Saving Seafood

  • Home
  • News
    • Alerts
    • Conservation & Environment
    • Council Actions
    • Economic Impact
    • Enforcement
    • International & Trade
    • Law
    • Management & Regulation
    • Regulations
    • Nutrition
    • Opinion
    • Other News
    • Safety
    • Science
    • State and Local
  • News by Region
    • New England
    • Mid-Atlantic
    • South Atlantic
    • Gulf of Mexico
    • Pacific
    • North Pacific
    • Western Pacific
  • About
    • Contact Us
    • Fishing Terms Glossary

Professor: Carlos Rafael’s actions did little to affect the ‘big picture’

September 20, 2017 — NEW BEDFORD, Mass. — A study by an SMAST professor shows that claims alleging Carlos Rafael’s actions created hysteria in the New England Fishery are exaggerated. The study by Dr. Brian Rothschild was filed in federal court on Monday, a week before Rafael is scheduled to be sentenced for falsifying fish quotas.

Rothschild said he doesn’t condone anything Rafael did, but in his study argues the data associated with the fishing tycoon’s criminal actions reveal a minimal effect on stock assessments.

In 54 pages entitled “The effect of under-reported catch (URC) on the New England Fishery and stock dynamics,” Rothschild used data agreed upon by the Department of Justice and Rafael’s attorneys, who funded the study.

“The thing that stood out the most was in terms of the big picture the amount of fish that both parties agreed to was relatively small,” Rothschild told the Standard-Times. “I put no value judgement on that. That’s for others to do.”

In the study, Rothschild stated, “The URCs were so small relative to common-sense benchmarks, that they could hardly be noticed in either the abundance of fish in the ocean or in stock assessments.”

Among the dozens who’ve spoken out since Rafael pleaded guilty in March, including Gov. Charlie Baker, Mayor Jon Mitchell, the Maine Congressional delegation and other organizations, Rothschild is the first to present data minimizing the effects of Rafael.

“I think that it’s a very contentious issue. When you look at the data, it comes out different than what most people perceive,” Rothschild said. “At the end of the day, it’s the science that really counts.”

Read the full story at the New Bedford Standard-Times

Recent Headlines

  • Scientists did not recommend a 54 percent cut to the menhaden TAC
  • Broad coalition promotes Senate aquaculture bill
  • Chesapeake Bay region leaders approve revised agreement, commit to cleanup through 2040
  • ALASKA: Contamination safeguards of transboundary mining questioned
  • Federal government decides it won’t list American eel as species at risk
  • US Congress holds hearing on sea lion removals and salmon predation
  • MASSACHUSETTS: Seventeen months on, Vineyard Wind blade break investigation isn’t done
  • Sea lions keep gorging on endangered salmon despite 2018 law

Most Popular Topics

Alaska Aquaculture ASMFC Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission BOEM California China Climate change Coronavirus COVID-19 Donald Trump groundfish Gulf of Maine Gulf of Mexico Illegal fishing IUU fishing Lobster Maine Massachusetts Mid-Atlantic National Marine Fisheries Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NEFMC New Bedford New England New England Fishery Management Council New Jersey New York NMFS NOAA NOAA Fisheries North Atlantic right whales North Carolina North Pacific offshore energy Offshore wind Pacific right whales Salmon South Atlantic Virginia Western Pacific Whales wind energy Wind Farms

Daily Updates & Alerts

Enter your email address to receive daily updates and alerts:
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Tweets by @savingseafood

Copyright © 2025 Saving Seafood · WordPress Web Design by Jessee Productions