New England Archives - Page 775 of 788

Former NOAA official pushed regs that benefit his company

November 10, 2015 — The following is an excerpt from a story originally published today by Greenwire:

The head of a company that receives millions of dollars from the federal government to provide at-sea watchdogs has a long history of advocating for the strict regulations that now benefit his company.

Andrew Rosenberg wears many hats. He heads up the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists. He is an unpaid affiliate professor of natural resources and the environment at the University of New Hampshire. He is a biologist with expertise in fisheries, once serving as the Northeast regional administrator for the National Marine Fisheries Service.

And he is the president of MRAG Americas, a consulting company that earns most of its gross revenue from NMFS.

Today, about 64 percent of the company’s gross revenue comes from providing at-sea monitors and observers to NMFS, an agency under the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Most of that — 55 percent — comes from being the sole provider of observers for the Northeast Fisheries Observer Program (NEFOP). Those observers collect data on bycatch, or fish and mammals caught unintentionally.

But MRAG has become a sort of boogeyman among New England fishermen who face paying for the separate At-Sea Monitoring Program. MRAG is one of three companies NOAA pays for those monitors, who are put on fishing boats to ensure groundfish fishermen stay within their quotas.

In an industry with long memories, Rosenberg is known for his time at NOAA. Fishermen who remember him as a government official now bristle at the thought of paying his company for watchdogs they find unnecessary.

“It seems strange that somebody who was an assistant administrator for NOAA quits the government and turns around and has a multimillion-dollar contract for observers,” David Goethel, the operator of a 44-foot trawler called the Ellen Diane, said in a recent interview. “Fishermen think that it’s wrong.”

Rosenberg left NOAA in 2000 and bought into MRAG in 2006. He became president of the company in 2007. In a recent interview, he emphasized the time lapse between the two jobs — and denied that his company benefited from his NOAA contacts.

The contracting process was “very difficult and very rigid,” he said. The observer program is also not very profitable, he said, thanks to the costs of training and the unpredictability of how many observers will be used.

“It was a very long, drawn-out process, and in fact that’s caused us a lot of problems,” Rosenberg said, citing competition that brought down the contract’s worth. “So if I got a benefit from the inside track, it wasn’t obvious.”

Read the full story from Greenwire

JOHN SACKTON: Media’s Rampant ‘Fisheries Are Going Extinct’ Claim Finally has Serious Rebuttal from Scientists

SEAFOODNEWS.COM [The Editor’s View] by John Sackton — Nov 3, 2015 — The following headline came across our newsfeed this morning “Some South China Sea fish ‘close to extinction'”, courtesy of Agence France Presse.

The report was based on a quote from Rashid Sumaila, director of the Fisheries Economics Research Unit of the University of British Columbia.

“The South China Sea is… under threat from various sources. We need to do something,” said Sumaila.

“The most scary thing is the level of decline we have seen over the years. Some species (are facing) technically extinction or depletion,” Sumaila, who headed the study, told a press conference in Hong Kong.

Having not seen the paper, it is not possible to evaluate his statements. But they are readily taken up because they feed into a media narrative that has proved very hard to change: fisheries around the world are dying because of human greed and overfishing. This narrative has been central to NGO campaigns focused on fisheries.

For many years, there was no organized response, and especially no way for journalists to get accurate scientific information. If they were fed a quote, such as “90% of the worlds stocks were unsustainably harvested” as appeared in Newsweek this summer, or that fish is ‘aquatic bushmeat’ comparable to eating monkeys and rhinoceros, as was said by Sylvia Earle, they have no way to evaluate its truthfulness. No wonder that seafood seems so controversial.

A group of scientists has come together through Ray Hilborn and his colleagues at the University of Washington, that is finally providing real-time commentary and rebuttal – i.e. pointing out the basic science – which in many cases does not support these media stories.

Our companion story today by Peggy Parker has more detail on Hilborn’s rebuttal to Newsweek, where he said one article ‘may set a record for factual errors’.

The idea is not to simply point out poor science and unsupported conclusions, but to encourage media to use their website cfooduw.org, as a resource whenever they see a scientific claim about fisheries.

For example, just in the past few days, scientists from around the world have posted comments on a range of global topics.

Hilborn pointed out, and the Newsweek editors accepted, a correction that not 90%, but 28.8% of fish stocks were estimated as overfished. Would they have run the story if they had not been pitched intitally that 90% of fish stocks have collapsed?

Steve Cadrin of the University of Massachusetts comments on recent articles about cod in both New England and Newfoundland. He says “The lesson from both of these papers is that rebuilding the stocks to historical levels depends both on fisheries management … and on the return of favorable environmental conditions.”

