Gulf of Mexico Shrimp Supplier Roundtable Wednesday, February 11 4:00 5:00 pm Hyatt Regency New Orleans

Transcription

1 Gulf of Mexico Shrimp Supplier Roundtable Wednesday, February 11 4:00 5:00 pm Hyatt Regency New Orleans Sustainable Fisheries Partnership (SFP) convened a Gulf of Mexico Shrimp Supplier Roundtable (SR) meeting after the 2015 Sea Web Seafood Summit. The goal of this SR meeting was to provide an opportunity for seafood supply companies to come together to share updates on Gulf of Mexico shrimp fishery improvement projects (FIPs), learn where further improvement efforts are needed, and identify ways in which they can work together in a pre- competitive manner to enhance sustainability of Gulf of Mexico shrimp fisheries. Attendees: SR members: Big Easy Foods: James Duhon Cox's Wholesale Seafood: Nancy Mathews, David Cordy National Fish & Seafood: James Baros Paul Piazza & Son: Kristen Baumer Wood's Fisheries: Reese Antley Guests: Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries: Katie Semon and Damon Morris California Environmental Associates: Max Levine Audubon Nature Institute: Laura Picariello Seattle Fish Company: Derek Figueroa Fortune Fish Company: Mark Palicki and Stacy Schultz Sustainable Fisheries Partnership: Megan Westmeyer, Sam Grimley, Brad Spear Key Points from the meeting: 1. SFP's FIP progress rating system is a new tool to help measure and compare FIP progress. All Gulf of Mexico shrimp FIPs are making good progress, though some individual FIP participants are less active than others. 2. Priority improvement needs in the Gulf of Mexico shrimp fishery continue to revolve around reducing bycatch (including that of sea turtles) and improving monitoring of bycatch. 3. SFP has identified the following three Action Recommendations for SR participants for 2015: a. Require your supply chain to request regular inspections by gear experts to maximize bycatch reduction, and provide documentation of the inspections to verify compliance with BRD and TED regulations. b. Catalyze shrimp FIPs in Alabama and Mississippi. c. Contact the NOAA Observer Program and ask them to perform an evaluation of the Gulf of Mexico shrimp observer program to determine statistically robust coverage levels, and then establish a plan to increase observer coverage to those levels. (SFP will facilitate a joint letter to be signed by SR participants.)

2

3 Meeting Notes: 1. Welcome and introduction (SFP) a. Reminder of who this group is and why we meet b. Who: shrimp suppliers who source product from multiple states in the Gulf of Mexico, who are concerned with the sustainability of the shrimp fisheries and want to maintain awareness of improvement needs c. Why: to receive updates from SFP on shrimp sustainability issues/needs overall and hear progress updates on improvement project d. Opportunity to identify overlapping areas of interest, where you can make more of a difference working together (pre- competitively) than individually 2. Progress update on GoM Shrimp FIPs a. Texas Shrimp FIP (SFP, Megan Westmeyer) i. Activity 1: "Obtain funding and commission an analysis of the stock status of main bycatch species" Cox's Wholesale Seafood, National Fish and Seafood, Philly Seafood, Katie's Seafood Market FIP activity complete - available on SFP's website or at yvnu3ojn4zrmf1nevwnnbmzzq/view?pli=1 1. Overview: Study used federal fishery observer data, SEAMAP data, biological information on the bycatch species, and shrimp fishery effort data. Identified the main bycatch species, evaluated status, and determined whether there is a correlation between shrimp fishery effort and status of the byatch populations. 2. Conclusion 1: Only main bycatch species or species groups (comprising 5% or more of the catch by weight) in the Gulf of Mexico shrimp fishery are Atlantic croaker, longspine porgy, sea trouts, and inshore lizardfish. 3. Conclusion 2: SEAMAP abundance data indicate that all of these populations are either stable or increasing, and comparison of the abundance data with shrimp fishery effort data suggest that only Atlantic croaker and sea trout population abundance appear to be correlated with shrimping effort. Both populations appear to have been increasing since shrimp effort decline in the early 2000s, and have demonstrated high resilience. 4. Conclusion 3: Further studies, especially full- fledged stock assessments, on these populations would be helpful. But study indicates that the shrimp fishery does not pose a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the bycatch species or species groups. ii. Activity 2: "Reduce bycatch by keeping gear well- tuned with regular gear inspections; document on gear inspection form" Philly Seafood activity ongoing 1. Progress update: In May 2014, captains and crew of 12 vessels in the Philly Seafood supply chain completed the Texas Sea Grant TED training program, learning how to inspect their own TEDs and BRDs to ensure they are properly installed, according to federal regulations, and are operating at peak performance.

