Saving Seafood

NOAA Fisheries Announces New Habitat Management Measures for New England Fisheries

April 4, 2018 — The following was released by NOAA Fisheries:

NOAA Fisheries has approved measures of the New England Fishery Management Council’s Omnibus Essential Fish Habitat Amendment 2. This amendment updates the Essential Fish Habitat designations required by the Magnuson-Stevens Act with the latest scientific information, and minimizes the effect of fishing on that habitat while balancing the economic needs of the fishing industry.

The approved measures include:

  • Revisions to the essential fish habitat designations for all New England Fishery Management Council-managed species and life stages;
  • New Habitat Areas of Particular Concern to highlight especially important habitat areas;
  • Revisions to the spatial management system within the Gulf of Maine, Georges Bank, and the southern New England area to better align with scientific advice on how and where to protect essential fish habitat while balancing the economic needs of the fishing industry;
  • Establishment of two Dedicated Habitat Research Areas, seasonal spawning protection measures, and a system for reviewing and updating the proposed measures.

The approved measures are effective on April 9, 2018.  

Two important notes:

Closed Area I North will remain closed until April 15 to protect spawning. This closure applies to all fishing vessels, except vessels in transit, vessels fishing with exempted gears, vessels fishing in the mid-water trawl exempted fishery, charter and party vessels, private recreational vessels, and scallop dredges.

The Spring Massachusetts Bay Spawning Closure will be closed April 15-30. This closure applies to all vessels, except vessels without a federal northeast multispecies permit fishing exclusively in state waters, vessels fishing with exempted gears or in the mid-water trawl purse seine exempted fishery, scallop vessels on a day-at-sea, scallop vessels in the dredge exemption area, transiting vessels, and charter/party and private recreational vessels.

For more information, read the permit holder bulletin. Also, see the map of the final approved habitat areas below. The dashed lines show the boundaries of the existing closed areas and habitat closures.

Learn more about NOAA Fisheries Greater Atlantic Region by visiting the site here.

 

Lawsuit against national marine monument moving forward

March 29, 2018 — A lawsuit against a national marine monument, started nearly a year ago, is moving forward once more after a U.S. District Court Judge lifted a stay placed on the case.

The Northeast Canyons and Seamounts National Marine Monument, established via executive order using the Antiquities Act by President Barack Obama, set aside 4,913 square miles (12,724 square kilometers) of ocean 130 miles (209 kilometers) off the coast of New England. Soon after the monument was established, several fishing groups sued the federal government arguing that the move exceeded the President’s authority.

The motivation behind the lawsuit stems from the monument’s blanket ban on all commercial fishing. While a grandfather period of seven years was given to the lobster and deep-sea red crab fisheries, all other fishing operations have been banned from the area.

Now, thanks to U.S. District Court Judge James E. Boasberg’s lift of a stay granted on 12 May 2017, the lawsuit will begin to move forward once more. The lawsuit argues that Obama did not have the authority to establish the monument based on the Antiquities Act, given that the ocean is not “land owned or controlled by the federal government.”

Secretary of the Department of the Interior Ryan Zinke recommended, in a review released in December 2017, that the proclamation of the monument be amended to allow the local fishery management council to make decisions as authorized by the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

“There is no explanation in the proclamation as to why the objects are threatened by well-regulated commercial fishing,” wrote Zinke in his recommendations. “The proclamation should be amended, through the use of appropriate authority.”

Since that recommendation, however, the Trump administration has failed to act.

“Fishermen have waited a year for the government to respond to their lawsuit challenging a clear case of Antiquities Act abuse – locking fishermen out of an area of ocean as large as Connecticut,” said Jonathan Wood, an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation who is representing the plaintiffs. “The court’s decision to lift the stay will now require President Trump to decide whether to act on the secretary’s recommendation or defend President Obama’s unlawful monument decision in court.”

So far, said Wood, they haven’t heard whether or not the administration plans to defend the monument in court.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

 

How a trade war threat could squeeze ag

March 26, 2018 — HOW A TRADE WAR THREAT COULD SQUEEZE AG: Farmers and ranchers, and their representatives in Washington, have spent much of President Donald Trump’s 14 months in office warning that the agricultural industry would be collateral damage in a tit-for-tat trade war. It seems their fears have been confirmed, after China released a lengthy list of $3 billion worth of products it has set up for reciprocal tariffs — including pork, nuts, fresh and dried fruits, and wine, Pro Ag’s Catherine Boudreau and Helena Bottemiller Evich report this morning.

