Saving Seafood

  • Home
  • News
    • Alerts
    • Conservation & Environment
    • Council Actions
    • Economic Impact
    • Enforcement
    • International & Trade
    • Law
    • Management & Regulation
    • Regulations
    • Nutrition
    • Opinion
    • Other News
    • Safety
    • Science
    • State and Local
  • News by Region
    • New England
    • Mid-Atlantic
    • South Atlantic
    • Gulf of Mexico
    • Pacific
    • North Pacific
    • Western Pacific
  • About
    • Contact Us
    • Fishing Terms Glossary

District Court Hears Challenge to Federal Grouper Allocations

October 25, 2022 — The following was released by the Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance:

Last week, the District Court for the District of Columbia heard a lawsuit challenging the legality of a federal reallocation of the red grouper quota in the Gulf of Mexico. The suit alleges that NOAA showed unlawful favoritism when it decided to raise grouper quotas for recreational fishermen at the expense of commercial fishermen, and that the result will harm the red grouper stock.

The Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance (GCSA) supports the Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance, Southern Offshore Fishing Association, and A.P. Bell Fish Company, who filed the suit, in their continuing efforts to challenge an unfair and unlawful decision by NOAA. GCSA members Dewey Destin and David Krebs attended the hearing, held at the federal courthouse in Washington, D.C.

Earlier this year, NOAA decided on a drastic reallocation of red grouper quota, as part of Amendment 53 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico. The Amendment reduces the overall red grouper quota, while increasing the recreational share of the quota from 24 percent to 40.7 percent, and decreasing the commercial share from 76 percent to 59.3 percent.

The lawsuit challenges the allocation on the basis that it “unlawfully benefit[s] the recreational fishing sector, harm[s] the commercial fishing sector and seafood consumers, and jeopardize[s] conservation.” It also alleges that the Amendment violates the conservation provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the federal law governing U.S. fishery management.

As part of its efforts to support the lawsuit, GCSA produced and filed commentsoutlining the flaws in the Amendment and the reallocation decision, including an insufficient analysis of the economic impacts of the decision. According to GCSA’s analysis, the reallocation also violates several sections of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Administrative Procedure Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act.

The decision also relies on deeply flawed data about recreational fishing, specifically the Fishing Effort Survey (FES). Starting in the late 1970s, NOAA collected data on recreational fishing through phone surveys. The agency has since switched over to the FES, which is a mail-based survey. To reconcile the two different methods of data collection, NOAA tried to develop a calibration model that would re-estimate the data collected during the phone survey. However, the estimates produced by the model produced anomalies that do not align with data produced by Florida vessels. It is these flawed estimates that NOAA used to set allocations with Amendment 53. But, as GCSA’s analysis notes, there appears to be insufficient information to determine that historical catch was different from the previous estimates, and therefore there is no basis for reallocation.

GCSA is hopeful that the District Court will see that NOAA made an unlawful decision based on a flawed process. Fisheries management needs to follow the law, and not benefit one sector at the expense of the stock and others that depend on it.

Commercial Fishermen, Other Members of Seafood Industry Challenging NOAA’s Red Grouper Reallocation

May 11, 2022 — Last week SeafoodNews reported on NOAA’s Amendment 53, a new rule in the Federal Register regarding the reef fish fishery of the Gulf of Mexico. The final rule revised the annual catch limits (ACLs) and annual catch targets (ACTs) for both the commercial and recreational sectors, reallocating 20% of the commercial red grouper quota to the recreational sector. The decision had commercial fishermen and others in the industry up in arms. But they’re not just sitting back. A lawsuit has been filed challenging the legality of the decision to reallocate the red grouper quota to recreational fishermen.

The lawsuit was filed late on Friday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by A.P. Bell Fish Company, the Southern Offshore Fishing Association, and the Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance.

“This case is about the government’s allocation of fishing privileges for catching red grouper in the Gulf of Mexico between two user groups,” reads the suit. “The challenged agency action takes fish away from the commercial sector, and gives them to the recreational fishing sector. But the recreational sector is wasteful, catching and throwing back millions of red grouper each year, of which hundreds of thousands die. Allocating more fish to the recreational sector will increase this waste, reduce the amount of fish available for consumption, and increase the risk of overfishing the stock. These outcomes are unlawful.”

The Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance (GCSA) made their opinions on NOAA’s decision very clear in an analysis that can be found here. Meanwhile, the recently filed lawsuit can be found here.

Read the full story at Seafood News

Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance Supports Lawsuit Challenging Unlawful Red Grouper Quotas

May 9, 2022 — The following was released by the Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance:

Commercial fishermen and members of the Gulf of Mexico seafood industry have filed a lawsuit challenging the legality of a recent decision by NOAA Fisheries to reallocate red grouper quota to recreational fishermen at the expense of the commercial fishery. The Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance (GCSA) supports the efforts by the Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance, Southern Offshore Fishing Association, and A.P. Bell Fish Company to challenge this decision, in an effort to restore a fair allocation for commercial fishermen.

The lawsuit, filed late on Friday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, challenges recent red grouper allocations approved by NOAA as part of Amendment 53 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico.

The plaintiffs indicated they will seek expedited review.

Amendment 53 drastically reallocates the quota for red grouper. It increases the recreational share of the quota from 24 percent to 40.7 percent, while decreasing the commercial share from 76 percent to 59.3 percent. Simultaneously, the Amendment decreases the overall available red grouper quota in order to account for increased grouper discards from the recreational fishermen.

According to the lawsuit, this allocation “unlawfully benefit[s] the recreational fishing sector, harm[s] the commercial fishing sector and seafood consumers, and jeopardize[s] conservation,” while going against the conservation goals set out in the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the federal law governing U.S. fishery management. It notes that the Amendment is only the latest in a series of decisions showing “unlawful favoritism” to recreational fishermen.

GCSA has previously criticized Amendment 53 in its own analysis. GCSA specifically has criticized the Amendment for the flaws in the process that led to its adoption, the inadequate economic analysis that supported its allocation decision, and the legal precedents that the Amendment violates.

The complaint specifies ten causes of action, demonstrating that Amendment 53 violates:

  • Magnuson-Stevens Act National Standard Four, which requires that allocations of fishing privileges “shall be…fair and equitable to all such [U.S.] fishermen” and “reasonably calculated to promote conservation.”
  • Magnuson-Stevens Act National Standard Nine, which requires that “[c]onservation and management measures shall, to the extent practicable, (A) minimize bycatch and (B) to the extent bycatch cannot be avoided, minimize the mortality of such bycatch.”
  • Magnuson-Stevens Act Section 303(a)(11), which requires that any Fishery Management Plan “establish a standardized reporting methodology to assess the amount and type of bycatch occurring in the fishery, and include conservation and management measures that, to the extent practicable and in the following priority—(A) minimize bycatch; and (B) minimize the mortality of bycatch which cannot be avoided.”
  • Magnuson-Stevens Act Section 303(a)(15), which requires all Fishery Management Plans to “establish a mechanism for specifying annual catch limits in the plan (including a multiyear plan) implementing regulations, or annual specifications, at a level that overfishing does not occur in the fishery, including measures to ensure accountability.”
  • Magnuson-Stevens Act National Standard One, which requires that “[c]onservation and management measures shall prevent overfishing while achieving, on a continuing basis, the optimum yield from each fishery for the United States fishing industry.”
  • Legal requirements regarding the setting and review of optimum yield as specified in Magnuson- Stevens Act Sections 303(a)(3), 303(a)(4)(A), AND 302(h)(5).
  • Magnuson-Stevens Act National Standard Two, which requires that “conservation and management measures shall be based upon the best scientific information available.”
  • Magnuson-Stevens Act National Standard Eight, which requires that NOAA must “take into account the importance of fishery resources to fishing communities.”
  • The Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
  • The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

Related:
Despite Flawed Procedures, Economic Inaccuracies and Legal Precedents, NOAA Acts to Take Fish from Families, Markets, Restaurants and Consumers

Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance: Statement on Red Grouper Quota Instability

 

Florida red grouper quota reallocation angers commercial-fishing sector

May 6, 2022 — A reallocation of the Gulf of Mexico red grouper catch limits has angered the region’s commercial fishing sector, which stands to lose a sizeable portion of its share of the catch to recreational anglers.

