Saving Seafood

Working Together to Protect Endangered Species

March 14, 2016 — The following was released by NOAA Fisheries:

To preserve and protect species that are threatened or endangered, federal agencies are required to work together under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Titled “Interagency Cooperation,” section 7 is an important part of the ESA as it ensures that the actions authorized, funded, or carried out by federal agencies do not jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species. This also applies to the habitat of listed species to make sure that actions do not impact areas where they live and spawn. Under the ESA, species are listed as endangered or threatened according to a process that examines their population status as well as five factors that may affect their continued survival (see section 4 of the ESA for a description of the five ESA factors for listing).

Section 7 requires consultation between the federal “action agency” (the agency authorizing, funding, or undertaking an action) and the appropriate “expert agency.” In the case of marine and several anadromous species, such as sturgeon and Atlantic salmon, NOAA Fisheries is the consulting agency while the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service conducts consultations for terrestrial and freshwater species.

Getting Recommedations Early On Is Key

The section 7 team at the Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO) works on a variety of projects including dredging of navigation channels, offshore wind projects, and fisheries management plans. We consult with other federal agencies to ensure that their activities are in compliance with section 7 of the ESA. In some cases, a federal agency (or a state, private party, or consultant) may seek technical assistance in the early planning stages of a project. This is the best time for us to provide information on species life history, best management practices, and measures to reduce the extent of potential effects. The federal action agency can then include our recommendations in their project proposal before initiating the consultation process with us. During the technical assistance phase, a federal agency may determine that there is no effect of the activity on listed species (i.e., there are no listed species present during the activity and no effects to habitat). In this case, there is no need for further ESA section 7 consultation.

In situations where an activity may affect a listed species, the action agency needs to begin the consultation process. First, the action agency makes one of two determinations: the activity is “not likely to adversely affect” listed species or the activity is “likely to adversely affect” listed species. Activities are “not likely to adversely affect” species if all effects are “insignificant” (so small that they cannot be detected) or “discountable” (extremely unlikely to occur). If the action agency makes this determination, we review their analysis, and if we agree with their finding, we respond with a letter of concurrence. This is the “informal” consultation process.

Read the full story online

How In Trouble Are Bluefin Tuna, Really? Controversial Study Makes Waves

March 9, 2016 — Bluefin tuna have been severely depleted by fishermen, and the fish have become a globally recognized poster child for the impacts of overfishing. Many chefs refuse to serve its rich, buttery flesh; many retailers no longer carry it; and consumers have become increasingly aware of the environmental costs associated with the bluefin fishery.

But a group of scientists is now making the case that Atlantic bluefin may be more resilient to fishing than commonly thought — and perhaps better able to rebound from the species’ depleted state. In a paper published Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the researchers suggest that fishery managers reassess the western Atlantic bluefin’s population, which could ultimately allow more of the fish to be caught.

The 10 co-authors, most of whom are scientists with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, say they’ve all but confirmed that bluefin tuna spawn in an area of the Atlantic Ocean previously suspected but not known to be a breeding ground. Not only that; the tuna spawning in this area off the Atlantic Coast are much younger and smaller than the age and size at which it was previously believed the fish become sexually mature, according to the scientists.

This, their paper claims, would make the western Atlantic bluefin tuna “less vulnerable to overexploitation and extinction than is currently estimated.”

But the study is controversial. Several tuna researchers we spoke with warned that the results are preliminary, and it’s much too soon to use them to guide how fisheries are managed

Read the full story from NPR

Scientists Find Possible New Spawning Area for Western Atlantic Bluefin

SEAFOODNEWS.COM [SeafoodNews]  By Peggy Parker — March 8, 2016 — Scientists from NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) and the University of Massachusetts Boston have found evidence of Atlantic bluefin tuna spawning activity off the northeastern United States in an area of open ocean south of New England and east of the Mid-Atlantic states called the Slope Sea.

The findings suggest that the current life-history model for western Atlantic bluefin may overestimate age-at-maturity. If so, the authors conclude that western Atlantic bluefin may be less vulnerable to fishing and other stressors than previously thought.

