By Shems Jud

 

“The best way to get something done is to tell a fisherman it can’t be done.”

– Bob Dooley, veteran fisherman and industry leader

With support from a Saltonstall-Kennedy grant and the Packard Foundation, EDF’s Pacific team joined with an all-star Steering Committee this month to convene a Gear Modification Workshop in Newport, Oregon. More than 70 fishermen from the West Coast and Alaska, along with scientists, net manufacturers, fishery managers, electronics experts, NGO representatives and others came together for two very enjoyable days of intensive information sharing.

The West Coast groundfish trawl fishery is a laboratory of gear innovation these days because the catch share management system requires fishermen to account for every fish caught. Having operated under catch share systems for many years, Alaska fishermen and researchers brought their experiences to bear. Since unwanted or undersized fish count against a fisherman’s overall quota, the incentive to “fish clean” is much higher than in less-accountable fisheries. Fishermen are deploying underwater cameras and working with net manufacturers to design nets that fish more selectively, reduce bottom impact and save on fuel costs.  Likewise, Alaska fishermen and researchers have long been leaders in gear innovation, and they brought their perspectives and expertise to share with their West Coast counterparts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“It’s workshops like this that are allowing fishermen and other innovators to really spread the word about all the efforts we’re making out on the water to make a difference.”–Steve Fitz, F/V Mister Morgan

In one presentation, Giuseppe (Joe) Penissi of Monterey described the remarkable success he has had in modifying his trawl to release non-marketable juvenile fish, and fellow fisherman Steve Fitz was impressed. “I keep going back to what Joe’s doing, because his example today was perfect. He witnessed 40,000 pounds of fish move through his net and he kept 4,700 pounds, so what more could you ask for? That was 100% sustainable, marketable fish. That’s just a real win-win situation.”

Sara Skamser, owner of Foulweather Trawl, has been listening to fishermen and refining trawl designs for years.  But not just fishermen. “In these changing times in fisheries, in modernizing the fleet, there’s a lot of partners besides ourselves that we work with. We work with scientists to quantify ideas that we have; they can go out and test it and tell us if it’s working. We work with EDF, with all kinds of people that have helped the fishermen understand the economic value of their fish, how to capitalize and get the most out of everything they’re bringing in from the ocean.”

Over the two days workshop participants discussed trawl-door spread, angle of attack, new materials for net design and a variety of other arcane topics, but in essence they were discussing the “half glass empty/half glass full” tensions that are created when fishermen are eager to innovate for efficiency and profitability, but must do so within the strictures posed by a slow-to-adapt overall management structure.

“The gear innovation that’s going on, all these changes, are really aided by this individual quota catch share program,” said Bob Dooley, veteran fisherman and industry leader. “When the currency of the fishery was catch all you can as quick as you can before somebody else shuts the fishery down, we didn’t have time to do this stuff.”

Although Bob Dooley’s comments reflected the positive overall vibe of the workshop, fisheries leader Heather Mann addressed the many longstanding problems with management of the West Coast groundfish fishery, including escalating costs and a Council process that requires years to resolve even non-controversial issues. “How do you innovate under that?” she asked. “How do you innovate when you operate in a bureaucratic morass that moves a glacial pace? Until we fix some of these fundamental problems…we’re in an adapt-to-survive mode instead of an adapt-and thrive-mode.”

But on-the-water solutions to improve efficiency and profitability were the focus of the discussions. Some of them were downright futuristic, but low cost/low tech also had its place. Steve Fitz described his DIY GoPro system that rivals many more expensive designs. “I’m beginning to learn and understand things that I’ve only been able to assume were going on 600 feet below me, and now I’m able to get some visual evidence and adapt to it and make changes for the better.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“There’s just a good groundswell of positive things happening here in this industry, and I’m looking forward to taking it into the future.”

–Steve Fitz, F/V Mister Morgan

Overall, the workshop was a great way to “un-silo” information and spread the word about innovations that help fishermen be more efficient and profitable while reducing fuel costs, seafloor impacts and bycatch. Many attendees expressed the hope that we will develop more workshops in the future, and we certainly intend to do so.  As the near-legendary net builder Sara Skamser said, “…the ideas bouncing around here are all just, wow! It’s been a perfect first step towards collaboration within the industry.”

By Kendra Karr

Photo credit: Jason Houston

Many of the world’s fish are caught in small-scale fisheries that lack data about the health of fish populations, giving managers very limited information to base management decisions on. In turn, most of these fisheries appear to be under-performing with respect to conservation, the amount of food they can produce, the amount of money they can generate, and the quality of the livelihoods they can support. There is a perception that these fisheries cannot be assessed without large amounts of data. Because of this perception, many fisheries remain unassessed, ineffectively managed or not managed at all leading to under performance or even collapse.

Fortunately, there are alternatives: fishermen and women, community members, managers and scientists are collaborating to bridge the data gap for these important fishing communities; increasing knowledge and resources for effective fishery assessment and management. While these collaborations have started to fill in the gaps, we still need input from fishery managers and practitioners for a complete picture of the data.

In collaboration with small-scale fisheries around the world, we are beginning to collect information on the pathway and tools employed in actions of science-based fishery co-management in small-scale, data-limited contexts.

Context and goals:

Finding ways to evaluate small-scale fisheries means gaining a deeper insight into the pathways and tools used to transition fisheries to more science based solutions. These solutions allow fisheries to meet environmental, social and economic goals. Successful fisheries around the world have shown that establishing secure fishing rights with science-based catch limits not only empowers fishermen to become stewards of the resource, but can also support a pathway to long-term sustainability. Both the pathways and tools employed to reform fisheries vary, but there are a growing number of examples that use a form of co-management along with science-based fishery management.

Case studies help identify the many ways stakeholders address the challenges their fisheries are facing and help develop science-based solutions for sustainable fishing.

Upcoming panel at IMCC:

At this year’s International Marine Conservation Congress (IMCC) in St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador – in collaboration with five fisheries – we will hear the stories from those involved in transitioning a small-scale, data-limited fishery into a science-based managed fishery. Attendees are encouraged to participate in the symposium – Integrated science and management solutions for data-limited and low governance fisheries – and contribute to the associated panel discussion.

Small-scale fisheries are reforming during a fortunate period, as there are tools designed to empower on the ground partners to address the challenges these fisheries are facing. These tools can be used to develop sustainable solutions that support more fish in the water, more food on the plate and more prosperous communities.

Let’s hear your story, so together we can bridge the gap in knowledge and understanding of the critical resources.

How you can participate:

• Contribute to our survey: Fishery Assessment and Management Pathway.
• Attend our symposium and panel discussion on data limited assessment and co-management of fisheries at this year’s International Marine Conservation Congress (IMCC) on August 1st 8:30-11:30 in Salon F.

By Katie Westfall

Caribbean Reef Sharks. Photo: Noel Lopez-Fernandez

This week, sharks make their annual summer migration to the Discovery Channel for Shark Week. It’s a great time to learn about some of the advances in shark research happening every day. In just the time since Shark Week 2015, we learned new things about where we can find the world’s largest concentration of sharks, how great white sharks migrate, how sharks use their photon conductive noses to hunt fish, and how catsharks grow brighter the deeper they swim. We’re also discovering new species to add to the growing list of hundreds of different sharks every couple of weeks.

Yet, with all these new findings, we still have a lot to learn about these keystones to our ocean ecosystems. Off the East Coast and in the Gulf of Mexico, a large number of shark species swim in and out of U.S. waters. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) manages these species of sharks—including many known to be highly susceptible to overexploitation such as great whites, whale sharks, and bigeye threshers.

Sharks are often caught unintentionally by fishermen

In several fisheries, the incidental catch of sharks (also referred to as bycatch) while targeting other fishes like tuna, swordfish, snapper, and grouper remains a significant threat. NMFS aims to protect many vulnerable sharks by simply prohibiting landings without actually preventing the overfishing that can result from bycatch.

In other words, even though fishermen can’t land these sharks, the sharks can still die as a result of being caught while the fisherman tries to catch another species like tuna. For example, Dusky sharks, a large coastal species, have been suffering overfishing for fifteen-plus years despite the ban on bringing them to shore.

Not only does this approach not prevent overfishing, it makes it difficult for us to get comprehensive data on “prohibited” species. The ban approach does not require an organized data collection program. Yet collecting and analyzing these data provide the scientific backbone for understanding the health of imperiled shark populations and effective management. Today, regulators collect bycatch data across domestic and international fisheries through a system that makes assessing shark mortality like solving a puzzle.

Bycatch creates problems for fishermen as well as sharks

For fishermen targeting other valuable fishes, having sharks on the line wastes time and money. Moreover, fishermen depend on healthy fisheries that result from intact ocean food webs that include sharks. In short, many fishermen would prefer to never catch sharks instead of the tuna and other species they seek.

