Jes Hathaway is the editor in chief of National Fisherman magazine and NationalFisherman.com.
Written by Jes Hathaway
February 14, 2013
NPR's three-part series on the Marine Stewardship Council addresses primarily the environmentalists' complaints about MSC (that it has expanded too quickly and, therefore, can't possibly be certifying only truly sustainable — whatever that means — seafood).
What is shocking is the fact that this series never once mentions the U.S. fishery management system. But even worse, it doesn't dig into the conflicts of interest that persist in the MSC's foundation supporters and those who pay for the blue sustainability logo. Nor does it truly address the consequences of a sustainability logo that no small fleet could afford for the long haul.
They would have gotten straight to the heart of it by addressing the most recent MSC controversy. That McDonald's announced its fish menu items would be made with all MSC-certified pollock the same week Russia announced its (controversial) pollock fishery was going forward with MSC certification.
Whole Foods and WalMart did not agree to start selling only MSC-labeled fish out of the blue one day. They were lobbied to do so (which the series does reveal).
So here's the rub: Fleets that want to keep selling into particular markets go through the very expensive MSC certification program in order to keep selling to those retailers that MSC has lobbied. That means MSC is driving its clients on one end by marketing themselves not to the fleets or to the public, but to the retailers on the other end. It's quite clever.
What that tells me is not that their primary aim is to educate the public or protect fishermen, but that they seek to control a stake in the global fishing industry. I have a hard time believing those efforts are altruistic when I see that MSC has funding sources in common with some of the world's largest corporations.
And what this series confirms for me is my belief that it's nearly impossible to isolate one fishery, green (or blue, as the case may be) stamp it, call it sustainable and walk away (regardless of whether you promise to come back to it three or five years later).
It also makes me very fearful that perhaps this push in questioning the MSC has a deeper reason — to further the cause for open-ocean finfish aquaculture, which some people foolishly believe will result in "organic" seafood.
The oceans are complicated, people. In the United States, the National Marine Fisheries Service does a good job of addressing the ebbs and flows of fishing stocks. In some cases, it (or the states that manage some fisheries) excels. In some cases it falls flat on its face and then tries to correct a misstep. We have very high standards here for our wild seafood.
That is the best we can expect when the marine environment meets government oversight. The bottom line is you can't fool yourself into thinking any label is a panacea. And you shouldn't fool yourself into believing open-ocean fish farms are the answer to the "dearth" of wild seafood.
U.S. fisheries are overall very healthy. If we turn our focus to eating a variety of foods in general, we will be assured of supporting more local growers and small-boat harvesters as well as keeping a check on the exploitation of our natural resources.
But instead, we turn more and more to the mantra that being too big to fail is equivalent to being sustainable.
Written by Jes Hathaway
February 5, 2013
The New England cod fishery has existed for hundreds of years, lasting through many major swings in landings.
Yes, this is the lowest we've ever "seen" the biomass (insofar as our limited data allows us to see), but this is also the warmest we've seen the water and the most dogfish we've had to contend with.
Fishing effort has been severely curtailed for more than 20 years, every year with the promise that someday soon, the sacrifices of the fleet will be worth it. And make no mistake, this fleet has made sacrifice after sacrifice, apparently to no avail. If the cod stock gets more and more dire every year, it's not because we have been fishing them rapaciously. It's because the circumstances for their return are not optimal and even worse, they are apparently beyond human control.
Cod landings hit a low very close to what we're seeing now during a 20-year period between 1950 and 1970.
That was also a time when huge foreign fleets parked offshore and scooped up as much fish as they could carry home across the oceans. Few people mention the effects this might have on the long-term sustainability of the stock.
After the Magnuson Act pushed them off of Georges and out of the Gulf of Maine, U.S. landings increased again. Then dipped for a while, then increased again and are dipping again.
We are not fools for wanting to be sure the cod returns. What makes us foolish is the notion that we can somehow trick nature into doing our bidding just because we want it badly enough.