4 Other activities: There are a few other activities on the work plan for other participants that have not shown any progress in the last year so we'll be checking with them on their intentions for FIP activity in 2015 b. Florida Pink Shrimp FIP (Cox's Wholesale Seafood, Nancy Mathews) i. FIP fully transitioned over to Cox's Wholesale Seafood and public report is posted. ii. Moving forward with gear inspections are getting results from boats that had inspections last year too and are seeing a marked improvement in compliance and gear tuning, will be getting more gear inspection results back then will compile and post to the public report Also working with docks to collect more information on how often the boats get boarded by law enforcement and what the results are, as well as how often they carry bycatch observers c. Florida Shrimp FIP (Wood's Fisheries, Reese Antley) i. Launched FIP about a year ago and are starting small initially with only two boats they trust a great deal, are planning to add two more trusted boats this year ii. With these boats they are developing gear inspection process, as well as how to integrate trip ticket data and FIP data into their Trace Register system Also monitoring tow time limits and plan to experiment with video monitoring systems to look at differences in bycatch with shorter tow times iv. FIP has a focus on shrimp quality as well as environmental sustainability so are working on ways to monitor shrimp handling procedures as well (temperature loggers, salinity monitors in brine tanks etc) d. Louisiana Shrimp FIP (LDWF, Katie Semon/Damon Morris) i. LDWF has been making steady progress on FIP workplan ii. Recently released a report describing interactions of shrimp fishery with sea turtles and results of federal enforcement of TED regulations document is on SFP's website (on Louisiana Shrimp FIP public report). General result is that Louisiana shrimp fishermen's compliance is equivalent to or better than other states. (Megan Westmeyer, SFP, noted that SFP has filed a Freedom of Information Act request with NOAA to obtain recent state by state TED compliance data. The FOIA request is overdue and has been bounced between multiple departments, but is now with the Office of Law Enforcement. SFP will share the information with SR members and FIP participants once we have it.) iv. Next (and final) activity to be completed is the fishery management plan have been several delays but is in final internal review and will likely be released in March FMP will have additional information on sea turtles as well as general information on the fishery (biological and socio- economic) and fishery regulations. Will contain recommendations for future action. Megan Westmeyer noted that after the fishery management plan is released, SFP will be transitioning this FIP to the Audubon Nature

5 Institute because they are a local NGO capable of developing deeper relationships with the local seafood industry. They will work with FIP participants to develop a new public report and workplan. 3. SFP FIP progress ratings (SFP, Megan Westmeyer) a. standardized tool for evaluating FIP progress requested by our buyer partners to help them evaluate FIPs evaluation does not prescribe whether or not to source from a particular FIP; each user of this evaluation can use the information how she/he chooses when FIPs are making poor progress SFP recommendation is typically that a buyer become MORE involved in the fishery/fip b. measure of improvement progress in a fishery mainly by tracking the frequency of improvements in fishery policies/practices and actual improvements in the water c. initially applied to only SFP FIPs, now applied to all FIPs information publicly on FishSource.com fishery profiles for each FIP d. based on info on FIP public reports evidence of activities undertaken AND progress generated (methodology publicly available on our website link on handout) e. Ratings range from A (Exceptional progress) to E (Negligible progress) f. Current GoM shrimp FIP ratings: i. Texas: A (Exceptional progress) because of bycatch status study and gear inspections in past year ii. Cox's Florida pink shrimp: A (Exceptional progress) because of bycatch status study and gear inspections in past year Wood's Florida shrimp FIP: A (Exceptional progress) because of gear iv. inspections in past year Louisiana: C (Some recent progress) because activities underway, but no impacts in last two years (will change to A, Exceptional progress as soon as FMP is released) 4. Review Priority Improvement Needs (SFP) a. Continue reducing bycatch. The most effective way to continually minimize bycatch is to ensure that the turtle excluder devices (TEDs) and bycatch reduction devices (BRDs) are properly installed. Keep gear well tuned and have turtle excluder devices (TEDs) and bycatch reduction devices (BRDs) inspected by a qualified expert at least one a year. b. Make BRD usage mandatory in all state waters, or provide evidence that BRDs are not needed. Bycatch reduction devices are not required in Louisiana, Alabama, or Mississippi state waters. c. Evaluate the Gulf of Mexico shrimp observer program. Perform an evaluation of the Gulf of Mexico shrimp observer program to determine statistically robust coverage levels, and then establish a plan to increase observer coverage to those levels.

