New York Commercial Fishing
2021 Survey Report
Last Updated: March 11, 2022
The Suolk County Department of Economic Development & Planning in collaboraon with New York Sea Grant,
Cornell Cooperave Extension Marine Program, and the Long Island Commercial Fishing Associaon developed
this survey to create an up-to-date prole of the Long Island commercial shing industry. The prole is meant to
assist with evaluang the needs of local shermen and characterize the harvesng and processing capacity of
the industry, support businesses, and people engaged in this livelihood.
The survey results reported here can be used to beer understand the industry and assist, industry, researchers,
policy makers, State and Federal Agencies in providing the resources and support necessary to promote a viable
and sustainable shing industry.
Contact:
Michael Ciaramella, PhD, MSc.
Seafood Safety and Technology Specialist
New York Sea Grant
Photo Credit : LICFA
Report prepared by: Michael Ciaramella, August Ruckdeschel, Maeo Reiss, Ryan Wolf, Bonnie Brady, Sco
Curatolo-Wagemann, Krisn Gerbino, and Tara McClintock
2
Partner Proles
The Department of Economic
Development and Planning’s mission is
to foster a comprehensive understanding
of how to grow, improve and conserve
Suolk County’s amazing resources
within both the built and natural environments. Our
goal is to implement iniaves and projects to realize
a Suolk County that is modern and sustainable,
where ambion, quality of life and economic growth
thrive. Suolk County has a rich agricultural and
marime heritage. These industries are the backbone
of the Long Island way-of-life. Not only do our farms,
farmstands, vineyards, marinas, sheries, pack houses,
and docks generate the tourism dollars that support
our local restaurants and service industries, but they
also provide the fresh seafood and produce that
feed people both locally and across the globe. The
Department of Economic Development & Planning
produces an Agriculture & Fishing E-Newsleer which
provides updates on important meengs, deadlines,
and economic opportunies for farmers and shermen.
You can subscribe to this valuable e-newsleer here.
New York Sea Grant (NYSG), a
cooperave program of Cornell
University and the State University
of New York (SUNY), is one of 34
university-based programs under the
Naonal Oceanic and Atmospheric Administraon’s
Naonal Sea Grant College Program. Since 1971, NYSG
has represented a statewide network of integrated
research, educaon and extension services promong
coastal community economic vitality, environmental
sustainability and cizen awareness and understanding
about the State’s marine and Great Lakes resources.
Through NYSG’s eorts, the combined talents of
university sciensts and extension specialists help
develop and transfer science-based informaon to
many coastal user groups—businesses and industries,
Federal, State and local government decision-makers
and agency managers, educators, the media and the
interested public.
Suolk County Department of Economic
Development and Planning
New York Sea Grant
Cornell Cooperave Extension Suolk County
Marine Program
Long Island Commercial Fishing Associaon
Cornell Cooperave
Extension (CCE) is a
non-prot community
educaon agency established in 1917. We are aliated
with Cornell University as part of the naonal land
grant university system started in 1862. CCE Suolk is a
subordinate governmental agency with an educaonal
mission that operates under a form of organizaon
and administraon approved by Cornell University as
an agent for the State of New York. The associaon
is part of the naonal cooperave extension system,
an educaonal partnership between County, State,
and Federal governments. As New York’s land grant
university Cornell administers the system in this State.
All associaons work to meet the needs of the counes
in which they are located as well as State and naonal
goals. CCE is one of the only groups on Long Island that
works directly with local commercial sherman. We
help to ensure this unique and historical way of life
is preserved. We work with local, State and Federal
managers to ensure local shing is sustainable.
The Long Island Commercial
Fishing Associaon
represents 11 dierent
gear types of commercial
shermen in 14 ports on
Long Island. It was established in 2001 to educate the
public as to the importance of commercial shing as a
heritage industry, and to work with town, county, State
and Federal lawmakers to promote and support New
York commercial shing and shermen.
3
Partner Proles 2
Execuve Summary 4
Background and Introducon 6
Survey Parcipants 10
Fishing Pracces 12
Fishing Eorts 19
Fishery Challenges 24
Regulatory Challenges 25
Environmental Challenges 29
Infrastructure Challenges 31
Infrastructure Needs 33
Business and Markeng Challenges 34
Other Challenges 37
Impacts of COVID-19 39
COVID-19 Support 42
Fisheries Investments 43
Conclusion 44
Ways to Support 51
Table of Contents
The development of this report was parally funded through A/EEP-52 award NA20OAR4170487 from the Naonal Sea Grant College
Program of the U.S. Department of Commerce's Naonal Oceanic and Atmospheric Administraon, to the Research Foundaon for
State University of New York on behalf of New York Sea Grant. The statements, ndings, conclusions, views and recommendaons are
those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reect the views of any of these organizaons.
Executive Summary
4
Faced with environmental, social and economic
pressures, the NY commercial shing industry has
endured many challenges to maintain its important
posion within the Long Island economy. In light of
these challenges, the Suolk County Department of
Economic Development, New York Sea Grant, Cornell
Cooperave Extension of Suolk County, and the Long
Island Commercial Fishing Associaon conducted a
survey in 2021 to produce data for policy makers to
consider in developing approaches to support an
environmentally and ecologically sustainable shing
industry. The survey garnered 67 responses from
commercial shermen, who rst answered broad
quesons about their businesses and then later oered
insights on the impacts of sheries, regulaons, the
environment, infrastructure, business challenges, and
COVID-19 on the industry. This report will help guide
future eorts to support and grow the commercial
shing industry.
This report idenes many pressing challenges to the
future of shing here on Long Island. Seventy-one
percent of respondents indicated a strong need for
addional support from State and Federal Sources.
Survey results showed a percepon that regulaons
favored compeng interests and compeng water
users. These interests include non-local sheries (out-
of-state and out-of-country) and the recreaonal shing
industry. Current and future oshore wind projects
were called out for parcular concern, as commercial
shermen indicated that oshore wind projects will
occupy and restrict tradional shing grounds, limit
days at sea (parcularly during construcon), and pose
safety hazards. Fishermen in the survey see a need for
increased investment and nancial assistance in order
to build and sustain new and exisng commercial shing
infrastructure, to market and promote local product,
and to oset increases in labor, equipment, materials,
and repair costs. Infrastructure needs were frequently
cited, as shermen experienced challenges related
to a lack of processing facilies for landed species
(80%), lack of ice dockside (66%), lack of direct sales
opportunies (64%), lack of refrigerated storage space
dockside (54%), and lack of facilies to maintain vessels
(54%).
The survey also asked shermen to evaluate
environmental challenges within the region. Habitat
loss (41.1%) and insucient dredging (31.5%) received
the highest percentages of respondents cing these
issues as “extremely challenging.” Fiy-seven percent of
respondents viewed habitat loss as “very” or “extremely
challenging” and only 5% stated that the issue is "not
at all challenging." Sixty-nine percent of respondents
viewed extreme weather events as at least moderately
challenging.
Source: Blue Moon Fish
5
The survey revealed that the COVID-19 pandemic has
presented negave impacts and hardship to almost
every facet of the commercial shing industry. Eighty-
seven percent of respondents experienced a loss of
revenue in 2020 due to the pandemic. A majority of
respondents reported losses in the sale prices of sh
landed, as well as quanty of sh sold, while 47.1%
indicated that COVID-19 reduced the number of dealers
selling landed sh. Addionally, a high proporon of
respondents reported seeing increased costs for both
gear and non-gear expenses. Fortunately, a signicant
percentage, but certainly not all, of the shermen
who responded were able to parally oset lost
revenues with some government nancial support,
including funds from the CARES Act Marine Fisheries
Relief Program, the Small Business Administraon and
Paycheck Protecon Program grants and loans.
Perhaps most importantly, many respondents asserted
that unfavorable condions have led to a widespread
disinterest by and barriers to entry to the next generaon
of shermen. Thus, despite growth in the industry from
$14.1 million in 2005 to $54.1 million in 2018 (NOAA
Fisheries ENOW), survey responses demonstrate how
fragile this industry can be in the absence of wise
planning, targeted government investment, and well-
developed and carefully considered regulaon. This
report concludes with some specic recommendaons
about how to invest in the future of commercial
shing and how we can migate the impacts of some
of the more severe environmental, regulatory, and
infrastructure based constraints on commercial shing
on Long Island.
With responses from only about 10% of licensed
shermen, the survey results are not inclusive and can
only serve as general insight into some of the challenges
and common pracces of New York's shing industry.
Source: Blue Moon Fish
Help increase representaon of the
600+ licensed shermen in New York by
sharing the 2022 survey. The survey is
linked above and open to all New York
Fishermen. Responses will be used to
develop the 2022 survey report.
Click Here to Complete the
2022 Commercial Fishing Survey
Click Here to Complete the
2022 Commercial Fishing Survey
6
Background and Introduction
The 2021 commercial shing survey was distributed to shermen across Long Island online through email and
social media plaorms and in person at the docks. Sixty seven shermen completed the survey and their responses
are recorded in this report. The team plans to connue to distribute this survey annually and publish an annaul
report to track changes in the Long Island commercial shing industry over me.
Overall, the local economic impact of marine living
resources has increased, with several indicators
suggesng that the growth has largely resulted from
investments in establishments that complement
commercial shing. The number of establishments
associated with commercial shing moderately
increased from 87 in 2005 to 110 in 2018, but the
number of employees per establishment increased
from four to six. While the number of self-employed
workers dipped slightly from 757 to 693, the number of
workers employed doubled from 307 to 614.
Meanwhile, wages have signicantly increased from $6
million to over $37 million, and the average wage per
employee increased from $19,400 to $37,300. These
data suggest a growth in higher-end subsectors of the
industry, especially as post-COVID-19 Suolk County
once again experiences record levels of tourism.
