IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING

SHELL
GAME
How the Federal Government is
Hiding the Mismanagement of
Our Nation’s Fisheries
Acknowledgements
Cover Images:

Top Right Photograph: Jack Mackerel caught by a

purse seiner. Photo Courtesy of: NOAA/Department
of Commerce

Bottom Left Photograph: Trawl net full of fish. Photo

Courtesy of: NOAA/Department of Commerce

Bottom Right Photograph: Bringing a huge trawl

aboard a commercial fishing vessel. Photo Courtesy
of: NOAA/Department of Commerce

This report was prepared by Sarah Clark Stuart, with

information provided by staff and members of the Marine
Fish Conservation Network.
Executive Summary
Ocean fish are the last wild creatures that humans hunt
for food on a large scale. The oceans once supplied a
seemingly unending bounty of seafood, with codfish so
plentiful off the coast of New England, fishermen merely
needed to dip baskets into the water to catch them.
Today, many of our nation’s commercially important
fish populations (or what fishery managers call “stocks”)
are fished at unsustainably high rates, with some, like
New England cod stocks, fished down to historic lows,
endangering the future of not only the fish stocks, but our
nation’s fishermen.

As American seafood consumption continues to rise, we Florida Red Snapper.

need healthy, productive fish stocks to support this growing
demand. Overfishing – catching fish faster than they can However, administrative actions, such as dropping stocks
reproduce – threatens the vitality of our fish stocks and the out of the count, deciding that not enough information
fishermen who depend on them for their way of life. existed so they should be moved to the “unknown”
category or collapsing many stocks into one “complex,”
Twenty years of ineffective regulation of U.S. fisheries by account for most of the declining trend: 60 percent of the
the National Marine Fisheries Service and the regional overfished stocks and 75 percent of the stocks experiencing
fishery management councils led to fish stock crashes in overfishing between 2001 and 2004 were taken off the
New England, the Pacific, and other parts of the country, list due to administrative shuffling or reclassification. In
resulting in severe economic and ecological impacts. a nutshell, the number of stocks that are overfished and
Congress recognized the threat posed by overfishing when experiencing overfishing has not appreciably declined.
it passed amendments to Magnuson Act known as the
Sustainable Fisheries Act in 1996, requiring the regional By 2004, only 13 percent of the nation’s fish
fishery management councils, using guidance provided stocks could be considered “healthy.” The
by the National Marine Fisheries Service, to define and number of healthy stocks, i.e., those stocks that are both
eliminate overfishing and create plans to rebuild overfished not overfished, nor experiencing overfishing, remained
populations within 10 years if possible. To track rebuilding constant between 2001 and 2004. Not only is the number
progress, the Sustainable Fisheries Act also required the of healthy stocks very low, there has not been a discernable
Secretary of Commerce to report to Congress annually on gain in healthy stocks between 2001-2004.
the status of each fish stock managed by the councils. This
report analyzes data from the 2001 – 2004 “Status of U.S. Councils have a pattern of allowing overfishing to
Fisheries” reports (the most recent reports available) and continue on overfished stocks. Many councils allowed
action by the regional fishery management councils from overfishing to continue on overfished stocks between 2001
2001 – 2005 to assess the efforts made by fishery managers and 2004, including New England’s Georges Bank cod,
to eliminate overfishing and rebuild overfished stocks. Key Pacific groundfish, and Gulf of Mexico red snapper. As
findings of this analysis include: of 2004, five councils and NMFS allowed 27 overfished
stocks to also be subjected to overfishing, despite legal
Progress reducing the number of stocks that requirements to end overfishing.
are overfished and experiencing overfishing
is an administrative shell game. At first glance Some councils refuse to accept scientific
there appears to be a declining trend in the number of recommendations with disastrous results.
stocks that are overfished and experiencing overfishing. Several councils have a history of refusing to accept

IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING 1

Bocaccio Rockfish.

scientific information that requires the adoption of strict NMFS does not know if the majority of stocks
conservation measures. It took a federal lawsuit to force it manages are overfished or experiencing
the New England Council to adopt a plan to rebuild overfishing. In 2004, NMFS did not know whether 70
Georges Bank cod by 2026. The Gulf Council exceeded percent of all the nation’s stocks were overfished or not.
red snapper catch levels recommended by scientists by 50 For over half of all the nation’s stocks, it does not know if
percent and, as a result, does not expect the population to they are experiencing overfishing. NMFS has worked to
be rebuilt until 2032. It took a federal disaster declaration increase its knowledge of commercially important stocks,
for the Pacific Council to finally take action to protect but knows less about so called “minor” stocks than it did
groundfish and, as a result, canary rockfish will not be four years prior.
rebuilt until 2074.
Out-of-date data is prevalent for some councils.
Ineffective management tools are common. When The variance in the availability of current data for
councils set catch levels without a mechanism to stop different councils is striking. The Gulf, South Atlantic and
fishing once the level is reached, overfishing often results. Caribbean councils work with data that is sometimes over
Many councils continue to use these ineffective measures, 5 years old. While the New England, Pacific, North Pacific,
even when a stock is declared overfished. Closed areas or and Western Pacific councils tend to work with more
fishing moratoria have allowed successful rebuilding of recent data.
whiting and lingcod in the Pacific, and goliath and Nassau
grouper in the Gulf of Mexico. Ten years after the passage of the Sustainable Fisheries
Act, efforts to prevent overfishing and rebuild overfished
populations remain inadequate. Overfishing continues on
overfished populations, while administrative changes to
the status of the stocks reports mask the councils’ failures
to control overfishing. Recent council actions to rebuild
overfished populations are an improvement over past
inaction, but still fall short of what is required to protect
our nation’s fish. Councils need to move beyond adopting
the easiest and most obvious measures, actively encourage
better data collection, and utilize moratoria, long-term
closures, and “hard” catch limits to provide the thorough
levels of protection needed for sustaining fish populations
for future generations.
Atlantic Cod.

2 IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING

An Introduction to Federal Overfishing and Rebuilding
Fisheries Management Of all the issues that led Congress to pass the SFA in
1996, overfishing and the need to rebuild depleted fish
In 1976, under pressure to eliminate foreign fishing in U.S. populations were the most prominent. The previous twenty
waters and promote the U.S. fishing industry, Congress years of ineffective regulation by NMFS and the councils
passed the Fishery Conservation and Management Act had resulted in fish population crashes in New England
(FCMA). The FCMA established a structure for the and other parts of the country, leading to severe economic
federal government to manage living marine resources and ecological disaster.
from 3-200 miles offshore, creating eight regional
fishery management councils to regulate commercial and Magnuson Act Requirements
recreational fishing. At the time, the primary goal of the
FCMA was to develop the American fishing industry and Prior to the passage of the SFA in 1996, the Magnuson Act
to phase out foreign fishing. To facilitate this, Congress allowed fishery managers to set unsustainably high catch
allowed the fishing industry a large role in writing the levels, i.e., to allow “overfishing,” for economic reasons.
rules. The FCMA established regional fishery management The mechanism for this was the definition of “optimum,”
councils composed largely of appointed fishing industry which is used to determine optimum yield.2 Optimum yield is
representatives, as well as state and federal regulators. The the catch level for a population (or what fishery managers
councils recommend fishing management measures to the call “stocks”) that achieves the greatest overall benefits
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), which then to the nation, including economic, social and biological
can either approve or disapprove those recommendations. considerations.3 For managers to set optimum yield,
This structure remains in place today. A recent study of scientists must first establish what is the largest average
this system showed that in a vast majority of cases, NMFS number of fish that can be caught over the long-term
approved the councils’ recommendations,1 thus making the under average environmental conditions (in fishery terms,
industry dominated councils the de facto regulators of U.S. this is called maximum sustainable yield or MSY).4 Prior to
ocean fisheries. the 1996 amendments, managers were allowed to set
optimum yield above MSY, often contrary to scientific
By 1996, it was clear that the system was not ensuring recommendations, for economic reasons and too often did.
sustainable management. Overfishing (catching fish at Over time, these unsustainably high catch levels, and the
unsustainably high rates), high levels of bycatch, (the lack of any requirement to rebuild depleted fish stocks,
catching and killing of non-target ocean birds, fish, and led to precipitous stock declines and severe economic
mammals) and destruction of fish habitat over the prior hardships in many parts of the country. The crash of New
twenty years had pushed many marine fish populations England cod stocks in the mid 1990s was the most widely
to unsustainably low levels. At the behest of a coalition known example of this and it played a large part in passage
of environmentalists, fishermen, and marine scientists, of the SFA.
Congress took bold action to change the focus of what
was then called the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and In 1996, when Congress passed the SFA amendments
Management Act (Magnuson Act) from promoting fishing to the Magnuson Act, it, among other things, created a
to conserving fish. In a unanimous vote in the Senate and new set of rules to protect against overfishing and rebuild
a nearly unanimous vote in the House, Congress passed depleted fish stocks. For example, the SFA created new
a series of amendments to the Magnuson Act, known as definitions of “overfishing” and “overfished.” Importantly
the Sustainable Fisheries Act (SFA), that were intended it also amended the definition of “optimum” to prohibit
to end overfishing, rebuild overfished populations, and managers from allowing overfishing for economic reasons,
minimize bycatch and fish habitat destruction by requiring required NMFS to notify fishery management councils
the regional fishery management councils to implement if a fish stock was determined to be “overfished,” and
specific provisions to address these major threats. required councils to create rebuilding plans to rebuild these
“overfished” stocks to healthy levels as quickly as possible,

IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING 3

but in not more than 10 years if biologically possible.5 In overfishing, or approaching an overfished condition.i In
situations where councils did not develop rebuilding plans its 2004 report, NMFS determined the overfished status
within one year, the SFA amendments mandated that the of 29 percent of all stocks and the overfishing status
Secretary of Commerce step in and develop such a plan. of 34 percent of all stocks.9 (To see NMFS definitions
for “overfished”, “experiencing overfishing,” and
The SFA also amended the national standards – the guiding “approaching an overfished condition” in the following
principles for the development of fishery management manner, please see the box below.)10
plans and their regulations – by adding new standards for
protecting fishing communities, minimizing bycatch, and
promoting safety. Overfished – The biomass (the amount of fish
expressed as total weight) of a stock is too low. 11
National Standard 1, which was not amended by the SFA,
requires that conservation and management measures Experiencing Overfishing – The proportion of a stock
be adopted in individual fishery management plans to taken by fishing is too high.
accomplish two things: prevent overfishing and achieve
catch levels that optimize the number of fish that can be Approaching Overfished Condition – Based on trends
caught while keeping the fish stock at a sustainable level, in harvesting effort, fishery resource size, and other
i.e., optimum yield.6 Because of the SFA changes to the appropriate factors, it is estimated that the fishery
definition of optimum, optimum yield can now only be will become overfished within two years.
set at or below maximum sustainable yield (MSY) while
accounting for other factors, such as the needs of the entire
marine ecosystem in which the fish stock lives. Councils are Once NMFS determines that a stock is overfished, or
no longer allowed to establish fishing rates that exceed MSY. overfishing is occurring, or other measures indicate
that a stock may soon be overfished, it must notify the
NMFS’ regulations state that “overfishing” is occurring relevant regional fishery management council. Councils
when a stock is fished for more than one year at a rate have one year to prepare a fishery management plan
that jeopardizes the stock’s ability to produce enough fish (FMP) or amend an existing FMP, detailing what action
to achieve its maximum sustainable yield on a continuing is required to end overfishing and rebuild the overfished
basis.7 In other words, a stock size needs to be large enough stock. As part of that action, councils must specify a
so that there are a sufficient number of adults biologically time period for rebuilding the stock that should be “as
capable of producing the offspring necessary for fishing to short as possible,” but “not to exceed 10 years, except
continue sustainably (remember: the maximum sustainable in cases where the biology of the stock of fish, other
yield (MSY) is the upper limit of what can be caught on environmental conditions, or management measures under
average without jeopardizing the health of the stock). If an international agreement dictate otherwise.”12 When
the amount of fish caught is so high that it reduces the councils do not develop a plan within a year, the Secretary
stock’s ability to sustain itself at the level that allows fishing of Commerce is supposed to develop one with nine months.
at MSY, overfishing is occurring.
Not only did Congress specifically require that the councils
If overfishing continues for a prolonged period of time, end overfishing and rebuild overfished stocks when passing
fish stocks may become “overfished.” A fish stock is the SFA, it charged the Department of Commerce with
considered “overfished” when its population size falls the responsibility of reporting annually on the status of
below a minimum level that scientists determine is too low
to ensure sustainable reproduction, generally below 20
percent of its historic unfished levels. i
Only a subset of stocks receives this review. Those stocks whose sta-
tus can be determined are considered “known” or “assessed,” while
Every year, NMFS conducts a review8 to determine those stocks for which information is not available or sufficient to
whether or not a stock is overfished, or experiencing make a determination are considered “unknown” or “unassessed.”

4 IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING

fish stocks under each council’s jurisdiction. The Secretary Marine Fisheries Service Implementation of the Sustainable Fisheries
of Commerce is required to report to Congress and the Act; and Caught in the Act – The Devastating Effect of Fisheries
councils annually on “the status of fisheries within each Mismanagement After Five Years of the Sustainable Fisheries Act (please
council’s geographic area of authority and identify those go to www.conservefish.org to view copies of these reports).
fisheries that are overfished or are approaching a condition
of being overfished.”13
At the National Level
Beginning in 1997, NMFS annually issued “Status of
U.S. Fisheries” reports to Congress and the councils. Progress in Reducing
While Congress did not explicitly set a deadline for this
report, NMFS has consistently released this report later Overfishing is Minimal
and later each year, so that the 1997 report was released
in September 1997, while the 2004 report was released in This section reviews NMFS’ “Status of U.S. Fisheries”
August 2005 – 11 months later in the year. A report for reports and summarizes the data provided in each of
2005 has yet to be released. them to determine chronological trends with respect to
how many fish are overfished, experiencing overfishing,
In an initial draft of amendments to what is now called the approaching an overfished condition, or not assessed at
Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA) prepared in 2005, NMFS all.15 Because one of the goals of the SFA is to encourage
proposed eliminating the annual reporting requirement fishery managers to act quickly and decisively to address
and substituting “[a] periodic….list of status of stocks.” overfishing problems nationwide, this comparative review
Such a list would make year-to-year comparisons difficult, attempts to determine the progress made since 2001. The
if not impossible, and ultimately due to objections from following questions frame this review:
the conservation community and other parts of the Bush
Administration, that language was dropped. The final 1. Has the number of stocks that are overfished or
proposed amendments transmitted to Congress stated experiencing overfishing declined?
that the list would be updated annually, but the reporting 2. Has the number of healthy stocks (those that
requirement remains.14 This effort to try to eliminate the are known to not be overfished nor experiencing
annual reporting requirement indicates that NMFS would overfishing) increased?
prefer to not have an annual metric of its performance in 3. Has the number of stocks that have been assessed
reducing overfishing and rebuilding overfished fisheries. to determine whether they are either experiencing
overfishing or overfished (so called “known” stocks)
This report provides an assessment of the progress made increased?
by NMFS and the councils in implementing the SFA 4. Has the implementation of the SFA improved the
requirements from 2001 through 2005. It summarizes nation’s fisheries and made them healthier?
information from the 2001 - 2004 “Status of U.S.
Fisheries” reports and each of the council’s actions taken By reviewing the key national data figures from the 2001-
from 2001 - 2005 to address overfishing and rebuilding. 2004 reports to Congress, several trends emerge.
Together these two analyses provide a solid understanding
of how NMFS and the councils have carried out their Reductions in the number of stocks that are
mandates to end overfishing and rebuilding overfished overfished and experiencing overfishing have been
stocks over the past five years. incremental. Overall, while the trend in the number
of stocks that are overfished and experiencing overfishing
For reviews of the implementation of the SFA’s conservation is declining, it is an incremental decline. The number of
requirements from 1996 through 2000, please see earlier stocks that were categorized as overfished declined from
Marine Fish Conservation Network reports entitled: Missing 80 to 56 between 2001 and 2004, but this only accounted
the Boat – An evaluation of fishery management council response to for a decline from 33 percent to 28 percent of all the
the Sustainable Fisheries Act; Lost at Sea – A Review of National stocks that have been assessed to determine if they were

IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING 5

overfished. Over the same period, the number of stocks Most of the declining trend is due to administrative
experiencing overfishing went from 62 to 44, which taken actions, not rebuilding or an end to overfishing.
as a percentage of the all the stocks assessed to determine The most unsettling aspect of this declining trend is not
whether overfishing was occurring, showed only an that it is so incremental, but that it is not real. Some of the
incremental drop from 22 percent to 19 percent. decline in the number of stocks categorized as overfished
or experiencing overfishing that is documented in these
This incremental downward trend is displayed in Figures charts is due to successful rebuilding of stocks and efforts
1 and 2, where the relationship between those stocks that to end overfishing, but proper management is not the main
are in jeopardy and those that are not overfished or not reason for the downward trend, and instead is the result of a
experiencing overfishing has not changed dramatically NMFS shell game.
since 2001.
Specifically, in 2002, NMFS moved 17 stocks off the
1000 Number of overfishing list to the “unknown, undefined, or N/A”
Stocks Whose lists.16 In 2003, the agency moved five shark stocks
Overfished
Status is from both the overfishing list and the overfished list to
800 Unknown “unknown.”17 In 2004, NMFS folded 17 shark species
Number of into one “complex,” the Large Coastal Shark Complex,
Stocks NOT
600 Overfished thus accounting for most of the drop in overfished stocks
Number of and stocks experiencing overfishing between 2003 and
400
Stocks 2004.18 Also in 2004, NMFS dropped stocks managed by
Overfished
the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission from
its total listing of all stocks, accounting for an additional
200
decline in stocks experiencing overfishing by five. Together
these administrative actions account for 60 percent of the
0 stocks moved off the overfished list and 75 percent of the
2001 2002 2003 2004
stocks moved off the experiencing overfishing list. ii,iii The
Figure 1. Number of Stocks that are Overfished, Not Overfished only way to interpret these findings is to conclude that
and Whose Overfished Status is Unknown. the declining trend in overfishing and overfished stocks
is due primarily to NMFS’ ploy of moving stocks off the
overfished and overfishing lists for reasons other than
1000 rebuilding or an end to overfishing.
Number of
Stocks Whose
Overfishing
800 Status is
NMFS has administratively reduced the number
Unknown of managed stocks. Chart 1 and 2 also show that
Number of the number of stocks whose status is unknown dropped
600 Stocks NOT
Experiencing significantly in 2004. Until 2003, the total number of
Overfishing
stocks managed by NMFS hovered between 900-950. In
Number of
400 Stocks 2004, NMFS changed its methodology for counting stocks,
Experiencing
Overfishing
by combining a number of “minor” stocks into “stock
complexes,” which resulted in a drop of the total number
200
stocks to 688, 25 percent less than in 2003.19 If NMFS had
kept to its pre-2004 methodology, the number of stocks
0 would have instead risen to over 1,700 individual stocks in
2001 2002 2003 2004 2004.20 This significant increase is due to the addition of
Figure 2. Number of Stocks Experiencing Overfishing, Not three new fishery management plans, which contain many
Experiencing Overfishing, and Whose Overfishing Status multi-species complexes.
is Unknown.

