PUBLIC COMMENT ON
ASMFC ADDENDUM I
TO THE
HORSESHOE CRAB
FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLAN

SUBMITTED BY
PERRY PLUMART
SENIOR POLICY ADVISOR

January 21, 2000

The National Audubon Society believes that to achieve the goal stated in the "Interstate Fishery Management Plan for the Horseshoe Crab" (Fishery Management Report No. 32, Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, December 1998), significant, substantial, and real reductions need to be immediately implemented in the landings, fishing, and harvest of horseshoe crabs.

The Executive Summary of the of the management plan for the horseshoe crab defines the goal of the plan as follows:

The goal of this plan is to conserve and protect the horseshoe crab resource to maintain sustainable levels of spawning stock biomass to ensure its continued role in the ecology of coastal ecosystems, while providing for continued use over time. Specifically, the goal includes management of horseshoe crab populations for their continued use by:

• Current and future generations of the fishing and non-fishing public;
• Migrating shorebirds; and,
• Other dependent wildlife, including federally listed sea turtles.

Despite years of direct scientific evidence that the stated goal of the horseshoe crab management plan was clearly not being achieved, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission has failed to prevent the landing of even a single horseshoe crab.

The scientific evidence that the horseshoe crab is being heavily overfished is clear and compelling. That there is no scientific evidence that the horseshoe crab is thriving or increasing in population is equally compelling.

In order for the ASMFC Commissioners and the public to understand the horseshoe crab fishery and to make an informed judgement on appropriate management strategies, the Horseshoe Crab Plan Review Team issued Draft Addendum I For Public Comment. That document contained the following definition of the problem:

The status of the stock remains unknown. The Stock Assessment Committee and the Peer Review Panel (PRP) concluded that there was a lack of information for a coastwide stock assessment. Information is not presently available to establish biological reference points, fishing mortality rates, or recruitment estimates. The Technical Committee and PRP, based on their assessment of the available data, recommended a conservative, risk-averse management strategy in order to maintain the horseshoe crab population. This recommendation was based on increases in catch and effort, coupled with several surveys that suggested localized declines in relative abundance, slow maturation, susceptibility of spawning crabs to harvest, population resiliency, and the need for sustainable biomedical and bait fisheries and the importance of horseshoe crab eggs as a food source for migratory birds.

This definition encapsulates the need for significant reductions in horseshoe crab landings. This statement of the problem is profoundly significant. In fact, it is so critical in determining which management strategy should be pursued that it is worth examining virtually every sentence.

Quite simply, nobody knows how many horseshoe crabs exist. It is known that in the last five years alone between 15 and 20 million horseshoe crabs have been landed. The consensus among fisheries experts is that these numbers underreport the true number of horseshoe crabs taken. The lack of an empirical number for the horseshoe crab population has lead some to fantasize without scientific data that the horseshoe population is some "billions" in numbers.

In a serious effort to find out what the Horseshoe Crab Management Board of the ASMFC estimates the stock of the horseshoe crab to be, the National Audubon Society wrote to every Commissioner requesting their assessment of the horseshoe crab stock or population (letter attached).

No ASMFC commissioner knew or had an estimate of what the horseshoe crab population might be at this time. In fact, no ASMFC commissioner responded with the information contained in numerous ASMFC documents that the status of the stock is unknown (responses attached).

No commissioner who responded acknowledged that the status of the stock is unknown, instead referring us to the data collected by the ASMFC. This is the same data that has lead the ASMFC horseshoe crab experts to recommend significantly reducing the landings of horseshoe crabs.

Based on the obvious and demonstrated lack of scientific knowledge of the population of horseshoe crabs by the Horseshoe Crab Management Board members, the recommendations of the Horseshoe Crab Technical Committee and the Peer Review Committee take on special significance. The landings of horseshoe crabs must be significantly reduced.

This technical sounding statement is enormously important. It states that according to the best available scientific evidence, nobody has any idea how many horseshoe crabs can be safely taken by fishermen while maintaining a stable population of horseshoe crabs. Scientific experts literally do not have an estimate of the number of horseshoe crabs that can be safely taken from the ocean and the beaches.

Even maintaining a stable population of horseshoe crabs would not achieve the stated goal of the Fishery Management Plan (FMP) because achieving the goal requires that there be sufficient horseshoe crabs to supply horseshoe crab eggs for migratory shorebirds. This requires a superabundance of horseshoe crabs on the beaches. Therefore, unlike other fisheries under ASMFC jurisdiction, the allowable take for horseshoe crabs would have to be established well above the fishing mortality rate.

