Fish Friday: The Atlantic Wolffish – Antifreeze Included

It’s FRIDAY! And you know what that means – time for another fishy feature. This week, we’re talking about a deep ocean predator, the Atlantic Wolffish. AtlanticWolffish

What Big Teeth You Have!

It’s clear where the wolffish gets its name. Those canines kind of remind you of…an actual wolf, right? But those visible chompers aren’t even the wolffish’s most useful dental feature; they use three sets of crushing teeth on the roofs of their mouths to grind down their hard-shelled prey – so hard that their teeth fall out every year after spawning and are replaced by a new set! Wolf AtlanticWolffish

Which one’s the wolf, and which one’s the wolffish? Images via National Park Service (left) and Jonathan Bird (right).

Atlantic wolffish are voracious predators, feeding on mollusks, crustaceans, and echinoderms (think urchins and sea stars). So voracious, in fact, that they serve as keystone species in North Atlantic food webs because they help limit populations of sea urchins and green crabs.

Without the wolffish around, urchin and green crab populations could explode, which would have serious negative impacts on the Gulf of Maine ecosystem.

Unique Biology

Can you imagine swimming in 30º to 50ºF (-1.2º to 10.2 ºC) water? That’s cold. The Atlantic wolffish prefers depths of 250 to 400 ft (80 to 120 m), so they live in water that frigid. How do they do it? No, they don’t wear wetsuits; they have something even better – concentrations of an antifreeze compound in their blood! And that’s not the only thing that makes these crazy creatures so unique. Unlike most fish species, which “broadcast spawn” (females release thousands of eggs into the water, and males compete to fertilize them externally), Atlantic wolffish pair up and fertilize the female’s eggs internally (much in the same way mammals mate). The female incubates the eggs for four to nine months (depending on the water temperature) before laying them in large clusters, which the male then aggressively protects for about four months until they hatch. AtlanticWolffishPair

Image via Jonathan Bird.

Greenland sharks, Atlantic cod, haddock, gray seals, and even spotted wolffish prey on pelagic Atlantic wolffish larvae. And occasionally, the larvae may resort to eating each other . . . not the healthiest sibling relationships. Those that survive to be early juveniles transition to benthic habitats, where they prefer complex substrates such as rocky outcrops and kelp beds. They can grow up to 5 feet (1.5 m), weigh up to 40 pounds (18 kg), and live to be up to twenty years old. Wolffish are slow-growing and don’t reach sexual maturity until about age six, which can make them susceptible to fishing pressure, as stocks recover slowly.

Populations in Peril

Since the 1980s, populations of this deep sea creature have been consistently dropping, and average fish size has decreased by 50%. It’s not like there’s a commercial wolffish fishery – so what’s happening?

The biggest threat to Atlantic wolffish is otter trawling. Wolffish are caught as bycatch, indiscriminately snagged by enormous nets intended for commercially harvested species. To add insult to injury, these nets scrape along the seafloor, crushing fragile corals, disturbing rocky outcrops and kelp beds, and re-suspending bottom sediments that damage the fish’s gills and potentially release settled toxic heavy metals.

Atlantic wolffish were historically found from the Gulf of Maine all the way down to New Jersey. However, after decades of habitat destruction, there are only three populations remaining: the Gulf of Maine, Georges Bank, and the Great South Channel (a passage between Nantucket and Georges Bank). To address population decline, NOAA identified the Atlantic wolffish as “Species of Concern” in 2004 and manages the species under Amendment 16 to the Northeast Fisheries Management Plan. But is that enough?

The fact that current population estimates don’t exist is a huge cause for concern. Direct studies on stock structure are a gaping piece of the puzzle in understanding and managing Atlantic wolffish populations. We know they were declining dramatically until 2009, the last year for which data is available. We need to know more.

Canada has protected their stocks through the country’s Species at Risk Act, but the U.S. has yet to follow suit. In 2009, NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) denied CLF’s petition for the Atlantic wolffish to be protected under the Endangered Species Act. What are we waiting for? Let’s get the conversation started about this crazy, rare, toothy, weird, unique deep sea dweller. We want to protect the Atlantic wolffish!

