NMFS Archives - Page 104 of 111

DON CUDDY: Fishermen fight back against government overreach

January 28, 2016 — The commercial fishermen suing the federal government over the cost of at-sea monitors had their day in federal court in Concord, New Hampshire, last Thursday. At issue is the notice to fishermen that they will henceforth be required by the National Marine Fisheries Service to pay out of pocket for the at-sea monitors that accompany them on fishing trips, an expense previously absorbed within the annual budget of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. That agency contends that it no longer has the money to fund the program, although these monitors act as agents for the government, and it insists that the boats must now assume payment. Fishermen believe that the high cost of monitors, as much as $710 daily, is excessive, will force many to tie up their boats and result in “irreparable harm.” They also believe that, irrespective of the cost, having at-sea monitors on their boats is a government mandate and consequently should be funded by the government.

I attended the hearing with John Haran of Dartmouth, manager of Northeast Fisheries Sector XIII which includes 32 fishermen. Sector XIII is a plaintiff in the case along with New Hampshire commercial fisherman Dave Goethel.

The all-day hearing concluded without a ruling. Federal District Judge Joseph Laplante will issue a decision in his own time after deliberating on a legal case with potential ramifications not only for the fishing industry but with respect to any government agency’s attempt to increase its own power.

Steve Schwartz, an attorney with Cause of Action, a nonprofit based in Washington, D.C., that focuses on government overreach, represents the fishermen. He told the court that the scope of an agency’s power is determined exclusively by Congress and that NOAA lacks the statutory authority to require fishermen to pay for monitors. If NOAA can force fishermen to start writing checks, “it would open the door to a whole panoply of ways that agencies can expand their powers,” he said.

Read the full opinion piece at New Bedford Standard Times

Nils E. Stolpe: After 39 years of NOAA/NMFS fisheries management, how are they doing?

January 27, 2016 — (FishNet USA – www.fishnet-usa.com/) — Back in June of 2012 I wrote After 35 years of NOAA/NMFS fisheries management, how are they doing? How are we doing because of their efforts? (http://www.fishnet-usa.com/) in which I looked at U.S. commercial landings on a regional basis. While there were some bright spots, overall the picture was somewhat dismal, with total landings minus Alaska’s swinging up slightly after a trending downward over the previous 5 years and being only 60% of what they were in 1979, the year that inflation corrected landings were at their highest value. Regionally, landings (minus scallops and lobster) in New England, in the Mid-Atlantic (minus scallops), in the Southeast and in the Gulf of Mexico were trending downwards with only Pacific landings heading up.

The latest available data from the NOAA/NMFS Commercial Landings website, for the years 2011 to 2014 (http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st1/commercial/landings/annual_landings.html) tell a different, and much more optimistic, story (But please bear in mind that any indicated “trends” since 2010 are for four years at most and at this point aren’t necessarily anything that people should hang their hats on).

(Note that in all of the following charts 2010, the last year in the original FishNet article for which data was available, is indicated by a red bar. The most current data are for 2014. Also note that all values reported were corrected for inflation, using federal government conversion tables and 2010 as the base year.)

Value of Total U.S. landings

Total U.S. landings reached a maximum of $6.8 billion in 1979. From a recent low of $3.9 billion in 2009 they increased to $5.2 billion in 2011 and are currently (as of 2014) at $5.0 billion.

The value of total U.S. landings has been increasing fairly steadily since 2002.

____________________

A number of people had commented on the original article that it would have been interesting to see a listing of all of the commercial species and their individual contributions to the total value of domestic landings. With landings of 485 species reported in 2014, that would take up a prohibitive amount of space here, but following is a chart listing the top 50 fisheries in terms of value. At the bottom of the list were frigate mackerel ($39), shortbelly rockfish ($22), Chubs ($12), redstripe rockfish ($10) and spider crab (42 lbs landed, no value listed). The values are in 2014 dollars. For reference I’ve also included a chart of the top 50 species in 2005 (the values here are listed in 2004 dollars).

