jonathon peros council staff - amazon s3 · 2018-03-22 · jonathon peros council staff advisory...
Post on 30-Jun-2020
3 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Jonathon Peros
Council Staff
Advisory Panel – March 21, 2018Committee – March 22, 2018
Providence, Rhode Island1
Meeting OutlineMorning: Updates on FW29, other issues Overview of 2018 Priorities (Doc. 3) Monitoring and Catch Accounting (Doc. 5, B1, B2) LAGC IFQ Trip Limits – Sam Asci (Doc 4a & 4b, B2)Afternoon: Streamlining Spec Actions/Standard Defaults (Doc. 6) Modify Access Areas to be consistent with OHA2 (Doc. 7) Gear Modifications to Protect Small Scallops (Doc. 3) Northern Gulf of Maine (Doc. 3 and B3)
2
Anticipated OutcomesSee page 2 of Doc. 2 – Memo from Vincent Balzano
~1. Provide input on the scope of each priority Include tasking for the PDT
2. Consider modifications to the 2018 priority list (add standard default measures?)
3. Consider ranking on priorities What should Council and PDT work on first? Where should resources (time) flow?
3
2018 Scallop Priorities Today’s meeting: Overview of priority list, then staff will present
background information on each item.
Motions and consensus statements today.
AP and Committee scheduled to “recap” input before adjourning, may be a time to rank priorities.
Outlook: 2018 will be a busy, crowded year. 4
5
Framework 29 Feb. 20, 2018 – NGOM Proposed RuleMarch 15, 2018 – Final SubmissionMarch 15, 2018 – FW29 Proposed Rule
~
NGOM Measures will be in place by April 1st
Other FW29 measures likely to be in place around mid-April (May 1 at the latest)
6
Framework 29Default Measures: 21.75 DAS and 1 MAAA trip for FT LA LAGC IFQ receive 75% of 2017 quota
Current (2017) openings and closures remain in effect until replaced by FW29
Once FW29 is in place, LA vessels have 60 days to finish their access area trips in area that are not allocated in 2018 (ex: CAII)
7
Scallop Benchmark – SAW/SARC 65 SAW Meeting #1 – Feb. 5 – 9, 2018 (Data Meeting) SAW Meeting #2 – March 26 – 29, 2018 SAW Meeting #3 – April 30 – May 4, 2018 SARC Meeting (Scallops and Herring) – June 26 – 29
Substantial overlap in membership of scallop PDT and scallop stock assessment working group.
All workgroup members participate in PDT process.Anticipate fewer scallop PDT meetings in first half of
2018 compared to 2016 and 2017.
8
Scallop Benchmark – SAW/SARC 65Scallop SAW Workgroup: All participate in PDT process. Dr. Burton Shank (NEFSC) – Chair Dr. Dvora Hart (NEFSC) – Lead Assessment Scientist Dr. Jui-Han Chang (NEFSC) Dr. Bill DuPaul (Retired, College of William and Mary) Mr. Benjamin Galuardi (GARFO, APSD) Mr. Jonathon Peros (Council Staff) Dr. Dave Rudders (VIMS) Dr. Liese Siemann (CFF) Dr. Kevin Stokesbury (SMAST)
9
2019/2020 RSA Process RSA cycle for 2019 will start soon. Opportunity to prioritize scallop fishery research.
~ The Scallop Committee will meet in late May or June to
develop research priorities for the scallop fishery. Council approves RSA priorities at June meeting. Research groups submit proposals in the fall. Awards announced in the spring of 2019.
10
2019/2020 RSA Process - Changes NO RSA Share Day planned for 2018.
Plan to invite some RSA talks at PDT this year.
Why are we skipping 2018? Resource/time constraints with benchmark assessment Feedback loop still in place RSA projects were presented
at the last benchmark Incidental & discard mortality, growth, SH/MW, LPUE
Two AP meeting in May is challenging Poor attendance in 2017: 9 out of 16 AP members came
Should we continue to hold RSA Share Day?11
Federal Survey Dates for 2018
R/V Sharp Leg 1: May 15 – May 24 Leg 2: May 26 – June 4 Leg 3: June 6 – June 16
31 Total Days
12
http://www.epscorideafoundation.org/
13
2018 Scallop Priorities1. Specifications 2. Action to modify access areas consistent with
OHA23. NGOM management measures4. Consider increasing LAGC IFQ trip limits5. Gear modifications to protect small scallops6. Monitoring and catch accounting provisions7. Specify Allocation Review Triggers8. 2018 Scallop Benchmark9. In-season catch accounting, RSA support
14
2018 Priorities and Vehicles
Specs Package Framework Amendment Other
Specifications and Modify AAs
LAGC IFQ Trip Limits
Benchmark(SAW/SARC)
Tracking flatfish catch, coordinate
with GF PDT
Monitoring and Catch Accounting Provisions
Gear Mods to Protect Small ScallopsRSA Support
HABITAT FW:Eastern GB?
