Lobster Advisory Council
Minutes
Lobster Advisory Council
Meeting Minutes
Department of Human Services
March 16, 2005 –
5:00 p.m.
A meeting of the Department of Marine Resources’ Lobster Advisory Council (Council) was held on this date at the Department of Human Services on Civic Center Drive in Augusta. Council members attending this meeting included: Chair Larry Knapp (Zone E), John Drouin (Zone A), Jon Carter (Zone B), Dan MacDonald (Zone C), Dan Miller (Zone D), Frank Strout (Zone F), Jim Alwin (Zone G) and Dana McIntire (Non-Zone Lobsterman). Council members not present included: Dana Rice (Eastern Dealer), Bob Baines (Non-Zone Lobsterman), Cappy Sargent (Non-Zone Lobstermen) and Ted Hoskins (General Public Member). Commissioner George Lapointe, Deputy Commissioner David Etnier, Deputy Commissioner Lewis Flagg, Col. Joe Fessenden, Deirdre Gilbert, Terry Stockwell, Carl Wilson and Sarah Cotnoir of the Department of Marine Resources were also present. Others present were Clive Farrin, Stephen Robbins, III, Edward Monat, III, Edna Martin, John Butler, Jeff Adams, Steve Lawrence, Phil Doucette, Chris Doucette, Clare Grindal, Susan Jones, Howard Gray, Kris Clark, Elliott Thomas, Patrice McCarron and Lyman Kennedy.
The meeting convened at 5:10 p.m.
1. Welcome and Review of Agenda
The Lobster Effort Discussion was moved to the beginning of the meeting.
4. Old Business
a. Lobster Effort Discussion – Next Steps?
Commissioner George Lapointe explained that the ongoing lobster effort discussion started with this Lobster Advisory Council last fall. The Department has since met with the Downeast Lobstermen’s Association, the Maine Lobstermen’s Association and all seven Lobster Zone Councils to discuss effort in the lobster fishery. Suggestions and comments from all these meetings were compiled and put into a PowerPoint presentation for further discussion at the Maine Fishermen’s Forum.
The Commissioner provided some background, highlighted the issues, stated the concerns, shared general comments/suggestions and specific proposals. The purpose of today’s meeting is to analyze this information and determine the next steps.
The following are points that were discussed at length:
· Student license issues. It was noted that industry voted years ago that students be allowed to enter closed zones as long as they fully completed their apprentice program and were under the age of 18.
· Effort in the western part of the State has slowed down, but eastern Maine has built up substantially. Zones D-G have decreased in tags and Zones A-C have increased. The average age of lobster license holders is 54 years old. Five to ten years from now, there will be a greater natural reduction in licenses. If we’re reducing licenses by 1% a year, then in another 5 years, that’s another 5%.
· Downeast doesn’t want any proposals to affect students.
· Until we change how we do business, or until you make guarantees, or until you assign a number to the license, the only choice a prudent person has is to build trap tags. We all know that more tags are purchased than are being fished. A commercial license holder under the age of 18 (LCU) wouldn’t need to build up trap tags if they were guaranteed the maximum when they were ready and willing to fish the traps.
· If we get rid of latent licenses, it’ll put real tags in the water.
· Put a number to some of the proposed ideas and see if it helps with effort reduction.
· How many license holders have purchased the 880 tags? One member of the audience suggested strongly in favor of something not materializing out of today’s discussion. It’s a zone issue. The zones can find a way to reduce the congestion. Before anything is done, we need to have an understanding about the stock assessment. It represents mortality and effort. We need fisheries independent and dependent data.
· About 1,000 lobstermen had to reduce down to the 800 traps. The people that have already had a trap reduction should not be the first ones considered to make the reduction just because they have the higher trap limits. The new people coming in is where the buildup is. The new license holders could come in at 300 traps and max out at 600. The highliners have made sacrifices; the new people can too.
· In December of last year, there were 1,400 people that had less than 300 traps. Is there a way to exclude licenses with low tag quantities out of the ratio?
· Where’s the buildup coming from?
· The new people coming in and building up is where the increase is coming from, since there are few licenses getting out and they hold minimal tag quantities.
· A Zone Council rep voted against the students, so he wouldn’t have to take a hit to a 600-trap limit.
· Trap tags that are being purchased (but maybe not fishing them) has increased; however, actual traps in the water are also increasing. There’s not just a buildup of gear, but a concentration of gear. Biology has remained consistent since the 1930s.
