2015-03-18 Regular Meeting Kodiak Island Borough
Kodiak Fisheries Work Group
Wednesday, March 18, 2015, 8:30 a.m.
Borough Conference Room
CITY CHAIRING
The Fisheries Work Group is an informal meeting of representatives of the City of Kodiak and Kodiak Island Borough to
discuss issues with its Fisheries Analyst.Although additional items not listed on the agenda are sometimes discussed,no
formal action is taken.Items that require formal action are placed on a regular City Council and/or Borough Assembly
meeting agenda.Public comments at committee meetings are NOT considered part of the official record.Public
comments intended for the'official record'should be made at a regular City Council or Borough Assembly meeting.A
quorum of the Assembly and/or the City Council may be present at this meeting.
Page
1. PUBLIC COMMENTS (Limited to Three Minutes per Speaker)
2. AGENDA ITEMS
a. Representative Louise Stutes Report, Chair on Special
Committee on Fisheries
3 - 23 b. Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update
• BOF Pollock Work Group Meeting
• Legislative Meeting with Fish and Game Commissioner
• SWAMC Meeting
BOF Pollock Workgroup meeting Feb 2015.pdf
KFWG report on Cotten meeting Feb 26 2015.pdf
SWAMC Bycatch from the Community Perspective final.pdf
KFWG report on meeting February 2015 McCarty.pdf
c. GOA Trawl Bycatch Management action:
• Forum Status
24 - 25 d. Economic Analysis Update
Fisheries Tax Revenue data.pdf
e. Supporting Kodiak Marine Research Community and Facilities
26 - 43 f. Magnuson Stevens Act Reauthorization and Other Federal
Actions Update - Heather McCarty
Magnuson from Gilman.pdf
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS
4. WORK GROUP CLOSING COMMENTS
Page 1 of 46
5. SET NEXT MEETING DATE AND TIME
6. ADJOURNMENT
7. INFORMATIONAL MATERIALS
44 - 45 a. Board of Fish (BOF) and North Pacific Fishery Management
Council (NPFMC) scheduled meetings.
BOF 2015 & 2016 Tentative Meeting Dates.pdf
NPFMC 2015 & 2016 Meetings at a glance.pdf
46 b. Other Information
03132015 Comfish 2015 flyer.pdf
•
Page 2 of 46
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
BOF Pollock Workgroup meeting
February 18,2015
[Note: I was listening on teleconference and the sound was not great-I missed a lot
and apologize in advance for gaps in info and any misheard points.Those present in
person,please correct and add to this.]
Members of the Workgroup present from Kodiak fisheries and community: Pat
Branson,Julie Bonney,Paddy O'Donnell, Mitch Kilborn,Jason Chandler for Kurt
Waters, Darius Kasperzak,Duncan Fields,Matt Hegge.
Co-Chair Sue Jeffrey:
This is the third and final meeting of the workgroup; others were April and October
2014.The workgroup continues in its mission of gathering information about what
a state pollock fishery would look like.
Bonney:
Proposal 44 was tabled until the March BOF meeting,so assume this meeting will
result in a report to the BOF at that time. Branson asked about the expected
outconie of the meeting.Jeffrey:yes,the outcome is a written report to the BOF.
There is no expectation of a formal recommendation from the workgroup. Re input
by workgroup members,they can comment during the BOF meeting in March.
Matt Hegge(author) re Proposal 44:
Create a state waters pollock fishery,with 25%of the TAC. State and BOF need to be
part of decisions about the management restructure of the pollock fishery.He
supports SE and Western Gulf being part of the state fishery as well,although it is
not in Proposal 44.
Staff comments:
Mark(ADF&G staff):comments have not changed since original meetings. Proposal
limited to Central Gulf originally. No separate state managed groundfish fisheries
exist in these areas. State Cod fishery in PWS,and parallel fisheries in other areas.
No observer program;would need observers. Presented tables of catches and
locations.
Discussion about the ADF&G budget: Commercial Fisheries less than 8%down in
Governor's budget There maybe a 25%cut over three years,and the users will see
changes in programs.Bering Sea crab fisheries have observers who are paid through
federal funding pass through. Federal grants pay for observers in scallop fishery.
Page 3 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
Kodiak pollock seine test fishery:
Fishermen asked for a test fishery for pollock seine and jig fishery.The opportunity
was provided to seine for pollock,but no one participated. Users commented on the
conditions needed to have a successful pollock seine test fishery.ADF&G indicated
folks could still ask for a permit to test fish.
Kodiak jig test fishery:
46 vessels asked for a permit and 46 made landings.Average was 245 pounds of
pollock per landing for a total of 33,000 pounds. Currently jiggers can catch and
retain up to 20%of pollock in a directed cod fishery.
Kasperzak noted that jig fishermen are still trying to recover from 2013 fishery.
A discussion followed on regulatory issues with the pollock jig fishery.
Cook Inlet pollock seine test fishery:
ADF&G reported the results of the test fishery in December and January.Beaver
Nelson of Homer participated in the seine test fishery. He said the pollock turned
out to be of a size that was not exactly right for the market and for the existing
processing capability.
A discussion followed about the potential issues of Chinook bycatch in a seine
fishery,and the genetic makeup of the Chinook historically caught as bycatch in the
Gulf groundfish fisheries (largely not of GOA origin).
Ernie Weiss,AEB staff:
Weiss addressed the AEB situation as follows.There is only one processor in the
area,and the assumption is that having one processor affects the fish prices.
Generally,therefore,the AEB is against processor quota.There are no Western Gulf
fishermen on this workgroup. In general,the AEB supports a state-managed pollock
fishery in state waters.Fishermen are generally leary about pollock seine fishery.
Economic study commissioned by the AEB will be available in June.
Bycatch is a concern,but much of the salmon bycatch in the Gulf is not coming to
regional streams.Cost of 100%observers is a concern,so AEB supports electronic
monitoring. Limited entry commissioner got questions last fall about a limited entry
program for pollock-sounds like once a fishery is established it can be made
limited entry.
O'Donnell: how much of tax revenues come from pollock and how much of that
comes from Bering Sea?Weiss was not certain.
Page 4 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
Bonney:did you talk about limited entry for Pcod?Some participants have
petitioned for limited entry for Pcod,but they feel there is not justification for that.
Fields:
•
He asked that Chignik be included in any discussion of a state waters fishery. He also
mentioned that there needed to be a dialogue with NMFS regarding SSL closures.
Southeast GOA:
Co-chair John Jensen asked that it be included,as some in SE have asked for
consideration.There are differing views about pollock fishing in state waters in SE;
ALFA reportedly opposes such a fishery.
Update on PWS Pollock proposals:
The proposer of the PWS proposals spoke to the two proposals that have now died
through the BOF taking no action.ADF&G reviewed the pollock fishery in PWS,and
Bonney spoke to the voluntary cooperative management of the fishery.
State GHL Pollock Draft Management Plan:
Co-chairs indicated that this is a template for a plan,just for the GOA.There are
options provided that would be filled in by the BOF,if they decided to go ahead with
a state water pollock fishery.
Bonney asked whether the goal was to look at the costs and benefits of a state water
fishery,or to comment on the management plan.The Co-chairs replied that it was
just a starting point for the BOF to work from should they decide to go forward.
Bonney pointed out the limitations of using the template approach.
Someone(audience?) commented that this template is following the priorities of the
Walker/Mallott administration,one of which is increasing opportunities and access
in state fisheries.
Hegge said that if the BOF chooses to develop a fishery with a GHL,opportunities for
seine,jig and trawl gear types can be adjusted as needed,similar to the state waters
cod fishery.
John(?) said that the numbers are not allocations but opportunities.The fish not
caught by the jig fishery could go back to the other gear types.
Bonney: in the State cod fishery any fish not caught by one gear type rolls to another
gear type in the state fishery,but does not roll over to the federal cod fishery.
Page 5 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
Bonney said that a state waters pollock fishery may not adhere to the management
objectives in the Council arena of better managing bycatch.
Bonney:there is no way to allocate to just Alaska residents.Could create a new
fishery that was accessible to non-residents. Don't like the idea of creating a GHL
state fishery.
Glenn Haight(BOF ED): We might ask,what are the components missing in the
plan?The workgroup could look at the template on a regional basis,or a gear basis,
in terms of bycatch management,gear interactions,etc.
(?): Provisions in here are general. Board is not planning to develop its own plan,
but the proposals will come from the public.
Break for lunch until 1 pm.
It was decided to go through the template by region.Western Gulf,Chignik,South
Alaska Peninsula was discussed first,and Weiss said it seemed reasonable to have a
length restriction of 58 feet or under.There are some vessels in the parallel fishery
over 58 feet. Dersham said a parallel fishery is legally a state fishery,and the state
can impose rules different than those in the federal fishery.
It was commented that there should be rollover provisions inside state waters,to
allow harvest by other gear types as needed. It was also commented that there
should be a rollover provision back into the federal fishery.
Weiss commented that all gear types,for Western Gulf,should be left in.There were
no suggestions for allocation among the three gear types.
Bonney said there was a possible incentive to strand quota. (Could not hear the
discussion.)
Re plan section (e), Bonney said there was no reason to make the fishery less
efficient by limiting the amount of fish that can be landed at one time. Currently
there is a 300,000 pound limit in state regulation. Hegge said he put a trip limit of
150,000 pounds in his proposal for management purposes,not efficiency.
Re sections(g) and(h),the workgroup discussed how the state waters and federal
fisheries might interact.
Re section 0), 100%observer coverage would be required.
Section (k) is a placeholder. Fields said it would require additional consideration of
distribution of catches,keeping in mind pollock availability and potential depletion
of pollock in state waters. It was suggested that language be included to also
distribute bycatch.
Page 6 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
Carla said that if there was a separate state GHL fishery the federal pollock TAC
would be reduced by that amount,but the salmon bycatch number for state waters
fishery would be additive to the federal bycatch cap,not taken from it.
Dersham said that the Council is not going to stop working on a bycatch reduction
package,even if it does not look like the one we have now.
Fields said that there was no assurance that a bycatch reduction might occur,if the
genetic makeup of salmon bycatch is considered.
Re other considerations not yet included,the group had a long discussion regarding
the implications of SSL closures and Section 7 consultation potentially required if
fishery regulations change.
Re coordination with federal fisheries,several issues were discussed. For example,
there is a prohibition on bottom trawling in some state waters.
