Pelagic Longlines Background
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Pelagic Long Lines Background 1 Brief overview 2 CBD, Oceana, TIRN to NOAA re: Draft Environmental Assessment To Consider the Potential Impacts of Authorizing an Exempted Fishing Permit For Longline Vessels to Fish Within the U.S. West Coast Exclusive Economic Zone (October 3, 2016) 3 Wild Oceans to NOAA re: Draft Environmental Assessment of an Exempted Fishing Permit Application to Fish Longline Gear in the U.S. West Coast Exclusive Economic Zone (October 3, 2016) 4 Earthjustice to NMFS RE: Comments on the draft Environmental Assessment of Exempted Fishing Permit application to fish with longline gear in the U.S. West Coast Exclusive Economic Zone (October 3, 2016) 5 Pew to NMFS re: Request for comments on the draft environmental assessment of an exempted fishing permit application to fish longline gear in the U.S. West Coast exclusive economic zone (October 3, 2016) 6 Audubon California to NMFS re: Request for comments on the draft environmental assessment of an exempted fishing permit application to fish longline gear in the U.S. West Coast exclusive economic zone (October 3, 2016) 7 Oceana to NMFS and PFMC: Opposition to Pelagic Longlines off the U.S. West Coast (March 30, 2017) 8 TIRN, CBD v US Dept of Commerce, NMFS, et al. 878 F.3d 725, United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit (December 27, 2017) 9 Oceana to PFMC and NOAA re: Bycatch in Pelagic Longline Swordfish Fisheries (February 8, 2018) 10 Audubon California to PFMC re: Swordfish Management and Monitoring Plan (August 27, 2018) 11 Oceana white paper: “Providing Domestically Caught U.S. West Coast Swordfish: How to Achieve Environmental Sustainability and Economic Profitability” (August 2018) 12 Oceana to PFMC and NOAA re: Bycatch in Pelagic Longline Fisheries (October 23, 2018) 13 Oceana Fact sheet: Hawaii Shallow-Set Longline Fishery (HI SSLL) 14 Polovina, J. and Woodworth-Jefcoats. 2013. Fishery-Induced Changes in the Subtropical Pacific Pelagic Ecosystem Size Structure: Observations and Theory. PLoS ONE 8(4): e62341. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0062341 15 Polovina, Jeffrey J. and Abecassis, Melanie and Howell, Evan A. and Woodworth, Phoebe (2009) Increases in the relative abundance of mid-trophic level fishes concurrent with declines in apex predators in the subtropical North Pacific, 1996– 2006. Fishery Bulletin, 107(4), pp. 523-531. June 3, 2019 PELAGIC LONGLINES OFF THE U.S. WEST COAST Pelagic longlines used to catch tuna, swordfish, and sharks, are widely known to have high levels of bycatch. Despite numerous gear modifications, improvements, and management measures, even the highly regulated pelagic longline fisheries off Hawaii have unacceptable levels of bycatch and have been shut down year after year for their interactions with sensitive and endangered species. The Hawaii fishery has been through litigation for decades (see history in most recent attached court decision) and has shown that there is no way to alter pelagic longline gear such that it doesn't catch excessive numbers of protected species. This bycatch would likely be much higher off California because we have much higher concentrations of protected species. In fact, NMFS conducted deep-set longline experiments in 2011, which resulted in over 75% of the catch being unmarketable species (bycatch), including 42 blue sharks caught for every swordfish. Pelagic longlines were initially prohibited in 1977, when the California Fish and Game Commission issued regulations requiring swordfish be taken only with handheld hook and line or harpoon within California’s territorial sea (0-3nm) 14 C.C.R. §107.12. In 1989 with the enactment of Section 9028 of the Fish and Game Code, the California Legislature prohibited the landing of fish caught with hook and line gear longer than 900 feet inside US West Coast Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Pelagic longline gear is also currently prohibited under the HMS FMP adopted in 2004. There is a Hawaii-based shallow set and deep set pelagic longline fishery that operates on the high seas outside the EEZ. This fishery regularly lands swordfish in California, and some participants are based in California. The 12-month season starting in January was closed in April in 2018 and 2019 due to excessive takes of endangered sea turtles. Authorizing additional pelagic longline effort under the Pacific Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan (HMS FMP) would increase bycatch, undermine and impair implementation of SB 1017, and impose significant new workload on state and federal fishery managers, and NGOs that could focus their attention elsewhere, and will likely lead to substantial new litigation. The recreational fishing and conservation communities have long opposed the introduction of a West