We need a new approach to shark management for these fisheries that helps U.S. fishermen catch more of the species they want while avoiding imperiled species like many sharks.

Cooperation between fishermen, scientists, and government can help protect sharks

Cooperative management and conservation incentives can lead to a more flexible regulatory structure that allows fishermen to use their expertise to avoid sharks. Leveraging the knowledge of fishermen who are on the water, together with full accountability across the fleet, can be a powerful combination to reduce shark bycatch.

Emerging technologies could play a role to effectively monitor and enforce real bycatch limits. We have seen this work in other instances where lowering bycatch was important, like in the West Coast groundfish fishery where smarter management led to a 70% reduction in bycatch.

These approaches also lead to better data, and strong science is the foundation of good management. Through carefully tabulating – rather than ignoring – shark catch, scientists and managers can figure out where sharks are being caught and assess the health of shark populations. Fishermen can use that information, in turn, to reduce their unwanted catch of sharks.

By developing a flexible system that improves both conservation and fishermen’s profitability, we can protect some of our ocean kingdom’s most compelling creatures.

By Pam Ruiter

Credit: Pam Ruiter

For the last three years, Environmental Defense Fund Europe has been working in partnership with World Wildlife Fund (WWF) Spain through a nation-wide project focusing on the sustainability of small-scale coastal fisheries. Small-scale fishing is the lifeblood of many coastal Spanish communities. In order to preserve this way of life it is critical to understand how these fisheries are doing biologically. As in small-scale fisheries worldwide, many Spanish coastal fisheries have limited information available to work with, and a stronger link between science and management could be made.

Small-scale coastal fisheries in both Spain and globally tend not to have the detailed information needed to utilize the most commonly used fisheries assessment methods. It used to be that there was a lack of tools adapted for use in small-scale fisheries, meaning that many went unassessed. Without the information needed to understand the real state of the ecosystem, and guide scientific decision making, effective management was hard to do.

But today there are alternatives: assessment tools collated from across the world that can be applied to Spanish small-scale coastal fisheries. These tools can start to paint the picture of the state of the marine ecosystems in question, and assess their vulnerability to over-exploitation. Finding ways to evaluate the state of these fisheries means gaining a deeper insight that can guide more effective fishery management decisions: both in terms of how to focus future data collection and how to design appropriate management measures.

These tools use the sort of information that is more readily available in small scale fisheries, such as:

• How many different stocks are targeted?
• What do we know about the biology of the targeted species? E.g. At what size do they reach maturity and what is their size, distribution and spawning potential?
• What do we know about the fishing activity taking place?

 

Collaborative workshop yields results

Last month, together with Gonzalo Macho from the University of Vigo, we brought together fisheries scientists, managers and government and NGO representatives to take part in an intensive training workshop aimed at learning practical ways to assess and manage Spain’s smaller, data limited coastal fisheries. The event showcased Environmental Defense Fund’s Adaptive Fisheries Management Framework, which outlines a process and a range of tools already in use in other data-limited fisheries across the world. Attendees came to Madrid from six autonomous regions of Spain where fishing is at the heart of local communities.

“The wolf was not as fierce as we feared!” – Participants at the workshop commented that they were surprised by how easily the tools could be used.

During the workshop, we applied the tools and methods to the six case study fisheries in a series of hands-on sessions designed to equip the communities to go back to the field and apply what they had learned to these, and many other data limited scenarios we find in Spanish coastal fisheries.

We will be producing a technical paper in the coming months that reviews the framework, showcases the tools, offers concrete examples and discusses important limitations and opportunities to improve these tools as we put them into use across Spain.

Fishery managers and scientists who joined us in Madrid are eager to start practical application of what they learned in the workshop, and it is important to create a discussion and support phase as this work gets underway.  With this in mind, we are also forming a working group to offer ongoing support as participants test and apply these methods in the fisheries they work with. We’re looking forward to an ever-evolving dialogue with these varied regions, and new learnings from their experiences.

Stay tuned for updates as we take the Adaptive Fisheries Management Framework out ‘into the field’ in Spain’s data limited coastal fisheries.

By Alexis Rife

By:  Alexis Rife & Jake Kritzer

Any fishery functions as a series of complex interactions among an ecosystem, the political arena, the economy, cultural norms and traditions, and other systems. Understanding these interacting systems is critical for achieving EDF’s triple bottom line goals: more fish in the sea, more food on the plate, and more prosperous communities. EDF has been tackling this challenge by bringing together expertise spanning disciplinary boundaries, including biology and ecology, social sciences, policy analysis, and business planning.  Members of EDF’s Fishery Solutions Center recently spent two days in Boston meeting with partners from Yale University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) to integrate research efforts in support of sustainable fisheries worldwide.

Participants reviewed the recent global macro-analysis of the biological, social and economic upside that can be realized by aligning incentives in fisheries through the application of well-designed fishing rights.  We then considered three parallel analyses that allow deeper understanding of how to best design scientific, policy and market systems that allow for the upside to be realized.

• Markets: A team working through the Sustainability Lab at the MIT Sloan School of Management illustrated how a range of existing tools for understanding supply chains, market structure, stakeholder interactions, and financing can be used to help fishermen and women and fishing cooperatives become more profitable and financially viable.  These are critical outcomes in building sustainable fisheries because they enable fishermen and women to work with fewer pressures, adopt longer planning horizons, stimulate creativity and innovation, and become better stewards of natural resources.

• Policy: Stronger financial footing for fishing communities will depend in part on the effectiveness of the national policies that govern fisheries management. A team with the Environmental Protection Clinic at the Yale University School of Law and School of Forestry & Environmental Studies described an extensive literature review that identified the key elements of good fisheries policy.  The team organized their findings into a framework that can be used to evaluate the strengths of a national policy, as well as those aspects in need of improvement, creating a roadmap to the enabling conditions for successful fisheries management.

• Science: One clear component of good fisheries policy is a strong role for science in setting management targets and management measures.  Scientific tools for understanding ocean ecosystems are becoming increasingly – and excitingly! – sophisticated.  Unfortunately, too many fish stocks around the world are not assessed, and research shows that many of these are likely to be overexploited.  Fortunately, there are many tools we can use to generate valuable insights on population status with only minimal data.  At the workshop, EDF provided an overview of our framework and toolkit for scientific analysis when data are limited, and NRDC shared a simulation modeling tool being developed with partners to help evaluate the effectiveness of these approaches.

These three components are critical to an effective fishery system, and these tools can give the fishing industry, buyers, NGOs, and governments the insights and information necessary to design systems that best addresses the challenges each fishery faces. Collaborations such as this help the bigger picture become clearer through better understanding of the various components.

Chef David Drew of Cambridge Brewing Company shares his perspectives on seafood sustainability with science, policy and business planning practitioners from EDF, Yale University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Amidst the dense technical discussions, we headed to Cambridge Brewing Company to meet with Executive Chef David Drew.  He shared his restaurant’s experiences with meeting a commitment to serving sustainable seafood, meat, and vegetables (not to mention beer!).  Despite numerous challenges in navigating the complex landscape of sustainability, Chef Drew told the group that many of his consumers today are much better educated and looking for the most responsible food choices available.  All of the scientific, policy, business planning, and other work that goes into building sustainable fisheries culminates in the work of people like Chef Drew, so his perspective was both unique and valuable for the workshop participants.

By Matt Tinning

We have a lot to be proud of in the United States when it comes to fisheries management. This week the New York Times highlighted the comeback of U.S. fisheries with an inspiring story of recovery. And today, NOAA Fisheries released its annual Status of Stocks report, confirming that the management reforms implemented over the last decade are continuing to deliver remarkable results.

For fish geeks, the annual Status of Stocks report is our “State of the Union." It’s an opportunity to take a big-picture look at where things stand, as well as to consider at a more granular level specific regions and fisheries where further reforms may be needed.

At a big-picture level, today’s report is another clear indication that “the state of our fisheries is strong." Indeed, it reveals that in 2015 the Fish Stock Sustainability Index (FSSI) – the composite index that tracks the health of key commercial and recreational stocks that account for 85% of total catch – hit an all-time high. The relentless upward march of the index since 2000 is stunning, and reflects the success of fishermen, managers and conservationists working region by region, fishery by fishery, to end unsustainable open-access management and implement reforms that incentivize conservation.

