[PPT] - Andrew Applegate NEFMC Staff Whiting PDT Chair NEFMC November PowerPoint Presentation

SLIDE 1

Andrew Applegate NEFMC Staff Whiting PDT Chair

NEFMC November 2018

SLIDE 2

Amendment 22 Webinar Presentation

Chronology Explain the error that occurred

 Corrected qualification estimates  Fishing activity and number of histories

Comparison of limited access alternatives

using correct estimates

Recent trends and management issues Limited access choices

12

SLIDE 3

Amendment 22

Development and approval of alternatives

 Initial history analysis: Oct-Dec 2016  Alternatives developed – Jan to April 2017

 Results presented March 2017  Council approved range of alternatives – April 2017

 Error in analysis (duplicate histories) April 2017, corrected  Analysis of impacts with corrected qualification estimates

presented to joint committee and advisory panel – August 29, 2017

13

SLIDE 4

Amendment 22

Development and approval of alternatives

 Initial history analysis developed Oct-Dec 2016  Alternatives developed – Jan to April 2017

 Results presented March 2017  Council approved range of alternatives – April 2017

 Error in analysis (duplicate histories) April 2017, corrected  Analysis of impacts with corrected qualification estimates

presented to joint committee and advisory panel – August 29, 2017

14

SLIDE 5

Amendment 22 Preferred Alternative Recommendations August 29, 2017

Advisors Committee Action 1 Alternative 1 (3-2) No preferred alternative Action 2 No recommendation In-season trigger to adjust possession limits (not approved) Action 3 Alternatives 1 & 4 for limited access Alternative 3 (squid and herring) for incidental Same

15

SLIDE 6

Amendment 22

Development and approval of alternatives

 Council chose No Action as preferred alternative – Sep

2017

 Amendment 22 revised and restructured  Revised final draft presented to Whiting Committee and

Advisors – Oct 30, 2017

 Council approved final draft Amendment 22 for

submission – Dec 2017

16

SLIDE 7

Amendment 22

Public hearings

 DEIS analyses and

summary data had the correct qualification information

 Summary numbers under

description of alternatives had results from initial analysis

17

SLIDE 8

Advisors and Committee recommendations Aug 29, 2018

 Comment period

 Five public hearings - July 19-26, 2018  Deadline for written comments – Aug 6, 2018

 Advisors

 Alternative 4 with status quo possession limits for Category I and

II

 2000 lbs. whiting and 400 lbs. red hake incidental limit

 Committee

 No Action, due to uncertainty about the estimated number of

qualifiers

19

SLIDE 9

Amendment 22 Supplemental comment period

Re-open comment period for 30 days due

to error in public hearing document.

Supplemental hearing – Nov 14 Advisory Panel and Committee – Dec 3 Council approves final action – Dec 4

20

SLIDE 10

Amendment 22 Qualification data sources

21

SLIDE 11

344 permit histories in 1996-2016 with one or more trips > 2000 lbs. whiting or 400

lbs. red hake

24

SLIDE 12

Amendment 22

Initial and corrected estimates

25

SLIDE 13

Amendment 22

Initial and corrected estimates

26

SLIDE 14

Amendment 22

Initial and corrected estimates

27

SLIDE 15

Amendment 22 Purpose and need

Purpose:

“To implement measures through

limited access that would prevent unrestrained increases in fishing effort by new entrants to the fishery.”

28

SLIDE 16

Amendment 22 Purpose and need

 Need:

 “To reduce the potential for a rapid escalation of the

small-mesh multispecies fishery, possibly causing

verfishing and having a negative effect on red hake

and whiting markets, both outcomes having negative effects on fishery participants. The amendment will help ensure that catches of the small-mesh multispecies and other non-target species will be at

r below specifications, reducing the potential for

causing accountability measures to be triggered and resulting closure of the directed fishery”

29

SLIDE 17

2018-2020 Specifications

 OFL/ABC specifications

12/07/2017

30

SLIDE 18

2018 Assessment update Northern Management Area

31

Silver Hake Red Hake

SLIDE 19

2018 Assessment update Southern Management Area

32

Silver Hake Red Hake

SLIDE 20

33

SOUTHERN SILVER HAKE

Recruitment

SLIDE 21

Whiting effort and landings by area

34

SLIDE 22

Management Considerations

 Southern red hake is overfished – initiating

action to rebuild

 Measures to rebuild southern red hake and cap

bycatch will be more restrictive without limited access

 Measures to rebuild southern red hake could

affect other small-mesh fisheries that have red hake bycatch.

