This week, the federal First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston dashed the hopes of the cities of New Bedford and Gloucester to throw out the management structure that has been in place since May 2010 for harvesting cod, haddock, flounder and other groundfish. The court upheld a prior decision by the district court in favor of the government and CLF, which intervened on the side of federal agencies. The carefully written and thoroughly considered 68-page opinion demolished every claim brought by New Bedford, calling New Bedford’s views in one case “misguided,” in another “inaccurate”, and in a third as having “no textual basis for the argument.”

At stake was the validity of the significant new management plan that was adopted by the regional fishery management council in 2010 and approved by the National Marine Fisheries Service that same year.

The judicial review of this plan bordered on frivolous. The 60,000+ page administrative record memorializing the decision to approve the new program provides extensive documentation on each and every decision made. New Bedford and Gloucester barely participated in that public process but nevertheless felt at liberty to drag the issue into court for two years. As the Court concluded: “the record demonstrates that the [National Marine Fisheries Service] engaged in reasoned decision-making and reached rational outcomes to hard choices.” That is what good fisheries management is all about. It’s never easy and there are always winners and losers, but decisions have to be made.

In this case, an overhaul was desperately needed. As the First Circuit said in its decision, “[t]wo decades of [a different form of fishing limits on the industry] has left the [f]ishery’s stocks on the brink of collapse.”

The new plan, created by Amendment 16 to the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan, accomplished two goals. First and most importantly from a conservation perspective, scientific opinion became paramount in setting catch levels, removing the politics that had previously trivialized scientists’ warnings about the risks of overharvesting. As a result of using scientifically-set fishing limits, the amount of groundfish that was available to the fleet at the beginning of the fishing year on May 1, 2010 was drastically reduced.

The second accomplishment of the new plan was the expansion of the “sector program,” an approach that had been pioneered in the region by the Cape Cod Commercial Hook Fishermen’s Association. The sector program allowed fishermen to form voluntary organizations in which they could pool their catch allotment and re-distribute it amongst themselves in any way that made the most economic sense to them. Since they were guaranteed a set amount of fish, they could choose when to fish, freeing them up to wait for high wholesale prices or good weather or to reserve some quota for late season holidays like Easter, which always brought strong prices. In return for forming the sectors and agreeing to be bound by the “hard” quota of fish, other regulations were relaxed, further increasing the potential for efficient operations.

It is a mystery to me why New Bedford and Gloucester, and their Congressional allies U.S. Representatives Frank and Tierney, tried to blow this new scheme up in court. None of their publicly stated reasons hold much water, and the Massachusetts representatives, including those from New Bedford, overwhelmingly approved the plan in 2010.

Perhaps the best explanation is that the lawsuit provided a handful of political demagogues with an opportunity to decry federal oversight of the public’s fisheries. In doing so, they diverted scarce federal management resources away from solving fisheries problems, no doubt spent significant municipal dollars on a fruitless goose chase, and intentionally destabilized and attacked a new management system in the front pages of their local papers. Now that the challenge to Amendment 16 is behind us, we can better focus our efforts on restoring the prosperity of this region’s fisheries.

New Bedford v. Locke Opinion – First Circuit Court of Appeals

November 7 – Small Fish, Big Opportunity - Over the past several months, a collection of conservationists, anglers and others have come together to urge federal policymakers to safeguard the array of species that serve as the foundation for a healthy marine ecosystem. And, to their credit, regional fishery managers on both coasts heeded the message these advocates delivered: If we want to protect the oceans, it makes sense to start small.

November 8 – Maine fisherman Terry Alexander works to revive redfish - Terry Alexander is a fourth generation fisherman from Harpswell, Maine. Alexander has teamed up with other fishermen, scientists, and the Gulf of Maine Research Institute to help revive redfish fishing in New England.NOAA’s Monica Allen caught up with Terry Alexander to learn more about the redfish revival and how sector management is working for him.

November 9 – Fish Talk in the News – Friday, November 9th - In this week’s Fish Talk in the News, Hurricane Sandy lowers fish prices in New England; New Jersey fishermen push for a disaster declaration; the battle over menhaden catch limits continues; NEFMC sets a special meeting to discuss groundfish allocations and closed area access; NOAA holds a forum on groundfish science; and the mayor of New Bedford says fishermen have no confidence in stock assessments.

October 23 – All About Aquaculture: Current Status in New England - In the fourth and final post in the All About Aquaculture series, we take a look at current aquaculture research and production in New England and the government agencies involved in the regulation of aquaculture operations.

October 26 – Fish Talk in the News – Friday, October 26 - In this week’s Fish Talk in the News, scientists and environmental groups speak out against a proposed fisheries data confidentiality rule; Carl Safina and Andrew Read argue against a delay for a gillnetting closure; The New York Times discusses the damaging effects of trawling; fishing communities prepare for Hurricane Sandy, a coalition celebrates the removal of a dam in Taunton; a new bill would allow spearfishing for stripers in MA; NMFS proposes more relaxed regulations for dogfish; Ellen Pikitch argues for precautionary, ecosystem-based fisheries management.

