Posts Tagged National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Feb 22 2012

Local Municipalities, Fishing Interests Intervene in Lawsuit to Protect Fishing in California

Groups Aim to Stop Extremist Lawsuit Seeking Drastic Cuts in Fishing Quotas

Monterey, Calif. – The California Wetfish Producers Association, a non-profit association promoting sustainable marine resources and fishing communities, announced today that it is working with a diverse group – including the City of Monterey and the Ventura Port District – to challenge a federal lawsuit by Oceana that would decimate California’s historic wetfish industry.

The group filed to intervene as defendants in the ongoing case by Earthjustice, representing Oceana, against the Secretary of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Marine Fisheries Service.

Oceana wants deep and unnecessary cutbacks in sardine fishing, as well as substantial harvest reductions in other “forage fish” fisheries, including herring, anchovies and squid – which are also already managed strictly and sustainably.

“Fishing for coastal pelagic species in California is under attack. Oceana has based this lawsuit on pseudo-scientific studies loaded with faulty calculations and conclusions, all to force federal regulators to massively curtail fishing limits, if not ban fishing outright,” said Diane. Pleschner-Steele, executive director of the California Wetfish Producers Association. 

“That’s why a diverse group representing cities and ports, as well as fishing families, including fishermen and seafood processors, has come together to help block this extremist lawsuit,” Pleschner-Steele continued. “In this tough economy, we can’t afford to destroy this historic fishing industry and the local economies in which it operates, especially when the action is not based on the best available science.”

Oceana’s lawsuit claims that sardines and other so-called forage species are being massively overfished. Ironically, California’s coastal pelagic fisheries have one of the lowest harvest rates in the world.  Further, fishery management in California and, the California Current Ecosystem is recognized as one of only a few areas worldwide deemed ‘sustainable’ by internationally recognized scientists, according to a 2009 Science magazine article, Rebuilding Global Fisheries, and other recent studies.

“Oceana’s lawsuit is baseless; California already has the most precautionary fishery management system in the world. If successful, this lawsuit would restrict our state’s fishermen unnecessarily, and unfairly, because virtually all the forage species listed are actively managed or monitored by the federal government as well as the state,” said Steve Scheiblauer, Monterey’s harbormaster.

The state and federal government established guidelines more than a decade ago for coastal pelagic species harvested in California and on the west coast, maintaining at least 75 percent of the fish in the ocean, far below the science standard set for other fisheries.

The sardine protection rate is even higher at close to 90 percent. In addition, California implemented a network of marine reserves in state waters through the Marine Life Protection Act.  Many reserves were established explicitly to protect forage for other marine life, including important bird rookery and haul out areas around Año Nuevo and the Farallon Islands, as well as the Channel Islands in Southern California. In addition, more than 30 percent of traditional squid harvest grounds are now closed in reserve.

“Oceana failed to get a bill passed in California’s state legislature last year, so now they are trying the federal courts to get their agenda implemented,” said Scheiblauer. “Legislators on both sides of the political aisle saw through the ill-crafted bill, AB 1299, and it died because legislators knew it would have unnecessarily decimated local coastal economies like Monterey.”

About California Wetfish Producers Association

The California Wetfish Producers Association strives for sustainable fishery resources, access, education and scientific research. Find more info at www.CaliforniaWetfish.org.

# # #

Feb 14 2012

Feds Approve Ban on Cruise Ship Sewage Discharge

“This is a great day for the California coast, which is far too precious a resource to be used as a dumping ground,” said Senator Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto). “This ‘No Discharge Zone’ – the largest in the nation – protects our coastal economy, our environment and our public health.”

Local beach off Crissy Field in San Francisco, CA. Courtesy of the U.S. EPA.

Written by Dan Bacher | Staff Writer

The federal government on February 9 approved a landmark California proposal banning the discharge of more than 22 million gallons of treated vessel sewage to shorelines and shallow marine waters in California every year, drawing praise from environmental and shipping industry groups alike.

U.S. EPA’s Pacific Southwest Regional Administrator Jared Blumenfeld signed a rule that will finalize EPA’s decision and approve a state proposal to ban all sewage discharges from large cruise ships and most other large ocean-going ships to state marine waters along California’s 1,624 mile coast from Mexico to Oregon and surrounding major islands.

