Commercial fishing in New England is done.

But do the comms want to accept it or see the writing on the wall?
They won't know it until they're standing in the unemployment line.

I've been ignoring this pretty much, might as well see what kind of comments it garners.


Patrick seeks federal aid for fishermen

By David Kibbe
Standard-Times staff writers
April 10, 2007 6:00 AM

and Becky W. Evans


BOSTON — Gov. Deval Patrick yesterday requested federal assistance for the state's fishing communities, saying new regulations that strictly curtailed days at sea had created a "true economic disaster" for fishermen.

Federal restrictions on groundfishing that were put in place last year have cost Massachusetts $22 million, the state said in a request for an economic disaster declaration. The application was filed with U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez.

"Everyone agrees that the stocks of groundfish in the waters off the coast of Massachusetts need to be replenished," Gov. Patrick said in a written statement. "Everyone also agrees that the fishing industry needs to remain part of the life of the commonwealth. The revenue declines experienced by fishing communities represent a true economic disaster."

Gov. Patrick initially asked Mr. Gutierrez to declare an economic disaster in February. The state had until yesterday to submit supporting documentation.

In New Bedford, fishermen welcomed the governor's appeal for federal aid but questioned how it would be distributed.

Toby Lees, captain of the dragger Seel, said disaster relief would be a "good thing," but only if it was given not just to boat owners, but to individual fishermen "who are losing their jobs right and left."

Deb Shrader, executive director of the fisherman's advocacy group Shore Support, said she'd like to see the money find its way to fishermen's families who "are really in distress."

Paul Diodati, the director of the state Division of Marine Fisheries, said it would be premature to say how much aid the state might get, what type, and what it might mean to individual fishermen. The state did not specify how much aid it was seeking.

Mr. Diodati said there was a precedent, as recently as the mid-1990s, for the federal government to declare a disaster based at least in part on regulations. Last year, Congress reauthorized the Magnuson-Stevens Act that governs commercial fishing, specifically allowing relief to be sought based on the economic impact of regulations.

"The state is simply requesting that the secretary of commerce make a determination for a disaster at this point," Mr. Diodati said. "If that happens, it's likely the federal government would look at regional impacts from Maine to Rhode Island."

In a statement, U.S. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., said the state's fishermen "need immediate relief to survive new restrictions and to avoid a total collapse of the groundfish industry.

"The state has made a compelling case to support a fishery disaster declaration, and I urge the Department of Commerce to provide the declaration as quickly as possible, so that immediate steps can be taken to remedy the economic losses," he said.

So far, Mr. Gutierrez has not said how he might act on the declaration. First, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration would have to declare that there was a fisheries resource disaster beyond the ability of fisheries managers to mitigate.

Anson Franklin, a spokesman for the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, said the request was under review. He defended the state's fishing rules to The Associated Press.

"The rules were put in place balancing all of the facts we had to consider," Mr. Franklin said. "We think that the rules are appropriate."

A disaster declaration would allow Congress to appropriate money for relief. The federal government provided $60 million in disaster assistance to groundfishermen after the collapse of fishing stocks in 1994 and 1995. It included direct aid, retraining and vessel and permit buyouts.

Priscilla Brooks, the director of the Conservation Law Foundation's ocean conservation program, said the short-term relief to fishermen would not solve the bigger problem — a lack of fish.

"We share the governor's goal of healthy fishing communities, and we want to see the New England fishing industry survive," Ms. Brooks said. "We'd like to see fisheries managers get to the root of the matter, which is overfishing.

"This is only a short-term fix for the fishing industry. What is really going to save this industry is to bring back the fish population. In order to do that, we simply have to take less fish."

New Bedford Mayor Scott W. Lang, who also categorized disaster relief as a "short-term solution," said he is working with local fishermen to develop an alternative groundfish management plan that would meet conservation goals while reducing economic losses to the fishing industry.

