A three-count National Marine Fisheries allegation against Edward Boynton arrived flawed and late.

The violations supposedly occurred in August, September and October 2005, when Boynton still owned the 42-foot Sissel B, a steel-hulled stern dragger, and when he still held a federal groundfishing permit as a commercial fisherman.

By the time Dierdre Casey, enforcement attorney for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, got around to citing Boynton on April 17 for landing yellowtail flounder without having a "yellowtail authorization letter," he had been culled from the industry — his boat and permit sold off.

Repeated devaluation through administrative orders — reducing the "days at sea" value of federal permits, along with other effort controls — had finally made fishing no longer a viable form of work for the transplant from North Andover, who had chosen to fish and live in Gloucester in the late 1970s after college and graduate school.

The effect of NMFS' effort controls was intentional, if not personal, for fishermen.

The number of boats fishing has been cut by more than 50 percent just since the '90s.

In the 1980s, once the first Magnuson Act established the 200-mile exclusive economic zone and barred the foreign factory ships, the federal government encouraged the rapid expansion of the domestic fleet. The policies were a precursor to the recent land-based economic fiasco of easy credit and mindless mortgages.

Ever since, to protect and rebuilt overfished stocks, the federal government has been effectively experimenting with various schemes to reduce fishing effort.

The recent end to two months of rolling closures that barred day boaters from reaching any open grounds is but one of the many methods used to frustrate fishermen.

But, on Monday morning, Boynton watched wistfully on the wharf behind Capt. Carlo's as the first day boats since March arrived at the Gloucester Seafood Display Auction, bringing in fresh catches of cod.

Since February, NOVAs — "notices of violations and assessment" of fines, civil indictments alleging violations of the third reauthorization of Magnuson — have been arriving at the homes of fishermen who chose to sell their catches at the auction.

In operation by the Ciulla family for about a decade, the auction was served with a 59-count NOVA on Feb. 13 to kick off what might be the greatest enforcement operation ever launched from NOAA's regional offices here.

As many as 24 fishing boats are expected to be charged along with the auction, which faces a 120-day closing and more than $300,000 in fines.

Many of the boat owners also tell of being offered light penalties or none for "ratting" out the auction. And, in thinly veiled terms, the state legislative, U.S. congressional and Senate delegations have protested the approach taken by NOAA enforcement toward the auction and its suppliers of fresh fish.

In the scheme of things, and the orbit of the auction, Boynton was a minor meteorite and seemed almost an afterthought to NOAA enforcement.

The three counts together, divided by month, alleged that his modest catches of yellowtail, on no day more than 139 pounds, which was well within the permitted limits, constituted a violation of Magnuson because Boynton, like many of his colleagues, did not have a "yellowtail authorization letter."

This requirement was introduced in 2004 and dropped in 2006. While required, fishermen could call the fishery service and have them faxed free of charge to the boat, as Bill Lee, a colleague did on the day he was boarded and written up by the Coast Guard, which works as NOAA's police arm.

The Coast Guard erroneously wrote Lee up for having made a fillet of a mangled fish and later sheepishly dropped both the illegal fillet charge and the yellowtail charge. In April, encouraged by Jim Balsinger, acting administrator of NMFS, Lee as informal ombudsman for the fleet, made a personal appeal to Dale Jones, NOAA's chief of law enforcement and the former police chief in Hagerstown, Md.

Lee called the yellowtail letter trap a "black eye" for the agency and wondered how and why NOAA could attempt to avoid taking some responsibility for publishing a paper requirement without reasonable communication to the fishermen about the new obligation. Jones has not responded publicly either to Lee or the Times.

Like most others caught catching flounder without the letter, Boynton expressed exasperation.

"I needed it, I didn't need it, I needed it, I didn't need it," he said.

The letter was issued not for conservation but research: It was to determine where yellowtail were coming from, and came in two versions, one authorizing catch from nearby and one from far off — too far off for the Gloucester day boats, which is one reason many of the owners assumed the letter was irrelevant to them.

The bulk of the counts against the auction involve the taking and brokering of fish that were rendered illegally caught for the failure of the boat owner to have the letter.

Boynton also noticed flaws in his NOVA.

Count 1 correctly identified him and his boat.

But Counts 2 and 3 had somehow been assembled with the wrong boat owner's name.

Instead of alleging that Boynton had caught illegal yellowtail, the NOVA charged Boynton but accused "Lawrence Tamilio."

Tamilio owns the Star Dust, and was charged separately with his own yellowtail letter violations.

Three days after the Boynton (Tamilio) NOVA went out, Casey wrote to Boynton to ask him to replace pages 1 and 4 with corrected pages. She said she was "sorry for any confusion," and characterized the flaws in the legal papers as caused by "typos."

But Boynton isn't having any of it.

"To call it 'typos' is a misnomer," he said. He called it "a mishandling of data," and said he believed it implied carelessness or incompetence.

Carelessness or incompetence is one explanation for why some fishermen overlooked the poorly publicized requirement that they have a yellowtail authorization letter.

But they didn't have the same luxury as Casey had to say "sorry" and move on.

The NOVA calculated Boynton's violations warranted a fine of $2,327.

Casey said the NOVA was charged against Boynton because "a violation has occurred."

But she noted deterrence is one reason for law enforcement.

"I did not know Mr. Boynton had sold his boat," Casey said in an e-mail. "That type of information is the kind of information I would consider in settlement."

Boynton said he has no intention of settling.

Richard Gaines can be reached at rgaines@gloucestertimes.com