AMENDMENT #4

TO THE

FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLAN

FOR THE

NORTHEAST MULTISPECIES FISHERY

INCORPORATING AN

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

AND

SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATORY IMPACT REVEW/

REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS

Prepared by

New England Fishery Management Council In consultation with

Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council

November 12, 1990

-. r

' . TABLBOPCONTENTS

I' age

I. . :tlf'J:AOD'DC'l'lOH • • • • • • • • • ·• • • • • • • • • • 1

Z R II. PI\OPOS£1) IWIAGZMENT III:ASVUS AHD 'J'HZIIl JHrACU •• • 2

.A. Modification• to the &xempt.ecl l'iabed.ea Pzogna ·• 2

B. Cea~ Mod.f.ficationa to bduce 8ycatoh of c~ounclfiab i.n the llort.bem 8bd.-p riabezy. • • • I

c. Incluion of Siloqr Bake, ocean l'out and llecl Bake in the .Mul.tiapeciea Kanagement VDit • • I

D. 2-1/2 Inch Kinismml. Cod.end. Heab ~o~ the ~xed T~awl Fishezy. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ~

z. Management Jleaaur:ea ~or tbe CultiYAtH Shoal Whiting (ail•e~ bake) Fiabezy • • • • • • • • • 12

F. Meaau~ea to P~otect Short-1i•ecl Concentrations of Small Fish • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 14

Fl. Southem llew bgland Yellowtail 1'10\IDder. • • 18

F2. Codfish on Stellwagen Bank ' tleffnya Ledge • 23

G. lleat~ictiona on the Ca~rying of Small Mesh ~ Meta while Fishing in the aegulated Heah .ana. • 34

H. 5-1/2 Inch Mesh Size ' othe~ Heasu~•• for the Southe~n llew England Closed Heah ~ea. • • • 3?

E~ III. • • • • ••• 46

E~ IV. CONSISTENCY WITH RATIONAL STAHD~S AND OTHER MANAGEMEN'f l'llOGJU\MS • • • . . . . . . • 53

V. FINDIRG 01' MO SlGNIFICAlf1' ZIIV%aoNH:£JID.l. DO' ACT. • • 55

VI. AMENDATORY LANGUAGE • • • • • • - • • • • • • • • •• 56

Z VII. :LIST OF .AGERCIES MD I'ZRSONS COHS'D:L'I'ZD Df FOJ\MUI.ATlNG THE II\OPOSED ACTION • • • • • • • • • • '5

VIII. :LIST OF PUPA.It£1l8 I'Oil ZNVIIlONHEN'fAl, .ASSESSKEN'f MD ILM .IMENDMEN'f ••••

%X. Reapolllle to Public Coalments. • • • • •

• • • • . . . ,, • • • • • • .. "

(continued on aext pap)

Novanber 12. 1990

:

..

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

Al'l'EHDXCI:S

&ppenclis &. Definition of OYe~iahing ~oa: 8i1.aa: Bake Stocke

&ppendis B. Definition of OYea:fiahiDg ~oa: Othea: 8todta

&ppendis c. •ublic Beaa:ing 8ummaa:iea and Wa:itten CCIIIDenta

Appenclis D. Description of l'iabea:iea ~oa: 8ll.aa: Bake, Ocean •out and bd llaJte

E Key to the Envia:oamental a.aea.ment

~ Key to the Supplemental aegulatoa:y Zmpact aeYiew and the Supplemental aegulatoa:y l'lezibillt~ &Dalyaia

012Sm

~12,1990

' r

• I

-· . L IN11lODUCDON

The New Bnglmd Fishery Management Council proposes to maend the Nonheast Multispecies Fishery Manaaement Plan (Mw~es Y.MP) that was conditionaDy epproved by the Nonheast Regional Director of the National Marine Fisberiea Service on July 17; 1986. Regulations implementing tbe Mwtispecies FMP we~e filed by the Depanment of Commerce (NOAA) on August 20, 1986 md beCame effecdve on Septeanber 15,1986. Amendment fl to the Muldspecies FMP, which was ~lemented on Occobcr 1, 1987, s~ to deficieDcies that we~e identified by the Regional Duector in b1s conditional lppl'OVal of the plan. Amendment fl. which was implemented in Janull')' 1989, ~ed 1be effeCtiveness of several FMP measures ill relation to two major factors: 1) tbe .Fomotioti of re.r;ulat.c ory compliance, and 2) the long-1erm achievement of management ob)ect!ves. 'Ibe arnendlnent llso. adOpted_ a Jarae-mesh aplation for Nantucket Shoals that had previously been implemented in Fcbnwy 1988 as an emerpncy action.

Amendment #3 implemented the FlnJDie Atea Action System on December 15, 1989. 1his enendment enabled the management system. including the New &gland FIShery Management Council, its Multispecles Committee, the Natioraal Marine Fisheries Setvice llld other management agencies to respond in a more timely manner to protect laqe concentradoas of juvenile, tub--legal (smaJJer than the minimum legal size) and spawning fish.

Amendmem M builds on the existing pliD meiSl.UU .ad, in many ways, wiD break new ground for iiSheries manaaement in New England. It will implement tbe first mesh ~eguJations iD the Southern New England area. It will provide a minimum mesh size for ID species, anless specifically exempted, under the Councll's management authority. It provides a framework mechanism to allow the Regional Director to close Urnited areas to protect small ye.llowtail flounder and to implement square mesh Det regulations to proiCCt IIDa11 cocJfish by DOtice in the Federal Register.

-~ Other measures proposed as pan of the amendment strengthen existinJ Mwtispecies FMP aae-81-entry controls. The modifications to tbe exempted fisheries program will enable the Councn to get needed infonnation to improve conttofs on the ~ed fisheries propam in tbe Gulf of Maine. Gear regulations in the DOdhem lhrimp fishery, baSed on w:ry recent conservation engineering research, will reduce the byCIIch of regulated species. Tbe amendment will include silver hake (whiting), red hake and ocean pout in tbe multispecies management unit. II wiD funher restrict the carrying of sma11 mesh aer on ft.sse1s .fishing in the agulated mesh areas.

Although Amendment N does not develop expUcit Jebuilding strategies for overfashed stocks, the Councn has already staned tbe development of the DeXt amendment, Amendment 15. to solve this problem in the multispecies fishery. Amendment #4 does include defmitions of overlishing for key mwtispecles stocks and acknowledges that many of 1bese •octs are being overfished because the 'IIMSP targets are DOt beiDa met. Scientists c:a tbe Tecbnical Monitoring Group (TMG) have infonned the Councll dud to meet these taraets.mbstantia! inc:reases in age-at-entry levels or teducdons iD fishing mortality (F) are aequired. Through its Mw~ies Comminee, the Council is DOW systematicaDy considering a fuU nnge of alternatives for Jnclusion in Amendment #IS to meet the requirements of the SO CPR 602 Guidelines for Fishery Ma1U1gement Plans.

November 12. 1990

•

D. PROPOSED MANAGEMENTMBASURES

This section contains a description. a rationale, Ed, w~ appropriate, a discussion of economic and biolosical considerations for each proposed measure. 'the maJys.is of quantifiable

. . . economic impacts of the measures is in AppendiX A.

A. Moc1.ifialdoas to the aeiDpltld f'ishe:l:iea pmpma

a) Require fishenpen to mpon the area in which they fished. the IIDOUDt of fishing time, depth range, lnd mesh size used,. 'Ibis infomaation is the same as that RqUired by the Tier Two fishing Trip Record rec:endy used in the ~tal Cultivator Sboalailver hake fishery {Fillft 1), but fisbennen would be JeqUired to ~n the 10 minute~ areas in which they fished instead of the LORAN bearings of individual tows end would DOt be mquired to estimate discards.

b) An exempted fisheries pennit holder must cmy a tea ampler if equested to do 10 by the Reaional DiRctor.

c) A vessel may DOt be in the exempted fisheries for silver hake Ed shrimp at the same time, but snver hake fishennen would be allowed to RUin ap to 200 lbs. of lbrimp per trip durin& the lbrimp season.

Ratioaate

1be exempted fssberies pros;ram was established to .Uow fishmnen to fish for tmaD mesh species in the .regulated mesh a.rea as Ions; as the benefits of small mesh fishing outweigh the costs

'"'in monality to sub-legal cod. haddock. poDoc:k. winter flounder, yellowtail flou.nder, American plaice, witch flounder and Rdfish. Tbe purpose of any modifications to this program is to increase net benefits from the program. To do this, the Councn Deeds better iDfonnauon on where amaD . mesh fishing may occur with tbe least possible impact on~ usually caught with large mesh gear. At present. NMPS coUects aJmost all Gulf of Maine llndinp data through the wei&h-out

~ data collection and the domestic sea-s~ling programs. Jntei'Yiews ofwssel ~that provide detaDed infonnation on the IOCIUOD of fishing, the depth range, mesh lize mel fishing time cover only a small percentage of fishing uips. This hlformarion is teqUiled to dctennine if further modifications to the exempted fisheries program 11e aecessary IDd, if 10, how they mJaht be made to yield the peat possible net benefit to the fishery.

Besides landings data. the Council Deeds infcmnation on tbe discant ofRplated ~iea in the small mesh fishery. Although. the Council expects tbat sea ~~mplera can collect this infonnation with the voluntary ~ation offisfiermen, tbe proaram ases a contrac~or to co1lect data on the discards of fish by placma samplm aboard vesselS on a voluntary basis. Tbere are, however, circumstances when many fishermen have astron& economic motive DOt to voluntarily carry samplers. for example, the preseace of a bqe concenttation of llll8D fish identified by sea samplers might lead to a flexible area action hnplemented UDder Amendment 13 that doses 1be area to fishing.

This measure also would not aUow vessels to participate in lhe exempted fisheries for silver bake and sJuimp at the same time would prevent sJuimp vessels from decfarin&lhat they are in the silver hake exempted fisheries program to land a pater bycatch of large mesh apecles as they may under cunent regulations. 1be bycatch of large mesh species Is calculated as a percenta&e of the amount of target species landed and silver hake landings a~e often ten times pater than shrimp landinas. This enables aome vessels to mix directed fishina for silver hake and sJuimp to increase the amount of cod and other pouudfisb chat they may land over the 7- to 30-day mportiDg period.

In 1988, 30% of port agent interviews for dbected fishln& trips for sDver bake (silver bate comprised ,.eater thaD SO% of the landings} repctrted landings of~~. aceedin& 200 lb. 1be high mean landings of shrimp {2,261lb./trip) indicated that on these fishin& trips, "WeSSels wea directing their fishing effort on both abrimp and snver bake. 1he Rmlinina704 of the interview sample {trips landing less than 200 lb./lrip} had mean landings of about llb./lrip. Those tdps landing more than 200 lb./trip accounted for 2.7~ of sJuimp lmdings in the interview aample.

Administrative CODSiderllioDs

The cost to fi.mennen from the inaase in time spent on fi1l.in& out Tier Two Logs required by this measure is $1,558 assuminf a wage overhead rate of Slllbr. 1be conesponding federal cost is $6,769 at $19.72/hr. which mcludes prindna distribution, handliD&, poc:essinJ md overhead. ·

Economic considerations

~ · This measure has no economic .impact in the sense that it a Imply requires more detaned reponing from vessels in the exempted fisheries program and doses a loophole that pemlits of harmful bycatch of large mesh species caused by directed fishing for both lilver bake and sluimp. -Additionally, because marltet sized sDver bake and shrimp are DOt cau&flt topther on the same fishing trips, this measure bas no impact on uonnal, directed fisbing for either species. When it established the December -1anuacy sDver hake fishery in Amendment fl, the Council did not intend that vessels be-aDowed to direct fishing effort on both snver hake Ed shrimp to increase their bycatch of regulated ~cies. 1herefore, the appropriate economic impacts have abu.dy been analyzed in Amendment #2.

November 12, 1990

'

•

ROURBI

.............. • , ...........

............ ,4 ... *-'1

'"...,.,..,. , ......... r ......... ·r.:.. r= •· ~~- r· t=.cr~ a.'-u &.OUtr ... ticiOII ........... ,

I

U.ilftclll ... llillllllllllilt tl ... 1101 ..... ~

t1 ................

·~

, J

-5-

B. Gear modificalioas to mcJuce bycatch ill the IIOdhem a14DIIJ• fishely

The shrimp season will be defined by die aistina window between December I WHl May 30 unless modiiled by die Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMPC). The CoUDcil, in consultation with ASMPC and NMFS, would determine die type of shrimp aear that may be ased to minimize the bycatcb of seautated species. Approved ~'ear would be sequlad throughout the Shrimp season. The COuncil wm review lnfcmnation on~ par tecfmoJOJ)' annualJy and make a secommendarion to the ReaJonal Director by July 15 abOut the type of shrimp aear that will be allowed for die foUowma shrimp season. There will be a 30-day pub6c comment period following this designation befoJe a final &tennination Ia made. For lbe firit aeason. the shrimp uawl will be the same as that aquired by die ASMPC.

Rationale

The Council believes that it is possible to substandaDy mfuce finfish discards in die shrimp fishery through improvements in a ear technolOJY. Fisheries manapmcnt authorities in both

· Norway and Canada are also exploring gear improvements to mfuce bycatcb in their shrimp fisheries. If improvements in aonhem shrimp gear can substaDtiatly !educe discard rates then such gear should be used throughout the shrimp season.

. Preliminary repons from aear trials initiated by the Council WHl conducted by NMFS Jn the spring of 1990 as pan of the conservation engineering ~ject funded by the Council and conducted by NMFS show that large mesh located behind the footn:Jpe !educes the Clllcb of sub-JegaJ American plaice (dabs) without a Jip.ificant loss of shrimp. Based on the findings of this study the Atlantic States Marine FISheries Commission is proposing modifications to shrimp ,aear for the 1990-91 season that could reduce the bycatch of American plaice by ID estimated 3SCJ> •

.. ·. This measure provides a mechanism for allowJna improvements in shrimp par to be ·

implemented ~n a ilmely basis. A public comment period will ensure that posstl>le concerns about the net benefits of 111.1y modification in lhrimp par wDl have positive economic benefits that exceed costs.

C. IDclude silver bate (whidog), mel bake .ad ocem pout ia lbc llllildspec:ies JI'IIDI&cmellt 11Dit

· ltatiooale

Silver hake, ted hake 1Dd ocean pout are ID integral pan of the mixed-species trawl fishery throu,hout the range of the species cunendy managed under theM~ PMP. (AP.Pe!Kfix B contams a summary descripuon of stocks of these IJ?Kies and the history of lheir harvest.) 'lbe landings of these species are affected by many Wstinl seplations for Olher poundfish species panicularly under the ExeJD,PJed fisheries propam. The mplllioos include aeasonat JeStrictions, JeStrictioas on the bycatch of large mesh species aac:IJePOrtiDJ requbemeats besides those of the weigh-out data coDection program. Regulations JOVemin& silver hake, Jed hake and ocean pout have a substantial im.Pact on tbe management of Olber lfOUDdfish species. Descriptions of lhe stocks and the fisbenes for these specks are contained in Appendix C of this docUment.

( .

SDver Hake (MerliiCdu bilinetiTU): The faDure of silver hake stocb to recover to historic levels suggests need to manage these stocks. Based on the analysis included in~ A of Ibis document it appears that both stocks of sDver hake were being overf'uhed in 1988. AlthouJh fishing monality rates seem to be decJinJna, particulady for the IOUthem stock (Table 2), the Stock Assessment Review Conunittee warned that this ·bend abould be ineelp'eled with caution. It is likely that current (1990) fishing monaJity rates .-e at least IS high IS they were In 1988. Thus, management actions such IS a regulated min.imwn dowable mesh size, are needed to aDevlate the overfishing problem. Tbe overfishina defmkioas for sDver bake arocks are also described in Appendix A. Given the status of silver hake, the Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) does DOt exceed the Domestic Allowable Harvest (DAH). The DAH is that level of harvest resultina from the cw:rent management replations.

Reel Hake (Uroplqds cluu.f): Acconting to Stlltus tftlu Flshlry R~IOID"t'IS OJ/IM Northeastern llniied Statts for 1989, the loog-tenn potential catch from both ltocb of red hake is unknown., however, they .-e under-aploited. The definitioo of ovc.rfishing for mt hake s.tocks is contained in Appendix B of this document. According to the ovedishing definitions, the Oalf of Maine· Northern Georges Bank stock is DOl overfished, but the Southem OeoJaes Bank­Mid-Atlantic stock is marginally overf'JSbed. exceeding the du'esbold by 3.1-., iDdicatinJ that the stock size is low and should be carefully monitored Yet, according to the Statu tfiM Fishery Resources OJ/ tht Northeastern Unlttd Stilt" for 1989, the stock has been subject to low fishing pressure since 1983, and with the strong 1985 year dus, an incJease in stock biomass caD be

.. expected in the next two years.

Since the status of the IOUtbem stock is uncertain, met considering that the llOithem stock is barely (4.3c.l) above its long tenn average size IS indicated by the 1989 spring abundance~ ABC for both stocks equals DAH. The DAH is that level of harvest Je&Uiting from the c:unent management regulations.

-~·Ocean Pout (Macro%Dtl1't'~l mnerlctuuls): According to the definition of ov~, described in Appendix B, which relies on the abundance index derived from the ~

· bottom-trawl survey, and which combines the aoutbem stock and pan of the DOithern stock, ocean. • pour is not ovenJShed. Jn each of the past four years, the index has been well above 5K of irs

long term average. 1be hiJh levels o( fishing that have recently OCCIIlRCI·on die northem stock iJl Cape Cod Bay take place in state waters when there is no exempted fishery for ocean pout in the EEZ. The effect of the Multispecles FMP is to prolu"bit fishing on the DOnhem ltOdt of ocean pout Iince there is almost no fishing on this stock in ihe period, June through November, when the exempted fishery provision allows ocean pout fishing in the EEZ. Only 2'1> of ocean pout landings from the Gulf of Maine occur during this period.

1be ABC for ocean pout equals the DAH because, although the stocks of ocean pout are not tieing overfished according to the spring survey, the abundance of ocean pout is ltill30% below irs Jong-tenn average. The DAH is that level of harvest resulting from the c:wrem management regulations.

Bamomic aad ~ caasideradoDs

1b.is measure is DOt expected to cause ID inclease in the lldministrative burden. Because these species are caught in tile mixed-species trawl fishery. fishermen male:ntinue to fish for 1hem under their existing multispecies pennits. 1be sknple inclusion of species in the Multispecies FMP bas no ecoaolnic impact although easuing specific management measures might.

November 12,1990

..

-7-

D. EstabUsb a 2-112• minimum cocJeDd mah size for lbc mixed-species trawl fithely

The followins provisions IIJ'e part of Ibis measure:

a) Establish a 2-112• minimum mesh size (inside measwement) to llpply throushout the ranse of species manased under the Multispe~les PMP 'Ibis measure would apply to muldspecaes fisheries, such u the aa_npteil fisheries in the Gulf of Maine, DOt otherwise subject to the 5-t/2• mesh aize aplltion with lbc foJlow.iDa ac:epdoos:

b) There would be I year-round exemption for I dim:ted JoJilo and IDa lqUld fishery; however, vessels usin11 mesh size smaDer 1han 7;.1/2" to fish for ·lqUid must JeStrict their bycatch of all ~cies included in the mul!isPecies management unit (cod, haddock, poDock, wmter flounder, yellowta.D floUnder, American plaice, wilch flounder, redrJ.Sh, .Uver hake,- hake, ocean pout, white hake ana windowpane flounder) to 2S'JI or less of lqUid Janctinp on Cach fi.sbins uip.

c) The fisheries for DOJ'tbem shrimp IDd herring would be exempt from Ibis measure; however, boats fishing for hening must timlt their bycatcb o( the foDowing species (cod, haddock .• poDock. winter flounder, yellowtail fJOI.IDder, American plaice, witch flounder, Jedf'ash. IDd sDver hake) to 1 'II of their henina landings ora each trip.

d) The mesh size :wequirement would initially apply to 80 meshes counted from the end of a trawl net and there would be 1 phase-in period (two years from the date of bnplementation of this IIDCndment) bef01e it applied to Ill mesh in the Det.

~ · . 'Where and when small mesh fishins is aU owed is Ill iiDpOJtant factor in conttolling the smaD mesh by catch of other imponant groundf'JSh species. To date, the absence of mesh size controls in these small mesh fisheries bas ~ed .both 1less-than-opr.itJW mesh size in directed · fishing for sDver bake.. and 1 higher mortality rate oflaqe mesh species. P.ishetmen have infonned the CouncD that vel'f:Small mesh, ranging from 1·1/2" to 2", whiCh is aonnally used to catch squid or shrimp. is also uselJ. for 1 vlriety of apecies iDc:lodins tat bake and ailver .bake.

~~ . .

The CouncD is~ the 2-1/2" minimum mesh llze because,~ to avaUable scientific infonnation, the m stock has been consistently dedininJ, and tbe IOUthem Jtock has been moderately ovmlShed for at least 1he last 4 years. Altbough fishins mortality rates may be declining, it is likely that CUI'Jent (1990) fishing~ rates 1ft at least IS high IS they were in 1988. Thus, management actions,IUch • a regulated mmimum allowable mesh lize, 1ft needed to alleviate the overfishina problem (see Appendix A).

Vessels fishing primarily for )oligo IDd ntex aquid would be exempt from lbe measure because tbe Mid-Atlantic Council bas the~ management authoritY for these species. 1be New England Council, however, believes that it u necessary to JeStriC1 the small meSh catch of silver hake and other apecies included in the mulrispecies m.anapment mit in order ftduce juvenile mortality.

November 12.1990

' .

The fisheries for nonbem shrimp and herring are exempt from this measme because they are subject to exempted fisheries restrictions md DOt directly managed bf the Mul~s PMP. "the Council, however, is further restricting the bycatch of teplated speaes to 1 ~ of herring landings on each trip to reduce small mesh monality of Jeplated species.

The two year period before the 2·1/l" mesh size nquirement ~to all mesh in the uet allows fishermen ample time to use ap a.isting supplies of smaDer mesh in the body of the net. The putpOSe of requiring a unifonn Diesh size is to lnake enforcement easier. Mesh ldectivily IIUdies have shown that the use of large mesh in the body of DCts has UUle or DO impact on the selectivity of trawl nets for most species.

Biolopcal coasidendioas

Besides the biological consideradons abeady mentioned, the proposed measure would increase the stock size of the Gulf ofMaine/Nonhem Geor&es Bank stOck by about 11'11 and the Mid-Atlantic/Southem Georges Bank stock by 111 estimated IN (fable 1). Based on a market eu1l of 11" for silver hake, the proposed measure also would reduce total discards by 67'11 for the combined Sleds. According to mesh selectivity data, the ~sed measure would cleacase the Jetention factor or 11" silver hake from about 67«), to 38«), {FJJllle 2). It also would decrease the tetention factor for 1 0" silver hake from about 3K to about 16«), yet the retention factor for 12"

t hake would temain hiJb at 67«),. 1his measure also would have • benefiCial impact on an m.ultispecies fin:fiSh to the exteat thai they ~ caught in trawl aets with mesh JeSs than 2-1/2".

·'

Economic COilSideradoDs

The Economic &: Replatory Impact Analyses in Section m summarizes the impacts of this . measure on landings, tevenues, prices and employment.

The proposed mea.swe would have several economic Dpa.cts. Ia the first two years of implementation it would cause an estimated decrease in landings of 7'11·from the 10Uthe01stock . and.12% from the nonhem stock (Tables 2A &: 2B) based on changes in mesh ldectivicy alone. There would be an additional nduction of about 3«), of aD.ver hake 1andinp from the 1011them stock because dUs measure woold force fisbennen who target lffdd to JeStrict their laDdings of multispecies finfish. There would be along-tenn (8 years after mplementation) inclease in silver hake landings of 6.6% from the northem stock and 0.91 CJ, from the IOUthem stock assuming constant fiShing mo11alicy at 19881evels.

Based on 19881andings data. 3.0SS m.iJUon lbs. of silver bake were landed on fishing trips on which the landings of m.ultispecies finfiSh (including silver hake, ft:d bake and ocean pout) were more than 2S~ of the landings of SQUkJ (either loligo or mex). If a codend m.esb aize of less than 2~ 1/2" were osed on these 1lips and dte landings of m.ultispecies finrlSb wae limited to 2S% of squid landings (8.249 mD.lionlbs.) the landings of multispecies inclucfin& sD.ver bake would be limited to 2.062 millioa Jbs.

November 12, 1990

- ,;

In other words, fisbennen would have been forced not to land about 993,000 lbs. of multispecies (3.055 miiius 2.062 million lbs.) or a permanent 2.8~ seduction in toralaDver hake landings if the 2-1/2" mesh size regulation was in place. In order DOt to understate potential negative economic im_.Pacts, the reduction in landings is assumed to consist of 1()()Cl, 1Dver hake. This estimated reducuon in landings llso overstates short-tenD negative impacts from the proposed measure because: 1) The Multispecies PMP has already established that a mesh size Jess au.ii 5-1/2" is bumful for ~cies for which there are minimum llh.e replations. Tberef'~c.n cu.mnt fishing modality levels, any reductions in the landings of these species with -mesh par resulting from a minimum mesh size wUJ have a beneficial effect. 2) Some fishermen have indicated that during certain times of the year they catch both lilver hate and aquid wkb 2-1/2" mesh. 3) Some fisbennen may discard lower Yalued red hake ins1eacl of aDver hake to stay within

. the 2SCJ> limit on multispecies. •

Distn"bution of econom.ic impacts: 1bis measure wm have the lf:I'Ongest lhon-tenn oegatlve bnpact on fishennen from New Jersey and New York. According to NMFS weigh-out data, New York and New Jersey pons bad recorded landinp of 15.6 mDlion lbs. in 1989. Of this amount 8.1 million lbs. were lmded by 131 Yessels. 1be remaining 7.5 million tbs. were landed by an unknown number of Yessels whose landings wert aggregated in the NMFS database. Mean silver bake landings and revenues for the YeSsels that can be individuaJly identif"Jed were 62,000 lbs. and S 17,000 respectively. Tbe distribution of these landings, however, was lkewed; 25 wssels accounted for over 90% of landings. 1bese vessels had average silver hake landinp of 292,000 lbs. with an ex·vessel value of $81,000.

Besides a decrease in landinp, this measwe will ~e net mplacemem costs on individual vessels. The cost of replacing a codend may be as high as $600 and the cost of a aew trawl net body is about $3,000, yet the economic cost to the fishing industry of making the tnnsition to the 2·1/2 inch mesh size is likely to be substantially less than the total replacement cost of aew nets for several reasons. 1) Codends must be replaced periodically due to wear. At 111)' point in time, the value of the nets in use is likely to be about 1fl of their original cost because of aonnal wear. ~2) Many fisbennen could use the smaUer (than 2-1/2 inches) cocJend in directed fisheries for squid and other species. 3) Many vesseJs,panicularly in the Gulf of Maine, already use 2-1/2" mesh codends. 4) The mesh segulations goveming the body of the Det have a two-year ~e in period · that will allow this pan of net to be td u il wears out. Because of tbe lack Of data on the number of vessels thai have landed w · • , and since, due to the lbove factoJS, the real economic cost of replacing nets'~ be detem;dned. these costs have DOt been included in the model used to calculate the econOmic effects of changes in the level of whidng lanc:Jings.

The changes in landings caused by an increase in the mesh size and JeStrictions on the bycatch of sDver bake in the squid fishery are included in the economic impr1ct analysis in section m of this document.

Novcmbcl' 12.1990

'

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

-10-

RGURI!2

Mesh Sdeedtll) far S~Jiab

- Historic Gear

+ 2.s• Meata

•

=J I .

~ =~------t--=~---1 I I I ·i--- --·. ---

1 ~·T -I

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Fish Length (Inches)

14 15 16

SOURCE: Based on seteccion &ctcn in in Jensen. A.C. a R..C. Haatemuth (1966) Size eelction 4 leta.inment of liter and led hake in aylOD codends ofuawl nets. ICNAF Research Ba.Detin. No.3. aDd VP A data in lbe Report of the 11th NEFC Stock Assessment Wodahop.

-11·

rable J&

Expected Clumges iA Stock 8iae act Catch W.ltll au J:Dcreaae t.a Mesh slae rzca 2• u 2.5•

Gulf' of' llaiDe/lloztheaa CJeoz:gea 8aDJt S.llYez: Bake 8tock

stock alae •ez:oent D.lac.ud l.andtap ••&'Cent Year (at) Change ., catJ Change

-~--~------~-----------------------~---~------~---------Xn:l.tial 29,508 o.oo 511 9,000 0.00 1 29,508 o.oo 118 8,346 -7.26 2 29,511 0.01 118 1,346 -7.26 3 30,575 3.61 118 1,770 -2.55 4 31,542 1.89 118 9,141 1.57 5 32,151 8.91 118 9,346 4.04 6 32,508 10.11 118 9,486 5.40 1 32,695 11.80 118 9,550 1.11 8 32,190 11.12 118 9,581 6.46

Final 32,836 11.28 118 9,511 1.13

--------------------------------------~-----~-----~-1. 2'he simulation assumes a c~stant r • 0.46.

rule 1B

&spected ChaJ19ea .in Stock Siae alKS Catch With au bCZ"e&ae ia llesb 8.be l'.l:ca z• t.o 2.5•

Southern Georgea Bank/SD 6 South SUYez: Bake stock

Stock ahe Pez:cent D.t..scaz:d J.anctings ••z:oent Year (mt) Change (at) (mt) Change

--------~--------~~------------~------------------~--Xflitial 39,242 0.00 493 10,000 o.oo 1 39,242 o.oo 206 8,818 -11.82 2 39,248 0.01 206 8,118 -11.82 3 40,885 4.11 206 9,301 -1.93 .. 42,180 7.49 206 9,651 -3.41 5 42,998 1.51 206 1,869 -1.31 I 43,463 10.76 206 1,185 -0.15 7 43,712 11.39 206 10,045 0.45 8 43,840 11.72 .. 206 10,0'76 0.76

Final 43,104 11.88 206 10,091 0.91 ---------------~--~~-~-~---------------~-------~-~ 1. 2'he a~ation asaumea a constant r • 0.33.

Novembec 12, 1990

E. O&anse tbe de.lianatkm oflbe n=cenr ~~., fishery for diYU hate ID lbe CaJtivator Sboalan:a to tbe "Caltivllor Shoal~~· wilhin bouDdariea md dodD& time pedod establishec1 by the CoaDcil ODD.,........... . This measure wm provide • transition from • tuccessfu1eaperiauentll fisbeJy for wbltin& 10 • more pel!!lanent fisbel)' that wm coatinue to enhance JeVenues iD the mb~ trawl fisbel)'. The experimental propam accomplished its original~ which was to . demonstrate that sDve.r hake could be caupt on Georaes Bank within aleSUicted area Me! eeason without having a neaative Impact on stocks of 1be mplatcd lpldes (cod. haddock. poD oct., winter Oounder, ycllowtailllounder, American pluce, wkcli Oounder and redfisb). Additionally. because lbe OP.P?naniiY to catch lilver hate dlvens aome effon away from stocks of mgulated species, • is likely to have alholt-tUD positive Impact oo tbe coadition of these stocks.

1) 1be boundaries of the fishery are .iDitiaDy defined by tbe foBowJna points:

Reference ~oximat Point J..adtude LoDPade LOian eoorctin.es Cl •rtO' 8°10' 13132 43970 C2 ·~~· uo•s· 13527 43767 C3 .1005' 68o:20' 13495 G627 CA .lOSS' Q040' 13074 43861

FJGURE3: Cultivator Shoal SDvrz Hake Aru

Cl CULTIVATOR

SHOAL IIHITING

C4

FISHERY

C2

C3

? •• ?0. 69.

• f

.. - -. -_ .. ·-··-··

-13-

2) For the first year. and until changed by the Council, tbe fisbel)' will take place from June 15 through October 31 within the boundaries clescribed above. A special~ from the Regional Director wiD be required to fish for silver hate in the pescribed area, and the Regional Director may restrict tbe Jssuance of these ~rmits if there are high discards of other species in the 1re1. Vessels RCeivins a~ to fish in the Cultivator Shoat Whitifta Fishery most fish ac1oslve1y lor silver bake.

3) Pennit conditions are: 1) a trip bycatcb limit of 1-. of .egulated apecles; 2) a minimum mesh size of 2-1fl" in the codend and extension piece (160 meshes from tbe end of the net); and 3) that 1he ~ ~irements would be the infonnation called lor in the Txr-Two Fishing Trip (F~ 1) used Ja the 1988 and 1989 experimental fisheries.

4) Periodic sea sampling should continue to clelennine whether changes in the times ll1d areas fiShed are needed and to determine tbe bycatcb of regulated species, ~Y haddock. Thete wm be a full review of data armuaUy befote changes of fishing dates. Changes wnl be published by DOiice in the Federlll Rlglstu.

llatioDale

Data from the initial experimental silver bake fisheries oa Cattivator Shoat m 1988 abow that .egulated species accounted for 1.1 ~of the total catch and 0.7., of the total landings. After the

· area was redefmed, data from July and August 19891howed 1bat .egulated species accounted for 0.6% of the total catch, and 0.4~ of the total landings. Silver Hake lanctings wae 4.9 million lbs. in 1988 and 6.2 million lbs. in 1989. "Examination of historical catch data from .Commercial fiShery and research vessels indicates that the area whete tbe [1988] Ex~al FIShel)' was

.~conducted was an area whete few .egulated species bad been cauJht in tbe past." (Almeida et al. 1989).

The boundaries of this area were based on landings data from tbe 1988 fishely chat was allowed to occur anywhere on Georaes Bank. These bouDdaries wete aelected for 1989 to include the area with the highest catch rates of silver hake and the lowest catch rates of .egulated species. Accorc:ting to preliminary data, sDver hake landings in the ~mat fishely iDaeased in 1989, and the ratio of catch of ~egulated species to total landings c1ec.reased despite the ~educed size of the area that was fiShed. Concentrations of silver bake Ire Jdahest between J1me 15 and October 31. accorc:ting. to the data from the 1988 and 1989 experimeDtat fisberies.

The special pennit provision allows the Regional Diredor to take action quiddy to dose the fishery if discards of .egulated ~ rise to an ~e level and to enforce JepOiting, IC8 sampling and bycatch requimnents.The 1., bycalcb 1iJriit for Rgulated ~peeies wDl prevent

· targeting of regulated species and. based on bist~ data, will DOl c:on$ain the catch of silver ·. hake. The rationale for the minimum meih size is discussed under aection D of this document. ·The J'Cason for requiring the minimum mesh size for at least 160 meshes is that 1be codend and extension piece on offsbote sDver hate nets typicaUy have a combined length of 160 meshes. Organhing the reponing of location fished by ICIHDinute~ areas is aecessll)' for tbe Cauncn to make adjustments to the Silver bate area if Deeded.

-14-

. Periodic sea sampling is needed to determine whether changes in the times and areas fished are required. and to determine the bycatcb of regulated species, especially haddock. 1be only reliable method of obtaining information on discards is throup aea samplinJ. The CouncB will review data from the fisheay ~nnually to make IDY oecessary adjustments.

BioJopcat coasidcnllioas

Tbe low catch level of replated species in the ailver hake ~vents any.dpD.acant negative impact on age·at-entry levels for these species on Georges Bank. 1be OJ',PC?lt11lUt)' to catch ailver hake in this fishery also dhterts fishing effon fRm Giber, more heavily eiptoited zegulated species.

"' • Bcooomic coasideratioas

In 1988, a total of 17 YeSsels fiom Pt. Judith, Rl, Newport, Rl, Gloucester, MA 111d Portland, ME made 119 fishing trips in the experimental ailver bake fishe.ry. Total landings of aD species were 5.105 m.Dlion lb. of which 4.932 million lbs., • 96.64J,, were ailver bake (Almeida et al., 1989). 1be total catch of replated IJ)eCies was only 67 ,7061bs. of which 37 ~71bs. were

_ landed. Discards totaling 1.132 million lbs. (liCit of the total catch), consisted ~1 of led bake (390,000 Jbs.), akate.s (140,000 lbs.) and northern sbortfin squid (128,000). 1he hi&h mean landings raae of 3,8621bs./br. provided vessels widJ ID anractive economic alternative to fishing

- for other, regulated species. The total ex-vessel value of aDver hake landed from Ibis fishery in ,- 1988 is estimated to be $774,000 or about $46,000 per wasel.

P. Meesma to poteet lhon-lhed ccmceot~llioua or ...n fish

1bis section contains two separate measures to protect cJiscinct poups of II1\IJl fish. 1he -~measures are designed to replace the PlexJ'ble .AJu Action System as a mechanism to protect

· juvenile fish in areas where the occmrence of small fish can be adequately 111ticlparecf. The first measure (Fl) protects ima1l Southern New England yeUowtaiJ flounder; the ICCODd (F2) protects

~ large concentrations of sma11 codfish on SteDwqen Bmk and Jeffieya Ledae.

Since many aspects of the rationale for these measures, as weD • the biological. economic -.1 administrative considerati0111, are common to boCb proposals, they are clcscn"bed topther in the foUowing sections. Those elements that are aniquc to each fisbely are described llepll'llCly in subsections Fl and Fl.

RatioDale

1he ~ of the measa~s Js to enable 1he manaaement system, Including 1be New England Fishery Management Council, h Mult~ Committee, IDd the National Marine F.ishcries Service, to RSpOOd quickly to protect W,e CODCeDtralioDs of juvenile, aublegal (smaller than the minimum legal size) fish. Many provisions of the 1IJ'OIK)Bed measures reflect elements of tbe Fle:u'ble Area Action System in terms lpeclfic to the fisheries they cover. The measures are Deeded for aeveta! reasons: 1) To lpplOacb the objecdve of the Multispecies FJidP of enhancing age-at-enuy controls with quiet, timely protection for~ concenu:arions of javcnile fish; 2) To replace similar types of actions under the Flexible .AJu Action System, actions that are likely to be needed re.plarly; ad 3) To be able to respond co~ from the fishing industry for timely action m a way that improves the climate for cooperation IDd progtess between the Council and the fishing industry.

November 12, 1990

-15-

Enhancement of,age-at-emy: Minimum size replati.ons do DOt protect concentrations of small fish under certain conditions. If many awketable fish 11e in tbe same area IS amaU fish, fJ.Sbermen might continue to fish in that area, sometimes very inteniely. Even if tbe mesh lize Is replated, large quantities of small fish can block abe mesh openings IDd cause maray aaD fish to be caught and subSequently discuded.

This problem oc:curmt JeOeDtly in lhe Nantucket Ji&htsbip area wbae aea 111111pling tows JeVealed that yeDowta.il d.iscan1s comprised more than 7K of lhe ycDowt.ail catch. ad an · SteDwagen Bank where cod landings wa~e more dian 5()Cl, of abe caleb 011 Jea aamplil:lg tows. A review of anecdotal infonnation suggests that ctiBcard rates in tbese mas~ even lipfficandy higher before sea sampling was conducted. S.imDar problems also occuned in tbc Nantucket

· Shoals area in the winters of 1987-88 and 1988-89 with discatds equal to 70-SK oftbe codfish caught. 1he amount of wasted fish was 10 large that fisbenneD reqUested that lhe Council implement seasonal mesh regulations in Ibis area.

A more serious situation of this type also occmred in 1977 011 Georges BIDk when most of the last vezy large year dass of haddock RCI'Uiting to that fishery was wilted despite the quota managemem system then in effea. Estimated discards of haddock were about 24 mD1ioD ~~ (OverhoJtz, Oark &. White, 1983) compared to total U.S. landings of 28A million poiJDds. The potential, undiscounted ex-vessel revenue from these discards UDder prevailina powch and aatural monality rates is estimated to have been $67 m.U.Uon. It is estimated that three times as many age 2 haddock recruiting to the fishery wa~e discarded as were landed. The amount of smaU haddock discarded that year was about 3.5 times pater than the total weight of U.S. haddock landings in

· 1987. Although official estimates were DOt made, according to data coJiected from sea sampling, combined with industry reportS, very birge mtmbers of the modentely 1t10DJ 1978 year claSs of haddock were also discardC.d in 1980 (Ovelboltz, CWk 6: White,1983).

~ If concentrations of smaD fish occur in an area where mesh size Is anregula1ed. alhey did in Southern New England in January through March 1989, an even peater amount of small fish will be wasted than in regulated mesh areas. In samples taken with commercial fishina par, only . 27% of the yeDowta.U flounder caught were of legal size in one area ad cmly 16CII in another. Potential losses of yeDowtail flounder from discards exceeds llnctings by a &c:tor of 410 6 times.

-:. .. In its Report ttiNew Engltmd Fishlry JfaMgemmt Ctnmcil'1 IHmlrl:al Filf/ish

Comminet, the Technical Monitoring Group (TMG) stated.

"A retrospective analysis conducted by tbe Nonbeast F.iaberies Ccnter,IDd reviewed at abe 5th Stock Assessment Wmtshop, indicated that tbe avcraae age-at-entry for cod and haddock during the early 10 mid 1980s was CODJistent with that which would bave JeSU1ted from the widespread use of 4-1/2" mesh."

· There are several ~easons why qe-at-enuy controls have DOt been completely efl'ective, aome of which have been addressed in Amendment 12 to abe MuJtispecies FMP and others under the Flexible Area Action System (Amendment 13). Nevenbeless, tbe CGanci1 believes that, where possible, action needs to be taken JDOJe quiddy to protect amaJl fish.

November 12.1990

-16-

Reduce the need for FJeXJ"ble Ale& Actions: The FleXJ"ble Alu Action System (PAA.S) was designed to pevent high discards in areas IJld during times that could DOt he ldequately anticipated. Since the implementation of the FAAS,IIld wilh improved recruitment for tome major groundfisb stocks, the CouDcD has become aware of ~everll areas IJld times where the incidence of high discards is pedictable. In the time nquiled to initiate ad carry out 1111Ction under the flexible Ale& Action System (a minimum of26 days), enonnous amounts of smaD fish can be ctiscarded. To implement FlexJ"ble An:~ Actions also~ aio.re llaff ad Committee time than the proposed measures, thereby CODS1raining the Council'11bDity to IOlve 11101e fundamental problems in the fisheJy by developiDg more comprehensive ttrategiel to address the ovetfishing Of many stocb.

Bio10Jical CGOSidemdoas · •

The main biological consideration, the Deed to improve age-at-entl)' controls in the Multispecles fishery, bas been discussed above. Other biological. coasiderations Chat arc addressed by the proposed measUJe are lhe unpredictable IDd sbolt lived aature of concentrations of small ~ ll1d the hnponance of husbanding incoming rear classes for stocks at low levels of . abundance. For groundfish stocks that are comprised Jaraely of a lingle year class, husbanding iDcomins year classes is important DOt ODly to increase 1hc yield per recruit but also to increase spavming stock biomass.

Bconomic CODS.icleralioas

It is difficult to ·quantify costs in ~elation to benefits before taking ldion 1lllder the proposed ~~because the duration IDd the effects oftbe actions cannot he acauately antic!fated and because the availability of different ma -'species of fish cannot be adequately predicted for any area. The inability to quantify the anticipated benefits or costs from the PJOPOied measure atiJ1 ~does not decrease tbe likelihood that they wm have substandal net positive bi:uelits.

1)

2)

3)

The proposed measwes heJp the industry 1pproach tbe objectives oftbe Mul~s FMP. ·. The FMP document and tbe 1988 repon of the Tecbnical Monitoring Group (TMG) detail tbe theoretical basis and the benefits of the aurent ID8JUI&f:IDCDt strategy. 'Ibis strategy is largely based on making age-at-ently controls work, and cootinuaJly improving these · controls. 1be benefits of hnpmving these controls already have been calculated in the orisinaJ FMP document.

Any measure that reduces moltllity primarily on •IUbJegal" fish instead to reducini monality on older aae groups is an efficient way to increase yield r=r recruit. Tbe inause in yield per recruit from any successful action will-=aue w:ry npadly. Today'• fishennen wm reap most of these benefits JWhhin • mlatively abort time iastCad ofhavq lbem captured by later entrants to the fisheJy. For example, aDder prevailing discard, powrb aad natural monaUty rates, tbe yellowtail discarded ill Southern New Eagland in J1110uy through March, could have yielded, within a year'• time, 4 to 6 times the ·.,olume oflegal size yellowtail landed durin& this period.

The propOsed measures aDow the Reponat Director to stop an -=don when Jr is DO longer warranted and prevents the Council from imposing 1JDileCeSSIIY costs anlhe fishing industry. This management 8exibility can mcrease confidence iD lhe JD1D11C1DCDt system by showing that management restrictions can be rescinded u weD as imposed on fishermen.

Ncmmbc:r 12,1990

• -17-

This measure wm aate costs ill two ways. First, there will be an inclase in the enforcement and administrative burden that must be met either by Increasing ~m for these functions or by forgoing other existing emorcemeDt, adm.inis1rative or other activities that are deemed to be less imponant. Secondly,1bere will be JeYcnucs lost by the fi.sbeJmen.

Costs for the administrati01i of 1he Multispecies PMP wJD increase because of the Deed to verify concentrations of smaD fisb.lnd to monitor areas In which the Committee lw tlbn ICdon under these measures. The NOJ'theast FJSheries Center has Wormed the Council Staff that the existin& sea·sampling propam budget- is desiped to provide 50 observer days within 1be total sample desian for monitoling management propams. Monltorina more than fifty dayS would impose costs either in terms of ldditionaJ JeSOUn:eJ Deeded by the ~pam or Jn tams of opponunity costs by a~uc_ing the &;ffectiveness of lbe oriPW umptirlJ deslp byl8diatributina observers to meet momtormg requuanents.

The averaae cost (based an total propam cost) ofpJICina a sea.18111P1a- aboard a vessel for a day at sea is about $750 per day aduding the cost of vessel. The margbl cost, if tbe aea sampling program were to be increased sJi&htly, is about $250 ~r day. Tbe Nonheast FJ.Sheries has infonned the Councn lhat in estimating the costs of monitoring acdvJty for the proposed measmes, it is appropriate to use tbe lower mar&inaJ cost fipre.

Jt is the Councn•s experi.enc::e that when there are 'fierY Jdsh discards offish. tome concerned fishennen wiD to carry sea samplers, even When there is tittle JeW lid in terms of the amount of fiSh they land. It is less ctiffic:ult to find vessels to cany sea umplers to monitor an area to end an action. if there is a Jarae amount of Jega1 size fish in tbe area lnd the w:ssels are liD owed to sell their catch. If barvestable fiSh are DOt aufticiendy abundant in tbe area., as was the case at tbe end the Flexible Area Action in Southem New EnJ)and, then fishermen are DOt inJeluted ill canying sea samplers. In this case, however, the economic loss from DOl beiDa able 10 monitor the area is vecy small or aonemtent because thele is no mOtive to fish ill dJe area. ··

A single vessefwith one observer aboard can adequately~ an estimated 900-square·miie areaJier day. to detennine tbe presence or absence of s!J.nificant aDODnts o! small fish. One or two obsener days at sea per 90()..square-mile ~initially miaht be aequired to detennine the acc:uracy of repons from fisheDnen or other aoun::e.s IIJ.IIeSf)Da Jarae IIDOWlts of small or spawning fish. ·

Although tbe ~~ add to the eufon:cmenr lnd administrative burden ofNMFS Ed the Coast Guard, it is not expected that chese qencies wDI apend more aaoun:es an fisheries management and enforcement. Instead, these agencies are apectccl to norder priorities for their asources/ac:tivities that have already been budgeted for the eiiforcement c;d'Multispedes F.MP agulations. 1he Coast Guard has Wormed the Council that if the Councll indicated lhat more ~basis should be placed on enforciD& mesh aplations ill a partlcutar area. eben the Coast Guard would dbect more of its boardin& activities to the IJ'Pfoprilte cca lnd away from other areas. If the RegionaJ Director implements an area c:'losm, the Coast Guard would Jeduce the number of vessel boardings to eafcn:e &he area dosure. To expect 1bat these measwu wDI have

Ncmmbcr 12, 1990

•.