U.S. Fish Stock Sustainability Index (Source: NOAA Fisheries)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Since 2000 a total of 39 federal stocks that were once dangerously depleted by earlier management failures have been declared fully rebuilt. The new stocks reaching that milestone in 2015 were Petrale Sole and Canary Rockfish – two iconic West Coast groundfish species that are among many being revitalized under catch share management.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Meanwhile, the number of overfished stocks has dropped steadily, from 92 to 38.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Although this good news further cements the United States’ place as a global leader in sustainable fisheries, it would be premature to declare mission accomplished. On the contrary, today’s report is an important indicator of where we are still falling short. New England is over-represented on all the wrong lists, home to 14 of 38 overfished stocks. This report is another reminder that monitoring failures in the New England groundfish fishery are undermining science-based management and must be urgently addressed. Similarly, a number of Highly Migratory Species remain in trouble. Today’s report notes, “NOAA Fisheries has limited ability to control overfishing of international stocks, because they are fished in international waters and are exempt from ACL requirements.” But there are many more steps we as a country can take to conserve these critical species – both through better management of our domestic HMS fisheries and relentless advocacy and diplomacy in international management settings.

As American seafood consumers, we all have power to encourage improved management. We are often urged to avoid certain seafood out of sustainability concerns; but it is equally important that sustainably-caught species find new markets, which can drive up prices and create a virtuous cycle. To that end, a new campaign called Eat These Fish! has recently launched, highlighting the recovery of these fisheries and encouraging the food industry and consumers to try some of these delicious, sustainably caught fish. We look forward to sharing more about how you can participate in the movement soon, but for now take a moment to celebrate the further good news that today’s report contains.

By Shems Jud

Potential is for higher catches and increased profitability per trip

Last month’s Pacific Fishery Management Council meeting broke a logjam that has frustrated fishermen for years.

When the West Coast catch share program “went on the water” in 2011, many of its new regulations were overlaid on existing  – but no longer practical or applicable – regulations from the fishery’s pre-catch shares past. This had the effect of hamstringing fishermen. They were unable to fully adapt their business plans, their nets and their fishing methods in order to leverage many of the advantages of the new management program.

A workshop we co-sponsored in Portland in February gave fishermen a platform to air their grievances on these matters, and those sentiments were echoed at the Council meeting last week. At that meeting, the Groundfish Advisory Subpanel (GAP) brought a detailed set of recommendations to the Council, and then, one after another, fishermen testified persuasively that the GAP’s common-sense recommendations were not only overdue, but critical in order for them to maximize catch and profitability in a fishery that has already proven a remarkable conservation success.

Although the specifics of the GAP recommendations adopted by the Council are a fish-wonk’s cornucopia, I’d like to draw out a couple key takeaways:

• Significant new flexibility in net design and mesh-size requirements will enable fishermen to target both flatfish and rockfish while trawling on the continental shelf. This will increase fishermen’s access to rich fishing grounds, expand the overall catch of certified-sustainable fish species, and improve per-trip profitability.
• Allowing fishermen to switch between a bottom trawl and a midwater trawl during a fishing trip will allow for much more efficient use of fishing time, reduce fuel and observer costs, expand overall catch and increase per-trip profitability.

Council members I spoke with stressed repeatedly that it was the quality and credibility of testimony presented by fishermen that gave them the confidence they needed to green-light these positive changes. Through that testimony the Council came to appreciate that fishermen truly want to do what’s right, but need a regulatory structure that makes sense in order to do so.

This is a great step forward and we applaud the Council for its actions. In effect, they have aligned regulations a bit more closely with the real world that fishermen operate in, and that’s a good thing. Additional improvements are needed to enable the catch share program to meet its economic goals – and we’ll continue working to advance those improvements – but last month was a good one here on the West Coast.

By Guest Author

Sea scallop. Photo credit: Dann Blackwood, USGS

By: Kristin M. Kleisner

Last week at the Maine Fishermen’s Forum, a session entitled “Questioning our Changing Oceans,” sponsored by The Maine Coast Fishermen’s Association, The Environmental Defense Fund, The Island Institute, and The Nature Conservancy, sought to address some of the major issues related to climate change that the fishing industry has been experiencing. The panel included Jake Kritzer (EDF) as well as local scientists Andy Pershing (GMRI) and Jon Hare (NOAA), along with headliners Capt. Keith Coburn of the hit show ‘Deadliest Catch’, Capt. Buddy Guindon of the new breakout hit ‘Big Fish, Texas,’ and fishermen from as far as Western Australia.

The panel highlighted two NOAA studies recently published in PLOS ONE that highlight the vulnerability of marine fish and invertebrate species such as American lobster and scallops on the U.S. Northeast Shelf to the effects of climate change. Both studies illuminate important trends in species adaptation that will help inform future management decisions in the region.

Climate vulnerability analysis:

The first study, led by Jon Hare, examined 82 species that are found off the Northeastern U.S., where ocean warming is occurring rapidly, and ranked them in one of four vulnerability categories: low, moderate, high and very high. The mix of species in the study includes all commercially managed marine fish and invertebrate species in the Northeast, all marine fish species listed or under consideration for listing on the federal Endangered Species Act, many recreationally fished species such as summer flounder, and a range of ecologically important marine species such as alewife.

Researchers in this study, found that most of the species evaluated will be affected by climate change, but that some are likely to be more resilient to changing ocean conditions than others. The goal of the study was to identify specific attributes that influence the resilience of different species to a warming ocean and characterize the risk posed to individual species. The intent is to be able to better incorporate this information into stock assessments and to account for climate effects in new fishery management measures.

One important finding of Hare et al. is that species that are “generalists” may be less vulnerable to climate change than those that are “specialists.” Atlantic cod and yellowtail flounder were considered to be moderately vulnerable generalist species because they can eat a variety of prey, use diverse habitats and may be able to shift to occupy more suitable habitat as climate changes occur. Conversely, Atlantic sea scallops were classified as specialists that have limited mobility and may be highly sensitive to potential ocean acidification, and therefore are highly vulnerable to climate change effects.

Understanding the vulnerability of different species can be important for fisheries management – those that are more vulnerable to climate change may require more precautionary management measures in the future. The study noted that many species are likely to shift their spatial distributions as a result of climate change and that these shifts may be widespread and likely to continue for the foreseeable future.

Climate-induced shifts in species distributions:

The second study, led by myself, took a more spatial approach to evaluating the pace and magnitude of climate change effects for species on the U.S. Northeast Shelf. In this study, the researchers classified almost 70 demersal species into four distinct groups, or assemblages, based on oceanographic characteristics from the Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) bottom trawl surveys.

The study hypothesized that groups of species characterized by similar temperature and depth preferences would exhibit similar responses to climate effects. The team compared observed historical shifts in species distributions from the late 1960s to the present with concurrent shifts in temperature to determine whether consistent responses to climate change were visible within the species groups.

http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/ecosys/spatial-analyses/mp4/red-hake-fall.mp4

[Video: NOAA. View spatial distribution videos for more species here]

The researchers found that there were consistent patterns in the direction and rate of shifts within the species assemblages in each region. Species associated with warmer, shallower waters in the Mid-Atlantic Bight and Georges Bank were shifting strongly northward, tracking shifts in temperature bands along the shelf. In contrast, species in the Gulf of Maine were shifting to the southwest, possibly tracking the cooler bottom waters in this area of the Gulf. Additionally, species in the Gulf of Maine associated with cooler and deeper waters tended to shift deeper, taking advantage of the variable bottom topography in this region.

The results of both studies indicate that there will be some potentially major changes in the complex array of species occupying different regions of the U.S. Northeast Shelf. The studies also show that these changes will depend both on the pace of climate change and on the ability of the species to adapt or shift to maintain their preferred habitat. Other factors such as the spatial distribution of fishing pressure and species interactions are also likely to be important. Collectively, these changes will result in important ecological, economic, social and natural resource management challenges throughout the region.

Understanding the vulnerability of species to climate change and how species have shifted relative to temperature changes can provide critical information for the development of management strategies in response to climate change.

By Shems Jud

Photo credit: John Rae

Last week, EDF joined with a broad array of stakeholders to convene the 3rd Pacific Groundfish Quota Program Workshop in Portland. Following on similar conferences we helped organize in 2010 and 2012, the workshop provided fishermen, processors, Council members and staff, NMFS officials and others involved in the fishery with an opportunity to acknowledge the successes and address the challenges of the West Coast catch share program.

In order for fishermen, processors and management personnel to work together toward their common goal of “getting it right,” the workshop steering committee felt it was important to hold this event ahead of the agency’s upcoming 5-year program review.

Fittingly, a number of workshop speakers began by looking back at conditions in this fishery in the 2000’s: too many boats chasing too few fish; multiple species identified as overfished; unreliable catch and discard data; and finally, a federal disaster declaration. Several of those problems have been remedied. Concurrent with full accountability in the fishery – which produces extremely high-quality data – the West Coast is seeing a historic resurgence of groundfish, and the Marine Stewardship Council now certifies the entire trawl fishery as sustainable. Meanwhile, recent upgrades from Seafood Watch brought 39 groundfish species up to either Green (Best Choice) or Yellow (Good Alternative) rankings.

