Catch share programs set a biologically based annual catch limit for a fish stock and allocate a specific portion of that catch limit to entities, such as commercial fishermen, cooperatives or communities. With their share secure, commercial fishermen can be more selective about how and when they catch their allotment. When designed correctly, catch share programs help eliminate the race to fish, reduce overcapacity and bycatch, and improve economic efficiency.
Unfortunately, in fisheries where there is a large and growing recreational sector, exclusive fishing rights proposals maximize benefits to the commercial fishing industry while ignoring the participation and beneficial economic impacts of recreational fishing.
"Catch shares are obviously a major focus for this Administration and we are concerned not only about the impact they have on recreational fisheries, but also at the pace with which they are being pushed into the management system. Catch shares are on a fast track and we don’t feel we have the luxury to ‘just say no’ – we’ve never chosen that option in any fisheries management crisis. We didn’t do that during the debate over marine protected areas or open-loop LNG terminals and we are not going to do it now. Catch shares are a real threat to the future of a number of recreational fisheries and they are not going to just go away anytime soon. We are going to stay very active on this issue to make sure recreational anglers are not left out of the debate…and out of the fishery."
Chester Brewer, Chairman
CCA National Government Relations Committee
Full report is attached. If you dont wish to read full report I will post a summary when I get thru it later today
Press release
NOAA Policy Encourages Catch Shares to End Overfishing and Rebuild Fisheries
November 4, 2010
NOAA today released a national policy encouraging the consideration and use of catch shares, a fishery management tool that has shown it can help rebuild fisheries and sustain fishermen, communities, vibrant working waterfronts and culturally important fishing traditions.
“Catch share programs have proven to be powerful tools to transform fisheries, making them prosperous, stable and sustainable parts of our nation’s strategy for healthy and resilient ocean ecosystems,” said Jane Lubchenco, Ph.D., under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator . “NOAA’s policy encourages fishery management councils and stakeholders to explore the design possibilities of catch shares to tailor programs to best meet local needs.”
Catch share programs, which include limited access privilege programs and individual fishing quotas, dedicate a secure share of fish to individual fishermen, cooperatives or fishing communities. Catch shares are used in 14 fisheries managed by six fishery management councils from Alaska to Florida and are being developed in additional fisheries. Both here and in other countries, catch shares are helping eliminate overfishing and achieve annual catch limits, improve fishermen’s safety and profits, and reduce the negative biological and economic effects of the race for fish that develops with some traditional fishery management.
After considering extensive public comment on its draft policy, NOAA added several important guiding principles to the policy, including a recommendation that regional fishery management councils periodically revisit allocations between commercial and recreational sectors in fisheries.
The policy also does not advocate individual catch shares for private recreational anglers. Councils will have NOAA support to consider catch share programs for charter boat and head boat sectors to explore recreational catch share pools that could benefit the health of the resource and the charter industry.
“The purpose of this policy is to provide a strong foundation for the widespread consideration of catch shares, which have proven to be an effective tool to help rebuild fisheries,” said Monica Medina, principal deputy under secretary for oceans and atmosphere. “ The key to a successful catch share program is extensive stakeholder involvement in the design of catch shares that take into consideration each community’s particular fishing traditions and goals.”
David Walker, a commercial fisherman who is part of the Gulf of Mexico red snapper individual fishing quota program, has seen how a catch share program can transform a fishery.
“This program has been a phenomenal success for the fish, and when you take care of the fish, you take care of the fishermen,” said Walker, who fishes from the homeport of Destin, Fla. “Before the program began in 2007, we were having to fish under derbies and having to go farther and farther to fish. We were getting fewer and fewer days as efforts were intensifying. Everyone raced for the fish and we were fishing in weather conditions that were dangerous at times. Fishing under the IFQ program implemented in 2007 has been a blessing to us. Now we have a year round season with very few discards. Fish prices are good. And the fish stock is rebuilding.”
On the West Coast, Steve Bodnar, the executive director of the Coos Bay Trawler Association, has been working with the Pacific Fishery Management Council to help develop a catch share program for the West Coast bottomfish trawl fishery.
“We’re on the edge of doing something great,” said Bodnar, who represents a group of fishermen based in Coos Bay, Oregon, who own and fish from nine trawlers. “This program is opening up communication between fishermen who were used to working alone. We're going to swap quota to keep as many boats on the water in order to keep our port whole. We’ll also work together to share resources, to develop gear that will avoid fish that are not as abundant and catch the healthier stocks, and to market our catch to help consumers support local fishermen. By working together, we will survive.”
