Saving Seafood

Changes to Halibut Fishery in the Bering Sea Being Considered by North Pacific Council

June 16, 2017 — SEAFOOD NEWS — At their June meeting last week, the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council moved forward on a regulatory amendment to allow Western Alaska Community Development Quota (CDQ) groups to lease halibut IFQ during times of low abundance.

The issue has been before the council since December 2015; last week the 11-member panel selected a preferred alternative for further analysis.

Low relative abundance has been an issue throughout the range of Pacific halibut since 2010 or so when the phenomenon of lower size at age became widely discussed. That years-long event, marked by successive generations of halibut not reaching sizes they have in the past at advanced ages, appears to have leveled out in recent years.

Both Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) and CDQ are issued in units which are converted to pounds, so the problem of lower pounds to fish, in a region defined by few processing plants and vast distances between fishing ports where product is processed and the markets that buy it, continues to affect residents of the Pribilofs and the Aleutian Islands.

In 2015, the issue reached a critical point when the International Pacific Halibut Commission’s (IPHC) stock assessment and harvest policy justified some half a million pounds of halibut in an area where over a million was required to run the plants and allow the fleet to go fishing.

The IPHC’s method for setting annual catch limits uses an equation that removes from the total biomass mortalities that are estimated by each country the year before, for example subsistence removals and bycatch removals.

In the Bering Sea, removals of halibut bycatch in the pursuit of flatfish and P-cod, amounted to 4.6 million pounds, nearly 14 percent of all halibut caught by the directed fishery in both countries that year. Catch limits went down from there in 2016. Additionally, most of the bycatch was smaller than 32-inches, which is the legal limit for the directed fishery.

In June 2015 the Council recognized the need to reduce bycatch in the Bering Sea and set goals for each fishing sector. The Amendment 80 fleet, targeting flatfish that inhabit the same sea floor as halibut, exceeded their reduction targets in the following years.

Any savings in the over 26-inch portion of the groundfish fleets’ halibut bycatch translates the following year as increased catch limits to the directed halibut fleet in the Bering Sea. Any savings of under 26-inch fish is taken into account by the IPHC’s annual stock assessments and improves the overall abundance of the species in that area and other areas affected by out-migration and recruitment to the biomass.

The action taken by the Council to allow CDQ groups to lease IFQ is seen as a stop-gap measure only in times of severely low abundance and until the Council completes their work on shifting the managment of halibut bycatch from a set Prohibited Species Catch (PSC) to an Abundance Based Management (ABM) scheme.

That effort continues at the Council with a step-wise process to establish first, indices that answer the question “Abundance of what?”, for instance just in the Bering Sea, or also the Aleutians or Gulf of Alaska, and a starting point that answers the question “Where do we begin measuring the ratio of what we’re catching with what is out there?”

Analyses will be done this summer for the Council’s consideration and further action at the October meeting.

This story originally appeared on SeafoodNews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.

CALIFORNIA: Squaring off over selling directly from boats at Fisherman’s Wharf

June 5, 2017 — Should local seafood be permitted to be sold straight from the boat in San Francisco?

That’s what some local fishermen are arguing, though their efforts are meeting resistance from some of the city’s oldest seafood families, who say the new proposal would hurt their established businesses and present a public health risk.

The would-be seafood mongers say that selling their wares from their boats would put the “fisherman” back into Fisherman’s Wharf, and could provide locals and tourists with a new shopping option.

“People in San Francisco do want whole fish,” said San Francisco fisher Sarah Bates. “This is a new market that the fishermen are uniquely situated to serve — especially when the fishing is slow or the weather is bad, and you have product and you have a couple days at the boat. This is value added directly to the fisherman.”

Fishing-boat operators and seafood wholesalers presented their points of view at a public meeting held by the Port of San Francisco on Friday. The 90-minute meeting got contentious at times, with some of the city’s seafood processors arguing that the proposal would put their businesses at a disadvantage. On the other side, individual fishers said that there’s no comparison between the wholesale seafood business and independent fishing entrepreneurs making a few hundred dollars when they have extra fish to sell.