Economic Impact
Suolk County’s commercial shing heritage spans
more than 400 years, represenng a patchwork quilt of
inter-related small businesses here on Long Island. Our
wild-caught sheries, ports, shermen, and support
industries all contribute to the producon of sustainable
fresh sh for consumers locally and beyond, supporng
our seafood shops, retail food stores, restaurants, and
tourism industries.
Marine employment on Long Island contributes close
to 34,000 jobs and nearly one billion dollars in wages.
Although commercial shing employment directly on
the water represents only 1.5 percent of that. This is
likely due to the limited access entry regulaons in
place by both the State and the Federal government.
Several economic indicators point to growth in the
overall sector, which can at least parally reect new
posive market trends of local seafood consumpon
(NOAA Snapshots). The gross domesc product (GDP)
increase from $14.1 million in 2005 to $54.1 million in
2018 provides a telling stasc of a growing market for
commercial shing.
In 2018 (ENOW data) nearly 700 small businesses that
depended on living marine resources in Suolk County
brought in over $54 million dollars. That same year
Montauk, the State’s largest shing port, was ranked
the 57th largest commercial shing port in the US in
pounds landed. Together the ports of Montauk and
Shinnecock alone landed over 18 million pounds of sh
in 2018 valued at $23 million dollars. The East End of
Long Island has long dominated the regional commercial
shing industry due to its access to a multude of both
local and Federal water shed species that migrate both
inshore and oshore along the New York Mid-Atlanc
Bight .
Regulatory Overview
Fisheries are regulated by the Department of
Environmental Conservaon (NYSDEC) in New York State
and by the Naonal Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS),
federally. Fishermen must have the appropriate State
and Federal commercial licenses to legally operate.
State and Federal quotas on various sh stocks are
based on biological values determined by both State
and federal sciensts. These quotas, which can vary by
season, determine how many pounds of each individual
species can be landed coastwide, regardles of whether
they were caught in State or Federal waters.
7
In New York State, commercial shermen are required
to have a Marine Commercial Food Fishing License,
which covers mulple species, costs $250 and must
be renewed yearly. Addional State issued permits are
required for certain highly sought-aer species (like
uke and striped bass). The Food Fishing License allows
the license holder to take and land food sh harvested
from State waters and to land food sh taken from
waters outside the State for commercial purposes.
The number of food sh licenses issued each year has
been limited since 1995. New applicants may need to
wait years before an old license is relinquished. Oen
younger shermen work on established boats to get
experience and income, and then once they meet the
income eligibility requirements (averaging $15,000
in commercial shing income over three years), they
can apply for their own personal permits. Species-
specic Federal permits are required for most species
in Federal waters, and many species have a moratorium
on new permits that require the sherman to purchase
an already exisng permit.
Commercial Fishing Methods
Commercial shing methods in Suolk County remain a
mixture of old and relavely new (20th century) shing
and gear types. Baymen may sh using the centuries
old method of pound nets or gill-nets in the bays or
dig for clams and other shellsh. Inshore State-waters
shermen, (0-3 miles from shore,) and/or oshore
Federal-waters-shermen (3-200 miles from shore),
may use gear types which include traps, pots, gill-nets,
longlines, oer-trawl nets, and dredges, depending on
the State and Federal permits they possess.
The species a sherman chooses to target will
determine how big of a boat is needed to work safely
in an ever-changing sheries environment. A boat’s
size will depend on the gear type shed and distance
necessary to travel for permied species, whether
inshore or oshore. In general, a shing boat will need
to be bigger to sh safely farther from shore in deeper
water, in all weather.
Maintenance, upkeep and gear costs, me-of-year
travel distances to sh stocks, (in some cases acquiring
out-of-state permits so as to travel to other States’
ports to land larger quotas of State-by-State regulated
species), seasonal weather changes, market demand
and the cost of fuel will also impact a shermen’s ability
to target, catch, and sell certain species.
In order to understand shing in Suolk County, it is
important to understand sh migraons. Many sh
species that are landed on Long Island migrate inshore
in the spring and then move oshore in the fall and
winter. Excepons to that migraon would include
winter ounder - they come inshore in the winter and
early spring to breed; golden lesh - which live near
the oshore canyons year-round, plus highly migratory
species like swordsh and tunas that swim the eddies of
the Gulf stream and migrate internaonally. New York
commercial shermen catch over 50 species of sh in
State and Federal waters.
Fisheries stocks abundance can uctuate so that shery
management regulaons may vary from year to year.
The top ve species landed by poundage in New York
in 2019 were scup, loligo squid, monksh, lelsh, and
whing. By dollar value, the top ve species were surf
clam, loligo squid, lesh, uke and scup.
8
Impacts of COVID-19
COVID-19 was devastang economically for Suolk
County’s commercial shing communies due to the
loss of sales to sh buyers who ulmately sell to local
restaurants throughout New York City and to points
beyond. Restaurants naonwide were hit hard by
closures or had limited sales during the height of the
pandemic. However a silver lining for the county’s
shermen may be a renewed, and growing, sustainable
consumer interest in both fresh and frozen seafood.
According to a recent 2021 seafood sales research report
by IRI and 210 Analycs, current seafood sales easily
trended ahead of pre-pandemic levels. Frozen seafood
sales spiked more than 40 percent ahead of 2019, while
fresh seafood sales jumped 33.7 percent compared to
2019. Whether it was due to shortages in other protein
sources like beef or chicken, or a newfound interest in
underulized sh species that were reasonably priced,
more Americans started eang more seafood.
Below are 2019 landings (2020 landings were not used
due to COVID-19) ranked by dollar value for Suolk
County’s two most producve ports – Montauk and
Hampton Bays/Shinnecock. Data was provided by the
Atlanc States Marine Fisheries Commission.
9
What You Can Find in This Report
The following report summarizes the demographics,
shing gear, port of landing and other important
aributes gathered from 67 Long Island shermen who
answered our survey. These 67 survey respondents
vary by gear type. The latest DEC records indicate
over 600 food sh licensees in Suolk County, so this
is a small sampling of New York’s overall commercial
shermen. With responses from only about 10% of
licensed shermen, the survey results are not inclusive
and can only serve as general insight into some of the
challenges and common pracces of New York's shing
industry.
The partners on this project intend to issue the
survey annually, so each year we hope to idenfy
beer pracces to increase the number of survey
respondents and obtain a stascally signicant data
set. Addionally, the 67 survey respondents may not
mirror precisely the scope and scale of Suolk County
commercial shing. Certain segments of Long Island’s
commercial shing industry may be underrepresented.
A future determinaon of how many shermen belong
to each gear type and how it relates to full or part me
income may be of interest.
Nevertheless, we believe these inial survey results
will help us beer understand the future needs of Long
Island commercial shing. By design, the survey was
meant to focus on the parcular modern-day needs
and challenges of commercial shing here in New York.
It was also meant to idenfy future opportunies for
Suolk County shermen, and serve the economic
development and quality of life interests of both
shermen and Long Island residents and visitors in
general.
Finally, this 2021 survey, which was in the eld
between April 2021 and November 2021, collected
data that can be compared to survey results collected,
but unpublished, in 2019 (76 respondents). Where
available, the reader will nd survey results compared
to 2019 responses.
This allowed the partners on this report to make
important comparisons to a “pre-COVID-19” industry
and it will allow readers and invested stakeholders to
make recommendaons and draw conclusions about
future industry needs. This report concludes with some
basic recommendaons and an invitaon to the reader
to help us evaluate and explore ways to protect and
preserve the economic, ecological, and sustainable
future of this essenal heritage industry.
Source: Blue Moon Fish
0
5
10
15
20
'21
'19
>5041-5031-4021-3011-206-101-5
Number of Respondents
4.2%
1.8%
10.9%
10.4%
23.6%
22.9%
23.6%
22.9%
14.5%
35.4%
20.0%
29.2%
5.5%
6.3%
10
Q1. How many years have you been a Commercial Fisherman?
Q2. What percentage of your total income (earned, pensions, investments, etc.)
comes from commercial shing?
Survey Participants
The majority of respondents (≥ 70%)
received 75% - 100% of their annual
income from commercial shing. This
remained consistent between the 2019
and 2021 survey. This is an important data
point, as the intent of this survey is to
collect informaon from those individuals
who rely on shing as their primary source
of income and could potenally be used
as an indicator of community reliance
and vulnerability to shocks in the system.
These are the individuals most invested in
the present and future of their industry.
This bar graph represents the length
of me in years that respondents
have been engaged in the
commercial shing industry.
Responses ranged anywhere
from 1-55 years with the majority
between 30-50 years as a
commercial shermen. This is an
increase from the 2019 results
which showed a larger number of
respondents shing between 11-30
years.
Years
Percent Total Income
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
'21
'19
75-100%51-75%26-50%0-25%
Number of Respondents
11.4% 11.4%
11.4%
5.7%
2.9%
7.1%
74.3%
70.0%
0 5 10 15 20 25
'21
'19
75-84
65-74
55-64
45-54
35-44
25-34
18-24
Number of Respondents
2.7%
11.9%
12.0%
13.3%
13.4%
19.4%
25.3%
28.0%
35.8%
10.7%
14.9%
8.0%
4.5%
11
Q3. What is your age?
The majority of respondents were between 45
and 64 years old. In the 2021 survey, there was a
slight increase in respondents in older age ranges
(55+) compared to the 2019 respondents. This
age breakdown mirrors the demographics of the
DEC's food sh licensees who have an average age
of 57, ranging from 18-90. It also speaks to the
aging demographics within the industry and the
need to take steps to idenfy next generaons of
American shermen.
