Saving Seafood

Predators may be less affected by catch of small fish than previously thought, new study says

April 3, 2017 — WASHINGTON — The following was released by the National Coalition for Fishing Communities and IFFO: 

New research published today in the journal Fisheries Research finds that fishing of forage species likely has a lower impact on predators than previously thought, challenging previous studies that argued forage fish are more valuable left in the ocean.

A team of seven respected fisheries scientists, led by Prof. Ray Hilborn, Ph.D., of the University of Washington, found that predator populations are less dependent on specific forage fish species than assumed in previous studies, most prominently in a 2012 study commissioned by the Lenfest Ocean Program, which is managed by The Pew Charitable Trusts. The Lenfest Forage Fish Task Force argued that forage fish are twice as valuable when left in the water to be eaten by predators, and recommended slashing forage fish catch rates by 50 to 80 percent.

 For fisheries management, such a precautionary approach would have a large impact on the productivity of forage fisheries. As groups such as IFFO (The Marine Ingredients Organisation) have noted, these stocks contribute strongly to global food security, as well as local and regional social and economic sustainability.

 However, the new research found multiple omissions in the methodology of the Lenfest study. “When you review the actual models that were used [by Lenfest], there are a few key elements on the biology of these animals that were not represented,” said Dr. Ricardo Amoroso, one of the study’s co-authors. He added that one of the authors’ approaches was to “look for empirical evidence of what is actually happening in the field.” Previous studies relied on models which took for granted that there should be a strong link between predators and prey.

 Specifically, the Lenfest study and another study using ecosystem models ignored the natural variability of forage fish, which often fluctuate greatly in abundance from year to year. It also failed to account for the fact that predators tend to eat smaller forage fish that are largely untouched by fishermen. Because of these oversights, the new study concluded that the Lenfest recommendations were overly broad, and that fisheries managers should consider forage species on a case-by-case basis to ensure sound management.

 “It is vital that we manage our fisheries to balance the needs of the ecosystem, human nutrition and coastal communities,” said Andrew Mallison, IFFO Director General. “These findings give fishery managers guidance based on science, and update some of the inaccurate conclusions of previous reports.”

 The Lenfest findings were largely based on a model called EcoSim, developed by Dr. Carl J. Walters, one of the co-authors of the new paper. Dr. Walters found that the EcoSim models used in earlier studies had omitted important factors, including natural variability, recruitment limitations and efficient foraging of predators.

Dr. Walters noted that there were “very specific” issues with previous uses of the EcoSim model. “It was predicting much higher sensitivity of creatures at the top of the food webs to fishing down at the bottom than we could see in historical data,” he said.

This is not the first time ecosystem models used in earlier studies have been questioned. One year after the Lenfest study was completed, two of its authors, Dr. Tim Essington and Dr. Éva Plagányi, published a paper in the ICES Journal of Marine Science where they said, “We find that the depth and breadth with which predator species are represented are commonly insufficient for evaluating sensitivities of predator populations to forage fish depletion.” The new study reaffirmed this finding, noting “several reasons to concur with the conclusion that the models used in previous analysis were insufficient.”

In addition to its critiques of previous research, the researchers found further evidence of the lack of fishing impact on forage fish. Their research indicated that environmental factors are often much more important drivers of forage fish abundance. They also found that the distribution of forage fish has a greater impact on predators than simply the raw abundance of forage fish. 

The authors concluded by noting the importance of forage fish as a part of human food supply chains, praising their high nutritional value, both through direct human consumption and as food in aquaculture, as well as the low environmental impact of forage fishing. Cutting forage fishing, as recommended by the Lenfest group, would force people to look elsewhere for the healthy protein and micronutrients provided by forage fish – likely at much greater environmental cost, the authors wrote.

“Forage fish provide some of the lowest environmental cost food in the world – low carbon footprint, no water use,” Dr. Hilborn said. “[There are] lots of reasons that forage fish are a really environmentally friendly form of food.”

It is also well-established that forage fisheries provide substantial health benefits to human populations through the supply of long chain omega-3 fatty acids, both directly through consumption in the form of fish oil capsules, and indirectly through animal feed for farmed fish and land animals. 