The action established a new federal regulation banning even treated sewage from being discharged in California’s marine waters.

“This is an important step to protect California’s coastline,” said Governor Jerry Brown. “I want to commend the shipping industry, environmental groups and U.S. EPA for working with California to craft a common sense approach to keeping our coastal waters clean.”

“By approving California’s ‘No Discharge Zone,’ EPA will prohibit more than 20 million gallons of vessel sewage from entering the state’s coastal waters,” said Jared Blumenfeld. “Not only will this rule help protect important marine species, it also benefits the fishing industry, marine habitats and the millions of residents and tourists who visit California beaches each year.”

This action strengthens protection of California’s coastal waters from the adverse effects of sewage discharges from a growing number of large vessels, according to an announcement from the the U.S. EPA.

Read the rest of the story on Alternet.

 

Feb 4 2012

“King Tides” Illustrate Vulnerability of California Shoreline

King Tides in Pismo Beach, CA- Credit: Cassidy Teufel (9/24/11)

On Monday, some of the year’s highest tides will hit California shorelines, providing a glimpse of what the state can expect as sea levels rise in the coming years. These “king tides” – as the highest winter tides are called – will be captured by citizen imagery through the California King Tides Initiative.

The California Ocean Protection Council estimates more than one foot of sea level rise by 2050 and four to five feet by 2100 along the California coast. The initiative is getting the public involved by asking residents to photograph high tides in their neighborhood, highlighting the way homes, harbors, and other infrastructure, as well as beaches, wetlands, and public access to the coast may be affected by sea level rise in the future.

The final winter king tides well occur from Monday, February 6 through February 8. These February king tides mark the third of three winter king tides events, following earlier king tide events on January 20-22, 2012 and December 23-24, 2011.

Visit the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) website for tide charts with specific information about the timing and location of tide levels.

 

Where to view and photograph King Tides:

North Coast/Humboldt – Eureka: Woodley Island; Indian Island; Del Norte St. Pier; Halvorsen Park/The Adorni Center. Arcata Marsh and Wildlife Sanctuary. King Salmon Beach. New Navy Base Road in Manila/Samoa.

San Francisco Area Outer Coast: Ocean Beach; Stinson Beach; Pacifica: Beach Blvd. Sea Wall near the municipal pier; Laguna Salada. City of Capitola. City of Santa Cruz.

Inner SF Bay: Proposed Treasure Island development site. South Bay: Redwood Creek and proposed Redwood City dev. site, Dumbarton Bridge. Marin: Corte Madera, Richardson Bay, Gallinas Creek (North of China Camp).

Santa Barbara Area: Isla Vista beaches, Goleta Beach County Park, Leadbetter Beach, Butterfly Beach, Miramar Beach, Padaro Lane, Carpinteria Salt Marsh, Hobson State Beach, Faria, and Emma Wood State Beach.

Santa Monica: Broad Beach, Malibu shoreline homes, Marina del Rey, Port of Long Beach, Port of Los Angeles.

Orange County: Seal Beach/Sunset Beach Oceanfront (City of Seal Beach), Huntington Harbor (Huntington Beach), Newport Beach islands and peninsula (Newport Beach).

San Diego: San Diego Bay, Oceanside Beach, San Elijo Lagoon, Del Mar Dog Beach/San Dieguito Lagoon Entrance, Torrey Pines (where Penasquitos enters the ocean), La Jolla Shores, and Mission Beach.

 

Jan 31 2012

Fish, Mercury, and Nutrition: The Net Effects

Documentary
 
Are you getting the omega-3s you need for brain development and a healthy heart? The selenium for good immune response and brain function? The vitamin D and calcium for strong bones? If you eat ocean fish, you get these benefits. Do you need to worry about mercury?
 
Fish really is brain food! Fish, Mercury, and Nutrition: The Net Effects presents the many benefits of eating ocean fish and the risk of mercury exposure for the population with the most to gain (or lose): unborn and young children. Pregnant and nursing moms will learn why two ocean fish meals a week during the critical window of development can safely give their babies lifelong benefits. The rest of the population also benefits by including ocean fish in their healthy diets.
 
About the Documentary
 
Fish, Mercury, and Nutrition: The Net Effects is a production of Prairie Public Broadcasting, Fargo, North Dakota, in collaboration with the University of North Dakota’s Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC). Funding is provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Marine Fisheries Pacific Islands Regional Office and the members of Prairie Public.

