Page 10. MAINE COASTAL NEWS November 2011


Commercial Fishing News NEW ENGLAND GROUNDFISH MANAGEMENT TESTIMONY


Continued from Page 1.


region with the most number of overfished species as of this summer, stands to gain significantly as overfishing ends and fisher- ies are rebuilt. A prime example of the benefits of rebuilding is seen in the New England sea scallop fishery, where revenues increased five-fold as the fishery rebuilt, from $44 mil- lion in 1998 to $265 million in 2010, making New Bedford the largest port by value every year since 2000.


To get the New England groundfish fish- ery back on track, I embraced new manage- ment decisions made by the Council, and I provided resources to speed up the transi- tion to a fishery with a more sustainable future. I did this because I realized the seri- ousness of the dire economic situation in New England and because the days-at-sea system was not helping the fish or the fisher- men. While there are improvements to be made in the sector system and fishermen are still struggling, glimmers of hope are now finally emerging in the fishery after decades of problems. We don’t want to return to the past, so we must work together to continue the recent progress we’ve seen, address the imperfections of the new system and get this fishery back in the black. The progress we’ve made is due directly to the active engagement of fishermen from throughout the region and our intense efforts to reverse our trajectory. Although we still have much more work to do, I believe we are turning the corner. I want to empower fishermen to chart their course. We will do that by simplifying regulations, giving fishermen more control over their operations, and working with them on management. For decades, the New En- gland groundfish fishery underperformed both ecologically and economically with not enough fish to support good fishing jobs. The 2006 Magnuson-Stevens Act reauthori- zation put into motion two important changes. First, it set annual catch limits to end overfishing and to rebuild stocks. Second, the Council worked with NOAA to put new rules in place to give fishermen increased flexibility in how they operate their busi- nesses.


How are we doing after one year with new catch limits and with the expanded sector management program? We see both signs of progress and continued room for improve- ment.


Signs of progress:


We are finally on track to end overfish- ing. For the first time ever, we have catch limits and accountability measures in place and clear ability to track progress. In 2010, fishermen fished within the limits for 18 of the 20 stocks. This is excellent news. Stocks are being rebuilt and therefore catch limits are up. Due to the rebuilding progress already underway, in the 2011 fish- ing year, catch levels have gone up for 12 of the 20 groundfish stocks, which is another indication the Magnuson-Stevens Act and associated management measures are work- ing to improve the status of the stocks and the economics of the fishery.


Fishermen are fishing more selectively which benefits their bottom line and avoids depleting already low stocks. Despite lower catch limits for many stocks, under sector management fishermen were able to fish smarter by more effectively avoiding weaker stocks and by capturing a higher percentage of the allowable catch. Fishermen and sector managers have reported to us how incentives have changed under this cooperative man- agement approach. They have noted they have the ability to spend more time offshore, seeking high abundance stocks and avoid- ing bycatch of weaker stocks. Sectors free


fishermen from limitations of days at sea management conditions.


We have a better accounting for and less waste of bycatch. Fishermen captured more high-valued species and kept more of the fish that had historically been thrown overboard. For example, only nine percent of Georges Bank yellowtail flounder total catch was dis- carded in 2010 compared to 31 percent in 2009. Adhering to catch limits and reducing dis- cards will hasten rebuilding, yielding in- creased quotas more quickly.


New England fishermen are beginning to realize new entrepreneurial opportunities under sector management. Here are three examples: (A) A group of small-boat fisher- men in Rhode Island has started a new busi- ness to market their fish directly to local restaurants as ‘boat to table.’ (B) Another new company helps fishermen match their supply to consumers’ demands across New England. (C) Fishermen in Port Clyde are making the most out of their catch through a Community Supported Fishery program. This program is similar to the Cape Ann Fresh Catch program started by the Gloucester Fishermen’s Wives Association and sup- ported by NOAA Sea Grant. Customers give the fishing community financial support in advance of the season, and in turn the fish- ermen provide a weekly share of seafood during the harvesting season. This innova- tive marketing program is leading to higher quality fish and higher profits. In each case, the sector program provided fishermen with the flexibility to be entrepreneurial and inno- vative, and to control the destiny of their small businesses. In each case, fishermen have been freed from overly burdensome regulations, and they can fish more safely. Revenues are up for some but not all fishermen. For example, the average New England groundfish fisherman earned 16 percent more per pound this year than last. Revenues for groundfishermen from Port- land, Maine, were up by 25 percent. For those with a homeport in New Bedford, the increase was over 20 percent. These initial numbers are encouraging, but we need the full balance sheet reflecting revenues and costs and par- ticularly changes in number of boats to know the full story, and we’ll have that information in the near future. Challenges Remaining:


Not all fishermen are reaping these ben- efits. While we have some promising prelimi- nary economic information about the first year of the program in New England (above and Attachment B), overall statistics can mask the trouble that some fishermen are facing. Some fishermen appear to be having a tough time making the transition to sectors. I want to understand why some sectors seem to be working well while others do not and identify corrective actions. And I want to work with those in Congress and in coastal communities who want to help improve the system for all fishermen, including small boat fishermen.


Some fishermen continue to distrust the scientific information used to set limits. Moreover, more frequent assessments for some stocks would be desirable. And, we are requesting additional resources for stock assessments in our FY 2012 budget. Costs of implementing the sector pro- gram remain a challenge.


Faster adjustments in response to changing status of stocks and more nimble ability to implement innovations are needed. Better communication among NOAA, fishermen and the Council is desirable. Improved understanding of and respon- siveness to economic challenges faced by fishermen is needed.


