Saving Seafood

Groundfishermen: ‘It feels like we’re just forgotten’

October 16, 2017 — HAMPTON, New Hampshire — New Hampshire fishermen say temporary federal aid for at-sea monitor coverage is barely holding their industry afloat now that a court battle over the cost appears to have ended.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is currently covering 60 percent of the cost for third-party at-sea monitors to observe commercial groundfishermen’s compliance with federal regulations. That coverage is projected to end May 1, 2018, when fishermen will be expected to cover the entire cost, according to NOAA spokeswoman Allison Ferreira. Groundfish include New England seafood staples like cod and haddock.

Hampton fisherman David Goethel said he would probably sell his boat and stop fishing if NOAA stops funding its portion of the cost. He and other fishermen filed a federal suit arguing it was unfair for fishermen to pay for monitors required by NOAA. Judges at the district and circuit court levels ruled the fishermen filed the suit too late to be considered on its merits, and the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition to have the case heard this month.

Read the full story at Fosters’s Daily Democrat

New England senators say Congress should save Sea Grant program

September 18, 2017 — PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — Maine’s U.S. senators are signing on to a request to keep the National Sea Grant College Program funded at least at its current level.

President Donald Trump has proposed to eliminate the program, which funds science that’s beneficial to commercial fisheries, conservation and coastal businesses. It has existed for about a half century.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at NH1

 

JOHN BULLARD: Houston should inspire us to keep shooting for the moon

September 8, 2017 — Think back to those times when we could do big things. When nothing was outside our grasp. When that young president asked us to do something for our country. When he inspired us with science. When science was a wonderful thing that brought the moon within reach.

Boy, could we use a president like that now. One not concerned about crowd size, but with the empathy to see and respond to the apprehensive and anxious victims in the crowd. One who understands the science behind the large storms and floods that now threaten our nation, and with the vision to be on the forefront of a new worldwide green economy rooted in science. One who can inspire us with a future of hope and aspiration.

There is an opportunity right now, in the teeth of the storm, for real leadership to do and inspire us to do great things.

Leaders can call the American people to do great things, but they have to ask. They have to describe the challenge and why it is important. They have to inspire confidence that, to borrow from FDR, “We will gain the inevitable victory.” And, importantly, they have to ask for our personal participation. Yes, you have to join in. You have to be in the arena helping out, just as so many of the people of Texas are doing right now. You have to be willing to work for it. As JFK said, “because it is hard.” No guts, no glory.

We celebrated science and technology when they were used to predict the eclipse. We love science and technology when they cure disease. We are grateful to science and technology when they are used by NOAA to forecast the path Harvey or Irma will take and how much rain will fall. Why, when scientists predict what will happen with climate change, does everyone get all political and talk about their “beliefs”? It’s not about what you believe. It’s natural laws. Like gravity. Nature doesn’t care what any of us “believes.” Nature just works. If we keep putting more CO2 in the atmosphere, we can expect more Houstons.

Our hearts go out to the people of Texas, and now those in the path of Irma. In the state of Texas, which produces more wind energy than the next three states combined, does it really have to be that way? Or, with real leadership from the top, could the American people show us once again that we can “make this effort, to solve these mysteries, to solve them for the good of all men”?

Read the full opinion piece at the Boston Globe

 

Something fishy in the quotas?

September 8, 2017 — There hasn’t been a large enough quota for fishermen to intentionally catch cod for four years, said Vito Giacalone, policy director for the Gloucester-based Northeast Seafood Coalition, which contends the federal limits on groundfish such as cod and flounder contradict what commercial fishermen are finding. The coalition has launched an effort to have input into the research done by the federal government as it sets the regulations.

“We’ve been seeing it for the past two decades, but more so in the past seven or eight years, especially on the [flounder and cod],” Giacalone said. “What we’ve seen in the last seven or eight years is that you can catch any fish you want at any time. That’s how available it is. So, we’re certain that the government estimates are wrong.”

Giacalone noted that scientists have a huge area to cover, and variables such as fish behavior — sometimes swimming near the top, sometimes the bottom, or abandoning certain geographic areas that are still included in the surveys — can influence the results.

The management plans are written by the New England Fishery Management Council in Newburyport, with input from several sources, including stock assessments from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Northeast Fisheries Science Center in Woods Hole. The assessments include surveys and catch and discard numbers from the commercial fishing industry, said Teri Frady, spokeswoman for the center.