Though most of the state’s harbors allow direct retail sales from the boat, it hasn’t been permitted in San Francisco since a brief trial period in 2000. The proposal the Port is considering — and will decide on this summer — is to allow fishers who have berth assignments at certain parts of the wharf to sell whole halibut, salmon, tuna, rockfish and bycatch from their boats. No Dungeness crab would be allowed.

Read the full story at the San Fransisco Chronicle

Alaska Longline fleet awaits word on fishing season start

February 27, 2017 — Commercial longline fishing fleets in Alaska are awaiting word about whether the season for halibut and black cod will actually start on March 11th. That’s the date voted on for halibut fishing by the International Pacific Halibut Commission in January. Typically the National Marine Fisheries Service also opens long-line fishing for black cod on the same day. This year that’s all up in the air.

The reason for the uncertainty is an executive order from President Trump in January requiring for every one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination. Trump also issued a 60-day freeze on new and pending regulations until they had been reviewed by the head of an agency appointed by the president.

The start dates for the fishing seasons require the publishing of regulations in the Federal Register. As of late February those regulations had not yet been published. During a recent stop in Ketchikan, Republican U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski said she’s trying to get to the bottom of what the president’s executive order means for Alaska fisheries.

“While I like the idea of eliminating some of the regulatory underbrush I think we recognize that in certain areas and this is exactly one of those we count on our agencies to be prompt and diligent in laying down these regs so that people can engage in their business and their livelihood,” Murkowski said. “We need to make that happen.” Murkowski said she didn’t yet know about whether the season would be able to start on March 11.

Read the full story at KFSK Community Radio

Adak’s Seafood Plant Not Processing Bering Sea Cod Because of Damage, Not Over Deliveries Lawsuit

February 24, 2017 — SEAFOOD NEWS — Yesterday morning National Marine Fisheries Service closed the “A” season for Pacific cod in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) effective today at noon, Alaska time. The TAC had been reached which prompted the closure on the earliest date ever for the “A” season. In 2016, the A season trawl P-cod fishery remained open until March 9.

The early closure is a defining note in a fishery that has historically included deliveries to Adak’s cod processing plant since it opened in 1999.

Those years were also marked by the American Fisheries Act, the BSAI crab rationalization program, and Amendment 80 to the BSAI groundfish plan, actions that changed the face of Alaska fisheries. Each of those landmark laws rationalized vast sections of pollock, cod, and crab fisheries. All three species have been delivered to and processed at the Adak plant over the years.

Rationalizing a fishery means putting management tools in place that, among other goals, eliminate the race for fish and protect historic users both onshore and offshore. But until last fall, shoreplants in the Aleutians west of 170 degrees longitude were not included in any of the rationalization plans in the area.

There are only two plants in the area: Atka and Adak. Atka has only processed halibut and sablefish.  Adak, which since it opened in 1999 has been reliant on cod, but has also processed crab, halibut and sablefish and limited amounts of pollock.

Since 2008, the North Pacific Council has been aware of the need for “fishing community protections in the Aleutian Islands” precisely because of the rationalization schemes.

Then last October, the Council passed Amendment 113 to respond to the issue, noting the “…increased risk that the historical share of BSAI cod of other industry participants and communities that depend on shoreplant processing in the region may be diminished. The BSAI Pacific cod TAC split and relatively low Pacific cod stock abundance n the Aleutian Islands further increase the need for community protections.”

Amendment 113 set aside 5,000 mt of Pacific cod for delivery to the Adak plant, but it is not a ‘guarantee’ of deliveries.  AM 113 creates a time-limited priority for shoreside processing in the Aleutians until March 15, but only if the Aleutian shoreside processors have taken at least 1,000 tons by Feb. 28.

Prior to the rationalization of the AI cod fishery, Adak processed on average 8,000 – 10,000 mt of cod per year, but the ability to plan for even 5,000 tons has been made difficult by factors related to fishing behavior that eventually led the Council to adopt AM 113.

