Magnuson-Stevens Act Archives - Page 45 of 46

NILS STOLPE: So how’s that “catch shares” revolution working out for groundfish?

FishNet USA/October 22, 2015 — NILS E. STOLPE — Most of you probably remember when newly appointed NOAA head Jane Lubchenco went to New England and announced that she was going to save our nation’s oldest fishery. But if it didn’t make a lasting impact on you, quoting from the Environmental Defense blog, EDFish by Tesia Love on April 8, 2009, “Sally McGee, Emilie Litsinger and I got to witness something pretty wonderful today. Jane Lubchenco came to the New England Fishery Management Council meeting to announce the immediate release of $16 million to the groundfish fishery to help move the fishery to ‘sector” catch share management by providing funding for cooperative research to help fishermen get through a tough fishing year with very strict limits on fishing effort.” She went on to quote Dr. Lubchenco “we need a rapid transition to sectors and catch shares. Catch shares are a powerful tool to getting to sustainable fisheries and profitability. I challenge you to deliver on this in Amendment 16, to include measures to end overfishing. I will commit the resources to my staff to do their part to ensure Amendment 16 is passed in June. We are shining a light on your efforts and we will track your progress. There is too much at stake to allow delay and self-interest to prevent sectors and ultimately catch shares from being implemented.”

I’m sure that you were there with the rest of us, heaving a huge sigh of relief with visions of Dr. Lubchenco on her shiny white steed, first riding to the rescue of the New England fishery, and then on to all of the rest of our struggling fisheries. “Hyo Silver! Away!”

So how did she do? A couple of years back NOAA/NMFS released the 2012 Final Report on the Performance of the Northeast Multispecies (Groundfish) Fishery (May 2012 – April 2013). It’s available at http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/publications/crd/crd1401/. The report included a table – available at http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/publications/crd/crd1401/tables.pdf – included a table titled Summary of major trends (May through April, includes all vessels with a valid limited access multispecies permit) for the fishing years 2009 to 2012. The table only takes up a single page, is pretty easily understood and is well worth your consideration in its entirety but I’ll take the liberty of synopsizing what I think are the major points it illustrates. In each of the four years the groundfish revenues, landed weight, number of active vessels that took a groundfish trip, the total number of groundfish trips, and the total crew days on groundfish trips decreased. The non-groundfish revenues and landed weight increased. The days absent on a non-groundfish trip increased slightly then decreased.

And then we come to 2013 (it seems that according to NOAA/NMFS, 2014 hasn’t gotten here yet). Had the myriad benefits of Dr. Lubchenco’s and her ENGO/foundation cronies’ Catch Share Revolution finally arrived? Apparently, not quite yet. According to the 2013 Final Report on the Performance of the Northeast Multispecies (Groundfish) Fishery (May 2013 – April 2014), just about everything that was falling in FY 2009 to 2012 continued to fall in FY 2014. I won’t go over any of the details, but the corresponding Table 1 for that year is available at http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/read/socialsci/pdf/groundfish_report_fy2013.pdf.

Oh well, I guess she deserves a few points for trying – and we shouldn’t forget that before she could really focus on fixing groundfish she was distracted by having to dump a couple of millions of gallons of Corexit into the Gulf of Mexico.

Thirteen species are included in the New England Fishery Management Council’s multi-species fishery management plan, the “groundfish” FMP. Four of those species support no or minimal directed fisheries. The landings of those that support a significant commercial fishery are in the table below (from the NOAA/NMFS commercial landings database). Looking at these data, it’s impossible to suggest that after years of intensive management this management regime is anything that could be considered a success – unless your idea of success is putting a whole bunch of people out of work. In fact only the most charitable among us could term it anything other than disaster – and it’s a disaster that has been in the making since long before Dr. Lubchenco so fatuously announced that she was going to fix it.

