INTERNATIONAL PACIFIC HALIBUT COMMISSION

Commission Finances  - Bruce M. Leaman

Special IPHC Experiments, 1998-1999 - Robert J. Trumble

Halibut, Climate, and Fisheries Oceanography - Steven R. Hare

The Pacific Halibut Fishery, 1998 - Heather L. Gilroy

Stock Assessment - William G. Clark and Ana M. Parma

Effects of Imposing a Maximum Size Limit

in Commercial Landings  - Ana M. Parma

Staff Regulatory Proposals: 1999 - Bruce M. Leaman

Appendix: Staff Recommendations for Research and Assessment:

INTERNATIONAL PACIFIC HALIBUT COMMISSION

SEVENTY-FIFTH ANNUAL MEETING

The Crest Hotel, Prince Rupert, B.C.

January 25 _ 28, 1999

*There is an extra room available for group meetings - contact the IPHC office

INTERNATIONAL PACIFIC HALIBUT COMMISSION

SEVENTY-FIFTH ANNUAL MEETING

The Crest Hotel, Prince Rupert, B.C.

January 25 _ 28, 1999

Public Session _ January 25, 1999

British Columbia Room

1:00 p.m. WELCOME FROM THE CITY OF PRINCE RUPERT

Mayor Jack Mussallem

1:15 p.m. OPENING OF MEETING

Chairman's Opening Remarks

Introductions

Commissioners

Commission Staff

Distinguished Guests

1:30 DIRECTOR'S REMARKS

1:35 STAFF PRESENTATIONS

Review of IPHC Finances

Special Experiments: 1998

Fisheries Oceanography Research

The Pacific Halibut Fishery, 1998

Population Assessment: 1998

Maximum Size Limits

Staff Regulatory Proposals: 1999

2:30 COFFEE

3:00 STAFF PRESENTATIONS (CONT.)

4:30 QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSIONS

6:00 ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ADJOURNMENT

Commission Finances

by

Bruce M. Leaman

Background

The Commission was established by the two governments in 1923, at the request of halibut harvesters, to address problems of the halibut stock. The mandate for the Commission as specified by the Halibut Convention is that:

The Commission shall make such investigations as are necessary into the life history of the halibut and may conduct or authorize fishing operations to carry out such investigations…for the purpose of developing the stocks of halibut of the Northern Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea to levels which will permit the optimum yield from that fishery, and of maintaining the stocks at those levels…

The mandate of the Commission is therefore the scientific, monitoring, assessment, and survey activities necessary for the continued health of the halibut resource. The funding for these activities traditionally came from the appropriations by the two governments, on a shared basis, and to a lesser extent from revenue generated by sales of fish taken during Commission research cruises.

In 1991, the funding for the Commission was increased from $1.59M (U.S.) to $1.67M. However, in 1994, the funding was reduced to $1.6M and has since been fixed at this level. Figure 1 shows the history of government appropriations as well as the effects of inflation on the purchasing power of the Commission's funding. A projection of the Commission's 1985 funding indicates a value of $2.1M, if funding had kept pace with inflation.

Several cumulative and recent developments have compounded the effects of inflation on the financial health of the Commission. The first of these developments was the transition to Individual Quota (IQ) harvesting frameworks in both Canada and the U.S. Prior to IQ programs, the fishery had been conducted via a progressively shorter set of derby-style openings, often with an entire season compressed into a total fishing time of only one or two weeks. While these intense derby openings had significant drawbacks, they did allow the Commission to mobilize its Seattle-based staff into the ports for the short periods of the openings. With the transition to IQ fisheries, the season length went from as little as 10 days to a present season of 245 days. This extended season meant that the Commission incurred the expense of full-time port samplers for the entire length of the season.

The third development affecting the Commission's finances was the requirement to re-establish a large program of fishery-independent stock surveys. This requirement was generated both by biological changes in the stock (recruitment and growth changes) and in the fishery (IQ effects on catch statistics). These changes created considerable uncertainty in the understanding of stock dynamics based on fishery-dependent data alone. To provide independent indices of relative stock abundance, the Commission re-instituted standardized setline surveys. Although halibut that are caught during the surveys are sold, the revenue generated from fish sales is often insufficient to cover all survey costs including administration. These surveys are very costly in Areas 2A and 4, which are areas of either low abundance or at great distances from landing ports. While surveys in the central portion of the halibut range are usually revenue positive, losses in these other areas are substantial.

