Magnuson-Stevens Act

The Modernizing Recreational Fisheries Management Act, known as the “Modern Fish Act,” or S. 1520, passed the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives in late December and was signed by President Trump just before the end of the year.  The bill seeks to address frustration with federal management of recreational fishing, stemming from shortened or cancelled seasons and reduced bag limits. The legislation has been billed as a bi-partisan compromise that provides authority and direction to NOAA Fisheries to apply additional management tools to manage recreational fishing such as extraction rates, fishing mortality targets, harvest control rules, or cultural practices to manage recreational fishing while maintaining the requirement for annual catch limits. Recreational angling interests have long sought data sources that can be used to more precisely estimate harvest than current options.  The bill requires federal managers to continue to explore options that can improve accuracy and timeliness of harvest estimates. Earlier this year, the American Fisheries Society released a set of policy recommendations that provided scientific and management advice to inform both proposed recreational fisheries legislation and a broader Magnuson-Stevens Act re-authorization. It covered four main areas including standards for best available science for introduce data into the management process, catch limits and rebuilding, habitat and ecosystems, and adapting to environment change. The following is a statement from Doug Austen, Executive Director of the American Fisheries Society: “We are pleased that the Modern Fish Act maintains the fundamental scientific framework of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. We recognize the inherent difficulties of estimating recreational catch and managing those fisheries to stay within annual catch limits, particularly where that catch is measured to estimate landings in pounds. AFS recommends pilot testing of alternative approaches to measure catch, like direct measurement of exploitation rates, rather than traditional biomass catch accounting, and a more adaptable approach to defining optimal yield in individual fisheries to meet the needs of in-season management. Looking ahead, we encourage Congress to look to a broader Magnuson-Stevens re-authorization to tackle some significant challenges that current law does not address. AFS is particularly interested in seeing a re-authorization that looks to flexibly deal with rapidly changing ocean conditions like rising temperatures, ocean acidification, and the challenges from moving fish stocks. AFS cannot overstate the importance of monitoring and evaluating the effects of climate-related factors on population structure and biological rates and incorporating these factors into stock assessments and science advice.”

On October 11, AFS Policy Director Drue Winters shepherded marine fisheries experts, Drs. Tom Miller and Cynthia Jones, around D.C. for robust discussions with NOAA Fisheries and Congressional staff on policy considerations for re-authorizing and amending the Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA). Context: Over the last several years, Congress has made attempts to amend the MSA.  In July, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 200 largely on party lines. The bill incorporates provisions of the Modern Fish Act that have made calls for flexibility in the law to deal with frustration from recreational anglers.  There is currently no corresponding re-authorization bill in the Senate.  However, a version of the Modern Fish Act passed out of the Senate Commerce Committee earlier this year. It is unclear whether there will be any movement on the legislation in the near future.  AFS will be sure to stay engaged as attempts to amend the law progress. Meeting Details The day began at NOAA’s Office of Sustainable Fisheries, where AFS representatives met with Director Alan Risenhoover and members of his staff on a range of policy considerations. In particular, Dr. Miller highlighted the benefits of broader use of harvest control rules that have been simulation-tested by the Fisheries Management Councils to avoid the need for rebuilding plans.  The AFS team also addressed opportunities created by dynamic ocean management to reduce bycatch and non-target species in mixed-use fisheries. Dr. Miller explained how the four traditional tools of fisheries management (size limits, season limits, closed areas and catch limits) and the regulations that support them, are not sufficiently flexible to respond to the dynamic seascape. He added, however, that new technologies developed over the last 25 years could help with this issue. [Today, fishing vessels know exactly where they are spatially, where they are with respect to currents and surface temperature features, exactly where their nets are, and how much is in their net. Scientists are also using this information to develop predictive models that would provide information on where stocks can be caught, and as importantly what could be avoided. However, the capabilities these technologies offer have not entered the regulatory environment.  Dynamic ocean management could lead to smaller areas of the ocean being closed to fisheries, less bycatch of endangered and unwanted species, and an increase in the efficiency of individual fishing vessels. Data collected in such a system could lead to more accurate stock assessments and improved fisheries management.] Following the NOAA Fisheries meeting, the team then headed to the Hill for separate meetings with Senate Commerce Committee and House Natural Resources Committee staff members.  A large part of the discussion in the Senate meeting focused on the use of Best Scientific Information Available. For example, recreational fishing stakeholders have called for the use of self-reported data via cell phone apps to estimate catch in hopes of providing anglers more days on the water, when accountability measures have led to short seasons. Dr. Jones explained that only successful anglers are likely to self-report and that insistence on using mobile phone apps for self-reported catch data will almost certainly hurt recreational anglers. Further, she said that when the reported high catch rates are transmitted without any accounting for the anglers who fished and caught nothing, the catch-per-unit effort will be higher than the true rate. A higher catch would be calculated resulting in greater catch restrictions or, in some case, even closing the fishery or shortening the season – thus, depriving anglers of catching up to the sustainable limit if true catch rates were available. Dr. Jones then explained that angler collected data from mobile devices are helpful to determine spatial distribution, movement patterns and often biological characteristics of the catch that’s particular helpful in light of changing conditions. During the meeting with House Natural Resources minority staff, Dr. Miller discussed AFS calls for flexibility and adaptability in the law. He explained that AFS stands by the fundamental framework of the law, but that transitioning out of rebuilding could be more flexible to account for uncertainties in estimates. A stock can be moved into or out of rebuilding when estimates are one fish over or under the threshold for rebuilding.  He clarified that it is more flexible and adaptive to allow councils to make rebuilding determination based on three years of data rather than one, particularly for highly productive stocks. He also highlighted the challenges for fisheries management as a result of changing ecosystems.  He expressed the need for significant additional resources to be directed to better understanding the unprecedented changes that we are already seeing from climate change so that information could be properly incorporated into stock assessments and management decisions. AFS staff is continuing outreach efforts to inform hill staff and others of these important recommendations. AFS thanks Drs. Miller and Jones for their tremendous service to AFS and in communicating fisheries science to policy-makers in a way that was relevant to the policy debate and understandable to the audience.

