‘Catch Shares’ Articles
Panel continues to push recreational-based catch share agenda
In a letter to the chairman of the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, Coastal Conservation Association is asking the Council to reject the recommendations of the Limited Access Privilege Program Advisory Panel (LAPP AP) and abandon consideration of sector separation and catch share experiments in Gulf reef fish fisheries.
“The recreational anglers who participated in this panel have been greatly frustrated with Council-generated directives and LAPP AP agenda templates that were predetermined to achieve a particular outcome,” wrote Chester Brewer, chairman of CCA’s National Government Relations Committee. “In the end, the panel has come up with a result that is opposed by almost the entire Gulf of Mexico for-hire sector, as well as the private boat angling sector.”
The LAPP AP was originally tasked by the Gulf Council with looking at Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ)/catch share programs for the “other species in the reef fish management unit” across sectors, but its scope was subsequently broadened significantly. Its focus evolved to include pilot programs to give a portion of the recreational red snapper quota to the for-hire fleet under a concept known as sector separation, which breaks the recreational sector into private boat anglers and charter/for-hire businesses.
“At the core of the report from the LAPP AP is the issue of taking red snapper quota away from the overall recreational sector to allow a tiny segment of the fishery to increase its economic viability,” says Brewer. “We see no effort by the Council to increase the financial viability of the entire fishery by maximizing the economic value available. NOAA Fisheries’ own analysis shows that the only way the Council will increase the number of days the for-hire vessels can fish for red snapper will be by taking fish away from the millions of private anglers along the Gulf Coast.”
CCA is asking the Council to focus instead on management measures such as completing the five-year review of the red snapper IFQ program, along with a review of red snapper allocation and the exploration of methods to exchange IFQ shares across sectors, all of which are mandated by the NOAA Catch Shares Policy. Similarly the Council should proceed with the timely completion of Amendment 28 and reallocate grouper between the recreational and commercial sector in order to create jobs and increased economic value from this fishery as well.
“We hope that the Council will recognize the extreme disconnect between the conclusions reached by this predisposed AP and the sentiments of the vast angling public,” says Brewer. “We urge the Council to abandon consideration of an unpopular and unnecessary program that caters to a tiny fragment of the fishery and instead focus on management measures that will create the greatest economic, conservation and social benefits.”
Click HERE for a copy of the CCA letter to the Gulf Council.
###
CCA is the largest marine resource conservation group of its kind in the nation. With almost 100,000 members in 17 state chapters, CCA has been active in state, national and international fisheries management issues since 1977. For more information visit the CCA Newsroom at www.JoinCCA.org.
Tags: gulf council, LAPP AP, red snapper, sector separation
Posted in CCA Gulf of Mexico, Catch Shares | 6 Comments »
Even Gulf commercial fishermen say catch share concept fails
KEY WEST, FL – Recreational anglers apparently are not the only ones who object to the use of catch share programs in the Gulf of Mexico. During the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council meeting this week in Florida, commercial grouper fishermen pointed out serious flaws in the catch share concept that are forcing them to discard an estimated 700,000 to 1 million pounds of dead red snapper annually. Coastal Conservation Association is calling for an accelerated review of both the commercial red snapper and grouper catch share plans by the Gulf Council.
“A lot of the grouper guys say the concept is not working and they are throwing half their fish away. They can’t get shares to keep the red snapper they catch while they are fishing for grouper, and so they are asking for the commercial red snapper program to sunset and just go away,” said Dr. Russell Nelson, CCA’s Gulf Fisheries consultant. “CCA pointed out that this kind of waste was a likely result when the Council was discussing the grouper catch share program in 2009, but those concerns were ignored.”
According to public comments to the Gulf Council by Bob Spaeth of the Southern Offshore Fisheries Association, a survey of commercial grouper fishermen revealed that a majority felt they were worse off after their Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) program went into effect. Furthermore, it appears that the commercial grouper sector may have caught the majority of its shares for the entire year already, meaning that very few grouper will be landed in last quarter of the year. That prompted a request from the commercial sector that they be allowed to catch some of next year’s quota this year.
