Fishing Industry Alerts

16 members of Congress wrote to ASMFC Executive Director Robert Beal and NOAA Assistant Administrator for Fisheries Sam Rauch, expressing concern over the 2012 menhaden assessment.

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) August 6, 2012 — They were most concerned over the exclusion of recent aerial survey data from the assessment, as well as the inability of the Menhaden Technical Team to change the assessment model to address problems first identified in the 2009 peer review process. "As a result," they write, "the Commission's Menhaden Technical Team found the assessment generally unfit for use in management." They also noted that information not fully considered by the Commission indicated that the menhaden stock may be twice as large as current estimates.

The Representatives concluded by asking that the Commission reconsider the recommendations of the peer review and consider incorporating, "the best scientific information and methods available," before implementing new menhaden regulations.

The full text of the letter is reproduced below.

Mr. Robert E. Beal
Acting Executive Director
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission
1050 North Highland Street
Suite 200A-N
Arlington, VA 22201

Mr. Samuel D. Rauch, III
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries (Acting)
National Marine Fisheries Service
1315 East West Highway Building SSMC3
Silver Spring, MD 20910

Dear Director Beal & Administrator Rauch:

On April 9, 2012, many of us sent you a letter regarding the then-pending stock assessment for Atlantic menhaden. The letter made three requests: .,(1) that the stock assessment be held in a face-to-face, publicly accessible format; (2) that the stock assessment team be allowed to consider new and relevant information, including the results of a University of New England aerial survey of the northern range of the menhaden stock; and (3) that the stock assessment address flaws in the statistical assessment model a respected international scientific team identified when they peer reviewed the last menhaden assessment in 2009.

Of most concern, additional and relevant information appears to have been excluded from consideration foregoing the thorough and reasoned scientific inquiry this weighty issue demands. Our constituents include bait fishermen, reduction harvesters and plant employees, recreational fishermen, lobstermen, and crab harvesters. They all depend on the menhaden fishery, and they all deserve a full, fair and comprehensive assessment better before the Commission undertakes any major new regulatory initiative.

As to our recommendations from April, our request for a publicly accessible assessment process was honored. We thank you for ensuring some transparency and opportunity for public input into this important process. However, while Dr. James Sulikowski was allowed to present his aerial survey results, the stock assessment team was not permitted to consider this information as part of the assessment itself Nor was the stock assessment team able to refine the assessment model to address the concern sidentified in the 2009peer review. As a result, the Commission's Menhaden Technical Team found the assessment generally unfit for use in management. It also called for new, thorough "benchmark'"assessment at the earliest possible time.

Furthermore, Commission scientists were unable to consider, either adequately or in some cases at all, scientific information that does not support calls for major cuts to this important fishery. For example, are renowned international fisheries scientist, Dr. Douglas Butterworth, presented to the assessment team detailed analyses that employed Dr. Sulikowski's aerial survey results, along with other aerial observation data that menhaden spotter pilots regularly collect to help guide fishing effort. Drs. Butterworth's and Sulikowski's presentation indicates the overall menhaden stock is at least twice as large as the current assessment results indicate. Yet, the Commission's ground rules prevented this important information from being taken into account at all. Nor, moreover, do regular state fishery surveys demonstrate the  menhaden stock is in any immediate peril; in fact, certain important surveys show an increasing population.

We recognize the Commission wants to implement a more comprehensive menhaden management regime. That being said, using the best scientific information and methods available, and heeding peer reviewers' specific recommendations on how to avoid making the same mistakes over again, represent core elements of any reasonable scientific and regulatory process. Thousands of our constituents along the East coast rely on the menhaden fishery-and on the Commission to devote the time and resources to informed decisions. It is our hope that the Commission would do the necessary scientific data collection and analyses before making major  new decisions to regulate the fishery.

Thank you very much for your attention to this very important matter.

Sincerely,

Robert J. Wittman (VA-01)

Michael H. Michaud (ME-02)

Timothy H. Bishop (NY-01)

Charles W. Boustany, Jr. (LA-07)

Michael E. Capuano (MA-08)

Joe Courtney (CT-02)

Barney Frank (MA-04)

Walter B. Jones (NC-03)

Jeffrey M. Landry (LA-03)

Frank A. LoBiondo (NJ-02)

Steven M. Palazzo (MS-04)

Bill Pascrell, Jr. (NJ-08)

Chellie Pingree (ME-01)

Jon Runyan (NJ-03)

Albio Sires (NJ-13)

John F. Tierney (MA-06)

Read the letter here.

 

 

Today, Senators John Kerry and Scott Brown, along with Congressmen Barney Frank, John Tierney, and William Keating, issued a joint statement in response to the new National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) preliminary report on fishing stocks in New England.

"We are extremely concerned about the recent National Marine Fisheries Service report which included troubling information regarding potential declines in groundfish stocks in both Georges Bank and the Gulf of Maine.
 
