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 6
February 2006
MA adopts Area 2 trap caps, dogfish limits
WESTON, MA - The Massachusetts Marine Fisheries Commission voted on Area 2 lobster effort control measures and spiny dogfish trip limits during its Jan. 12 meeting, but each vote led to a commission member declining to cast a ballot either way to protest a management strategy he viewed as unreasonable.
The commission also engaged in serious discussions about extension of the nearshore cod closure and the upcoming hearings on groundfish permit changes.
But the first order of business was the election of officers and, for the first time in a number of years, the commission made a significant change in its leadership.
Vito Calomo of Gloucester, an experienced commission member and executive director of the Massachusetts Fisheries Recovery Commission, was elected chairman in a unanimous vote.
Calomo takes over for Mark Amorello, who moved into the vice chairman’s spot long held by Bill Adler. Pat Frontierro was once again elected as commission clerk.
Area 2 traps
After a year of difficult meetings and negotiations among industry members and managers, a new Area 2 effort control plan emerged that was approved by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) lobster management board in November as Addendum VII to the interstate lobster plan.
The Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF) and the commission held a public hearing on the addendum just before its Nov. 9 meeting and, during the Jan. 12 meeting, DMF Director Paul Diodati recommended that the commission approve state rules to enact the plan as of Jan. 1, 2007, as required by ASMFC.
The primary component of the effort control plan is an individual trap allocation to each qualified Area 2 fisherman based on his fishing history between 2001 and 2003. Trap allocations will be transferable among Area 2 lobstermen but the overall number of traps in the area will not increase.
In his recommendation memo, Diodati pointed out that the conservation tax that was part of the initial Addendum VII proposal was not included in the ASMFC’s final vote in November. However, he said the tax is expected to be part of another addendum later this year that will address transfer issues and should be in place by the time transfers begin in 2007.
DMF is planning to let eligible Area 2 permit holders know what their individual trap allocations are, probably sometime in March, to give them time to plan.
Diodati also said that while he was asking for the commission to sign off on the Area 2 effort control regulations, he would not be filing the regulations with the state immediately.
“We want to work with Area 2 lobstermen and Rhode Island (officials) first to make sure there are no administrative glitches,” he said.
When it came time for the vote, Bill Adler, executive director of the Massachusetts Lobstermen’s Association (MLA), announced that he would abstain because of concerns he had about the individual trap limits.
“I have a problem with this whole theory of having 375 different trap limits in the ocean,” he said.
The motion to adopt the Area 2 effort control plan passed with Adler electing to abstain.
Dogfish trip limits
Federal and interstate actions to conserve spiny dogfish continue to confound Massachusetts commercial and recreational fishermen and to frustrate DMF and commission members.
However, in order to come in line with ASMFC requirements, Diodati recommended that the commission approve the ASMFC-endorsed 600-pound daily possession limit year-round for the upcoming 2006 fishing year, which starts on May 1.
Due to changes in state regulations, Diodati has the authority to make adjustments to the dogfish trip limit without going through a public hearing process.
But the agency notified the public of its intent to adopt the 600-pound year-round possession limit through several local newspapers, the Massachusetts Register, and the DMF Internet listserv and web site.
Public comment
By the time the public comment period closed on Dec. 16, DMF had received 10 comments. Not surprisingly, all of them called for possession limits much higher than 600 pounds, ranging, in fact, from several thousand pounds to an unlimited commercial fishing season.
Brendan Adams of Eastham recommended that the state increase the limit to 6,000 pounds per day to support processing operations.
“The spiny dogfish stock is very healthy right now – too healthy,” Adams said. “We need to work on opening up this resource, not further limiting it.”
Bruce Lloyd of Sandwich endorsed a 3,000-pound limit, noting that fishermen came nowhere near close to landing the 2005 fishing year’s 4-millionpound coastwide quota because of low possession limits.
Added Jean Frottier of Wellfleet, “It is illogical to an extreme to be limiting the catch of dogfish to 600 pounds per day when dogfish are now carpeting state waters to the extent that it interferes and sometimes even prevents fishing for other finfish species.”
Other comments on the proposed 600-pound possession limit included phrases such as “Are we all going nuts? … To even think about putting severe restrictions on dogfish is ridiculous” and “Doesn’t anyone listen to us at the meetings? We are being plagued by dogfish. They are devouring everything that is used for forage by other species.”
Another abstention
When it came time for the commission to vote on the 600-pound possession limit, Mark Amorello said he would abstain.
“I am sick and tired of the ASMFC and the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council’s dogfish (management approach). It becomes more ridiculous every year,” Amorello said.