A new marine fisheries policy was approved by the AFS Governing Board Atlantic City in August to inform the proposed Congressional re-authorization and amendment of the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Management Act, the federal law that governs fisheries management in offshore waters. A special committee of prominent marine fisheries experts led by co-chairs, Tom Miller, University of Maryland Fisheries Professor and Director of the Chesapeake Biological Laboratory and Cynthia Jones, Immediate Past President of the Marine Fisheries Section and Professor at Old Dominion University, developed science-based recommendations to inform policy-makers as they seek to revise the law. The committee focused its advice on four key areas: Best Scientific Information Available, Catch Limits and Rebuilding, Habitat and Ecosystems, and Adapting to Environmental Change. See the summary below or download PDFs of the summary and the full report. American Fisheries Society Scientific Recommendations on Reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Act Best Scientific Information Available The American Fisheries Society (AFS) strongly endorses continued reliance on Best Scientific Information Available Standard (BSIA), as a best practice in managing the nation’s fisheries.  AFS is concerned that data from self-reported sources (i.e. mobile technologies) are not sufficiently reliable to estimate catch without a valid sampling frame and should not be mandated in legislation.  AFS supports the inclusion of citizen science into fisheries management and encourages the development of innovative survey sampling methods to enable collection of reliable and unbiased data from anglers.  Catch Limits AFS believes science-based management is the cornerstone of fisheries management and recommends the continued separation of scientific and socioeconomic decision-making. AFS supports the requirement that the Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) must be less than the Overfishing Limit (OFL).  AFS supports maintaining the Annual Catch Limit (ACL) requirement for recreational fisheries, but recommends a flexible approach to defining “Optimal Yield” in individual fisheries.  Revisions to the Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA) should allow for adaptable and responsive management to account for new developments in science and management. AFS supports increased flexibility in MSA with regard to setting OFLs, ABCs, and ACLs for data-poor stocks.  AFS urges innovative approaches to managing mixed-stock fisheries and encourages exploration of emerging technology to better manage for “choke” species.  Rebuilding Rebuilding timelines should be based on the biology of the stock and AFS supports adaptability and flexibility in transitioning into and out of a period of overfishing or rebuilding.  AFS supports the call of the National Research Council to focus on management of exploitation rates in a rebuilding context rather than abundance (biomass).  Using harvest control rules that have been simulation tested in a management strategy evaluation to reduce fishing mortality before a species becomes overfished could eliminate the need for rebuilding plans and could reduce the need for accountability measures.  Habitat and Ecosystems AFS recommends continued focus on habitat and Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management as ways of improving stability and value of the nation’s fisheries.  Clearer policy guidance regarding the objectives of EBFM is necessary for it to be more widely used.  Adapting to Environmental Change Precautionary catch limits and realistic rebuilding timeframes will be necessary to account for uncertainty and change in the climate and ecosystem.  Future re-authorizations should focus on adaptability and flexibility to reflect the fact that fisheries productivity is changing.  Resources must be directed to monitor and evaluate the effects of climate-related factors on population structure and biological rates and resulting information should be incorporated into stock assessments and scientific advice.  AFS recommends active outreach by NMFS and the Councils to encourage fishermen to actively participate in data collection, assessment, and management.  For more detailed information, please read the full report or contact Drue Winters, AFS Policy Director, at [email protected] or (301) 897-8616 x202.

The House Rules Committee members heard testimony on H.R. 200 on Monday, a bill that seeks to amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA).  They will take up the bill again today and it could go to the full House tomorrow for a vote. However, the House is embroiled on immigration issues which could delay a vote until after 4th of July. Don Young (R.-Alaska) testified that federal control of fisheries has not worked in every area and the bill provides for flexibility in the law called for by communities and Fishery Management Councils without hurting fish stocks.  Jared Huffman, (D.-Calif.), testified against H.R. 200 noting the lack of bi-partisan compromise on the bill.  He expressed concern about the lack of provisions for science-based catch limits and loopholes on critical provisions that would weaken the law that has led to drastic improvements in fish stocks in the United States. Congress has been debating re-authorizing and amending the MSA, the law that governs federal fisheries management, to provide additional flexibility. The last re-authorization in 2007 required NOAA Fisheries to end current and prevent future overfishing by adopting a precautionary approach that relies on scientific stock assessments to set annual catch limits. In a relatively short time, NOAA Fisheries has recovered 44 previously overfished stocks using this approach to fisheries management.  Despite the successful rebuilding of many overfished stocks, both commercial and recreational fishers are frustrated by what they perceive to be an inflexible management regime that limits harvest to these more abundant stocks. Link to the hearing:  https://rules.house.gov/video/rules-committee-hearing-hr-200-2083-6157

The U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation will hold an executive session on Wednesday, February 28, at 10:00 a.m. to consider S. 1520, Modernizing Recreational Fisheries Management Act of 2017 and a number of nominations. Sponsors of the Modern Fish Act include Sens. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), Deb Fisher (R-Neb.), Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Todd Young (R-Ind.) Details: Wednesday, February 28, 2018 10:00 a.m. Full Committee Markup Senate Dirksen Building, Room 106 A live video of the markup and additional information will be available at www.commerce.senate.gov

