Consistent with its duties under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Council needs to balance the needs of habitat protection and restoration with the preservation of access to fishing grounds vital for the future of fishing communities.
December 16, 2014 — The following remarks were given by New Bedford Mayor Jon Mitchell at the December 16 meeting of the New England Fishery Management Council regarding Draft Omnibus Habitat Amendment 2:
Dear Council Members:
As the Mayor of New Bedford, I have the responsibility of representing the most valuable fishing port in the country, home to New England's scallop fleet and a large number of its groundfishermen. We've been able to build a thriving port over the past several years due to the success of a rotational management system that allows our fleet to be both economically successful and environmentally sustainable, with one of our industries, the scallop fishery, one of the most valuable fisheries in the nation.
As the Council considers additional habitat protections through the Omnibus Amendment, it needs to be mindful of both the economic as well as the environmental impact of the proposals before it. Consistent with its duties under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Council needs to balance the needs of habitat protection and restoration with the preservation of access to fishing grounds vital for the future of fishing communities.
For example, the continued success of the scallop fishery depends on a functional rotational closure system that allows the fleet access to the region's most valuable scallop grounds. When it works, not only is the fleet able to harvest the optimal number of scallops, but it is also able to minimize its time at sea and the interactions between scallop gear and the ocean bottom, leading to the least possible amount of bycatch and environmental disturbance.
But many of these habitat proposals would close off some of the densest, most productive scallop grounds in the region, such as the Northern Edge of Georges Bank. This would prevent scallopers from accessing their traditional fishing grounds, with the scallops in some of the closures ageing and dying off with no net benefit to scallop populations outside of them. The Council should instead consider proposals that would both improve and update existing habitat protections, while not interfering with the scallop fishery's long-term ability to be managed on a rotational basis.
Similarly, the Council needs to consider both the long-term protection of groundfish habitats along with the long-term survival of the groundfish fishery. Most available evidence finds that the best way to reduce the environmental impact of groundfish vessels is to improve the fleet's efficiency and increase catch per unit of effort (CPUE). This minimizes environmental disturbances while allowing fishermen to be as productive as possible. And the best, most proven way of accomplishing this is allowing fishermen access to the most productive fishing grounds.
Fortunately, I am pleased to note that, in two of the areas under consideration, both the scallop and groundfish industries, as represented by the Fisheries Survival Fund and the Northeast Seafood Coalition, are in agreement on Alternatives before the Council that will not only improve on existing habitat protections, but also minimize their negative economic impacts.
As you know, the Fisheries Survival Fund represents much of the New England and Mid-Atlantic scallop fleet, while the Northeast Seafood Coalition represents the region's commercial groundfishermen.
In Georges Bank, Alternative 7 is the proposal that best strikes this balance. It improves upon current closures by providing protection for a diverse array of essential fish habitats and by allowing the scallop fleet to minimize its ecological footprint by accessing some of the region's densest scallop beds. Crucially, it also allows groundfishermen access to fishing grounds along the Hague Line, in order to better compete with Canadian fishermen, who for years have reaped the benefits of fishing near the closures on the American side of the border.
In the Great South Channel, Alternative 5 would provide significant habitat protections while minimally displacing fishing effort. It's the end result of a collaborative effort between the fishing industry and the scientific community, and thus represents a well-rounded proposal that takes into consideration the concerns of both groups.
The cooperation and collaboration between fishermen and scientists also extends to the Western Gulf of Maine area, where the groundfish industry and NOAA's Stellwagen Advisory Committee worked on developing Alternative 6. This "Stellwagen Large" Alternative is both an improvement over the existing Western Gulf of Maine closures and a benefit to the local groundfish fleet that was previously locked out of the area.
The current set of area closures can certainly be improved upon, given the wealth of scientific knowledge that has been gained since they were first established. These Alternatives provide the best chance for the Council to put both the region's habitats and its fisheries on a sustainable future course.