Saving Seafood

Sea to Table: There are plenty of fish in the sea

August 17, 2016 — Overfishing and illegal behavior in the seafood trade is a serious issue in many fisheries around the world. A recent study found that the annual global catch was roughly 30 percent higher than reported in 2010. This means that approximately 109 billion metric tons of fish go unreported each year.

In the United States, the picture is a lot brighter. Thanks to the Manguson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act that went into effect in 1976, many fisheries in the U.S. have been rebuilt over the past 40 years. As of 2015, 84 percent of federally managed stocks were not on the overfished list, indicating that the population sizes are at sustainable levels.

The problem? “Over 90 percent of all seafood consumed in the U.S. comes from outside the U.S.,” says Michael Dimin, the founding director of Sea to Table. “The U.S. has the world’s largest fisheries, we have the largest exclusive economic zone in the world, and we have the best-managed fisheries, yet we only want to buy cheap fish.”

Dimin’s business, Sea to Table, is working with chefs across the country to address this dichotomy. The concept is inherently simple: Sea to Table passes fish from the nets of fishermen directly to the hands of chefs and diners. Fish that land on a dock anywhere in the U.S. can arrive at a kitchen the next day. Making the logistics work is a little more complicated.

The Sea to Table team has spent years cultivating personal relationships with small-scale fishermen to provide a lucrative market for their wild, domestic, responsibly caught fish. “The seafood supply chain is kind of long and opaque and doesn’t really create value so much for fishermen, but creates value for the middle of the chain,” Dimin explains. “We thought it would be a good idea to figure out how to get a little better market for fishermen, and to get better quality fish to diners.”

Read the full story at DC Refined

Rick Robins Receives MAFMC Award of Excellence

August 17, 2016 — The following was released by the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council:

VIRGINIA BEACH, Va. — Last week the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council presented its outgoing chairman, Richard B. Robins, Jr., with the first MAFMC Award of Excellence. The award was presented to Robins for his distinguished service to the Council and outstanding contribution to the conservation and management of our nation’s marine fisheries resources.

Robins was appointed to the Council in 2007 and was elected as Chairman the following year. During his 8-year tenure as chairman, Robins led the Council in the development of more than 25 amendments, 17 frameworks, numerous specifications for the Council’s managed species, and a number of other major projects. He also served on the Council Coordination Committee and the Northeast Region Coordinating Council, represented the Council at New England Council meetings, attended and participated in numerous workshops and committees, and served as the Council representative at various meetings around the world.

“Rick Robins has demonstrated exemplary leadership as chairman of the Council,” said Chris Moore, Executive Director of the Council. “His chairmanship has been defined by an unwavering commitment to the sustainability of Mid-Atlantic fisheries and his tireless efforts to develop innovative approaches to the complex challenges of marine fisheries management.”

One of Robins’ most notable accomplishments was leading the Council through a visioning and strategic planning process. He advocated for the development of a “stakeholder-driven” plan, which was achieved through a large-scale outreach effort in which more than 1,500 stakeholders provided input on the future of Mid-Atlantic fisheries. This process culminated in 2014 with the implementation of the Council’s first-ever strategic plan.

Under his leadership, the Mid-Atlantic Council became the first of the eight regional fishery management councils to utilize the discretionary provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act to designate areas of protection for deep sea corals. The Council’s Deep Sea Corals Amendment established a nearly 38,000 square-mile area in which deep sea coral will be protected from the impacts of fishing gear.

Robins also demonstrated particular leadership in the Council’s effort to transition to a more ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management. At his final meeting as chairman, the Council approved a guidance document to facilitate the transition to an ecosystem approach to fisheries management (EAFM). This document lays out a framework for the Council to coordinate ecosystem considerations across Mid-Atlantic fishery management plans (FMPs). During the same meeting, the Council approved an amendment to protect more than 50 species of unmanaged forage fish in the Mid-Atlantic.

