Saving Seafood

House Passes MSA Reauthorization with Support of NCFC Members

July 13, 2018 — The following was released by Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities:

Yesterday the House passed H.R. 200, the Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act, which modifies and reauthorizes the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

Members of Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities from around the country have been invested in improving MSA for years, and weighed in with their comments and concerns at various points in this process.

Many of these concerns were addressed during the committee process and in the discussion of amendments. Several Members of Congress cited support from NCFC members for the bill during the debate on the House floor.

From Rep. Bradley Byrne of Alabama:

Let me tell you, there are over 170 groups that have signed on to being supportive of this bill. I do not have time to read all the names to you, but let me just read a few: the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation…the National Coalition for Fishing Communities…and the Guy Harvey Foundation. This is a very broadly, deeply supported bill among people who are actually fishing. Now, it may not be supported by people who don’t fish and who don’t know anything about fishing, but for those of us who do fish…we like it.

From Rep. Garret Graves of Louisiana:

…Mr. Chairman, this bill is bipartisan. It’s why we have bipartisan support for this legislation. We have co-sponsors. It’s why the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation, the National Coalition for Fishing Communities…American Scallop Association, Garden State Seafood Association, West Coast Seafood Processors Association, North Carolina Fisheries Association, Florida Keys Commercial Fishing Association, Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance, Southeastern Fisheries Association and many, many others that have a genuine stake in the sustainability of our fisheries [support this legislation].

In the debate over a proposed amendment from Reps. Jared Huffman of California and Alcee Hastings of Florida that would be detrimental to commercial fishing, Rep. Don Young of Alaska, author of the bill, quoted from a letter signed by several of our members and submitted the day before the vote. The amendment was ultimately defeated.

According to a letter authorized by the National Coalition for Fishing Communities…I want to submit for the record, if I could, the letter to the leadership of the House and to myself where they say… “We believe it will undermine the MSA, impede reforms that are desperately needed, and attack jobs in coastal communities around the country, including California and Florida,” the home states of Mr. Huffman and Mr. Hastings. I suggest this amendment is uncalled for and frankly will gut the bill and the MSA, period.

House Passes Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization with Bipartisan Support

July 12, 2018 — The following was released by the House Committee on Natural Resources:

Today, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 200, the bipartisan Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act. Introduced by Rep. Don Young (R-Ala.), the bill reauthorizes and modernizes the Magnuson-Stevens Act by implementing regional flexibility, tailored management practices and improved data collection for America’s federal fisheries.

“Improving how we manage our fisheries will help us be better stewards of our resources, while bolstering an economic engine for our country. This bipartisan bill provides much needed flexibility for fishery managers and creates greater fishing access for the public. I want to thank Reps. Young and Graves for their tireless efforts to work across the aisle and move this bill through the House. With this vote, the ball is now in the Senate’s court, and we will work with them to get a final bill to the president’s desk,” Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah) stated.

“The North Pacific is the gold standard of fisheries management, and in Alaska the fishing industry is crucial to our local economies and livelihood,” said Congressman Young. “It’s been over a decade since Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA) was reauthorized which is why I’m proud to see this bill pass out of the House today with bipartisan support. My bill will update MSA to ensure a proper balance between the biological needs of fish stocks and the economic needs of fishermen and coastal communities. We know that each region works within their unique conditions which is why I fought to ensure the management process will be improved by allowing regional fisheries to develop plans that meet their local needs. I am proud to say my bill protects our commercial and recreational fishing interests, and will allow Councils to do their jobs in a more streamlined and effective manner. I thank my colleagues who helped pass this important fisheries legislation today which will deliver much needed relief to this industry. I look forward to working with my Senators to see this legislation get to the President’s desk,” Rep. Young said.

“In Louisiana as in places across the country, our fisheries are more than major economic drivers – they are a way of life for millions of normal, everyday people who like to fish, to be outside and enjoy the bounty of America’s waters. H.R. 200 improves federal fisheries policy so that resource managers can use better science, management strategies, tools and other updated capabilities that have developed since Magnuson-Stevens was enacted more than four decades ago. The bill also provides more flexibility compared to the current system, which means that management plans can be regionally tailored to specific species while improving the balance of management between recreational and commercial fisheries,” Rep. Garret Graves (R-La.) said.

“I am an avid outdoorsman. I’ve hunted and fished with both my son and now my grandchildren.  There is no one who cares more about the conservation of species than hunters and recreational fishers. It’s time that Magnuson-Stevens reflect a healthy balance between commercial and recreational fisherman.  All too often recreational fishers take a back seat to commercial interests.  This bill establishes catch limit time periods that give recreational fishers the certainty they need to plan fishing seasons,” Congressional Sportsmen Caucus Co-Chairman Rep. Gene Green (D-Texas) said.