Fish Friday: The Basking Shark, a Modern Marine Mystery

T.G.I.F.F. – thank goodness it’s Fish Friday! This week, we’re diving in with an elusive gentle giant, the Basking SharkBasking Shark

Sharks have been ruling the media lately. From Great White sightings off of Cape Cod to mysterious appearances in wooded backyards to the recent string of encounters along the coast of North Carolina, it seems that sharks have been everywhere, just in time for the annual explosion of shark media – the always entertaining, awe-inspiring, and extraordinarily sensationalist Discovery Channel Shark Week.

This week, sharks, a diverse and ecologically vital clade, have been labeled as “ninjas,” “monsters,” and “serial killers” – kind of aggressive descriptions, right? While some species do serve as apex predators, maintaining delicate ecosystems from the top of the food web, it’s important to remember that some sharks, such as this week’s feature, also maintain ecological balance by feeding at the base of the food web. Basking sharks aren’t interested in seals or tuna. They’ve got much smaller prey on their menu—tiny fish, fish eggs, and zooplankton.

It may be difficult to believe that a creature often mistaken for a Great White is actually a filter feeder. These gentle giants are estimated to grow up to 12 meters (exceeding 30 feet), but they survive on itty bitty prey consumed in massive quantities. Named for their tendency to “bask” on the surface of the water, basking sharks swim open-mouthed, passively feeding as their gill rakers act as sieves, preventing prey from passing through their gill slits.

GillSlits

Disappearing Act

Basking sharks are still a bit of a mystery to scientists. We know they roam the cooler waters of the Northern Atlantic and Pacific during the summer months, but for decades, the world’s second largest fish disappeared every winter.

In 2009, Gregory Skomal from the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries and colleagues discovered that, during winter months, New England basking sharks travel south at depths between 200 and 1,000 meters (600 and 3,000 feet). While some tagged sharks stopped in Florida, others traveled as far south as the Caribbean Sea, or even the mouth of the Amazon River! The migration has Skomal questioning previous beliefs about basking shark population structure: “What were thought to be regional stocks may in fact belong to a single, oceanwide population.”

Why do the sharks make this annual trek? Skomal suggests that they follow plankton to warmer waters in the winter months. “But why do they move all the way to Brazil?” Skomal asks. “There is plenty of food for them in northern Florida.” One possibility is that they migrate south to find nursery grounds. “We still have no idea where they give birth,” says Skomal.

Endangered Mammoth Migrators

While we still have a lot to learn about basking sharks, we do know that their populations are dwindling. In 2000, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature listed the North Pacific and Northeast Atlantic populations as endangered and the species itself as vulnerable.

The main reason for population decline is fishery overexploitation. For centuries, basking sharks were caught for their liver oil (to be used for lighting and industry), their skin (to be used as leather), their flesh (for food and fishmeal), and their fins (which are highly valuable in international trade, especially in East Asia). The basking shark’s exceptionally slow recovery rate – females are believed to sexually mature between 16 and 20 years old – makes them extremely vulnerable to overfishing.

Today, almost all basking shark fisheries around the world are closed. The only significant trade is in bycatch from New Zealand blue grenadier fisheries. Basking sharks are protected by the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species, the European Union, the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, and numerous national governments, including the United States federal government.

You can help!

Basking sharks are a common sight in our waters. Dr. Jon Witman from Brown University has spotted the sharks at Cashes Ledge, and there have already been reports this year of sightings off the coasts of Massachusetts and Maine.

Also, the New England Basking Shark and Ocean Sunfish Project is working to better understand the biology and ecology of these mammoth migrators, and they need help from citizen scientists like you! If you spot one of these gentle giants, be sure to report your sighting. The more data collected, the more we can learn and help protect!

And don’t worry, this rounded fin means you’re good.

BaskingSharkFin
Basking shark off the Isle of Skye, Scotland. Image via Antony Stanely.

 

 

 

 

This pointier one means you might want to call in for backup . . .
WhiteSharkFin
A white shark in Salt Pont, Naushon Island, MA. Image via MA Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs.

Welcome to Our First Fish Friday! This Week: Atlantic Sturgeon

The New England Ocean Odyssey team would like to welcome you to our new weekly series all about New England’s special ocean species! While we will primarily feature the region’s exceptional fish, we can’t guarantee that we won’t throw in the occasional marine mammal, reptile, or invertebrate. We couldn’t possibly resist discussing Atlantic harbor seals, Kemp’s ridley turtles, and American lobsters. So join us every Friday to learn about the ecologically essential, economically critical, and craziest-looking sea creatures in New England!

Let’s dive into this week’s feature: the threatened, yet resilient Atlantic sturgeon

This fish species looks like a creature from prehistoric times, and for good reason. Sturgeons (family Acipenseridae) are a group of primitive fishes that emerged about 70 million years ago during the Upper Cretaceous epoch. In fact, some of the best-preserved fossils were discovered in dinosaur stomachs! While sturgeons today have cartilaginous skeletons (as opposed to their bony ancestors), they have retained many primitive features. These include bony plates (called scutes) instead of scales, long “whiskers” (called barbels) covered in taste buds that dangle from the underside of their snouts, and the ability to shoot out their tubular mouths to inhale prey1.

Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus) can be distinguished from other sturgeon species by their large size, small mouth, and distinct snout shape. They range from dark blue and black to olive green on their backs and have lighter bellies. Adults can measure up to 800 pounds and may reach 14 feet long!

They have been aged up to 60 years old and generally reach sexual maturity between 10 and 35 years old, although southern populations may mature faster. Males typically spawn every 1 to 5 years, while females will spawn every 2 to 5 years.

Human Threats

Atlantic sturgeon are anadromous fish, meaning they are born in fresh water, spend a majority of their adult lives in the ocean, and return to fresh water to spawn. In the spring (May and June in northern waters), Atlantic sturgeon migrate from their oceanic ranges into rivers along the Atlantic coast from Florida to Labrador, Canada, where they spawn at the border of fresh and salt water. This dependence on estuarine habitat, in combination with late spawning age, makes Atlantic sturgeon particularly vulnerable to human threats such as dams, water pollution, and overfishing.

In 1998, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) and the federal government implemented a coast-wide moratorium on commercial harvest that remains in place today. While this prevents intentional harvest of Atlantic sturgeon, many factors continue to threaten stocks up and down the coast: dams prevent migration to spawning grounds, dredging ruins spawning areas altogether, water pollution (often due to coastal development) hinders juvenile development, and other commercial fisheries accidentally harvest Atlantic sturgeon as bycatch.

To address these additional threats, NOAA listed five populations under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 2012. The Gulf of Maine population was listed as threatened, while the Chesapeake Bay, New York Bight, Carolina, and South Atlantic populations were listed as endangered.

With money made available by the ESA listing, NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service was able to invest in research to determine human threats to Atlantic sturgeon populations and devise mitigation strategies, such as nets that will allow sturgeon to escape while still capturing smaller fish.

"

In the Gulf of Maine, multiple dams have been or will be removed, allowing Atlantic sturgeon to return to their historical spawning grounds. There have recently been reports of potentially higher catch-per-unit-effort than in the past – a sign that the population may be recovering.

There are still a lot of cards stacked against the Atlantic sturgeon; we have much left to learn about their distribution, and, at the moment, NOAA has little control over when and where dredging occurs. But, as conservation writer and editor Ted Williams says, “Maybe the greatest value of the Endangered Species Act — greater even than information it generates about how and where animals live and the threats they face — is the knowledge that it’s not too late to save them…Atlantic sturgeon didn’t make it for 70 million years without being resilient.”

Sammi Dowdell is the Ocean Conservation Program Summer Intern for Conservation Law Foundation.

Georges Bank on the Habitat Chopping Block

The New England Fishery Management Council’s (NEFMC) Habitat Committee continues to show complete disregard for habitat protection. Up for consideration at the Committee’s Monday meeting was an industry-introduced proposal to open critical areas of Georges Bank as part of the Omnibus Habitat Amendment. The proposal was originally designed to allow access to the Northern edge of Georges Bank for scalloping.

The discussion that played out reinforced the notion that the management body tasked with protecting essential fish habitat in New England is driven instead by short-term industry interests and willing to sacrifice important ecological areas in order to accommodate fishing interests.

The Habitat Committee ultimately voted to the full Council as its preferred alternative for the Georges Bank area a revised and further weakened version of the industry’s proposal, which establishes two habitat closures along the southern edge (a western and eastern area) closed to mobile-bottom tending gear and a “mortality closure” over the scallop and vulnerable habitat rich northern edge. A mortality closure can be opened at the discretion of the Council and NMFS when the population of fish that it was intended to protect no longer need such catch protections

When a commenter pointed out to the Committee that the “mortality closure” comprised 80% gravel and cobble bottom habitat – some of the most vulnerable, high quality essential fish habitat according to NEFMC’s own data – the Committee moved quickly to conjure up a new name for the area. Sadly, no wordsmithing could disguise the meaning of intent of the Committee to ensure that damaging scallop dredges would gain access to this most vulnerable of habitats. In a move that again directly contradicted the Council’s own science, the Committee leapt to relocate the western habitat protected area from a region comprised mostly of cobble and gravel bottom to one dominated by sand. The Council has repeatedly taken the position in this years-long process that their science indicates that sandy bottom on Georges Bank has among the lowest values as essential fish habitat.

With this as preferred alternative going into the June full Council meeting, Georges Bank faces a drastic reduction in overall protected habitat area, rolling back decades of habitat recovery in some of the areas now proposed to be wide open to all fishing gears. Disregarding its own science accumulated over the innumerable years this amendment has been underway, the Council seems positioned to cash in its habitat protected areas in favor of short term economic gain, while risking long term viability of New England’s fishing future.

The Council meets in the third week of June to finalize its votes on the Omnibus Habitat Amendment. After the June vote, the Council will submit its proposed amendment to NOAA for final approval or disapproval. At this point, the public will have the opportunity to weigh in with the agency about how the Omnibus Habitat Amendment moves ocean habitat protections backwards and endangers the future of our fisheries and the communities that depend on them.

Image: A sea scallop and tunicate colonies encrusting pebble gravel habitat on Northern Georges Bank. Photo by USGS.

Commonwealth Loses Lawsuit on Lower Catch Limits

Last May on the Boston Fish Pier, Massachusetts’ Attorney General Martha Coakley held a press conference to announce her lawsuit against NOAA over the reduction in catch limits for New England groundfish. Her rhetoric that day was strong:“NOAA’s new regulations are essentially a death penalty on the fishing industry in Massachusetts as we know it.”

With a court decision released on April 8 which denied the Commonwealth’s claims,Coakley’s lawsuit has run its predicted course. Judge Richard Stearns decided that, in setting catch limits for the 2013 fishing year, NOAA had fulfilled its obligations to mitigate economic impacts and consider the best available scientific information. The sharp cuts in catch limits for many groundfish stocks were a response to the severely depleted status of these species. However, instead of recognizing the poor state of fish populations hard figures of groundfish catch records, Coakley doubled down on her anti-NOAA rhetoric in her post-loss statement.

More than a year and a half after a fishery disaster was declared by the Department of Commerce and almost two months after New England received its $33 million allocation in federal fishery disaster funds, it is time for all of Massachusetts’ elected leaders to recognize the environmental fact that decades of overfishing have created a depleted ocean ecosystem and the economic fact that New England fishermen are not landing groundfish because the fish simply are not there. The problems and the challenges will become more difficult before they get any easier—the impacts of climate change are an increasingly significant factor in the change in our ocean ecosystems and our regional fisheries.

It’s time to recognize that we need real solutions such as stopping overfishing, protecting habitat, reducing bycatch and improving ocean management. Recovering our ocean’s health and restoring grossly depleted fish populations is a serious matter in need of honest assessment and discussion. Fisheries management by political interference is affecting thousands of New England families and the health of our ocean.

Image via NOAA

Business as usual meets the new normal: climate change and fisheries management

What if a hurricane with the lowest low pressure readings ever seen in human history was barreling toward the East Coast and all we did was debate if it was a category 4 or 5? John Bullard, regional director for the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) in New England, used that metaphor recently to describe how we are coping with the enormous transformations that are happening in our ocean right now from climate change.

He used this attention-getter at the overdue multi-agency session in Washington, DC last week, the purpose of which was to consider the implications of climate change for fisheries management along the US Atlantic coast. This meeting was overdue in that climate change impacts are already being observed by fishermen and scientists alike, and adjusting to our new “normal” will not be easy and will take time.

For New England, the challenge is stark. The Gulf of Maine is one of the most rapidly heating bodies of water on the Atlantic Coast, if not in the US. These temperature changes are sending the sea life off to seek their comfort zone – according to NMFS, 24 of 36 stocks evaluated seem to be moving north or away from coastal waters. To make matters worse, our ocean is also acidifying at increasingly alarming rates. This can cause major problems for shell-forming animals, and much of our fishing economy is dependent on shell-forming animals – scallops and lobsters. Unfortunately, there has been little economic analysis about the implications of this issue yet.

Former fish czar Eric Schwaab also spoke at the climate change workshop, noting that the climate is likely changing faster than the fisheries governance structure. Sadly, New England’s fisheries managers have not particularly distinguished themselves in the first 30 years of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, even with a relatively stable ecosystem. Yes, I know there is no such thing as a “stable ecosystem” but it will likely seem like one compared to future manifestations. Now the natural variability will be happening within an ecosystem that is rapidly changing itself.

Bullard drove this home by saying that the current climate-changing 400 parts-per-million levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have never been experienced by mankind, let alone New England fishermen. He then made the obvious point that nothing in our oceans will ever be “normal” again, even though, right now, everyone is acting as if it will be. As if that huge hurricane heading our way will just be going out to sea.

Current examples of the effects of climate abound and were noted by various speakers: black sea bass in NH lobster traps, green crabs taking over the Maine coast, more summer flounder summering more in New England than ever before, no northern shrimp fishery to be found, and the looming end of the southern New England lobster fishery.

I’ve seen it myself, with the glut of longfin squid hanging out on the Massachusetts north shore the last two summers. While we can hope that these changes will be gradual and that an incremental approach will suffice, many ecologists suggest that the “state changes” could be rapid, extensive, and irreversible. Moreover, some New England fishermen who imagine that they will soon being fishing on Mid-Atlantic fish stocks may have forgotten that most of those fish are already in limited access fisheries and have been allocated to others.

Bullard put his finger on what is needed at such a critical pivotal moment: leadership. In his words (loosely transcribed), leadership requires responding to a threat with actions commensurate to the size of the threat even if everyone around you is acting like the threat doesn’t exist.

Amen. While it is hard to put aside my cynicism about the likelihood that this Rube Goldberg fisheries management system—Dr. Mike Orbach’s metaphor here at the meeting—is up to the task, the challenge is clear and the stakes could not be higher for fishermen and fishing communities up and down the Atlantic coast.

In the end, Bullard’s message seemed to me to fall largely on deaf ears at the workshop, with much of the to-do discussion focused on managing at the margin and improved coordination between the New England and mid-Atlantic councils. In other words, business as usual. The leadership to respond to the dramatic shifts in our marine ecosystems due to climate change was not yet evident at the workshop.

But there is hope for the future. While many of these forces of nature are likely beyond our control even if we stop emitting greenhouse gases altogether, we can prepare for changes and increase resiliency by rebuilding as many fish populations as we can and protecting habitat. Dynamic, integrated management will help our fisheries, ecosystems, and communities respond to the realities of a new normal.

Image via NASA Earth Observatory

New England Fisheries Managers: Get Your Facts Straight about Habitat

Thousands of acres of New England’s protected ocean wildlife habitat in such places as Cashes Ledge, Stellwagen Bank, Jeffrey’s Ledge and Georges Bank is again at risk as the New England Fisheries Management Council (NEFMC) heads into next week’s meeting.

The NEFMC is scheduled to identify its preferences for which ocean habitat areas will be protected from the impacts of bottom trawling and other harmful fishing gear. This work is part of the NEFMC’s ongoing development of the Omnibus Habitat Amendment (OHA). While a final OHA decision is not expected until June, the selection of preferred alternatives will set the stage for final scientific analysis and public involvement to decide the fate of the best remaining habitat in all of New England’s ocean.

Some of the ocean habitat areas have been protected for twenty years and served in the recovery of Georges Bank haddock stocks and the now famous scallop fishery that has made the City of New Bedford the top fishing revenue port in the U.S. for the past 13 years. Two important places at risk are the magical Cashes Ledge, with its dense, kelp-forested mountains and healthy surrounding ecosystem, and the Western Gulf of Maine protected area, a refuge for highly productive female cod that is a particular favorite of the recreational fishery.

