|
51/49 Percent Enforcement Proves Difficult
by Laurie Schreiber
Dozens of people appeared at last week’s meeting of the Lobster Zone B Council to discuss a problem that involves fishermen violating the 51/49 percent rule, which requires fishermen to place the majority of their traps in the zone they declared as license-holders. Over the past year, said Marine Patrol Lieutenant Alan Talbot, and in the last four months especially, the Marine Patrol has had numerous calls and comments about people not fishing any of their traps in the zone they declared for their license, and instead are fishing in the adjacent zone. The Marine Patrol has been trying to figure out how to enforce the rule, Talbot said. The law was tweaked by the legislature last session when it became a requirement for fishermen to declare their second zone also. LD 1510, “An Act to Amend the Lobster Fishing Laws in Maine,” was designed to improve enforceability on this issue. It imposes a requirement that all the zones which a license holder indicates on their license application will also appear on their license, and that a person may not place any traps in a zone not identified on their license. With regard to the requirement that a person fish the majority of their traps in their declared, “home” zone, the law says the number of trap tags sold will be used to determine the majority of a person’s traps, rather than the number of traps fished. The law became effective last September. But the change didn’t fix the problem of fishermen using the second zone primarily, Talbot said. Talbot said he was notified by three fishermen about one man in particular who was setting his traps in Zone B—which includes Mount Desert Island and the surrounding area—and none in his primary zone. Colonel Joe Fessenden, the chief of the Marine Patrol, said Zone G (York County) has had problems with the issue for five years now. The issue there involves a lot of fishermen in Zone F (Casco Bay) who move their gear in the winter into Zone G. He said that the issue has been before the Lobster Advisory Council several times, but with no results. According to Fessenden, the situation for Zone B is a little different because it involves men who fish a little less than half their gear in Zone B and none in their primary Zone A. Zone B Council chairman Jon Carter said he’s had a ton of calls on the problem for two years now. He said perpetrators are essentially thumbing their noses at people who are on the waiting list to get into a zone and who are going through the process legitimately. At last fall’s meeting of the Department of Marine Resources’ Lobster Advisory Council, Carter noted a scenario that involves a man who has a Zone A license, but fishes gear only in Zone B, with no traps in Zone A. The person, Carter said, lives in Zone B, but does not have a Zone B license. He is one of a handful of people who have found a way around the 51/49 percent rule, he said. Talbot said he approached District Attorney Michael Povich to see how the matter might be addressed, and learned the wording of the law was problematic for enforcement. The law uses wording such as where a fisherman “proposes to fish” and is “authorized” to fish, Talbot said. According to Talbot, the DA said that the ambiguous wording makes the law unenforceable; for example, “authorized,” means “can,” but not “must.” Talbot said the wording might be fixed by using another word, such as “shall.” Talbot went on to say that another issue, which amounts to the difficulty of actually counting traps, compounds the enforcement problem. For example, he said, The Marine Patrol asks a Zone A fisherman to show them his gear. The man takes them into Zone A, pretends to look around, and says he had more than half of his gear there but someone must have cut it. In reality, the fisherman has his gear in Zone B. “It’s his word against ours,” Talbot said. “But until we change the law, it’s unenforceable.” Zone B council member Tom Lawson said everyone understands that the intention of the law is to address fishermen who straddle the zone lines and how they could use their gear. Fessenden said double tagging for the secondary zone might be part of the solution, but doesn’t solve the problem of fishermen claiming to have traps in their primary zone and then saying they must have been cut. Zone G will be starting a pilot program for double tagging, he said. “If anyone has a better idea, call us,” Fessenden said (Boothbay Harbor, 633-9595). One man at the meeting suggested the burden of proof should be with the fisherman, not with the Marine Patrol. If an officer wants to see a fisherman’s traps, he must be able to show them, and if he can’t, the Marine Patrol should require the removal of his traps in the secondary zone, the man said. On the Down East problem, Fessenden said that, because Zone A is now closed to new entrants, the problem might slow down. Enforcing trap limits and the zone lines over the past decade has been “an absolute horror show,” although the bugs have gradually been worked out, Fessenden said. In other business, Talbot told fishermen that if they have a federal fishing permit, they should make sure their federal operator’s permit is in order, as well. A situation along the midcoast last fall involved a federal permit holder who was boarded by National Marine Fisheries agents. His operator’s permit had expired and he was forced to dump about $6,000 worth of lobsters overboard. Even if a federal permit holder is fishing within the state line, he still must have his federal operator’s permit, Talbot said. Members of the zone council noted that dragging for sea cucumbers is ruining good lobster bottom, adding they would like to see regulations. The pickle season runs from October through June, and is closed July through September. Some council members suggested Senator Dennis Damon, co-chair of the Legislature’s Marine Resources Committee, should be approached on the matter. |
