August 21, 2023
Jennifer Farmer
Regulatory Coordinator
Virginia Marine Resources Commission
380 Fenwick Road
Building 96
Fort Monroe, VA 23651
RE: Comments on Petition Entitled “Gear type use in Virginia waters pertaining to depth of current purse seine nets”
Dear Ms. Farmer:
These comments are submitted on behalf of Ocean Harvesters, owner and operator of _ menhaden purse seine vessels homeported in Reedville, Virginia, and which harvest menhaden in the Chesapeake Bay and coastal Atlantic waters, as well as the fish spill response vessel, Hopeful Harvest. Ocean Harvesters is the named target of the Petition asking the Virginia Marine Resources Commission (“VMRC”) to regulate the water depth in which our vessels may operate. Noting that menhaden reduction fishery has been operating in the Chesapeake Bay for over 145 years and that such gear cannot operate in contact with the sea floor, the Petition is directed at a concern which does not exist. For this and other reasons specified herein, it should be denied.
The Petition requests that VMRC develop a regulation creating a so-called “safety zone” to limit the depth in which purse seine vessels may fish. Petitioner suggests a “regulation such as ‘No Purse Seine net may be placed in any area of Virginia’s waters that is less than 5’ deeper that the depth of the actual net utilized.’” Petitioner also indicates a belief that, at least as to Ocean Harvesters’ vessels, such depth is 50’ to 60’ ostensibly based on testimony of Ocean Harvesters’ Captain Thomas Moore before the VMRC. In fact, Capt. Moore was describing the depth at which the net is fished in deeper oceanic waters. He followed that answer with the same explanation given below on how Ocean Harvesters’ vessels fish in the shallower waters of the Chesapeake Bay.
The Petition thus appears to request a rule that would prohibit Ocean Harvesters from fishing in waters shallower than 65-feet in an estuary with an average depth of 21-feet. This is not a “safety zone,” it is a de facto ban on Ocean Harvesters’ ability to fish in the Bay at all. There are few areas that deep within Virginia’s portion of the Chesapeake and only a small fraction of Ocean Harvesters’ catch come from them. Such a rule would also have severe adverse impacts on the menhaden purse seine fishery for bait, which would be excluded from most of the areas it operates under the proposed 5-foot “safety zone” rule. Petitioner fails to even acknowledge this fact.
In short, the Petition is dishonest about its intent. It is not about protecting submerged aquatic vegetation or the seafloor from “scraping.” If it were, it would have addressed all purse seiners, not to mention other bottom-tending fishing gear. Rather, this is just another approach by anti-Omega Protein activists to shut down the menhaden reduction fishery and inflict severe economic harm on the historic fishing community of Reedville and Northumberland County. It is of a piece with the ongoing lawsuit against the VMRC’s recent menhaden regulations; the petition before the State Water Control Board to have the water returned from fish pumping operations declared “point source pollution” ; and the ceaseless and threatening calls on both the VMRC and Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission to push Ocean Harvesters’ vessels from the Chesapeake Bay and coastal waters.
As explained previously to the VMRC and again below, purse seines cannot operate effectively when they come into contact with the bottom and, in fact, do not contact the seafloor save for rare malfunctions. The Petition itself acknowledges this fact, stating “Purse Seine net design dictates that the net be deployed to a depth that is above the sea bottom,” though it assumes that Ocean Harvesters’ nets are working the bottom. This appears to be based on the simplistic assumption that because these nets can be fished to depths of 60-feet (where appropriate), they must always be deployed to their full extent of depth.
This is not the company’s practice and it would be irrational in the extreme to do so for the following reasons:
Certain amount of water depth required
• Ocean Harvesters’ purse seiners cannot fish in shallow water given its vessels’ draft, so purse boats cannot set in water that does not allow the steamer to access.
• Ocean Harvesters’ purse seiners draw 8-14 feet of depth depending on the boat and the amount of fish aboard. They must be able to go alongside the net to pump fish and retrieve the purse boats. This already puts a large areas of shallower waters of the Chesapeake Bay, including those with rocks and other debris that reduce the amount of clearance, beyond the reach of the fishery.
Captains/Crews control net depth
• Trained menhaden captains have the ability to control purse seine net depth and can manipulate the net, as Capt. Moore explained at the December 6, 2022, VMRC meeting.
• Captains control their nets based upon water depth, tides, fish in the net, etc., by utilizing two methods:
o Purse line spool brake & “Tom Weight”: The depth these nets go to is controlled by a brake on the purse line spool, so that the bottom of the net at the deepest part (the Bunt) is under tension and moves under the school of fish. It does not go straight down to the bottom/sea floor. The “Tom Weight” is then lowered to a depth above the sea floor to ensure that as the net is pursed (the bottom closed), it does not come together scraping along the sea floor. This is vitally important because doing so would constantly snag the net on everything on the bottom, tear it, make it impossible to get the net back, and generally tear the net to pieces. The fact that our vessels never catch crabs, oysters, clams, or rocks from the sea floor is evidence of this.
o Purse speed: Purse seine nets can be pursed strategically depending on fish, water depth, and tides. When fishing in the Chesapeake Bay, nets are pursed quickly, keeping the net off of the seafloor. When fishing in the ocean, where captains need to fish deeper, they will purse the net slower to allow the net to go deeper.