D.B. PLESCHNER: Monument proposal would devastate California’s fishing industry

August 15, 2016 — The following is excerpted from an opinion piece written by D.B. Pleschner, executive director of the California Wetfish Producers Association. It was published today in the Sacramento Bee:

California’s fisheries provide healthy, sustainable food, but that could change under a dangerous new proposal being circulated, until recently, behind closed doors at the Legislature.

California’s fishing community – more than 40 harbors, chambers of commerce, seafood processors and recreational and commercial fishing groups – has united to oppose the proposal to declare virtually all offshore seamounts, ridges and banks off the coast as monuments under the Antiquities Act and permanently close these areas to commercial fishing.

After pursuing rumors, fisheries groups discovered the proposal, along with a sign-on letter encouraging legislative support. But no one bothered to seek any input from recreational and commercial fishermen. Even worse, there has been no scientific review or economic analysis, no public participation and no transparency.

The areas identified in the proposal are indeed special places, rich in marine life and valuable corals, sponges and structures. The seamounts and banks are also very important for fisheries.

Tuna, swordfish, rockfish, spiny lobster, sea urchins, white sea bass and species including mackerels, bonito and market squid are all sustainably fished in Southern and Central California. And in Northern California, albacore tuna and other species provide opportunities to fishermen who, for the past few seasons, have been unable to rely on Chinook salmon and Dungeness crab.

These areas do deserve protection. But policies for protecting resources in federal waters exist under the federal Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and other bipartisan laws, such as the Marine Mammal Protection Act and Endangered Species Act, which require science-based, peer-reviewed analysis conducted in a fully public and transparent process.

Read the full opinion piece at the Sacramento Bee

NOAA Fisheries releases final acoustic guidance

August 8, 2016 — The following was released by NOAA Fisheries:

NOAA Fisheries has released final guidance to help predict how human-made underwater sounds affect marine mammal hearing.

Sound is critical to the survival of marine mammals. It is a primary means of marine mammal communication, orientation and navigation, finding food, avoiding predators, and mate selection.

NOAA will use the guidance in its assessments and authorizations of activities that generate underwater sound. The guidance also allows federal agencies, industries, and other applicants to more accurately predict effects of their proposed projects and help inform decisions about appropriate mitigation and monitoring. NOAA Fisheries also created online tools to help applicants use the new guidance.

“We recognize that growing levels of ocean noise are affecting marine animals and their habitats in complex ways,” said Eileen Sobeck, assistant NOAA administrator for fisheries. “The guidance is one part of NOAA’s holistic approach to addressing effects of ocean noise on marine life.”

NOAA’s authorities to address the effects of ocean noise on marine resources fall primarily under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, Endangered Species Act, National Marine Sanctuaries Act, and Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation Act. These authorities allow NOAA to recommend or require mitigation in order to reduce or eliminate their predicted noise impacts to species and the places they rely on. NOAA shares this responsibility with a number of other federal agencies.

NOAA released its a broader draft Ocean Noise Strategy Roadmap less than two months ago. The technical document is one example of a step the agency is taking to address increasing levels of ocean noise.

New England Fishing Groups Oppose Use of Antiquities Act for Atlantic Marine Monument as Requested by Connecticut Lawmakers

August 4, 2016 — The following was released by the National Coalition for Fishing Communities:

WASHINGTON (NCFC) – August 4, 2016 – Led by Sen. Richard Blumenthal, the Connecticut Congressional Delegation today asked President Obama to use executive authority under the Antiquities Act to designate the New England Coral Canyons and Seamounts as a Marine National Monument. The Connecticut Congressional Delegation is comprised of Sen. Blumenthal, Sen. Chris Murphy, Rep. John Larson, Rep. Joe Courtney, Rep. Rosa DeLauro, Rep. Jim Himes, and Rep. Elizabeth Esty.

Members of the National Coalition for Fishing Communities (NCFC) have previously expressed opposition to the misuse of the Antiquities Act to designate an Atlantic Marine Monument. A monument designation would subvert the open and transparent process for fisheries management currently in place under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and threatens the jobs and livelihoods of hardworking fishermen.