Cost/benefit discussion and closing comments:
Bonney presented the cons of a state water fishery from the point of view of
trawlers:
Inability to manage for bycatch
Inability to set right amount for GHL for pollock or bycatch annually,per table 44-1
Fractures the fisheries into two separate areas and conflicts with current parallel
fishery
Mirror image of federal system,and comes with a huge cost to State
Stranding of quota
Safety issues by forcing fishermen outside three miles
Another commenter(did not get name) expressed strong support for proposal#44.
O'Donnell:
Do not support a state water fishery.Continue test fisheries before allocating to jig
fishery. Don't like vessel size restriction or exclusive registration. Don't like losing
the ability to fish closer to shore. Restrictions are inefficient
Kasperzak:
Appreciate the administration trying to get more permits into people's hands. Good
to have smaller trawlers and seiners fishing for pollock Catch share program would
exclude folks from state waters.
Chandler:
Page 7 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
Don't see the benefit in allocating a state water trawl fishery to a group that doesn't
•
exist.
Bonney:
The idea of creating a small trawler(under 58 foot) fishery environment that is of a
certain efficiency and resident level is difficult.Creating a new fishery for new
participants to enter may affect other state fisheries. Will provide an incentive for
people to bring in more wide body 58 footers.
Ray:
If it is all about efficiency,you are shutting the door to the little guy.
Jig fisherman (?):
I'm the least efficient guy at the table. I will hire more people. Efficiency does not
necessarily equate to money-it is not perhaps the best way for the community to
manage fish. Fish may come in more slowly,but we may get more money for that
fish,and the money will be spread out more evenly.
Fields:
•
Given the hiatus in the Council process, October may be too soon to have your BOF
discussion. Perhaps wait until the Council acts in October.The concern grew out of a
federal catch share system that would inhibit new entrants. If the system does not
do that,it might be a different situation.
Bonney:
Every fishery is different. Sometimes low and slow is good. But pollock is a high
volume,low value fishery. From a trawl perspective,the fishery has to be efficient
enough to cover costs and provide return on an investment.Jig and seine-no
objection.Continue with Commissioner's permits and see how the fishery develops.
Nelson:
•
The 32,000 pounds caught in test fishery is not the upper limit of what the seine can
do in terms of catching pollock.
October meeting:
Jeffrey:will make the announcement of the October meeting date at March BOF
meeting March 17-20. On further consideration,the report from this pollock
working group will not be available in March. Proposal 44 must be taken up at the
Page 8 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
March meeting,although it could once again be tabled. Public testimony will be
taken at the beginning of the meeting the first day,March 17,and again during the
committee process later in the meeting.Written public testimony for the BOF is due
March 3,but comment less than 10 pages can be received at any time prior to the
discussion.
Page 9 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
Date: February 27,2015
To: Kodiak Fisheries Work Group
From: Heather McCarty,Fisheries Analyst
Subject: Report on meeting with ADF&G Commissioner Sam Cotten,February 26,2015
I was able to accompany Borough Assembly members Carol Austerman,Rebecca Skinner
and Larry LeDoux and lobbyist Mark Hickey to a meeting yesterday with Commissioner
Cotten.Our hope was to obtain a little more information on his thoughts regarding the Gulf
Trawl Bycatch Management(GTBM)action at the North Pacific Fishery Management
Council (NPFMC),and the BOF proposal to provide for a pollock fishery in State waters.
After the November election of Governor Walker,the Commissioner and the Council stalled
the GTBM action until October 2015,to allow for the State administration to review the
current proposal and suggest possible changes in direction.
The Commissioner indicated that the administration remained very interested in providing
a system to allow better control of bycatch,but said he was not certain the best way to do
that was to institute a catch share program that granted control of the fisheries resources to
historical harvesters in perpetuity.He said he was certainly not ready to make public any
new proposal,but that he had been looking at alternative ideas.One of those he mentioned
was somehow institutionalizing the current voluntary cooperative management system
• being used in the•pollock trawl fishery.He also talked about allocating individual bycatch
amounts to harvesters to arrive at a system of individual accountability for bycatch
performance.He did not give a lot of detail on either of these ideas,but we did have a brief
discussion on bycatch accountability and how it could be implemented.
Cotten emphasized that he was looking for discussion and feedback from the interested
public on new GTBM ideas.We provided the Commissioner with the most recent
City/Borough letter to the Council (October,2014),and mentioned that the letter,while
quite general,did support the GTBM action moving forward,and acknowledged that
cooperative management was a workable tool to manage bycatch.
Regarding the proposal to create a State waters pollock fishery with part of the Federal TAC,
Cotten said that if the Federal fishery was expected to become a catch share fishery he
would be in favor of also having a State waters fishery,which would presumably be open to
other participants. However(and this was less clear),he appeared to agree with comments
made by Duncan Fields at the most recent BOF Pollock Working Group meeting that the
planned BOF meeting on a State waters pollock fishery should be delayed until after the
Council becomes more certain about their intent regarding the GTBM action.(NOTE:This
should happen in early October,so if the BOF meeting were in late October,the timing
would seem to be workable.)
Assembly members also told the Commissioner how much the community would like to
host him,and have further discussions on these and other topics.He said he was trying to
get to Kodiak for ComFish.Also,he will be meeting again with Kodiak folks when they cone
to Juneau at the end of March.We mentioned that the KFWG is planning a facilitated
roundtable forum soon on the subject of GTBM,and he said he would be interested in
Page 10 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
attending.He also indicated that it would be difficult for him to spend much time out of
Juneau during the session.
The meeting was cordial and informative.In summary,Cotten was clear that he would
indeed prefer to move in a different direction on GTBM than what is in the current proposal,
and acknowledged that he knew that some stakeholders in the harvesting sector may not
agree with moving away from a catch share program for target species.
If any of the other attendees would like to fill in more details in this summary,please add to
this brief report.Thanks for inviting me to attend!
Page 11 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
•
Bycatch from the Community Perspective
SWAMC Conference, March 6, 2015
Thank you! I'm honored to be invited to speak at your conference.
I'm a consultant based in Juneau with a background in salmon fishing,aquaculture,
marketing and fish policy issues. I have been working for more than a decade on
bycatch issues and catch share programs,mostly at the North Pacific Council,and
largely from a community perspective. I have worked with Central Bering Sea
Fishermen's Association(CBSFA) for ten years.CBSFA is on St. Paul Island and is
one of the six Western Alaska Community Development Quota or CDQ entities.Also,
for the last year I have been working as a fisheries analyst jointly for the City of
Kodiak and the Kodiak Island Borough.
I need to make it clear that I am not representing either of those entities at this
conference,and the thoughts I am offering are just from me.
However, from firsthand experience with coastal communities in both the Bering
Sea and the Gulf of Alaska, I am going to talk today about the impact of bycatch on
those communities,which will include the potential effects of current and proposed
bycatch management strategies.And how each community has been interacting
with the industry and the regulatory process.
Communities have an important and statutory role to play in fisheries regulation.
The ten National Standards,as you have heard,include the requirement that the
investments,participation and continued health of communities be considered in
the development of regulatory programs.The State of Alaska and the federal
government are both working to keep fishery-dependent communities sustainable,
and resilient communities are a serious focus of the National Marine Fisheries
Service(NMFS).The sustainability of a community is closely related to the health of
the fisheries resources that surround it,and to the ability of community members to
access those resources.
As in most communities, neither St Paul nor Kodiak has a unanimous approach to
the issues of bycatch and bycatch management. In fact, Kodiak is justifiably famous
for having a wide range of opinions.So I will talk about the various concerns and
differing points of view that exist in both those places. It's important to recognize
that these attitudes reflect universal concerns shared by other communities,the
state and the nation.
It is the job of the North Pacific Council and other regulatory bodies to balance
competing interests,and to achieve the best use of the fisheries resources while
controlling bycatch of non-target species,principally salmon and halibut.
• Page 12 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
Let's look first at Kodiak
KODIAK
SLIDE OF KODIAK(This magical shot shows the original harbor in Kodiak)
Kodiak-based harvesters and processors work on salmon,halibut,pollock,cod,
flatfish and rockfish.Seiners,pot boats,longliners,jiggers and sport charter vessels
fill the harbors.
SLIDE/S OF HARBOR,BOATS(One shot shows the newer harbor on Near Island,and
one shot shows a trawler tied up at a processor dock)
The groundfish trawl industry is one of the major drivers of the economy of Kodiak,
through fish taxes to the community,processor and harvester employment and
through revenues to the support businesses.
Currently,the groundfish trawl fleet is being challenged by regulations put in place
by the Council and NMFS to reduce bycatch limits of salmon and halibut These
regulations,known as amendments to the fishery management plans in the Gulf,
were supported by salmon and halibut fishermen,by environmental groups and
community members-out of a concern for the resources. (But as you have heard)
hard caps on bycatch species lead to groundfish harvesters'fears that they will not
be able to catch all of their target species.Foregone groundfish harvest would cause
a reduction of fish across the docks in Kodiak,which in turn causes a concern for the
economic well-being of the community.
To help harvesters avoid bycatch,the Gulf rockfish fishery was recently rationalized
through a catch share program that requires cooperative management,and the
groundfish trawl industry continues to advocate for a similar catch share program
for pollock and cod,to allow cooperative management,to slow down the fishery and
avoid bycatch.
The industry points out that while the Council has imposed stricter bycatch
provisions on the GOA trawl industry,they have not changed the fishery
management structure to provide tools to accompany these new higher standards.
Industry has succeeded in working cooperatively in the Central Gulf through
voluntary catch share agreements and bycatch avoidance plans-but
representatives say these voluntary measures are very fragile-it only takes one
person to blow the plans out of the water by not signing the agreement,as happened
in Fall 2013. Also,they say,more vessels continue to enter. Historically the Central
Gulf had 25-30 trawl participants;now there are more than 40.
With a Chinook cap newly implemented in January the Western Gulf fleets are
struggling to control their salmon bycatch in the cod fishery.The new cap is 2,700
Page 13 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ..:
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
fish across all trawl cod and flatfish fisheries for both the Central and Western
Gulf. Once that limit is reached,the shoreside cod and flatfish fisheries close for the
year.The Western Gulf fleet has taken 810 salmon of the 2,700 cap (as of the time of
the presentation),and participants in both the Western and Central Gulf are
•
concerned. •
The GOA Trawl Bycatch Management(GTBM)package was started in October 2012
and proposes cooperative management with pollock,cod and bycatch (PSC)
allocations to the coops. In December 2014 the Council tabled the package until
October this year,so the State of Alaska can review the current proposal and
possibly advance different options.
What might those options be?There are a finite number of concepts.
Fisheries management to control and minimize bycatch,while also harvesting target
species at an optimum level,has two potential elements.
