Saving Seafood

Misplaced NOAA footnote blamed for shark fin miscue

October 27, 2017 — US senator Cory Booker and others have been exaggerating the number of shark fin incidents in efforts to get legislation passed that would ban the practice, but it’s really a misplaced footnote that’s to blame, a fishing industry trade group says.

Booker, who has been suggested as a future possible presidential candidate, reported at a hearing of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, & Coast Guard, in early August, that he was “shocked to find out that, since 2010, [the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)] has investigated over 500 incidences of alleged shark fining.”

But the New Jersey Democrat is wrong, according to a press release issued by Saving Seafood on Thursday, bringing the matter to light.

“While the information NOAA provided in response to senator Booker’s staff was not entirely inaccurate, a footnote was attached to the wrong sentence, making it possible for a reader to misinterpret the over-inclusive information provided,” the group said.“So, in the past 7.5 years, with an annual average of 2.6 million pounds landed sustainably from federally managed shark fisheries, there has been on average just 3.5 incidents per year resulting in charges,” Saving Seafood said.

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

Read the full story at Undercurrent News

 

Footnote Error Leads to Dramatically Inflated Claims of Illegal Shark Finning from Sen. Booker, Oceana

October 26, 2017 (Saving Seafood) — The horrific practice of shark finning has been illegal in U.S. waters since 2000, and is vehemently opposed by all U.S. shark fisheries and participants in those fisheries. The Office of Law Enforcement at NOAA Fisheries is enforcing the current finning prohibition; US fishermen are in full compliance with the law.  There are very few incidents of this terrible practice on record in the United States.

On August 1, 2017, U.S. Senator Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) chaired a hearing of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, & Coast Guard regarding the reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA).  During the hearing, Senator Cory Booker (D-New Jersey) asked Chris Oliver, NOAA Assistant Administrator for Fisheries and head of the National Marine Fisheries Service, to keep him informed on NOAA investigations of shark finning allegations. Sen. Booker introduced a bill earlier this year designed to prevent people from possessing or selling shark fins in America.

Leading up to his question, Senator Booker stated the following. “You know that shark finning was first outlawed in U.S. waters in 2000. And a loophole in that original law was closed by the Shark Conservation Act of 2009. I recently asked your office how many shark-finning investigations NOAA has opened since January 1, 2010. I was shocked to find out that since 2010, NOAA has investigated over 500 incidences of alleged shark finning. As of April, there were seven shark finning cases that were open but not yet charged.”

Sen. Booker’s statement, that NOAA advised him of over 500 instances of alleged shark finning immediately sparked incredulity in the commercial fishing industry, because in June 2016, in an article by Ally Rogers, a communications specialist for NOAA’s Office of Law Enforcement (OLE), entitled OLE Working Hard To Identify, Prevent Incidents of Shark Finning, Illegal Shark Fishing, NOAA stated that during the ten year period from 2006-2016, 40% of the “nearly 80 shark-related incidents” referred to “fins that were not naturally attached to the shark carcasses.”  That works out to fewer than 32 incidents involving shark fins in a decade, or on average no more than 3.16 per year.

Saving Seafood asked NOAA how it could be that the agency told Senator Booker that they had “investigated over 500 incidences of alleged shark finning” in the past 7.5 years.

While the information NOAA provided in response to Senator Booker’s staff was not entirely inaccurate, a footnote was attached to the wrong sentence, making it possible for a reader to misinterpret the over-inclusive information provided.

In the NOAA case management system, there were 526 reports that contained the word “shark” in some form or another.  This could include a number of legal and illegal activities including inspections, boardings, a legal or illegal take of a shark, by-catch, harvesting sharks during a closed season, and unpermitted shark fishing activities, to name a few.  Any report that came into NOAA with the word “shark” in it, would have appeared as an incident in the numbers provided to Senator Booker.

