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 37 Number 7
March 2010
Calls grow for new herring assessment; trade-offs weighed
PORTSMOUTH, NH – With sharply reduced herring quotas on the horizon for the next three fishing years – on top of already significant quota cuts – many fishermen and managers are intensifying their calls for a new stock assessment as soon as possible.
The most recent stock status overview was unveiled in 2009 as a “turn-of-the-crank” update – not a full-scale assessment. The update concluded that the herring stock complex overall was not overfished and overfishing was not occurring, but it also revealed a strong “retrospective pattern” – a definite red flag in the world of science (see CFN September 2009 for details).
A retrospective pattern shows up when the model used to run the assessment overestimates stock size and underestimates fishing mortality on a fairly regular basis. This then leads fishery managers to be more conservative in setting total allowable catches (TACs) due to “uncertainty” over what’s really going on with the resource.
That’s exactly what happened in November when the New England Fishery Management Council set herring specifications for the 2010-2012 fishing years. It erred on the side of caution (see CFN December 2009 for details).
During the council’s most recent Jan. 26-28 meeting in Portsmouth, Maine council member Terry Stockwell said, “It’s been agonizing to go through the specification process with a great deal of distrust in the assessment.”
And the consequences, according to fellow Maine council member Mary Beth Tooley, have been enormous.
“This is having an extremely negative impact on industry,” she said. “We’ve turned the landings stream on its head. In Maine, people are losing their jobs. There are just a number of reasons we need to move forward with a good assessment as soon as possible.”
While agreeing that the retrospective pattern in the assessment “has changed” over the years, Tooley said, “The herring biomass is not declining. The stock has been stable for quite some time.”
Earlier assessment?
Given the dire consequences the last stock status update had on quota setting for 2010 and beyond, calls for a new, full-scale “benchmark” assessment quickly grew louder.
Fishery managers, well aware of the problems, fielded inquiries. And then, New England Fishery Management Council Executive Director Paul Howard sent a letter to Northeast Fisheries Science Center Director Nancy Thompson on Jan. 5, asking her about the possibility of moving up the scheduled June 2012 herring benchmark assessment to December 2011.
Howard said, “The results of the upcoming benchmark assessment will form the basis of scientific and management decisions for the 2013-2015 Atlantic herring fishery specifications, which must be developed during 2012. A benchmark stock assessment in June 2012 does not leave adequate time for the process to develop the 2013-2015 fishery specifications.”
Thompson said the center could accommodate the request, but “there will be less time to work on the assessment, less data available, and the terms of reference will have to be adjusted.”
She then provided a table detailing which data needs would be compromised by the shortened timeline.
Council response
After reviewing the center’s response, council member Mark Gibson of Rhode Island expressed worries about the consequences of a shortened assessment timeframe.
“I’m concerned that a lot of things might drop off the radar screen,” he said. “It’s essential to consider what we could lose vs. what we could gain in a shorter amount of time.”
After asking for additional input, council Chairman John Pappalardo of Massachusetts confirmed a course of action. He said the herring committee would discuss the issue at its next meeting – with a representative from the science center and industry advisers present – to develop a solid recommendation for the council to consider as a “position” for timing of the next assessment.
This recommendation would be made in full recognition of the pros and cons of a December 2011 assessment vs. a June 2012 assessment, he said.
Pappalardo said he then would present the consensus to the Northeast Region Coordinating Council (NRCC) during its spring meeting.
The NRCC discusses workload priorities to balance the needs of the New England and Mid-Atlantic councils, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, which often all depend on the same resources to complete their work.
Janice M. Plante
Back to story list
|
|
Tell us what you think.
