Saving Seafood

Warm Waters Prevent Cod Stocks from Recovering

November 13, 2015 — Cod use to be the backbone of New England’s fisheries, but now stocks have nearly collapsed. While the decline was due primarily to overfishing, a new report led by the Gulf of Maine Research Institute (GMRI) reveals that stocks haven’t been able to recover because of the rapidly warming waters in the Gulf of Maine.

The Gulf of Maine is warming 99% faster than anywhere else in the world, which has led to changes in major currents and climate phenomena.

Noting the continued decline of cod stocks, fisheries managers severely restricted harvest rates in 2010, but that hasn’t made much of a difference. Stocks are hovering around three to four percent of sustainable levels.

Read the full story at Marine Science Today

Environmental groups want thorny skate on endangered list

November 11, 2015 — PORTLAND, Maine (AP) – A pair of environmental groups wants the U.S. government to add a species of skate to the list of animals protected under the Endangered Species Act, touching off a drive from some fishermen who say they are already burdened with too many regulations.

Animal Welfare Institute and Defenders of Wildlife say the thorny skate’s decline in the northwest Atlantic Ocean is troubling enough that it should be afforded protections reserved for endangered animals. Their request is before the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which has a year to make a decision about whether to protect the bottom-dwelling fish.

Federal surveys state that the fish’s population has declined since the late 1960s, and it was only 3 percent of its target level in the early part of this decade.

The thorny skate is one of at least three species in the Gulf of Maine, a key New England fishing area, that are up for potential listing. Listing a species under the Endangered Species Act can lead to habitat protections and fishing restrictions, and some fishermen plan to oppose listing the skate.

The listing would be especially bad for New England lobstermen because some use skate as bait, said Beth Casoni, executive director of the Massachusetts Lobstermen’s Association.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at the New Jersey Herald

 

JOHN SACKTON: Media’s Rampant ‘Fisheries Are Going Extinct’ Claim Finally has Serious Rebuttal from Scientists

SEAFOODNEWS.COM [The Editor’s View] by John Sackton — Nov 3, 2015 — The following headline came across our newsfeed this morning “Some South China Sea fish ‘close to extinction'”, courtesy of Agence France Presse.

The report was based on a quote from Rashid Sumaila, director of the Fisheries Economics Research Unit of the University of British Columbia.

“The South China Sea is… under threat from various sources. We need to do something,” said Sumaila.

“The most scary thing is the level of decline we have seen over the years. Some species (are facing) technically extinction or depletion,” Sumaila, who headed the study, told a press conference in Hong Kong. 

Having not seen the paper, it is not possible to evaluate his statements. But they are readily taken up because they feed into a media narrative that has proved very hard to change: fisheries around the world are dying because of human greed and overfishing.  This narrative has been central to NGO campaigns focused on fisheries. 

For many years, there was no organized response, and especially no way for journalists to get accurate scientific information. If they were fed a quote, such as “90% of the worlds stocks were unsustainably harvested” as appeared in Newsweek this summer, or that fish is ‘aquatic bushmeat’ comparable to eating monkeys and rhinoceros, as was said by Sylvia Earle, they have no way to evaluate its truthfulness. No wonder that seafood seems so controversial.

A group of scientists has come together through Ray Hilborn and his colleagues at the University of Washington, that is finally providing real-time commentary and rebuttal – i.e. pointing out the basic science – which in many cases does not support these media stories. 

Our companion story today by Peggy Parker has more detail on Hilborn’s rebuttal to Newsweek, where he said one article ‘may set a record for factual errors’.

The idea is not to simply point out poor science and unsupported conclusions, but to encourage media to use their website cfooduw.org, as a resource whenever they see a scientific claim about fisheries.

For example, just in the past few days, scientists from around the world have posted comments on a range of global topics.

Hilborn pointed out, and the Newsweek editors accepted, a correction that not 90%, but 28.8% of fish stocks were estimated as overfished. Would they have run the story if they had not been pitched intitally that 90% of fish stocks have collapsed?

Steve Cadrin of the University of Massachusetts comments on recent articles about cod in both New England and Newfoundland.  He says “The lesson from both of these papers is that rebuilding the stocks to historical levels depends both on fisheries management … and on the return of favorable environmental conditions.” 

“Stock assessment models are simplifications of a much more complex reality. Stock assessments typically assume that components of productivity (survival from natural mortality, reproductive rates, growth) are relatively constant. These assumptions may be reasonable for relatively stable ecosystems. However, considering the extreme climate change experienced in the Gulf of Maine, such assumptions need to be re-considered.  Alternative approaches to science and management are needed to help preserve the fishing communities that rely on Gulf of Maine cod.” 

