The Halibut Commission uses estimates of total removals from the halibut resource to perform stock assessment and to recommend commercial catch limits for the fishery. The total removals estimated include commercial catch, sport catch, bycatch mortality, personal use, and wastage. 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 limited to one or two fish per person per day depending on location. 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.

The 1996 removals of halibut off the Pacific coast by commercial catch, sport catch, bycatch mortality, personal use and wastage were 47.4, 7.7, 13.4, 0.5 and 1.3 million pounds, respectively (Table 1). The total removal of 70 million pounds is close to the 1995 level and to the average of the last thirty-five years. The total removals from 1986 to 1994 were at high levels, with the removals between 81 and 97 million pounds.

Trends of each of the removals will be summarized in this report. The 1996 data are preliminary. 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 1996 catch and seasons by regulatory area (Figure 1) is provided in Table 2. The regulatory areas are the same as in 1995. For comparison between years, the total of the commercial and research catches should be used. The commercial catch occurs in an open access fishery and a treaty Indian of Area 2A; the quota share (QS) fisheries of Area 2B and Alaska; and a Metlakatla fishery within the Annette Island Reserve. The Metlakatla fishery will not be discussed in detail; 126,000 pounds were landed between April 27 and September 15, 1996.

Area 2A

Once again, IPHC issued Area 2A vessel licenses for the incidental commercial fishery while salmon trolling, the directed commercial fishery, and sport charter fishery. The number of licenses issued for the sport and incidental commercial fisheries were 135 and 123, respectively. This represents no significantly change from 1995. In 1996, we issued 403 directed commercial fishery licenses, 51 more licenses than in 1995.

The incidental commercial halibut catch during the May and June salmon troll fishery was 9,521 pounds, 6,547 pounds under the catch limit set by the Pacific Fisheries Management Council (PFMC). As in 1995, this fishery was limited to the area south of Westport, WA. For 1996, the allowable incidental catch ratio was one halibut per fifteen chinook, an 'extra' one halibut regardless of ratio, and a maximum number of incidental halibut landed not to exceed twenty per fishing trip. For example, if twenty chinook were caught, two halibut could be landed. The 1996 incidental catch regulations helped to significantly increase halibut catch above the 2,000 pounds caught in 1995. The remaining 6,547 pounds were rolled into the directed commercial fishery at the end of the June troll fishery. If commercial catch had been under the catch limit at the end of July, the original underage of 6,547 could have rolled back into the troll fishery. The commercial catch limit was taken by July 24th.

As in 1995, the directed fishery was restricted to waters south of Point Chehalis, WA. The directed commercial fishery consisted of two 10-hr fishing periods with fishing period limits (Table 3). In 1995, the fishing period limits for H-class vessels ranged from 1,000 to 4,000 pounds. There appeared to be a greater interest in the directed commercial fishery in 1996, as the catch limit was taken in two fishing periods, five fewer than were needed in 1995.

The treaty Indian commercial catch of 166,000 pounds was approximately 1% under the catch limit. Two unrestricted treaty Indian longline fisheries for a total of four days had a catch of 154,000 pounds, 11,000 pounds over the catch limit. The restricted fishery, limited to 500 pounds per trip, did not last as long and caught less than anticipated due to the overage in the unrestricted fishery. The amount reserved for the ceremonial and subsistence catch was 14,000 pounds.

The Quota Share Fisheries

The QS fisheries of Area 2B and Alaska were open from March 15 to November 15. The following paragraphs discuss the fisheries by area and by the landing patterns.

Area 2B

The Individual Vessel Quota (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 12,600 pounds available as carryover from the underage/overage program in the 1995 fishery. The 1996 catch was within 1% of the catch limit.

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 1996 to 266 vessels, since 47% or 204 of the licenses or quota shares were transferred. The number of vessels landing halibut has continually decreased since the initial transfer program was implemented in 1993, the third year of the IVQ fishery. It is important to note that because vessels can only fish up to 4 shares, the number of vessels will not drop below 218 (unless some do not fish).

The dockside tagging program, initiated for enforcement and marketing purposes in 1995 for all IVQ Canadian halibut, expanded to include tagging U.S. caught fish landed in Canada. The fish were tagged with either green or white tags for Canadian or U.S. caught fish, respectively.