NGOM Management
Measures
Allocation Review
Triggers?
Each column represents a way to address each priority
Anticipated OutcomesSee page 2 of Doc. 2 – Memo from Vincent Balzano
~1. Provide input on the scope of each priority Include tasking for the PDT
2. Consider modifications to the 2018 priority list (add standard default measures?)
3. Consider ranking on priorities What should Council and PDT work on first? Where should resources (time) flow?
16
17
Monitoring and Catch Accounting LAGC IFQ program review found:Low compliance with VMS hail/notifications in
IFQ fishery Low number of monitored offloads
Since the Council voted on this priority in December 2017 several new monitoring and catch accounting issues have emerged.
18
Monitoring and Catch Accounting
19https://www.seafoodsource.com/news/supply‐trade/carlos‐rafael‐faces‐nearly‐usd‐1‐million‐in‐fines‐in‐noaa‐civil‐action
Monitoring and Catch Accounting
20
Monitoring and Catch Accounting
21
http://www.southcoasttoday.com/news/20180219/seized-scallops-bright-light-for-homeless-veterans-in-new-bedford
Monitoring and Catch Accounting
22
Monitoring ‘Strawman’ PDT discussed using ‘strawman’ approach to initiate
discussion on this issue. (Document 5, p.2 – Table 1) Ideas to spur conversations…need Council input.
Strawman for 3 issues. PROBLEM WHY WE THINK THERE IS A PROBLEM GOAL OBJECTIVE TACTIC/MEASURES
23
Issue #1: Hail Requirements PROBLEM: Poor compliance
WHY WE THINK THERE IS A PROBLEM: Data from OLE re: VMS hail compliance
GOAL: 100% Compliance with regulations
OBJECTIVE: Improve from recent levels.
TACTIC/MEASURES: ex: Council sends a letter to NMFS recommending…
24
Issue #2: Exceeding landing limits PROBLEMS:
Lack of adherence to trip limits and allocations Unknown removals from the fishery
WHY WE THINK THERE IS A PROBLEM: NOAA civil penalties against Carlos Rafael, et al. Counts 21 – 35,
January 10, 2018 MA Environmental Police report of F/V Dinah Jane overage.
GOALS: 100% Compliance with regulations. Equity among fishery
participants. Dealer reports a true census of landings. OBJECTIVE:
Full compliance with scallop regulations. TACTIC/MEASURES:
… 25
Issue #3: Exceeding Quota PROBLEM:
IFQ vessels participating in fishery with a negative quota balance.
WHY WE THINK THERE IS A PROBLEM: OLE reminder to permit holders on 2/20/18 50 CFR 648.14(i)(4) states that it is unlawful to possess or land
scallops in excess of a vessel's IFQ, or fish for scallops without IFQ
GOAL: 100% Compliance with regulations. Equity among fishery participants.
OBJECTIVE: Full compliance with scallop regulations.
TACTIC/MEASURES: … 26
Northeast VMS ProgramNortheast Active VMS Vessel Population: ~945
Note: Most vessels hold multiple permits
Total Unique Scallop Vessels with VMS: ~720 About 76% of vessels that are required to
use VMS can legally possess scallopsAll scallop permits (FT, PT, and all LAGC)
27
Scallop Landings The majority of scallop landings (~90%) are landed in the top 10
ports. Landings ports may vary depending on rotational management.
28
Landings: Number of Ports Data based on VTR reports Total ports where scallop
landings were reported ranged from 59 – 77 since 2010 (High: FY2016).
The number of ports where less than 3 total scallop vessels reported landing ranged from 37 to 52 during the same time period (High: FY2016).
29
LA Access Area Fishing Distribution of landings per trip:
The majority of LA FT vessels land the access area trip limit.
