Saving Seafood

Agency gave bad data to senator trying to stop shark finning

October 27, 2017 — A federal agency said on Thursday that it made a mistake with a key piece of data it gave to U.S. Sen. Cory Booker as he was building a case to shut down America’s shark fin trade.

Booker, a New Jersey Democrat, has cited more than 500 incidents involving complaints of shark finning in the U.S., dating back to January 2010, as cause to support shutting down the trade. But the number is actually 85.

Booker reached out to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration months ago to find out how often it investigates allegations of shark finning, an illegal practice in which a shark’s fins are removed and the shark is dumped back into the water, sometimes while it’s still alive.

An NOAA worker’s error involving a new case management system caused the mistake in the number of finning incident reports, said Casey Brennan, chief of staff for the NOAA’s Office of Law Enforcement. He said the number of reports that led to charges was 26.

Saving Seafood, a fishing industry trade group, asked the NOAA to clarify the figures about shark finning incidents after seeing conflicting data on the agency’s website.

“Shark finning is a reprehensible activity that has been outlawed in the U.S. and is opposed by participants in the sustainable U.S. shark fishery,” said Robert Vanasse, executive director of the group. “Members of our coalition do not believe there is any need for Booker’s bill.”

Read the full story from the Associated Press at the Washington Post

ASMFC Horseshoe Crab Board Sets 2018 Specifications for Horseshoe Crabs of Delaware Bay Origin

October 19, 2017 — NORFOLK, Va. — The following was released by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission:

The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission’s Horseshoe Crab Management Board approved the harvest specifications for horseshoe crabs of Delaware Bay origin. Under the Adaptive Resource Management (ARM) Framework, the Board set a harvest limit of 500,000 Delaware Bay male horseshoe crabs and zero female horseshoe crabs for the 2018 season. Based on the allocation mechanism established in Addendum VII, the following quotas were set for the states of New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland and Virginia, which harvest horseshoe crabs of Delaware Bay origin:

  Delaware Bay Origin Horseshoe Crab Quota (no. of crabs) Total Quota**
State Male Only Male Only
Delaware 162,136 162,136
New Jersey 162,136 162,136
Maryland 141,112 255,980
Virginia* 34,615 81,331

*Virginia harvest refers to harvest east of the COLREGS line only

** Total male harvest includes crabs which are not of Delaware Bay origin.

The Board chose a harvest package based on the Technical Committee and ARM Subcommittee recommendation. The ARM Framework, established through Addendum VII, incorporates both shorebird and horseshoe crab abundance levels to set optimized harvest levels for horseshoe crabs of Delaware Bay origin. The horseshoe crab abundance estimate was based on data from the Benthic Trawl Survey conducted by Virginia Polytechnic Institute (Virginia Tech). This survey has not been funded consistently in recent years, but was funded and conducted in 2016. A composite index of the Delaware Trawl Survey, New Jersey Delaware Bay Trawl Survey, and New Jersey Ocean Trawl Survey has been developed and used in years the Virginia Tech Survey was not conducted. While continued, long-term funding of the Virginia Tech Survey is preferred, the recent revival of this survey also allows the composite index to be improved through “tuning” relative to additional Virginia Tech Survey data points. The Virginia Tech Survey has been funded for 2017 and is currently underway. Funding for future years continues to be explored.

Terms of reference for the 2018 stock assessment were presented to and approved by the Board. Within these terms of reference were tasks specific to the horseshoe crab stock assessment, including assessments of regional populations of horseshoe crabs, incorporation and evaluation of estimated mortality attributed to the biomedical use of horseshoe crabs for Limulus Amebocyte Lysate production, and comparisons of assessment results with results from the ARM Framework used to annually set bait harvest levels for horseshoe crabs from the Delaware Bay region. The completed assessment is expected to be presented to the Board in October at the 2018 Annual Meeting.

For more information, please contact Michael Schmidtke, FMP Coordinator, at 703.842.0740 or mschmidtke@asmfc.org.