-18-

any effect on the amount of total resources lllocated to enforcement agencies is unrealistic. The economic cost of reallocating enforcement resources is a loss of benefits from enforcement in lower priorily areas. If enforcement resources have been efficiently deployed, this cost will be at least as great u the direct management and enforcement costs involved.

The second cost categoty is the amount of cbe revenue lose by the fisbing indusuy because of the action. In the worst case, the immediate neaative impacts from an action taken u.nder lbe proposed measwes woUld not be mitigated. An example of this would be an area closure tbat caused fishennen to remain at the dock rather than to lish in other areas that are DOC affected by the action. Yet this worst case scenario is very unlikely for ~everal ~. 1) Even when large area closura have been imposed in the past. fishennen have had access to alternative &shin& lfOUDds. 2) Many small fish protected by m action under the proposed ll'leaS1ltel will pow rapidly and become available to the fishety when the action endi. "the increase in yield per JeCrUit is especially great when the fishery is dependent on single, incoming year classes and any immediate losses probably wm be made up within one year.

Fmally, forgone revenues are different from forgone prof"lts. It is even possible 1bat profits could ~ increased in a beavDy exploited fishety if vessels were idled during periods of low catch rates and resumed fishing only when catch rates were higher. Therefore, estimates of forgone evenues can overstate the shon-term negative impacts of my .:tion.

Fl. Authorize the aonbeast RegioDat Director to close a part oftbe IOUihem New Jqland yellowtail dosurc area ortbe NJUliUcket 1iptship area to poled YCfJiarp ~1adoas of juvenile yeBowtail flCJUDder, based em biweekly (t'trilz aiDCIDih) 1ea umpliDa dala.

a) The closurc wm be limited to the area covered by 10 ten-minute lqUIJ'eS (approximately 770 square miles) within the areas shown in FJgUre 4. Ten-minute squares are rectangles defined by 10 minutes of latitude xlO minutes of longitude on a side. 1be Nantucket lightship area is defined by boundary lines connecting: NLI-40043'N 70000'W, NL2- 40"43'N 68°S9'W, NL3-40~'N 68°S9'W,.IIld NLA-40028"N 70°00'W. 1he dosure will be implemented by a aotice in the Fl!dual R~gister. Additional DOtification will be provided through aiiOiice to permit holders and the news media.

b) The criterion for detennining whether~ is a large concentration of ama11 yeJl0'\1ail flounder in the 8Je8 will be whether DIOR' than S()CJ, of the catch by weight of yellowtail flounder are smaJier than the legal minimum size (cuaendy 13•). In the event that the catch rate for yeDowtaD on sea ~ling tows Is Jess tban 500 lbs. per .hour, the Regional Director will consult the Muluspecies Committee to ensure 1h8t his action is consistent with the Councl's intent. The ama wiD aopen if las than SO% of the catch by weight of yellowtail flounder mii'JiaDer than the ICgal minimum size or

. tbe catch rate for yellowtail on sea aampling tows is leas than 500 lbs. per hour (aurendy 13").

Ratkmale

Fishermen have reponed that these areas frequendy contain lqe conc:enttations of yellowtail flounder. Yellowtail first get caught in small mesh ttawl or IC811op aear • about two years old (1 0" in length) and do not ·

November 12, 1990

-19-·

te:ach lhe minimum size of 13" untn about 3 years old. According to sea-sampling data coUected in December 1989, even with S-1/2" mesh, discards can be as high as 76% of the yellowtaD landings by weight. Yellowtan can grow from a length of about 11.75 inches to the 13 inch minimum size within a six month period. Potential gains in landings from protecting these fish from 4 to 6 months can range from 215% to 386$ tespectively.

Mesh n:gulations are believed to be less effective dtan closures in protecting large concentrations of small fish for the following teasons: a) in "fety large concentrations of ama11 fish, large mesh nets can become obstructed. panicularly if long tows are made; b) mesh tegulations wiD not protect small yellowtail from scallop aear; c) because the amount of area that would be closed at any time is relatively smaD., 'Vessels that would otherwise fish there wm be able to find alternative fishing grounds.

. ..... _ ....

·•••••Y·••••!·•••• . --~·····:···-

:

. . ····-··········· . .

•

FIGt.J.R.E4

The Soutbem New England Qosed Ama, the Nantucket Shoals Large Mesh .Ala. &

the Nantucket lJsbtshlp Azea

1 . . . ............ ·······-·· ·········•····. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . '"' .

: : : : : 0 0 . : : : . . . . .

···~···········':-'·····:·····:-···· : : . : . . . . .

.

. . : . : ············-·········· .. ····· . . . . . . . . . . • • 0 . . . : 0

0 • . . . . . ·····~·····!·····~·····:·····~·····

: i : : . . . .. . . . . . . . ................. _ ................. . : ·. : . .

0 • . . . 0

...... :·····:-··· . . . 0

:

: 0 . . . . . .

0

. . . . . . . . . . . ·····t····:·-·-:-···! : : : . : : . . . . ·····:·····-:-·---:'·····: . .

0

·­.

. ...... . . . . ..:. ..... : ..... :. .... .; .... I : : : . . .. I : : .: ~ • : !

.

. . : . . . . . .

: j : : :

.. L.ooj ..... ~.o~o.i ... o1o ....... ___ , . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "'*!••••·: --!-•••!••••••! ..... . . . . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . • 0 • 0 ···-i .. ~f"l'·""'---oo! . . . . . .

···••!•• ... !•• . . . . . . . . . . 0 • 0 ................... 0 • • .. : : : . . . . . . 0 • •

. . . . : :

.

: : :0 :

"··-·~~r=J . . a.. • -"!':····· -···r····-t--t . . . 0

. . . . : . :~ : : . : : :. : . : ·····!·····-=-····-!·····!-····i····· ·····~· ..... : ... --·: . . .

: ' .

November 12, 1990

. .

-20-

The Regional Director needs the flexibDity to move the 1rea of a dosure throupout a Jarae pan of the range of Southem New Enaland /Mid-Atlantic yellowtail flounder because the aggregations of amaJJ fish •likely to move. Two attemp11 10 ~small yellowtailusinJ the Flexible Area Action System iD 1990 were abandoned beCause Of the alleJed movemear of concentrations of smaJ1 yeUowtaD before the Acdon could be implemented

Bcooomic caasidmltioas

· Because this measure is open-ended (an indefinite number of actions may be taken in any year), its economic impacts cannot be esdmared by iD the ecoDOmic ~ analysis. Instead, an example of 1 possible Closure can be used to analyze the pote_ntiaJ ecoDOmic impacts of dais measure. In 1anuaty 1990, the MuJtispecles Committee considered a closure o(tbe N&Dhlc:ket Lf&htship Area, simDar in scope to action envisioned under Ibis measure. The dosure was proposed under the Flexible Area Action System but was DOC curied out because the concenuation of sub-legal yellowtail flounder was alleJed to have clispmcd by tbe date of the tequest for action. The closure could have lasted up to a maximum of 180 days.

Discard tates of su~lcJal yellowtail were 76,. of total catch of)'eUowtail by weight mel 83% oflandings by weight for "¥essels DOt usinJ the repllled mesh size. UsinJ 1988 data, in which the natural monality rile is 20CJ, for aD apecies acept ICIDops, DOt applyq a powah &ctor to already harvestable fish or acallops, and if the impacts on llndinp do DOi uve an effect on price levels, the potential Jain was estimated to be $330,700 w.ilb • benefit-to-cost nrio of about 1.2. Based on 1988 landings data (Table 2), the proposed ICtion would have bad litt1e impacc on

~ ,~eallopers because few scallopers fished in the lre8 and the ICI1Jops would be available for harvest · later.

The cost to fisbennen InC! processors of the~ ICiioa would have beeii the lhon-cerm·. Joss of revenues they otherwise mijht have earned frOm Jmdings from the dosed lre8. 1hese · costs would have been small because most of the small &sh protected by any ICtion taken under · this system would grow npidly and .would have been liDded 10011 lfter tbe action ended. Additionally, the fish that already just met minimmn lize aequiRmeDts would have pown to Jaraer market sizes that command 1 peater Jl!d.ce per pound.

Oiven the avaDabllity of other fishinJ pounds, the DCt llhon-cerm costs of the Jvpothetica1 dosun: to fJShennen are estimated to be a maimwn of~ of the revenues they would have derived from regullled ~s, IWIIIICtfl.oundcr (fluke), windcrwpane flounder md acatJops • .-1 50% of the revenues from Giber species incJudifta lobster mel aqoid. "''bis fipre ~bly overstates the actual shon-tenn costs because tbe replated apecies a 10 beavDy exploited, and a large fraction of the fish~ by a closure woufd be caught soon after they beeline available to the acar. Enforcement oftbe ICtion is estimated to requile 160 Ius. of ..... enforcement asinJ 82-J JO' pauoJ craft and to cost llbout $.51.40(). The estimated aet beuefits of this h.JpolhetieaJ dosure are summarized in Tlble 3 for comparison.

November 12, 1990

'\

-21-

~1. 2

Value of Laacl1D9• - •aatacket ld.ghtabJ.p ana 1188

(Thowlancl Dolla~:a)

Ottezo 8callop t.~:awl dnclge S'ODL

SPECIES $10001J • $1000• • $10008 • Cod 136 25 • • 136 2C

Haddock 2 0 • 2 0

Silver hake 5 1 • 5 1"

Am.. Plaice 1 0 • 1 0

Fluke C5 8 0 0 C5 8

.; 1 ~. . Blackback fl.. 58 11 58 10

Gray Sole 9 2 • • 2

Yellowtail fl. 193 36 0 1 193 3C

Windowpane fl. 56 10 • 56 10

Other Groundfiah 34 ' 3 11 36 ' Sea Scallops .·. 0 0 20 88 20 • Loligo S~id.:: 1 0 • 1 0

Lobate:r 1 0 • 1 0

Other Fish 1 0 • 1 0

'1'0'1'AL 542 100 23 100 564 100

Ncm:mber 12, 1990

-22-

~le 3

BetJaated. .. t BeDefita of Jl.lpotbetloal C1oew:e of Ru:at.1ldr.et Llghteb.lp Ana tiYeA a 1ft Diaoazd aate

of 'J'ellowtail l'~oaader

Benefits of protecting aub-le;al yellowtail ·

ror9one revenues fro. heavily ezpoited species

ror9one scallop revenues ror9one revenues from other epecies

Monitorin9 coste

Snforcement coste

Bet BeDefite

• • 501.6

- 151.5

4.0

- 23.4

0

- !il.j

• 271.3

The disttiburion of impacts can be detennined by examining historical fishing patterns. The value of landings from this ~JU was $564,000 in 1988. Sixty-eight percent of this amount, or

~·about $382.000, was eamed by vessels landing their catch in New Bedford, although some of this - amount can be attributed to vessels from other home ports landing some of their catch in New

Bedford. The value of landings from this area for other ports is shown in Tlble 4.

~le 4

Value of LaDdinge :frc:a the Ra~~tudtet Lightahip &rea la Juuaqr thl:ough J1me 1188

(Trawlers ~ 8cal.lope..r:s - 2bouaDCl Dollars)

.oaT • • llew Bedford 382 68 Other MA ports 3 1 llewpo.r:t, Ill '79 14 •t. Judith, R% Jl 18

'l'otal 56t 100

November 12, 1990

P2. Measures to proiCCl CODCalll1ll:ioa of jaw:nile codfish 011 Stdlwapra Bd ...S Jc8ieyl ~e .

The Regional Director of NMFS can initiate a two-dued action aimed at conttoDing the high discard rate of juvenile codf'11h durinJ their Spring mlp'atioD throuJh the Stellw~ Bank .xt Jeffreys Ledge by an announcement m the Fedenl ReJister. 1be threshold at which die action is automatically triggered is when there is an avaage 20c.i discard rate of undersized cod dudng at least three aeograph.ically sepresentative monitoring towa which are conducted within aJeUonable time frame with a NMPS-approved sea sampler on boant. 1he minimum catch rale during the monitoring tows must be 500 pounds per hriur. The period cJu.rin& which this ICtion can take place · is February through July, however, the duration of die action may be only as long as is necessary to protect the small fish concentrations. Tbe .aion wDI be tenninated by tbe Reaional Director if he determines, by monitoring tows conducted II least biweekly, that tbe dasbold conditions DO longer exist.

The areas which can be included in the action are descn'bed in Table 5A and 58, and ll'e sho'C'.'Jl in FigureS. 1bese are maximum areas and, as ccmditions wmant, may be subdivided by the Regional Director in consultation with industry and enforcement officials.

The inirialstep of the action is to require that YeSSels using bottom-tending mobDe par (traWl nets) use nets with mesh that is 5·1/2 inches or larger provided that the mesh comprlsing the fifty bars of mesh counted from the end of the codend must be at least 6-inch mesh hung on the ~are. During the conuol action, vessels in the area are only pemUue.d 10 have available for immediate use nets with S-1/2-inch mesh or IuBer. Any mesh leSs than 6 inches which is not~-of 1be net, must be stored in accordance with Section G of Ibis Amendment. In any case, DO mesh less than 5-1/2" is rmitted in the area during the JDCSh.control action. If tbe 20CJJ discard rale ~with

Jthe use of6 .. square mesh, or if there is a significant degree of aon-compJiance with the 6" aquare mesh rUle, the Regional Director wm dose the affected area or areas 10 'bottom-tending mobile gear.

Ratiooale

The Multi~cles FMP has attempted to !educe fishin& mortality primarily on juvenile and .. sub-legal fish • The proposed measure will pro!ect Jarae concentrations of migratory codfiSh that have been seponed to occur on both Stellwapn Bank and Jeffreys Ledge. These OCcurrences have been sbon Jived, lasting pelhaps two to eiJht weeks. ~g to these concentrations by taking action under the Flexible Area Action System would be impractical, because such an action would take a minimum of26 days to implement and, to elate, the only flexible uea action so far implemented took much lonaer than 26 days 10 initiate. 1he major occurrence of heavy discardS of juvenile codfish o.n Stenw.,en Bank toot place within 1be first 26 days from when these fish were discovered by fisbennen.

The triggering mechanism for the action would aDow lbe Reponat Db:ector to tapond quickly when concentrations of sma1I fish begin to IJ.'PCII'·

The Regional DirectQr could limit action 10 smaller areas within the desipated area.

The catch rate of SOO lbs,Jbr. on monitoring tows ensures that the action will not be taken because of a vezy small sample size.

November 12, 1990

-2A-

TABLE 5A. STBU.WAGBN BANKA.R.BA COORDINA"mS

Refereace t::m&::ioltea LiDc Point Latitude Lon,citado Descdpdoa.

51 42°34.0' 70023.5' 13737 <44295

52 42°28.8' 70039.0' 13861 44295 alofti44295

53 42°18.6' 70022 . .5' 13810 44209 S4 42005.5' 70023.3' 13880 4413.5

55 42°11.0' 70004.0' 13737 4413.5 .tq44135

alq137371051.

TABLE 58. JEPFREYS LEDGE ARBA COORDINATES

Reference

~--Une

Point Latitude LoagilucJe

11 43°12.7' 70000.0' 13369 4444.5 25826

12 43°09.5' 70°08.0' 13437 4444.5 25845 .tons 4444.5

13 42°57.0' 70°08.0' 13.512 44384 25779 .toag 70008.0'

14 42°.52.0' . 70021.0' 13631 44384 2580.5 .tq44384

2580510 25804 1.5 42°41.5' 70032 • .5' 137.52 44352 25804

16 42°34.0' 70026.2' 137.52 44300 25720 .tons 13752

n 42°.5.5.2' 70000.0' 13474 ..... 362 25720 .tq25720

tllq7()000' 10 J1

November 12, 1990

. .

-25-

ROURB5

S1e11wqaa Bllll met JeflieJI Ledp OmlmtAIMS

.Jl

~2 rj ~J) JEFFREYS

.Jy / J1 LEDGE

. ~~/ . ~·s~""'\ STELLIIAGEN

·~ ')ss\ BANK

k,..)ss . MILES SA ~---~

I 11

-26-

The boundaries of the desiJnated areas {F'JgWe 5) primarily contain fishinglfOWids Jess than 30 fathoms deep on Stellwagen Bank and less than 40 fathoms deep on Je~ys ledge. These area definitions allow otter trawleD to caleb valuable species other than cod such as American plaice (dabs), witch Oounder (gray sole) and northern shrimp in IUD'OUDding areas that are deeper whDe stm maintainin,g a protective DWJin around the sballower waters.

Mesh selectivity carves. FJBLWS 6, llustrare that a~ square mesh wiDKtain a very low percentage of c:odflSb smaller lban 19". Estimates based on experimental tows, suggest tbal less than 1c.l> of 19" codfuh would be mained. "Ibis I::Jidrcentage improves the ~ability of high ~pee of escapement even under • ·ons of "fery large eoocentradons

The opponunity to ue 6" aquue mesh provides anlltemarive to an area closule, yet If dais measwe does DOl mfuce the discard rate to below the threshold the Reaional Director will dose the appropriate areas.

According to the RpOrtS of fishermen and other wbesses, the high rate of cli.scard of juvenile cod that occuned in the Spring of 1990 OCC\I.IDd in waters above 30 fathoms in the Stellwagen Bank area and in waters above 40 fathoms ia the area of Jeffreys Ledge. R.epons suggest that on SteDwagen, the fish scacteted as they mtwned to deeper water, yet there are repons of concentrations of juvaille cod in watm up to 75 fathomS around Jeffreys. These are the depths at which migratoey poups of cod containing Rlatively high percemages of juvenile fish are found ailnually. In the S_Prlng of 1990, the Jdative aumbers of fish bemg discarded were reponed to be about three ames peater on Stellw'len than on Jeffreys, mainly due to the ctif(erem bottom dwactedstics IDd the accessibility of concentrations of fish.

The period, february through July, allows the Regional Director the awdmum fleluoil.ity, based on historical accounts. to take action whenever the problem might occur. Any panicular action probably will last DO more than eight weeks.

The RqUirements that mobDe..aet vessels fishing in or 1l'lnSJnin& these areas would be pennined to cany on board only Dets with 5-112" mesh and 6" mesh bung on tbe aquare in the codend, that my mesh smaller than 6" that is not incorporated into the Del be •ond according to the aet-stowage requirements, and that in ao case can there be mesh less than 5-1/2" on board, peatly improves the enforceability of the par astrictions bposed by the first tier of action.

Biolop:at CDDSidcntions

'Ibis measure would reduce fisldng mortality on·. ablegat" cod. and marginilly ~educe fishing mortality on all sizes of cod from either or both Jbe Oulf of Maine and Geoqes Bank •octs. Based on lanc.tings pattems, tea-sampling mpons and anecdotal illfotmation, discards from SteUwagen Bank in 1990 are estimated to be about 5c.l> of projected landings (based on the first six months) of about 2S million pounds from the Gulf of Maine. Given that the Mul~s FMP is DOt achieving its objective for codfish for either stock, my~ in fishin& moilality are beneficial.

Based on landings and sea-sampling data (ISSU!Ding a 5K discard mte), potential landings from protecting these fish range from 1.043 to 1.353 mDlion lb. 1be lower estimate assumes a higher fishing monality rate (f=0.9) whDe the higher estimate ISS1I1l'les that fisllina mona1ity is less, F = 0.6. Natural mortality is •sumed to be 0~ (Table 6)

Ncwember 12.1990

-7:1-

PIOURB6

Cod Selection Curves Square vs. Diamond Mesh

Selectivity

0.9

0.8

0.7

,-0.6

0.5 -

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

8 12 16

----- ---- --· -

..i.8- 6.6• Square

-B- tto• Square

~ 6.&· Diamond

20 24 28 32 36 40 Fish Length (inches)

.~

-28-

Table6

Estimated Values fcJr Pmleclins Larp Ccmc:eucratioDa of Sublcpl Codfish

GD SteDwapnBa aad JcftRya LecJp

(Based GD May 1990 l.ancfinp Data fram Ste1lw.,:a B-*)

Fiihing Mortality Rare -= 0.6

Potential I -dinp (1000 lb)

Net PRsent Value ($ 1000)

Fishing Mortality Rare = 0.6

Poteutiall -dings (1000 lb)

Net Plaent Value ($ 1000)

Assumptions:

•

542

257

435

221

1,353

643

1,()43

552

1,625

772

1,157

663

Constant prices based on 1988 data; no price increases for llqer fish; 1K discount rate; fish fully reauited to gear at 19"i utural mOrtality (M) = 0.2

-29--

If the discard rate were only 20% IS specified in the triggerins mechanism. the potential&ain in landings from protecting small fish, based on data from SteUwaacn Bank, would ranse from 0.435 million lb. to 0.542 mDlion lb.· If uecdotal iafonnation provided to the Council is co.rred, discards will more likely exceed SK within large concentrations of amall codfish, and the 60'11 discard rate used in Table 6 may be a conservllive estimate.

Mesh-selectivity data show tbat very few subJegal codfish are likely to be caught in 6" lqU&re mesh. about 1 ~of 19" fish (Flf'lre 6); yet codends made of 6" square mesh could become pluged with other fish or twine, either IDtentionalJy or tmintentionally. Tbc estimate of potential benefats assumes no discards of sublegal fish with 6" square mesh. Tbe Reponal Director would dose the mesh-control area if the discard rate aceeds die 20'11 threshold.

Economic coosidermoas

Based on the c:lata from SteDwagen Bank in the Spring of 1990. it is possible to 4iscuss the hyPOthetical impacts of a possible action to protect smaJl fish. Table 7 uses estimates of poteDtia1 aams in landings based on the 1990 landings IDd discard data &om SteDwagen Bank, a estimates or foregone revenues by fiShennen, as weD IS administrative lnd enforcement costs to estimate hypothetical net benefits from the proposed measure. It shows benefits nnpg from $ 77,000 (net present value) assuming a 20% disCard rate and a fishins monalicy nte ofF • 0.9 to S 579,000 assuming a 60% discard rate and a fishing monatity rate ofF=0.6. IAJwercnforcement costs are associated for the )ower discard nte because of the lesser Deed to maintain aatro.DJ enforcement presence.

The distn"bution or economic impacts can be detennined by fishing pattems from 1be Spring or 1990. According to landings data, a maximum of about 72 mobDe net 'VeSsels &bed on ~Stellwagen Bank, about 44 on southern Jeffreys Ledge (defined as south of 43° N.laitude) and 17 on nonhero Jeffreys Ledge in any month during the February through Juue period in 1990. In 1989, landings or cod accounted for 31 ~ of tbe value of landings for tbcse Ycssels from Stellwagen Bank, 8% of the value ofJandings from southern Jeffreys Ledge and~ of the value of landings from northern Jeffreys Ledge (Tables 8A • 8C). In 1990, landinp of cod accounted for 43% of the value of landings for mobile net vessels from SteUwagen Bank. 25% oflbe value of landings from southern Jeffreys Ledge and 37% of the value of landings from aorthem Jeftieys Ledge. Other cornmercialJy valuable species landed by mobDe net vessels in these areas~ yellowtail and winter (blackback) flounder from SteUwagen Bank, aortbem shrimp, and American plaice (dabs) and witch flounder (gray sole) from Jeffreys Ledge. .

The Regional Director will consult with the Coast Guard and fishing industty sepresentatives to detennine whether action should be taken in .U or pan of either control area. or whether there is

. substantial non..compliance with the 6" square-mesh~· In following this procedure, he could match the appropriate action to the pan.icular problem, coasidering enforcement and monitoring capabnities.

Ncwembec 12, 1990

-30-

T.ble7

Estimated Net Bc:rJefits of Possible .AdioDs UDder Measure to Protect Larp Caocentratioas of Sublepl

Codfish aa Stdlwagea BaDk ad Jef:flep LecJp

(Based on May 1990 Landings Data from Stellw~pn Bank)

Potemial benefits (Net present wzlut t1/ future cod kuulings)

Monitoring costs (30 days)

Air surveDiance HH-3 helicopters

At-sea enforcement 82-110' patrol craft

Sea sampling (6 days S 750/day)

Administrative costs (200 hr $50/hr)

Opportunity costs ( 10% t1/ forgone revenues from all spedes)

Total

Thousand DoDars

Low

s 221

S -31 (15 Ius.}

-20 (60 Ius.}

-5

-10

-78

77

s 772

s -61 (30 brs.)

-39 (12011Ts.J

-5

-10

-78

579

Ncmmbcr 12, 1990

-31-

D.IILZ lA

8tellwageD Bank LaDdiav- 1190, lloblle 11et. CJeaJ:

S'BOOSUID I'OU.RDS

I'D .. .... IIU' .. 'I'OI:&L

BP&ClZS

Cod 59 65 3'7 1063 446 16'70

Haddock 0 0 0 1 1

Whiting 0 1 1 0 0 2

Am. Plaice 1 4 • 12 25 50

Blackback fl. 54 '70 30 60 48. 262

Gray Sole 1 5 3 15 22 46

Yellowtail fl. 65 91 88 175 95 514

Other Flounder 2 3 2 4 3 14

Angler 1 0 2 13 27 43

Cusk 2 0 0 3 2 7

. Pollock ' 5 2 14 25 55

White bake 0 1 1 18 20

Other Groundfish 28 co 48 27 56 199

Dogfish, spiny • 8 8

Other finfish 29 45 94 145 239 552

Squid Unknown 11 0 11

Shrimp 20 8 2 30

Other Shellfish 3 1 0 1 0 5

".W.rAl. 2'7C 339 315 15C6 1015 3489

November 12, 1990

-S2-

~LB IB

S0\4be:nl Jef.f.rtJXa :Ledge~ 1IJO, Mobile .. t Gu.z:

'I'IIOUSARD IOUJilD8

I'D JAR ua ar .;rmr ~

8P&CDS

Cod 34 95 tO 104 188 461

Haddock 3 8 1 1 4 1'7

Whiting 30 29 31 30 43 163

Am. Plaice 5 15 19 46 26 111

Blackback fl. 12 3 3 3 2 23

Gray Sole 3 6 5 16 33 63

Yellovtail fl. 5 2 11 18 1'7 53

other Flounder 2 3 1 0 1 '7

Angler t 5 0 2 11 22

Cusk 2 t 0 0 '7 13

J Pollock 25 15 1 3 39 83

White hake 3 0 0 2 3 8

other Groundfish 10 15 24 16 25 90

Dogfish, spiny • 2 2

other finfish 1 1 0 2 5 9

Shrimp 184 90 169 13'7 580

other Shellfish 1 0 0 0 1

'l'OTAL 323 292 305 380 406 1'706

Novembc:c 12, 1990

-33-

t'ABLB ec

•oz:t.heZ"D tleff~• Ledge J.aDcU.aga 1110, llc:lblle .. t 8eaJ:

'DIOOSARD .aoHDS

ftB .... ... III.X ..,. 4J!ODJ,

8PBCI&S

Cocl 1 38 • 23 101 1,3 U6

Bacldock 0 1 1

11hit.J.ng 13 • 13

Al'n. Plaice • 5 5 11 4 25

Blackback fl. , 1 2 10

Gray Sole 2 2 5 1 10

Yellowta.il fl. 6 0 3 3 12

Other Flounder 0 • • 0

Angler 1 1 2 3 , Cua:k. 1 2 1 4

Pollock 0 0 2 11 13

White bake 0 13 3 0 16

Other Grounclfish 3 2 3 1 9

Other finfish 4 • 4

Sb:z:imp 49 103 164 16 332

'l'O:t'AL 50 166 224 1St 198 ,,2

November 12.1990

In selecting the boundary lines for the control areas, several facto:n were considered. Primarily, the areas enclose the pounds in which the Ju!enile cod a~e concentraled in lbe Sprins. At the same time, the boundaries were chosen to m.irum.ize lbe impact OD other fisheries, particularly those that occur near, but DOt coincidentally with, the fisberiea in question. For enforcement pmposes, the boundary lines, or at least cbe comers, are expressed in Latitude and Longitude, and the area enclosed is sufficiently large to be enfon:eable, aDowing for • tolerance around the margin. The boundary linesa~e sufficiently pneraUzed (contain cbe fewest DUmber of turning points) for ease of compUanc:e and enforcement.

Since fish species, and sizes within species, m very often clepth~egorized, the ideal boundary wouJd be one that is defined by a specific bottom contour. However, from a practicaJ standpoint that would~ unenforceable, especiaJiy in areas of moderate slope or where the depth is highly variable. A depth-defined boundary lllso would be unenforceable from the air. The Gnly easily enforceable boundary is one that can be expressed in tenns of latitude and longitude, or It least as running between points defaned by LatLong coordinates. It wu determined that dermins the boundary strictly in tenns of lines of Latitude and LonJitude would enclose much more area than was necessary. This meant that the lines to be selected must ran It some IDJle to the lines of latitude and longitude. This could create a naviaational burden on vessels trying to detennine if their position was within the enclosed aJea by sequiring that they continuaDy transpose infonnation from navigation equipment to a chart on which they had peviousty drawn the

... boundary lines. However, lines couesponding to individual Loran tines of position make it easy for vessels to detennine if they comply with tbe control action or dosure. The comen of the control area were thus defined by Latitude/LonJitude but were elected for their position on Loran TD lines that could be used as boundaly lines.

G. Restrictious oo small mesh while fishing ill tbe ~mesh area

~ No vessel issued a valid Multispecies pennit, except vessels employina midwater trawl par '- and vessels not having any fish aboard, may have avail8ble for immediate use my net, or any

piece of a net, not meeting the mesh size ~equ.irements, or mesh lhat is choked off while in the large mesh areas.

A net that confonns to one of the foDowins specificadons and that cannot be shown to have been in recent use is considered to be "aot ava.Dable for .immediate use":

1)

2)

3)

Nets stowed below deck;

Nets stowed and lashed down on deck;

Nets that are seemed in a manner approved by the Regional DiRctor. After nwiew and approval, the Rqiona1 Director may specify altemative manner(s) of securing nets by notice in the Federal Register;

4} Nets that are on teds and are covered and secured wkh the codend RmOVed.

-35-

•. Guidance OD secudDi DetS

A net is considered to be stored below deck if it is located below the mam wOJking deck from which the net is deployed md mrieved. Tow.in& wires (any wha includina the "'ea• wires), must be detached from the aet.

A net is considered to be stowed and lashed down oa deck if il is faD folded (flaked) and bound around its circumference md aecwely fastened to the deck or the nil of tbe 'leiSeL 'The towing wires (any wiles including the "lea• wires) also must be detached from tbe aet.

A net on a reel is considered to be •stowed md lashed dowa on deck• oaly if the entire surface of the net on the reel is eovered with canvas or similar materiallhat is leCWely bound, the towing wires (any wires including the "'ea• wires) .e detached fiom the aet, and the codend Js removed from the net and ltored below deck.

llatioDale

This measure is designed to lllow vessels the maximum flexibility to IW.itch between small and large mesh fisheries in response to changing weather cooditioDs, fish avaDabDity 01 fish prices whDe establisiUng reasonable safeguards qainst the use of amatl mesh ae-whete ~ited. Requiring aU vessels to cany only large mesh while fishing in the replaced mesh area wDl not significantly improve the enf'orc::eabDity of mesh regulations because most mesh 'riolations involve the use of codend liners and DOt the use of a whole smaD mesh aet. Vessels can ltDl circumvent mesh regulations by using Jarae mesh in tbe fonn of eldler double or ~e liners if they intend to violate mesh regulations, despite my pohibitions placed on the canyinJ of amaD mesh FU'· Small mesh sear such IS snver bake Dets lie very expensive and can cost IS much IS $10,000.

· ~·Vessels carrying such gear are unlikely to risk conf'"ISCition of IUCh a act by asin.l il in violarion of mesh tegulations when they can use relatively cheap liners (costiD& Jess than $200 worth of labor and materials) that ue mucb more difficult to detect. .

The purpose of the stricter mesh regulations in the a.empted fisheries program is to conttol small mesh fJSIUng th~t is allowed within the JqU!ated mesh area, DOt to prevent vessels from seeking small mesh flshing opportunities outside the 11ea. Gulf of Maine vessels not participating in the exempted fiSheries program still have the option of carrying smaU mesh gear to fish outside the re,Wated mesh area. Jn the Cultivator Shoal sDver hake fishery, these 'VeSsels are DOt prohibited from carrying both large and small mesh .ooard because its JUles provide adequate controls on small mesh fishing.

Two factors that lessen the need for tbe IDII'Jhlal improvement in the enforceability of mesh agulations provided by a one-mesfl..on..board agulation are significantly Jaricr fines for eerious, fust-time violations of mesh regulations, llld the opportunity to use square mesh instead of diamond mesh. In February 1990, the maximum peDalty for a ICriou.s, first-time Yiolation of mesh aguJations was increased from $2,500 to $20,()0(). About this time, wssels fisiUng ~y for flounder species in Sootbem New England and on the southwest patt ofOecqes Bank staned using square mesh codends. 1be use of square mesh codends is known to increase peady the catch of small flounders. PJe1iminaly infonnation suggests that a 5-t/2• ~mesh

codend may have rouahJy the same flatfiSh selectivity characteristics as a s- diamond mesh code.nd (it increases the catch of small flatfish compared to a 5-tn." diamond mesh codend). In public bearings, fisbennen have stated that the combination of the ~atly increased penalties for mesh violations and the pea!er reaention of flatfiSh by square mesb codends has eveRly nduced the use of and the incenuve for using linen Jn both mpJated and 1IDI'egulated mesh lieU.

Bcooomic considenllioDs

In 1987 and 1988, there were 56 vessels from Rhode Island pons that fished in the large mesh area but depended on amaD mesh fishins for IDOie than 4K ofdieir JeVenues. Fifty ofdlese

· depended on amall mesh ~es for more than 5K of their poss JeVenue IDd 26 for more than 60% of their poss revenue. lnlonnation from tbe commercial fisheries data base, which~ be missing some infonnation on split frips, shows that aeven boats from Rhode Island ports .pur fishing Uips between catchins egutated species in the large mesh ~~~e~. and small mesh~

· elsewhere. Fishennen from Provinceto1m ad other inshore fisheJmen lOUth of Cape COd have also stated that they need the flexibility of canying different mesh size Dets aboard tbe.ir ft~Sels to fish in different areas.

A prohibition against canying sma1l mesh aboard while a wssel is fishing in the large mesh area (an alternative to the proposed measure) would force a vessel to choose wbetber to direct its fishing on eithe.r larse or llnall mesh species before it lefi pon. The wasel would DOt have the

~ flexibility to sespond to chaJlaingweather conditions, fish avaDability or fish prices once it had left the dock. Switching from a Jarae mesh fishery in the ~egutated mesh mea to aiiDill mesh fishery in an unregulated mesh uea, would require a vessel to travel back to ill bomepon to IWitch aets and to go around the ~egulated mesh IIIU when traveling to fishin& pounds lOUth of the repilated mesh area. The additional steaminstime would impose additional costs and additional aposure to bad weather, a safety hazard, on vessels making the switch between laqe and IIDID mesh fishing .

. These vessels also would be fon:ed to remove small mesh par entirely to I'Witch to ala.!Je mesh .~ fishery. Small mesh nets designed to catch sDver hake 1re very large .ad leqUire JeVe.ral hours of

:. labor to move between a truck and a vessel. The additional storaae costs lbat would be Jmposed by a •one-mesh-on-board" requirement are estimated to be $120- 240 per year per vessel.

The proposed meas~m is a darification of the aistina mplations IDd is DOt a;pected to • impose any additional costs on fishins operations.

November 12.1990

-37-

H. Additional IDe8SIIIa lor lbc IOG1Ixm New Bng1md Jdlowtail Sormder closure IRA {Fiprc 7)

a) The entire Soutbem New England ydlowtaD dosure area would close an March 1 (cwrently the J)alt west of710]()' doses on .April I). The dosu.re would proJu,it aD commercial fiShing aear that can catch yeUoWtail. Such aear includes bollom tending mobile net gear and scatlop dredges. It does DOt include IU.If clam dredges, lobster aear or hook-and-line gear.

b) \Vhen the closure is not in effect, there would be a 5-1/2" minimum mesh regulation In . this area. The minimum mesh size would 1ppl1 ~ 15 meshes from the end of the net in trawl nets and to aD mesh in aillnets. Vessels fishing with mesh smaller than lbe yellowtail mesh size may not have IJlY yeDowtailstored below deck.- 011 deck In baskets~ 'totes or other containers. Vessels with yeDowtaD and smaD mesh aboard must follow the replationa pertaming to lbe cmylng of small mesh while in tbe Regulated Mesh Area.

Radonale

1he purpose of this measure is to enable the plan to ICbieve its ob~ve lor Soathem New · England and Mid-Atlantic yeDowtaD flounder. 1bis objective is to mamtain the stock 10 that it can · replace itself over the long-term. The target spawning stock biomass~ recruit levelaeeded to

achieve this objective is 20% of the theotetical maximum spawning stOck biomass per teendt. The Council's Technical Monitoring Group (TMG) has indicated that abe plan's manapment objectives for this stock are DOt being met.

Biological impacts "' ,_, __

CurTent percentage of Maximum Spawning Potential (~SP) for Southern New England yeUov.1ail is estimated to be 5.2%. The froposal is expected to Jncrase 'IIMSP to a level ranging · from 5.97~ to 6.56., (Tables 9Aic 9B. This would be a 15'11 to 27'11 improvement In lp&wn.ing stock biomass for tbis::-stoct. IDcreases in lona-temtlandings are expected to range from 5~ to 7CJ, in the third year after1mplementation, ap to annge of 1a to 18tJ; ln tbe tenth year (under assumptions of constant recruitment and fisbing JDOJtallty.) Tbe deaease In discaids wDl ange from 3% to 7«Jt over the long tenn despite the increases in laudinp and stock size.

The above estimates assume that fishmnen wm use either a 5-ltr aqaare or a 5-1/2" diamond mesh, while the current effective mesh size, d:le mesh aize In ICtUal use, is 4" diamond mesh. The Council staff estimates that lbe increases in landings and spa~ stock biomass wm be at the low end of the ranges mentioned above because 1be effective mesh me wD.I be closer to S" than to S-112" (diamond mesh). The effecdve mesh size is expected to be about 5" (diamond mesh) because fJShennen may use either square or diamond mesh with a minimum 5-1/2" inside, stretched, diagonal measurement. For flatfish the 5-1/2" square mesh is tboaafu to have about the same retention characteristics as 5" diamond mesh. 1he ability of square mesh to catch mo~ small flatfish than diamond mesh of the same size wm aure·m incentive for fishermen to cboose square rather than ltiamond mesh when targeting small yeJJ.owtaD.. 1his view has been ll'lppOitCd by comments from fishermen at Jeeent public meetings.

November 12,1990

• . 71°

; =

November 12, 1990

'!'able M

Sout.hen ... &ag1aucl Tell.owtaJ.l rloaDd4J.: 5.0• ..... ill Cloaecl kea, JuD-reb

4 • lleah Out.alcle Cloaecl &J:ea

Spav:n.ing ••~:cent DlacaZ'd J.aftdlnga • 'rear Stock -· cat) cat) Clump (at.)

---------~--------------------------------------------%nlt.la1 3921.1 5.19 206'7.1 2328.0 o.oo 1 3154.1 5.23 1158.0 2310.3 -0.'77 2 4028.9 5·.33 2014.0 2310.3 -o • .,, 3 4225.6 5.59 2014.0 2457.0 5.25 4 4374.4 5.78 2014.0 2559.2 1.03 5 4451.6 5.89 2014.0 2611.9 10.87 6 4487.7 5.93 2014.0 2636.2 11.69 '7 4503.5 5.16 2014.0 2646.9 12.05 8 4510.2 5.96 2014.0 2651.3 12.20 • 4512.9 5.17 2014.0 2653.2 12.26

10 4514.0 5.9'7 2014.0 2653.9 12.28

Final 4514.7 5.97 2014.0 2654.4 12.30

-----------------------~------------------~---------Aas\111\e F • 1.0, without cliaplacement. of effort t'Z'OIIl cloaed a~:ea du~:ing cloauze pet:iod.

'l'able JB

80utben ... Bnglaud TeUowtaJ.l r1oadezo 5. 5• lleah b CloaecS Al:ea, .JD•reb

4• Meah Ou.talde Cloaed &J:ea

Spav:n.iftg •• ~:Cent DiacaZ'd .LandiDp • Year Stock IISr c-t) CatJ Cbange (lilt)

-----------------------------~--~-~-----~-----lnit:i.al 3921.9 5.19 2067.8 2328.0 o.oo 1 3984.6 5.27 1873.'7 2281.4 -2.04 2 4079.7 5.39 1917.9 2281.4 -2.04 3 4409.5 5.83 1t17.9 2497.1 6.'77 4 4687.6 6.20 1917.9 2682.2 13.20 5 4836.3 6.40 191'7.9 2782.3 16.33 6 4!J06.5 6.49 1917.9 282!J.5 1'7.'72 7 4937.6 6.53 1917.9 2850.3 18.32 8 4950.7 6.55 1917.9 2859.0 18.57 9 4956.1 6.55 1911.9 2862.6 18.68

10 4958.3 6.56 1917.9 2864.1 18.72

Final 49S!J. 7 6.56 1917.9 2865.0 18.'74

----------~~----------------------------------------.&seume F • 1.0, without diep1acement oE efEort fZ'OIIl cloaed a~:ea du~:ing c1oaure pezoiod.

. -40-

Bconomic coasideratioas

The Economic lr. ResuJatorr Impact Analyses in Section m summarizes the impacts of chis measwe on landinss. avenues, pnces ind employment.

Costs: The major negative economic impacts of the~ action will be: 1). abort-cenn loss in landings of yeDowtaillnd other speciea caught wiih ydlowtail; and 2) the temporary loss of fishin& pounds to poundf'ash lllld .C.U<w vessels in the westem pan of the 11ea (west of 71030') caused by the chanse in the closure .ltal'lini date from April! to Mardll for this part of the aru..

Shon-term losses ofyeDowtail Jandinp that would be caused by the mesh-size nqukement are estimated to ranse from 1.5 to 3.6~ in the first two yem after the~ cbanse. Wilh 1be 1..5~ loSs being the most likely. An examination of the ICleotion characteristics of other apecles subject to minimum Size zesuJations IUIIest that the proposed mcrease in mesh size mo Will Dot cause fisbennen to suffer a major advene Impact. Tlie legal me fish l\rtlined by 1be mesh size requbed under this proposal wm ranae from 41 to 61 ~ for cod. 2:1 to~ for winter Sounder (black back) and 6S to 8~ for American plaice (dab). The JUaber mention levels DOled above are more likely to occur because fisbennen may IUbstitute lqU8Ie mesh for diamond mesh codends.

The proposed increase in mesh size wm DOt affect vessels catchins primarily anaD-mesh species such as whiting (silver hake), Jed bake and loligo -.ukf because these vessels are be

· exempted from the measure if they do DOt have any yeDowtaD on board (in containers or below deck). For reference purposes. all Jandinss and value-of-landings data are IUIDJDirized in Tables 9A & 9B for 1987--89.

The change of the startins date from April I to March 1 for the closme in western part of the area (west of 71 °30') also is not expected to fiave a significant negative sbort-1em1 impact on either groundfish or scallop vesseJs. Both poundf'ash mel scaUop stocks m Ibis area are thought to

.~be harvested at or in excess of nstainabJe n.tes (StlllllS of the Fishlries Resources Off the Northeastern United States for 1989. NMFS). An early dosure of the westem pan of the area wouJd increase needed protection of both IIDI1l yellowtail flou.nder and Atlantic sea scaUops, as well as other Un.ponant finfish species.

In the period 1987 through 1989, the ex-vessel value of March labdinp in the westem part of this area by sroundfish vessels ranged from a low of S 0.87 million in 1989 to a hi&h of$ 1.61 million in 1988 (Table lOB). The number of poundfish vessels nnpd from a low of 12 to a JUsh of 19 in the same years (Table 13). 1be value of landings by ICillop vessels nnpd from a low of S S.8 million m 1989 to a high of S 16.8 mDlion in 1987 (Table liB). 1be DWDber of ICallop vessels ransed from a low ollS to a hJ&b of 37 m the aame JCilS (Table 13).

Benefits: As mentioned above, the long-tam increase in Jellowtail lancJinp is !:'t*!ed to range from s to 7'1> in the third year after Implementation to • ranae of 12 to 1 KID the 1eDth year after implementation of the proposed measure. Ex-vesieiJUenues from yellowtail would increase from 3.7 to 5.89&. Smaller, bu(positive net benefits can be apected in tams of the measure's impacts on other species subject to minimum size agulations such as cod, winter flounder (blackback); American plaice (dab) aod summer Sounder (fluke). Net positive impacu of mcreases m mesh size to S-lfl" have been docmnellted m the 0Jiaina1 plan document and IUbsequent amendments.

November 12. 1990

-t1-

~-:,

Distribution of impacts

The fishing activities that would be affected by lbe proposed action ~ IUI1'UJW'ized Jn Tables 9- 13. The increase Jn mesh size under tbe proposed action would~ affect arawl vessels from New Bedford, Point Judith IU1d other RhOde Island~. IUldldontaU Ed other Long Island pons (Table 12). Based OD historical data, tbe chanie oftbe starting date from April 1 to March 1 for the dosure in western part of the ~would affect primarilyscallopers from New Bedford and uawlers primarily frOm Point Judith (Tible 13).

S'able fA

Landings ~rca the Southern ••• b91anct Ze11owt:ail &Z'ea ('rhousand •ouncts)

1987 1988 1989 4J'0"1'.AL

SUM • SUM • SUM • SUM • Cod 267 12 887 tO 1,040 t7 2,194 100 Haddock 3 35 3 34 3 31 10 100 Sil-ver Bake 5,681 t4 2,912 23 t,215 33 12,809 100 Am. Pl.aice 3 27 7 54 3 20 13 100 Fl.uke 1,385 39 1,390 39 756 21 3,531 100 Blackback fl.. 1,117 46 715 29 609 25 2,440 100 Yellowtail fl. 1,413 38 772 21 1,t90 41 3;675 100 Windowpane fl. 317 28 363 32 447 40 1,128 100

.. Red hake 477 44 403 37 216 20 1,097 100 Scup 954 49 524 27 476 24 1,955 100 Herring 3 5 45 83 6 12 54 100 Butterfiah 831 36 513 22 985 42 2,335 100 Mackerel. 65 16 205 so 138 34 408 100 Weakfish 5 33 1 4 9 63 15 100 Other fish 289 35 266 32 278 33 832 100 Sea Scallops 30 63 13 27 5 10 47 100 Loligo Sqilid 2,734 25 4,393 41 3,625 34 10,752 100 Squid-Illex 6 63 4 37 • • 10 100 Squid Onknown 0 7 4 93 . • 4 100 Lobster 56 24 89 39 83 36 229 100

TOTAL 15,642 36 13,510 31 14,385 33 43,537 100

November 12, 1990

~1•.,.