Two tuna scientists collaborate on a story in response to the charge by Greenpeace that John West is breaking its sustainable tuna pledge by buying fish caught with FADs.

FADs are a type of fishing gear (radio monitored fish aggregating devices) that have become very widely used for pelagic tuna. The two scientists, Laurent Dagorn and Gala Moreno, point out in a comment and a recent paper the important issues with FADs are 1) quantifying, with scientific data, how big that impact actually is, 2) determining if the impact is acceptable for the amount and diversity of fish caught, 3) comparing it with the impact of other fishing gears, and 4) implementing measures to reduce an impact if it is too high for the ecosystem, taking into account all fishing impacts. 

This provides a real road map for a discussion of FADs and how they should or should not be used, in contrast to the campaign claims that they are simply destructive types of fishing gear.  Dagorn and Moreno point out that all food production (including organic farming) involves making choices about modifying ecosystems, and tuna fishing should not be considered in isolation, but in how it meets the goal of providing food for global populations.

Aggregating and making this kind of fisheries science easily accessible is one of the most concrete actions that has been taken in years to counteract the misinformation that so many of us in the industry experience every day. 

It is an effort that deserves wholehearted support, including publicizing the resource to local writers and editors. Please visit their website at cfooduw.org.

This opinion piece originally appeared on SeafoodNews.com, a subscription site. It has been reprinted with permission.

JON WILLIAMS: Not So Fast On Atlantic Marine Monument

WASHINGTON — November 4, 2015 — The following is an excerpt from an opinion piece written by Jon Williams, President of the Atlantic Red Crab Company of New Bedford, Massachusetts. It was originally published today by The Hill, a Washington-based publication covering Congressional policy and politics: 

An ongoing campaign led by large, well-funded environmental organizations is urging President Obama to use the 1906 Antiquities Act to designate parts of the Atlantic Ocean-such as Cashes Ledge in the Gulf of Maine and the New England Canyons and Seamounts-as marine National Monuments. In September, I had the privilege of testifying before House Natural Resources Committee Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans about the aspect of this proposal that seeks to exclude historic fisheries from the designated area.

The Antiquities Act, originally enacted to give Teddy Roosevelt authority to protect vulnerable Native American archeological sites, allows the president to act quickly, unilaterally, and without Congressional oversight to preserve sites in danger of destruction. The act, while undoubtedly created in good faith, has been misused in the case of marine monuments to a frightening extent.

In my case, the red crab fishing business I’ve been operating for twenty years is active in some of the areas under the proposal. Not only has our fishery complied with every regulation, but we have expended significant resources and time to ensure the health of the resource we fish.  We were the first U.S. Atlantic Coast fishery certified as sustainable by the Marine Stewardship Council, demonstrating we have minimal impact on the health of the species and its environment. Additionally, we are listed as “Ocean-Friendly” by the New England Aquarium Seafood Guide program. 

Although these processes took years of effort and hundreds of thousands of dollars-a significant cost for a fishery of our size-it was important that we understood how the red crab fishery impacted the environment and demonstrated that our practices were indeed sustainable. 

These efforts to both understand and minimize our impact on the environment have been so successful that after forty years of red crab fishing, our fishing grounds are described as “pristine” by the same environmental groups who seek the monument designation. If these habitats are still “pristine” after forty years of fishing, how can a serious argument be made that the area is in imminent danger and in need of immediate, unilateral protection by presidential fiat? By labeling our fishery as an imminent threat despite our ability to keep the area pristine, these environmental groups have both ignored the facts and devalued our successful efforts to operate a sustainable fishery.

In addition, those of us who have fished sustainably and responsibly in the area for decades have had our voices almost completely shut out of this process. A prime example was the September 15 “town hall” meeting held by NOAA in Providence, Rhode Island. Hastily arranged, many fishermen who would be affected by the proposals were not even aware that it took place. Those in attendance were provided no firm details on the scope of the proposal, preventing them from commenting substantively about something that could dramatically affect or even eliminate their livelihoods. There’s no guarantee that there will be any future opportunity for those affected to voice their concerns. The Antiquities Act does not require such input, and a designation could come at any time.

Read the full opinion piece at The Hill 

NEFMC Declares Amendment 18 Flawed Then Votes It In

November 4, 2015 — PLYMOUTH, Mass. —“The core message, across the board, is—we don’t want this fishery owned and controlled by a small group of people.”

That was the consensus, as expressed by Brett Tolley, of the Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance, delivered to the New England Fishery Management Council (NEFMC) during their latest deliberations on Amendment 18 to the groundfish management plan.