Nevertheless, this program was designed to improve economic performance as well as conservation performance, and we heard loud and clear from fishermen and processors that the economic potential of the program is not fully being met. The agency’s process for clearing regulatory backlog is glacially slow; program-related costs are rising – even stranding some fishermen at the docks; and most of the total allowable catch is going un-harvested. NMFS heard from multiple speakers on these topics.

What they did not hear was anyone calling for a return to the bad old days. The groundfish quota program on the West Coast can and must be fixed. With over 160 attendees, the Portland workshop clearly showed that there is no lack of interest in doing so.

A final report from the workshop will:

• Highlight potential actions that the Council, NMFS, and industry members can take to increase the value of the fishery;
• Clarify why timely action on program refinements currently being considered are key to improving the economic performance of the fishery; and
• Identify issues and potential solutions that should be explored during the program’s five-year review.

Our processor and fishermen-allies have been responsible for the program improvements we have seen to date, and have borne the costs of the failure to make additional, critical changes. We will be with them every step of the way in advocating for a fishery with enormous upside potential.

By Rod Fujita

By: Rod Fujita & Doug Rader

People have been catching fish for thousands of years, so you’d think by now we would have a pretty good idea of how fisheries are doing.  However, the two most basic numbers that you need to answer that question – how many fish are in the sea, and how many are being caught – have been highly uncertain.

A new study published in Nature by researchers at the University of British Columbia finds that the number of fish in the sea has been underestimated, and that the world’s fisheries should be more closely monitored. We couldn’t agree more.

It’s critically important for scientists to estimate these numbers so we can tell whether catch is too high, too low, or just right.  The stakes are enormous: these numbers and trends will determine what management actions are necessary to ensure that fisheries can continue to provide healthy food for billions of people and provide livelihoods for tens of millions.

Many scientists have tried to estimate the first number – how many fish are in the sea.  Typically, rich streams of data are used to feed a complex model which is used to estimate it.  However, the vast majority of fisheries do not collect much data, so other methods are necessary to estimate fish abundance.  Scientists at the University of California at Santa Barbara and the University of Washington came up with one such method using catch statistics from the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and information on the life history (e.g., growth rate, life span, etc) of each of the target species.  Using this method, they were able to estimate the abundance (biomass) of fish species targeted by 1,793 fisheries that had not been scientifically assessed before (see their paper here).

Their conclusion: nearly 2/3 of these fisheries are too depleted to produce their maximum yields over time, meaning that the world is losing out on large amounts of yield and the jobs, profits, and economic development that come with that yield.  In fact, if fishery management systems were put into place that stopped the decline in biomass and rebuilt fisheries to levels consistent with the production of maximum sustained yield, it’s possible that global catch could increase by 40% and biomass levels would go up by 56%.

Scientists are making progress estimating the number of fish in the local ocean, too – even when there are no catch records.  This is important, since many fisheries do not report catch to the FAO.  Many of the methods they’ve developed depend on other kinds of data that are commonly collected even when catch is not recorded such as underwater visual surveys of coral reefs or the distribution of lengths of fish in the catch.  All of this commonly collected information can tell us a lot about the status of fish populations.  We describe a process for using these kinds of methods to generate scientific guidance for fisheries management when data are scarce here).

This new study addresses the second question: What is the global catch?

Scientists at the University of British Columbia undertook a monumental analysis of all of the information they could find on fish catches in each fishing country.  Current estimates of fish catch from the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization depend on spotty catch reporting accumulated by fishing nations.  These official – but limited – statistics painted a picture of global marine fisheries catch peaking in 1996 at about 86 million metric tons, then falling to about 80 million tons and stabilizing there.

By supplementing the FAO statistics with deep dives into each country’s fisheries, the UBC team was able to “reconstruct” each country’s catch from 1950 to 2010.  Their new study paints a radically different picture, one that shows global fisheries catch peaking at 130 million tons in 1996 – about 50% higher than the FAO estimate – then declining rapidly after that to about 110 million tons. Perhaps more important is the decline in the availability of fish to individuals, which according to the UBC study peaked and stabilized from 1970 to 1988 – as increases in fish harvest kept up with the population boom – but has fallen consistently since, threatening the food security of the world’s poor.

Declines in catch can result either from depleting fish populations, which can produce less and less catch as fish become less abundant, or from the imposition of catch quotas to rebuild fish populations or maintain production of yields over time.  The UBC study suggests that the imposition of quotas — while they can be very effective for individual fisheries, if incentives for complying with them are also in place–appear to have only a small impact on catches at the global scale.  When the main regions that use catch quotas are removed from the analysis, the overall catch trend is unchanged, suggesting that the main cause for declines in catch is stock depletion.

The UBC study also sheds light on three other big unknowns in the world of fisheries: how much are recreational, artisanal, and subsistence fisheries catching?

Official statistics on these types of fisheries are very few and far between, because countries focus on their larger-scale industrial fisheries.  While industrial fisheries do appear to be responsible for most (73%) of the global catch (109 million tons in 2010), artisanal fisheries –often extremely important for food security and livelihoods, especially in the developing tropics – caught about 22 million tons, or about 20% of global catch, in 2010.  Subsistence fishermen caught about 3.6 million tons in 2010 (3% of global catch).  Discards accounted for 9.6 million tons (9%) while recreational fishing added about 1 million tons (1%).

The UBC team is careful to point out that their estimates are highly uncertain and the ranges for the estimates are quite large.  However, this paper represents a major advance in our understanding of how the world’s fisheries are doing – and it is not a pretty picture.  But there is a silver lining – if global catches are indeed much higher than FAO thought, then the economic, social, and ecological benefits of reversing fisheries declines are also much greater than projected by all the studies that have been using FAO statistics.

Fortunately, we know how to do this.  Secure fishing rights have been shown to reverse declining catch trends in fisheries, while actually increasing profits for fishermen, improving safety at sea, and improving the quality of fishing jobs.  What’s needed now is to expand the fishing rights tool box to fit all of these different kinds of fisheries, make sure that they are equitable, build working examples, and spread them around the world.

This process is underway in countries like Belize and the Philippines. Belize just committed to create a national fishing rights system designed by Belizeans to suit their fisheries, dominated by small sailing vessels and skiffs.  The Philippines, worked with four communities to design their own fishing rights systems customized to coral reef ecosystems and local culture.  EDF has a plan to scale these kinds of locally-grown solutions up to the global scale, by focusing on 12 particularly important countries that together account for most of the global catch and have an outsized influence on the fisheries of many other countries.

 

By EDF Oceans

Picture the world’s oceans once again abounding in fish, as part of a thriving and diverse marine ecosystem that supplies people with an increasing amount of protein rich food.

This can be the future. Within our lifetimes, improved fishing policies and practices can help create much healthier oceans that support more fish, feed more people, and improve livelihoods. These outcomes go hand in hand, because a healthier, more resilient ocean is also one that can support larger harvests.

This World Fisheries Day, we are optimistic that despite challenges facing fisheries, there is a bright future for both fish populations, and the people who depend on them.

 

Here are 5 progress points from 2015 that give us hope:

1. Global oceans can yield more fish, more food, and more prosperity: At the World Oceans Summit in June, we previewed a bio-economic model that shows a triple win for fisheries with smarter management. Our preliminary results show that global fisheries, if managed sustainably, could yield 23% more wild fish, generate 315% more profits, and boost the amount of fish left in the water for conservation by 112%. If we get fishing right, we can reverse the threats facing fisheries and coastal communities within our lifetimes. Read more here.

1. Cuban marine protection milestones: 2015 was a huge year for the Cuban marine environment. Diplomatic ties between the U.S. and Cuba have thawed, making way for increased collaboration on science and protection of shared marine resources—culminating in an agreement signed by both countries this week. In addition, Cuba launched a National Plan of Action for shark conservation in October. This plan calls for new protective zones to guard critical shark habitats, adopts new regulations that will protect juvenile sharks, and limits fishing and by-catch of sharks. Read more about the NPOA here.

1. Belizean fishermen voted for nationwide system of multi-species fishing rights: Fish populations have been declining as a result of ineffective management in Belize—threatening the livelihoods of local families, food security for Belizeans, and the barrier reef ecosystem. For some fishermen, spiny lobster catches plunged from 200 to 20 per day. In response, we helped create a coalition of government, fishermen, and civil society organizations to end open access and create incentives to steward the resource. We tested this concept at two sites. Fishermen are enjoying better catches, reef fish are recovering, and violations of no take zones are down 60%. As a result, fishermen voted earlier this year to expand the system of ‘Managed Access’ nationwide. Read more here.