Amendment 53, which was announced by NOAA on Monday, 2 May, and which will go into effect 1 June, 2022, amends the fishery management plan for reef fish resources in the Gulf of Mexico so that the allocation of the red grouper catch to the commercial sector is lowered from 76 percent to 59.3 percent, while increasing the recreational catch-share from 24 percent to 40.7 percent.

Read the full story at SeafoodSource

 

Despite flawed procedures, economic inaccuracies and legal precedents, NOAA acts to take fish from families, markets, restaurants and consumers

May 2, 2022 — The following was released by the Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance:

Today, the U.S. Department of Commerce and NOAA Fisheries formally published their decision to take fish from working families, markets, restaurants and consumers, even though this decision comes as a result of flawed procedures, inaccuracies and inadequacies in their economic analysis, and numerous legal precedents which will be violated.

Amendment 53 to the Reef Fish Resources Fishery Management Plan as formulated by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Gulf Council):

  • Will reallocate 20 percent of commercial red grouper quota to the recreational sector (a 32 percent decrease from what would have been allocated without the amendment) causing significant harm to restaurants, markets, distributors, processors, harvesters, and ultimately end consumers;
  • Will deny the citizens of the United States access to 1.2 million pounds of red grouper currently being caught annually by commercial fishermen and enjoyed by anyone who does not have the ability or opportunity to fish recreationally;
  • Will deprive restaurants of revenue from those landings, negatively affect the tourist industry, and deprive non-angler citizens of their access to Gulf of Mexico seafood resources.

During the public comment period, the Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance (GCSA) submitted an analysis conducted by respected independent experts in opposition to the proposed rule. In addition to our comments, seventeen major organizations registered their opposition to Amendment 53, including the Environmental Defense Fund, the National Restaurant Association, the National Fisheries Institute, the Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance, and the Charter Fisherman’s Association.

On February 18th, public comments were due to NOAA Fisheries on the proposed rule for the implementation of Amendment 53 to the Reef Fish Resources Fishery Management Plan. On March 9, just 12 workdays later, Andrew Strelcheck, the regional administrator, approved the Amendment in a letter to Dale Diaz, chair of the Gulf Council. Given the typical length of time required by NOAA to conduct analyses, it is incomprehensible that the agency undertook a serious analysis of the comments submitted by GCSA and the numerous other organizations and individuals who raised serious concerns.

Instead, NOAA appears to have taken an “approve now, analyze later” approach.

THE GCSA REVIEW

GCSA’s expert panel analyzed the Gulf Council’s actions in the development of Amendment 53, and found significant problems, from three perspectives:

  • Process: flaws in the processes and procedures undertaken by the Gulf Council that led to its adoption
    • An analysis of the Gulf Council process under the supervision of Dr. Steve Cadrin, Professor of Fisheries Oceanography at the University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth, School of Marine Science and Technology, and past president of the American Institute of Fisheries Research Biologists, conducted by Aubrey Ellertson Church, a graduate student at the same institution.
  • Economic: inadequacies and inaccuracies in the economic and environmental studies conducted
    • An economic analysis by Dr. Tom Sproul, Associate Professor of Environmental and Natural Resource Economics at the University of Rhode Island, who represents Rhode Island on the Committee for Economics and Social Science at the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission.
  • Legal: the legal precedents that would be violated by implementation of the Amendment
    • A legal analysis by attorney Drew Minkiewicz, a partner in the Washington, DC law office of Kelley Drye & Warren LLP. In his second decade of legal practice, he represents commercial fishing interests and maritime shippers. Prior to joining Kelley Drye, Drew served as senior counsel and staff director of the Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries and Coast Guard of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation.