“This bill accomplishes several objectives of the recreational fishing community that will contribute to the growth of our economy, while rebuilding overfished and depleted stocks. I negotiated with the majority to remove some problematic provisions that related to the Endanger Species Act, the Antiquities Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act. The resulting bill provides fishery councils with the tools they need to manage federal fisheries, and still ensure conservation and sustainability of saltwater fishery resources,” Congressional Sportsmen Caucus Vice-Chair Rep. Marc Veasey (D-Texas) said.

Background:

The U.S. seafood industry is an economic engine for the American economy. In 2015, the fishing industry generated $208 billion in sales and supported 1.62 million U.S. jobs. Commercial fishing had a sales impact of $144.2 billion, an additional $60.6 billion in value added impacts, and generated $5.2 billion in revenue. Approximately 11 million saltwater anglers spent a total of $60.9 million on fishing trips generating $22.7 billion in income and contributing an additional $36.1 billion in value added impacts.

Specifically, H.R. 200:

• Eliminates unscientific timeframes to rebuild fish stocks that unnecessarily restrict access to fisheries.
• Provides flexibility for fishery managers to apply alternative management strategies better suited to regional needs and specific fish stocks.
• Includes critical reforms advocated by the sportsman community to allow for proper management of recreational fisheries.
• Provides necessary support for stock assessments, cooperative research and fisheries science to empower NOAA to prioritize its core mission of health fisheries management and achieving maximum sustainable yield.
• Authorizes no new federal spending and an estimated $100 million in savings over a similar bill, H.R. 1335, that passed the House with bipartisan support in the 114th Congress.

Click here for additional information on the bill.

Stakeholder support for the bill includes:

“Marine recreational fishing is not a partisan issue, which was illustrated by the support H.R. 200 received from both parties today in the House. We owe great thanks to Chairman Rob Bishop, Congressmen Don Young, Garret Graves, Gene Green and Marc Veasey for working together to properly recognize recreational fishing within the Magnuson-Stevens Act. These bipartisan leaders have made the difference for anglers from coast to coast.” – Jeff Angers, president of the Center for Sportfishing Policy

“We thank the House Leadership, Congressman Young and the leaders of the House Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus for their leadership in finding bipartisan solutions to move the bill forward. The provisions of the Modern Fish Act contained in H.R. 200 are a top priority for saltwater anglers across the United States and charts a clear course for effective recreational fisheries management while ensuring abundant, sustainable fisheries for future generations.” – Jeff Crane, president of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation

“We applaud the U.S. House of Representatives for passing commonsense legislation modernizing the federal fisheries management system, which will provide America’s recreational anglers and boaters reasonable and responsible access to public marine resources. The recreational boating industry calls on the U.S. Senate to pick up the baton, and immediately take up and pass S.1520, the Modernizing Recreational Fisheries Management Act of 2017 (Modern Fish Act). Millions of Americans are counting on it.” – Thom Dammrich, president of the National Marine Manufacturers Association

“No legislation is ever able to please every constituency, but Chairman Rob Bishop, Subcommittee Chairman Doug Lamborn, and Chairman Emeritus Don Young deserve a round of applause for developing a bill that addresses the concerns of multiple constituencies, and will serve to further improve the Magnuson-Stevens Act, which has left a legacy of success in its wake since Congressman Young and my former Congressman, the late Gerry Studds. were original co-sponsors in 1976. Legitimate commercial fishing organizations and seafood companies across the nation, — together with recreational interests — have spoken in favor of HR 200. It is unfortunate that uncompromising environmental groups and the fishing organizations funded by them did not work more cooperatively over the years during which this bill was crafted. In addition, Congressmen Gene Green and Marc Veasey of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus should be commended for their work across the aisle to bring this important legislation to the floor.” – Bob Vanasse, executive director of Saving Seafood and its National Coalition for Fishing Communities

“The GSSA is very appreciative of the reform efforts brought forth by Chairman Rob Bishop, Congressman Don Young, and their respective staff. While GSSA members operating in numerous East Coast fisheries understand that no bill can be perfect, we agree H.R. 200 is a positive step forward toward restoring some badly needed balance to the Act while preserving our conservation success since the 2006 Amendments.” – Greg DiDomenico, executive director of the Garden State Seafood Association (GSSA)

Eleven of 27 Amendments Proposed for Magnuson Reauthorization Bill HR 200 Could Go to House Vote

June 28, 2018 — SEAFOOD NEWS — An anticipated House of Representatives floor vote on H.R. 200, the Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act, was delayed Tuesday. More than 25 amendments were proposed for the bill reauthorizing the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. It went to the Rules Committee instead.

