NEW ENGLAND. “BEST RATING PRACTICES”
NEW ENGLAND. Connecticut - Maine - Massachusetts - New Hampshire - Rhode Island - Vermont
NEW ENGLAND. 2.3.2.2 PORT ANALYSIS CRITERIA AND OVERVIEW
NEW ENGLAND. The entire New England region has centuries of identification as a collection of fishing communities. The New England fisherman in his yellow slicker and corn cob pipe is a world-famous stereotype, underscored by the reality of thousands of people in this region of all types, men and women, young and old, who still make a living today from harvesting the sea. Georges Bank, the Gulf of Maine and Xxxxxxxxxx Bank all remain active fishing grounds where generations have ventured and many have died in pursuit of the seafood so prized by this entire region. According to the Northeast Multispecies Amendment 13 SEIS, in the year 2000 $105 million worth of groundfish was landed by the New England fishing fleet, which consisted of 1,888 active vessels. The largest proportion of this fleet used otter trawl gear, followed by hook and line, and xxxx nets. New Bedford had the highest amount of landings, followed in order by Portland, Gloucester, Chatham and Boston. The Sector has maintained a place in the groundfish fishery because the Sector has an approved Operations Plan (2 years) and the low impact of the hook fleet in general,. The Sector Operations Plan provides for an opportunity to manage at a local level, thereby creating flexibility to seek scales of efficiency. Justification for a region wide, port by port consideration of human environment impacts from the proposed action can be found in the Amendment 13 SEIS: It is important, however, to consider the impacts of the proposed alternatives across all communities. Social impacts can be defined as the changes that a fisheries management action may create in people’s way of life (how they live, work, play, and interact), people’s cultural traditions (shared beliefs, customs, and values), and people’s community (population structure, cohesion, stability, and character). As such, social impacts may result from changes in flexibility, opportunity, stability, certainty, safety, and other factors that are not specific to any community, but oftentimes to any individual or entity experiencing changes resulting from a fishing regulation. It is possible that the social impacts of some measures under consideration will not be experienced solely by one community group or another; rather, it is likely that some impacts will be experienced across communities, gear sectors, and vessel size classes. An example of this would be a reduction in allocated DAS if it is applied to all multispecies permit holders. Another example woul...
