ECOSYSTEMS, MANAGEMENT AND OUR MARINE WILDERNESS

Since the Magnuson-Stevens fisheries management act was reauthorized in 1996 as the Sustainable Fisheries Act, there's been a mandate for 'ecosystem management' of the fish in the oceans of the United States (this was reaffirmed with last year's reauthorization of the MSA). I think it's fair to say, whether you look at the North Pacific, the North Atlantic, or our own Gulf of Mexico - most fish managers don't know what it means, and don't know how to do it. As a result, it hasn't been done. But do I have any specific direction to these poor managers of our shared natural resources? Can I write down how they should be 'managing ecosystems?'

Probably not as explicitly as the fish managers would like, but I can take a stab at it, and point to some movement around the globe that gives me hope that we can start to make it happen on a more wide-scale level:

First, to enact ecosystem management, we should remember the wise words of Aldo Leopold (though he was writing of a 'land ethic' I think he'd be alright with us applying his values to a 'marine ethic' as well): "To keep every cog and wheel is the first precaution of intelligent tinkering." We need to keep all the pieces of a functioning ecosystem, to keep it healthy. We can expect the law of unintended consequences to apply to our seas.

One way to keep all the pieces is to simply fence off the most pristine and intact habitats we have left. Recently the tiny island nation of Kirbati in the north Pacific created the largest marine sanctuary in the world. Choosing to forgo the immediate gain of commercial fishing leases and recreational fishing permits, the country decided to add to their existing Phoenix Islands Protected Area, to total over 158,000 square miles! Trumping President Bush's Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument in Hawaii, this is the payoff of important work by the island nation, conservation international and the New England Aquarium.


The unfortunate reality in the U.S. is that recreational and commercial fishing interests react with violent opposition to any talk of 'restricted areas', even though the argument can be made that by keeping some areas free of fishing, the fish in those areas can become so productive that they actually 'seed' other areas that are open to fishing. Here in the Gulf, one of our marine sanctuaries, the Flower Garden Banks, is right now considering closing some of the banks to fishing and diving to see what the affect will be. An even larger proposal has been floated called, "Islands in the Stream." This concept is the brain child of Billy Causey, who helped create the Florida Keys Marine Sanctuary. The stream in the name is the circling currents of the Gulf of Mexico, which connects even distant areas. The islands would be a network of different protected areas along that current - stretching from the Yucatan around to the Keys. Some are areas that already have some protection, such as the Flower Garden Banks, but most are areas that researchers know contain high-value habitat, but are as yet, unprotected.

Aside from creating sanctuaries, ecosystem management must work to consider, characterize and quantify the interactions between fish species - such as the red snapper - shrimp interactions that have been quantified in the finally finalized new rules to rebuild red snapper. These rules are a good first step, as they acknowledge that shrimp trawl bycatch has a significant impact on red snapper, and needs to be a factor in that species management. But this regulation is the exception, not the rule, and for the most part bycatch isn't significantly considered in the single-species management rules that exist in the Gulf.

Texas is taking the lead in protecting a key forage species, currently proposing a limit on menhaden catch in state waters, specifically because so many species from birds to marine mammals to predatory fish rely on this unassuming schooling fish. Of course, this isn't news, and as my friend Mark Muhich with the Galveston Sierra Club points out - the NY Times was writing about the importance of this species to other species some 100+ years ago. We think the Texas cap is a good first step, but would like to see observers on menhaden boats to characterize and quantify the catch and bycatch as the pogie boats strip mine the schools, as well as some far more intense species management modeling which takes into account the whole ecosystem's need for menhaden and sets some catch levels which respect those interactions. (Agree? Take action here).


It all comes down to this: Humanity has had a significant impact on our marine ecosystems. A new map out of Stanford shows that over 40% of the world's oceans have been hammered by humans - whether it's fishing, coastal development, land-based pollution running into the oceans, shipping pollution or atmospheric deposition, the seemingly endless oceans are running out of untouched areas where the cogs and wheels are still running smoothly. Trawling, purse seines or longlines, the inherently unfair arms race we've engaged in with our fish friends (no arms on their side, just flippers) has hammered habitats and winnowed fish populations. The photo to the right, a google earth image from our friends at Skytruth shows the mud plumes of shrimp trawlers off the Louisiana coast, churning the benthic habitat and leaving an indelible mark visible from space.

It's time to get serious saving cogs.

Aaron Viles is the GRN's Campaign Director

SUSTAINABLE DIETS: SEAFOOD EXAMINED

There is a saying in the nutritional world: “Eat to live, don’t live to eat”. I am a native of Louisiana so this statement makes zero sense to me. Food is a huge part of our culture, from acquiring food through fishing to competitive cook-offs and guarding family recipes. Even though I am someone who lives to eat, I still worry about the environmental impact of my choices.

There are many good reasons to avoid cows, chickens, and pigs. The environmental impact of mass producing meat is far-reaching and the process is gross. It is also questionable on moral grounds; people are starving in the world. The calories in the grain used to feed farm animals could feed many more people than the meat does.

Furthermore, eating beef contributes to global warming. The UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization reported in 2006 that livestock is responsible for approximately 18% of global warming pollution. We have all heard the jokes but would it surprise you to know that most of the methane gas from cows is from their belches? Also contributing to the climate problem is the destruction of carbon sinks, e.g. forests, which are required for grazing.

