Groundfish Fishery Management Plan:
Amendment 22
Limiting Entry to the Open Access Fishery
At its June 2009 meeting in Spokane, Washington, the Council voted to affirm its March 2009 recommendation to require owners of all open access fishing vessels to register their vessels with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) in the year prior to fishing for specified open access groundfish. The vote came after hearing a report from the NMFS citing potential duplication of effort between the proposed registration process and the recently implemented Vessel Monitoring System. Prior to the vote, Council members cited the need for consistency in its decision process and the potential for interruption of some business decisions by fishery participants based on the March 2009 recommendation.
The proposed new regulation is a modification of Alternative 2 contained in the Council's groundfish plan amendment document. Because of staff limitations, NMFS may not be able to implement the proposed regulation (if approved) before the 2012 fishing season. To view a summary of the March 2009 Council action on proposed Amendment 22, please see page 7 of the March 2009 Council decision document.
The material below on this webpage was in place at the time of the March 2009 Council action. Note that the adopted alternative (modified Alternative 2) requires preseason registration of all open access vessels while the original alternative would have allowed for in-season registration. The adopted regulation is expected to limit fishery participation to fishermen/owners that are truly dependent on the fishery for income.
Top
The Pacific Fishery Management Council is considering changes to the groundfish fishery management plan (proposed Amendment 22) that will affect all open access harvesters:
-
Development of a limited entry program for the directed fishery sector of the groundfish open access fishery (this would create a new B permit program)
-
Development of a registration program for the incidental fishery sector (this would create a new C permit program).
The Council has developed new qualification criteria for the new B permit program. In March 2009, the Council will decide on issues including:
-
permit transferability
-
previous year landing requirement
-
coastal state permit endorsement
-
use of A (current Limited Entry) and B permits on vessels in the same year
-
landing endorsements for sablefish and lingcod.
The Council has developed six alternatives related to these criteria.
In September, the Council received an analysis of the alternatives approved earlier in the year and adopted a preferred alternative (Alternative 6). Final action will be taken in Seattle, Washington at the Council's March 2009 meeting. The program is expected to begin January 1, 2011. Visit the Council's How to Get Involved webpage for further information about how to get involved in the Council process.
Top
In 1994, NMFS implemented a limited entry program for the West Coast groundfish fisheries. The program restricted the number of vessels allowed to target groundfish in order to better align the fishery with the available harvest. However, to ensure that vessels in state-managed fisheries and those landing groundfish incidentally could continue to fish for groundfish, and to allow smaller vessels to target groundfish at lower landings rates than in the limited entry fishery, the program did not reserve all groundfish for the limited entry fleet. A percentage of the annual allowable groundfish catch was set aside for an open access (OA) fishery. Participation in this fishery was unlimited.
Conversion of the OA fishery to limited entry management has been under discussion since April 1998 and was listed in 2000 as a management priority under the Council's Groundfish Strategic Plan. On September 13, 2006, the Council adopted a control date for considering limitation on the number of vessels that would be allowed to participate in the OA fishery in future years.
Top
The Council is considering limited entry for the OA fishery in order to limit groundfish fishing capacity. Without such a program, allocation issues will become more acute and more restrictive measures will be needed to prevent overharvest of stocks and increased fishery discards. Specifically:
-
Fishing capacity needs to be carefully managed to ensure that capacity and/or effort is maintained consistent with resource availability. Limited entry is an important step in this process.
-
Due to high fishing capacity, restrictive landing limits have been necessary for some species. This has reduced the economic potential of the fishery and increased fishery discards. Capacity reduction may increase fishery profits.
-
Restrictive salmon fishing regulations, combined with states' nearshore management programs, have pushed new vessels into the OA fishery, further increasing fishery capacity and competition for a relatively small allocation of groundfish.
-
Registration of all vessels is important to meeting fishery management goals and efficiently allocating sampling resources among coastal ports.
