December 20, 2018 — The following was released by the National Coalition for Fishing Communities:

In June, members of Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities wrote to Congressional leadership in support of H.R. 200, the reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. That bill, championed by Congressman Don Young (R-Alaska), would have addressed the concerns of the commercial fishing industry by allowing more flexibility in management, eliminating arbitrary rebuilding timelines, and adding other reforms to better take into account the complex challenges facing commercial fishermen.

Unfortunately, the Senate failed to take up the House bill, and instead took up S.1520, the “Modernizing Recreational Fishing Management Act.” In its original form, S.1520 faced widespread opposition from both commercial fishing and environmental groups. After its most controversial components were either totally removed or substantially weakened, it moved forward in the Senate and passed the House yesterday.

S.1520 is an amendment to, but not a reauthorization of, the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

Commercial fishing interests, recreational interests, and environmental groups all agree that the Magnuson-Stevens Act should, as the Environmental Defense Fund recently noted, “be recognized as one of the most successful conservation statutes ever enacted.” But no law is perfect, and there are still reforms that need to be addressed.

“We certainly hope the passage of this bill doesn’t reduce the incentive for the 116th Congress to work with the seafood industry on legislation to reauthorize the MSA in ways that will enhance the law and benefit fishing communities throughout the U.S.,” said Lori Steele, Executive Director of the West Coast Seafood Processors Association in Portland, Oregon. “The need for such legislation remains.”

“The enormous amount of energy spent working to turn S.1520 from a widely opposed bill to a diminished version just so it could make it through the Senate would have been better spent on crafting a helpful Magnuson-Stevens Act reauthorization,” said Greg DiDomenico, Executive Director of the Garden State Seafood Association in New Jersey. “If the President signs this bill into law, the best outcome might be that the public may get a better sense of the significant catch and discard mortality associated with recreational fishing, but the bill does not get us the real reform that both industries need.”

“Any Magnuson-Stevens re-authorization should include two goals,” said David Krebs, president of Ariel Seafoods Inc. in Destin, Florida and a board member of the Gulf Coast Seafood Alliance. “The ten national standards must be maintained, and provisions should be included to ensure balance between commercial and recreational interests on the eight fishery management councils.”

Ms. Steele and Mr. DiDomenico both testified before the Senate this year in favor of needed improvements to the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

Some of the crucial issues addressed in HR 200, and that were not addressed by the Senate include:

1) Eliminating the 10-year time requirement for rebuilding fisheries and replacing it with a biologically based time frame. This will allow the Regional Fishery Management Councils (RFMCs) to determine the optimal path and duration for stock rebuilding.

2) Modifying requirements for annual catch limits (ACLs) to allow RFMCs to consider ecosystem changes and the needs of fishing communities when establishing ACLs. In light of changing environmental conditions and the role of the environment in fisheries recruitment, these considerations make both scientific and common sense.

3) Using the term “depleted” instead of “overfished” throughout the Act is a simple yet very important change that will allow the Secretary of Commerce to more accurately characterize stock condition not based solely on fishing mortality. The term “overfished” is perceived negatively and can unfairly implicate the industry for stock conditions resulting from other factors.

4) Maintaining the requirement for a transparent referendum process before any new catch share program can be implemented in the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico regions to ensure the industry has a role in determining its future.