By Steve McMullin, AFS President President Barack Obama once famously said, “Elections have consequences.” The first year of the Trump Administration clearly demonstrates the truth of that statement, and the consequences for fisheries and the environment are potentially “huge.” The Trump Administration’s approach to science and the environment during its first year in office included withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accords, attempts to roll back clean water protections through efforts to repeal the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule, political appointees disregarding science and established processes in fisheries management decisions, failure to fill science positions in the administration, and proposed budget cuts for aquatic research and conservation, just to name a few. In my brief remarks upon being installed as president of the American Fisheries Society (AFS), I stated that AFS must be the voice for fisheries because many of our members (i.e., those who work for government agencies) do not always feel free to publicly voice their concerns when science is ignored or misused in the policy process. However, we must keep in mind that AFS is a professional society and that serving as the voice for fisheries differs from environmental advocacy. Actively engaging in the policy process raises many questions. How will we choose from among the many issues that will affect fisheries and the profession? What form will our engagement in the policy process take? Where will we find the resources we need to effectively engage? I will address each of these questions in the remainder of this column. There are at least a dozen policy issues in play with important implications for fisheries as I write this column. In order to be most effective, AFS must focus its resources on a few, select issues. A proactive, focused, and deliberate approach to policy will ensure that we engage in a timely and effective manner in the most important national debates, while leaving room for smaller issues as time and resources will allow. We will assign highest priority to national issues where we can act proactively rather than reactively and where our efforts will have the greatest impact. The traditional approach employed by AFS of developing lengthy policy statements did not allow for timely engagement and those statements were not always germane to the national debate. Though well researched and documented, those policy statements often were out of date by the time they were adopted and were rarely updated as per AFS Procedures. Based on that reality, the AFS officers identified three issues as highest priority for the next year: engaging in the repeal/replacement of WOTUS to ensure consideration of the importance of wetlands and headwater streams to aquatic resources, supporting passage of the Recovering America’s Wildlife Act to secure funding for proactive conservation for imperiled fish, and ensuring that proposals for the reauthorization of the Magnuson–Stevens Act are informed by science and AFS collective management experience. AFS will continue to work to ensure that the value of wetlands and headwater streams are properly considered in the administration’s efforts to repeal the 2015 WOTUS rule and replace it with a rule that undermines protections for water quality and threatens aquatic resources. The Society has an established position on this issue and has a long history of engaging on WOTUS both individually and with its partners in the Consortium of Aquatic Science Societies. AFS will continue to ensure that the best available science is considered as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency considers whether to repeal and replace the rule. In addition to WOTUS, AFS will take an active role in supporting passage of the Recovering America’s Wildlife Act. This proposed legislation would direct US$1.3 billion annually to state fish and wildlife agencies for proactive conservation. State wildlife action plans are designed to protect and recover nongame species of greatest conservation need, but the states need substantially more funding to ensure that species in decline are addressed before they become threatened or endangered. Studies of extinction rates among freshwater fauna suggest that North America is losing species as rapidly as tropical forests (Ricciardi and Rasmussen 1999). This proposed legislation provides an opportunity to address habitat loss, combat invasive species, improve water quality, and apply many other conservation strategies to prevent additional decline and improve the outlook for many other species. As an added benefit, if passed, the Recovering America’s Wildlife Act would significantly increase employment opportunities for fisheries biologists. This bill could be as transformational for state fish and wildlife agencies as Pittman–Robinson or Wallop–Breaux. We will be calling on our members to get involved in this opportunity of a lifetime. Lastly, but equally as important for marine species, AFS will engage in the reauthorization of the Magnuson–Stevens Act, the federal law that governs fisheries management in the U.S Exclusive Economic Zone. Discussions are underway in the current Congress that call for additional flexibility in the law. The last reauthorization in 2007 required National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration–Fisheries to end current and prevent future overfishing by adopting a precautionary approach that relies on scientific stock assessments to set annual catch limits. In a relatively short time, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration–Fisheries has recovered 41 previously overfished stocks using this approach to fisheries management. Despite the successful rebuilding of many overfished stocks, both commercial and recreational fishers are frustrated by what they perceive to be an inflexible management regime that limits harvest to these more abundant stocks. The involvement of AFS in the reauthorization debate will focus on ensuring that proposals for changes in the law are informed by good science, sound management strategies, and well-supported policies. AFS will evaluate existing provisions of the law and the proposals for flexibility to ensure that conservation gains are not reversed. Where possible, AFS will propose scientifically based solutions for federal fisheries managers with flexibility to harvest sustainably and without undermining conservation gains. Elections do indeed have consequences. There has never been a more important time to get involved in ensuring that aquatic resources and their habitat are conserved and protected.

Tuesday, December 12 The House Committee on Natural Resources has scheduled a markup on 15 bills including the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act beginning on Tuesday, December 12, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. in 1324 Longworth House Office Building. The committee will convene for opening statements only and will reconvene the following day. Tuesday, December 12 The Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee’s Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard will hold a hearing titled “National Ocean Policy: Stakeholder Perspectives.” The hearing will examine the state of the National Ocean Policy and the program’s interaction with existing laws and regulations for ocean management. Read more here. Wednesday, December 13 House Natural Resources Committee will reconvene on Wednesday, December 13, 2017, at 10:00 a.m. until 12:30 p.m. in 1324 Longworth House Office Building for a full committee markup of several bills, most notably. H.R. 200, introduced by Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska).  H.R. 200 seeks to reauthorize the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the primary law governing fisheries resources and fishing activities in United States federal waters.  Mr. Young will offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute that restructures the bill and includes several provisions from S. 1520, introduced by Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.). The committee will also markup H.R. 3588, sponsored by Rep. Garret Graves (R-La.) and H.R. 4465, sponsored by Rep. John R. Curtis (R-Utah). H.R. 3588 seeks to amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to provide for management of red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico. H.R. 4465, The Endangered Fish Recovery Programs Extension Act of 2017, seeks to re-authorize funding for the Upper Colorado and San Juan fish recovery programs through fiscal year 2023. Read more about the bill here.