NOAA has partnered with the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) to create a new NFWF grant program called the Fisheries Innovation Fund that will award $2.2 million to support local fishermen and fishing communities that want to consider catch share programs and put their ideas into action.To learn more about the fund go to http://www.nfwf.org/fisheriesfund
To learn more about catch shares go to attached pdf
This article is from the EDF Enviormental Defense Fund
I do not trust anything this org. promotes, they are Extremists, They are a fraction of PEW, funded by Pew to be on the fringe,
Catch Shares Key to Reviving Fisheries
New Study Shows Innovative Approach Can Help Solve Overfishing
Posted: 17-Sep-2008; Updated: 07-Oct-2009
Cod and haddock were once so abundant off the coast of New England, it was said fishermen could catch them just by lowering a basket in the water.
Not any more. The fish that fueled New England's economy are only a fraction of what they were, and that’s true of many fisheries around the world (see Fisheries in Decline).
New study shows catch shares prevent collapse
But now there is reason for hope. A study just released in the journal Science shows how overfishing can be turned around through an innovative management system called catch shares.
Our Oceans team has long advocated well-designed "catch share" programs as a smart way to manage and recover ailing fisheries. Catch share programs allow fishermen to own shares, or quotas, of the overall scientifically determined catch so they have a direct financial stake in the fishery. They can sell these shares, or buy them from other fishermen. As the fishery recovers, shares grow in value, giving fishermen a vested interest in the health of the ocean.
The study, "Can Catch Shares Prevent Fisheries Collapse?" (full text | abstract), examined more than 11,000 fisheries (a fishery is a population of fish caught commercially) from around the world between 1950 and 2003. It confirms that catch share systems for fisheries can help solve the fishery crisis. Among its striking findings:
* Fisheries managed with catch share programs dramatically outperformed fisheries without them: they were only half as likely to have collapsed by 2003.
* If catch share systems been in place globally in 1970, only about 9 percent of the world's fisheries would have collapsed by 2003, rather than 27 percent.
Conventional fishery management has failed
Most of the world's fisheries are governed by systems with perverse incentives that actually encourage overfishing. A combination of decades of poor management and overfishing has had devastating results.
Many fishermen work harder than ever to catch fewer and fewer fish, putting their safety at risk and suffering economic hardship. Global fisheries peaked in 1988 and have been steadily declining ever since.
Restoring our fisheries is critical. About one billion people worldwide rely on fish for at least part of their essential food needs. And the ocean fishing industry employs 200 million people worldwide.
Catch shares are a better way: More results
Our 2007 groundbreaking report showed that well-designed catch share programs (see key findings):
* dramatically reduce habitat damage and bycatch (capture of unwanted species that are discarded as waste),
* improve fishing safety and
* increase profits, among other benefits.
Just a fraction of fisheries in the U.S. are managed by catch shares. A recent success was our work with fishermen and managers to design a catch share system for red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico. Because of the catch share program there, the commercial snapper season in 2007 was open year-round for the first time since 1990. Gulf fishermen now earn 25 percent more for their fish and wasteful discarding of fish dropped at least 70 percent.
Catch shares and regulations that affect the youth and the future completely blow my mind. Why no regulations to allow the youth without fishing history to have the chance to obtain fishing permits
Suck- Your people Generation ruined it (if your 45 yrs or older, you can be proud you regulated you children right out of fishing), The last thing I want to hear out of anyone month about fishing is "save some for my kids", Cuz that s the biggest load of tar I've heard about. What if your kid wants to be a commercial fisherman
The purpose of this policy is to encourage well-designed catch share programs to help maintain or rebuild fisheries, and sustain fishermen, communities and vibrant working waterfronts, including the cultural and resource access traditions that have been part of this country since its founding.
DEFINITION
“Catch share” is a general term for several fishery management strategies that allocate a specific portion of the total allowable fishery catch to individuals, cooperatives, communities, or other entities. Each recipient of a catch share is directly accountable to stop fishing when its exclusive allocation is reached. The term includes specific programs defined in law such as "limited access privilege" (LAP) and "individual fishing quota" (IFQ) programs, and other exclusive allocative measures such as Territorial Use Rights Fisheries (TURFs) that grant an exclusive privilege to fish in a geographically designated fishing ground
Catch shares may not be the best management option for every fishery or sector7. NOAA will not require the use of catch shares in any particular fishery or sector, but it will promote and encourage the careful consideration of catch shares as a means to achieve the conservation, social and economic goals of sustainable fishery management.
