Agenda Item C.4.c Public Comment April of 23

Transcription

1 Agenda Item C.4.c Public Comment April of 23

2 2 2 of 23

3 3 3 of 23

4 4 4 of 23

5 5 5 of 23

6 6 6 of 23

7 Council Members: Please give favorable consideration to authorizing a 12-month lingcod commercial fishery for small day boat fishers. I fish nearshore black/blue rockfish and lingcod. My buyers are small restaurants that sell and serve fresh-caught seafood to the public. Allowing year-round harvest of lingcod will not result in and overharvest of the species, will allow small boats to make additional profits, and produce and economic benefit to small businesses that service the tourism industry, particularly during the offseason months. Due to ocean conditions during the winter months, allowing small boats to harvest lingcod year-round will not negatively affect the sustainability of the lingcod population. Thank you for your consideration. Terry Obteshka Skipper, FV STALKER OR 758 WG Newport, Oregon To: Pacific Fishery Management Council From: Gene Fowler, Claudia Fowler and Mike Fowler; we have been commercial near shore fishermen in Port Orford, Bandon, Charleston and Gold Beach for the last ten years. This is a response to the hearing that PFMC is proposing to dramatically reduce harvest levels of Kelp Greenling and China rockfish. We have thought for many years those population assessments for Kelp Greenling have been ridiculously low and have felt that, through our communication with ODFW; we would be seeing a sizeable increase in this quota, by next year. When we start out a two- month period of fishing, we fish to catch other species that are easier to catch and that the quotas are higher on. We catch Kelp Greenling everywhere we go- deep, shallow and in between. If weather, water conditions and or bite keep us from catching our quota of Sea Trout during most of the quota period, we can go out and catch the quota of 300 pounds, easily, in one or two days. We have talked to our local ODFW representative for years about raising the harvest level for Kelp Greenling. They have agreed that the assessment was definitely not reflecting the populations. The three of us scuba dive this area and Sea Trout are seen everywhere. Where we fish, predominately in Port Orford, is far and away the heaviest near shore fishing pressure in the state. We have a high catch rate of Sea Trout and according to Federal Observers that accompany us on our boats, the highest catch of China Rockfish of anywhere. This is not because they caught all the fish in these other places; it is because they don t have as much habitat. The commercial fishermen don t fish there in the numbers that they do here in Port Orford because 7 of 23

8 they don t have the fish populations because of less habitat. Commercial fishermen that don t catch the quotas of near shore fish, in our area, are either fishing other fisheries or not fishing. Sport fishermen don t keep Sea Trout as one of their seven fish unless they cannot catch something like Black Rockfish that have far larger fillets. The same situation goes for China Rock fish; you need to catch one that is 4+ pounds to have a good sized fillet. Another thing is that Sea Trout don t show on your fish finder as a school of Black and Blue rockfish do. Not saying that sport fishers are not capable of catching Sea Trout, but they are less likely to catch them and keep them unless they are fishing from a jetty or rocky shoreline. Maybe you should reduce how many fish jetty fishermen can keep. The ocean is a big place, it is full of fish, and we are already restricted from fishing most of it. Reducing the harvest levels of Sea Trout and China Rockfish will be financially damaging to a fishery that is already taking hits from reductions in closed areas to fish. We have limitations from conservation areas and marine reserves, along with species harvest levels being reduced. This proposed reduction of Sea Trout and China Rockfish with poor or no data is not the way to manage our fishery. We are limited in our ability to catch fish by ocean conditions and management of fisheries. Each species of fish has its own biological plan of where it goes, when it eats, when and where they have their young. All these things affect our ability of where and when we can expect to catch a fish, and sometimes there are so many fish our lure can not reach the bottom without ricocheting off fish that don t want to bite. Possibly, the next day our fish finder doesn t see a fish and if that is the day you choose make your assessment of stock, you get bad information. Assessments of fishing stock can not be expected to be accurate based on going fishing on a specific date, for a specific species, in a specific location. If you reduce Sea Trout quotas, we will be catching and releasing a day. Weather and ocean conditions permitting, we could catch the quota in one or two days of the quota period. In this same scenario, on days they are biting, we would be releasing 20 to 50 China Rock. Large amounts of China Rockfish live predominately in water deeper and we usually can not keep them alive for live markets, so we do not normally target them in waters deeper than 20 fathoms. Please do not reduce or ruin our livelihood based on non-existent or poor data. Commercial F/V s Sea Hunt, C/Dawn, Providence III Gene Fowler Claudia Fowler Mike Fowler 8 of 23

