To return to the Fishing New Jersey site introduction page: http://www.fishingnj.org
To return to the current Garden State Seafood Association Weekly Update: http://www.fishingnj.org/currentupdate.htm

New England Council turns cod management over to Secretary of Commerce - At it's meeting last week, the Council by a 9 to 8 vote decided to take no action on codfish for 2002. This shifted the responsibility for codfish management measures for the coming year to the Secretary of Commerce (Fisheries council inaction leaves cloud over industry, Kennebec Journal, 12/25/01). This is a reflection of a situation that is becoming all too common as fisheries stocks increase around the coasts; we're stuck with a management system that, while well-adapted to dealing with declines, is incapable of dealing with those same stocks when they are on the increase. Said most simply, because of drastic cutbacks in fishing, New England codfish are now available in such numbers that the fishermen, even with vastly reduced effort, are catching too many of them to allow the stocks to rebuild in the federally mandated timeframe (thanks to successful lobbying and a series of lawsuits bankrolled by the multi-billion dollar Pew/Packard cartel and accomplished by the so-called "conservation community," it's virtually impossible for managers to apply any flexibility to stock rebuilding schedules). Therefore, due to the success of the conservation efforts that the New England fishermen are already suffering from, there are so many codfish that the existing stringent management measures are no longer reducing the codfish catch sufficiently. So, of course, the fishermen are supposedly expected to give up even more - and the managers are expected to force them to do so, with the "conservationists" undoubtedly willing to yet again reach into their bottomless buckets of oil bucks to fund whatever court efforts they feel are required to force the issue. Quite a system, isn't it? We doubt that Joseph Heller could create its equal.

And in the Mid-Atlantic - The same federal dictates that forced New England Council members to throw up their hands in frustration over cod management came into play at the Mid-Atlantic Council's meeting the week before with scup. Like cod in New England, scup stocks have been increasing in recent years and are presently at high levels of abundance. However, and in large part because of this abundance, the "system" demands a 57% reduction in the recreational harvest, a reduction that would harm many of the recreational fishing businesses that have become dependent on this now vigorous fishery. In spite of this, the Council voted a smaller reduction in federal waters, arguing that, considering the state of the stock, management measure put in place in state waters would suffice. It's abundantly clear, in these situations that involve recreational as well as commercial fisheries, that without some rapid legislative relief, fishermen who have been victims of declining fish stocks brought about not only by fishing pressure but by any of a number of other factors (see the story on cod below) are now being forced by the well-heeled "conservationists" to be further victims of the rebuilding of those same stocks. Majorities of both Councils have apparently decided to object to the situation using those few administrative tools that are available to them, but a legislative fix is going to be the only real solution.

Dwindling cod stocks not due to overfishing? - "Scientists at the University of East Anglia (in Norwich in the U.K.) are involved in a major research project investigating a possible link between global warming and falling numbers of cod. A team from the UEA is currently analysing sea samples containing zooplankton, tiny marine animals, which are the staple diet of the fish and other species such as haddock…. The £6.5million study by the National Environment Research Council (NERC) was prompted by concern about dwindling numbers of fish stocks. Previous studies in the North Sea have shown a 90 per cent decline of zooplankton in the past 40 years at a time when cod, haddock, herring and mackerel levels have also fallen fuelling speculation that over-fishing may not be the sole cause of their decline. And experts are keen to discover if a similar pattern is being repeated in the Atlantic waters. One theory being investigated is that rising water temperatures could be effecting ocean circulation patterns, moving the shrimp-like creatures north into waters away from traditional fishing grounds." (Study investigates depleted fish stocks link to global warming, Norfolk-Now, Eastern Counties Newspapers Group Ltd., 12/28/01). It's unfortunate that the so much of the fisheries research establishment in the U.S. is so locked into the "blame it on overfishing" mindset as to be virtually blind to other, and potentially far more significant, causes of stock fluctuations.

December 21, 2001

The truth about "grassroots" groups representing the "public interest" - In an opinion piece in the 12/13 Wall Street Journal, (http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/kstrassel/ ) Kimberly Strassel reports on ActivistCash.com (http://www.activistcash.com), a new website by the Guest Choice Network. She also ties in a Sacramento Bee series on the environmental industry by Pulitzer recipient Tom Knudsen that we've also discussed (http://www.sacbee.com/static/archive/news/projects/environment/index02.html). Dispelling the commonly held - particularly by the media - belief that organizations claiming to be acting in the public interest are grass-roots efforts that have appeared more-or-less spontaneously because of a concerned citizenry, Ms. Strassel shows how they are interconnected and funded not by individuals but by large foundations. In her words, "All of the information listed (on the ActivistCash website) is an eye-opener, but a couple of things stick out. The first is the degree to which the top management of most of these organizations are engaged in a lovefest. ActivistCash.com not only provides financial records, but the names of trustees, directors and management. Click on these names, and you are transported to the many other organizations the activist in question is involved with…. Perhaps the other major revelation of ActivistCash.com is the link between established charitable foundations and controversial activist groups. Many of the country's larger and more prestigious foundations--from the Pew Charitable Trusts, to the Packard Foundation--have images of high-minded organizations that promote 'worthy' projects in culture and education. As ActivistCash.com shows, though, many are giving millions to the more extreme activist organizations, not to mention promoting such views themselves." Many of us have been at meetings or hearings where members of various groups claim to be representing "the public interest." It appears that the interests that some of them are representing aren't that public at all.

Government biologists "cooking the books" over endangered species? - As reported in the Washington Times on December 17 (Rare lynx hairs found in forests exposed as hoax, A. Hudson, 12/17/01), government wildlife biologists (two of whom worked for the state of Washington, two for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and three for the U.S. Forest Service) planted false evidence of Canadian lynx frequenting two national forests in Washington state. DNA testing indicated that they had placed hair at three sites in the forests from one lynx that was actually in a wildlife preserve and another that was an escaped pet being held by the federal government. Had their deception not been discovered, "the government likely would have banned many forms of recreation and use of natural resources in the Gifford Pinchot National Forest and Wenatchee National Forest in Washington state…. To protect the habitat of the felines, roads would have to be closed to vehicles, and off-road vehicles, snowmobiles, skis and snowshoes would have been banned. Livestock grazing and tree thinning also would have been banned." The involved scientists subsequently claimed that they had only carried out the deception to see if a laboratory was capable of properly identifying lynxes from hair samples. "Forestry officials, conservationists and retired federal officials said they were outraged that the data were tampered with and said they are skeptical it was an attempt to test the lab." Considering the many billions of dollars that federal mandates - particularly those involving the Endangered Species and Marine Mammal Protection Acts - are costing the US economy each year, we can only hope that the involved agencies begin to pay closer attention to the "science" their programs are based upon.

In keeping with the holiday season??? - We've referred before to a chat room that has served as a focus for anti-commercial fishing activists. In a recent message thread there referring to an article on the menhaden controversy (http://www.fishingnj.org/artpogynj.htm) a member wrote "I try and stay away from Nil's (Nils Stolpe, G.S.S.A. Communications Director and author of the article) site and the garbage that he puts up there.... This guy's like the Osama Bin Ladden of the commercial fishing world…." The rest of the thread continues in a similar - though not quite so repugnant - vein. The fact that there are people who dislike anyone interfering with their hobby so strongly that they need to express themselves like this comes as no surprise. We accept it. However, the site's webmaster, who is generally scrupulous in maintaining the decorum on his site (not allowing even mild profanity), has seen fit to allow this post to remain there since December 15, generating more ill will yet with no even vaguely substantive comments on or refutations of material in the article nor any objective information regarding the fishery (though, to his credit, one member did suggest that the Bin Ladden reference was "way over the edge."). This represents a worrisome trend on the internet. Rather than thoughtful, reasoned discussions we see attacks reducing arguments to the lowest common denominator, with purposefully generated ill-will (today what better way to do that than by invoking Bin Ladden's name?) aimed at inciting political pressure. And, according to the participants in these exercises in "democracy," this is supposed to be a more effective substitute for a fisheries management system based on objective science. We wonder what James Madison would think. (Note: if you would like the URL of the chat room please send Nils Stolpe an email at njsha@voicenet.com.

December 15, 2001

New England Council sets management priorities for the coming years – At it’s most recent meeting the Council agreed to focus on the following fisheries/tasks for 2002: #1 – Groundfish - Finish Framework Adjustment 36 and Amendment 13 to the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan; #2 – Monkfish - Develop Amendment 2 to the monkfish FMP; #3 – Skates - Develop a new skate FMP; #4 – Scallops - Complete Amendment 10 to the scallop FMP; #5 - Habitat - Develop an "omnibus amendment" that will modify several FMPs as required by court order; #6 - Red crab - Complete the new red crab FMP. The Council also adopted a “secondary” priority list including development of Amendment 14 to the groundfish plan to address whiting issues and development of Amendment 1 to the herring FMP primarily to address limited entry and effort in Area 1 A and possibly Area 3. (J. Plante, New England Council sets 2002 priorities, Commercial Fisheries News, 12/01)

Rebound of Chesapeake Blue Crabs – Following nine straight years of declining crab populations in Chesapeake Bay, Virginia Institute of Marine Science researcher Rom Lipcius has reported that the number of mature female crabs in the bay has doubled in the past year. While, according to Lipcius "We're not going into a collapse, and we may be starting a rebound," the size of the female "brood" population still remains 80 percent below the long-term average and continues to cause concern. Last year, the number of breeding-age females stood at 92 percent below average. (L. Latane, Blue crab numbers turning around? [Richmond, Va] Times-Dispatch, 12/14/01.)

Oil rich foundations to the rescue again – The Pew Charitable Trusts, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Rockefeller Family Fund, the Turner Foundation and several others have now formed Oceana, “an international ocean advocacy organization with the singular mission to protect and restore ocean life. Oceana is creating an unprecedented international movement that will work through public policy, science, legal action, grassroots mobilization, and public education to conserve the world’s oceans, the source of life.”  (http://www.oceana.org/). In an press release announcing the settlement of a lawsuit against the federal government that was negotiated by the new organization, Oceana, Senior Attorney Eric Bilsky said “Scientists tell us that certain fishing gears, such as shrimp trawls and scallop dredges, act like bulldozers on ocean habitats,” continuing what is becoming a tradition among the not-for-profits of spending millions of oil dollars to discredit commercial fishing at every available opportunity (for another side of the fishing gear argument, go to http://www.fishingnj.org/dirtrawl.htm.)

