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 32 Number 10
June 2005
DMF plans to close winter inshore cod fishery
WESTON, MA - The Massachusetts Marine Fisheries Commission spent most of its May 5 meeting hashing over likely changes in several areas of interest, including coastal access permits (CAP), the winter state waters cod fishery, lobster marketing, seafood dealer reporting, and permit fees.
Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF) Director Paul Diodati told the commission that he planned to allow state-permitted groundfish gillnetters to exchange their gillnet permits for CAPs.
This represents a change in DMF policy that dates back to 1993. The CAP is a limited-access permit that allows fishermen to use mobile gear in state waters.
Diodati stressed that he would issue CAPs only in trade for gillnet permits that have been fished four out of the last five years.
“I’m recommending that this be allowed provided that the gillnet permit is an active one, not one that’s been sitting on a shelf,” he said.
The trade-in would apply only to groundfish gillnet permits, not to dogfish gillnet permits.
“Dogfish wouldn’t count because that fishery doesn’t exist anymore,” Diodati said.
The commission had no objection to the policy change.
Winter closure
The CAP-gillnet permit swap discussion was followed by an announcement from Diodati that DMF will likely propose an across-the-board closure of a highly productive winter inshore cod fishery.
The agency ran into a brick wall late last year when it tried to take emergency action to establish a “cod conservation zone” in state waters between Salem and Boston to protect a dense aggregation of spawning cod.
DMF had to back off a plan to ban all gillnets, reduce commercial landing limits, and impose recreational landing limits for fishermen working in the area between Dec. 30 and Feb. 28 – a proposal that infuriated just about everyone who would have been affected.
Now, however, Diodati said he believed DMF had enough data on the fish and the fishery to justify closing it to all gear types at least for the month of December and possibly longer – perhaps Nov. 15-Jan. 15. He added that he was planning to meet with various groups of industry people to explain the situation.
“Pasture cod”
Research has identified the inshore cod aggregation as a unique body of especially large spawning fish that fishermen in the past have referred to as “pasture cod.” The fish are believed to be important to cod stock recovery efforts, according to Diodati.
“I want to start telegraphing today that this area will be closed,” the DMF director said. “It’s the responsible thing to do and we have enough information to support it.”
Diodati added that DMF is continuing to work with the National Marine Fisheries Service to coordinate groundfish permit rules.
“If you’re in a day-at-sea fishery, you should be using days-at-sea even if you’re fishing in state waters,” he said.
Floating groundline
The International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) has written a letter to DMF encouraging the agency “to require the use of nonbuoyant line on all lobster trawls in the inshore waters of Massachusetts.”
Rather than triggering concern over the potential for more regulation, DMF staffers and commission members agreed that the state’s rules on fixed gear modifications are now so comprehensive that doing what IFAW is asking would affect few fishermen.
“In general, we’re not against getting rid of floating groundline,” said commission member Bill Adler, who is also the executive director of the Massachusetts Lobstermen’s Association (MLA).
In fact, the IFAW request prompted a discussion on how to use the state’s now comprehensive whale protection program as a marketing tool to create a premium for Massachusetts lobsters.
“I want to meet with industry to discuss the opportunity we have to take credit for what’s been done,” Diodati said. “We can declare our lobster fishery to be whale friendly if not whale safe.”
DMF Deputy Director Dan McKiernan noted that 300 lobstermen took advantage of the poly line buyback program sponsored by IFAW, DMF, and MLA over the last year.
The project removed 2,100 miles of float rope from state waters and gave participating lobstermen more than $700,000 toward the purchase of nonbuoyant line, covering about 70 percent of the line replacement cost.
“We believe we’ve captured everyone who used substantial amounts of poly,” McKiernan said.
Diodati suggested the launching of a cooperative marketing campaign would be a way to let the public know that Massachusetts inshore lobstermen fish in a “whale-friendly” way.
“I see this as having value-added potential for Massachusetts,” he said.
Dealer reporting
The commission and DMF discussed the need to adjust seafood dealer reporting requirements to ensure that all fish and shellfish landed in the state are properly weighed and accounted for.
Complete and timely reporting is critical, Diodati explained, especially for quota-managed species, and he said DMF would be clarifying reporting rules in the near future.
At the same time, Adler insisted that DMF not require more information than industry people are willing and able to provide and DMF is able to actually use. Diodati was quick to reassure him.
“Our intent is to reduce burden and create a single reporting standard,” he said.
Permit fees
DMF is also working to put together a schedule of all permit fees, along with fees charged by other states, to allow for comparison as a first step toward consolidation and change in the permit fee structure.
Fee increases would not enhance DMF revenue since all fees go into the state’s general fund. However, Diodati pointed out that fee increases can be effective management tools for controlling effort and can also raise the agency’s profile among legislators during the budget process.
Back to story list
|
|
Tell us what you think.