But what about Fish? Eating fish is good for you, omega 3’s, healthy protein, and all that. But it has its drawbacks, of course. Carnivorous fish farming requires large amounts of wild fish for feed. Other farmed fish can have much higher levels of contamination than wild caught fish because of the contaminants that are added during the processing of the fish food. Many animals get caught up in fishing nets and must be tossed out, known as bycatch. It is estimated that 25% of the commercial seafood harvest is wasted bycatch.

Making the right choices can be tricky. Luckily, I recently visited the Monterey Bay Aquarium and noticed little pocket-sized cards that read “Seafood WATCH”. Since seafood was already on my mind, I picked one up and was delighted to find a gem’s worth of information to help me diet more sustainably.

The Aquarium’s guide recommends that you ask 3 questions when eating out or shopping:

1. Where is the seafood from?

2. Is it farmed or wild-caught?

3. How was it caught?

Choose seafood caught more locally to you. The US has better regulations on bycatch, habitat protection, and farming practices. Furthermore, the more local the seafood was caught the fresher it is likely to be. You are also doing your part to limit global warming by buying local and cutting transportation time for your food.

Wild caught fish are generally better than farmed as farming fish can be harmful to the local environment and the contamination in the fish tends to be higher. If you choose farmed fish, omnivorous fish (tilapia) are better than carnivorous fish and seafood (tuna, and salmon).

Dredging, gillnetting, and trawling are bad because they damage important habitat and increase the risk of bycatch. Harpooning, trolling, and hook and lining are environmentally responsible ways to fish. Check the Seafood Watch website for a specific list of “Best Choices” and “Good Alternatives” in the “Southeast Seafood Guide 2007”.

To help get you started on a sustainable seafood diet here is my family’s rabidly guarded seafood gumbo recipe. Enjoy!

The Roux: Equal parts peanut oil and flour (1 cup each), flat edged wooden spatula, cast iron skillet. Add oil and keep heat at slightly higher than medium heat. Sprinkle flour in slowly while stirring continuously. Be sure to scrape the bottom so the flour does not burn. Get the roux a very dark chocolate brown but not black! This can take up to 45 minutes. When the roux is the darkest possible add the green onions (1 cup chopped into ½ inch pieces), remove from heat, and stir vigorously adding a little green bell pepper (1/2 cup) and celery (1/4 cup) and as much yellow onion as will fit in your skillet. Roux will sizzle and it smells really good. Meanwhile, have a pot of water or fish stock at medium heat (a gallon) standing by. When the sizzling stops add roux and veggies to water and stir until dissolved. Add the rest of your vegetables (1/2 cup bells, yellow onion (2 cups), celery (1 cup). Add cayenne pepper, gumbo file, garlic, thyme, rosemary, oregano, and salt to taste. If this is your first time, use a pinch of each. You can always add more later if you want more spice. Bring to a boil. Turn down heat to a simmer and leave for about 45 minutes. Cook the rice. When the soup tastes right, bring back to a boil. Add the shrimp (1 lbLouisiana caught) wait 2-3 minutes. Add 1 lb cleaned Louisiana crawfish tails wait 2-3 minutes. Add 1 lb sustainable tilapia white fish wait 2-3 minutes. Add lastly add 1 lb gulf coast oysters cook and cook another 2 minutes. Make sure your seafood is properly cooked! Take off heat. Put a little bit of rice in a bowl and spoon out some gumbo on top. cleaned and peeled wild

Casey Roberts is the GRN's Special Projects Coordinator

PRAY FOR THE PREY: GRN STAFF SUMMER BOOK REVIEW
THE MOST IMPORTANT FISH IN THE SEA BY H. BRUCE FRANKLIN

The Gulf of Mexico as a region is frequently forced to deal with ecological catastrophes from which the rest of the country can learn. Cases in point would be Louisiana’s staggering coastal land loss, and the dead zone created by nutrient pollution from the Mississippi River. These massive problems point researchers to the lessons of excess nitrogen and phosphorus in marine ecosystems, and the important roles that natural sediment and fresh/saltwater regimes play in maintaining estuarine wetlands.

It’s a less frequent occurrence when those who manage our natural resources can look to other parts of the country and learn from their mistakes. In H. Bruce Franklin’s “The Most Important Fish in the Sea,” that’s exactly the opportunity that is presented, in the form of an exhaustive chronicle of a modest fish.

Following the boom-bust economic/ecological history of menhaden (or alewives, or moss-bunkers, or in the Gulf the fish known as pogies) up and down the Atlantic Coast, this book underscores again and again the role the fish play in a functioning ecosystem: as forage for predatory fish, birds, marine mammals and sharks; and as filter feeders, challenging even oysters in their ability to clean waters of excess nutrients and algae. That ecological role is underscored in the face of seemingly thoughtless commercial exploitation, first for fertilizer, then for oil, finally for a mix of feed for farm animals and aquaculture, oil for health supplements and some pet foods.

As the industry fished this species again and again to regional population collapses, driven by an ever-more efficient fleet of airplane-guided purse seines, people finally began to catch on to the impact. Few would complain about the absence of menhaden, as it’s a fish no one eats, but the absence of menhaden began to have impacts to other strands in the food web once anchored by this oily fish, and as striped bass began to show signs of stress due to lack of their primary forage, recreational fishermen in the Atlantic grew concerned. As this concern fueled political opposition to the fishery, states began to close their waters to this near-monopoly, and the industry turned toward the Gulf.

