4/18/15 4/18/15

Editor's View: Pacific Sardine Closure Shows Management Works, but Oceana and Pew Won't Accept That

Posted with permission from SEAFOODNEWS — Please do not repost without permission.

SEAFOODNEWS.COM [Editor's View] by John Sackton - April 14, 2015

Yesterday the Pacific Fisheries Management Council closed the directed West Coast sardine fishery for the first time in 30 years. The move was widely expected, as fishery managers adopted a precautionary plan to shut the fishery during cyclical periods of low abundance.

This year’s stock estimates, which have been revised downward based on likely recruitment failure in 2014, range from 97,000 to 133,000 metric tons, significantly below the 150,000 ton spawning stock threshold set by the council.

Sardines are a cyclical fish, with population boom and bust that is closely related to water temperature. A period of several years of colder water off California has led to poor recruitment, and a stock collapse. Although waters in southern areas have warmed in the past two years, there has not yet been a response in increased sardine populations.

“While this is a sad day for all those dependent on a healthy sardine fishery, it is actually a good thing that this Council is addressing the problem directly, something you don't always see across the nation or certainly, internationally, ” said Council member Frank Lockhart of National Marine Fisheries Service.

“This Council cutback on salmon with extensive closures a decade or so ago, and the Klamath and Sacramento stocks rebuilt fairly quickly. This Council also cut back on lingcod and other groundfish catches in the recent past, and those stocks are also rebuilt. This action today paves the way for the sardine population to rebuild as soon as the ocean cycles permit. ”

Sardines are subject to large natural population swings associated with ocean conditions. In general, sardines thrive in warm water regimes, such as those of the 1930s, and decline in cool water years, like the 1970s. After reaching a recent year peak of about one million metric tons in 2006, the sardine biomass has dropped to an estimated 97,000 metric tons this year.

Council Vice Chair Herb Pollard said, “The Council’s Fishery Management Plan has done its job. When the sardine stock declines to this point, the directed commercial fishery stops. This is a testimony to the precautionary provisions the Pacific Council has locked into our management regime. ”

In essence, the Pacific Fishery Management Council not only has a precautionary system in place for sardines, they have a strong track record of rebuilding other fisheries though application of the same principles.

So it is strange that organizations like Ocean and Pew rush to the press to call the Sardine closure a failure of fishery management.

"It turns out the sky was falling," said Geoff Shester, California program director for Monterey-based Oceana.

“There’s a management failure here, ” he said. Oceana filed a lawsuit in 2011 demanding the council take more action to lower the fishing rates than it did. A judge refused to hear the case on grounds that it was not filed in a timely fashion, but the case is now on appeal.

“They didn’t respond fast enough to the decline, ” said Shester, who blamed overfishing for worsening an already bad situation. “Now we find ourselves in a crisis situation. ”

The problem for Oceana is that it is well known that in fisheries like sardines and anchovy, populations skyrocket and then collapse. The pacific sardine spawning biomass was over 1 million tons about ten years ago, and is now less than 10% that size. Tinkering with fishing levels would not change this outcome - but would shut down many other West coast fisheries.

One of the problems for NGO’s is that the best scientific data is still only an estimate - and subject to revision and updates. That is why the Council is being so cautious. Sardines are hard to count in the water column, and the council well could have overestimated the size of the 2014 recruits. But they took the most conservative number, recognizing their survey may have overstated the population, and that their prior year estimates of 2014 may have been too high.

The council was able to act because it has the resources and scientific support to effectively monitor the west coast sardine populations.

Yet the current bill for the reauthorization of Magnuson in the House of Representatives would take away the requirements for sound scientific advice - and the funding for such research, from most other areas of the country.

When Oceana goes to the press and says the Pacific Sardine Closure is a result of management failure, when in fact it is managers successfully reacting to scientific data, they undermine public confidence in fisheries management.

On the West Coast, such management has brought back salmon runs that were shut in emergency action; it has rebuilt Pacific Whiting Stocks, it has halted and reversed the critical decline in certain species of rockfish, and as a result, virtually all Pacific Coast groundfish are now not only MSC certified, but celebrated by Chefs who follow the advice of the Monterey Bay Aquarium.

And Oceana calls this a record of failure!

