Saving Seafood

Florida sets 40-day red snapper season

April 18, 2018 — TALLAHASSEE, Fl. — The state has set a 40-day red snapper season for recreational anglers in federal and state waters this year.

The season will run June 11 to July 21, which is significantly longer than the 24-day season — May 27 to mid-June — the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission originally had proposed. The season for-hire vessels, which includes charter boats and head boats, has not yet been announced and is still under the direction of the federal government.

“Florida is a premier fishing destination, and saltwater fishing in the Gulf of Mexico has a $7.6 billion economic impact in our state every year,” Gov. Rick Scott said in a press release announcing the season. “Adding additional opportunities for anglers to enjoy Florida’s world-class fishing not only benefits our visitors but also our Gulf Coast communities.”

The announcement marks the first time ever the state has been able to set the season for recreational anglers and non-reef-permitted charter captains in federal waters, as part of a two-year pilot program among the five Gulf states and the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

“We are going to give the states an opportunity to demonstrate effective management that improves recreational opportunities for all Americans,” Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross said in a press release.

Read the full story at the Panama City News Herald

 

NOAA Tells NE Management Council That Sectors 7 and 9 Plans May Not be Approved Until Mid-Summer

April 18, 2018 — SEAFOOD NEWS — NOAA is discussing the fate of the vessels in sectors 7 and 9 with the New England Fishery Management Council this morning.

This has been the subject of a stand-off in which NOAA has demanded the illegal fishing is sector 9 due to Carlos Rafael be accounted for before vessels, including those formerly in the sector, will be allowed to lease quota or operate.

Meanwhile, players in New Bedford who have been hurt by the enforcement action have been trying everything possible to start fishing operations again without any final decision by NOAA.

In their presentation which will be given to the Council this morning, NOAA lays out their plan and invites comments.

Their Sector 9 proposal is to treat illegal catch in each fishing year as if it was known immediately after the end of the season.   This would eliminate carryover of unused quota into the next season when illegal catch was involved.

Once the illegal catch was identified by year, and allocated, then the sector could repay that out of 2017 lease quota.  After the repayment, the sector would be free to lease its remaining quotas.

NOAA anticipates that if they conduct rulemaking this would happen by ‘mid-summer’.

Regarding sector 7, all of whose current roster transferred from sector 9, NOAA says they will not be allowed to start fishing on May 1st.

Instead, sector 7 allocations will be made through separate rule making.  This is because sector 7 is proposing substantive changes in their operational plans, including prohibiting any vessel owned by Carlos Rafael from fishing or leasing quota until it has ownership transferred.

NOAA will be holding meetings with the sectors to discuss the apportionment of overages.

This plan does not address the issue of whether these permits should have restrictions or even be allowed to be transferred.  The argument between New Bedford and some of the other New England Ports is whether the permits that are sanctioned should remain in New Bedford, be sold to the highest bidder no matter where they may operate, or be deactivated and the representative quota returned proportionally to all remaining quota holders.

This story originally appeared on Seafood News, it it republished here with permission.

 

New Bedford Mayor Jon Mitchell to NEFMC: Sector IX Closure Is Hurting New Bedford’s Economy

April 18, 2018 — The following statement was delivered to the New England Fishery Management Council today on behalf of New Bedford, Massachusetts Mayor Jon Mitchell. Mayor Mitchell also serves as Chairman of the New Bedford Port Authority:   

Thank you Chairman Quinn and Members of the Council for this opportunity to communicate about a matter of ongoing concern to the Port of New Bedford, namely the impact that the closure of Sector 9 of the Northeast Fishery is having on groundfishing operations in the Port.

The NOAA decision has had–and continues to have–troubling economic consequence for the Port of New Bedford and our local economy. It has triggered significant business losses among local companies that provide support services to the commercial fishing fleet, and has meant the loss of livelihood for dozens of local fishing families.

It is important for all parties to keep in mind the numerous New Bedford businesses and families who have played no direct role in the operation of Sector 9, but who now find themselves in severe financial distress as a result of the Sector’s closure.

While the significant human cost of the closure cannot be adequately measured, Professor Dan Georgiana of the School of Marine Science and Technology at the University of Massachusetts (SMAST) has used a standard NOAA economic impact model to estimate the economic damage being done to the Port of New Bedford. His analysis found that the Port suffered roughly $12 million in economic losses in just the first twenty-five days after the closure went into effort on November 20th of last year.

This week marks the fifth full month of the Sector 9 closure, and the losses continue to mount. If one extrapolates from Professor Georgiana’s original analysis, it is not unreasonable to suggest that the Port of New Bedford may now have cumulatively suffered tens of millions of dollars in losses in the last five months.

This figure includes the impacts on harvesting, processing, wholesale and retail market activity, but does not include the cost to the public of unemployment compensation or the impact on businesses that supply vessels or process groundfish.

