Saving Seafood

ALASKA: SE legislators seek inclusion in pink salmon disaster request

October 26th, 2016 — A pair of Southeast legislators is asking the governor to include Southeast fishermen in Alaska’s request for federal disaster relief under the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

Sitka representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins and Ketchikan representative Dan Ortiz made the appeal in a letter to Governor Bill Walker on October 21, on behalf of Southeast fishermen affected by this season’s weak pink salmon return.

Under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, fishermen are eligible for automatic disaster relief if the value of a fishery drops more than 80-percent below its five-year average.

Staffers for Kreiss-Tomkins and Ortiz calculated this season’s loss at 55-percent, which qualifies the Southeast pink salmon fishery for “further evaluation” for disaster relief.

Governor Walker in September applied for disaster relief for the pink salmon fisheries in Prince William Sound, Kodiak, Lower Cook Inlet, and in Chignik.

In Southeast, pink salmon are targeted primarily by seiners. In their letter, Kreiss-Tomkins and Ortiz argue that Southeast fishing families are facing huge losses through no fault of their own, and there is no reason to bar them from the same support requested for Southcentral fishermen.

Read the full story at KCAW

Industry applauds new NOAA fisheries, Magnuson-Stevens guidelines

October 17, 2016 — Changes to national standards for Magnuson-Stevens are receiving accolades from the recreational fishing industry.

NOAA Fisheries last week filed in the Federal Register its final rule to revise the guidelines for National Standards (NS) 1, 3, and 7 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA).    MSA contains 10 national standards which guide the contents and objectives of federal fishery management plans.

Groups including the Recreational Fishing Alliance and American Sportfishing Association are applauding the revision.

“We commend NOAA Fisheries for making meaningful improvements to the National Standard guidelines, which should improve recreational fishing opportunities for federally managed marine fisheries while ensuring the nation is still achieving our strong fisheries conservation standards,” said Mike Leonard, ASA’s Conservation director. “Many of the proposed changes address issues identified through the engagement that NOAA Fisheries has made with the recreational fishing community in recent years, and more specifically the recommendations of the Commission on Saltwater Recreational Fisheries Management, more commonly known as the Morris-Deal Commission.”

The revisions include several changes sought by the industry:

  • Allowing changes to catch limits to be gradually phased in over up to three years, as long as overfishing is prevented.
  • Increasing latitude, based on the biology of the fish stock, in setting timelines for rebuilding programs.
  • Providing flexibility for better managing data-limited stocks while adhering to conservation requirements.
  • Allowing for greater stability in fishing regulations through guidance on considering multiple years when determining overfishing status.

“RFA believes that the revisions put forward by NOAA Fisheries in the final rule are a step in the right direction and will help restore some balance to the management of our federal fisheries under MSA,” said Jim Donofrio, RFA executive director.  “The intent of Congress was to treat the 10 national standards equally in order to achieve a balance between conservation and needs of our fishing communities.  Yet, selective execution of certain national standards over the past decade has resulted in a loss of opportunity and economic output in many of our most important recreational fisheries.”

The rulemaking revisions are progress, but point to the importance of legislative changes to address the issues with Magnuson-Stevens, Donofrio said.

Read the full story at Boating Industry

Fishing rule gives regional councils more flexibility on catch limits

October 14th, 2016 — Recreation anglers could see more fishing opportunities under a new rule issued by the Obama administration Thursday that gives regional management councils more flexibility to set catch limits.

The rule, already under fire from environmental groups in a rare conflict with the administration, could help mollify the recreational industry and its Republican allies in Congress. They’ve been critical of the administration for not relaxing restrictions given the dramatic rebound of many fish stocks over the past few years.

Officials with the Fisheries division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, said the change, months in the crafting, strikes an appropriate balance between the needs of the economically vital recreational and commercial industry while not undermining the current law that has helped rescue dozens of once overfished stocks.

Re-authorization of Magnuson-Stevens a decade ago is credited with helping to rebuild 40 endangered stocks since 2000. Eight stocks came off the overfishing list in 2015 including greater amberjack in the Gulf of Mexico, thorny skate in the Gulf of Maine; and hogfish in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico.

Read the full story at USA Today 

Southern fisheries earn win in federal court

September 26th, 2016 — A federal appeals court has ruled in favor of a state commercial fishing organization that challenged a decision to move several southern Alaska salmon fisheries from federal to state management.

The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday overturned the decision by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council. The ruling means the case will go back to U.S. Alaska District Court and that federal fisheries policymakers will have to work with state managers on a new management plan, The Alaska Journal of Commerce reported.

The United Cook Inlet Drift Association sued over the council’s 2011 decision to remove Cook Inlet, Prince William Sound and Alaska Peninsula salmon fisheries from the federal fisheries management plan. The 2013 suit was initially rejected by District Court Judge Timothy Burgess. But the group appealed, arguing that the state’s plan doesn’t adhere to the same high standards as federal rules.

