*THE HULL TRUTH is the world's largest FREE network for the discussion of Boating & Fishing. Whether you're researching a new boat, or are a seasoned Captain, you'll find The Hull Truth Boating & Fishing Message Forum contains a wealth of information from Boaters and Sportfishermen around the world.
Welcome to the updated THT!
If you are having trouble signing in, please email feedback@thehulltruth.com with your username and we will help you. We thank you for your patience as we help you access the new site!
Random Quote: I thought I was hooked on fishing then I got strung out!
Well this sucks. Because of what myself and many others blame on the lack of herring we have not caught our quotas the last few years and because of this the western atlantic quota just got cut to 2100 mt. i dont know for sure what it equates to, but we will have the same percentage of that as usual so we will see a decent cut next year. and of course, the eastern atlantic didnt agree to take any meaningful steps to do what is right and will continue to overfish. this is such crap.
until the whole forage issue is corrected we wont have to worry but if we get this tuna fishery back to what it was a few years ago, this cut will prove to be a big pain for all sectors of the US fishery.
(fyi- the herring amendment final rule is supposed to be published by wednesday.....so unless NMFS delays we should know whether midwater trawlers will be inshore next summer or not by midweek)
here is an article on it:
UNITED STATES MAKES PUSH FOR BLUEFIN TUNA RECOVERY
The United States made a bold attempt last week to ensure the future
of eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean bluefin tuna. The United States
fought hard for tougher conservation measures to end overfishing of
this stock during a meeting of the international commission that
manages bluefin and other tuna and tuna-like species. The 2006 stock
assessment for eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean bluefin tuna
included grim news that the stock is being severely over-harvested
and will collapse if strong conservation measures were not adopted
and implemented without delay. The meeting of the International
Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), held in
Dubrovnik, Croatia, began November 17 and concluded Sunday, November 26.
"The United States wants to manage commercial tuna fishing in an
environmentally sound way," said Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez.
"We want to limit harvests to sustainable levels to ensure the future
of tuna stocks and the fishermen who depend on them. We will continue
to work with the world's fishing community towards these goals."
The United States strongly supported reducing annual eastern bluefin
tuna catches to 15,000 metric tons. For the last four years, the
annual catch for the eastern fishery was capped at 32,000 metric
tons; however, due to wide-spread non-compliance, scientists estimate
the actual catch has been much higher - 50,000 metric tons per year
or more. The United States also supported expanding the closed season
in the Mediterranean to the peak spawning month of June for all
bluefin tuna fleets, which catch bluefin using different types of
fishing gear. These proposals are consistent with scientific advice.
Contrary to scientific advice, the European Commission (EC) put
forward a proposal to set a quota for 2007 of 29,500 metric tons with
a gradual reduction each year so that the quota would reach 25,500
metric tons by 2010. The EC measure only closed the fishery in June
for the longline gear fleet, even though the purse seine gear fleet
catches between 70 and 80 percent of all bluefin tuna in the
Mediterranean. The EC proposal also eliminated requirements for
countries to pay back over-harvests through future quota reductions,
while under-harvests were allowed to be carried over to future years.
Although the EC proposal included improvements to monitoring and
control of the fishery, the quota reductions are likely too little,
too late even if they can be perfectly implemented. In a bid to block
the proposal, the United States requested a roll call vote for the
first time in ICCAT history. Unfortunately, eastern bluefin tuna
harvesting nations voted 10-8 in favor of the EC proposal despite the
fact that it will continue the severe overexploitation of eastern
Atlantic and Mediterranean bluefin tuna.
"I am extremely disappointed with the inability of nations which
harvest eastern bluefin tuna to adopt a meaningful stock recovery
plan," said Dr. Bill Hogarth, director of NOAA Fisheries Service and
U.S. government commissioner to ICCAT. "Of particular concern is the
blatant disregard of strong scientific advice on the need to
substantially reduce catches."
In contrast, the United States successfully pushed for the adoption
of a proposal to lower the annual catch of western Atlantic bluefin
tuna from 2,700 metric tons to 2,100 metric tons, in line with
scientific advice to stop overfishing. Importantly, the United States
maintained its current percentage share of quota. Despite the strong
actions taken in the West, however, there is substantial concern that
the flawed agreement for the eastern Atlantic bluefin tuna stock
could jeopardize the effectiveness of ICCAT's western Atlantic
rebuilding program, due to mixing between the two stocks.
"We have always followed scientific advice for managing the western
stock of bluefin tuna, and this year was no different," Hogarth said.