Gov. Patrick had been urged to seek the declaration by Mayor Lang, Gloucester Mayor John Bell and state legislators from fishing communities.

Rep. John F. Quinn, D-Dartmouth, said the state's documentation went far in proving the state's case. Local contributors included Dr. Brian Rothschild of the Massachusetts Marine Fisheries Institute, UMass Dartmouth economist Dan Georgianna, and Dartmouth resident Richard Canastra, the co-owner of the Whaling City Seafood Display Auction.

"It really hits home as far as analyzing the negative impacts that these regulations have had," Rep. Quinn said.

The National Marine Fisheries Service in November passed regulations to prevent overfishing and keep rebuilding programs on track for cod, yellowtail flounder and other declining groundfish stocks. The state of Massachusetts is challenging the new federal regulations in U.S. District Court.

The new rules reduced days at sea by 50 percent for inshore fishermen, such as those from Gloucester who drag their nets in the Gulf of Maine. The regulations cut fishing days for New Bedford's offshore draggers from about 50 days at sea to about 46 days. Industry representatives said it would eventually cost the New Bedford economy $30 million to $40 million.

Cape Cod's revenue from groundfishing declined from $8.3 million in 2001 to $4.5 million in 2004.

The state filing said the reduction in days at sea "has caused and will continue to cause a substantial reduction in revenues to the Massachusetts groundfish fishery and related sectors. The economic effects of this reduction will continue to ripple through the already stressed local economies of fishing communities like New Bedford, Gloucester and Chatham."

Unlike New Bedford's beleaguered draggers, the city's scallop fleet is enjoying a lucrative harvest, with scallops selling for around $8 per pound at yesterday's seafood auction.

The scallopers are "peaking out to the maximum, and the poor draggermen are down in the dungeon," Capt. Lees said.

Scallops, which are the largest-growing seafood export in the Northeast, have helped New Bedford maintain its ranking as the most valuable fishing port in the country for the past six years. A successful area rotation plan that opens and closes fishing grounds based on the size and condition of scallops has helped maintain a sustainable population.

FRL, I'm assuming you put that stuff in bold, not the article writers? That whole paragraph is worded pretty poorly but it would appear going from 50 days to 46 days only effects the offshore draggers, not the inshore draggers, who have to cut back by 50%.

The whole situation sucks but for any long-term resource extraction industry facing crisis situations like this the story's pretty much the same:
1. Rape and pillage your preferred resource for generations
2. "suddenly" face your resource stocks crashing or otherwise not being economically sustainable to harvest anymore.
3. Try and deal with balancing some semblance of harvest to protect the harvesters with protection of the severely depleted resource.

I'd say fuck the fishermen, protect the fish because if the choice is sacrificing one or two generations of fishermen well being vs. the loooong-term protection of the fish stocks, then.... Unfortunately it's not as easy as that.

Good luck New England and Oceans everywhere.

This was predicted in the twenties, for god's sake.

The collapse of the cod stocks was a wake up call, and the fishing industry has been hitting snooze ever since.

Suckage.

The commercial fishing industry has been raping the oceans of the world for as long as it's been in existence. They'll get everything they deserve.
Fuckers.

I blame the Portagees.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceman

I blame the Portagees.

---

Your disdain for the Portuguese never ceases to amaze me.

I blame it on ocean dumping of thalidomide.
The fathers always get away with it ... the sons will suffer.

Or enjoy disaster relief buyouts and retraining, whatever.

If their scene is anything like it is here then the cut from 50 to 46 days for the offshore fisherman means nothing really for the economic state. these vessels tend to be the large factory trawlers, usually with a strong international backing and selling to foreign tenders etc.

the 50% cut in nearshore is what will hit the regional population as these are the smaller operations that return every couple of days to offload their catch to shore. the way we think of "traditional" fishing.

This "First, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration would have to declare that there was a fisheries resource disaster beyond the ability of fisheries managers to mitigate." is a key component of whether or not the feds bail this out with a economic disaster declaration.

