Saving Seafood

Hawaii Longline Leader Testifies on Ways to Strengthen the MSA

July 27, 2017 — SEAFOOD NEWS — A Hawaii fishing industry leader made three suggestions to the House Natural Resources Committee’s Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans during a hearing last week on “Exploring the Successes and Challenges of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.” The hearing was designed to continue discussions relevant to MSA reform and consider current draft legislation.

Hawaii Longline Association President Sean Martin, one of four invited witnesses, said overall the MSA is working well, but the Hawaii seafood industry is facing problems related to national monuments created under the Antiquities Act, Endangered Species Act issues and more.

“The MSA is a success and should be the principal source of authority for management of U.S. fisheries,” Martin said in his testimony. “Overfished stocks have been rebuilt, and few stocks are now overfished. Management measures are precautionary and based on the best scientific information available. The regional fishery management councils provide regional fishing expertise and utilize an effective bottom-up decision making process that includes the fishing industry. The MSA also requires the evaluation of impacts on fish stocks as well as fishermen and fishing communities.”

However, the 140 active vessels in the longline fleet, which lands roughly $100 million worth of tuna and other highly migratory fish annually, is struggling with access to fishing grounds.

“We operate in a very competitive arena, both for fishing grounds in international waters and for the U.S. domestic market. The recent marine monument designations established under the Antiquities Act prohibits us from fishing in 51 percent of the US Exclusive Economic Zone in the Western Pacific region,” Martin said. “Access to the high seas is also being challenged by recent United Nations initiatives. Closure of US waters and the high seas hurts us, reducing our ability to compete and increasing the vulnerability of our markets to foreign takeover.”

Martin said the longliners have worked with NMFS and the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council for more than 25 years to ensure sound fishery data would be used in stock assessments and regulations. They have collaborated on research such as gear modifications to protect sea turtles, seabirds and marine mammals.

“We are proud of our efforts and the Hawaii longline fishery is an iconic, internationally recognized model fishery. It is the most highly monitored, strictly regulated longline fishery in the Pacific,” he said.

With that, Martin suggested three things to help make the MSA stronger:

  1. Manage U.S. ocean fisheries through the MSA process;
  2. Strengthen support for U.S. fisheries in the international arena; and
  3. Simplify the MSA regulatory process.

“In recent years, the management of fisheries covered by the MSA has been circumvented by other statutes and authorities,” Martin said regarding using the MSA process for managing ocean fisheries. “This includes the Endangered Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, National Marine Sanctuaries Act, and the Antiquities Act. These acts do not require the same level of public consultation and transparency as compared to the MSA.

“For our fishery, the biggest gains in protection have been achieved through the Council process. For example, sea turtle and seabird interactions were reduced by 90 percent as a result of industry cooperative research and Council developed regulations. In HLA’s view, fisheries should be managed primarily through the fishery management councils under the MSA. This ensures a transparent, public, and science-based process which allows the fishing industry and stakeholders to be consulted. It provides that analyses of impacts to fishery dependent communities are considered, and prevents regulations that might otherwise be duplicative, unenforceable, or contradictory.

“Past administrations have established huge national marine monuments in the Pacific totaling more than 760 million acres of U.S. waters under the Antiquities Act of 1906. In our view, marine monument designations were politically motivated and addressed non-existing problems. Fisheries operating in these areas were sustainably managed for several decades under the MSA and the Western Pacific Council. There was no serious attempt to work with the fishing industry in the designations of these marine monuments. Public input was minimal.”

Regarding support for U.S. fisheries in the international arena, Martin said, “In 2016, Congress enacted ‘Amendments to the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Convention Implementation Act’ (16U.S.C. 6901 et seq.). The amendments direct the Secretaries of Commerce and State to seek to minimize any disadvantage to U.S. fisheries relative to other fisheries of the region and to maximize U.S. fisheries’ harvest of fish in the Convention Area.

“The amendments are intended to level the playing field between
U.S. and foreign fisheries. U.S. fisheries managed under the MSA are sustainable, yet they are often disadvantaged within international fisheries commissions. U.S. fishing interests require strong U.S. government negotiators to advocate and support U.S. fisheries.

“For example, the Hawaii longline bigeye quota has been reduced to 3,345 metric tonnes (mt), while quotas for other countries have not been reduced (e.g. Indonesia). The WCPFC-imposed quotas are based on historical catch and do not match current fishing capacity. For example, Japan has a bigeye quota of nearly 17,000 mt, but only catches around 11,000 mt. China has been expanding its longline fleet from about 100 vessels in 2001 to over 430 vessels in 2015, and has a bigeye quota of around 7,000 mt. Our fleet has been limited to 164 permits since 1991. China is continuing to expand its longline fisheries and supplying US markets with poorly monitored seafood.”

