The Pacific Fishery Management Council is seeking candidates to serve as its next Executive Director. The application period is open now through August 8, 2021. More information is provided in the Executive Director recruitment packet, which consists of a recruitment announcement and a position description.
The Pacific Fishery Management Council is committed to the principle of diversity and is particularly interested in receiving applications from a broad spectrum of people, including minorities, protected veterans, and individuals with disabilities.
Council Meeting Decision Summary Documents are highlights of significant decisions made at Council meetings. Results of agenda items that do not reach a level of highlight significance are typically not described in the Decision Summary Document. For a more detailed account of Council meeting discussions, see the Council meeting record and transcripts or the Council newsletter.
Habitat Issues
Current Habitat Issues
The Council directed staff to draft and send a letter to NOAA on its Draft Mitigation Policy in time for the July 30th comment deadline. The Council also directed the Habitat Committee to take the lead on a letter to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) on oil rig decommissioning, including coordinating with other Council advisory bodies. The letter would either be a “quick response” letter or will be included in the September Briefing Book, depending on the timing of the comment period. Finally, the Council directed the Habitat Committee to take the lead on a letter to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management on its expanded “Morro Bay 399” Call Area, which is expected to be announced this month and available for public comment.
Salmon Management
Southern Oregon Northern California Coast Coho Endangered Species Act Consultation
The Council provided guidance on a range of harvest control rules for Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast (SONCC) coho, based on information provided in the Ad-Hoc SONCC Workgroup’s Fishery Harvest Control Rule Risk Assessment.
The Council asked the SONCC Coho Workgroup (Workgroup) to::
Focus on total (ocean and freshwater) exploitation rates (exclude alternatives that are ‘ocean only’)
Focus on constant exploitation rates (exclude alternatives that are abundance -based, or matrix-based)
Evaluate constant exploitation rates between 7 and 20 percent, with incremental increases on the higher end of the range (~13-20)
Include a ‘no-fishing’ alternative (zero exploitation rate)
Include a ‘status quo’ alternative, and
Include in the Risk Assessment a section describing any Workgroup recommendations, and/or evaluation of the pros/cons of the alternatives provided.
The Council is scheduled to review a revised risk assessment of this range of alternative harvest control rules and identify a preliminary preferred alternative at its September 2021 meeting.
Highly Migratory Species Management
International Management Activities
The Council recommended that the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) adopt status quo catch limits for Pacific bluefin tuna in a one-year measure for 2022. This would allow a future multi-year IATTC resolution to align with the results from a new, benchmark stock assessment scheduled for completion in 2022. Any IATTC resolution would need to be coordinated with complementary measures in the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) Convention Area through the Joint Working Group process. The Sixth Session of the Joint IATTC and WCPFC-NC Working Group on Management of Pacific Bluefin Tuna is scheduled for July 27 to 29, in advance of the IATTC regular session in August.
The Council also recommended that further development of the interim harvest strategy for North Pacific albacore, based on the results of the recently-completed management strategy evaluation (MSE), be deferred until 2022. This would give managers and stakeholders more time to consider MSE results and identify a preferred harvest control rule and any related management measures.
Exempted Fishing Permits
The Council recommended National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) issue exempted fishing permits (EFPs) for the seven applications received to test deep-set buoy gear (DSBG, see Attachments 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 10). Three other applications (Attachments 2, 4, and 9) described activities other than testing conventional DSBG. (Attachment 9 is a request to use DSBG and night-set buoy gear in specific areas within California state waters, which is not part of current EFP terms and conditions.) The Council forwarded these applications for further consideration and final action at the September Council meeting, with the expectation that applicants will provide more detail about the requested activities. The Council also recommended that NMFS reissue expiring EFPs for 2022 and 2023 to current active permit holders. The Council recommended not reissuing the Hall short-line EFP, which is based on the application reviewed and approved by the Council in 2018, because the EFP recipient was unable to arrange a vessel to implement the EFP and no fishing occurred.
Drift Gillnet Fishery Bycatch Performance Report
The Council reviewed bycatch estimates for the California large mesh drift gillnet fishery against previously adopted performance metrics for certain finfish, marine mammal, and sea turtle species as reported by the HMSMT. None of the performance metrics were exceeded in calendar years 2018 or 2019. The Council also endorsed the continued work on the methods to estimate bycatch and detect trends in bycatch levels in the fishery as recommended by the HMSMT.