He added that he hoped “in the not-too-distant future” that a dogfish fishery in state waters would be sanctioned. While it wouldn’t be worth a huge amount of money, it would generate enough to alleviate the hardship now being experienced by many small boat fishermen, Amorello said.
DMF Deputy Director David Pierce noted that a new dogfish stock assessment will be produced this year, which could lead to changes. He also said he is preparing to challenge scientific assumptions that 75 percent of gillnet dogfish discards and 50 percent of otter trawl dogfish discards actually die.
“We believe (the discard mortality rate) really is five percent or less,” Pierce said. “Hopefully this won’t be another exercise in futility for us and will produce meaningful dogfish management.”
A motion to adopt the 600-pound possession limit passed with Amorello abstaining.
Borden joins DMF
During the meeting, Diodati introduced David Borden as a DMF senior policy analyst. Borden recently retired from the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (DEM).
During his 32 years at DEM, he served in a number of capacities, including a four-year term as chief of the Division of Fish and Wildlife. In 1994, he was named the agency’s assistant director of natural resources.
Borden spent 26 years as a member of the New England Fishery Management Council representing Rhode Island and first served as council chairman from 1986 to 1988 and again in 2003-2004. He also served as chairman and vice chairman of ASMFC from 1996-2000.
Diodati said that Borden, who is working part-time for DMF, has been asked to focus on several management issues of concern to Massachusetts, including: recreational scup; US/Canada issues, which primarily means herring and groundfish; Mid-Atlantic issues; and deliberations of the New England council on groundfish as they relate to industry-funded vessel buyback efforts.
Groundfish buyback
State Sen. Bruce Tarr of Gloucester attended the meeting to discuss several issues, including the status of state ocean management legislation, red tide funding, and the possible groundfish buyback program.
Fearful anticipation of Framework 42 to the federal groundfish plan, which is expected to result in yet another significant cut in days-at-sea, has prompted a group of fishermen from around the Northeast region to begin meeting to discuss development of an industry-funded buyback program.
Those participating have evolved into an independent group, which has had several meetings since November, Borden said.
Tarr told the commission that he views such a buyback, which is authorized under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, as “not a first preference, but a necessary safety net.”
“I am very fearful of Framework 42 and its impacts on our fishermen,” he said. “We may urgently need a buyback.”
Tarr added that he had succeeded in attaching language to S 2264 that would direct $75,000 to DMF. Ironically, the legislation is titled the “Economic Stimulus Bill” and is currently making its way through the state Legislature.
According to the appropriation request, the money would be “for the purpose of designing a comprehensive vessel buyback program to be used as the basis for federal funding and implementation of the program.”
“I want Massachusetts to take the lead on this and not be reactive,” Tarr said.
The senator added that he is working to secure $300,000 in funding to allow DMF to respond effectively to red tide disasters.
Tarr pointed out that the red tide events that closed thousands of acres of important commercial shellfish beds in 2005 was likely to happen again and that, while closing areas is easy, he wants to make sure DMF has the staff and resources to conduct retesting in order to reopen areas as soon as possible.
Ocean management
Diodati, Tarr, and Department of Fish and Game (DFG) Commissioner David Peters shared the announcement to the commission that marine protected area (MPA) language in the draft Massachusetts Ocean Act had been removed.
The bill was passed out of the Joint Committee on the Environment, Natural Resources, and Agriculture on Dec. 12 with a favorable recommendation.
The idea for an ocean management plan was initiated in 2003 by Gov. Mitt Romney, who named an ocean management task force to come up with recommendations of a comprehensive plan to protect state waters from unfettered commercial development by companies seeking to site and operate liquified natural gas terminals, windmills, sand and gravel mining, communications cables, gas pipelines, and other projects.
But the task force report and subsequent development of implementing legislation raised the possibility that the plan could lead to the regulation of fishing activities through the creation of MPAs.
This was unacceptable to DFG, DMF, the commission, and fishermen’s groups, and they all worked hard to ax such authority from the bill.
“We were successful in getting MPAs out of the bill,” said Peters. “This is huge progress.”
Added Tarr, who admitted he at one time thought the battle might be lost, “I salute the commissioner, the division, and the commission for standing firm on MPAs. This has brought us all together as a team, a really effective team.”
However, the senator warned that everyone involved needed to continue to participate.
“The views of the commission and recreational and commercial fishermen will be critical” as the bill travels from the Senate to the House and to the governor for final signature, Tarr said.
Commission Chairman Calomo immediately appointed a subcommittee of the commission to review the bill and make recommendations. The subcommittee members are: Mark Amorello, Mark Weissman, Chuck Casella, and Bill Adler.
Said Calomo, “This is an important issue to all in the fishing industry.”
Back to story list
|
|
Tell us what you think.