Tolley continued, “That’s no good for communities or the fish or the seafood system. And right now, at the end of this process, we’re debating whether seven or five entities should control this fishery….So there’s something fundamentally flawed with this public process.”

In late September, NEFMC was considering measures that would impose limits on the amount of fishery permits and/or Potential Sector Contribution (PSC) that individuals or groups may hold, as well as other measures that might promote fleet diversity or enhance sector management.

But fishermen and others at the meeting said Amendment 18 failed to achieve the goals outlined by NEFMC.

“It feels like we’re making things up on the fly,” said NEFMC member John Pappalardo. “The document here doesn’t answer a lot of questions that have come up today. I’m still toying with the idea of making a motion to scuttle this whole thing and send it back for further development….There’s a sense that folks just want to get this over with, but I’m not sure that’s the best course of action right now.”

Ed Barrett, a commercial fisherman from Marshfield, Mass., said he predicted, during the development of Amendment 16, that sector management would never work.

“We’re here in Amendment 18, pretty far down the road in a process that’s included years of scoping and committee meetings, and we have an amendment that’s not going to fix a thing,” Barrett said. “Right now, all we’re arguing over is the minutiae of a bad business model. This has been a waste of taxpayer money. It has failed me as a business owner, it’s failed my family’s business, it’s failed my fishing community. We need to stop this amendment right here. We need to go forward with something that will fix the problems that are killing the industry right now.”

“Give us the names of the five or seven guys who are going to own this fishery,” said Sandwich, Mass., fisherman William Chaprales. “We’re going too fast. Slow down. Let’s shelve this.”

Chaprales referred to the report produced by consulting firm Compass Lexecon (CL), which was charged in 2013 by NEFMC to determine if excessive market share currently exists in the groundfishery and to recommend potential constraints that could prevent excessive shares in the future. CL concluded there was no evidence of excessive market share and recommended accumulation limits in the 15.5 to 25 percent range on stock-specific potential sector contributions, and said lesser controls could reduce efficiency unnecessarily. PSC is an individual fisherman’s historical share of landings of groundfish species.

Read the full story at Fishermen’s Voice

 

 

Climate change fuels cod collapse

November 3, 2015 — The strongest link yet between climate change and the collapse of New England’s cod fish stunningly confirms how global emissions fuel regional calamities. The problems can no longer be contained by fishery council catch limits. They now demand worldwide greenhouse gas solutions.

A team of scientists, including those from the Gulf of Maine Research Institute, the University of Maine, and the Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences in Maine, found that average surface water temperature in the Gulf of Maine rose four degrees between 2004 and 2013. Temperatures in the gulf have risen faster than in 99 percent of all sea waters, with record warmth recorded in 2012.

Four degrees is trivial to humans, who can shed sweaters or seek shade. But for a cold-blooded fish at the southern edge of its breeding range, unable to turn on the AC against the northward shift of the Gulf Stream, four degrees is a sauna. Less cod larvae survive in warmer water, possibly because their cold-water zooplankton food is also less available. Surviving cod then seek deeper, colder water, where more voracious predators await to compound their mortality.

The study, published last week in the journal Science, helps explain why cod stocks have not rebounded under draconian federal catch limits. Adding in the negative impact of warmer water, researchers found that fishing mortality was far too high to rebuild stocks even when fishermen did not exceed quotas.

Read the full story at Boston Globe

A fisherman’s doubt, and his love of the sea

November 3, 2015 — He is up before the dawn, and, a creature of steady habits, he heads for the seashore.

It’s dark when Frank Mirarchi jumps into his black pickup truck, and dark still when he reaches Scituate Harbor. He parks on the town pier and stares at the ocean. But his 55-foot stern dragger is no longer moored there.

Actually, the boat is there. But it’s no longer his. It was renamed last June after he sold it — a poignant punctuation point to Mirarchi’s half-century career as a commercial fisherman.

“I’m down here every morning to watch the boats go out,’’ he told me Monday as we sat on a bench overlooking the dazzling harbor and under an unseasonably warm autumn sun. “I did it for 52 years. And I still love it.’’

I first met Mirarchi in early January when the harbor was icy and fat flakes of snow gently fell as if one of those snow globes had been softly shaken.

He is the son of a scientist and is something of a self-taught scientist himself. When I suggested Governor Charlie Baker would do well to pick his brain and appoint him to an ad hoc group looking into the travails of the cod fishery in the Gulf of Maine, the new governor took my advice. And soon Mirarchi was shaking hands with Baker on Beacon Hill.

