Hundreds of fishermen, conservationists, managers, and ocean experts from around the country are gathered in Washington, D.C., May 7-9 for a summit hosted by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the regional fishery councils. The conference, Managing Our Nation’s Fisheries 3, will provide a rare opportunity for stakeholders to discuss an array of fisheries issues facing our nation. My hope is that this discussion will build on past achievements and identify new ways to better meet remaining and future challenges.

The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the bedrock law governing U.S. fisheries, is up for debate and amendment in Congress. This conference will formally launch the reauthorization discussion.

In the 1960′s and 1970′s, fishing by large foreign vessels in U.S. waters brought many valuable commercial species to the brink of collapse. The Act’s passage in 1976 pushed out the foreign fleet, promoted the U.S fleet, and put the nation’s ocean fish populations under U.S. control. This was strong progress. Unfortunately, domestic overfishing soon replaced the overexploitation by foreign vessels. Along with this came damage to ocean ecosystems from indiscriminate industrial fishing practices. So Congress strengthened the law in 1996 by calling for an end to overfishing, the restoration of depleted fish populations, the protection of important fish habitats, and the minimization of the catching and killing of nontarget ocean wildlife. Regrettably, overfishing remained a particular problem, which Congress addressed by amending the act again in 2006.

After decades of hard work and innovation, the United States now boasts one of the best fisheries management systems in the world: with science-based catch limits designed to end overfishing on all federally managed species and 32 previously depleted species rebuilt to healthy levels since 2001. These hard-won successes are profiled in Pew’s new report, “The Law That’s Saving American Fisheries: The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.”

Fishing for shad on the Potomac River at Fletcher’s Boathouse is a spring tradition for many Washington-area anglers.

While we have made significant progress protecting and restoring individual species over the past two decades, there’s still much work to be done. As far back as 1996, Congress recognized that ending overfishing was just the beginning of sustainable fisheries management and it added amendments to Magnuson-Stevens to address the cumulative effects of fishing on marine ecosystems. We now need to do more to ensure healthy oceans by protecting essential forage fish, small prey species that our valuable fish populations rely upon and by reducing the effects of destructive fishing practices on habitats. Finally, we need to rethink how we broadly manage our oceans, in order to minimize the effects of individual decisions on the ecosystem. Doing so can help safeguard our gains while allowing us to handle new global threats to our oceans, including warming waters and ocean acidification.

Embracing ecosystem-based fisheries management can even help ensure that once again shad will migrate by the thousands up the Potomac to provide fishing opportunities for anglers like me and food for other fish and wildlife.

This summer, the Obama Administration is expected to issue new bluefin tuna regulations for U.S. fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the agency responsible for fisheries management, should seize this opportunity to protect bluefin tuna from dying needlessly on surface longlines.

This wasteful fishing gear stretches for 30 miles on average — a length equal to 528 football fields, dangling hundreds of baited hooks. Surface longlines are used to catch yellowfin tuna and swordfish, but they catch and kill bluefin and approximately 80 other species of ocean wildlife. Most of these animals are thrown overboard, dead or dying. Because the Gulf of Mexico is the only known spawning area for western Atlantic bluefin, NOAA’s proposed regulations should prohibit the use of surface longlines in the Gulf and encourage more selective alternative fishing gear.

The American Bluefin Tuna Association is a diverse organization made up of commercial, charter, and recreational fishermen, shoreside businesses, fish buyers, and many others from Maine to Florida involved in the U.S. bluefin fishery. The International Game Fish Association is a not-for-profit recreational fishing organization committed to the conservation of game fish and the promotion of responsible, ethical angling practices through science, education, rule-making, and record keeping. Thanks to this important opportunity presented by the proposed bluefin regulations, we have come together to work toward a common goal.

The regulations proposed by NOAA could drastically reduce the unintentional catch of bluefin tuna and protect its spawning ground. This will lead to a healthier bluefin population and will benefit coastal communities that fish for the species using selective methods.

