Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act Archives

Greg DiDomenico & Diane Pleschner-Steele: Senate MSA reauthorization a step back for fishing communities

August 21, 2018 — The following op-ed was originally published in The Hill and was written by Greg DiDomenico, the Executive Director of the Garden State Seafood Association, and Diane Pleschner-Steele, the Executive Director of the California Wetfish Producers Association:

In July, the House passed H.R. 200 the “Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act,” a much needed update of federal fisheries law that allows for both sustainable fisheries management and the long-term preservation of our nation’s fishing communities. Unfortunately, its counterpart bill making its way through the Senate would likely have the opposite effect.

The Senate bill, S.1520, or the “Modernizing Recreational Fisheries Management Act of 2018,” introduces changes to the Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA)—the main law governing U.S. fisheries—that would impose increasingly burdensome regulations on American fishermen and undermine H.R. 200’s goal of increasing flexibility in fisheries management.

Of particular concern are provisions contained in Section 104 of the bill, “Rebuilding Overfished Fisheries.“ Rather than giving fisheries managers more flexibility in how they manage and rebuild fish stocks, these new requirements added to S.1520 make rebuilding requirements more stringent and onerous.

For example, one of the most disturbing changes is the requirement that Regional Fishery Management Councils achieve a 75 percent chance of rebuilding a stock if that stock has not rebuilt in as short a timeframe as possible. What that means in practice is that regulators will be forced to set quotas according to a rigid, predetermined timeframe, rather than one based around scientific evidence or biological necessity. This will lead to quotas that are much lower than they need to be to sustainably manage the species, and fishing communities being unnecessarily hurt in the process.

Read the full opinion piece at The Hill

Jessica Hathaway: Outboards overboard

June 26, 2018 — In the coming weeks, the House is likely to vote on Rep. Don Young’s (R-Alaska) Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act, or H.R. 200.

This revision and reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act garnered a lot of support in the industry but has since been amended to include anti-commercial-fishing language that all but assures the slow creep of commercial quota to the sport fleet in favor of a tourism-based economy.

“It’s time for the federal policies that govern U.S. fisheries to account for the impact the recreational and boating industries have on the economy,” said Martin Peters, Government Relations Manager for Yamaha Marine Group in a press release.

A band of charter fishermen out of Galveston, Texas, is publicly protesting Yamaha Marine Group because the company has actively been lobbying for the amendment, which weakens the commercial fleet’s access to reef fish quota on the Gulf Coast.

“We had turned the corner and rebuilt these fisheries,” Scott Hickman, owner of charter fishing company Circle H Outfitters of Galveston, Texas, told the Daily News in Galveston. “Now, companies like Yamaha are funding bad legislation that would roll back the conservation aspects of the act.”

Yamaha’s advocacy cemented the company’s alliance with recreational fishing interests and the Coastal Conservation Association. But the push to strip the commercial fleet of its quota reportedly has broader support among other members of the National Marine Manufacturers Association, as well.

Read the full story at National Fisherman

East and West Coast NCFC Members: ‘H.R. 200 Will Create Flexibility Without Compromising Conservation’

June 25, 2018 — WASHINGTON — Today, East and West Coast members of Saving Seafood’s National Coalition for Fishing Communities (NCFC) submitted a letter to Speaker of the House Paul Ryan and Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy in support of H.R. 200, the Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act, which would update the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

The letter, which was also sent to Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rob Bishop, House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Emeritus Don Young, and other top Congressional officials, states that H.R. 200 will “create flexibility without compromising conservation.”

“We want a Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA) that allows for both sustainable fisheries management, and the long-term preservation of our nation’s fishing communities,” the groups wrote. “We firmly believe that Congress can meet these goals by allowing for more flexibility in management, eliminating arbitrary rebuilding timelines, and adding other reforms that better take into account the complex challenges facing commercial fishermen.”

The letter does not include support from the NCFC’s Florida, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic members, which supported the legislation from the beginning, but withdrew their support due to a late change to the Manager’s Amendment that would negatively impact their region. The NCFC’s East and West Coast members continue to support the bill on its overall merits, but share the concerns of Gulf and South Atlantic fishermen over this late alteration.

Organizations affiliated with the NCFC do not accept money from ENGOs, and represent the authentic views of the U.S. commercial fishing industry.

The letter signers represent the American Scallop Association, Atlantic Red Crab Company, Atlantic Capes Fisheries, BASE Seafood, California Wetfish Producers Association, Cape Seafood, Garden State Seafood Association, Inlet Seafood, Long Island Commercial Fishing Association, Lund’s Fisheries, North Carolina Fisheries Association, Rhode Island Commercial Fishermen’s Alliance, Seafreeze Ltd., Town Dock, West Coast Seafood Processors Association, and Western Fishboat Owners Association.