“Again, this shows that catch share programs pose more problems than solutions,” said CCA’s Chester Brewer, chairman of the National Government Relations Committee. “The idea may be compelling on paper to some, but when you put it into practice and factor in human nature, all the economic models fall apart. These ideas are sold as one-size fits all solutions, but there are inherent, fundamental flaws that are unavoidable.”
As the debate flared over commercial catch share programs, the Gulf Council tried to sidestep controversy over the appointment of a Headboat IFQ Advisory Panel that was originally intended to explore separating headboats from the recreational sector and giving them their own shares of red snapper in yet another catch share program. In a thinly veiled attempt to deflect mounting criticism over the panel, the Council elected to rename it the Ad Hoc Headboat Advisory Panel and broaden its scope to examine all things important to the headboat industry, not just sector separation and catch shares.
“If commercial boats and recreational anglers don’t favor catch shares, it is hard to see why NOAA Fisheries continues to promote them. They don’t make economic sense or conservation sense,” said Nelson. “Unfortunately, there are financial incentives for Councils to implement catch share programs and so these concepts keep hanging around even though very few people are in favor of them.”
CCA has encouraged members and all recreational anglers to contact the Gulf Council at info@gulfcouncil.org to urge the rejection of sector separation and catch shares in recreational fisheries.
###
Tags: Catch Shares, grouper IFQ, gulf council, red snapper IFQ
Posted in CCA Gulf of Mexico, Catch Shares | No Comments »
Federal insistence on catch shares for headboats outrages anglers
NOAA ignores overwhelming opposition, proceeds with controversial program
In spite of opposition from governors, Congress and the vast majority of recreational anglers, NOAA Fisheries has unveiled a proposal for the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council to take red snapper from the private boat angling sector and give them away in a catch share program. This latest affront to anglers is outlined as an item on the Gulf Council’s June agenda calling for a closed-door session to appoint an advisory panel to make recommendations on a new headboat Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) program.
“It is infuriating that NOAA Fisheries is disregarding the very clear messages that have been delivered on catch shares and their impact on recreational anglers,” said Chester Brewer, chairman of CCA’s National Government Relations Committee. “Four Gulf state governors signed a letter in 2009 warning about the negative impacts of catch shares on recreational angling. The Jones Amendment barring any NOAA funds from being used to implement new catch share programs was approved by Congress just a few weeks ago. Yet, somehow, NOAA Fisheries believes it is OK to proceed with a closed-door session to figure out how to do a new catch share program. This is an agency that seems almost completely disconnected.”
Catch share systems bestow a percentage of a public fishery resource to a select group of fishermen to harvest. The commercial entities pay nothing back to the public for this right to harvest a public resource and Coastal Conservation Association has contended that these programs ignore the participation and beneficial economic impacts of recreational fishing. According to a presentation by NOAA Fisheries to the Gulf Council in April 2011, splitting the recreational sector and implementing a catch share program for charter/for-hire boats could shorten the private boat recreational red snapper season by as much as 20 percent. CCA is opposed to sector separation and filed a lawsuit against the federal government in 2009 over the Gulf grouper catch share program in a case that continues to make its way through federal district court.
“NOAA has funded economic studies that show the vast majority of the value of Gulf reef fish fisheries is in the private recreational boat sector,” said Brewer. “Why would they insist on going down a path that discourages the most valuable part of this fishery? When you combine the public outcry with the economic data, it appears that NOAA Fisheries is intent on doing the wrong things to manage this fishery. It defies logic and common sense.”
In response to the closed-door session to appoint an IFQ advisory panel, Gulf Council member Ed Sapp has requested clarification from NOAA Counsel on the Jones Amendment that prohibits NOAA from expending funds to implement new catch share programs.
“I’ve already received numerous phone calls from fishermen who believe NOAA and the Gulf Council are operating out of line,” he said. “I feel that it is vitally important that we have these public discussions before we proceed with any new catch share related issues.”
###
Tags: Catch Shares, gulf council, headboats, IFQ
Posted in CCA Gulf of Mexico, Catch Shares | 1 Comment »
HOUSTON, TX – Following its meeting March 28-29 in Tampa, Florida, the Limited Access Privilege Program (LAPP) Advisory Panel to the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council is presenting a suite of options at the Gulf Council meeting next week to aid the struggling charter/for-hire industry and seem to lead inevitably to catch shares and sector separation in the recreational sector.
