Online Edition Updated MonthlyA Compass Publication


COMMERCE

Subscriber Services
Classified Ads
Subscribe
Advertise

NEWS

This Month
Editorial
Letters
F/V Safety
Past Issues

ABOUT US

Contact Us
Latest Issue
Subscribe
History

MORE CONTENT

CFN Archives
Links


Each month exclusively in the PRINT edition of CFN

Along the Coast
Ask the Lobster Doc
Bearin’s
Classifieds
Coming Events
Editorial
Enforcement Report
FISH SAFE
Fleet Additions
Letters
Lobster Market Report
New Boats
News Catch
Quahog Market Report




Commercial Fisheries News 
Volume 33 Number 3
November 2005


New England Council's herring Alternative 7 gets nod at public hearings

GLOUCESTER, MA - Deserved or not, midwater trawlers were on the receiving end of a lot of criticism from inshore Gulf of Maine fishermen during public hearings held in October on draft Amendment 1 to the federal Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Herring.

About 50 people attended the Oct. 19 hearing in Gloucester, where the testimony was overwhelmingly in favor of Alternative 7. Most of the nine or so people testifying at the hearing in Rockport, ME on Oct. 13 also favored Alternative 7.

Under Alternative 7, effort will be shifted to later in the year. There is an assumption that the TAC will be taken, but that’s not what’s going to happen. There will be a reduction in the amount of herring taken in Area 1A and there will be an increased cost to the lobster fishery.
—Dave Ellenton, Cape Seafoods and Western Sea Fishing Company

Out of the seven alternatives proposed by the New England Fishery Management Council – and the one singled out by the council as “preferred” – Alternative 7 contains the most restrictive criteria for a vessel to qualify for a limited-access permit. It also would bar midwater trawlers from fishing in Area 1A from June 1 through Sept. 30 each year.

At Gloucester, tuna fishermen, groundfish fishermen, recreational fishermen, and even one herring purse seine fisherman all told the presiding officials that the midwater boats took such a toll on the forage base that there was no incentive for fish like bluefin tuna and striped bass to remain in the inshore Gulf of Maine.

“Perhaps it’s too good of a mouse trap,” said Gloucester fisherman Paul Cohan of the midwater trawl gear. “Even if we’re looking at a healthy resource, we’re seeing regional disruptive effects on the behavior of the stocks because of a technology that’s too efficient.”

Added bluefin fisherman Steve Weiner, “These guys are fishing on small pieces of bottom until there’s nothing left.”

And it wasn’t just fishermen who were worried about the effect of midwater trawling operations. Whale and sea bird advocates and conservationists also supported Alternative 7 for the same reason.

“This is an opportunity to advance a plan to provide for the health for the overall Gulf of Maine resource,” said Conservation Law Foundation economist Priscilla Brooks. “We support Alternative 7 because it offers the greatest benefit to the widest range of users.”

Haddock bycatch

The draft amendment also contains a host of “independent measures,” which the council can add to any of the seven alternatives. One of them would allow directed herring boats to retain some amount of haddock bycatch and 100 pounds total of other regulated species.


The issue is the gear (midwater pair trawls), not the fishermen who run the boats. It is the deadliest gear type used in the Gulf of Maine ever — two boats towing a big net, fast. —Steve Weiner, bluefin tuna fisherman

There are three alternatives for this bycatch measure, which, in very basic terms, are: no action; 1,000 pounds of haddock per trip; or establishment of a haddock bycatch cap of up to one percent of the Georges Bank and up to one percent of the Gulf of Maine haddock total allowable catch.

In June, the National Marine Fisheries Service implemented a 1,000-pound haddock trip limit for Category I herring vessels with a 270,000-pound cap through emergency action. The agency took this step at the request of the New England council, which recognized that the big herring boats were finding it impossible to avoid small haddock while fishing on Georges Bank.

But the idea of allowing multispecies bycatch while groundfish fishermen are so strictly regulated for stock rebuilding purposes really bothered a number of people who offered comment at the Amendment 1 hearing.

“Haddock is an extremely profitable resource for our fishermen and they have sacrificed for years to rebuild haddock stocks. Midwater vessels should not be exempt from groundfish limits,” said Sarah Gallo of the Cape Cod Commercial Hook Fishermen’s Association.

Added fisherman Richard Burgess, “We have the largest (groundfish) mesh in the world fishing side by side with the smallest mesh by the midwater trawlers. We will not be able to rebuild codfish and haddock stocks inshore with these guys working inshore.”

Access concerns

One of the key elements of Amendment 1 that received serious criticism from midwater trawl boat representatives was the impact Alternative 7’s limited-access criteria will have on the herring fleet and, subsequently, on the lobster industry that relies on it for bait.

According to the council, Alternative 7 will have the “most negative” impacts of any of the alternatives on fishing businesses and communities.

Under its limited-access criteria, some of the larger vessels that have come on line since 2001 to supply Gloucester’s Cape Seafoods and New Bedford’s NORPEL herring/mackerel plants will be shut out of Area 1, and those that entered the fishery in 2004 and 2005 also will be shut out of Areas 2 and 3.

Midwater trawl boats that do qualify to stay in the fishery will still be prohibited from fishing in Area 1A during the purse-seine/fixed-gear-only season. They would have the option of rigging over to purse seining, but the conversion costs would run an estimated $300,000-$500,000.

Larger midwater trawl and pair trawl vessels excluded from Area 1 also will face increased fuel costs on the order of $4,100-$5,900 per trip to fish in other areas.

Altogether, the council predicts that the fleet’s harvesting capacity under Alternative 7 potentially could be 42 to 47 percent lower in Area 1 than it is today.

Although the Massachusetts Lobstermen’s Association (MLA) did not have a spokesman at the Gloucester hearing, the MLA told the council it does not support Alternative 7 because of bait supply and price concerns.

The New England council is expected to finalize Amendment 1 at its Nov. 15-17 meeting in Hyannis, MA.

Lorelei Stevens


Back to story list


CFN

Tell us what you think.


Deadline Info! Click here...


Secure Online Form


Display Advertising Info



the latest selected stories are here...