(I’ll add here that catch share management is not a cure-all for all that’s wrong with fishery management nor is it the reason for management failures – though at the time Dr. Lubchenco and her “team” apparently believed it was. It is nothing more than an option for dividing the catch among users. As such it can have profound socioeconomic impacts on participants in the fishery and on fishing communities that depend on it, but not on the fishery resources themselves.)

Species	Year	Metric Tons	Value	Species	Year	Metric Tons	Value

Atlantic	2009	8946	$25,223,364	Haddock	2009	5,818	$13,655,842
Cod	2010	8039	$28,142,681		2010	9,811	$21,715,488
	2011	7981	$32,596,942		2011	5,709	$16,316,219
	2012	4766	$22,200,043		2012	1,959	$7,833,001
	2013	2261	$10,455,352		2013	1,869	$6,002,480
Plaice	2009	1395	$3,886,809	White	2009	1,696	$3,556,719
	2010	1413	$4,498,591	Hake	2010	1,807	$4,116,221
	2011	1387	$4,274,757		2011	2,907	$5,849,790
	2012	1480	$5,048,688		2012	2,772	$6,933,743
	2013	1318	$4,688,995		2013	2,238	$6,484,444
Winter	2009	2209	$8,094,381	Pollock	2009	7,492	$10,010,039
Flounder	2010	1587	$6,959,547		2010	5,158	$9,529,022
	2011	2124	$8,002,376		2011	7,193	$12,292,573
	2012	2395	$10,331,500		2012	6,743	$13,185,509
	2013	2746	$9,899,924		2013	5,058	$11,395,943
Yellowtail	2009	1605	$4,759,536	Acadian	2009	1,440	$1,572,292
Flounder	2010	1318	$4,193,981	Redfish	2010	1,646	$1,959,681
	2011	1827	$4,762,969		2011	2,014	$2,754,692
	2012	1808	$5,396,502		2012	4,035	$5,891,429
	2013	1278	$4,199,927		2013	3,577	$4,337,163
Witch	2009	949	$4,036,115
Flounder	2010	759	$3,773,526
	2011	870	$3,955,053
	2012	1037	$4,247,528
	2013	686	$3,735,330

How might it be fixed? In the original FishNet article I quoted a couple of paragraphs from a National Academy of Sciences study Evaluating the Effectiveness of Fish Stock Rebuilding Plans in the United States (available at http://www.nap.edu/catalog/18488/evaluating-the-effectiveness-of-fish-stock-rebuilding-plans-in-the-united-states). I can’t think of anything more valuable than repeating those words here. On page 178 of the report the authors concluded “the tradeoff between flexibility and prescriptiveness within the current legal framework and MFSCMA (Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act) guidelines for rebuilding underlies many of the issues discussed in this chapter. The present approach may not be flexible or adaptive enough in the face of complex ecosystem and fishery dynamics when data and knowledge are limiting. The high degree of prescriptiveness (and concomitant low flexibility) may create incompatibilities between single species rebuilding plans and EBFM (Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management). Fixed rules for rebuilding times can result in inefficiencies and discontinuities of harvest-control rules, put unrealistic demands on models and data for stock assessment and forecasting, cause reduction in yield, especially in mixed-stock situations, and de-emphasize socio-economic factors in the formulation of rebuilding plans. The current approach specifies success of individual rebuilding plans in biological terms. It does not address evaluation of the success in socio-economic terms and at broader regional and national scales, and also does not ensure effective flow of information (communication) across regions.”

In other words, the fishery managers need more informed flexibility to adequately manage our fisheries. It has been the goal of the fishing industry’s friends in Congress to provide this necessary flexibility (with adequate safeguards, of course). Conversely it has been the goal of a handful of foundations and the ENGOs they support and a smaller handful of so-called fishermen’s organizations to prevent this, and it seems that they have been willing to resort to just about any tactics to do it. As they have been successful in their efforts the fishing industry has continued to lose infrastructure that will never be replaced and markets that will be next to impossible to recover – and the percentage of imported seafood that we consume will continue to increase in spite of the fact that our fisheries are among the richest in the world.