We’re hopeful this partnership of fishermen and environmentalists will clearly illustrate to NOAA officials just how important bluefin tuna is to us all. By working together to end the waste of this remarkable fish, we can ensure a brighter future for this species and the fishermen who depend on it.

When it comes to predicting the number of adult salmon that will surge into inland rivers, though, scientists have consistently stressed one factor: the amount of food available for these fish in the ocean.

Salmon depend on abundant populations of small schooling forage fish—including sardines, anchovies, and herring. These oil-rich fish eat tiny plants and animals drifting near the ocean’s surface, in the process forming large “bait balls” of nourishment. These are then devoured by bigger fish such as salmon, and by marine wildlife ranging from seabirds to seals, whales, and sharks.

If we want to maintain a vibrant and productive ecosystem, it makes sense to leave enough food in the water for other animals in the food web to consume. A new study by scientists at Oregon State University and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration suggests that abundant prey in the ocean is the most reliable predictor of the number of adult salmon that return to spawn in the Columbia River and its tributaries.

This research bolsters the view of members of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NPCC), a four-state regional organization with a unique charter to balance the Northwest’s environment and energy needs by developing and maintaining a regional power plan and a fish and wildlife program.

The NPCC noted that electric ratepayers spend $250 million a year to offset the damage to salmon habitat caused by federal hydroelectric dams. In a rare letter to the Pacific Fishery Management Council in November 2012, the group cited its own independent scientific analysis, which revealed that the presence of forage fish in the Columbia’s estuary and plume is “exceptionally important” in determining the proportion of juvenile salmon and steelhead trout that will return to the river as spawning adults. The group urged fishery managers to follow through on the goal they established last June to prohibit unregulated fisheries on forage fish.

A new report from Pew’s ocean science division underscores the importance of forage fish on the West Coast. The analysis found that these baitfish tend to be much more valuable as prey than as catch in ecosystems such as the California Current, where nutrients pulled from ocean depths fuel the growth of phytoplankton (microscopic plants) at the surface. Forage fish swarm to these blooms of life, helping to convert the sun’s energy into food for salmon and other fish and wildlife.

Fortunately, the Pacific Fishery Management Council recognizes the unique ecological role of forage fish in its newly proposed Fishery Ecosystem Plan. The first concrete initiative under the plan would extend management protection to forage species—such as saury, sand lance, and certain kinds of smelts—that Pacific Coast fisheries haven’t yet targeted.

The council is wise to encourage precaution. We know these and other unmanaged species are an important food source for fish and wildlife along the West Coast, and that these same species are already subjected to large-scale fishing pressure elsewhere around the world.

About 90 percent of the forage fish caught worldwide is turned into products such as animal feeds and nutritional supplements. Prices of fishmeal and fish oil have increased substantially over the past year, raising the prospect of new forage fisheries developing even before the science is in place to evaluate the effect on dependent predators such as Columbia River spring chinook.

King salmon trace a remarkable life’s journey. As juveniles they emerge from the gravelly bottoms of mountain streams. Then they migrate to the ocean and live there for three to five years before returning to their native waters as spawning adults. It’s hard to imagine an animal so tightly entwined in Pacific Coast history, economics, and culture as salmon coursing through the Columbia River basin.

This spring, as fishermen converge on the rivers and seafood lovers throng the salmon displays at local grocery stores, it’s worth remembering the little fish that make it all possible.

Recent scientific studies estimate that cod populations are at or near record lows. But this serious problem has not stopped the New England Fishery Management Council from proposing to end protection of their waters off the New England coast, a move that will make it even harder for cod—a fish that helped build the region’s economy—to recover.

It is difficult to overstate the importance of cod to New England. America’s oldest fishing ports grew and thrived because of once-abundant schools of the species. “The sacred cod”—a wooden carving—hangs in the Massachusetts statehouse. And, of course, there is the famous cape named for the fish.

