Saving Seafood

NILS STOLPE: So how’s that “catch shares” revolution working out for groundfish?

FishNet USA/October 22, 2015 — NILS E. STOLPE — Most of you probably remember when newly appointed NOAA head Jane Lubchenco went to New England and announced that she was going to save our nation’s oldest fishery. But if it didn’t make a lasting impact on you, quoting from the Environmental Defense blog, EDFish by Tesia Love on April 8, 2009, “Sally McGee, Emilie Litsinger and I got to witness something pretty wonderful today.  Jane Lubchenco came to the New England Fishery Management Council meeting to announce the immediate release of $16 million to the groundfish fishery to help move the fishery to ‘sector” catch share management by providing funding for cooperative research to help fishermen get through a tough fishing year with very strict limits on fishing effort.”  She went on to quote Dr. Lubchenco “we need a rapid transition to sectors and catch shares. Catch shares are a powerful tool to getting to sustainable fisheries and profitability.  I challenge you to deliver on this in Amendment 16, to include measures to end overfishing.  I will commit the resources to my staff to do their part to ensure Amendment 16 is passed in June. We are shining a light on your efforts and we will track your progress.  There is too much at stake to allow delay and self-interest to prevent sectors and ultimately catch shares from being implemented.”

I’m sure that you were there with the rest of us, heaving a huge sigh of relief with visions of Dr. Lubchenco on her shiny white steed,  first riding to the rescue of the New England fishery, and then on to all of the rest of our struggling fisheries. “Hyo Silver! Away!”

So how did she do? A couple of years back NOAA/NMFS released the 2012 Final Report on the Performance of the Northeast Multispecies (Groundfish) Fishery (May 2012 – April 2013). It’s available at http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/publications/crd/crd1401/. The report included a table – available at http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/publications/crd/crd1401/tables.pdf – included a table titled Summary of major trends (May through April, includes all vessels with a valid limited access multispecies permit) for the fishing years 2009 to 2012. The table only takes up a single page, is pretty easily understood and is well worth your consideration in its entirety but I’ll take the liberty of synopsizing what I think are the major points it illustrates. In each of the four years the groundfish revenues, landed weight, number of active vessels that took a groundfish trip, the total number of groundfish trips, and the total crew days on groundfish trips decreased. The non-groundfish revenues and landed weight increased. The days absent on a non-groundfish trip increased slightly then decreased. 

And then we come to 2013 (it seems that according to NOAA/NMFS, 2014 hasn’t gotten here yet). Had the myriad benefits of Dr. Lubchenco’s and her ENGO/foundation cronies’ Catch Share Revolution finally arrived? Apparently, not quite yet. According to the 2013 Final Report on the Performance of the Northeast Multispecies (Groundfish) Fishery (May 2013 – April 2014), just about everything that was falling in FY 2009 to 2012 continued to fall in FY 2014. I won’t go over any of the details, but the corresponding Table 1 for that year is available at http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/read/socialsci/pdf/groundfish_report_fy2013.pdf.

Oh well, I guess she deserves a few points for trying – and we shouldn’t forget that before she could really focus on fixing groundfish she was distracted by having to dump a couple of millions of gallons of Corexit into the Gulf of Mexico.

Thirteen species are included in the New England Fishery Management Council’s multi-species fishery management plan, the “groundfish” FMP. Four of those species support no or minimal directed fisheries. The landings of those that support a significant commercial fishery are in the table below (from the NOAA/NMFS commercial landings database). Looking at these data, it’s impossible to suggest that after years of intensive management this management regime is anything that could be considered a success – unless your idea of success is putting a whole bunch of people out of work. In fact only the most charitable among us could term it anything other than disaster – and it’s a disaster that has been in the making since long before Dr. Lubchenco so fatuously announced that she was going to fix it.

(I’ll add here that catch share management is not a cure-all for all that’s wrong with fishery management nor is it the reason for management failures – though at the time Dr. Lubchenco and her “team” apparently believed it was. It is nothing more than an option for dividing the catch among users. As such it can have profound socioeconomic impacts on participants in the fishery and on fishing communities that depend on it, but not on the fishery resources themselves.)  