HOWEVER THEY WILL PROMOTE CATCH SHARES WHEREVER THEY DEEM THEM EFFECTIVE.
CATCH SHARE PRINCIPLES
1All fishery management programs, including catch shares, should identify specific measurable goals for management.
2.Allocations : Should be evaluated regularly based on catch, conservation, economic and social considerations
3 transferability should be considered
4 Distinctions Among Sectors: No fishery or sector (e.g., commercial, recreational or subsistence) is required by the policy to adopt catch shares. Councils should consider the appropriateness of catch share programs and decide which, if any, sectors may benefit from their use.
5 Duration: The duration of every catch share program should be explicitly defined.
6 Fishing Community Sustainability: Councils should develop policies to engage with and promote the sustained participation of fishing communities
7 Royalties will be collected from participants
8 Cost of program shared with participants
9 Shares should be reviewed periodically
Evaluating Catch Share Applicability:
1. Fishery is overcapitalized- too many boats and too many fishery- reduce fishermen to a more manageable size
2. Stake holders are receptive to plan
3. Stocks are overfished
4. Infrastucture exists to administer plan
5. Bycatch is significant
Guiding principles
1. Specific management goals: All fishery management programs should identify specific measurable goals for management. Councils should develop explicit goals and a specific future outcome for the fisheries under their stewardship. This is particularly important for fisheries considering catch shares because these programs have a great deal of design flexibility to accomplish a variety of goals. The consideration of a broad range of management alternatives, including catch shares, is desirable to determine which management approach is best suited for each fishery since each one is different. Examples would include eliminating overfishing and race-for-fish or derby fishing behavior; promoting more precise catch accounting to meet ACLs; identifying bycatch reduction targets and improved ecosystem functioning; improving socio-economic conditions for fishery participants and/or fishery-dependent communities (such as stabilizing employment or new job creation).
2 Councils should develop these explicit management goals early in the management plan development process.
3 Allocations: NOAA recommends Councils periodically revisit the underlying total allocation to each sector of a fishery (e.g., commercial and recreational) on a regular basis, regardless of whether catch shares are the management tool of choice for one or more sectors. a catch share program subdivides and distributes privileges to individuals or groups within a given sector, usually in the form of a privilege to harvest a percentage of the sector’s allocation. Councils must have a system of setaside or reallocation or new members will be unable to enter a group.
4. Transferability: Councils should thoroughly assess the range of options and net benefits of allowing transferability of catch shares. These are problems that NOAA admits exists
Risks of transferability
Groups that don’t fish could obtain shares ie enviros
New people could nbe locked out
Can shares transfer within a fishing family
Will one group or region end up with too many shares
Uniformed fishermen may lease or sell their shares unwisely due to improper education and understanding of the process.
Too few rules or too many may have undesirable effects
Distinctions Among Sectors: No fishery or sector (e.g., commercial, recreational or subsistence) is required by the policy to adopt catch shares . Councils should evaluate the pros and cons and consider the appropriateness of catch share programs to decide which, if any, sectors may benefit from their use. Under their MSA authority, Councils have a range of options to consider. They include the immediate adoption of catch shares for all fishery sectors; for only some sectors; phasing-in their adoption over time; or not adopting catch shares for any sector. Historically, the application of catch shares has focused on the commercial sector of a fishery. When a Council recommends a catch share program for the commercial sector, the MSA does not require catch shares to be adopted in the recreational or any other sector of a fishery. The Councils may also encounter fisheries where catch shares cannot provide positive net biological, social or economic benefits to all sectors of the fishery, thus Councils may decide where and when to recommend a catch share program.
NOAA admits that a single sector fishery is the easiest to administer, but most fisheries involve more than 1 sector and more than 1 species
THIS SECTION I REPRINTED AS POSTED AS IT APPLIES TO US. It is also very murky
Recreational anglers – A successful recreational angling experience is not as dependent on harvest as in commercial fisheries. Many anglers participate on the expectation of a catch and continue to fish without realizing a positive catch on every trip, and some anglers release the fish they do catch. Many anglers prefer management options that do not foreclose fishing opportunity or access and will accept a lower catch limit in return.