Now the scallops - if you want to see a fishery that really digs up the bottom, then that is the one - makes bottom trawling look kinda friendly.


Or just do what iceman said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bagtagley

Your disdain for the Portuguese never ceases to amaze me.

---

They are a dark and furtive people, malevolent in thought and deed. The reason they inhabit the end of the Iberian Peninsula is that Civilized Europe drove them there.

Which is also how the Irish came to inhabit Ireland, but that's another story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceman

Which is also how the Irish came to inhabit Ireland, but that's another story.

---

Because of the Portuguese?

I KNEW it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wendigo

Now the scallops - if you want to see a fishery that really digs up the bottom, then that is the one

---

I had to give up scallops after seeing what the ocean floor looks like after being dredged for scallops.

Shrimp trawlers too. Take a look at the mud trails churned up by the trawlers at 32° 8'40.24"N, 121°36'42.87"E on Google Earth (view from about 2.5 km up.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceman

Which is also how the Irish came to inhabit Ireland, but that's another story.

---

That is a myth, supposedly. More people migrated down from Scandinavia and Scotland than up from the Moorish/Spanish/Portuguese areas.

My wife is in Ireland right now, I'll
ask her to look into it.

(I am supposedly 'Black' Irish, from County Cork)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rideit

My wife is in Ireland right now, I'll
ask her to look into it.

---

Due to the portuguese conspiracy I am betting that people will either give her a blank stare or possibly even deny it.

THE RUMORS MUST BE TRUE!

Hemaphroditic Portuguese Warriors Drove the Irish from their Land!

Here on Cape Ann the number of real fishing boats has dwindled to a handful. All the processors are gone because all the fish are gone. Most all of the real fish that does come in the harbor comes in frozen blocks to make fish sticks.

The "value added" processors get fillets from china and the like.

All oceans are being raped. The only boats making a living are lobstering and that will come to an end soon.

Pass the butter!!!!

No, no, no, of course the Irish didn't come from Portugal. I was trying to say that, like the Portuguese, the Irish were driven to the furthest fringe of Europe because nobody could stand having them around. All four of my grandparents were born in Ireland - even the Irish couldn't stand having us around.

Back to the original point: If like me you are actually interested in commercial fishing, you should read:

LAMENT FOR AN OCEAN
The Collapse of the Atlantic Cod Fishery: A True Crime Story

by Michael Harris

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceman

No, no, no, of course the Irish didn't come from Portugal. I was trying to say that, like the Portuguese, the Irish were driven to the furthest fringe of Europe because nobody could stand having them around.

---

Wait! So what you are saying is that the Cossacks drove the Irish into the hands of the Basque Seperatists, who in a deal WITH the Portuguese drove them from the depths of the adriatic sea across the oceans to the English, (who in conjunction with the pentavrite) banished them from the Scots land to the island where they currently are.

I KNEW IT!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cl1953

The only boats making a living are lobstering and that will come to an end soon.

---

Even they're not doing too well either. Lobster is nowhere near at the collapse levels that the draggers are at, but they're certainly not killing it as it were.

Scallopers while there is somewhat decent management is rolling its way to shutdown within a few years, they're just fishing as hard and as fast as they can unfortunately and raking in a TON of money.

A family friend who owns both his own scalloper and his own dragger just sold the dragger, it was losing money faster than it was making it. 46 days at sea then it sits on the pier for the rest of the year? Just no point in it anymore.

Scallopers currently get I believe 6 months at sea, so he mostly fishes during the winter then takes the rest of the year off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wendigo

If their scene is anything like it is here then the cut from 50 to 46 days for the offshore fisherman means nothing really for the economic state. these vessels tend to be the large factory trawlers, usually with a strong international backing and selling to foreign tenders etc.

