Experts hopeful overfishing can be solved
Photo: NOAA
Experts say they’re hopeful that the problem of overfishing will end in the United States by the year 2010.
That’s with the help of a law called the Magnuson–Stevens Fishery and Conservation Reauthorization Act. Earth & Sky spoke to Steve Murawski, chief science advisor for the National Marine Fisheries Service.
Steve Murawski: Before Magnuson Reauthorization, there was no requirement that we had to end overfishing in a certain way. And so, there was no deadline for ending overfishing.
Overfishing has been recognized as one of the major challenges of the 21st century. Murawksi said about 4 dozen species are defined as being overfished. Overfishing happens when the rate of commercial fishing outpaces fishes’ ability to reproduce and regenerate.
When certain species of fish disappear from the ecosystem, other fish that aren’t as valuable for fishing move in and dominate, knocking the ecosystem out of balance. This has happened in Cape Cod, Massachusetts, where dogfish have come to replace cod and halibut.
President Bush signed the new law in January of 2007. It’s said to be better in several respects: better catch limits, more accountability and calls for increased international cooperation.
Our thanks today to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Information from NOAA on Magnuson–Stevens Fishery and Conservation Act reauthorization
Grouper price soars as diners demand the real thing
Our thanks to:
Steve Murawski
Director of Scientific Program sand Chief Science Advisor
NOAA Fisheries
Washington, DC
NEW! Find related content with Sphere
Sure, it’s good thing. But will it be in time? I think “experts” are holding back from telling us the truth: that we’re pretty much too late. What if we are?
I find it ironic that you had the Chief Science Advisor for NOAA Fisheries talking about overfishing, considering that the fish stocks that are deemed overfished in this country have been “managed” by NMFS/NOAA Fisheries. To say that they had no requirement to end overfishing prior to reauthorization of MSA is ridiculous…if they had done their jobs and had made decisions been made on the health of the resource, rather than “political” expedience, those fish stocks would likely still be healthy.
Keep in mind that this is the same agency that has had two (2000 and 2004)BiOps on operations of the hydropower dams on the Columbia River remanded by the courts for, as Judge Redden phrased it, “I found NOAA’s opinion that DAM operations would not jeopardize the continued existence of listed salmon species was arbitrary and capricious because it was based on a flawed framework of analysis that improperly segregated elements of the proposed action NOAA deemed to be nondiscretionary, and compared rather than aggregated the effects of the proposed action on listed salmon species.”
Somewhat in their defense, far too often the priorities of the current administrations drive NMFS/NOAA actions and are, more often than not, in conflict with their defined mission: “Stewardship of living marine resources for the benefit of the nation through their science-based conservation and management and promotion of the health of their environment.”
Also, for another perspective on the overfishing issue, take a look at “Faith-based Fisheries” by Ray Hilborn in FISHERIES (American Fisheries Society) vol. 31, no. 11, November, 2006.