Paul Shivley, Portland, Oregon-based project manager for The Pew Charitable Trusts, said he was pleased overall with the council's action but disappointed it allowed so much "incidental" fish to be caught.

"What they've created is a situation where the rebound will inevitably be slower because of how much they left for incidental fisheries," Shivley said, but did not address the fact that many healthy fisheries require some amount of sardine bycatch. When will his message of support be unqualified, saying the management system has worked.

We do have a problem in that some in Congress make the argument that since money for science is not available, they change the law to throw out or weaken the requirements to use best available science in a precautionary way, and instead go back to managing the nation’s fisheries after they collapse, and not before.

When NGO’s are so focused on smashing a gnat on pavement with a hammer, they completely miss the steamroller coming towards them. Instead of rallying their followers to support the successful record of fishery managers, they mislead their followers with the argument that the managers have failed - and the corollary argument that they are not worth fighting for.

This is selfish and irresponsible. Now matter how good they are Oceana and the other NGO’s cannot replace the successful system of fishery management based on sound science that we currently have in the US - one of the most stringent management regimes in the world.

But their take no prisoners attitude towards this system - never crediting its success; never telling their followers how important it is to maintain government resources and support for this system - is irresponsible. It means they are putting their own goals of building up their organization above the real steps needed to maintain sustainable fisheries. It is a stance they may come to regret.

Subscribe to SEAFOODNEWS.COM to read the original story.

4/16/15 4/16/15

Council Votes to Close 2015-2016 Pacific Sardine Fishery

Regarding Council action yesterday to close what’s left of the 2014-15 sardine fishery, the Council recommended that NMFS close the directed fishery in the fastest way possible, using current rule making authority. This action stopped short of declaring an emergency, which would require justification and new rule making which could take more than a month. The Council explanation was that this closure was recommended as an added layer of precaution, considering the recent sharp decline observed in the sardine biomass due to lack of recruitment in the past few years. Given the recent uptick in directed landings in both OR and CA, it is expected that the closure could be implemented in about a week.

This action, as well as the 2015 stock assessment, did not – and could not under current rules – take into consideration the recent spawning activity observed off the Oregon coast and the small fish now appearing in both California and Oregon, an indication that recruitment is now occurring.

Rohnert Park, California – The Pacific Fishery Management Council today announced the closure of the 2015-16 Pacific sardine directed fishery, beginning July 1.Pacific Council members heard from scientists that the abundance forecast for the 2015-2016 season, scheduled to start July 1, was significantly below the 150,000 metric ton threshold for a directed fishery. They also heard testimony from fishery participants and environmental groups before reaching a decision to close the directed fishery. Small amounts of sardines may be taken incidental to target fishing on other stocks, and a much reduced harvest amount was allocated to the Quinault Indian Nation along the mid-Washington coast.“While this is a sad day for all those dependent on a healthy sardine fishery, it is actually a good thing that this Council is addressing the problem directly, something you don’t always see across the nation or certainly, internationally,” said Council member Frank Lockhart of National Marine Fisheries Service. “This Council cutback on salmon with extensive closures a decade or so ago, and the Klamath and Sacramento stocks rebuilt fairly quickly. This Council also cut back on lingcod and other groundfish catches in the recent past, and those stocks are also rebuilt. This action today paves the way for the sardine population to rebuild as soon as the ocean cycles permit.”Sardines are subject to large natural population swings associated with ocean conditions. In general, sardines thrive in warm water regimes, such as those of the 1930s, and decline in cool water years, like the 1970s. After reaching a recent year peak of about one million metric tons in 2006, the sardine biomass has dropped to an estimated 97,000 metric tons this year. (Biomass is the (estimated) weight of a stock of fish.)Council Vice Chair Herb Pollard said, “The Council’s Fishery Management Plan has done its job. When the sardine stock declines to this point, the directed commercial fishery stops. This is a testimony to the precautionary provisions the Pacific Council has locked into our management regime.”“We know boats will be tied up, but the goal here is to return this to a productive fishery,” said Council member David Crabbe.The Council takes a precautionary approach to managing Pacific sardines. When the fish are abundant, more fishing is allowed; but as the stock size declines, the amount of allocated to harvest decreases. When the biomass is estimated at or below 150,000 metric tons, directed commercial fishing is shut down.Although directed commercial fishing will close, the Council will allow up to 7,000 tons of sardines to account for small amounts taken as incidental catch in other fisheries (such as mackerel), live bait harvest, Tribal harvest, and research. However, if the allocated amount of incidental harvest is reached, those other fisheries will also be shut down.On Wednesday, April 15, the Council will consider whether to take the additional step of making changes to the remaining months of the current season, which ends June 30.BackgroundThe sardine biomass is assessed annually, and the fishing year runs July 1 through June 30. Although sardine fishing doesn’t generate the money that some other fisheries do, it is an important source of income for communities up and down the west coast.Sardine productivity is generally linked to ocean temperatures, but it’s not a perfect relationship. For example, temperatures in the Southern California Bight have risen in the past two years, but we haven’t seen an increase in young sardines as expected.The allowable harvest in recent years has been as high as 109,000 metric tons (2012), but has dropped as the biomass has dropped. In 2013 the harvest guideline was 66,495 mt, in 2014 it was 23,293 mt. Exvessel revenues were $21.5 million in 2012. Sardine exports were valued at $44 million in 2010 and $34.8 million in 2011.Council RoleThe Pacific Fishery Management Council is one of eight regional fishery management councils established by the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976 for the purpose of managing fisheries 3-200 miles offshore of the United States of America coastline. The Pacific Council recommends management measures for fisheries off the coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington.All Council meetings are open to the public.