 

Learn more about the documentary on EERC’s website.
 
Jan 9 2012

U.S. tightens fishing policy, setting 2012 catch limits for all managed species

New restrictions on U.S. fisheries. - Photo courtesy of NOAA.

By Juliet Eilperin | Enviromental Reporter

In an effort to sustain commercial and recreational fishing for the next several decades, the United States this year will become the first country to impose catch limits for every species it manages, from Alaskan pollock to Caribbean queen conch.

Although the policy has attracted scant attention outside the community of those who fish in America and the officials who regulate them, it marks an important shift in a pursuit that has helped define the country since its founding.

Unlike most recent environmental policy debates, which have divided neatly along party lines, this one is about a policy that was forged under President George W. Bush and finalized with President Obama’s backing.

“It’s something that’s arguably first in the world,” said Eric Schwaab, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s assistant administrator for fisheries. “It’s a huge accomplishment for the country.”

Five years ago, Bush signed a reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, which dates to the mid-1970s and governs all fishing in U.S. waters. A bipartisan coalition of lawmakers joined environmental groups, some fishing interests and scientists to insert language in the law requiring each fishery to have annual catch limits in place by the end of 2011 to end overfishing.

Although NOAA didn’t meet the law’s Dec. 31 deadline — it has finalized 40 of the 46 fishery management plans that cover all federally managed stocks — officials said they are confident that they will have annual catch limits in place by the time the 2012 fishing year begins for all species. (The timing varies depending on the fish, with some seasons starting May 1 or later.) Some fish, such as mahi-mahi and the prize game fish wahoo in the southeast Atlantic, will have catch limits for the first time.

 

Read the rest of the story on the Washington Post.

 

 

Dec 7 2011

House panel eyes Magnuson reform

By Richard Gaines 

The U.S. House Natural Resources Committee heard more than three hours of testimony Thursday on eight bills to reform federal fishery laws, with the chairman asserting his intention to modify the Magnuson-Stevens Act, a move sought by fishing industry leaders throughout the East and Gulf Coasts.

The plethora of bills to amend Magnuson — it does not require reauthorization for another five years — and a brief exchange between a Democratic member of the committee from New Jersey and the Republican chairman from Washington State demonstrated a shift toward action, at least in the House.

“We should schedule a vote,” said Congressman Frank Pallone, the New Jersey Democrat who has been at the vanguard of the movement to instill some statutory language in Magnuson that allows flexibility in rebuilding time lines. “I hope we can mark up these bills,” he added.

“My intentions are to deal with these bills,” was the response from Doc Hastings, the chairman.

The bills — including legislation by Reps. Barney Frank and William Keating, Massachusetts Democrats, Pallone and Republicans Walter Jones of North Carolina, Jon Runyon of New Jersey, Rob Wittman of Virginia — all “provide fertile ground for moving forward,” noted Rick Marks, a fishery scientist, industry lobbyist and former member of the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council.

Marks described the shared concern of flexibility advocates — that the 2006 reauthorization brought the nation “the Alaska model,” where the scale of the industry produces enough revenue to support stock surveys, acute technological monitoring, and scientifically based findings allowing confident calibrations of conservation and fishery yields.

The approach is “a good idea,” Marks testified, “provided the scientific capabilities of the Alaska region also applied.

“We all know they don’t,” he continued. “Instead, we ended up with a rigid implementation model resulting in precautionary buffers and lower yields at the expense of our industry and our nation.”

That problem was the rallying cry for the February 2010 outdoor gathering of up to 5,000 fishermen at the U.S. Capitol, which was organized by the New Jersey based Recreational Fishing Alliance.

The pending bills and Thursday’s hearing were seen as among the first tangible results from the 2010 rally — and they come with plans already afoot for a second “United We Fish” rally sometime next spring.

In his opening remarks Thursday, Hastings provided a similar analysis to Marks’.

Read the rest here.

Dec 1 2011

Fishermen, farming, mining groups decry ocean zoning

By Richard Gaines Staff Writer

A national alliance of fishing groups, including the Gloucester-based Northeast Seafood Coalition, and advocates for the nation’s farmers, ranchers, builders and miners have urged Congress to negate President Obama’s National Ocean Policy, rolled out in 2010 via executive order.