"Those numbers suggest the possibility of further difficulties for fishermen and fishing communities in Massachusetts, specifically the small boat fishermen who can least bear the burden of additional declines in available fish.  It is our understanding that these declines are not related to overfishing and not due to the actions of our fishermen.  We must take immediate action to provide relief to fishing communities and to improve fisheries science so that there will be fish to catch in the future.
 
"In response to this information, we again ask that the federal government take immediate and decisive action to provide a disaster declaration for New England fishermen and fishing communities.  For the past two years, the New England Congressional delegation and New England Governors have pushed the federal government to issue a disaster declaration.  We believe the evidence is now overwhelming in favor of such a declaration.
 
"We also request that the federal government provide emergency disaster assistance to our fishermen and fishing communities to assist them in dealing with any future declines in fishing related to the new information provided by NMFS.
 
"We have also asked for a meeting in Massachusetts with Acting Assistant Administrator Sam Rauch and stakeholders to review the current science, fishing allocation process and to determine the options available for our fishermen and our fishing communities."

Read the letter from the Lawmakers to Secretary of Commerce Blank 

 

 

 

Pew Environment is misleading the public though the selective presentation of facts on Atlantic menhaden.

WASHINGTON — August 1, 2012 — On July 23, Peter Baker, Director of the Northeast Fisheries Program of the Pew Environment Group, sent an email to supporters urging them to contact the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission and take a number of steps related to the regulation of Atlantic menhaden. Unfortunately, Pew Environment is misleading the public though the selective presentation of facts.

– Pew Environment states for dramatic effect that “overfishing has occurred in 32 of the last 54 years”, but they avoid mentioning that 30 of those 32 instances occurred between 1954-1993.  From 1994-2008 (the last 15 years for which there is data) overfishing occurred only twice, most recently in 2008 and only by 0.4%.

– Pew Environment does not mention the work of, among others, Dr. Doug Butterworth of the University of Cape Town, one of the world's leading scientists in the area of mathematical modelling approaches in the assessment of renewable marine resources and Dr. Alexia Morgan, of the University of New England, who is also a consultant with the Ocean Sciences Division at the Pew Charitable Trust, and a contractor with both the New England Aquarium and the Blue Ocean Institute.  Drs. Butterworth and Morgan analyzed the results of a menhaden aerial survey conducted by Dr. James Sulikowski of the University of New England, an expert in the area of composition and spatial/temporal distribution of fish communities, and found that the actual menhaden stock size may be more than twice as large as the stock assessment's estimate.

– Pew Environment, while voicing concern about the health of the menhaden population, fails to mention that in the most recent assessment the number of eggs produced was almost double the number below which menhaden would be considered overfished.

– Pew Environment asks its supporters to demand that menhaden management be based on the 2012 menhaden update stock assessment. They fail to mention that because of issues such as a pattern of contradictory historical population estimates, and incorrect assumptions about the age distribution of fish caught by the fishery, the members of the ASMFC Menhaden Technical Committee have deemed that assessment to be severely flawed and not reliable for management purposes.

 

Analysis in Detail:

In their recent petition, “Protect Atlantic Fish and Fishing – Keep Menhaden Recovery on Track”, the Pew Environment Group misleads the public by selectively quoting the 2010 menhaden stock assessment to give the impression that the status of Atlantic menhaden is significantly more dire than it actually is.

Pew claims, “according to the ASMFC's [Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission] peer-reviewed 2010 stock assessment, overfishing has occurred in 32 of the last 54 years and is still occurring.” In reality, most of that overfishing occurred between the 1950s and the 1970s, and incidences of overfishing are much rarer in the recent history of the fishery. In that same 2010 stock assessment, it can be seen that in the last 15 years for which data is available, from 1993 to 2008, overfishing occurred only twice. The last recorded instance of overfishing was in 2008, when the fishery was just 0.4 percent over the threshold determined by the ASMFC. Because menhaden is a comparatively short-lived species (living from 10-12 years), and the average menhaden produces a high number of eggs during its lifetime, the most recent data is much more relevant in determining the health of the species than older, dated statistics.
 
Pew also fails to make the important distinction that while the 2010 benchmark stock assessment (a peer-reviewed assessment where the assessment methods can be analyzed) determined menhaden were experiencing slight overfishing (meaning that the number of fish caught exceeded the mortality level set by the ASMFC), it concluded that the stock was not overfished (meaning that the population is still producing enough eggs to sustain itself). In fact, the assessment shows that the species abundance, measured by the number of eggs produced, is at a level that is currently considered healthy, and is nearly twice the level needed in order to be considered overfished.

Contrary to what the petition states, the members of the menhaden fishery do not oppose new menhaden management and are not trying to “derail” the management process. Rather, industry participants have always advocated that any decision be based on the best available science. In the past, members of the fishery have supported efforts by members of Congress to improve the management process and stock assessment model through efforts such as the inclusion of new aerial survey data.  The fishery depends on the stability of the stock, and the industry supports any plan to restore the menhaden population that is scientifically justified.