Value of LancliDgs f~ca tbe 8outbem •e• &Dgl.and Yellowtail area (ftounDcl Dol.lan)

1187 U88 1181 S'Ol'AJ.

8UH • 8UH • 8UM • 8UH • Cod 250 15 ,24 38 .,,2 47 1_,,3, 100 Haddock 4 42 2 25 3 33 10 100 Silver llaJte 1,464 50 ,11 21 152 21 2,134 100 Am. llaice 5 37 5 42 3 22 13 100 !'luke 1,134 40 1,,51 36 1,120 24 4,,13 100 Blackback fl. 1,041 45 '50 28 ,26 27 2,31' 100 Yellowtail fl. 1,711 40 181 20 1,'707 40 4,307 100 Windowpane fl. 1,5 30 175 31 211 31 5,0 100

·Red bake 14 46 73 40 27 15 113 100 Scup 716 51 411 27 355 23 1,570 100 Herring 1 10 3 54 2 3' 5 100 Butterfish 377 34 243 22 419 45 1,119 100 Mackerel 9 10 59 '2 27 29 15 100 Weakfish 5 32 0 3 11 '5 17 100 Other fish 474 37 421 33 386 30 1,281 100 Sea Scallops 127 '0 '1 29 23 11 210 100 Loligo Squid 1,215 27 1,190 44 1,210 29 4,496 100 Squid-Illex 1 29 1 71 • 2 100 Squid Unknown 0 4 2 96 • . 2 100 Lobster 182 26 265 31 251 3' ,18 100

!'OTAL 9,753 37 8,153 31 8,162 31 26,068 100

Ncmmber 12, 1990

S'able lOA March J.andJ.oga ~rca Weet.ern Part ot' tile Tellowtall area

(ftouePCI l'ow:ula)

cn:.u.-otter uawl

198'7 1t88 1tl9 S'otal

8tJM • 8'011 • SUM • 8UM • Cod 4 5 4 1 16 10 24 4 Haddock 0 0 . . . . 0 0 Silver hake 9 11 159 4'7 16 56 254 44 Fluke '7 8 23 '7 2 1 31 5 Blackback t'l. 10 12 19 6 9 6 38 ., Yellowtail t'l. 22 2'7 17 5 ., 5 46 • Windowpane t'l. 15 18 21 6 I 5 44 I Red bake 1 2 '76 22 • '78 13 Scup 0 0 0 0 • .. . 1 0 Herring 1 1 • . 4 2 4 1 Butterfiah 2 2 4 1 ' 1 Mackerel 1 1 • • 1 0 Weakfish 0 0 . . . • 0 0 Other Finfish 2 3 3 1 1 1 6 1 Loligo Squid '7 9 13 4 21 14 42 '7

'.l'otal 81 100 340 100 154 100 575 100

S'able lOB Value of March Lanc!inga from Western Pert ot' the Yellowtail kea

(!'houeand Dol lara)

~tertnwl

1987 1988 1989 S'ot.al

8'0M • 8UM • 8tiM • 80M • Cod 51 ' 43 3 140 16 235 ., Bad dock 0 0 . - • .. 0 0 Silver hake 54· 6 318 24 310 36 "151 22 Fluke 132 15 450 21 35 4 611 11 Blackback t'l. 137 15 206 13 119 14 461 14 Yellowtail t'l. 333 3'7 193 12 115 13 6t1 19 W.inc!owpane ~1. It , "13 5 37 4 194 • llecl hake 5 1 168 10 - 1'73 5 Scup 4 0 4 0 • • • 0 Berring 1 0 • • 13 2 15 0 But.t.erfiah 19 2 11 ·1 •

,., 1 Mackerel 2 0 • • · . 2 • Wea.Jtfiab 0 0 . • • • 0 • Ot.ber Finfiah 42 5 ,. 2 11 1 . ., 3 Lollgo Squid. 26 3 35. 2 to 10 151 4

~1 191 100 1,113 100 169 100 3,3'73 100

November 12.1990

!.'able 11&

Hazch Lanc:linga ~zca Weatezra ••r:t o~ the Tellowtail &zoea (!'houaaml .OUDda)

. GUa•Scallop ckedge

1987 1988 1t89 '.r«*al

SUM ' 8'DM ' II1:IC .,

II1:IC ' Cod. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Am.. Plaice 0 0 • . • • 0 0 Fluke 2 0 2 1 1 1 5 1 Blackback ~1. 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 Yellowtail fl. 8 2 • 3 0 0 13 2 Windowpane fl. 2 0 3 2 0 0 5 1 Ot.hez Finfish 28 7 1. 8 12 7 53 7 Sea Scal.lopa 381 to 147 86 153 t2 fi81 to

Total 422 100 172 100 166 100 760 100

'-'able 118

'Value of Mazch LaDd.i.Dp t'I:'CIIII westerD •ar:t o~ tbe Tellawta.U azea (S'bouaDcl Dol.lu:a)

GEAR•Scallop dredge

1'ZAJl 87 88 89 '-'Ot.al

SUM ' SUM ' SUM ' SUM ' Cod 2 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 Am. Plaice 1 0 . . • • 1 0 Fluke 26 0 22 0 12 0 co 0 Black.back £1. t 0 5 0 2 0 16 0 l'ellowtail fl. 123 1 58 1 1 0 183 1 Windowpane fl. :19 0 16 0 1 0 36 0 Ot.hez Finfish 491 3 224 ... 133 2 .... 3 Sea Scallops 16,128 96 5,615 t5 5,653 97 27,397 t6

'l"otal 16,799 100 5,942 100 5,803 100 28,543 100

Ncmmbc:l' 12, 1990

.h .

'l'eble 12

Rumber Veaaela in Pia'b!.Dg in t.be aD 'l'ellowta11 &na- &11 '1'-.z

lt8'7 1188 lt8t ~al PORT ME - Ot.bez • 3 1 • lfew Beclford 1'7 60 J3 220 JG - -Ot.ber • . 2 5 '7 Rew Jezaey 1 I '7 16 IIY - Ot.ber 12 • 2 23 Greenport 3 1 1 5 Montauk 11 ., 2 20 IU - Ot.ber 1 5 3 • Rewport 29 31 28 88 Pt. Juclitb '76 , .. ., .. 224 Vizginia 3 • 3

Total 203 200 216 61t

'hble 13 ~z Veaael• Pi•billg' in tile Weaten •art

of' tbe 'Xellowtail ana .lA llazcb

------------ G&Aa-Scallop dredge ----------------

198'7 1988 1989 ~al PO aT Rev Bedford 30 11 1'7 58 Rev Jezsey • 3 • '7 New 'fork • 1 1 Rewport 3 • • 3

Total 3'7 15 1'7 ,. ---~~-------~-- ~ter tzavl ~~-~~-

198'7 1988 1989 2'otal POaT Rev Jezaey . 3 • 3 Greenport 1 . • 1 Montauk 3 . 3 Bampton Bay • • 1 1 Revport 1 . 1 2 ft. hcSith 10 13 10 33

Total 12 19 12 43

..

m. ECONOMIC ct RBGt.Jl.ATORY IMPACT ANALYSBS

The economic impact analysis in the first aubsection below evaluates the only two proposed . measures (D and H) that can be quantified in the multispecies bioeconomic simulation model. AJl the measures ue briefly listed below:

A. Modifications to the ExeJD.Pled F.isberles P.rogram: Adds reponina JeqUUements ao economic impact beyond additional tiun:Jen bows;

B. Gear Modifications to Reduce Bycatch in the Northern Shrimp Fiabery: 1his ila fnmewodt measure. An economic impact ailalysis wDI be completed aJons wilh any par modifications that IW proposed in the 1\atwe;

C. Include whiting (silver bate), ted bake and ocean pout iD the muldspecies manapment unit; No economic impact except for those calculated for measureD;

D. Establish a 2·1/2" minimum codend mesh lize for tbe mixed trawl fishery; Economic impact analysis incJuded in this aection. .

E. Owtge the designation of the recent experimental fishery for silver hake in the CaJtivator Shoal area to the "CaJtivator Shoal whiting fishery"; No economic Jmpact; ao iDitial changes proposed;

F. Measures to Protect SmaD Fish: These measwu cdy will be ~mented iflhey are triggered by high discards of small yellowtail flounder or codfish. The economic costs and benefits calculated along wilh the description of the measures are hypothetical examples and therefore their results are DOt included iD the economic mel RJU).atory impact impact analysis;

.0. Restrictions on small mesh while fishinJ in the R.eptated Mesh Ma: Oarification of existing regulations -no economic impacts;

• H. Additional measu~s for the Southern New England Je]lowtail flOUDder closure mea: Economic impact analysis included m this lection.

The economic impact analysis shows the JeSUits in terms of present Yl1ues of both proposal D and H. separately and combined Because there are high and low nnges associated with die hnpacts of the proposed measures for the Southern New England closed uea (H),Ibere are five aeparate possible outcomes. 1bc second subsection ~lains the benefits, costs •. IDCI benefit-cost concJusion for each measure and their combination. This leCdon also Jacludes the RlR./R.FA which lhows the first year impJementation costs of the llle8SUIU.

Eccmomic impact 8D81ysis

Management Options for Analysis: Tbe biological impact analysis estimates expected changes in landings for two (silver bake IDd yeUowtail).oflhe eleven teplated species, RSUiting &om changes in mesh regulations. Expected landings include lbe initial losses mel ~ent gains .in the landed weight from mtricting the catch to Jaraer size fish, but cJo DOC include the expected increases from eDhanced recnai1ment and the~ pin in stock biomass.

Ncm:mbez 12, 1990

-41-

The economic analysis from 1he FMP has~ c:laanaed zelative to each of the Dine proposals as follows:

1. Minimum Mesh Size: SmaU mesh fisheries for whiting, red bake lnd other amaJ1 meah species in the multi.s~ management unit must use a 2-1/2" codend (80 meshes from the end of the net) mesh. The biological analysis inco!pOI'ates this increase with the effective increase in the mesh size, and dais is mflectecf iD the economic malyais.

2. Minimum Mesh Sizes: YeUowtaD must be caught with 5-1/2" mesh in the SNE dosed area during· the time when the dosuze ia DOt in effect (June throUp Febnwy). Depending whether fishennen use diamond or llqUile mesh. tbc measure has a nnge of benefits (high IDd low). ·

No action· the baseline, Is l:imPJy the cunent zegulatlons with ao change. 1he mesh sizes associated with the· other lltematives JeSuit in benefits from increases in Jie)d-per·recruit for lilver hake and yellowtail flounder, and decrease losses from discardin& of aadenizecl fish.

Results: The baseline aepments the original fMP as amended. Tbe two proposed meuures (D &: H) increase minimum mesh sizes for sDver hake md ycDowtail. Tbe .natjsis includes aD multispedes finfish except ocean pout, the exempted species except dogfish, aqukl. .IDd aortbem sbrimp, and other species such IS summer flounder md cusk. The increase in mesh size cbanaes landings of whidna and ycDowtail. For each other species, the averaae 1987-89landina level Js held constant over the ten--year period because average m::ruicmem IDd fisbiDa mor&ality .e assumed to be constant at cwrent levels.

· The expected changes in landinas of other~ from the increased mesh lize in these fisheries are small enough that they are DOt estimated m the biological model; bowever,landinp of orher species are included in the economic impact IDilysis because they affect the system of price equations.

·' A groundflSh demand model is used to estimate prices lnd avenues associated with the expected landings for each option during the ten-year period 1991-2000. Tbe method of estimating the demand model is described in Wana (1984). Dependeut variables in the price equations (inverse demand equations) are landings of the species mep.tioned above, landings of the other economically related species, impons of economicalfy n1ated species,~ income, general price movements, lqged prices, and seasonal factors. lmpons of each species or Jl'OUP are constant at 1987 levels. Both COIJSilJDer income and the pueraJ price index projections ase ARlMA time-series models. Lqged ~is the ~cted price from the previous period. The cost/benefit analysis, based on these sunulations, mcludes Only the expected benefits from increases yieJd--per-JeCI'Ilit, • opposed to increases in RC~Uitme.nt. Costa are tbe ·fcqone zevenues in the initial years.

Table 14 shows the discounted cash flows for the IIDctinp ofzeptated species, tbe subtotal of the regulated species, lhe subtotal of the exempted species, IDd the OVCI81l total. Revenues are discounted at lK. The baseline case is aponed' in thousand doDars, whereas the table shows. the impacts of the other alternatives in aenns of changes (in $1,000&) from the baseline. Ozeater net benefits are expected from increases in mesh size for yellowtail, Measure Hand Measures D ct H combined, but DOt flom M.eas&rc D alone. The estimated benefits of the Jnferred altemative, Measures D a: H combinecl, nnge from $1336 million to $3.208 mi1.1ioD more 1ban tbc baseline case ($ 1.2 billion) over the ten-year period because of the incJease in yield per ftCIUit of yellowtail flounder.

Navember 12, 1990

1MLI "

lclllplrfiOft ef .,..,..,. leWI'III 1t..- CIUIOOJ WP1·~ 'l'llownJ loliiM'S IIIAII'Ited 11t -

Alltf..-t• ....... " •

110 • AIUIE I IDUII ACT lOll I·VI" .IN 1-'1/1" ... II M CI.IID lilA .............

&.MIIMGE II'NIIAIGI ........ .... tAIGI

IKC:IIS IICUIGI 'I ICMIIGt 'I DAIGI • -- • .... 'I

aiD ""·'" • ••• •tl -a.o -It .... •tl .... -11 ... .. lllllfi•G 151,576 •1,965 •J.I I ... I 1.0 ...... •I .I ..... •1.1

UDOOCK 155,069 • ••• •16 -a.o •IS .... -16 .... ... .... I'CILLDCC "'·"' • ••• ..,., -41.1 .. .. .~ ..,., ...... .. ... .. 111.LOIII AU. $101,947 • ••• , .. ,. 1.7 .. ~ 1.1 1;na .. ., .. ~ 1.1

~OJIC)£RS 1377,302 0 ••• •195 -a.1 -162 ..... .... .... 1 -162 ... 1

IIDFISII R7,711 I ••• .. ., -a.o •'10 .... . ., .... •'10 ..... IUI•fDTAL 1862,100 •1,f65 -o.z 1.190 1.4 .... 1.6 t.w 1.1 J,JICo u

.IIIMPT 1101,153 14 1.0 I 1.0 I 1.1 14 ... • 1.0

TOTAL 11,115,11! •1,930 •O.Z 1,156 1.1 ··- .. , , ... .. , 1,. I.J

..

Socio-cultural impact.nalysis

The most striking and quantirlllble impacts of the manqement options are on employment. A coefficient that computes employment based on ex-vessel avenues was derived thmup input-outputlnllysis. The direct, indirect and mduced employment effects are measmed in total man-years. .

Both of the proposed measures initiaDy reduce employment (~ee Table 15.) 1be aize ofdds mtuetion ranges from 210 55 jobs lost (0.1 'IJ to 0.6,. oltotal employment). Twenty-eeven percent, or 1 to 16, of the jobs are in the harvesting sector (dbect effect). After the firsr ,artbere u a net gain over the jobs lost the previous year, although scm a loss from tbe.baseUne 1IDtiJ about year four. Employment fuUy recovers by year four for cbe combination of the two measures, md remains positive for the JeSt of the ten year period aladve to the baseline. In year 10 • ..,toyment is from 26 to 44 man-years pater than in die baseline case. limployment does DOl fully ecover for MeasureD alone within the tea year period.

Ratiooale for lldopdoD • ADatysJs of cas~~ a beae&s

This section describes tbe measures in tams of their costs, benefits, md benefit-cost conclusion. The economic benefits and costs wem estimated wilh tbe bioeconomic above model. Enforcement costs in tenns of airaaft and cutter days in 111 expanded large mesh area are unspecified. Administrative and monitoring costs are DOt apected to chanp. .

Benefits: Increased yield per JeCnJit for yellowtailllld silver hake; Net pleiCDt ftlue (NPV) over ten years nnges frOm $1.3 mDiion to $3.2 million for tbe combined measures.

Table 15

Change in 'l'otal %1\d.uatzy-wid.e bvenuea 6 Bmploptent for the Firat Year of laplementation (1991)

$!SILL ION .CIWIGJ: •n.CJ:NT liM-DARB CBANGZ

Baseline 149.858 o.o o.o 0

Measure D 149.057 -o.8oo -o.s -so

Measu;re B (low) 149.827 -0.031 o.o - 2 (high) 149.777 -o.oeo -0.1 -5

*Combined (low) 148.027 -0.831 -o.• -51 (high) 148.977 -o.8eo -o.s -ss

*Council preferred. option.

November 12, 1990

Oms: Short-tenn loss in landings Yalued If $31,000 to $80,000 for yeDowtail act $800,000 for silver hake the fint year.

Benefit-cost coodusion: NPV of Measure H .Sone is positive; the NPV ofMeasure D atone is negative; the NPV of the combination of measwes is positive ($1.3 to $3.2 million). Administrative costs ~ uncbanged. .

. . .

1bis section provides tbe lnfonnation aecessll)' for the Secmary of Commerce to add.less the requiremems ofEitecutive Order 122911Dd the Replaror,y Ruibility Act. The~ and aeed for management is described in the Introduction and in the rationale for each measure. The alternative management me&s11la and enforcement costs of the rejulldory action are descn"bed in the description of the proposed measures. 1he c aDd social impact analysis of these alternatives is included In this aection and is I11IIIIJ1atized below. Other elements of the Regulatory Impact Review and the Regulatory Flexibility Act are also included below.

RegulatOI)' 'Impact Review

1be economic impact IDilysis above showslhat ~ H IDd the combination of Measure D & H produce positive cliscounted cash Bows over the ten year~ when compared to a continuation of the current program; a $1.3 to $3.2 mil1ioD inaase iD the present Yalue of ex-vesselsevenues. Only Meas01e D .Sone, the 2-1/2" minimurp mesh size, has aeaative NPV ( -$1.1 million). Under both measures, tepantely and combiDed, the yeDowtailiDd ailYer hake

. f"ISheries will initially suffer a loss m effi~; however, onc:c • higher level oflmdings is ~ reached (in about four years), all vessels DOW m the fishery wDl be able to operate more efficiently

(assuming no new entry), consumers wiD benefit from higher sustained catches, and lhoreside ,. industries dependent on theses species will enjoy increased product flow. Tbese results primarily ·

are due to the increases in minimum mesh sizes, which improve yield per JeCJUit and Rduce discards of sub-leaaJ or unnwtetable fish. 1be annual cost for this loftg-tm:m improvement is pearest during the first year, from $831,000 to $880,000, or a 0.1 tJ loss in ex-Yessel n:ve.nues. These initial losses decline each au~ year an.til the beDefits ICa'Ue du.rina the fourth year.

Costs are measured in teans of foteaone revenues, ISSUlDing that operating costs nmain unchanged and that vessels are anabte to JedUect their fishiDg effort to altemative filherlel.

Based upon the economic iaq)act analysis above, which estimated Jona~ ~in terms of ten-year present Yalues, Ibis section concentrates an the first year changes in ex-.euet revenues. Losses are the greatest m the first year. The expected revenues, and dedved total employment impacts, for 1991 ue shown m Table 15:

The prefemd option in canu of the lowest amount of first year costs is No Action (the baseline case). Measure H atone is the preferred option when CDDSiderin& the total impacts for the ten year period. This ~bas pater biological benefits in terms of rpawaing poteiitial, Jield per recruit, and protection from stock co11apse for yellowtail.

. Ncm:mbe:r 12, 1990

"' ... -~ . '

-51-

Employment impacts vary cliredly with ex-vessel nwenues mel include impacts on fisbennen. processing employees, Jumpers, etc .. end even lhe induced employment impacts mullins from changes in consumption patterns (see 71.3, Socio-Cultural Jmpact AnaJrsis of the FMP). Percent changes in expected employment IDd total a-vessel revenues are identical, because ~Joyme.nt is calculated as a function of revenues. Models for final consumptioD demand (Jetai1 pnce) a1e unavailable, but usins a simple mark--up relationship, the changes iD consumer costs are estimated to be about the saine for aD altematives. The a-vessel price model used in Ibis .Wysis contains consumer income, imports, and lhe consumer price index, which a~e aenerally associated with mail demand, as expfanatol)' variables. Analjais of harvesting industry profits is DOt fOSsible because models that determine costs as a function of cbanses Jn landinss (the primaty impaCt of

·this program) are not avaDabte. Models which incorporate costs as a percentaae of pou JeVeDUe will aot show percent cbanaes different from those for nweaue.

There currently are ao sipificant a:porta of Rplated fish~~ products, and tbe amount of change in landinss for any altemadve fs DOt expected to affect tbe Jmpolt matket pudy (see 7B7, Assessment and Specification of DAH. DAP, 1VP, mel TALF'f', in the PMP). DlanJes in landings, prices, and revenues from the proposed 1l18118Jemenl posnunme DOl expected to have

- different effects on vessels of different sizes; however, yellowtail and sBver hake trawlen wD1 be the most severely affected, Josins 0.6% of their catch durinf lhe first -,ear. Individual vessels may be differentially affected, but the available data are insufficlCJlt to estimate those impacu. Tbe prop<!sed measures are expected to affect all asen equaDy. to Dot hatm anyone '1 competitive pos1tion, and to promote investment and innovation Ja IIKR ldecdve par 1Jpel.

Compliance costs and ..,niDI burdens me anchanpd and identical for all user poups. The cost of new, larger-size nets is DOt a signiiiCII'lt additional burden on tbe industry. because 5-1/2" ~sh codends are used by many vessels fishin& Jn the replated mesh area md IOIDetimes with a .~end liner in unreJUlated mesh meas. For the 2-1/2" minimum mesh size there ila orte·year phase iriperiod before lhe minimum mesh is JeQU.Ired tbroupout tbe net ander Measure D. Many ves~s already use 2-1/2" ~h ~odends t~ catch silver hake. S~arly, ~mel mamtenance costs DOt expliady mcluded m tbe model sbould rema.m Jdauvely 1111Changed. The increased reponing reg.uirement in 1he exempted fisheries propam makes use of existins JePOrtin& foans and administrative costs should be very much tbe same as or less than those for lhe FMP, while enforcement colts may rise due to thee~ area of Coast Ouard IUl'VeDiance of minimum mesh sizes. .

In summary, the RIRJIRFA includes the~ iqJacts clue to increases in tbe minimum mesh sizes. The proposed altemative, the combmation of meiS1lreS D and II, results in an initial cost of $831,000 to $880,000 in terms of foresone revenue to fishelmen in 1991. Tbe net pesent

·. value of this altemative ranses from $1.3 to $3.2 mDJion.

Ncm:mber 12, 1990

-52-

Initial RcsuJatmy Pkxibility Analysis

The fiShing industry directly affected by this manasement program consists emilely of amall business entities operating in waters off the New Bnsland, New YOlk ad New Jeney coasts. The number of units operating is aiven below (Table 16).

1986 1987 1988 1989

S'Ule 11

•amber of Operating 'Unit• lla the llhlltlt~pecl•• r.t•bez:r ... IIDgland 1 llid-at11mtlc

Otter 1'rawlera

1182 1220 1246 1153

Glllnettera

148 210 255 2t7

Line ~rawlera

148 210 255 2t7

The regulatory impact 11181ysis above estimates the industJy-wide impacts (assuming related processing and consumer impacts) expected with the two options. AD vessels and processors affected by the proposed measures are be small businesses; DODe is dominant in the lfOWldfish harvesting, processing or distn."bution industries. 1be change in first-year avenues Is shown in Table IS and total benefits are showD in Table 14. Given the 1,153 trawl vessels operating in 1989

.J. and expected to be operating in 1991, tbe averaae impact in terms of foregone ~ue nnges from $721 to $763 per vessel from average poss revenues of about $150,000 per vessel. 1be economic ~act on vessels primarily engaged in the southern whitins fishery, and C'IUI'eDtly using 2-1/2" mesh m abe c~ could range from $3,000 to $24,000 in lost ~~~m~al avenues. ·

The dependence ofpartic:uJar sizes of vessels on 111 iadividual ~or JIOUP of ~ies is not as pat as their dependence on panicular fishingmeas or on a p8rticu1ar type of fishing sear­Gill net vessels senerally land only four poundfash apecies (polloCk. white hake, cod, llld haddock) and will not be affected by the proposed mesh regUlations. In conttast, otter trawlers land almost all the multispecies finfish at one time or mother.

. New Jersey and Long Island boats will bear most of the negative ~ of1be proposed . 2-1/2" minimum size for trawl nets, while vessels from Pt. Judith, IU, New Bedford, MA,

.. Nev.oport, R1 and Long Island pons will bear the initial.aeaative impaets ·from tbe increase in the mesh size in the Southern New Engfand Dosed Area (Table 12).

November 12.1990

-53-

IV. CONSIS'IENCYtWliH 1HENAUONALSTANDARDS

National Standards- Amendment 14 to the Nonbeast MuJ~ FMP rqxesents a continuation of the Council's commi1ment to respond to cbanginJ condittons w.ilhin the resource and the fishery in relation to the achievement of manaaement objectives and the mainteDance of consistency wJih the National Standards.

•1 Coaserv.riou met management measures lhatl pevcal crn:dishiDs wJUle 8ChimDI, m a coatinuins basis, the optimum ,Wd hiD ad1 lislla).

Amendment 14 builds on the existin& plan measwes and, In aeverat ways, will break new pound for fisheries management In New England. It wD1 implement the first mesh teplations in the Southern New PnJiand area. It wm provide a minimum mesh size for aD apecies,11Dlcss specifically exempted. under the Council's manaaement authority. It provides • framewOJk mechanism to allow the ReaionaJ Director to close limited areas to protect ama1l yellowtail flounder and to implement square mesh net ~ep1ations to protect IIDaJ1 codfish by DOtice iD the FtdtrtJI Rtgisttr.

Other measures proposed as part of the amendment atrengthen existing MuJtispecies PMP age-at-entty controls. 1be modifications to the exempted fiSheries proaram wm enable the Council to get needed information 10 improve controfs on abe ~ed fisheries propam in the Gulf of Maine .. Gear reauJadons in the Donhem ~fishery, baSed on '9C1Y RCeDt conservation engineering research, wiD reduce the bycatch of regulated species. Tbe amendment wiD include

· silver hake {whiting),~ hake and ocean pout in the multispccies management tmit. It will tiii'Cber restrict the carrying of smaU mesh net on vessels fishing In tbe tegulated mesh mas. The Council expects that implementation of Amendment 14 wDl substantially enhance abe achievement of tbe

· conservation and management objectives of the P.MP. Topther with a continuing commitment to ,# FMP mcmitoring and future FMP modifacations as may be teqUired, tbe management proposals in Amendment ##3 serve to promote the achievement of the Council's management objectives. and in. so doing, maintain consistency with National Standard •1.

n Conservalioo met IJUIIVtlemealiiiCUUR'Iil aba1J be lllseclllpOII the best ldra•irac iafODDatioa available. ~~7• ·

.. . In the development of Amendment •3 to the NOitbeast Multispecies FMP, the Council used

the most complete IDd current scientific Jnfomaation avaDable. In Clevel~g tbe proposed changes to the management program. the Council has ued iaput from the TechniCil ilonitoring Group and from the lOth and lith Stock Assessment WOJbhOps.

~ •3 To lbe exteDtpracdcable, m iradividaal .-. offishlhatl he~ • a wdr ~its Dllge, md iaterrelated ltocb of fish lha11 he DI8DIIpcl• a a • m dose CDOJdiDitioD.

The proposed measme does not detract from tbe Council'• efforts to manage an the atocks within the multispecies fishery. Tbe Council has JeCOII1mel1ded a minimum mesh size applicable throughout the .range of aD multispecies finfish.

November 12, 1990

-54-

4M Conserv.UOO aod Managcmeot~DCU~:Ue~lhatliiDI cJllc:riminate betweea RSideall of diffelall states.

'· Management measures proposed in this Amendment m~ppUcabJe to aD participants in the Northeast Multispccics fishelj. AU management proposals m designed to promote conservation and the achievement of tbe management objccdvcs Without d.isc.rinUnatOI)' intent.

.S Conservllion and management measwes lha11, where~. pomoee eflicieocy m the vtt1iutioa of fisbcJy resom:ces; a.cept that DO lOCh IIICUII1'e ahall Jiavc ecoaomic .Uocatioa as its sole pwpose. · .

Most measures proposed in this Amendment me desiped to inaasc the efraclency of age-at-entry controls by preventing the wasteful disclrdina of fish that do DOt meet lbc minimum size Rquirements.

fi Conserv.UOO and~ IDeiS1DeS lballtate ialo liCo:MIDl m:JIIllow lx"fAAiidools among, aod CODtiDgeDcies ill, fisheries, fisbety aaoan:ea, md catdles.

Several proposed measures, such as the dosures to _PrOtect amaJl fish. and the procedures both for reviewing the rules for die Culdvator Shoal whiting fishery and for m.akins modifications to shrimp sear' Jive the Council fle:x.lbility to deal in ..nations amona. and contJnae.acies in. fisheries, fiShery tesourc:es, and catc:bcs.

•1 Conservation and management ·111e1SURS lhaD, wlae pncdcable. minimize. CDitl md avoid BIU~SIJY cluplicar:ioD.

_. The proposed measures are cost-effective because tbey enhance ase•-entl)' coatto1s and increases yield-per-recruit by eliminatina the wasteful discard of IIDI1I fish.

Other Jaws and management programs- 1be proposed measure 4ocs DOt change in my way lhe relationship between the federal ma.oagement program for cbe multispecles fishery JeS01li'Ce IDd the other state and federal laws and statutes that lffect aU or a pan of the multispcc!es resource. Nothing in this amendment wm change the relationship that bas been discussed in Sections 7C2 and 2BS of rhe Northeast MuJtispecies FMP in ~dation to marine mammals II'KI endangered species. The Council has detemained, that ICCOfding to tbe ~of 303(a)(6) of the Act, none of the measures in this Amendment will create aaafety pioblem for fisbeanen. Fmatly ,1he CouncD has determined that this amendment will be implemented in a manner ccmsistcnt to cbe maximum extent practicable with the lppJ'OVed Coastal Zone Manaaement Programs of the affected states. Letters have been sent to the appropriate 1tate coastal r.one manapmerat agencies to confirm this determination. ·

November 12, 1990

V. FINDING OFNO SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTALIMPACI'

In vlew of the analysis pi&emed in this ~.it Is hereby detennined Chat lbe proposed action in this amendment to tile Nonheast MuJ~ies Fuhery Manapmem Plan would DOt significantly affect the quality oflbe human enviromncnt with specific nfereace to the cdleria contained in NDM 02-10 implementing the National Environmental Policy Act. Accordinaty, lbc preparation of a suppJementll Envkonmental Impact Statement for this proposed acdon Is DOt aecessary.

AssiStant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA

November 12, 1990

VI. AMENDATORY LANGUAGE

The _Council proposes to amend 1be lanpaae contained in Section 1B1 of the N011beast Multispecies PMP as follows:

14.2 Jlefinjdgn of the DNIDIIemmf ri

Manapmeot gnit

Major species within the fishery tbat may be subject to specific replation under 1bis PMP include:

J 17Bl

Adantic cod ••• """ •••••••• .Gddus morlulll haddock ...................... M elllnogrllmmJIS 11eglejinus pollock ................... ".Pollachhu YiriiiS winter fJ.ounder •••••••••••••• Pseudopleuroneaes tlmNici.uuu yellowtail flounder .•••.•.••. Limanda fem,lginta American ptaice .............. Hippoglouoides pllltusoides witch flounder ................ G/Jptocephlllru qnoglosRI n:df'lSh ...••••.••.•••••••• _..Sebtlstelllltlrinus white bake ....•....•..•••••••• Urophycil tenuis "·indowpane flounder .......... .Scophthtzlmlls llfllDIIll silver bake .•••.••••..•••••.• Merluccills bilintllTis Jed hake ...................... Uroph]ds clulss ocean pout ................... .MaaD%DtlTces tllllerictlnus

2. '&A'" • -L • .w)DtmJlJJl DJe;w SJZe:

Southern N~.Atlantk; Jdlowtail c1ocd IRA-When the dosure of this area (illustrated in Figure 7B2.b) is not in effect, there would be a 5-1/2"minimum mesh n:gulation for the area. The minimum mesh size would apply to 75 meshes from the end of the net in trawl nets and to aU mesh in sDJnets. Vessels fishing with mesh smaller than the yellowtail mesh size may DOt have my :yellowtail ston:d below deck or on deck in baskets, totes or other containers. Vessels with yellowtail and 1maD mesh aboard must follow the replations pena.inlna to the can:yiDs of IIDID. mesh wb.De in lbe Regulated Mesh Area. .

llupgaJwultbe iance ofmqltilpocjcs finfim -1he minimum mesh size (mside measmement) to apply 1broughout the nnge of species managed under the Multispecies FMP .is 2-1/2". This measure would apply to mul~ fisheries, such as lbe exempted fisheries iD the Ou1f of Maine, DOt otherwise abjeCt to the 5-1/2" mesh size regulation wilh lbe foDow.ina exceptions:

There would be • :year-mund exemption for. directed loliao and mex liqUid fishery; however, vessels usin& a mesh size smaDer than 2-1/2" to fish for tquid must restrict their bycatch of aU species included in the muJtispecies ~ement UDit (coc:J. haddock, pollock, wmter flounder, :yeDowtaiJ Sounder, .American pl~, witch flounder, fcdfish, silver hake, red hake, ocean pout, white bake ma windowpane flounder) to 2SCf, or less of squid Jandinas on Ncb fisbina trip.

Ncm:mbez' 12, 1990

-57-

The fisheries for nonhem shrimp and herring would be exempt from this measure; however. boats fishing for bening must limit their bycatch of the foDowinJ species (cod. haddock, poDock, winter flounder, yellowtailllounder, American plaice, witch flounder, redfish, and silver hake) to ICJ, of lbeir heniDJ landinp on eaCh trip.

The mesh size requirement would initially -.,JY to 80 meshes couated from tbe end of 1 ttawl net and there would be 1 phase-in penod (two yean from 1be date of implementation of Ibis amendmeDt) befoze it appUecl to an mesh in tbe lid.

Jtestrictions oa pna1J mesh while tiahina Ia the mp.latcd II!C!Jih 1m1-No YeSsel issued 1 valid Multispecies pennit, except vessels employjnf mklwater trawl par and vessels not having any fish aboard, may bave avaDable for immediate use any net, or any piece of a uet, not·meetinJ the mesh size mquirements, or mesh that is choked off wh.Ue in the luge mesh areas. A Det that confolll18 to one of the foUowina apecifacadons and which cannot be ahovm to have been in acent ase is considered to 6e "Dot available for immediate use":

Nets stowed below deck -A Del is consideled to be stowed below cJeck if it is located beJow the main wolking deck from which the Det is deployed and Jetrieved. Towing wires (any wires includinJ the "leg" wires). must be detached fiom the net.

Nets stowed and lashed clown on deck· A Det is conslcJered to be stowed and lashed down on deck if it is fan folded (flaked) and bound around its circumference and securely fastened to the deck or the ran of the YeSSel. The towia& wires (any wires including the "leg" wires) must also be detached from tbe net.

Nets which are secured in a manner approved by the Regional Dilector ·After review and approval, the Regional Director may specify a1temative manner(a) of aecuring acts by notice in 1he Federal Register.

Nets which are on ~eels mel are covered and seemed with the cOOend amoved- A aet · on a reel is considered to be "atowed met Jasbed down on deck" only if the emile surface of the net on the reel is covered with canvas or limilar material that is aecurely bound, the.·1owing wba (any wires includina tbe "leg" wires) are de&ac:bed from the net, and tbe codend is JaDOmf from the Det and ltored below deck.

3. Exempred fiskJ:y mpllljons

Opponunities to fiSh with small mesh codends in the replated mesh areas are provided for the exempted fishins area shown in Pjpte 7Bl. Note thai tbe whiting exempted fishely is restricted to operation in the ponion of tbe mastl'lied area that is west of WOO'W.

Exempted fisheries for commerciaDy nluable species that mquire the use or mesh smaller than the replated mesh size wm be allowed as lpecified under Exempted FJShely Options below. Exempted fisheries must be applied for iDdepeudently aad may DOt be lfllliCd more than one exemption at a time.

November 12.1990

Bcpilaled species .. include cod, haddock, poDock, ~American plaice, and yeDowtail, winter and witch 8011Dde11. .

Period: June throu&b November

Tqet species: Dogfish, mackeJel, led hake silver hake IDd ocean pout. Replated apecies weight may DOt exceed 25fl, of the combined weipt of dogfish, ·

Period:

mackerel, ocean pout, Jed hake and lilver hake on each tnp IDd IHI of the total landings of those taraet species elwin& 1he reporting period.

Target species:

December through January

Henina

Comments: Regulated species nJ silver hake may DOt exceed If!, of the totallandinp of helrinJ on each a:ip.

Period:

Target species:

December through January

Silver hake

Comments: Regulated species weight may DOt exceed 25fl, of the weight of silver hake on each trip and 1 ~ of the total Jandinas of silver hake elwin& the reponina period. Shrimp landings may DOt aceed 200 pounds em each trip durina the months shrimp may be landed.

The NOJtbem Shrimp Section of the Atlantic States MlriDe Fisheries Commission is responsible for the management of DOitbem shrimp. 'lbe Section has die authority to adjust tbe shrimp season awropriate for the conservation of northern lhrimp; however, the Section will consult the New EnJland Fishery Management Councilmaardirig ad~ to the shrimp season with mpect to its effects on the a:umagement of muldspecies finfish.

~-An exempted fisheries pennitholderamst cmy a 1a ampler if sequested to do so by the Regional DUector. .

ltcpottiral pedocl-1be reportjng period for the aempted fisheries shaD be 30 calendar days or antD withdrawlll of the vessel from a.e e:umpted fishery, whichever is the shorter period.

November 12, 1990

Rqwt form- 1be repon form will be the existing federal 1ep0rting form submitted by each panicipating &sherman at the end of the apo~ period. Individual trip :records that are 'Verif"led by the dealer(a) handlina each Clip, or part of a trip, must be retained by participating Sshennen to corroborale complilnc:e data over the repordng period. A pan.icipant failinato meet tbe reponing ~uiremellts may either be au~ from panicipating in this propm or cle.nlid cauy to the ~P!D· or both. Panicipants me also responsible for RpOrdnJ 1be area in which they fished, the amount of fishing lime, depth nnge, and mesh lize ased. 'Ibis inf'ormatioa is lbe same u that required by the T~er Two FJShing Trip Record; however, fishenDen would be required to repon the 10-minute square lieU in wbicb they fished instead of the LORAN bearings of individual toWSIDd wouJd DOl be sequired to estimate discards. ·

4. Area dosgres

Olherarus:

SoutbmJ New EndandiMicMdantic JdlotrtaD cloaed 11M-A portion oftbe New England/ Mid-Atlantic mea west of 69"-40', Dlustrated in F'J&We 7B2(b), will be seasonally closed to reduce monali1y mf ~spawning~ for yellowtail flounder. "'bis dosure is compatible w:ilh manaaement efforts for yellowtail stocks in otber ~aource areas.

The\vhole of the area wDI dose on AprD 1 and mmain dosed as far into Nay • the Councn detemdnea appropriate to achieve the objecdve oftbe P.MP ftladnJ to Southern New England yello'Wtail flounder, at which time DOtice of reopenmg wD1 be published in the Federal Register. .

This area will be dosed to .n mobDe gear fisJUng wirh the foDowing a.ceptions: a) midwatcr gear operating with a pemtit issued by the Regional Director mel subject to the restriction of a zero bycatcb of regulated species, b) surf clam/ ocean quahog · dredges subject to the Regional Director's specification ofbycatch reportins tequire~l.l~ and c) aU hook and line gear, 'however, possession of ;venowtail by anyone fishing with hook mel tiDe sear in this area would be ~*btted. The Council may specify bycatcb limits to surf dam/ocean quahog operauoas in tbe dosed mea after a careful review of bycatch iDformation.

5. Additicmal measures

Oan1e the desipatjon oflbe tuqwiniOfll) fisbeJJ for ajlyc;r 1gb Ia lhc Qjhjycor Shoal ~tea to lhQ :CWtivator Shoal WhifipJ fisbcty"

The boundaries of the fishery, 10 be reviewed by the Council annu.Uy, are initially defmed by the following points:

Reference Point

Cl C2 C3 C4

42°10' 41 «>2S' 41005' 41°55'

68°10' 68°45' 68°20' 67°40'

13132 13527 13495 13074

43970 43767 43627 43861

FIGURE 7B3: Olt1iY-.or Sbol1 WhidD& An:a

411

November 12,1990

For the first year. and untD changed by the Council. the &sbeay will take place from June 15 through October 31 w.ilhin the boundaries described above. A special pennit from the Regional Director wm be~ to fisb for silver hake in the ~"bed area, and the Regional Dhector may aestrict tb8 iuuanc:e ofchese ~ if there are bigh discards of other species in the area. Vessels receiving a perin.it to &sb in the Cultivator Shoal WhitinJ P.isbay must fish exclusively for aiver bake.

Permit conditions me: 1) a trip bycatch limJt of 1 ~of septated species; 2) a m.inimwn mesh size of 2-1/2" in the code.nd and atensioa piece (160 meshes from the end of the net); md 3) that the =s. RqUirements would be the information caJled for in the IJer 'JWo FishinJ Trip . ·

Periodic sea samplinJihoald continue to dete.unlne whether changes in tbe times and areas fished are Deeded md to determine the bycatch ofseplated species, apeciaDy haddock. There will be a 6dlllinual nv.lew ol data befo& Changes of fishin& dates. Otanges wDl be published by DOtic::e hl the F«<Billbgi#B.

Gear mncJjfiqtjons to n;dpce lr.Jcatch iD lhe IMll'lhcm lhajn•• filfaJ ·

The Council. in consultatiOn with ASMFC and NMFS, would determine the twe of shrimp sear that may be used to minimize the bycatdl ofseplated ~- ~ved ~sear . would be required throughout the shrimp le8SOlL Tbe CounCil will JeVJew infonnation on shrimp gear technoloBY 11111ually and mike a JeCOJDmeDdatioD to tbe Repo-.1 Director by July 15 about the type of shrimp sear that wD1 be allowed for 1he foDoWJn& shrimp season. There will be a 30-day public comment period foDowlnJ this designation befme a final detennmation is made. For the first teaSOO. tbe abrimp tmwl will lie the same.., that required by the ASMFC.

MeasuRs to procect lhoU-Uyed CODCeiiiiidons ofllllllJ M

Soutbem New BnaJand Jdlmdail flmmclor .. The Nonbeast Relioaal D.irector may close a pan of the Southem New England yellowtail closme area or die Nantucket IJsbtship area to protect very large concentrations of javenDe yeBowtaD. flounder, based on biweekly (every two weeks) sea samplinJ datL

1be closure will be limited to the area covered by 10 ten-minute squares (approximately 770 square miles) within the areas shown in Fipre 3. Ten-minute squares are rectangles defined by 10 minutes of latitude x 10 minutes of longitude on a side. 1be closure wiD be implemented by a DOtice in theF«<Bol Rtglstu. Additional notification wDl be provided drrough a DOtic:e to peDDit bolclen and the Dews media.

1be criterion for detennbling whether there is a Jarae cancentl'ltion of small yellowtail Oounder in tbe area wm be whether more tban 5K of tbe catch by weiJht of yellowtail flounder is smaUer lhan the legal minimum size (c:arrently13"). In lhe event that the catch rate for yellowtail on sea~~ tows is Jess than 500 pounds.·

per hour, tbe Regional Director will cansult the ~ies Committee to easu.re that his action is consistent with the Councll's intetd. Tbe area will seopen if less than SO% of the catch by wei&ht ofydlowtail llOUDder is smaller lban .-legal minimum size. If the catch rate for yellowtail on sea samplin,s tows is less than 500 pounds per hour, tbe Regional Director will CODSUJ.t with the Council about mopeniDg the area.

Novembel' 12, 1990

SteDwqen Bri IDd 1~ Ledp ·Tbe Nonheast R.eaionaJ Director may initiate a two-tieml action aimed at controlling the hi&h discard Jate of juvenile codrllh during their Spring migration dvoup the SteUw-aen Bank IDd Jellicya Ledge by 111.anouncement Jn the FtdtrDI Rtglster. .

The threshold at which the action is •tomatically 1Jiueled is when tbele is Ill average 20% ctiscard Jate of undersized cod (less tban 19") during• least three aeographicaJly ~ative monitorin& tows that are conduc:Ced withiD &JUSonabJe period with a NMFS-approved sea sampler on boanL Tbe minimum catch rate durina the monitorin& tows must be 500 poundS per hour. 1be period durin& which 1bls action can take place is Februuy through July, however, the duration of the action · may be only IS long u is uecessuy to protect the ama11 fish concentrations. 1be action wm be ended by the Regional Dilector if be determines. by monltoriaa tows conducted at leut biweekly, lbat tbe duesbold conditions DO Ionaer alit.

Tbe first step of the action is to aquke that ftSSels asing bottom-tending mobDe par (trawl nets) use nets with mesh that is 5-112. inches or laraer IDd that the mesh comprising the ratty bars of mesh counted from the end of the codend be Mleast 6-inch mesh hung on the liqllale. During the CODttol acdon. 'ftlsels in the area are only pennitted to have available for immediate ase Dets with 5-1/2-inch mesh or larger. Ally mesh less than 6 inches 1bat is DOt part of the aet, must be Mored accordina to Section G oftbis Amendmeat. In IDY case, DO mesh less 1ban 5-1/2." is permitted iii the area during tbe mesh-control action. If the ~ ctiacard rate pelSists with the use of 6" JqU.&Je mesh. or if there is alipificant depe of DOI'l-COmpliance with the 6• square mesh JUle, the Regional Director will dose the d'ected area or areas to bottom-tending mobDe aear. The areas that can be included in the action are c1esaibed below .00 are lbown in Figure 4. These are maximum areas lnd, IS conditions warrant, may be subdivided by the ReJional Director in coasaltation with indusby .ad emon:ement officlals. .

STBLLWAOBNBANKARBA (X)()RDJNAT.BS

R.efeR:DCe

=~ LiDe

Point lalitude J..onaihlde llacltllioo

Sl 42°34.0' 70023.5' 13737 .4429.5

S2 420:ZS.8' 70039.0' 13861 .4429.5 .tona4429.5

S3 42°18.6' 10on.s· 13810 .44209 S4 4200.5.5' 1oon.3· 13880 .4413.5

S.5 42°11.0' 70004.0' 13737 .4413.5 lllong 4413.5

lllong 13737 to Sl.

November 12, 1990

JEPHU!YS U3DOI!ARBA COORDIN.ATBS

Refenmce t::=m-. IJDe PoiDt Latitude t.onpude Deacliptioo

J1 43°12.7' 70000.0' 13369 44445 25826

43009.5' 70008.0' 44445 25845 alq44445

n 13437

J3 "42°57.0' 70008.0' 13512 44384 25779 along70008.0'

14 42°52.0' 70021.0' 13631 44384 25805 lllong 44384

25805 to 25804 15 42°41.5' 70032.5' 13752 44352 25804

16 42°34.0' 700U.2' 13752 44300 25720 8long 13752

17 42°55.2' 70000.0' 13474 44362 25720 8long25720

8long 70000' to 11

November 12. 1990

·.JI

~r~ .JJ ) JEFFREYS

.Jy' / J7 LEDGE

. ~\,/ .•• 5?..(...-"'\st STELL IIAGEN

')s;\ BANK

k..>ss MILES 1-----t I 11

vn. UST OF AGBNCIBS AND PERSON OONSULTBD IN DBVBLOPJNG 1HB PJlOPOSPD A COON

A. Fcdeml A&encies

u.s. Environmental Protection A&enc:y (RegiOJU J.JI.ID) Depanment of State U.S. Coast Guard Depanment of Interior- Fuh IDCJ Wildtif'e Service U.S. Army Corps of Enaifteers Muine Mammal Commission Mid-Atlantic F'uhery Management CouDcD. South Atlantic FIShery Management CouncD Atlantk States Marine Fisheries Commission

B. Statt Apncies

Maine Department of Marine R.esources Maine State Planning Office New Hampshire Dept. of Fish and Game Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management Rhode Island Dept. of Environmental Management Rhode Island Statewide Planning Program Connecticut Dept. of Environmental Protection New York Division of Marine and Coastal Resources

c. Individuals

Marshall Alexander Joseph Brancaleone Tommy Jordan KenMacara Mark Phillips Howard Nickerson Lucy Sloan

Bubara Stevenson Roben Contzino Ellie Dorsey ~ Testaverdc James McCIU.tey Tom Morse Frank Grice

November 12, 1990

VID. USTOFPREPARERSPORBNVIRONMENTALASSPSSMBNTANDPI..AN AMENDMENT

This Amendment to the Northeast Multispecies FIShery Management Plan {FMP) was . prepared by a team of fishery managers and scientists wilh Jmowledae lbout the multispecJes resource.