It shouldn’t surprise anyone at all familiar with our commercial fisheries that American lobster, sea scallops and walleye pollock are the three most valuable U.S. fisheries.

But that seven of the ten most valuable species being shellfish might be.

At this point NOAA/NMFS doesn’t differentiate between capture fisheries and aquaculture production in the commercial landings database. Tracking the growth – or not – of aquculture through actual production would be an effective way of determining how realistic the pronouncements of the “future of aquaculture” which have been periodically resurfacing for almost 50 years actually are and it would be most useful.

Other facts that you might find interesting – or that in emergencies can serve as conversation starters:

• Of the top fifty species, twenty-three were shellfish.

• In spite of all of the associated hand-wringing, Atlantic cod were #69 ($9.4 million).

• Ditto for American eels at #66 ($9.8 million).

• Ditto for swordfish at #51 ($18 million).

• Bloodworms were #86 ($6.0 million).

• Florida stone crab claws – the fishermen keep one, the crabs keep one and are then released – were #35 ($28 million).

The fifty highest value fisheries in the U.S. in 2005 (in 2005 dollars) and 2014 (in 2014 dollars)

Forty-five fisheries that were in the fifty most valuable in 2005 were still in the top fifty in 2014. When adjusted for inflation, in 2010 dollars, landings in the top 50 fisheries were valued at $3.9 billion in 2005 and at $4.5 billion in 2014.

(For anyone who is interested in exploring the reported landings of any species in any regions or states on a year-by-year basis, the above linked NOAA/NMFS database provides a wealth of information. With a basic knowledge of spreadsheets you can get an accurate picture of any commercial species (with limited exceptions) for the last 75 years, or for as long as that species supported a fishery. I’ve made one of my worksheets for this FishNet available at http://www.fishnet-usa.com/HowWeDoing_Update.xlsx to give you an idea of what’s possible. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me by replying to this email.)

____________________

Ignoring Alaska, the value of U.S. landings appear to be increasing after a decline that began in 1979.

Correcting for inflation, total U.S. landings in 2014 were 74% of what they were at their highest point (1979). Minus Alaska, total U.S. landings were 71% of what they were in 1979.

The story region by region – New England first

Starting out in New England, home of our oldest and not so long ago some of our most valuable “traditional” fisheries, at first glance things appear to be rosy. Reaching a post-Magnuson plateau of just over $1 billion in 1987, the value of total landings declined from then until 2001, from there increasing until almost $1 billion in 2005 and then falling again. But in 2011 they topped $1 billion again, and have remained there ever since.

Unfortunately, the reality in many New England fisheries is not what is indicated by the total landings. Since 1950 about half of the value of New England landings (converted to 2010 dollars) has been in the lobster and sea scallop fisheries. In 2010 these two fisheries accounted for 41% of the value of New England’s total landings (in the previous FishNet I had erroneously reported “over 69%”). In 2014, driven by a large increase in lobster landings which wasn’t offset by smaller decrease in scallop landings, that increased to 47%.

Subtracting the value of sea scallop and lobster landings from the total New England landings, there ws a decline in value extending from the early 90s to 2009. This was offset by an increase beginning in 2010 that increased the value to levels last seen in 1995.

In 2010 dollars, the New England lobster fishery has increased in value from $73 million in 1950 to $518 million in 2014. That’s an increase of 700%. The sea scallop fishery has increased from $57 million to $273 million, an increase of 480% (“record” scallop landings were $370 million in 2012).

In 2014 the next three most valuable fisheries were oysters, soft clams and Atlantic herring. Together with sea scallops and lobsters, landings in these 5 most valuable fisheries were $941 million. This represented 85% of the total New England landings in 2014. In 2000, 2005 and 2010 the 5 most valuable New England fisheries represented respectively 57%, 68% and 77% of the total value of New England landings.

The Mid-Atlantic

With the exception of 2013-14 the total value of Mid-Atlantic landings appear to have been fluctuating pretty widely but staying mostly between $200,000 and $250,000 since the early 1980s. However, the dramatic increase in the value of sea scallop landings have been compensating for a pronounced and prolonged decrease in the value total of landings of the other fisheries.