Lastly, Martin hit on another problem faced by several industry groups around the country, not just in Hawaii: Simplifying the MSA regulatory process. The National Environmental Policy Act has caused delays and duplications in several regions.

“HLA supports the regional councils’ efforts to achieve a more streamlined process for approval of regulatory actions,” Martin testified. “A fishery management plan document from a regional council typically contains a full discussion of impacts on the fisheries, on the fish stocks, and on associated species (e.g., endangered species, marine mammals, seabirds, etc.).

“The National Environmental Policy Act requires duplicative evaluation and incongruent public comment periods. The analytical duplication between the MSA and NEPA is unnecessary, delays needed actions, has a high cost, and provides more avenues for legal challenges and delays on non-MSA grounds. Also, it is often very confusing to the industry with regard to timing and where we should apply our input in the process.”

Martin said the longline association recommends amending the MSA to authorize a single analytical document for any proposed regulatory action that will streamline the process, eliminate duplication and allow for more meaningful industry input.

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

National Coalition for Fishing Communities Members Testify on Magnuson-Stevens Act

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) – June 19, 2017 – Two members of Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities testified at the hearing, “Exploring the Successes and Challenges of the Magnuson-Stevens Act,” held by the Water, Power and Oceans Subcommittee of the House Natural Resources Committee.

Mr. Jeff Kaelin, head of Government Relations at Lund’s Fisheries, Inc. in Cape May, New Jersey and a member of the Garden State Seafood Association, and Mr. Sean Martin, President of the Hawaii Longline Association in Honolulu, Hawaii, offered testimony.

Mr. Nick Wiley, Executive Director of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission in Tallahassee, Florida, was the third witness for the Republican majority.

Mr. Charles Witek, a Recreational Angler and Outdoor Writer from West Babylon, New York, tesitfied at the invitation of the Democratic minority.

In March, New Bedford, Massachusetts Mayor Jon Mitchell delivered written testimony to the Subcommittee on behalf of the NCFC, expressing concerns over the increasing use of marine monuments to manage fisheries in place of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA). According to the mayor and NCFC members, this has undermined the more transparent and collaborative management process established by the MSA.

The following additional information was provided by the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans:

On Wednesday, July 19, 2017, at 2:00 p.m. in 1324 Longworth House Office Building, the Water, Power and Oceans Subcommittee will hold an oversight hearing on “Exploring the Successes and Challenges of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.”

Policy Overview:

  • Recreational and commercial fishing industries are significant drivers of the U.S. economy. Together, the U.S. seafood industry and the recreational fishing industry generate $208 billion in sales impacts and contribute $97 billion to the U.S. gross domestic product. Additionally, these industries support upwards of 1.6 million U.S. jobs.
  • Unfortunately, in recent years, access for commercial and recreational fishing has eroded due to poor science, overbearing regulations, and abuse of Marine Protected Areas – such as Marine National Monuments and Marine Sanctuaries – that often prohibit various fishing activities.
  • According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), nearly 90 percent of federally managed fisheries that our commercial and recreational fishermen are not being allowed to harvest at maximum sustainable levels.
  • This hearing will begin to explore issues facing a number of federally managed recreational and commercial fisheries and identify possible solutions, including potential areas to update the federal fisheries framework via reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.

Read the Subcommittee’s full memo here

New England marine monument gets bad review from lawmakers

March 17, 2017 — Members of subcommittee of the House Natural Resources Committee are objecting to the way President Barack Obama created a national marine monument off the coast of New England last year.

The subcommittee on water, power and oceans held an oversight hearing on the creation and management of marine monuments on Wednesday. Republican members say the creation of the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument lacked significant local input and scientific scrutiny.

The monument is made up of nearly 5,000 square miles of underwater canyons and mountains. A group of commercial fishermen has filed a lawsuit challenging the legality of its creation.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at NH1

Congressional panel says New England marine monument hurts fishing communities

March 16, 2017 — Members of subcommittee of the House Natural Resources Committee are objecting to the way President Barack Obama created a national marine monument off the coast of New England last year.

The subcommittee on water, power and oceans held an oversight hearing Wednesday on the creation and management of marine monuments. Republican members say the creation of the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument lacked significant local input and scientific scrutiny.

The monument is made up of nearly 5,000 square miles of underwater canyons and mountains. A group of commercial fishermen has filed a lawsuit challenging the legality of its creation.

The subcommittee is chaired by Doug Lamborn, a Colorado Republican. The subcommittee issued a statement on Wednesday that said the monument negatively impacts New England fishing communities.