One of the factors is that catcher processors who are part of the rationalized fisheries can also act as motherships and accept deliveries from other catcher vessels to process only. AM 113 does not prohibit this, but obligates deliveries under certain conditions to shoreplants during the A season.

There are three triggers in the amendment that would relieve vessels of the obligation. First, if the plants notify NMFS by December 1 that they will not be taking deliveries, catcher boats can deliver anywhere. Second, if the plants have not taken at least 1,000 mt by February 28, then the 5,000 mt set-aside will become available for any other processors, including motherships. Third, by March 15 the restriction to deliver shoreside is lifted.

Shortly after the amendment was adopted, The Groundfish Forum, representing six companies and 20 trawl catcher processors, along with United Catcher Boats, B and N Fisheries, and the Katie Ann LLC, filed suit against NOAA Fisheries saying the amendment violated national standards and other laws. Part of their position is the “harvest set-aside” part of the amendment is unlawful.

“There are trawl catcher vessel owners, who have delivered a fair amount of cod to the Adak plant over the years when it was operating, that would be willing to deliver to another renovated shore plant if it was in operation,” said Brent Paine, executive director of the United Catcher Boats, a plaintiff in the suit. “They just want the option to deliver their catch to multiple markets, onshore or offshore.”

Since the filing, the Adak Community Development Corporation (ACDC), the Aleutian-Pribilof Island Community Development Association (APICDA), and the city of Adak have joined as intervenors in the lawsuit, supporting AM113. The cities of Adak and Atka may also join as intervenors.

“NMFS did an excellent job in responding to comments on national standards in the Federal Register comments,” said Dave Fraser, board member for ADCD. “I think the record is good.”

The amendment is the result of nearly a decade of consideration, during which Amendment 80 and 85 were passed. Those regulations created community development quota entities and cooperatives in the groundfish fisheries and amended cod allocations in the BSAI. It was also the time of sea lion protection measures, and a version of AM 113 was included in the proposed mitigation regulation. In the end, Fraser believes the process has developed an amendment that has “passed muster” on all the national standards and requirements.

“Amendment 113 does not change by a single pound any of the fish allocated under AM 85,” said Fraser. “The only thing that will change is who processes it.

“The set aside for Adak is less than our historic average annual plant production,” he noted. Prior to 2010, Adak received 3-6 percent of the total BSAI allocation, with an average of 4.7 percent. Figuring 4.3 percent of the aggregate of 2015’s TAC, according to NMFS analysis, is 10,836 mt.

“It’s a minimal program because the Council had to balance competing interests,” Fraser notes.

The Adak plant has been out of commission since a severe 2015 winter storm damaged portions of the roof. The city sent a letter to NMFS, according to AM 113 protocol, notifying them they would not be buying cod this winter, last fall. The plant is expected to be in full operation by 2018.

The lawsuit was filed in the D.C. District Court.

This story originally appeared on Seafoodnews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission.

Phil Thompson: Changing our U.S. fish trade is not just for the halibut

February 15, 2017 — In the past five years I have monitored hundreds of halibut offloads from small fishing vessels in Nova Scotia, from Eastern Passage to Marie Joseph.

It’s a rare privilege to be present first thing in the morning while many generations of Maritimers work together with small cranes and strong hands to make a hard living from this dangerous ocean.

To put this fishery in perspective, it was halibut the five young men on the Miss Ally were seeking when they lost their lives in a rogue wave while trying to get home.

I was at the dock in Seaforth that terrible day in February 2013, and the skipper landing halibut had just returned with his catch. He was pale from the storm he had just survived. It was dangerous even at the dock.

We had been listening to the Coast Guard radio communications on his radio regarding the lost crew. We were both devastated. It was the saddest and most poignant offload I have ever monitored.

Read the full opinion piece at The Chronicle Herald

Alaska Halibut’s Responsible Fisheries Management Certification is Renewed

February 13, 2017 — SEAFOOD NEWS — The Alaska halibut fishery has been awarded continued certification to the Alaska Responsible Fisheries Management (RFM) Certification Program. Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute (ASMI) announce the finding late last week.

