The Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission’s Lobster Board voted, at its latest meeting, to revisit the Trap Plan for Area 2, the one that was passed last December as part of Addendum IV.  The Board wants that Area’s Lobster Conservation Management Team (LCMTs) made up of fishermen, to meet and recommend a different strategy to reduce traps.  The Board, at the same time, refused to let that LCMT also revisit another part of the same Addendum that requires four more gauge increases on top of the four that the Area just went through over the past two years.  It had been argued that since one provision, the Trap Plan, was potentially going to be changed because the involved states (Massachusetts & Rhode Island) as well as the Feds, were having heartburn over that part, that what was the harm in also giving the fishermen a shot at revisiting the gauge part.  The fishermen are having heartburn too and its mostly due to the further minimum size increases.

 During the discussion on a motion to include the gauge issue in the LCMTs deliberations, it was encouraging to see that at least the two involved states supported the idea and it was disheartening and frustrating to also see most other states who have no direct involvement in this Area, refuse to support the motion.  You would have thought that they would have, at least, supported their fellow states on this.  It was also shortsighted since the Area LCMT may resist changing a trap plan designed by them if in return one of their concerns cannot at least be considered.  One must remember through all of this that the last series of gauge increases was to address a serious drop in the lobster stock, which was not only because of fishing but also due to other factors.  Some preliminary statistics have shown that the stock status may be improving and so one might question whether further increases, to 3 ½”, are really needed in this area.  It is a fact that lobsters in this Southern New England inshore area mature at a smaller size then elsewhere and therefore egg-out sooner.  The concept of raising a minimum size at all is to allow the lobster to have a chance at producing eggs at least once before she is taken to market.  Even the last set of increases up to 3 3/8” hurt these fishermen more so then it might have in some other areas that recently also had minimum size increases. 

 Another undertone surfaced during these discussions and it was a vaguely disguised strike at the whole LCMT – fishermen process itself.  The comment by one state manager noted that “too much emphasis has been placed on the LCMT process” and the insinuation here was that in trying to accommodate their idea is why this trap plan was so screwed up.  Wooo – this smacks of a you can talk but we may not listen attitude which has, to their credit, not been the general approach the ASMFC has taken at least on lobster.  It was interesting also that earlier in the Commission’s meeting week, another Committee had been working on how to make the Advisory Panels, made up of users, work better.  One of the prerequisites has always been that if you get the Advisors to meet and recommend something that meets the goal that the Boards also must be willing to “hear” what they recommend.  But this whole issue is a discussion for another day.

 We would urge the Area 2 fishermen at the LCMT meetings to push the issue of including the possibility of canceling the next set of gauge increases.  The draft Addendum is due back to the Board in November.  Perhaps some alternate suggestions could be discussed if further measures are really needed at all.

 The Atlantic States Fishery Management Boards have, in general, tried to understand the other side of a fishery issue and here they should also recognize that its better to give a little and not just take.  It works wonders when trying to affectively manage a resource and its fishermen.

 What spells heartburn relief,….a little flexibility?

  Bill Adler
Executive Director                   

9/04