Drift Gillnet Fishery Hard Caps
The Council adopted the following revised purpose and need statement for the implementation of hard caps for selected protected species taken in the California large mesh drift gillnet (DGN) fishery:
The purpose is to incentivize fishing practices and tools in an effort to minimize bycatch and bycatch mortality, as well as to conserve other unmarketable non-target species, including Endangered Species Act- (ESA-) listed species and marine mammals, in the DGN fishery to the extent practicable. The need is to ensure that take and bycatch of unmarketable non-target species, including ESA-listed species and marine mammals, in the DGN fishery is minimized to the extent practicable and that such take and bycatch does not result in limitations on the economic viability of the west coast swordfish fishery.
The Council originally adopted hard caps for the fishery in 2015 but implementing regulations were vacated due to a court order.
The Council also directed its HMSMT to develop a final range of alternatives for adoption by the Council including:
A no action alternative (as required by the National Environmental Policy Act).
Hard caps as in the Council’s original 2015 action, which were rolling two-year caps based on observed mortality/injury for five marine mammal and three sea turtle species.
Annual hard caps based on the hard cap numbers in the original action with sub-options for different closure period durations.
Hard caps that apply both to individual vessels and the fleet as a whole. When a vessel meets an individual cap, both that vessel and all unobservable vessels would have to stop fishing. All vessels in the fishery would have to stop fishing when a fleet-wide cap is reached. As above, sub-options for different closure period durations will be included. The individual and fleet-wide caps under this alternative are:
Species
Individual Cap
Two-Year Fleetwide Cap
Fin whale
1
2
Humpback whale
1
2
Sperm whale
1
2
Leatherback sea turtle
1
2
Loggerhead sea turtle
1
2
Olive-Ridley sea turtle
1
2
Green sea turtle
1
2
Short-fin pilot whale CA/OR/WA
2
4
Common bottlenose dolphin CA/OR/WA Offshore stock
2
4
Coastal Pelagic Species Management
Pacific Mackerel Assessment and Management Measures
The Council adopted harvest specifications and management measures for Pacific mackerel for the 2021-22 and 2022-23 fishing years, which run July 1 through June 30. Should the directed fishery realize the Annual Catch Target (ACT), the directed fishery will close and shift to an incidental-only fishery for the remainder of the fishing year, with a 45 percent incidental landing allowance when Pacific mackerel are landed with other coastal pelagic species (CPS). Up to 3 mt of Pacific mackerel per landing could be landed in non-CPS fisheries.
Management Framework for the Central Subpopulation of Northern Anchovy
The Council considered a proposed framework for frequency of conducting stock assessments, and triggers for revising acceptable biological catch levels in response to changes in stock abundance indices. The Council directed the Coastal Pelagic Species Management Team to develop draft language incorporating the framework into Council Operating Procedure 9, for consideration at the November 2021 meeting.
Groundfish Management
Fixed Gear Catch Sharing Review – Scoping
The Council directed analysts to move forward with development of a public review draft of the 2021 Limited Entry Fixed Gear Review, working from the draft outline provided at this meeting and incorporating input from the Enforcement Consultants, Groundfish Advisory Panel, Groundfish Management Team, Scientific and Statistical Committee reports. This topic is tentatively scheduled for the November 2021 Council meeting, at which time the Council could approve a draft document for public review and consider potential program modifications that would be listed in the review document for possible future action. Program changes requiring minimal analytical support and regulatory change might be scheduled for development at the same time the review is being completed. Input will also be sought on research and data needs related to the fixed gear catch share program.
Electronic Monitoring Update
The Council directed staff to draft a letter to NMFS requesting a delay in electronic monitoring (EM) Program implementation and extension of the EM exempted fishing permits through 2022. In addition, the Council would like NMFS to examine the potential use of West Coast catch share cost recovery funds to support the EM Program video review and storage through a grant contract with Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission. The Council is scheduled to discuss these potential changes at the September 2021 Council meeting.
Groundfish Endangered Species Workgroup Report
The Council requested NMFS provide the following information to be available for review by the Groundfish Endangered Species Workgroup (GESW) at their 2023 meeting:
Updates to any telemetry and observer data for short-tailed albatross south of 36° N. lat.
Status of fulfilling the humpback whale Incidental Take Statement Terms and Conditions.
Updated seabird avoidance and bycatch minimization research results for floating longline gear, notably the cooperative NMFS, Oregon Sea Grant, and industry research funded for FY2022.