Number of Responses
Age Range
Source: Long Island Commercial Fishing Associaon
12
Q4. How many months a year do you use each of the below gear types?
Fishing Practices
How many months a year do you
use a bull rake?
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Months
Number of Responses
121110987654321
How many months a year do you
dive?
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Months
Number of Responses
121110987654321
Respondents were asked to indicate how many months each year they ulize dierent shing gear types. Bull
rakes, diving, and hook and line, shown here were used to varying degrees by respondents with hook and line
being used most frequently and by the largest number of respondents. Bull rakes are large metal rakes used to
harvest shellsh from the sea bed from a boat or ski. Diving is tradionally used in New York for shellsh harvest
and hook and line is the tradional rod and reel shing used to catch a variety of nsh species.
How many months a year do you
use hook and line?
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Months
Number of Responses
121110987654321
13
How many months a year do you
use an o�er trawl?
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Months
Number of Responses
121110987654321
How many months a year do you
use a pelagic longline?
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Months
Number of Responses
121110987654321
Oer trawls are a type of midwater trawl that ulize large nets that are pulled behind a shing vessel through the
water column to catch a variety of nsh species commonly found in the water column. This is a common gear
type for New York shermen and are used all year long. Pelagic long lines are used far less frequently in New York
and consist of a series of baited hooks aached to main line that is buoyed at the surface. This type of gear is more
commonly used to catch large game sh like Tunas and Swordsh.
14
How many months a year do you
use pots/traps?
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Months
Number of Responses
121110987654321
How many months a year do you
use a pound net?
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Months
Number of Responses
121110987654321
Pots and traps are used regularly by New York shermen and are submerged three dimensional devices made of
wood or wire that are baited to ence target species to enter and are designed to be dicult to escape. This gear
type is most commonly used to catch crustaceans and mollusks such as crabs, lobster, and whelk. Pound nets,
while not as common, are also used to varying degrees in New York. Pound nets use mesh fences and tunnels to
interrupt sh movements and funnel the sh into a trap or pound at the end that limits opportunies for escape.
The sh can then be harvested from the trap/pound by net. These can be used for nsh species such as bluesh,
menhaden, and ounder.
15
How many months a year do you
use a dredge?
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Months
Number of Responses
121110987654321
How many months a year do you
use a gill net?
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Months
Number of Responses
121110987654321
Gill nets are regularly used by New York shermen and consists of a wall of neng that is suspended in the water
column. The mesh size of the neng is designed to specically allow the head but not the body of a target nsh
species to pass through. Once the head passes through the sh's gills, they get caught in the mesh. This method
can be opmized to target a variety of dierent nsh species. Dredging is another method used by New York
shermen. This method relies on a metal frame aached to a collecon bag that is dragged along the sea oor to
collect boom dwelling species of shellsh such as clams, mussels, oysters, scallops, crabs and whelk.
16
How many months a year do you
use a purse seine?
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Months
Number of Responses
121110987654321
How many months a year do you
use other types of fishing gear?
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Months
Number of Responses
Haul Seine
Not Specified
Beach Seine
Hand Gather
121110987654321
Purse seines are not commonly used in New York but can be used by a couple shermen up to six months a year.
Purse seines are large nets that are deployed around a school of sh in the water column and then closed at
the base before being lied out of the water to trap any sh in the vicinity. This method is commonly used for
schooling nsh species and squid. New York shermen also use haul seines and beach seines to capture near
shore species and hand gather shellsh in the bays across Long Island. More informaon on shing gear and
pracces can be found on the NOAA Fisheries website.
Source: Long Island Commercial Fishing Associaon
17
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Purse Seine
Pelagic Longline
Dive
Other
Pound Net
Bull Rake
Dredge
Gill Net
Hook and Line
O�er Trawl
Pots/Traps
Number of Respondents
Number of Respondents Using
Each Gear Type
35
31
30
27
19
16
9
5
4
3
2
Number of Gear Types Used by
Respondents
0 5 10 15 20 25
12-
11-
10-
9-
8-
7-
6-
5-
4-
3-
2-
1-
Number of Respondents
Number of gear types
21
8
15
7
0
1
3
6
0
1
0
1
Respondents were not limited to choosing
a single gear type. This allowed for mulple
gear types to be idened by a respondent.
The most common gear types employed
were pots/traps (35), oer trawl (31), hook
and line (27), and gill nets (27).
A majority of respondents (44 of 63) indicated
that they used three or fewer dierent gear
types when conducng commercial shing
acvies. One third of all respondents only
used a single gear type.
18
Point
Lookout (1)
Q5. Where is your primary port of landing?
Q6. How many crew work on your vessel?
Of the 67 responses, 45 indicated they
had at least one crew. The majority of
boats have between one and three
crew, with a few reporng as many as
eight crew members.
Montauk - 25
Shinnecock-Hampton Bays - 15
Primary LI Ports:
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Women
Men
None7-94-61-3
The largest shing port represented by respondents
was Montauk followed by Shinnecock-Hampton Bays.
Number of Crew
Number of Responses
19
Q7. How have your shing eorts changed over the last year?
Fishing Eorts
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Time Spent Fishing
Number of Responses
41.4%
34.5%
24.1%
+=
-
+
=
-
Decrease
No Change
Increase
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Crew
30.4%
58.9%
10.7 %
Number of Responses
+=
-
Fiy-six respondents answered the queson of how
their crew size changed over the past year. More than
half (33 responses) of these responses indicated that
respondents' crew levels stayed the same over the past
year. Thirty percent reported that their crew levels have
decreased over the past year and 10% indicated that
crew levels had increased from the year before.
Of the 58 respondents who answered this queson,
41% (24 responses) indicated that the me in which
they spend shing has decreased over the last year.
Thirty-four percent indicated that their me spent
shing had not changed since last year and 24%
indicated that their me spent shing increased from
the year before.
Fiy-eight respondents, in total, provided a response to
the queson of how the me spent on compliance with
regulatory procedures and paperwork has changed
over the past year. A majority – 38 responses (65%) –
indicated that the me spent on regulatory compliance
and paperwork had actually increased over the past
year. Nearly all other respondents (19 responses)
indicated that the me spent on regulatory compliance
had stayed the same, with only one respondent
indicang that me spent on regulatory compliance
had decreased.
Among those 58 respondents indicang how the
amount of gear used has changed over the past year
nearly 70%, or 40 respondents, indicated that the
amount of gear they used had not changed since 2020.
Nearly 14% indicated that the amount of gear they
used had increased (eight responses) and 17% said the
amount of gear decreased from last year.
20
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Time Spent on Regulatory
Compliance/Paperwork
+
=
-
Decrease
No Change
Increase
Number of Responses
1.7%
32.8%
65.5%
+=
-
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Amount of Gear Used
(Number of pots/traps/etc.)
+=
-
17.2%
69.0%
13.8%
Number of Responses
More than three-quarters (79%) of the 58 respondents
providing a response to this queson indicated that the
type of shing gear that they use had not changed over
the past year. However, a total of twelve respondents
(21%) answered “yes.” Some specic changes to gear
that individual respondents referenced in their survey
responses involved the addion of more traps and
nets, the addion of crab pots, the decision to work
in dierent sheries, and switching from lobstering to
scallop dredging. While the sample size is small, roughly
one out of ve respondents indicang a change in gear
type from year-to-year is noteworthy.
21
Q8. Has the TYPE(s) of shing gear you use changed over the past year?
Q9. If yes, how has the type(s) of gear you use changed over the past year?
"Crab pots."
0
10
20
30
40
50
NoYes
Number of Responses
20.7%
79.3%
"Need to use multiple gear types in the same day."
"Increase in price."
"More eective, less bycatch."
"More types."
"Need to use multiple gear types in the same day."
"Needed to work dierent sheries to make income."
"Same methods, just
more traps/nets."
"Experimenting with gear to maximize catching."
"I had to change some of my shing methods."
"I have made modications to my gear."
"I’ve switched from lobstering to scallop
dredging . I intend to start trawling in 2022."
22
Q10. What species have you landed in the past year?
Species Landed
Percentage of
Respondents
Black Sea Bass 71.6%
Bluesh 67.2%
Striped Bass 65.7%
Scup/Porgy 62.7%
Dogsh 58.2%
Tautog 58.2%
Weaksh 53.7%
Skate 49.3%
Summer Flounder (Fluke) 49.3%
Buersh 44.8%
Goosesh (Monksh) 38.8%
Longn Squid 38.8%
Conch 35.8%
Lobster 29.9%
Atlanc Mackerel 26.9%
Clams (Quahog) 28.4%
Silver Hake (Whing) 28.4%
Winter Flounder 28.4%
Blue Crab 26.9%
Menhaden (Bunker) 26.9%
Red Hake 26.9%
Eel 23.9%
Golden Tilesh 20.9%
Cod 19.4%
Oysters 19.4%
Atlanc Herring 14.9%
Sea Scallops 14.9%
Jonah Crab 13.4%
Tilesh 13.4%
Bluen Tuna 9.0%
Yellown Tuna 9.0%
Surf Clams 1.5%
Horshoe Crabs 0.0%
13.4% of respondents indicated that they
caught other species such as: blowsh
chubb mackerel, kingsh, sanddab,
spot, silversides, croaker, mantis shrimp,
swordsh and welk.
Among the 67 respondents who
completed the survey, over 71%
were landing Black Sea Bass,
over 67% were landing
Bluesh, over 65% were
landing Striped Bass, over
62% were landing Scup/
Porgy, and over 58% were
landing Dogsh and Tautog.