“Stock assessment models are simplifications of a much more complex reality. Stock assessments typically assume that components of productivity (survival from natural mortality, reproductive rates, growth) are relatively constant. These assumptions may be reasonable for relatively stable ecosystems. However, considering the extreme climate change experienced in the Gulf of Maine, such assumptions need to be re-considered. Alternative approaches to science and management are needed to help preserve the fishing communities that rely on Gulf of Maine cod.”

Two tuna scientists collaborate on a story in response to the charge by Greenpeace that John West is breaking its sustainable tuna pledge by buying fish caught with FADs.

FADs are a type of fishing gear (radio monitored fish aggregating devices) that have become very widely used for pelagic tuna. The two scientists, Laurent Dagorn and Gala Moreno, point out in a comment and a recent paper the important issues with FADs are 1) quantifying, with scientific data, how big that impact actually is, 2) determining if the impact is acceptable for the amount and diversity of fish caught, 3) comparing it with the impact of other fishing gears, and 4) implementing measures to reduce an impact if it is too high for the ecosystem, taking into account all fishing impacts.

This provides a real road map for a discussion of FADs and how they should or should not be used, in contrast to the campaign claims that they are simply destructive types of fishing gear. Dagorn and Moreno point out that all food production (including organic farming) involves making choices about modifying ecosystems, and tuna fishing should not be considered in isolation, but in how it meets the goal of providing food for global populations.

Aggregating and making this kind of fisheries science easily accessible is one of the most concrete actions that has been taken in years to counteract the misinformation that so many of us in the industry experience every day.

It is an effort that deserves wholehearted support, including publicizing the resource to local writers and editors. Please visit their website at cfooduw.org.

This opinion piece originally appeared on SeafoodNews.com, a subscription site. It has been reprinted with permission.

Regulators consider what to do about collapsed lobster stock

November 9, 2015 — PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — Interstate fishing regulators are considering what to do about southern New England’s collapsed lobster population, and fishermen fear new restrictions could land on them as a result.

The lobster population has sunk to the lowest levels on record in southern New England waters, affecting once-productive fishing grounds off Rhode Island and southern Massachusetts. The catch off Rhode Island is a third of the size that it was in the late 1990s, and it has all but disappeared off Connecticut.

A science committee of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission is working on a report about the lobster stock that the commission’s lobster board will see in February. The board could then make a decision about the future of the fishery, including changing quotas or enacting new restrictions.

William Adler, a longtime Massachusetts lobstermen and a member of the lobster board, said that a moratorium is not likely on the table but that something needs to be done to conserve the region’s lobsters, which are beloved by restaurant diners.

Read the full story from the Associated Press at the Boston Globe

MASSACHUSETTS: Lobsterman rescued after boat burns

November 6, 2015 — Editor’s note: Proper safety and survival training is critically important for dealing with emergencies and disasters at sea. To learn more about maritime safety and to enroll in a maritime safety and emergency preparedness course, contact Fishing Partnership Support Services.

A lobsterman was forced to jump overboard after his vessel caught fire just off Plum Island on Friday morning.

Luckily for Sam Allen of the Dawn Breaker, two men in a nearby vessel were able to pull him out of the water within 15 minutes.

Though Allen, an Ipswich resident, sustained no injuries, the Dawn Breaker is a total loss.

The fire started when the Dawn Breaker’s engine began to overheat. Allen tried to put the flames out with a portable fire extinguisher, but the vessel went up fast, Lt. Lee Prentiss of the Ipswich Fire Department said.

The Coast Guard lauded Allen for his quick actions.

“This is the mark of a true professional mariner,” said Petty Officer 1st Class Darin Crozier, a watchstander at Coast Guard Sector Boston’s command center, in a statement. “He was prepared and did everything right — he donned his immersion suit, communicated his location clearly with his radio, and abandoned ship with his locator beacon.

Read the full story at the Gloucester Daily Times

Image courtesy of the U.S. Coast Guard.

BOSTON HERALD: Drowning in regulations

November 6, 2015 — President Obama is poised to designate two large areas off the New England coast as national marine “monuments,” to the delight of conservationists who seem much more interested in protecting the ocean than they are in protecting people.

Gov. Charlie Baker has written to President Obama to express concern about the impact on the region’s fishermen if the federal government turns part of the New England coastline into a sort of undersea museum — one that only scientists are likely ever to lay eyes on. Baker in his letter raises reasonable concerns about the process — or lack thereof — that led to this point.