. Orouudfish Committee

Barry Gibson Herbert Drake Ph.Uip Coates Anthony Versa

Douglas Marshall Pamela Mace Phillip Harins

Nar:iooal MariDe Fisheries Se.rv:ice

JolmTelTID Peter Colosi

David Pierce, Mass. DMF. Qainnan Frederick Serchuk. NMPSJNEPC Thomas Hoff, MAfMC Staff . Cbristopher K.eUog, NEPMC Staff

Howard RasseD Louis Goodrau Claristopher EeDog

Peter Colosi. NMPSJNBRO John Mason, NY DEM Ralph Mayo, NMPSJNBPC

JX. RESPONSE 1'0 PUBUC COMMENTS f~;

A. Moctificalioas to the Ellempced Fllbaia Pmpm

Most commencs about the proposed modifications to the at:q)ted fisheries poJI'IIIl concerned the proposal to teplace 1be pro~ with ID experirDenta1 fishery lnd to pemUt smaD-mesh fishing only where pe:nnhied by the ReponafDUector. 'lbls propoaalwu deleted because the National Marine Fisheries Servace indicated 1hlt it wOuld DOt be able to administer the program. No aubstantial neaative comments were teeeiv~ on the other aspects of the proposed measure. . .

B. .Gear modificatioas to n:duce bycatch iD tbe DOI1hem ~fishery

The oriJinal measures proposed to reduce the bycatcb in the DOtlhem ~fishery also have been substantially mOdUJed in msponse to public comments. 1he Co1iscD decided not to propose shrimp sear re,Wations because the ftsults of ita recent consCJVation eagineerina projects did not have adequate peer review. 1be public will have adequate opportunity to comment on future abrimp aear modifications when 1bey am proposed.

C. IDclude sDver bake (whidus), .cl hake (liDs) mJ ocean pout iD the maltilpec:iea management anit

New Jersey fsshermen opposed inclusion whiting in the Multispecies PMP because they opposed 2·1!2" minimum mesh size for whiting. Tbe need for .,aging whiting and the rationale for the 2-lfl" minimum mesh size is discossed in tbe IDe8S1I1'e below.

D. Estmlish a 2-1(1."' mjnimgm cocleDd IIICSb size iD tile llliKed-lpeciDa tnwl fisbery

Comments: New Jersey end some New YOlk fishermen stronJly opposed this proposed measUR becauSe of it would reduce impact whiting landings .in the -short-J'IIil. .A Jetter received from the Belfast Seafood Coop stated 1hat the dump in mesh JeiU)ations would require vessel owners to purchase new codends costing about $600 each and eventuaUJ ne~ Dets costing lbout $3,000 each. It also qgested that • illfonnal quota I}'Stem was alteady established and effective in ~vided aeecJed CODtiOis on overfishini for whitin& cau&ht by New Jersey vessels, and tbe.refore, it wu tmece~sary eo inaease tbe mesh size.

Response: Where IDd when small mesh fisbin& Is .Uowed is~~ iD CODfrollinJ the small mesh bycatch of regulated poundfisb apecies. To date, the 8bsence of mesh-me controls in small mesh fisheries bas .Uowed both too small a mesh size in the directed fishery for sDver hake and a high monaUty rate of juvenile fish of Jarae mesh ~ies. Fishermen have infonned the Council that very sma1J mesh, nnainl from 1·1!2" to 2", which is oonnaDy used to catch squid or shrimp, Ia also ued for a 'Variety of ocher species including red hake •d sDver hake.

November 12.1990

The Council is proposinJ the 2-1/2" minhnum mesh size. in pan. because of the decJinin& condition of snver bake stocks. According to the most recendy avaBable scientirac infonnation, it appears that both atocb of ailver bake were being overfisbed in 1988. Although fishinl monality ntes seem to be cJec1inina, particularly for lhe southern stock. the Stock Assessment Review Committee warned that this tlend lhould be intezpreted with caution. It is likely that CI.1DeDt (1990) fishJna mortality rates am If least IS hish as they were in 1988. Thus. management actions ncb IS a nplated minimum allowable mesh lize are needed to alleviate the overfishina problem.

Vessels fbhing primarily for loligo and mex ICJUid would be exempt from the measure. Tbe New England Council, however. believes that 11 is necessuy to astrict the ama1l mesh catch of silver hake and other apecies included in the multispecies IDIIIIIemeDt unit in order Rduce juvenile mortality. ·

The fisheries for northem lhrimp and herrin~ are exempt fmm this measure because they am subject to exempted fisheries RStdctions ..a not directly managed under the Multispectes FMP. The Council, however. is funher mstricting the byCIIfda of nplated apecies on cadi trip to J '*'of heJring landings to reduce small mesh mortaUty of mpdated species.

The two.yearpbase-in period for the 2-1/2" mesh size Jn the body of the net allowi fishmnen enough time to use up existing supplies of smaller mesh. The pwpose of a unifonn mesh size is to make enforcement easier. Mesh selectivity IIUdies have aboWn that Rlatively large mesb in the body of nets has little or no impact on lbe aelectivity of trawl DdS for most species.

The costs of administerinJ a quota l)'ltem for anly silver hake pobably would exceed the benefits. The use of a large mesh size is an effective way to Jeduce mortality on small fish and saves dockside culling. Fisbennen who IIDd hiaJHiu.aUty whitina in D01them pons daim that they already use a 2-1/2" codend mesh size.

E. Establish the CaltivllOr Shoals '\\'hidnc Fllhery aa a p=nnaneat t.sis

Comment: Vessels should be allowed to fish for Rplated l!pCcies in the large mesh area with Iarae mesh nets while lbey are Jn the Culdvator Shoals wbitin& fishery:

ltespoDse: 1) Fishing mortality ntes for •oc::b of ~plated species on Georges Bank, other than wbitinJ, ..., above levels that lllow management objectives to be teaehcd. Additional incentives to land these species ll1'e not apprOp.rilre. 2) The PMP already bas been criticized for allowing too much IID8II mesh fishin&-iil Jarae mesh areal -.d nbsequent nail mesh mortality on Jeplared species. 3) AllowJDa boats to use bolh Jarae m:J amaJl mesh on the the dame fisbin& trip to tbC large mesh area would iDclase the burcJen GD enforcement agencies and lake resowas away from lbe cafcucement of ather measUra.

Novanbet 12, 1990

: .:: , .. ·--

P. Measun::s to Protect Sbott-Jived CoDce:nuatioDs SmaD Pish

Fl. Southern New &gland yellowtaiJ flounder

Comment: Oosures are ~opriale for ydlowrall DUI'IeiY poauds because conc:enttations of amatl fish are l1most always mbed willa CDDCeDb1ldoas oflaspr &ah.IDCJ tbe dOSIIIa therefore prevent tisbeDDeDiivm &bin& ef&cieatly. A 1rip-Jimit or -..odaertJpe of quota system would be a beuer aJteJ.'Didve.

Response: Tbe p~ ~would eaable theReafoa.al D.imctorafthe ~ Marine FJSberies Sirvice to dose R.ladvely 11D1D areas u CCJDCeDtnllioDs of IIDilllsh move. .-ad therefore lessen the impacts CIUSe4 by Jarae area c1onles. A~ to pocect · lhort-lived concentratioll;;ra;D.n fish is impiactical because of the~ md cnfcm:emeot bwdc:o il would CIUIC. ·

Pl. Slellwapn Barak md Jeflie)'l J..edge

Comment. There should be a quota on landings of scrod (sma.D cod) from SteDwaaen Bank rather than the proposed 6" 1q01.1e mesh size.

Response: A quota on landings fnm Gnly one partlcular area would be unenforceable because some fishermen would have too peat an incentive to land fish from the area of concern and to claim that the fish were caughl in other areas. In tbe lite 1970's NMPS found it impossible to enforce separate area quotas on yellowtail flounder for this JaSOn.

G. Restrictions on SmaD Mesh wble Fashina Ia the ReplJitecJ Mesh Alea

~' Comment. Fishermen should be allowed to keep the legs lttached to lbe [large mesh] nets, hOwever, it should be Wegal to have the towing wires from the winch lltached to aets stowed on deck (Offshore Mariner's Alsociatiou). ·

Response: This measure would not pJace any JeSUiccioas on tbe way Dets that meet . regulated mesh area requirements (large mesh Dets) are curied aboard a YCSSel.

H. Additional measun:s for the Socdbem New Engln ,eDowtail floaader~ ~

Comment: The S-1/2" mesh regulatioa ahouJd extend lhoreward of the Soathem New &gland Oosed Area.

Response: The aumber of small mesh fisheries, indudiDg those for IC'Up, batterfish and loligo squid would make a S-1/2" mesh regulation Jmpracticallborewant of the dosed area at ~s~. .

November 12.1990

.APPENDIX A

AD new fMPs or amendments to existin& PMPs 11e nquire4 to contain objective, c:.perational definitions of overlishin&, in accordance with the P.kfelines Jn Federal Jlepster Pinal Rule SO CFR Part 602 (July 24, 1989). 1he• ove.rfishin& definitions must lddresl mcmitment overfistdng at the least, but may also include or substitute other. mom mstrictive bouDds on the fishery (e.g. bounds that are intended to Cl'lbanc:e yields). In Amendment~ to the Nonbeast Multispecies FMP (MSFMP) it is pro.,osed that tbe two US ltocks of ailver hake (whitin&) be added to the management unit. 11Us c1ocmnent provides details of the proposed definition of eauitment overfishin& for silver hake, tbe rationale for abe definition. and abe npportin& malysis.

Definition of O'VeJfishiDg

The recommended cterwtion of overfishina for both the Gulf ofMaine/Nonbem Georaes Bank and Southem Georges Bank/Mid-Atlmtic Blocks of ailvcr bake (bereafter refemi to as the DOJ1hem and southern stocks .espectively) is:

'"Overf1shing is deemed to have occurred or be OCCUI'linJ whenever the four-year runnina average percent maximum spawnin& potential (CJ.MSP) is less 1ban the tbleshold CJ,MSP."

-rhe current estimate of the threshold .,MSP is 31CJ, for the MaineJNonbem Oeoraes Bank stock and 42% for the Southern Georaes Bank/Mid-Atlantic ltock. These aumbers 11e · subject to periodic .evision as appropriale new lclentific information becomes available."

Rationale for the use of a .,MSP tbli:shotd

There are two main types ofbiolopcat afeJ:eDCe points that CQU)d form an =te basis for an operational definition of ovedishina: a minimum ltock aize and a maximum mortality rate. Specification of a minimum stock size ia poblematic for most fish Mocks (panicularly highly-productive, or hiJbly-variable, ltocks) because of the aeed to partition the variation in stock size into that due to ovedishin&II'Jd that due to eaviromnentat tacton. · lntel)>retation of a maximum fishin& mortality rate is aiore ltraigbtfowanl. c.ndidates for the ma:umum (JShin& mortality rate include PO. I and Fmax, both of which 11e derived from yield per recruit (YPR) analysis, and Flep_ (F-mplacement), which is derived from the Jelated apawnin& stock biomass per Jeenlit (SSBJR) malysis combined wilh SpawDer-recruit data.

RefeRRce points from YPR.III81ysis IJ'C primarDy te1ated to f.rowth ovetfishin&, nther than JeCNitment overfishina. On the other hand, Faep was ~Y derived as a Jefenmce point dermina the threshold of recruitment over:fishina. Flep-is dermed as.._ rate offishinaliKxtality at which year dasses 11e, on average, able to replace themselves". It 1I'IDIIates diJecdy into a

CJJMSP threshold. 1be only altemative, fully-specified teference points of recndtment overfishing are those derived from theoretical spawuer-JeCIUit Rlationships. Even when such theoretical zelationships (Jt the data wen (which is rardy the case, and silver hake is DO exception), Prep wDJ aenerally provide a more conservative estimate of the ovafishing thRshotd.

Since Prep~ on the a.ploitation panem (the Rlative hcdoD of fish in each ap poup lbat is removed by the fishery}, it is more convenient to translate il into a related refenmce fOint, the replacement SSBJR, in which the ~-~dated pattern of fishing mortality is coDipsed mto a sinJle number. Tbe replacement SSB/R can then IJe expressed u a percentage of the maximum possible SSB/R which occurs when there is DO fis6ing. 'Ibis quantity k called the

r CJJMSP.

The proposed defanition of overfisbing for silver hake is similar to those which have ~beady been adopted lor other regulated species in die MSFMP.

RatiooaJe for the use of a J'DIIDina aw:np

There are aeverll advantages to wsing a nnning averap ntber than the most ~nt estimate alone:

(i) The main objection to the use of a one-year fishing moJta1ity rate to specify O't'CI'fishing Is that it defines tbe "act of ovafishinJ", but DOt necessarily the "~tate of being ovafished". Even thou&h a stoCk is camntll being &abed beloW' 10111e threshold fishing monality rare, il may still be judged to be in an vverfished condition" because ltOCk size Js extremely low or the age distribution Is severly uuncated. Low ltock size and atnmcated 1p disuibudon could both be caused by recent high levels of fishing moJtality; however, the former phenomenon could also be the result ofllllfavorable caviroamental conditions while the latter could be the result of IIIIUSU8D.y hip recruitment. Use of a running average fishing monality .rate is a partial solution for dealing with the overiishina/overfished dichotomy, while at the same time lime excluding the confounding effects ol environmental conditions end other factors that are ptObably ardlted to fishing p11Clices.

(ii) The SSB!R model, lite the mated YPR model, ISSW1leS a constant fishing mortality and exploitation pattern throughout the lifespan of a cohort. However, ill aality both fishing monality and the exploitation pattem vary somewhat from year to year. Use of a nmning average will tend to smooth out the variabD.ity in fishing pattems (as weD as errors in the estimation of recent fishinJ mortalities). Moreover, a nmning avenge procedure may provide a more reliable means for IISSeSSina 1ral4s ill tbe data.

(iii) It lllows fishery managers to ::;c:ate for iDadeqa.aciea or uncertainties ill ltOCk assessments, plan monitorina, cm:ement IDd ocber factom which have JaUlted ill lhe targets of previous yean being under· or over-lbot.

Use of a running averap means dud m aistina cmmishing poblem cannot be aolved simply by achieving the 11ueshotd fl1MSP for a lingle year. To correct • ovedishing condition quickly, it may be aecessary to reduce &.shin& moJta1ity below the 1evd ~to the threshold tf,MSP for several consecutive lean· Conversely, fishing moJta1ity ntes move the

. threshold may be allowable occasionally if prior fishing IDOI'I81ity ntes have been wctJ below the · · threshold. This ICtioD could DOt be taken anless it was pacdcal to wry fishing mortality

substantially (down as wen asap) from one JC1r to the next, ill order to ensure that the mnning average was never exceeded.

Nonmber 12,1990

..

Since highly-p[oducrive stocks ouJht to be able to recover from overfishin&IIIOJe rapicDy, the period chosen for Calculation of the nmnln& averaae lhould be mated to the life histOI)' of the species. Silver hake are considered to be a productive~ since they mature early (qe 2-3 years) and have a matively high Daturat mortality rate (M=0.4). Their potentlallifes_pan js only about eight years (3/M). Alchou&h somewhat arbitrary, we have lldopted the c:onvenliOD ofasing half the potential lifespan as the appropriate period for aveJ81iDg.

SupportiD& ma1ysis

This analysis uses data from the most recent ltOCk assessment for aDvei hake, ooatlined In the Stock Assessment Review Committee (SARC} ConseDSDS Summary of Assessments (Report of the 11th NEFC Stock Assessment Wod:.sbop) which met at the Nonbeast FJSberies Center in October, 1990 (NOAA 1990).

Bactground: Data from commercial1D.ver bate fisheries dare back to 1955. A pevious silver hake assessment (Almeida 1987) utD.ized 1he entire time aeries; however, clue to a change in ageing procedures in 1973, the most recent assessment was RStricted to 1he period from 1973 to the most recent year for which data had been coUated (1988). Almeida'IISSessment suuested that both stocks of snver hake exhibited dramatic dectines durin& the late 19601 {FJIS. 1 a 2). Although estimates from the most JeCeDt assessment may DOt be 4irectly comparable, it is likely that both stocks aft still at extremely low levels in comparison to their historic JUabs (F.~p. l a 2).

Input parameters: Prep (F-~Iacement) mel the conesponclina tlnsbo1d 'J,MSP (percent maximum spawning potential) aft calculated from a spawDei'-JeCnlit (S-R) Jelarionship and a spawning stock biomass per Rcruit (SSB/R) analysis. The data iDput to each oftbese must be from compatible times of year.

Slmmer-ft'JCI'D.it plots: Using NEFC's method of srandardization, VP A JK?l!ation . numbers at age on January 1 for each of the years 1973--86 (Table 1) were projected foward to the · mid~int of the spaWning season (August fortbe IIOl'tbem stock; June for the IOUtbcm •oct) by muluplying them by::. .

where P = F(i,t) =

p =

M(i,t) =

;-:-- e-1••r (1, t) + p*H (1, t)J

fraction of fishing mortality within JCU beforespawa~Dg (O.M? for lbe aortbem stock, 0.500 for the IOUthem ltock) · fishing monality for year i and 11e t (Tible 2) fraction of natural monality within year bef«R lpiWDing (0.667 for the DOrthem stock, O.SOO for the IOIIthem llock) aatura1 mona1ity for year I and ap t (canstant at 0.4).

It was then assumed chat commercial weights It qeiiJ'PI'C)Ximate the weJghts a ap1J1Plicable during the mid-points of the ~g seasons for eacn stock (since f!ak c:amnerc:iaf fishing, and therefore peak sampling~ occurs during each spawning season; Almeida, pen. c:omm.). Therefore, the projected numbers were multiplied by lbe comme.rcial we)Jhts at ap (Table 3) mel the maturities at 11e {0.0 for age 1, 0.59 for age 2~ 0.95 for .,e 3, and 1.0 for IpS 4+) and I'UIIU'Ded to give armual estimates of spawning stock biomass (SSB). These estimates Of SSB were plotted against the conesponding VP A numbers at 11e 1 (Table 1), using a one-year~ (Flgs. 3 IDd 4). Note that estimates from the most JeCeDt years of the VP As (Table 1) we~t~ DOt included in the analysis. the replacement SSBIR was estimated as the inverse of lbe alope of the lb'aiaht line passing through lbe origin and bissecting the data points {tbe median).

Ncmmber 12,1990

SSBIR curves: To confonn witb the S-R analysis, SSBIR was calculated by projectin& the stable age disttibudons foward by tbe same amounts (0.667 yean for the nonhem atoc:k, 0..500 years for the southern stock) .. Other inputs to SSB/R (llld YPR) IDIIyais wue:

Both et.ocks: II • 0.4 Age of zeczuit.ent • 1 Oldest age • I (3/111 DO p1u group)

lllll/111/lll/ll//llllll//ll//l/l//llllllllllll/lll/1/1///ll/llll

fartial recruitment (northern atock) .016 .583 1 1 1 1 1

fartial recruitment (aouthern atock) .069 .468 1 1 1 1 1

Weight a-at-ave (northern atock) .121 .116 .240 .352 .C92 .551 .562

Welghta-at.-age (aou.tbern atock) .018 .141 .191 .283 .C12 .523 .551

froportion aature (both stocks) 0 .59 .95 1 1 1 1

/11111//lll//llll/111/lllllll/lll/11/llll/11/11/lllllllll/l/11/1/

r.ract ion of fiabJ.ng mortalit7 within ~ar before apaWiling • 8/12 for n.o.rtbem atock (Auguet.) 6/12 for aou.tbe.rn atodk (June)

Fraction of n.atu.ral aortalit7 within ~ar before apaWiling • 8/12 for n.ortbe.rn atodk (August) 6/12 for aoutbe.rn atock (June)

1

1

.666

.659

1

Tbe partial recruitments (PRs) were estimated from the fishina ll'lOitl1ity rates (Table 2) for lbe years 1982..S6 inclusive,. assuming a 8at-t~ PR wilh qe! IS the first qe of fuD ncluitment. PRs for ages 1 and 2 were calculated by dividing the fishing mortalities for aaes lllld 2 by tbe pooled fishing mortalities for IpS 3-6 (tbe &shin& mortalities tlbu1ated for aaes 61Dd 7+ in Table 2),. and then taking the geomeuic mean across years. Wef&hts ld aae wea calculated (from Table 3) as unweigbted averages across tbe yean 1984-88 inclusive. The IDIIIU.rity OJive was taken from Morse (1979).

. Results: 1be teplacemeut SSBIR was estimated to be 0.13 q for the DOI1bem atock .00 0.16 kg for the southem stock. Corresponding esdmates of •MSP .00 Prep were ddennlned by Joca~ing the appropriate valoes of SSBIR Jn Tables 4 A 5. 1he •llues of .. MSP were 31 .. end 42% respectively; ad the values of Prep were 0.51md 0.39 mpecdvely (IISS'Dmin& abe average PR vectors given in 1he above text table).

MotCIIIiber 12, 1990

Car.rent status of silver hake fisheries

The four-year (1985-88) nmning average of pooled Fa for qes 3-6 (presented IS the P estimates for ages 6 and 7+ in Table 2; i.e., the fuDy.RCJUited Ps) is 0.76 forlhe DOrthem ltock and 0.71 for the southem stock. If an average PR is calculated for the four most recent years of tbe VPA (1985-88) using the method outlined ill the previous aedion, the cormpondingCJ>MSP is estimated to be approximately 27., for bo1h ltocb.

Condusioas

These two stocks of silver bake aR unusual Ja lbat they an amonpt the few aamplea of fish stocks with values of PJq> that approximate FO.l. Based oa the above RSUlts, whidi aR applicable up to 1988, it appears that both Stocks of silvez hake wc:a bein& ovafisbed It that time. Although f"asbing mortality ntes seem to be declining, ~culady for the aouthem ttock (rable 2), the SARC warned that lh.is trend should be intapeted with caution. It is likely that current (1990) fishing mortality rates are at least u hilh as tbe)' were in 1988. 1hus, man~pment actions ncb IS a tegulated minimum allowable mesh size ~Deeded to aDeviate the overfishing problem.

References

Almeida, F. P. 1987. Status of the Silver Hake Resource off the Nortbeut Coast of the United States· 1987. Woods Hole Laboratory RefeMDCC Documeot No. 87-03.

NOAA 1988. Status of the Fishery Resources off the Nonbeastem Uaited States for 1988. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMfS..FINEC-63.

J NOAA 1990. Report of the 11th NEFC Stock Assessment Wmbhop: Stock Assessment Review Conuninee (SARC) Consensus SUIIU'IUU)' of Assessments, Oclober 1990. Report held at NEFC, Woods Hole, MA.

Nowmbcr 12.1990

Table AI Januuy I population munbers • qe (miDions) for die DOitbem and IOUtbem stocks of lilver hake (tables F41Dd F5 from NOAA 1990)

Mea...._.,_ IJ ......... ·-~.a:

• 1f7J ""' "" - ., ..,. ., -~ .a .......................................................... ............... ,. 157.1 1111.1 m.t ... •. , .. , • •• .. , 17.1 ... I• 111.1 1'11.1 ••.s •.s .... ... 11.1 ., .. at.& ... I• IS.S J'l.l '"·' '"·' ... .... . .. .. , ... .... •• ,_, IP.& ••• ... ••• ... .., . .. tU ... •• , .. t.S lf.S ... ""' ., .. ... , .. u .., •• '"' ••• ... 1.1 '·' ... ., .. '"' .. , ... ... '"' ... , .. ... ... t.l 1.1 a.r u t.l .......................................................................... h 110.1 Wl.l .... 111.1 Wl.l ... 161.1 "'"' ... , 111.1

• till "" --.., .. ... ..................................................... ,. ••• .0.1 "'·' •.. ••• "·' • •• le I1..S .... sr.t .,_, lt7.J ... ..... •• u.o ••• ••• ... ••• ... u.s •• '·' ••• '-' '"' .. , ••• ... •• ••• .J.S .. , , .. ... a. a a.r •• .. , , .. '"' t.t ... . .. '·' ... , .. ••• 1.1 ... ... ... u ..................................................... ... w.z ••• •1.'1 •.s IN.I ... •••

Mea ....... ,,. ,, .... u .... ..,.... 11'11:1

• • tt7S "" "" .... ""' "" "" - '1111 -............................................................................. ,. 14U.J t1fS.'I m.s I" A .. ., ., .. -.1 tU.t '111.1 W.t

I• ..... ... , WM lt4.1 m..s as.t MO.t tit .I ft.& ••• •• ,. .. ltJ.o ""·' ....... 6'.1 ... ., . ., ••• . .. ... lt..J tSJ.I .... m.s . .. ••• .. , .... "'·' ... •• ••• • •• ... a.s ••• ... .. 11.1 It .I .... IU •• 1.2 "·' .. , 1.1 ••• , .. ... . .. Lt . .. ,.. '·' .... S.l ... • •• u ... • •• u .... ..............................................................................

h ln4.t ISIS.? ., .. u11.z •·• m.a ........ ., -..

• 'HIS "" --.., .. ... ..................................................... ... ••• ••• 111.1 .. , Ill .I M'I.Z ••• I• 97.0 uo.s ., .. I U.S .. .. .. .. ••• I• 16.1 46.1 10.1 ..... ••• 11.1 ao.t •• ... ••• a .a ... ••• ••• .. . •• .., '·' ... '·' . .. , .. ... •• 6.1 ... .. , .. , ... ... ... ... u ... 8.& ... .. , .., .. ,

........................................... ~ ......... ... .... ... 111.1 ··' .. , •u ....

TlbleA2

·A7·

FishinJ monatity rates for 1he DOrcbem md JOUtbem llodcl of lilvetllake (Tables P4 and F5 of NOAA 1990)

...._ ..................................................................... . I • 1.1110 I.IUS L1117 I.Mtl 1.- 1.1171 1.1111 1..-.a l.ltiC. e.-. I e 1.6m I.IOtt I.JI.If I.I'Q I.Jt'J9 I·"" 1.1"1 I.DZI IJIINI ._.. I e I.QSt 1.&11'1 t.I9Z7 1.191tt 1AM1 ...- ..-a 1.1160 I.AHI ._.., 4 • I.DD I.JSP4 t.ISO£ 1.006 I.IMS 1.1UII.IQ6 loll" I.AtJS I.G$1 le 1_...71 I.Gn I.M1 l.fJ99 I.GZI Ltzn l.ftlt 1 ... 7 I.Dft 1..1111 • • e.&m e.Q.II t.WJt 1.1171 '·''~~~ ,..,. e.eu 1.Mt1 &MY~ I.JIIIt .. 1.4US IADI t.tm l..wfl I.IUI .... IMQ....., 1Mn....,. ·-- .... ~..,._ ................................................ I • 1 ... 1.- L'llf.l LIU6 1.1'111 l •• tl l e 1.&1111 I.&UJ 1.141.1 I.'RU l.l'm t.ISB J ei.JfJJ .t.I'JM l.fJU I.MGZ l.t1KJ 1 ...... • • 1.1111 I.'PJU I..G6f I.W$0 I.J&fr IM76 I • 1.,119 tAGS t.aUI t.UZI l.ta22 '""'' • • I.GH l.ftJO 1.9557 I.GM I .... '""'' .. I.GK 1.1UO Lt5S7 &.aM 1.1111 ....,,

• ... •• •tam • .,._ l'ftXX

• tiJ1J "'' "" "'' "" tl7l 1171 - ., -............. - .... -·-:· ............ ~ .................................... . 1 e 1.1151 IMIS 1.1017 IMO l.ltM l.ltiiiAKO 1-"" 1.'1111 I.WII I e IAIZI LJ617 1. tm LIS04 I..IHI6 1.1742 I.W7 l.lfSI l.flll5 I.IGJ' I e I.JZn 1.1ftt 1.1157 I.IS&t I.INZ ...... ._., t.Jaa 1.1112 1.'1111 "e I.SM t.UPf t.ISM t..&MS 1.7att Uflll 1.6111 1.&512 l.tn:l ._._. le 1.1101 t • .W IMJO 1.101 I.'IKJ I.IJIIIAZ7S l.&m I.INO I.IRt • e 1.019 l.tSQ . I.'IZ'III '·"'' .__, I.IU'I a.ASZ4 I.Jm 1.'11\1 l.lm .. 1.1111 l.tMZ t.'IZ'III Lflld 1.-rt I.IUS I.UZC. I.11'U L11\Z l.lltl

• tNS ""' - - .., -.................................................... I e I.ISM IMM ...US 1..11&7 l.tZ17 .__. le t.Mtl LIMt I.UCI L1A5 L15G3 1.1&76 I e 1.1166 1...0 1..1250 LtZK Lllft IAtSt • e ,_., I.IIZt t.MJ6 I.Jm t.-a UtSt I e 1.- 1-"'1 t.MO l.tell' C.GfJ IAtSt • e 1.15118 1.1157 l.tnf 1.1619 t.'ISSO IAtSt h ,... t.11S7 t.w:l7 1.1611 LJIII UtSt

TableA3 Mean weights at age {kJ) from the commerdalcatch of lilver hake from a) tbe aonhem stock and b) the IOUthem stock (rabies F3a and P3b from NOAA 1990)

a) • .... • • .... • • • • • .. - ... •• .... .... .at .... ...... .... ... .. , •• .1M .... ... .. ...... """ ., ..... ·- .... .... ... .. ... ..,. ..... ... .,.. -- ..... .. .lilt .... ... ... .-... ... -- ·- .... .... ... ... """ ... ... ..... . .. ·"" .... ... .... .... ... .... .. , .... -- -- ... .. ... ... .., J/IIS tNI .., •• ·"' Jlllt .. ... .... .., .Ill ...,. ... .. .... Jlllt ... .... .... Jl'lt ..., ...... ..,. .., ... .... .IV ... ..Ill .. .... .... .... •• ·"' .... ... .... ... ,J/111. .. .... ...., .. • • Jlllt ... .,., .. .,...,. ~ .., .., ..... .... .M1' .. .... ,J/111. .. ... ..,. ... ... ..,. ... J/1111 .- .- .... - ..... .... .Itt .... .. ... ... ..... .,. ... ..- ... ... ... .- ..... .- .. ""

.., .. ·- • au .. .... .., ... .-wrz .... ..... ..... ... M6 ... .- ... ""' .,. ... .trJ .IIIII .. " ..,. ...... JIG .... .... .,. ·- ..111' ..,. .I'M ....... .- ""' "'"' ..... "" ·- .... ... .an .... ..- ..... .., .... .., .- •• Jilt .,.., .- ... ...., ......... "" -- .... ... .., ... ... .JI'll ... ..... ..,. .... .. ... .., .., J/IAf .., ., .., "" ·- .., ... .... .an .... .... ........ - ..... .. ·- ... .., ..., .- ...... ~ .ttl .... ·- .au ... .. ....... "'" ., ·"' ·- ·"" .... .., .I'll ....... .... 1111 ... ·"' .... :1:

,.,. .... .. .... .... ..... •• ... .N .- ~ ....... "'" - •• ........ .. .,au .... ..,. .... .... ... .... "*' ..,. ...,. ... .... .... .... ... . .., .- ·- ... ... ..,. .... ..,. .... ... , ... ... .... ... ..... ... .Ill J/111'1 .... ... . ...

'IMP ' •• I • I • • • .. b)

"" ..... ·"' •• ... J/1111 .- ... .. .. ... .- .- ·"' ... .IV ..... ... .... .;m

""' .. ... •• .aM .... ... ..111 .., .. ... .... ... •• ..... .IN .,., ... .. ... ... ... .. ... .., ... ... .- ... JllfJ ... .,.., .- ·- .... ..at'l ..., JID .. .. ... .., .. ..... .lfr .... .,.,. .... ... ... tNI ...,_ ... ·- ..... ... .... .... Jl'lt ..., .a ..,. ·- ·"' ... .... .... .... .... ..... ...... ..., ·- ·- ... .... .... """ ... ... "" ... •• •• ..... .... .,., ... 4lt .... .... .. .... ... .., .... ... ... .... ..... ..., ... .- .... .1M .... .... ... ..... .til ... ... .... ·- ·"" .:Itt ... ..... Jlltl .., .... ..... ·"' ·- ...., ... ... ..,., ..... .,. ..... .- •• ... ... .lfl,r ..., ...... ""

..., ... •• .1M ... .. .... ... ... 11ft .- ... .... ... ... .... ... -.... "" ... Jill# ... ... .- ... .. ... ..., ""' .., ... .. ... ...... .., .- .. "" •"' .. , ..... .- ....... ~ a 1.111 - .il* .... ... ... .... .., ..... ... ., ... .... ...., .., .- .., """ .... .... - ... .. .- ... .. .. .... ... .... .,., ... .. ...., .., ...... ........ - .- .. .I'll .... ........ .., .. .at .. .... ·- ... ... ... .... .... ,., .... - .- ... ... ..... ... .. All .... JIIJ ~ .'10 .- .J/1111 ... .. .lfl,r ........ ... ... ... .... .. ... ... ... ,., .. - .., ..- .aM .a& ... -... ,., JllfJ - ... •• .. ... .. ... ......... ..,

·"' .. .- .aM .... .... ......... - .... .... ... ... .., ... ... ,., ...

TablcA4 Yield~ recruit (YPR) and spawlliDJIIock biomass per JeCJUit (SSBIR) msuJts for the DOithem stock of aDver bake

·- .40 Ma• 1'10 • NOPOniOII OF IIA1UIW. lalfAI.Ift ftiGa to .. AIIIIIICI • •• 17 NOPO&'UOII OF 1'11111110 .oatAI.tn fUGa to .. MIIIIICI • .tt7

Wllatft'll A'f Ml lcatcbl • • 111 1. • alta. .au a. ...... .... '· ..,. .. Wit GilT• U Ml C•c.clt I • • ut a. • Itt a. ..... J • .... .. .... '· _., ...

• ... 4 • ••••• . ..... .4H I •

•utiAI. IIECIIUIIMIIIf • .1711 •• .IIH z. 1 .... 1 lo a.1oo1 •· a.eoot s. ...... .. •••••• '· 1.1101 ••

NOPOUIOil IIUUIE • ..... .. ·'"' z.

• .... J. &.lOOt 4. &.MOt I • 1.1101 •• ...... '· 1 .......

·························•··•·················· ...•.•..••• nSHJIIG CA~ fta.D HI &ftBGE Ul I'D '

IIOUA:LnY 1101. IW:IUlt U 111. U IIICaUrt U .. • eooo .eooo .eooo .eooo .c111 aeo.eeoo .o21o .ons .1101 .auo .1177 tJ.IOSI .tsoo •• uo .ezn .a asz .auz 11 .uu .1000 .1171 .1157 .JOC2 .1111 JS.ISSO .1soo .1111 .et77 .1111 .1772 ••·1111 .aooo .1001 .es7o .11tc .zest 11.1171 .zsoo .1110 .lltz .1717 .aa•• ta.414C .10oo .auc .1710 .atn .atu 4t.Hu .asoo .aau .11cs .uot .nil 42.14n .tooo .1012 .1112 asn .astt II.Hot .4$00 .1271 ... u ~1471 ..... 14.1254 .sooo .acsa .eus .1ca1 .uu u.ttcc .11oo .1111 .ttss .aan .uu 11.auo .tooo .aus •• 1111 .ano .1121 11.11os .noo .11n .ttas .un .aotc as.ens • 7000 .4007 .lltl .1217 .tt70 11.1111 • ?Soo .uu .1101 .uoo .ttn aa.nu .1000 .4121 .1111 .1111 .11c• 11.1121 .1soo .4111 11122 .atas .1111 at.t7to .tooo ·••o• .ttu .1111 .17u n.azu .1soo .4412 .tilt .ao71 .1111 11.7111

1.eooo .4.511 .ttu .aoss .1"0 u.eua 1.esoo .4145 .ttu .aoJJ .112c ac.ttu 1.1000 .4715 .1141 .1010 .lltl 14.1771 a.uoo .n12 .tts2 .1tto .1111 u.csn 1.1000 .4145 .IISS .&t71 .1111 12.7111 1.1500 .uos ·"" ... u .1107 12.1111 1.1000 .4111 .ltll ~1117 .1411 11.5112 1.1soo .so11 .111c .1121 .ecta at.ttft a.cooo .sno .1111 • atn .ec4t at.I7U 1.4500 .suo .1161 ..... .01422 11.1151 t.5ooo .sue .ttn .1110 .tete '·"" 1.ssoo .1214 .111c ·•••• .1111 1.1111 u.1ooo .1211 .1n1 ·t••• .1111 'l.tlo7 1.1500 .1101 .1171 • ••• .1157 1.5571

1.7000 .5142 .1110 ...... .IJ4J 1.1251 • noo .1112 .ttu .112c .1110 7.tul

1.1000 .lUI .ttlt .1111 .1111 1.1111 l.UOO .JCSI .IllS .1101 .1101 1.1115 t.tooo .lett .ttn .17t7 .1211 7.t7cc a.tsoo .1121 .1111 ·'''' .121o1 •·•act 2.1ooo .1112 .1119 • nao .tz7S 1.1111

n:a. .4ttc n.a na.e • ... 21 ~~ anPaot • .aNI ..X • tt.toOO WIIAX na.D • • Uct ~~ 811PIMIUC • . .tltO

.... ,. cn.u • aa.11 ..ata CIIWI:t • ...

Table A5 Yield per m:ndt (YPR) and lpiWDiDa stock biomass per RCI1Iit (SSBJR) ~aults for the southem stock or lllver luite

.....

............ ·- . l'aoPOatiOII Of IIUUIAI. ..UU.tn I'UC. W DMII'IIIG • .At •aOPCNrtlOII or niBIN ..U.S.Jft ftlCia SO IPAWliiCI • .100

.-EJGHrs a Mt: C•tcllt • ·••• a. ·••• a. ·'"a. _.., •· _.., s. .... .. . ... '· ...... IIEIGRU U .1111 C...lt • .Ill 1. .141 a. .IN 1. .at 4. .411 I • .... .. .... '· ......

·'''' a. ·•••• a. a.eoot a. a.ttOt •· a • ..., s. ...... •• • ... ot '· .... ot •• • • 1001 1. .ttal a. .tJOI 1. LIIOI 4e 1 .... 1 • •••• , ••• 1-1001 '· a.IOOI •• ...........•..•..•••••..••...........•••.•••.•. ···········

I'UHliiG ~rn

• 1000 • eno .1100 .1100 • asoo .1000 .asoo .JOOO .JSOO .4000 • 4100 .1000 .ssoo • aooo .asoo • ,000 • '7100 .1000 .ISOO .9000 .tsoo

••• ooo a.osoo 1.1100 a.asoo a.zooo a.zsoo I.JOOO 1.1100 1-4000 1.4500 1.5000 1.ssoo a.uoo l.tiOO 1.'7000 1.1100 1-1000 1.1100 t.tooo J.uoo a.eooo

CUCII -­..... • IUt

·"" .un .asn . • I til .1211 • acta .ant .aus ••••• • 1102 • 1414 .lltJ .nzo .111'7 ..... ..... • 4UI .4221 • un ..... .usa .4111 .4190 .4112 .nu • 4717 .4111 .uu .nzz .U'JO .lOIS • sost .sao1 • sau .Sill ,.szzo • 121'7 .nu .1111 • 1111

'1'111.» Ia -.ern a ..... ..... ... .., .lzt4 ...... ..... .asu ..... ...... .auo ·"" ..... ..... ..... .. ., .. .. .,. . .. .,., .lUI .172'7 .1111 .. ., . • lUI • 1'740 • 17U .1'741 .. .,.., .. ., .. .. ., .. .1'712 .I lSI • ens .en• .1'71'7 .If II • t1St .. ., .. .. .,.. .1'712 .. ., .. .. .,,, .1714 .. ,. .

aftiMI tr.r. JIG • eooo .al04 • 1141 .ans .1sn .1440 ..... .an• -1204 .aut .1010 .1oza .11'7'7 .atu .1111 .1151 ..... .un . .., .. .au a _.., .. ..... .1112 .1142 ... 21

·"" .Jilt ... .,. .asst .1541 .asn .ISZI .ISOt ...... ..... • 14'71 ..... .1411 • 1411 .1442 .1414 .1411

...... IIIICIIIIl' a

.auo .....

.IJU .a no

.1sts

.1114 .. .,,

.U11

.11tJ .usa ... ,. ·1111 .uao ..... .lOSt .lttZ ... , ·'"' . .... .1'711 ..,., .t'JU .. ., . ..... ·"" .tSt4 ... ,. • 1141 .111'7 .150'7 ..... .14'72 .eua .ecu .1421 ..... ..... .. ,., .. ., . ... ., .tJH ... ..,

• .. ....... 11.1141 .,., ... ,._,.,. 11.1114 ..... ,. ..... , ....... ..... tl 41.7111 11.1110 14.4111 aa.tnt

"·"" a1.7JCO aS.NlJ a ....... ai.IIIJ 11.7410 II.HU lt.N14 11-1.112 11.7114 ll.tiiS ... 1114 11.1411 ....... 14.1154 u.nu U.ll52 u .••• ., u.atn ...... ,. u.ssn U.IIU 11.1114 ..... , ....... •••• $1 ..... 17 t.IJIJ ••• 'JJ1

n.a • .4111 n.a'J'DLD • .euz ae .. ,ao1 • .t411 I'MX .... 10u IIWt Da.D • .ent ae 8laPIIJWt • -•~••

.... ,. ........ 11.10 ... ,. CIIWIU • 1.11

F.tgmeAl

FigureA2

-All-

1iends in spawnmastoct. biomass (SSB) for the northern stock of silver hake· pfojected dlta clerlved from Almeida 1987 (clashed line) md NOAA 1990 (solid tine) .

8SB f'OOOt mt) 100 .. ·' •• • • ' . ' ' . .

t I t

' . ' t...... ' ' 150

100 ~

10

0 15 10

• • • ' • ., ...... '

• 15

...

•

\

' • ' • ' ' \ • ' ' \ .~

V' )

.,~ ~ Year •

•

______ _,. • i

71 eo as

Trends in spawnina stock biomass (SSB) for the southern ltock of silver hake -projected data derived from Almeida 1987 (dashed tine) and NOAA 1990 (solid line)

&SB ('OOOt mt)

4100

800

200

100

····· 0 IS.

... .. ,

~ •• . ' I l • • I t

• • I ' • l

I t , . I t

I t f ' • • , \

• • . ' • • . ' ' ' I ' , : ........ j

f \ I f ' I

f ' I

~· '•

eo IS 10 ~ __._ _ ___._..::===::z::::::::J

Year

.. ..

Spawner-recruit data for the 1973-86 year cl•ses of the aortbem ltock of ailver hake. 1be 10Ud line is tbe JiDe that bisects tbe data.

. Recruits (#a at age 11n rnlnlonl)

eoo----------~~------------------~

<400 D

0

800

200 0

100 0

oo

0~----~------------~----------~ 0 '10 20 80

sse ('OOos· mt)

FigureA4 Spawner·JeCIUit data for the 1973-86 year classes of the IOUthem stock of aDvu hike. "Jbe solid line is the line that bisects the data.

• Recruits (#a at age 1 In millions)

1400--------------------------------~

1200 0

1000

BOO

600

400

200 c c 0

20 40 80 80 100 120 MO

SSB ('OOOs. mt)

.APPENDIXB

The multispecies managemer~t unit c:urrmtly Jocludea ltocks of the foDowqspecles of finfish:

Atlantic cod.-····· ........ .Grdu rnorluul haddock. ....................... Mtltmogr4mmllllltglfjftull poDock" ........................ .Polltlclaills Ylr'•u winter fJ.ounder ............ .P.rtlldopltarOMctfl ~ yellowtail flounder ..... .Limando /nnlginttl American plaic:e .... - ... Hippoglossoidfl Jlltlttnoidt~ wilch f1ounder .............. Gtyptocq1ullra eynoglol1111 recS.ruh ............................. .StbllsttiiiUI.riluls white hake .................... Urophyds ttiUiil -·.indowpane fiODDder •• .Scophthtllmul lltJIIOIIIS.

Under this pr~ amendment atocts of sDver hake (Merlllf:dru liUintllri.rJ, nd hake (Uroph)•cis clulss}, 1nd ocean pout (Mac:rtnotff'Ct.JtlmnictlusJ llsowDI be included in the management unit. Because of its length, the analysis npporting tbe ove.rfishina cJefinruoas for silver hake stocks is pesented in aaeparate appendix (Appendix A).

AD species except ocean pout, ed hate aad aihcr llate

In a Jener, dated Novcmher 21, 1989, to the NMFS Nonheast Rcgioaal D.Uector. tbe Cooncll proposed overfishin& definitions as foDows:

The Council defines ovcrfishingas occ:mrinJ when the target peRlel1t maximum~~ potential (%MSP) levels described in the Northeast M~ f'MP arc 1101 achieved. Tbe .,MSP targets are described on page 6.4 of the PMP. 1belc include:

Gulf of Maine

20% MSP for haddock 20% MSP for cod 2~ MSP for winter flounder 20% MSP for wilch flounder 20% MSP for American Plaice 20% MSP for Jedfisb

Ge<qesBd

3K. MSP for haddock ·~ MSP for cod ~ MSP for yeiJowtaD flounder 2K MSP for wJntcr flounder ~ MSP for witch flounder 2~ MSP for American Plaice

Soatbem New &,land

209& MSP for yellowtail fJOUDder 209& MSP for winter flounder

Tbe Council concluded that 11 the pesent time these tar&et ~MSPa a. DOt beiDa dleved for haddock. cod. and yeDowtail flounder in the IIUS in which they a listed above. "'bis conclusion was based on infcmnation presented IDd discussions that took place • the Autamn 1989 secent NEFC Stock Assessment Wolb~ (SAW). AJthoulh estimates of cwrem exploitation rates for haddock wea DOt 9"clficaJiy derived 11 the SAW, tbe Council assumed that much, if not all, RCent fashin& effort by IIIJe trawlers dRcled aa Adandc cod limuttaneously affects haddock. .

1be Councn is DOt cenain about tbe CUJiaat 1tatus of witch flounder, American plaice. or winter flounder, and requires ~ice reaardin& ncent &shin& mortality rates for daese ~peeies. At present, redflSh is primarily a bycatcb of the other regulated pound(JSh ~pedes. The COuncil recommends, at least for the ~sent time.1bat .tfish be consideJed a "aiJnor ~·with the expectation that the ~MSP that zesults with the aucceuful reauJadon of the Oltier apecies wm ensure 1he Jong·tcDD viability of the redfish ltoct.

