53 



legitimate reason that these vast amounts of area must remain closed, then perhaps we need to 

 review the idea of rotating these areas when the spawning season concludes. What was originally 

 done to protect the concentrations of spawning groundfish has now become the most serious 

 impediment to the survival of the Massachusetts fishing industry. Even a fisherman can realize the 

 benefits in protecting the vulnerable concentrations of spawning fish, but once that situation no 

 longer exists we need to be able to access those areas so that the concentration of effort on the rest 

 of the fishing grounds will be lessened. 



During the past year, along with members of the local scallop industry and members of the 

 scientific community I have attempted to get permission to do preliminary scallop studies within 

 the closed areas. These efforts have been met with extreme prejudice and have been countered with 

 either disdain or a convoluted series of quasi restrictions. The intent of these studies was to 

 provide a baseline upon which we could measure the effects of the closures upon the scallop 

 resource, groundfish presence, and habitat conditions and changes. It would also provide us with a 

 unique opportunity to do research that would enable us to design and test methods in order to 

 enhance escapement of the affected groundfish from either the traditional scallop dredge, or 

 perhaps if needed the next generation of scallop gear. This sequence of studies would benefit by 

 the expected increase of both groundfish and scallops that we feel we would encounter in these 

 areas. Other than the standard NOAA surveys, a baseline to be used to measure any changes 

 either positive or negative in these areas does not exist. 



What was first implemented as a sound management effort (i.e., the protection of spawning 

 groundfish through timed area closures) has become an unbearable hardship for us that the 

 National Fisheries Service is loath to relent on. 



Contrary to many reports most fishers do not wish to sell their boats, but these arbitrary 

 decisions have caused added financial burdens that they can not endure. We are aware that not all 

 will survive these difficult times while rebuilding the groundfish and scallop stocks. Yet the 

 suddenness of these impacts seems intended to hasten the erosion of the resolve that most fishermen 

 have to remain fishermen. While the boat-buy-back program may help some boatowners find a 

 way to withdraw from the fisheries, it provides few answers for the rest of the industry. I am 

 referring to the crews, and shoreside support workers such as fish lumpers, fuel suppliers, 

 fishhouse workers, icehouses, food and gear suppliers, electrical and mechanical repairers, etc. 



Much of this infrastructure has already been lost, along with nearly 100 fishing vessels 

 from the Greater New Bedford fishing community alone! These losses are in turn serving to 

 further undermine the economic structure of the entire Massachusetts fishing community. Much of 

 what has taken a hundred years or more to build in place has been torn apart in a few short years. 



The true disaster becomes apparent when the entire cost to the country is measured. For 

 as every wave upon the sea eventually washes upon a shore, the ripple effects caused by these 

 sudden events carries from the boats, to the shore, and to the people beyond. 



Executive Director 



New Bedford Seafood Coalition 