The beauty, health, and wealth provided by the productivity of New England’s ocean is illustrated in the diversity of ocean and coastal habitat found in the Gulf of Maine, Georges Bank, southern New England waters, and the far edge of the Outer Continental Shelf. New England’s ocean habitats provide a huge economic service, but only if the underlying ecological foundation is healthy and sustained. Pushing our ocean waters to produce more fish and seafood than is sustainable can lead to a severe decline in goods and services – as we are seeing with the most recent groundfish depletion crisis – or even to an unrecoverable collapse as has happened in eastern Canada.

There are really two major components to a healthy ocean: don’t take out too much in the way of fish and other living resources and don’t put in too much in the way of runoff, nutrients, carbon dioxide, and other pollutants. In New England’s celebrated cod and groundfish fishery we have clearly been taking out too much through decades of overfishing. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), at the request of the New England Fishery Management Council, has for years taken the riskiest possible approach to managing fish stocks. NOAA and the Fishery Management Council have set catch limits at the highest levels allowed by law and then shown great surprise when fish stocks fail to recover.

We need NOAA to show proactive leadership by ensuring a more precautionary approach to setting annual catch limits and to rebuilding fish populations. Decades of unsustainable catch levels should not continue to plague New England’s fisheries or our ocean’s health.

The other problem of overfishing is that the methods used to catch fish have gotten more destructive. Since the development of more powerful engines and sonar during World War II, fishing vessels can go farther out to sea, fish in deeper water, and drag heavier bottom trawls. These inventions not only catch a lot more fish, but also cause more damage to ocean bottom habitat – the kelp beds, boulders and rocky fields, tube worms, anemones, sponges, corals, and mussel beds which serve as nurseries and spawning areas. Over decades we are left with cumulative impacts to large areas of New England’s ocean habitat.

This makes the remaining special areas such as Cashes Ledge even more important as a place where small fish can grow and become large enough to reproduce.

In New England, NOAA is headed in reverse on its legal responsibility and the ecological necessity to further protect juvenile groundfish in their nursery grounds. The commercial fishing industry, led by big trawlers, has argued for opening these nursery grounds. Areas of sea bottom that provide essential fish habitat must be protected from destructive fishing practices like trawling and dredging.  For nearly a decade regional fishery managers have failed to take serious action to protect essential fish habitat.  It’s time to make habitat conservation a priority.

The Conservation Law Foundation, our conservation partners, marine scientists, fishermen, and ocean users agree that permanent habitat protection is needed for Cashes Ledge and other special places.

Join our statement to NOAA asking for their leadership. Click here to urge NOAA to protect our ocean beauty, health, and wealth.

A New Bedford trawler leaves port.

“Groundfish resources off New England have experienced significant changes in abundance during the past 30 years and have now fallen to all time record lows.” 

-  Ronald Brown, Secretary of Commerce. Declaration of Disaster Affecting the New England Fishing Industry – March 18, 1994

“…I don’t hear so much in New England that ‘there are plenty of fish, our scientists got it wrong’…right now what I hear  – and what I see in the eyes of fishermen  – is people are saying ‘we can’t find codfish’ and they are really worried about their ability to stay in business…”

-  John Bullard, NOAA Northeast Administrator. MPBN Radio Interview – August 29, 2012

Why does this current groundfish crisis seem so familiar? As the populations of New England’s cod, haddock and flounder have continued to decline, it’s not surprising that the number of fishing boats chasing them have declined. The business of consolidation within any industry is often a fact of doing business and we know that consolidation has been happening in the New England groundfish fleet for decades. So far, the New England Fishery Management Council has avoided any serious approach to addressing fleet diversity and consolidation as it kicks the can down the road on the development of Amendment 18, and the National Marine Fisheries Service has been willing to watch from the sidelines. Some members of the New England Congressional delegation are trying to reduce the potentially devastating economic blow to fishing families and coastal communities by seeking federal disaster assistance, and for their good intentions and hard work, are getting a bizarre and negative counter reaction. And, NOAA appears to look for grossly wrong-headed short-term fixes, such as the concept of an accelerated effort to open some of the best remaining habitat areas in the Gulf of Maine to increased trawling and dredging.

Consolidation, fleet diversity, maintaining our region’s fishing heritage, federal assistance and creating new economic opportunities for fishing families are all important and serious issues, but they continue to avoid the core problem. The bottom line is that when there are no fish, there will not be a fishing industry.

What NOAA can do now is to exhibit leadership: stop looking towards actions which would heave the decades-long saga of the New England groundfishery into the next episode and, instead, focus on restoring the fish populations which are the basis for the jobs, resources and tremendous benefits which we all need and enjoy. Don’t wait for the elections and for Congress to sort itself out. Don’t seek to cheat on “inaccessible” fish stocks by opening closed areas. Catch limits which are not based on scientific data may be more politically palatable, but will only continue to mask the simple fact that the region’s best fishing captains aren’t finding fish because the fish are not there.

