ALLOCATION OF THE PACIFIC SARDINE HARVEST GUIDELINE

Transcription

1 ALLOCATION OF THE PACIFIC SARDINE HARVEST GUIDELINE REGULATORY AMENDMENT FOR THE COASTAL PELAGIC SPECIES FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLAN INCLUDING ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, REGULATORY IMPACT REVIEW, AND FINAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS Prepared by: Pacific Fishery Management Council 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 200 Portland, Oregon (503) In Conjunction with the: Department of Commerce National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Region AUGUST 2003

2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This document was prepared by: Dr. Paul Crone, Mr. Brian Culver, Dr. Samuel Herrick, Dr. Kevin Hill, Ms. Jean McCrae, Mr. Jim Morgan, Dr. Paul Smith, and Mr. Dan Waldeck. Compilation and final editing were performed by the Pacific Fishery Management Council staff. This document may be cited in the following manner: Allocation of the Pacific Sardine Harvest Guideline - Regulatory Amendment for the Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery Management Plan. (Document prepared by the Pacific Fishery Management Council for the Department of Commerce National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Region.) Pacific Fishery Management Council, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 200, Portland, Oregon This document is published by the Pacific Fishery Management Council pursuant to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Award Number NA03NMF

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents... i List of Tables... iii List of Figures... List of Acronyms and Abbreviations... iii iv 1.0 INTRODUCTION How This Document is Organized Purpose: Pacific Sardine Allocation Need: Problems for Resolution Background Pacific Sardine Harvest Guideline Formula Future Considerations Scoping Summary ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION Pacific Sardine Allocation Alternative 1 (No Action) Alternative 3 (Proposed Action) Other Possible Alternatives Other Options Considered in Developing Alternatives AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT Essential Fish Habitat Predators Fishing Industry Community Impacts ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES Pacific Sardine Allocation Impacts of No Action (Alternative 1) Impacts of the Proposed Action (Alternative 3) i

4 4.1.3 Analysis of Other Possible Management Alternatives Analysis of Other Options Considered in Developing Alternatives Economic Impacts Changes in Producer Surplus Impacts on Small Entities Cumulative Impacts of the Proposed Action Other Potential Cumulative Effects CONSISTENCY WITH THE FMP AND MAGNUSON-STEVENS ACT Consistency with the FMP Consistency with the Magnuson-Stevens Act OTHER APPLICABLE LAW National Environmental Policy Act Regulatory Impact Review and Regulatory Flexibility Act Determination Executive Order Regulatory Impact Review (Elements Beyond Those Considered in the Environmental Assessment Impacts on Small Entities Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Coastal Zone Management Act Listed Species Endangered Species Act Marine Mammal Protection Act Migratory Bird Treaty Act Paperwork Reduction Act Executive Order Executive Order Executive Order Executive Order REFERENCE MATERIAL Bibliography List of Public Meetings List of Preparers ii

5 LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1 Options for restructuring the 2003 sardine allocation framework Page Table 4-1 Estimated economic impacts, changes in producer surplus and private profit of proposed West Coast sardine harvest guideline reallocation options Table 4-2 Summary of options for restructuring the 2003 sardine allocation framework Table 4-3 Projected monthly landings by fishing sector under each alternative Table 4-4 Annual sardine landings (metric tons) by fishing sector, Table 6-1 Regulatory impact review - elements of analysis Table 6-2 RIR tests of significant regulatory actions LIST OF FIGURES Figures 1 Seasonal landings by region iii

6 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ABC CalCOFI CDFG Commission Council CPS CPSAS CPSMT CUFES CZMA EA EEZ EFH EIS ENSO EO ESA FMP FONSI HMS FRFA LE Magnuson-Stevens Act or MSA MOU MPA MSY mt NEPA NMFS NOAA acceptable biological catch California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigations California Department of Fish and Game California Fish and Game Commission Pacific Fishery Management Council coastal pelagic species Coastal Pelagic Species Advisory Subpanel Coastal Pelagic Species Management Team continuous underway fish egg sampler Coastal Zone Management Act environmental assessment exclusive economic zone essential fish habitat environmental impact statement El Niño Southern Oscillation Executive Order Endangered Species Act fishery management plan finding of no significant impact highly migratory species final regulatory flexibility analysis limited entry Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act memorandum of understanding marine protected area maximum sustainable yield metric tons National Environmental Policy Act National Marine Fisheries Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration iv

7 LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (CONTINUED) NS ODFW OY PDO PRA PS RFA RIR SAFE SBA Secretary SIO SSC SST STAR SWFSC U and A USFWS VHS WDFW National Standards (per the Magnuson-Stevens Act) Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife optimum yield Pacific Decadal Oscillation Paperwork Reduction Act producer surplus Regulatory Flexibility Act Regulatory Impact Review Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation Small Business Administration U.S. Secretary of Commerce Scripp s Institute of Oceanography Scientific and Statistical Committee sea surface temperature Stock Assessment Review Southwest Fisheries Science Center usual and accustomed areas U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service viral hemorrhagic septicemia Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife v

8 1.0 INTRODUCTION PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION 1.1 How This Document is Organized This section discusses the purpose and need for the recommended action and background about the current allocation framework, harvest control rule, and considerations for developing a longer-term allocation framework. Section 2 describes the proposed action and other alternatives considered, including the rationale for the proposed action. Section 3 is a description of the affected environment. Section 4 contains an analysis of the expected consequences of the various alternatives considered by the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council). Section 5 summarizes the proposed action s consistency with the Coastal Pelagic Species (CPS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP) objectives and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). Section 6 addresses other laws that apply to the development of fishery management actions including Regulatory Impact Review (RIR) and Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) Determination (Section 6.2). Section 7 contains reference material including a list of preparers and summary of public meetings. In accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Council develops and submits recommended regulatory amendments to the regulations implementing the Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery Management Plan. The Department of Commerce reviews the recommended amendments, then either approves and implements the action or disapproves it. 1.2 Purpose: Pacific Sardine Allocation 1/ Purpose: Implement an interim allocation framework that seeks optimal use of the annual Pacific sardine harvest guideline to benefit all sectors of the West Coast sardine fishing industry and fishing communities. Proposed Action: The Pacific Fishery Management Council is recommending National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) implement a regulatory amendment to: (1) change the definition of Subarea A and Subarea B by moving the geographic boundary between the two areas from 35 40' N latitude to 39 N latitude, (2) move the date when Pacific sardine that remains unharvested is reallocated to Subarea A and Subarea B from October 1 to September 1, (3) change the percentage of the unharvested sardine that is reallocated to Subarea A and Subarea B from 50% to both subareas to 20% to Subarea A and 80% to Subarea B, and (4) reallocate all unharvested sardine that remains on December 1 coast wide Need: Problems for Resolution Critical to any environmental assessment (EA) is the degree to which the alternative management actions have biological and/or socioeconomic impacts on the affected environment. The affected environment germane to this EA is the West Coast population of Pacific sardine, the ecosystem in which they reside, the various regional harvesting and processing sectors, and the communities dependent on the sardine resource. The critical consideration for this proposed action is the distinction between biological and economic effects of the various management alternatives. Information in this EA was developed and analyzed by the Council s Coastal Pelagic Species Management Team (CPSMT). Council recommendations to NMFS are based on CPSMT analysis, advice of the Coastal Pelagic Species Advisory Subpanel (CPSAS), and public comment. In developing this analysis, the CPSMT generally agreed that (measurable) implications of alternative allocation schemes used to partition the Pacific sardine harvest guideline largely involve socioeconomic considerations, given that the current recommended yield is generated from analysis based on the dynamics of a single, coast-wide population. Moreover, the CPSMT is confident the sardine harvest guideline control rule provides an appropriate means to manage the sardine fishery (see Section 1.2.3). However, in the future, 1/ Interim measures are being considered for 2003 and 2004 (and potentially 2005). The intent is to develop a longer-term allocation scheme after this action is completed. EA, RIR, and FRFA 1 August 2003