Limited access, however, is a pre-requisite for a MSA LAPP. Thus, any recreational management program based on allocating shares to a limited number of individuals may not be a widely-accepted approach by anglers because it contradicts a longstanding open-access tradition. Designing and enforcing an individual angler catch share program for potentially millions of participants in a fishery could also be a prohibitively costly and complex undertaking. Thus, as explained in more detail below, NOAA will support the design and implementation of catch share programs for the recreational charter and head boat sectors where appropriate, but does not advocate the use of individual private angler catch shares. However, NOAA will support Councils in the identification and application of innovative management measures that both promote individual recreational angler fishing access and foster sustainable fisheries.
There are a few examples21 where a limited number of tags for individual fish have been allocated to anglers on a per capita or lottery basis. Historically these tagging programs have been used where the resources were limited and a strict constraint on landings was required. NOAA will continue to work with Councils who have expressed interest in adopting such tag programs.
NOAA also recognizes the interest among recreational fishermen to sustain or increase their fishing access, and as such is open to considering innovative approaches that may allow for this in the context of a Council’s goals and objectives. For example, some angler groups have suggested an approach in which their sector might increase its underlying allocation of the ACL through inter-sector purchase of commercial catch shares and creating a recreational catch share pool. The purchase and management of the shares would be overseen by an agreed-upon third party such as a state fisheries agency or non-profit organization, similar to an RFA under section 303A of the MSA. The entity could increase the amount of fish in the pool by transfers of shares from other sectors as long as share transferability was allowed by the Council and other program requirements were met.
If a Council recommends such inter-sector trading, it should do so in a manner that considers trading in both directions, promotes the conservation and accountability objectives of the MSA, and ensures that inter-sector transfer of shares results in no loss in ACL accountability. While many variations and details must be evaluated to establish this as a management alternative, because of high stakeholder interest NOAA is committed to working with any interested Council, state agency, and angling organizations on the development of new approaches for fishing access by recreational fishermen through appropriate inter-sector trading programs and/or catch share pools.
The for-hire component of the recreational sector is a significant part of the U.S. fisheries contribution to the economy and provides opportunities and fishing access to millions of anglers on charter and head boats and guided fishing trips. Charter and head boat captains manage a fishery dependent business similar to commercial fishermen, with many for-hire captains also possessing a commercial fishing license. Given these similarities, Councils might consider catch share management for the charter and head boat sector in a given fishery. The MSA and other applicable laws do not prohibit the adoption of a catch share program for just the for-hire recreational sector if a Council and stakeholders wish to do so. Thus, NOAA supports the design and development of catch share programs for the recreational charter and head boat sector as appropriate. Councils should evaluate these options and provide an open and transparent opportunity for stakeholders to assess the pros and cons of this approach to see if a catch share is appropriate for meeting the goals and objectives of their FMP.
Since experience with developing catch share programs for the for-hire component of the recreational sector is limited, NOAA is willing to work with Councils, states, commissions, and interested for-hire stakeholders to consider a pilot program to design and implement an effective for–hire catch share program.
Accountability of catches will increase as all catches must be reported.
Duration: Catch share privileges are not granted to an entity in perpetuity. The MSA defines a LAP as a permit, issued for a period of not more than 10 years, which will be renewed if not revoked, limited or modified. The program can be amended at any time specified by the Council.
Fishing Community Sustainability: Councils should develop policies to promote the sustained participation of fishing communities and take advantage of the special community provisions in the MSA. This will help assure sustainable fishing communities, including the continuation of working fishery waterfronts, fishery infrastructure, diverse fishing fleets, and recreational access.
In addition NOAA will support capacity building in fishing communities to help fishermen’s/community groups explore and organize catch share options. NOAA will also encourage public-private partnerships, and collaborate with state and local governments, regional economic development districts, public and private nonprofit organizations, and tribal entities to help communities address problems associated with long-term fishery and community sustainability.
Royalties: Section 303A(d) of the MSA requires the Councils to consider the use of auctions or other means to collect royalties for the initial or any subsequent distribution of LAPs. (Technically, a royalty is but one mechanism for collecting resource rent, and other mechanisms include auctions and taxes. Resource rent is an economic term defined as a surplus value, i.e., the difference between the price at which fish can be sold and the respective production costs which include a normal return.23) Many managers and stakeholders confuse rent recovery with cost recovery, which is addressed separately in the following section.
