Saving Seafood

U.S. Fisheries Management Clears High Bar for Sustainability Based on New Assessment

January 28, 2016 — Today, NOAA Fisheries announced the publication of a peer-reviewed self-assessment that shows the standards of the United States fishery management system under the Magnuson-Stevens Act more than meet the criteria of the United Nation’s Food and Agriculture Organization’s ecolabelling guidelines. These same guidelines serve as a basis for many consumer seafood certification and ranking schemes. The assessment demonstrates that the U.S. fisheries management system is particularly strong when considering responsiveness and science-based criteria. Beyond the biological and ecosystem criteria, the assessment also pointed out that the U.S. system incorporates the social and economic components of fisheries essential for effective long-term stewardship.

This assessment was authored by Dr. Michelle Walsh, a former NOAA Fisheries Knauss Fellow and current member of the Marine Science Faculty at Florida Keys Community College. Walsh evaluated the sustainability of how U.S. federal fisheries are managed using the FAO’s Guidelines for the Ecolabelling of Fish and Fishery Products from Marine Capture Fisheries. These guidelines are a set of internationally recognized criteria used to evaluate the sustainability of fisheries around the world.

“While the performance of U.S. fisheries clearly illustrates that the U.S. management system is effective, my colleagues and I wanted to evaluate the U.S. approach to fisheries management as a whole against these international guidelines for ecolabelling seafood,” said Walsh.

Read the full story from NOAA Fisheries

Seven Fishing Associations File an Amici Brief to U.S. Supreme Court in Shark Fin Lawsuit

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) — January 28, 2016 — Seven fishing associations have filed an amici brief in support of the Plaintiffs’ petition for certiorari in Chinatown Neighborhood Association, et al. v. Kamala D. Harris, which seeks to overturn California’s shark fin possession ban.  The Sustainable Fisheries Association, Rhode Island Fisherman’s Alliance, Long Island Commercial Fishing Association, Garden State Seafood Association, North Carolina Fisheries Association, Virginia Seafood Council and America Scallop Association take the position that the ban frustrates the purpose of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA).

The Plaintiffs’ suit claims California’s shark fin law directly affects the fisheries of abundant, sustainably federally managed shark species such as Atlantic spiny dogfish and winter skate. According to the brief, “The California shark fin ban directly conflicts with the basic purpose of commercial fishing – allowing commercial fishermen to possess, and to place in the stream of domestic and international commerce, legally harvested fish.”

The brief argues that the California law conflicts with commercial fishing regulations that are governed and sanctioned by the MSA and should be preempted by the federal law. Commercial fishermen may catch Atlantic spiny dogfish and winter skate but the ban outlaws the fins from those legally caught sharks from being possessed in or shipped through California. According to the brief, this arrangement “creates an impermissible conflict by frustrating a primary purpose of MSA.”

The fishing associations argue that the law also conflicts with existing treaties between the United States and foreign countries by stopping fins from sharks like Atlantic spiny dogfish and skate at the California border, barring access to the ports and airports of California and ultimately prohibiting commercial fishermen from conducting foreign trade. The suit considers this a direct assault on the MSA and lawful businesses.

According to the brief, “the shark fin possession ban is not only ‘an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress’…but it frustrates treaties and overtly blocks international trade,” and harms the members of the fishing associations.

View a PDF of the amici brief

 

Federal judge denies fisherman’s motion to block shift of monitoring costs to fishermen

January 28, 2016 —  A federal judge has denied a New Hampshire fisherman’s motion for a preliminary injunction that would have halted NOAA Fisheries’ plan to shift the cost of the at-sea monitoring program to fishermen.

U.S. District Judge Joseph J. Laplante, sitting in Concord, New Hampshire, ruled Wednesday that New Hampshire fisherman David Goethel’s claims for injunctive relief in his suit against the U.S. Department of Commerce and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are barred by the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

“Accordingly, plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction is denied,” Laplante wrote in his ruling.

Goethel, owner of the 44-foot fishing trawler Ellen Diane out of Hampton, and Northeast Fishing Sector 13 are suing the federal agencies and administrators, claiming NOAA’s plans to shift the cost of at-sea monitoring (ASM) to permit holders is illegal and will put fishermen out of business.

Saving Seafood Editor’s Note: The following clarification was provided by David Goethel, a primary plaintiff in the lawsuit:

The Judge gave a narrow preliminary ruling that denied the availability of a particular kind of preliminary injunctive relief. He ruled that he could not issue an injunction to stop the National Marine Fisheries Service from charging the fishermen for At-Sea-monitoring until the merits of the case were decided. The court said nothing about the merits of the case — specifically, nothing at all about the legality of industry funding for ASM — and we are working to get the merits decision as quickly as possible. Meanwhile the Court denied the government’s motion to transfer the case to Boston, Massachusetts, so we can hope that he will want to reach the merits soon.  We are still fighting to prevent industry funding from kicking in. A court date has not been set for a hearing on the merits of our case, but the Judge did set a date for the government to provide the administrative record and honor a Freedom of Information request for all documents and emails written in regards to at-sea monitoring.