9 the CPSMT suggests that biological-based implications of different allocation schemes be further evaluated, at least in qualitative terms, to provide management some guidance regarding how the operations of the sectoral fisheries might impact the dynamics of the sardine population at-large. For example, research on coastwide abundance of sardine and a CPS stock assessment review (STAR) process will occur in These initiatives should provide useful information that could be incorporated into considerations of longerterm allocation measures. In summary, recent assessments generally indicate the sardine population off the U.S. Pacific Coast has responded relatively well to levels of exploitation over the last several years. That is, in the short-term, overall fishing practices are in accordance with concerns related to resource sustainability. Currently, there is an immediate need to prevent socioeconomic problems that are likely to occur under the current allocation framework. Therefore, development of an interim management measure for allocation of the coastwide harvest guideline is being pursued, and analysis of alternatives will focus on economic information. It is the intent of the Council to follow this action with a more comprehensive development of a longer-term allocation mechanism that would entail a more detailed analysis of alternative allocation frameworks in terms of socioeconomic and biological impacts. It is important to note that a more detailed analysis, to meet longer-term allocation needs, may require substantial work and subsequent time demands on researchers and managers. In this regard, the CPSMT strongly advised that the revisions to the current allocation scheme discussed in this EA be considered strictly temporary measures that address emergencyrelated issues associated with early closures to fisheries based on quota stipulations. The Council concurred and recommends the interim measures be considered for 2003 and 2004, with possible extension to the 2005 fishing season. The proposed action is consistent with FMP objectives (see Section 5) it seeks to promote efficiency and profitability in the fishery, including stability of catch and aims to ensure the optimum yield (OY) is achieved. The proposed action is also consistent with recently implemented Amendment 10 to the CPS FMP (68FR3819). Amendment 10 established a maximum fleet capacity for the CPS limited entry fishery, allows the transfer of limited entry permits, and establishes criteria for issuing new permits if economic or resource conditions indicate that such permits would be beneficial. One element of the proposed action would move the management subarea line from 35 40' N latitude (Point Piedras Blancas) to 39 N latitude (Point Arena). This action would make the management subarea line and the limited entry fishery line complementary. This should provide additional stability to all sectors of the sardine fishery by explicitly dividing the harvest guideline 2/ among the limited entry fishery and open access fishery. See Section 5 for more information on the consistency of the proposed action with the CPS FMP and the Magnuson-Stevens Act Background The current allocation framework partitions the annual harvest guideline 66% to the southern subarea and 33% to the northern subarea. Nine months after the January 1 start of the fishery (i.e., October 1), the remaining harvest guideline is pooled and re-allocated 50%-50% to each subarea. The current subarea line is 35 40' N latitude (approximately Point Piedras Blancas). This formula was incorporated into federal management from existing California state law. The state law was designed to balance fishing opportunity between the Southern California-based fishery ("South") and Monterey-based fishery ("North"). At the time of the FMP s implementation, this was considered a status quo action (as the sardine fishery occurred, principally, in California) with no environmental impacts. No alternative allocation formulae were considered. The FMP does not preclude additional allocations based on other geographic areas or other factors developed under the authority of the FMP and provides for allocation matters to be addressed under the socioeconomic point-of-concern framework. Currently, the southern subarea primarily includes the fleet based in San Pedro and Los Angeles, California; the northern subarea includes fisheries off Monterey, California; Oregon; and Washington. 2/ North of 39 N latitude the federal fishery is an open access fishery. However, Oregon and Washington actively limit participation in fisheries off their coasts. EA, RIR, and FRFA 2 August 2003

10 With expansion of the Pacific sardine fishery into the Pacific Northwest, the northern area allocation is now shared by Monterey, Oregon, and Washington-based fisheries. Concern has been expressed that the current allocation framework does not provide optimal harvest opportunity to these respective fisheries. For example, under the current allocation framework (and given status quo harvest levels), there is a high likelihood the northern area fisheries will attain their portion of the annual harvest guideline prior to the scheduled October 1 reallocation, which (as described below) effectively causes premature closure of the Pacific Northwest fishery. Specific socioeconomic concerns include: Pacific Northwest fisheries generally finish operations in October, because weather and ocean conditions make fishing difficult or impossible for purse seine gear and less productive because sardine schools are harder to locate. In 2002, the northern area allocation was reached, and the fishery closed on September 14, 2002 (67FR58733). Due to concern over community impacts resulting from this closure, NMFS promulgated an emergency rule to re-allocate the unused amount of the coastwide harvest guideline on September 26, 2002 (67FR60601). That is, emergency action was taken to reallocate before October 1, The express purpose of this emergency rule was to avoid unnecessary economic hardship. At the time of the emergency action, sufficient amounts of the sardine harvest guideline remained to satisfy all users. At the end of the year, the harvest guideline had not been attained (approximately 17,400 metric tons (mt) remained unharvested). Had the reallocation occurred earlier, avoiding the September 14 closure, there likely would have been a net gain in harvest and producer surplus. Monterey area fisheries target squid (when available) during the first half of the year and begin to target sardine around August, with their season running through January or February of the following year. Concern has been expressed that harvest opportunity for the Monterey fishery could be preempted by the Pacific Northwest fishery. The existing allocation system (as incorporated from the former California state management system) was designed to prevent the Southern California fishery from preempting the fishery in Monterey. However, the development of significant fisheries off Oregon and Washington has changed the harvesting dynamics. Additional fishing opportunity could be provided to the northern fisheries without adverse impacts on southern fisheries at current harvest guideline levels. The harvest control rule for Pacific sardine is environmentally-based and tuned to the importance of sardine within the ecosystem. It is based on the best available science, and the annual harvest guideline is set at a sustainable level. A principle goal of the CPS FMP is to ensure full utilization of the annual coastwide harvest guideline. However, in recent years as much as 59,000 mt of the harvest guideline was left unharvested at the end of the season. Concern has been expressed that this foregone harvest opportunity could be exacerbated by the current allocation formula, and could result in an unnecessary impact to the coastwide fishery and loss in net national benefit. Each of the three sectors operates over a unique schedule. Generally, Southern California starts harvesting sardine January 1 and increases steadily throughout the year; Northern California starts in August (tied to market squid availability) and increases through January or February of the following year; and Oregon and Washington have a much more abbreviated season, which starts in June and ends in October. Because these sectors operate on very different schedules, annual allocations help to ensure that each sector receives a reasonable fishing opportunity. Ex-vessel landings in all sectors are driven by domestic and international market forces for sardines, as well as the availability and markets for other species of economic benefit to sardine vessels and processors. The Northern California fishery is also influenced by availability of market squid and adverse weather. The Pacific Northwest fishery is affected by sardine availability and adverse weather. Figure 1 displays the seasonal structure of the three regional sectors. Table 4-4 in Section 4 provides information on harvest by sector for the years 1995 through Pacific Sardine Harvest Guideline Formula The following excerpt from the CPS FMP Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) reviews the environmentallybased formula for determining the annual allowable harvest (harvest guideline; also known as OY) for the Pacific sardine fishery. Information is excerpted from page EIS-9 and Appendix B, Section 4 of the CPS FMP. This information is provided to bolster the Council s finding that the proposed action does not pose an EA, RIR, and FRFA 3 August 2003

11 environmental risk. That is, the proposed action is not expected to change the nature of the fishery, a fishery which is managed sustainably under a conservative, environment-based harvest control rule. For CPS, an maximum sustainable yield (MSY) control rule is defined to be a harvest strategy that provides biomass levels at least as high as the F MSY approach while also providing relatively high and relatively consistent levels of catch. By definition, candidate MSY control rules for CPS take the F MSY policy as a lower bound in terms of biomass and catch. This means that any candidate MSY control rule must provide biomass levels that are at least as high as those from the F MSY policy while also providing relatively high and consistent levels of catch. The definition of an MSY control rule for CPS is compatible with National Standard 1, but more conservative and more general. According to National Standard 1 (50 CFR ) an MSY control rule is "a harvest strategy which, if implemented, would be expected to result in a long-term average catch approximating MSY." Similarly, MSY stock size in National Standard 1 "means the long-term average size of the stock or stock complex, measured in terms of spawning biomass or other appropriate units, that would be achieved under an MSY control rule in which the fishing mortality rate is constant." The definition of an MSY control rule for CPS is more general, because it includes the definition in National Standard 1. The definition for CPS is more conservative, because the focus for CPS is oriented primarily towards stock biomass levels at least as high as the MSY stock size. In the definition for CPS, "relatively high and consistent catch levels" are important, and MSY is used as a lower bound. The primary focus on biomass, rather than catch, is appropriate for CPS, because most species (Pacific sardine, northern anchovy, and market squid) are very important in the ecosystem for forage. MSY control rules for CPS (e.g., for sardine) are superior to the F MSY approach in economic, social, and ecological terms. However, the F MSY approach serves as a lower bound (with respect to biomass and catch) in their definition, and adjustments can be made to account for stock biomass, precision of biomass estimates and data, statistical characteristics in recruitment patterns (e.g., runs of years with good or bad recruitment), and other characteristics of the stock and fishery. Sardine are important as forage to a large number of birds, marine mammals, and fish predators (including endangered species) although few data are available, because of the scarcity of sardine, until recently. Decisions about harvest formula options and the definition of overfishing for sardine must, therefore, consider sardine as forage. Forage and ecosystem-related goals and objectives are included in this FMP. Of all CPS, sardine productivity is most strongly affected by environmental variation. Favorable and unfavorable periods or "regimes" for sardine tend to occur in cycles of about 60 years. This means that periods of low abundance for sardine are probably inevitable, even in the absence of a fishery. It is important to remember that sardine productivity changes substantially in response to long term environmental variation. Favorable conditions for sardine are characterized by warm sea surface temperatures in the Southern California Bight while unfavorable conditions are characterized by cold sea surface temperatures. This means that the best MSY control rule in a particular year might depend on ocean conditions. For Pacific sardine, MSY control rule options are analyzed using a species and fishery- specific simulation model. The general approach is to simulate the stock and fishery over a long period of time and using a large number of MSY control rule parameter values. Results are used to find MSY control rules and control rule parameters that give good results for most measures of performance. Options for Pacific sardine and Pacific (chub) mackerel are based on the general formula H=(BIOMASS-CUTOFF) x FRACTION where H is the harvest level, BIOMASS is the estimated stock biomass, CUTOFF is the lowest level of estimated biomass at which directed harvest is allowed, and FRACTION is an exploitation rate EA, RIR, and FRFA 4 August 2003

