Saving Seafood

Scallop Group Praises NMFS Decisions on Openings, But Still Wants Georges Bank Area as Well

January 18, 2018 — SEAFOOD NEWS — In a step towards balancing sustainable scallop fishing and environment protection, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has approved the majority of Omnibus Fish Habitat Amendment 2 (OHA2).

The New England Fishery Management Council initiated OHA2 in 2004, and it was implemented in 2017 to update essential fish habitat designations, as well as designate new Habitat Areas of Particular Concern for Atlantic salmon and Atlantic cod. Now the council has received approval for habitat closures in the Great South Channel and western Georges Bank. According to a press release from the Fisheries Survival Fund, a group established to ensure the long-term sustainability of the Atlantic sea scallop fishery, the closures will “provide critical protections for species like Georges Bank cod, and will provide dramatically more protection for critical habitat than the nearly 20-year closures that they replace.”

The Fund is praising NMFS’ decision, saying that it creates “new opportunities for the successful scallop rotational management system.” However, they also have some concerns.

While NMFS approved habitat closures in the Great South Channel and western Georges Bank, they rejected habitat management in eastern Georges Bank. The Fund says that the area contains “some of the most historically rich scallop fishing areas in the world.”

“According to its decision memo, NMFS appears to have been seeking more information on how habitat-friendly rotational scallop fishing can be implemented to benefit both fishermen and habitat,” the Fund wrote in a press release. “In the meantime, the outmoded 20-year-old closures remain in place, despite zero evidence that these closures have done anything to promote groundfish productivity. In fact, the evidence suggests they have stymied economic growth and prevented optimization of scallop management.”

The Fisheries Survival Fund says that they hope NMFS is “willing to work on refining a solution to restore Northern Edge access.”

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

 

Michelle Malkin: Big Brother on America’s Fishing Boats

January 17, 2018 — Salt water. Seagulls. Striped bass.

My fondest childhood memories come from fishing with my dad on the creaky piers and slick jetties of the Jersey shore. The Atlantic Ocean is in my blood. So when fishing families in New England reached out to me for help spreading word about their economic and regulatory struggles, I immediately heeded their call.

Now these “forgotten men and women” of America hope that the Trump administration will listen. And act.

The plague on the commercial fishing industry isn’t “overfishing,” as environmental extremists and government officials claim. The real threats to Northeastern groundfishermen are self-perpetuating bureaucrats, armed with outdated junk science, who’ve manufactured a crisis that endangers a way of life older than the colonies themselves.

Hardworking crews and captains have the deepest stake in responsible fisheries management — it’s their past, present, and future — but federal paper-pushers monitor them ruthlessly like registered sex offenders.

Generations of schoolchildren have been brainwashed into believing that our seas have been depleted by greedy commercial fishermen. In the 1960s and ’70s, it is true, foreign factory trawlers from Russia and Japan pillaged coastal groundfish stocks. But after the domestic fishing industry regained control of our waters, stocks rebounded.

Reality, however, did not fit the agenda of scare-mongering environmentalists and regulators who need a perpetual crisis to justify their existence. To cure a manufactured “shortage” of bottom-dwelling groundfish, Washington micromanagers created a permanent thicket of regional fishery-management councils, designated fishing zones, annual catch limits, individual catch limits, and “observers” mandated by the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

Even more frustrating for the fishing families who know the habitat best, the federal scientists’ trawler surveys for assessing stocks use faulty nets that vastly underestimate stock abundance.

Meghan Lapp, a lifelong fisherwoman and conservation biologist, points out that government surveyors use a “net that’s not the right size for the vessel.” This produces “a stock assessment that shows artificially low numbers,” she says. “The fishing does not match what the fishermen see on the water.”

Instead of fixing the science, top-down bureaucrats have cracked down on groundfishermen who fail to comply with impossible and unreasonable rules and regulations. The observer program, which was intended to provide biological data and research, was expanded administratively (not by Congress) to create “at-sea monitors” who act solely as enforcement agents.

Read the full story at the National Review 

 

Tom Davis to Congress: ‘Oil and water should not mix’

January 17, 2018 — Below is the text of testimony state Sen. Tom Davis, R-Beaufort, plans to deliver Friday, Jan. 19, before the U.S. House Committee on Natural Resources’ Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.

The hearing is titled “Deficiencies in the Permitting Process for Offshore Seismic Research.”

