BACKGROUND ON SEAFOOD COMMUNITY COALITION AMENDMENTS Best Scientific Information Available
This is the standard used in the Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSFCMA) to establish conservation and management measures. Under current law, it is undefined. We are proposing a definition that requires peer review, is based on sound data, is neutral in regard to management outcomes, and allows consideration of information provided by fishermen and processors.Peer Review
While some fishery management councils - notably the Pacific and North Pacific - have established processes for peer review of fisheries stock assessments, this concept has not yet been developed in other areas. The amendments require councils to establish a peer review process for fisheries stock assessments.Essential Fish Habitat
The broad interpretation of "Essential Fish Habitat" by the National Marine Fisheries Service, combined with lack of data, has forced councils to declare the entire ocean as "essential", thereby dissipating efforts to protect truly important areas. The bill requires councils to narrow their focus into "habitat areas of particular concern", an effort that has already begun in the North Pacific.Overfishing / Rebuilding
Current law mandates impossible rebuilding requirements on fish stocks that have been reduced due to natural environmental fluctuations, such as is occurring on the Pacific coast. It also imposes nearly impossible time frames on scientists and fisheries managers. The amendments change the focus to concentrate on stocks that are reduced by human actions (true "overfishing"), recognize fish stock fluctuations due to changes in carrying capacity, require rebuilding programs to be based on science, and give managers enough time to develop workable rebuilding programs.Food Policy
The amendments modify existing policies to recognize the importance of fish as a source of food, nutrition, and good health.Observers
Existing observer programs are fragmented and often designed without clear goals and objectives. The amendments recognize that observer coverage in fisheries can be an important source of data for fisheries conservation and management, but that clear policies, goals, and objectives need to be established for such programs. In no case should observers be used to provide economic advantages to one segment of the seafood community over another.Cumulative Impacts
Far too often, rules are added on top of regulations without recognizing that the cumulative impact of restrictions may be far greater than was intended. The amendments maintain conservation as a priority but - consistent with that priority - require managers to recognize the cumulative impact of regulations.Population Fluctuations
Fish populations are neither static nor predictable and often fluctuate annually. So, too, can harvest levels. Under existing law, catching one fish too many means that fisheries managers are trapped into the onerous requirements for stock rebuilding. The amendments recognize natural fluctuations, while still maintaining protections against overfishing (as noted above).Effects on Fishing
While the law requires federal agencies to consult with fisheries managers on actions that affect fisheries habitat, similar actions that affect the users of that habitat are ignored. For example, dredge spoils cannot be arbitrarily dumped in a crab nursery area, but dredging operations that interfere with fishermen can occur without much recourse. The amendments require federal agencies to engage in similar consultation if their actions affect fishing.