· There’s an issue with part-timers - teachers, BIW employees, truck drivers in the winter time, clam diggers and woodcutters. They fish 2-3 months out of the year and they won’t stick with it. Although, some felt that a person should be allowed to work as many jobs as they wanted and not be penalized for fishing part-time.
· Zone B has been talking about a tiered license looking at income.
· There was support requiring license holders to hold a license for 5 years before their ability to sponsor someone else.
· In the past, there was much research on a part-time/full-time bill that was submitted. We can bring the report back and look at it with 2005 issues.
· John Butler submitted a draft proposal to the Lobster Advisory Council:
o Set a control date
o Grandfather any apprentice already in the program
o Counting students in exit ratio
o Establish a 1:1 ratio
o New entrants have a maximum of 600 traps· Need to identify or establish a goal. What’s the goal of effort reduction? Do people want it? An MLA survey showed a lot support of reducing effort across the board.
· Looking at the anticipated BIW and MBNA layoffs, Rep. Percy asked if the Department could contact DECD to see what defines a small business.
· Many of us here have testified for years. But what is right for one zone might not be right for another. If it’s a zone issue, do the zones have the authority? Expanding zone council powers on a local basis would have to be done through legislation.
· Need to solve social problems that may or may not affect biology. The social problems Downeast are different than to the western part of the state.
· Can we develop a tiered license system? At the last Zone G meeting, it seemed that most were against students getting in, but they have a right to get into the fishery. A tiered license in Zone G has a lot of merit. There was even a suggestion for a 3-tiered system, which would allow a third tier for retiring license holders giving them 150 traps.
· There are huge expectations placed on the lobster resource right now. What if 7,000 participants had to diversify? What is the expectation of the LAC of what this fishery should be? Should it be a 20-million pound fishery, 40-million pound? Effort in the fishery has scaled with the resource going up.
· It’s social economics. The fishery was always the survival of the fittest. The flaw in this system is that we’re trying to make it so everybody can go fishing. There are people that would drop off if went to 20 million pounds.
· Some would like to see more options in the tool box for the zones. Even on a relative level, Zone G has much fewer apprentices and students compared to Zone A. Downeast doesn’t have the shore jobs that other areas have.
· Others would like to see more statewide control since there’s only so much that a zone can do. Plus, there’s also going to be more growth in the lobster fishery.
· 2 tiered system – few licenses getting out, people coming in and building up.
· There are now 1,400 permits fishing offshore, an increase of 500 from 7 years ago. There is also some new effort arriving from Southern New England with several boats now fishing offshore of Maine.
Deputy Commissioner Etnier asked the Lobster Advisory Council to provide some specific comments at the next LAC meeting in May. The Department will then take the summer to run any necessary analysis and bring back answers in the fall.
The Council opinion to see if the LAC should increase their efforts looking at effort reduction is as follows:
· Status Quo – Let the process in place work for a while
(J. Carter, L. Knapp & J. Alwin)· Need more work on effort control
(J. Drouin)· Need to develop a list that identifies triggers and come up with an action plan to respond. These are the issues and we need to work with them. We need to have solutions if certain measures are triggered. Develop list and possible solutions.
(D. Miller & F. Strout)Where are the complaints coming from if people here today don’t want to address this more? The Department is only responding to the industry saying that there is congestion, snarls and too much gear in the water. The Department doesn’t have answers or solutions here today, but will continue to look at the effort issue.
Discussion concurred that there is overcrowding in all the zones, but collectively it seems that we’re not yet to the point that we’re willing to say what needs to be done. If something needs to be done, ideas will be taken from effort discussion summaries. There was some agreement in the audience to make a plan for the future and do nothing now.
Social issues are only one of the many issues. DMR and the industry needs to be positioned if something comes up - a water quality issue, unpredicted stock assessment. A proactive plan should be in place. DMR is looking for guidance from people that have historically been in the lobster fishery. A draggerman reminded everyone that a severe resource reduction could happen to lobstermen over night and that action must be taken now to prevent the lobsters from depleting like the groundfish. With the recent decrease in lobsters, people can either adjust or get out of the fishery. If the kids come in at 600 traps, they’ll have to adjust or do something else.
b. Legislative Update
Deputy Commissioner Etnier distributed the summary sheet on lobster related legislation.
LD 513: An Act to Amend the Hours for Lobster Fishing – Under current law, it is unlawful to haul any lobster trap during the period 1/2 hour after sunset until 1/2 hour before sunrise from June 1st to October 31st. This bill changes the end date of this period from October 31st to October 1st.