Now the second largest fishery by weight in the U.S., most menhaden are caught in Gulf waters. More precisely, due to net bans in Florida and Alabama, most menhaden are caught in Mississippi, Louisiana, and some Texas waters. With a processing plant in Empire, LA, Daybrook Fisheries is the smaller force in the industry, dwarfed by Omega Protein which owns processing plants in Moss Point, MS and Abbeville, and Cameron, LA. Despite the size of the harvest, and the efficiency of the fleet, there currently exist no annual catch limits for the Gulf menhaden fishery. Within the industry’s self appointed summer season, they catch what they can find.

Of course some of what they find within a menhaden school aren’t solely the prey, but sometimes the predator. In the very little amount of information the industry has ever allowed off the deck of a menhaden boat, researchers have reported shark bycatch as high as 148 blacktip and spinner sharks caught in a single purse seine set. In addition to sharks, fishermen have reported the disappearance of dolphins for weeks at a time after the menhaden fleet visits their waters.

In our region it’s not striped bass that recreational fisherman would be watching closely, but our popular spotted seatrout (specks) and red drum (redfish) both eat menhaden, which is why it is such an effective bait. As much as 95% of the spring redfish diet can consist of menhaden.

While our Gulf ecosystem struggles with vanishing wetlands and a seemingly endless dead zone, we may be wise to pay close attention to the troubling tale of menhaden over exploitation on the Atlantic Coast that Mr. Franklin’s book shares with us, and look at the role that menhaden play in those larger, more immediate concerns. What will happen to the estuarine-dependent menhaden schools as the coastal wetlands dissolve, and how can a robust, historic population of menhaden help mitigate the algae driven dead zone? While we don’t know the answer to these questions, it seems highly reasonable to being asking them more forcefully.

Aaron Viles is the GRN's Campaign Director

MERCURY + DREDGING + LNG = LOSE, LOSE, LOSE

The GRN is proud to be a network of local, regional and national conservation and community groups committed to protecting and restoring the resources of the Gulf Region for future generations.

This blog posting comes to you from Diane Wilson, the head of Calhoun County Resource Watch, who seeks to protect a quiet corner of the Texas Coast from polluters and politicos.

In May, 2007 Galveston District of the Corps of Engineers issued a Draft Environmental Impact Statement to evaluate the impact of the Calhoun County Navigation District’s widening and deepening of 27 miles of the Lavaca /Matagorda Bay Ship Channel, Port Lavaca, Texas

Our concern about the proposal arises primarily from the continued presence of mercury contamination in the sediments of Lavaca and Matagorda Bays. Sediments in Lavaca Bay were contaminated with mercury from past operations at Alcoa's Point Comfort, Texas facility. From l967 until l979 Alcoa operated a chlor-alkali processing unit at the plant and discharged wastewater containing mercury into Lavaca Bay.

Federal EPA documents state that Alcoa discharged 165,000 lbs of mercury or an average of 67 pounds per day into Lavaca Bay from l967 until 1970. However, internal and confidential Alcoa documents and transcripts from a 1994 court case in Washington between Alcoa and their insurers estimated l,223,755 pounds of mercury was released between l967 to l979 and that on a 5 day normal working period in the chlor-alkali unit, 1500 pounds of mercury was lost with flow charts showed mercury going to the bay.

In the early l970's, mercury levels in oysters in Lavaca Bay were significantly elevated and the Texas Department of Health closed parts of the bay to the harvesting of oysters. In 1988, the Department issued a closure order prohibiting the taking of finfish and crabs for consumption from a portion of Lavaca and Cox Bays, based on mercury levels found in these resources.

A Preliminary Public Health Assessment prepared by the Texas Department of Health stated in l995 that eating fish and crabs contaminated with mercury at the concentrations observed from the closure area of Lavaca Bay could affect the unborn fetus of pregnant women and, as such, classified the Lavaca Bay site an urgent public health hazard and a Mercury Superfund.

Although some clean-up of the mercury has occurred during the Superfund cleanup, there is still considerable controversy over how much mercury was left in the bay, especially given the conflicting mercury data, and the uncertainty of the health of the fishing community. Calhoun County fishermen, environmental activists, and concerned Calhoun County residents say the Mercury Superfund failed miserably in its attempt to address the health impacts of mercury on the mostly poor minority Vietnamese and Hispanic fishing communities. When local shrimpers asked the EPA about the number of cases of learning/physical disabilities among children in the county and if that number was greater than other counties, the Preliminary Public Health Assessment prepared by the Texas Department of Health stated: Unknown.

Dr. John Villanacci, in charge of Public Health Assessment at Texas Department of Health, said when the agency attempted to talk with the Vietnamese community about eating the contaminated seafood, they ran into a wall of silence. He suspected the people were afraid to admit consuming fish from the bay because they would also be admitting to breaking the law. That left nothing to investigate. No exposed population. No tests. A community health study was never performed on the fishing community.

