U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

National Marine Fisheries Service

Northeast Region

Northeast Fisheries Science Center

Woods Hole, Massachusetts

December 2001

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-164

An Overview

of the Social and Economic Survey

Administered during Round II

of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery

Disaster Assistance Program
149. Essential Fish Habitat Source Document: Scup, Stenotomus chrysops, Life History and Habitat Characteristics.

By Frank W. Steimle, Christine A. Zetlin, Peter L. Berrien, Donna L. Johnson, and Sukwoo Chang. September 1999.

v + 39 p., 18 figs., 1 table. NTIS Access. No. PB2001-100144.

150. Essential Fish Habitat Source Document: Spiny Dogfish, Squalus acanthias, Life History and Habitat

Characteristics. By Donald G. McMillan and Wallace W. Morse. September 1999. v + 19 p., 10 figs., 3 tables. NTIS

Access. No. PB2001-100148.

151. Essential Fish Habitat Source Document: Summer Flounder, Paralichthys dentatus, Life History and Habitat

Characteristics. By David B. Packer, Sara J. Griesbach, Peter L. Berrien, Christine A. Zetlin, Donna L. Johnson, and

Wallace W. Morse. September 1999. vi + 88 p., 38 figs., 6 tables. NTIS Access. No. PB2001-100149.

152. Essential Fish Habitat Source Document: Tilefish, Lopholatilus chamaeleonticeps, Life History and Habitat

Characteristics. By Frank W. Steimle, Christine A. Zetlin, Peter L. Berrien, Donna L. Johnson, and Sukwoo Chang.

September 1999. v + 30 p., 12 figs., 2 tables. NTIS Access. No. PB2001-100143.

153. U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Marine Mammal Stock Assessments -- 1999. By Gordon T. Waring, Debra

L. Palka, Phillip J. Clapham, Steven Swartz, Marjorie C. Rossman, Timothy V.N. Cole, Larry J. Hansen, Kathryn D.

Bisack, Keith D. Mullin, Randall S. Wells, and Neilo B. Barros. October 1999. vii + 196 p., 17 figs., 59 tables, 1 app.

NTIS Access. No. PB2000-102497.

154. Report of the Joint Scientific Review Group Workshop, April 13-14, 1999, Seattle, Washington. By Richard

L. Merrick, compiler. November 1999. v + 22 p., 3 figs., 6 tables, 5 app. NTIS Access. No. PB2000-105393.

155. Food of Northwest Atlantic Fishes and Two Common Species of Squid. By Ray E. Bowman, Charles E.

Stillwell, William L. Michaels, and Marvin D. Grosslein. January 2000. xiv + 138 p., 1 fig., 7 tables, 2 app. NTIS Access.

No. PB2000-106735.

156. Proceedings of the Summer Flounder Aging Workshop, 1-2 February 1999, Woods Hole, Massachusetts. By

George R. Bolz, James Patrick Monaghan, Jr., Kathy L. Lang, Randall W. Gregory, and Jay M. Burnett. May 2000. v

+ 15 p., 5 figs., 5 tables. NTIS Access. No. PB2000-107403.

157. Contaminant Levels in Muscle of Four Species of Recreational Fish from the New York Bight Apex. By Ashok

D. Deshpande, Andrew F.J. Draxler, Vincent S. Zdanowicz, Mary E. Schrock, Anthony J. Paulson, Thomas W. Finneran,

Beth L. Sharack, Kathy Corbo, Linda Arlen, Elizabeth A. Leimburg, Bruce W. Dockum, Robert A. Pikanowski, Brian

May, and Lisa B. Rosman. June 2000. xxii + 99 p., 6 figs., 80 tables, 3 app., glossary. NTIS Access. No. PB2001-107346.

158. A Framework for Monitoring and Assessing Socioeconomics and Governance of Large Marine Ecosystems.

By Jon G. Sutinen, editor, with contributors (listed alphabetically) Patricia Clay, Christopher L. Dyer, Steven F.

Edwards, John Gates, Tom A. Grigalunas, Timothy Hennessey, Lawrence Juda, Andrew W. Kitts, Philip N. Logan, John

J. Poggie, Jr., Barbara Pollard Rountree, Scott R. Steinback, Eric M. Thunberg, Harold F. Upton, and John B. Walden.

August 2000. v + 32 p., 4 figs., 1 table, glossary. NTIS Access. No. PB2001-106847.

159. An Overview and History of the Food Web Dynamics Program of the Northeast Fisheries Science Center,

Woods Hole, Massachusetts. By Jason S. Link and Frank P. Almeida. October 2000. iv + 60 p., 20 figs., 18 tables,

1 app. NTIS Access. No. PB2001-103996.

160. Measuring Technical Efficiency and Capacity in Fisheries by Data Envelopment Analysis Using the General

Algebraic Modeling System (GAMS): A Workbook. By John B. Walden and James E. Kirkley. October 2000. iii

+ 15 p., 9 figs., 5 tables. NTIS Access. No. PB2001-106502.

Recent Issues in This Series:
NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-164

This report series represents a secondary level of scientifiic publishing. All issues

employ thorough internal scientific review; some issues employ external scientific

review. By design, reviews are transparent collegial reviews, not anonymous peer

reviews. All issues may be cited in formal scientific communications.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Donald L. Evans, Secretary

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Jr., Administrator

National Marine Fisheries Service

William T. Hogarth, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries

Northeast Region

Northeast Fisheries Science Center

Woods Hole, Massachusetts

December 2001

Julia Olson1,2 and Patricia M. Clay1,3

An Overview

of the Social and Economic Survey

Administered during Round II

of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery

Disaster Assistance Program

Postal Addresses: 1National Marine Fisheries Serv., 166 Water St., Woods Hole, MA 02543-1026

E-mail Addresses: 2Julia.Olson@noaa.gov; 3Patricia.M.Clay@noaa.gov
Editorial Notes

Species Names: The NEFSC Editorial Office’s policy on the use of species names in all technical communications is

generally to follow the American Fisheries Society’s lists of scientific and common names for fishes (i.e., Robins et al.

1991a), mollusks (i.e., Turgeon et al. 1998b), and decapod crustaceans (i.e., Williams et al. 1989c), and to follow the

Society for Marine Mammalogy's guidance on scientific and common names for marine mammals (i.e., Rice 1998d).

Exceptions to this policy occur when there are subsequent compelling revisions in the classifications of species, resulting

in changes in the names of species (e.g., Cooper and Chapleau 1998e

, McEachran and Dunn 1998f).

Statistical Terms: The NEFSC Editorial Office’s policy on the use of statistical terms in all technical communications

is generally to follow the International Standards Organization’s handbook of statistical methods (i.e., ISO 1981g

).

Internet Availability: This issue of the NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE series is being copublished, i.e., as

both a paper and Web document. The Web document, which will be in HTML (and thus searchable) and PDF formats,

can be accessed at: http://www.nefsc.nmfs.gov/nefsc/publications/.

a

Robins, C.R. (chair); Bailey, R.M.; Bond, C.E.; Brooker, J.R.; Lachner, E.A.; Lea, R.N.; Scott, W.B. 1991. Common and scientific names of fishes

from the United States and Canada. 5th ed. Amer. Fish. Soc. Spec. Publ. 20; 183 p.

b

Turgeon, D.D. (chair); Quinn, J.F., Jr.; Bogan, A.E.; Coan, E.V.; Hochberg, F.G.; Lyons, W.G.; Mikkelsen, P.M.; Neves, R.J.; Roper, C.F.E.;

Rosenberg, G.; Roth, B.; Scheltema, A.; Thompson, F.G.; Vecchione, M.; Williams, J.D. 1998. Common and scientific names of aquatic

invertebrates from the United States and Canada: mollusks. 2nd ed. Amer. Fish. Soc. Spec. Publ. 26; 526 p.

c

Williams, A.B. (chair); Abele, L.G.; Felder, D.L.; Hobbs, H.H., Jr.; Manning, R.B.; McLaughlin, P.A.; Pérez Farfante, I. 1989. Common and

scientific names of aquatic invertebrates from the United States and Canada: decapod crustaceans. Amer. Fish. Soc. Spec. Publ. 17; 77 p.

d

Rice, D.W. 1998. Marine mammals of the world: systematics and distribution. Soc. Mar. Mammal. Spec. Publ. 4; 231 p.

e

Cooper, J.A.; Chapleau, F. 1998. Monophyly and interrelationships of the family Pleuronectidae (Pleuronectiformes), with a revised classification.

Fish. Bull. (U.S.) 96:686-726.

f

McEachran, J.D.; Dunn, K.A. 1998. Phylogenetic analysis of skates, a morphologically conservative clade of elasmobranchs (Chondrichthyes:

Rajidae). Copeia 1998(2):271-290.

g

ISO [International Organization for Standardization]. 1981. ISO standards handbook 3: statistical methods. 2nd ed. Geneva, Switzerland: ISO;

449 p.
Page iii

Contents

Abstract ............................................................................................................................................................................ v

Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1

Results ................................................................................................................................................................................ 1

Introductory Sketch .................................................................................................................................................. 1

Households and Communities .................................................................................................................................. 2

Expenditure Impacts of Fishing Industry in New England ........................................................................................ 3

Fishing Business Practices........................................................................................................................................ 3

Management and Enforcement.................................................................................................................................. 5

Capacity and the Future ............................................................................................................................................ 5

Fishing Family Assistance ........................................................................................................................................ 6

Summary and Discussion.................................................................................................................................................... 6

Acknowledgments .............................................................................................................................................................. 7

References Cited ................................................................................................................................................................. 7

Tables

Table 1a. Characteristics of the 297 vessels owned by the 286 owner respondents in the Social and Economic

Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program ..... 8

Table 1b. Comparative characteristics of all 3,714 vessels with a valid multispecies permit during fishing year 1999 ........ 8

Table 2a. Multispecies permit characteristics of the 297 vessels owned by the 286 owner respondents in the

Social and Economic Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery

Disaster Assistance Program .............................................................................................................................. 9

Table 2b. Comparative permit characteristics of all 3,714 vessels with a valid multispecies permit during fishing

year 1999 ............................................................................................................................................................. 9

Table 3. Primary fishing gear used by the 297 vessels owned by the 286 owner respondents in the Social and

Economic Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster

Assistance Program, compared to the primary fishing gear used by all 3,714 vessels with a valid multispecies

permit during fishing year 1999 ..........................................................................................................................10

Table 4. Distribution of large-mesh groundfish landings by gear type, by multispecies permit category, and by

homeport state for all 3,714 vessels with a valid multispecies permit during calendar year 1999 .......................11

Table 5. Permits held by the 297 vessels owned by the 286 owner respondents in the Social and Economic

Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance

Program, compared to permits held by all 3,714 vessels with a valid multispecies permit during fishing

year 1999 ............................................................................................................................................................11

Table 6. Summary of responses to selected questions and data requests on households and communities, asked

in the Social and Economic Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery

Disaster Assistance Program .............................................................................................................................12

Table 7. Summary of responses to selected data requests on family involvement, asked in the Social and Economic

Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program ....12

Table 8. Summary of responses to selected questions on regional impacts of expenditures, asked in the Social

and Economic Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster

Assistance Program ...........................................................................................................................................13

Table 9. Summary of responses to selected questions on changes in fishing business practices during past five

years due to regulations, asked in the Social and Economic Survey administered during Round II of the

Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program ..........................................................................14

Table 10. Summary of responses to selected data requests on assistance required at sea during 1995-99, asked in the

Social and Economic Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery

Disaster Assistance Program .............................................................................................................................14

Table 11. Summary of responses to selected questions on management alternatives, asked in the Social and

Economic Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster

Assistance Program ...........................................................................................................................................15

Table 12. Summary of responses to selected questions on management and enforcement, asked in the Social and

Economic Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster

Assistance Program ...........................................................................................................................................15
Page iv

Table 13. Summary of responses to selected questions on capacity and the future, asked in the Social and Economic

Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program ....16

Table 14. Summary of responses to selected questions on goals for fisheries, asked in the Social and Economic

Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program ....17

Table 15. Summary of responses to selected questions on fishing family assistance, asked of both owners and crew

in the Social and Economic Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery

Disaster Assistance Program .............................................................................................................................18

Table 16. Summary of responses to selected questions on fishing family assistance, asked of owners only in the

Social and Economic Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery

Disaster Assistance Program .............................................................................................................................19

Figures

Figure 1. Hometown distribution of crew survey respondents .........................................................................................20

Figure 2. Hometown distribution of owner survey respondents.......................................................................................21

Figure 3. “Homeport” distribution of all multispecies-permitted vessels in the NMFS Northeast Region ........................22

Appendices

Appendix I. Social and Economic Survey (for owners)...................................................................................................23

Appendix II. Social and Economic Survey (for crew members) ........................................................................................51

Acronyms

DAS = days at sea

GRT = gross registered tons

NMFS = National Marine Fisheries Service

NOAA = National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

TAC = total allowable catch

VHP = vessel horsepower
Page v

ABSTRACT

This paper characterizes and summarizes responses to selected questions from the Social and Economic Survey

administered in spring and summer 2000 to recipients of the second round (Round II) of financial assistance in the Northeast

(Gulf of Maine) Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program. The paper indicates how these fishermen conduct their

livelihood, the beliefs they have about fishing, and the social communities in which they live, and points to further research

needs generated by the initial survey results. Both permit holders (vessel owners) and crew members participated in the

survey which covered six broad themes: households and communities, expenditure impacts, business practices,

management and enforcement, capacity and the future, and fishing family assistance. Survey results, while summarized

across all respondents, illustrate both the degree of similarity and diversity within the fleet. While some survey results

corroborate accepted arguments in the social sciences of fishing, others point to possible qualifications, especially notions

of the “local,” and of community. For many respondents, visions of the future seemed to center on notions of community and

community relations as alternative spaces for institutional foundations, with promising implications for future management.

Page 1

INTRODUCTION

Congress appropriated five million dollars to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

in late 1998 to provide emergency disaster assistance to

persons or entities in the Northeast multispecies fishery

who incurred losses from a commercial fishery failure due

to declining groundfish stocks. (The Northeast multispecies

fishery covers 15 species occurring between Maine and

North Carolina: Acadian redfish, American plaice, Atlantic

cod, Atlantic halibut, haddock, ocean pout, offshore hake,

pollock, red hake, silver hake, white hake, windowpane, winter flounder, witch flounder, and yellowtail flounder.) The

initial round of disaster assistance, initiated in October 1999,

was directed towards groundfish fishermen most affected

by seasonal area closures enacted in 1999 in the Gulf of

Maine. Although about 200 individual permit holders (vessel owners) in the fishery received an average of about

$12,500 each, the first round of disaster assistance did not

exhaust all of the appropriated funds. Therefore, NOAA

Fisheries initiated a second round (Round II) of disaster

assistance in March 2000. In Round II, eligibility requirements were broadened such that many more people, including both vessel owners and their crew members, became

qualified to receive one-time payments of up to $7,500 per

owner and up to $1,500 per crew member. In return for

receiving compensation, participants agreed to make their

vessel available for cooperative research projects and/or to

respond to a survey that would provide social and economic information for fisheries management.

The Social and Economic Survey that resulted from this

initiative covered six broad areas of interest to policy-makers, researchers, and stakeholders: households and communities, expenditure impacts, business practices, management and enforcement, capacity and the future, and fishing

family assistance (Appendices I and II). The survey questions solicited specific information, as well as feedback for

improving future surveys. Owners received surveys in

March 2000, and had until the middle of the following month

to complete their survey; crew received surveys in May

2000, and were given until the end of the following month to

complete their survey. Completed surveys from 286 owners

(holding ownership of 297 vessels) and 181 crew members

(representing 135 permitted vessels) were received and processed. The response rate was 78.1% for owners eligible in

both rounds, and 75.1% for crew.

