Fishermen Question Accuracy
of Shrimp Science

by Laurie Schreiber

Shrimp fishermen questioned the accuracy of the science that forced the fishery to close early two years in a row. At a recent Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMfC) hearing on a new suite of proposed management measures that are designed to prevent early closures in the future, fishermen expressed skepticism about the need for the measures.

They said high catch rates could be an indication that there’s plenty of shrimp – more than scientists think. This idea was contrary to the ASMFC’s take, which was that excessive catch rates could jeopardize the future of the shrimp resource and of the fishery.

About two dozen fishermen attended a public hearing for comments on new measures proposed to manage the fishery, expected to be implemented in time for the start of the upcoming 2011-2012 fishing season. According to Terry Stockwell, the section will meet this month to adopt a plan for the 2011-2012 fishing year. Stockwell is the Department of Marine Resources’ (DMR) director of external affairs and Maine’s representative on the ASMFC.

Stockwell said the section’s intention is to “mix and match” management options to provide flexibility to the fishery. He said the section aims to develop management tools designed to spread the catch throughout the season, as well as an improved catch reporting system.

“Your fishery is very different from the guys in Port Clyde, and their fishery is very different from the Portland guys,” Stockwell said. “So we’ll try to mix and match so there’s something equitable for everyone.”

Some fishermen said that what was thought to be overfishing might instead be proof that there is more shrimp in the gulf than originally thought.

“How many years in a row do we exceed the maximum before we say there’s more out there than you thought?” said David Horner of Bass Harbor.

Horner and others said that, regardless of what the statistics show, they supported a “core” fishing season of January, February and March, with April and May optional depending on where the harvest numbers are at the end of March. He and others said there are not enough shrimp along the downeast coast in December to make the fishery worthwhile then.
“That would give us the stability in what we’re doing,” said Horner.

James West, a Sorrento fisherman, agreed.

“I’d like to see the season start on January 1 for two reasons,” West said. “One, it helps us downeast. But also, it helps the fishery out tremendously because [the shrimp] get to come in and all of them get to lay their eggs. The shrimp will spread out, so you get a nicer shrimp to sell to the market.”

Stockwell said the goal of the hearing was not to take comment on the specific timing of the season, but on the various management concepts proposed by the ASMFC and the management tools that might be used to slow the harvest and spread the fishery equitably along the coast from the earliest shrimp seasons in Massachusetts and New Hampshire to the progressively later seasons in Maine. He said that exceeding the target landings cap again is not an option.

“So somehow we’ve got to slow this fishery down. And these measures that have been proposed—a lot of them came right out of this room,” Stockwell said, referring to scoping sessions on the draft proposals that were held earlier this year, adding that part of the ASMFC’s intention is to have a March fishery, in accordance with the industry’s wishes.

“I couldn’t be more emphatic in telling you that we’re going to try to enable a robust fishery here in the month of March, and it’s the section’s and some of the industry members’ opinions that some of these measures may contribute to that. Doing nothing from the section’s perspective is not an option,” Stockwell said.

The idea, he said, is to employ the individual management “tools” under consideration, or some combination of them, to slow the fishery down if the rate of catch seems too high at the start of the season. “With none of these measures applied, it will be a repeat of last year, which doesn’t work for you, doesn’t work for the state, doesn’t work for the processors and doesn’t work for the shrimp section,” he said.

But Horner suggested that the harvest should itself be factored into an estimate of the shrimp biomass. He said that fisheries scientists tend to view “phenomenal” catch rates a proof that fishermen are catching shrimp at too fast a rate.

“It never indicates to you that, ‘Hey, there’s a lot out there,’” Horner said. “Why wouldn’t that be factored in?”

Horner and West said they supported the idea of separate management areas, each with its own quota of the total shrimp allocation.

The measures, proposed by the ASMFC’s Northern Shrimp Section, are contained in draft Amendment 2 to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Northeast Shrimp. The Northern Shrimp Section consists of representatives from Maine, New Hampshire and Massachusetts, and is responsible for the fishery’s management.

The section closed the Gulf of Maine shrimp fishery prior to the end of the season due to landing rates that were greater than anticipated, according to information contained in the draft amendment. The 2010 fishery closed 24 days early and the 2011 fishery closed 46 days early.

Shrimp is currently managed under Amendment 1 to the plan, which was adopted in 2004. Amendment 1 provides two options for managing the fishery—season length and gear limitations. According to the draft, Amendment 1 will result in rebuilt shrimp stocks in the Gulf of Maine. Stocks suffered a precipitous decline in the 1990s, when “exploitable biomass” declined from 12,800 metric tons at the beginning of the 1996 season to a low of 3,800 mt before 2001. The biomass rose to 23,000 mt for the 2007 season, driven by a strong 2004 year class. The biomass estimate then declined to 14,400 for the 2011 season.

ASMFC information cautions that there is a “high degree” of uncertainty around the estimates. Landings also dropped like a rock in the 1990s—from a high of 9,166 mt in 1996 to a low of 424 mt in 2002. According to the draft, the drop was due to a combination both of low abundances of shrimp and reductions in fishing effort.