9 Dear sirs,i have been working in the live fish industry for about years,as a fisherman,buyer,hoist operator,etc.so I have seen alot of data being recorded by ODFW over the years.and it is very confusing as to why we as tax payers are having all this done at our expense and then when it comes time to assess this 'data' we overlook all this hard work done and just ask the sport fishermen[who dont target greenling anyway]and base our harvest numbers on their opinions. Scott Spencer. Hi my name is a Joel matthew purkey I am a commercial fisherman that fishes out of a small port called port orford I fish for nearshore fish and make a liveing at it my concerns are that the assessment methods to determine stock abundance are not good data I have personally been fishing for nearshore fish for close to 20 years I have been involved in juvenile rockfish studys and seen with my own observation that there is an abundance of greenling and china rockfish in the ocean through my own observation of the stocks I have been fishing for 20 years I am concerned that if the board reduces catch allotment of nearshore fish mainly greenling and china rockfish that it will put allot of people out of buisness that rely on those fish to make a liveing and support there family and community the economic impact would be great in my community of Port orford it would put alot of families out of buisness and not to mention that there is alot of people including myself who have invested alot of money buying the permits and boats and gear to stay in a fisherie that may be shut down do to bad data I plead with the board to really take a look at how your data is being acquired and base it on fish tickets fisherman's observation and observer data not just data poor so shut us down because there is no data I plead with you and the board please dont take my lively hood away sincerely Joel Matthew Purkey owner operator of fishing vessel Desertstorm Port Orford Oregon From: oregonwrestlers <oregonwrestlers@yahoo.com> Date: Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 12:24 PM Subject: Live fish concerns To: pfmc.comments@noaa.gov I recently purchased 2 live fish boats in port orford oregon. I am hereing rumors of a meeting concerning china cod and greenling quoatas. I have concerns if the rumors are true it would make it near impossible for me to continue to make a living. I have one employee whom is a father of two young children. I would like you to consider whom may be affected by any such decisions. And ask yourselfs what information you are using to base your decision. As fisherman we have made many strides to ensure our sustainable future with projects like red fish rocks reserve. I am asking that you please look at both sides of the coin before making a decision. Thank you Gary Jantzer of 23

10 From: Craig W <ccwwood55@gmail.com> Date: Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 1:53 PM Subject: Oregon Nearshore Fishery To: pfmc.comments@noaa.gov Concerning the proposal in the reduction of the Oregon Kelp Greenling landing cap. I feel that the data that has been provided to you is poor and very inaccurate. Data from the Oregon Nearshore mandatory log books and the data from the mandatory Noaa observer program and also data from ODFG research need to be included. Oregon Kelp Greenling is found in all kinds of bottom structure and depths in Oregon. Also they reproduce at a young age even before reaching legal twelve inch size limit. I feel there is no need to cut the landing cap, the Kelp Greenling stocks are healthy and thriving and if anything the cap should be increased. Also any reduction would financially hurt all nearshore fishermen. It is one of the higher priced fish provided to the live market. Assessments for all nearshore species need to be based on actual data. As an Oregon nearshore fisherman we must provide daily log book information, take Federal Noaa observers, also dockside sampling is done byodfw for size and age structure. Please use all data that is available not just sport fishermen dockside interviews. As a life long fisherman I feel that the Oregon nearshore stocks are healthy. Thanks, Craig Will Oregon Nearshore Fisherman 10 of 23