Read the full letter here

Lori Steele: Flexibility with Choke Species Key Issue for Magnuson, Seafood News Missed the Mark

January 3, 2018 — SEAFOOD NEWS — The following is a letter form Lori Steele, the Executive Director of the West Coast Seafood Processors Association, responding to the Seafood News story, “MSA Reauthorization Veers From Core Principles After House Committee Vote; Would Allow Overfishing,” originally published on December 19, 2017:

Your story on Dec. 19, 2017, “MSA Reauthorization Veers From Core Principles After House Committee Vote; Would Allow Overfishing,” contains some questionable statements, particularly the suggestion that core principles of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) are being eroded by the changes proposed in the House bill, H.R. 200, the Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act.

The assertion that, “changing words like ‘to the extent possible’ to ‘to the extent [practicable]’ when rebuilding stocks” will make the MSA weaker and less precise is incorrect and disingenuous. The West Coast Seafood Processors Association (WCSPA), along with the majority of the U.S. seafood industry, has supported this change through several MSA reauthorization bills over the last few years. The inclusion of this in H.R. 200 should be viewed as a success. This change will not compromise or weaken the effectiveness of the MSA; rather, it will help to truly fulfill one of the fundamental and original goals of the MSA, emphasized in National Standard 1, the Act’s guiding principle – to prevent overfishing while achieving, on a continuing basis the optimum yield from each fishery. From its beginning, the MSA has conserved, protected, rebuilt, and sustained our nation’s marine resources. As we move forward with this reauthorization, we have an opportunity to better conserve, protect, and sustain the people, the economies, the culture, and the communities that rely upon healthy and abundant fisheries.

Case in Point: The Pacific Fishery Management Council faced a situation like this in 2013 with rebuilding plans for two rockfish stocks. At that time, allowing 30-mt increase in the ACL of a single rockfish species while achieving rebuilt status in December of that year – vs. January of that same year – would have provided for another few hundred tons of associated rockfish landings. While the dockside landed value of those fish may not have been viewed as significant, the indirect value was enormous: Having more incidental species available would have provided additional opportunity for commercial, sport, and tribal harvesters to access abundant stocks of fish that currently go unharvested due to the choke species effect. In turn, local vessels would have had another few weeks on the water, processors would have had longer seasons, consumers would have had more healthy domestic seafood – all without any risk to the status of the rebuilding rockfish species. Yet, the interpretation of the law required selection of a rebuilding time that would be as short as possible, not as short as practicable.

Simply changing the terminology from “possible” to “practicable” in the rebuilding requirements of the MSA would provide Councils much needed flexibility and the option to choose between several rebuilding scenarios to achieve specified conservation and management objectives, not just the shortest and most harmful to fishing communities. This change could benefit coastal communities without undermining any conservation and stock rebuilding objectives. The Councils would be able to exercise some reasonable judgment so they could, for example, allow a fish stock to be rebuilt in December rather than January, which were the choices available for canary rockfish in the above example.

We certainly agree that there is a need to work towards a more bipartisan bill, but just as Rep. Huffman stated, the one sticking point is “how the bill dealt with annual catch limits and the rebuilding framework under Magnuson.” This is indeed a “big deal,” and it’s exactly why the industry must stand behind the elements of H.R. 200 that provide much-needed flexibility to the Councils to better meet the standards set forth in the Act while also better meeting the socioeconomic needs of regional fisheries and fishing communities.

I hope that seafoodnews.com will support the U.S. fishing industry with this effort. Thank you for your consideration of my perspective.

Sincerely,

Lori Steele

This letter originally appeared on Seafoodnews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.

Magnuson-Stevens reauthorization bill advances in US House

December 14, 2017 — By a 22-16 vote on Wednesday, the US House of Representatives’ Committee on Natural Resources advanced HR 200, the Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act, legislation introduced by representative Donald Young, an Alaska Republican.

The bill was one of 15 scheduled for markup Tuesday and Wednesday by the panel.

With just days to go before Congress breaks for the holidays, the bill to reauthorize the Magnuson-Stevens Act so far has not received much attention in the Senate. Chances are strong that the debate over the measure will continue well into 2018.

However, that didn’t stop the ocean conservation group Oceana from responding, issuing a statement that warned HR 200 “would weaken science-based conservation of U.S. fish populations and increase the risk of overfishing by removing annual catch limits for many species”.

Oceana campaign director Lora Snyder called the vote “a slap in the face to anyone who cares about ensuring the health of our nation’s fisheries, instead jeopardizing decades of progress in ocean conservation. … [It] would roll back decades of progress, leading us back down the path to oceans empty of fish and fishermen losing their livelihoods.”

Read the full story at Undercurrent News