Last week, the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council held
its August meeting. That meeting is
often a raucous affair, because it’s the time when the Council sets annual
specifications for summer flounder, scup, black sea bass and bluefish, and one
or more of those species is always a lightning rod for discontent.
Such specifications were set at the meeting, and there was
certainly some comments made. However,
the big news coming out of the Council wasn’t about the usual “big three”
species—summer flounder, black sea bass and scup—that usually generate most of
the controversy. Nor did it involve
bluefish, which looked like it was going to be a hot issue a few weeks ahead of
the meeting.
Instead, the truly important story was that of the Council
approving the Unmanaged Forage Fish Amendment, which will directly protect
not the popular species that we all fish for, but the many small species of
fish, mollusks and crustaceans that anchor the Mid-Atlantic’s food web and keep
those popular species alive.
The amendment wasn’t intended to protect fish already
covered by regional or federal fishery management plans, such as menhaden or
Atlantic herring. Instead, it was
intended to “freeze the footprint” of fisheries targeting important forage
species, and prevent the creation or expansion of any such fishery until enough
data can be gathered to demonstrate that such new fishery will be sustainable,
both in the individual species and in an ecosystem context.
The amendment broke new ground on the East Coast, although a similar
amendment has already been approved by the Pacific Fishery Management Council.
Quite honestly, when the Unmanaged Forage Fish Amendment was
first proposed some years ago, I wished the effort well, but didn’t give it
much chance of succeeding.
There was
institutional inertia to be overcome; there had never been an amendment for
largely unfished species approved by the Mid-Atlantic Council before, and it is
always difficult to convince people to do something that’s new and different.
In addition, the concept of forage fish management didn’t
sit well with owners of industrial fishing fleets, who were used to wringing
substantial profit out of high-volume fisheries for low-value species.
Omega
Protein Corporation, a company responsible for the lion’s share of the menhaden
harvest, both on the East Coast and in the Gulf of Mexico, had its outside
legal counsel prepare a “white paper” for the Mid-Atlantic Council, in
which Omega did its very best to cast doubt on the value of forage fish
management, and stop the Council effort in its tracks.
Fortunately, the members of the Mid-Atlantic Council saw
through the smoke screen. Through Council meetings and public hearings,
through discussions in the press and in social media, they doggedly fought on to
keep the Mid-Atlantic’s food web intact.
Thanks to their efforts, we’re not going to have to endure
the sight of a big New England trawler, pushed off its traditional grounds by
the collapse of cod and other groundfish stocks, deploying fine-mesh midwater
trawls and scooping up tons of the sand eels that we need to support fisheries
for everything from fluke to bluefin tuna, and selling them to fish meal plants
for export to China.
Thanks to their efforts, the chub mackerel that have been so
important to Long Island’s bluefin tuna and shark fisheries this season will,
for the first time, be subject to real harvest restrictions, instead of being a
part of a growing free-for-all that has seen more
than 50 million pounds of completely unregulated landings hit the dock over the
past five years.
Thanks to their efforts, well, we just don’t know what harm
to the food web we won’t be seeing, as the Unmanaged Forage Fish Amendment
prevents the creation of unsustainable and ecologically unwise fisheries for
over 50 named species.
Yet the amendment is more than a closed and locked door that
forever prevents the creation of new and potentially valuable fisheries. Should someone want to move forward with a
forage fish fishery, and can get over the first hurdle of demonstrating that,
so far as scientists can tell, such fishery will not cause ecosystem damage, they
will be able to apply for an Exempted Fishery Permit from the National Marine
Fisheries Service, that will give them further opportunity to prove that the
contemplated fishery is sustainable. If
that fact can be proven to the satisfaction of NMFS, the fishery will be
allowed to move forward.
Thus, the amendment takes a balanced approach to the forage
fish issue, opting for precaution and protecting the ecological status quo in
the first instance, but allowing fisheries to be created if they are
demonstrably benign to the food web.
But the Unmanaged Forage Fish Amendment is important not
only for what it says on paper, which is substantial in its own right, but
about what it says about the mindset of Mid-Atlantic fisheries managers: That they are ready to move on from
traditional, one-size-fits-all single species management, and expand into the
new and more challenging world of managing fisheries on an ecosystem basis,
where the impacts on an entire network of life, rather than just commercially
and recreationally valued fish species, will be part of the management
equation.
That was confirmed later in the week, when the Council approved an Ecosystem
Approach to Fisheries Management Guidance Document, which defined such
approach by saying
“An ecosystem approach to fishery management recognizes the
biological, economic, social, and physical interactions among the components of
ecosystems and attempts to manage fisheries to achieve optimum yield taking
those interactions into account.”
The Guidance Document stated that the goal of an ecosystem
approach is
“To manage for ecologically sustainable utilization of living
marine resources while maintaining ecosystem productivity, structure, and
function,”
and defines “ecologically sustainable utilization” as
“utilization that accommodates the needs of present and
future generations, while maintaining the integrity, health and diversity of
the marine ecosystem.”
That’s a very big step forward.
Taken together, the forage fish amendment and ecosystem
approach guidance document represent a real watershed moment, and a lot to get
done in a single meeting. The annual
summer flounder, scup, black sea bass and bluefish specifications pale in
comparison, whatever they happen to be.
And once again, the members of the Mid-Atlantic Fishery
Management Council prove themselves to be leaders, who pioneer new paths that the rest of the coast ought to follow.
Charlie...
ReplyDeleteYou might want to double check the chub landings.
I am not sure it is 50 million pounds in the last 5 years.
Greg DiDomenico
Garden State Seafood Association
Greg--
DeleteSeems high to me, too, but that's straight from NMFS. 50 million in the 3 years between 2012-2014.
Go to public info document written by MAFMC staff. In one recent year we had 5 million and that was the highest in series.
ReplyDelete