Posts Tagged ‘Bluefin Tuna’
Last week, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration released the allocations for bluefin tuna among U.S. fisheries for 2012. The agency allocated the full quota of 957 metric tons that was given to the U.S. by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), the international body that governs bluefin tunas and tuna-like species.
The traditional rod and reel commercial sector was given the largest portion of the U.S. quota with 435 metric tons, followed by the recreational sector with 182 metric tons. Allocations of the other sectors were: purse seine/large nets – 172 metric tons; longline, 61 metric tons; harpoon, 36 metric tons; traps 1 metric ton and a reserve of 70.6 metric tons. The reserve is set aside to account for dead discards and scientific research.
This allocation decision was set against the backdrop of two significant issues surrounding the bluefin tuna fishery. Earlier this year, the NOAA declined to protect the western Atlantic population of bluefin tuna under the Endangered Species Act, despite a decline in catch from a 1964 peak of 18,671 metric tons to just over 1,900 metric tons in 2009. Coastal Conservation Association did not support the ESA listing for bluefin tuna for a variety of reasons, but the efforts to have the species listed reflect the high degree of uncertainty that continues to surround the health and future of the bluefin tuna fishery.
Also earlier this year, NOAA grappled with how to adjust quotas to account for 160 metric tons of dead discards in the U.S. Longline Category. The 160 metric tons of dead tuna thrown back by the longliners is more than the entire longline allotment for 2012. The agency did not require the longliners alone to “pay back” their enormous waste of dead bluefin tuna, despite the profusion of new ‘accountability measures’ that will require such from numerous recreational fisheries. Instead, NOAA opened a public comment period for input from stakeholders on how to subtract the longliners’ overage from every other category, including the Angling Category.
Coastal Conservation Association stated its adamant opposition to any proposal to reduce quota from the Angling Category, as well as from other categories, in order to accommodate dead discards in the Longline Category. We believe that the commercial longliners, who are solely responsible for such discards, should be held responsible for the consequences of their actions.
Yet, although the Longline Category produced 100 percent of the “excess” discards (i.e., discards that cannot be set off against unused 2010 quota), NOAA’s proposed rule required that only 8 percent of such discards will be subtracted from the Longline Category’s quota, with the other categories being required to subsidize the remainder.
CCA believed that was a wholly inadequate response to the indiscriminate waste of 160 metric tons of a fish that was on the verge of being listed as an endangered species.
In CCA’s view, the only truly viable way to substantially reduce dead bluefin discards in the longline fishery is to impose time and area closures. We requested that, in the short term, NOAA not implement the proposed rule with respect to quota adjustment, and instead implement time and area closures designed to reduce dead discards in the longline fishery by not less than 65 metric tons. In the longer term, we asked that NOAA implement such time and area closures on the longline fishery to fully implement the mandate of National Standard 9, which requires that bycatch not just be reduced, but reduced to the full extent practicable.
Our comments were ignored, as were the comments of countless other angling organizations and those of other, less destructive bluefin tuna harvesting categories. With its announcement of the 2012 allocations, NOAA has decided that everyone will pay for the sins of the longlining sector.
NOAA’s decision is just the latest bizarre twist in the long history of bluefin tuna management, one that has been checkered with Band-aids and half-measures and greed. By allowing the Longline Category to continue its operations unencumbered by any additional regulation that might reduce the tons of dead, discarded, nearly endangered bluefin tuna, the old Bureau of Commercial Fisheries has signaled that it is business as usual.
If logical requests to curtail the use of the most indiscriminate commercial gear in the ocean with targeted time and area closures are ignored, then perhaps it is time to acknowledge that the agency is simply incapable of responsibly managing this particular fishery. Perhaps it is time for other participants in this fishery to consider a larger vision, such as simply removing longline gear from the management regime altogether through a buyout program or similar efforts.
