[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
13289 Coastal Zone Information NOV, 2 2 1977, Center H D 9502 M32 M37 1977 27989895 July 2 1997 MARINE RELATED ACTIVITIES: AN ASSESSMENT OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF OCS ENERGY DEVELELOPMENT lst OCS Year (Task 8.7) Prepared by New York Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Land Resources and Forest Management Outer Continental Shelf Study Program 50 Wolf Road Albany, New York 12233 U.S. DEPARTMENT, OF COMMERCE NOAA October 1977 COASTAL SERVICES CENTER 2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE CHARLESTON., SC 29405-2413 The preparation of this report was financially aided through a Federal Grant from the Office of Coastal Zone Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under the Coasal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, Grant #04-5-158-50002 Property of CSC Library This report was prepared for the New York HD State Department of State 9502 .U53 M37 1977 PREFACE This report focuses,upon the potential implications for marine related recreational activity on the south shore of Long Island and to the State's Atlantic co rcial fisheries of prospective Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) energy development activities. The characteristics and economic importance of these activities are briefly inventoried. Assessment is then made con- cerning the potential adverse effects of OCS activities on recreational expenditures, commercial fisheries harvests and related economic ramifications. Information concerning the prospective character and magnitude of OCS related energy development activity contained in this report was based upon material and information published in New York State and Outer Continental. Shelf Development @- An Assessment of Impacts,__New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (October 1977). Extensive use was made of the material prepared by the-State Office of Parks and Recreation and Long Island State Park andRecreation Commission in their study, Assessment of Impacts of Proposed Activities an Long Island's Shoreline RecreationIndust17 (June 1977) completed under task 8.8 of the OCS work program. This report covers one of,three elements of task 8.7 (Economic Impacts) of the OCS Work Program. Separate reports have been prepared covering the potential economic benefits from attracting OCS related onshore activities to New York and the potential contribution of OCS oil and gas resources in meeting future state energy needs. All three reports provide information and assessments necessary to judge the.overall economic implications - potential costs and benefits associated with e=loration.1 development and recovery of OGS energy. They can serveserve as a basis for federal, state and local planning efforts to maximize the economic benefits of-OCS activity while recognizing the need to minimize any adverse environmental ramifications. OCS energy development activities are only in the formative stages. Major uncertainties exist with respect to the magnitude of the recoverable resources, the means to be utilized to transport the resources to onshore locations and a wide range of prospective environmental interactions. The findings contained in this report are based upon the best currently available information and reasonable judgements. While the intent is to identify potentially significant adverse economic impacts, their occurrence will be dependent upon still unforeseen conditions.. Appropriate planning -could minimize 'many adverse environmental/economic impacts. To this end, the report should serve to stress the importance of implementing policies to protect the marine environment against any pros- pective OCS activities. TABLE OF CONTENTS Marine Related Activities': An Assessment of the Economic Impacts of OCS Energy Development Page Preface i Part I: Introduction and Findings 1 A. The Economic Importance of Maxine Related Activities 2 B. Perspectives on OCS Development 5 C. Findings on the Potential Impacts 11 Part II: Inventory and Impact Analysis 14 A. Shoreline Recreation 15 B. Sports Fishing 27 C. Commercial Fisheries 32 Part III: Appendix Material 48 A. Tables 49 B. Implications of the Extended U.S. Fisheries Juris-, 56 diction PART I: iNTRODUCTION AND FINDINGS -2- A. THE ECONGAUC IMPORTANCE OF MARINE FZLATED ACTIVITIES 'Recreation 1viarine related recreational activity on,the south shore of Long Island and New York City directly generates over $460 million in annual expenditures for goods and services. A whole array of business and individuals provide facilities and services for public beach visitors and tourists, private beach and recreation club members and persons engaged in boating and sports- fishing pursuits. This sectors viability in turn supports other businesses in the New York Metropolitan Area.and as a result almost $1.2 billion is generated directly, indirectly and induced from recreational activity on the south shore (see Table 1). The unique natural resources and manmade marine facilities on the south shore, 150 mile of ocean front with 38 major beach areas and over 500 marine facilities, its proximity to 11.5 million people in the metropolitan area its attraction to tourists makes it the most heavily utilized oceanfront real-estate on the A:tlantic coast. During the peak summer season close to 50 million visitations are made to the public beaches in New.York City, Nassau and Suffolk counties. Almost 850,000 sports fisherman annually fish,off the shore and on a good summer weekend day, as many as 10,000 motor and sail boats may be offshore. This unique and valuable marine environment is not only recognized at the state and local level, but also by the federal government. The Fire Island National Seashore was established in 1964 and in 1972 the National Gateway Park, the,first major urban Federally administered recreational area, was established. Numerous State Parks, with Jones Beach the most well- known, are located along the 150 miles of oceanfront. -3- Table I-I Current Annual Expenditures Associated with Marine -Ity on the South Shore Recreational Activil Expenditures for Goods and Services (smillions 7 Beach Visitations and Tourism $ 245 New York City ($48m) Nassau and Suffolk Counties ($197m) Spo.-t-Fishing, 92 Boating 82 Private Beach Club Membershi-o 40 Total.Direct Expenditures 463 Direct, Indirect and Induced Expenditures $1,160 Based upon a regional multiplier of 2.5 applied to direct expenditures Sources: New York State.Department of Environmental Conservation and the Long Island State Park and Recreation Commission -4- rily a summar activity, concentrated Recreation on the south shore is prima. during the 18 week season stretching from mid-.UV through mid-September. Therefore., for the bulk of the recreational oriented businesses, a limited span of time principally determines their annual income prospects. An estimated 85 percent of total annual rec .reational expenditures occurs during the summer season. Wbile almost all of New York City's and Long Island's shore front serves some form of public and private recreationj there are different patterns of use that result in different expenditure characteristics within geographic sub-areas. For example, Coney Island-, the Rockaways and the,beaches in Nassau County usually are more crowded and tend to have primarily day-use visitors. Suffolk County beaches especially the more eastern ones are gener- ,ally less crowded and used by weekenders and vacationers. These latter groups often occupy motel rooms and seasonal homes and as a result spend more per-capita than day-use visitors. Commercial Fishing Commercial fishing off the south shore is part of the complex of businesses and activities comprising the.Me tropolitan area's seafood industry that includes: harvesting, processing, wholesale distribution and.retail sales. This industry is only-partially dependent upon fish harvested in or near New York waters with greater reliance on other domestic fisheries. and foreign Sources. Indeed, these latter sources comprise the overwhelming bulk of fish products processed and wholesaled in the @6etropolitan a-rea.., The overall dollar value.of some of the components of theMetropolitan Area's seafood industry are as follows: Estimated 1976 (millions) Value of Dockside Commercial Landings in New York State $ 32 Value Of Processing Activities 93 Wholesale Trade Establishment Sales 364 Retail Seafood Market Sales 96 Sources: See Part II and appendix material The harvesting of commercial fisheries off New York State shores is potentially sensitive to,OCS energy development activities and therefore, this report concentrates on assessing the characteristics of this function and the potential consequences of OCS activity. New York's com rcial fishing is principally dependent upon high value shellfish resources located in and around the bays, sounds and inlets and near-shore ocean waters. These resources represented in 1976, 85%,of the total landing values with hard clams being the most important species, representing about 25% of the total poundage and over 50% of the value. Suffolk County is the main location of landings and accounts for over 75% of the state's total marine landings, with Nassau having 15% of the total. Employment associated with marine commercial fishing is estimated at 9,500 with, 11owever, two-thirds being part-timers, reflecting the,seasonality of the industry and its inability to provide for year round employment. B. PERSPECTIVES ON OCS DEVELOPMENT As a result of current U.S. Department of Interior lease sales in the Mid and North Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) within the next few years there will be a determination of the amounts of potentially recoverable oil and gas resources. The finding of economically recoverable resources -6- will mean,that major activity associated with development and production of energy could commence by 1980 in offshore areas within 100 miles of the state's shores (see mao 1). In assessing the potential environmental, economic and energy impacts and implications of OCS energy 4evelopment for New York State, three scenarios were postulated by DEC.with respect to the amount of recoverable resources. These scenarios are not meant to be predictions, but rather assumptions using the best. available information to identify a range of possible resource finds. The three resource finds are a high oil and gas find, a very high gas find,,' and a low oil and gas,find. Potential yields for each scenario for the Mid- Atlantic and North Atlantic OCS areas are contained below in Table 2. Table 1-2 Potential Resource Finds' Mid-Atlantic and North Atlantic IVIid-Atlantic North Atlantic Total Scenarios Oil Gas oil Gas Oil Gas #1 high oil and gas 2.6 12.8 0.9 4.2 3.5 17.0 #2 very high gas 0 30.0 0.9 4.2 0.9 34.2 #3 low oil and gas 0.4 2.6 0 0 0.4 2.6 Note:. Oil quantities are 'noted in bill-ions of barrels. Gas quantities are noted.in trillions of cubic feet. Source: New York State and Outer Continental Shelf Development An Assessment of Impacts, New York State Department of En.717onmental Conservation (October, 1977). The recovery of oil and gas from the OCS will require major investment in offshore and onshore facilities. Rigs, platforms and pipelines will be put down offshore and tankering operations may be required to transport oil to coastal landing sites. Onshore support activities including service 740 720 700 60 661, > MAINE > 440 441 @VERMONT NEW IHAMPSHIRE NEW YORK MASS. 0 R. CONN. P E N N. N.J. 400 \X IIA DE L. 3@0 38-1 jII HID !VIi D NORTH ATLA@i=u 0"CIS LZASE AFIAS V A e 940 c a -1. 