CONSIDER QUOTAS

New England groundfishermen, already upset that the number of days they are allowed to net their catch were reduced by a quarter last year, were further angered earlier this month when the National Marine Fisheries Service closed a large portion of Georges Bank to fishing. The order is meant to protect yellowtail flounder and to uphold a resource-sharing agreement with Canada. Maine’s senators and the New England Fishery Management Council have called on the federal agency to reverse the closure.

Reducing days at sea and closing areas to fishing – the tools most often used by regulators – have done little to quell concerns about overfishing and have jeopardized the livelihoods of many fishermen. Clearly, other approaches are needed and quotas should be part of the discussion.

Sen. Olympia Snowe, chair of the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Oceans, Fisheries and Coast Guard, has opened the door to that conversation. As part of the reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act, Sen. Snowe has drafted a bill that covers a wide range of fisheries topics. It includes a provision requiring that any quotas that are proposed meet national standards that limit consolidation – the buying up of fishing rights by large vessels – and protect local communities.

Quotas that do both have been put in place in other states and countries. In addition, the bill would require that any proposed quota be put to a vote by fishermen. A quota could not be put in place unless two-thirds of fishermen who voted supported it.

In New Zealand, quotas gave fishermen greater certainty and ended the race to harvest as many fish as quickly as possible. After quotas were adopted in the late 1980s, the quantity of fish caught declined by 20 percent while the value of the catch increased by 400 percent, according to Maurice McTigue, who was a member of parliament and held several cabinet positions there. This was because processors had a steady, predictable supply of fish rather than an overabundant supply that arrived all at once. The health of the fishery also improved with some stocks doubling. As added benefits, fishermen police one another to ensure that quota and by-catch limits are not exceeded and they work more closely with government regulators, mainly to ensure that catch limits are properly set.

Quotas have also helped the Alaska halibut fishery. In the early 1990s, fishermen could catch halibut during just three 24-hour periods during the year. After quotas were adopted in 1995, the season was lengthened to eight months. Fishermen sold more fish for higher prices, according to a General Accounting Office review. When the race for halibut ended, safety improved and gear loss declined.

Alaska also offers an example of how quotas should not be used. The crab fishery there is now down to less than a week and a quota has been proposed. But, to appease crab processors worried that fishermen, if they can fish year around, will bring in their catch when the price is high, a processor quota was put in place by Sen. Ted Stevens, the senior Alaska Republican. The result is that processors can manipulate supply to keep dockside crab prices low, thus harming fishermen.

There are many details to be worked out, but quotas may provide the best alternative to the contentious fisheries management system now in place in New England.