This paper looks at trends across all survey respondents in order to provide a general indication of the material

available in the survey results. It does not, however, examine the connections within the set of responses for any

given survey respondent; further study will be needed to

examine the configuration of response patterns for individual fishermen in order to better approach the interplay

between meaning and practice. The eventual goal to further such study is a database maintained by the Northeast

Fisheries Science Center that will be made accessible to

outside researchers, while preserving the anonymity of survey respondents.

RESULTS

INTRODUCTORY SKETCH

The respondents can be characterized as fishermen who

predominantly fish using small- to medium-scale boats (over

80% belong to tonnage classes 1 and 2 which include boats

under 50 gross registered tons), have multispecies permits

in the fleet days-at-sea (DAS) permit category, and fish

using bottom trawls or, to a lesser extent, gill nets (Tables

1a, 2a, and 3). Compared to all other vessels with a valid

multispecies permit (hereafter the “overall groundfish fleet”),

the survey respondents fish with somewhat older and less

powerful vessels (in terms of vessel horsepower and gross

registered tonnage); yet, the distribution of size classes in

the survey population is less skewed than the overall permitted groundfish fleet (Table 1b). That is to say, both the

very small and very large vessels are not represented in the

survey population. This difference can be attributed, in

part, to the large number of multispecies vessels in the overall groundfish fleet that are permitted in the open-access

categories H-K, and that fish primarily with hand gears

(Tables 2b and 3).

Most surveyed crew members and owners live in ports

along the Gulf of Maine coast (Figures 1 and 2), while the

distribution of homeports for all vessels in the overall

groundfish fleet implies a much wider distribution of residences, though it should be noted that the vessel homeport

represents the mooring location of a vessel and cannot be

taken as synonymous with residence for all fishermen (Figure 3). Moreover, because the survey was administered to

people eligible for disaster relief from specific area closures,

the results cannot necessarily be generalized to all fishermen in the Northeast.

Yet, while the profile of the average survey respondent

may not match all of the characteristics of the average owner

or crew member in the overall groundfish fleet, survey respondents seem to resemble more closely – in terms of the

actual landings of groundfish – the region’s active core of

medium-sized, limited-access, groundfish fishermen. The

1999 landings of large-mesh groundfish were largely brought

in by bottom trawl and gillnet vessels that fished in the

individual and fleet DAS permit categories, and that were

homeported in New England (Table 4), which is in large

measure similar to characteristics of the survey respondents.

Nonetheless, whatever the uniqueness or representativeness of the group which qualified for disaster assistance

(Table 5), the survey responses provide a glimpse into how

the members of that group conduct their livelihood, into the

beliefs they have about fishing, and into the social communities in which they live.
Page 2

HOUSEHOLDS AND COMMUNITIES

Respondents were typically long-time fishermen, with

owners averaging 28 yr on the water and crew averaging 18

yr (Table 6), with an analogous difference in average ages

(47 and 38 yr old, respectively). While fewer than half of

either group claimed a father or grandfather in the industry

(Table 6), about 21% of owners and 13% of crew were associated with families having four or more generations in the

fishing industry (see Table 15). Owner households were

more than twice as likely as crew households to belong to

fishing industry organizations (51 and 19%, respectively);

nonetheless, the majority of owners and crew felt that those

organizations represented fishermen’s interests (Table 6).

While about half of all respondents had previously worked

in nonfishing jobs – with crew somewhat more likely to

have done so – both crew and owner households earned,

on average, 83-84% of their current income from the fishing

industry (Table 6). Many of these households are fishing

households, in which other family members (primarily

spouses, but also children and parents) are involved in

various aspects of the business (Table 7).

The majority of fishermen surveyed considered the

town in which they live to be a fishing community, though

less than half considered their communities dependent on

fishing (Table 6); this partial disconnect between community and dependence voices multiple notions of what constitutes a fishing community, and speaks to the need to

consider “on-the-ground” notions of economic and social

dependence when assessing communities. The fishermen

who considered their communities “fishing communities”

most commonly referred to the high number of boats, fishermen, or fishing businesses and infrastructure present

(cited by 57% of owners and 41% of crew). Another important factor noted was a long history of ties in the community to the fishing profession (27% of both owners and

crew). These percentages should be interpreted with some

caution, as many of the same respondents who considered

their town a fishing community also said their views had

changed over time, voicing concern that their communities

were being–or already had been–forced out of fishing. For

the respondents who did not regard their port as a fishing

community, the most common reasons were: a lack of fishing boats or fishing facilities, including supportive organizations (56% of owners and 58% of crew); living inland and

fishing elsewhere (18% of owners and 19% of crew); and

regional changes out of fishing due to tourism, development, or regulations (19% of owners and 11% of crew).

Yet, respondents provided more nuanced and sometimes ambiguous explanations about community in further

commentary, a better sense of which can be gained from

examining responses at a smaller scale (see also Hall-Arber

et. al (2001) for in-depth regional and port descriptions).

While the sense of not being dependent on fishing closely

coincided with the sense of being a nonfishing community,

this relationship showed regional differences. (With the

exception of Gloucester, Massachusetts, most communities did not have enough respondents for meaningful comparisons to be made, so discussion will be confined to the

state level.) Of the 82 owner respondents from Maine, 34

said they did not live in a fishing community, 47 said they

did, and 1 responded other. For those who lived in selfdeclared nonfishing communities, the overwhelming majority (94.1%) also did not consider them dependent on fishing; for those who did live in self-declared fishing communities, just over two-thirds (68.1%) also considered them

dependent on fishing. Of the 33 owner respondents from

New Hampshire, 21 said they did not live in a fishing community, and 12 said they did. For those who lived in selfdeclared nonfishing communities, the overwhelming majority (90.5%) also did not consider them dependent on fishing; for those who did live in self-declared fishing communities, only one-fourth (25.0%) also considered them dependent on fishing. Of the 106 owner respondents from

Massachusetts, not including Gloucester, 45 said they did

not live in a fishing community, 59 said they did, and 2

responded other. For those who lived in self-declared

nonfishing communities, the overwhelming majority (95.6%)

also did not considered them dependent on fishing; for

those who did live in self-declared fishing communities,

less than half (44.1%) also considered them dependent on

fishing. Owner respondents from Gloucester, Massachusetts, numbered 63, of which 62 considered Gloucester a

fishing community and only 1did not (for whom Gloucester

was also not dependent on fishing). For those who called

Gloucester a fishing community, nearly all (91.9%) also considered it dependent on fishing.

What lies behind many of these responses is a shifting

sense of what constitutes the fishing community itself, especially with respect to the respondents’ views about community members who do not fish. For example, many of the

Maine respondents who considered their ports to be fishing communities but not to be dependent on fishing, reasoned that what made their community a fishing community was a large number of fishermen working out of, or

living in, the area – particularly if there was a history of

such fisheries participation. However, what these Maine

respondents regarded as the community as a whole was

one which was primarily engaged in other activities; here,

the notion of a fishing community was more as an enclave

within a larger jurisdiction. Those who considered their

fishing communities to be dependent on fishing, tended to

view other occupations – such as those in the tourism industry or with seafood restaurants – as themselves dependent on fishing. It should be noted that these variations

often occurred among respondents claiming the same community. Yet, the survey respondents from Gloucester, in

particular, showed a remarkably consistent sense of being a

fishing community, focusing on both a history of fishing

and a strongly articulated sense of an entire community

dependent on and supportive of fishing, in contrast to respondents from other towns who wrote of how the greater

community now works against them.
Page 3

Of course, it is easy to read too much into short survey

answers, and understanding the differences and the representations of community lends itself better to ethnographic

interviewing. But the point is not so much that one set of

answers is right and the other wrong, but that one’s notions of, and mutual commitments to, a community are colored precisely by the variety of relations that constitute

and affect community. As one respondent explained, his

community was dependent on fishing because “There are

hundreds of families that live on cape year[-]round who

make their living from the sea.” He reasoned, nonetheless,

that he didn’t live in a fishing community because “The

cape is [being] overrun by development. There is a fishing

community here, but it[’]s becoming harder to find.”

EXPENDITURE IMPACTS OF FISHING INDUSTRY

IN NEW ENGLAND

The Social and Economic Survey solicited data on the

flow of fishing costs and expenditures through 13 broad

regions: Downeast Maine, Upper Mid-Coast Maine, Lower

Mid-Coast Maine, Southern Maine, New Hampshire Coast,

Gloucester/North Shore, Boston/South Shore, Cape and

Islands, New Bedford Area, Rhode Island, Connecticut

Coast, Non-Coastal New England, and Outside New England (Appendices I and II).

Based on all survey respondents, most captains (95.3%)

and crew (82.3%) lived in their vessel’s home region, and

most vessels also purchased the majority of their fishing

and vessel needs in their home region (Table 8). Of these

purchases, bait (for those applicable), moorage fees, fuel,

and food were more likely acquired in the home region;

likewise, crew spent the majority of their income in their

home regions as well. Insurance and new gear, on the other

hand, were less likely to be acquired in a vessel’s home

region. Most respondents did not believe that recent closures or other regulations had significantly changed in which

of the 13 regions they made purchases or spent their income; however, some fishermen noted that the level of their

purchases had decreased, while others wrote that they were

doing business in larger metropolitan areas because of, for

example, port changes due to area closures, or because

smaller, local businesses had closed.

FISHING BUSINESS PRACTICES

According to the vessel owners surveyed, the most

significant changes in fishing business practices due to the

past 5 yr of regulations were: “decreased time spent on the

water,” “postponed new gear,” “changed fishing location,”

“took on less crew,” and “cut back on gear and vessel maintenance” (Table 9). These changes can have many different implications, from financial solvency to community impacts to vessel safety, to mention a few. The following

subsections explore these implications further, drawing from

selected questions in this section of the survey (Appendices I and II, Section 3).

Changes in Number and Composition of Crew

The average number of crew members working on the

vessels represented in the survey decreased from 2.1 in

1994 to 1.8 in 2000 (see Table 16). The stability and composition of the crew may have also changed, for while almost

all (93.4%) of the crew survey respondents said that they

were considered a regular crew member of one boat, almost

one-third (29.8%) also said that the crew changes during

the year. The most common explanations for crew changes

were that the boat was not making money (30%) or that

there were personal problems between the owner and the

crew or within the crew (19%) – neither of which are necessarily unique to the current regulatory climate. Another

common explanation for lack of stability was a reduction in

available crew “sites” (a term commonly used by fishermen

to mean a billet or employment on a vessel) explicitly attributed to area and DAS regulations (21%). Further, while

24% of crew survey respondents saw no change in the type

of individuals being drawn to fishing occupations, 38% indicated that crew members overall were getting older (or

that few young people were going into the profession),

13% noted that new and different ethnic groups and nationalities were entering those occupations, 12% said that

reliable and knowledgeable help was becoming harder to

find, and 9% said that the crew was in fact getting younger.

Despite these differences, what many of these responses seemed to share was a concern that fishing was

increasingly seen as an unreliable source of income, and

that a strong outside economy was both drawing away its

core and changing a traditional family and life cycle of crew

to owner. To what extent these changes vary regionally,

affect already existing differences among ports in the crewto-owner cycle (see Smith and Peterson 1977), or themselves

engender significantly different social relations, bears

greater attention in future studies.

Time at Sea

Another possible indication of changing social relations – within the boat, family, and community – can be

inferred from practices such as time away at sea. Over half

(58.1%) of crew respondents stated that the amount of time

they spent away from home had changed compared to 5 yr

ago: 44.8% said that time away at sea had increased (primarily due to moving farther offshore, or taking longer trips to

find fish), 39.0% said that time away at sea had decreased

(primarily due to increasingly stringent regulatory changes

such as DAS cuts), and 3.8% said it had both increased and

decreased in that they were at sea less often, but when they

were gone the trips had become considerably longer. (The

remaining 12.4% of respondents gave no answer.)
Page 4

Vessel Safety

Slightly over half (54.2%) of owners responded that

their vessel had needed help either while fishing at sea or in

returning to port at least once during the past 5 yr, of which

those required help on average 2.9 times (range of 1-32)

during the 1995-99 period. The average number of times for

vessels needing help in any given year was relatively constant (between 1.4 and 1.6 times a year), although the number of vessels that needed help did vary annually (Table

10). Of those owners who had not required any assistance

at sea during this 5-yr period, they still had delayed trips

due to mechanical or electrical problems during the last 12

mo of the period, on average 2.5 times (range of 0-52). By

contrast, those who had required assistance at sea had a

slightly higher number of delayed trips during the last 12

mo, on average 2.9 times (range of 0-20). However, respondents claimed that most (84% for owners and 86% for crew)

of the fishermen they knew had all the required safety equipment in good operating order on their vessels.

Recent studies have indicated that the probability of

vessel accidents decreased in the decade prior to the time

period of the survey (Jin et. al [in review]); yet, whether

assistance at sea varies inversely or directly with the documented accident rate, and how assistance needs may interact with and be influenced by risk-taking, deferred maintenance, and regulatory inducements, require future study.

Income Effects

Owners were also asked what factors have affected their

ability to make a living, and both owners and crew members

were asked how changing regulations have affected their

household finances. The factors cited most commonly by

owners as having a “very negative effect” on their livelihood included “increased marine fishery regulation” (83.6%),

“increased costs of harvesting fish” (45.1%), and “loss of

habitat” (42.7%). Other factors cited by owners less commonly as having a “very negative effect” were “coastal

development” (18.9%), “increased number of recreational

fishers” (20.3%), and “loss of markets for harvested fish”

(24.5%). Only 5.2% of owners and 5.0% of crew listed no

changes in their household finances; the most common

changes, similar for both groups (Table 9), were reducing or

eliminating savings, cutting back or eliminating vacations,

and postponing the purchase of new vehicles. Owners

(40.6%) also cut back on insurance in general (including

vessel, home, auto, health, life, and/or unspecified insurances), while almost one-quarter (23.8%) specified they had

no health insurance at all (see Table 15). The insurance

situation was more acute for crew, with almost half (49.2%)

indicating that they had reduced or eliminated insurance in

general (including auto, health, life, and/or unspecified insurances), while over half (55.2%) of crew respondents specified that they had no health insurance whatsoever.

With respect to nonfishing income, 44.4% of owners

reported some increase or a major increase (25.2 and 19.1%,

respectively [note that totals may differ from sums of components due to rounding error of components]) in their dependence on nonfishing income during the past 5 yr, while

a nearly equal percentage of owners (46.5%) reported no

change. Many of the owner respondents incurred an increased debt load to cover reduced fishing income, with

59.5% of owners reporting some increase or a major increase

(31.5 and 28.0%, respectively) in the use of loans and other

credit during 1995-99; 29.0% of owner respondents, however, saw no change in debt load during this time period. In

terms of changing labor practices–which both reflect and

further impact these changes – 30.1% of owners experienced some decrease or a major decrease (12.9 and 17.2%,

respectively) in the use of nonfamily hired labor or crew

(47.2% saw no change); 41.9% reported some increase or a

major increase (27.6 and 14.3%, respectively) in the use of

family labor (49.0% saw no change); and 50.4% indicated

some increase or a major increase (30.8 and 19.6%, respectively) in the need for family members in more roles (40.9%

saw no change). To what extent these changes indicate

permanent structural changes in labor relations warrants

further study.

