Jonathon Peros Council Staff - Amazon S3 · 2018-03-22 · Jonathon Peros Council Staff Advisory...

Jonathon Peros

Council Staff

Advisory Panel – March 21, 2018Committee – March 22, 2018

Providence, Rhode Island1

Meeting OutlineMorning: Updates on FW29, other issues Overview of 2018 Priorities (Doc. 3) Monitoring and Catch Accounting (Doc. 5, B1, B2) LAGC IFQ Trip Limits – Sam Asci (Doc 4a & 4b, B2)Afternoon: Streamlining Spec Actions/Standard Defaults (Doc. 6) Modify Access Areas to be consistent with OHA2 (Doc. 7) Gear Modifications to Protect Small Scallops (Doc. 3) Northern Gulf of Maine (Doc. 3 and B3)

2

Anticipated OutcomesSee page 2 of Doc. 2 – Memo from Vincent Balzano

~1. Provide input on the scope of each priority Include tasking for the PDT

2. Consider modifications to the 2018 priority list (add standard default measures?)

3. Consider ranking on priorities What should Council and PDT work on first? Where should resources (time) flow?

3

2018 Scallop Priorities Today’s meeting: Overview of priority list, then staff will present

background information on each item.

Motions and consensus statements today.

AP and Committee scheduled to “recap” input before adjourning, may be a time to rank priorities.

Outlook: 2018 will be a busy, crowded year. 4

Framework 29 Feb. 20, 2018 – NGOM Proposed RuleMarch 15, 2018 – Final SubmissionMarch 15, 2018 – FW29 Proposed Rule

~

NGOM Measures will be in place by April 1st

Other FW29 measures likely to be in place around mid-April (May 1 at the latest)

6

Framework 29Default Measures: 21.75 DAS and 1 MAAA trip for FT LA LAGC IFQ receive 75% of 2017 quota

Current (2017) openings and closures remain in effect until replaced by FW29

Once FW29 is in place, LA vessels have 60 days to finish their access area trips in area that are not allocated in 2018 (ex: CAII)

7

Scallop Benchmark – SAW/SARC 65 SAW Meeting #1 – Feb. 5 – 9, 2018 (Data Meeting) SAW Meeting #2 – March 26 – 29, 2018 SAW Meeting #3 – April 30 – May 4, 2018 SARC Meeting (Scallops and Herring) – June 26 – 29

Substantial overlap in membership of scallop PDT and scallop stock assessment working group.

All workgroup members participate in PDT process.Anticipate fewer scallop PDT meetings in first half of

2018 compared to 2016 and 2017.

8

Scallop Benchmark – SAW/SARC 65Scallop SAW Workgroup: All participate in PDT process. Dr. Burton Shank (NEFSC) – Chair Dr. Dvora Hart (NEFSC) – Lead Assessment Scientist Dr. Jui-Han Chang (NEFSC) Dr. Bill DuPaul (Retired, College of William and Mary) Mr. Benjamin Galuardi (GARFO, APSD) Mr. Jonathon Peros (Council Staff) Dr. Dave Rudders (VIMS) Dr. Liese Siemann (CFF) Dr. Kevin Stokesbury (SMAST)

9

2019/2020 RSA Process RSA cycle for 2019 will start soon. Opportunity to prioritize scallop fishery research.

~ The Scallop Committee will meet in late May or June to

develop research priorities for the scallop fishery. Council approves RSA priorities at June meeting. Research groups submit proposals in the fall. Awards announced in the spring of 2019.

10

2019/2020 RSA Process - Changes NO RSA Share Day planned for 2018.

Plan to invite some RSA talks at PDT this year.