But Cape Cod fishermen have largely given up on their home’s namesake. Cod averaged more than $3 per pound at auction for much of 2012—a very high price. But the catch from nearby Georges Bank has been so paltry that fishermen barely landed one-third of their allotted quota.

Why are cod and many other species of groundfish, or bottom dwellers, struggling to recover? Decades of heavy fishing depleted their numbers and damaged the ocean ecosystem. These fish now face additional challenges from climate change as New England waters hit record high temperatures in 2012.

At the last meeting of the council in late January, grim reality set in among officials. “We’re just headed toward oblivion,” John Bullard, regional fisheries administrator for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, said in reference to the scarcity of cod. “We have to change course.”

Despite considerable pressure from the seafood industry and its allies in Congress to allow overfishing to continue, the council held firm and approved painful but necessary cuts in the catch limits. These new limits for cod and other important groundfish are supported by the best science, and they follow the proven path for rebuilding fish populations as laid out in the nation’s primary fishery law.

While the catch limits are an important step in the right direction, other proposals approved by the council risk further harm to an already battered ocean ecosystem. For most of the past two decades, New England’s groundfish benefited from a network of areas closed to most bottom trawling and dragging. Created after fish populations crashed in the 1990s, these areas cover more than 8,000 square miles, sheltering spawning and juvenile fish, and allowing seabed habitats to recover from decades of damage. These protections played an important role in the recovery of some species, including scallops. Scallops now make New Bedford, Massachusetts the nation’s richest fishing port.

Yet, in a move advocated by the owners of large vessels in the New England fleet, the council passed a measure that will end protection for more than half these areas. Roughly 5,000 square miles—the size of Connecticut—could be open to bottom trawling.

Learn More: Explore an interactive map at www.pewenevironment.org

Author and noted marine biologist Callum Roberts recently wrote that opening the protected zones will be disastrous because a “linchpin of fishery recovery” could be “wiped out in less than a season’s fishing.”

The council’s proposal to open these protected areas to bottom fishing now rests with officials at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Their decision will test their commitment to truly set a new course for one of America’s most storied fish—and one of its most historic fishing grounds.

Along with subsequent reforms to the act, the legislation spurred many years of hard work by NOAA and advocates for sustainable fishing. The United States is now on the path to end overfishing and rebuild long-depleted species.

NOAA Photo: Karen Roeder

 
Already, 2013 is shaping up to be an important year for the health of our nations’ fisheries. NOAA recently concluded a public comment period on a wide range of policy issues that could determine the future course of U.S. fisheries management. We may see new proposed rules within the next six months.

Some of these proposals would take us backward, with costly new delays and exemptions that could allow overfishing and reverse conservation gains. Other proposals offer an opportunity to improve the health of our oceans, by managing our fisheries as part of the larger ecosystem. This holistic approach — often called “ecosystem-based fisheries management” — looks beyond the health of individual species to also consider the food and habitat they rely upon. More than 46,000 public comments urged NOAA to advance conservation reforms such as limiting catch levels for important prey species to help ensure healthy populations of large predatory fish.

“Ecosystem-based fisheries management” may sound wonky, but it is not a new idea. In 1871, the head of the newly established U.S. Commission of Fish and Fisheries (the precursor to today’s fisheries service), Spencer Fullerton Baird, launched some of the nation’s first marine ecology studies. Baird recognized that studying only single species “would not be complete without a thorough knowledge of their associates in the sea, especially of such as prey upon them or constitute their food.” He urged federal officials to consider the complex connections between fish and the ocean environment.

NOAA has come a long way over the past 140 years. In 2012, it achieved a historic milestone by establishing science-based catch limits to end and prevent overfishing on all ocean fish species managed by the regional fishery councils. It has also made great strides in rebuilding depleted fish populations such as mid-Atlantic summer flounder, Pacific lingcod and Atlantic scallops.