Read the full story at Gloucester Daily Times

 

 

GSI’s Walk On the Hill Important For Survival of Gulf Fisheries

January 25, 2016 — Even before members of the Gulf Seafood Institute (GSI) took their first steps toward Capitol Hill, they realized this year’s “Walk on the Hill” would be extremely important for the survival of commercial fishing in the Gulf of Mexico.

“The surprise that state boundary limits for all fisheries going to nine miles introduced into the Sportsman’s package has dire consequences for a lot of seafood sectors that haven’t been vetted,” said GSI Florida Board Member David Krebs, president of Ariel Seafood. “I think we are all surprised these amendments have been attached to an Environment and Public Works bill instead of through the Commerce Committee. Hopefully GSI will be able to circumvent the damage before it is done.”Hours before GSI members were scheduled to leave their D.C. headquarters at the Hotel George, GSI received word that two amendments would be offered to the Bipartisan Sportsmen’s Act being heard at the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee that would negatively impact the harvesting of commercial seafood in the Gulf of Mexico. One of these amendments would have permanently extended state waters in the Gulf of Mexico to nine miles, effectively rescinding the Magnuson Stevens Act for all commercial, charter-for-hire and recreational fishing out to 9 miles – an outcome that would imperil consumers’ access to Gulf fisheries.

With a telephone glued to his ear, GSI President Harlon Pearce, owner of Harlon’s LA Fish in New Orleans, made call after call to other organizations to raise awareness of the proposed amendments. The organization made last minute changes to its legislative agenda as it prepared to meet with the Gulf Congressional Delegation, as well as Maryland’s Senator Barbara Mikulski and Alaska’s Senator Dan Sullivan.

“We often meet with legislators outside of the Gulf,” said Pearce. “It was a stroke of luck that we were in the right place at the right time to bring this important information on the proposed amendments to their attention. We also thanked them for all they have done for our industry in the past. It is important to meet with legislators outside of the Gulf to educate them that what affects our fisheries eventually affects their constituents.. We want to keep Gulf fish available for all Americans.”

Read the full story at Gulf Seafood Institute

 

DAVE KUBIAK: Alaska’s senators, especially Sullivan, can positively affect fisheries for generations

January 25, 2016—Alaska and sustainable seafood are synonymous. Whether because of our iconic salmon and halibut fisheries or the fact that 60 percent of the nation’s fish is caught off our coast — when people think of Alaska, they think seafood.

Equally synonymous with Alaska and Alaska seafood is Sen. Ted Stevens and his legacy of championing responsible fisheries management. Indeed, the nation’s federal fisheries management law, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, bears the name and insights of our late senator.

It is fitting, then, that the “Stevens Legacy” is one of our state’s most important exports. Through the various updates of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, Stevens worked to advance sustainable fisheries not just for Alaska but also for the country. In 1996, he led the charge to amend the law to require fishery managers to rebuild depleted stocks in a timely fashion. In 2006, he further improved the act to require science-based annual catch limits for the whole country — something Alaska had been doing for decades. These provisions have become core to U.S. fisheries management and have rebuilt nearly 40 fish populations across the country since 2000.

Now it is Sen. Dan Sullivan’s turn to carry that legacy forward. Sen. Sullivan holds an important membership on the Senate Commerce Committee — where Stevens left his mark on the nation’s fisheries law. With the Magnuson-Stevens Act due for reauthorization, Sullivan has the opportunity to shape and define fisheries management for the next generation of fishermen in Alaska and beyond.

Read the full opinion piece at Alaska Dispatch News

NOAA scientist says federal fish counts suffer from ‘perception issue’

January 22, 2016 — WASHINGTON — It’s not easy counting fish. Just ask the people who have to do it.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s fisheries division is responsible for estimating the health and size of dozens of fish stocks in U.S. waters, measurements that help eight regional councils determine which fish commercial and recreational anglers are allowed to catch.

The accuracy of NOAA’s counts is at the heart of a national debate over whether to loosen current catch limits.

NOAA defends the data, obtained through a combination of sampling methods and statistical models. But recreational fishermen and their backers on Capitol Hill, who want to loosen the catch limits, claim they’re based on “flawed science.”

The debate comes as Congress considers reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the law that governs management of federal fisheries.

Richard Merrick, NOAA’s chief fisheries scientist, believes the fish counts are “statistically robust” but acknowledges NOAA could do a better job explaining how it conducts the counts and building trust among stakeholders.

Merrick recently talked with USA TODAY about why NOAA’s counts are under attack and options for improving them.

Read the full story at USA Today

Secretary of Commerce approves measure to reduce Bering Sea halibut bycatch

January 20, 2016 — The following was released by the NOOA Alaska Regional Office:

The Secretary of Commerce has approved a fishery management plan amendment to reduce halibut bycatch in four sectors of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands groundfish fisheries. NOAA Fisheries anticipates the amendment will reduce the actual amount of halibut bycatch in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands by approximately 361 metric tons compared to 2014. It may also provide additional harvest opportunities in the directed commercial, personal use, sport, and subsistence halibut fisheries.