4/14/15 4/14/15

Feds lower boom: no sardine fishery next year

By Jason Hoppin, Monterey County HeraldRohnert Park >> For the first time in 30 years, boats operating along the West Coast will be banned from pursuing the fish that helped build Cannery Row: sardines.Meeting Sunday in Rohnert Park, federal fishery regulators canceled the 2015-16 sardine fishery, which was set to begin July 1. For the first time since 1986 — when the sardine fishery was nurtured back to life following an 18-year fishing ban that stretched back to the collapse of Monterey Bay’s fishing industry — fishermen will have to make their livelihoods elsewhere.“We know boats will be tied up, but the goal here is to return this to a productive fishery,” said David Crabbe, a Carmel fisherman and member of the Pacific Fishery Management Council who voted in favor of the ban.On Wednesday, regulators will also vote on an emergency closure of the remaining sardine season through June 30, a vote that would largely impact Oregon fishermen.The moves are a sign the West Coast sardine population, which rises and falls with natural cycles, has reached a nadir. Fishery regulators estimate there are less than 97,000 metric tons of sardines off the coasts of California, Oregon and Washington, far below the minimum of 150,000 tons needed to sustain even a modest fishery.Sardines have become a flashpoint in an ongoing debate between environmentalists, regulators and commercial interests in how to best manage the ocean’s resources. Since they are prey for larger fish, such as salmon and tuna, not to mention birds and marine mammals, they have taken on a much greater role in debates about the ocean’s ecosystem than their lowly status would seem to warrant.Sunday’s vote was a victory for environmental groups, which have been adamant for years that more needs to be done to manage a fish that is critical to the ocean’s food chain.“It turns out the sky was falling,” said Geoff Shester, California program director for Monterey-based Oceana.Fishing interests weren’t happy about the vote, which had been expected after initial sardine assessments showed the numbers are very low. But they supported it.“This is a harvest control rule that we support,” said Dianne Pleschner-Steele, executive director of the California Wetfish Producers Association. “It is doing exactly what it’s intended to do.”Area fishermen hauled in more than 820 tons of sardines in 2013, according to state figures. It is Monterey Bay’s second-largest fishery, far behind market squid.Despite closing the fishery, the council will allow 7,000 tons of sardines to be fished by native tribes, taken for recreational bait or taken by boats seeking other species, such as anchovies or mackerel.Paul Shivley, Portland, Oregon-based project manager for The Pew Charitable Trusts, said he was pleased overall with the council’s action but disappointed it allowed so much “incidental” fish to be caught.“What they’ve created is a situation where the rebound will inevitably be slower because how much they left for incidental fisheries,” Shivley said.That catch allows fishermen to continue fishing other fish, with nets often scooping up a number of species at once. If the 7,000-ton limit is reached, other fisheries could be shut down as well to protect sardines.“The council, thankfully, is allowing a small incidental catch so that we can at least do our other fisheries,” Pleshner-Steele said, later adding: “It’s going to be a hard year for the fleet. There’s no doubt about it.”Pew is also urging the council to take a closer look at anchovies, which can also be abundant in Monterey Bay. He is concerned sardine boats would turn their attention to that fishery, which is monitored by regulators but not capped.“What we’re asking the council to do is update their stocks assessment and get a better handle on anchovies before it becomes a free-for-all,” Shivley said.Oceana maintains that sardines have been overfished for years, citing a council recalculation that lowered the maximum amount of sardines that could be sustainably fished.“It’s a step in the right direction,” Shester said of the fishery closure. “But irreversible ecosystem damage has already occurred that will persist for decades.”Pleshner-Steele strongly rejected the overfishing allegation, saying sardines rise and fall naturally.“Fishing has a minimal impact. It does have some. In the long term, this fishery is managed excruciatingly precautionary,” she said.Fishermen maintain there are more sardines in the sea than federal assessments show, an argument Shester rejects.“The reality is, neither scientists nor fishermen nor all those starving sea lion mothers can go find them,” Shester said. “Show us the fish, if that‘s the explanation.”For months, starving sea lion pups have washed up on California beaches, with no signs of slowing. Federal scientists blame changes in ocean conditions, and Pleschner-Steele said El Niño and overpopulation is to blame, not fishing.“Sure, there’s (no fish) in the water for those young pups to eat. But that doesn’t mean the fishermen took them,” she said.