Read the full story at the Portland Press Herald

Executive order storm may be tempest in fisheries management teapot

February 28, 2017 — President Trump’s executive order directing that federal agencies choose two regulations for repeal whenever they propose a new one raised the angst of legislators and industry members concerned with the management of the nation’s fisheries.

Trump’s executive order, Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs, directs agencies to repeal two existing regulations for every new regulation, and to do it in a way that does not increase the total cost of compliance.

In a Feb. 2 letter to the President, House Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Raúl Grijalva and Water, Power and Oceans Subcommittee Ranking Member Jared Huffman warned the President that his executive order would prevent the National Marine Fisheries Service from:

  • Setting and adjusting commercial and recreational fishing seasons.
  • Adjusting landings quotas or other conservation or management related measures.
  • Adopting new or amended fishery management plans without getting advance authority from the administration.

“All fisheries that take place in federal waters require regulatory action to open and close season, set catch limits, modify conservation and management measures, or adjust participation eligibility requirements,” the congressmen wrote. “We urge you to rescind the executive orders immediately and eliminate political interference with the processes that help commercial and charter fishermen earn their livelihoods, and allow recreational anglers access to well-managed stocks.”

Last Friday, Drew Minkiewicz, a Washington, D.C., attorney who represents commercial fishing interests and provides counsel on regulatory issues, said Trump’s executive order “is not going to impact or delay the operation of fisheries management at all.” Minkiewicz spoke before the White House announced the President’s latest executive order.

According to Minkiewicz, the administration’s Office of Management and Budget has determined that the executive order applies only to “significant actions” as defined in another executive order issued during the Clinton administration.

“More than 99 percent of NMFS regulations are not deemed significant,” he said. “There could be maybe one rule in the next four years this (the recent executive order) applies to.”

Read the full story at The Ellsworth American

Senate holds hearing to modernize the Endangered Species Act

February 16, 2017 — A Senate hearing to “modernize the Endangered Species Act” unfolded Wednesday just as supporters of the law had feared, with round after round of criticism from Republican lawmakers who said the federal effort to keep species from going extinct encroaches on states’ rights, is unfair to landowners and stymies efforts by mining companies to extract resources and create jobs.

The two-hour meeting of the Environment and Public Works Committee was led by Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), who said last month that his focus in a bid to change the act would be “eliminating a lot of the red tape and the bureaucratic burdens that have been impacting our ability to create jobs,” according to a report in Energy and Environment News.

In his opening remarks, Barrasso declared that the act “is not working today,” adding that “states, counties, wildlife managers, home builders, construction companies, farmers, ranchers and other stakeholders” have made that clear in complaints about how it impedes land management plans, housing development and cattle grazing, particularly in western states, such as Wyoming.

At least one Republican has vowed to wage an effort to repeal the Endangered Species Act. “It has never been used for the rehabilitation of species,” House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah) said, according to an Associated Press report. “It’s been used to control the land. We’ve missed the entire purpose of the Endangered Species Act. It has been hijacked.”

But members of the hearing said its regulations prevented people from doing business and making a living. In a comment to a former U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service director who testified at the hearing, Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.), repeated a point made by Barrasso that of more than 1,600 species listed as threatened or endangered since the act’s inception, fewer than 50 have been removed.

Read the full story at The Washington Post

Read more at CNN

Congressmen Seek Investigation Of Hawaii Fishing Practices

December 14, 2016 — Four Democratic congressmen have written to officials at the U.S. Coast Guard and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration claiming that Hawaii’s longline fishing fleet is operating illegally by employing — and in some cases possibly abusing — foreign fishermen.

The congressmen said fishing boat owners who are not in “compliance with the law” should not be allowed to sell their products.

Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva’s staff convened a forum about the matter on Capitol Hill last week. Activists at the event, who described what was happening as modern-day slavery, advocated a boycott of tuna until the alleged abuses stop.

The letter was signed by Grijalva, ranking Democratic member of the Natural Resources Committee; Jared Huffman of California, ranking Democratic member of the Water, Power and Oceans Subcommittee; Peter DeFazio of Oregon, ranking Democratic member of the  Transportation Committee and Infrastructure; and John Garamendi of California, ranking Democratic member of the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Subcommittee.

It was addressed to Adm. Paul Zukunft, commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard, and Kathryn Sullivan, under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator, and was delivered Monday.

“This illegal activity does not represent American values and has dealt a blow to U.S. credibility as a global leader in fighting (illegal, unreported and unregulated) fishing and human trafficking,” the congressmen wrote.

John P. Connelly, president of the National Fisheries Institute, a trade group, told Civil Beat the industry is looking forward to the response by the Coast Guard and NOAA, saying that it would allow a “clarification” of employment law affecting foreign fishermen working in Hawaii.