Make no mistake about it. Mercury is a serious health threat. Methylmercury is a nonspecific toxin, meaning it can attack a variety of body systems. It often damages the central nervous system, resulting in consequences such as concentration difficulty, memory loss, and mood changes. Mercury can also cause birth defects. Recently, epidemiological and biochemical research studies have shown that mercury is directly linked to the development of autism spectrum disorders and is significantly toxic to the gastrointestinal, immunological, metabolic and neurobiological systems in children

The Calhoun County Navigation District's proposed deepening and widening of the ship channel will resuspend mercury contaminated sediments, potentially increasing the biological uptake of mercury by shellfish and fish in Lavaca and Matagorda Bays and in turn, increasing the risk of mercury contamination being transmitted to folks eating fish from Lavaca and Matagorda Bays . As it stands now (without more dredging and resuspension) the mercury contamination levels in fish from Lavaca and Matagorda Bays have been much higher than either the Texas coastal or national averages.

A second concern about the widening and deepening of the Matagorda Ship Channel arises from the mess that exists at the jetties where the Ship Channel enters the Gulf. When the ship channel was originally constructed, the depth through the jetties was about 45 feet. Over the years, the channel has scoured to the point that it is about 90 feet deep.

At the same time that the Matagorda Ship Channel has been eroding to an unprecedented depth, Pass Cavallo, the natural fish pass immediately south of the ship channel, has been silting in. Today, Pass Cavallo is barely navigable and the potential exists that it will silt-in entirely. The energy within the Matagorda Bay system necessary to keep Pass Cavallo open is being focused within the Matagorda Ship Channel, spelling the end for Pass Cavallo.

The loss of Pass Cavallo is a major concern for the fishery of Matagorda Bay. Many species such as brown and white shrimp, blue crabs and redfish (among others) spawn in the Gulf and migrate back into the bay as free-floating organisms. These larval life forms make this trip by settling to the bottom when the tide goes out and then releasing and riding the incoming tide into the bay, then dropping back to the bottom again. In this manner, organisms lacking their own mobility can ride the tide into the estuarine nursery.

The deep scour of the Matagorda Ship Channel through the jetties means that these organisms will have a more difficult time navigating into the bay, given the depth of the channel. Pass Cavallo has functioned over the years as the primary fish pass on the south end of the bay, yet it has been getting shallower and shallower, and will eventually cease to function.

A third problem (or fact of life) is that for all practical purposes, the ship channel dredging has been called to life because the Calhoun County Navigation District hopes to draw in the proposed Liquid Natural Gas Terminal which will be sited on land owned by the Navigation District. Additionally, two coal burning power plants are trying to get permitted, one by…. you guessed it… Calhoun County Navigation District and the other by Formosa Plastics. Not only will the fishermen have a resuspension of mercury in the bay sediments, they will also have a suspension of mercury in the air from the two coal burning power plants.

. .

The bottom line is that Matagorda Bay is the most heavily impacted of all of the bay systems of the Texas coast and the health of its people the most ignored. They both need serious oversight and protection, something that arguably is not being provided by our state and federal agencies. I would urge everyone to vote this project OUT.

Diane Wilson

Diane chronicled her work as an activist in her book, "An Unreasonable Woman: A True Story of Shrimpers, Politicos, Polluters, and the Fight for Seadrift, Texas."

GRN's Campaign Director Aaron Viles reviewed the book for Chemical & Engineering News in August of 2006.

FISHING FOR TROUBLE - MANAGING FISH AND FISHERMEN IN THE GULF

Since it's World Oceans Day today, what better occasion to celebrate a significant step towards sustainable fisheries management here in the Gulf - Our fisheries consultant Marianne Cufone weighs in on red snapper and the Gulf Council.

I’ve been watching and participating in fisheries management for well over 10 years, 8 of which have been right here in the Gulf of Mexico. Today, I’m thinking about what went on during this week at the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council meeting in New Orleans, LA. Yesterday, at long last, the Council, an advisory body to the National Marine Fisheries Service (the agency tasked with managing fish for the U.S.) finally recommended some REAL management for red snapper. The new rules include: reducing the total annual catch from 9.12 million pounds to 5.0, lowering the commercial size limit from 15 inches to 13, lowering the recreational bag limit from 4 fish per person to 2, setting a recreational fishing season, eliminating captains and crew members from taking the daily recreational bag limit of fish on for-hire boats (charter and head boats), and requiring the use of circle hooks, venting and de-hooking tools to reduce bycatch. Maybe this sounds like no big deal, but in actuality it was a historical occasion.

Why is the recommendation of some fish rules a major accomplishment? A few reasons - First, the Council is dominated by recreational and commercial fish interests, and government folks that often lean toward those interests (since they are from states where fishing is very popular). This means many of those that make money from catching fish are helping to recommend regulations for catching fish. Not surprisingly then, most times the development of regulations are super slow (if they are going to limit catch or access to fishing) and when rules are finally approved, they are often not as strict as the science indicates necessary. Why would people that make money from a resource vote to limit the amount they can take from it? Well, in this instance, because the law says so, - the primary federal law about fish says we have to conserve and manage fish for the benefit of the nation, and that there are certain levels that fish populations can’t fall under. If they do, managers are supposed to take action. Red snapper has been under that level since the late 1980’s… but this was overlooked for years.

Second, red snapper is a super popular seafood item, and thus also a favorite catch for both recreational anglers and commercial fishermen/women. The annual allowed catch is split 49% recreational - 51% commercial. Red snapper therefore, are big money in the form of getting a good price at the dock and also getting people to book charterboat trips to go catch them. Big $$ = big debate over limiting catch…and so there were lengthy arguments, challenges to science and serious manipulation of politicos and information for years and years. Nearly 20 years in fact…red snapper has been known to be severely depleted since about 1988.