One is allocation through catch share or quota rights being granted to fishermen,
based on historical participation.The other is cooperative management to slow the
pace of fishing and facilitate bycatch avoidance. One question is: can you have
cooperative management without allocating target species through catch shares?
Another is: can you allocate just bycatch quotas to individuals and accomplish the
management goals?
Community members in both the Central and the Western Gulf are concerned with
potential community impacts of a catch share program,given the experience of past
catch share programs,and the possibility of quota migrating away from Alaska's
fishing communities through quota holders becoming absentee owners of the
resource.They have provided an option in the current proposal that would allow
Community Fishing Associations, or CFA's,to receive a certain percentage of initial
allocation of quota,to hold and manage for the benefit of the community.
Proponents of this option say that a CFA provides a mechanism to anchor quota in
the community,and provides a path for entry into the fishery so coastal
communities retain access to fisheries outside their doors,which is so important to
a sense of place and a sense of community.
Another aspect of the community control of quota is the question of--which
community or communities?The smaller rural communities in the Kodiak area also
have an interest in having community fishing associations.
Community involvement
The community of Kodiak has geared up for participation in the Council's
consideration of the GTBM action.The City and the Borough have passed resolutions
outlining their purposes and goals for consideration of fishery management issues
Page 14 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
of concern to the region.The Kodiak Fisheries Work Group(KFWG),with three
members from the City Council and three from the Borough Assembly,regularly
discusses Council actions,and helps provide information to the Kodiak public.The
FWG is also working on an economic study to help quantify the dependence of
Kodiak on the groundfish fisheries.The goal is to help determine what the effects
could be on the community of potential management changes in the Gulf.
Let's now turn to St Paul,to see how that community is affected by bycatch and
bycatch management
SAINT PAUL
SLIDE OF SAINT PAUL WITH THE NEW SMALL BOAT HARBOR
St.Paul is in the middle of the Bering Sea,the largest Aleut community in the world.
The inhabitants were originally brought from the Aleutians to the Pribilofs by the
Russians to harvest fur seals as slave labor.When the US bought Alaska from Russia,
the fur seal harvest continued under the direction of private industry and the US
government,with Pribilovians acting as indentured workers.When the US
government halted the harvest in 1985,it pledged to help the Pribilofs build a new
economy based on the fishery resources of the Bering Sea. Thirty years later,on St
Paul Island,that fisheries economy has become a reality.
SLIDE OF LARGE AND SMALL VESSELS IN THE SAINT PAUL HARBOR
The community development quota or CDQ program has been a major contributor
to the success of St Paul.CBSFA is financed by its share of the rationalized Bering
Sea pollock fishery,and by its investments in the Bering Sea crab and cod fisheries.
The benefits of the CDQ program to the community include large projects like
financing the small boat harbor,the fire station,the community crane,the rescue
vessel and the boat repair shop-as well as pre-school programs,elder care and
college scholarships.
The community of St Paul is directly dependent on two important fisheries that
support the economy.One is crab and the other is halibut.
The rationalized Bering Sea crab management program is a large industrial catch
share fishery. It was designed,in part,to guarantee the continued delivery of crab to
the one processing plant in St Paul.The raw fish tax from those deliveries is the
mainstay of the City's revenues and supports the operation of the municipality.
SLIDE OF THE RAW FISH TAX REVENUES IN ST. PAUL (This slide showed that the
tax revenues provide between 70 and 80%of the City budget)
Page 15 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
The halibut fishery is the lifeblood of St. Paul,employing more than a quarter of the
residents and providing family incomes.
SLIDE OF HALIBUT DEPENDENCY (This slide shows that the halibut harvest
provides between 30 and 48%of total local income.)
The halibut fishery is also a source of cultural identity,and contributes to the sense
of community purpose and self-sufficiency so essential to local residents.
Since 2011, however,the available halibut resource has been declining,with the
directed halibut fishery in the Central Bering Sea under the management of the IPHC
reduced by 78%while the bycatch,under Council management,remain consistently
high.This change affects 39 Western Alaska communities,as well as communities
downstream in the Gulf and even SE Alaska and beyond.
SLIDES OF THE HALIBUT SITUATION (One slide shows that between 2011 and 2014
the FCEY,what is available to directed fisheries,decreased from 3.7 million pounds
to 1.28 million pounds and ex-vessel value decreased by 69%. One slide contained
the two pie charts that show the switch in the category of halibut taken between
2002-2011 average and 2015,from the majority being directed fishery to the •
majority being bycatch.)
•
Community involvement
SLIDE OF HALIBUT FISHERMEN AND BOATS
The community of St. Paul has responded with an activist approach.At the urging of
the directed halibut fleets,the North Pacific Council has addressed this problem
with a proposal to reduce the halibut bycatch caps in the groundfish fisheries by up
to 50%.
The groundfish trawl sectors responsible for most of the bycatch (which include the
Amendment 80 fleet represented here by John Gauvin) are concerned that large
reductions in bycatch caps will affect their ability to harvest their target species.The
similarity to the concerns in the Gulf trawl fisheries is clear.The importance of the
halibut fishery to the communities of Western Alaska and beyond must be balanced
against the interests of the groundfish trawl fleets,and the communities that depend
on them.
•
Different,however, is the fact that almost all of the groundfish trawl fisheries in the
Bering Sea are already rationalized,and operate under a catch share system and
cooperative management. They thus have the tools to respond to reduced bycatch
caps,while the trawl fleets in the Gulf of Alaska do not.
Page 16 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
Further complicating the situation is the fact that many of the Western Alaska CDQ
groups have substantial investments in the groundfish fleets-so the balancing act is
internal to those groups,as well as a State and a Council responsibility.
In conclusion,while there are differences in scale between the Gulf and the Bering
Sea,the communities of Kodiak and St. Paul both have an interest in continuing the
successful prosecution of large groundfish fisheries-as well as in protecting the
bycatch species and the community benefits they provide.
•
Page 17 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
Kodiak Fisheries Work Group(KFWG)
City of Kodiak and Kodiak Island Borough
Meeting February 11,2015
Notes;
1.The written note provided by the Clerk at the beginning of each KFWG Agenda informs the public
that the work group is an"informal meeting of representatives of the City of Kodiak and the Kodiak
Island Borough to discuss issues with its Fisheries Analyst....Items that require formal action are
placed on a regular City Council and/or Borough Assembly meeting agenda."
2.The following summary of the meeting is provided by the Fisheries Analyst to help inform the
public about the main issues discussed,and is not intended to constitute formal minutes of the
meeting.Administrative Notes after each meeting are also provided by the City or Borough staff,and
included in the meeting packet for the following KFWG meeting,available on the City or Borough
website prior to that meeting.
Present in person were Co-Chairs Chris Lynch and John Whiddon,members Carol
Austerman and Larry LeDoux,and Borough Manager Bud Cassidy. Pat Branson was
unable to fly into Kodiak and called in for the meeting. Fishery Analyst Heather
McCarty also was unable to fly in,and participated by telephone.
State Representative Louise Stutes from Kodiak also called into the meeting.
Public comment
Steven Taufen said that Council testimony should be based on more hard data and
information. He encouraged more information to come from seafood companies,
especially in light of changing ownership.
Julie Bonney said that she is on the planning subcommittee for ComFish,and
recommended that the roundtable forum on Gulf Trawl Bycatch Management
mentioned at the last KFWG meeting should be on Wednesday April 1,before the
ComFish events Thursday, Friday and Saturday. She reported those three days are
full of activities.Commissioner Sam Cotten is coming and so is Sen. Murkowski.She
said plans call for a presentation on research by NPRB,and from the Kodiak
research facilities,and she does not want to see a conflict with the events.
Fishery Analyst's Report
McCarty gave her Analyst's report,attached,adding more detail.
McCarty also reported on attending a meeting which was not included in the written
report-the International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC) annual meeting in
Vancouver,Canada,January 26-30, 2015.At that meeting,the Commission reported
halibut stocks appear to be stabilizing in several regions,with some management
Page 18 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
areas experiencing small increases in biomass available for harvest.The approved
2015 catch limit for Area 3A was 10.1 million pounds,which is the combination of
commercial harvest and sport charter harvest.This is slightly higher than the catch
limit for 2014.
The Commission meeting also focused strongly on the bycatch of halibut in the
Bering Sea and the Gulf.
Representative Stutes reported that she was told that Lt.Governor Mallott will be
very engaged in fisheries issues,acting as an advisor to the Governor.
Sue Jeffrey,member of the Alaska Board of Fisheries from Kodiak,and Co-Chair of
the BOF Pollock Working Group, reported on the agenda for the Feb. 18 workgroup
meeting.The State's Draft Management Plan for pollock is available on the ADF&G
website.The BOF also plans an October meeting on state waters pollock --near
October 21 and 22.She said that the Feb. 18 meeting will likely be the last meeting
of the Working Group,which would then compile all the information and pass it on
to the full BOF.
McCarty asked whether the FWG wanted her to attend the BOF Pollock Working
Group meeting Feb. 18.The group felt that the members of the Kodiak community
who serve on the working group would be covering the meeting. Pat Branson will be
specifically representing the community at the meeting. (Note: McCarty listened to
the meeting via teleconference,and a report is attached.)
McCarty reported that she will be speaking on"Bycatch from the Community
Perspective"as part of a bycatch panel at the SWAMC meeting in Anchorage March
6.The other members of the panel will be Comm.Cotten,John Gauvin from
Amendment 80 fleet,Glenn Merrill from NMFS,Becca Robins-Gisclair, Bob Foy and a
representative from the Environmental Defense Fund.
McCarty said she would make clear at the beginning of her presentation that she
was NOT representing the community of Kodiak or any other client in her remarks.
Gulf Trawl Bycatch Management(GTBMI
Austerman said that as the FWG is unclear on where the proposal will go,it is
difficult to determine what they should discuss. McCarty said that we are able to
look at the more general issues common to catch share programs,and at the realm
of possible management actions.
LeDoux:We need to be able to tell policy makers what the effect of management
policies may be on the industry and the community.We need to hear from the
industry and others what those are,and communicate that clearly.
Page 19 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
Branson:we need that understanding,and need to listen to the industry and
stakeholders.
•
Whiddon:We are looking at the expenditures of the community in support of the
industry-and the need to engage.
Austerman:we need to narrow down the issues and the possible ways to address
them from a management perspective.
Whiddon: bring people to the table for a real discussion.We need to roll up our
sleeves and engage as soon as possible.
Lynch:We will compile a list of topics with the fisheries analyst,and put it out to the
public.They can say they want to have a seat at the table.