11 From: jon wieder Date: Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 4:21 PM Subject: rock greenling quota reduction To: To Whom it May Concern, I am a near shore ground fish commercial fisherman operating out of Gold Beach, OR and fishing off the Rogue River Reef fishing grounds. I have recently become aware of the new rules to be enacted (or under consideration) that will further limit and reduce substantially our annual quota for some species of fish that we catch. I do not know the hard numbers under consideration, but I understand the Rock Greenling (sea trout) will have substantially reduced numbers for harvesting. I object to this reduction of catch. This fish is an important asset to our lively hood and not only will the fewer fish mean less income, but we can assume that this will depress the value of our permit. This reduction is a sudden decision on NOAA's part and to my knowledge not very public. If there were meetings and discourse, we fisherman were not notified. I think our voices should be heard. Respectfully, Jonathan Wieder FV OR344ADE Black/Blue rockfish w/ nearshore endorsement Permit #59040 From: Sean <fvaimlesswanderer@gmail.com> Date: Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 9:45 PM Subject: Nearshore rockfish quotas To: pfmc.comments@noaa.gov Hello my name is Sean Roberts owner operator of the f/v Irish sea I am concerned about the current prospect of loseing kelp greenling and China rockfish quota for several reasons first the species is extremely abundant 2 month quotas are regularly caught in. One 6 hour day trip and second this could devistate the fishery fisherman and communitys and third by decreasing quota on a very obviously abundant species it will increase pressure dramatically on other fisheries and species I believe that there is a problem with these assessments and that can be proven by state logbook information and I believe that this should be addressed before huge quota cuts ruin peoples lives and communitys thank you Sean Roberts Ps ling cod are also very 11 of 23

12 healthy in population and should be opened quota all year roundbefore they eat all the kelp greenling From: Mark Date: Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 10:32 AM Subject: agenda items C-4/C-9 To: Pacific Fisheries Attn: Dorothy Lowman We are a family of seven, ages 2yrs to 62yrs. that own and operate two boats that charter and commercial fish for near shore rock fish Blacks & Blues and Lingcod. We fish eight months of the year and have depended on that for our livelihood for over twelve years. So we know of what we speak and ask your reception of this letter with all due respect. It has come to our attention that the Council is considering reducing the allowable catch of Chine rock fish and Kelp Greenling to levels that will severely impact negatively the near shore commercial fishers as well as the sport and charter fishing groups. The data and science that is being used is highly inaccurate and no stock assessments and surveys have been done that are consistent with past procedures. Using charter boat catch effort and success for China rock fish abundance is in no way an indicative measure. Those fish are not even fished for by charter boats. Due to their smaller size that does not make for nice fillets and their random location and not schooling like Black rock fish. Plus they are not fishable with light tackle are just some of the reasons that China rock fish are only an occasional by catch and with current tools and informational education most are released by fishermen so they can keep fishing for a more desirable fish and not retained to be brought in to be counted in creel surveys. The very same situation also applies to Kelp Greenling. In summery neither one of these fish are targeted and fished for with tackle and gear that catches them in any numbers. They are not desirable fish for the charter boat fisherman or private sport fleet and not often caught much less brought in. Their value is in the near shore live fish commercial fishery which is highly regulated both in participants and catch quotas. To reduce to lower level of these two fishes the negative impacts will be huge. They will make it no economically feasible for the commercial fishers in the live fish fishery to be able to operate and catch the varieties of fish the market needs to be viable. It will reduce the value of investments, permits, boats and equipment by fishers and businesses to the point of putting them out of business. Many of these have recently sold and transferred with the current regulations in place and to change now so unexpectedly would be a huge hit to the new business both personal and corporate. This in turn will severely hurt the small coastal communities that rely heavily on this economic income. In several of these this fishery is the main source of income and employs the highest number of people. The charter sport and recreational fishery would also be impacted as with reduces bag limits, seasons, etc. People would do other things than bottom fish. 12 of 23