12 parameter. In some cases, it is useful to define a maximum harvest level (MAXCAT) so that total harvest never exceeds MAXCAT. MSY control rule parameters might be constant from year to year or might change, depending on environmental conditions or conditions in the fishery. Most CPS are transboundary resources distributed off Mexico, the U.S., and Canada. It is, therefore, necessary to adjust harvest levels for U.S. fisheries in proportion to the biomass in U.S. waters. This is typically done by multiplying the overall acceptable biological catch (ABC) from the MSY control rule by an estimate of the percentage of the stock in U.S. waters. For sardine, the Council chose a harvest control rule that provides biomass and catch levels comparable to or better than the deterministic equilibrium F MSY projected for other options and because it has a CUTOFF of 150,000 mt. This option was chosen, because it best achieves the FMP goals and objectives of preventing overfishing, providing adequate forage for dependent species, and promoting stability of catch. FRACTION, the variable tied to sea surface temperature, provides an element of environmental sensitivity in recognition of the sensitivity of the sardine biomass to changes in ocean temperature. In general, the sea surface temperature (SST) used for determining FRACTION has been declining since the inception of federal management. If this trend continues, a swift reduction of catch from 15% of the available biomass to 5% (based on how FRACTION is applied in the harvest guideline formula) could occur. To gauge the importance of this issue, the CPSMT reviewed the development and application of the harvest guideline formula. Three issues of concern were discussed: (A) the quality of the contemporary versus historical entries in the SST time series; (B) the availability of alternative temperature time series for use in the harvest control rule; and (C) reevaluation of the functional relation between sardine productivity (e.g., recruitment and abundance) and oceanographic conditions. A. Contemporary versus Historical Scripps Pier Sea Surface Temperatures The basis for the time series of sardine-environment is the relationship between the Scripp s Institution of Oceanography ([SIO]; La Jolla, California) pier SST and age 1-5 biomass of sardines in the period The CPSMT is exploring ways to ensure application of the FRACTION range (5% to 15%) is flexible enough to prevent over harvest without unnecessarily burdening the fishery. In the future, the CPSMT may revise the relationships based on new ideas and data. In particular, some have expressed concern that the SIO pier is central to the California-Baja California fisheries reduced population of Pacific sardines in this time period, the current population range is now several times as great, reaching into Alaska and prominent in British Columbia, Canada. B. Better Temperature Time Series There are now several data sets of temperatures representing large portions of the ocean. The California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigations (CalCOFI) time series have been compared to the SIO Pier SST data set and found to be comparable. There are also shore station and air temperature time series throughout the range of Pacific sardine and some method of assembly could be adapted for use in a regulatory control rule. C. Environmental Influence There are also compendia describing environmental influences on sardine recruitment. For example, 20 environmental mechanisms have been proposed as controlling factors for regulating sardine growth. The Pacific sardine stock covered by the FMP ranges along the entire West Coast of North America. Functional solutions to sardine production have not been fully developed. While the mechanisms appear plausible, the current level of biological oceanography effort, fisheries oceanography commitment, and physical oceanography approaches have not led to definitive conclusions about sardine production. EA, RIR, and FRFA 5 August 2003

13 Based on this consideration and review, the CPSMT concluded: 1. The current harvest control rule for sardine is sound and based on good analyses. 2. The SIO pier SST data set constitutes a reliable data source. 3. A stepped (gradual) transition from 15% to 5% might be a useful management tool for managing a dynamic fishery Future Considerations In the future, when information becomes available, some biological questions relating to allocation and differential impacts on the coastwide resource from the three fishing sectors that could be evaluated generally include: Impacts to the coastwide population from a fishery that targets older, mature fish. Impacts to the coastwide population from a fishery that targets younger, immature fish. Recent indications of changes in maturity rates (i.e., delayed maturity) in the southern fishery resulting from density-dependent factors. Potential refinements to the Pacific sardine assessment and/or harvest control rule in response to new biological information. Future biological information will include NMFS research surveys off the Pacific Northwest scheduled for summer 2003 and a STAR scheduled for spring NMFS-Southwest Fisheries Science Center (SWFSC) will conduct sardine acoustic trawl and Continuous Underway Fish Egg Sampler (CUFES) surveys off the coast of Oregon and Washington in July 2003 and January-February 2004 (acoustic-trawl only). These surveys are designed to fill major gaps in knowledge of sardine populations, by measuring the age structure and reproductive rates, and assessing the extent the fishery is dependent on migration and on local production of sardine. The objective of the surveys is to estimate the biomass present at these two times of the year, with the ratio of the two values providing an estimation of the relative proportion, as well as size/age structure of the sardine stock, which is hypothesized to over-winter off the coast of Oregon and Washington. A CPS STAR workshop is scheduled for May The goals and objectives for the CPS assessment and review process are: ensure that CPS stock assessments provide the kinds and quality of information required by all members of the Council family; satisfy the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other legal requirements; and provide a well-defined, Council oriented process that helps make CPS stock assessments the "best available" scientific information and facilitates use of the information by the Council. In this context, "well-defined" means: based on a detailed calendar, with explicit responsibilities for all participants, and provides specified outcomes and reports; emphasizes external, independent review of CPS stock assessment work; increases understanding and acceptance of CPS stock assessment and review work by all members of the Council family; identifies research needed to improve assessments, reviews, and fishery management in the future; and uses assessment and review resources effectively and efficiently. The CPS STAR process will be used in crafting alternatives for a longer-term allocation framework and information for Pacific sardine management in As data become available, this information, along with more robust economic information on producer profit and surplus, will be considered in crafting longer-term management alternatives for annual allocation of the Pacific sardine harvest guideline. As noted, it is expected that once an interim measure is in place, the Council will embark on an amendment to the CPS FMP. 1.3 Scoping Summary The Council process offers many opportunities to determine the scope of the action and the likely environmental consequences that merit analysis and disclosure. This work is carried out by advisory bodies and at Council meetings, which are open to the public. The preceding background discussion and Section 4 describe how the proposed action analyzed in this document evolved with direction from the Council and EA, RIR, and FRFA 6 August 2003

14 development by various advisory bodies, in particular the CPSMT and CPSAS. Section 7.2 of this document lists public meetings where issues and analyses contained in this regulatory amendment were developed, analyzed, and adopted. This regulatory amendment and the proposed action were developed over the course of 10 meetings of the Council and its advisory bodies. Opportunity for public comment was provided at each of these meetings. The Council received approximately 50 letters from the public about this issue. Approximately 8 and 18 members of the public provided testimony to the Council at the March and April 2003 meetings, respectively. A notice of availability for the public review draft of the regulatory amendment was distributed via and U.S. post on March 19, The public review document was posted on the Council website and distributed via , fax, and U.S. post on March 25, Final Council action occurred on April 10, The intent of the Council is for this action to be implemented in time to prevent premature closure of northern subarea sardine fisheries prior to reallocation of the harvest guideline (i.e., some time in August 2003). Thus, given the time necessary for the federal rulemaking process, this schedule required final Council action in April EA, RIR, and FRFA 7 August 2003

15 2.0 ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION 2.1 Pacific Sardine Allocation As noted above, the current FMP allocation framework partitions the annual harvest guideline 66% to the southern subarea and 33% to the northern subarea. Nine months after the January 1 start of the fishery (i.e., October 1) the remaining harvest guideline is pooled and re-allocated to each subarea. The current subarea line is 35 40' N latitude (approximately Point Piedras Blancas). In developing alternative management measures for an interim change to the allocation framework, the CPSMT started from an initial suite of management measures provided by the Council in November The Council gave discretion to the CPSMT to develop the most appropriate set of alternatives, including development of new alternatives. Through the analysis described in Section 4, the CPSMT settled on a suite of alternatives that could most practicably provide for consideration of an interim change that could be implemented in The management measures initially reviewed by the CPSMT were: Status quo. No allocation institute a coastwide harvest guideline. Move northern boundary of southern subarea from 35 40' N latitude to 39 N latitude, change reallocation date from October 1 to September 1 (or August 1), and provide for December 1 reallocation to a coastwide harvest guideline. Change reallocation date from October 1 to September 1 or (August 1), and provide for December 1 reallocation to a coastwide harvest guideline. Sub-alternatives for the initial allocation were also considered. 33% to the north, 66% to the south. 50% to the north, 50% to the south. In analyzing these initial management alternatives, some alternatives were eliminated and other alternatives were developed. The full range of alternatives considered is described in Section 4 along with the rationale for eliminating particular alternatives. A key consideration was what are the most practicable alternatives for implementation in 2003 to prevent adverse fishery impacts? These alternatives and analyses were developed during public meetings of the CPSMT, CPSAS, and Council. Opportunity for public comment was provided, and public input was considered at each of these meetings. In March 2003, from the initial management measures listed above, five alternatives were adopted by the Council for public review: Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 Status quo. Move subarea line to 39 N latitude, change reallocation date to September 1 (50% to the south and 50% to the north), add December 1 coastwide reallocation. Move subarea line to 39 N latitude, change reallocation date to September 1 (80% to the south and 20% to the north), add December 1 coastwide reallocation. Do not change subarea line, change reallocation date to September 1 (50% to the south and 50% to the north), add December 1 coastwide reallocation. Move subarea line to 39 N latitude, reallocate the remaining harvest guideline coastwide on September 1. At the April 2003 Council meeting, the Council selected Alternative 3 as their preferred alternative, i.e., the proposed action that would be recommended to NMFS. The Council recommends this revised allocation regime be in effect for the 2003 and 2004 fishing seasons, and could be extended to 2005 if the 2005 harvest guideline were at least 90% of the 2003 harvest guideline. EA, RIR, and FRFA 8 August 2003

