Feds Close Most of Northeast to Cod Fishing

Oh noes!!!!
Cod is one of those fish we love, due to it's mild flavor and flakiness.
Looks like we'll be giving it up for now.....

Federal scientists say the move is necessary to prevent a further decline in the codfish population, which is 97 percent below what they consider a sustainable level. And the ban should help protect areas where the fish spawn, NOAA Fisheries Regional Administrator John Bullard said in a statement.

But fishermen argue that the scientific measurements may not be detailed enough or properly fine-grained, and that there are enough codfish to safely catch in some areas; they also suggest that the regulations will disproportionately hurt small, independent fishermen as opposed to larger corporations.

The ruling applies to the entire Gulf of Maine, a huge area of water larger than the state of Maine itself, and cuts off all cod fishing in near-shore waters north of Provincetown, Massachusetts—a town on Cape Cod so-named for the formerly countless number of cod near its shores.

www.newsweek.com...

If this indeed does help the cod population rebound, kudos to the Fed.
If it doesn't do as well as it should, it will be seen as a horrible economic disaster to small fishermen and communities in New England.

More on the economic part of the six-month ban
www.foxnews.com...

Fisherman question the government's data
www.necn.com...

And, in a related matter, Maine shrimp season is cancelled for another year:
www.necn.com...

Seafood is touted as healthy food, bu overfishing seems to be less than healthy for the planet.

I wouldn't touch anything that came out of modern oceans. Years ago I stopped eating the fish from the local ponds and lakes (lake country) due to pollution.

Overused, unsustainable, a blow to the economy.

Sounds about right for modern America.

This could seriously impact pubs and taverns everywhere... The horror... What will I wash down with my Guinness now?

a reply to: Mirthful Me

Well I'm sure people will still get their serving of fish from beer. Islinglass.

Here's a thought that might make the cod's absence more palatable. Ever since our local fishmonger told us about the number of worms he finds in the fresh cod, I just haven't been able to stomach it. I miss the fish & chips but the thought of all the creepy crawlies is just too much. Apparently, the worms are "harmless." Still...

cooking.stackexchange.com...

Forget about the cod and come visit us in San Francisco where Dungeness Crab season opens today. I'm chilling a nice, slightly oaked chardonnay and simmering some garlic butter.



And, if there's anything gross in the Dungeness Crabs, please don't tell me about it.

Federal scientists say the move is necessary to prevent a further decline in the codfish population

The hypocrisy is blinding. So why aren't they shutting down the pharma industries to 'prevent a further decline in human population? Or any number of painfully obvious things to address, such as pollution and GMO products, or one of a million other things that are threatening ALL life on Earth. Protecting cod my rear end.

I'm always in doubt of their stated intentions. The record shows them to be pathological liars. Especially when it comes to the general well being of ANY life form, the fed is never fighting on life's behalf. So I'm left to assume that this is none other than a power grab or some variant of market manipulation. In other words, money and power.

I have no faith in the 'good' intentions of any governmental body and never will. These mischievous ones are, once again, up to something.

Doesn't macdonalds use cod for their fish fillet sand which, and Burger King? Red lobster, or golden coral? I remember seeing cod fish ona commercial and thinking how they will kill the cod population.....maybe they are fishing out all the cod....too bad. I feel for the maine fisherman who now have no income!

I have not been up in the Northeast, but from what I have heard the Cod numbers are hurting. Hopefully this ban can give the fish stock sometime to recover.

The fisheries really do a lot of research on these closures. Here in Florida, Red Snapper have been off limits for a few years. Last year they opened up a mini-season for recreational and the commercial guys are given a weight limit per year and have to pay extra for a permit. It does appear the Red Snapper are doing much better here. Certainly not a popular ban for most, but the ban has resulted in many more Red Snapper.

Hopefully in a few years, we can say the same about the Cod in the NorthEast.

a reply to: Visitor2012

I get that you don't trust government but what's the nefarious plan here?