Fishing interests warn that the policy entails a kind of ocean zoning that threatens fishing industry jobs, while the land-based alliance expressed concern about executive overreach that might lead to decisions based on uncertain values and priorities, squelching business along inland waterways.

The White House has denied the policy is akin to ocean zoning, and, in two heated hearings by the House Natural Resources Committee this fall, Congressman Edward Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, has scoffed at the worries.

“Opposing ocean planning is like opposing air traffic control,” Markey argued at the second hearing on Nov. 7. He described the opposition as engaging in “scare tactics.”

But the Republican majority, led by the committee chairman, Congressman Doc Hastings of Washington, agreed with the ocean zoning characterization in sparring with Nancy Sutley, chairwoman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality, and NOAA Administrator Jane Lubchenco, who was representing the president.

Congressman Jon Runyon, a New Jersey Republican, said the top-down approach to the National Ocean Policy reminded him of the way that Lubchenco’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration introduced her catch share policy by top-down leverage.

“NOAA does not impose catch shares,” Lubchenco countered.

“I’ve never seen anybody dance around the answers like that, you never answer the questions,” Congressman Don Young, an Alaska Republican, told Lubchenco and Sutley.

Hastings said he doubted that the White House had the legal authority to introduce the National Ocean Policy by executive order.

Lubchenco also introduced catch shares — which has created a commodities market within fisheries and is widely blamed for accelerating job losses and fleet consolidation — without congressional input or approval in 2009.

“It’s a new fad bureaucracy, whether states want it or not,” said Hastings. “I’ve asked for the statutory authority, but I’ve only been given a hodgepodge list. They haven’t been concise. The Obama administration has decided that the president’s signature along is all that’s required.”

The National Ocean Policy involves new concepts, including marine spatial planning and ecosystem-based management, championed for years by Lubchenco.

Marine spatial planning’s closest terrestrial parallel is simple zoning. But, as White House officials told the Times last year, “instead of mapping it out,” nine regional advisory committees reporting to the National Ocean Council would attempt to work out how shipping, commercial and recreational fishing, recreation, aquaculture, mining and drilling and other uses might be fit together, if continued mining and drilling are allowed at all.

Read the rest of the story on the Gloucestor Times.

Oct 24 2011

Growing chorus against catch shares

'U.S. Capital' photo (c) 2009, chucka_nc - license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/

Written by
John Oswald | Staff Writer

A number of U.S. legislators are voicing their growing displeasure with NOAA’s catch shares program by asking the federal government to abandon the controversial fisheries management measure.

Simply, catch share programs take the total allowable catch for a fishery and divide it up into shares which are then bought by individuals, associations, communities or corporations. A main concern among those raising the cry against catch shares is that the policy consolidates the fishery in the hands of a few large operations to the detriment of individual fishermen.

On Oct. 6, Congressman John Runyan (R-NJ) sent a letter to President Obama urging him to reconsider the use of catch share programs for commercial and recreational fishermen. In his letter, which was also signed by Representatives Frank LoBiondo (R-NJ), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), Frank Guinta (R-NH), and Sandy Adams (R-FL), Runyan wrote,

“Excessive government regulations have played a large role in our continued economic crisis. One of these excessive regulations is the catch share programs for fishermen. These programs have proven to decrease the number of fishing boats, which can have long lasting unintended economic consequences, including the loss of jobs in the fishing industry.”

Less than a week later, U.S. Senators Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) and Scott Brown (R-MA) introduced the Saving Fishing Jobs Act of 2011 which would require, among other things, that the Secretary of Commerce terminate new and existing catch share programs that result in a 15 percent or more reduction in the total number of fishermen in the program.

“Catch share programs are driving New Hampshire’s fishermen out of business. Five months after federal catch shares were implemented in New England, 55 out of the initial 500 boats in the fishery controlled 61 percent of the revenue, and 253 of the boats were sitting at the dock, unable to fish without quota,” Sen. Ayotte said.

And as recently as Wednesday, an article in the Gloucester Times of Gloucester, Mass, reports that Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) has requested that NOAA administrator, Dr. Jane Lubchenco, declare the catch shares program a disaster.

Read the rest here.

Sep 8 2011

NOAA Fisheries Releases 2010 Fisheries of the U.S. Report

Today, NOAA Fisheries released its Fisheries of the United States 2010 report.