In sports, substances and gear that give an individual player an unfair advantage over other players are labeled a threat to the integrity of the game and outlawed. Players who insist on using the offending gear are banned from the league. In the world of fisheries management, no consideration is given to the integrity of the league as a whole. Indeed, players using the most offensive gear in the game are coddled and protected at the expense of the other participants.
With its most recent announcement on bluefin quotas, the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries has not left many choices on the table. Banning commercial longliners from the league may be the only option left.
Tags: Bluefin Tuna, ICCAT, longlines
Posted in Bluefin Tuna, CCA Blogs | No Comments »
What is CITES?
CITES is an acronym for the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, an international treaty intended to prohibit or strictly regulate the commercial exploitation of badly depleted species, and in some cases to prevent such exploitation from driving a species to extinction.
Why should bluefin tuna be given CITES protection?
Bluefin tuna populations on both sides of the Atlantic have crashed. The international body that has the primary responsibility for managing the bluefin resource, the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) has historically shirked its responsibility to manage the bluefin in accordance with scientific recommendations, but has instead heeded the demands of eastern-hemisphere nations to keep harvests unsustainably high in order to benefit the fishing industry. ICCAT has also been unable to rein in chronic overharvest and illegal fishing operations that further drive down bluefin populations. The greatest impetus for the continuing overharvest is the lucrative foreign market, most particularly in Japan, which pays fishermen far more than they could obtain locally. A listing on CITES’ Appendix 1 would outlaw international trade in bluefin, and thus remove much of the motivation for overharvest.
But didn’t ICCAT follow the scientific advice at their latest meeting, and act to reduce bluefin harvest in 2010 and beyond?
Not exactly. In its efforts to establish a recommended quota for bluefin, the scientists have to make a number of assumptions with respect to things such as age at maturity, the average productivity of mature fish, how quickly the stocks might rebuild under different harvest scenarios, etc., and there is significant disagreement as to what such assumptions should be. Ultimately, the Standing Committee on Research and Statistics recommended that the 2010 quota for the Eastern stock (eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean) fall somewhere between 8,500 and 15,000 metric tons, but it also warned that, even at 8,500 metric tons, there is a 70% chance that, even by 2019, the spawning stock biomass would remain below 15%. In addition, the SCRS recommended that all fishing be prohibited during the time when bluefin spawned. However, ICCAT failed to close the fishery during the spawning period, and settled on a 13,500 metric ton quota, which was near the high end of the suggested range and would clearly do little to recover the spawning stock. ICCAT also agreed to set catch limits for the 2011 through 2013 fishing years at a level which would have at least a 60% chance of rebuilding the stock by 2022, but there is no guarantee that quotas will be so set, as the language adopted this past November is not binding on the Commission that must act to set any new limits on harvest next fall, and given their track record it would be no surprise to see higher harvests ultimately adopted. A number of people involved in the process, including individuals advising CCA, speculate that ICCAT took a somewhat more conservative position at Recife last fall in an attempt to derail the effort to have bluefin listed under CITES, and that if the threat of a CITES listing fades later this year, ICCAT will renege on the 2009 agreement and again increase quotas.
Even if the Eastern Stock has been overfished, why should the Western Stock be subject to a CITES listing, when Canadian and American fishermen have generally conformed to the ICCAT decisions?
Just because the Western Stock is not currently subject to overfishing doesn’t mean that it is not badly overfished, and hovering on the brink of collapse. There is no question that the number of Western Stock fish has declined sharply since the 1970s, and even in the ‘70s the number of bluefin had begun to slip below historic norms. There is little evidence that the stock has begun to rebuild. Thus, a CITES listing could only benefit Western Stock bluefin. Also, the best evidence indicates that bluefin tuna can, and often do, cross the Atlantic. Although the Eastern Stock, which spawns in the Mediterranean, and the Western Stock, which spawns in the Gulf of Mexico, are clearly separate stocks of fish which can be distinguished in the laboratory, there is no way for a fishermen to tell them apart at boatside. The latest scientific evidence shows that it is likely that about half of the bluefin caught by U.S. anglers and commercial harevesters were Eastern Stock fish, and even with the decline in the Eastern Stock, such fish are undoubtedly still being killed. Thus, in order for a CITES listing to effectively protect Eastern Stock bluefin – and begin to restore abundance of the species throughout the Atlantic – it must be extended to all bluefin in the northern Atlantic region.
