Alliance of Communities for Sustainable Fisheries Press Release

Media Contact:
Kristina Chavez Wyatt
Armanasco Public Relations, Inc.
(831) 372-2259
kwyatt@armanasco.com

Organizational Contact:
Frank Emerson
Alliance of Communities for Sustainable Fisheries
(831) 277-0544
frankemerson@redshift.com

Study Contact:
Mark Damian Duda
Responsive Management
(540) 432-1888
mark@responsivemanagement.com

STUDY RESULTS SHOW STRONG SUPPORT FOR CALIFORNIA’S FISHING INDUSTRY

MONTEREY, Calif. – April 11, 2007 – A recent study of 801 Californians, conducted by Responsive Management, a nationally recognized public opinion and attitude survey research firm, on behalf of the Alliance of Communities for Sustainable Fisheries (ACSF) showed overwhelming support for local, sustainably harvested seafood and family-run fishing operations. The telephone survey evaluated Californians’ opinions on and attitudes toward commercial and recreational fishing in coastal areas of California, the ecological health of California’s coastal fisheries and wildlife, and fisheries and wildlife management along the
coast.

According to the results of the study, two-thirds of Californians (66%) disagree that fishing harms the ocean. There was much more support (by more than 2 to 1) for allowing fishing in all areas, with science-based limits on the total harvest (68% support this position) over fully protecting (i.e., prohibiting all harvesting in) some areas with the concomitant result that fishermen would concentrate their fishing in remaining open areas (24%). In simple terms, Californians support harvest limitations over complete harvest bans.

Respondents were asked to directly rate the importance of commercial fishing to California’s economy, and why they think it is important: a large majority, 79% rated commercial fishing at the midpoint or higher; only 17% rated it less than the midpoint. Many items reflect that the public does not blame family fishing for concerns about the ocean/fish populations, 59% consider foreign factory or large corporations as the type of fishing that is harming the ocean, 66% do not feel that fishing is even harming the ocean, 25% rated their concern for continuing family fishing at the highest level possible and 55% disagree that family fishing is harming the ocean.

Results illustrated that the public does not want to jeopardize the family fishing industry. Knowing that California fishing is more highly regulated than other countries, 82% would prefer to buy local and 63% would not be willing to buy imported seafood, if that meant putting California’s family fishermen out of business. In response to the study’s findings, Vern Goehring, manager of the California Fisheries Coalition of which the ACSF is a member stated, “It’s difficult to understand why national conservation groups work in partnership with fishing in foreign countries, yet they seem not to care about marine protected areas and reserves in the U.S. that are driving small, local fishing businesses out of business.”

When presented with the scenario where fish stocks are stable or already recovering, there was little support for a ban, as only 24% agree that commercial fishing should still be banned if scientific evidence shows that fish stocks are stable or already recovering (66% disagree). Slightly higher agreement (37%) was found when suggested that commercial fishing be banned while allowing recreational fishing, if scientific evidence shows that fish stocks are stable or already recovering (53% disagree). Kathy Fosmark, member of the Federal Pacific Fisheries Management Council and co-chairperson of the ACSF stated, “The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has reported, and science is telling us that there is no overfishing on the west coast of California. The seven fish stocks that had been declared overfished are in stock rebuilding plans that are already improving faster than predicted.”

NEXT