Discussions at the two-day AP meeting included a “days-at-sea” program for the charter for hire fleet and the allocation of an Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) program for the 63-boat headboat fleet in the red snapper fishery. Each proposal would presumably reserve part of the recreational allocation for such boats and allow them to fish it throughout the year. The LAPP AP was originally tasked with looking at IFQ/catch share programs for the “other species in the reef fish management unit” across sectors, but was subsequently tasked with looking into pilot programs to give the for-hire fleet flexibility in red snapper fishing days in an effort to help the depressed economic status of the fleet.
“Development of these proposals was a fast, unexpected turn of events,” said Bill Bird, a CCA board member and panel participant. “It seemed to me that everyone in that room, including Council staff, knew where they wanted this to go before the meeting even started, despite CCA’s objections. Most of the details remain undefined, but it is difficult to understand how either program would work unless those boats get a specific allocation of the recreational quota. You can call it anything you want, but it looks and sounds like the first steps to sector separation and catch shares.”
From the start, CCA was concerned at the prospect of the AP turning to catch shares as a tool and it is clear that those concerns were well-founded.
“The assignment of the catch share approach to a pilot headboat program was out of left field and spun out of control at the meeting very quickly, even though no headboat operators are represented on the LAPP AP,” said Troy Williamson, CCA board member and panel participant. “It was a runaway train and CCA will certainly make the case at the Council to stop it in its tracks.”
CCA is opposed to both recreational catch shares and to splitting the recreational sector between private boat anglers and the charter/for-hire fleet. “Sector separation,” as it is known, and catch shares are both unpopular concepts with the vast majority of the recreational angling community.
“The days-at-sea program is being sold as a benefit for conservation, data collection and management, but all of those things can be achieved by means other than catch shares and sector separation,” said Bird. “Additionally, the Council could help the entire recreational sector and not just the charter and headboat operators by reallocating the red snapper fishery properly in the first place. In fact, the Council just decided at its February 2011 meeting to finally begin reviewing red snapper allocation and the existing red snapper IFQ program. To make this recommendation before that review has even started doesn’t make a lot of sense.”
###
CCA is the largest marine resource conservation group of its kind in the nation. With almost 100,000 members in 17 state chapters, CCA has been active in state, national and international fisheries management issues since 1977. For more information visit the CCA Newsroom at www.JoinCCA.org.
Tags: Catch Shares, Gulf red snapper, LAPP AP
Posted in CCA Gulf of Mexico, Catch Shares | 5 Comments »
Anglers applaud decision to terminate catch share development in Amendment 21
ST. SIMONS ISLAND, GA – Recreational anglers are applauding the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council’s decision today to “terminate all work relative to catch share development in Amendment 21,” the Comprehensive Catch Share Amendment. In a motion by Council member George Geiger of Florida, the Snapper Grouper Committee yesterday voted to remove catch shares from Amendment 21, setting up today’s action by the full Council. The decision is good news for recreational anglers who have been fighting the concept of catch shares as a one-size-fits-all solution to fishery management problems.
“There are so many other things for federal managers to be focusing on other than a controversial management scheme like catch shares,” said Chester Brewer, chairman of CCA’s National Government Relations Committee. “This action by the South Atlantic Council signals that NOAA should stop the rush to embrace catch shares and reconsider its priorities.”
Catch share programs set a biologically based annual catch limit for a fish stock and allocate a specific portion of that catch limit to entities, such as commercial fishermen, cooperatives or communities. Unfortunately, in fisheries where there is a large and growing recreational sector, catch shares maximize benefits to the commercial fishing industry while ignoring the participation and beneficial economic impacts of recreational fishing. CCA has engaged in a multi-tiered strategy to lessen the recreational sector’s exposure to the negative impacts of catch share programs.
“Proper management of the recreational sector should be a top priority for the Congress and for NOAA Fisheries – not catch shares,” said Brewer. “We need more frequent stock assessments, development of fishery independent data and improved recreational catch data for federal fisheries. We are very pleased that South Atlantic Council members decided to remove catch shares as a management option in this Amendment and we hope that other Councils will follow their lead.”