OvedisbJD& Definitioos for Red Bab IDd OcaD PGat

Given the la,ck of information on recent ltock sizes, a prelimlnuy cfefmition of ove.rfishina for srocb of these species is as foDows: "'vcrfishin& is dccined to occur whenever the the

.J. five-year average of the appropriate NMPS abundance IW'Yey Index falls below l/2 of las lona tenn avuaae level." Altboup it may be somewhat IJbitnry to ~Y a cfefinirioa based on 1his 50'k to individual stocks, experience with a wide variety of fisheiies suuests that ilk aasonable to expect stocks to vary from about 1/2 to twice 1beir avenae abundance even Jn the lbsence of · overfashing. 1be Council expects to refine its overfishina definition for •ocb of ocean pout and ted hake as more information becames avaBable.

Red Hake

According this defmition, the Gulf of Maine .. Northem Oeoraea BIJ'Ik stock is not bein& overfished (fable Bl), however. the Soutbem Oeoqes Bmt ·Mid-Atlantic ltCd is just below lhe overfishing threshold (by 3.1 ~). indicating that the llock lize is low and lhould be carefully monitored. The Stlltus of 1M FillauJ RaotrTt:n OJ/ de Ntlf"'Austnn Ulllted Sttnes for 1989,

- however, states abat the stock lias been subject 10 low fishin& pressure ainoe 1983 and with the sttong 1985 year dass,m incJase in stock biomass ciD t.e apec:ted in the DU.t two years.

Ocean Pout

In each of the past four ycara. the abundance index for :S:: bas been weD above 50'11 of its long term average. The hiah levels of fishin=t lurve 'I oc:curzed aolbe aonhem 1tock in Cape Cod Bay take place in ~tate waters • a dme when lhere k DO exempted fishely for ocean pout iD the EEZ. til effect, the Mul~ies ~ filhiDa OD·tbe aOnbem stock of ocean pout because theze is ~irtually DO f.isl'&iDa aolbis stOck in the Jaac throush November period, when the exempted fishery for pout Is permitted iD tbe EBZ. Oaly H of pout landings flom the Gulf of Maine occur durin& t1iis periOd.

Noftmbcr 12. 1990

In evaluatin& overfishing definitions it is ~nant DOt to con1Use tbe defmition of overfishing with ~building strateaies. Overfishing is defmed in terms of • ~MSP lhre.shold and a conesponclina fishing monalty rate; rebuilding may require a fishin& mortality rare lower chan the ~MSP threshold. In other words, the definltlon of ovei'fisbing should DOt depend on tbe tunent status of • stock. If a stock is overfished. a-defininJ overfishina in tams ofJU&ber ~MSP values w.ill not prevent it from occuaing. IDsteacl, appropriate modifications should be made to rebuildiria strate&ies. For Ibis reason. the CoimcD does DOt think It reasonable at this dme to increase CJ;,MSP targets IS has been suagested for atocb of yellowtail flounder ad haddoc:k. bat It will consider hi1ber CJtMSP wgets as mbuttdin& strategies. Tbe Council also u:pecra that in consultation with scientists from the NMFS Northeast Fisheries Center, tbe TMG and otbers,lts . definitions of oveJfishin& continullly wm be a-evaluated and modified in J.i&ht oftbe best infom1ation available. · •

On the other band, in RSpODH to comments. Jl Js dear that the tam •MSP Deeds aiDOI'e precise defudtion. The Council intended that this tmn means lbe ~Pf.WD.ing stock biomass per recruit {SSBJR) as the percentaae of1he unexploited SSBJR llthedhan (SSB) a a ~tage of unexploited SSB. ThiS definition of CJtMSP means that overfishin& is defined in teJmS of a maximum fishing mortality rate ralber than in terms of a minimum SSB.

As mentioned in the introduction to Ibis amendment. the Council has abeady atarted tbe development of Amendment 4t5 which contains abuildin&strate&ies for Ill ovufisbed stocks.

Ncmmber 12, 1990

TlbleB1

Stnd6ecl Mean Ollch per Tow (tl) fmm NMPS Baaom Tlawl Sarvejl

ofOceaD Poaa md Reclllab

OCBA.N fOUl' ·JtEDRAXB RBDIIAKB

~= =Saney Autumn S!DW)' ofMaiDe- Soathem Georaes-

YEAR Ga1f ofMalae Nodbem Oeaqes Nid-Attanfil!

1963 ·'7.588 1964 3.016 1965 3.887 1966 2.077 1967 - 1.078 1968 .5.370 0.869 2.432 1969 6.1.50 0.492 2.364 1970 .5.180 0.390 1.681 1971 2.180 0..569 1.734 1972 2.450 1.270 3.051 1973 3.370 2.041 1.875 1974 1.480 1.198 0.057 1975 1.340 2.108 3.763 1976 1.400 1.678 2.326 1977 3.570 1.383 2.304 1978 3.370 1.301 ·1..594 1979 1.490 1.187 2.514 1980 .5.730 2.109 2.989 1981 7.610 4350 2.250 1982 4.740 2.085 2.048 1983 4.240 3.080 5.1.51 1984 .5.540 2..526 0.662 1985 7.010 3.961 2.01.5 1986 6.300 3378 0.929 1987 2.700 3.587 0.627 1988 3.200 2.160 0.645 1989 2.792 a.ttt J.342

Long-ccnn 2.02A Average 3.964

~ ofl.oaJ-tmm 1.982 1.012 1.148 AYCtagC

APPBNDIXC

NBW ENGI.AND PJSHBR.Y MANAOBMBNTCOUNa:t.

Summary ofPubUc HearinJ Comments AmendmeiU 14 to lbe Northeast ldultispecies P.MP

Skipper lim. Paidaaveo.MA

Februll)' 20,1990

Tbe hearlna was cat1ed to order by David BOlden • 7:00PM. Mr. Borden ~lined flat the pwpose of the hearinawas to receive comment on alx proposals for .-ndin& die Northeast Multispecies FMP. He indicated that Mr. Howard Rasself ofihe CoancD •aft' would explain the tpecific proposals IDd chat comment would be RCeived on each. fa tum. Nr. DamJnaos Paiva acted as translator for the Ponuaese ipelkina fishermen in lftendancc. ~efy 25 fishennen attenc:Jed the heariD&; 111 atfeDdanCe liil il81taebed. 1he beadnj wu adjoameclat 9;00 PM. ..

P.toposall. Replace the ••••!fed Fllbedes Plopam wtlb a eq4ulnediJ&J-.y.

The question was asked whether this propouJ was In afermce only to whhina. The answer was ttiven that it applied to aD amall-mesh specie& amently UDder lbe EFP, iDcludiq whitfna. dop1Sh, ocean pout, etc.

No other com.rnents were pen on this proposal.

PJoposal2. MeiSUI'CS to nduce byCIICb in tbe DOl'dlem .,.., flahcl)'.

No comments were pven.

Pmposa13. IDclude wJUr:ing, nd bab,IDIJ CllCelll pout ia the MaJdspecieiiiiiDipment alt.

One ~rson stated that there should be a tK tolerance level lor aD nplltecf J,PeCies. DOt just for sqwd. The misunderstanctina was NCtified.

No comments were Jiven.

P.copou15. Scadem New..,.., ,..:1lowCaD clolma.

J. Why was 1bfs .u tiJiblsbip .u] p:ap:tted lor domre? Don't a.tieve dlat Ill)' fishennan would complain or catcbiDJ too lnlll)' fish. .

2. Everyone in this IVOIIl bows daat this nnraer they 'Wele '*china 200.000 C1d brinaina In 20,000 in the LiJbtship cu. We need to eave fish lor abe funue.

3. Should dose an ~nato acaDopen as weU as qpn. 4. Don't bow if ltD. can pt dX wont out about a closure in time for fishermen to avojd

inadvenently enterina a closed area. Sbould put info out OD 1be weather cbmnel; do DOC aly only on a mailed notice.

5. If you decrease lhe l'.l'1inlmGm fish dr.e [for JdlowtaJl] to 12", trips will be lhoner IDd fewer amaD fish wm be discarded.

Proposal6. 0De mesh CID bolnl

1. wm you subsidize the $1000 for fuel needed 10 ao back to~ to pt lhe ocher aet? . 2. A lot of lost •;:in is broqht ap In oar clrap. What then? 1be Coast Guard is 'Vel)'

hard nosed about mesh re ations. 3. Use S" mesh set the ye.DowtaD minimum dze • 12". You wm uve aloe oflinle fish

because people wDl Dot ase Dnm.

l1em for public dilcassiaD-5-J./',r eqaate llah.

Mr. Borden indicated lbat this concluded the aerlu ofpropo_sals which • 'beJna conside!al In Amendment~. He atated chat the CounCil wu aJJo inteatid fD recelvlu public Jnput into the question whether tbe CouncD oup to Rqulle tbe ase of 1q1111e mesh 1D trawl Fir·

J. Several people rcated that the decision whether to ue S.1/2" dilmoad or S.l/2" aquue mesh ought to be ap 10 tbe iDctividual boat.

2. One penon indicated that evezything poposecJ, lnc1adinJ this, is Dot enoup to bring lhe fish stocks back. He funher stated that the obviOUS answer a fisherman wouJd Jive to lhe question

, as stated [on .Page 15 of the hearing document) is DO. What is missing in this proposal is ltie alternative. p can only infer that the penon wu IDuestin& that sornethina more draconian. Deb as 6 .. diamond mesh, would be an appropria~ alternative 10 S.I/2"1QUare]

HR:0057m

· New ERataiul Fishel)'~ar~meDt CowlcD. I Broadway

Sauau-, MA 01808 'J'elephoDe 117JJS1-o&22

Public Attendance at Crgundff.sb py'blic learipa Date 2/20/90 Location lkiRPer'• lm. hirb.ayen. MA

(PLEASE.PRINTCLEARLYI

!lame HomeAddreu •

l\1 (b.Asc. «.t A,(. W OA-A. t~•g!U.r6Z fi'..ZZ"I..,_

~O(q; Gr?ZR. ~W&Ya

Jtkuc ~ )Sf frt(.,c .• Nrl 1143 1),,-j.:i,o,J?Z' 2'/o €~-{(J,'i )0/Z ~ 1.1 tJi'tvre,-~~, c7t~~LediN>,cM~u:F-J ~· ~ "-3 ~-L..pralf2 M·/2-'~t9. 9'19't'€::t~ ~~ S../...k · ~~ 7'> ...1.. ,_~ ~t &· t3 tk .. 1. ~ a-~~ ~ NtS.

«Js .. t:> <l:a'i> "-'' !ft!. a,£ sJ: (liD.

•

,. -

· New EDcl~4 Filh~ueeme~~t CoucD 1Broa4wq

8&UJ'UI, MA 01908 'l'etephoDe 8171231~

PubllcAtUmdm~u-----~~o=~=d~fi~n~N~bl~i'~'-•~•r~m~•----------------])ate 2/20/90 Location Slr:fp.per '• Inn. El'frbayen 1 MA

(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY I

•

: •• J". "'·

: -c&-

NEW ENOI.AND PJSHBR.Y MANAOBMBNT COUNa:L

Swranary of Public Hearina Comments Amendment N to the Nonbeast MuJtispecies PMP

NMPS CclafeJeoce Roam. Oloaceller.NA

Febnwy 20,19PO

The hearing was caDed to order by Mr. Oibsollll 7:00PM. Mr. Gibson ~tained that 1be purpose of the hearin& wu to ncelve comment on a proposals for amendin& the Nonheast . Multispecies FMP. Mr. K.eUou of the CouncB ll&ff' ctescilbed the ~pecJfic proposals in the public hearing document. ApproxJmately 75 people attended tbe hearin& (lee an.cbed llteDdlnce list). The hearing ended ll ihout 9;20 PM.

Pzoposlll. Replace tbe Ea.eqAed Pilhedel Plvpllll wilhiD eqcrlnaci1Jilbely.

There was unanimous opposition to this proposal. Several fishermen apposed Ibis ~sal for the following reasons: 1) The pzopam has been modfied leVCral times arid fisbennen firiaDy anderstand the rules; 2) The p-ogram wOJts well; 3) Small mesh fisheries are DOt the cause of the scare it)· of regulated species. 4) 1he CouncB does DOC Deed 10 e:.q:»eriment with lbe propm. These fisheries have existed for atcma time and people don't like lbeir livelihoods to be pan of an experiment.

Reduction in trip bycatch aDowance: There was lh'Ong owo_sition to the~ nduction in the regulated species trlp bycalch allowances from 2SCJJ to 10'11 of the target lpec:ies. 'lbe Gloucester Inshore Fubennen 's Association IUJSested reramma tbe 2SCJJ trip bycatcb alJowance ~for regulated species until the data shows that its necessary to aduce this ~ntale. Mr Snead of the Gloucester Fisheries Association commented that the lowerin& of the trip bycatch limit wouJd onl)' increase discards and DOt !educe mo.ltllliy on smaD fish. No one apob In favor of this .aspect of the proposal. · ' . ··:-.:

Resaictkms on shrimp lmdinp: There was atrona apposition to po!u,ltin& the landing of shrimp by whiting vessels. Several fishermen commented that they abould DOt be foJced to discard valuable flSh that they cannot avoid c:atcbinJ. Clpt. Tcstavade, ~resentina the Oloucester Inshore Fisheries Association., commented that the a bycatcb limit Of 2 boxes (200 lbs) of shrimp might prevent forced discanfs of lhrimp and would IICCCJlq)lish the lime aoat • pvlu"bldn& landings of any lbrimp by the whiting floats.

Reponing RequfmneDts: Cape. Tatavcrde commented that the Gloucester Inshore FJSberies . Association cOuld live with ctie tier rwo fisbina llip ~ .S mcreued ftiPOI'dna mqulrements.

PJoposal 2. Melsures to ndDce ..,CIIda iD the wdl:m aluk•t• &bay.

..... There was unanimous IDd 111'001 apposition to this prcpsat. Mr. Snead. ~ntin& the Gloucester Fisheries Association JttOD&Iy Opposed limitina die lbrilnp 11U0D to 31110nths.

Capt. Testaverde commented that & Gloucester IDshoJe Pisherics Assodldon ltJOnlly apposed a 3 month shrimp eeason because the fishermen would lose their market for lhrimp. He explained that his association would accepliD.Y type of tepar~~or trawl that woD:ed.

Gloucester, MA . .

Mr. Linquata of Salt Water Seafoods ltlled that Ibis proposal would create aevere IOCiaJ and economic hardship in Gloucester.

Mr. ZiRUi, also of Saltwarer Seafoods commented that a 3 month shrimp teaSon would force shrimp processors to close clown because it was UDeCODOmiCII to have auch alhon Ieason. He added that the AtJmtic Stares Marine FISheries Commlssioa (ASMFC) already mana&ed abrimp weD enouah.

~· Levier commented that his bycarcb wu mostly whirinJ and lin& and doubted that tbe CouncD bad reliable cti.seard data on which to base Its proposal. He added that Its easy to blame 1maU mesh (uhina for the decline of pounclfuh, but that the Jaraer boats~ more fishina power were mo~ to blame. ·

. C'apt. DeCoste stated that if he were forced to Jive ap fishinJ for shrimp, he would have to

fish much harder for pundfish, the.Jeby increasin& fishinl pressure an JrOU!idfisb ttocls. He added that it is DOt 11oocf idea to Jeplate fisbinJ leal because fishelmeD can make tbe par catch anything they want. ·

.. . One fishennen commemed.that a lingle desip for a teparator trawl could 1101 be~ to

by fishennen from different; that fishennen could DO Jonaer stand 1hls amount of abuse [from proposed measures]; and lhat the next aeneradon will DOt ao into 1bis lndusby.

One person stated that the harsh weather was llready providin& eDOI.llh protection to finfiSh durin& the winter. . ·

. Ploposa13. IDclude whitiaa, .S Jub,IDd OCDID poat iD lbe Mu1tilpeciel nwnapmealtmit.

The Gloucester Fisheries Association orPOSed aplatinJ wbhinJ, but If lbe CouncD did regulate it, it would be inappropriate to allow foteip ventures to take pan in the fishery.

Capt. Testaverde, apresentin& Olnucester Inshore FISheries Association, lblted that it was in favor of this proposal if a workable mesh size tolerance II allowed. Ja nquested tbar, when fishing for hening, vessels be allowed more lban al~ bycatch ofwhltins . .

Capt. Balbo IDd several other fishennen Mated that be aupponed a 2-112• mesh aJze for whiting as long as there was a tolerance an the mesh aJze.

Pn»posal4. Meuura for lhe c.kiv.ror Sbol1a wllidDa filhety.

· Capt. Testaverde, representing Gloucester Jnsbcn Fuberies Association, ltlted that the association supponed this proposal. SeYeral ocbers also aupponed this proposal.

No comments.

0061m

.. Gloucester, MA

Pmposll6. ODe mesh Gil board.

Several fishermen IDd die Gloucester Jnshcn Pisbermen'a Assoclldon nppone.d this proposal.

Item for pabUc &tisc:assioll-5-1/2"' 8qlllle mesh.

Several fishennen commented that.-, would not survive a measure like this because it would force them to to lose too many aood fish. 1'bc Gloucester Inshore P.isbcrmen'a Association atated that the decision of whether to use tquarc mesh abould be left to tbc captain.

•

0061m

.ca.. New EDI!u4 FUher.r lluapmeat ComacD

1Broa4way laUJUJ, MA 01108

IJ'elephoae 11 71J31..odl

~UcAtun&m~H--~~~p~w~4~f1~GLb~bl~1c .. b~arua~•~----------------Date · 2/20/90 Location 'IM'FS C.onference lnnm1 Gloucelter, )fA . .

(PLEASE PIJNT CLEARLY I . i

Name Home Nldre•l 'J'elepbone

..

. I I D:Y" C>~" Lie lot.{ t:u.,.r~/t:itve, ItO- o7'f7

A/'7 A·-:itdr'Laor al. /?PM;J/;M.z s~w .aPt-al:JJ-

-· .Jfl., L ,/6.ri<t f (),.".,. /ti,.IV /Jr. 21"'/ ... .Jqr >

,_ • - , . . ,

.2 f$- y< <L?" ~') .~3- S' 'J 1 9

..

..ce .... New EDI'Wa4Pilher,v llu.a&emeJ&t CotmcD

1Broa4wq 8aq'U, MA. 01108

Telephne 1171J81..cMI2

Public Attendance at . Ctoup4f1•h Public; Beariu& Date 2l20/90 LocatiOD ltJFS Cppfercpee lpmp. Glpur:ener. J1A

(PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY I Home Adcke11

.S C .tr.r J OC',.. ~-v

33~./.i . PM f

&&.fin (

t'elepbone ·

NEW ENGLAND PISHERY MANAGEMENT COUNaL

SummayofPubUcH~ AmeDdment 14 to the Nonheut P.MP

•oct-•a HJP School. Boc::tt.t. Maine

Febnwy 21,1990

Mr. Odlin opened the hearing at 7:00p.m. There were 46 persons present at lhe hearing although onJy 39 signed the Mtendmce lhecL Mr. OdJ.in described iD IUIDIDII)' fashion tbe six proposals for cbqes to be mcluded in Ameadmeut 4J4.

P.ruposa11. Replace abe P..uwpcecJ Fasbaiea P.loplm wilb m up::aiwa...., &hely • . He then reviewed in detail the first proposal- to make~ ll1d other .man mesh

fisheries. There were a few questions, bUt no comments were on the pr~. It was ·· remarked that there Is no whitin& market in the area and a question from the ciWravelled chat

there were no whitina fishelmen present.

'. P.ruposal 2. Measures to ncJuce byCideh ia the DOI.1fJcm ····I' fisheJy.

Proposal12 reaardinJ a astriction of the shrimp leiSOft to Janull)', Febnllt)', and Much. untfl such time as a separator trawl net is llpplOVed fOr use in 1hat &bel)', drew tbe most comments

- .~ · of all the proposals. There was recopition of the intent of the ~to poteet aub-JeaaJ aize aroundf1Sh, but commentators weR pnerally opposed to the proposal. Comments iDcluded the following points.

\ -December is very ~ant for most shrimp fisbennen, 7ieldin& 15 to 20 percent of lluimp income at a time when there is little lltemauve fishina available. Mr. Wanen ofV'malhavc.n said his best shrimp month was April and chat he lild w:ty linle bycatch then.

• • -While adcnowledgin& that anaJ1 mesh does catch sma1l fish, most COIIIJ'Delltaton Aid Chat their bycatcb JeYeJS m the eastem pan Of Maine Ire J.cny. They pneraiJy felt lhat dJe by-caleb problem is located in the PonlancJ:Oioucester area 011 Jeffreys IAdge. Mr. 'lltompson and. averal other speakers suaaested that cbe fishel)' ia that area lhould be closed doWD or tbe area made inlo a Jarac mesh (5-1/2") aalyarea for cenain IDDDtba of die Jell·

-There was aqFSfion, tuppOrted by a number of speaken, that tbe par taeareh on teparator uawls be compleced IDd evaJ1111ed befom ay Jeduction to a three IDODth IWOD •

.one commentator said cbere lhou.ld be a phue-clowD to lbc three IDOOtb teaSOil over a period of two or tbme years.

·Another speaker 111Jed tbat lhe Council take action to have tbe State of Maine leSttict lbe use of shrimp traps constructed of 1/l" wire mesh.

.. RoeklaDd, ME -011-

-several speakers argued that although lhrimp landings only bring harvesters S7 .S m.Dlion annually, compared to $22 m.Dlion for poundfiSh boats, there are many times more poundf1Sh boats ad the per-vessel income from abrimp Is as peat ad as imponant as It is ·from around!" ISh. More flimess was uraed in dealing with the two fisheries •.

-one. man felt the CouncD cbanses the rules on fisbJDs too often cad chat a.lstifta rules should be given a chance to wolk.

-Mr. Cochran IUJed a halt to 1111 fa.nding IDCJ iDcencives for boat CODJtniCtioD.

-Mr. 1bompson stated he would ratherpat 12" mesh in the aet beDy than be closed out of the · December fisheJ')'. He also suggested anaJysis oflhe 1e1 sampler data to locate •cific areas where bycatcb is a problem and then addressiDJ the problem Ia 11mB. areas ratbei than CVel')"Whe.re.

-Mr. Davis said Maine fishennen compete with a subsidized Jndu~ 100 mDes away (in Canada) and that if U.S. fishemen arc to be forced out of a fisheey than 1he U.S.aovemmem mirht as well llm.it enuy into tbe fishery, buy excess boau ud p_ay fishennen welfare or unemployment for the months they are out of tbe fisheJy. Canadian &heanen pt $465 Canadian dollars per month when they cannot fish.

-'J'hree ~ople noted that processors would not process a1uimp If the IeaSon Is only tJuee ·months. Mr. Odlin noted that others have said lhe season should be cut ofl eadiertban at present.

-Mr. Davenport expressed disappointment with the P.fOPOSal on~ and with federal regulations m general. Too often. he noted, the reJulauons arc keyed to Jar&e vessels and are not appropriate for small vessels.

Ploposal 3. IDclude whidng, led hake, md ocean pout in lbe Mul1:ispccies mpaaement anit.

Proposa1113 broiaif!t some objections. . .

-Mr. Cochran noted that be fishes for tuna and could not so bait fishing with the proposed 2·112" minimum mesh. He also asked what fishermen would do with all the mesh Jess than 2·1/2" that they now own If ilwcre DOt used up befom the cblnge. He VJed a 1,000 pound per day exemption for a bait carcb and added that Jf there is to be a mesb size restriction it ihould be announced early-Dot in the fill when it is too late to order ad receive aew aets. Another speaker Aid he could Dot IO above 2 iDches for. minimum mesh me.

Pmposa14. Measare:s for tbe Caltiv•or Shoats whhiD& fisheJy •

• This proposal was of little Jrderest to those preacnt. ODe IIIJ!CSted it abould be left to Tlll111lie Pansi of Gloucester.

PJoposa15. Southern New Eqland ,ellowaaD dosaJes.

No comments were made on this proposal, but one speaker Doted that there bad been a Jot of yeDov.1ail flounder close in north of cape Ann last summer and wondered whether the~ was any intent to establish a closwe in that area.

Ploposa16. ODe mosh Gil boanl

Likewise It broupt no ot-jetdons from the JI'OUP· ODe apelker noced tb1! Ill)' mesh size that is allowed in vessels wDJ be used. Tbele wa a murmur or pneral. JUP.POn for oae mesh oo board.

Jlan ror public cliscassioa-s-ur equrelllelh.

Mr. Odlin then Jailed the question or whether tbe Council lhould consider ~Irina S.l/2" ~are mesh cod..end in the lalje mesh area. "lbere was pnenl interest in the Jdea aDd Mr. Mede Thompson said that be wDI try a teedon or S 1/2" aquare mesh an tbe top ball of the atension . piece m his trawl. He f'elt there would be mote escapement or smaU fis5 there llld leas loss or legal size fish than ir the square mesh were.llSed Ja the cod-end.

About a dozen or those preseut Indicated that when they 1ft DOl ibrimpq they Ish for poundflsh. .

.. 1be hearing was dosed ll 9-.50 p.m.

·• DGM.2S90C 2125/90

· New Elll!uct Plah...,...81h,emellt Coaaell IBroactw&)?

Sauru. MA 01108 'l'elep1lo11e I171J8J.odl

Public Attendance at-~-C:.:.::roun=df.=i•:::..ib .:.:Pu='bl:.::,::tc::....l!Be:=a~rm~a.._ ______ _ Date 2/21/0o Location JocJtlapcJ at1b &cbooJ , •or'k""", ME .

IPLEASE PJUNT CLEA.llLY)

Jiame Home Adctma 2'tlep'bone Jt

"

" It 4 3..,1-'J..7(f.

'63L - ,,,.,-

---- "

•

... -

•

..C14-New ED&tu4 PiAer.rlluapmeat CoaacD

IBroaclway _ la11ru,lrlA 11101 Nep'hue 11 71131-ND

Public Atfmu!ance at CrOU1lc1fi•b Public lear1Ds Date 2/21/90 LocatiOD •ae)1epd 1Hp 'chon] • &.akZ••• 111

·!lame

tJ I I 1/ 0..?'/U//V

::r~~c..e-q~"t-t-..

1 / U,~ _IJ;XC

I PLEASE PRlNT CLEARLY I Ito~· A«c1rt11

i

~.LI:rc r;-_,, f.; l '-4- ra o

:e.zsp'-'-"' ~-!2.. <z..•~ T'tJ-o.3"{ q

~ : . "

..

•

NEW ENGI..AND PJSHBRY MA.NAOINENT COUNQL

Summary ofPubJicHearinJ oa Amendment M to the Nonbeast Multispecia FJsbely M~n~&ement Plan

Shenlca llm.llylllllls, NA

February 21, 1990

The bearina was called to order by Mr. Coates at 7:00PM. Nr. Coates ~ained that the . purpose of che bearina wu to aceive comment on ab ~· for amendin.a die No.nheast Mul~cies FMP. Mr. KeDoag of the Council Iliff' cksciibed tbe apeci6c proposals In the pubUc hearing document. Approximately 11 people attended cbe J1earina (lee aaaChea lftCDdance list).

Plu.posal 1. Replace the lbe&f:l1*id F.llbedes PmJnm wilh a aperiuca«a1 fllhay.

Cc:iiuments: Those present strongly opposed a1educdon in the bycatcb. limits from 25CJJ to 1K of the target species. Mr. McCarl aave the followq sasons for opposinJ this proposal: 1) In tr)'in& to locate target ~cies such as.whiting, II Js very difficult to Cletamine whidi species wiD

· be caught on the initial exploratory tows. 2) The 25CJ> limits already cause some ctiscards of tegulated species for 6shennen who are tr.Yinl DOt to catch rep!ated species. 3) Because 1he 25CJJ per trip bycatch limit hu onJy been in place about two years, more infOnnatioD Deeds to be collected before the byCilch limits are lnodified 1111 ~rther. 4) Furtbermstrictions in smaU mesh fishing would ~se bo••-s t~ I'Wilcb. to Jar.ae mesh fiSbin.l and pat lunber presslW anstocb of

· tegulated speaes. · •

c.; Mr. Mirarchi ~nted that the ~e ofasinglft aperimenta1 ~was to co11ect infonnatlon about small mesh fishina lrid that It would be~ to stan ina adjustments such as the reduction in the trip bycatch percentaae until die Council, ICientists lftd odlers · reviev.•ed the data. He added tbat discard information lhould be coDected by U'l.ined ICIS Amplers and not supplied by fishermen.

No comments

PJoposat3. IDCiude whldD&, nd bah. IDd C~C~&G pout • tire MuNspedel..,.aemear alt.

:Mr. McCara ilated 1hat he was in favor of a 2-1/'l" or Jaraer minimum 1b:e for wbitina or pout but lhat 2·1/l" would ~ too Jarae to catch aquid.

Mr. Mirarchl commented that dllt it was aaood Idea to iadude whiting, pout ..a red bake in the 11'111111ement plan and that • 2-1/l" minimum mesh size wu aaood first step.

P.roposaJ 4. Measures for tire C'tattivatar Sboa1s wlaidD& filhely.

No comments

Hymmis,MA

Piopusal 5. Soutbem New Pn&Jand Jdlcnn.D Lloiuaea.

Mr. Mirarchi commented that ICIDopenlhoukf DOt be .Uowed to catch yeDowtaiJ Jn yeDowtaD closed areas.

PJuposa16. Ooe mesh aa board.

· Most evel)'one present strongly opposed the propoted measure and spoke in favor of the aJcemative (restrictions for canyinJ amlll aiesh whlle iD the .eplaled mes6 II'CI). No cme spoke in favor of the proposed. measwe. ·

Mr. McCira stated 1har 1 one mesh onboard RgUirement would cause Ievere problems for Provincetown fishermen because they do DOl have adequate docbide facilities for Detltowqe. The proposal would cost them a lot of money in terms Of ~roraae costs, labor to move nets on and off their vessels and lost OexibBity in their fishing.rations. He added that It abeady takes

.. enough time for fJSbennen to change nets 10 that the Coast Guard c:ould catch bim If be were trying to use an WeaaJ codeDd m the Jarae mesh II'CI.

Item for Public Discassioa-5-Jtr ~ mah:

Mr. Mirarchi commented that ilia JRIDihlle to mquire aga.e a1eab twiae. Beet::: that he tried usiq batted twine ban& on dJc ~ 8nd tbat: 1) k l"tained more IIDID .

. .

. J than diamond mesh; 2) dist~ too easily; .ad 3) tbe mesh opeain& was 11101e pady nduced . by shrinking thaD is dUimoDd mesh. He wu DOt able 10 adeqUIIely ftlll tbe distordoa by \ asing helper ropes iD tbe codmd. W"llh 1 minim~;~m order quiDtky ~ lbs. 8nd 1 price of $19.0()

per pound, tnodess square mesh .iltoo ap;nsive for an tnaividuit fisbemaeD 10 ob«•in Same ' qeocy or cooperadve lhou1d belp fisbeaDeD obtain bodess ~q~~m mesh ftriae.

Other f"asbennen conlll'CIICed that lqUBm mesh lhould 1101 he nquhed • tis time because of lOme of tbe problems associa!ecl wilh it. If ilia nqulred, lbeD tbe aovam•n~tlhouJd assist fishermen iD quiriDg it. ·

OOSBm

. ,.

•

. . ... .C17-

IIew Ellflud Pi61117 Kuapmeat CooeD ..... 117

laqu,IIA 11108 IJ'elePb•• 1171131..cNII

Publie Attendance at Grouns!fitb lu)Jie Beartpa• Date 2/21/90 Location Sheraton - Byatmia. HA

!lame

i · .. ;:.,.(f ,s /,;a ic

-r~ -\,.,zc- /11 r.. ~ ~ c ,., '

c~~. ku (, y\1. s=r;,.,

IPLEASE PRINT CLEARLY I Bom• AcJ4nst

•

I1Ls1 . .&:f OOC!'r .

_,.,I -t.1v <iYrra -acss J

l'?r,, I+'< ,.9-,t·· c . FA &HIC I&TRPJl.Sit... JMIOACN

14&?/V.:. S.wG,J l'l?fcto

V.Tttut6 ~. I

-r.lephone

-·

yi?- h 's

'''l) CI(S ·il.l/

U.'{-9 0 Cf t'

•

-CIS-

NEW ENGlAND PJSHER.Y MANAGEMENT COUNaL

Summary of Public Hearing Comments Amendment N to tbe Nonbeut Multispecia PMP

Dalc:h laD, Ollilee, Rl

Fcbnllly 22, 1990

The hearing was caDed to order by Mr. Smith M7:00 PM. Mr. Smith apt aiDed that the • · purpose of the hearing was to receive comment on six proposals for amending the Nonheast MuJtispecies FMP. Mr. KeDogg of the CouncD Miff descil"bed the specific proposals in the public hearing document. Approximately 10 people attended 1be heariDa (see anldled attendance list). The meeting ended at about 9:00PM .

PJopusaJJ. Replace dae &cmpte&l FJibedes PropiiD wilb ID ape+inMilltA1 fishery.

No comments

-f. PJoposal 2. l&asures to reduce byc:alch m abe DoJ1brm ILl b•t• fishery.

No comments

PJopusal3. JDclude whirin&, Jed hake, md OCUD pout Jab MaJdspecJa ~ 1lllit.

~<· Mr. McCauley stated that lhe Boanf of Directors of the Pl. Judith FJShermen's C~ve · supponed this proposal; however, that it was his anderslandin& that the minimum mesh me

applied to liners that might be used to catch LoUao squid.

Mr. Repoz.a stated that he f•voted a 2-112" mesh size (measured bot to knot) 1pplied to a liner because it would retain Loligo. He opposed a measure that would require him to buy a separate 2-112" mesh c:odend which might cost about $1.5()0 • .

PJoposaJ 4. Measures for tbc CaldviiOr Sbol1a wbil:iDa fishery.

Mr. Repoza supponed thi~ proposal bat lb'OftJly Gbjected to a 1f5 bycatcb limit on the catch of regulated species.· He augested that fishennen be aDowed to fish for Jarae mesh ~cies while on Georges Bank in order to round out their catch. He 11111ested that a 5~ byCIIch 1imi1 might be more seasonable.

Mr. Fox apeed with Mr. Repoza '1 comments. He .. 1ed that lbe ltJ, limit wu campletely arbitrary md that it wu incorrect to base a trip bycar~ 1imi1 aa an historical averaae Jevef of bycatch because the avcmae could be pady exceeded on a lingle lrip. He .&Sed lbat if there is a rebuilding of cod stocks that the 1'1> bycatch limit would be DDWotb&le.

Mr. Barbera of tbe Town Dock FISh Company commented tbit be also ~ned this proposal but that fishennen aeeded tbe flex~oD.ity aDowed to them by a larger bjcatch limit in order to survive. ·

.. Gilnee,RI

Pmposa15. Soatbem New Pn&Jand Je)lowtail c:lolllnll.

Mr. McCauley commented that be IUPPOrced this pr~al but that lhe dosures lhouJd replace the Southern New Enatmd yeDowtlil doswe ll'eL He added lhat the IJze of 1he dosure, 770 square mDes was very Jarae, and 1bat that the Re&lonal Dlreclor should dose a IQ'tl11er arulf ~~ppropriate. He ldded that more IbiD one arealhoala be able to be dosed at one time.

Mr. Avila supported tbis proposal because dle~a is a Deed to potecc coacentrations of tmaD yetlov.Uillike dae one thll just occunecL

Mr. Fox suagested that criteria in tenns or apec1fic coocentrations of JuvenDe fish be · decided upnn before the Refonal Director doses 111 area llld questioned what CODSr.ituted "Jarae • concentrations or small fish •

Pn»posal6. ODe mesh em bom1

This measure was stronaly opposed by an tbe fishermen at the meeting. Mr. McCauley commented that it would severely hun the Point Judith fishennen in tenns because 11'111D mesh nets are very lar&e. difficult to move, u~ive to D'lOVe llld stow other than oa a vessel. He added that the Point judith FIShermen's cooperative stronafy IUPPOMd the akematlve whicb would add funher ~altrktions on bow amaU mesh can be Carried ibol.rd 'VeSsels &bin& In the Jarae mesh area. He pointed out that this measure, coupled wkb the recent major chlnps 1ft the

.. penalties for mesh violations, would be very effeCtive iD cleterrJnavesseJS from lleplly 111inJ small mesh in the larae mesh IJU, ·

• ,;· . Mr. Avila commented that tbe CouncD aeeds 10 consider the lituation that frequently occurs · when a trawler hauls back a lost net. II he happens to catch a small mesh net while iD a Jarae mesh

area he is prohibited from discard ina it overboard and is also prohibited from bepina it on board.· For either the violati~ tbe penalties are DOW very biab·

Jlem for public disalsskxl- 5-JJ'}: ..,._,mesh: . There was unanimous apeement .-nona tbe fishermen present lhat the dedsJon whether to

use square mesh codends should be left to the captain. Mr. AYiJa commented that he thou&ht its abUity to catch flounders encouraaed a lot of fisliemlen to ase 5-1/l"lrpii'C mesh codends J'llher than liners.

0064m

•

•

•

-._

\..·

. .

Public Attendance at Ctoypdfiab Public •••tiD• Date 2/22/90 LocatiOD Dutch Jm. ealll••· It

I PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY I Name Bomt Ac!clru1 t'alepbone -

~1"&;"?'£2.. J..Ji-J-.'P&co· SD1f13k77Y

~~~~~--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~·~U&·~IDL • "')JN-2.20o

f7J11/ti7ic12 r{ /ufi(Q!t"<dAii21'1 ~-1s·J·1FJJ

f/,~1! ~.,~ .. t"tc.~ ('/}ptyll/1. M ~ ~ R.L IS'i.t:P

He..~\:D~t

t I fiSte#. RtntL ;"""o~·'ifSC-t 1~5

7t::~··'JL6 ' .'5.1 f.t;rr0!1JA ell "7)., 1... 4"/t/4-'E!{- l.i> ,EX ~(/ zr .. ;:Z/.67 1

1¥.,;.. ~ AJ'. t, . < ________________________________________________ _

.c21· NEW ENGLAND PISHBRY MANAGBMENT COUNaL

Summary of Public Hearin& Comments . Amendment 4N to the Nonbeast Multispedel PMP

Holiday IDa, Pord8DCJ, MB

Febrully 23,1990

1be hearin& wu caDed to Order by Mr. Gibson M7:00 PM. Mr. Gibson ~ained that tbc purpose of the heariD& wu to aecelve comment 011 lis pr~ats for amendin& the Nonheast Mulrispecies FMP. Mr. Kelloaa of the Council staff descn"bed the spec:Hic poposals In the public .

- bearin& document. Approximately 15 people ltteDded tbc hearinJ (see aaaChecJ lttMclance list). Tbe meetina ended at about 9:15 PM. ·

PJoposat I. Replace tbe EJ;e:mpcecJ Pilbel:iel P.lopiiD wflh .. MCJCM"••Jtal fill:lcq.

Se"·erai people commented that If the Exempted F"uheries wem to lie mtructured • an experimental fisheries, that fishennen must be able tO pi in and out of the fishery IS quickly as possible and that the existinJ exempted fisheries propam c1aes DOt allow fishermen to do this quickly enough .

.. Mr. Jontan commented that tbc CoaDcit lhould DOC eDd lbe December· Jlmlll)' whltin&

fishery. '

Pmposa12. McasuteS to ~educe byclrch iD tbc DOIIbe:m •••••• filhery.

~~: nus J'I'OP)Sal wu atronaJy opposed by many ~Je who attended the meetina lnd no one 'spoke in favor it. Several JH:OCCSSors. mcludin& Mr. Norton of Cozy IWbor Seafoods, Mr ..

. Dov.·ting of Resource Tradin& Co .• Mr. Roland Hurtubise lnd Mr. Devnew stated that shrimp ·. processors need more than a three month aeason in order to make shrimp process in& economicalJy feasible. They explained that the cosu of equfpnent.tpace, ove.thead. mmedD& and distn"bution could not be coverect.by a~~ season. Additic:inaUy, stuirnp ~sJn1 helped cover

·overhead for other processmg activitaes and Ill)' loss of JeVenues frilrillbrimp processlna would . hun their ability to compete in other processin& ICtiv.il.ies.

. Several people at the meeting ccxnmented that lhe Nonhem Sbdmp Section of the Adantic States Marine fisheries Commission (ASMfC) bid auccessfully =ed shrimp for over 15 · years and the CouncD had ao Je&Son to intervene. Nr. Hunublse 11a that tbe ASMFC aorthem shrimp manaaement plan mentiODed a dellp that allowed 92-. of the finfish 10 ~ a shrimp trawl. Mr. Btennan stated that tbe Maine Depanmem of Marine Resoan:es Advisory Commlnee ."J'PPJed a 3 month shrimp season and recommended that ASMPC mtaiu an manaaement authoriry for nortbem shrimp and tfaat carralt ASMFCmanapmem policiH an accessful.

Many fishermen commented that restricdn,c the lhiintp JeiSOil to three months would pu1 them out of business and that the CGuncD lbould DOt decide to cbanp die leiSOD 1IDtD it had compJeaed its aear ltUdies. Several people ccmnented lbat if there taDy wae problems with bycatcbes of Jeplated species. the ASMFC would have llddressed them iD ill ...,ement plan.

. Several fishermen commented chat lbere should be ao limits placed oa tbe tbc catch of ·finfish other than tbe aplated ~pedes in the shrimp aempted fishely.

Mr. Jonlan commented 1hll if fishermen pve ap lhdmplna that they would 11ave to catch poundfish, thereby puttiD& more flsbin& effort •ltoCb of tlldidoDaJ pxmdfish tpecies.

.. PordiDC!,ME

Mr. Tetrault commented that the Jreltest amount of'bycatch from shrimp fishin& occuned in shoal waters and queStioned the public hearin& document conclusion lhlllbe hiJbest ratio of bycatcb to shrimp ocamed m December, April and May.

Mr. Harriman or lbe Maine's Fubennen'1 ~radve Association augested that lhe CouncD &ive his association '1 IUJgestion I chance before lOin& ahead with poposalll.

Mr. Devnew cormnented lhatlhe prcpn] had ancenain and pob_ably marainat benefits which had probably not included any constaeralioa of abe imperts Of a three month IWOD on lbe shrimp processing iDdusuy.

Mr. Nonon commented made lhe foJlowin& comments: l) He IIIOI'IJly opposed a duee. month season because market development costs are too biah for ncb a abort aeason. 2) Shrimp processing is a vay imponant adjunct to his finfish ~sin& and that any cutback in shrimp processing might force llim to !educe some ocher operations. 3) If there ila ~em with llriall mesh fisheries, tbe Council should blame Jnadequate law enforcement ntber 1ban lbe fishenDen.

Mr 'Rice asked '11ow do we teD you Ibis ahould be acr-we4 MCJ to ao home? We can't live with and it shouldn't have Botten Ibis far. •

r Mr. Cameron commented that he couldn 'tiiDderstand why lbe JOVemmeDt was lpCDding Jood money to investigate this problem.

Pmposal3. IDclude wbidD&. ad bake, md oceiD poat iD die Maltispecies """''emml1IDIL

·. Ms. Stevenson commented thai she supponed the 2-1/2" mesh lize for whitina but that Ibis ~ ~~ prnposaJ needs to be funher wmt and lhar alllquid 6shina lbould be eumpted from lbe minhnum .. mesh size ~iremem .

. ,. Pluposa14. Measures for die Cabivltar Sboa1s wllidD& &bel)'.

No comments.

ProposalS. Soa1bem New I!DaJIDCI ,etlowtail dalules.

No comments.

PloposaJ 6. ODe mesh oa boln1

Two people carnmented that they ~fish with onJy Jaqe mesh lboud acept when in an exempted fishely mcf uw DO reason 1hat Ibis lhou1d DOt apply to aD &beDDeD.

Item for pab1ic ctisaassioD

Commeuts; l) Ban the use of cootie covered pound cables IDd lep mead. 2) Fisbennen llready own too much old par lhal.eplations DOW ~"bh. If a aew type of pit il required, then the aovemment should pay for it. 3) Tbe rule~ 5-1/2" mesh-lhrouabout 1rawl aets was .implemented.cmly 6 weeks .,o. Its too 100ft to JeqUire fisbermen 10 make lanber modifications to their par. 'lbe ocean il abeady fuD of discardecJ aets that filhennen may DOt Je&ally to dump anywbele. 4) Fisbennen catch too man~ dabs with 5-1/2" diamond mesh. Square mesh would make this problem worse. 5) Give zmen • iDce:ntlve 10 111e tquare mesh in the whitina fishery. don't folce 1bem 10 use it.

. ..(!28..

New ED&tu4 Pil!a1117 lluacemnt OcnuacD IBroadw&)'

8auJUI,ItiA 01108 .. Nep'hoae l171131.oca

Pu.blic Attenclance at eroundftab Pubttc; ltarua Date 2/23/20 Location Boltd•7 Tnn, J!orrJend 1 IIF

lPLEASE PRmT CLEAKLYI

!lame 2'elepbone

Pu.blie Attendance at Groun4fiab Public Bea·d.111 Date 2/Z3/90 LocatiOD loU«•x Jg. J!Mtlend, JCE .

(PLEASE PRINT CLEA:R:LYl .

Jlame B'pme Addre11 !»lep),one

' ~· ,. ,... /.•• ... • •; I ~·~· ••• ~r-~

. ;!_ :J\{.fv~"\ p \!..\\ cQ •l~"'i I 'l i\. M '%.~ · (t\lh 'f"Ln • f1& 1' 'f f· Z I 'i <:

. .

·· IJM, )cA¢lr tr , &r *'i" L. "'"'"'*7'' ~-t& e 3- s-, 1 G

£L~' fo/ b"IJ!jltt .. ,-LM CMI.l(?eJ'1.1' Azti_7A­. ;> • · lt,-vl,rt Al&.aodec=s<7/er.Jf< Sa PC.!! lhas w.e1pc ~~7=f?$-S?3f=

auzpY •

, ·~ kr '.1 :rn ·· e., ~\t'" ~~'44.:

. . ...

'.

•

..c25-New EDJ!u4 Fi4e.I7Hualtmeat CoucD

IBroaciWQ' 8auiUI. MA 11808

'lelephcme I1'11J31..oal

Pu.bUc Attendance at Gtpupdfhb MUc Jeartn1 Date 2/23/90 Location lolf.day tpp. Pprdpd, ME .

I PLEASE PlUNT CLEARLY I

~~~ #:~f/o- t;;~y S:rt9 .. t· &~,~£¥ ~ &aAL-:::N~.,z:ar ~m W-~tr:-:P7

J f u.-

~z1'1 .·.;,~ ... ~,,. /Z,.$4' r1 ,4P Q.'fc:Aart/' Btr .. A. Aht· '!'%'·/-'?/

A "''"' - .... - l"t -"' 't _, =t -:--t:.. "2./ L..,.. e;; r. ,.. c.=.r:\,' tl --. ~, --t'-<:>ct!) ,:>:J'T'fs la:J 8-vdzr:L.AtvH c=tS H rl;:"t;, 2. ..!..:!. _ ~-, ~ "'

~?£::W » rt,.,swdf .Q Jt.r\.t.,."'\ -;=;Q,' c J7:Cf' •ttli 0

f!:i-1::,<<=(/ -P i'J,C //'~# d~te ?&·/·vpp

e'rJl ~L. £i! th.-k.t. O;s ~'IL· 3''' ~tn/C

'77/-l.l./

NEW ENGLAND fiSHERY MANAGEMENT COUNaL

Summary of Public HearinJ CGmments Amendment 14 to abe NOCbeas1 Multispecia FMP

The hearina was opened at 7:00p.m. by Orotmdf"JSh Committee member Roben Smith. He stated that each of the 111 pr~ coma~ iD lbe helriDJIUIDID&l')' document would be conside~d and discussed individuaDyiD order.