Davis provided the text to The Island Packet and The Beaufort Gazette on Wednesday.

1. Impact of seismic testing:

Seismic testing involves firing loud sonic guns into the ocean floor every 16 seconds to read echoes from the bottom geology, with the tests taking place over miles of ocean for months at a time. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) confirms that the sound from the sonic guns can be recorded from sites more than 1,860 miles away.

Scientists disagree on whether these underwater noises are lethal, but most do agree the blasts could alter sea mammals’ behavior, affecting their migration patterns, mating habits and how they communicate with each other. Most animals in the ocean use sound the way animals on land use eyesight; saturating their environment with noise will have an impact. ExxonMobil had to suspend seismic-blasts near Madagascar after more than 100 whales beached themselves. NOAA estimates that 138,000 marine animals could be injured, and 13.6 million could have their migration, feeding, or other behavioral patterns disrupted.

Seismic testing also affects commercial and recreational fishing — sonic blasts can decrease catch rates of commercial fish species by an average of 50 percent over thousands of square miles. Seismic blasting will affect fish that spawn in the rivers and estuaries all along the East Coast. A 2014 study cited by Congressmen John Rutherford (R-FL) and Don Beyer (D-VA) that found reef fish off North Carolina declined by 78 percent during seismic testing compared with peak hours when tests weren’t being conducted.

2. Results of seismic tests would be proprietary to private companies.

Proponents for testing and drilling often argue that seismic tests are necessary in order to provide coastal communities with data about oil and gas deposits off their shores that is necessary in order to assess whether it makes economic sense to move forward with drilling for those resources. But that information is considered proprietary by the private companies conducting them. Local decision makers won’t have access to it, nor will the public. Not even members of Congress can get their hands on it.

3. Damages associated with drilling.

Accidents happen in a world where human error, mechanical imperfections and coastal hurricanes all play unexpected roles. When you drill, you spill. It is inevitable. The oil industry touts a 99 percent safety record, but that 1 percent is pretty horrific for people living in the vicinity of a spill when it occurs. The federal Mineral Management Service predicts at least one oil spill a year for every 1,000 barrels in the Gulf of Mexico over the next 40 years — a spill of 10,000 barrels or more every three to four years.

We saw what happened in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010 when the BP Deepwater Horizon rig spilled millions of barrels of oil into the gulf. It was a disaster, but thankfully the Gulf’s bowl-like shape contained the spill in that region. A similar spill off the Atlantic Coast would be a disaster of epic proportions. If oil entered the Gulf Stream it would be forced up into the Chesapeake Bay, the Hudson River Valley, the Gulf of Maine, the Grand Banks (some of the richest fishing grounds in the world).

The Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Horizon blowout showed that oil cannot be removed from salt marshes and other wetland systems. It can remain in the sediments for decades, as was seen in marshes in Massachusetts. Coastal salt marshes in South Carolina are among the most productive ecosystems in the world, and nursery grounds for many estuarine and marine species. Toxic substances from oil spills, both chronic and acute, will put all of these organisms at risk.

Even if a spill never occurs — and both the oil industry and the federal government admit that spills are inevitable – there’s still an adverse impact to South Carolina’s coast in that the land-based infrastructure necessary to support offshore drilling is dirty and highly industrial. Also, the infrastructure required to transport offshore oil is devastating, e.g., a series of canals built across Louisiana wetlands to transport oil has led to vast destruction of marshlands. Healthy marshlands are a critical component of our ecosystem.

Read the rest of Davis’ future testimony at the Island Packet

 

Fisheries Survival Fund: Approval of OHA2 ‘Significant Step Forward’

January 17, 2018 — WASHINGTON — The following was released by the Fisheries Survival Fund:

The National Marine Fisheries Service’s (NMFS) decision to accept the majority of Omnibus Fish Habitat Amendment 2 (OHA2) is a significant step forward in balancing sustainable scallop fishing and environmental protection.

NMFS approved the New England Fishery Management Council’s well-documented recommendations for habitat closures in the Great South Channel and western Georges Bank. These closures will provide critical protections for species like Georges Bank cod, and will provide dramatically more protection for critical habitat than the nearly 20-year closures that they replace.

OHA2’s rebalancing of habitat management both allows for greater habitat protection and restores access to historically productive scallop grounds. It creates new opportunities for the successful scallop rotational management system, which has made the scallop fishery one of the most successful and sustainable fisheries over the last 20 years. Allowing new access to abundant areas such as these has also proven to be the best way to limit adverse environmental impacts from scallop fishing.