Below are statements from NCFC members on their opposition to an Atlantic Marine Monument designation.

David Frulla and Andrew Minkiewicz, Fisheries Survival Fund (Atlantic Scallops):

“A monument designation, with its unilateral implementation and opaque process, is the exact opposite of the fisheries management process in which we participate. Public areas and public resources should be managed in an open and transparent manner, not an imperial stroke of the pen.”

Jon Williams, New England Red Crab Harvesters’ Association:

“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. 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?”

Greg DiDomenico, Garden State Seafood Association:

“The Antiquities Act was perhaps a necessary tool to protect sensitive areas in 1906, but with our increased technological capabilities, knowledge, and an all-encompassing regulatory system, it is an unnecessary and blunt tool for 2016. It is time that the years of on-the-water experience possessed by the commercial fishing industry be acknowledged, especially in the context of this issue.”

Richard P. Ruais, American Bluefin Tuna Association:

“Given that our fishing gear has no negative impact on deep sea coral, a proposed prohibition on the fishing methods we employ would be arbitrary, completely unnecessary and would result in significant negative economic consequences.”

Statements from more NCFC members on their opposition to an Atlantic Marine Monument are available here.

Rep. Zeldin Secures House Passage of Proposal to Protect LI Fishermen

July 15, 2016 — Congressman Lee Zeldin (R, NY-1) announced today that an amendment he introduced in the House of Representatives to the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 2017 (H.R. 5538) passed the House with a vote of 225 to 202. The Zeldin amendment bars funding for the designation of any National Marine Monuments by the President in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Marine Monuments are massive areas of ocean where fishing would be banned without consulting the local community, fishermen, or regional fisheries managers. You can watch the Congressman discuss his amendment on the House floor, by clicking here.

Congressman Zeldin said, “The Antiquities Act has been an effective tool in the past to preserve historic sites like the Statue of Liberty, but the overly broad interpretation of this law held by the current Administration is threatening to shutdown thousands of square miles of ocean from fishing through a Presidential Proclamation. My amendment ensures that this President, or the next President, does not abuse the Antiquities Act to lock out thousands of fishermen on Long Island and nationwide from portions of federal waters that contain essential fisheries. We must protect our oceans and the solution is clear—any efforts to create a marine protected area must be done through the transparent process laid out by the Magnuson-Stevens fishery conservation law, not through executive fiat that threatens to put thousands of hardworking men and women out of business. Recent Marine Monument designations proclaimed by the Obama Administration have been the largest in U.S. history, locking out fishing in perpetuity—a severe departure from the original intent of the Antiquities Act to preserve historical sites and archeological treasures. Protecting the seafood economy, coastal communities, and the hardworking men and women of the seafood industry who provide for their families through fishing is a top priority for my constituents on the east end of Long Island. I will keep fighting to get this proposal signed into law on behalf of fishermen on Long Island and throughout the nation.”

Read and watch the full story at Long Island Exchange

U.S. House Makes Strong Statement Against Marine Monument

July 14, 2016 — The following was released by the National Coalition for Fishing Communities:

WASHINGTON (NCFC) — The U.S. House of Representatives made a strong statement against the declaration of marine monuments last night, passing an amendment offered by Congressman Lee Zeldin (R-New York) to bar funding for the designation of any National Marine Monuments by the President.  The amendment to H.R. 5538, the Fiscal Year 2017 Interior and Environment Appropriations bill, passed the House by a vote of 225-202. Congressman Zeldin represents a coastal district and the fishing hub of eastern Long Island, N.Y.

Yesterday, National Coalition for Fishing Communities (NCFC) members the Garden State Seafood Association (NJ), the Red Crab Harvesters Association (MA), the Long Island Commercial Fishing Association, and Blue Water Fisheries Inc. (NY) asked fellow NCFC members to reach out to their representatives to support the amendment. The Montauk Tilefish Association (NY) and the Monkfish Defense Fund joined them in calling for support for the amendment.