Pew recommends that the 2012 update assessment (an assessment that adds more data to the previous benchmark assessment but does not change the methods) for menhaden, along with the 2010 benchmark assessment, be the sources considered when setting the new annual menhaden quotas. In doing so, Pew goes against the advice of the ASMFC’s Menhaden Technical Committee, which considers the 2012 update assessment to be severely flawed and not a suitable reference for future management decisions. Many of the flaws present in the 2012 update assessment were first noticed in the 2010 benchmark assessment.

At the last Menhaden Technical Committee meeting, the committee noted that the updated assessment revealed a retrospective pattern in the model, meaning that the estimates in previous population assessments contradicted the population estimates in the most recent assessment, and needed to be revised in order to fit the more current data. With the addition of the 2012 update assessment results, it was found that, from 2006 to 2010, the menhaden assessment model showed a pattern of underestimating the population size and overestimating the fishing mortality rate. This indicates that the model being used for menhaden assessments may be too pessimistic, implying that more fish are dying than actually are. The appearance of retrospective patterns in stock assessments is an indication that a particular assessment model may not be working and that the data being produced is not reliable.

A widely acknowledged flaw in the current menhaden assessment process is that very little data from the northern range of the menhaden population, an area that extends from New Jersey to Maine, is included in the assessment. To address this lack of data, Dr. James Sulikowski, of the University of New England, conducted an aerial study in 2011 of the area and determined that significant amounts of menhaden are located there. In reviewing this study, Dr. Doug Butterworth and Dr. Alexia Morgan determined that over two times as many fish may exist than are accounted for in the assessment. Because the assessment draws much of the data used to calculate population estimates from fishery data, these fish are not included. This is reflected in the assessment’s selectivity pattern, the graphical reflection of what kinds of fish are available to be caught by the fishery.

The menhaden assessment model has a “flat-topped” selectivity, which assumes that for the commercial fishery, all adult fish age three and older are equally likely to be caught by the fishery. When this assumption is graphed, the vulnerability to fishing increases until the age of three, at which point the fish are assumed to be caught by the fishery.  Here, the selectivity curve pattern plateaus at maximum selectivity, creating a flat top.

In the 2010 peer review of the assessment, the reviewers suggested that, instead of the flat-top selectivity, a different selectivity might better reflect the fishery’s catch. Menhaden become increasingly vulnerable to being caught as they grow to three years old, and then become increasingly less susceptible to harvest. So, the true selectivity curve for the fishery would take a different shape. Because the fishery only catches a high proportion of the middle age group of one to three year old fish, the likelihood that the fishery will catch these groups is much higher than other age groups. The increasing availability of menhaden up to the age of three, and the decreasing availability beyond that age creates a curve that is bell-shaped. This is known as a “dome-shaped” selectivity curve.

The 2010 peer review recommended that the “dome-shaped” selectivity be used to represent the commercial fishery in southern waters, because they could not access the older, larger fish that were found by the Sulikowski aerial survey to inhabit the northern waters during the fishing season.

These issues have led the Menhaden Technical Committee and Stock Assessment Subcommittee to consider recommending that the ASMFC Menhaden Management Board conduct a new benchmark assessment as soon as possible, rather than using the critically flawed 2012 update for future management purposes.
 
Because the most recent data available is from 2008, the current health of the menhaden population is unknown. The next full benchmark assessment will not be available until 2015 at the earliest. Assessments are conducted in a three-year cycle , with each three year period ending in either an update assessment or a peer-reviewed benchmark assessment. 2011 was the end of a cycle resulting in an update assessment, which was released this year. Pew is suggesting that the ASMFC make severe cuts in the beginning of a new cycle when only a flawed update assessment is available.
 
Enacting regulations based solely on data that is either out of date or scientifically questionable does not serve the goal of good, science-based management, especially when the result will cause definitive economic harm to Virginia’s Northern Neck, home of the Atlantic menhaden reduction industry. A recent economic impact study conducted by the Virginia Institute of Marine Science highlighted the importance of the industry to this rural area of Virginia: the reduction fishery employs almost 300 people directly, and many more indirectly, and contributes more than $80 million in economic output to the Northern Neck. Without the reduction fishery, employment in the region would decrease by 8 percent and economic output by 14 percent. Enacting a new quota now could lead to a bad economic situation, and could be considered bad management with no science-based rationale for setting quotas and no recent, reliable stock assessment as a reference.