Responses to Closures

Owners were specifically asked how their fishing practices change when one of their traditional fishing grounds

is closed. The most common answers were: “fish in the

closest area to the closed area, if there is a reasonable chance

of success for the same species” (67.8%), “go to the next

area that has a reasonable chance for the species I’m allowed to fish” (59.8%), “try several areas around the closed

area” (49.7%), and “depending on length/size of closure,

might switch target species” (45.5%). Other responses less

commonly cited by owners were “depending on length/size

of the closure, might move to a different port altogether”

(22.0%), and “fish in closed area with exempted gear”

(21.3%). The fact that fishermen seem less likely to move to

a different port is good news for those concerned about

community disruption due to closures, though other factors in maintaining sustainable communities need to be examined.

Marketing Changes

Most fishermen (60.5%) indicated that they chose a

dealer trip by trip, basing decisions according to the particular species they were selling (31.8%) or by shopping

around for the best price (28.7%). Other fishermen had

dealers prearranged before their trip (27.6%) or sold to an

organization to which they belonged (15.1%). A number of

owners (15.4%) indicated that they also sold their catch at
Page 5

an auction. When specifically asked to compare auction to

nonauction sales, auctions came out on top in 11 of 12

possible categories, for example, “speed of sale,” “treated

well,” “quality is rewarded,” “speed of payment,” and “firm

prices”; only “personal contact” received a higher rating

under nonauction sales. About 5% of owners, however,

commented that they had no options for their sales and

marketing practices: that there was only one dealer or auction in town, or that local businesses were closing down

and forcing them to go to larger towns. Thus, regional

stability implied in the results of the Section 3 of the survey

(“Expenditure Impacts of Fishing Industry in New England”)

does not preclude the possibility of microlevel changes

and impacts, and reiterates the need for local-level studies.

MANAGEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT

Mesh-size regulations were the management measures

considered by both owners and crew to most effectively

reduce fishing mortality, and least negatively impact income

and family life (Table 11). Large, long-term closures were

deemed hardest on families and finances, while trip limits

and overall quotas (total allowable catches or TACs) were

seen as least effective in reducing fishing mortality. The

strength and consistency of these responses echo views

expressed by others in the fishing industry, and may indicate that these views are generally shared by many fishermen.

Responses to questions about management processes

(Table 12) reveal that more public outreach and involvement are needed. Most respondents (71.4% of owners and

87.3% of crew) had either never or seldom attended a Council or Committee meeting. A little more than half of the

owners (59.1%) and crew (51.4%) felt that they understood

the Council/Committee management system; 65.0% of owners and 56.9% of crew felt that they knew the important laws

that guide the fisheries management process. At the same

time, a little more than half of owners (53.9%) indicated they

needed more information about regulations to conduct their

businesses better, a need second only to more information

about gear technology (cited by 62.6%). About three-quarters of both groups felt that they understood fish population dynamics, but only about one-third of owners and onefourth of crew felt that they knew how economic information was used in the management process, and fewer of

these fishermen said they understood how social and cultural information was used (55% of owners, however, felt

they knew why such information was important). Moreover, 73.4% of owner respondents and 54.7% of crew respondents felt that their views do not get expressed in the

formal Council/Committee management process, and a number of respondents who answered that their views were

expressed, tempered that sentiment by explaining that they

still were not listened to. These responses speak to a feeling, among some owners and crew, of disenfranchisement

in the management process.

Most respondents (92.3% of owners and 90.1% of crew),

nonetheless, indicated that fishermen generally want to

comply with regulations. Almost all respondents (95.8% of

owners and 97.8% of crew) believed that at least 50% of

commercial fishermen usually or always complied with

groundfish laws and regulations, and over half of respondents (55.2% of owners and 50.8% of crew) believed that

95-100% of fishermen did so. The majority of respondents

also felt that there was adequate enforcement both at sea

(84.6% of owners and 85.1% of crew) and on the dock (81.1%

of owners and 86.7% of crew).

Compliance and enforcement are not limited to just federal and state regulations, however, for the responses to a

question asking owners which “local, informal, traditional

fishing rules or codes or agreements (not federal or state

regulations) affect how you fish,” indicated a vital system

of local practices. Most commonly cited were: “rules or

traditions for avoiding gear damage to other gears” (61.2%),

“rules that limit where I fish” (54.9%), “rules or traditions to

minimize waste and discards and encourage conservation”

(53.9%), “rules that designate areas for different gears”

(52.8%), “rules that limit when I fish” (52.8%), and “rules for

cooperation among same gear vessels” (45.5%). These findings are consistent with the literature on community-based

management (see McGoodwin 1990 for an overview), which

has documented the many possible and extant forms of

regulation and resource management, and the disenchantment of many fishermen with institutional arrangements of

“top-down” management.

CAPACITY AND THE FUTURE

Many stakeholders have become increasingly concerned about the future of fishermen and fishing communities. Fishermen’s associations, special partnerships, and

vision statements have been created – in part – in the past

5 yr in response to changing management regulations.

Economists, anthropologists, and other social scientists

working in fisheries have also been concerned with how

individuals and communities are reacting to and planning

for these changes. The survey revealed that many of the

respondents neither see the need for much change in fleet

structure or fishing practices, nor are optimistic about effective changes in future management strategies. Most

respondents believe that current levels of fishing capacity

(number of vessels, total effort, etc.) are reasonable for current stock conditions, and do not believe there will be too

much active fishing capacity for a rebuilt biomass to sustain. The majority had no plans to reduce their own effort

when stocks rebuild; almost half had made investments,

mostly in gear, to increase their current catch per day.

Most respondents also plan to continue fishing themselves (see next section on “Fishing Family Assistance”),

and 63.5% of crew still want to own their own vessel, even

though 55.8% have changed their expectations of doing so

over the past 5 yr. Nonetheless, only one-quarter of re-
Page 6

spondents would advise young people to go into fishing

(Table 13). The majority of respondents (86.7% of owners

and 79.0% of crew) believe that the current permit system

reduces flexibility for fishermen, but only just over one-half

think that system could be changed without increasing fishing pressure on stocks (Table 13). Similarly, only 26.5% of

the crew respondents think that crew members should be

licensed. About one-third thought there could be advantages to a system of localized control of fishing capacity

such as the Maine lobster management zones (primarily

because it would take into account area characteristics and

allow fishermen a more direct responsibility), but 28.0% of

owners, and even more crew (44.8%), thought such a system would ultimately not work.

Both owners and crew were presented with a list of

possible goals for fisheries in the Northeast region, and

showed very similar tendencies in the ranking of the different objectives (Table 14). The goals with which respondents most “strongly agreed” or “agreed” were: “maximum

benefits to the community” (83.3% of owners and 74.1% of

crew), “secure places for existing fishermen with opportunities not reduced by new entrants” (76.2% of owners and

75.2% of crew), “maximum possible number of fishing jobs

the resource can support” (60.5% of owners and 64.1% of

crew), “harvest capacity matched to resources” (72.7% of

owners and 60.7% of crew), “new entrants limited to numbers exiting” (55.9% of owners and 49.2% of crew), and

“maximum economic benefits to the nation” (61.5% of owners and 47.0% of crew). The only goal that was evenly split

in interpretation – and evenly split for both owners and

crew – was “maximum possible number of fishermen.” Finally, the only goal with which respondents most “strongly

disagreed” or “disagreed” was “unlimited entry in any fishery” (68.5% of owners and 57.5% of crew). These responses

speak to an accordance with notions of both ecological

and social sustainability.

FISHING FAMILY ASSISTANCE

The Social and Economic Survey also solicited views

on the fishing family assistance programs that have been

available over the past 5 yr (Appendix I and II, section 6).

About three-fourths of the respondents were aware of these

programs, though almost as many had never used them

(Table 15). Less than one-third (31.8%) of the owners expressed interest in using free computer and Internet access

at the fishing family assistance centers, and even fewer

owners (18.9%) were interested in attending career orientation workshops; the vast majority (93.7%) were committed

to staying in fishing. Among crew however, there was more

interest in both using the centers and in career workshops,

despite a strong commitment to continue fishing.

While the surveyed fishermen as a whole do not wish

to leave the industry, they are considering other, at least

temporary, options to their normal fishing patterns. Almost

half of the owners surveyed (46.2%) were interested in a

vessel buyback program, and 71.0% were interested in using their vessel in additional ways such as research, charter, day-hire, and training (Table 16). Over half (61.5%) of

the owners indicated they would like more information on

gear technology, and almost half were interested in additional information on grants and regulations. Finally, while

a minority of crew and owner respondents cited a need for

assistance in, for example, applying for loans or setting up

a new business (Table 15), crew respondents were somewhat more likely than owners to say they did need such

assistance. Overall, most respondents expressed satisfaction with the opportunities available at the fishing family

assistance centers, although the responses may also indicate that a need exists for greater outreach to crew members.

SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION

Stakeholder surveys can begin to give fishery analysts

and managers a better sense of the knowledge, practices,

and beliefs of fishing participants, in order to move toward

better-informed management and policy planning. This

paper has presented results from the Social and Economic

Survey that, while summarized across all respondents, have

illustrated both the degree of similarity and diversity within

the overall groundfish fleet. For example, while the effects

from regulatory changes were consistently acknowledged

by respondents, the particular kinds of effects, and their

distribution, often varied: some respondents saw crew

members getting younger, others saw them getting older;

some respondents saw trips getting longer, others saw them

getting shorter. This diversity may hinge on any number of

considerations – from sociotechnological factors such as

gear and vessel size, to regional and port differences – which

this paper has only begun to explore. Indeed, while some

survey results corroborate accepted arguments in the social sciences of fishing, other survey results seem to point

to possible divergences. As one example, active participation in informal management practices that exist outside the

federal and state regulatory framework is consistent with

the literature on community-based management; yet, the

general rejection as workable of attempts at local areas of

control such as the Maine lobster zones suggests some

qualification of what “local” means for mobile gear types.

As another example, many social science studies of fishing

have focused on the role of kinship, family, and history in

constituting fishing practices and businesses; yet, here we

see the average respondent often being the first generation

to fish, but one whose community – if not immediate family

– may be centrally involved in fishing activities.

While these observations invite further exploration and

research, the survey results themselves point in a number

of directions. These survey results project an image of a

group of fishermen who feel disenfranchised from the fed-
Page 7

eral management process; yet, these results also show promise for future management direction. For many respondents,

visions of the future seemed to center on notions of community and community relations as alternative spaces for

institutional foundations; that is to say, communities were

seen by many as the most appropriate level at which to

incorporate fishermen’s knowledge and to negotiate decisions. Yet, such notions again raise questions about the

relations among communities, localities, and fishing

grounds, and about the differing modes of, and relations

involved in, resource management (see also Pálsson 1991;

McCay 2000). In answering questions about capacity and

the future, neither owners nor crew saw any signs of excess

capacity in the fleet as currently constituted; yet, the most

clearly stated goals for the future were a strong position

against unlimited entry and a strong agreement for securing maximum benefits to the community. At the same time,

while flows of resources and personnel across a regional

level bespoke a relative stability, other answers indicated

instability and anxiety at the port level, particularly for smaller

ones and those faced with forces other than fishing and

fisheries management, such as tourism and waterfront development. Here again, we face the dissonance among definitions of fishing community, definitions of community, and

notions of dependence on fishing, where “community” may

encompass various meanings and varying degrees of exclusion and inclusion. What communities can become and

can do, for these very reasons, may serve as a “key symbol” that coalesces the concerns and practices of future

fisheries management. It is hoped, therefore, that these

summaries of responses to selected questions not only assist in the refinement of other such surveys in the future,

but also inspire greater cooperative research on, and attention to, the patterns of responses and the sociocultural

configurations underlying stakeholder beliefs and practices.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors acknowledge the assistance and editorial

advice provided by Drs. Eric Thunberg, Phil Logan, and

Fred Serchuk, and the informative and articulate responses

provided by the fishermen who participated in the survey.

REFERENCES CITED

Hall-Arber, M.; Dyer, C.; Poggie, J.; McNally, J.; Gagne, R.

2001. New England’s fishing communities. MIT [Mass.

Inst. Technol.] Sea Grant Publ. MITSG01-15. Available

from: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge,

MA.

Jin, D.; Kite-Powell, H.; Thunberg, E.; Solow, A.; Talley, W. In

review. A model of fishing vessel accident probability. J.

Safety Res.

McCay, B. 2000. Sea changes in fisheries policy: contributions from anthropology. In: Durrenberger, E.P.; King, T.,

eds. State and community in fisheries management: power,

policy, and practice. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey; p.

201-217.

McGoodwin, J.R. 1990. Crisis in the world’s fisheries: people,

problems, and policies. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Pálsson, G. 1991. Coastal economics, cultural accounts: human ecology and Icelandic discourses. Manchester, UK:

Manchester University Press.

Smith, L.; Peterson, S. 1977. The New England fishing industry: a basis for management. WHOI [Woods Hole

Oceanogr. Inst.] Tech. Rep. 77-57. Available from: Woods

Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA.
Page 8 Table 1a. Characteristics of the 297 vessels owned by the 286 owner respondents in the Social and Economic Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies

Fishery Disaster Assistance Program. (Data based on 1999 permit data, representing the last valid permit at the end of fishing year 1999.)

Gross

Year Percentage Hull Percentage Vessel Percentage Registered Percentage Length Percentage

Built of vessels Material of Vessels Horsepower of Vessels Tons of Vessels (ft) of VesselsPre-1950 6.7 Fiberglass 47.5 <200 10.4 < 25 46.8 < 40 27.31950-69 14.1 Wood 33.7 200-249 14.1 25-49 34.7 40-44 25.6

1970-76 15.8 Steel 17.5 250-299 20.9 50-74 11.4 45-49 15.2

1977-83 32.7 Other 1.3 300-399 35.4 75-99 4.0 50-59 20.2

1984-89 22.9 400 19.2 100 3.0 60 11.8

1990+ 7.7Average 324.4 33.2 46.6

Table 1b. Comparative characteristics of all 3,714 vessels with a valid multispecies permit during fishing year 1999. (Data based on 1999 permit data, representing the last valid

permit at the end of fishing year 1999.)

Gross

Year Percentage Hull Percentage Vessel Percentage Registered Percentage Length Percentage

Built of vessels Material of Vessels Horsepower of Vessels Tons of Vessels (ft) of Vessels

Pre-1950 2.6 Fiberglass 58.4 <200 17.0 < 25 63.0 < 40 53.2

1950-69 11.7 Wood 20.9 200-249 14.9 25-49 13.8 40-44 13.7

1970-76 15.9 Steel 18.4 250-299 9.3 50-74 5.3 45-49 5.3

1977-83 28.4 Other 2.2 300-399 24.7 75-99 4.4 50-59 6.7

1984-89 24.7 400 34.0 100 13.2 60 21.2

1990+ 16.6

Average 391.9 38.2 44.0
Page 9

Table 2a. Multispecies permit characteristics of the 297 vessels owned by the 286 owner respondents in the Social and Economic Survey

administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program. (Data based on 1999 permit

data, representing the last valid multispecies permit at the end of fishing year 1999; DAS = days at sea.)

Multispecies Number Percentage Average

Permit Category of Vessels of Vessels Allocated DAS

A (Individual DAS) 31 10.4 122.6

B (Fleet DAS) 255 85.9 88.0

D (Hook gear) 6 2.0 88.0

G (Large-mesh fleet DAS) 3 1.0 120.0

K (Nonregulated) 2 0.7 N/A

Table 2b. Comparative permit characteristics of all 3,714 vessels with a valid multispecies permit during fishing year 1999. (Data based

on 1999 permit data, representing the last valid multispecies permit at the end of fishing year 1999; DAS = days at sea.)