And while we’re on the subject…. – “Timber industry representatives say international environmental groups are trying to establish a worldwide ‘eco-dictatorship,’ by creating environmental myths and controlling the forestry industry. Nilder Costa, a mechanical engineer with EIR Industries, a regional consultant firm, warned participants at the Plywood and Tropical Timber International Congress in Belem over the weekend that environmental groups want to dominate the industry by way of the Forest Certification Council (FSC), a private group headquartered in Mexico that is trying to establish new restrictions on logging. Costa called the green agenda ‘colonialism with a new face’ under an ‘eco-dictatorship,’ and he detailed how international environmental groups lobby to restrict the timber industry and hurt local populations in the process…. Many of the presenters at the conference accused the green movement of creating myths about the Amazon without regard for science.  They pointed out that the Amazon is one of the most intact and least endangered forests on the planet, nearly 90% intact. The idea that the Amazon supplies 1/5 of the world’s oxygen was refuted and several speakers noted how tropical forests are resilient and regenerate ” (M. Morano, Timber Industry Warns of 'Eco-Dictatorship, CNSNews.com, 11/27/01). There are frightening  parallels between what’s being done to the Amazon lumber industry and to the commercial fishing industry – up to and including a Marine Stewardship Council established by multinational conglomerate Unilever and the World Wildlife Fund certifying “sustainable” fisheries.

December 5, 2001

The never ending story (like the Energizer bunny, some things go on and on and on…) - Something called the "Salty Dogs" is evidently bombarding New Jersey legislators with more misinformation on the menhaden fishery. Supposed reasons for this recurring effort by recreational anglers (documented attempts to close down this fishery began in the early 1900s) had generally revolved around the idea that menhaden fishermen were catching other gamefish along with menhaden. When this was disproved, the anti-fishing argument shifted to menhaden fishermen catching so much of their food that striped bass, fluke and other gamefish were starving. With recent "bumper crops" of all of our most popular gamefish species, this supposed argument has crashed in flames as well. But not willing to let a good anti-fishing campaign die its well-deserved death, the "Salty Dogs" and other recreational fishing groups are now claiming that menhaden are far too valuable for removing nutrients from our inshore waters to catch for any reason (except, of course, for use as bait) and that continuing the fishery will also put our osprey populations at risk. They also argue that closing down the fishery for fishmeal will actually protect New Jersey's menhaden bait fishery.

While the idea that menhaden, as filter feeders, remove nutrients from the water column certainly has some validity, to suggest that the removal of part of the menhaden population would reduce water quality is a leap of faith that isn't supported by any research that we are aware of (in fact, were one given to specious arguments, one could say that removing the menhaden once they had ingested the nutrients would be even more beneficial to water quality). As far as the osprey are concerned, in their attack on the menhaden fishery the "Salty Dogs" quote a state official saying "a lack of food, particularly menhaden, in the Great Bay area might be the cause of a recent slight decline in osprey offspring in the area. Osprey will eat a variety of fish, but prefer hunting menhaden, and we haven't been seeing a lot of menhaden." Puzzlingly, there is no menhaden fishing allowed in Great Bay, so it's a bit difficult to determine what point is being made here. Equally, or perhaps more, puzzling is the fact that Great Bay, which is considered one of the most pristine estuaries on the East coast, is evidently able to maintain its water quality even in the absence of what, according to the "Salty Dogs," is the invaluable contribution of menhaden to removing nutrients.

As far as “protecting” the New Jersey bait fishery, New Jersey’s bait fishermen totally support the right of the reduction boats to harvest menhaden in New Jersey waters in conformance with the effective management plan put in place by the ASMFC.

Over the last 50 years, average menhaden landings on the East coast have declined by approximately 50 percent. Once ranging up to 700,000 metric tons a year, over the last five years annual landings have averaged only about 200,000 metric tons. The fishery is managed by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), of which New Jersey is a member. In a report on the fishery released last June, the ASMFC wrote "The status of the menhaden stock is considered to be healthy and not over fished…. the joint technical and advisory committee (AMAC) has concluded that the stock should be considered healthy, and that no additional restrictions should be imposed on the fishery at this time."

Yet again we see an attempt to close down a viable and sustainable fishery by recreational anglers. And why do they want to close it down? Not for any rational reasons relating to the health of the fisheries (at least as far as the professional managers' understanding of these fisheries extends), and not for any documented "environmental' reasons (if we can use Great Bay, with it's apparently natural lack of menhaden, as a model for the rest of our estuaries), but solely because they don't want to share their waters or their fish with others. Fisheries managers are beyond that. The New Jersey legislature should be as well.

Ground broken for relocated Fulton Fish Market - "New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani broke ground Monday on the city's new $85 million wholesale fish market at Hunts Point Food Distribution Center in the Bronx, which will replace the 160-year-old Fulton Fish Market located at the South Street Seaport in lower Manhattan by the. Summer of 2003. The new facility – a 450,000-square-foot state-of-the-art wholesale facility on 30 acres of vacant land at the southern end of Hunts Point –will be fully enclosed and temperature controlled. The new market will also be 40,000 square feet larger than Fulton market and create almost 200 additional jobs, bringing about 1,000 jobs to the Bronx. All 55 vendors currently located at the Fulton market have agreed to move to the new market at Hunt’s Point, a city spokesperson told WorldCatch News Network.” (Mayor Giuliani breaks ground on new Fulton Fish Market WorldCatch News Network, 11/29/01)

November 27, 2001

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Sea Grant Program starts a program to link commercial fishing vessels to students in their classrooms – In a collaborative effort between the fishing industry and educators funded by the Northeast Consortium, commercial fishing vessels will be used to teach kindergarten through high school students “the complexities of marine resource utilization, marine ecology and life as a fisherman.” Among the program goals will be the presentation of “a balanced picture of commercial fishing, helping to build an enlightened citizenryregarding marine resource utilization.” During the first year of the program twelve vessel/classroom partnerships will be implemented, using a variety of commercial fishing vessels from Maine, New Hampshire and Massachusetts. In the second year the program will be expanded to include more boats and approximately 100 classrooms. (Adopt-a-Boat: linking commercial fishing vessels to classrooms, C. Goudey, MIT Sea Grant).

Endangered bird a problem for fish farmers – “The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is proposing to hand the management of rapidly growing numbers of fish eating birds known as double-crested cormorants over to individual states and federal agricultural managers. The agency has released a draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for public review that will guide development of a new nationwide management strategy for double-crested cormorants, which can compete with humans for fish. The EIS analyzes various options for managing the burgeoning cormorant populations to reduce conflicts with recreational anglers, commercial aquaculture and other human activites.…Today, the population is at historic highs, due to the presence of ample food in their summer and winter ranges, federal and state protection, and reduced contaminant levels. The population resurgence of double-crested cormorants has led to increasing concern about the birds' impact on commercial and recreational fishery resources.…USFWS proposes to issue a new Depredation Order authorizing state, tribal and federal land management agencies to authorize killing double-crested cormorants at fish farms and hatcheries, and expand the program to include killing the birds at their winter roosts. Public comments on the draft EIS will be accepted until January 15, 2002.” (Environmental News Network, 11/27/01)

Recreational fluke harvest again exceeds management program allowances – According to preliminary figures, the recreational mortality of fluke (also known as summer flounder and one of the most popular seafood products from local waters) was reportedly almost 50% higher than allowed for in the management plan. The fluke stocks having responded to stringent management measures much more rapidly than originally envisioned in the management plan, and the plan (and the entire federal fishery management process) lacking the flexibility that would allow for sensible management, the recreational harvest will be further reduced – at least on paper – again next year. Of course, there being so many fluke available, the new recreational quota will again be exceeded, and even more stringent management measures will result. And of course, because the commercial fishermen have again stayed within their quota, recreational fishing activists are arguing that the commercial share of the fishery should be reduced and the recreational share increased. Sort of as a reward for them catching way more than their quota for four years running, we guess.

Lobster Addendum III public hearings scheduled for New Jersey – December 5 starting at 7:00 PM, Galloway Township Library, Jimmie Leeds Road, Absecon, New Jersey. December 6 starting at 7:00 PM, Belmar Municipal Courtroom, 601 Main Street, Belmar, New Jersey. For more information, please contact Bruce Freeman at (609) 292-2083.

Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council meeting (with the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission) - December 11-13, 2001 at the Sheraton Society Hill, One Dock Street, Philadelphia. On the agenda: 2002 recreational fishery management measures for summer flounder, scup, and black sea bass fisheries; Ecosystems Management Committee to identify Council and Commission quota set-aside priorities and the criteria for evaluating proposals submitted under the 2003 program; scoping meeting to initiate Amendment 9 to the Squid, Mackerel, and Butterfish Fishery Management Plan.

November 9, 2001

Independent scientific panel rejects federal government shark science – “In November 2000, commercial fishermen and the United States Government settled a long standing court dispute regarding the scientific and economic data and analyses used by the Government to set restrictive shark fishing quotas in the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico.  As part of the settlement, the parties agreed to an independent scientific review of the scientific data and analyses used by the Government to set these quotas.  Litigation efforts had blocked the imposition of Federal quotas that would have effectively eliminated commercial shark fishing.  The results of the independent scientific review are just in.  A comfortable majority of the five reviewers concluded that the “scientific conclusions and scientific management recommendations” used to set the shark quotas and related measures at issue were not based on “scientifically reasonable uses of appropriate fisheries stock assessment techniques and the best available biological and fishery information relating to large coastal sharks.”

Robert Spaeth, Executive Director of the Southern Offshore Fishing Association, the lead Plaintiff in the case, said, “We hope the review will bring a new, more fair and science-based era in federal shark fishing management.”  David E. Frulla of Washington, D.C.’s Brand & Frulla, P.C. and counsel to the shark fishermen, stated, “It has been a long road. We are pleased that the independent scientific review confirmed and vindicated the shark fishermen’s concerns.  We applaud the Government’s decision to let its science be subject to impartial scrutiny to help move matters forward.”

 For more information, please contact Mr. Spaeth at (727) 398-2692, and Mr. Frulla at (202) 662-9700.
(This information was prepared by the plaintiffs in the shark management law suit. The reviews are available in their entirety at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/Shark_Peer_Reviews.htm)

Punitive damages award in Exxon Valdez rejected – A federal appeals court has rejected the record $5.3 billion dollars awarded by a jury to fishermen and other plaintiffs resulting from the 1989 accident that fouled over 3,000 square miles of Alaskan waters. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit unanimously ruled that the over 17 to 1 ration of compensatory to punitive damages awarded (compensatory damages were $287 million) was excessive, citing the ratio of 4 to 1 established by the Supreme Court in two previous cases.

A monopoly on the fish in our coastal waters? - Imagine how much fresh fish would cost the non-fishing public if they were supplied one at a time by a highly inefficient, generally inexperienced rod-and-reel angler using a $500 fishing pole throwing $10 hunks of wood or plastic as bait who had ridden to the beach he was fishing from in a shiny, new $35,000 sport utility vehicle. For thousands of years people have recognized that catching fish with nets is far more efficient than catching fish using other techniques. Commercial fishermen, whose ability to efficiently catch large numbers of fish determines whether they can stay in business or not, use nets accordingly. That's what allows consumers to afford ocean-caught fish and shellfish. This seems pretty simple, doesn't it? Yet a handful of fishing hobbyists who fail to grasp this simple truth showed up at a New Jersey Marine Fisheries Council meeting last week demanding that commercial fishing not be allowed in areas where they want to fish. The reason these so-called "sportsmen" couldn't catch as many striped bass as they wanted to was because the migration, which brings the fish within their very limited reach, was several weeks late this year. Since then, according to fishing columnists, the fish have started to come into New Jersey waters in droves and are available in large numbers to anglers. Yet these angling "stalwarts," incapable of recognizing either the limitations of their chosen method of fishing or their possession of sufficient skills to employ it effectively, sadly needed someone to blame their ineptitude upon, and the "netters" got singled out. It would certainly be a sad state of affairs if tens of thousands of consumers could be made to suffer because a few self-centered hobbyists won't recognize their own limitation.