The Technical Committee and PRP, based on their assessment of the available data, recommended a conservative, risk-averse management strategy in order to maintain the horseshoe crab population.

The horseshoe crab experts of the ASMFC, examining the best scientific evidence, have stated that significant action needs to be taken just to ensure the survival of a substantial horseshoe crab population. Again, merely maintaining the horseshoe crab population for bait needs would fail to meet the stated goals of the FMP because such a management strategy ignores the needs of the migratory shorebirds.

This sentence contains a number of key reasons why the ASMFC horseshoe crab experts concluded that real reductions in horseshoe crab landings must take place. The commercial fishing industry has significantly increased the amount of horseshoe crabs taken in the last 10 years. In addition to the fishermen taking more horseshoe crabs, they also are trying harder to catch horseshoe crabs.

The studies examined by the Stock Assessment Committee and the Peer Review Panel found the population of horseshoe crabs to be reduced in several local areas. Considered together, these studies indicate a regional problem.

The phrase "slow maturation," while accurate, understates the enormity of the problem. Horseshoe crabs take about 10 years to reach sexual maturity. Horseshoe crabs are being taken before they have had a chance to reproduce. The future horseshoe crab population is being fished out today.

The next phrase, "susceptibility of spawning crabs to harvest," does not fully illuminate what is happening. The bait industry targets the horseshoe crabs that can reproduce by literally picking up the pregnant females off of the beach. Indeed, pregnant females are the preferred bait. It takes little imagination to see the effect this has on the horseshoe crab population-consistently removing mothers and babies dooms a species.

The next phrase emphasizes the need for extra caution. With low "population resiliency" the horseshoe crab cannot recover quickly from overfishing. Mistakes made in setting landing levels too high will be magnified by the years it would take the horseshoe crab population to recover.

This last part of the definition of the problem acknowledges the need for sustainable fisheries. It does not suggest that the horseshoe crab should be fished until the population collapses. It also contains a reminder of the importance of the horseshoe crab to the migratory shorebirds.

There is an assumption that the horseshoe crab fishery has been managed based on sound science. This is a myth.

The scientific fact is that the horseshoe crab fishery has not been managed at all. Rather, the horseshoe crab fishery has been exploited. The science used by the ASMFC to determine what landing levels should be used is determined by finding out the bait needs of commercial fishermen.

A Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VMRC) public hearing in early 1999 exemplifies this "science." A commissioner declared that horseshoe crab landing levels should be based on demand, not on supply. The VMRC adopted that policy by setting landing levels based only on input from the bait industry.

When the states of New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland took action to protect the horseshoe crab, the ASMFC did nothing. The ASMFC members knew that the commercial fishermen would land the horseshoe crabs in Virginia. That is exactly what happened as landings in Virginia exploded by 26 times the amount landed the previous year. This undercutting of the conservation management strategy is acknowledged in the statement of the problem. For political purposes, the ASMFC could pretend that action had been taken, when in actuality the commercial fishermen have successfully undercut the regional conservation measures.

Implementing the goals of the FMP has come in a distant second to the bait needs of the commercial fishermen every time the ASMFC has had an opportunity to make a decision.

The science advisors of the ASMFC recommended in their October 1998 report that the ASMFC adopt measures to restrict the landings of horseshoe crabs. The ASMFC commissioners ignored the recommendation that was based on the best available science. The ASMFC shirked their responsibility by doing nothing to restrict horseshoe crab landings. The action they did take was to ask states to provide them with Reference Period Landing numbers.

Despite the warnings of their scientific experts that the horseshoe crab population was in jeopardy, the ASMFC delayed action, allowing 3 million horseshoe crabs to be landed in 1999.

In 1998, the ASMFC asked the member states to provide them with the number of horseshoe crabs landed in their states. The result was a political document in which many states with significant horseshoe crab fisheries tried to demonstrate large landings. These numbers are known as Reference Period Landings (RPL).

Several states set their number as the largest number of horseshoe crabs ever landed. This has been confirmed at open hearings held by the ASMFC. Virginia's RPL levels bear no relation to its reported landing levels and appear to be the result of backroom dealing. The reason given for using the highest number of horseshoe crabs landed is that it coincides with the best data. While this may be true, there is another reason for setting the numbers high.

