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 37 Number 8
April 2010
Northeast Fisheries Summit allows for civil discourse on sector/catch share concerns
NEW BEDFORD, MA - The auditorium of the New Bedford Whaling Museum was chock full on March 8 for the Northeast Fisheries Summit as 300 politicians, including Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick and city Mayor Scott Lang, fishing industry representatives, scientists, attorneys, and representatives of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) came together to try to find some common ground.
Sponsored by the city of New Bedford, the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, and the Massachusetts Marine Fisheries Institute, the summit was organized rather quickly in response to growing concerns over the imminent implementation of sectors in the groundfish fishery and the growing momentum for expanding catch share management programs.
But the summit was decidedly not intended to be a protest. Rather, the goal was to come up with an “action plan” on how to “rebuild and strengthen the partnership between the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and industry, achieve conservation, and preserve jobs and income.”
Following heart-felt opening remarks from several local state representatives, US Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) told the audience that his major goal was to amend the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) to allow flexibility in stock rebuilding timeframes (see story previous page) because the way the MSA is now structured does not work.
“The basic law is wrong,” he said. “It is fundamentally flawed. People have tried to put certainty where it does not belong.”
Frank sharply criticized federal fisheries law enforcement, but actually defended NOAA Director Jane Lubchenco in this regard, pointing out that she had “inherited” the enforcement situation (see story page 8A).
He concluded by pledging his support for meaningful change.
“This is a very serious day,” Frank said. “Come up with real and specific proposals and we will do everything we can to put them into place.”
Rothschild perspective
Brian Rothschild, a long-time scientist at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth School for Marine Science and Technology (SMAST) who spent a number of years working as an upper level NOAA administrator, set the stage for the day’s three panel discussions by outlining perceived problems and potential solutions to the coming management changes.
Among the problems associated with catch shares were a lack of understanding of economic impacts and long-term consequences, as well as questions about the equity of the allocation process.
But Rothschild pointed out that there also were problems associated with the days-at-sea system, including wasteful discards, unaccounted-for overfishing, and regulations that prevented attainment of quotas.
One of the solutions to the morass of regulations that have led managers and many in industry to believe catch shares/sectors are the only option would be to change the way overfished/overfishing thresholds are set.
For example, instead of setting thresholds in terms of very specific numbers, Rothschild suggested moving towards the use of ranges for determining whether a stock is overfished and/or if overfishing is occurring.
He added that cutting the NMFS research budget only will lead to more uncertainty in stock assessments.
In presenting his conclusions about the looming May 1 implementation of sector management, Rothschild said, “This will be a major action that is irreversible. In New Bedford today, we have 13% unemployment. The rush to this transition places the socio-economic fabric of coastal communities on an uncharted course. This is bad public policy.”
Rothschild outlined an alternative “roadmap,” which included these steps:
• Take time to do the job right;
• Do not disadvantage industry in the short term;
• Create a regional “fisheries reorganization commission” to deal with any property rights system;
• Develop a new approach to stock assessments, one that “matches the quality of the data we have;” and
• Use fishing vessels as observation and survey platforms.
“Embrace the ‘man on the moon’ engineering approach to reorganizing fishery management,” Rothschild concluded. “It is the right time.”
Observations
The summit was organized around panel discussions on these three topics: catch shares and sectors; scallop and scallop bycatch; and amending the MSA. Throughout, audience members had opportunities to ask questions of panelists and weigh in with their opinions.
Not long after the event, Rothschild circulated a report by Emily Keiley of SMAST that acknowledged the wide range of viewpoints expressed. The report also outlined six observations that were made by summit participants. They are as follows.
• “It appears that sectors, in general, will not be economically viable. To make sectors feasible, additional quota would need to be allocated.”
• One strategy that should be considered is placing a moratorium on the implementation of sector-based management.
• Increase the flexibility of the MSA, specifically in terms of rebuilding periods.
• Clarify the definition of and distinction among catch shares, limited-access privilege programs, and sectors.
• Increase support for cooperative research programs; and
• Develop a buyback program in advance of the implementation of sector-based management.
For more information on the Northeast Fisheries Summit report, e-mail Rothschild at <brothschild@umassd.edu>.
Lorelei Stevens
Back to story list
|
|
Tell us what you think.