These represent the top
six species landed by
respondents but does not
fully reect NY landings
as a whole, as there are over 600
licensed commercial shermen
in New York. The landings data
reected here is highly dependent
on permits held, geography,
and gear types ulized by the
respondents.
The survey team hopes to increase parcpaon over
me to more accurately represent the New York
commercial shing industry as a whole. For more
complete statewide sheries landing data see: www.
accsp.org
Long Island shermen nd Porgy/Scup to be the most dicult to sell, with een other species idened by at
least one shermen.
Number of Responses
23
Q11. In your opinion, which locally abundant species are most dicult to sell?
Separate le for species landed qs
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Tuna
Summer Flounder
Squid
Skate
Conch
Oysters
Tautog
Lobster
Eel
Crab
Dogfish
Menhaden
Sea Robin
Monkfish
Porgy/Scup
While respondents did identify several
species that were dicult to sell, many
noted that the real challenge was
getting a reasonable price for their
catch, not just selling it.
24
Q12. How concerned are you about the future protability of your business?
Fishery Challenges
89.7%
8.8%
76.3%
20.3%
3.4%1.5%
Not Concerned
Not Very Concerned
Somewhat Concerned
Very Concerned
2019 2021
Fiy-nine of the 67 survey respondents oered their insight into concern over the future protability of the shing
business. Ninety-seven percent of respondents (57 responses) indicated that they are at least “somewhat” or “very
concerned” about the future protability of their business. Specically, 76% of respondents alone reported being
“very concerned” about the future of their business, with an addional 21% being only “somewhat concerned.”
Only two respondents were not very concerned about the future of their business’ protability. Interesngly,
the percentage of shermen who said they were “very concerned” about future protability actually decreased
between 2019 to 2021 from 87% to 76%.
Responses to the queson on the challenge of
the availability of real-me quota tracking were
collected from 54 of the 67 parcipang survey
respondents. Among these responses, 22%
characterized the availability of real-me quota
tracking as “very” challenging. A total of 60%
viewed the availability of real-me quota tracking
either as “very” or “moderately” challenging.
Fiy-ve of the 67 total individuals responding
to the survey answered this queson on Federal
and State regulaons. Nearly 42% of queson
respondents indicated that they felt Federal and
State regulaons were “extremely” challenging.
Nearly half of the 55 queson respondents (27
responses) said that Federal and State regulaons
were either “very” or “moderately” challenging.
Fiy-four respondents to the survey responded
to the queson of the challenge of inappropriate
state-by-state sheries allocaons, with 13
respondents not providing a response. Sixty-ve
percent of these 54 respondents characterized
inappropriate state-by-state sheries allocaons
as “extremely” challenging. An addional 27% of
respondents characterized these allocaons as
“very” or “moderately” challenging.
25
Q13. How challenging are the following regulatory issues are for you as a
commercial shermen?
Regulatory Challenges
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging is the availability of real-�me
quota tracking?
22.2%
25.9%
33.3%
14.8%
3.7%
Number of Responses
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging are Federal and State regula�ons?
41.8%
23.6%
25.5%
5.5%
3.6%
Number of Responses
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging are innapropriate state-by-state
fisheries alloca�ons?
64.8%
20.4%
7.4%
1.9%
5.6%
Number of Responses
Fiy individual responses from the survey’s 67
total respondents were collected for this queson.
Overall, 36% of these 50 respondents indicated
that insucient regulaon of internaonal sheries
was “extremely” challenging. Forty-two percent of
respondents reported that they felt the insucient
regulaon of internaonal sheries to be either
“very” or “moderately” challenging.
Of the 45 respondents providing responses to this
queson, 71% idened a lack of State support
as extremely challenging. “Very” or “moderately”
challenging were used to describe the lack of State
support by 22% of queson respondents. Few (3
responses) respondents reported nding a lack of
State support as either only slightly challenging or
not at all challenging. Of all challenges idened
under “Regulatory Challenges” sub-category, the
“lack of State support” actually received the greatest
proporon of respondents indicang that this issue
was extremely challenging. Some respondents
provided addional open-ended feedback and cited
issues associated with license transfers, the inability
to transfer permits, and shing quotas.
26
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging is insufficient regula�on of
interna�onal fisheries?
36.0%
22.0%
20.0%
8.0%
14.0%
Number of Responses
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging is a lack of State support?
71.1%
8.9%
4.4%
2.2%
Number of Responses
13.3%
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging is a lack of Federal support?
48.8%
17.1%
19.5%
0.0%
14.6%
Number of Responses
Nearly half (20 responses) of the 41 total respondents
to this queson stated that the lack of Federal support
was “extremely” challenging. An addional 36% of
these respondents chose “very” or “moderately”
challenging to describe the lack of Federal support.
Six of the 41 respondents (nearly 15%) said that the
lack of Federal support was not at all challenging. No
respondents used “slightly challenging” as a way to
describe the lack of Federal support.
Specify what type of federal
support is lacking:
Specify what type of state support
is lacking:
Respondents indicang that there was a lack in State and Federal support for their industry and/or business
were asked to specify what support was lacking. The quoted text on this page represents the support that
respondents felt was lacking at the State and Federal level.
"Poor promotion of
national industry."
"Unfair shery allocations" & "Too
many permits."
"Federal agencies should not be able
to lease areas directly on or adjacent to
signicant shing grounds."
"If Federal regulations prevent
us from earning a living, we
should be compensated much
like the farm industry."
"If they have a say in waterfront
development they haven’t been
helpful for the Bayman."
"Lack of ability to transfer NYS food
sh permits makes it impossible to shift
sheries."
"Little to no communication."
"Regulations that limit what we sh for are business killers. If we are restricted by
limits and seasonal closures, we should be compensated much like the farm industry."
"They don’t support the sherman in New York. We sh
under the smallest quota on the east coast. We don’t have
processing in the State. Shipping costs are extremely high
to get our sh where they need to go."
"No regulation on homes built along
waterfront negatively impacting water
quality, thus restricting baymen’s
harvesting grounds."
"Too many licenses."
"Limited promotion of local industry."
27
Of the 55 out of 67 survey respondents answering this
queson, 34% said that the cost of compliance with
sheries management regulaons was “extremely
challenging.” More than a quarter of respondents
separately characterized the cost of compliance
as “very challenging” (25% of respondents) and
“moderately challenging” (27% of respondents). The
remaining 13% of respondents indicated that this
cost of compliance was “slightly challenging”, with
no respondents saying that complying with sheries
management regulaons is “not challenging at all.”
Of the 50 survey respondents to this queson, 68%
of respondents found that the perming of oshore
wind turbines was “extremely challenging” to their
livelihood. Twelve (24%) respondents indicated that
this perming was either “very” or “moderately”
challenging. The remaining four respondents to this
queson all indicated that the perming of wind
turbine lease areas in tradionally producve and
viable shing waters was “not challenging at all”.
Responses for this queson on the challenge of
COVID-19 regulatory condions were collected
from 50 of the 67 individuals parcipang in this
survey. Overall, 30% or 15 of these respondents
characterized COVID-19 regulatory condions
as “extremely challenging” to their business. An
addional 44% of respondents indicated that they
found COVID-19 regulatory condions to be “very”
or “moderately” challenging. The remaining 26% of
respondents were nearly evenly divided between
thinking COVID-19 regulatory condions were either
“slightly challenging” (seven responses) or “not at all
challenging” (six responses).
28
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging is the cost of compliance with
fisheries management regula�ons?
34.5%
25.5%
27.3%
12.7%
0.0%
Number of Responses
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
68.0%
12.0%
12.0%
0.0%
8.0%
Number of Responses
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging are the COVID-19 regulatory
condi�ons?
30.0%
24.0%
20.0%
14.0%
12.0%
Number of Responses
Among the 56 respondents (out of
67 total parcipang individuals) for
this queson, the most commonly
provided answer was that extreme
weather events are moderately
challenging, with 37.5% of these
individuals characterizing extreme
weather in this fashion. 17% of
respondents indicated that extreme
weather events were “extremely
challenging” and 23% reported
that they were “very challenging”
to their livelihood. An addional
16% of the queson’s respondents
found extreme weather events to be
“slightly challenging,” with only three
respondents characterizing this issue
as” not at all challenging.”
29
Q14.Please indicate how challenging the following environmental issues are
for you as a commercial shermen?
Environmental Challenges
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging is environmental pollu�on and the
loss of fisheries habitat?
41.1%
16.1%
33.9%
3.6%
5.4%
Number of Responses
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging are extreme weather events (For
Example, Super Storm Sandy)?
17.9%
23.2%
37.5%
16.1%
5.4%
Number of Responses
Fiy-six of the total 67 survey respondents provided insight on the challenges associated with environmental
polluon and the loss of shery habitat. Forty-one percent of these respondents characterized polluon and
sheries habitat loss as extremely
challenging. Half of the respondents
used “very challenging” or “moderately
challenging” to describe the issue of
environmental polluon and the loss
of sheries habitat. Five respondents
reported that these issues were either
only slightly challenging (2 responses)
or not challenging at all (3 responses).
Among the issues incorporated under
the category of “Environmental
Challenges”, environmental polluon
and the loss of sheries habitat
received the highest proporon of
respondents indicang that they felt
“extremely challenged” by this issue.
Out of the survey’s 67 parcipants, 56 respondents oered insight into the issue and challenges of global climate
change. Among these individuals, nearly 18%, indicated that global climate change is “extremely challenging” to
their profession. Thirty-nine percent of these respondents indicated that global climate change was either “very
or “moderately challenging”. Out of the remaining 24 respondents for this queson, 14% indicated that global
climate change was “slightly challenging” and 29% believed that global climate change was “not at all challenging”
for their livelihoods.
