Debate begins over protection of large lobsters

By Tina Comeau

THE VANGUARD

NovaNewsNow.com

You can expect a jumbo discussion and debate in the months ahead as the lobster industry and DFO try to reach an agreement on the protection of large lobsters.

DFO officials say that in southwestern Nova Scotia and around the Bay of Fundy at some point in the future – sooner rather than later – measures will be put in place to protect larger lobsters.

In other words, keep more of them in the water so they can continue to reproduce.

While there is a minimum size limit in the region, there is nothing to prevent fishermen from landing large lobsters.

At the spring meeting of the Lobster Fishing Area (LFA) 34 Advisory Committee, fishermen around the table were told it is not a matter of if large lobsters are going to be protected, but rather a question of how.

“The idea is not to talk for another two or three years, a decision has been made, it is a priority…mature lobsters, male and female, need some better protection,” said Jim Jamieson from DFO’s Dartmouth office.

The rationale behind the protection of large lobsters, DFO biologist Doug Pezzack said at the meeting, is large female lobsters produce more eggs and better quality eggs, therefore protecting them will create more stability in the lobster population. And if you’re going to protect the females you need to look after the males too since they need to mate with their female counterparts.

Two measures were thrown out for consideration. One entails implementing a maximize size measure, meaning no lobsters beyond a certain size can be landed. It’s like this in Maine where fishermen can’t catch lobsters with a five-inch (127 mm) or larger measure.

The other suggestion involves initiating a window slot measure, meaning you’d protect lobsters of a certain size for a period of time long enough to allow them to reproduce. Most likely you’d be looking at taking these lobsters out of the catch equation for two years.

Both measures come with pros and cons.

While it’s unknown what protection measure will go ahead, what DFO and fishermen did agree on during the June LFA 34 meeting in Yarmouth, N.S. is that whatever the end result is, everyone has to be governed by the same rules. It will do no good to have one LFA throwing large lobsters back into the water if a boat 50 miles away in the next LFA is landing them. Such a scenario makes enforcement difficult since beyond the wharf you can’t prove from what LFA a lobster came from.

Ashton Spinney, co-chair of the LFA 34 committee, said a plan is place to get all of the LFAs from 33 to 38, and including 41, at the table to start talking about large lobsters. A meeting, he said, was tentatively slated for the early part of July in Halifax.

“This (meeting) won’t be with DFO science or management, it will be industry and industry alone to discuss all of the options,” Spinney said.

It was noted by Spinney, and others around the table, including DFO, that there are a number of considerations in this debate. Aside from conservation there is the issue of economics and shifts in fishing efforts.

“The economics of the situation is you cannot bring in something that is going to destroy our market, and if we take out of our landings one major aspect…then we’re going to pay big time,” Spinney said. “So it’s something we really have to think about.”

Spinney added some fishermen would be affected by large lobster protection measures in the spring, some in the winter. Some not at all, some far more than others.

Some of the meeting debated just how much the market embraces these large lobsters.

Still, part of the concern over the effects of the protection measures is the possible changes in fishing effort it could create.

“If you put just a large lobster measure, it’s going to have drastic changes in the way people fish because the boats that are fishing the 50-mile line are catching a lot of these large lobsters,” said fisherman and Pinkney’s Point/Little River Harbour port rep Bob Newell. “If they can’t go after that five-inch measure, they’re not going to go to the 50-mile line, they’re only going to go to the 20-mile or 30-mile line so you’re going to have concentrated areas of fishing.”

To get the ball rolling, DFO has thrown out a six-inch measure as a starting point for the discussions that will be held over the next few months. It was stressed this has not been decided on as a maximum size, it’s just to get the dialogue started.

Jamieson said the plan had been to initiate some kind of protection measure this fall, but he said he is pleased to see industry is coming together to talk about the issue.

However, he said, that doesn’t mean DFO will sit back forever and wait.

“We will allow industry time to discuss the issue, but the idea is not to stir the pot for two or three years,” he said.

DFO area director and committee co-chair Ian Marshall offered this during the discussion, to questions from the floor about DFO’s timeline.

“I think the easy answer to your question is if it doesn’t happen this fall, it will happen next fall,” he said.

The LFA 34 committee plans to meet again in September to discuss the large lobster issue.

Points to consider in the large lobster protection debate

(The following information is supplied by DFO)

Importance of large lobsters

•produce more and larger eggs

•larger eggs may have better survival

•egg loss appears to be lower on larger females

Present large lobster protection

•LFA 30: 132mm (5 ¼ inch) maximum size females

•LFA 31A: 114-124 mm window/slot size females

•LFA 28 and 29: 152 mm (six inch) max hoop size females and males

•LFA 33-38: voluntary v-notching females

•LFA 31B and 32: fixed amount v-notching females

•LFA 41: voluntarily restrict landing males and females >six pounds

Size of lobster maturity

•LFA 27: 71-76 mm

•LFA 28-30: 72-78 mm

•LFA 31A, B: 75-78 mm

•LFA 33: 90-100 mm

•LFA 34: 95-100 mm

•LFA 35-38: 100-105 mm

Some questions to consider

•Will there be an unequal impact of the measure within an LFA?

•Is there a potential for a shift in fishing effort?

•Are there potential market and economic impacts?

Window/slot size pros and cons

Pros: •simple, enforceable

•targets size that still have large numbers •lobsters available again

•allows one extra set of eggs (a small percentage produce two extra sets)

•egg benefits occur quickly

Cons: •three measures (legal, lower window, upper window)

•produces only one extra brood

•reduces the availability of a middle size group in the market

•may have a larger impact on some sectors of the fishery

•optimal sizes depend upon exploitation rate and this can change with fishing

•provides little long-term buffer if recruitment declines

•no protection for large males needed by large females

Maximum size ranges used in the USA:

•Maine: 127 mm (five inches)

•southern New England: 133 mm (five and one-quarter inches)

•offshore: 175 mm (six and three-quarter inches)

Note: with a five-inch maximum size, females can produce 6-12 sets of eggs over a 12-30 year period

Maximum size pros and cons:

Pros: •simple, enforceable

•large return in egg production with 10 of more extra sets of eggs

•targets lobsters for which there is a lower market demand

•provides large buffer to declines in recruitment

•protects larger males needed for large females

Cons: •lobsters permanently removed from fishery

•eliminates a size group from the market

•takes a long time for the full benefits of more eggs (more than 10 years)

•may have larger impact for some sectors of the fishery

•optimal sizes depend upon exploitation rate and this can change with fishing

Why protect the males?

•males must be at least as large as the female and preferably larger

•a shortage of males can lead to unfertilized eggs, incomplete fertilized eggs, failure of very large female to produce a second brood

•while males grow faster than females, males also have a higher exploitation rate because females are protected when berried

•one male can mate with a number of females but larger males can mate with more females