PROCESS ISSUES AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS PROBLEMS

The review found these serious issues in the Gulf Council’s promulgation of Amendment 53:

  • The Gulf Council’s economic analysis in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) contains a pattern of assumptions and omissions that bias the cost-benefit analysis against commercial fishing and in favor of recreational fishing. Accordingly, an unbiased FEIS would come to the opposite conclusion, that recreational quota should be reallocated to the commercial fishery.
  • The Gulf Council’s analysis to calculate economic value for recreational fisheries included all value added from the time a fish was swimming freely below the waves until it was caught by a recreational fisher’s hook, but that Council analysis to calculate economic value of commercially-caught fish ended with the ex-vessel value at the dock, and ignored all additional value added from the dock to the restaurant plate or the market seafood counter.
  • Significant concerns exist on efforts to retroactively interrelate estimates of recreational fishing effort derived from the Coastal Household Telephone Survey (CHTS) with the Fishing Effort Survey (FES). These concerns emerged in the Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) Calibration Model Peer Review organized by NOAA Fisheries in 2017, and are expressed in the minority report on Amendment 53.
  • Anomalies in the record of the NOAA Fisheries analysis of the 2017 MRIP Calibration Model Peer Review indicating that the data from Florida private vessels most representative of recreational red grouper catch are not aligned with the macro assumptions used by the Council in the adoption of Amendment 53.

The circumstances leading to Amendment 53 arose from changes in the way that recreational fishing catch is estimated. Starting in 1979, data about recreational fishing effort was collected by phone survey. This method became less practical over time—due in large part to a decline in the use of landline telephones. It was replaced with the FES, a postal mail survey sent to a sample of residential households in coastal states. Between 2016 and 2017, NOAA Fisheries staff and independent consultants worked to develop a calibration model to re-estimate statistics produced by the phone survey.

During the 2017 MRIP Calibration Model Peer Review, NOAA Fisheries researchers were unable to explain the large difference in MRIP-FES catch estimates using covariates in the statistical calibration model. Reviewer Jason McNamee noted it was impossible to certify the accuracy of the predictions backwards in time. Neither of these difficulties are surprising given the difficulty of retrodicting data going back decades from just a few recent years of calibration data.

Members of the GCSA are concerned about an anomaly we have found in the official record of the 2017 MRIP Calibration Model Peer Review. In examining the records of the estimated retrodicted FES values (the recalculation of the historic numbers) against the previously existing CHTS values, and using what can be called the “Sesame Street analysis,” we see that that “one of these things is not like the other, one of these things just doesn’t belong”:

  • The additional materials from the 2017 MRIP Calibration Model Peer Review panel contain a series of plots of the estimated retrodicted FES values against the previous CHTS values for each of the 17 Atlantic and Gulf Coastal states.
  • An examination of the plot of retrodicted FES values against previous CHTS values for private boat trips by Florida anglers – who represent the overwhelming majority of the Red Grouper recreational fishery – shows that nearly all the pre-existing CHTS values over the period 1986 – 2005 fall inside the confidence interval for the newly calculated MRIP-FES predictions.
  • The implication of this one-state anomaly is important. It implies that the retrodicted FES values for Florida anglers – who comprise much of the Gulf red grouper recreational fishers – are not statistically different from the previously existing CHTS estimates.

In other words, there appears to be insufficient statistical information to determine that historical catch for these anglers was different from the previous estimates, and therefore there is no basis for reallocation.

Our combined review of both the Council procedures and the ultimately selected alternative using questionable historic statistical analyses demonstrates that Amendment 53 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico:

  • Does not promote conservation for a highly vulnerable stock;
  • Does not advance objectives of the Fishery Management Plan;
  • Ignores factors that would have increased the commercial sectors allocation;
  • Does not minimize bycatch;
  • Does not provide information on how NOAA Fisheries recalibrated historical red grouper landings;
  • Ignored the Council’s allocation policy;
  • Ignores recommendations of the Reef Fish Advisory Panel and IFQ Advisory Panel.

