Deirdre Boelke, NEFMC Staff,

Scallop PDT Chair

Inshore Scallop Workshop

February 22-23, 2016

1

Outline of Presentation

1. History of Scallop Fishery and Management Plan

2. Summary of scallop resource information

2

1. History of Commercial Fishery

Commercial harvest began along the US/CA continental

shelf in the late 1880s, but catch relatively low at first.

Discovery of scallops on GB in 1930s led to development

of offshore scallop fleets – but more serious after WWII

Sporadic fishing in Mid-Atlantic (MA) since 1920s

Three components: GOM, GB, and Mid-Atlantic

Harvest reached historic high in 1977 (18,000 mt) and

large increases in ex-vessel prices

3

1. History of Scallop Management

US fishery began in mid-1900s with sporadic booms and busts

4

A 4

GB

closures

Scallop

FMP Area

Rotation

FMP – 1982 Amendment 4 – 1994 GB closed Areas – 1994 FW 11 – 1999 GB access areas first open Amendment 10 - 2004

Source: SARC 2014 (NEFSC 2014)

1. Scallop FMP - 1982

About 80 vessels in 1970 and over 300 in 1977 (but 100 of

those NE trawl with only 1% of catch)

Catches fell in 1979 and 1980 despite increases in effort

Council develops FMP: overall objective to maximize over time

the social and economic benefits from harvesting scallops

- Restore adult stock to reduce fluctuations in recruitment and

abundance

- Enhance yield per recruit

- Evaluate research and enforcement costs

- Minimize adverse environmental impacts

Alternatives considered: controlling catch through quotas,

control fishing practices (meat count and min. shell size),

controlling effort (limited entry and fishing time) 5

1. Amendment 4 - 1994 Limited entry, DAS limits, gear restrictions

Criteria - one trip with more than 400 pounds in either 1988 or 1989, extended for new vessels under construction

Permit category based on number of days used in 1990, or average of 1985-1990 days (FT:150, PT: 37-149, Occ: <37)

Could qualify for a single category increase in permit category, but permit restricted to smaller dredge and lower crew limit

Non-qualifiers: open access/general cat permit restricted to 400 lb. possession limit

Plan to reduce effort 35-70% over the first seven years, about 10% per year – Between 1994 and 2001 DAS reduced from 204 to 120

Handful of gear restrictions to reduce mortality

6

Late 1990s - Desperate times A4 measures still not enough –

fishery not recovering

1998 – emergency action to

close Hudson Canyon and

Virginia Beach

GF closures since 1994 –

scallop biomass increased by

15-20 times

Dedicated experimental survey

in southern part of CA2

Framework 11 provides

temporary access in 1999:

3 trips at 10,000 lb. each

7 Source: NEFMC (1999): CMAST survey data

1. Amendment 10 - 2004

Large-scale rotational area management system to increase

yield and reduce impact on the environment

Areas with small scallops are closed for several years and then

reopen under controlled fishing mortality targets

Implemented EFH closed areas and several gear modifications

to reduce impacts on habitat and bycatch

Modifications to observer and research set-aside programs

8

Positive results right away

Large increases in

biomass and landings

Average meat weight

increases

Landings stabilize

Area swept decreases

9 Source: SARC 2014 (NEFSC 2014)

1. Amendment 10 - 2004

Combination of effort

reductions, closures, and

area rotation increases

overall biomass and yield

Price increases as markets

stabilize

Starting in 2001 general

category landings started to

increase

10

Fish Year

Total scallop landings by General Category vessels only

LBS %

1994 95,268 0.64%

1995 123,967 0.78%

1996 204,635 1.24%

1997 310,049 2.46%

1998 164,435 1.47%

1999 150,482 0.71%

2000 357,691 1.09%

2001 1,216,947 2.69%

2002 983,775 1.98%

2003 1,809,071 3.30%

2004 3,245,661 5.26%

2005 7,495,884 14.09%

Source: Amendment 11 (NEFMC 2007)

1. Control date and Amendment 11

Control date put in place on November 1, 2004

Council begins work on Amendment 11 with one goal – control capacity in GC fishery

Objectives: allocate portion of fishery to GC permits, limited entry, prevent GC from exceeding their allocation, and address incidental catch of scallops in other fisheries.

