Saving Seafood

CHRISTIAN PUTNAM: There are plenty of fish in the sea

July 20, 2017 — “The ocean has been over-fished, there are only a few more years of fish out there; and then they will all be gone.”

“There simply are not any more fish in the sea, they have all been taken!”

“The Northeast fishing industry is dead, they have fished themselves out of business.“

These are all common statements one might hear about commercial fishing in the Northeast, although each represents a misunderstanding of the situation. In fact, today these statements are just plain wrong. The Northeast ground fishing industry is in real trouble and has been for some time, which is true. The trouble is not the result of lack of fish. As Fishy Business often points out, the real culprits are poor fishery management by the federal government, incomplete fish stock assessments and bad science.

Be not heavy of heart, there is good news! To start with, there are plenty of fish in the sea. How do we know this? That’s even more good news. Instead of relying on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admiration’s (NOAA) Henry H. Bigelow (FSV 225) to survey the same areas of the ocean each year to create fish stock assessments (known by NOAA as, “Index of Relative Abundance”), more organizations are helping to create usable data and a more complete picture. You see, the Index of Relative Abundance tells us what the number of fish in a specific area are compared to prior years. The increase or decrease in fish counted is then extrapolated to represent the entire region.

This is sort of like polling the same people for every election and predicting the behavior or the entire Commonwealth of Massachusetts without taking other factors into account. What other factors? When it comes to fish stocks they might include; climate change (sea water temperature), mortality change, predatory change (for example, more seals), growth rate change and fraud. Fraud? Yes, one explanation as to why NOAA’s fish stock numbers don’t match reality is said to be because of the actions of Carlos Rafael, the “Codfather”, who notoriously underreported his catch. Carlos will be heading to prison for his misdeeds soon, so perhaps the assessments will become more accurate; don’t hold your breath. In short, the fish stock assessment environment is not optimal; but that is changing.

Read the full story at Wicked Local

Former sheriff’s deputy convicted of smuggling in fishing scheme

July 19, 2017 — A former Massachusetts sheriff’s deputy has been convicted of helping a fishing mogul known as “The Codfather” smuggle profits out of the country.

A federal jury in Boston found 47-year-old Antonio Freitas guilty Wednesday of charges of bulk cash smuggling and structuring the export of U.S. currency. The former Bristol County sheriff’s deputy will be sentenced in October.

Prosecutors say Carlos Rafael, who owns Carlos Seafood, Inc. in New Bedford, lied to federal authorities for years about the quantity and species of fish his boats caught to evade federal quotas.

Rafael pleaded guilty in March to federal charges of evading fishing quotas and smuggling money to Portugal.

Prosecutors say Freitas helped Rafael smuggle the profits to Portugal while also working as a Department of Homeland Security task force officer.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at Boston.com

Court documents suggest Carlos Rafael may sell all permits

July 17, 2017 — Documents filed in U.S. District Court on Thursday suggest that Carlos Rafael’s time as the New Bedford’s “codfather” may be coming to an end.

As part of a motion requesting a sentencing delay, Rafael’s attorney sought “additional time to resolve a critical component” in the case, specifically, “the possibility of a global settlement, which may involve Mr. Rafael exiting the commercial fishing business.”

The request suggests not only the 13 permits subject to forfeiture, but all of Rafael’s fishing permits may wind up with someone else before the sentencing.

″… The parties need additional time to resolve this issue — the result of which may be a critical component of the defendant’s argument to the court at sentencing and may obviate the need for briefing and hearing on the forfeiture issues left open in the plea agreement,” according to court documents.

The parties include Rafael’s defense and counsel for NOAA.

Read the full story at the New Bedford Standard-Times

NEW BEDFORD STANDARD-TIMES: New leader of NOAA Fisheries knows his mission

June 25, 2017 — Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross has appointed Chris Oliver as the new Assistant Administrator for NOAA Fisheries, with blessings from the White House, a broad swath of fisheries stakeholders, and an enthusiastic group of local stakeholders.

