L E T T E R S   T O   T H E   E D I T O R

Why a 5% Conversion Rate for Students?

As a student lobsterman facing a future on a waiting list, I have spent a lot of time thinking about the lobster licensing system and how it has gotten to the point it’s at. There are some people who have been on waiting lists for upwards of ten years and for someone in my position the prospect of a decade or more on a waiting list is a depressing one. You may be wondering why a student is going to the waiting list. Students are let in, right? Not exactly. According to a report commissioned by the legislature, “Despite the priority licensing policies for students, there is a strong pattern of exit of the fishery at age 18, likely associated with students not completing the program prior to their 18th birthday.” Additionally according to the report, “The ten-year average conversion rate of LCS license holders to full-time active commercial fishermen is 5%.”

Why is this? You may assume that these kids must be slacking off, but this is not the case. In the current system, any students who begin logging hours over the age of fifteen are excluded entirely from the priority policies. This means this state is requiring fifteen-year-olds to work lobstering or lose a chance at a license without the waiting lists. Furthermore, young aspiring lobstermen can also say goodbye to any extracurricular sports or activities on account of the steep requirement of 200 fishing days before eighteen. One small tweak could fix this. Not a major overhaul but a minor adjustment in the system. I think any child should have a chance to start logging hours and, if they complete the requirements while holding a student license, they should be allowed in. Currently, because a student can keep their license until twenty-three, a sixteen-year-old can lobster for seven years only to have the state put an end to it and throw them on the lists. I have written more extensively about that proposal in a letter to the editor in Fishermen’s Voice, June 2014 issue.

Why are the waiting lists so slow? Zone E has seen a 30% decline in the number of commercial lobster licenses since 1997. Accompanying this has been a decrease in trap tags. Over the past few years across the state, catches are on the uptick. So why does zone E, like 5 out of 7 zones, l have a 1:5 entry/exit ratio? I can blame the absurdity of the student system on poor legislation, but zone councils are responsible for entry/exit ratios. How are these ratios at all justified? On one hand, I can’t blame a council of commercial license holders, elected by commercial license holders for trying to keep everyone else out. What did the state think would happen? Of course license holders are going to stop anybody else from getting a license, at least as much as they can. But in the end, the zone council’s responsibility was to properly manage entry ratios, and given the current conditions, it’s obvious they have failed to do so.

Now legislators are forced to come up with a whole new system because of the council’s unwillingness to set reasonable ratios. We have a system here that with the right entry ratios and more reasonable student licensing policies would work. Instead of making an effort to allow the system to work, councils for years have watched the lists grow. Now because of the years of mismanagement an ‘overhaul’ of the system is becoming inevitable. What is coming and what powers councils will have in the future is entirely unknown at this point. If councils and the license holders they represent don’t want to lose their control, action is required and fast.

Councils need to consider proposed solutions and act on them soon. Things like setting maximum wait times on lists, residency requirements for lists and the easiest of all, setting less restrictive ratios. I believe the current system is workable, and would rather see an effort to make this system work than an entirely new one. Zone Councils still have a chance to demonstrate a willingness to help make this system work. As someone facing a future on a waiting list, I hope very much to see meaningful efforts made to improve the licensing system. Finally, I want to thank everyone from the DMR offices in Hallowell, the marine patrol and the legislature that have taken the time to talk to me about these issues over the last couple of years.

– Troy Plummer
Boothbay Harbor, ME

Wood, Glass & Wrapper

I enjoyed reading the Esther II article in the December edition of the Fishermen’s Voice, particularly the background of the boat and the Trask family. I would like to clarify the mention of my carpenter friend, Greg Wheeler.

In 1981, when Chummy Rich was building a new boat for me, the Daystar, all topsides cockpit sealing, trap and ice sheathings required glasswork. On one trip to see her progress, Greg rode up with me. Because of his knowledge and ability with wood and fiberglass, Chummy hired Greg for that part of the project. Greg stayed in Bass Harbor for 3 or 4 years before returning to Green Harbor to concentrate on repair work.

It was eight years later that I bought the Finest Kind and hired Greg to help with the restoration work. She was a beautiful design. It’s unfortunate we never took the lines off her. There is a picture of her on the “Relaunchings” page of Wooden Boat magazine, April 1998–Issue 141.

Laurie’s article about Richard Stanley brought back another Bobby Rich memory. Back in the late 1960s, when glass hulls were typically finished with wooden topsides, Bobby often said “they are building them upside down.” That’s why my present boat is a wood hull with glass over plywood topsides.

Keep up the good work. The Fishermen’s Voice is still the best “fish wrapper” on the coast. h

– Ray Noyes
North Marshfield, MA