13 In summery this action is not justified for lots of reasons. Poor data, no real surveys, highly inaccurate based on catch effort that does not fish for these fish and or keep them when caught. There would be a very high negative economic impact to one man/family operations that have spent lots of time and dollars to buy boats, permits, etc. to participate in a fishery available to them in a tough economic area. We ask you to no go through with these changes until such time a proper process has been in place to accurately determine the status of the fish. To use them with the information being considered is bad management. From: Ryan Sherman <shermanem18@gmail.com> Date: Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 10:02 PM Subject: PFMC Topics for thought To: pfmc.comments@noaa.gov I have attached a little thoughtful paper I have written regarding the way that you have attempted to take data from catch records and extrapolate any scientific data from it. Without taking into account the weather, the amount of permits fished in one area, the ability of fishermen to catch specific species with hook and line etc. Thank you for your time, Ryan Sherman To Whom it may concern, My name is Ryan Sherman and I have been fishing in Oregon for the past twenty five years and I am 32 years old. I would like to tell you about my experiences in those years of fishing. When I was twelve years old my father and I would fish commercially for the nearshore species of rockfish mainly black rockfish. We would catch them by hook and line only. At that point in time there were only fifteen to twenty boats fishing out of our Port for the nearshore species. Without a cap on how many fish we could catch it wasn t inconceivable for us to catch 2000 lbs of rockfish a day. We would sometimes go out to deeper water and catch the china rockfish because they were worth more or the yelloweye rockfish because we knew where they all liked to be. Then the 20 fathom line restriction was put into place. This served many purposes that weren t expected by the fishery program. The intent as I have been informed was to prevent the accidental retention or by-catch of the yelloweye rockfish. It actually allowed the fish in a lot of our favorite fresh fishing areas to not be at risk of being caught saving a large population of fish from exposure to fisherman. The other thing it did was force the fisherman into a different type of fishing. We as commercial businesses were forced to explore different types and more refined fishing techniques as a result. We dabbled in long lining off shore before we were forced to start long lining more often as the quota system has gotten tighter and tighter. If the nearshore fishing quotas get dropped from the low quota that the commercial fleet is allowed now the fisherman won t be able to afford to run their boats causing many fisherman and businesses to cease to exist. 13 of 23

