Funding for shellfish inspectors would be a tiny item in the proposed state budget, but it is one with big consequences. One case of paralytic shellfish poisoning, for example, could decimate the state’s multimillion-dollar shellfish industry.
That’s why lawmakers are wise to look for ways to find $120,000 in funding for three inspector positions within the Department of Marine Resources.
The money was not included in the governor’s proposed $6 billion budget for the next two years. Thankfully, members of the Legislature’s Marine Resources Committee — from both parties — recognize the necessity of keeping the inspectors on the payroll.
“A dirty lobster or a bad clam, and we lose billions of dollars,” said Sen. Nancy Sullivan, D-Biddeford, as the committee discussed the issue earlier this week.
During an especially bad outbreak of red tide, a toxin that shellfish absorb, the state closed most of the coast to shellfish harvesting in 2009. Shellfish flats also are closed periodically due to tainted runoff, especially after heavy rains.
Maine does a thorough job of testing shellfish once it is harvested and before it heads to market, so it is safe to eat. But more inspectors in the field means the state can be more precise in shutting down flats rather than putting large swaths of the coast off-limits to shellfish gathering. This is better for the people who make their living harvesting clams and other shellfish.
Also in 2009, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration threatened to halt the sale of Maine shellfish in other states because the agency found that Maine was not adequately testing potential pollution sources that could contaminate shellfish beds. The FDA said Maine needed to hire more people to get this work done.
At that time, Sen. Dennis Damon, then co-chairman of the Marine Resources Committee, said the state’s shellfish industry was valued at between $50 million and $60 million a year with 90 percent of its catch sold out of state.
Lawmakers increased fees paid by public sewage treatment plants and wastewater disposal system to hire the inspectors. This hasn’t been enough to cover the full cost, however.
In the short term, lawmakers need to find a way to continue to pay the inspectors, even if it means expending state funds. Then they should devise a better system for collecting enough money to sustain the jobs for the long term.