View a PDF of the opinion piece

Snapper bill could kill fishing jobs

October 23, 2015 — The following opinion piece appeared on The Hill and was written by Shane Cantrell, Buddy Guindon, Glen Brooks and Brett Veerhusen:

The commercial and charter fishermen in the Gulf of Mexico and throughout the United States, are unified in opposition to H.R. 3094 (Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority Act).

Every year tens of millions of Americans enjoy fresh caught seafood from their favorite restaurants and grocery stores, and millions of tourists travel to the coasts for a day of fishing on charter boats. Fish and shellfish are public resources, and our four fishing industry organizations work hard to provide the American public with sustainable access to the bounty of the Gulf of Mexico and other coastal regions of our nation.

Together, our organizations and the thousands of fishermen we represent have embraced science and management tools that promote conservation and sustainable fishing practices, reduce wasteful by-catch, operate safer and more stable small businesses, and protect fishing and shore-side jobs. We strive for sustainability, accountability, and access to some of the world’s best seafood; and we do so through active and progressive campaigns that bring fishermen, stakeholders, and regulators together to solve problems.
H.R. 3094 poses a clear and imminent threat to our jobs, our fishing communities, and the red snapper resource that we have helped rebuild to some of the highest levels on record.

H.R. 3094 creates loopholes that will erode the commercial red snapper fishery and access to red snapper by millions of American consumers. Commercial management of red snapper in the Gulf is a success story – overfishing was stopped, wasteful discarding was all-but-eliminated, and fishing businesses and jobs are profitable and stable. This is all due to the core conservation and management protections that are afforded to us under federal law (the Magnuson-Stevens Conservation and Management Act). H.R. 3094 allows the Gulf States to take away nearly 10% of the commercial quota every year without conferring with the Congressionally-approved and stakeholder-comprised Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Gulf Council). To add insult to injury, H.R. 3094 deceives the public by claiming it will not change the IFQ shares in this fishery. However, those who developed this language fail to point out that the “shares” are a percentage of the whole commercial allocation, and that any reduction in commercial allocation will reduce the quota associated with the shares. Commercial fishermen don’t keep what they catch – it goes to American consumers who purchase red snapper from restaurants and grocery stores.

Read the full opinion piece at The Hill

Commercial and Charter Fishermen Send Opposition Letter to Congress on Eve of Red Snapper Hearing

October 22, 2015 — Later today, the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans will hold a hearing on the Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority Act (GSRSMA) – H.R. 3094. The bill, sponsored by Representative Garret Graves (R-LA) and originally introduced this summer, transfers management authority from the public and transparent federal process to the five Gulf states. This sets a dangerous precedent to unravel the success of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, a landmark piece of legislation.

Read the full story at The Outdoor Wire

View a PDF of the Official Statement of the Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance

View a PDF of the testimony of Robert F. Zales from the National Association Charterboat Operators

Proceeds from NMI’s fishing quota will go to conservation

October 16, 2015 — The $525,000 that the CNMI earns from selling half of its big eye tuna quota will go to marine conservation programs and development of fishery management, Variety learned.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Marine Fisheries Service or NMFS gave the CNMI a 2,000 metric ton catch limit for big eye tuna for the year 2015, and allowed the commonwealth to sell half of it to a group of long-line fishermen in Hawaii.

NMFS allowed the CNMI to allocate a 1,000-metric ton catch limit to Hawaii long-liners in a specified fishing agreement.

In his email to CNMI Department of Lands and Natural Resources Secretary Richard B. Seman, NMFS Regional Administrator Michael D. Tosatto said: “As an accountability measure, NMFS will monitor, attribute, and restrict (if necessary) catches of longline-caught bigeye tuna, including catches made under a specified fishing agreement. These catch limits and accountability measures support the long-term sustainability of fishery resources of the U.S. Pacific Islands.”

