Saving Seafood

A Famed Fishing Port Staggers as Carlos Rafael Goes to Jail

February 12, 2018 — NEW BEDFORD, Mass. — Carlos Rafael, whose initials are emblazoned on boats all over this port city, boasted that his fishing empire was worth even more than official records showed. His trick? When he caught fish that are subject to strict catch limits, like gray sole or cod, he would report that his nets were filled with something far more plentiful, like haddock.

“We call them something else, it’s simple,” Mr. Rafael told visitors who seemed interested in buying his business. “We’ve been doing it for over 30 years.” He showed off a special ledger labeled “cash.” And he described an under-the-table deal he had going with a New York fish buyer, saying at one point, “You’ll never find a better laundromat.”

But Mr. Rafael’s visitors turned out to be Internal Revenue Service agents, and the conversations, caught on tape and described in court documents, began the unraveling of Mr. Rafael, whose reign over a segment of this region’s fishing industry gave him his larger-than-life nickname, “the Codfather.”

As Mr. Rafael sits in prison, having pleaded guilty to lying about his catches and smuggling cash out of the country, nearly two dozen of his boats have been barred from fishing for species like cod and haddock, grinding part of the centuries-old maritime economy in the nation’s most lucrative fishing port to a halt.

Fishermen, ice houses and shoreside suppliers who once did business with Mr. Rafael are anxious, as their own businesses have slowed or stopped. Regulators, who oversee a federal system aimed at limiting what the industry fishes for, want more penalties, raising doubts about the future of the port when it comes to groundfish, the bottom-dwelling species like cod that were once the backbone of the fishing industry in New England.

“There are a lot of people on this waterfront, very hardworking people, whose livelihood depends on Carlos’s landings,” said Jon Mitchell, the mayor of New Bedford. “They don’t deserve to suffer along with him.”

Tony Fernandes, a captain on one of Mr. Rafael’s boats, said he was collecting unemployment benefits and waiting to learn when he may be able to fish again. “He’s putting in his time and he paid his fine,” he said of Mr. Rafael. “We are in limbo.”

For decades, Mr. Rafael, 65, was a blustery, polarizing figure along these piers. He called himself a pirate, and mocked smaller competitors as maggots or mosquitoes. When he wasn’t yelling into his phone in Portuguese, he held court around town, talking politics and fish. The authorities said he owned one of the country’s largest commercial fishing enterprises, and analysts estimate that he controlled about one-quarter of New England’s landings of groundfish. Mr. Rafael also had boats to harvest scallops, which now make up a much greater share of New Bedford’s total landings than groundfish do.

But Mr. Rafael also served as a dealer for the seafood that came off his boats, which prosecutors say made it easier for him to lie about what he was catching and how much he was getting for it.

“Carlos Rafael has been well known in the commercial fishing industry for 30 years,” said Andrew Lelling, the United States attorney for Massachusetts, who prosecuted the case. “And, for almost as long, federal law enforcement has heard rumors and concerns about Rafael acting illegally.”

Some people in New Bedford saw Mr. Rafael far differently — as a Robin Hood of sorts, with a pack of cigarettes and a dinged-up Silverado. He was a Portuguese immigrant who had started out cutting fish and eventually provided jobs for many people along a waterfront that has been bustling since Herman Melville immortalized its cobblestone streets and whaling ships in “Moby Dick.”

He saw an opportunity eight years ago when the government moved forward with a new regulatory system in New England, after Congress mandated that science-based limits be used to prevent overfishing. The cod catch, long a staple of New England’s economy, had fallen over the years.

Instead of the former approach of limiting how many days boats could spend at sea, the new regulations by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration set specific ceilings on how many fish could be caught. The rules instantly were contentious, especially when regulators set low limits for dwindling species like cod to help them rebound.

Read the full story at the New York Times 

Deep-sea coral habitat south of Cape slated for protection

February 6, 2018 — The New England Fishery Management Council voted last week to protect deep-sea coral from the effects of fishing across a large stretch of ocean located about 100 miles south of Nantucket.

“The main reason why the council wanted to take this action and protect them from fishing is they are long-lived and very sensitive to disturbance. They can easily be broken and take a long time to recover,” said Michelle Bachman, who works for the council and is the group’s habitat plan development committee chairwoman. “We know they have a special ecological connection to other species like invertebrates and fish.”

Once approved by the National Marine Fisheries Service, the 25,153 square miles of ocean will join a 38,000-square-mile coral protection area off the Mid-Atlantic, and another protected area off the Southeastern U.S. covering, in total, nearly 100,000 square miles of the Atlantic continental shelf ecosystem.