6 IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING

Only 13 percent of the nation’s stocks are healthy, NMFS still does not know if most of its stocks are
i.e., both not overfished and not experiencing overfished or experiencing overfishing. Between
overfishing. After nearly eight years of SFA 2001 and 2004, the percentage of stocks that were not
implementation, only 13.3 percent of all stocks are both assessed to determine if they were overfished had declined
not overfished and not experiencing overfishing according from 74 percent to 71 percent. With regard to determining
to the requirements of the SFA. This is an increase from whether stocks were experiencing overfishing, the
8.9 percent in 2001. However, this slight increase is not a percentage dropped from 63 percent to 58 percent.
function of an increasing number of healthy stocks, but
rather a function of the drop in the overall number of So although NMFS is making some progress in increasing
stocks that NMFS manages between those two years. In its knowledge base about the stocks it is responsible for,
fact, the actual number of healthy stocks (91) remained flat after eight years of implementing the SFA, it still does
between 2001 and 2004.iv Not only is the overall number of not know if two-thirds of all the nation’s fish stocks are
healthy stocks still pitifully low, there has not been a discernable overfished, or if over half of all the nation’s stocks are
gain in healthy stocks between the years of 2001-2004. experiencing overfishing.

Overfishing still continues on overfished stocks. NMFS focuses on “major” stocks at the expense
In 2001, 65 percent (53 out 81) of the overfished of all stocks. In 2001, NMFS started to categorize stocks
stocks were also experiencing overfishing. In 2004, the as being “major” if more than 200,000 pounds of the stock
percentage was 47 percent (27 out 57). While this is a were landed in a year and “minor” if the landings were less
welcome improvement, after nearly eight years of SFA than 200,000 pounds.21 This decision allowed NMFS to
implementation, overfishing continues to occur on nearly argue that it is making progress on the stocks that “matter,”
half of the nation’s stocks that are already depleted and i.e., those stocks that are more economically important.
are in need of rebuilding. NMFS’ record of allowing By emphasizing that its record is better on major stocks
persistent overfishing calls its leadership into question. One (as opposed to all stocks), NMFS downplays the problem
of the lesser know provisions of the SFA requires NMFS of overfishing. For example, by 2004, 13 percent of
to develop an FMP or amendment to end overfishing if major stocks were overfished and 15 percent were
a council does not do so within one year of a stock being experiencing overfishing. That is a better record than 28
identified as overfished. Unfortunately, NMFS has never percent and 19 percent respectively of all assessed stocks.
fulfilled this legal responsibility. While this artificial distinction may make NMFS’ track

ii
Between 2002 and 2004, the number of overfished stocks dropped from 86 to 56 (in 2001, the number was 81) for a net total of 30
stocks that were moved off the overfished list. In fact, 25 were moved off for administrative reasons, such as determining that their
status was “unknown” or folding many stocks into one complex, while 16 others were determined to be either rebuilt or rebuilding.
12 stocks were added onto the overfished list for a net total of 29. (There is a discrepancy of 1 stock between the numbers provided
in the Status of Stocks tables and the accounting of each stock’s status provided in the report.) Thus 25 out 41 (60%) were moved off
the overfished list due to administrative actions.

iii
Between 2002 and 2004, the number of stocks experiencing overfishing dropped from 66 to 44 (in 2001, the number was 65) for a
total decline of 22 stocks. Twenty four were moved for administrative reasons, while 8 stocks were moved off because overfishing
ended. Eleven stocks were added back on for a net total of 21 stocks. (There is a discrepancy of 1 stock between the numbers
provided in the Status of Stocks tables and the accounting of each stock’s status provided in the report.) Thus, 24 out of 32 stocks
(75%) were moved off the overfishing list due to administrative actions.

iv
The number of healthy stocks in 2004 (91) might be a very slight undercount because NMFS dropped figures from ASFMC and
GSFMC that year. Even if healthy stocks from ASFMC and GSFMC in 2004 were added in, the number of healthy stocks would
not be significantly higher than 91.

IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING 7

record look better, it runs counter to calls from the U.S. North Pacific
Commission on Ocean Policy and others to move fisheries 250 243
management towards ecosystem-based management Total
where a stock’s value is based on its ecological value, not Assessed
its economic value. 200 In-Jeopardy
Healthy

NMFS’ knowledge about minor stocks is poor 150

and getting worse. By emphasizing the importance of
major stocks, NMFS dedicates more resources towards
assessing the health of economically valuable stocks at 100
82
the expense of potentially ecologically important minor 70
54
stocks. By 2004, the percentage of minor stocks whose 50
overfished and experiencing overfishing status was 26 28
unknown was substantially higher (92 percent and 88 2 4
0
percent respectively) than for major stocks (35 percent and
27 percent respectively). 2001 2004

In fact, the trend for minor stocks is getting worse. The Figure 3. North Pacific Fishery Management Council. Total
percentage of minor stocks whose overfishing status was includes the total number of stocks under federal management.
unknown rose from 84 percent in 2000 to 88 percent in Assessed includes the number of stocks, post Sustainable
2004. The unknown overfished status for minor stocks Fisheries Act, which have been at least partially evaluated for
increased from 87 percent in 2000 to 92 percent in 2004. overfishing and/or overfished status. In-Jeopardy includes
the number of stocks that are overfished and/or experiencing
overfishing. Healthy includes the number of stocks that are
Summary of Regional neither overfished nor experiencing overfishing.

Councils’ Efforts to Reduce The North Pacific Fishery Management Council takes
the most precautionary approach of all councils when
Overfishing Between 2001 managing its fisheries and is recognized by many as
a model for other councils. Managers tend to follow
and 2005 scientists’ recommendations when setting catch limits
for stocks. As a result, their finfish stocks are not formally
This section reviews the progress each council has made considered overfished or experiencing overfishing. However,
in implementing the Magnuson-Stevens Act’s (MSA) many conservation organizations have expressed concerns
requirements to end overfishing and rebuild overfished that the MSA’s narrow definition of overfishing does not fit
stocks between 2001 and 2005. Researchers for this the multi-species nature of Alaska’s groundfish fishery and
report gathered information for each council from fishery that single-species focused management fails to account
management plans (FMPs) from the years 2001 to 2005, for the impacts of fishing on the ecosystem as a whole.
and compiled information from the status of stocks reports
on which stocks were declared overfished, experiencing The crab fisheries of the Bering Sea and Aleutian
overfishing, and/or approaching an overfished condition. Islands that the North Pacific Council co-manages with
They also looked at what measures the councils have the State of Alaska illustrate the council’s conservative
taken to end overfishing and what progress is being made management practices for overfished species. The council
to rebuild overfished stocks. The researchers used this closed three of the four overfished crab fisheries in an
information to ascertain each council’s record. effort to rebuild them. In addition, the council closed six
other crab fisheries due to concerns about bycatch of
overfished species and insufficient population data. Despite

8 IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING

these measures, crab populations are not rebuilding as and following rebuilding requirements. The council should
quickly as expected. Crab bycatch caused by trawling for build on its otherwise notable achievements by taking a
groundfish, habitat destruction, and severely depressed closer look at its interpretations of overfishing and overfished
crab populations due to years of overfishing may all be definitions and embracing ecosystem management.
contributing to the crab stocks’ slow recovery.
Western
80 Pacific
While NMFS has rarely declared Alaska’s groundfish as
70
overfished or experiencing overfishing, some fishermen 64 Total
and most conservationists believe that the MSA’s narrow 60 Assessed
definition of “overfishing” does not suit the complicated In-Jeopardy
nature of Alaska’s groundfish populations. Groundfish 50 Healthy
stocks are managed as a single population across the entire
40
range of the Bering Sea /Aleutian Islands. For those stocks 35
that have smaller scale distributions, overfishing can occur 30
in one region or even in a subunit of a region, and not
trigger an overfishing identification because the definition 20
applies to the status of the population as a whole. This
10 8
process, called localized depletions, is clearly occurring 4 4 4
0 2
with some rockfish species, particularly rougheye rockfish 0
and possibly others, where local catch levels have exceeded
sustainable levels many times in recent years.22 2001 2004
Figure 4. Western Pacific Fishery Management Council. Total
The definition of “ovefished” has also masked some of the includes the total number of stocks under federal management.
problems within the high volume Alaskan pollock fishery. Assessed includes the number of stocks, post Sustainable
Although no Alaskan pollock stocks have been deemed Fisheries Act, which have been at least partially evaluated for
“overfished” under the requirements of the MSA, the overfishing and/or overfished status. In-Jeopardy includes
National Research Council recognized nearly a decade ago the number of stocks that are overfished and/or experiencing
that exploited pollock stocks have suffered major declines overfishing. Healthy includes the number of stocks that are
since the 1980s.23 neither overfished nor experiencing overfishing.

Additionally, the single-species focus of the MSA fails On the surface, the Western Pacific Fishery Management
to account for the impacts of the fisheries on marine Council seems to be on top of its overfishing and
food webs and habitats in an ecosystem context. The rebuilding requirements. However, a closer look reveals
North Pacific Council’s fishery management plans for a different story. The council did not implement its SFA
pollock exemplifies this shortcoming. For years, the amendments until 2003, five years after being legally
council downplayed the pollock fishery’s role in declining required to do so and four years after NMFS rejected its
Steller sea lion populations – a position that became very initial SFA amendments.25 While the council is currently
controversial. In 2000, NMFS documented that the Bering developing rebuilding plans for known overfished stocks,
Sea / Aleutian Groundfish FMP was indeed jeopardizing the health of over 70 percent of the stocks the council
the continued existence of the western population of the manages is unknown.26 As of 2004, only one stock in
Steller sea lions by removing too much of its food source the western Pacific was categorized as overfished, the
(pollock) and adversely affecting its critical habitat.24 seamount groundfish complex-Hancock seamounts, and
two were determined to be experiencing overfishing,
The North Pacific Fishery Management Council is, in bottomfish multi-species complex-Hawaiian archipelago
many ways, leading the way toward sustainable fisheries and bigeye tuna.27 The council is just now in the process of
management. It deserves credit for basing management completing its rebuilding plans for these stocks, so it is too
decisions on science, closing fisheries that are overfished, early to evaluate their efficacy.

IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING 9

One seemingly bright light is that the council is in the reports to hold their fishing licenses.31 Enforcement of
process of developing fishery ecosystem plans (FEPs) to management measures in the fishery is also problematic.
replace its species-based plans, but many conservationists The council acknowledges that “good enforcement and
fear that these plans are little more than window dressing. accurate reporting of catch data are imperative for the
The council is currently focused on revamping its species- bottomfish fishery,” but the council does not detail what it
based FMPs into FEPs. They have tentatively approved of plans to do to enforce its regulations and collect better data.32
four archipelagic FEPs for American Samoa, the Marianas
(Guam and Northern Mariana Islands), Hawaii, and U.S. Pacific
Remote Island Areas. A Pacific pelagic FEP will supplant
200
the existing FMP for tuna, billfish, and other open- Total
Assessed
water species.28 Many worry, including some employees 168
167 In-Jeopardy
at NMFS and the council, that these plans are nothing Healthy
150
more than the current single species plans with new titles.
Their effectiveness is questionable for several reasons.
Archipelagos are large geographic features that comprise
100
many ecosystems (from open water to barrier reefs, steep
slopes, and lagoons) each with its own unique habitats
and varying relationships between different species,
50 49
including predators and prey. Therefore, many scientists 41
31 30
consider the archipelagos to be too large to manage as
a single ecosystem. The ecosystem-based management 7 9
0
plans also contain poor definitions and data, and the
council has moved them quickly without enough informed
2001 2004
consent from the impacted communities, making their
effectiveness questionable.29 Figure 5. Pacific Fishery Management Council. Total includes
the total number of stocks under federal management. Assessed
The Western Pacific Council’s efforts provide a prime includes the number of stocks, post Sustainable Fisheries Act,
example of a council going through the motions of which have been at least partially evaluated for overfishing and/or
embracing ecosystem-based management without taking overfished status. In-Jeopardy includes the number of stocks
an in-depth look at the impacts its actions will have on its that are overfished and/or experiencing overfishing. Healthy
fisheries and communities. The council is making decisions includes the number of stocks that are neither overfished nor
despite the uncertainty of the influence it will have on 70 experiencing overfishing.
percent of the stocks it manages. The council appears to
be proactive, but it needs to have better population and During the past five years, the Pacific Fishery Management
ecosystem data to ensure that its new ecosystem plans Council struggled to rebuild nine overfished groundfish
are meaningful. populations decimated by decades of mismanagement.
High catch levels, failure to adequately control catch, and
Given the large number of unknown stocks, the council failure to account for bycatch from the late 1970s through
and NMFS should increase their data collection efforts the 1990s led to the declines of seven long-lived, slow-to-
to better inform their management decisions. In addition reproduce rockfish species and two other species.33 The
to the more than 70 percent of fish stocks whose health council’s slow response ultimately led the Department
is unknown, the council also does not collect reliable data of Commerce to formally declare a fishery disaster in
on fishing effort in this region. Almost 70 percent of the 2000.34 Since 2000, the council’s actions to restore these
fish in the Western Pacific are caught for recreational or populations have been mediocre at best.
subsistence purposes and are not recorded or reported.30
The data for the other 30 percent relies on the honesty In 2002, the council chose to close massive areas of the
of commercial fishermen who must complete daily catch ocean to fishing in order to retain fishing opportunities

10 IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING

for the gear type primarily responsible for the declines council enacted strict measures on commercial and
(bottom trawl) while simultaneously pushing cleaner gear recreational fisheries, many of the 69 wild and hatchery
types out of the closed areas. It ignored scientific advice stocks the council oversees remain severely depleted due
and stretched out rebuilding for decades (e.g., canary to dams, habitat loss, and insufficient river flows – all
rockfish is not expected to fully recover until 2074) and conditions which the council has no authority to regulate.
even attempted to increase catch of one species during The council has not been able to force NMFS, the Bureau
rebuilding. The council also allowed overfishing to occur of Reclamation or other relevant state and federal agencies
for two consecutive years on one species.35 Most recently, to improve conditions for spawning and survival of these
the council approved a policy that would allow increased anadromous fish, nor have its efforts to increase spawning
catch of overfished species despite a court order telling the escapement to the rivers been met with concurrent actions
council not to proceed with the increases. Despite these to improve in-river conditions.
actions, two species have rebuilt and four are showing
modest improvement. Three species are in the same or Two examples illustrate the failure of NMFS to remove
worse shape.36 barriers and restore flows and habitat necessary to restore
salmon populations. First, NMFS’ plan for restoring
The Pacific Council’s management of darkblotched endangered or threatened salmon populations in the
rockfish is a good case study of how the council has Columbia-Snake River system have continued to be
approached restoring overfished populations. In 2002, a found inadequate by federal courts. Second, NMFS’
stock assessment showed the darkblotched population at mismanagement of Klamath River fall-run Chinook
22 percent of its original size.37 At the time, the council – with low flows, warm water and poor water quality – has
argued that it could rebuild the population in less than recently led to a massive disease problem in the Klamath
ten years and set a catch of 187 metric tons. In 2003, a River that has been lethal to spawners and even more
new stock assessment showed the population was in worse deadly for their progeny. Although the disease problem is
condition than previously thought, at 12 percent of its well-known and documented, NMFS and other agencies
original size.38 The council then argued that darkblotch did not intervene to mitigate the impacts of the disease,
rockfish could not be rebuilt in ten years and increased the other than calling for restrictions in fishing. NMFS’ refusal
catch to 203 metric tons. The council increased the catch to act diminishes the Pacific Council’s efforts to manage this
again in 2004, despite only modest improvement in the population by limiting ocean catch and thwarts fishermen’s
species (14 percent of original size). In late 2004, the 9th opportunities to fish on healthy salmon populations.
Circuit Court ruled that the council acted improperly when
setting the higher catch levels and ordered the council to NMFS avoids accountability for this mismanagement by
lower the catch and take actions to immediately restore the not counting endangered and threatened species in its
species.39 The council did lower the catch, but kept in place annual status of stocks report to Congress.
a policy to allow for increased catch of overfished species.
The Pacific Council, with the Western Pacific Council,
The council even lobbied Congress to eliminate a key manages highly migratory species, such as albacore tuna,
provision in the law that requires fishery managers to but neither council has set thresholds for when to declare
rebuild fish populations within ten years if possible,40 these species as overfished or experiencing overfishing.
ironically the very provision responsible for the quick Recent assessments by international governing bodies show
restoration of the commercially and recreationally valuable that albacore tuna and yellowfin tuna are experiencing
lingcod.41 Most recently, the council asked U.S. Senator overfishing and are probably overfished.43 International
Ted Stevens (R-AK) to remove a proposed provision in his assessments also show that bigeye tuna is experiencing
MSA reauthorization bill, which would strengthen the law overfishing and is overfished. The council has missed a
to prevent overfishing.42 one-year deadline to take action to end overfishing, but in
tandem with NMFS is working to enact remedial measures.
Pacific salmon is one of the first fisheries the Pacific
Council managed, beginning in 1977. Although the

IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING 11

In sum, the Pacific Council’s recent record on overfishing council frequently works with old data. The most recent
shows a council unwilling to follow scientific advice to assessments to determine whether a stock is overfished use
restore overfished populations, but willing to exploit a data from the following years: red grouper (2001); greater
perceived loophole in the law to increase catch during amberjack (1998); vermillion snapper (1999); red drum
rebuilding. A council that continues on a policy path to (1997), Nassau grouper (a pre-SFA determination made in
allow increased catch of overfished species, despite a court 1990), and gag grouper (2001).44
order to the contrary, should re-think its management
practices to ensure the sustainability of its fisheries. Red snapper is the species that best exemplifies the
trouble this council has with overfishing. While the council
Gulf of Mexico recognized that red snapper needed rebuilding as early as
1984, over the years its measures were never enough to
60 57
55 Total end overfishing and allow the stock to rebuild to a healthy
Assessed level.45 Since 2001, red snapper’s status as overfished and
50
In-Jeopardy experiencing overfishing has not changed. Thus, after
Healthy two decades, the council still has not ended overfishing
40
as required by law. Recently, NMFS predicted the red
snapper stock would be only at 2.8 percent of historical
30
levels by 2007.46 Although the council uses a firm catch
limit, size limits, and closed seasons to reduce red snapper
20
catch, the stock is not rebuilding. One reason the stock is
12 not rebuilding it that overfishing is still occurring because
10 8 the council has failed to follow scientific recommendations
4 4
0 0
to control it. In 1999, the Gulf council set the catch limit
0 for red snapper 50 percent higher than recommended by
2001 2004 scientists. (The assessment team recommended a catch
limit of 5.8 million pounds and the council adopted one
Figure 6. Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. Total of 9.1 million pounds and assumed an overly optimistic
includes the total number of stocks under federal management. reduction in red snapper bycatch reduction in the shrimp
Assessed includes the number of stocks, post Sustainable fishery.)47 The council predicts that overfishing will end
Fisheries Act, which have been at least partially evaluated in 2009 or 2010, but based on current catch rates, red
for overfishing and/or overfished status. In-Jeopardy includes snapper is not expected to rebuild fully until 2032.48 The
the number of stocks that are overfished and/or experiencing council is now working on amendments to its reef fish and
overfishing. Healthy includes the number of stocks that are shrimp management plans to reduce overall mortality for
neither overfished nor experiencing overfishing. red snapper from shrimp bycatch, regulatory discards by
commercial and recreational fishermen (e.g., fish thrown
Overall, the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council back because they are too small, or the season is closed),
has not made sufficient progress in reducing overfishing or and by further reducing total allowable catch limits. 2006
rebuilding its stocks, with the exception of king mackerel. In will be an important year for the future of red snapper
that case, it took the council seven years to rebuild the stock. in the Gulf of Mexico because the council is expected to
complete these new amendments to address overfishing
The Gulf Council’s performance in reducing overfishing to and bycatch.
rebuild overfished stocks is plagued by two compounding
problems. First, when confronted with information Lack of information is a big problem in the Gulf of
showing overfishing, the council’s resulting actions were Mexico. The council does not know the status of more
not sufficient to rebuild effectively. In at least one instance, than 70 percent of the fish stocks that it manages. The
it flat out rejected scientific recommendations when setting Southeast Fisheries Science Center, which conducts stock
catch levels. Secondly, for those fish that are assessed, the assessments for the Gulf, South Atlantic, and Caribbean