Of the 54 individuals responding to this queson, 17 or 31% thought that the issue of insucient dredging was
“extremely challenging”. More than 38% of respondents indicated that this issue was either “very” or “moderately
challenging” to them and their business. An addional 20% believed that insucient dredging was “not a challenge
at all.”
30
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging is insufficient dredging?
31.5%
16.7%
22.2%
9.3%
20.4%
Number of Responses
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging is global climate change?
17.9%
16.1%
23.2%
14.3%
28.6%
Number of Responses
Responses to this queson were collected from 55 of
the total 67 parcipang respondents. Of these 55
individuals, the most common characterizaon of the
challenge of conicng water uses and users were
“very challenging” and “moderately challenging,” both
of which were equally selected by 29% of respondents.
Nearly 22% said that conicts with other water users
was “extremely challenging” to them, while 16% said
that this issue was only “slightly challenging.”
Fiy-ve respondents answered this queson, with
the most common characterizaon of the lack of local
infrastructure and support industries being “extremely
challenging.” In total, 49% of respondents said that this
issue was “extremely challenging” to their industry and
profession. An even number of respondents answered
that they believed the lack of local infrastructure
and support industries to be “very” or “moderately
challenging,” with 12 responses received for each. Only
four respondents (7 %) indicated that they felt this issue
was either “slightly” or “not at all challenging.”
Nearly 70% of answering respondents (56 out of 67
total survey respondents) characterized the issue
of rising costs associated with shing as “extremely
challenging.” The remaining 30% of respondents to this
queson either indicated that this issue was “very” or
“moderately challenging” to them. Among the surveyed
infrastructure challenges, rising costs associated with
shing received the greatest proporon of respondents
viewing the issue as an extremely signicant challenge.
31
Infrastructure Challenges
Q15. Please indicate how challenging the following user and infrastructure
issues are for you as a commercial shermen?
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging are conflicts with other water users?
21.8%
29.1%
29.1%
16.4%
3.6%
Number of Responses
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging is the lack of local infrastructure and
support industries?
49.1%
21.8%
21.8%
5.5%
1.8%
Number of Responses
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging are the rising costs associated
with fishing?
69.6%
21.4%
8.9%
0.0%
0.0%
Number of Responses
A total of 50 survey respondents oered insights into this queson pertaining to specic infrastructure challenges
within the commercial shing industry. The most commonly idened infrastructure challenge was the lack of
processing facilies for landed species, with 80% of respondents (40 out of 50 individuals) nding this to be a
challenge within the industry. The second most common infrastructure challenges were a lack of ice/ice shavings
dockside (66%) and a lack of direct sales locaons and opportunies (64%). Both a lack of refrigerated storage
space dockside and a lack of facilies to repair and upgrade vessels were idened by 54% of the 50 queson
respondents.
"Dock space is available , but costs are challenging."
"No new recruits to industry."
"That I have to truck my sh 30 miles east to have them shipped 100 miles west -
much of which is then shipped back to where they came from. Ludicrous."
32
Q16. What specic infrastructure challenges do you face (Check all that apply)?
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Other (Specify)
Dock Infrastructure - Not properly maintained
Lack of Dock Access
Lack of Facili�es to Repair/Upgrade Vessels
Lack of Refrigerated Storage Space Dockside
Lack of Direct Sales Loca�ons and Opportuni�es
Lack of Ice/Ice Shavings Dockside
Lack of Processing Facili�es for Landed Species
Specific infrastructure challenges
Number of Responses
Lorem ipsum
80%
66%
64%
54%
54%
42%
40%
6%
Source: Long Island Commercial Fishing Associaon
In a scenario where new process facilies are constructed, survey respondents most commonly idened
refrigerated storage as being necessary for processing. Of the 48 total respondents, 75% (36 respondents)
indicated refrigerated storage as being needed. Gung/lleng, frozen storage and commercial freezing facility
capabilies were all also idened as being necessary by more than 80% of respondents. Advanced processing
and cooking was the least idened capability, with only 25 respondents viewing this feature as a challenge
to the shing industry. Addional capabilies that individual respondents idened as being necessary for a
potenal new processing facility would be scallop opening and shucking, squid processing, wet storage for sh
and shellsh, ice, and packing and trucking/distribuon.
"Design a Long Island market...keep it local...many dealers
travel daily to Hunts Point and drive back to Long Island."
"Packing & Trucking."
"Needs to be available to shermen - not middlemen."
"Labor!!! Its a huge issue on Long
Island..housing for labor..."
"Scallop openning shop \ sea scallops and
being able to open scallops in the bay."
"Squid processing."
"Ice."
"Shucking."
"Wet storage for sh and shellsh."
33
Infrastructure Needs
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
75.0%
68.8%
66.7%
64.6%
52.1%
20.8%
Q17. If new processing facilies could be constructed, please indicate which capabilies
would be necessary (Check all that apply).
Fiy-ve of the 67 commercial shermen responded
to the queson of how much of a challenge
imported seafood presents to their businesses. The
majority, 64%, found imported seafood to be either
“very” or “extremely challenging” with “extremely
challenging” being the most common answer. Only
three respondents viewed seafood imports as non-
threatening.
Of the 55 respondents to this queson, 57%
believed the compeon from recreaonal
sheries to be either “very” or “extremely
challenging” with 18 respondents responding
as “extremely challenging’ as the most common
answer (n=18; 32%). Only four shermen found
no compeon from recreaonal sheries.
Out of the 54 survey parcipants who responded to
this queson, a total of 22% found accessing capital
to be “extremely challenging.” Twice as many
respondents (44%) characterized access to capital
as either “very” or “moderately challenging.” The
nal one-third of respondents found this issue to
be only “slightly challenging.”
34
Business and Marketing
Challenges
Q18. Please indicate how challenging the following business and markeng
issues are for you as a commercial shermen?
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging is compe��on from recrea�onal
fisheries?
32.1%
25.0%
19.6%
16.1%
7.1%
Number of Responses
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging is compe��on from imported
seafood?
41.8%
21.8%
18.2%
12.7%
5.5%
Number of Responses
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging is access to capital?
22.2%
27.8%
16.7%
18.5%
14.8%
Number of Responses
Of these 56 respondents, 39 (70%) found
it to be “extremely challenging” to nd the
next generaon of Long Island shermen.
An addional 14% cited it as extremely
challenging. Only two respondents did
not believe there would be a problem
nding the next generaon of commercial
shermen.
Fiy-six shermen responded to this queson
and, unlike with most of the other quesons
related to business challenges, the most frequent
response was “moderately challenging” with 34%
of the respondents. Much fewer respondents
viewed lack of demand as “extremely” or “very
challenging,” with each response receiving seven
votes.
The percepon of the challenges associated
with the lack of markeng and promoonal
support for seafood is much more evenly
distributed than other quesons related
to the business challenge sub-category.
The most common answer was ‘extremely
challenging’ with 18 of 54 (33%). The second
most common answer was “moderately
challenging” with 28% of the responses while
15% of respondents found no issue with
markeng.
35
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging is a lack of consumer demand?
12.5%
12.5%
33.9%
19.6%
21.4%
Number of Responses
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging is a lack of marke�ng and
promo�onal support for local seafood?
26.9%
13.4%
22.4%
6.0%
11.9%
Number of Responses
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging is finding the next genera�on of Long
Island Fishermen?
69.6%
14.3%
7.1%
5.4%
3.6%
Number of Responses
Fiy-six of 67 commercial shermen assessed
the level of challenge that the COVID-19 market
presented to their businesses. Seventy percent
viewed the market shi as either “very” or
“extremely challenging” with “extremely
challenging” as the most common answer
(45%).
Fiy-six of the 67 total survey respondents
provided feedback on the issue of access to
labor. Slightly over 39% of these respondents
reported nding access to labor to be “extremely
challenging.” An addional 30% found the issue
to be either “very” or “moderately challenging”.
An equal amount (30%) of respondents found
access to labor to either be only “slightly” or
“not at all challenging.”
Fiy-four responses were collected from
among the survey’s 67 total parcipant
respondents on the issue of compeon
from domesc and internaonal aquaculture.
Nearly 30% (equal to 16 respondents) found
this compeon to be “extremely challenging.”
The largest poron of respondents indicated
that this issue was “very” or “moderately
challenging,” with exactly half choosing one
of these two characterizaons. The remaining
20% of responses idened this compeon as
only “slightly challenging” or “not a challenge
at all.”
36
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging are the COVID-19 market condi�ons?
44.6%
25.0%
16.1%
8.9%
5.4%
Number of Responses
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging is compe��on from domes�c and
interna�onal aquaculture?
29.6%
25.9%
24.1%
7.4%
13.0%
Number of Responses
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Not at all
Slightly
Moderately
Very
Extremely
How challenging is access to labor?
39.3%
16.1%
14.3%
16.1%
14.3%
Number of Responses
37
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Finding the next genera�on of Long Island Fishermen
Rising costs associated with fishing
Environmental pollu�on and loss of fisheries habitat
Inappropriate State-by-State fisheries alloca�ons
Regulatory Challenge
Environmental Challenge
Infrastructure Challenge
Business and Marke�ng Challenge
Number of Respondents
Most Challenging by Category
39
39
23
35
The most challenging by category was idened as the challenge receiving the most respondents selecng
"Extremely Challenging."
Other Challenges
Source: Long Island Commercial Fishing Associaon
38
"Crew."
Other Challenges Idened by
Respondents:
"Able to follow regs and regs are dierent
with each ocer."
"Aordable work space suitable
for processing seafood for
direct marketing purposes."