Some five dozen fishing organizations, companies and advocates have been pleased with the outcome of the process that selected Mr. Oliver from among three candidates.

Mr. Oliver’s explicit responsibility will be oversight of management and conservation of the nation’s fisheries — commercial and recreational — inside the coastal fisheries habitat found within the 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone established by the United Nations.

According to NOAA, while executive director of the Alaska-based North Pacific Fisheries Management Council, he “led the way on several cutting edge management initiatives,” including developing the programs that regulate fishery quota, fishing cooperatives and catch share programs such as we see in the Northeast, the Alaska fishery’s onboard observer program, bycatch reduction programs, habitat protection, allocation programs, and community development programs. This familiarity will leaves us more certain that the progress made in management of the challenging multispecies fishery can continue. It is far from perfect, but the moves toward fleet collaboration and consideration of fishing communities could stand to continue in the Northeast.

“I understand how important stakeholder involvement, transparency, and best available science are to making the right policy decisions and I plan to ensure those tenets of the Magnuson-Stevens Act are applied across the board while I am leading the agency,” he was quoted as saying by the NOAA press release that announced his appointment last Monday. “I intend to rely heavily upon the regional expertise of the eight fishery management Councils and the associated NOAA Fisheries Regions and Science Centers, and to ensure they have the resources necessary to effectively tackle region-specific issues.”

A federal budget has yet to be passed, and the Trump administration has already signaled it wants to see cuts at NOAA, particularly on weather and climate research, but not necessarily on fisheries (perhaps ignorant of the return on investment climate data delivers for fisheries industry and management alike). Mr. Oliver, as he was quoted above, wants to see the resources available to remedy “region-specific issues.” The list for the Northeast council and the Greater Atlantic Region includes untangling the influence of Carlos Rafael upon the groundfish fishery, besides trying to manage a multi-species fishery in a dynamic ecosystem in some of the fastest rising ocean temperatures on Earth.

Read the full opinion piece at the New Bedford Standard-Times

New Bedford Mayor, Others In New England Weigh in on Rafael Permits

June 26, 2017 — The following is an excerpt from a story published June 24, 2017 by the New Bedford Standard-Times. As previously noted by Saving Seafood, New Bedford Mayor Jon Mitchell has written to officials at NOAA, citing legal precedent, asking that Carlos Rafael’s fishing permits be allowed to remain in New Bedford to protect the innocent parties who were not involved in criminal activity. The Mayor also notes that selling the permits, as well as the rest of Mr. Rafael’s fishing interests, whole to a New Bedford-based entity is likely the only way to have Mr. Rafael completely divested from the fishing industry, as his scallop business is not implicated in any crimes.

Mayor Jon Mitchell was the most recent party to lobby for the permits proposing that they remain in New Bedford in a four-page letter to Samuel Rauch, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries for NOAA. But his letter also shed the most light on the situation, including references to Rafael selling his entire fleet of ships and that the government appears to not have sufficient evidence to seize any scallop permits.

“All the decisions concerning Carlos’ sanctions are being discussed right now. They’re being discussed by the U.S. Attorney’s office and NOAA and Rafael’s attorney,” Mitchell said. “They’ve all heard from me over the last several months, more than once. I wanted to put my thoughts in writing on the record so it’s clear to everybody where New Bedford stood.”

In his letter, Mitchell focuses on the 13 permits’ influence on third parties. He pointed out that Rafael’s business, Carlos Seafood Inc., directly employs 285 fishermen and indirectly “supports a sprawling supply chain in the port that includes gear menders and manufacturers, fuel companies, vessel outfitters, settlement houses, welders, lumper, ice houses, truckers and many others.”

According to the mayor, Rafael’s fleet accounts for 70 percent of the fuel supplied to fishing vessels by Bay Fuels, 30 percent of the fishing gear manufactured by Reidar’s Trawling and 75 percent of the groundfish landed at Whaling City Display Auction.

