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
RI council asks DEM to strike controversial effort control words
NARRAGANSETT, RI – The Rhode Island Marine Fisheries Council unanimously voted on Feb. 5 to approve language changes recommended by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) to the state’s Area 2 lobster effort control plan.
The ASMFC recommendations were in response mainly to two changes the Department of Environmental Management (DEM) made to the state plan that DEM approved just last fall.
The two clauses in question involved qualifications for physical incapacitation during the 2001-2003 lobster season and the maximum number of traps fished during the same years.
The version of the Area 2 effort control plan that DEM submitted to ASMFC for review would have allowed fishermen to qualify for a material incapacitation exemption if an illness or injury “adversely affected his/her fishing performance.”
The ASMFC plan review team found that such language had the potential to “allocate more traps than those intended by the plan and enacted by the commonwealth of Massachusetts.”
Rhode Island’s Area 2 effort control plan is necessary to comply with Addendum VII to Amendment 3 of the interstate lobster plan and Rhode Island and Massachusetts have been working to coordinate their measures.
ASMFC recommended replacing the part of DEM’s material incapacitation language that said, “adversely affecting his/her fishing performance” with “prevented the permit holder from fishing.”
“Sustained” traps
DEM also added the word “sustained” to a phrase in the plan governing the maximum number of reported traps fished. That number is used to determine initial trap allocations and industry had struggled to come up with the version it asked DEM to adopt.
During a Jan. 25 public hearing on DEM’s proposed language changes, Lanny Dellinger, president of the Rhode Island Lobstermen’s Association, said, “Maximum ‘sustained’ number of traps fished is not consistent with Addendum VII and should be struck from the new plan.”
Along with industry members, ASMFC questioned what the term maximum “sustained” traps fished meant.
“The insertion of the term “sustained” … could possibly result in a different formula for allocation of traps for Rhode Island fishermen compared to that used for … in other states,” ASMFC said.
ASMFC recommended that the word “sustain” be struck from the Rhode Island regulations. The Rhode Island Marine Fisheries Council agreed and sent that recommendation to DEM.
On behalf of DEM, Robert Ballou said the department would seriously considered the recommended changes.
During the hearing, some fishermen also complained about the logbook program not being in place for the trap allocation qualification period 2001-2003.
“Number of traps fished should be thrown out and the numbers should be based solely on pounds,” said lobsterman Peter Brodeur.
Mason Beutel
Lorelei Stevens
Back to story list
|
|
Tell us what you think.