October 28, 2001

Why don't they just cook?  - Today's celebrity chefs "aren't just peddling a better risotto or personalized nonstick skillets. Today's celebrity chefs have assumed a graver mission: to school the country--or at least its aspiring elites--on the politics of food. Gone is Betty Crocker's vibrant optimism. Today's activist chefs are dour. From their menus to their multimedia bully pulpits, more and more of America's big chefs routinely preach not a joyful gospel of God's great abundance, but rather a message of doom and scarcity, as if the 20th century and the agricultural revolution had never happened. In their worldview, food is no longer something to be enjoyed; it is something to be feared and understood through a complicated set of new rules that acknowledge the global implications of every plate of pâté. Though most Americans just want to have fun and tuck into a good meal, spending upwards of $128 billion on high-end dining every year, the uptown chefs just can't lighten up. Instead, they increasingly serve up a message of humorless moral suasion that increasingly ends up on the plates of policymakers around the world." This article by Greg Critser puts the jaundiced views - as well as the undue influence - of these chefs that have become so adept at grabbing publicity in the proper perspective. (Mean Cuisine, Washington Monthly, 07/01,http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0107.critser.html)  While he doesn't get into seafood, Mr. Critser does mention the Chef's Collaborative, whose heavily financed forays into the seafood industry have been covered by Guest Choice on their website (Catch of the Day: Politically Correct Fish, http://www.nannyculture.com/article_detail.cfm?ARTICLE_ID=119)

Welcome words from the new head of the National Marine Fisheries Service -  Speaking at the eighth annual Fisheries Forum in Gloucester, Massachusetts on October 19, NMFS Administrator Bill Hogarth noted that "the American fishing industry is an important economic resource that generates $52 billion a year. We need to try and operate the fishery as a business…. We need to try and develop a fishery that's sustainable and dependable." He stressed the need to streamline the rulemaking process so fishermen will know what's ahead and be better able to plan. He also emphasized the need to include fishermen in discussions at all steps in the process -- not just during public hearings when proposed rules are already formulated. "We want to do a better job with stakeholders when there's not an issue on the table," he said. "We need to be more transparent about how we do business -- not just do it behind closed doors." (New NMFS director: "We need to do better," Gloucester Standard Times, 10/23/01)

Pop-up timers come to the seafood industry - Morey's Seafood International of Golden Valley, Minnesota, has introduced a line of ready-to-cook salmon products with pop-up cooking timers similar to those that tell chefs when turkeys are done cooking. This should go a long way towards demystifying fish cookery. (Pop goes the salmon? http://www.worldcatch.com, 10/30/01) For how these timers work, see the How Stuff Works website http://www.howstuffworks.com/pop-up-timer.htm.

Cranberry farmers to switch to aquaculture? - Speaking of turkeys, researchers from the Western Massachusetts Center for Sustainable Agriculture at Hampshire College in Amherst, Massachusetts, are trying to provide Bay State cranberry growers with technology to produce fish on their farms. Utilizing systems developed by Clemson University, the bogs would be used to treat the water that was circulated thru adjacent fish pens. Production levels of 10,000 pounds of fish per acre of water are anticipated, though the decision on which fish species to culture hasn't been made. (Some cranberry growers turn to fish, Associated Press, 10/29/01)

Department of the Interior oks sale of offshore oil/gas leases in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico - Interior Secretary Gale Norton announced on October 26 that 1.5 million acres would be opened to oil and gas exploration. According to Secretary Norton, "The Interior Department calculates the area contains 1.25 trillion cubic feet of natural gas - enough to serve one million U.S. families for 15 years, the area also contains 185 million barrels of oil - enough to fuel the automobiles of a million families for nearly six years." (Offshore Energy Production Headed For Gulf Of Mexico, Environmental News Service, 10/30/01, http://ens-news.com/ens/oct2001/2001L-10-29-09.html)

October 19, 2001

More “objectivity” from the Newark Star Ledger - - In his October 14 column, Al Ristori wrote of a group of recreational fishermen in a boat anchored in one of the canyons off the New Jersey coast when a “dragger practically ran into them.” The crew of the fishing boat, according to Mr. Ristori, then “turned off its lights to prevent identification.” He continued “Unfortunately, that story is not unique as commercial boats often have only one person at the wheel and if he falls asleep that boat becomes a ‘loose cannon.’”

This kind of “reporting” can’t help but leave the reader with a bad image of commercial fishermen, can it? But Mr. Ristori also writes that the commercial boat passed “75 yards off the bow” of the angler’s boat. Perhaps it’s a bit close, but ¾ of the length of a football field hardly classifies as a near tragedy. Considering that, why would the dragger’s operators wish to avoid identification? And, considering that there’s neither any legal requirement nor any practical reason for a vessel to have it’s name or other identification numbers illuminated, it’s difficult to see how turning of any lights could make identification more difficult. The recreational anglers reported that they could see no one at the helm of the dragger when they “flashed” spotlights on its bridge – a practice we wouldn’t recommend when a vessel is coming towards you – and therefore they, or Mr. Ristori, leaped to the conclusion that it was on autopilot and the crew were all asleep. In fact, prudent seamanship demands a vessel’s crew occasionally leave the bridge for a less-encumbered look at the surrounding area, particularly when around other vessels. Of course this possibility wouldn’t be consistent with the image of irresponsible commercial fishermen that Mr. Ristori goes to so much trouble to create. So we have one vessel passing another in the night – no collision, no damage, and to our way of thinking not even any frayed nerves. Yet Mr. Ristori manages to twist it into yet another assault on working fishermen doing nothing more than pursuing their trade. Shouldn’t the readers of the Star Ledger expect better?

Federal funds to environmental organizations – “Last year about $137 million flowed to 20 major environmental nonprofit groups -- an average of $377,000 a day -- up 27 percent from 1999. Since 1998, more than $400 million in federal money has been granted to environmental groups. Four groups -- The Nature Conservancy, Ducks Unlimited, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, and the World Wildlife Fund -- have gotten more than two-thirds of the money since 1998. More than 15 nonprofits received $1 million a year or more…. More than half of the money is used to help groups purchase, restore or protect land and species. That process, which often involves mingling federal and private dollars to maximize their impact, has achieved dramatic results for fish, wildlife and open space across the United States…. The rest of the federal money is channeled to hundreds of projects and purposes, worldwide….But federal audits, reports and records show public money also trickles into more controversial activities, such as lobbying and advocacy. Some also helps fund government adversaries.” (Who helps fund green groups?, T. Knudson, Sacramento Bee 10/21/01)

Upcoming meetings:
     New Jersey Marine Fisheries Council – 11/01/01 starting at 4:00 p.m. at the Galloway Township Library on Jimmie Leeds Road in Absecon, NJ – Update on progress on 2002 regulatory amendment (gill net, fish pot, blue crab, lobster, black sea bass).
     New England/Mid-Atlantic Council joint Monkfish Oversight Committee – 11/05/01 starting at 9:30 a.m. at the Kings Grant Inn on Trask Road in Danvers, MA (978 774-6800) – The Committee will develop recommendations for adjustments to the FMP for the 2002 fishing year.
     New England Council Skate Committee – 11/05/01 starting at 6:00 pm (directly following the Monkfish Committee meeting) at the Kings Grant Inn described above.
     New England Council – 11/06/01 to 11/08/01 at Tavern on the Harbor, Gloucester, MA (978 283-4200) – Whiting Committee at 9:05 on Tuesday, Sea Scallops Committee at 10:00 on Tuesday, Dogfish at 3:00 on Tuesday, Groundfish Committee at 1:00 on Wednesday, Monkfish Committee at 1:30 on Thursday (note that days/times for Committee reports are tentative.

October 11, 2001

Here we go again – A post appeared on a recreational fishing bulletin board a while back that reported on a commercial gillnetter fishing off a New Jersey beach who had returned a lure lost by the author. He wrote “As I looked over his gunnels all I could see was mounds upon mounds of weakfish, stripers, bluefish, croakers, and albies - filled to the brim. I was absolutely disgusted.” The following thread of messages has included countless incidents of fishermen being called “rapists,” threats to sink their boats and destroy their gear, directions and exhortations to get the appropriate authorities to stop the “slaughter” and punish the involved fishermen, calls for legislative action because the appropriate authorities are incapable or uninterested in apprehending and punishing the flagrant lawbreakers, acknowledgements that the boats had no names affixed to their sterns so they could break the law anonymously, and even accusations that the involved gillnetters were acting traitorously by knowingly breaking the law while all of the enforcement officials were involved with matters of coastal security.

All of this, of course, was in response to fishermen who were working where they are legally permitted to work, using gear they are legally permitted to use, during hours when they are legally permitted to operate, and most probably catching and keeping fish they are legally permitted to catch and keep (we doubt very much that any commercial fisherman in New Jersey would keep any bycatch striped bass, his disgust at having to waste perfectly good fish that he couldn’t avoid catching being more than balanced by the formidable fines he would have to pay if he were caught keeping them and the necessity of him having to sell them himself out-of-state).

Along with the name-calling, calls to action and demonstrations of complete ignorance of applicable laws and regulations was a theme that went something like “we can’t catch any of the fish that are obviously out there with our rods and reels, so why should they be allowed to catch them with their nets? There are more of us, aren’t there?” The author of the original post, obviously a firm believer that no good deed should go unpunished and that no chance to unjustifiably persecute commercial fishing should be passed up, identified himself a charter boat operator, someone who is in “competition” with recreational fishermen in general and inshore gillnetters in particular. Considering the ability of the internet to mobilize people behind just about any cause imaginable, we suspect the fact that commercial fishermen had the temerity to successfully fish in the same areas where anglers don’t want them to is going to result in some level of pressure on the New Jersey Legislature. If it does, we trust that our Legislators will make the fact-finding efforts that the anglers behind all of this ruckus so obviously didn’t.

A few quotes from the “what right to our fish do they have” thread (excuse the misspellings; they aren’t ours):

· “don't buy fin-fish either at the fish market or out to dinner, encourage your family and friends to do the same. If family and friends want to eat fish, catch some for them.
· Until then, about the only thing that will stop them is a bazooka (are they within range?).
· I guess it is like the greedy doctors and chiropractors that rape the auto insurance company, get absolutely filthy rich, and get away with it, and we all have to pay the price via higher insurance premiums.
· Is their any oversite of these rapist at sea? I'm thinking flaming arrows might keep them farther from the beach.
· I say we get that debris from the WTC dumped in strategic spots so you can't drop a gill net within 3 miles without getting hung up on steel and concrete.
· I just pray they are an old dying breed like the clammers and baymen of Long Island.