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS PROBLEMS

To translate the term “consumer surplus” from terms used by economists to the commonly used vernacular, what this means is that the economic analysis used by the Council includes the value of any fish caught by a recreational angler all the way to the hook of the recreational fisher. But when we examine the application of the same “consumer surplus” concept as it is applied to the commercial fishery in the Council analysis, the calculation ends at the “ex-vessel” value that is paid by a “fish house” or processor at the dock. So, all of the additional economic value added by the GCSA members who distribute seafood wholesale, or own markets or restaurants, is ignored in the Council calculations, as well as the value to the end consumers of seafood.

There is no justification for this choice, nor even any disclosure that this choice was made.

Our economic analysis found that the FEIS contains incomplete, arbitrary and biased analysis – it cannot be relied upon for federal rulemaking until corrections are made.

The key points in our review are as follows:

  • Estimates of angler consumer surplus are arbitrary and overstated.
  • Estimates of consumer surplus from commercial harvest are missing.
  • Estimates of producer surplus from commercial harvest are missing for secondary wholesale, retail and restaurants.
  • Estimates of climate change impacts are missing. Our estimates indicate substantially larger climate change impacts from recreational trips than from commercial harvest.
  • Indirect and induced economic impacts are omitted from the cost-benefit analysis.
  • Objective cost-benefit analysis favors increasing commercial quota allocation.
  • Confidence in the analysis is overstated because estimates of uncertainty are missing.

The economic conclusions drawn in the FEIS to support Amendment 53 hinge entirely on the arbitrary assignment of outsize enjoyment benefits to recreational anglers of $110 per fish. This value is based on a single research study using hypothetical tradeoffs, and it is more than 25x the value determined appropriate by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Without this single arbitrary assumption, the economic analysis in the FEIS would come to the opposite conclusion: Amendment 53 should be rejected and, if anything, recreational quota should be reallocated to the commercial fishery.

LEGAL PROBLEMS

Our legal analysis shows the rule would violate existing law in several ways:

  • Under the law, if fishing privileges are allocated to a specific group, that allocation must actually “promote” a conservation purpose. Because the allocation fails to promote the conservation of a fish stock, the rule violates National Standard Four of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. 16 U.S.C. § 1851(a)(4).
  • It does not advance the objectives of the Fishery Management Plan to achieve robust fishery reporting and data collection systems across all sectors for monitoring the reef fish fishery, which minimizes scientific, management, and risk uncertainty; to minimize and reduce dead discards; and to promote and maintain accountability in the reef fish fishery. By selecting alternatives that contradict these stated goals the Agency is acting in an arbitrary and unreasonable fashion. Oceana, Inc. v. Evans, 2005 WL 555426, *7 (D.D.C. 2005), quoting City of Alexandria v. Slater, 198 F.3d 862, 867 (D.C. Cir. 1999).
  • National Standard 9, 16 U.S.C. § 1851(a)(9) directs those measures to minimize bycatch or mortality of bycatch. Amendment 53 has no measures to reduce bycatch. Rather, the rule would increase bycatch in a directed fishery. In Coastal Conservation Ass’n v. Gutierrez, 512 F.Supp.2d 896 (2007), and in Flaherty v. Bryson, 850 F.Supp.2d 38 (2012), courts found that NMFS violated the law by not including measures to address the minimization of bycatch.
  • 16 U.S.C. § 1851(a)(2) dictates that conservation and management measures shall be based upon the best scientific information available. Yet, as our economic analysis shows, the Environmental Protection Agency’s meta-analysis is far superior than the economic analysis used to justify Amendment 53 in every objective way. In Hall v. Evans, 165 F. Supp. 2d 114 (D.R.I. 2001), the Court concluded that NMFS violated National Standard 2 because the Secretary had not utilized the best scientific information available to the agency.
  • The proposed rule for Amendment 53 is similar to the rule promulgated for Amendment 28 to the Reef Fish FMP which was rejected in Guindon v. Pritzker, 240 F. Supp. 3d 181 (D.D.C. 2017), in which the Court struck down a reallocation that rewarded the recreational sector for overharvesting as not “fair and equitable”.