Deep sea corals are found all over the world at depths of between around 130 to 10,000 feet. Most occur at between 1,000 and 2,600 feet, according to what Florida State University researcher Sandra Brooke told The Pew Charitable Trusts. They exist in a twilight – sometimes pitch black – world where photosynthesis isn’t possible. Northern coral don’t form reef structures, but include individual “plants,” fans, trees, that can be brightly colored, 10 feet across and live hundreds to thousands of years, growing slowly.

“Although the council could have chosen stronger protections, the measure marks a major expansion of coral habitat shielded from dredging and dragging,” said Peter Baker, who directs ocean conservation efforts in the Northeast for The Pew Charitable Trusts.

Few fishermen set pots or tow nets or dredges where coral live on the steep canyon walls that descend from the table top of Georges Bank, but even an accidental jostling by a lobster or crab pot or line or a misplaced tow could cause irrevocable damage. Fishermen told the council they didn’t tow gear below 1,600 feet; the measure protected coral below the 2,000-foot contour established by the New England council last week. The lone exemption was for the red crab fishery, which has relatively few participants, said Bachman.

Read the full story at the Cape Cod Times

 

‘Cod Is Dead’: New Netflix Series Details Challenges Facing U.S. Fishermen

January 5, 2018 (Saving Seafood) — The challenges facing American fishermen, ranging from declining quotas to disputed science to fleet consolidation, are highlighted in a new Netflix documentary series premiering today.

The new series, Rotten, “travels deep into the heart of the food supply chain to reveal unsavory truths and expose hidden forces that shape what we eat.” The series’ sixth and final episode, “Cod is Dead,” focuses on the domestic seafood industry, and the business and regulatory climate that has made it increasingly difficult for fishermen to make a living. Special focus is given to the ongoing fallout from the Carlos Rafael seafood fraud case and the continuing impact of the controversial catch share management system.

The episode interviews fishermen, scientists, environmentalists, and other stakeholders, with special emphasis placed on industry members in New Bedford, Massachusetts. The full list of interviewees is:

  • Steve Welch – Commercial Fishing Captain
  • Richard Canastra – Co-Owner, The Whaling City Seafood Display Auction
  • Peter Baker – Director, U.S. Ocean Conservation-Northeast, The Pew Charitable Trust
  • Ian Saunders – New Bedford Dock Worker
  • Dr. Jonathan Hare – Science and Research Director, Northeast Fisheries Science Center
  • Seth Macinko – Professor of Marine Affairs, University of Rhode Island
  • Aaron Williams – Commercial Fishing Captain
  • Scott Lang – Former Mayor of New Bedford/Lawyer
  • Jake Kritzer – Director of Fishery Diagnostics and Design, Environmental Defense Fund
  • Tor Bendikson – Vice President, Reidar’s Trawl Gear & Marine Supply
  • Arthur Bogason – Chairmen, Icelandic National Association of Small Boat Owners
  • Ragnar Arnason – Professor of Economics, University of Iceland
  • Charles Smith – U.S. Coast Guard
  • Tom Williams – Commercial Fishing Vessel Owner

Rotten is available now on Netflix

 

Public gets say on changes to herring rules

December 12, 2017 — Cape Cod’s small boat fishermen, both commercial and recreational, have been asking for protection from a fleet of large herring trawlers for more than a decade.

They may get an answer to their plea as early as June, when the New England Fishery Management Council will likely vote on whether to create buffer zones that prohibit fishing close to shore by these large vessels for part or all of the year.

The council’s potential actions are focused on midwater trawlers which tow large nets, sometimes between pairs of vessels, targeting huge schools of herring swimming midway between the bottom and surface. Back in 2007, the council prohibited midwater trawlers from fishing during the summer months along the coast north of Provincetown to Canada. But they allowed them to come within three miles of the Cape and states to the south.

Herring are considered a forage species, a vital link between the massive food source contained in the plankton they eat, and the protein needed by important commercial species like striped bass, cod and bluefin tuna that prey on them. But Cape and other East Coast fishermen have argued that the massive nets and large vessels used by the herring fleet are so efficient that cod, tuna and other species, with no herring to eat, do not come close enough to shore for the smaller vessels of the inshore fleet.

“Our guys are not fishing the way they did 12 years ago around the Cape because those fish aren’t there because the bait isn’t there,” said John Pappalardo, executive director of the Cape Cod Commercial Fishermen’s Alliance and a member of the fishery council. “We live in a migratory corridor here. We depend on the bait to be there.”

Read the full story at the Cape Cod Times

 

Green groups, fishermen at odds over new rules on small fish

November 15, 2017 — Environmentalists and commercial fishing groups on the East Coast are divided over a decision to increase the amount fishermen can catch of an ecologically vital small fish.

