The deputy director of the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, Councilor David Pierce, said he’d support the reduction in the acceptable biological catch level by the 40 percent that the cut to 90,000 metric tons represents if the Science and Statistical Committee had been able to site a decline in spawning stock.
‘But it’s a level line, no overfishing, not overfished,’ said Pierce. ‘Why didn’t you consider a smaller buffer?
‘The SSC was focused on uncertainty,’ Sullivan said. ‘We don’t know what’s changing; we don’t know where this is going.’
‘This is extremely precautionary,’ said Pierce. ‘Too much so. This won’t destroy, but it will certainly devastate the herring industry. I’d like to have an industry standing when we get a new benchmark.’ SEAFOOD.COM NEWS by John Sackton – Sept. 28, 2009 – Herring has become quite controversial in New England due to a fight between inshore vessels and larger offshore pair trawlers. But stocks have generally been healthy.
David Ellenton, president of a large herring fishing and processing business in Gloucester, told the Gloucester Times the conservative catch limit would effectively reduce landings by 50 percent and ‘have a disastrous effect on the fishery.’
However, in 2008, total landings were around 90,000 tons for the U.S. and Canada, and the U.S. share was 74,000 tons. Reductions in landings are more likely to be due to time and area closures rather than the size of the total TAC, which will likely not be fully caught in 2009.
The Science and Statistical Committee reported that while the ocean herring stock is not subject to overfishing and has not been overfished, a troubling and inexplicable statistical data trend suggests caution.
The statistical problem, known as a ‘retrospective pattern,’ is that as more recent numbers are fed into a mathematical model for the fishery the trend is in the wrong direction. In other words catch and landing data are not supporting continuation of current fishing levels.
The problem is that the assessment is not based on actual new stock survey, but on the fact that current landings data suggests there is uncertainty about the direction herring stocks are taking.
When Dr. Patrick Sullivan from the SSC presented the findings to the council, he evoked the collapse of the Canadian cod fishery. Prior to that collapse ‘retrospective’ data had begun indicating a problem that had not yet showed up in other measurements.
After an extensive debate, the council voted 8-7 to ask the committee to reconsider its determination of the level of the allowable biological catch, but there was little expectation that the panel would change its mind or have a basis for doing so.
Stock biomass increased steadily from 116,000 metric tons in 1982 to almost 830,000 metric tons in 1997, then fluctuated without a trend since then and was estimated to be 652,000 metric tons in 2008, according to the status report of the Transboundary Resource Assessment Committee, a joint U.S.-Canadian scientific panel that advises both nations on the fishery on either side of the border through Georges Bank.
Combined landings increased from 106,000 metric tons in 2005 to 116,000 metric tons in 2006, then declined to 90,000 metric tons in 2008. US catches were about 74,000 tons in 2008.
The deputy director of the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, Councilor David Pierce, said he’d support the reduction in the acceptable biological catch level by the 40 percent that the cut to 90,000 metric tons represents if the Science and Statistical Committee had been able to site a decline in spawning stock.
‘But it’s a level line, no overfishing, not overfished,’ said Pierce. ‘Why didn’t you consider a smaller buffer?
‘The SSC was focused on uncertainty,’ Sullivan said. ‘We don’t know what’s changing; we don’t know where this is going.’
‘This is extremely precautionary,’ said Pierce. ‘Too much so. This won’t destroy, but it will certainly devastate the herring industry. I’d like to have an industry standing when we get a new benchmark.’
Jeff Kalen, who represents fishing interests in Cape May, N.J., objected to the dramatic decline in herring landings resulting from the Science and Scientific Committee’s adjustment in catch limits.
‘Forty percent is grabbing at straws,’ Kalen said. ‘I don’t want to go on about the serious impacts. How shocked are we? We lost 90,000 (of TAC, not landings) tons in a couple of afternoons.’