• 

  Photo credit: Sean Cosgrove

  May 17 – “Slinging Mud” – The mud in Casco Bay, Maine, is changing. According to an article last fall in the Bangor Daily News, areas that used to contain vast quantities of economically valuable clams are now “dead mud.” Local clammers are finding that sites of former abundance are now completely devoid of shellfish. Even efforts to seed the formerly thriving areas with shellfish larvae are not yielding results. Some scientists think that the increasing acidity of the mud, due partly to the increased carbon dioxide being absorbed from the atmosphere, is making conditions unsuitable for shellfish larvae to form, well, shells. We may not yet be able to quantify the damage ocean acidification will cause in New England waters – although researchers are trying. But we don’t want to sit on our hands and wait to see how bad it will get.

• May 18 – “Fish Talk in the News – Friday, May 18” – This week’s interesting fishing and seafood-related stories: the ethics of seafood; NOAA’s annual status of the stocks report; making sure funding for ocean programs stays in the federal budget; CLF’s Peter Shelley talking about seafood on WGBH; and what local seafood to keep and eye out for at the market this summer.

• 

  The NOAA Fisheries Northeast Regional Office in Gloucester (photo credit: NERO website).

  Monday, April 30: “Penny wise and politically foolish” – Two weeks ago, a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee determined that federal dollars would be better spent by closing down the Northeast Regional Office of NOAA Fisheries in Gloucester, MA and moving almost all operations to the NMFS headquarters in Silver Spring, MD. This move was proposed as a cost-saving measure, but we believe it is a short-sighted proposal.

• Friday, May 4: “Fish Talk in the News – Friday, May 4” – Interesting stories this week: a New York chef takes a trip to the Boston fish market; the Boston Globe supports NERO staying in MA; more confusion over which sustainable seafood guides to trust; a new stock assessment confirms that river herring populations are depleted; and upcoming trips to take a look at herring runs.

• “Bottom Line: Historic Anniversary for Fishing in America’s Oceans”: Lee Crockett of the Pew Environment Group discusses the 2007 reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and the progress that has been made because of its strict limits on overfishing.
• “Fish Talk in the News – Friday, January 27″: This week’s news roundup: discussion of NOAA’s potential move from the Department of Commerce to the Department of the Interior, talking fishery management with Maine fisherman Glen Libby, and updates on menhaden conservation and the Gulf of Maine cod stock assessment.

In the mid-1990’s a Vermont ski area executive told me this joke.

“How do you make a small fortune in the ski industry in New England?” he asked.

“Start with a large one.”

He was talking about the challenges he faced then, which seemed normal at the time:  limited water for snowmaking, labor shortages, skyrocketing costs of doing business, aging baby boomer population, and inconsistent (though generally reliable) snowfall. The snow sports industry now faces a much more fundamental challenge: a shrinking winter.

But for a recent cold snap, a light dusting on MLK day, and a destructive storm in October, our winter here in New England has been largely without snow. The temperature has been high – in many instances, far higher than normal.

Consider recent temperature trends as reported by @JustinNOAA – the Twitter feed by NOAA’s Communications Director. On Friday, December 9^th, he Tweeted: “NOAA: 971 hi-temp records broken (744) or tied (227) so far this January.” The day before broke “336 hi-temp records in 21 states.”

Rising temperatures are a death knell for falling snow. On the final day of 2011, only 22% of the lower 48 had snow. Today, New England remains largely untouched by snow. A glance at NOAA’s snow depth map shows most of New England with 4 or less inches of snow. This was true of my New Year’s hike with my brother and his dog up Camel’s Hump. As the background of the photo shows, there was little snow across the surrounding Green Mountains.

With so little snow, New England is suffering. While ski mountains have been making snow (and areas like Sugarloaf and Stowe are reporting recent snow fall), other outdoor recreationists are suffering. Some seasons haven’t even started yet, weeks if not months into their normal season.

Snowmobilers, for instance, are facing one hell of a tough time. With so little snow in most of New England, they’ve been prevented from riding over familiar terrain. Ice fishermen, too, are facing lakes and ponds that, by this time of year are usually covered in a thick layer of ice by mid December. Today, many that are usually frozen by now remain open bodies of water.

