Saving Seafood

A new chapter for US aquaculture?

June 28, 2018 — A bill that could allow for the culture of fish and shellfish in US Federal waters for the first time has been welcomed by representatives of the US aquaculture industry.

The bill to introduce the Advancing the Quality and Understanding of American Aquaculture (AQUAA) Act was implemented by Senator Roger Wicker and aims to streamline the permitting process for aquaculture farms in federal waters, and fund research and development to advance the aquaculture industry.

Its introduction was welcomed by the US National Aquaculture Association (NAA), whose president, Jim Parsons, told The Fish Site: “The last time the US Senate considered this topic was in 2005. Over the last several decades, shellfish, fish and seaweed farming in state waters has contributed considerable jobs and income benefits to coastal communities and resulted in the production of high-quality seafood. Because of this experience and success, the stage is set to recognize times have changed. We can farm offshore using new technology, new production gear, and greatly improved feeds to make the US a net seafood exporter instead of the second largest consumer of global seafood. In addition, a proven regulatory model of federal and state regulations has demonstrated that we can grow fish, shellfish and seaweed sustainably and be fully protective of the environment. We are looking forward to working with Congress to pass legislation beneficial to the US aquaculture community.”

Read the full story at The Fish Site

Senate panel advances ‘Modern Fish Act’ against harvesters’ wishes

February 28, 2018 — A bill supported by recreational anglers but opposed by commercial harvesters and environmental groups was approved by the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation on Wednesday by a voice vote.

The Modernizing Recreational Fisheries Management Act (S. 1520), legislation its supporters have termed “the Modern Fish Act,” will now go to the Senate floor. Some of the same provisions are contained in H.R. 200, a measure sponsored by representative Don Young, an Alaska Republican, which is expected to receive a vote soon on the House floor.

“[T]his is the commerce committee at its best,” said senator Roger Wicker, the Mississippi Republican who introduced S. 1520, noting after the vote the bipartisan support his bill enjoyed. Seven Republicans and six Democrats cosponsored the legislation.

“Saltwater anglers are conservationists and this bill will help provide for healthier marine fisheries and will amend the law in such a way as to enhance saltwater fishing and build our economy,” he said.

The American Sportfishing Association, one of multiple recreational fishing groups to support S. 1520, was quick to applaud the vote, too, saying Wicker’s bill would add “more tools to the management toolbox, improving data collection techniques, and examining some fishery allocations that are based on decades-old decisions.”

However, the Seafood Harvesters of America (SHA) and Garden State Seafood Association are among no less than 30 multiple commercial fishing groups that have expressed their opposition to the bill.

Read the full story at Undercurrent News

 

Chefs heat up red snapper debate

February 27, 2018 — Priced at $32, the pan-roasted Gulf red snapper with coconut rice and Malaysian curry sauce is among the best-sellers at Carrollton Market in New Orleans.

But chef Jason Goodenough worries that it could someday disappear from his menu, if Congress goes too far in loosening regulations and allows more overfishing of the stock.

“On the macro level, my fear is that tourism is going to drop off because less and less Gulf seafood is available to us as chefs,” said Goodenough, named the 2017 chef of the year by New Orleans Magazine. “People come to New Orleans to eat, to drink and to hear music — food tourism is a major, major part of the fabric of the economy.”

Goodenough is one of 26 chefs, most of them from New Orleans, urging Congress to put the brakes on any proposed rollbacks of federal laws that protect fish populations.

Their latest target is the “Modern Fish Act,” which is set for a vote Wednesday by the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.

Backers of S. 1520, sponsored by Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and formally known as the “Modernizing Recreational Fisheries Management Act of 2017,” say it would give sports anglers more access to federal waters.

While many recreational anglers cheered the Trump administration for extending the Gulf red snapper season by 39 days last year, they regarded the move as a temporary fix. They’ve touted the “Modern Fish Act” as a permanent solution and a much-needed way to bring more flexibility to fisheries management (Greenwire, Dec. 19, 2017).

Opponents, including the chefs, say the bill would weaken federal protections and result in more overfishing, damaging stocks in the long run.

Jeff Angers, president of the Center for Sportfishing Policy in Baton Rouge, La., said it is “utter folly to think that chefs are interested in conservation.”

“I know that it’s going to be of a lot of interest that some chefs want to pick a fight — ‘bless their hearts’ is what my mother taught me to say,” he said. “But I don’t think any responsible person in America looks to chefs who profit from these fishery resources to be guiding any discussion on conservation.”

Recreational fishermen have long complained that the nation’s premier fisheries law, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, has become too bureaucratic, fixated on quotas and catch limits.

Read the full story at E&E News

 

‘Rule of Thumb’ Management Approach Is Wrong For Forage Fish, Dr. Ray Hilborn Tells U.S. Senate Subcommittee

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) – October 31, 2017 – At a hearing of the U.S. Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries and Coast Guard last week, respected fisheries scientist Dr. Ray Hilborn testified that fisheries managers “can do better than a one-size-fits-all” approach to managing forage fish. He also said there was “no empirical evidence to support the idea that the abundance of forage fish affects their predators.”

Dr. Hilborn’s comments came in response to questioning from Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) about whether fisheries managers should manage forage fish according to a “rule of thumb” approach, where fisheries are managed according to a set of broad ecological and management principals, or a “case-by-case” approach, where management is guided by more species-specific information.