Federal fisheries management plans must be in line with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, which require fisheries managers to consider optimum yield, best available science, equitable allocations and community health among other factors.

The Cook Inlet group called the appeals court ruling a win for Alaska’s fishermen and the health of the resource.

 

Read the full story from the Associated Press at Juneau Empire 

Work Continues on Coral Amendment, Clam Dredge Framework

September 23, 2016 — The following was released by the New England Fishery Management Council:

The New England Fishery Management Council today clarified the range of fishing gear restrictions that will be analyzed under its Deep-Sea Coral Amendment. The Council is considering alternatives to restrict (1) trawl and dredge gear only; or (2) all fixed and mobile bottom-tending gears in the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank coral zones. Previously, the Council had not taken a position on how to address the lobster and Jonah crab fisheries, which are not managed by the Council under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act but rather by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission.

In a move that eliminated this ambiguity, the Council asked for additional analyses from its Habitat Plan Development Team (PDT) about the potential economic and biological impacts of restricting lobster and crab traps in coral zones. The Council then added an alternative to the amendment to potentially exempt these trap fisheries from bottom- tending gear restrictions.

Updated NOAA Fisheries policy guidance, which states that restrictions in coral zones ”may apply to … state-regulated fishing that is authorized in the Exclusive Economic Zone,” enabled the Council to take this step.

On Sept. 15, President Obama designated the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument, which overlaps portions of the Council’s Coral Amendment. The Council considered – but ultimately postponed to November – a motion to remove canyons and seamounts that fall within the monument’s boundaries from further consideration in the Coral Amendment.

The Council first wanted additional information from NOAA Fisheries about how regulations related to the monument designation will be developed and implemented, as well as additional analyses from the PDT, before taking action.

The deep-sea canyon zones in the Council’s amendment that fall completely or partially within the monument boundaries are Oceanographer, Gilbert, Lydonia, Filebottom, Chebacco, and Heel Tapper. The overlapping seamount zones are Physalia, Bear, Retriever, and Mytilus. The monument also includes portions of the depth-based, broad zone proposals.

In addition, the Council approved:

Boundary adjustments to the Central Jordan Basin coral zone in the Gulf of Maine based on updated information from the PDT; and

Adding a 600-meter depth-based broad zone to be considered alongside the other broad coral protection contour zones of 300, 400, and 500 meters that currently are under analysis.

Several workshops, meetings, and public hearings will be held prior to the Council taking any final action on this issue or other Coral Amendment issues.

After fine-tuning several details, the New England Council in early September resubmitted Omnibus Essential Fish Habitat Amendment 2 (OHA2) to the the National Marine Fisheries Service’s Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO) for approval. The Council and GARFO expect the amendment will be implemented next spring.

Implementation will trigger a one-year exemption for the surfclam/ocean quahog clam dredge fishery from a prohibition on fishing in the Great South Channel and Georges Shoal Habitat Management Areas (HMAs) identified in the map below.

At industry’s request, the Council initiated a framework adjustment to OHA2 to consider development of a longer-term access program so clam fishermen could continue working in both areas beyond the one-year exemption. The Council now is in the process of identifying areas within both HMAs that provide suitable bottom for clam fishing but minimize adverse fishing impacts on habitat to the extent practical. The Council’s ultimate goal is to balance conservation and industry needs.

See the full release at the NEFMC

Opponents of Atlantic monument say process lacked sufficient analysis

September 19th, 2016 — Opponents of President Barack Obama’s newly designated Atlantic marine monument, which will eventually bar all commercial fishing in a 5,000 square-mile area, say its creation was not preceded by sufficient cost-benefit analysis.

Last week, Obama established a protected area — which will be called the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts National Marine Monument — of nearly 5,000 square miles 130 miles southeast of Cape Cod.

The area was established under the 1906 Antiquities Act, which allows the president to create national monuments without congressional approval, and the method means there was a severe lack of economic and scientific analysis before the decision was made, opponents said.

By contrast, the creation of a national park or changes to fishing policies under the Magnuson-Stevens Act typically trigger extensive public comment and review processes.

Grant Moore, president of the Atlantic Offshore Lobstermen’s Association, estimated to Undercurrent News that the economic impact could be over $120 million in lost revenue, but added that making predictions is difficult given how diverse and dynamic the fishery is.

“There was absolutely no analysis done. This was basically behind closed doors,” he said, adding that there were some private meetings, but “nothing that you would have to go through under Magnuson-Stevens”.

According to Moore, many in the industry never expected the monument to pass when they first heard about it a year ago at a meeting in Providence, Rhode Island and is now trying to figure out how it will adjust.

