|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Owners of commercial fishing vessels or permits can now sign up for compensation to cover economic losses attributed to the region’s offshore wind installations.
Millions in funds are available, but the process can be complicated.
Without a national fishermen compensation program, rules vary, depending on the state or the individual offshore wind projects.
But we’ve got the processes explained in simple terms, with step-by-step graphics on the two projects currently underway — Vineyard Wind and South Fork Wind.
Vineyard Wind’s program
Vineyard Wind entered an agreement with Massachusetts in 2020, establishing a $19 million fund to compensate affected fishermen and shoreside businesses that provide goods or services to the fishing industry.
Vineyard Wind is not directly administering the program, which includes reviewing applications, determining payment amounts, and addressing appeals or disputes. That work will be overseen by Major Sharpe, an accountant based in Tennessee with the firm, de maximus.
The firm will launch a separate program for shoreside businesses in the near future, but hasn’t specified when. Similarly, shoreside businesses will not be required to demonstrate economic impacts from the Vineyard Wind project in order to qualify for the program or receive payments.
As for captains and crew, the owners and operators are “strongly encouraged to share annual compensation payments” with them, but the program does not require it.
Applications are due in June, and members of the fishing industry will not have another opportunity to qualify for the program.
The developer established a separate “innovation fund” of about $1.75 million, overseen by the state’s Division of Marine Fisheries. Those funds are not meant to cover losses, but to help the fishing industry coexist with offshore wind.
South Fork Wind’s program
Fishermen seeking compensation from Orsted for its 12-turbine project south of Rhode Island must apply for eligibility.
South Fork Wind entered an agreement with Massachusetts in 2021 that established a $2.6 million fund to compensate affected fishermen; $2.1 million will go toward direct compensation (the processing of claims), while the remaining $500,000 will be used to fund research, navigation training, and fishing vessel upgrades.
Fishermen deemed eligible for the direct compensation program will also be eligible for the navigation and training program.
The project also established a community fund for Massachusetts, which can be used to fund initiatives and research projects. Money earmarked for direct compensation that remains unused will be reverted to this community fund.
Accounting firm PKF O’Connor Davies will review eligibility and claims on behalf of Orsted. Once fishermen are confirmed eligible, they may submit separate applications for compensation.
Fishermen will not receive compensation from Orsted for several listed reasons, including declines in stock caused by climate change, and “environmental changes unrelated to [South Fork Wind].”
Clear differences between plans
There are already notable differences between the first two programs with South Fork Wind and Vineyard Wind.
One will directly compensate eligible shoreside businesses; the other won’t. One requires fishermen to prove the losses are due to the wind farm (and not other factors, such as climate change); the other doesn’t require that level of proof. One has an appeals process if fishermen are denied access to the program or payment; the other does not allow appeals for Massachusetts fishermen.
More than a dozen other projects (meaning potentially as many compensation programs) are at various stages of permitting, which could generate more confusion for the fishing industry.
Revolution Wind and Sunrise Wind, both Orsted projects, last year established separate funds with Massachusetts. It remains to be seen whether those programs will follow the design and claims process of that established for South Fork Wind.
Find more offshore wind coverage at The Light’s dedicated page for offshore wind news. And find more fishing coverage at our dedicated page for stories on the fishing industry.
This should be interesting! Fishing Industry accounting generally reveals little profit, so no income taxes paid! How can they seek compensation if in their previous years, they already showed losses before the wind farm was even built? On top of that. sea life is migratory so all they need to do is fish the perimeters. Little change in venues!
What was the dollar value, minus incremental costs, of the catch from the windfarm area?
Will the fisherman be asking for more than this amount?
Will the fish in that area move to adjacent areas?
Will the windfarm be a good breeding ground, structures provide protection?
The due compensation will be very difficult to determine.
When it comes to “profit” honest fishermen are a rare breed.
Think of New Bedford’s very own Codfather.
The issue is not the vagaries of the tax system, but that being said, there is a reason fishing incomes are low and it is because of an institutional bias that has grown up over the years in our government agencies. Fishing has been demonized for so long by our ‘saviors of the ocean’ that almost no consideration is given to management with an eye towards fishermen being able to make a profit. Fishermen do have income from fishing and it does not always result in a profit on their tax returns. The fact that most fishermen are able to put food on their tables (and yours), most of the time goes hand in hand with the fact that in general we are not doing very well. Not because the resource isn’t there for increased sustainable fishing, but because our government doesn’t look out for us. So we are already victims of regulatory negligence, but now we have government encouraging and enabling private companies in industrializing the ocean in ways that will displace fishermen from the fishing grounds for 30 years and likely more. Schellenberger says it best when he says we were all seduced by the promise of wind energy: energy for free from the wind! But when the reality of OSW began to raise its ugly head with quadrupling or quintupling of energy costs, unavoidable environmental, fisheries resource, marine traffic and search and rescue negative impacts, we find the OSW bus has no brakes! By BOEM’s own admission there will be no net climate benefits from OSW. Did that not register? Will the momentum of investment already made push us into going forward with what we now know is a bad idea?