This is the first reassessment of Alaska halibut under Alaska’s RFM program, after initially being certified in April 2011. The fishery is also certified by the Marine Stewardship Council’s program. The fishery client is the Fishing Vessel Owners Association, based in Seattle.

In the more than 125 management standards used in RFM sustainability certification, the Alaska halibut fishery received highest marks in all but one: observer coverage. Although National Marine Fisheries Service changed the federal observer program to include the halibut longline fleet in 2013, the new plan, which was paid for by the halibut industry, was fraught with problems. Many longline vessels cannot support an additional observer onboard without significant impact on their crew size and efficiency, so have preferred electronic monitoring (EM) as an alternative data and observation source.

The assessment report includes details for what it describes as a “minor” non-conformance.

“For 2016, 58 fixed-gear vessels 40-57.5 ft LOA will [sic] participate in the EM selection pool and will carry EM systems as described in the EM Plan. The Observer Program Annual Report (NMFS 2015a) and the Observer Program Supplement Environmental Assessment (NMFS 2015b) have highlighted the data gaps caused by not having any observer information on vessels less than 40 ft LOA. In 2014, vessels less than 40 ft took about 20% (in value) of the longline halibut catch in Alaska (Fissel et al. 2015). NMFS recommended in its 2016 Deployment Plan138 that vessels less than 40ft LOA be considered for electronic monitoring in the future, and there are plans to partially implement EM in this sector in 2017.”

Details of the assessment can be found in the Final Assessment Report.

For more information on Alaska RFM certification, visit here.

This story originally appeared on SeafoodNews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission

North Pacific Council Reviews Bering Sea Pollock and IFQ Halibut Progams

February 9, 2017 — SEAFOOD NEWS — The North Pacific Fishery Management Council oversees all federal fisheries between three and 200 miles off the Alaska coast. One of eight regions, the North Pacific fishery is by far the country’s most profitable, having produced two-thirds of the country’s total seafood value in 2015.

At their Seattle meeting Feb. 1-6, the council focused on some of the structures at the core of fisheries management, reviewing catch share programs and looking for areas to tune up in both the halibut IFQ fishery and the Bering Sea pollock fishery, Alaska’s largest fishery by volume.

For the IFQ halibut fishery, the council asked that some information be refined and sent back to it, including effects on the outmigration of rural employment, the amount of Community Development Quota ownership, and the individual ownership for catcher vessels.

The American Fisheries Act, signed into law in 1998, was designed to end foreign control of the Bering Sea pollock fishery. Under the new rules, vessels must be a minimum 75 percent U.S.-owned.

As with most of the continually evolving North Pacific fisheries, the biggest points in the AFA review included how the program has encouraged U.S. and Alaskan ownership and employment.

Indeed, the program did produce some consolidation. At the start of 2000, 18 companies owned the 19 catcher-processors in the Bering Sea fishery. By 2015, seven companies owned them.

Impacts to fishing communities have been “largely beneficial,” according to the review’s authors, Marcus Hartley and Gary Eaton of the research firm Northern Economics.

Frank Kelty, the city manager of Unalaska, talked of stability as the program’s best feature. Unalaska is the town home of Dutch Harbor, perennially the nation’s largest seafood port and where Kelty said AFA has led to steadier employment and steadier school enrollment.

Stakeholders and council members both acknowledge that the AFA program was a big step in fisheries management, bringing a host of management tools into practice.

“We never talked about co-ops before AFA,” said Stephanie Madsen, executive director of the At-Sea Processors Association. “We never talked about sideboards.”

Because issuing quota in the pollock fishery may free up opportunity to move into other fisheries, the sideboards set limits on the extent of those harvests so as not to crowd out other individuals not involved in harvesting pollock.

Both co-ops and sideboards continue to feature heavily in management talks, including a recently discarded program for groundfish in the Gulf of Alaska.

The review was not without problems, however. The council’s Scientific and Statistical Committee hadn’t reviewed the study, leaving several questions.

Among other areas, council members wanted more information that the study had related to Community Development Quota, or CDQ, ownership and individual vessel ownerships.