The effects of this extends beyond our enjoyment to our economy. According to a story on NPR, reported by Maine Public Broadcasting, the unseasonably warm winter has meant millions of dollars in lost revenue for sporting good stores, lodging, and recreation. One store in the story has reported a decline in sales by around 50%.

Competitive cross-country and downhill skiers suffered, too. They’ve have had their race schedule reshuffled due to rain last week. According to the US Ski Team development coach Bryan Fish, quoted in the Boston Globe, “We’ve had the same challenges on the World Cup. It is always a challenge in a sport that relies on the climate.”

That is precisely the problem. People are drawn to New England to live, work and play for its climate: its warm summers, stunning falls and picture perfect winter landscapes, suitable for a wide range of outdoor activities. Walk down the halls of our states offices and you’ll see signs of that passion right here at home: people wearing ski vests, pictures of people snow shoeing, cabins nestled into densely fallen snow. If our climate changes – which the IPCC and others have repeatedly demonstrated it will – then New England will be a very different region than the one we all have come to know and to love.

That’s why I ask you to help us protect our New England winters. Help us protect the places where we enjoy ourselves.

To do just that, I suggest a few things:

1)      Help us transition away from inefficient, 20^th century energy to clean energy of the 21^st century. As a recent EPA report showed, power plants account for 72% of greenhouse gases – by far the largest contributor to global warming in the U.S. Here at CLF, we’re pushing for a coal free New England by 2020.

2)      Also according to the EPA, transportation accounts for the second largest portion of greenhouse gasses. Ride your bike, walk, or take public transportation to work, to do your errands or your other daily tasks. It makes a big difference.

3)      Support both national and regional or local environmental organizations. As I wrote in a NY Times letter to the editor recently, local environmental organizations “have known for years what the nationals are only now realizing: we’ve got to engage people closer to where they live.” Support local, effective environmental organizations who are creating lasting solutions in your area.

4)      Make yourself heard; write letters to your Senators, Congressmen and Representatives. Ask tough questions, and don’t settle for easy answers.

5)      And be sure to get outside. Plant a garden, even if it’s a small one in a city. Go for a hike, or for a bike ride. And take a friend or family member. Remind yourself and others why we need to protect our environment.

By doing all of these simple but important things, you can help us keep winter, winter.

Last Thursday, I testified before the House Committee on Natural Resources on a topic that I have worked on for years: restoring New England’s fisheries and commercial fish populations.

The topic is as important today as it was when I started working on it in 1989, if not more: our fish species continue to face immense pressure with a number of stocks still in terrible condition after a decade of concerted effort and the region’s fishing communities and fishermen continue to face unacceptable levels of business uncertainty and volatility. At the same time, there are some positive signs in the fishing industry that are critical to build on rather than  continuing to focus on the past.

There were not any commercial fishermen on the panel before the Natural Resources Committee, which was a lost opportunity for the panel to hear what’s working and what’s not working for the working fleets.  In any event,  I appreciated the opportunity to voice CLF’s support for rebuilding a vibrant New England fishery.

Below find the full text of my testimony. Or, if you like, you can find a .pdf here.

****

Chairman Hastings, and Ranking Member Markey, thank you for inviting me to testify today.

My name is Peter Shelley. I am a senior attorney with New England’s Conservation Law Foundation, the oldest regional conservation advocacy group in the nation. I have worked on federal fishery management issues in New England since 1989.

Next to my computer at work, I have a post-it note with formula on it:

31 billion (dollars more in fish product sales) + 500,000 (new jobs) +

2.2 billion (more dollars flowing to America’s fishermen and their communities).

Those are the results that rebuilt fisheries in this country could produce. Even if the country could only reach half those numbers, rebuilding fisheries would be an important national strategic objective.

Those were the goals Congress had when it overwhelmingly passed the Magnuson Reauthorization Act in the Bush Administration in 2006.