A final and recent development was the impact of large harvests and associated over-winter holdings on ex-vessel fish prices. The season-average ex-vessel price for fish from IPHC surveys dropped from $2.10/lb (U.S.) in 1997 to approximately $1.10/lb in 1998, a decline of almost 50%. The financial health of the IPHC followed this decline.

An overview of Commission operations for 1998 reveals the following:

Government appropriations $1.600M

Personnel and administration costs (without surveys) $1.672M

Catch statistics and port sampling $0.379M

Research programs $0.288M

Sub-total $2.339M

NET BALANCE -$0.739M

The drop in the price for fish in 1998 affected the Commission and the industry in the same manner. The Commission initially undertook several measures to offset the deficit created by this drop. Staff levels were reduced, including not re-staffing the Commission's primary assessment scientist, who left for an academic position. Operations and research travel was restricted and other components of operations spending were reduced.

Implications of Fixed $1.6M Appropriations

There are several implications to the present funding arrangement for the Commission. Chief among these is that the Commission's economic health is increasingly dependent on that of the halibut resource, and less on the appropriations from governments. The funding for the Commission to execute its mandate is therefore precarious. Costs of operations will continue to escalate and the only means of achieving cost reductions of the magnitude needed to offset shortfalls on appropriations will be reductions in both full-time and temporary staff. However, these reductions will significantly reduce the ability of the Commission to produce high-quality research and assessment recommendations.

At the request of the Commissioners, the Staff has produced a budget for Commission operations that incorporates only the $1.6M government appropriations. This budget permits only the assessment and commercial fishery sampling activities of Commission operations but does not contain sufficient resources to generate standardized setline surveys. It also contains a reduction in personnel costs equivalent to 7.5 positions. While some research would still be done (see the Appendix to this book), a substantial body of necessary research could not be conducted. The lack of the setline surveys, in particular, would have serious effects on our ability to understand stock dynamics. Recommended yields from the resource will become more conservative as uncertainty about its status increases.

Future Actions

The Staff has kept the two governments well informed about the financial status of the Commission. The Commissioners have responded positively and initiated measures through the U.S. State Department and the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans to draw attention to the situation. However, the IPHC is only one of many agencies to which governments provide some funding and we must continue to seek outside research funds.

A number of alternatives to address Commission needs can be considered.

1. The Commission could reduce staff and expenditures to meet target spending of only $1.6M. This implies an immediate and substantial staff reduction as well as continual reductions in personnel and research costs to maintain fishery monitoring and assessment. The implications to our long-term understanding and management of the resource are substantial and serious. The Commission would eventually become only a catch monitoring agency.

2. The appropriations to the Commission from governments could be increased to offset the shortfall in operations expenses and permit surveys, in conjunction with Commission cost savings and some survey revenue.

of survey and/or research programs. It could also act as a reserve to buffer the effects of lower yields and fish available to surveys, when stock levels are lower.

4. The Commission could receive funds directly from industry. These funds could be specified for general operations and ongoing or specific projects. Direct funding could be a valuable component of the Commission's financial plan although it should be evaluated in the context of the Commission's continuing costs.

Special IPHC Experiments, 1998-1999

by

Robert J. Trumble

During the summer of 1998, the IPHC staff conducted special experiments in association with the stock assessment surveys. The extra fishing was designed to answer questions regarding gear effectiveness. The experiments helped offset lost revenue from the surveys that occurred as a result of the drop in halibut prices. The staff is currently conducting a winter experiment that spans December 1998, January, and February 1999. The winter experiments build on the results of the summer work, and emphasize bait comparisons.

SUMMER EXPERIMENTS

During the 1998 charter season, the IPHC created opportunities for vessels on stock assessment charters to conduct research fishing in addition to that required by the original charter. We selected vessels on charter because these vessels were already geared up to fish for the Commission and had IPHC staff on board, which minimized the cost and logistics of the operation.

Units of gear were either full (1500- or 1800-foot) skates or half (750- or 900-foot) skates rigged similarly in terms of hook spacing, gangion length, and hook type. Gear was fished in pairs. Each experiment was intended to compare two gear treatments. The order of treatments in each set usually alternated from day to day to help minimize variation due to changes in habitat or fish abundance.

In all cases, the special experiments were designed to evaluate sources of variability in the calculation of catch per unit effort (CPUE) for the stock assessment surveys or for the commercial fishery. IPHC staff worked with owners or operators of vessels chartered for the experiments to select the specific experiments. We tried to balance the gear and interests of the vessel with the need to obtain adequate samples for each type of experiment. The experiments examined effects of:

1. Hook size (standard large hooks versus small hooks on conventional gear);

2. Gear type (conventional halibut gear versus cod-style gear);

3. Bait size (standard size versus smaller or larger size baits);

4. Bait quality (standard #2 semi-brite versus dark chum, or semi-brite chum from different sources);

5. Bait type (standard #2 semi-brite chum versus other bait types).

per pound. The IPHC paid charter vessels 50 percent of revenue from the special experiments, and divided the cost of the experiments 50-50 with the vessels.