Read the original story: http://www.montereyherald.com

4/8/15 4/8/15

Feds likely to shut down sardine fishing on West Coast

Please read the CWPA: Comment to PFMC. JEFF BARNARD Associated Press Apr 4, 2015

West Coast fisheries managers will likely shut down sardine fishing this year as numbers decline, echoing a previous collapse that decimated a thriving industry and increasing worries that other species might be withheld from the commercial market.Fishermen are resigned to not being able to get sardines, but they hope the Pacific Fishery Management Council will not be so concerned that it sets the level for incidental catch of sardines at zero, shutting down other fisheries, such as mackerel, anchovies and market squid, which often swim with sardines.Sardines were a thriving fishery on the West Coast from World War I through World War II, and the cannery-lined waterfront in Monterey, California, became the backdrop for John Steinbeck's 1945 novel, "Cannery Row." The fishery industry crashed in the 1940s, and riding the book's popularity, Cannery Row became a tourist destination, with restaurants and hotels replacing the canneries.The industry revived in the 1990s, when fisheries developed in Oregon and Washington waters. Today, there are about 100 boats with permits to fish for sardines on the West Coast, about half the number during the heyday. Much of the catch, landed from Mexico to British Columbia, is exported to Asia and Europe, where some is canned, and the rest goes for bait. West Coast landings have risen from a value of $1.4 million in 1991 to a peak of $21 million in 2012, but are again declining."The industry survives fishing on a complex," of species, said Diane Pleschner-Steele, director of the California Wetfish Producers Association, which represents 63 California-based fishing boats. "Sardines, up until this point, have been one very important leg of a three- or four-legged stool.... Now we don't have sardines. Our fleet is scrambling."The latest estimates of how many Pacific sardines are schooling off Oregon, California and Washington have fallen below the mandatory cutoff line. The council cut harvests by two-thirds last year, and meets April 12 in Rohnert Park, California, to set the latest sardine harvest.The conservation group Oceana is urging the council to immediately shut down sardine fishing, and not wait until the new season starts July 1. The group wants incidental catch limits set at zero, leaving as much food as possible in the ocean for sea lions and other wildlife, and speeding the rebuilding process for sardines.Ben Enticknap of Oceana acknowledged that sardines naturally go through large population swings, but he argued that fishing since 2007 has exceeded their reproduction rate, exacerbating the numbers collapse."Previous stock assessments were way too optimistic and weren't matching up with what was observed on the water," Enticknap said. "The sea lions and sea birds have been starving since 2013, pelicans since 2010. Everyone knew something was going on because there wasn't enough food to eat for these predators. Now this stock assessment comes out saying that the sardine population is much lower than they had previously expected."David Crabbe, a squid fishing boat owner and council member, said he would expect the council to allow incidental catch to reduce the impact on the fleet.The latest stock assessments vary between 133,000 metric tons, and 97,000 metric tons, both below the 150,000 metric tons cutoff, and less than 10 percent of the 2006 peak of 1.4 million metric tons.The stock assessment is conducted by boat. As the research boats cruise the water, an acoustic signal is emitted, which bounces back with information on what kinds and how many fish are nearby. Stock assessors also estimate how many sardine eggs are floating in the water, and how many sardines are spawning off California, said Kerry Griffin, a staff officer for the council.Fishermen are unhappy with the stock assessments, Pleschner-Steele said. They say the acoustic gear is too deep in the water and misses fish on the surface, where they feed.