(As an interesting note, several of the participants in the bulletin board above were suggesting the organization of a consumer boycott of seafood restaurants, retailers, etc. who serve commercially caught fish. This, it appears would be their way of showing their displeasure at having to share their fish with the non-fishing public. We doubt that many members of the public, or many anglers, for that manner, would support the idea that all of the striped bass, bluefish, weakfish, fluke, flounder, mackerel, tuna, mahi-mahi, etc. belong to those that can catch them with rod and reel and that the rest of us should be satisfied with farm-grown salmon and tilapia, frozen imports or should learn how to fish ourselves.)

Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council elects new officers – At a meeting on Tuesday in New Bern, North Carolina, the members of the Council elected Ricks Savage of Maryland as Chairman and Ron Smith of Delaware as Vice-chairman.

October 1, 2001

The real numbers behind the shark “scares” – In the latest edition of National Fisherman, “Harvest of Blame” by Hoyt Childers presents what is the most compelling argument against the “too much fishing is behind the recent rash of shark attacks” theories that has so far been advanced by the anti-fishing claque (literally, a group of professional “fans” hired by performers to applaud at their own performances). Based on the entirely reasonable assumptions that the number of shark attacks in any given year is a function of the number of people in the water and the number of sharks in the same water, and that the number of sharks in the water is inversely related to the number of sharks harvested by fishermen, Mr. Childers shows that in Florida the number of shark attacks per year per million visitors doubled from 1990 to 2000 (from 0.243 to 0.476) while the shark landings during the same years decreased from 12.2 million pounds to 1.8 million pounds. It’s reasonable to assume that the same relationship would hold in other coastal states as well. Additionally, he proposes that the banning of most types of net fishing in Florida’s near-shore waters in 1950 has contributed to the buildup of local concentration of sharks, the corresponding increase in forage species attracting sharks to the same areas frequented by bathers.

Politically Correct fish? – On Nannyculture.com, one of our most highly recommended web sites, the Guest Choice Network, “a coalition of more than 30,000 restaurant and tavern operators that works to preserve for consumers a full menu of dining and entertainment choices,” takes on EcoFish, a seafood distributor recently covered by an Associated Press article, that has been endorsed by National Audubon Society, World Wildlife Fund and Environmental Defense. According to Guest Choice “The EcoFish scam works like this: They influence the mass media to tell you which fish are politically correct to serve and eat. They direct you to ‘approved’ vendors that sell products at an inflated price. They funnel a portion of the profits (25% in EcoFish’s case) to their friends at Audubon, WWF, and Environmental Defense — as ‘charitable’ contributions.” The Guest Choice staff then go on to explore the relationships between EcoFish, the Chef’s Collaborative (whose “organizational principles recommend organic cooking ingredients and across-the-board cuts in meat consumption.”), various “environmental” organizations that are members of the anti-fishing claque, and the Pew Trusts and Packard Foundation. They also tie in Fenton Communications, “the same high-powered Washington PR firm that brought us the Alar-on-apples food scare,” (see PR Watch for more insight on Alar, apples, Fenton and Natural Resources Defense Council at http://www.prwatch.org/prwissues/1997Q2/alar.html or do a web search on “Alar Fenton apples) and the Marine Stewardship Council. The column also has some interesting observations on SeaWeb's Save the Swordfish campaign.

In Cat’s Cradle Kurt Vonnegut wrote, “Nice, nice, very nice--So many different people in the same device.” Along with groups like Guest Choice, we’re starting to get a handle on who’s involved in the multi-million dollar “device” that is so intent on demonizing fishing businesses and manipulating public taste. What’s a little more di8fficult to unravel is why they’re doing it. (The Guest Choice column is at http://www.nannyculture.com/article_detail.cfm?ARTICLE_ID=119)

Mid-Atlantic Council to meet in New Bern, North Carolina on October 9-11 – The meeting will be at the New Bern Riverfront Convention Center, 406 Craven Street, New Bern, NC. Agenda items are approval of 2002/2003 management measures for the Spiny Dogfish fishery and the Monkfish fishery, discussion of management actions regarding Amendment 1 to the Spiny Dogfish Fishery Management Plan. “he Ecosystems Management Committee will meet on Tuesday afternoon to receive information regarding the Magnuson-Stevens Act reauthorization which may, or may not, include provisions for the Council to adopt some type of ecosystem management approach. Following the Ecosystems Management Committee meeting, the head of the Atlantic Coast Bottlenose Dolphin Take Reduction Team will provide an overview of the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Tere will be three presentations on Marine Protected Areas on Wednesday afternoon. n Thursday morning, the Council will convene a public hearing to take comment on a proposed regulatory amendment to the Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fishery Management Plan and then conduct its regular business activities.” (From Marla Trollan, MAFMC Public Affairs Specialist, 302-674-2331, ext. 32, mtrollan@mafmc.org)

September 19, 2001

Does any group “deserve” fishery resources? - In a recent article in the Asbury Park Press about summer flounder (A flukey season, 09/14/01), John Geiser quotes a spokesman for the Recreational Fishing Alliance (RFA) asking the question “Who is entitled to the greatest share of a limited resource?” Mr. Geiser then goes on “He (the RFA spokesman) claims that it is not an angler versus ‘consumer’ question as spokesmen for the commercial industry claim because an angler is a consumer. ‘If we are talking about one fish, who gets it, the one who spends $40.52 and his time to catch it on hook and line or the one who spends $9 a pound for someone to do it for him with a net?’ he asks.’” (To keep the RFA “argument” in perspective, according to the latest National Marine Fisheries Service statistics, in 2000 slightly over 10 million people fished in the coastal waters of the United States – and somewhere around 270 million people didn’t.)

While we doubt that it was intentional, in Mr. Geiser’s article the RFA has hit on the question that should be providing the basis for every allocation decision that is made by marine resource managers. The fish in our coastal waters being a resource that belongs to everyone, how should they be apportioned to the public?

Summer flounder is a particularly apt subject for such a discussion because it is a species that is extremely popular with consumers (meaning those 270 million members of the non-fishing public) as well as with recreational anglers.

The RFA cites Virginia Institute of Marine Science data that shows “harvest expenses per pound were $40.52 for anglers versus $1.27 for netters,” and claims that “the difference in contribution to the economy is obvious, but is still ignored by government.” The RFA argument is, we suppose, that because recreational anglers pay so much more per pound in pursuing their hobby than commercial fishermen do to provide competitively priced fish to the marketplace, the hobbyists deserve all of the fish that they want to catch and the rest of us should make do with their leftovers, whatever they’re not interested in catching.

This seems about as valid as arguing that the backyard gardener is more “valuable” to the economy than the production farmer because each year he or she will produce a basket or two of extremely expensive tomatoes (accounting realistically for land and labor and other production costs) while the real farmer will produce thousands of bushels at a competitive price.

And of course the species that the recreational anglers want all to themselves are those that are most highly regarded as table-fare; summer flounder, striped bass, mahi mahi, yellowfin tuna, etc.

As suspiciously distorted and self-serving as the RFA argument at first appears (the words “arrogance” and “elitism” immediately spring to mind), on further consideration it’s even farther off target. The lion’s share of seafood consumed in the U.S. is eaten in restaurants. By the time the restaurant patron, one of our 270 million non-fishermen or women, gets to enjoy his or her fish, its cost has doubled or trebled or more. As part of a meal, the RFA’s $9 a pound commercially caught flounder fillet will generate two $10 or $20 or $30 meals, easily eclipsing the $40.52 a pound that, in the RFA view, is supposed to justify their monopoly of entire species.

As we’ve written before, a lot of people – evidently at least 270 million of them in the United States – either don’t have the money, the time, or the interest to go out and catch their own fish. They are, however, willing to pay a fair price for the fish they aren’t willing to catch themselves, particularly if those fish are ocean-fresh and locally caught. But, according to the people at the RFA, this shouldn’t make a difference. Because their members have the spare time and can afford to spend the money (for an idea of how much money, see below), and because they have the interest, they think that all of the fish that they want to catch should “belong” to them. Is that justification for denying over 96% of the people who live in the United States the opportunity to enjoy the fish that belong to everyone? While the RFA people think so, and while they’ve convinced some of our elected officials in Trenton and Washington, somehow we doubt it.

And how can anglers spend $40 a pound to catch their fish? – In the same Asbury Park Press edition, Mr. Geiser has a review of a recreational fishing boat. In describing this boat, he writes “The family on a tight budget has few options when looking for a high-quality, 23-foot boat, but there are opportunities.” In the words of a sales rep for the boat "This is a back-to-basics boat," built by “a down-to-earth company that specializes in boat-engine packages for the average American family." This bargain-basement boat can be had “ready to go” for $28,995. Mr. Geiser titled the article “A boat that fits the budget.” Who’s budget? If it takes $30,000 worth of fiberglass and hydrocarbons-spewing steel just to get started as a recreational fisherman, no wonder the RFA’s fish cost their anglers $40 a pound. But is that any reason for them to assume that they therefore have more rights to fisheries resources than anyone else. (For even more perspective, Robert Healey, President of the RFA, is CEO of Viking Yachts in New Gretna, NJ [website http://www.vikingyachts.com/index1.htm]. The fishing boats he builds probably start out in the neighborhood of half a million dollars.)

July 26, 2001

Second largest food retailer in the United Kingdom reports huge increase in seafood sales - Sainsbury's (which also owns the New England supermarket chains Shaw's and Stars) saw an increase in fish sales of 30% in the twelve week period ending on June 23rd. While part of this increase was attributed to consumer apprehension about red meat because of foot-and-mouth and mad cow disease, Craig Leach, Sainsbury's fish buyer, feels that a large part of the increase is due to the fact that overall, fish sales are a "growth area." (UK's No. 2 retailer reports huge UK seafood sales, M. Browne & B. Charron, 07/27/01, IntraFish.com). Fortunately, this increase in the demand for high quality fish isn't just a phenomena in the UK.

That's one way of looking at it - In a column dated July 13, Al Ristori wrote in the Asbury Park Press "Doormats (large summer flounder) have never been common, but are once again a more realistic goal since the management plan curbed excessive commercial fishing." Just a few months ago Mr. Ristori was arguing in print for a larger allocation to the recreational anglers because they had historically taken more summer flounder than the commercial fishermen. Since the species has been under rigorous management the commercial harvest has been maintained well within its quota while the recreational quota has been exceeded year after year. But, in spite of that, we have an ocean full of summer flounder and a federal management program that's inflicted unreasonably low quotas on both sectors. Instead of manufacturing opportunities to drum up opposition to commercial fishing whenever he can, Mr. Ristori might perhaps consider using his position to argue for more effective management for everyone.

