This year’s report indicated that the stock is not overfished and that overfishing is not occurring.  The tech’s estimate is that there is 1.8 million metric tons of herring out there in the great North Atlantic and the fishery is only taking about 100,000 metric tons.  This would seem to be great news for once.  Hey, there really is some fish stocks that are doing okay, you might say.  But wait, some people just can’t accept the report and continue to wave the red danger flag.  They never seem to be able or willing to find that green flag.

 I have always found it strange that when a technical report delivers up a judgment that a stock is overfished or that overfishing is occurring, that managers trip over each other in a rush to do something which usually involves some fishing restrictions.  And yes, when that is the message something should be done but the ironic part is that when a stock is not overfished, few want to believe the technical report they have just heard.  Striped bass has been one example of this and herring is yet another example.  Some managers and some members of the public as well as most conservation groups can’t seem to deal with success.  Certainly there still must be measures in place to make sure a healthy fish stock doesn’t slide backwards and hopefully would even continue to grow.  All too often, however, managers and many of the public can’t let go of the restriction stick or that red flag.

 This year’s debates have also focused on a forage base.  That is, having enough of, in this case, herring for all the other “fishy’s” to feed on.  If there is 1.8 million tons of herring swimming around and fishermen only took 100,000 tons of the estimated total, that leaves 1,700,000 tons, by my calculations, still in the ocean to feed other fish.  It certainly seems that that should be adequate and there should not be any need to turn to the fishermen for more.

 Then there is the issue of at-sea processing.  From our perspective, U.S. fishermen should be able to fish for herring within the quota limits, but why?  The answer is, of course, to make a living by selling those fish but to whom?  We now have shoreside processing plants and canneries and they need the fish.  We also have the most valuable fishery in New England, the lobster fishery, which depends on having an adequate supply of herring or that fishery could be dead in the water.  The lobster fishery uses more herring then the other users combined. It’s a big deal and herring is also worth more as lobster bait then it is when sold for processing.  The various shoreside markets, therefore, need the fish and at-sea processing somewhere beyond the horizon could seriously cut down on what makes it to shore.  At-sea processing operations should not be able to potentially cripple such a valuable and large industry as the lobster fishery nor should it be able to also potentially hurt the shoreside processing ventures.

 We would urge the managers not to take actions that could lead to a shortage of herring for those shoreside markets.

 Looking at the lobster fishery again, what else would lobster fishermen use for bait if they didn’t have enough herring, striped bass or cod?

 How would everyone feel if that was the alternative?

  Bill Adler
Executive Director                     

 7/04