Jane, doh!

I have to wonder that if Jane Lubchenco had known how catastrophic this year in fisheries management would be, would she have taken the job?

She got off to a widely publicized start by rushing to the coast of Massachusetts to talk to fishermen there about what was not working in their industry. Their answer: A lot.

Her shine started to dull pretty quickly when it became apparent she was in her leadership role not so much to lead but to tow the administration's line toward catch shares.

Despite complaints of a total lack of readiness to implement this system for the Northeast groundfishery, NOAA pushed it through by the deadline of May 1.

Since then, all hell has broken loose.

Not only has the catch share system been a pretty miserable failure in terms of management, but fishermen joined forces to protest poor management practices in a huge D.C. protest back in March.

Next came the Deepwater Horizon spill in the gulf — a nightmare for thousands of fishermen today and who knows how many more to come.

Then the Northeast fishermen started really pushing for some answers as to their heavy fines. Lo and behold, they were right.

No more brushing off fishermen's conspiracy theories about draconian management tactics and fines. So far the evidence shows Northeast fishermen were being fined considerably more than fishermen from other regions, and the money has allegedly been misused as a slush fund for whatever managers fancied — cars, trips, a luxury yacht. All this while fishermen tried to keep their heads above water.

So what does Jane Lubchenco have to say about all of this?

I'm not sure. She hasn't spoken much publicly since the oil spill began, NOAA's slush fund of penalties was exposed or catch shares essentially imploded. But she is holding a summit on Aug. 3 in Washington — at which her constituents will apparently be at least severely underrepresented.

Is it any wonder members of Congress are calling for her ouster?

We've had one worthy shakeup at NOAA this year, when enforcement chief Dale Jones was tossed for allegedly shredding documents ahead of an investigation. It may be time for another.

Comments

[Dick Allen]

Like Thomas Paine, I believe “That government is best which governs least.” I’m happy to bash the government and government bureaucrats when they deserve it. But National Fisherman Assistant Editor Jes Hathaway misses the mark when she aims her editorial arrows at Jane Lubchenco.

Hathaway must know that Lubchenco had no power to delay the Congressionally-mandated deadline on annual catch limits for the New England groundfish fishery. Hathaway must also know that it was the New England Fishery Management Council, not NOAA, that developed the catch share program that went into effect on May 1. Is National Fisherman urging NOAA to disregard the Council and set policy based on fishery protests? Why isn’t NF calling for the removal of the 15 Council members, including five state officials, who voted for Amendment 16 and Framework 44, which set the annual catch limits. If the NOAA Administrator had set aside the multiple votes taken by the Council and side-tracked the sector management program, the catch limits would have gone into effect under the old DAS system that everyone hated until it was replaced.

There’s no question that sectors have had their start-up problems, but it is equally clear that catch shares have freed fishermen from the threat of fishery-wide closures that would have been inevitable if they were still working under DAS with strict catch limits. Under catch shares, one fisherman may shut himself down if he uses up his quota, or he may shut his sector down; but he won’t shut the whole fishery down as would happen in the absence of catch shares. A look back into the NF archives for the late 1970s and early 1980s would make clear the potential for fishery-wide closures when strict catch quotas aren’t allocated to individual fishermen.

Jane Lubchenco came into her job at a time when the sector system was in its final stages of development by the New England Council and the new catch limits were being set in accordance with Congressional requirements. She couldn’t realistically change either of those policies even if she wanted to. What she did do was to provide many millions of dollars out of the NOAA budget to assist New England in making the transition from DAS to sector management.

I would have preferred a straightforward ITQ system to sector management, but the New England Council saw sectors as meeting more of the concerns about catch shares that have been expressed repeatedly by NF Editor Jerry Fraser and others. Sectors give fishermen more “community” control over the management of their fishery than they had under the old system, but less flexibility and probably higher costs than they would have with ITQs.

Beating up on scapegoats may make some people feel better, but New England’s fishery problems weren’t caused by any political appointee in Washington and they won’t be solved by the removal of any political appointee. It’s easy to criticize, but much more difficult to contribute helpful solutions.

[National Fisherman]

Thank you for writing. I would like to clarify that I do not dislike Jane Lubchenco. But I believe that this critical time in fisheries management requires a stronger leader. As I said in my piece, I wonder if she would have taken this role had she known what was coming.

My estimation of the readiness of the catch share program comes directly from its users: fishermen. They believe it CAN work, and they want it to work. However, it is not yet working, and it was implemented before it was fully functioning.

[Wreckfish]

I get that you don't like Jane Lubchenco but it would be nice if you at least tried to be accurate.

You say that "the catch share system been a pretty miserable failure in terms of management" and "catch shares essentially imploded?" Where's your evidence? There are scores of successful catch shares around the country and the world if you care to look. Even in New England where the jury is still out, sectors are on-track to allow fishing for the entire fishing year and because fishermen are harvesting more selectively they are maximizing their catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE). Do you really think the old system that great?

And Jane "hasn't spoken much publicly since the oil spill began?" Do a google news search on her name. She's in the news every day. Go to her facebook page where she has at least one post every day.

On NOAA's enforcement matters, nearly all of the apparent bad deeds came before Jane took office. Who do you think fired the head of that division? Jane!

You're right about the job being tough and it gets tougher when this kind of junk is written.