---

We do have the menhaden boats purse seining here (they're banned from Naragansette bay and now the foreign factory ships are also banned) rarely but otherwise they're typically 100-150 foot draggers and selling to local fish houses.

These are scallopers but there's no size difference between these and the draggers.

http://milvetstravel.net/new_bedford_fleet.jpg

Where have all the lobsters gone?
By DON CUDDY
Standard Times staff writer
May 06, 2007 6:00 AM
Although no one can pinpoint the cause, regulators, scientists and fishermen agree that there are not as many lobsters as there used to be in the coastal waters.
"Lobster on Georges Bank and in the Gulf of Maine are doing OK, but Southern New England is the one area where we are seeing a significant stock decline," said Tina Berger of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, a deliberative body made up of representatives from the 15 Atlantic coastal states.
The commission's comprehensive 2005 assessment, the most recent, estimated Southern New England's lobster population at 14 million, a dramatic reversal in the health of the industry. That is a dramatic decline from the 45 million estimate of 1997.
"Since 2000, we have seen a precipitous decline in the lobster stock culminating in a 25-year low in 2003," said Bob Glenn, senior marine biologist at the Massachusetts Department of Marine Fisheries, speaking from his office at the Quest Center on Purchase Street in New Bedford.
"From 1996 to 1998, there were record catches, but when you push a population to the edge, even a small disruption to their environment can cause serious problems," he said.
A number of factors have been posited to account for the steep decline. Fishing pressure, predation, shell disease, rising water temperatures, pollution and environmental stresses, such as habitat disruption, all have been under examination.
How to address the decline is the subject of an ongoing debate, with regulators considering further restrictions on fishermen in an effort to rebuild stocks. The ASMFC is holding public hearings on a range of proposals, with the goal of boosting the lobster population back toward the target of 23.9 million.
Longtime fishermen agree that the glory days of the 1990s have passed, but they believe that the worst years might be behind them.
Dave Magee fishes out of Fairhaven on the Miss Molly and has been hauling traps for 25 years.
"Since 2004, there are more lobsters. We last peaked in 2000 and then we went down, but it's been coming back. I've been fishing the same amount of pots for the last 10 years and I go by what I catch for pounds at the end of the year. We're now doing double what we did in 2003.
I think they need to let it go for a few more years," he said of possible new regulations.
As lobster stocks in Southern New England increased from 1982-97, the number of traps in the water also rose, from 206,000 to 846,000 according to a Northeast Fisheries Science Center assessment. As catches have dwindled, the number of traps has decreased to 314,000 in 2004.
"A lot of fishermen left the industry and now they can't get back in," Fairhaven lobsterman Arthur DeCosta said. " We've had trap-cap programs, gauge increases, vent size increases and the V-notch program," he said, referring to 1.25 million female lobsters returned to local waters with a notch in the tail, giving them protected status.
"If you consider that it takes six to seven years for a lobster to mature, I think they need to give these measures more time to work."
Under existing rules, local fishermen are limited to 800 traps.

a major concern
The prevalence of shell disease has become a serious concern to the industry and is the focus of intense research.
"We are looking at a severe case of epizootic shell disease," said Dr. Roxanna Smolowitz, an aquatic veterinary pathologist at the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole. "It's not fatal but it does debilitate the animal and take resources away from growth and reproduction. It's like having burns over one third of your body."
Scientists still do not fully understand the disease.
"We have identified the alpha-proteo bacteria that's consistently there, but it's a secondary bacteria that's killing the lobster," Dr. Smolowitz said.
The warmer water temperatures of recent years also are considered a factor.
"There appears to be a correlation between high water temperatures and shell disease. Lobsters that have shed in high water temperatures are not quite right molecularly," Dr. Smolowitz said, adding that some female lobsters that have shell disease are molting before their eggs hatch.
Scientists at Woods Hole have been taking hourly water temperatures year-round since 1945.
During the past eight years, water temperatures in Buzzards Bay have been exceeding 20 degrees Centigrade with unprecedented regularity.
Brent Courchene, a research technician at the School of Marine Science and Technology, has been diving in Buzzards Bay for the past two years as part of a study comparing the number of lobsters caught in ventless traps with the numbers observed in their vicinity.

