DMR Committee Considers
Imported Lobster

by Laurie Schreiber

An Act to Allow Certain Wholesale Lobster Seafood Dealers to Process Imported Lobsters, was sponsored by Sen. Lois Snowe-Mello (District 15), who is co-chairman of the Marine Resources Committee. The bill would allow lobster processors to process oversize or undersize lobsters that were not landed in Maine, as long as the processed product is not sold in Maine. Current law allows wholesale seafood dealers with a lobster permit to import, handle and transport lobsters that do not meet minimum or maximum length requirements, but not to process them.

Snowe-Mello said that sometimes, normal shipments to Maine processors, from other lobster-catching areas such as Canada and Massachusetts, include lobsters that do not meet Maine’s minimum and maximum size requirements.

Keliher, testifying on behalf of the DMR, said the bill would grant flexibility to Maine processors to process these lobsters – which are mainly oversize – rather than cull, store and ship them out of state. Processing the oversize lobsters and then selling them out of state would allow processors to make money from the product, rather than spend money on labor to cull them.

Proper recording-keeping and chain-of-custody protocols would prevent the measure from becoming a loophole for Maine lobster fishermen to harvest oversized lobsters, Keliher said.

John Hathaway, owner of Shuck’s Maine Lobster in Richmond – one of four lobster processors in Maine – spoke in support of the bill.

“This request would allow us to make money on something we now lose money on,” Hathaway said. “We’re legally allowed to hold and transport the product, but can’t add value while it’s in our possession.”

Hathaway explained that about 60 percent of Maine lobster goes to Canada to be processed in the spring and fall, and it comes back labeled as a product of Canada, not Maine.

“When we do receive shipments of lobster from Canada, our records show that about 6 percent of the delivery is oversize. We have to pay someone to cull it out, put it under seal, hold it separately, and then ship it out of state. All we’re asking for is be able to add some value to it while it’s in our possession – not to sell it in state, but to ship it out of state.”

Processing the oversize, Hathaway said, would give Maine processors greater flexibility and make them more competitive with Canadian processors.

“It seems to be common sense,” Hathaway said. “It’s already something that we can legally possess, but we can’t make money on it and we’re losing on it. We’re not asking to possess oversize Maine lobster. We’re not asking for anything to be harvested in the state of Maine to be oversized.”

Hathaway said that Maine processors buy Canadian lobsters in the spring or fall, when the Maine lobster fishery has fallen off.

“It’s a mismatch of the seasons,” he said. The seasons are much different, and so is the size of the lobster.”

Most Maine lobsters tend to be smaller than those harvested by Canadian fishermen, he said.
“We have to put it in a crate, seal the crate, and find a home for it – less the labor we pay to cull it out,” Hathaway said of the oversize animals. “If we could process it, cook the meat – then there’s a market for that. We’re happy with the market being out of state. The market is out of state anyway.”

One man at the hearing expressed concern that the Canadian animal, once processed in Maine, would be labeled as Maine product, thereby potentially downgrading the Maine brand.
Speaking again for the Maine Lobstermen’s Association, David Cousens said his organization opposed the bill.

“The MLA shares the state’s goal of removing unnecessary red tape and keeping Maine’s dealers and processors competitive in today’s marketplace – but not at the cost of conserving our resource or harming the Maine lobster brand,” Cousens said. “The MLA is opposing LD 1547 because we believe that conservation of the lobster resource and preservation of the Maine brand far outweigh any gains Maine’s processors might make if this bill were passed.”
Cousens spoke to the importance of the oversize measure in Maine.

“The state of Maine recognized the reproductive importance of oversized lobsters early on and has protected lobsters larger than five inches carapace length since 1933,” he said. “Larger lobsters are known to have greater reproductive capacity than smaller lobsters because the number of eggs produced by a female increases exponentially with her size. These larger lobsters are often found in offshore, deeper water, which is explains why the MLA also opposes landing dragger-caught lobster, and supports Maine’s zone council management system extending into federal waters.” Maine’s lobstermen consistently throw back large lobsters that are caught in their traps, he said.

“Maine lobstermen strongly believe that it is in our own best interest to ensure that we have the reproductive capacity to maintain the stock, rather than trying to gain some short-term benefits by selling the oversized lobsters that are caught,” Cousens said.

The question goes beyond conservation, Cousens said.

“In today’s global economy, the ‘Maine brand’ is inextricably tied to our conservation measures which include both our minimum and maximum size protections, v-notch protection and our prohibition on the landing of dragger-caught lobster. If the consumer starts to associate Maine lobster with violations of any of these core conservation measures, we will all lose,” Cousens said.