“My concern is that if the government doesn’t exercise its discretion in a way that reasonably considers the interest of innocent third parties,” Mitchell said. “I believe there would be considerable harm to those folks.”

The concern extends to the New Bedford economy, which already heavily relies on scallops. Mitchell said that Rafael owns about 75 percent of the groundfish permits. Groundfish accounts for 10 percent of the port’s revenue.

“When industries in a place are less diversified, they’re more prone to economic shocks,” Mitchell said. “If we become almost exclusively reliant on scallop landings, we’re prone to all the risks that prevent themselves to that industry.

The one commonality among most of the written notes is the desire for Rafael to never fish again.

Mitchell is the only one who developed a scenario to make that a reality.

Rafael’s most valuable permits lie within his scallop vessels. There’s no evidence that the government can seize any permits other than the 13 listed in the original indictment.

“If, as it appears, the government does not have sufficient evidence or legal authority to pursue the forfeiture of all of Rafael’s permits and vessels not named in the criminal indictment, Rafael will be able to use his remaining permits…to profit from scallop landings — even from his cell in jail,” Mitchel wrote.

Read the full story at the New Bedford Standard-Times

MASSACHUSETTS: Fish council clams up about Carlos Rafael sector

June 22, 2017 — The New England Fishery Management Council on Tuesday opted not to adopt a position on whether restrictions should be enacted against Northeast Fishery Sector IX because of widespread misreporting by Carlos Rafael’s vessels.

The council, meeting for three days in Portland, Maine, refrained from pursuing formal comments, preferring to defer discussion on possible measures against the New Bedford-based groundfish sector until after Rafael is sentenced on July 28. The 65-year-old fishing mogul, known as the Codfather,  pleaded guilty in late March to falsifying fish quotas, conspiracy and tax evasion.

“Many people think it is more appropriate to wait for the sentencing hearing to take place and the criminal case to be fully settled first,” said Janice Plante, council spokeswoman.

The council spent nearly all of Tuesday deliberating other groundfish issues, including the selection of varied monitoring alternatives for the Groundfish Monitoring Amendment 23 aimed at “improving the reliability and accountability of catch reporting.”

The council voted to include electronic monitoring alternatives, a dockside monitoring program option, alternatives to determine the total monitoring coverage rate, proposals to improve sector reporting and an option to publicize the coverage rate at a time that assists the sectors in their business planning.

The council specifically identified aspects of electronic monitoring requiring more analysis and development, including electronic monitoring “as an approved alternative to at-sea monitors to directly estimate discards.”

Read the full story at the Gloucester Times

MASSACHUSETTS: Mitchell sends NOAA letter requesting Rafael permits stay in New Bedford

June 21, 2017 — Mayor Jon Mitchell penned a letter to NOAA regarding Carlos Rafael’s permits, a day after Maine’s congressional delegation signed a letter regarding the permits.

In an argument consisting of four pages, Mitchell provided legal precedent for the Department of Justice and NOAA to punish Rafael, while also keeping the 13 fishing permits in question in New Bedford. He likens Rafael’s case to those cases involving wrongdoing by the head of a large business. He states, “It is common for the government to tailor punishment so as to avoid harm to others who were not involved.”

Rafael’s business employ 285 fishermen.

Mitchell suggested Rafael sell his entire business to other New Bedford companies, forfeiting the proceeds to the government. It would entirely exclude Rafael from fishing despite possessing more permits than the 13 in question.

“If the Service affords him a reasonable opportunity to fully divest himself in such fashion,” Mitchel wrote. “The government can accomplish its enforcement goals and avoid harm to employees and other businesses.”

On Monday, U.S. Senators Angus King and Susan Collins, along with members of Congress Chellie Pingree and Bruce Poliquin, drafted a letter to U.S. Secretary Wilbur Ross stating the permits should be redistributed among “all eligible permit holders in the fleet.” The Congressional delegation cited the Magnuson-Stevens Act to justify its belief.