In recent months, talk of offshore aquaculture has been buzzing in the news and in Washington. While finfish and shellfish culture has flourished in state waters for more than a century, offshore finfish aquaculture has not kept pace.  There are currently no large-scale commercial finfish net-pen aquaculture operations in federal waters. Congress and federal agencies are making strides to set up the legal and regulatory structure that will allow an offshore aquaculture industry in the U.S. to flourish while protecting marine ecosystems from environmental damage. We’ve highlighted some of the key issues, recent developments, and our engagement thus far to underscore the immense opportunity before AFS to provide solid scientific knowledge, share decades of member experience across the culture sectors, and contribute to efforts to improve management plans and policies related to marine aquaculture. The Trump Administration brought some weight to the idea of expanded offshore aquaculture when Wilbur Ross, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Commerce, identified it as a promising opportunity to help our nation decrease its foreign trade deficit. One of the reasons that offshore aquaculture is not advancing is that lengthy, expensive and complicated permitting requirements discourage investment.  Stable and predictable regulatory regimes are key to investment in offshore aquaculture. Efficient regulation of offshore aquaculture could lower the financial burden and reduce the time associated with permitting while ensuring the regulatory requirements are satisfied. AFS met with NOAA officials to get a better sense of the agency’s plans and the larger landscape and to offer our expertise as the agency works through these issues.  Through these meetings, AFS learned that NOAA officials have discussed the possibility of collaborating with industry, states, and other stakeholders on a national aquaculture initiative to increase U.S. domestic seafood production through regulatory streamlining and other measures. NOAA is also working on a draft bill to provide for a legal regime and permitting structure for an offshore aquaculture regime. Congress is also discussing aquaculture as part of broader Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA) re-authorization talks and as a stand-alone legislative effort. There are a host of issues to resolve in legislation, but the one that really seems to be a sticking point is the concern that federal law doesn’t clearly authorize aquaculture in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone.   Resolving this problem would lead to greater certainty, which could in turn allow for greater investment in aquaculture. NOAA asserts that the MSA gives the agency jurisdiction to regulate offshore aquaculture for federal managed species.  In 2009, the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council developed a Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for Regulating Offshore Marine Aquaculture in the Gulf of Mexico.  In January 2016, NOAA finalized a regulation that provides for the permitting of offshore finfish aquaculture in the Gulf of Mexico. The rule authorizes NOAA Fisheries to issue permits to grow federally managed species such as Red Drum, Cobia, and Almaco Jack in federal waters in the Gulf for an initial 10-year period with an optional 5-year renewal. Shortly after publication of the final rule in the Federal Register, fishing and public interest groups filed suit challenging the rule on the grounds that NOAA exceeded its authority under MSA by including offshore aquaculture as “fishing” activity.  The plaintiffs argued that the MSA does not contemplate aquaculture as fishing either expressly or indirectly and that there was no legislative history to suggest that aquaculture was contemplated under the law. To date, there have been no permit applications submitted to conduct offshore aquaculture operations in the Gulf of Mexico.  The issue has even come up in recent MSA re-authorization hearings in the Senate with Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) questioning NOAA Assistant Administrator Chris Oliver about why there had been no permit applications for offshore aquaculture in the Gulf of Mexico despite the rule.  Oliver wasn’t able to provide a response at the time, but the uncertain legal landscape could be a significant factor leading to the lack of permit applications. Even if NOAA prevails in the lawsuit, there are other challenges to using the MSA to regulate offshore aquaculture.  Because the law was developed to regulate the harvest of wild fish, some provisions may be incompatible with management of aquaculture.  Further, FMPs regulate federally managed species, but large scale offshore aquaculture operations may need the flexibility to cultivate a broader range of species to be economically viable, making an alternative legal regime desirable.  From a more practical perspective, most fishery management councils have designated aquaculture as a non-fishing activity, further limiting the application of MSA as a vehicle for offshore aquaculture expansion. Over the last several months, AFS has been working with congressional staff to provide the scientific and management expertise of our members to inform draft legislation on offshore aquaculture.  AFS staff attended a Capitol Hill briefing on aquaculture this summer where we learned of Sen. Wicker’s interest in crafting a bill on this topic.  In follow-up, AFS staff met with the senator’s staff to explore ways that we could offer support as they worked towards a draft bill. As a result of that meeting, AFS was able to share some big picture information to help inform the bill as well as some recent research to help staff better understand the improvements in science and technology that have lessened the potential environmental impact of aquaculture activities. We were later asked to comment on the senator’s discussion draft of the “Marine Aquaculture Act of 2017” that seeks to “establish a regulatory system for offshore aquaculture in the United States exclusive economic zone.” With the assistance of our Resource Policy Committee, AFS solicited comments from AFS members with appropriate expertise and relayed timely comments for consideration back to staff. Wicker’s bill creates a new legal and permitting regime for aquaculture and takes the regulation of offshore aquaculture out of the MSA.  At least one other member of Congress has addressed offshore aquaculture in proposed legislation.  Jared Huffman’s (D-Calif.) discussion draft of a MSA re-authorization bill in the House proposes to exclude aquaculture from the definition of fishing.  We’ll

On October 27, the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council announced open commercial and recreational fisheries for Red Snapper. The recreational season opened in federal waters of the South Atlantic for two consecutive three-day weekends, November 3-5 and November 10-12. The commercial fishery opened November 2 with a 75-pound (gutted weight) trip limit and no minimum size limit. Earlier this year, U.S. Department of Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross interceded in fisheries management decisions normally handled by a regional fishery management council and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) on Atlantic summer flounder and Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper. (Read more here.)  While the latest Red Snapper decision fell within normal council and NOAA procedures, it remains significant. According to one close observer, the South Atlantic Red Snapper decisions reflect increased trust in the science behind annual catch limits and greater dependence on technology to monitor the limited recreational and commercial harvests. Coupled with the possibility of secretarial intervention it would appear the South Atlantic Council was willing to adopt a less conservative catch limit and to open the recreational season for the first time since 2014. The council also offered specific best practices and launched a voluntary, pilot reporting tool to monitor catches and releases at www.MyFishCount.com. Altogether, these three decisions could affect current efforts to re-authorize the Magnuson-Stevens Act. More specifically, the less conservative decisions to open fisheries could be an important departure from the recent past. It also may confirm that the existing management structure has more inherent flexibility than some thought or greater trust in the science behind setting annual catch limits. Still, reactions to the latest Red Snapper decision are mixed. A press release from the American Sportfishing Association applauds the new recreational season while Pew is concerned about the added risk to a stock susceptible to overfishing. AFS will continue to monitor marine fishery management decisions with respect to MSA re-authorization proceedings and overall progress toward the goal of no overfishing and sustainable populations.