Mr. Zeldin explained that he offered the amendment to keep commercial fishermen from losing access to important fishing areas through Marine Monument Designations. Opposition to the amendment was led by Congresswoman Niki Tsongas (D-Massachusetts) and Congresswoman Chellie Pingree (D-Maine).

“As we heard at a field hearing in Riverhead, New York, unilateral marine monument designations override the current public process of established fisheries management and threatens the livelihood of the U.S. fishing industry,” said House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah).

“Congressman Zeldin’s amendment brings us one step closer to protecting local economies while safeguarding local input in management decisions,” Chairman Bishop continued. “Many Presidents—but not all—have used the Antiquities Act, but they use it sparingly. Only a few Administrations, including this one, have abused the Act. President Obama has a long history of abusing the Antiquities Act, locking up land and water with the stroke of a pen.”

“We applaud Congressman Zeldin for his leadership on protecting fishermen both in his district here on Long Island, and across America,” said Bonnie Brady of the Long Island Commercial Fishing Association.

Marine Monuments are large areas of ocean where commercial fishing would be banned without consulting the local community, fishermen, or regional fishery managers. Mr. Zeldin’s amendment mandates that, “None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to declare a national monument under section 320301 of title 54, United States Code, in the exclusive economic zone of the United States established by Proclamation Numbered 5030, dated March 10, 1983.”

The bill now goes to the U.S. Senate. Any differences between the House and Senate bills must be worked out between the two bodies, and a final bill is expected to be passed by both chambers before Sept. 30. Should the amendment survive the conference process, it will complicate the Obama Administration’s ability to act. While it would not stop a declaration, it would not allow funds to be spent to implement a declaration.

In 2014, President Obama declared a 407,000 square mile National Marine Monument in the Pacific Ocean where commercial fishing was banned and recreational fishing was severely limited.

Now important fishing areas in the Northwest Atlantic, on the West Coast, and in Alaska, where fishermen have worked for centuries, are under consideration for Monument designations with little public input and no transparency.

In a letter to House colleagues, Mr. Zeldin stated that there is an emerging national consensus that “any efforts to create marine protected areas in the EEZ must be done through the transparent and consultative process laid out by the landmark Magnuson-Stevens fishery conservation law. No one is more invested in protecting America’s waters from overfishing than the hardworking families who rely upon fishing for their livelihoods.”

Opposition to California Offshore Monuments Mounts After Draft Proposal Leaked

July 14, 2016 — SEAFOOD NEWS — What do creation of national monuments have in common? A lack of transparency when it comes to discussing the potential access restrictions with stakeholders. That same closed-door effort is happening off of California, as effort mounts to create offshore monuments on both west and east coasts.

California sport and commercial interests first became aware of the proposal to establish monuments around nine seamounts, ridges and banks (SRBs) as rumors a few months ago. In June, the industry got a look at the first proposal draft. Washington State Sen. Kevin Ranker, D-Orcas Island, was urging California state lawmakers and West Coast members of congress in Washington, D.C., to support the proposal that could make the nine areas off-limits to commercial fishing but remain open to all recreational fishing, including charter boats.

Diane Pleschner-Steele, one of the signatories to an opposition letter, noted the proponents argue the nine areas are not significant commercial fishing areas.

“However, the fishermen I’ve spoken with hotly contest that,” Pleschner-Steele, Executive Director of the California Wetfish Producers Association, said in an email. “Those are productive fishing grounds and to lose them forever would be a huge economic blow to many fishermen, processors and local communities.”

Ranker is no stranger to proposed monuments. As a co-chair of the president’s National Ocean Council’s Governance Coordinating Committee, he is one of the advisers to the NOC that provide guidance on the development of strategic action plans, policy and research priorities. In 2013, he worked with Washington leaders to create a national monument in the San Juan Islands.