No fisheries program currently collects rent but it would be similar to gas and oil leases.
Cost Recovery: It is NOAA policy to compute and recover from participants only the incremental operating costs associated with LAPPs. Cost recovery aims to recover a variety of government costs attributable to the private sector use of a public resource. Section 303A(e) of the MSA requires cost recovery of the management, data collection and analysis and enforcement programs that are directly related to and in support of LAP programs. The costs would be based on the difference between the cost of traditional management and the cost of catch shares. If catch shares cost less there would be no recovery. Fisheries with low market value of economically depressed fisheries may require government subsidy.
Review Process: Councils should periodically review all catch share and non-catch share programs. The intent is to ensure that management goals are specified, measurable, tracked and appropriate steps taken to ensure a program is meeting its goals and objectives.
Councils and NOAA must establish relevant performance measures. Performance metrics for some of the typical fishery goals may include how fishery stocks responded to management; what were the impacts on fishing communities, participation and entry into the fishery; what happened to prices, revenues and profits; and how recreational fishery access and participation rates changed after program initiation.
Internationally, similar programs have been used in hundreds of fisheries. Both here and in other countries catch shares have shown they can effectively achieve annual catch limits, reduce the negative biological and economic impacts of the race for fish, and when properly designed can eliminate overfishing and result in safer and more profitable fisheries while also addressing other social objectives. For example, where preserving cultural and historic use patterns in a fishing community is a high priority, a Council could design a catch share program to maintain traditional coastal fishing communities comprised of owner-operated fishing fleets.
However one of the results admitted by NOAA and enviros is reduction of the fishing fleet. Fishery is overcapitalized- too many boats and too many fishery- reduce fishermen to a more manageable size
Catch share programs can help transform fisheries and ensure they are a prosperous and sustainable element of a national strategy for healthy and resilient ecosystems for present and future generations. One of the challenges facing NOAA is the integration of new catch share programs with existing federal and state fishery management regulatory requirements, some of which will not be using catch shares. In some cases, fisheries cross Council, state and international boundaries. Harmonization of rules across several jurisdictions will require extensive planning and communications efforts between NOAA, Councils, states, Commissions and other management bodies especially during the transition period to new catch share programs. This policy acknowledges that challenge, and provides a foundation for facilitating the wide-spread consideration of catch share fishery management policies to achieve biological sustainability and economic prosperity, while enabling local fishermen and communities to be part of the process.
CATCH SHARES WILL REDUCE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF REGIONAL COUNCILS AND STATE CONTROLS BECAUSE SHARES WILL OVERLAP DIFFERENT COUNCILS AND MANY STATES
Stakeholders are receptive – Well-informed fishermen who want to pursue consideration of catch shares will improve the likelihood of success of this fishery management option.
IT DOESn'T seem that many are.
Specific management goals: All fishery management programs should identify specific measurable goals for management. Councils should develop explicit goals and a specific future outcome for the fisheries under their stewardship. This is particularly important for fisheries considering catch shares because these programs have a great deal of design flexibility to accomplish a variety of goals. The consideration of a broad range of management alternatives, including catch shares, is desirable to determine which management approach is best suited for each fishery since each one is different. Examples would include eliminating overfishing and race-for-fish or derby fishing behavior; promoting more precise catch accounting to meet ACLs; identifying bycatch reduction targets and improved ecosystem functioning; improving socio-economic conditions for fishery participants and/or fishery-dependent communities (such as stabilizing employment or new job creation)
PROBLEM IS THAT MANY OF NOAA'S GOALS ARE BASED ON SCIENCE THAT NOT ALL AGREE WITH, AND THEY ARE NOT ADDRESSING THAT ISSUE.
Councils should develop these explicit management goals early in the management plan development process.
I don't see real work on evaluating goals properly
4. Transferability: Councils should thoroughly assess the range of options and net benefits of allowing transferability of catch shares. These are problems that NOAA admits exists
Risks of transferability that NOAA admits too
Groups that don’t fish could obtain shares ie enviros
New people could be locked out
Can shares transfer within a fishing family
Will one group or region end up with too many shares
Uniformed fishermen may lease or sell their shares unwisely due to improper education and understanding of the process.