In recent years, the International Pacific Halibut Commission – the joint U.S.-Canadian body charged with management of Pacific halibut – has determined that the exploitable biomass of halibut has declined, particularly in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands. This decline has resulted in reductions to the catch limits for the directed commercial halibut fishery in Area 4, in particular Area 4 CDE in the eastern and northern Bering Sea.

Groundfish fisheries–which seek to catch species like pollock and yellowfin sole–regularly encounter halibut as bycatch during their fishing operations.

In response to declining commercial catch limits for the directed commercial halibut fishery, in June 2015, the North Pacific Fishery Management Council recommended reducing halibut prohibited species catch (PSC) limits for the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands groundfish fisheries. The council’s recommendation was Amendment 111 to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands.

Amendment 111 reduces the overall Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area halibut prohibited species catch (PSC) limit by 21% to 3,515 metric tons (mt). The PSC limits are reduced by specific amounts for the following groundfish sectors:

  • Amendment 80 sector by 25% to 1,745 mt;
  • BSAI trawl limited access sector by 15% to 745 mt;
  • BSAI non-trawl sector by 15% to 710 mt; and
  • Community Development Quota (CDQ) Program (CDQ sector) by 20% to 315 mt.

The Secretary approved Amendment 111 after determining that it is consistent with the national standards in the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.

NOAA Fisheries will publish a final rule for the measure this spring, which will go into effect 30 days after publication in the Federal Register. For more information, visit NOAA Fisheries Alaska Regional website.

 

 

Case for Shad & Herring Rules Circles the Drain

January 7, 2015 — (CN) – The D.C. Circuit cut the line on a case accusing the government of failing to protect ocean fish that feed New York and New Jersey eagles and striped bass.

Led by the New Jersey-based Anglers Conservation Network and its founder, Capt. Paul Eidman, the case centers on four dwindling stocks of fish – alewife, blueback herring, American shad and hickory shad – that school in the Atlantic Ocean from New York to North Carolina.

As those fish migrate up rivers during their annual spawning in the spring, they are prey for bald eagles, ospreys and other birds, like cormorants and gulls, as well as for other fish at sea and for striped bass making their annual spawning run into many of the same rivers.

The case at hand contends that there are even fewer river herrings and shads available for bigger species on the food chain, thanks to a 2013 inaction by the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, one of eight established by the 1976 Fishery Conservation Act, or Magnuson-Stevens Act.

That year, the council was considering adopting Amendment 15 to add river herring and shad to the 1983 Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fishery Management Plan.

Rather than approving the amendment, however, the council voted 10-9 to table the issue for three years while a working group studied the fish further.

The plaintiffs say this decision violated the Magnuson-Stevens Act, but U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler dismissed the complaint on Sept. 30, 2014.

A three-judge panel with the D.C. Circuit affirmed Tuesday.

Read the full story at Courthouse News Service

 

Federal court rules against challenge to red snapper quotas

January 5, 2016 — A federal judge in New Orleans on Tuesday rejected a challenge to the Gulf Council’s red snapper fishing quotas for the next three years.

The plaintiffs, challenged the legality of Amendment 40 to the Gulf Council’s Reef Fish Fishery Management Plan and the associated rule which sets fishing quotas and seasons for 2015-17.

The plaintiffs argued that under the federal Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Gulf Council is prohibited from regulating charter fishing separately from recreational fishing. Also, that the Gulf Council and the National Marine Fisheries Service did not “assess, specify and analyze” the economic and social effects of Amendment 40, that the amendment makes an unfair and inequitable allocation of fishing resources and the Council improperly delegated authority to the National Marine Fisheries Service.

Amendment 40 defines the partitioning of the recreational sector. All four arguments were struck down.

Read the full story at the Daily Comet

Lawsuit: NOAA prioritized recreational snapper

December 31, 2015 — Twenty-six fishermen, fish markets and industry groups have again sued the US government alleging that regulators are allowing recreational fisherman to deplete scarce red snapper stocks in the Gulf of Mexico.

The lawsuit, filed against commerce secretary Penny Pritzker, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and its parent agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) comes in the wake previous litigation that has seen the commercial fishing industry succeed in challenging regulators’ red snapper management policies.

Previously, courts ruled that regulators did not have enough enforcement measures in place to ensure that recreational fishermen did not exceed their total allowable catch (TAC) of red snapper, a species under strict management because it is considered to be “overfished.”

The lack of adequate controls on recreational fishing violated provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and prompted regulators to develop new measures for recreational fishing. However, in the lawsuit filed Dec. 28, commercial fishermen argue that a new regulatory proposal to “reallocate” a portion of future red snapper TAC from recreational to commercial use violates existing federal law.

Read the full story at Undercurrent News