The
House Natural Resources Committee is going to hold a fisheries hearing on Long
Island next Monday. It will focus on
summer flounder and striped bass, and what it alleges to be recent harvest
reductions based on
“the lack of science and inadequate data collection used in
the management of these key species as well as other potential regulatory
issues in the region that could hinder access to those fisheries and hurt the
regional seafood economy.”
Given that the science and data set used for striped bass is
arguably the best available for any salt water fish in the nation, and that the
science used to manage summer flounder is acknowledged to be better than
average, it would seem that the hearing is based on a pretty shaky premise.
But that’s hardly surprising. The Committee majority are the same folks who
supported H.R.
1335, Alaska Congressman Don Young’s reincarnation of Doc Hastings’ Empty
Oceans Act, and the hearing is reportedly being held at the request of East End
Congressman Lee
Zeldin, who helped to torpedo New York’s recreational salt water fishing
license while still a state legislator, so it’s pretty clear what direction
the hearing will take, although minority reps will undoubtedly try to poison
the planned atmosphere by injecting measured doses of reality.
Even so, it would be good to have some folks in the room who
care about keeping fish in the ocean and would rather not see their grandkids
fishing for the last surviving sea robins in Great South Bay.
I might have had a chance to testify, but won’t be able to
show, having made a prior commitment that was practically impossible to
break. But if I had been available, my
testimony would have sounded something like this:
The people who support H.R. 1335, and similar efforts to add
“flexibility” to the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management Act, have failed to learn the lessons
of the past thirty-five years.
If we go out to Montauk today, it’s not hard to notice that all
of the fisheries which are healthy—summer flounder, black sea bass and scup—can
all thank Magnuson-Stevens for their current abundance.
Summer flounder have a big place on the hearing agenda.
Back in 1989, the population had bottomed
out, and biologists had trouble finding fish more than two years old. Even after Magnuson-Stevens had been amended
in 1996, to include new provisions that prohibited overfishing and required
overfished stocks to be rebuilt—if at all possible—in no more than 10 years,
fisheries managers didn’t take the law seriously, and came up with a summer
flounder management plan far more likely to fail than succeed.
That’s when conservationists changed the face of fisheries
management by bringing the landmark case of Natural Resources
Defense Council v. Daley, which determined that a fishery management
plan that did not have at least a 50% chance of success did not meet the
demands of the law.
Thanks to the court’s support of Magnuson-Stevens, the
summer flounder stock staged a magnificent recovery, and if the most recent
science suggests that it was never quite fully restored, it recovered to the
point that anglers now frequently catch summer flounder so large that just one
fillet—you get four from each fish—is longer and heavier than the entire 14”
summer flounder that we tried hard to find twenty-five years ago.
Now, the biologists tell us that summer flounder had
unsuccessful spawns in four consecutive years, 2010-2013. Such things happen in nature from time to
time; there doesn’t appear to be anything inherently wrong with the stock, but
the annual catch limits need to be reduced for a few years, until the spawning
stock has a chance to rebuild.
That seems like a reasonable course; there is a four-year-class
hole in the spawning stock right now that is very obvious if one looks at
recreational landings, which fell far below the annual catch limit this
year. The fish spawned between 2010 and
2013 are subject to significant attrition; trawlers and anglers cause the stock
to decrease on every day that the season is open. Thus, it makes sense to protect the fish that
remain, including those from the near-average 2014 spawn, which will be the
first decent-sized cohort produced in five years.
The Committee majority, of course, doesn’t seem to believe that. In the hearing memo, it notes that
“this assessment and the resulting recommended reductions
have been met with staunch criticism from the industry—many of whom were taken
by surprise by the 2015 assessment.”
As evidence, they quote one “angler” (who
was in fact a New Jersey party boat captain), who reportedly said
“We see a lot of flounder.
We raised the [size] limit and saved a lot of fish. It looks like it recovered and then the next
year they say we have a problem.”
I saw a lot of summer flounder last season, too. The problem was that they were almost all
one-year-olds, fish from the nearly-average 2014 year class. Next season, if the annual catch limits are
not reduced, those fish will be about 14 inches long, just big enough to be
kept by the commercial trawlers that are also complaining about the harvest
reductions.
If harvests are not reduced, how many of those fish will
survive until 2018, when they’ll finally be about 18 inches long and large enough
for anglers to take home? That’s
something that the for-hire boats out at Montauk to think about, because with
the 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013 year classes significantly smaller than average,
the 2014s represent the next decent cohort of fish that will be available to
their customers.
If efforts to weaken Magnuson-Stevens succeed, and the
harvest reductions aren’t put in place, party and charter boats that depend on
summer flounder won’t have much to offer their customers until, at best, 2019. That would not be a good thing for business.
The other thing that for-hire boats need, particularly out
at Montauk, is striped bass.
One of the issues that the Committee will examine at the
hearing is whether striped bass fishing should be allowed in the section of ocean
between the East End of Long Island and Block Island. It’s not a big area, but much of it lies in
federal waters, where striped bass fishing is prohibited. However, a special provision in the federal
rules allows boats to transit that area with striped bass on board, provided
that they do not stop to fish along the way.
For years, the Montauk charter boat fleet has been seeking
legislation that would allow them to fish for striped bass in that “transit
zone.” That request, at first, seems
innocuous, as the area is relatively small.
However, as Jim
Hutchinson, former Managing Director of the Recreational Fishing Alliance,
noted in testimony to Congress a few years ago while opposing such an
effort,
“The Block Island Sound transit zone is not the only region
within the striped bass management unit where stakeholders have expressed a
desire to open portions of the EEZ for directed striped bass harvest. These efforts have been denied by federal
agencies due to the potential impacts on the overall stock and the challenges
associated with enforcing small exempted areas.”
We can be sure that if the Block Island Sound transit zone
were opened to striped bass fishing, pressure would build quickly to do the
same thing elsewhere, particularly off Virginia, where a winter fishery
targeting concentrations of prime spawning-sized fish in federal waters existed
for years, until federal enforcement actions, and resultant severe penalties,
made it clear to lawbreaking anglers that the risk of getting caught wasn’t
worth the possible gains. If that winter
fishery opened up again, its likely impact on striped bass mortality would be
substantial.
And that would be a bad thing, as a
recent update to the striped bass stock assessment shows that, at the end
of 2014, fishing mortality was well over the target, and approaching the
overfishing threshold.
Quite simply, it would be foolish for Montauk charter boat
captains to do anything that could cause a decline in the stock. I remember the stock collapse of the late
1970s and early 1980s, and have no doubt that some of the older captains
remember it, too. A lot of well-known
boats went out of business back then, and the ones that survived did so because
there were quite a few other things to fish for.
In the late 1970s, Montauk offered a cornucopia of species
and a season that had no real end. From “snowshoe”
winter flounder in the spring to big summer cod at Coxe’s Ledge, from giant
bluefin tuna that sometimes broke 1,000 pounds to hordes of yellowfin in the
Butterfish Hole, there was a fish to fit every angler’s dreams. The loss of bass hurt, but there were other
options.
Today, the boats have striped bass and summer flounder,
along with a seasonal spattering of sharks and—again thanks to Magnuson-Stevens—an
abundance of scup and black sea bass.
Everything else, from white marlin to winter flounder and weakfish, is
either pretty scarce or completely gone.
Thus, if the angling-related businesses are to survive, they
need to take care of what they still have, because if they lose it, they’ll end
up with nothing at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment