![\"\"](\"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/02\/Screenshot-2018-03-22-20.44.08.jpg\")
While the committee has supported the development by the fishing industry of protective measures, the industry hasn\u2019t yet offered anything specific.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIn our conversations with the industry, I was very disappointed with them, to tell you the truth. They didn\u2019t seem to recognize what I would call the urgency. They\u2019re either going to be told what to do or develop what to do. They didn\u2019t seem to have the organizational motivation to produce their own plan,\u201d committee member Ray Hilborn said of a recent meeting between SSC members and Hawai\u2018i longline fishery members.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThey say, \u2018Well, we could do some better crew training … and we\u2019ll call it a day.\u2019 I have a feeling that\u2019s not going to wash,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Committee member Steve Martell echoed Hilborn\u2019s sentiment, adding that one approach might be to have the industry develop a legally binding bycatch plan. \u201cThat puts the onus on them to self- regulate to certain limits. However you want to manage it,\u201d Martell said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given the fishery\u2019s current circumstances, Martell conceded that Kingma has \u201cbeen under a lot of duress with sales and fleet panicking.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Committee member Milani Chaloupka then reminded members that the Hawai\u2018i deep-set and American Samoa longline fisheries catch very few loggerheads or leatherbacks. \u201cIt\u2019s important not to impose unnecessary economic burdens,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Kingma testified, \u201cFor obvious reasons we\u2019ve been focused on significant impacts of COVID. … I think the timing is such that if COVID never happened, we\u2019d be further along. [It\u2019s] not necessarily the greatest excuse, but it is a reality.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWe are a small percentage of effort in the Pacific. It\u2019s tough for us to swallow sometimes when we\u2019re faced with restrictive fishing measures,\u201d he said. If given the chance to devise its own plan, Kingma said he thought the Hawai\u2018i fishery has anopportunity to lead other countries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
At the council meeting, a handful of conservationists testified in support of setting a catch limit for oceanic whitetips and of identifying handling techniques that would increase the likelihood that sharks released alive will survive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Brettny Hardy of Earthjustice reminded council members that their recommendations to protect the sharks must address the international overfishing, as well as the U.S. fleets\u2019 contribution to that overfishing. According to a draft 2019 Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation report, the American Samoa longline fishery caught an estimated 892 oceanic whitetips last year, and the Hawai\u2018i deep-set longline fleet caught an estimated 2,122 of them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Even if the relative impact of U.S. vessels is small, the council is still required to develop measures that address that U.S.contribution to overfishing. “They must do something,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Executive Orders<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n In response to Trump\u2019s executive orders promoting American seafood competition and supporting economic recovery, NOAA Fisheries assistant administrator Chris Oliver has asked regional fishery councils to prioritize a list of actions to ease burdens on domestic fishing, including what regulations should be rescinded or modified. The list is due in November.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In addition to the letter Soliai and Simonds already sent to Trump, Simonds encouraged council members to add to a list that staff had drafted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cOne of our biggest issues has been protected species. … Our shallow-set BiOp took 435 days to completion. The fishery is not operating under the new [rules]. The feds are working on comments. If you add that in, it\u2019s 600 days. It\u2019s unconscionable,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The SSC voted at its June meeting to establish a subgroup to work with council staff on drafting recommendations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Guam council member Michael Duenas suggested the renegotiation of the Compact of Free Association to regain fishing grounds lost to the Federated States of Micronesia. He also wanted Congress to revisit the Billfish Conservation Act, which prohibits the sale to the U.S. mainland of billfish caught in the Pacific. \u201cIt\u2019s just not right that billfish in our area for the most part is not overfished. We should be able to get our fish to the mainland,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Chair Soliai complained about what he said were NOAA\u2019s \u201cvery unfair\u201d recusal determinations for council members, which prevent employees of companies with potential conflicts from voting on matters that affect those companies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Hawai\u2018i council member Ed Watamura also raised his concerns about the billfish act, as well as the marine national monuments. He criticized former President Barack Obama\u2019s extension of the Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument out to 200 nautical miles as \u201cunderhanded and deceptive.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n With regard to protected species, Watamura called fishing restrictions under the Endangered Species Act and Marine Mammal Protection Act unnecessary and unwarranted. \u201cThe least impactful threat is from our fishers,\u201d he said. He added that the current closure of fishing groups south of the Main Hawaiian Islands (known as the Southern Exclusion Zone, or SEZ) to protect false killer whales was unconscionable, as was NMFS\u2019s closure last year of the Hawai\u2018i shallow-set fishery due to excessive take of loggerhead sea turtles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Goto also pushed for the reopening of the SEZ, especially since a recent stock assessment by the Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center suggests that the pelagic population of false killer whales is larger than previously thought. \u201cIt\u2019s just another part of the U.S. EEZ we\u2019re being denied access to,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In response to Duenas\u2019s suggestion regarding Guam\u2019s marine boundary, Michael Brakke of the U.S. State Department said any action to remedy that falls outside the scope of the executive orders. NMFS Pacific Islands Regional Office administrator Mike Tosatto also urged council members to make recommendations that fall under what is being requested in the orders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cClearly there are some that could increase productivity of the fisheries. To the extent we remain consistent with ESA and MMPA, these can be considered. Let\u2019s keep focus. Because some of them frankly would not be, removal would not be consistent with those acts. It\u2019s not the best use of effort to expend, going down those roads,\u201d Tosatto said, adding, \u201cI think you should think big, then curtail the focus to those with a chance of success.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Recommendations that would require a change in the law (such as the Billfish Conservation Act), would not likely be successful, he added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n HLA director Eric Kingma testified in support of opening the SEZ. \u201cWith the most recent information about false killer whales, it\u2019s likely the fishery was never a strategic stock. [The fishing ban in the SEZ] could be lifted very, very quickly and do a lot of good,\u201d he said. (The National Marine Fisheries Service is in the process of evaluating criteria to reopen the SEZ.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThere are things we can identify quickly and the Fisheries Service can act on it quickly, rather than waiting for the fall. … I recommend we move as fast as we can,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Tosatto reminded the council that the executive order on seafood competition calls for more than just a list of recommendations. Those recommendations must also include a proposal to implement or initiate within a year. \u201cYou have a task that is more than removal of burdens on the fishery,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Simonds said the council was aware of its obligations, but that covering everything in the order at the June meeting would be burdensome. \u201cThis was just one item that was chosen from the EO. People understand the council is going to be following both EOs. We just concentrated on section 4 [regarding regulations to be removed]. The report is going to be presented to the council at its September meeting. There\u2019s a lot of work. We can\u2019t just say \u2018Remove this, remove that.\u2019 We have to explain, have examples,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n David Sakoda, representing the state of Hawai\u2018i on the council, said the state would like an opportunity to review the list of recommendations before it\u2019s finalized and submitted to the council for approval. \u201cAnd every member should have that opportunity, too,\u201d he said. In recent months, the state of Hawai\u2018i\u2019s representatives on the council have clashed with the council and staff from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration over a variety of issues, mainly those concerning the council\u2019s involvement in the management of state marine resources.<\/p>\n\n\n\n At the council\u2019s March meeting, Ryan Okano, who was then the state\u2019s representative on the council, objected to the inclusion in the agenda of a status update by the state on the aquarium fishing trade, which is the subject of ongoing litigation and occurs exclusively in state waters. The council chose to keep the matter on the agenda, but Okano warned that when the time came to hear it, \u201cyou guys can talk about \u2019em. We not gon\u2019 present nothing.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n When the time came, attorney Jim Lynch, chair of the council\u2019s Scientific and Statistical Committee, updated the council. In his private practice, Lynch represents a group of commercial aquarium fishers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The June meeting saw a continuation of that friction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n On May 8, in response to an invitation from Peter Navarro of the U.S. Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy during a conference call on the executive order promoting American competition, Simonds and Soliai sent a letter to Trump asking him to \u201cplease consider lifting the fishing restrictions in the Pacific marine national monuments,\u201d including those for the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (known as Papahanaumokuakea) and the Pacific Remote Island Areas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201c[Fishing] restrictions in the Pacific marine national monuments are impeding America\u2019s three main tuna fisheries in the Pacific and the StarKist tuna cannery in American Samoa from operating at optimal levels and that these fishing restrictions are unnecessary as they have no proven conservation benefit,\u201d they wrote. (Soliai is in charge of government and community relations at StarKist Samoa.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n David Sakoda, who represented the state\u2019s interest at the June meeting, informed the council that the state didn\u2019t necessarily agree with the letter Soliai and Simonds sent. \u201cWe don\u2019t feel the fishing has been hurt by [the monuments]. And there are conservation benefits,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When it came time to vote on the contents of another letter to Trump, which included the commendation for opening the marine national monument in the Atlantic, Sakoda balked. \u201cI don\u2019t know if the state can support the portion that thanks the president or commends the president for modifying the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument. So I\u2019m going to be voting no,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The rest of the council members voted in favor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The most pronounced disagreement between the state and the council centered on the approval of a new marine conservation plan for the Pacific Remote Island Areas. (The existing plan expires in August.) Under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the plan must include Western Pacific community-based demonstration projects and \u201cother coastal improvement projects to foster and promote the management, conservation, and economic enhancement of the Pacific Insular Areas,\u201d according to a council summary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Projects included in the plan would be paid for through the council\u2019s Sustainable Fisheries Fund, which receives penalties paid for violations within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone in the Western Pacific region, as well as money paid by Hawai\u2018i longliners to Pacific island territories for bigeye tuna quota.