Why are we skipping 2018? Resource/time constraints with benchmark assessment Feedback loop still in place RSA projects were presented

at the last benchmark Incidental & discard mortality, growth, SH/MW, LPUE

Two AP meeting in May is challenging Poor attendance in 2017: 9 out of 16 AP members came

Should we continue to hold RSA Share Day?11

Federal Survey Dates for 2018

R/V Sharp Leg 1: May 15 – May 24 Leg 2: May 26 – June 4 Leg 3: June 6 – June 16

31 Total Days

12

http://www.epscorideafoundation.org/

2018 Scallop Priorities1. Specifications 2. Action to modify access areas consistent with

OHA23. NGOM management measures4. Consider increasing LAGC IFQ trip limits5. Gear modifications to protect small scallops6. Monitoring and catch accounting provisions7. Specify Allocation Review Triggers8. 2018 Scallop Benchmark9. In-season catch accounting, RSA support

14

2018 Priorities and Vehicles

Specs Package Framework Amendment Other

Specifications and Modify AAs

LAGC IFQ Trip Limits

Benchmark(SAW/SARC)

Tracking flatfish catch, coordinate

with GF PDT

Monitoring and Catch Accounting Provisions

Gear Mods to Protect Small ScallopsRSA Support

HABITAT FW:Eastern GB?

NGOM Management

Measures

Allocation Review

Triggers?

Each column represents a way to address each priority





16

Monitoring and Catch Accounting LAGC IFQ program review found:Low compliance with VMS hail/notifications in

IFQ fishery Low number of monitored offloads

Since the Council voted on this priority in December 2017 several new monitoring and catch accounting issues have emerged.

18

Monitoring and Catch Accounting

19https://www.seafoodsource.com/news/supply‐trade/carlos‐rafael‐faces‐nearly‐usd‐1‐million‐in‐fines‐in‐noaa‐civil‐action


20


21

http://www.southcoasttoday.com/news/20180219/seized-scallops-bright-light-for-homeless-veterans-in-new-bedford


22

Monitoring ‘Strawman’ PDT discussed using ‘strawman’ approach to initiate

discussion on this issue. (Document 5, p.2 – Table 1) Ideas to spur conversations…need Council input.

Strawman for 3 issues. PROBLEM WHY WE THINK THERE IS A PROBLEM GOAL OBJECTIVE TACTIC/MEASURES

23

Issue #1: Hail Requirements PROBLEM: Poor compliance

WHY WE THINK THERE IS A PROBLEM: Data from OLE re: VMS hail compliance

GOAL: 100% Compliance with regulations

OBJECTIVE: Improve from recent levels.

TACTIC/MEASURES: ex: Council sends a letter to NMFS recommending…

24

Issue #2: Exceeding landing limits PROBLEMS:

Lack of adherence to trip limits and allocations Unknown removals from the fishery

WHY WE THINK THERE IS A PROBLEM: NOAA civil penalties against Carlos Rafael, et al. Counts 21 – 35,

January 10, 2018 MA Environmental Police report of F/V Dinah Jane overage.

GOALS: 100% Compliance with regulations. Equity among fishery

participants. Dealer reports a true census of landings. OBJECTIVE:

Full compliance with scallop regulations. TACTIC/MEASURES:

… 25

Issue #3: Exceeding Quota PROBLEM:

IFQ vessels participating in fishery with a negative quota balance.

WHY WE THINK THERE IS A PROBLEM: OLE reminder to permit holders on 2/20/18 50 CFR 648.14(i)(4) states that it is unlawful to possess or land

scallops in excess of a vessel's IFQ, or fish for scallops without IFQ

GOAL: 100% Compliance with regulations. Equity among fishery participants.

OBJECTIVE: Full compliance with scallop regulations.

TACTIC/MEASURES: … 26

Northeast VMS ProgramNortheast Active VMS Vessel Population: ~945

Note: Most vessels hold multiple permits

Total Unique Scallop Vessels with VMS: ~720 About 76% of vessels that are required to

use VMS can legally possess scallopsAll scallop permits (FT, PT, and all LAGC)

27

Scallop Landings The majority of scallop landings (~90%) are landed in the top 10

ports. Landings ports may vary depending on rotational management.

28

Landings: Number of Ports Data based on VTR reports Total ports where scallop

landings were reported ranged from 59 – 77 since 2010 (High: FY2016).

The number of ports where less than 3 total scallop vessels reported landing ranged from 37 to 52 during the same time period (High: FY2016).

29

LA Access Area Fishing Distribution of landings per trip:

The majority of LA FT vessels land the access area trip limit.

LPUE for vessels taking more than one trip to access areas: The LPUE of LA FT is similar among vessels, irrespective of how

many trips they took to fish an area.

