6/16/14 6/16/14

Point of View: Seafood’s future hinges on reducing carbon pollution

By Bruce SteeleJune 01, 2014

Bruce Steele has spent more than 40 years as a commercial diver and fisherman in Oregon and California. He is a longstanding leader in resource management and industry associations.

A decade ago, Japanese researchers showed that seawater soured by carbon pollution would hamper sea urchins’ reproductive capabilities. I read their report and saw trouble on the horizon. As a commercial urchin diver in California, I hoped this trouble would stay far away. Now it’s here.Christina Frieder at UC-Davis has demonstrated that waters acidified to pH 7.8 — a level already detected along the West Coast — can reduce fertilization success by 20 percent in red sea urchins, which are harvested from California to Alaska. Frieder states that 60 percent reductions in fertilization success may occur in the decades ahead as pollution pushes seawater pH down to 7.5. This means that red sea urchins will have a harder time recruiting into the fishery, and they will be less abundant. Surface waters had an average pH of 8.2 in pre-Industrial times; acid from carbon emissions has reduced that to about 8.1 in today’s ocean, and it’s heading south fast.Now ocean acidification is my problem. If you work in seafood, it’s yours too.Red king crab suffers 100 percent mortality of larvae after 90 days in seawater at a pH of 7.5. Oysters, mussels, clams, abalone and some scallops are vulnerable, which shellfish farmers are learning the hard way. Corals that shelter vulnerable fish populations in much of the world are at risk. Shells of pteropods, common zooplankton that are a key food source for salmon, are already dissolving in Pacific Northwest waters. Two recent studies found that modest levels of acidification can impair growth in American lobsters. Direct impacts on fish are also becoming clear: Some fish lose their ability to smell and evade predators or distinguish them from their own prey. The catalog of harm includes damage to organ tissues, neurological functions, growth and reproduction.For the seafood industry, some consequences are now inevitable. But there is no place to hide, so we had better defend ourselves. Both the causes and the consequences of acidification can be reduced.How to curb the causes? Strong policies to reduce carbon emissions would be a good start. Without those, everything else we do will amount to an epitaph.This industry can and should push Congress and the Obama administration to protect fisheries from carbon pollution. California and nine Atlantic states from Maine to Maryland have embraced market-based systems — akin to individual fishing quotas — to cut emissions. This hasn’t broken their economies. Now even China is trying a market system to cut emissions in five cities. India has launched the world’s first nationwide cap-and-trade regime to curtail carbon pollution.Protecting seafood supplies will require especially deep cuts in carbon pollution. A recent paper published in Nature by Steinacher, et al., illuminates the geochemical vulnerability of productive fisheries: If CO2 emissions push atmospheric concentration beyond 550 parts per million, more than 90 percent of waters where coral reefs grow are likely to become chemically hostile to many corals and other calcifiers.How to reduce harm? We are learning tools for adaptation. To save collapsing “seed” supplies for Pacific Northwest shellfish farms, hatcheries have found effective but costly ways to measure and manipulate seawater chemistry in their tanks. That’s how they protect larvae that were dying by the billions in corrosive waters during their most vulnerable first days of life. In coastal bays, researchers along the West Coast are investigating whether photosynthesis by sea grass can soak up enough CO2 to protect neighboring calcifiers from acidifying waters, a research priority identified by Washington’s Blue Ribbon Panel on Ocean Acidification.Can we protect fish stocks in open waters? Maybe. No-fishing areas, which I fought for many years, do increase density and size of formerly fished stocks. That might help protect reproductive capacity of broadcast spawners like red sea urchins: Acidification makes their sperm swim slower and survival time of urchin sperm limits successful fertilization. Another approach is increasing the size limit of sea urchins that can be harvested, to increase sea urchin densities and spawning success.Working with researchers from two University of California campuses, the sea urchin industry has funded and facilitated a long-term study of larval sea urchin recruitment. Our one-of-a-kind data set shows trends in sea urchin survival at 15 sites. If decreased red sea urchin recruitment does show up, we will see it in the data. Keeping track of recruitment has helped us manage our fishery in the past and it will help us recognize when we need to protect spawning capacity. But that’s only treating the symptom.Frieder’s findings on red sea urchins are a harbinger of trouble for the whole ocean. To stay in business, seafood producers of all kinds will need to belly up to some tough new management practices. We will also need to become effective champions for pollution controls that most of us have ignored until now.Bruce Steele has spent more than 40 years as a commercial diver and fisherman in Oregon and California. He is a longstanding leader in resource management and industry associations.

Read the original article here.

3/5/14 3/5/14

Has There Really Been A Sardine Crash?

