twinwinds
Active Member
OSU is not GOD!
Tribes take issue with hatchery fish study
Sunday, June 28 | 1:00 a.m.
BY PHIL RIGDON
Tribal hatchery programs are restoring and rebuilding salmon runs throughout the Columbia Basin above Bonneville Dam, contrary to a recent study of summer steelhead that spawn in the West Fork of Hood River purporting to show damage to the fitness of wild runs.
The Oregon State University study concluded that adult fish that are offspring of matings between hatchery-reared summer steelhead and wild summers have a lower reproductive rate than offspring of wild fish. The study implies the presence of a genetic "poison pill" that arises in hatchery-reared fish and is passed to succeeding generations, including those reproducing in the wild.
The Columbia River Treaty Tribes believe that careful scientific investigations always have a place in natural resources management, but we know from experience that some can mislead. In the OSU study, "The scientific data presented in this study are insufficient to reach broad conclusions regarding the reproductive success of hatchery-reared fish," said Dr. Shawn Narum, a geneticist at the Hagerman Fish Culture Experiment Station, a joint project of the University of Idaho and the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission. In view of major implications such studies have for fishery policies, the region must be sure of its science before embarking on wholesale policy reform.
The Columbia River Treaty Tribes are gathering empirical evidence that hatchery-reared fish play an effective, if not essential, role in restoring salmon populations. Tribal programs in Oregon, Washington and Idaho utilize hatcheries with habitat improvements as the primary means of restoring wild salmon populations in tributaries throughout the Columbia Basin.
Supplementation of native populations with hatchery-reared salmon to increase natural spawning is a cornerstone to the tribes' efforts. In the Yakima River during the 1980s and 1990s, spring chinook numbered around 2,000 fish. After the Yakama Nation began its supplementation program, this run peaked in 2001 at 21,000 fish. Since then, more than 5,000 spring chinook return yearly as a result of the Yakama program.
Successes like this are repeated throughout the Columbia Basin. The Umatilla Tribes have been supplementing spring chinook in the Umatilla River. After a 70-year absence, the Umatilla River once again supports both sports and tribal fisheries. The Nez Perce Tribe succeeded in returning adult coho to the Clearwater River after these fish were extirpated by Snake River dams and overharvested below Bonneville Dam.
Precious resources
Where spring chinook were eliminated by the Powerdale Dam on the Hood River, the Warm Springs Tribes have reintroduced this prized salmon species and will perform the same study on their supplementation program as done by the OSU researchers to determine whether OSU conclusions hold true for other species and rearing methods.
The most successful supplementation program in the basin, begun in 1963 at Hanford Reach, provides fisheries from the Columbia along the Washington coast to Canada and Alaska.
Few things are more important to Native people than natural resources that have sustained them for countless generations. Few of these resources are more precious to the tribes than salmon that, in our belief, was the first to stand before the Creator and offer itself as food for Indian people. That is why our forefathers took care to ensure that our right to fish was secured in treaties with the United States, wherein we ceded large tracts of what are now the states of Washington, Oregon and Idaho in exchange for a promise by the United States to secure our rights to fish at all usual fishing places.
The Columbia River tribes have an abiding interest in using hatcheries to rebuild our salmon runs. In 1982, member tribes of the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission first advocated hatcheries and habitat improvements, with reforms in hydro operations and harvest coordination to preserve and enhance wild salmon populations. Now these efforts are bearing fruit.
We do not wish to see these efforts derailed by premature conclusions from one study of one segment of one small population in one tributary of a tributary of the Columbia River. The tribes are carefully studying salmon programs that they implement, and we are committed to prudent stewardship.
Phil Rigdon of Toppenish is director of the Yakama Nation Department of Natural Resources.
******************
USA Pacific North West
NEW QUOTA SYSTEM CALLED AN ELABORATE THEFT OF PUBLIC FISHERY RESOURCES: Far from the coast and the affected communities, the Pacific Fishery Management Council last Thursday in Spokane approved its groundfish “catch share†plan (Amendment 20) for the west coast trawl fleet. The plan allocates most of the available west coast groundfish stocks to a fleet of 120 or fewer trawl vessel owners.