When the latest news arrived last week about the depths of the cod collapse, the numbers were so alarming that I instantly thought of Frank and those like him who found their livelihood at sea.

Read the full story at Boston Globe

ASMFC Atlantic Herring Section Approves Public Hearing Document on Draft Amendment 3 for Public Comment

November 3, 2015 — ST. AUGUSTINE, Fl. – The following was released by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission:

The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission’s Atlantic Herring Section approved the Public Hearing Document for Draft Amendment 3 to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for Atlantic Herring for public comment. Draft Amendment 3 was initiated to strengthen spawning protections in Area 1A (inshore Gulf of Maine) and address concerns raised by the commercial fishing industry. The Public Hearing Document proposes (1) alternatives to the spawning monitoring program (protocol, default start dates, area boundaries, and length of the closure period); (2) removing the fixed gear set‐aside rollover provision, and (3) requiring a vessel’s fish hold to be emptied before leaving on a fishing trip.

Today’s rebuilt herring population is comprised of a broader range of age classes with older and larger fish compared to the population during overfished conditions. Analysis of more than a decade’s worth of data suggests larger herring spawn first and the timing of the start of spawning varies from year-to-year. Proposed alternatives to the current spawning monitoring program address inter-annual differences and provide additional measures to more adequately protect spawning fish in the areas where they spawn.

At the request of the fishing industry, the Public Hearing Document includes an option to adjust the fixed gear set-aside rollover provision. Currently, the set-aside of 295 mt is available to fixed gear fishermen through November 1, after which the remaining set-aside becomes available to the rest of the Area 1A fishery. The November 1 date was set because, typically, herring have migrated out of the Gulf of Maine by that time. Anecdotal evidence suggests herring are in the Gulf of Maine after November 1, therefore, fixed gear fishermen requested the set-aside be made available to them for the remainder of the calendar year.

Members of industry also suggested a requirement for fish holds to be empty of fish prior to trip departures. This provision would allow for full accountability and encourage less wasteful fishing practices by creating an incentive to catch herring to meet market demands. The New England Fishery Management Council included a complementary provision in its Framework Adjustment 4 to the Federal Atlantic Herring FMP.  

The states will be conducting public hearings on the Public Hearing Document this winter. Fishermen and other interested groups are encouraged to provide input on the Public Hearing Document either by attending state public hearings or providing written comment. A subsequent press release will announce the availability of the Public Hearing Document, details of the scheduled hearings, as well as the deadline for the submission of public comment. For more information, please contact, Ashton Harp, FMP Coordinator, at aharp@asmfc.org or 703.842.0740.

Will Maine lobster crash like cod? Only close ocean monitoring will tell

November 2, 2015 — There was a mix of news about the Gulf of Maine last week. First, there were dire warnings about the role of rising ocean temperatures in the demise of cod in the North Atlantic. Then came what sounded like good news — Maine has surpassed Massachusetts to become the state with the second most lucrative seafood landings in the country. Finally, on Friday, federal regulators announced they would close the Gulf of Maine herring fishery this month.

All of these stories are interrelated and point to the need for much more research to gain better understanding about what is happening in the Atlantic Ocean and why. With better knowledge about how changing ocean conditions affect different species, regulators can more effectively target rules to protect them and the fishermen who make a living catching them.

The virtual disappearance of cod from the waters off New England is not news. But a new report, published in the journal Science, concludes that rising ocean temperatures played a much larger role in the decline than initially thought. The study’s lead author, Andrew Pershing, is a scientist with the Gulf of Maine Research Institute in Portland.

In the simplest sense, regulators decide how many tons of a species can be taken from the ocean based on assessments of that species’ population. The problem with cod management, Pershing’s report concludes, is that regulators didn’t fully grasp the severity of the ocean temperature increase and what it meant for the legendary groundfish. As a result, regulators allowed fishermen to catch too many cod.

“Failure to recognize the impact of warming on cod contributed to overfishing,” the report said. “Recovery of this fishery depends on sound management, but the size of the stock depends on future temperature conditions. The experience in the Gulf of Maine highlights the need to incorporate environmental factors into resource management.”

This is especially true in the gulf, which is warming faster than 99.9 percent of the world’s oceans. Most troubling, beginning in 2004, the rate of warming in the Gulf of Maine increased more than seven-fold, the report says. Because of this rapid warming, regulatory limits on cod fishing didn’t work because cod did not reproduce and grow as expected.

This isn’t an academic problem. As the cod population declined, regulators imposed quotas that allowed fishermen to catch less. When the population didn’t rebound, regulators tightened the quotas, adding to the economic hardship for fishing communities.

Read the full editorial at Bangor Daily News