The Senate Commerce Committee Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard Subcommittee convened a Magnuson-Stevens Act re-authorization hearing focusing on fisheries science on Tuesday, October 24, 2017. The hearing, a fourth of the series, focused on the state of our nation’s fisheries and the science that supports sustainable management. The witnesses included two AFS members, Ray Hilborn, Ph.D., professor at the University of Washington School of Aquatic and Fisheries Sciences and Michael Jones, Ph.D., professor at Michigan State University’s Quantitative Fisheries Center. While AFS does not yet have a position on the proposals for amending Magnuson-Stevens, AFS officers recently identified this as a policy priority for the coming year. Discussions are underway in the current Congress that call for re-authorizing the law and amending it to provide additional flexibility. The last re-authorization in 2007, required NOAA Fisheries to end current and prevent future overfishing by adopting a precautionary approach that relies on scientific stock assessments to set annual catch limits. In a relatively short time, NOAA Fisheries has recovered 41 previously overfished stocks using this approach to fisheries management.  Despite the successful rebuilding of many overfished stocks, both commercial and recreational fishers are frustrated by what they perceive to be an inflexible management regime that limits harvest to these more abundant stocks. “The involvement of AFS in the re-authorization debate will focus on ensuring that proposals for changes in the law are informed by good science, sound management strategies, and well-supported policies,” said Steve McMullin, President of the American Fisheries Society. “I am calling for a special committee to evaluate existing provisions of the law and the proposals for flexibility and will propose, to the extent possible, scientifically-based solutions for federal fisheries managers to be able to maximize sustainable harvest without sacrificing conservation gains realized over the last few decades.” Please contact Drue Winters ([email protected]) if you are interested in serving on the special committee.   Witness testimony, opening statements, and a  video of the hearing are available here. We’ll be bringing you highlights of the hearing on the AFS website.  

As Commerce chief, Secretary Wilbur Ross’ portfolio includes oversight of NOAA, but it is rather unusual for a cabinet level official to wade into federal fisheries management decisions.  National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS or NOAA Fisheries), a unit within NOAA is charged with management of the nation’s fisheries. With the help of the six regional science centers, eight regional fisheries management councils, the coastal states and territories, and three interstate fisheries management commissions, NMFS takes a science-based approach to conserving and managing fish stocks in federal waters.  Since taking office in February, Ross has surprised fisheries managers and stakeholders by directly intervening in federal fisheries decisions leaving many wondering whether the Secretary’s atypical approach might be the new norm. Ross’ first foray into federal fisheries management came with an announcement in June to lengthen the federal Red Snapper season in the Gulf of Mexico from 3 days to 42. The Secretary responded to pleas to provide more access to the resource from recreational fishermen and state managers who were frustrated by shrinking recreational seasons despite larger and more abundant fish. In the late 1980s, NOAA Fisheries and the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council began implementing various regulations to rebuild the Red Snapper population including limiting fishing mortality.  The 2013 stock assessment indicated overfishing was not occurring, the stock was rebuilding but remained overfished, and catch levels could be increased.  Ross justified his deal with the Gulf states to extend the season in exchange for limiting fishing in state waters on the grounds that the current management regime was undermining the federal-state partnership on Red Snapper management, and that it was threatening to undermine federal fisheries management in the Gulf and elsewhere. Given those factors, Ross felt a more modest rebuilding pace was an acceptable risk. In July, Ross again went outside of standard procedure with his decision to allow New Jersey fishermen to harvest more Summer Flounder than allowed under the catch limits recommended by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (of which the state of New Jersey is a member).  Summer Flounder (known locally as fluke) are overfished and under the Commission’s rules states could be required to reduce quotas drastically or implement a region-wide moratorium on fishing if the population falls another 14 percent. Officials in New Jersey, which has one of the region’s largest fluke populations, had drafted an alternative plan that they said would do more to protect the fishery, but it was rejected by the commission, whose scientists concluded the plan would result in nearly 94,000 additional fish being caught. This move marked the first time the federal government had disregarded such a recommendation by the commission, leading to concerns that political maneuvering could threaten preservation of fragile fish stocks. “The commission is deeply concerned about the near-term impact on our ability to end overfishing on the Summer Flounder stock as well as the longer-term ability for the commission to effectively conserve numerous other Atlantic coastal shared resources,” Douglas Grout, the commission’s chair, said in a statement. Commissioners and fisheries managers along the east coast, as well as the region’s NOAA officials, expressed concern with the move saying it was unprecedented for a Commerce secretary to make a decision without seeking their input. Such rulings are routinely vetted by NOAA’s regional officials and scientists, who review the commission’s recommendations and then prepare the agency’s response, they said. The Red Snapper and Summer Flounder decisions were both outside of the regular order of fisheries management decision-making. There’s concern that states and fishing groups will directly seek political relief instead of following NOAA procedures and adhering to fishing quotas set by government experts and scientists.These actions appear to address a Trump Administration promise to reduce bureaucratic hurdles to solving problems. Ross told a Senate panel in June he understood the frustration over a shorter federal Red Snapper season and that he shared Trump’s “commitment to cutting unnecessary red tape and eliminating failed regulations.” These decisions are being watched closely as Congress considers reauthorizing the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Management Act. The House Natural Resources Committee invited Ross to testify at a hearing on federal fisheries management on September 27, but Chris Oliver, Assistant Administrator of NOAA Fisheries, testified in his stead. Oliver, responding to a question by Arizona Rep. Raúl Grijalva, the top Democrat on the Natural Resources Committee, said the decisions in both the Red Snapper and Summer Flounder cases did not involve the administration going against any recommendations made by NOAA scientists or agency leaders. Grijalva asked Oliver to provide more information on both decisions within 30 days and Oliver agreed to do so. Oliver said the Trump administration has yet to weigh in on specific changes it would seek as part of an overhaul of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, but he said the administration backs “legislative opportunities” that would prove additional flexibility on annual catch limits. AFS will be watching for other federal fisheries management decisions from Secretary Ross.