"The United States has done the right thing to protect this
magnificent fish for the future, unlike our counterparts fishing for
eastern bluefin.
Hogarth noted that the United States has always complied with ICCAT
rules for western Atlantic bluefin tuna fisheries, and he indicated
that the United States will focus close attention to the status of
both stocks under these new plans. In addition, compliance with the
eastern plan will be closely monitored.
ICCAT made progress during this year's meeting in the following
additional areas:
* After long and difficult discussion, ICCAT adopted a new management
arrangement through 2008 for swordfish that took into consideration
the scientific advice, the sacrifices made by U.S. fishermen to help
rebuild this species, and the needs of countries with developing
fisheries. Significantly, the United States maintained its current
percentage share of the swordfish quota. Swordfish negotiations were
particularly tough given the number of countries that demanded
increases in their quotas. North Atlantic swordfish has been under a
rebuilding program since 2000 and is now essentially recovered.
* The rebuilding plan for blue and white marlin was extended through
2010 and enhanced with the addition of observer requirements to
improve data collection and limits on artisanal fleets.
* The Commission recognized the efforts made by Taiwan to address its
fleet capacity and control problems over the last year. ICCAT
reinstated Taiwan's bigeye tuna quota with the proviso that Taiwan
continue to implement sufficient monitoring and control measures and
work to eliminate illegal, unregulated, and unreported fishing.
Hogarth, current chairman of ICCAT, was accompanied at the meeting by
commercial and recreational commissioners Randi Parks Thomas and
Robert Hayes, as well as a delegation that included U.S. government
and constituent representatives.
Maybe I've just turned into a real pessimist with all this stuff, but I thought we were going to get hammered alot worse on this.
I was going to mention this before - 2fin - I saw a letter from your senator before the ICCAT meeting, with congratulations on the success of the complete recovery of swordfish - I didn't realize a sustainable harpoon fishery had popped back up off the vineyard (or is my definition of "recovered" a little dated?).
you are right, there was a chance we could have got hit much worse. and the swordfish have come back big time. the canadians killed them harpooning last summer and from what i hear (from the tuna pilots that also sword) the fish are everyhwere and good sized ones. the swordfish has a weird breeding cycle- it breeds year round unlike most fish which have small windows to do it, and i think this is a major reason for the quick return in swordfish numbers. but whatever the reason, the swords are back.
Yet another failure for the US ICCAT delegation and our vaunted political "leaders" in Washington! Great, they ding us for roughly 22% of our PALTRY share fo the world's bluefin quota and then tell the eurotrash, who've been overfishing their quota for years, sometimes by as much as 30,000 MT in a single year, that they need to reduce theirs by 20%? Amazing stuff. It's a GD peehole in the snow and I can't WAIT to see the spin certain fools will want to put on this. You know, shrinks define insantity as doing the same thing over and over, all the while expecting a different result. Our "policy" of dealing with EU overfishing in the most egregious and blatant manner possible for years and years is nothing short of insane. Ab-so-lute garbage and you all helped fund it. We should be real proud, huh???
Nothing will change until we either get serious and put real poltical pressure on the EU and the rest of ICCAT, the stock crashes over there, or somehow a miracle happens and they all realize that what they are doing is bad.
I cannot believe that we left that meeting with another quota cut and the rest didnt agree to do jack. So frustrating.
The meager funding we have to fight this fight will never be enough to win this fight. And if we dont start catching fish again by next summer, there will be nobody from the US fishery fighting any longer and that will be worse than what we have in place now whether some of you want to admit it or not.
I dont think the US delegation has the ability to do anything without the backing of some of the most powerful people in our government. NO matter what the US delegation does, unless the US government is willing to get tough the delgation will have no ability to do anything at all.