Good news for Gulf of Maine (GOM) cod and Gulf of Maine cod fishermen - In a recent report the National Marine Fisheries Service updated the status of GOM codfish, as determined by the 33rd Stock Assessment Review Committee (SARC), a group of fisheries scientists brought together twice each year to update the status of various fish stocks. The assessments done by the SARC serve as the foundations of the fishery management plans created and updated by the regional management councils. According to the SARC the spawning stock biomass - that is, the weight of fish in the stock that are large enough to spawn - has increased from 21.8 million pounds to 50.7 million pounds between 1998 and 2001. (Gulf of Maine Fish Stocks Improve, Worldcatch News Network, 07/25/01, http://www.worldcatch.com)

And bad news as well - Unfortunately, from the same article we learn "….that discards (fish caught but not landed) likely exceeded landings in 1999 and accounted for more than one-third of the catch in 2000." While some managers claim that such "regulatory discards" are inescapable, there's no way that anyone with an interest in our nation's fisheries should be willing to accept a management system that forces fishermen to waste more fish than they are allowed to keep.

Another reason to eat more fish - An article in the Journal of the American Medical Association "suggests that a diet high in fatty fish can significantly decrease a woman's risk of ischemic stroke…. women who ate four ounces of fish two to four times a week cut their risk of ischemic stroke by 48 percent…. The JAMA article suggests that Omega-3 fatty acids work to alleviate blood clots, which are largely responsible for ischemic strokes…. This type of stroke constitutes more than 80 percent of all strokes. The fish most often cited as the highest in Omega 3 fatty acid concentrations include king oscar sardines, salmon and mackerel." Note that fish oil produced by the menhaden reduction fishery is another source of Omega 3. Note also that a group of recreational fishermen who are obviously more interested in pursuing their hobby unhindered by commercial "competition" than in the public's health are trying to ban the menhaden reduction fishery in New Jersey waters. (Eating fish reduces stroke risk - Women who ate fish decreased their stroke risk by an astounding 52 percent, Health News Digest.com, 07/16/01)

What's next on the "Blame it all on overfishing"agenda? - An article in the current issue of Science magazine (Historical overfishing and the recent collapse of coastal ecosystems, Jackson et al, 08/27/01) attempts to fix the blame for every ill that's currently facing coastal waters worldwide on overfishing by Homo sapiens, and using a time scale going back in some instances 125,000 years. According to the authors, other anthropogenic activities - water pollution, coastal development, etc. - have played only minor roles in the decline of our estruaries; fishing is the primary culprit.

The next Mid-Atlantic Council Meeting is scheduled for August 6th to 9th at the Sheraton Society Hill, One Dock Street in Philadelphia, PA (215 238-6000).

July 19, 2001

Goosefish Spawn In Captivity For First Time

A milestone in research on goosefish biology was achieved this month.  Adult goosefish, or monkfish, successfully spawned in captivity at the Howard Marine Science Laboratory in Sandy Hook, New Jersey.  The fertilized egg mass, or ‘veil’, was released in the Howard Laboratory’s 32,000 gallon research aquarium.  According to Christopher Chambers, project leader of the Goosefish Research Initiative, this is the first time that mating has been observed and a fertilized egg veil produced in captivity.

Dr. Chambers and his team of scientists introduced five adult goosefish into the aquarium in April.  These fish, which have been monitored continuously by video cameras, began feeding and displaying mating behavior in late spring.  The scientists have been documenting the use by the goosefish of their trademark “angler’s lure” to attract and then capture prey.  On the day of spawning, the 30 x 3 ft buoyant sheet of eggs was expelled by the courted female within several seconds.  Capturing the exact date and time of spawning will permit the scientists to document larval and juvenile development as well as establish methods for age determination of young goosefish in nature.  These baseline data can be applied to the study of specimens collected in the wild in support of research that will provide critical information on goosefish biology.  Ultimately, this research aims to gain a sound scientific understanding of goosefish population processes and to determine the aquaculture and stock enhancement potential of the species.

The Goosefish Research Initiative is a collaborative undertaking by the National Marine Fisheries Service and the Garden State Seafood Association in order to address the need for basic biological information on goosefish, Lophius americanus.  Goosefish is currently the highest dollar-value finfish in the commercial sector of the Northeast with 1999 landings valued at $45.9 million.  Because of the species’ commercial value, the fishing industry has taken an active role in promoting goosefish research.  Two major exporters of goosefish, Export Inc., of Barnegat Light, NJ and Agger Fish Corporation of Brooklyn, NY are helping to finance the research with contributions to the Garden State Seafood Association.  The goosefish industry hopes that sharing their intimate knowledge of the species with NMFS scientists will result in better scientific information that will enable the fishery to continue in a responsible manner.

During the first year of the Goosefish Research Initiative, project scientists collaborated with New Jersey fishermen to collect samples of wild-spawned egg veils and obtain data on adult goosefish.  Utilizing egg veil fragments provided by fishermen, the project team successfully incubated and hatched eggs, and reared the goosefish larvae through the early feeding stages in the laboratory.  Fishermen have also provided information on egg veil sightings to the project team which will allow scientists to identify potential breeding grounds.  Using adult goosefish supplied by fishermen, the scientists have also been able to quantify the annual energy allocation to liver and reproductive organs, and its relationship to the spawning cycle of goosefish.

Appointments announced for the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council – Jim Lovgren, owner/operator of the F/V Sea Dragon docked at the Fishermen’s Dock Co-op in Point Pleasant, long time Farm Bureau supporter and founding Director of the Garden State Seafood Association and Ronal W. Smith, biologist at the University of Delaware College of Marine Studies have been reappointed to the Council. Lawrence W. Simns, waterman and president of the Maryland Watermen's Association and Yvonne Peabody of the Peabody Corporation of Hampton, Virginia; Lewes, Delaware were appointed as new members of the Council.

Study finds Stellar Sea Lions ignore Alaskan pollock – We’ve reported previously on major restrictions placed on the $700 million a year Alaskan pollock fishery because of the belief by various environmental organizations that these fish are a primary food of endangered Stellar sea lions. In a study reported on in the June 28th issue of the British journal Nature, researchers Gary L. Thomas and Richard E. Thorne of the Prince William Sound Science Center in Cordova reported that, in spite of the presence of much higher numbers of Pollock in the area, observed Stellar sea lions fed exclusively on herring schools. (Study finds Stellers ignore Pollock, Anchorage Daily News, 07/09/01 – from http://www.gofish.com).

And turtle strandings in South Carolina are unaffected by shrimp trawling – The conventional wisdom, at least as expressed by various anti-fishing environmental organizations, is that the Alaskan Pollock fishery is responsible for the plight of the Stellar sea lions and that shrimp trawlers, in spite of required Turtle Excluder Devices (TEDs) are responsible for killing sea turtles. But a South Carolina biologist has reported that sea turtle stranding numbers for May of this year were almost identical to those from last May, despite almost no shrimp trawling this year. “Sally Murphy, a biologist with the state Department of Natural Resources, said there were 22 turtles found dead on state beaches last May, and 21 found this year. Murphy noted that to date in June, there have been 16 dead turtles found. Last June 49 dead turtles washed up. But, she added, offshore shrimping season did not open until June 16, and South Carolina waters didn't open until June 25. Eight turtles washed up before waters opened, and eight since, she said. Murphy said she was surprised the numbers were so similar given that shrimp trawling is believed to be one of the major contributors to turtle deaths.” (Sea turtle strandings remain high - Shrimp trawling restrictions have little effect, The  Island Packet, 07/02/01)

More good news about Omega 3 – “Eating more fish may help regulate an irregular heartbeat, doctors at the 17th world congress of the International Society for Heart Research were told Tuesday. Dr. Alexander Leaf, a professor emeritus at Boston's Harvard University, said foods rich in omega-3 fatty acids can stop arrythmia before it triggers sudden death from heart attacks. That makes fish such as salmon as potentially potent as any high-tech heart drug and considerably cheaper to stock up on, Leaf told a symposium of some of the 1,700 scientists and doctors from 70 countries.” (Omega-3 can help stop arrythmia, The Canadian Press, 07/11/01 – from http://www.gofish.com).

And a little bit of bad news as well - Fish oil manufactured from menhaden in the reduction fishery is a primary source of Omega 3. Ironically, the New Jersey General Assembly recently voted on legislation that would prohibit the taking of menhaden for reduction purposes – and for the production of Omega 3 rich fish oil – in New Jersey waters.

Yet again, it’s not overfishing – Ever since the outbreaks of the so-called “Killer Algae” Pfiesteria in 1997, Maryland’s Department of Natural Resources has been carrying out an extensive program of monitoring of state waters for toxic algae. Along with Pfiesteria, two previously unknown varieties of algae that could kill bay creatures as well as familiar algae blooms that could be harmful to estuarine organisms have been found. “While those algae have not been linked to human illnesses in the United States, evidence indicates that they can kill underwater grasses, prevent oyster larvae from hatching, contaminate shellfish and damage other fragile bay life. ‘It could be that you're losing 20 or 30 percent of the population, and you'd never be able to absolutely document it, unless you were out there looking extremely carefully day to day,’ said Robert Magnien, director of the department's tidewater ecosystems division.’” These algae, microscopic plants, are dependent upon high levels of nutrients in the water column. “Experts estimate that nutrient levels in Chesapeake Bay are about seven times higher than they were at the time of European settlement. Nutrient levels in the coastal bays are also rising as the shorelines become more developed.” (Toxic Algae Found in Chesapeake Bay and Adjacent Waterways, Associated Press, 07/09/01)

June 15, 2001

Industry members honored at Jersey Shore Partnership’s Summer Celebration 2001 – G.S.S.A. Director Ernie Panacek, member Jim Gutowski from Viking Village, and Ray Cosgrove, owner of Bahr’s Restaurant in Highlands received awards for their contributions to the seafood industry. A check for $7500 was also presented to The Clammer’s Family Fund, established in honor of local clammers, William A. Bourguignon and Neil Greg Pearce, who lost their lives when their boat capsized in January in Sandy Hook Bay.

U.S. House of Representatives approves $600 million to restore Pacific salmon – Legislation that would provide funding over three years to western states and Indian tribes has passed the first hurdle and must now make it through the Senate. The money, which would be made available on a matching basis, could be used for a variety of regional and local projects to improve salmon habitats, including efforts to plant vegetation near waterways, restore watersheds or remove roads whose runoff can foul streams. These funds are in addition to the millions of federal dollars already being provided for various salmon programs. Twenty-six species of Pacific salmon and sea-run trout are listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act.  (House OKs $600 mil' to restore Pacific salmon, Associated Press, 06/13/01)

“Mitigation” salt marshes may contribute to poor water quality – In California Salt Marsh May Contribute to Ocean Pollution (Environmental News Service, 05/29/01), Cat Lazaroff reports on a paper in the June 15 issue of "Environmental Science and Technology” that “A team of California researchers may rewrite environmental textbooks after uncovering evidence that a manmade saltwater marsh is a source of potentially hazardous fecal bacteria that is contaminating the swimming and surfing waters of one of the state's most popular beaches. The study suggests that environmental managers should take care in designing artificial wetlands.” Evidently the high number of birds attracted to the marsh, coupled with the rapidity with which water moves through it, is the source of the problem. "We have to be smarter about how we build these marshes," said (Stanley) Grant (leader of the research team at the University of California, Irvine). "If they are designed so that the water goes through them very rapidly, like it does here, the chances are pretty high that you'll have the same kinds of problems. When properly designed, though, these wetlands might improve water quality."