If bluefin are listed under CITES, won’t that mean that they’re an “endangered species” and that no one could fish for them?
Absolutely not. “Endangered species,” as that term is generally used in the United States, refers to species that are “listed” under the Endangered Species Act because they are in imminent danger of extinction. The Endangered Species Act is a federal law passed by the US Congress and administered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. A species listed under ESA is given broad protections, cannot normally be harvested, and must ultimately be subject to a recovery plan designed to rebuild the population to safe levels. CITES, on the other hand, is an international treaty which is solely concerned with protecting species at risk from commercial exploitation at the international level. It has no effect on the domestic harvest of a species (including at-sea harvest within a nation’s exclusive economic zone), and even permits the sale of such species within the nation where it is harvested. There is no requirement that a species listed on CITES Annex 1 also be listed under the ESA.
How will US anglers on the East Coast be affected if bluefin are listed under CITES?
They will not be affected at all. A CITES listing will not prohibit US anglers from fishing for, or harvesting, bluefin in US waters. And since recreational fishermen, by definition, do not sell their catch, restrictions on international trade will have no impact on them. If CITES affects anglers at all, such effect will be positive, as its prohibition on international sale will probably reduce commercial harvest, and thus make more bluefin available to the public.
That’s fine for anglers, but why should our commercial fishery be shut down?
A CITES listing will not shut down the US commercial bluefin fishery, although it will prohibit US commercial fishermen from exporting its catch. However, what most people don’t realize is that the United States is a net importer of bluefin tuna. While American commercial fishermen do ship prime bluefin tuna to Japan, where they can get the best price, American restaurants import a lot of bluefin, often lower-priced, pen-raised Eastern Stock fish, for the growing domestic sushi market. If bluefin are listed under CITES, US commercial fishermen will still be able to sell their fish to US markets, where it would replace the Eastern Stock fish that could no longer be imported.
If that’s true, why are some spokesmen for both commercial and recreational fishermen opposing the CITES listing?
It’s all about Japan, and the prices paid there for the best tuna. While international economic conditions have caused prices to fall from the high levels of a few years ago, the Japanese market still pays the highest prices in the world for tuna, and commercial fishermen are loath to lose their most lucrative market. The question of why “recreational fishing” advocates would oppose a CITES listing has much the same answer. For while recreational fishermen, fishing under an Angling Category permit, may not legally sell their tuna, there are a lot of part-time commercial fishermen in the Northeast who fish from sportfishing boats and catch their fish on rods and reels, but hold General Category permits, which allows them to sell their catch. Charter and party boats, which fish under a Charter/Headboat Category permit, are also allowed to sell their catch.
It should be noted that the Coastal Conservation Association and The Billfish Foundation are ardent supporters of a CITES listing, and that International Game Fish Association President Rob Kramer has said that a CITES listing for bluefin “means only good things for recreational fishermen.”
What would have to happen for bluefin tuna to be protected under CITES?
The next meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES is meeting in Doha, Qatar, in March. For bluefin to be listed under the Convention, two-thirds of the contracting parties must vote in favor of such action. Whether that will happen is very much open to doubt. While the bluefin has staunch supporters in the international community, Japan and the Mediterranean fishing nations will undoubtedly lead a strong opposition to a listing. In order for the bluefin to have any chance at all, conservation advocates must, at the least, mount an equally strong campaign. To date, the United States has not firmly committed itself to any course of action, and US leadership is undoubtedly crucial if the listing effort is to have any chance at all—which is why the US commercial tuna industry and its allies have engaged in a comprehensive and sometimes misleading campaign aimed at affecting US public opinion and ultimately US policy.