The individual allocations will be determined based on the catch history of the permit trawl vessel or vessels. The actual amount of quota given out to the trawl vessel owners is expected to be considerably higher than the amount of their catch history since it includes the quota of trawlers retired from the fishery from a 2004 buy-back program (see following story) and the TAC (total allowable catch) for many groundfish stocks are expected to increase as species rebuild. This is a real bonanza for current trawl permit owners, but a potential big bust for other traditional groundfish fishermen and coastal communities.
Under Amendment 20, quota holders will be available to consolidate operations, which could result in fewer than 40 vessels coastwide fishing the overall groundfish quota and far fewer trawlers if some of those vessels opt for longline or hook-and-line fishing. Traditional hook-and-liners, however, if they seek to purchase any of that quota being given the trawlers, could only use that quota on a vessel with a trawl permit. Thus, the qualifying trawl vessel owners get a double shot at the prize – they are awarded valuable quota that thhey can then sell or lease and, second, that quota can only be taken on a vessel owned or purchased from an existing quota holder.
Under the PFMCs trawl groundfish scheme, many coastal communities will find themselves without access to fish off their own shores if the expected massive consolidation of vessels occurs. In 1976 and before, fishermen off the coast watched foreign trawlers scoop up groundfish and other species 12 miles offshore and take the fish back to Russia, Japan, Korea, wherever. Now, those same fishermen and communities could again be watching helplessly from the shore as trawlers from another port, such as Coos Bay, scoop up the groundfish outside of 3 miles offshore, taking them back for processing in a far distant port.
Zeke Grader, Executive Director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations (PCFFA), called the plan “a massive give-away of public trust fisheries resources under the guise of conservation.†He warned that “this ‘catch share’ program threatens smaller fishing communitie™ access to the resources they depend on while providing no additional conservation benefits.â€
Unlike the catch share program being proposed for New England, the PFMC scheme does not allocate between gear or geographic sectors. The allocation between gear sectors was done through Amendment 21, approved earlier this year, where the historic (not simply 2-year history) of the open access and fixed gear permitted fishery was largely ignored when the lion’s share of the resource was handed over to the trawl fleet. Many of the 80-odd species that make up the groundfish complex can only be harvested by trawl, but more than a half dozen, such as sablefish and lingcod, can and historically have been taken by hook-and-line fisheries. The hook-and-line fish are of a higher quality and thus bring a higher price. Those fisheries also have far less bycatch than larger trawlers.
Individual fishing quotas (IFQs) -- now called “catch shares -- were initially proposed by free-market economic idealogues and pushed strongly by the Bush Administration. The Obama Administration has opted to continue this policy, creating a task force to develop recommendations on implementing these programs into American fisheries. Catch shares divide the available catch of an individual species into shares awarded to those in the fishery based on past participation and other criteria. Shareholders are free to buy and sell shares from others awarded quota. This then becomes a right to a percentage of each year’s catch, based on the shares held by an individual.
PCFFA has voiced strong opposition to unfettered catch share programs. These programs often lead to massive consolidation, large corporate take-overs of what were once family-owned fishing businesses, and non-fishermen ownership of quota shares -- effectively turning fishing men and women into “seafaring sharecroppers. Grader noted that if catch share programs are to be implemented that “they need to be tightly regulated with requirements that holders of quota share participate in the fishery and are limited from acquiring an excessive share of quota.â€
Grader also noted that the Councils catch share program is sloppily designed. There are currently no requirements that quota holders participate in the fishery. The Council failed on three separate occasions to hold back quota for smaller fishing communities to access. Without these holdbacks smaller fishing communities will lose access to their own traditional fishing grounds. Additionally, according to the Council’s own analysis, the high accumulation limits they approved could lead to a situation where less than 40 boats own 90% of the groundfish in U.S. waters from the Mexican border to Canadian border.
