By: James Salisbury, Portland ME

My name is Jim Salisbury. I am a Member of the New England Regional Fisheries Management Council. The Councils have the responsibility for managing the fisheries in the Federal waters of their respective regions. I am also one of three United States Commissioners to the North Atlantic Fisheries organization (NAFO). NAFO is a treaty organization which regulates the fisheries in the international waters of the Western North Atlantic. I am a resident of the City of Portland and a Member of the Board of Directors of the Portland Fish Exchange. Perhaps most relevant to my perspective on this issue, however, I am a former lobster fisherman and a former groundfisherman.

Current Federal regulations allow all permitted groundfish vessels fishing in Federal waters to retain and land 100 lobsters per day up to a maximum of 500 per trip, as by-catch to their groundfish catch. The Federal Lobster Plan, which was developed by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission of which Maine is a member, recognizes this by-catch and accounts for it in management strategy. This regulation has been in effect for many years and had been the historic practice throughout the fishery (except by vessels landing in the State of Maine) even before federal regulations were established. The directed lobster trap fishery has increased dramatically over the past ten to fifteen years and has achieved record high landings with no apparent ill affect from the by-catch landings in the groundfish fishery. This Federal regulation is not likely to change in the foreseeable future.

The prohibition on landing lobsters in Maine other than those caught in traps was enacted many years before there was any federal regulation of lobster fishing and was Maine¹s attempt to prevent a directed trawl fishery for lobsters from developing. With the enactment of federal regulations on lobster fishing that prohibit a directed trawl fishery, that purpose has been achieved throughout the region. The catch of lobsters in the trawl fisheries in federal waters is now limited to a statistically insignificant by-catch only amount. Trawling for lobsters is also illegal in Maine waters. What management purpose, then, does this prohibition now serve? What is accomplished now by targeting one hundred or so fishermen, whose sole distinction is that they prefer to return home to do their business, and prohibiting them from doing what every other groundfisherman in New England can do?

The effect of this prohibition does not just affect Maine fishermen. It forces all groundfisherman to choose between doing business in Maine, or discarding and forgoing legally retained catch. It is a disincentive for anyone to do business in Maine and a powerful incentive for Maine fishermen to go elsewhere.

The proposed legislation seeks to eliminate this handicap on Maine’s groundfishermen. It is easy to see why this makes sense for them, but first we need to look at what harm, if any, could be caused by this proposal and is it worth it?

Those opposed to the proposal claim it will create a ‘new dragger fishery for lobsters’. It will harm the resource by taking more lobsters than the present rules allow and it will allow landing of oversized lobsters which are the ‘brood stock’. They further claim that, even if passed, the boats landing outside the state will not come back because of higher fish prices and lower costs elsewhere,

As stated earlier, Federal Laws prohibit a directed fishery for lobsters by draggers. The proposal itself would preserve Maine¹s oversize limit (more restrictive that Federal regulations) and in fact would decrease the catch of oversized lobsters if more vessels landed in Maine. There are approximately one hundred draggers in Maine. Of these about one third are now landing by-catch lobsters out of state. Another one third are capable of doing so on a regular basis but so far have chosen not to. The last third are small vessels which could only land lobsters occasionally when weather and groundfish regulations make it practical to travel offshore but relatively close to home. If all the Maine draggers capable of landing lobsters from the offshore area were to do so, a realistic estimate of the maximum increase in landings from by-catch would be approximately 120,000 lbs. This represents less than 0.2% of Maine’s 60,000,000 lb. average annual lobster catch from 2000 through 2005. The impact of a plus or minus 0.2% change in landings which annually vary by as much as 30% is not quantifiable and has no management significance in a resource regulated solely by effort controls. Furthermore, it is unreasonable to presume that such an increase would not occur if this proposal is defeated. Maine vessels can no longer afford to forgo substantial revenue just to do business close to home. On the other hand, if vessels now landing out of state were to return because they did not have to give up revenue to do so, the by-catch amount would not change but the number of oversized lobsters landed would actually decrease. Would vessels (Maine¹s as well as others) return?

Recently, as a result of the dramatic decrease in landings at the Portland Fish Exchange, I was asked to chair a committee to talk to vessel owners to find out the reasons for their not landing at the Exchange and determine what could be done to bring them back and to keep them in the future. The ability to land and sell their lobster by-catch was the overwhelming reason given to leave the Exchange and land in Massachusetts. Many who are capable of fishing offshore and landing elsewhere but have not yet done so expected to do so in the near future as a ‘matter of necessity’. Day fishing vessels did not cite lobsters as having any influence on whether to land at the Exchange. Furthermore, of the vessels now landing in Massachusetts, the majority said that if they could land lobsters in Maine, they would return to the Exchange most of the time. A few said that now that they have made the change, they will not likely come back. Those cited better service facilities and long term commitments as reasons why they would not regularly return. Distance to the fishing grounds was considered to be a variable factor more dependent on target species abundance, and did directly determine their choice of where to land. Fish prices for species abundant near Maine were considered generally better at the Exchange than in Massachusetts. Fuel tax exemption in Massachusetts was helpful but not enough by itself to warrant leaving home for. Lobster by-catch was the determining factor in making their decision where to land. If they had more lobsters than they were willing to ³throw away² they landed in Massachusetts. Additionally, those who are not now landing out of state expected to do so soon if things get any worse. There were a few vessels that had other reasons to leave the Exchange but those reasons can be dealt with by the Exchange itself and it is doing so.

In conclusion, from the prospective of fisheries management, there is no valid reason why the legal by-catch of lobsters in the groundfish fishery should not be landed in Maine. If protection of the ³brood stock² by preserving Maine¹s oversize limit is a valid resource conservation measure, as Maine¹s lobstermen believe, then passage of this proposal could actually provide increased protection of oversized lobsters and thereby be beneficial to the lobster resource. Furthermore, since the proposal would restrict vessels to only landing by-catch caught 50 miles from shore, Lobster Management Area 3, the catch would come from an area fished primarily by lobstermen from New Hampshire. I do not see any rational resource conservation reason why Maine should not now allow the landing of legal lobster by-catch.

Thank you for your consideration.