Groups rally in opposition to fisheries bill: Several dozen environmental groups wrote to House leaders Reps. Paul Ryan and Nancy Pelosi last week opposing H.R. 200 (115), a measure that they say would weaken the Magnuson-Stevens Act’s conservation provisions “by creating loopholes, watering down legal standards, and decreasing accountability.”

NOAA plans cod quota increase: NOAA plans to greatly increase the quotas for cod and haddock catches to increase revenues for Northeastern fishermen, the Associated Press reports.

Read the full story at Politico

 

NPFMC: Council meets April 2-10, 2018 in Anchorage, Alaska

March 7, 2018 — The following was released by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council:

The meetings are held at the Hilton Hotel, 500 W. 3rd Avenue, in Anchorage, Alaska. The Agenda and Schedule are available, as well as a list of documents for review posted to the agenda prior to the meeting. Other meeting information follows:

  • Submit and review comments at comments.npfmc.org
  • Public comment deadline is March 30, 2018 at 12 noon (AST)
  • Hilton Hotel offers discounted room rates HERE
  • Alaska Airlines offers Discount Code: ECMZ242
  • Hotel wifi / password:  Hilton_Conference / summertime
  • Listen Online while the Council is in session

Salmon FMP:

The Council will review comments received from stakeholders and will determine the scope of work for a Salmon Committee. A staff report will provide context about how stakeholder recommendations comport with the Magnuson-Stevens Act requirements for fishery management plans, and whether the FMP applies to state waters and the sport fishery in the EEZ. Although the Council has already received submissions for membership (which are being held on file), the Salmon Committee will not be appointed until the Council has formally issued a call for nominations, as is scheduled to occur at this meeting.

Halibut ABM:

The discussion paper on BSAI halibut abundance-based management is being prepared to help the Council refine alternatives with respect to elements of the control rule. The paper will provide: an overview of the current Council motion and suite of alternatives (the control rules aspects), a suggested restructuring of the Council’s suite of alternatives with details on their complexity, and an evaluation of these to help the Council narrow the control rule options to a more reasonable range of control rule types, stepping through each individually (as was done with indices) and then providing the Work Group’s rationale for what might be reasonable for analysis. The draft alternatives brought forward are focusing largely on linear control rules and their application in 2-3D look up table for purposes of setting a PSC limit that may be influenced by information from the trawl survey and/or the IPHC setline survey. Draft alternatives also will also explore setting PSC limits by gear type separately to one or both indices and consider formulations which address halibut stock status.

Learn more about the NPFMC here.

 

Crab Fight! Aboard Alaska’s Quest To Be America’s King Of Crab

February 28, 2018 — Deep in the Bering Sea off Alaska’s Aleutian Islands, the U.S. and Russia share fishing waters that are home to this nation’s supply of king and snow crab. Predictably, the relationship is contentious. While the two nations compete for room on your plate, the deck is stacked against Alaskan fisheries thanks to cheaper imported product and illegal crab. Despite the economics, the Alaskan crab industry, made famous by The Discovery Channel’s hit show Deadliest Catch, fights for quality and sustainability in a competitive, and sometimes sketchy, global market.

Alaska’s modern fishing industry accounts for nearly 60% of America’s seafood, and today’s sustainability practices stem from the Alaskan constitution, written in 1959. But the 1976 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act marked the first significant shift in the regulation of our modern seafood, starting with redefining our fishing boundaries.

“Magnuson-Stevens expanded our coast from three to 200 miles offshore,” says Tyson Fick, Executive Director of Alaska Bering Sea Crabbers. “We decided we were tired of foreign fleets fishing off our shore, and we said, ‘You know what’? Those are our fish.’ We stepped up and claimed it.”

2005 was another year of sweeping changes. Magnuson-Stevens implemented a catch-share program, reducing the number of crab-fishing boats from three hundred to about eighty. The drastic cut sounds harsh, but crabbing was dangerous, even by today’s standards. Excellent seamen competed with less experienced captains commanding inadequate vessels in a race to catch crab regardless of the weather. People died. Crowded ports meant the catch was stretched thin and few were making decent money. Talented captains were falling into debt.

Read the full story at Forbes

 

Senate panel advances ‘Modern Fish Act’ against harvesters’ wishes

February 28, 2018 — A bill supported by recreational anglers but opposed by commercial harvesters and environmental groups was approved by the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation on Wednesday by a voice vote.