1for nomin- ilease Sal N C ations area Lease Sale #42 Call- for norain- 3bo 0 ations area 36' Lease Sale #49 cal for noyiiin- ations area Tract selections, Lease "Dales #40 and #42 7 740 720 700 6,80 0 50 100 150 Km Scale I5,0001,0@00 j(1,0 M i -8- bases, platform fabrication yards, energy processing plants and a range of other facilities willb e needed along the Atlantic Coast. All told, the dis- covery of significant resources will mean the advent of new industry bringing both oportunities and potential problems for New York and other Northeast states. OCS activity will occur within a marine environment that is a major economic asset to New York and other states. Commerical fisheries of the North Atlantic are one of the major world food sources. The coastal shore- front from Maine to Virginia provides to the 50 million inhabitants of the Boston to Norfolk megolopolis, access to a unique recreational resource. This OCS environment is likely to be highly suceptible to adverse impacts from the integration of OCS energy recovery activities within its perimeter. Marine fisheries could be impacted by competition for space in fishing grounds that contain platforms, rigs and pipelines. Oil spills could have immediate and long-term detrimental impacts on fisheries and if they reach shore, severe consuquences for shoreline recreation activities. The utiliza- tion of the beaches, boating activity and sportfishing could be dramatically curtailed and substantial economic losses suffered in the event of major spills. The Nature of Prospective OCS Activity There are four major phases associated with OCS energy recovery activities after lease sales by the U.S. Department of Interior. Exploratory Phase Development Phase Production Phase Shutdown Phase -9- Exploratory activities are conducted by the petroleum companies to deter- mine whether oil and gas resources are actually present and to delineate the size a-ad extent of any resources that may exist. Exploratory rigs, designed to be easily moved from one location to another drill wells.to determine hydrocarbon resource characteristics. This information is used to plan the timing and scale of development operations. The number of wells drilledis determined by the amount of resources present and exploration may continue well into the development phase if sub- stantial finds are identified. If non-commercial finds are only encountered, their exploration may cease within five years or less. Exploratory activities generate a limited amount of onshore support requirements, primarily support from temporary service bases. In the development phase, production platforms are installed and onshore support operation established. Each production platform is installed for the life of a field and each will support one or more drilling rigs. A drilling -rig can dxill four or more wells per year and the number of develop- ment wells may reach 20 or more per platform. During this phase, decisions are made concerning the means by which OCS oil and gas resources are transported to shore. Either pipeline or tankers will be used, depending upon economic, technological and environ- mental considerations including the total amount of resources, expected .rates of production and prospects for adverse environmental impacts from transfer operations. For gas, pipelines axe the only economically feasible means of transfer since the alternative, liquefying the gas at the platform and shipping it by (LNG) tanker will.not be economically advantageousin .the Atlantic OCS. With respect to the transport of oil recovered from,the OCS leasing areas, a sufficiently large oil find will economically justify the construe- tion of a pipeline. A small find will make the use of tankers more economi- cally attractive. The use oftankers is likely to incur much greater environ- mental risks as a result of loading f@om the platforms, potential tanker s-oills in transit and accidental spills during shore unloading. The development phase of OCS generates substantial onshore and offshore activity and employment peaks with the need to fabricate platforms, install pipelines and commence operations of permanent OCS service. It is at this stage that all the necessary infrastructure must be in place to-enable pro- duction and recovery of, oil and gas. The production phase may overlap both the exploratory and development phases. During this phase which may last 10-20 years the level of onshore support activity is well below that experienced during development. In +,he overall production phase, because of phased drilling of wells, production rates at any.given time will vary among different fields. However, because of technological requirements, the overall pattern for,a group of fields is for a rapid rise of production followed by constant decline. The economic limits of production in any reservoir field is a function of complex physical and-economic factors. Generally, primary recovery leaves substantial resources in place which are uneconomical to recover. Secondary and tertiary recovery techniques exist, however, they are expensive. They would,extend production of OCS lease areas and fields but at this point, too many unknown factors exist to assess prospects for secondary and tertiary recovery from OCS lease areas. The shutdown phase occurs when the fields reach e--onomic exhaustion. At this point, wells are plugged, production platforms are removed a-ad pipe- lines are abandoned. Not withstanding the potential substantial energy and economic benefits to the nation, northeast and New York State of OCS oil and gas resources, the exploration, development and recovery of these resources could have adverse environmental and economic effects. These implications for New York's marine activities are summarized below and detailed further in Part 11. C. FINDINGS CN THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OCS development can adversely affect both the, offshore and nearshore marine environment and may cause conflicts with commercial fishing and marine recreational activities on the south shore. Negative economic consequences for these sectors could therefore occur. However, the most significant detrimental ffects would not be inherent in day-to-day OCS energy develop- ment activities. The issue of adverse environmental consequences that could cause major economic losses is principally associated with "the random event of a major oil spill", especially one occurring near the shoreline. Normal ongoing OCS operations, both onshore support activities and at offshore facilities should not present conflict problems with marine recrea- ticnal pursuits. The OCS lease areas are well offshore and any major onshore facilities that New York State attracts are not likely to be located near major shorefront recreational areas. As a result, it is difficult to envision circumstances where ongoing OCS activities would adversely affect recreational expenditures and thereby cause losses in business income and employment opportunities. OCS offshore operations may lead to some conflict situations with respect to commercial fisheries harvests by New York State based fleets. However, under current harvesting operations, these conflicts would only affect minor segments of the industry. The bulk of the industry-measured by the volume and value of landings harvests shellfish and finfish species from waters within 12 miles of the south shore. If however, the State's commercial industry expands to species and locations well offshore, as a result of the protection afforded by the newly extended U.S. 200 mile fish- eries jurisdiction, relatively greater conflict prospects may develop. Currently uncertainties, concerning the specific prospects for expan- sion of commercial fisheries,the severity of potential friction with OCS activities, and the feasibility of amelliorative actions makes it impossible to identify the nature and magnitude of prospective adverse economic con- sequences. The most detrimental aspect of OCS development appears to be the Possibility of both major and minor oil spills. According to information to date, pipelines will probably be utilized to transport oil from the Baltimore Canyon (Mid-Atlantic) leasing areas to the shore. in the case of the Georges Bank (North Atlantic) however, tankers will most likely be used to transport oil to refineries in the Mid-Atlantic. Because tankers are environmentally more dangerous, there has been great concern that "the additional tanker traffic may subject Long Island's south shore to a high degree of risk. Tanker traffic from the Georges Bank would use sea Lanes close to Long Island shore points such as the Nantucket/Ambrose traffic lane. Oil spills along this location have a high probability of stranding on the shorefront and thereby affecting recreational activity. Close in spills and major off- shore spills reaching the bays and inlets of the south shore could severely impact commercial fisheries. The worst economic losses would be suffered from a spill occurring during the summer season, the peak period for beach activities, boating and sports- fishing as well as commercial fisheries harvests. Specific study findings with respect to the economic related implications Of a major oil spill for the marine recreational sectors and the commercial fishing industry occurring during a typical July are as follows: - Average direct weekly losses in recreational expenditures ranging from between $2 and $13 million, depending upon the location of.the impacted shore area. - Average direct weekly losses in gross revenues to commer- cial fisherman of $50,000 to $500,000 if harvests are reduced between 5% and 50% respectively. - Relative declines in the above harvests would translate into economic losses of seafood products, valued at the retail level, .of between $130,000 and $1.3 million. The figures above represent values at 1976 conditions. They do incor- porate projected increases in marine recreational activity, growth in per capita expenditures nor the increasing value of seafood products or considerations regarding future harvest levels. Therefore, the economic losses noted above are conservative estimates. The fact.that substantial aggregate dollar losses would result from a major oil spill, doesn't provide -a picture of the comiDlete socio-economic conseauences. Maxine recreational oriented services and commercial fishing operations are typically small businesses, often family operated. The loss of significant income for these types of businesses for even a week cannot be easily absorbed. Prolonged business declines beyond a week, which could very likely occur as a consequence of a major spill, would have severe implications for maintaining the viability of individual business operations and their work forces. PART II: INVENTORY AND DRACT ANALYSIS -15- A. SHORELINE RECREATION The south shore of New York City and Long Island provides a unique environment for marine recreational activity - swimmingboating, sports- fishing and related pursuits. Located in the heart of the most concentrated center of population and economic activity in the nation, the shore is an irreplacable resource, serving the recreational needs of the 11.5 million inhabitants of the New York Metropolitan Region and countless domestic and foreign tourists and visitors. The shoreline is also abundant in shellfish resources, the principal money harvest of New York's commercial fishing industry based on Long Island. The uniqueness and value of the marine environment is not only recognized at the state and local level but, also by the Federal Government. The Fire Island National Seashore was established in 1964 and in 1972 the National Gateway Park was established, the first major urban federally administered recreational area. Numerous State parks, with Jones Beach the most well- known, are located a-long the 150 miles of oceanfront. The figures on the use of the natural resources and marine facilities affirm the attraction and importance of this area for rec@reation and tourism. The 38 major southshore beaches attract 60 million annual visitations. On an average summer day, those in Nassau and Suffolk have 233,000 visitations while double this number may utilize New York City's famous Coney Island and Rockaways Beaches. Additionally, many hundreds of thousands use over 500 marine facilities (marinas public and private docks, and ramps) for boating and sportfishing activities (see table 1). As a result of being a major attraction for recreational pursuits and related tourism for Metropolitan area residents and visitors, the shoreline is an important economic asset. Currently over $460 million annually is -16- Table II-1 New York City and Long Island South Shore Marine Related Resources and Indicators of their Utilization Shoreline Acres of Tidal Marshlands 25,000 Miles of Ocean Front 149 Major Beach Areas 38 -Nassau-Suffollc (30) -New York City 8) A@nual Beach Attendance 60 million -Nassau.