Southern Offshore Fishing
            Association

Our position on the proposed de-facto closure of the bottom longline fishery in the Gulf of Mexico over loggerhead turtle mortality considerations is summed up in a letter (reprinted after the jump) sent to Mary Glackin, Deputy Acting Under Secretary of NOAA and Dr. James Balsiger, Assistant Administrator NMFS with copies to Senators Bill Nelson and Mel Martinez as well as Representatives Allen Boyd, Gus Bilirakis. C.W. Bill Young. and Charlie Crist, and the Office of Management and Budget, Commerce Division; Council on Environmental Quality, Office of Ocean & Coastal Policy;  Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Fisheries; and the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Oceans.  The letter was signed by a large number of commercial fishermen, boat owners, fish house owners and workers, consumers, and others in industry related jobs.

If you agree with our position and would like to let your Representatives and Senators as well as a number of other officers of various Fishery related Government Organizations, you can use the contacts link from the main menu at the top of our pages to get to many of them.  They all either provide an email form you can send in directly or, in the case of most of the legislators, a link to a contact page on their own web sites that you have to use to send them a message.  Please, if you support our position, let these people who may have an influence in our future know.  You can copy and paste this letter to them or you can use the sample messages on the Contact pages or you can put it in your own words but please, if you agree with us on this issue please let these people know that or they may well be closing us down, putting a lot of people out of work and cutting off (or sharply curtailing) the supply of fresh domestic grouper to consumers.

Letter Follows:

February 21, 2009

Mary Glackin, Deputy Acting Under Secretary
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Washington, DC

Dr. James Balsiger, Assistant Administrator
National Marine Fisheries Service
Silver Spring, MD
via facsimile to 202.482.1041; 301.713.2258
 
Dear Deputy Acting Under Secretary Glackin and Dr. Balsiger:

We, the undersigned Florida commercial longline fishermen, including vessel owners, captains and crewmen, Florida fish dealers and their employees, Florida commercial fishery-dependent businesses and individuals, consumers and other stakeholders urgently and respectfully request that NOAA/NMFS not implement the pending emergency closure to prohibit the use of longline gear for commercial reef fish fishing in waters less than 50 fathoms for the entire eastern Gulf of Mexico (east of Cape San Blas).

The emergency closure recommendation, spearheaded by the Department of Commerce’s NMFS under a 60-day threat of litigation by several environmental NGO’s, was approved by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council on January 29, 2009 by a vote of ten to seven (of note,  NMFS offered/voted for its own motion). A Gulf Council Minority Report opposing the emergency action was submitted to the NOAA/NMFS Regional Office on February 6, 2009.

There is no question that loggerhead turtles need our help and members of the commercial fishing industry are very concerned about the state of the turtle populations. We are commercial fishermen -- we set our gear to catch fish, not turtles. We are prepared to find middle ground and do our part for turtle conservation but we cannot abide by such onerous and indefensible actions such as the proposed closure. We firmly believe this federal emergency action circumvents processes pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA) and Endangered Species Act (ESA), violates NOAA Data Quality Act policy, and is not scientifically, economically, or procedurally defensible.

The proposed closure will prohibit Florida commercial longline reef fishing in the region for the next 12 months (an initial 6-month period plus one presumed 6-month rollover period) and then for 10 months out of each year thereafter. At a time when this Administration and the 111th Congress are attempting to save jobs and stimulate the economy this action will destroy Florida commercial fishing jobs and businesses as well as supporting infrastructure along the west coast of Florida.

Florida fishermen cannot survive working just 2 months per year. The State of Florida will lose jobs and economic stability. This fishery supports approximately 1,848 jobs and 150 fishing vessels with approximately 475 owners/captains/crewmen. The fishery is valued annually at approximately $20-$25 million (ex-vessel) and contributes an overall value of at least $60 million annually to the Florida coastal economy (using the NMFS economic multiplier and FMP Amendment 30B). The fishery supports numerous fish houses (ice, bait, fuel, groceries, etc.), wholesalers, restaurants, grocery stores and retail fish markets which will all be adversely impacted by the proposed closure.

Specific Concerns with the proposed Emergency Action

The use of MSA emergency authority is not justified. The NMFS did not determine or justify that commercial longline fishing so severely impacts sea turtles as to endanger their population. In fact, the sea turtles in question are threatened, not endangered. NMFS did not justify that a fishery emergency exists pursuant to the MSA to support such a sweeping and pre-emptive ESA action.

NMFS has scant data on the status of the sea turtle population. Rather, the agency attempts to use sea turtle nesting success to support the need for emergency action. First, the fishing industry is not responsible for sea turtle nesting success. Second, despite the takes in the longline fishery, sea turtle nesting success in 2008 is actually equal or very similar to the rates reported for 1988, 2002 and 2004. How can nesting success be increasing (or at a comparable rate to prior years) at the same time the agency says the longline takes are so extreme the fishery must be completely closed?

The data that NMFS did present to the Council (“Estimated Takes of Sea Turtles in the Bottom Longline Portion of the Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Fishery July 2006 through 2007 Based on Observer Data”) used incompatible data sets to estimate turtle take. The authors did not claim that this document provides indisputable evidence of high turtle takes in this fishery. Rather, recommendations were for increased observer coverage, not to close the fishery entirely.