LPUE for vessels taking more than one trip to access areas: The LPUE of LA FT is similar among vessels, irrespective of how
many trips they took to fish an area.
Days fished in AA for FT LA vessels: The number of days FT LA vessels fish an access area in not
tightly concentrated, meaning that vessels spent a varying amount of time in each area (ex: between 25 and 50 days in the MAAA in 2015).
30
New Data on ComplianceCouncil staff requested data on compliance with
VMS hails and notifications for LA and LAGC IFQ components. More data likely coming. PDT has not reviewed yet. Discuss at next meeting.
Thank you: Enforcement group at NOAA Fisheries Bill Semaru and Team
31
VMS Pre-Land ComplianceLA and LAGC IFQ Data
Preliminary Pre-landing Notification DataNon-compliant: Vessel did not send their pre-land
notification.
Report run during 2017 FY, compliance rates for this year are subject to change. Data: Total trips & non-compliant trips Access area and open are fishing
32
33
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017Total Trips Non-Compliant Trips % Non-Compliant
# of TRIPS
LAGC IFQ Pre-Land NotificationsNon-Compliance – Access Area Trips
34
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Total Trips Non-Compliant Trips % Non-Compliant
# of TRIPS
LAGC IFQ Pre-Land NotificationsNon-Compliance – Open Area Trips
35
# of TRIPS
LAGC IFQ Pre-Land NotificationsNon-Compliance – ALL Trips
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Total Trips Non-Compliant Trips % Non-Compliant
36
# of TRIPS
Limited Access Pre-Land NotificationsNon-Compliance – Access Area Trips
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
0200400600800
100012001400160018002000
2015 2016 2017
Total Trips Non-Compliant Trips % Non-Compliant
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
2015 2016 2017
LAGC IFQ % Non-Compliance LA % Non-Compliance
37
% of TRIPS
LA and LAGC IFQ Pre-Land NotificationsNon-Compliance – Access Area Trips
Report Run during 2017 FY
2017 Compliance Rate Subject to Change
PDT DiscussionSee PDT Meeting Summaries
Looking for guidance on how to proceed, where to focus. Strawman to initiate discussion.
This ‘monitoring’ issue also feels like an enforcement issue. If so, perhaps some benefit from engaging OLE for input.
IFQ Quota Overages: Regulations are already in place. A letter from the Council may be more appropriate vs. having
the Council develop more measures. This could be true for other monitoring/enforement issues as
well. 38
PDT Recommendation
The PDT recommends that NMFS pursue technical solutions to assist with quota compliance (ex: automatic notifications, updates on quota balance when vessels go to declarations/new PTNS system).
39
Anticipated OutcomesSee Doc. 2 – Memo from Vincent Balzano
~Consider PDT input, recommendations
1. Provide input on the scope of this priority Tasking for PDT Motions, Consensus Statements.
40
41
42
Standard Default MeasuresThere are a number of decisions that the Council
makes on an annual basis during specifications process.
Some decisions have become fairly routine, and mostly consistent year to year.
There may be some opportunity to streamline the specifications process by developing standard default measures.
43
Standard Default MeasuresPotential Areas of Focus: Default measures for following FY LAGC IFQ allocations to access areas
(ex: always 5.5% of the access area allocation?)
Part-time access area allocations Clarifying access area allocation timeline (12 months vs. 12
months + 60 days to finish AA trips) Clarify: Do we “open” and “close” areas, or are they always
available. If we allocate to them they are open and if there is no allocation
they are closed. 44
Expected BenefitsExpected benefits of developing standard defaults: Reduce number of decisions made by the Council
at Final Action, and workload for PDT and staff to develop measures on an annual basis that have fairly predictable outcomes.
Predictable outcomes for stakeholders.
45
PDT RecommendationSee Feb. 28 PDT Meeting Summary
The PDT supports adding the concept of streamlining scallop actions to the 2018 scallop priorities list.
46
Next StepsIssues for AP and Committee to address: This represents a “new” work item for 2018.
Could be done as part of “Specs Package”
Does the AP/Committee want to recommend that the Council add this to 2018 priorities? If so, What issues does the AP/Committee recommend work on?
Start with current list?
47
48
Overview Interest in revisiting access areas boundaries as a follow-up to
the approval of the Omnibus Habitat Amendment. Habitat portions of Closed Area I and the Nantucket Lightship
recently became available. NMFS did not approve measures for eastern Georges Bank. There are several other issues that the Council may wish to
consider as part of this priority.
