Location: Atlantic, Eastern United States Title: New England Fishery Industry: Fishing for Answers Introduction Much of the history and economy of New England is intertwined with the fishing industry. Stories about the trials and tribulations of brave individuals embarking on treacherous fishing expeditions abound in magazine stories, books, and television documentaries. The search for highly preferred commercial fish such as cod, flounder, haddock, mackerel, redfish, and tuna is still driving a thriving industry. However, the fishing industry is currently involved in many controversial issues related to the economics and biology of commercial fishing. Research indicating the health benefits of eating fish has created an upturn in fish consumption. In addition, an increasing desire for exotic foods is generating a tremendous need for invertebrates, including a variety of mollusks, lobster, shrimp, and squid. The use of inexpensive fish as the flavoring and nutrient source for a burgeoning domestic animal food market is making a greater demand for seafood organisms. New England fisheries not only supply food for the United States, but also provide fish and invertebrates for Asia and Europe. A rise is seafood consumption in Europe is following health scares associated with the safety of eating beef, pork, and lamb potentially contaminated with viral diseases. This great demand for seafood is beneficial for the economy of fishing communities. However, pollution and overfishing are greatly depleting the world's supply of fish. Fishing boats are spending more hours and traveling more miles than in the past to get a profitable catch from decreasing pools of fish and invertebrates. Exacerbating the problem is a rash of diseases affecting the longevity, reproductive potential, and market quality of fish and invertebrates. This seemingly unending demand for seafood could eventually drive many organisms to extinction if something is not done to increase the fish and invertebrate populations. Any measure for keeping the oceans healthy has ramifications that do not equally satisfy the needs of environmentalists, those once affiliated with the fishing industry, and the consumers in the United States and abroad. Background Fishery management for the North Atlantic states comes under the watchful eyes of several federal and regional agencies. One influential group is the New England Fishery Management Council. In its Northeast Multispecies Management Plan (FMP), the agency monitors the status of various commercially important fish and invertebrates. Other agencies and researchers also oversee fishing operations. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration operates the National Marines Fisheries Service, with regional offices covering specific fishing regions. A northeast regional group keeps track of coastal fishing waters spanning North Carolina to Maine and parts of southeastern Canada. Information such as the number of trips needed to catch a fish, the amount of fish caught, and the mass of fish collected is gathered by these agencies. They use the information for researching the factors affecting the availability of the fish. A common way to record overfishing is with a measure called the exploitation rate. It uses biomass, the total weight of a selected population of organisms, as an indicator of fish or invertebrate abundance. The exploitation rate calculation takes into account the natural reproductive rate of a particular organism and the natural rate of death needed to maintain the organism's population. Researchers then evaluate the biomass loss due to fishing. Overfishing is then defined as an annual rate of catch that lowers the population of the organism. Regular overfishing can decline an animal population to the point of extinction. Factors such as pollution and loss of habitat must also be taken into account when estimating overfishing. However, it is not always possible to predict unexpected losses due to environmental catastrophes. So, overfishing may occur even when the calculations indicate safe levels of fishing. Guidelines and strategies intended to limit overfishing by American fisheries operations are a result of recommendations and policies established by governmental and independent fisheries agencies. Confining fishing to areas outside of breeding waters prevents overfishing. In addition, restrictions are placed on the age and number of fish and invertebrates caught during a fishing trip and season. Negotiations permit fisheries to make a profit based on market prices. Overfishing specifications do not protect the decimation of fish populations by lack of food, overpredation, and disease. Water pollution can create conditions that deplete plankton and other foods for smaller commercial fish. Drastic drops in food supply can cause a population crash if fish are caught under guidelines intended for a population with adequate food. Pollution can also cause unpredictable death of fish or decrease their reproductive rate. Overpredation is also a problem as marine mammals and sea birds hunt depleted fish populations with low food diversity. Fish diseases also appear to be on the increase, causing unpredicted population decreases. Recent data analyses collected by these agencies show some disturbing, as well hopeful, trends in the northeastern fishing waters. Data collected on several commercial fish such as haddock and plaice indicate current overfishing practices. The haddock population at this point is overfished, meaning that its population could reach critically low numbers. Unfortunately, trends show the reduction of reproductive-age fish in New England fishing waters. Overall, fish populations have declined since 1960. On the other hand, conservation practices seem to be working