Saving Seafood

MAFMC Revises 2016 Spiny Dogfish Specifications

December 16, 2015 — The following was released by the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council:

The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council has revised the spiny dogfish specifications that were previously recommended for the 2016 fishing year. During the December 2015 Council Meeting last week in Annapolis, Maryland, the Council approved a revised acceptable biological catch (ABC) limit of about 52 million pounds and a commercial quota of 40 million pounds. The revised commercial quota represents an increase of nearly 60% relative to the quota originally recommended for 2016. In addition, the Council approved ABCs of 51 million pounds for 2017 and 50 million pounds for 2018. 

At a previous meeting in October, the Council had recommended substantial reductions in spiny dogfish catch limits for 2016, including a 50% cut in the commercial quota, in response to the findings of the 2015 spiny dogfish stock assessment update. Although the update concluded that the stock was neither overfished nor subject to overfishing, the new estimate of stock biomass had decreased markedly. The Council’s recommendations would have reduced the commercial quota for spiny dogfish by 50% next year. 

However, the Council expressed concern that the spiny dogfish assessment update did not include any data from 2014 – the result of mechanical issues with the Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) trawl survey vessel – and requested that the SSC work with the NEFSC to evaluate alternative ABC-setting methods that could address this data gap. Three different methods for calculating spiny dogfish biomass were evaluated, and the SSC identified a Kalman filter as the best available approach for overcoming the missing data. 

Using the alternative approach, the SSC recommended ABCs that resulted in commercial quotas of approximately 40 million pounds for 2016, 39 million pounds for 2017, and 38 million pounds for 2018. This represents a 20% reduction in quotas from 2015 to 2016. However, landings have been below 50% of the commercial quotas for the last two full fishing years, and the reduced quota is unlikely to be constraining. 

After considering additional public comment during last week’s meeting, the Council accepted the SSC’s revised ABC recommendation and associated management measures. The New England Fishery Management Council also approved similar specifications at its December meeting for this jointly-managed species, and if approved by the National Marine Fisheries Service, the new measures will go into effect May 1, 2016.

Overfishing is Getting Filleted by Markets

December 9, 2015 — Overfishing is a serious threat to the nearly 200 million people who depend on the world’s oceans for sustenance. After all, nearly one in five people around the world consume fish as their primary source of protein and overfishing has deleterious cascade effects on other marine ecosystems.

Illegal and excessive fishing are to a degree inevitable because oceans, rivers and many lakes are publicly administered. This gives fishermen an incentive to take from them as much as is legally possible. Yet, market-based resource management is offering a concrete solution to this “tragedy of the commons” and has already begun alleviating strains on U.S. fish stocks.

The U.S. economy is intertwined with the fate of the high seas. By conservative estimates, commercial and recreational fishing alone account for 1.3 million jobs and nearly $60 billion in economic activity. Overfishing has pernicious effects on Americans’ livelihoods: commercial anglers can lose out on up to 80 percent of potential revenue when local fish species see drastic population decline, as was the case in New England when cod, flounder, and halibut populations were unexpectedly low in 2009.

With market-based resource management, data from September 2015 show that the total number of wild stocks placed on the “overfishing” watch list has fallen to its all-time lowest level since 1997. Since the 2007 reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, annual catch limits (ACLs) have allowed the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to reduce the number of overfished U.S. stocks by nearly 75 percent since 2007 alone (from 41 in 2007 to only 10 in 2014). ACLs create total tonnage allotments based on a series of population growth factors specific to certain fish species.

Read the full story at Economics 21

 

DAVID SCHALIT: Report from ICCAT

December 7, 2015 — The following is a commentary submitted to Saving Seafood by David Schalit, the Vice President of the American Bluefin Tuna Association:

The International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) used to be the regional fishery management organization everybody loved to hate.  Its dysfunctionality was legendary.  ICCAT became famous because it is the regional fishery management organization responsible for Atlantic bluefin tuna, the famously “iconic” and “charismatic” tuna stock that has been the subject of intense media interest for a very long time and the only tuna species to star in its own cable television series. 

