Saving Seafood

DICK GRACHEK: Catch Shares

May 4, 2016 — The problem with catch shares is not in their “design”.  The problem with catch shares is in their existence.

Except for a few “winners” perhaps, it’s a problem for all concerned that this flawed and destructive privatization scheme was even considered, no less established as a management approach.

Catch Shares management has proven to be A Bad Idea:  Catch Shares have done nothing to help the fish. Catch Shares have done nothing to help the fishermen and the fishing communities. Catch Shares have done nothing to help the fish consuming public. Catch shares were not put to the referendum vote as statutorily mandated by the MSA. Catch Share Sectors were not “voluntarily” joined by the majority of the fishermen—the common pool was not a viable “option”.  The NOAA/NMFS Individual Transferable Quota initial allocation data base was admittedly flawed and inaccurate. Catch Shares had been “ramrodded” through the council process without due deliberation or adequate planning.

Finally catch Shares or ITQ’s are just a tool like any of the others that have been tried; but this one, as it fails, jeopardizes the entire independent small-boat fishery, their shoreside support businesses, and their iconic and much touted communities which could be lost permanently.

Fleet “consolidation” through ITQ’s and the consequent collapse of shore side support facilities, possible factory ship cartels, (legal under the American Fisheries Act 1998), and the transfer of fishing “rights” into the “wrong” corporate hands, are some of the irreversible consequences of this plan.  And, as is occurring wherever they have been instituted worldwide, catch shares or Individual Transferable Quotas ultimately spell the end for the independent fisherman and their communities and their shoreside support businesses.

Read the full story at the Center for Sustainable Fisheries

Vessel owners fined for fishing in protected areas

May 4, 2016 — BOSTON — The owners of two fishing vessels paid civil fines after fishing in protected areas in 2013 and 2014.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration resolved the civil penalty cases after the crews of the vessels were found to have violated the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, according to a press release from the U.S. Coast Guard.

Following up on a referral from NOAA law enforcement officers, on March 21, 2014, a crew from Coast Guard Air Station Cape Cod spotted the fishing vessel Warrior, of New Bedford, fishing for scallops in Closed Area II Essential Fish Habitat, according to the release. The area, about 120 miles east of Cape Cod, is one of five closed fishing areas in New England that cover 8,000 square miles of protected waters, according to the release.

Read the full story at the Cape Cod Times

US Justice Department asks federal court to dismiss American Samoa lawsuit

May 3, 2016 — The U.S. Justice Department has asked the federal court in Honolulu to dismiss with prejudice the Territory of American Samoa’s lawsuit, which seeks to overturn a ruling made in February this year by the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service or NMFS that reduces the Large Vessel Protected Area or from 50 miles to 12 miles in the waters of American Samoa.

A dismissal “with prejudice” would mean the plaintiff — in this case, American Samoa — will be barred from bringing action on the same claim again.

The Large Vessel Protected Area or LVPA, implemented in 2002, was reserved for the locally based alia or fishing boat, but the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council had argued that the number of local alias has declined over the years, to number less than 10 in 2014. The council then recommended that the NMFS issued its final rule on Feb. 3, 2016 to allow U.S. longline vessels to fish in portions of the LVPA.

According to NMFS, the intent of the rule is to “improve the viability of the American Samoa longline fishery and achieve optimum yield from the fishery while preventing overfishing….”

However, American Samoa said the NMFS — in promulgating the final LVPA — “acted arbitrarily by asserting a rationale to support the new rule that is contrary to the evidence in the record.”

It asked the court to vacate the NMFS rule and declare that, among other things, the final LVPA rule is inconsistent with the Deeds of Cession, and therefore violates the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and the Administrative Procedure Act.

Read the full story from the Marinas Variety

US fisheries continue to rebuild thanks to NOAA’s management process

April 25, 2016 — As a result of the combined efforts of NOAA Fisheries, the regional fishery management councils, and other stakeholders, in 2015 two stocks were rebuilt and the number of stocks listed as subject to overfishing or overfished remains near an all-time low.

“On the 40th anniversary of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA), we recognize that our dynamic, science-based management process is proving to be successful at ending overfishing and rebuilding stocks, helping us realize significant benefits to the economy,” NOAA Fisheries stated in its annual report.