16 The Council discussed several reasons and considerations for recommending the proposed action (not in priority order) The proposed action should eliminate or, at least, greatly reduce risk of early closure of the northern subarea fishery, with minimal risk of early closure for the traditional California fisheries. Recently, the southern fishery has been constrained by markets and the coastwide harvest guideline has not been achieved since implementation of federal management. Moreover, current (as of April 2003) landings information from Southern California indicate lower landings than the same period during 2001 and This action should provide considerable gains in producer surplus in Pacific Northwest fisheries, which report strong markets, increasing demand, and higher product prices than in California. It is also expected to provide considerable increases in Pacific Northwest employment and income, while resulting in no to minimal risk of disruption to other fishery sectors. This action is consistent with FMP objectives. It recognizes the historic dependence of California fisheries and is not anticipated to have significantly impact nor disrupt the limited entry fishery. Thus, the proposed action should help to ensure stability in the southern sector while fostering a strong northern fishery at the peak of the season. The Council acknowledges that the harvest guideline could dramatically decrease if sea surface temperature continues to decline. The Council accepts this as a low probability risk during the duration of this interim measure. The Council notes that biological concerns about the proposed action are limited because the U.S. coastwide harvest will continue to be constrained by a risk-averse and environmentally-sensitive harvest control rule. A succinct summary of potential biological impacts for the longer term can be found in the third paragraph of section Additional survey work this summer and the beginning of next year off the Pacific Northwest will provide important information to determine the annual biomass. Related to this is the potential of one area of the fishery harvesting too much of a single age class. Size and age data is being collected for proper monitoring. The biological questions related to allocation are the same for all options. From a purely biological point of view, there is no reason to chose one alternative over another. The reason the Council considers the proposed action as temporary is because more biological information is needed before a permanent allocation scheme can be implemented. The interim nature of this recommendation acknowledges the potential for a decrease in available harvest by limiting its application to 2003 and 2004, and possibly This action provides management stability for the short term (2003 and 2004), while a longer-term allocation framework is developed. The Council anticipates new biological and economic information collections will provide the basis for developing a longer-term allocation. To that end, the Council fully supports increased research and is endeavoring to ensure science and management are based on the best available scientific information Alternative 1 (No Action) Alternative 1 is the status quo (no action alternative). This alternative would maintain the current allocation framework. In Section 4, the status quo alternative is used to compare the relative impacts of the proposed action and alternative management actions Alternative 3 (Proposed Action) Alternative 3 was selected by the Council as the proposed action. Under this proposed action, the management subarea line would be changed from 35 40' N latitude (Point Piedras Blancas, California) to 39 EA, RIR, and FRFA 9 August 2003

17 N latitude (Point Arena, California); on January 1 the harvest guideline would be initially allocated 66% to the southern subarea and 33% to the northern subarea; on September 1, the unused amount of the harvest guideline would be pooled and reallocated 80% to the southern subarea and 20% to the northern subarea; on December 1 the remaining unused harvest guideline would be reallocated coastwide Other Possible Alternatives Under Alternative 2, the management subarea line would be changed from 35 40' N latitude (Point Piedras Blancas) to 39 N latitude (Point Arena); on January 1 the harvest guideline would be initially allocated 66% to the southern subarea and 33% to the northern subarea; on September 1, the unused amount of the harvest guideline would be pooled and reallocated 50% to the southern subarea and 50% to the northern subarea; on December 1 the remaining unused harvest guideline would be reallocated coastwide. Under Alternative 4, the subarea line would remain 35 40' N latitude (Point Piedras Blancas); on January 1 the harvest guideline would be initially allocated 66% to the southern subarea and 33% to the northern subarea; on September 1, the unused amount of the harvest guideline would be pooled and reallocated 50% to the southern subarea and 50% to the northern subarea; on December 1 the remaining unused harvest guideline would be reallocated coastwide. Under Alternative 5, the management subarea line would be changed from 35 40' N latitude (Point Piedras Blancas) to 39 N latitude (Point Arena); on January 1 the harvest guideline would be initially allocated 66% to the southern subarea and 33% to the northern subarea; on September 1, the unused amount of the harvest guideline would be pooled and reallocated coastwide and be equally available to all sectors for the remainder of the year Other Options Considered in Developing Alternatives The complete range of alternatives considered is evaluated and compared in Section 4. This includes reasons why the rejected alternatives were not considered reasonable alternatives for addressing the problems described in Section The following table displays relative impacts of the five alternatives; impacts include early closure of a sector, gained or foregone harvest by sector, and un-attained coastwide harvest guideline. EA, RIR, and FRFA 10 August 2003

18 TABLE 2-1. Options for restructuring the 2003 sardine allocation framework. Early Close Southern CA Northern CA OR/WA Coastwide OY Landings (mt) Gained or Foregone Relative to Status Quo* Early Close Landings (mt) Gained or Foregone Relative to Status Quo* Early Close Landings (mt) Gained or Foregone Relative to Status Quo* Achieved? Amount left (mt) 1. Status Quo N 0 Y 0 Y 0 N 9, (Pt. Arena, Sept , Dec. coastwide) Y -3,618 Y 35 N 10,108 N 3, (Pt. Arena, Sept , Dec. coastwide) Y -225 Y 2,449 Y 7,622 Y 0 4. (Sept , Dec. coastwide) Y 0 Y 274 Y 8,091 N 1, (Pt. Arena, Sept. reallocate coastwide) Y -2,500 Y 2,239 N 10,108 Y 0 * Status quo represents landings made in 2002 expanded by a 10% assumed growth. EA, RIR, and FRFA 11 August 2003

19 3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT As noted above, this interim action is not anticipated to have positive or negative biological impacts or create resource conservation concerns. None of the stocks managed under the CPS FMP are considered overfished. Impacts are anticipated to be limited to trade-offs among harvest opportunity (and associated revenue, employment, and other economic activity) provided to each of the three fishery sectors and attainment of the coastwide harvest guideline (OY). Comprehensive information on the affected environment may be found in Appendix A and Appendix D to the 3/ CPS FMP. The California Current is the eastern boundary of the North Pacific great subtropical anticyclonic gyre. At the northern extreme, subarctic water is entrained to flow equatorward. The great shifts in ocean climate at the decadal to century scale control the eastern boundary along the coasts of Washington, Oregon, California, and Baja California. The California Current and the subarctic entrained waters are known as the "Transition" zone. The mixing of these waters with the seasonal coastal wind driven upwelling yield highly structured waters with patches of high nutrient and high productivity. High nutrient levels result from a winter buildup of regenerated nutrients and new nutrients from a shoaling thermocline, an influx of high-nutrient, subarctic water and small coastal intrusions of newly upwelled water. Pelagic fish species dominate the exploitable biomass of the system, with major concentrations of anchovy and squid close to the coastline ranging offshore to the habitats of sardine and jack mackerel. The California Current ecosystem is essentially a region of transport, coastal jets, divergence, and upwelling. Seasonal and interannual environmental variability within the California Current ecosystem are associated with variations in the Pacific Basin atmospheric pressure systems, which control the local winds and Ekman transport, and affect flows of the equatorward California Current, the poleward undercurrent, and the inshore countercurrent. Variations on time scales of several years to decades are associated with alterations in the tropical and Aleutian pressure systems, (i.e., the El Niño southern oscillation [ENSO] phenomenon and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation [PDO]). ENSO and PDO events markedly alter flow and temperature of currents in the California Current. Anchovy, sardine, hake, jack mackerel, and Pacific mackerel achieve the largest populations in the California Current region as well as in other major eastern boundary currents. These populations are key to the trophic dynamics of the entire California Current ecosystem. Anchovy and sardines are the only fish in the ecosystem that consume large quantities of primary production (phytoplankton), all five of the species are significant consumers of zooplankton. All five species of fish, particularly mackerels and hake, and also squid are important predators of the early stages of fish. The juvenile stages of squid and all five species of finfish, and in many cases the adults, are important as forage for seabirds, pinnipeds, cetaceans, and other fish. Trophic interactions between CPS and higher-trophic-level fish are poorly understood, and it is unknown if populations of individual predaceous fish are enhanced or hindered by large populations of CPS. It is not known if the value of CPS as forage to adult predators outweighs the negative effects of predation by CPS on larvae and juveniles of predator fish species plus competitive removal of phytoplankton, zooplankton, and other fish. 3.1 Essential Fish Habitat A complete description of CPS essential fish habitat (EFH) may be found in Appendix D of the CPS FMP. In determining EFH for CPS, the estuarine and marine habitat necessary to provide sufficient production to support MSY and a healthy ecosystem were considered. Using presence/absence data, EFH is based on a thermal range bordered within the geographic area where a managed species occurs at any life stage, where the species has occurred historically during periods of similar environmental conditions, or where environmental conditions do not preclude colonization by the species. The specific description and 3/ Unless stated, appendices cited in Section 3 refer specifically to appendices to the CPS FMP, not the current EA/RIR document. EA, RIR, and FRFA 12 August 2003