Coast-based pelagic longline fishery due to the impact on other marine life including seabirds, sharks, and valuable marlins. The Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) considered the authorization of a West Coast-based pelagic longline fishery outside the EEZ in 2009 (in the same area as the Hawaii-based fishery), but ultimately decided not to move forward due to concerns around environmental impacts. Despite this decision, with the recent changes in PFMC composition and the state’s move to phase out drift gillnets, NOAA Fisheries has pushed the PFMC to reconsider the authorization of a pelagic longline fishery outside the EEZ and has approved exempted fishing permits to allow pelagic longlines inside the EEZ. The Council is tentatively scheduled to discuss this issue at their November 2019 meeting in Costa Mesa. NMFS and other pelagic longline proponents are taking a 2-prong approach aimed at the long-term goal of opening the US West Coast EEZ to pelagic longlines. First, they are issuing Exempted Fishing Permits to allow commercial pelagic longline based on the Hawaii fishery inside the US West Coast EEZ. Second, they are trying to authorize and issue West Coast- based pelagic longline permits to fish outside the US West Coast EEZ. This would both remove the longstanding prohibition on pelagic longlines in the HMS FMP and establish a management machinery at NMFS West Coast Region and the PFMC to manage pelagic longlines. The arguments for these measures are that we need to collect new data to determine whether pelagic longlines have unacceptably high bycatch, and that we need to increase domestic swordfish landings. Deep-set buoy gear is a gear type that has a currently untapped potential to increase domestic swordfish landings, and linked buoy gear offers the potential to scale up the catching June 3, 2019 power of this proven clean fishing method. We need to give deep set buoy gear a chance. Unless and until deep set buoy gear has been authorized for several years and determined not to be commercially viable, there is no need to explore pelagic longlines. Any effort to do so would be counter to the solution reached in SB 1017. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife has a seat on the PFMC and California has 3 additional seats on the Council that are appointed by the Governor. California also plays a role through the Coastal Zone Management Program implemented by the California Coastal Commission whereby the state may request to review federal actions for consistency with the state’s coastal management program. NOAA’s Office of Coastal Management recently denied the California Coastal Commission’s request to review a pelagic longline exempted fishing permit for consistency with state law, finding that endangered leatherback sea turtles are not a coastal resource of California despite their status as the state’s marine reptile and their regular use of state waters as a foraging destination. We request that CDFW and the state of California adopt the following position: 1. Strongly oppose any further consideration of authorizing a West Coast-based pelagic longline fishery outside the EEZ. Specifically, at the June 2019 PFMC meeting, request that the item be removed indefinitely from future PFMC agendas (it is currently scheduled for November 2019). 2. Oppose any future Exempted Fishing Permits that seek to test pelagic longlines. 3. Oppose any new pelagic longline fishing. Attached to this summary are several recent reports, analyses, and comment letters from stakeholders opposing the introduction of a pelagic longline fishery that detail the issues associated with pelagic longline fisheries in general and why the introduction of a pelagic longline fishery in the California Current is inadvisable. Images Oceana received from a Freedom of Information Act request from NOAA from the Hawaii shallow-set longline fishery. For more information or follow-up, contact: Jennifer Fearing [email protected] Geoff Shester [email protected] Tara Brock [email protected] Paul Shively [email protected] Andrea Treece [email protected] Submitted via email: [email protected]. October 3, 2016 Mr. Barry Thom, Regional Administrator NOAA Fisheries West Coast Region (NMFS) 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Bldg. 1 Seattle, WA 98115 Re: Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) To Consider the Potential Impacts of Authorizing an Exempted Fishing Permit (EFP) For Longline Vessels To Fish Within the U.S. West Coast Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ); 81 Fed. Reg. 60675 (Sept. 2, 2016) Dear Mr. Thom: The Center for Biological Diversity, Oceana, and the Turtle Island Restoration Network request that you adopt Alternative 1, under which NMFS would deny the EFP to authorize longline vessels within 200 nm of the California and Oregon coasts, because of the detrimental