12 IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING

councils, generally does them on a five-year cycle, leaving amendments until 2005; a full nine years after Congress
the council to use data from fishermen’s landings that does passed the act.49 The council even waited until 2002 to
not accurately account for the number of fish in the water establish a committee to deal with SFA implementation.
to make prudent regulatory decisions during those years While the council made some prudent decisions in its SFA
when up-to-date information is not available. amendments, the lack of timely implementation, data
problems, and enforcement issues challenge the efficacy
The Gulf Council must follow the recommendations of of their current management methods and may have
its scientists, take stronger measures to end overfishing and severely compromised the future health of this region’s fish
rebuild its overfished stocks, address bycatch in the shrimp populations and the communities that depend on them.
fishery in a meaningful way, and actively seek current and
accurate fisheries data to ensure the health of the fish While the council is finally ending the potentially
stocks it manages. damaging fishing practices it allowed following the passage
of the SFA, it still lacks sufficient data to make effective
Caribbean management decisions. In fact, the Southeast Regional
Office of NMFS has not conducted a stock assessment in
200
179 179
the Caribbean since the passage of the SFA. As seen in
Total other councils, the lack of scientific data is often cited as
Assessed rationale for continued overfishing and delayed rebuilding.
150 In-Jeopardy The council does not have sufficient information to know
Healthy
the health of 90 percent of the fish it manages – these
stocks may be thriving, or they may be struggling to
100
survive, the council just does not know. The data and
assessments used to determine the health of the remaining
10 percent of stocks that the council does have information
50
on is dangerously outdated. The most recent stock
assessments for Nassau and goliath groupers date back
0 0 0 0 0 0 to 1990 and 1994 respectively, several years prior to the
0
passage of the SFA.50 While the council acted prudently to
2001 2004 prohibit fishing for these groupers in the early 1990s, they
remain in an overfished condition today. 51 Additionally,
Figure 7. Caribbean Fishery Management Council. Total because the council lacks the ability to collect fishing data
includes the total number of stocks under federal management. itself, it relies on landings data provided by the U.S. Virgin
Assessed includes the number of stocks, post Sustainable Islands and Puerto Rico, which are comprised mostly of
Fisheries Act, which have been at least partially evaluated for monthly log reports that are not considered reliable. As
overfishing and/or overfished status. In-Jeopardy includes a result, the council also lacks accurate landings data to
the number of stocks that are overfished and/or experiencing inform its decisions.
overfishing. Healthy includes the number of stocks that are
neither overfished nor experiencing overfishing. Because NMFS Recognizing that prohibiting fishing of overfished
has not conducted a stock assessment in the Caribbean since stocks alone was not resulting in rebuilding; the council
before the passage of the SFA, this figure does not include prohibited the filleting of fish in the U.S. Caribbean
the status of the three stocks in the Caribbean known to be Exclusive Economic Zone in their SFA amendments
overfished prior to the passage of the SFA. as a way to control illegal fishing.52 While this new rule
will make it easier for dockside observers to recognize
The Caribbean Fishery Management Council’s SFA the species of fish when landed intact rather than as a
implementation is characterized by foot dragging, poor fillet, many subsistence fishermen do not land their catch
data, and weak enforcement. It was the last council at commercial facilities, which still makes enforcement
to implement the SFA and did not complete its SFA difficult. The council also acknowledged that several

IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING 13

stocks – parrotfish, certain snappers and groupers – were measures to decrease fishing mortality, such as setting
at “risk of being overfished” and included seasonal target catch limits and using indirect means to control
closures designed to reduce fishing mortality in their catches including size limits, bag limits, gear restrictions,
SFA amendments.53 While these are sensible steps for limited entry programs, and closed areas (in particular
the council to take to eliminate overfishing and promote the Oculina Experimental Closed Area).54 These effort
rebuilding, inadequate monitoring and enforcement of restrictions, however, have not been sufficient to
fishing effort continues to thwart attempts to rebuild fish successfully control overfishing.
stocks in the Caribbean.
There are several factors that have impeded progress to
The council has finally completed its SFA amendments, end overfishing in the South Atlantic. First of all, the
but its reluctance to do so for the past nine years may nature and complexity of the snapper-grouper fishery
have put the slow-growing Nassau and goliath groupers provides enormous challenges. The fishery consists of 73
in jeopardy for decades to come. The council needs to species, many of which have complex life cycles. They can
collaborate with local fish and wildlife departments to be slow growing, long lived, and late maturing, all of which
collect accurate data and increase fisheries monitoring and extend the time needed to fully recover. Also, because
enforcement to ensure the sustainable future of its fish stocks. many of these fish are deep-water species that often do not
survive catch-and-release fishing practices, conventional
South Atlantic management measures like bag limits and size limits
99 99 do not significantly decrease fish mortality, except by
100
Total indirectly discouraging fishermen to target those fish. But
Assessed
In-Jeopardy
even targeting certain species, without catching others, is
80
Healthy difficult due to the mixed nature of the fishery.

60
The biggest obstacle for the South Atlantic Council,
however, is the lack of accurate and up-to-date data.
40
31 33 In the snapper-grouper complex, the current status of
60-70 percent of the stocks is unknown. In 2002, there
20 13 12 was only enough data on three of the 73 species in the
7
2 snapper grouper fishery to conduct a stock assessment
0 necessary to comply with the SFA.55 Many of the current
2001 2004 assessments are based on data that is more than five years
old, sometimes 10 years old or more, and even then often
Figure 8. South Atlantic Fishery Management Council. Total incomplete. This is a severe problem that continues to
includes the total number of stocks under federal management. impair the council’s willingness or ability to take more
Assessed includes the number of stocks, post Sustainable action, as it cannot back up the need to make drastic
Fisheries Act, which have been at least partially evaluated for reductions without consistent science.
overfishing and/or overfished status. In-Jeopardy includes
the number of stocks that are overfished and/or experiencing The council, for the most part, does follow the scientific
overfishing. Healthy includes the number of stocks that are recommendations it receives, even if the tools it uses to
neither overfished nor experiencing overfishing. meet these recommendations have not been very effective.
One particular success story is the case of red porgy, which
For more than a decade, the South Atlantic Fishery NMFS declared in critical condition in 1998; the number
Management Council has struggled to curtail overfishing of young fish entering the fishery had plummeted. The
in the snapper-grouper complex, in which the vast council listened to the science and immediately drafted
numbers of species under its jurisdiction that are an emergency interim rule to prohibit the catching and
overfished or are experiencing overfishing are grouped. possession of red porgy off the southern Atlantic states.
In the past, the council tried a wide array of regulatory Although it took NMFS a year to enact the rule, the agency

14 IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING

closed the fishery. In the most recent assessment, the status Mid-Atlantic
of red porgy had improved, and was beginning to rebuild. 12 12 12
Total
In response, the council sent a moderate increase in catch 11 11
Assessed
levels to the Secretary of Commerce for approval. 10 In-Jeopardy
Healthy
Recently, new stock assessments and pressure from NMFS 8
have reinforced the need to take stronger steps to end
6
overfishing. Additionally, the council has continued to 6
work to bring its management plans for all species into 4 4
4
compliance with the SFA. These have all combined to 3
bring about the development and approval of Amendment
2
13C to the Snapper Grouper Fishery Management Plan.
This amendment, which the council finalized and sent to 0
the Secretary of Commerce for approval in December
2001 2004
2005, marks the council’s first real crack-down on
overfishing in this complex. It makes significant catch Figure 9. Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council. Total
reductions and sets strict catch limits for four species in the includes the total number of stocks under federal management.
snapper-grouper complex: snowy grouper, golden tilefish, Assessed includes the number of stocks, post Sustainable
vermilion snapper, and black sea bass. Once fishermen Fisheries Act, which have been at least partially evaluated for
meet these quotas, the council will close the fisheries, giving overfishing and/or overfished status. In-Jeopardy includes
the stocks a real chance to begin rebuilding. the number of stocks that are overfished and/or experiencing
overfishing. Healthy includes the number of stocks that are
There is still a lot of work to be done in the South Atlantic. neither overfished nor experiencing overfishing.
If Amendment 13C is approved by the Secretary of
Commerce, and the council follows it with appropriate
rebuilding plans, it will succeed in ending overfishing The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council’s
immediately for golden tilefish, phasing-out overfishing for performance in ending overfishing and rebuilding
snowy grouper and black sea bass over the next three years, overfished stocks is characterized by its inability to
and establishing a definite cap for vermillion snapper. Even effectively control all forms of fishing mortality. Poor
with an end to overfishing for three of these four stocks, data, particularly on bycatch mortality, combined with
there are still more than 10 stocks assessed as overfished or unsuitable and ineffective management measures,
experiencing overfishing, and dozens whose status is simply especially for the recreational fishery, have impeded
unknown. The council has recently shown that with some effective management.
extra pressure it has the ability to make good decisions
even in the face of uncertain data, and it can take the Two of the stocks that are subject to overfishing owe their
necessary actions to end overfishing and comply with SFA. status to data problems. Scup is the poster fish for how a
But, this has been a long time coming, and the council’s rebuilding plan can be hampered by a lack of data. Data
actions in developing rebuilding plans for snowy grouper, on the amount of scup discarded in other fisheries (such
black sea bass, and red porgy will be extremely telling of as the squid fishery) is unreliable, making it difficult for
their commitment to moving forward. scientists to determine whether the stock was subject to
overfishing in the 2002 assessment.56 However, a more
recent survey found that the scup stock is about 75 percent
below its target level, and it was categorized as overfished
in 2005.57,58 The council is currently developing an
amendment to the Scup FMP that will contain a rebuilding
plan.59 In addition, recent actions taken by the council
should contribute to an increase in scup abundance.

IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING 15

These include the development of a standardized bycatch more funding for data collection and analysis, including
reporting methodology in the scup rebuilding plan which enhanced at-sea, dock side, and phone surveys. With just
will improve data and a 5” mesh size to reduce bycatch.60,61 four years remaining in a ten year rebuilding plan, the
Council is a little over half of the way toward a rebuilt stock.65
While scup may be the poster fish for how management is
affected by a lack of data, summer flounder is the billboard New England
fish, and a controversial one at that. The controversy
40 39
is centered on imprecise data on recreational fishing 36 35
Total
35
mortality, the true status of the stock, and a regulatory 35 Assessed
In-Jeopardy
approach that has shaken the community’s faith in science 30 Healthy
and management.62 Managers attempt to control summer 25
flounder recreational fishing mortality by increasingly
20
higher size limits and bag limits, both meant to limit 17
the number of fish landed as the stock rebuilds. This is 15 14 13
problematic, however, because higher size limits led to 10 10

more discards of undersized fish and associated discard 5

mortality. In addition, the landed catch is composed of
increasingly larger fish, which can put the fishery over 0
quota since it is measured by weight, not numbers of 2001 2004
fish. If the number of recreational fishermen increases,
as it typically does in a rebounding fishery, more fish than Figure 10. New England Fishery Management Council. Total
projected are likely to be killed. Additionally, and unlike in includes the total number of stocks under federal management.
many commercial fisheries, recreational fishing does not Assessed includes the number of stocks, post Sustainable
stop when catch limits are reached because there is no real Fisheries Act, which have been at least partially evaluated for
time monitoring of catch. Recreational catch is estimated overfishing and/or overfished status. In-Jeopardy includes
via a telephone survey after the fishing season is over, and the number of stocks that are overfished and/or experiencing
many question the data’s quality. Finally, a large portion overfishing. Healthy includes the number of stocks that are
of the summer flounder catch comes from state waters neither overfished nor experiencing overfishing.
making state and federal cooperation on data collection
essential. All of these factors make accurate recreational The tale of New England’s groundfish (cod, yellowtail
fishing catch estimates and compliance with quotas difficult. flounder, and haddock, among others) is a case study of
overfishing in the United States. The New England Fishery
Not surprisingly, there has been little predictability in Management Council has a long history of refusing to
summer flounder management. In 2004, the Council protect against overfishing despite clear evidence that
and NMFS set a quota of 30.3 million pounds based on overfishing has consistently been a problem. Decades of
a stock assessment put forward by the council’s technical overfishing have caused the population sizes of the most
committee that had a 75 percent probability of success.63 important groundfish species to drop far below their
In 2005, NMFS cut it back to 23.59 million pounds when “target levels” (levels at which they can support healthy
a new assessment classified summer flounder as subject and sustainable populations). Overfishing caused these low
to overfishing again.64 NMFS estimated that this lower population levels, which has led to the steady and dramatic
quota would have a 50 percent probability of meeting decline of groundfish landings since the 1960s.66
rebuilding targets. Given the erratic and controversial
history of summer flounder management, the Council and New England and its history of mismanagement were
NMFS should take a hard look at its overall management the driving force behind the SFA’s amendments requiring
strategy and explore other, more innovative ways to gather fishery managers to end overfishing and rebuild depleted
data and keep catches within annual quotas and provide fish stocks. Despite this Congressional mandate, the
greater predictability. Included in these efforts should be New England council continued to ignore scientific

16 IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING

recommendations to reducing fishing and rebuild depleted sea available for scallop fishing, but did not control the
stocks. To compel fishery managers to comply with these entrance of new and larger vessels in the fishery. By 2004,
legal mandates, the Conservation Law Foundation, along scallop overfishing was again occurring.
with several other environmental groups, brought a key
lawsuit against the Commerce Department, which resulted In addition to refusing to take action when presented with
in a 2001 judgment ordering the council to take action scientific findings about the condition of its stocks, the
to rebuild these stocks.67 Several fishing groups then council’s choice of management actions to reduce fish
joined CLF’s side during the remedy phase of the case mortality continues to contribute to this council’s failure to
and the order ultimately resulted in Amendment 13 to control overfishing. The New England Council consistently
the Northeast Multi-Species Fishery Management Plan. places its faith in the ability of “input controls,” such as
While Amendment 13 established rebuilding schedules limiting the number of days-at-sea a vessel can fish, area
for depleted groundfish stocks, it failed to require an closures, and gear restrictions to collectively constrain
immediate end to overfishing. Instead the council adopted the amount of fish caught so that the target catch levels
a phased approached to ending overfishing, which calls for are met.69 But, input controls have proved to be blunt
an end to all overfishing by 2009.68 instruments in the war on overfishing, and fishermen have
consistently caught far more of the fish than the “target
In another example of poor management by the council, levels” without penalty. The constant overruns of fish caught
scallops were overfished for decades, prior to the 1994 in excess of the target catch levels scientists recommend
creation of groundfish closed area that prohibited all illustrate how the management actions have failed.
commercial fishing, including dredging for scallops. The
closed areas allowed the scallop stock to grow to full New England’s signature Georges Bank and Gulf of
reproductive maturity, resulting in a larger increase in the Maine cod stocks further illustrate this phenomenon.
stock than expected from the late 1990’s until 2001. In Between 1996 and 2004, landings compared to target
response to the increase in stock size, the council opened catch levels show how consistently input controls have
some of the closed areas to scallop dredging. The council failed to stop overfishing from occurring. Georges Bank
tried to reduce fishing effort by reducing the days at cod in particular has taken a beating from the constant

50000 Target Catch

Actual Catch
40000
1,000 POUNDS

30000

20000

10000

0
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
FISHING YEAR

Figure 11. Target Catch vs. Actual Catch – Gulf of Maine Fishery Statistics Office, includes commercial landings only,
and Georges Bank Cod 1996-2004. 1996 target TAC (total and excludes commercial discards and recreational catch.
allowable catch) and landings estimate from NEFMC 2001 2004 Target TAC from Amendment 13 Final Rule, actual catch
Multispecies Monitoring Committee, October 29, 2000. from 2005 GARM Report, includes discard estimates and
1997-2003 target TAC and commercial landings data from recreational catch for Gulf of Maine cod.
the National Marine Fisheries Service Northeast Regional

IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING 17

overfishing allowed over the years. Overfishing drove the Summary of Councils’ Performance in
spawning stock biomass (a measure of abundance -- the Reducing Overfishing and Rebuilding Stocks
amount of fish expressed as total weight) of Georges Bank
cod down from over 120,000 metric tons in the late 1970s Most councils either had the same number of overfished
to nearly below 10,000 metric tons in the mid 1990s.70 The stocks or stocks experiencing overfishing between 2001 and
2001 assessment showed that the stock was at 15 percent 2004, or dropped several from their lists. The Mid-Atlantic
of healthy stock levels. By 2004, Georges Bank cod had had the best record, dropping three stocks, while New
declined another 21 percent to near record lows and was England and the North Pacific had more stocks added
at only about 10 percent of healthy levels. during the same time period. While some councils have
better or worse records than others, some common themes
Unfortunately, Amendment 13 may not be enough to fully emerge. The New England, Gulf of Mexico, and Pacific
recover Georges Bank cod or other groundfish stocks. councils all either ignore scientific recommendations,
It explicitly allows for overfishing on Georges Bank cod delay action to address overfishing, or both. The Gulf,
and four other stocks to continue for several years, and its Caribbean, and South Atlantic councils all have fewer
continued reliance on input controls has once again led to resources than the other councils and use older data,
overfishing on Gulf of Maine cod and several additional which contributes to their inability to manage overfishing
stocks. Unfortunately, a federal court ruled in 2004 that effectively. Many councils (Western Pacific, Pacific, Gulf,
this overfishing is legal under the MSA as long as it ended Caribbean, and South Atlantic) do not know the status of
by the end of the rebuilding plan.71 the majority of the fish stocks they manage.

Overall, overfishing continued on stocks managed by

councils that implemented ineffective controls on fishing,
such as limiting the days a vessel can go to sea, or gear
restrictions. As late as 2004, five councils and NMFS (New

Council First Declared Year Rebuilding Rebuilding

Overfished Date Set Target Date
Gulf of Maine Cod New England 1997 2001 2014
Georges Bank Cod New England 1994 2001 2026
Redfish New England 2002 2001 2051
Pacific Ocean Perch Pacific 1999 2004 2027
Canary Rockfish Pacific 2000 2004 2074
Cowcod Pacific 2000 2004 2090
Darkblotched Rockfish Pacific 1999 2004 2030
Widow Rockfish Pacific 2001 2004 2038
Yelloweye Rockfish Pacific 2002 2004 2058
Red Snapper Gulf of Mexico 1988 2004 2032
Red Porgy South Atlantic 1997 2003 2018
Black Grouper South Atlantic 1998 2003 2015

