DMR credibility questioned in Maine

Home rule is a concept rooted in Maine’s Constitution. The language is dry enough, but you might say that it is designed to protect us from an excess of government. Those rights of government not specifically reserved to the state, which are local in nature, are reserved to local government. It respects the ability of the towns to manage their own destiny.

Now put yourself at a meeting in Deer Isle last fall, an informational meeting on salmon aquaculture spurred by applications for leases in Blue Hill and Penobscot bays. This is a matter for scientist and economist, as well as people who just don’t want to look at the pens. The crowd is large and represents a full cross section of the community, from fishermen to “straphangers.” People are respectful, but skeptical.

There are in the panel of speakers a scientist from the University of Maine, a representative of local government (and fisherman), a lease applicant and a man from Department of Marine Resources. The perspective of the speakers was predictable until some one asked the man from DMR if he really meant to describe himself as an advocate for aquaculture. He said yes. He was asked if he understood the apparent conflict of being both advocate and reviewing authority on the leases. He saw no problem.

There is currently no meaningful input from local towns into the lease application review process. The state has pre-empted the process. The local citizen can look only to DMR for protection of its interest. There are the rights and interests of the salmon growers. There are legitimate environmental issues that relate to preservation of local shellfish and lobster stocks. There are economic issues arising from the fact that a tremendous number of jobs exist in the recreational industry (include innkeepers, retailers, homebuilders, boat builders and others) and the recreational value of the area may be diminished in the eyes of the consumer by proliferation of salmon pens. Solomon (no, not salmon) would be confounded by this set of issues. The only apparent arbiter of all this is a state agency that has lost any claim to impartiality.

Pursuit of economic facts by environmentalist and local businessmen alike turns up the appalling fact that no one has a credible figure just for the number of jobs created by the salmon industry. Figures put forth by state agencies run from 2,500 down to 167. The 950 to 1,100 is commonly quoted, but without documentation. As of Feb. 29, the Maine Aquaculture Association had no hard figures. Don’t blame the salmon growers, many industries don’t have that kind of data. But if there is a possibility of promotion of one industry at the expense of others, the state has an obligation to have it.

In a letter dated Jan. 15, DMR claims gross sales from three large companies and one contract grower (these three companies represent a huge piece of the industry) to be $125 million. There’s a penny-a-pound tax on salmon produced. The most recent total shows that figure to be $284,355. That’s 28 million pounds. With the disease problem, it’s declining. Wholesale value at the New York market averaged on the strong side of $2 a pound in 2001. The entire product of the industry on the loading dock in New York had a value of about $60 million. This same letter claims 510 jobs with these three companies.

A lot of this type of input went before the Marine Resources Committee in Augusta as part of its consideration of a “Bill to Make Changes to the Laws Governing Aquaculture Leasing.” DMR gave considerable testimony in support of the Salmon growers. Fairness suggests that someone from the state should have analyzed the potential conflict with other industries and given balance to the proceedings. It didn’t happen. Some segments of the recreational/tourism industry made their own presentations. Environmentalists had a significant presence, as did the salmon growers.

This bill has the potential to give some consideration to the recreational and aesthetic values of a proposed lease site. It could also give local towns real participation. DMR weighed in against allowing local towns the right to a local permit. It hasn’t given them reason to think anything else will protect them.

Let’s go back to those lease applications in Blue Hill and Penobscot bays. Home rule is a wistful notion and the concept of fairness severely bruised. The issue of credibility of the DMR has begun to loom almost as large as the core issues. There are a lot of good people in the department and it has done a great deal for the fishing industry. It is unfortunate to see that good will squandered. If the commissioner doesn’t work hard at reclaiming fairness in substance and appearance for the DMR, you might well see innkeepers, homebuilders, lobstermen, boat builders and environmentalists all on the same side of the table. A real “seaweed rebellion.”

Bob Vaughan lives in Brooksville and is the owner of Seal Cove Boatyard.