"Being priced out of area, no aordable
dockage, lack of infrastructure, no new
blood/recruits coming into industry."
"Better opportunity to obtain shing permits."
"Dock space and commercial
shing waterfront protection."
"Dockage and available real estate to rent
is very challenging, too expensive."
"If and when retirement comes, NYS
commercial permits despite the $25,000
maintenance cost cannot be transferred to
new entrants unless they are blood, most
States permits are transferrable."
"Lack of infrastructure. Municipalities allowing
commercial waterfront property to become condos."
"Lack of infrastructure on Long Island. We need
a local sh processing plant to stay competitive
in the market. Rhode Island, New Jersey and
Massachusettes all have processing in their States."
"Lack of promotion of our
local harvesting tradition."
"The extreme bias towards the recreational sector
shown by State and Federal policies. The fact that New
York is the only State that does not allow private held
limited access licenses to be sold by the holders."
"Yes shore side packing facility..."
Respondents were given the opportunity to share
more specically what challenges they faced. These
represent direct quotes with minor grammacal
correcons, when necessary, from survey
respondents.
Overall, most shermen in this survey experienced a decrease in revenue in 2020 as a result of the COVID-19
pandemic. More than half (51%) of these 45 responding shermen reported revenue losses of between 25-
50% in 2020, compared with the year before. 13% of respondents indicated losses of greater than 50% of their
revenue in 2020. Addionally, two shermen indicated a loss of revenue greater than 99%.
39 respondents experienced a
decrease in revenue, 4 experienced
an increase, 2 saw no change and 22
did not respond to the queson.
39
Impacts of COVID-19
Q19. Did your revenues increase or decrease in 2020 as a result of COVID-19?
25 20 15 10 5 0 5 10 15 20 25
- 76-100%
- 51-75%
- 26-50%
- 1-25%
1-25%
26-50%
51-75%
76-100%
Decrease Increase
2020 Revenue Changes Due to COVID-19
Number of Respondents
Out of 51 provided responses, most reported a
negave impact from COVID-19 on the sales price
of sh they landed. Nearly 63% found that the sales
price of sh landed was lower than before COVID-19.
Only 16% experienced higher prices during the
pandemic and 22% saw no change compared with
the period before COVID-19.
Of the 51 survey respondents to this queson, 51%
reported lower sale prices for sh landed during the
COVID-19 pandemic, rather than before COVID-19.
Eleven respondents did not noce any changes in sale
prices. Eight respondents (12%) actually reported
higher prices than during the COVID-19 pandemic
rather than before.
Fiy-one commercial shermen commented on
changes in the number of dealers selling sh.
Twenty-four shermen observed a lower numbers of
dealers, while a dierent 24 shermen did not noce
a change in the number of dealers before and during
the pandemic. Three shermen (6%) believed there
was an increase in the number of dealers during the
on-going pandemic.
40
Q20. How would you compare the following regarding your
commercial shing business to before COVID?
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Lower (-)
Same (=)
Higher (+)
How has COVID impacted the sale price of fish landed?
Number of Responses
15.7%
21.6%
62.7%
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Lower (-)
Same (=)
Higher (+)
How has COVID impacted the quan�ty of fish sold?
Number of Responses
11.8%
37.3%
51.0%
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Lower (-)
Same (=)
Higher (+)
How has COVID impacted the number of dealers
selling fish?
Number of Responses
5.9%
47.1%
47.1%
Fiy-one commercial shermen weighed in on the
cost of shing gear before and during the pandemic.
Exactly three-quarters of the respondents believed
that the price of gear increased. Twenty four
percent of shermen believed that the price has
stayed the same and just one shermen believed
the cost of gear decreased.
Fiy-one commercial shermen provided insight
on the change in cost of non-gear expenses. Similar
to the percepons of gear cost expenses, the
overwhelming majority of respondents (76%) said
that the cost of non-gear expenses increased during
the pandemic. Ten respondents believed that prices
stayed the same while only two thought the price
lowered.
Fiy commercial shermen provided feedback on
the ability to sell direct to consumers during the
COVID-19 pandemic. Sixty percent believed that
direct sales opportunies remained unchanged.
Twenty two percent saw in increase in direct sales
opportunies and 18% felt a decrease in direct
sales opportunies.
41
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Lower (-)
Same (=)
Higher (+)
How has COVID impacted the cost of gear (pots,
traps, nets, hoods, etc.)?
Number of Responses
74.5%
23.5%
2.0%
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Lower (-)
Same (=)
Higher (+)
How has COVID impacted the the cost of non-gear
expenses (ice, bait, fuel, fishing tackle,
boxes/packaging, etc.)?
Number of Responses
76.5%
19.6%
3.9%
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Lower (-)
Same (=)
Higher (+)
How has COVID impacted your ability to sell direct to
consumers?
Number of Responses
22.0%
18.0%
60.0%
Of the total 67 survey parcipants, 47 responded to the queson related to receiving government or private
nancial support made available to commercial shermen. Thirteen respondents indicated they “sought no
nancial assistance” and six indicated they “preferred not to answer.” Of the remaining 28 shermen who received
some form of pandemic nancial assistance, 15 received CARES Act Marine Fisheries Relief Program funding, 11
received Small Business Loans, 10 received assistance through the Paycheck Protecon program, two received
private bank loans or personal lines of credit, and one was turned down for assistance. Three other received
some alternate form of nancial assistance. In many instances, receiving nancial assistance from one nancial
resource (e.g. a PPP grant), would not necessarily preclude a shermen from receiving nancial assistance from
other sources (e.g. CARES Act Marine Fisheries Relief Program funding). In most cases, support is predicated on
ensuring that all combined monies received could not make the harvester “more than whole.”
42
Q21. Has your commercial shing business received funds from any of the following
sources to deal with the eects of the COVID-19 Pandemic (select all received)?
COVID-19 Support
0 4 8 12 16 20
Applied for assistance but was turned down
Private Bank Loan OR Personal Line of Credit
Other (please specify)
Prefer not to answer
Paycheck Protec�on Program (PPP)
Small Business Loan (SBA)
Did not seek financial assistance
CARES ACT Marine Fisheries Relief Program
Financial Assistance Received to Deal with the Effects of
the COVID-19 Pandemic
Number of Respondents
Source: Long Island Commercial Fishing Associaon
“Need for more processing facilities…Other than sending products
to Hunts Point, it’s becoming extremely dicult to get seafood o
Long Island. There are only so many markets to be developed on
the Island. This was a problem long before COVID-19.”
“Processing space for direct marketers. I feel that after our grounds are shifted to use for
wind plants, direct marketing will be the only viable course for small boat shermen.”
43
Fisheries Investments
Q22. In your opinion, what is the best investment that can be made in the
commercial shing industry to sustain the long-term health and economic viability
of this important heritage Long Island industry?
Thirty-seven commercial shermen oered their valuable perspecves on which aspects of the industry are most
in need of investment. To synthesize responses, a word cloud generator extracted the most common words used
by the shermen. The size of each word in the cloud is proporonal to the number of mes it is menoned in the
responses. Each word appeared at least two mes in the responses.
Several opportunies for investment emerged – the need for processing facilies and infrastructure, the need
for dock access, and overall market condions, including dockside prices and consumer demand. Some of the
concerns, such as perming, quota limits, and allocaons, are explored more deeply in the conclusion of this
report.
Conclusion
“I have no packing facilities less than two
hours and have to drive in congested
trac after shing to deliver.”
44
The ming of our surveys provides an important
snapshot of the commercial shing industry before
COVID-19, and during COVID-19. Unsurprisingly,
an industry that was broadly challenged before the
pandemic connues to be challenged two years into
the pandemic. Our survey results mirror real-world
realies. The U.S. Department of Commerce Naonal
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administraon released a
report in December of 2021 tled "U.S. Seafood Industry
and For-Hire Sector Impacts from COVID-19: 2020 in
Perspecve." The report showed an across-the-board
22% decline in commercial landings revenue during
2020 compared to the previous ve-year average.
Northeast sheries suered slightly less, suering 18%
decreases.
However, the same report contains a silver lining.
While shermen were hit hard with loss of business
and landings revenue, seafood retail sales surged
during 2020 as consumers stayed home, stocking their
own freezers and pantries. The report notes another
study, conducted by the Food Industry Associaon
which tracked U.S. seafood retail sales and found they
“increased signicantly in 2020 across all seafood
categories: frozen, up 36 percent; fresh, up 25 percent;
and grocery (canned, pouches, etc.), up 21 percent.”
This aligns with the report’s other notable ndings,
that high-value and export products were hit hardest,
especially in the early months of the pandemic. When
restaurants closed and/or went into lockdown, the
market for restaurant sourced seafood collapsed. The
foodservice sector is our commercial sheries' most
high-value market, both naonally and locally. When
that industry suers, Long Island shermen suer.
Interesngly, according to U.S. Bureau of Labor
Stascs Occupaonal Outlook Handbook, the naonal
employment of shing and hunng workers is actually
projected to grow 11 percent from 2020 to 2030,
faster than the average for all occupaons. On average,
about 5,300 openings for shing and hunng workers
are projected each year over the decade. However,
many of these openings are expected to result from
the need to replace workers who transfer to dierent
occupaons or exit the labor force, such as rerement.
So how do we nd and create opportunies for the next
generaon of shermen? How do we tackle exisng
challenges and problems as idened and priorized by
Long Island shermen in this survey? Below, is a short
and incomplete list of potenal soluons to exisng
challenges and opportunies within the industry. These
recommendaons should be considered a launching
point for future invesgaon. We hope this report will
generate new, more in-depth and thoroughly veed
discussions and detailed plans to address issues of
concerns within the commercial shing industry.