for some shellfish. New England scallops show no overfishing and have adequate numbers to sustain the population. Their populations are recovering from drastic declines in the past 30 years. The success of overfishing protection requires the regular monitoring of fish catches. In the United States, fish monitoring is performed predominantly by observers who work for federal or state governmental agencies. Industry institutions monitor some fishing. Self-monitoring by the fisheries was done is the past, but has proven ineffective in providing useful data for making governmental policies on overfishing. Marine environments are not alone in the loss of aquatic biodiversity. A recent report by the United States Geographical Survey Biological Resources department accounts a decline in freshwater fish and invertebrates. Much of the loss is due to a decline in water quality rather than overfishing. However, sports fishing and mussel harvesting are making the problem more severe. The researchers conducting the study concluded that in the United States, only 3.9% of the streams could support adequate populations of sport and commercially important fish. Catch limits on sports fishing and restrictions on commercial freshwater fisheries operations may tighten as a result of these findings. The Issues In spite of declining fish populations, the international demand for seafood is growing. Catch limits on commercial fishing by American fisheries are driving small fishing operations out of business. Larger operations can afford to travel farther and have larger fleets of boats for extending their overall catch. Many commercial fishing operations are not satisfied with the tight fishing regulations, which limit their ability to benefit from the increased seafood demand. Fishing operations must also compete with unregulated fishing entities. A growth in illegal fishing is taxing the fish populations as well as the resources of agencies that enforce fishing operations. In addition, American fishing operations are frustrated by the competition from Japanese, Russian, and Scandinavian fishing boats competing for fish in the same areas. These countries do not have the overfishing restrictions placed on American fishing operations and contribute to fish population depletions. American fisheries must spend more time to catch fish as they compete with these competitors. As if competition with other fishing operations is not enough of a problem, American commercial fisheries are limited in their ability to compete with otters, seals, and sea birds for fish. Federal laws protecting marine mammals, sea turtles, large predatory fish, and many birds prohibit fishing boats from interfering with these animals. Many of the laws require that fishing boats have expensive modifications that protect seafood predators. Many fisheries are protesting the protection of these animals in fishing waters, claiming that the animals are exacerbating fish population declines. Again, most foreign fishing operations do not have to comply with these regulations, giving them advantages over American fisheries. References Literature: Karp, W. A. & McElderry, H. 1997. Catch monitoring by fisheries observers in the United States and Canada. Report to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Http://www.fao.org/docrep/x3900e/x3900e5-01.htm. Web Sites: Northeast Fisheries Science Center http://www.nefsc.nmfs.gov USGS Biology Resources http://biology.usgs.gov Key Principles Conservation biology Fisheries management Overfishing Population ecology Ethical Considerations One way to control the supply of any commodity is to raise the price high enough to discourage excessive purchase or consumption of the material. What are the implications of raising the price of seafood and other seafood-based products? How would a price increase influence the following users of seafood products: grocery stores, restaurants, lower income Americans, and European consumers? How would a price increase affect American and foreign fisheries? Many fishing operations object to government monitors recording their fishing data and catch. They believe that the government is wasting money on duties that can be carried out by the fisheries. Several fisheries have asked the government to permit self-monitoring of fishing trips and catch measurements. Provide arguments for and against the use of self-monitoring to control overfishing. American fishing operations find it unfair to compete with illegal and foreign fisheries. Explain some strategies that can be used to ensure fair competition between American and foreign fishing operations. Large fishing operations are incidentally putting the small, family-owned fishing boat operators out of business. Does the United States have a responsibility to protect small businesses? What are the pros and cons of any strategies for ensuring the survival of small fishing operations? Fisheries are asking for some ability to discourage predators from competing for the fish they are catching. What are the economic and environmental implications of permitting fishing boats to chase away predators in the vicinity of the fishing boats? Some fishing operators argue that the government should relax overfishing limits when the population of a commercial fish is increasing. What arguments would you use to dissuade fisheries from seeking higher catch limits under those conditions? Dr. Brian R. Shmaefsky Biology and Environmental Sciences Kingwood College 20,000 Kingwood Drive Kingwood, TX 77339-3801 E-mail: Brian.Shmaefsky@nhmccd.edu Back Copyright ©2001 The McGraw-Hill Companies. Any use is subject to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. McGraw-Hill Higher Education is one of the many fine businesses of the The McGraw-Hill Companies.