The Rules Committee held a hearing Monday night and passed a rule to provide a structured amendment process for floor consideration. The rule included 11 of the 27 amendments.

H.R. 200, sponsored by Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, was the primary bill proposed to re-authorize the Magnuson-Stevens Act. It garnered both strong support and strong opposition.

Opponents blanketed Capitol Hill offices and committees with reasons why the bill should not pass. At the same time, many Democratic lawmakers proposed amendments or changes, some that could fundamentally change Young’s original bill.

Outside supporters and lawmakers were also busy lining up votes and proposing amendments to the bill.

By Monday night, 27 amendments had been submitted: 16 from Democrats and 7 from Republicans; four were bi-partisan. Five were revised amendments and four were submitted late, after the 10 a.m. Monday deadline.

California Democrat Jared Huffman led the opposition to H.R. 200. Both he and Young were the invited witnesses to the Rules Committee hearing Monday evening.

Young, one of the creators of the first Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976, said he recognizes the successes this bill and subsequent reauthorizations have made over the years and that he, better than anyone, understands what else is needed to protect fish stocks while helping communities. “This legislation is dear to my heart,” Young said during the Rules Committee hearing.

Young also referred to recent lawmakers proposing changes to the bill as “Johnny-come-latelys” who don’t understand the fundamentals of the language that protects the stocks while balancing communities’ needs. The proposed bill was made with the suggestions from regional Councils and scientists, Young said.

Huffman countered that several provisions in the bill would roll back fish stock protections and the current language doesn’t prevent overfishing. He also noted that all previous bills reauthorizing the Fishery Conservation and Management Act were bipartisan; this one isn’t he said. It passed out of committee on party lines, Huffman added.

To that end, Huffman proposed four amendments, one considered a substitution for the entire bill. That particular amendment was not included in the committee’s final rule

By the end of the hearing, the Rules Committee passed a rule that included 11 of the 27 amendments — also along party lines. If that rule also passes the House, only those 11 amendments can be considered when H.R. 200 comes up for a floor vote again.

Those amendments, in order, include:

1. A revised manager’s amendment by Young and Rep. Garret Graves, R-La. It revises some sections and adds a new section regarding the Western Alaska Community Development Quota Program;

2. An amendment to create an industry-based pilot trawl survey for the New England and Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council regions (Reps. Joe Courtney, D-Conn. and Lee Zeldin, R-NY);

3. A provision for a voting representative from Rhode Island on the MAFMC (Reps. Jim Langevin and David Cicilline, D-RI);

4. An amendment ensuring rebuilding plans are successful in rebuilding overfished fish stocks (Reps. Jared Huffman, D-Calif., and Alcee Hastings, D-Fla.);

5. Waiving compensatory mitigation requirements for maintenance dredging projects in certain waterways (Reps. Lois Frankel, D-Fla., and Daniel Webster, R-Fla.);

6. Requiring the Comptroller General to report to Congress on the resource rent of Limited Access Privilege Programs in the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic Fishery Management Council areas (Rep. Garret Graves, R-La.);

7. A plan to establish fully operational electronic monitoring and reporting procedures for the Northeast Multispecies Fishery (Rep. William Keating, D-Ma.);

8. A requirement for NOAA to conduct a study on all fees it charges the lobster industry and report those findings to Congress (Rep. Bruce Poliquin, R-Maine);

9. Lifting the ban on striped bass fishing in the Block Island transit zone between Montauk, NY and Block Island, RI (Rep. Zeldin, R-NY);

10. Directing the Secretary of Commerce to use funds collected from penalties and fines for monitoring, in addition to traditional enforcement activities (Rep. Keating); and

11. Rewarding the elimination of lionfish from US. waters by allowing individuals to exchange lionfish for tags authorizing fishing for certain species in addition to the number of such species otherwise authorized to be taken by such individuals (Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla.)

Some of the amendments that didn’t pass muster in the Rules Committee included refinancing a Pacific Coast groundfish buyback loan; two amendments related to sharks and shark finning; a prohibition on offshore drilling In essential fish habitat areas on Atlantic and Pacific coasts; additional funding for stock assessments; two amendments related to aquaculture; and more.

The earliest the committee’s rule and H.R. 200, with the 11 amendments, is likely come up on the House floor for a vote is the week of July 11. However, it may be delayed again if appropriations bills are ready in the next week and a half.

This story originally appeared on SeafoodNews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission. 

