INTERNATIONAL PACIFIC HALIBUT COMMISSION

SEVENTY- SECOND ANNUAL MEETING

Embassy Suites Hotel, Bellevue, Washington

January 22 - January 25, 1996

PUBLIC SESSION - January 22, 1996

REGENCY ROOM

9:00 a.m. OPENING

9:15 a.m. DIRECTOR'S REMARKS

9:30 a.m. STAFF PRESENTATION

10:30 a.m. COFFEE

11:00 a.m. - 12 Noon QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION

(Continued after lunch ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ADJOURNMENT if needed)

6:30 p.m. RECEPTION (No Host) - Ballroom

TOTAL REMOVALS OF PACIFIC HALIBUT IN 1995

by

Heather L. Gilroy

The total 1995 removals of halibut off the Pacific coast were 68 million pounds. This represents a decrease of 13 million pounds from 1994; and the majority of the decrease occurred in the commercial catch. The total removal is now close to the average of the last thirty-four years and similar to the 1985 level. The total removals from 1986 to 1994 were at all time high levels, with amounts over 80 million pounds. The 1995 removals of halibut by commercial catch, sport catch, bycatch mortality, wastage, and personal use were 43.8, 7.7, 14.9, 1.1, and 0.5 million pounds, respectively. A summary of the various types of removals of halibut by regulatory area is provided in Table 1.

Commercial catch is the directed removal by the halibut fleet. Sport catch is fish caught with a single line or spear, which cannot be sold, and is generally limited to two fish per person per day (with the exception of some Areas in 2A, where it is one fish). Bycatch mortality consists of losses of halibut discarded in other fisheries. Wastage results from lost gear, abandoned gear, and the mortality of sublegal halibut in the halibut fishery. Personal use includes removals from a variety of sources such as Indian food fish in Canada and landings with commercial gear for personal use in both Canada and United States that are not included in commercial or sport statistics. In 1995, the fish taken-home by the commercial halibut fishermen were included in the commercial catch, not as personal use as it had been done previously.

Trends of each of the removals will be summarized in this report. The commercial catch will be discussed in detail; however 1995 data are preliminary. Details of bycatch and sport catch and special research projects will be discussed in a later report. The data sources are from the International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO).

A detailed summary of the 1995 catch and seasons by regulatory area (Figure 1) is provided in Table 2. The IPHC research catch has historically been included in the commercial catch but not identified separately. In 1995, the research catch has been separated so a comparison can be made between the catch and catch limits in the quota fisheries. For comparisons between years the total catch should be used.

Area 2A

There were several significant changes to the management of the Area 2A non-treaty commercial fishery requested by the Pacific Fishery Management Council. First, the commercial fishery was divided into; a directed catch and an incidental catch while salmon trolling, each with a separate catch limit. At the completion of the salmon troll fishery in June, the remaining catch limit would 'roll' into the directed catch limit. Vessels could participate in only one of the fisheries. Secondly, the directed fishery was restricted to waters south of Point Chehalis, WA.

The directed commercial fishery is an open access fishery. The fishery consisted of seven 10-hr fishing periods with fishing period limits (Table 3). In spite of issuing 352 licenses for the fishery, fishermen showed little interest in halibut. During some periods, very few vessels fished as there were conflicts with sablefish openings, or meetings between fishermen and plant personnel to sort out salmon prices. Also, bad weather played a part during one period. Additional fishing periods were added to the original openings announced in the regulations as the catch limit had not been taken at the end of the August 15 period. The fishery closed September 26 with a total catch of 105, 000 pounds.

The incidental catch in the May and June salmon troll fishery was only 2,000 pounds. In 1996, the number of halibut to salmon kept will be examined in an attempt to increase the catch.

The treaty Indian catch of 175,000 pounds exceeded the catch limit by 2%. This fishery consisted of three unrestricted longline fisheries, one restricted fishery with a 3,000 pound trip limit, and incidental halibut catch with the sablefish and salmon troll fisheries.