“Basically the industry right now is taking a step back and taking a deep breath. It came at everybody pretty fast,” Moore said.  “It was not until last Friday that certain members of the industry saw the proposal for the first time. That doesn’t give you a whole lot of time to comment and try to work with them. It was basically a done deal.”

Read full story from Undercurrent News 

STATEMENT ON THE ADMINISTRATION’S NORTHEAST CANYONS AND SEAMOUNTS MARINE NATIONAL MONUMENT DESIGNATION

September 19th, 2016 — The following was released by The Seafood Harvesters of America: 

The Seafood Harvesters of America represents commercial fishermen from Maine to Florida, Texas to the West Coast and north to the Gulf of Alaska and beyond. Everything we do in our work as fishermen and in our advocacy for accountable and sustainable fishery practices is based on our nation’s foundational fisheries law, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, or MSA. Commercial fishing is not a right, it is a privilege bestowed by the laws of our country. We take that privilege very seriously.

And with privilege comes obligation. A president has an obligation to uphold the laws of this land before exercising the privilege of his office. Exercised incompletely and with little regard for science – and the public’s informed input – MSA is quickly reduced to little more than an instrument of punishment to be taken to us when it is politically expedient. The Act is capable of so much more and we are deserving of so much better.

Magnuson-Stevens allows for identification of Essential Fish Habitat (EFH), and regulatory mechanisms for preventing fishing in areas designated as EFH. In the Northeast we have just completed a 10-year process working closely with the New England Fishery Management Council to designate – again, within and under the MSA – extensive areas for EFH protection. Voluntarily and in a deeply collaborative fashion, we have taken ourselves “off the water” across vast areas of the Atlantic seaboard, from the Carolinas to the Canadian border. This has not been easy, this has not been without pain, but it has taken place within the spirit and the letter of the law that we live by.

That’s why we are so disappointed at the course chosen by the Administration in setting aside the MSA and declaring this Connecticut-sized marine monument. Although we applaud the fact that oil drilling will not be allowed in the area covered by the monument, the Administration has chosen to disregard the fact that commercial fishing will also be prevented. MSA provides a framework that we all could have worked within together, to prevent drilling and other potentially harmful activities while allowing for continued, well-managed commercial fishing.

The Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument designation takes fishermen off the water across vast stretches of traditional fishing grounds unnecessarily, without due consideration and collaboration. It is a sad day when the creative potential of the Magnuson-Stevens Act is set aside in a unilateral fashion through executive action in favor of a declaration that threatens severe unintended consequences – not just for New England fishermen but for the foundational integrity of the regional fishery management council process and our nation’s premier fisheries law.

‘Sad day’ for the fishing industry following marine monument designation

September 16, 2016 — NEW BEDFORD, Mass. — Backers of the Northeast U.S. fishing industry reacted with anger, chagrin and legal arguments Thursday to President Barack Obama’s declaration of a marine national monument south of Cape Cod, saying the ocean preservation effort circumvented public process and will significantly damage a key economic engine — and way of life — in the region.

“It’s all anybody’s talking about, that’s for sure,” said Jon Williams, president of Atlantic Red Crab Co. on Herman Melville Boulevard. “The general feeling is (that) it’s a sad day for the New England fishing industry.”

Obama’s designation of the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument — in two areas also known as New England Canyons and Seamounts — permanently bars those areas from an array of commercial and industrial uses, including commercial fishing. The areas total 4,913 square miles, are more than 100 miles southeast of Cape Cod and are the first such monument in the Atlantic Ocean. The designation follows at least a year of concerns and opposition from advocates of the commercial fishing industry, who feared yet another financial hit from government regulations that already include catch limits and quotas broadly questioned by fishermen.

“Millions of dollars of lost revenue are at stake” in the monument decision, states a letter from the Washington, D.C. office of international law firm Kelley Drye & Warren.

The firm sent the letter Sept. 14 to Christy Goldfuss, managing director of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, on behalf of the Southern Georges Bank Coalition. The coalition of fishing representatives includes Williams, J. Grant Moore of Broadbill Fishing in Westport, and at least 10 other members from Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Massachusetts and New York.

The letter said those entities “are directly affected by the monument description, as it includes their fishing grounds,” and called Obama’s use of the Antiquities Act to declare the marine monument, “an illegal and illegitimate use of presidential authority.”

“I think there’s widespread and pretty much universal disappointment, anger, frustration and feelings of betrayal in the commercial fishing industry,” said Bob Vanasse, a New Bedford native and executive director of Washington, D.C.-based Saving Seafood.

“There is widespread and deep feeling that our fisheries should be managed under the public process of the Magnuson-Stevens Act,” Vanasse added.

Read the full story at the New Bedford Standard-Times

Northeast Fishing Groups Question Legality of Antiquities Act in Monument Designation

September 14, 2016 (NCFC) — In a letter today to Christy Goldfuss, Managing Director of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, representatives of the Atlantic offshore lobster, red crab, squid, and whiting fisheries challenged the legality of the use of the Antiquities Act in the declaration of a new marine monument off the coast of New England.