To get to those goals, I believe, Congress needs to do three things:

1. Allow the current law to work and allow the regional councils and the agencies to implement it — it’s only just begun to take effect.
2. Fund the Act so it can work, perhaps on the order of three times the current appropriation for the essential tasks of stock assessments, monitoring, and data collection, and
3. Invest in our working waterfronts and coastal communities so they will be there to benefit from a healthy, restored ocean.

In my view, three of the bills before the Committee today are aligned with those actions. The other five bills, notwithstanding the good intentions of their sponsors, are not.

The Coastal Jobs Creation Act, sponsored by Representatives Pallone and Pingree, is a great piece of legislation with broad public support. The infrastructure and capacity investments the bill identifies are essential to our maritime and fishery future and will be repaid many times over. H.R. 594 should be supported by the Committee.

Rep. Frank’s Asset Forfeiture Fund bill and Rep. Keating’s Strengthen Fisheries bill also have merit.  These two bills are the only ones before the Committee today that make an effort to identify new funding streams for the fisheries science and data collection that is critically needed in the regions. HR 2753 also has merit but no new funding source.

In my opinion, the other four major bills before the Committee, H.R. 1646, 2304, 2772, and 3061, would move this country farther from our common goals, perhaps out of reach.

Without exception, they

–impose new costs and mandates for marginal benefits and without new funding
–create more business uncertainty and volatility for fishermen
–require substantial new regulations and guidelines
–cause more procedural delay in the management process
–mandate that councils take higher risks than they might deem advisable
–and eliminate one of the only market-driven and de-regulatory tools in the management toolbox—the LAPPs.

Finally, by providing the least protection to the weakest fish populations, these four bills actually increase the probabilities of future stock failures and job losses in my opinion.

I think that they could put New England’s groundfisheries right back in the 20-year deep ditch they have just now started to climb out of.

The first New England groundfishing season using a management plan in full compliance with the new Reauthorization Act requirements ended April 2011.

The net profits to the small business boat owners that year are reported to have increased $10.8 million—in a year when quotas were significantly cut, the Council started an entirely new management program, and diesel prices went up 30%.

If the New England Council had not shifted to the “sector” catch share program they now use, the economic estimates were that the fleet might lose 15 million dollars.

As stated in a letter sent to the New England Congressional delegation on Nov. 14, 109 fishing captains –- some of N.E.’s best small business owners in the groundfishery –- want to retain the current catch share program and management program.

By my count, these folks have seen rules changes on average every four months from March 1994 to May 2010. They think that’s enough and I tend to agree with them. They believe they can make the Magnuson Act work and I agree with them there as well.

These four bills do not directly address one of the three specific things those knowledgeable fishermen have asked for in their letter to the delegation.

1) Management stability
2) New opportunities to target rebuilt fish stocks and reduce operations costs
3) Funding to improve and increase frequency of stock assessments to support effective management

Despite the often heated rhetoric, it is clear to me that more New England fishermen are starting to have some hope based on the success of the sectors program. These fishermen now need regulatory stability so they can continue to grow their businesses.

Moreover, there are strong signs that the Magnuson Act Reauthorization is working around the country. Overfishing is finally stopping and many fish stocks are growing, sometimes rapidly.

I am confident that  conditions will continue to improve if the course is continued and not weakened. Decades of overfishing can’t be turned around overnight. Full recovery will take time and patience and there will be some very rough spots ahead. we can get through them without new law and when statutory changes are needed, such as with the Canadian trans-boundary issue last year in New England, precise and surgical changes can be made that minimize the ever present risk of unintended consequences.

In 1976, Congress created a fishery management council system, which is unique in the country and one that many skeptics thought couldn’t work. But the system brings regional and local values and local political accountability to these complex and multi-faceted fishery decisions and management actions and risks get adjusted for local conditions.  In New England, the Council system is starting to work for more and more fisheries and fishermen.

I urge the Committee to continue to trust the council system and the agencies with these tough management decisions without statutory micromanagement. I also urge the Committee to fund the agencies and programs so they can succeed.

Thank you and I look forward to answering your questions.

