DIVERSITY FAILING

continued from Homepage

NEFMC received considerable input from fishermen and others asking NEFMC to limit quota accumulate to between 2-5 percent of stocks. They also requested inshore area protections such as trip limits, fishing one broad stock area to allow local stocks to recover, fleet diversity protections for inshore fishermen, and mechanisms for inter-generational trading of fisheries access, affordable community quota, baseline leasing criteria for leasing, and more.

“The council’s inaction is bad for the fishermen, the fish, and for New Englanders who love and value their local seafood,” Saco fisherman Tim Rider wrote in a petition drive, set up by the Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance (NAMA) in Gloucester, Mass., to change the decision. “For many fishermen, this means a loss of our livelihood and culture. It means a break in a family tradition. And perhaps more importantly, it means future generations in these fishing families will have no access to using and stewarding the fish stocks and marine ecosystems that have sustained them for so long. I have a 3-year-old son, and I would love to know that one day he could be a commercial fisherman if he wanted. But the way things are going there is no hope for a family fisherman to earn a living. We’re being told that to stay in the industry we have to either get big or get out.”

The discussion was the latest since the fishery was converted in 2010 to a catch share system as a method to control fishing. Fishermen and others have said they’ve identified problems such as excessive fleet consolidation, inappropriate scale of fishing on inshore areas, lack of access for the next generation of fishermen, and lack of transparency.

NEFMC has said Amendment 18 is meant to address these problems.

According to information from NEFMC, because of concerns related to maintaining the diverse makeup of the fleet, as well as an interest in keeping active fishing ports throughout New England, NEFMC considered a range of measures that would impose limits on the amount of fishery permits and/or Potential Sector Contribution that individuals or groups of individuals may hold, as well as other measures that may promote fleet diversity or enhance sector management.

Low catch limits, in conjunction with expanded sector management, may lead to excessive consolidation and lack of diversity in the groundfish fleet. As stocks rebuild and allowable catches increase, there may be increased future consolidation and decreased diversity in the groundfish fleet. The amendment is intended to implement measures that affect the level of allocation that individuals or groups of individuals may control, gear restrictions, inshore offshore sub-ACL measures, and other measures aimed at maintaining the diversity of the fleet. The action is intended to promote diversification and prevent any individuals, corporations, or other entities from acquiring or controlling excessive shares of the fishery.

According to NEFMC’s recent groundfish performance report, there are today fewer active vessels targeting groundfish across all length classes, down 18.3 percent from 2012 and 26.7 percent from 2010. There are fewer active vessels targeting groundfish in most homeport states since 2010. Declines range from minus-2 vessels in Connecticut to minus-66 vessels in Massachusetts. Since 2010, vessels dependent on groundfish have seen a 25-50 percent decline in groundfish revenue.

At the meeting, many fishermen disagreed with a report by consulting firm Compass Lexecon (CL), commissioned by NEFMC. CL was asked to determine if excessive market share currently exists in the groundfishery and to recommend potential constraints that could prevent excessive shares in the future. CL concluded there was no evidence of excessive market share and recommended accumulation limits in the 15.5 to 25 percent range on stock-specific potential sector contributions (PSC), and said lesser controls could reduce efficiency unnecessarily. PSC is an individual fisherman’s historical share of landings of groundfish species.

Brett Tolley, a community organizer with NAMA and the son of a commercial fisherman, was among those who denounced the CL report. “Seven entities could all be fishing out of one port, selling to one dealer. That is a problem. This is not creating a bogeyman. This is happening in real time….That is not a joke to fishermen, to future generations and to the broader community of people eating the seafood.”

Ben Martens, executive director of the Maine Coast Fishermen’s Association (MCFA) in Topsham, said Amendment 18 needed more “meat on the bone” to prevent consolidation. “Put alternatives in here that address fleet diversity concerns,” Martens said. “There are a lot of issues we’ll face in the next couple of years, when it comes to allocations and constraints on our businesses….We favor putting some type of cap on holdings. We might not have consolidation happening now, but we’ve had it in past, in almost every fishery with limited access.”