Make no mistake, this poorly crafted program will significantly alter the character of the entire West Coast fishing industry, said Larry Collins, a San Francisco commercial fisherman and Vice-President of the PCFFA. “Smaller operators and ports will be gone, replaced by fewer and ever larger trawl vessels towing larger nets that will be concentrated in a few ports in the Northwest.â€
The trawl catch shares program has been sold as a way to promote conservation; however, the plan that the Council adopted provides no additional conservations benefits. In fact, the program may actually thwart efforts to develop a more conservation oriented fishery on the West Coast. “If this plan is supposed to be about conservation, why was no analysis done to examine whether allocating more fish to sectors that are known to fish cleaner?†, asked Larry Collins, “This isn't about conservation, this is an outright theft of public trust resources." “We urge Dr. Lubchenco and others at NOAA to reconsider this poorly designed plan,†said Larry Collins, “It has no protections for fishing communities and does not add any additional conservation benefits to the fishery. The NOAA catch share task force needs to develop strong national standards, such as owner-on-board requirements, in order to prevent regional Councils from developing plans like this.â€
For more information see www.pcouncil.org/decisions/0609decisions.pdf. For more information about the NOAA Catch Share Task Force see www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20090623_catchshare.html and www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/domes_fish/catchshare/index.htm.
*************************
PACIFIC COAST GROUNDFISH BUYBACK PROGRAM STRUGGLES WITH REPAYMENT: PCFFA has received a memo on the status of the Pacific Coast Groundfish Buyback Program. On 1 March 2004, NMFS dispersed $35,662,471 to fishermen who agreed to surrender fishing privileges in exchange for cash payments under the program. The program was designed to reduce fleet capacity and targeted the following fisheries: Groundfish, CA Dungeness Crab, OR Dungeness Crab, WA Dungeness Crab, CA Pink Shrimp, OR Pink Shrimp, and WA Pink Shrimp.
The funds for the buy-back program were to be repaid through landing fees from the remaining fishermen in each fishery as a 30-year federal loan. Interest on the loans began accruing immediately. There was no fee collection by NMFS, however, until 18 months later, in September 2005. The gap between loan dispersal and repayment occurred because the buyback was required to begin implementation within 90 days of becoming public law, and at that time no fee collection system had yet been designed or codified.
Once fee collection did begin on 8 September 2005, payments were applied to the accrued interest on each sub-loan. The CA crab, OR crab, WA crab, OR shrimp, and WA shrimp sub-loans have, as of March 2009, all repaid the accrued interest through fee collection and are now paying off the principal balance. The CA Pink Shrimp fishery saw low landings in the years since the buy-back, and so while it has made some payments it has neither paid off the accrued interest nor touched the principle. Accrued interest on the Groundfish sub-loan has been reduced by $340,000 through landings revenue.
NMFS does not have the authority to reduce the interest rate or forgive the accrued interest on this loan. If there is an unpaid balance after the 30 years, repayment on the loan will continue.
*****************************
15:18/03. LUBCHENCO ASSEMBLES CATCH SHARE TASK FORCE: In an effort to successfully implement the new fishery management strategy now known as catch shares, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Administrator Jane Lubchenco has formed a Catch Share Task Force. The newly formed task force is headed up by senior advisor to the NOAA Administrator Monica Medina and includes 16 NOAA advisers and fisheries experts. Director of policy for NOAAs Fishery Service Dr. Mark Holliday will serve as the Executive Director. The remainder of the group is comprised of representatives from 7 of the 8 different regional fishery management councils and current NOAA staff.
The Catch Share Task Force will provide guidance for fishery management councils, such as the freshly converted New England Fishery Management Council, as they adopt catch share programs. Catch shares divvy up the fishery resource to individual fishermen, community or fishery organizations. These catch shares entitle each share holder to a certain percentage of the Total Allowable Catch (TAC), which is the annual catch limit set for each fish stock. The task force will develop updated NOAA policy on catch shares, provide technical and administrative support to councils that adopt catch share programs, involve local fishermen in the regional catch share fishery design, promote environmental and economic performance, consider organizational changes to NOAA to adapt to new catch share systems, provide advice to the Under-secretary, and solidify milestones by which progress may be measured.
For a 23 June 2009 press release from NOAA, go to www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20090623_catchshare.html. For a 24 June 2009 article from Scientific American, go to www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=cap-trade-fisheries-catch-share . For a 25 June 2009 article from the Gloucester Daily Times, go to www.gloucestertimes.com/punews/local_story_175230003.html.
