Scallop
Management
Collaborative Development of a Sustainable and Economically Viable Maine
Scallop Industry– 2/20/02
Industry
Meetings Held fall 2001/winter 2002: Lubec, Machias, Jonesport,
Ellsworth, Stonington, Rockland, Port Clyde, Wiscasset, Portland, Saco
Industry Meetings to be Scheduled early 2002:
Milbridge, Mt. Desert, Stonington
Collaborative Industry/DMR meeting to be scheduled late Feb 2002
Industry Roundtable Discussion Scheduled at Fishermen’s Forum March
1,2002
Meeting
Summaries
Condition
of the Resource:
Nearly everyone in the fishery is concerned that
the resource is in very poor shape.
General concerns are that the amount of effort is too high, the
amount of broodstock low and the quality of meats low.
Some feel that the population of the resource is dangerously low.
There is significant concern on the global market and resultant current
low boat price. Some industry believe that the current spat enhancement
experiments will improve the capability of the resource to recover.
General support for the collaborative development of a sustainable
and economically viable fishery.
Discussions on Entry Controls:
Strong support for some kind of entrance criteria.
Strong support for owner/operator provision. Some industry felt that a limited entry system is needed to
protect the last of the traditional draggers.
Supporters advocated for a system to allow some level of entry and
others wanted to establish a retroactive base year for allowing licenses.
Still others discussed entry based on reciprocal licenses.
A few industry members were opposed to limited entry in concept. Full time/part time issues were raised, particularly in
regard to divers and “weekend warriors”.
Suggestions:
·
Limited Entry
·
Require enhancement
work as part of licensing requirement
·
Increase cost for
license- using the extra money for research, enhancement, marketing, etc.
·
Controlled entry
with an avenue for people to enter industry
·
Priority given to
full time fishermen
·
Allow full time
fishermen to float between industries
·
Moratorium on
licenses
·
Allowing fishermen
from traditional towns to access to permits first
Comments:
·
The way the fishery
is operated now, it allows the good crop to be wiped out as soon as the
season begins.
·
Increasing the
license fee gives a better idea of who is really fishing scallops.
·
It is difficult to
define what full and part time fishermen are- because even income % can
give a misleading value.
·
License moratorium
helps lessen the concern that a few will work hard to restore population,
but then others who didn’t help with rebuilding will reap the benefits.
·
If industry is
closed, all those fishermen from other industries that help with
enhancement would be lost, and that would thwart the enhancement process.
·
Scallop fishing has
traditionally been a secondary fishery, and limiting entry into it shuts
out those who use scallops as a backup.
Inter-
and Intra-fishery Competition: Strong
support.
Major issue that must be considered in upcoming
discussions.
·
Scallop Only Fishing: Make
it illegal to possess scallops while fishing with gear other than a
scallop drag as defined in regulation.
·
Urchin, quahog and muscle fisheries: There is concern about
simultaneous fishing and impact on the scallop industry.
General perception that urchin and muscle fishermen illegal possess
scallops as a by-catch. Many
scallop draggers believe that pressure from the divers in the sea urchin
industry has been the cause of the drop in scallop landings. i.e.: divers
can get into areas that draggers cannot get with a drag and are therefore
stripping the broodstock.
·
Some DownEast fishermen want the scallop and urchin season
to open at the same time.
·
Some DownEast fishermen want adoption of a one type of
license per season.
·
Some felt scallopers have bycatch of urchins to release some
of the seed cutting and give the scallopers a day’s wage to take home.
- There are strong tensions between the draggers
and divers and support to ban diving.
There was also concern that the non-commercial take of scallops
is excessive.
- NO direct diving on scallops by anyone.
·
Gear conflict issues between lobsterman who don't move gear
for scallopers when lobster fishing is hot. Wet storage of traps was also raised an important issue.
Dredge/Ring
Configurations: General
support.
Suggestions:
·
Increase in ring
size to 4”. But
concern was raised that larger ring sizes will result in extra tow time to
get same product and therefore result in extra habitat destruction. Others thought the ring size should stay where it is or be
dropped to 3 inches. The
State ring size should be comparable with Federal ring size.