Nearly 40 people representing sport and commercial fisheries signed on to a letter opposing the designation of monuments that could include Gorda Ridges and Mendocino Ridge off of northern California; Gumdrop and Pioneer seamounts, Guide Seamount and Taney Seamounts off of central California; and Rodriguez Seamount, San Juan Seamount, Northeast Bank and Tanner and Cortes Banks off of southern California.

“We oppose the designation of California offshore marine monuments that prohibit fishing under the Antiquities Act because monument status is irreversible and the Antiquities Act process involves no public peer-reviewed scientific analysis, no NEPA analysis, no public involvement or outreach to parties most impacted – no transparency,” the opponents wrote in the July 6 letter to President Obama, the Council on Environmental Quality, the secretaries of Commerce and Interior and a number of senators and congressmen.

A joint letter from the American Albacore Fishing Association and Western Fishboat Owners Association further note that some of the proponents’ data about the economic importance of the seamounts, ridges and banks is old and outdated. Some fisheries expanded their use of the offshore areas when California imposed marine protected areas in southern California in 2012.

The groups also note the Council Coordination Committee that includes members of the eight regional fishery management councils recently made a resolution that says, “therefore be it resolved, the CCC recommends that if any designations are made in the marine environment under authorities such as the Antiquities Act of 1906 that fisheries management in the U.S. EEZ waters continue to be developed, analyzed and implemented through the public process of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.”

“in the even this proposal moves forward, we strongly support maintaining management of fisheries under the MSA, through the [Pacific Fishery Management Council],” AAFA and WFOA wrote.

The proponents state the sites are “for discussion purposes only; specific sites, boundaries and regulations will be determined through a robust public consultation process that includes tribes, fishermen and stakeholders. There is a full commitment to working with these interests to better understand the activities occurring in these areas and mitigate potential concern.”

Meanwhile, other groups also are preparing written comments in an effort to fend off the threat of limited access to the nine offshore areas as the opposition grows. It’s unlikely anyone from the seafood industry is fooled by some of the behind-the-scenes political maneuvering that is taking place to create the monuments.

“In our opinion, which is informed by the lack of any attempt at collaboration with industry, this proposal is no more than legacy, political ambition and preservation being prioritized over the best available science and a multi-lateral, collaborative political process in the design of marine conservation measures,” AAFA and WFOA said in their letter.

Click here to read the letter sent to Congressman Huffman.

Click here to read the letter by Sandy Smith of the Ventura County Economic Development Association.

Click here to read the oppositon letter from the National Coalition for Fishing Communities.

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

NOAA Fisheries Updates U.S. Congress on Deep Sea Coral Research

July 13, 2016 — SEAFOOD NEWS — A report to Congress submitted last month describes the 2014 and 2015 research activities on the nation’s deep-sea coral areas. The report also briefly describes progress during this period in MSA-related management actions that contribute to protecting deep-sea coral areas.

Feldwork in two regions was done during 2014-15. A survey of 31 submarine canyons between Maine and Virginia and the discovery of coral gardens just 25 miles off the coast of Maine was done by the Northeast Fieldwork Initiative.

In Alaska, images of the seafloor at more than 200 stations throughout the 1,200-mile Aleutian Islands chain were taken, confirming widespread corals and commercially important fish using the coral areas.

These initiatives tell researchers about many deep-sea coral communities that no humans had seen before. The involved scientists shared their findings and enabled the respective  management councils to act on the newest data.

NOAA’s Deep Sea Coral Research Program is a central partner for new research in the Pacific Islands region that began in 2015 and will continue until 2017. This research is also discovering deep-sea coral communities, and likely new species, in places never before surveyed.

Deep-sea corals can live for hundreds or thousands of years, creating remarkably complex communities in the depths of the oceans. Their habitat in the deep sea ranges from 150-foot depth to more than 10,000 feet.

Deep-sea coral habitats have been discovered in all U.S. regions on continental shelves and slopes, canyons, and seamounts. Their full geographic extent is still unknown, because most areas have yet to be adequately surveyed.