A PDF version of the press release can be found here –http://www.asmfc.org/uploads/file/59e8e1eapr49HSC2018Specifications.pdf

 

ASMFC American Lobster Board Approves Draft Addenda XXVI & III to the American Lobster and Jonah Crab FMPs for Public Comment

October 17, 2017 — NORFOLK, Virginia — The following was released by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission

The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission’s American Lobster Management Board approved American Lobster Draft Addendum XXVI/Jonah Crab Draft Addendum III for public comment. Given the same data collection needs apply to both American lobster and Jonah crab fisheries, Draft Addendum XXVI and Draft Addendum III are combined into one document that would modify management programs for both species upon its adoption. The Draft Addenda seek to improve harvest reporting and biological data collection in the American lobster and Jonah crab fisheries. The Draft Addenda propose using the latest reporting technology, expanding the collection of effort data, increasing the spatial resolution of harvester reporting, and advancing the collection of biological data, particularly offshore.

Recent management action in the Northwest Atlantic, including the protection of deep sea corals, the declaration of a national monument, and the expansion of offshore wind projects, have highlighted deficiencies in current American lobster and Jonah crab reporting requirements. These include a lack of spatial resolution in harvester data and a significant number of fishermen who are not required to report. As a result, efforts to estimate the economic impacts of these various management actions on American lobster and Jonah crab fisheries have been hindered. States have been forced to piece together information from harvester reports, industry surveys, and fishermen interviews to gather the information needed. In addition, as American lobster and Jonah crab fisheries continue to expand offshore, there is a greater disconnect between where the fishery is being prosecuted and where biological sampling is occurring. More specifically, while most of the sampling occurs in state waters, an increasing volume of American lobster and Jonah crab are being harvested in federal waters. The lack of biological information on the offshore portions of these fisheries can impede effective management.

The Draft Addenda present three questions for public comment: (1) what percentage of harvesters should be required to report in the American lobster and Jonah crab fisheries; (2) should current data elements be expanded to collect a greater amount of information in both fisheries; and (3) at what scale should spatial information be collected. In addition, the Draft Addenda provide several recommendations to NOAA Fisheries for data collection of offshore American lobster and Jonah crab fisheries. These include implementation of a harvester reporting requirement for federal lobster permit holders, creation of a fixed-gear VTR form, and expansion of a biological sampling program offshore.

It is anticipated the majority of states from Maine through New Jersey will be conducting public hearings on the Draft Addenda. The details of those hearings will be released in a subsequent press release. The Draft Addenda will be available on the Commission website, www.asmfc.org (under Public Input) by October 27th. Fishermen and other interested groups are encouraged to provide input on the Draft Addenda either by attending state public hearings or providing written comment. Public comment will be accepted until 5:00 PM (EST) on January 22, 2017 and should be forwarded to Megan Ware, FMP Coordinator, 1050 N. Highland St, Suite A-N, Arlington, VA 22201; 703.842.0741(FAX) or at comments@asmfc.org (Subject line: Draft Addenda XXVI & III).

ASMFC Spiny Dogfish Board Approves 2018 Fishery Specifications

October 17, 2017 — NORFOLK, Virginia — The following was released by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission

The Commission’s Spiny Dogfish Management Board approved a spiny dogfish commercial quota of 38,195,822 pounds for the 2018 fishing season (May 1, 2018 – April 30, 2019). The Board maintained a 6,000 pound commercial trip limit in state waters (0-3 miles from shore) in the northern region (Maine through Connecticut). The quota and northern region trip limit are consistent with the measures recommended to NOAA Fisheries by the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council. States in the southern region (New York to North Carolina) have the ability to set state-specific trip limits based on the needs of their fisheries.

2018 marks the third year of the current federal 3-year specifications cycle. It is anticipated the stock assessment will be updated in 2018 to inform development of fishery specification recommendations, including the commercial quota, for 2019 and beyond. Additionally, the Board intends to discuss issues raised by the Advisory Panel (and other fishery participants) in more detail prior to setting 2019 specifications. The timing of the next benchmark stock assessment for spiny dogfish is less certain, however, the Board supported the Council’s recommendations to conduct a benchmark stock assessment in 2019, or soon after.