Opinion: Chefs respond to column on fisheries management

February 13, 2018 — We read David Cresson’s op-ed “Chefs push half-baked fisheries agenda” and were immediately struck with how little he seems to appreciate the real problems in Gulf fisheries.

As chefs who rely on healthy fisheries to run our businesses, we know it is possible to have fish for both the commercial and recreational sectors to catch and eat while also preserving this resource for the future. We know this because we already have a system that is doing just that: the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the primary federal law managing our nation’s fisheries.

Cresson is right when he states, “It’s time to set the record straight. The United States manages its fisheries better than anyone else in the world.” MSA has rebuilt 43 fish stocks since 2000, all while increasing their economic output.

He also correctly points out that Louisiana’s senators and congressional representatives support the proposed Modern Fish Act, a bill that would weaken fishery management and is supported by Cresson’s Coastal Conservation Association.

But it makes sense that the Louisiana congressional Delegation would stand with CCA once you follow the money.

CCA, through the lobbying firm Adams and Reese, has rewarded the Louisiana delegation handsomely. CCA paid Adams and Reese more than $110,000 each of the last three years to dole out campaign contributions to Louisiana politicians.

Cresson attempts to paint MSA defenders’ focus on red snapper as overblown, even irrational. But it is CCA’s champion, U.S. Rep. Garret Graves, R-Baton Rouge, who introduced a bill titled the Red Snapper Act that would exempt that single species from the protection of MSA, the very legislation that rebuilt the stocks.

Despite CCA’s claims that the commercial sector is taking more than its fair share, recreational fishers are allocated 49 percent of the red snapper quota. And still they have exceeded their quota 7 out of the last 10 years. Meanwhile, the commercial sector is intensely monitored to stay within its quota and the charter for-hire component of the recreational fishery (captains who take individual, paying anglers out on fishing trips) has developed separate management that is keeping them in their limit.

If Cresson is indeed interested in leading the fight for conservation, perhaps he could explain to the public why the Louisiana politicians his lobbyists influenced pushed the Commerce Department to open up the federal recreational season this summer for an extra 39 days, knowingly allowing overfishing by upwards of 50 percent, or 6 million pounds.

Read the full opinion piece at Houma Today

 

Trump team may have broken law to score red snapper win

December 19, 2017 — The Trump administration scored last week when a House panel voted to give Gulf of Mexico states more power in managing the popular red snapper, but court records suggest it may be a tainted victory.

Internal memos show that Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross and a top adviser may have knowingly violated federal fisheries law in June when they extended the Gulf red snapper season, hoping the move would pressure Congress to act.

In a June 1 memo, Earl Comstock, the Commerce Department’s director of policy and strategic planning, told Ross that a longer season “would result in overfishing” of the stock by as much as 40 percent and possibly prompt a lawsuit.

But Comstock urged Ross to extend the season anyway, saying it could lead to “a significant achievement” by forcing Congress to liberalize the federal law and transfer more authority to Gulf states.

“It would allow a reset in the acrimonious relationship and set the stage for Congress to adopt a long-term fix,” Comstock told Ross.

Comstock followed up with a second memo on June 7, reminding his boss that both the White House and a dozen congressmen from Gulf states had asked Ross to explore the possibility of a longer fishing season.

The next week, Ross decided to extend the season from three to 42 days, much to the joy of recreational anglers in Florida, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama (Greenwire, Sept. 20).

Critics say the memos offer proof that Commerce and NOAA Fisheries plotted to bypass the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, a 1976 law that sets quotas as a way to rebuild overfished stocks, including the red snapper.

“I appreciate it when people are transparent about their intentions,” said Janis Searles Jones, the CEO of Ocean Conservancy, a nonprofit environmental group.

Commerce made the memos public as part of its response to a lawsuit filed in July in U.S. District Court in Washington by Ocean Conservancy and the Environmental Defense Fund. The complaint accuses Ross, NOAA and NOAA Fisheries of mismanagement by allowing overfishing.

Read the full story at E&E News

 

Red snapper measures advance in Congress

December 14, 2017 — Measures that will impact how much red snapper recreational fishermen will be able to catch in the Gulf of Mexico advanced today in Congress.

Proponents, including recreational fishing groups and Louisiana lawmakers, say the two bills approved by the House Natural Resources Committee would eliminate overly restrictive catch limits and unnecessarily short seasons for red snapper. The measures would give Gulf states more authority to regulate the popular species off their coasts.

Environmental and conservation groups counter that the measures will hamper efforts to help red snapper rebound from years of severe overfishing.