The IVQ and IFQ Fisheries

Area 2B

An Individual Vessel Quota (IVQ) fishery was in effect in Area 2B from March 15 to November 15. The 1995 IVQ regulations were similar to those of 1994 with the exception of a quality control tagging program discussed later. The IVQ fishery allowed each vessel to catch a predetermined poundage of halibut as calculated by the DFO, based on the 9.52 million pound catch limit approved by IPHC. There was also an additional 131,000 pounds available as carryover from the 1994 fishery to vessels which did not take their total allotment. This poundage was from the underage/overage program where underages of up to 10% of the IVQ were carried to the next year.

There were 435 vessels which received quota shares, and these quota shares were split into two equal blocks or shares. A vessel could fish up to 4 shares or blocks. The fleet was down in 1995 to 286 vessels, since 42% or 184 of the licenses or quota shares were transferred. The fleet in 1994 consisted of 313 vessels; but in 1991 and 1992, before transferability was allowed, 433 and 431 vessels landed halibut.

A dockside tagging program was initiated by DFO and fishing organizations in 1995. All IVQ Canadian halibut were tagged on the tail by the port monitors as the fish were offloaded. The tags were blue and coded so the fish could be identified as being caught in Canadian waters. The program was initiated for enforcement and marketing purposes. It is anticipated that in 1996, U.S. halibut landed in Canada will be tagged but with a tag of a different color. It was hoped that the tagging of U.S. fish would have been in effect in 1995 as the tags were already produced; however the legislation to allow this was not available.

Alaska

The IPHC set the Alaskan catch limits by regulatory area and a season of March 15 to November 15 as shown in Table 2. The North Pacific Fisheries Management Council (NPFMC) passed the regulations for an Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) Fishery in Alaska and NMFS implemented the program in 1995. The IFQ fishery allowed quota share (QS) recipients to catch a predetermined poundage of halibut known as their IFQ. For a comparison of the general concepts of the Alaskan IFQ and the Canadian IVQ fisheries see Table 4.

The implementation of the IFQ program was a major change to the management of the Alaskan commercial halibut fishery. Since it was a new program, some of the regulations have been under review and are still being defined by the NPFMC. The program will continue to be reviewed and updated for the next several years, IPHC staff will review the changes.

Landing Patterns

One advantage of QS fisheries is spreading out landings over time. The three fishing days in 1994 for Areas 2C and 3A expanded to 245 fishing days in 1995. The U.S. fishery got off to a slower start than the Canadian IVQ fishery (Figure 2). The Alaskan fishery landed only 8% of the catch in the first 1.5 months. This was because of severe weather and sablefish ex-vessel prices that were much higher than halibut prices. The majority of the U.S. fleet with both halibut and sablefish IFQs targeted sablefish early in the year. The Alaskan fishery landed the greatest amount of pounds in September. The Canadian fleet emphasized fishing in early spring, April had the highest monthly landings (by weight), but the last two weeks in March were busier on a daily basis.

Kodiak and Homer have been the leading ports for processing halibut since 1986 and remained the leading ports under the IFQ program (Table 5). Although Table 5 does not directly compare total Alaskan landings it illustrates changes. Changes occurred to ports where tenders landed, within Area 4, and where the sablefish vessels landed. In the first year of the IFQ fishery, offloads to tenders were only allowed if the tenders became registered buyers, which meant they had to be able to send the landing weight information to NMFS within 6 hours of a catcher vessel's offload. As expected ports such as King Cove, with a history of tenders, processed less fish under the first year of the IFQ fishery. The Area 4 ports together, Dutch Harbor and Akutan, processed more halibut as vessels made more than one trip in Area 4, and Dutch Harbor was an important sablefish landing port. The top sablefish landing ports were Seward and Sitka, presumable mixed halibut and sablefish trips increased Sitka's importance to halibut landings.

The top three landing ports for Canadian halibut were Prince Rupert, Port Hardy, and Vancouver. These three ports have been the most important ports since 1991; the initial year of the IVQ program. They also receive over 80% of the landings by weight.

