Saving Seafood

NEW YORK: Thiele Acts for Fishermen ‘Under Siege’

April 7, 2017 — Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr. has introduced a package of legislation intended to aid the commercial fishing industry. Two of the three bills were introduced in the 2015-16 legislative session. One would direct the state attorney general to bring legal action against the National Marine Fisheries Service, or any other federal agency, to challenge existing quotas that the bill calls inequitable and discriminatory against New York State commercial fishermen. The bill is now in the Assembly’s environmental conservation committee.

A second bill, also introduced in the 2015-16 legislative session, adds a new element in its current form. It would establish a commercial fishing advocate and, in its new version, create a commercial fishing jobs development program under State Department of Economic Development jurisdiction. Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo vetoed the bill last year, Mr. Thiele said yesterday. “We’ve re-introduced it and made revisions that we hope will help encourage the governor to sign it,” he said.

Read the full story at The East Hampton Star

Looking Forward to Looking Back: Electronic Monitoring in New England Groundfish

April 7, 2017 — The following has been released by John Bullard, Regional Administrator for NOAA Fisheries Greater Atlantic Region:

Electronic monitoring (EM) is being used for catch monitoring and reporting compliance in fisheries worldwide, but use in the Northeast has been somewhat limited. There are always challenges with ensuring the accuracy of self-reported fisheries catch data, but EM represents a new suite of tools to improve reporting accuracy and increase catch monitoring. If we want to provide scientists with the best information possible and manage our fisheries sustainably, then we need to consider all of the tools in the toolbox.

Here in the Greater Atlantic Region’s groundfish fishery, fishermen are considering EM to replace human at-sea monitors. Naturally, people want to compare costs. This is understandable; the cost of at-sea monitors is significant and has been the subject of much discussion, particularly because a portion of the costs are now borne by the industry. However, comparing only the costs of EM and at-sea monitors, as the programs exist today, without any context to what the programs offer, is unfair, difficult, and a bit premature.

Comparing the costs of the two programs is unfair because EM and at-sea monitors offer such different results. Right now, the at-sea monitoring program covers 14 percent of all trips. With a large portion of the fishery going unobserved and recognizing that fishing behavior may be different on unobserved trips, we may be missing out on a lot of critical information. EM could gather data from all trips, which is a quantum leap in the amount of information available to scientists. This could result in better science and potentially lower uncertainty when setting quotas. So while at-sea monitoring is a cost, EM could be an investment.

Comparing the costs is difficult because this is a classic case of apples and oranges; certain components of EM, like purchasing hardware and video review, don’t exist in an at-sea monitoring program. The EM cost estimates in our 2015 report were very conservative at every step, and when totaled, were quite high. That was a government exercise in assessing costs, but industry may be able to do better. When the government shifted the costs of at-sea monitoring to the fishing industry, the private sector negotiated lower costs for the same services. Is anyone surprised by that? And just like any electronic technology, EM is getting smaller, faster, and cheaper in a hurry. It is very difficult to project a cost for technology that will likely go into widespread use in a couple of years.

That brings me to my final point. Cost comparisons are premature. We don’t know what EM models we might use in the future. We don’t know if we can get financial support for startup costs, such as hardware acquisition. We don’t know how much of the video will need to be reviewed; review may even be done by computers. We don’t know what the required at-sea monitoring coverage will be when EM is fully developed. There are too many critical unknowns right now in EM to compare costs in a meaningful way.

Read the full release here

Restaurateur accused of operating illegal seafood network

April 6, 2017 — A well-known Houston restaurateur has been accused of operating an illegal seafood network that allegedly funneled nearly 28,000 pounds of unlawfully-caught finfish through his restaurants.

Texas game wardens allege that Bruce Molzan, 59, bought and then sold the illegal finfish off the menus at Ruggles Green and Ruggles Black. Molzan hasn’t been associated with Ruggles Green since 2016 but still owns Ruggles Black.

In addition, another restaurant illegally sold shrimp to Molzan for use in his restaurants in violation of commercial fish wholesale regulations, according to investigators.