1. Sustainable fishing now within reach for two fishing communities in the Philippines: After months of hard work by the Fish Forever team and local stakeholders, the communities of Tinambac and Cantilan recently approved the first ever TURF+Reserve designs. These are historic milestones for these communities for many reasons. Perhaps most importantly, they were driven by engaged community members and fishers who laid the groundwork for sustainable fisheries management by working through and discussing their options to land on a design that works for them and meets their needs. Read more here.

1. U.S. fishermen innovating to reduce seafood waste: A recent report focused on the issue of seafood waste in the United States. The waste occurs throughout the seafood chain, but also in wild fish discarded at sea, sometimes called “bycatch” or “discards.” Fortunately proven solutions exist to reduce wasted fish in the form of bycatch and discards. When fishermen are empowered with sustainable management by having secure access to the resource, they are able to focus on gear and harvesting innovations that target only the fish they want to catch. In fact, catch shares, a proven tool that aligns environmental and economic incentives for fishermen, save enough fish from being discarded to feed 17 million Americans their seafood for an entire year. Read more here.

By Monica Goldberg

Dusky Shark  (Carcharhinus obscurus) are extremely rare. This one is swimming at Seaworld Aquarium in Queensland, Australia. Photo by: Amada44 via Wikimedia Commons

Shark advocates at Oceana recently sued the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), claiming that the way the agency controls fishing on dusky sharks violates the Magnuson-Stevens Act.  Duskies are overfished and have suffered overfishing for years, even though it is illegal to retain them if they are caught.  The duskies’ plight highlights the shortcomings of bans and similar efforts when it comes to protecting vulnerable species like sharks, especially when they are caught alongside other, healthier species.

Over the last several years, more and more people have learned about both the importance of sharks and the ongoing threats to their existence. This is great news because sharks are among the most important creatures in the ocean, playing a vital role in maintaining healthy marine ecosystems.  Plus, they’re really cool.  Formerly of interest exclusively to fish geeks like myself, Shark Week is now a widely celebrated summer ritual.  Shark finning, a deplorable practice where a shark’s fin is removed and the rest of its body is discarded at sea, has been banned in the United States since 2000, and more than 70 other countries have enacted similar bans.

Despite this progress, shark populations remain threatened and overfishing is common. The FAO reports that the market for sharks has actually increased, and many sharks die as bycatch as a side effect of fishing for other species at healthier population sizes, such as Atlantic swordfish (which has recovered after a focused conservation effort).

Nineteen U.S. shark species, including duskies and great white sharks, are at such low population levels that they are so-called “prohibited” species; if caught, they cannot be kept.    For dusky sharks, the ban has been in place since 2000.  Nevertheless, they have continued to experience overfishing.  Duskies simply can’t tolerate much fishing and struggle to recover because they don’t reproduce until about 20 years of age and then deliver 5-10 pups only once every three years.  NMFS calculates that in order to rebuild them in a century — 100 years — fishing levels have to drop by more than half.

In short, the ban isn’t working.  Pretending sharks don’t get caught because we prohibit landing isn’t effective.  Even if increasing the use of conventional management tools, such as closed areas or gear restrictions, worked to curtail fishing mortality enough, those restrictions could force U.S. fishing vessels out of the fishery altogether.  But the foreign-flagged vessels can have even higher levels of bycatch, so importing more seafood could further harm the sharks we’re trying to protect.

We need a new approach.  Fortunately, emerging technologies could provide the means to effectively monitor and enforce real bycatch limits, and conservation incentives can lead to more flexible regulatory structures that give fishermen the ability and motivation to use their expertise to avoid the sharks.  Fishermen will have a stake in the recovery of the dusky population by minimizing the catch of the species and its impact on their ability to fish.

We’ve seen this kind of transformation in the west coast groundfish fishery.  After years of high levels of fishing mortality (and extensive litigation) that left many groundfish species extremely overfished, the long-lived species faced rebuilding plans that in some cases ran to more than 100 years.  The Pacific groundfish individual fishing quota program, which involves binding quotas of both targeted and bycaught species and careful monitoring, took effect in 2011.  The conservation results have been amazing.  Bycatch declined from roughly 20-25% of catch to less than 5% in 2011-2015.  2014 fleet-wide catch for overfished species was well below allowable limits.  Overfished populations have rebounded much more rapidly than expected.  Producing similar results for duskies and other sharks would be game-changing.

On the east coast and in the Gulf of Mexico, pelagic longline fishing vessels already carry cameras that monitor their fishing activities, and they tally their catch under a new system designed to protect Atlantic Bluefin tuna.  These changes are not easy to navigate, and fishermen deserve support and credit for doing so.  NMFS should carefully examine the lessons learned in the Atlantic Bluefin tuna effort and consider expanding it to other species, including dusky sharks.

Nor should American fishermen bear burdens that foreign fleets do not.  The United States has often broken new ground in fisheries management.  As solutions emerge for species like sharks that are caught all over the world, we can leverage our participation in international fishery management organizations to institute global management that takes into account the need to catch target fish while avoiding more vulnerable species.

Oceana has highlighted an important issue, and the law backs them up, as we explained in a letter to the agency back in January.  Pretending we can ban our way out of the deadly problem of shark bycatch has failed and violates the Magnuson-Stevens Act.  We hope the lawsuit leads to a stakeholder-driven process to develop real solutions.

By Shems Jud

NPR’s Planet Money recently featured the Alaska Halibut fishery in a compelling story of how the commercial catch share system has dramatically improved safety for fishermen while preventing overfishing, ensuring a higher quality product, and allowing fishermen the time to invest in their fishing businesses.

Before the catch share, seasons were increasingly shortened until fishermen were forced to race against each other in 24 hour derbies—often risking their lives and their equipment.  After the new rules were put in place, fishermen were given a total number of fish they could catch, rather than being constrained by a short time window. The catch share program is part of the reason why the Coast Guard reported zero operational related commercial fishing fatalities in Alaska in Fiscal Year 2015.

Fishing is inherently dangerous but it’s still important to look at the several ways to make it safer. Inspections, the use of safety gear and training all make a difference. So can the way fishing regulations attempt to address overfishing.

Regulators often unintentionally create a race to fish by setting short seasons or giving boats just a limited allocation of days to be on the water. Under those circumstances, sitting out bad weather or letting exhausted crews come ashore is harder to do because it results in lost opportunity and lost revenue.

Catch shares eliminate the race to fish. Instead of fishing in a derby to catch the fish before the competition does and before boats are forced off the water, fishermen can time their trips to the best market and weather conditions. A peer-reviewed study in the journal Marine Policy found on average safety nearly tripled in fisheries in the U.S. and British Columbia that switched to catch shares.

A big takeaway of the piece is that catch shares can be an effective tool to improve safety, flexibility, and sustainability of the fish stock, but they need to be designed in a way that ensures fair and equitable allocations. The importance of design for fair access is something that we encounter in all fisheries, whether domestic or international. If designed well, with all stakeholders involved in the process, this type of management has many important benefits for people and fish.

By Rod Fujita

Photo: Kennedy Warne

All who enjoy the wild biodiversity of the seas should take a moment this week to mark the passing of Dr. Bill Ballantine, the Founding Father of what has become a fast-growing global network of marine protected areas.

The science of setting aside unique sanctuaries from development is an art that dates back centuries – at least on land. America’s own federally designated national parks, wildlife refuges, and forest reserves can be traced to the mid-1800s.

But ocean protection is a relatively recent phenomenon, emerging only in the late 1970s. And it’s arguably more difficult to know how to chart, value and protect life that is hidden from view.

No one had previously envisioned what marine reserves would look like, where they should be, or how they might work. Then Bill showed us all exactly how it could be done, and done well.

He helped enact New Zealand's Marine Reserve Act in 1971, fought six years of political opposition to create the country’s initial marine reserve at Leigh Marine Laboratory – one of the first "no-take" reserves in the world – followed by another 13 reserves encircling what he referred to as “the most maritime country in the world” consisting of 90 per cent ocean. When he died, a dozen more marine reserves were underway.

It is hard for EDF to overstate the extent of his impact on our own work. We invited him to give a series of talks, which shaped our approach in the early days of MPA maturation in the U.S.  It was serious business, and he had to be driven to what could be lengthy meetings. But along the way he found time and energy to teach my 3-year-old daughter – a next generation  ocean steward –songs about fish. Bill could play as hard as he worked; on his last celebratory visit to the U.S. he left a big bottle of Ballantine's whiskey, still in my office.

