When
President Donald Trump released the Executive Order “Restoring American Seafood
Competitiveness” on April 17, commercial fishermen in the Gulf of Mexico
were generally pleased. The order sought
to
“unburden our commercial fishermen from costly and
inefficient regulations,”
and ordered federal fisheries managers to
“consider suspending, revising, or rescinding regulations
that overly burden America’s commercial fishing.”
“The Gulf of America Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance…and
commercial fishermen across the Gulf commend President Trump for recognizing
the vital role of the American seafood industry in our nation’s economy, food
security, and cultural heritage…
“The Shareholders’ Alliance looks forward to our role in the
process as this Executive Order is implemented.
We stand ready to work with federal agencies like the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration…and the Gulf Council so that all Gulf commercial
fishermen can have a seat at the table…
“We are encouraged by the President’s commitment to shining a
national spotlight on the challenges and opportunities faced by commercial
fishermen. His support sends a strong
message that American fishing jobs and coastal economies matter.”
“…[The National Fisheries Institute] commends the President
and his Administration for taking a thoughtful, strategic approach to
supporting American seafood production and consumption. The [Executive Order] outlines key actions to
benefit every link in the supply chain—from hardworking fishermen to parents
who serve their family this nutritious and sustainable protein at home.
“Importantly, the Order calls for reducing unnecessary
regulatory burdens on fishermen and seafood producers while also promoting the
many benefits of eating seafood as part of a healthy, balanced diet.
“NFI stands ready to support the Administration in advancing
this important policy initiative and improving the lives of all those who
depend on the commercial seafood industry.”
However, it didn’t take too long for Gulf fishermen to begin
having second thoughts.
An
article that appeared last June in the Houston Chronicle was titled
“How Trump’s plans to boost catch limits could hurt Gulf fishermen.”
It noted that even as Gulf fishermen publicly
cheered the Executive Order,
“behind the scenes, many were concerned.
“The limits, set up by Congress 50 years ago to manage how
much fishermen could catch [Author’s note:
Congress did not actually set up the limits, but instead passed what is
now known as the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, which established the
framework and process for setting such limits], helped critical species
like red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico rebound after overfishing through most
of the 20th century.
“And Trump was proposing to raise them while cutting
fisheries staff at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which
is charged with conducting the fish counts that determine catch limits, at a
time when some fishermen say they’re suddenly seeing less stock in the sea.”
Thus, although the Gulf of America Reef Fish Shareholders’
Alliance offered strong support for the Executive Order when it was first
issued, the Houston Chronicle article quotes its deputy director, Eric
Brazer Jr., voicing support for fisheries managers who exercise caution.
“We support measured and reasonable increases when the stocks
can handle them. You want there to be
enough fish in the ocean to run your business 30, 40 years, so you can pass
this business on to your children. Conserve
a few more fish today to have more fish down the road.”
It’s not clear that such sentiments are entirely in tune
with the Executive Order which, with the except of a single reference to
Magnuson-Stevens, does not mention conservation at all.
Fishermen also find the Administration’s cuts to the
National Marine Fisheries Service’s staff, and its scientific staff in
particular, very troubling. Relaxing
regulations at the same time that the Administration is reducing the staff
needed to evaluate the effect of such regulations can have serious, negative
consequences for Gulf fish stocks. Mr.
Brazer has noted that
“Bad data, or no data, or gaps in the data means disruption
for commercial fishermen down the road.”
He also observed that good data and adequate regulation are
not inconsistent with the Executive Order’s goals, saying
“In order to implement the President’s vision, we need to
maintain core services for NOAA.”
“Brazer…worries that the consequences of cutting or reducing
surveys, dockside monitoring, and other data collection activities today won’t
show up for years to come—and by then it may be too late to prevent a fishery
from crashing.”
Such worries are particularly justified when catch limits
are increased at the same time that regulations are being relaxed, increasing the likelihood of
overfishing.
Those concerns are not limited to Mr. Brazer and his
associates.
