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 36 Number 12
August 2009
Rec allocation angers commercial fishermen
PORTLAND, ME – Commercial fishermen expressed anger and deep frustration over the New England Fishery Management Council’s decision to use 2001-2006 as the Amendment 16 reference period for calculating allocation shares for the recreational fishery for Gulf of Maine cod and Gulf of Maine haddock.
Commercial fishermen who spoke to the issue universally supported using 1996-2006 as the baseline – the same period adopted to calculate permit history for people joining one of the 17 new groundfish sectors.
Using 1996-2006, preliminary estimates indicated that the recreational fishery would have been allocated 25.1% of the available Gulf of Maine cod annual catch limit (ACL) and 17.6% of the Gulf of Maine haddock ACL.
Instead, by adopting 2001-2006 as the reference period, recreational fishermen will receive 33.7% of the cod and 27.5% of the haddock ACL shares respectively.
“This is profound,” said Vito Giacalone of the Northeast Seafood Coalition. “It takes a substantial amount of fish out of the commercial fishery.”
Joel Hovanesian, speaking on behalf of the Rhode Island Fishermen’s Alliance, also opposed the 2001-2006 period.
“Our feeling is we’ve had enough flesh carved from our bones,” he said.
The council’s recreational advisory panel (RAP) strongly supported 2001-2006. According to RAP Chairman Barry Gibson, the panel had several reasons for doing so, but two were especially important.
“We think the time period better reflects the proportions of Gulf of Maine cod and haddock currently caught by the two components of the fishery,” Gibson said. “And this more recent time period is more reflective of where the fishery is at present and where it’s likely to be going.”
Allocation at stake
The RAP panel’s reasoning, however, didn’t satisfy commercial fishermen.
“I don’t think this is appropriate at all,” said Gloucester fisherman Dave Marciano. “We’re already not getting enough allocation, and this is a big percentage for the recreational fishery.”
New Hampshire fisherman Carl Bouchard agreed.
“I am very, very much opposed to this,” he said. “This is treating one group different from another. We should all have the same time period.”
Giacalone added, “We’ve gone to a straight catch history allocation for the commercial sector with 1996-2006. We’ve been saying all along that a consistent baseline is appropriate.”
Council support
Rhode Island council member Frank Blount said he didn’t agree that calculating the ACL split between commercial and recreational fishermen was the same as setting a baseline for establishing permit history in sectors.
“There’s no baseline here,” he said. “It’s two totally separate issues. We’re dividing up the catch between the commercial and recreational fisheries during the same years. If you pick the wrong years here, the recreational fishery would be looking at taking a huge hit on haddock.”
Massachusetts council member David Pierce acknowledged the tension the issue generated between the two user groups.
“Allocation decisions are always difficult,” he said. “But in my state, there are thousands of recreational fishermen who take cod and haddock every year. That’s not just party/charter boats. It includes individual recreational fishermen. I feel it’s necessary to support the motion (2001-2006).”
Council opposition
New Hampshire council member David Goethel tried to amend the motion to replace 2001-2006 with 1996-2006.
Goethel said he considered 2001-2006 to be “an illegal action” that violated National Standard 4 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act because it did not treat all people “fairly and equitably.”
“We need a common baseline,” he said.
Maine council member Jim Odlin also supported 1996-2006.
“My philosophy is we always should take the longest period possible and we should always look at history,” he said. “I want to be consistent.”
But Goethel’s move to amend failed in a 6-to-10 vote with one abstention, and the reference period 2001-2006 passed 11-to-5 with one abstention.
This was one of two issues that led Goethel to vote “no” on approving the final Amendment 16 document for submission to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and to submit a minority report with a dissenting opinion to the commerce secretary.
Other rec measures
The council also approved the following additional recreational measures for Amendment 16:
A reduction in the haddock minimum size to 18" to match the reduced commercial size;
A requirement that recreational fillets come from legal-sized fish and have at least two square inches of skin on each fillet;
Removal of the limit on the number of hooks allowed per line;
A prohibition on landing Gulf of Maine cod from Nov. 1 through April 15, although these dates may be modified slightly following a review by the groundfish plan development team;
Maintaining the same recreational 10-fish bag limit and 24" minimum size for Gulf of Maine cod; and
Applying an accountability measure to prevent the recreational fishery from exceeding its annual catch limits. If an ACL is exceeded, the NMFS regional administrator, after consulting with the council, will be authorized to adjust season length, minimum size, or bag limits for private boats and/or party/charter boats to prevent future ACL overages.
Janice M. Plante
Back to story list
|
|
Tell us what you think.