Read original post: utsandiego.com

4/8/15 4/8/15

Comment to Pacific Fishery Management Council

INFORMATION COMPILED BY DR. RICHARD PARRISH

“The reason that the sardine population has declined so rapidly in the last few years is exceedingly simple. The story is easily seen in the figures I have attached here.

There was a very poor year-class in 2010 followed by 3 years of total recruitment failure. Both the sardine stock assessment and the Acoustic-Trawl series clearly show this. End of story.The sardine control rule did exactly what it was designed to do. It has shut down the directed fishery after a series of poor recruitment years. — Richard ParrishSardine recruitment in billions of one-year-old fish; 2010 was a very poor reproductive year and it was followed by three years of complete reproductive failure (2011, 12, 13). The estimate for 2014 is a statistical forecast based on the average recruits per spawner. Few 2014 sardines have been observed. (Hill et al 2015 Sardine Stock Assessment)

The spawning stock biomass fell from about 600,000 mt in 2010 to a bit over 100,000 mt in 2015. With no recruitment, biomass drops very fast with or without a fishery. The same thing happened in the Japanese Sardine fishery about 20 years ago.

Here is the Acoustic survey data showing again the complete reproductive failure in the 2011-13 year classes.

Sea Lion pups are starving in Southern California and Oceana claims it is due to overfishing of sardine. Here are the food habits of sardine. They are 8th in abundance in the California sea lion diet.

Lowry, M. S. and J. V. Carretta. 1999. Market squid (Loligo opalescens) in the diet of California sea lions (Zalophus californianus) in southern California (1981-1995). CalCOFI Rep. 40:196-207.

Here is the time series of sea lion pups. This is used as the primary population index. The most recent total estimate is as follows: (from CALIFORNIA SEA LION (Zalophus californianus ): U.S. Stock. Revised 12/15/2011)POPULATION SIZEThe entire population cannot be counted because all age and sex classes are not ashore at the same time. In lieu of counting all sea lions, pups are counted during the breeding season (because this is the only age class that is ashore in its entirety), and the number of births is estimated from the pup count. The size of the population is then estimated from the number of births and the proportion of pups in the population. Censuses are conducted in July after all pups have been born. To estimate the number of pups born, the pup count for rookeries in southern California in 2008 (59,774) was adjusted for an estimated 15% pre-census mortality (Boveng 1988; Lowry et al. 1992), giving an estimated 68,740 live births in the population. The fraction of newborn pups in the population (23.2%) was estimated from a life table derived for the northern fur seal (Callorhinus ursinus) (Boveng 1988, Lowry et al. 1992) which was modified to account for the growth rate of this California sea lion population (5.4% yr-1, see below). Multiplying the number of pups born by the inverse of this fraction (4.317) results in a population estimate of 296,750.Minimum Population EstimateThe minimum population size was determined from counts of all age and sex classes that were ashore at all the major rookeries and haul-out sites in southern and central California during the 2007 breeding season. The minimum population size of the U.S. stock is 153,337 (NMFS unpubl. data). It includes all California sea lions counted during the July 2007 census at the Channel Islands in southern California and at haul-out sites located between Point Conception and Point Reyes, California. An additional unknown number of California sea lions are at sea or hauled out at locations that were not censused.Current Population TrendTrends in pup counts from 1975 through 2008 are shown in Figure 2

INFORMATION COMPILED BY CWPA

ALLOWING AN ADEQUATE INCIDENTAL SARDINE CATCH IN OTHER CPS FISHERIES IS CRITICAL TO SUSTAIN CALIFORNIA’S WETFISH INDUSTRY

