DMR Advisory Council Meeting Minutes
January 18, 2006
A meeting of the Department of Marine Resources’ (DMR) Advisory Council (AC) was held on this date at the Department of Human Services Central Offices Conference Room, 442 Civic Center Drive, Augusta. AC members attending this meeting included Dana Rice, Sr. - Chair, Craig Pendleton, Glenn Libby, Scott Tilton, Dana Temple, Susan Farady, Bob Baines, Timothy Kief, Mike Danforth, Bill Sutter, David Pecci and Vincent Balzano. Council members Al West, David Turner and Rod Mitchell were unable to attend. Department staff included Commissioner George Lapointe, Colonel Joe Fessenden, Terry Stockwell and L. Churchill. Other attendees included Susan Jones (Commercial Fisheries News) and Dana Morse (UM Sea Grant).
1. Welcome
Chair Dana Rice called the meeting to order at 1:10 p.m.
The Chair asked for volunteers to serve as the nomination committee for election of officers. Committee members are Craig Pendleton, Bill Sutter and Dave Pecci.
2. Approval of minutes (see handout)
Motion: (C. Pendleton, D. Pecci) Motion to approve the minutes of the meeting held Oct. 19, 2005.
Discussion: None
Motion continued: Unanimous to approve
The Chair introduced Bob Baines, the new ex-officio member representing the Lobster Advisory council. He replaces Larry Knapp in this position.
4. Special License request (see handouts) Dana Morse, Maine Sea Grant, scallop spat
Dana Morse provided a review of his activities under his previous special license describing the research and development directions he hopes to pursue.
Motion: (C. Pendleton, D. Temple) Motion to approve the Special License requested by Dana Morse.
Discussion: Several members asked him questions to which he responded.
Motion continued: Unanimous to approve
3. Regulations – Action (see handouts)
Chapter 25.02 Define “rigged” for compliance/consistency with new statute
Col. Fessenden provided a brief review.
Motion: (C. Pendleton, M. Danforth) Motion to approve the rulemaking in Chapter 25.02, as written.
Discussion: none
Motion continued: Unanimous to approve
Chapter 25.08 Correct in medical waiver rule to match statute
Col. Fessenden provided a brief review.
Motion: (D. Pecci, B. Baines) Motion to approve the rulemaking in Chapter 25.08, as written.
Discussion: none
Motion continued: Unanimous to approve
Chapter 25.96 Lobster Apprentice
Col. Fessenden provided a brief review. Commissioner Lapointe added examples of the problems. B. Baines also described abuses that have occurred and the importance of warden verification.
Motion: (V. Balzano, D. Pecci) Motion to approve the rulemaking in Chapter 25.96, as written.
Discussion: none
Motion continued: Unanimous to approve
Chapter 45.05 Shrimp Season 05-06
Comm. Lapointe provided a review followed by a short discussion about shrimp traps. Col Fessenden explained that Maine is closed to small mesh fishing in certain months and that trapping is not prohibited in the month of December like small mesh is. Questions were asked about the status of a separate rulemaking on wet storage of traps, which has been moved back to the drawing board for now. Col. Fessenden stressed that more emphasis is being placed on the 30-day wet storage rule instead at this time.
Motion: (C. Pendleton, G. Libby) Motion to approve the rulemaking in Chapter 45.05, as written.
Discussion: none
Motion continued: Unanimous to approve
Chapter 25.93 Zone F Exit Ratio 5:1
T. Stockwell provided a review of the rulemaking. In response to questions T. Stockwell answered that this rule originated from the Zone F council and that the process for students is the same as all other zones and must be completed by the time they are 18 years old.
Commissioner Lapointe asked for the statement regarding “All other students and” be struck for clarification in the basis statement. Council members discussed details about limited entry. Comm. Lapointe explained that there is an ongoing discussion about effort and that students are still considered a valuable part of the family tradition of allowing students being able to continue to fish if they come from a fishing family.
T. Kief: this ratio is too extreme; allows the fox to guard the hen house; you never see a 50 trap loss; half these people never fished 800 traps; and if you’re over 45 years old you could be waiting a very long time to get into the fishery. T. Stockwell explained that each zone turns over 40-50 persons each year. Zone F has the longest wait at ~ 3 years time. The 800 trap limit came from the Legislature and industry complained that they only had ½ a tool box to address effort so the Legislature gave them the exit ratio option. It is admittedly not a perfect system. How the resource is shared is hotly debated. One zone went to a 600 trap limit and that option for others is there. Zone F has less [fewer fishermen] but more trap tags are being used.
B. Baines: The DMR Lobster Advisory Council (LAC) has discussed this at length. Around 2000 there were more traps in the water; I’m in Zone D and we’re still getting more fishermen entering the fishery. This is just some brakes and we’re actively looking for other options this year. To take 50 traps away from each person doesn’t get at the problem of effort.