The South Atlantic

The value of South Atlantic landings declined almost steadily from a peak at in 1979 to 2005 or so and has been fairly constant since then.

Commercial landings in the South Atlantic in 2014 were 38% of what they were at their highest point (1979).

The Gulf of Mexico

The value of commercial landings in the Gulf of Mexico declined until 2010, when it reached the level that it hadn’t been at since 1960. Since then the total value has increased significantly, in 2014 being at 67% of what it was in 1979, when they were at their highest value.

As in the South Atlantic, the value of shrimp landings has varied much as the value of the other species has.

West Coast

The value of total West Coast landings appears to be continuing a 10+ year upward trend which had been interrupted by a drop in 2009/10. The total value of West Coast landings in 2014 was 69% of the highest value, which was in 1988.

The value of Hawaii landings in 2012 almost equaled the highest level reported, which was in 1992 (Hawaii landings were only reported in the NMFS/NOAA commercial landings database beginning in 1981). The value of landings has dropped in the subsequent two years.

The total value of Alaska’s landings appears to have resumed the upward trend that had begun in 1985.

What’s it all mean?

Looking at the biggest picture – and accepting the NOAA/NMFS figures – the domestic commercial fishing industry is doing quite well, having been just under $4 billion in 2009 and in 2014 having topped $5 billion. Adjusted for inflation, landings of the most valuable 50 fisheries were worth $3.9 billion on 2005. The value of the top 50 species had increased to $4.5 billion in 2014.

However, as is almost always the case, the devil is in the details, and some of those details clearly demonstrate that all is not well in every pilot house of every boat fishing in our EEZ.

One of the clearest examples of that is seen in the traditional fisheries of the Mid-Atlantic. While the value of total landings were valued at $195 million in the Mid-Atlantic, 44% was from one fishery (sea scallops). When the value of total landings minus the sea scallops shows that a decline that started in 1997 in the Mid-Atlantic is still continuing.

New England is slightly more complicated. In 2014 the value of landings if two fisheries (lobster and sea scallops) made up 73% of the value of New England’s total landings. In 2000 they accounted for 53% of the total. While the value of landings minus lobster and scallops has increased over $100 million since 2010, the four species – herring, soft shelled clams, oysters and American eels – that have accounted for most of the increase are either caught by very large vessels, are mostly from a limited and highly regulated river fishery for elvers, or are harvested from either inshore fisheries or aquaculture operations.

The bright spot on the East coast is the South Atlantic region, if you consider having stable landings a bright spot.

The value of total U.S. landings in the Gulf of Mexico has increased dramatically since a post-Magnuson low point, not coincidentally the year when BP released 5 million barrels or so of oil and almost 2 million gallons of corexit (an oil dispersant) into the Gulf.

After a gradual increase from the early 90s, the value of West Coast landings (minus Hawaii and Alaska) has been fairly steady since 2010 with an upswing in 2014. The value of Alaska landings increased significantly post 2010 but in 2014 had fell back to the same level it was at then. The value of Hawaiian landings increased steadily from 2009 to 2012, when it reached a level it hadn’t been at since 1993, but it has decreased since then.

Obviously it’s impossible to generalize at the national level much more than that significantly more dollar’s worth of fish and shellfish crossed U.S. docks in 2014 than did in 2010, and that’s definitely a good thing. However, the benefits haven’t been spread out evenly. There are disparities from region to region, from state to state, from port to port, from fishery to fishery and from dock to dock. The situation on the New England groundfish fishery is an example of that (and I’ll note here that decreased landings of a particular species isn’t necessarily related to reduced numbers of that species). But what can’t b\e overemphasized is that in far too many instances fishing revenues are being increasingly concentrated in a decreasing number of fisheries. In the long term this could prove disastrous, not just to the participants in fisheries in which the landings are declining, but to the participants in the other fisheries as well. This is because it takes a certain minimum level of presence to maintain necessary infrastructure (docks, gear suppliers, ice houses, marine railways, etc.), and once that minimum level is reached those businesses that support the fishing industry will have no choices other than shutting down or relocating.