Alaska

The Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) fishery, regulated by the NMFS, allowed QS recipients to catch an annually determined IFQ, a predetermined poundage of halibut by regulatory area. In addition to the catch limit, the carryover amounts resulting from the 1995 underage/overage program by regulatory area were: Area 2C = 289,000; Area 3A = 485,000; Area 3B = 33,000; Area 4A = 11,000; Area 4B = 106,000; Area 4C = 13,000; Area 4D = 4,000; Area 4E = 0.

Area 4E was the only regulatory area where the catch limit was taken. The other regulatory area catches were under the catch limits by 3 to 12%. This is an improvement over 1995, where the catches were under the catch limits by 9 to 27%. In 1996, Areas 4A and 4C were under by 12%, while in 1995, Area 4B was the area with the greatest underage of 27%.

Although 1996 was the second year of the IFQ fishery, the regulations were still under review by the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council (NPFMC). The program will continue to be reviewed and updated for the next several years. The NPFMC passed a regulation in 1996 to be in place for 1997 that requires a standard deduction (2%) for ice and slime in calculating landing weights for unwashed halibut. Previously, the deduction for ice and slime was not standardized and there was confusion and abuse of the system.

Landing Patterns

One advantage of QS fisheries is that the landings are spread out over time (Table 4). The busiest month for all the QS landings as a whole was June. The U.S fishery got off to a much faster start in 1996 than in 1995. Approximately 8% of the U.S. catch was landed in the first two weeks of the 1996 season, where only 1% was landed for the same period last year. Also, Area 2B got off to a busy start, March received the greatest poundage when 14% of the catch was landed. The last two months, October and November, were the slowest months for Area 2B and Alaska as a whole, but October varied in importance depending on regulatory area.

There were no changes in the leading landing ports in Alaska or British Columbia. Kodiak and Homer have been the leading U.S. ports for processing halibut since 1986. In 1996, Kodiak received 7.2 million pounds or approximately 20% of the catch. Sitka had the most vessel landings with just over 1,000. Kodiak was a close second at around 900 landings. The top three landing ports in Canada were Prince Rupert, Port Hardy, and Vancouver, as they have been since 1991, the initial year of the IVQ program. They received over 90% of the 1996 landings by weight. Prince Rupert received the largest Canadian poundage and the most landings. Also, close to 0.7 million pounds of Alaskan halibut was landed in Prince Rupert.

One question raised with the implementation of the IFQ fishery was: would more fish that was caught in Alaska be landed in southern ports? It appears that just over 10% of the Alaskan catch was landed in Washington, Oregon, California, and British Columbia. A similar percentage of the Alaskan catch was landed in these southern areas in 1994, so the IFQ fishery has not changed this landing pattern.

Sport catch estimates changed little from 1995 to 1996. The total estimated 1996 sport harvests from Alaska, British Columbia, and Washington/Oregon/California were 6.8, 0.66, 0.23 million pounds, respectively. IPHC began accounting for sport catch in 1977 and the estimated catch increased yearly until 1991. Since 1991, sport harvest has varied slightly, and peaked at 8 million pounds in 1993. In 1996, projected sport catch represented 10% of the total removals. Once again, Area 2A is the only area with a sport catch limit; the catch limit for sport fishing for 1996 was 0.23 million pounds. The IPHC considers the data collected by either creel census, telephone and postal surveys in both Alaska and Washington/Oregon/California accurate. In 1996, IPHC and DFO continued to review the Area 2B sport catch estimates. The goal of implementing a scientific-based estimation procedure was not met but the discussions continue on how this can be accomplished. The Area 2B catch estimates were from 1987 to 1992 averages.

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. The Oregon Trawl Commission and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife have started a voluntary observer program in Area 2A, but information is not yet available. Estimates of bycatch mortality in Area 2A use 1987 research data updated with 1992 fishing effort data.

In 1996, we recalculated bycatch mortality in the domestic groundfish fisheries off Alaska since 1990. Previous bycatch mortality estimates used pre-season estimates of discard mortality rates, while the recalculation used actual discard mortality rates calculated for each fishery and year. The revised estimates are generally higher than the previous estimates (Figure 2, Table 5). The estimate of 1996 coast-wide bycatch mortality using pre-season data, 13.4 million pounds, is substantially smaller than the revised estimate for 1995, 15.8 million pounds. However, we expect that revised 1996 values will be higher. Canada implemented an individual bycatch quota program for its trawl fleet that, combined with other trawl management programs, reduced trawl bycatch to about 300,000 pounds in 1996 from about 1.5 million pounds in 1995.

