36 



My small business has had to confront this dramatic and sudden 

 downturn, and many others in Gloucester and other ports have also. 

 Planning for this sudden stop in activity would have been nearly 

 impossible, if we had known how sudden and severe it was going to 

 be in the first place. 



instead, we tried to worx with the federal government to 

 develop plans that everyone could live with. We met among 

 ourselves first, and then participated in meeting after meeting 

 with the Nev England Fisheries Management Council and the National 

 marine Fisheries Service. First, we were told that Amendment Five 

 to the groundfish plan would be the solution to recovering stocks 

 and allowing us to survive at the same time. In good faith, we 

 told our government that the plan wouldn't work. 



We didn't just offer our criticisa-we offered a commercially 

 workable plan to recover our stocks gradually without destroying 

 our community. That plan, known as the Gloucester Plan, was 

 largely ignored, instead, we were confronted with a federal plan 

 which hit faet and hard, trying to rebuild all 10 multispecies 

 stocks within 5-7 years. 



Even though the socio-economic report on Amendment Five 

 predicted hardship and community distress, it was approached based 

 on unrealistic projections of recovery and economic benefit. In 

 March of 1994, when Amendment Five went into effect, we thought we 

 had seen the worst and braoed for survival. 



Now, just 24 months later, Amendment Seven has cone into 

 of feet, making our survival extremely questionable. This plan, 

 based on lagging scientific data, was forced through the system 

 when it became clear to federal regulators that Amendment five 

 wouldn't work, and has descended upon us without time to adequately 

 plan for the most difficult economic times of our lives. 



Once again, we offered a viable proposal at the single round 

 of public hearings on Amendment Seven held by the NETMC. Our plan 

 would have adapted Amendment Five to allow a gradual change and 

 progress in rebuilding groundfish stocks. This approach was again 

 rejected based on NMFS'9 perceived need to rebuild the Stocks in a 

 short period of tine, and unrealistic oost-bonef it assumptions. 

 Science, ve were told, spoke of the need for immediate and dramatic 

 ohange. 



Yet the science appears to be mostly based on data from at 

 least three years ago. While our catches are smaller and it is 

 getting difficult to stay in business, Cod and Haddock do seem to 

 be growing in number, what remains unclear is how changes in our 

 environment caused such a sharp and unpredicted depletion in our 

 stocks. Instead, policy makers seem focused only on the 

 convenience of making us pay the price for changes in the 

 environment which no one understands. 