The 2018 spiny dogfish commercial quota allocations (in pounds) for the northern region and the states of New York through North Carolina are provided below. Any overages from the 2017 season will be deducted from that region’s or state’s 2018 quota allocation. Similarly, any eligible roll overs from the 2017 season will be applied to that region’s or state’s 2018 quota allocation.
For more information, please contact Kirby Rootes-Murdy, Senior Fishery Management Plan Coordinator, at krootes-murdy@asmfc.org or 703.842.0740

NEW YORK: Strained Fluke Quotas, Hurricanes and Safe Harbor

Case of fisherman bound for North Carolina caught in José’s rough seas highlights inadequacies in interstate fishing regulations

September 29, 2017 — Less than a month after a bill granting vessels safe harbor in New York was signed by Governor Andrew Cuomo, a fishing vessel bound for North Carolina carrying 6,000 pounds of fluke has tested the new policy, straining New York’s federally designated fluke quotas.

The F/V Rianda S., which has long been a part of the Montauk fleet, was in transit to land its fish in North Carolina, where it has fishing licenses, on Sept. 17 after fishing in federal waters when it encountered the rough seas generated by Hurricane José and requested safe harbor in Montauk.

New York’s fluke fishery is closed for the month of September,  due to banner fluke landings this summer that strained the state’s already low federally mandated quotas.

The law granting safe harbor, sponsored by South Fork State Assemblyman Fred Thiele and East End State Senator Kenneth LaValle, allowed vessels fishing with licenses from other states immunity from prosecution for violations of state fishing regulations if they seek safe harbor under certain emergency situations, including weather, mechanical breakdown, medical emergencies and loss of essential gear that renders vessels unable to remain at sea.

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) guidelines for safe harbor were drawn with input from commercial fishermen after an incident in January 2015, when the arrival of bad weather forced a commercial fisherman with New Jersey fishing permits to land his fish in Hampton Bays instead of continuing on to New Jersey.

Read the full story at the East End Beacon

Could a Shark Fin Ban Actually Be Bad for Sharks?

Two scientists have argued that the United States’ proposed shark fin ban may not have the intended benefits.

September 26, 2017 — At first blush, a proposed national ban on shark fins in the United States would seem like a good thing for sharks. Shark fishing has been blamed for the decline in a number of shark species, and specifically fins, which typically find their way into shark fin soup, create their own problems. Since the fin is the most valuable part of a shark, some fisherman use a practice called “finning”—already banned in the U.S.—where the fins are removed from the shark (sometimes while still alive) and then the rest of the animal is disposed of. Banning the fins all together sounds like a simple way to end all these issues once and for all. However, in a paper published this month in the journal Marine Policy, marine scientists David Shiffman and Robert Hueter present a different argument: such a ban actually “would undermine sustainable shark fisheries.”

According to the office of New Jersey Senator Cory Booker, over 100 scientists have come out in support of the bill he introduced this past March seeking to ban shark fins. But of course, there are two sides to every story, and according to the Associated Press, Shiffman and Hueter essentially state that when it comes to shark fishing, America is one of the few places that actually practices sustainability, so why mess it?

“Removing that from the marketplace removes a template of a well-managed fishery,” Shiffman told the AP. “It’s much easier for us to say, here’s a way you can do this.” His paper also suggests that since the U.S. is such a small part of the worldwide shark fin trade, a ban in the U.S. would simply be made up for by more fishing elsewhere.

Read the full story at Food & Wine

Shark fin bans might not help sharks, scientists say

September 25, 2017 — PORTLAND, Maine — As lawmakers propose banning the sale of shark fins in the U.S., a pair of scientists is pushing back, saying the effort might actually harm attempts to conserve the marine predators.

Democratic Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey introduced a bill this year designed to prevent people from possessing or selling shark fins in America, much to the delight of conservation groups such as Oceana. But marine scientists David Shiffman and Robert Hueter said this approach could be wrongheaded.