Changing the US/Canada quotas will do absolutely nothing for the sustainability of the bluefin. The main reason we are not seeing the fish we used to, other than the lack of adequate bait populations, is that Gulf of Mexico spawning fish, which are the majority of the fish we see off of NY, CT, MA, NH, ME are crossing the pond via the Flemish Cap or the stream into the Mediterranean and off the coast of Spain and while there, they are being picked off by seiners regardless of their size due to lack of enforcement over there. These fish never have a chance to return to the gulf and spawn and rejuvenate the western stock. It's completely ridiculous what ICCAT and EU are proposing - only a 7k MT reduction by 2010 - the more you think about it, the more you realize how close this amazing fish species is on the verge of extinction. There needs to be an extreme change made in the eastern Atlantic, the US and Canada quotas are unimportant in the overall context of the sustainability of the bluefin, BUT they are important to the guys who depend on this income. Unfortunately, the high seas lack the enforcement necesary to ensure complaince for all highly migratory species. If ICCAT and EU could have some damn foresight, they would see that utter destruction is on the imminent horizon, and their stupidity is affecting the number of fish that frequent northeast hotspots. One of the most important provisions that they failed to address was to stop the purse seining in the Mediterranean during the months of June and July, which are peak spawning periods - it might help us as well, allowing some of the Gulf of Mexico fish to leave Europe and return to the Gulf to spawn the following April. Ever since I hooked and landed my first giant, I got the addiction and I pray that I will be able to still fish for these amazing fish when I retire. Enough ranting, but it's important that we at least attempt to have a voice as this management evolves, I know it's a long and difficult road and one with many deaf ears, but we have to try. Tight lines guys
Yet another failure for the US ICCAT delegation and our vaunted political "leaders" in Washington! :
I was there and watched it all go down. The US delagation did all they could, but at the end of the week, they were simply out voted. Even the US forcing a vote was something of a coup, these people do NOT like to be on the record. The count I think I heard was 10 nations in support of the EU plan, 4 nations against, and 4 abstained. The official votes will be in the final ICCAT report. I know Norway voted with us, but they were just upset that they didn't get any quota allocation. Many of those who abstained do quite a bit of fish exports to the EU, I assume they were afraid of reprisals.
As for our quota cuts, we went to EXACTLY where the scientists recommended. There's a compelling argument that says we shouldn't have cut if the Europeans didn't cut, that would be good negotiating. Of course, the Western Bluefin stocks don't realize you are just negotiating as you overfish them. Tough call, really, but I think we need to save our local stock.
Another time the delagation went to bat for us was when the Euro's were trying to paint us as baby killers for taking ANY bluefin below spawning size. These are the fish that keep the recreational fishery, and the proportion we take is very low. What offended me was that in their compliance report they reported ZERO undersized fish were caught in the entire EU in the last 4 years. I've spoken to people who tell me you can find them in fish markets throughout Europe.
The Europeans will get whats coming to them. In '02 they were advised to drop the total catch from 29,500 tons to 24,000 tons. Instead they RAISED the catch to 32,000 tons and exceeded that by up to 18,000 tons. This year the scientists recommended they drop to 15,000 tons. Instead, they will slowly drop to 25,500 over the next 4 years and put a paperwork plan in place to try to keep nations from overharvesting. I believe there is no chance it will work, they will eventually face an economic collapse of the fishery that will leave thousands of people out of work.
I admit ICCAT is broken, I am certainly not defending it. The thing is I don't know how to fix it. One thing that would really help would be to get more recreational fishermen from more nations involved. The only other nations I really heard discussing recreational fishing were Brazil, and Senegal. I had the pleasure of having lunch with the delegate from Senegal, a poor nation whose fishermen are using their boats, like Haitians, to make a long and dangerous escape. The Senegalese, at least this one man, recognize that people will spend more money to catch a fish than they will to eat that same fish. He sees recreational fishing as a potential economic engine in a poor nation.
Anyway, enough rambling notes, I just wanted to stick an oar in for our delegation and our commissioners.
If you want to know more about the meeting I'd be happy to try to answer.
Rweber- great account of the meeting, much appreciated.
Here is a report we got from one of the industry people at the meeting (one of the advisers) ....
"Friends:
The ICCAT Plenary meeting held in Dubrovnik, Croatia from November 16 to November 26 was the largest and longest ICCAT meeting I have attended since 1991. There were 515 authorized delegates in attendance representing 42 fishing nations (actually 66 including the collection of nations belonging to the European Community -- EC). The results for Atlantic bluefin tuna were disappointing overall due to the continued stonewalling by the EC and their refusal to heed clear scientific advice.
Dr. Rebecca Lent headed the U.S. delegation during Plenary meetings along with recreational Commissioner Bob Hayes and Commercial Commissioner Randi Parks-Thomas. Glenn Delaney and I represented the U.S. Bluefin Tuna and Swordfish industries during the 11 day meeting. The results for the East and West are summarized below.
East Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea
All discussions over eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean bluefin were held under an atmosphere of ongoing or impending stock collapse as clearly identified in the 2006 stock assessment held last June. The latest scientific analysis by ICCAT's Standing Committee on Research and Statistics (SCRS) showed that the current fishing mortality rate is three times the level necessary to stabilize the stock. Thus, the scientific advice for the east is that catches need to be immediately reduced from the recent 50,000 metric ton (mt) level to no more than 15,000 mt, the spawning grounds need to be closed to directed fishing from May 1 to July 31 and the minimum size increased to 30 kg without tolerance. The combination of these measures perfectly implemented would place the fishery fishing at Fmsy levels and allow slow rebuilding.