<\/p>\n\n\n\n At the council\u2019s March meeting, which is when staff first recommended the plan for approval, state Department of Land and Natural Resources director Suzanne Case complained that the state had not been consulted during the council staff\u2019s drafting of the PRIA MCP. The draft plan included projects to be undertaken in Hawai\u2018i and Case said she would rather they not be included. Rather, the projects should stick to fisheries under federal jurisdiction, such as pelagics or bottomfish.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Citing a critical investigation published last year by the online news site Civil Beat on the council\u2019s use of the Sustainable Fisheries Fund, Case said she wanted to keep a close eye on future council expenditures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cI\u2019ve asked for expenditures from the Sustainable Fisheries Fund and haven\u2019t gotten any. If there\u2019s a place we can look online?\u201d she asked.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When the matter returned to the council last month, Sakoda, representing Case, asked for several amendments to the draft plan, including the inclusion of language requiring transparency and accountability regarding the use of the fund, as well as state concurrence on projects.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Council staff dismissed both of those requests. The plan eventually did include language requiring collaboration with the state, which Sakoda said sufficed. But he questioned the resistance to the transparency language.<\/p>\n\n\n\n NMFS Pacific Islands Regional Office administrator Mike Tosatto replied that the plan is merely a list of projects that NOAA can provide funding to, in accordance with \u201ca slew of guidelines,\u201d including accountability. He said his agency was not looking to add extraordinary requirements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Simonds added that staff provides reports on how much money has been spent from the Sustainable Fisheries Fund and how much is left. She claimed that contractors and sub-awardees provide reports and that those reports are provided in the council\u2019s newsletters. She added, \u201cOn the website, I\u2019m not sure if we list all the financial things. … Maybe you should look at our reports after every meeting that we have. … They\u2019re available to the public.\u201d (The council consistently omits links to financial reports in its list of online documents for each council meeting. And for those documents on agenda items that are available online, the staff has a policy of keeping them up for only two weeks after the council meeting.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIf you could send us those reports, that would be great,\u201d Sakoda said, adding that the state just wants to make sure there aren\u2019t questions about how the money was spent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cWe\u2019ll show you what we do provide that is to the public and talk about it later,\u201d Simonds said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n With regard to Case\u2019s and Sakoda\u2019s request that projects that occur in areas under state jurisdiction not be included in the MCP, Simonds, Tosatto, and NOAA general counsel Fred Tucher rejected that, as well.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Simonds noted that the council funded the fishpond restoration at He\u2018eia Kea in windward O\u2018ahu. Tosatto said the fund could also be used for fisheries education and training.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Tucher said MCP projects aren\u2019t necessarily limited to federally managed fisheries. \u201cI appreciate the state\u2019s concern, but we do not agree,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIs there another way you can suggest addressing the state\u2019s concerns for things that are primarily not council-managed fisheries?\u201d Sakoda asked, suggesting that the state might object to an MCP project that involved advocating for or against state community-based fishing areas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cWe don\u2019t necessarily look at the message to be communicated,\u201d Tucher replied.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the end, the council approved the plan. Sakoda was the sole dissenter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u2014 Teresa Dawson<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Book-ended by opening and closing Christian prayers from chair Archie Soliai, the federal Western Pacific Fishery Management Council’s June meeting included the near-unanimous approval of a letter to President Donald Trump, commending him for lifting the commercial fishing ban in the Northeast … Continued<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":10178,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,471,17,339,422],"tags":[3],"class_list":["post-12658","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-fisheries","category-july-2020","category-marine","category-nwhi","category-nwhi-fishing","tag-teresa-dawson"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12658","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=12658"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12658\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/10178"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=12658"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=12658"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=12658"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"\"](\"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/1280px-Oceanic_Whitetip_Shark-1024x769.png\")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/environment-hawaii.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/01\/image.png\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nHawai\u2018i Reps Continue Standoff with Council
<\/h2>\n\n\n\n