The New England Fishery Management Council feels compelled to address several statements in the editorial "Fishing aid promises need independent monitoring, too".
On behalf of its 18 members, I am writing to express concern about the following paragraph: "… it's essential that any added allocation be funneled to the struggling small, independent boats — not the big-boat business of Maine, or the Cape Cod Hook Fishermen's Association, which have already gotten more than their share through the New England Council's shaky actions in the past."
It is a matter of public record that the fish allocations approved for the existing two "sectors," one of which was referred to in the editorial, were based on a different qualification time period than was used for other permit holders who chose to join a newly established "sector." As a result, the existing sectors received about 3.3 percent more of the Georges Bank cod quota than they would have if their allocation was based on the period used for other vessels (1996-2006).
Time frames were developed to be inclusive, and most of the fishing industry responses to the council supported the approach. Many believed that including landings over a long period would smooth out the effects of regulatory changes over time. It also meant that the allocation would not necessarily reflect recent fishing activity. Without question, there have been negative consequences for individuals who did not meet the qualification criteria.
Importantly, the allocation the two sectors received at that time applied to Georges Bank cod only. It did not involve the other species in the groundfish complex, such as haddock, pollock and several flounder species.
Read the entire letter at The Gloucester Times.