Concerns & Goals

For comprehensive discussion of the issues below, as well as anecdotal/scientific evidence, Click here then scroll down

Addressing Inshore Resource Depletion
A seasonal purse seine only area should be established in Area 1A by prohibiting the use of midwater trawl gear annually from June 1 through September 30. This temporal “buffer zone” is critical in order to prevent localized resource depletion of herring and to provide adequate forage for recovering groundfish stocks, large pelagics such as bluefin tuna, and several species of sea birds, mammals and sharks. Herring midwater trawlers would still be allowed to fish in offshore areas during the summer months.

Single and pair midwater trawling by vessels measuring up to 150’ in length, with the capability of holding 1,000,000 of fish per trip, introduce boats that are too efficient and too powerful to be used in coastal waters. The fishing pattern employed by these midwater vessels aims at targeting relatively small fishing grounds with repetitive, overlapping tows until the local supply of herring is exhausted and catch rate is dismal. Forward looking sonar allows the midwater vessels to target the remnants of schools scattered by previous trawl efforts. This fishing pattern is not compatible with other management objectives put forth by the Council to rebuild valuable groundfish resources such as Atlantic cod.

Herring Amendment 1 was developed by the New England Council over a number of years and after numerous meetings and multiple public comment periods. Those affected by the herring midwater trawl fishery off New England came out in force and had a real say in the outcome. In February of 2006, in Portland, Maine, the Council voted 13-2 in favor of Alternative 7 which was the alternative CHOIR and others supported; included in this alternative was an inshore buffer zone (Purse seine/fixed gear only zone), keeping midwater trawlers out of Area 1A in the crucial summer months.

The amendment was then given to NMFS who would have the final say in what the rule would look like. After months of going through the Council’s version, NMFS published a Proposed Rule(PR), which included all but one of the measures within the Council’s final version. After another public comment period in which the public truley made it’s voice heard, the NMFS published the Final Rule(FR)in early March of 2007; as with the PR, the FR included, among other things, an inshore buffer zone in the Gulf of Maine.

This tremendous victory has reinvigorated countless fishermen and others who eagerly await a summer free of midwater and pair trawling in the Gulf of Maine.

The Costs of Buffer Zones
Establishing a buffer zone imparts a minimal, one-time expenditure for those midwater and pair trawlers in the herring fleet that opt to return to more ecosystem-friendly purse seine gear. Purse seine gear possesses the ability to release herring as well as inadvertently captured bycatch back into the ocean alive. Furthermore, purse seine gear targets only a portion of an assemblage of herring. Success of the gear is shown in its ability to supply an ample amount of herring to support the baiting needs of the lobster industry of New England.

Another reason purse seiner gear is optimal is that, unlike midwater trawling, there are natural limits on fishing effort. A purse seiner is limited by factors such as time of day (always fish at night when herring come off the bottom), the tide, the weather and the behavior of the fish. Midwater and pair trawlers are not limited by any of these factors and are able to fish around the clock in any weather that the inshore Gulf of Maine can throw at them. This aspect of purse seining makes it far more sustainable and much better for the herring and all that rely on it.

Buffer Zones South of the Gulf of Maine
The CHOIR Coalition previously submitted a plan to the Council that would have created coastal buffer zones in which midwater trawling would not have been allowed close to shore. That proposal was later labeled considered but rejected. The CHOIR Coalition still believes the proposal makes sense and will minimize gear conflicts and promote safety at sea.

Bycatch Caps & Observer Coverage
The Council should ensure that there will be a cap on the amount of haddock that will be caught as bycatch by the midwater herring fleet. In addition, the Council should put in place bycatch caps to control the bycatch mortality of the midwater trawl fleet on other important target species, such as cod, dogfish, striped bass, tuna, and marine mammals. Bycatch caps are essential to ensuring the groundfish community that the small haddock that represent the future of the fishery are not wastefully discarded.

We believe that observer coverage should be maximized on the midwater fleet because of their immense capacity to incur large amounts of bycatch. The gear is extremely efficient, catching everything in its path, and while captains may make every effort to avoid it, they are capable of extreme bycatch events. Our groundfish resources are too fragile and important to allow the midwater trawl fleet to operate without the scrutiny and security of a strong and adequate observer program.

For discussion of bycatch in the trawl fleet, as well as evidence, Click here Then scroll down to Section 5 at the bottom of the page.

Click the following link to learn more about observer coverage on comparable vessels in the Pacific, where 100% observer coverage is the minimum. The fleet off New England has, on average, less than 3% coverage.

Pacific Observer Requirements

Whiting-silver hake-bycatch dumped by midwater trawler

Midwater Trawling and Tuna
Localized herring resource depletion has had a profoundly negative impact on fisheries for giant bluefin tuna in the Gulf of Maine, including a dramatic drop in the quality and fat content of fish caught during the months of August and September. A study by the University of New Hampshire Large Pelagic Lab examined nearly 4,000 tuna product gradings that have occurred since the transition of the herring fishery from purse seine to midwater gear. Results documented that poor quality bluefin increased from 9% of the fish in 1991 to 76% of fish in 2004. In the absence of herring on tuna fishing grounds, tuna must expend more energy to find a lower abundance of prey, producing a net loss of energy that manifests as poor fat content and subsequently lower values on the domestic and international sashimi markets.

Bluefin Tuna Not As Healthy As Before…

The tuna fishery has been devastated by herring midwater trawlers and pair trawlers that have decimated all of the historic feeding grounds that were able to attract and hold tuna from June through October. Since miwater and pair trawlers showed up, the traditional tuna fishery has declined each year. At the same time, just across the border, parts of Canada have been seeing more tuna than ever. The tuna have been driven out of US waters and into Canadian waters, where midwater trawling is not allowed. This is only natural as these fish can swim hundreds of miles in a day or two and will not hesitate to move from the Gulf of Maine into Canadian waters in order to find the food they need.

Midwater trawling has displaced the bluefin and the creation of inshore buffer zones free of midwater trawling is essential if this important bluefin fishery will regain its strength.

Reporting of catch

The reporting system in place in the herring fishery is inadequate. The system relies on estimates of catch and not actual weighing. Any system based on estimates is likely going to be inaccurate; and, with such a high volume fishery, miscalculations can mean massive overages.

CHOIR feels that a weighmaster system should be put in place so that the landings can be properly accounted for. This weighmaster would observe any offloading and would allow for a more accurate reporting system that would in turn give managers the ability to manage the fishery properly.

Jump to:
Home
Gallery
Research
Media
Management
About Us
Contact

Last updated: June 1, 2007