Multispecies Number Percentage Average

Permit Category of Vessels of Vessels Allocated DAS

A (Individual DAS) 137 3.7 126.8

B (Fleet DAS) 1,269 34.2 88.0

C (Small vessel exemption) 14 0.4 N/A

D (Hook gear) 197 5.3 88.0

E (Combination vessel) 42 1.1 45.2

G (Large-mesh fleet DAS) 17 0.5 120.0

H (Hand gear) 895 24.1 N/A

I (Charter/party boat) 406 10.9 N/A

J (Scallop possession limit) 158 4.3 N/A

K (Nonregulated) 579 15.6 N/A
Page 10

Table 3. Primary fishing gear used by the 297 vessels owned by the 286 owner respondents in the Social and Economic Survey

administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program, compared to the primary

fishing gear used by all 3,714 vessels with a valid multispecies permit during fishing year 1999. (Data based on 1999 permit

data, representing the last valid multispecies permit at the end of fishing year 1999.)

Vessels Owned by Survey Respondents All Vessels with Permits

Number Percentage Number Percentage

Gear Type of Vessels of Vesselsa of Vessels of Vesselsa

Bottom trawl 185 62.3 1,043 28.1

Gill net 78 26.3 364 9.8

Longline or setline 19 6.4 311 8.4

Handline 6 2 692 18.6

Other trawl 3 1 18 0.5

Rod and reel 3 1 1,120 30.2

Purse seine 1 0.3 5 0.1

Boat seine 1 0.3 2 0.1

Boat dredge 1 0.3 100 2.7

Pots and traps 0 0 46 1.2

Midwater trawl 0 0 7 0.2

Unknown 0 0 6 0.2

Total 297 100 3,714 100

a

Totals may differ from sums of components due to rounding error of components.
Page 11

Table 4. Distribution of large-mesh groundfish landings by gear type, by multispecies permit category, and by homeport state for all

3,714 vessels with a valid multispecies permit during calendar year 1999. (Data based on logbooks and permits. Only values

of 2.5% or more are shown. Large-mesh groundfish include all of the species in the Northeast multispecies fishery complex

except ocean pout, offshore hake, and silver hake.)

Gear Landings Percentage Permit Landings Percentage Homeport Landings Percentage

Type (lb) of total Category (lb) of total State (lb) of total

Bottom trawl 47,407,740 73.7 B 30,444,151 47.3 M A 37,563,794 58.4

Sink gill net 10,993,992 17.1 A 29,666,838 46.1 ME 11,700,584 18.2

Bottom longline 3,171,839 4.9 E 1,589,261 2.5 RI 5,689,393 8.8

NH 3,076,254 4.8

NY 2,610,770 4.1

Table 5. Permits held by the 297 vessels owned by the 286 owner respondents in the Social and Economic Survey administered during

Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program, compared to permits held by all 3,714 vessels

with a valid multispecies permit during fishing year 1999. (Data based on 1999 permit data, representing the last valid permit

at the end of fishing year 1999.)

Vessels Owned

by Survey Respondents All Vessels with Permits

Number Percentage Number Percentage

Permits of Vessels of Vessels of Vessels of Vessels

By Individual Fishery Management Plan

Multispecies a

290 97.6 3,714 100.0

Scallop–general (open access) 266 89.6 1,891 50.9

Dogfish 261 87.9 2,182 58.8

Monkfish 245 82.5 1,909 51.4

Lobster 243 81.8 1,915 51.6

Squid-Mackerel-Butterfish 205 69.0 2,491 67.1

Surf Clam 128 43.1 1,252 33.7

Ocean Quahog 122 41.1 1,166 31.4

Summer Flounder 84 28.3 1,413 38.0

Scup 64 21.5 1,264 34.0

Black Sea Bass 24 8.1 1,224 33.0

Scallop–limited access 0 0.0 256 7.9

By Combination (5% or more of vessels) of Fishery Management Plans

Dogfish, Lobster, Monkfish, Multispecies, Scallop -- general, 34 11.4 71 1.9

and Squid-Mackerel-Butterfish

Dogfish, Lobster, Monkfish, Multispecies, and Scallop 19 6.4 44 1.2

-- general

Dogfish, Lobster, Monkfish, Multispecies, Ocean Quahog, 15 5.1 94 2.5

Scallop -- general, Squid-Mackerel-Butterfish, and Surf Clam

Multispecies only 1 0.3 259 7.0

a

All 297 vessels had a multispecies permit at some point during fishing year 1999. For the seven vessels that no longer retained their

multispecies permit as their last valid permit during fishing year 1999: five canceled due to “transfer” or “vessel owner changed”, one

due to “permitted fisheries changed,” and one due to “permit sanction.”
Page 12

Table 6. Summary of responses to selected questions and data requests on households and communities, asked in the Social and

Economic Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program

 Survey

 Question Asked / Data Requested Owner Only Crew Only

How long have you been in commercial fishing? Avg.: 28.0 yr Avg. 17.8 yr

Range: 7-60 Range: 0-53

Average age of respondent: Avg.: 46.8 yr Avg.: 38.3 yr

Was your father a commercial fisherman? 44.1% Yes 44.8% Yes

Was your grandfather a commercial fisherman? 40.9% Yes 38.7% Yes

If applicable, does your spouse come from a fishing family? 19.9% Yes 13.8% Yes

10.1% N/A 26.0% N/A

Have the fishermen in your household ever worked outside the fishing industry? 45.8% Yes 54.7% Yes

What percent of your household’s total annual income comes from all aspects of the fishing Avg.: 83.9% Avg.: 82.7%

industry? Range: 0-100 Range: 0-100

Number of persons who live in your household: Avg.: 3.2 Avg.: 2.7

Range: 1-8 Range: 1-6

Do any members of your household belong to any fishing-related organizations? 51.4% Yes 19.3% Yes

Do you feel these groups represent fishermen’s interests? 62.2% Yes 58.0% Yes

How long have you lived in the town you live in now? Avg.: 31.0 yr Avg.: 22.0 yr

Range: 1-70 Range: 1-62

Do you consider this town a fishing community? 62.9% Yes 58.0% Yes

Do you consider this town a community that is dependent on the fishing industry? 43.4% Yes 43.6% Yes

Table 7. Summary of responses to selected data requests on family involvement, asked in the Social and Economic Survey administered

during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program

Fishermen (owners only) Spouse or Other (not including hired help)

Average Hours per Percentage with Average Hours per Percentage with

 Data Requested Week (if hours > 0) Hours > 0 Week (if hours > 0) Hours > 0

Household finances 3.0 47.9 5.7 71.3

Operating the boat 68.5 81.8 24.0 4.2

Record keeping 4.4 69.9 6.1 48.6

Supervising crew 43.9 61.2 4.9 2.8

Sales 5.9 60.1 6.2 8.7

Repair and maintenance 14.2 85.3 10.0 7.0

Nonfishing employment 21.6 9.8 33.4 35.3
Page 13

Table 8. Summary of responses to selected questions on regional impacts of expenditures, asked in the Social and Economic Survey

administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program

Percent of

Question Asked Yes Answers

Trip needs purchased in vessel home region?:

Fuel 92.2

Ice 87.7

Food 92.0

Bait 95.2

New gear 66.3

Repair needs purchased in vessel home region?:

Hull 80.3

Engine 75.8

Gear 73.0

Electronics 76.5

Fixed needs purchased in vessel home region?:

Insurance 55.4

Accounting 87.1

Legal 88.1

Moorage 92.9

Captains live in vessel home region? 95.3

Crew members live in vessel home region? 82.3

Crew income spent in home region? a

89.0-90.0

Owner survey: Area closures shifted where purchases made? 19.9

Owner survey: Other regulations shifted where purchases made? 15.0

Crew survey: Area closures or other regulations changed where income spent? 22.7

a

Crew whose own home region was the same as their vessel home region spent on average 89.0% of their income in that region.

Crew whose own home region differed from their vessel home region spent on average 90.0% of their income between the two

regions (41.6% in the vessel home region and 48.4% in their home region).
Page 14

Table 9. Summary of responses to selected questions on changes in fishing business practices during the past five years due to

regulations, asked in the Social and Economic Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery

Disaster Assistance Program

 Percent of Yes Answers

Question Asked Owners Crew

Changes in fishing practices?:

Spent less time on water 73.1 N/A

Postponed new gear 71.3 N/A

Changed fishing location 68.5 N/A

Took on less crew 67.5 N/A

Cut back on maintenance 66.1 N/A

Switched gears 57.3 N/A

Engaged in less exploratory fishing 49.7 N/A

Fished more species 47.2 N/A

Postponed new motor 43.0 N/A

Changes in household finances (for at least 10% of respondents)?:

Cut back on savings 56.3 70.2

Cut back on vacations 54.2 53.0

Postponed new car/truck 44.1 51.4

Cut back on insurance 40.6 49.2

Cut back on clothes 21.3 25.4

Cut back on repairs 21.0 <10

Reduced spending overall 19.9 16.0

Postponed or sold home 17.8 31.5

Table 10. Summary of responses to selected data requests on assistance required at sea during 1995-99, asked in the Social and Economic

Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program

Average Number

Number of Vessels of Times a Vessel

Year Requiring Assistance Required Assistance

1995 45 1.5

1996 54 1.6

1997 72 1.5

1998 73 1.5

1999 64 1.4
Page 15

Table 11. Summary of responses to selected questions on management alternatives, asked in the Social and Economic Survey administered

during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program. (Responses were ranked scores, where 1

= most and 6 = least; table values are average ranks of scores.)

Effective in Reducing Difficult for a Family Hard on Net Income

Fishing Mortality? to Adjust To? or Profits?

Alternative Owner Crew Owner Crew Owner Crew

DAS limits 2.8 2.9 3.1 2.7 2.8 2.8

Large, long-term closed areas 3.3 3.4 1.8 2.2 1.8 2.2

 (Most difficult) (Most impact)

Short-term closed areas 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.2 3.3

Mesh-size regulations 1.7 1.9 4.9 4.6 4.3 4.3

 (Most effective) (Least difficult) (Least impact)

Trip limits 3.8 3.9 2.9 2.8 2.7 2.6

Overall quotas (TACs) 4.5 4.2 2.9 2.9 3.0 2.9

 (Least effective)

Table 12. Summary of responses to selected questions on management and enforcement, asked in the Social and Economic Survey

administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program

Survey

Question Asked Owner Only Crew Only

Do you feel you understand the Council/Committee management system? 59.1% Yes 51.4% Yes

How often do you express your views to the Council or a Committee of 23.1% Never 37.0% Never

the Council in person or in writing over a year? 48.3% Seldom 50.3% Seldom

Do you think you have a basic understanding about fish population dynamics? 72.4% Yes 75.1% Yes

Do you feel you know the important laws (like the Magnuson Act)

that guide the fisheries management process? 65.0% Yes 56.9% Yes

Do you think you know how economic information is used in the

management process? 32.2% Yes 26.5% Yes

Do you know how social/cultural information is used in the management process? 23.4% Yes 12.7% Yes
Page 16

Table 13. Summary of responses to selected questions on capacity and the future, asked in the Social and Economic Survey administered

during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program

Survey

Question Asked Owner Only Crew Only

Do you think the current permit system reduces flexibility for 86.7% Yes 79.0% Yes

fishermen?

Do you think the permit system could be changed to increase 56.0% Yes 52.5% Yes

flexibility without increasing pressure on stocks?

Do you see advantages to more local control of fishing capacity 35.8% Yes 33.7% Yes

and/or effort such as with lobster management by zones in Maine?

Can you think of any existing groups or organizations that could 23.1% Existing group 17.1% Existing group

play that role, or would new groups and organizations need to be 48.3% Need new group 22.7% Need new group

started? 28.0% Won’t work anyway 44.8% Won’t work anyway

Do you think there is too much active capacity now for stocks to 14.0% Yes 18.2% Yes

recover without more regulations?

Do you think there will be too much active capacity for stocks to stay 25.9% Yes 21.5% Yes

recovered when they do come back?

Have you invested in equipment to increase your catch per day as 48.3% Yes N/A

your days at sea have been reduced?

When stocks recover will you reduce your fishing effort? 25.2% Yes N/A

Would you advise young people to go into the fishing industry? 27.3% Yes 22.1% Yes
Page 17

Table 14. Summary of responses to selected questions on goals for fisheries, asked in the Social and Economic Survey administered

during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program

 Percentage of Agreement

Respondent Strongly Strongly

Goal Category Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Disagree

Maximum economic benefits to the nation Owner 24.8 36.7 24.1 6.3 4.5

Crew 15.5 31.5 37.6 9.9 2.2

Harvest capacity matched to resources Owner 27.6 45.1 16.1 6.6 2.4

Crew 17.1 43.6 22.7 9.4 4.4

Unlimited entry in any fishery Owner 7.3 9.1 12.6 19.2 49.3

Crew 9.4 11.0 18.2 22.7 34.8

New entrants limited to numbers exiting Owner 24.1 31.8 16.1 10.5 12.6

Crew 13.3 35.9 28.2 13.3 5.5

Secure places for existing fishermen with Owner 44.4 31.8 11.5 5.2 4.5

opportunities not reduced by new entrants

Crew 39.8 35.4 16.0 3.9 2.2

Maximum benefits to the community Owner 39.2 44.1 10.8 2.4 1.0

Crew 34.3 39.8 20.4 2.8 0.0

Maximum possible number of fishermen Owner 13.6 19.2 30.4 19.2 15.0

Crew 13.3 20.4 33.1 19.3 8.8

Maximum possible number of fishing jobs Owner 26.9 33.6 23.8 7.7 5.9

the resource can support

Crew 22.7 41.4 22.7 6.1 4.4
Page 18

Table 15. Summary of responses to selected questions on fishing family assistance asked of both owners and crew in the Social and

Economic Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program

Survey

Question Asked Owner Only Crew Only

Are you aware of Fishing Family Assistance type programs? 82.2% Yes 71.8% Yes

Have you ever used any of these programs? 22.0% Yes 21.5% Yes

Would you use a center that provided free Internet access, computer use for resumes, 31.8% Yes 60.8% Yes

want ads, etc.?

Are you planning to stay in fishing? 93.7% Yes 87.3% Yes

How many generations of your family have been involved in the fishing industry? Avg.: 2.5 Avg.: 2.2

Distribution: Distribution:

N/A: 8% N/A: 12%

0: 6% 0: 9%

1: 25% 1: 29%

2: 20% 2: 17%

3: 19% 3: 20%

4+: 21% 4+: 13%

Would you be interested in participating in a fishermen’s round-table on gear conflict, 57.7% Yes 54.1% Yes

new gear and technology, or some other topic?

Would you be interested in attending a career orientation workshop? 18.9% Yes 37.6% Yes

Do you have health insurance? 76.2% Yes 44.8% Yes

Were you fishing in 1994? 96.9% Yes 89.5% Yes

Do you need assistance in preparing any of the following?:

Loan/credit availability 21.3% Yes 29.3% Yes

Bankruptcy/foreclosure 5.6% Yes 6.1% Yes

Setting up new business 11.5% Yes 22.1% Yes

Other 8.0% Yes 9.4% Yes
Page 19

Table 16. Summary of responses to selected questions on fishing family assistance asked of only owners in the Social and Economic

Survey administered during Round II of the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Disaster Assistance Program

Question Asked Owner Survey

Do you fish alone? 26.9% Yes

If not, how many crew members do you have now? Avg:. 1.8

Range: 1-5

If you were fishing in 1994, how many others were on the boat with you back then? Avg.: 2.1

Range: 1-9

Are you interested in a boat buy back? 46.2% Yes

Are you interested in using your boat for research, charter, day hire, training, 71.0% Yes, of which:

or other uses?

