COMMERCE
Subscriber Services
Classified Ads
Subscribe
Advertise
NEWS
This Month
Editorial
Letters
Past Issues
ABOUT US
Masthead
Latest Issue
Subscribe
History
MORE CONTENT
CFN Archives
Links
Each Month In CFN
Along the Coast
Ask the Lobster Doc
Bearin’s
Classifieds
Coming Events
Editorial
Enforcement Report
FISH SAFE
Fleet Additions
Letters
Lobster Market Report
McKinley
New Boats
News Catch
Quahog Market Report
|
Commercial Fisheries News
Volume 32 Number 9
May 2005
Common pool, sector hook boats split season in CA I haddock SAP to avoid derby
NEWPORT, RI – In all likelihood, common pool hook vessels will have access to the Closed Area I Hook Gear Haddock Special Access Program (SAP) this fall, giving them another opportunity to use B days-at-sea to work on a healthy resource.
Furthermore, common pool boats won’t have to directly compete with vessels from the Georges Bank Cod Hook Sector because the two groups negotiated an agreement to split the season and the available 1,000-metric ton (mt) total allowable catch (TAC) to avoid a derby fishery.
Under the agreement, which was adopted by the New England Fishery Management Council at its March 2931 meeting here as part of Framework Adjustment 41 to the groundfish plan, sector vessels will fish the first half of the SAP season from Oct. 1 through Nov. 15 with their haddock catch capped at 500 mt.
Nonsector vessels will fish the second half of the season, Nov. 16 through Dec. 31, for the other 500 mt.
If sector vessels catch their half of the overall haddock quota early and their fishery ends, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) may allow common pool boats to begin their season prior to Nov. 16. Also, if sector vessels don’t fully catch their half of the TAC by Nov. 15, the underage will roll over to the nonsector boats.
“This is a very important issue that was worked on very hard by a lot of people in the sector and outside of the sector,” said Paul Parker, executive director of the Cape Cod Commercial Hook Fishermen’s Association.
Avoiding a derby
Parker said fishermen on both sides worried about the detrimental effects of a derby fishery. They estimated that roughly 35 sector boats and 20 common pool boats would all try to fish simultaneously once the SAP opened on Oct. 1.
Under this scenario, they predicted that gear conflicts and catch rates would be high, prices would be low as a result of the flooded market, and the 1,000 mt haddock TAC would be caught in less than two weeks, forcing a shutdown of the fishery.
On the other hand, the negotiated agreement offers everyone who intends to work in the SAP a chance to set up their business plans and both sides know in advance that they’ll have access to a fair share of the TAC, said Parker.
Plus, common pool boats won’t have to compete simultaneously with sector boats, which have significant experience in the area because they worked in the SAP last year and participated in an experimental fishery beforehand to gain approval for the SAP. And the sector will have more opportunity to work with its own members to spread out its half of the fishery.
Common pool fisherman Mathew Thomson of Maine urged the council to support the industry agreement.
“This is a good way to go for at least this year,” he said. “I don’t think we’d want to participate in a derby fishery.”
Fixing former problems
Common pool vessels will be granted access to the SAP through Framework 41. The council signed off on the framework at the March meeting, but NMFS must now review and approve it.
The council initially created the SAP through Framework 40A, but NMFS disapproved access by common pool hook vessels due to concerns about cod bycatch accountability. Sector vessels, which work under a hard total allowable catch (TAC) for Georges Bank cod and operate within constraints set by the sector, were granted access under 40A.
Common pool boats that were gearing up in anticipation of the SAP were outraged over the nonsector disapproval and applied enormous political pressure to have the decision reversed.
NMFS worked closely with the council to address the cod accountability issues in a new framework with the idea that common pool boats would be able to have access this fall to the SAP under revised rules.
Framework 41 now stipulates that nonsector vessels will be bound by a 1,000-pound trip limit for cod and must use a B-regular or B-reserve day to participate in the fishery. Furthermore, nonsector boats won’t be able to possess any gear on board that’s not allowed during a SAP trip, which limits them to hook gear.
Nonsector vessels also will be operating under a total Georges Bank cod incidental catch TAC, which will need to be calculated after Framework 40B is implemented. Framework 40B contains incidental catch quotas for other B-day programs that will affect the Framework 41 SAP fishery incidental TAC.