The illegal catches were made by a web of about a dozen unlicensed commercial fishermen and sold to the restaurants, according to Texas Parks & Wildlife investigators. Their catches consisted primarily of highly-regulated red snapper, along with other protected game fish species, including tuna, amberjack, grouper and red drum.

The investigation expanded significantly last April after U.S. Coast Guard crews stopped an unlicensed commercial fishing boat in coastal waters near Freeport with 488 red snapper weighing approximately 1,900 pounds. Texas game wardens and the National Marine Fisheries Service seized the fish, which were illegally caught in the Gulf of Mexico off Freeport and Galveston, and investigators were able to link the subjects with the illegal seafood operation.

“This is a big deal and exemplifies the critically important work our Texas game wardens do to protect the state’s natural resources,” said Col. Craig Hunter, TPWD law enforcement director. “Not only did these unscrupulous actors violate recreational fishing regulations at an extreme level for personal profit, but they also circumvented restrictions and rules governing the possession, safe handling and sale of commercial aquatic products intended for human consumption.”

Read the full story at WTSP

Molly Payne Wynne: Maine’s coastal communities depend on agencies Trump plans to gut

April 5, 2017 — Let me be open from the start — I’m a scientist, and I’m from away.

I spent my first summer in Maine navigating backroads along the coast, collecting fish, and water samples in ponds, rivers and estuaries for a study I was conducting. I’d get up with the sun and travel to various fishways for this work. I’d meet and talk with alewife harvesters, who would often treat me to a cooler full of alewife and blueback herring. I used these fish samples — and the harvesters’ anecdotes — in my research to shed light on where river herring live and grow, and how best to manage populations for the benefit of the fish and the people who depend on this valuable resource. Meeting these fishermen and studying the nearby fish habitats made the mutual dependence coastal communities have with the resources of Maine’s coastal rivers very clear.

As media reports continue to unveil the Trump administration’s proposals, it is also clear that our nation’s environment and natural resources programs are increasingly at risk. Coastal states such as Maine need to pay attention to proposed cuts to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The White House is proposing to slice its budget by 17 percent. Cuts to programs such as the National Marine Fisheries Service and National Weather Service would have far-reaching consequences for programs created to ensure healthy coastal environments and economies. In Maine, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is a significant contributor in the effort to save endangered Atlantic salmon in the last remaining rivers in the country in which they still spawn.

Read the full story at the Bangor Daily News

NOAA Fisheries Announces an Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Advisory Panel Meeting May 9-11, 2017

April 5, 2017 — The following was released by NOAA:

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) intends to hold a meeting of the Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Advisory Panel (AP) on May 9-11, 2017, at the Sheraton Silver Spring Hotel, 8777 Georgia Avenue, Silver Spring, MD 20910.  The AP meeting and webinar will be held from 10:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, May 9, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, May 10, and from 9:00 a.m. to 12 noon on Thursday, May 11.  A new member orientation session will be held from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, May 9. 

The meeting on Tuesday, May 9, Wednesday, May 10, and Thursday, May 11, 2017, will also be accessible via conference call and webinar.

Participants are strongly encouraged to log/dial in 15 minutes prior to the meeting.  NMFS will show the presentations via webinar and allow public comment during identified times on the agenda.  

The intent of this meeting is to consider alternatives for the conservation and management of all Atlantic tunas, swordfish, billfish, and shark fisheries.  We anticipate discussing Amendment 5b on dusky sharks; Draft Amendment 10 on Essential Fish Habitat; implementation of Final Amendment 7 on bluefin tuna management, including the upcoming three-year review; and progress updates on various other rulemakings, including individual bluefin quota transfer criteria effective dates, requests for regulatory changes received to date; domestic implementation of recommendations from the 2016 meeting of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas and issues for 2017; progress updates regarding the exempted fishing permit request to conduct research in pelagic longline closed areas and white shark research; and updates on shark stock assessments.  We also anticipate discussing recreational and commercial fishing topics in specific breakout group sessions, including a detailed discuss of permitting, reporting, and compliance with recreational and commercial vessel requirements in response to several requests.  Finally, we intend to invite other NMFS offices and the United States Coast Guard to provide updates on their activities relevant to HMS fisheries.