The appropriate vehicle (Framework vs. Amendment) will be determined by the scope of issues addressed in this priority.
49
Potential Areas of FocusModify existing access area boundaries Address scallop access on Eastern Georges Bank
(northern edge) HABITAT ACTIONRevisit the rotational management principles of
Amendment 10Environmental changes and other issues post
benchmark (SAW/SARC 65)Exploitable biomass vs. Effective biomass
50
PDT Input Important to review the performance of the FY 2018
before attempting a major changes to the management system.
The Council may want to address this priority in a holistic way over multiple years. Unlikely to make substantial progress on this in one year. Explore using a “specs package” for 2019/2020.
The PDT could work on the development of a tool to help identify areas where yield could improve year to year (“growth rule” candidate closures)
51
Next StepsFor AP and Committee to Consider: What does the Council hope to achieve with this
priority? Goals and objectives? Problem statement(s)? Holistic approach?
Based on the answer to #1 (above), what is the desired timeline for completing work on this issue? Wait until after FY 2018 is complete and develop in 2019 (for
2020 implementation)? Align with habitat work on eastern Georges Bank?
52
53
Gear Modifications to Protect Small Scallops Seems to be a perennial priority – on list last several years Several projects have promise, though it does not appear
that protecting small scallops will be a major issue this year. PDT recommends removing this from the priority
list in 2018, but consider in future years.
54Photo Credits: CFF
Flounder Sweep Low‐profile dredge Extended links
55
FW29 Rationale
56
Rationale: Short term solution to allow controlled fishing in the NGOM management area until a future action can be developed to address NGOM issues more holistically. Not intended to be permanent.
NMFS recommended this remain a priority for 2018.
NGOM Management Measures Need input from Council on what issues to focus on. Develop goals and objectives and/or problem statement?
Specific issues to consider? NGOM appendix included in FW29 submission documents
captures Council work in recent years. Anticipate that major changes (such as allocation) would require
the development of an amendment. The 2018 benchmark may fold some areas in the Gulf of Maine
into the SAMS model.
57
58
Set limit/cap overall removals200,000 lbsTAC for 2018
LAGC TAC: 135,000 lbs LA limit (RSA): 65,000 lbs
LA share available for RSA fishing only
NO DAS fishing
No change to existing regulations or reporting
requirements
2017 Surveys of Jeffreys & Stellwagen (post fishing):
1.3 million lbs
Model growth, M, and project forward to estimate exploitable
biomass for 2018:~1 million lbs
Evolution of NGOM Management
59
2008 – 2016 2017 2018+
Setting Catch Limits
Based on historic landings
UMaine/DMR
surveys
Based on surveys and forward
projecting model
Harvest Controls
LA – DASLAGC – Hard TAC
Overall limit for removals
Scallop RSA
OTHER research (lowest priority)HIGHEST
survey priority
2018 NGOM LAGC Fishery
135,000 pound TAC200 pound trip limitFishery scheduled to
open April 1, 2018~675 total trips for
LAGC vessels
60
ActiveVessels
Daily Landings Days open
50 10,000 lbs ~13
40 8,000 lbs ~17
30 6,000 lbs ~22
20 4,000 lbs ~34
10 2,000 lbs ~68
Monitoring scalloping in NGOM The industry funded monitoring program established in the
scallop FMP covers LA and LAGC IFQ trips.
LAGC NGOM vessels are not part of this program, and do not carry at-sea monitors.
The Scallop Committee has not discussed this topic. Unclear when this needs to be addressed.
PDT Input: Monitoring program for NGOM should compliment management program. Wait and see what new measures are developed before addressing this.
61
2018 Scallop Benchmark - GOM
Exploring ways to develop catch advice for NGOM using available (survey) data.
Area north of Provincetown, and Stellwagen Bank could become SAMS areas
No change in how the assessment determines the status of the resource (still Georges Bank/Mid-Atlantic)
62
Anticipated OutcomesSee page 2 of Doc. 2 – Memo from Vincent Balzano
~1. Provide input on the scope of each priority Include tasking for the PDT
2. Consider modifications to the 2018 priority list (add standard default measures?)
3. Consider ranking on priorities What should Council and PDT work on first? Where should resources (time) flow?
63
64
top related