DMF proposes lower cod trip limit, Southern New England cod moratorium and higher yellowtail/monkfish limits

Jared (DMF staff) presented a proposal for changes to state-waters groundfish management intended to keep landings within state subcomponents of federal annual catch limits and to preserve access for the remaining active state-waters participants.

Why it matters: Federal framework adjustments have reduced the state-waters subcomponent for several cod stocks; DMF proposes trip-limit and access changes to avoid triggering federal accountability measures that would affect federal permit holders and other stakeholders.

DMF staff explained that federal Framework 69 redefined codstock boundaries and that the Western Gulf of Maine state‑waters subcomponent is reduced to about 44,000 pounds for the upcoming fishing year. To create a buffer and avoid exceeding the subcomponent, the department’s preferred regulatory alternative is a straight reduction of the Western Gulf of Maine cod trip limit from 400 to 300 pounds per trip. An alternative under analysis would use seasonal trip limits (higher in spring/summer, lower in fall/winter).

For Southern New England cod, DMF said it will propose a moratorium on the retention, possession and landing in state waters for both commercial and recreational sectors to match federal moratoriums; staff noted the moratorium would have little practical effect where there is little to no cod fishery in Vineyard Sound, Buzzards Bay and Nantucket Sound.

To provide access where cod ACLs are low, DMF proposed increasing yellowtail flounder trip limits from 350 to 500 pounds (state subcomponent ~62,000 pounds) and raising monkfish tail-weight limits (DMF staff noted a preferred alternative up to 600 pounds and support for a stakeholder request to consider 1,000 pounds). Staff said monkfish permit transfer rules and the small number of active participants limit the risk of new effort entering state waters.

DMF also proposed updating the groundfish-endorsement control date to a more recent date to ensure any future performance criteria would include recently active participants; staff clarified that changing the control date is not, by itself, a reduction in the number of endorsements issued.

Commissioners asked questions about access for previously qualified fishermen, monitoring and reporting limitations, and the potential economic impact of reduced trip limits. Bill Amaru expressed concern that tighter controls or a recent control date could restrict future access for fishermen and asked for protections for previously qualified participants. DMF staff replied that updating the control date could increase the pool of potentially qualified fishermen (by including more-recent activity) and that existing transfer restrictions also limit new entrants. DMF said it will analyze alternatives and publish them for public hearing. No votes were taken at the meeting.