 

Citations:

Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, “Stock Assessment Report No. 10-02 of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission Atlantic Menhaden Stock Assessment and Review Panel Reports ,” 2010

Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, “Stock Assessment Report No. 10-02 of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission Atlantic Menhaden Stock Assessment and Review Panel Reports – Figure 8.4 Annual Fishing Mortality ,” 2010

Saving Seafood, Areas of Concern in ASMFC’s Atlantic Menhaden Assessment Update , 2012

Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, “Menhaden SAS/TC Conference Call 5/29/12 ,” 2012

Kirkley, James E. “An Assessment of the Social and Economic Importance of Menhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus)(Latrobe, 1802) In Chesapeake Bay Region ,” 2011

Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission Menhaden Management Board, “Draft Proceedings of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission Menhaden Management Board ,” May 2, 2012

Sulikowski, James; Morgan, Alexia; Carlson, Amy; Butterworth, Doug, “Inferences from aerial surveys on the abundance of Atlantic menhaden from outside the normal fishery range : Implications for improved management of the resource ,” 2012,

NOAA FishWatch, “Overfishing vs. Overfished: The Same Thing? ” 2012

Thorson, James; Prager, Michael, “Better Catch Curves: Incorporating Age-Specific Natural Mortality and Logistic Selectivity ,” Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 2011

Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, “Atlantic Menhaden Stock Assessment Subcommittee Conference Call Summary ,” June 15, 2012

Wittman, Robert; Michaud, Michael, et. al., Letter to John V. O’Shea and Sam Rauch , April 9, 2012

NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office, “Menhaden Fact Page ”

Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, “Addendum to Amendment I to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Menhaden ,” August 2004

 

 

The New England Fisheries Management Council and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration released notes and statements today indicating that "Several important fish stocks are in poor condition and some catch limits for 2013 will be reduced markedly from 2012." 

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) Aug. 2, 2012 — The statements and notes were released at a New England Fishery Management Groundfish Committee meeting.

The notes indicate severe cuts of approximately 70% for cod, haddock and American plaice. Yellowtail flounder stock cuts are predicted to be approximately 50%. Looking back two years, the most severe overall cut is in the Georges Bank stock of yellowtail flounder, which is predicted to have a 2013 allowable catch that is 94% lower than it was in 2011.

The notes continue "These reductions will have impact across all segments of the groundfish fleet. Reductions in yellowtail flounder will also affect the scallop fishery. The reduction in catch limits is largely a result of the need to prevent overfishing. Several stocks have experienced several consecutive years of poor recruitment, while some remain subject to continued overfishing, despite stringent management requirements."

Statements have been released by Samuel Rauch of NOAA Fisheries, and C.M. “Rip” Cunningham Jr. of the New England Fishery Management Council, and also by the Northeast Seafood Coalition, the largest membership organization in the northeast groundfish fishery.
 

STATEMENT FROM SAMUEL RAUCH, NOAA FISHERIES, AND C.M. “RIP” CUNNINGHAM JR., NEW ENGLAND FISHERY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL

As we have been discussing over the past several months, the groundfish fishery in New England will face many challenges in 2013. We are committed to this fishery, to this industry, and to the people in this community; preserving the groundfish industry is of the utmost importance to us and we’ll put forward our unwavering support. Today, we are continuing to engage in a conversation with our regional partners well in advance of the start of the 2013 fishing year. While there is unlikely to be any solution to fully mitigate the challenges in 2013, we plan to continue to work closely with the industry to explore every possible option.

NSC STATEMENT ON FINDING WORKABLE SOLUTIONS FOR FISHING YEAR 2013

The Northeast Seafood Coalition (NSC) is committed to evaluating and pursuing every possible option to mitigate impacts of the dire forecast for 2013 fishing opportunities on our membership and the groundfish fishing industry.

At this point in time, everything has to be on the table—science, management and the law. Year after year, industry has complied with everything the science and management have asked for; but ultimately, the status of several core stocks continues to decline. There are much larger forces at work in the Gulf of Maine and on Georges Bank than just controlling fishing mortality or preventing overfishing on an instantaneous basis. It’s time for NOAA, Managers and Congress to openly acknowledge that low productivity of fish stocks is outside the control of the law or fisheries management and we can no longer continue to destroy fishing communities in an effort to control the uncontrollable. It is not only unfair to hold fishermen fully and exclusively accountable to the natural cycles of complex natural ecosystems, but it is irresponsible to continue in this manner. It is now time to review and understand the larger picture of this ecosystem and develop management strategies that are more reflective of this stark actuality. An overhaul is required, or else there will be no groundfish fishery.

NSC—the largest membership organization in the northeast groundfish fishery, which represents a majority of the active fishermen in the region—looks forward to working with our members, Northeast Fishery Sectors, NOAA, the Council, and our champions in Congress in the coming weeks to find workable solutions that will be the least impactful to this historic industry.

 

Read the notes "Northeast Multispecies: Brainstorming Mitigation Alternatives for Fishing Year 2013" released today.

 

 

DOVER, Delaware – The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council has released a final report summarizing the ideas, concerns, and recommendations from more than 1,500 individuals who provided input for the Visioning and Strategic Planning Project.

July 31, 2012 — The Stakeholder Input Report outlines 55 themes/concerns and 123 recommendations from three of the Council's primary stakeholder groups-the commercial industry, the recreational sector, and the environmental community. Participants commented on topics ranging from decision-making and communication procedures to management strategies for specific fisheries.