The paper was authored by Dr. Ray Hilborn, Dr. Ricardo O. Amoroso, and Dr. Eugenia Bogazzi from the University of Washington; Dr. Olaf P. Jensen from Rutgers University; Dr. Ana M. Parma from Center for the Study of Marine Systems -CONICET, Argentina; Dr. Cody Szuwalski from the University of California Santa Barbara; and Dr. Carl J. Walters from the University of British Columbia.

Read the full study here

Watch a video about the study here

Read an infographic about the study here

About the NCFC

The National Coalition for Fishing Communities provides a national voice and a consistent, reliable presence for fisheries in the nation’s capital and in national media. Comprised of fishing organizations, associations, and businesses from around the country, the NCFC helps ensure sound fisheries policies by integrating community needs with conservation values, leading with the best science, and connecting coalition members to issues and events of importance. For more, visit www.fisheriescoalition.org.

About IFFO

IFFO represents the marine ingredients industry worldwide. IFFO’s members reside in more than 50 countries, account for over 50% of world production and 75% of the fishmeal and fish oil traded worldwide. Approximately 5 million tonnes of fishmeal are produced each year globally, together with 1 million tonnes of fish oil. IFFO’s headquarters are located in London in the United Kingdom and it also has offices in Lima, Peru, and in Beijing, China. IFFO is an accredited Observer to the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO). To find out more, visit www.iffo.net.

PRESS CONTACT

Robert Vanasse

National Coalition for Fishing Communities

Washington

+1 (202) 333-2628

bob@savingseafood.org

Georgie Harris

IFFO, The Marine Ingredients Organisation

London

+44 (0) 2030 539 195

gharris@iffo.net

Fishermen Nationwide Sign Letter of Support for Commerce Secretary’s Fishery Goals

WASHINGTON — March 22, 2017 – The following was released by the National Coalition for Fishing Communities:

Earlier this month, shortly after being confirmed as Secretary of Commerce, Wilbur Ross addressed Commerce Department staff and outlined his priorities for the Department. Among the top priorities listed was “obtaining maximum sustainable yield for our fisheries.” 

The Secretary had previously expressed his desire to boost domestic seafood production prior to his confirmation. In a February story featured in Politico, Secretary Ross is quoted as emphasizing the need to “figure out how we can become more self-sufficient in fishing and perhaps even an net exporter.”

In response to Secretary Ross’ early interest in working with U.S. fisheries, the National Coalition for Fishing Communities (NCFC) organized a letter of support for the Secretary’s goals. The letter was signed by over 350 members of the fishing industry from across the country. The NCFC would like to thank Commerce Secretary Ross for pledging to support the nation’s fishing communities.

The full text of the letter is below:

Dear Secretary Ross,

As members of our nation’s fishing communities, we want to express our gratitude for making the attainment of maximum sustainable yield in our fisheries a priority for the Commerce Department. We are also most appreciative of your publicly stated goal to increase domestic seafood production, which is a priority of Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities.

It is most encouraging that we have a Secretary of Commerce who understands the importance of sustainably harvested seafood. As you know, the U.S. fishing industry is a multi-billion dollar industry, and is a vital economic engine for our coastal communities. The industry is ready and willing to work with you and your department to achieve the goals you have set forth for American fisheries, and we want to build a successful relationship between the Commerce Department and commercial fishermen. 

We know it is within our means to sustainably increase harvests and achieve maximum sustainable yield. A vibrant fishing industry will pay dividends not only to the coastal communities, but also to the millions of consumers who rely on the nutritional benefits of domestic sustainable seafood.

Read the letter here

New Bedford Mayor Jon Mitchell Voices Coalition Concern Over Marine Monuments at House Hearing

WASHINGTON – March 15, 2017 – The following was released by the National Coalition for Fishing Communities:

Today, New Bedford, Mass. Mayor Jon Mitchell delivered written testimony to the House Natural Resources Committee on behalf of Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities. His testimony expressed serious concerns about the impacts of marine monuments, designated using executive authority under the Antiquities Act, on fishermen and coastal communities.

Mayor Mitchell had planned to testify in person before the Subcommittee on Water, Power, and Oceans as a representative of the NCFC, but was unable to attend the hearing in Washington due to snow and severe weather conditions in the Northeast.