Record number of sharks taken in South Jersey tournament – According to a number of published reports, the 200 boats that participated in the South Jersey Shark Tournament over the past weekend caught over 1100 sharks, including almost 200 makos. This good news for the recreational fishing industry in the Mid-Atlantic certainly flies in the face of the doom and gloom predictions by some of the anti-fishing activists of an ocean soon to be devoid of sharks unless ever more stringent harvest controls aren’t put in place.

Maine’s Congressional delegation opposes exploratory drilling on Georges Bank -  “Last week, Maine's entire congressional delegation signed letters to (President) Bush that urged him to drop plans for exploration on Georges Bank. The major concern: Gains in restoring fisheries are at risk by drilling for natural gas.” (Drilling seen as threat to fisheries, 06/11/01, Portland Press Herald). Georges Bank, which is divided into U.S. and Canadian waters by the Hague Line, is one of the richest fishing areas in the world.

Canada approves offshore oil development project on the Grand Banks - Canada's Environment Minister David Anderson gave a green light Monday to the proposed White Rose Offshore Oil Development Project, located on the northeast Grand Banks, approximately 350 kilometers east of St. John's, Newfoundland…. using a floating production, storage and offloading system and sub-sea well-head structures located in ‘glory holes.’’’ (Grand Banks oil development plan gets green light, 06/12/01, Canada NewsWire). The Grand Banks, which were immortalized by Rudyard Kipling in Captains Courageous, are another of the world’s ocean’s most productive areas.

Scientific Monitoring Committee meeting scheduled prior to Mid-Atlantic Council meeting - On June 27 at 9:00 a.m. the Council’s Squid, Mackerel, Butterfish Committee will meet to review recommendations for the year 2002 loligo squid, ilex squid, mackerel, and butterfish quotas. The NFI-SMC will have a breakfast meeting at 7:00 a.m. at the Radisson Hotel prior to the MAFMC Meeting to discuss NFI-SMC issues and the MAFMC Squid, Mackerel, Butterfish quotas. Please contact Debbie at 609 884-3000 if you plan to attend.

Delaware accepts asbestos contaminated subway cars – According to a news brief on National Public Radio’s Philadelphia outlet (WHYY) this week, the state of Delaware is going to save New York’s Mass Transit Authority millions of dollars by allowing the disposal of 400 obsolete subway cars off the Delaware coastline for “artificial reefs.” This will allow the MTA to avoid the heavy costs of actually disposing of the cars. These are the same subway cars that Acting Governor DiFrancesco wisely banned from the seafloor off New Jersey.
 

June 8, 2001

Good news from New England – For the better part of ten years we’ve heard nothing but doom and gloom about New England’s commercial fishing industry, particularly from the popular media and various anti-fishing crusaders. Whenever anyone is trying to argue why fishermen can’t be part of the management process, he or she will invariably start with “look at New England….” People in the industry and others willing to dig out the facts have known that the “death” of New England’s fisheries has been severely exaggerated. While some stocks have been at reduced levels, other fisheries have continued as they have historically, with no indications of the fishing “crisis” supposedly afflicting all of New England.

A June 7 press release from the New England Fisheries Management Council titled “New England Fish Stocks Recovering” reports on the status of those fisheries that were experiencing hard times. “Commercial and recreational fishermen, as well as the public, need to know that collectively the Council is headed in the right direction --- that fisheries will continue to improve and consumers, fishermen and their communities will benefit over the long-term from responsible and effective management programs,” said Council Executive Director Paul Howard.

From the release “Year 2000 calculations show that estimated biomass levels for 11 important groundfish stocks, collectively, have increased almost 2-1/2 times since 1994. Witch flounder (gray sole) and Georges Bank yellowtail flounder have been rebuilt to sustainable levels, while others including Georges Bank haddock, Cape Cod yellowtail flounder and redfish have increased substantially. Even stocks that need further rebuilding such as Georges Bank cod, American plaice, white hake and Southern England yellowtail flounder are stable and showing signs of improvement.

Reports from several of the major fishing ports in New England mirror the good news about the status of groundfish stocks. As of March 9, cod landings in Gloucester, Boston and New Bedford totaled 1.4 million pounds, 400,000 pounds more than the same time a year ago. Haddock (1.1 million pounds) and yellowtail flounder (1.7 million pounds) landings topped 2000’s nine-week total by 100,000 pounds and 200,000 pounds, respectively. The Portland Maine Fish Exchange recorded a 33 percent increase in fish landings last year and is anticipating a banner year in 2001. Further south, Rhode Island ports have seen an approximate 53 percent increase in landings between 1994 and 1999.” As we’ve reported here previously, the sea scallop fishery is approaching record levels of production. (The full release is available at http://www.nefmc.org/news/releases/recovering-stocks.htm)

What’s money have to do with the environmental movement? – We’ve already drawn our readers’ attention to aaeries in the Sacramento (CA) Bee that “examines the high-powered fund raising, the litigation and the public relations machine that has come to characterize much of the (environmental) movement today.” In “Cutting a deal on the environment, Scott Winokur and Christian Berthelsen, San Francisco Chronicle staff writers, look at a situation where four envirorgs started out in opposition to an expansion of a power plant in Moss Landing that will have a severe impact on Monterey Bay. “Eager to placate environmentalists, the Duke Energy Corp. agreed to pay more than $12 million to Monterey Bay area groups whose objections could have scuttled the controversial expansion of its Moss Landing power plant, destined to be the state's largest. Most of the groups are now being accused of taking financial advantage of the situation and betraying their mission as environmentalists to defend the Monterey Bay area's fragile harbors, sloughs and wetlands. The environmental groups protested until Duke put up money, then dropped their opposition. The result, opponents say, is that the very things the groups originally protested, including the discharge of heated water into fragile aquatic environments, will still happen.” According to Winokur and Berthelsen, one of the envirorgs is the Center for Marine Conservation, an organization that has had a particularly high profile in anti-fishing activities in the Mid-Atlantic and New England. “Although fierce initially, key opposition to Duke vanished between the late summer and Nov. 6 -- when a document laying out the company's agreement to pay for "monitoring" and additional "mitigation" was finalized. The environmental groups agreed by that date that they would "not participate in any lawsuit, regulatory challenge, regulatory appeal or any other action . . . that might obstruct, delay, or prevent Duke's construction" of the plant.” The full article is on the Chronicle’s website
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/06/03/MN159298.DTL

The next Mid-Atlantic Council Meeting will be on June 26 to 28 at the Radisson Hotel in Hampton, Virginia (757 727-9700).

The National Fisheries Institute’s Clam Committee will have a breakfast meeting at the Hampton Radisson on June 26 prior to the Council’s discussion of EFH issues and quota setting for the coming year. Please contact Debbie at 609 884-3000 if you plan to attend.

June 1, 2001

The selling of Marine Protected Areas – Marine Protected Areas MPAs), also commonly referred to as Marine Reserves or No Take Zones, have become the latest “save the oceans” panacea of a large segment of the environmentalist world. Unfortunately - or perhaps fortunately for their proponents - almost nothing is known of their efficacy beyond the fact that if you ban activities that negatively impact particular organisms in particular areas, you’ll sometimes end up with more of those organisms in those areas. Hardly rocket science, but that seems to be the state of actual knowledge (for a review, see An Evaluation Of The Short-Term Social And Economic Impacts Of Marine Reserves On User Groups In Key West by T. Dobrzynski and E. Nicholson at http://www.environmentaldefense.org/programs/Oceans/KeyWestDukeAbst.html). Predictably, this lack of real data on MPA performance isn’t preventing the anti-fishing folks from using them in their latest assault on commercial and, increasingly, recreational fishing. Surprisingly, however, the National Academies National Research Council seems to have bought into their arguments. Their recently published Marine Protected Areas, Tools for Sustaining Ocean Ecosystems was to “objectively investigate the potential use of marine reserves with respect to design, implementation criteria, and probable efficacy in relation to meeting biodiversity, conservation, and fisheries management goals.” The “objectivity” the Council’s MPA panel brought to this investigation becomes immediately obvious in the report’s title and continues in like fashion for 250+ pages. To the question “why MPAs,” the panel responds “As management becomes more integrated and holistic, MPAs will take on greater importance as a tool for conserving marine resources.” While the report faithfully captures much of the controversy – as well as the lack of knowledge – surrounding the adoption of MPAs, it presents their use as a fait accompli. At this point this seems neither warranted nor conducive to their objective evaluation. (We’ve already written concerning the Pew Charitable Trusts’ support of the concept of MPAs - see http://www.fishingnj.org/netusa17.htm. Of the 13 members of the National Research Council’s 13 member MPA panel, 5 have been Pew Fellows.)

On the subject of money – Environmental groups are proposing to stop suing the federal Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) over the listing of species as “endangered” if that agency hastened the listing of those species. It’s unfortunate but understandable that federal agencies can be “held hostage” by heavily funded environmental organizations. Earthjustice Legal Defense has received over $10 million in Pew funds alone over the last several years while the FWS currently budgets only $2 million per year for endangered species. (Environmental Groups Offer Deal, Associated Press, 05/31/01)

Maine’s lobster landings up for another year – The state’s lobster landings reached a record 56.7 million pounds, some 20 million pounds above the average for the last 100 years and almost 3 times the landings of 15 years ago (Down East, the Lobster Hauls Are Up Big, C. Goldberg, NY Times, 05/24/01). While no one has anything approaching a solid explanation for the continued boom in lobster production, theories for it abound. Whatever the cause, everyone does seem to agree to that it can’t last forever.

Another benefit from Omega 3? – According to an Associated Press article today (Eating fish could cut risk of prostate cancer), the British medical journal Lancet has reported that Swedish males with a diet high in heavy, fatty fish had an incidence of prostrate cancer half of that of those who didn’t. While the study didn’t prove a cause and effect relationship between a higher fish consumption and a reduced occurrence of the disease, it did show yet another benefit of eating fish.

Corrections –Last week we announced that the Blessing of the Fleet in Barnegat Light was to be held on June 13. The real date is Sunday, June 17. Also, if you had trouble linking to the web page on the status of the menhaden stock, try http://www.asmfc.org/Programs/Fish%20Mgnt/2000%20FMP%20Reviews/menhaden2000_FMP.HTM . If that doesn’t work, contact the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission directly at 202 289-6400.