In the next section, I lay out a number of specific actions NOAA is advancing to help


with these and other implementation prob- lems.


Responsive actions underway. After learning about problems in NOAA’s opera- tions in the region, I have overseen a top-to- bottom overhaul of our work in the region, including in the areas of enforcement, sci- ence, management and engagement. In one of our first steps, Eric Schwaab, our Assistant Administrator for fisheries, took the initiative to set up a comprehensive, independent review of management in the region; that review provides some excellent suggestions that we are now pursuing. Our overhaul is still underway and is bringing long-overdue change. We have also commit- ted to seeking industry and regional input as we work to fill the Northeast Regional Admin- istrator and Northeast Science Center Direc- tor positions.


The Management Review, conducted by an independent firm, provided a regional analysis and management review of the fish- ery management process in New England, focusing on the relationships among the New England Fishery Management Council, the Northeast Regional Office, and the Northeast Fisheries Science Center. The review exam- ined how effective those three entities are at carrying out their responsibilities under the Magnuson-Stevens Act. This review in- cluded nearly 200 independent interviews with stakeholders across the region. In April, NOAA released the results and at my direc- tion, immediately began taking actions to address management, science, and commu- nications issues identified in the review. In tackling the multiple issues identified in the report, NOAA Fisheries began with those changes that would bring the greatest benefit: (1) simplify governance; (2) simplify communications; (3) improve science col- laboration; and (4) maximize overall collabo- ration. Because many of these changes re- quire Council action, NOAA Fisheries is working closely with the New England Fish- ery Management Council on many of these efforts. At its meeting on September 26, 2011, the Council and the agency reported on progress to date, including:


Fast tracking a mid-term review of the current five-year research strategic plan for cooperative research to ensure it is respon- sive to industry, management, and scientific priorities. Our Cooperative Research Pro- gram is wrapping up a series of outreach meetings with fishermen and scientists to gather input to refine its research strategic plan through 2014.


Overhauling our data collection and management system. We have initiated a review and analysis of the regional data sys- tems to better integrate them and improve efficiencies. NOAA’s Satellite and Informa- tion Services staff, which has conducted similar work in the past, has begun this re- view.


Developing new operating agreements. We are working on new agreements with the New England and Mid-Atlantic Councils to clarify roles and responsibilities, strengthen collaboration, simplify the governance struc- ture and process, and highlight opportuni- ties for public input.


Launching a “plain language” cam- paign; we are striving to make all of our written documents more clear and concise. Establishing a single Communications Team in our regional office — representing the region, the center and the Office of Law Enforcement — to simplify and strengthen our outreach and collaboration efforts and streamline and improve our external commu- nications. We host regular meetings with sector managers to identify and resolve is- sues related to sector management, provide information, and get feedback from the fish-


ing industry.


Hiring a former commercial fisherman in New England to serve as our first formal compliance liaison in the country. He is work- ing directly with the fishing industry in a non- enforcement capacity to improve communi- cations and ensure all can comply with needed conservation measures.


Developing a revised approach for pro- ducing stock assessments that we will begin transitioning to in 2013. The intent of this new approach is to provide managers the informa- tion to adjust annual or biennial catch limits in response to changing stock conditions, so industry can take quicker advantage of healthy stocks and not overfish newly de- pleted stocks.


Future actions. Even with the significant progress made, we have much work ahead and are open to any good ideas about how to make progress with the fishery and our effec- tiveness. I appreciate the suggestions of- fered by the July 26 letter from the New England Delegation, and intend to pursue aggressively the following actions: 1. Develop more cost-effective observer and monitoring approaches, and a cost-tran- sition plan that recognizes chronic economic challenges facing many segments of the in- dustry. We understand that adaptation to any new management system is challenging, and the timing of sector implementation in conjunction with the requirement to set an- nual catch limits to end overfishing created an even more difficult transition. In recogni- tion of the hurdles faced by the fishery asso- ciated with that transition, in fiscal years 2009 and 2010, NOAA invested over $47 million to assist in many ways, including to offset start- up costs of groundfish sectors, conduct at- sea research with industry, and develop per- mit banks.


In addition, recently, NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) re-evalu- ated the effectiveness of the dockside moni- toring program, made a timely adjustment to the requirements, and redirected funding for that program to make approximately $1 million in additional funds available directly to sec- tors to support their operations. While monitoring is critical to the sector management program’s success, I recognize that at-sea monitoring costs are difficult for the fishing industry to assume and I share your desire to reduce these costs; NOAA is working to do so. NOAA is also working with the fishing industry to improve the utility of new monitoring tools beyond at-sea monitor- ing, such as electronic catch monitoring, which could reduce overall monitoring costs to the industry. Pilot programs are currently underway to test the effectiveness of these techniques. Following these pilots, we will work with the Council, sector managers, and stakeholders to more broadly implement elec- tronic catch monitoring technology, and I am committed to nationwide efforts that will re- duce the economic burdens associated with monitoring costs.


2. Evaluate input controls and provide access to unused quota. Following the 2010 fishing year, two particular issues arose that require agency and Council attention. Earlier this summer, we asked the Council to con- sider action to raise the 10 percent unused quota carryover provision. Additionally, the Council is considering the continued merits of groundfish closed areas through an Es- sential Fish Habitat amendment process. We have and will continue to advocate that the Council give priority to both issues. Underutilization of available catch is an on-going challenge in the groundfish fish- ery. The fishery has under-harvested avail- able quotas for a number of species over the


Continued on Page 20.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32