Days fished in AA for FT LA vessels: The number of days FT LA vessels fish an access area in not

tightly concentrated, meaning that vessels spent a varying amount of time in each area (ex: between 25 and 50 days in the MAAA in 2015).

30

New Data on ComplianceCouncil staff requested data on compliance with

VMS hails and notifications for LA and LAGC IFQ components. More data likely coming. PDT has not reviewed yet. Discuss at next meeting.

Thank you: Enforcement group at NOAA Fisheries Bill Semaru and Team

31

VMS Pre-Land ComplianceLA and LAGC IFQ Data

Preliminary Pre-landing Notification DataNon-compliant: Vessel did not send their pre-land

notification.

Report run during 2017 FY, compliance rates for this year are subject to change. Data: Total trips & non-compliant trips Access area and open are fishing

32

33

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017Total Trips Non-Compliant Trips % Non-Compliant

# of TRIPS

LAGC IFQ Pre-Land NotificationsNon-Compliance – Access Area Trips

34

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Total Trips Non-Compliant Trips % Non-Compliant

# of TRIPS

LAGC IFQ Pre-Land NotificationsNon-Compliance – Open Area Trips

35

# of TRIPS

LAGC IFQ Pre-Land NotificationsNon-Compliance – ALL Trips

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017


36

# of TRIPS

Limited Access Pre-Land NotificationsNon-Compliance – Access Area Trips

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

0200400600800

100012001400160018002000

2015 2016 2017


0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

2015 2016 2017

LAGC IFQ % Non-Compliance LA % Non-Compliance

37

% of TRIPS

LA and LAGC IFQ Pre-Land NotificationsNon-Compliance – Access Area Trips

Report Run during 2017 FY

2017 Compliance Rate Subject to Change

PDT DiscussionSee PDT Meeting Summaries

Looking for guidance on how to proceed, where to focus. Strawman to initiate discussion.

This ‘monitoring’ issue also feels like an enforcement issue. If so, perhaps some benefit from engaging OLE for input.

IFQ Quota Overages: Regulations are already in place. A letter from the Council may be more appropriate vs. having

the Council develop more measures. This could be true for other monitoring/enforement issues as

well. 38

PDT Recommendation

The PDT recommends that NMFS pursue technical solutions to assist with quota compliance (ex: automatic notifications, updates on quota balance when vessels go to declarations/new PTNS system).

39

Anticipated OutcomesSee Doc. 2 – Memo from Vincent Balzano

~Consider PDT input, recommendations

1. Provide input on the scope of this priority Tasking for PDT Motions, Consensus Statements.

40

Standard Default MeasuresThere are a number of decisions that the Council

makes on an annual basis during specifications process.

Some decisions have become fairly routine, and mostly consistent year to year.

There may be some opportunity to streamline the specifications process by developing standard default measures.

43

Standard Default MeasuresPotential Areas of Focus: Default measures for following FY LAGC IFQ allocations to access areas

(ex: always 5.5% of the access area allocation?)

Part-time access area allocations Clarifying access area allocation timeline (12 months vs. 12

months + 60 days to finish AA trips) Clarify: Do we “open” and “close” areas, or are they always

available. If we allocate to them they are open and if there is no allocation

they are closed. 44

Expected BenefitsExpected benefits of developing standard defaults: Reduce number of decisions made by the Council

at Final Action, and workload for PDT and staff to develop measures on an annual basis that have fairly predictable outcomes.

Predictable outcomes for stakeholders.

45

PDT RecommendationSee Feb. 28 PDT Meeting Summary

The PDT supports adding the concept of streamlining scallop actions to the 2018 scallop priorities list.

46

Next StepsIssues for AP and Committee to address: This represents a “new” work item for 2018.

Could be done as part of “Specs Package”

Does the AP/Committee want to recommend that the Council add this to 2018 priorities? If so, What issues does the AP/Committee recommend work on?

Start with current list?

47

Overview Interest in revisiting access areas boundaries as a follow-up to

the approval of the Omnibus Habitat Amendment. Habitat portions of Closed Area I and the Nantucket Lightship

recently became available. NMFS did not approve measures for eastern Georges Bank. There are several other issues that the Council may wish to

consider as part of this priority.