The Northeast Seafood Coalition wants to play a bigger role by providing more information from the field. To do so, it is fund-raising to hire independent scientists to develop a method of collecting information that could be shared with government officials to develop more accurate assessments of species numbers.

“What [the regulators] should be doing is using the industry’s data to come up with a relative abundance index,” Giacalone said. “We realize it’s difficult because it has to be standardized, [and] it has to be unbiased. But until they admit that they could be getting it wrong, by a lot, they’re never going to put that work in. What the coalition is trying to do is shine a light on that.”

Frady said the NOAA center in Woods Hole is interested in any input.

Read the full story at the Boston Globe

 

RHODE ISLAND: Fisherman and scientists collaborate during voyage

September 8, 2017 — NARRAGANSETT – Last week, the fishing vessel Karen Elizabeth docked home in Point Judith following a 10-day voyage that involved the study of flat fish populations and the methods used to catch various species. Formulated by the Northeast Trawl Advisory Panel, a group made up of fishing industry professionals, government bodies and various fishing councils, the research was examining the number of summer flounder, winter flounder and red hake off the coast of New England. The resulting data will go on to better inform catch and population estimates of each species and came about due to the collaboration of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the local fishing industry.

On the NOAA side, John Manderson, a senior fisheries research biologist with specialties in field ecology, habitat ecology, fisheries ecosystem science and collaborative research working out of the organization’s Northeast Fisheries Science Center in New Jersey, served as the chief scientist on the project. Chris Roebuck, operator of the Karen Elizabeth, was representing the fishing industry. The crew onboard the vessel totaled 10 members – five researchers and five fishing professionals.

The goal of the study was to develop a quantitative understanding of two different modes of ocean-floor species surveying – one approved by the federal government and one designed by the fishing community for maximum efficacy.  For this experiment, the third leg of the overall project, researchers were examining the catch rates of summer flounder, winter flounder and red hake. Previous and similar research conducted in 2015 was examining yellow-tail flounder and grey sole.

“My specialty has become collaborative research with the fishing industry,” said Manderson. “The reason for that is that at the scale of the ecosystem, experts in the fishing industry have much greater access to the ecosystem and as a result they have much better intuitions about what is going on in the ecosystem in real time, including changes in habitat occurring as a result of changes in climate, than we do. “

The fishing vessel Karen Elizabeth is a twin trawler equipped with two nets as close together as possible which can then be towed simultaneously at approximately the same speeds and for the same duration. These assets lend the boat well to research-based projects that involve comparing different survey methods literally side-by-side.

Read the full story at the Narragansett Times

 

Conservation Law Foundation submits victim impact statement in Carlos Rafael case

September 7, 2017 — NEW BEDFORD — Within the past 10 days, the Conservation Law Foundation sent three letters to various individuals involved — either directly or indirectly — with the Carlos Rafael case.

The foundation doesn’t represent any party directly, but its goal is to “use the law, science and the market to create solutions that preserve our natural resources, build healthy communities, and sustain a vibrant economy,” according to its website.

CLF sees Rafael’s guilty plea in March to illegal fishing as infringing on its principles.

“Discovering there’s been someone who has been systematically trying to undercut management, from our perspective not only harms the fisheries but also the work we’ve done,” senior counsel for CLF Peter Shelley said.

Shelley drafted all three letters. The first, he sent Aug. 29 to the New England Fishery Management Council’s Chair John Quinn and Executive Director Thomas Nies.

The second was addressed to NOAA’s John Bullard, the regional administrator, and Joe Heckwolf, an enforcement attorney, was sent Sept. 1.

The final letter, dated Sept. 6, was addressed to Judge William Young, who presided over Rafael’s plea agreement and will sentence the New Bedford fishing giant on Sept. 25 and 26.

Read the full story at the New Bedford Standard-Times

 

JOHN BULLARD: Set facts straight on scallop recovery

September 7, 2017 — Don Cuddy continues to peddle a simplistic, incorrect and unfair fable about the rebuilding of the scallop stocks that places all credit for the turnaround on the shoulders of Dr. Kevin Stokesbury (“Stokesbury’s science continues to yield scallops for SouthCoast,” Sept. 3).