U.S. Rep. Garrett Graves, R-Baton Rouge, whose district includes northern Terrebonne and Lafourche, sponsored one of the bills and helped craft the other.

“As the stock has rebuilt, recreational anglers have unfairly seen fewer and fewer fishing days,” Graves said in introducing the Red Snapper Act of 2017 this summer. “Something has to change. It is time to replace the status quo with a management system that more accurately reflects today’s red snapper private recreational fishery.”

Read the full story at the Daily Comet

 

House Natural Resources Committee Passes Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization

December 13, 2017 — WASHINGTON — The following was released by the House Committee on Natural Resources:

Today, the House Committee on Natural Resources passed H.R. 200, the “Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act.” Introduced by Chairman Emeritus Don Young (R-AK), the bill reauthorizes and modernizes the Magnuson-Stevens Act by implementing regional flexibility, tailored management practices and improved data collection for America’s federal fisheries.

“It has been 11 years since the Magnuson-Stevens Act was reauthorized and when we first passed this law, we saw tremendous success for the fisheries nationwide. Alaska is considered the gold standard of fisheries management and this industry is crucial to our local economy. I am proud to see my bill pass out of Committee today. This legislation will improve the management process by allowing regional fisheries to develop plans that match the needs of their area. Ultimately, this bill updates the Magnuson-Stevens Act to ensure a proper balance between the biological needs of fish stocks and the economic needs of fishermen and coastal communities,” Rep. Young stated. 

“America’s fisheries are governed by an outdated regulatory scheme and inflexible decrees imposed by distant bureaucrats. Fishermen and biologists on the ground should be partners in the formation of management plans, not powerless onlookers,” Chairman Rob Bishop (R-UT) said. “This bill provides flexibility so we can better meet local needs, expand economic activity and conserve ecosystems. Rep. Young has delivered a win for local management and I look forward to moving this bill through the chambers in the coming year.” 

Click here to learn more about the bill.

The following was released by the Democrats of the House Committee on Natural Resources:

Ranking Member Raúl M. Grijalva (D-Ariz.) today highlighted the broad-based economic and environmental opposition to H.R. 200, today’s highly partisan rewrite of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, which governs fisheries and fishing quotas across U.S. waters. The GOP bill is opposed by the Seafood Harvesters of America and a wide swathe of restaurants and individual commercial fisherman and by dozens of environmental groups, including the Alaska Wilderness League, Defenders of Wildlife, Earthjustice, the League of Conservation Voters, the National Audubon Society, Pew Charitable Trusts, the Ocean Conservancy and the Wilderness Society.

Opponents of the Republican bill have written a barrage of letters to Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah) and other Republican leaders, including Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.), who chairs the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans, urging them to reauthorize the Magnuson-Stevens Act and abandon today’s bill, which was written by Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) on highly partisan lines. The letters are available at http://bit.ly/2nYuEin.

“Republicans’ plan is to deregulate our oceans and fish everywhere until there’s nothing left, and we’re not going to let that happen,” Grijalva said today. “Ocean management is about sustainable use and enjoyment, not just making environmentalists unhappy. Like most of the bills advanced by the leadership of this Committee, this bill is extreme and has no future in the Senate. Until my counterparts decide to take the issues in our jurisdiction more seriously, we’re going to keep wasting time on unpopular bills that have no chance of becoming law.”

Grijalva also underscored the deep opposition to H.R. 3588, Rep. Garret Graves’ (R-La.) bill deregulating red snapper fishing in the Gulf of Mexico. Many letter-writers who oppose H.R. 200 also oppose Graves’ effort, which an alliance of chefs and restaurateurs noted in a Nov. 7 letter “could inadvertently result in significant overfishing and deprive our customers of one of their favorite fish.”

 

House Natural Resources Committee Announces Markup on 16 Bills

December 8, 2017 — WASHINGTON — The following was released by the House Committee on Natural Resources:

On Tuesday, December 12, 2017 at 5:00 PM in 1324 Longworth House Office Building, the Full Committee will hold a markup on the following bills:

  • H.R. 200 (Rep. Don Young), To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to provide flexibility for fishery managers and stability for fishermen, and for other purposes.  “Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act”
  • H.R. 1157 (Rep. William R. Keating), To clarify the United States interest in certain submerged lands in the area of the Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge, and for other purposes
  • H.R. 1349 (Rep. Tom McClintock), To amend the Wilderness Act to ensure that the use of bicycles, wheelchairs, strollers, and game carts is not prohibited in Wilderness Areas, and for other purposes
  • H.R. 1350 (Rep. Richard M. Nolan), To modify the boundary of Voyageurs National Park in the State of Minnesota, and for other purposes;
  • H.R. 1675 (Rep. Suzan K. DelBene), To establish a national program to identify and reduce losses from landslides hazards, to establish a national 3D Elevation Program, and for other purpose.  “National Landslide Preparedness Act”
  • H.R. 2888 (Rep. Jason Smith), To establish the Ste. Genevieve National Historic Site in the State of Missouri, and for other purposes.  “Ste. Genevieve National Historical Park Establishment Act”
  • H.R. 3400 (Rep. Rob Bishop), To promote innovative approaches to outdoor recreation on Federal land and to open up opportunities for collaboration with non-Federal partners, and for other purposes.  “Recreation Not Red-Tape Act”
  • H.R. 3588 (Rep. Garret Graves), To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to provide for management of red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico, and for other purposes.  “RED SNAPPER Act”
  • H.R. 4033 (Rep. Doug Lamborn), To reauthorize the National Geologic Mapping Act of 1992.  “National Geologic Mapping Act Reauthorization Act”;
  • H.R. 4264 (Rep. Rob Bishop), To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain Bureau of Land Management land in Cache County, Utah, to the City of Hyde Park for public purposes.  “Hyde Park Land Conveyance Act”
  • H.R. 4266 (Rep. Bruce Poliquin), To clarify the boundary of Acadia National Park, and for other purposes.  “Acadia National Park Boundary Clarification Act”
  • H.R. 4465 (Rep. John R. Curtis), To maintain annual base funding for the Upper Colorado and San Juan fish recovery programs through fiscal year 2023, to require a report on the implementation of those programs, and for other purposes.  “Endangered Fish Recovery Programs Extension Act of 2017”
  • H.R. 4475 (Rep. Don Young), To provide for the establishment of the National Volcano Early Warning and Monitoring System.  “National Volcano Early Warning and Monitoring System Act”
  • H.R. 4568 (Rep. Raul R. Labrador), To amend the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 to promote timely exploration for geothermal resources under geothermal leases, and for other purposes.  “Enhancing Geothermal Production on Federal Lands Act”
  • S. 825 (Sen. Lisa Murkowski), To provide for the conveyance of certain property to the Southeast Alaska Regional Health Consortium located in Sitka, Alaska, and for other purposes.  “Southeast Alaska Regional Health Consortium Land Transfer Act of 2017”
  • S. 1285 (Sen. Jeff Merkley), To allow the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians, the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon, the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians of Oregon, the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs, the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, the Klamath Tribes, and the Burns Paiute Tribes to lease or transfer certain lands.  “Oregon Tribal Economic Development Act”
WHAT: Full Committee Markup on 16 bills
WHEN: Tuesday, December 12
5:00 PM
WHERE: 1324 Longworth House Office Building

On Tuesday December 12, 2017, the Committee will convene at 5:00 P.M. in 1324 Longworth House Office Building for opening statements only. The Committee will reconvene on Wednesday, December 13, 2017 at 10:00 A.M. until 12:00 P.M. in the 1324 Longworth House Office Building.

Visit the Committee Calendar for additional information once it is made available. The meeting is open to the public and a video feed will stream live at House Committee on Natural Resources.

North Pacific Council Weighs in on MSA Reauthorization Bills

November 8, 2017 — SEAFOOD NEWS — In response to a request from Alaska Senator Dan Sullivan, the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council reviewed three bills related to the reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, comparing them to the current law and practices used to manage the nation’s largest fisheries.

“The North Pacific Council believes that the current MSA already provides a very successful framework for sustainable fisheries management, and major changes are not necessary at this time,” wrote NPFMC chair Dan Hull.

“Nevertheless, we also recognize the potential benefits of increased flexibility in some circumstances, and amending the Act to provide for such flexibility could provide all the regional councils additional opportunities to optimize their fishery management programs, with appropriate cautionary notes and limitations.

“In order for the Council to provide for the continued conservation of our resources, any changes to the law providing additional flexibility must continue to ensure that fundamental conservation and management tenets based on sound science are upheld, and should not create incentives or justifications to overlook them,” Hull wrote.

Allowing more flexibility in fisheries management, particularly when stocks in a rebuilding phase, is a hot-button issue with many stakeholders, not just in the North Pacific but nationwide. Proponents of adding more flexibility to any new legislation say the current law is too protective of the resource at a cost to the fishery. They urge more flexibility so that each management council can optimize yield without jeopardizing the resource.

“Regarding potential changes and increased flexibility for stock rebuilding plans, the NPFMC believes that further flexibility, would appropriately increase the ability to maximize harvest opportunities while still effecting rebuilding of fish stocks,” noted Hull, referring to HR 200, the bill introduced by Alaska Congressman Don Young.