·
Lighter dredges
should have more flexibility in configuration requirements.
·
Need to design a
dredge that has less impact on the bottom.
·
Mandate a dredge
weight limit, either overall or by boat size.
·
Change dredge
configurations to allow more undersized scallops to escape.
·
Creation of a gear
advisory group.
·
NO changes to ring size schedule.
·
Change rock drag twine back regulations.
Comments:
·
Dragging efforts can always circumvent scallop drag ring
size minimums. If one drag
long enough, the rings will plug with trash over certain bottoms. Seaweed in the drag after a tow will maintain the plugging
effect. The minimum ring size
does work in general for reducing the mortality on sub legal scallops in
the fishery, but it is defeatable as a size selector by lawbreakers.
·
Gear/ Vessel
restrictions just create smaller boxes, doesn’t really help industry.
·
New Bedford drag may
cause more damage to bottom.
·
Dredge weight, not
size, could be the problem.
·
Heavy dredges crush
juvenile scallops.
·
There are
consequences associated with dredge size limits.
·
Mussel draggers
cause a problem because they can harvest smaller scallops- they only have
a 2 ˝” ring size.
·
Technology can
increase effort (“takes the fishing out of fishing”)
·
Since there has only been one year since the 3-˝ ring size
was established, shouldn’t the results of that change be monitored
before any other changes are made?
Drag Size:
·
Drag Size of 5 1/2 feet Year Round:
This would discourage big rigs from entering the coastal waters.
·
Some other industry members felt that a 5 1/2 ft drag causes
more damage than a 10ft drag. A
6 ft. maximum drag in state waters/weight could be regulated.
Industry members claimed they needed an 8 ft. drag for deep water.
Some members of the industry advocated for keeping the current
maximum 10’ 6” law. .
Shellsize Restrictions:
General support.
Suggestions:
·
Meat count
·
Increase in minimum
scallop size (suggest 4”)
·
Maximum size
·
No shelling on boat
·
Mandatory culling before cutting
·
Leave things alone
Comments:
·
Maximum size isn’t
always effective because people just throw the shells over the edge of the
boat.
·
Since everybody is hunting the large scallop, especially the
diver, maybe it is time to put on a maximum scallop size to go along with
minimum size.
·
One cannot make a
living on scallops alone any more, and many fishermen have been pushed
into other industries. If
scallop harvests increase, other industries will benefit from reduced
fishing effort.
·
Need to help prevent
small scallops from being removed from the water.
·
Some industry believes others are cutting the undersize
scallops on board, which is nearly impossible to enforce and almost as
impossible to sell. They
recommend a Statewide Cobscook Bay shelling regulation.
·
General support that the "longest diameter" as
stipulated in statute results in a smaller scallop.
Therefore small (undersized) scallops meet the definition and are
legal. A more conservative
interpretation should be used to put smaller scallops back in the water.
Scallops should be measured across shell, not including hinge, to
let smaller scallops go.
·
Some favor Increase Shell Size Over Meat Counts as meat
counts are labor intensive and didn't work on the federal level and will
not work on the state level.
·
An increase in the shell size would be preferable based upon
how big a shell needs to be in order that more scallops become available
to spawn.
Management
Issues: General support for Zones/Councils and some support for community based
management. Enhancement
experiment is a curiosity. It
may be a viable management option in the future?
Suggestions:
·
General support to
establish Zones/ Council.
·
Some support following the example of the lobster zone
councils. Harvesters in their
own area could elect these members.
·
NO zones
·
Community management – no DMR
·
Some enhancement support
Comments:
·
Same day opening for
urchin and scallop industry to help balance participation between these
two industries
·
It may be that
different styles of management are necessary for various parts of the
coast to suit the needs of various areas (example: Cobscook Bay and or
Saco Bay)
·
All industries need
to be involved with establishing a management system, because there are a
lot of other people affected- fisheries are interdependent.
No group should be excluded from the process.
·
The scallop fishery
is too mobile for zones- it would kill certain areas.