Whiddon: We have many of the involved people here in the room now-including
AGDB and Whitefish Trawlers and AMCC.We need to get going.
Members agreed that the meeting or workshop should have a roundtable format,
with a facilitator to control the meeting and allow everyone to participate.
Austerman:interested in a facilitated discussion not a series of presentations.
Switching formats is a good idea td move forward-let's see how it works.We need
to determine the right representation for the discussion.The Fisheries Analyst and
Co-chairs could narrow down the list before the next meeting.We will need Bios
from the persons representing the stakeholder groups.
LeDoux:we determine what questions and outcomes we want from the meetings.
We need to determine how we take the information from the meetings and make it
useful.We also need to have a place for individuals to come in and talk-fishermen
and the public.
The Fisheries Analyst will draft a key point summary to help determine what the
FWG wants to accomplish.
Whiddon: agree with individuals participating,but they need to discuss the issues at
hand.
Branson: it's important to have a list of issues and a facilitator to focus the
discussion.
ComFish Forum
Lynch: maybe we need to schedule the meeting we are talking about later than April.
Whiddon: is it reasonable to slot in such a meeting at ComFish?
•
Page 20 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
Lynch:believe it is reasonable to plan fora forum on Wednesday,April 1.
The FWG agreed by consensus on April 1.
(Note:since the meeting,it has come to the attention of the Co-chairs that many
small boat operators and fishermen will be participating in a SERVS exercise on
April 1.The Co-chairs have indicated that the next meeting of the FWG will include a
discussion on identifying a different date for the roundtable forum.)
Co-chairs and Fisheries Analyst will draft a list of issues,and send to other members
before the next meeting of the FWG.
)economic studyi
Cassidy: the Borough has been accumulating data available at the Borough level,so
we can determine what effects management decisions and policies may have on the
community.We have the three last years'severance tax data from each species,
which is confidential data individually,but usable in aggregated form.We are now
getting infrastructure costs for the Borough.
Lynch: there is a master plan at the City to gather similar data,so we need to find
out when we might have it available.
Magnuson Stevens Act reauthorization
Things are beginning to take shape in the new Congress,and reauthorization bills
are likely to be made public soon. It was agreed that the City and Borough
representatives in Washington DC would prepare a report on MSA,and other
relevant federal issues,for the next FWG meeting.
Kodiak Marine Research
McCarty reported that Chris Sannito has been hired as a temporary faculty member
at the KSMSC,but that it will be difficult to find further funding for replacement of
faculty members.Quentin Fong of KSMSC is scheduled to make a presentation to the
Borough Assembly Feb. 19.
Public comment
Taufen:
He reported that BSAI groundfish issues will be reflected in the Gulf. Northern
Economics gave a power point presentation at the Council meeting,and included a
slide of estimates for foregone revenue if halibut bycatch is reduced.Taufen also
Page 21 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
discussed pricing in the fishing industry,and said that the FWG should get involved
in the price inequities in Kodiak.
Paddy O'Donnell,trawl fisherman:
He said fleets are operating under A87(salmon bycatch reduction) this year,with
2700 Chinook salmon available to the trawl fisheries.They might be looking at a
bottom trawl closure in mid-April if the bycatch numbers continue as they are now.
We need to look at the impacts to the community if there is a closure. Pollock are not
aggregating because of warm water conditions-A season pollock may not show up.
More cod vessels will be working.The fleet is getting bycatch of hatchery fish that
are part of the problem,not part of the natural cycle of things-this is a major
concern.We all need to think about this moving forward.
Jason Chandler,trawl fisherman:
He said the whole process can be really frustrating when listening from the
sidelines. He is looking forward to the roundtable meeting where questions can be
asked and answered. Lots of issues are coming forward.The biggest tool (in a
rationalized fishery) is time-giving fishermen time to prosecute the fisheries.
100%observer coverage is not a tool for bycatch reduction.
Bonney:
She suggested a show and tell,with all the Council and Assembly members invited
to come to the processing plants and the trawlers.
Regarding bycatch,the fleet is dealing with three regulatory amendments,with a
voluntary coop structure. Lots of salmon are on the grounds,so the question is can
the fleet get the pollock out of the water.A87 is a Gulf-wide cap on salmon,and in
the Western Gulf the under 60-foot vessels have driven the salmon cap-they have
taken S00 Chinook so far,and could trigger the closure to shut down the A season
cod fishery for the year for the whole Gulf. If we don't get the tools we need to
manage bycatch,it could be serious. Right now on the waterfront it is very fragile.
Jeffrey:
She reported that the BOF has an October 21 and 22 work session,and it is a high
probability the pollock meeting will be Oct. 24 or 25. From Kodiak the Pollock
Working Group has had O'Donnell, Kasperzak, Bonney, Branson, Kilborn, Fields and
others. She also said moving forward with the roundtable forum will be great.
Closing comments:
Branson: She said Julie's invitation to visit plants and trawler was a good idea.
Page 22 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #2.b.
LeDoux: He said he would look forward to the invitation to visit plants and vessels.
He asked about the genetic makeup of the salmon bycatch,as he could not hear the
answer from Julie.(Note:question was answered.)
Lynch: Reported that the genetics report is on the Council website from the October
meeting.
Austerman: She said she was very interested in the forum,and believed the tour of
plants and vessels was a good idea.
Whiddon: He said sport fish regulations had just changed,allowing five halibut a
year and no fishing on Thursdays.He believes this will have a detrimental impact on
the community.The sport charter industry is not heard as much as it could be. He
also thinks it would be good to do an industry tour to see offloads,employees,
investments,etc.The industry is very important to the community-and is
approaching a cliff.
Lynch:She reported briefly on the rural leadership forum,saying that Duncan Fields
was there and encouraged villages to use the CQE program.Other villages said they
wanted something similar to the Karluk Lake fertilization.
She said she did not want subsequent meetings in the Library,as it was very hard to
hear.
The next FWG meeting was scheduled for March 18,at 8:30 am.
Page 23 of 46
Fisheries Analyst Reports and Update BOF Pollock Work Group ...
AGENDA ITEM #24.
Kodiak Island Borough
Revenue from Fisheries Taxes
Fiver year data,Fiscal years 2010-2014
Dept of Rev
Kodiak Island Fishery DCED •
Borough Resource Fishieries
Fiscal Year Severance Tax Landing Tax Business Tax
2010 1,287,693 1,339,575 • 68,855
2011 1,583,276 1,026,385 88,859
2012 1,892,755 1,405,360 60,000
2013 1,654,149 1,647,025 110,532
2014 1,715,496 1,546,308 97,679
2,000,000
1,800,000 �7
1,600,000 — 1
1,400,000 o Kodiak Island Borough
1,200,000 — — Severance Tax
1,000,000 — — D Dept of Rev Fishery
800,000 — — — Resource Landing Tax
600,000 — — o DCED Fishieries Business Tax
400,000 — —
200,000 — —1 —
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Page 24 of 46
Economic Analysis Update
acNDaITEmga
, m!!` !
; i(\i \ U(}! § ` ;;( §
` H \ \ ° /
/- ( /2 \ /\/
~ \Th 2/ \
/ , /7/ /)/
/[ // // §De :
§
. ;, !
/ /rc/ /E/
; 1 . . ,
! / \ // § (/( (
2y 9 §
| / r : ' }
Fi ` ! Mir. {}/. ;
\,,/ 9 g ; S/ \
) ` ` 4 ` �
! R r 4 T
` R e' /\/ / \/
!} . ! . . .
§ Ii )
.) / Q Q Q 9 Q[ \
Page 25,46
Economic Analysis Update
AGENDA ITEM #2.f.
Angela MacKenzie •
Subject: FW: Gilman re: Magnuson
Attachments: Magnuson--memo comparing House and Senate bills(March 9,2015).docx;
Magnuson--Marks side-by-side(March 2015).pdf
From: Bradley Gilman I mailto:mackerel @hsoblaw-dc.comt
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 12:29 PM
To: 'Heather McCarty'; Bud Cassidy; akniaziowski@city.kodiak.ak.us
Cc: Rick Marks; tarpon@hsoblaw-dc.com
Subject: fr: Gilman re: Magnuson
Heather: Rick Marks put together the attached side-by-side of the recently introduced House bill and what we believe
will be the first Senate bill(not yet introduced but announced by Senate staff as the starting point). We have updated
the analysis we sent you in August to reflect the current situation. The main points of the analysis are essentially the
same,however,the Senate bill is now silent on many issues(many of the provisions Senator Begich put in the bill will
likely not show up in the first Senate bill). The analysis and the side-by-side should be read together.
The issue has a long way to go.
Brad
•
Page 26 of 46
Magnuson Stevens Act Reauthorization and Other Federal Actio...
AGENDA ITEM #2.f.
Comparison of the House and Senate Magnuson-Stevens Act bills
March 9.2015
The House Committee on Natural Resources has a new Chairman. Representative Rob
Bishop(R-UT). Representative Bishop has asked Alaska's Representative Don Young to
manage the reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Representative Young has
introduced H.R. 1335,titled"Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in
Fisheries Management Act". This legislation is based on H.R.4742,a bill originally approved
by the House of Representatives on May 29,2014. Representative Young has made minor
changes to the legislation,but it is essentially the same bill as the one passed by the House last
year. We expect the Committee to mark this bill up some time in April.
The Senate Oceans,Atmosphere. Fisheries, and Coast Guard Subcommittee Chairman,
Senator Marco Rubio(R-FL). intends to introduce a reauthorization bill in the near future. We
believe it will be similar to the"Florida Fisheries Improvement Act'he introduced in September,
2014. We are using it as the comparison document for this initial analysis,even though it is
likely to change upon reintroduction in the 1146 Congress. We have produced the attached
side-by-side comparison of the two bills,and are willing to provide additional detail on specific
issues as necessary. The following is a brief analysis of the major issues before the Congress in
the Magnuson-Stevens Act("MSA")reauthorization process.
Fisheries Data
Fishery data collection and fishery stock assessments have been recurring themes of prior
MSA reauthorization. There is a widely held(and we believe accurate)perception within the
fishing communities that good fishery data leads to larger quotas,while poor data causes the
Regional Fishery Management Councils("Councils")to take precautions with the fishery
resource by reducing the quotas. Fishing groups have continued to press Congress to force
NOAA Fisheries to improve their data collection and increase fishery stock assessments
throughout the country in the hope of more robust harvests.