Fisheries of the U.S. is an annual snapshot of the landings and value of U.S. fisheries. This year it contains some good news – landings were up and the value of those landings was up. U.S. commercial fishermen landed 8.2 billion pounds of seafood valued at $4.5 billion in 2010, an increase of 200 million pounds over 2009 and an increase in value of more than $600 million from 2009.

Today’s report also highlights the top U.S. ports including our leader for the 22nd consecutive year, the Alaska port of Dutch Harbor-Unalaska.  And, for the 11th consecutive year, New Bedford, Mass., had the highest valued catch, due in large part to the sea scallop fishery.

Another aspect of the report is seafood consumption. In 2010, the average American ate 15.8 pounds of fish and shellfish, a slight decline from the 2009 figure of 16 pounds.  On a global scale, the U.S. continues to be third-ranked for consuming fish and shellfish, behind China and Japan.  Imported seafood continues to increase to help fill consumer demand – about 86 percent of the seafood consumed in the U.S. was imported from overseas.

As Eric Schwaab, NOAA Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, said in our announcement today:

These increases in fish landings and value are good news for our nation’s fishermen and for fishing communities, where jobs depend on healthy fish stocks. We know fishermen are making sacrifices now to rebuild fish populations, and these efforts, combined with good science and management, support sustainable jobs for Americans.

Read the full report online.

Aug 26 2011

Department of Commerce submits plan to comply with Obama regulatory review

The Department of Commerce has submitted its plan to comply with President Obama’s Executive Order 13563, “Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review”.   The General Counsel of the Department of Commerce, Cameron Kerry, will be responsible for overseeing execution of the retrospective analysis laid out in the Plan.

According to the plan:

Many of NOAA’s statutory mandates emphasize the need to base decisions on best scientific information available and require periodic review of regulatory actions. In addition, many of NOAA’s activities require analyses under the National Environmental Policy Act. The Council on Environmental Quality has indicated that environmental impact statements that are more than 5 years old should be carefully reexamined to determine if supplementary analyses are required per 40 C.F.R. § 1502.9 of the CEQ regulations. Seehttp://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/40/40p3.htm (explaining need for supplements to old EIS at question # 32 of “NEPA’s Forty Most Asked Questions”).

NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) intends to reinforce the existing culture of retrospective analysis through increased outreach to the Regional Fishery Management Councils that develop fishery management plans pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The Councils’ fishery management planning process entails significant public participation and opportunities for soliciting thoughts on needed modifications to or repeal of regulatory actions. NMFS has begun, and will continue, to coordinate with the councils, emphasizing the need for scrutiny of proposed and existing regulations consistent with Executive Order 13563, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other relevant laws, and the need to make fisheries management regulations simpler and easier to follow. NMFS intends to encourage such scrutiny of regulatory actions through its meetings with the Council Coordination Committee and during meetings of the councils and their subcommittees.

As part of the agency’s Catch Share Policy, NOAA has provided further guidance to the Councils regarding periodic review of all limited access privilege programs pursuant to 16 U.S.C. § 1853a(c)(1)(G). Specifically, the agency directs that Councils should periodically review all catch share and non-catch share programs to ensure that management goals are specified, measurable, tracked, and used to gauge whether a program is meeting its goals and objectives. The policy reinforces NOAA’s commitment to working with Councils, stakeholders, the Department of Commerce, the Office of Management and Budget, and Congress in improving and monitoring useful and relevant performance metrics for all U.S. fishery management policies, not just catch share programs.

Additional plan sections referenceing NMFS include:

NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Regional Fishery Management Councils established under the Magnuson-Stevens Act have ongoing engagement with constituents and other members of the public on fishery management actions. NMFS and the Councils receive continual feedback on concerns regarding regulations, guidance documents, information collections, and other agency activities. Since publication of the notice, NMFS has used outreach and communication opportunities, as they have arisen, to alert members of the public to the notice and to encourage people to provide feedback.

The vast majority of NOAA’s significant regulations involve marine fishery and protected resources issues. These regulations are subject to change frequently as a result of new information and also pursuant to statutory requirements.

NOAA is currently undertaking the following actions to review its rulemaking, in many cases to streamline and reduce requirements:

Read the rest on SavingSeaFood.com or the complete document here.