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.
Bookmarks