The House bill would require the Secretary of Commerce to develop five-year fishery
research/stock assessment plans for all fish stocks nationally. These plans would be required to
be revised every five years. The Senate bill would require a plan to be in place for all fish stocks
within five years of the date of enactment,with a deadline waiver that would provide NOAA
with an additional three years to develop these plans if necessary. NOAA Fisheries is already
anticipating these legal requirements to expand the range of stock assessments. The agency has
issued a draft document titled"Prioritizing Fish Stock Assessments. Once final,the document
will serve as the template for a future initiative to develop prioritized stock assessment plans.
There is a disconnect between increasingly stringent MSA conservation requirements and
lack of funding to resolve data-poor management scenarios. In developing the`Prioritizing
Fish Stock Assessments"protocol,NOAA Fisheries implicitly assumes a flat-line budget with
insufficient funding to survey all stocks adequately. The agency resolves this problem in its
Page 27 of 46
Magnuson Stevens Act Reauthorization and Other Federal Actio...
AGENDA ITEM #2.f.
protocol by postulating that the MSA will require fishing to be curtailed to protect the stocks in
data-poor fisheries. In other words,the protocol has been shaped to reflect NOAA's budget
realities and the stringent MSA conservation requirements.
The House bill pushes NOAA to improve data quality and expand stock assessments to
data-poor fisheries. The House bill mandates improvements for the Gulf of Mexico and South
Atlantic fisheries. The MSA does not, however,govern the appropriation of funds for fishery
programs. It imposes stringent conservation and management standards to prevent overfishing
and rebuild overfished stocks, but it cannot guarantee that adequate funding will be available to
provide the type of information the Councils need to manage fisheries at a robust level.
Performing stock assessments on all fisheries nationally within five years is not possible under
current funding levels. The current situation is transforming into a"shell game"where stock
assessment priorities are likely to change from year to year based on political pressure and/or
fisheries disasters. Fishermen have been calling for greater regulatory flexibility to adapt fish
stock rebuilding programs when the data quality is poor but the evidence on the water suggests
an improving stock(see below under"Conservation and Management").
The current MSA dialogue serves a useful purpose by continuing to highlight the fact that
data-poor fisheries result in the loss of income and employment. The House and Senate
proposals neither hurt nor help Alaskan fishing communities. The planning process would
provide a partially transparent forum for Alaska fishermen and fishing communities to
understand and participate in the development of a five-year plan and the Prioritization template
provides some insight into how decisions would be made. Pressure to improve data quality in
other regions of the country might convince the agency to dilute funding currently being
allocated to the North Pacific. This dynamic is unfolding with or without enactment of a new
MSA reauthorization bill.
Both bills seek to establish a special fund to receive money collected from fines,
penalties,and forfeitures. Money currently collected by the Federal Government goes into the
General Treasury. Under the two proposals,this money would become available to the
Secretary of Commerce without further appropriation for research and data programs. The
House bill would require the money to be spent on cooperative research and data-poor fisheries
within the region in which it was collected. The Senate bill would allow the Secretary of
Commerce to use the money for stock assessments,surveys,and data collection. These
proposals would provide a modest source of funding for improving data quality and expanding
stock assessments.
•
Observers
The 2006 amendments to the MSA increased conservation and management requirements
to prevent overfishing and rebuilding fish stocks. The use of observers by the Councils has
expanded to meet the new MSA conservation and management standards. The 2006 MSA
Amendments created the framework for the North Pacific Fisheries Observer Program.
Alaskan fishermen are assessed an ex-vessel tax on their harvest which is deposited into a
dedicated observer fund. The North Pacific Council and NOAA Fisheries set forth the
Page 28 of 46
Magnuson Stevens Act Reauthorization and Other Federal Actio...
AGENDA ITEM #2.f.
methodology for deploying observers based on the fund balance. This included expansion of
the observer program to the Alaskan small boat fleet.
A major problem is that human observers are costly. The Federal Government has
subsidized observer costs in all regions but Alaska.but the trend now is to try and shift these
costs back to the fishermen nationally. Observer funds generated in Alaska are insufficient to
cover both the larger vessels and expand into the various small boat fisheries. To complicate
matters further,many fishermen feel that their vessels are too small to accommodate an
additional body on board.
The advancement of electronic monitoring technology has risen to the forefront as a
potential tool in expanding observer coverage. While the Canadian Government has relied on
electronic monitoring techniques for years.NOAA has been slow to embrace the use of cameras
in our domestic fisheries. The House bill seeks to empower the Councils to be more
aggressive in the incorporation of electronic monitoring technology into fishery management
plans. The House bill stops short of mandating electronic monitoring as a replacement for
human observers. The intent of the House bill is to reduce costs and improve effectiveness for
the fishermen. The House bill would require the Secretary to issue guidance in the form of
criteria for developing future electronic monitoring requirements,and would allow the Councils
to develop pilot projects. The Senate bill is silent on the issue of electronic monitoring.
The MSA reauthorization discussions again reflect the ongoing dialogue between the
industry,the Administration,and the Congress over the cost and implementation of the observer
requirements. The West Coast appears to be more advanced in adopting the use of cameras.
There has been an ongoing pilot program for both trawl and fixed gear fishermen,and the Pacific
Council has issued Experimental Fishing Permits to test the efficacy of cameras on both trawl
and various fixed gear vessels. There appears to be more confusion in the North Pacific. A
number of fishing groups want NOAA to be more aggressive in implementing an electronic
monitoring regime as a replacement for human observers. The Alaska Fisheries Science
Center, in contrast,has defended the use of human observers as the best method of collecting
necessary biological information. The Science Center's priority at present is to develop
camera software to obtain certain types of biological data(species identification;size and weight.
etc.). Progress has been slow in the North Pacific region.
The House bill does not resolve this issue.and the Senate bill does not address it at all.
The House bill emphasizes the need to incorporate electronic monitoring into fishery
management regimes,but stop short of determining how the technology is to be used and
whether it is designed to complement or replace human observers. The fact that electronic
monitoring is a highlighted feature of the legislative debate will provide proponents of the
electronic monitoring with additional authority in seeking to influence policy in the future.but
the bill language itself does not resolve the issue.
Conservation and Management
The agency interpretation of the 2006 MSA Amendments created a rigid conservation
protocol to end overfishing and rebuild overfished stocks. The current regime provides very
Page 29 of 46
Magnuson Stevens Act Reauthorization and Other Federal Actio...
AGENDA ITEM #2.f.
little flexibility for the Councils to alter rebuilding timelines and to address situations where a
stock is"overfished"but the main reason for the stock decline is not related to fishing(e.g. ocean
climate changes).
The House proposes to correctly define"overfishing",and also eliminate the term
"overfished"and replace it with"depleted". In simple terms,the Secretary of Commerce
would determine whether a stock is"depleted". Once that determination is made,the Secretary
would then attempt to establish a cause or causes for the depleted status. Current MSA
terminology assigns"overfished"status to any struggling fish stock,even if fishing is not the
primary cause of the depleted state. The House bill seeks to distinguish between fishing-related
depletion and other environmental causes. Under the House approach,a depleted fishery might
avoid being shuttled into a rebuilding cycle if the cause for the depletion is not fishing related.
The Senate bill is silent on the issue.
The House provides additional flexibility to the Councils in crafting rebuilding programs
to reflect the"depleted"status of a specific stock,and replace the term"possible"with
"practicable"with respect to the rebuilding timeline. The ten-year rebuilding requirement is
eliminated, replaced with a timeline that reflects the time it would take for a fishery to rebuild if
no fishing were to occur,plus additional time reflecting the"Mean Generation Time"of the fish
stock in question("MGT"means the time represented from the birth of an individual fish to the
birth of the individual fish's first offspring). The House bill also provides some additional
flexibility in establishing quotas(termed"Annual Catch Limits"or"ACLs")by allowing for the
consideration of ecosystem or economic impacts and excepting certain species from the ACL
requirement because they are not depleted and are harvested incidentally as a non-target species.
The Senate bill provides some additional flexibility to allow alternative management
measures for recreational fisheries,and also adopts the MGT formula for going beyond the ten-
year rebuilding requirement. The Senate bill does,however,retain the ten year rebuilding
requirement. We believe this represents an ambiguity in the law that could potentially impede
the goal of providing the Councils with additional flexibility in managing rebuilding fish stocks
by allowing longer rebuilding timelines.
•
We don't view the proposed changes as being significant to the management of the
Alaska fisheries in the short term. The Senate bill provides some limited flexibility for short-
lived species(life cycles of 18 months or less)and for stocks whose spawning and recruitment
occur beyond the U.S. EEZ. This is not terribly significant for current Alaska fisheries. The
House bill provides the Secretary to set up"multispecies complex ACLs". It also defines
"ecosystem component species"as a non-target incidentally harvested species or a species
identified by the Council as not being depleted or likely to become depleted. The North Pacific
Council has been handling multispecies complex quotas for decades. Allowing some flexibility
to avoid ACLs for"ecosystem component species"might help the Council manage quirky
situations where a minor fish stock(Giant Grenadier)shows up in a multispecies complex and
the Council doesn't believe the fishing pressure warrants further regulation. Having regulatory
flexibility is a good thing for fishing communities because it is impossible to predict future
management scenarios. The short-term impacts on Alaskan communities would likely be
marginal under the current management scenario.
Page 30 of 46
Magnuson Stevens Act Reauthorization and Other Federal Actio...
AGENDA ITEM #2.f.
The proposed reconciliation of the National Environmental Policy Act("NEPA")and the
MSA process is the one area which could be immediately significant in the North Pacific. The
Councils currently are required by the MSA to engage in a rigorous evaluation of fishery
management plans and amendments. They must identify options,and evaluate the social,
economic and environmental impacts of each option. Public participation and stakeholder
involvement is woven into every step of the MSA process. Since the formation and amendment
of fishery management plans are federal actions.NEPA also applies to every decision of the
Councils and the Secretary of Commerce. There is a substantial analytical overlap between the
MSA and NEPA. Critics of this overlap argue that very little of a substantive nature is gained
from having this overlap; that applying both NEPA and the MSA standards expend precious
energy and resources unnecessarily:and that the overlap invites additional litigation. The
House bill would amend the MSA to require a"fishery impact statement"that would satisfy all
the requirements of NEPA and would need to be deemed"adequate"by the Secretary of
Commerce. The intent is to require integrated procedures and timelines to eliminate duplication.
The Senate is silent on the issue. The North Pacific Council has been aggressively pressing the
Congress to spell out the streamlining in law.
Allocation
The allocation provisions should have no impact on Alaskan communities except to the
extent they are precedential. We understand there is currently a move in the Gulf of Mexico with
respect to red snapper management that will be of concern to the North Pacific if handled .
improperly. Most of the specific allocation provisions in the House and Senate bills are focused
on the Gulf of Mexico and the South Atlantic(there are major ongoing sector and catch share
disputes in these two regions). There is an American Fisheries Act provision in the House bill
which would increase the harvest cap on Bering Sea pollock from 17.5%to 24%,but any
increase would be at the discretion of the North Pacific Council.