-Suffolk (38 m.) *New York City (22 m.) Average Summer Day Attendance 233,oob -(Nassau-SuffoU Beaches) Number of Marine Facilities 512 (Marinas, public and private docks, ramps and fishing stations) *Nassau-Suffolk (416) -New York City 96) Private Beach Clubs 120 -(Nas-sau Suffolk) 11. Marine Recreation Registered Motor and sailboats 100,000 Number of Primary Sports-fish 845,000 herman ,,New York State Residents (735,000) 'Out of State (110,000) Total Annual Recreational Fishing Days 6,760,000 @Sources: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and Long Island State Park and Recreation.Commission -17- directly spend on recreational goods, services and fees. This supports many large and small business enterprises and provides about 50,000 permanent and seasonal jobs. These expenditures result in significant indirect and induced dollar income flows amounting to about $700 million for the Metropolitan economy. Thus in total, south shore marine recreational activity generates almost $1.2 billion for Ithe Region's economy.2 Beach visitations and related tourism accounts for most of the $463 ,.million annual direct expenditures - about $250 million with 80 percent spent in Nassau-Suffolk and 20 percent in New York City. Sportfishing by the almost 850, 000 anglers generates $90 mi Ilion annually in direct trip related expenditures. General boating activities and participation in south shore private beach and recreation clubs account for over $120 million. Recreation on the south shore is primarily a summar activity. Most of the participation and visitation occurrs during the 18 week season stretching from mid-May through mid-September. As expected, the bulk of the related expenditures and the economic impact is experienced during this period. Table 2 totals indicate that about$350 million, 85 percent of total annual expenditures take place during the summer season. While all of New York City's and Long Island shorefront serves some form of public and private recreation, there are different use patterns along various.stretches. For example, Coney Island the Rockaways and the beaches in Nassau County are more crowded and tend to have primarily day-use visitors. Suffolk.County beaches, especially the more eastern ones, are, generally less crowded and used by weekenders and vacationers. These latter groups rent motel rooms and seasonal homes and therefore spend more per- capita than day-use visitors. 2Estimates developed by Long Island State Park and Recreation Commissionsand New York State DEC OCS Program. Data sources are provided in accompanying tables and supporting documents. MAP II-1 0 S 0 f4 0 q 3 U2 5 7 TT If 10 SEA TUCKET E NAN NN ES-f ja0UND COASTAL RECREATION SECTORS IA. Coney Island - Rockaways I. Western Nassau II. State Park Region III. National Seashore Region IV. Westhampton - Tiana Beach V. The East End 5 Source: Long Island State Park and Recreation Connission A breakdown of Long Island's south shore into coastal recreational ,sectors has been developed by the Long Island State Park and Recreation Commission. This is shown on Map I and characteristics of these sectors, with respect to facilities, seasonal attendance and expenditures are indi- cated in table 2. This locational information will be the basis for identify- ing potential economic losses resulting from OGS energy development activities. Potential Impact of OCS Activity The Long Island State Park and Recreation Commission has developed economic impact information concerning the consequences of possible oil spills reaching various locations along th e south shore. They hypothesized five medium and large spills at different locations along the Ambrose-Nantucket Sea Lane, as identified on Map 2. The sea lane is an established route for tankers bringing crude oil and petroleum products into the New York-New Jersey Port area. Proposed OCS.oil development in the North Atlantic Georges Bank lease area could.result in the tankering of crude oil from offshore to refineries located in Northern New Jersey via the Port of New York. The routes used, such as Ambrose-Nantucket, pass close to the Long Island's south shore as noted on map 2. Currently, about 800 ships use this route, presentingdangers of spills to Long Island even without OCS development. OCS oil development from the Baltimore Canyon lease area is likely to be transported by pipeline to land sites on the New Jersey Coast. Therefore there would not be the issue of tanker spills from that lease axea. Oil spills occurring within the lease areas, from platform blowouts or tanker loading.operations, have very low probabilities of reaching the south shore according research utilizing mathematical spill models. Therefore, they are not considered as much a danger to shore resources and economic activity.3 A@ajor spirls at sea could have 'very adverse impacts on fisheries. This will be discussed in Section C. MAP 11-2 N 0 0 N f L 0 -, S- 3 4 5 Y -4 La vy- ""I" 7 11 10 -1 A C - - (AMBROSc-NAN'TUCKET SF-A "E VIEST 13oUND HYPOTHETICAL OIL SPILL LOCATIO14S (A-E Proxiridty of.Sea Lane to Points Along. Ocean Shore I Seashore - 8 mi le s 1. Montauk Point . - 34 miles 6. Nationa 2. Napeague, Harbor - 30 miles 7. Robert Moses State Park - -7 miles 3. Southampton - 23 miles 8.. Jones Beacli State Park - 7. mi les 4. Moriches Inlet - 18 miles 9. Atlantic Beach 7 miles 5. StiLith Point Beach - 14 miles 10. Rockaway Beach 6 miles 11. Coney.Island 3 jfdles 3, "- - @M-lr 7 Source: Long Island State Park and Recreation Colfffidssion. Table 11-2: Characteristics of Long Island's South Shore by Coastal.Recreational Sectors Seasonal Expenditures,3 Sector Miles of Number of Number of Average Seasonal ($ millions) Ocean Front Beaches Marine Daily Attendance3 Total Beach Visits Boating & Facilities Attendance2 (millions) and Tourism Sports fishing .I- Western 13 211 107 45,000 5.6 38.8 4.5 34.3 Nassau II- State Park 26 7 120 89,000 11.0 52.8 8.9 43.9 Region National Sea 31 17 62 22,000 2.7 38.1 22.2 15.9 Shore IV -West Hampton- Tiana 18 18 56 27,000 1.5 51.9 33.5 18.4 V- The East 45 29 71 50,000 6.2 164.8 124.0 40.8 Total 133 92 416 233,000 29.0 $346.4 $193.1 $153.3 l/ The City of Long Beach has 32,,small, beaches, they-are counted as 1 in this table 7/ On a Summer day -51 18 week season from mid-May to mid-September Source: I'Assessment of Impacts of Proposed OCS Activities on Long Island's Shoreline Recreation Industry" Prepared by the L.I. State Park and Recreation Commission under N@ew York State CZM/OCS Program (June 1977) -22- Spill Assumptions, Characteristics and Locations It was determined that oil spills occurring at random points along the Ambrose-Nantucket route during the summer months would very likely wash ashore LongIIsland beaches within a period of 2-10 days.4 Oil spill scenarios for the locations noted on map 2 were developed for medium and lar-e volume spills. 5 It was estimated that a medium s-Dill could potentially impact a 20 mile length of shoreline and a large spill, 60 miles. The impact analysis assumed that all of the spills would occur during the second half of June. This represents the.worst condi tion because it would effect the peak July 4th summer recreational period. The five s-oill locations, A through E identified.on Map 2 for a medium and large volume spill would have the following onshore impacts. Onshore Impact Areas (West to East) Distance From,Shore Medium Spills Large Spills (Miles Spi 11 A 7-8 Atlantic Beach Atlantic Beach Ceder Beach Western end of Smith's Point Park Spill, B 7-.8 Long Beach Gilgo Atlantic Beach Beach Smith Point Park Spill C 8-9 Robert Moses State Park Atlantic Beach - Smith's Western and Smith's Point Park Park Spill D 20 Smith's Point Park Eastern Jones Beach Quoque Beach Quoque Beach Spill E 26-28 None expected Ibriches Inlet Montauk Point 4Based upon spill trajectory studies prepared for the Nassau-Suffolk Regional Board by NIT's Department of Ocean Engineering under the OCS program. 5Utilizing U.S. Coast Guard standards of 500-1,000 barrels for medium spills and over 1,000 barrels for large spills. -23- In estimating the impact areas and resultant economic losses, the following assumptions were made by the Long Island State Park and Recrea- tion Commission: Medium spills at the various locations could impact about 20 Miles of beach front Large spills at ,these same locations could impact around 60 miles of beaches . Impacted beaches will be completely closed for periods of 1-4 weeks . There will be 100 percent diversion of potential beach users to outside Nassau-Suffolk during this period. There will be no money expended by beach visitors in the impacted area. . Losses of 10-30 percent in expenditures for the sportsfishing and boating components of the recreation industry. This was based uDon the Commission's study of the economic impact of the June 1976 waste -oollution wash-up on Long Island's beaches. Economic Losses Table-3 summarizes the findings concerning the economic consequences of the hypothesized spills. The economic losses are based.upon estimates. of the total weekly recreational expenditures for the on-shore impact areas identified above. The losses represent estimated low and high ranges for both medium and large spills originating from the five Ambrose-Nantucket spill locations. The range of economic losses would be substantial. A large spill at location E would cause the most extensive dollar damages, between $9-13 million in direct recreational spending. A medium spill at location E would however, not have appreciable impact. A medium spill at location A would have the smallest dollar loss, less than $1 million. TableII-3: Eco.nom ic Impact of Oil Spills Reaching Long Island Shore .Areas: Weekly Lossess During Peak Summer Months .Illustrative Offshore' Weekly Recreational Expenditures Range of Likely Oil Spill Locations in Impacted Area (see maps) Weekly Expenditure Losses (See maps) ($ Millions) Millions) Large Spill .7.4 2.0 3.6 ,at Location A Large Spill 6.5 1.7 3.1 at Location B Large Spill 7.4 2.0 3.6 at Location C Large Spill 8.15 2.7 4.4 .at Location D IQ Large Spill 23.7 8.9 13.3 at Location E -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Medium Spill at Location A 2.0 0.4 0.9 Medium Spill .at Location B 2.5 0.6 1.2 Medium Spill at Location C 2.9 1.2 1.7 Medium Spill at Location D 3.6 2.2 Medium Spill No impact Negligible .at Location E Source: Long Island State Park & Recreation Commission -25- The broader economic implications of the losses pre sented in table 3, should be noted. The direct losses in recreational spending would not only impact di rectly involved recreational businesses, but also have "ripple effects" for the entire regional economy. Indirect and secondary impacts occur especially on Long Island. 