May 18, 2012 – The New York Times heralds catch shares for saving summer flounder and Northeast haddock, which is like crediting a freshman class for the seniors' high college placement rate. By the same token, we could blame catch shares for the demise of Northeast cod stocks. But we don't.
What we can credit catch shares for is making it easier to manage some fisheries because, inevitably, it causes consolidation, a shrinking of the fleet and risks the changeover of valuable working waterfront properties to condos, offices and seasonal homes.
Catch shares do not affect the science with which we analyze fishery biomass. They do not affect the maximum sustainable yield or fishing quotas. It is merely a scheme that enables managers to assign the quotas to certain fishermen, groups of fishermen or other private entities. Catch shares do not change the number of fish fishermen are allowed to catch, so how could they possibly be credited with the rebound of a species, especially a species that was rebounding before catch shares were applied as a management tactic?
The concept behind catch share management flies in the face of American values and quality-of-life standards. We can tweak it to help preserve small-boat fishermen and working waterfronts, but so far, that provision is sorely lacking in the Northeast catch share program. Would you rather buy your food from a large-scale retailer or from your neighbor?
Read the full story at the Gloucester Times.