“The arbitrary 10-year requirement may constrain the Councils management flexibility with overly restrictive management measures, with unnecessary, negative economic impacts, with little or no conservation gain,” Hull wrote.

Another controversal issue is using annual catch limits (ACLs) to manage stocks, something opponents have said needlessly restricts a fishery. Hull defended the importance of ACLs as a foundational part of fisheries management.

“Annual catch limits (ACLs) have been used in the North Pacific for over 30 years, and such limits are a cornerstone of sustainable fisheries management. We also believe there are situations where some flexibility in the establishment of ACLs is warranted, particularly in the case of data poor stocks.

“Consideration of the economic needs of fishing communities is critical in the ACL setting process, and while the current MSA allows for such consideration, we recognize the desire for a more explicit allowance for these considerations.

“We must be careful however, not to jeopardize long term fisheries sustainability, and associated community vitality and resiliency, for the sake of short term preservation of all economic activity associated with a fishery,” he wrote.

“Accounting for uncertainty, articulating policies for acceptable risk, and establishing the necessary precautionary buffers, are all explicit outcomes of the ACL process, and we believe that the [Scientific and Statistical Committees] SSCs are the appropriate gatekeepers to establish the upper limits of ‘safe’ fishing mortality. This limit, which is established as the Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) level, appears to be consistent with the provisions of H.R.200,” Hull added.

Speaking to Rep. Garrett Grave’s (R-LA) S. 1520 Modernizing Recreational Fishing Management Act of 2017, Hull noted that “alternative measures” may not meet the standard in the current MSA.

“The bill provides the councils authority to use alternative measures in recreational fisheries including extraction rates, fishing mortality targets, harvest control rules, or traditional or cultural practices.

“The NPFMC notes that it is unclear if alternative fishery management measures replace the requirement for ACLs. Nevertheless, fisheries managed under alternative measures should be accountable to the conservation and management provisions of the MSA, including prevention of overfishing. ACL’s serve as the primary conservation measure for fish stocks in the North Pacific, and have effectively prevented overharvesting in our fisheries. The NPFMC also notes that traditional or cultural practices are not normally considered as recreational fisheries,” Hull wrote.

Hull also addressed the section in the bill related to rebuilding overfished stocks that would mandate a rebuilding term to be “as short as possible” but in any case not to exceed ten years.

“The NPFMC believes that the arbitrary 10-year time period can be harmful to resource users and fishing communities if it prohibits even limited fishing activity under a scientifically sound rebuilding plan. Replacing the term ‘possible’ with ‘practicable’ provides the councils with more flexibility to incorporate the needs of fishing communities in maintaining economic stability during a rebuilding period,” Hull wrote.

The NPFMC took issue with sections of Rep. Jared Huffman’s Discussion Draft (also called “Strengthening Fishing Communities Through Improving Science, Increasing Flexibility, and Modernizing Fisheries Management Act”) in certain areas, while agreeing with others.

But a section requiring an assessment of conflict of interest of council members, triggered a lengthy comment on problems the NPFMC have faced and a solution they’ve offered to NMFS.

The current MSA conflict of interest language leaves a standard for recusal of a council member up for interpretation. The recusal provision in the current law requires full economic disclosure but also that an affected individual not be allowed to vote on council decisions that would have a significant and predictable effect on a member’s financial interest.

“The MSA language left the issues of significant and predictable effect open for interpretation, so NMFS developed a regulation that set a 10% threshold for a significant effect, which is the basis for determining whether a recusal is required,” explained Hull.

“The primary problem is the way in which NOAA calculates a member’s financial interests in determining whether the 10% thresholds are exceeded. The NOAA and NMFS policy is to attribute all fishing activities of a company — even partially owned by an associated company — in calculating an individual Council member’s interests. The North Pacific Council believes that this attribution policy is inconsistent with the intent of the conflict of interest statute and regulations.

“The following example helps to explain this issue: Joe Councilman works for Fishing Company A, which owns 50% of Fishing Company B, which in turn owns 3% of Fishing Company C. NOAA uses ALL harvesting and processing activity by ALL three of these companies in determining whether Joe Councilman exceeds any of the 10% thresholds,” Hull explained.

“The North Pacific Council believes that this is an unfair and illogical interpretation of the recusal regulations, and results in unintended recusals of Council members. The North Pacific Council believes that NOAA should use only the amount of harvesting or processing activity equivalent to the Council member’s percentage of ownership,” Hull continued.

