Written by Leslie Taylor
It would be nice to think that, in the wake of an “unscheduled” stock assessment that conspicuously left out any input from fishermen or others inherently familiar with the industry, the planned “peer review” of the findings by NOAA’s Northeast Fishery Science Center would include someone who represents the fishermen’s interests before there is any move to carry out even more dire limit cuts for Gulf of Maine cod.
Sadly, however, the peer review panel pulled together by the New England Fisheries Management Council shows no outreach whatsoever toward the industry that is already caught in a recognized economic disaster — and one that was declared even prior to NOAA’s 78-percent cod limit cut in the spring of 2013.
The “peers,” instead, will include at least two scientists who work closely with NOAA’s science arms, and thus could be seen as having every reason to back the center’s findings.
Read the full story at the Gloucester Times>>
Want to read more about NOAA's cod assessment? Click here...
NMFS recently released a draft action plan for fish discard and release mortality science, creating a list of actions that they hope can better inform fisheries.
We know that fishermen have to deal with bycatch by discarding or releasing unwanted catch overboard, but there is a data gap regarding how those fish survive.Read more...
A new study has identified a set of features common to all ocean ecosystems that provide a visual diagnosis of the health of the underwater environment coastal communities rely on.
Together, the features detail cumulative effects of threats -- such as overfishing, pollution, and invasive species, allowing responders to act faster to increase ocean resiliency and sustainability.Read more...