NMFS estimates these measures could contribute well over $100 million in scallop landings in the short-term for coastal fishing communities – news that FSF welcomes.

But the Council’s work is not done. NMFS rejected innovations in habitat management in the eastern portion of Georges Bank that would have allowed access to a portion of what is known as the “Northern Edge,” an area that contains some of the most historically rich scallop fishing areas in the world. Several generations of scallops have been born, lived, and died of old age since the last time fishing was permitted there.

According to its decision memo, NMFS appears to have been seeking more information on how habitat-friendly rotational scallop fishing can be implemented to benefit both fishermen and habitat. In the meantime, the outmoded 20-year-old closures remain in place, despite zero evidence that these closures have done anything to promote groundfish productivity. In fact, the evidence suggests they have stymied economic growth and prevented optimization of scallop management.

We are disappointed in the decision regarding eastern Georges Bank, but are hopeful we can take NMFS at its word that it is willing to work on refining a solution to restore Northern Edge access.

 

South Atlantic Council Wants Public Input on Management Changes for Atlantic Cobia

January 16, 2018 — SEAFOOD NEWS — In an effort to “allow for more equitable distribution of harvest and facilitate better coordination between state and federal management of Atlantic cobia” without reducing protection of the stock, members of the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council are soliciting public input on proposed Amendment  31.

The Amendment is the result of year-to-year overages in recreational harvests and a currently overly complex management system among state and federal management of the sleek cobia, also known as black kingfish.

In 2015 an overage of recreational landings resulted in a  shortened 2016 recreational season for Atlantic cobia, and triggered an amendment to help reduce the likelihood of exceeding ACLs again. The South Atlantic Council also asked the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) to consider complementary management for cobia. The Commission’s interstate management plan is expected to be implemented this April.

Recreational landings far outweigh commercial along the Eastern seaboard.  Landings in North Carolina and the Mid- Atlantic states have driven the increase.

Recreational landings went from 498,000 lbs in 2012 to 1.34 million lbs. in 2016. For commercial landings, the increase was from 42,000 lbs. in 2012 to 88,000 lbs. in 2016.

Amendment 31 offers four alternatives. According to the analysis done by the South Atlantic Council, Alternative 1 or status quo would likely result in the annual catch limits being exceeded, with negative impacts to the stock.

Alternative 2 would remove Atlantic cobia from the FMP, which means no further federal management for the stock. However, federal regulations for annual catch limits and other management measures would continue.  Alternative 2 would likely result in the ASFMC extending their jurisdiction into federal waters and managing cobia under the Interstate FMP which has more restrictive measures. “The biological and ecological benefits to the stock are expected to be beneficial,” reads the analysis.Alternative 3 would outline

Alternative 3 would outline complimentary management of Atlantic cobia with the ASFMC. This gives the South Atlantic Council the flexibility to continue to manage Atlantic group cobia but the majority of the management responsibility would be by the states through the ASFMC Interstate FMP. Alternative 3 would have positive biological impacts to the species.

Alternative 4 would establish a framework procedure in the CMP FMP for an enhanced cooperative management system with the ASMFC that allows changes to Atlantic cobia management through NMFS rulemaking. This alternative sets up a procedure in which ASMFC can propose new regulations directly to NMFS, without formal action from the Council. Rules would still need to meet Magnuson-Stevens Act standards and FMP objectives, thereby having a positive biological impacts to the stock.

Public hearings will be conducted via webinar with listening stations as noted below.

January 22, 2018 Webinar – begins at 6:00 PM

Listening Stations:

1 Port Royal Sound Maritime Center: 310 Okatie Hwy, Okatie, SC 29909

2 North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries’ Central District Office: 5285 Highway

70 West, Morehead City, NC 28557

3 Georgia Department of Natural Resources Coastal Division: One Conservation

Way, Brunswick, GA 31523

January 23, 2018 Webinar – begins at 6:00 PM

Listening Station:

Hatteras Community Center; 57689 NC Highway12, Hatteras, NC 27943

January 24, 2018 Webinar – begins at 6:00 PM

Listening Stations:

1 Haddrell’s Point Tackle: 885 Ben Sawyer Blvd, Mt Pleasant, SC 29464

2 Virginia Marine Resources Commission (The Maritime Building); 2600 Washington Ave., 4th Floor, Newport News, VA 23607 *Note: The VA location is a state-organized listening station and was arranged to provide the public in Virginia the opportunity to attend and provide comments in-person.