There were 18 observed turtle interactions in the longline fishery during 2006-2007. This number was extrapolated across the fishery to indicate a total take level. In 2008, under a similar level of observer coverage, only 3 takes were observed by NMFS. Even though NMFS has data which indicate a potentially lower level of take and the industry requested these data be considered, the agency would not wait the additional time to prepare these data and include them in the analysis. Rather, the NMFS staff urged the Council move quickly to close the fishery to address the “emergency” despite knowing the take rate is lower in 2008.

NMFS claims the emergency closure is needed “to reduce sea turtle bycatch” under National Standard 9 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. We believe this standard does not require complete reduction in bycatch, only its minimization to the extent practicable. We do not believe that a complete closure of a valuable $60M per year Florida fishery is very practicable, nor consistent with Congressional intent to protect jobs and stimulate the economy.

The agency will treat fishermen differently in different regions/fisheries under the proposed action. In the past, the agency used a formal ESA Biological Opinion to determine that the Gulf of Mexico shrimp fishery was jeopardizing sea turtles. The interaction level of this fishery was many times larger than the takes being estimated for the Gulf longline fishery. Despite this, NMFS and the Council acted using a Biological Opinion and ESA process to develop mitigation measures over many years. The current proposed rule does not afford the same treatment to the Gulf longline fishery despite having a much lower level of observed interaction. Similar NMFS actions are currently ongoing in New England (scallops) and Alaska (pollock) and in each case a formal Biological Opinion process is driving the action, not pre-emptive fishery closures.

NMFS refuses to consider or address any other source of turtle mortality (sources which exceed the impacts from fishing) and is only acting to close commercial longline fishing despite having data to the contrary. A long-term monitoring program coordinated by Florida Fish and Wildlife reported that during 1980-2005, over 4,000 stranded sea turtles were documented (500 live; 3,500 dead) with propeller wounds which represents 30% of all turtle strandings. Trend data from the Florida Sea Turtle Stranding Network demonstrates that the annual proportions of boat-strikes related mortality is increasing.

By comparison, the NMFS 95% confidence limits indicate longline fishing-turtle interactions number between 411-1983 each year, resulting in a morality estimate of about 275 to 1325. When these calculations are updated to include 2008 data, the estimated average annual take will fall substantially. The estimate could fall even further if the mid-2005 through mid-2006 data are added. Despite this information and possibly other strandings data for other fisheries, NMFS is only holding the Florida commercial longline industry responsible.  

We requested the NMFS Southeast Region work with industry to identify a valid but less onerous position. We recommended a shorter closed season and gear mitigation that might reduce turtle interactions and keep Florida fishermen working. We received no response to the proposed shorter closure period and were told there is not enough time or money to generate statistically significant data that can be used to manage the situation. NMFS is not even using statistically significant data to close this fishery nor will they afford us enough time or support to develop workable alternatives for the Biological Opinion. Clearly, this region of the agency has little interest in keeping Florida commercial fishermen working as a viable component of the industry.

Recommendations for Action

•  Reject the proposed MSA Emergency Action to close the Florida commercial reef fish longline fishery.
•  Complete an updated Biological Opinion and if jeopardy is triggered using the best scientific information available (including the 2005-2008 data) enter into a Section 7 consultation to determine reasonable and prudent alternatives to reduce the take rate to a practicable level.
• Consider a less onerous alternative that closes only 1-3 of the warmer months rather than a 5 month closure that becomes a 12 month closure shortly thereafter. Of the 18 observed takes on reef fish longlines during 2006-2007, the vast majority came from the warmer months of June (17% of takes), July (50%) and August (22%). Since the agency has not yet determined what percent reduction is necessary to protect turtles closing any one of these months provides a reduction in the number of interactions. For example, closing July alone may be sufficient in the interim period until such time that gear mitigation efforts can provide workable alternatives.
• The Council should cease development of Amendment 31 until NMFS can complete its Section 7 Consultation and prepare a new Biological Opinion using the best available scientific information – including data from the 2005 and 2008 observer reports. No Biological Opinion prepared under the ESA has yet to find that the Florida reef fish fishery poses any jeopardy to sea turtles. There is no requirement for an FMP Amendment and certainly no reason for Amendment 31 to proceed ahead of the Biological Opinion.
• Provide a report to the Council and the public detailing all existing data, regardless of the data base, for every sea turtle interaction and stranding in the entire Gulf of Mexico from 2005-2008.
• Expedite the Experimental Fishery Permits (EFP) process and provide funding to begin to work immediately with longline fishermen to identify gear mitigation alternatives such as shortening leaders, prohibiting the use of squid as bait, and potential modifications of effort/behavior that may prove beneficial to turtles. We have already worked with NMFS’s Pascagoula Laboratory staff to investigate the potential of hook guards as a way to discourage turtles from taking longline baits. This type of research takes time, money, agency support, and must be done on actual commercial longline trips in a fishery that remains open.
• We request the NMFS work with the industry to consider an alternative which includes a longline gear conversion program shifting effort from longline to vertical-line fishing.
• We also recommend the NMFS quantify the potential benefits from the Limited Access Privilege Program (IFQ) pending for the Gulf reef fish fishery. We believe this action will reduce longline effort by up to 30% and thereby reduce the number of longline-turtle interactions and negate the need for a closed season. 

Respectfully submitted by the following Florida commercial longline fishermen, including vessel owners, captains and crewmen, Florida fish dealers and their employees, Florida commercial fishery-dependent businesses and individuals, consumers and other stakeholders -