When the New England groundfish fleet was given the choice between continuing with the days-at-sea fisheries management approach or a new, sectors-based system that divides the entire allowable catch of cod, flounder and other bottom-dwelling fish into specific allotments for each boat, many saw the sectors approach as the lesser of two evils. Now, with their first season under the new system complete, fishermen and fisheries researchers alike are sorting out what works-and what doesn’t-as they strive to create a fishery that is sustainable for the fish and for the communities that depend on them.
“When this started, I think we saw it as deciding between two bad choices, but we have tried not to pass judgment on the sectors system because it was new and we wanted to give it a year to play out. We’re still not willing to say ‘yeah-it was a success,’ or ‘no-it was a failure,’ but we have made progress,” said Hank Soule, manager of the Sustainable Harvest Sector. “There was a steep learning curve, but we are definitely learning how to work within the sectors system.”
Soule said that there was reason to be optimistic about sectors management with regard to conservation goals, stating that the new system gave fishermen much more room to “hunt fish” than the previous system that was based on the number of days at sea. This ability to target specific stocks played an important role in the significant reductions in discards and fishing pressure on overexploited species.
“The days-at-sea model came down to measuring revenue per day or, really, revenue per hour, but with the sectors system, there’s a big incentive to target specific species, which reduces the overall effort on non-target stocks,” Soule said. “There was clearly a huge reduction in discards, which makes us all very happy. Fishermen hate to throw away fish.”
Glen Libby agrees. As president of the Port Clyde Community Groundfish Sector, Libby sees the sectors system as a way for the fishermen in his sector to try different methods to increase their catch and reduce mortality of non-target species.
“With days-at-sea, the clock was always ticking and we had to catch as many fish as we could as fast as we could,” said Libby. “Now we have the time and the incentive to try different methods and different types of gear. We have been doing a lot of work with larger mesh sizes that seem to be working
-we leave a lot of the smaller fish, but we can afford to because we have the time.”
Maine Department of Marine Resources Commissioner Norman Olsen sees the sectors approach as an important step forward for Maine’s groundfish fishery. “We need sustainability. Boom-and-bust fisheries won’t work for Maine. I’m tremendously pleased with how the sectors approach is working. We’re seeing sustainable fish stocks, which means sustainable fishing, sustainable support services and sustainable communities,” Olsen said. “We now have a system that prevents overfishing, allows fishermen to fish to the needs of the market and fish with the weather in ways that don’t endanger lives unnecessarily. Sector management is allowing fishermen to fish for a combination of species that best fits the market and meets sustainability goals. If we stick with it, the future of Maine fishing looks very bright.”
Despite their progress in achieving certain conservation goals (the fishery met the mortality reduction goals for Gulf of Maine cod for the first time in ten years,) Soule and others in the Sustainable Harvest Sector admit that the system is still
a work in progress.
“There was a lot of difficulty at the beginning with the new reporting and monitoring system, but we’re trying to make that work the best we can,” said Maggie Raymond, executive director of Associated Fisheries of Maine. “There are still a lot of challenges with this system, but there is really no valid alternative on the table.”
One aspect of the sectors management approach, and in the federal catch shares mandate in general, that has many fishermen and community groups concerned is the threat of widespread consolidation, both of the number of boats and of the on-shore services that support them. While Soule is hopeful that any problems that exist with trading allocated shares of fish stocks will work themselves out on their own, others see a need for changes and additions to federal catch-share policies that would help to avoid the type of widespread reduction in fishing vessels that happened in Alaska, where the trade of catch-shares led to a 25 percent reduction in working boats. In any catch-share system, the federal government’s allocation of a portion of the fish stocks to groups or individuals can lead to widespread trade of those allotments on the open market, which often leads to the consolidation of those fishing rights to larger boats that work with fewer on-shore markets, crippling small operators and low-volume ports.
In an effort to help maintain diversity within the fishery and improve methods for allocating and trading catch shares, The National Panel on Community Dimensions of Fisheries Catch Share Programs has released a comprehensive report that outlines specific ways in which catch-share management systems could be modified that would allow greater flexibility in the distribution and trade of shares.
“As NOAA and councils move forward with implementing NOAA’s Catch Share Policy, both agency and councils have an important opportunity to emphasize and support fishing communities and jobs in the development of catch-share programs,” stated Megan Mackey, Fisheries Policy Associate for Ecotrust. “The Panel’s report contains a set of forward-looking recommendations for making catch-share programs work for fishing communities.”
Implementing some of these recommendations, which include measures like tying percentages of shares to specific regions and creating a dedicated loan program for communities and individuals who wish to purchase shares, could make the difference for many groundfishermen who are already struggling to stay in the game.
Overall, it seems that the region’s groundfishermen are happier with the sectors approach than they were with the days-at-sea model. With some thoughtful adjustments and the addition of certain safeguards, sectors might actually become a fisheries- management model that works.
“I think (sectors management) really brought us together as a group, and for the most part I think it has been working pretty well. As a way to control fish mortality, it seems to be working, and the science seems to back that up. With 12 different species, our allocation has actually gone up, and that’s the first time that has happened in a very long time,” said Libby.
“I think it has created more freedom to fish, and its seems like most of the fishermen have made more money. There are always tweaks and revisions, but it seems like this has a real shot, as long as it doesn’t get scuttled. There is always the chance that politics will run over the process, but hopefully that won’t happen”.
David Munson is a freelance writer living in Lincolnville.