Registration for each webinar is required. Registration information, along with public hearing documents, video presentations, and other materials is now available from the Council’s website at: http://safmc.net/safmc-meetings/public-hearings-scoping-meetings/. An online public comment form for written comments is also available. Comments must be received by 5 p.m. February 9, 2018 to be included in the briefing book materials for the Council’s March 5-9, 2018 meeting in Jekyll Island, GA.

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

 

Cape Cod Times: A landmark fisheries plan

January 15, 2018 — For seafood lovers, there’s nothing better than a lightly battered scallop, freshly harvested from the North Atlantic, and dipped in simmering butter. And now that federal regulators have agreed to open an area east of Nantucket, closed since the 1990s, fishermen could catch as much as $218 million worth of scallops this year, and $313 million over three years. Expect those fried scallop plates to cost less this summer.

The reopening of the sea bed is just one of the many beneficial outcomes of a new fisheries management plan that was nearly 15 years in the making. The landmark set of regulations opens a large swath of the region’s waters to fishing while maintaining other closures to protect vulnerable species. The plan uses science and the latest technology to decide which ocean areas are important for the critical life stages of fish and shellfish species and how to protect them.

Two decades ago, habitat closures were decided based on drawing a line around areas where fish were congregating. Now, with a model that compares the sea bed with the impact of fishing, regulators can make decisions that will help restore and protect fish stocks. The new plan also sets aside research areas to investigate the link between habitat and fish productivity.

“We think these are groundbreaking regulations,” said John Bullard, NOAA’s outgoing regional administrator, who issued the regulations as one of his last acts on the job. “It puts the focus on the quality of the habitat protected — not the quantity, or how many square miles were protected.”

Cape fishermen are pleased with at least two elements of the plan. They cheered the closing of a large part of the Great South Channel that runs between the Cape and Georges Bank because it is essential habitat for spawning cod and other fish species. State and federal surveys have found that the region’s cod population has plummeted by about 80 percent over the past decade. Closing this area will now help ensure the continued survival of species like Atlantic cod, haddock, and flounder for years to come.

Read the full opinion piece at the Cape Cod Times

 

Pentony steps into NOAA’s top Atlantic post with much underway

January 15, 2018 — Michael Pentony, John Bullard’s successor as administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Greater Atlantic region, is a “straight shooter,” who works toward “yes,” and has a lot of experience on fisheries management issues, sources tell Undercurrent News.

NOAA ended months of speculation on Thursday when it announced that Pentony, a long-time NOAA staffer and also a one-time member of the New England Fishery Management Council (NEFMC) staff, was its pick to lead all fishery policy making in the 100,000 square mile long region that stretches from the state of Maine to Cape Hatteras, in North Carolina, and the Great Lakes.

“Michael’s deep experience in every aspect of sustainable fisheries management, both commercial and recreational, positions him perfectly for this job. He is going to hit the ground running,” assured Chris Oliver, director of NOAA Fisheries, in a statement announcing the decision.

Bullard announced his retirement back in July, ending a nearly six-year rein in the region’s top spot, which comes with an office in Gloucester, Massachusetts, and beginning the agency’s search for a replacement. He said at the time that he had a long list of chores to complete before he could finish, most of which he took on during a recent flurry of activity at the agency.

However, Bullard left quite a few big matters for Pentony to finish up.

Pentony, who is set to assume his new role on January 22, enters his new job at the end of an eventful period, including the prosecution and sentencing of the owner of New England’s largest fishing operation, Carlos Rafael.

Read the full story at Undercurrent News

 

Government Scientists Say A Controversial Pesticide Is Killing Endangered Salmon

January 12, 2018 — The federal government’s top fisheries experts say that three widely used pesticides — including the controversial insecticide chlorpyrifos — are jeopardizing the survival of many species of salmon, as well as orcas that feed on those salmon.

It’s a fresh attack on a chemical that the Environmental Protection Agency was ready to take off the market a year ago — until the Trump administration changed course.

Chlorpyrifos is widely used by farmers to protect crops like strawberries, broccoli and citrus fruit from insect pests. In recent years, though, scientists have found evidence that exposure to chlorpyrifos residues can harm the developing brains of small children, even in the womb.