View a PDF of the opinion piece here

Kingpins of the Gulf make millions off red snapper harvest without ever going fishing

January 25, 2016 — A little-known federal program has turned dozens of Gulf of Mexico fishermen into the lords of the sea — able to earn millions annually without even going fishing — and transformed dozens more into modern-day serfs who must pay the lords for the right to harvest red snapper.

The hold is full of market-sized red snapper, which range from 1 to 3 pounds. Captain Simms had to shell out $3,000 for the right to catch 1,000 pounds of snapper on this trip. His profit will only be about $1,500 of these fish, while a broker will earn more than twice as much.

A four-month probe by AL.com has found that roughly $60 million has been earned since 2007 by this small number of fishermen whose boats never left port. That money was collected from the labor of fishermen who have no choice but to hand over more than half of the price that their catch brings at the dock.

As it stands today, the right to catch 77 percent of the annual red snapper harvest is controlled by just 55 people, according to an AL.com analysis of hundreds of pages of federal documents, reports and websites.

The lion’s share of the commercial harvest was concentrated in the hands of a very few in 2007 when a federal program known as the Individual Fishing Quota system, or IFQ, was established. The National Marine Fisheries Service divided up the Gulf’s snapper harvest like a pie, with the largest pieces going to the fishermen who landed the most fish in the preceding years. A handful of snapper fishermen got shares as large as 5 or 6 percent of the Gulf’s total harvest, while others received shares as small as a ten thousandth of a percent, which granted the right to catch about a dozen fish a year.

“I sold my first snapper when I was 16 or 17,” said Ricky Wilson, a welder who lives in a small cottage on Mobile Bay. Commercial snapper fishing provided part of his income for 20 years.

When the IFQ portions were handed out, his share amounted to about 430 pounds, which would have taken him one or two days to catch and brought less than $1,000 at the dock.

Read the full story at the New Orleans Times-Picayune

Fishing treaty fee dispute is keeping vessels out of Pacific

January 17, 2016 — Two San Diego-based fishing concerns say they are no longer able to uphold their intention to provide the market with sustainable, free-school tuna harvested in the Western and Central Pacific Oceans (WCPO). South Pacific Tuna Corporation (SoPac) and its affiliate, The Global Companies (Ocean Global, LLC, Sea Global, LLC, and Pacific Global LLC), made the announcement on Sunday.

According to their press release, this is a result of halted U.S. Tuna Fleet operations as directed by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), which advised last month that all U.S. vessels are prohibited from fishing in the Western Pacific Ocean (WPO) until licenses from the Pacific Island Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA) are issued for 2016.

The companies committed to establishing a Marine Stewardship Council (MSC)-certified tuna program in January 2015, and spent the following nine months establishing chain of custody programs to meet and exceed the requirements. MSC standards are considered the most stringent of the current managed sustainability programs.

Read the full story Samoa News

New Hampshire Candidates Sought for New England Fishery Management Council

January 12, 2016 — DURHAM, N.H. — The State of New Hampshire has been notified by the National Marine Fisheries Service of vacancies for New Hampshire’s obligatory seat and two at-large seats for the New England Fishery Management Council (NEFMC). New Hampshire’s obligatory seat is currently held by Ellen Goethel of New Hampshire, who is completing her first term as a Council member.

Candidates should be individuals who, by reason of their occupational or other experience, scientific expertise, or training, are knowledgeable regarding the conservation and management, or the commercial or recreational harvest, of the fishery resources in the coastal and ocean waters of New Hampshire and New England. Those interested in being considered for the obligatory seat must be residents of New Hampshire.