Sardines have been a hot news topic in recent weeks. Environmental groups and others have claimed that the sardine population is collapsing like it did in the mid-1940s.The environmental group Oceana has been arguing this point loudly in order to shut down the sardine fishery. That’s why they filed suit in federal court, which is now under appeal, challenging the current sardine management.So what is the truth about the state of sardines? It’s much more complicated than environmentalists would lead you to believe. In fact, it’s inaccurate and disingenuous to compare today's fishery management with the historic sardine fishery collapse that devastated Monterey's Cannery Row.Read the full story here.

3/5/14 3/5/14

Viewpoints: The state of sardine populations

Sardines have been a hot news topic in recent weeks. Environmental groups and others have trumpeted that the sardine population is collapsing like it did in the mid-1940s.The environmental group Oceana has been arguing this point loudly in order to shut down the sardine fishery. That’s why it filed suit in federal court, in a case now under appeal, challenging the current sardine management.So what is the truth about the state of sardines? It’s much more complicated than environmentalists would lead you to believe.In fact, it’s inaccurate and disingenuous to compare today’s fishery management with the historic sardine fishery collapse that devastated Monterey’s Cannery Row.In the 1940s and ’50s, the fishery harvest averaged 43 percent or more of the standing sardine stock. Plus, there was little regulatory oversight and no limit on the annual catch.Today, the allowed annual U.S. catch totals roughly 5 percent and coastal sardine exploitation averages less than 15 percent of the northern stock.Read the full story here.

11/20/13 11/20/13

State, squid industry getting together

11/2/13 11/2/13

Wetfish industry, state work together to manage squid fishery

Recently, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) closed the commercial fishery for market squid Loligo (Doryteuthis) opalescens. The closure came a month earlier than the year before.This was the fourth straight year that the squid fishery closed early; the season typically extends all year, from April 1 to March 31. The difference this year -- unlike the past -- was that the Department collaborated with the squid industry on day-to-day management, including the closure date.Squid fishermen and seafood processors, working with the Department, tracked catches daily from season start in April. They determined that the season's harvest limit of 118,000 short tons of market squid would be reached early because squid began spawning far earlier than normal in Southern California in 2013, a fact documented by industry-sponsored squid research.This uncommon industry initiative -- a precedent-setting voluntary effort to cooperatively manage the squid fishery -- represents a big step forward for conservation and responsible fishing.Beginning in 2010, the superabundance of squid available to California fishermen was the product of a decadal resource “boom” the likes of which had not been experienced since 1999. Strong La Niña conditions produced a perfect storm of enhanced ocean productivity and market squid took advantage.The fishery responded in kind, and markets increased their packing capacity to process the abundance. The squid fishery exceeded the seasonal catch limit in both 2010-11 and 2011-12 seasons.In 2012-13, in lieu of proposed “slow down” restrictions that the industry opposed, the California Wetfish Producers Association (CWPA), a nonprofit organization representing the wetfish industry -- including squid -- volunteered to help track landings at the end of season. CWPA received full cooperation from participating markets, which helped to validate the Department's preliminary totals.Department representatives attended the CWPA annual meeting in March 2013 and discussed ways to improve in-season tracking of squid landings to achieve the goal of attaining the total allowable catch as closely as possible without exceeding the catch limit.CWPA members volunteered to submit landing receipts daily in order to help track landings virtually in real time from the season start in 2013, and the collaboration between industry and agency began.All major squid processors signed the CWPA agreement. The Department established a single email address to accept daily landing receipts so markets could voluntarily scan and submit via email.In addition, it provided a website where markets could voluntarily upload scanned landing receipts, if they preferred. Additionally, the Department agreed to create and post landing updates on CDFW's market squid page for individual processors and fishermen to monitor fishery progress.Read the full opinion here.

5/30/13 5/30/13

Magnuson Reauthorization must address food, jobs, and revenue, as well as fish says Ray Hilborn

Ray Hilborn is a Professor in the School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, and one of the world's reknowned experts on fisheries. He has long advocated a broad view of the benefits of fisheries in the food system, and asked that we consider the ecological impacts of not fishing as well as those of fishing. This is a guest editorial written following the Managing Our Nation's Fisheries Conference, held earlier this month in Washington, DC.The recent Managing Our Nations Fisheries conference in Washington D.C. and the upcoming reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Management and Conservation Act has focused attention on the nation’s fisheries, how well they are doing, and what can be done to improve the contribution of U.S. fisheries to our national well-being. A logical first step in evaluation of our fisheries is to first ask what are the objectives of American fisheries management?The text of the act begins with “To provide for the conservation and management of the fisheries, and for other purposes”, but then becomes more specific by stating that rebuilding fish stocks, ensuring conservation , protecting essential habitat are all intentions of the act. Also, the act makes it clear that one objective is to provide for “the development of fisheries which are underutilized or not utilized … to assure that our citizens benefit from the employment, food supply, and revenue which could be generated thereby.”Read the full story here.

