River Herring Protections Worked Out

by Laurie Schreiber

Alewives swimming through fish passage at Benton Dam, Sebasticook River, Benton, Maine. “Millions of dollars and untold hours of volunteer effort have gone toward protecting river herring and shad while they are in rivers to spawn. But that effort is undermined when these fish return to sea.” – Herring Alliance © Photo by Sam Murfitt

PORTLAND – Protection of river herring and shad, anadromous species that are caught as bycatch in two major directed fisheries along the East Coast, was on the agenda of the New England Fishery Management Council (NEFMC) at its June meeting.

The two species are caught as bycatch in the Atlantic herring fishery, which falls under NEFMC’s purview, and in the mackerel fishery, which falls under the purview of the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC). Both councils are seeking to establish catch caps on the bycatch of river herring and shad.

For NEFMC, the catch cap alternatives will fall under Framework Adjustment 3 to Amendment 5 of the Atlantic Herring Fishery Management Plan. Under Framework 3, caps are expected to be implemented sometime during the 2014 fishing year.

The MAFMC established catch caps as part of Amendment 14 to its mackerel management plan.

According to NEFMC documents, the goal of Framework 3 is to provide “strong incentive” for the industry to continue to avoid river herring and shad, and reduce their catch to the extent possible; to enhance coordination with the MAFMC to address overlapping fisheries; and to promote flexibility to adjust the cap in the future as more information becomes available.

The NEFMC considered alternatives that said the catch cap should apply to all trips landing more than the open access possession limit of 6,600 pounds of Atlantic herring; that the catch cap areas for the Atlantic herring fishery be analyzed by statistical area, season, and gear type; and that the catch caps should be based on the herring management areas – Area 1 (Gulf of Maine, divided into inshore Area 1A and offshore Area 1B); Area 2 (southern New England/Mid-Atlantic); Area 3 (offshore Georges Bank).

The NEFMC also considered a proposal to conduct a detailed “hotspot” analysis of the occurrence of river herring and shad throughout Atlantic herring grounds.

Catch cap amount for 2014 and 2015 would be developed from 2008-2012 observer data.

Alternatives for the measures to become effective when the catch cap is reached included closure of the directed fishery, with all vessels limited to 2,000 pounds of herring ; or all vessels limited to 6,600 pounds of herring until a sub-annual catch limit (ACL) or ACL trigger closes the directed fishery.

The NEFMC is expected to make a final decision on Framework 3 at its September meeting. According to NEFMC documents, the decision to apply the rule to permit categories landing more than 6,600 pounds of herring was made because 6,600 pounds is possession limit for open access herring permits. Vessels landing more than 6,600 pounds of herring must possess a herring limited access permit.

“This threshold is consistent with the intent of Amendment 5 (to apply measures to address river herring bycatch to limited access herring vessels),” the NEFMC said.

There are currently four permit categories.

Category A limited-access permit has no possession limit and may fish in all herring management areas.

Category B limited-access permit has no possession limit and may fish in Areas 2 and 3.

Category C limited-access is for the incidental catch of herring, and has a possession limit of 55,000 pounds per day.

Category D is an open access permit and has a 6,600-pound (3 metric tons) possession limit. Thus, the new rule would not apply to Category D permit-holders.

Currently, the NEFMC said, there is “no way to link the catch cap amount to river herring biomass or fishing mortality. It is therefore also not possible to quantify the impacts of the catch caps on the river herring and shad stocks.”

According to NEFMC, “developing a catch cap with a largely unknown stock component and high variability can create major difficulties” and there is a “need for continued cooperation with the herring fleet and the MAFMC to best address this issue over the long-term.”

The Boston, Mass.-based Herring Alliance lauded the MAFMC’s decision to establish a catch cap as “a major move for protecting these historically important but imperiled fish. Millions of dollars and untold hours of volunteer effort have gone toward protecting river herring and shad while they are in rivers to spawn. But that effort is undermined when these fish return to sea. Too often they are accidentally scooped up by an industrial fishing fleet targeting Atlantic herring or mackerel.”

At the NEFMC meeting, Jeff Kaelin, representing Cape May, N.J.-based Lund’s Fisheries, Inc., a seafood company whose products include herring and mackerel, said many in the industry feel the realization of optimum yield – the amount of fish that can be harvested while still maintaining a sustainable resource – in the directed fisheries has become secondary to the catch cap issue.

Kaelin proposed that “realization of optimum yield” should be specified as one of the objectives of the action.

Patrick Paquette, a recreational fishing advocate in Massachusetts, responded that the Atlantic herring fishery “continues to cause significant mortality compared with what we’ll be allowed to catch….American shad is getting shut down all over the place, so fair is fair, there should be a limit. It’s okay to say, Enough is enough.”

Said Kaelin, “Of course we want to reduce river herring catches. I think we’re doing everything we can.

But NEFMC member Doug Grout noted that provisions regarding optimum yield are already codified in the federal fishing law known as the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

NEFMC member David Goethel objected to the 6,600-pound threshold which, he said, could mean that Category C boats, as well as Category A and B boats, would have to carry observers. He proposed changing the threshold to 20,000 pounds. Another NEFMC member proposed changing the threshold to 55,000 pounds, which would exempt Category C.

But Kaelin said that anyone who potentially catches river herring and shad as bycatch should be included in the cap. “This motion goes down the road of singling out one class of American fishermen with treatment that’s different from all the other American fishermen that are killing river herring, whether it’s intentional or not,” Kaelin said.

But Peter Baker, director of the Herring Alliance, urged NEFMC to focus the program on Category A and B permits which, he said, catch the majority of river herring.

Jeff Pierce, executive director of the Alewife Harvesters of Maine, said the 6,600-pound threshold should stand. “Everybody has skin in this game and everybody should be responsible for reporting their river herring bycatch,” Pierce said.

The 6,600-pound threshold, responded Goethel, “is as arbitrary as any other number picked out. You devalue people’s permits with this motion. You turn C permits into D permits.”
In the end, the NEFMC endorsed the catch cap with a 6,600-pound threshold.