New England Fishery Management Council 50 WATER STREET NEWBURYPORT, MASSACHUSETTS 01950 PHONE 978 465 0492 FAX 978 465 3116 John Pappalardo, Chairman Paul J. Howard, Executive Director Possible Management Approaches to Address Historical Fisheries 1.0 BACKGROUND/PROBLEM STATEMENT There are a number of historical whiting fishermen in both Downeast Maine and the Mid-Atlantic region who used to participate significantly in the fishery and may have lost access to the resource in more recent years. Many of these fishermen may not qualify for the limited access directed fishery based on the qualification criteria under consideration in this amendment. Examples include Mid-Atlantic fishermen south of New Jersey, primarily in North Carolina where whiting landings were more significant in the early to mid 1980s. There are also concerns about fishermen in Downeast Maine who may have lost access to the resource since the mid-1980s. The Pelagics Committee recognizes the importance of this issue and supports the opportunity for a small mesh multispecies fishery to re-emerge in these areas should the fish repopulate their historical range. However, accommodating historical fishermen in a limited access directed fishery program that effectively controls long-term harvesting capacity would be very difficult, as it would likely require broad qualification criteria that qualify numerous additional vessels. In turn, the Committee agreed to explore alternative approaches to providing access to the fishery for historical vessels if the fish return to these areas. This may better focus the limited access program being developed in this amendment on the more recent participants in the fishery. The Pelagics Committee supports more recent qualifying time periods for the limited access directed fishery (post-1993) if historical fisheries can be addressed through an alternative management approach. The Whiting PDT has started to outline possible management approaches to consider for addressing historical fisheries. These possible alternatives are very preliminary and would require a significant amount of additional discussion and detail. At its meeting, the Pelagics Committee should consider the following and: Clarify the problem statement and intent relative to this amendment; Provide guidance and recommendations relative to the possible management alternatives outlined by the Whiting PDT in this document (provide more detail and rationale, discuss potential problems or concerns, identify outstanding issues to resolve, modify or eliminate alternatives); and Recommend any additional management approaches that should be explored further in this amendment. Historical Fisheries Discussion Paper 1
2.0 POTENTIAL MANAGEMENT APPROACHES 2.1 LIMITED ACCESS DIRECTED FISHERY PROGRAM IN HIGH CATCH AREAS ONLY At the February 28, 2007 Pelagic Committee meeting, the Committee unanimously passed a motion to consider: A limited access (directed fishery) program that applies to the area where 95% of the landings came from during the three qualification time periods recommended for further consideration; all other areas would remain open access: January 1, 1993 December 31, 2005; January 1, 1995 March 25, 2003; and January 1, 1995 December 31, 2005. Under this approach: An open access permit would be established for vessels that do not qualify for the limited access permit in order to retain small mesh multispecies only in the open access areas. Vessels that qualify for the limited access directed fishery permit could fish for small mesh multispecies in all areas. Vessels that obtain the open access permit would be prohibited from retaining small mesh multispecies in the limited access area. The Committee should consider whether the current mesh size/possession limit restrictions should continue to apply to open access permit holders or whether different restrictions should apply (perhaps a lower possession limit no matter what mesh size, in order to prevent directed fishing in the open access areas). Open-access permit holders would likely fish for other species in the limited access area; the Committee should consider what restrictions may apply to these vessels while participating in other fisheries in the limited access area. The following figures illustrate the recent distribution of fishing effort on small mesh multispecies, based on VTR reports of fishing location. Since 1994, VTR data have been collected through fishermen s trip reports and include information about fishing location latitude and longitude as well as statistical area. Figures can only be made available for the time periods following the establishment of VTR reporting: January 1, 1995 March 25, 2003 and January 1, 1995 December 31, 2005. As illustrated, the areas to which a limited access program for small mesh multispecies would apply are the same for both of these time periods. A limited access program based on about 95% of the catch distribution for either of these time periods would include the following statistical areas: 513 and 514; 521, 522, 525, and 562; 537, and 539; and 612, 613, and 616. Historical Fisheries Discussion Paper 2
The Whiting PDT initially expressed some concern about an approach for a limited access program in the small mesh multispecies fishery that would render some areas as open access. A partial approach to a limited access program may be complicated and may not most effectively match harvesting capacity with the available resource; additionally, related enforcement, compliance, and administrative issues associated with this approach will likely be difficult to resolve. However, this approach does address the Pelagic Committee s concerns about historical fisheries, as the areas that would remain open access are generally consistent with the areas about which the Committee expressed concern. If the Committee/Council wants to further develop this alternative in the small mesh multispecies amendment, the Whiting PDT suggests that the area to which the limited access program apply be simplified to include some statistical areas that would provide for a more uniform management area. This may address some of the potential problems. The PDT recommends that Statistical Areas 538, 561, 526, 533, 534, 541, 542, 543, 611, 614, and 615 be added to the area for the limited access program. This will simplify the area, improve enforceability, and better capture the majority of the recent/current fishery. The original area for consideration comprised about 94.4% of the small mesh multispecies landings during the time period, while the PDT s proposed area comprises about 97.9% of the landings. The Committee also should consider whether Statistical Area 515 and the portions of Areas 464 and 465 in U.S. waters should be included in the limited access program. Requirements for limited access vessels to use vessel monitoring systems (VMS) may help address enforcement and compliance issues if this approach is utilized for a limited access program. The information provided to the Committee regarding the potential number of qualifiers in a limited access program for the directed fishery includes estimates of the qualifying vessels that already use VMS in other fisheries. In most cases, the majority of qualifying vessels already use VMS (see May 3, 2007 memo re. Additional Limited Access Information). Input from the Whiting Advisory Panel regarding the location, nature, and extent of historical whiting fisheries and the management approaches under consideration in this amendment would be useful prior to fully completing the details of the alternatives for the Draft EIS and public hearing document. Additionally, a review relative to enforcement and administration may be appropriate. Historical Fisheries Discussion Paper 3