A few deep-sea coral species form reefs that, over millennia, can grow more than 100 meters (300 feet) tall. Many other coral species are shaped like bushes or trees and can form assemblages similar to groves or forests on the seafloor.

Nationwide, these complex structures provide habitat for many fish and invertebrate species, including certain commercially important ones such as grouper, snapper, sea bass, rockfish, shrimp, and crab.

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

New Atlantic Marine Monument Poll Presents Misleading Picture of the Issues

July 12, 2016 (NCFC) — Yesterday, a poll released by the Protect New England’s Ocean Treasures Coalition claimed that 80 percent of Massachusetts and Rhode Island residents support national monument designation for certain ocean areas. However, the survey questions selectively presented information to respondents, withholding information about existing protections in the proposed monument areas.

The poll, conducted by Edge Research, a suburban Washington, DC polling company with a specialty in ocean conservation issues, consisted of phone interviews with 400 residents in Massachusetts and 403 residents in Rhode Island. Respondents were presented with questions that minimized the economic impacts of a potential marine monument.

When asked about the monuments, respondents were told, “protecting these areas would prohibit the fishing activity in these limited areas and could result in a small adverse economic impact on commercial fishing.” [emphasis added]

But according to fishermen themselves, the economic impact of a marine monument could in fact be devastating – potentially costing the industry millions of dollars and thousands of jobs. The affected areas are important grounds for the valuable red crab, swordfish, tuna, and offshore lobster fisheries. This has led the affected fisheries, as well as virtually the entire New England fishing industry and its regulatory bodies, to unite in opposition to the current monument proposals.

The pollsters also repeatedly asked whether respondents supported federal protections for the areas in question, without mentioning the protections already in place under the current management system. These protections include the prohibition of federally managed fisheries from using bottom-tending gear in Cashes Ledge, one of the areas under consideration.

Several leading fisheries management bodies have made it clear that they support the current public and transparent process for habitat and fisheries management. The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission passed a resolution in May asserting its preference for using the current process, under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, to develop protections for the proposed monument areas.

Also in May, the Council Coordination Committee, comprised of all eight regional fishery management councils in the U.S., stated its support for the “public, transparent, science-based process and management” of fisheries required by the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the primary law governing fisheries management in the country. Marine protections enacted under this process are not mentioned as a potential alternative in the poll.

The press release accompanying the poll states that Edge Research “is recognized as the chief pollster for ocean issues.”

The Edge Research principal named in the release, Lisa Dropkin, is described as having “conducted research for a host of conservation organizations, including The Ocean Conservancy, Monterey Bay Aquarium, Environmental Defense Fund, and World Wildlife Fund.” She also chairs Green Media Toolshed, “an application service provider supporting media communications for environmental organizations,” which lists among its goals strengthening the “ability of conservation groups to influence national, regional and local media.”

In June 2015, Edge Research “partnered with the David & Lucile Packard Foundation to conduct new research on American Millennials’ attitudes towards oceans, ocean conservation, and pathways for engaging this next generation of ocean leaders.”

There is no indication on the Edge Research website that they have ever done work for the commercial fishing or maritime shipping industries.

The Protect New England’s Ocean Treasures Coalition, which is advocating for a Marine National Monument in the North Atlantic Ocean, is composed of Center for American Progress, Conservation Law Foundation, Earthjustice, Environment America, Mystic Aquarium, National Geographic Society, National Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources Defense Council, New England Aquarium, Ocean Conservancy, Oceana, and The Pew Charitable Trusts.

About the NCFC 
The National Coalition for Fishing Communities provides a national voice and a consistent, reliable presence for fisheries in the nation’s capital and in national media. Comprised of fishing organizations, associations, and businesses from around the country, the NCFC helps ensure sound fisheries policies by integrating community needs with conservation values, leading with the best science, and connecting coalition members to issues and events of importance.