 

Species

Year

Metric Tons

Value

Species

Year

Metric Tons

Value

Atlantic

2009

8946

$25,223,364

Haddock

2009

5,818

$13,655,842

Cod

2010

8039

$28,142,681

 

2010

9,811

$21,715,488

 

2011

7981

$32,596,942

 

2011

5,709

$16,316,219

 

2012

4766

$22,200,043

 

2012

1,959

$7,833,001

 

2013

2261

$10,455,352

 

2013

1,869

$6,002,480

Plaice

2009

1395

$3,886,809

White

2009

1,696

$3,556,719

 

2010

1413

$4,498,591

Hake

2010

1,807

$4,116,221

 

2011

1387

$4,274,757

 

2011

2,907

$5,849,790

 

2012

1480

$5,048,688

 

2012

2,772

$6,933,743

 

2013

1318

$4,688,995

 

2013

2,238

$6,484,444

Winter

2009

2209

$8,094,381

Pollock

2009

7,492

$10,010,039

Flounder

2010

1587

$6,959,547

 

2010

5,158

$9,529,022

 

2011

2124

$8,002,376

 

2011

7,193

$12,292,573

 

2012

2395

$10,331,500

 

2012

6,743

$13,185,509

 

2013

2746

$9,899,924

 

2013

5,058

$11,395,943

Yellowtail

2009

1605

$4,759,536

Acadian

2009

1,440

$1,572,292

Flounder

2010

1318

$4,193,981

Redfish

2010

1,646

$1,959,681

 

2011

1827

$4,762,969

 

2011

2,014

$2,754,692

 

2012

1808

$5,396,502

 

2012

4,035

$5,891,429

 

2013

1278

$4,199,927

 

2013

3,577

$4,337,163

Witch

2009

949

$4,036,115

Flounder

2010

759

$3,773,526

 

2011

870

$3,955,053

 

2012

1037

$4,247,528

 

2013

686

$3,735,330

How might it be fixed? In the original FishNet article I quoted a couple of paragraphs from a National Academy of Sciences study Evaluating the Effectiveness of Fish Stock Rebuilding Plans in the United States (available at http://www.nap.edu/catalog/18488/evaluating-the-effectiveness-of-fish-stock-rebuilding-plans-in-the-united-states). I can’t think of anything more valuable than repeating those words here. On page 178 of the report the authors concluded “the tradeoff between flexibility and prescriptiveness within the current legal framework and MFSCMA (Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act) guidelines for rebuilding underlies many of the issues discussed in this chapter. The present approach may not be flexible or adaptive enough in the face of complex ecosystem and fishery dynamics when data and knowledge are limiting. The high degree of prescriptiveness (and concomitant low flexibility) may create incompatibilities between single species rebuilding plans and EBFM (Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management). Fixed rules for rebuilding times can result in inefficiencies and discontinuities of harvest-control rules, put unrealistic demands on models and data for stock assessment and forecasting, cause reduction in yield, especially in mixed-stock situations, and de-emphasize socio-economic factors in the formulation of rebuilding plans. The current approach specifies success of individual rebuilding plans in biological terms. It does not address evaluation of the success in socio-economic terms and at broader regional and national scales, and also does not ensure effective flow of information (communication) across regions.”

In other words, the fishery managers need more informed flexibility to adequately manage our fisheries. It has been the goal of the fishing industry’s friends in Congress to provide this necessary flexibility (with adequate safeguards, of course). Conversely it has been the goal of a handful of foundations and the ENGOs they support and a smaller handful of so-called fishermen’s organizations to prevent this, and it seems that they have been willing to resort to just about any tactics to do it. As they have been successful in their efforts the fishing industry has continued to lose infrastructure that will never be replaced and markets that will be next to impossible to recover – and the percentage of imported seafood that we consume will continue to increase in spite of the fact that our fisheries are among the richest in the world.

View a PDF of the opinion piece

September/October 2015 NEFMC Newsletter

October 22, 2015 — The following was released by the New England Fishery Management Council:

The Council Report summarizes major actions approved at NEFMC meetings or highlights items of interest to interested parties.

At its September 29-Oct 1, 2015 meeting in Plymouth, MA, the Council:

  • Approved Amendment 18 to the Groundfish Plan
  • Refined elements of Framework 55 (annual groundfish specs)
  • Approved the 2016- 2018 Atlantic herring specifications
  • Selected preferred alternatives for Scallop Amendment 19 and reviewed information related to Framework 27
  • Modified the red hake specifications
  • Initiated frameworks for the Skate Complex FMP and Habitat Amendment

If you would like to receive notices for committee meetings and other types of Council information via email, please click on Subscribe at the top of the homepage and receive e-notices.

