2015-16 Groundfish Harvest Specifications and Management Measures Tillamook August 6 Newport August 7 Brookings August 12 North Bend August 13 1
(SSC) Scientific and Statistical Committee Groundfish Management Team (GMT) Regional Academic Institutions Public Tribes Pacific Fishery Management Council External Review Coastal State Agencies Stock Assessment and Review (STAR) Process Resource Surveys Groundfish Advisory Panel (GAP) NOAA Fisheries FRAM Obs. Program State Fishtickets & Lobgooks PacFIN Pacific States Marine Fish. Commission RecFIN Regulations Fishers Commercial Discards Commercial Landings Sport Landings State Rec. Monitoring Based on diagram given to me, note says it originally came from Hastie
Regulation Development Process FEDERAL 2 year cycle 2015-2016 PFMC recommendation to Secretary of Commerce in June, 2014 Govern all groundfish fisheries Adopt harvest levels for all groundfish Acceptable Biological Catches and Optimum Yields Federal Annual Catch Limits (ACL) Overfished species Black rockfish Cabezon STATE Yearly cycle 2015 Process occurs in fall, 2014 Able to adopt more the same or more conservative Sport Commercial nearshore Adopt state landing caps for: Black/blue rockfish Other nearshore rockfish Cabezon Greenling 3
Federal Timeline Summer 2013 Stock assessments Develop list of proposed management measures September 2013 Rebuilding plans for overfished species/set catch limits Narrow list of proposed management measures November 2013 Preliminary range of ACLs (overfished and non-overfished species) Preliminary list of management measures Winter 2013-2014 GMT analyzes range of ACLs and management measures Begins drafting the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 4
Federal Timeline April 2014 Draft EIS ready available for review and public comment June 2014 Council makes final recommendation on ACLs and Management Measures Final EIS submitted to Secretary of Commerce for review and public comment Fall 2014 EIS approved and regulations adopted January 1, 2015 Fisheries begin 5
Stock Assessments Conducted in Full Assessments 2013 Catch Reports/ Updates Data Moderate Assessments Darkblotched RF Bocaccio RF Brown RF Petrale Sole Canary RF China RF* Rougheye RF Yelloweye RF Copper RF* Aurora RF Shortspine Thornyhead Longspine Thornyhead Cowcod Pacific Sanddab * sent to the Mop-Up panel in late September for further review Sharpchin RF Stripetail RF Vermilion RF Yellowtail RF English Sole Rex Sole 6
Stock Assessments Conducted in 2013 NO NEW OVERFISHED SPECIES Currently overfished species still making progress on rebuilding Widow rockfish was declared rebuilt beginning 2013 Petrale sole and bocaccio expected to be rebuilt in 2015 China Rockfish, not overfished, but the sustainable level is lower than current harvest levels Reductions in harvests will likely be needed Will know more in late September 7
China Rockfish Will likely need to reduce impacts Sub-bag limit? Of 79,048 bottomfish angler trips, only 151 trips caught more than 1 China = 0.2% Size Limit Likely have to do some sort of maximum size limit, because most are small Complicated regulations 8
China RF per angler China Rockfish Will likely need to reduce impacts Depth Restrictions? Intermediate depths would have to be closed 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 <10 10-20 20-25 25-30 30-40 Fathoms 9
Yelloweye Rockfish 2013-14 Between Sector Allocations Annual Catch Limit = 18 mt CA Recreational 19% Research 18% EFP 0% Incidental OA 1% OR Recreational 14% Tribal 13% Shorebased trawl 6% At-sea Whiting 0% WA Recreational 16% Open Access Nearshore 7% Non-nearshore 6% 10