**************************
15:18/05. VITAMIN D AND FISH OIL WILL BE PUT TO THE TEST IN A LARGE US STUDY: Cancer, heart disease, and stroke are in the crosshairs of a new government study that will test the effectiveness of vitamin D and fish oil in the prevention of these major health threats. This will be the first major nutrition study to target a specific racial group -- African Americans will be a large focus of the study and will comprise 50,000 of the 100,000 participants. Dr. Joann Mason and Dr. Julie Buring will co-lead the study at the Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston.
The National Cancer Institute, the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute and other federal agencies will provide $20 million dollars to fund the five year study. Pharmavite LLC of California will provide researchers with the daily 2,000 international unit supplement of cholecalciferol or vitamin D. Ocean Nutrition Canada Ltd. of Dartmouth, Nova Scotia will provide the daily one gram doses of fish oil. Doctors will select 20,000 healthy older people to take part in the study. Men over 60 and women at least 65 years of age with no previous history of cancer or cardiovascular disease will be randomly assigned to one of four groups. One group will be given fish oil and vitamin D, one will be given fish oil and a placebo, another will be given vitamin D and a placebo, and the fourth will only be given placebos. Participant health will be monitored via medical records, questionnaires, and occasional in-person exams.
The study is placing special focus on African Americans due to their abnormally high rates of heart disease, stroke, and cancer. Their higher level of pigmentation means that blacks are not able to produce as much vitamin D as lighter skinned races. This physiological difference can lead to vitamin D deficiencies in some African Americans. Some studies have suggested that reduced blood levels of vitamin D may foreshadow cancer. “If something as simple as taking a vitamin D pill could help lower these risks and eliminate these health disparities, that would be extraordinarily exciting,†said Dr. Manson.
Vitamin D and the omega-3 fatty acids found in fish oil “have powerful anti-inflammatory effects that may be key factors in preventing many diseases. They may also work through other pathways that influence cancer and cardiovascular risk,†said Dr. Manson.
Despite suggested health benefits, consumers should remain cautious when it comes to self-prescribing large quantities of dietary supplements. Many supplements, such as folic acid and selenium, which were thought to lower health risks, were later proven by scientific studies to be ineffective or even harmful. Researchers’ hope that beneficial results begin to appear long before the end of the 5 year study and that these benefits are not just limited to heart disease, stroke, and cancer. Any additional affects on conditions such as memory loss, depression, diabetes, and osteoporosis will also be documented by the study.
For a 22 June 2009 article from the Associated Press, go to www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jx5XHOadtSttZg8wOgO_sE5IxSPwD98VSLJG0 . For a 23 June 2009 article from the Boston Globe, go to www.boston.com/news/local/massachus...study_to_test_vitamin_d_fish_oil_supplements/ .
15:18/06. SALMON DISASTER RELIEF DISTRIBUTED: Salmon fishermen and related businesses who were left without income after the 2009 commercial salmon season was cancelled for the second season in a row have now been sent 2009 disaster relief checks. “All the checks went out on June 19,†said David Goldenberg, of the California Salmon Council. “We utilized all of the remaining funds.â€
According to Goldenberg, the 2009 fishery disaster was classified as an “extension†of the 2008 disaster, so all the 2009 relief money was in fact leftover from 2008, the remainder set aside specifically in anticipation of a second closed season. California recipients got a prorated 63 percent of the funds that were distributed in 2008. Oregon applicants received less -- about 42 percent -- because Oregon had spent more of its original 2008 allocation. Oregon did, however, receive Washington’s share of the aid; Washington residents did not qualify for additional aid in 2009, as the commercial salmon fishery is open north of Cape Falcon. Since the 2009 collapse is designated as an extension of the 2008 disaster, only those who received aid in 2008 could qualify for aid this year. The Pacific States Marine Fisheries Council asks that those who are expecting a disaster relief check contact them on 6 July if the check has not yet arrived.
For answers to some frequently asked questions regarding the 2009 salmon disaster relief fund, visit http://www.psmfc.org/files/2009_sacramento_river_salmon_federal_fishery_disaster.pdf .