In his testimony, Mayor Mitchell questioned both the “poorly conceived terms of particular monument designations,” as well as “more fundamental concerns with the process itself.” Mayor Mitchell also delivered a letter to the committee signed by eleven NCFC member organizations further detailing their concerns with the monument process and how fishing communities across the country are affected by monument designations.

The letter was signed by the Atlantic Offshore Lobstermen’s Association, the California Wetfish Producers Association, the Fisheries Survival Fund, the Garden State Seafood Association, the Hawaii Longline Association, the Long Island Commercial Fishing Association, the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition, the North Carolina Fisheries Association, the Southeastern Fisheries Association, the West Coast Seafood Processors Association, and the Western Fishboat Owners Association.

In addition, three NCFC member organizations, the Atlantic Offshore Lobstermen’s Association, the Hawaii Longline Association, and the North Carolina Fisheries Association submitted individual letters outlining in further detail their opposition to marine monuments.

Mayor Mitchell was also critical of the monument designation process, by which a president can close off any federal lands or waters on a permanent basis using executive authority under the Antiquities Act. He instead praised the Fishery Management Council process created by the Magnuson-Stevens Act, which he said affords greater opportunities for input from stakeholders, scientists, and the public.

“The monument designation process has evolved effectively into a parallel, much less robust fishery management apparatus that has been conducted entirely independent of the tried and true Fishery Management Council process,” Mayor Mitchell said. “It lacks sufficient amounts of all the ingredients that good policy-making requires: Scientific rigor, direct industry input, transparency, and a deliberate pace that allows adequate time and space for review.”

Mayor Mitchell used his testimony to call attention to issues affecting fishing communities across the country, including New England fishermen harmed by the recently designated Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument, and Hawaii fishermen harmed by the expansion of the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument. He also expressed the concerns of fishermen in Mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Pacific waters in dealing with the monument process.

Mayor Mitchell concluded by calling on Congress to integrate the executive branch’s monument authority with the established processes of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, ensuring that the long-term interests of all stakeholders are accounted for.

“This Congress has an important opportunity to restore the centrality of Magnuson’s Fishery Management Councils to their rightful place as the critical arbiters of fisheries management matters,” Mayor Mitchell said. “Doing so would give fishing communities much more confidence in the way our nation approaches fisheries management. And it could give the marine monument designation process the credibility and acceptance that it regrettably lacks today.”

The mayor spoke at the hearing on behalf of the NCFC. The city of New Bedford, as Mayor Mitchell stated in his testimony, was instrumental in the founding of the Coalition, providing an initial seed grant for its creation.

Read Mayor Mitchell’s full testimony here

Read the NCFC letter here

Read the Atlantic Offshore Lobstermen’s Association letter here

Read the Hawaii Longline Association letter here

Read the North Carolina Fisheries Association letter here

Could Trump undo New England national monuments?

November 14, 2016 — Opponents of new national monuments in Maine’s North Woods and off coastal New England are asking whether Donald Trump could reverse those decisions as part of his campaign pledge to overturn President Obama’s executive orders.

Although preliminary, the discussions illustrate how Trump’s election is already affecting debate on conservation and environmental issues.

President-elect Trump vowed repeatedly during his campaign to repeal the Obama policies he viewed as executive overreach. Trump often made those comments in relation to issues such as immigration, foreign policy or environmental regulation.

Fishermen opposed to Obama’s designation of nearly 5,000 square miles of underwater ecosystem off the coast of southern New England – known as the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument – also are exploring their options, whether through Trump or the Republican-controlled Congress.

“In the immediate aftermath of Donald Trump’s election, I would say there is a lot of talk about what can be done,” said Robert Vanasse, executive director of the National Coalition for Fishing Communities, which represents fishing organizations and businesses. Vanasse classified the discussions as “informal conversations,” but added: “Clearly the companies and fishermen that have been economically damaged by the actions of the Obama administration are thinking about what in this new (political) environment – president, House and Senate – might be possible.”

Obama designated Northeast Canyons and Seamounts National Monument on Sept. 15, protecting an underwater mountain range that is home to many rare and endangered species.