Politicians and organizations have jockeyed for leverage regarding the final destination of the permits almost immediately after Rafael pleaded guilty to 28 counts including falsifying fishing quotas, false labeling, conspiracy and tax evasion at the end of March.

Read the full story at the New Bedford Standard-Times

New Bedford Mayor Calls on NOAA to Protect Innocent Parties in Rafael Case

June 21, 2017 (Saving Seafood) – The mayor of New Bedford, Massachusetts is calling on NOAA to protect the innocent, preserve waterfront jobs, and avoid economic harm as the Carlos Rafael case nears the end of its sentencing phase. Citing long-standing Department of Justice rules, Mayor Jon Mitchell urges the federal government, in a letter to then-Acting NOAA Assistant Administrator for Fisheries Sam Rauch, to resolve the case in a way that minimizes harm.

The mayor noted that Department of Justice policy “directs federal prosecutors to take into account the effect their decisions may have on innocent third parties.” He cites the Principles of Federal Prosecution (Section 9-28.1100), which “speak directly to the possible need for restraint in cases of corporate misfeasance, where punishment that results in the demise of the business itself would cause harm to employees, shareholders, suppliers and other constituents of the business.”

Mr. Rafael, owner of one of the largest groundfish businesses in New England, pled guilty in March to fish mislabeling, falsifying federal records, conspiracy, and other charges. The sentence is expected to be handed down in July.

Mayor Mitchell acknowledges that Mr. Rafael’s sentence should result in the forfeiture of his groundfish permits and “be sufficient to deter others from engaging in similar misconduct.” But the mayor also warns that it should be handled in a way that is least disruptive to the hundreds on the New Bedford waterfront who depend on the businesses that are based around those permits.

“Although I believe that Rafael should not be allowed to profit from permits he has abused, numerous others in Greater New Bedford, who played no part in his fraudulent scheme, also depend on the landings associated with those permits for their livelihoods,” the mayor writes. “The decisions concerning the forfeiture or revocation of Rafael’s permits should take their interests into account.”

The mayor, who as a former Assistant U.S. Attorney worked with NOAA law enforcement on several successful prosecutions prior to serving as mayor, contends that there is existing precedent for such a decision, pointing to past sentencing practices.

By allowing Mr. Rafael to transfer his permits to willing buyers in New Bedford, and transferring the profits of the sale of those permits to the government, the mayor argues that the federal government can achieve its main goals—“a clear general deterrence message and the removal of Rafael from the business of fishing”—without causing harm to workers in New Bedford.

The mayor also notes that this option may be the only way for the government to compel Mr. Rafael to leave the fishing industry entirely.

“If, as it appears, the government does not have sufficient evidence or the legal authority to pursue the forfeiture all of Rafael’s permits and vessels not named in the criminal indictment, Rafael will be able to use his remaining permits, largely to fish for scallops,” the mayor writes. “This scenario would result in harm to the businesses that rely on his groundfish landings, while Rafael could continue to profit from scallop landings—— even from his jail cell.”

According to the mayor, those in New Bedford who would be affected by any permit forfeiture include 285 fishermen who are directly employed by Mr. Rafael, as well as hundreds more directly employed in supporting businesses. Many businesses on the waterfront—“gear menders and manufacturers, fuel companies, vessel outfitters, settlement houses, welders, lumpers, ice houses, truckers”—depend on Mr. Rafael’s permits for a significant portion of their revenue.

“Approximately seventy percent of the fuel supplied to fishing vessels by Bay Fuels, a fueling company based on the New Bedford waterfront, is sold to Mr. Rafael; thirty percent of the fishing gear manufactured by New Bedford-based Reidar’s Trawling is sold to Mr. Rafael; and seventy five percent of the groundfish landed at the Whaling City Display Auction is landed by Rafael’s boats,” the mayor writes.