14 As for data collection from sport and commercial harvest information. You must realize that fisherman won t go and try to catch whatever bites and throw back the other fish they can t keep. We as commercial fisherman have found that certain species of fish are more prevalent in certain areas than others. We have also found that color patterns of lures make a difference on what certain species of fish will bite. For example, Sea trout aka greenling are more prevalent on rocky bottoms than sandy bottoms it isn t to say that some greenling don t live in sandy areas but the kelp they live in and around supports them with food as well as camouflage. We also understand that greenling aren t veracious predators like a ling cod so they will be more likely to bite something that is smaller and looks like a wounded fish or a glob of eggs which they predate on when eggs are available. Another misconception is the amount of china rock fish caught isn t showing the amount of fish that are out in the ocean. It is very difficult to keep deeper water fish with swim bladders alive for the market than shallower fish. China rockfish are one of these species of fish if you are to fish for just china rockfish you should be fishing in 16 fathoms or deeper in a rocky or heavy coral area. We as fisherman have a hard time keeping these fish alive turning their value from $6.75lb to $1.00lb I am not sure about you but that doesn t seem like something I would want to do just to make a buck. I feel that if I had an infinite quota allowed for one day I could get you the same thing I did 25 years ago 1500 to 2000lbs of fresh rockfish. I also feel that if anything some species were helped by the closer of the 20 to 100 fathom curve sections of the ocean because the fish in those areas spilled over into the lesser fished areas. In closing I ask you to get real scientific data with backing before you destroy our lives forever. These little towns on the coast can t take another blow we are barely surviving now. From: Aaron Longton <aaron@oceanresourceteam.org> Date: Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 12:37 PM Subject: Testimony concerning Unwarranted reductions in Oregon Nearshore Fishery. To: pfmc.comments@noaa.gov Dear Council Members. The recreational data driving Reductions in the Kelp Greenling and China Rockfish has no relation to reality. Recreational data is greatly flawed by the difference in fishing methods and species targeted. Recreational fishers particularly aboard charter boats are instructed to minimize contact with the bottom as to reduce loss of gear. This results in catching species that are suspended or are less reluctant to leave the security of their high relief habitat. This method used by recreational fishers across the coast deliberately targets Lingcod and Black Rockfish. By targeting these two species in particular fishers are able to maximize the lbs of fillet they take home in a bag limit. The recovery ratio of a China Rockfish is consistently 22-24% while Black Rockfish yield 35-37% and are much larger to start with. As for Kelp Greenling they are discarded in the recreational fishery due to the smallness and their inseperatable orientation with the bottom. We have in the commercial fishery constantly reached our Kelp Greenling Quota easily due to the Vast population in the nearshore. As for China Rockfish, We have just enacted a Marine reserve ( Redfish Rocks) That moves toward mitigation of any commercial impacts. That in addition to over half of the nearshore habitat from 30 Fm to 14 of 23

15 70Fm is locked up in the RCA. All this protection insures sustainable harvest of nearshore species. While mo be pursued in the nearshore, existing data in the form of ODFW length frequency data,age data and maturity data as well as data generated in the State logbook program could serve as more representative of the commercial fishery. The best data in my opinion would be Federal observer data that records the magnitude of Kelp Greenling discards in the Oregon Nearshore Fishery. Please pursue better data. China Rockfish and Kelp Greenling are an abundant and valuable resource depended on by many fishermen in Oregon. Lets get this right. Aaron Longton F/V Goldeneye Port Orford Oregon. From: brett webb Date: Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 8:37 AM Subject: rockfish comments To: council, the recent proposed cuts to greenling and china rockfish are alarming. i am an advisor to the state of oregon sitting on the commercial nearshore fishery advisory council..i am aware of this fisheries significant importance to coastal communities. the data used to determine these cuts is not derived from the industry. i strongly object to the path chosen as it has no scientific merit, and causes a serious threat to the economic well being of fishing communities. i must insist the council reconsider its source of data, make adjustments then proceed with caution. respectfully, brett webb of 23

16 To Pacific Fisheries Management Council; I am a commercial fisherman in Port Orford, Oregon where I estimate 70% of the nearshore permits in the state of Oregon are fished. We have hoped to have our bimonthly quota for Greenling raised for the last few years because the, seemingly, abundance of them. Instead, the quota has been reduced without a formal assessment of the species. Currently we bi-monthly receive 300# and can catch them in 2-3 days if we fish where they are abundant. China Rock fish live predominately where deeper water fish live that we don't regularly target. When we do target China's we are usually fishing ' and catch China's a day, several days a month. Deleting these species from our quota will cost each permit holder about $1900 per two month period. And these are some of the easiest fish to catch so it would be a direct reduction in our livelyhood. I ask that you complete a full assessment of Greenling and China Rockfish before you consider reducing our quotas. We have already had our quotas reduced in recent years without correct assessments of fish stocks. Fishing on a given date, in my opinion, is not a reliable method of assessing fish stocking. Fish that move around or do not bite are factors as is ocean conditions. We in this area have thought Greenling and Colored fish quotas were due to increase and that our over restrictive quota levels are causing explosions of these species. Gene Fowler Commmercial Fisherman Port Orford layne layneb@charter.net Im a commercial fisherman in Port Orford,I understand that sea trout will be reduced because of false records. They are he easiest fish to retain that I fish for. If you reduce these fish it will be a financial.hardship as I'm a single parent raising my daught now on my own for 15 years,please do some studies on our boats so we can prove there is an abundance of this fish From: brian trotter <casey253@gmail.com> Date: Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 4:23 PM Subject: Fwd: Public comments from Garibaldi Fishermen To: pfmc.comments@noaa.gov Greetings to the PFMC from the Black and Blue Rockfishermen of Garibaldi, I'm forwarding you the I sent to Jeff Miles our representative. 16 of 23