House Natural Resources Subcommittee to Discuss MSA Amendments On Tuesday, September 26, 2017, the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans will hold a legislative hearing on the following bills: H.R. 200 (Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska), To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to provide flexibility for fishery managers and stability for fishermen, and for other purposes. H.R. 2023 (Rep. Garret Graves, R-La.), To modernize recreational fisheries management. Modernizing Recreational Fisheries Management Act of 2017 H.R. 3588 (Rep. Garret Graves, R-La.), To amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to provide for management of red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico, and for other purposes. RED SNAPPER Act Discussion Draft of H.R. ____ (Rep. Jared Huffman, D-Calif.), To amend and reauthorize the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, and for other purposes. WITNESSES The Honorable Jonathan Mitchell, Mayor, City of New Bedford, New Bedford, Massachusetts Mr. Chris Macaluso, Director, Center for Marine Fisheries,  Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, Washington, DC Ms. Susan Boggs, Co-Owner, Reel Surprise Charter Fishing, Orange Beach, Alabama The Honorable Wilbur Ross (Invited), Secretary, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC Mr. Ben Martens, Executive Director, Maine Coast Fisherman’s Association, Brunswick, Maine Mr. Mike Merrifield, Southeastern Fisheries Association, Tallahassee, Florida Mr. Chris Blankenship, Commissioner, Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Montgomery, Alabama Meeting details: 1334 Longworth House Office Building Washington D.C. 20515 10:00 AM

Sport Fishing magazine interviewed Chris Oliver, who was recently named assistant administrator of NOAA Fisheries. The interview touches on topics such as commercial vs. recreational fisheries management strategies, Magnuson-Stevens Act re-authorization, NOAA’s placement in the Department of Commerce, management of Red Snapper, FY 2018 budget cuts, offshore aquaculture, and catch shares in recreational fisheries. Read the article.

On September 12, the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard will hold a hearing on the reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA). Panelists will talk about the successes and challenges of MSA from the perspective of commercial, charter, and recreational fishermen. The Committee hearing is scheduled for 2:30 pm EDT in Russell Senate Office Building, Room 253. Witness testimony, opening statements, and a live video of the hearing will be available on www.commerce.senate.gov. Witnesses: Panel I –  Phil Faulkner, President, Nautic Star Boats –  Jim Donofrio, Executive Director, Recreational Fishing Alliance –  Chris Horton, Senior Director, Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation Panel II –  Lori Steele, Executive Director, West Coast Seafood Processors Association –  Capt. Robert F. Zales, II, President, National Association of Charterboat Operators –  Greg DiDomenico, Executive Director, Garden State Seafood Association

On August 1, the Senate Commerce Committee Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries and Coast Guard held the first of a series of hearings on the successes and challenges of the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation Act (MSA). Chris Oliver, the Assistant Administrator for NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) testified before the subcommittee in support of greater management flexibility in the law for both commercial and recreational fisheries. Oliver praised the MSA for effectively ending overfishing and rebuilding domestic fish stocks but noted that flexibility applying accountability measures, annual catch limits (ACLs) and rebuilding timelines could address many of the challenges that have been raised in re-authorization discussions. He explained that “managing under ACLs and associated accountability measures has been a major change and a new challenge for many fisheries” particularly in recreational fisheries where harvest data can be difficult to collect or isn’t quickly reported or where robust stock assessments don’t exist or management goals may differ fundamentally from commercial fisheries. He noted that in his personal experience, additional tools in the toolbox would be helpful. Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) explored the challenges of managing recreational fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico under the existing law.  Anglers argue that NOAA’s Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) cannot provide data at the level of timeliness and accuracy needed for managing effort for quota-based ACLs. MRIP relies on mail surveys to track catch data. In response, the Gulf Coast states have developed data collection surveys that rely on more frequent in-season surveys and have made other data-collection improvements to track effort. Oliver touted the pending baseline benchmark for red snapper as an opportunity to make some headway on this issue and acknowledged the “less than perfect satisfaction with stock assessments” and the inability “through real time accounting to know precisely what’s coming out of the water.” When asked about opportunities to use new technology employed by the Gulf Coast states like smart phone technology to better track harvest data, he noted that NMFS is prioritizing and expediting certification of state data programs to be able to use these tools. Oliver highlighted the 2018 National Saltwater Recreational Fisheries Summit scheduled for March 28-29, 2018 in the D.C. area as an opportunity to “chart a course for future success.” The event, sponsored by NMFS and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, is an effort to engage recreational fisheries constituents from around the nation to identify commonly held concerns, goals, objectives, and priorities, which in the past has served as the basis for the NOAA Fisheries National Action Agenda, subsequent Saltwater Recreational Fisheries Policy, and National and Regional Implementation Plans. A number of other issues were raised that impact fisheries across the country including concerns about ocean acidification, movement of fish stocks due to warming waters, the ability of the regional councils to track movement, and concerns over available harvest being left in the water due to bycatch restrictions and regulatory hurdles. Oliver used West Coast ground fish to highlight how regulations and bycatch restrictions are creating a scenario where fishermen must leave significant portions of available harvest in the water. ​For example, fishermen might be required to discard marketable fish because they are under-sized, caught unintentionally, or caught out of season. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) highlighted the challenges of fish stock movement for the New England fishing industry and characterized the current system as profoundly unfair. Catch limits are often based on where fish have been most abundant in the past, but outdated assessments have not kept up with stock movement leaving fishermen from southern states on the east coast with a larger share of the catch. Blumenthal called for “sweeping, immediate and radical change” to the MSA to accommodate the New England fishing industry. Subcommittee Chairman Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) asked Mr. Oliver to speak to opportunities to address the seafood trade imbalance with foreign importers. Echoing Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross’ interest in this expansion, Oliver indicated that the agency is making “marine aquaculture development a renewed priority” and is working towards operational and budgetary incentives to make inroads on the seafood deficit through aquaculture production.  He cautioned that regulatory and permitting issues are hurdles to expansion. In early 2016, NOAA finalized a regulation that allows for coordinated permitting for offshore finfish aquaculture in the Gulf of Mexico. The new rule authorizes NOAA Fisheries to issue permits to grow species such as Red Drum, Cobia, and Almaco Jack in federal waters in the Gulf for an initial 10-year period with an optional 5-year renewal. In addition to a NOAA permit, farming fish in federal waters also requires permits from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) who has an interest in developing aquaculture legislation, questioned Oliver about the reasons for the lack of permit applications. Oliver committed to provide a response for the record. Fishing and public interest groups filed suit challenging the rule on the grounds that NOAA exceeded its authority to regulate fishing under MSA by including offshore aquaculture as “fishing” activity.  Some believe that investors are hesitant to fund these endeavors in the face of opposition from environmentalists and fishermen, while others believe investment is stymied due to regulatory and leasing hurdles. Sen. Blumenthal expressed frustration about the Administration’s proposed Fiscal year 2018 budget cuts that impact NOAA programming including Sea Grant and federal research efforts to expand aquaculture, and asked Oliver to justify them.  Oliver noted that he was not in a position to comment extensively, but cautioned that there could be a need to refocus limited monetary and staff resources on core, mission critical activities such as basic stock assessments and catch accounting. Oliver’s written testimony is available for review here.  