Prior to this research, the only known spawning grounds for Atlantic bluefin tuna were in the Gulf of Mexico and the Mediterranean Sea. The evidence for a new western Atlantic spawning ground came from a pair of Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) research cruises in the Slope Sea during the summer of 2013.

“We collected 67 larval bluefin tuna during these two cruises, and the catch rates were comparable to the number collected during the annual bluefin tuna larval survey in the Gulf of Mexico,” said David Richardson of NEFSC, lead author of this study. “Most of these larvae were small, less than 5 millimeters, and were estimated to be less than one week old. Drifting buoy data confirmed that these small larvae could not possibly have been transported into this area from the Gulf of Mexico spawning ground.”

Larvae collected during the cruises were identified as bluefin tuna through visual examination and genetic sequencing. To confirm the identification, larvae were sent to the Alaska Fisheries Science Center laboratory in Juneau, where DNA sequences verified that the larvae were Atlantic bluefin tuna.

A single bluefin tuna can spawn millions of eggs, each of which is just over a millimeter in diameter, or the size of a poppy seed. Within a couple of days these eggs hatch into larvae that are poorly developed and bear little resemblance to the adults. Larval bluefin tuna can be collected in plankton nets and identified based on their shape, pigment patterns and body structures.

High-value Atlantic bluefin tuna has a unique physiology that allows it to range from the tropics to the sub-arctic. As a highly migratory species, Atlantic bluefin tuna is assessed by the Standing Committee on Research and Statistics (SCRS) of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) as distinct eastern and western stocks separated by the 45 degree west meridian (or 45 w longitude). The U.S. fishery harvest from the western Atlantic stock is managed through NOAA Fisheries’ Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan.

For many years, global overfishing on this species was prevalent, resulting in substantial population declines. Recent international cooperation in managing catches has contributed to increasing trends in the abundance of both the eastern and western management stocks. The western stock, targeted by U.S. fishermen, is harvested at levels within the range of the SCRS’ scientific advice.

This research may change the long-held assumption that bluefin tuna start spawning at age 4 in the Mediterranean Sea and age 9 in the Gulf of Mexico. Electronic tagging studies begun in the late 1990s showed that many bluefin tunad, did not visit either spawning ground during the spawning season, despite being large enough to be of spawning age. This led some to say that these larger fish were not yet spawning, and that the age-at-maturity for western Atlantic bluefin tuna was 12-16 years, rather than 9 years, as was assumed in the stock assessment.

A consistent supporter of an alternate hypothesis was Molly Lutcavage at the Large Pelagics Research Center of the University of Massachusetts Boston. She believed tuna that did not visit the Gulf of Mexico and Mediterranean Sea were spawning elsewhere. Her research team used electronic tagging data from the Lutcavage lab to present an alternate model of western Atlantic bluefin tuna spawning migrations.

Only the largest bluefin tuna, those over about 500 pounds, migrate to the Gulf of Mexico spawning area. After these fish exit the Gulf of Mexico, they swim through the Slope Sea rapidly, on their way to northern feeding grounds. On the other hand, smaller bluefin tuna, ranging in size from 80 to 500 pounds, generally spend more than 20 days in the Slope Sea during the spawning season, a duration consistent with spawning. Lutcavage is a co-author on the study.

“Last year, we demonstrated using endocrine measurements that bluefin tuna in the western Atlantic mature at around 5 years of age. That study, and ones before it, predicted that these smaller fish would spawn in a more northerly area closer to the summertime foraging grounds in the Gulf of Maine and Canadian waters,” Lutcavage said. “The evidence of spawning in the Slope Sea, and the analysis of the tagging data, suggests that western Atlantic bluefin tuna are partitioning spawning areas by size, and that a younger age at maturity should be used in the stock assessment.”