3/31/15 3/31/15

Rep. Don Young's MSA Reauthorization Bill Focused on Flexibility and Science

Taking the lead on legislation he’s been involved with since it first passed in 1976, Alaska U.S. Rep. Don Young introduced a bill March 4 to reauthorize and amend the Magnuson-Stevens Act.The act, or MSA, governs all U.S. federal fisheries, which take place in the exclusive economic zone, or EEZ, between three and 200 miles off the coast. The MSA was most recently reauthorized and updated in 2006.Young introduced H.R. 1335 on March 4 with three regional cosponsors: Reps. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, Bradley Byrne, R-Ala., and Amata Coleman Radewagen, R-American Samoa.Young’s proposed version of the MSA is titled the “Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act.” His philosophy is to let the councils, who have more intimate understandings of their stocks and more responsiveness than the Department of Commerce, have more control of their respective operations, and to update the act to account for better scientific governance and more attention to economic effects.The revised act has several amendments regarding stock rebuilding protocols, council transparency, catch limits, pollock cooperative quota limits, the definition of “overfished” or depleted stocks, data collection, MSA authority in relation to other federal responsibilities, and the definition and role of subsistence.The MSA governs eight regional councils in the federal waters off the U.S. coast. Alaska’s waters, fished mainly by fishermen from Alaska and the Pacific Northwest states, fall under the North Pacific Fishery Management Council’s authority.Some changes make provisions for more flexible planning. The plans for rebuilding depleted fisheries will remove the current mandatory 10 years for rebuilding plans and allow councils to phase in rebuilding plans over a three-year period to limit damaging effects to fishing economies.Some changes expand the MSA’s authority to govern fisheries according to economic needs as well as biological. Under one amendment, councils may take into consideration “changes in an ecosystem and the economic needs of the fishing communities” when establishing annual catch limits.Moving away from overfishing as the main term for depleted stocks is a key part of the new MSA’s revisions to scientific policy.“They blame any decline in stock to overfishing,” said Young. “That’s not true. There could be climatic changes; there could be something else. We want to give (councils) a more scientific basis.”Stock rebuilding plans will account for more causes than overfishing, such as predation and environmental variations.Young’s reauthorization would replace all uses of the word “overfished” with the word “depleted.” Annual reports “shall distinguish between fisheries that are depleted (or approaching that condition) as a result of fishing and fisheries that are depleted (or approaching that condition) as a result of factors other than fishing.”The distinction is important, as some stocks will decline in the total absence of fishing. Young said his attention was first brought to the difference between terms in the western Aleutian Islands, where certain stocks like Atka mackerel were depleted not due to overfishing, but predation by Steller sea lions.Some provisions offer more control in setting harvest use caps. In an amendment specific to the North Pacific Fishery Management Council, Young has authorized the council to set the maximum Bering Sea Pollock harvest use cap for “individuals, corporations, or other entities,” such as cooperatives at no more than 24 percent compared to the previous use cap of 17 percent.Young said the amendment is intended to allow for profitability for pollock fleets but not over-consolidate to the point of excluding entry into the fishery.Young’s reauthorization also includes a kind of declaration of sovereignty for the act’s authority to govern fisheries. Under one amendment, any conflict between the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the National Marine Sanctuaries Act or the Antiquities Act of 1906 will fall under the authority of the MSA. Any required changes to fisheries under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 will also fall under MSA authority to examine and implement.“As far as I’m concerned, the only thing that manages fish is the Magnuson-Stevens Act,” said Young. “Not the Antiquities Act. Not monuments. When they set an area off for the Antiquities Act that drives out commercial fishermen, they’re managing for fish. It’s an attempt to get commercial fisheries out of the ocean. They’ll deny it, but they know it.”Young has vocally opposed the executive authority under the National Marine Sanctuaries Act and the Antiquities Act of 1906 to establish monuments and antiquities that amount to national parks or wildlife refuges, such as the recently-nominated President Barack Obama proposed on Jan. 25 to set 12 million acres of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, or ANWR, aside as wilderness, effectively halting any oil development. Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan and Rep. Don Young all drafted letters of disapproval.On Jan. 27, Obama also designated 9.8 million acres of the Beaufort and Chukchi seas as a marine sanctuary, halting oil and gas leasing in those areas as well as ANWR. In 2014, Obama used his power under the Antiquities Act to expand the Pacific Remote Islands Marine Sanctuary.Only days before the ANWR designation, on Jan. 22, Young introduced H.R. 330. The bill would restrict the president’s authority to independently create national monuments under the Antiquities Act of 1906.Council process will be altered to provide for more public transparency and involvement. Council Scientific and Statistical Committees “shall develop such advice in a transparent manner and allow for public involvement in the process.”The Department of Commerce will maintain a public archive of all Scientific and Statistical Committee audio, video, and transcripts.Each council itself will be required to make available on its website a webcast, audio recording, or live broadcast of each meeting. Each will also provide audio, video, or a searchable audio or written transcript of each meeting of the Council and of the meetings of committees within 30 days of the meeting’s conclusion.Any proposed fishery requires a fishery impact statement before implementation. Under Young’s amendment, the impact statement shall “assess, specify, and analyze the likely effect and impact of the proposed action on the quality of the human environment.”Each statement shall be made available to the public not les than 14 before the final decision takes place.Another broadly-focused amendment concerns data collection and confidentiality. The amendment would require that the Secretary of Commerce issue regulations for electronic monitoring, and allow for the replacement of onboard monitors with electronic monitoring, if the council has determined that electronic monitoring yields comparable results to the observer program. All regulations regarding electronic monitoring must be issued within one year of the MSA’s reauthorization.Catch shares in certain regions will require a more democratic process. In the New England, Mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Gulf of Mexico, all catch shares will require a referendum approval by the majority of permits holders eligible to take place in the fishery. In New England, the referendum may include fishing crew members who earn a significant portion of their livelihood from fishing.Specific to Alaska, Young defines subsistence in his reauthorization, and provides for subsistence fishing experience as criteria for North Pacific council seat selection.