It's most likely that there aren't enough cod. This is no surprise since the Gulf of Maine is getting hit with climate change style issues.

www.cbsnews.com...

a reply to: DontTreadOnMe

I live in New England. I have friends and family up through Maine and down to Cape Cod. It's as bad as they say. Before the feds came in, all the talk was about how few fish and shrimp there was. The thing is these fisheries, the small local ones, they have no choice but to keep fishing and the biggest harm done to them has been corporate fishing... that was the talk before. The talk now is all about the 'goddamn feds' and how there's enough pockets here and there to keep fishing... these guys want to conserve but they can't because how else are they going to feed their families? They know too that only the corporate fishing vessels would get to those pockets anyway but better to go out there and try to get at least something to stay afloat for another year.

It used to be that fishermen grew their families into the fishing industry, that hasn't been the case for many years here now, they know that gig has run it's course... now they are fighting to keep going just so they can send their kids to college so they can get out.

It's heartbreaking and enraging. Many of these small, local outfits have tried their hand at fish farms (I worked at one several years ago) the problem there is that it isn't cost effective to do it without antibiotics and the public really has gotten wise to how dangerous that is. Farmed fish doesn't sell very well here. We did this to ourselves and we can no longer outrun the consequences, at least here in New England.

originally posted by: Meldionne1
Doesn't macdonalds use cod for their fish fillet sand which, and Burger King? Red lobster, or golden coral? I remember seeing cod fish ona commercial and thinking how they will kill the cod population.....maybe they are fishing out all the cod....too bad. I feel for the maine fisherman who now have no income!

Ocean "White fish" is pretty much the fish they use, which means it could be any kind of several types of fish processed and packed together.

If it is Cod, it will be stated as such....

Edit: I was misinformed as far as saying white fish could be several types of different fish. I looked it up to discover, there is in fact a family of fish that are called "white fish".

Just wanted to correct my misinformation!

It's about time. The fishing only needs to be shut down for about ten years for the population to go back up. They have known about this problem for years, also the Halibut populations are suffering in some areas. The Europeans are somewhat managing their fisheries, the US should manage theirs.

I like Cod. I do know that the Cod are getting over fished though and agree with their actions. There are some areas that have plenty of Cod, but if all the fishermen decide to relocate, they will wipe those out too.

When you get fish on your plate at the restaurant, eat it all or take it home to eat later. Don't waste such a good food. I have seen so much waste of food, especially in restaurants, that it sometimes makes me sick to think that people can do this.

a reply to: Meldionne1

Considering the volume of fish used by fast-food outlets....I doubt cod is being used.

In November 2007, McDonald's lowered the use of New Zealand hoki and increased the use of Alaskan pollock,[14] due to declining New Zealand hoki fishery sustainability and large cutbacks in the total allowable commercial catch of hoki by the New Zealand Ministry of Fisheries - from 250,000 tonnes in 1997 to 90,000 tonnes in 2007.[15] McDonald's originally used Atlantic cod, before declining cod catches forced McDonald's to find sustainable fish elsewhere. McDonald's is trying to maintain fish only from areas certified as sustainable by the Marine Stewardship Council, but that is becoming more difficult each year. Hoki is no longer an ingredient as of 2013, since McDonalds lists only pollock as the type of fish used.[16]

As of March 2009, the Marine Stewardship Council[17] placed the Alaskan pollock fisheries in a re-assessment program[18] due to catch numbers declining by over 30% between 2005 and 2008, and by-catch problems with salmon.

As of January 2013 the Marine Stewardship Council stated that the pollock comes from suppliers with sustainable fishing practices, and McDonald's packaging/promotion will reflect that change.

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: Kali74

I like to hear about things like this from people who live in the effected areas. It seems when you make a living doing something you take a stance against regulations even you deep down know the regulations are necessary. If they didn't regulate this, the big corporate fisheries would wipe out the last of the pockets that could actually help replenish the area in ten years. But the fishermen can't comprehend this because of their financial situation.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: DontTreadOnMe
.... The thing is these fisheries, the small local ones, they have no choice but to keep fishing and the biggest harm done to them has been corporate fishing... that was the talk before. The talk now is all about the 'goddamn feds' and how there's enough pockets here and there to keep fishing... these guys want to conserve but they can't because how else are they going to feed their families? They know too that only the corporate fishing vessels would get to those pockets anyway but better to go out there and try to get at least something to stay afloat for another year.