As the agency looks to the future, it should not revert to the failed policies (as described in my earlier posts) that shortchanged the long-term health of our oceans and left us a legacy of overfishing,

NOAA should heed the thousands of citizens who have asked it to move forward to manage fish comprehensively by protecting the habitats they depend on and the food they eat. This is an invaluable opportunity to apply the ecosystem-based approach that Baird envisioned almost 150 years ago to manage and conserve fish in the 21st century.

After many fish populations collapsed in the early 1990s, large sections of New England waters were closed to bottom trawling. This wise move protected seafloor habitat and provided safe places for spawning and for young fish to survive to maturity. Now the New England Fishery Management Council wants to open more than half of these sheltered zones to commercial fishing. This is an area roughly the size of Connecticut. The proposal would allow bottom trawling and other destructive fishing methods that damage seafloor habitat. Opening these areas is a significant ecological risk—with no guarantee of long-term economic benefit for our coastal communities.

Fish shelter among rich kelp habitat in the Cashes Ledge protected area. Large parts of Cashes Ledge are now at risk.

Populations of cod and other important species are still recovering from the lingering effects of decades of overfishing, and they face additional challenges as warmer water disrupts distribution patterns that evolved over the ages. Allowing new habitat destruction could deplete New England’s fish population to a level where it is no longer commercially viable. This is exactly what happened in Canada’s Atlantic waters in the 1990s.

Marine scientists are not alone in their opposition to the council’s proposal. Many small-boat fishermen and recreational anglers also oppose the change. They believe—with good reason—that the operators of larger boats with bottom dragging gear are most likely to benefit, while some smaller vessels may be displaced. The captains of smaller vessels are the ones bearing the brunt of the fishing industry’s economic crisis. There is strong evidence that the protected areas support long-term recovery of New England’s groundfish populations. Peer-reviewed science demonstrates that fish move from closed areas into surrounding waters. Many vessel operators take advantage of this pattern of movement by operating around the edges of the closed areas.

One study found that 25 percent of all New England fishing trips targeting groundfish occurred within three miles of a closed area. Average revenue for those trips was twice as high as elsewhere. Studies also show that some fish are larger and more abundant inside the closed areas. This gives cod and other species protected from trawling an advantage: larger and older fish can reproduce more easily and help rebuild depleted populations. That means closed areas are an investment that pays dividends. Exploiting these areas is akin to spending the principal rather than the interest. Before long your funds are gone.

The council’s proposal is shortsighted and skirts requirements for full public participation and study of the environmental impact. Major changes to the management of public resources – and that is exactly what the council is proposing—demand transparency and accountability. I am confident that once people are aware of what’s at stake they will recognize what many scientists and fishermen already know: these protected areas work. Removing them now could undermine the long term recovery of cod and other species that so many depend on.

I’ve written about menhaden before; small, bony, and oily, it isn’t much of a meal for humans. But it’s a favorite food for ocean wildlife including striped bass and bluefish, weakfish and whales, tuna and ospreys. Menhaden form a critical part of the ocean food web and that makes overfishing them a serious threat.

The industrial fishing fleet takes menhaden by the hundreds of millions in what’s called a “reduction” fishery:  they’re “reduced” by grinding and boiling into a variety of products including fertilizer and feed for livestock and aquaculture. It’s the East Coast’s largest fishery by weight, yet it is largely unregulated. There is still no limit on how many menhaden can be caught at sea. Over the past three decades, the Atlantic menhaden population has plunged 90 percent to historically low levels.

Once you know these facts you can understand the huge show of concern about this little fish and why so many people from so many walks of life wrote to the ASMFC:

• 94 leading scientists wrote because they know how valuable forage fish are to the health of the oceans.
• Groups of birders and whale watchers wrote because they know menhaden help feed the animals they love.
• Thousands of recreational anglers and small business owners wrote because of a simple fact: big fish need little ones like menhaden for food.

