Saving Seafood

ASMFC Urges President to Minimize Potential Economic Harm from Atlantic Marine Monument Designation

ALEXANDRIA, Va. (Saving Seafood) – May 4, 2016 – The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) has taken a formal position on the possibility of a Presidential proclamation of an Atlantic Marine Monument.

The Obama administration, at the urging of major environmental groups, is considering creating a National Monument in the New England Canyons and Seamounts region via the Antiquities Act. Few specifics have been released about what the monument would look like, but it could have significant negative impacts on fishermen in the affected areas.

The ASMFC’s Interstate Fisheries Management Program (ISFMP) Policy Board unanimously (with three abstentions) approved a resolution today drawing a line in the ocean (see map), in close proximity to the Atlantic canyons and seamounts off of Georges Banks, and urging that the creation of a monument only take place in a region seaward of that line. The ASMFC resolution urges that management of waters under Federal control from the coastline to that line be managed under the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

The resolution states:

  • That it is the preference of ASMFC that the current New England Fishery Management Council coral management process continue without a Presidential proclamation on the issue;
  • That should the President decide to designate a deep-water marine monument off the New England coast prior to the end of his Presidency, it should be limited to the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected, as required by the Antiquities Act;
  • That the area be limited to depths greater than approximately 900 meters and encompass any or all of the region seaward of the line (see map) out to the outer limit of the EEZ;
  • That only bottom tending fishing effort be prohibited in the area and that all other mid-water/surface fishing methods (recreational and commercial) be allowed to continue to use the area;
  • That the public and affected user groups be allowed to review and comment on any specific proposal prior to its implementation.

The motion was initially crafted by members of the ASMFC Rhode Island Delegation, in consultation with other regional fisheries organizations. ASMFC’s Lobster Board, where the resolution originated, gave its unanimous approval to the proposal at its meeting on Monday.

In a letter this week to the ASMFC American Lobster Management Board requesting guidance on the monument issue, Board Chairman David Borden wrote about the potential consequences a monument would have for commercial and recreational fisheries in the area.

“The economic impacts of a potential Monument designation would undoubtedly be significant depending on where the boundaries are set. These economic impacts would be felt coast wide as the fishing fleets working in and around the canyons hail from ports across New England and the Mid-Atlantic.”

Specifically highlighted are the potential impacts on the offshore lobster and crab fisheries, which would be hurt by the prohibition on fishing in the monument area, or by being displaced into nearby fishing grounds. Lobster and Jonah crab revenue from Southern New England are estimated at $38 million per year. A monument designation could also hurt the lobster stock by pushing fishermen from areas where lobster is abundant into areas where lobster is more depleted. Concerns were also voiced about potential negative impacts of the proposal on whales and protected species.

Additionally, many of the States represented on ASMFC have major interests in finfish, pelagic longline, squid, and red crab fisheries, or have large recreational fisheries. “All of these fisheries could be directly affected by a closure or indirectly affected by a redirection of effort.”

According to ASMFC Chairman Doug Grout the ASMFC leadership plans to meet with representatives of CEQ next week to discuss ways to mitigate impacts on commercial and recreational fisheries.

de816714-4925-4a00-8ce5-e2e0c35e97a2

 

About the ASMFC
In the early 1940s, recognizing that they could accomplish far more through cooperation rather than individual effort, the Atlantic coast states came together to form the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. An Interstate Compact, ratified by the states and approved by the U.S. Congress in 1942, acknowledged the necessity of the states joining forces to manage their shared migratory fishery resources and affirmed the states’ commitment to cooperative stewardship in promoting and protecting Atlantic coastal fishery resources.

Read a letter from ASMFC Lobster Board Chairman David Borden to the ASMFC Lobster Board

Read a letter from Blue Water Fishermen’s Association Executive Director Terri Lei Beideman to the White House

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