20 identification of EFH for CPS finfish accommodates the fact the geographic range of all species varies widely over time in response to the temperature of the upper mixed layer of the ocean, particularly in the area north of 39 N latitude. This generalization is probably also true for market squid, but few data are available. Adult CPS finfish are generally not found at temperatures colder than 10 C or warmer than 26 C. Preferred temperatures (including minimum spawning temperatures) are generally above 13 C. Spawning is most common at 14 C to 16 C. 3.2 Predators Northern anchovy, Pacific sardine, and market squid are probably important as forage to a long list of fish, birds, and mammals, including threatened, endangered, and depleted species. Some of the more important squid predators are king salmon, coho salmon, lingcod, rockfish, harbor seals, California sea lions, sea otters, elephant seals, Dall s porpoise, sooty shearwater, Brandt s cormorant, rhinoceros auklet, and common murre. Coastal pelagic species are eaten by several species of marine mammals, and dependence on CPS varies by age from predator to predator. A great deal of information is available about the diets of adult marine mammals, and the total amount of CPS eaten per year has been estimated for a few. It is not currently possible, however, to estimate the total amount of CPS used as forage by all marine mammals in the California Current ecosystem or the size of CPS populations necessary to sustain predator populations. Some of the species, such as the Pribilof population of the northern fur seal, are listed as depleted, but a local stock at San Miguel Island is not depleted. Pelagic schooling fish are key components of marine food webs and primary prey of many seabirds. CPS are important to seabirds because of their abundance near the sea surface, relatively small size, fusiform shape, and dense concentration. Seabird populations of the California Current ecosystem and other eastern boundary currents are large relative to areas not driven by large-scale coastal upwelling. Coastal pelagic species are consumed by a large number of seabirds off the coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington. Availability of anchovies is known to directly affect the breeding success of pelicans, terns, gulls, and auks. It is likely that many predators of anchovies also eat sardines. For example, increased abundance of sardines off Southern California was followed by increased breeding success and abundance of brown pelicans. 3.3 Fishing Industry The sardine fishery was first developed in response to demand for food during World War I. Landings increased from 1916 to 1936, and peaked at over 700,000 mt. The Pacific sardine supported the largest fishery in the western hemisphere during the 1930s and 1940s, with landings along the coast in British Columbia, Washington, Oregon, California, and Mexico. The fishery declined, beginning in the late 1940s and with some short-term reversals, to extremely low levels in the 1970s. There was a southward shift in the catch as the fishery decreased, with landings ceasing in the northwest in 1947 through 1948, and in San Francisco in 1951 through Sardine were primarily used for reduction to fish meal and oil, and as canned food, with small quantities taken for live bait. An extremely lucrative dead bait market developed in central California in the 1960s. In the early 1980s, sardine began to be taken incidentally with Pacific (chub) mackerel and jack mackerel in the Southern California mackerel fishery and was primarily canned for pet food, although some were canned for human consumption. As sardine continued to increase in abundance, a small directed fishery was reestablished in California in As biomass continued to increase, the directed fishery was expanded. During the 1990s, landings averaged almost 42,000 short tons per year. By the late 1990s the sardine fishery had expanded coastwide, with active fisheries off Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia. Coastal pelagic species of finfish landed by the roundhaul fleet (fishing primarily with purse seine or lampara nets) are sold as relatively high volume/low value products (e.g., Pacific mackerel canned for pet food, Pacific sardine frozen and shipped to Australia to feed penned tuna or to Japan for longline bait, and northern EA, RIR, and FRFA 13 August 2003

21 anchovy reduced to meal and oil). In addition to fishing for CPS finfish, many of these vessels fish for market squid, Pacific bonito, bluefin tuna, and Pacific herring. Other vessels target CPS finfish in small quantities, typically selling their catch to specialty markets for relatively high prices. During the period 1993 through 1997, these included: Approximately 18 live bait vessels in Southern California and two vessels in Oregon and Washington that landed about 2,000 mt per year of CPS finfish (mostly northern anchovy and Pacific sardine) for sale to recreational anglers. Roundhaul vessels that take a maximum of 1,000 mt to 3,000 mt per year of northern anchovy that are sold as dead bait to recreational anglers. Roundhaul and other mostly small vessels that target CPS finfish (particularly Pacific mackerel and Pacific sardine) for sale in local fresh fish markets or canneries. In Oregon, Pacific sardine is managed as a developmental fishery. In 2001, the number of permits was increased from 15 to 20. Permit stipulations include: permit is not transferable; logbook is required; observers are allowed on board; a grate must be place over the hold to sort out larger fish; renewal of the permit is subject to meeting minimum annual landing requirements of five landings of sardines of at least 500 pounds each, or one landing of at least 5,000 pounds. In Washington, sardines are currently managed under Emerging Commercial Fishery provisions as a trial commercial fishery. The Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission first approved a trial ocean purse seine sardine fishery in 2000, and the fishery has occurred for the last three years. As part of the trial fishery regulations, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) requires fishers to pay for, and carry at-sea observers, primarily to collect bycatch information. Bycatch has been recorded in terms of species, amount, and condition; observers noted whether the fish were released or landed, and whether the fish were alive, dead, or in poor condition. Permits in a trial emerging fishery, by law, may not be limited. However, WDFW is currently pursuing moving the fishery to limited entry. In 2002, W DFW issued 35 permits and 19 vessels made landings. The majority of the catch was landed by 13 vessels. In 2002, Washington s trial fishery was managed to a state harvest guideline of 15,000 mt. Table 4-4 summarizes annual landings for each fishing sector, Community Impacts Community impacts indicate the amount of economic activity, in terms of sales, income and employment, that is generated by the business operations of economic entities within a particular geographic region. The economic impacts of changes in the Pacific sardine harvest guideline allocation framework are expected to affect coastal communities in Southern California (San Pedro/Los Angeles) and Northern California (Monterey), and in Oregon (Astoria) and Washington (Illwaco/Westport). Analyses in Section 4 demonstrate that each of the non-status quo (as noted previously, "status quo" landings equal 2002 landings plus 10%) alternatives will have different impacts on sectoral fishing opportunities, and on the overall level of harvest guideline utilization. In general, a gain/loss in landings for a particular sector will result in increased/decreased economic activity in that sector s sardine fishery and related business sectors. Because the harvest guideline is not fully utilized under the status quo alternative, it is possible for all sectors to be made better off in terms of increased economic activity, or at least no sector being made worse off. Therefore, based on projections in Section 4, relative to the status quo, Alternative 2 would result in an increase in economic activity in Northern California and Oregon/W ashington, and a decrease in economic activity in Southern California. Likewise, Alternative 3 would result in slightly decreased economic activity in Southern California, although not to the degree of alternative 2, and increased economic activity in Northern California and Oregon/W ashington. Alternative 4 would not result in any decrease in economic EA, RIR, and FRFA 14 August 2003

22 activity in any sector, but overall gains in terms of OY attainment and producer surplus would be lower than under alternatives 3 and 5. Alternative 5 would result in an increase in economic activity in Northern California and Oregon/Washington and a decrease in economic activity in Southern California. Industry sources have pointed out that given the short season of the Oregon/Washington fishery, closure of this fishery prior to October (when weather generally closes the fishery) could have a significant impact on dependent communities. Closure of the Southern California fishery in November or early December could also have community impacts, because the peak season for the San Pedro-based CPS fleet runs from the fall months through January or February. In addition, representatives from the Pacific Northwest remarked that, under status quo, shutting down production in September for more than a week would likely result in the loss of their labor force, which would mean the industry could not restart after the status quo reallocation on October 1. EA, RIR, and FRFA 15 August 2003

