IFQ Summary Series No. 6

MID-ATLANTIC SURF CLAM & OCEAN QUAHOG

Program Adopted in 1990

Statistical Summary of IFQ Experience

Special Circumstances

• Previous Management- In the 13 years preceding the adoption of the Surf Clam and Ocean Quahog ITQ system, the surf clam fishery was managed through limited entry, quarterly quotas, and fishing time restrictions.  “By 1987, effort limitations combined with a growing strong year-class and increased vessel harvesting effectiveness had created the ultimate expression of overcapacity or over-management: each permitted surf clam vessel was allowed only 6 six-hour trips per quarter.” (McCay, B and Creed, C. 1994. Social Impacts of ITQs in the Sea Clam Fisheries. NJ Sea Grant Final Report, NJMSC-T-94-001.)

• Allocation Formula- Two different initial allocation formulas were used for the Mid-Atlantic and New England regions. The allocation formulas included both vessel size and landing history.
• No Concentration Limits - A minimum quota holding requirement was included, but no maximum holding and no limit on accumulation. 
• Impact on Vessel Safety- A point of contention in the Surf Clam ITQ plan is whether or not vessel safety has been improved or reduced compared to the former management system. 
• The Maine Mahogany Quahog Fishery – The Maine (Federal waters) Mahogany Quahog fishery operates on a competitive TAC that is embedded in the Surf Clam and Ocean Quahog ITQ program.  When the Surf Clam and Ocean Quahog ITQ plan was developed and implemented, a small fishery for mahogany quahogs (“little neck” ocean quahogs) in federal waters off the coast of eastern Maine was overlooked.  There was a period of controversy that ended when 100,000 bushels of ocean quahogs was set aside for the Maine Mahogany Quahog fishery.  This portion of the total quota is not allocated to individuals, but is fished competitively by a limited number of federal permit holders.  Permit holders and others can also buy or lease ocean quahog quota (from other areas) and continue fishing if the 100,000 bushel quota is caught, as it was in 2000. The fishery in state waters is open-access but the catch is counted toward the Maine quota.  Although it has not formally been designated as a Community Development Quota (CDQ), the Maine Mahogany Quahog quota is similar in nature to a CDQ within an ITQ system.
• State-Waters Fisheries -  The ITQ program does not include fisheries in state waters.

Statements of Individuals Involved in the IFQ Program

Fishery Administrator:  Tom Hoff, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council staff member

ITQs are one of the tools managers need in their toolbox; they are not right for all fisheries, but there is a handful of fisheries where they are absolutely the way to go. From a management perspective ITQs have reduced management costs dramatically.  From 1977 to 1988, the ten years prior to the approval of the Surf clam ITQ program, there were only two Council meetings where Surf clams were not discussed.  I would estimate that roughly 40% of Council staff time was spent on Surf clam management prior to the ITQ program, while today not even 5% of staff time is spent on surf clam management.  Before ITQs, we had a tremendous safety problem in the Surf clam fishery.  There have been several accidents since 1990 when the ITQ program was implemented, but I think it is bogus how certain individuals are blaming those accidents on the ITQ management program.  Lastly, the fishermen that are upset about the Surf clam ITQ program are unhappy mostly because of their personal relationships with their processors, not as a result of the ITQ program.  What processors and fishermen really want is stability, and ITQs provide stability to the industry.

Tom Hoff has been a staff member of the Mid-Atlantic fishery management council since 1982.  He has a PhD in Marine Science and is the Senior Ecologist responsible for Surf clams and Ocean quahogs, Tilefish, and Essential Fish Habitat.

Email address: thoff@mafmc.org

Fishery Participant:  Ricks Savage, Commercial Fisherman

I am not a quota owner and I did not receive any initial surf clam quota allocation, but I still believe that the ITQ program works well.  Way back we had 50 boats in this fishery, the price quickly skyrocketed from $3.25 to $12 dollars a bushel, and everyone in the world was trying to get a boat to clam.  Within a year and a half there were 165 boats clamming and the resource could not handle the pressure.  These new and marginal fishermen are the ones that have lost in the ITQ system, but they would have lost anyway, at least with a quota system they got to leave with something.  Before ITQs, within one years time the fishing limit went from 96 hours a week to six hours every other week, this was the craziest system ever and is the reason we turned to ITQs.  Now the fishery is back to about 50 boats again, which is where it should be; 50 is the number that can make a living, and that is the number of boats there has always been.  A management plan cannot be expected to solve every problem; the surf clam ITQ program has stabilized the fishery, it has reduced management costs, and fishermen can be more selective so the resource has benefited.  As far as safety, in the last ten years since the ITQ program started we have lost 5 or 6 boats, however before 1990 we lost 5 or so boats a year.  And as far as corporation ownership, the three largest companies that received initial quota allocations do not exist anymore.  And the banks that own quota today are just holding companies; eventually the individuals that financed their quota through the bank will purchase the full ownership of the quota outright.

Ricks Savage ran a clam boat for 21 years and sold his last boat in 1985.  He has been on the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council for a total of 17 years and is currently the Chair of the Surf Clam & Ocean Quahog Committee.

Email address: savageclam@aol.com

Academic Researcher:  Lee Anderson, Professor of Economics at the Univ. of Delaware

From a fishery wide perspective, individual transferable quotas can provide all the biological benefits of a total allowable catch program, and yet can also offer participants the potential to fish when, how, and how much they want.  In the surf clam and ocean quahog fishery, owners went form a limited number of fixed time trips per boat to freedom to take their shares anyway they wanted.  This allowed them the freedom to fish when and where product recovery rates were high.  It also allowed for better scheduling of harvest times to minimize inventory storage costs.  The bottom line is that the elimination of micro-management reduces the workload of the regulator and creates incentives to lower costs and improve product quality.  This will lead to different advantages in different fisheries depending on the particularities of the stocks and the industry.

Lee Anderson is a Professor of Economics and Marine Studies in the College of Marine Sciences at the University of Delaware.  He has been working on academic and practical aspects of fisheries management for 27 years.  He served as Chairman of Surf Clam and Ocean Quahog Committee of the Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Management Council during the design and implementation of the ITQ plan.

Email address: lgafish@udel.edu

Surf Clam ITQ Critic:  James O’Malley, Exec. Director, East Coast Fisheries Federation

ITQ’s have been advocated as a way of improving vessel safety, supposedly because they can put a stop to derby fisheries and give fishermen choices about when and how to fish.  But the surf clam fishery lost at least 18 men in its first decade under ITQ management.  That’s about 10% of the entire workforce. That’s a staggering number, and it’s the most dangerous fishery in the world.  We need to find out whether ITQ’s might have had anything to do with that, by changing the nature of the relationship between fisherman and buyer, or fisherman and ITQ-holder.  Are fishermen now exposed to other dangers, fewer choices, because of a shift in the balance of power in the industry?