The catch share concept has not disappeared entirely from the South Atlantic Council’s menu of options, as work will continue on catch share development for the golden crab and wreckfish fisheries, both exclusively commercial.
“We still have a lot of work to do on catch shares, but this is a step in the right direction,” said Brewer.
###
CCA is the largest marine resource conservation group of its kind in the nation. With almost 100,000 members in 17 state chapters, CCA has been active in state, national and international fisheries management issues since 1977. For more information visit the CCA Newsroom at www.JoinCCA.org.
Posted in CCA Federal Fisheries, CCA South Atlantic, Catch Shares | No Comments »
By Ted Venker
Conservation Director
Coastal Conservation Association
This week, the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council made the decision to eliminate catch share programs as a viable tool to manage fishermen in most fisheries in the South Atlantic. CCA supports this conclusion, made by the Council after reflecting on the appropriateness of catch shares for the fisheries typical of the South Atlantic.
CCA does not support top-down decision-making on the use of catch shares, and is increasingly concerned about the zeal displayed by this Administration to use this tool in virtually every fishery. The South Atlantic Council should be commended for moving against the tide that has been building for catch shares in federally managed fisheries.
The road to this point has not been simple. Coastal Conservation Association is among the many groups that have been opposed to catch shares, and we have invested a great deal of time and resources on many fronts to lessen the potential for negative impacts of such programs on the recreational angling community.
In September of 2009, CCA filed suit against the federal government against the Gulf grouper catch share program. The Environmental Defense Fund, one of the primary supporters of catch shares, later intervened on behalf of the federal government. The lawsuit, delayed greatly by the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico last summer, is ongoing.
In October of 2009, CCA coordinated a joint letter from four Gulf state governors to U.S. Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke expressing their concern over the negative impacts of catch shares on their recreational fisheries.
In April of 2010, CCA and a number of the leading groups representing marine resource conservation as well as the tackle and boat manufacturing community, engaged a number of prominent environmental groups that were promoting the use of catch shares in federal fisheries. The ultimate goal of that engagement was to make the case why catch shares are completely inappropriate for the recreational sector, and to lay out a set of parameters for their use in the commercial sector of mixed-use fisheries. The result was an “insurance policy” of sorts in the form of a letter that specified that before any catch share program could be put in place for the commercial sector, the fishery had to be reallocated using modern, forward-looking criteria, and the commercial shares had to be made available for transfer to the recreational sector.
Also in April of 2010, the Center for Coastal Conservation testified before the House Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife Oversight Hearing Committee on Natural Resources during a hearing on catch shares to express “….serious concerns about the potential impact of commercial catch shares on the recreational sector in mixed-use fisheries (in which there are both recreational and commercial components). Our organizations respectfully submit that the Draft Policy Catch Share Policy of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under consideration lacks the necessary guidance to protect the recreational sector from adverse impacts associated with the implementation of a catch shares policy in mixed-use fisheries.”
In December of 2010, after a long period of engagement with groups including CCA, the American Sportfishing Association, The Billfish Foundation, the National Marine Manufacturers Association, the Center for Coastal Conservation and the International Game Fish Association, NOAA released its Catch Share Policy. As a result of constant work by those groups, NOAA’s official Catch Shares Policy contains the following language, “NOAA…does not advocate the use of individual private angler catch shares.“
Earlier this week, CCA issued a call for its entire membership to contact their U.S. Senators and urge them to support the Jones Amendment, which would prevent the use of $54 million earmarked for catch shares in NOAA’s FY2011 budget from being used for catch share programs in the Gulf of Mexico or on the East Coast. Rep. Walter B. Jones of North Carolina filed the amendment, which passed the House of Representatives in late February. Though CCA was not involved in the creation of the amendment, we embraced it as a good vehicle to force NOAA to use scarce funds for more frequent stock assessments, development of fishery independent data and improved recreational catch data rather than highly controversial catch share programs.
The catch share issue has been a long-running saga, and while the action by the South Atlantic Council today is a huge step in the right direction, the issue is far from decided. Progress is being made on catch shares, but recreational anglers would be wise to stay engaged on all levels to keep it moving in the right direction.