What will happen if bluefin are not listed under CITES?
Predicting the future is always an uncertain thing, but if we are to gauge the future the experiences of the past, it is likely that ICCAT will continue to set quotas too high to permit the bluefin to recover, and perhaps too high to even maintain the status quo. In the Mediterranean and eastern Atlantic, fishermen will continue to exceed even those liberal quotas, under-report harvest and engage in “pirate” fishing activities that will increase the kill of bluefin far beyond sustainable levels. As a result, in the not-very-distant future, the Eastern Stock is likely to collapse, become commercially extinct, and perhaps fall to a level from which recovery will be very difficult, if not impossible. In the western Atlantic, fisherman, particularly in Canada, will kill most of the remaining giant bluefin, which represent the remnant reproductive capacity of the stock. With those fish gone, and few younger fish growing out to take their place, the Western Stock, already poised at the brink of collapse, will also likely fall past the point of commercial extinction, and perhaps past the point of no return.
Tags: Bluefin Tuna, CITES, ICCAT
Posted in Bluefin Tuna | No Comments »
Coastal Conservation Association Comments on U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Consideration of a CITES Listing for Atlantic Bluefin Tuna
Following the management decisions made at the November 2009 meeting of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) in Recife, Brazil, the Coastal Conservation Association (CCA) remains firm in its call for the United States to take a leadership role and insist that all international trade in Atlantic bluefin tuna be halted, while hope for a recovery still remains.
Management measures adopted by the member countries of ICCAT at its latest meeting fall far short of the commitment needed to ensure a future for this valuable species, despite a growing international realization that time is growing short to end the overexploitation of bluefin tuna.
ICCAT’s own Standing Committee on Research and Statistics (SCRS) issued guidance warning that adoption of a harvest limit of 8,500 tons in 2010 would result in a 70 percent chance that the spawning stock biomass for bluefin tuna would still be less than 15 percent in 2019 Nonetheless, the member countries of ICCAT adopted a 2010 harvest limit of 13,500 tons. Furthermore, the SCRS called for a closure of the Mediterranean during spawning season which was also rejected.
These latest decisions continue ICCAT’s well-documented history of ineffective half-measures regarding the international management of Atlantic bluefin tuna and underscore the need to have both the eastern and western stocks of Atlantic bluefin listed on Appendix I to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). Given the ICCAT track record, the “promise” to adopt measures next year that will have at least a 60 percent probability of moving the spawning stock above the low 15 percent level seems empty. Also, efforts by European nations to eliminate the illegal fishing on the species that caused the liberal 2008 quota to be exceeded by more than 50 percent have yet to show success.
In our previous correspondence, CCA asked that, should ICCAT fail to adopt biologically defensible management measures, the Department of Interior proceed with an effort to list the Atlantic bluefin on Appendix 1 to the CITES, thus prohibiting the international trade in bluefin and extinguishing the greatest motivation to overfish the species It is clear from the last meeting of ICCAT that its management efforts have again failed the United States, the world and the bluefin tuna. There is no longer any reason to expect ICCAT to end the overexploitation of bluefin.
American fishermen and markets are not responsible for driving bluefin tuna to the edge of extinction, but this country needs to lead the solution to salvage what is left and set it on a road to recovery. Under an Appendix 1 listing, American commercial fishermen will be allowed to market bluefin domestically and anglers will be able to continue fishing within the proscribed quotas and bag limits. We encourage the Department of Interior to proceed with the necessary course of action to list the Atlantic bluefin on Appendix I to CITES and prohibit the international trade in bluefin.
Click here for a fact sheet on a CITES listing for bluefin tuna
Tags: Bluefin Tuna, CITES, ICCAT
Posted in Bluefin Tuna | No Comments »
NOAA Administrator announces support for strongest possible conservation measures
Coastal Conservation Association (CCA) commends an announcement by Dr. Jane Lubchenco of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration that the United States will seek the strongest possible management measures for international conservation of Atlantic bluefin tuna. The announcement from NOAA also gave U.S. support to Monaco’s proposal to list Atlantic bluefin under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).