The Port of New Bedford as a whole also relies on Mr. Rafael’s businesses for diversity in its landings. If Mr. Rafael’s permits were dispersed, the Port would be forced to rely almost solely on revenues from one species, Atlantic scallops, making it more vulnerable to potential downturns.

Read the full letter here

 

Maine congressional delegation asks forfeited groundfish permits be redistributed through Northeast

June 19, 2017 — Sens. Susan Collins and Angus King and Reps. Chellie Pingree and Bruce Poliquin sent a letter Monday to U.S. Department of Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross asking that the 13 groundfish permits forfeited by Carlos Rafael — a New Bedford fisherman who has pleaded guilty to 28 federal counts of tax evasion, falsifying fishing quotas and conspiracy — be redistributed to fishermen throughout the Northeast, not only New Bedford.

In their letter, the Maine congressional delegation said that groundfish permits embody a shared resource and, as such, should be returned to groundfish fishermen in “a fair and uniform manner.”

“Mr. Rafael’s grave and extensive disregard for both the law and sustainable fishing practices is a setback to the recovery of the beleaguered Northeast multispecies (groundfish) fishery, and has done, and will continue to do, financial harm to fishermen from Maine to New York,” the delegation wrote.

“These fishermen, who have complied with federal quotas and regulations, were forced to compete with this illegal activity and now must endure its repercussions on future stock assessments,” they wrote. “For these reasons, we believe the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) should cancel each of the groundfish permits that Mr. Rafael currently holds and reallocate the fishing privileges associated with such permits to all eligible permit holders in the fleet.

“We are specifically troubled that the City of New Bedford (where Mr. Rafael’s enterprise is based) is seeking to acquire control of his permits. We believe, instead, that all members of the fleet, including those in New Bedford, who have been disadvantaged by Mr. Rafael’s illegal activity, deserve a share of the rights to access these permits once remanded back to NMFS,” the delegation wrote.

Read the full story at the Bangor Daily News

NEW BEDFORD STANDARD-TIMES: Rafael’s assets could fund observer program

June 18, 2017 — Any discussion of fishery management nowadays — official and casual alike — is likely to include musings on what should happen to the assets forfeited by Carlos Rafael as punishment for his recent crimes.

Mr. Rafael pleaded guilty to charges related to his falsifying landing records and laundering cash, and is scheduled to be sentenced in late July.

The courts are working to untangle the IRS and fisheries crimes, dealing with them at one time.

A careful distinction between tax penalties and fishing penalties must be made.

The penalties for the tax crimes will be arrived at through IRS rules and laws.

The penalties for fisheries crimes are stipulated in NOAA regulations. They provide great latitude in application, from a slap on the wrist to a permanent end of fishing for Carlos Seafood. The defense is making an argument that Mr. Rafael’s influence on the fishery is so important — due to his size — that economic harm to others would be too great if he were to be sanctioned too severely.

Infractions in the fishery will result in proceeds from fines and from 13 forfeited permits and vessels, and they should be applied toward remedies for the management system’s failures. Carlos Rafael’s criminal enterprises represent Exhibit 1 of those failures.

While his acknowledged cheating predates the current regulatory regime of sectors and quotas, certain vital aspects of the management of groundfish stocks remain inadequate, including compliance. Managers have been trying to force 100 percent monitoring on fishing trips, but the requirement that vessels cover the cost has prompted a lawsuit, ad hoc funding from the NOAA Fishery Science Center budget, and postponement of implementation. None has solved the problem, and only about 1 in 7 trips is observed. Fishermen may well be fishing differently with an observer, hewing closely to the rules when observed, only to resort to landing all they can when not. Researchers have been able to compare landings from the monitored trips against the others to make inferences about that difference, although Mr. Rafael’s schemes have confounded that effort to no small degree. Furthermore, the financial balancing act that seeks to ease the cost burden on the beleaguered industry could become a much less complicating factor if 100 percent electronic monitoring were to be implemented with those windfall funds.

Read the full opinion piece at the New Bedford Standard-Times