Here’s a proposal to NOAA: Follow the law. Tell the truth. Do the right thing.

Realistic catch limits are based on scientific data and incorporate a responsible amount of precaution. NOAA can establish rebuilding timelines which create a much higher likelihood of restoring fish populations. Ending overfishing is not just a legal requirement but a best management practice.

In addition to strict scientifically set catch limits, the most basic component for healthy fish populations and ocean wildlife is to protect and maintain quality habitat. This is an area of management which NOAA can effectively control. NOAA needs to come to grips with the reality that better protection and restoration of degraded habitat is not only integral to the recovery of fish populations, but serves to create the long term resilience that fish populations need when the more unpredictable effects of climate change hit. Existing habitat areas and areas already closed to bottom trawling and dredging, juvenile groundfish in nursery areas and essential fish habitat are building blocks for restoring the fishery. This is a Basic 101 Management issue.

Fishing families and coastal communities deserve any help they can get in an economic crisis. Over a year ago the Department of Commerce deployed Economic Development and Assistance Teams to assess economic impacts to New England communities. Those reports are gathering dust. High-level interagency coordination helped develop solutions in the wake of the Deepwater Horizon disaster, and they can do that on a respectable scale in New England. Support communities with the available programs of the Departments of Labor, Housing and Urban Development, the Small Business Administration and community grants.

August 29 – Fisheries Scientists across the Yellow Line? – In discussions about how to set catch limits for yellowtail flounder, some scientists may have crossed the line separating pure science from policy making.

August 31 – Fish Talk in the News – Friday, August 31 – In this week’s Fish Talk in the News, a draft disaster relief package for the Northeast groundfishery; the mayor of New Bedford asks NEFMC not to reduce the catch limit for yellowtail flounder; dogfish receives MSC certification; NMFS adopts a new scallop stock assessment technique; warmer waters may be changing the distribution of New England fish stocks; the Ocean Health Index gives US oceans a low score for food production; and Coast Guard safety inspections for fishing vessels become mandatory this fall.

August 31 – A Proposal for NOAA – Why does this current crisis seem so familiar? As the populations of New England’s cod, haddock and flounder have continued to decline, it’s not surprising that the number of fishing boats chasing them have declined.

August 24 – Court Order Sets Clock Ticking for Action on River Herring – In a few weeks the New England Fishery Management Council will get a letter, probably a long one, explaining why the coming year will bring big changes to the way the council handles severely depleted river herring and shad.

August 24 – Fish Talk in the News – Friday, August 24 – In this week’s Fish Talk in the News: NOAA asks Congress to keep NERO in Gloucester; the Boston Globe supports John Bullard; New England fishing is the deadliest profession in the country; the South Shore Seafood Exchange grows; rising seal numbers cause concern; a gold rush for New England conch; river herring return to Upper Mystic Lake; and a cooking competition raises awareness of local, sustainable seafood.

• 

  This week, Peter Shelley writes about the importance of federal funding for fisheries science. Here, cooperative research in action: A Massachusetts industry-based cod survey (photo credit: MA Division of Marine Fisheries).

  Tuesday, May 29 – “Taking Stock of New England Fish – Part 2” – TalkingFish.org interviews Mike Palmer, Research Fisheries Biologist in the Population Dynamics Branch of the Northeast Fisheries Science Center. In this post, Mike Palmer explains the basic steps to conduct a stock assessment and the role of models in stock assessments.

• Wednesday, May 30 – “Investing in fisheries science for management success” -  A TalkingFish.org exclusive opinion piece from CLF’s Peter Shelley about the need to adequately fund fisheries science in order to get the fishery management results we want.

• 

  Soon, Boston residents will be able to buy day-boat-caught fish at farmers markets like this one. Read about this and other interesting fish-related news on TalkingFish.org. (Photo credit: Commonwealth of Massachusetts)

  Monday, May 21 – “Congress, Catch Shares, and the Councils” – An opinion piece by Nick Battista of the Island Institute and Ben Martens of the Maine Coast Fishermen’s Association on the effort by some members of Congress to prohibit NOAA, NMFS and the councils from developing new catch shares management plans on the East Coast and in the Gulf of Mexico.

• Tuesday, May 22 – “Taking Stock of New England Fish: Part 1” – TalkingFish.org interviews Mike Palmer, Research Fisheries Biologist in the Population Dynamics Branch of the Northeast Fisheries Science Center. In this post, the first in the series, Mike Palmer talks about his background and interest in fisheries science and the types of data used in stock assessments.
• Thursday, May 24 – “A Small ‘Catch’ in Recent Fisheries Coverage” – Lee Crockett of the Pew Environment Group writes to “make an important distinction between catch limits and catch shares, a difference that has been inadequately explained by NOAA and has resulted in some understandable confusion.”
• Friday, May 25 – “Fish Talk in the News – Friday, May 25” – Interesting stories this week: Boston brings local and fresh fish to its farmers markets; disconcerting news about Thailand’s seafood export industry; and recipes for healthy fish stocks.