Councilor McBride stated that, more than a decade ago, the Council worked with the Department to develop recommended measures to set numerical limits on several types of commercial fishing licenses. The concern was to limit participation in certain fisheries as a measure of economic self-interest and to protect these fisheries from overutilization by large vessels from other areas that might be displaced from federal waters by the groundfish plan. At the same time, the Council recommended the creation of an operators license for charter and party boats. Initially, the license cost $100 annually and this has since risen to $250. When the license fee reached $250, Mr. McBride stated, many of the then-license holders (approximately 400-425 in number) requested that a numerical cap be placed on the number of charter and party boat operators licenses. These individuals believed that tying the operating license to the boat increased the market value of the investment they had made in their vessel(s) and equipment. The Council eventually recommended to DEC and the State Legislature that such a cap be established, but the Legislature has not implemented this recommendation. In Mr. McBride’s view, it is presently too easy for people to enter into the charter and party boat fishing industry, an industry that, like the commercial fishing industry, is operating on a limited fish resource and a limited demand for its services. He believes that, at least on eastern Long Island, the charter and party boat industry needs some type of limitation on entering the industry to afford economic protection to those already in it.

Councilor Melton responded that he thought this might be largely an issue for the East End. He suggested that the Council form a subcommittee to look into the need for and potential benefits of limiting charter and party boat operators licenses and report back to the full Council. Councilor Jack Councilor Ferrara thought that a survey should be sent out to the holders of the charter and party boat operators license to get their feelings and comments on license limitation.

Councilor John Davi, Jr. said that a license cap or moratorium is put into place to protect the target fishery resource. Since there is already quota management in place for most of the species of main interest to the charter and party boat industry, these target resources are already protected and a license cap is not necessary. Several Councilors disagreed with Mr. Davi. In their view, license limitation is more often implemented to help secure the economic viability of fishermen already licensed in a fishery.

Councilor Freierman thinks there is a difference between "charter boats" and "party boats" with regard to the investment and in terms of the clientele they service. She would like to see whatever information is received, to be separated and labeled either "charter" or "party." Indirectly, the outcome of this issue will have an impact on resource management.

Councilor McBride supported Mr. Melton's suggestion of a Council subcommittee on the matter, but thought that a survey of license-holders might not be useful; many of the license-holders might not be fully aware of the pros and cons of a license cap. He felt that these pros and cons should be compiled and then a meeting held with holders of the charter and party boat operators license to discuss them. He felt that a survey might be useful if distributed after such a meeting.

Mr. Wise asked the recreational fishing industry members of the Council to form the subcommittee, with Tom Councilor Melton heading the group. Councilor Jordan requested to be a member of the subcommittee, as well. Mr. Wise asked that the subcommittee present its findings and recommendations at the Council’s May 2004 meeting.

 

Page last modified Wednesday, February 2, 2005 by George E. Carroll