In his Oct. 9 letter to Gov. Eloy S. Inos. Tosatto said he has reviewed the agreement between the CNMI government and Quota Management Inc. and determined that it is consistent with the requirements of the Fishery Ecosystem Plan for Pelagic Fisheries and the Western Pacific, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, and other applicable laws.

Read the full story from Marianas Variety

PORTSMOUTH HERALD: NOAA monitoring fee will kill local fishing industry

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) — October 6, 2015 — The following editorial appeared yesterday in the Portsmouth Herald in Portsmouth, New Hampshire:

Local fishermen say the looming cost of paying $700 per day, for at-sea monitors, could put them out of business by the end of the year.

It’s a threat that everyone should take seriously.

“The day I really have to pay for this is the day I stop going fishing,” says David Goethel, a commercial fisherman from Hampton.

Stringent federal catch limits have already crippled the 400-year-old fishing industry in New Hampshire to the point where there are now only nine active groundfishing boat operators.

This additional expense, to make sure fishermen are following regulations put forward by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), could be the final nail in the coffin.

That’s why we were pleased that last week NOAA delayed the downshifting of the costs to fishermen until Dec. 1. We urge NOAA and our congressional leaders to do what they can to ensure that the delay is permanent because it’s the right thing to do.

NOAA has been footing the bill for the at-sea monitoring program for several years, and rightly so as it’s the federal agency’s responsibility to ensure that annual catch limits are not exceeded.

At-sea monitors keep track of how vessels are meeting their groundfishing allocations set by NOAA to keep groundfish stocks like cod, haddock and flounder from being destroyed.

NOAA’s current rules state that at-sea monitoring costs were to be instituted in 2012. However, they have delayed implementation because of the “continuing economic problems” in the industry, according to Teri Frady, spokesperson for NOAA’s Northeast Fisheries Science Center.

While the fishing industry is still in crisis, NOAA is now claiming it can’t afford to foot the bill for the monitors.

We find it hard, however, to believe that an agency with a billion dollar budget can’t afford it.

The real people who can’t afford it are the fishermen, who are already struggling to stay afloat due to the heavy regulations.

The cost for at-sea monitors will likely be near $700 per day for each vessel, a figure based on what NOAA paid in fiscal year 2015.

In an email to congressional staff, NOAA regulators admit the change would be “economically challenging” for many.

Studies by NOAA show that as many as 60 percent of affected boats could be pushed out of profitability if they have to pay those fees.

Sen. Kelly Ayotte was right to question whether this decision to downshift costs violates the law.

By law, according to the National Standards of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NOAA is directed to sustain both fish stocks and fishing communities.

Forcing fishermen to pay for at-sea monitors may support sustainable fisheries but it will kill the local groundfishing industry.

Read the full editorial from the Portsmouth Herald

Author Tracks Decline of Fisheries

September 30, 2015 — Three years have passed since the publication of the book, The Mortal Sea, but its impact continues. The 378-page history of the dramatic decline of fish in the western Atlantic took 10 years of investigative work to write. The book opens when European fishermen sailed these waters in pursuit of cod and finishes in relatively recent times, with the introduction of diesel powered draggers 60 years ago.

Jeffrey Bolster, the author, continues to give talks and share his book’s mission. On Sunday, Oct. 11, he will speak at the Chatham Historical Society.

In a phone interview with the Vineyard Gazette, Mr. Bolster said: “By the time I finished writing the book, I realized that I had written a parable. You will always have scientists saying we have taken too much. And you will always have someone say that the science isn’t enough. Whether you are talking about potable water in California, about plastics in the ocean or global warming, there will always be someone on either side of the issue, someone saying we need to proceed with caution. On the flip side, they will press on regardless.”

The fish in the ocean once numbered the grains of sand in the Sahara, he said. “And there was thinking that there was nothing we could do to touch it. Yet, it turns out, the killing of the fish in the ocean was far easier than the killing of all insects on the land,” Mr. Bolster said.