Some say the best option, as we keep a narrow-minded focus on "how we've always done things," may be to shut down the industry for a full year. We could try to think outside the conference room on this, but I doubt we will. As of now, it appears that we will indeed allow the ports and infrastructure to shrivel up and go the way of the vacation condo and law firm.
We'll let our 400-year-old industry drift into the fog instead of using all the tools in our arsenal to chart a clear course for the future of the fleet, allowing fishermen to pursue redfish and other healthy populations in the 15-fish complex that is New England groundfish. And then, after we've thinned out the dogfish population a little (a necessity as a result of our self-imposed protections) and the water cools again, thanks to Mother Nature, we'll pat ourselves on the back for having saved the cod.
Then we'll look around for someone to go fish for it, find one or two fishing conglomerates that amassed enough quota to make money on what little fish they were allowed to land, and wonder why it's so expensive to buy local fish.
Welcome to the short-sighted future. This is what happens when you think you're watching out for the long term, steaming full ahead, secure in your course. But the surprise attack comes from the side.
Written by Jes Hathaway
January 29, 2013
As New England's groundfish fleets wait for bad news this week about their quotas for the coming fishing year, I am also wondering if a federal fishery disaster declaration will result in any aid from the federal government.
The best chance of it was lost when all non-Sandy-related funding was stripped from the House relief bill, including funding for three fishery disasters.
As Drew E. Minkiewicz and Shaun M. Gehan illustrate in their Washington Lookout column in our March issue, the prospects for representation of fishermen on Capitol Hill look fairly grim as we usher in the 113th Congress.
Fishermen have lost Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), Scott Brown (R-Mass.) and the late Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) and are likely to lose John Kerry (D-Mass.) to the president's cabinet.
On the House side, we said goodbye to representatives from a wide swath of the country, including Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Allen West (R-Fla.) .
Tomorrow I will join some fishing industry representatives from Alaska and Washington state in meetings with Maine's Sen. Susan Collins and Rep. Chellie Pingree to discuss Pebble Mine and what the implications of such a project could have on local and national fishing communities.
My hope is to spread the word that wild fisheries need to be protected across this country, whether that's keeping a mine out of the headwaters of the world's largest wild sockeye run or offering fishermen and small fishing towns a leg up in bridging the gap between disaster and recovery.
The problems we face as an industry now have very little to do with effort vs. abundance because we are managing our stocks with great care in this country. Our next hurdle is to overcome the dearth of data, so we can approach the looming problems of climate, access and gear modification.
If we hope to have an industry even 20 years from now, we have to start protecting it now, from habitat to infrastructure.
Written by Jes Hathaway
January 24, 2013
The 12th annual Mid-Atlantic Waterman of the Year Contest kicked off with a double heat of net mending on Saturday, Jan. 19, 2013, at the Maryland Watermen's Show in Ocean City.
Emcee John Martin, a partner in the family-owned fish wholesaler and retailer Martin Fish Co. of Ocean City, announced that each heat would award $100 to the winner, $50 to the runner up and a Maryland Watermen's Association T-shirt for third place.
Brandon Malek, a rockfish, catfish and white perch fisherman out of Baltimore, was the winner of the first heat and overall net-mending title-holder.
In the second heat, father and son Rob and Sam Joiner, pound net fishermen out of Rock Hall, Md., went head to head. Sam won the heat and took second place.
The baiting round went to Rob Joiner, and second place to Sam Joiner, both in the middle of the table.
Knot tying went to Charles Martin, also a member of the Martin Fish Co. family as well as a fisherman who says he goes on any kind of boat, from longlining to dragging to working the bay. He took the second heat and first place, tying a figure 8, a bowline and a square knot in 10.85 seconds.
Brandon Malek took the $50 prize and won the first heat in 11.22 seconds.
Splicing went to Rob Joiner, with Brandon Malek in second.
This heat of the competition was not without some controversy as the judges hovered over a splicing technique and wound up disqualifying what would have been second place.
