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 36 Number 5
January 2009
RI sector pilot program on hold for one year
NARRAGANSETT, RI – After running into heavy opposition during a Nov. 13 public hearing, the Rhode Island Marine Fisheries Council met on Dec. 1 and voted 4-to-3 to postpone further consideration of a controversial fluke sector pilot program for one year.
Council Chairman Mark Gibson listened to public comment and discussion before asking for a motion on a recommendation to Department of Environmental Management (DEM) Director Michael Sullivan on the proposal. The majority of speakers were in favor of postponing the program until management issues had been further discussed and revised.
As proposed, the pilot sector allocation program would allow a group of licensed commercial fishermen to harvest a percentage of the state’s total quota for a specific species.
These sector members would agree to abide by the same rules and not fish beyond the limits of the agreement. This kind of program would give them the opportunity to harvest fluke whenever they wanted, provided they did not exceed their assigned percentage of the total state quota.
Chris Brown, president of the Rhode Island Commercial Fishermen’s Association, designed the program. He acknowledged people’s concerns, but said that he did not feel that everyone understood the program and its intentions.
“It’s a pilot program,” he said. “It might not be perfect. That’s what pilot programs are for, to work out the kinks. If we just move forward, we can make it work for everybody. It’s good for the industry, the fishery, and could pave the way for a better future.”
Pros
Those who supported the program said the state needed a way to better conserve and control the fishery, while at the same time affording fishermen an opportunity to make a living. Sector allocation, they said, was a logical solution to the problems created by current fishery management measures.
Specifically, they said that, as quotas are reduced, the only way fishermen would be able to sell close to the number of fish they sell today would be to eliminate all discards.
They also pointed out that discards were not being accurately accounted for right now. Under a sector allocation plan, discards would be minimized, helping stock rebuilding efforts.
Finally, sector advocates said giving a group of fishermen an allocation of fish they could manage on their own would allow them to operate their businesses more efficiently.
Cons
Those who opposed the program were gravely concerned about how the allocations would be determined, even though the pilot program was not intended to result in any permanent allocation.
Many said that a sector allocation program would favor the few by allowing sector members free access to the fishery while everybody else would be subject to days-at-sea and possession limits.
“Sector members can fish whenever they want because they aren’t subject to restrictions,” said Rich Fuka, president of the Rhode Island Fishermen’s Alliance. “Consequently, they can consolidate their effort and catch their quota in a few days and dramatically reduce their overhead. If you’re not a member of a sector, you can’t do that.”
The idea of making allocations based on fishing history also disturbed many fishermen who did not have a prolific history and would be assigned smaller allocations as a result.
Additionally, opponents said the system would not be fair to bigger boats because of current regulations.
Veteran fisherman Jerry Carvalho agreed with Fuka.
“The sector pilot program allows sector members to fish any time they want,” Carvalho said. “They are not restrained by daily possession limits, and they can take advantage of the higher prices. The disadvantage to the rest of the fishery is that the eight boats that are sector members will have this special privilege, whereas the rest of the fluke fishermen will be competing against one another in a common pool.
Carvalho dismissed the state’s characterization of the pilot as a research program.
“It has nothing to do with research,” he said. “It has to do with setting aside a specific portion of the quota for the benefit of a small group.”
Carvalho also said fishermen without a long history in the fishery would be put at a distinct disadvantage because they wouldn’t be able to compete with the guys who have been fishing for years.
“The DEM director should be working on a program that benefits all participants in the fishery,” he said.
Questions
Brian Loftes, another veteran fisherman, said no program should move forward until the information collected about the fluke fishery, such as on landings, discards, and biomass, is straightened out.
“How can you expect any program to work when the data on which it is based is inaccurate?” he asked.
Another longtime fisherman who chose to remain anonymous said the data would not be as flawed if everybody reported their discards.
“But they are afraid, and I understand why,” he said. “They don’t want to report the number of dead, legal fish they throw away. They are high-grading. I can’t fault them for that when smaller fluke sells for $1.50 to $2 per pound and four-to-five-pound fluke sells for $4.50 per pound. People are throwing back more than they are selling.”
New, different
Bob Ballou, assistant to the DEM director, said the proposed program was very new and different and that was making people apprehensive.
“They worry that it involves the allocation of a set amount of the state’s overall quota to a select group of individuals, which is not the way we have done business in the past,” he said. “It’s always been that if you have a license to harvest fluke, you’re on equal footing with every other licensed fisherman.”
After the vote, the council agreed to recommend to DEM Director Michael Sullivan to postpone and make revisions so that the sector allocation pilot program would be fair to everyone wishing to participate.
Back to story list
|
|
Tell us what you think.
