Consolidating the fleet won't save the fish

There are some really interesting things happening in fisheries management right now. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I would have my hands full trying to figure out who or what puppet master is pulling the strings behind the curtain when it comes to fisheries management.

In this recent op-ed in South Coast Today, there is a statement about the number of boats not fishing:

"Two-thirds of New Bedford's fishing boats are tied up at the dock, according to data Mayor Scott W. Lang plans to release today. About 35 boats have caught and been allocated 80 percent of the catch, Lang said, while some 140 boats share the rest. That means they're fishing very little or staying home."

Advocates of "Catch shares" have not hidden their agenda to consolidate the fleet. They argue that reducing the fleet is the key to restoring fish populations, but in every catch share system ever implemented, consolidation does not lead to reduction of effort, rather it leads to consolidation of effort. In other words, just like the giveaways of family farms to corporations in the name of efficiency, the fishing fleet is being essentially offered up to the highest bidder.

Why? And who gains? Follow the money...One might think large vessel owners and processors would be in favor of consolidation, yet last Thursday the largest vessel owner in New England and the owner of the New Bedford Seafood Auction spoke out vigorously against the current management regime at a forum hosted by the mayor of New Bedford.

This is compounded by a transfer of wealth and consolidation of revenue. 55 of the 247 boats fishing are now realizing 61% of the revenue. The remaining 192 vessels account for only 39% of total revenue.

I can only say that at a time when people need jobs, the government seems intent on getting rid of fishing jobs.