Vision Statement:

The overall intent of this action is to stabilize capacity and prevent overfishing from the general category fishery, and in doing so, the Council’s vision of this general category fleet from this point forward is to maintain the diverse nature and flexibility within this component of the scallop fleet. Specifically, the Council intends to consider measures that will control mortality from this component of the fleet, but preserve the ability for vessels to participate in the general category fishery at different levels. This Council recognizes the importance of this component of the fishery for small fishing communities, as a component of overall catch for some individual vessel owners, and the value this “dayboat” scallop product has in the scallop market. Overall, the Councils’ vision of the general category fishery after Amendment 11 is implemented is a fleet made up of relatively small vessels, with possession limits to maintain the historical character of this fleet and provide opportunities to various participants including vessels from smaller coastal communities.

11

1. Amendment 11 - 2008

Implemented a limited entry and ITQ program

Criteria: 1,000 pounds during and year (FY2000-2004),

individual allocation based on best year indexed by # of years

active in the fishery

Vessel and ownership caps

NGOM and Incidental limited entry programs

10% of projected catch allocation in FY2008 and 2009, and

5.5% of projected catch allocation starting in FY2010

Pre-A11 there were about 2,500 permits, post-A11 about 700

permits for 3 limited entry permit categories:

A: 240 IFQ, B: 90 NGOM, C: 240 Incidental

12

1. Amendment 15 - 2011

Magnuson Act reauthorized in 2007 requiring annual catch limits

(ACLs) and accountability measures (AMs) in all FMPs

Need to account for scientific and management uncertainty

New acronyms

OFL – catch associated with Fmsy (F = 0.48)

ABC = ACL (ABC – catch that accounts for scientific uncertainty

ACL – catch over which accountability measures are

triggered) (F = 0.38)

ACT – catch that accounts for management uncertainty (F = 0.34)

LAGC Allocation is 5.5% of total ACL, not 5.5% of projected

catch (A11). Since 2011 has been about 6% - 9% of projected

catch

13

1. Other modifications to Gen Cat program

Amendment 15 (2011)

Allow 15% rollover of IFQ

Increase possession limit to 600 pounds

Increase vessel cap restriction to 2.5%

Allow splitting of LAGC allocation from permit

Allow partial leasing and leasing during the year even if

some fishing has occurred

Framework 24 (2013)

Separate YT accountability measures for LAGC

Include open area LAGC trips under observer set-aside

14

1. Management Process Today

Fishery Specifications adjusted every 1-2 years (Fishery ACLs,

DAS, access area allocations, NGOM hard TAC, etc).

Several scallop surveys conducted each summer, Plan

Development Team reviews results in August every year.

Estimates of biomass updated and any areas with small scallops

identified for potential closure.

PDT develops draft alternatives using fishing target principles

developed in A15.

Several meetings back and forth with AP, Cmte and Council.

Final measures selected in November.

Target implementation in April.

15

2. Scallop Resource Life History and Distribution

Bivalve mollusk from Cape Hatteras to St Lawrence in

Newfoundland.

Primarily in depths of 30-100 meters.

Patchy distribution with higher concentrations typically on

hard sand and gravel substrates.

Filter feeders that are mature at age 2, but much more

productive after age 4.

Larvae are planktonic for 1-2 months then settle to bottom.

Scallop meat weights affected by depth and latitude.

In general, meat weight decreases with depth, and MA

scallops do not grow as large as GB.

16

17

Average Meat weight by depth

Average shell height by depth Solid line – 40m Long dash – 60m Medium dash – 80m Short dash – 100m

2. Productivity

These differences cause

differences in yield per

recruit (YPR) curves

Shallow areas should be

fished less to maximize

yield per recruit

Yet these are generally

fished first and harder

Could increase overall

YPR if shallow areas fished

lower

18

2. Stock status

Stock is not overfished (B < 48,240mt) and overfishing (F > 0.48) is

not occurring

19 Source: SARC 2014 (NEFSC 2014)

Fmsy

½ Bsmy

Questions?

20