“This is an important step in the right direction, but much work remains to ensure a recovery for bluefin,” said Chester Brewer, chairman of CCA’s National Government Relations Committee. “I am thrilled to see the Administration send a clear message to the international community that it cannot continue its failed history of management for such an important species. The conservation of bluefin tuna has to be addressed.”
In a Sept. 25 letter from CCA National Chairman Venable Proctor to Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke and Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, CCA cited the failure of the international community to rein in harvest of bluefin tuna and urged the United States to proceed with an effort to list the Atlantic bluefin on Appendix I to CITES and prohibit the international trade in bluefin.
“It is time for the United States to demonstrate some leadership and insist that all international trade in Atlantic bluefin tuna be halted, while hope for a recovery still remains,” Proctor said.
“Over the past 40 years, the international body that manages bluefin tuna, the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), has overseen a 72 percent decline in the adult population of eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean stock of bluefin tuna and an 82 percent decline in the adult population of the western Atlantic stock,” Lubchenco, Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and NOAA Administrator, said in the statement. “A sustained lack of science-based management for the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean stock of bluefin tuna and concerns about slow recovery in the west, have brought us to this point.”
Lubchenco calls for definitive action on bluefin at the November 2009 meeting of ICCAT, including the establishment of management measures that end overfishing, such as science-based quotas, stronger enforcement of the quotas and closures during spawning periods. She indicated that the United States will consider amending or withdrawing its support of a CITES listing depending on the outcome of that meeting.
Tags: Bluefin Tuna, CITES, ICCAT
Posted in Bluefin Tuna | No Comments »
International impasse leaves bluefin on the brink
HOUSTON, TX – Citing the failure of the international community to rein in harvest of bluefin tuna, Coastal Conservation Association is urging the United States to proceed with an effort to list the Atlantic bluefin on Appendix I to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) and prohibit the international trade in bluefin.
“It is clear from the last meetings of International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) and the failure of the European Union to agree on a ban that we are left with only one option to save bluefin tuna,” said Chester Brewer, chairman of CCA’s National Government Relations Committee. “It is time for the United States to demonstrate some leadership and insist that all international trade in Atlantic bluefin tuna be halted, while hope for a recovery still remains.”
The call to list bluefin tuna as an endangered species was outlined in a letter from CCA National Chairman Venable Proctor to Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke and Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar. Proctor pointed to ICCAT’s own independent review of its approach to fisheries management, which concluded that the management of bluefin tuna is an “international disgrace,” as evidence of the need for the United States to take more of a leadership role.
“ICCAT has failed to take any action to enforce its own regulations on its own members, which violate already excessive quotas with impunity, resulting in annual harvests that have been 400 percent of levels recommended by biologists intimately familiar with the species,” Proctor stated. “There is no longer any reason to expect ICCAT to end the overexploitation of bluefin.”
“American fishermen and markets are not responsible for driving bluefin tuna to the edge of extinction, but we need to lead the solution to salvage what is left and set it on a road to recovery,” said Dr. Russell Nelson, CCA’s Gulf fisheries consultant.
An Appendix I listing means that a species ranks among the most endangered of CITES-listed animals and is threatened with extinction. Such a CITES listing prohibits all international trade in specimens of these species except when the purpose of the import is not commercial, such as for scientific research.
Tags: Bluefin Tuna, CITES, ICCAT
Posted in Bluefin Tuna | No Comments »
It is time for the United States to demonstrate some leadership and insist that all international trade in Atlantic bluefin tuna be halted, while hope for a recovery still remains.
Click HERE to see the entire letter.
Tags: Bluefin Tuna, CITES, ICCAT
Posted in Bluefin Tuna | No Comments »