Red snapper’s target recovery date (the time by which the population should be back to a healthy level) was originally the year 2000. Seven years ago. Then it got moved back to 2007 (yes, this year), then it was changed to 2019, then 2032, each time to allow continued overfishing of red snapper. Consequently, studies show red snapper down to 3% of its historical population. Yikes. Tofu anyone?

We got to such a depleted population because despite knowing red snapper were doing poorly and that lack of management likely meant red snapper would continue to decline or at least not rebuild, the Council and NMFS bent to political pressures and ignored the advice of scientists, setting catch levels too high and allowing too many fish to be caught and killed as bycatch. We came to a point where really severe management was necessary to avoid a total population collapse. The measures I mentioned above were approved by the Council and now await final NMFS approval to stop overfishing, reduce bycatch and help rebuild red snapper. Yippie – finally.

However, that is sadly not the end to this saga. Old habits die hard, and even as the new red snapper plan was being finalized, the Council added in an assumed 10% reduction in effort to catch red snapper attributed to hurricane impacts, despite a lack of credible science indicating this. This means the rules will assume we are already meeting some of the necessary reduction in catch…we’ll have to wait to see what that does to the final outcome. They also voted to allow an increase in bycatch of red snapper as the population (hopefully) rebuilds under the new plan.

Oh wait, there’s more...right after they voted to send the whole plan to NMFS for final approval, they started discussions about changing it! The Council now wants to look at the concept of regional specific catch limits (for example eastern verses western Gulf) to see if they can squeeze just a bit more out of the total catch limit in certain places, based on local red snapper abundance. So, if there are more red snapper found in the west verses in the east, then the west could get more quota.

Unbelievable...if you haven’t been part of the process for years. If you know this bunch, then its merely typical.

Adding to the hooplah of yesterday were colorful characters from various groups insisting that there were MORE (not less) red snapper out there than ever before…you could walk on red snapper across the Gulf from Texas to Florida practically, and no one can catch anything else (wait…does this mean ALL the other fish are depleted? That’s another issue for another day).

Others claimed that fish kissers (GRN, the Ocean Conservancy and other environmental groups) were weaving a story about red snapper being depleted and that the science indicating a problem with red snapper was simply a result of imagination. Funny, the judge didn’t see it that way in the lawsuit GRN and other groups recently won on the issue, forcing a red snapper management plan that had at least a 50% chance of success (do you believe this is the standard we use???) to be in place by December 31, 2007. It was such a clear case, we actually won on a summary judgment…no trial, no further consideration. Sadly, I think it took the litigation to motivate the final outcome of yesterday…but whatever. After all these years, it seems red snapper will finally be on the road to recovery.

Marianne Cufone is the GRNs Consultant on Fisheries Issues, based in Tampa Florida.

SWELL SHELL!

What great news! The Gumbo Alliance was finally victorious in our opposition to Shell's fish-killing, off-shore LNG terminal, Gulf Landing. Congrats and great work to all who made this possible - the sportsmen and concerned citizens who flooded Shell and Governor Blanco with faxes, phone calls and postcards; the funders who paid for the banner we towed over the Shell-sponsored Jazz Fest last year (Shell - Thanks for the music, don't kill our fish) and allowed Mike Lane and I to head to the Hague to take our concerns directly to Shell's CEO, President, Board and Shareholders; the fishermen who trailered their boats and circled Shell gas stations and head quarters in New Orleans, Houston and Pensacola; the agency scientists and concerned citizens who sorted through the various, often erroneous environmental impact statement appendices to really get a handle on what kind of fish impacts were at stake; the dogged concerned citizens who showed up at hearing after hearing to speak out in opposition to these projects; the Sierra Club and their canvassers who went door to door throughout New Orleans alerting the public; the Green Corps organizers who went where the fight was and joined us in the Gulf for a few crazy months; Walter Williams, who put Mr. Bill and his wit to work for the cause; the charter boat captains and commercial and recreational fishermen who packed the hearing in Baton Rouge and ensured some political leadership on this issue; the politicians who followed that public outcry; every founding and supporting member of the Gumbo Alliance; and finally, the student attorneys and their instructors who stood in there against the department of justice to challenge MARAD's flawed permit (and likely bought us the time we needed to win).

Whew. A lot of people put a lot of time and resources into this fight. It really shows what can be done when disparate interests put aside their disagreements to focus on a single issue and bring their passion and expertise to bear.

And whatever reasoning Shell uses to explain this decision, today is an important day for fish and the health of the Gulf. Thanks again for making it happen.


Aaron Viles is the GRN's Campaign Director

COURT FORCES RED SNAPPER INTO THE BLACK

It finally happened. We won recognition that stronger protections are needed for red snapper! After slogging through the lengthy and politically charged U.S. fishery management process for years (personally, for 8, and GRN has been involved since just after its establishment in 1994) trying to get fish managers to simply follow the law and make rules to help save red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico - this is really great news.

In a Summary Judgment ruling (for non legal types, this means that the law and facts were so clear on this it did not need a trial) released late afternoon on March 12th, a federal judge told the primary agency tasked with managing our U.S. fish, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), that they failed to follow the law in conserving and managing Gulf of Mexico red snapper and that a long term rebuilding plan needs to be done within the next 9 months!