NOAA pointed out that based on the assessments carried out at the end of 2015, the findings are the following:

  • 28 stocks were on the overfishing list, from which some were removed, such as hogfish (Eastern Gulf of Mexico Puerto Rico Scups & Porgies Complex Puerto Rico Wrasses Complex), thorny skate (Gulf of Maine), winter skate (Georges Bank/ Southern New England), windowpane (Gulf of Maine/Georges Bank), greater amberjack (Gulf of Mexico), gray triggerfish (Gulf of Mexico). Others were added, such as hogfish (Southeast Florida), chinook salmon (Columbia River Basin: Upper River Summer), chinook salmon (Washington Coast: Willapa Bay Fall Natural), chinook salmon (Washington Coast: Grays Harbor Fall), coho salmon (Washington Coast: Hoh), swordfish (Eastern Pacific ), summer flounder, yellowtail flounder (Southern New England/Mid-Atlantic Winter), flounder (Georges Bank) and bigeye tuna (Atlantic).
  • 38 stocks were on the overfished list, from which blueline tilefish (South Atlantic) and canary rockfish (Pacific Coast) while others were removed as is the case of hogfifish (Southeast Florida), yellowtail flounder (Southern New England/Mid-Atlantic Winter) and flounder (Georges Bank).
  • 39 stocks have been rebuilt since 2000, including canary rockfish (Pacific Coast) and petrale sole (Pacific Coast).

Read the full story at FIS

10 fish stocks added to NOAA’s overfishing list in US

April 22, 2016 — Three stocks of Chinook salmon, one of Coho salmon and two flounder stocks have been added to the overfishing list produced by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the organization that regulates U.S. fishing reported in its 2015 Report to Congress on the Status of U.S. Fisheries.

Still, the number of fish stocks in U.S. waters subject to overfishing is near an all-time low, according to Alan Risenhoover, director of NOAA Fisheries’ Office of Sustainable Fisheries.

“The partnerships forged over past 40 years under the Magnuson-Stevens Act have resulted in the number of overfished stocks remaining near all-time lows and additional stocks are rebuilding,” Risenhoover said. “Through its stakeholder-driven process, the U.S. will continue to be a global leader in managing its stocks sustainably.”

Read the full story at Seafood Source

U.S. fisheries continue to rebuild; number of overfished stocks remains near all-time low

April 22, 2016 — The following was released by NOAA:

Total number of rebuilt U.S. marine fish stocks since 2000 rises to 39

The number of domestic fish stocks listed as overfished or subject to overfishing remain near all-time lows, according to the 2015 Status of U.S. Fisheries report to Congress.

The 2015 report highlights the United States’ continued progress towards managing fish stocks sustainably. This is a result of the combined efforts of NOAA Fisheries, commercial and recreational fishermen, the regional fishery management councils, states, and other partners.

“It’s fitting that this report aligns with the 40th anniversary of the Magnuson-Stevens Act,” said Eileen Sobeck, assistant NOAA administrator for fisheries. “Magnuson-Stevens provided the dynamic, science-based management process that is proving successful year after year at keeping U.S. fisheries among the world’s most sustainable and resilient. This year’s report highlights the act’s continued success.”

In 2015, eight stocks came off the overfishing list:

  • greater amberjack in the Gulf of Mexico
  • gray triggerfish in the Gulf of Mexico;
  • hogfish in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico;
  • thorny skate in the Gulf of Maine;
  • winter skate in Georges Bank/Southern New England;
  • windowpane flounder in the Gulf of Maine/Georges Bank;
  • Puerto Rico scups and porgies complex (similar species that occur in the same area)
  • Puerto Rico wrasses complex.

In addition, two stocks are no longer listed as overfished—blueline tilefish in the South Atlantic and canary rockfish along the Pacific Coast.

A stock is on the overfishing list when the annual catch rate is too high. A stock is on the overfished listwhen the population size of a stock is too low, whether because of fishing or other causes, such as environmental changes.

The report also found that two fish stocks—canary rockfish and petrale sole, both on the Pacific Coast—were rebuilt to target levels in 2015. That brings the total number of rebuilt U.S. marine fish stocks to 39 since 2000.