Outreach and data gathering for the report occurred over a five month period beginning in September 2011. Online and mail surveys were available to anyone interested in providing input on fisheries management, and council members and staff met with more than 200 individuals in 20 locations throughout the Northeast region in roundtable sessions. Organizations also had the opportunity to submit position letters describing their concerns and priorities for Mid-Atlantic fisheries.

Common themes were identified by members of the commercial fishing industry, the recreational fishing sector, environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs), and the general public.  These themes included:

– There is a lack of confidence in the data that drive fishery management decisions. 
 
– Stakeholders are not as involved in the Council process as they can and should be. 
 
– Different jurisdictions and regulations among the many fishery management organizations result in complexity and inconsistency. 
 
– There is a need for increased transparency and clearer communications in fisheries management. 
 
– The dynamics of the ecosystem and food web should be considered to a greater extent in fisheries management decisions. 
 
– Stakeholders are not adequately represented on the Council. 
 
– Pollution is negatively affecting the health of fish stocks.

In addition to voicing concerns and providing recommendations, stakeholders identified elements of a "Vision" for successful fisheries and fisheries management in the Mid-Atlantic.  Five common characteristics of a vision were identified across all stakeholder groups, including:

– Fish populations are thriving and are harvested at sustainable levels. 
 
– Management decisions are based on sound data and science. 
 
– There is equitable consideration of the needs of diverse stakeholder groups; the interest of no one stakeholder group outweighs another. 
 
– There is little waste in the fisheries, and regulatory discards are minimal.  
 
– More stakeholders are involved in the management process.

 

Read the full release here.

Read the report here.

 

 

Last Friday, the Fisheries Survival Fund (FSF) wrote to Dr. Bill Karp to address serious concerns regarding NOAA's most recent assessment of the Georges Bank yellowtail flounder stock.

WASHINGTON — July 18, 2012 – Last Friday, the Fisheries Survival Fund (FSF), an industry group that includes the majority of full-time, limited-access scallop permit holders, wrote to Dr. Bill Karp, the newly appointed Director of NOAA's Northeast Fisheries Science Center, to address serious concerns regarding NOAA's most recent assessment of the Georges Bank yellowtail flounder stock.

The following information regarding the letter has been provided to Saving Seafood by the Fisheries Survival Fund:

In their letter, referring to the recent Transboundary Resource Assessment Committee (TRAC) meeting that discussed the yellowtail stock, FSF stated, "Despite all of the hard work of the [Georges Bank] yellowtail stock assessment team, those of us at the meeting were presented with a seriously flawed assessment."

The scallop industry is concerned about yellowtail flounder because yellowtail can inhabit the sea bottom in the same areas as scallops. If scallopers' yellowtail flounder allocations are reduced to low levels, it will act as a choke species, preventing fisherman from harvesting scallops.

The letter, which was signed by Fisheries Survival Fund legal counsel Drew Minkiewicz and David Frulla, stated that, "…all too often [the center that Mr. Karp now leads] takes the approach of trying to solve an assessment problem by reworking the existing data and using numerous statistical tools."

After noting that NOAA's scientists have not been able to resolve the problems in the model without contradicting NOAA's own prior public statements on the subject, FSF observed, "If the model is not capable of accounting for the unknown aliases, the answer is not to put one's head down and go forth into that statistical night; rather, it is to accept the limitations of the model and acknowledge the obvious: we are currently in a place that is beyond the capability of the current model, making the model no longer useful for catch advice."

FSF told NOAA that NOAA Fisheries, formally known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), "…needs to redirect its limited resources away from the computer models and towards field research." They continued, "What we are asking for, and believe the fishing industry and nation deserve, is a defensible process for setting catch quotas and a partner in moving forward to improve our understanding of this critical stock. "

Last May, a new assessment of the Georges Bank yellowtail flounder stock found that the previous assessment was over-optimistic in its estimates, and that the catch limits produced from that assessment resulted in overfishing of this stock. As a result, the total Georges Bank yellowtail harvest was reduced to 540 metric tons for 2012; half of the 2011 catch level.

FSF further asks that NOAA recognize that the current yellowtail assessment is not viable for use as a basis for catch advice. In addition, FSF encourages the use of alternate catch advice methods to set allocations for Georges Bank yellowtail flounder, and implores NOAA to embark upon an expanded biological research program for yellowtail flounder to help try to identify the causes of the model's flaws, so they can be resolved in a principled way.

FSF did not request any repeal of pre-existing yellowtail catch quota reductions , and is not pressing for a new benchmark assessment at this time. Rather, FSF asks for more reliable science, a more thorough biological research process, and a better assessment model for the basis of yellowtail management. All these steps need to be taken before NOAA embarks on a comprehensive benchmark assessment, or else the next assessment won't be any better than the last. FSF wrote, "If there are to be cuts in the fishery, so be it, but it must be done in an open and justified manner."  
 