A recent study of “forage fish” found they are worth twice as much in the water—where they feed more valuable species—as they are in the nets of a reduction industry.  But even that estimate is low because it did not include the eye-popping economic impact of recreational fishing. On the Atlantic coast alone, recreational anglers add nearly $11 billion a year to the U.S. economy while supporting more than 90,000 jobs.  As one group of business owners wrote to the commission, “Simply put, menhaden help support our businesses, and are a major economic driver in our local economies.”

The ASMFC meets December 14 in Baltimore to enact a plan that will meet its goal of ending overfishing and managing menhaden “as a critical ecosystem component.” Unfortunately, some have presented this as a choice between the environment and jobs. But wise management policies do not pit conservation against commerce; rather, they recognize that a vibrant coastal economy needs a healthy ocean ecosystem. That is why Pew is calling on the commission to cut the menhaden catch in half and enact the first coast-wide limit on the fishery.  And we are not alone.  Tens of thousands of people agree that keeping more of these little fish in the water brings the biggest benefits to us all. Please join us and let the commissioners know you want them to act.

Pacific bluefin tuna hunting Pacific sardines; the small "forage fish" are key parts of the food chain, but are increasingly under threat.

Our nation’s West Coast is known worldwide for the rich and iconic marine life that can be found off its shores. In fact, countless tourists travel there every year just for a glimpse of a pod of migrating gray whales or the chance to catch a coho or king salmon in the wild.

These species and a host of other Pacific marine predators need to eat plenty of small fish to survive and thrive. In fact, to understand the well-being of an ocean ecosystem, one of the first steps is to measure the food supply upon which other, larger species depend.

The Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) has a chance to do just that when it meets this November to guide the completion of its Fishery Ecosystem Plan. Nobody, however, wants a document that just gathers dust on a shelf. Embracing a new policy to measure the amount of prey in the water would be a huge step forward with benefits for numerous Pacific marine predators—from whales breeding off the sunny shores of San Diego to salmon foraging in the chilly waters of the Seattle area’s Puget Sound.

Small oil-rich fish such as sardines, anchovies, and smelt—commonly known as forage fish—are the linchpin of the marine ecosystem along the West Coast. They eat tiny plants and animals drifting near the surface and, in turn, become prey for everything higher on the food web.

In June, the PFMC recognized the ecological importance of these fish when it set a goal of prohibiting new commercial fishing that targets forage species until there is proof that it won’t degrade the ecosystem. However, the council has delayed enacting actual protections for vulnerable forage species such as saury, sand lance, and lanternfish. Instead, the PFMC is now pursuing a slower path that requires it to complete a Fishery Ecosystem Plan by March 2013 before moving on to protect currently unmanaged forage fish. So the council needs to make sure it finishes the plan on time.

We cannot afford to delay protections for these important prey species. Our oceans are under increasing environmental stress because of chronic problems such as water pollution and degradation of coastal habitat. Unlike these and other large-scale factors affecting ocean health, the PFMC has a say about fishing that impacts the prey base along the West Coast, and its members can take proactive measures to protect these little fish.

Worldwide, forage species account for more than a third of total marine fish landings by weight, with 90 percent turned into products such as animal feeds and nutritional supplements. Commercial interest in these small, oily fish is growing more intense.

In fact, an analysis done for the PFMC noted that the market for currently unfished forage species along the West Coast is likely to become even more attractive because of the “spectacular growth” of the global aquaculture industry. In other words, the need to feed carnivorous species such as farmed salmon and pen-fattened tuna could take the food supply away from fish swimming in the wild. That means the abundance of fish that supports both commercial and sports fishing, as well as a number of other sectors of the West Coast economy, is at risk.

The Pacific Fishery Management Council can’t control global market trends, but it can make forage fish a priority as the key link in a productive Pacific Ocean. The council should start by approving a plan in November that puts in place a system to measure and track the amount of prey in the water.