11any individuals and businesses within the sou-Ithshore recreation related industries - concessionaires, motel operatorz, sports fishing and boating supply shops - could suffer extensive losses that might mean a collapse of their business. Given the short season upon which their annual revenues depend, and the generally small size of the enterprise, many couldn't absorb the losses resulting from extensive reductions in tourism and recreational activity. A spill early in the season could set the business tone for the whole summer by detering later visits and trips to the South Shore. While an actual spill might restrict beach use to a limited period, it could have the psy- chological impact of reducing south shore recreation over an entire.summer season. Other economic and social conseqi.@eences of prospective oil spills are difficult to measure, yet could affect the welfare of individuals, businesses in the region and communities along the south shore. These concerns include: The displaced recreational opportunities for hundreds of thousands which would represent a significant "psychic income loss" The depreciated.value of water-front property because of potentiall exposure to oil spill dangers and effects. The diminished high level aesthetic values and environment typical of many southshore communities. -26- The OCS oil spill analysis represents hypotheses about possible future random events and therefore the economic consequences are probalistic not planned certainties. However, events such as these do however happen with too much frequency. The Santa Barbara oil spill of 1969 and the recent Argo Merchant disaster off the Georges Bank near Cape Cod are but two of these recent occurrences. Closer to home, the June 1976 fouling of Long Island beaches as a result of the wash-up of sea-borne debris and organic wastes,. dramatically documents the economic impact of environmental disasters. A total of 68 miles of south shore beaches were affected over an 18 day period resulting in multiple closings of about 20 major beaches. As a result, there was a 6 loss of $25 million to the recreational industry on Long Island. If future significant OCS related oil spills do occur and they reach shore areas, there will be tangible and unfortunately substantial environ- mental and economic damages. 6Described and documented in detail in the following reports: Long Island Beach Pollution: June 1976, Report coordinated by the Nationa.170ceanlc and Atmospheric Administration (February 1977); Report to Governor Hugh.L. Careyon the 1976 Fouling of Long Island Beaches, N.Y..State DEC ( eb. 1977) and Long Island Waste Pollution Study An Economic Analysis, L.I. State Park and Recreation Commission and NYS Office of Parks and Recreation (Nov. 1976). -27- B. SPORTS FISSHING7 Tdarine sports fishing off the south shore of New York City and Long Island is a major recreational and income generating activity. It provides enjoyment to hundreds of thousands and supports a major segment of the marine 'facilities and service industry. The sports angler, also catches fish in substantial amounts and this too is i=ortant with respect to its value as a food source. Currently there are an estimated 845,000 persons (including about 170,000 non-itate residents) who are hard core sports anglers who fish an average of 8 days per year off the shore. In 1976 these anglers generated an estimated $96 million in direct expenditures for goods and services, and caught enough fish to equal $50 million in retail seafood products. In the aggregate, the recreational value to these anglers is estimated at $75 million in 1976 (see tables 4 and 5 and appendix material). In addition to the prime anglers who spend an estimated 6.8 million days annually fishing, there may be over twice as many persons occasionally participating in sports fishing off the south shore. Sports fishing mostly occurs along the shallow bays and sounds that are found along the south shore rather than the ocean proper. A significant minority,:perhaps as much as 30-50% utilize shore beaches, banks, jetties or bridge piers. The majority however utilize charter, rental and self-owned boats with a segment of these groups engaging in deep sea fishing. Compre- hensive data on sports fishing of -.'L' the south shore is lackin,a, but, probably closely parallels the pattern for the northeast indicated in table 6. 7 The economic loss estimates in the previous section included those associated with sportsfishing. However, the importance of this activity and the poten- tial adverse impacts of@OCS activity on fisheries calls for a more in-depth assessment. TABLE 11-4 ECONOMIC BENEFITS ASSOCIATED WITH MARINE SPORTS FISHING OFF THE SOUTH SHORE OF NEW YORK CITY & LONG ISLAND: 1976 (In $ Millions) Annual Seasonal Distributionx- 1976 Tun@m-6r Fall Spring Winter Direct Angler $ 95.8 4.8 23.9 Expenditures for Goods & Services Value of fish 50.7 35.5 2.5 12.7 as Food (Retail Prices) Benefits of Recreating '74 4 -52.1 @@.7 18,.6- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Addendum: 00 Angler-Recreating Days 6,760 4,732 -338- 1,690 (000) Number of Anglers 845,000 *Distribution represents general seasonal variation rather than specific 1976 pattern. **Assumed to be insignificant. SOURCE.: See tables to follow & appendix material. 'fable 11-5: SELECTED SUMMARY INDICATORS ON. kIkRINE SPORTS FISHING OFF SOUTR SHOR@,, OF N.Y. CITY & LONG ISLAND: 1976 Indica tors Souroe (1) Primary Anglers 845,000 See Appendix (2) Total Annual Angler Expenditures for G@3ods & Service@-, million M x 3 3), Average Annual Fxpenditure See Appendix per Angler 113 (4) Average Annual Recreating 8 Average for all U.S. -days per angler Salt-Water fisherman i,6, 12 (From 1970 National Survey Of FiShifLg & HU11ting). Redued to 8 for N.Y. State. 5 Average Expeadituve Per Recreating day 14 (3)';(4) (6) Distribution of Ref-Ireating Days by Season Anciual Total 6,760,000 Based upon k4iddle Atlantic Summer Fall @3prirlg Winter States Pattern for all re(3reattonal rishing adjusted percentage 70 5 25 Negligible to N.Y. SLate conditions -30- COASTAL ZONE INFORMATION. CENTER Table 11-6 Distribution of Recreational Fisherman: 1970 (percentage) Sound Ocean Rivers,& Bays ion Locat' 41 From Boats On Land blethod 62 _77 Source: Marine Recreational Fishing in New York and New England, 1970 Salt-Water Angling Survey (U.S. Department of Interior) Sports fishing.in New York waters, is primarily a summ, r activity. An estimated 70% of the recreating days occurs the4,while the spring season accounts for 25% and the fall/winter months constitute the remaining 5% (see table 5). Therefore, the.economic inpact of this activity is highly seasonal, being concentrated in the summer months. Potential Impact of OCS Acti Normal OCS energy exploration, development a-ad recovery activitiesare not likely to conflict with.the majority of sports fishing activity. Both the Georges Bank and the Baltimore Canyon lease areas are located well beyond (over 75 miles) the waters that account for almost all sports fishing. Only if OCS operations significantly impact the fisheries resources of the mid and north atlantic, would there be adverse inpacts and associated economic consequences from curtailment of sports fishing activity. 'lie impacts of oil spills reaching A critical factorwould however be t1 shoreline areas. Amajor spill of this type in the summer season could drastically reduce recreational fishing and cause severe adverse economic losses to sports anglers and the onshore marine industry. Even minor spills TABLE ILLUSTRATIVE ECONOMIC VALUES AND POTENTIAL LOSSES: (AVERAGE WEEK IN PEAK SUMMER SEASON) ASSOCIATED WITH LOST OR DISPLACED ANGLER DAYS Average Weekly Average Weekly Economic Benefits ($millions)* Angler Days Angler Value Recreating Expenditures of Fish Benefits for Goods & Services as Food L2 L3 Total Values 364,000 $ $2.7 3@ 4.@4 Assumed Recreating Days Lost Average Weekly Economic Losses ($millions)* Percent: Number 3 0.1 0.2 5% 18--,200 -0. 10% -36,400 -0.5 0.3 0.4 20% -72,800 -1.0 0.5 o.8 50% -182,000 -2.6 1.4 2.0 *Rounded to nearest hundred thousand 11 Summer season angler recreating days, 4,732,000 divided by 13 weeks. ay) 21 Average weekly angler days x $14-00 Average expenditure per angler d Average weekly angler days x $7.50 Average value of anglers day food catches) Average weekly angler days x $11.00 (Average angler-day recr eating benefit) NOTE: See appendix material for supporting data -32- close to shore would cause some economic dislocation. For example, the discouragement of a small number of anglers because of the "publicity" sur-. rounding a minor contained spill would result in some economic losses. Table 7 provides a means to assess the economic consequences resulting from lost or displaced sports fishing activity for a typical average week in the peak.summer season. Even a "marginal" reduction of 5% in angler days translates into economic losses -$300,000 in angler expenditures for goods and services, - $100,000 in "lost" food value and - $200,000 in angler recrea- tional benefits. Although the information provided in table 7 represents hypothetical economic damn es, -it does illustrate that a reduction in angler activity due to an oil spill (or indeed any factor including natural causes such as bad weather) can have important negative economic consequences. With the antici- pated growth of sports fishing over the next decade, economic losses associa- ted,with shore area oil spills in the peak summer months would be even greater than those, show n on table 7., 'The promotion of sports fishing is a major element in the current state/ .,local coastal zone management planning program. The need to protect this activity from potentially damaging conditions from OCS activity deserves priority consideration. C. COADERCIALFILSHERIES This section focuses upon the harvesting of fisheries in the Atlantic waters off the state, becauseof potential direct and adverse effects of OCS energy development activity. Commercial harvesting is however, only one of the integrated components inthe state s larger and important seaf ood indus- try. An inventory of the economic dimensions of this overall industry is necessary to provide perspectives on the potential, indirect as well as direct economic consequences of OCS activity. -33- Overview of the Seafood Industry The seafoodindustry in the state and particularly in the New York Metropolitan Area is composed of businesses and activities covering the harvesting, processing, distribution and retailing of finfish and shellfish products withlinkages to other states and foreign sources as well as within New York. Chart I provides a simplified diagram of the major segments of the industry and the value of their activities. At the center is the wholesaling function which in 1976 accounted for an estimated $364 million in sales. The metropolitan area with respect to sales, is the nation's number one seafood distribution center. This pre- eminence is a result of both serving the latest and richest regional popula- tion Tnqr et, -a.nd also a function of the area being a major transhipment center of domestic and imported fresh and processed products,for states east .of the NIississippi. Only a small but important component of seafood wholesaled in New York is landed by New York State commercial fleets. As the chart indicates, commercial landings in 1976 were valued at $32 mill-Jon at the dock (with an estimated.w.holesple value of $67 million). Wholesalers are overwhelmingly dependent upon products from other domestic and foreign commercial harvests. The important seafood processing business in the state, with an esti- mated production value of $93 million in 1976 is highly specialized. About