Too few rules or too many may have undesirable effects
Distinctions Among Sectors: No fishery or sector (e.g., commercial, recreational or subsistence) is required by the policy to adopt catch shares . Councils should evaluate the pros and cons and consider the appropriateness of catch share programs to decide which, if any, sectors may benefit from their use. Under their MSA authority, Councils have a range of options to consider. They include the immediate adoption of catch shares for all fishery sectors; for only some sectors; phasing-in their adoption over time; or not adopting catch shares for any sector. Historically, the application of catch shares has focused on the commercial sector of a fishery. When a Council recommends a catch share program for the commercial sector, the MSA does not require catch shares to be adopted in the recreational or any other sector of a fishery. The Councils may also encounter fisheries where catch shares cannot provide positive net biological, social or economic benefits to all sectors of the fishery, thus Councils may decide where and when to recommend a catch share program.
THEY HAVEN'T BEEN USED RECREATIONALLY SO THE PROCESS MAY BE FAULTY BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO HISTORY TO BASE IT ON.
NOAA admits that a single sector fishery is the easiest to administer, but most fisheries involve more than 1 sector and more than 1 species
Many anglers prefer management options that do not foreclose fishing opportunity or access and will accept a lower catch limit in return
RECS DONT NEED TO KEEP FISH FOR FOOD SO THEY CAN JUST HAVE FUN RELEASING AND BUY FISH TO EAT PROBABLY FROM TAIWAN.[/I][/B]
NOAA also recognizes the interest among recreational fishermen to sustain or increase their fishing access, and as such is open to considering innovative approaches that may allow for this in the context of a Council’s goals and objectives. For example, some angler groups have suggested an approach in which their sector might increase its underlying allocation of the ACL through inter-sector purchase of commercial catch shares and creating a recreational catch share pool.
WE MAY HAVE TO BUY SHARES FROM COMMERCIAL TO BE ABLE TO FISH.
Since experience with developing catch share programs for the for-hire component of the recreational sector is limited, NOAA is willing to work with Councils, states, commissions, and interested for-hire stakeholders to consider a pilot program to design and implement an effective for–hire catch share program.
THERE IS NO HISTORY HERE. EARLY PROGRAMS WILL BE EDUCATED GUESSES who will police unreported catches, poaching and bycatch. THE COSTS COULD BE ASTRONOMICAL.
Councils and NOAA must establish relevant performance measures. Performance metrics for some of the typical fishery goals may include how fishery stocks responded to management; what were the impacts on fishing communities, participation and entry into the fishery; what happened to prices, revenues and profits; and how recreational fishery access and participation rates changed after program initiation.
IN MY OPINION THEY DO A POOR JOB AT THIS NOW. WILL IT IMPROVE ?
fISHERMEN ARE GOING TO HAVE TO CHOOSE WHAT SECTOR THEY WISH TO BE IN. iT IS UNLIKELY THAT A BFT FISHERMAN WILL FISH AS A CHARTER BOAT WITH A COMMERCIAL OPTION AS THE PRESENT SYSTEM ALLOWS. THEY WILL NEED TO BUY SHARES IN BOTH THE REC AND COMM FISHERY OR COULD BE FORCED TO PICK ONE ONLY
RECREATIONAL FISHERMEN ARE GOING TO BE AT ODDS WITH BOTH COMM AND CHARTER BOATS BECAUSE WE WILL HAVE TO FIGHT FOR OUR OWN SHARE
By Ted Venker
Conservation Director
Coastal Conservation Association
Much has been made about the catch share issue in recent months. Catch shares are a poorly understood issue that has been made more complicated by an absolute avalanche of mistruths, half-truths, and outright lies swirling about it in fishing chatrooms and blogs across the country.
Almost every facet of the past, present and future of catch shares has been grossly distorted. A glance at the average chatroom would lead casual readers to believe that there is a vast, strange conspiracy linking all-powerful environmental groups with oil companies with “double-agents” posing as anglers to rid the world of fishermen. One recurring theme is that the goal is to empty the oceans of all people so the oil companies can pillage at will. Another, green theme says the goal is to empty the oceans of all people so that the fish and whales are left alone to prosper. There are long, fantastical charts linking this group to that group, to prove the conspiracy of anti-fishers exists. Everyone is on Pew’s payroll, or Environmental Defense’s or Exxon’s. The only thing missing is a good 007 character to save the day.
None of it is true, but it makes good reading. And nothing spoils a good tale like a few cold facts, but in the interest of setting at least some of the record straight, this column attempts to splash a little reality on the catch share mystery.