###
Posted in CCA Blogs, CCA Federal Fisheries, CCA South Atlantic, Catch Shares | 1 Comment »
The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council’s Snapper Grouper Committee voted today to take catch shares off the table as a management option in Amendment 21. By a vote of 9-4, the Committee motion to remove catch shares as an option now goes before the full Council tomorrow, March 11, for final approval.
During public hearings on this and other South Atlantic issues in January and February 2011, CCA presented the following remarks regarding the Comprehensive Catch Share Amendment (Amendment 21):
- CCA is opposed to catch shares for recreational fisheries. NOAA’s own Catch Share Policy states that catch shares are not an appropriate management option for recreational fisheries;
- CCA acknowledges that catch shares may be a valid management tool in purely commercial, large-scale, industrial fisheries, such as those in the North Pacific and North Atlantic, to reduce overcapacity and address bycatch issues. However, there are no such fisheries in the South Atlantic;
- CCA has grave reservations about the use of catch shares for the commercial sector in mixed-use (recreational and commercial) fisheries. Catch shares systems are not appropriate tools for the recreational sector in mixed-use fisheries;
- Before the implementation of a catch share system for the commercial sector of a fishery, CCA wants managers to reallocate the fishery based on economic, social and conservation parameters as outlined in NOAA’s own Catch Share Policy;
- After reallocation, the catch share system for the commercial sector should be designed so that commercial catch shares are available for transfer by states or other such entities to the recreational sector;
- If a catch share system is installed for the commercial sector of a fishery, then the fishery should be scheduled for regular reevaluation, including reallocation;
- The commercial participants in any catch share program should pay some form of ongoing resource rent to pay the expense of managing the catch share program and repay the public for the exclusive use of a common property natural resource.
CCA is encouraging the South Atlantic Council to formally adopt the Committee’s motion to remove catch shares.
Posted in CCA South Atlantic, Catch Shares | No Comments »
Ted Venker
Conservation Director
Coastal Conservation Association
The catch share issue is generating a lot of attention, and it is certainly warranted. Any concept that proposes to privatize a public resource should get a strong reaction from the public and every attempt should be made to beat it back.
However, some of the rhetoric about catch shares is overheated, and it is threatening to blur some other important concepts, like the very real differences between recreational and commercial fishing. Take for example the recent press release headlined, “Catch Share Activists Meet Heavy Resistance.” That release uses words like, “turncoats,” “sellouts,” “treachery,” and “sharecropping” to blast proponents of catch shares. Very provocative stuff that would get anyone’s blood boiling. Light the torches and grab your pitchforks!
The release goes on to laud elected officials for defending the “fishing industry,” and laments that too many fishermen are struggling to provide for themselves and their communities.
“Honest fishermen work very hard to make a living in our states every day,” it quotes representatives who are pushing an amendment to block funding for catch shares as saying. “We write to express our concern that NOAA’s catch share policy will further endanger the economic vitality of the already struggling fishing industry…”
The release is about an amendment filed by Rep. Walter Jones, who has been an unabashed, unapologetic champion of the commercial fishing industry, to keep any of the millions of dollars earmarked in NOAA’s budget from being used on catch share programs in the Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, Mid-Atlantic and New England areas. It is an amendment that Coastal Conservation Association happens to support – there are far better things for NOAA to be spending scarce resources on than catch share programs. Things like more frequent stock assessments, developing fishery independent data and improved recreational catch data. CCA is currently engaged in a lawsuit against the federal government and Environmental Defense Fund over a catch share program. A victory there, and passage of Rep. Jones’s amendment, will go a long way to slowing down the rush to embrace catch shares as a one-size-fits-all solution to any fisheries problem.
It is important, though, for anglers to keep an eye on the ball in this debate. Beneath the incendiary language of that press release is a continuing, subtle and somewhat sinister slide into defending the commercial fishing industry, which caused most of the problems in our fisheries in the first place. Rep. Jones has filed a potentially useful piece of legislation to derail a management tool that was developed for commercial fisheries, and as a side benefit it would also ward off the negative impacts of catch shares to recreational ones. You may recall that North Carolina made headlines recently for allowing trawlers to continue industrial fishing operations in state waters despite outrageously wasteful striped bass kills that were videotaped by recreational anglers.