Malek also won the rope throwing (tossing a line around a piling) and survival suit heats. He got his face flap closed at the 31-second mark.
In the end Brandon Malek won the title of Waterman of the Year, knocking Rob Joiner to second place for the first time in many years. And Sam Joiner took third.
The event was sponsored by Vane Brothers and Martin Fish Co.
Written by Jes Hathaway
January 16, 2013
As I mentioned in my current Editor's Log; for the magazine, this is the time of year when we hit the road in search of fishing shows and fishermen's input.
This weekend, I'll be in Ocean City, Md., attending the Maryland Watermen's Show, officially known as the East Coast Commercial Fishermen's and Aquaculture Trade Exposition. I love this show, and can't wait to visit with Larry Simns, NF Highliner, the Watermen's president and the subject of a wonderful new book, which is featured in our February issue.
This year, in addition to the usual shows, I'll be attending two conferences I've never been to before: the National Working Waterfronts & Waterways Symposium and Managing our Nation's Fisheries.
I'm very curious to see how communities and fishermen are discussed at these two programs, which are not necessarily fisherman-focused.
My hope and my goal as editor of this magazine is to speak for the fishermen and your communities to people who can and must make a difference simply by recognizing their value.
Successful management of our nation's fisheries and preservation of working waterfront communities should not be approached through punishment or restrictions. It should be a task focused on getting the most out of every resource without selling fishing grounds to develop other natural resources (Snowbirds included).
The Obama administration has a great opportunity, as Jane Lubchenco exits stage left, to redefine leadership at NOAA and NMFS. Lubchenco was hailed this week in a Natural Resources Defense Council blog as a champion of science. That may be, but when it comes to fishing, the science — as long as we've had it — has never been a more pathetic tale.
I don't think Lubchenco would like that to be her legacy, but there it is. I hope the next chief can improve on the condition of fishery data rather than burying the truth about current management practices in a pile of statistics manipulated to skew the disastrous results of catch shares into a rosy picture of economic success.
My fingers are crossed, but I can't hold my breath on this one.
Written by Jes Hathaway
January 9, 2013
The people (your bosses) are tired of you. We are tired of the bickering, the pettiness, the posturing and the strong-arming.
We want to see you working, not stroking your egos or those of your major donors.
There are significant groups of people in this country who are in desperate need of help, and your response has been to let them flounder. These people may not be your constituents, but one day your own people very well could be in a similar predicament.
No region of this country is safe from disaster of any kind. The longer you hold Sandy recovery funds at bay, the more you risk disgusting the majority of voters.
This bill is not about you or your party. It's about people who are homeless as a result of a natural disaster — and many others who are struggling to keep their homes and their boats as a result of playing by the rules the federal government established for their fishery and getting bupkis in return for more than two decades.
And what has delayed action done? So far, it has not served to reduce the Senate-proposed bill, as the House Republicans initially intended. House leaders were pushing to cut fishing disaster relief funding (for Alaska king salmon and New England groundfish) from the Senate-proposed $60 billion bill. They countered with a $24 billion bill.The Senate eventually approved a $60.4 billion bill last Friday. The House approved $9.7 billion in emergency funds to the federal coastal flood insurance program and is expected to get around to voting on the rest of the bill next week.
Lest we forget, this storm hit the East Coast at the end of OCTOBER last year. The best-case scenario at this point is that it will have taken the House nearly three months to get around to releasing aid funds. That is unacceptable.
And ultimately, House Speaker Jim Boehner (R-Ohio) is conceding to the Senate's proposal. Or is perhaps seeing the light that sometimes pork is not pork, it's just the business of running the country. Most of the funding in the relief bill is earmarked for storm recovery and disaster prevention in other regions of the country. It's not hard to come to the conclusion that it was put there to secure Republican votes in the Senate.
So what was the point of delaying?