Charter: 29.0% Yes

Research: 62.2% Yes

Day-hire: 39.5% Yes

Training: 25.9% Yes

What additional information do you need to better conduct your business?:

Regulations 47.6% Yes

Export markets 26.6% Yes

Local markets 28.7% Yes

Harvest techniques 37.1% Yes

Grants 48.3% Yes

Gear technology 61.5% Yes

Buy backs 32.9% Yes
Page 20

Figure 1. Hometown distribution of crew survey respondents. (Small dots represent 1-3 respondents, medium-small dots represent 4-8 respondents, medium-large dots represent 9-13 respondents, and

large dots represent 14 or more respondents.)
Page 21

Figure 2. Hometown distribution of owner survey respondents. (Small dots represent 1-3 respondents, medium-small dots represent 4-8 respondents, medium-large dots represent 9-13 respondents, and

large dots represent 14 or more respondents.)
Page 22

Figure 3. “Homeport” distribution of all multispecies-permitted vessels in the NMFS Northeast Region. (Data based on 1999 permit data, representing the last valid permit at the end of fishing year

1999.)
Page 23

Social and Economic Survey

Instructions

Thank you very much for taking the time to fill out this survey. Included in this package you will find:

1) A set of Social and Economic Survey Questions designed for Northeast fishermen. 

 

2) A stamped and addressed envelope for returning the completed questionnaire.

This is a sample set of questions from a variety of surveys that researchers have used in the past in order

to learn more about how management affects fishermen and their communities. Many of the question

that follow ask you how to get good information from fishermen and ask you for your ideas for better

questions. Other questions ask your opinion on topics that are important to you. Your collaboration in

this research is appreciated. All information you provide will be kept confidential. Any public release of

results, for example, to fishermen, will be in only a very summarized form, making it impossible for you

to be identified. The survey is divided into six sections:

1. Households and Communities 

2. Expenditure Impacts of Fishing Industry in New England

3. Fishing Business Practices

4. Management and Enforcement

5. Capacity and the Future

6. Fishing Family Assistance

NOTE: This questionnaire should be completed by the person to whom payment will be sent. 

Where the vessel is under corporate ownership, the principal owner or primary stockholder

should complete the survey. Agents for vessels should not complete the survey. 

Multiple vessel owners should answer vessel-specific questions with the vessel which produces the

most groundfish revenue in mind. 

If you would like to speak to someone about how to complete the survey call

_____________________ at _______________________ in the Northeast Regional Office.

If you have any questions for Italian language interpretation please call Angela Sanfilippo or Nina

Groppo at the Gloucester Fishing Family Assistance Center - (978) 283-2504.

If you have any questions for Portuguese language interpretation please call Rodney Avila at the

New Bedford Fishing Family Assistance Center - (508) 979-1791.
Page 24

Please Print your Name:________________________________________________________

Please sign your name here: _____________________________________________________

Corporate Name (if applicable): _________________________________________________ 

Your position in corporation (if applicable)________________________________________

Your Address: ___________________________________________________

 (corporate address if applicable)

 __________________________________________________

 __________________________________________________

 __________________________________________________

Telephone Number: _____________________________________________

Vessel #1 Name _____________________________________________

Vessel #1 Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number: 

Vessel #1 US Coast Guard Documentation Number, or State Registration Number.

Vessel #2 Name ________________________________________________

Vessel #2 Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number: 

Vessel #2 US Coast Guard Documentation Number or State Registration Number
Page 25

Vessel #3 Name ________________________________________________

Vessel #3 Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number: 

Vessel #3 US Coast Guard Documentation Number or State Registration Number

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you need more room for answering questions, please use the other side

of the page.

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit number in the space

provided at the bottom of each answer page.

Please return all of the answered pages which contain your permit 

number using the stamped and addressed envelope - thank you!
Page 26

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

Households and Communities

Section 1 asks questions about household and community topics, and also some direct questions about

how different fishermen and fishing families go about fishing. By looking for patterns across all

fishermen, we can see how different communities or other groups may be impacted by management

decisions. Please use check marks and fill in with more information if appropriate. We appreciate you

sharing your expertise and knowledge.

1a. Many surveys ask you to identify your race/ethnicity (e.g. Italian, Norwegian, Portugese, etc). This

information can be important, since crews and work patterns are often based on ethnicity. Would a

question about your ethnicity be too personal to ask in person in an interview setting? 

a. ___ N (please go to question 2) b. ___ Y (please continue to 1b)

1b. If yes, could such a question be improved by:

a. ___ Providing an explanation such as the one above 

b. ___ Wording the question in a different way. Please give an example of a question you

 would feel comfortable with __________________________________________

c. ___ Deleting the question entirely

d. ___ Other (please explain) _______________________________________________

2a. Social researchers often ask you questions about what school grade you finished. This helps us know

more about your background, in order for us to better understand the different people who live from

fishing. Would asking for your education be too personal in an interview setting?

a. ___ N (please go to question 3) b. ___ Y (please continue to 2b)

2b. If yes, could such a question be improved by:

a. ___ Providing an explanation such as the one above 

b. ___ Wording the question in a different way. Please give an example of a question you

 would feel comfortable with __________________________________________

c. ___ Deleting the question entirely

d. ___ Other (please explain) _______________________________________________

Questions 3 through 7 are aimed at understanding you and your family’s involvement in the fishing

industry, since this helps us get a sense of your experience in fishing. 

3. How long have you been in commercial fishing (including the recreational for-hire sector)?

______ years
Page 27

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

4. What has your career history in fishing been? (for example, began as deck hand for ten years,

currently captain/owner for last two....) Please include your present position on the boat. 

_____________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________

5a. Was your father a commercial fishermen? Please check and fill in appropriate information.

 a. ___ N b. ___ Y (If so, where did your parents live? ______________________)

5b. Was your grandfather a commercial fishermen? Please check and fill in appropriate information.

a. ___ N b. ___ Y (If so, where did he live? ______________________________)

5c.. (If you’re married) Does your spouse come from a fishing family? Please check and fill in

appropriate information.

a. ___ N b. ___ Y (If so, where did they live? _____________________________)

c. ___ Not married, question doesn’t apply

6. Please list all persons who live in your household, noting whether they are involved in the fishing

industry or fishing-related work. Please start with yourself in the first row. Please write “minor” in the

occupation column for children in your household if they are unemployed. 

Relation

to you

Gender Age Involved 

in fishing

 work?

What type of 

fishing-related

 work?

Occupation (or as

applicable: student,

retiree, unemployed)

SELF Y or N

Y or N

Y or N

Y or N

Y or N

Y or N

Y or N

Y or N
Page 28

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

7a. Regarding questions 3 - 6 above, do you have any other connections to the fishing industry ?

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

7b. Do these questions adequately capture your family’s involvement and historical ties to fishing?

_______________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

8.This question focuses on work relations within your family because, for example, in many places

wives traditionally handle most of the finances. Please fill out the following table, answering how many

hours during a typical week are spent doing the following activities:

Fisherman Spouse Other (specify)

household finances

operating the boat

record keeping

supervising crew

sales

repair and maintenance

non-fishing employment

9a. Do you think this question captures the way fishing duties are organized in your family? 

a.____Y b.____N If No please explain_______________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

9b. Do you think it generally captures the way other fishermen organize their businesses?

a.____Y b.____N If No please explain_______________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

10a. This question looks at how communities are informally organized; this can help predict social

impacts, if for example some groups are under-represented. Do any members of your household belong

to any fishing-related organizations? Please check one and fill in more information if appropriate.

a. ___ N. b. ___ Y. If yes, which fishery-related organizations, and what is their

function/purpose?_________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________
Page 29

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

10b. Have you participated in any of the organizations activities or meetings on a regular basis? 

a. ___ N (If not, what are the reasons? ________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

b. ___ Y (If so, what activities have you participated in? __________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

10c. Do you feel these groups represent you or other stakeholders (e.g. crew members or wives)? 

a. ___ N (If not, why not?__________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

b. ___ Y (If so, do they do it well?___________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

11. Do you think questions 10a through 10c capture how you feel about fishery-related organizations? 

_________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

12a. Surveys often ask for income level in order to determine whether or not a management measure has

the same impact on fishermen of different means or socioeconomic status. Would asking you for your

income be too personal in an interview setting? 

a. ___ N (please go to question 13) b. ___ Y (please continue to 12b)

12b. If yes, could such a question be improved by:

a. ___ Providing an explanation such as the one above 

b. ___ Wording the question in a different way. Please give an example of a question you

 would feel comfortable with __________________________________________

c. ___ Deleting the question entirely

d. ___ Other (please explain) _______________________________________________

The following questions look at how dependent you and your family are on a particular fishery or the

fishing industry in general (i.e. harvest and no-harvest sectors). This helps show how regulations may

impact household and small businesses.

13. Have the fishermen in your household ever worked outside the fishing industry?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

14. What percent of your household’s annual income comes from all aspects of the fishing 

industry? ___ %
Page 30

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

15a. Would a question about the level of your household indebtedness (for example, as a percentage of

your household income) be too personal to ask in an interview setting?

a. ___ N (please go to question 16) b. ___ Y (please continue to 15b)

15b. If yes, could such a question be improved by:

a. ___ Providing an explanation such as the one above 

b. ___ Wording the question in a different way. Please give an example of a question you

 would feel comfortable with __________________________________________

c. ___ Deleting the question entirely

d. ___ Other (please explain) _______________________________________________

16a. Would a question about whether your home mortgage is tied to your vessel be too personal to ask

in an interview setting?

a. ___ N (please go to question 17) b. ___ Y (please continue to 16b)

16b. If yes, could such a question be improved by:

a. ___ Providing an explanation such as the one above 

b. ___ Wording the question in a different way. Please give an example of a question you

 would feel comfortable with __________________________________________

c. ___ Deleting the question entirely

d. ___ Other (please explain) _______________________________________________

The next questions look at the links between community membership, and the fishing industry, and the

kinds of practices that strengthen these links. The questions attempt to understand the different kinds of

communities that may be important to fishermen and their families.

17. What town do you live in? _____________________________________________________

18. How long have you lived here? ____ years

19a. Do you consider this town a fishing community?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

19b. Why or why not?__________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

19c. Has your view about this changed in the past few years? 

a. ___ N b. ___ Y Please explain_______________________________________

________________________________________________________________________
Page 31

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

20a. Is this community dependent on the fishing industry?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

20b. If Yes why is it dependent?____________________________ _______________________

________________________________________________________________________

20c. Has your view about this changed in the past few years?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

Please explain____________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

21. Would you have to move out of your town if fishing became more difficult because of more

regulations? a. ___ N b. ___ Y

What else might you be able to do in your town?________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

22. Do you or your vessel participate in a Blessing of the Fleet ceremony?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

Why or why not? _________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

23. Do you or any household members participate in other community organizations?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

If so, can you describe further? ______________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

24. Do you have relatives who are fishermen and live in other towns than you?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y (If so, what town(s)? __________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

25. Who (e.g. friends, relatives, co-workers) do you go to when you need advice:

About fishing? ___________________________________________________________ 

About equipment? ________________________________________________________

About regulations or any other such issues? ____________________________________

26. We would like to know if the questions 17-25 let you identify your community and adequately

characterize it. Are there any issues which you think are missing? _______________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________
Page 32

Expenditure Impacts of Fishing Industry 

in New England

The fishing industry is not isolated from the rest of the New England economy. Commercial fishermen

purchase fuel, ice, bait, insurance and other products and services from businesses that help make

fishing possible. How fishermen and coastal communities are impacted by fishery regulation requires

information about what fishermen buy, where they buy it and where captain and crew income is spent. 

Information on what fishing businesses buy helps us understand what other types of shore-side

businesses may be affected when fishing conditions change. Knowing where these businesses are

located and where captain and crew live helps us understand how economic impacts are spread

throughout the New England coastal region.

On the next page you will find a map of New England with several different coastal subregions

identified along with towns and cities for reference. Each subregion has been identified with a number

and a name. For example, subregion 2 has been called the “Upper Mid-Coast region of Maine.”

Altogether there are 11 coastal subregions for New England, one non-coastal region for the entire

inshore part of New England (region 12), and one region for everything outside New England (region

13).

Following the map are tables for recording where you make purchases. Table 1 is for trip costs, annual

repair and maintenance costs, and fixed costs. Table 2 asks for the home region of your vessel, your

current crew and, if not yourself, your current captain.

If you buy goods and services from more than one region, try to give approximately what percent you

purchase in each region. For example, if you operate out of Portland, Maine, then in 1999 you may have

purchased 50% of your fuel within the Lower Mid-Coast region, 25% from Southern Maine and the

remaining 25% from the Gloucester/North Shore region (the percentages should sum to 100). Please

use a best guess - do not go through your records. For any listed item that you did not purchase over

the course of 1999, please write a zero in the Total column for that item.. 
Page 33

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

New Haven (11)

Boston (7)

Newport (10)

Chatham (8)

Rockland (2)

Jonesport (1)

Providence (10)

New London (11)

Gloucester (6)

Portsmouth (5)

New Bedford (9)

Provincetown (8)

Kennebunkport (4)

Boothbay Harbor (3)

Plymouth (7)

11 10

9

8

6

5

4

3

2

1

Maine

1: Washington

2: Hancock, Knox, Waldo

3: Cumberland, Lincoln,

 Sagadahoc

4: York

New Hampshire

5: Hillsborough, Rockingham, 

 Strafford

Massachusetts

6: Essex

7: Norfolk, Plymouth, Suffolk

8: Barnstable, Dukes, Nantucket

9: Bristol

Fishing Regions of 

New England

12

12

12

13

DOC/NOAA/NMFS, Woods Hole, MA, 2/9/00

Rhode Island

10: All Counties of RI

Connecticut

11: Fairfield, Middlesex, 

 New Haven, New London

Other regions

12: Near Coastal New England

13: Other US Regions

Fishing Regions by State 

7 Counties within Each Region are Listed

with Major Fishing Ports

(region numbers for ports follow their names)

13
Page 34

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

Table 1

Annual

Expenses

Downeast MaineUpper Mid-Coast MaineLower Mid-Coast MaineSouthern MaineNew Hampshire CoastGloucester/North ShoreBoston/South ShoreCape and IslandsNew Bedford AreaRhode IslandConnecticut CoastNon-Coastal New EnglandOutside New England

Region Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

% % % % % % % % % % % % % Total

Example 50 25 25 100

Trip Needs (where bought)

 Fuel

 Ice 

 Food

 Bait

 New Gear 

Repair Needs (where bought)

 Hull

 Engine

 Gear

 Electronics 

Fixed Needs (where bought)

 Insurance

 Accounting

 Legal

 Moorage
Page 35

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

Table 2

Home

Region of

Current

Captain

and Crew

Downeast MaineUpper Mid-Coast MaineLower Mid-Coast MaineSouthern MaineNew Hampshire CoastGloucester/North ShoreBoston/South ShoreCape and IslandsNew Bedford AreaRhode IslandConnecticut CoastNon-Coastal New EnglandOutside New England

Region

Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Check One

Region For

Each

Person



Example 

Vessel

Home

Current

Captain

Current

Crew #1

 

Member #2 

 

Member #3

 

Member #4

 

Member #5
Page 36

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

3. Compared to the way you would prefer to operate, have area closures shifted where you make

purchases? (Check one) 

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

If yes, what changes in your purchasing pattern have you made?____________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

4. Besides area closures, are there any other regulations that have shifted where you make

purchases? (Check one) 

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

If yes, what are these regulations and what changes have you made?_________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

5. Are there better ways of asking fishermen about where they make their purchases?

 (Check one) 

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

If yes, what improvements do you suggest? ____________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

6. Are there any other questions you think fishermen want to be asked about their industry’s impact

on the broader New England Economy or on the economy of the Town or Port? 