Bait size

Bait size was examined during eight separate vessel trips. Four-ounce chum salmon baits were chosen as the standard against which other sizes would be compared. Sizes of bait compared to this standard were 2, 3, 6, 7, and 8 oz. On average for any trip, the CPUE for smaller baits was less than that for the 4-oz. bait, and the CPUE for larger baits averaged higher (Fig. 1).

Hook size

Four different trials compared standard 16/0 hooks with smaller hooks on standard 18-foot halibut gear, three with 14/0 hooks and one with 13/0 hooks. In three of the four trials, the larger hooks resulted in a larger overall CPUE of halibut (Fig. 2). Generally, the smaller hooks tended to catch more sublegal halibut and halibut in the 10 to 20 pound market category, and larger hooks caught more halibut over 40 pounds.

Bait quality

In most cases, one bait out-fished the other (Fig. 3), but the best bait was not necessarily the better grade bait. In five trials, dark chum salmon out-fished semi-brite chum. In two cases, the average catch for either bait was about the same. In both cases that semi-brite salmon out-fished dark salmon, we purchased dark and semi-brite salmon from the same run fresh from a seiner. In another trial, two batches of semi-brite salmon were compared against each other. One batch consistently produced lower catches than the other, averaging 80% of the higher catch. In another trial that compared two batches of silver-brite salmon, the catch rate of one batch averaged about 75% of the other.

Bait type and gear type

Summer experiments compared black cod gear (short spacing, short gangions) with standard halibut gear, and Pacific cod and squid with standard chum salmon. These experiments have not yet been summarized by set. Results will be available from the IPHC office when analyses are complete.

WINTER EXPERIMENTS

As the special summer experiments came to an end, the IPHC staff reviewed the effectiveness of the experiments in providing data and revenue. The success on both counts led to a recommendation for future special experiments. The decision to pursue the experiments during the winter came from four considerations:

2. A higher price of halibut anticipated in winter would bring in higher revenues;

3. Winter landings would not compete in the market place with commercial landings of fresh halibut, but would provide some information on marketing fresh halibut during the winter closure; and

4. Collection of DNA samples in winter when halibut concentrate near the spawning grounds is needed to evaluate genetic stock structure and compare with summer samples when halibut disperse to the feeding grounds.

The experiments are taking place near Seward, Alaska using one vessel and near Prince Rupert, British Columbia using two vessels. Harvest will be limited to approximately 300,000 pounds from each area.

The staff selected bait experiments as the emphasis of the winter experiment. Specifically, we wanted to find out if readily-available baits could substitute for the #2 semi-brite chum salmon that we use as the standard bait on our stock assessment surveys. Chum salmon may not always be available, or not available at a reasonable price, so comparable alternative bait gives us a back-up to keep surveys going. Therefore, we chose two sizes of two different, readily-available baits (herring and squid) to test as possible alternatives to the standard chum salmon. The bait comparison studies use a statistical design that requires all five bait types to be fished on separate skates in a random order for each set. To minimize variations caused by differences within a bait type, all vessels used baits from the same sources.

In addition, we are collecting tissue samples for DNA analysis, and otoliths to help determine the timing of annular ring formation. Determination of genetic variability is needed during winter when halibut congregate on the spawning grounds, as well as when they are dispersed during summer. Halibut begin depositing annual rings that mark the start of summer growth during the spring, and begin depositing rings that mark the winter growth during the fall.

The Commission staff is experimenting with a unique arrangement with two companies to broker sales of the halibut caught during the winter charters. Rather than sell each load individually on the open market, the companies will sell the halibut to end users, subtract designated costs and commissions, and remit the remainder to the Commission. One company brokered the fish sales in Seward, and the other brokered sales in Prince Rupert. Because of the short time from the decision to conduct winter charters and the start of the cruises, the staff solicited bids from companies that bought substantial amounts of halibut from the IPHC during the summer surveys. If the marketing experiment proves successful, we will consider public tenders for brokering of fish from other IPHC surveys or special experiments.