Read the full story at the Portland Press Herald

Obama’s Marine Monument Could Spell Disaster for New England Fishermen

September 19th, 2016 — America is well-known for its glorious and plentiful national parks, and at a conference taking place in Washington, DC this week, President Obama made the dramatic declaration that he was signing an executive order to create the very first national marine monument in the Atlantic Ocean. The almost-5,000-square-mile area—called the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument—lies off of Cape Cod, Massachusetts and has been dubbed an “underwater Yellowstone.”

But although conservationists are hailing the president’s move as “phenomenally exciting,” fishermen in the area are not so psyched. To say the least. They’re accusing Obama of legislating from the White House—a power, the lobstermen and crab fishers of Massachusetts say, he simply doesn’t have. There’s also the very real concern among the community that the administration is selling out hundreds and hundreds of sustainable fishermen in favor of environmental grandstanding that ignores the real culprits.

The area in question is a phenomenal expanse of extinct volcanoes, underwater forests, canyons, and reefs filled with endangered and exotic species. But it is also a place that has provided a livelihood for generation after generation of fishermen, especially those focused on red crab and lobster. If all goes according to plan, the area will be off limits to them in seven years and the good times will be over.

MUNCHIES spoke with Bob Vanasse of the National Coalition for Fishing Communities, who said about the designation, “I don’t know anybody in the fishing community who is in favor of it.” Vanasse said that the local fishermen believe their point of view was wholly ignored before the order was enacted. He believes that by creating the monument in an executive order, President Obama sidestepped the process of running the idea through Congress, which would have entailed a “consultative process where environmentalists, the industry, and regulators are involved and what comes out is reviewed by an agency for a year or more before it gets published in the Federal Register. This executive order is a short circuit around all of that—and that’s the reason it’s frustrating.”

Read the full story from VICE 

Majority of US Seafood Producers Call to Stop Undermining Magnuson with End Run for Marine Monuments

September 13, 2016 — WASHINGTON — SEAFOOD NEWS — The US has one of the most highly successful systems for managing living marine resources in the world.  Under the Magnuson Act, stakeholders come together to determine fisheries management policy, guided by the best available science.  The result has been a huge rebuilding of US fish stocks, and the protection of essential habitat.  Many tradeoffs have been made to create closed areas, and to preserve fishing rights where coastal conditions support them.

The keys to this success are first, the decision process is completely open and transparent.  Every argument and decision is made in open forums, and according to the best available science.  This limits the ability to use fisheries resources to score political points.

Both Canada and Europe’s fisheries suffered greatly as governments for years abused their authority by trading fishing privileges for other political favors; with the result that these stocks have been significantly overfished. Only in the last few years has this process begun to be reversed.

Use of the Antiquities Act to create marine monuments, although legal, makes an end run around both state and federal management systems, and in short trades monument designations, made without public review,  for political gain.

Today, in advance of the “Our Oceans” conference being held later this week at the State Department, the National Coalition for Fishing Communities (NCFC) delivered a letter to the White House calling on the President to refrain from designating new marine monuments under the Antiquities Act. Copies of the letter were also delivered to the offices of Senators representing the states of the signers. (Letter)

The letter has over 900 fishing industry signers and is supported by 35 fishing organizations that together represent a significant majority of domestic seafood producers.  It urges the President to conserve marine resources through the federal fisheries management process established by the bipartisan Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Management Act (MSA).

“The federal fisheries management process is among the most effective systems for managing living marine resources in the world,” the letter states. “The misuse of the Antiquities Act to create a marine monument is a repudiation of the past and ongoing efforts of almost everyone involved to continue to make Magnuson-Stevens management even more effective.”

The NCFC members join an ever-growing list of fishing organizations and individuals opposing new ocean monuments via use of the Antiquities Act. The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, the Council Coordination Committee, and over two dozen individual fish and seafood industry trade organizations have previously written to the White House asking for the MSA continue to guide fisheries management.

Mayors from major East and West coast ports have previously expressed their concerns with monument designations in letters to the White House. NCFC members have also spoke out in opposition to designating a monument off the coast of New England, which would hurt the valuable red crab, swordfish, tuna, and offshore lobster fisheries.

This story originally appeared on Seafoodnews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.