The Council recommended NMFS continue their funding of the WDFW Columbia River eulachon spawning stock biomass survey.
The Council also directed staff to write a letter to the Federal Communications Commission regarding their proposed rule on the use of Automatic Identification Systems (AIS) devices to mark fishing equipment and encourage them to reconsider their current prohibition of using AIS as a gear marking device.
Adopt Stock Assessments
The Council adopted a new full assessment of Dover sole, an update assessment of sablefish, data-moderate assessments of copper rockfish in WA and OR, and data-moderate assessments of quillback rockfish in WA and OR. The Council delayed adoption of a new full assessment of spiny dogfish and requested further evaluation of the scale of the population by investigating the choice of the catchability (q) of spiny dogfish in the West Coast Groundfish Bottom Trawl survey. The Council also delayed adoption of data-moderate assessments of copper rockfish in CA south and north of Pt. Conception, a data-moderate assessment of quillback rockfish in CA, and a data-moderate assessment of squarespot rockfish in CA. The Council requested further evaluation of the CA data-moderate rockfish assessments with a review of the sensitivity analyses outlined in CDFW Report 1, apparent errors in catch streams that may affect scale estimates as outlined in CDFW Report 2, and an evaluation of the appropriate stock delineation of Pt. Conception used in the copper rockfish assessments. The Groundfish Subcommittee of the Scientific and Statistical Committee is scheduled to review any additional assessment analyses at a virtual meeting scheduled for August 17.
2023-2024 Harvest Specification and Management Measures Planning
The Council adopted the proposed schedule for developing the 2023-2024 Groundfish Harvest Specification and Management Measure and discussed potential management measure items for inclusion. The Council is scheduled to adopt preliminary harvest specifications and resume discussion of preliminary management measures at their September 2021 meeting.
Inseason Adjustments – Final Action
The Council received one request to increase the open access canary rockfish trip limits north of 40° 10’ N. lat., but based on reports from the GMT and the GAP the Council did not recommend any inseason adjustments.
The Council considered the scoping document and Management Team reports for potential fishery management plan amendments. It is anticipated that one or more plans may need to be amended to be consistent with NMFS final rule. The Council is examining which Council meeting(s) in 2021 the next review will take place.
Update on Executive Order 14008
The Council received a presentation by Mr. Sam Rauch on the National Climate Task Force report “Conserving and Restoring America the Beautiful.” One of the report’s recommendations was that an interagency working group should develop an American Conservation and Stewardship Atlas to measure the progress of conservation, stewardship, and restoration efforts across the United States. Council staff is participating in an Area-Based Management Subcommittee established by the Council Coordination Committee to develop a common understanding among the Councils of area-based management measures and to develop a report on area-based measures in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) to assist with the development of the Atlas.
Marine Planning
The Council received verbal updates on NOAA Aquaculture Opportunity Area planning and Bureau of Ocean Energy Management planning for offshore wind energy development on the West Coast. The Council also considered options for addressing and responding to offshore development activities, and established an ad hoc Marine Planning Committee (MPC), to track and advise the Council on marine planning issues and their effects on Council managed fisheries, data collection surveys, habitat, and coastal communities.
The MPC will consist of six representatives from current PFMC Advisory Bodies (one each from HMS Advisory Subpanel, CPS Advisory Subpanel, Groundfish Advisory Subpanel, Salmon Advisory Subpanel, Ecosystem Advisory Subpanel, and Habitat Committee); one conservation representative selected from one of the Council’s Advisory Subpanels; three resource managers representing the states of Washington, Oregon, and California; one Tribal representative nominated by the Council’s Tribal representative; and one representative from NMFS.
Fiscal Matters
The Council approved the CY 2021 Operational Budget of $5,040,430 including the amounts for No-Cost Extension projects. Council also approved the 2020 Audit Results, and recommended scheduling a Budget Committee meeting in September 2021 to identify 2022 budget priorities and in November 2021 to recommend a 2022 provisional budget.
Membership Appointments and Council Operating Procedures
The Council elected Mr. Marc Gorelnik as the Council Chair and Mr. Brad Pettinger as the Council Vice-Chair for the August 11, 2021 through August 10, 2022 term.
The United States Coast Guard (USCG) announced changes to their Council designees. Lieutenant Commander Scott McGrew will remain RADM Vogt’s first designee, Lieutenant Lelea Lingo will become his second designee, and Mr. Chris German will be his third designee.