17 Attached are the comments a few of us would like the council to hear from us. Thank you, Brian Trotter March 14, 2014 Greetings from the Garibaldi, Oregon Rock Fishermen, Please accept this letter as our written public comments and a request for an incidental catch trip limit during the months of December through April of 50 pounds. Commercial fishing in small vessels in the Pacific Northwest is greatly affected by wind, seas, tides, and currents especially during the winter months. We struggle every month to find a few days in which we can fish. In addition, we are encompassed by Black Rockfish management areas which restrict us to 300 pounds per trip. For example, during the first two weeks of March only one of our fishermen was able to get out for a fishing trip. Two other trips were attempted but had to be aborted due to rapidly deteriorating conditions. That one trip was also cut very short due to changing tides and worsening bar conditions. It produced less than 125 pounds of rockfish. Those fishermen also had to release about 25 pound of lingcod. That extra released revenue may seem minor to some, but with the high cost of fuel and weather limiting opportunities, every little bit is vital to us. We are all affected in slightly different ways by a few different regulations, but all agree that an incidental catch trip limit would be very beneficial during these months that fishing is so limited and tough. If the population of lingcod is stable or on the rise, please consider the positive impact this could make for the fishermen and adopt a new incidental trip limit for those already fishing during these months. Thank You for your consideration. Ken Jewell, F/V Hooksalot Paul Meyer, F/V After Shock Leonard Trotter, F/V Silver Girl Bryan Smith, F/V Cold Track Brian Trotter, F/V Silver Girl II 17 of 23

18 Gene Fowler PFMC members; Attached is a letter discussion my opinions of a reduction in Greenling and China rockfish quotas. To: Pacific Fishery Management Council From: Gene Fowler, Claudia Fowler and Mike Fowler; we have been commercial near shore fishermen in Port Orford, Bandon, Charleston and Gold Beach for the last ten years. This is a response to the hearing that PFMC is proposing to dramatically reduce harvest levels of Kelp Greenling and China rockfish. We have thought for many years those population assessments for Kelp Greenling have been ridiculously low and have felt that, through our communication with ODFW; we would be seeing a sizeable increase in this quota, by next year. When we start out a two- month period of fishing, we fish to catch other species that are easier to catch and that the quotas are higher on. We catch Kelp Greenling everywhere we go- deep, shallow and in between. If weather, water conditions and or bite keep us from catching our quota of Sea Trout during most of the quota period, we can go out and catch the quota of 300 pounds, easily, in one or two days. We have talked to our local ODFW representative for years about raising the harvest level for Kelp Greenling. They have agreed that the assessment was definitely not reflecting the populations. The three of us scuba dive this area and Sea Trout are seen everywhere. Where we fish, predominately in Port Orford, is far and away the heaviest near shore fishing pressure in the state. We have a high catch rate of Sea Trout and according to Federal Observers that accompany us on our boats, the highest catch of China Rockfish of anywhere. This is not because they caught all the fish in these other places; it is because they don t have as much habitat. The commercial fishermen don t fish there in the numbers that they do here in Port Orford because they don t have the fish populations because of less habitat. Commercial fishermen that don t catch the quotas of near shore fish, in our area, are either fishing other fisheries or not fishing. Sport fishermen don t keep Sea Trout as one of their seven fish unless they cannot catch something like Black Rockfish that have far larger fillets. The same situation goes for China Rock fish; you need to catch one that is 4+ pounds to have a good sized fillet. Another thing is that Sea Trout don t show on your fish finder as a school of Black and Blue rockfish do. Not saying that sport fishers are not capable of catching Sea Trout, but they are less likely to catch them and keep them unless they are fishing from a jetty or rocky shoreline. Maybe you should reduce how many fish jetty fishermen can keep. The ocean is a big place, it is full of fish, and we are already restricted from fishing most of it. Reducing the harvest levels of Sea Trout and China Rockfish will be financially damaging to a fishery that is already taking hits from reductions in closed areas to fish. We have limitations from conservation areas and marine reserves, along with species harvest levels being reduced. This proposed reduction of Sea Trout and China Rockfish with poor or no data is not the way to manage our fishery. We are limited in our ability to catch fish by ocean conditions and management of fisheries. Each species of fish has its own biological plan of where it goes, when it eats, when and where they have their young. All these things affect our ability of where and 18 of 23