IPHC relies on state and federal agencies to provide sport harvest data. Washington/Oregon/California harvest data are obtained from creel census and telephone surveys and are available the year of the fishery. IPHC considers the data accurate. In British Columbia, no new harvest data of acceptable quality are available so averages from 1987 to 1992 are used. The Alaskan harvest data from creel census and postal surveys are considered good estimates, but the 1995 data for Alaska are unavailable, so the 1995 harvest projections are based on the 1994 average weight of sport caught fish and applied to a regression of the catch in numbers for the last six years. The total estimated 1995 sport harvests from Alaska, British Columbia, and Washington/Oregon/California were 6.8, 0.66, 0.24 million pounds respectively. Only Area 2A has a catch limit for sport harvest, 0.23 million pounds in 1995.

IPHC began accounting for sport catch in 1977 and the estimated catch has increased yearly, with the exception of 1992 and 1994, when slight decreases from the previous years occurred. In 1995, projected sport catch represented 11% of the total removals. This is slightly above the 8 to 9% of the last few years. As the halibut stocks decrease, the commercial catch limits also decrease; if the sport catch continues to increase it will continue to represent a greater proportion of the total removals.

Bycatch mortality estimates are obtained from data collected by the observer programs in Alaska and Canada. No observer program is currently in place off of Washington and Oregon, so the 1987 observer data are used to calculate the bycatch mortality estimates. Total bycatch in 1995 was 14.9 million pounds and the amount has not changed significantly in the last five years. Bycatch represented 22% of the total removals in 1995, where it has represented between 18 to 20% over the last five years.

Wastage in the halibut fishery dropped to approximately one million pounds in 1995, which is less than half of 1993 or 1994 levels. The drop in wastage may reflect improved fishing practices with the implementation of the IFQ fishery in Alaska. First, lost or abandoned gear in the Alaskan commercial fishery dropped significantly from 1994 to 1995. The ratio of lost skates to hauled skates decreased to a level similar to the ratio observed in Canada, where there has been a quota fishery for several years. Secondly, the rate of discard mortality of sublegal halibut used in 1995 was 16% instead of the 25% previously used. The 16% rate is from observations in the Bering Sea and Aleutians sablefish hook and line fishery where the pace is similar to the individual quota fisheries. The 16% rate has been used for the Canadian IVQ fishery since 1991.

Total personal use estimates for 1995 accounted for approximately half a million pounds. Personal use has only been accounted for in the last five years. One improvement in the 1995 estimates from those of 1994 was that take-home fish in all of the commercial halibut fisheries are now required to be recorded on the fish tickets. Personal use fish in the halibut fisheries outside of Alaska have been recorded on tickets and with the implementation of the IFQ fishery, this is now the case in all areas. Since, these data are recorded on fish tickets they are now included as commercial catch. The remaining personal use harvest is from the Canadian Indian food fish and the Alaskan non-commercial and non-sport landings from which little documented data are available.

Table 1. The 1995 removals of Pacific halibut by regulatory area in net weight (thousands of pounds).

NEW DEVELOPMENTS AND MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS FOR NONCOMMERCIAL REMOVALS OF PACIFIC HALIBUT

by

Robert J. Trumble

The Halibut Commission uses estimates of total removals from the halibut resource to perform stock assessment and to recommend catch limits for the fishery. We estimate removals for commercial catch, bycatch mortality, sport catch, personal use, and wastage, and look for patterns that may suggest removals in the near future. This section will report on special projects or management actions involving noncommercial removals that have significance for the halibut resource. Bycatch mortality and the sport fishery are the two areas of focus for 1995. Improvements that Individual Fishing Quotas in Alaska made in understanding and estimation of personal use and wastage were reported in the previous section by Heather Gilroy, and will not be covered here.

As usual, we used data from observers aboard groundfish vessels to estimate the halibut bycatch rates, discard mortality rates, and total bycatch mortality for the groundfish fisheries off Alaska. The recent observer coverage in Canada has provided updated values for bycatch rates and discard mortality rates for some fishing areas. No observer coverage occurs off Washington and Oregon, so bycatch mortality estimates use 1987 research data. Coast-wide estimates of bycatch mortality decreased from 15.7 million pounds in 1994 to 14.9 million pounds in 1995, about a 6% change. Small declines occurred in Areas 3 and 4; in spite of the bycatch mortality reduction program in Area 2B, bycatch mortality increased slightly (Table 1). No significant change has occurred in the past five years as bycatch mortality has fluctuated between about 15 and 16 million pounds (Figure 1).

