COMMERCE
Subscriber Services
Classified Ads
Subscribe
Advertise
NEWS
This Month
Editorial
Letters
F/V Safety
Past Issues
ABOUT US
Contact Us
Latest Issue
Subscribe
History
MORE CONTENT
CFN Archives
Links
Each month exclusively in the PRINT edition of CFN
Along the Coast
Ask the Lobster Doc
Bearin’s
Classifieds
Coming Events
Editorial
Enforcement Report
FISH SAFE
Fleet Additions
Letters
Lobster Market Report
New Boats
News Catch
Quahog Market Report
|
Commercial Fisheries News
Volume 36 Number 3
November 2009
CITES threat hangs over US dogfish industry
NEW BEDFORD, MA – With spiny dogfish blanketing the ocean to the point that fishermen often can’t avoid them, it’s hard to believe that the very future of the commercial fishery is in doubt.
But it is.
The US dogfish industry, made up of processors, unloaders, and fishermen, joined by many recreational fishing organizations, is engaged in a pitched battle to counter this latest looming offensive: the upcoming meeting of the signatory nations to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), which will be held in March.
Over the summer, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) asked the public whether or not the US should propose bringing several species of sharks, including spiny dogfish, under CITES protection. The process for providing this protection is called “listing.”
On Oct. 16, FWS released its slate of CITES proposal candidates, and dogfish was not on the list. But no one was breathing any easier.
That’s because simply not proposing a listing does not guarantee that US negotiators won’t support a dogfish listing in exchange for something they really want, such as support for US proposals to list polar bears and a group of six other shark species – whitetip, scalloped hammerhead, great hammerhead, smooth hammerhead, dusky, and sandbar – under CITES.
“FWS, in concert with the National Marine Fisheries Service, will determine whether the US delegation to CITES will support a dogfish listing,” said Nils Stolpe, who does coordinating and consulting work for Fishermen Organized for Responsible Dogfish Management. “The fear is that the proposal won’t be received with the ridicule it deserves.”
Added Shaun Gehan of the law firm Kelley Drye & Warren LLP, “The goal is to get the US to stand by its industry and against any dogfish listing. The problem is there’s not a lot of accountability.”
Congressional help
Fishermen Organized for Responsible Dogfish Management hired the high-powered law firm to convince members of Congress and their staffs to come out in support of the US dogfish industry.
The effort paid off in early October when 21 lawmakers signed a letter to US Department of the Interior Sec. Ken Salazar and US Department of Commerce Sec. Gary Locke urging them to direct their agencies to oppose any CITES listing for spiny dogfish.
“Such a listing would be bad policy for the US, it would break faith with those who have sacrificed to rebuild the stock, and it would depress a sustainable fishery on an abundant stock of predatory fish,” the letter stated.
Those who signed the letter were: US Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), Susan Collins (R-ME), John Kerry (D-MA), Paul Kirk (D-MA), who has been appointed to fill Sen. Ted Kennedy’s seat until a special election is held early next year, Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Judd Gregg (R-NH), Kay Hagan (D-NC), Richard Burr (R-NC), Mark Warner (D-VA); and US Reps. Walter Jones (R-NC), Barney Frank (D-MA), Bill Delahunt (D-MA), Robert Wittman (R-VA), Frank Pallone Jr. (D-NJ), Frank LoBiondo (R-NJ), Timothy Bishop (D-NY), Chellie Pingree (D-ME), Mike McIntyer (D-NC), John Adler (D-NJ), Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH), and John Tierney (D-MA).
Additionally, US Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) wrote a letter to Salazar and Locke pointing out that the US has “operated an efficient and profitable industry” based on spiny dogfish exports while maintaining conservation standards that have contributed to the rebuilding of the stock.
“Such a listing would be harmful for those who export spiny dogfish in New York State,” she said.
CITES levels
Under CITES, there basically are two kinds of listings: Appendix I and Appendix II.
Appendix I is intended to cover species threatened with extinction that are or may be affected by trade. Under this listing, no commercial trade is allowed. There are currently around 900 Appendix I-listed species, including tigers, Asian elephants, and sea turtles.
On Oct. 16, the Principality of Monaco officially proposed listing bluefin tuna as an Appendix I species. The US has indicated it will support that proposal if serious steps are not taken later this fall to revise international stock rebuilding plans for bluefin.
Appendix II is intended to include species that, although not necessarily threatened with extinction, may become so unless trade is subject to strict regulation. There are currently 33,000 Appendix II species, including orchids, parrots, and great white sharks.
