The Winding Glass

New Eng. Managers must keep the Portland Fish Exchange Alive

Here is our story and video about the Portland Fish exchange.  Low volume threatens to force it to close. 

Plight of Portland Auction Example of need for regionalization of landings in New England (editorial

SEAFOOD.COM NEWS by John Sackton (Editorial Comment) - July 26, 2010 - The Portland Fish Exchange was a pioneer in building the first display auction in New England, and changing the practice from selling whole trips to a single buyer to having fishermen sell each part of their catch to the highest bidder. The result was better pricing and more transparency. Subsequently, display auctions developed in both Gloucester and New Bedford, as private owners saw the business opportunity in charging landing and auction fees for fish coming across the dock.  All three auctions have helped make fish prices more competitive, but even so, some of the auctions are susceptible to being dominated by a few large buyers. So, the loss of the Portland auction would be an economic loss for most fishermen in New England. Further, the idea that New England fisheries are free market is simply not the case. Fishermen are highly regulated in how and when they catch a public resource, how they report their landings, in their gear and fishing methods and in numerous other ways. Therefore, it is legitimate to ask the question whether regulators have a reason to manage the fishery so as to keep the maximum number of auctions viable.  Portland is fully viable with slight changes to fishing rules that have become standard in Alaska.  Portland's problem is that due to restrictions on lobster, among other things, groundfish boats have generally migrated to Gloucester. The result is that the captains and crews get a few more short term dollars. But if the auction dies due to lack of volume, the long term result is prices for all New England fish will be lower than they otherwise might be. Further, specific fisheries in Maine, such as the highly successful shrimp fishery this year would find it harder to operate. Maine is at risk of losing its entire fishery, with the exception of lobsters. Herring is already virtually gone, with the shut down of the Stinson canning plant, the last sardine cannery in the state. Most of the groundfish boats have migrated to Gloucester, in search of slightly higher profits.  Without a positive regulatory stance by the New England Management Council and NMFS, Maine will be essentially cut out of the fishery, regardless of how much they try and purchase permits; because the permits alone will not keep the fishing infrastructure in place. When Alaskan communities faced the fact that IFQ systems such as adopted for crab would give harvesters the right to land anywhere they chose (a natural objective for fishermen), the communities realized that unless they were given a voice at the management table the investments and jobs in those communities would simply vanish due to the choices of the quota holders. As a result, the price for harvesters getting IFQ fishing rights to crab included a requirement for regional deliveries. The deliveries had to match the historical shares in roughly the same manner as IFQ holders' catch histories.  New England needs a similar approach. There is no reason why a certain amount of quota would not be designated has having to be landed in Maine. The fishing history on which this quota was based was earned partly through deliveries at the Portland fish exchange. To allow the quota holders to then take this history and move all groundfish out of the state of Maine may make life easier for the quota holders, but it also imposes a huge social cost that is not necessary. As groundfish stocks come back, the protection of infrastructure, including docking space and the auctions, is a key component to keeping a viable fishing industry in New England. As such, a regional requirement has to be part of the changes in the sector management plan being considered by the council. Market forces could still shape how this happened. Holders of quota with a Maine landing requirement could easily trade with others if they did not want to participate in a Maine fishery. It would in no way diminish the benefits gained from allowing quota holders to lease and sell quota to each other, and within and among sectors. But the net result would be that in a few years, the historical landings pattern of New England fisheries, and the ports that benefited, would be protected as well as the fish, and fishermen.

We discuss the closing of the Newfoundland snow crab fishery, and current snow crab markets.