So what exactly is this “hard-working fishing industry” described in this release that some groups are fighting to protect? I don’t know too many in the recreational sector who fall into that category other than those in the charterboat industry, which depends on and caters to recreational anglers. The marinas, and the tackle and boat manufacturers could conceivably be the “fishing industry,” but I don’t get the feeling that is who this release was talking about. After all, the same folks who wrote this release also marched on Washington DC last year and, although there were well-intentioned recreational anglers in their midst, for the most part they were arm in arm with trawlers and netters and longliners from all over New England to demand their right-to-fish at all costs.
I know lots of anglers who work hard to support their fishing habit. They aren’t supporting their families with it. They’re passionate, sure, and they spend a fortune buying boats and tackle and fuel and bait and equipment. They want to go fish whenever they can, which is never often enough, and they hope the resources are healthy enough that they can bring a pile home for dinner.
But are they a “hard-working industry” bent on bringing enough fish back to port to sell and support their community? That doesn’t sound like recreation. It doesn’t sound like the for-hire industry either. That sounds a lot like commercial fishing, and as we have seen historically, and most recently in Maryland and North Carolina, industrial fishing and recreational fishing don’t have the same goals on most issues.
In the fight to rein in this Administration’s zeal for catch shares, it is good to find common ground with Rep. Jones and others where we can. But it is also good to not get so caught up in overheated rhetoric that the recreational sector sells its soul and erases the lines between recreational angling and industrial fishing.
To re-rig an old saying, the rear-end you kiss today just might be connected to the trawler who dumps thousands of pounds of dead striped bass over the side tomorrow.
###
Tags: Catch Shares
Posted in CCA Blogs, Catch Shares | No Comments »
Much has been made about the catch share issue in recent months. Catch shares are a poorly understood issue that has been made more complicated by an absolute avalanche of mistruths, half-truths, and outright lies swirling about it in fishing chatrooms and blogs across the country.
Almost every facet of the past, present and future of catch shares has been grossly distorted. A glance at the average chatroom would lead casual readers to believe that there is a vast, strange conspiracy linking all-powerful environmental groups with oil companies with “double-agents” posing as anglers to rid the world of fishermen. One recurring theme is that the goal is to empty the oceans of all people so the oil companies can pillage at will. Another, green theme says the goal is to empty the oceans of all people so that the fish and whales are left alone to prosper. There are long, fantastical charts linking this group to that group, to prove the conspiracy of anti-fishers exists. Everyone is on Pew’s payroll, or Environmental Defense’s or Exxon’s.
The only thing missing is a good 007 character to save the day.
None of it is true, but it makes good reading. And nothing spoils a good tale like a few cold facts, but in the interest of setting at least some of the record straight, this column attempts to splash a little reality on the catch share mystery.
- Catch share programs have been used sporadically in commercial fisheries for decades. They were created to address a fundamental problem in some commercial fisheries – too many boats chasing too few fish, resulting in dangerous, wasteful derbies. If you have ever watched the early seasons of Deadliest Catch on The Discovery Channel, that was a derby fishery. The whistle blew, all the boats went to catch king crab no matter what the weather was, no one slept and they fished until someone, somewhere, calculated the quota had been caught and then the season ended. Some made a fortune, some went broke, and everyone fished in a manner to catch as much as possible as fast as possible regardless of the danger or bycatch involved. The fact that no one sleeps for 4 or 5 days at a time is the reason it’s called Deadliest Catch.
- Staying with the Deadliest Catch theme, catch shares took the whole quota for king crab and divided it up among boats based on their past catch history. Each boat’s percentage effectively became “theirs” to harvest, however and whenever they liked during the season. The Northwestern, the Cornelia Marie, the Wizard, the Time Bandit and others all now “own” shares of the king crab fishery.
- The goal of catch shares in that scenario is to eliminate the derbies and reduce bycatch. A by-product of catch shares is that inevitably, some boats will sell out or lease their share to other boats. The overall number of boats drops, until a relatively few big boats are left fishing. Ideally, the dangerous derbies are eliminated, bycatch is reduced and the economics improve. That is the goal of a catch share system in a purely commercial fishery.