19 when we can expect to catch a fish, and sometimes there are so many fish our lure can not reach the bottom without ricocheting off fish that don t want to bite. Possibly, the next day our fish finder doesn t see a fish and if that is the day you choose make your assessment of stock, you get bad information. Assessments of fishing stock can not be expected to be accurate based on going fishing on a specific date, for a specific species, in a specific location. If you reduce Sea Trout quotas, we will be catching and releasing a day. Weather and ocean conditions permitting, we could catch the quota in one or two days of the quota period. In this same scenario, on days they are biting, we would be releasing 20 to 50 China Rock. Large amounts of China Rockfish live predominately in water deeper and we usually can not keep them alive for live markets, so we do not normally target them in waters deeper than 20 fathoms. Please do not reduce or ruin our livelihood based on non-existent or poor data. Commercial F/V s Sea Hunt, C/Dawn, Providence III Gene Fowler Claudia Fowler Mike Fowler Harry Whisman <telsta860@gmail.com> To Pacific Fisheries Management Council; I am a commercial fisherman in Port Orford, Oregon where I estimate 70% of the nearshore permits in the state of Oregon are fished. We have hoped to have our bi-monthly quota for Greenling raised for the last few years because the, seemingly, abundance of them. Instead, the quota has been reduced without a formal assessment of the species. Currently we bi-monthly receive 300# and can catch them in 2-3 days if we fish where they are abundant. China Rock fish live predominately where deeper water fish live that we don't regularly target. When we do target China's we are usually fishing ' and catch China's a day, several days a month. Deleting these species from our quota will cost each permit holder about $1900 per two month period. And these are some of the easiest fish to catch so it would be a direct reduction in our livelyhood. I ask that you complete a full assessment of Greenling and China Rockfish before you consider reducing our quotas. We have already had our quotas reduced in recent years without correct assessments of fish stocks. Fishing on a given date, in my opinion, is not a reliable method of assessing fish stocking. Fish that move around or do not bite are factors as is ocean conditions. We in this area have thought Greenling and Colored fish quotas were due to increase and that our over restrictive quota levels are causing explosions of these species. 19 of 23

20 This page blank intentional. 20 of 23

21 From: Gary Anderson Date: Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 1:40 PM Subject: OFL To: This letter is to request the Council take into consideration the economic impact of the proposed reductions for Kelp Greenling and China Rock-cod for The lack of scientific data regarding such a drastic reduction to these two species does not warrant the major economic impact this decision could have on the local Port Orford fishing fleet. Over half of the near-shore permits in Oregon are based in Port Orford, where fully 29% of the workforce is engaged directly or indirectly in commercial fishing, decisions of this magnitude have a domino effect and eventually effect the entire financial health of not just Port Orford but all communities on the coast. Thank you for your consideration. Gary Anderson Port Manager Port of Port Orford 21 of 23

22 22 of 23

23 23 of 23