View a PDF of the NEFMC Newsletter

New England fishermen fear looming costs for at-sea monitors

October 21, 2015 — PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — New England fishermen, running out of time before the federal government hands them the cost of monitoring the industry at sea, say emergency intervention is needed or many of them will be out of business.

The monitors are trained workers who collect data on commercial fishing trips that help fishery managers with things like setting quotas on catches in future years. Officials with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said the money it had been using to pay for monitors who work in New England fisheries such as cod, pollock and haddock is going to run out around Dec. 1.

Fishermen will have to pay for the monitors, which can cost more than $700 per trip. The new cost is almost certain to put people out of work in a struggling fishery that is already challenged by declining fish stocks and tough quotas, said Ben Martens, executive director of the Maine Coast Fishermen’s Association.

“It’s really scary. At the same time, we have problems with our resources right now,” Martens said. “We need to make sure we have better and stronger business not just next year, but three and five years down the line.”

Read the full story from the Associated Press at the San Francisco Chronicle

 

2,000 lb Possession Limit in Effect October 22 for Midwater Trawl Vessels in the GB Haddock AM Area

October 19, 2015 — The following was released by NOAA Fisheries:

Herring Possession Limit Reduced to 2,000 lb in the Georges Bank Haddock Accountability Management Area in Effect October 22 for Midwater Trawl Vessels

The Atlantic Herring Georges Bank Incidental Haddock Catch Cap for the 2015 fishing year has been harvested. 

As a result, herring midwater trawl vessels will be prohibited from fishing for or landing more than 2,000 lb of herring per trip or calendar day in or from the Herring Georges Bank Haddock Accountability Measure Area effective October 22. This limit will remain in place until the quota becomes available for the 2016 fishing year (expected on May 1, 2016). 

This action effectively limits the midwater trawl fishery in Herring Management Area 3 to 2,000 lb of herring per trip/day until May 1, 2016, because Area 3 falls within the Georges Bank Haddock Accountability Management Area. 

Herring vessels issued an All Areas or Areas 2/3 Limited Access Herring Permit may land haddock from the Herring Georges Bank Haddock Accountability Measure Area provided they have a Northeast Multispecies permit and are on a declared Northeast Multispecies day-at-sea.

For more information, please read the Federal Register notice and the permit holder bulletin.

Questions? Contact Shannah Jaburek, Regional Office, at 978-282-8456 or shannah.jaburek@noaa.gov.

Atlantic herring. Credit: NOAA

 

NOAA to pay for at-sea monitors through November

October 1, 2015 — NOAA Fisheries will continue bearing the cost for at-sea monitoring of Northeast multispecies groundfish vessels at least through the end of November, three months past the target date the agency initially set for the expense to shift to permit holders.

This extension — the second in as many months — is based on the same rationale as the first: with fishermen producing fewer fishing days because of slashed quotas and area closures, the money the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration budgeted for at-sea monitoring for at least 24 percent of total fishing days is lasting longer than the agency expected.

NOAA initially said the money for at-sea monitoring — which runs to about $710 per vessel per day — would run out around Aug. 31 and then the responsibility for paying for the legally mandated at-sea monitoring would have to be borne by the fishermen.

In early August, NOAA said decreased effort by the fleet had reduced monitoring expenditures enough for the money to last through Oct. 31. Now that same reduction in fishing effort has given the fleet another month-long reprieve, but it has not solved the long-term dilemma of how to pay for the at-sea monitoring.

The issue certainly is not going away.

NOAA is adamant that it expects permit holders to ultimately assume the cost of monitoring, while fishermen flatly state that the additional expense — heaped upon already miniscule, if non-existent, profit margins — simply will sink the fleet.

In late July, NOAA flatly rejected the request of the New England Fishery Management Council to use its emergency powers to remove all at-sea monitors from groundfish boats for the remainder of the 2015 fishing season.

Instead, NOAA, as well as the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, advanced the idea that the cost of monitoring be covered by some portion of the $6.9 million remaining in the Bay State’s third phase, or Bin 3, of the federal fishing disaster assistance.

Read the full story at Gloucester Daily Times

 

 

Disbursement of Groundfish Disaster Funds (Bin 3)

October 1, 2015 — The following was released by NOAA Fisheries:

The final installment of groundfish fishery disaster aid, commonly known as Bin 3, has been released to four of the affected states (Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Connecticut) by NOAA Fisheries. Bin 3 represents the final third of $32.8 million available to assist the groundfish industry. This action allows the states to move forward with the development of individual spend plans for economic assistance to include direct aid to permit holders and crew.  

