April 20, 2015 — The NEFMC and NMFS have an obvious solution before them in the form of Alternatives 5 and 7, both of which ensure a thoughtful and successful balance of interests all working toward the same common goal.
New England's historic fisheries are too important to our communities, to our economies and to our cultural heritage to allow special interest politics to stand in the way of substantive progress. Contrary to recent claims by some environmental organizations, the New England Fishery Management Council's (NEFMC) proposed updates to habitat closures in our region via Omnibus Habitat Amendment 2 (OHA2) will align our commercial fisheries with exponentially improved science that better protects both our industries and our environment.
Currently under consideration as part of this process, the NEFMC must pursue Alternative 5 for the Great South Channel and Alternative 7 for Georges Bank. These proposals will improve conservation, advance our fishing industries, expand our scientific understanding of these important areas and secure a future for our fisheries as prestigious as our past.
When habitat closures were first enacted in New England, scientists knew more about the surface of the moon than of the seafloor comprising the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank, much of it just miles off our coats. Today, our advancements in scientific research are astounding, and it is incumbent on our leaders that this knowledge be put to use in a capacity that mutually benefits our environment and the hard-working fishermen whose livelihoods rely on it.
These scientific achievements were not without hard work and cooperation. Scallop and groundfishermen alike volunteered their resources, their expertise and their time to conduct thoughtful research and create innovative solutions that put us in a far better place today than when closures were first enacted two decades ago.
The impacts of this progress on our fisheries and on our efforts to conserve these crucial ecosystems are not mutually exclusive. Much the opposite, they are fundamentally inextricable. For our fisheries to succeed, so too must our environment. In order to accomplish this dual mission, the NEFMC must continue its course to update our habitat closures in accordance with the most recent and accurate information about our fish and their ecosystems.
To be clear, these goals do not exclusively require that we open current closures. Fishermen share the same goals as environmentalists who seek to bolster environmental sustainability. Our scientific breakthroughs merit opening some obsolete closures, but they may also require creating new ones. The scallop industry has proposed options for consideration that include extensive closures, and fishermen from an array of industries have similarly identified valuable areas worth closing off.
Read the full op-ed at the New Bedford Standard-Times