Historical Fisheries Discussion Paper 4
Historical Fisheries Discussion Paper 5
2.2 MULTI-TIERED LIMITED ACCESS PROGRAM Thus far, the Pelagics Committee has focused most of its discussion on the development of a limited access program for the directed small mesh multispecies fishery, i.e., more recent participants in the fishery (post-1993). It may be possible to accommodate historical fishermen by creating a multi-tier limited access program with different qualification criteria for different limited access permits. This approach was utilized in the Atlantic herring fishery to accommodate vessels that do not target herring, but do land herring in measurable quantities as incidental catch in other fisheries. A multi-tiered limited access program could accommodate historical fishermen and provide some level of access to the fishery while still maintaining a sustainable level of harvesting capacity in the directed small mesh multispecies fishery. It would establish limited access in some form throughout the range of this fishery. If the Council determines that historical fishermen (those who have not participated significantly in the fishery since prior to 1993 or 1995) should be granted access to the small mesh multispecies fishery at some level, alternatives could be developed that establish a limited access historical permit or limited access incidental catch permit. The Council could select a lower threshold of landings to qualify for a limited access historical or incidental catch permit. The Council also could explore time periods that extend prior to 1993 to accommodate historical vessels for a second tier limited access permit. However, problems with landings data associated with older time periods should be acknowledged and addressed if the latter approach is utilized. Concerns have been expressed on numerous occasions about using an earlier starting date for qualification because catches were not documented by NMFS prior to 1994 when the vessel trip report (VTR, logbook) system was implemented and the dealer reporting system was revamped. Earlier starting dates will likely result in more vessels qualifying with written receipts and other documentation of catches prior to the current reporting system. The Whiting PDT will not be able to predict with accuracy how many additional vessels may qualify under options based on earlier qualifying periods. However, this may be less of a concern for a historical or incidental catch permit if the restrictions associated with this permit do not allow for significant levels of participation and/or directed fishing on small mesh multispecies. In turn, the Council may want to consider additional or different (from the status quo) restrictions for vessels that are granted access to the fishery at a level less than that of a directed fishery (ex., a specific possession limit for limited access historical or incidental catch permit holders, restrictions on the number of trips/landings, other management measures). Historical Fisheries Discussion Paper 6
2.3 ALLOCATIONS FOR HISTORICAL FISHERIES Specific allocations of a portion of the TAC(s) for whiting and/or red hake could be made to accommodate historical fishermen. 2.3.1 Step 1: Establish a Historical Permit The first step would be to define a permit for historical or inactive vessels, i.e., those to which the allocations would apply. This permit would essentially be another form of limited access permit (see Section 2.2 for discussion of a multi-tiered limited access program). Should this permit be the same as a limited access incidental catch permit, if one is established, or should it be a completely separate permit category intended only to address historical vesssels? Should any non-qualifying vessel be eligible for this permit? Based on historical landings? Based on geography? (There may be National Standard problems associated with a State or geographically-based approach.) Based on specific vessel characteristics? 2.3.2 Step 2: Establish a TAC Allocation/Process for Historical Permit Holders 2.3.2.1 TAC Set-Aside Process A relatively simple approach would be to establish a process for TAC set-asides for historical permit holders as part of a small mesh multispecies fishery specification process, should one be established in this amendment. This process could be very similar to the TAC set-aside processes developed recently in Amendment 1 to the Herring FMP. This measure could authorize the establishment of TAC set-asides for historical permit holders as part of the small mesh multispecies specification process (annual or multi-year). Until such time when an allocation is needed, the set-aside could remain at zero. If the fish return to historical areas and opportunities re-emerge for these permit holders, the Council could consider the relevant issues (status of the stock and market/fishery conditions) and allocate a portion of the TAC to these vessels. Analysis of the impacts related to the TAC allocation would be included in the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the specifications package. This approach would provide an opportunity to address this issue using the most recent available information if/when the need arises in the future. During the specifications process, a portion of the TAC could be allocated to vessels possessing the historical permit, which essentially treats these vessels as a sector. When the quota is reached for the historical permit category, fishing stops. Initial allocations would be required in this amendment, although it does not appear that there is a need for an allocation at this time. However, this amendment should specify the details of the management program for historical vessels fishing under this allocation if one is established in the future. Real-time reporting would be mandatory, and the same monitoring/reporting rules would apply to both limited access directed fishery and historical permit holders. What would happen if the allocation is not taken during the fishing year? Some portion (50-75%) could be rolled over into the following years TAC. Historical Fisheries Discussion Paper 7
2.3.2.2 Priority TAC Allocation Approach Under this approach, both limited access directed fishery permit holders and historical permit holders would fish in the small mesh multispecies fishery until some percentage of the whiting and/or red hake TAC is caught during the fishing year. Once the specified percentage of the TAC is reached, only limited access directed fishery permit holders would be allowed to fish in the directed fishery for small mesh multispecies until the remainder of the TAC is caught. Historical Fisheries Discussion Paper 8