All I can see is that the modern model of national politics is a mangled, limping mess that insists it's fine, when it really needs to be put out of its misery. Once upon a time, members of Congress collaborated with a mutual understanding and respect that despite disagreements on the details, negotiations have to come to the middle, because that's where the majority of Americans are.
Can someone get that message to Congress? Maybe we should suggest sector management for the House of Representatives. We'll call it Vote Shares. There will be fewer of them, but they'll get paid more and be easier for us to control. What a deal!
Written by Jes Hathaway
January 4, 2013
We love unveiling a new issue every month.
Our work goes straight into your hands, and we always hope it means something to you. This is a small but widely varied industry. The one thing that we all have in common is appreciation for the people who make a difference for more than just themselves.
Some do that in small ways, like an innovative boatbuilder who designs a new kind of boat and creates it out of two would-be-retired seiners. (See Splitting pairs about a Virginia menhaden seiner.)
Some do that in big ways, like NF Highliner Larry Simns, who has held the title of president of the Maryland Watermen's Association since 1970 and recently released his memoir, co-written with Robert Rich Jr. (See the Editor's Log and the full story in the magazine.)
Then there are those who just get an early jump on things, like buying their first boat at age 12. That's what Maine lobsterman Alec Peasley did and is now building his third and biggest boat. (See Around the Yards.)
More than anything, I love to hear a good story. There are a lot of challenges in our industry right now, and I refuse to bury my head in the sand about them. But today I'd like to focus on what's going right.
Let's ring in the new year with some cheer and then get down to work.
Written by Jes Hathaway
December 26, 2012
Some days it's hard not to succumb to the feeling that the world is a very dark place. And in Maine in the winter, that is enforced by a meager 9 hours of daylight — just enough time to get to work and back.
Add to that the impending doom along New England waterfronts as we desperately search for a way out of a groundfish catastrophe that could mark the end of hundreds of years of fishing history in many small ports on our coast. And the recent disappearance of the scalloper Foxy Lady II, whose gear and rescue pod washed ashore several days after her scheduled arrival home.
Yet I try, every year at this time, to start looking back at the things that make me grateful for what I have and how I can improve my life and the lives of those around me in the coming year. (Props to my folks for my virtues, few as they may seem at times!)
For one, I am humbled to be in the position of improving awareness of fishing safety. I don't dedicate my life to it like Jennifer Lincoln (NIOSH Alaska), Jerry Dzugan (AMSEA) or Rodney Avila (New Bedford-Mass.-based safety coordinator, former fisherman and NF Highliner). And I didn't make a huge contribution to one community, like Randa Szymanski did in Haines, Alaska. But I do what little I can to put people in touch with the right people and help the industry adapt to much needed cultural changes.
Right before we headed to Seattle for the expo this year, I got a call from a guy who is selling a safety product that's new to the U.S. commercial fishing industry.
He wanted to come to the show and get a feel for the industry's possible interest in a product like his.
In other industries, an editor getting a call like this sends the guy packing to the advertising reps and never wants to hear from him again unless his product wins an award or has some legitimate reason for reaching the editorial section.
But the size and nature of our industry makes these kinds of calls an opportunity to make a difference. Yes, there's a business component to it. But more than that, it was a chance to help someone roll out a new safety product.
National Fisherman has been promoting safety at sea since long before I got here. One of our traditions, the Fisherman of the Year contest, includes a survival suit contest. Though we don't hold an official contest on the East Coast anymore, Rodney Avila and Jerry Fraser (our publisher and longtime emcee of the races) held two heats of survival suit contests at a fishing expo in New Bedford this summer.
Add a comment
The winner of the second heat, seen here, is Shawn Machie, skipper of the 90-foot scalloper Apollo out of New Bedford (and of the History Channel's "Nor'Easter Men"). He slipped into his suit in just 29.3 seconds, besting first-heat winner Laurie Botelho of Fall River, who finished in 40 seconds.