In fact, of those 526 reports, only 85 were incidents that referred to “shark fins” or “shark finning”.  Of those 85 incidents, only 26 resulted in charges that could be a criminal complaint, a summary settlement, a written warning, or a Notice of Violation and Assessment (NOVA).  So, in the past 7.5 years, with an annual average of 2.6 million pounds landed sustainably from Federally managed shark fisheries, there has been on average just 3.5 incidents per year resulting in charges. And that is consistent with the earlier data.

In 2016, just ahead of the Discovery Channel’s “Shark Week,” Senator Booker, and House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce (R-California) joined with actor Morgan Freeman and the environmental group Oceana to introduce the Shark Fin Trade Elimination Act (S. 793/H.R. 1456, in the current Congress).  The ban is opposed by leading shark scientists David Shiffman of Simon Fraser University in British Columbia and Robert Hueter, Director of the Center for Shark Research at Mote Marine Laboratory in Sarasota, Florida.  Delegate Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan (I- Northern Mariana Islands), and Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-West Virginia) are also original co-sponsors.

Oceana, the Humane Society International, Wild Aid, and COARE have used the inaccurate information in support of the shark fin ban, erroneously arguing that even “in U.S. waters, our anti-finning law does not effectively stop shark finning.”  In a recent blog post, Lora Snyder, Campaign Director at Oceana, Iris Ho, Wildlife Program Manager at Humane Society International, Peter Knights, Executive Director at WildAid and Christopher Chin, Executive Director at COARE, reference “government records cited during recent Congressional testimony” to make the claim that “more than 500 alleged shark finning incidents… have taken place in U.S. waters since January 2010.”  They go on to extrapolate from that number, stating “That is approximately five cases every month.”

In fact, over the past decade, there have been fewer than four incidents per year.

Oceana hired The McGrath Group, headed by six-term former Congressman and President of the National Republican Club Ray McGrath to lobby for the bills, spending $20,000 with the GOP firm between July 1 and Sept 31 this year.

Marine Insurers Join the Fight Against Illegal Fishing

October 11, 2017 — Environmental NGO Oceana and a group of leading marine insurers have released a statement on safeguards to reduce the threat of illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing. The group has commited to implement and promote due-diligence processes that will make it harder for blacklisted fishing vessels to find insurance coverage.

According to the UN, IUU fishing costs the global economy between $10 billion and $24 billion annually, which translates to 11-26 million tonnes of fish. “IUU fishing has ramifications for all of us and contributes to overfishing. It takes away jobs from honest fishers and supplies the unsuspecting public with illegally-caught food,” said Lasse Gustavsson, the executive director of Oceana Europe.

Researchers have identified marine insurance as one of the main sources of leverage in the fight against IUU fishing. Just like the legal fishing fleet, many IUU vessels are required by law to have insurance, and many operators prefer to have it even if it isn’t required. In a 2016 paper, Dr. Dana Miller and Dr. Rashid Sumaila of the University of British Columbia’s Fisheries Economics Research Unit argued that many IUU fishing firms would be exposed to catastrophic risk if they could not insure their ships. Miller and Sumaila found that dozens of known IUU fishing vessels were listed on publically acessible insurance databases, demonstrating that some commercial insurers (and occasionally some P&I clubs) were extending coverage to blacklisted operators. They concluded that some insurers did not have adequate safeguards in place to ensure that vessels suspected of illegal fishing are kept off the rolls. The researchers did not name the firms involved.

Read the full story at Maritime Executive 

Lora Snyder: Help Harvey recovery by consuming sustainable Gulf seafood

October 6, 2017 — Many of the men and women who work every day to bring some of the best, sustainable seafood to your dinner plate have plenty to worry about – fishing can be hard business.

Fishers and others in the industry deal with a host of ever-changing variables: fuel prices, market fluctuations, fishery health and abundance, competition with imports, long unpredictable hours and one of the more uncertain wild cards – weather. Changing winds can mean the difference between days’ or even weeks’ worth of income.

And now, weather is becoming even more of a concern. Today, stronger and stronger storms that scientists attribute to warming oceans – a result of human-caused climate change – are becoming more common. These days bad weather is an existential threat to the industry.