OTHER MAJOR ORGANIZATIONS OPPOSING THIS ACTION
Following are excerpts from their public comments:

Environmental Defense Fund:

  • Much of our U.S. work supports the development and implementation of fishery management best practices and climate resilience. Key to progress in these areas is ensuring that fishery management policies are rooted in sound public process, are consistent with governing laws, and use the best available science. It is through this lens that we respectfully request that you reject Amendment 53 in its current form and send it back to the Gulf Council for further consideration, following the Gulf Council’s designated allocation review process.

National Restaurant Association

  • [Amendment 53 will] cause significant harm to the entire seafood supply chain, including restaurants, and is inconsistent with the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act Fishery Conservation and Management Act [and] would remove hundreds of thousands of red grouper servings from restaurants and their consumers.

National Fisheries Institute

  • If adopted, Amendment 53 will establish a worrisome precedent against the science-driven, collaborative MSA framework. That framework has enabled NMFS and the fishery management councils to restore dozens of significant fisheries to maximum sustainable yield and then to keep them there in the face of conservation and other headwinds. But if one sector can successfully engineer a dramatic reallocation in the red grouper fishery as proposed here, that will tempt others to seek similar, one-sided outcomes in other, completely unrelated fisheries that (like this one) do not face sustainability disaster. Gulf Council management of the red snapper fishery in recent years has already prompted similar concerns from environmental advocates, commercial seafood producers, Gulf Council members, and other parties. This will undermine the MSA framework and if repeated often enough will cause its collapse.

Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders Alliance

  • NMFS attempted to re-create historical ACLs based on FES calibrations for other species like king mackerel. No similar attempt was made for red grouper. Our understanding is that attempting to calculate historical ACLs going back to years used for red grouper allocation (1986-2005) was difficult. But without undertaking that exercise, reallocation is just a one-way ratchet in which only the recreational sector can ever benefit. In that regard, red grouper reallocation under Amendment 53 is similar to red snapper reallocation under Amendment 28, which a court struck down as not fair and equitable as required by National Standard 4.

Charter Fisherman’s Association

  • Amendment 53 appears to punish the commercial sector for the discards of the recreational sector (the commercial sector loses 1.2 million pounds of red grouper while the recreational sector’s quota only increases 550,000 pounds; the remaining 650,000 pounds goes to accounting for the recreational sector discards) and we can’t support that…Each sector, or subsector, should be responsible for their own discards and not be forced to subsidize the dead discards of others.

The Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance (GCSA) is an organization of stakeholders seeking a common goal: equitable and sustainable fisheries along the Gulf Coast for commercial and recreational use alike. Our members make up a diverse group of restaurant owners, chefs, vessel owners, and seafood market owners. GCSA members represent the entire spectrum of commercial fish production in the Gulf of Mexico, from harvest at sea, to processing, and ultimately to the end consumer – shoppers in markets and diners in restaurants.

 

Gulf of Mexico fishermen, supporters organize to challenge red grouper reallocation

March 11, 2022 — A move to reallocate Gulf of Mexico red grouper has marshaled a broad coalition of fishing, seafood and food service industry groups asking federal officials to reconsider.

In a region where fishery politics are dominated by the recreational sector, commercial fishing advocates aided by allies in the restaurant and seafood industries mounted a big pushback on the planned Amendment 53 to the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council reef fish management plan.

But in a March 9 letter, NMFS regional administrator Andrew Strelcheck advised the council that NMFS intends to approve the move.

In June 2021 the Gulf of Mexico council voted to change the recreational and commercial allocations of red grouper, based on recent changes to NMFS surveys of recreational fishing effort that showed the recreational side caught more fish during allocation reference years than had been estimated before.

The net effect would be to reduce the commercial sector’s allocation from 76 percent to 59.3 percent, while and increasing the recreational share from 24 percent to 40.7 percent, according to a Seafood Harvesters of America comment letter to NMFS.

“Effectively, this will result in a reduction of nearly one-third (32 percent) of the commercial sector’s allocation,” the group wrote.