Zone C wanted this brought forward because island fishermen want to get in early before the winds come up. What little Zone A has discussed this, they thought it was counterproductive. There aren’t any islands Downeast that this law would benefit. If the wind blows, go home - that’s effort reduction. Zones B, E and F have not discussed this yet. D. McIntire stated that this is only 30 days. This would allow all night hauling, which very few people do in Harpswell. However, this bill does increase effort. Zone G is against it, but thought it should be an individual zone issue.
LD 527: An Act to Authorize the Commissioner of Marine Resources to Regulate the Use of Alternative Bait in Marine Fisheries – This bill authorizes the Commissioner of Marine Resources to adopt rules to regulate the use of alternative bait in marine fisheries. These rules are routine technical rules. MLA brought this forward and yet to have its public hearing.
The MRC already passed another bill which protects the public health. It was largely to get at hide bait, if there were any documented health concerns.
LD 895: An Act to Expand the Authority of Maine’s Lobster Management Policy Councils – This bill expands the lobster management policy council authority to propose rules, upon approval in a referendum in the management zone in which the rules would apply, to increase the length of time an apprentice must be enrolled in the apprentice program up to a maximum of 5 years; to specify that a sponsor of an apprentice must have held a Class I, Class II or Class III lobster and crab fishing license for at least 5 years; and to require that a person who completed an apprenticeship may enter a particular lobster zone only if the apprentice apprenticed in that zone. It is a statewide law that gives 3 additional zone council authorities - exactly what Zones C & E have adopted. The Marine Resources Committee needs to hear from you.
LD 1209: Resolve, To Create the Task Force to Study Commercial Lobster Fishing in Offshore Waters – This resolve establishes the Task Force to Study Commercial Lobster Fishing in Offshore Waters. The task force is directed to identify and investigate problems facing Maine licensed lobster fishermen who fish in federal waters with particular attention to issues related to fishing in federal Offshore Lobster Management Area 3, and to develop recommendations to address identified problems. The task force is required to submit a report by January 1, 2006 and is authorized to introduce legislation related to its report to the Second Regular Session of the 122nd Legislature. There is a fiscal note attached to this bill. This task force will be staffed by legislative staff allowing a per diem. This bill can address the GOM stock and the increased effort in Area 1 - A lot of good can come out of this. Colonel Fessenden explained that Area 3 permits (oversized and higher trap limits) want to land in Maine. This bill would address these concerns.
LD 1231: An Act to Require Recreational Lobster Fishing License Holders to Participate in Current Conservation Efforts of the Commercial Lobster Industry – This bill subjects the holder or an applicant of a non-commercial lobster or crab fishing license to the same limited entry requirements of a commercial lobster or crab fishing license holder or applicant. It would put non-commercial people on an exit/entry ratio list. The wording is not quite right in this bill and needs to be written correctly. It should read that new non-commercial people coming in would enter at rate of the individual zone exit ratio. Are the tags associated with non-commercial license holders really the problem people think it is? Should there be a cap statewide, or a ratio, or consider non-commercial license holders part of the whole effort discussion? It is a public resource; the public does have the right to harvest these. It was pointed out that there isn’t a recreational urchin or shrimp license. Hunting moose is a public resource too, but they have a lottery to hunt them. The complaint in Zone E is that people are fishing the 5 traps and selling the lobsters. It’s already against the law. It’s an enforcement problem that is difficult to enforce. It is hurting the resource and is worth addressing. People were encouraged to attend the public hearing.
LR 627: An Act to Amend the Lobster Fishing Laws of Maine – The bill has not been printed yet, but it addresses 7 separate issues.
LR 631: An Act to Create a Nonresident Lobster and Crab Fishing License – This bill has not been printed yet, but will address cases similar to the Volovar case.
LD 1147: An Act to Protect Fishing Families – This bill authorizes the transfer of a Class I, Class II or Class III lobster and crab fishing license by the license holder to that person’s child, grandchild, spouse, domestic partner or sibling under certain conditions. The relative who is receiving the license by transfer must have completed the Department of Marine Resources’ apprentice program for entry into the lobster fishery and the license holder and the transferee must notify the Department in writing of the transfer.
There was a bill two years ago that would have allowed the sale of a license. This bill is similar insofar as they can transfer their license. The resource is owned by the State of Maine, not the license holders. Secondly, this hits the student license. The reason there is a student license is so anybody under the age of 18 can get into any zone without going on a waiting list. This is why the Apprentice Program exists. Thirdly, if this passes, there would never be a reduction in the zones. The ratios would have no effect. Zone G asked how many traps would be allocated to the transfer. Another member explained that a grandfather would never have given up his license, but he would have given it to a grandson. This would ruin the ratio system. Some members thought that the bill had some merit and that the Legislature passed something similar with moorings. The title sounds good, but the text leaves too many loopholes.