Allocation issue
The Northeast Seafood Coalition expressed significant reservations about the industry agreement portion of the SAP and the allocation implications involved with it.
“We have problems with the precedent being set here,” said Gloucester fisherman and coalition member Vito Giacalone.
The coalition’s primary concern is that the sub-allocation will allow participating vessels to establish catch history for future allocations when the council has yet to develop an overall policy about resource allocation.
Giacalone said the coalition felt trapped. Its number one priority was to ensure that nonsector vessels were granted access to the SAP this fall, but it strenuously opposed any move that would “regulate” an allocation of a resource, which would happen with the 500 mt split under the industry agreement.
“We would like to see that whatever derby solution gets forwarded is de-linked from nonsector access,” he said.
Coalition representative Glenn Delaney also supported this approach. He urged the council to first vote to grant nonsector boat access to the SAP, and then independently figure out what to do about the derby fishery.
“In no other case in a SAP or B-day program has there been a sub-allocation to a sector of the industry – a TAC for two groups of people,” said Delaney.
Broad participation?
Delaney also expressed concerns about common pool vessels who weren’t part of the industry negotiations.
“We have been contacted by many nonsector vessels saying, ‘We weren’t aware these negotiations were going on,’” Delaney said. “This is a small group of people who negotiated a private agreement and now are asking the government to memorialize a private deal.
“The vast majority of participants in the fishery didn’t know it was being made,” he said. “I think this is a central point to approvability (of this part of the framework by NMFS).”
NMFS Northeast Regional Administrator Pat Kurkul emphasized that no industry proposal is ever implemented without being approved by the council in a public process.
“As for the lack of public participation (at the industry session), frankly, that argument could be made for any proposal,” she said. “I don’t think we want to get to a point where the industry can’t get together to develop proposals to bring before the council.”
Sector and nonsector members in the room said they thought both sides had solid representation at the meeting and the two groups negotiated in good faith.
“We worked with the nonsector participants,” said Mike Russo, a sector member who urged the council to endorse the agreement.
“My business is highly dependent on this (SAP),” he said. “I don’t want to see it last a week or 10 days.”
Sector member Eric Hesse added, “I get the council mailings. I appreciate being able to participate in the process.
“I think a split as being proposed by the industry is a fair way to go forward here,” he said. “This is not meant to be a permanent decision on your part. The whole SAP will have to be readdressed at some point.”
For and against
Massachusetts council member Rip Cunningham supported council endorsement of the agreement.
“I do believe it was a reasonable attempt by sector and nonsector boats to get together,” Cunningham said.
New Hampshire council member John Nelson was in the same camp.
“Quite frankly, it puts the burden on the industry to do it right,” he said.
But David Goethel, also of New Hampshire, was extremely troubled by the idea of the council sanctioning the agreement.
“I’m very concerned that we set any precedent on allocation at all until we have an overall policy on allocation,” he said. “I’d almost be more comfortable if we just allowed nonsector access to the SAP and then let the people who are going to fish there figure it out among themselves” without putting it in regulation.
Groundfish committee Chairman David Pierce of Massachusetts supported the agreement.
“We should lessen the chance that a derby fishery will occur,” he said.
Pierce also emphasized, “This solution to the derby does not represent a permanent allocation to any user group.”
No history acquired
Framework 41 specifically states that the season-splitting program “does not constitute an allocation to any user group but solves the immediate problem of a derby fishery. Further discussions of the Closed Area I Hook Gear Haddock SAP should not be based on this current solution nor should the solution constitute a precedent for the development of SAPs, Category B-regular day programs, or other allocations in the future.”
In an attempt to further allay concerns about allocation issues, the council passed a separate “sense of the council” motion further expressing its intent that fishermen participating in the haddock hook gear SAP would not acquire catch history.
Maine council member John Williamson made a point of crediting the participants who got together to work out the industry agreement.
“I think that’s a great big precedent that we ought to be encouraging,” he said.
The council supported incorporating the industry agreement into Framework 41 by a margin of 13-to-3 with one abstention.
Janice M. Plante
Back to story list
|
|
Tell us what you think.