two-thirds of production is for very high priced products such as smoked fish, prepared shrimp and.canned specialities for the in-state, @rincipally ..the New York City market-area. Processers are even more dependent upon sources of supply external to the state than wholesalers. Consumers in'the metropolitan area, through access to specialty retail ,seafood markets, ($96 million in estimated sales in 1976), supermarkets and restaurants have available, given the willingness to often pay premium prices, the widest range of seafood products available to the American public. Chart:II-I NEW YORK'S SEAFOOD INDUSTRY: DIAGRAMATI .C FLOW OF FISHERIES. PRODUCTS X Volue of > Commercial < Landings M 32 M (1976) 00 z -n 0 n 0 Non- (D 0 60% Food Processing (est.) Use's Activities 1 93 M-(est. 1976) 0 0 0 a M 0 1. . U) Q@o Lo C> z Wholesaling k 4 Other Activities Other States and in N.Y. Met ro Area 0 States and Foreign 1364 M. (est. 1976 Foreign Sources Sources X CU 0 z PO 0 z U) C. No Retail Sea food n RestGurcnis Other Food ad in MY. Metro Markets in Stores In 0 Area N.Y. Metro Area N.Y. Metro Area z t4 "'o :@ 04 o-f i @tl Non - Fo 0 @d Us es N.Y. M in 1 96 M. Soles(1976@ etro Area 'Source-. -See Appendix Tables 010" -35- Commercial Fishing in New York State Marine Waters New York's marine commercial fisheries harvest is predominately a high value product with shellfish,principally clams, oysters, scallopsand lobsters in 1976 representing 85% of the total value of landings. The hard clam is the single largest species harvested and accounts for over 25% of the poundage and over,50% the value of landings. Flounder is the most important finfish, but only accounts for about 5% of the total value (see table 8). While.finfish landings are now of minor economic importance representing only half the weight of landings an d less than 15% of the value, this was not always the situation. Twenty years ago, finfish represented well over 90% of the amount of landings and about half the value. Chart 2 dramatically illustrates the declining importance of commercial finfishing since 1956 and the rapid increase in the value of shellfish, The changing composition of New York's commercial landings reflects the impact of economic and resource conditions; chiefly: The competitive decline in the economics of catching and processing in-state the low value consumer and industrial fishery products such aa menhaden. The growing demand for high value shellfish by an increasingly more affluent and seafood oriented public. The declines in the supply of certain fisheries species due to extensive foreign catches off the New York and other northeastern, 8 states. Currently, commercial fishing.activity is principally concentrated in the bays and inlets of Long Island which are the habitats of the shellfish 8The extended 200 mile U.S. fisheries jurisdiction, enacted.in 1976 under the Fishery Conservation and Management Act, no longer will allow extensive foreign operations and can aid in the long-term recovery of commercial fin- fishing in New.York State (see Appendix B). Tablell-8: Major Marine Commercial Fisheries Species Landed in New York State 1966, 1971, 1976 1966 1971 1976 Species Pounas Value Pounds Value Pounds Value (000) T-$ -00-0-T- d 1-s-t (000) ($000) (% dist) T-0 -0-0-F (sooo) -TT d -Is t Fish: Butterfish 593 65 0.6 353 95 0.5 959 274 0.9 Flounders 2,466 586 5.2 1,090 360 1.9 3,203 1,500 .4.7 (Fluke) Flounders 3,486 305 2.7 71242 449 2.4 595 168 0.5 (Yellow Tail) Menhaden 4,870 82 0.7 999 36 0.2 1,014 43 0.1 Scup or,Porgy 4,077 637 5.6 1,321 404 2.2 2,468 580 1.8 Seas Trout 26 5 - 1,280 205 1.1 1,345 304 0.9 (Grey) Stripped Bass 1,050 193 1.7 1,159 324 1.7 693 422 1.3 Whiting 2,008 89 0.8 1,058 95 0.5 2,546 290 0.9 Subtotal 18, 576 1,962 17.3 14,855 1,968 10.6 12,823 3,581 11.1 Other Fi'sh Species 32,102 950 8.4 5,212 585 3.2 3,728 809 Total Fish 50, 79- 2,912 25.7 20,o67 2,553 13.8 16,551 4,390 13.7 Shellfish: Lobsters 730 613 5.4 l'?91 2,054 11.1 593 1,338 4.2 Hard Clams 6,581 5,788 51.0 8J549 10,756 58.0 9,028 18,120 56.0 Surf Claffis 1,840 148 1.3 3,688 438 2.4 3o455 1,1089 3.4 Oysters 177 335 3.0 788 1,682 9.0 1,901 4,764 14.8 Bay Scallops 317 323 2.8 144 234 1.3 438 816 2.5 Seas Scallops 2,128 1,009 8.8 402 609 3.2 758 1,236 3.8 Subtotal 11,773 8,216 72.4 15,352 15,773 85.1 16,173 27,363 85.1 '6-tE-e-rShellfish SDecies 1,662 221 1.9 824 219 1. 1 1, 438 387 1.2 otal 8hellfish -ITI-435 8,437 74.3 1-6-, 1-7 6-71-5 -,-@ 92 86.2 17,611 27,750 86.3 Grand Total 64,113--f-1,349 100.0 36,24) 18,544 100.0 34,163 32,139 100.0 Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Services Chart:[email protected] Trends in Commercial Landings of Marine Fisheries In New York State 1956 - 1976 Total 8hellf ish Total Fish Pounds (millions) and Value Pounds Value (million (millions) Ornillions) 160-40 30 28 140-8 26- 24- 120--6 22- 20- 100-5 18- 16- 8.0-4 14- voluil 12- pounds 60 -3 10- 8- 40-2 6- 4- 20-1 2 1956 1960 1966 1970 1975 1956 1960 1966 1970 1975 01 Source: National Marine Fisheries Service -38- species described previously. Even finfishing is primarily carried out within close proximity,to the shore, generally within 12 miles of the shoreline (see table 9). Seasonal variation in the levels of harvesting is characteristic of the industry with spring and summer being the peak harvest periods, altho ugh there are differences among individual species. Table 10 indicates this seasonal, patterns, with data for, 1976 and 1971. The seasonal nature of the industry results in the lack of full-time job opportunities and the National Marine Fisheries Service estimate that in 1975 two thirds of the 9,500 commercial fisherman were part-timers. Landings are principally concentrated in Suffolk County with over 75% of the state's total. Nassau county accounts for about 15 percent of the landings, while Brooklyn, once harboring a major commercial fishing fleet, now has less than 10% of the landings. Manhattan's Fulton Fish Market, the major center of wholesale business, has not been a major landing port for commercial fleets for the past 20-30 years (see Appendix). Economic Outlook forIndustry Commercial fishing in New York and indeed the entire.Northeast is charac- terized by small, often family operated enterprises. Hard information about the income andprofitability of the industry is lacking. However, those enterDrises that have survived difficulties associated with depletion of commercial species and competition from more efficient domestic and foreign fleets are probably doing fairly well. The growing demand formost fish and shellfish, which cannot be met 'from the relatively limited supply, has caused prices to increase dramati- cally over the past decade. Chart 3 indicates that the dockside prices for fish and,shellfish landing in New York since 1967 have outpaced the overall consumer price index. While costs associated with harvesting have no doubt Table 11-9 Value of Principal Marine Commercial Species Landed in New York State and National Data on Distance Caught from Shoreline Percentage Caught 2 Value 0-3 3-12 over 12 Fish: ($ millions) mi le s miles miles Butterfish 0.3 48 13 39 Flounders 1.5 34 13 53 Scup or Porgy o.6 38 8 54 Sea Trout 0.3 64 33 Stripped Bass 0.4 97 3 Whiting .3 12 44 44 Shellfish: Lobsters 1.3 73 10 17 Hard Clams 18.1 100 -- Surf Clams 1.1 13 23 64 Oysters 4.8 100 -- -- Bay Scallops o..8 100 Seas Scallops 1.2 4 6 90 Source: National Marine Fisheries Service: 11976 Landings in i4ew York State 2Fisheries of the United States, 1976; National Marine Fisheries Service Table II-10 Seasonal Patterns of Convnercial Fisheries Landings in New York State. Total Fish, Shellfish and Important Shellfish Species: 1976 and 1971 (percent distribution based upon pounds landed annually) 1976 Peak Month lst Q 2nd Q, 3rd Q 4th Q Month Percent Total Fish 17 38 25 20 June 15 Total Shellfish 16 29 34 21 July 12 Hard Clains 15 29 37 19 July 14 Oysters 28 24 19 29 March 10 Nov 10 CD 1971 Peak Month lst Q 2nd Q 3rd Q 4th Q Month Fe-rcent Total Fish 24 32 24 20 April. 11 Total Shellfish 13 29 35 23 June 12 July 12 Aug 12 Source: National Marine Fisheries. Service increased significantly, it is likely that profit margins for commercial fishing enterprises (and for wholesalers as well) have been good. The short-term outlook for commercial fishing,in the state is however clouded by economic and environmental factors: Reduction in she7lfish harvesting areas within the bays and nearby ocean waters because of water pollution problems. Over harvesting in many areas of shellfish and finfish species which is reducing the resource base. Requirements that the industry modernize in order to effectively compete and maintain its markets. One positive factor that should prove to have long term benefits is the extension of the U.S. fisheries territorial jurisdiction to 200 miles under the 1976 Fisheries and Management Conservation Act. Since almost all of New York's current harvesting, as noted earlier, is within the 12 mile limit, the state's fishermen will not receive immediate benefits. The long-term expansion of the State's commercial fishing to deepwater species may however be possible as a result of this legislation. (see Appendix B). Potential Impact of OCS Activity The potential implications of OCS exploration, development -and recovery of oil and gas resources from the Baltimore Canyon and Georges Bank lease areas for the State's commercial fishing industry was evaluated with respect to the following considerations: Impacts of impacts of Normal OCS 2-Perations Spill and Discharges At e'9 Onshore Loss of fishing Harbor and shore . Immediatephysical reduc- space space tion in harvesting areas Obstruction and Marine Services . Long term implications on debris fish stocks Navigational haz- Labor Market and arcis and benefits other business factors -42- Chart:ii, -3 Comparison of Price Changes: Average Dockside Prices of Fish & Shellfish Landings in New York 8s Overall. Consumer Price Index for N.Y. Metro Area (Index 1967 =I 00) Index 230 A /X 220 210- zoo- -Fish 190- Sheiffish 180- 160- I 50@ surner Price 140- n ex 110- 100- X 1967 1970 171 '72 73 74 '75 '76 Average Price Per Lb. Landed; Shellfish .74 .86 .99 il. 24 1. 17 1.25 1. 31 1, 58 C on Fish 12 '15 .13 .15 .22 .24 .26 .27 Source: N M FS &US Bureau of Labor Statistics -.43- These factors considered in the evaluation were from a study carried out by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute.9 The specific implications for New York State's marine.commercial fishing is based upon the general findings of this study and information concerning the overall characteristics of the state's commercial fisheries activity. These findings are however subject to further evaluation, especially with respect to micro impacts for particular segments of the industry. Only when the actual OCS energy recovery operations are initiated, wililit be possible to identify the full range of prospective conflict situations. Normal OCS Operations With most of the State's fisheries harvesting occurring within 12 miles. of the shore and the lease areas being over 75 miles from shore, there is not likely to be extensive at sea conflict situations. Thesituation for New York State fishermen in this respect is quite different from their New England counterparts. The Woods Hole study noted the fact that lease .areas in the Georges Bank will be within one of the worlds richest fishing grounds. T hey however concluded that even on the Georges Bank, there shouldn't .be significant overall adverse effect on commercial fishing. If New York State expands its deepsea finfish harvesting, then the question of at sea conflicts deserves greater attention. Potential competition between commercial fishing and OCS activity with respect to onshore facilities and operations shouldn't be a T)roblem for the state. Any prospective major OCS onshore support bases,and other activities that the state mayattract will very likely be' located in the New York- New Jersey Port District, which doesn't have any sizable commercial fishing operations. If minor OCS onshore operations are located along the south shore of Long Island, 'they should.be able to co-exist with commercial fishing 9Effects on Commercial Fishing of Petroleum Devel2pmentoff the Northeastern United.States, (April, 1976). -44- activities. In fact, there could be positive contributions from OCS activities such as the upgrading of marine service facilities. The indication is that the New York Area will attract only relatively moderate levels of OCS on-shore activities and facilities. Given the attri- butes and location of the commercial fishery industry and port bases, the probability of disruption from onshore OCS operations has to be Con- sidered highly improbable. OCS Related.spills Major oil spills, whether they occur well offshore in the leasing areas ornearshore should be.of major concern. While the probability of the complete destruction of a major fisheries resource is very slight, spills may affect spawning areas and have unforeseen impacts on future fisheries. Given the precarious nature of commercial fishing, due to weather and other natural conditions, any factors that change.