According to the Chronicle Hurricane Harvey damaged or destroyed 25 percent of the Texas shrimp fleet. Oystermen predicted shortages of upcoming oyster harvests due to the runoff from Harvey’s historic rains. And then came Irma. Tragically, a Florida shrimper lost his life off the coast of Tampa, when the hurricane bulldozed up the state’s Gulf Coast.

Hurricanes Harvey and Irma have been devastating, but there is a unique way to help your fellow Americans. This is a great time to get better acquainted with our own healthy and sustainable seafood that’s right here in our backyard.

Read the full opinion piece at the Houston Chronicle

Shark fin bans might not help sharks, scientists say

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Oceana claims four countries violated EU law by fishing illegally in African waters

September 14, 2017 — Environmental nonprofit Oceana is claiming vessels from the European Union’s distant-water fleet have been fishing unlawfully in the waters off the coasts of Equatorial Guinea and Gambia.

Using Automatic Identification System (AIS) data collected by satellite and terrestrial receivers tool Global Fishing Watch, Oceana said it tracked 19 vessels from Greece, Italy, Portugal, and Spain fishing unlawfully for more than 31,000 hours in African waters between April 2012 and August 2015.

The European Union has signed fisheries partnership agreements with several African countries, offering financial and technical support in exchange for fishing rights. However, its agreements with Gambia and Equatorial Guinea are “dormant,” signifying countries that signed fishing partnership agreements “without having a protocol into force, for structural or conjonctural reasons.” Under rules set by the European Commission, EU vessels are not allowed to fish in waters of countries with dormant agreements.

Read the full story at Seafood Source

Trump administration nears decision that sets stage for offshore drilling in the Atlantic

September 11, 2017 — Environmental groups are bracing for the Trump administration to approve controversial testing along the Eastern seaboard that would mark a significant step toward offshore drilling in waters off the coast of Florida all the way north to the Delaware Bay.

Five geophysical survey companies are seeking federal permission to shoot pressurized air blasts into the ocean every 10 to 12 seconds around the clock for weeks and months at a time, seeking fossil fuel deposits beneath the Atlantic Ocean floor.

The testing, which would cover 330,000 square miles of ocean, faces fierce opposition from environmental groups and local officials due to the possible economic and environmental effects.

Because the underwater blasts are louder than a Saturn V rocket launch and can be heard by monitoring devices more than 2,500 miles away, scientists fear long-term exposure to the noise could cause hearing loss and impair breeding, feeding, foraging and communication activity among dolphins, endangered whales, other marine mammals and sea turtles.

Some worry the blasts could cause mother whales and their calves to become separated. Commercial and recreational fisheries could also be affected if fish change their breeding and spawning habits to avoid the noise. Others fear disoriented marine life could collide with the vessels that tug the air guns or become entangled in their lines. Oceana, an international conservation group, estimates that 138,000 marine mammals could be injured in the testing process.

Seventy-five marine scientists asked the Obama administration in 2015 to reject seismic air gun testing in the Atlantic because of these threats. Twenty-eight marine biologists did the same in 2016 over concerns that testing would harm the estimated 500 endangered North Atlantic right whales.

“That’s the species we are most concerned about,” said Doug Nowacek, associate professor of conservation technology at the Duke University Marine Laboratory in Beaufort, North Carolina. “They are in decline. They live coastally along the U.S. They were hunted (by whalers) and they were slowly recovering. And now they’re starting to decline again.”

Read the full story from the McClatchy Company at the Miami Herald

Oceana Loses Court Battle on Mid-Atlantic & New England Standardized Bycatch Reporting Methodology

August 28, 2017 — WASHINGTON — As part of its efforts to prevent overfishing, Congress has directed the National Marine Fisheries Service and regional councils to establish methodologies for collecting and reporting data on fish that are caught but subsequently discarded. Such discards are known as bycatch. In response to the congressional directive, the Northeast region adopted its Standardized Bycatch Reporting Methodology in 2015. Oceana, Inc., a nonprofit organization focused on protecting the oceans, filed suit, claiming that the adoption of this methodology violates the Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA), the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

In March 2015, the National Marine Fisheries Service approved a new version of the Standardized Bycatch Reporting Methodology, which is set forth in Standardized Bycatch Reporting Methodology: An Omnibus Amendment to the Fishery Management Plans of the Mid-Atlantic and New England Regional Fishery Management Councils, AR 6438-7511. NMFS then promulgated a final rule implementing the amendment in June 2015. United States District Judge Ellen Segal Huvelle has ruled that Oceana has not identified any feature of the 2015 SBRM that violates the MSA, APA, or NEPA.