Additional information on the meeting and a copy of the draft agenda will be posted prior to the meeting at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/advisory_panels/hms_ap/meetings/ap_meetings.html.

This email notice is a courtesy to Atlantic HMS fisheries interests to keep you informed about the fisheries.  Official notice of Federal fishery actions is made through filing such notice with the Office of the Federal Register.  For further information related to Atlantic HMS Management, please call (301) 427-8503 or see the HMS web page at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/.  

NOAA Fisheries Announces the Final Rule for Amendment 5b to the 2006 Consolidated Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan

April 3, 2017 — The following was released by NOAA: 

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) announces the final rule to implement Amendment 5b to the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP).  Amendment 5b implements a range of management measures to prevent overfishing and rebuild overfished dusky sharks.  These measures are based on the 2016 dusky shark stock assessment update that determined dusky sharks are overfished and experiencing overfishing.  

Who is affected?

Amendment 5b could affect:

  • Any commercial fishermen with HMS permits.
  • Any recreational fishermen who catch sharks of any species.
  • Any dealers who buy or sell sharks or shark products.

What will it do?

The final rule, which will publish in the Federal Register on April 4, 2017, and related documents, including the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) may be found at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/.

The management measures implemented by this final rule (which were analyzed in the Amendment 5b FEIS) are listed in the table below.  Amendment 5b is designed to meet the objective of ending overfishing and rebuilding the dusky sharks, building on measures adopted in 2008 as a dusky shark rebuilding plan.  NMFS considered a full range of alternatives in the FEIS, which can be found in Chapter 2 of the FEIS.  After considering comments on the proposed rule and DEIS, NMFS is implementing final measures, as follows:  

  • NMFS has added and preferred Alternative A6d, which would require the use of non-offset, non-stainless steel circle hooks by all HMS permit holders with a shark endorsement when fishing for sharks recreationally south of 41° 43′ N latitude, except when fishing with flies or artificial lures. This alternative is preferred instead of Alternative 6a in the DEIS, which would have required the use of circle hooks by all HMS permit holders with a shark endorsement when fishing for sharks recreationally, defined as when deploying natural bait while using a wire or heavy (200 lb test or greater) monofilament or fluorocarbon leader;
  • Preferred Alternative B3 has been modified based on public comment to recognize safety concerns, specifying that fishermen with an Atlantic shark limited access permit with pelagic longline gear onboard must release all sharks not being retained using a dehooker or cutting the gangion less than three feet from the hook as safely as practicable.

NMFS Sets 16 Percent Observer Coverage Level for NE Groundfish Sector for 2017

March 20, 2017 — SEAFOOD NEWS — The National Marine Fisheries Service announced a 16 percent at-sea monitoring coverage level target for groundfish sector trips in the Northeast for 2017.

This target coverage level is a 2 percentage point increase from the 2016 coverage level (14 percent). The target coverage level is set based on an average of at-sea monitoring data from the past 3 full groundfish fishing years, so the 2017 level is set based on data from the 2013-2015 years.

Federally funded observer coverage provided by the Northeast Fishery Observer Program to meet the Standardized Bycatch Reporting Methodology requirements will partially satisfy the 16 percent coverage requirement. Sectors will actually pay for at-sea monitoring coverage on less than 16 percent of their groundfish trips, but the total will depend on the SBRM coverage rates. The SBRM coverage rates have not been published yet.

NMFS said the agency expects to be able to reimburse sectors for some portion of their monitoring costs but doesn’t have the information it needs to determine the reimbursement rate. The agency was able to reimburse 85 percent of at-sea monitoring costs in 2016, but expects the 2017 reimbursement rate to be lower.

