72 



RHODE ISLAND COMMERCIAL FISHERIES ECONOMIC ADJUSTME^^^ STRATECfY 



From the outset, Rhode Island has endeavored to coordinate and integrate its re- 

 sponse to this situation. Following meetings with public and private sector rep- 

 resentatives involved with the industry and afler coordinating with our extensive 

 University of Rhode Island research community and the entire congressional delega- 

 tion we created a steering committee to assess the impact of the new restrictions 

 on Rhode Island commercial fishermen and related industries and make rec- 

 ommendations to the governor on how best to proceed. I am staff director of that 

 effort which is currently underway. The immediacy of the restrictions dictates a con- 

 certed focused effort that: 



1. Identifies the threats and opportunities presented by the regulations and miti- 

 gation measures being considered oy the federal government and neighboring states; 



2. Identifies and evaluates the alternatives for responding to the threats and tak- 

 ing advantage of the opportunities locally and regionally; and 



3. Sets forth an implementation plan that includes specific actions and related in- 

 vestment strategies. 



Rhode Island's Commercial Fisheries Economic Adjustment Strategy effort is pro- 

 ceeding in two phases: 



Phase I (4 months) Problem Analysis & Strategy Development. The steering com- 

 mittee, staffed by the division of planning will identify the local impacts of new fed- 

 eral restrictions on finfish harvesting and develop specific action plans to mitigate 

 those impacts on both the Rhode Island commercial finfishing industry and their 

 host communities by maximizing existing institutional resources and prioritizing re- 

 quirements for additional resources. Governor Sundlun's Executive Order and a de- 

 scription of the work program of Phase I are attached (Attachment B may be found 

 in the committee files). 



Phase II (24 months) Strategy Implementation & Coordination. Professional staff 

 will be devoted to sustaining the effort by coordinating existing resources, preparing 

 grant applications to fill programmatic or financial-gaps in the action plan, provid- 

 ing technical assistance to communities in securing implementation resources, and 

 establishing oversight and coordination capacity that builds on established linkages. 



These planning and management activities are supported, in part, by a grant from 

 the Economic Development Administration, USDOC. Simultaneously, the state ap- 

 plied for and recently received an EDA grant to its existing Small Business Loan 

 Fund Corporation to create a Fisheries Revolving Loan Fund. The manager of that 

 fund, worKing closely with the Steering Committee has developed application cri- 

 teria and priorities (Attachment C may be found in the committee files) for the Fish- 

 eries RLF. 



INTERACTION WITH OTHER STATES AND FEDERAL AGENCIES 



Since March, members of our steering committee and staff have been-on the road 

 visiting effected communities, experts in specific aspects of the issue, and with rep- 

 resentatives of federal agencies (EDA and NMF'S) to develop a fuller picture of the 

 "Fisheries Crisis," how different communities perceive it and are responding or pre- 

 paring to respond to it, and to understand and determine how best to participate 

 in the development and implementation of the federal response on behalf of the 

 Rhode Island commercial fishing and related industries. Frankly, we have found the 

 effort an exercise in frustration. 



Meaningfial interaction with other states in the region has proved to be difficult 

 until recently. Relevant agencies at the state government level have appropriately 

 been busy responding to in-state constituencies and developing their own response. 

 Recently representatives from five New England marine fishing states met in 

 Gloucester, Massachusetts literally to make introductions and compare notes. But 

 while all of us agreed on the need for some level of regional cooperation on the issue 

 we remain at a loss to define it or the mechanism. We have, nowever, established 

 a network. 



In my opinion, the failure to articulate a regional response to the commercial fish- 

 eries issue to date stems, in part, from the nature of the federal response. The high- 

 ly publicized announcement of emergency funding on the order of $30 million to the 

 region in March fostered expectations of immediately forthcoming aid. The frenzy 

 that ensued had an every-man-for-himself aspect that inhibited collaboration or co- 

 operation. At the same time, the town meetings organized up and down the coast 

 by the Office of Sustainable Development and Intergovernmental Affairs, which 

 were properly aimed at determining needs of effected fishing communities, effec- 

 tively bypassed state governments and left them scrambling to keep informed. In- 

 deed, the town meetings in Rhode Island were organized before we even knew of 

 them. And once we notified OSDIA that the Office of Strategic Planning was head- 



