SUPPORTING THE SILVER BULLET BAND


The state legislature is currently debating the next fiscal budget and again this state’s Division of Marine Fisheries has so far been getting, as usual, the short end of the stick.  The proposals range from just short of three million dollars to, in the Senate version, a high three million dollar figure.  This will of course result in a compromise number.  Just a few years back the figure was 4.6 million to run the Marine Fisheries show.  Last year, as part of the Administrations cutbacks, the Division lost its dedicated funds.  Those funds came from our license fees, by the way, and although it wasn’t enough to run the whole Division, it helped.  Now those funds all go into the big black hole also known as the “general fund”.  The Division must now grovel to try and get enough to run the Marine Fisheries program.  It should also probably be mentioned that most of the funds that came in to the Division from license fees came from the commercial fishing sector with another fair amount coming from the recreational lobster group.  Also, by the way, there is no recreational salt water fishing license component except for a federal handout from the federal Wallop-Breaux account designated as a recreational fishing contribution.  The DMF expends a lot of its energy on recreational fishing issues and yet this “contribution” seems to be the extent of that sectors financial assistance.  The Division was always strapped when it came to running the agency.  Now, of course, all this is moot because most of the monies generated by the Agency is all dumped into the big pot.

 As if this was not bad enough, much of what is doled out to Marine Fisheries by the legislature is done as “earmarks”.  What is that you ask?  Earmarking is a technique where an agency is given a lump sum but part of it is designated for use only on a specific project or program.  Yes, Marine Fisheries is saddled with this too and since that money can’t be spent on general operations, the real figure for use in keeping the agency staffed and operating is further reduced.

 Perhaps you have tried to contact the Division and have had trouble reaching someone.  Perhaps you’ve wondered why some things take so long to get processed.  Perhaps you’ve wondered why programs have been cut or scaled back.  The answer is plenty of work and fewer staff to do the job. An agency can only get so much done when it’s been relegated to operating with a skeleton crew.

 There are many fishing regulations needed to maintain our resources and as we know many come from sources outside the Commonwealth such as the Atlantic States Fisheries Commission and the federal fishing agency.  The state needs to be able to maintain its commitments to these other managing units as well as maintain its own state initiated rules.  This workload is staggering and that effort can only be accomplished if there is a properly funded agency to do the job.

 The marine resources of the Commonwealth are important for livelihoods, communities, recreation, the economy, to supply food and to encourage tourism.  To accommodate all these needs and to maintain healthy marine resources, there is a need to have a marine resource agency that can manage this part of the Commonwealth’s natural treasures.  Such an agency shouldn’t be relegated to the position of a second-class state program working out of a closet somewhere.  The current meager budget handout proposals are sending this agency into that closet.

 Our fishing industry and the lobster industry in particular are not always supportive of the Marine Fisheries agency’s every move.  In fact, sometimes we are downright opposed to some actions this agency takes but we do realize that there is still the need for a functional marine fisheries agency.  Although we may frequently disagree on many issues, and perhaps even the course taken to address those issues, we still always rely on the fact that there is such a state agency within this Commonwealth that is trying to keep the marine resources sustainable not only because its “nice” to do or to ensure we fishermen have something to catch, but also because it’s the right thing to do.

 We would urge our state legislators to see that this Agency is properly funded and not with the pittance that we have seen in the budget proposals.  We would also like to see our license fees returned to Marine Fisheries where they belong.  This Agency that is responsible for so much of our coastal economy should be given the tools it needs to function and in this instance that means sufficient funds to maintain its staff and operate its resource programs. 

Are we or are we not “the Bay State” and isn’t there a big “cod fish” hanging somewhere in the State House?

   Bill Adler, Executive Director                          6/04