Sector Apprehensions

(from the April, 2008 issue of National Fisherman)

Sectors are coming to New England groundfish management. How do I know? I attended a two-day workshop in Narragansett last month, and according to what I heard there, it’s all over but the shouting. At some point in the not-too-distant future, the New England groundfish fishery, or at least major parts of it, are going to be managed via sectors.

First off, if you’re expecting to find out if I think sector-based management is either good or bad, you might as well stop reading now, ‘cause you’re not going to read that here. (Maybe move on to the column by that other guy with the beard. He thinks right tonsorially, so he undoubtedly thinks right on other stuff as well.)

Like ITQs or whatever we’re calling them this year, trip limits, days at sea or any of the other management gimcracks and geegaws, sectors are tools. They aren’t the be all and end all of fisheries management, nor are they a guaranteed death knell for one or another group of fishermen. They are, or should be, a management option to be adopted after careful consideration by the industry members – on board and on shore – whose businesses will be impacted by them.

But I get the idea that that’s not the case with sector based management, at least with New England groundfish. I get the idea that a lot of folks wouldn’t be considering this form of management except for the fact they’re mostly convinced that it’s going to happen regardless of how they, or most industry members, feel about it, and they want to be ready when it does.

I probably don’t need to tell you that isn’t exactly my kind of management. According to Merriam-Webster, a stampede is “a wild headlong rush or flight of frightened animals.” Replace animals with fishermen and you’ll maybe appreciate where I’m coming from. A lot of folks in the groundfish fishery are frightened about what the next iteration of Days At Sea management is going to do to them, and – based on what’s gone on before – they should be. The next groundfish shoe is going to fall next year, and it’s going to fall heavily. But you’ve heard of frying pans and fires, right?

Getting back to the workshop in Narragansett. There appeared to be more bureaucrats, academics and “conservationists” than actual industry people registered. For us perennial skeptics that wasn’t a real auspicious start.

If I were a fisheries manager, particularly one with years of groundfish management under my belt, I’d be at the front of the sector bandwagon. And if I was an academic or some other brand of researcher, the millions of dollars of grant funds that are and will continue to be available to “study” sectors would be a good incentive to jump aboard.

But if I were a groundfish fisherman, I’d think twice (or thrice, or more) about what I was buying into and what it was costing me. It seems like I’d be getting less boats in the fishery and some freedom in how, where and when I fished, at the cost of a lot more shared responsibility and shared liability, and with much of the administrative burden shifted from the government to me. And with no indication that the somewhat less than adequate science and the distorted management philosophy that’s afflicting so many of our fisheries are going to change. Same old TACs, just divvied up differently. Is it worth it? If you catch or sell groundfish, you should be able to decide for yourself.

The “environmentalist” contingent in Narragansett was all aflutter over the idea of a conservation sector. Having to bid for sector shares against the shills for multi-billion dollar “charitable” trusts is a truly frightening thought, but considering the political climate in Silver Springs, it just might sell. I doubt there are many of us who would want to co-own a fishery with OFCT.

Not at all surprisingly, an Environmental Defense cheerleader for “catch shares” and Limited Access Privilege Programs gave a presentation at the workshop to boost the Sector campaign, and the ENGOs place in it.

There are some particular situations in particular fisheries where sectors might work, and might work well, and they might be viewed as a magic bullet by a lot of people and organizations that have interests not completely in line with commercial fishermen’s. But a panacea they’re surely not, and I really hope that no one in the industry is looking at them as if they are.

Nils E. Stolpe