Certain sector groundfish trips, those using gillnets with 10-inch or greater mesh in Southern New England and Inshore Georges Bank, are also excluded from the ASM requirement due to their low catch of groundfish species. This further reduces the portion of sector trips subject to industry-funded monitoring and better focuses monitoring resources, the agency said in a press release.

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

Trump’s budget cuts rattle nerves in Alaska

March 17, 2017 — Massive cuts could be in store for the agencies and people who provide the science and stewardship to preserve and protect our planet.

The budget proposed by President Donald Trump that starts in October puts on the chopping block the agencies and staff in charge of fisheries research and management, weather forecasting, satellite data tracking and the U.S. Coast Guard.

Trump called the cuts a tradeoff to “prioritize rebuilding the military” and to help fund the border wall with Mexico.

The Washington Post broke down a White House memo to the Office of Management and Budget last week that showed the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration would lose 26 percent of its budget; its satellite data division would lose 22 percent of its current funding.

The National Marine Fisheries Service and the National Weather Service would each face a 5 percent cut.

Read the full story at the Alaska Journal

Portland Press Herald: NOAA budget cuts would have high cost for Maine

March 10, 2017 — Though funding for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration amounts to less than one-half of 1 percent of discretionary federal spending, it pays outsize dividends for Maine. The people at the center of our state’s $700 million commercial fishing industry depend on NOAA’s weather forecasts, research and fisheries management services. A proposal to slash the agency’s budget is a short-sighted move that would save pennies now only to forfeit dollars later.

The White House plan, first reported last week in The Washington Post, would roll back NOAA’s budget by 17 percent. Among the targeted programs are the National Marine Fisheries Service and National Weather Service, which each would see 5 percent cuts; the satellite division, which would face a 22 percent reduction in funding, and the Sea Grant program, which would be abolished.

None of this is good news for Maine’s marine sector. National Weather Service wind and wave height forecasts are essential to fishermen. So is the research conducted by the National Marine Fisheries Service, which guides decisions about where, how and when to fish and enables fishermen to build business plans around their catch. What’s more, the steep reductions in the satellite division’s budget would deprive the weather and fisheries management offices of data that are crucial to their mission, compounding the harm done by the relatively small direct cuts to the programs themselves.

Read the full opinion piece at the Portland Press Herald

NOAA cuts proposed by Trump could cut jobs in South Mississippi

March 7, 2017 — The agency whose satellite photographs alert Coast residents of approaching hurricanes could see deep budget cuts, putting jobs and programs in South Mississippi in jeopardy.

The Washington Post reports it obtained a four-page budget memo which shows the Trump administration is seeking to cut the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration budget by 17 percent.

Even deeper cuts are proposed for fiscal year 2018, which starts Oct. 1, for NOAA’s Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research. It would lose $126 million, or 26 percent of its funds under the current budget. NOAA’s satellite data division would lose $513 million, or 22 percent, the report says.

These programs have staff working at Stennis Space Center in Hancock County, along with the National Marine Fisheries Service and the National Weather Service, which both face 5 percent cuts.

The National Data Buoy Center, headquartered at Stennis under the National Weather Service, maintains a network of buoys that serve all U.S. coastal states and territories. They are used by the weather service supercomputers to produce computer-generated model forecasts of the atmosphere and climate used by recreational boaters, commercial interests and the U.S. military. The NDBC also is responsible for tsunami stations around the world.

NOAA has been at Stennis since the early 1970s and employs more than 250 federal employees and contractors, according to the NOAA website.

These early numbers frequently change during budget negotiations between the federal agency and the White House, and later between Congress and the administration, the article says. The budget figures cited by the Washington Post are part of the Office of Management and Budget’s “passback” document, and are a key part of the annual budget process during which the administration instructs agencies to draw up detailed budgets for submission to Congress.

NOAA representatives at Stennis declined comment on the budget report.

Many of these cuts are for agencies that study climate change. The budget proposal would eliminate the $73 million Sea Grant program that supports coastal research through 33 university programs, among them the University of Southern Mississippi, Mississippi State, Jackson State and University of Mississippi.

Read the full story at The Sun Herald