* Catch share programs have been used sporadically in commercial fisheries for decades. They were created to address a fundamental problem in some commercial fisheries – too many boats chasing too few fish, resulting in dangerous, wasteful derbies. If you have ever watched the early seasons of Deadliest Catch on The Discovery Channel, that was a derby fishery. The whistle blew, all the boats went to catch king crab no matter what the weather was, no one slept and they fished until someone, somewhere, calculated the quota had been caught and then the season ended. Some made a fortune, some went broke, and everyone fished in a manner to catch as much as possible as fast as possible regardless of the danger or bycatch involved. The fact that no one sleeps for 4 or 5 days at a time is the reason it’s called Deadliest Catch.
* Staying with the Deadliest Catch theme, catch shares took the whole quota for king crab and divided it up among boats based on their past catch history. Each boat’s percentage effectively became “theirs” to harvest, however and whenever they liked during the season. The Northwestern, the Cornelia Marie, the Wizard, the Time Bandit and others all now “own” shares of the king crab fishery.
* The goal of catch shares in that scenario is to eliminate the derbies and reduce bycatch. A by-product of catch shares is that inevitably, some boats will sell out or lease their share to other boats. The overall number of boats drops, until a relatively few big boats are left fishing. Ideally, the dangerous derbies are eliminated, bycatch is reduced and the economics improve. That is the catch share system in a purely commercial fishery.
* Some environmental groups, Environmental Defense Fund foremost among them, became enamored, somewhat naively, with the prospects of applying catch shares to all fisheries, including recreational ones, based on their use, implementation and success in purely commercial fisheries. The critical disconnect is that no one at EDF understood or appreciated the vast differences between recreational fisheries and commercial fisheries. In EDF’s mind, catch shares were a solution to all fisheries problems.
Now, in order to set the stage for what comes next, you have to understand a separate but connected issue, and that is how allocations are set in mixed-use fisheries – fisheries that have both commercial and recreational participation. Allocations between recreational and commercial sectors have historically been based on catch history, often using time frames as short as selected three-year segments. Given federal managers’ history of promoting commercial fisheries, the time frames were often not favorable to the recreational sector.
Those allocations are essentially frozen, despite the growth of recreational angling and the growing economic contribution of the recreational sector. They are frozen because the reallocation process is a political nightmare for a Fishery Management Council. It is long, convoluted and tortuous, with lots of emotion thrown in for good measure. No Council member or staffer willingly endures it if he or she can possibly avoid it.
As a result, allocations that were set 20 or 30 years ago are completely out of whack with the demographics, population and public demand that exists today. When a stagnant recreational allocation combines with the constant migration to the nation’s coasts, the end result is that more and more recreational anglers are trapped chasing a fixed allotment of fish, resulting in shorter seasons and greater restrictions for everyone. The red snapper fishery in the Gulf of Mexico is a prime example. About 300 commercial boats currently chase 51 percent of the entire harvest of red snapper in the Gulf under a catch share system. Hundreds of thousands of recreational anglers get the other 49 percent.
And no one in NOAA Fisheries has been interested in cracking the egg on reallocation.
* Jumping back to catch shares, Dr. Jane Lubchenco was appointed to lead the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in 2008. Dr. Lubchenco is a marine scientist with deep ties to EDF, including a stint on its board.
* Not long after that appointment, the Obama Administration created the Catch Share Policy Task Force, signaling a new focus to broadly impose catch share systems on federal fisheries, including those enjoyed by recreational anglers. Compounding the complexity of this issue is the fact that the Obama Administration is filled with people from places like San Francisco and Chicago who do not exactly understand or appreciate saltwater recreational angling.
* Promoted by a former board member of EDF – which doesn’t understand or appreciate recreational angling – in an Administration that doesn’t understand or appreciate recreational angling, the danger of a Catch Shares Policy Task Force was immediately clear. There was NOTHING to prevent catch shares from proceeding as a one-size-fits-all solution for the commercial and recreational sectors in every fishery.
* A coalition of marine industry and fishery conservation groups, recognizing the need to become involved in the process of shaping the new policy, engaged the Administration on the issue of catch shares. At the same time, the coalition engaged with environmental groups that were heavily promoting catch share systems, including Environmental Defense Fund. The goal of that engagement was to educate them on the problems catch shares present for recreational anglers and shape the policy so that at the very least it was not detrimental to recreational angling.