Lobsters less mobile
"At higher temperatures, you can catch all you want using scuba, and if you set the traps you won't get any," he said.
"The lobsters become less mobile when the water heats up, so you can have a decline in trap catch but the population might be static."
Mike Clancy, an assistant professor of natural sciences at Boston University, has done extensive work with lobsters. "The V-notch program put a lot of eggs in the water but that was just a short-term solution. We have to lower fishing pressure. But how do you limit the catch without hurting the fisherman?" he asked.
Bill Adler executive director of the Massachussetts Lobstermen's Association, said the lobstermen have done their part. "A lot has been done in Area 2 to address the fishing part of this. That's what aggravates fishermen. Shell disease or warmer water are not our fault. We think we've paid the price. We've lost half of the fishermen."
Final action by the ASMFC on new management regulations will be considered at a their upcoming meeting Tuesday in Alexandria, Va.
The future remains uncertain, according to Mr. Glenn of the DMF.
"Lobster are resilient and I am sure that they will recover, but the big question mark is whether they will become commercially extinct."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceman

They are a dark and furtive people, malevolent in thought and deed...

---

You forgot "swarthy." I hate swarthy people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceman

The reason they inhabit the end of the Iberian Peninsula is that Civilized Europe drove them there.

---

Who drove them to Fall River?

Hey, I saw a John Sayles movie once that said the Black Irish came from people having sex with seals. Or sumthin' like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steven S. Dallas

Who drove them to Fall River?

---

Fall River is the Iberian Peninsula of Southeastern Massachusetts.

Well, either Fall River or New Bedford. Maybe both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steven S. Dallas

Who drove them to Fall River?

---

Mauricio Santos Mela dos Chavez.

In a van, which I believe is still down by the river.

My mother in law grew up in Fall River, left in 1965 just as the infestation was beginning. They are a swarthy people.

Alot came to New Bedford/Fall River when Faial (azores) blew the fuck up (volcano)

I say we crucify Emeril.

No one will mind, really.

We need to proceed with caution, the sweet bread and chourice and linguica are damn good. The salt cod I could live without.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn

The commercial fishing industry has been raping the oceans of the world for as long as it's been in existence. They'll get everything they deserve.
Fuckers.

---

Don't drag all fishermen into this. Look at the sucess of the salmon and halibut fishermen in Alaska in forcing habitat protection and sustainable quotos. If it was up to the consumer, the fish would be cheaper, but the fishermen have banded together to protect the future.

On the other hand if they were all swarthy, then we'd be eating naught but carcasses by now. (And I'd like to point out that my family came from Ireland in the 17th century to fish cod off new england...but we're at worse medium brown Irish)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grrrr

(And I'd like to point out that my family came from Ireland in the 17th century to fish cod off new england...but we're at worse medium brown Irish)

---

So the english, (after getting support from the portuguese, basque separatists, cossacks and.... THE DUTCH) decided to market a fake potato famine idea which in turn made the irish flee to america where the portuguese underground in conjunction with the Italians forced them into the boston area.

I KNEW IT!

All my grandparents/great-grandparents came from Ireland.

Time for the scallopers to take it.