- Some environmental groups, Environmental Defense Fund foremost among them, became enamored, somewhat naively, with the prospects of applying catch shares to all fisheries, including recreational ones, based on their use, implementation and success in purely commercial fisheries. The critical disconnect is that no one at EDF understood or appreciated the vast differences between recreational fisheries and commercial fisheries. In EDF’s mind, catch shares were a solution to all fisheries problems.
Now, in order to set the stage for what comes next, you have to understand a separate but connected issue, and that is how allocations are set in mixed-use fisheries – fisheries that have both commercial and recreational participation. Allocations between recreational and commercial sectors have historically been based on catch history, often using time frames as short as selected three-year segments. Given federal managers’ history of promoting commercial fisheries, the time frames were often not favorable to the recreational sector.
Those allocations are essentially frozen, despite the growth of recreational angling and the growing economic contribution of the recreational sector. They are frozen because the reallocation process is a political nightmare for a Fishery Management Council. It is long, convoluted and tortuous, with lots of emotion thrown in for good measure. No Council member or staffer willingly endures it if he or she can possibly avoid it.
As a result, allocations that were set 20 or 30 years ago are completely out of whack with the demographics, population and public demand that exists today. When a stagnant recreational allocation combines with the constant migration to the nation’s coasts, the end result is that more and more recreational anglers are trapped chasing a fixed allotment of fish, resulting in shorter seasons and greater restrictions for everyone. The red snapper fishery in the Gulf of Mexico is a prime example. About 300 commercial boats currently chase 51 percent of the entire harvest of red snapper in the Gulf under a catch share system. Hundreds of thousands of recreational anglers get the other 49 percent.
And no one in NOAA Fisheries has been interested in cracking the egg on reallocation.
- Jumping back to catch shares, Dr. Jane Lubchenco was appointed to lead the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in 2008. Dr. Lubchenco is a marine scientist with deep ties to EDF, including a stint on its board.
- Not long after that appointment, the Obama Administration created the Catch Share Policy Task Force, signaling a new focus to broadly impose catch share systems on federal fisheries, including those enjoyed by recreational anglers. Compounding the complexity of this issue is the fact that the Obama Administration is filled with people from places like San Francisco and Chicago who do not exactly understand or appreciate saltwater recreational angling.
- Promoted by a former board member of EDF – which doesn’t understand or appreciate recreational angling – in an Administration that doesn’t understand or appreciate recreational angling, the danger of a Catch Shares Policy Task Force was immediately clear. There was NOTHING to prevent catch shares from proceeding as a one-size-fits-all solution for the commercial and recreational sectors in every fishery.
- A coalition of marine industry and fishery conservation groups, recognizing the need to become involved in the process of shaping the new policy, engaged the Administration on the issue of catch shares. At the same time, the coalition engaged with environmental groups that were heavily promoting catch share systems, including Environmental Defense Fund. The goal of that engagement was to educate them on the problems catch shares present for recreational anglers and shape the policy so that at the very least it was not detrimental to recreational angling.
- That engagement is the source of a lot of confusion on the Internet. In the eyes of some conspiracy-theorist bloggers, by engaging the Administration and the environmental community on catch shares, the angling groups involved (CCA, CCC, TBF, IGFA, ASA, NMMA) were somehow “negotiating with the Devil,” “selling anglers out,” “getting on the EDF payroll,” etc. That line of thinking completely ignores the consequences of non-engagement. An outcome driven by an EDF-driven Catch Share Policy Task Force, in an Administration that has no interest in recreational angling, could only be bad for sport fishermen. The belief that anyone can achieve a favorable outcome merely by turning their back on this issue and “just saying No” is pure political fantasy.
- The coalition created a list of points to pursue in discussions with the administration, most of which are now included in the NOAA Catch Share Policy released in late 2010, such as:
- The coalition is and always has been firmly against catch shares for recreational anglers. The coalition does not believe they are an appropriate tool to manage recreational anglers under any circumstances.
- The coalition is firmly against separating the recreational sector into for-hire/charter and private boat designations.
- In mixed-use fisheries, those that have a quota for both recreational and commercial fishers, it may be determined that catch shares are an appropriate tool for the commercial sector. However, before implementing a commercial catch share system, the allocation must be redefined and updated using economic, social and conservation criteria.