Alaska

The U.S. implemented a series of management measures over the past several years in Alaskan waters to limit halibut bycatch mortality and better monitor or control the bycatch mortality limits. Reductions to halibut bycatch limits in the North Pacific that would significantly constrain the ability of the groundfish fleet to harvest available groundfish may not be seriously considered in the near future by the NPFMC unless an effective incentive program can be devised.

Three programs are under evaluation in Alaska that may lead to lower bycatch mortality limits: Individual Bycatch Quotas; Vessel Incentive Program; and Careful Release. The NPFMC is evaluating the legal and technical problems with incentive programs, and will prepare an analysis of individual bycatch quota alternatives for the NPFMC in 1996. A concept under development as a potential alternative to individual bycatch quotas allocates bycatch mortality to pools of fishermen, rather than to specific fisheries.

The Vessel Incentive Program was implemented by the NMFS in 1991 to penalize groundfish fishermen who caught halibut and other bycatch at higher than standard rates. The program began in 1991, and the first two cases were resolved in 1995. In the first case, an Administrative Law Judge imposed a $50,000 fine on a vessel for exceeding the Bering Sea-Aleutian Islands (BSAI) halibut VIP rate standard during May 1991 while fishing in the flatfish fishery. The owner and fishmaster appealed portions of the decision, and the decision on the appeal is pending. In the second case, the owner and the NMFS settled for a penalty of $35,000 for exceeding the BSAI halibut VIP rate standard in September 1991. Decisions on two other cases from 1991 are pending following hearings before an Administrative Law Judge.

The NPFMC approved in 1993 a recommendation from the IPHC staff to require all groundfish longline vessels to use prescribed methods of careful release for discarding halibut bycatch. The requirements did not work well during the first two years after implementation, with discard mortality rates at the same level as before the requirement, around 18-20%. The assumed 12.5% discard mortality rate for in-season management used in the previous two years for the Bering sea Pacific cod longline fishery continued in 1995, so the NPFMC asked the IPHC and NMFS to monitor the rate in-season and report back to the Council in June 1995, so that any necessary retroactive adjustments in the rate could be made. Observers reported viability data to IPHC weekly throughout the season, and many vessel captains also sent their data to a consultant. The consultant provided reports of discard mortality rates to individual vessels and the fleet, thus providing opportunity for those with high rates to change fishing practices. At the end of the season, analysis by IPHC showed an average discard mortality rate of 11.5%.

The NPFMC received in 1995 a proposal from the IPHC to require on-deck sorting of halibut bycatch from factory trawlers and catcher vessels that dump to stern tanks for sorting below decks. Support for the concept is widespread, as improved survival would allow increased groundfish harvest for a given bycatch mortality limit, or increased halibut harvest for as given amount of groundfish harvest. However, opposition to on-deck sorting occurred primarily because of 1) increased work load for the groundfish observers, increased safety problems for observers working on deck, and inability of the observer data base to accept data from deck-sorted halibut; 2) incompatibility of deck-sorting with the VIP, as data from deck-sorting does not follow the VIP sampling protocol; 3) reduction in the quality of bycatch estimates, and 4) difficulties in confirming that vessels adhere to the deck-sorting requirements when observers are not actually monitoring a haul. The NPFMC is scheduled to take final action on the proposal in January, 1996. The IPHC Commissioners recommended to the NPFMC that on-deck sorting not be approved unless it is part of another program that addresses the problems identified.

Canada

Canada has developed a bycatch reduction plan and identified a bycatch reduction target of 1 million pounds of halibut bycatch mortality by 1997. For 1996, this plan calls for a reduction of the bycatch mortality limit for Hecate Strait to 500,000 pounds, from the 1995 value of 580,000 pounds. In addition, a trawl bycatch mortality limit of 380,000 pounds will be introduced for the west coast of Vancouver Island. DFO will also implement an individual bycatch quota for trawl vessels in the groundfish fisheries in 1996. Bycatch mortality limits for the remaining portions of Area 2B will occur in 1997. Additional reduction measures will be introduced, as necessary, to reach the 1.0 million pound target.