Red snapper has been known to be severely depleted since the late 1980’s. Red snapper’s target recovery date (the time by which the population should be back to a healthy level) was originally the year 2000. Seven years ago. Then it got moved back to 2007 (yes, this year), then it was changed to 2019, then 2032. Now, who knows? We haven’t even started a real rebuilding plan! Consequently, studies show red snapper down to 3% of its historical population. Yikes. Tofu anyone?

Sadly, it took a lawsuit to stop the agency’s denial and political waffling and get us back on the road to recovery.

I’ve been asked “what exactly will this lawsuit do?” Primarily, it tells fish managers that they need to put into place rules that help rebuild depleted fish in a timely manner. Also, that bycatch - a fish that is caught unintentionally, while trying to catch something else, or one that is under the legal size or out of season and can not be kept – needs to be reduced, because large amounts of bycatch can cause a fish population to be depleted unnecessarily. Seems like common sense (oh and by the way it’s the law) but for some reason it simply did not get done for red snapper in nearly 20 years.

I look forward to seeing the final regulations now in 9 months time and can make peace at last with this issue. Yeah to all of us that worked so hard on this. I’m sure Gulf of Mexico red snapper are collectively grateful for the sincere and persistent efforts.

Marianne Cufone is the GRN's Fisheries Consultant, based in Tampa Florida.

HUGE MERCURY VICTORY: PIONEER GOES HG-FREE

In a move which will reduce Louisiana's mercury emissions by about 20%, Pioneer announced yesterday that they will switch their St. Gabriel chlorine plant to the industry standard, mercury-free process by 2008. This decision comes after a long-fought campaign by GRN, Oceana and other conservation groups urging the switch, and after a recent GRN action alert which generated close to 2,000 e-mails to Pioneer. Thanks to everyone who clicked for a mercury-free Gulf.

Aaron Viles is the GRN's Campaign Director

MERCURY RISING: WHY DOES PIONEER HATE FREEDOM?

I just hung up from a radio interview with Don Dubuc on New Orleans' WWL radio, discussing the problems with mercury pollution in Louisiana and the Gulf Coast. WWL is Louisiana's most powerful radio station, and the number one news channel in NOLA, so it was a fantastic opportunity to get the word out about our effort to pressure Pioneer to switch their chlorine plant outside Baton Rouge to a mercury-free technology, sparing our air (and eventually waters and fish and us) 1,500 lbs of mercury per year!

We had some great calls - one from Tracy Kuhns, the Louisiana Bayoukeeper, thanking us for urging alternatives to mercury pollution, and not simply scaring people off seafood, and another from a woman who swore that her microwave sparked when she heated up some tuna for her cat - and the tuna wasn't in the can! Could high mercury levels have caused that reaction that typically happens with metal in your microwave? Don and I couldn't really hazard a guess, but it was a crazy thought.

Louisiana and the Gulf Coast have an incredibly high concentration of fishermen - recreational, commercial, and subsistance - so the idea that we also have to put up with more sources of mercury pollution than other areas is absurd and dangerous. Whether it's the chlorine holdout Pioneer, the thousands of abandoned mercury menometers scattered throughout the state's gas fields, or the mercury in drilling muds dumped at offshore drilling rigs, they all need to be identified, cleaned up, or remediated in some way to finally end emissions into our environment and start bringing down levels in our fish. With one in six women of childbearing age estimated to have levels of mercury that put a developing child at risk of neurological disorders, there's really no time to waste.

Thankfully, the seafood Louisiana and the Gulf Coast are best known for, such as shrimp, oysters and crawfish, are all typically low in mercury pollution. Of course that's due more to their lifecycles than it is to a clean environment. Freshwater species like bass and catfish can all accumulate problematic levels, and marine fish like cobia (lemonfish), greater amberjack, king mackerel and blackfin tuna have all been identified as unsafe offshore.

But it's not just fish that develop dangerous mercury levels. Anything at the top of a food chain with a lot of fish links will be at risk. Here is an interesting story about a bald eagle that was found in Louisiana with such accute mercury poisoning that it couldn't fly! After six weeks of therapy from LSU veterinarians, it was able to be re-released into the wild, but of course, it will go back to it's normal diet, and could be in trouble again soon.

So there you go - this is a story about motherhood, our national symbol, and fishing - all wrapped up with one simple request: Pioneer must go mercury-free!

Aaron Viles is the GRN's Campaign Director

CHRISTMAS GIFT FOR FISH?

Last week was an active time for fish in the Gulf and all the marine waters of the U.S. While the fish probably didn't notice, fishing communities and conservation groups certainly did.

First, at 2am on Saturday morning, Congress approved a reauthorization of the Magnuson Stevens Act, our nation's preeminent law to rebuild depleted fish populations. The law was strengthened in a few areas: increasing the role of science in setting catch limits, and using stronger language to end the overexploitation of depleted stocks. On the whole it's an improvement over current law and if implemented effectively could help our nation's fisheries rebound.

Next, on Thursday, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA-Fisheries) released a proposed interim rule for Gulf red snapper, ratcheting down the catch limit from 9 million pounds to 6.5 million pounds and utilizing some other management tools to put the population on a rebuilding track. As our ED says in our press release, "These are long awaited, important first steps to take for rebuilding red snapper." Looooooooooong awaited - Gulf fisheries managers have known about these problems for some 20 years!