The CDQ program that gives 10 percent of the overall groundfish harvest quota to 65 western Alaska villages within 50 miles of the coast.

The program was designed to promote economic health in those regions, and some of the review’s statistics point to success.

Over the length of the pollock-based program, royalties going to CDQ groups from the AFA fishery have increased.

From 2001 through 2005, CDQ royalties ranged between $42.6 million and $60.5 million per year, with increases every year. Pollock accounted for 79 percent to 86 percent of total all-species royalties in any given year during this period.

From 2007 to 2013, estimates ranged between $59.9 million and $79.5 million per year, with a general upward trend.

Alaska Department of Fish and Game Commissioner and council member Sam Cotton wanted a more detailed breakdown of CDQ ownership in the fishery.

“The question here is how much of that fishery is staying in Alaska,” said Cotten. “How big a share of the fishery is owned by CDQ groups? In terms of percentage of the vessels, or harvesting capacity, revenue?”

Hartley said that he has made those calculations before, but not for the current study.

The study had similar gaps where the AFA’s 100 individual catcher vessels were concerned. By AFA design, none of these vessels can have anything less than 75 percent U.S. ownership. Council member Buck Laukitis wanted to make sure that these vessels weren’t skirting the rules.

Inshore catcher vessel ownership info, Hartley explained “was insufficient to determine changes in ownerships pattern.”

Those records are held by the U.S. Maritime Administration, or MARAD, which is tasked under the AFA with ensuring compliance with the U.S. ownership rules. Hartley said Northern Economics could not get access to much of the proprietary information.

This story appeared on SeafoodNews.com, a subscription site. It is reprinted with permission. 

ALASKA: Halibut gets bump; salmon prices soar

February 1, 2017 — More Pacific halibut will be going to market this year due to an overall boost in the harvests for the West Coast, British Columbia and Alaska. The coastwide catch of 31.4 million pounds reflects a 5.1 percent increase, and for the first time in decades, not a single fishing region met with a decline in halibut catches.

The heartening news was released on Jan. 27 by the International Pacific Halibut Commission, overseer of the stocks since 1923.

Halibut catch limits are determined by summer surveys at more than 1,200 stations from Oregon to the Aleutians. In 2016, the results showed the stock had remained stable over a span of three years, although the fish remained small for their ages.

Alaska always gets the lion’s share of the Pacific halibut catch and a take of 22.62 million pounds this year adds up to an extra million pounds for longliners who hold quota shares of the fish.

The good news has been dampened somewhat by a potential delay to the March 11 start of the fishery due to the bureaucratic freeze by our new president.

Read the full story at the Alaska Journal of Commerce 

Halibut season in jeopardy even as catch limit rises

January 31, 2017 — Despite a 5 percent hike in the total halibut catch limits, the start of the 2017 season will likely be delayed because of a 60-day freeze on federal regulations in the United States.

On 27 February, the International Pacific Halibut Commission increased the total allowable catch (TAC) to 31.4 million pounds. It marks the first time in around 10 years that there were no cuts in any region’s quotas.

While the IPHC approved the halibut season to start on 11 March, that date is expected to be pushed back because of President Donald Trump’s freeze on new and pending regulations – which would include regulations on the federally-managed fishery. The freeze went into effect on 20 January, so the earliest starting date for the Pacific halibut fishery would likely be 27 March, according to Alaska Dispatch News.

Read the full story at SeafoodSource

Alaska commercial halibut fishermen get big boost in catch limit

January 29, 2017 — More Pacific halibut will be going to market this year due to an overall boost in harvests for the West Coast, British Columbia and Alaska. The coast-wide limit of 31.4 million pounds reflects a 5.1 percent increase and, for the first time in decades, not a single fishing region faces a decline its allowable catch.

The heartening news was released Friday by the International Pacific Halibut Commission, overseer of the stocks since 1923.

Halibut catch limits are determined by summer surveys at more than 1,200 stations from Oregon to the Aleutians. In 2016, the results showed the stock had remained stable over a span of three years, although the fish remained small for their ages.

Read the full story at the Alaska Dispatch News