Washington-Oregon-California

The Pacific Fishery Management Council accepted in 1995 a procedure developed by the University of Washington and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) that uses CPUE of halibut and total effort in groundfish and shrimp trawls to estimate bycatch. The final estimate, from 1987 data, was 910,000 pounds of bycatch, equivalent to 455,000 pounds of mortality. An updated estimate using 1992 effort data is in progress at ODFW. The Oregon Trawl Commission is working with ODFW to implement a voluntary observer program for the trawl fisheries off Oregon and Washington.

Even though the IPHC has recommended a 10% per year bycatch limit reduction, we recognize that major reductions in U.S. fisheries are not likely to be approved by the NPFMC in the near future without some method that also allows groundfish harvest at or near current levels. The IPHC staff had been a strong supporter of in-season individual incentive programs, such as an Individual Bycatch Quota, as a mechanism to reduce bycatch but maintain groundfish harvest. A post-season incentive program, such as the on-going Vessel Incentive Program in Alaska, has yet to show effectiveness. Progress on developing incentive programs has been slow in previous years, so IPHC staff research has emphasized bycatch reductions in much smaller steps through time-area management and reduction on halibut discard mortality rates. Renewed emphasis on an individual bycatch quota (IBQ) program by the National Marine Fisheries Service is encouraging, and the IPHC staff will provide research assistance if an IBQ proves feasible.

In 1995, we continued tagging operations to improve estimates of discard mortality rates of trawl-caught halibut by tagging nearly 5,000 trawl-caught halibut near Kodiak Island. As part of a cooperative study, the University of Washington placed halibut in sea-bottom cages to monitor short term mortality. In 1993 and 1994, IPHC staff tagged 13,000 longline-caught halibut to improve estimates of discard mortality rates. Tags from these fish are now coming in. We encourage all fishermen to watch for and return tags to us, as the accuracy of the results will improve as we get more tags. Many of the tagged halibut will be sublegal in 1995, and it is important that tags from these smaller halibut be returned. Fishermen using any gear can legally bring in undersized, tagged halibut, but cannot sell them.

Since the early 1980s, the IPHC has accounted for the effects of bycatch mortality on the halibut resource by reducing the catch limits in the halibut fishery. The procedures have been improved and updated over the years. Two more modifications to the procedure are now being considered for 1997. First, legal-sized halibut bycatch will be treated as removals in a way similar to commercial catch. The quantity of bycatch mortality and its length composition will go into the stock assessment model to estimate exploitable biomass. The quantity of legal-sized halibut bycatch mortality will be subtracted out of the area in which the bycatch occurred. Second, catch limit reductions to compensate the resource for lost reproduction will occur only for sublegal-sized halibut bycatch mortality. The catch limit reductions will be distributed among regulatory areas according to the young halibut migration pattern, rather than be pooled over all areas. A migration model determines the movement of sublegal halibut for the purpose of catch limit reduction. The new bycatch compensation procedure will affect the estimate of exploitable biomass, will change the amount of catch limit reduction, and will change the distribution of the reductions. We cannot determine the amount of these changes until the legal-sized halibut are incorporated into the stock assessment model, and that will occur when historical data on bycatch mortality by size is available this spring.

The IPHC staff convened a workshop on November 30 for researchers working on halibut bycatch. Twenty-two scientists attended the workshop and discussed 19 projects that are underway or in planning concerning halibut bycatch. The group concluded that an individual incentive program would allow fishermen to more easily implement bycatch reductions, and that solutions for obstacles to incentives are a high priority. The participants supported a functional research approach to bycatch consisting of projects to 1) reduce encounters of gear with halibut; 2) increase selectivity of target species and reduce retention of halibut; 3) reduce discard mortality; 4) understand basic biological responses; 5) improve estimates of bycatch and bycatch mortality; 6) educate fishermen and managers; and 7) provide research coordination and communication. These research areas often overlapped, and some recommended projects touched several areas. Participants agreed to hold future workshops annually.

Sport catch estimates in Alaska are made by Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) from postal and creel census surveys. ADF&G provides the estimates with a one year lag to allow for receiving and processing postal data. Current estimates for Canadian sport estimates are not used because of data quality concerns. Most sport fisheries in Area 2A have in-season estimates made from creel census surveys, and others have post-season estimates but within the year of record. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and ODFW provide the estimates.

