The question is whether this downward ratchet represents a responsible application of the precautionary principle (a term nowhere found in the Magnuson-Stevens Act) or a lack of will to "walk the talk" that fishermen are to be rewarded for their sacrifices.
WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) — April 7, 2015 — The following commentary appeared in the "Washington Lookout" section of the May 2015 issue of National Fisherman Magazine:
Some see fisheries management as a one-way ratchet: Harvest levels fall at the slightest whiff of bad news, but rebound slowly, if at all, when stock status improves. While this may be an overstatement, it's not exaggerating to observe that, all things equal, managers are more likely to make cuts based on bad news than to raise harvest levels on good news.
The question is whether this downward ratchet represents a responsible application of the precautionary principle (a term nowhere found in the Magnuson-Stevens Act) or a lack of will to "walk the talk" that fishermen are to be rewarded for their sacrifices when stock conditions are shown to have improved. Blind pessimism and a reflexive failure to accept good scientific news do not constitute true precaution. Rather, they amount to what environmentalists often criticize fishermen for: failing to accept a solid scientific conclusion based on the argument there might be some countervailing signal the data and modeling aren't yet detecting.
The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission is confronting this situation for Atlantic menhaden. The 2010 stock assessment concluded menhaden were subject to overfishing by a wafer-thin margin, a finding also of the 2012 update. The latter, however, failed as a statistical matter, plagued by a retrospective pattern that made it impossible to determine whether the stock was grossly overfished or at target levels. Following a massive media and public relations campaign, the commission established a stockwide quota and cut allowable fishing levels by 20 percent beginning in 2013.
The menhaden fishing industry reacted constructively. It undertook a preliminary aerial survey of menhaden's northern range, which demonstrated what seemingly everyone but the assessment model knew: larger, older (age 3-plus) menhaden do live north of Delmarva, largely outside the fishery. Earlier assessment models, which relied solely on catch data, overestimated mortality of this more fecund segment of the population.
The coupling of new data with a more realistic model in the 2014 benchmark assessment, each responsive to past peer review recommendations, led to a finding that Atlantic menhaden are neither overfished nor subject to overfishing – and have not been for well over a decade. The fishing mortality rate is the lowest on record and, since 2007, fecundity (the stock size measure) is at its highest sustained level in the 58-year time series. The assessment passed peer review with flying colors.
The commission now confronts the ratchet litmus test. Does it react favorably to good news, or maintain its cuts as hedge against a potential future adverse assessment or in response to unrelenting pressure from fishery opponents?