Mr. MarshaD very briefly described lbe Maldspecies PMP md lbe minimum lfzes for ibe eiaht species cov~ by tbat meuure. ·

Ploposall. Replace lbe Es"'DJ:*M! Fllbcdes Proplm widlm apednlf1Jfll flsbay.

This proposal broupt one or two questions that were IDSWered No comments were nceived.

Ploposa12. Melsura to ftlduce byCISda ill die DOI1baD • ..., &hely.

This proposal broupt no comments from tbe alicDce.

Ploposa13. IDclade whida&, .t bate, 1114 OCUD poa1 iD die Ma1titpdel awnaaemeaJ aDit.

Richard Isaksen stlle41bat 2-1/2" mesh for whitinJ would .Uow .U the aqaid bycatch to escape. He fishes in the Hudson Canfon area .-ad ~es the 2-1/2" mJnirnurn mesh lize. Scientists don't know what is happen1111 in the ocem. "'"bm is no probJem With whiting in the ocean. Nils Stolpe asked about tlie byellch for those who enter die squid &hely. M.r Smith mswered and explained tbe teD perccDt fisure.

Another argumentor auagested that Da equid lhould a&o be Included In the es~ to the 2-1/2" mesh requirements ll1d noted 1llat July IDd Aapt is DOl the liP time~ fOr the exemption. He did Dot have lltemate dales ID minct,IJut pn::mlsed to aapply them ID a written comment.

Martin StDlson felt that the planlhould ~for a RlaaJ:ion oftbe pvposed aplation of altowing whiting if stocks pow to b.faher levels. He uqed that limited entl)' be consideJed for the fishei)'. BNce Halgren asked flow far lbe 2-1/l"meah would 11pply to the IOUib. He was told through the J'llllt of whitillaaad pout.

Richard Isaksen ltltcd chat tbe aaly 11D1D whitiDa they catch is CIDJIU cJarina September and October and that they am few. At Giber times there are almost DO IIDID fish. He aoteCIIbat fish as lmiD as 10 inches ~ Jadily marketable.

One 'l'!aker commented tbat 2-1/2" mesh wD1 am Jots of fish iD tbe New Jersey~. Another s11d a lot of mau:tetable bycatch would llso be lost w.kh 2-1/2" mesh.

•

Soulh wan. NJ -027-

John Cole suggested the mesh .eauJation apply an1y Jo the Cultivator Shoals fisbel)' blaot off New Yolk and New Jersey. 1his 'WouJd &Dow use or aiiDIDer mesh to main the lqUld. Proposed .egs wouJd put New Jersey &shennan out of business. ·

Proposa14. lrfeasmes for abe CaltiYator ShoiJs whlliD& fisheq.

One commentator ltlted he had helrcJ that Caltivator Shoats whitins were 10 Jarae they aDJec1 in 5-1/2"' mesh. Another questioned 'Whether there Is nliable Wonnatlon about the whJt_inJ Moc::k. Several questiOns were asled about lhe aeasampliDa pro&JWD. Several comments lilted that foreign processing s!Ups are currently fishing in the EEZ for Adantic eea hel'riDJ. Another . reiterated that all the study and msearch 'Wif done iD New EnaJmd anc1 didn't apply to the :Mid-Atlantic area. •

A final comment wu that lbe Caltivator Shoats area lhoald be left • alpi'WIIina area.

Proposa1 s. Soalhem New lfDIJind :reJicnrtail clolllrel.

·· After an explanation or the proposal, one commentltor endo!Sed the flexlbDity to dose areas within the Ye1Iov.1ail Closure area on the Nantucbt Uahtship closed area. Another IUJgested the Cow1c:D should consider a 5,000 pound limit per week aa yellowtaillanclinas per YeSSel.

PJoposll6. 0Dc mesh CID board.

One fishennan DOted that aU the six proposals ldnk. Bruce HaJpen mnadted lhar in New . . Jersey a c:all in system has aUowed fisbem11n to transit mas either closed or aatricted and

· · SUJBested the CouncD consider a call in to allow transit or the RMA by wssels lbaf want to do so . to get to another area to fish with small mesh. Several present stated that fishery manapment

; should not be to facilitate eaf'on:ement activity.

NUs St~lpe stated that the CouncD lhould adopt the alternative propouJ to aesuict tmall mesh possession by tequ~g it to be stored mel DOt available in the RMA: ·

The added queStion ofrequirinJ use of 5-1/2"' ~q~~are mesh rather than limply aaying 5-1/2"' mesh. There were no people present who have ued aquare mesh 10 tbem weze DUI'IICIOUS questions, but no recommendations from the audience.

Mr. Halgren mtumed to~ 13 to IUJJCst that PeJIIIPS the bycatcb in the exemption for squid should be reconsidred and perhaps, as in the cue ollhr~, Jarser OD m individual trip. It was c:lear that no one pmsent thou&ht fO percent bycatda ofwhitana was • accepcable leveL One man suggested 50.. 50 uips of aquid Md Whitina be aU~ by lbose tatptJna .quid.

Mr. Smith dosed the hearin& at 9:15p.m.

DOM.2S96C Attachment: Attendance list

• . .

'tf J ... -" ~ ;)9/) ljl J - ,~,<... ?i'7·~~¥S H-111//-?J >1171178'&

. ooCestet1ilshore1isheries'itss .. - •

lew Ena~and Fishery Manaaement Council 5 !roadway . .

.. , Saurus, Mass. 01906. £WlNGIJ..r.."::fir,'"':-..~

Dear Sirs, • After much discussion A meetincs vith•embera of the

Gloueester lnsbore Pisheriea Association on the issues of amall • · mesh !Jaberies, we have concluded that aany of.tbe proposals

have merit but need clarification. .

PROPOSAL 1 - Jeplacinc exempted fisheries (except tor zortb• ern ahrimp).with an experi•ental fisheries

-. .... We are arainst the •Experimentai Pisheri; •• 4eaianation, as ve in

• ~ Gloueester have historically, for over '0 ~ears, conducted a amall meah {whiting, red hake and herrin&) tiaberiea with landin& data civen to port arenta. We approve aome of the ••••urea presented.

A. Allow the IMFS Bortheaat Resional »irector (the Reaional Director) the flexibil1t7 to issue or c!e:ny permits based on Ilia ~udrment of whether a particular tishinr. activitv cauaed an unaccept­able level ot harm to 8tocka of re&ulated apeciea in the Exempted Fisheries Area.

J. If and when a P.M.P. tor whitin£1 red hake, etc. ia established and approved, a ~easel tiahin& in the small mesh fisheries would be allowed to retain shrimp as a tiJcatch. (la appr4ve4 and propoaed by the Atlantic States Marine Piaheriea Commiaaion). !his bycatch of ahrimp could zot be uaed toward the percentase ot rerulated apeciea·on the trip) · period of reportiDI requirement.

c. lequire fishermen to report uains the tier fiahins trip record torm.

two

D. !he permit holder would carr1 a lea Sampler if requested to 4o ao by the Be&ional ~irector.

J:. letain the aame nlea 11ai tilll by catch of zoeaulated. apeciea-25~ of the taraet apecies on each trip and 10K tor the ,.,o da7 reportilll period.

P. Prohibit the uae of roller aDd roethopper aear in the Gulf of Maine Whi tiDI Piahery •

--··---~

--·

~ .-. ..

ooCestet1fishore1isheries2tss • •

PROPOSAL 2 - Measures to ~educe bJC&tch 1D the Borthern Shrimp •iaherJ ·

•

A. On the reduction of the ehrimp •eaaon to three eontha (Jan. Peb. and March) we are totallJ aaainat thia eeasure as a reduced period could cauae a •a~or loss of ahoreside market• and a complete collapae of the ahrimp fiaheriea •

B. Vessel• in the ehrimp ~iaheriea coul4 mot 11ae the bycatch of whitinc toward the re1ulated •peciea percentases of 25~-1~.

C. Ve support the ••.• o~_.appro!ed a:ad workable eep-arator aear. . • .; . .,.

PROPOSAL 3 - Vhi tinr, Bed Bake, and Oceu Pout tD the Multispecies M&D&fement ua1t. .

A. Establish a 2 1/2• Minimum 1Dside •easurement to apply throuahout the ~anse of epecies under the multispee1es PMP.

E. fhe exemption for a directed loliao equid ~ishery. c. Direeted Herrinr Piaheriea would be exempt, ~rom

this measure, however, boata ~iahina for herrinr would limit the catch of re£ulated apecies to 1". Whiting at times are eixed.1n larae mumbera with herring,••------rtill one-apecies or another takes over the bottom, We are askinl for a bycatch of whiting with·no percentare allowed toward the reculated apee1es.

D. fhe mesh aise reQuirement of 160 eeshes counted • from the end of a trawl met and pha•ea in over a

3 year period would be acceptable.

Rationale: Gloucester has historically fished tor whitinr and eeeinr the le~el of ~uven1le fiah that are comin£ back, we believe these eeasures will be mee4e4 tor.a ~ealtby recovery. As Glouceater and porta eouth ~elJ on the

wbitin& fisheries to •ake up a larce percentase of their Jearly catch we believe theae eeaaurea ahould be enacted as soon as poasible. ·

EStABLISHMENT OP tOLERANCES • We believe in establishment of tolerance in all twines 1s needed due to eanutacturinr technique• that are used in the •anutacturin& of vebbiur. We propoae that a work1nr croup be eatabliabed to look 1nto thi• 1asue of creat importance to the tiahiDf industry. (Ste enclosure)·

--·

•

oocesfer 1ilshore1isheries2lss -

PROPOSAL 4

. ~_.;. _......,... -­- -On the des1cnate4 ebanre ot the Cult1•ator Shoal Wh1t1nr 7ishery,the Gloucester Inshore Piaheriea Association approves ot the chanfe to a rerular flaberlea prot14e4 b3 the outline·conditiona •

• PROPOSAL 5

In as much as the Southern Bew Enslan4 Yellowtail cloaure srea and the ~antueket Li£htehip area are mot tiahed ,, our membership we withhold comment on tb1a propoaalexcept to aay that, it a lar£e Jearclaaa ot Jellowtail tloUDdera are be1nr observed then measures ahoul4 'e taken to ~roteet auch with workable measures.

PROrOSAL 6 • "': ·._ .- .A!ter talkiD£ with members who t1ahe4 the 1ar1e aesh rel­

ulated area, we believe that one aeah nettiDI while tiah1nr in the area is a rood practice and one tbat is presently practiced in Glouceater. Also,it aeems like this would five the Coast Guard and the IMPS a 'etter tool to work with when dealin£ with liners.

'SQUAU f'.&ISH CODENDS We believe that more research ahou14 be done to werify the benefits of the use.ot a;uare aesh codends while keepiDB in mind that there are limited aarkets tor aueh twine at this present time •

•

e e irector Gloucester lnabore Pieheriee Aeeoc •

•

--

. .

• .

• •

SMALL MESH PISHERIIS Por Wh1t1DI• le4 Hate

!hrouchout their Bans• 1. I.Y Januar)' 1990 (or date to be eat) 2 1/2• J.D. Cod ln4 u4

extension by definition that a eoden4.be 80.100 Meab »eep fhe aame for the extension.

2. 2-5 Jeara to eliminate ~toek ~llee of aeta ~ webbiar • (As there ia DO poasibilitJ Of a JuJ Jack ~laD) after tbe CUtoff

• date A ainimum of 2 172• l.D. throu,hout the aet. p.., -A. Durinr thi• period (2-5 Je&ra teat with combination

ot ideaa to redp~e the di1earcJ of aroundtiab (aoetlJ tlat ~ish) ~ecauae duriDI the June-December period run in with round 1roundfiah 1a at •iniaum levela.

~··· '· Effort cuttiDJ _ • "': ·.• . A. lo roller, roekhopper or diec ~illiDI of amall •eab

nets will be allowed-to eut down on.tbe opportunitJ to run into ,roundfieb. • •

!. Only boats that can ~rove tbeJ ~iab 50.15• (to be est.) ot the time ror amall aeab 8pec1ea would be allowed ~nto proaram-elimiaatins or euttiDJ down

......

the boats that would 3ump into procram to eonceal elicit p~act1ces. ,/

/ . ~/ ~. Establish a tolerance ot webbiDI 8chedule tor tinea ~or

'iolat1ons. · 0..5" lo Violation

Over 5-l~ lat ottenae-written warninr tbat'a put on record that ~e~h 1a reach1DI a aon-uae ~aba•

Over lot'

2n4 ottenae-Gear (eodena, extension) or net which 1a out of eonfiauration) will be eontiacate4 3r4 Ottenae-Gear ua all tiah on· board 1a con•

tiacate4 Jlua.losa of entry into Small Reah Eroaru tor )-6 •tha.(to be eat)

lat Offense·- Gear ud liab Contiacated 2nd Ottenee - Gear u4 liab COntiacated ~lua

out ot Proaru ~or J-6 •tha. Srd Ott•~·· - Gear a »1ah CoDtiacate4 ~lUI DO

ace••• Sftto ha~l lleah Procram

.

t/s. Establiah a work croup (Piaher.en, JnduatrJ, State A federal people) to identitJ and locate potential time Jer1oda or areas tor larse aeah uae ODlJ.

•

WRITT.EN OOHMENTS ON .AMEN1HFm' 14 Submitted br T/1 Fiah, Jnc.

And it'a Preaident -lohrt 11. Tetrault

Jt •iaht h hst to start vitb a deacriptiOD of who I .am and Jaov I t~ualifJ ~o aubmit the followina commenta. ·

J own and operate three (3) commercial fiahiaa wessela operatin& rear­round in the Gulf of Maine. 1beae wesaela vere desiaaed aad conatructed vitb the 'Gulf of Maiae ahr:l.llp fiaberru ld.ad aad ... e prowen to h •err effectiwe harve~tera over tbe past decade, laadiaa 5I of Jlaille'a ahrillp catch for the 88-89 aeason. J am currentlr a l»oard aemhr at the pd.ll.lrJ aquatic lender in the State of Maiae, repreaentill& the fiabiaa c01111unit7 vitb cloae to $40 aillion ia loans. J am also a current ••ber of the Commercial Fiabiaa Jaduatrr Yeasel Advisory Committee and a former semhr of the ortatnal l»oard that fouaded the Portland Fish Exchange, the nation'• first full displar auctioa. I Jaave ._en involved in Gulf of Maine fisheries all •r life aad frequentlJ apeak and offer

_:comments at hearinas such as these. J chose to aul>mit •1 CDIII!Dents 1D vritin& .. this time because vhen it comes to the abrillp fiaherr, •1 aotiODs often take

over and my comments are Dot as effective &i•en orallr. W1tb over a 811lion dollars invested 1n a fishery, J can't Jaelp •r emotional SDwolwement.

General Comments

It is not fair to shut down the abrblp fisher, for any lenath of time while aear-vork ia still ._in& conducted. Sbutttna down a fishery until a proper met ia tried ., a poorlJ-funded ao•ermment agency is not sound aanaaement. Offer incent~wes to the priwate sector that vould encourage priwate invea~nt to Jae1p reach the aoals set by 8anaaera, then JOU can illpoae theae aeaaures oa all operators 1n the fisherJ to reach Jour loaa-tera objective.

All the pror,osed amendments fall abort iD addressina •r primlrJ concern of 'aivtna direction• to anr of the fisheriea 1avolved. The shrimp fisherJ iD particular .. S auffered for Jeara from little or Do auidance. !be abseace of aa.e aaster plan raises havoc ._cause it doesn't perait tnveataent b7 the priwate aector ashore. Jot kDowin& whether JOU Will .. 'fe !!!I. MaiOD Jear-to-Jear diacouraaes anr aianificant invesc.eat iD processina or even the development of alterutiwe aarkets ·tor the product. ru. rear ia a aood example of this; poor prtcea coupled With the aev bJ-catcb reatrictions ~ave forced .anr weasels to ~rweat larae 'uantitiea of poor qualitJ (larae cOUDt) ahriJJp to aake •P for the lack of revenue from tneir mormal fishill& opera tiona. llr YeaHla, for example. landed trice their morul ladtnas of ahriap for JanuarJ for a 201 reductioa 1D revuue. TbeJ deliwered this vtth a 201 iacrease in effort! If the product wa .. tter •tiUaed br the

•

• • Page 2.

processors then some of this effort ~&ht be relaxed throu&h better returns for the product. Myself, I would have invested long aao in peel in& aachines, araders ud freezers if I could be &iven some direction bJ fiaberJ aanaaera. Each aeaaoa .is aet a couple of weeks before und v:l th DO •ntion of tile aut; aot a healthy atmosphere for investaent. VbJ DOt develop a plan . that addresses the lona-tera aoal• and stick to tt tn1teac! of the "damage control" ve are aow practicina. Z.,rovementa throuab technoloaical aeaz: advucel il .. obvious path to follow, ht the current laws do not eacouraae thta. 'J'heJ iD fact diacouraae aue l>y ukina :l.t cumbersome and f:I.DanciallJ rillkJ to experiaeat. l'illh bebaviorial studies and advancements in aear deli&n aake tt possible to apply today'a knovledae to JesterdaJ'• probleJU. lnovina I had 2 six sonth seasons to AJDOrtize •J costa I voulc! uperilent with separator trawls currentlJ available iD Europe.

The present aanaaement •J•ta 1or lorthern Sbrillp, the lorth Shrillp Settion of the Atlantic States fisheries COamdss:l.on, ia poor bJ comparison to other :l..lllportant f:l.aberies. L:l.ttle is done oataide the annual stock assessment and a couple of •et:l.nas vbere a "political compromise" ia often ~•ached. lov a different aroup of managers are attackina th' fiaberJ fr011 a different anale; the alleaed unimporta~ce of ahrtmp as opposed to froundfiah and the need to ban shrimp:l.na to aave aroundfish._ It a tt.e the tvo aroups consolidated their efforts bto one and uaaaed the f:l.aberJ as a 1o'hole :l.n close consultation with the iDdustrJ 80 ve can pool our efforts to .. ,rd one common aoal.

§pecific Comments on Proposals

Proposal 11 . This is alriaht provided the Exper:l.ltental F:l.sherJ Mcban:l.ca allows a

fisherman the ab111 ty to aet 1ft and out of a fi.aherJ v:lthin a 8:1.n:l.aum t:I.IDe frame so he can take advut.aae of weather. •rket and fiab abundance.

d) The requirement that a peral t bolder aust C8ITJ a aea sampler would bave to h accc.paaied bJ a 801'e axtnsive disclaimer than I v:l tnessed last JUr. It would Jaave to hold the vessel owner ~ess on at least three front.a; aegliaence. tmaeavort.MDeas ud ~--dJ ., the aove~nt • insurer aaainst the vessel for U..aes the tuurer paid to the injured. 'Jbe diacla:l.lter last fear for the aea -pler proaram vas Dot extensive aouah to allow • to participate, not all vessels are OVDer/operatora.

•

; ,.

•

• rase 3.

e) this only vorks after the aped.es Jaaa a veil-defined presence. In the·hainnina of any chanae of fiaherJ, after •onths of al»sence frOID that fiaherJ, a certa:lll amount of experimentation ia involved that redef1Dea that fisherJ resultina in a •dirtJ• catch for a abort period. Jlo one ia ao aood aa to be •on the fish• tmmediatelJ, and diacardiD& all reau1ate4 apeciea aver 10% is both wasteful and uproductive. Let'a DOt foraet the intent vhen draftina these and other rea•· .

. . Comments on Alternative Measures

I aussest: retainina a), and eliainatina •> hcauae (b) favora oae aeosraphic aeament over another. I vould also add the ~Dimum .eah aize and·the aea sampler requirement (aa in d. above).

Proposal 12

The econ0111:lc value of the ahrbp fiaher, llbould be IIUaured incladina by-catch to properly compare the Yalue of landinaa to aroundfish. Bere the comparison is ude of one apecies to .!11 the reaulated apecies. lou ••t consider that a shrt.p·aeason is for aix aontba at lG-12 hours a day aa ·compared to aroundfiahina which ia tvelw· aontha around the clock. !hia ia ~ot a fair comparison especiallJ when a peak Jeer iD aroundfish ia compared with a poor year in shrimp. I vould like to ahov ay 1990 ahrillp landinas annualized in 1989 dollars to emphasize the iaportance of the Gulf of Maine shrimp fishery!

a) As I said earlier, vby ahould the industry ao v:lthout \!bile. an under-funded aovernment oraanization experiDenta. Involve industry throuah incentives. A aet available eov that has been around for Jeara and would do alot to llinillize discards sells for $1.5,000 - $20,000. A fiaherun Meda usurances that if be purchased the net he could use it lona enouah to properly amortize the coat. Another •iacentive• ai&ht allow an expert-ental fisherJ iD the off-.eason to develop htter aear if an observer vaa carried to ~nitor the catch to usure that no additional .. ra -· kouaht to the fiaher,. ru. vould allov the fisherun to benefit frOID Ida uperi.Mntation. Everyone could then cash in on the bovledae aaiaed.

I vould assume the Sea Samplina P.roaru data INacb up rour allelation of December'• discard• u '-ina •unacceptablJ biah vben c•pared to other ~~onths u tbe firat aonth. Aa I have said at prior hearinas. "' content that the firat ~nth in the ahri•Jt fisherJ v:lll be the dirtiest IMtcauae it is the firat aontb •

..

' ,

. .. • Paae 4.

Vessels are wenturina into areas they have not Y1sited for months and an increase in discards over aubsequent aonths is inevitable. Is the type of aear considered into the equation? £ny data collected '' fiahereen asina •erdina ded.ces 1.D front of the net ahould .. throw out.

Processors will aot aear •P aufficiently for a three acmtb season to off-set revenues lost u the other three 110ntbs.

b) 'l'bis should have ken this vay oriairaslly.

Proposal 13

a) 2!" ainiiDWD 11esb ai&e aoUDds like the optina Msb &iva t:be data in the proposal.

d) 160 meshes of 2i" between the krtot twine is 40' of vebbin&! To a small vessel this.!!. all the •sh in the net.

, Proposal 16

I support only the alternative proposal •ut •uestion vby ve need any . restrictions at all aiven the amount of vays a fishersan us to c1rcWDYent the law. 'J'he.re is DO "easy" alternative to at-sea enforcement and catchina the individual in the act. If lav enforcement could .. achieved this vay, ve would all have aovernors on our cars.

lespectfully submitted,

lobert M. Tetrault President T /P. Fish, Inc. •

-:I> • c . .t'lttKZrr/4""-., ~-c... l>IU\.-.:D~ tJ. E'. f". 1-{. c.

c.S 13~6)4c:Jv.lt4-f ~.4114JS 1 MA-. o 1' o(p

-:z:>~ MIL.. ~I#KC.... :J? C)PF EA. 11{£- ,._t.i.. w•J.. {; ~...._ 011\ ,J files 1-o.f:)s,.-~ -:nic-

"fll, P.~>).t(.,J CP ~""'~~~ -t:};:-1- ~'Til£ M-tl~~~~ ~~~ ""?ler.tJ •

l>'Laf>os K i I ::r ~ off as~ ~ ~'$ A-s ~ ~ .SS>~?-c.~ M~..,c...~.

(8...) &;ap~£0 - lf""'y.:ul wA-J'i'~ k1:.DJF-• .J f -nb: S\)~cPLc E)C..Q41~n\tfet.v n.Jfi-~lf." J)aJI c~-;e l'f tJE:U C'L~ l~ftt..'I'TI•"!J., nbs ,~.._~ESC..ca,J1::.)4f, • AJ /N "11/£

I rl l>..JS"7'ff.y.. -nla ;r'lt-o P• SK fir+~ lf)o .5/'~f'Ft..c.. 77~ 'FL.,~ ..s .J <-t-1 4-5 J y fi'tM- 4'r .., ..,~ tl ,.,.,.,.,~ IT ~CUll,.., IM Jt ,.. " -"8~ ? ~~·s Z?o 7f"t1 + •,., 4{ p,. t. ~ o tJt ~ .,t-t:itl'ri,J• (.b)~PI'o.s~-... ~ ~~- -~...s • .c._o 71-l"s"'TT --f<f'PL4-c.E .-nla! ~..c__, 4!-'"A::.•P&t"-1.~ 4U ~ E'"' k.. F""'L ..fl'1'1ib .

(C) CJP~$CS>-,.. 4-a .s~ -r<'~•r•,:;·llf·~~c.e.l l "F Y tJ.J w.~,..Jt'",... IC.' ,.,J fi..,_j ~ yc o-p.rr tt- p_... • .r) er~vPL.1er ~ eltr&o .Jcss-«s c,.t,c..(..•~ ,.... ~' ~ 7thJ JN~~.Ja

f.{ ~ (S)PPt&Fol!tl ~ ~ ~. ~ ..J ns t!J. .~ a'-<.. C. t~~ptJt.1~ ~ ,OL(?r ~,., C...f ''F ~. c..l&~ot'i '1b ':i)- ,SQ.

{e) oPIJQS~ -ra ~ •~ .-- ~J..,vo7<~'17fF 2~--/. ?~ Of.tj 1• /. ~ 'P~..,ti..,-p«c""

..

Ao\lf: wiJ\E.,JAl·PuP.,~..ttas SJ'~~~ ~JQ.( Fal'&.iN~)...J .,1~ P~ uT-" 4 ('lv.p.~..e,.c M.~ ~\AN -rile~ .. .._~~ p

t\\A-I(vJ'11·f~?uP-s.t<. &~~~E O..»•c./."f tll~trO "F6<­It·t.L 111.'~ lfWA-c.C &r.

:C ~\A.ICr .. ;;,!~u:E~-rtb= ~~"AL~<Lf'll~'"'Po-,tk. ~ a,.4-t,.JAct~£71h!' ~~ stiiC.I~P r::,~ · · t~ yuu ;{bS:i!DI- fr'S-A-tzE'srDII\\'tP.1&E-,:>.,~c..tC. ~~,~~~~"(l;:j e:J~ A u...o _, ,-t( c: S..l4 ~ ~ n~ ,.J ~ -lri'P~ fto5 1\ Paa;, P• ~ r;, A 1'1 A<:r f..>~ ~'-o.SS :D,c;.c~,,_..,,Aitfr1-w..u. 1"1-\-,,. as ._..,J INS'..str-a. tt-'' 'Vfk 3...-o -i- ·\1 s ~;· t..:> , ~~ ..t. J ~ , ,. -nhs r-.. ~ if,z...r- :.: 1:: JC..Perc:--.:-.,... \,..s P ..... ~l""tt:"..J, .~ ,, ,J~) t'..t ~ ,.f..()• G.·~.,

:I:"' ()r/s~t!. ,.,,:.,.J aiVI1 ,-,h- ~. C:.~ M.(.. ftt:J-1?\1 a.~ S'ftiCclri. ~ MArJ4·f-a.~ IJ\t;r'"l- Q(l.._ ~ 11'1CtA.JcPWe- -nlf: ~ ..c=:::l'"&lt.CI>cc::'D..,J ...,..a\O(.J -f\tJ y Jv"'~"')'- • ... ~-> SPe:c-,G".. T rf>!..y -:TU ts ~e:c.A-Ja e '(.:iW -ts ,f.. ,.......,-P (,.J.,J tJer.r c. "'"J-a~l cQ.4.. ""'"f"'~ ""'Aa- ytf~l~Jt) M-1£ ~ ,.,..._.,. "'"'~e-J -~tt.l.o C'tolLy ._., •l·e,J 'Jou-p~oucc ~.:St) L.\S (ttt.K:t~e.E4ft ~(h~\) Sif.,...,Lw.> '/, .... , -~£ 'i,,J&.J 41J., (;;.(.~ ~~~HS\~c~ .

..

-p,t .. of>&a...-t.~ *"- X A~\'~'1 fSlPP.\110. T'fkr. lJaA.~S~~~­"P-t.~tl•: ... 1 l ~ .:b••--''i ::tl.r\\ p,NE'" &JA)O~ '"tile -pA.S~'f" Ml\lllll\c.t.-=-~.srNl" \>:;, '/ -rzk: '\. S.M.F.C •• ~tJ ... A14t 1'lf."c;.~.,"'-• · 5"t-{. ·• c. o L..¢4J f: (4 .U,t i:. ~ o_,E lri"f' /rf'J'J MeeT~ t.:» Ka( .. :t .. c,tr~)

"\-'s-'4.'' \~ j,)t:..4La.K..G......._tD"-~~~ ~_,~-.'1't!W ~-~e..~ oJecc.. J:" w.s •• . u ... o .q..p P 4:.!~ ~'TI£ &a~ C. e I" cr¥r"na~ IJN ~ 'F.a -.1-' ,IC '1 •"" 'I~~"' \·'n"4.7 \b HeLP J>e.:Jn•' ..1( S.rP~"-~~(. .,..,~,c~ J ::> t~l '-'.: d ~t\ e.&\b \\b. t4) o ~1· "J! "'"'L a,.,fhW \ll~t'-r '-"e-... ~t- ., H.: ,..Js:>,:)>n'-1 ~..(..J&..~ .t~~..tc Ftta AL lf'l'b..Jir'C.. e>~ 9y~

;.f. 4 \!r\ ·"· U!,. aJ 5•._, <..& """' E:' M ~ T S~ 'FP.~ -nEe- ~.Jo M.\ C.

C.:.c:.•~~~ l...l."l~~ Pi= 'i!>o-n-\ •

;-..:)'t''ET~ F I•.. f'-\.att5 ..J 'l~. ~') ~·'"~~ . - ~~ -n:. ~R..f:C.:Ebtt':t'a '-·~~4EW'~. (~>\ •nPl'tU~·tp-\'\. ...fto$ ~~.. f...t,.)ot.tLO lrPPitav'E \F ~u.JeJt~ \ ~- !,n,."f "c._,.., f..O fo)u~ A-u .. ""Q~ \~ ~ E-.c...,...P'l'e.'O "Ft'i~y 'f·"'u ·•• .n-,.J u ~l\\PL !:;;*Yt" l'- MG to{ Si; '.C.: .!fC -nic:a ~ C" Tl"""" E:. • '-'} t.,.A?P 6JSCD - Ul •Ll ttf)Pii..D'-"t!" \~ -nk: llet:eS a'-lllol 'S LEK -p. ,1:-l?" ,.uo"'s-.rc.7 M~~~~3. ~SEl.v~. Yo.J ,.e:T ir .,,. .. , \ c,..'"'H fee.. -yc.c:ss:N'\ l'i"' lb ..,c;· A-AI~ t....) I: w ICA... Tl:\-\.. y .... 1 \ · ·~ E" uK .t rr- G.)'-- "'' ~

Ct)) l.Nt.:- t-1 ~e.> - -n/r: tJ. e. 1=!. M. C. MAy QF--r;.~ 1~ c:F7 iJ I Q ,.J tl• nfe- fl~~.M?t=:,C .. ~..s«.. - UJE d! ~ a~D.J~ N~ ·l.tt \M ~ .4 .. ~:M. \=:C Jf\lCGQP~o__, w ,~~ j1-£:• -tot IV l \:.+<.-~ ~' "\1:'~ c,.,a36c.Jl~ ~~ E" ¥;tJk(. &4-f •

. .

1-'~,L\V&'~ft-(. :l\-.3. ..1-~ e>PPDSez:t -n -n.ks. ~ -rb.:.Yc.-cEt>...,c, G.~~i Tl-lt:-:- t4., eAI ~e -pc ~-n ~,J IS "'Fi L(..(!IQ ~ •-n-l -a.~e:A~C~Ttc: 6~81\t!;~. ~i5'U)Cl~\( '*'s .to ,-,;- C~ ai! \Jf\\~.0 e»,J

· · t='l "-~ -~ · "'P-eA.OaiVti •

.S~fC.-\\.;.c. ~~..,,in .. (g.) U\9PgS2J '1b \\ItS ~'Te'a. ~ '/P~ wt\IJ"\ z-.l 11~&t

,-.13.£ \ISEO '"ft\lt.,)·ev.r II 1\lEr IIJA Dect.~~~~ ?"t.-;. ,tec.y ~ UJi-\ trtH 4 • ..,-.e.fl.l S•y S.o l

rh" APPR.s\1\r

<.d) a>Pro..Seo- st-(....slo~- ~sl.~w~N" ~-o-.~.­THG t-)E\~ o~ :J\r~e 1Sj tqcro.

So~,J ~Q...-.l ~~D S'&.a•O 12\.\~ .:ra"'IS c.Jec.~ If) ~~p"..,. t'\.~~c..&r ~) ~TJ.I.-..s -pa...Pwa~ .. No \...,a-ae"L.S ~l'-•Wiib A~.,...,~ 1 ·

--r/t,l> P OSQ-'- -4 c.( ClWo~ liD ~ •s Si"tfr-"'l'&l) • -~E wr-ao~o tr -n. ~1 6'A,..Woo\ P\IIF-1.

SPE1=.,?' ..... c.. M~~. (~) tl• (Q~~ c_L) ~Pe, (b "'tD It'S' Bnrt'l\..., • -~:I .,.a•c.(;) .,;-. SA1 .S "~

e. ~P'\l!v.) -"Pet-~"l'\ .. ~~·,"'t"\~"' ~ 4-'PLy. ~) 1) MPI..•.J'E

-a.) ~-£" ~u- •• r Mer~ .- •F .:Jb -'CF ft;' l'i 1o .1) c;,PP~E a+S S"'M1i!P - c.ttr...,..-.cr ..,.. ~Pil...~ Aha.'

'" e -..Pewz. tf'oo\.~'tlt't... (.J,) /rPPR..e.IE .

~e Po.,~ J\. ~ lf{JI'A.•\Ie .

Pa. • '-r. ttt.. air. (.. twPR...avF.

r-'.c.~ t\\Ot(.fi :rTA-~• -n\-,s tOPP&1.."'"Nr') \ 't-'f -rl) S'c.:ttili ft'rill~ ~!. ... c..t-\A,J'-..el \b 'VA.ODJC£ AI\~ IN "•C..JrM.,J't"' f'U /ltAIIJ ~fl&~ ~lt. ~ ~Saw~ MA~ ~y ~ ~hiA~~c.."L...• :r;-...,~\.c:JS.nl~ls;'S"f5 S..sc.J ..4& JL\ T~ "?~Urc.~·~ '"a~ .J~ ~'By~~~« ~t...o~~A f\s~t'- ~~A ()~Pe\.K S~~t\1r ~etJDM~c(IS~Y, tf fill"~ S.,c:...( t1·s ..U.S.~--a~\11\\C:. ~~ f'L4C:E' • .l\.\.~nfi. IALoSit.f w•""'-D -nteJ \l.e MJ te -n -eec-v .. ...o. ?a.c:::es~ t1 ......, ~t=s •I\ ~-~ y ,.,.t, &11'1\la .,J> ~\...,~ ~ ~f1tM ,,.,., T' 'I·~ .:t:At6<.HIC. on f'AI'I~ &.....- -s. a or.> "-A~~ ~f FJ..,.,.,..TlMf' IN\1!'C.~ ... 'a ..... ~.~~..,._-~ .. ll'ltk•J.c.a?pac.~ •f-?-.oO.aG'l.•.J 04.. eN~' lif!lr.,.Jt!P wo~\.4D '"at: \SliD "\b AC..c...-. -n\-e- M•T'"«"\'-) \.S"•\...1~.,.. "&f C~~ Of.)~._ ........ Me"'~"' ~lS. w.l'a_.\. ~C..\.a_. W\A.. -rt> £"'~toe='. S ~4\. J \..,_,. Ar-JD t4-l$ • ~ ~c.e<:a,'1 't:)""C..V'~ ~ ff!'Et. -nl'l y ~ l>t~"t ....... m.Jt- f.U ()u"'f'. --nfE Jti'IE ..a.uVIJ 'illE c..&~~ ?'WI~ -e,.CF -os /;eT n&! .p,,..,,.,~.FA--l.c.. ~esAt.J~ ltrltfJ ~c~ -.o ~~~·t:" ~-.'b~~?t..v AF~ ~'~· ~ I"Qro\~"'lt/1010~·

•

. ,.

£1 e.a'L sv.. OJt AW:lam:

OFFSHORE MARINERS' ASSOC., INC. 114 MacArthur Drive

New Bedford, MA 027o40 Tel. f90.1377

~~ !1, J990

A. l am oppo.aed bJ 4 fiUUUoll plvuued &6 ~ Oltt 1146 •should .tht Couneit .ttqu.itte 51/' .aqWVLt •ull e.oduul6 ba .the lA\at •ull ate.a.!" 'OJt .6tvvurl Jlta.60n.6.

fwt, J dora' .t 'eet .tJua PubUc H~ .alt.Dul.d 6t .the pt.opVL place. 'o~ .the. pubUc bJ dtc.idt o.t ""f9Ut ~.the Couc.U .tlli&Wlt ang ac.t.ion on 11ny 'i..6heJLy action. J don .t Uit .the u.6t o' .thew .-.egu.Utt 'OJt m:o.n.y Jlta.60n.6.

Ma.ny ptoplt hl ~orne w.taneu, &t a P«&hl.lc fiUJL.iJtg aot tliJttctle . involved with the. suu.rul6.Uk i.lu/Jut:Ae o.t .the •esu.tAttd atu.a, aight M rr..i.g,..:t not .thilllz, lsee .U. d.ou ao.t .,,eet •e. flat .U' ~ 4 SJLIAt .i.tlu o.t viet Ve/L.64.

Tht Couneit a£slat tJU./4 set 4 IIJ.tOftS btplltuloa :tM.ou.gll ao 4G.UU o6 thei.Jt GWn.

8. J am conc.UAed al1.t .&Oilt o' a.& U.vt •odell luvul blfbag .to eonvhlct .tltt s.t.oUild6i.6kWftt.ll .tNa. 5Jf' d.ituttoltd •ult e.odf.IU:L6 La 4 s-tut i.d.t4. Some. o6 u.6 uvt .&taek OWL AtW 0CLt 4 l.ollg Mil/ .to eMOJi.6t and J,uppol&.t t:lat 5%" tl.i.amoltd •ult e.odf.IU:L6. fvcn i&a fiPI.lg &6 .Wt .&Wfllle.t, we IOC!ILt Uvbtg 4DIIt VlUW Vlf .tftt 5Ji' ll.iaoftd 11&611, "-'l&Ubag .tftt ~ .t.h.D..t .U.' ~ sobtg bJ 6t .tAt •esuta.ti.on, .ao beg J.:t on roUil. aeo aet. Mu.y tJ...id. ~ .to .the. .-.qulattoa so.iAB h«.o &'4tct. tft Wo, t/1.ll.lg llut .1p1Wtg, bJtd .the. BeAll. .ato.tu .tltf./1 ~loul.d 6t .a.todifts .tAt 5JI' lllAittoltd c.odtnd. ·

J n.6.idt MA6.&aclw.6ett.6 .at&tt ata.teu s• l6 .tAt aec.tptabte ..UZt, 6ut tot 4.6led why Jt.Dt so bJ 5Ji', J,t! 4 sohtg .to Upptlt 40011l.t u.th.u. tluut WVL.

• •

!

c. NtM petM.p.A tAt Counc.U L6 looiUfts 4o.t 64d ap .auppo.U to so· to .the 5%" .aqu.a.tc •uh t.otli.IIIJ.6 btme4itl.telg. llg p~~.obtem L6 •luzt dout tAU the. I.U hvunen and. swa. .aho~ .tha.t kve. 6ousla.t alu1 .at.oclcd ap oa .tltt 5Ji' tti.tz.molttl •uh cctle.n461

Thu.e.{o.llt J oppO.At tAt .aussutcd Aquut 6tl .tltt PuW.ie tl.ll.d/011. ~tit.!! &t tiW.6 Lbne..

f). J •J.U tuld 4o.t tAt AteoU, laoe.vu., ~ J lUll GOM.f. tA&t .tllu.t GAt .aome. 5%" .aqu.Me. •uh cctlutl.6 hi a6t loctdb./ 4o.t .aome. 4.U"b.tJ MW. J Aave. AlAo hf.IVUI. .aome. sootl cmnme.n.ta 4.\011! 4 4fl41 pe.opl.e. J .Quit about .tilt 5Jf' .6QL&41Lf. llUh.

Howe.ve..t, J 1&4vt lt.uvu:l 4um -..ng otheu tA&t .tlte.g C4111 .t .,,O.Illl to cJuz.ns e. ov e..t.

Thv.e. .atem6 .to 6e. .ttll.ong .ae.ntimtn.t 4.tom A tot o' gJLowul,.Uhu.mtn that they don' .t •a.nt to ehtuage. and. p11.obable •o•' .t ..u:hout A flsht uti. A

• lot. o6 w..tl 'e.et.Uas.a aU GJt.Owul. . :

The. eo.&t o{ eotltntl.6 4o.t .aome. At44on .atcm.a .to 6t uca.t.ati.ft.g u.p.i.dl.g ud 4o1L no Appa.ttft.t Au.6on.. A.6 SUUIUL,.Uh BW (011. WJ •o.tt 4CMCt, .they hllve .to 4.i6h 1&4.\tle..t 6oUom luul .tltO.&e. 6.ig .a:tonu u.Ut ll.c.U fiJl.th .the. gea-":.. Al.ao .£' the.g .th.\ow 011. •f.f'ltl A pa.tch hi .the. t.otlf.llll, J)t 6ettet 6t 51f" oJt U.' .1 b.ig Vi.oubte., tvf.lt .thou.sh .it' .a a bmpOIIJV&g patch .to """"" .the. v.A.p.

J lutvt 4 .aolut.ioa: Tlt.e. Blt.M .aupp.Ue..t 4UJIUI.Uitu a 44,UD.vU. 46 .to 11uh .t.ize. and tla.te. 6ousht. Tlt.e. Couc.U &Uow.a 4 1i' .t.ott.\a.ltce .bt .tile. •uh .a.ize. .in 4 JUUUlom •uh C.he.c:.k, 6g .the. C0&6.t. G~ Oil biiA1 M'o.ti.Uiflent. .

flrAIN/Oa.tl.

.SU..cu.et,g, '

~.~ fltJWDJUI. tl. IUcleuoa fxecuUvt tatc:to.t

ATLANTIC TRAWLERS FISHING, INC.

February 26. 1990

Ne't.' Eqland Pisbery Jdanqement. Council

5Broadway ·· Sauaus, MA 01906

•

IE: AMENDMENT •.c TO THE GROTJNDFISB PLAN

Dear Council Members:

P.O. lOX 288 DTS PORTLAND. ME 04112 ·~7 1-1050 FAk r 7)811-1811

8102.t05041

..

As a participate in the GrouDd Fishery for fit&een years aDd ower fl t.hree Ground Fjs.b Vessel's. I would like 10 auppol11be lbol1er Sbrlmp Seasoa until a proven Sep1rat.or Trawl is developed. Etperimental Shrimp Petmlts lbould be issued durin& the orr leUOD 10 .belp Ibis cleveJopmnt or Separator Trawls with the observers o.o board at .U times.

It is time that the relatively amall Shrimp Fishery be ltOpped. it Js just 10 llarm!ul to a much Jaraer mdustry. le. Ground Filb. ll II weD bovD lbat tbousands and thousands of juvtDile GtouDd Pilb Itt tilled JD Ws fishery. J tbint tbat Jt' you looted back wbeD lbe Shrimp FJabery was cloltd, Uae Jut 'lime. a relatively short lime Jater.lbere were wry aooclstocts fl Ground fish in t.be GuJC or Maine.

I would also lite to tee all amall mesh by ca1cbea be JimHed to II cl tbe waewd species. u your lhrimpma caklllbrimp.l Jour for JaerrJaa Clk1l ~erriq. et.c.

Smeerely. a .. MJcJ-· /;:A.Odlin

..

.• . -044-

Th .. follnwi"'J l,.tter is i>r-'iftoJ SP.nt t.o all . t·:.,--:t •·r:• Fis!,cory ra.Jn·•:.!~"'mcont Councils, .and other rel.attKJ •• ~;..,.nri~:~ •. md Or~~ni =--:Jti ons.

....

.,.T.Jmt"" Lovgren N~"'v J'~rsP.y Farm nurP.ilu Pt. J•leasant .Fishermans Co-op NP.v JP.ra-.y Comcercial Fisherman&

' \

.-issoc:iation

. .

. -C46-

fi£HfRmfW5 DOCK CO-OPfRHliVf, Inc. CHANNEL DRIVE • POINT PLEASANT. N. J.

Telephous: • 10•-m-••n

101-199-11'13

Dear Si!" ,

•

I a- ee~ry that these co1~~nts are cor.Jn~ so

.... ,AtH,... •• 0 ... 1114

fOINr IUASANT 11ACM. N. .1. •742

' t

an1 !a:::: C"! tor!'i nl:t at fall '.i'ownship, N.J .on a:r.end!Y'ent :"1. The poor t..:rnout

vas ·r:ot t~ ..1'!.' to 1ac:t of interest tut to 1ac:J: or weather for five c!o,l•s f're­~

~n~l-E. -.: :.:rt :n::-'t in •. e-:.-:- Jersey. It see.,ts that the COU.W)Cil feels that 2':" ~sh

is L- ~oc~ si!~ !or catchin~ Y~tin~. One me=~~r of the council fish~~ for

~-=- ~:II!_ ... c: ··1· ""1.- - 3 i~clo. ""-""'c i:1 ..a ... .:...- •• -.: c.. ·• s; ~..~G&. • l! I tried that in ~.J. I'd be out o! :usiness

in a ::-o::t!:. ·-!~ '-lE~ 2" bags for:. vt.iting because tbey are most effective in

ret~!.r.ir.;; t~e fisr-,. ':'his also ir;Clu~es loligo squid.and even with a 2" 'ba»

you ·1 OS~ at Ot Of squid • 'l'hat 'S Vhy most boats in the squid indus~ use

liners •. 1. n:entio:-: was made at·out exceptions to the 2l:" mesh includin; . - .

loliio an~ ,:-r.itin~ ::ut the impression that l get from the people attendin•

the hearing is that Yhi ting fishing vill require a 21t" bag size. If )'OU 111-Bnt

to put ..:s out of :tusiness, you ar.e doing it. N.M.F.S. taas a contempa!:lf!

attitude tt-.at it can do anything it vant.a. regardless of the consequences

to th~;~ ir.dus:try. A look at t.he coucil •s lftemberahip will show you why. Does

anr c:o~~cil in t~~ country have an active fisherman on it? NoS You have

sci4!1r.tists, eurecrats, and special interest processors or wholes&lers, ~l·:;;.

-047-

flbHfRffifWS DOC~ CO-OPfRHTIVf, Inc. CHANNEL DRIVE • POINT PLEASANT, N. J.

Meifkott lwlclrua P.O.IoaiJM

' .

1eleph011h: 101·nt·ll72 101·nt·ll7.1 fOINT ft.IASANT ~ N. J.11742

.T~'!' 1'·1-=.F.s. does not take into account Economics vben it tnakes up

plans ..... 11 you care about is Optimum sustainable Yield. Fine I After you have . .

put all the indepen ent fishermen out of business. you vill have ~t you

want, a '!ew 1ar;e companies CN'ning All the boats. The American lfay. '.rhe

ric~ t.l!'t richc:ar and t!19 :nid:!le class gets screwed. IIJ'banks to gover!!'ent 1cr1

int~~est loa~s an~ tL~e~ous tax vrite off's. many ~oats in the industry are

cr.med :y i::ves:tors. ':!lese t:eople don •t care if t.hey make Jr.oney. they just

v•:rt. c. tea.:·: '!-:rite o!f. Do ve need these people in the industry? "-11 your rule

a~d re.u!,-tio~s ~ct lo~~ time fishermeh out of ~usiness. v~~le t~s~ in-

V~:c:·t~,. .,..c .... ~-;-• ...... : •e it o•~ - • tJ;~,.. - ---... "-..... • ... :..rhat a co:'!."":4!::y 1 -.:.'hanks for contri:utini; to the

• ,.;::nrie:::. r.i;)·.t:-1:a~e. If yoa are serious about o.s. Y. and rPplenishin!ii fish

stoc:;s, t::~::-; c. ne~: &~J:roztch is necessary. OnP that vilt not put Pf'O~\P. out

of ::;;asi::1~ss. You Cdn start D.Y rec;uiri~ an ec:ono."nics expert on a1 t o'! t~e . cou:;ci!E . .:o:,•~t·or.E a•ho -will co:lsider.the economic effect of your plans ••

~ ..• F.S. vill ~ receivi~ a letter outlinin» the Point PlP.asant pro­

posal in "t!'l'! !':'!,:t fe« days~ It is f'ishi~ based on economics. This is a

busint:ss, re!!!en~-er? The main proposal is to adopt a trip limit on all

speei•s ir. the Multi Species Plan. By limiting the amount of fish cau;ht,

the price stays higher and the f'isherme.n 'ltill still make as JnUCh money.