23 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 4.1 Pacific Sardine Allocation As noted above, this interim action is not anticipated to have adverse biological impacts or create resource conservation concerns. Impacts are anticipated to be isolated to trade-offs among harvest opportunity provided to each of the three fishery sectors and attainment of the annual harvest guideline. Analysis of the environmental impacts of the Pacific sardine harvest control rule are available in the CPS FMP, which is described above in Section Anticipated Impacts in Terms of Attainment of the Harvest Guideline and Foregone Harvest In developing and analyzing the management alternatives, the CPSMT used an analytical tool that forecasted how the various alternatives would impact the three fishing sectors. The analysis provided expected yields to each fishing sector for each of the alternatives, based on 2002 landing statistics. Inputs included average landings by month and area and maximum landings by month and area. In general, the two areas (north and south) include three fishing sectors Southern California, Northern California, and Pacific Northwest. Under certain of the alternatives, the area "south" includes Southern and Northern California, and the area "north" includes Oregon and Washington. Under all other alternatives, "south" represents Southern California and "north" represents Northern California, Oregon, and Washington. This approach provides information regarding the amount of the annual harvest guideline likely to be left unharvested at the end of the year, as well as the amount of harvest opportunity gained or foregone by each sector under the various alternatives. As noted in Section 1, for this interim management measure, two issues are the central focus of this analysis (1) how to ensure achievement of the coast-wide harvest guideline, while (2) minimizing detrimental economic impacts on the various fishery sectors. The former is measured by how much of the harvest guideline remains at the end of the year and the latter in terms of how much harvest opportunity is foregone by a given sector and the timing and duration of likely subarea closures. Initially, three different landings utilization scenarios were reviewed. Each scenario provided insight into how the 2003 fishing season would be expected to progress based on landing statistics observed in The first was based on average monthly landings for each of the three sectors. The second was based on maximum monthly landings for each of the three sectors. The third was based on average monthly landings in each of the California fisheries and maximum monthly landings in the Pacific Northwest; this was premised on the assumption that California fisheries are generally stable, whereas Oregon and Washington fisheries are expanding. The scenarios were reviewed to ensure they would provide a realistic analysis of potential impacts and if they should be used to compare impacts of the alternatives. In regard to maximum versus average monthly landings, it was noted that in California the squid fishery will heavily influence sardine landings. If squid is available, sardine landings are likely to be in accord with recent averages. If squid is not available sardine landings will likely approach recent maximum landings. It was also noted the scenario premised on average landings coastwide is probably not representative of how the fishery will operate in the future, because current conditions are not in equilibrium. For example, the northern fishery is still expanding, and market disruptions (domoic acid, viral hemorrhagic septicemia [VHS]) that dampened the southern fishery in 2002 might not repeat during the 2003 fishery. Also, a scenario premised on average landings is more risk-prone, because the likelihood of exceeding the projections is greater than under the maximum-based scenarios. Conversely, using combined maximum landings for all areas might misrepresent the potential fishery in Southern California, which has not caught the available harvest in recent years. For example, combining maximum monthly landings for Southern California results in approximately 64,000 mt annual landings, whereas recent annual landings in this area have not exceeded 49,000 mt. However, without a clear reason it might be inconsistent to use one standard in one area and a different standard in a second area. EA, RIR, and FRFA 16 August 2003

24 In deciding the most appropriate scenarios, the CPSMT concluded that, generally, the various sardine fisheries would operate in 2003 much the same as in In the analysis, to provide for possible fishery expansion, projections for 2003 are based on 2002 landings plus 10%. Expansion could occur in the Pacific Northwest, because these fisheries have experienced major expansion in recent years and are expected to see continued expansion in Expansion in California fisheries was premised on low squid availability, improved markets, and a decrease in domoic acid and VHS impacts. Three criteria were considered in analyzing the various alternatives. That is, under the a scenario premised on 2002 landings expanded by an assumed 10% growth factor, (1) how often did a subarea use up their allocation prior to the reallocation date, resulting in closure of the fishery in that sector, (2) which alternatives are better at ensuring full use of available annual harvest guideline, and (3) what are the impacts (in foregone harvest opportunity relative to the status quo or no action alternative) on the three sectors? Below, the various alternatives are presented to demonstrate that a full range of alternatives was analyzed in developing the suite of alternatives adopted by the Council. Several tables are provided to display projected landings and compare relative impacts: Table 4-1 displays projected changes in total harvest and producer surplus for each fishery sector and coastwide totals. Table 4-2 summarizes the anticipated effects of each alternative on the various fishing sectors in terms of early closure of a fishing sector, changes in projected harvest, changes in producer surplus, and amount of harvest guideline projected to be unharvested at the end of the season. Table 4-3 displays monthly projected harvest for each fishery sector under each of the five alternatives. Table 4-4 summarizes annual landings for each fishing sector, Impacts of No Action (Alternative 1) Alternative 1 (status quo) W ith a 10% increase in harvest from 2002, the northern subarea would close in late-august. Reallocation (50-50) would occur on October 1. The Monterey fishery would likely reopen, but Oregon and Washington would be shut down the remainder of the year. Approximately 9,847 mt of the coastwide harvest guideline would not be caught by the end of the season Impacts of the Proposed Action (Alternative 3) Alternative 3 (start year with allocation, subarea line to 39 N latitude, September [80-20] reallocation, and December [coastwide] reallocation) with a 10% harvest increase, the Oregon/Washington fishery closes in late-september. Both California fisheries close in late December. All of the coastwide harvest guideline would be harvested. Southern California would forego about 225 mt, Northern California would gain 2,449 mt, and Oregon/Washington would gain 7,622 mt Analysis of Other Possible Management Alternatives Alternative 2 (start year with allocation, subarea line to 39 N latitude, September [50-50] reallocation, and December [coastwide] reallocation) with a 10% increase in harvest from 2002, the coastwide fishery closes early in November. This does not impact the Oregon/W ashington fishery, which, generally closes in October due to weather. The fishery would reopen coastwide December 1, but approximately 3,321 mt of the coastwide harvest guideline would remain at the end of the year. Relative to the status quo, Southern California would forego 3,618 mt and Northern California would gain 35 mt, and Oregon/W ashington would gain 10,108 mt. Alternative 4 (start year with allocation, subarea line not changed, September [50-50] reallocation, and December [coastwide] reallocation) with a 10% increase in harvest, the northern subarea would close in late- August. Reallocation (50-50) would occur on September 1. The Monterey fishery would likely reopen, then EA, RIR, and FRFA 17 August 2003

25 close again in mid-november, and reopen in December. Oregon and Washington would be shut down the remainder of the year. Approximately 1,482 mt of the coastwide harvest guideline would not be caught by the end of the season. Southern California would realize no change in landings, Northern California would gain 274 mt, and Oregon/Washington would gain 8,091 mt. Alternative 5 (start year with allocation, subarea line to 39 N latitude, September coastwide reallocation) with a 10% increase in harvest from 2002, Southern California and Northern California fisheries would close in early December, while there would be no early closure for Oregon/Washington. All of the coastwide harvest guideline would be harvested. Southern California would forego about 2,500 mt, Northern California would gain 2,239 mt, and Oregon/Washington would gain 10,108 mt Analysis of Other Options Considered in Developing Alternatives Alternative 6 (no allocation coastwide harvest guideline) with a 10% increase in harvest from 2002, the coastwide fishery closes early in December. This does not impact the Oregon/Washington fishery, which, generally closes in October due to weather. The coastwide harvest guideline is achieved, and Southern California would forego 2,500 mt, Northern California would gain 2,239 mt, and Oregon/W ashington would gain 10,108 mt. Alternative 7 (start year with allocation, subarea line to 39 N latitude, September [50-50] reallocation, and December [coastwide] reallocation) with a 10% harvest increase, the impacts were the same as under Alternative 2. Alternative 8 (start year with allocation, subarea line not changed, September [50-50] reallocation, and December [coastwide] reallocation) with a 10% increase in harvest from 2002, the Northern California and Oregon/Washington fisheries would close in late-october and remain closed in November. The Northern California fishery would likely resume December 1. The Southern California fishery would not close. Approximately 279 mt of the coastwide harvest guideline would remain uncaught. Southern California would gain about 2,501 mt, Northern California would forego 2,692 mt, and Oregon/Washington would forego 87 mt. The Council also investigated the effects of changing the reallocation date to August 1. Alternative 9 (modified to start year with allocation, subarea line not changed, August [50-50] reallocation, and December [coastwide] reallocation) with a 10% increase in harvest from 2002 the northern subarea (both Monterey and Oregon/W ashington) would close in late-september. Southern California would not close early. Approximately 8,093 mt of the coastwide harvest guideline would not be caught by the end of the season. Southern California would gain about 2,501 mt, Northern California would forego 8,627 mt, and Oregon/Washington would forego 1,967 mt. Given the apparent severe impacts projected for the Northern California fishery from an August 1 reallocation date, consideration of the August 1 reallocation date within the other alternatives was not considered further. Potential impacts from having no allocation (i.e., a coastwide harvest guideline) were discussed. There is concern that this could result in a derby fishery, with associated negative consequences in all areas. It was also perceived as a very radical change from the current fishery and, hence, not practicable without a more comprehensive analysis of impacts. In advising the Council, the CPSMT noted the 10% estimated increase in landings is a conservative estimate. Oregon and W ashington fisheries could easily expand more than 10% in 2003 if given the opportunity. This would likely accelerate the impacts of the proposed allocation alternatives. One critical basis of this analysis is the relatively stable harvest guideline. That is, available harvest in 2003 is very similar to what was available in Biological impacts would be similar even if the harvest guideline declines in the next few years. This section (4.1.4) addresses only economic impacts. If available harvest were to decline (e.g., in response to a decrease in sea surface temperature) the predicted impacts noted above would likely not be accurate. EA, RIR, and FRFA 18 August 2003