(Check one) 

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

If yes, what questions do you recommend? ____________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________
Page 37

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

Fishing Business Practices

Over the past five years fishery regulations have significantly impacted fishing practices. This

section seeks to find out what adjustments fishermen have made to their fishing activities and 

business practices because of these regulations and because of changes in the industry as a whole. 

Some questions look at how these changes impact the family as well. Please use check marks and

fill in with more information if appropriate.

1. Please list the most significant changes that you have made in your fishing practices in the last

five years because of regulations. Put a check beside ones that apply to you:

a. ___ Switched to different gears i. ___ Spent less time in exploratory fishing

b. ___ Cut back on gear/vessel maintenance j. ___ Increased time on water

c. ___ Decreased time on water k. ___ Changed fishing location

d. ___ Changed fish dealer l. ___ Fished more species 

e. ___ Took on less crew m.___ Postponed purchases of new gear

f. ___ Postponed new motor n. ___ Took longer trips.

g. ___ Other (specify)_________________ o. _________________________________

h. _________________________________ p. _________________________________

2. Please list the most significant changes in your household finances that you have seen over the

last five years because of regulations. Some examples are: Cut back on insurance, Cut back on

family vacations, Cut back on new clothes, Cut back on savings, Postpone new car, truck, house,

etc.

a. _________________________________ d. _________________________________

b. _________________________________ e. _________________________________

c. _________________________________ f. _________________________________

3. How do you decide which fish dealer to sell to? (Check more than 1 if appropriate)

a. ___ Belong to organization f. ___ Shop around for best price

b. ___ Decide where while at sea g. ___ Tied into buyer through contract/loan

c. ___ Call Market News h. ___ Pre-arranged before trip 

d. ___ Call contacts in ports i. ___ Depends on species

e. ___ Other________________________ j. _________________________________
Page 38

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

4. Do you think you have good price information going into a sale?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

5. Do you pay for price information now?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

6. What kind of price information service would be best for you? What kind of Technology -phone,

fax, computer, etc? What would you wan to know? When would you want to know it, and how

frequently would you use it? _____________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

7. How do auctions compare to non-auction sales of your fish. Check which is better for 

 Traditional Auction 

a. Speed of sale _____ _____ 

b. Firm prices _____ _____ 

c. Price reflects broad market _____ _____ 

d. Personal contact _____ _____ 

e. Get good information _____ _____ 

f. Treated well _____ _____

g. No hassles _____ _____

h. Good idea of prices beforehand _____ _____ 

i Quality is rewarded _____ _____

j. Works better with my accounting arrangement _____ _____

k. Speed of payment _____ _____

l. Other_________________________________ _____ _____

8. Have you needed help while at sea or in getting back to port over the last five years? 

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

9. How many times in _____1995, _____ 1996, _____ 1997, _____ 1998, _____1999?

10. How many times have you delayed leaving on a trip because of mechanical/electrical problems 

in the last 12 months? ___ times. (Please keep primary groundfish vessel in mind) 
Page 39

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

11.What percentage of the fishermen that you know well have all of the required safety equipment

in good operating order on board their vessels? ___ %.

12. What additional information do you need to better conduct your business? Please check any of

the following types of information that you could use

a. ___ More about regulations h. ___ Gear technology

b. ___ Local markets i. ___ Buybacks

c. ___ Export markets j. ___ Research survey results

d. ___ Harvest techniques k. ___ Onboard processing

e. ___ Aquaculture l. ___ Advanced license opportunities

f. ___ Value Added Handling m. ___ Retraining

g. ___ Other management approaches n. ___ Other (specify_________________

 o. ________________________________

13. Do you get the services of professionals (whether in the family or coop or organization) to

handle the following for you? Please check any of the following for which you use a

professional

a. ___ Accounting/Bookkeeping services f. ___ Vessel electronics 

b. ___ Settlement g. ___ Office automation

c. ___ Insurance h. ___ Other________________________

d. ___ Fish stock information i. _________________________________

e. ___ Selling j. _________________________________

14. How much have the following things changed over the last five years?

Major Some No Some Major

Decrease Decrease Change Increase Increase

a. Dependence on non-fishing income ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

b. Record keeping needs ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

c. Amount of time in sales/marketing ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

d. Use of non-family, hired labor or crew ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

e. Time spent in trade association meetings ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

f. Use of loans and other credit ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

g. Use of family labor ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

h. Need for family members in more roles ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

 i. What else?_______________________ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

j. _______________________________ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

 k ________________________________ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
Page 40

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

15. How much have the following affected your ability to make a living fishing?

No Moderately Very

 Effect Negative Effect Negative

a. Loss of habitat ___ ___ ___

b. Increased number of recreational fishers ___ ___ ___

c. Increased seafood imports ___ ___ ___

d. Increased marine fishery regulation ___ ___ ___

e. Coastal development ___ ___ ___

f. Loss of markets for harvested fish ___ ___ ___

g. Increased costs of harvesting fish ___ ___ ___

h. Imports ___ ___ ___

i. ____ Other___________________ ___ ___ ___

 j. ____________________________ ___ ___ ___

16. What do you do when your regular grounds are closed for a period? (Choose all that apply)

a. ___ Fish in the closest area to closed area, if there is a reasonable chance of success for

the same species

b. ___ Depending on length/size of closure, might move to a different port altogether

c. ___ Try several areas around the closed area

d. ___ Depending on length/size of closure, might switch target species

e. ___ Go to the next area that has a reasonable chance of success for any species I’m

allowed to fish

f. ___ Fish in closed area with exempted gear

g. ___ Other ___________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

 _________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________
Page 41

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

Management and Enforcement

The following questions ask for your perspective, as a fisherman, on the fisheries management

process, the use of economic information in that process, the role of fishermen in the process, and

on enforcement issues. Besides getting these perspectives, we also want to know what information

you feel is important for managers to understand about fishermen’s roles in enforcement and

fisheries management, and which management measures you view as effective. Please use check

marks and fill in with more information if appropriate.

1. What local, informal, traditional fishing rules or codes or agreements (not federal or state

regulations) affect how you fish? (Check all that apply)

a. ___ Rules that designate areas for different gears 

b. ___ Rules for cooperation among same gear vessels

c. ___ Rules for first establishing a fishing area

d. ___ Rules for accommodating same gear vessel from somewhere else

e. ___ Rules or traditions for avoiding gear damage to other gears

f. ___ Rules or traditions to minimize waste and discards and encourage conservation

g. ___ Rules that limit my total effort

h. ___ Rules that limit when I fish

i. ___ Rules that limit where I fish

j. ___ Other rules (please list )___________________________________________

k. __________________________________________________________________

l.___________________________________________________________________

m.___________________________________________________________________

2. What other questions do fishermen want to be asked in order to tell their story of how they selfregulate? (Please list) _______________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

3. Do you feel your views get expressed (if not adopted) in the Formal Council/Committee 

management process? 

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

4. If no, then why not? __________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________
Page 42

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

5. Do you feel you understand the Council/Committee management system?

a. ___ N (go to 6.) b. ___ Y (go to 7.)

6. If no, what isn’t clear? ________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

7. How often do you express your views to the Council or a Committee of the Council in person or

in writing over a year?

a. ___ Never b. ___ Seldom c. ___ Frequently

8. Do you think you understand the basics of fish population dynamics?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

9. What do you think fishermen want to know about fish population dynamics/biology that they

don’t already know?____________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

10. Do you feel you know the important laws (like the Magnuson Act) that guide fisheries

management? a. ___ N b. ___ Y

11. What do you think fishermen want to know about the laws that apply to fisheries management?

_________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

12. Do you feel you know how economic information is used in the management process?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

13. What do you think fishermen want to know about how economic information is used?

_______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

14. Do you feel you know why social/cultural information is needed in the management process?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

15. Do you know how social/cultural information is used in the management process?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y
Page 43

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

16. What questions do fishermen have about how social/cultural information is used?

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

17. Is it your feeling that fishermen generally want to comply with regulations?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

18. Do you think most fishermen know how to improve enforcement?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

19. What questions should be asked to fishermen to give them a chance to tell how to improve 

enforcement? _________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

20. Do you feel there is adequate fisheries enforcement at sea in the areas where you fish?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

21. Do you feel there is adequate fisheries enforcement at the dock where you land your catch?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

22. What percentage of the enforcement in the groundfish fishery is carried out by fishermen

themselves without the help or knowledge of enforcement officers? (Check the one that most

applies)

a. ___ None b. ___ 1 - 25% c. ___ 26 - 50%

d. ___ 51 - 75% e. ___ 76 - 100%

23. Please estimate to the best of your ability, what percent of commercial fishermen usually or

always COMPLY with the groundfish laws and regulations? (Check the ONE category that is

closest to your answer)

a. ___ Zero % f. ___ 50 - 74%

b. ___ 1 - 4% g. ___ 75 - 89%

c. ___ 5 - 9% h. ___ 90 - 94%

d. ___ 10 - 24% i. ___ 95 - 98%

e. ___ 25 - 49% j. ___ 99 - 100%
Page 44

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

24. Please estimate as best you can, what percent of commercial fishermen frequently VIOLATE

the groundfish laws and regulations? (Check the ONE category that is closest to your answer)

a. ___ Zero % f. ___ 50 - 74%

b. ___ 1 - 4% g. ___ 75 - 89%

c. ___ 5 - 9% h. ___ 90 - 94%

d. ___ 10 - 24% i. ___ 95 - 98%

e. ___ 25 - 49% j. ___ 99 - 100%

25. What percent of the management meetings (Council or Committee or Advisors’ meetings) that

you would like to attend are you able to get to? ___ %

26. Which of the following general tools of fisheries management do you feel are most effective in

reducing fishing mortality? Please Rank: Most effective = 1, Least effective = 6.

a. ___ Days At Sea (DAS) limits d. ___ Mesh size regulations

b. ___ Large and long closed areas e. ___ Trip Limits

c. ___ Short term closed areas f. ___ Overall TAC

27. Which of the following general tools of fisheries management do you feel are most difficult 

for a family to adjust to? Please Rank: Most difficult to adjust to = 1, Easiest = 6.

a. ___ Days At Sea (DAS) limits d. ___ Mesh size regulations

b. ___ Large, long-time closed areas e. ___ Trip Limits

c. ___ Short term closed areas f. ___ Overall Quota (TAC)

28. Which of the same tools are hardest on net income or profits? Please Rank: Most impact on

net income = 1, Least impact on net income-profits = 6.

a. ___ Days At Sea (DAS) limits d. ___ Mesh size regulations

b. ___ Large and long closed areas e. ___ Trip Limits

c. ___ Short term closed areas f. ___ Overall TAC

29. What questions should fishermen be asked so that others understand the impacts of different

kinds of regulations on their businesses? ____________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

30. What questions should fishermen be asked so that others understand the impacts of different

kinds of regulations on their families and family life? ________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________
Page 45

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

Capacity and the Future

Recently, there has been an increased focus on how fisheries managers should assess and manage

the fleet’s fishing capacity (number of vessels, total effort, etc). These questions ask for your views

on fishing capacity and its impact and ask for your ideas about the future of fishing. Please use

check marks and fill in with more information if appropriate.

1. Do you think the current system of permits reduces flexibility for fishermen?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

2. Do you think the permit system could be changed to increase flexibility without increasing the

pressure on stocks?

a. ___ N (go to 4) b. ___ Y (go to 3)

3. If Yes, how do you think it could be done? _______________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

4. Do you see advantages to more local control of fishing capacity and/or effort as with lobster

management by zones in Maine? 

a. ___ N (go to 6) b. ___ Y (go to 5)

5. If yes, what are the advantages? _________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

6. If no, why do you think there would be no advantage? _______________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

7. Can you think of any existing groups or organizations that could play that kind of role, or would

new groups or organizations need to be started? 

a. ___ Existing group b. ___ Need new group c. ___ Won’t work anyway 

 (Go to 8) (Go to 9)

8. What group or kind of group? _________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________
Page 46

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

9. If you answered (b) a new group, what would it look like? ____________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

10. Have you invested in equipment to increase your catch per day as your days at sea have been

reduced? 

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

11. If yes, what have you invested in?_______________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

12. When stocks recover will you reduce your fishing effort?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

13. Can you think of a way to “bank” capacity until stocks recover? 

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

14 . If yes, how? _______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

15. Do you think there is too much active capacity now for stocks to recover without more

regulations?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

18. Do you think there will be too much active capacity for stocks to stay recovered when they do

come back?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

19. What questions do fishermen want to be asked about capacity? _______________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
Page 47

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

20. If you were not fishing, what do you think you could be earning?

a. Much less ___ b. Less ___ c. Same ___ d. More ___ e. Much more ___

21. What would that job be? ______________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

22. Would you advise young people to go into the fishing industry?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

23. If yes, what job in the industry? ________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

24. What other questions do you think fishermen want to be asked about their vision of the future

for themselves, their family’s role in fishing, or the industry? ______________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

25. Please indicate if you agree or disagree with the following list of possible goals for fisheries in

this region in the future:

 Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Agree Disagree

a. Max. economic benefits to the nation ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

b. Harvest capacity matched to resources ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

c. Unlimited entry in any fishery ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

d. New entrants limited to numbers exiting ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

e. Secure places for existing fishermen with 

 opportunities not reduced by new entrants ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

f. Maximum benefits to the community ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

g. Maximum possible number of fishermen ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

h. Maximum possible number of fishing

 jobs the resource can support ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

26. What other goals do you strongly support?________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________
Page 48

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

Fishing Family Assistance

These questions ask about your involvement and views on Fishing Family Assistance Programs in

general and about other programs aimed at helping fishermen and their families. Your suggestions

for making these programs as useful as possible is invited. Please use check marks and fill in with

more information if appropriate.

1. Are you aware of Fishing Family Assistance type Programs?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

2. If yes, how did you become aware?_______________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________ 

3. Have you ever used any of these programs?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

4. If yes, what is your opinion of them?_____________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

5. If no, why haven’t you used them? _______________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

6. What do you think are the best ways to inform fishermen about the kinds of job training

programs available to them? _____________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

7. What type of training/services would you like to see offered through these centers to fishermen

experiencing a decline in fishing activity/income?___________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

8. What kind of employment/career would interest you if fishing couldn’t support you and your

family?______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________
Page 49

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

9. What services could Centers like this offer to fishermen who want to continue to fish?

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

10. Would you use a Center that provided free Internet access, computer use for resumes, want ads,

and so on? 