Thanks to decades of bipartisan cooperation, we have one of the strongest fisheries management systems in the world. Over the years, presidents and members of Congress from both sides of the aisle, including President Gerald Ford and Sen. Warren Magnuson (D-WA) in 1976; President Bill Clinton, Rep. Gerry Studds (D-MA), and Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK), in 1996; and President George W. Bush and Sen. Stevens in 2006, set aside partisan differences and came together to strengthen our nation’s ocean fishing law, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA). Thanks to their hard work, we now have measures in place to rebuild depleted ocean fish populations; to ensure that science, not politics, drives management decisions; and to end and prevent overfishing through ACLs.

Though we still have much work to do, this most recent accomplishment in Alaska is an important milestone in our efforts to secure profitable fisheries and healthy oceans. Around the country, we have examples of fish populations that are recovering thanks to the MSA’s conservation requirements, including Gulf red snapper and mid-Atlantic summer flounder (follow the links to see recipes for these species from celebrity chefs).

The U.S. fishery management system is one of the best in the world and science-based catch limits are an important cornerstone of it. However, we need to make sure that our fisheries research and science remain top-notch. New legislation, including the Fisheries Investment Act and congressional appropriations for science and management, are critical to maintain this momentum. Equally important, we should not weaken the conservation mandates of the MSA.

Recreational fishermen heading to the Gulf of Mexico face a conundrum if they want to hook a red snapper.

Fishery managers have increased the total weight that can be caught legally because the depleted species is rebounding after decades of severe overfishing. Indeed anglers report encountering scores of these fish. While this would normally sound like good news, anglers are allowed to catch fewer fish now, so despite the increase in total allowable recreational catch – from 3,530,000 pounds in 2010 to 3,959,000 pounds in 2012—those figures represent fewer fish because red snapper are larger.

It’s a catch-22 situation that sometimes develops as depleted species recover. In this case, red snappers are growing significantly heavier—an important indication of improved health. In 2011, the average red snapper weighed 6.39 pounds, almost double the 3.32 pounds in 2007 before a recovery plan went into effect. And that weight gain has put fishermen on a diet of sorts.

Now, an additional complicating factor: The fish are dispersing over a wider area of the Gulf, so more fishermen are able to catch them and they’re meeting the quota faster.

As if that’s not complex enough, consider one more detail. If fishermen exceed the quota in one year, managers adjust the length of the recreational fishing season the following year to keep the catch from going over the quota again. That generally means an even shorter season – and this year’s recreational fishing season, from June 1 to July 17, is the shortest ever. The 46-day season in 2012 is partly due to last year’s breach of the limit. It’s been a pattern for much of the past several years.

Fortunately, this is not an endless spiral. First, managers are exploring several new approaches to keep better tabs on the amount of fish caught so next year’s season is not cut short due to excess catch from this one. The goal is to keep the rebuilding plan on track and also allow for more fishing opportunities. Second, the red snapper population isn’t expected to continue gaining weight as fast as it has recently. Similar to children, these fish may have growth spurts, but they eventually level out. And if the population continues to rebuild as planned, fishery managers expect to increase allowable catch each year. Eventually that will mean more individual, not just heavier, fish to go around.

A study to be completed in May 2013 is expected to provide an updated look at the progress red snapper in the Gulf have made toward rebuilding to healthy levels. The most recent data show they are at about 30 percent of their target level. To continue the recovery, the fish must grow larger and older to reach their most productive spawning years. A single 24-inch red snapper can produce as many eggs as approximately 212 fish that are 17 inches.

Since the rebuilding plan went into effect in 2008, a population that consisted mostly of 2- and 3-year-old red snapper is now typically made up of 5- to 7-year-olds, with a larger number of red snapper reaching 10 or more years.

Recovery plans take time and patience, and there are bumps along the road. That’s why it’s best to prevent overfishing in the first place. An ounce of prevention is worth more pounds of fish.