|
July 31, 2009
Report says rebuilding fish stocks more
quickly would have economic benefits
By SUSAN WEST
The
Pew Environment Group released a report last week that maintains that
failing to rebuild depleted fish stock populations as quickly as
possible results in lost economic opportunities for the fishing
industry.
The report, “Investing in Our Future: The Economic Case for
Rebuilding Mid-Atlantic Fish Populations,” found that rebuilding
summer flounder, black sea bass, butterfish, and bluefish populations
by 2007 would have increased commercial fishing landings by 48 percent,
increased recreational landings by 24 percent, and generated an
additional $570 million per year in direct economic benefits.
“Often the significant long-term economic benefits of rebuilding
fish populations are overlooked,” said Lee Crockett, director of
federal fisheries policy for the Pew Environment Group.
Outer Banks commercial fishermen don’t discount that rebuilt fish
stocks would offer increased economic benefits, but only under certain
circumstances.
“The track record has been that fisheries managers are very
conservative when it comes to increasing harvest limits even for
healthy stocks that have been fully rebuilt,” said Hatteras
Island commercial fisherman and gear supplier James Caldwell.
He said increases to the commercial quota for the Atlantic Ocean
striped bass fishery, declared recovered in 1995, have fallen far short
of promises once made by fishery managers.
Caldwell said the fishing industry is unlikely to recover from the
negative economic impacts of stringent fishing restrictions associated
with a quick timeframe for rebuilding stocks.
He said fishermen couldn’t afford to sit idle, waiting out
periods of closed fishing seasons or small catch limits, so they would
have to turn to other jobs.
“And then more of the infrastructure that supports commercial fishing will be crushed,” he explained.
“It won’t matter if stocks are rebuilt because there’ll be no one left to fish,” Caldwell said.
Crockett said his organization isn’t blind to the short-term economic pain of rebuilding fish populations quickly.
“We’re looking at ways to mitigate those impacts and to
help fishermen transition to a brighter future,” he said in a
telephone interview last week.
More federal funding to hire fishermen to work on fisheries data
collection projects, such as tagging studies, could help fishermen
recoup lost income, according to Crockett.
He said federal fisheries disaster aid could be another way to lessen the negative economic impact.
Pew Environment Group has urged Congress not to move forward with
legislation that would authorize federal fishery management councils to
extend rebuilding deadlines for species on the path to recovery so that
economic dislocation could be averted.
“That was the way things used to be done, and it resulted in
managers letting fishing go on at too high a rate for too long,”
Crockett said.
Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) introduced the Flexibility in Rebuilding
American Fisheries (HR 1584) in March. The bill has 20
co-sponsors, including N.C. Reps. Walter Jones and Mike McIntyre.
Jones has been a strong advocate for giving the councils more leeway in
setting recovery schedules, and introduced legislation nearly identical
to the Pallone bill in November, 2007.
Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) introduced S 1255, a companion bill to
the Pallone legislation, in June. That bill has no co-sponsors.
“The two bills in Congress would help assure the destruction of
more fisheries,” said Carl Safina, president of Blue Ocean
Institute, in a teleconference with reporters last week.
The bills have been endorsed by many commercial fishing organizations
and by some recreational fishing groups, but supporters said extensive
lobbying by conservation groups could preclude any action on the bills
this year.
|
|
  |
|
|