None of this is to suggest that the one person at the center of the controversy should not be punished severely. Carlos Rafael should be held fully accountable for his actions. I emphasize rather that the Fisheries Service should undertake its rulemaking, as it is statutorily required, with the interests of the Port and its businesses in mind. At a minimum, this means that it should complete the rulemaking “expeditiously”–as NOAA’s notice of withdrawal said it would–so that the effected fishermen and businesses can get back to work without further delay.

The Service also noted it had to calculate the amount of “overage” to certain groundfish stocks caused by Rafael’s fraud before it completed its rulemaking. Yet the Service has had, for some time now, all the reasonably available information to complete this loss calculation. Again, I urge the Service to complete these calculations and its rule-making with all deliberate speed.

The clock is ticking against New Bedford fishermen and shore-side businesses. A resolution of this matter therefore cannot come soon enough for the Port of New Bedford. Thank you for your consideration.

 

Massachusetts: Lectures at New Bedford Whaling Museum will focus on restoring ocean health

April 18, 2018 — “Where the Land Meets the Sea,” a series of lectures at the New Bedford Whaling Museum in 2018, will feature projects, organizations and people who are working to restore and maintain ocean health and marine wildlife.

The series premieres April 26 with “Underwater Yellowstones.” Experts will explore marine sanctuaries off the coast and their associated benefits and challenges for fish, whales, scientists and humans. “Underwater Yellowstones” speakers are Benjamin Haskell, acting superintendent of Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary, NOAA ; Jenni Stanley, marine scientist with Northeast Fisheries Science Center, NOAA; and Michelle Bachman, habitat coordinator for New England Fishery Management Council.

The lecture begins at 7 p.m. and will be preceded by a reception at 6. Tickets are $10 for museum members and $15 for nonmembers. To register call (508) 997-0046 (ext. 100) or visit whalingmuseum.org.

Read the full story at the New Bedford Standard-Times

 

MAFMC Advisory Panel Applications Due April 20

April 18, 2018 — The following was released by the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council:   

The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council is soliciting applications from qualified individuals to serve on eight advisory panels. Advisory panels provide information and recommendations to the Council during the development of fishery management plans, amendments, specifications, and management measures. One of the chief responsibilities of advisory panels is the development of annual Fishery Performance Reports. These reports provide the Council and SSC with information about the factors that influenced fishing effort and catch within each fishery during the previous year.

Advisory panels are composed of individuals with diverse experience and interest in Mid-Atlantic fisheries. Members include commercial fishermen, recreational anglers, for-hire operators, dealers, scientists, environmentalists, and other members of the interested public. Most advisory panels meet 1-2 times per year. Members are compensated for travel and per diem expenses for all meetings.  Individuals who are appointed to advisory panels serve for three-year terms. All current advisory panel members must reapply in order to be considered for reappointment.

The Council is accepting applications for the following advisory panels:

  • Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass
  • Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish
  • Surfclam and Ocean Quahog
  • Tilefish
  • Bluefish
  • Ecosystem and Ocean Planning
  • River Herring and Shad
  • Dogfish (Jointly managed with New England Council)

How to Apply

Anyone interested in serving on an advisory panel may apply online or download an application at www.mafmc.org/forms/advisory-panel-application.

Completed applications must be received by Friday, April 20, 2018, 11:59 p.m. EST.

 

Regulators push for rope removal to save North Atlantic right whale

April 18, 2018 — In a multinational drive to protect the North Atlantic right whale, fisheries along the east coasts of the Canada and the United States are being mandated, legislated, or volunteering to reduce rope use as much as possible.

The Canadian government has instituted steps that requires snow crab fishermen use less rope, use more easily breakable rope and report any lost gear as soon as possible. These conditions apply to all fishing in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

While Canada’s federal effort has been heavily on the snow crab fishery, the Prince Edward Island Fishermen’s Association (PEIFA) recently laid out its own plan to reduce potential entanglements and involvements with the endangered whales.

No right whale has been found entangled in lobster gear, but nevertheless, the lobster fishermen in Area 24, along Prince Edward Islands’s North Shore, have agreed to voluntarily reduce what the gear they put in the water by at least 25 percent – setting their traps in bunches of six rather than a one trap set or smaller bunches.

“We feel we’re eliminating somewhere around 16,000 Styrofoam buoys out of the system and each of those buoys is responsible for 130 or 140 feet of rope, which go from the buoy down to the trap,” Francis Morrissey, of the Area 24 Lobster Advisory Board, said. “So we feel that by doing this, there’s 16,000 less chances for marine mammals to get entangled.”