Top
The proposed action is intended to compliment the existing limited entry or A permit program. The proposed action has two parts:
Conversion of the directed (target) fishery component to limited entry management. Vessels with valid registrations or permits would be allowed to directly fish for and land specified groundfish species. This is called the “B” permit program.
Conversion of the incidental (non-target) fishery component of the OA groundfish fishery to a license registration program for all state-registered OA vessels that do not receive a B permit and that seek to retain incidental amounts of specified groundfish. This is called the “C” permit program.
Top
STEPS
|
DATES
|
|
Council adopts final action
|
March 2009
|
|
NMFS develops C permit issuance regulations
|
April - May 31, 2009
|
|
NMFS drafts proposed regulations and prepares proposed rule package
|
April - July 31, 2009
|
|
NMFS published proposed rule
|
September 1, 2009
|
|
30-Day comment period on proposed rule ends
|
September 30, 2009
|
|
Final rule/compliance guide published
|
November 30, 2009
|
|
Application period/public outreach
|
January - June 30, 2010
|
|
Deadline for B permit applications
|
June 30, 2010
|
|
NMFS issues C permits as needed
|
Continuous starting in late 2010
|
|
B and C permits required
|
January 1, 2011
|
Note: The current plan is that NMFS would provide applicants 45 days to make an appeal after a NMFS decision to disapprove a B permit application. NMFS would have 90 days to review an appeal and issue the final agency decision. NMFS anticipates that initial decisions on B permit applications will be issued both during the application period and after the application period (if applications are received near or on the application deadline date).
|
Top
-
The B permit program is intended to better match fleet capacity with resource availability.
-
B permits would be issued to current owners of qualifying vessels, and permits would be registered to single vessels.
-
B permits would apply to the directed taking and landing of all federal groundfish, not including nearshore rockfish, cabezon, kelp greenling, and California scorpionfish (nearshore groundfish which are protected under state regulations).
-
A directed open access fishery landing is one in which >50% of the total revenue was of B species groundfish, and directed fishery gear was used. Only landings of B species of groundfish during April 1998-September 2006 would be considered1/.
-
State nearshore permits may not be used in lieu of obtaining a B permit to take B species groundfish.
-
A C permit must be registered to a vessel to land incidental amounts of federal groundfish, excluding nearshore species. A state-issued nearshore permit registered to the vessel or in possession of a fisherman onboard the vessel may be used in lieu of obtaining a federal C permit.
-
Valid B and C permits or state-issued nearshore permits would be required when fishing for, possessing and landing permitted species in U.S. waters off the coasts of Washington, Oregon, and California (0-200 miles).
-
B permit landing limits would be set based upon open access fishery allocations. C permit landing limits would take into account target species landings (nearshore and non-groundfish landings).
-
State regulations would continue to be in compliance with federal regulations.
-
B permits would be renewed annually; expired permits would not be renewed. Timing of annual B permits would align with current A permit renewals (fall of year prior).
1/ April 1998-September 2006 is inclusive of the two OA permit program control dates.
Top
Directed landing = 50% or greater of revenues were of B species groundfish, excluding nearshore species. Black rockfish and cabezon are not included in the following calculations because they are nearshore species, which are proposed to be excluded from the OA fishery permit program (see Current Permit Program Conditions and Assumptions, above)
Top
The Council has approved six alternatives that address various program issues (Table 1). Note that while each alternative reads as a complete program option, the components of each alternative could potentially be mixed and matched to create an OA permit program.
Alternative 1 (No action)
Alternative 1 would continue to allow commercial fishing vessels to prosecute federal groundfish species allocated to OA fisheries without federal registration, except as required under other regulations. The No-action alternative does not limit participation in the OA fishery.
Alternative 2
This alternative establishes an annual federal license requirement for vessel owners who intend to participate in the OA groundfish fishery. The purpose of this alternative is to identify all vessels and vessel owners that participate in the fishery and to aid managers in estimating fishery impacts to target and non-target species. This alternative would not limit fishery participation. The license would be valid for directed or incidental fishing operations.