Today most striped bass caught along the eastern seaboard were spawned in the Chesapeake Bay. Yet more than a century ago, striped bass spawned in many of the rivers of the eastern seaboard all the way up to Maine.

Read the full story at the Vineyard Gazette

NILS E. STOLPE: FishNet-USA/Who’s really in charge of U.S. fisheries?

September 14, 2015 — An Oligarchy is defined as “a country, business, etc., that is controlled by a small group of people”

Ancient City Shrimp is an eight minute YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WepRokGO8d8) produced by the St. Augustine Lighthouse Museum that examines St. Augustine’s past as one of several centers of commercial shrimping in Florida.

Unfortunately – or perhaps tragically is a better fit – Florida’s shrimp fleet is only a shadow of what it once was. One of the reasons for this is the imposition of unrealistic regulations on U.S. shrimpers that has made the fishery much less profitable than it used to be.

The video’s producers don’t really focus on this as one of the reasons for this decline, rather emphasizing the impacts of cheaper – and generally inferior – shrimp from abroad. This is understandable. You can only cover so much ground in a short video. Opening the can of worms that fishery regulation in the Southeast has become is a guarantee of complication and controversy, things which few museums would willingly get involved in.

In spite of a really good job overall I found part of the final narration troubling. Almost at the end (7 minutes and 50 seconds or so in) the narrator in his wrap-up states “while we can’t change federal regulations we can change our purchasing habits. Demand local shrimp(my emphasis added).” He’s on target with the “demand local shrimp” but it’s hard to imagine anything more antithetical to the principles that our country was founded upon than his acceptance of the idea that we can’t, or that we shouldn’t, change federal regulations.

While it seems unlikely, apparently he missed out on any exposure to or consideration of the words “government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth.”

As close to immortal as any words spoken in the last half a millennium, they are from Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address. In a commemoration of the sacrifices of Union soldiers in the battle of Gettysburg, on November 19, 1863, President Lincoln expressed what governance in the United States was all about. To repeat those words, “government of the people, by the people, for the people.”

It kind of makes you wonder how the documentarians who put together Ancient City Shrimp became convinced that we (the people, I presume, as in the U.S. Citizenry) can’t or shouldn’t change federal regulations. One possibility is that they weren’t aware that Aldous Huxley’s 1984 was a work of fiction. Another would be that they have been exposed to the bottomless morass that federal fisheries management has been turned into.

A history lesson or two

Back in 1976 (this was before the existence of a multi-billion dollar environmental industry so thankfully they weren’t there ti impede the process) the Magnuson-Stevens Act became law. It brought fishing in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone under federal control and established a management regime that would eventually phase out virtually all foreign commercial fishing in U.S. waters.

It was generally agreed that one of the strongest features of the Act was the determination that fishermen were an integral part of the federal fishery management process. This was achieved by mandating that fishermen were voting members on each regional Fishery Management Council.

This was in recognition of a number of factors that the public, or at least the majority of the involved politicians and bureaucrats, have subsequently turned – or been turned – away from. Among these were the relative lack of knowledge of our fisheries and what affects them, the value to fisheries managers of the knowledge that has been accumulated by a multigenerational fishing industry over many years, and the belief in and the commitment of fishermen to the long term sustainability of the fisheries they participate in.

Read the full op-ed at FisheryNation.com

Milestone Reached in Setting of New Bottomfish Catch Limits for US Pacific Island Territories

September 18, 2015 — The following was released by the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council:

HONOLULU — A milestone was reached this week in the setting of the 2016 and 2017 annual catch limits (ACLs) for federally managed bottomfish fisheries in the US Territories of American Samoa, Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). The current ACLs of 101,000 pounds; 66,800 pounds; and 228,000 pounds, respectively, for the territories were initially set for fishing year 2013 based on a 2012 stock assessment and then rolled over for fishing years 2014 and 2015. The ACLs are specified by the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council and transmitted to the Secretary of Commerce for final approval.