@even marginally, harvesting conditions can cause economic dislocation. In an industry composed of relatively small enterprises, marginal impacts for the industry in general could significantly impact the viability of individual firm. Major spills that.occur in close-in waters, either through tanker accidents or a platform spill that reaches shoreline areas, could present critical problems. They may result in the immediate loss of harvesting opportunities because of bans on fishing to expedite cleanup operations. Additionally, if public health concerns develop, with respect to,contam- ination of t'he fishery resources or their habitant, there could be pro- longed economic.misfortune for the commercial fishing industry. Of principal concern to New York.State, should be the prospect of a major spill that hits the extremely productive shellfish beds in Great South Bay and other similar grounds along Long Island's'south shore. Spills in these locations could have substantial economic consequences even if they were relatively minor ones. -45- DEC did not develop the dollar losses or broader economic consequences from oil spills occurring at specific locations such as done for the shore- front recreational activity. A means of illustrating the overall potential direct ef f ects , of reductions in commercial harvesting activity f rom OCS spills is however possible. Table 11 provides a basis for determining the dollar value of losses associated with spills reaching major fisheries that might reduce commercial harvesting levels., It illustrates, the potential displaced or lost gross income to fisherman and losses valued at retail prices with July 1976 data. The month of July is generally the peak period for commercial landings. At the maximum end.of the scale, a 50% reduction in harvesting for the month of July 1976 would have resulted in a loss to commercial fisherman of $1.9 million ($5.2 million at the retail stage). A five percent reduction in harvesting for a week would result in a loss of $50,000 in gross income to the industry ($130,000 att he retail stage). 10 While small overall reductions in harvesting would not.wreck the industry as a whole, the complete loss of harvesting for a few individual,fishermen or firms for a month or even a week can cause extreme.financial hardships.. Tablell, therefore cannot identify important micro implications, but can only illustrate the macro-effects. Since this is an industry dominated by micro enterprises, the socio-economic consequences of even small reductions in:harvesting operations cannot be measuredusing this analysis. The concern for the economic effects of oil spills and normal OCS operations should -not be limited to only direct conflicts with New York 10 Given,tb.e upward pressures on the price of seafood products,in the future even without increase in the volume of harvesting, the state's commercial fisheries will become even more valuable. Therefore any reductions in 'harvesting occurring during the 1980's and 1990's as a result of OCS energy recovery conflicts will result in substantial higher economic losses. -46- State's commercial fisheries. The interdependence of the State's seafood industry with other domestic fishery resources was noted earlier in this section. Therefore, any potential major OCS related disruptions, along the Atlantic Coast zdght have subst=-tial adverse economic ramifications for New York State. Table 11-11 ILLUSTRATION OF ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF A REDUCTION IN COMMERCIAL HARVESTING OFF N.Y. STATE MARINE WATERS*: PEAK OF 1976 SEASON Month of July 1976 ($000) Average Week in July ($000) Gross Revenues-of Gross Revenues Commercial Retail Value of Commercial Retail Value Fisherman of Seafood Products Fisherman of Seafood Product :)tal Value of Commercial Landing $3,8331 $10 313492 3 $2,587 3 Reduction in .Commercial 5 Harvesting Displaced or Lossed Values Displaced or Lossed Values (percentage) ($000)4 ($000)4 5% -190 -520 -50 -130 I OIX -3801, -1,040 -100 -260 2 0% -770 -2,070 -190 -520 50% -1,920 -5,170 -480 -1,290 Addendum: total Harvest in July 1976 3,535,000 lbs of fish and shellfishl *Principally reflects harvesti ng and landing within South Shore area of Long island 1NY State Commercial landings in July 1976 as reported by National Marine Fisheries Service 2Based upon relative mark up indicated in Appendix table A-3 3Monthly values divided by 4 - reflects generalization rather than actual conditions 4Rounded to nearest $10,1000 5Assume no price/supply interactions only that a reduction in harvesting leads to proportion change in revenues and income PART III: APPENDIX MATERIAL Table A-1: WORK SHEET TO DETERMINE 1976 EXPENDITURES FOR RECREATIONAL MARINE FISHING IN THE ATLANTIC OCEAN OFF N.Y. STATE 1. Estimating the number of primary anglers(major spending individuals) A. 1970 Primary Anglers in New England and New York State 1,,666,000 (source: 1970 Salt-Water Angling Survey (National Marine Fisheries Service) B. 1973-74 Survey of Participants in Marine Recreational Fishing* New England and N.Y. State 5,013,000 N.Y. State 2,980,000 (Share) 59% (*Source: NMFS NOTE: These figures are substantially larger than 1970 angler data because they include person under 12 years and "peripheral" participants.) C. Estimates of 1976 Primary Anglers New England. & N.Y. State = 1,915,000 (Based upon assumption of 15% growth from 1970 figure of 1.7 million. Previous angler surveys showed following growth rates: 1960-65 = 32% 1965-70 = 9% 1. New York State Primary Anglers 1,915,000 X 59% see (B) above 1,130,000 2. Out of State Residents 170,000 (Based upon proportion in 1973-74 survey who fished in N.Y..State TOTAL 1,300,000 but were out of State residents) II. Estimating Expenditures A. 1970 Average Expenditure Per Angler Total=$127 (Source: 1970 Survey of Hunting & Fishing U.S. Dept. of Interior. Data is for entire Atlantic Coast Anglers.) B. Estimated 1976 Average Expenditure per Angler Total=$170 (see accompanying Table for Atlantic Coast Anglers adjusted to $113 for Anglers off N.Y. State* *reflects the assumption of an average.of 8 recrea tional days per angler per year compared to 12 for all salt-water anglers in U.S. (from 1970 Survey) C. 1,300,000 1976 Primary Anglers (see I.C. 2) X 65% (Percentage utilizing South Shore N.Y. City and Long Island locations and facilities and fishing in Atlantic 'rather than L.I.. Sound.) DEC OCS Prog-ram assumption, likely to be conservative) =845,000 - Primary Atlantic Ocean Anglers X$113 Average Annual Expenditure (see B, above) $ 95_,800,000 TOTAL EXPENDITURES IN 1976 AVERAGE EXPENDITURES FOR RECREATIONAL SALT-WATER FISHING ATLANTIC COAST: 1970 & ESTIMATES FOR 1976 L976 1970 Update Indicies for 1976 2 Estimate@ Average Pe Consumer Price Index 1976 as % Average per Fisherman Categories of 1970 Fi'sherman3 Total, $ 127.00 169.504 Food & Lodging 18.50 Food 158% .29.00 Transportation 13.0.0 Private Transportation 148'11@ 19.00 Fishing & Auxiliary 42.50 Recreational goods 122/-.' 52.00 Equipment Bait, PuBlic and 53.00 Recreational services 131", 69.50 Private fees and other trip expenses IFrom the 1970 National,Survey of Hunting 2U.S. Consumer Price Indicies published by and Fishing (US Department of Interior the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Fish.& Wildlife Service) Note: Categories 3 are aggregates of detailed items rounded Column I X 2 rounded to 50c. to nearest 5 Oc. 4Sum of components TABLE A-2: Work Sheet for Calculating Value of Fish as Food Caught by Sportsfisherman Off South Shore (1) Fish Caught per wigler per year 70 (From 1970 Salt Water Angling Survey Data for North Atlantic Region N.E. plus NYS) (2) Average Number of Angling Days Per Fisherman 8 (All U.S. Salt Water Anglers = 12 Adjusted to New York StateConditions) Average Number of Fish Caught Per Angler Day 8.8 (70-. 8) Number of Catches Kept for Food 5 (Assumption) (5) Average Weight of Catches Kept = 2.5 lbs. (Average weight of all fish caught in 1970 was 2.3 lbs for North Atlantic) (6) Assumed Usuable Food Weight Per Catch = 1.0 lbs (7) Nwnber of lbs. of Usuable Food Per Angler Day 5.0 lbs x (6)) (8) Average Retail Price Per lbs. of Fish $1.50 (Based Upon Retail Prices) low estimate (9) Total Angler Day Value of Food $7.50 (10) Total Annual Value $50.7 million ($7.50 x 6,760,000,70=ging days) Table A-3: VALUE OF MARINE COMMERCIAL FISH & SHELLFISH LANDED IN N.Y. STATE AT VARIOUS LEVELS:1976 Value $(million) (1) Commercial Landings 32.1 (2) Estimated Value at Wholesale Stage 67.4 (3) Estimated Value at Retail Stage 87.6 Sources: (Ij National Marine Fisheries Service NY State Landing Annual Summary 1976 (2) Commercial landings X 2.1,.which is national mark up for fisheries products, includes mark ups in processin- stages (National Marine Fisheries Service Fisheries of the U.S. 1976 p. 6-1 (3) Wholesale value X 1.3 which is retail mark up (same source) Table A-4 Commercial Fisheries Landed in.New York State by County 1976, 1971, 1966 1976 1971 Total Fish, Shellfish Total Fish Shellfi h New York State Lbs. (000's) 34,162@ 16,551 36,242 20,066 16,176 Percent (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) Suffolk County Lbs. (000's.) 26,308 13,339 12,969 25,964 15,065 10,899 Percent (77) (81) (74), (72) (75) (67) Nassau County Lbs. (000's) 4,871 994 3,877 6,037 1,526 4,511 Percent (14) (6) (22) (17) (8) (28) Kings County Lbs. (000's) 2,449 2,194 255 3,593 3,301 292 Percent (8) (13) (1) (10) (16) (2) Now York County Lbs. (000's) 534 24 510 648 174 474 Percent (2) (3) (2) (1) (3) Note: *less than .055% Source: National Marine Fisheries Service Table A-5: Summary of Economic Activity and Values Associated with the Marine Commercial Seafood Industry in New York State Employment Value Data Sources ($ millions Atlantic Commerc ial 1975: Full-time 3,200 Total 1976: 32.1 National Marine Fisheries Fisheries Harvesting in Part-time 6,300 Landings 1975; 28.1 Service Statistics New York State Total 1-5 _00 1971: 18.5 1966: 11.3 Processing Activities 1973: 1,150 Production 1,973: 68.7 National Marino Fisheries (plants 39) service Statistics Wholesale Trade in 1972: 1,420 Sales 1972: 257.2 U.S. Bureau of the Census, Fish and Shellfish Wholesale Trade Census W NY Metro Area) tablishments. 