6 5. Discuss Action Recommendations for SR Participants (SFP) a. Require your supply chain to request regular inspections by gear experts to maximize bycatch reduction, and provide documentation of the inspections to verify compliance with BRD and TED regulations. i. SFP's ask of SR participants: Require gear evaluations of your suppliers (free via Texas Sea Grant and NOAA Gear Monitoring Team); set annual goals for percentage of supply chain completing gear evaluations; publicly report your goals and progress made toward goals b. Catalyze FIPs in Alabama and Mississippi. i. SFP's ask of SR participants: If you source from Alabama and Mississippi and are interested in working on a FIP, let us know. SFP will not be the FIP implementer, but we will help facilitate connections between interested participants. ii. Laura Picariello (Audubon Nature Institute) noted that they are having conversations with the state fishery managers in Alabama and Mississippi about the possibility of starting Marine Advancement Plans (Audubon's equivalent of a FIP) in these states. c. Contact the NOAA Observer Program and ask them to perform an evaluation of the Gulf of Mexico shrimp observer program to determine statistically robust coverage levels, and then establish a plan to increase observer coverage to those levels. i. According to NOAA current otter trawl observer program is still considered in the "Pilot" stage (though mandatory since 2007); needs to move through "Developing" (refine sampling design) to "Mature" (fully implemented program, achieves the recommended goals of precision of bycatch estimates) ii. Skimmer trawl observer program only at "Baseline" (most basic) National Bycatch Report (2011) states that otter trawl bycatch estimates typically based on inconsistent or unreliable information; sampling designs inadequate. Skimmer trawl bycatch estimates typically based on outdated or unreliable information. iv. NMFS has contracted an independent statistical review of the Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Observer Program. Will provide improved methods for vessel selection; bycatch estimation techniques for both abundant and rare species. This review should be completed by They need to do the same for shrimp. v. SFP's ask of the SR participants: Will you sign on to a joint letter to NOAA requesting this review? SFP will draft letter and coordinate signatures and delivery. vi. David Cordy, Cox's Wholesale Seafood, asked what the potential drawbacks might be if they do so. Megan Westmeyer suggested that the only potential drawback might be that fishermen might feel the suppliers were taking action that would force higher rates of observer coverage on them. While this is certainly a possibility, the information is needed and the level of observer coverage is one of the few remaining vulnerabilities in the Gulf shrimp fishery. It must be addressed.

7 vii. SR participants all seemed open to the idea of signing onto a letter. Megan Westmeyer will follow up with each individually and will work on a draft letter. 6. Final questions/wrap- up a. Kristen Baumer, Paul Piazza and Son, raised concern that a FIP progress rating could be incorrectly interpreted as a rating on the status of a fishery. Megan Westmeyer described how the FIP progress ratings are displayed on FishSource.com and how the FIP progress rating is on a page with the FIP details of progress, while the actual information on the status of the fishery is on a different page. b. Derek Figueroa, Seattle Fish Company, stated that from a buyer perspective, they have a very clear understanding of the difference between a FIP progress rating and any sort of rating of the fishery sustainability, and they find the FIP progress rating to be a very useful tool to help them gauge the status of a FIP and where they need to become more engaged c. Mark Palicki, Fortune Fish C.o, explained that they don't necessarily see a C or D FIP progress rating as bad some FIPs working on extremely challenging situations will not have A or B progress ratings and that's ok. It's just one thing they look at. d. Megan Westmeyer encouraged everyone to look at how the FIP progress ratings are displayed and explained and let SFP know if there are improvements we can make. These have just recently been publicly released and we know we will modify and refine the system over time. Stakeholder input is welcome. e. Meeting adjourned just after 5 pm.