The following is excerpted from an article published Friday by Courthouse News Service:

Federal regulators ducked a conservation-minded challenge Thursday concerning rules meant to minimize fishing bycatch.

The National Marine Fisheries Service adopted the rules in question two years ago, with approval from the D.C. Circuit.

Though the rules requires fishing vessels to occasionally have a biologist document the amount of fish caught and discarded, the group Oceana complained in a federal complaint that the infrequency of such observation undermines its efficacy as a serious check on fishing abuses.

U.S. District Judge Ellen Segal Huvelle sided with the agency Thursday at summary judgment, saying the issue comes down to how the Fisheries Service allocates its funding for NMFS, short for standardized bycatch reporting methodology.

“There is no funding trigger that needs to be adequately defined, nor a discretionary procedure for which the agency must set out an identifiable standard,” the ruling states. “Since there is no impermissibly vague funding trigger, the agency’s funding allocations to the SBRM are not reviewable.”

Read the full story at Courthouse News Service

Indonesia’s decision to share vessel tracking data ‘ill-advised,’ some say

August 22, 2017 — JAKARTA, Indonesia — Not everyone supports the Indonesian government’s decision to publish information on the location of fishing boats in its waters, via data mapping platform Global Fishing Watch, accessible to anyone with a computer.

The move, aimed at countering illegal fishing, has earned a backlash from some observers, who say it may prove “counterproductive.”

In June, Indonesia became the first country to share its Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) data with Global Fishing Watch, a partnership between Google, conservation group Oceana, and SkyTruth, which uses tools like satellite imagery to monitor environmental issues. The platform provides both general data for the public and more detailed information seen only by authorities.

The move was praised by conservationists for its potential to deter illegal fishing. But some argue that publishing the data will reveal the location of Indonesia’s best fisheries, creating a run on the resources that further depletes them.

“Without any access restrictions to the data, fishing vessels will likely rush to sail to locations with the most fishing vessels, and this will result in massive exploitation of marine natural resources,” said Marthin Hadiwinata of the Indonesian Traditional Fishermen’s Union (KNTI).

“Isn’t that going to end up becoming unsustainable instead?”

Read the full story at Mongabay

The Man Who Got Americans to Eat Trash Fish Is Now a Billionaire

July 19, 2017 — Chuck Bundrant was a college freshman with $80 in his pocket when he drove halfway across the country to Seattle to earn a few bucks fishing. The year was 1961.

He hasn’t stopped fishing since.

And today, Bundrant, the founder and majority owner of Trident Seafoods, is worth at least $1.1 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. His wealth is due to a fair measure of pluck. Back in the early 1980s, he persuaded Americans to eat pollock, then considered a trash fish, at fast-food restaurants and, to this day, Trident ships it — along with salmon and cod — to chains including Costco and Safeway.

Along the way, Bundrant cultivated politicians who would pass legislation that aided Trident’s business by keeping foreign fisheries at bay. These days, Trident also is benefiting from health-conscious consumers gravitating to seafood.

The Bloomberg index calculates that Bundrant owns 51 percent of privately-held Trident, which had $2.4 billion in revenue last year, based on information compiled from trade groups. It’s valued by the Bloomberg index at about $2.1 billion, using comparisons to five publicly traded peer companies, including Clearwater Seafoods Inc. and Oceana Group Ltd. Trident operates about 16 processing plants and 41 fishing vessels — and remains defiantly independent.

“We don’t answer to investment bankers like some other seafood companies,’’ the company writes on its website. “We only answer to our customers, our fishermen, and our employees.”

Read the full story at Bloomberg