|
ELLSWORTH — A close shave
could soon be essential to any lobster bait
salesman who wants to make it in Maine.
Last week, the Marine
Resources Committee unanimously supported an
amended bill, intended to outlaw the use of most
hide and offal bait starting in 2006. The only
exception to that law would be for the use of
animal hide from which the hair has been
removed.
Heated debate about the use
of so-called “alternative bait” isn’t new to
Maine’s lobster industry. In the fall of 2003
lobstermen along the coast started voicing
concerns about the growing use of bait made of
animal hide. In early 2004, Bass Harbor
lobsterman Steve Carter circulated a petition
among lobstermen urging a ban on the use of
alternative bait until the state could study its
effects on lobsters.
His petition raised even
more public discussion on the issue and helped
stirred the state Department of Marine Resources
(DMR) to examine its inability to regulate the
use of such baits.
While a request for
proposals was sent out to the scientific
community to conduct some research into the
effects of hide bait, Maine lobster biologist
Carl Wilson said the $20,000 set aside for study
remains unspent as the immediate future for
alternative bait is hashed out in the
Legislature.
This latest move from the
Marine Resources Committee came about as a
result of the public hearing on a bill
introduced by Sen. Dennis Damon (D-Hancock
County) at the request of he Maine Lobstermen’s
Association.
LD 527 was intended to give
Maine’s marine resources commissioner the
authority to regulate the use of alternative
bait through rulemaking procedures. Damon said
the intention was to give the commissioner some
basic ability to have say as to what gets put
down in traps as bait. In the absence of
specific scientific information about the
various alternative baits, no definitions or
prohibitions were proposed originally. That
changed following the public hearing.
Damon said DMR drafted the
proposed amendment he introduced, which
specifically banned the use of wild or domestic
animal renderings or offal as bait to fish for
lobster of crabs. An exception was specified for
animal hide bait from which the hair had been
removed. The amendment also specified that, for
the purposes of enforcement, the presence of
such bait on a lobster or crab boat would be
evidence of a violation. The new laws would come
into effect Jan. 1.
According to Damon, the
amended bill would address two of the three
basic areas of concern in the alternative bait
discussion as it has been carried on by lobster
fishermen, fisheries scientists and resource
managers.
First, there’s a market
concern that comes from the reports that animal
hair from the hide bait is showing up in the gut
of lobsters when they go to market. Lobster with
animal hair in it is simply less marketable than
lobsters without, especially in Japan. Those
market concerns prompted a ban on hide bait in
the west Australian rock lobster fishery in 2002
after hair was reportedly found in the guts of a
small percentage of the catch. The Australian
fishery is particularly dependent on Japanese
consumers. Damon warned that just the perception
of a problem with hair in the lobsters could
damage Maine’s market.
The second concern is the
health of fishermen using the unregulated bait.
Lobstermen at the public hearing on the bill
gave accounts of some bait that is essentially
sweepings from the slaughterhouse floor. Damon
said, lobstermen told the committee of
infections they got after handling the least
refined of some of the alternative baits. In
addition to cow hides, moose and deer hides as
well as pig renderings are used in some of the
baits available.
The third major worry is
what impact the widespread use of alternative
baits might have on the health of the wild
lobsters that feed from traps on a regular
basis. That includes what effect the bait could
have on the broader marine environment where it
is used.
Damon said, as the bill is
written, it addresses the first two concerns,
but “we can’t get to the last one without
science.”
“We don’t know what impacts
there are from the processes they use to produce
it,” said Deputy Commissioner David Etnier of
the alternative baits. However, he noted that
defining what sort of bait would be acceptable
and allowing the commissioner the latitude to
implement additional rules, is a good regulatory
combination. “It would be difficult to set
standards for a product that’s evolving,” he
said.
Although there’s no more
known about the effects of the shaved bait on
lobsters than of the other varieties, the
decision was made to allow the former on grounds
that the hair wouldn’t be an issue and the
possibility of harming lobstermen would be
reduced by allowing only hide.
The other wild card in the
bait debate is the security of the wild herring
supply, which still accounts for the majority of
lobster bait. In recent years the supply has
been spotty, driving the price of bait up and
making alternative bait more of a realistic
option for lobstermen. The hide is longer
lasting in the traps, easy to transport in
buckets, and consistently available. Fishermen
used to fish the bait strategically at times
when traps couldn’t be regularly tended or when
sand fleas were cleaning out the herring bait.
But as sources of wild fish bait fluctuate, more
fishermen are likely to turn to alternatives.
Damon and Etnier said the
delay of implementation of the proposed law
until next year would allow fishermen to work
through the supplies of bait they might already
have on hand. It also would allow bait suppliers
a window of time to come up with shaved bait
alternatives.
Robert Brown, co-owner of
hide bait producer SeaLure, didn’t respond to
calls by press time. |
