Community-based Sectors for the New England Groundfish Fishery

More documents

Recommendations

Info

stocks). In practice the only two sectors that have been authorized to date could be characterized as community-based sectors. The members of both sectors fish out of Cape Cod (though this is not an official restriction of membership) and both sectors voluntarily delineated a fishing area. To date, both sectors are comprised of individual permit owners whose catch histories each contribute to the overall sector allocation. However the Cape Cod Commercial Hook Fishermen’s Association has begun to explore the concept of developing a permit bank owned by the Association that would hold permits and associated catch histories that could contribute to the sector allocation. The permit bank would enable the sector to purchase permits that might otherwise be sold and migrate to other regions, and it could allow the sector to increase its share of the fishery over time and provide a means for new entrants from the community to participate in the fishery. To that end, both the GB Hook sector and the GB Fixed gear sector have included right-of-first-refusal clauses in their sector contracts that provide the sector entity with the option to purchase the permits of any members that are intending to sell their permits at a price equal to what the individual has been offered by a private buyer. 3.0 Case Studies The primary objective of this project is to conduct two case studies of potential community-based sectors in Maine, one in the Midcoast region and one in the Southern region. Port Clyde is the only port with a significant number of active groundfish boats in the Midcoast region. These fishermen have also formed an association, the Midcoast Fishermen’s Association. For these reasons, Port Clyde was chosen for one of the case studies. Portland is, by far the largest groundfish port in Maine in terms of landings and vessels landing there. For that reason Portland was chosen for the second case study. Although there is a group working with the Portland Fish Exchange that is developing a sector, the sector includes vessels from three states landing in several ports and does not fit the conceptual idea of a community-based sector being explored for this study (i.e., one tied to a geographically defined community). For that reason, a case study was conducted on a hypothetical sector including vessels that landed the majority of their groundfish in Portland in the 2005/06 fishing year. The case studies include: discussion of the objectives of the fishermen and the community for setting up a community-based sector; a description of the potential sector including its structure, potential participants and basic operational plan; and an analysis of the economic feasibility of setting up and operating the sector. The port specific case studies are followed by an economic feasibility analysis of a permit bank that could be developed in conjunction with a communitybased sector. Operational and regulatory issues for the sectors that may present difficulties are then discussed. 3.1 Port Clyde Community-based Groundfish Sector The case study of the Port Clyde community-based sector was facilitated by the existence of the Midcoast Fisherman’s Association which was established in 2006 by a group of area fishermen that came together to discuss and deliberate the future of their industry. They decided to form an organization that would be “an active voice for their interest in preserving a healthy ocean, balanced with a need to maintain the viability of local coastal fishing communities.” I presented the concept of a community-based sector to the association in June 2006. The members were uncertain whether this form of management would suit them but voted unanimously to work with 14
me to explore the idea further and to participate in a case study. This eventually culminated in the group submitting a proposal to form a sector, though the group of permit holders that is currently considering joining the sector if it is authorized is not identical to the original set of vessels included in the following case study. The primary interest of the Port Clyde fishermen in developing a community-based sector is to improve their profitability and economic viability. However, they also expressed the belief that sectors could improve safety since vessels would be more likely to return to port if bad weather was predicted. The current restrictions on DAS create incentives for vessels to stay at sea rather than using up their limited fishing time steaming back to port before completing a full trip. The sector members also see the sector as a way to improve sustainability since they would no longer have to discard fish when trip