Momentum is strong to list dogfish as an Appendix II species because European stocks are seriously overfished. However, even though the fishery here has been conservatively managed, it’s the US fishery that would suffer.
Processors stressed that an Appendix II listing would create huge paperwork requirements for each individual shipment of dogfish to overseas destinations.
“If a CITES listing does pass, it will be impossible to export to Europe,” said Steve Barndollar, president of Seatrade International Inc., which is headquartered in Portsmouth, NH. The company has processing facilities in New Bedford and is one of three major exporters of dogfish in the Northeast.
“This is a $40 million-$50 million industry. Plus, there is the factor of trucking and shipping to Europe along with skate and monkfish. If you take dogfish out of the equation, it hurts in terms of freight and customers’ willingness to buy product,” Barndollar said. “Everything depends on what happens at CITES in March.”
Dogfish exports
Right now, the dogfish fishery in the Northeast is restricted by a 12-million-pound quota. Commercial fishermen from Maine to North Carolina land dogfish, but nearly all of it ends up being processed at facilities in Massachusetts operated by Seatrade, Marder Trawling Inc. in New Bedford, and Zeus Packing Inc. in Gloucester.
These companies largely produce three products: fresh and frozen fillets, which are shipped to Italy, France, Belgium, and England; belly flaps, which are mostly shipped to Germany; and tails and fins, which are primarily shipped to Asia.
As recently as a few years ago, processors were getting up to $5 per pound from German buyers for flaps. But then environmentalists began insisting that retailers carry only products that had earned Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) certification, demonstrating that they came from sustainably managed and prosecuted fisheries.
“The MSC demand from Germany has cut the demand for flaps by three-quarters over the last two years or so,” said Louis Juillard, export manager for Marder Trawling. “Now, we’re throwing away about 50% of the flaps.”
Plummeting German demand was in large part responsible for the drop in price to US fishermen this year from around 28 cents to roughly 22 cents, according to Zeus Packing CEO Kristian Kristensen.
“We had to drop the price due to the Germans not being able to take so many belly flaps,” he said.
MSC certification
Until just recently, the three processors, normally competitors, had been working together to secure MSC certification, which is not only important for continuing to sell dogfish to Germany but is increasingly being demanded by other countries.
“It’s getting worse and worse,” said Kristensen. “It started in Germany, and now it’s spreading in France. Retailers are scared. They don’t want people demonstrating in front of their shops. They’d rather not carry dogfish than risk getting a bad reputation.”
The three companies began the MSC pre-certification process last spring and, on Sept. 28, received a final report giving the go-ahead for seeking full certification.
“The auditor concludes that the US spiny dogfish fishery in the Atlantic Ocean appears to be a good candidate for MSC certification, even though it is recognized that there may be strong opposition from environmental nongovernmental organizations,” the report prepared by Moody International stated.
The report added that the conclusion was based on the recovery of the dogfish stock, the “continued precautionary approach to management, and the possible exclusion of trawl gear from certification consideration.”
Going the next step, however, will cost about $90,000 and, given the uncertainty over the export market’s future, the processors have agreed to wait until after the CITES meeting to decide how to proceed.
“There’s no reason to go ahead with MSC certification until we know about CITES,” Kristensen said.
Europe stock issues
There is no question that the health of the US dogfish stock and this country’s aggressive management approach is being lost in the increasingly frantic concern over the condition of dogfish stocks in Europe.
Yet, as pointed out in the information distributed to congressional staffers this fall, restricting trade of US-caught fish taken from a fully rebuilt stock will do nothing to improve conservation and management of the European dogfish resource, especially because it will not restrict trade among European countries.
“As with bluefin tuna, European nations have failed to take the necessary steps to manage their stocks of dogfish,” Fishermen Organized for Responsible Dogfish Management said in its educational materials. “Impact of trade is the key criterion for listing a species under CITES, a test this species cannot meet.”
Added Shaun Gehan, “At the end of the day, a CITES Appendix II listing doesn’t do anything to require Europe to better manage their fishery. If anything, impeding US trade just puts more pressure on European stocks and hobbles their recovery.”
And no one wins under that scenario, Stolpe concluded.
“The Brits can sell to Germany without restriction,” he said. “US fishermen lose. European dogfish lose.”
For more information on Fishermen Organized for Responsible Dogfish Management, visit the group’s web site at <www.fishnet-usa.com/dogforum1.htm>.
Lorelei Stevens
Back to story list
|
|
Tell us what you think.