SUMMARY

Halibut, Climate, and Fisheries Oceanography

by

Steven R. Hare

BACKGROUND

In 1997, the IPHC embarked upon a three year fisheries oceanography project to examine the influence of climate variability on Pacific halibut biology, particularly growth and recruitment. Beyond better understanding the factors that influence halibut population dynamics, the ultimate goal of the project is to integrate the fisheries oceanography research more closely with the stock assessment, hoping to expand it beyond a single-species environment-free model. During the first two years of the project, a number of research activities were conducted, reaching varying levels of completion. A few of these are summarized below.

EL NIŅO-SOUTHERN OSCILLATION AND PACIFIC DECADAL OSCILLATION

In 1997 and 1998, a wide array of unusual climatic and ecosystem anomalies were observed in the Bering Sea, from record warm sea surface temperatures and eerily calm atmospheric conditions to extensive die-offs of seabirds, salmon run "collapses" and previously undocumented coccolithophore blooms. In many ways, the strength of the 1997/98 El Niņo and 1998/99 La Niņa (collectively termed ENSO events) and the widespread ecosystem response reawakened much of the fisheries community to the tremendous impact climate variability can have on natural resources.

HALIBUT GROWTH CHANGES OVER TIME

Over the past 15 years, there has been a remarkable decrease in the weight-at-age of halibut in commercial (Fig. 2) and survey catches (Fig. 3). The decline in weight-at-age differs among areas and age classes but the following generalizations hold:

· Fish from all IPHC regions showed declines in weight-at-age with the largest decreases occurring in Areas 3A and 3B; the smallest decreases were in Area 2A.

· Decrease in weight-at-age increased with age. In Area 3A, the decline in weight-at-age for 13 year old fish was 50% between the mid-1970s and mid-1990s. The decline was 60% for age 17 fish and 70% for age 20 fish. In Area 2B, the declines were 30%, 50% and 60% for age 13, 17 and 20 fish, respectively.

· The steepest declines in weight at age occurred between the early 1980s and early 1990s for fish older than age 15. In Areas 3A and 3B, for a given age, fish from successive year classes weighed 6-8 pounds less each year during this period.

· There appears to be a slight increase in size-at-age among the younger age classes beginning in the mid-1990s.

The cause(s) of the change in growth rates that led to the observed decline in size-at-age is unknown but is likely related to either density-dependent or environmental factors. The declines coincided with an enormous increase in the biomass of total groundfish in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA) that began in the mid-1970s (Fig. 4). Even though its biomass has doubled over the past 20 years, halibut constitute less than 2% of the total GOA groundfish biomass. Certainly, halibut from year classes after the mid-1970s have faced increased competition in terms of absolute numbers of fish though it has been shown that productivity within the GOA also doubled during that time.

PACIFIC BASIN CLIMATE VARIABILITY AND PATTERNS OF NORTHEAST PACIFIC MARINE FISH PRODUCTION

THE OCEAN BOTTOM PROPERTIES DATABASE

This project involves the compilation of oceanographic data to assist our ongoing analysis of factors influencing halibut recruitment and growth. At year's end, the database consisted of nearly 145,000 observations of eight hydrographic variables (temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, nitrite, nitrate, phosphate, silicate and pH) measured within 15 m of the ocean bottom along the continental shelf from the Bering Strait to southern California. All of these records have been verified for accuracy. The principal additions this year were 35 years of Russian bottom-trawl temperature data and an update (through 1994) of National Oceanic Data Center hydrocasts. Several dozen data requests have been filled from outside agencies as word of this apparently unique resource has spread. A two-year proposal to expand this database with collected but undigitized data is presently being considered by NOAA's data rescue program, ESDIM (Environmental Service Data and Information Management).

FUTURE RESEARCH AND DIRECTION

The IPHC does not have the wherewithal to fund an independent full-scale fisheries oceanography research program. It does stand to benefit, however, from the significant amount of ongoing ecosystem/climate research currently being conducted in the north Pacific. The IPHC funded one research scientist and began establishing collaborative relationships with several of the agencies, organizations and initiatives engaged in research relevant to Pacific halibut biology. Plans for the next year include pursuing several lines of research.

· Continue research on nature of climate variability and, in particular, examine how ocean climate at depth differs from surface conditions.

· Analyze historical variations in halibut growth increment. We will update and extend an earlier study and look at temporal variation in halibut growth as recorded in their otoliths. This project was rescheduled from last year due to funding problems.

· Construct an environmental-based recruitment index for halibut. This is in collaboration with scientists at NOAA who are engaged in similar work for other groundfish species.

· Compare growth changes across different species of groundfish and attempt to construct an environmental growth model for halibut.

· Examine Pacific basin-wide patterns of zooplankton biomass variability. This is in collaboration with Japanese, Canadian, and U.S. scientists.