* That engagement is the source of a lot of confusion on the Internet. In the eyes of some conspiracy-theorist bloggers, by engaging the Administration and the environmental community on catch shares, the angling groups involved (CCA, CCC, TBF, IGFA, ASA, NMMA) were somehow “negotiating with the Devil,” “selling anglers out,” “getting on the EDF payroll,” etc. That line of thinking completely ignores the consequences of non-engagement. An outcome driven by an EDF-driven Catch Share Policy Task Force, in an Administration that has no interest in recreational angling, could only be bad for sport fishermen. The belief that anyone can achieve a favorable outcome merely by turning their back on this issue and “just saying No” is pure political fantasy.
* The coalition created a list of points to pursue in discussions with the administration, most of which are now included in the NOAA Catch Share Policy released in late 2010, such as:
- The coalition is and always has been firmly against catch shares for recreational anglers. The coalition does not believe they are an appropriate tool to manage recreational anglers under any circumstances.
- The coalition is firmly against separating the recreational sector into for-hire/charter and private boat designations.
- In mixed-use fisheries, those that have a quota for both recreational and commercial fishers, it may be determined that catch shares are an appropriate tool for the commercial sector. However, before implementing a commercial catch share system, the allocation must be redefined and updated using economic, social and conservation criteria.
- Once set, the new allocation must be reviewed periodically using those same criteria.
- In mixed-use fisheries that employ a catch share system for the commercial sector, the commercial shares must be made available for transfer to the recreational sector to allow for the growth of the recreational sector. The mechanism for transferring commercial shares could include state agencies, but is as yet undefined.
* The coalition’s engagement effectively changed the Catch Share Policy from one that was initially poised to work against recreational anglers, to a tool that may be used to address the persistent allocation problems that have short-changed anglers for decades. Would this be the case if the coalition had not engaged? Absolutely not. We would certainly have a catch share policy, but there would be very little in it that might work FOR anglers.
* Ideally, applying the current catch share policy in the Gulf of Mexico for red snapper, for example, could result in a 70% or 80% recreational share, with the potential to shift more commercial quota to the recreational side if economic, conservation and social factors determine it is warranted. Unfortunately, the policy does not apply to Gulf red snapper since a catch share system was implemented for that fishery in 2006. The outdated allocation for Gulf red snapper remains a stubborn problem seeking a solution. However, CCA is currently pursuing reallocation and transferability of commercial red snapper shares at the Gulf Council.
The coalition of groups that engaged with the Administration and the environmental community on catch shares stepped in to prevent a disaster for recreational anglers. Perhaps that is not as interesting as a good spy novel, full of intrigue, deception and betrayal, but this is not some daytime soap opera. This is a real-life fisheries debate, with real political consequences that must be confronted and dealt with.
When it comes to the Internet, it is good to remember that often the simplest explanation is correct. If it starts to sound like something Ian Fleming wrote, then maybe it has been written for entertainment purposes only. In fact, you should be suspicious of everything you read in chatrooms and online forums, which means you should even take this article with a grain of salt. At the very least, go see the complete text of CCA’s documents and testimony before Congress and letters to the Administration, and check out information about our lawsuit against the federal government and Environmental Defense Fund over the Gulf grouper catch share program. It’s all on the Catch Shares page in the Newsroom section of www.JoinCCA.org. Do some research and, by all means, decide for yourself.
Recreational sector stands united against sector separation - Nov. 10, 2010
If the public comment period at the Sector Separation Workshop hosted by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council is any indication, recreational anglers are united against any proposal to separate the recreational sector into for-hire/charter and private boat angler categories. The three-day workshop was put on by the Gulf Council this week ostensibly to help managers and stakeholders gain a better understanding of sector separation as a proposed management tool for recreational fisheries.
The whole murky part about the recs is what scares me.
Also if this goes out for bids what keeps a group like PEW with tons of money or the Commercial fleets with tons of money from buying up the Share's?
Just my thought's?
I don't sell my catch. I hardly hire a charter unless I'm on vacation.
NMFS and NOAA and MRFSS can't get it right now, how confident can we be that they will succeed with this.
Will traditional catch data be used to set shares. As historically Fluke was 80% recreational to 20% commercial. Of course it isn't now. So many things I have no confidence in the govt. organizations to figure out.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