The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission approved changes to menhaden fishing rules on Tuesday, including increasing the East Coast’s fishing quota by 8 percent, or some 35 million pounds (15.88 million kilograms) of fish.

The decision followed a string of public hearings and weeks of debate about how to manage a fish that is important for such industries as fish oil for human supplements and meal for aquaculture, but is also a vital food source for whales, dolphins and large fish.

The commission had been considering several new ways of managing menhaden, some of which included potentially reducing the quota — an idea environmental activist groups supported.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at WRAL

 

Science on Menhaden Continues to Support Increased Quota

August 3, 2016 — The following was released by the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition:

Peter Baker, the Director of U.S. Oceans, Northeast for the Pew Charitable Trusts, argues in a recent article that fisheries managers should not raise the coastwide Atlantic menhaden harvest level (“10 Reasons to Maintain the Atlantic Menhaden Catch Limit in 2017”). But this recommendation goes against the last two years of menhaden science, which found in 2015 that the stock is healthy and sustainably managed, and this year finds that the quota can be significantly and sustainably raised.

Mr. Baker writes that “the [Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission] created the first coastwide catch limit in 2013 and set the allowable catch lower than the amount taken in preceding years in order to help menhaden rebuild.” In fact, the cuts were made to address overfishing that turned out never to have existed. The quota cut was instituted following a flawed stock assessment in 2010 that underestimated the health of the menhaden population, leading to an unnecessarily strict quota. Contrary to that assessment, menhaden was, and remains, a healthy and vibrant stock.

The numbers are not better now because cuts allowed the stock to rebuild, but rather because the earlier numbers were inaccurately low and have been corrected in the most recent assessment. The more recent, accurate ASMFC assessment, released in 2015, conclusively found that menhaden was “neither overfished nor experiencing overfishing” – in other words, the stock is sustainable and successfully managed.

Scientists with the ASMFC Menhaden Technical Committee recently gave regulators further evidence in favor of a quota increase. In a series of simulations – 9,000 to be precise – the Technical Committee analyzed what would happen if the menhaden quota was raised by various increments, up to a 40 percent increase. Their conclusion: there is a zero percent chance of overfishing occurring should the quota be increased.

Mr. Baker also questions the ecological effect a quota increase would have. Menhaden play a role in the food chain, with juvenile menhaden—menhaden from ages 0-1—serving as food for larger predators. Commercial fishermen do not fish for juvenile menhaden, a fact supported by the available data.

Additionally, Mr. Baker alleges that striped bass and weakfish populations are diminished because they have a lack of menhaden to consume. But striped bass and weakfish are susceptible to a wide variety of environmental factors, which regularly cause fluctuations in the population.

Lastly, Mr. Baker argues that the public supports the existing quota limitations based upon the results of online petitions with leading questions, funded and promoted by his organization.  The accuracy of Pew’s campaigns notwithstanding, commercial fisheries are not managed by popularity contests.

Over the past three years, commercial fisheries and related industries have suffered lost revenue and workers have lost jobs.  We now know that the unnecessarily low quotas were based on flawed data.

It is time to set quotas based on solid data and scientific review, not by demands made in well-funded media campaigns from the Pew Charitable Trusts and other special interest groups.

About the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition
The Menhaden Fisheries Coalition is a collective of menhaden fishermen, related businesses, and supporting industries. Comprised of over 30 businesses along the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts, the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition conducts media and public outreach on behalf of the menhaden industry to ensure that members of the public, media, and government are informed of important issues, events, and facts about the fishery.

Pew Vs. Pew: A Tale of Two Stories

June 3, 2016 — The following was released by the Menhaden Fisheries Coalition:

WASHINGTON (MFC) — On May 16, the Pew Charitable Trusts published an article (“Mid-Atlantic Council Poised to Take Historic Action for Forage Fish”), on their website, authored by Peter Baker, Director of US Oceans, Northeast, falsely claiming that “Many forage fish, such as … menhaden, are fished in large numbers for use in fish oil, bait, and livestock feed, with no limits on how many can be caught[.]”

The truth? Atlantic menhaden are actually closely monitored and responsibly regulated.  It’s curious for Pew and Mr. Baker to claim there are “no limits” on the catch, since in a May 15, 2014 Pew story, “Atlantic Menhaden Catch Cap a Success,” Mr. Baker himself wrote that the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) “voted into place a cap that reduced the overall catch of Atlantic menhaden by 25 percent from the previous year.”