The ASMFC commissioners knew that the RPL would be used as the basis for any reductions in the landings of horseshoe crabs. By setting the RPL numbers as high as possible, reductions in landings mandated by the ASMFC would have little real effect on the bait fishermen. This would be the case even with an otherwise seemingly significant action such as a 25% reduction of horseshoe crab landings from the RPL.

Because the RPL levels were deliberately set at high levels to protect the fishermen and not the horseshoe crab population, the goal of the FMP can only be achieved with a coastwide quota set, at a minimum, at a 50% reduction from RPL.

The ASMFC has promoted the commercial fishing industry's destructive use of the horseshoe crab to the detriment of the $100 million per year tourism industry and the $50 million per year biomedical industry.

Both the tourism and the biomedical industries are non-consumptive uses of the horseshoe crab resource. In other words, serious money can be made and jobs created without killing the horseshoe crab. Using horseshoe crabs for bait is a perfectly legitimate use of the resource. It is also a consumptive use.

The actions of the ASMFC clearly prioritize the use of the horseshoe crab resource that puts the long-term health of the horseshoe crab population at risk for all industries3/4 commercial fishermen, tourism, and biomedical.

TOURISM

The horseshoe crab and the migratory shorebirds that depend on it are an integral part of one of the fastest growing recreational industries in the country, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Sixty-two million Americans engage in bird and wildlife watching according to the National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation released in 1997.

The National Audubon Society report, "Horseshoe Crabs: Serious Business, The Economic and Health Benefits of Strict Landing Limits in Virginia," demonstrates the tens of millions of dollars of economic benefits at risk without reasonable horseshoe crab landing limits (report attached).

The New Jersey Department of Fish, Game, and Wildlife issued a report on October 1, 1999 entitled "Wildlife-Associated Recreation at Delaware Bay, The Economic Impact of Tourism Based on the Horseshoe Crab-Shorebird Migration in New Jersey." The gross economic value of trips to the Delaware Bayshore was estimated to be nearly $30 million (report prepared by Fermata, Inc. Austin, Texas).

BIOMEDICAL

Horseshoe crabs play a critical role in protecting the nation's drug supplies. Horseshoe crab blood is used to detect the presence of contaminants. According to "Cardiology Today" in the September 1999 issue, "Current law requires any intravenous drug, IV solution, or biomedical device that would have contact with human blood be analyzed for endotoxins by the LAL (limilus amebocyte lysate) test" (article attached).

Bleeding of horseshoe crabs is a $50 million per year industry. Its value in protecting the nation's health is almost incalculable. Horseshoe crab blood protects drugs used in every hospital in America.

The survival rate of horseshoe crabs from being bled is very high. Mortality is estimated to be less than 10%.

The Delaware Department of Natural Resources, in an excellent pamphlet entitled "Delaware Bay Shorebirds," outlines other medical uses of the horseshoe crab (pamphlet attached). These include research into the human eye and using the chitin from the horseshoe crab shell for sutures and dressings for burn victims.

BIAS

The ASMFC remains focused on the needs of horseshoe crabs for the commercial bait industry while ignoring the equally legitimate needs of the tourism industry and the biomedical industry.

Horseshoe crabs were heavily overfished at the beginning of the last century for use as fertilizer. It has been suggested by some ASMFC commissioners and others that because the horseshoe crab has been heavily overfished before and apparently recovered it is reasonable to overfish the horseshoe crab again. This is prima facia bad fishery management and it ignores the historical lessons of what happened to the horseshoe crabs and the migratory shorebirds. While millions of horseshoe crabs were being ground up for fertilizer, migratory shorebirds were being slaughtered by the tens of thousands for market. The shorebirds were showing up on dinner tables. Only in recent years have both the shorebirds and the horseshoe crabs recovered.

This history is well-described in Scott Weidensaul's book Living on the Wind: Across the Hemisphere with Migratory Birds. He makes a strong case for not repeating the mistake of overfishing the horseshoe crab a second time (chapter attached).

"The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, a legal compact of all East Coast states, might seem the best hope for conserving the horseshoe crab. But the commission has only promised to include a section on the crab as bait in a coastwide eel-management plan it is developing-and even that is expected to take years." Audubon Magazine, May-June 1996

"And as the catch of horseshoe crabs has increased, troubling indications of a population decline have alarmed conservationists and officials in Delaware and New Jersey." Audubon Magazine, May-June 1996

"A similar moratorium was adopted by Delaware, and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission is considering adopting an interstate management plan." Washington Post, Ugly Horseshoe Crab May Have a Future to Match on Delaware Bay, August 4, 1997

"But scientists who study horseshoe crabs say the evidence is clear. Crab populations are dropping rapidly in a trend that mirrors a sharp increase in harvesting." Washington Post, Ugly Horseshoe Crab May Have a Future to Match on Delaware Bay, August 4, 1997

"Surveys over the past decade show significant declines in the numbers of horseshoe crabs and shorebirds. The sanderling population alone has decreased an alarming 80 percent in the past decade." Delaware Department of Natural Resources and the Environment pamphlet "Delaware Bay Shorebirds", 1998.

