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 35 Number 6
February 2008
NMFS needs to fix, not muddle EFP process
The Dec. 21 publication of a National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) proposed rule laying out new requirements for scientific research and issuing exempted fishing permits (EFPs) raises questions about the future of cooperative research.
For nearly a decade, fishermen and researchers in the Northeast have been working together to conduct supplemental fishery resource surveys, test innovative gear designs to reduce discards and habitat impacts, and document fish migratory patterns.
This work has greatly enhanced our understanding of fishery resources and how to manage them, as well as promoted mutual respect between fishermen and scientists, something that was sorely lacking before.
But cooperative research has never been easy because of complicated, obstructive rules that make it difficult and sometimes impossible for research teams to obtain EFPs from NMFS in a timely way – even for NMFS-approved projects.
When Congress passed the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act of 2006 a little over a year ago, it fully endorsed the cooperative research concept by including an entire section establishing cooperative research and management programs around the country on a regional basis. These programs were to be created through “partnerships” among federal and state managers, scientists, fishing industry participants, and educational institutions. Congress further directed NMFS to promulgate regulations to “create an expedited, uniform, and regionally based process” for issuing “experimental fishing permits.”
The proposed rule is apparently NMFS’s attempt to comply with that directive. However, it falls short.
With few exceptions, the proposed rule would require cooperative research teams to conduct the equivalent of an environmental impact analysis just to apply for an EFP.
The proposed rule would differentiate “conservation engineering” activities from “gear testing.” Then it would require a fishing vessel involved in gear testing activities to comply with all fishing regulations and prohibit it from retaining fish. This restriction not only has the potential to compromise meaningful gear testing, it requires fishermen and scientists to engage in appalling discard practices.
The proposed rule states that to be classified as scientific research, at-sea studies must be conducted aboard “a scientific research vessel,” the definition of which does not include commercial fishing vessels. It requires that research activities “address a testable hypothesis,” raising questions as to the viability of cooperative industry-based research surveys that simply collect information.
These and other factors make this a proposed rule that should go back to the drawing board.
Because NMFS is closely involved in the approval of many cooperative research projects, an EFP, if required, should automatically be issued to any NMFS-approved project. Simpler letters of authorization should be issued instead of EFPs when recognized scientific organizations are partners in approved research projects. Commercial fishing vessels should be considered proven platforms for research beyond gear testing. Participating vessels should be allowed to land fish so that it can be counted against appropriate quotas. And applications for EFPs should not entail burdensome environmental impact analyses.
Cooperative research shouldn’t be so hard. The deadline for comments is March 20.
Back to story list
|
|
Tell us what you think.