Since then, landings increased to 4,912 mt in the 152-day 2008 season, and then declined to 2,163 mt in the 180-day 2009 season; that drop might have been due to the low price the product was fetching at the time, the draft says.

Preliminary landings data from harvester reports for the 2010 season total 5,617 mt. The 2010 season was characterized by very high catch rates and improved market conditions, according to the draft. (Data for 2009 and 2010 are preliminary.)

According to the draft, the proposed 180-day season for 2010 was cut short to 156 days due to the industry exceeding the section’s recommended landings cap for that year by 14 percent, and due to concerns about small shrimp. The preliminary landings for 2010 of 5,600mt were more than double the landings observed in 2009.

The 2011 season began on Dec. 1, 2010 and was originally scheduled to go for 136 days, until April 15. The section set a landings cap of 4,000 mt. But by mid-February, according to the draft, a preliminary tally of shrimp landings had already reached 4,192 mt. In the end, the section determined that the landings cap was exceeded by 48 percent. The ASMFC’s latest landings report showed that total landings for the 2010-2011 season were 5,534 metric tons.

Landings data are provided by dealers. According to the ASMFC’s “Preliminary Status Report for the Gulf of Maine Northern Shrimp Fishery-2011,” published on February 17, the length of the season and the fishing mortality target were based on the goal to keep fishing at a “stable” level relative to fishing effort during the years from 1985 through 1994.

The situation became more urgent, the report said, because egg hatching was already underway by February, and appeared to be earlier than last year.

In addition, “the abundance of age 5 shrimp in the population is significantly below average. This results in the fishery harvesting primarily age 4 shrimp which should be the foundation of next year’s fishery. The age 5 shrimp provide the greatest spawning potential and also receive a higher market price than smaller younger shrimp.”

The excess situation was exacerbated by the fishery’s untimely reporting system, which resulted not only in the overharvest but in short notice to fishermen of the season closures, said the draft.

The goal of Amendment 2 is to maintain a healthy shrimp stock, and to maximize the shrimp market and benefits to the fishery, the draft said.

Potential management options include the clarification of fishing mortality reference points, a timely and comprehensive reporting system, trip limits, trap limits, days out, area management, seasonal quotas and harvest set-asides.

Management options such as area quotas, seasonal quotas or harvest set-asides by area or gear type—or some combination of the various options—might be useful for ensuring that fishermen to the east get their fair share of the harvest, Stockwell said.

He said the objective is to control the rate of shrimp landings early in the season, in order to ensure that enough shrimp is accessible to fishermen in the latter part of the season. The logistics are particularly tricky, said Stockwell, because the fishery occurs in stages along the coast. Shrimp show up downeast about three or four weeks later than they do midcoast. Likewise, midcoast fishermen see the animal several weeks later than fishermen further to the west.

According to information provided by the ASMFC, northern shrimp occur throughout the North Atlantic and North Pacific oceans. The Gulf of Maine marks the southernmost extent of its Atlantic range. Primary concentrations occur in the western gulf, where bottom temperatures are coldest.

“The fishery has been seasonal in nature, peaking in late winter when egg-bearing females move into inshore waters and terminating in spring under regulatory closure,” the ASMFC said. “Northern shrimp has been an important resource to fishermen working inshore areas in smaller vessels who otherwise have few options due to seasonal changes in availability of groundfish, lobsters and other species,” said the ASMFC. “A typical annual round for fishermen in the smaller ports is to lobster in the spring, summer and fall and then to go shrimping in winter (December-May).” Currently, the shrimp fleet is comprised of lobster vessels and trawlers that re-rig for shrimping.

“We want to spread the landings out through the entire state,” said Stockwell. “We want to have a stable fishery.” One man expressed concern that the section will choose measures that will benefit Massachusetts and New Hampshire rather than Maine, given the fact that the states have equal votes.

“They do have equal votes, but Maine catches 90 percent of the shrimp, and that’s not unnoticed,” responded Stockwell. He added that the ASMFC often collaborates on matters that have different levels of importance to different regions. Stockwell said it will be important for the industry to stay involved in the process of working out the fine details for managing the fishery.

“In order to spread things out, you guys have to have your input, too,” he said. “What’s best, out of these alternatives, to make the season work? If the industry in general doesn’t like any of these options, then it’s going to put the section in the hard position of having to pick and choose ones that will make a profound difference to you.”

The comment period for the draft amendment ended on October 3.

Upon completion of Amendment 2, the section will initiate consideration of a limited entry program, the draft said. The section has already established a control date of June 7, 2011.

“The intention of the control date is to notify potential new entrants to the fishery that there is a strong possibility they will be treated differently from participants in the fishery prior to the control date,” the draft said. The section may use historic landings and/or participation criteria for current and past participants as the limited entry system is established.

“There’s no guarantee that limited entry will come up or, if it does, what form it will come out in,” said Stockwell. “But if it does, this is just a heads-up to the fishery that, if there’s a history-based allocation proposal that comes forward, this control date will be an action for people to look at.”

Copies of the draft amendment can be obtained by contacting the ASMFC at (703) 842-0740 or at asmfc.org under Breaking News.

For more information, contact Michael Waine at (703) 842-0740.