ICCAT’s Problem

In the mid-late 1990’s, due to concerns expressed by ICCAT scientists about the status of Atlantic bluefin, ICCAT began adopting measures to limit harvest of both east and west stocks.  Only the west Atlantic harvesters heeded the advices of ICCAT scientists.  European Union fishing countries and other eastern harvesters who target east Atlantic bluefin weren’t listening.  During the next several years the east Atlantic stock was subject to consistent and increasing overfishing, illegal fishing and unreported fishing.  In 2007 – the worst year on record for east Atlantic bluefin – ICCAT scientists estimated that catch in the east Atlantic could be as high as 60,000 MT, almost twice the allowed quota.  

As a consequence, “the plight of the Atlantic bluefin” became the subject of ongoing public relations campaigns by numerous environmental organizations.  Annual meetings of ICCAT in the years leading up to 2008 developed a circus atmosphere, consisting of a full complement of delegates, a large number of industry representatives, media and environmental observers as well as environmental activists who regularly demonstrated outside of the meeting venue.  As a result, ICCAT meetings were regularly covered by media worldwide.  

ICCAT’s Redemption

ICCAT finally began to redeem itself during its 2008 meeting when it mustered the political will to cease overfishing and begin the process of rebuilding east Atlantic bluefin stock.  Today, both east and west Atlantic bluefin stocks have become a fishery management success story. 

The New Problem

However, ICCAT may be returning to its old ways.  This time, the problem is with Atlantic bigeye tuna.  ICCAT scientists turned in a stock assessment on Atlantic bigeye this October indicating that the stock is presently overfished and with overfishing presently taking place.  ICCAT scientists urged the adoption of conservation measures to immediately address this problem.  Last week, the 24th annual meeting of ICCAT was held in Malta.  Unfortunately, when the meeting came to a close on November 17, ICCAT had failed to achieve meaningful conservation measures for Atlantic bigeye tuna.  Sound familiar?

What Were the Objectives?

The scientists recommended steps that would lead to increasing “future chances that the stock will be at a level that is consistent with the convention objectives.” The primary means available to ICCAT for achieving this were a reduction in harvesting of mature bigeye in the central/south Atlantic and a reduction in bycatch of juvenile bigeye in the Gulf of Guinea skipjack fishery.  Neither of these goals was met.

Major Harvesting Forces

The Atlantic bigeye tuna fishery consists of 8 major harvesters and 11 minor harvesters.  The eight major harvesters (China, EU, Ghana, Japan, Panama, Philippines, Korea and Chinese Taipei) are, in total, a fleet of 659 longline vessels plus assorted “support vessels”, mostly fishing in the equatorial Atlantic, in deep water, for mature bigeye.  The EU alone has 269 vessels in this fleet, and Japan has 245.  

In addition, there are 51 purse seine vessels permitted by ICCAT to operate in the Gulf of Guinea skipjack fishery that are responsible for significant bycatch of juvenile bigeye and yellowfin.  Of those 51 vessels, the EU (France and Spain) is the largest fleet, with 34 vessels.

To put this in perspective, in 2014, the 8 major harvesters were responsible for over 53,000 MT of bigeye catch, whereas the 11 minor harvesters, including the U.S. and Brazil, were responsible for just under 14,000 MT.  (The U.S. reported 800 MT of catch in 2014.)  And there is a great deal of uncertainty regarding the level of mortality on juvenile bigeye in the purse seine fishery. 

The Negotiations

During the negotiations at last week’s meeting, the U.S., Brazil and a few other minor harvesters squared off against the very well prepared forces of the EU and Japan who had the backing of their formidable fishing industries.  It is said that those who have “the most skin in the game” tend to prevail and so, notwithstanding the efforts of the U.S., Brazil and others to reduce fishing effort by these major harvesters, the EU, Japan and the 6 other major harvesters were the winners and Atlantic bigeye tuna was the loser.

Curiously, the major harvesters can make the claim to have reduced the overall TAC.  Atlantic bigeye harvesting is presently governed by an Atlantic-wide TAC from which each of the 8 major harvesters are given a fixed, “not to exceed” individual TAC. Last week, the major harvesters agreed to reduce their combined allowed TAC from its present level of 79,000 MT to to 58,000 MT.  This gives the distinct impression that significant conservation measures were taken.  However, landings averaged over the last 5 years are below 58,000 MT.  In actual fact, this agreement allows these harvesters another 9,000 MT above their reported landings of 2014.  Consequently, no actual cuts in catch were made. 