The Modernizing Recreational Fisheries Management Act (S. 1520), legislation its supporters have termed “the Modern Fish Act,” will now go to the Senate floor. Some of the same provisions are contained in H.R. 200, a measure sponsored by representative Don Young, an Alaska Republican, which is expected to receive a vote soon on the House floor.

“[T]his is the commerce committee at its best,” said senator Roger Wicker, the Mississippi Republican who introduced S. 1520, noting after the vote the bipartisan support his bill enjoyed. Seven Republicans and six Democrats cosponsored the legislation.

“Saltwater anglers are conservationists and this bill will help provide for healthier marine fisheries and will amend the law in such a way as to enhance saltwater fishing and build our economy,” he said.

The American Sportfishing Association, one of multiple recreational fishing groups to support S. 1520, was quick to applaud the vote, too, saying Wicker’s bill would add “more tools to the management toolbox, improving data collection techniques, and examining some fishery allocations that are based on decades-old decisions.”

However, the Seafood Harvesters of America (SHA) and Garden State Seafood Association are among no less than 30 multiple commercial fishing groups that have expressed their opposition to the bill.

Read the full story at Undercurrent News

 

Chefs heat up red snapper debate

February 27, 2018 — Priced at $32, the pan-roasted Gulf red snapper with coconut rice and Malaysian curry sauce is among the best-sellers at Carrollton Market in New Orleans.

But chef Jason Goodenough worries that it could someday disappear from his menu, if Congress goes too far in loosening regulations and allows more overfishing of the stock.

“On the macro level, my fear is that tourism is going to drop off because less and less Gulf seafood is available to us as chefs,” said Goodenough, named the 2017 chef of the year by New Orleans Magazine. “People come to New Orleans to eat, to drink and to hear music — food tourism is a major, major part of the fabric of the economy.”

Goodenough is one of 26 chefs, most of them from New Orleans, urging Congress to put the brakes on any proposed rollbacks of federal laws that protect fish populations.

Their latest target is the “Modern Fish Act,” which is set for a vote Wednesday by the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.

Backers of S. 1520, sponsored by Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and formally known as the “Modernizing Recreational Fisheries Management Act of 2017,” say it would give sports anglers more access to federal waters.

While many recreational anglers cheered the Trump administration for extending the Gulf red snapper season by 39 days last year, they regarded the move as a temporary fix. They’ve touted the “Modern Fish Act” as a permanent solution and a much-needed way to bring more flexibility to fisheries management (Greenwire, Dec. 19, 2017).

Opponents, including the chefs, say the bill would weaken federal protections and result in more overfishing, damaging stocks in the long run.

Jeff Angers, president of the Center for Sportfishing Policy in Baton Rouge, La., said it is “utter folly to think that chefs are interested in conservation.”

“I know that it’s going to be of a lot of interest that some chefs want to pick a fight — ‘bless their hearts’ is what my mother taught me to say,” he said. “But I don’t think any responsible person in America looks to chefs who profit from these fishery resources to be guiding any discussion on conservation.”

Recreational fishermen have long complained that the nation’s premier fisheries law, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, has become too bureaucratic, fixated on quotas and catch limits.

Read the full story at E&E News

 

Zero Dollars for Marine Mammals?

February 27, 2018 — The future of marine mammals is at risk in U.S. waters. President Trump’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2019 would eliminate the Marine Mammal Commission. With an annual operating budget of $3.4 million, which comes to just over one penny per American per year, the Marine Mammal Commission has for 45 years been assiduously developing science and policy to protect seals, sea lions, dolphins, whales, dugongs and walruses. Through the 1972 Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), Congress charged the commission with providing independent oversight of marine mammal conservation policies and programs being carried out by federal regulatory agencies. Obviously, with a proposed budget of zero dollars, it would be impossible to execute the federally mandated objectives of fostering sustainable fisheries (through the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act [MSA]) and protecting endangered species (through the Endangered Species Act [ESA]).

Marine mammals are more than just lovable creatures. They are important components of productive marine and coastal ecosystems that overall generate $97 billion of the gross domestic product. Whales function as ecosystem engineers by cycling vital nutrients between deeper and surface waters in the oceans. Without this nutrient cycling, oceans would produce less plankton and phytoplankton, which would eventually mean less fish. Also, through complex food-web interactions, marine mammals help to regulate fish populations. For example, marine-mammal–eating killer whales (often called “transient” killer whales) will eat seals, a common predator of pelagic fish—enabling fish populations to stay high. This kind of interaction is called a trophic cascade and is very common in marine ecosystems.