“This rebuilding success demonstrates the importance of the scientific monitoring and responsive management approach Congress built in to the Magnuson-Stevens Act,” said Sobeck. “It also shows that managing fisheries to sustainable levels in an ever-changing environment is an ongoing process of science informing management.”

See the release at NOAA

 

 

Recognizing 40 Years of the Legislation That Established U.S. Fishing Boundaries

April 20, 2016 — WASHINGTON, D.C. — Tonight, recreational and commercial fishing representatives, Members of Congress, and key former and current individuals from the administration gathered on Capitol Hill in recognition of the 40th anniversary of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), a first-of-its-kind piece of legislation that established a framework to manage domestic, federal saltwater fisheries.

“We take many things for granted now that were not the case 40 years ago when foreign fishing fleets depleted fish stocks just off our coasts,” said American Sportfishing Association Government Affairs Vice President Scott Gudes. “We owe a debt of gratitude to Sens. Warren Magnuson and Ted Stevens, along with Reps. Gerry Studds and Don Young and their House and Senate colleagues, for their extraordinary leadership in creating this innovative system for managing our marine fisheries for the public good.”

On April 13, 1976, President Gerald Ford signed the “Fishery Conservation and Management Act”, not long after the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) was created. The Act set into motion internationally recognized territorial boundaries today known as the “exclusive economic zone” between 12 and 200 miles off the coast. Touted as one of its most significant successes, the “200-mile limit” eliminated foreign fleets from fishing nearshore, ensuring United States resources benefited its citizens and industries. It also established eight regional fisheries management councils still in place today. Since that time, the Act has undergone six amendments, primarily addressing sustainable catch limits and rebuilding timelines for fish stocks.

Read the full story at OutdoorsFIRST Media

Cook Inlet Salmon is a Prime Example of a Fishery Magnuson Has Not Been Able to Help

April 20, 2016 — SEAFOOD NEWS — The Magnuson Act 40 Years Later – Promises not kept for all fisheries

The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act turned 40 last week and Federal and State fishery managers marked that event with an opinion piece (ADN, April 12) extolling the successes of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and its implementation in Alaska as a “global model of sustainability.”  As the authors point out, the Magnuson-Stevens Act sets up a “transparent governing process” intended to ensure that “science is behind every fishery management decision” in Alaska.  Indeed, the Magnuson-Stevens Act sets up national standards ensuring that all fisheries are managed to achieve “optimum yield from each fishery” with management decisions “based on the best scientific information available,” and guided by carefully considered fishery management plans.

We can all find common ground in recognizing the benefits associated with management under the Act, as well as many of the successes of the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (the Council) and NOAA Fisheries in ensuring the long-term stewardship of Alaska’s fisheries.

The problem is that many important fisheries have been left out of the fold of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.  The Cook Inlet salmon fishery is a prime example.  Every year, some 10 to 30 million salmon pass through Federal waters in Cook Inlet, in route to their native streams.  These are some of the largest wild salmon runs in the world, and they go largely unharvested.

But the North Pacific Fishery Management Council and NOAA Fisheries plainly don’t want anything to do with Cook Inlet salmon fisheries, despite their obligation under federal law.  The Council never took an active role in managing the fishery, and in 2012, with approval from NOAA Fisheries, removed Cook Inlet from the Council’s Fishery Management Plan, despite the objections of the commercial fishing industry.

The result is that the benefits of Magnuson-Stevens Act have never come to pass in Cook Inlet.  Cook Inlet does not get the benefit of “drawing on NOAA’s environmental intelligence to improve stock assessments and assess the impact of climate change on fish population.”  Cook Inlet does not get to draw upon the Magnuson-Stevens Act’s “transparent governing process” or the robust “public-private management process founded under MSA.”  Cook Inlet does not get to draw on the Magnuson-Stevens Act’s promises of optimum yield for each fishery, or the promise that “science is behind every fishery management decision” in Alaska.