With New England’s groundfish populations at historic lows and the prognosis for recovery not getting any better wouldn’t you think that any decision affecting these places—even preliminary ones—would be made with a full review of the best and most complete scientific research and data? And yet it appears the NEFMC has plans to do precisely the opposite.

Over the lengthy ten year OHA development process, the NEFMC’s technical team has attempted to compile the most critical information needed to select among about forty different alternatives for habitat protection and research areas into a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). The DEIS is a legally required, multi-volume document that will include detailed characterizations and maps of the habitat found in New England’s ocean waters. More than just a paper exercise, the DEIS holds descriptions of the specific habitats that fish use at each life stage and measures the impacts that each type of fishing gear has on the ocean environment. The DEIS also holds an estimate of the economic effect of fishing a proposed habitat area versus the value of protecting it.

This important document will guide the Council’s initial decisions and inform the public about the different alternatives for protecting habitat. In order to ensure that the Council’s choices are based on the facts, it is essential that the analysis be completed before the Council selects its preferred habitat protection alternatives.

Unfortunately, and in spite of the best efforts of the technical staff, the current DEIS is lacking analysis of the environmental impacts of 14 separate habitat alternatives and an economic impacts analysis of 20 habitat and research alternatives. How can the NEFMC ensure that its decisions are appropriate and defensible when almost half of the alternatives are lacking fundamental environmental and economic impact information? How too can the public meaningfully comment on these alternatives when they are presented with only some of the facts?

Environmental impact studies are designed to help make good decisions before the use of the American public’s natural resources, not to justify decisions after they are made. The solution here is simple. The NEFMC meets again in January and this process of selecting preferred alternatives can be dealt with then. The fate of New England’s best ocean habitat deserves a thorough approach and should avoid the risk of premature, ill-informed decisions.

World Premiere of Ocean Frontiers II – A New England Story for Sustaining the Sea

How do we meet our ever-expanding demands on the ocean and also work together to protect it? The answer is explored in a new film from Green Fire Productions, Ocean Frontiers II: A New England Story for Sustaining the Sea. The second in the award-winning film series, Ocean Frontiers II is an inspiring story of citizens working together for the sake of the sea. Please join us for the premieres of this timely and important film in Providence on October 28th and in Boston on October 29th.

Ocean Frontiers II brings you face to face with those now embarking on the nation’s first regional ocean plan, promoting healthier economies and healthier seas across New England. A spotlight on Rhode Island reveals how the Ocean State turned potential conflict into collaboration, inviting all on a path of ocean stewardship. Watch the film trailer here http://ocean-frontiers.org/trailer.

The world premiere of Ocean Frontiers II is in Rhode Island on October 28th, at 7pm at the Providence Public Library. The Massachusetts premiere is the following night, October 29th, at the New England Aquarium’s IMAX theater in Boston, also at 7pm. Both events are free and open to the public, but space is limited so please make your reservation:

 

Providence, October 28th http://bit.ly/OceanFrontiers2RI

Boston, October 29th http://bit.ly/OceanFrontiers2Boston

 

Following the screening of each film we will have a short panel discussion that explores New England’s leadership to foster sustainable growth of our ocean economy and the protection and restoration of our ocean ecosystems.

You may have seen the original Ocean Frontiers: The Dawn of a New Era in Ocean Stewardship, at one of our previous screeningsOcean Frontiers is a compelling voyage to seaports and watersheds across the country to meet industrial shippers and whale biologists, pig farmers and wetland ecologists, commercial and sport fishermen and reef snorkelers—all of them embarking on a new course of cooperation to sustain the sea and our coastal and ocean economies.

Following on the heels of the award-winning Ocean Frontiers I, Green Fire Productions brings you face to face with those now embarking on the nation’s first multi-state attempt at ocean planning. Navy scientists, wind-energy executives, fishermen, Native American tribal leaders, planners and environmental advocates – all are working as one to promote healthier economies and a healthier ocean across the breadth of New England.

According to Karen Meyer, Executive Director of Green Fire Productions, “One of our goals was to make sure that people know that ocean planning is underway and that all of our voices are really critical at this stage. It’s our role as concerned citizens who are interested in coastal economies and a thriving marine ecosystem to be involved and make our voices heard.”

Please join us at one of these premieres and learn how to make your voice heard in ocean planning. In the meantime, learn more about why ocean planning matters in New England. We hope to see you at the movies!