>>Fishermen's Voice Monthly Newspaper, Gouldsboro Maine

I feel very strongly that one of the most important things we can do as elected officials, especially those of us fortunate enough to represent coastal Maine, is to promote responsible stewardship of marine fisheries resources. Fish know no boundaries, and, as a result, what one state does or doesn’t do, affects all people who make there living from the sea. We must be mindful of that, and work toward establishing standards that will help all parties involved.

During these three years that I have served in the Maine State Senate, I have been fortunate to be appointed Commissioner, representing the State of Maine Legislature on the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC). The ASMFC was established in 1942 by the 15 Atlantic coast states, recognizing that fish do not fall within particular state and political boundaries. Each of the states is represented by three commissioners. As one of the 45 Commissioners, I participate in discussions and deliberations pertaining to the Commission’s five main policy areas: interstate fisheries management, research and statistics, fisheries science, habitat conservation, and law enforcement. The ASMFC also includes the full participation of the federal partners — NOAA Fisheries, Regional Fishery Management Councils, US Fish and Wildlife Service — which allows for corresponding and complementary management in state and federal waters.

The three Commissioners from each state include a member from the general public, a member from the state legislature, and the commissioner, or head, of the state agency representing marine resources.

The ASMFC operates using the model of one state, one vote. This drives the decision-making process, and ensures fairness — each state, regardless of size, is given an equal voice and seat at the table. Besides me, the Maine delegation consists of Commissioner of the Maine Department of Marine Resources, George Lapointe, and York resident and lobster fisherman, Patten White. The ASMFC meets four times a year. Earlier this past month, we traveled to Alexandria, Virginia for ASMFC’s Spring Meeting. We dealt with issues regarding lobsters, eels, menhaden, winter flounders as well as Tautog, weakfish and striped bass. Although our last meeting did not include all the stocks we are responsible to manage, in future meetings we certainly will discuss strategies for management of croaker, herring, sturgeon, black sea bass, bluefish, horseshoe crab, northern shrimp, red drum, scup, shad and river herring, Spanish mackerel, spot, spiny dogfish and coastal sharks, spotted sea trout, and summer flounder. The purpose of the Commission is to work towards healthy, self-sustaining populations for all Atlantic coast fish species.

Currently there are fish stocks that are listed as over-fished, and we are under the microscope to assure that they are managed in such a way that will insure they will remain healthy and sustainable. The stocks considered over-fished are; American shad, American eel, Atlantic sturgeon, American lobster, northern shrimp, winter flounder and Tautog. Obviously, the Maine Commissioners are very concerned about the designation for American lobster. As an aside, it is strange that they are referred to as that. I always called them “Maine” lobster.

I was born into the fishing way, and lobsters have always been a fairly big part of my family’s life. The conservation measures in law when I was born were explained to me by my father. The over-sized and under-sized law existed. Berried females were carefully returned and their tails were “punched,” although we did it by cutting a V-notch. And if a punched lobster, or a lobster with a mutilated tail, was caught, it was released without question. If the tail was mutilated, a more discernible V-notch was made before release. For him and the other fishermen I knew, there was zero tolerance when it came to protecting the female brood stock of lobsters. Finally, there was the prohibition on catching lobsters by any means other than the conventional lobster trap, which banned dragging for lobsters. Dad explained to me that we did this so there would continue to be more lobsters when I went fishing by myself. These laws, rules and regulations were never questioned. They worked.

It has, therefore, seemed hard for me to grasp the resistance that has come from other states when similar conservation measures have been discussed at ASMFC meetings. It was only last year, after many discussions, that our neighbors, New Hampshire and Massachusetts, finally agreed to the zero tolerance standard as it pertains to V-notched female lobsters. Seems like such a common sense and practical thing to do, yet it has taken this long.

Obviously, we here in Maine continue to lead the way in lobster conservation measures. Since Dad died, we have instituted additional conservation measures. Trap limits, limited entry and escape vents are all intended to conserve the lobster population. There is a term new to me, “conservation equivalencies,” which allows states to develop their own methods of conservation if those measures do, in fact, serve to conserve and protect the resource. I suppose if a state does not want to use the same methods that have been so successful here in Maine, but would instead like to reinvent the wheel, that is OK. As long as efforts work to conserve, protect and continue the lobster stock throughout its entire range, we all benefit.

I think Dad and my brothers would be proud that I am working at the state and federal level to help protect the fishing way of life they respected so much.