B and C Permit Alternatives
Alternatives 3-6 are the OA fishery permit program alternatives, each of which has provisions for issuance of B (directed fishery) and C (incidental fishery) permits. There are various conditions and assumptions associated with the adoption of any alternative that calls for the issuance of B and C permits. These have been described above. Some issues that Alternatives 3-6 have in common are as follows:
-
A-3, A-4 and A-6 allow one B permit transfer per calendar year, while B permits are non-transferable under A-5. This means that under A-5, B permits may only be registered to single vessels that qualified for the permit.
-
A-5 has a previous year landing requirement for B permit vessels, which would have to be completed by November 30 for the permit to be renewed by December 31. There is no previous year landing requirement under any of the other alternatives.
-
A-3 has a state landing endorsement associated with each B permit, which is not a provision under the other alternatives. This means that under A-3, B permit species caught under the authority of a B permit may only be landed in the state for which the permit was issued.
-
A-3, A-4 and A-6 allow for A and B permit registration to a single vessel and allow for alternate use of the two permit types during the year, after notification is made to NMFS of permit type that will be in use before leaving port. A-5 prohibits B permit registration to any vessel with an A permit in the same year.
-
A-6 is the only alternative that requires a sablefish or lingcod landing endorsement to take, possess and land these species.
Alternative 3
This is one of two alternatives that have a specific initial fleet size goal for issuance of B permits. The goal for A-3 is either 1) the average number of vessels that made directed B species landings during the recent years of 2004-2006 (680 vessels, after rounding) or 2) the number of vessels that made a directed B species landing during 2006 (713 vessels). The long-term fleet size goal under this alternative is the same as the initial fleet size goal. The qualification frameworks that will be used for this alternative are described in Table 2.
Alternative 4
This alternative was developed to analyze the fishery impacts of a range of B permit qualification criteria. There would be no initial fleet size or long-term goal under this alternative, but no new permits would be issued after the first year. The B permit qualification criteria that have been approved for analysis under this alternative are shown in Table 2.
Alternative 5
The initial fleet size goal in A-5 is 390 vessels, which is 91% of the average number of vessels (after rounding) that fished at least three years for federal groundfish species, including nearshore species, during 1994-1999. The 91% adjustment factor is an extrapolation of fishery data for 2000-2006 used to estimate the proportion of vessels that fished for nearshore species only during 1994-1999 when nearshore rockfish were often recorded as “rockfish unspecified.” The long-term fleet size goal under this alternative is 170 vessels, which is 20% of the 2000 fleet size, a proportion based on the Council's Groundfish Strategic Plan. Attainment of the long-term fleet size goal would be accelerated by 1) requiring a previous year landing requirement and 2) not allowing for permit transfers between vessels. The qualification frameworks that will be used for this alternative are described in Table 2.
Alternative 6 (Council Preferred)
Vessels that made cumulative landings during the 1998-2006 window period of >100 lbs of B species groundfish and that made at least one B species directed fishery landing during 2004-2006 would qualify for a B species permit under this alternative (A-6). The permit would allow directed fishing for and landing of all B species groundfish not including sablefish and lingcod, for which species-specific landing endorsements would be required. The Council is considering three landing thresholds in any one year during the 1998-2006 window period for issuance of sablefish and lingcod landing endorsements: a) >1 lb, b) >100 lbs and c) >500 lbs.
Top
Top
Top
-
The staff officer (interim) for OA Permit Program is: Mr. LB Boydstun (lbboydstun@comcast.net), telephone (916) 844-4358 (cell). Comments may be mailed, emailed, or delivered in person at a Council meeting. See the Council's contact information.
-
You are invited to attend a Council meeting or subcommittee meeting on this topic (see the Council's Meeting and Events webpage).
Top
PFMC
06/23/09
|
