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 34 Number 7
March 2007
Mandatory reporting hearings
Maine lobstermen voice opposition; confidentiality, quota concerns
ELLSWORTH, ME – Maine lobstermen turned out in droves for last November’s public hearings on mandatory reporting, and the overwhelming majority of people who testified or submitted letters to the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) adamantly opposed any sort of reporting requirements.
On the table was Addendum X to Amendment 3 to the interstate lobster plan.
All told, 123 people attended hearings in Machias, Ellsworth, Rockland, and Portland, and almost a dozen-and-a-half individuals and organizations submitted written comments. Massachusetts and Rhode Island each held one hearing, but only three people showed up in Rhode Island and none at all turned out in Massachusetts.
In summing up the hearings for ASMFC’s American Lobster Management Board at a Jan. 29 meeting in Arlington, lobster plan coordinator Toni Kerns said, “The Maine hearings were very well attended. The majority of the commenters were against any type of mandatory reporting.”
Lobstermen expressed numerous concerns. They feared the data would not remain confidential and would lead to the development of an individual transferable quota (ITQ) program.
They also said lobstermen so fiercely opposed mandatory reporting that they might not tell the truth and the data would be “bad,” which wouldn’t help scientists in the long run.
Many questioned the cost of the program and wanted to know who would pay for it. Furthermore, numerous lobstermen worried about the complexity of the reporting forms and the amount of time it would take to do all the paperwork.
Machias, Ellsworth
Here’s some of what people had to say in Maine, according to public hearing summaries provided by ASMFC.
“We don’t understand what this data will tell or how it will help manage the lobster resource,” said John Drouin at the Machias hearing. “No one can understand why it needs to be personalized. You already know the landings from the dealer reporting.”
Brian Cates added, “I don’t care for the government intruding into my private business and cloaking it under conservation.”
Jeremy Cates also opposed mandatory reporting.
“I can appreciate a scientist’s perspective of good data, but I am fundamentally against this. For the incremental value that we will gain over dealer reporting, it just puts us closer to ITQs and IFQs,” he said. “It’s a privacy concern. Growing up as a fisherman, this is a violation of our core principles.”
In Ellsworth, Rick Bubar asked, “If the state of Maine is the biggest producer of lobster, why do we have to be in the ASMFC? I’m against this.”
But Jon Carter, who several years ago served as ASMFC’s lobster advisory panel chairman, said, “The state of Maine has worked hard and has saved us from a lot of evil. When Maine came to the table, they (other state representatives) didn’t want to listen to us. Canada and other states have come on board (with reporting). The best case is to get 10%.”
Carter also said, “We cannot walk away from ASMFC. It could be much worse if people had not been there fighting for us.”
Rockland, Portland
In Rockland, Dan Staples asked, “How are you going to fund this? You can’t ask fishermen to fund something they don’t want. The more information, the more it costs the taxpayers. You have much bigger issues that need more work than this.”
Gerry Cushman saw it a little differently.
“If we don’t participate in these discussions, we might get something we don’t want. I’m not all for this, but I would rather work with the state. I know it’s coming. I’d rather tweak it and make it work for us,” he said.
Of the options available, Cushman leaned toward 10%.
“You get chosen, and then you don’t get picked again for a while,” he said. “We need good data. I want to know what’s going on. Sea sampling is not showing all the data. I would support more comprehensive data at 10% reporting. If we push for 10%, we may get it (instead of 100%). We can live with that.”
In Portland, Jim Henderson of the Southern Maine Lobstermen’s Association opposed mandatory reporting.
“The dealer reports are enough,” he said. “This information will hurt us. Sea sampling is important, as is broodstock protection and v-notching. On the other information you want to gather, I’m not going to tell you how many traps (I fished) and soak time, and no one else is either. You have a good day, and everyone will be all over you.”
Elliott Thomas said, “We don’t mind giving the data, but we don’t want names attached.”
Having received several phone calls about the issue, Thomas said people told him they were worried about quotas, trap taxes, and other things if names were tied to the data.
Harry Shain, chairman of the Cobscook Bay Fishermen’s Association, was one of several association leaders to write to ASMFC.
Shain said, “Maine still has the healthiest lobster fishery in the country. Perhaps applying our basic conservation measures universally would help restore the lobster fisheries in the other ASMFC states and allow you to avoid adding yet another set of unnecessary and intrusive regulations to our lives.”
Jeff Donnell of York River Lobster Company also wrote in to oppose the idea of having dealers collect “area fished” information from lobstermen.
“I would like to give you a little insight into the workings of running a lobster car in York Harbor after fishing all day,” he said. “We have 16 lobstermen who drop off their catch into the car. This is just a float in the middle of the river. Most times we do not even see the fishermen. They drop off their catch and off they go. When we get to the car, there may be up to 20-30 crates or more in there to weigh … and sort.
“The thought of us trying to collect data from fishermen is ridiculous and impossible,” wrote Donnell. “I am not privy to where, when, or anything else about their catch and I do not want to be. I fish alongside these men. They are not going to want to sell their catch to me and have me know all of that information.”
In conclusion, Donnell said, “I would love for all of you to spend a day this winter out fishing and then on the lobster car with me. Then, you will understand the fisherman’s plight and the impossible task you are asking of us.” /cfn/
Back to story list
|
|
Tell us what you think.