Tribes take issue with hatchery fish study
Sunday, June 28 | 1:00 a.m.
BY PHIL RIGDON
Tribal hatchery programs are restoring and rebuilding salmon runs throughout the Columbia Basin above Bonneville Dam, contrary to a recent study of summer steelhead that spawn in the West Fork of Hood River purporting to show damage to the fitness of wild runs.
The Oregon State University study concluded that adult fish that are offspring of matings between hatchery-reared summer steelhead and wild summers have a lower reproductive rate than offspring of wild fish. The study implies the presence of a genetic "poison pill" that arises in hatchery-reared fish and is passed to succeeding generations, including those reproducing in the wild.
The Columbia River Treaty Tribes believe that careful scientific investigations always have a place in natural resources management, but we know from experience that some can mislead. In the OSU study, "The scientific data presented in this study are insufficient to reach broad conclusions regarding the reproductive success of hatchery-reared fish," said Dr. Shawn Narum, a geneticist at the Hagerman Fish Culture Experiment Station, a joint project of the University of Idaho and the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission. In view of major implications such studies have for fishery policies, the region must be sure of its science before embarking on wholesale policy reform.
The Columbia River Treaty Tribes are gathering empirical evidence that hatchery-reared fish play an effective, if not essential, role in restoring salmon populations. Tribal programs in Oregon, Washington and Idaho utilize hatcheries with habitat improvements as the primary means of restoring wild salmon populations in tributaries throughout the Columbia Basin.
Supplementation of native populations with hatchery-reared salmon to increase natural spawning is a cornerstone to the tribes' efforts. In the Yakima River during the 1980s and 1990s, spring chinook numbered around 2,000 fish. After the Yakama Nation began its supplementation program, this run peaked in 2001 at 21,000 fish. Since then, more than 5,000 spring chinook return yearly as a result of the Yakama program.
Successes like this are repeated throughout the Columbia Basin. The Umatilla Tribes have been supplementing spring chinook in the Umatilla River. After a 70-year absence, the Umatilla River once again supports both sports and tribal fisheries. The Nez Perce Tribe succeeded in returning adult coho to the Clearwater River after these fish were extirpated by Snake River dams and overharvested below Bonneville Dam.
Precious resources
Where spring chinook were eliminated by the Powerdale Dam on the Hood River, the Warm Springs Tribes have reintroduced this prized salmon species and will perform the same study on their supplementation program as done by the OSU researchers to determine whether OSU conclusions hold true for other species and rearing methods.
The most successful supplementation program in the basin, begun in 1963 at Hanford Reach, provides fisheries from the Columbia along the Washington coast to Canada and Alaska.
Few things are more important to Native people than natural resources that have sustained them for countless generations. Few of these resources are more precious to the tribes than salmon that, in our belief, was the first to stand before the Creator and offer itself as food for Indian people. That is why our forefathers took care to ensure that our right to fish was secured in treaties with the United States, wherein we ceded large tracts of what are now the states of Washington, Oregon and Idaho in exchange for a promise by the United States to secure our rights to fish at all usual fishing places.
The Columbia River tribes have an abiding interest in using hatcheries to rebuild our salmon runs. In 1982, member tribes of the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission first advocated hatcheries and habitat improvements, with reforms in hydro operations and harvest coordination to preserve and enhance wild salmon populations. Now these efforts are bearing fruit.
We do not wish to see these efforts derailed by premature conclusions from one study of one segment of one small population in one tributary of a tributary of the Columbia River. The tribes are carefully studying salmon programs that they implement, and we are committed to prudent stewardship.
Phil Rigdon of Toppenish is director of the Yakama Nation Department of Natural Resources.
******************
USA Pacific North West
NEW QUOTA SYSTEM CALLED AN ELABORATE THEFT OF PUBLIC FISHERY RESOURCES: Far from the coast and the affected communities, the Pacific Fishery Management Council last Thursday in Spokane approved its groundfish “catch share†plan (Amendment 20) for the west coast trawl fleet. The plan allocates most of the available west coast groundfish stocks to a fleet of 120 or fewer trawl vessel owners.