Instead, Cook Inlet is left with the Board of Fisheries.  Regardless of whether you believe those who claim the Board of Fish “isn’t broken” (ADN commentary March 16, 2016) or others who believe it certainly is broken (ADN commentary March 30, 2016), no one can reasonably argue that the Board of Fish process can match the transparency of the Council, or claim that “science is behind every fishery management decision” made by the Board of Fish.

There should not be any real doubt, of course, why the Council doesn’t want to deal with salmon management in Cook Inlet.  The resource disputes between user groups are contentious and longstanding.  But the need for the scientific rigor and transparency that the Council can provide has never been greater.  The Board of Fish has made no real effort to find solutions to managing Cook Inlet salmon fisheries in light of poor returns of some stocks, the identification of several “stocks of concern,” impacts from invasive species, and growing habitat problems from both urbanization and climate change.  The result in recent years has been sport and commercial fishery closures and restrictions, the loss of millions of un-harvested salmon, the loss of tens of millions of dollars to the regional economy and the loss of millions of dollars to the State treasury.

All Cook Inlet salmon fisheries would plainly benefit from coordinating the State’s long-standing salmon management experience with the Council’s transparent, science-based process.  This is precisely what the Magnuson-Stevens Act contemplates.  Hopefully, the sport and commercial fishermen and the coastal communities in Cook Inlet won’t have to wait another 40 years for the promises of the Magnuson-Stevens Act to be fulfilled.

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

Gulf Council Meets in Austin on Eve of 40th Anniversary of Magnuson Stevens

April 19, 2016 — As the eve of 40th anniversary of the signing of the Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act approached, the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council met in Austin to discuss numerous fishery issues. Included on the Council’s busy agenda were changes in king mackerel allocation, stock boundaries, and sale provisions; hogfish annual catch limits, minimum size and stock definition; red grouper catch limit increases; and charter and headboat reporting requirements. However, as usual, it was Gulf red snapper that once again stole the show as well as a majority of the Council’s time and energy.

Forty years have passed since Congress passed the sweeping legislation changed the landscape of the American seafood industry and established a comprehensive framework for governing marine fisheries management in U.S. federal waters. The Act created eight regional fishery management councils – including the Gulf Council – designed to address the unique, regional differences in marine fisheries across the country.

For years, red snapper has consumed a majority of the Councils time, and the Austin session proved no exception. Red snapper management for federally permitted charter vessels, the 2016 recreational red snapper season and the extension or elimination of the red snapper sector separation sunset provision all topped the agenda, as well as federal reef fish headboat management.

The Council received an update from the NOAA Fisheries Service (NMFS) on red snapper season projections for the coming year. Both the private recreational season and federal charter for-hire season will open on June 1. NMFS predicts a private recreational season of just six to nine days, and a federal charter for-hire season of between 38-56 days. The final 2016 recreational red snapper season closing dates will be announced in May prior to the start of the season.

Read the full story at the Gulf Seafood Institute

 

New Bedford Standard Times: Bring more electronic monitoring to fishery

April 19, 2016 — In the sustainable fisheries conference held at Rhode Island College last week, audience members were asked various demographic and opinion questions about the ocean, fisheries, and management that were tabulated and presented on the spot. Unscientific, yes, but very interesting. The question of whether the groundfish fishery is sustainable was asked of the audience before and after, and the results suggest that some opinions were changed — for the positive — by the two hours of discussion.

When asked who would be best to regulate the fishery, the answer showed the thoughts of those in the audience based on biases and attitudes, but there is only one answer to that question. The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, passed by Congress and administered by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, is the fishery’s manager, and that won’t change.

One very important part of that manager’s charge is ensuring both conservation and economic goals are considered in its management.

One policy tool for those goals is at-sea monitoring, which aims to provide accurate data on what is caught and what is thrown back. Accurate assessments support effective management and more successful fishing. It has been a point of contention for several years, as the cost of monitoring is to be borne by the industry, not the regulator. Cost aside, monitoring can help fishermen.

Hauling up less abundant species like Gulf of Maine cod or yellowtail flounder creates a dilemma for the fisherman. His options are to throw legally landed fish back into the ocean to avoid the choke species mechanism that limits the harvest of abundant stocks, or to take the fish back to port to be counted against the quotas, and hasten the day the fishing season comes to an end.

Read the full editorial at the New Bedford Standard-Times