limits were reached. They also envision using the sector to operationalize fishing practices that will minimize bycatch of juvenile or spawning fish through gear modifications, fleet communication, voluntary closures, or other management measures. To develop an understanding of whether and why the surrounding community would be supportive of a community base groundfish sector, Cindy Smith (sector project manager for GMRI) interviewed John Falla, who is the town manager for St. George, Maine and Dave Schmanska, the Port Clyde harbor master. They stated that the town is interested in maintaining the groundfish fleet in Port Clyde. The town recognizes the importance of fishing to its year round residents – the primary fisheries in St. George are lobster and groundfish, and most of the groundfish vessels fish for scallops and or shrimp in the winter. The St. George comprehensive plan includes a Commercial Fishing/Maritime Activities District, and language about the importance of working waterfront was recently added. Throughout the comprehensive plan, it states repeatedly that “other uses will not adversely affect existing commercial fishing or maritime activities in a Commercial Fisheries/Maritime Activities District”. Falla and Schmanska suggested that the town might be interested in managing a permit bank to supplement catch quota available to boats landing in Port Clyde, particularly if the administration cost is funded by some other entity such as the state. However, they also voiced concern about whether they could administer a permit bank given their lack of expertise, experience and funds. Mr. Falla and Mr. Schmanska agreed that any community-based sector would have to be able to stand on their own without local subsidy. The town is not willing to foot the bill for a sector manager unless the town will be getting some return on their effort. Again, they mentioned that taxpayer money would not be available, and any sector would need to seek support from some other sources if it were needed. Mr. Falla did say that it might be possible to use the town’s bond rating to co-sign or float a bond that the sector members would have to pay back. He also reported that the town would not be able to supply taxpayer dollars, but it might be possible to put the concept out as an economic development initiative. Falla noted that for the town to provide support to the community-based sector, there would have to be a benefit to the town. Schmanska suggested that vessels leasing quota would have to designate Port Clyde as their homeport, thus requiring them to pay their annual excise tax to the Town of St. George. Requiring them to land in Port Clyde would ensure that they will buy their fuel and ice in town as well. 15
Page 1 and 2: Community-based Sectors for the New
Page 3 and 4: Table of Contents Executive Summary
Page 5 and 6: Community leaders in Portland and P
Page 7 and 8: of community-based permit banks. Th
Page 9 and 10: 1.0 Introduction The groundfish fis
Page 11 and 12: Although Amendment 13 effectively e
Page 13 and 14: somewhat vague on how the allocatio
Page 15: 2.2 Experience with Existing Sector
Page 19 and 20: period is that which was used to de
Page 21 and 22: shown above in Table 2. Revenue pro
Page 23 and 24: Table 3a: Port Clyde Sector Revenue
Page 25 and 26: ecruitment and could be either high
Page 27 and 28: increased. They also have caught a
Page 29 and 30: 3.2.1 Strawman Sector Structure and
Page 31 and 32: Table 8: Portland Sectors A and B V
Page 33 and 34: discussed earlier these price proje
Page 35 and 36: Table 9b: Portland Sector A Revenue
Page 37 and 38: Table 9d: Portland Sector B Revenue
Page 39 and 40: Table 10b: Portland Sector A Revenu
Page 41 and 42: Table 11b: Portland Sector B Specie
Page 43 and 44: vessels would be leased to sector v
Page 45 and 46: is ostensibly to reduce excess capa
Page 47 and 48: Table 15: Projected Total Revenue,
Page 49 and 50: later. However, rolling baselines c
Page 51 and 52: 4.4 Communities without Catch Histo
Page 53 and 54: opportunities for consolidation of
Page 55 and 56: References Alexander, Yvette 2006.M
Page 57 and 58: Appendix A: Landings and revenue pr
Page 59 and 60: Appendix B: Groundfish Price Model
Page 61 and 62: Appendix C: Sector Proposals Submit
Page 63 and 64: Port Clyde Community Sector Glen Li
Page 65 and 66: Full Retention All fish caught 1. e
Page 67 and 68:
Reasons for Existence: 1. end overf
Page 69 and 70:
Gloucester Fixed Gear Sector Peter
Page 71 and 72:
New Bedford Channel Trawl Sector Ri
Page 73 and 74:
Point Judith / Southern New England
Page 75:
Pier 6 Initiative Michael Walsh Req
show all

Community-based Sectors for the New England Groundfish Fishery

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?