Four lawyers representing New Bedford, Gloucester and other fishing interests squared off against eight U.S. government attorneys while National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration general counsel Lois Schiffer watched grimly from the audience of about 50 people.

As the strictly timed 90-minute hearing progressed, Zobel gradually steered it away from arguments over declining or rebuilding fish stocks or the cost of sector management. Instead, the legal wrangling centered largely on the issue of whether the new system is one of quotas, which would require that it be put to a referendum.

Stephen Ouellette, the Gloucester attorney speaking for the plaintiffs, was asked by Zobel, "Could a remand be limited to a referendum?" — a question that quickly overshadowed much of the discussion about other aspects of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The fishing ports claim the NOAA evaded Magnuson's requirement for a referendum by using semantic tricks, and that catch shares and sectors are actually quotas in thin disguise.

Read the complete story from The South Coast Today.