February 2010 Commercial Fisheries News - The Northeast's Fishing Newspaper for over 35 years

Commercial Fisheries News
Volume 36 Number 6
February 2009

Poor design may cripple catch share programs

Competition and disagreement are pretty much the norm during debates over how to manage Northeast fisheries. But seldom has there been a management strategy as divisive as catch shares.

With its creation of almost a dozen and a half new sectors, Amendment 16 to the groundfish plan has brought home the true impact of individual allocations based on fishing history because of the stark differences between the haves and the have-nots.

Fishermen who amassed strong landing histories during qualifying years and/or invested in permits to build history may find themselves in a pretty secure spot. Sectors – a form of catch shares – probably will work for them.

Others, those who barely got by for years under increasingly strangling regulations on the promise that their sacrifice would pay off in rebuilt stocks, now find they don’t have enough allocation to go on. Sectors – catch shares – are looming as the end of the road for them.

These fishermen are outraged, unable and unwilling to silently swallow the inequity of their position or the injustice of how they got to where they are. They argue that they didn’t have an equal opportunity to build fishing history because they were forced to comply with low trip limits or stay tied to the dock during area closures or were restricted as to where they could fish because their boats were small, all while other boats had more flexibility and options.

Just as this anger was peaking, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) released a draft national policy encouraging the use of catch shares as a fishery management tool to “end overfishing and rebuild and sustain fishing jobs.”

From the perspective of people distressed by the groundfish sector program, it’s hard to see how catch shares accomplish either of those goals.

Interestingly, NOAA is admitting that catch shares “are not a panacea or one-size-fits-all solution.” And the agency is emphasizing that catch share programs, including sectors, individual fishing quotas, and community quotas, must be “designed properly at the fishing community level.”

Even the Pew Environment Group, a proponent, is stressing the need for careful planning when creating a catch-share management scheme. In a Dec. 10 statement applauding the release of NOAA’s draft catch share policy, Pew’s Lee Crocket said, “Poor design can cause unintended economic hardship for many fishermen and their communities.”

Less than two weeks later, Pew made note of a new study, which found that “catch share programs result in more consistent and predictable fisheries but do not necessarily improve ecological conditions.”

So it was no understatement for NOAA to say upfront that catch shares are not a remedy for all the problems of fisheries management. And few can say that the Amendment 16 groundfish sector catch share program was “well designed” as a whole. That’s a big part of the reason it is ripping this industry apart. And it’s something to point out to NOAA as it mulls its draft catch share policy.

The public comment deadline is April 10. For more information or to submit a comment, go online to <www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/domes_fish/catchshare>. Comments may also be submitted by fax to (301) 713-1940 or by e-mail to <catchshares@noaa.gov>. Write “Attn: Catch Shares” in the subject line. /cfn/

Back to story list