Dr. Hilborn, a professor at the University of Washington’s School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, was part of a team of top fisheries scientists that recently examined these issues, as well as what effects fishing for forage fish species had on predator species. Their research indicated that previous studies, like a 2012 report from the Lenfest Forage Fish Task Force, may have overestimated the strength of the predator-prey relationship.

Before the hearing, Dr. Hilborn spoke with Saving Seafood about his research and his message for lawmakers.

“It’s very clear that there really are no applicable rules of thumb, that every system is independent [and] behaves differently, and we need to have the rules for each individual forage fish fishery determined by looking at the specifics of that case,” Dr. Hilborn told Saving Seafood.

He also discussed his team’s finding that forage fish abundance has little impact on their predators. They looked at nearly all U.S. forage fish fisheries, including the California Current system and Atlantic menhaden, and concluded that predator species generally pursue other food sources when the abundance of any one forage species is low.

“The predators seem to go up or down largely independent of the abundance of forage fish,” Dr. Hilborn said, adding, “For Atlantic menhaden, for their major predators, the fishery has reasonably little impact on the food that’s available to them.”

Another key message Dr. Hilborn had for the Subcommittee was that fisheries managers must determine what they want to accomplish so that scientists can advise them accordingly.

“The time has come to refocus our fisheries policy on what we actually want to achieve because rebuilding is only a means to an end,” Dr. Hilborn told Saving Seafood. “Do we want to maximize the economic value of our fisheries? Do we want to maximize jobs? Do we want to maximize food production?”

In his testimony, Dr. Hilborn praised U.S. fisheries policy that has “led to rebuilding of fish stocks and some of the most successful fisheries in the world.” He attributed this success to a variety of factors, including funding of NOAA, regionalizing fisheries management decisions, and requiring managers to follow science advice. As a result, overfishing should no longer be the top priority for fisheries managers, he testified.

“The major threats to U.S. fish stock and marine ecosystem biodiversity are now ocean acidification, warming temperatures, degraded coastal habitats, exotic species, land based run off, and pollution,” Dr. Hilborn testified. “Overfishing remains a concern for a limited number of stocks but should not continue to be the most important concern for U.S. federal fisheries policy.”

The hearing was the latest in a series examining reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the nation’s supreme fisheries law. It was organized by subcommittee chairman Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK), and focused on fisheries science.

Watch the full hearing here

Senators to Trump Administration: Don’t cut Coast Guard budget

March 15, 2017 — Mexico isn’t going to pay for that wall and neither will the Coast Guard, if a bipartisan group of U.S. senators have their way.

According to reports, the FY 2018 Presidential Budget Request could seek an almost 12 percent cut in the service’s budget, apparently in an effort to help pay for increased expenditures elsewhere in the Department of Homeland Security.

A letter sent by Senators Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Dan Sullivan (R-AK), Gary Peters (D-MI), Patty Murray (D-WA), Roger Wicker (R-MS) and eighteen other senators urges Office of Management and Budget Administrator Mick Mulvaney not to make what could be a $1.3 billion dollar cut to the Coast Guard budget.

The senators note that President Trump has committed to stopping the flow of illegal drugs into the country, protecting its borders, investing in national security, and improving support to armed service members and their families. The Coast Guard plays an outsized role in all these areas and  the senators say thatits budget should be increased rather than gutted.

“We are concerned that the Coast Guard would not be able to maintain maritime presence, respond to individual and national emergencies, and protect our nation’s economic and environmental interests. The proposed reduction… would directly contradict the priorities articulated by the Trump Administration,” wrote the Senators. “We urge you to restore the $1.3 billion dollar cut to the Coast Guard budget, which we firmly believe would result in catastrophic negative impacts to the Coast Guard and its critical role in protecting our homeland, our economy and our environment.”

Read the full story at Marine Log

Read the full letter here

Sens. Murkowski and Sullivan say no to Coast Guard cuts proposed by White House

March 13, 2017 — WASHINGTON — Alaska’s Republican senators won’t support proposed major budget cuts for the U.S. Coast Guard, they told the White House Office of Management and Budget in a letter following reports of major cuts in President Donald Trump’s draft budget.

Several national outlets have reported on a draft White House budget request to Congress that includes $1.3 billion cut from the Coast Guard’s $9.1 billion budget. The Coast Guard cut is reportedly aimed at helping pay for a wall on the southern border shared with Mexico.

Alaska Sens. Dan Sullivan and Lisa Murkowski and Mississippi Sen. Roger Wicker were the only three Republicans among 23 senators to sign the letter. The rest were Democrats.

Cutting into the Coast Guard budget could mean a far lower chance of bolstering the dwindling U.S. fleet of icebreakers, at a time when shipping traffic is increasing in the Arctic. Senators warned this is not the time to “kick the can down the road” on the Coast Guard’s aging fleet.

“We strongly urge you to refrain from any such cuts. The Coast Guard budget has suffered a steady decline since 2010, which resulted in negative impacts to Coast Guard missions, infrastructure, delays in necessary recapitalization efforts, and has generally constrained Coast Guard operations,” the senators wrote in a letter to OMB Director John Mulvaney.

Sullivan’s office was involved in crafting the letter, which was ultimately released by Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington.

Read the full story at Alaska Dispatch News