NMFS
set to impose ‘most restrictive set of
regulations’ By
Edward Wolfe
Coquille,
Oregon - 8/22/02 -The National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) told area fishermen
last Thursday that, in order to rebuild
groundfish populations, it is planning to
implement in 2003 what its documents term
“the most restrictive set of regulations in
the history of the fishery.”
Heather Munro of Oregon Sea Grant said
that recent regulations on fishing have hit
deep and they’re “going to hit deeper.”
She described changes the fishing industry is
going through as “fundamental and
permanent.”
Members of NMFS, Oregon Department of
Fish and Wildlife, and other fishery
management agencies met in the North Bend
Library with local fishermen and community
leaders to discuss upcoming regulations that
will severely reduce groundfish harvest
levels. Although Munro said that input from
local fishermen could affect the level of
restrictions, she also said fishing management
is moving ahead with the data they currently
have. She and others also admitted that the
data they have is not very good.
After surveying various stock levels
for several years, scientists have made
educated guesses about which fish species are
suffering from reduced numbers. Based on this
data which Ralph Brown, a member of the
Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC),
admits is “faulty,” they’ve nevertheless
recommended drastic cuts to the industry.
All options under consideration include
large-scale closures of both commercial and
recreational fishing. Fishing for species with
high populations will be affected by
regulations to protect species with low
populations. Bottom-fishing for groundfish
(and possibly other species) will probably be
prohibited across most of the continental
shelf.
The harvest reductions are not just for
the near future. To “rebuild key stocks”
of certain groundfish, NMFS and the PFMC say
fishing would have to be drastically reduced
for the next 15 to 136 years.
NMFS describes the groundfish fishery
as being in a crisis. According to an NMFS
“questions and answers” handout, the
crisis was caused by the following factors: •
Inadequate understanding of fish
stocks’ health •
Too many boats chasing too few fish •
Steady declines in amounts of
groundfish •
Failure of groundfish to replace
themselves •
Overfishing •
Magnuson-Stevens Act requirements.
The restrictions being imposed by NMFS
are based on data NMFS Groundfish Senior
Policy Analyst Steve Copp called
“inadequate.” Senator Ted Kulongoski told
The Newport News-Times that “it’s clear we
need much more better research.”
Fishery management representatives
presented possible restrictions in two
categories: least conservative and most
conservative. One drag fisherman told The
Sentinel that if the most conservative
restrictions are enforced, he and 99 percent
of the fishermen he’s talked to will be out
of business. Oregon Sea Grant has a program
that can assist displaced fishermen with job
retraining if they are unable to continue
fishing with the new regulations.
Other possibilities offered to the
ground fishermen was to acquire permits and
equipment necessary to harvest other fish that
aren’t classified as overfished, or to do
their fishing in deep water outside of the
fathoms covered by the coming restrictions.
That option involves extra expenses, different
equipment and no guarantee of being able to
catch the fish normally caught in shallower
depths.
If a fisher acquires a permit to
harvest a different species of fish, his
troubles may not end there. Also addressed by
the fishery management is the matter of
“bi-catch.” That refers to catching more
than one type of fish at a time. If a
fisherman hauls in a load of fish that
aren’t under regulation, he must also ensure
that no restricted fish are in the catch. If
there are restricted fish on board, he must
throw them back or pay fines upon returning to
the dock.
Some fishermen urged the regulators to
change the daily quota regulations so that if
they catch more than their quota in a single
day, they can apply them toward an annual
quota. Currently, fish over the quota must be
returned to the water, even though by the time
that happens, they are dead. If the fishermen
were given an annual quota, they could
complete their year’s worth of fishing
sooner rather than throwing dead fish back in
the water to satisfy a “regulatory
discard” rule. Munro responded that
individual quotas are not permitted under the
law and an annual quota would be considered an
individual quota.
NMFS is required by various laws,
including The Magnuson-Stevens Act, to
consider the economic impact their regulations
will have on fisheries and coastal
communities, but they are not permitted to
fail in their obligation to the fish for the
sake of mitigating economic impact. There is
currently no time frame for how long the
severe restrictions on groundfishing will be
in place. According to the Fishery Management
Q & A document, “significant depth-based
fishing restrictions will continue for some
time in the future.”
Brown said that if these overfished
species were endangered, fishers would be
permitted to catch more than they will be now
without such classification. He said
regulations in response to overfishing are
“tougher than Endangered Species Act
regulations.”
Asked if the yelloweye rockfish might
be to the fisheries what the spotted owl has
been to the forestry, Brown said it’s
“much worse than the spotted owl.” In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. [Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml]
|