South of the border, an op-ed in The Boston Globe by John K. Bullard, the retiring regional administrator for NOAA’s Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office, challenged the U.S. lobster industry to take the lead in heading off the extinction of the North Atlantc right whale.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

 

SSA Member to House Subcommittee: Sustainable Shark Bill Recognizes Sacrifices of U.S. Fishermen, Fin Ban Undermines Them

SSA member John Polston testifies before the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans today. (Photo: House Natural Resources Committee/YouTube)

April 17, 2018 — The following was released by the Sustainable Shark Alliance:   

At a House Natural Resources subcommittee hearing today, John Polston, a fisherman and member of the Sustainable Shark Alliance (SSA), testified in support of legislation that would promote shark conservation by incentivizing other nations to meet the same high standards of sustainability as U.S. shark fishermen.

In testimony before the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans, Mr. Polston, owner of King’s Seafood in Port Orange, Florida, praised the Sustainable Shark Fisheries and Trade Act (SSFTA) as a “proactive bill that levels the playing field for American fishermen.” The bipartisan legislation, introduced last month by Rep. Daniel Webster (R-FL) and a group of six Democrats and Republicans, would create a formal and transparent certification program for countries importing shark products into the United States. Nations would be required to prove that they have an effective prohibition on shark finning, and management policies comparable to those in the United States.

“The SSFTA creates an incentive for other nations to end shark finning and meet the same high standards for marine conservation to which the United States holds its fishermen,” Mr. Polston said. “This bill recognizes the sacrifices our fishermen have made, and continue to make, to rebuild domestic shark populations by leveling the playing field with our foreign competitors.”

Mr. Polston was joined in his support for the SSFTA by Dr. Robert Hueter, director of the Center for Shark Research at Mote Marine Laboratory in Sarasota, Florida, who served as a scientific reviewer for the legislation.

“The SSFTA will give the American people an effective tool to say, ‘No longer will we allow the import and consumption of unsustainably fished shark and ray products on American soil. Our participation as consumers in this practice ends now,’” Dr. Hueter said. “The bill does this without punishing American fishers who are conducting legal and sustainable shark fishing, providing a model of responsible management and conservation for the rest of the world.”

Mr. Polston and Dr. Hueter also expressed their opposition to another shark bill discussed at the hearing, the Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act, introduced by Rep. Ed Royce (R-CA). This legislation would ban the domestic sale of all shark fins, including responsibly and sustainably caught American shark fins.

“This bill punishes me and others in the shark fishery by taking away an important income source, undoubtedly pushing some small businesses into unprofitability,” Mr. Polston said. “It is an insult to American fishermen who have been required to give so much for decades to create a sustainable fishery.”

Alan Risenhoover, director of NOAA Fisheries’ Office of Sustainable Fisheries, voiced similar criticisms of the Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act.

“This bill does not meet its intent to improve the conservation and management of domestically harvested sharks,” Mr. Risenhoover said. “It prohibits the possession and sale of shark fins. This would hurt U.S. fishermen who currently harvest and sell sharks and shark fins in a sustainable manner under strict federal management.”

About the Sustainable Shark Alliance
The Sustainable Shark Alliance (SSA) is a coalition of shark fishermen and seafood dealers that advocates for sustainable U.S. shark fisheries and supports healthy shark populations. The SSA stands behind U.S. shark fisheries as global leaders in successful shark management and conservation. The SSA is a member of Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities.

 

Congressman Jones: Sustainable Shark Fisheries and Trade Act Levels the Playing Field for Domestic Producers

April 17, 2018 — The following statement was released by Congressman Walter B. Jones:

I would like to thank Chairman Lamborn and Chairman Bishop for holding this hearing today. I am pleased to join my friend, Congressman Dan Webster, in cosponsoring H.R. 5248 – the Sustainable Shark Fisheries and Trade Act. It is very important that America’s fishermen have a level playing field with foreign producers. The bill would hold other nations to the same conservation and management standards that America has adopted in our shark fisheries.

Under H.R. 5248, any nation seeking to export shark products to America must receive certification from the Secretary of Commerce that it has an effective ban on the practice of “shark finning,” and that it has a similar conservation and management program for sharks, skates, and rays. The bill also increases traceability of imported shark products.

If foreign countries are failing to manage their shark populations appropriately, they should change their ways. They shouldn’t be allowed to dump unsustainably harvested shark product on our market, and our legal, sustainable American harvesters should not be penalized for the shortcomings of foreign fishermen.

America has been a global leader in protecting shark species while allowing a sustainable harvest.  In fact, U.S. federal law mandates that the domestic shark fishery be managed sustainably.

According to renowned shark scientist, Dr. Robert E. Heuter of Florida’s Mote Marine Lab, America has “one of the best systems in the world for shark fisheries management and conservation.”  The proof can be seen in NOAA Fisheries own data.  NOAA Fisheries’ 2015 coastal shark survey captured and tagged “more than 2,800 sharks, the most in the survey’s 29-year history.”  The leader of the survey stated that NOAA Fisheries has “seen an increase in the number of sharks in every survey since 2001,” and the agency called the survey results “very good news for shark populations.”