176) Retail Trade 1972: 970 Sales 1972: 59.8 U.S. Bureau of the Census Fish and Seafood Markets Retail Trade Census NY Metro Area (Establishments 306 Table A-6: Update of Benchmark Sales and Value Data for New York State's Seafood Industry* 1976 Benchmarks 1972 Update Factorsx* Estimates millions) Percent ($ millions) Re tail Sales of Seafood 59.8 Change in U.S. Consumer Price + 60% 95.7 establishments in New Index 1972-76 for Fish Pro- York Metro Area ducts @Wholesale Sales of Fish and :257.2 Change in U.S. Wholesale Price + 42% 364.0 Seafood Establishments Index 1972-1976 for Processed in New York Metro Area Fish and Shellfish 1973 f"Lillion) Value of Processed Fish 68.7 Change in U.S. Price Index 36% 93.4 Products in New York State for the Output of Fresh or Frozen Package Processing Establishments *Supporting Material for Chart in Section Ij- C. Assumes no change in volumes from benchmark year. **U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics -56- ,APPENDIX B Implications of the Extended U.S. 200 @Lle Jurisdiction 0 r the Fisheries Resources & Fishing Activity of New York and the Northeast States -57- I. OVERVIEW OF FISHERIES RESOURCES Major Fishing Grounds and Species Most of the fisheries in the Northeast lie within the Continental Shelf. This shelf is relatively narrow from Virginia to Long Island and then broadens to encompass Georges Bank. The width of the shelf varies from a narrow thirty mile strip in the southern end to 150 miles in the north. The production of various fisheries is roughly proportional to the amount of shoal water that they are based on. The wide coastal belt stretching from the Gulf of Maine out into Georges Bank and down to Long Island gives this area one of the worlds best fishing grounds. Most of the catch in this area is made up of cold water species of ground fish that are taken from the hard bottom shoals on banks. The various fishing banks range in size from a few square km,to larger plateau areas such as.Georges Bank. Georges Bank which is located off the coast of Massachusettes is one of the most productive fishing grounds in the world. The fisheries of,the Northeast consist of seventy varieties of finfish and roughly twenty-five varieties of shellfish. This spectrum of-species is dispersed through an equally diverse range of habitats. .The mid-Atlantic is dominated by warm water species while the northern Atlantic is composed mostly of cold water fish. Species which dominate New England Fisheries are Flounder, Cod Whiting, Sea Scallops, Menhaden, Clam and Lobsters. The fisheries of the Middle Atlantic states (New York, New Jersey and Delaware) are composed mainly of Bluefish, Flounder, Clams,- Lobster and Crabs. The Chesapeake regions fisheries are predominated by Alewives, Menhaden, Oysters, Clams, Crabs and Fluke. -58- Major Marine Economic and Recreational Activity Recreational: Until recently commercial fisheries took the greatest part of the total marine finfish catch in the United States. Recreational fishing though has now reached proportions which are sianificant with respect to the harvesting of the fisheries resources and the economy. Most species of fish today are now harvestedby both commercial and sport fishermen. Contrary to some years ago, the catch of marine sport fishing is needed to provide a complete picture regarding the "consumption" of marine finfish re sources (the majority of shellfish harvested is done by the commercial fishing industry). Recreational salt water anglers fish-in one of two principal areas, offshore in the ocean or in the various sounds,rivers and bays. They fish from one of four places; a private or rented boat, a party or charter boat, a bridge or pier, or a beach or bank. The species most frequently caught by anglers in the Northeast region of the Atlantic includes Flounder, Atlantic Mackerel, Puffers, Bluefish and Striped Bass. Nationwide in 1955 there were a total of 4,557,000 salt water anglers. The number more than doubled by 1970 to @,392,000 which indicat.es how popular sport fishing has become over the years. In the Northeast Atlantic region thenumber of anglers or sport fishermen Q in creased by almost 1 million from 1960 to 1970 (see table #1), a 37 percent increase. in the same ten year period the number of fish caughtalso increased 35 percent, and the weight of fish caught increased -59- 42 percent. The amount of money spent on recreational fishing (on the Atlantic coast) totaled $636 million dollars in 1970. Boats and. bait were the two largest expenditures. As for some of the characteristics of salt water anglers; @40 percent of the fishermen live in the suburbs and small cities while. 31 Percentlive in the big cities and 29 percent live in the rural areas. The age group for males which contained the most fishermen was the 25-34 age bracket. As for females the 18-24 age bracket held the most. As a rule the higher the income level the more fishing activity which takes place. For example in the income bracket of 3000-4000 dollars a year, only 3.9 Percent of the total population participated in salt water angling. On the other hand 7.9 percent angled in the 15000-24000 income level. U.S. Commercial Indust-ry: The U.S. Commercial fishing industry in the North Atlantic is a very important industry to the regionsleconomy. Many,fishermen find it necessary to engage in several types of fishing because the avail- ability of fish and shellfish chanqe with the seasons. Fishermen tend to operate from a single port year round, but there is some local interchange between ports. A few of the larger vessels change ports and make the rounds-11-o maximize theirincome. Most fish is sold by individual. bargaining between the fishermen and a dealer. In the mid-Atlantic Bight Area (New York, New Jersey and Delaware) many of the fisheries consist of inshore activities like clamming and oystering. These fisheries however provide considerable shoreside employment which boosters the economy of many small communities. -6o- In the North Atlantic region about 60 to 65 percent of the fish caught is used for direct human consumption. The rest is manu- factured into.industrial products such as meal and oil. The products of the Atlantic fisheries are marketed nationwide. Lobsters are shipped by air to retail outlets and restaurants and other fish are distributed widely. Markets for a few species have developed in areas remote from the Atlantic region by filling a need or short supply which existedat the time. Over the years, since 1956J. the amount of finfish caught by the Northeast fishermen has decreased (see table #2). The large decline in Doundage harvested was due to the reduced catches of a single species, the menhaden. This fish, which constituted fifty percent of the landings in the North Atlantic region is used for industrial purposes and.has a low per unit value. The steady increase in the value of commercial landings over the years, while poundage has declined substantially (see table #2), reflects increasing demand for fish and rapidly increasing unit prices. Shellfish landings have both increased in poundage and value, with the values increasing at a greater rate. This also reflects the hiah consumer demand which cannot be satisfied by the moderate increase in supply. New York State has basically followed the trend of the rest of the Nor theast (see table #2), with however even greater emphasis on shell- fishing. A good indication that the commercial fishing industry in the Northeast is a growing industry is the value of processed products of fish. In 1956 total processed fish products for the Northeast were valued at $239 million. This figure tripled to $742 million in 1973. 61 in New York State the 1956 value increased 2.5 times in the 18 year period. Some of the important commercial species to the Northeast in regard to total value are Cod, Flounder, Perch, Lobster, Shrimp, Clams, Scallops, Menhaclen, Oysters, Fluke, Striped Bass and Crabs. The Importance of Foreign Catches: The fishing of Foreign Fleets off U.S. Coasts is the result of an international agreement set up by the International Commission for the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries, (ICNAF) which was established in 1949. Foreign fleets first began fishing in the coastal waters from Block Island to Care Hatteras in the early 1960's. international competition has intensified for the same fish and shellfish that were once considered resources belonging solely go to the. U.S. During the past decade foreign fishing off U.S. Coastal waters has expanded rapidly. Large foreign fishing fleets which consist of fishing craft, factory ships and support vessels operated on U.S. fishing grounds such as Georges Bank. Construction of large trawlers and factory ships by foreign fleets greatly increased their harvests, while the U.S. has not kept pace. These large trawlers have contributed to serious overfishing of the fisheries, created conservation problems and harmed the domestic industry. The principal industrial fish in New England, the red hake was heavily harvested by the U.S.S.R. This has hurt New England's economy to a certain extent. Other species of economic importance which are -62- likely to be overfished are silver ha,@,e, bluefish, black sea bass and scup. It is probable that the catch by foreign nations has affected the abundance of many of the migratory species in the New York fishing ,areas. However, shellfish such -as oysters and clams which are very important to New York's economy were protected by the previous 12 mile fishing limit. II., COMPARING THE HARVESTING OF FISHERY RESOURCES: Fishery resources off the Atlantic coast are harvested by three sources; U.S. recreational fishermen, U.S. commercial fishermen and foreign fishermen. Table #3 compares the catch of these three ,sources by major species. Certain species are mainly of recreational importance (this can be'seen from 'the percent of total species' columb of table 3). These species include bluefish, striped bass, tautog, weakfish, spot and Puffers. They have little commercial value to the U.S. but are imDortant -recreational species. Six of these species listed (table 3) are dominated by the U.S. commercial fishing industry. Generally, these species are located relatively near the coast. This means that they are probably located near or within the previous 12 mile fishing limit. This 12 mile limit was off limits to foreign fishermen and explains why the U.S. dominates the six species. Four of these six species are shellfish.which are high value resources. -63- The largest amount of any fish caught is menhaden, with thirty- eight percent of all commercial catches being menhaden. However, menaden is a low value fishery. The important fact that table 3 reveals is the species in which U.S. and foreign commercial are in competition for. Only three species are in direct competition; Cod, Alewive, and Herring. The 200 mile jurisdiction will make these three species more available for U.S. fishermen and reduce their availability to,foreign fleets (see next section). Since.forty-two percent of all foreign catches depends on herring, this could have an important impact on the overall fish supplies in certain foreign counties. Analysis of Harvesting Data Sources: The original data which table 3 is based upon was derived from three different sources. Data for U.S. recreational fishing was obtained from the 111970 SaltWater Angling Survey," U.S. Marine Fisheries Services. U.S., Commercial data comes from "Fishing Statistics c-; the United States, 197011 also published by the National Marine Fisherie.5 Services, and the Foreign data-.was- from Historical Statistics of the Fisheries .of the New York Bight Area New York Sea Grant Institute. In the '11970 Salt Water Angling Survey," the data was based on a sample which was selected from the Current Population,Survey (CPS@). The selected sample of fishermen were interviewed as to the type and number of fish they caught. There exists two types of errors in this survey. The first type is a standard error which reflects the.relation- ship of a selected sample to the total population. The other error is a bias of response. In this case the bias tended to be on the positive -64- side since recreational fishermen will sometimes exaggerate. Data for the U.S. commercial fishing was collected by the National Marine Fishery Service in Cooperation with various state agencies (the states included in Table 3 are east coast-states from Maine thru Virginia). In many cas es only partial surveys were taken and as in all sample surveys some error does exist. In "Historical Statistics of the Fisheries of the New York Bight Area," data for foreign catches covers the Georges Bank to Cape Hatteras, North Carolina. U.S. receational and commercial data includes roughly Maine to North Carolina while foreign data exclude's Maine. Foreign catches of several species lack sufficient data as a result of landings over the previous U.S. quota but only reporting the quota or less. III THE EXTENDED 200 MILE U.S.