Therecy, increasinQ fish stocks. Limdted entries and trip bycatches vil!

not te n~cessary. 3oats vill not be ttecl iat.o· an7 •ne in~ustry. It will

wo:i:.

C:':'l~ last co!'!li.:ent on trip catches. ~ncl ose:l you will fin:l a tic;.~et for

rr.y tast tri~, tvo da!"S· .tts rou can see Squid and •n-J.ting vere ca1.~s;l':t in at-

-- ... ---- -·--•--...11 .,_ ..... _ ....... _ ............................................... ..

·,

.• -

'feltp,ICIIIIS: ......... 72 ......... ,

. -c48-

HSHfRffifWS UOC~ CO-OPfRHTIVf, Inc. CHANNEL DRIVE • POINT IUASANT, N. J.

U.llllgAMrau P.O.a.IJJ<t

liOINT 111£\SANT lEACH. N. J. •742

b&ve hLd to tnroa out 11,000 pounds of Whiting, as m,y 2,000 pounds of

l:.utter!ish 1r.·ould have exc-eedea my bycatch limit. What eense do these t-yc~tch

lir.~ts :.ake? Certainly not economic sense, or conservation. Since the ~rice . of squid ~igJ:t !)e as hi;h as 25~ ,I Jllight have a trip but not if I du.~pe~

all t~n ~hiti~=.!t is necessary to be akle to catch other fish t•sides your

di:~ct~~ s~~ri~s. :! I a~ vhiting fisbin; and get a 50 ~o~ tow of porgies,

-:~ha~ ~o ! :o , c!u-r.p the::'l? !)u.-np the whiting? Cr just shru;- !r-Jt sboul:!ers like ~

the·co~~ci! ~~~~rs at all t~e meetin~s I attend. '

:,.=E-:.1::, t~P. :;:.:del .S;>ecial Interest still claim to be a!:-le to han(U•

ell t!:.c: S=d-:.:i:-! ca-:.:;·ht !:y t~ do:nestic fleet. They lied again I Pric .. s ta.ve . ·· ·

c!:o.:-~~~ .:-:::2o.· 2:-: a r .. :1.rat·er of times this vi:'lter because in their ca-n vorc!s

... -:e·cc:-.•t ~;::::c~le t!".t:.;-, ... Yet even no ... : squic! processors are t,ein" ;.;;uilt to

cc;tc!'; ~ere :;·.:de that they can•t handle. 1\.:r:.F.s. is creatin;; favora:tlP.

re;:·~Jat!c!"'l: e::coura:;in:; it. If there a.re too :1\Bny boats alreac!y vhy ar.e some

proce~.so:-s ~=-~:;) ::ever O't\--nec:J. a !:>oat in t'heir lives allowed to t>u.ild an:l enter

an alrP! d:; ov~rc:owded industry •nd vhy do you. help ~hem vith regulations

belp!~l to the~. but ha~ful to real fishermen?

l ~a~t to thank you for hearing ~~se complaints and suggestions! I

hop~ you seriously consider them.

fii0NIIt9·1172 CMANNILMM "'.:.ot9- •

.. ...

Fishermen's Dock Cooperative, Inc. PRODUCERS· PACKERS· WHO&!SALIRS

IIAFOOD

UMIT lOa P.O. lOX 1114 fOINt PLUIANT IIACH, tu. 01142

Customer's Phone Order No': No. -----... O:t:s-1/ Nome~.f4.8 b.6pV -Address------------------""

KW:!IY ~ ~Qil GtoUGI -~ -'IIJIII

QuAN. OEiCIIPTION NICE AMOUNT

ltf?s-tJ ~k,nA./1 7.._i , J9.!tJ l?urr~J?_r r.s.~

. .

1?.1dl? ~~u/h _ga_.~

u . . .

,

.

.

ALL cloi!N Olld retum~d eood6 MUST .. • ...., .. d J1r llhi5 WIL

" 1 ~~5G3 •arvtO er TOTAL . -----·--.. :::2 'ba.! ~ 0~~ slo rA-

,..,.sk: ~

\

telepfiiJIIII: 201·199·1172 •• ·199-117J

fi~HfRffifn'S.. DO~t!n-OPfRHTIVt Inc. CHANNEL DRIVE • POINT PLEASANT, N. J.

U.llifltAMraa .f.O ... II14

IOINT 1\EA.SNtF IIACH. N. ~ 11142

• Th,· ~ .,j ,., J J t'!iot:.idnt J•ropcmal is bas•~ on ~ishing by economies. Comt.ined

with .J 2 ... mtt.sh si l!e, tvo thintJS vill occur a l.ess ~ish vill be caught and

"J'I~t> : ... :Uot,.sl Ho.~riur" r'ish-.ry .:.)P.rvit:P.K should take a long lOOk at the·

···Jlit.iz:". !ish~rie>s in l .. oint Pleasant and Belford •• These ports have concentrated

f)n "'fi! i •1: f't)r fQrt.y y~'1rs;;, vi th thf!;IIJ r hoat111 !ncomo up to 70",:, a year from c

whi • i ~~ • ·=•h"~" tw., portfi h..avr.' for 20 yP.ars voluntarily lillited thP-ir catc:hes

to l:'l1 '~·n·:l!s nf vhi ting.a day, primarily from November tp June. 'l'his strategy.

t"V•'r: -·r.n1.r ·1i 1 ,, "!lnr .. ~\r•w F.n:Jl .. nd hoats varlintJ in this fishery •. sti 11 vorks.

•:y ti".r:iti'":· tht" ...:up;.ly o! fish the pricn stays bigher. 'l'herefore, \ess fish .. . ..

r..lu,;t:t .;.ut thl? samp or more money :nade. If the price of whiting dropped to

l•:s:=: tt.!.~:1 11·: c1 poind to tho !::oats, then the boats would not fish for whiting.

-:'hi~ ·•llrl\1:~ thr" rrlllrl'.,..t t.n dry up cau:;ing t.h~ pric:e t.o rifle again. 'this

vou11 dt.d dcJt:>~ .:..pply to ttll species caught. 'J'he 1av of economics is supply

.... ,d dl"';t...:nti. .;:.y li:ni tin:J the supply. t.he pri~e stays higher • less fish are

~"·'•l:ht • .:n1 c-onsPrv.:~tion is mueh better than through any other ~neans.'l'ho

l.:ar-;t t-hin-; .any fish.,rmon v .. nts to hear vhen .he comes into port is that his

tiRh arP. vorthl~ss. Unfortunately. this happens. ant! the ~iaherJnen are the

f_ft,.,~~ ~!ht) !"illZ'fr"r. r.y limiting tbe catch to 100 'boxes a day, soo··boxes per

'fN'!·. !"C"'.'ll cnn~~"rvatinn and manageMnt of ·vtdting can take place •

• a~ ;.-oint~d out in .• \mendment ·~· whiting stocks are at a historic low. If

.a pt"r t.l)..tt t. rip limit is not applie~ soon, the industry faces disaster. \

·fhi ti :-,:, ".Jvf"" ~on ovP.rfished tbe last three years by New England !>oats.

'•

-c&l-. . fiSHfRffifn'S D~~~ EO-OPfRRliVt, Inc.

CHANNEL DRIVE • POINT PLEASANT, N.J.

Tellpflollll: • IDI·Ift·ll12

Mtlift1AMreu P. O.loa IJ14 ••-ett·••n IOINt IUASANt lEACH. N • .1. .,.,

'!'hey bring in 500 to 1000 boxes • trip. ~::-y don•t car .. ~ vJlilt th~y gel ·:o.:·

them. it's just weight across the dbek. Unfortunately, two boats c~n ar.rl

vill kill the market price. Fishins. by cconOIT.ics is t..hr. b«1st V4Y to t:"rnt:.r•r,-·

all liJ,.'\(l>Ci£>s presently under the t:;ulti-..;pec:ies Fish~ry Mt1Dii!!P.:O:It'nl Pl~n.

ln 197~ or 1980, yellowt.all ~lounder vas l.imited to 75 boxes a VP.C'!Jk in

Mass. and 50 boxes a week in Rhode Island. Boats VP.re c.:atc)-\.ing 12~ •.n.xr·s d

veok ancl getting SO to 75¢ a pound. This w.:as great 't>c""CDU!Il" thf"' IJDJ1.:: ..,.r,..

.aking rnonP.y and the fish were conserved. Unfortu.natol)~• th~ ~-••·•·.!:i. bfl\\•t•1

to pressurP. from unknown sourc('s and did away with th,.. Ji,..Jt Jn t"c- r.a1 1 ;

and vintPr of 1930 •. Boats were bringinrJ 'i00-800 box••s (\P.r trip 4ilnrt f"l rr.-t i v·•1

viped out the yell~~ail industry· for the 1980's. Thilll can .and will tap .. i:-n

again if' thP. N.M.F.S. does not adopt a fishing by PCnnnmic• rnliry. Thr­

JJ.}t.t·.:;. Rhould sti::lrt a trip linlit plan f'or yt!>ll~~ctil tlound•·r f•·a:.tc~H·••-•--1:.

The stocks hcsve recovered quite· a bit., .but vill quickly bP. overfi:Jh,..:l vithc-u1

a limit. Y~llOlr.~ail flounder present the perfect eXilmplc of f'ishirl'J ':'y .1'-r\...c. '""t ..A~.~>)"' (' .,

.c:onor.dcs. as would bf'! in 'lbuch ~tter shape t..h.:an it f n now.

Think long and hard abOut vhat ve are proposii'K.J here. l"r~sr;."ftt.l;;,·, l1:m o

are t.oo many boats in t.he industry and everyone is bei!Y.d hurt ~ont)ft'li t:>ally

by too much prP.R!Iiure on t.hP. fiRh 11tncks. If' you limit t.h•• am,unl ,,r ri ~:h

caught per boat, the price vill stay higher and a11 the boats vill !A:- .at,lf•

to stay in business. This vill &llov the ~ishermen to stay in buBiJ'\f!.\~~:: anrt

at thP. saM time the fish stocks vill r-.p1r.-nish. •\t l'nint J'lt'-..ll':C.!'l .-:~n:! •.. ,,1 f.,.

C~ops, tho fishermen vould rat.h'lr vork. on 20 bOxo,; a day or whlti n-.; ·•l ',•1·:

a pound, then 100 boxes at lOt a pound. •1akP.s centtct dor&_-;n•t it? :;a:tK"" ..-rwt·:·,

• •

..

...

t.l.phllll: IOI·IH·tln 101·199-1171

fl~~fRffifn'S OOC~10-DPfRHIIVt Inc . CHANNEL DRIVE • POINT PLEASANT, N.J.

... ,."',,.,.,... •• o. .......

fOIN1' IUASAN1' I!ACH. N. ... 11742 . .

uo.Jts ~•h'''Ul~ not bo locked into one f'iahery. !'he 0!"1-Y way •ny boats survive .. is t.y vr'rs.:.t.:.lity •. fP. a.i~ht catch squid one day ancl ·vbiUM the Dext day on

. . • f.W' . 1.!1• :.:.t· I t)f f::hnn- t.ri..,. a«I"JUl..atino, c:atches t.n 10.~ of species is VI&Steful

. .,. ... .;and N:n:--n: ... ..i re1lll' dil~ging to bo.lts. If I am vbit.ing f'ishing ancl I cateh 100

bo:.;""r• o: a:or• .. ies, vhat do I do? ShOuld I throw them overboard? Setting a per

t.d:· .:nt! : ... ,. w•···l. limit nn :;pt"t:'it"s vill tdmplify all your problctms. '!'hero

~till •v·- lr .. :;:-; r't'- .... at.irYJ !:>:· fiRh~rmen. using illegal size bags and small fish.

~fnrr.""~""nt ~ill only require dockside reporting and documentation of catch.

11u• t:o.1:;t \.:u:trd vould nnt ~ nt"codP.cS for enforcement as l'nlCb. '!'he benofits

n: t~~,·· i"·"r t.ri1, and vr,~l: landings are clear. Let's vork out the small pro­

.=il..::m~ c•t:d p~t this plar .. into effect Immediately •••

.. .. , t: ;

.,,., ·- .... !=- . • .:.. ,, . . .. -...-................... _ ... -- ...

PROPOSAL FOR A UMITED GROUNDFISH PERMIT

lCayl2.1110

•"c: • l

... ·· MAY 2 9 199) ~ " .. • l

i,..... - ·­! • . . ·-

TM =nmerdaf lilting pora af &elforcl uc1 PDinl PIMsantln NewJeiU)' ancr ~raJ afthe poet~ on .._-..-mend of l..ontJ ltlancl. New York (8~ Mel FnteporQ hiM tuppOI'IIMia IMI fJI abouiiO aMd tD

..clium sized draggel'l (up tD 75 fMt in.., length) that are dependtlnt on h MUOnal wtafting......, b

appraacfmataly 75% of their aMuallaatvut. 1'ht whllln0 ~ 1r.f ..._ ._. 8DCIDU1d tDr apprcaclrnatefy

IS% of the '*' llftdings (2.5 mmion fOUhdt w:M1h 1500.000 annually) 1ft a.lfold • pilnarlf t.rough h

a.lford Seafood CboperarMI • ancl?n clthe t:1ta1 lllndinp(lmmion pounds worth 12 lllllron ltMUIJiyJ 1ft

Faint Plauald • thrDu;h the FIShermen._ ODe* Caopara1Na. ID -og...gale they llirec:lt1 employ about 110

people on ....... ,. and 50 people on ....... doubtfullellher fllfae two ..opl. b:ICh af wtaiclt ware

lftcorporated in ... 1150's. cauld Nrnain in lluliftelt wllh a Mrioul _,UCiion In whldng lahdingt . .._,. MihQ

.muarly no atremativoe fisheries available tD the WIIHII. "''he -... .,. ,_.nil)' all ap~rating on wlllfltlllytrip

lmfll with alirnhed byc::atd\ of NCI We and lolfgo MIUid. The product ill all landed frath aACf IIIOid In lllfl1in;

ln&I'U1I from New York Cf\' south. -... -~ Amendment 14 ID the New Englaftd fishery Management QMmcit'a MutlispMiea (Qn:Mmdfllh) Plan

.ould. ~u;h Ill mesh-size and~ pta'lrisiou . ..,.._n the CDntinued ...._nc» flltlla llhery. allhery

which has ewtved over the last 50 plus,..,. and now MtYa& as tw fDuftdatioft cia tllable artd Mff.austalnfng

ernmerci&l fishing lncSt.mry in 1M Man C111he UnMd -'llalgest IMII'OpOiilan area. To Insure the i1tLmt of

tlis fishery WI are pn:,posing t.at a limited grounctfiah permit be tnade available ID faoH who parlicipaflllft It

tbat wiU allow the CDmrnen::iaf ltharytwd tau dwltloped ~....,.,generations tD CDfttinue.

This lrnMd permit ~lcf Nltrkt thoM who t.olcl • tD lshing Welt rtf the 72 degrH West longitude

1M cfYring ... period of Oc:lober 1 tD June ao ~ ,..,. V...ll e.olcfing Midi a pennft WDUicl .. praNbilecl

tDm tshmg Eut af .,. 12 ~~ttgrH liM • ... az • _.. e. -.qutrec:t ., ....,... ., a r fhlide IMIS'"ment) minimum nwsft "''he ~ Mltricllionla Nquhcf In Amencflnent,. WDUfd apply tD lmllecl

permit holdet1 u w.tl TH lsharmenMclingtail pennJIWDUid •·eMne .,._ ~tDW &stelfMt .. lrHt and • si;ftific::ant porlion clfMtir laiNelt. ~ ~ ·during ... o.hr, tD JuM ., .. rlod in

order ID ,......_ tMtlrtradftional llhery.

Enforotrnent would be euily IIOI:DI'ftPfsMd 11r.,.. _.lligha. During tlwt period el O.X.r 1 tD

.June 30 a WISH I bolding alimllld lfDU"dfish pend WDUtd .. In WDratiDn lllhing £Mt elfMt 71 dlgrMiiM.

-

NATIONAL FISHERIES INSTITUTE. INC. ~~ r.:..!:lti s:v .. bM:· a S:r.E ~ aiJit.I\GTOf\1 "'" m a ~ Dl8) a11.1.n ~ IIIG2S04I!$ a r:.r,x (703; ~..at:~•

Douglas c. Marshall Executive Director

llarch 2, 1990

New En9land Fishery Management Council 5 Broadway (Route 1) saugus, MA 01906

.... -~ ......... -- .. _ im R m I C ~· ~ r:. !\ ~. f ~;r --- ,. 'ul •~:~ s ~-.}~-: .fJ .. ·~··•I!,. ......... , ..... , -·· n.n 5 ,_,-.,.._.,.a.; • ".~: •. :.:: :

... 6:.''1. .~::~· ·=-·:- c·· .. -· . "' ·• .... '" • • v.,..a; ~....: .• •

RE: Comments on Amendaent 4 to t.be Northeast llultispecies r Fishery Management Plan.

Dear Mr. Marshall:

~he National Fisheries %nstitute (RFI) aaintains aerious concerns over a number of proposed aeasures to the Hortbeast Mul­tispecies Fishery Management Plan. MFI takes issue with aeas­ures to:

o limit the northern shrimp fishery aeason, o allow only a two aonth exemption rroa the !\ .. sh aise

regulations for the directed Loligo aquid risbery1 and

MFI opposes the proposal to limit the northern shri•p fish­ery season and joins with the council in atrong opposition to the alternative proposal calling for the eli•ination of the fishery.

A three •onth reduction to the present .Deceaber - Xay shri•p · season wi 11 cause serious .iapacts on rJ.sher.en, ahoreside proces­sors, and consumers. !'he lJt.U study sm. Economic: Ac;t;iyit;y Associ­UG Ki.:th [i shery lroduc;ts in She Dniter;J lt.ot.es couents that the direct and indirect .iapacts on the u.s. econoay ~roa all activi­ties of the northern shriap fishery (includin; harvesting, re­tail, and export sales) totaled over S73,ooo,ooo. A lhdt on the fishery vould negatively iapact tbese realiaed be~fits.

~be reduced season ••Y also cause a transfer of fishing pressure from the northern sbriap fishery to other stocks, an iapact that vould run counter to the objectives of bendltent .c.

.,.

Kr. Marshall Karch 2, 1990 Comments Amendment 4

•

!'he northem ahri•p industry bas •upportetl and will continue to work with the Atlantic States Marine Piaberies Commission and its Northern Shri•p !'ecbnical Coamittee toward an· effective, economical and practical .. ana of reducing the a•ount of finfish bycatch.

NFI disagrees with the council's proposed two •onth •esh size exemption for the Loligo squid fishery. •FI questions the reasoning employed in selecting the two •ontb exemption (bycatch levels, seasonal landings history) and recommends that this aeasure be removed from any further consideration •

•

Robert Koran Government Relations

2

..

NATIONAL FISHERIES INSTITUTE. INC. 1f.."'' f'I;.S.OI. t:)J;.fVAIIIO ell.II'IIICO e MUNt;TQt.;, YA aa& 8 (JAil.,._, a fl1.1a 1:11 .._ e t&A v.l'; llHS,I

00. t:PR 21!19J I .

Karch J, 1910

"!\.'.' £?-~3L6.\':- F:~t:£,.·a· t • • "'' .....,_, •..• ...,. (''· ..... M Dou .. ii';-lta!-"•ball =~ Executive »1reetor Mew England Filbery Management Council 5 lroadvay (Route 1) Saugua, MA 01t06

IE: Co•ments on Aaendment 4 to tbe Mortbaaat Kultlapecle• Fiahery Nana;eaent Plan.

f mear Mr. Marshall:

~he National Fiaberiea Jnatitute (KFJ) aaintaina aerloua concerns over a nuaber of propoaed .. asures to the •ortbeaat Nul• tispecies Fishery Mana;eaent Plan. •ri ~kee iaaue with ..... area to:

o liait the northern ahriap flahery aea1ont o allow only a two .onth exeaption froa the t\ .. ah aize

regulation& for the directed Lo1190 equid fiabery1 and . NFI opposes the proposal to Jlait the northern ahrlap fish­

ery season and joins with the council in atrong opposition to ~he alternative proposal eallln; for the e1ia1nation of the flebery.

A three aonth red~c~ion to the present De~r • Kay abr1•P aaason will cause aerlous iapacta on f1aheraen, abor•slde procea• 1ors, and conauaera. !be 1111 ltgd¥~ IQono•ts &et!x!tz l!•ogl• at.e.d K.U.h Uabea trQ4usq .in &ba V~d IYtea ooa.enu that the direct and in41re=t iapacta on the u.s. economy troa all actl¥1-ties of the northern ahrlap fllhary (including •arveatln;, re­tail, and export aal .. ) totaled over S7J,ooo,ooo. A llalt on the tiahary would ne;a~ively t.,act tbeae rea111ed ._netita.

~he reduced aeason ••Y alao oeuae • tranater of ~l•blnt pressure from ·the northern ahrlap tlahery to other atocka, an iapact that would run oounter to the objectives of Aaendaent •·

•

f'i~F' t ·e~ JE-: JO NitT FJS.HEPJES Jt.IS.T t-C

Jlr. Maraball March 2, litO Comments ~endment 4

PltG!.83 •

~he northern shrimp industry baa eupporte4 and will continua· to work with the Atlantic States Marine Piaberiea eo~iaaion and its Northern Shriap ~eehnica1 Coaaittea toward. an effective, acono~ical and practical .. ana of reducing tbe aaount of finfish bycatch.

. MFl disa9rees with tbe council•• propo•ed two •onth ••sh

size exemption for the toli90 a;uid fishery. MFl queationa the rees~ning employed in •electin9 the tvo aonth exemption (bycatcb levels, seasonal landings ~iatory) and recoaaenda that this aeasure be removed froa any further eonalderatlon.

aobtart Moran Governaent Relations

·.

February 27. 1990

Jew ln&land riaber.r Kanasemant Council

aE: .Amendment 14 .

.. '

Jortbeast Mullispeciea Fishery Kanaseaent Plan

Gentlemen:

.. •

QOPOSAL I

..

' .

00 fi.&R 2199J

·.lfeasure A.: t am esainst tbla aeasure for one •Jor nason. It is .,.

rnr ... t .• • i.•,

'

.. U71derstancSins that in an experi.Mntel fiaber.r tbe aeaional Director baa the power to close the fiaberr when de.med aecesaary.

1 believe that aost of the people lavolnd are laoneat and trriD& to do a fair job. 1 cosmnent them for their work. lloW'ever. t.bere are people iD power 1ft Jational Karine Fisheries service Wbo bave •de c011111ent• to • ncb u -.,job b to protect the flab Wbatever it takes" and •ama11 ••b kills everrtbln&. l want it stopped".

~lt ls very bard •• a fiaberun to support a ••aura that would &ive people . with this attitude aore power •• to when, where and IMMt w cu ao flahina.

·1easure B: 1 support this aeasure 1Nt ask that while abrblplaa w can retain our vhittins 'but raot count them acaiut our •rcatch Ualt. ftia la a loophole that has been abused and aeeda to be pluced.

lfealllre c & D and Alternate Meagre A i 1: J npport all these ••sure•.

DOPQSAL II

Ieasure A: 1 cannot support tbia ...aura hcauae of tba ecoaOIIic lapact on :the Gloucester abrillp fleet.

1 understand tbe charta that ••r nvenuea are loweat 1ft these -.nt.ba. 1Nt 1 believe that lft the caae of April and aar it la hcauae effort la leas. aaine ~ata out ft.UID.'ber Gloucester l»oata ... -1. ad ttaar opt for other fJ.aber1 .. 1ft these aonthl u abrblp ••• f'ul'tber offabore ad their •mt luseu.

··But here in Gloucester w contiftUe t.o abr18p hcauae aur •rketa •tar open. filis rear because the abrblp didn't coae cloae to •bore (lpiWicb Bar> we bave lost a lot of fiahina dar• and I project tbat 70S of 111 abrt.p lracoae will come in these last two -.ontba .•

. -059-Also, Salt Water Seafoods, our •iaceat aarket, baa aaid that •s~ of their ahrimp are procened in April and .. ,. Without these aoratba tbeJ would lulve to abut down their domestic ahrlmp operation Which would clo•• our urket and in effect end commercial ahrlm:plfta. AI for brcatch of naulatad apeciaa durin& thll time I di~pute rour facta. I have hen abd.II!Plfta for four run and have found that the fllhet:'f can h a clean one dapendlD& OD bow va I'll& our eslltin& saar a• •1 ncord• Ifill atteat.

I have participated ta the lea lapllq ho&raa ad tavlte ar ob1ervu to come alona anrtt.e.

II!IIU£1 I: I aupport t.hla Maaure • .

Ieasure C ' p: I npport. t.heae Maaurel U lcm& U lt b IJOrkable &Ur, ad I offer ay boat to test anr aear pu wuld Uke.

UOPOS6L Ul

I aupport tbb proposal I:Jut, lf adopted, would like to ••• a •rcatch of ahrbtp and .. not have the ahria,p count aaalut tbe percntaa• of naulatad spacial bycatch. I would al1o like to ... aoma aort of tolerance for twine.

UOPOSAL U

·1 aupport Ws proposal. Southam lew ln&land laa1 lcm& had tba advantas• of carryin& larce and -.all •ah aet1 at tha aaae t.t.ae. rua allOIII tbea to filh for around fisb and at the end of tbe trip top off with vblttlq ltbara t.be Whittin& price ia hi&h. .,. compete em the aae aarkat ad I hliava t.bi1 to ._ an unfair advantaae. ·

In closin&. aentlemen, I would llka to aar that I lftiPPOrt 70Ur effort lD -.ana&ement and conversation. It 11 an blpoa1lbla Job to bap evarrona happf. Jut, it has come tt.e for u1 fi1heraen to .,eak up •

. I've been fishlns for 22 rears: line trawU.ftl, &illnattlD& ad •auins. over that time I have adhered to all of the aala1 and naulatlou to coae down, lx.at now its a .attar of aurvival.

We are mostlr rounc aen wbo believe lD the ••d for convaraatlon. llolt of u1 intend to atay in thil bu1ine11 the nat of our llwas. lla ca llwa lf'lth ad aupport resulatlons that are for t.lie aood of all ncb u JTopoaall I and 6, tNt not with furt..ber clonra1 and .. uou.l nductlou.

Propo1a11 1 and 2 ••• to M alaed at curbln& cheatlq •re t.llall couervlns ':. tbe resource. •ost of us admit that t.bere are ehaat1 ill W• llull.nea1, there · is not a bu1inas1 em thil earth that floaan•t have .. opla llho cheat. •1u1e

don't pa11 aore n&ulaticms to atop t.bea, that will llurt u, tbe ujorUr Who are complrln&. Law lnforctDtmt bon wbo tbaJ are, let t.Mm do their Job. I plead witb rou •pon•t ..t• u1 tb! lftdiQ&tred tpeclaa".

alllceral~,

~:>d..,A aichard L ... al FlY GaMet 172710

'\ .

•

.. • • •

............. ~

~ • .,. ,..!4> .,: 6.·~·

'M<o Do~l,s l\1~n~.ll ' ;.}.1/'io YY~w r,.A~~J f~ ~1t .... :t. ~ ~£~v,-v ,--F--~-~~,Tr~-~-

£'-.qura u~ '(V\"fl. ~ ,, Oh I - rfi1 ,fnJ" . · · 'IIJJ re ' 0 • 1!/J

Pe\qt- ~\(" . .~:~~~-..,. ,oq;., ' I -l, ·C·'f e:··, .:. 1

~: .

. t cf.r £'J.JcN DIY~~, II #/G"1 cP19Ef ~-~ f"n:)Wl

f lifi.#VIphYV w.H. z-· fi:,l,. i'w -t~e SNu~ tJ.ert . eV\cf trf +~"- G:cAf o.f'£"\QJt.P. ~ /,tt~e ll'3 f~D

.- e~~ i:JII~~~ '"-~ ~ , 19 s (?)4ft 111 iN of". v"' r'ltJt.$ ue. ~Is • tlfiT.e "'..;.I 'J

~proJch'oh~fe..l1 +'~~ oFI'r'l1 IM.ol\«- 1$ e/.r-1,;}

fi.~M sk)l~jl'\~ .~ fl~1oo Ff-0!111 -fiJt: ""(c. ,t u/.li+.~ ~-~err-J~·n ~,lilt ,A. , ,,tl)k,,r~-. · 'Z A •"• c-il,.cl~ /1 Jr-~ oF IIWJMe~

. ~J ~..J ,WI t>:JwFur.eP.Aitovl ~ ~~~ -~~~ 19fl>'t

. +o ~~a/11-tcJ> ~Cie.s' I'F.!ttJiflif 1-A11/t.. ~~fl'le ~ubeY· Gr- eJI~""fleJ. if' ~ f1iJ~ ~ /,t-frl•-,

-· ,vi J 1 j; "e •llo-ocA> llo ~ f"/Oilt!Jft\, e 1t or . ~A-i J 1 t 'e ,. llo~P 11o •c.-! F".h.fl~ 4, Ire, 1- lbJ.;-It"'i :t ~AJll) IQ5st-,._ FOr- fl1~ 1.1ter-- -11.-.Y. il.1~ fla, J,frcr:, . . . . "' ... . .

.· -------

"" ..

._. --r ... . . . . .. ·--.-----------.-_. __ _ - -

• ...

< •

---·-·· .. ..• ... . .. ~' .... - ·--· .. ___ __... ___ .....::...,.;~,::.;_--...!.~--~-_ . .. -:1; ~ /?,-,_, ':"" -~ '-'.), 7 ~/ ;:;;.N.r£.4 ~tf./.J C.~_t,..Bf~r._, ...... t/E'.....,a: ...... .s._' __ _

____ -·?_e.!~ .. ll,i)~E-A~c:-c.:nAJ. .. H4S:'7i!EE:t~!! ~~ B vpP:.·.:<'~.= "~· ... ·.-__ _ .J:. ,, .

------~-- ..- AIE..JN S/:/1..£ ~E€~J.tj7~~ :7A':&'*'ut:A~t7 ZKE

_ -· .. _ 7Z AwGE ~Nc,.£c./'P../.-vf# /HE /Jhl>."'4~~..$--:~.tf§d£._ .. --------:--··-- --/.--~-::&:-.?~~,1).1.-!lo/- SJ:i£kt:E.l~ 7.;(.-{T;~fV.L'b JI,Ed'~~:r-

___ _ ,;i7,,??~ . .S(,)C.,J/ A_ ~;A&' .... ·,l~---L.t.~~~1> .·§£· "'tf..~ ..... ~ ..... :..rA........;;;;;~..,__· ---

S c.~.~? ( ~~ i'C: '= r), /l A.t~ ~&A ~s.s .... _ .... .;.... .. ~ . __ .. .;.... .. ___ _ - ..,.,. I ,, . L :J, , _/ H&: ,;1-s-. /J/EJJ*'I.,. .Vtd .JN~_:J2t'J[.,..:f=c.. .,-'Zt(?>_ F&?) ----

_ ______ 1 ... UJCi:> /AI (H,E -~ii'E (J?.G.JN. t:"..S;.k~Q€.1J#·:F2'.~-­

-·--- . w,.'"'. i-1::> #Av£ 7" 73£ /lc;.C$ ?T/J i?!;li ti~·; d# /'~./~~¥: __ ,, ,, .

-----·:- ~/A.I.C: 12. .. /bE.As "2.~ t:!?.P' N ;:-!-..V.c:~ E#JIL:_lt.(E:ild.l~4f,:::rp"l:>::;;,;:V-.,:----·-... o w.1J. oic c,Ji""' A.£,;,. i<1> .Tt·-:.:13cy. Li_ ~/J?.t£- -II.~JI)L~'-";;...;,.0'~-----.. ..-___ .. -. Gw F,..:}) ~..~,;,7~ A ;l._{ /A./C# .LPJ'.l~_/!ttGA.sv75i#=.L?2.~~~-;.-::...· __ _

- N ________ --~-A.5~<-E'.tJ/IF#rt.lFN__?li...A_~.cr=ztL.€~~~.:----.

--·-- . - . _ /Y/ j: _j H _7<~' ,,_IJ\TI~ ~ F/Jb' .IF 7!,./. _.ti'/?AAUJ~.E.A..f_;_A? fcli.:C, __ _ " "' " . -

·- . . A"'-~ .?.r:._TI{ Jf. )u~ E H.. '-".we,~ "Pi:...: l(l{£ .A/4 iZM~ L :!.'.f!J!T.§Ie. • #I

---·-"""c.oJ) __ E..AJJ> __ /.s tA.hJAJ..'-y: ~-:1;._ .a.~ Ar!JiA..o-.s,.:'-:/l,tf!;1 "t)l~J:!'.K. ---· -·· V ~JIIJe_.: :Jr_~J_{J_&J it""ZF_i:.tC.£: .. ..,-~A'.:%""#:((! ~/iAV(f.i{t;.#~

. ,.. ... ------- WJ/1. :BE· SA..71J;:'A cr,. !lj A~ ~c.c.c.~'.L·d·~ 7¢!0.-:B..l..Fft:d'.E.s

----. ______ c F . ..:J.H.£.. .0 c'"',., Ct L . ----- .... ·----·-· ...... -: ---.

. . - . ~ - , .. . - -- . -· .. . -- ~ . . l ::t\.

- ! . . - ...... ~ --- -----------------..

. ·~ . . ... .. ~--- -.. ......... u· .... .. - • . •. ··- - ~· • .. .. . . • . ..., ...., 1\ . \• '- ' -·Of;- .. ·-- ---.-.. ... A.. . • • • - .. • • .-...-.. ·-- ---··---- • • • , - .

~AI G'.A.J..II .. O&'ci.E" ~"''~., 112At:..~-rl. "H.EittR,.v~, A _

/J?Jr~s...;-:2.: m.E'A.•7J .-.1i? t RE ~ .,,;;,£'b :n:- ?.&:1'"~!'-'.AT~~~4f~- --·

/. c L 1 e, ~ o K. :I~-. ,..,e ,)I ..I f "'"):. 1

~ T C,.,.v tJ~Vf:.)'. .7/E l!A/D._.AV;......;... __ _

A --:}?;~~.t...'-6'1> T'.J.[t(~l)<. :::Z::,_ ~A.~ (;.,..s.~ .:A _!'f,J>.£"!!1:#~~

C 1: ~/·C-A"T'H Wt-twL:b J'I'AVt Tt. '2~-:1Ji£=TG,.2~~ttVI"~ ~.J _;r· . •

H A~ 6£ E AJ .,,..., 0 7 ;(c ,'2 ;::,J#t!F K,.,e:j . . :l:J-~ .7.1U" C-,M_~ Ill!'._ _

,t_,.J.., "'' Sc .... • b, .A /~ tit /~-fl. 7/·CIITut ktAFL 4/t'v-'b

A.??:ft."i~ 7tJ 7JJ5 A?i>l'l,•YXI/tl.E.

~'M'"'"~ A"P?ic,.~c.II&.J h.l¥ -:lf.2>£ZE'iiL'Z.t'U.S:i).. __

)-,.il /J?At:~<&iZill (jA-·:> h'c/2.R,uc.:.~_4"7/-f..f:l.F.~~.!.G.If_._:_ __

/1 At..& A. ,lv...v~/·CI\7c..l'l ~Evt:t INN.£..~. £L~#4..> -~-'·- __

A IA.T<.GET .j"'?&c,,.;:.... . - . • -· • · ..!- •·.· •• · -

/#'"-=- :l~Ly ~vG ~•r ExFmi>T:~~ -~~~zr- ·· ... /.s ,~._./ FE'"A.ti7l~ 1-('nFA./ Cc 4t'J ,1:>£..l~.lP~. 'TII'IE 4·~~~ _ S'i.\.1 17> FtJ!-!E llj _S,~;,s:.E /7 ~i· CI..EA..Ti,.lsf-A-Y.ti'A-a.~)­

. F I·S,..,;: o/ J . v A 7t y,; 41 ri 0 ,./ J.,y "A.·' . .,L{I (;,. lf7:-'t...V..;::"' N ./!!:;> ...... - . - -·· -:· -·

.ALIIIt.·ot;,t-1 7NtJ Cu~~;.:../f PT .oJ.!-..tL;)_~!r-~-~~..: . ...:.. __

SPE~E .E.JE.i) ll?/:.JI/ l./;t.c.J ( 11.5 /2PM/&. .. Rll ..I~7>.l~~.:..~~~.:~?:: -:BE J.o/'' /~J/1>~ (l?G./N F~J.? ~~n,:;>..t~. ~~ . .J.i..l.~- A~-­IA/'-'ITAT/I;AI '" CII.EAT 7N£' .S,/'..S7Ge'}7 _iE:IJt;,J.l._@.tJA(~&A£_.

HI\~ rc ~c"L,-z.,iE 7H'-' l=~tJn·l'lc.~~'-*YZ p~_A ~.r!l! __ ~ ·~ ~

SJ:l.E' . .!vc,r} AS.~~ 7rlll,cv,ll0a.:IT.~~ /rA4t1~ -~~ __ .

JJ(:T f>K.At.IIC-AJ... /HE h7EA..J..,ii.E ..• ~Jtt..0::..'7Jfi ·--- ··----. A\.C.c\)7~ ·~ 7Hc hJHJE7i/';GAI ~J. _/L_~f-u~Lh:.._ . .

#\A.~ Jt:;:'r:: '\1 A 'it t1 *'?r"'t:.:v~A#~A/ ?Et:J "'-"'!.'A/"'- . ~~'!!~

• . ¥·.

,. .. -- ...:,.t.-.=

::- ,.. -

-- .

. F ;,;EA-. 7/-/t.) '-"'' H .F 4./;::c R ... ~ ,n.~:-,., ;- '?A?i7S /.IEI""hl .,E'A,J;;-__

._ ........ ____ _

~ -? jl J ... : ;.., I""? A}.&.. j . ]e H tJ.1> E :I.J· J. /t ,., ,., " C""·· &: ~ i'?. ~ •· ~~~ ----!

·J .• a,._ y4iatt... c.t.- 1t.L ~£ 7Hl£ D~~y' t:J~iti.S_.E~£;"~7:€i;>_ ____ _

~~ I~ c,..,E Inc.& II CA.' -~,,,«.'";) ·]l.,:c,,,_tli'P4{, .7He nJ(,,'£~--

~r,1".tJA~ E ~.t ~j1,."JT 711 "c 7H.t$ il p~,·i6~1"n-L4!lC .... ····-----·

·- .... -~-·-· -li-.IE(c.E #1\.J . i.s"-.,;A/ A rv.,j/1 J:!'d.1~:.THE -:/JJE=,:ELt P- __

,..,]}: ""T o£ "''" ... :::;>£g. t,"' £ ~ t.: z..:~ ..S?iE ""~~- · /N~ _F6JLI.L./2~JI __ . .. , ;; if..J 1-" "-. 1t I If 7:>£ e, c Lc ?i?i) ,;AT ;..r:,. J I .,-:& R _ ~;:". t?r -~"'(:. t/_ .

i:;-,,~ ,W: tit~ 1'71 !>- AT"-Il ,.,,, (... ~.C::&/~AI ..LIJLJ:..It .,7i:JLAL~ ·-· -­

l<.ti (j)$' LI-AN i>. .M w IH~ll E / .J' A 112E-A.J..wiic£.._tJ..dL..T..IYG

IA'B4E. :::r~AT w• 11 'D,7lz:c.:r ..... y~:ITl'l,c:r 7:~------·-­Ac;r,,_,,., j uF JH~.S E · L'r ~S E~o..j· £1.111 /~li.. k.IJ..£1£._ c;li!.::!~¥---­

JQ . F J..Jrl Dtv /1/.E lift/-=>~~ Vt'E ilL l~i:!,d/12• ~l. .. P14.tH --­

~?~c.,~s, /#e. C"7>riVAlJ .IJF 7H.F. V.GU.iih..4._ w.1.!L ...!!Ltt~----

-;$ c 7l E. " ... n jl;;:"i') .,.. (; mA /(. E A C.. II,, c.,j$ -:1611'1 /C..,N . F.AI A'.,£ /;;c;.;J/-

/H'6j ~~· '1$/i /AI. I .. - .... ·~·· ... --··--- -----

·-· -- .... -·----- ~?f.V~S'".;t? _;;,~ IY("1 . --

· ,.,.,,.~f)""i?~ ct:rQ.,"ii;L_.r't¥..L ?·"'.., vw '_tr vd,_ ~ If..! =to· t?ffl f!.J:_ b'

N/gh'y ~,.,~ fott; t?/g¥./.r;J c:t"' V S.J.Yt'e:_(!)l~~~iit( ll!: HT;#&t/ .

7fl,.,.,l"., *'-' .;o ~IV/'7~ w~ :t/?'J.-·n .. r'T,.. ···· ·--::-·· :r~''...!.\'Y"¥17 ;r~/"i Hr#iv =!1 ll/•12 f/.f/

-v--qJH~n' ~iY· k.~wt!'.;;;r':::L ,~,~_,~ ~~'({, :IU-

-- ·--~I'WiP..9#-..,,.7e'EC ;:w _:tt*tiJ (!.~~ .. .,,.'}L I rv · ''?-::F'..J.J--'i> ,-.,N., -:7 'V H Q.."'"' ·1~ ((.:tfP~V/ I . .- .,...,.,...,.~.-- -- --

--~;i;--?v;.a:"r"'':::h!: · "?#..L ·k:~~ ;11-L =1. :> r"?f g ~V/YV!,u ~ .. -~

. ·- _ .. ___ ;/V_l-d-~· _!.h9...i,i'l'l' ,;1K..L. . ..!.t;IY r' ..2. V 1-1-l. H ?t') o Ill_ ..., ;tf'l=:t . .--~.7ilif'7L PN?c:t:•.,,V.~ _=1 N ..J. .IY' JY'" i.Vc!. ,..,,..L't!.Vc::!..:. 1! 511·1_/_

· ::.:.£ :' .-y..Lr ~ o.z: _!.~t.t/: ..LL\1 IYV '='~ rv.: w l! :r llr' :J "'\!./' " / y_

----- cz~;,l'l· · r~·- <t_~v~-e_ ,.,(' H r-;w ;N9 ·..!.~"ct.. ~1!v:./ nt ,. •' I

-j:y"l.r"R;,.'ti}-1.':nf:...,..,-1'1 f4.,!Hrv- /?1_:-"""~t,:L. /frt:;c:!.·...,n'"'lf? :t/-IL

--··· iV·~i!~- ·~--;;rn·.,..,x~ ...!.c:!.9?7 v ..1. .,r, ~ r1v /1'·""'1 ;;,'1'\

...

- .. ··<:fi-.,d#-~H~ ='~9 ·u 317t.LV,.,Z!;1.L1V .SH..L. h "

·-- r~'. f/!~"""1",<:!. ~L .. r"'·~d. ..,,., , ?Z- ?#_!.. ..,..L ? tv"CL-z!.1..,..,~

--~~ii;---w;-,z g'2flt?Sir ·7...L, • .,~¥, 77~M .-!..··' e_ r:z.-:/~N/'." ¥

-~F ~t:U~-;7}~~ H .. l.l<Z:..~( _!IV;~ it..,..,~

------· ------ · .. - ·.r,:...t.v....!1" .,,J.."' 117...J.tl- <..i?ti tJ. ~1-'...L<;r

~;q~· q,/Yr>1it-~ /It "'IN ~ ... .,,-' "3,;"' .. '0 ~Nvysz= ;Q~L­--w·;a,.":f'-·fi;wr/;~r-'::1 /z._....t. ~:7:'::;'.?· 'N'Nf''.:( _; N..L

... ;' ?--

~7·~,~.:;;-z~,tir~ .. ,.i!-.. ,~,.:H.ftl .r.., ::.'7.a'"''-ll .,0 #F,.;!(L", 'l(:J . - .

----- :ff#_, ~-,/;~~ .;N-L ·"'"~ c:.c- . <! ..,..., 't?L '){_ v#/ t;! #(!.:~~ ~..,.:r'

-~i;l.rriiT~ ~- ·-r;.& .r:iHf",;/ '2f#9""~cZ '1 1! '.:'ct .. ~,.,;'(/ 'fV..Yit/~ t/-•L9Q-

~ 4 .. -

. . H~HtRffifn'S D~CrLO-OPfR~TIVt Inc.

57 CHANNEL DRIVE • POINT PLEASANT. NJ

tNprvmn: 201-899·1872 201-899-1873

fax: 201-199-32i4

lichard Joe, Jeaional Director lational Marine Fisheries Serwice, IE aeaion 1 Blackburn Drive Gloucester, Ma. 01930

Dear Director Joe;

r~~~~~-------,,~1). ~ I J \1 I flnl f "• -........., t! ,a,), . . ! u· . :; SEP ·2 5 II'W\ = ',. · ... . ~ : . :--· .. ' ......

• .1 i.-- - ...... -.~ -- -....... .J

: ... .. ... --· ... :·.J.-:.t . " . .. . . . . . . --- . ·. _..._ ____ ft

In spite of our eztenaiwe efforta, it appeara aa if the lev En,land leasona~ Fisheries Manaaeaent Council ia intent upon iapoaina ~he.2 '' ainimum aesh requirement on our vhitina (silwer hake) fisherJ aa part of ~mendment 14 to the Hultispecies (Croundfish) Hanaaeaent Plan. While tht Council "promisee" that thia aaendaent vill altiaataly justifJ itself throuah increased Jields to the fiaheraen, at ~his point - part­icularly considerin& the recant and expected further increases in the cost of fuel it is questionable if aanJ of ua vill •e able to continue fishing lona enouah to take advantaae of this bonan&a. Aa JOU knov, ve are hi&hly dependent on the vhitina fisherJ. Our options in othelllliaheriea ar• aome~here between aeverely.liaited and non-existent and •anJ of ua won't be able to stay in business vith vhat the lev Enaland Council staff considers to be a aonor reduction in our whitina landinas.

The impact of this won't be liaited to a fev or a handful of boats, however. Our two co-ops need all of our aeabers workina if we are to s~ay in business: and if we don~t stay ia •uaiaeaa, lev ~arsey vill defini~ely lose Belford and ve~y possible lose Poiat Pleasant as coaaerical fishing ports.

· We hov• put a lot of effort into coataa up with aa alteraatiwe to Amendmont 14 that we feel ve can live vith. We request that it •e offered as an option to thoae of ua in lev Jersey and lev York vho •••e beea participants in vhat ia a traditional, aelf-liaitiaa aad stable fisher,. This fishery has aerved as the foundation of the coaaerical fishin& industry in Point Pleasant and Belford for aeneration•. To allov it to be threatened by a plan Aaendaent created by the lev Enalaad Cou&eil for the New Enaland fishery (and bJ Council •eabera and ataff vith with absolutely no kaovledae of or iatereat !a it• paat or it• future) •akes a aockery of the Haanuson ·Act, ~be leaional Couacil •J•tea. and doaeatic fisheries aanaaeaent policy.