This was a big week for TalkingFish.org! We launched a re-designed website as well as a new Special Features section, making it easier than ever for you to get the information you’re looking for about the scientific, financial and social aspects at work in New England’s fisheries. Here’s a weekly recap of this week on TalkingFish.org:

• 

  Alex Hay outside Mac's Seafood - read an exclusive interview with him at www.TalkingFish.org

  November 1: “Fishermen to Council: Sectors are working; don’t make any drastic changes” – A recap of the New England Fishery Management Council’s workshop to discuss lessons learned from the first year of sector management. The main message fishermen shared at the event? Sectors are working, and we need to stay the course with this system. Fishermen also stressed the importance of stability to their business operations.

• November 2: “Know where your fish comes from” – The first piece in TalkingFish.org’s new “Ask an Expert” series – this week: an interview with Alex Hay of Mac’s Seafood in Wellfleet. Alex talks about his company’s commitment to local and sustainable seafood and provides a great recipe for pan-seared hake with wild mushrooms.
• November 3: “Overfishing 101: A Small Fish With Big Problems” – This is the latest piece in Lee Crockett of the Pew Environment Group’s “Overfishing 101″ series, and it deals with Atlantic menhaden, a small fish that is “a pillar of the East Coast marine food web.” Sadly, Atlantic menhaden populations have declined to record lows. The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission will consider options to protect menhaden when it meets next week in Boston.
• November 4: “Fish Talk in the News – November 4, 2011″ – A weekly update of recent news stories that might interest TalkingFish.org readers. This week: reactions to the Boston Globe’s seafood fraud investigation, more opinions on the groundfish sector system, and NOAA will consider listing river herring under the Endangered Species Act.
• November 4: “Peter Shelley: Call to oust chief of NOAA is bad for a fishing industry in flux” – CLF’s Peter Shelley’s Letter to the Editor of the Boston Globe in response to Senator Scott Brown’s call for NOAA administrator Jane Lubchenco to resign.

Senator Scott Brown (Photo credit: Bibliographical Directory of the U.S. Congress)

In late October, Senator Scott Brown called for the resignation of NOAA administrator Jane Lubchenco. CLF’s Peter Shelley wrote the following Letter to the Editor of the Boston Globe in response to Senator Brown’s statement:

Call to oust chief of NOAA is bad for a fishing industry in flux

SENATOR SCOTT Brown’s call for the resignation of the administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is misdirected and destructive to a changing fishing industry that needs predictability, not political theater (‘‘Citing ‘indifference,’ Brown says NOAA chief should be fired,’’ Metro, Oct. 23).

Brown seems to think that the catch-share program was forced on Massachusetts fishermen by NOAA and Jane Lubchenco. In fact, the approach of having sectors of boat owners manage their fish quotas was developed and approved by the New England Fishery Management Council with unanimous support from the council’s Massachusetts fishing industry members and Governor Patrick’s representative. NOAA adopted the council’s plan without change. Eighteen months in, with some promising results and no quantitative evidence of an economic emergency, the council continues to support the catch-share program.

Brown’s call for Lubchenco’s head may curry favor with some frustrated Massachusetts groundfishermen, but it won’t solve their problems. What they do need is economic stability and confidence that their concerns will be addressed in full by the New England council. Its efforts to build on the program’s successes and mitigate its negative impacts are already underway with the full support of NOAA and Lubchenco.

If Brown is really concerned about the fate of Massachusetts’ fishing industry, he’d be better off seeking to end the congressional stalemate that is prolonging the national economic crisis than creating a bogus enemy in Lubchenco.

Peter Shelley

Senior counsel Conservation Law Foundation Boston

On Wednesday, September 14, Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary presented a groundbreaking proposal to establish a dedicated ecological research area within the Sanctuary’s boundaries to study the area’s diverse ecosystem. Although the Sanctuary’s multi-stakeholder Advisory Council voted strongly in favor of the proposal, NOAA officials decided not to send the proposal on to the New England Fishery Management Council (NEFMC) for further review.