Researchers also found that individual tuna occupy both the Slope Sea and Mediterranean Sea in separate years, contrary to the prevailing view that individuals exhibit complete fidelity to a spawning site. Reproductive mixing between the eastern and western stocks may occur in the Slope Sea and the authors contend that population structure of bluefin tuna may be more complex than is currently thought.

“Past analyses of Atlantic bluefin tuna population structure and mixing between the western and eastern Atlantic stocks may need to be revisited because they do not account for the full spatial extent of western Atlantic spawning,” Richardson said. “So much of the science and sampling for Atlantic bluefin tuna has been built around the assumption that the Gulf of Mexico and Mediterranean Sea are the only spawning grounds. This new research underscores the complexity of stock structure for this species and identifies important areas for future research.”

The authors expect these findings could potentially lead to a lower estimated age-at-maturity, a critical component of the stock assessment, and could reopen consideration of the nature and level of mixing between the western and eastern Atlantic populations. This new information will be considered along with other pertinent research as part of the regular ICCAT SCRS stock assessment process.

The findings were published yesterday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The scientific team for this study comprises researchers from NOAA’s Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) and Alaska Fisheries Science Center (AFSC), the Large Pelagics Research Center at the University of Massachusetts Boston, the School of Marine Science and Technology at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, and NOAA’s Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO). The sampling for this study was supported by NOAA, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, and the US Navy through interagency agreements for the Atlantic Marine Assessment Program for Protected Species (AMAPPS).

This story originally appeared on SeafoodNews.com, a subscription site. It has been reprinted with permission

Southern California Fisheries Hit Hard By Warming Water

March 2, 2016 — Squid have pretty much disappeared from Southern California in the last several months.

“Squid’s kind of our bread and butter. That’s what a lot of us make our payments and survive on,” said Corbin Hanson who fishes off the coast of Southern California.

“It’s extremely frustrating. It’s demoralizing to go out and not be able to catch anything,” Hanson said.

Hanson has not caught any squid for more than four months. Squid is one of California’s largest commercial fisheries, and much of it is exported to countries in Asia and the Mediterranean.

Oceanographer Andrew Leising with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries said unusually warm water is causing squid and other fish to move farther north. At a meeting at the Aquarium of the Pacific, scientists explained one cause of the warming waters is what they call “the blob.”

“During the, say, 30-year record, this event “the blob” stands out far beyond anything we’ve seen in that 30 years. And in terms of that total warmth of the water, it’s pretty much the warmest we’ve ever measured and over an extremely large volume of water,” Leising said.

Read the full story and watch the video from Voice of America

GSI Responds to Impact of Federal Fisheries on Small Businesses Hearing

March 4, 2016 — The Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Chaired by Louisiana Senator David Vitter, recently held a hearing on “The Impacts of Federal Fisheries Management on Small Businesses”. In a letter to Chairman Vitter and Ranking Member Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), the Gulf Seafood Institute urged committee members to keep in mind the myriad benefits this landmark legislation has had on Gulf coast fisheries.

Witness at the hearing included; Ms. Pam Anderson, Operations Manager at Capt. Anderson’s Marina in Panama City, FL, Mr. Hughes Andry, Regional Manager of Sportco Marketing, Mr. Brad Gentner, President of Gentner Group Consulting, Mr. James Hayward, President ofXI Northeast Fisheries Sector and Dr. Joshua Wiersma, Managerof  Northeast Fisheries for the Environmental Defense Fund.

“Thousands of fishermen and millions of consumers nationwide depend on robust, sustainably‐managed Gulf of Mexico U.S. fisheries,” said Harlon Pearce, GSI’s President and NOAA Marine Advisory Committee member. “Commercial, charter-for-hire and recreational anglers in the Gulf of Mexico are a regional economic powerhouse; protecting the public’s access to these resources for every American must be paramount.”

Read the full story from the Gulf Seafood Institute

Monitor Costs Shift to Fishermen March 1

February 29, 2016 — Cape Ann lawmakers Bruce Tarr and Ann-Margaret Ferrante walked a thin line last week when they sat down and penned a letter to state Attorney General Maura Healey on the issue of at-sea monitoring.