“Using this proportional share approach, NOAA GC would use 100% of the harvesting and processing activity of Fishing Company A, 50% of the harvesting and processing activity of Fishing Company B, and 1.5% of the harvesting and processing activity of Fishing Company C to determine whether Joe Councilman exceeds any of the thresholds.

“At our request, NOAA and NMFS revisited the attribution policy, but to date, have declined to make changes,” Hull wrote.

Finally, on behalf of the NPFMC, Hull asked that any new legislation:

• Avoids across the board mandates which could negatively affect one region in order to address a problem in another region.

• Allows flexibility in achieving conservation objectives, but be specific enough to avoid lengthy, complex implementing regulations or ‘guidelines’.

• Is in the form of intended outcomes, rather than prescriptive management or scientific parameters.

• Avoids unrealistic/expensive analytical mandates relative to implementing fishery closures or other management actions.

• Avoids constraints that limit the flexibility of Councils and NMFS to respond to changing climates and shifting ecosystems.

• Avoids unfunded mandates.

• Prioritizes the reservation and enhancement of stock assessments and surveys among the highest when considering any changes to the Act.

This story originally appeared on Seafoodnews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.

 

NCFC Members Bring Concerns of Commercial Fishermen to House Hearing on Fisheries Bills

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) – September 26, 2017 – Members of Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities testified this morning at a hearing of the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans on four bills that would modify federal fisheries management.

Jon Mitchell, mayor of the nation’s top-grossing fishing port New Bedford, Massachusetts and head of the New Bedford Harbor Development Commission, and Mike Merrifield, Fish Section Chairman of the Southeastern Fisheries Association (SFA) testified on the needs of commercial fishermen and reforms they would like to see to the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

Mayor Mitchell and Mr. Merrifield were joined by several other witnesses, including Assistant Administrator for NOAA Fisheries Chris Oliver, who testified on the reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the possibility of allowing additional flexibility in stock rebuilding. Earlier this year, commercial fishermen from around the country united to support Mr. Oliver’s appointment to NOAA.

At this morning’s hearing, the subcommittee considered two bills to amend and reauthorize the Magnuson-Stevens Act, as well as bills that would alter recreational fisheries and red snapper management.

While Mayor Mitchell called the Magnuson-Stevens Act “generally speaking…a success story” that has helped make America’s fisheries “at once among the world’s largest and most sustainable,” he called for more flexibility in fisheries management to allow fishermen to catch their full scientifically justified quota. In particular, he criticized the ten-year rebuilding requirement for overfished stocks.

“The ten-year rule is arbitrary, and its establishment was at odds with the underlying premise of regional management,” Mayor Mitchell said. “Regional councils should have the flexibility to set rebuilding timelines for stocks under their jurisdiction based on the unique biological and ecological conditions, and by giving appropriate weight to the economic wellbeing of fishing communities.”

The mayor was also critical of the Antiquities Act, by which presidents can designate large national monuments with little or no input from scientists and local stakeholders. The Act was recently used to create and enlarge several marine monuments, including the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument in New England and the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument in Hawaii.

“The continued use of a parallel process outside the Magnuson-Stevens Act, however well-meaning, ultimately works against the long-term interests of all stakeholders,” Mayor Mitchell said. “We all lose when the checks and balances employed in the council process are abandoned.  A decision-making process driven by the simple assertion of executive branch authority ultimately leaves ocean management decisions permanently vulnerable to short-term political considerations.”

Mr. Merrifield voiced skepticism of efforts to shift federally managed species over to state management, saying that states manage many fisheries in such a way that recreational fishermen get most or, in some cases, all of the fish.

“SFA firmly believes there should be no reward for exceeding [annual catch limits] and that all stakeholders – commercial, for-hire and private anglers – should each be held accountable for their impacts on our nation’s fish resources,” Mr. Merrifield testified. “We must resist changes to the law that could be interpreted to remove this accountability.”

Mr. Merrifield also testified about the SFA’s strong opposition to the RED SNAPPER Act, introduced by Rep. Garret Graves of Louisiana, which would give states more authority over red snapper management.

“The justification [for this legislation] is built entirely on the misconception that anglers can only fish for red snapper for 3 days (now 39 days) in federal waters in the Gulf of Mexico,” Mr. Merrifield said. “This is a false narrative. Anglers can fish 365-days per year for red snapper and all of the other 38 species in the Gulf reef fish complex. They can only kill red snapper on 3 (or 39) of those days. To be clear, there is unlimited fishing opportunity for recreational anglers in the federal waters of the Gulf which calls into question the actual need for, and defense of, this legislation.”

Read Mayor Mitchell’s full testimony here

Read Mr. Merrifield’s full testimony here