May 26, 2001

More on menhaden - The Asbury Park Press took the side of the anti-commercial zealo…, oops, sorry, of the recreational fishing "conservationists" in an editorial Thursday supporting the ban on menhaden harvesting for fish oil and meal in New Jersey waters. Referring to the G.S.S.A. position of leaving fisheries management to the managers (and insuring that they have the science to do their job adequately), the editorial ended "Calling for scientific evidence can be a convenient way of delaying action indefinitely." Unfortunately, the editorial writer missed out on the fact that we already know as much about menhaden as we need to know to manage the stock adequately and that a successful management program has been and is currently in place. In fact, the 2000 Review Of The Fishery Management Plan For Atlantic Menhaden that was prepared by the three scientists on the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission's Atlantic Menhaden Plan Review Team and published last June reported "The status of the stock is considered to be healthy, with 9 age classes represented in 1999…. Average estimated spawning stock biomass for 1997-99 was 53,800 metric tons, over three times the minimum level considered acceptable by the FMP. The updated estimate for 1997 is the largest value estimated since 1962, and is comparable to the spawning stock biomass estimate for 1958 which produced the largest number of age-1 recruits on record."  (http://www.asmfc.org/Programs/Fish%20Mgnt/2000%20FMP%20Reviews /menhaden2000_FMP.HTM). It's extremely unfortunate that so many of the people who are interested in menhaden don't avail themselves of the readily available information from legitimate sources (try a http://www.google.com search on "menhaden" and "management") but rather depend on the kind of hysterical rhetoric that's much more appropriate to and successful in hunting witches than managing fisheries. On a related note, Press fishing columnist John Geiser reported that U.S. Congressman Frank Pallone is now supporting this proposed ban, citing the fact that "waste" from the netting operations might wash up on New Jersey beaches. If there aren't substantive resource-related reasons to justify the anti's "we want it all" attitude, others can apparently be manufactured at the drop of a hat.

Push for offshore gas development (now there's a surprise!) - In Gas development advised for Outer Banks (05/23/01) H. Josef Herbert writes for the Associated Press "A subcommittee of an Interior Department advisory panel is recommending the government consider resuming gas development in some coastal waters, including North Carolina's Outer Banks, that have been off-limits for more than a decade. The decision on whether to forward the recommendation to Interior Secretary Gale Norton was to be made at a meeting today by the full advisory group on Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas development. If acted upon by Norton, it would be the first step to overturning a moratorium on oil and gas development for most of the country's coastal waters. The moratorium was imposed by former President Bush in 1990 and extended by former President Clinton three years ago." Speculation is that several areas that are extremely important to commercial fishermen will be among those considered. It will be interesting to see how strenuously those environmental groups that have taken tens of millions of gas and oil dollars over the last few years will object.

The most sincere form of flattery? - The Jersey Coast Anglers Association has a page on its website promoting an anti-menhaden fishing rally held in Trenton (http://www.jcaa.org/Rally.htm). The background image on the page looked surprisingly familiar, bearing an uncanny resemblance to an image on the striped bass page that's part of our New Jersey Fishing website (http://www.fishingnj.org/prorock.htm). While we certainly don't mind if our recreational fishing colleagues, or any other folks, "borrow" materials from our website to enhance their own, it's unfortunate that in this instance the JCAA didn't borrow some of the more substantive materials on New Jersey's striped bass ban as well. Their readers would have probably benefited more from that than from a fish illustration.

Jersey Shore Partnership Summer Celebration 2001 - This annual event will be held at Sandy Hook on the evening of June 13, and once again the contributions of members of the Garden State Seafood Association to the commercial fishing industry and the Jersey Shore will be recognized. Each year the event gets bigger and the food gets better. For information on attending call 732 747 0456.

Barnegat Light Blessing of the Fleet - Another event that gets bigger and better each year, it will be held on June 13, but this year the blessing will be combined with the dedication of a statue honoring longliners and other local fishermen and a new mural at Viking Village of local sea life and commercial fishing vessels.

May 2, 2002

More on striped bass - We are witnessing what appears to be an increasingly desperate struggle by a group of recreational anglers to continue to keep millions of New Jersey's consumers from enjoying ocean-fresh striped bass. The Jersey Coast Anglers Association (JCAA) and the NJ Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs (NJFSC) sent a letter to the editors of the Newark Star Ledger and the Atlantic City Press that seemed to be a panic-induced response to a Star Ledger editorial reprinted in the Press questioning the right of these anglers to keep this delicious fish entirely for themselves. (Exercising their editorial judgment, neither paper printed the letter. Of this, Tom Fote, its author, had to say in the May JCAA newsletter "neither paper has had the nerve or the professionalism to print this letter. I can only wonder what they are afraid of. Perhaps they don't want people to know how out of line they were in their original editorial." Perhaps Mr. Fote starting his letter with "The heart-wrenching plight of a Star-Ledger editorial writer and some other wealthy New Jersey residents who are unable to buy relatively expensive wild striped …." and some diligent fact checking - we don't know of any "wealthy" editorial writers, New Jersey residents or not -  might have had more to do with that decision than fear.) Mr. Fote went on to suggest that the ban on the sale of these fish in New Jersey was ultimately for the "protection" of New Jersey's unsuspecting consumers, citing advisories routinely released on the consumption of various fish species from particular waters by the Department of Environmental Protection. Somewhat paradoxically, neither the JCAA nor the NJFSC seems to be all that concerned about the same striped bass when consumed by their own members or other people who fish for a hobby. In the most recent angling columns in the Star Ledger and the Asbury Park Press we read of the current striped bass season "The result was day and night trip limits plus lots of shorts…. caught a limit from over 40 stripers, including an 18-pounder…. one was a 261/2-pounder weighed in at The Tackle Box…. used sandworms Thursday to beach a 28-incher plus two slot bass...  while Sunday morning's catch consisted of two slots and two shorts. Several anglers had the limit of three fish (including the bonus fish), and others had one or two…. and she kept one that weighed 10 pounds…. caught 13 bass on clams, and kept two."  It's safe to assume all of these striped bass were kept for personal consumption. Fote then writes that the JCAA and the NJFSC  "fought not only for conservation but also a fair deal for those citizens unable to afford boats and most in need of the food they can catch from shore…." And finally, and most paradoxically, "And statistics show that due to regulations, less than one in four of New Jersey's anglers are allowed to take one striped bass home a year to eat." Aren't all those anglers, both boated and boatless, due the same level of protection from enjoying a meal or two of striped bass that Mr. Fote appears so selflessly willing to extend to eight million or so of New Jersey's non-angling consumers? Or perhaps his concern isn't all that selfless. Perhaps it's yet another strained argument for denying those consumers their fair share of a resource that is supposed to belong to everyone. It's apparent that New Jersey's recreational anglers, or at least those anglers represented by the JCAA and the NJFSC, are understandably unwilling to share this most desirable fish with anyone else. In spite of that, it's time that New Jersey's residents, who are the real "owners" of fish in New Jersey waters, be allowed to enjoy their striped bass without having to catch them themselves or leave New Jersey to do it.

(For the Star-Ledger Editorial http://www.nj.com/editorial/ledger/index.ssf?/editorial/ledger/12be9de.html)

And what they want New Jersey consumers to miss - Top 10 sources of omega-3 fatty acids, an April 27 article on Worldcatch News Network (http://www.worldcatch.com) reports that according to the American Dietetic Association the 10 best sources of Omega-3 Fatty Acids, which are considered to provide extreme dietary benefits, are Sardines (21.1 grams/100 grams of fish), Atlantic mackerel (2.5 grams), Herring (1.7 grams), Lake trout (1.6 grams), Salmon (1.2 grams), Striped bass (0.8 grams), Tuna (0.5 grams), Pacific Halibut (0.4 grams), Channel catfish (0.3 grams) and shrimp (0.3 grams).

Scallop Framework 14 provisions in effect as of May 1 - NMFS Northeast Regional Administrator Pat Kurkul sent a letter to all permit holders late last week explaining the Framework measures. The letter is available on the NMFS website (http://www.nero.nmfs.gov/ro/doc/nr.htm). There was also a mistake in the letter that has been corrected in a follow-up notice that reads "In that letter, it was indicated that scallop vessels with Occasional permits would be allocated 19 days at sea (DAS) for the 2001 and 2002 fishing years. However, scallop vessels with occasional scallop permits are only allocated 10 DAS for the 2001 and 2002 fishing years under the provisions of Framework 14. Vessel owners should take note." More information is available through NMFS's Regional Headquarters at 978 281-9300.

New Jersey Marine Fisheries Council meeting - Thursday, May 3 at the Galloway Township Library on Jimmy Leeds Road in Absecon starting at 4:00 pm.

April 15, 2001

Acting Governor DiFrancesco decides contaminated subway cars don’t belong on our ocean bottom – When the task force that Acting Governor DiFrancesco formed to address the question became stalemated on the issue, he decided to “err on the side of safety and the environment” by nixing plans to use 650 asbestos contaminated subway cars in New Jersey’s artificial reef program. The acceptance of these cars, which were to be “donated” to our coastal waters by New York’s Metropolitan Transit Authority, was supported by recreational fishing activists and several outdoors columnists in spite of the environmental downside.  Governor DiFrancesco wisely sided with the environment and deserves a great deal of credit for taking this position in spite of a significant lobbying effort against it. He did, however, come out in strong support of New Jersey’s artificial reef program. New York has apparently joined with New Jersey in refusing the MTA’s offer of free subway cars but at this point it appears as if they might find a home off Ocean City, Maryland. We can only hope that the appropriate authorities down there show as much regard for the environment as Governor DiFrancesco has in New Jersey.

The Green Machine – In Environment, Inc. a five part series by the Sacremento (California) Bee’s environmental reporter Tom Knudson “examines the high-powered fund raising, the litigation and the public relations machine that has come to characterize much of the (environmental) movement today.” We strongly recommend that everyone with an interest in the environmental movement – and what it’s become – follow the series. Of the Natural Resources Defense Council, an organization that first achieved prominence with the Alar apple scare and is now playing a prominent role in fisheries issues nationally and locally, Knudson writes “Consider a recent mailer from the Natural Resources Defense Council, which calls itself ‘America's hardest-hitting environmental group.’ The letter, decrying a proposed solar salt evaporation plant at a remote Baja California lagoon where gray whales give birth, makes this statement: ‘Giant diesel engines will pump six thousand gallons of water out of the lagoon EVERY SECOND, risking changes to the precious salinity that is so vital to newborn whales.’ Clinton Winant, a professor at Scripps Institution of Oceanography who helped prepare an environmental assessment of the project, said the statement is false. ‘There is not a single iota of scientific evidence that suggests pumping would have any effect on gray whales or their babies,’ he said. The mailer also says: ‘A mile-long concrete pier will cut directly across the path of migrating whales -- potentially impeding their progress.’ Scripps professor Paul Dayton, one of the nation's most prominent marine ecologists, said that statement is wrong, too. ‘I've dedicated my career to understanding nature, which is becoming more threatened,’ he said. ‘And I've been confronted with the dreadful dishonesty of the Rush Limbaugh crowd. It really hurts to have my side -- the environmental side -- become just as dishonest.’ Former Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo halted the project last year. But as he did, he also criticized environmental groups. ‘With false arguments and distorted information, they have damaged the legitimate cause of genuine ecologists,’ Zedillo said at a Mexico City news conference.” (http://www.sacbee.com/news/projects/environment/)

More health benefits from seafood – While most people at this point are familiar with the cardio-vascular benefits of a diet rich in seafood, Jim Robbins in Research Suggests Positive Effects From Eating Fish in today’s New York Times
Discusses other proven or suspected health benefits of a type of fat called omega-3 that is found in fish, particularly fatty species. He writes “Research in a number of disciplines shows that lack of omega-3 may play a role in a number of modern maladies, including depression, heart arrhythmia, irritable bowel syndrome and rheumatoid arthritis…. Research also indicates that omega-3 may prevent the clots that cause heart attacks; reduce the body's inflammatory response, helping prevent atherosclerosis; and in higher amounts reduce blood triglyceride levels. But those applications need further research, Dr. Krauss said…. women who ate fish once a week were 22 percent less likely to have strokes than women who ate fish once a month, and eating fish five times a week cut the risk of stroke in half.” He also reported that clinical studies have indicated that fish oil might be effective in treating mania and depression. While much of the research on the benefits of omega-3 is in the earliest stages, it’s becoming increasingly apparent that it should be a fish rather than – or perhaps along with - an apple a day.