Mr. Cuddy says that Dr. Stokesbury’s camera work caused Secretary Daley to open up the scallop grounds, causing New Bedford to be the top dollar port ever since. First of all, it was the New England Fishery Management Council that closed the grounds to scalloping in 1994, which allowed the scallops to grow from 40 count to U10′s by 1998 and to spawn several times before being harvested. They certainly deserve some credit for making that courageous decision.

Read the full letter at the New Bedford Standard-Times

 

Maine center to study impact of climate change on cod, sole

September 6, 2017 — PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — The federal government is giving a Maine science center more than $1 million to investigate the impacts of climate change on important commercial fish species such as cod and sole.

Gulf of Maine Research Institute says it’s getting $1.1 million from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The Portland-based center says researchers will also try to learn more about how fisheries management can be improved in the era of climate change.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at the Gloucester Times

 

Sen Sullivan to NOAA: ‘Meaningful Changes’ Needed for Marine Sanctuaries and Monuments

September 6, 2017 (Saving Seafood) — In a letter last month to NOAA Acting Administrator Benjamin Friedman, Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK) called for “meaningful changes” to marine sanctuary and marine national monument designations, particularly in the form of greater stakeholder engagement.

In his letter, Sen. Sullivan, who serves as Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard, called the concept of marine sanctuaries and monuments “well-intentioned” but wrote that they had caused challenges for coastal communities across the country, including Alaska’s “robust commercial fishing industry.”

“Fisheries restrictions imposed outside of the process utilized by Regional Fishery Management Councils on these areas are problematic for the communities who rely on access to commercial fisheries,” Sen. Sullivan wrote.

Sen. Sullivan expressed concern that the National Marine Sanctuary Act, while requiring stakeholder engagement, does not require that this engagement be taken into consideration when designating a sanctuary. “This can lead to communities feeling betrayed by the agency when the established sanctuaries are unrecognizable to the localities who spent years working with NOAA to form a mutually beneficial designation and management structure,” he wrote.

Sen. Sullivan also called into question the process by which the president can unilaterally establish national monuments with no stakeholder consultation under the Antiquities Act. He criticized recent presidents for using the national monument process as a “political tool” to “limit access to economically viable resources.”

“This action is often taken at the request of non-affected parties such as environmental groups,” he wrote. “This is problematic when monuments are established without the use of best-available science, absent stakeholder engagement, and inattentive to the economic consequences for local communities.”

On August 24, Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke completed a review of national monuments ordered by President Donald Trump. While Secretary Zinke’s full recommendations have not been made public, the AP reported that they include changes to a “handful” of monuments.

Read the full letter here

 

MASSACHUSETTS: Marbleheader cleared in alleged fish smuggling plot

August 15, 2017 –A Marblehead businessman is asking the federal government to pay his attorney’s fees after being cleared of what he described as “being framed” by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Robert Kliss and his company North Atlantic Traders Ltd. was indicted in April, after a nearly five-year investigation. He was charged with smuggling, falsifying records and conspiracy.

In July, it took a jury only about an hour to clear him of all charges.

“This is a case the government never should have brought,” said Kliss’s Attorney Barry Pollack.

“I would have to say it was probably the most stressful thing I’ve very gone through,” Kliss said. “More so than an IRS audit and I’ve been through three.”

The Motion

In his motion for an award of attorney’s fees, which was filed in U.S. District Court Aug. 9, Pollack lays out all the ways the government’s case went wrong, including pressuring witnesses to, in some cases, exaggerate testimony and in one case invoke the Fifth Amendment.

Three cooperating witnesses pled guilty to a misdemeanor, “as the result of a hybrid charge and fact bargaining,” Pollack stated in his motion. “The government paid substantial consideration, in that respect, to each witness while pressuring him to provide testimony against Kliss.”

One of the most damning pieces of evidence against the government’s case however was when Agent Shawn Eusebio testified that during the more than four-year active investigation, no one on the government’s team realized Kliss wasn’t even in the country during the time he was alleged to have created and filed false documents in Massachusetts. Kliss had been in British Columbia with his son.

“My evidence was my stamped passport along with my son’s,” Kliss said. “That’s how bad the investigators and (prosecuting) attorneys are.”

Read the full story at the Marblehead Reporter

Read a statement from Stephen Ouellette, an attorney for North Atlantic Traders, here