"Third, federal action is expected late this fall to set horseshoe crabbing regulations for the whole coast." Baltimore Sun, "Virginia Rejects Chance to Shield Horseshoe Crab", August, 21, 1998

"But on thing is not in doubt. The horseshoe crabs, which have survived since before trees evolved, can be devastated by overharvesting." Baltimore Sun, "Virginia Rejects Chance to Shield Horseshoe Crab", August, 21, 1998

"The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission is considering a cap as well." U.S. News and World Report, "The Decline of the Ancient Mariner" July 5, 1999.

"Since Hall began coordinating an annual springtime census for the University of Delaware's Sea Grant College Program a decade ago, the number of breeding adults on the shores of Delaware Bay-the center of the specie's range and its most important spawning zone-has plummeted from 1.2 million to about 400,000. The main reasons for the decline are the loss of Atlantic beach habitat and-perhaps most significant-the crabs'value as bait for eel and conch fishermen." U.S. News and World Report, "The Decline of the Ancient Mariner" July 5, 1999.

"The stock is not in jeopardy, our management program has been effective, and we are being unjustly criticized for not doing more,' said Dieter Busch, director of the commission's Interstate Fisheries Management Program." Boston Globe, "Vital to Many, Horseshoe Crab in Danger" November, 3 1999

"'The commission has allowed the strip-mining of horseshoe crabs as a resource,' said Perry Plumart, senior policy advisor at the National Audubon Society. 'It has no idea what the crab population is, yet does know there's been an enormous spike in the catch in the last few years and has just stood by, watching the resource be depleted.'" Boston Globe, "Vital to Many, Horseshoe Crab in Danger" November, 3 1999

The regulation of horseshoe crab landings is an issue of national importance and significance. The horseshoe crab is found from Florida to Maine. As the Addendum to the FMP points out, horseshoe crab landings and bait fisheries developed in Pennsylvania and Florida as other states independently implemented conservation measures.

U.S. Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt went to Delaware Bay on May 17, 1999 calling for conservation measures for the horseshoe crab to be implemented. Members of Congress from across the United States have written the ASMFC (letter attached) asking the Commission to act responsibly.

As much a part of America's wildlife heritage as the California condor, Yellowstone wolves, and the bald eagle, responsible conservation measures are needed to preserve the horseshoe crab for future generations.

The horseshoe crab fishery is in serious trouble because the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission has allowed unlimited take and landings of the horseshoe crab for the last decade. The Atlantic States Marines Fisheries Commission, despite years of solid scientific evidence and factual data, ignored the growing crisis in the horseshoe crab population. The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission has steadfastly undermined the stated goals of the Horseshoe Crab Fisheries Management Plan by allowing one special interest to dominate its activities. In fact, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission has been so negligent that the proper fishery management action in this situation would be to impose a moratorium on horseshoe crab landings.

The National Audubon Society recommends the following options be adopted as the minimum measures that should be taken to implement the goals of the FMP:

Option 4.

Establish a state-by-state cap on horseshoe crab bait landings at 50 percent below the reference period landings for all states. Individual state horseshoe crab bait fisheries would be closed once their state's cap is reached.

Option 11.

Require states to implement a harvest sex ratio of at least 1:1 males to females in any day's harvest.

Option 12.

Recommend that the National Marine Fisheries Service close the harvest of horseshoe crabs in federal waters (3-200 miles offshore).

Option 13.

Require states to promote and encourage the use of alternative horseshoe crab baits and trap techniques in the conch and eel fisheries.

The National Audubon Society opposes the following option:

Option 9.

Allow the transfer of quota among states under any coastwide quota program that is allocated state-by-state.

With over a million members and supporters in 518 chapters throughout the Americas, the National Audubon Society conserves and restores natural ecosystems, focusing on birds, other wildlife, and their habitats for the benefit of humanity and the earth's biological diversity. The National Audubon Society appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments as the ASMFC deliberates on the options to implement the Horseshoe Crab Fisheries Management Plan.