Subscribe to Seafoodnews.com | read original post here.Peggy Parker, Science and Sustainability EditorSeafoodNews.com 1-781-861-1441

3/19/15 3/19/15

Ray Hilborn's Commentary on Capitol Hill: Magnuson Has Given the US Sustainable Seafood

Hilborn published an opinion column today in the Hill, a newspaper targeting Congress and Congressional Staff. He makes the case that with the Magnuson Stevens Act the US has acheived sustainable fisheries.

This year marks 40 years since the passage of landmark Congressional legislation that fundamentally overhauled how the $90 billion U.S. commercial fisheries industry is managed. It established a unique public-private partnership in which the industry, working with scientists and both federal and local authorities, would regulate fishing according to agreed-upon scientific standards for environmental sustainability, even as the industry stretched to meet skyrocketing demand for seafood. As the world's marine science and fisheries experts convene in Boston this week at the International Boston Seafood Show, the implications of the bold decisions taken in 1976 on U.S. fisheries should be assessed in light of a race to the bottom of the seas elsewhere due to overfishing.Prior to 1976, federal regulations for marine fisheries were virtually non-existent, leading to rampant exploitation of our oceans and fisheries. But the Magnuson Stevens Act changed that in two important ways. First, it eliminated foreign fleets from a 200-mile exclusive economic zone, reserving these waters for U.S. vessels alone. And second, it established a system of regional management councils to regulate federal fisheries, laying the foundation for a strict and transparent science-based approach to fisheries management that has enabled the U.S. to emerge as a model of seafood sustainability around the world.Under the provisions of the Magnuson Stevens Act, regional fishery councils in the U.S. are required to use the best available science in setting harvest levels, identify and protect essential fish habitat, abide by the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Act, and enact protections from fishing activities that are detrimental to other species.Over the years, various amendments to the Magnuson Act have further refined and improved its structure. Most importantly, following the painful collapse of the nation’s oldest fishery—New England bottom fish, including haddock and redfish—significant amendments in 1996 resulted in a stronger focus on protecting habitats and establishing a requirement for a 10-year rebuilding timeline.Today, the U.S. has essentially eliminated overfishing, with only 9 percent of stocks now fished at rates higher than would produce long-term maximum yield. In a report released this month by the Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch, 98 percent of U.S. fisheries received a “Best” or “Good” rating, with only 2 percent on the “Avoid” list. While 17 percent of stocks are still considered “overfished”, most of these are on the road to recovery. And in New England, bottom fish stocks have made a spectacular recovery, having increased six-fold since the mid-1990s.Technically speaking, some stocks will always be “overfished” – fish stocks fluctuate naturally and the managers can only control what they harvest—but the U.S. management system, using scientific advice, is designed to take such fluctuations into account, and will completely stop harvesting when stocks reach low levels. Consumers and retailers should buy U.S.