Staff Regulatory Proposals: 1996

Catch Limits

In 1995, the Commission staff reviewed the methods used for estimating biomass and setting catch limits. The method that has been used in recent years appeared to underestimate recruitment of young halibut and the biomass of adult fish because of changes in growth rate that have occurred recently. A new method of estimating biomass has been developed, which confirms that the old method tended to underestimate biomass. Unfortunately, the staff is still evaluating the new method and the degree of underestimation The staff plans to spend 1996 completing the testing of the new method and will present the results to the Commission and the halibut industry in the fall of 1996. In addition the staff plans to implement a new procedure in 1996 for compensating the stock for losses due to bycatch mortality. These changes may well affect catch limits in 1997, but it is too early to fully assess the magnitude of the changes. Given these considerations, the staff recommends that the catch limits that were in place in 1995 continue through 1996. The staff considers these catch limits to be conservative and this approach will allow the staff time to fully explore technical aspects of the new methods while not putting the stock in jeopardy of over fishing The 1995 catch limits which would continue through 1996 along with the 1995 catches are provided below:

Individual quota fisheries will be in effect for all areas except Area 2A. The staff is still in favor of a winter closure from November through March to reduce the interception of fish that move between regulatory areas during spawning migrations. However, we have no evidence that any significant interceptions occurred during the 1995 fishing season which ran from March 15 through November 15. The staff will not object to a similar season in 1996 if this is what the industry prefers.

On a related issue, the North Pacific Fishery Management Council ( NPFMC) has approved a year-round Aleutian Island sablefish season that would open with the regular IFQ halibut and sablefish season (e.g. March 15, 1996) and close the day before next year's season begins (e.g. March 14, 1997). Participation in this extended season requires Aleutian Island sablefish quota share holders to also possess sufficient halibut quota shares to cover their halibut bycatch and have observer coverage. The NPFMC has requested that the Commission consider allowing halibut retention by adjusting its seasons or allowing a bycatch allowance for these few vessels. The staff does not see any significant conservation problem as long as the number of vessels is as small as expected. However, we would object to a year-round fishery that would land large quantities of halibut during the winter. The staff recognizes that social or economic concerns are also involved and suggests the Halibut Conference Board comment on this matter.

In Area 2A, the staff recommends fishing periods similar to those in effect in 1995: a series of 10-hour periods, with fishing period limits to be sure that the catch limit is not exceeded. The size of the fishing period limit will be determined later when more information is available on fleet size.

Area 2A Management

A catch sharing plan for halibut in Area 2A was developed by the Pacific Fishery Management Council for 1995 and we anticipate a similar plan to be in effect for 1996. Highlights include:

1. Allocation:

2. Commercial fishery:

3. Sport fisheries:

4. IPHC licenses:

Area 4 Management

The NPFMC has approved a catch sharing plan which calls for allocating the Area 4 catch limit among subareas using the same percentage that was in effect last year as long as the total catch limit is not increased. These percentages are: 4A-33%, 4B-39%, 4C-13%, 4D-13%, 4E-2%. In the event that the total Area 4 catch limit is increased, the first 80,000 pounds would be allocated to Area 4E.

The staff recognizes that allocation regimes are important in Area 4 and that some of the subareas were created primarily for allocation reasons. However, we continue to support the management policy of setting catch limits in proportion to biomass. We are continuing to work on developing biomass estimates for each subarea and intend to have a report available for the NPFMC by April, 1996. We also intend to make recommendations on biomass-based catch limits to the Commission for implementation in 1997. Although we expect to have biomass estimates for each subarea, it is likely that we will recommend that the Commission set catch limits for Area 4A, Area 4B, and a combined Area 4C, 4D, and 4E. The reason for the Commission combining 4C, 4D, and 4E is that this previously was a single area that was split largely for allocation purposes. The staff will recommend that the NPFMC consider biomass when making allocation decisions.

The staff also recommends changes in clearance procedures in Area 4 to eliminate unnecessary regulatory burden on the industry. Clearance procedures were implemented in Area 4 during the 1960's and 1970's to help assure that vessels were, in fact, in Area 4 rather than fishing in Areas 2 or 3 and claiming their catch from Area 4. This enforcement device was needed because Area 4 required longer running time from major ports of landing and because fishing conditions tended to be more difficult in Area 4. This was particularly important in Area 4B. With the IFQ program some of the incentives to falsify fishing location have been eliminated and there is generally better enforcement today in Area 4 than when clearances were initiated.

The staff makes the following recommendations:

1. Eliminate clearance requirements for vessels that fish for halibut only in Area 4A and land their entire annual halibut catch in Area 4A. Clearance requirements should similarly be eliminated for vessels that fish and land their halibut only in Area 4D. This provision is already in effect in Areas 4B, 4C, and 4E and extending it to the other subareas should ease any regulatory burden on primarily small vessels that tend to fish and land all of their halibut in one area.
2. Eliminate the requirement that vessels clear out of an area when fishing is completed. Eliminating out-going clearances should not increase violations.
3. Change the location of clearances for Areas 4C and 4D from Dutch Harbor or Akutan to St. George or St. Paul. Present regulations call for clearing out of St. Paul or St. George, but the staff is recommending eliminating out going clearances so the location for in-coming clearances needs to changed.
4. Allow vessels to clear into multiple areas if an observer is on board and fish are separated by area in the hold of the vessel. The staff needs to maintain the accurate landing statistics and estimates of the age-size composition by area. Allowing vessels with observers on board to clear for multiple subareas should assure accurate data for assessment as long as the fish can be separated at the time of landing. Vessels without observers or that can not keep halibut from each area separate would be required to only clear for a single area.

Areas 2C, 3A, 3B Management

The staff is very pleased with the IFQ program in Alaska, but has minor concerns that landing statistics and our sampling for size and age composition may be compromised by vessels fishing several regulatory areas during a single fishing trip unless additional regulations are put in place. Presently IFQ regulations allow a vessel to fish in multiple areas even without observers although the amount of catch is restricted if observers are not on board. (Without an observer, a vessel can not have on board more halibut than the IFQ for the area that is being fished even if some of the catch occurred earlier in a different area.) Further, landings from multiple areas are not required to be separated in the hold of a vessel.

Issues of fishing multiple areas and separating landings directly involve the IFQ program in Alaska and perhaps should best be addressed by the NPFMC or NMFS. However, these issues also have conservation implications, and the staff suggests that the Commission consider the need for either additional IPHC regulations or recommending that additional regulations be adopted in the U.S.. Sampling problems associated with fishing multiple areas are not critical at the present time, but could become worse over time. The staff would like advice from the Halibut Conference Board on how best to resolve this problem. Regulatory changes could be delayed beyond 1996 without jeopardizing the resource.

IPHC Licenses

The Staff is considering dropping the IPHC license requirement for commercial halibut vessels fishing in Alaska for 1997. The present license will be maintained in 1996 and a license system for recreational charter vessels and commercial vessels fishing in Area 2A would continue indefinitely.

The Commission stopped licensing the Canadian commercial fleet after the IVQ program was in effect. Information obtained from the license application is needed to contact fisherman and is helpful in associating the vessel with landings. However, we have been successful in obtaining this information from other sources in Canada and we anticipate being able to do the same in Alaska by 1997.