I am glad you mentioned corporate fishing. They are driving the small guys out of business and doing far more harm than the small individual fishermen. They can also easily afford the permits and such to fish for restricted species. With Florida Fisheries, they claim a lot of restrictions are to prevent over fishing but they often drive the small guy out of business while the corporate boat can pay for the permits and do as much overfishing as he likes.

What needs to be monitored is the corporate guys in the NorthEast. If they can pay for a permit to fish for Cod that the small guy can not afford, then there is a major problem.

a reply to: jrod

Yeah and most likely they will go just out of range of the ban (I haven't looked at the area of the ban yet) because they can afford to buy and use more fuel. Which of course will only continue to cascade the problem instead of letting the populations recover.

If people really care about this problem, don't buy cod anywhere until the ban is lifted and stop going to the large sea food chains like Legal Seafood and Red Lobster, don't buy fish fillets at McDonalds or frozen fish fillets/sticks/nuggets from the grocery store. Buy fresh fish at fish markets and farmers markets as often as you can. That's how you help the little guys.

Just a quick link... this shows fishing vessels worldwide. To me, this is jaw dropping.

The tool uses a global feed of vessel locations extracted from Automatic Identification System (AIS) tracking data collected by satellite, revealing the movement of vessels over time. The system automatically classifies the observed patterns of movement as either “fishing” or “non-fishing” activity.

Global Fishing Watch

It may take a minute to load, I have a good PC and good internet and it didn't immediately load.

originally posted by: Visitor2012

Federal scientists say the move is necessary to prevent a further decline in the codfish population

The hypocrisy is blinding. So why aren't they shutting down the pharma industries to 'prevent a further decline in human population?

Uhhh, what? Last I checked, the human population has not had its population decline to the extent that it's 97% below a sustainable level. In fact, the last time I checked, the human population was still growing and expanding at a rate just slightly above 1%, which is okay because there are so many of us. Positive growth directly infers a flourishing, not a decline, and we're certainly not diminished down to 97% of sustainable levels like the codfish.

You opened your entire post with that remark and I have to say, it really dropped my jaw in total befuddlement. You opened your post with such a fallacy laden remark and got 4 stars for it--this is why I have no care for stars at all because they are not a measure of value. They're a joke. You just plugged in words that would get a positive response--a dig at pharma (and admittedly big pharma IS a problem but not in this context) and then a dig at a non-existent problem (further decline in human population). We were 6.9 billion a couple years ago. We're around 7.3 billion (rounded) now with projections of being at around 11 billion by 2050. Where is your decline in human population?

It doesn't exist and if it did, well, that would be great for the codfish and we wouldn't be seeing a 97% decline below sustainable levels in their populations. The number one source for depletion of this food resource is us. Humans. If our population declined, our draw on that resource (codfish) would decline, resulting in a positive growth in codfish population. We wouldn't be having this conversation at all or if we were, it'd be around things that might be poisoning them in the oceans.

Deny fallacies, irrational statements, and well, ignorance.

originally posted by: Visitor2012

Federal scientists say the move is necessary to prevent a further decline in the codfish population

The hypocrisy is blinding. So why aren't they shutting down the pharma industries to 'prevent a further decline in human population? Or any number of painfully obvious things to address, such as pollution and GMO products, or one of a million other things that are threatening ALL life on Earth. Protecting cod my rear end.

I'm always in doubt of their stated intentions. The record shows them to be pathological liars. Especially when it comes to the general well being of ANY life form, the fed is never fighting on life's behalf. So I'm left to assume that this is none other than a power grab or some variant of market manipulation. In other words, money and power.

I have no faith in the 'good' intentions of any governmental body and never will. These mischievous ones are, once again, up to something.

Actually, the Chinese are buying up fish plants & boats here in Nova Scotia. I wonder if that has anything to do with it.