Throuah our Hid Atlantic Couaci& ve •ave tried to vork vith the lev Enaland Council to coae up with a aanaaeaeat alternatiYe ~hat would DOL destroy out fishery. All ve hawe to •how for our effort• is'n extreme sense of frustration, a •uch better •nderatandina of vhy the lev Enaland fisheries are ia the coaditioa tbeJ are ia, and a reali&ation that our fisheries are aoiaa to be •anaaed adequately only vhea they are aaaaaed by our Council. Datil that tia~ ve aeed JOur •elp to atay ia business.

. .. . . .

-.ceottones: 101-899-1872 201-199·1873

f&l: 201-199·3294

' . . .

fi~HtRmtWS DOCMll-OPfRRllVE Inc. . . 57 CHANNEL DRIVE • POINT PLEASANT. NJ

llailinJ~A&Idtlsl: P.O. lOX 1314

PaNT PLEASANT lEACH IIJDS742

rw~~

.F7'y yj /ruv&=- s/d, ~ S#~jo41

·J/v #/lfl.l ~ s 1.,.1;

r/r /'&lflfi- Sv& rv J/1314, e.

'' I fV ~~~ -mn£·

•

OFFSHORE MARINERS' ASSOC., INC .. 114 MacArthur Drive

New Bedford, MA 02740 T cL 990-1377

Augu.at l.f, ' '''

PRAtT IJI.Etn)Mfltf 14 FOR THE NORTHEAST MaLTJSPECIES FJSHERV PAGE fJ7 • JIET.S STOfiJE'D: -

Nou.• ~ Aoughu. .&14 c.oru:U.t.ion.s CWl bt expu.te4, fl1hielt Mku 11od on de.cl b.eonve.n.ie.n.t G.nd .in .aomt CAAU pt1l.U.IIu.6, I would. Uke. bl .aa.ggut .tM:t: Net.& Jn;;.if be ~t.cwed. on de.e.fl. uWt:A .tht te.g4 AttAched u .tltt alt.

It would. luwtvu. be. .ute.g4l. bl U.vt .the. ~ atiJLu 4Jt.om .tlr.e. atiftclt 4UJJ.che.d to .t.ht ftW .ataoed Oft &fe.cl.

lt ./...6 tU.~M .. cutt Oft aD.nfl tWiggW, •kich IIAf/ a.ae. ~ C/JJIJIII 41.6 Wd1lfl 46 5 .au...a o~ le.gls ortbo41Ltl, u .ttemovt 4IUJ. .6tDAt .thu etuwhMe. b&c4&L.6t o' a l4efl. o~ dtc.k 011. hold .6pae.e..

·' Ltg w-Utu on .t.ht .1to1Led ftf.t dou aot ateU.6'""4' •14ft ~ IUI!Ithi.as .ute.s4l. o-~ an u.Uv..i..oJL mo.ti.vt .iJ, ut.abUJ.Ir.e4, .i:t .iJ, olflu a. 114UM o' c.onve.n.ienet 4IUJ. a p-~c..t.lCD.l .ti.mt .1avu. 46 MJeU. 46 4 p114ettut fA14H u .ato.t.e. .tht te.g w.Utu, pc.r.UCld.lv..ty on b.4gge.u IIU.:tlr. U:ttt.t .apaet av&Uablt foA se.a.t .6tcxoa.ge..

Page 111 ~w..:thVI. piLov.l.rlu, •Gu.Uiane.e. on S~ Net.a•. Gu.itl4net .alr.ou..td. not be a.UOA.•e.d 4.6 A v.iota.tion "' l.e.g4 llltt Oft .thl. .&towed alt. I be.Ut.vt tb.4t. the. p/-,.t/:..6e., "Gu.ida.nee. on .Se.CWLbtg Nw•, w e.on,u.6e.d .aome. f.Uir.euae.n.

l am c.ul'..i..ou.6 46 b hDuJ .the. lloUitl.lut iluUi..lpe.el.u '-""""'¥ pe.usU lot.dvu wv..e. no.ti.~.i.e.rl 4.6 to t.hJ.j cte.w.Um.. ·

fLit beUtvt .in giving :the. 5J/' •ulr. aet6 a sood ~e. .tA..i4t 6a.6.i.6 fo.t .tAt c.a.tdt.i.nB D' geU.owtAU, ""WideM. . · .

HtwtVU., A'tU. ~ fJI&.~ bWI.l.. pV&Lod b date. WI. ful d4t, .tJr.e. J 3" yellow b:U.1 'l.Dwult11. utu a bLVWtee. fa.etoJt. J fA1Dul4 .auggut ut l.U.6 .th.a.n 7 Dl at tA.i.6 Lime., qcz..Ut, Oil 4 .tU.4l. ba.N.6.

Pv..t:.ie.u.l.aJr.l¥ .in bad 11uthUL uuJ. ht A.Ou.gh 4146 U. L6 alln~t btpouibtt 'Cit tht elltw to p.{..ci olflu gf.Utl.o bJLt6 J 5• ~ IIOA£.. Tft.£.6 ./A f'IJ}l.ti~ bw.t .i.' .the. CILtc.h c:.ont.a.in.a 4 l4Jtst cuno&Lftt o' tlJACJIJI.tl.6 o' .,ch .allal.tu. ""'"' .tNut J 3". Thi.6 1114kU .tAt .64Vu.6 l.Dofl. e.oft41.tlt1Ltlbtg l4Jist.t.

-c71-

Tht CAptAin ht t.ht p.U.ot 1Lou.6t e4ll aot ove.utt 4U tht pi.cflbt.s tuUl•£46u.Wls th4t sou on old on dtck.

Should tht '"'ltins veuel owne.t 6t an wtnttt GWII&.t tuU!.aot Oil 6oaJuf tht ve.uet, ki6 p~.i:tiDn .U ateh •o.\t p.ti.C41LUua 6U4alt it 1146 tD ~""" ~t u.i.ol4ti.on 41111 tht 111.6u.ins 'hae., plu6 IM4 o' 8Jl.OU wd .tdtn tlDduUle..

"t .in Neo 8e.d,oJUl ftQ41 lulvt 411Dthe.t fUW..6U4l p.tObttm, l' tltq Mt c:.ontUbuto.u lA tht HtaUh 41Ul Ptn4ioll FIUI.d 6!1 al.ttbOIL/.aNlSfJIJtnt untuct. . .

Tht Fu.nd .taku t.ht Attit,dt. ~ .me..t£46 tAt ~d 14illl J"'1Ptftt) IOJL tht AU.tge.d v.iol.tJ.:tion .U .in Uc.tcxO pUo.\ b ~eizu.te., thtbt du..iJ,.£on .U, tAt bri.p u not 4 6~tolet 41Ul thett,o.\t tht Fwul .U, LtsaU.ii t.A'Utl.e.d tD thtbt eow..ibuti.on 4t6 ~ du.e..

.. A l.Dwyet 'DIL tAt. c:Jteo wo 4tW ~ ~t Coll&O .U, the.tt,OJLI. cnt.Ute.d b thr..v.. OJI..di.Nv.JJ ~h41tr. .c.' tAt Fund sw tAt..iA c:.oratJt.lbuti.Dn.

1 .thinfl 'Wtthet .it .U onl.g 411.it ~ tht 6o4t .uh tht 4Utge.d violUA.on 0' yett.w.• uu ,tound£11. luu 4 M.ght bJ inGKJ .wa 17£/1.1. tAt Lutst.h:6 0' tAt. 4.Uh JLD:ttd 4.6 u.ndv.. J 3". All.t. theg J 2 111•, J 2 5/1•, J 2 J 12• 0.\ ~IMUW

It would 4ppe.tVL u ht. 4 tli..a~ 4l.ttlt!t.ioll IO.\ ~DIIt 604t6 tuUl Coil~ wl1o Mt tt.ybtg ~o obeg tht. Jt.tgul.Ation tuUl jut hDA.d.y IIU4 out. 4o lDOI o' t.ltt ye.Uu.c tJLU. 'loundt.JL6 IVLt. eon,.Uca.te.d 46 we.U 46 4 4.illt 6uhlu 40.\ ili

.J w.•nv../ c.a.ptaA.n, u..6u.al.ly en.rU.ns up 46 tAt owne.u p1LD6ttm onl.g.

Tlt.ant gou. 4o1L gouJL J')A.titnct. 41Ul J am onl.g bights b Milt. 4 tli".icu.U. ~lt.u.c.U..on moJLt. bw-..ablt. 4o.ll. ~t. eon.&eitntiou 4.i.J,hWrltn 111M &\t b.gJ.ns u eomply ttnd ma~t 4 Uv.ing 4t tht 4Gmt. ~e..

At VIc Thu.IL4dag, Augu.6t. 9, J99D, II&J £11Ql4rul FJ.41Lu.ie6 Mutlgurtllt Cour..c.U. 4 U. S. Co4.6t Gu.Mtl o''.ic£11. p.tUt.ll.t UD.te.d: U. S. C. G. GUGW4 Cl .tole.wtct o' ~ma.U yeU.tNJ tJUl ~wule.u ht thtbt .tuputioll lo.\ l.t.nsth v.i.DIJLti.D~tj.

HCJ»lV"..d fll. N.ieiVL6on, £~tc.u.tl.vt P.l.uetOJ&. 0' 6~ hOJtt Ntvl.i.lleu AuocJ.D..ti.on JJ.f M4c AMlw.Jt 1)Jl.ive., ScUtt f3 New Bt.d£olld, NA 02140

Au.gu.6t 24, 1990

. '· 12 Dover Ave Hampton Bch. NH 03842

~une 27r-.-:1'~o ...... • ;.-;- . ···' •· • t: . NE F'i sh•ry t1anagemen t Counci 1 fi ~~;--:· : · ·"' · -

S Br oadi.-Jay t ~ !· t• Saugus, t1A 01906 •jJ;.:• ~ 281Q) RE1 Closur• of Stellwagon/J•ffr•ys JJ.L ... --..... -J em a recreational fisherman who on occasion will sel !~::.;f;.~:_::;~~~.·~.; 900d -•Y• I use standard hook and lin• 9ear. 1 think the closure should hav• been don• months ago. The fishing on ~effr•ys 1"ilht now is v•ry poor. The Northe1•n edge of Scar.turrc had a v•ry large population of cod. a few we•ks ago. "ost were undersiz• fish. But that didn't stop thr•• lar1• draggers from working over the area for a week. During that time J tri•d fishing ther•, but aft•r catching 1$ or so cod, all undersiz•, J left the ar•a to find some legal fi.sh. J wonder what th• draggers were catchin!? I sur• they were findint the s~• thing J wat., unde-rsiz• fish, eany of which were discarded, probably -•ad.

J also Tur.a fish on both Jeffreys and Stellwagon, J hop• whatev•r 'restriction you may de-c:i de-d c•r., cc•r.si der that •ome people have a need to use herring for Tuna bait. These- aTe som•Urnes caught by using a small •esh 2.5 ~ 3 inch net. The lercgtt. is- P•all 1 arour.d 100ft., some bitg•r boats ••Y fish you up to 300 ft. TheTe it very little cod by•catch in this type of fishing. I hope ,ou allow bait n•ts of this type to be used on the banks.

Allow·hook/line fishing. They can't catch or ~stroy anywhere th• emount of fish, or•• large- draggeT can do. Al•o the fish have to be f'eeding to be caught.

Now some ger.•ral thoughts on my views where I believe N1F"S should be working to.

* Find a way to phas• out dragging. Jt ts too wasteful. There are pTot•l•rr•l betwe-•n dTaggers and fhced 1•ar, hook/line fishermen. The tcC•C•k/line fisherrner. are being forced to Mou• off of the hard bc•tterrr, while a dTagger to.,;,s through. Th• n•t fishermen ar• losing lc• ts of gear.

The need to ~rot•ct fish whil• they are spawning. Jn th• spring dTagg•rs and ne1ters from NH/Hain• b•at on the spawning stocks within e-10 ll'•iles. of the coast. They come in with 1ar1• (S0-80 lb) fish still full of spawn. These ar•as should b• clos•d to this t~P• of fit-hing. J'm told that hook/lin• fishing shouldn't hav• much of an •ff•ct o~ these fish, the spawning fish don't f'e•d very often during this time. ·

lais• the •in. size of cod up fyom the 11• lt ts now. It s•ems to b• h•lping the the ~ount of bass. This ts the b•st •ear tn Hampton li uer ar.yberdy can 1"etnernber.

Require fi••d gear fisherm•n to stay with their gear. ~~ , •• ,. eust b• t••·•n horr•• after a trip. This will help stop the wast• of fish l•ft i~ nets that ar• lost or not t•nded because of weath•r• Jt also opens up som• bottoms for T•cr•ational fishing.

• S•t aside bottom for Yecr•ational fish•r••n. 8etw•en dTaggers •nd all th• n•ts, ther•'s v•ry littl• productiv• bottom l•ft.

SteDhen "· ~o,c• J~.(,.._

.-

·-

APPBNDIXD

Descri~Jdon oflhe Ocean Pout, SDw:r Jlab 4 Red lbke Sfoeks A FJSberies

The material in this appendix bu been a~ed from Statui D/Fiihuy ResOw-us OJIIM Northtastern United States for 1989 by the National Marine Fisheries Service, Northeast Fisheries Center.

Ocean Pout •

The ocean pout, Macrozoarces tunUictuuu, is a demersal eel-Jike ~angina from Labrador to Delaware that attains lenJihs of up to 98 em (39 in.) and weights of 5.3 q (14.1lb). Ocean pout prefer depths of 15 to 80 meters aDd 1empeJa1W'es of 6 to 7 C. Tagin&ltUdies and NEFC bottom trawl survey data indicate that ocean pout do not andenake extensive mlptions, but rather move seasonaUy to different substrates. Dwina winter and spring, ocean pout feed over sand or sand-aravel bottom and are wlnerable to otter trawl fisheries. In IUIDIDer, ocean pout stop feeding and move to rocky areas, where they spawn in September and October. 1be demersal eggs are auarded by both parents until hatching. During this period ocean pout 11e not available to c:onunercial fishing operations. Catches typically increase again when adults JetUm to their feeding grounds in late autwnn and winter. 'lbe diet consists primaril7 of invenebrates: britde stm, sand dollars, sea urchins, and bivalves, with fish beina Galy a mmor component. Stock

_ identification studies suggest the existence of two stocks: GDe occupying tbe Bay of Fundy area tt- and the nonhem Gulf of Maine east of Cape Elizabeth, 8Dd a second stock ranaing from Cape Cod

Bay south to Delaware. The soutbem stock is characterized by faster powth rates, and to dite bas supponed the commercial fishecy. ·

._ .~ The principal fishing aear used to catch ocean pout is lbe otter trawl, ad the fishery occurs -. primarily between December and May each year. There is DO fishery management plan in place ·.

for federal waters; the state of Massachusetts replates the fisbecy which primarily occurs aear shore. Total nominal landings dec:tmed 18% in 1988 (2,200 mt to 1,800 mt).

Commercial interest in ocean pout bas fluctuated widely. Ocean pout were awteted as a food fish dUring World War U, ancJlandings peaked at 4,500 mt in 1943. However, ID outbreak of protozoan parasite that caused lesions elimin8ted consumer demand for ocean pout as a food item. From 1964 to 1974, an industrial fishery developed, and nominal catches for lbe USA averaged 4, 700 mt during these months. Soviet vessels began barvestina ocean pout in Jarae quantities in 1966 with nominal catches peaking at 27,000 mt in 1969. Poreip catches nbsequently declined substantially and none have been reponed since 1974. USA DOmina1 catches declined to an average of 600 mt annually from 1975 to 1983. ,

Catches increased in 1984 and 198S to 1,300 mt and 1,500 mt tapeetively, due to the development of a small directed fishecy in Cape Cod Bay aupplying the fiab fillet matkeL Although landinas fell to 800 mt in 1986, catches iaaeased mmedly in 1987 to 2,200 mt, the highest annual total since 1974, ad Rm8ined bi&h at 1.800 mt in "1988. Landin&s·from southern New England and Cape Cod Bay dominated lbe catch,ICCOJIDting for 58 .. and 34 .. .apec:tively, of the total 1988 USA harvest, ~en.ina 1lndin& patterns observed in 1986-87 •

•

Due to tbe ocean pout's pattem of seasonal distribution, lbe NEPC ap:rinJIIII'Vey index is more useful than the autumn IUl'Vey for evaluatina relative abundance. From 1968 to 1975 (encompassing peak levels of foreip fishing IDd the domestic industrial fishety), commercial landings and NEFC sprinJ survey indices followed aimilar bends: both declinecJ from historic values (27 ,000 mt and 6.15 kl/low) m 1969 to lows of 300 mt and 1.34 tsftow, as,pecdve1y,ln 1975. Between 19751Dd 1985, IUJ'Vey indices increased to mconi JUsb levels.~Jin _1981 81d 1985 to more thm 7.0 tsftow. Sublequentlr, IIU'Vey catch per tow Indices declined; lbe aprina1987 index (2.7 kg/low) was the loWest smce 1979, and the index Jemained low (3.2 tgltow) in 1988. More importantly, the "llues for average weipt and mean lenlfh of Individual fish has decreased recently to 1976-82 values, wheD tbe stock was dominated b)' 1111111 fish and landings were at historicatly low levels.

Declining relative abundance since 1985 coupled wilh increasing DOmlnal caiches and decreasina fish size suggests that fishinJ morta1itj has rapidly increased. The popu1atkm IJIPUIS to be fully exploited, but catches at tbe preseatlcvel may DOl be IUSiainable.

SDverHake

1be sDver bake or whki:na, Jluhu:clu biliMIIris, me widely clistributed.llender, swiftly swimming fish with a range extendin& from Newfoundland to South Carolina. but are most abundmt from Maine to New 1er&ey. Research vessel bottom trawl surveys indicated that ailver

. bake have a wide aeographic and depda ranges throuJhout lbe year. 'Tile maJor conc:entradons of fish vary from season to season in response to lle8SODI1 hydloJI'IPh.lc conditions, avaDability of food and spawnina requirements. TWo stocks have been identified based an IDOipholopcal differences, north and south of Oecqes Bank. Migration is ex1allive, with O'VetWinterin& iD tbe deeper waters of the Gulf of Maine for nonbem stock 81d aJona tbe outer CODtriDema1 abeJf and slope for southern stock. mel with movements to lbaUow waten from March to November to feeding and spawn.

Major spawning areas include lbe coastala&ion of the Gulf of Maine fram Olpe Cod to Grand Manan Island, southem and southeastern Georaes BIDk. and tbe IOUthem New England area south of Manha's Vineyard. Mcxe than a half of two year old fish (20-30 an) lpi.WD, ad nearly all three year oJd (25-35 em) lpiWII. snver bake crow to. maimum leraJth of around 65 em. Ages of 15 years have been reponed, but few fish are ICeD beyond aae six. Natural

_ instamaneous inonality is estimatecl ~be 0.4 (IIDIIl rate of33 percent). 1bis Ia twk:e avenge lnnual death rate for most JI'OUDdfisb.

-.

The principal commen:ial &bin& par used to catch IDver hate is the oner trawl. Re~ational catches are insipificant. 1be fishery .Ia managed ~r the Hake PJeUminary Management Plan. Total DOmina1 catches increased by 3'11 in 1988 (15,600 mt to 16,100 mt).

::. ~stic ex-vessel value oftbe whiting landed in New Enslmd cleclusecJ in 1988 by 26'JJ ($7.4 million to $,.5 million). . .

Oa1f of:Maine/Norlbem Gecqc:a Bank Stodc W':dh Introduction of the distance W8ter fleet (DWF) in 1962.landinas JUChed a peak of94,SOO mt In 1964,1ben dropped llwply in 1965, declined for 13.years, lnd reached die lowest in time aeries of3,400 mt lii 1979. bimna 1980-86 Jandinss padually increased to averaae about 6,400 mt IDd Jeacbed 8,500 1D1 ill 1986, then

.,_ dropped qain in 1987 to .5,700 mt. PJior to the lncepdon oftbe MPCMA. tbe DWF J.adin&s averased about 4K of tbe total; tbe DWP was exclUded from lbese watm ill 1978.

.. •

'

The nominal catChes of sDver hake in 1988 were 6,800 mt, inc1uding 2.200 mt landed exclusively by an experimental silver hake fishery from July to October. The~ of the 1988 experimental sDver liake fishery was to determine the feasibility of conductinlalmaD mesh fishery for silver hake in the offshore waters of Georaes Bank where laqe mesh (Jess thin 5.5 in.) trawl aear for aroundf'ISh is CUII'e.Dtly aquiJed of aU commercial fishinaiCiivides.

The autumn NEFC bottom trawlnrvey catch-per-tow index readied a JUab Jn 1975 and 1976 and declined 1brouah 1984. In 1985 and 1986 autumn index increased sharply due 'Primarily to ltron& 1984 and 1985 year classes. 1be autumn index Jn 1987 and 1988 inaiCaf.ed dud lhe 1983 year dass was quite weak mel the 1984, 1985 Ed 1986 year dasses Jelatively III'OIJI, especially 1985. Subsequent yearcl'=""' appear to be cmly averap •

• • Fishina monalities (P) for fuDy recruited fish anpd from 0.19 to 1.29 durin& 198S..a7, and

averaged 0.43. Before the introduction oftbe DWP, Fwu fairly lteady, averaaing 0.27 clurina 1955w6l. F JOSe rapidly however, wilh the incJused fishiDJ effd!C an the ltOCk bepming in 1962 and reachea 0.70 in 1964. In 1965 both landings IDd F • led aharply, and then F stabD.ized durin&1965-70 aiiD averap OAl. In 1971, Jl increued dramatica!ly, teaChing 1.29, but dropped to 0.42 in 19721Dd ftuctuated in lll1emate years during 1972-78 betweeD 0.28 and 0. 78 before dropping to 0.19 in 1979 after inception ofldPCMA. Since then, P mnaJned fairly lteady, averaging OA1 through 1987.

Spawning stock biomass incrased from 251,800 mt in 1958 to a high of 301,900 mt Jn 1962. then be&an a steady ten year to cled.ine to 47,900 mt in 1972. Aa a result. of lti'ODI year classes in 1971,1972 and 1973, spawning biomass increased to 73,700 in 1975, tJut declined to only 12,000 mt by 1982. Biomass has increased since 1981 to 33,500 mt for 1987. (More Jecent infODDition on the status of this stock is contained in Appendix A.)

·~ .- Soathem Georps BantJMid..Adlndc Stock: W'lth introduction of DWP in 1962,1andings zuched a peak of 307,100 mt in 1965 md declined sharpJy up to 1970, then incleued to fonn a secondary peak of 109,900 mt in 1975. Since then, the landmp were downward to the present level. The DWF landinas from 1963 to the iDcepdon ofMFCMA in 1977 clominafed the total landings from this sroct, averagina87'11 annualfy. With IUCricdons on DWF in 1978, total landin&s declined to an average of 12,300 mt since 1980. 1he DWF landings is DOW taken primarily as by catch in the squid fishery. Recreational Jendinp for ailver hake ill 1988 were estimated to be about 100 mt. Tbe aominal19881aadinp were 9,200 mt, iacluded 6,400 mt of landinas from joint venture, which is tbe lowest level Iince 1960.

. The auturm NEPC bottom trawl catch-per-tow Index decreased from its JUsbest during 1963w65 to the lowest in 1974, incJ:eased alijhtly between 1975 and 1978, md tbeD clecreased through 1982. The indices fluctuated between 1983 and 1988, and the 1985 JC8I' dass llppe8lCd f(Uite strona. The strength of 1986 JC8l class appeared to be below the averap level. ana weakest amce 1973, whDe 1~7-88 year dasses appeared to be better than that of 1986.

The F J'8Dged from 0.09 to 0.98 between 1955 and 1986 and averaged 0.45. Daring 1955-59, F averaged 0.32, but dropped to 0.11 during 1960-62 before increasing dnmarkally with the DWF to 0.98 in 1965. P then c1iopped during 1968·77 and averaged 0.52. With the IDcepdon of MFCMA and the iestrlctions ptaeed on the DWF, F decliDed from 0.76 iD 1977 to b31 iD 1980, increased during 1981-84 and averaged 0.33 iD 1985-87.

Spawnina stock biomass increased from 51,600 mt in 19.55 to a aeries JUab of 655,700 mt · before droppiDa steadily 10 143,000 mt in 1970. Biomass lben iDcreued to 219,500 mt In 1974,

but subsequently declined to only 24.000 mt in 1983. It has been JncreasiDB aiDce tom estimated 3.5,200 in 1987. [More ~eeent infomation on the ·llltUI of this ltoc:k is ccm.Wned in Appendbt A.]

Jtedllab

The Jed hake, Vrop'hyc& dulls, is wideJy clistn"baaed wilh aranae atenctin& from the Oalf of St. Lawrence to Nonh Carolina, but is most abundant between Oeoraes Bank ID4 New Jeney. Research vessel bottom trawl surveys indicated that led hake have wide popaphlc IDd depth _ nnaes tluougbout the year. The major concentration offish. varies trom season to leiSOI'I m

~- nsponse to seasonal hydropaphic conditiODS, avdability of food and ~awniD& ~nts. Their mJgratioa is extensive, over-winterifta in the deep waters of the OWl ofMa.ine and Ilona the outer coatinental shelf and alope lOUth mel 1011tbwest of Georaea BW. Dudna tbelr lp&WDina period from May tbrouJh November, ted hake am found in the warmer ahoaland ia.sbOJe waters.

Major spawninaueas iDdude tbe aoathwest part of Oecqes Blllk and tbe IOUthem New · England area south of Montauk Point, Lonaldand. The maximum leDgth reached by ncl hake is

approximately .50 an (19.7 in). 1be mu.imum aae is JepOned to be about 12 JC811,ht few fish •e seen beyond 8 years of qe. Two atocb have been ilentified. divided DOith md lOUth of tbe Central Georaes Bank ~Jion.

The principal commen:ial fishinJ ae• ased to catch Jed hake is the otter trawL Recreational catches am negligible. The fisheJy is IDIDI&ed under tbe Hake P.re1imilwy Manqement Plln. Total reported catches in 1988 were W1J limil• to 1977 (1,900 mt wau.s 1.100 mt), aD domestic •

. Gulf ofMaiDe/Nortbem Oecqes Bank Stoclc The IIOIDinal Jandinp of this atoct of Jed bake in # 1988 were 900 mt, taken a.clusively by tbe US vessels. Tbesc Jandinp m: about 14'11 less than those of 1987 and continue tbe low levels Rponed aiDc:e 1977. Tlends in tocallandings from this . •ock bave shown three distinct= The first~ fmm the eady 19601 tbtough 1971, were characrerized by relatively low ,.,ma frim about 1,000 to 5,000 mt. 1he leCood period. from 1972 to 1976, showed a aiWp IDCI'eiSe, wilh landings I'ID&inJ from 6,300 to 15.300 mt. During chis period approximately 93t, of tbe total11111uallandinp were taken by tbe distant-water-fleet (DWF) on northern Oeoraes Bank. Tocal ~eben dropped~y Cld have averaged only 1,100 mt from 197710 the peaent, due primlri1y 10 lbe dUplacemeDt ofDWF from the waters .inhabitatcd by this atock.

The NEPC sprina boctom trawl aurvey iDdex incJused fnxn low levels in the late 1960s, -.nd has fluctuated at mughly the ume level Iince. Tbe 198.5 'ftlue 'trll tbe lhinl hishea_t NCOrded .in tbe .teries, but tbe 1988 index has dcc1ined by albinl campared to tbe 1987 index. Survey c:atcb-per-tow-at-aae data indicate that tbe 1973 mt 1974 J'CII' classes were tbe llrODJest Iince 1970. Year dasses produced between 1975 md 1979 were of avcrap ltrelJith wilh lbe exception

~- of. weak 1977 cohOrt. The 1980 IDd 1981 year classes~ to be above averaae while the 1983 year dass lppelled to be weak in cornpa1ison to othels. Tbe 198.5 year c1us ~to be

.1. quite stroriJ, recordinJ the aecond JUpest age 0 autumn iDdex In tbe 1970-8.5 dme .mea. 1he .-ength of the 1987 ,ear class~ to be lhove avcnp, while tbe 1988 year cllss ~

· to be average.

..

'Jbe combination of low fishina pessure, low catdles (average 1,100 mt since 1983) and the average and above averaae year classes produced since lbout 1980 has raulted in 111 inc:Juse ill stock size as indicated from the NBFC bottom trawlaurvey. It is anlikely that this llock wDl undergo any major declines in 1989 if landings nmain 11 or somewhere above the levels 1ep01ted in recent years. The stock is under exploited and 111bstantill1y biper Cllcbel could be aupportecl.

Soathem Georges BaDt/Mici-Admtic Stoc:l: 1be nominal J.fmp of this atock of led bake ill 1988 we~e 900 mt, the same u 7W. less than in 1987. 1.-dinp in 1986 were tbe lowest nported m the 1960-86 time series ·.oo continued a trcncJ of decmasina ~:!:'.:Jan ill 1977. 1'be DWF landings were reported to be DOne. ReautionaliiDdiop wem • to lie -:pprox.imately 30 mt.

Total landings from this stock rose clnmaticaDy with tbe introduction of the DWP, from 4,600 mt m 1960 to a high of 108,000 in 1966. Landings subsequently cJec1ined to 18,700 mt in 1968, increased to .53,400 mt in 1969 then dr~ to oaly 11,900 mt by 1970 before Jnc:rusina to 61,400 in 1972. Since 1972, there has been a iteady decUne ill totallandinss, ia.idally bec•1se of a modest decline in DWF llndiDgs and later because of a sharp decline in D~s after the USSR was excluded from the fishery. From 1965 to 1976 tfie fishery was by 1be DWF, which averaged 83'f, of the totaliiUlual landings. Shlce 1978, tbe DWf Janctings bave averaged only 10% of the total annual landings due to Jaaictions placed on the fleet after the Inception of MFCMA. 1be DWF landings of Jed bake in Je.CeDtyem bave been likeD as by-catch in the squid fishery.

USA commercial Iandin~ increased from 4.300 mt in 1960 to a aeries JUab of32,600 mt in 1964 and then began a steady decline to 4,000 in 1966. USA lmdJngs have JeD1IinecJ Blatively steady between 1967 and.1979, when Jandinas averaged 4,100 mt annually, lnd have Iince declined steadily.

The NEPC autumn bottom trawl survey index declined steadily fiom the lliJhest levels in the mid-19605. mnahled fairly constant between 1968 and 1973, and:= to a aeries low in 1974. The index ina:eased sharply in 197.5, dedined llisfltly a " fairly lleldy between 1976 and 1982 at a level iimilar to that between 1968 and 1973. 'lbe index Bacbed the second higbest in 1983, dropped sbalply in 1984 (almost to tbe lowest level), bat iDcreued in 198.5. It dropped &fain in 1986 and dropped even fUrther iD 1987 to tbe eecond lowest level since 1963. The 1988 index was the lfiiDC feVelas .lbat of 1987. Survey catcb-per-tow-at.qe indices indicated that the 1974 and 1979 to11981year cluses wme stronaer 1ban ottier JU11 in the aeries, with the 1974 cohort being the strongest. Olber year classes slncem!e970 to be of ODJy average strength with the exception of the 1983 year class, which to be weak. However, the autumn 1985 p:::! recruitment index was the second highest the time aeries, indicating the possibility of a strong 198.5 year class. 'lbe ltreqth of the 1986-18 year d•sse1 ~to be much weaker than the averap. · .

1be low catches in ~cent years (average 1,000 mt since 1983) Jdlectslow fishing pressure, which bas allowed the qe strueture to nmain fairly ltlble wilh three or four year classes · c:onttibuting strongly to tbe survey indices. However,1be ID!Vey iDdiCIItes that tbe ltoCk bas declined somewhat in recent years. Jftbe 1985 year class is as ltRilgas tbe llltuma iadex has indicued, then an increase in stock biomass will be apecred Ja lbe DeXt oae to two JellS. The stock is under exploited, and inclelsed catches cou1d tie sa.pporoncd over the aext few JAI'S·

11381

\

C!:.· =:r .·n .. _. --\ ~MUf'y

/

Mr. Robert A. Jones

UNtiED &TArES DEPARTMENT OF COMM!ACE NaUol\al Ocunic •nd AtmOtphtrlc Admlnlattatlon NATIONA.l MAAIN£ FISI1EAt!$ SERVICE Nortntasl Fle:.•on 0~ B~atKbloll'n Dr11A! Qfoucetter. MA OltlO

February 27, 1991

New England Fishery Management council Suntaug Office Park

fD) IE 00 IE D IIi IE , j<1'ii

IJ11i FEB 2 1 1991 I~. s Broadway (Route 1) Saugus, MA 01906

Dear Bob: NEW ENGLAND FISHERY MANAGEtv·i~NT COUNCIL

This is to inform you that I h&ve partially approved k~endr.er.t 4 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Northeast Multispecies Fishery (AF.end~ent). The measure establishing a 2-l/2 inch minimum ~esh and the framework measures dealing with discards of yellow~ail flounder and cod have been disapproved. These measures have been deterDined to be inconsistent with the national standards or other applicable law. The O?erfishinq definitions for ocean pout and red hake have also been disapproved. The remaininq measures and definitions are approved an~ ~ill be published in the federal Register as the final rule for this amendment. Under the Magnuson Act, the Council has the op~ortunity to revise and resubmit the disapproved measures for expedited Secretarial review. I urge you to consider this option ..

Measure: Minimum Mesh of 2-1/2 incbes

National Standard 1 requires that conservation and management measures sh~uld prevent overfishing. The measure proposing a ninir.um mesh size of 2-l/2 inches would have no significant effect on preventing cverfishinq. The proposed mesh is virtually the same as is currently in use es indicatea by the mesh selectivity curve presen~ed in the Amen~~ent. This curve presents data on mesh selectivity between 2 inch, historical and 2-1/2 inch m&sh. The selectivity curves for the 2-1/2 inch and historic mesh are very similar. The analysis was based on an increase from 2 inch mesh rather than the actual mash in use. Accordingly, the benefits derived from tbis analysis are overstated. The many exe~ptions to the 2-1/2 inch aesh further reduce any likely benefits.

The analysis tried to show the impacts of this measure on the silver hake resource exclusively. There vas no analysis provided to show any increase in tMSP for silver hake resulting from this measure. Further, there was no evidence that the proposed aesh size would reduce fishinq mortality rather than shifting it to­other age classes.

Executive Order (E.O.) 12291 not be undertaken unless the

requires that regulatory action ,.~ potential benefits to society ~

-~

I I

(

I

'5'50$ zu 93 71 ~003tOOS __

outweigh the costs. The &conomic analysis failed to demonstrate any benefit over a ten yQar period which is incon~istent vith E.o. 12291. The net result is a discounted loss of $2 million and 50 jobs Yith no &ppreciable net bQnefit to the resource. Without a net benefit to the resource or the public being derived from this measure, there is no justification for its imposition. The Mid-Atlantic region would bear the ~ajor impact of this neasure which comments received attested to.

To revise this ~easure for resubmission, the Council needs to reexamine the conclusions of the lltb Stock Assessment Workshop, r&view historic interview data, and review literature on the selectivity of small mesh and silv~r hake. The TMG had req~ested that the council examine other mesh sizes such as 3 inch. some q~estions re~ain with respect to the assumption that mesh alone is a valid measure of partial recruitment. As with any measure, in order for it to ~e acceptable, the biological or economic benefit must exceed costs.

Hea~ure& Pramework to Proteet Short-lived concehtrations of Small :riah

The framework aeasure is an attempt to shorten the time it takes to act on occurrences of ir.efpropriate levels ef discard. Action is taken based on established crit~ria. This ~easure is being disapproved because the specific discard levels chosen are inappropriate to pr~vide sufficient protection. Further, this agency's adoinistrative ability to determine that there is a problem taking place may not be adequate. The ~echnical Monitoring Group has reported previously that short term, reactive time;area closurQs may be Minappropriate tor yellowtail flounder, since juveniles are resiaent due to fairly ~ell-de!ined nursery areas. Annual fixed closures in space and time are more sensible•

~he triqqerinq criteria for yellowtail flounder in Southern New England is so percent discard or sUblegal yellowtail flounder of tows of soo pounda or greater. Given the depleted status of the yellowtail flounder resource, allowing up to •9 percent discard before action is taken is not an acceptable threshold to effectively protect this resource. The argument can be made that disapproval will leave tha yellowtail flounder resource mor• vulnerable. The FAAS is already in place and through improvements in initiation and implementation, can be made more responsive. I ~ould rather have a more effective measure and let the FAAS handle the oceurrences in the interim.

For Atlantic cod this approach ~ay be more reasonable but would be hampered by fairly rapid shifts in ~istribution and the aqency•s ability to determine that a problem exists based en three random tows. Short term timetarea closures shift mortality to other segaants of the pepulation cr merely postpone it. No quantification of biological benefits was done for this measure and without this, it cannot be sho~ that these measurea prevent

. I

.- ..

I .

esos 281 9371 ~OAA FISHERIES -~- ~LFMC Jal oo.a .· oos

overfishing w~ich is inconsistent with National Standard 1.

The success of this frame~·ork measur.& depends on a lin.ite:d sea sampling program which i~ opportunistic rather than suaranteed. Sea samplers rr.ay not be available or be in the right place and time to eolleet information that would trigger action. We have already seen that dependence on the sea sampling proqra~ can be hacpered when vessel operators either refuse to take sea samplers out or conduct operations in areas outside of the area of concern. To tie the criteria to just this one program could possibly cause further problems in the future. Y.y fear is that it could jeopardize the effectiveness of tha sea sampling program.

To revise t~is measure. the criteria on which it is based must be reasonable and attainable, and an analysis supporting its i~position ~ust be done. Use the reconmendations of the T.M~. That is the purpose of their creation.

Definitions of overfishing

The definitions ot overfishing for oeean pout and red hake are not app~ovable. oeaan pout was not determi~e4 by the Council as being overfished despite survey indices being at their lowest since 1979. Ocean pout are tully exploited but are vulnerable to overfishinq because of low reproductive potential. The Southern red hake stocks are warqinally overfished while the No~~hern stock is barely above its long term average. The d&finition of overfishing fer these two species is "whenever the five-year average of the appropriate NMFS abundance survey index falls below l/2 of its long term average level.•• This definition could allow overfishing to take place if rapid declines occur. A s­year average is too long and too insensitive to rapid changes in abundance. A definition that allo\-ts overfishing is not acceptable and is inconsistent with National Standard 1.

The council should also reexamine the definitions for silver hake and redfish. They are approved to allow rebuilding schedules to be developed but they are not definitions entirely appropriate for these species. For silver hake, the Council's approach of using a time period estimate rather than a point estimate of F to determine 'MSP is an improvement over other definitions. The conoern is that the four year time period may be too long fer silver hake at this time given its 8bbreviated age structure.

The statement that •tne 'MSP that results with the successful regulation of the other species will ensure the long-term viability ot the redfish stock" fails to take into account the vastly different population dynamics (c,;;rowth, age at maturity, natural mortality rate) of redfish as compared with the other species. The a·dvance age and delayed maturity of the stock may nake the 20-30 \MSP goals excessive for the stock.

(

(

~ . • u:v.t·,·. 91 IS: o.; -cso& 281 9371 ~0~~ FISHERIES -·~ ~EFIC 1ll oos ·oos

Conclusion

The Amend~~nt does little to r&duce fishinq mortality of the groundfish resourc&. This has to be accomplished in order to allow rebuilding to take place to the council's 'MSP targets. Despite this, I feel that it is important to approve the remaining m~asures in the Amendment. What is important though is progress on )~en~~ent s which ~ust include reductions in fishing mortality. This can most effectively be achieve~ through effort controls. The Co~~ittee has a focus for Amen~~ent S and that is the \MSP targets. A similar focus was needed for Amendment ~.

It is interesting to note that the Multispeciea Cocmittee in formulating measures for Amend~ent 5 has already made amendments to the me:asures pro~·osed in Amendment 4. Alnend."nent 4 specifies a mininu~ mesh of 5-1/2 inches and an extended closure of the Southe:n New Englana Yellowtail Area. Already the Conmittee has p~cpcsed a 6 inch mesh and an expanded area. The rationale for this expansion has been provided by the TMG. The Committee has a valuable rasource in the TMG ana should use its recommendations.

Sincerely,

~ Richard B. Roe Regional Director

NBW ENGLAND FISHERY MANAGEMF..NT COUNCU..

Revised Measures for Multispecies FMP Amendment #4 Approved by the CoWicil on March 15, 1990

PROPOSAL 1: Make the following amendments to the Exempted FISheries Program:

a) Require fishermen to report the area in which they fished, the amoWit of fishing time, depth range, and mesh size used. This information is the same as that required by the Tier Two Fishing Trip Record recently used in the experimental Cultivator Shoal whiting fiShery; however, fiShermen would be required to report the 10 minute square areas in which they fiShed instead of the WRAN bearings of individual tows and would not be required to estimate discards.

b) A permit holder must carry a sea sampler if requested to do so by the Regional Director.

c) The bycatch of regulated species (the species for which there are minimum size regulations) would be limited to 25% of the target species on each trip and to 10% for the 7-30 day reporting period.

d) A vessel could not be in the exempted fisheries for whiting and shrimp at the same time; however, whiting fiShennen would be allowed to retain up to 200 lbs of shrimp per trip during the shrimp season.

PROPOSAL 2: Measures to reduce bycatch in the northern shrimp fishery

a) The shrimp season will be defined by the existing day window between December 1 and May 30 Wlless modifted by the ~tlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC). The CoWicil, in consultation with ASMFC and NMFS, would determine the type of shrimp gear that may be used in order to minimize the bycatch of regulated species. Approved shrimp gear would be required throughout the shrimp season. The Council will review information on shrimp gear technology annually and designate the allowable type of shrimp gear by July 15 for the following shrimp season. There will be a 30 day public comment period following this designation before a final determination is made.

b) For the first season ( 1990-91 ), the shrimp trawl will be the same as that required by the ASMFC in 1988-89 season with the following modifications. 1) Nets must contain 12" mesh hung on the square (6" bars) in the belly panel for at 5 rows not less than 10' in width. 2) The bottom leg wires may not be longer than 10 fathofllS. The net must also contain the same polyethylene flapper required by the ASMFC.

-2-

PROPOSAL 3: Include silver hake (whiting), red bake and ocean pont in the Mnlt:ispecies management unit.

a) Establish a 2-1/2" minimum mesh size (inside measurement) to apply throughout the range of species managed under the Multispecies FMP This measure would apply to multispecies fisheries, such as the exempted fiSheries in the Gulf of Maine, not otherwise subject to the 5-1/2" mesh size regulation with the following exceptions:

b) There would be a year-round exemption for a directed Loligo and lllex squid fishery; however, vessels using a mesh size smaller than 2-1/2" to fiSh for squid must restrict their bycatch of species included in the multispecies management unit (species for which there are minimum size regulations plus whiting, ·red hake, ocean pont, white hake and windowpane flounder) to 25% or less of squid landings on each fiShing trip.

c) The fiSheries for northern shrimp and herring would be exempt from this measure; however, boats fiShing for herring must limit their bycatch of regulated species (species for which there are minimum size regulations) and whiting to 1% of their herring landings on each trip.

d) The mesh size requirement would initially apply to 80 meshes counted from the end of a trawl net and there would be a two year phase-in period before it applied to all mesh in the net.

PROPOSAL 4: Olange the designation of the experimental fisbeiy for whiting in the Cultivator Shoal area to the "Cultivator Shoal whiting fishery" and allow it to continue within boundaries and during times established by the Council on an annual basis.

a) The boundaries of the fiShery are def"med by the following LORAN C lines:

!)LORAN 5930-X-11450 on the southwest, 2)LORAN 5930-X-1200() on the northeast, 3)LORAN 5930-Y-31350 on the northwest, 4) LORAN 5930-Y -31200 on the southeast;

b) For the fust year, and until changed by the Council, the fishery will take place from June 15 through October 31 within the existing LORAN C boundaries. Furthermore, a special permit from the Regional Director will be required to f"ISh for whiting in the prescribed area.

c) Permit conditions are: 1) a trip by-catch limit of 1% of regulated species; 2) a minimum mesh size of2 1/2" in the cod end and extension piece (160 meshes from the end of the net); and 3) The reporting requirements would be the information called for in the Tier Two Fishing Trip Record (Figure 1) used in the 1988 and 1989 experimental fisheries.

d) Periodic sea sampling should still continue to determine whether changes in the times and areas fished are needed and to determine the by-catch of regulated species, especially haddock. There will be a full review of data annually before changes of fishing dates.

Revised measures for Mnltispecies FMP Amendment 4 3/16/90

-3-

PROPOSAL 5: Authorize lhe Northeast Regional Director to close a part of lhe Soulhem New England yellowtail closure area or the Nantucket Lightship area to protect very large concenttations of juvenile yellowtail flounder, based on biweekly {twice a month) sea sampling data.

a) The closure would be limited to the area covered by 10 ten minute squares (approximately 770 square miles). Ten minute squares are rectangles defined by 10 minutes of latitude x 10 minutes of longitude.

b) The criterion for determining whether there was a large concentration of small yellowtail flounder in the area would be whether more than 50% of the catch by weight of yellowtail flounder were smaller than the legal minimum size (currently 13"). In the event that the catch rate for yellowtail on sea sampling tows is less tban 500 lbs per hour, the Regional Director would consult the Multispecies Committee to ensure that his action was coosistent with the Council's intent.

PROPOSAL 6: No vessel issued a Multispecies pennit, except midwater trawlers and vessels not having any fish~ may have available for immediate use any net, or any piece of a net not meeting the mesh size requirements, or mesh that is choked off while in the large mesh areas.

A net that conforms to one of the three following specifications and which cannot be shown to have been in recent use is considered to be "not available for immediate use":

1) Nets stored below deck: or

2) Nets stowed and lashed down on deck; or

3) Nets which are secured in a manner approved by the Regional Director. After review and approval, the Regional Director may specify alternative manner(s) of securing nets by notice in the Federal Register.

4) Nets which are on reels and are covered and secured with the cod end removed.

Guidance on securing nets:

A net is considered to be stored below deck if it is located below the main working deck from which the net is deployed and retrieved. Towing wires (any wires including the "leg" wires), must be detached from the net.

A net is considered to be stowed and lashed down on deck if it is fan folded (flaked) and bound around its circumference and securely fastened to the deck or the rail of the vessel. The towing wires (any wires including the "leg" wires) must also be detached from the net.

A net on a reel is considered to be "stowed and lashed down on deck" only if the entire surface of the net on the reel is covered with canvas or similar material which is securely bound, the towing wires (any wires including the "leg" wires) are detached from the net, and the cod end is removed from the net and stored below deck.

Revised measures for Multispecies FMP Amendment 4 3/16190

PROPOSAL 7: Additional measures for tbe Southern New England yellowtail flounder closure area

a) The entire Southern New England yellowtail closure area would close on March 1 (currently the part west of 71 °30' closes on April1 ). The closure would prohibit all flshing gear capable of catching yellowtail.

b) When the closure is not in effect, there would be a 5-1/2" minimum mesh regulation in this area The minimum mesh size would apply to 75 meshes from the end of the net in trawl nets and to all mesh in gillnets.

c) Vessels flshing with mesh smaller than the yellowtail mesh size may not have any yellowtail stored below or on deck in baskets or totes. Vessels with yellowtail and small mesh aboard must follow the regulations pertaining to the canying of small mesh while in the Regulated Mesh Area.

0078m

Revised measures for Multispecies FMP Amendment 4 3/16/90