Shiffman and Hueter authored a study that appears in the November issue of the journal Marine Policy, saying the U.S. has long been a leader in shark fisheries management and that shutting down the U.S. fin trade entirely would remove a model for sustainability for the rest of the world.

The U.S. also is a minor contributor to the worldwide shark fin trade, and countries with less regulated fisheries would likely step in to fill the void if America left the business altogether, Shiffman said.

“Removing that from the marketplace removes a template of a well-managed fishery,” Shiffman, a shark researcher with Simon Fraser University in British Columbia, said. “It’s much easier for us to say, here’s a way you can do this.”

Shark fins are most often used in a soup considered a delicacy in Asia. Shark fins that American fishermen harvest are often shipped to Asia for processing.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at the Bangor Daily News

A US ban on shark fins is a bad idea, say researchers

September 22, 2017 — Earlier this year, United States senators put forth S.793, a bill they’ve named the “Shark Fin Trade Elimination Act”. With the noble goal of protecting shark populations, which are in decline all over the globe, the document proposes a total ban on the buying or selling of shark fins in the US. Sounds like an unambiguously good thing, right? Well, the straightforward answer to a problem is not always the best one – and some shark researchers worry that this approach could do more harm than good.

In a recently published paper, shark researchers David Shiffman and Robert Hueter argue that banning trade in fins would not prevent many shark deaths at all – but it might hinder successful conservation practices, and sow confusion by misrepresenting the true threats to these animals. What they recommend instead is prioritising the continued sustainable management of shark fishing.

The finning issue

Let’s start with the broad problem: sharks are in trouble. And losing them is a threat not only for the ecosystems in which they serve important roles, but also for economies all over the globe that rely on them for food, including the United States. Worldwide, many populations are dwindling, their decline driven largely by overfishing, including hunting for meat, bycatch, as well as the lucrative fin trade, which supplies demand in some countries for a delicacy known as shark-fin soup.

This fin trade has led to a phenomenon called shark finning. As the bill describes, “Shark finning is the cruel practice in which the fins of a shark are cut off on board a fishing vessel at sea. The remainder of the animal is then thrown back into the water to drown, starve, or die a slow death.” This practice is not only cruel, but also wasteful – in contrast with conservative shark-fishing practices that make use of meat and parts from the entire body.

Shark finning has actually been banned in the US since the 1990s, but as long as the animal’s body is not discarded at sea, fishers are generally free to do what they will with the fins; indeed, these are typically harvested along with the meat. The new bill, however, presented by Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, proposes a total ban on possessing, transporting, selling or purchasing shark fins, under threat of a fine of up to $100,000 or more.

Read the full story at Earth Touch News

Commerce chief Ross makes waves, roils fisheries rules

September 21, 2017 — Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross has wasted little time in giving a jolt to the nation’s fisheries.

In June, the 79-year-old billionaire investor who now oversees NOAA Fisheries singlehandedly extended the fishing season for red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico, ignoring protests from scientists and environmentalists that it could spur overfishing of the popular species.

Then in an unprecedented decision in July, he handed a big win to New Jersey fishermen and the state’s Republican governor, Chris Christie, by overturning catch limits for summer flounder that had been approved by an interstate fisheries commission.

While Ross wants more fishing and more seafood exports, critics say his early moves have smacked of meddling and favoritism and will ultimately sabotage hard-won conservation gains.

And many fear that states and fishing groups will directly seek political relief instead of following NOAA procedures and adhering to fishing quotas set by government experts and scientists.

“It just really seems that it’s kind of setting a bad precedent,” said Trey Blackiston, a former commercial fisherman from Chestertown, Md.

Noah Oppenheim, executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, said he’s still waiting for Ross to sign an emergency declaration for California crabbers and salmon fishermen. But he’s worried about the signals from Washington.

“We’re asking maybe the wrong questions, right?” Oppenheim said. “If the Trump administration is finding it easier to disrupt the status quo than to follow the normal procedures to get this done, we don’t want any part of that. We’re sort of sitting on the West Coast with one of the best fishery management council processes in place … watching the country crumble and wondering what the hell’s going on. But I’m not inclined to seek political favors.”

Read the full story at E&E News