“There were some pretty impressive organizations that were against the amendment,” the Reef Fish Shareholders Alliance noted in a bulletin to its members. “These included the National Restaurant Association, the National Fisheries Institute, the Florida Restaurant and Lodging Association, The (National) Food Industry Association, Seafood Harvesters of America, Southeastern Fisheries Association, Southern Offshore Fishing Association, Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance, National Association of Charterboat Operators, Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance, Fish for America USA, Southern Offshore Fishing Association, and the National Association of Charterboat Operators.”

Read the full story at National Fisherman

 

Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance Urges Feds to Preserve Red Grouper Access for All Americans

July 8, 2021 — Last month, the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council changed the allocation between commercial and recreational red grouper from a 76:24 split to 59.3:40.7 split on a slightly reduced total allowable catch.

Yesterday, the Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance (GCSA), called the move “… deeply disturb[ing] …”.  If approved, the Council’s action will deprive the citizens of the United States access to 600,000 pounds of red grouper this year currently being caught by commercial fishermen, and enjoyed by anyone who does not have the ability or opportunity to fish recreationally,” the group said in a statement. GCSA represents seafood harvesters, distributors, and restaurants across Gulf Coast.

Read the full story at Seafood News

Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance Calls on Federal Government to Preserve Red Grouper Access for All Americans

July 6, 2021 — The following was released by the Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance:

Members of the Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance, representing seafood harvesters, distributors, and the restaurants serving their products, are deeply disturbed by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council’s recent proposal to reallocate 20 percent of the commercial red grouper quota to the recreational sector.

If approved, the Council’s action will deprive the citizens of the United States access to 600,000 pounds of red grouper this year currently being caught by commercial fishermen, and enjoyed by anyone who does not have the ability or opportunity to fish recreationally. It will also deprive restaurants of revenue from those landings, and will block both local residents and tourists from accessing our Gulf seafood resources.

This decision demonstrates the success of an ongoing effort by the well-funded recreational fishing lobby to take a disproportionate share of the quota for their personal enjoyment, and for the profit of companies supplying fishing gear and recreational vessels.

Of America’s approximately 330 million citizens, only 38 million are holders of recreational fishing licenses, tags, permits and stamps, according to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. The 11 percent of Americans who enjoy fishing recreationally, who can afford the gear, boats and charters needed to participate in this sport, certainly have the right to access this resource, but they should not have the right to monopolize the resource.

The other 89 percent of Americans nationwide who do not hold fishing licenses, tags, permits or stamps also have the right to access domestic seafood resources, which they currently do through the labor of our commercial fishermen and distributors, who supply wild-caught seafood to their markets and favorite restaurants.

Commercial fishing is just as important to the Gulf tourist economy as recreational fishing, even though the benefits are often overlooked. If commercial fishermen can’t catch enough local species like grouper, the impacts will ripple through the critically important restaurant industry. Less grouper to catch means less grouper for restaurants, and that will inevitably lead to higher prices at the table.

Red grouper is one of the best selling local seafood items at Gulf restaurants. Without ready access to it at prices customers feel comfortable paying, some restaurants may have to consider supplementing their wild-caught products with farm-raised fish from overseas. Fresh, local seafood is one of the reasons people come from across the country to the Gulf; a restaurant industry without it would be far less appealing.

Appointees to the Fisheries Council selected by former Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross from the slates of nominees submitted by regional governors tipped the composition of the Council in the direction of recreational fishing interests who derive their pleasure from our fisheries over those who derive their livelihoods from our fisheries.

As the former Governor of Rhode Island, our current Secretary of Commerce, Gina Raimondo, unquestionably understands the need to balance the rights of recreational fishing participants with the rights of citizen consumers. Like our Gulf Coast, the Rhode Island economy has for centuries supported fishing interests – both commercial and recreational – as well as a robust tourist trade that sustains restaurants, markets and hotels filled with guests who enjoy local seafood. We must continue developing methods to share our nation’s coastal resources and not exclude one sector in favor of another.

About the Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance
The Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance (GCSA) unites fishermen, seafood dealers, and restaurants to advocate for the fair distribution of fish across the Gulf Coast. Americans who live in or visit the Gulf should have fish to catch at sea and fish to buy onshore. Our members drive a fishing economy that provides jobs, promotes tourism, and delivers fresh seafood across the Gulf Coast. View our membership here.

