May 29, 2012 — Congressmen Frank and Jones argue that a recent New York Times editorial was wrong about both Catch Shares and the efforts in Congress to address problems in Federal fisheries management.
A May 16 editorial in the New York Times, "The Grand Old Party and the Sea," stated that "recreational fishing organizations and their Republican allies in Congress" were responsible for the passage of an amendment recently to defund new "catch share" programs in fisheries management. In fact, past and present efforts to correct poor fisheries management policy by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have been a positive example of bipartisanship in an otherwise deeply divided Congress.
This most recent amendment is another step in a continuing bipartisan effort. The first time Congress voted to defund catch share programs was on February 19, 2011, through an amendment offered by us and our colleague, Frank Pallone, D-N.J.,. The Jones-Frank-Pallone amendment succeeded with 51 Democrats joining 208 Republicans in favor. It was supported by a broad coalition of fishermen, boat builders and consumer groups, including seven major commercial fishing organizations and the majority of commercial fisherman in New Bedford, Mass., the nation's highest revenue port.
This broad opposition to catch shares demonstrates the inaccuracy of the Times editorial's declaration that "Most commercial fishermen support this program." In truth, catch shares were opposed by the Northeast Seafood Coalition, which proposed an alternative that federal regulators refused to consider. Instead, regulators crafted a version of catch shares where quotas are assigned to "sectors," each sector being a group of fishermen who assemble into a collective. This legal maneuver avoided the stipulations of a measure added to the Magnuson-Stevens Act by Congressman Frank, which requires a referendum vote of eligible permit holders before implementing any quota system on individual fishermen. By assigning quotas to collectives rather than individuals, NOAA violated the intent of Congress and flouted democracy by depriving fishermen of a fair up-or-down vote on the management system that would determine their livelihood.
Additionally, the largest and oldest commercial fishing ports in Massachusetts, New Bedford and Gloucester, have filed a suit challenging the sector form of catch shares on the basis of federal regulators' failure to adhere to the referendum requirement in the law. Commercial fishing interests all along the Atlantic Coast have joined the suit, including the Democratic governor of Massachusetts, Deval Patrick, who along with Congressmen Frank and John Tierney filed amicus briefs in support of the lawsuit.
Also opposed to this sector-style catch share program is the scallop industry, the most profitable fishery in the country and one of the best examples of sustainable fishing.
Even those who believe that catch shares management is a good system admit that its implementation in the Northeast was undemocratic. Had NOAA followed the law, the referendum would have forced the agency to work closely with all of the stakeholders. That would have eliminated the numerous problems and inadequacies plaguing the current management system. Those problems, created by regulators who usurped a fair democratic process, are at the root of current industry and political frustration with the agency and the management system that it imposed upon fishermen.
Barney Frank is a Democratic representative from Massachusetts, and Walter Jones is a Republican representative from North Carolina.
This opinion piece ran in the New Bedford Standard Times.