Results of controlling net depth
• If menhaden purse seine nets disturbed the bottom of the Chesapeake Bay as described by this petition, then net tears would be occurring often, likely every day.
• Net tears are typically a result of a large unmapped obstruction or debris on the sea floor. For example, during the 2017 season, a net tear occurred when an anchor sticking up 10 feet off the sea floor tore a net. This spill was not due to the purse seine net interacting with the bottom. Furthermore, the 2022 incident mentioned in the Petition which caused fish to wash up on the shores of Kiptopeke State Park and elsewhere was also not the result of bottom contact. As Ocean Harvesters explained to VMRC at the time of the incident, this was an intentional release because the Captain realized that the net had captured a large number of red drum that were below the school of targeted menhaden. This was a rare event that demonstrates how seriously the Company, its Captains, and crew take their responsibility to avoid capturing non-target species.
Submerged Aquatic Vegetation
• Even though everyone recognizes that the unfortunate 2022 event discussed above was the result of a deliberate release intended to avoid capture of and to save entrapped red drum, the Petition seeks to characterize this evidence of Ocean Harvesters’ allegedly “causing massive amounts of SAV (Submerged Aquatic Vegetation) sea grass and other bottom growth to be destroyed.” The hyperbole of this statement aside, as the net in that case was not, in fact, interacting with the sea floor, it clearly was not responsible for the sea grass on the shores of Kiptopeke State Park that day. As the pictures appended hereto demonstrate, the occurrence of sea grass on those shores is not uncommon.
• A quick review of the Virginia Institute of Marine Science’s annual sea grass survey reports shows no correlation of losses/gains in sea grass and Ocean Harvesters’ fishing locations. In fact, the worst losses of sea grasses last year were in Maryland where the Company’s vessels are not allowed to fish. By contrast, some of the largest increases in grasses were in Tangier Sound where menhaden purse seine vessels do operate. Overall, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Chesapeake Bay Office noted a twelve percent increase of sea grass coverage in 2022 as compared to 2021.
• The issue of purse seines’ impact on SAV is a red herring, as the nets simply do not interact with them.
The VMRC should reject this thinly veiled attack on the menhaden reduction fleet. Vessels operating in essentially the same manner as those of Ocean Harvesters have been working the waters of the Chesapeake Bay since the 1870s. Over that time span, the estuarine ecosystem has varied immensely, suffering the collapse of the oyster fishery, the decline and revival of the striped bass population (with a recent and quickly counteracted bout of overfishing), depredations of DDT and recovery since its ban in the 1960s, extreme nutrient loading and ongoing efforts to reduce it, hypoxia, and now global warming. None of these things were caused by the menhaden fishery.
In fact, over the course of all of our lifetimes, the level of fishing effort in terms of the number of purse seine vessels prosecuting the fishery and the amount of menhaden harvested in the Chesapeake Bay has declined. Due both to management actions and conscious decisions by Ocean Harvesters and Omega Protein to be responsive to and respectful of concerns raised by other stakeholders, current effort over the past decade has been at the lowest sustained levels since at least 1955 and likely since the fishery’s inception. There is simply no rationality in the attempts to blame Ocean Harvesters’ efforts for every ecological woe affecting the Chesapeake Bay.
Ocean Harvesters takes its stewardship of the marine ecosystem seriously and is mindful of the impacts any fish spill has on citizens of the Commonwealth. It is for this reason its Captains are careful to keep the nets off the bottom (coupled with the fact that each net costs $75,000 and thus they are each treated with the utmost care). It is also the reason that Ocean Harvesters invested in the Hopeful Harvest and entered into an agreement with the Commonwealth of Virginia to respond quickly to any future spill. There is simply no need for a regulation to mandate a practice which is in both the Company’s economic interest and its interest in continuing to operate for another 160 years and beyond. The VMRC should reject this Petition.
In closing, Ocean Harvesters and Omega Protein have long maintained an open policy with respect to their operations and business. Should any Commissioners have any questions or concerns, or would like to see the operations in action, please let us know. Thank you for your time and careful attention to this important matter.
Sincerely,
Ben Landry
Vice President of Public Affairs, Ocean Fleet Services
ATTACHMENT
Sea Grass on Kiptopeke State Park
https://thedyrt.com/virginia/virginia-kiptopeke-state-park.htm
https://www.nps.gov/places/kiptopeke-state-park.htm
https://www.alltrails.com/parks/us/virginia/kiptopeke-state-park
