South County Independent

NARRAGANSETT — A controversy is brewing among fishermen as the state Department of Environmental Management and the R.I. Marine Fisheries Council consider major changes to the way summer flounder, or fluke, is regulated.

The plan, which is in the early stages of a public hearing process, is to adopt a sector allocation model for the fluke fishery and grant a group of eight to 12 fishermen exclusive rights to fish for a fixed percentage of the fluke catch. The current proposal pegs the percentage at 12 percent.

Under the plan, members of the fluke sector would have the right to fish for fluke virtually anytime they wanted and could ignore daily quotas, days-at-sea limits and other complex regulations that fishermen say have made their job extremely difficult. The only catch is they must remain within their allocated percentage.

The subject will be discussed at the next council meeting on Monday at 6 p.m. in Corless Auditorium on the University of Rhode Island’s Narragansett Bay Campus, South Ferry Road, Narragansett.

Supporters of the plan, which include some members of the R.I. Commercial Fishermen’s Association, say that the myriad regulations fishermen must obey are counterproductive. Fishermen often find themselves throwing perfectly good fluke overboard because of daily quotas or being forced to fish when conditions aren’t optimal.

But not all fishermen are happy with the idea, especially those with smaller boats. Robert A. Mattiucci, a commercial fishermen for 40 years and a member of the Sumer Flounder Advisory Committee, recently wrote DEM Director Michael Sullivan urging him to reconsider the proposed pilot program.

“This contract could be worth $700,000 to $1 million depending on the price of summer flounder and the size of the quota,” Mattiucci wrote. “Why would [DEM] even consider a proposal which gives 8 or 10 boats total control over 12 percent of the RI summer flounder quota (including the right to sell this without even fishing for it)? The R.I. summer flounder allocation should always be available to all licensed R.I. fishermen.”

In an interview, Mattiucci said that the proposal effectively grants an exclusive group of fishermen an unprecedented amount of control over the fishery. If members of the fluke sector have their way, he said, they will fish for fluke only in the summer, when prices are highest. This will force other fishermen to hang on their coattails and fish when the sector fishermen fish.

“They will be able to control the market,” Mattiucci said. “They will fish when prices are high and all that fish coming on to the market will affect prices, making it harder for smaller guys to make a living.”

Mark Gibson, chairman of the Marine Fisheries Council and deputy chief of DEM’s Division of Fish and Wildlife, said that the sector allocation proposal is “new to Rhode Island” and that DEM “is not committed to it” until the public hearings are complete and Sullivan makes a decision.

Still, DEM is considering the proposal. As fishermen struggle to survive in the face of high fuel prices and a management system that some say is broken, “we’re interested in any and all innovative forms of management because what we have hasn’t worked well,” Gibson said.

Sector plans already have been implemented in other nearby fisheries, such as in Cape Cod. Support is growing for sector allocation proposals around the country because, with increasing economic pressures and insurance costs, any way to reduce regulations and give fishermen more flexibility is beginning to look like a viable option.

“It gives fishermen flexibility with their businesses,” Gibson said. “They can structure their businesses to take [fish] when there’s the most opportunity to take it, when the price is good and the weather is good. They can manage discards better instead of having to throw fluke overboard,” Gibson said. “Fishermen feel they can run their businesses better if they know how many pounds of fish they can catch from the start. They can mix up their trips, and it’s not about how many days at sea anymore.”

Gibson said he understands the opposition. The obvious con, he said, is that the plan essentially gives a portion of the fluke fishery to a limited group of fishermen. It also creates an opportunity for “corralling” the market.

“It makes things less open,” Gibson said. “The remaining fishermen could see themselves looking at a smaller piece of the remaining pie. Instead of fishing throughout the year, they will have to concentrate their fluke fishing in the summer when prices are high and that could deplete the resource. If you take out a big bunch of fish quickly, it makes it harder for other individuals to catch their fish and capture the market.”

The sector allocation plan would be implemented as a pilot program if it receives the blessing of the fisheries council and DEM.

Reader Comments

The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of scindependent.com.

jim arnoux wrote on Oct 3, 2008 3:49 PM:

" The first point is that these boats have been catching 8-12% of the RI fluke quota for years. This figure is based on years worth of historical landings, and their sector agreement forces them to stay within their quota. What this proposal does is allow sector boats to land fluke that they would otherwise throw overboard while fishing for other species. The conservation benefit will result in thousands of pounds of fluke remaining uncaught. Safety may also be increased as a result of this program, as members may spend less days in the winter fishing for fluke. As far as price goes, the miniscule summer period fluke quotas and fuel prices make it difficult, if not an outright joke, to call this a commercial fishery for most full-time commercial fishermen. This plan will increase the overall economic value of the fluke fishery by redirecting landings away from the high-volume winter fishery. Finally, this is a pilot program; if we are going to improve fishery management at some point we have to try something new. "

Reader Comments

Submit a Comment