License holder Howard Gray approached Representative Curley to submit this bill. Mr. Gray attended today’s meeting to further present his situation. Mr. Gray would like to give his son his license, boats and traps when he retires. His son could wait 10 years to get a license.
D. McIntire stated that he is not opposed to the concept, but the language is lacking. It needs to specify that there has been activity on the license - A working lobsterman that wants to pass it on.
What if your son is a lawyer for 10 years and then wants to go lobstering? You shouldn’t have to quit school to go lobstering. You should be able to go get an education and then go lobstering. The control of the fishery would then go to license holders. The value of your license just went up because now you have control, not the State of Maine. It’s a public resource.
On behalf of the State of Maine, we control that, but we don’t “collect” licenses. We largely lost control anyway, because of Limited Entry. It’s on auto pilot.
Colonel Fessenden explained that fishermen who go to Florida for the winter ask to have their sternmen fish their traps. The owner of the traps has to be on board. The older guys are slowing down, but they still want their traps fished. This bill would allow that. There are widows inheriting boats and want to sell out, but there’s no access to the fishery.
Members were advised that LD 2 was coming up Tuesday and we need industry more involved, particularly in property tax reform.
3. New Business
a. Proposed New Federal Whale Rules
Terry distributed a 6-page summary of the Take Reduction Plan Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) talking points.
The goal of the Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Plan (ALWTRP) is to reduce entanglements that result in serious injury or mortality to a rate approaching zero. From 1997-2001, there was an average of 1.2 right whale mortalities per year. The DEIS and proposed changes in the rules resulted from 9 fatal and 22 live right whale entanglements that occurred in 2002.
NMFS conducted a series of scoping meetings to gather public comments two years ago. DMR and many Maine lobstermen proposed a number of suggestions including exemption lines. Six alternatives resulted from those scoping meetings which are included in the handout.
Four of the six alternatives require sinking and/or neutrally buoyant groundline by 2008. Consequently, Alternative 5 seems like the best proposal for Maine to support. There is no prohibition of floating groundline; however, the proposal to expand SAM in space and time may eventually include Jeffreys Ledge, which would then prohibit the use of floating groundlines in that area.
The current ALWTRP is comprised of 3 components: gear modifications, DAMs and SAMs. Alternative 5, which includes the concept of exemption lines and removing DAM, expands SAM and other universal gear modifications in order to replace DAM. The DEIS focuses on reducing the risk of groundlines and does not include any assignment of risk reductions to endlines.
Four public hearings will be held in Maine during the first week in April. The full ALWTRT will be meeting April 26-28 in Baltimore. Please plan to attend the hearings or submit any comments before the May 16th deadline. The proposed final rule should be published by the end of this summer, with the final rule in place by the end of this calendar year. By this time next year, these rules should be implemented. Your comments are important and needed, specifically comments concerning the proposed exemption lines. As a State we need to support the concept but request more operationally workable lines based upon the Department’s analysis of 35 years of Federal sightings data. It will also be important for you to support the concept of low-profile groundlines too.
We’re working with several conservation groups to fund and implement a poly rope buyback program in western Maine. Jeffreys Ledge and Stellwagen Bank are considered high risk, and it’s likely that in the near future lobstermen will be prohibited from fishing poly groundlines in these areas. We are 2 years into research and development towards the development of low-profile groundline and are very close to perfecting an operationally viable commercial product. However, a lot more gear R&D work is needed in the next couple of years.
5. Reports and Updates
a. DMR Updates
Rulemaking – There are two issues relating to the Marine Harvesting Demonstration License. Sunday operations and diving for lobsters.
Sunday operations – Right now, the license holder can have up to 20 traps. They must immediately liberate catch. The boat has an identifying mark and currently, Sunday operation for harvesting lobsters is prohibited. The Department has consulted with Marine Patrol and can see the merit of allowing these license holders to engage in business on Sundays, since tourism likely occurs more on weekends. The Department wanted to get feedback from the LAC.
· Some suggested that these license holders should have to go through the Apprentice Program.
· People are going to complain about them doing this on Sundays. However, their season is short and the demo license already exists.
· Others had a problem with Sunday operations – hauling on a breezy Sunday and blowing around makes snarls on Monday morning.
· There is currently no limit on these licenses, but they do have to take the non-commercial lobster license exam (unless they can prove they held a commercial lobster license in the past).