The House bill adds the phrase"subsistence fishing" into the MSA to make it clear that
the Governor may nominate individuals with knowledge and experience of subsistence fishing
for future seats on the North Pacific Council. The North Pacific Council is already focused on
the protection of subsistence fishing(e.g. salmon bycatch caps),and the Alaska Governor
already may nominate individuals with knowledge of subsistence fishing under current law. The
intent is to emphasize the importance of subsistence fishing,but this again reflects the current
situation in the North Pacific Council arena. The Senate bill clarifies that Tribes are eligible
for Fisheries Disaster Relief pursuant to MSA protocol.
The Senate bill includes a technical correction relating to the Alaskan salmon fisheries in
federal waters. The provision would allow for the State of Alaska to manage salmon in three
small areas of federal waters which are not included in the North Pacific Council's salmon
fishery management plan. This is intended to close a potential loophole for unregulated fishing
in those areas.
Page 31 of 46
Magnuson Stevens Act Reauthorization and Other Federal Actio...
AGENDA ITEM #2.f.
Consistency With Other Laws
The House bill seeks to resolve jurisdictional overlap between the MSA and three other
laws. The Senate bill is silent on these issues.
The bill clarifies that the MSA process is to be used in the regulation of fishing activity
inside federal Marine Sanctuaries,rather than the National Marine Sanctuaries Act. The bill
would also require the MSA process to be used in developing"reasonable and prudent measures"
to regulate fishing when such activity is implicated in an Endangered Species Act listing. The
current practice is for NOAA Fisheries to develop"reasonable and prudent measures"to mitigate
fishing impacts outside of the MSA on ESA-listed species. During consideration of the Steller
Sea Lion listings,NOAA consulted with the North Pacific Council but developed the mitigation
measures under its own ESA authority. The proposed change would put the development
authority into the hands of the Council. Finally,the bill would require the MSA process be
used in regulating fishing within National Marine Monuments established unilaterally by the
President pursuant to the Antiquities Act. Both President Bush and President Obama have used
Antiquities Act authority to establish large segments of the marine environment as National
Monuments,with fishing activity either eliminated entirely or severely restricted. The Councils
would be empowered by the House bill to tailor the regulation of fishing in new National Marine
Monuments.
We believe all three of these proposed changes provide coastal communities with some
additional protection against the arbitrary exercise of administrative power.
Capital Construction Fund
The Capital Construction Fund("CCF")currently provides a mechanism for fishermen to
defer income from federal taxation through deposits into a CCF account. Funds can be used to
replace existing fishing vessels without tax penalty. The Senate bill would dramatically expand
the CCF to include investments for the replacement,acquisition,or construction of fishing
vessels. Companies owning shore-based facilities would also be able to use the CCF for
fisheries or aquaculture facilities, including construction costs, land improvements and
acquisition,and equipment. The House bill is silent on the issue.
This issue is likely being driven by the Gulf of Mexico menhaden fishery,but it would
apply Alaskan fishermen and processors as well. We believe that the proposal would require
approval of the Senate Finance Committee and House Ways and Means Committee, including a
cost estimate and a corresponding budget offset amount. It will be very difficult for this
provision to be enacted in the current budget climate.
Page 32 of 46
Magnuson Stevens Act Reauthorization and Other Federal Actio... •
0j
ca
J
0
0
cn
MAGNUSON STEVENS FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT ACT
0
A REAUTHORIZATION EFFORTS •
1't Session of the 114th Congress
0
A side-by-side comparison of the major elements of House and Senate MSFCMA reform legislation for the 1"Session
7 of the 114th Congress is provided here by ROMEA.The House legislative effort is being initiated by Alaska Rep.Don
G.) Young(supported by House Natural Resources Full Committee Chairman.Rob Bishop;UT-3)with the introduction of
O H.R.1335—"The Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act".This
legislation is based on H.R.4742,a bill originally approved by the Natural Resources Committee and favorably reported
nto the House on May 29,2014.For purposes of H.R. 1335,Rep.Young and his staff made slight changes to H.R.4742
which are reflected in this document.
m
n The Senate Commerce Subcommittee staff indicated they intend to use Florida Sen.Marco Rubio's "Florida Fisheries
° Improvement Act"as the starting point for the MSA reauthorization effort in the Senate(in place of the 113th Congress
"STAFF WORKING DRAFT VERSION N2"which was introduced by Alaska Sen.Mark Begich in December,2014).
NOTE""In an effort to provide ROMEA Clients with the most helpful MSA comparison document--we compare H.R.
1335 with the provisions contained in Chairman Rubio's existing legislative offering.Please be advised that the Senate
bill may change before formal reintroduction in the 114th Congress.
Prepared by:Rick Marks,ROMEA
Date:March 6,2015
on
m
to
w o
co 1 n
m
Permission for reproduction d use required:Rick Marks,remraarseblaw-dc.com ROMEA,March 6,2015
at
N
cu
cu
N
CD0
rn
H.R.1335"Strengthening Fishing Communities and "Florida Fisheries Improvement Act";FL
`n Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act";AK Senator/Subcommittee Chairman Marco Rubio
Rep.Don Young with Reps.Bishop/Byrne/Radewagen (Version eas14277 from 113th Congress,2"4 Session;
(introduced 3/5/2015) initially introduced 9/16/2014)
(New SEC.23)SUBSISTENCE FISHING Tribes are afforded same status as States with respect to a federal
Tribal and Subsistence Issues:adds comprehensive definition of fishery disaster request(See"FISHERIES DISASTER RELIEF"provision
H "subsistence fishing";and consideration of subsistence experience in"Additional Provisions"at the end of this side...)
as appropriate for RFMC nominations,esp.in Alaska
SEC 4.FLEXIBILITY IN REBUILDING FISH STOCKS Regarding rebuilding timelines:stocks must still be rebuilt in as short
ru
Replaces"possible with practicable";replaces 10 year rebuilding a time period as possible taking into consideration status and biology
a. requirement with time="no fishing+1MGT"for:international of overfished stocks,international treaty recommendations,and
stocks under a formal&informal trans-boundary agreements; interactions of stock with the marine environment;the RFMCs must
CD issues beyond RFMC control or when rebuilding cannot be specify a time period that does not exceed the sum of the minimum
m effective by only limiting fishing;mixed stock allowance provided time required to rebuild and affected stock+1MGT of the affected
the weak stock does not become depleted;unusual events where stock—OR—10 years considering environmental impacts,if based on
rebuilding may negatively impact communities best scientific information available
REBUILDING PLANS:can now take into account environmental Provides the RFMC SSC's the ability to use alternative management
factors,predator/prey relationships;must include a schedule to measures in recreational fisheries and for recreational components of
review FMP targets and progress;can now use alternative harvest mixed-use fisheries(e.g.extraction rates,F-rates,harvest control
control rules and F-rates;rebuilding plan may be terminated if it is rules)--if consistent with MSA requirements
determined the depleted status was in error;emergency
rule/interim measure period increased to 1-yr(from 180 days)
with an option to extend for an additional 1-yr period
SEC.5—MODIFICATIONS TO THE ANNUAL CATCH LIMIT(ACL) Clarifies that ACL requirements will not apply for:short-lived species
REQUIREMENT (18-mos or less);or to a fishery/species to which all spawning and
RFMCs may consider ecosystem changes and economic need of recruitment occurs beyond state waters and the EEZ if not overfished
fishing communities when setting ACLs;new ACL exceptions—
ecosystem component species;a species with a life cycle of
approx.1-yr or where more than half of a single year class will n
-0 complete their life cycle in less than 18-mos and fishing mortality
has little impact on the stock.RFMCs may also consider to
co
n international agreements,informal transboundary agreements
n2
en
Permission for reproduction K use required:Rick Marks,rem w'hseblaw-dc.com ROMEA,March 6,2015
C)
m
0
a
J
N
CI H.R.1335"Strengthening Fishing Communities and "Florida Fisheries Improvement Act";FL
to
Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act";AK Senator/Subcommittee Chairman Marco Rubio
Rep.Don Young with Reps.Bishop/Byrne/Radewagen (Version eas14277 from 113th Congress,2ntl Session;
m (introduced 3/5/2015) initially introduced 9/16/2014)
and where no agreement exists but activities outside the EEZ
o' hinder conservation efforts for species whose recruitment,
F distribution,life history or fishing activities are transboundary
MULTISPECIES COMPLEX Acts:can be set for a stock complex and
J for up to 3 years
Defines"Ecosystem Component Species"as a non-target
n incidentally harvested species—or—such species identified by a
RFMC that is not depleted or likely to become depleted in the
P N P
absence of management measures
- SEC 6.DISTINQUISHING BETWEEN OVERFISHED AND DEPLETED
Clarifies the definition of"overfishing"at(34)by removing the
B term overfishedfrom the existing definition
Defines"depleted"as a stock or complex whose biomass has
declined below a level that threatens to produce MSY;and
replaces the term"averfishee with the term"depleted"each
place it appears
Requires Secretary to distinguish(in its Annual Report)between