 Southern whiting biomass and CPUE is falling

35

SLIDE 23

Management Considerations

 Haddock bycatch is high (10-20%) – no sub-ACL  Yellowtail flounder – sub-ACL triggers selective

gear requirements

 Squid limited access re-qualification  Reductions in longfin squid possession limit

 Tier 2 permit – 5,000 lbs.  Incidental permit – 250 lbs. when Trimester II closes

36

SLIDE 24

Amendment 22 Limited Access Choices

 Limited access with whiting and red hake possession

limits for Category I, Category II, and Incidental permits

 Limited access with existing possession limits for vessels

fishing in raised footrope trawl exemption areas

 Limited access with no changes in possession limits for

any of the above permits

 No Action – open access (Preferred Alternative)

37

SLIDE 25

Amendment 22 Three Actions

 Action 1: Limited Access

 No Action (preferred) plus 5 alternatives

 Action 2: Possession Limits by Permit Type

 Category I, Category II, Incidental

 Action 3: Permit Allowances

 Category I and II limited access permit  Incidental permit

38

SLIDE 26

Limited Access Qualification Criteria

* November 28, 2012 control date

39

Alternative

Qualifying period Qualification Criteria

(Pounds of small-mesh multispecies & number of qualifiers)

Category I Category II

1

2008-2012* 5 years 500,000 lbs. 40 vessels 100,000 lbs. 74 vessels

2

2008-2012* 5 years 1,000,000 lbs. 20 vessels 20,000 lbs. 203 vessels

3

2008-2016 9 years 500,000 lbs. 51 vessels 100,000 lbs. 90 vessels

4

2000-2016 17 years 500,000 lbs. 55 vessels 100,000 lbs. 124 vessels

5

1996-2012* 17 years 1,000,000 lbs. 84 vessels 200,000 lbs. 159 vessels

SLIDE 27

Action 1: Limited Access Fleet History Analysis

* November 28, 2012 control date

40

Alternative Category Vessels

Vessels with trips > 2000 lbs. in 2014-2016

1

(Section 4.1.2) 2008-2012* 500k/100k Cat I 40 33 83% Cat II 74 38 51% Non-qualifiers 971 42 4% No History 1581 15 1%

2

(Section 4.1.3) 2008-2012* 1M/20k Cat I 20 19 95% Cat II 203 69 34% Non-qualifiers 908 25 3% No History 1581 15 1%

SLIDE 28

Action 1: Limited Access Fleet History Analysis

* November 28, 2012 control date

41

Alternative Category Vessels

Vessels with trips > 2000 lbs. in 2014-2016

3

(Section 4.1.4) 2008-2016 500k/100k Cat I 51 44 86% Cat II 90 46 51% Non-qualifiers 1099 38 3%

4

(Section 4.1.5) 2000-2016 500k/100k Cat I 55 42 76% Cat II 124 38 31% Non-qualifiers 2035 48 2%

5

(Section 4.1.6) 1996-2012* 1M/200k Cat I 84 43 51% Cat II 159 30 19% Non-qualifiers 2345 45 2% No history 91 10 11%

SLIDE 29

Analysis of Impacts



Biological impacts

 Ability to harvest optimum yield



Annual Catch or landings and number of small-mesh multispecies trips per qualifying vessel  Discards: Red hake, yellowtail flounder, haddock



Mesh and selective gear

 Economic impacts

 Vessel reliance on small-mesh multispecies fishery



Qualifiers and non-qualifiers



Alternatives for non-qualifiers that target small-mesh multispecies

 Community effects



Proportion of revenue from small-mesh multispecies

 Social impacts

 Concentration of fishing effort  Participation  Employment

42

SLIDE 30