26 The CPSMT discussed the practicality of implementing the various alternatives to prevent problems from occurring in Considerations included controversy (e.g., no allocation) and the need to change regulations mid-season (e.g., harvest guideline already allocated 66-33). Based on this advice, the Council concluded: Alternative 6 (no allocation) is highly controversial. Alternatives 7 and 8 were not practicable in that they call for a initial subarea allocation. Alternative 9 (notably, the August 1 reallocation) would severely impact the Northern California fishery. Establishing a "set aside" at the outset of the fishing season was also discussed. This amount would be taken off the top of the harvest guideline and held in trust to be used by a sector if they reached their subarea harvest guideline prior to a reallocation date. While this idea may have merits, and be practicable in the future, it did not seem possible for the 2003 season, especially because the season is underway. 4.2 Economic Impacts The economic impacts of prescribed allocations in the sardine fishery include changes in net economic benefits to the nation, and the financial affects on small entities associated with each allocation option. Net economic benefits to the nation are the sum of producer surplus, in this case the difference between gross revenues and all costs related to west coast sardine harvesting and processing, and consumer surplus, the net value of sardine products to domestic consumers. In analysis which follows, net benefits were calculated as the change in producer surplus associated with each allocation alternative, since markets for Pacific sardine are mainly overseas, and therefore benefits do not accrue to domestic consumers. The small entities that would be affected by the proposed action are the vessels that compose the West Coast CPS finfish fleet. The financial impacts analysis focuses on the ex-vessel revenue affects of each allocation alternative on CPS finfish vessels. Because cost data are lacking for the harvesting operations of CPS finfish vessels, it was not possible to evaluate the financial impacts from estimated changes in sardine landings, under each allocation alternative, in terms of vessel profitability. Instead, financial impacts were evaluated based only on changes in sardine ex-vessel revenues relative to the status quo Changes in Producer Surplus The economic analysis of alternative allocation schemes used to partition the Pacific sardine harvest guideline estimates the incremental change in producer surplus (PS) for each fishery sector when comparing each of the proposed allocation alternatives to the status quo. The procedure used estimates both the distributional changes and total changes in PS under each option. Specifically, the year-end projected landings for each fishery sector under each alternative were subtracted from the corresponding projected year-end landings under the status quo. The differences in landings were multiplied by an estimate of PS per metric ton for each fishery sector to obtain estimates of the change in sectorial PS. The sectoral changes in PS were summed to obtain an estimate of the total change in PS associated with the option. The measures of PS were derived from processor cost and earnings data that were voluntarily provided by industry members. It should be noted that because these data were not collected using a formal statistical sampling design, they may not be representative of the economic performance of sardine processing operations across each fishery sector. Nonetheless they were considered the best data available and, therefore, used in the economic analysis of allocation alternatives. Given that the allocation alternative is to be a short-run, interim measure, it was assumed there would be no significant changes in the basic operations of sardine processors during its term. There was not expected to be any significant changes in investment in facilities or other restructuring by processors that would alter the costs of operations during the period of the proposed action. Under these circumstances, all but the variable costs of sardine processing (in particular, the costs of labor, energy/utilities, raw fish, and other inputs that vary directly with the quantities of sardines processed) were considered fixed over the time horizon of the action EA, RIR, and FRFA 19 August 2003

27 and, therefore, would not effect estimates of PS (i.e., only the, variable costs of processing sardines were used in the calculations of PS). Producer surplus was calculated as the difference between gross revenue from the sales of processed sardine products, and the total variable cost of producing those products. This aggregate estimate was divided by the total quantity of processed product to get a weighted average, per unit measure of PS which was then used to estimate the incremental changes in PS associated with the proposed allocation alternatives. It was assumed that each of the inputs were traded in perfectly competitive markets and, therefore, their private cost will be equal to their social opportunity cost. Under this assumption, there would be no difference in measures of producer surplus and private profit. That is, the profits realized from sardine processing would be the same as the net benefits to the nation. Estimates of the incremental changes in PS relative to the status quo were positive for each of the allocation alternatives (Table 4-1). Under the proposed action all of the coastwide harvest guideline would be caught by the end of the season. Sardine landings for the entire West Coast were estimated to increase 9,846 mt from the status quo, with a corresponding increase in PS of $1,856,152. An additional 7,622 mt of sardine would be processed in the Oregon/Washington fishery sector which would result in an increase in PS of $1,856,152 above the status quo. The Northern California fishery sector would gain 2,244 mt of sardine which translates into a $318,951 increase in PS. Southern California would forego 225 mt in sardine landings and a loss in PS of $30,239. The Council considered three alternatives to the proposed action in addition to the status quo/no-action alternative. All three alternatives resulted in gains in PS of various magnitudes for the fishery as a whole. However, the proposed alternative yielded the largest economic benefit, with the least negative impacts to any individual fishery sector while allowing the fishery the greatest possibility of achieving OY. In the discussion that follows all dollar projections for 2003 are in 2001 dollars. Alternative 1 (status quo) Projected landings, given a 10% increase in harvest from 2002, would be 101,061 mt, a shortfall of 9,847 mt from the OY. Producer surplus under the status quo would be $15,885,326; $7,238,050 for Southern California, $1,831,481 for Northern California and $6,815,794 for Oregon/Washington. Alternative 2 (start year with allocation, subarea line to 39 N lat., September [50-50] reallocation, and December [coastwide] reallocation). Relative to the status quo, the Southern California sector would lose $486,175 in PS, Northern California would realize an improvement of $4,624 and Oregon/W ashington would gain $2,078,460 for an overall net gain in PS of $1,596,909. Alternative 4 (start year with allocation, subarea line not changed, September [50-50] reallocation, and December [coastwide] reallocation) Compared to the status quo, the Southern California sector would realize no change in PS, Northern California would gain $35,692 and Oregon/Washington would gain $1,663,693, for a coastwide net gain of $1,699,385 in PS. Alternative 5 (start year with allocation, subarea line to 39 N lat., September coastwide reallocation) Relative to the status quo, the Southern California fishery sector would lose $336,022 in PS, Northern California would gain $291,693 and Oregon/Washington vessels would gain $2,078,460, which results in a net improvement of $2,034,131 in PS coastwide Impacts on Small Entities Approximately 140 vessels are permitted in the sardine fisheries off the U.S. West Coast; 65 vessels are permitted in the Federal coastal pelagic species (CPS) limited entry fishery off California, while approximately 55 vessels are permitted in State of Oregon and W ashington sardine fisheries. An additional 18 live bait vessels are permitted in Southern California and 2 live bait vessels are permitted in Oregon and Washington. Under the proposed action, sardine landings for CPS vessels for the entire West Coast were estimated to increase 9,846 mt from the status quo, with a corresponding increase in ex-vessel value of $1,077,540 (2001$ which applies to all dollar amounts from hereon). All of the coastwide harvest guideline (OY) would be caught EA, RIR, and FRFA 20 August 2003