A NOAA diver studies anemones and other marine live covering a wreck in Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary (Photo credit: Matthew Lawrence, NOAA Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary).

Yesterday, Priscilla Brooks, Ph.D., director of CLF’s Ocean Conservation program, said, “The proposal by the Stellwagen Bank Sanctuary staff to establish a Sanctuary Ecological Research Area is a bold step forward in the Sanctuary’s stewardship of this national treasure. This incredibly rich ecosystem and the close location of the Sanctuary to New England’s world-renowned marine science research institutions and ports makes Stellwagen Bank Sanctuary an excellent choice for a dedicated research area where scientists can study and learn more about New England’s greatest natural resource – our ocean.

Given the public release of this proposal and the support of Sanctuary Advisory Council, we are baffled that NOAA would then decide not to move the proposal forward to the New England Fishery Management Council for further public and stakeholder consideration and a final decision on the proposal. NOAA’s erratic decision is confusing and disappointing to citizens and scientists who have long supported the Sanctuary’s efforts and indicates an inexplicable willingness by NOAA to put the scientific management and stewardship of Stellwagen Bank Sanctuary on the back burner.

We applaud the very good effort by the staff at the Stellwagen Bank Sanctuary. NOAA now needs to move the proposal forward and submit it for review by the Fishery Management Council.”

To read the full statement, click here.

Photo credit: Leslie Boudreau

CLF applauded today’s announcement of federal approval of Rhode Island’s Ocean Special Area Management Plan (SAMP). Developed by the Coastal Resources Management Council (CRMC) with extensive input from scientists and government, business and environmental stakeholders, including CLF, the plan aims to balance the protection of vulnerable marine habitats and wildlife with responsible ocean uses including the development of clean renewable energy. Read the full news release here.

This morning, CLF Rhode Island Director Tricia Jedele joined Governor Chafee and members of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) at a press conference to celebrate the formal adoption of the SAMP, at which she reflected on this momentous achievement:

“Conservation Law Foundation is truly grateful to be included in today’s event – as grateful as we were to be a part of the transparent and inclusive SAMP planning exercise that produced this document.  It is a wonderful and amazing accomplishment that this comprehensive ocean use plan prepared by the smallest state in the country will now be used to help shape the future of sustainable ocean use in New England, including making the path straight for offshore wind energy and other important ocean uses.

So often referred to as merely “the SAMP,”  such a small name for such a massive undertaking, this document demonstrates that often the first step towards getting somewhere is simply deciding that you are not going to stay where you are any longer.

Rhode Island made the right decision. The State could no longer stay where it was.  It had to develop a response to the growing threat of climate change. It had to find new and sustainable ways to create economic growth. It had to protect its ocean resources for today and future generations. And, it had to develop a vision for the coordinated use of those shared resources. Because RI decided that it was time to move ahead, the State is now in a position to facilitate the speedy development of the renewable energy resources we need so badly, to foster the centuries old fisheries industry – an industry that makes us proud to call ourselves New Englanders, and to protect the critical and vulnerable habitat areas that keep our oceans healthy.

Not only is the SAMP a critical building block to the development of a regional comprehensive ocean management plan for New England and a milestone for Rhode Island’s ocean waters, but the SAMP is also a testament to the foresight and dedication of the people working for the State of Rhode Island.

CLF would like to share with you our sincere appreciation of the staff of the Coastal Resource Management Council, and the Coastal Resources Center of the University of Rhode Island, and the Council itself, for their enduring willingness to engage all of Rhode Island in this effort, to create a genuine sense of participation and a healthy and positive view of our ocean resources.  This team never backed down from a difficult question (even when the hour was late), never failed to receive and hear and learn from the many comments thrown their way (and CLF threw its fair share).  The State made a sincere effort to be responsive and to allow this ocean use tool to evolve in a way that reflected the science and the voices of all those organizations and individuals trying to shape it.

As a result of the State’s fearless approach to public engagement and science-driven planning, Rhode Island is now a national leader, with a plan that will serve as a model for the country.”

View the full transcript of Tricia’s remarks here.

Learn more about CLF’s ocean conservation work.