Rhode Island Joins Mid-Atlantic Fishery Council, Increasing Membership to 23

If you’re involved in fishing, whether commercially or recreationally, you know that where the decisions get made matters. The Rhode Island Fishermen’s Fairness Act of 2025 is a bill focused entirely on changing the address label on the federal fishery management council that controls a lot of what happens between New York and North Carolina.

The Mid-Atlantic Gets a New Neighbor

This bill’s main move is administrative, but it has real implications for who has a seat at the table. It amends Section 302(a)(1)(B) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, which governs the regional councils. Specifically, it officially adds Rhode Island to the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC). Up until now, Rhode Island has been managed under the New England council, even though its waters and fishing stocks often overlap with the Mid-Atlantic region.

This change isn’t just a simple swap; it means the MAFMC is expanding. The bill strikes the number 21 and replaces it with 23, meaning the total number of council members jumps from 21 to 23. It also adjusts another internal count from 13 to 14. Essentially, Rhode Island gets two new seats, giving its fishing industry—from the biggest trawler captains to the smallest charter boat operators—a direct voice in setting quotas, seasons, and gear restrictions for species like summer flounder, scup, and black sea bass, which are critical to the region.

What This Means for the Water and Your Wallet

For Rhode Island fishermen, this is a win for local representation. Instead of having their interests filtered through a council primarily focused on New England species like cod and haddock, they now have dedicated representation on the council that directly manages the Mid-Atlantic’s shared coastal stocks. This should, in theory, lead to management decisions that better reflect the realities of fishing closer to home.

However, expanding any governing body changes the dynamic. For the existing member states—like New York, New Jersey, and Delaware—the addition of two new members means their relative voting power is slightly diluted. The council now has more voices to juggle, which could potentially make the decision-making process slower or more complex. While the bill itself is purely structural and doesn't change any fishing regulations today, it fundamentally alters who gets to write those regulations tomorrow. It’s a classic example of how seemingly small legislative tweaks about council membership can have a significant real-world impact on industry representation and regional policy balance.