Economic Benefits of American Lobster Fishery Management Regulations

Abstract

A simulation model is used to compare measures for future management identified in the American lobster fishery management plan; specifically, increases in the minimum legal size and a modest reduction in aggregate fishing mortality are evaluated. The analysis diners from previous work in that the distributional aspects of the alternative management regulations are quantified. The results indicate that (1) both an increased minimum size and a reduction in fishing mortality are economically justified in the sense that net benefits are positive; (2) increasing the minimum size without an adjunct regulation to prohibit entry will cause present fishermen to suffer an initial short-term reduction in revenues for which there will be no long-term gain; (3) because increased minimum size can be justified on the basis of consumer benefits alone, arguments favoring its increase to prevent recruitment failure are moot as far as a test of national economic efficiency is concerned; and (4) a program of effort reduction which reduces by 20% the fraction of available lobsters captured annually is projected to generate $1 of producer benefits for every pound of lobster landed. Reducing the annual harvest fraction by 20% results in a level of fishery benefits greater than increasing the minimum size to 89 mm (3½-in.), and increases the coincidence of short-run costs and long-term benefits among those impacted by fishery management.