28 by the end of the season under the proposed action. Sardine landings by vessels participating in the Oregon/Washington fishery were estimated to be 7,622 mt greater, than the status quo, with ex-vessel revenues increasing by $873,526. Landings by CPS vessels that historically would have participated in the Northern California sardine fishery would increase 2,449 mt above the status quo with a corresponding rise in ex-vessel revenues of $228,035. Under the proposed action, a loss of 225 mt in landings was estimated for vessels that historically fished out of Southern California ports, which equates to foregone ex-vessel revenues amounting to $24,021, or approximately $370 per vessel, in lost ex-vessel revenue relative to the status quo. Twenty live bait vessels landed approximately 2,000 mt per year of mixed species from 1993 through 1997 which were comprised mostly of Pacific sardine and northern anchovy. The estimated 18 live bait vessels fishing in Southern California are expected to be only minimally impacted by this action. The two live bait vessels fishing in Oregon and Washington are not expected to be impacted by this action. For the 65 CPS limited entry vessels that could participate in either the Southern California or Northern California sardine fisheries, the 225 mt loss represents a potential loss in ex-vessel revenues for the CPS vessels choosing to operate in Southern California, which is substantially less than 0.01 percent per vessel. If the 65 CPS limited entry vessels choose to fish in the traditional Northern California sardine fishery, the potential gain in ex-vessel revenue for that fishery was estimated to be approximately $3,508 per vessel per year. However, this amount could be underestimated since data from the 2001 SAFE report show that only 27 CPS vessels landed in Monterey/Santa Cruz and only 13 CPS vessels landed in San Francisco. Even though limited entry vessels based in Southern California are not restricted from participating in the Northern California or the open access Oregon/Washington sardine fisheries, it is unlikely that it would be profitable for all Southern California vessels to do so due to additional travel time and fuel costs. However, any loss in profitability by the CPS vessels choosing to fish in Southern California could be mitigated to a certain extent by moving northward to land larger, higher-priced sardines in Northern California ports. Vessels that participate in the Oregon/Washington sector of the fishery were estimated to increase ex-vessel revenues by $15,882 per vessel based on the estimated 55 State sardine permits issued. However, this figure may be underestimated since data show that, of the 35 W ashington permitted vessels, only 19 vessels participated in these fisheries in 2002 with the majority of the catch landed by only 13 vessels. The Council considered 3 alternatives to the proposed action in addition to the no-action alternative. All alternatives resulted in ex-vessel revenue gains of various magnitudes for the fishery as a whole. However, the proposed alternative yielded the greatest overall gain, with the least negative impacts to individual vessels from any one region while allowing the fishery the possibility of achieving OY under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Alternative 1 (status quo) With a 10% increase in harvest from 2002, total landings would be 101,061 mt and total ex-vessel revenues would amount to $10,587,481. Southern California would realize ex-vessel revenues of $5,749,562, Northern California $1,039,424 and Oregon/Washington $3,798,405. Alternative 2 (start year with allocation, subarea line to 39 N latitude, September [50-50] reallocation, and December [coastwide] reallocation). Relative to the status quo, Southern California vessels would lose 3,618 mt or $386,201 in ex-vessel revenues, Northern California vessels would gain 35 mt, or $3,306, and Oregon/Washington would gain 10,108 mt, or $1,158,314, for a net increase in coastwide ex-vessel revenues of $775,420. Alternative 4 (start year with allocation, subarea line not changed, September [50-50] reallocation, and December [coastwide] reallocation). Compared to the status quo, Southern California vessels would realize no change in landings, Northern California vessels would gain 274 mt or $25,518 in ex-vessel revenues, and Oregon/Washington vessels would gain 8,091 mt or $927,167. This results in an overall net increase of $952,685 in ex-vessel revenues. Alternative 5 (start year with allocation, subarea line to 39 N latitude, September coastwide reallocation). Relative to the status quo, Southern California vessels would lose 2,500 mt or $266,924 in ex- EA, RIR, and FRFA 21 August 2003

29 vessel revenues, Northern California vessels would gain 2,239 mt or $208,547, and Oregon/Washington vessels would gain 10,108 mt or $1,099,937, for a net increase in overall ex-vessel revenues of $1,099,937. CPS finfish vessels typically harvest a number of other species, including anchovy, mackerel, squid, and tuna. However, since data on individual vessel operations were not readily available, no attempt was made to evaluate potential changes in fishing strategies by these vessels in response to different opportunities to harvest sardines under each of the allocation alternatives and what this would mean in terms of total ex-vessel revenues from all species. 4.3 Cumulative Impacts of the Proposed Action Cumulative impact is the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor, but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time (Council on Environmental Quality regulations at 40 CFR ). The proposed action is not anticipated to result in additional impacts on the environment. The current action would revise the allocation framework for apportioning the annual Pacific sardine harvest guideline. Environmental impacts of the harvest guideline were analyzed in the EIS for the CPS FMP. Pacific sardine are managed with a maximum sustainable yield control rule that is more conservative than default control rules, and the primary focus is on biomass, rather than catch, in recognition of the importance of sardine as forage in the ecosystem. See Section for a discussion of the harvest control rule. U.S. West Coast fisheries for Pacific sardine are largely constrained by processor orders and affected by international markets, since implementation of the FMP, annual coastwide harvest has been below the harvest guideline (Table 4-4). Under the proposed action, the 2003 harvest guideline is projected to be fully utilized, which is consistent with the Objectives 1 and 2 of the FMP. However, these projections are premised on a 10% harvest increase (relative to 2002 landings) for each sector of the fishery. Achieving the projected 10% increase and achieving full utilization of the harvest guideline will depend heavily on international demand. Full utilization raises no biological impact questions. As stated in section 1.2.2, the CPSMT is confident that the harvest formula is appropriate for management of Pacific sardine. Into the future (beyond the proposed interim action), new biological and economic information will be considered in developing a longer-term allocation framework. This new information on coastwide fishery dynamics is expected to provide additional and increased benefits in terms of sardine stock sustainability and fishery stability. See Section for more information. Relative to other recent management actions, Amendment 10 to the CPS FMP was approved by NMFS on January 27, 2003 (68FR3819). Amendment 10 established a maximum fleet capacity for the CPS fishery, allowed transfer of limited entry permits, and established criteria for issuing new permits if economic or resource conditions indicate that such permits would be beneficial. One element of the proposed action would move the management subarea line from 35 40' N latitude (Point Piedras Blancas) to 39 N latitude (Point Arena). This action would make the management subarea line and the limited entry fishery line complementary, which should provide additional stability to all sectors of the sardine fishery. That is, one portion of the annual harvest guideline would be provided to the limited entry fishery; the open access fishery, north of 39 N latitude, would be provided a separate allocation, which should help to ensure that one fishery will not be prematurely closed through preemption by another sector. 4.4 Other Potential Cumulative Effects To illustrate other possible effects from this regulatory amendment, the following discussion describes general environmental and management issues relative to the proposed action. Fluctuations in the Ocean Environment EA, RIR, and FRFA 22 August 2003

30 Large scale environmental fluctuations are characteristic of all oceanic ecosystems and have significant effect on the distribution, movement, and habitat of all CPS. Significant sources of inter-annual physical and biological variation are El Niño and La Niña events in the Pacific with apparent secondary impact on the Atlantic and other world oceans. Regime shifts (e.g., in the North Pacific) have also been identified as having meso-scale impacts on both the physical and biological systems, with concurrent impact on the distribution of oceanic species. There is no evidence to suggest that populations of eastern Pacific CPS are immune to these shifts. Emerging evidence suggests these environmental and climatological perturbations may have greater influence on the relative abundance of CPS than any of the alternatives reviewed in this EA. However, these environmental events are independent of any of the proposed action, and vice versa. Food Webs and Ecosystems The role of CPS in the structure of oceanic ecosystems and the potential ecological effects of their removal is an area of particular concern. These are creatures that, if removed from an ecosystem in significant numbers, may cause existing trophic relationships to be upset, affecting other species stock abundance or viability. Northern anchovy, market squid, and sardine are forage for at least two bird species (brown pelican and least tern) and four marine mammals (fin whale, humpback whale, sei whale, and Guadalupe fur seals) classified as endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA); one marine mammal species (Northern or Steller's sea lion) classified as threatened under the ESA; and one marine mammal species (northern fur seal) classified as depleted under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. In addition, anchovy, sardine, and squid are forage for all depleted, threatened, and endangered salmon stocks along the coast. To the extent the proposed action is designed to promote stability in the CPS fishery, it would have a benign impact in terms of cumulative effects on CPS-based food webs and ecosystems. Moreover, the proposed action is consistent with, and enhance achievement of, key objectives of the FMP, namely, attainment of OY, provision of adequate forage for dependent species, and prevention of overfishing (CPS FMP, Appendix B, Section 2.1). Current and Future Regulatory Regimes Prior to implementation of the CPS FMP, the states of Washington, Oregon, and California managed CPS fisheries. Oregon and Washington actively manage sardine fisheries occurring in waters off these states (see CPS SAFE, 2002). It is anticipated these regulations will continue to remain in effect and will be complementary to this regulatory amendment. Several areas are currently closed to purse seine fishing (see 50CFR ). In the future, federal or state marine protected areas (MPAs) off the West Coast could also become part of the regulatory regime. However, the effects of closed areas and MPAs on CPS finfish and market squid have not been determined, and it would be speculative to attempt to describe potential cumulative effects at this time. Foreign Fisheries and Effective International Management CPS are transboundary resources shared by the U.S., Mexico, and Canada. Sardine, anchovy, and Pacific mackerel are taken in U.S., Mexican, and Canadian fisheries. No international management of CPS within U.S., Mexican, and Canadian waters currently exists. However, recent collaborative scientific work on sardines with Mexico and Canada may contribute to a more favorable climate for international management of eastern Pacific CPS by the U.S., Mexico, and Canada. Nonetheless, in the absence of effective international management, the abundance of CPS stocks harvested by U.S. fisheries could be negatively impacted, and unilateral U.S. actions to conserve and manage highly migratory species (HMS) might be insufficient. EA, RIR, and FRFA 23 August 2003

31 EA, RIR, and FRFA 24 August 2003