Green Harbor, Mass., fisherman Ed Barrett called the catch share program an “unmitigated disaster.” Addressing NEFMC members, he said, “The status quo as contained here is an abdication of the responsibilities of all you people in this room. I ask that we go back to scoping, re-read the comments, start this process again, and get things that will help and not continue down the road we’re on.”

Another fisherman, from Sandwich, Mass., said his business has gone downhill since the implementation of sector management. “There will be no third generation” of fishing in his family, he said. “You have to look back at the rules and regulations since Amendment 5. We’ve gone along with everything you’ve implemented…It’s all failed…So you have to ask, Where have we gone wrong? Right now my vessel is worthless and so is my permit.”

Kyle Molton, policy director at the Penobscot East Resource Center in Stonington, said that, throughout the development of Amendment 18, NEFMC has failed to acknowledge industry recommendations on ways to maintain fleet diversity and protect the small-boat, inshore fleet. The survival of the small-boat fleet depends on NEFMC, he said, and will cease to exist if better protections are not put in place. “It’s your duty to address the concerns of all the people involved in this fishery,” Molton said. “All segments of this industry matter.”

Josh Wiersma, northeast fisheries manager at the Environmental Defense Fund in New York, N.Y., said ownership limits are an integral part of catch share programs elsewhere in the world, in a way that lets savvy fishermen maintain viable businesses. “We’re unique in New England, because we have a system that looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, but isn’t necessarily the same type” of system operating elsewhere, Wiersma said. Average fishermen don’t have an incentive these days to invest in the fishery, he said. “We’re very vulnerable for somebody to come in and try to have a controlling interest in certain stocks. From my experience, I think it’s necessary to look at ownership caps but in a manner that’s meaningful and has protections,” such as looking at particular stocks.

“There’s a big communication gap between this council and the guys fishing right now,” said third-generation Rhode Island fisherman Jason Jarvis. “Is it possible consolidation will come to the groundfish fishery? It’s possible, when we get groundfish back.” Jarvis said Rhode Island is a good example of what fleet diversity should look like, a mix that ranges from fishermen digging steamers in the bay to large offshore boats. “We’ve got to keep an eye on this before the groundfish industry is owned by a handful of people….You need more fisherman input here and a better liaison between this council and the people who are dying out there so Johnny and his mom can have some codfish for dinner.”

“I never thought I’d favor a cap, because I never thought we’d get to that point,” said Jim Kendall, executive director of New Bedford Seafood Consulting but speaking for himself. But current regulations have forced the issue, he said, because they’re forcing people out of business. “People are forced into selling out and allowing those who can afford it to purchase their quota and consolidate and do a good business,” Kendall said. “If you don’t support a cap in this instance, and you continue the downward trend of the fisheries, more and more people will be forced into those situations where they’re looking for one of those people they can sell to….You need a cap just to prevent it from getting out of hand at this point, and you can review it later on.”

“A lot of people can’t go anymore,” said Sandwich, Mass., fisherman William Chaprales. I know four groundfishermen off the Cape last week, they sold their permits….So I don’t understand this mumble-jumble about Compass Lexecon telling us there’s not consolidation….Small-boat fishermen going out of business amounts to consolidation. Read my lips. If you go with this thing, people are going to look like fools because there is consolidation coming down.”

But Vito Giacalone, volunteer chair of governmental affairs at the Northeast Seafood Coalition in Gloucester, Mass., questioned whether limiting quota accumulation would solve anything.

“We all agree super-consolidation is a bad thing,” Giacalone said. “To date, that’s not occurring…..You’ve got an unavailable fishery for other reasons, and I don’t see any solution in Amendment 18. Are we chasing the right problem?”

NEFMC also heard from health care and food security organizations. Stacia Clinton, New England regional director for Health Care Without Harm’s Healthy Food in Health Care Program, said hospitals have begun to look at impacts on communities, in addition to healthfulness, when purchasing food. New England hospitals, she said, are getting involved in prioritizing local underutilized species available in New England waters. “Our national dietary guidelines are looking at food beyond nutritional composition to health and sustainability of the ecosystem,” Clinton said. “These are important issues we can deal with now. Being on the forefront, this council has the opportunity to put forward policy to benefit the nation, in terms of diversification and sharing resources in local communities.”