Bill stressed how beautiful, incomparable places deserve our respect and formal recognition as a whole. And that required a profoundly different way to think about the integrity of natural world rather than individual species, whales or fishing rights.

He also showed us how high-powered science could help us understand the vital role these places play in the sea. Bill led the front end of an entirely new research discipline of designing reserves in the ocean, where there are no boundaries, and thus a pressing need to understand spatial, structural, and ecological connectivity.

Anyone who spent time with him sensed his impatience, linked to his passion and drive. Others found him grumpy and opinionated.  Yet he knew, early on, that actually securing a marine reserve required far more than just knowing what to protect, where and why. He had deep respect for the essential role of local people in understanding the richness and vitality in their surrounding waters, of having a bona fide partnership with coastal communities and fishermen in order to make it endure. And of keeping protected areas open for people to explore, photograph, research, understand, love, and fight for.

Almost everything we have done to advance ocean protections and marine protected areas were built on the back of Bill’s formative experience in New Zealand.

So while I mourn his passing, I also plan break out that bottle of Ballantine’s he left me, and toast his legacy, which will live on in the seas that surround us all.

 

By Sarah Smith

Heat map showing warming waters in the Gulf of Maine over time. Credit: Pershing et al.

Climate change is preventing cod from rebuilding in New England. Many scientists and fishermen believe this, and a study released last week in Science by Dr. Andrew Pershing from the Gulf of Maine Research Institute and his co-authors provides new evidence to support this claim.

A brief history

Cod, an iconic species and a mainstay of New England fisheries, were overfished for decades, with catch levels peaking during the 1980s. In 2010, the fishery transitioned to the current quota-based management system under an Annual Catch Limit (ACL). Bringing cod under a fixed quota system should have ended overfishing and brought about recovery of the stock, but in recent years the biomass of Gulf of Maine cod has continued to decline, and was estimated in 2014 to be at just 3-4% of sustainable levels. Fishermen are catching fewer cod every year, and the quota is now so low that most fishermen actively try to avoid catching them. Yet despite these very strict catch limits, Gulf of Maine cod have not rebounded and the region’s fishermen are suffering devastating economic consequences.

Strong evidence that climate change is reducing cod’s ability to successfully rebuild

The Gulf of Maine is at the forefront of climate change impacts – the region has seen water temperatures increasing steadily over the last decade as a result of climate change, and is known to be warming at a faster rate than 99.9% of the world’s oceans.

As the Gulf of Maine becomes warmer, it becomes less suitable for cod. The study found that many juvenile cod appeared to be dying before reaching adulthood when they become large enough to spawn successfully and be targeted by fishermen. The authors suggest this could be in large part due to an increase in predation on young cod. Warmer waters mean an earlier spring and a later fall, which could result in more migratory predators present in the region for a longer duration each year. Elevated temperatures could also mean cod may have additional energy requirements, reducing their likelihood of survival.

Fisheries management needs to account for environmental changes

At the same time, fishing pressure was not sufficiently reduced to account for these changes, meaning that despite large cuts, Gulf of Maine cod still could not rebuild, even though fishermen were not exceeding their quotas. Fisheries stock assessments, used to determine how many fish can be taken each year, do not typically account for temperature and other environmental variables, and thus they consistently overestimated the size of the population. How much water temperatures continue to increase in the near future, and how fishery management strategies respond to these changes, will determine whether and how quickly the cod fishery can return to one that is sustainable and profitable in the coming decades.

So what can be done to address this problem?

Fisheries managers and scientists need to take temperature and other ecosystem factors into account when conducting stock assessments and setting catch limits not just for cod, but in all stock assessments to avoid discovering too late that we’ve been setting catch limits incorrectly. We can no longer assume a static environment in which fisheries can return to where they were in the past. To that end, EDF has an ongoing research project with our partners at the University of California Santa Barbara to better predict what fisheries in New England might look like in the future under climate change.

We also have a handful of studies underway directed at integrating climate change into fisheries science, including reviewing past groundfish stock assessments to determine whether incorporating climate change would have improved the results, and developing recommendations for how to better incorporate environmental change into stock assessments in the future. Additional research is needed to better understand the impacts of climate change on fisheries. NOAA should increase opportunities for fishermen and scientists to work together under cooperative research programs to gather real-time data on water temperatures, fish behavior and abundance, and other factors to observe these changes as they are happening.

Finally, consumers can seek out healthy, abundant groundfish stocks, including haddock, pollock, redfish, and hake, to support the struggling groundfish fleet in the absence of healthy cod populations. We are supporting efforts to bolster markets for underutilized fish to support fishermen. By promoting better science and management that is responsive to our changing environment and by shifting our focus onto healthy stocks, New England can support a resilient, profitable groundfish fishery and thriving fishing communities once again.

By Monica Goldberg

Credit: Gulf Wild

The Gulf of Mexico red snapper fishery has undergone a tremendous recovery over the last eight years. Thanks to reformed commercial management the stock is rebounding strongly, and as a result this year’s quota is the highest on record. Unfortunately, recreational fishermen have not fully benefited, since their failed management system creates a cycle of shorter and shorter seasons. There are many competing attempts to address this very real problem, including several in Congress.

This week a U.S. House subcommittee will hold a hearing on H.R. 3094, a bill that proposes to transfer management for Gulf of Mexico red snapper to a new authority made up of the directors of the Gulf state fish and wildlife agencies. Some advocates of this approach, which we oppose, have suggested that the states successfully manage striped bass in the mid-Atlantic and Dungeness crab in the Pacific, and therefore transferring management of red snapper to the Gulf States is a good idea.

But these arguments gloss over important differences between red snapper and these other species, making the comparison about as real as most good fish stories.

 

Striped Bass

In many ways, the biology of striped bass makes it more suited to state management.  Striped bass aggregate inshore to spawn and are easy to count.  They are easy to fish for selectively, and currently all striped bass are caught in state waters.  Red snapper, on the other hand, live mainly offshore, spawn throughout the Gulf, are difficult to target selectively, and often die during catch and release due to barotrauma (“the bends”) and other injuries.

Who fishes for striped bass and red snapper, and where, varies even more.  When the existing striped bass laws were passed, the striped bass population had crashed and there was little commercial fishing for the species.  As we will see below, the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act and the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Act actually increased the federal role in the management of the fishery, and today some striped bass commercial fishing exists in state waters (accounting for U.S.-caught striped bass’s presence on some menus).  Yet the fishery remains overwhelmingly recreational, with no catch at all in federal waters.

Gulf red snapper, on the other hand, supports a thriving commercial fishery that supports thousands of jobs, contributes hundreds of millions of dollars to the Gulf economy, and provides locally-caught, sustainable fresh seafood to consumers throughout the region and the country.  Federally-permitted commercial fishermen catch their entire portion of the quota in federal waters.  Even when it comes to the recreational half of the quota, a significant number of charter/for-hire boats can only pursue red snapper in federal waters, and those fishermen now have a separate sub-quota that they can manage as they see fit.

Thus even if striped bass were successfully managed strictly by the states, the differences between the biology of the fish and the nature of those who fish for them mean that comparing the two species would not be apt.

But contrary to suggestions that striped bass are managed in a state-dominated manner similar to the structure set forth in H.R. 3094, the somewhat complex legal framework that governs striped bass extensively involves federal standards and regulators, even in state waters. (See footnote at end of post for details.)

The conservation standards that apply to striped bass are not as strict as those of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and that may account for the troubling downward trend in its population size and availability as documented by others. H.R. 3094 would impose even less stringent standards, threatening the progress we have seen in red snapper. Indeed, the steady increase in the Gulf red snapper population contrasts with the varying availability of striped bass over the years.

 

Dungeness Crab

Similarly, if there is a marine species less like red snapper than Dungeness crab, I’m not sure what it is.

Most crabs are in shallower state waters, and Dungeness is no exception.  In contrast, red snapper is found mainly in federal waters, and many who object to H.R. 3094 fish exclusively in federal waters.  Furthermore, the recreational fishery for Dungeness crab remains small, while the red snapper recreational fishery is large and managed through season and bag limits that are highly contentious. Given these differences, it’s not surprising that there was no federal management for Dungeness when the original legislation transferring authority to the states took effect. In contrast, H.R. 3094 would displace a federal red snapper fishery management plan which has been around for decades.

A final, important difference is the level of U.S. Congress heavy-handedness embodied in H.R. 3094.  The Dungeness crab legislation effectively ratified a deal worked out at the local level and agreed to by stakeholders across the board.  But H.R. 3094 represents an effort by a subset of Gulf congressmen to pick a winner – the private angler component of the recreational fishery – over other fishermen who vehemently object to the bill. It is one thing for Congress to ratify a stakeholder consensus through legislation; it is quite another for Washington to run roughshod over a longstanding local stakeholder decision-making process.