The individual allocations will be determined based on the catch history of the permit trawl vessel or vessels. The actual amount of quota given out to the trawl vessel owners is expected to be considerably higher than the amount of their catch history since it includes the quota of trawlers retired from the fishery from a 2004 buy-back program (see following story) and the TAC (total allowable catch) for many groundfish stocks are expected to increase as species rebuild. This is a real bonanza for current trawl permit owners, but a potential big bust for other traditional groundfish fishermen and coastal communities.
Under Amendment 20, quota holders will be available to consolidate operations, which could result in fewer than 40 vessels coastwide fishing the overall groundfish quota and far fewer trawlers if some of those vessels opt for longline or hook-and-line fishing. Traditional hook-and-liners, however, if they seek to purchase any of that quota being given the trawlers, could only use that quota on a vessel with a trawl permit. Thus, the qualifying trawl vessel owners get a double shot at the prize – they are awarded valuable quota that thhey can then sell or lease and, second, that quota can only be taken on a vessel owned or purchased from an existing quota holder.
Under the PFMCs trawl groundfish scheme, many coastal communities will find themselves without access to fish off their own shores if the expected massive consolidation of vessels occurs. In 1976 and before, fishermen off the coast watched foreign trawlers scoop up groundfish and other species 12 miles offshore and take the fish back to Russia, Japan, Korea, wherever. Now, those same fishermen and communities could again be watching helplessly from the shore as trawlers from another port, such as Coos Bay, scoop up the groundfish outside of 3 miles offshore, taking them back for processing in a far distant port.
Zeke Grader, Executive Director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations (PCFFA), called the plan “a massive give-away of public trust fisheries resources under the guise of conservation.†He warned that “this ‘catch share’ program threatens smaller fishing communitie™ access to the resources they depend on while providing no additional conservation benefits.â€
Unlike the catch share program being proposed for New England, the PFMC scheme does not allocate between gear or geographic sectors. The allocation between gear sectors was done through Amendment 21, approved earlier this year, where the historic (not simply 2-year history) of the open access and fixed gear permitted fishery was largely ignored when the lion’s share of the resource was handed over to the trawl fleet. Many of the 80-odd species that make up the groundfish complex can only be harvested by trawl, but more than a half dozen, such as sablefish and lingcod, can and historically have been taken by hook-and-line fisheries. The hook-and-line fish are of a higher quality and thus bring a higher price. Those fisheries also have far less bycatch than larger trawlers.
Individual fishing quotas (IFQs) -- now called “catch shares -- were initially proposed by free-market economic idealogues and pushed strongly by the Bush Administration. The Obama Administration has opted to continue this policy, creating a task force to develop recommendations on implementing these programs into American fisheries. Catch shares divide the available catch of an individual species into shares awarded to those in the fishery based on past participation and other criteria. Shareholders are free to buy and sell shares from others awarded quota. This then becomes a right to a percentage of each year’s catch, based on the shares held by an individual.
PCFFA has voiced strong opposition to unfettered catch share programs. These programs often lead to massive consolidation, large corporate take-overs of what were once family-owned fishing businesses, and non-fishermen ownership of quota shares -- effectively turning fishing men and women into “seafaring sharecroppers. Grader noted that if catch share programs are to be implemented that “they need to be tightly regulated with requirements that holders of quota share participate in the fishery and are limited from acquiring an excessive share of quota.â€
Grader also noted that the Councils catch share program is sloppily designed. There are currently no requirements that quota holders participate in the fishery. The Council failed on three separate occasions to hold back quota for smaller fishing communities to access. Without these holdbacks smaller fishing communities will lose access to their own traditional fishing grounds. Additionally, according to the Council’s own analysis, the high accumulation limits they approved could lead to a situation where less than 40 boats own 90% of the groundfish in U.S. waters from the Mexican border to Canadian border.