Alaska

The coast-wide halibut sport catch decline from 8.0 million pounds in 1993 to 7.4 million pounds in 1994 was driven by lower catches in Area 3 of about 15% (5.3 to 4.5 million pounds). The decline was attributed partially to reductions in estimated mean weight of sport halibut in central and southern Cook Inlet. Smaller halibut were also observed in southeast Alaska. Sport catch was estimated in 1994 by stratifying private and charter catches. Smaller halibut, on average, were landed by private anglers than charter anglers. Unstratified estimates made prior to 1994 gave more emphasis to the charter harvest, which tended to raise the total catch. The ADF&G is evaluating the effects of these changes. The pattern of increasing sport catch in Alaska may be slowing. The quality of the sport estimate, based on a postal survey with follow up mailings to non-respondents, is very good.

Later in 1996, the NPFMC is scheduled to discuss possible allocation of halibut catch between sport and commercial halibut fisheries. Allocation discussions have occurred with the Council and with Council work groups, but no analysis of specific alternatives has yet occurred.

Canada

Since 1981, IPHC has used estimates of sport-caught halibut in waters off British Columbia, Canada (IPHC Area 2B) from a postal survey ("Tidal Diary") conducted by the Pacific Region of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO). During 1993 and 1994, DFO and IPHC biologists discussed alternative estimates, and in 1994 IPHC received an alternate estimate for the 1993 sport catch based on a variety of data, such as reports from fishing lodges, reports from fishery officers, and anecdotal information. The IPHC staff has concluded that the procedures used for the estimate recommended by DFO for 1993 are not adequate, and that a scientifically and statistically credible sport catch estimation procedure for Area 2B is needed. In 1995, the IPHC staff recommend using the six-year (1987-1992) average from the postal survey of 657,000 pounds for future years until a better procedure is available. While the six-year average suggests that halibut catch is stable, we have received reports that halibut sport catch is increasing as salmon catch declines.

The Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) currently has inadequate resources for surveying sport halibut catch, and efforts to estimate sport catch are currently part of the process to estimate other recreational species, especially salmon. Estimates of future halibut sport catches will continue to be difficult without a program to collect sufficient data specific to halibut. A Recreational Catch Working Group within DFO is addressing a comprehensive program for sport catch estimation, including halibut, but has not reached a conclusion on future methods of estimation.

Washington-Oregon-California

Allocation of halibut among sport, commercial, and treaty Indian fisheries in the Washington-Oregon-California area is decided by the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC). Only in Area 2A does specific allocation occur between sport and commercial fisheries. The IPHC does not participate in the allocation decision. In-season management of many of the Area 2A sport fisheries has led to implementation of in-season catch estimates of sport catch, which are timely and high quality. Post-season catch estimates are made for a few regions without in-season management. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and Oregon Department of Fish and Game are the only agencies that provide sport catch data during the year of the fishery.

Bycatch mortality estimates have fluctuated somewhat over the past four years, but without a trend. Only minor changes in the level of bycatch are likely in the near future. Serious evaluation of an individual bycatch quota system in Alaska offers hope that effective incentives, and subsequent bycatch mortality reductions, may be coming. Canada has implemented a bycatch reduction program to bring down bycatch mortality, and is on schedule to reach 1 million pounds by 1997. The IPHC staff has released nearly 20,000 tags over the past three years to help improve estimates of discard mortality rates, and we encourage fishermen to look for and return tags. The bycatch compensation model will affect both estimates of exploitable biomass and the distribution of catch limit reductions among areas.

We have seen the sport fishery grow substantially in the recent past, and IPHC staff work closely with state and federal biologists to improve the data and our understanding of the sport fishery. The slight decline in sport harvest in 1994, decreasing average size of sport-caught halibut, and new estimates from stratification by charter and private catch, suggest that the increasing trend of Alaska sport catch may be slowing. A method for accurately estimating sport catch in Area 2B is needed, as we suspect that halibut catch is growing there. Changes in sport catch in Area 2A depend on allocation decisions made by the PFMC.

Table 1. Estimates (thousands of pounds, net weight) of bycatch mortality of Pacific halibut (Hippoglossus stenolepis) for 1991 through 1995.