-JURISDICTION: Background: On April 13, 1976, President Ford signed into law H.R. 200, the Fishery Co.nservaton and Management Act. This act is a national projram for the conservation and management of all living resources out to 200 miles,from the coast. This area has been named the Fishery Conservation Zone. The act stimpulates agreements between the U.S. and foreign nations on allotments of f i sh that the nations are able to catch within the zone. So far 18 counties have entered into this agreement whic h was officially named, "The Governing International Fishing Agreement." Each foreign fishing vessel must obtain a permit from the U.S. Department of State before they are able to enter the zone. The -65- permit is obtained by submitting an application to the Department of State which describes the physical features of the vessel, anticipated catch and the area it will be fishing in. The director of, National Marine Fisheries Service reviews all applications. After consultation with the Department of State and the Coast Guard he may approve the. application. The conditions and restrictions on the approval of the application, and request for fees, are sent to the foreign nation through the Department of State. There are two types of fees that a foreign vessel must pay; a fixed annual fee and a poundage fee. There is also an observer fee which requires the foreign nation to pay the U.S. all costs of placing observers on board a foreign vessel. The Fishery Conservation and Management Act establishes seven CD standards or rules for the zone. These rules basically deal with fishery management and conservation measures. For example, one of the seven standards is "Conservation and management measures shall be based on the j IM best scientific information available." Another standard says, "Conservat ion and management measures shall, where practicable, minimize costs and avoid unnecessary duplication." Eight Regional Fishery m anagement Councils were set up under the Act., Each one is r'sponsible for -preparing a management plan for its designated geographical area. The Secretary of Commerce has the ,responsibility to implement -or amend any management plans. The Secretary may promulgate such regulations as may be necessary to implement any approved Fishery Management Plan. -66- Eaforcement of the Act is a joint responsibility of the Secretary of Commerce and the Coast Guard. Implications of the 200 mile Jurisdiction: Table 4 shows the implications of the 200 mile jurisdiction on the foreign fishing industry. The table presents the major species harvested by foreign nations in 1975 and the allocations under the Fishery Conservation.and,Management Act (20O.mile limit) for 1977. The greatest impact of the act with respect to restricting will be on Atlantic Herring and Mackerel., Foreign fleets caught seven times, as much Atulan-tic Herring before the act as they will be able to in 1977. Since table 3 showed that 42 percent of all foreign catches are Herring, there could be significant economic implications for certain foreign counties. Before it can be determined what the long term economic impact of the 200 mile.jurisdiction will'result in for the U.S. and specific states, an understanding of the biological implications on the fisheries themselves,must be developed. Currently we can assume with reasonable certainty that the fisheries that were being over-fished will replenish themselves since less pressure on foreign fishermen is being put on them. Thi.s will eventually mean a greater supply of certain species for domestic fishermen. Three major species exist on the east coast in which U.S. commercial'and foreign commercial were in competition for, before the .jurisdiction; Cod, Alewi ves and Herring (see table 3). The Herring is quite important to foreign fishing but is fairly insignificant to the Northeast fishing industry. Herring makes up only 5 percent of the -67- commercialcatches (see,table 3). The 200 mile jurisdiction therefore should not greatly affect the Northeast fishing industry in regard to Herring. God made up 4 percent of commercial catches while Alwives .was only 2 percent. Even though the foreign nations are not able to catch either Cod or Alewives off the eastern coast, leaving greater supplies for domestic fishermen, the jurisdiction should not affect the fishing industry greatly. The long term implications of the 200 mile jurisdiction for New York are not clear. There are no.t,likely to be immediate significant benefits to the.state's commercial fishing industry which is principally based on shellfish catches within the 12 mile limit, and therefore not having been accessible. to foreign fleets. The longer range benefits to the State of the 200 mile jurisdiction will at least mean a Dotential supply of fisheries for fishermen to harvest.. One result of the greater supply could be the ex pansion of the State's finfishing industry. However,this is dependent upon complex factors including the economics of finfishing, processing and distribution in New York versus other Northeast states such as Massachusettes which may more significantly benefit from restrictions on foreign catches., IV. FURTHER ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH PRIORITIES' FOR NEW YORK STATE- Even though the New York State.fishing industry may not benefit greatly from the 200 mile jurisdiction we should nonetheless intensify research on the potential implications. Policy options should be explored regarding the prospect to expand marine recreational and Commercial fishing. Monitoring should be done on the fisheries to see what the accomplishments of the act were. A major role for the future ofNew York fisheries lies with the Mid-Atlantic Council, which is one of the e4-,,,-,ht Regional Fishery Management Councils. It is their mission to develop management plans for New York's fisheries. The management plans will have to consider numerous factors and diverse interests if it is to be successful. The ,.Council [email protected] measures that will,maintain the, resources at an optimal level of abundance. Information on the resources must be provided to fishermen which will aid them in more efficient'operations. and to ultimately aid the public by providing more abundant and reasonable fish products. The plans which the Council must consider contain some highly charged issues such as should the resources be developed for the benefit of recreational or commercial fishermen. Questions like these must be addressed. Potential opportu nities exist to aid the economy of the state while carrying out desirable resource management strategies for preserving important fishery resources. Table Estimated number of salt water anglers and catches on the Atlantic Coast: Maine through Virginia 1960 1:965 19TY (Thousands) Number of Anglers 2,504 2,905 3,433 Number of fish caught 211,885 264,786 285,223 (thousands of lbs.) Weight of fish caught 361,740 444,648 51-3,718 Source: 111970 Salt Water Angling Survey" U.S. Department of the Interior Table B-2:, U.S. Commercial Landings off the North East CoastY 1956, 1966, 197.3 and 1976. Thousand Pounds Thousand Dollars 1956 -1966 1973 --1976-- 1956 1966 1973 Northeast Finfish 2,252,703 1,098,000 1,209,000 .59,920 59,000 94,000 Shellfish 193,339 256,000 266,000 62,948 76,000 1.29,000 Total 2,446,042 1,354,000 1,475,000 1,398,063 122,868 135,000 223,000 318,307 New York Finfish 142,358 51,000 22,000 4,210 3,000 5,000 Shellfish 11,206 1.3,boo 15,000 5,154 9,000 17,000 Total 153,564 64,000 37,000 34,000 9,364 12,000 22,000 32,403 N.Y. as Percent of N.E. Finfish 6.3% 4.6% 1.8% 7.0% 5.1% 5.3% Shellfish 5.8% 5.1% 5.6% 8.2% 11.8% 13.2% Total 6.3% 4.7% 2.5% .2.4% 7.6% 8.9% 9.9% 10.2% Footnote: Includes the Atlantic Coast from Maine through Virginia Sources: Fishery Statistics of the U.S. 1956, 1966, 1973 and Historical Statistics of the Fisheries of the New York Bight Area, 1976 Table B-3: Recreational,,U.S. Commercial and Foreign Catches of Major Speciea.off the NQrtheast Coaat: 1970 U.S. Recreational l./ U.S. Commerciali/ Foreigni/ @Total Catches (000 of lbs) (000 of lbs.) TOOO o7 lbs.) (all species) 513,718 1,301,713 1,300,736 Major Species2 % of % of Total % of % of Total of Foreign % of To al Recreational Species3 Commercial Species3 Catches Species@ Catches Catches Bluefish .19 (.96) Cods .07 (.32) .04 (.47) .018 (.21) Flounder .11 (.32) .09 (.67) Red flake Silver Hake .012 (.84) Mackerel .14 .13) .055 -97 Perch .02 .19) .04 (.81) Puffers .05 (1.0) .35 .85) Sharks .009 .64) Spot .04 .77) Stripped Bass .14 .89) Tautog .03 .99) V-Jeakfish .03 .86) Alewives .02 (.36) .03 .64) Butterfish .015 (.84) Herring .05 (.12) .42 (.89) Menhaden .38 (1.0) Whiting .03 (1.0) See Scallop o6 (.93) Crabs o6 Lobsters .03 (1.0) Shrimp .02 (1.0) Clams .07 (1.0) Squid .02 (.90) Source: U.S. Recreational 1970 Salt Water Angling Survey; U.S. Commercial - 1970 Fishery Statistics of the U.S.; Foreign - Historical Statistics of the Fisheries of the N.Y. Bight Area: The Geographical Coverage includes the east coast roughly from Georges Bank to Cape Hhtteras N.C. The three categories though may not cover exactly the same geographic areas. 2/ Species in which 10,000,000 lbs. or more were caught in any one of the three categories Percentage of total recreation, commercial and foreign catches in the species. Table,B-4: Comparison.of Foreign Harvest off:the Northeast Coast in 1975 and East Coast 1977 Allocations under U.S. Extended 200 Mile Jurisdiction Ratio.. 75 Allocat,ed Species 1975 Harvest 1977 Allocation Harvest/77 Allocatio (millfon (million lbs.) (million lbs.) Silver Hake 202.5 162.5 1.2:1 Atlantic Mackerel 548.4 136.4 4:1 Atlantic Herring 312.0 44.5 7:1 Squid 1300.0 86.2 1.5:1 Butterfish 16.3 11.4 1-4:1 Red Hake 57.5 66.4 0.9:1 Source: Fisheries of the United States, 1976 and Historical Statistics of the Fisheries of the N.Y. Bight Area (July 1976) Footnotes: V Species and allocations were listed by Country; total allocations per country were as follows: Bulgaria - 17.8 million lbs.; Romania - 3.1; Poland - 82.0; Japan - 47.4; Spain - 31.7; USSR 370.2; German Democratic Republic - 44.5; Federal Republic of German - 14.3; France - 2.6; Italy - 9.3. These allocations are for the entire East Coast while 1975 Harvest covers area from Mas'sachusetts to North Carolina These are from only ten of the eighteen countries that have signed fishing agreements. The other countries include: Belgium, Denmark, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Republic of Korea, Replublic of China, and the United Kingdom. COASTAL ZONE INFORMATION CENTER, A7E DUE GAYLORD No. 2333 PRINTED IN U S.A. 3 6668 14106 1228