M. Danforth: In Casco Bay there may be more congestion; many only have traps inside; some keep a day’s haul offshore; this [method] will take years for this to probably be productive [effective]. It will take a lot of ways to get through this.
C. Pendleton: This is not a fix to the problem. The basis doesn’t state what is being accomplished for conservation. Why is this being done? It is difficult to vote for this as voting does nothing. A letter needs to be written.
B. Sutter: Same as C. Pendleton. This is like age discrimination and playing with the numbers; these are changes people don’t want.
S. Tilton: Ditto and students shouldn’t be automatically given a license. Fundamentally unfair; but since he voted yes for other zone exit ratios he should now.
B. Baines: to C. Pendleton’s comments, there is tremendous frustration at the council level with little tools to slow it down or cut traps (Zone E ex.) and this is what is left. The zones started at 1:1 or 2:1 and are moving towards 5:1. Your letter would be appreciated. This is all Zone F has to work with and no one spoke against it.
B. Sutter: They could choose fewer traps.
D. Rice: We have support the zone council concept. In my area there is a lot of effort and many traps. We’ve used a democratic process although they are ignoring other options maybe a letter would help.
Comm. Lapointe: We started last year at the Fishermen’s Forum with this effort discussion. There was general concurrence on reducing effort. 1) The ASMFC assessment says the fishery is not over-fished but there is too much effort and 2) too crowded. An example like the students coming in was a conscious decision by the Legislature and changes to that need to be well thought out. If they change this we are moving away from tradition as we try hard to preserve it. The full time / part time and latent license issues need to be addressed because there are legitimate issues raised by folks that are concerned about effort shifts rather than effort reductions. This is a tough issue and the consequences are serious; they deserve careful deliberation. Some research shows that you can remove traps and still catch as much although others do not agree.
B. Sutter: Public perception is everything. There are traps offshore where they didn’t use to be and landing in Maine but yet those lobsters don’t come from Maine. The inshore fishery has gone down.
Comm. Lapointe: This is not accurate and why there was a conscious decision to not say state waters for the zones and for the landing statistics.
G. Libby: There is a parallel to the groundfish industry here. It too started inshore and went offshore. On the student category if you get a license before you’re 18 you don’t pay attention in school. They should be restricted to 150 traps until they’re 20 years old.
Comm. Lapointe: This was discussed and decided it was not good legislation.
M. Danforth: They will follow SW Nova Scotia where they overcapitalized and are losing fishermen who have spent all they can and can’t keep up with the payments or lifestyle and there is no more.
C. Pendleton: Urge members to vote in favor of this, even though he will vote no, for consistency. However, we need to send the message that the exit ratio is an improper management tool.
M. Danforth: This should still be a tool used, not scraped, for effort reduction.
Motion: (S. Tilton, M. Danforth) Motion to approve the rulemaking in Chapter 25.93, with the following text struck near the end of the basis statement: All other students and.
Discussion: none
Motion continued:
Affirmative votes: B. Baines, S. Farady, S. Tilton, D. Temple, G. Libby, V. Balzano, D. Pecci, M. Danforth, D. Rice
Negative votes: C. Pendleton, B. Sutter, T. Kief
The motion passed by a majority of affirmative votes.
V. Balzano said to the lobster fishermen “Do it while you have time, don’t wait like the ground fishermen did.
D. Rice: Continue these discussions.
T. Kief: Things do change in a hurry. The 400 lb highliners fell when he was young; last year he went from 4 to 1 million lbs of mussels. Things happen fast. No other zones but E has taken cuts.
B. Baines: As chair of the LAC this will be a much discussed point for the rest of the year. It is easier here and at the LAC level than at the zone council levels. As the Commissioner said there is a need for “fundamental; change”. What is next? No idea.
Comm. Lapointe: …and we cannot do nothing…
B. Sutter: In the Zone E with the rivers there, they move 300 or less traps apiece anyway as there are more little guys there.
Comm. Lapointe: But if you analyze it the vote the big operators voted as much for the reduction.
M. Danforth: Described a small harbor Downeast and its problems
Chapter 25.94(2)(e)&(f) Technical Correction to Zone’s E & F Boundary
T. Stockwell provided a brief review and thanked the members for their previous discussion as it is difficult to make decisions without their types of perspectives.
Motion: (C. Pendleton, V. Balzano) Motion to approve the rulemaking in Chapter 25.94, as written.
Discussion: none
Motion continued: Unanimous to approve
5. Other Business
Fisheries Issues (Comm. Lapointe)
Fishing Vessel Safety Council
Blair Pyne was the previous DMR AC representative. AC member Bob Baines volunteered to be the DMR AC representative on that council and given there were no other volunteers he will serve in that capacity.