Failure of the 2005 "split series" correction

In 2005, the yellowtail assessment began to show a retrospective pattern, which is an indicator of inaccuracy within a model. To correct for this, the 2009 assessment team split the time series of yellowtail data, meaning that they applied different catchability rates to data collected after 1995, masking from view any of the unknown and potential causes of the retrospective pattern. However, the disappearance of this retrospective pattern was only temporary. It recently re-emerged, indicating that there are deeper problems within the model.

Upon the retrospective pattern's return this year, the assessment committee tested several ways to correct their model. The team ran three different trials, adjusting the natural mortality rate, catch rate, and both values, attempting to fit the data to the model, and eliminate the retrospective pattern. But in order to do so, they had to adjust these values by as much as four to five times their original figures. The committee considered these values too great to include them as the possible explanations for the retrospective pattern, leaving the cause still unclear.

Despite the admitted presence of a retrospective pattern in the model, and the unknown cause of that pattern, the assessment continues to be used to provide management and catch advice for the fishery. NOAA Fisheries asserts that their adjustments are adequate to fix the unknown underlying problems, directly in contradiction to their own prior statements. FSF points out that assessments marked with retrospective patterns are not acceptable for use in management decisions, citing NOAA's Chris Legault in a 2008 Retrospective Working Group meeting: "A strong retrospective pattern is grounds to reject an assessment model as an indication of stock status or the basis for management advice."

FSF asked, "Does NMFS intend to follow its own advice?"
 

Not asking for "more fish" but for "defensible, empirical findings"

In summary, NOAA Fisheries is asking the industry to assume responsibility for a 50% reduction in quota, on top of a 50% reduction in quota from the previous year, based on flawed techniques that, even by NOAA's own statements, should be excluded from consideration.

Despite the abundance of problems within the data, TRAC was reluctant to reject the assessment because no alternative method for giving catch advice was available. FSF requests that, until these problems can be eliminated, that catch advice be based on catch data and surveys, rather than the flawed assessment. To act otherwise would invest the future of both the scallop and groundfish fisheries in unreliable and problematic data. That is not in the best interests of either industry, nor of federal management organizations.

FSF asserts that the focus of research must shift from statistical to biological. As it stands, many concerning trends in the yellowtail population still lack a tangible, biological explanation. Although these issues remain unresolved, the agency continues to move forward with a current assessment model that will strike a catastrophic blow to both the yellowtail and scallop fisheries alike.

According to FSF, the scallop industry is committed to maintaining a sustainable stock size of Georges Bank yellowtail flounder, and has demonstrated that pledge through their continued partnership with The University of Massachusetts School for Marine Science and Technology (SMAST) bycatch avoidance system. Working together with SMAST, and in cooperation with NOAA Fisheries and the New England Fisheries Management Council via their Scallop Research Set-Aside Program, great opportunity exists to develop better research programs and more sustainable harvesting practices without relying on arbitrary and mutually detrimental data.

Concluding their letter, FSF offers further and final clarification that their motivation to submit written comments to NOAA is not simply to be permitted to catch more fish from the sea, but, instead, to establish an ongoing effort to replace currently flawed data and models with defensible, empirical findings.

They request that NOAA Fisheries acknowledge that the current Georges Bank yellowtail flounder assessment is not suitable for providing catch advice; provide the public with an objective set of criteria to judge the viability of an assessment; as an interim measure, that NOAA Fisheries and the New England Fisheries Management Council provide catch advice using alternative catch advice strategies that rely on survey and catch indices; and that NOAA Fisheries works with FSF and other interested parties in developing and executing a research program for Georges Bank yellowtail flounder with the goal of creating a credible stock assessment.
 
Read the original FSF letter here 

 

  

A week ago Friday, NOAA sent out notification to a limited universe of fishing interests, via fax, notifying them that the 90 percent of the Longfin Squid fishery had been harvested and would be closed the following Monday.

GLOUCESTER, Mass. – July 16, 2012 — Last week, United States Senators Charles E. Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand and Congressman Tim Bishop blasted the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) for failing to properly notify the Long Island, New York fishing industry that a closure of the squid fishery was imminent, costing local fishermen thousands of dollars in haul preparation costs that cannot be recovered. A week ago Friday, NOAA sent out notification to a limited universe of fishing interests, via fax, notifying them that the 90 percent of the Longfin Squid fishery had been harvested and would be closed the following Monday. Word of the impending closure did not reach many in the industry until days later, after many boats were at sea, having purchased fuel, ice, and provisions for up to five days.
 
Read the press release from United States Senators Charles E. Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand and Congressman Tim Bishop
 
Today, NOAA Fisheries' Northeast Regional Office mailed a letter of apology to affected fishermen.  The apology will be posted to their website tomorrow.

The text of the apology follows:
 
The longfin squid fishery was closed on July 10 as our catch projections showed that 90% of the Trimester II quota would be caught. We announced the closure on the afternoon of July 6, but two of our primary means for providing the information to industry did not work. I have heard from fishermen that the poor communication caused confusion, inconvenience, and, in some cases, unnecessary expenses. I apologize for the poor communication and am committed to improving.