stocks that are depleted(or approaching that condition)due to
fishing and those that are depleted due to factors other than
fishing;Secretary must also state for each identified fishery
whether they are the target of directed fishing
SEC 7.TRANSPARENCY AND PUBLIC PROCESS RFMC SSC's required to be transparent and provide for public
RFMC SSCS required to be transparent and provide for public participation; provides the SSC's the ability to use alternative
participation;RFMCs/CCC must make available audio,webcast,or management measures in recreational fisheries and for recreational n
live cast of meetings(to the extent practicable);and Secretary components of mixed-use fisheries(e.g.extraction rates,F-rates,
o must archive RFMC and SSC meetings,video,transcripts harvest control rules)--if consistent with MSA requirements;RFMCs m
where practicable,shall make available a video or audio webcast of
N
° 3
Co
Permission for reproduction&use required'Rick Marks,rem4ihseblaw-dc.com ROMEA,March 6,2015 m
It
03
J
CO
c
0
O
J
Co
m
H.R.1335"Strengthening Fishing Communities and "Florida Fisheries Improvement Act";FL
Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act";AK Senator Subcommittee Chairman Marco Rubio
9 Y� 9 Senator/
Subcommittee
Don Young with Reps.Bishop/Byrne/Radewagen (Version eas14277 from 113th Congress,2nd Session;
(introduced 3/5/2015) initially introduced 9/16/2014)
RFMC and SSC meetings who 30 days
PAGE 11-16:NEPA STREAMLINING WITH NEW FISHERY IMPACT
STATEMENT AND ADEQUACY DETERMINATION:for any
IMP/amendment which details social and economic impacts,
J cumulative impacts,participants affected,safety,and must be
z made available 14 days prior to a RFMC meeting;this Section is
intended to serve as a"FISH NEPA"
SEC.8 LIMITATION ON FUTURE CATCH SHARE PROGRAMS
The term"catch share"is comprehensively defined;any future
m catch share program in the GOMEX/NE/SA/MID is required to
a have a fully-informed majority vote referendum by fishermen with
•
m
'm landings in 3 of 5 recent years(hardship provided);in the COMEX
multispecies fishery,any active permit holder with landings in past
• 5 years can vote;in the NE region,crewmemhers who derive a
significant portion of their livelihood from such fishing can •
participate in the referendum;Sec is required to report annually
to Congress on how fees are used to manage every existing catch
share program
(New SEC.24)INTER-SECTOR TRADING OF COMMERCIAL CATCH
SHARE ALLOCATIONS IN THE GOMEX
Any commercial catch share allocation in the GOMEX may only be
traded by sale or lease for use in the same commercial fishing
sector •
n
U 0
co
SEC 10.DATA COLLECTION AND CONFIDENTIALITY AND • m
ELECTRONIC MONITORING Z
en
0 to
4
Permission for reproduction d use required:Rick Marks,rem nihsghlaw-dc.com,ROMEA,March 6,2015
03
m
m
C
0
O
CO
to
m
H.R.1335"Strengthening Fishing Communities and "Florida Fisheries Improvement Act";FL
Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act";AK Senator/Subcommittee Chairman Marco Rubio
Rep.Don Young with Reps.Bishop/Byrne/Radewagen (Version eas14277 from 113'"Congress,2na Session;
m (introduced 3/5/2015) initially introduced 9/16/2014)
Secretary shall issue national EM regulations&criteria w/in 12-
a months of data of Act;RFMCs may develop EM for their fisheries;
r prior to final regulations,RFMCs may also do EM pilot projects
o (NOTE"'this section is comprehensive...suggest interested ponies
read this section in its entirety)
o DATA CONFIDENTIALITY: defines confidential information
comprehensively to include trade secrets,proprietary
information,observer information,and information of a
competitive business nature;specifies and reinforces how
m information is to be protected,and in what specific instances it
can be shared
USE OF ASSET FORFEITURE FUND:funds can be'used for data Expands Sec.311(e)to allow fines,penalties and forfeitures under
collection in the region where collected;incl.for cooperative the Act to be used for the costs of stock assessments,surveys and
research and data poor-species surveys and assessments;includes data collection in fisheries managed under the Act
use of State personnel and resources
DATA-POOR STOCKS:data-poor stocks are defined;RFMCS must
identify these stocks&prioritize them
SEC 11.COOPERATIVE RESEARCH&MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FISHERIES RESEARCH/STOCK ASSESSMENT PLAN:Fisheries Research--
Within lyr the Secretary must publish a plan detailing prioritized Requires the Secretary to publish on same schedule as Sec 404(b)
research needs and projects to meet them,and a summary of timeline in the FR a plan to conduct stock assessments for all stocks
completed projects;to be revised every 5-yrs of fish for which there is an FMP within S-yrs with an allowance for a
3-yr delay.Secretary can identify outside sources of data that may
reduce uncertainty
Requires the Secretary to publish a detailed plan in the FR for
am m conducting these assessments but provides a"waiver'to the stock m
assessment requirement if the Secretary determines the assessment
° 5
a
Permission for reproduction&use required:Rick Marks,remr.hseblaw-dc.com ROMFA,March 6,2015
Fn
N
cm
N
0
co
N
H.R.1335"Strengthening Fishing Communities and "Florida Fisheries Improvement Act";FL
N
Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act";AK Senator/Subcommittee Chairman Marco Rubio
Rep.Don Young with Reps.Bishop/Byrne/Radewagen (Version eas14277 from 113th Congress,2nd Session;
(introduced 3/5/2015) initially introduced 9/16/2014)
is not necessary
0
IMPROVED DATA COLLECTION:Amends Sec 404 to require the
Secretary in 1-yr to report to Congress on facilitation of greater
z incorporation of data,analysis,assessments,and surveys from non-
governmental entities into fisheries management to help reduce
uncertainty and also establish a registry of info providers
SEC 12.COUNCIL JURISDICTION FOR OVERLAPPING FISHERIES For the SAFMC--Governors are required to submit equal number of
In the Mid-Atlantic region:the MAFMC&NEFMC are provided commercial and recreational RFMC nominees(adds SAFMC to current
m with reciprocal liaison voting rights GOMEX requirement in Section 302)
SEC 13.GOMEX FISHERIES COOPERATIVE RESEARCH AND RED GULF OF MEXICO RED SNAPPER CATCH LIMITS:Section 407(16 U.S.C.
F33 SNAPPER MANAGEMENT 1883)is amended by striking the entire subsection below:
Secretary/Gulf States/GMFMC/sport fishing sector are required to
develop a real-time reporting system for GOMEX red snapper 5(d)CATCH LIMITS.—Any fishery management plan,plan
fishery;prioritize 5-1(funds for this purpose amendment,or regulation submitted by the Gulf Council for the red
snapper fishery after the date of enactment of the
Sustainable Fisheries Act shall contain conservation and management
measures that—
(1)establish separate quotas for recreational fishing(which,for the
purposes of this subsection shall include charter fishing)and
commercial fishing that,when reached,result in a prohibition on the
retention of fish caught during recreational fishing and commercial
fishing,respectively,for the remainder of the fishing year;and
(2)ensure that such quotas reflect allocations among such sectors
and do not reflect any harvest in excess of such allocations.
GOMEX/SA COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM:Gulf m
to States/GSMFC/ASMFC/SAFMC/GMFMC/commercial/charter/sport
m O
cn
6 n
rn
Permission for reproduction use required:Rick Marks,rem mhsgblaw-de eom,ROMHA,March 6,2015 m
N
0
m
r=
0
0
C'
y
H.R.1335"Strengthening Fishing Communities and "Florida Fisheries Improvement Act";FL
Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act";AK Senator/Subcommittee Chairman Marco Rubio
Rep.Don Young with Reps.Bishop/Byrne/Radewagen (Version eas14277 from 113"'Congress,2n°Session;
w
(introduced 3/5/2015) initially introduced 9/16/2014)
sectors required to develop and implement a coop research
program with priority on data-poor stocks using SK funds
GOMEX/SA SURVEYS AND ASSESSMENTS: Secretary must develop
0 a schedule of prioritized stock surveys and assessments for S-yr
period and direct SERO to complete the tasks,ensuring that each
prioritized stock is surveyed at least every 5-yrs;fisheries
o. information made available under this Act must be incorporated
into assessments as soon as possible
GOMEX&RED SNAPPER STATE MANAGEMENT BOUNDARIES:for GOMEX/SA ALLOCATION REVIEW:At least once every 5 years the
m the purposes of managing the recreational red snapper sector in GMFMC&SAFMC shall review any allocation of fishery privileges
the Gulf,the seaward boundary of each Gulf State is 9 miles among commercial,recreational,and charter components"except
m
m seaward from the baseline from which the territorial sea is the councils may delay action for not more than 3 additional one year
measured periods if necessary'
0
0
CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER LAWS:in the case of conflict with
NMSA and Antiquities Act --the MSA will control;when it is
determined that fishing restrictions are necessary pursuant to ESA
to manage fisheries,any measures must be
developed/implemented via MSA process
SEC.16 NORTH PACIFIC PROVISIONS
AFA is amended such that no entity in the Pollock fishery may
harvest in excess of the maximum percentage=24%of the Pollock
•
available in the directed fishery
0 n
m C)
o SEC.14 NORTH PACIFIC CLARIFICATION m
m
Removes data citation that has limited the NPFMCs ability to
to
0
7
Permission for reproduction&use required:Rick Marks,remru.hssblaw-dc.com ROXIFA,March 6,201
csa
J
N
O
0
0)
co
N
H.R.1335"Strengthening Fishing Communities and "Florida Fisheries Improvement Act";FL
Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act";AK Senator/Subcommittee Chairman Marco Rubio
Rep.Don Young with Reps.Bishop/Byrne/Radewagen (Version eas14277 from 113"Congress,2nd Session;
CD (introduced 3/5/2015) initially introduced 9/16/2014)
m
manage salmon fishery
Sec 17.RECREATIONAL FISHING DATA
ry Secretary shall develop partnerships with States to develop best
ED
practices and guidance for collection of recreational fishing data.