Yes, Obama has the authority to take this step under the Antiquities Act (and has done so for other areas in the Pacific, as did President George W. Bush). But Baker notes there has been little public input into the decision to designate areas known as Cashes Ledge and the New England Canyons and Seamounts as national monuments, making them off limits to commercial fishing and such activities as oil or gas exploration or extraction — permanently.

Read the full editorial at the Boston Herald

Mass. gov. Baker to Obama: Monument plan contrary to regional ocean planning

November 5, 2015 — Gov. Charlie Baker today directly addressed his concerns to President Obama about the potential designation of one or more National Marine Monuments off the coast of New England, saying the process has lacked stakeholder involvement and threatens to undermine existing fishery management systems.

“While the protection of critical marine habitats is a goal shared by many — including my Administration — significant questions and concerns have been raised regarding this possible designation,” Baker wrote in a letter to Obama, a copy of which was obtained by the Gloucester Daily Times. “I wish to convey my Administration’s apprehension as to both the process being implemented and the effects of such a unilateral declaration.”

The Obama administration, under significant pressure by environmental groups, is considering using the Antiquities Act to unilaterally designate areas of deep-sea canyons and seamounts — and possibly an area on Cashes Ledge — as National Marine Monuments, thus closing them off to commercial and other recreational uses. Cashes Ledge is about 80 miles east of Gloucester.

“My Administration has been unable to determine how these areas were identified and selected,” Baker wrote to Obama. “NOAA held a single public meeting in Providence, Rhode Island, and I believe that this falls far short of any meaningful stakeholder process.”

By contrast, Baker reminded the president, Massachusetts is an active participant in two regional ocean management systems — the New England Fishery Management Council and the Northeast Regional Planning Body — that are “stakeholder-based, informed by rigorous science and provide for robust debate.”

He pointed out that the NEFMC approved a marine habitat plan in April that “continues long-standing protections for a large area covering Cashes Ledge and extending many miles beyond” and that the council is working on extending similar protections to the New England Canyons through the Deep-Sea Coral Amendment.

Read the full story at Gloucester Daily Times

NEFMC Declares Amendment 18 Flawed Then Votes It In

November 4, 2015 — PLYMOUTH, Mass. —“The core message, across the board, is—we don’t want this fishery owned and controlled by a small group of people.”

That was the consensus, as expressed by Brett Tolley, of the Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance, delivered to the New England Fishery Management Council (NEFMC) during their latest deliberations on Amendment 18 to the groundfish management plan.

Tolley continued, “That’s no good for communities or the fish or the seafood system. And right now, at the end of this process, we’re debating whether seven or five entities should control this fishery….So there’s something fundamentally flawed with this public process.”

In late September, NEFMC was considering measures that would impose limits on the amount of fishery permits and/or Potential Sector Contribution (PSC) that individuals or groups may hold, as well as other measures that might promote fleet diversity or enhance sector management.

But fishermen and others at the meeting said Amendment 18 failed to achieve the goals outlined by NEFMC.

“It feels like we’re making things up on the fly,” said NEFMC member John Pappalardo. “The document here doesn’t answer a lot of questions that have come up today. I’m still toying with the idea of making a motion to scuttle this whole thing and send it back for further development….There’s a sense that folks just want to get this over with, but I’m not sure that’s the best course of action right now.”

Ed Barrett, a commercial fisherman from Marshfield, Mass., said he predicted, during the development of Amendment 16, that sector management would never work.

“We’re here in Amendment 18, pretty far down the road in a process that’s included years of scoping and committee meetings, and we have an amendment that’s not going to fix a thing,” Barrett said. “Right now, all we’re arguing over is the minutiae of a bad business model. This has been a waste of taxpayer money. It has failed me as a business owner, it’s failed my family’s business, it’s failed my fishing community. We need to stop this amendment right here. We need to go forward with something that will fix the problems that are killing the industry right now.”

“Give us the names of the five or seven guys who are going to own this fishery,” said Sandwich, Mass., fisherman William Chaprales. “We’re going too fast. Slow down. Let’s shelve this.”

Chaprales referred to the report produced by consulting firm Compass Lexecon (CL), which was charged in 2013 by NEFMC to determine if excessive market share currently exists in the groundfishery and to recommend potential constraints that could prevent excessive shares in the future. CL concluded there was no evidence of excessive market share and recommended accumulation limits in the 15.5 to 25 percent range on stock-specific potential sector contributions, and said lesser controls could reduce efficiency unnecessarily. PSC is an individual fisherman’s historical share of landings of groundfish species.