Yelloweye Rebuilding Currently projected to be rebuilt in 2074 Future coastwide Annual Catch Limit (ACL) projection Year OFL (mt) ACL (mt) Coastwide Depletion 2011 47.8 17.0 21.4% 2012 48.0 17.0 21.8% 2013 51.2 17.7 22.3% 2014 51.2 18.0 22.7% 2015 51.2 18.3 23.1% 2016 51.1 18.6 23.5% 2017 51.1 18.8 23.9% 2018 51.0 19.1 24.3% 2019 50.9 19.3 24.6% 2020 50.9 19.6 25.0% 2021 50.8 19.8 25.3% 2022 50.7 20.0 25.7% 11
Canary Rockfish 2013-14 Between Sector Allocations 2013 ACL = 116 mt 2014 ACL= 118 mt EFP 1% CA Recreational 19% Research 4% Tribal 8% Incidental OA 2% OR Recreational 9% WA Recreational 3% Shorebased trawl 34% Non-nearshore 3% Open Access Nearshore 6% At-sea Whiting 11% 12
Canary Rebuilding Currently projected to be rebuilt in 2030 Future coastwide ACL projection Year OFL (mt) ACL (mt) Coastwide Depletion 2011 471 102 23.2% 2012 495 107 23.7% 2013 526 116 24.1% 2014 540 118 24.6% 2015 551 100 25.0% 2016 565 105 25.5% 2017 582 110 26.2% 2018 598 115 27.0% 2019 612 120 27.9% 2020 623 124 28.9% 2021 631 128 30.0% 2022 639 132 31.2% 13
Other Recreationally Important Species State Landing Cap (in mt) 2013 2014 Black Rockfish 440.8 440.8 Black plus Blue Rockfish 481.8 481.8 Other Nearshore Rockfish 13.6 13.6 Cabezon 15.2 15.2 Greenlings 5.2 5.2 Expect 2015 and 2016 to be similar 14
Cabezon In 2009 cabezon off of Oregon was federally assessed for the first time, http://www.pcouncil.org/wpcontent/uploads/cabezon09_final.pdf Since cabezon has a federal stock assessment, it then has a federal management limit, rather than the state limit it was managed under previously Assessment showed that cabezon off of Oregon is at 52% of unfished biomass, but trending downward Management target is to stay above 40% 15
Cabezon Projection of potential cabezon ABC, OY (OY=Annual Catch Limit), spawning biomass and depletion (Table 24 in assessment) ACL will be 48 mt for 2013-2014, then increase to 49 mt after that 16
Cabezon Prior to 2011 the cabezon in the recreational fishery was managed under a state-specified ocean boat landing cap Did not have to account for the shore fishery or discard mortality Commercial fishery had its own landing cap Total landings equaled 48.5 mt Therefore both commercial and recreational fisheries had to reduce impacts 17
Current Season Structure and Regulations Bottomfish Season Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Open all depths Open < 30 fm Open all depths Marine Bag Limit 1 Seven (7) Cabezon Closed 1 fish sub-bag limit 2 Closed Lingcod Bag Limit Flatfish Bag Limit 3 Three (3) Twenty Five (25) 1 Marine bag limit includes all species other than lingcod, salmon, steelhead, Pacific halibut, flatfish, surfperch, sturgeon, striped bass, pelagic tuna and mackerel species, and bait fish such as herring, anchovy, sardine, and smelt 2 From July 1 through September 30, the marine bag limit is seven (7)) fish per day, of which no more than one (1) may be cabezon. 3 Flounders, soles, sanddabs, turbots and halibuts except Pacific halibut Minimum length in inches: Lingcod = 22 Cabezon = 16 Greenling = 10 18
Rockfish Descending Devices Currently voluntary use Benefits the fish and the fishery Depth (fm) Surface Release Mortality Mortality when Release Device Used Mortality Savings 0-10 22% 21% 1% 10-20 39% 21% 18% 20-30 56% 21% 35% 30-50 100% 27% 73% 50-100 100% 45% 55% 19
Management Tools Bag limits Size limits Season lengths Depth closures Area: hot spot closures (Stonewall Bank YRCA) or cold spot open Day of the week closures Gear restrictions 20
Increase lingcod bag limit? Bars= lingcod vs. Yelloweye catch rates Line= % anglers that catch 0-2 lingcod Bars show that yelloweye rockfish catch rates are much higher for trips with higher lingcod catch rates (red is projections of 3 lingcod) Line shows that few bottomfish anglers catch current lingcod limit (~5%) What this means: Since so few people currently catch limit sof lingcod, not much effect on yelloweye by going to a three fish limit - however a 3 rd fish could increase effort or targeting (unknown by how much), so difficult to project yelloweye impacts of a three fish bag limit. 21