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

11. Are you planning to stay in fishing?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

12. How many generations of your family have been involved in the fishing industry? ___

13. Do you fish alone?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

14. If no, how many crew members do you have now? ________

15. Were you fishing in 1994?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

16. If yes, how many others were on the boat with you back then? ________

17. Are you interested in a boat buy back?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

18. If yes, what should the buy back program do? ________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

19. Are you interested in using your boat for research, charter, day hire, training or other uses? 

 a. ___ N b. ___ Y

20. If yes, check one or more:

a. ___ Charter b. ___ Research c. ___ Day-hire d. ___ Training e. ___ Other
Page 50

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

21. Would you be interested in participating in a fishermen’s round-table (discussion group,

meeting) on gear conflict, new gear and technology, or some other topic?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

22. If yes, what topics? __________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

23. What additional information do you need to better conduct your business? Check any that

apply 

a. ___ More about regulations g. ___ Local markets

b. ___ Export markets h. ___ Gear technology

c. ___ Harvest techniques i. ___ Buy backs

d. ___ Grants j. ___ On-board processing

e. ___ Aquaculture k. ___ Retraining for yourself or a family member

f. ___ Other __________________ l. _______________________________________

24. Would you be interested in attending a career orientation workshop?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

25. Do you have health insurance?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

26. Do you need assistance in preparing any of the following? Check any that apply

a. ___ Loans or credit availability c. ___ Setting up a new business

b. ___ Bankruptcy/ foreclosure d. ___ Other ________________________

27. What other kinds of assistance or training programs do you think fishermen should be asked

about? _______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

Thank you very much for your time and effort!

Please return the answer sheets by using the stamped

and addressed envelope.
Page 51

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

Social and Economic Survey

Introduction

Thank you very much for taking the time to fill out this survey. Included in this package you will

find:

1) A set of Social and Economic Survey Questions designed for Northeast fishermen. 

 

2) A stamped and addressed envelope for returning the completed questionnaire.

This is a sample set of questions from a variety of surveys that researchers have used in the past in

order to learn more about how management affects fishermen and their communities. Many of the

questions that follow ask you how to get better information from fishermen and ask you for your

ideas for better questions. Other questions ask your opinion on topics that are important to you.

Your collaboration in this research is appreciated. All information you provide will be kept

confidential. Any public release of results, for example, to fishermen, will be in only a very

summarized form, making it impossible for you to be identified. The survey is divided into six

sections:

1. Households and Communities 

2. Expenditure Impacts of Fishing Industry in New England

3. Fishing Business Practices

4. Management and Enforcement

5. Capacity and the Future

6. Fishing Family Assistance

NOTE: This questionnaire should be completed only by a person identified by the owner of a

vessel which participated in the first or second round of the Disaster Relief program. 

If you would like to speak to someone about how to complete the survey call the following

number at the Northeast Regional Office. (978) 281 9399.

If you have any questions for Italian language interpretation please call Angela Sanfilippo or

Nina Groppo at the Gloucester Fishing Family Assistance Center - (978) 283-2504.

If you have any questions for Portuguese language interpretation please call Rodney Avila at

the New Bedford Fishing Family Assistance Center - (508) 979-1791.
Page 52

Please enter your Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

Please Print your Name: __________________________________________________

Please sign your name here: __________________________________________________

Your Address: __________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

Telephone Number: __________________________________________________

Name of Vessel whose owner identified you as a crew member (Captain or Mate, etc.)

__________________________________________________

What is this Vessel’s Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number?

Instructions

Please enter the Multispecies Groundfish Permit number of the vessel

whose owner identified you as a crew member in the space provided at

the bottom of each answer page.

Please return all of the answered pages which contain that permit 

number. Please use the stamped and addressed envelope - thank

you!
Page 53

Please enter Vessel’s Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

Households and Communities 

Section 1 asks questions about household and community topics. By looking for patterns across all

fishermen, we can see how different communities or other groups may be affected by management

decisions. Please use check marks and fill in with more information if appropriate. We

appreciate your sharing your knowledge and experience.

1a. Many surveys ask fishermen to identify your race/ethnicity (e.g. Italian, Norwegian, 

Portugese, etc). This information can be important, since crews and work patterns are often based on

ethnicity. Would a question about your ethnicity be too personal to ask in an interview?

 a. ___N (please go to #2) b. ___ Y (please go to #1b)

1b. If yes, how could such a question be improved?

a. ___ By providing an explanation like the one above 

b. ___ By wording the question in a different way. Please give an example of a question 

you would feel comfortable with_______________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

c. ___ By omitting the question completely

d. ___ Other (please explain) _______________________________________________

2a. Social researchers often ask fishermen questions about what school grade they finished. This

helps us know more about your background and let’s us better understand the people who make their

living from fishing. Would asking for your education level be too personal in an interview setting? 

a. ___ N (please go to # 3) b. ___ Y (please go to #2b)

2b. If yes, how could such a question be improved?

a. ___ By providing an explanation such as the one above 

b. ___ By wording the question in a different way. Please give an example of a question you 

would feel comfortable with ______________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

c. ___ By deleting the question entirely

d. ___ Other (please explain) _______________________________________________

3. How long have you been in commercial fishing (including party/charter)?

_____________ years

4. What has your career history in fishing been? (for example, began as deck hand for ten years, 

currently first mate for last two....) Please include your present position on the boat. 

________________________________________________________________________
Page 54

Please enter Vessel’s Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

5a. Was your father a commercial fishermen? a. ___ N b. ___ Y 

If so, where does/did he live?_______________________________________________

5b. Was your grandfather a commercial fishermen? a. ___ N b. ___ Y 

If so, where does/did he live? ________________________________________________

5c. (If you’re married) Does your spouse come from a fishing family? a. ___ N b. ___ Y

If so, where do/did they live?_____________________________ c. ___Doesn’t apply.

6. Please list all persons who live in your household, noting whether they are involved in the fishing

industry or fishing-related work. Please start with yourself in the first row. Please write “minor” in

the occupation column for children in your household if they are unemployed.

Relation

to you

Gender Age Involved 

in fishing

 work?

What type of 

fishing-related

 work?

Or other Occupation

(or retiree, student

unemployed, etc)

SELF Y or N

Y or N

Y or N

Y or N

Y or N

Y or N

7a. Do you have any other connections to the fishing industry? a.____N. b______Y. If so what?

_______________________________________________________________________

7b. Do these questions adequately capture your family’s involvement and historical ties to fishing?

a._____Y b. _____N If No, please explain further____________________________

________________________________________________________________________

8a. Do any members of your household belong to any fishing-related organizations?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y If so, which ones and what do these groups do?_____________

________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________
Page 55

Please enter Vessel’s Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

8b. Have you participated in any fishing organizations’ activities or meetings on a regular basis? 

 a. ___ N b. ___Y. If so, what activities have you participated in? _______________

_______________________________________________________________________

8c. Do you feel these groups represent fishermen’s interests?

a. ___ N If not, why not?__________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

b. ___ Y If so, do they do it well?___________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

8d. Do you feel these groups represent your interests as a crew member?

a. ___ N If not, why not?__________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

b. ___ Y If so, do they do it well?___________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

9a. Surveys often ask about earnings in order to determine whether or not a management measure

has the same impact on fishermen of different income levels. Would asking you for your income be

too personal in an interview setting? 

a. ___ N (please go to # 10) b. ___ Y (please go to # 9b)

9b. If yes, how could such a question be improved?

a. ___ By providing an explanation such as the one above 

b. ___ By wording the question in a different way. Please give an example of a question you 

would feel comfortable with______________________________________

________________________________________________________________

c. ___ By deleting the question entirely

d. ___ Other (please explain) _______________________________________________

10. Have the fishermen in your household ever worked outside the fishing industry?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

11. What percent of your household’s total annual income comes from all aspects of the fishing

industry? ______ %

12a. Would a question about the level of your household indebtedness (for example, as a percentage

of your household income) be too personal to ask in an interview setting?

a. ___ N (please go to # 13.) b. ___ Y (please go to #12b)
Page 56

Please enter Vessel’s Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

12b. If yes, could such a question be improved by:

a. ___ Providing an explanation such as the one above 

b. ___ Wording the question in a different way. Please give an example of a question you

 would feel comfortable with __________________________________________

c. ___ Deleting the question entirely

d. ___ Other (please explain) _______________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

13. How long have you lived in the town you live in now? ____ years

14a. Do you consider this town a fishing community? a. ___ N b. ___ Y

14b. Why or why not? ___________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

15a. Do you consider this town a community which is dependent on the fishing industry?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

15b. Why or why not? ___________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

16. Would you have to move out of your town if fishing became more difficult because of more

regulations? a. ___ N b. ___ Y 

17. What else might you be able to do in your town if you were not fishing?________________

________________________________________________________________________

18. Do you or any household members participate in community organizations?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y If yes, can you describe them and what you do with them?

________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

19. We would like to know if the questions above gave you a chance to identify your community and

describe its relation to the fishing industry. Are there other questions we should have

asked?________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________
Page 57

Expenditure Impacts of Fishing Industry in New England

The fishing industry is not isolated from the rest of the New England economy. How fishermen and

coastal communities are impacted by fishery regulation requires information about where captain

and crew income is spent. 

Information on what fishing businesses buy helps us understand what other types of shore-side

businesses may be affected when fishing conditions change. Knowing where these businesses are

located and where captain and crew live helps us understand how economic impacts are spread

throughout the New England coastal region.

On the next page you will find a map of New England with several different coastal subregions

identified along with towns and cities for reference. Each subregion has been identified with a

number and a name. For example, subregion 2 has been called the “Upper Mid-Coast region of

Maine.” Altogether there are 11 coastal subregions for New England, one non-coastal region for the

entire inshore part of New England (region 12), and one region for everything outside New England

(region 13).

Following the map is a table for recording the home region of your vessel, where you live, and

where you spent whatever you didn’t save of your 1999 income. If you spent your money in several

regions, try to give approximately what percent you spent in each. For example, if you operate out

of Portland, Maine, then in 1999, 50% of whatever you spent of your income may have been spent 

within the Lower Mid-Coast region, 25% in Southern Maine, 15 % in the Gloucester/North Shore

region and 10% perhaps in Culebra, Puerto Rico (the percentages should sum to 100). Please use a

best guess.
Page 58

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

New Haven (11)

Boston (7)

Newport (10)

Chatham (8)

Rockland (2)

Jonesport (1)

Providence (10)

New London (11)

Gloucester (6)

Portsmouth (5)

New Bedford (9)

Provincetown (8)

Kennebunkport (4)

Boothbay Harbor (3)

Plymouth (7)

11 10

9

8

6

5

4

3

2

1

Maine

1: Washington

2: Hancock, Knox, Waldo

3: Cumberland, Lincoln,

 Sagadahoc

4: York

New Hampshire

5: Hillsborough, Rockingham, 

 Strafford

Massachusetts

6: Essex

7: Norfolk, Plymouth, Suffolk

8: Barnstable, Dukes, Nantucket

9: Bristol

Fishing Regions of 

New England

12

12

12

13

DOC/NOAA/NMFS, Woods Hole, MA, 2/9/00

Rhode Island

10: All Counties of RI

Connecticut

11: Fairfield, Middlesex, 

 New Haven, New London

Other regions

12: Near Coastal New England

13: Other US Regions

Fishing Regions by State 

7 Counties within Each Region are Listed

with Major Fishing Ports

(region numbers for ports follow their names)

13
Page 59

Please enter Vessel’s Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

Table 1

Downeast MaineUpper Mid-Coast MaineLower Mid-Coast MaineSouthern MaineNew Hampshire CoastGloucester/North ShoreBoston/South ShoreCape and IslandsNew Bedford AreaRhode IslandConnecticut CoastNon-Coastal New EnglandOutside New England

Region

Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Check

regions for

next 

questions

Example 

1. Vessel

 Home

 Port

2. Your

 Home

Percent

breakdown

of spending

Example 50 25 15 10

3. Of 1999

 Income

 spent, it

 went

 here.

4. Have area closures or other regulations changed where you spend your income? 

a. ___ N b. ___ Y If yes, what regulations and what have you changed?______

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________
Page 60

Please enter Vessel’s Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

Fishing Business Practices

Over the past five years fishery regulations have significantly impacted fishing practices. This

section seeks to find out what adjustments fishermen have made. Some questions look at how these

changes impact the family as well. Please use check marks and fill in with more information if

appropriate.

1. Please list the most significant changes in your household finances that you have seen over the

last five years because of regulations. Some examples are: Cut back on life and or health insurance,

Cut back on family vacations, Cut back on new clothes, Cut back on savings, Postpone new car,

truck, house, etc.

a. _________________________________ d. _________________________________

b. _________________________________ e. _________________________________

c. _________________________________ f. _________________________________

2. What percentage of the fishermen that you know well work on or own vessels which have all of

the required safety equipment in good operating order on board their vessels?______ %.

3. How many boats did you worked on in 1999? _______ boats

4a. Is this about the same number of boats you usually work on in a year? 

a. ___ Same 

b. ___ More than usual. Up by _______ (please fill in)

c. ___ Went down by _________ (please fill in)

4b. Are you considered a regular crew member of one boat? a._____N b.______Y 

5. Are you usually able to get on the boat that you want to crew on? a. ___N b. ___ Y 

6. How did you get your site on this boat? __________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

7. What makes a boat the kind you would like to work for (e.g. one that catches a particular species

of fish, one where you know the captain or owner, one with a good safety record etc.)?

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________
Page 61

Please enter Vessel’s Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

8a. Looking at a typical boat you have worked on, do you think the crew generally stays about the

same for the whole year?

a. ___ N (If not, what causes the crew to change?) ______________________________

______________________________________________________________________)

b. ___ Y (If so, what accounts for the loyalty of crew to that particular boat?) ________

______________________________________________________________________)

8b. Do you think crew members generally come from families with a history of fishing?

a. ___ N (If not, why?) __________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________)

b. ___ Y (If so, why?) ____________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________)

8c. Do you think that crew members ought to come from families with a history of fishing?

a. ___ N (If not, why?) __________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________)

b. ___ Y (If so, why?) ____________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________)

9. Is your experience of other crew members changing (for example, do you see them getting older

or younger than they used to be, are they coming from different ethnic groups or nationalities now,

etc.)? _________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

10a. How often are you away from home on a fishing trip, and for how long at a time? 

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

10b. Do you have any say in how long your boat stays out fishing?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y 

10c. Is this amount of time away from home different than it was five years ago?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y (If so, please indicate whether time away from home has increased or 

decreased, and the impact on you ___________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________
Page 62

Please enter Vessel’s Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

11. How have you been affected by regulations such as Days at Sea? 

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

12a. How are you paid for your work on the boat (for example, lay system, hourly wages, piece

rate)? ________________________________________________________________________

12b. Has this changed at all from the way it was five years ago? a. ___ N b. ___ Y (If so, how

has it changed? ___________________________________________________________

13a. Do you want to own your own boat in the future? a._____Y b.______N

13b. Do you think you would be able to able to own your own boat if you wanted to? a._____Y 

b._____N. If no, why not?________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________

13c. Have your expectations about owning a boat in the future changed over the past 5 years?

a._____N b._____Y If yes, why? ________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

14. What other questions should crew be asked to get at how regulations have affected them?

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

15. What other questions should crew members be asked to show the differences between being

a crew member and being a vessel owner?__________________________________________ 

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

16. Do you think crew members should be licensed? a._____N b._____Y. If yes, what

requirements would you make for getting a license? __________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________
Page 63

Please enter Vessel’s Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

Management & Enforcement

The following questions ask what you think, as a fisherman, about the fisheries management

process, about the use of social, biological and economic information in that process, about the role

of fishermen in the process, and about enforcement issues. We also want to know what

information you feel is important for managers to understand about fishermen’s roles in

enforcement and fisheries management, and which management measures you view as effective.

Please use check marks and fill in with more information if appropriate.

1. Do you feel you understand the Council/Committee management system?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y . If no, what isn’t clear? ______________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

2. Do you feel your views get expressed or represented (if not adopted) in the Council and

Committee management process? a. ___ Y b. ___ N . If no, why don’t they get represented?