To assist in filling these vacancies, the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department’s Marine Fisheries Division will host a candidates’ interview night on Thursday, February 11, 2016, at 7:00 p.m., at the Urban Forestry Center in Portsmouth, N.H. Potential candidates must be prepared to present their qualifications at the session. Interested candidates should contact Doug Grout, Chief of Marine Fisheries for the N.H. Fish and Game Department, at (603) 868-1095.

Read the full story at The Outdoor Wire

Federal court rules against challenge to red snapper quotas

January 5, 2016 — A federal judge in New Orleans on Tuesday rejected a challenge to the Gulf Council’s red snapper fishing quotas for the next three years.

The plaintiffs, challenged the legality of Amendment 40 to the Gulf Council’s Reef Fish Fishery Management Plan and the associated rule which sets fishing quotas and seasons for 2015-17.

The plaintiffs argued that under the federal Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Gulf Council is prohibited from regulating charter fishing separately from recreational fishing. Also, that the Gulf Council and the National Marine Fisheries Service did not “assess, specify and analyze” the economic and social effects of Amendment 40, that the amendment makes an unfair and inequitable allocation of fishing resources and the Council improperly delegated authority to the National Marine Fisheries Service.

Amendment 40 defines the partitioning of the recreational sector. All four arguments were struck down.

Read the full story at the Daily Comet

Inouye-influenced rule enables extra Hawaii tuna fishing

January 5, 2016 — HONOLULU (AP) — Many Hawaii residents were thankful for plentiful platters of ahi tuna they were able to enjoy over the holidays. But few realized the critical role the late Sen. Daniel Inouye played in making sure Hawaii fishermen could get it to them.

A federal rule allowing Hawaii-based fishermen to catch more bigeye tuna than permitted under international agreements can be traced to his time as chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

In 2010, catch limits forced Hawaii fishermen to stop catching bigeye in waters west of Hawaii in November. That left Hawaii markets without much locally caught tuna just as holiday demand spiked.

This year, Hawaii longline fishermen hit their limit in August. But the National Marine Fisheries Service created new limits for U.S. territories like Guam and allowed Hawaii’s fleet to use up to half of them.

The fisheries service’s Pacific Islands regional administrator, Michael Tosatto, said Congress directed the federal agencies to create the quota transfer program in a 2012 appropriations bill.

Inouye was Senate appropriations committee chairman at the time, not long before his death in December 2012. The senator’s then-chief of staff said Inouye was troubled to see local fishermen abiding by quotas that U.S. diplomats had agreed to, only to see foreign fishermen keep fishing.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at New Jersey Herald

Lawsuit: NOAA prioritized recreational snapper

December 31, 2015 — Twenty-six fishermen, fish markets and industry groups have again sued the US government alleging that regulators are allowing recreational fisherman to deplete scarce red snapper stocks in the Gulf of Mexico.

The lawsuit, filed against commerce secretary Penny Pritzker, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and its parent agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) comes in the wake previous litigation that has seen the commercial fishing industry succeed in challenging regulators’ red snapper management policies.

Previously, courts ruled that regulators did not have enough enforcement measures in place to ensure that recreational fishermen did not exceed their total allowable catch (TAC) of red snapper, a species under strict management because it is considered to be “overfished.”

The lack of adequate controls on recreational fishing violated provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and prompted regulators to develop new measures for recreational fishing. However, in the lawsuit filed Dec. 28, commercial fishermen argue that a new regulatory proposal to “reallocate” a portion of future red snapper TAC from recreational to commercial use violates existing federal law.

Read the full story at Undercurrent News

Fishing for a solution for endangered right whales

December 29, 2015 — Sometimes technology solves a problem, sometimes it makes it worse.

When researchers at the New England Aquarium and the Center for Coastal Studies in Provincetown examined ropes recovered from whales entangled in fishing gear from 1994 to 2010, they found that entanglements for North Atlantic right whales, the world’s most endangered great whale species, accelerated dramatically from 1993 to 2010, in both frequency and in the severity of the entrapment.