April 5, 2001

Misperceptions and half truths – Last week the Asbury Park Press ran an editorial praising a cooperative fishing industry/government research program aimed at generating better at-sea data to improve the management of the monkfish fishery, one of the Northeast region’s most valuable. Unfortunately, some people can’t stand by while anything positive is written or spoken about commercial fishing. From a letter that he wrote to the editor of the Press in response to the editorial, perhaps David Thorensen falls into this group. He used so many of the hackneyed shibboleths that have become the stock in trade of the anti-fishing activists that we thought we’d take this opportunity to address them.

He starts of by stating that monkfish, which were once “underutilized,” must now be “stringently managed” and that this “proves that the commercial fishing practice of otter trawling is too efficient, environmentally destructive and wasteful.” We would suggest that the fact that we have management – stringent or otherwise – in any fishery doesn’t prove much of anything at all other than the fact that we don’t want that fishery to remain or become overfished. Also, the monkfish fishery isn’t the sole province of otter trawlers. Landings are fairly equally divided between them, gillnet and scallop fishermen.
He then writes “Another story noted that the commercial summer flounder quota was caught in three days, another fishery that has been devastated by the otter trawl.” His reasoning here seems somewhat fuzzy, doesn’t it? If the fishery has been “devastated,” how could there be enough fish for the commercial fleet to catch its full quota in only three days? This isn’t a “token” quota set in a distressed fishery. One would imagine that in a “devastated” fishery it would take an extended amount of time to catch the full quota, and that quota would be rather stingy, wouldn’t one? In fact, the summer flounder stocks are, according to many commercial and recreational industry members, at or approaching an historical high.

Following “It is now time for the fisheries manager to realize that no management practices will produce optimum yields as long as the otter trawl is involved in a fishery” he reverts to the classic anti-fishing rant “Methods of procuring natural resources have been eliminated because of their destructive nature, for example, strip-mining, clear-cut forestry, and slash-and-burn agriculture.” Otter trawls - and similar gear – have been used in specific areas in specific fisheries since the gear and the vessels to haul it were developed, and they have been used continuously and  sustainably. Year after year, decade after decade, and generation after generation particular areas have produced, and continue to produce, catches of fish and shellfish. The fishermen keep coming back because that’s where the fish are. Of course, catch levels fluctuate widely, sometimes due to natural variability, which is beyond our control, and sometimes due to overzealous harvesting. Hence the need for stringent management. Anyone who doubts this has only to check historical and present day landing data readily available on the NOAA Fisheries website. (As an aside, strip-mining, clear-cut forestry, and slash-and-burn agriculture are each, in spite of much public misunderstanding, widely used and environmentally acceptable practices when applied appropriately.)

Even a cursory examination of landings data, or the current situation in the summer flounder fishery, on the Atlantic coast will put his statement “The thought that the rod-and-reel fishery is even remotely as destructive as the otter trawl has been entertained by fisheries managers too long” in its proper perspective. In fishery after fishery the recreational landings are greater than the commercial, and to suggest that the hundreds of thousands of outboard motor propelled recreational fishing boats spewing unburned fuel and exhausts into our waterways aren’t at least as “destructive” as otter trawls seems ludicrous.
Mr. Sorensen ends with “The list of overutilized fisheries that were healthy before introducing the otter trawl to a fishery starts with the codfish and moves through every other fishery, including flounder, whiting, totaug (sic) and now monkfish. It's time to end the destruction.” On the contrary, there are many other primarily otter trawl fisheries that are in good shape – including various cod and flounder stocks - and even more that are rebuilding – including other cod and flounder stocks - thanks to the sacrifices of the (primarily otter trawl) fishermen that participate in them. Average annual recreational tautog harvest in the years 1991 to 1999 was 4,350,000 pounds and average annual commercial tautog landings were 530,000 pounds during the same period. There’s a growing belief that our whiting fishery is a casualty of increasing ocean temperatures, not overfishing. And getting back to monkfish, paradoxically – at least from Mr. Sorensen’s perspective – it appears as if commercial otter trawls will be the tools that give us a much more accurate picture of the distribution of this important species.

As anti-fishing activists have discovered in recent years, it’s not too difficult to put together a reasonable sounding tirade and get it into print somewhere. But there’s a wealth of information available, and a wealth of knowledgeable people willing to share it, concerning what’s really going on in our coastal waters. All it takes is a desire to access it.

March 27, 2001

The Star Ledger thinks it’s time the New Jersey consumer got a fair shake – An editorial “Forbidden Fish” that ran on the 26th of March began “Striped bass helped sustain the Pilgrims in those first years, and William Woods in his 1634 New England's Prospects described the fish as ‘sweet and good, pleasant to the pallet and wholesome to the stomach.’’’ It then goes on to question the fact that New Jersey’s non-fishing consumers can’t enjoy this delectable fish, which is present in unprecedented numbers in New Jersey waters and ends with “It seems that the recreational fishermen have too much to say about the striped bass. But even worse than that, the legislators in Trenton keep listening. Other states have found there are plenty of fish for both commercial and recreational fishermen, and it's time New Jersey did the same. It's time to decriminalize possession of a striped bass and let chefs sauté them with butter and a little chardonnay without looking over their shoulders for the fish police. Then we can decide for ourselves whether Wood was right.” While a handful of recreational anglers, who seem to take their hobby a bit to seriously, have become adept at pressuring New Jersey legislators, isn’t it about – or past – time for the Assembly and Senate to think about all of the people they represent, rather than the selfish few who actually believe they are the only ones deserving enough to enjoy this delicious fish?
Shark cartilage and cancer – “An anticancer extract derived from the spine of the dogfish shark appears to double the survival time for patients suffering from deadly kidney cancer — giving patients who have exhausted all other options an extra 8 months of life. ‘This new data is also very encouraging,’ said Dr. Ronald Bukowski, director of experimental therapeutics program at the Cleveland Clinic Cancer Center and one of the principal investigators who studied the drug, Neovastat…. In the study, presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research in New Orleans, La., researchers said that patients who received a higher dose of Neovastat survived for an average of 16.3 months, compared to 7.1 months for patients who received a lower dose of the drug.’ (Shark extract extends cancer patient life, 03/27/01, UPI) Note: In spite of a near record biomass of dogfish, the federal fisheries managers at the urging of anti-fishing “conservation” groups have closed down the East Coast dogfish fishery.

Canadian scientist says Alaskan fishery isn’t responsible for the decline of Stellar sea lions – We’ve previously written about the closure of large parts of the Alaskan pollock fishery – one of the world’s largest commercial fisheries – because a coalition of environmental groups have taken the position that endangered Stellar sea lions are supposedly starving because of the Pollock fleet’s harvest. Research reported by Dr. Andrew Trites, Director of Research of the North Pacific University’s Marine Mammal Research Consortium in British Columbia, at an Alaskan fishing industry trade show last week, indicated that wasn’t the case. In an interview by Dan McGovern for the fishing website Worldcatch.com (Why Steller sea lions have declined - An exclusive WNN interview with Steller sea lion expert, Dr. Andrew Trites), Dr. Trites was quoted “What [our findings] suggest to us is that the problem for Steller sea lions, in the wild, is not that they can’t get enough pollock to eat, it’s that they are eating too much of it. Of course, that seems counterintuitive.” He went on to explain that the sea lion’s diet used to be rich in smaller forage fish – herring and sand lance - which are no longer common. As a consequence pollock, which are lower in nutritional value, are making up a too large part of the sea lion’s diet. He went on to speculate that the change in species composition was the result of a “regime shift,” a change in the ocean’s climate that occurred back in the 1970s. And then he echoed a feeling that’s becoming more widespread in the fishing industry and among fisheries managers “I just feel that if these groups (the environmental organizations that are so intent on fixing the blame on the commercial fishing industry) really cared, they would spend some time coming to inform themselves, find out what they could really do to help Steller sea lions. So, it’s very disappointing to me that I haven’t seen any sign of any interest from these groups to really learn the facts, and come ask what they can do to help.”

If it’s not the Jersey Coast Anglers Association way…. – Several weeks ago the New Jersey Marine Fisheries Council refused to vote to close state waters to the menhaden reduction fishery, the source of fish meal and heart healthy fish oil. For years several recreational fishing groups, including the JCAA, had stridently campaigned for this closure, in spite of there being absolutely no scientific evidence supporting it (seems like recreational anglers aren’t satisfied with not sharing their fish, they don’t even want to share their ocean). In the most recent JCAA newsletter, President Frank Richetti  wrote “It was one of the Councilmen who occupy an at-large seat that upset the apple cart… (he) who voted in favor of the menhaden protection measure at the July Council meeting, did an about face and voted along with the commercial interests to strike the regulation before it could be enacted…. What made (him) change his mind and vote against the very proposal that he supported just a few months earlier? Was he confused and just made an honest mistake? Was he just playing politics? Knowing that the balance of power favors the commercial men, was he looking to please them so that some future measure of his would be looked upon favorably? Did he have some other reason for voting the way that he did?” We have known the Council member Mr. Richetti is referring to for years. He is a well respected member of the international community of ocean researchers, has absolutely no ties to the commercial fishing industry that we are aware of, and takes only well-considered positions after carefully evaluating the underlying science. All of us with an interest in New Jersey’s fisheries should be thanking him for donating his time, his experience and his expertise to the Council, not questioning his motives. He, the Council and all of New Jersey’s fishermen – both recreational and commercial – deserve much better than that.

To return to the Fishing New Jersey site introduction page: http://www.fishingnj.org
To return to the current Garden State Seafood Association Weekly Update: http://www.fishingnj.org/currentupdate.htm