At its October 12 meeting, the Rhode Island Marine Fisheries Council (RIMFC) ap- proved several changes to the regulations that govern floating fish traps in Rhode Island waters.  Not only will the number of approved trap sites be cut in half, but existing traps will be required to provide radar reflecting devices.  Also, DEM will be required to inspect trap sites twice each year.

"This is definitely a step in the right direction," said George Allen, who chaired the Fish Trap Advisory Panel (also RISAA member).

Fish traps have been used by some commercial fishermen for many years, and have always been an aggravation to anglers and boaters.   But in 2002, when fish trap operators requested permission to install two more traps at the Point Judith Harbor of Refuge walls, it riled anglers enough to take action.  RISAA members turned out in force at a RIMFC hearing, requesting that the newest trap sites not be approved, but this failed to deter the Council, which was commercial-heavy at the time.

Following this RIMFC action, the RISAA Legislative Committee went to the next level, and legislation to restrict and separate all fish traps was drafted and introduced into the R.I. House and Senate in January, 2003.

Shortly thereafter, then DEM Director Jan Reitsma, spoke with RISAA President Steve Medeiros, and both agreed that the legislation would be pulled back, and instead, the RIMFC would bring this issue to the forefront.  The Fisheries Council established a Fish Trap Advisory Panel, and Council members George Allen and Ken Ketchum were appointed co-chairs.  Then several fish trap owners and several RISAA members were appointed to the new Panel, and in a series of meetings, crafted several changes to the regulations.


Everyone on both sides of the fence were satisfied with the changes, but when the proposed regulation changes were published in advance of the October 4 public hearing, one new item that appeared caused a big commotion: a 100 foot no fishing zone around every trap.  The proposal read:

14.6 Safety Zone: There shall be a 100-foot safety zone around each fish trap, including the trap leader, within which it shall be illegal for any fishing from a boat or the shore to take place or for a diver or swimmer to enter.


On the night of the hearing, many turned out to voice their opinions of the fish trap changes.

Robert Moeller, RISAA Public Access Chairman, told the Fisheries Council that the safety zone requirment would restrict public access to shore anglers.  He pointed out that the east and west walls at the Pt. Judith Harbor of Refuge were created with federal funds, and it wasn’t likely that prohibiting public access at the walls to protect fish traps would be legal.

Dennis Zambrotta of the Newport County Saltwater Fishing Club said that Newport has many fish trap sites off Brayton Point Park, Sauchest Point and the cliff walk - all of which are public access locations, and to take away any of the shore anglers’ access is wrong.

Tom Hoxsie, one of the fish trap operators in the audience, recommended that the 100’ safety zone for shore anglers be eliminated from the regulations.

Jim Low, a commercial rod & reel fisherman, told the Council that the entire 100’ safety zone section should be eliminated, and that it was “unrealistic to prevent people from fishing prime spots” and that this regulation would be unenforceable.

A letter was entered into the record. Written by Kevin Cute of CRMC, pointed out that:

By making it illegal to fish from the shore, within the 100-foot safety zone associated with the fish trap leader, this draft regulation proposed to restrict the public from exercising its shoreline privilege of fishing from the shore as established by the Rhode Island Constitution.

The RIMFC met on October 12 to vote on many of the public hearing items, including the fish trap changes.

When the trap section came up for discussion, Council member Steve Medeiros moved to approve all of the proposed changes except “to remove section 14.6 in its entirety since it would hinder public access to both shore anglers and boaters.”  George Allen seconded the motion.

But, in a move that surprised everyone, Chairman Mark Gibson said he would rule Medeiros’ motion out of order.  Why, everyone wanted to know?  Gibson said something about how the 100’ rule was the intent of the Fish Trap Advisory Panel and removing that section would be out of order.  Someone in the audience said that the motion was legitimate and demanded it be voted upon, but Gibson insisted he would not allow the motion to go forward as stated.

Then, conceding, Medeiros amended his motion to state that the proposed regulations should all be approved, with the 100’ safety zone still eliminated, but that the Fish Trap Advisory Panel would meet in the future to discuss the issue again and come back with another recommendation.  This new motion passed.


The major points of the new fish trap regulations are as follows:

• Reporting Requirements: A January 10 deadline in which trap operators will have to indicate locations of where they plan to set traps during the upcoming fishing season
• Chart: DEM will publish and make available to the public, a chart that shows where the traps are to be located each year
• Review: DEM will review trap site permits each year and eliminate any sites not permitted.
• Inspect: DEM must inspect all fish traps in the Spring and Fall and report back to the Fisheries Council
• Distance: Fish traps may not be placed closer than 3,000 feet to each other without the advice of the Fisheries Council
• Navigation Aids: Annual Coast Guard determination on navational aids and marking requirements on all fish traps
• Hook-Backs: Hook-backs in all leaders are prohibited
• Restricted Locations: Fish traps may only be set on sites identified in regulation.

     George Allen who cochaired the Fish Trap Advisory Panel should be thanked for his efforts on behalf of recreational anglers to help solve this thorny issue.  Other RISAA members who served as Panel members are: Bruce Getchell, Jim White, and Doug MacPherson.