Tuna Scientists Slam PEW Fact Sheet for “Irresponsible Distortion”
Wayne Davis photo, wayne@oceanaerials.com
Four leading highly migratory species scientists have in a published document labeled a PEW Trust report on blue fin tuna an agenda driven irresponsible distortion. The PEW report was titled, “The best Available Science on Western Atlantic Bluefin Tuna”. The scientist’s paper charges the PEW report with implying that PEW is the final arbiter of best available science rather the International Committee for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT) process for developing a scientific basis for fisheries management.
The scientist’s paper noted that, “Atlantic blue fin tuna assessments are highly uncertain because of the highly migratory nature of tuna and the diverse expansive international fisheries for tuna.”
The PEW report, the scientists wrote, fails to recognize the two-stock (east and west Atlantic stocks) hypotheses and the low recruitment hypothesis supported by the Scientific Research and Statistical Committee (SRSC). Scientifically, the low recruitment hypothesis recognizes ecological changes in the North Atlantic ecosystem that could affect Atlantic blue fin tuna reproduction rates in the North Atlantic. “Failure to recognize environmental changes and associated changes in fishery produc
tivity can lead to ineffective fishery management,” the paper stated.
The PEW report was also criticized for citing a 2010 tuna stock assessment, which was later corrected in 2012 in the presence of the PEW report’s author, but those corrections were not noted in the PEW report. The scientists’ paper also noted flaws in the PEW report regarding scientific evidence on the earlier age of blue fin tuna maturity, the strength of the 2003 year class, the greater mixing of the east and west Atlantic stocks and the confounding of the issue of historical and recent blue fin productivity in the western Atlantic. The paper claims the PEW report represents an agenda that seeks to reduce fishing without regard to current and accepted scientific data.
Highly migratory scientists are particular concerned because this PEW report is being released at a time when the leading independent blue fin tuna research science is losing funding. (See Funding Cut for Tuna Research below.)
The scientists paper closed with, “In summary, the PEW fact sheet is a subjective selection of information, lacks scientific credibility and appears to be agenda driven. Fishery managers should be aware of the uncertainties involved in Atlantic bluefin tuna biology and stock assessment and should consider the alternative hypotheses identified by the SCRS process, the 2012 Blue Fin Tuna Assessment Session and the 2013 Blue Fin Meeting on Biological Parameters Review.”
The entire scientist’s paper on the PEW report can be read at fishermensvoice.com.
The scientists who authored the paper were, Steve Cadrin, UMASS, Dartmouth SMAST; Molly Lutcavage and Ben Galuardi, UMASS Large Pelagics Research Center and Walt Golet, UMaine.