In sum, Gulf red snapper does not closely resemble either striped bass or Dungeness crab in scientific, management, or political terms.  It’s difficult to manage due to competing fishing groups, which is precisely the type of situation the regional management council system was set up to deal with.  Rather than imposing the views of a subset of user groups to decide on how to manage the fishery, Congress should let the regional process work.

 

Footnote on Striped Bass Legal Framework: See, e.g., 16 U.S.C. §§ 5154 (federal government can declare moratorium on fishing in state’s coastal waters, impose regulatory controls and seek civil penalties against violators); 5155 (federal government shall conduct stock assessments and investigate impacts of factors like water quality and land use on striped bass population).

While fishing for striped bass in federal waters is currently prohibited, 50 C.F.R. § 697.7(b), if it reemerges it will be governed by federal regulations developed in consultation with the New England and Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Councils (sister organizations of the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, which H.R. 3094 would deprive of authority over red snapper) or federal regulations.   16 U.S.C. § 5158.  Even within state waters, the federal government has the responsibility to re-enforce the management plan developed by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, including imposing a moratorium on fishing in the waters of states that do not comply with the Commission’s plan.  Id. § 5154(a).

 

By Doug Rader

Seafood for sale at the Pike Place Market in Seattle, WA. Photo: Kate Culzoni

Squandering ocean fish—an essential living resource—unnecessarily harms not only wild creatures, but also the billions of people around the world dependent upon fish for their food and livelihoods.

A recent report by the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future finds that between 2009 and 2013, billions of pounds of seafood is wasted every year in the United States—that’s as much as 47% of all edible seafood going to waste. The waste occurs throughout the seafood supply chain, but also in wild fish discarded at sea, sometimes called “bycatch” or “discards.” Fortunately, there are good answers to the bycatch part of this challenge.

Proven solutions exist to reduce wasted fish in the form of bycatch and discards. When fishermen are empowered with sustainable management, they are able to focus on gear and harvesting innovations that target only the fish they want to catch.

In fact, catch shares, a proven tool that aligns environmental and economic incentives for fishermen, save enough fish from being discarded to feed 17 million Americans their seafood for an entire year.

 

West Coast fishermen are innovating to reduce waste:

Take one example from the U.S. West Coast. In the early 2000s, a very large trawl fishery targeting multiple species of groundfish—such as

W. Coast fishermen like Joe Penissi are innovating for more sustainably caught seafood. Photo: Corey Arnold

rockfish and sole—was decimating populations of many slow-growing fish species. Strict regulations on which ones could be kept, and decisions by fishermen to keep only the largest and/or more valuable fish (sometimes called “high-grading”), resulted in frequent discarding of unwanted dead fish at sea. This practice had severe ecological and economic consequences, including a formal federal disaster declaration.

Intense collaborative work between fishermen, managers, scientists and NGO experts led to the adoption of a high-performance catch share in 2011 that features incentives for avoiding depleted species, which has cut their accidental catch dramatically and substantially reduced overall discarding of dead fish at sea. At the same time, this new management plan established a system of 100% catch monitoring, which ensures the accounting of every fish that comes over the rail.

This combination spurred an innovation boom within the trawl fishery, which is reducing its footprint, staying out of sensitive areas, testing new gear, and exchanging bycatch information in real time to avoid overfished and depleted species. As a result, approximately 70% of West Coast flounder and sole and 60% of rockfish now qualify as a Seafood Watch Best Choice. Now, 20 species caught under this system have been certified sustainable by the Marine Stewardship Council, producing about 40 million pounds of high-quality, low-waste seafood.

Recently,  a West Coast fisherman was featured in KQED for his low impact trawl gear—which he was able to capture on a Go Pro camera. His net is “light touch,” which means that it operates above the sea floor and allows juvenile fish to escape before the net is brought on board. Innovations like this are possible because fishermen operating under catch shares management have more time to focus on how they can make their business more efficient and sustainable.

More progress needs to be made:

The U.S. Southeast still uses ineffective management tools (like size and bag limits and closed seasons) to manage many reef fishes for individual species, while still allowing fishing for others, guaranteeing that many dead fish must be dumped back dead into the sea. Many species of vulnerable groupers and sharks are managed solely through a landings prohibition that requires every single one caught to be dumped, dead or alive, without effectively managing how many are killed.

Even there, the high-quality catch share for commercial red snapper and a variety of groupers and tilefishes in the Gulf of Mexico speaks to a better day ahead, in terms of wild seafood waste and economics of fishing.  A novel trial for red snapper addressing part of the recreational fishery shows that similar approaches there hold great potential for reducing current large waste in that sector.

Overall, the U.S. has made progress on reducing bycatch, while still landing safe, fresh fish.  Nationwide, bycatch rates are falling. A further update to the U.S. national bycatch report is due out this year, and a comprehensive report is expected in 2017.

Time and again, it has been our experience that fishermen hate to see fish go to waste more than anyone—and that when empowered with the right tools like catch shares—not only does waste decrease, but innovation increases.

By Alexis Rife

Photo: Alexis Rife

Cozumel, Mexico might be better known for its diving and tourism, but it’s also home to some of the most successful fishing cooperatives and TURFs in the world. In a recent trip with our partners Rare and the Sustainable Fisheries Group at UCSB, we met with fishing cooperatives from Mexico to learn from these fishers and communities about successful TURF-Reserve models and conditions that have contributed to their success. It was an amazing opportunity to share learnings and experiences cross-country (and truly, around the globe).

First, some background on cooperatives. A cooperative is a group of fishers who communicate about and coordinate their fishing activity to meet their goals. Cooperatives can perform a range of activities, from coordinating fishing activities to participating in co-management, and even marketing their products. Successful cooperatives also sustainably manage their fishery so that the species are healthy and simultaneously provide for sustainable livelihoods for fishers.

Fishing cooperatives can be especially critical to sustainable fisheries management, especially in areas where governance is weak. Many cooperatives also invest a portion of their profits in community projects, which increases awareness of the importance of fishing resources as an important source of income and prosperity for the community as a whole.

On our trip, we visited and spoke with fishers from some of the most successful fishing cooperatives in Mexico: Vigia Chico and Cozumel

Leaders of Vigia Chico Cooperative. Photo: Alexis Rife

from the state of Quintana Roo and Buzos and Pescadores in Isla Natividad from Baja California Sur. These three cooperatives have been granted exclusive access to fishing areas, i.e., concessions or TURFs, to fish for lobster within their area by the Mexican government and have been operating for around 40 years. When granted concessions, the cooperatives are incentivized to steward the resource since the health of the fishery is directly tied to their fishing behavior.

The concessions are granted on a 20 year timeframe – and all of these cooperatives have been granted renewals, a testament to their success in sustainably managing the resources within. Time and again during our visit and chats with these fishers, they reiterated how important internal organization and cooperation was to their success and how they had experienced a change in their mindset from pure business to one of a sustainability ethic. The results are impressive:

• All three of these cooperatives have received MSC certification for their products (mainly lobster), firsts for small-scale fisheries
• They are widely recognized as some of the most successful fishing cooperatives in the world

From the Mexican cooperatives, we, and our partners, walked away with ideas on structure, decision making, and how fisher organizations can coordinate and regulate their fishing activities – all insights that can be applied to our small scale fisheries efforts around the world:

• how internal rules could be used to ensure responsible fishing practices,
• how within a concession, the fishers were able to subdivide the area so that each had his own area,
• how profits are shared and divided amongst members, and
• how eventually, a portion of their profits were contributed to the group in order to meet their larger goals – building processing plants or searching for MSC certification.

But I think the biggest takeaway for us all was that organization and dedication to a vision of sustainability is the most important thing that cooperatives can have to be successful – in managing their resources sustainably while providing sustainable livelihoods.

Lobster Fishing Boat. Photo: Alexis Rife

This sort of cooperation amongst fishers will be crucial for our small-scale fisheries work at EDF, where many of the fisheries we are seeking to reform are in areas of low governance. These cooperatives have overcome many challenges including depletion of their primary resources and learning how to coordinate amongst themselves, before becoming as successful as they are today.

It was clear that the designation of these areas to the cooperatives was a first step towards sustainable practices. By learning from their prior experiences, the groups were able to make their own management decisions (in accordance with the federal laws) and regulate their catch – putting the responsibility in their own hands. This process has made fishers proud of what they do, and secure that the resource will be healthy for their children to catch. It has empowered to become true stewards of the environment and their resources, and to reap the rewards of their stewardship.

Speaking with members from the cooperatives and learning about their structure, fishing techniques, challenges and how they overcame them was a unique learning experience for all of us working on small-scale fisheries at EDF and with the Fish Forever project, and especially our in-country partners who are working with fishing communities every day.