Future Changes in Bycatch Mortality

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. The NPFMC and the NMFS had planned to evaluate in 1996 a Vessel Bycatch Account (VBA) program that would allocate bycatch mortality to individual vessels in Alaska. However, US Congressional action prohibited work on such a program for most of 1996, so evaluation of the program will occur in 1997.

The IPHC staff has long supported the concept of VBA program, but has recommended that the NPFMC pursue traditional bycatch measures until three serious obstacles identified by the staff have been resolved. The three obstacles are:

1) Uncertainty inherent with current observer data, especially unedited in-season data, makes bycatch mortality estimates disputable. Due process requires a hearing before assessing penalties. For a VBA system to be effective in Alaska, NMFS must move to reduce uncertainty, through programs such as weighing or measuring all halibut.

2) Real-time weighing or measuring all halibut on a whole haul basis may not be feasible, for technical or financial reasons. Observer program sampling is designed for estimating fleet-wide values, not individual vessel values (except VIP). An in-season program may not be feasible.

3) Until recently, the staff did not consider initial allocation as a significant problem. However, concern by some industry representatives that VBA allocation will become a political issue to allocate groundfish among users could diminish support within the trawl groups.

The solutions to VBA problems proposed by the IPHC staff may not be feasible given the current management and economics of the groundfish fisheries.

Traditional measures recommended by the IPHC staff are:

1) Require pelagic trawling for all pollock fishing

2) Require sorting halibut on deck from factory trawlers.

3) We suggest that the NPFMC use its SSC and AP and perhaps a working group to explore a modification of the pelagic trawl concept (net design specifications with a performance standard) for the Pacific cod/non-pelagic pollock fishery to reduce halibut bycatch.

Canada

Canada has developed a bycatch reduction plan and identified a bycatch reduction target of 1 million pounds of halibut bycatch mortality by 1997. In previous years, DFO set bycatch mortality limits by area (500,000 pounds for Hecate Strait and 380,000 pounds for the west coast of Vancouver Island). However, because of the success of the Canadian individual bycatch quota program and the low resultant bycatch mortality in 1996, DFO will not set limits for specific areas in 1997. DFO will continue the observer program and the individual bycatch quota for trawl vessels in the groundfish fisheries in 1997.

Washington-Oregon-California

The PFMC has undertaken no programs for establishing bycatch limits in the Washington-Oregon-California, or for target reductions in current bycatch. The poor quality of bycatch data has led the Oregon Trawl Commission and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife to implement a voluntary observer program for the trawl fisheries off Oregon and Washington. The program intends to provide better bycatch data to determine the magnitude and distribution of the problem by area, time, and fishery.

Bycatch Research

In 1996, we continued receiving tags from tagging operations off Kodiak Island. In 1993 and 1994, IPHC staff tagged 13,000 longline-caught halibut, and in 1995 tagged nearly 5,000 trawl-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. 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 were implemented 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, the IPHC staff will account for the effects of sublegal bycatch by reducing target exploitation rates.

Personal use has only been accounted for in the last seven years. With the implementation of the QS fisheries the take-home fish all of the commercial halibut fisheries are now required to be recorded on the fish tickets. Take-home fish from the Area 2A commercial fisheries had already been accounted for on the fish tickets. There is little documentation for the remaining personal use harvest from non-commercial and non-sport landings, The personal use estimates that were calculated in 1993 are being reviewed with ADF&G and may be revised in 1997.

The wastage in the halibut fishery in 1996 increased slightly above the 1995 levels, but was still significantly lower than the wastage that occurred in the "derby" fisheries of 1993 or 1994. The wastage from lost gear and the discard mortality of sublegal halibut was .9 and .4 million pounds, respectively.

Wastage can also occur when fishers must discard halibut to stay within fishing period limits in Area 2A, and IVQ in Area 2B, or IFQ in the Alaska regulatory areas. The amount of legal-sized halibut caught but discarded is recorded during logbook interviews. At this time, mortality from the discards is not factored into the wastage calculation but the goal is to include the amount in the future, either in wastage or at another level in the stock assessment.

Figure 1. IPHC regulatory areas for the 1996 commercial fishery.

Figure 2. Pacific halibut bycatch mortality (net weight) from 1962 through 1996, with revised estimates for 1991-1995.