The Fiasco in the Gulf of Guinea

The problem in the Gulf of Guinea is an issue that has plagued ICCAT since the 1990s. ICCAT has made various attempts, beginning in the late 90’s, to reduce bycatch of juvenile bigeye and yellowfin typically weighing no more than 3-6 lbs, in the Gulf of Guinea purse seine skipjack fishery.  According to the scientists, none of these attempts yielded any reduction in bigeye bycatch.  Why?

At each ICCAT meeting in which this bycatch problem was addressed, the EU has tendered its own fully detailed proposal to address the problem.  In each instance, their proposal involved a variation on the concept of a time/area closure in the Gulf of Guinea for a fixed period during each fishing season.  Since the EU purse seine fleet is the dominant force in the Gulf of Guinea skipjack fishery, it is difficult to imagine why ICCAT would have ever seriously considered an EU proposal.  Clearly, the EU’s interests are best served by thwarting any conservation action that would have a negative effect on its seining activities in the Gulf.  However, in each instance, ICCAT has adopted the EU’s proposal.  And in every instance, ICCAT scientists subsequently found that these closures did not result in the reduction of bycatch.  Today, these facts are well known to ICCAT member countries.  So, why did ICCAT, in last week’s meeting, adopt a new EU-authored solution to the problem of bigeye bycatch that is likely to achieve nothing?  This, too, is reminiscent of the “old” ICCAT.

Final Outcome

We can point to other successes that came out of the ICCAT meeting such as significant progress on Convention amendments, eBCD and the development of harvest control rules; all important issues.  But if ICCAT fails in its primary task – the “conservation of Atlantic tunas” – all other successful initiatives are diminished in importance because of that failure. 

Fortunately for ICCAT, it has a chance to partially redeem itself at next years’ meeting, when it will address Atlantic yellowfin tuna, a stock that has some of the same problems as Atlantic bigeye.  Unfortunately, ICCAT will have to wait until 2018 to have a chance to again address the issue of conservation of bigeye tuna.

Marine Protected Areas: are they conservation measures?

October 28, 2015 — Billionaire philanthropist Richard Branson recently composed a brief article on his website to applaud recent efforts to expand marine protected areas (MPAs) around the world and to call for widespread no-take MPAs (marine reserves) on the high seas and in the exclusive economic zones of the developed world.

Of the efforts Branson highlights as positive steps forward, he cites The Bahamas efforts to protect at least 20% of its marine environment by 2020, the recent and controversial Ross Sea MPA proposal, and recent efforts by Pacific Island nations like Palau to fully protect upwards of 80% of its waters. Branson explains that, “science suggests we need to fully protect very large areas of ocean from destructive and extractive activities, so that at least 30% of the global ocean is fully protected,” but only 3% is currently marine reserve.

Branson believes the, “combination of overfishing, pollution and warming and acidifying seas,” can be alleviated by widespread, internationally agreed upon marine reserves:

“Now is the time for a massive groundswell that reflects the realities of the 21st century. So instead of destroying life in the sea, we must regenerate and rebuild it. Marine Protected Areas across the globe are the key to making sure this happens. From small to large, from the tropics to the icy frontiers, we need protection and we need to get moving on all fronts.”

Comment by James H. Cowen, Louisiana State University

Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) have become, in the eyes of many scientists, NGOs and lay people (most recently Richard Branson, CEO and owner of the Virgin empire), a solution for the overexploitation of fish populations and other marine aquatic animals (corals, sponges, gastropods, etc.) that are contained within their boundaries (Protect Planet Ocean) Many supporters of MPAs rightly acknowledge the many threats to the ocean, including climate change, ocean acidification, pollution, land based runoff, plastics, and overfishing. Then as a solution to these problems MPAs are proposed when, in fact, they impact none of these except legally regulated fishing, especially in the developed world where most fisheries are well managed. It is also important to note that most MPAs exclude commercial fishing, while recreational fishing is permitted. A Sciences paper published in 2004 indicated that recreational fishers account for 23% of the total US landings of the most relevant species (snappers, grouper, sea basses, several species of drums, etc.). Given the likelihood that recreational fishing mortality has increased since 2004, and is higher in MPAs the relevant species groups listed above are again indicative of poor planning.