The
Houston, Texas-based television station, KHOU-11, observed that local fishermen
were saying
“’We’re seeing less fish,”
and that
“Galveston fishermen push back on deregulation, warning it
could sink industry.”
An article on the station’s website describes one such
fisherman’s concerns.
“At Pier 19 in Galveston, it’s business as usual for Buddy Guindon,
a veteran Gulf fisherman with more than four decades on the water. His market, Katie’s Seafood, is the main
destination for red snapper caught in the Gulf and a lifeline for the local
seafood economy.
“’We were in really bad straits when I started,’ Guindon
said. ‘Fish stocks were depleted, and
fishing was pretty tough.’
“That all changed, he said, thanks to federal oversight. Strict, science-based catch limits helped
Gulf fisheries recover. But with Trump’s
executive order rolling back regulations and reducing oversight, Guindon fears
the progress may be reversed.
“’We’re highly regulated and we want to be. We want to be accountable,’ Guindon said. [emphasis added]”
Certainly, not every fisherman feels that way. Some would prefer that fisheries returned to
the old, “Wild West” days, when fishermen could sell everything that they could
catch, and a fisherman’s income depended solely on how hard they worked and how
much time they were willing to put in, even if that level of fishing was unsustainable
and ultimately left far fewer fish for everyone.
I met Buddy Guindon once, nearly a decade ago, when I
was down in
Galveston fishing for red snapper with Capt. Scott Hickman, and gathering
information for a piece I was writing on Gulf red snapper issues.
It didn’t take more than a few seconds to realize that Mr.
Guindon was one of the new breed of commercial fisherman, who perhaps came of
age in the old rough-and-ready days of commercial fishing, when the only thing
that mattered was piling fish on the dock, but has since come to recognize that
good science, good regulations, and accountability for every participant in the
fishery was, in the end, the best way not only to manage commercial—and recreational—fisheries,
but also to support viable, profitable and sustainable fishing businesses such
as his.
So when Mr. Guindon discusses the state of Gulf fisheries,
it probably makes sense to listen.
The Station KHOW-11 article went on to report
“Guindon remembers what the industry looked like before
regulation and doesn’t want to return to a time of empty nets and uncertain futures.
“’When I started fishing, there were no limits. And it wasn’t good.’
“…[S]ince the executive order, the Department of Government
Efficiency, or DOGE, has cut nearly 30% of NOAA’s staff, including key
scientists who monitor fish stock data, much of which is already years behind.
“’They’ve got fewer people now,’ Guindon says. ‘There’s a worry there. A little bit of a worry.’
“…For Guindon, the stakes are personal.
“’To have a business to pass on to your family, you can’t
take all the fish out of the ocean this year and expect them to make a living
next year,’ says Guindon. ‘So we want
this balance.’”
It seems like a sensible, and sensibly cautious,
stance. But the
National Marine Fisheries Service, bound as it is by the Executive Order,
apparently disagrees, for it dismissed Mr. Guindon’s concerns in its response, alleging
“The President’s Order Unleashing Seafood Competitiveness has
and will continue to make a positive impact on the U.S. seafood economy. NOAA data is helping us responsibly increase
allowable catch, and NOAA fisheries will continue to ensure a healthy balance
between managing the marine environment and increasing access to abundant
resources for our great American fishermen.”
Maybe.
But with the target biomass in most fisheries already based on maximum sustainable yield, and the acceptable biological catch, and so annual catch limits, in most fisheries also based on MSY, but reduced to account for scientific uncertainty, it’s difficult to understand how that’s going to happen.
Cuts to NMFS' scientific staff can only lead to a dearth of data needed to manage fish stocks,
increasing the uncertainty surrounding heavily-prosecuted fisheries. With good data harder to come by, increasing the allowable catch will only increase the
probability of exceeding maximum sustainable yield, and driving down the
abundance of the most heavily fished stocks.
Thus, the Gulf fishermen are wise to worry, because without
healthy and abundant stocks, their businesses will suffer, and the Executive
Order’s goal of increased U.S. seafood production will never, in the long term,
be achieved.
No comments:
Post a Comment