The U.S. was prepared to do serious battle over any challenge of the SCRS scientific findings of impending eastern collapse and over the great continuing damage to the western fishery stemming from the past decade of irresponsible non-management and gross overfishing in the East. Dr. Bill Hogarth contracted with Dr. Mike Sissenwine (former NMFS Chief Scientists) and Dr, Joe Powers (former SCRS Chairman/NMFS bluefin scientist) to back-up Dr. Clay Porch and SCRS Chairmen Dr. Jerry Scott as necessary. One could make an argument that no other country in the world could produce this level of Atlantic bluefin tuna stock structure/population assessment expertise available at any meeting. Dr. Alan Fonteneau (Past SCRS Chairmen/bluefin scientist) from France volunteered to attend the meeting to pressure the EC and France to accept the reality of the dire eastern stock situation.
The EC smartly decided against challenging the science but opted for a more devious and contemptuous strategy of acknowledging the critical stock situation but advancing a sham of a so-called "emergency", "coherent Recovery Plan" that openly and plainly ignores the science but claims to restore the stock. The "Plan" sets the target quota double the SCRS recommended level and ignores the imperative finding that to be effective at stock protection the spawning closure must include a major reduction in fishing during the month of June.
The EC leader John Spencer mocked the U.S. refusal to support any eastern plan not consistent with the scientific advice and joked that our position was akin to "Kill Bill 3", a disrespectful reference to Chairman Bill Hogarth's steadfast stand on heeding scientific advice and the economic consequences of following the advice to reduce catches to 15,000 mt. Throughout the meeting, John Spencer criticized the western bluefin plan, particularly the fact that our 30 kg minimum size did not protect spawning sized fish, as inadequate in substance and detail and he claimed that the EC proposal was "comprehensive" because that is the way "we like to do things". The best defense is always a good offense, whether you have accurate ammunition or not.
In any case, the new eastern "Recovery Plan" contains 57 separate provisions that essentially, if implemented, will establish for the first time ever the infrastructure to monitor and control eastern fisheries, should the political will develop to comply with a plan anytime soon. What John Spencer is unaware of is that the western plan does not need to detail monitor and control measures because the U.S., Canada and Japan have had fishery management infrastructure and control in place for over 30 years. The EC has no experience with fishery management as was betrayed again at this meeting, for example, by their initial proposal that the ICCAT Secretariat notify countries when 100% of their TAC was caught. Later, they changed the proposal to 85% after they were educated that lead time is required unless one desires to guarantee consistent quota overages.
The new eastern "recovery plan" contains the following quotas in metric tons:
Total Allowable Catches:
2007 29,500
2008 28,500
2009 27,500
2010 25,500
A special 3 day or longer meeting of ICCAT's Panel 2 will be held in January 07 in Kobe Japan to develop the allocation shares among eastern fishing countries. The EC failed to get agreement on how to split up the declining quota between competing nations such as Turkey, Morocco, Libya, Tunisia and more. Some of the other major provisions for the East and Mediterranean agreed to in Croatia include:
* the spawning closure for large scale longline vessels (>24 meters) will be extended from June 1 to December 3
* purse seine closure will not start until after July (after the farms are fully supplied) and last through December 31
* baitboats will be prohibited from fishing from Nov. 15 to May 15, as will midwater pelagic trawlers
* minimum size is increased to 30kg with tolerance of 8% but not to include fish below 10kg; prohibition against any dead discards with all fish to be landed and counted against quota
* prohibition on use of airplanes and helicopters searching for bluefin
* recreational bag limit of one fish with no sale provision, suggestion that countries take steps to release all live recreationally caught fish
* no carry-over of any underharvests shall be allowed under the "Recovery Plan" except for underages from 2005 and 06 of which 50% may be made
* various measures to attempt to control and record farming production
* 20% observer requirement on purse seine, pelagic trawlers and longlines
* VMS for all vessels over 24 meters
* tail tags for the east Atlantic baitboat fisheries
The U.S. forced a roll call vote on the eastern plan and lost by a 10 to 8 margin accepting the sham recovery plan. The EC and many other eastern parties are clearly not yet willing to make the quota sacrifices necessary to rebuild the resource. They are counting on this new paper plan to buy time, relieve some of the pressure from the U.S. and environmental groups and they hope apparently to reduce the prospect of a successful proposed CITES Listing (i.e. a ban on international trade of bluefin tuna). I find it difficult to see how this plan can work and unfortunately our fishery is linked to the almost certain continuing ICCAT bluefin tuna failure.