On Sept. 16, the Council’s Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) considered a recent update of the 2012 stock assessment and a review of the updated assessment by a panel comprised of Dr. Erik Franklin (Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology), Dr. Milani Chaloupka (University of Queensland) and Dr. Donald Kobayashi (National Marine Fisheries Service). The bottomline of the stock assessment update is that the bottomfish management unit species in American Samoa, Guam, and CNMI are not overfished and not experiencing overfishing. The SSC determined that the updated stock assessment is the best scientific information available. The Council is required by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to use the best scientific information available in its fisheries management decision-making.

American Samoa Bottomfish Alia Boat

Several other steps will take place next week to develop the 2016 and 2017 ACLs. On Sept. 23 and 24, a working group will meet in Honolulu and by teleconference to recommend the risk of overfishing to be used in setting the ACLs. The risk of overfishing is based on scientific uncertainty of the information about the fisheries. On Sept. 25, another working group will meet to provide guidance on the social, economic, ecological and management uncertainty in the information about the fisheries. Then on Oct. 13 and 14, the SSC will meet in Honolulu during which time it will consider the working group findings and determine the acceptable biological catch for the territorial bottomfish fisheries, i.e., the amount of fish that can be harvested without overfishing. The Council will meet Oct. 21 and 22, 2015, in American Samoa during which time it will use the acceptable biological catch specifications, the working group findings and public comments to determine the 2016 and 2017 ACLs.(SSC) considered a recent update of the 2012 stock assessment and a review of the updated assessment by a panel comprised of Dr. Erik Franklin (Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology), Dr. Milani Chaloupka (University of Queensland) and Dr. Donald Kobayashi (National Marine Fisheries Service). The bottomline of the stock assessment update is that the bottomfish management unit species in American Samoa, Guam, and CNMI are not overfished and not experiencing overfishing. The SSC determined that the updated stock assessment is the best scientific information available. The Council is required by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to use the best scientific information available in its fisheries management decision-making.

While it is too early to determine what the final numbers will be for the 2016 and 2017 territorial bottomfish ACLs, last year the Council rolled over the 2014 ACL to 2015 noting that the actual catch of bottomfish by the Territories comprise a small proportion of the limits and there was no significant change in the fishery or the management of it. Except for the updated stock assessment, that situation remains the status quo.

For more information on the upcoming meetings and how to provide written and/or oral testimony on the topics to be covered at them, please go to www.wpcouncil.org/meetings or contact the Council at info.wpcouncil@noaa.gov or call 808 522-8220.

Scientific and Statistical Committee: Judith Amesbury (Micronesian Archaeological Research Services); Dr. Paul Callaghan (University of Guam retired); Dr. Frank A. Camacho (University of Guam); Dr. Milani Chaloupka (University of Queensland); Dr. Charles Daxboeck, chair, (BioDax Consulting Tahiti); Dr. Richard Deriso (Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission); Dr. Erik Franklin (Hawai`i Institute of Marine Biology); Dr. John Hampton (Secretariat of the Pacific Community); David Itano (consultant); Dr. Pierre Kleiber (NMFS PIFSC, retired); Dr. DonaldKobayashi (NMFS PIFSC); Dr. Molly Lutcavage (University of Massachusetts); James Lynch (K&L Gates); Dr. Todd Miller (CNMI Division of Fish & Wildlife); Alton Miyaska (Hawai’i Division of Aquatic Resources); Dr. Domingo Ochavillo (American Samoa DMWR); Dr. Minling Pan (NMFS PIFSC); Dr. Craig Severance (University of Hawai`i at Hilo, retired); Dr. John Sibert (Pelagic Fisheries Research Program, retired); and Dr. Robert Skillman (NMFS PIFSC, retired).

Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council: Appointees by the Secretary of Commerce from nominees selected by American Samoa, CNMI, Guam and Hawai`i governors: Michael Duenas, Guam Fishermen’s Cooperative Association (Guam) (vice chair); Edwin Ebisui (Hawai`i) (chair); Michael Goto, United Fishing Agency Ltd. (Hawai`i); John Gourley, Micronesian Environmental Services (CNMI) (vice chair); Julie Leialoha, biologist (Hawai`i); Dr. Claire Tuia Poumele, Port Administration (American Samoa); McGrew Rice, commercial and charter fisherman (Hawai`i) (vice chair); and William Sword, recreational fisherman (American Samoa) (vice chair). Designated state officials: Suzanne Case, Hawai`i Department of Land and Natural Resources; Dr. Ruth Matagi-Tofiga, American Samoa Department of Marine and Wildlife Resources; Richard Seman, CNMI Department of Lands and Natural Resources; and Matt Sablan, Guam Department of Agriculture. Designated federal officials: Matthew Brown, USFWS Pacific Islands Refuges and Monuments Office; William Gibbons-Fly, US Department of State; RAdm Cari B. Thomas, US Coast Guard 14th District; and Michael Tosatto, NMFS Pacific Islands Regional Office.

Fisheries Regulation and Catch Limits Round Table With US Senator Kelly Ayotte & NOAA Officials

September 17, 2015 — The following was released by the office of Sen. Kelly Ayotte:

United States Senator Kelly Ayotte will hold a round table discussion with National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) officials, New Hampshire fishermen, and business leaders.

When: Friday September 18, 2:00 PM to 3:30 PM

Where: 1 New Hampshire Avenue – Suite 300 (New Hampshire Room – 3^rd Floor)

Pease Trade Port, Portsmouth, NH

United States Senator Kelly Ayotte has asked NOAA officials to come to New Hampshire to hear directly from New Hampshire fishermen and business leaders whose businesses rely on commercial and recreational fishing off New Hampshire’s seacoast. NOAA has been asked to discuss and answer questions regarding fishing regulations, including catch limits, NOAA’s process for assessing and determining fish stocks, the imposition of fees for monitors on commercial fishing vessels, and NOAA’s application of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Following introductory remarks from Senator Ayotte, attendees will have an opportunity present questions or comments to the NOAA officials.

OCEANA AGAIN SUES NOAA OVER BYCATCH MONITORING

July 29, 2015– WASHINGTON — Oceana, the maritime environmental group that successfully sued NOAA Fisheries in 2011 over its bycatch rules, is challenging the federal regulator of the nation’s fisheries over its newest bycatch rule for the Northeast region.

Oceana again sued NOAA Fisheries on Wednesday, claiming the current bycatch reporting rule finalized last month for the region — in part, as a response to Oceana’s earlier legal victory — is underfunded, uniformly inadequate for providing accurate information and in violation of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the Administrative Procedure Act.

The 43-page lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington D.C., claims the new bycatch rule “leaves loopholes that would guarantee that observer coverage will never meet its performance standards, ultimately failing to fix current insufficiently low levels of monitoring in the region,” Oceana said.

The group’s lawsuit said NOAA’s new Statistical Bycatch Reporting Method (SBRM) “fails to address the fundamental legal flaws” identified in its previous lawsuit and “effectively doubles down on the Fisheries Service’s decade-long practice of under-funding and marginalizing its bycatch monitoring systems.”

That under-funding, Oceana said, impedes NOAA Fisheries’ ability to generate statistically reliable data needed to assess the impact of bycatch on individual fisheries.

The lawsuit draws a direct connection between faulty bycatch monitoring and overfishing. It specifically targets NOAA Fisheries’ bycatch monitoring performance in New England and among the Northeast multispecies groundfish fleet.

“New England in particular has been plagued for decades by lax monitoring and overfishing,” said Oceana Assistant General Counsel Eric Bilsky. “The failure to monitor catch and enforce catch limits is in part responsible for the collapse of the New England groundfish fishery, including the historically important Atlantic cod populations of the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank.”

Read the full story at the Gloucester Times