On July 19, the House Natural Resources Committee’s Water, Power and Oceans Subcommittee held an oversight hearing to explore regional successes and challenges associated with federal fisheries management under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA). Stakeholders from various regions testified on specific management challenges they have faced, and highlighted reforms that could be made to the act to afford regional fishery managers and the Secretary of Commerce the flexibility to tailor management plans to the unique circumstances of different fisheries – both commercial and recreational – in different regions across the U.S. First passed in 1976, MSA is the primary law governing commercial and recreational marine fisheries management in U.S. federal waters out to 200 nautical miles from shore. The law seeks to prevent overfishing, rebuild overfished stocks, increase long-term economic and social benefits, and ensure a safe and sustainable supply of seafood. Congress made significant revisions to MSA in 1996 with the passage of the Sustainable Fisheries Act, and again in 2007 with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act.  Federal fisheries are managed for Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY), the amount of fish that can be removed from the stock without impacting the long-term stability of the population. MSY can be adjusted for the ecological, economic, and social goals of the country to achieve Optimal Yield. There are a number of bills that have been introduced in this Congress to reform federal fisheries management. Congressman Don Young (R-AK) sponsored a MSA reauthorization bill, H.R. 200, the Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act, provides for flexibility in the currently mandated 10-year rebuilding timeframes that would allow Fishery Management Councils to take economic factors such as the effects of the fishing restrictions on the fishing communities into account while still rebuilding the fishery.  Congressman Garret Graves (R-LA) introduced H.R. 2023, the Modernization Recreational Fisheries Management Act of 2017, to address recreational fisheries concerns with federal management of red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico.  Both bills are awaiting subcommittee action. Republicans expressed concern about access for commercial and recreational fishing, lack of reliable data to inform stock assessments, inflexible regulations, and limited fishing areas resulting from expanded Marine Protected Areas associated with Marine National Monuments and Marine Sanctuaries. Democrats highlighted the existing flexibility in the law and touted the successes in rebuilding fish stocks through science-based catch limits, accountability measures and rebuilding plans under MSA. Nick Wiley, executive director for the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) testified that he believes MSA, as currently written, needs to be modified and improved to better balance today’s need for access and conservation. In his written testimony, he noted “The Act has worked best when applied to the commercial sector, but not so well when applied to the recreational sector.” Further, he noted “the requirements to manage fisheries under strict annual catch limits, the overly prescriptive constraints for stock rebuilding plans, and general inflexibility within the current version of the law have hindered management of fish stocks in the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. This inflexibility has fostered a serious erosion of public confidence, trust, and support for this fishery management system.” Sean Martin testified on behalf of the Hawaii Longline Association.  He expressed concern with the establishment of national marine monuments in the Pacific Ocean under the Antiquities Act of 1906 which, in his view, circumvented MSA and excluded the fishing industry. He recommended that the MSA be amended to ensure that the act is the only process by which regulations affecting U.S. fisheries can be adopted to ensure a transparent, public, and science-based process. Jeff Kaelin, representing a Cape May, New Jersey commercial fishing enterprise, Lund’s Fisheries, expressed support for H.R. 200, Rep. Young’s MSA re-authorization bill and highlighted the need for reforms to the existing law, particularly in light of what he views as challenges to consistently achieving Optimum Yield.  He testified that insufficient data on many stocks and scientific uncertainty has resulted in robust precautionary buffers around quotas and yields below MSY at the expense of the industry and our Nation. Charles Witek, a recreational angler and outdoor writer specializing in saltwater fishery conservation from New York, spoke in favor of the existing conservation and management provisions of MSA. He testified that Annual Catch Limits and rebuilding deadlines were the only framework that has met with consistent success. He explained that New York’s inshore fisheries are managed in cooperation with the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) under a “flexible management system that does not require overfishing to be ended, stocks to be rebuilt by a particular deadline or the best scientific information to be used when evaluating the health of the stock.” He testified that federally managed stocks have been successfully rebuilt since the 1996 amendment to MSA, but the ASMFC has failed to rebuild a single stock under its sole jurisdiction and a number of stocks have even declined since then. He also called for the best peer reviewed science to be used in assessments and advocated for ecosystem-based management. The need for improved data and data collection methods was discussed repeatedly in the hearing. Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) asked each panelist whether they supported more funding for fishery science. All of the panelists expressed support for increased funding, but Mr. Wiley cautioned that funding should be directed towards the greatest needs. State fisheries agencies in the Gulf of Mexico have been critical of the federal Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) which relies on mail surveys for catch data and argue that it cannot provide data at the level of timeliness and accuracy needed for managing effort by quota-based Annual Catch Limits. In response, the Gulf Coast states have developed data collection surveys that rely on more frequent in-season surveys and have made other data-collection improvements.  All five Gulf States have developed or are developing state-specific reef fish angler harvest data programs to identify the pool of reef fish anglers and collect harvest data in, or close to,