Crucially, we were also able to discuss contexts and conditions in each country where we are working together – to discuss how to take the lessons and insights from the Mexican cooperatives to the Philippines, Indonesia, Mozambique, and Brazil – and to share the experiences in each of those countries. Further, the lessons learned here can also apply to EDF’s work on small-scale fisheries in Belize, Cuba and Spain. Learning directly from communities – on what has worked for them – will have direct impact on our work with small-scale fishing communities around the world, where fishing organizations will play a crucial role in managing their fisheries for a sustainable future.

By Emilie Litsinger

By: Emilie Litsinger & Lito Mancao (Director, Technical Operations, Rare Philippines)

Photo: Rare Philippines

The communities of Tinambac and Cantilan recently approved the first ever TURF+Reserve designs in the Philippines. This accomplishment follows months of hard work by the Fish Forever team and our talented on-site coordinators, and collaboration with the local government units, village leaders, key agencies, and, most importantly fishers, and community members.

This effort is part of the Fish Forever (FF) program: a collaboration of EDF, Rare, and the University of California Santa Barbara (UCSB) that empowers fishing communities in the developing tropics to manage their near-shore fisheries with a proven, sustainable management approach called TURF+Reserves.  In the Philippines, the goal of FF is to create a network of TURF+Reserves both within municipal waters (0-15km) and between adjoining municipalities.

These are historic milestones for the communities of Tinambac and Cantilan for many reasons.  Engaged communities and fishers laid the groundwork for sustainable fisheries management by working through and discussing their options to land on a design that works for them and meets their needs.

Stakeholder engagement:

Earlier this year, the Philippines team kicked off and completed the first participatory TURF+Reserve design workshops in Cantilan, Tinambac, and Cortes—three of our pilot sites for Fish Forever in the Philippines.  Community members heard presentations of biophysical fisheries data collected by the University of the Philippines-Marine Science Institute (UP-MSI); shared their local ecological knowledge of spawning grounds, important fishing grounds, aquaculture, and areas of gear conflict; and produced coastal zoning maps. These discussions were further informed by the new fish catch monitoring systems in place and fishers reporting their catch.

 

We walked municipal officials, village leaders, and fishers through discussions on several fisheries design elements including:  

• identifying and prioritizing fisheries challenges;
• setting fisheries goals;
• selecting species and habitat to prioritize based on best available science and local ecological knowledge;
• evaluating the size and location of existing marine reserves;
• setting boundaries, fishing rules, and determining access rights to the TURF; and
• determining roles and responsibilities for successful co-management between the fishers, municipality, and barangay (village).

Our implementing partners used their social marketing talents to encourage fishers to attend meetings to voice their opinions and needs.  In these discussions, we saw community members get really excited, argumentative, and passionate about making their points of where the TURF should be, why, and who should have access.  Most importantly, we witnessed new levels of cooperation, participation, and enthusiasm for the TURF+Reserve management system that can help these communities sustain their livelihoods and fisheries for years to come.

 

TURF+Reserve approval and design:

Tinambac TURF+Reserve Map

 

 

On August 17, the Tinambac municipal legislative council passed an ordinance declaring the Lamit Bay Special Fisheries Management Area (SFMA- what the communities have decided to call TURF+Reserves locally), covering an area of almost 8,000 hectares and including three marine reserves (1 additional reserve was added by the community members as a result of this process).  The harvest regulations that were approved include spawning closures, gear restrictions, deployment limits, and prohibitions on landing egg-bearing female crabs and on using certain harmful, illegal fishing gears and practices (as defined in the national fisheries code).  The map also demarcates seaweed farms as this practice has been present here for over 10 years. The TURF is further broken down into smaller management units at the barangay (village) level for enforcement and management purposes, and grants fishing privileges to Tinambac-Lamit Bay registered fishers.

 

 

 

Shortly after Tinambac, the Cantilan municipal council passed their ordinance, for an SFMA covering a 2 km radius encircling the island

Cantilan TURF+Reserve Map

of Ayoke with an existing marine reserve.  The harvest regulations inside the TURF are similar to Tinambac- a mix of gear restrictions, deployment limits, spawning closures for dangit (rabbitfish), and prohibitions on illegal fishing gears and practices.  Fishing privileges are granted within the first 1km ring for Ayoke registered fishers, and in the outer ring to registered Cantilano fishers who historically have fished in the area.

These two TURFs are designed to include multiple species of fish. We are still working with fishers and community members to set catch limits, and finding ways for fishers to coordinate on harvesting and marketing opportunities to improve the sustainability and profitability of their catch.

Both ordinances have been approved at the municipal levels, and sent on to their provincial boards for final approval.  If the measures are passed in review, either through a formal resolution of approval or through the provincial boards taking no action after 30 days, then the ordinances will be submitted for posting or publication.  After compliance with all other legal requirements, the ordinances then finally become law.

 

Looking forward:

Photo: Rare Philippines

While there is still work to be done to ensure that these programs are implemented and managed successfully, the approval and design of the TURF+Reserves in Tinambac and Cantilan are huge milestones for these fishing communities. Consensus building takes time and effort, but the work will pay off in the future: through that lengthy process the communities came together in support of a shared vision for their fisheries.

We are now focused on making sure to translate these designs into fully implemented and functioning TURF+Reserve systems that we can use as first proof-of-concepts here in the Philippines to catalyze nationwide change to create networks of TURF+Reserves.  We are encouraged that we now have whole communities working towards the same vision, and look forward to supporting them in the future.

 

Acknowledgements:

This work would not be possible without our hardworking colleagues at Rare and our implementing partners including:

Catherine B. Demesa, NSLC, Executive Director, Rare Conservation Fellow, Cherry M. Ravelo-Salazar, Agricultural Technologist, MAO, LGU-Cantilan, Surigao del Sur/Rare Alumni Conservation Fellow, Vincent A. Duenas, CRMO/Rare Alumni Conservation Fellow, Local Government Unit of Cortes, Rocky Sanchez Tirona, VP, Rare Philippines, Julius Guirjen, Manger, Fisheries Program Implementation, Rare Philippines, Koko Tandang, Manager, Fisheries Organizational and Institutional Development, Rare Philippines, Gerald Maglinte, Attorney, Jun Amolo, Senior Manager, Marine Governance, Rare Philippines, Pablo Rojas, Senior Manager, Monitoring and Evaluation, Rare Philippines, Dean Apistar, Associate, Monitoring and Evaluation, Rare Philippines

 

By Phoebe Higgins

Since launching in 2008, the California Fisheries Fund (CFF) has made 30 low-interest loans—ranging from $50,000 to $350,000 — providing fishermen and sustainable fishing businesses with the capital needed to upgrade boats, purchase equipment and improve their business operations.

Our recent loan to the Monterey Bay Fisheries Trust—a new community-led non-profit dedicated to securing groundfish fishing rights in the Monterey Bay region—provided the organization with vital seed money to enable its establishment.

“Our loan from the CFF has been critical to our organization’s early development” said Sherry Flumerfelt, Executive Director, Monterey Bay Fisheries Trust. “With the quota we were able to buy; we can lease to local fishermen, generate lease revenues and build on the success of sustainable fisheries management.”

With its new CFF loan, the Monterey Bay Fisheries Trust will be better equipped to serve a community of local, family-owned fishing businesses; ease the burden on new entrants– making it easier for new fishermen to lease quota with flexible terms; and support a personalized, one-stop-shop leasing system that provides quick and improved services for fishermen.

The Monterey Bay Fisheries Trust acquired more than $1 million in commercial groundfish quota from The Nature Conservancy. This transaction coupled with the CFF loan and The Monterey City Council’s pledge to use $225,000 from the city’s Tidelands Trust Fund to acquire fishing rights to be managed by the Monterey Bay Fisheries Trust–will allow hundreds of thousands of pounds of groundfish to be caught under a sustainable fishery management program.

In 2011, this program, “catch shares," went into effect for more than 60 species of West Coast groundfish (e.g., sole, rockfish) and has achieved significant conservation goals. The new program has generated impressive conservation results:

• In 2014, the Monterey Bay Aquarium Seafood Watch program moved 21 species of West Coast fish to sustainable status
• The Marine Stewardship Council certified the fishery sustainable, emphasizing the important role that the catch share program played in recovering the fishery.

The Monterey Bay Fisheries Trust enhances the West Coast program, maintaining historic fishing access in Monterey Bay and supporting the communities that rely on it (Moss Landing, Monterey and Santa Cruz). CFF is fortunate to support the Monterey Bay fishing community and advance the vision of the Monterey Bay Fisheries Trust, securing the profitability and sustainability of Monterey Bay for many generations to come.