Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hard Clam Amendment 3 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Marine Fisheries panel votes to accept 3‑year phaseout of mechanical hard‑clam harvest
Summary
The Marine Fisheries Commission voted 5‑4 to accept the division’s recommendation to phase out mechanical hard‑clam harvest over three years and to discontinue mechanical harvest tied to maintenance dredging; staff cited habitat damage and enforcement costs.
The Marine Fisheries Commission voted 5‑4 to accept the Division of Marine Fisheries’ recommendation to phase out the mechanical hard‑clam fishery within three years and to discontinue use of mechanical gear in conjunction with maintenance dredging.
Division co‑lead Lorena De La Garza told commissioners that mechanical gears used in the fishery — escalator dredges and clam troughs — “cause physical damage to clams and other organisms living in and adjacent to their habitat,” and that high turbidity from the gear can reduce larval settlement and smother shellfish. She said the division now believes “the habitat value may now outweigh the value of the fishery.”
Staff described three management options shown to advisory committees: A) status quo; B) further limit mechanical harvest areas to improve enforceability and reduce habitat effects; and C) a three‑year phaseout with contingency triggers. After advisory committee input raised concerns that trigger thresholds (for example, at least 10 participants or more than 1,000,000 clams landed) might incentivize re‑entry and increase habitat harm, the division revised its recommendation to a three‑year phaseout without contingency triggers and to end allowance of mechanical harvest during maintenance dredging.
Commissioners questioned economic effects on a small number of participants who still rely on the gear. One commissioner warned there is no compensation mechanism in state statute for winding down a fishery, and staff replied that the commission can set an effective date and must perform regulatory impact analyses and, if appropriate, fiscal notes. Staff noted the commission lacks funds analogous to transition funds used in other industries.
The roll call recorded five aye votes and four nay votes; the commission chair announced the motion passed. The division said the next step is to prepare a draft Amendment 3 for legislative review.
What happens next: Draft Amendment 3 will be routed for legislative review and then return to the commission and advisory committees as required by the FMP process.