Of course, not everyone is happy about these changes. Charter boat operators in Alabama have been leading the charge to delay any changes in red snapper management, as they have apparently built their businesses around a 'meat trip' mentality that won't be satisfied with a 2 fish limit. No one wants to see businesses that are already struggling to come back from last year's devestating hurricane season further pinched, but if we don't take the necessary steps to rebuild this population, we'll end up with even more draconian measures being enforced. In the long run, we will see more fish in the Gulf, and more generous catch limits that will be worth more to recreational and commerical fishing economies.

Aaron Viles is the GRN's Campaign Director

'GLOBAL COLLAPSE' OF FISH SPECIES FEARED

Looks like it's not just the GRN and Alyssa Denny (see below) who are concerned about the long-term health of our fisheries. Check out this NYTimes article on a recent study that appeared in Science predicting a horrible, widespread collapse of our wild fisheries due to overexploitation and pollution.

While these warnings are more dire and specific than others, they are merely a continuation of the alerm bells sounded by the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy and the Pew Oceans Commission over the past few years. These two non-partisan panels populated by experts, relyed on research and outreach to our coastal communities working hands-on with our resources to get a lay of our oceans, and came up with strikingly similar outlooks and suggestions for action. The two commissions have continued their advocacy through the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative.

We need Gulf and Ocean leadership, and the Gulf Council and NOAA-Fisheries have shown themselves as not up to the task of ratcheting down the overexploitation of our fisheries, while the EPA and the states environmental agencies have been woefully inadequate in dealing with pollution and other challenges.

Bad math for the Gulf.

Aaron Viles is the GRN's Campaign Director

TAKING ACTION ON SNAPPER


Alyssa Denny, a GRN intern, is urging the Gulf Council, NMFS, and the Department of Commerce to go forward with the necessary steps it will take to rebuild the Gulf's red snapper stock. We couldn't agree with her more!

Today, her opinion is being voiced to thousands of Americans- check out her LTE in the Times-Picayune!

Action on snapper is overdue
Wednesday, November 01, 2006

Re: "Plan to cut red snapper quotas draws intense opposition," Page 1, Oct. 24.

I'm disappointed to see opposition to a management plan that is necessary in order to restore red snapper populations in the Gulf to sustainable levels.

Action on this issue is long overdue. Evidence of decline in adult populations was recorded as early as 1980. The year 1988 marked the first scientific assessment indicating that red snapper was severely overfished.

The assessment suggested that reductions in fish mortality rates as high as 70 percent would be necessary to rebuild red snapper stocks. It has been nearly 20 years since that report and the problem has not yet been properly managed.

I understand that the new regulations will affect the commercial and recreational fishing industries now, but it is in their best interest in the long term.

Complaints from recreational fishing industries are unwarranted. This restriction is limited to red snapper.

Fisherman can diversify their catch in order to come home with several different species in moderation instead of a full bag of red snapper.

Alyssa Denny

New Orleans

You can take action on this important issue too, just click here.

Dan Favre is the GRN Campaign Organizer.

You Wanna Eat Some Gulf Fish? Sure, They're Safe, But Not Safeguarded

I received a couple of phone calls from reporters last week, looking to check into the safety of fish caught off the Louisiana coast. Apparently, the idea of toxic New Orleans water being dumped into Lake Pontchartain to filter into the Gulf of Mexico was a Katrina image worth revisiting one year later. I'll admit, the image of the NOLA 'dewatering' process and the millions of gallons of nasty, fetid, toxic gumbo being pumped into the lake was a bit chilling, but hey, it's a big lake, and the water had to go somewhere. But the feds were pretty quick to start looking at the impacts on fisheries, and the test results have been uniformly positive. Check out the latest 'all clear' from NOAA right here.

Whew. But if the shrimp, oysters, redfish and speckled trout we're famous for are all free of nasty toxins and fecal colliform, should we rush to consume as much as possible in a sign of solidarity with the rebuilding fishermen? That's a trickier issue. There are a ton of issues to sort out when you're considering what fish you want to eat, what fisheries you want to support, and the health issues involved. I just read a well-thought-out opinion piece in the New York times on those concerns. Check it out here.

I know that the Central Gulf's recreational and commercial fishing infrastructure got hammered last year, and we need to help our fishermen rebuild in a smart, and sustainable way. That doesn't change the fact the our shrimp and red snapper fisheries were overcapitalized (way too many boats, chasing way too few fish). Given the ever increasing cost of fuel, the ever decreasing price of shrimp at the dock due to cheap farm-raised foreign imports, fewer and fewer shrimpers were making a decent living. A lot of folks, including the quasi-governmental federal advisory body, the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, agreed that the rebuilding plan coming out of of Katrina/Rita should take advantage of the opportunity to help shrimpers and others out of the industry if that's what they wanted, granting federal resources to buy back and retire shrimp permits and boats, to help shrimpers out from under crushing loans that would have forced them into bancrupcy or back into the water.

That move would have helped remaining shrimpers make more money, and help the ecosystems of the Gulf that are impacted by shrimp trawl bycatch. Shrimp trawls in the Gulf of Mexico are the single 'dirtiest' fishing gear in the country, catching four pounds of unintended fish for every pound of shrimp. That unintended bycatch gets thrown overboard, dead or dying. Tough on shrimpers backs, and tougher on species like red snapper, whose juveniles end up dying in big numbers.