-caught fish with confidence that the fishery is managed through an open, transparent, and sustainable process.However, consumers and retailers are often confused by the numerous non-governmental organizations providing consumer advice on what stocks are sustainably managed. Legitimate concerns about overfishing in the 1990s led to the rise of these watchdog NGOs, and today there are literally dozens of seafood advice web sites that provide often conflicting advice. A stock may be listed as a “best choice” by the Monterey Bay Aquarium, but still be on Greenpeace’s “red” list. The same stock of fish may be rated “green” or “red” by the same organization depending on how it is caught.Why the conflicting information? Quite simply, providing seafood advice is now a big business, both with direct payment from retailers to those giving advice, and by fundraising campaigns to “save the oceans” that fail to acknowledge that the existing U.S. fisheries management system provides for sustainability. Indeed, despite the fact that it is widely agreed among scientists, fisheries managers, and government regulators that U.S. fisheries are well managed, some NGOs now gain so much revenue from companies that sell seafood and concerned citizens, that they simply cannot admit the U.S. success.The interests of marine stewardship are far better served should NGO’s direct their attention to places where fisheries management is not science-based and effective. While there is always room for improvement, the U.S. has a system in place that can adjust to sustainability concerns, while many other countries do not routinely monitor the abundance of their fish stocks, nor have management systems in place to reduce harvest when abundance goes down.Moving forward, the U.S. government and NGOs should promote the U.S. management system and its successes as a model for the world. The race to the bottom in countries that routinely overfish is ultimately self-defeating. Convincing fisheries that sustainability preserves jobs as well as stocks is a monumental task. But the U.S. has the benefit of 40 years of evidence—a thriving industry with one of the lowest levels of overfished stocks—to back it up.

Hilborn is a professor of aquatic and fishery sciences at the University of Washington and author of "Overfishing: What Everyone Needs to Know."

3/17/15 3/17/15

Proposal for new Central Coast marine sanctuary is rejected

By David Sneed | dsneed@thetribunenews.com

A gray whale comes to the water's surface as it passes Morro Bay on its way south.JOE JOHNSTON — jjohnston@thetribunenews.com

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has rejected a proposal to create a new National Marine Sanctuary on the Central Coast.The proposed Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary would have stretched from Cambria to near Gaviota in Santa Barbara County. The agency said the nomination by the Northern Chumash Tribal Council was insufficient.“It really just boiled down to the fact that some of the management considerations needed more detail,” said Lisa Wooninck, policy coordinator with the NOAA Sanctuaries regional office in Monterey.Andrew Christie, director of the Santa Lucia Chapter of the Sierra Club, said the Chumash can resubmit the nomination with additional details. The club supports the formation of the sanctuary.“We always knew this was one of the potential outcomes,” he said. “The Chumash will submit an amended nomination in response.”The proposed sanctuary would be sandwiched between two existing marine sanctuaries: the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary to the north and the Channel Islands Sanctuary to the south.The proposal drew the support of the California Coastal Commission, San Luis Obispo County Supervisor Bruce Gibson and State Sen. Fran Pavley, D-Calabasas.National Marine Sanctuary guidelines include restrictions on dumping, altering the seabed and disturbance of historic and archaeological sites. Oil and gas drilling and exploration are also restricted.“Designation of the proposed California Central Coast Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary will ensure the continued protection of one of the most important, culturally and biologically diverse, unique and ecologically rich coastlines in the world,” wrote Fred Collins on the Northern Chumash Tribal Council in the nomination letter.Successful marine sanctuary nominations typically take two to four years to complete. NOAA recently opened the marine sanctuary nomination process for the first time in two decades.

Read original post: http://www.sanluisobispo.com

REPRESENTING CALIFORNIA’S HISTORIC FISHERY