DMR Annual Research Report
C. Pendleton: He said he would be negligent to not point out that last year members called attention to the concern that there is no real research planning in this document. A sub-committee spent an extra day last year with Linda Mercer on our areas of concern such as collaborative research that are not addressed still. This document is not a plan even with the opportunities out there. It does say that this is the only work that can be completed because DMR is stretched thin financially and this is recognized. However, this is a report, not a plan. We expect more forward thinking such as an analysis of how much it would take.
Comm. Lapointe: We’ve been in a holding pattern for 3 years now financially with a 16% cut last year, 14% the year before and the money reflects where we are now.
C. Pendleton: Understood, but this should be presented differently.
Comm. Lapointe: During my first few years here we did a research priority review that cost $15K and at this point we don’t have money for this type of review. The results were presented here last year and unfortunately we got caught up in other issues and let it go but it is a valid observation.
B. Sutter: During our meeting last year with Linda Mercer our input was a critique not criticism. The BRM does a lot such as the water quality monitoring of the flats but this is not research work. It is ok to put in a report. You need to get funding to study something that is research and that is what we asked for and separate from BRM but it didn’t happen.
D. Pecci: Section 8 should include a straw-man for bullets on research ideas. My business needs a plan in case opportunities come along and this would be the place to pick up an go from.
Comm. Lapointe: Good observations and we could do a priority review like before and when funding comes along we’ve jumped on it. He will talk with L. Mercer about prioritization but we won’t take money away from other obligations.
NEFSC document titled: Ecology of the Northeast Continental Shelf (handout)
Comm. Lapointe: He got a copy a few weeks ago and describes this as a useful description of the NW Atlantic for the discussion on ecosystem based modeling. This is an issue we will hear much more about.
C. Pendleton: Plus our data will be published and out in about one month. You can see what fish come together graphically laid out – using pictures.
Water Quality issues
Comm. Lapointe: Last year was the worst year in 40 years for the number of closures throughout the year and we were criticized for this even though we have lower staff levels and fewer resources. People wanted their areas sampled versus others. At times we closed preemptively and due to the lack of overtime and state work rules it took time to get back out to sample. There are requests for surgical strikes versus a comprehensive plan that is now being presented to the Legislature in current bills. We need to look at this more broadly and will mail the plan to members. Updated equipment and maintenance costs are expensive.
General Access Category Scallop permits update
Comm. Lapointe: In the Mid Atlantic states a court ruling indicated they could not cap permits. Other options are not addressing the build up. At a September meeting they agreed to look at the general access category. This will be of interest to Maine folks. There will be scoping meetings here in Maine in February: 2/6 Portland, 2/7 Rockland, 2/9 Machias and 2/13 Ellsworth. VMS was put in place in December and these meetings are not about overturning VMS (vessel monitoring system).
Full time scallop fishers vs. lobstermen with a spare scallop gear occasionally used…
T. Stockwell: The schedule will be mailed to general category permit holders
Comm. Lapointe: There is the potential for big changes.
B. Sutter: What is the scallop council input?
T. Stockwell: We’ve tried to schedule meeting but have been unable due to lack of a quorum. We allocated money for the council in the fall, then the fishing was lousy, then further delays.
D. Rice: What bothers me is Maine won’t be in the scallop industry if we don’t pay attention.
B. Sutter: But VMS is bad.
D. Rice: Many agree but the few scallopers who did participate agreed to VMS because the votes weren’t there. The cards were stacked against us there and federal enforcement asked for this.
C. Pendleton: Turn VMS into a positive issue instead. Like L. Mercer’s report make it a tool to use to fight a battle or a tool everyone can benefit from.
Groundfish
Comm. Lapointe: Framework 42 is still not ready; he is growing convinced that we need something completely different; no one is doing better than they were 1-15 years ago; we need to do some soul searching on this issue and will be asking for input at the Fishermen’s Forum. At the Council interim, interim rules on cod are coming which will likely include an across the board reduction in days at sea (DAS).
C. Pendleton: With T. Stockwell in his new position he can keep following up having open meetings. There has to be a place to throw any ideas on the table without criticism. A reality check would hopefully influence some of the people in decision making positions. If they remove the general category, decrease days and if we can’t shrimp, this is real serious.
B. Sutter: Selling days?
C. Pendleton: Need access to capital
B. Sutter: ITQ?
C. Pendleton: In general people are saying there are no fish, grey sole, dabs, for example one large grey sole out of 8K lb of fish, then where are they going? Yet here is tons of haddock that we can’t fish on.
Comm. Lapointe: On issues of quotas, our Congressional delegation has fought tooth and nail to keep us out of quotas; we need to be cautious here. If Maine is willing to sacrifice but no other states are then it won’t happen; it needs to reach the other states and others who supported us in the past.