Scallopers could see catches cut in half

Chatham fisherman Bob Keese hopes a compromise can be reached that allows small-boat fishermen to continue scalloping.
By DOUG FRASER
STAFF WRITER
May 21, 2007
It is an ironic twist that closing large areas of the ocean to fishing a dozen years ago, to restore New England's bread-and-butter species like cod, haddock and flounder, helped scallops flourish while the fish populations are still struggling to recover.
Now considered one of the last great wild scallop fisheries in the world, the areas right off Cape Cod, and in the Mid-Atlantic, saw 53.3 million pounds of scallop meat harvested in 2005, worth more than $408 million, and $7.50 per pound paid to fishermen. In 1994, scallop landings hovered around 15 million pounds, and the average price paid to fishermen was somewhere around $4 or $5 a pound.
What's next
The next public hearing is tomorrow at the University of New Hampshire in Durham.
• The New England Fishery Management Council meets June 19-21 in Portland, Maine, to discuss the scallop plans.
• The deadline is June 11 for written public comments. Instructions are at www.nefmc.org.
So, it's no surprise that fishermen have been rushing to convert their small (average size 46 feet) boats from catching fish to dragging for scallops.
It's also no surprise that fishery managers are struggling to limit the number of scallopers so scallop populations remain at healthy levels.
That could spell big economic trouble for Cape and Islands fishermen, who landed $8.5 million worth of scallops in 2005 and could possibly see that halved by the new regulations.
Chatham fisherman Bob Keese, 37, remembers scalloping with his father on a boat out of Wellfleet when he was 12 years old. He's been fishing ever since.
He sits on the council's scallop advisory board and is uneasy about how the new plan could affect him and other Cape scallopers. Under the council's preferred plan, he believes he would go from scalloping 100 days a year to just 20.
That's still better than what Chatham fisherman Ty Vecchione sees as his fate. In 2004, Vecchione paid nearly $200,000 to purchase a used lobster boat and re-rig it for scalloping. He said he was never told that the amount of scallops he landed that year might determine how much he would be allowed to land in future years. He fished for only a couple of months that year because the conversion took too long. "They've got to give you a year to establish landings," he said.
In Barnstable County, 226 boats have scallop permits. Multiday permits for larger vessels have been closed to new entrants since 1994. But permits for smaller vessels, which go out and return the same day, remained open. Known as general category permits, they limit fishermen to 400 pounds of scallop meat a day. When prices started climbing in recent years, so did profitability, and the number of general category scallop permits rose from a little under 2,000 in 1994 to nearly 3,000 in 2006. Even more importantly, the number of boats landing scallops increased threefold from 181 in 1994 to 627 vessels by 2006.
Although landings in the general category were just 14 percent of total landings in 2005, they were nearly triple that of the previous year. New England Fishery Management Council fishery analyst Deirdre Boelke said her agency feared the scallop population could take a much bigger hit if large numbers of the more than 2,000 boats that didn't go out and catch scallops last year decided it was time to use their permits.
Last week and this week, public hearings on three alternative scallop plans are taking place in New England and the Mid-Atlantic regions. The plan identified by the council as the preferred alternative includes allowing only fishermen who landed a specified amount of scallops within a certain time period to be able to continue scalloping. Still to be decided is whether to go with two-, four- or 10-year window from 1994 to 2004 as the qualifying period.
Under the most liberal of those plans, the number of general category scallopers would drop from nearly 3,000 to a little more than 700. Other alternatives cut that number to as low as 143. The preferred plan reduces permitted vessels to 459.
Even more critical will be the quota given to the general category boats. The council has indicated it prefers 5 percent, which would cut general category landings by 55 percent. But it has said it would consider between 2 percent and 11 percent.
Some in the big boat category resent the smaller boats in the general category, thinking of them as refugees from other fisheries who jeopardize the healthy stock status, and cash flow, that scallop fishermen now enjoy.
"There are people saying (the general category quota allocation) should be down to zero," Boelke said.
But Keese remains cautiously optimistic a compromise can be reached that will maintain the scallop stocks and allow dedicated small-boat fishermen to continue scalloping.
"Everyone I've talked to says that everything can change after the public hearings," he said.

another reason to eat wild alaskan salmon, especially pinks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceman

Fall River is the Iberian Peninsula of Southeastern Massachusetts.

Well, either Fall River or New Bedford. Maybe both.

---

SOLID FUCKING GOLD!!!