·
Need to ensure that
management is still effective, even when industry is thriving, because if
there is a low, sustainability will make it less low than it would have
been without management efforts (works as insurance).
·
Management must be
kept up for it to be effective.
·
The lobster fishery
could establish zones because the fishery is distributed fairly evenly
along the coast and also because the zones were predefined by tradition.
·
The industry profile
changes with shifts in population size.
Questions:
·
What is the cost of
a comprehensive scallop management plan?
·
How will we ensure
that the state plan is working?
·
Are scallop zones
inappropriate for this state?
·
What states have a
thriving industry and what are they doing differently?
Enforcement:
Overall concern over lack
of enforcement assets and not creating any new programs that are not
enforceable.
§
The idea of
increasing fines and penalties was brought up.
§
Support to minimize the cutting of small scallops.
A meat size could work if harvesters didn't cut the scallops into
fresh water, which swells the meat.
Marketing Strategies: Major industry concern on
existing market and prices.
Strong industry support for
marketing strategies to be discussed as a part of the management process.
Some suggested strategies included:
·
High-end marketing.
·
Labeled Marketing-
(Maine Scallop)
·
Using money from
licensing fee for promotion.
Area
Closures: Some
support. Mixed support
for creating scallop conservation areas.
Concerns were raised about diver bandits hitting the areas and the
mobility of small scallops to move out of a conservation area.
Supporters of the concept of conservation areas pointed to the
Swans Island cable area, which used to be productive until divers were
allowed inside.
Suggestions:
·
Close nursery and
recruitment areas.
·
Restrict inshore
settlement and recruitment areas but leave other areas open.
·
Allow only certain
size vessels (small) to fish in specific areas.
·
No weekend fishing.
·
Close productive bays after xxxx days of fishing
·
No chain sweep
inside
·
No Sunday or
night dragging in state waters
Comments:
·
Federal water’s example shows that closures can be
effective in restoring population size
Aquaculture: Confusion
over process and
very little support.
Suggestions:
·
Require aquaculture
scallops to reach a certain age before harvest, so that they can help
enhance the wild population.
·
Location of
aquaculture sites needs to be regulated so that good scallop bottom
isn’t lost.
·
Need to ensure that
lease sites are spread out.
·
Needs to be a policy
that wild scallop spat cannot be use for bottom culture.
·
Predator control for
starfish and green crabs.
Comments:
·
Concern with the
allocation of aquaculture resources.
·
The aquaculture process can be split into stages- it
doesn’t necessarily have to be taken all the way- and still be
beneficial (“spit spat”).
·
There was mixed reaction to the idea of leases.
"Conservationists are ruining things by trying to fix them.
Vessel Modifications:
No support.
Comments:
·
Large boats could
become a problem if the resource recovers.
·
Concern about
large” monster” boats that fish 24 hrs with double dredges in all
weather .
·
Horsepower
restrictions- negative response from the groups.
·
Small boats are
penalized by some regulations.
Landing
Restrictions: Very
little support.
Comments:
§
“Days at Sea” are not an appropriate management tool for
the Maine Scallop fishery due to the fishery’s structure.
§
No trip limits.
§
“Wait and see” interest in Cobscook legislation.
§
Earlier Opening to Local Boats, (like Cobscook Bay)
Federal Management:
Not
many comments
Comments:
·
It was noted that
the industry should be wary of just mirroring the Federal plan- need to
seek out new ideas and get input from people who have not participated in
the process before.
·
How will the state
and federal plans relate to one another?
Habitat:
Not many comments
Suggestions:
·
Local surveys to
monitor population.
·
More research.
·
Create Marine
Protected Areas for known spawning and recruitment grounds.
Questions:
·
Do we know the exact
reasons behind the decrease in the scallop population?
·
What type of impacts does scallop enhancement have on the
ecosystem?
·
Industry members felt that non-point source pollution and
farm runoff into rivers was causing problems for the scallop resource.
Miscellaneous Comments:
·
Dates for changes should be set far ahead of time so that
there is
plenty of time for the industry to adjust.
·
Changes should be small and spaced out over time.
·
Some individual desires must be sacrificed to achieve
long-term goals.