Source: Blue Moon Fish
45
The Challenge: Lack of State Support
The Soluon: Create a New York State Supported
Markeng Campaign
New York’s 2020 Budget included $33.2 million in local
assistance funding to grow New York’s agriculture
industry and $5.8 million of that funding was earmarked
specically for agricultural development programs.
A dedicated New York State markeng campaign is
needed to highlight locally-landed seafood. To be
sucient, the eort should be similar in intent, but
much larger in scale, to the New York Agriculture and
Markets “Pride of New York Seafood Campaign” which
received $50,000 in the 2000s.
The Challenge: Lack of Federal Support
The Soluon: Resurrect the Naonal Seafood Council
Between 2019-to-2023, the United States has
appropriated $235 million towards agricultural trade,
promoon and facilitaon. There is no equivalent
energy behind the promoon of American seafood.
USDA-Local Farmers Promoon Program and Farmers
Market Promoon grants can fund seafood markeng,
but does so infrequently. NOAA’s Saltonstall-Kennedy
grants also fund seafood eorts, seafood markeng and
promoon exclusively. However the funding tends to be
isolated and segmented, typically funding regional, but
not naonal campaigns. This can result in unnecessary
compeon amongst regional markeng campaigns
and be discouraging to consumers being pulled in
dierent direcons. A naonal industry-supported “Buy
American Seafood” campaign is needed to educate
consumers on the economic, environmental and ethical
advantages of buying local seafood.
There has been some recent proven success with
seafood markeng campaigns in the United States. The
"Eat Seafood America!" markeng campaign, launched
in 2020 by the Seafood Nutrion Partnership (SNP) and
Challenges and Potenal Soluons
the Seafood4Health Coalion, achieved an 800 percent
return on investment, according to SNP. The campaign,
which was launched as a rapid response to the
COVID-19 public health crisis with the dual goals of
helping Americans stay healthy and boosng the U.S.
seafood sector, has already shown to have increased
seafood consumpon in the U.S. The campaign reached
four million households and, according to the SNP,
every dollar spent on campaign ads resulted in a US $9
increase in seafood purchases.
Recent Examples of Federally Funded Seafood
Markeng Campaigns
USDA Farmers Market Promoon Program (FMPP): In
2019, Cornell Cooperave Extension of Suolk County
(CCE) secured a three year grant for $144,000 in USDA-
FMPP funding to provide markeng and promoon
for the “Choose Local F.I.S.H” program. The F.I.S.H
project (Fresh, Indigenous, Sustainable, Healthy) is a
unique iniave oered by CCE that helps to increase
the consumpon of local seafood through improved
consumer awareness and educaon. CCE has created
and distributed eecve promoonal materials to
increase demand for local seafood in retail outlets and
at relevant events.
Cornell Cooperave Extension of Suolk County has
developed a seafood locator to assist consumers in
nding New York Seafood.
www.localsh.org/locator
Local Seafood Locator
46
NOAA Sea Grant 2020-2021 Special Projects "E"
-Addressing COVID Impacts to Seafood Resources
(NOAA-OAR-SG-2020-2006435): In 2021, New York
Sea Grant and Cornell Cooperave Extension of Suolk
County secured $198,301 to assist in enhancing the
market for New York farmed and shed seafood. These
eorts will include the development of a seafood sales/
purchase incenves program, addional local seafood
markeng resources to assist producers and retailers in
markeng products, and educaonal opportunies to
engage communies on New York’s seafood products.
NOAA Sea Grant FY2020 and 2021 COVID-19 Response
(NOAA-OAR-SG-2021-2006818): In 2020 and 2021, New
York Sea Grant leveraged $56,000 of COVID-19 rapid
response funds from the Naonal Sea Grant Oce to
assist New York seafood producers in accessing dierent
markets. This included the development of regulatory
and technical guidance documents and free seafood
HACCP trainings for New York producers interested
in exploring new markets. Four regulatory guides and
ten addional technical resources were created to
help producers understand the regulatory framework
around geng seafood and seaweed products to
dierent markets in the State. Free food safety training
opportunies are being oered to assist producers in
transioning to processing and markeng their seafood
products.
NOAA Saltonstall-Kennedy: In 2021, in response to
the COVID-19 pandemic, CCE, in partnership with the
East End Food Instute, and Rhode Island based Eang
with Ecosystems, secured $64,000 in NOAA Saltonstall-
Kennedy funding to connue and expand the “Choose
Local F.I.S.H” program. This funding was used to produce
a series of videos to cook and prepare local, sustainable
sh species. CCE is also producing een online “Demo
and Dialogue” local seafood cooking demonstraon/
educaon events. These interacve experiences led by
expert chefs and CCE sheries specialists are designed
to teach home cooks how to prepare local seafood in
their own kitchen. They are intended to provide local
shing industry knowledge and educaon and to
increase interest and demand for local seafood. The
proceeds generated from these events will be spent on
local seafood to feed community members in need in
the States of New York and Rhode Island. Importantly,
this project helps a) ll the need for increased at-home
cooking instrucon for local seafood; b) allows project
partners to leverage the bounty of the Northeast region
to provide healthy food for our neighbors in need; and
c) provides economic support for local shermen by
increasing demand for local seafood.
New York Sea Grant provides Seafood HACCP
training opportunies for seafood businesses.
www.nyseagrant.org/seafood
New York Sea Grant has free customizable seafood
markeng resources for a variety of seafood species
available online.
www.nyseagrant.org/seafoodmarkeng
47
The Challenge: Lack of Local Instuonal Market
Demand
The Soluon: Create Middle-Tier Processing to Provide
Instuons with Local Processed Fish Products
Create local processing infrastructure to provide large
Long Island instuons with processed (gued, lleted,
vacuum sealed, and frozen, etc.) sh products. Schools,
universies, hospitals, and food banks may wish to
source nutrious, sustainable, and locally abundant
products, but products may not currently be available
in a format needed by on-site sta, such as cafeteria
workers in schools and hospitals, or end-users, such
as food bank recipients who are inexperienced dealing
with a whole-sh product. Specically in the case of
food banks, several States and local municipalies have
implemented “sea-to-plate” food bank iniaves that
could serve as successful models in New York. In fact, this
recent NOAA Fisheries arcle, released in November,
highlighted some of the more successful models. See
the next secon for some addional exploraon on the
need for local processing infrastructure.
The Challenge: Lack of Processing Infrastructure
The Soluon: Tax Credits and Grant Incenves for
Seafood Processing
Use appropriate tax incenves and zoning mechanisms
to bring commercial shing processing back to Long
Island in appropriate locaons. Historically, Suolk
County was home to dozens of nsh and shellsh
processing facilies, all of whom have either shuered
or vacated the region. In its absence, roughly 95
percent of the raw catch caught on the East End goes
into processing facilies in New York City, where it
enters the New York City market, with some of the
catch returning east at a higher retail price. If shermen
had a local Suolk County facility, preferably on the
East End where most catch is landed, the shermen
and the local shing industry could benet from higher
prices for a processed catch. Unfortunately, locang a
sh processing facility is dicult under most exisng
zoning, land acquisions costs, and neighbor concerns
and objecons.
Local llet houses, or even leasable HACCP approved
commercial kitchens, could also service the shing
communies. These services could be located in a
stac locaon or repurposed as a mobile, on-demand
facility, similar to a very large catering/food truck. These
facilies could assist innovave shermen looking to do
their own value-added processing. Alternavely, they
could create opportunies for mid-er entrepreneurs
to ll the void, oering a processing service to local
shermen who could in-turn sell to consumers directly.
This kind of direct “harvester-to-consumer” retail
connecon has become a staple of Suolk County
agriculture and has proven to be very successful and
economically lucrave.
Potenal Grant Funding and Financing Sources: Suolk
County IDA, Empire State Development, United States
Department of Transportaon Marime Infrastructure
Grants, USDA Value Added Producer Grant, USDA
Local Food Promoon Program Grant, US Economic
Development Administraon Public Works and
Economic Adjustment Assistance Programs, Long Island
Development Corporaon.
The Challenge: Lack of Waterfront Port Access
The Soluon: Spend Community Preservaon Funds to
Preserve Remaining Waterfront Access
Encourage Suolk County’s East End Towns with
Community Preservaon Funds to ulize a poron of
that funding on “preservaon of lands necessary to
protect sheries and water dependent uses essenal to
maintain and enhance marime heritage” as permied
per the legislave amendment approved in 2020. The
program is voluntary, so in pracce this means that if
a shing pier, pack house, gear storage, or a boatyard
were to come on the market, the Town’s CPF funds
now have the ability to acquire the properes or the
development rights for those properes and keep them
available for the tradional industry. While this soluon
will not be able to create new waterfront access, it can
help preserve crucial exisng access and infrastructure.
48
The Challenge: Oshore Wind
The Soluon: Investments in Commercial Fishing
With the connued push for oshore wind, the
commercial shing industry is losing both producve
shing grounds and working waterfront to support
businesses. In 2022, Governor Kathy Hochul announced
the intenon to earmark $500 million for the creaon
of oshore wind port-side jobs. Yet there has never
been a commercial sheries-equivalent NY State
spending campaign for the support and promoon of
New York’s commercial shing industry. As the Federal
government makes available, and the State of New York
grants private rights to public waters for commercial
wind producon, some poron of those revenues could
be devoted to supporng and permanently preserving
exisng commercial shing waterfront and to create
new areas in port towns for gear storage. In support
of greater energy eciency iniaves, grants could be
made available to upgrade engines in fuel eciencies,
which would help cut shing costs AND protect the
environment. Funds could also be earmarked to make
investments into NEW sh processing facilies for the
processing of underulized and sustainable sh species
in Long Island waters including porgy/scup, bluesh, sea
robin, menhaden, skate, sea bass, and spiny dogsh.