Typically, when we have time-sensitive news to announce, we place paper copies of the permit holder letter in the mail, air messages over National Weather Service Radio and Coast Guard Broadcast, and email constituents who have opted to receive emails from us at nero.noaa.gov. We do not typically send VMS messages for longfin squid closures because VMS is not required for longfin squid permit holders.

These notification methods are obviously not foolproof, and our communication leading up to the July 10 closure have prompted us to troubleshoot and rethink how we pass time-sensitive information to the fleet. We seek your help. We will investigate the costs and utility of using VMS to notify vessels of longfin squid closures.

We'd also like to hear any ideas you may have for improving our fleet notifications about other time-sensitive actions. Contact the Sustainable Fisheries Division at 978-281-9315 if you have suggestions.

Sincerely,

Daniel S. Morris
Acting Regional Administrator
 
View the original letter here  

 

 

A bipartisan group of Members of Congress from New Hampshire to Florida have written to Chairman Doc Hastings of the House Committee on Natural Resources

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) July 17, 2012 — A bipartisan group of Members of Congress from New Hampshire to Florida have written to Chairman Doc Hastings of the House Committee on Natural Resources asking that "with fewer than 30 legislative days remaining before the November elections … that the Natural Resources Committee take legislative action on fisheries management reform as soon as possible.' 

At a hearing held by the Natural Resources Committee last December, several Members of Congress including signers of this letter, raised a number of concerns that they asked be addressed before the next reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.  In the letter, the Members noted that "members of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation's Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard announced their intention to hold hearings to begin reforming the flawed policies of the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Management Act."

The text of the letter follows:
 
July 16, 2012

The Honorable Doc Hastings
Chairman
House Committee on Natural Resources
1324 Longworth House Office Building Washington, DC 20515

The Honorable Edward J. Markey
Ranking Member
House Committee on Natural Resources
1329 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Chairman Hastings and Ranking Member Markey:

With fewer than 30 legislative days remaining before the November elections, we again request that the Natural Resources Committee take legislative action on fisheries management reform as soon as possible. This is an urgent matter to us and the fishermen we have the privilege of representing. We write to you as Members of both parties and respectfully urge you to move this bipartisan effort forward expediently.

As was clear at the hearing the Committee held last December, our fishermen continue to face economic hardships as a result of the drastic policies set forth in the current Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Management Act. We believe that this should not be the case. Fishermen have a vested interest in participating in the rebuilding and conservation of fish stocks, but doing so must not come at the expense of the livelihood of those fishermen. By making sensible reforms to current fisheries law, such as some of those suggested at last December's hearing, fish stocks and the fishing industry can be rebuilt together.

It is our understanding that, last month, members of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation's Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard announced their intention to hold hearings to begin reforming the flawed policies of the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Management Act. It is positive that the Senate also appears to be recognizing the urgency of enacting such reforms.

Thank you for your consideration of our request.

Sincerely,

John F. Tierney (D- Massachusetts)
Walter B. Jones (R-North Carolina)
Timothy H. Bishop (D-New York)
Barney Frank (D- Massachusetts)
Frank C. Guinta (R- New Hampshire)
William R. Keating (D-Massachusetts)
Mike McIntyre (D-North Carolina)
Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-New Jersey)
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Florida)

 
View the original letter here

 

 

The Fisheries Survival Fund and the Northeast Seafood Coalition have responded to NOAA's announcement that 332,016 pounds of yellowtail quota will be transferred from the scallop industry to the groundfish industry.

WASHINGTON – July 13, 2012  – The Fisheries Survival Fund and the Northeast Seafood Coalition, the primary industry groups representing the northeastern scallop and groundfish industries, respectively, have responded to NOAA's announcement that 332,016 pounds of yellowtail quota will be transferred from the scallop industry to the groundfish industry.

The Fisheries Survival Fund stated:

Today, NOAA announced that it will adjust the Georges Bank yellowtail flounder quotas for the scallop and groundfish industries, "to preserve fishing opportunities for both industries." The adjustment will move 332,016 pounds of allowable yellowtail from the commercial scallop industry to the groundfish fishery. As Samuel Rauch, deputy assistant NOAA administrator for NOAA's Fisheries Service stated in today's press release, both the scallop and groundfish industries worked together "to find an effective solution to a very difficult situation."

Yesterday, the Fisheries Survival Fund, whose participants include the majority of full-time, limited-access scallop permit holders, wrote to Mr. Rauch to express appreciation for his efforts regarding Georges Bank yellowtail flounder annual catch limit issues, to outline remaining concerns, and to reaffirm their position on the transfer. 