Secretary shall report on a biennial basis on the accuracy of the
z registry and state programs and data collection programs and
creation/results of federal grants-to-states program
O
STUDY OF RECREATIONAL FISHERIES DATA:within 60-days of
CD
passage of the Act the Secretary shall enter into an agreement
with the National Research Council of the National Academy of
Sciences to study methods to improve recreational survey
methods,limitations of MRIP;report is due in 1-yr
SEC 18.STOCK ASSESSMENTS USED FOR FISHERIES MANAGED
UNDER THE GOMEX REEF FISH MANAGEMENT PLAN
The GSMFC shall conduct all stock assessments to be used to
manage reef fish in the GOMEX.Assessment shall incorporate
surveys from university researchers;and also from private assets
to conduct surveys.Any surveys conducted after passage of this
Act shall incorporate relevant information from natural and
artificial reefs. Each assessment shall allow for constituent and
stakeholder input and provide for transparency of all data;and
require independent review
- SEC.19 ESTIMATION OF COST OF RECOVERY FROM FISHERIES •• ADDITIONAL PROVISONS'n
o RESOURCE m
°o The Secretary shall publish the estimated cost of recovery from a CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION FUND:Pages 7-16(nearly 1/3`d of the entire
n 8
Permission for reproduction&use required:Rick Marks,rem alhseblaw-dc.com ROMEA,March 6,2015 m
KJ
N
a,
COC
N
O
cn
N.R.1335"Strengthening Fishing Communities and "Florida Fisheries Improvement Act";FL
Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act";AK Senator Subcommittee Chairman Marco Rubio
9 Y� 9 Senator/
Subcommittee
Don Young with Reps.Bishop/Byrne/Radewagen (Version eas14277 from 113th Congress,2n°Session;
(introduced 3/5/2015) initially introduced 9/16/2014)
$ fishery resource disaster no later than 30 days after the Secretary bill)are dedicated to reforming the Capital Construction Fund(CCF)
o' makes a formal determination at U.S.C.Title 46.The CCF allows U.S.-owned companies to acquire
fishing vessels or improve a current vessel through deferment of
SEC.20 DEADLINE FOR ACTION ON FISHERY DISASTER REQUEST BY federal taxes on activities for property in a CCF account. The
A GOVERNOR proposed changes include but are not limited to:adding'qualified
The Secretary must decide on a fishery disaster request within 90- fishery facilities',including structure,appurtenance,land,equipment
days after receiving an estimate of the economic impacts from the and vessels,and for processing and aquaculture purposes;and adding
entity making the request acquisition,construction and reconstruction of a fishery facility and
CD also replacement,acquisition or reconstruction of eligible vessels;
- SEC.21 PROHIBITION ON CONSIDERING RED SNAPPER KILLED amends/expands qualified tax withdrawal provisions (NOTE'"this
DURING REMOVAL OF OIL RIGS section is comprehensive...suggest interested parties read this section
m Any GOMEX red snapper fishery killed in rig removal shall not be in its entirety)
counted against the total catch
NATIONAL ALLOCATION STUDY IN MIXED-USE FISHERIES:Not later
SEC.22 PROHIBITION ON CONSIDERING FISH SEIZED FROM than 60 day after enactment,the Secretary shall enter into an
FOREIGN FISHING agreement with the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a
Any fish seized from a foreign fishing vessel shall not be National study to provide guidance to RFMCS on criteria that could be
considered when setting the total catch for that species used for allocating fishing privileges incl.consideration of the
conservation and socioeconomic benefits of commercial,recreational
and charter components of fishery;identify sources of information
that could reasonably support the use of such criteria in allocation
decisions;issue a National report to Congress not later than 1-yr after
enactment
n
•
y 9 n
cn
Permission for reproduction B Marks, r
use required:Rick Mar ,rem .hseblaw-dc.com ROMEA,March 6,2015 m
to
N
to
N
O
co
rD
co
H.R.1335"Strengthening Fishing Communities and "Florida Fisheries Improvement Act";FL
Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act";AK Senator/Subcommittee Chairman Marco Rubio
Rep.Don Young with Reps.Bishop/Byrne/Radewagen (Version eas14277 from 113th Congress,2n°Session;
m (introduced 3/5/2015) initially introduced 9/16/2014)
m
FISHERIES DISASTER RELIEF:Secretary must decide on a fishery
disaster request within 90-days after receiving an estimate of the
o'
economic impacts from the entity making the request;and Tribes are
afforded consideration under this section equivalent to States and
0. fishing communities
•
O STUDY OF ALLOCATION IN MIXED USE FISHERIES:Directs the NAS,in
(1, coordination with the NOAA,to agree w/in 60 days to conduct a
m study to determine which variables,including consideration of
conservation and socioeconomic benefits of each sector in a fishery,
m
d should be considered by the RFMCs in allocating fishing privileges in
an FMP;and which sources should be used for such variables.NAS
o.0 would have 1-yr to report to Congress
S-K FUNDS:Provides a budget point of order that can be raised during
Congressional consideration of an appropriations bill that authorizes
the transfer of S-K funds to NOM
m APPROPRIATIONS AUTHORIZED THROUGH 2019 m
a Z
END— END--
cn 0
m
Permission for reproduction&use required:Rick Marks,rem<nhsehlaw-dc.com,ROMHA,March 6,201
N
AGENDA ITEM#2.f.
s•
go-
7a"
E
LI
R
.. m
01
L
E
E
ro
0
V_
8
6
U
W
CO
Page 43 of 46
Magnuson Stevens Act Reauthorization and Other Federal Actio...
•
AGENDA ITEM #7.a.
•
PuSe
♦��^mot
ADF&G a Boards Support Section
,1M1µ ry,r mvw boards.adlg.state,ak,us
ALASKA BOARD OF FISHERIES
2015/2016 Cycle
Tentative Meeting Schedule
Bristol Bay Finfish;Arctic,Yukon,and Kuskokwim Finfish;Alaska Peninsula,Aleutian
Island,and Chignik Finfish;Statewide Finfish and Supplemental Issues
PROPOSAL DEADLINE: 5:00 p.m.Friday, April 10,2015
Meeting Dates Topics , Location Comment Deadline
October 21-22,2015 Work Session Anchorage Oct. 1,2015
[2 days] ACRs,cycle organization, Egan Convention
Stocks of Concern Center
Nov.30-Dec.7,2015 Bristol Bay Finfish Anchorage Nov. 19,2015
[8 days] Egan Convention
Center
January 12-17,2016 Arctic/Yukon/Kuskokwim Fairbanks Dec.28,2015
[6 days] Finfish Alpine Lodge
Feb.23-Mar.3,2016 Alaska Peninsula/ Anchorage Feb.8,2016
[10 days] Aleutian Island 1 Chignik Sheraton Hotel
Finfish
March 8-12,2016 Statewide Finfish and Anchorage February 18,2016
[5 days] Supplemental Issues Sheraton Hotel
Total Meeting Days: 31
Agenda Change Request Deadline: August 21,2015 [60 days prior to fall worksession]
Amended November 20/4
Page 44 of 46
Board of Fish (BOF) and North Pacific Fishery Management Cou...
AGENDA ITEM #7.a.
Council Meetings At A Glance-North Pacific Fishery Management Council Page I of 4
Contact Us r Seach This Sire..
Home About Membership Meetings Fisheries Current Issues
Bycatch Controls Publications
Council Meetings At A Glance
You are here:Home•Council Meetings At A 6!ance
Audio for all meetings is available HERE.Use the time log posted with the audio files to help navigate to the
correct file.More information on accessing audio recordings of Council meetings is available below.
•
• Three Meeting Outlook
• Navigating the Process:Overview
2015
February 2-10,2015/Seattle,Washington
April 6-14,2015/Anchorage,AK
June 1-9,2015/Sitka,AK
October 5-13,2015/Anchorage,AK
December 7-15,2015 /Anchorage,AK
2016
February 1-9,2016/Portland,OR
April 4.12,2016/Anchorage,AK
June_,2016/TBA On Alaska)
October 3-11,2016/Anchorage,AK
December 5-13,2016 /Anchorage,AK
The Council meets five times each year,usually in February,April,June,October and December,with three of
the meetings held in Anchorage,one in a fishing community in Alaska and one either in Portland or Seattle.
Most Council meetings take seven days,with the SSC and AP usually following the same agenda and meeting
one and two days earlier,respectively.
http:/hvww.npfmc.org/at-a-glance! 1/8/2015
Page 45 of 46
Board of Fish (BOF) and North Pacific Fishery Management Cou...
AGENDA ITEM #7.b.
.
- - - „
•
. .
, .
.:—..._...... ..„ - , .
. , Comns laska ,,
,. . ,
,, , _ r7---7- 15--^tyTh”":7•7Qt.:::-
•
- • 'cc ::: - i ° „::-; A,..-\ • 4 .--1 •- 4-11-: •
•• 4 •f-''' .7'.: •-tt.,::'"•,,. i • - ' -•.'" • ,.‘",/.; 11 ,/I: ;. .t.1 \k: , .,-.1. t. . • -, ,
, .
„ ..
. -••
•..
- -. .diffreasegs-- z•-• '- ca.- -..v.,,,..;‘,.. . ---..1‘,:-- ,:c.1:71)-7--1;_::'?■;.:- --•-:-
----se
--.- ,
P
c ..
-,„7-7-----.- :- _;:. -- 4'nel .- - i{ t.... 4,......-
- _
A 1 I c - - 2 ----ALASKA
-. et p r, - . - -z\Liu: . ..4....,..., , ...3, ,, --
1
'' i -KODIA
WHY7Olilliat Ili n 'eN'D'egONFOS - •
_ -,,,,,, . -4•4.. . . . -,...,,,,,,.,‘_, -• B, , . : _ ---. ‘ : . , '
, ---.s__.
ct
rod
ii 44 -4 4iiStryipus..:
JitercH_Is_ _eOVER Innovative A,T ,...,,„_. -„, ,.„,,„.iisi pt;, .,,, ._,-•
EXPLORa opportunities't44o,44f'r urther y{7 5oLku tk, n o
,
wledge of the Alaska
Commercial Fishing Industry.
CONNECT with organizations that have your best interest in mind.
UNDERSTAND Industry challenges and opportunties.
MEET the leaders that Influence the Alaska Fishing Industry.
SUPPORT Alaska's only Commerical Fishing Wade Show that Is
located In 'a.Major Alaskan Port!
a"I11--.F,lMAt-'-SA----yS:FE-4AUR INSt.I(,tC, O_iMM ISSIONl._iRiSAM,C O-,T:TE NA_,0 D..-. IR,_ 'E CcftT_-2O__ —,.COLi_eCrSM r- E S C
HIrAi;
FisiEelEtltF RESNiit-1 EA it ikThEiriLLET KNIVESFLY3nOCESSOR)FI4E T■
i nth ETITONt=iEXH B S.FEA tltiN4COMMERti,41 FisHINGNEND6RvolonAROUNYTHE
WO410:_ntMeRit* tgskitOtAikDALETTREDENJAAONS.LDRANINflSiV_L1EHED ATHEATRWSai0441iITOfkDkfctOONORT:AK , 1/4etICKETS)T,Ansmot„ogg ,
i
.
.
KODIAK 1.1713:E=11' ir" ." ..° _WWI
ri— it :1';' ' tSAMSONi I -lift' 4nYOZE nail
DIESEli . p._;;\_____ ...rt.r...,....
Ra-an-anne ...-.Z..:-..) .. . . ,. BuljzfiRoDFycs ,
' .. )
rob.
. .-..K-.-ooDIniAiaK,It-cDAILYM.riIRrRaoOnnR .-..1 t c pr 1.1,.
=
I p
/ N :Rav n A ROSPA CE ‘k cik i emo
, Inn 61riir;:orco .nc ic ,i =,=
'Kir ci:i -4''-''' ltitAtfftioagiCoM/O5K4P&HALASS4
7 MitiVititi....1.....ALASKA.COM •wvy ., .
scorg(6-35si
. . ,
Page 46 of 46
Other Information
KODIAK ISLAND BOROUGH/CITY OF KODIAK
FISHERIES WORK GROUP
Meeting of: Maim` L9; -Lois
Please PRINT your name Please PRINT your name
S7eDAen /C4fc'., ‘V
‘.-S)
Any 2,4W-bOLASY--.
IF L.P'rf'/MA2
!LC latM
. \`. v