Florida restauranteur delivering fresh, flash-frozen fish across the US with Gulf to Table

January 19, 2021 — A restaurateur on Florida’s Gulf Coast has started a new endeavor designed to bring the region’s seafood delicacies to individuals and businesses across the country.

Charles Morgan launched Gulf to Table to deliver fresh, flash-frozen fish to markets, restaurants, and private homes. The fish are processed at Morgan’s Harbor Docks restaurant and market in Destin, and shipped overnight. Morgan counts markets in New York and Canada among his customers, along with a slew of independent restaurants.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

“Gulf to Table” Ships Fresh, High-Quality Gulf Seafood Directly to Consumers Across the U.S.

December 21, 2020 — The following was released by the Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance:

Gulf to Table is shipping the highest quality wild-caught Gulf seafood to families, restaurants and markets around the country through personalized shopping and overnight shipping. The ease of purchasing from Gulf to Table’s website makes it an ideal choice for consumers looking for fresh Gulf seafood this holiday season, no matter where they live.

Gulf to Table is the brainchild of Charles Morgan, whose seafood restaurants are known in Destin, Florida and throughout the Southeast for their impeccably fresh seafood and innovative menus. Mr. Morgan has developed a strong reputation of caring for his fishermen, staff, and the sustainability of Gulf fisheries, while delivering high-quality seafood across his restaurants. With Gulf to Table, he has expanded his successful business to offer this same care and high-quality seafood to customers across the country.

Gulf to Table ships fresh, flash frozen seafood – fast. The website is constantly updated and personalized, making shopping online easy. Staff is trained in all things fish. If a customer is struggling to choose the right type, quantity, or cut of seafood, the website offers a responsive chat experience to help them make the right choice for them. True to Mr. Morgan’s desire to foster a transparent seafood market, customers can even find out which boat and captain caught the fish that gets shipped out. There’s also a pick-up option for locals.

“Wild-caught seafood is the last truly wild protein available to the public,” Mr. Morgan said. “It’s our goal to help customers understand just what goes into getting honestly labeled and sustainably harvested fish from the waters of the Gulf to their dinner tables. And through our user-friendly website, fresh seafood is just a click away.”

Gulf to Table strives to offer as much of the Gulf’s bounty as possible, from whole fish and fillets, to local favorite cuts of cheeks and throats.

Through his Harbor Docks restaurant, Mr. Morgan is a member of the Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance, which brings together fishermen, seafood dealers, and restaurants to advocate for the fair distribution of fish across the Gulf of Mexico

  • 1
  • 2
  • Next Page »

Recent Headlines

  • EPA decision on Bristol Bay draws criticism and praise
  • The Shift to Renewable Energy Is Speeding Up. Here’s How.
  • ALASKA: Alaska salmon troll fleet under the gun over chinooks and killer whales
  • U.S. EPA’s move to block Pebble project in Alaska ‘unlawful’ – CEO
  • US FDA announces overhaul of its food-safety programs
  • Aquafeed companies issue ultimatum: Fix North Atlantic blue whiting issues or we’ll stop buying it
  • ALASKA: Kodiak crab strike ends after 2 weeks
  • Republicans vow EPA scrutiny in Pebble veto’s wake

Most Popular Topics

Alaska Aquaculture ASMFC Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission BOEM California Climate change Coronavirus COVID-19 Donald Trump groundfish Gulf of Maine Gulf of Mexico Illegal fishing IUU fishing Lobster Maine Massachusetts Mid-Atlantic National Marine Fisheries Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NEFMC New Bedford New England New England Fishery Management Council New Jersey New York NMFS NOAA NOAA Fisheries North Atlantic right whales North Carolina North Pacific offshore energy Offshore wind Pacific right whales Salmon Scallops South Atlantic Tuna Western Pacific Whales wind energy Wind Farms

Daily Updates & Alerts

Enter your email address to receive daily updates and alerts:
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Tweets by @savingseafood

Copyright © 2023 Saving Seafood · WordPress Web Design by Jessee Productions