Serving as an independent oversight body, the commission has the critical task of assessing the scientific validity and effectiveness of research conducted to meet the federal mandates of the MMPA, ESA and MSA. If we as a country can’t even protect the charismatic species, I worry for all the less adorable parts of nature. So we need to draw a line in the sand. In this era of “fake news,” maintaining this entity to guard against encroachments to science-based policymaking on is more valuable than ever.

Read the full story at the Scientific American

 

Seafood group wants next Magnuson-Stevens Act to do away with “overfishing”

February 16, 2018 — A consortium of groups with ties to the seafood industry is calling for the U.S. Congress to pass a Magnuson-Stevens Act reauthorization bill that gives the Regional Fishery Management Councils greater flexibility to achieve their objectives, but they also looking for federal officials to change how a couple of items are termed.

Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities is asking Congress to do away with the term “overfishing,” claiming it’s not accurate to base a stock’s condition on just its fishing mortality. In its place, the 24-member group wants to new MSA law to call fishstocks “depleted.” They made their recommendation in a letter to U.S. Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska).

“The term ‘overfished’ is perceived negatively and can unfairly implicate the industry for stock conditions resulting from other factors,” the group wrote.

Gib Brogan, a campaign manager with Oceana, said the effort behind depleted is an attempt by commercial fishing interests to escape a “negative perception and culpability for the state” of stocks.

“Modern fisheries science already accounts for the ‘other factors’ that may decrease the abundance of fish in the oceans,” Brogan said.  “When these ‘other factors’ have been accounted for in the underlying science, fishing remains as the source of mortality and it is entirely appropriate to keep the focus on fishing by using ‘overfished.’  If these other factors are not being appropriately considered, that should be resolved through the assessment for affected fish stocks, not a blanket change in terminology.”

Along with several other commercial fishing groups, the coalition is also calling for the new act to do away with the 10-year rebuilding requirement and giving the regional councils more flexibility in determining the timeframe needed to bolster stocks. The group also suggests moving from “possible” to “practicable” when it comes to those rebuilding periods.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

 

After turbulent 2017, states want to control snapper fishery

February 14, 2018 — A year after the Trump administration likely broke the law by allowing overfishing of red snapper, five Gulf of Mexico states now want special power to manage the species in federal waters in 2018 and 2019.

They’re likely to get their way, too.

Unlike last year, the new plan would not allow sports anglers in Florida, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama to exceed federal quotas, but the states would get the authority to call the shots in setting their own fishing seasons in federal waters.

Daryl Carpenter, the owner of Reel Screamers Guide Service in Grand Isle, La., and president of the Louisiana Charter Boat Association, can’t wait, saying the federal management system is broken and “has failed to come up with any type of fix.”

“It’s too dominated by non-interested groups, by your green groups who want to hug and cherish the fish,” he said. “You can get nothing done in the federal system. … I’m 100 percent in favor. The states need to take control of this and get the federal government out of our damn life.”

Critics say that ceding control to the states would be a mistake, arguing that federal officials long have led the way in rebuilding the red snapper population and remain the most qualified to do the job.

“The federal management process is the most open and transparent, no matter how frustrating,” said Shane Cantrell, executive director of the Charter Fisherman’s Association and the owner of Galveston Sea Ventures in Galveston, Texas.

All five states are pushing the idea as an experiment that would be allowed under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976, the nation’s premier fishing law.

They want NOAA Fisheries to give them “exempted fishing permits.” Those permits allow fishing that would normally be banned under federal law, usually as pilot projects done in the name of research.

“It allows us to exempt certain fishing activities from the regulations,” said Roy Crabtree, administrator for the NOAA Fisheries Southeast Region in St. Petersburg, Fla.

“How well will it work? Well, time will tell,” Crabtree said. “But I think a lot of people will argue that we’ve had some quota overruns in the past and we’ve had a lot of dissatisfied customers, so I think we do need to try something different.”

Many state officials say that NOAA is all but certain to sign off on the exempted fishing permits, after Alabama Republican Sen. Richard Shelby got Congress to include language in a fiscal 2017 appropriations bill that directed the agency to come up with a pilot program to give states more control.

After the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council voted on Feb. 1 to approve the plans, Alabama officials said they were one step closer to taking over management of the red snapper.

Read the full story at E&E News