For more information on the spend plans, contact:

Maine: Meredith Mendelson (207) 624-6553 

New Hampshire: Cheri Patterson (603) 868-1095

Massachusetts: Melanie Griffin (617) 626-1528

Connecticut: David Simpson (860) 434-6043 

New York and Rhode Island continue to work with NOAA Fisheries to develop and complete grant applications to benefit affected fishers and their families.

More information is available on our website.

Questions? Contact Jennifer Goebel, Regional Office, at 978-281-6175 or Jennifer.Goebel@noaa.gov.

Credit: NOAA

 

MASSACHUSETTS: State won’t follow Gloucester fishery aid plan

October 1, 2015 — GLOUCESTER, Mass. — With one day to spare before the grant period is set to begin, the state finally released details on its plan to distribute the final portion of federal fishery disaster aid to Massachusetts fishermen with federal permits.

It is not the so-called “Gloucester Plan” that would have spread between $6 million and $7 million to federally permitted fishermen who landed at least 20,000 pounds of groundfish in any of the fishing seasons 2012 to 2014.

Instead, according to Katie Gronendyke, spokeswoman for the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, the state will divide the federal assistance among fishermen with a Massachusetts homeport as of April 30, 2015, who either landed at least 10,000 pounds of groundfish in any fishing season between 2012 and 2014 or had an observer aboard their vessel for at least one groundfish trip in 2014.

The plan, according to Gronendyke, will “better target active fishermen in the groundfishery throughout the Commonwealth.”

The full grant of $6.9 million contained in the third phase, or Bin 3, of federal funding being funneled through the state is the final installment of the roughly $21 million in federal fishery disaster funds designated for Massachusetts from the $75 million appropriated by Congress in January 2014.

The state Division of Marine Fisheries, Gronendyke said, is in the process of identifying qualified recipients by auditing federal catch and trip data.

Read the full story at the Gloucester Daily Times

NEW BEDFORD STANDARD-TIMES: Fishery management needs balance

September 30, 2015 — The requirement that the cost of at-sea monitors be paid by the fishermen who participate in the Northeast Multispecies Fishery is mere weeks away from being phased in.

Study by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration suggests as many as 60 percent of affected boats could be pushed out of profitability by the requirement, based on estimates of monitors costing $700 per day.

Republican U.S. Rep. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire hosted a roundtable mid-month with NOAA representatives and fishermen to address the issue.

“We’re supposed to take into account that we don’t destroy the fishing communities,” Rep. Ayotte said, according to Sept. 18 report by the Portsmouth Herald. “(Requirements to protect fishermen) are being ignored in all this.”

She was referring to National Standard 8 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, which says measures used to manage the fishery must “take into account the importance of fishery resources to fishing communities by utilizing economic and social data,” consistent with the prevention of “overfishing and rebuilding of overfished stocks.”

The requirement for consistency, above, might explain why Greater Atlantic Regional Administrator John Bullard told Rep. Ayotte that “eliminating overfishing” supersedes all other priorities.

The Standard-Times is having a very difficult time trying to understand why a policy that will have such a clear negative impact on fishermen is being instituted when the beneficial impact on the resource — the fishery — is so unclear.

Read the full editorial from the New Bedford Standard-Times

Cape Cod fleet hopes for financial aid

September 29, 2015 — The big “bin” of cash, doled out by Congress in September 2012, when they declared the New England groundfish fishery a disaster, is about to be emptied of the last nickels and dimes.

It wasn’t a hurricane or brutal snowstorm that caused the disaster, it was a lack of cod. Quotas for the Cape’s namesake fish were slashed 80 percent in the Gulf of Maine and 61 percent for Georges Bank.

A total of $32.8 million was set aside for the New England fishery, with $11 million reserved for future use and $14.6 million sent to Massachusetts for distribution.

“The first round was money distributed by the federal government to permit holders who caught 5,000 pounds of ground fish in either 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013,” explained Claire Fitzgerald, policy analyst for the Chatham-based Cape Cod Commercial Fisherman’s Alliance.
In round one (or bin one) $6.3 million of Massachusetts’ share of the award was parceled out to 194 ground fish permit holders who qualified; $32,463 apiece. Unfortunately, in the case of the Fisheries Alliance, less than half of the two dozen boats in their Fixed Gear Sector qualified.

Read the full story from The Cape Codder