It is not clear whether Pew has changed its mind, or if they are experiencing institutional amnesia.  In their most recent release, they claim “at this scale, industrial fishing could dramatically reduce the numbers of forage fish, potentially destabilizing the entire ocean ecosystem.” Yet, two years ago, they stated that the “commissioners should be proud that that they’ve established an effective management system for the largest fishery on the Atlantic coast.” This is yet the latest example of misinformation from Pew regarding menhaden management.

Pew’s sudden forgetfulness notwithstanding, the fact is that rather than being unmanaged and unrestricted, the menhaden fishery operates under the responsible oversight of the ASMFC, which manages fisheries in state waters from Maine to Florida. The ASMFC sets coastwide harvest quotas for menhaden based on the best available science.

With the release of the most recent assessment of the Atlantic menhaden stock in 2015, the ASMFC found menhaden to be neither overfished nor experiencing overfishing. In another indicator of stock health, the assessment also found fishing mortality to be at an all-time low. Combined with the fact that fecundity – a measure of the stock’s reproductive ability – is at an all-time high, the science clearly supports the fact that menhaden are not only well-protected, but are well-positioned for the future.  In fact, as testament to the successful efforts undertaken by menhaden fishermen to ensure stock health, in 2015 the ASMFC even raised the harvest quota by 10 percent.

These conclusions have also been supported by several independent organizations. In a report last year, the non-profit Sustainable Fisheries Partnership (SFP) rated menhaden as one of the best-managed forage fish species in the world. In their report, menhaden was cited as one of only four fish species to have improved its status from previous years. Corroborating SFP is a certificationfrom the third-party sustainability certifier Friend of the Sea, which independently rated Atlantic menhaden as sustainable.

The evidence is clear – menhaden is a healthy, well-managed stock, not the unmanaged fishery Mr. Baker claims.

PETER BAKER: We Must Do More to Save Deep-Sea Corals

Editor’s Note: While Peter Baker’s commentary notes that New England fishery managers “have not yet put forward a plan for protection” of New England’s deep-sea corals, the New England Fishery Management Council (NEFMC) has in fact been working since 2012 to extend protections to the region’s coral habitats. The Council’s effort, the Omnibus Deep-Sea Coral Amendment, is still in development, but contains protections similar to the much-lauded coral protections enacted by the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council through their own Deep Sea Corals Amendment.

December 8, 2015 — Less than 100 miles offshore from the heavily populated Eastern Seaboard lie submerged seascapes that look more like visions from another world than the cities and landmarks for which they are named.

Baltimore Canyon, Norfolk Canyon, Hudson Canyon, and others were carved by ancient rivers back when seas were shallow and the coastline was radically different. Now, these undersea canyons gouge into the edge of the continental shelf, plunging thousands of feet seaward to the abyss.

Scientists, exploring these places with robotic submersibles, have upended our assumptions about the deep sea. Far from a barren seafloor, these canyons teem with life—from familiar fish, squid, and crabs to some animals so bizarre that they could easily pass for creatures in a sci-fi flick. Some of the stranger sightings here include gangly crustaceans called sea spiders; the long-nosed chimera, or ghost shark; and the comical “Dumbo” octopus, which propels itself with earlike protrusions.

Most amazing, perhaps, are the living structures known as deep-sea corals that many of these animals depend upon for habitat. Unlike the familiar corals of the warm, shallow waters, these corals are adapted to the cold, dark depths where they slowly grow. Colorful bubblegum corals form bulbous ends in bright pinks, while fan corals grow in veined sheets of maroon and brown. Many deep-sea corals are centuries old, and some are among the Earth’s oldest known living animals.

Read the full commentary at the Pew Charitable Trusts

 

Greens’ hopes for quick win on New England monument fade

September 30, 2015 — One month ago, environmental groups were strategizing over their latest bid: Get the Obama administration to create its first marine monument off New England.

They had talks with fishing groups, lawmakers and think tanks. At the end of August, they exchanged emails over their progress — and in one, the president of the Conservation Law Foundation warned everyone to keep quiet about the possibility of a breakthrough at the upcoming Our Ocean Conference in Chile.

“I hope no one is talking about Chile to the outside world,” CLF Interim President Peter Shelley wrote. “It’s one of the few advantages we may have to know that it could happen sooner rather than later.”

The email showed up in response to a public records request that Saving Seafood filed with the office of Maine Gov. Paul LePage’s. The advocacy group — which represents fishermen opposed to the monument — sent the emails to Greenwire yesterday, asserting that they confirm “rumors” of an impending monument announcement from the White House.

Such an announcement would certainly make waves. The proposed monument is small and sees little activity today, but it is near prime fishing grounds. House Republicans have also added the proposal to their arsenal of criticism over the White House’s use of the Antiquities Act (E&E Daily, Sept. 30).

Read the full story from the E&E Reporter