G. Libby: We’re getting close to losing the fishermen
Comm. Lapointe: Given the councils decisions on Framework 42, it is like a see saw. 2 years ago, we could not have had the type of discussion that is currently taking place.
G. Libby: The price isn’t going up either.
Comm. Lapointe: On average prices are worse.
C. Pendleton: At this point we are less in debt yet here comes a leasing program that puts you back in debt.
B. Sutter: You should take the days and value to the bank.
Comm. Lapointe: As we enter this discussion we must realize the difference between 1,000 permits fishing on 1 million lbs versus 10 million lbs. This is a critical discussion. There should be a Magnuson-Stevens bill out of the Senate by the end of the month.
V. Balzano: What is the status of the Magnuson-Stevens Act?
Comm. Lapointe: Sense that the Senate will move but the House will not.
V. Balzano: Council?
Comm. Lapointe: They haven’t yet taken the drivers seat; the magnitude of the discussion needs to, and likely will, take place there with the other states as well. It may seem like they’re picking on Maine but that is where the problem is and forcing the discussion is appropriate.
V. Balzano: I have been fishing on cod for half my life, many want to leave it open; not trying to shut anyone out.
Comm. Lapointe: If you haven’t seen Framework 42 you should look at it.
V. Balzano: The 2003 cod year class was supposed to [be good]; at some point we need to be responsible to the science…
G. Libby: Cod and bait lines – substantially based on hear say (?)
Comm. Lapointe: Yes, but we need to look in our own back yard. This is not an issue of too many cod being taken as bait, from traps or used on bait lines. If multiplied out it could be a substantial amount.
V. Balzano: Plus the fish are small, which means high mortality…The large mesh that we use doesn’t even get them.
B. Sutter: Heard that the greatest population of cod is in Massachusetts Bay. Their fishery closes seasonally. That area always had little ones and yet this year they’ve seen fewer.
Herring and the NEFMC
Comm. Lapointe: The discussion has been about June – October restrictions; ASMFC is meeting on this soon; Sector allocation – watch this next month; In Maine they’re discussing a prohibition on trawling but not on purse seine and if this moves forward we’ll have to deal with it; At the staff level they are will to craft emergency regulations if needed.
V. Balzano: He heard at two meetings there were two large investors.
Comm. Lapointe: We intend to be proactive but not sure what form it will take.
V. Balzano: Be weary of the guys who have done this their whole life, there are a handful of them.
Comm. Lapointe: There will be a session at the forum on the herring management plan to bring people up to speed.
D. Rice: There is the potential for a 160 foot vessel to come in here. Some can pile a lot of seine in a boat. The big boats and a lot of money can put a large amount of seine out.
C. Pendleton: It is hard to keep a consistent message in the rulemaking. There are multiple layers of problems. What are we fighting for?
American eels
The American eels have been in the news a lot. There is a proposal from a Maine resident in the federal process on endangered species. The Feds have requested the status review. This usually takes a year. The stock assessment will come up in a meeting during the week of February 20th. The data will be much less robust than lobster; as there are there are silver, yellow eel and the elver fisheries. Many have paid attention to the fishery but not the habitat until about 10 years ago. This will be discussed at the Board of Environmental Protection tomorrow. This is like the whales and fisheries versus ship strikes. The likely impact is not on the fishery but shutting off habitat.
Updates
Bill Sutter requested updated email addresses from other council members.
Letter from AC to LAC from members
S. Tilton asked about the status of the letter on exit ratios from the AC to the LAC.
C. Pendleton: It is close to being done and will then need a DMR/Commissioner’s review.
B. Sutter: He wants to see the draft letter at an Advisory Council meeting first.
S. Farady: Ditto. The effort issue is bigger and any letter from us should be well thought out.
B. Sutter: We’re looking more political than regulatory. This letter should go to the Commissioner, the LAC, the 7 LZMC chairs and to the Legislature’s Marine Resources members.
S. Tilton: The draft should be reviewed by all AC members. [Will forward to L. Churchill to mail to AC members when ready.]
D. Rice: We need to urge the LZMC chairs to read and discuss at their meetings. The smaller compressed councils work better but it is not so good in the larger councils.
B. Sutter: The LZMC’s don’t report to the DMR. Our input is an independent review. They should be thinking about this up front.
T. Stockwell: Dynamic Area Management (DAM)
Last weekend a DAM was implemented near Monhegan. 40 Right whales were sighted. The fishermen can’t fish with float rope. This should end next week or be extended 14 days.
No February meeting, the next is March 15.
Comm. Lapointe: pending regulations on double tags (Zones F & G) briefly discussed. This would involve removable tags and if passed would have a September effective date after the tags are due to be changed June 1. The problem is only Zone G right now.
Motion: (C. Pendleton, D. Pecci), the Council voted to adjourn.
Motion continued: Unanimous to approve