Read the full story at Fishermen’s Voice

Climate change fuels cod collapse

November 3, 2015 — The strongest link yet between climate change and the collapse of New England’s cod fish stunningly confirms how global emissions fuel regional calamities. The problems can no longer be contained by fishery council catch limits. They now demand worldwide greenhouse gas solutions.

A team of scientists, including those from the Gulf of Maine Research Institute, the University of Maine, and the Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences in Maine, found that average surface water temperature in the Gulf of Maine rose four degrees between 2004 and 2013. Temperatures in the gulf have risen faster than in 99 percent of all sea waters, with record warmth recorded in 2012.

Four degrees is trivial to humans, who can shed sweaters or seek shade. But for a cold-blooded fish at the southern edge of its breeding range, unable to turn on the AC against the northward shift of the Gulf Stream, four degrees is a sauna. Less cod larvae survive in warmer water, possibly because their cold-water zooplankton food is also less available. Surviving cod then seek deeper, colder water, where more voracious predators await to compound their mortality.

The study, published last week in the journal Science, helps explain why cod stocks have not rebounded under draconian federal catch limits. Adding in the negative impact of warmer water, researchers found that fishing mortality was far too high to rebuild stocks even when fishermen did not exceed quotas.

Read the full story at Boston Globe

Woods Hole Report: Climate, weather and the economy

October 31, 2015 — The coastal ocean and its fisheries have played a huge role in the cultural and economic development of Cape Cod. Yet recent changes in the atmosphere and deep ocean threaten the natural rhythms that govern the ecosystems of the shallow waters surrounding Cape Cod.

One factor affecting the coastal ocean in the northeastern United States is a change in the motions of the atmospheric jet stream. We felt the effects during the past winter, which was exceptionally cold and snowy. In recent years, the north-south movements of the jet stream have been increasing. However, the eastward motion has been stalling, resulting in more persistent weather patterns – cold or warm – that affect the temperature distribution in the coastal ocean.

In early 2015, the jet stream dipped well southward of its normal position and stalled, bringing a steady burst of storms moving along the coast and cooling the coastal ocean. By contrast, the jet stream remained well north of its normal wintertime position in the winter of 2011-2012 so that warm air remained over New England for much of the winter. As a result, spring water temperatures were much warmer than usual, 3-4 degrees Fahrenheit above normal over a six-month period, and as high as 10 degrees Fahrenheit for short time periods.

Research at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution found temperatures of continental shelf waters in 2012 off New England were the highest they’ve been in 150 years of measurements.

Read the full story at The Metrowest Daily News

Will Maine lobster crash like cod? Only close ocean monitoring will tell

November 2, 2015 — There was a mix of news about the Gulf of Maine last week. First, there were dire warnings about the role of rising ocean temperatures in the demise of cod in the North Atlantic. Then came what sounded like good news — Maine has surpassed Massachusetts to become the state with the second most lucrative seafood landings in the country. Finally, on Friday, federal regulators announced they would close the Gulf of Maine herring fishery this month.

All of these stories are interrelated and point to the need for much more research to gain better understanding about what is happening in the Atlantic Ocean and why. With better knowledge about how changing ocean conditions affect different species, regulators can more effectively target rules to protect them and the fishermen who make a living catching them.

The virtual disappearance of cod from the waters off New England is not news. But a new report, published in the journal Science, concludes that rising ocean temperatures played a much larger role in the decline than initially thought. The study’s lead author, Andrew Pershing, is a scientist with the Gulf of Maine Research Institute in Portland.

In the simplest sense, regulators decide how many tons of a species can be taken from the ocean based on assessments of that species’ population. The problem with cod management, Pershing’s report concludes, is that regulators didn’t fully grasp the severity of the ocean temperature increase and what it meant for the legendary groundfish. As a result, regulators allowed fishermen to catch too many cod.

“Failure to recognize the impact of warming on cod contributed to overfishing,” the report said. “Recovery of this fishery depends on sound management, but the size of the stock depends on future temperature conditions. The experience in the Gulf of Maine highlights the need to incorporate environmental factors into resource management.”

This is especially true in the gulf, which is warming faster than 99.9 percent of the world’s oceans. Most troubling, beginning in 2004, the rate of warming in the Gulf of Maine increased more than seven-fold, the report says. Because of this rapid warming, regulatory limits on cod fishing didn’t work because cod did not reproduce and grow as expected.

This isn’t an academic problem. As the cod population declined, regulators imposed quotas that allowed fishermen to catch less. When the population didn’t rebound, regulators tightened the quotas, adding to the economic hardship for fishing communities.

Read the full editorial at Bangor Daily News

News for the New England Region