Make no mistake, this poorly crafted program will significantly alter the character of the entire West Coast fishing industry, said Larry Collins, a San Francisco commercial fisherman and Vice-President of the PCFFA. “Smaller operators and ports will be gone, replaced by fewer and ever larger trawl vessels towing larger nets that will be concentrated in a few ports in the Northwest.â€
The trawl catch shares program has been sold as a way to promote conservation; however, the plan that the Council adopted provides no additional conservations benefits. In fact, the program may actually thwart efforts to develop a more conservation oriented fishery on the West Coast. “If this plan is supposed to be about conservation, why was no analysis done to examine whether allocating more fish to sectors that are known to fish cleaner?†, asked Larry Collins, “This isn't about conservation, this is an outright theft of public trust resources." “We urge Dr. Lubchenco and others at NOAA to reconsider this poorly designed plan,†said Larry Collins, “It has no protections for fishing communities and does not add any additional conservation benefits to the fishery. The NOAA catch share task force needs to develop strong national standards, such as owner-on-board requirements, in order to prevent regional Councils from developing plans like this.â€
For more information see www.pcouncil.org/decisions/0609decisions.pdf. For more information about the NOAA Catch Share Task Force see www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20090623_catchshare.html and www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/domes_fish/catchshare/index.htm.
*************************
PACIFIC COAST GROUNDFISH BUYBACK PROGRAM STRUGGLES WITH REPAYMENT: PCFFA has received a memo on the status of the Pacific Coast Groundfish Buyback Program. On 1 March 2004, NMFS dispersed $35,662,471 to fishermen who agreed to surrender fishing privileges in exchange for cash payments under the program. The program was designed to reduce fleet capacity and targeted the following fisheries: Groundfish, CA Dungeness Crab, OR Dungeness Crab, WA Dungeness Crab, CA Pink Shrimp, OR Pink Shrimp, and WA Pink Shrimp.
The funds for the buy-back program were to be repaid through landing fees from the remaining fishermen in each fishery as a 30-year federal loan. Interest on the loans began accruing immediately. There was no fee collection by NMFS, however, until 18 months later, in September 2005. The gap between loan dispersal and repayment occurred because the buyback was required to begin implementation within 90 days of becoming public law, and at that time no fee collection system had yet been designed or codified.
Once fee collection did begin on 8 September 2005, payments were applied to the accrued interest on each sub-loan. The CA crab, OR crab, WA crab, OR shrimp, and WA shrimp sub-loans have, as of March 2009, all repaid the accrued interest through fee collection and are now paying off the principal balance. The CA Pink Shrimp fishery saw low landings in the years since the buy-back, and so while it has made some payments it has neither paid off the accrued interest nor touched the principle. Accrued interest on the Groundfish sub-loan has been reduced by $340,000 through landings revenue.
NMFS does not have the authority to reduce the interest rate or forgive the accrued interest on this loan. If there is an unpaid balance after the 30 years, repayment on the loan will continue.
*****************************
15:18/03. LUBCHENCO ASSEMBLES CATCH SHARE TASK FORCE: In an effort to successfully implement the new fishery management strategy now known as catch shares, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Administrator Jane Lubchenco has formed a Catch Share Task Force. The newly formed task force is headed up by senior advisor to the NOAA Administrator Monica Medina and includes 16 NOAA advisers and fisheries experts. Director of policy for NOAAs Fishery Service Dr. Mark Holliday will serve as the Executive Director. The remainder of the group is comprised of representatives from 7 of the 8 different regional fishery management councils and current NOAA staff.
The Catch Share Task Force will provide guidance for fishery management councils, such as the freshly converted New England Fishery Management Council, as they adopt catch share programs. Catch shares divvy up the fishery resource to individual fishermen, community or fishery organizations. These catch shares entitle each share holder to a certain percentage of the Total Allowable Catch (TAC), which is the annual catch limit set for each fish stock. The task force will develop updated NOAA policy on catch shares, provide technical and administrative support to councils that adopt catch share programs, involve local fishermen in the regional catch share fishery design, promote environmental and economic performance, consider organizational changes to NOAA to adapt to new catch share systems, provide advice to the Under-secretary, and solidify milestones by which progress may be measured.
For a 23 June 2009 press release from NOAA, go to www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20090623_catchshare.html. For a 24 June 2009 article from Scientific American, go to www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=cap-trade-fisheries-catch-share . For a 25 June 2009 article from the Gloucester Daily Times, go to www.gloucestertimes.com/punews/local_story_175230003.html.