Can you beat those times? How about on a rolling deck? There are no guarantees in life, and more than just a small dose of luck in every survival story. But without practice, you can almost guarantee that you won't make it into a survival suit in a true emergency. Try one on today. Make a resolution to best Shawn's time in 2013.
Written by Jes Hathaway
December 20, 2012
These days New England groundfish fishermen are on quite a roller coaster ride.
First, a week ago, we learned that the loudest voice behind the catastrophic (for the Northeast) catch shares system, NOAA chief Jane Lubchenco, will be stepping down from the agency in February. That most certainly was a rare zenith for the fleet.
Then acting Commerce Secretary Rebecca Blank ordered federal regulators to return more than half a million dollars in unjust fines collected under the much-maligned NOAA Office of Law Enforcement.
But now Senate Republicans are threatening to keep fishery disaster relief money out of the Hurricane Sandy relief package. The groundfish fishery was declared a disaster this fall. The relief money for the fishery would be $150 million, which was slashed from a $60.4 billion package.
And lastly, today fishermen start down the long, hard road that as near as anyone can tell will deal the fishery its last blow. Between catch shares and climate change, fishermen who have spent decades cutting quotas and fishing effort with the promise that one day it would all be worth it now face quotas so disastrously low, they would have no way to make a living and no hopes that their prospects will look up anytime soon.
Analysis of the stocks is ongoing, amid disputes over the validity of trawl survey methods. And there's no telling what the results will be and what effect they will have on quotas in the near future.
Today the New England Fishery Management Council voted 15-2 to delay until January the deep cuts to catch limits.
Fishermen are hoping for a Hail Mary pass on the stock analysis. Otherwise, it will truly be the end of the world as they know it.
Written by Jes Hathaway
December 11, 2012
Friday in Portland, Ore., the state's Fish and Wildlife Commission approved Gov. John Kitzhaber's proposal to ban gillnets on the Columbia River's main stem. Part of the plan also allocates 5 percent of the commercial sector's 40 percent quota to recreational fishermen in 2013 and another 5 percent in 2014.
What is the purpose of increasing the recreational allocation to 65 percent and decreasing the commercial allocation from 40 to 35 percent? I'm confused as to how that is part of a conservation measure.
The Coastal Conservation Association claims gillnets are not selective enough. However, gillnets are improved year over year in fisheries all over the country. Fishermen shift depth, mesh size, net length, soak time and even attach pingers to make their nets unattractive to unwanted species.
What the CCA is basing this information on is a mystery to me. Yes, there is some bycatch in any fishery — including recreational fisheries. Meanwhile, we know that recreational fishing landings leave huge data gaps. I suppose ultimately the cuts don't matter that much, since commercial fishermen say they are unlikely to find enough fish in off-channel areas to fill their more modest quotas anyway.
“The Columbia River belongs to everyone, and the fish in it are a shared public resource that belongs to everyone,” Clatsop County Commissioner Dirk Rohne said at a rally last Thursday, according to the Daily Astorian. “Everyone should have the same right to enjoy Columbia River salmon, and that is a service the gillnetters provide for all of us.”
Nationwide, we are moving closer to privatized fisheries, from delivering the fish out of the hands of commercial fishermen, whose efforts feed the public at large, to delivering quotas to fewer and fewer boat owners, which leads to the Wal-Mart model in commercial fishing — behemoth stakeholders enjoying less competition.
Neither of these management developments makes fisheries easier to manage.
To the people of Oregon, I say only this: When you're eating Alaska and California salmon next summer, you will know whom to thank — commercial fishermen from states that allow for innovation in commercial fishing as an alternative to shut-downs.
Page 18 of 39
Governor Bill Walker has officially requested that the federal government declare a disaster for four Alaska regions hurt by one of the poorest pink salmon returns in decades.Read more ...
The New England Fishery Management Council recently elected Dr. John F. Quinn of Massachusetts and E. F. “Terry” Stockwell III of Maine to serve respectively as chairman and vice chairman in the year ahead. The two have led the Council since 2014 but reversed roles this year.Read more ...