Read the full story at CFOOD

Arctic Nations Seek to Prevent Exploitation of Fisheries in Opening Northern Waters

November 24, 2015 — Ruth Teichroeb, the communications officer for Oceans North: Protecting Life in the Arctic, an initiative of the Pew Charitable Trusts, sent a note this evening about new steps related to an issue I’ve covered here before – the rare and welcome proactive work by Arctic nations to ban fishing in the central Arctic Ocean ahead of the “big melt” as summer sea ice retreats more in summers in a human-heated climate.

Given how little is known about the Arctic Ocean’s ecology and dynamics, this is a vital and appropriate step.

Here’s her note about an important meeting in Washington in early December, which will likely be obscured as the climate treaty negotiations in Paris enter their final week at the same time:

The United States is hosting negotiations for an international Arctic fisheries agreement to protect the Central Arctic Ocean in Washington, D.C., on December 1 to 3. The five Arctic countries will meet for the first time with non-Arctic fishing nations to work on a binding international accord. This follows the declaration of intent signed in July by the Arctic countries.

The big question for this meeting is whether China, Japan, Korea and the European Union will attend and cooperate on a precautionary agreement to prevent overfishing given the dramatic impact of climate change in the Arctic.

Read the full story at The New York Times

Say Goodbye to Bycatch: Fishing Smarter in the 21st Century

November 23, 2015 — Fishing nets are blind. They have been for thousands of years.

Just like our ancestors, today’s commercial fishermen drop their nets, or “trawls”, into dark, opaque waters. What they pull up is anyone’s guess.

In addition to the fish being targeted, their trawls also contain “by-catch”: unintended fish species and ocean wildlife that are tossed back because they cannot be sold. The thing is, by the time the nets are hauled up, most of the by-catch is already dead.

So what’s the problem with catching a few extra fish?

What if I told you that by-catch is a major contributor to overfishing and poses a significant threat to the world’s oceans? Currently, in the United States, approximately 1 in 5 fish caught by commercial fishermen are by-catch. That’s 2 billion pounds of fish and other marine species wasted each year. Imagine inadvertently capturing, killing, and disposing of 4,800 blue whales…what an enormous, destructive waste.

In attempting to solve the by-catch problem, Rob Terry, founder of SmartCatch, asked himself: what if commercial fisheries could see inside their trawls before they reel them in?

In 2014, the Lindblad Expeditions-National Geographic (LEX-NG) Fund issued a grant to Rob Terry to develop SmartCatch’s Digital Catch Monitoring System, or DigiCatch for short. With DigiCatch technology, fisherman can reduce by-catch by having eyes underwater to monitor their trawls.

Read the full story at the National Geographic

Ocean activists, fishers and scientists differ on heavy anchovy declines

November 23, 2015 — A new, beautifully produced but troubling public service announcement from Oceana features “Glee” television actress and singer Jenna Ushkowitz diving with sea lions off Santa Barbara.

Fishing, she says, decimated Southern California’s historically booming stocks of Pacific sardine and Northern anchovy, a major food source for top ocean predators. Those stocks have dropped dramatically in the past decade, prompting reduced fishing quotas as starved sea lion pups and California brown pelican chicks die in record numbers.

“Sea lions rely on forage fish for survival. But years of overfishing have put this important food source in jeopardy,” Ushkowitz narrates while underwater footage shows her swimming through kelp. “Join Oceana and help protect forage fish in the Pacific. … We need to stop this and replenish.”

The West Coast’s leading fishery scientists, however, disagree. They believe the fish are most likely enduring natural population fluctuations and are on the cusp of making a big comeback.

Oceana, a nonprofit advocacy organization favored by celebrities such as Leonardo DiCaprio, insists that fishing is the primary problem. The group lobbied aggressively to close the West Coast anchovy fishery, delivering nearly 40,000 letters from concerned citizens nationwide to the Pacific Fishery Management Council, a 14-member body that sets fishing policy for California, Oregon and Washington, before its meeting last week.