Relax bottomfish depth restrictions? YE Mortality Rates Depth (fm) Surface Descending % trips 0 to 10 22% 21% 21% 10 to 20 39% 21% 61% 20 to 30 56% 21% 5% 30 to 50 100% 37% 5% 50 to 100 100% 45% 7% 100 + 100% 100% 0% Bottomfish effort by area (central coast) Benefit to anglers? Not sure how they would benefit, because they don t fish deep when they can (expensive, lot of reeling, heavy tackle for small fish, most bottomfish fishing best shallow) Localized depletion benefit? -the exploitation rate of black rockfish in the most heavily fished reefs in Oregon is only 3.5% - 5% (black rf PIT TAG data) South reefs of Newport by far the hardest fished Yelloweye impacts? Since few fish deep when allowed to, mortality rates of yelloweye by depth are the driver (whereas halibut is driven by catch rates because people fish deep and morality rates are similar) 22
Relax bottomfish depth restrictions? Circle sizes are relative catch rates by depth Red=overfished species -Deep water trips are mostly for lingcod and yellowtail -lingcod are common in shallow as well -have to go deep to catch yellowtail -if going for yellowtail, could use the longleader gear to help avoid yelloweye 23
Bottomfish angler trips Longleader (mid-water) yellowtail fishery? 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0 to 10 10 to 20 20 to 30 30 to 50 50 to 100 100 + Depth (fm) Because so few people fish bottomfish deep when allowed to, very unlikely that people will go deep to fish a complicated gear (longleader) unless given incentive to or if they are already there for something else (halibut or tuna). WINCHESTER BAY / FLORENCE Although ports with nearshore reefs would be unlikely to utilize a longleader fishery, this could provide some opportunity to Winchester Bay and Florence because they have no other bottomfish options (their reefs are well past the current depth restrictions.) 24
Yelloweye impacts (mt) Lingcod on all-depth halibut days? Situation: Anglers report catching on average 0.1 lingcod per angler during all-depth halibut days No additional impacts if people allowed to keep lingcod and no targeting occurred -If targeting occurs, then these trips essentially become both all-depth halibut trips and deepwater bottomfish trips -Deepwater bottomfish catch rate (>40 fm) is 3x higher than on halibut trips, because targeting rock whereas halibut folks target gravel/sand 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Graph shows impacts if X% of alldepth halibut anglers target lingcod Yelloweye quota for all fisheries 0% 10% 20% 50% 75% 100% All-depth halibut anglers targeting lingcod Basically, you can have: a)lingcod on halibut but no bottomfish fishery b)halibut fishery without lingcod and a bottomfish fishery 25
Your Input is Needed Confirm year-round season is desired Trade-off with offshore opportunities Even if it means changes to bag limits Fewer months inside 30-fm or Lingcod (bottomfish) retention on all-depth halibut days What is the recommendation for the daily bag limits for lingcod and marine fish (rockfish, greenling, etc.)? 26
Proposed Changes to the OR Rec. Fishery for 2015-2016 (received so far) Retention of lingcod/groundfish during all-depth halibut days (Limited) retention of canary rockfish Long-leader outside 40-fm fishery Mandatory use of recompression/descending devices Change season structure Possible change in Yelloweye Rockfish Conservation Areas (YRCA) 27
End of Presentation 28