Finally, in ICCAT's Compliance Committee, the EC ignored the U.S. emphatic demand that the 54,000 mt in eastern bluefin tuna quota overages the last three years be addressed in some fashion and, at the very least, by appointment of a special review committee. They refused to even acknowledge this minimal request. This situation of some eastern nations being allowed to carry forward underages from the last two years while blatantly ignoring 54,000 in overages is outrageous, irresponsible and should be criminal. I cannot imagine this type of unfair trade situation being tolerated beyond an international fish product.
Western Bluefin Tuna
The SCRS assessment for western bluefin in 2006 was more pessimistic than the previous assessment largely because the 1994 and 1997 year classes are now believed to be only average in size. The assessment continues to find the stock is stable at a low level and not likely to change significantly with catches at 2,700 mt quota level. The advice also continued to point out the linkage of western stock productivity and western fishery performance to inadequate management in the east because of the mixing between east and west.
However, the SCRS advice also proposed a quota reduction from 2,700 to 2,100 mt which would result in spawning stock biomass increases of about 1.5% per year for the next few years and reduce fishing mortality to the Fmsy level. Consistent with U.S. ICCAT policy since 1981, the U.S. supported the scientific advice and advanced a new agreement.
The new western quota of 2100 mt for 2007-08 represents about a 20% cut for the west and the U.S. share will be 1,190 mt down from the current quota of 1,489. Canada's reduced quota will be 496 and Japan's will be 380 mt. The new quotas will be inclusive of dead discards and this is a significant change. We made sure that the method of calculating dead discards would be from longline vessel logbooks and not include any extrapolations NMFS scientists continue to be fond of. The U.S. will carry forward underage into 2007 that will likely minimize the quota cut for the following two years.
There are a few new provisions to the bluefin agreement. There is now a cap on the amount of rollover of underage and the limit is 50% of a nation's base quota. This same cap applies for the swordfish agreement as well. Although we do not yet know the amount of 2006 rollover, clearly the U.S. under the 50% limit will be forfeiting uncaught quota built up over the last 3 years. The new agreement transferred 50 mt of U.S. underage to Canada for fishing years 2007 and 2008.
As expected, Mexico was exceptionally demanding at the meeting for bluefin tuna quota share. They demanded 220 mt of quota even knowing that the western quota was being cut by 600 mt for the foreseeable future. They let it be known that they were prepared to block any western agreement unless their quota demand was made. The U.S. initially opposed Mexico's request and eventually countered with 10 tons for 2007-08. I pointed out that the Gulf of Mexico was closed to directed fishing and Mexico already had 25 tons for bycatch.
Mexico countered that they were transferring 9 small boats from the Pacific to fish the Atlantic and although we consistently pointed out the improbability of developing a south Atlantic/Caribbean directed bluefin fishery, Mexico ultimately held the U.S. up for 75 tons of underage in 07 and 100 tons of underage in 08. Provisions restricting the transfer of underage prohibit Mexico from fishing in the Gulf of Mexico and from trading the quota to another party. I believe that both prohibited activities are likely to happen and will not be reported unless they are caught.
Mexico will expect to receive an allocation of quota share equal to or greater than the 175 tons received this year and the U.S., Canada and Japan will have to be prepared to fight this fight in 2008. There is simply no reasonable justification for allowing major new players to develop when a stock is being rebuilt. The U.S. delegation will require State Department influence with Mexico prior to the next meeting to end or limit unreasonable expectations.
Another new provision in the 2006 agreement will allow any country to make a one time annual transfer of up to 15% of its allocation to another country subject to a restriction that it not be used for to cover prior quota overages and that it not be retransferred by the receiving country. This provision was included at the joint request of U.S. and Canada to make possible reciprocal fishing privileges in each respective countries EEZ. Some initial discussions with Canadian government and bluefin industry were made at the meeting with the result being a commitment to further the discussions in early 2007 after a meeting between Dr. Hogarth and a Canadian Minister with authority to allow reciprocal fishing.
Finally, the western 8% tolerance on bluefin below the 30 kg minimum size was increased to 10% of the U.S. quota in an attempt to allow a continuation of recreational opportunities under the reduced TAC.
Anyone wishing copies of the actual agreement can contact me and I will forward it."
iccat/western quotas (bluefin) 