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

3. How often do you express your views to the Council or a Committee of the Council in person or

in writing over a year?

a. ___ Never b. ___ Seldom c. ___ Frequently

4. Do you think you have a basic understanding about fish population dynamics?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

5. What do you think fishermen want to know about fish population dynamics/biology that they

don’t already know? ____________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

6. Do you feel you know the important laws (like the Magnuson Act) that guide the fisheries

management process? a. ___ N b. ___ Y

7. What do you think fishermen want to know about the laws that apply to fisheries 

management? _________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________
Page 64

Please enter Vessel’s Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

8. Do you think you know how economic information is used in the management process?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

9. What do you think fishermen want to know about how economic information is used?

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

10. Do you know how social/cultural information is used in the management process?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

11. What questions do fishermen have about how social/cultural information is used?

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

12. Do you think fishermen generally want to comply with regulations? a. ___ N b. ___ Y

13. Do you think most fishermen know how to improve enforcement? a. ___ N b. ___ Y

14. What questions should be asked to fishermen to give them a chance to tell how to improve 

enforcement? _________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

15. Do you feel there is adequate fisheries enforcement at sea in the areas where you fish?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

16. Do you feel there is adequate fisheries enforcement at the dock where you land your catch?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

17. What percentage of the enforcement in the groundfish fishery is carried out by fishermen

themselves without the help or knowledge of enforcement officers? (Check the one that most

applies)

a. ___ None b. ___ 1 - 25% c. ___ 26 - 50%

d. ___ 51 - 75% e. ___ 76 - 100%
Page 65

Please enter Vessel’s Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

18. Please estimate to the best of your ability, what percent of commercial fishermen usually or

always COMPLY with the groundfish laws and regulations? (Check the ONE category that is

closest to your answer)

a. ___ Zero % b. _____1-4% c._____5-9% d._____10-24% 

e.____ 25-49% f._____50 - 74% g. ___ 75 - 89% h._____90-94%

i. ___ 95 - 98% j. ___ 99 - 100%

19. Please estimate as best you can, what percent of commercial fishermen frequently VIOLATE

the groundfish laws and regulations? (Check the ONE category that is closest to your answer)

a. ___ Zero % b. _____1-4% c._____5-9% d._____10-24% 

e.____ 25-49% f._____50 - 74% g. ___ 75 - 89% h._____90-94%

i. ___ 95 - 98% j. ___ 99 - 100%

20. What percent of the management meetings (Council or Committee or Advisors’ meetings) that

you would like to attend are you able to get to? ___ %

21. Which of the following general tools of fisheries management do you feel are most effective in

reducing fishing mortality? Please Rank: Most effective = 1, Least effective = 6.

a. ___ Days At Sea (DAS) limits d. ___ Mesh size regulations

b. ___ Large and long closed areas e. ___ Trip Limits

c. ___ Short term closed areas f. ___ Overall TAC

22. Which of the following general tools of fisheries management do you feel are most difficult 

for a family to adjust to? Please Rank: Most difficult to adjust to = 1, Easiest = 6.

a. ___ Days At Sea (DAS) limits d. ___ Mesh size regulations

b. ___ Large, long-time closed areas e. ___ Trip Limits

c. ___ Short term closed areas f. ___ Overall Quota (TAC)

23. Which of the same tools are hardest on income? Please Rank: Most impact on net income =

1, Least impact on net income = 6.

a. ___ Days At Sea (DAS) limits d. ___ Mesh size regulations

b. ___ Large and long closed areas e. ___ Trip Limits

c. ___ Short term closed areas f. ___ Overall TAC

24. If you could manage fisheries, what would you do differently and why? 

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________
Page 66

Please enter Vessel’s Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

Capacity and the Future

These questions ask for your views on fishing capacity and its impact and ask for your ideas about

the future of fishing. Please use check marks and fill in with more information. 

1. Do you think the current permit system reduces flexibility for fishermen? a. ___ N b. ___ Y

2. Do you think the permit system could be changed to increase flexibility without increasing the

pressure on stocks? a. ___ N b. ___ Y If Yes, how do you think it could be done?

_________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

3. Do you see advantages to more local control of fishing capacity and/or effort such as with lobster

management by zones in Maine? a. ___ N (go to #4) b. ___ Y If yes, what are the

advantages?_______________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

4. If no, why do you think there would be no advantage? _______________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________

5. Can you think of any existing groups or organizations that could play that kind of role, or would

new groups or organizations need to be started? a. ___ Existing group(go to #6)

 b. ___ Need new group (please go to #7) c. ___ Won’t work anyway.

6. What group or kind of group? _________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

7. If you answered (b) a new group, what would it look like? ____________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

8. Can you think of a way to “bank” capacity until stocks recover? a. ___ N b. ___ Y If yes,

how? _______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

9. Do you think there is too much active capacity now for stocks to recover without more

regulations? a. ___ N b. ___ Y

10. Do you think there will be too much active capacity for stocks to stay recovered when they do

come back? a. ___ N b. ___ Y
Page 67

Please enter Vessel’s Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

11. What questions do fishermen want to be asked about capacity? _______________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

12. If you were not fishing, what do you think you could be earning?

a. Much less ___ b. Less ___ c. Same ___ d. More ___ e. Much more ___

13. What would that job be? ______________________________________________________

14. Would you advise young people to go into the fishing industry? a. ___ N b. ___ Y

15. If yes, what job in the industry? ________________________________________________

16. What other questions do you think fishermen want to be asked about their vision of the future

for themselves, their family’s role in fishing, or the industry? ______________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

17. Please indicate if you agree or disagree with the following list of possible goals for fisheries in

this region in the future: 

Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Agree Disagree

a. Most economic benefits to the nation ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

b. Harvest capacity matched to resources ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

c. Unlimited entry in any fishery ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

d. New entrants limited to numbers exiting ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

e. Secure places for existing fishermen with 

 opportunities not reduced by new entrants ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

f. Maximum benefits to the community ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

g. Maximum possible number of fishermen ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

h. Maximum possible number of fishing

 jobs the resource can support ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

18. What other goals do you strongly support?________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________
Page 68

Please enter Vessel’s Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

Fishing Family Assistance

These questions ask about your involvement and views on Fishing Family Assistance Programs in

general and about other programs aimed at helping fishermen and their families. Your suggestions

for making these programs as useful as possible is invited. Please use check marks and fill in with

more information if appropriate.

1. Are you aware of Fishing Family Assistance type Programs?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

2. If yes, how did you become aware?_______________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________ 

3. Have you ever used any of these programs?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

4. If yes, what is your opinion of them?_____________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

5. If no, why haven’t you used them? _______________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

6. What do you think are the best ways to inform fishermen about the kinds of job training

programs available to them? _____________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

7. What type of training/services would you like to see offered through these centers to fishermen

experiencing a decline in fishing activity/income? ____________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

8. What kind of employment/career would interest you if fishing couldn’t support you and your

family? ______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

9. What services could Centers like this offer to fishermen who want to continue to fish?

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________
Page 69

Please enter Vessel’s Multispecies Groundfish Permit Number 

10. Would you use a Center that provided free Internet access, free computer use for resumes, and

want ads, etc? 

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

11. Are you planning to stay in fishing?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

12. How many generations of your family have been involved in the fishing industry? ___

13. Were you fishing in 1994?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

14. Would you be interested in participating in a fishermen’s round-table (discussion group,

meeting) on gear conflict, new gear and technology, or some other topic?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

15. If yes, what topics? __________________________________________________________ 

_______________________________________________________________________

16. Would you be interested in attending a career orientation workshop?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

17. Do you have health insurance?

a. ___ N b. ___ Y

18. Do you need assistance in preparing any of the following? Check any that apply

a. ___ Loans or credit availability c. ___ Setting up a new business

b. ___ Bankruptcy/ foreclosure d. ___ Other ________________________

19. What other kinds of assistance or training programs do you think fishermen should be asked

about? _______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

Thank you very much for your time and effort!

Please return the answer sheets by using the stamped

 and addressed envelope.

Publishing in NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE

Jon A. Gibson, Biological Sciences Editor & Laura S. Garner, Editorial Assistant

Manuscript Qualification

This series represents a secondary level of scientific publishing in the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). For

all issues, the series employs thorough internal scientific review,

but not necessarily external scientific review. For most issues,

the series employs rigorous technical and copy editing. Manuscripts that may warrant a primary level of scientific publishing

should be initially submitted to one of NMFS’s primary series

(i.e., Fishery Bulletin, NOAA Technical Report NMFS, or Marine Fisheries Review).

Identical, or fundamentally identical, manuscripts should

not be concurrently submitted to this and any other publication

series. Manuscripts which have been rejected by any primary

series strictly because of geographic or temporal limitations may

be submitted to this series.

Manuscripts by Northeast Fisheries Science Center

(NEFSC) authors will be published in this series upon approval

by the NEFSC's Deputy Science & Research Director. Manuscripts by non-NEFSC authors may be published in this series if:

1) the manuscript serves the NEFSC’s mission; 2) the manuscript meets the Deputy Science & Research Director’s approval; and 3) the author arranges for the printing and binding

funds to be transferred to the NEFSC’s Research Communications Unit account from another federal account. For all manuscripts submitted by non-NEFSC authors and published in this

series, the NEFSC will disavow all responsibility for the manuscripts’ contents; authors must accept such responsibility.

The ethics of scientific research and scientific publishing

are a serious matter. All manuscripts submitted to this series are

expected to adhere -- at a minimum -- to the ethical guidelines

contained in Chapter 1 (“Ethical Conduct in Authorship and

Publication”) of the CBE Style Manual, fifth edition (Chicago,

IL: Council of Biology Editors). Copies of the manual are

available at virtually all scientific libraries.

Manuscript Preparation

Organization: Manuscripts must have an abstract, table of

contents, and -- if applicable -- lists of tables, figures, and

acronyms. As much as possible, use traditional scientific

manuscript organization for sections: “Introduction,” “Study

Area,” “Methods & Materials,” “Results,” “Discussion” and/or

“Conclusions,” “Acknowledgments,” and “References Cited.”

Style: All NEFSC publication and report series are obligated to conform to the style contained in the most recent edition

of the United States Government Printing Office Style Manual.

That style manual is silent on many aspects of scientific manuscripts. NEFSC publication and report series rely more on the

CBE Style Manual, fifth edition.

For in-text citations, use the name-date system. A special

effort should be made to ensure that the list of cited works

contains all necessary bibliographic information. For abbreviating serial titles in such lists, use the most recent edition of the

BIOSIS Serial Sources (Philadelphia, PA: Biosciences Information Service). Personal communications must include date of

contact and full name and mailing address of source.

For spelling of scientific and common names of fishes,

mollusks, and decapod crustaceans from the United States and

Canada, use Special Publications No. 20 (fishes), 26 (mollusks),

and 17 (decapod crustaceans) of the American Fisheries Society

(Bethesda, MD). For spelling of scientific and common names

of marine mammals, use Special Publication No. 4 of the

Society for Marine Mammalogy (Lawrence, KS). For spelling in

general, use the most recent edition of Webster’s Third New

International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged

(Springfield, MA: G.&C. Merriam).

Typing text, tables, and figure captions: Text, tables,

and figure captions must be converted to the NOAA-wide

standard of WordPerfect. In general, keep text simple (e.g.,

don’t switch fonts and type sizes, don’t use hard returns within

paragraphs, don’t indent except to begin paragraphs). Also,

don't use the WordPerfect automatic footnoting function; all

notes should be indicated in the text by simple numerical

superscripts, and listed together in an "Endnotes" section prior

to the "References Cited" section. Especially, don’t use the

WordPerfect graphics function for embedding tables and figures

in text.

Tables may be prepared either with WordPerfect text or

with the WordPerfect table formatting function. If text is used,

then data should be assigned to columns by using all tabs or all

spaces, but not a combination of the two.

Each figure should be supplied both on paper and on disk,

unless there is no digital file of a given figure. Except under

extraordinary circumstances, color will not be used in illustrations.

Manuscript Submission

Authors must submit one paper copy of the double-spaced

manuscript, one disk copy, and original figures (if applicable).

NEFSC authors must include a completely signed-off “NEFSC

Manuscript/Abstract/Webpage Review Form.” Non-NEFSC

authors who are not federal employees will be required to sign

a “Release of Copyright” form.

Send all materials and address all correspondence to:

Jon A. Gibson (Biological Sciences Editor)

NMFS Northeast Fisheries Science Center

166 Water Street

Woods Hole, MA 02543-1026 USA.

NORTHEAST FISHERIES SCIENCE CENTER

Dr. Michael P. Sissenwine, Science & Research Director

Capt. John T. Moakley, Operations, Management & Information Services Chief

Teri L. Frady, Research Communications Chief
Research Communications Unit

Northeast Fisheries Science Center

National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA

166 Water St.

Woods Hole, MA 02543-1026

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE -- This series is issued irregularly. The series typically includes: data reports of longterm or large area studies; synthesis reports for major resources or habitats; annual reports of assessment or monitoring programs;

documentary reports of oceanographic conditions or phenomena; manuals describing field and lab techniques; literature surveys of major

resource or habitat topics; findings of task forces or working groups; summary reports of scientific or technical workshops; and indexed

and/or annotated bibliographies. All issues receive internal scientific review and most issues receive technical and copy editing.

Fishermen's Report -- This information report is a quick-turnaround report on the distribution and relative abundance of commercial

fisheries resources as derived from each of the NEFSC's periodic research vessel surveys of the Northeast's continental shelf. There is

no scientific review, nor any technical or copy editing, of this report.

Northeast Fisheries Science Center Reference Document -- This series is issued irregularly. The series typically includes: data reports

on field and lab observations or experiments; progress reports on continuing experiments, monitoring, and assessments; background

papers for scientific or technical workshops; and simple bibliographies. Issues receive internal scientific review, but no technical or copy

editing.

The mission of NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is "stewardship of living marine resources for the benefit of the

nation through their science-based conservation and management and promotion of the health of their environment." As the research

arm of the NMFS's Northeast Region, the Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) supports the NMFS mission by "planning,

developing, and managing multidisciplinary programs of basic and applied research to: 1) better understand the living marine

resources (including marine mammals) of the Northwest Atlantic, and the environmental quality essential for their existence and

continued productivity; and 2) describe and provide to management, industry, and the public, options for the utilization and

conservation of living marine resources and maintenance of environmental quality which are consistent with national and regional

goals and needs, and with international commitments." Results of NEFSC research are largely reported in primary scientific media

(e.g., anonymously-peer-reviewed scientific journals). However, to assist itself in providing data, information, and advice to its

constituents, the NEFSC occasionally releases its results in its own media. Those media are in four categories:

Publications and Reports

of the

Northeast Fisheries Science Center

OBTAINING A COPY: To obtain a copy of a NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE or a Northeast Fisheries Science

Center Reference Document, or to subscribe to the Fishermen's Report or the The Shark Tagger, either contact the NEFSC

Editorial Office (166 Water St., Woods Hole, MA 02543-1026; 508-495-2228) or consult the NEFSC webpage on

"Publications and Reports" (http://www.nefsc.nmfs.gov/nefsc/publications/).

ANY USE OF TRADE OR BRAND NAMES IN ANY NEFSC PUBLICATION OR REPORT DOES NOT IMPLY

ENDORSEMENT.

STANDARD

 MAIL A

The Shark Tagger -- This newsletter is an annual summary of tagging and recapture data on large pelagic sharks as derived from the

NMFS's Cooperative Shark Tagging Program; it also presents information on the biology (movement, growth, reproduction, etc.) of these

sharks as subsequently derived from the tagging and recapture data. There is internal scientific review, but no technical or copy editing,

of this newsletter.