· There are 10-15 Marine Harvesting Demonstration Licenses in the State of Maine. In creating this license, it was to standardize them and get away from Special License circumstances. Applicants don’t have to go before the DMR Advisory Council for a Special License any more. The main purpose of this license was to expose people to the lobster industry, which promotes our product. The operations that are doing this have been doing it a few years.
· If a license holder holds both a Marine Harvesting Demonstration License and a Commercial Lobster License, the maximum amount of traps allowed to harvest lobsters would be 20 traps. A person might argue that’s unfair competition.
· Members want to take this proposal to the zone councils for feedback.
· Marine Patrol has never had a complaint about these licenses.
Rulemaking could be started to have this in place by this summer.
The second issue relates to this same license. The request is to be able to dive for lobsters to show people on the boat and then liberate.
Ed Monat from Bar Harbor is here today to explain his situation. He has held a Special License from DMR for the last 5 years allowing him to dive for lobsters. DMR changed the rule last year that he could do it with everything but lobsters. The Legislature created a Marine Harvesting Demonstration License, eliminating the Special License. This demo license is relatively easy to get and would allow people to perform tourism-related presentations and not have to go before the DMR Advisory Council on an annual basis.
When these rules were promulgated, the Department didn’t find it appropriate to allow people to dive for lobsters.
A fisherman asked where he was getting the lobsters from when he’s on bottom.
J. Carter explained that Mr. Monat has been running a responsible operation. He has a Diving Theater on board that has a live feed to a 6-foot screen. It has been a positive experience for students and tourists.
In the past, this LAC didn’t support either of these scenarios presented today – hauling on Sunday or diving for lobsters.
On the application, there is a place to check for traps or scuba diving. Do we need to incorporate diving into the Harvesting Demonstration License? We can’t change by regulation since the law already exists. This law was created because reviewing Special Licenses was not a good use of time for the DMR Advisory Council. The Special Licenses were not intended for this, but rather for Aquaculture and Research. This is removing the work from the DMR Advisory Council and giving it to the Lobster Advisory Council.
Should there be a separate review process…or should this gentleman be grandfathered in his operation and apply for a Special License every year? Consensus was for the annual Special License application.
ASMFC – The ASMFC is scheduled to have the lobster stock assessment completed by this spring and presented at the ASMFC Board meeting in August. The results will then be reported to the Lobster Advisory Council, the LCMTs and the Lobster Zone Councils to ascertain what it means and what changes for Area 1, if any, should be made.
Patrol Update
· There are wet storage issues in Pen Bay contributing to growing gear conflict issues between shrimp draggers and lobstermen. A number of fishermen with federal permits that don’t fish inshore are plugging up tows.
· Work is underway for a new Marine Patrol boat Downeast.
· Hired 2 new Marine Patrol boat captains for the Rockland and Portland area. They will be on board the first of May.
Other – C. Wilson reminded members that the Lobster Seed Fund RFPs would be sent out again this spring. The Seed Lobster Fund Sub-Committee will need to meet to review the proposals and make recommendations back to the LAC (or mail ballots in so the process can be started as soon as possible.)
b. Zone/Industry Issues – Summaries
Zone A: J. Drouin reported that Zone A has met twice since the last Lobster Advisory Council meeting to discuss Limited Entry. The Commissioner attended the February meeting. A public hearing has been scheduled for March 24th to hear comments about the two exit ratios. The Zone A Council preferred the 3:1 ratio, but the second choice was the 1:1 ratio. The next Zone A meeting is scheduled for March 29th.
Zone B: J. Carter reported that there hasn’t been a recent Zone B meeting; however, one is scheduled for March 28th.
Zone C: D. MacDonald stated that there was a huge crowd at the last Zone C meeting on January 27th. The next meeting is scheduled for March 21st.
Zone D: D. Miller explained that Zone D did not have a quorum at their last meeting. Agenda items included the dredge hearing discussion, gear conflicts and pocket waters. A draggerman has made exclusive charts of the Pen Bay area. The Maine pocket waters are up for reauthorization this year.
Zone E: L. Knapp stated that Zone E has not met since the last LAC meeting. The next Zone E meeting is scheduled for March 23rd.
Zone F: F. Strout reported that the Commissioner attended the last Zone F meeting on February 3rd.
Zone G J. Alwin stated that Zone G has been pretty quiet. The agitated effort discussion at last night’s Zone G meeting was recapped here today.
6. Set Next Meeting Date and Agenda
The date of the next Lobster Advisory Council meeting was set for Wednesday, May 18, 2005 at 5:00 p.m. at the Department of Human Services on Civic Center Drive in Augusta.
MOTION: (J. Carter and J. Alwin) To adjourn. Unanimous.
The meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m.