Saving Seafood

Fishing leaders: Has the Monterey Bay sanctuary kept its promise?

December 22, 2017 — The answer is no, not to fishermen; please let us explain.

Reflect back to 1992 when the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary was proposed. While fishermen and most others agreed that it could help prevent offshore oil development, we had concerns about how sanctuary authority might affect those of us who provide food from ocean resources.

There was also public discussion about how stakeholders would have a say in the new federal bureaucracy. Commercial fishermen and recreational anglers had killed two earlier sanctuary proposals over these concerns.

In response, fishermen heard that the new sanctuary would not threaten our livelihoods or create fishing regulations. It was a broad assurance, and repeated often by both elected and NOAA officials. Based on this, fishing leaders weren’t neutral, they supported it, even traveling to Washington, D.C.

This promise was never a free-pass from fishing regulations. Rather, it acknowledged that fishery laws, such as the Magnuson-Stevens Act, already provided science-based management. Under that law, overfishing has ended on the West Coast, and several thousands of square miles of quality habitat are protected. It also acknowledged that sanctuaries are not intended to manage fisheries.

The promise is written into the sanctuary’s designation document. If any problem arose, the sanctuary would work with us for a solution.

Read the full editorial at the Santa Cruz Sentinel

 

Marine Sanctuaries Program is Bad for Fishermen, California Fishing Captain Tells Senate Subcommittee

WASHINGTON (Saving Seafood) — July 10, 2017 — Marine sanctuaries are hurting commercial and recreational fishermen and overruling the fisheries management process created under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, said Capt. Jeremiah O’Brien, vice president of the Morro Bay Commercial Fishermen’s Organization, at a Senate hearing June 27.

Speaking before the Senate Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard at a hearing convened by chairman Dan Sullivan (R-AK), Mr. O’Brien criticized marine sanctuaries for their “weak science capabilities” and “poor, self-serving public process.” He said that policymakers are interpreting the National Marine Sanctuaries Act in a way that steadily limits human uses of marine resources, violating the principles of ecosystem-based management and the law’s mandate for comprehensive and coordinated management.

“For fishermen and fishery managers, the fact that sanctuaries can overrule the Regional Fishery Management Councils, with eight National Standards serving as the council’s guide, is disconcerting, and not in the best interest of ocean health,” Mr. O’Brien said. “I hope Congress will make it clear that the Magnuson-Stevens Act is the nation’s law for fisheries and habitat management.”

Read the full testimony here