**************************
15:18/05. VITAMIN D AND FISH OIL WILL BE PUT TO THE TEST IN A LARGE US STUDY: Cancer, heart disease, and stroke are in the crosshairs of a new government study that will test the effectiveness of vitamin D and fish oil in the prevention of these major health threats. This will be the first major nutrition study to target a specific racial group -- African Americans will be a large focus of the study and will comprise 50,000 of the 100,000 participants. Dr. Joann Mason and Dr. Julie Buring will co-lead the study at the Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston.
The National Cancer Institute, the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute and other federal agencies will provide $20 million dollars to fund the five year study. Pharmavite LLC of California will provide researchers with the daily 2,000 international unit supplement of cholecalciferol or vitamin D. Ocean Nutrition Canada Ltd. of Dartmouth, Nova Scotia will provide the daily one gram doses of fish oil. Doctors will select 20,000 healthy older people to take part in the study. Men over 60 and women at least 65 years of age with no previous history of cancer or cardiovascular disease will be randomly assigned to one of four groups. One group will be given fish oil and vitamin D, one will be given fish oil and a placebo, another will be given vitamin D and a placebo, and the fourth will only be given placebos. Participant health will be monitored via medical records, questionnaires, and occasional in-person exams.
The study is placing special focus on African Americans due to their abnormally high rates of heart disease, stroke, and cancer. Their higher level of pigmentation means that blacks are not able to produce as much vitamin D as lighter skinned races. This physiological difference can lead to vitamin D deficiencies in some African Americans. Some studies have suggested that reduced blood levels of vitamin D may foreshadow cancer. “If something as simple as taking a vitamin D pill could help lower these risks and eliminate these health disparities, that would be extraordinarily exciting,†said Dr. Manson.
Vitamin D and the omega-3 fatty acids found in fish oil “have powerful anti-inflammatory effects that may be key factors in preventing many diseases. They may also work through other pathways that influence cancer and cardiovascular risk,†said Dr. Manson.
Despite suggested health benefits, consumers should remain cautious when it comes to self-prescribing large quantities of dietary supplements. Many supplements, such as folic acid and selenium, which were thought to lower health risks, were later proven by scientific studies to be ineffective or even harmful. Researchers’ hope that beneficial results begin to appear long before the end of the 5 year study and that these benefits are not just limited to heart disease, stroke, and cancer. Any additional affects on conditions such as memory loss, depression, diabetes, and osteoporosis will also be documented by the study.
For a 22 June 2009 article from the Associated Press, go to www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jx5XHOadtSttZg8wOgO_sE5IxSPwD98VSLJG0 . For a 23 June 2009 article from the Boston Globe, go to www.boston.com/news/local/massachus...study_to_test_vitamin_d_fish_oil_supplements/ .
15:18/06. SALMON DISASTER RELIEF DISTRIBUTED: Salmon fishermen and related businesses who were left without income after the 2009 commercial salmon season was cancelled for the second season in a row have now been sent 2009 disaster relief checks. “All the checks went out on June 19,†said David Goldenberg, of the California Salmon Council. “We utilized all of the remaining funds.â€
According to Goldenberg, the 2009 fishery disaster was classified as an “extension†of the 2008 disaster, so all the 2009 relief money was in fact leftover from 2008, the remainder set aside specifically in anticipation of a second closed season. California recipients got a prorated 63 percent of the funds that were distributed in 2008. Oregon applicants received less -- about 42 percent -- because Oregon had spent more of its original 2008 allocation. Oregon did, however, receive Washington’s share of the aid; Washington residents did not qualify for additional aid in 2009, as the commercial salmon fishery is open north of Cape Falcon. Since the 2009 collapse is designated as an extension of the 2008 disaster, only those who received aid in 2008 could qualify for aid this year. The Pacific States Marine Fisheries Council asks that those who are expecting a disaster relief check contact them on 6 July if the check has not yet arrived.
For answers to some frequently asked questions regarding the 2009 salmon disaster relief fund, visit http://www.psmfc.org/files/2009_sacramento_river_salmon_federal_fishery_disaster.pdf .