The letter noted the following:
In its vote to recommend the reallocation, the New England Fishery Management Council also voted in favor of an emergency measure, "indemnifying" scallopers should they exceed their reduced sub-ACL in the 2012 fishing year. Without the indemnification provision, the scallop industry could not support the reallocation.  
Because this major switch in quotas (a reduction of about half of the scallop's previous quota) occurs in the middle of the fishing season, and the allocation changes are not based on in-season data on the amount of yellowtail bycatch, or the location in which the scallop industry operates.        
Before any further changes to annual catch limits and accountability measures are made, better tools for tracking yellowtail bycatch need to be developed and used. Scallop fishermen currently pay observers to track bycatch during fishing operations, and yet NOAA Fisheries takes five to six months before the observer data is integrated into the catch estimates. The scallop fishermen have no reliable way to keep track of their yellowtail bycatch, and a long period of uncertainty before learning of the potential imposition of accountability measures. It is unfair to the fishermen to impose reactive accountability measures without giving the fleet a real time indicator of whether or not they are in accordance with the set quota.       
Other alternatives for accountability measures should be considered, such as the use of a three-year average (as permitted under National Standard 1 Guidelines) for determining when quotas have been exceeded. This method is currently used in many fisheries where the annual catches are highly variable and season data is often unreliable. Under a three year average, the scallop industry could avoid reactive closures if the catch limits were exceeded in only one out of the three years, as long as average remained under the limit.
The letter also emphasizes the importance of the ongoing and highly-successful efforts to develop technology to reduce the incidental bycatch of yellowtail flounder. FSF has been working with NOAA Fisheries and its academic research partners via the Research Set-Aside Program to research and develop operational and gear-related methods to reduce bycatch.  They are also working with the University of Massachusetts School for Marine Science and Technology (SMAST) to expand the bycatch avoidance system that has been producing effective results. These measures should eventually provide a better alternative to the current closure-based accountability measures that cause so much uncertainty and potential loss of scallop optimum yield.

Read the letter from FSF counsel to NOAA Fisheries

The Northeast Seafood Coalition stated:

The Northeast Seafood Coalition ("NSC")-a membership organization that represents 254 small-business entities with 514 permits that operate in the commercial groundfish fishery from Maine to New Jersey-supports today's announcement from the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration's National Marine Fisheries Service ("NMFS") to initiate a transfer of approximately 332,016 pounds Georges Bank yellowtail flounder to the commercial groundfish fishery. This action will help to alleviate the severe economic hardship being faced by many NSC members that need yellowtail in order to fish on Georges Bank.

NSC board member and multiple vessel owner Thomas Williams praises the NMFS for recognizing the need for immediate action. "I think it saved the hides of a lot of people. Had [this action] not been made, I don't know that many fishermen could have survived. We know there's an abundance of yellowtail out there, so many that we wouldn't have been able to fish for winter flounder or any flat fish without catching yellowtail. I'm very happy they made this decision. It's critical to our operation," Williams said.

Based on results of a NEFMC requested Georges Bank Yellowtail Working Group and a joint Groundfish and Scallop Committee meeting held in June, it was recommended by the New England Fishery Management Council ("NEFMC") that NMFS utilize existing authority provided in groundfish management plan Framework 47 to immediately transfer 156.9 metric tons ("MT") or 90 percent of the 174.3 MT of GB YT from the Atlantic scallop fishery sub-annual catch limit (ACL) to the groundfish sub-ACL based on revised projections of 2012 GB YT bycatch by the Atlantic scallop fleet. Furthermore, any unused GB YT should be transferred to the groundfish fleet by January 15, as outlined in the existing regulations and based on actual catch from the scallop fleet in fishing year 2012.

The NEFMC motion addressed the oversight made in Framework 47 where the updated projection of GB YT bycatch by the Atlantic scallop fleet did not make it into the final number approved by the Council for the current fishing year 2012.

Furthermore, the Council's motion also requested NMFS initiate an Emergency Action to temporarily relieve the Atlantic scallop fishery from any AM triggered by catch less than 307 MT of yellowtail flounder catch by the scallop fishery that under the current scallop regulations would be required if the sub-ACL is exceeded in 2012. Instead, the pound-for-pound repayment provision of the U.S./Canada agreement could be utilized should the total allowable catch be exceeded for FY 2012.

The NSC appreciates the leadership provided by Council and NOAA leadership to address this crisis. NSC strongly thanks NMFS for their quick action, which will enable groundfish fishermen to make reasonable plans for how to make the best use of what is an extremely small overall ACL for the United States fishery in 2012.

On two separate occasions, in September 2011 and May 2012, the Northeast Seafood Coalition wrote to the NEFMC and NOAA Fisheries Service respectively, urging the reevaluation of estimated Georges Bank yellowtail flounder by-catch in the Atlantic scallop fishery and to adjust sub-allocations of the scallop and groundfish fleets accordingly. NSC staff and leadership have been heavily focused on this critical issue with participation on the Georges Bank Yellowtail Working Group and exchanges with NOAA leadership and the NEFMC to assist in the drafting of the transfer mechanism in FW 47 utilized today.