Lee Crockett of the Marine Fisheries Conservation Network said he was “struck by the amount of overlap” when he compared the recommendations of two commissions that recently studied the needs for managing U.S. oceans.

Environmentalists worried that the Bush-appointed U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy would come up with vastly different recommendations from those of the Pew Oceans Commission, a private-sector commission funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts.

However, both commissions recommended two changes fisheries advocates see as paramount: ecosystem management and the separation of science and management.

“The Pew Commission is seen as `green’, and the other, which had retired admirals, oil and gas people, could never be called a group of screaming environmentalists,” said Crockett.

But both ended up calling for ecosystem management of the oceans, said Crockett, although both had different approaches.

“Pew says we should redefine fisheries management and that ecosystem management should be the organizing principle, enabled by law, while the Ocean Policy commission encouraged an ecosystem approach but with no specificity or recommendation to do it legally,” said Crockett.

He addressed his remarks to 97 members of the MFCN at the group’s fifth annual meeting in Washington, D.C. Representatives of 61 member groups from 17 states attended the meeting, which featured a day-long series of talks and workshops covering several marine issues. Most attendees then lobbied senators and representatives for two days, hoping to prod them to vote for legislation to protect oceans and fish stocks.

Both commissions called for separating the functions of science and stock assessment from stock management and allocation of quotas, and a bill has been written for submission to this Congress that would accomplish this division.

The science and conservation of stocks should be handled by National Marine Fisheries Service, possibly working inside a new, independent oceans agency, with allocations determined by regional councils, said the Pew report. The Oceans Policy group called for Scientific and Statistical Committees (SSCs) to supply the scientific information to Regional Fisheries Management Councils that would continue to make the management and allocation decisions. Both called for independent review of fisheries science.

Pew would require management of bycatch, habitat damage and overcapacity as a condition of fishing as well as catch limits for intended and unintended catches and an expanded use of observers. Pew also called for boat buybacks to reduce capacity that would restrict fishermen who took the payments from re-entering the fishery. The Oceans Policy commission recommended repealing the capital construction fund.

The controversial topic of individual fish quotas was addressed by both commissions. Pew called for individual or community quotas within a total allowable catch, setting three national standards for their use that include establishment of categories for different vessel types and non-transferability within types, and establishment of an excessive shares cap to limit the amount of quota any one person or corporation can own in order to prevent excessive consolidation. “We believe in sunset” for the quotas, said Crockett, “So the quota isn’t considered property.”

The Oceans Policy commission calls for Congress to amend the Magnuson-Stevens Act to affirm that managers have the authority to use dedicated access practices, “but we’re leery of that,” said Crockett.

Rep. Tom Allen introduced a bill in 2003 called “Fishing Quota Standards Act of 2003” to ensure that IFQ quotas are not considered property rights, that IFQ systems and shareholders be required to provide additional conservation benefits to their fishery, protect individual fishermen and communities by limiting consolidation and require independent review of IFQ systems. This bill is still under consideration, along with the Fisheries Management Reform Act of 2004.

This bill, sponsored by Rep. Nick Rahall of West Virginia, ranking Democrat on the Resources Committee, while not the big oceans bill being written now, is based on recommendations of both commissions and seeks to separate conservation and allocation decisions, broaden representation on the regional councils and strengthen rules governing conflict of interests for council members.