These investments could be accommodated with a
sheries compensaon program. A poron of lease
revenues, acquired through aucons and operang fees,
could seed an investment fund for commercial sheries.
The compensaon program could cover costs including,
but not limited to, navigaon system upgrades, new
vessels, shing equipment, gear modicaon or gear
upgrades, insurance premiums or training and loss of
shing revenue. Importantly, funds could be invested
in technologies that would allow shermen to operate
SAFELY within the wind farms.
The Challenge: Helping Grow the Next Generaon of
Long Island Fishermen
The Soluon #1: Implement 2019 Report
Recommendaons
In 2019, the New York State DEC commissioned a
report of recommendaons to revise and improve
New York State Commercial Fishing licensing system.
The commercial shing community has raised specic
concerns on several issues including limited entry,
license transferability, latent licenses, allowing new
parcipants, too many parcipants (overcapitalizaon),
parcipant qualicaon and exibility due to health
concerns, to name a few. The report considered the
maers including but not limited to, latent licenses,
license qualicaons through income vericaon, part
me versus full-me sherman, license transfers (within
family and outside), new entrants to the shery, vessel
licenses, gear and geographic diversity, and allowing
the lease of licenses and permits. Unfortunately, none
of the report’s recommendaons has been advanced at
this me.
The Soluon #2: Trade Skills
There are sets of tradional trade skills that are needed
to succeed in commercial shing. These include, but
are not limited to, engine mechanics, gear knowledge
and gear repair, electronics and welding. An eort
to create a Suolk County commercial shing trade
cercate would help more people who may become,
or are already interested in, a career in commercial
shing. Suolk County BOCES is an ideal partner in this
eort and is currently working on developing addional
curriculum and enhancing its oerings in this space.
The Young Fishermen's Development Program, through
NOAA Sea Grant, can be leveraged to support these
eorts.
"Make it easier for young people
to get permits."
"New access to permits for younger people."
"Fair and appropriate regulations,
necessary facilities, no
industrialization of the ocean."
"Keep shing docks modern and ecient. "
49
The Challenge: Environmental Polluon and Loss of
Fisheries Habitat
The Soluon: Invesng in Water Quality Preservaon
and Restoraon/Minimizing Future Environmental
Degradaon
Excess nitrogen can stress habitat and watersheds,
overwhelm nave species, lead to harmful algal blooms,
degrade tradional protecve sh habitat grounds, and
cause sh kills. Town, County, and the New York State
government are all invesng money in water quality
preservaon and restoraon eorts for surface and
groundwaters on Long Island (groundwaters too can
ulmately end up in our bays and oceans). The ve
East End towns on Long Island all have Community
Preservaon Funds that can be tapped for water quality
improvement and restoraon eorts. Passed in 2017,
the amended Community Preservaon Fund allows
towns to ulize up to 20% of their CPF funds for water
quality improvement projects. Connued investment
in water quality improvement and research to ensure
the most eecve methods are used is crucial to ensure
progress connues to be made to support a healthy
coastal ecosystem.
Source: Long Island Commercial Fishing Associaon
The Challenge: State-by-State Fisheries Allocaons
The Soluon #1: Enhanced Support for Commercial
Fisheries in New York
Fishing allocaons have been a challenge for New
York shermen for decades. The best approach to
addressing this challenge would be to increase nancial
support for the NYS DEC Division of Marine Resources to
engage stakeholders and Federal and regional planners
to address concerns with the current pracces for
determining quotas and sheries allocaons. It is also
important for locally-elected ocials to take a more
intense interest in their commercial shing industry as
an economic engine for their communies. Recreaonal
sheries have recently beneted from such aenon,
while New York commercial sheries have not received
the same aenon.
The Soluon #2: Fund Research to Correct Historical
Fluke Landings Data
Summer ounder, known as uke, is a aish iconic to
Long Island. In the past, millions of pounds of New York-
landed uke fed the naon. In the 1970s and 80s, States
from Massachuses to North Carolina would send
tractor trailers to New York ports to pack uke caught
in federal waters o Long Island and drive back to their
States’ processing facilies to add to their landings.
These pracces led to a distorted understanding and
appreciaon of New York landed uke. New York State
could hire a full-me staer or outside consultant
to research a historical recount of the state-by-state
landed uke during the historical qualifying me
period. A more complete, historically accurate, analysis
would demonstrate more substanal landings records
from that me period. This analysis could review past
data and more accurately match New York shermen’s
sh returns from the subject me period. Matching
catch to ports would likely discover landings previously
unaccounted for. This data collecon could then arm
and empower New York representaves to appeal to
the Naonal Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the
Mid-Atlanc Fishery Management Council (MAFMC) for
more appropriate, and fair, New York State allocaon.
50
secure funds through the LIREDC, in the form of a
“Fisheries Future Fund”, which focused on supporng
the Long Island shing industry, have not been
successful. New York State could put more funding
into industry informed, impacul commercial shing
projects and enhance eorts to communicate the value
of this essenal heritage industry to New York State.
Source: Long Island Commercial Fishing Associaon
The Challenge: Rising Costs Associated with Fishing
The Soluon: Investments in Commercial Fishing
Commercial shing on Long Island is expensive. Boats
are expensive, gear and equipment is expensive, dock
rental fees are expensive, labor is expensive, and fuel
and energy costs are expensive. In fact, the rising costs
associated with shing was idened by respondents as
one of the greatest challenges to the commercial shing
industry. Given these nancial challenges, shermen
need access to capital and nancing to expand and
diversify their businesses. As menoned previously,
grants for fuel ecient engines are an ideal government
supported opportunity in this space. But grants, not
loans, are needed to support infrastructure and gear
including, but not limited to, ice machines in ports,
refrigerated sea water systems, navigaonal systems,
gear modicaons, bycatch reducon technologies,
and equipment and gear needed to safely navigate
between proposed oshore wind infrastructure.
While shermen may be able to occasionally access
funding though commercial banks, or specialty
banks like Farm Credit East, these funding sources
are frequently insucient to the task. Fishermen
need access to the capital funds and the tax credits
we aord other industries. The Federal government
has nancial assistance for farmers through the
Farm Services Agency and cost share for equipment
through the United States Department of Agriculture-
Natural Resources and Conservaon Services. Both NY
State and Suolk County have farmland preservaon
programs that can provide the working capital needed
to make major investments in the future of farming.
The State has also made funding available through their
“New Farmers Grant Fund” program and in 2015 even
invested $1,000,000 in Long Island agriculture through a
“Farmers for the Future Agriculture Capital Equipment”
grant award through the Long Island Regional Economic
Development Council (LIREDC). However, aempts to
Consumers and foodservice professionals can support
New Yorks commercial shermen by sourcing and
buying local. Purchasing locally caught seafood
ensures that the product you are buying is sustainably
harvested and in compliance with strict U.S. shing
and food regulaons. Choosing local seafood benets
local economies by creang and maintaining jobs for
shermen, processors, and wholesalers. Locally caught
seafood has a low carbon footprint when compared to
imported seafood, which also results in a fresher and
a beer tasng product. Consuming seafood at least
twice per week also contributes to a healthier diet.
Educang consumers and culinary professionals on
the sustainability of local sh creates a value ethic by
which they purchase, prepare, consume, and serve
sh. Overseas imports of seafood comprise a majority
(62-65%) of seafood consumpon in the United
States (Gephart et al., 2019). These unregulated and
oen mislabeled imports compete unfairly with local
products, depressing their price and value.
In 2016, with funding from the New York Farm Viability
Instute (NYFVI), Cornell Cooperave Extension of
Suolk County (CCE) launched the “Choose Local
F.I.S.H.” markeng campaign to brand and promote LI
seafood as Long Island “F.I.S.H. – Fresh, Indigenous,
Sustainable, Healthy”. The project helped increase
consumpon of local seafood through improved
consumer awareness and integrated supply-side ability
to support demand. In 2020, funding awarded by the
USDA’s Farmers Market Promoon Program extended
and expanded this program.
In the spring of 2020, CCE partnered with a well-
known culinary nutrionist to create a series of 11 local
seafood recipes and cooking demonstraon videos to
encourage consumers to cook local seafood at home.
CCE has held tasng events, collaborang with local
restaurants and chefs to oer tasng events of locally
caught sh and provide diners with an opportunity
to experience and enjoy the bounty of our local
waters. Restaurant events can have varying levels of
involvement, including full restaurant “take-over”
events with mulple chefs, tasngs of passed appezers
oered during happy hour with CCE sta providing info
on the project to patrons, or chef's inclusion of one or
more local seafood dishes on the menu with project
info available. The CCE Fisheries Team helps source
local sh and works with collaborators to focus on lesser
known, underulized, less expensive sh opons (porgy,
dogsh, skate, sea robin) which help create markets for
shermen and increase prots for restaurants.
If your business or organizaon is interested in
partnering with Cornell Cooperave Extension of
Suolk County on a “Choose Local F.I.S.H” event, please
contact Krisn Gerbino at [email protected].
Ways to Support
51
New York Sea Grant, organizes an annual "NY
Seafood Summit" to convene a group of enthusiasc
professionals with vested interest in seafood to build
acve communicaons between the various sectors of
New York's seafood industry. Each year at the summit
New York’s bounful seafood supply is highlighted and
parcipants are introduced to the delicious, diverse,
and versale seafood’s available locally. Get involved or
support the summit acvies by learning more online
at www.nyseagrant.org/seafoodsummit or contact Dr.
Michael Ciaramella at [email protected]