Two years ago, the Environmental Protection Agency issued a proposal that would have stopped farmers from using chlorpyrifos. The final decision, however, fell to the Trump administration, and EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt decided to keep the chemical on the market while the agency continues to study its risks.

This new report, however, examines another danger entirely — the risk that chlorpyrifos and two other pesticides, diazinon and malathion, are washing into streams and rivers and harming wildlife.

The National Marine Fisheries Service concluded that continued use of the chemicals is likely to jeopardize the survival of endangered species of salmon, as well as orcas that eat the salmon. According to the report, use of chlorpyrifos is affecting 38 species of endangered fish, and it’s having negative effects on 37 areas that have been designated as “critical habitat” for endangered species.

Read the full story at New England Public Radio

 

Lobstermen may have to give up their secrets

January 10, 2018 — ELLSWORTH, Maine — The antiregulatory fervor sweeping the nation’s capital doesn’t seem to extend as far as the Gulf of Maine, at least not for lobster and Jonah crab fishermen.

This week, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission is holding two public hearings in Maine on a plan to impose new reporting requirements in the offshore lobster and crab fisheries. One hearing was scheduled for Scarborough on Tuesday evening. The other is scheduled for 6 p.m. today, Thursday, Jan. 11, at Ellsworth High School.

The ASMFC is concerned that it does not have enough data about the lobster and Jonah crab fisheries to make appropriate management decisions.

Ten percent of Maine lobstermen, chosen annually at random, are required to file monthly landing reports with the Department of Marine Resources about where and how they fish. The reports include detailed data about the geographic location of traps, how long they have been set and at what depths, how many traps are hauled on each trip, the total pounds landed and more.

Lobstermen licensed by other New England states already file detailed reports with their state resource management agencies.

Only about 20 percent of Maine’s roughly 5,000 commercial lobstermen also hold the federal permits required to fish outside the 3-mile limit of state waters, and even fewer fish in the really deep waters beyond 12 miles from shore. According to the ASMFC, some 98 percent of lobster landings from the Gulf of Maine come from inside that 12-mile zone, so reports of what’s happening in the offshore lobster fishery are generally scarce. What’s more, unlike most fishermen operating in federal waters, federal permit holders fishing only for lobster are not required to report their trips to the National Marine Fisheries Service via electronic reporting devices. No separate landing reports are currently required for Jonah crab.

Read the full story at the Mount Desert Islander

 

NMFS Approves New England Council Habitat Amendments; Will Provide Boost to Scallops up to 60 Million lbs

January 10, 2018 — SEAFOOD NEWS — NMFS has given formal approval to the New England Council’s Fish habitat amendment that makes major changes in rules regarding closed areas in New England.

The most immediate impact is on scallops, where NMFS approved the opening of closed area 1 and the Nantucket Lightship area.  The concept here was that an abundance of scallops in these areas would lead to rapid harvesting, and a lower swept area by scallop dredges than if vessels were trying to gain their allocations outside the closed areas.

Also research has shown that these were not significant areas for fish spawning.  The approval means that the options for scallop harvest will be at the maximum level considered by the council, which projects about 60 million pounds of scallop landings for the 2018-19 season.

NMFS rejected the opening of closed area II on Georges Bank, which is also a major scallop producer.

Overall, full time license holders will get a total of 6 closed area trips of 18,000 lbs each, along with 24 days at sea in the open areas.

The habitat framework is the most far reaching adjustments of closed areas in 20 years, and it will provide better protection for both fish and habitat while eliminating closures that no longer serve their intended purpose.

The major change that was not allowed by NMFS was the opening of Eastern Georges Bank, called closed area II.  This is the so called Northern Edge, which historically was one of the most abundant scallop producing areas.  NMFS is keeping it closed to protect habitat.

Council Executive Director Tom Nies said, “Naturally we’re disappointed that our proposed Closed Area II changes were not approved, but the fact that the vast majority of the amendment will be implemented is a solid endorsement of the work the Council and staff did to dramatically change the closure system off New England.”

The habitat framework also establishes a series of seasonal cod spawning closures to all gear, both recreational and commercial; and it also sets a number of areas where bottom trawl gear is prohibited, but the council makes distinctions in many areas that will allow use of gillnets and lobster gear, as well as scallop and clam dredging.

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