The culprit, scientists believe, is a new type of rope known as Polysteel, that rope manufacturers began making and marketing to fishermen and others in the marine trades as being 40 percent stronger and more durable than other synthetic ropes. Plus, the lobster industry also shifted from wood to wire traps that allowed them to use heavier gear and for the pots to stay in the water through the winter, increasing the likelihood of interaction with whales.

Even though fishermen already employ weak links designed to break and separate the line from the buoy when a whale pulls on it, researchers found the lines themselves were still doing a lot of damage.

“It was a huge change,” said Amy Knowlton, the lead author of the study and a research scientist with the New England Aquarium working to reduce the risk of whale entanglement and death from fishing gear and lines. Scientists put the number of North Atlantic right whales that can be lost due to human causes at less than one per year, if the population is going to increase and avoid extinction. The National Marine Fisheries Service has calculated that 3.25 right whales per year either died or were severely injured between 2007 and 2011 by being caught up in fishing gear and lines. The agency estimates that 83 percent of the right whale population shows scarring from fishing gear.

Read the full story at the Cape Cod Times

DAVID GOETHEL: Fishermen on the Hook to Pay for Their Own Regulators

December 28, 2015 — The following is a excerpt from an opinion piece published today in The Wall Street Journal. Mr. Goethel, a groundfish fisherman out of Hampton, N.H., writes that he is suing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration “to stop it from sinking New England’s groundfish industry for good.” He is represented by Cause of Action, a government watchdog group based in Washington, D.C.

Mr. Goethel writes: “The courts are the industry’s last chance. This month, along with the Northeast Fishery Sector 13, I filed a federal lawsuit- Goethel v. Pritzker. Our claim: Neither NOAA nor its subsidiary, the National Marine Fisheries Service, has the authority to charge groundfishermen for at-sea monitors. Even if Congress had granted this authority, they would have had to follow the process called for in the Administrative Procedure Act and other statutes-which they haven’t. A bipartisan group of senators, including Susan Collins (R., Maine) and Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.), highlighted this troubling fact in April. Writing to the assistant administrator of NOAA Fisheries, they stated NOAA ‘has chosen an interpretation of the FY15 report language that is inconsistent with congressional intent, and consequently, that very high [at-sea monitoring] costs will soon unreasonably burden already struggling members of the fishing industry in the Northeast.'”

Few professions are as significant to New England’s economy and history as fishing. Yet the ranks of groundfish fishermen have dwindled so much that we’re now an endangered species. The causes are many-but the one now threatening us with extinction is the federal government. Along with one other plaintiff, I’m suing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to stop it from sinking New England’s groundfish industry for good.

Groundfish include cod, haddock and 11 other common bottom-dwelling species. After years of dwindling stocks, in 2012 the U.S. Department of Commerce issued a disaster declaration for groundfish territory off the coast of New England. Over the past four years my cod quota-my bread and butter-plummeted from 60,000 pounds to 3,700 this year. I caught my limit in four days in June.

Shifting ocean patterns have certainly contributed to our struggles, but regulators are a separate anchor altogether. Groundfish fishermen are organized into a patchwork of 15 sectors, i.e., government-designed cooperative organizations. We operate under at least seven overlapping federal and state entities and programs, all of which have their own regulatory nets.

As if warrantless searches from the Coast Guard, catch inspections upon returning to port, and satellite tracking weren’t enough, at-sea monitors also accompany us on roughly one in five randomly selected fishing trips. They are hired by three for-profit companies-one of which is led by the former NOAA official who designed the monitor program. They follow us around and take notes on everything we do. That includes measuring our nets, measuring fish we bring in and those we throw back, and recording our expenses down to how much we spent on lunch.

The program is unnecessary given the heavy regulation that exists. And last month NOAA informed us that, beginning on Jan. 1, groundfish fishermen must pay an estimated $710 a day when a monitor is present. That fee covers the monitors’ training, mileage to and from the fisherman’s boat, supervisor salaries, data processes and all other administrative costs. It also covers a set profit margin for the three companies providing the monitors. What those margins are, neither NOAA nor the companies have disclosed.

Read the full opinion piece at The Wall Street Journal