Atlantic herring haven’t been doing too well. In recent
years, recruitment—the number of new fish entering the population—has fallen to
historic lows. In response, the National
Marine Fisheries Service recently cut the 2018 annual harvest limit by 55%, in
order to prevent the stock from becoming overfished.
At the same time, Atlantic
herring have been subject to harvest by an industrial fleet of mid-water
trawlers which, as reported in the Providence [Rhode Island] Journal,
“tow huge nets and can quickly scoop up millions of pounds of
the fish, causing, according to environmentalists, and others, the depletion of
its population in small areas. The trawlers
have been active in the herring fishery for the last two decades or so and are
the most efficient vessels at catching the fish.”
It is not unusual for two such midwater trawl vessels to
work together and pull a single net, known as a “pair trawl,” that is far
larger and more efficient than the nets that individual vessels can
employ. The impact of the pair trawlers
on the Atlantic herring fishing has been significant. As
the Pew Environment Group noted in one report,
“In 1995, pair trawlers landed approximately two million pounds
of herring; by 2004 that number had climbed to more than 127 million pounds.”
Since then, the Atlantic herring population has declined,
and catch has declined along with it. The commercial
harvest limit for 2018, which includes all regions and all types of gear, is just
49,900 metric tons, or about 110 million pounds.
“For years large factory fishing boats with nets larger than
the size of football fields, have worked the waters south of Martha’s Vineyard,
off Rhode Island and all around Cape Cod in pursuit of the forage fish, Atlantic
herring…”
It noted that the Cape Cod Commercial Hook Association put
out a press release that read, in part,
“New England fishermen believe that the herring fishery has
had cascading detrimental effects on many other species of fish such as
depleted cod, juvenile haddock, bluefin tuna and striped bass. The fishery removes large quantities of
herring, the primary food source for these species, and…it kills these species
when they are caught accidentally as bycatch.”
“’Localized depletion’ refers to a situation where
concentrated fishing—in this case by midwater trawlers—takes too many fish out
of too small an area in too short a time.
It has biological impacts when it affects the normal age structure
(removing too many older, fertile fish) or the genetic diversity (losing a genetically
distinct sub-population) of a species.
It has ecological impacts when it wipes out all the prey for a dependent
predator and that predator leaves the area.
And it has economic impacts when other fisheries, such as commercial
fishing for cod or recreational fishing for striped bass, as well as
eco-tourism businesses like whale watching, are forced to move.”
To avoid such adverse effects, fishermen and other
conservation-oriented interests have argued that Atlantic herring should be
managed, in part, based on their importance to the ecosystem, and not just for
their commercial value. Wild
Oceans, an advocate for such ecosystem-baseed management, said in an op-ed in
Sport Fishing magazine that
“Raising our standards for conserving key prey species means changing
our management goal from maximizing yields for commercial fisheries to sharing
the resource, in a way that accounts for the vital ecological role of these
species as forage for natural predators, while still providing reasonable
fishing opportunities.”
However, representatives of the industrial fishing fleet categorically
reject such an approach. The Providence
Journal reported that
“Commercial fishing groups say that herring are being caught
at sustainable levels and argue against the ecosystem approach, which would
ensure that a larger share of the population remains in the water for other
animals to prey on. They say the system
needs flexibility to react to dips and spikes in the herring population.
“’Localized depletion of herring has never been
documented. Herring, and the species
that feed on them, are both highly migratory, and travel over a wide range. Any potential impact from the herring fishery
would be limited in duration,’ the Sustainable Fisheries Coalition, which
includes Rhode Island-based Seafreeze and The Town Dock, said in a statement.
“…Maghan Lapp, fisheries liaison for Seafreeze, said in
written comments to the New England Fishery Management Council that there is no
scientific basis for [excluding pair trawlers from inshore waters].”
“The New England Fisheries Management Council approved a rule
that ‘establishes a long-term policy that will guide the council in setting
catch limits into the future’ at a meeting in Plymouth [Massachusetts].
“Such an option will result in more herring being left in the
water ‘to serve as forage and be part of the overall ecosystem,’ according to
the council. Under that proposal, catch
limits can be adjusted based on new information.
“Additionally, the council approved a measure aimed at
preventing midwater trawlers from fishing too close to shore for herring. The boats are banned from fishing within 12
miles of shore, an area stretching from the Canadian border through Rhode
Island, that includes areas east and southeast of Cape Cod, according to the
council.”
It’s good news, but it doesn’t mean that the herring are
home free. Although the New England Council
approved the measures, the National Marine Fisheries Service must also approve
them before such measures are included in fisheries regulations. And there will undoubtedly voices out there
trying to convince NMFS to reject the Council’s decision.
According to the Globe,
“Shaun Gehan, counsel for Sustainable Fisheries Coalition, a
group of harvesters and processors from North Carolina to Maine that includes
three companies in Gloucester [Massachusetts], had a different take.
“The council’s decisions, he said, would ‘make it very, very
difficult to catch even the low amounts of herring that are going to be
allocated for the next three years.’ The
measures are going to hurt lobstermen, and commercial fishermen who catch
herring and mackerel, he said. The
region’s lobster fishery chiefly uses herring as bait.
“’What the council did today is inconsistent with law,’ he said.”
Thus, it wouldn’t come as a surprise if the industrial
fishing fleet lobbied NMFS, and the Commerce Department, and urged them to
reject the New England Council’s proposed management measures. And it also wouldn’t come as a surprise if
the same Commerce Department that allowed
New Jersey to go out of compliance with the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries
Commission’s summer flounder management plan in 2017, and agreed
to illegally reopen the recreational red snapper season in the Gulf of Mexico
at about the same time, would again turn its back on conservation
considerations and support the industrial fleet.
Even if NMFS does ultimately endorse the New England
Council’s recommendation, there is the chance that the mid-water trawlers could
challenge NFMFS’ decision in court, an action that, even if unsuccessful, would
discourage other regional fishery management councils from beginning their
journeys toward ecosystem-based management until any such lawsuit was
ultimately decided.
But even with those uncertainties, conservationists should
view this week’s actions on Atlantic herring as a victory. As
Peter Baker of the Pew Charitable Trusts said, the New England Council
should pride itself on
“being among the first to follow a public, science-based
process with concrete actions to conserve forage fish.”
Baker went on to say that
“Protecting these sensitive areas and the from intensive
fishing and rebuilding the herring population will directly benefit marine
wildlife and the coastal businesses that depend upon them.”
Yes, it’s true that the 12-mile-wide coastal buffer zone,
that excluded mid-water trawls from inshore waters, wasn’t nearly as large as
the 25- and 50-mile-wide buffers that were also considered, and ultimately
rejected, by the Council.
Thus, the Council’s recommended measures represented a relatively
small step forward, compared to the greater strides that had been proposed.
But as anyone who has engaged in the fisheries arena will be
quick to tell you, taking even a small step forward is far, far better than just standing
still.
No comments:
Post a Comment