The state Senate minority leader and state representative, respectively, wanted to enlist Healey’s support in the legal campaign to block NOAA Fisheries’ plan to shift the cost of mandated at-sea monitoring (ASM) to groundfish permit holders on March 1 and they knew they were racing the clock.

They also didn’t want to overplay their hand by pressuring Healey to follow a specific course of remedy, such as having Massachusetts become an intervening plaintiff in the ongoing federal lawsuit filed by New Hampshire fisherman David Goethel seeking to block NOAA Fisheries’ plan to transfer the responsibility of funding ASM to the fishermen as of Tuesday.

“We didn’t want to pre-suppose any method of support,” Tarr said. “We just believe that this plan represents such an injustice that it would be a serious mistake not to look at every option and we wanted to make sure the commercial fishing industry is represented.”

So, Tarr and Ferrante carefully worded their letter, asking the state’s senior law enforcement official to explore any available legal avenue for supporting the industry effort that Goethel’s lawsuit has emerged to most poignantly represent.

“We request that your office explore all appropriate legal means to support our fishing families and ports through vehicles such as the current pending case,” they wrote, referring to the Goethel lawsuit that was filed in U.S. District Court in Concord, New Hampshire. “We are interested in Mr. Goethel’s plight because his situation is comparable to that of fishermen in Gloucester and the statewide fishing industry.”

Read the full story at the Gloucester Times

Coral Reef Die-Off Reaches Record Duration, Says New Research

February 26, 2016 — Rising global temperatures combined with an especially powerful El Niño are causing one of the biggest coral reef die-off events ever recorded.

The researchers, who are monitoring and forecasting offsite link the loss of corals from disease and heat stress due to record ocean temperatures, report that the global coral bleaching event that started in 2014 could extend well into 2017.

Approximately 500 million people worldwide depend upon reefs for food and to protect coastlines from storms and erosion. Coral reefs provide habitat, spawning and nursery grounds for economically important fish species; provide fishing, recreation, and tourism jobs and income to local economies; are a source of new medicines, and are hotspots of marine biodiversity. Reefs contribute approximately $29.8 billion to world economies each year. In the United States, NOAA Fisheries estimates the commercial value of U.S. fisheries from coral reefs is more than $100 million.

“We are currently experiencing the longest global coral bleaching event ever observed,” said Mark Eakin, NOAA’s Coral Reef Watch coordinator. “We may be looking at a 2- to 2½-year-long event. Some areas have already seen bleaching two years in a row.”

According to Eakin, the length of the event means corals in some parts of the world have no time to recover before they are hit by more bleaching. The current global bleaching event is hammering some reefs repeatedly.

Scientists first observed the current global coral bleaching event beginning in mid-2014, when bleaching began in the western Pacific Ocean. In October 2015, as the current El Niño was still strengthening, NOAA scientists declared the third global bleaching event on record was underway.

The NOAA coral scientists point out that reefs that bleached in 2015 in the Caribbean and Florida Keys have just started to recover, but may start bleaching all over again as early as July. Eakin also notes that in the Pacific, corals in Fiji’s nearshore waters are bleaching with lots of dead coral for the second consecutive year, and could be worse than last year.

Read the full story at Canada Journal

NORTH CAROLINA: Federal Closure Looms Over Cobia Season

February 25, 2016 — The N.C. Marine Fisheries Commission voted in late February to reduce the daily creel limit for cobia from two fish to one in state waters, and fisheries officials are hoping to find more ways to delay a federal closure of the season that could come as soon as June 15.

Rereational fishermen caught almost a million pounds over their annual catch limit of 630,000 pounds in Atlantic Ocean waters north of the Florida-Georgia line last year, according to NOAA Fisheries, and federal regulations mandates a reduction in harvest this year.`

Dr. Louis Daniel, director of the N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries, hopes that the creel-limit reduction, and perhaps an increase in the minimum size could allow North Carolina fishermen to have their season extended. States have an understanding with NOAA Fisheries and the South Atlantic Fisheries Management Council (SAFMC) that measures adopted to reduce state-by-state catches could result in a longer 2016 season.

At its Feb. 17-19 meeting in Wrightsville Beach, the Commission voted 7-0, with Sammy Corbett, the chairman, abstaining, to lower the daily creel limit from two fish to one, effective Feb. 27. The NCDMF has asked the ASFMC how long raising the size minimum from 32 to 36 or 40 inches might extend the season.

Read the full story at the North Carolina Sportsman

Fishing Monitor Program Suspended and Will Start Again March 1, When Boats Must Pay Costs

February 25, 2016 — NOAA Fisheries exhausted its budgeted money for at-sea monitoring of Northeast fishing sector groundfish boats on Feb. 16 and has suspended all required monitoring until the fishing industry assumes monitoring costs on March 1.

The details of the suspension, which has not been publicly announced by NOAA, were contained in a Feb. 19 declaration filed by NOAA Regional Administrator John K. Bullard in the federal lawsuit New Hampshire fisherman David Goethel of Hampton filed against the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Department of Commerce and officials within those federal agencies.

The suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Concord, New Hampshire, seeks to block NOAA from transferring to the fishing industry the responsibility of paying for contracted at-sea monitoring (ASM), charging it will economically destroy what is left of the Northeast groundfishing fleet.

Late last fall, NOAA said it anticipated retaining sufficient money to continue paying the ASM costs until March 1. That changed, according to Bullard’s declaration, on Feb. 16 when NOAA realized it had not sufficiently updated the weekly reports used to determine the number and cost of observed trips on sector groundfish boats.

“On or about Feb. 16, the (Northeast Fisheries) Science Center became aware for the first time that recent updates did not include information for all completed trips … and that committed government funds to pay for ASMs had been exhausted,” Bullard wrote in his declaration.

NOAA Fisheries, he said, then decided to cease until March 1 the requirement and deployment of monitors on sector trips selected for coverage.

“Due to a lack of funds, those trips have been issued waivers from the requirement to take on ASM,” Bullard wrote. “This decision is based on our commitment that sectors be provided adequate notice of the onset of industry funding so that necessary accommodations, planning and contracting can occur.”

Bullard stated the agency is confident the temporary suspension of observer coverage will not jeopardize NOAA Fisheries’ ability to estimate discards by sector vessels — one of the primary tasks of the ASM program.

Read the full story at the Gloucester Times

LOUISIANA: Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance fights NOAA over aqua farms

NEW ORLEANS, La. — February 25, 2016 — The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA)  decision to approve industrial offshore fish farming last month in federally protected waters in the Gulf of Mexico is a strong concern in a “delicate and restricted estuarine system,” according to a leading non-profit fisherman’s organization.

Eric Brazer, deputy director at the Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance, told the Louisiana Record that there are strong concerns with constructing an aquaculture facility of unprecedented size.

“We’ve already seen the catastrophic damage of the Deepwater Horizon disaster in this sensitive ecosystem,” Brazer said. “It will likely take generations to understand the true ecological and economic cost, the latter of which is already on the order of billions of dollars.”

Finalized in January, the plan for the aqua farms will permit up to 20 industrial facilities, which will see approximately 64 million pounds of fish produced every year in the Gulf of Mexico. This is the same amount of wild fish currently caught in the Gulf of Mexico annually, meaning that farmed fish would double offerings and flood the market.

Brazer said that it will be future generations who suffer as a result.

“It is our commercial fishing and charter businesses in the Gulf of Mexico, and those of the next generation, that will be the ones carrying the entire burden of risk that comes out of this new aquaculture industry,” he said.

A suit was filed against NOAA by a number of Gulf fishing groups, including Brazer’s organization, in the U.S. Eastern District Court of Louisiana on Feb. 12. The suit alleges that NOAA has no authority to undertake the offshore fish farming, and that allowing aqua farms is a threat to native and endangered species, the ecosystem, and the fish we eat.

Read the full story from the Louisiana Record