COMMERCE
Subscriber Services
Classified Ads
Subscribe
Advertise
NEWS
This Month
Editorial
Letters
F/V Safety
Past Issues
ABOUT US
Contact Us
Latest Issue
Subscribe
History
MORE CONTENT
CFN Archives
Links
Each month exclusively in the PRINT edition of CFN
Along the Coast
Ask the Lobster Doc
Bearin’s
Classifieds
Coming Events
Editorial
Enforcement Report
FISH SAFE
Fleet Additions
Letters
Lobster Market Report
New Boats
News Catch
Quahog Market Report
|
Commercial Fisheries News
Volume 33 Number 2
October 2005
NE council pares down groundfish FW 42
PROVIDENCE, RI – In a move intended to insure that Framework 42 is implemented in time for the May 1 start of the 2006 groundfish fishing year, the New England Fishery Management Council deferred consideration of a significant number of framework items to a future regulatory action.
On hold for the time being are proposals to modify the Gulf of Maine rolling closures, expand the geographic range of the Closed Area I Hook Gear Haddock Special Access Program (SAP), establish a longline SAP in the Western Gulf of Maine Closed Area, and modify the Closed Area II Yellowtail Flounder SAP. Several other proposals were put on hold as well.
The council settled on this approach at its Sept. 13-15 meeting after learning that Framework 42 in its current state could not be adequately developed and analyzed in time for final approval in November.
A delay beyond November would jeopardize implementation of the measures by May 1 and lead to what many council members and industry said were unacceptable consequences.
For starters, two Amendment 13 “default” measures would be automatically triggered. These involve:
• A change in the split between Category A- and B-day allocations from 60 percent A-days and 40 percent B-days to 55/45; and
• “Differential counting” of days-at-sea for vessels fishing in the Southern New England/Mid-Atlantic Regulated Mesh Area. Days would be counted at the rate of 1.5-to-1, meaning that for every one day used, vessels would be charged a day-and-a-half.
Furthermore, the days-at-sea leasing program would expire, as would the Regular B-days-at-sea Pilot Program.
Tough choices
Framework 42 is the first major “biennial adjustment” to the groundfish plan under Amendment 13. Under a biennial adjustment, the council is supposed to modify management measures based on updated stock status information.
But Framework 42 had become much more than that. And by September, it contained roughly two dozen highly complex sections, several of which were added late this summer and had yet to be vetted by the groundfish plan development team (PDT).
“We are going to have to make some very difficult decisions to make this a bare-bones framework,” said Massachusetts council member David Pierce, chairman of the groundfish committee. “No one is going to be happy when the day is over.”
With this in mind, the council determined that the framework should focus on measures that directly respond to new stock status information developed during the 2005 Groundfish Assessment Review Meeting (GARM).
“We have to figure out what we need to do to get fishing mortality under control,” said Pierce.
What’s “in”
Here is the still-substantial list of what remains in Framework 42:
• Target total allowable catch (TAC) limits for all groundfish stocks for 2006 through 2009;
• Revised incidental catch TACs for “stocks of concern;”
• New management measures to further reduce fishing mortality on stocks that are significantly off target, which at the least will include Gulf of Maine cod and all three yellowtail stocks (Georges Bank, Cape Cod/Gulf of Maine, and Southern New England/Mid-Atlantic);
• A formal rebuilding program for Georges Bank yellowtail due to its recently declared “overfished” and “overfishing occurring” status;
The automatic TAC adjustment to the Closed Area I Hook Gear Haddock SAP, which remained in the framework even though the proposed geographic expansion of the SAP was delayed;
• Revision of the opening date for the Eastern US/Canada Area Haddock SAP from May 1 to July 1 to lower cod catch rates, which in turn should allow more haddock to be taken;
• A process for the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) regional administrator to approve the use of additional gear types in the Eastern US/Canada Area Haddock SAP, particularly important to longliners who have been working to gain access to the area;
• New “performance standards” for vessels required to use haddock separator trawls, which may include 6-1/2" square mesh codends, a zero possession limit on lobsters, and a 500-pound limit each on monkfish, skates, and all flounders combined;
• Establishment of a Georges Bank Cod Fixed Gear Sector;
• A standardized bycatch reporting methodology;
• Extension of and revision to the Regular B-days-at-sea Pilot Program, which the council believes will help fishermen target Georges Bank haddock;
• Removal of the haddock trip limit;
• US/Canada Management Area changes;
• Days-at-sea transfer program modifications;
• Extension of the days-at-sea leasing program; and
• Standardized requirements for all special management programs, including SAPs, US/Canada area fishing, and B-day fishing.
Rolling closures “out”
Establishing the “what’s in” and “what’s on hold” lists wasn’t easy because every item in the framework had defenders.
Many inshore fishermen strongly backed a proposal to modify the Gulf of Maine rolling closures. But the council took this item out of Framework 42 after hearing from its PDT that the analysis almost certainly wouldn’t be ready by November. Also, some council members worried that easing up on the rolling closures might be a problem given that the GOM cod stock was in line for additional reductions in fishing mortality based on the GARM report.
Ed Barrett of the Massachusetts Bay Groundfisherman’s Association expressed deep disappointment, arguing that the primary rationale for modifying the rolling closures was safety (see CFN August 2005 for details).
“We took the time to get people to show up at the safety meetings, and now you’re just going to put this on the chopping block,” he said. “It troubles me that we’re even considering dropping this section.”
The proposal will be reconsidered in the next groundfish management action.
Fixed gear sector “in”
Another section of Framework 42 that was heatedly debated was the proposal to establish a Georges Bank Cod Fixed Gear Sector.
When the council considered deferring action on this item, sector proponents fiercely fought to keep it alive.
“If we have a group of fishermen willing to fish under hard TACs, I think we’re crazy to turn them away,” said Sally McGee, a council member from Connecticut.
But several people, including the council’s groundfish industry advisers, expressed concern about the sector being allocated a hard TAC for Georges Bank cod but not for other groundfish stocks.
According to Cape Cod fisherman Stuart Tolley, the sector applicants elected to stick with days-at-sea to control mortality on everything except cod.
When questioned about the one-stock-only quota approach, Tom Nies, the council’s groundfish plan coordinator and PDT chairman, said, “Neither Amendment 13 nor the implementing regulations are very clear on this. These guys are requesting to operate just as the current hook sector,” which also uses days-at-sea to control mortality on other groundfish stocks.
The council then questioned whether further analysis of the sector would result in too much work for the PDT given everything else still on the table.
Massachusetts council member John Pappalardo, who manages the first-of-its-kind Georges Bank Cod Hook Sector, told the council that wouldn’t be the case.
“The burden of the analysis falls on the shoulders of the participants,” he said.
Nies confirmed that the sector had met all of its deadlines for submitting an operations plan and draft environmental impact statement.
Eric Brazer Jr., who helped fishermen apply for the sector, urged the council not to delay its implementation.
“These fishermen should not be turned away from this,” he said. “They will not be catching and discarding cod.”
The sector proposal remained on the Framework 42 list.
What’s next?
The groundfish committee was scheduled to meet on Oct. 5 and Nov. 2 to develop specific measures to reduce effort on stocks where the fishing mortality rate in calendar year 2004 exceeded the Amendment 13 targets set for the 2006 fishing year.
This undertaking could be the most difficult part of Framework 42 to date, and any measures to further reduce effort on Gulf of Maine cod and Cape Cod/Gulf of Maine yellowtail are expected to be particularly painful.
The council is scheduled to cast its final vote on the framework in Hyannis, MA during its Nov. 15-17 meeting.
Back to story list
|
|
Tell us what you think.