This week, AFS staff attended Capitol Hill Ocean Week (CHOW), an annual conference convened by the National Marine Sanctuary Foundation.  Each year, CHOW brings together more than 600 national and global policymakers, scientists, scholars, businesses and conservation leaders to address pressing science, conservation, and management issues facing our oceans and Great Lakes. A Congressional Roundtable featuring Ocean Caucus members, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) and Rep. Derek Kilmer (D-Wash.) provided lively and informative discussion on bi-partisan approaches to solving marine challenges.  The panelists provided some insight into the budget and some hot topics to monitor in the coming months, including legislation to address marine debris and ocean acidification, as well as the prospect of a Magnuson-Stevens reauthorization in the near future. Budget: The panelists addressed the President’s Fiscal Year 2018 budget proposal which recommends sharp cuts to conservation programs.  Rep. Kilmer, whose district includes the Puget Sound in Washington State, felt that it was a “completely unserious proposal by the administration” that doesn’t represent his constituent’s interests in coastal resilience, fisheries or shellfish aquaculture.   Sen. Sullivan cautioned the attendees on the need to address fiscal sustainability in light of the escalating deficit, but maintained that Congress would “wreck this budget.” Legislation to Follow: Marine Debris Senators Whitehouse and Sullivan introduced S. 756, the Save Our Seas Act, in March, to address marine debris.  The bill has now made its way out of the Senate Commerce committee.  A companion bill, sponsored by Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) and Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.) has been filed in the House. Both pieces of legislation would provide a funding source for the cleanup and response for severe marine debris events, reauthorize NOAA’s Marine Debris Program through FY2022 and encourage the Executive Branch and the U.S. Department of State to become more engaged in understanding, prevention, and response to marine debris. The Senate Commerce Committee will hold a hearing on this issue at 10 a.m. on Thursday, June 22, 2017. A live video of the hearing will be available at www.commerce.senate.gov. Ocean Acidification This week, Reps. Derek Kilmer and Jaime Herrera Beutler (R-Wash.) reintroduced bipartisan legislation that aims to fight ocean acidification. House Resolution 2882, entitled the Ocean Acidification Innovation Act, would allow federal agencies to use existing funds to design prize competitions to increase the ability to manage, monitor and research ocean acidification and its impacts. Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Act Sen. Sullivan indicated that we could see movement on re-authorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Act (MSA) soon.  In January, Rep. Don Young introduced H.R. 200 which would revise and reauthorize the MSA through FY2022; but as of this writing, no hearings have been scheduled on re-authorization.  AFS staff will update our membership as we learn of developments here. Get Involved! Sen. Whitehouse offered some excellent advice for making your voice heard to your member of Congress.  He counseled advocates for conservation causes to make the issue local to the member with whom you’re communicating and explain how the issue or proposed solution supports the local economy.  In light of ongoing budget discussions, we encourage AFS members to make your voices heard on the importance of programs slated for budget cuts. Your story is important to your member of Congress. Don’t know what to say or how to say it? AFS policy staff can help.  Reach out to Drue Winters at [email protected] or Tom Bigford at [email protected] for more information.

NOAA Fisheries announced final revisions to the guidelines that federal managers will use as they routinely update the nation’s marine fisheries plans. The revised federal fishery management guidelines, known as the National Standard 1 guidelines of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, are intended to provide more flexibility and be more effective in ending and preventing overfishing. “U.S. efforts to rebuild fish stocks under the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the National Standards have resulted in real ecological and economic benefits, and made the nation an international leader in fisheries management,” said Eileen Sobeck, assistant NOAA administrator for fisheries. “The revisions will continue our progress to prevent and end overfishing while providing an adaptive management system that better supports fishermen and fishing communities.” These successes are based on the fundamental mandate within the Magnuson-Stevens Act that overfishing must be prevented. Changes to these guidelines will not change that. Rather, these updates are based on lessons learned since the reauthorization of the Magnuson Act in 2007 and provide consistent technical guidance across the eight regional fishery management councils. The National Standard 1 revisions reflect advances in fisheries science and address a range of technical issues, including: Providing regulatory stability for commercial and recreational fishing – so that businesses can increase their resilience to stock changes over time Adding scientific methods that result in better informed rebuilding plans Improving guidance on managing a fishery when data about a stock is limited Advancing ecosystem-based fisheries management, which will help managers consider the broader marine ecosystem when managing fish populations The National Standard guidelines assist the eight regional fishery management councils and NOAA Fisheries in developing fishery management plans that comply with the Magnuson-Stevens Act. National Standards 3, 7, and the General Section of the guidelines have also been streamlined as part of the revisions. This rule was developed over the course of the past 4 years, and was informed by over 100,000 public comments and significant engagement with the fishing industry and others concerned about the sustainability of our ocean resources. Since 2000, NOAA has declared 40 U.S. fishery stocks rebuilt, and the number of overfished stocks and stocks experiencing overfishing are at all-time lows. The latest available data show that U.S. commercial and recreational saltwater fishing generated more than $214 billion in direct and indirect sales and supported more than 1.8 million jobs in 2014. To learn more about the revisions to National Standards 1, 3, 7 and the General Section of the guidelines, click here. Source: NOAA press release