R. 5248 is supported by the North Carolina Fisheries Association, Southeastern Fisheries Association, Blue Water Fishermen’s Association, Sustainable Shark Alliance, Garden State Seafood Association, and the Louisiana Shrimpers Association. This bill is a reasonable, balanced approach to leveling the playing field for domestic producers, while trying to encourage other nations to raise their shark management practices to appropriate levels.

Other legislative options before the subcommittee, including banning the trade of legally, sustainably harvested American shark products, represent an unnecessary, short-sighted overreach that should be rejected.

 

Shark Week Comes Early This Year

April 17, 2018 — The following was released by the House Committee on Natural Resources: 

Today at 1:00pm the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans will hold a legislative hearing on three bills including H.R. 5248, the bipartisan Sustainable Shark Fisheries and Trade Act, (Rep. Daniel Webster, R-Fla.), and H.R. 1456, the bipartisan Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act of 2017, (Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif.).

Debunking the Shark Finning Myth:

Shark finning is the brutal practice of removing a shark’s fin(s) at sea and returning the carcass, dead or alive, to the ocean. Despite what you may believe, shark finning in the United States is illegal. Today’s debate isn’t whether the act of shark finning is heinous or reprehensible… it is, and members of both parties and industry agree.

After the enactment of the Shark Finning Prohibition Act of 2000 and the Shark Conservation Act in 2010, shark fisheries in U.S. waters have been successfully and sustainably managed. In fact, according to NOAA, there has been a dramatic increase in shark population over the past decade. With that said, as with any other industry, there comes the need for balance. Shark fisheries are valuable contributors to the U.S. economy. Due to the success of the nation’s fisheries management and conservation, the U.S. ranks as one of the top-ten shark fishing nations in the world.

So What’s the Issue? And What’s the Solution?

While shark finning is almost universally banned, some countries still do not have or effectively enforce shark finning bans. While all can agree that this is unacceptable, there are two different approaches to fixing the problem: imposing additional regulations on U.S. fishermen to stem the tide of trade of inhumanely obtained shark fins (H.R. 1456) or to leverage access to U.S. markets to encourage foreign nations to adopt strong shark conservation measures (H.R. 5248).

Unintentional Consequences of Overregulating *Already Regulated* Fisheries:

While we all agree that the illegal trade of inhumanely obtained shark fins needs to be address, it must be done in a way that doesn’t penalize those that follow the rules.

One of today’s witnesses Alan Risenhoover, Director of the Office of Sustainable Fishers under the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, lays it on the table: “We cannot support the Shark Fin Sale Elimination Act (H.R. 1456) because the bill’s negative impact on U.S. fishermen would outweigh its minimal benefit to shark conservation.  The United States currently has effective laws and associated regulations that prevent shark finning and sustainably manages its fisheries.  As written, this bill does not meet its intent to improve the conservation and management of domestically harvested sharks.  It prohibits the possession and sale of shark fins.  This would hurt  U.S. fishermen who currently harvest and sell sharks and shark fins in a sustainable manner under strict federal management.  Furthermore, the bill does not significantly curb international trade in shark fins where the majority of trade in shark fins occurs.”

Imposing stricter regulations or removing sustainably sourced U.S. shark fins off the market could shift demand to bad actors and pave the way for a black market, unregulated supply. Nobody wants that.

Learn more at their website here.

 

Matching grants open for sustainable groundfish projects

April 17, 2018 — The New England groundish fishery is one of the priority targets of a new grants program by the National Fish & Wildlife Foundation to promote innovation in sustainable fisheries. through “effective participation by fishermen and fishing communities.”

The Fisheries Innovation Fund program, funded by NOAA and three private foundations, is set to award up to $950,000 nationally. Most of the grants are anticipated to fall within the range of $50,000 to $100,000.

The program, however, noted that priority for funding will be given to projects in one of four local fisheries — New England groundfish, West Coast groundfish, Gulf of Mexico reef fish and Gulf of Alaska halibut and groundfish.

The grants will require 100 percent matching funds from recipients. The NFWF said in its announcement that eligible recipients include non-profits, state government agencies, municipal governments, educational institutions and individual businesses.

To date, according to NFWF spokesman Rob Blumenthal, the Fisheries Innovation Fund “has awarded grants totaling over $20.3 million to 127 projects across 26 states, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.”

Those awards generated more than $22.5 million in matching funds from recipients “for a total conservation impact of $42.8 million.”

The three foundations joining NOAA in providing the overall funding include two with strong ties to environmental and conservation groups — the Kingfisher Foundation and the Walton Family Foundation — as well as the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation of Palo Alto, California, started by the founder of Intel.

Read the full story at the Gloucester Times