Well, those initial instincts weren't met with much enthusiasm by the feds or vocal support from the shrimp industry associations, and at the last Gulf Council meeting the Gulf federal fisheries managers voted to halt the development of plans for action on red snapper rebuilding or shrimp fleet management - pointing to the hurricanes' impacts and a perception that an absence of heavy shrimping or charter boat activity would mean the red snapper (down to 3% of historic abundance in the Gulf, and experiencing on-going overexploitation that has kept the population from rebuilding) may be doing just fine, thank you very much.

Read the story about it in the NOLA Times-Pic right here. So, the inaction of the Council means the feds need to step in and set a more protective annual catch level for red snapper or be forced by the courts to do so (we've sued NOAA-Fisheries on the issue of continued red snapper overfishing, along with the Ocean Conservancy and the Coastal Conservation Association). On the whole, we completely disagree with the idea that one year of decreased shrimping and recreational and commercial fishing would put snapper back on track, and will be urging the Feds to set a proactive and conservative catch limit for next year's season.

Back to your shopping list. Does that mean avoid red snapper, and avoid shrimp? Maybe. Of course the irony is that right now the shrimp catch is really high for the boats able to get into the water and find a port and an icehouse, and their bycatch is probably a bit lower than normal due to the lack of competition and an ability to get into the deeper water for the larger shrimp. At the root of the problem, is that the fish managers who set the rules that commercial and recreational fishermen live by, ignore the clear mandates of the federal fisheries law, and exploit loopholes to allow continued overexploitation of our depleted fisheries.

We still have an opportunity to fix those loopholes and tighten up the law so that my kids and grand kids may still have a chance to experience the one ongoing reminder of our hunter-gatherer history. Tell Congress to fix or flush the Pombo-authored revision of the Magnuson Act, our key fisheries law - it's being decided right now.

Aaron Viles is the GRN's Campaign Director

Still Seeing Red Over Snapper

Past red snapper managment actions have failed to effectively estimate and limit bycatch and end overfishing, as evidenced by the recent stock assessment information: red snapper are now estimated to be at 3% of historical abundance.

The Reef Fish Committee of the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Committee) discussed potential management measures for the depleted red snapper stock on March 21, 2006 in Mobile, Alabama. Unfortunately, results were problematic.

First, the document that the Council was provided to review and discuss was different than the one that went out to public comment during the scoping process of amendment development. The National Marine Fisheries Service established a new process for creation of Gulf Council documents that is a cooperative effort between agency and Council staff. This new process, called the Interdisciplinary Planning Team (IPT) review has provided a more collaborative and cooperative approach to fisheries management and ultimately more streamlined and more complete Council products. However, it seems in an effort to streamline 27/14, the IPT actually re-wrote it, interjecting opinions and removing or editing options without Council members input. This is inappropriate. The law requires that the general public be allowed to participate in management of marine resources that we all share. Many people took the time to read and comment on 27/14 during the scoping process through written letters and also attendance at scoping hearings throughout the Gulf. It is important that the Council ensure the public process is not discounted by IPT efforts.

We are just coming out of the scoping phase of the process and therefore it is the time to be inclusive and open to new ideas and provide a reasonable range of management alternatives for discussion and review. The new 27/14 options paper did not fit with this. Rather, discussions argued for a certain management action rather than objectively evaluating all. The document randomly rejects reasonable options based on past actions and justifies inaction by touting uncertainty. This is problematic.

Also, it is a great disservice to the public and raises questions about NMFS control of the Council process that the scoping document as presented during scoping hearings was not reviewed, discussed and acted on during a public Council meeting by the Council.

Additionally, the document provided to the Council by the IPT was drastically whittled down to minimal management actions during the Committee meeting. NMFS and the Council admits that the driving force behind the development schedule for 27/14 is the need to establish a new total allowable catch (TAC) for 2007 before a new program for individual fishing quotas (IFQs) is implemented next red snapper season. This is reasonable in that knowing what amount of fish there is to be allocated through individual shares (or individual quotas...thus IFQ) should be established before the IFQ program is created. However, the need for a new TAC should not overshadow the need for a comprehensive long term red snapper plan with short term and future rebuilding goals. Rushing through and creating a lengthy yet largely meaningless document again is time consuming and ineffective. There are so many important items waiting for Council attention that a more strategic approach on red snapper should be followed. A better plan would be for a new red snapper TAC be set through an interim or framework process and a full red snapper plan with options to effectively address overfishing, bycatch reduction, standardized reporting, data collection and other legal requirements be developed in conjunction with or following the TAC that includes a reasonable range of management alternatives.

Specifically, management actions excluded from the document were: seasonal-area closures, bycatch quotas, mandatory use of circle hooks and other bycatch rehabilitation tools (e.g. venting), identifying approved gear for red snapper catch (hook and line and spearguns) and limiting the number of hooks per line. Items left to address bycatch reduction are reducing or eliminating commercial and recreational size limits and changing BRD criteria. The BRD criteria might be moved to a separate framework action to move it faster than 27/14.

Management actions that GRN recommended and are not included are: mandatory recreational catch and bycatch reporting or federal recreational licenses, subtraction of quota overages from the next year’s allocation, consistent seasons for recreational and commercial sectors and consistent seasons for species caught as bycatch of one another (like vermilion snapper and red snapper).

The current 27/14 is again not adequate to fully address required management for red snapper to prevent overfishing and rebuild the stock in the Gulf of Mexico.

Marianne Cufone is GRN's Fisheries Consultant