Read the full story at the Honolulu Civil Beat

MATTHEW DALY: Congress must help Hawaii fishermen confined to boats

December 7th, 2016 — Congress should act immediately to improve slave-like conditions for hundreds of foreign fishermen working in Hawaii’s commercial fleet, speakers at a congressional forum said Tuesday.

“These fishermen are treated like disposable people,” said Mark Lagon, a scholar at Georgetown University’s Walsh School of Foreign Service, who told the forum the fishermen live like modern-day slaves. Crew members earn less than $1 per hour, and total costs for crews of nine or 10 men are less than the cost of ice to keep the fish fresh, Lagon said.

“Slavery is not just some abstract concept,” said Lagon, the former director of a State Department office to monitor and combat human trafficking.

Slavery “is something that touches our lives. It goes into our stores, and it goes into our mouths,” Lagon said.

Lagon was one of several speakers at a forum Tuesday on slavery and human rights abuses at sea. The forum, sponsored by Democrats on the House Natural Resources Committee, followed an Associated Press investigation that found fishermen have been confined to vessels for years without basic labor protections.

The AP report found that commercial fishing boats in Honolulu employ hundreds of men from impoverished Southeast Asia and Pacific Island nations who catch swordfish, ahi tuna and other seafood sold at markets and restaurants nationwide. A legal loophole allows the men to work on American-owned, U.S-flagged boats without visas as long as they don’t set foot on shore.

Fishing “is used as a tool for slavery,” said Kathryn Xian, executive director of the Pacific Alliance to Stop Slavery, a Honolulu-based advocacy group.

Read the op-ed at The Seattle Times 

House panel approves bill to shift red-snapper management to states

June 19, 2016 — The House Natural Resources Committee has passed a bipartisan bill that would move the management of red snapper in Gulf states from federal oversight to the states.

The Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority Act (H.R. 3094) also requires approval from the full House and Senate and President Obama’s signature.

“Once it becomes law, the mechanism in the bill for the transfer of management authority is very simple: Once the states agree on their management plan, then the responsibility moves to the states,” Jeff Angers, president of the Center for Coastal Conservation, told Trade Only Today.

The CCC is one of several groups that have worked to change the way red snapper is regulated for recreational anglers. This year’s red snapper fishing season was nine days.

Angers said he hopes the current administration will pass the bill.

“The House has stepped up on challenging fisheries issues already this Congress. They passed the bill to fix [the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act] last year, so the leadership is surely up to the challenge,” Angers said.

The Magnuson-Stevens Act regulates saltwater fish stocks. The law has long lumped commercial fishing in with recreational fishing. Recreational fishing and boating stakeholders have been trying to change that in recent years.

“The current federal model is clearly not working, and it’s time for a more balanced approach to the management of this fishery,” Jeff Crane, president of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation, said in a statement.

Read the full story at Soundings Trade Only Today

House Hearing: Ocean Stakeholders Discuss National Ocean Policy

May 20, 2016 — WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) – Earlier this week, ocean stakeholders – representatives from fishing, offshore power, agricultural industries – testified regarding their disparate experiences working with the Obama Administration’s National Ocean Policy. Their testimonies were part of an oversight hearing by the House Natural Resources’ Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans, “The Implications of President Obama’s National Ocean Policy.”

“I have to wonder,” said Representative Tom McClintock (R-CA), “if perhaps some stakeholders are more equal than others.” The question of who benefits from current ocean policy framed the entire hearing.

Bob Zales, a fisherman of 50 years and president of the National Association of Charterboat Operators emphasized in his testimony the exclusion of fishery stakeholders from the formulation and implementation of the National Ocean Policy. In one telling anecdote, Mr. Zales described how his only means of participation in the planning process was a one-minute testimony during the public comment period of a hearing New Orleans.

“I drove from Panama City Florida to New Orleans – and back – in one day, to give one minute of testimony,” he said. “That one minute does nothing.”

Meghan Lapp, who represents commercial fishing company Seafreeze Ltd., echoed Mr. Zales’ testimony in her own statement, discussing the limited and frustrating interactions Seafreeze had had with planners during the formation state of the National Ocean Policy.

“They’ll listen to your comments, but they don’t do anything with them. They don’t incorporate them into whatever they are doing,” said Lapp.

In contrast, Jim Lanard, CEO of Magellan Wind, when questioned by Representative Tom McClintock about the level of input offshore power companies have had on the National Ocean Policy, protested, saying regulators had in fact listened to him. “No, that has not been my experience at all,” said Mr. Lanard.

Representative Rob Bishop (R-UT), Chairman of the Natural Resources Committee, spoke for many at the hearing when in his comments he summarized the confusion created by the National Ocean Policy.

“This National Ocean Policy was created six years ago,” he said, “and six years later they [the Obama Administration] still don’t seem to know what they’re doing.”