Read the full story at Daily Breeze

NOAA: Haddock flourish, while cod stocks dwindle

November 21, 2015 — The groundfish stock updates released this week by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reflect what the agency says is the continuing deterioration of the Gulf of Maine cod stock, while showing that other stocks such as haddock, pollock and redfish appear to be flourishing.

The operational assessment updates were performed on 20 Northeast groundfish stocks, with the results corresponding to the state of the individual stocks through 2014.

The news for cod, according to the update, is really no news at all.

“Based on this updated assessment, the Gulf of Maine Atlantic cod stock is overfished and overfishing is occurring,” the authors of the report wrote in their executive summary.

The results show the GOM cod spawning biomass to be hovering between 4 percent and 6 percent of what is necessary to sustain a well-managed stock despite three years of Draconian cuts to cod quotas and the more recent shuttering of the Gulf of Maine to all cod fishing.

While the update’s results continue the trend of NOAA data that show the GOM cod stock near total collapse, they also continue to fly in the face of the season-long insistence by Cape Ann fishermen — commercial, recreational, fin and lobster fishermen — that they have seen more cod this season than in many years past.

Read the full story at Gloucester Daily Times

EU fishing sector accuses Pew of knowingly publishing misinformation

November 19, 2015 — The following is an excerpt from a story originally published on November 18 by Undercurrent News:

European fisheries industry body Europeche has issued an open letter to Pew Charitable Trusts, warning that statements which are “demonstrably untrue and contrary to scientific opinion” can cause damage.

Javier Garat, Europeche president, pointed to the Pew report ‘Turning the Tide: Ending

Overfishing in North Western Europe’ as containing such misleading inofrmation.

The report makes the assertion that:

  • Fishing in recent decades, in pursuit of food and profit, off North West Europe has dramatically expanded
  • Calls by scientists and environmentalists to reduce fishing pressure have been ignored
  • Many fish stocks collapsed throughout the region
  • The reformed CFP should prove a successful first step in restoring and maintaining the health of the fisheries and fish stocks

The unambiguous view of the scientific community has been clearly stated, most recently at the State of the Stocks Seminar in Brussels, said Garat, quoting Eskild Kirkegaard, chair of the ICES advisory committee:

“Over the last ten to fifteen years, we have seen a general decline in fishing mortality in the Northeast Atlantic and the Baltic Sea. The stocks have reacted positively to the reduced exploitation and we’re observing growing trends in stock sizes for most of the commercially important stocks.”

Read the full story at Undercurrent News 

Iran seeks revival of caviar industry in post-sanctions era

November 13, 2015 — GOLDASHT, Iran (AP) ” On the shores of the Caspian Sea, an ambitious project is underway to produce a pricey delicacy that could boost Iran’s economy as sanctions ease: caviar.

Iran, once the world’s biggest exporter of the luxury food, sold over 40 tons of sturgeon eggs in 2000. Exports plunged to just 1 ton last year due to dwindling fish stocks and economic sanctions imposed by world powers in response to Iran’s nuclear program.

After Tehran struck a landmark deal this summer to curb its nuclear ambitions in exchange for lifting sanctions ” including those on caviar ” some in Iran are now counting on a revival in exports of the exclusive eggs.

“We hope that as a result of the Iranian government’s interaction with the world, the path will be opened for us to export our products abroad and bring in foreign currency earnings. It does not make a difference where we export to, the United States or Europe,” said Ishaq Islami, manager of the private Ghareh Boron Caviar Fish Farm in the coastal village of Goldasht.

The farm and two nearby facilities are breeding half a million sturgeon fingerlings a year, filling its pools with water pumped in from the Caspian Sea.

Islami began the $100 million project in 2005 but it takes at least 12 years for sturgeon to mature and produce caviar. About 110,000 are beluga species that produce prized silver-gray eggs, the world’s most expensive caviar.

The fish farm aims to export 30 tons of salt-cured caviar and 2,000 tons of sturgeon meat in three years. Islami expects to earn $90 million a year based on an average price of $3,000 a kilogram (about $1,360 a pound) for caviar. The United States, Europe and Japan have traditionally been Iran’s biggest export markets.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at the New Bedford Standard-Times