I. THE ANTIQUITIES ACT DOES NOT ALLOW FOR MARINE MONUMENT DESIGNATION IN THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE 

The letter, which was authored by attorneys from law firm Kelley Drye & Warren, representing the fisheries, argued the President’s use of the Antiquities Act to declare new marine monuments in the United States’ exclusive economic zone (EEZ) is “an illegal and illegitimate use of presidential authority.” The letter specifically notes the legal contradiction between the applicability of the Antiquities Act – passed in 1906 – and the EEZ, which was not established until 1976.

“The Antiquities Act did not apply to areas to which Congress staked its MSA [Magnuson-Stevens Act]-based claims, moreover, because the United States had never claimed any right or authority to manage the area for fisheries, natural resource protection, or anything else, prior to 1976”, the letter states. “Indeed, the MSA provides that it is “to maintain without change the existing territorial or other ocean jurisdiction of the United States for all purposes other than the conservation and management of fishery resources.”

II. FISHERIES ARE BEST MANAGED UNDER THE MSA 

According to the letter, fisheries should instead be managed under the process established by the Magnuson-Stevens Act, particularly the successful marine conservation efforts undertaken by the New England and Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Councils. The councils are required to operate according to science-based management.

“The MSA requires decisions to be made based on the best scientific information available,” the letter states. “In complete and total contrast, the monument ultimately designated in the Atlantic was largely the result of a series of political compromises layered with a thin veneer of public outreach.”

III. THE PROPOSAL IS NOT NARROWLY TAILORED AS REQUIRED UNDER THE ANTIQUITIES ACT 

Finally, existing federal law requires monuments to be as tightly confined to the area necessary to accomplish their objectives as possible. The letter states this is not the case for the proposed monument in the Atlantic.
“The proposal for a monument designation in the Northwest Atlantic canyons is not narrowly tailored to achieve its objectives,” the attorneys wrote. “Unlike the deliberative, scientifically- based fishery management council activities to protect habitat based on the presence of or suitability for corals, a restricted fishing area based solely on geographic location and depth contour is neither narrowly tailored, nor practically defensible.”

For further information or to arrange interviews with any of the fishermen mentioned in the letter, please contact NCFC Executive Director Bob Vanasse at bob@savingseafood.org.

Read the full letter here

Majority of US Seafood Producers Call to Stop Undermining Magnuson with End Run for Marine Monuments

September 13, 2016 — WASHINGTON — SEAFOOD NEWS — The US has one of the most highly successful systems for managing living marine resources in the world.  Under the Magnuson Act, stakeholders come together to determine fisheries management policy, guided by the best available science.  The result has been a huge rebuilding of US fish stocks, and the protection of essential habitat.  Many tradeoffs have been made to create closed areas, and to preserve fishing rights where coastal conditions support them.

The keys to this success are first, the decision process is completely open and transparent.  Every argument and decision is made in open forums, and according to the best available science.  This limits the ability to use fisheries resources to score political points.

Both Canada and Europe’s fisheries suffered greatly as governments for years abused their authority by trading fishing privileges for other political favors; with the result that these stocks have been significantly overfished. Only in the last few years has this process begun to be reversed.

Use of the Antiquities Act to create marine monuments, although legal, makes an end run around both state and federal management systems, and in short trades monument designations, made without public review,  for political gain.

Today, in advance of the “Our Oceans” conference being held later this week at the State Department, the National Coalition for Fishing Communities (NCFC) delivered a letter to the White House calling on the President to refrain from designating new marine monuments under the Antiquities Act. Copies of the letter were also delivered to the offices of Senators representing the states of the signers. (Letter)

The letter has over 900 fishing industry signers and is supported by 35 fishing organizations that together represent a significant majority of domestic seafood producers.  It urges the President to conserve marine resources through the federal fisheries management process established by the bipartisan Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Management Act (MSA).

“The federal fisheries management process is among the most effective systems for managing living marine resources in the world,” the letter states. “The misuse of the Antiquities Act to create a marine monument is a repudiation of the past and ongoing efforts of almost everyone involved to continue to make Magnuson-Stevens management even more effective.”

The NCFC members join an ever-growing list of fishing organizations and individuals opposing new ocean monuments via use of the Antiquities Act. The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, the Council Coordination Committee, and over two dozen individual fish and seafood industry trade organizations have previously written to the White House asking for the MSA continue to guide fisheries management.

Mayors from major East and West coast ports have previously expressed their concerns with monument designations in letters to the White House. NCFC members have also spoke out in opposition to designating a monument off the coast of New England, which would hurt the valuable red crab, swordfish, tuna, and offshore lobster fisheries.

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