Photo courtesy of NOAA Fisheries
US harvester group presses NOAA again to expand observer exemption
A group of US seafood harvesters again is trying to convince the president Donald Trump administration to expand the exemption it recently extended for commercial fishing vessels in the Northeast from the requirement to carry at-sea monitors and observers to vessels in other parts of the country.
But optimism for further change from the federal government is in short supply.
Since March 22, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has allowed several hundred Atlantic groundfish and scallop vessels in New England to avoid having to welcome the third-party auditors onboard to collect data intended to protect species from being overfished.
The agency announced last month that it would allow the exemption to expire on June 30, however, at the last minute -- as first reported by Undercurrent News -- it sent an email explaining that it had to "re-evaluate and adapt to changing circumstances," and it extended the exemption until July 31 -- a little more than two weeks from now.
Helping to pressure NMFS were lawmakers, including Massachusetts representative Seth Moulton, and a decision by Canada's Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO), announced on June 28, that it was postponing the reinstatement of its observer requirement until Aug. 12.
Meanwhile, throughout the pandemic, NMFS has yet to provide any such relief to vessels in the Gulf of New Mexico or the West Coast of the US, including salmon harvesters in Alaska, which have been forced to continue carrying observers and monitors and a significant amount of related anxiety.
It's "unacceptable", argue Leigh Habegger, executive director, and Bob Dooley, president, of the Seafood Harvesters of America (SHA), a trade association that represents 18 commercial fishing groups and thousands of harvesters, in a three-page letter sent Monday to four administration officials, including Neil Jacobs, the Commerce Department's acting undersecretary for the oceans and atmosphere; Chris Oliver, the assistant administrator for fisheries at NMFS; Samuel Rauch, NMFS' deputy assistant administrator for regulatory programs; and Paul Doremus, NMFS' deputy assistant administrator for operations.
As it is, the observer and monitor requirement can be waived for only two reasons under NMFS' rules, Habegger explained to Undercurrent in a telephone interview. That includes when local, state, or national governments or private companies that deploy observers restrict travel or otherwise issue guidance that's inconsistent with NMFS rules, and also when no qualified observers are available.
SHA is asking also for a third criterion that considers the health and safety of captains, crew, coastal communities, and observers.
They suggest, instead of observers, that boats be equipped with video monitoring systems and have crew members collect biological samples from their tows.
"We remain alarmed by the agency’s illogical approach to observer waivers — issuing waivers in some regions while enforcing observer mandates in others," Habegger and Dooley wrote in their letter, noting how the regional fishery management councils in the Pacific, Mid-Atlantic and New England have all raised concerns about the approach, as well as several fishing organizations and members of Congress.
"Unfortunately, these concerns, fears, and letters have been ignored or met with empty words from agency staff," they wrote. "The agency has failed to issue a thoughtful, reasonable response that justifies the glaring inequities in its issuance of observer waivers in only some regions, an action that very clearly risks lives during this global pandemic."
Habegger and Dooley note how harvesters and processors have thus far borne the costs associated with curbing the spread of COVID-19 with little help from the administration.
"The guidance documents developed for our industry were not produced by NMFS," they said. "The logistics for setting up testing sites for our captains and crew were not handled by NMFS. The monetary and resource costs associated with enforcing strict quarantines and vessel procedures were not borne by NMFS. We did these things to ensure we could continue to provide seafood for American consumers and fish in the safest way possible."
All of these efforts could be undermined by NMFS' lack of a consistent policy, the group argued.
SHA notes the apparent hypocrisy of how NMFS has now canceled nearly 60 scientific surveys around the country "because the logistics and risk prove too much for NMFS staff, researchers, and communities while we are being forced to risk our lives taking observers in the name of science and data collection."
The group continues: "The agency is sending a particularly egregious message that fishermen are expendable while NMFS staff must be protected from contracting COVID-19."
Habegger didn't seem particularly hopeful that NMFS would respond to the latest effort when Undercurrent talked to her on Tuesday, suggesting that her group would be approaching lawmakers again to help in the fight.
And she warned that sparks would likely fly on July 31 whether or not NMFS again extended its monitor and observer requirement for the Atlantic Coast harvesters if it didn't include vessels in other regions.
"Fishermen and NOAA have been partners -- I don't know if we have always been happy partners -- but we've worked together to collect this important data, so we can do this. This isn't about trying to break the law or skirt around some legal requirements. This is about trying to protect lives."
Contact the author jason.huffman@undercurrentnews.com