5/7/13 5/7/13

MIKE CONROY: Squid Fishermen Fight Not ‘David vs. Goliath,’ More Like ‘Boy Who Cried Wolf’

Hearing claims of three squid brail (smaller boat) fishermen, one might think that the larger seine vessel squid fishermen are illegally catching all of the allowable quota.But that’s just not the case. In fact, not only is there an abundance of squid in California’s waters – more than enough to go around – most of the brail-boat fishing fleet have no problem with the current management structure.That’s because the squid resource is booming and most fishermen have been catching plenty of squid!Read the full story here.

11/20/12 11/20/12

We are not the only ones who feel strongly about the allegations made by Oceana, here are some similar articles and places they are being published... California Wetfish Producers Intervene in Lawsuit in Opposition to OceanaThe following was released by the California Wetfish Producers Association: Monterey, Calif. – Feb 22, 2012 – The California Wetfish Producers Association, a non-profit association promoting sustainable marine resources and fishing communities, announced today that it is working with a diverse group – including the City of Monterey and the Ventura Port District – to challenge a federal lawsuit by Oceana that would decimate California’s historic wetfish industry.The group filed to intervene as defendants in the ongoing case by Earthjustice, representing Oceana, against the Secretary of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Marine Fisheries Service.Saving Seafood Squid and sardine fishing is no danger to species in Monterey BayThe Monterey Bay region’s healthiest fisheries are under attack by extremists. Touting studies with faulty calculations, activists have been trying to persuade federal regulators to massively curtail sardine limits, if not ban fishing outright. But the science doesn’t support their conclusions. Today’s fishery management of coastal pelagic species along the West Coast portion of the California Current Ecosystem is recognized as the most protective in the world, one of only a few areas that’s deemed sustainable by internationally recognized scientists. This is not a newly implemented strategy. The state and federal government established guidelines more than a decade ago for coastal pelagic species harvested in California and on the West Coast, maintaining at least 75 percent of the fish in the ocean to ensure a resilient core biomass for other marine species.Saving Seafood Oceana is wrong about forage fishRegarding the recent op-ed by Oceana on forage fish management, this is just more incompetent baloney. I don't know who is advising Oceana on these science questions, but it is plain that it didn't comprehend the Lenfest report. This report clearly calls out West Coast forage fish management as highly precautionary and the best in the world.Oceana's science arguments, claiming that sardines are being overfished, have been subjected to peer review and don't hold up. Oceana tried to get a forage bill through the Legislature last year, but it had so many problems it didn't pass, thank goodness. Many of us are working with the Fish and Game Commission to develop a state forage policy that has a scientific basis. Oceana wants to kill our fisheries, even when they are sustainable.Kathy Fosmark Alliance of Communities for Sustainable FisheriesMonterey County Herald Fishermen fight suit over forage limits; battle set over state's dominant fisheriesJoined by Monterey officials, California's wetfish producers are fighting a lawsuit that aims for greater protections for anchovies, sardines and squid, setting the stage for a major battle over one of the state's dominant fisheries.So-called "wetfish," also known as forage fish, live near the bottom of the food chain but make up a substantial percentage of California's commercial catch, including 97 percent of all landings in Moss Landing and Monterey. In December, environmentalists filed suit to change how the federal government manages those fisheries.Mercury News, Santa Cruz Sentinel California is global leader in managing forage fishMore than 150 years ago, immigrant Chinese fishermen launched sampans into the chilly waters of Monterey Bay to capture squid. The Bay also lured fishermen fromSicily and other Mediterranean countries, who brought round-haul nets to fish for sardines.This was the beginning of the largest fishery in the western hemisphere – California’s famed ‘wetfish’ industry, imprinted on our collective conscience by writers like John Steinbeck.Who doesn’t remember Cannery Row?Capitol Weekly, North County Times What Makes A Fishery "Viable"?To no one's surprise, environmentalists and industry lobbyists are butting heads in a major legal wrangle over California's "wetfish"--sardines, anchovies, mackerel, and market squid. As you may recall, the pretty little market squid is the state's single biggest fishery:And it's not just humans who like to eat them--they're a major food source for sea lions, seals, seabirds, sharks, etc. According to the Mercury News, Oceana is now suing to "force the federal government to consider impacts on the broader marine ecosystem when setting limits." If Oceana wins, then when the Feds decide how many squid fishermen can catch, they would have to factor in the needs of all the other animals that like to eat squid.Science 2.0