The following op-ed ran in the New Bedford Standard-Times:
March 30, 2013 — Recent developments in marine science and fisheries management demonstrate that greater access to previously closed areas is possible without negatively affecting conservation.
The New England Fishery Management Council, after years of exhaustive deliberation and scientific analysis, is finalizing recommendations to modify closed areas off New England to better conform to updated science and current management goals. Several prominent environmental groups and advocates are defending the status quo.
One of the highest profile defenses of the current system appeared in the New York Times, ("Keep the Fishing Ban in New England" Jan. 30) by Dr. Callum Roberts, a tropical ecosystem expert at the University of York. Dr. Roberts claimed that maintaining the current areas is essential to continuing the recovery of species like scallops and haddock. But recent developments in marine science and fisheries management demonstrate that greater access to these areas is possible without negatively affecting conservation.
When the closed areas were designed, fisheries managers used "effort controls," specifying where, when and how fishermen could fish. As part of that system, areas of Georges Bank were closed to make the fleet less efficient, not because they were environmentally important. Today, managers determine catch directly with allocations.
Outside of their original purpose, the closings have provided insights into new management strategies and fishing techniques. We saw that scallops are able to mature and grow to larger sizes. We learned that this provided for a healthier resource with larger harvests and more spawning.
To capitalize on these benefits, scallopers partnered with NOAA and the NEFMC to create a system of "Rotational Area Management." This restricts where and when scallop vessels can fish, directing vessels to areas where fully grown scallops are located and keeping them away from areas with undersized scallops. In 2004, the fishery increased the "ring size" on fishing gear to 4 inches, so that only larger scallops are caught, while smaller scallops and fish bycatch are excluded. This current system is the result of extensive collaboration between the government, scallop fishermen and independent fisheries scientists. Cooperative research conducted by NMFS, the Fisheries Survival Fund, Coonamessett Farm, the Virginia Institute of Marine Science at the College of William and Mary, and the School for Marine Science and Technology at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, remains a model of collaborative, conservation-minded fisheries management.
Operating closures on a rotational basis, rather than maintaining permanent closed areas, has proved to yield a healthy scallop population. In 2005, Dr. Deborah Hart, head of sea scallop research at NOAA's Northeast Fisheries Science Center, wrote that "there is no clear evidence indicating that the closures have enhanced recruitment or landings in the areas remaining open to fishing," and that any gains that do occur are offset by the loss of access to the closed areas. However, rotational closures, which provide the same benefits of increased yield and abundance, "are much more likely to improve scallop yield than permanent closed areas."
Maintaining the current closed areas for a long period of time creates little value for the environment. Much of the seabed on Georges Bank comprises sand and gravel, and the bottom in these areas is naturally dynamic. High-energy tides frequently sweep the ocean floor, and habitats are constantly changing. These forces often reach the equivalent of 70 mph winds on land, and occur frequently enough to cause the seafloor to become unstable on a bi-weekly basis.
Trawling in these areas has few long-term effects. A 2004 University of Connecticut study found that sand and gravel habitats recover in less than a year. A 2006 study from SMAST determined the effects of trawling in these areas to be similar to the forces they experience under natural conditions.
Growing evidence also suggests that the current boundaries exclude important rocky habitat and are not optimal. Unlike the sand and gravel bottoms, these areas are more stable and likely to support permanent habitats and shelter groundfish. The NEFMC has proposed modifying the closed areas to better reflect this newly available information in its upcoming Omnibus Habitat Amendment.
The NEFMC Habitat Plan Development Team, in a 2011 analysis of the Georges Bank seafloor, found "for mobile bottom-tending gears, which comprise nearly 99 percernt of all adverse effects in our region, allowing fishing in almost any portion of the area closures on Georges Bank is estimated to substantially decrease total adverse effects from fishing."
Maintaining the status quo in the closed areas may be more detrimental to Georges Bank. With large sections of the ocean off-limits, fishing effort has concentrated on open areas that have been regularly fished since the establishment of the area closures in 1994. Because many of these areas do not have as many scallops and groundfish as parts of the closed areas, boats need to trawl for a longer period of time. Modifying the closed area would ultimately benefit the economic and environmental health of the fishery.
Ron Smolowitz is a marine engineer and retired NOAA Corps officer, and has been conducting fisheries research and fishing gear development for almost 40 years.
Read the full opinion piece at the New Bedford Standard-Times