18 IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING

England, Mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic, Gulf, Caribbean, “unknown,” or collapsing many stocks into one “complex,”
and Highly Migratory Species) allowed overfishing to account for most of the declining trend: 60 percent of the
occur on 27 overfished stocks, threatening the ability of overfished stocks and 75 percent of the stocks experiencing
those depleted stocks to recover. Those councils, such as overfishing between 2001 and 2004 were taken off the list
the North Pacific and Pacific, that use moratoria, long- due to administrative shuffling. One can only conclude
term area closures, or “hard” total allowable catch limits that overall the number of stocks that are overfished and
– a requirement that fishing stops when the target catch is experiencing overfishing has not appreciably declined
met – have better success at controlling overfishing. The between those years.
Gulf Council uses strict catch limits but still managed to
allow overfishing on three overfished stocks because the As of 2004, only 13 percent of the nation’s fish
limits it sets are too high. stocks can be considered “healthy,” i.e., they are
both not overfished nor experiencing overfishing.
The New England, Pacific, Gulf of Mexico, and South The number of healthy stocks (91) remained constant
Atlantic councils have particularly long rebuilding between 2001 and 2004. Not only is the number of healthy
time frames for some of their overfished stocks. While stocks pitifully low, there has not been a discernable gain in
long rebuilding times (over 10 years) are not in and of healthy stocks between 2001 and 2004.
themselves against the law, they do highlight that the
longer a council waits to take action to protect a stock, Councils have a pattern of allowing overfishing
the longer it takes for the stock to rebuild. For example, to continue on overfished stocks. Many councils
the Pacific Council waited until the Commerce Secretary allowed overfishing to continue on overfished stocks
declared a federal disaster on rockfish stocks to address between 2001 and 2004, most notably the New England
overfishing and now many of these stocks are not expected Council (on Georges Bank and Gulf of Maine Cod), the
to be rebuilt until the end of this century. The table on Pacific Council (groundfish), the Mid-Atlantic Council
page 18 shows how some of the councils have stretched out (spiny dogfish, black sea bass, and bluefish), Gulf (red
rebuilding long past the 10-year timeframe. snapper), and the South Atlantic (many of the species in
the snapper-grouper complex). As of 2004, five councils
Summary of Findings and NMFS (New England, Mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic,
Gulf, Caribbean, and Highly Migratory Species) allowed
The incremental progress NMFS documented 27 overfished stocks to also be subjected to overfishing, and
between 2001 and 2004 in reducing the number NMFS did not intervene as legally required.
of stocks that are overfished and experiencing
overfishing is an artifact of an administrative When Councils refuse to accept scientific
shell game. At first glance it appears that for those stocks recommendations, the results are disastrous.
that are assessed, there is a documented declining trend in Several councils have a history of refusing to accept
the number of stocks that are overfished and experiencing scientific information that requires drastic conservation
overfishing. The percentage of assessed stocks that are measures. It took a federal lawsuit filed in 2000 to force
overfished went from 33 percent to 28 percent, and the the New England Council to adopt an amendment in
percentage experiencing overfishing dropped from 22 2004 that had a chance of rebuilding a portion of its
percent to 19 percent. groundfish stocks. As a result, Georges Bank cod may be
rebuilt by 2026. The Gulf Council set its total allowable
However, when those stocks are reviewed to understand catch for red snapper at 150 percent of what its scientific
why they were moved off the lists (i.e., were they moved advisors recommended. As a result, scientists predict that
from an overfished to an “unknown” classification or red snapper will be at less than three percent of its historic
was the stock actually rebuilt), close scrutiny reveals levels by 2007 and do not expect that the population will
this trend to be an artifact. Administrative actions, such be rebuilt until 2032. It took a federal disaster declaration
as dropping stocks out of the count, deciding that not for the Pacific groundfish to prompt the Pacific Council
enough information existed so they should be moved to to finally take action and close down large swaths of

IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING 19

fishing grounds. As a result, canary rockfish will not be from 87 percent in 2000 to 92 percent in 2004. This trend
rebuilt until 2074. In many cases, councils reject scientific shows that NMFS knows less about most of the stocks it is
advice on catch levels to end overfishing in deference to responsible for in 2004 than it did four years prior.
the projected short-term economic impacts on the fishing
industry. Invariably, those decisions have not helped Out-of-date data is prevalent for some councils,
fishermen or fish in the long run. particularly the Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic,
and Caribbean. The variance in the availability of
Ineffective management tools are common. current data for different councils is striking. The Gulf,
Experience has shown that when councils set catch South Atlantic, and Caribbean councils work with data
levels without a mechanism to stop fishing once the that is sometimes over five years old. While the New
catch level is reached, they run a high risk of allowing England, Pacific, North Pacific, and Western Pacific
overfishing to continue. Even so, many councils use these councils tend to work with more recent data.
ineffective measures, already proven not to work well to
end overfishing, even when a stock is declared overfished.
Closed areas or fishing moratoria have allowed successful
rebuilding of some of the New England groundfish stocks,
whiting and lingcod in the Pacific, and goliath and Nassau
grouper in the Gulf of Mexico. The North Pacific and
Gulf councils tend to use more effective measures to
control fishing, and the South Atlantic is beginning to use
them more for the snapper-grouper complex.

Long rebuilding plan target dates are indicative

of past negligence. Some councils (Pacific, Gulf of
Mexico, South Atlantic, and New England in particular)
have rebuilding plans with long timeframes. Some are so
far in the future, such as the five Pacific rockfish stocks with
target dates of 2030, 2038, 2058, 2074, and 2090, that
they defy credibility. These dates indicate that by putting
off tough measures in the past, some stocks now need
multiple decades to recover. Past negligence holds these
councils responsible for the long-term depletion of their
overfished stocks.

NMFS still does not know if a majority of stocks it

is responsible for are overfished (or experiencing
overfishing) or not. For 70 percent of all the nation’s
stocks, NMFS does not know if they are overfished as of
2004. For over half of all the nation’s stocks, it does not
know if they are experiencing overfishing. NMFS has
worked to increase its knowledge base about “major”
stocks (those stocks that produce over 200,000 pounds in
landings) at the expense of “minor stocks.” The percentage
of minor stocks (minor stocks account for 63 percent of
all stocks) whose overfishing status was unknown rose
from 84 percent in 2000 to 88 percent in 2004. The
unknown overfished status for minor stocks increased

20 IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING

Endnotes 10
Annual Report to Congress on the Status of U.S.
Fisheries – 2004. National Marine Fisheries Service. U.S.
1
Taking Stock of the Regional Fishery Management Department of Commerce. Silver Spring, Maryland.
Councils. Josh Eagle, Sarah Newkirk, Barton H. 2005. p. 1 and 3.
Thompson Jr. Island Press. Washington, DC. 2003.
11
The total weight or volume of a species in a given area.
2
16 U.S.C. § 1851. Available from: Understanding Fisheries Management: A Manual for
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/magact/mag3.html#s301 Understanding the Federal Fisheries Management
Process, Including Analysis of the 1996 Sustainable
3
Understanding Fisheries Management: A Manual for Fisheries Act. Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant
understanding the Federal Fisheries Management Process, Consortium. Second Edition. 00-005.
Including Analysis of the 1996 Sustainable Fisheries Act. http://nsgl.gso.uri.edu/masgc/masgch00001.pdf
Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Consortium. Second
Edition. 00-005. Available from: 12
16 U.S.C. §1854 (e)(4)(A) Available from:
http://nsgl.gso.uri.edu/masgc/masgch00001.pdf http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/magact/mag3.html#s304

4
See both the definition of MSY in the National Standard 13
16 U.S.C. §1854 (e) (1) Available from:
1 Guideline (63 Federal Register 24229, May 1, 1998) http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/magact/mag3.html#s304
and Understanding Fisheries Management, p. 22.
14
Administration’s Final Reauthorization of the
5
Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Magnuson-Stevens Act-2005 Bill. Available from:
Management Act. Public Law 94-265. Available from: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/docs/msa2005/MSA%20R
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/magact/ eauthorization%20bill_Final%20(12-1-05).pdf

6
16 U.S.C. § 1851. Available from: 15
Annual Report to Congress on the Status of U.S.
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/magact/mag3.html#s301 Fisheries – 2004. National Marine Fisheries Service. U.S.
Dept. of Commerce. 2005. Available from:
7
National Standard 1 Guideline. 63 Federal Register. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/domes_fish/
24230, May 1, 1998. StatusoFisheries/StatusReport2004.pdf

8
Based on best available information, stocks are reviewed Annual Report to Congress on the Status of U.S.
relative to the status determination criteria contained Fisheries – 2003. National Marine Fisheries Service. U.S.
in the relevant fishery management plan (FMP). Based Dept. Commerce. 2004. Available from:
on that review, NMFS determines the overfishing and http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/statusoffisheries/
overfished condition, including whether or not it is statusostocks03/Report_Text.pdf .
approaching an overfished condition. Annual Report to
Congress on the Status of U.S. Fisheries – 2004. National Sustaining and Rebuilding the Status of U.S. Fisheries.
Marine Fisheries Service. U.S. Dept. of Commerce. 2002 Report to Congress. National Marine Fisheries
2005. p 3. Available from: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ Service. U.S. Dept. of Commerce. 2003. Available from:
sfa/domes_fish/StatusoFisheries/StatusReport2004.pdf http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/statusoffisheries/cover_
sos.pdf
9
Annual Report to Congress on the Status of U.S.
Fisheries – 2004. National Marine Fisheries Service. Toward Rebuilding America’s Marine Fisheries. Annual
U.S. Dept. of Commerce. 2005. Available from: http:// Report to Congress on the Status of U.S. Fisheries—
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/domes_fish/StatusoFisheries/ 2001, National Marine Fisheries Service. U.S. Dept. of
StatusReport2004.pdf Commerce. 2002. Available from: http://www.nmfs.noaa.
gov/sfa/reg_svcs/statusostocks/Stock_status01.htm

IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING 21

16
Sustaining and Rebuilding the Status of U.S. Fisheries. 24
NMFS. Endangered Species Act-Section 7 Consultation:
2002 Report to Congress. National Marine Fisheries Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Statement.
Service. U.S. Dept. of Commerce. 2003. pp 8-9. Alaska Region Sustainable Fisheries Division.
Available from: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/ 2000. Available from: http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/
statusoffisheries/cover_sos.pdf protectedresources/stellers/plb/fmp_sec07-NOV30_
2000_FINAL_Pages_1-352.pdf
17
Annual Report to Congress on the Status of U.S.
Fisheries – 2003. National Marine Fisheries Service. U.S. 25
WPFMC SFA Supplemental Amendments - FR Final
Dept. of Commerce. 2004. page 5. http://www.nmfs. Rule Notice August, 5. 2003. Available from: http://
noaa.gov/sfa/statusoffisheries/statusostocks03/Report_ www.wpcouncil.org/Documents/SFAComprehensiv
Text.pdf eAmendments/SFASupplementalAmendments-FR-
FinalRule.pdf
18
Annual Report to Congress on the Status of U.S.
Fisheries – 2004. National Marine Fisheries Service. 26
Annual Report to Congress on the Status of U.S.
U.S. Dept. of Commerce. 2005. Table 11 and page 19. Fisheries – 2004. National Marine Fisheries Service.
Available from: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/domes_ U.S. Dept. of Commerce. Table 2. 2005. Available
fish/StatusoFisheries/StatusReport2004.pdf from: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/domes_fish/
StatusoFisheries/StatusReport2004.pdf
19
Annual Report to Congress on the Status of U.S.
Fisheries – 2004. National Marine Fisheries Service. U.S. 27
Ibid
Dept. of Commerce. 2005. Appendix 1, p. A7. Available
from: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/domes_fish/ 28
WPFMC Press: Fishery Council Moves Forward with
StatusoFisheries/StatusReport2004.pdf Fishery Ecosystem Plans, Northwestern and Main
Hawaiian Island Fisheries Management Changes.
20
Annual Report to Congress on the Status of U.S. November 14, 2005. Available From: http://www.
Fisheries – 2004. National Marine Fisheries Service. U.S. wpcouncil.org/press/2005Nov14_PRESSRELEASE_
Dept. of Commerce. 2005. Appendix 1, p. A7 and A10. CM129.pdf
Available from: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/domes_
fish/StatusoFisheries/StatusReport2004.pdf 29
December 11, 2005. Memo from Rick Gaffney to
Kitty Simmons.
21
Toward Rebuilding America’s Marine Fisheries. Annual
Report to Congress on the Status of U.S. Fisheries— 30
Information and Management Alternatives Regarding
2001. National Marine Fisheries Service. U.S. Dept. of Overfishing in the Hawaii Bottomfish Fishery. The
Commerce Page 6. Western Pacific Fishery Management Council. January
5, 2006. Available from: http://www.wpcouncil.org/
22
“Rockfish Case Study.” Alaska Marine Conservation bottomfish/Documents/MaterialforPubliMeetings-2006-
Council. Available from: http://www.akmarine.org/ Jan4FinalDraft.pdf
ourwork/rockfish.shtml
31
Ibid
23
The Bering Sea Ecosystem. National Research Council.
National Academy Press. Washington, D.C. 1996. 32
Ibid, Page 5.

33
McCall, A. “Status of bocaccio off California in 2002”,
page 22. National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest
Fisheries Science Center. 2002.

22 IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING

 Gunderson, D. 1984. The great widow rockfish hunt 43
Sakagawa, G. HMS stock assessment update for the
of 1980-1982. North American Journal of Fisheries Pacific Fishery Management Council. Powerpoint
Management 4:465-468. 1984. presentation given at June 2005 PFMC Meeting in Foster
City, CA. 2005.
Francis, R.C. “Fisheries Research and its Application
to West Coast Groundfish Management” in Fisheries 44
Additional Stock Assessments and other Status
Management: Issues and Options, University of Alaska Determination Information for Stocks Contained in
Sea Grant Report 85-2. 1982 Federal Fisheries Management Plans--Appendix 6 of
the 2004 Status of U.S. Fisheries Report to Congress.
34
National Marine Fisheries Service. 2000. Press Release Available from: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/
2000-R103. January 19, 2000. statusoffisheries/2004/2004Assessments2.pdf

35
PFMC. Acceptable biological catch and optimum yield 45
Amendment 26 to the Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish
specification and management measures for the 2005- Fishery Management Plan for a history of Red Snapper
2006 Pacific Coast groundfish fishery. Final environmental management. Available From: http://www.gulfcouncil.
impact statement and regulatory analyses. Pacific Fishery org/downloads/Amend26PublicHearingDraft092605.
Management Council. Portland, OR. 2004. pdf Page 26.

36
PFMC. Scientific and statistical report on stock 46
September 20, 2005 letter from the Nancy Thompson
assessments and rebuilding analyses for 2007-2008 Director of NMFS Southeast Fisheries Science Center to
groundfish fisheries. Agenda Item H.2.B. Supplemental Julie Morris, Chairwoman of the Gulf Council Fishery
SSC Report. November, 2005. PFMC Meeting. Management Council.

37
Rogers, JB. 2005. Status of the darkblotched rockfish 47
TAC and ABC Recommendations by the GMFMC
resource in 2005. National Marine Fisheries Service, Reef Fish Stock Assessment Panel of SEDAR7. Gulf of
Northwest Fisheries Science Center. Newport, OR. Mexico Red Snapper. SEDAR7 Assessment Report 1
Section III Stock Assessment Workshop Report. Table 2.
38
Ibid. Available from: http://www.gulfcouncil.org/downloads/
SEDAR7%20AW%20report%20main.pdf
39
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. National
Marine Fisheries Service, 421 F.3d 872. 9th Cir. 2005. 48
Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper. Southeast Data,
Assessment, and Review. Stock Assessment Report
40
PFMC. Letter to Senator Ted Stevens dated 12/12/05 of SEDAR 7Assessment Report 1 Section II.I Stock
and attached Legislative Committee report. PFMC, Assessment Workshop Report. p 18. Available from:
Portland, OR. http://www.gulfcouncil.org/downloads/SEDAR7%20A
W%20report%20main.pdf
41
Safina, Carl, Andrew A. Rosenberg, Ransom Myers,
Terrance Quinn II, and Jeremy Collie. “U.S. Ocean Fish 49
Final Rule. Comprehensive Amendments to the Fishery
Recovery: Staying the Course.” Science. Vol. 309. July Management Plans of Caribbean. Available from:
29, 2005. http://www.caribbeanfmc.com/pdfs/Carib_SFA_
finalrule1%2010-28-05.pdf
42
PFMC. Letter to Senator Ted Stevens dated 12/12/05
and attached Legislative Committee report. PFMC,
Portland, OR.

IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING 23

50
Additional Stock Assessments and other Status 62
Federal Register. Vol. 70, No. 249. December 29, 2005.
Determination Information for Stocks Contained in
Federal Fisheries Management Plans--Appendix 6 of 63
MAFMC Memo to Summer Flounder Monitoring
the 2004 Status of U.S. Fisheries Report to Congress. Committee. July 15, 2005.
Available from: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/
statusoffisheries/2004/2004Assessments2.pdf 64
Correspondence. Patricia A. Kurkul, NMFS Regional
Administrator to Daniel T. Furlong, MAFMC Executive
51
Annual Report to Congress on the Status of U.S. Director. May 11, 2005.
Fisheries – 2004. National Marine Fisheries Service. U.S.
Dept. of Commerce. 2005. Table 10 and 11. Available 65
MAFMC Memo to Summer Flounder Monitoring
from: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/domes_fish/ Committee. July 15, 2005.
StatusoFisheries/StatusReport2004.pdf
66
“Rebuilding New England’s Historic Groundfish.”
52
Final Rule. Comprehensive Amendments to the Fishery Conservation Law Foundation. Available from:
Management Plans of Caribbean. Available from: http://www.clf.org/programs/cases.asp?id=260
http://www.caribbeanfmc.com/pdfs/Carib_SFA_
finalrule1%2010-28-05.pdf 67
CLF. v. Evans. Civil Action No. 00-1134. Memorandum
Opinion. Available from: http://www.clf.org/
53
Ibid. uploadedFiles/CLF/Programs/Healthy_Oceans/
Fishing_Communities/Protecting_Groundfish/Framewo
54
Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation Report for the rk%2033%20Decision.pdf
Snapper Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic, Nov.
18, 2005 Available from: http://ocean.floridamarine. 68
CLF challenged that aspect of Amendment 13, which
org/efh_coral/pdfs/SnapperGrouperSAFE111805.pdf allowed overfishing to continue on several of New
England’s most depleted stocks, like Georges Bank cod.
55
“Response to Follow-up Questions from the U.S. In a somewhat illogical decision, the federal District
Commission on Ocean Policy for Testimony of Robert Court in Washington D.C. held that such overfishing is
K. Mahood Before the Commission on January 15, allowed under the SFA so long as the stocks are part of a
2002.” March 28, 2002. Available from: http://www. rebuilding plan will end overfishing as part of the plan.
oceancommission.gov/meetings/jan15_16_02/answers/ CLF v. Evans. 2005 WL 555416 (DDC 2005).
mahood_answers.pdf
69
A Total Allowable Catch is “the annual recommended
56
MAFMC Memo to Scup Monitoring Committee. July catch for a species or species group. The regional
26, 2005. councils set the TAC from a range of the acceptable
biological catch.” Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant
57
Federal Register. Vol. 70, No. 221. November 17, 2005. Consortium. Understanding Fisheries Management:
A Manual for understanding the Federal Fisheries
58
Correspondence. Patricia A. Kurkul, NMFS Regional Management Process, Including Analysis of the 1996
Administrator to Daniel T. Furlong, MAFMC Executive Sustainable Fisheries Act. Second Edition. 00-005.
Director. August 18 2005. http://nsgl.gso.uri.edu/masgc/masgch00001.pdf

59
MAFMC Press Release. December 12, 2005.

60
MAFMC Press Release. October 11, 2005

61
Federal Register. Vol. 70, No. 2. January 4, 2005.

24 IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING

70
“Deep Sea Rescue: Is Time Running Our for Georges
Bank Cod?” Conservation Law Foundation and the
Natural Resources Defense Council. Available from:
http://www.clf.org/uploadedFiles/CLF/Programs/
Healthy_Oceans/Fishing_Communities/Protecting_
Groundfish/gfish_Factsheet_GBCod.pdf

71
CLF v. Evans. 2005 WL 555416 (DDC 2005).

Photo Credits
Page 1: Florida Red Snapper.
Photo Courtesy of: NOAA/Department of Commerce

Page 2: Bocaccio Rockfish.

Photo Courtesy of: NOAA/Department of Commerce

Page 2: Atlantic Cod.

Photo Courtesy of: NOAA/Department of Commerce

IN FOCUS: OVERFISHING AND REBUILDING 25

Marine Fish Conservation Network
600 Pennsylvania Ave. SE, Suite 210
Washington, DC 20003
P: 202-543-5509
F: 202-543-5774
network@conservefish.org
www.conservefish.org