The appropriate vehicle (Framework vs. Amendment) will be determined by the scope of issues addressed in this priority.

49

Potential Areas of FocusModify existing access area boundaries Address scallop access on Eastern Georges Bank

(northern edge) HABITAT ACTIONRevisit the rotational management principles of

Amendment 10Environmental changes and other issues post

benchmark (SAW/SARC 65)Exploitable biomass vs. Effective biomass

50

PDT Input Important to review the performance of the FY 2018

before attempting a major changes to the management system.

The Council may want to address this priority in a holistic way over multiple years. Unlikely to make substantial progress on this in one year. Explore using a “specs package” for 2019/2020.

The PDT could work on the development of a tool to help identify areas where yield could improve year to year (“growth rule” candidate closures)

51

Next StepsFor AP and Committee to Consider: What does the Council hope to achieve with this

priority? Goals and objectives? Problem statement(s)? Holistic approach?

Based on the answer to #1 (above), what is the desired timeline for completing work on this issue? Wait until after FY 2018 is complete and develop in 2019 (for

2020 implementation)? Align with habitat work on eastern Georges Bank?

52

Gear Modifications to Protect Small Scallops Seems to be a perennial priority – on list last several years Several projects have promise, though it does not appear

that protecting small scallops will be a major issue this year. PDT recommends removing this from the priority

list in 2018, but consider in future years.

54Photo Credits: CFF

Flounder Sweep Low‐profile dredge Extended links

FW29 Rationale

56

Rationale: Short term solution to allow controlled fishing in the NGOM management area until a future action can be developed to address NGOM issues more holistically. Not intended to be permanent.

NMFS recommended this remain a priority for 2018.

NGOM Management Measures Need input from Council on what issues to focus on. Develop goals and objectives and/or problem statement?

Specific issues to consider? NGOM appendix included in FW29 submission documents

captures Council work in recent years. Anticipate that major changes (such as allocation) would require

the development of an amendment. The 2018 benchmark may fold some areas in the Gulf of Maine

into the SAMS model.

57

58

Set limit/cap overall removals200,000 lbsTAC for 2018

LAGC TAC: 135,000 lbs LA limit (RSA): 65,000 lbs

LA share available for RSA fishing only

NO DAS fishing

No change to existing regulations or reporting

requirements

2017 Surveys of Jeffreys & Stellwagen (post fishing):

1.3 million lbs

Model growth, M, and project forward to estimate exploitable

biomass for 2018:~1 million lbs

Evolution of NGOM Management

59

2008 – 2016 2017 2018+

Setting Catch Limits

Based on historic landings

UMaine/DMR

surveys

Based on surveys and forward

projecting model

Harvest Controls

LA – DASLAGC – Hard TAC

Overall limit for removals

Scallop RSA

OTHER research (lowest priority)HIGHEST

survey priority

2018 NGOM LAGC Fishery

135,000 pound TAC200 pound trip limitFishery scheduled to

open April 1, 2018~675 total trips for

LAGC vessels

60

ActiveVessels

Daily Landings Days open

50 10,000 lbs ~13

40 8,000 lbs ~17

30 6,000 lbs ~22

20 4,000 lbs ~34

10 2,000 lbs ~68

Monitoring scalloping in NGOM The industry funded monitoring program established in the

scallop FMP covers LA and LAGC IFQ trips.

LAGC NGOM vessels are not part of this program, and do not carry at-sea monitors.

The Scallop Committee has not discussed this topic. Unclear when this needs to be addressed.

PDT Input: Monitoring program for NGOM should compliment management program. Wait and see what new measures are developed before addressing this.

61

2018 Scallop Benchmark - GOM

Exploring ways to develop catch advice for NGOM using available (survey) data.

Area north of Provincetown, and Stellwagen Bank could become SAMS areas

No change in how the assessment determines the status of the resource (still Georges Bank/Mid-Atlantic)

62





63

Jonathon Peros Council Staff - Amazon S3 · 2018-03-22 · Jonathon Peros Council Staff Advisory...

Documents

Transcript of Jonathon Peros Council Staff - Amazon S3 · 2018-03-22 · Jonathon Peros Council Staff Advisory...