- Once set, the new allocation must be reviewed periodically using those same criteria.
- In mixed-use fisheries that employ a catch share system for the commercial sector, the commercial shares must be made available for transfer to the recreational sector to allow for the growth of the recreational sector. The mechanism for transferring commercial shares could include state agencies, but is as yet undefined.
- The coalition’s engagement effectively changed the Catch Share Policy from one that was initially poised to work against recreational anglers, to a tool that may be used to address the persistent allocation problems that have short-changed anglers for decades. Would this be the case if the coalition had not engaged? Absolutely not. We would certainly have a catch share policy, but there would be very little in it that might work FOR anglers.
- Ideally, applying the current catch share policy in the Gulf of Mexico for red snapper, for example, could result in a 70% or 80% recreational share, with the potential to shift more commercial quota to the recreational side if economic, conservation and social factors determine it is warranted. Unfortunately, the policy does not apply to Gulf red snapper since a catch share system was implemented for that fishery in 2006. The outdated allocation for Gulf red snapper remains a stubborn problem seeking a solution. However, CCA is currently pursuing reallocation and transferability of commercial red snapper shares at the Gulf Council.
The coalition of groups that engaged with the Administration and the environmental community on catch shares stepped in to prevent a disaster for recreational anglers. Perhaps that is not as interesting as a good spy novel, full of intrigue, deception and betrayal, but this is not some daytime soap opera. This is a real-life fisheries debate, with real political consequences that must be confronted and dealt with.
When it comes to the Internet, it is good to remember that often the simplest explanation is correct. If it starts to sound like something Ian Fleming wrote, then maybe it has been written for entertainment purposes only. In fact, you should be suspicious of everything you read in chatrooms and online forums, which means you should even take this article with a grain of salt. At the very least, go see the complete text of CCA’s documents and testimony before Congress and letters to the Administration, and check out information about our lawsuit against the federal government and Environmental Defense Fund over the Gulf grouper catch share program. It’s all on the Catch Shares page in the Newsroom section of www.JoinCCA.org. Do some research and, by all means, decide for yourself.
Tags: Catch Shares, EDF, NOAA Catch Share Policy
Posted in CCA Atlantic States, CCA Blogs, CCA Gulf of Mexico, CCA South Atlantic, Catch Shares | 8 Comments »
GULFPORT, MS – The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council is meeting in Mississippi this week and the issue of sector separation is again in the spotlight as the Sustainable Fisheries/Ecosystems Committee voted to remove it from the Annual Catch Limit/Accountability Measure Amendment and re-frame it either as a stand-alone issue or attached to another amendment.
Sector separation is a controversial management proposal that would break the recreational sector into for-hire/charter and private boat angler categories. As it stands now, fisheries managers divide harvest quotas between commercial boats and recreational anglers. Under Sector Separation, managers would assign quotas to commercial boats, private boat anglers and charter/for-hire boats.
However the sector separation issue re-emerges, Coastal Conservation Association is reiterating its opposition to breaking up the recreational sector based on four key points:
- The creation of imbalances in distribution of fish among anglers fishing from private boats and those fishing on charter vessels;
- The creation of deep political conflicts within states as decision-makers grapple with how to spread fishing opportunities between private and charter sectors;
- The challenges state fisheries directors will have when determining how Sector Separation will influence the growth in licensed anglers and fishing opportunities in their states;
- Shorter public season for most offshore fishing. Private boat anglers will often be unable to pursue many species unless they pay a charter/for-hire vessel.
“There would be no desire for sector separation if we had adequate allocation for these fisheries in the first place, and the allocation problem is not going to be fixed through a management scheme that slices up the recreational sector,” said Chester Brewer, chairman of CCA’s National Government Relations Committee. “Sector separation will only create additional divisiveness among users and will further detract from the public’s ability to access these important natural resources.”
INTERESTING FACT: In 2008, private anglers spent $28 million on licenses in Florida for enforcement, habitat and management of the state’s resources. The 3, 400 for-hire licenses brought in $1 million.
###
Posted in CCA Gulf of Mexico, Catch Shares | No Comments »
