Coastal Conservation Association (CCA)

Shades of Gray in White Marlin Debate
By Ted Venker

Fisheries management is a surprisingly complex arena mixing science, politics, statistics, emotion and economics. As much as we would all like to find black or white answers to the problems facing some stocks of fish, inevitably a kettle of other factors come into play that smudge things into a cloudy shade of gray.

Sometimes the situation is so bad that the answer is vivid, like during the darkest days of the striped bass collapse when the only option remaining was to completely shut down the fishery in order to save it. Not much room to smudge things in that case. Now that striped bass have staged a remarkable comeback, the palette is starting to run together, but that is a whole different story.

With that example in mind, white marlin seemed to be aptly named. Science has determined that the stock has been decimated and that action is needed to recover the species. Do something now before it is too late – black or white.

However, there is an important difference in the two species. Striped bass live primarily in state and federal waters. White marlin swim all over the Atlantic, far out in international waters, and their decline can be directly linked to the increase of longliners fishing there. These fleets come mostly from Japan, China, Taiwan and Spain. There are about 1,800 longliners greater than 24 meters in length registered to operate in the Atlantic and, of those, only 211 are U.S. vessels. By most accounts, only 75 of those U.S. vessels actually operate in the Atlantic.

International participation in a fishery tends to cloud things considerably.

In addition to the registered vessels, there are some 150 longliners fishing illegally, and thousands of longline vessels under 24 meters fishing in the Atlantic.

Undocumented participation in the fishery adds even more gray.

DO SOMETHING

So how to recover a species that swims in international waters and is subject to millions of hooks arbitrarily dropped into the sea every day by a fleet of longliners from maybe a dozen different countries?

The International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) manages all tunas and tuna-like species, such as billfish, swordfish and tunas, in the Atlantic. It has grown to include 38 members representing more than 70 countries, including Korea, Taiwan and China, as well as the largest seafood markets in the world – the EU, U.S., Japan and Canada.

Based on the science, ICCAT implemented a measure that requires nations to reduce their landings of white marlin from the 1999 level by 67 percent. The same measure allows the United States to conduct a directed recreational fishery for white marlin so long as the landings do not exceed 250 fish for both white and blue marlin combined.

These controls, which only came into effect in 2001, are the primary conservation measures to halt the further decline of white marlin. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), in a review to determine whether white marlin ought to be listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 2002, concluded it was too early to tell whether the ICCAT measures were adequate and declined to list the species.

By most accounts, member nations have reduced the landings of white marlin, but the effectiveness of these reductions on the stock may not be known until 2006.

In the meantime, two groups have decided that white marlin should be listed under the ESA. In January 2004, the Center for Biological Diversity and the Turtle Island Restoration Network filed suit in federal district court challenging NMFS’ decision not to list white marlin under the ESA, despite the fact that domestic recreational anglers and commercial longliners are responsible for just 5-10 percent of the Atlantic-wide mortality of white marlin. The suit also disregards the fact that even the complete elimination of the U.S. longline fleet will not halt the decline of white marlin.

REALITY CHECK

In fact, any regulation enacted under an ESA listing would not apply to foreign citizens, the high seas or foreign countries. All regulations would apply to U.S. citizens only.

While it is difficult to speculate what regulations NMFS might put in place in the event white marlin are listed, it is certain that it will involve a torrent of regulations. It is possible that ESA regulations could mean a prohibition on fishing in any manner that might conceivably catch a white marlin regardless of the species being targeted. Would you still be able to troll for king mackerel? Maybe not. The repercussions of such a regulation would be huge.

CCA has a long history of following the science to recover the resource. As early as 1988, CCA called for and obtained a billfish plan that made marlin the first federal game fish. Most of the domestic rules in place today for billfish are a result of CCA’s efforts.

In 1999, CCA pressed Congress for longline time and area closures. NMFS ultimately put closures in place in 2000. CCA has had at least one member on the ICCAT Advisory Committee for 15 years and the last two ICCAT Commissioners are CCA members.

With the benefit of all that experience, CCA realizes that the long-term solution for white marlin is controlling foreign longline fleets in addition to our own through continued participation in ICCAT. An ESA listing would misdirect an overwhelming amount of regulatory effort at domestic recreational fishermen who land fewer than 50 white marlin annually. With that in mind, the CCA Executive Committee decided to intervene as defendant in the suit against NMFS.

There is much work to be done on white marlin, but it must be done in the proper arena. CCA is committed to the long-term success of ICCAT and committed to being a part of any proceedings that might result in further meaningful regulation of the species.

The proposal to list white marlin feels like the right thing to do, but it is not. It is a very black or white solution to a problem that is awash in gray. For white marlin, the answer is not that simple.