The USCG and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) announced changes to their Enforcement Consultants. Mr. Chris German and Lieutenant Lelea Lingo will represent the 13th and 11th Districts of the Coast Guard respectively. Captain Eric Kord was appointed as CDFW’s primary Enforcement Consultant and Lieutenant Jason Kraus will serve as CDFW’s alternate designee.
The Council appointed Ms. Abbie Moyer to the NMFS West Coast Region (WCR) position on the Groundfish Management Team formerly held by Ms. Gretchen Hanshew and appointed Mr. Dan Lawson to a NMFS WCR position on the Groundfish Endangered Species Workgroup.
The Council reviewed the Council Operating Procedures, particularly the composition of Advisory Bodies and adopted the following proposed changes for public review.
Regarding the HMS Advisory Subpanel (HMSAS):
Relabel the two HMSAS Commercial At-Large seats as Commercial Fisheries North and South of Point Conception.
Add a Private Recreational North of Pt. Conception position and relabel the existing Private Recreational position as South of Pt. Conception.
Change the At-Large position to a Deep-Set Buoy Gear Position.
Regarding the Groundfish Endangered Species Workgroup, add a Fishing Industry Representative position.
Revise COP 4 to allow At-Large Scientific and Statistical Committee members to request an alternate.
Revise COP 2 to remove language referring to “majority and minority” reports but continue to require Subpanel Chairs to report areas of consensus and differences.
Council Staff will prepare public review drafts of the Council Operating Procedures for potential final adoption by the Council at its September meeting.
In response to Executive Director Chuck Tracy’s announced retirement, the Council created the Ad Hoc Executive Director Selection Committee and, in consultation with the Council, Chair Gorelnik appointed himself, Vice Chair Pettinger, Mr. Phil Anderson, Mr. Pete Hassemer, and Ms. Heather Hall to the Committee. The Council anticipates posting a recruitment announcement for a new Executive Director no later than July 7.
It was also announced at this meeting that Mr. Phil Anderson, Mr. Bob Dooley, Mr. Joe Oatman and Ms. Christa Svennson will be reappointed, and that Mr. Louis Zimm will be replaced by Ms. Corey Ridings, for the 2021-2024 term on the Pacific Council.
Cautionary Note — These preliminary motions do not represent the final official administrative record. The motions and amendments contained in this blog are as projected on the screen at the Council meeting at the time of the Council vote and often use expedited language and references without the benefit of any final editing or proofing. They may use short-hand language or abbreviations that may not be clear without the context of verbal comments and clarifications made during their development at the meeting, or may contain inadvertent transposition errors. They have not been approved by the Council to represent the final official record of Council action. The final official record will be posted on the Council website after the Council approves the full meeting record at a future Council meeting.
Industry members invited to attend June 8 virtual meeting
WDFW NEWS RELEASE Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 1111 Washington St. SE, Olympia, WA 98501 wdfw.wa.govMay 27, 2021 Contact:Fish Program, 360-902-2700 Media Contact: Eryn Couch, 360-890-6604
OLYMPIA – The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) is looking for feedback from commercial fishers, shellfish growers, charter boat owners, seafood processors, and members of the public as it develops a spending plan for $40 million in federal relief funding for industry members impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.
The funding is part of an additional $255 million in federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act funding approved by the U.S. Congress that followed an initial $300 appropriation, of which Washington state received $50 million, last summer. The current allocation includes $30 million for all federally recognized tribes in coastal states and the Great Lakes and $15 million for Great Lakes states.
“We’re thrilled to be able to begin the process to provide another round of relief funding distributed to support commercial seafood, charter and shellfish aquaculture industry members here in Washington state,” said Ron Warren, WDFW fish policy director. “We applaud our federal leaders for relentlessly championing this funding. As we develop a fair and balanced plan to distribute this funding, it’s critical that we hear from industry members most impacted by the pandemic.”
In coordination with the Governor’s Office, WDFW will be working with the state departments of Agriculture and Commerce to develop criteria for receiving funding assistance based on National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) guidance.
Once developed, Washington will submit its plan to NOAA fisheries for approval and then to the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission to manage the application process and distribute funds.
To learn more and provide feedback, industry members are invited to tune in to an online public meeting at 5:30 to 7:30 p.m., Tuesday, June 8: https://zoom.us/j/96045781724
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife works to preserve, protect and perpetuate fish, wildlife and ecosystems while providing sustainable fish, wildlife, and recreational and commercial opportunities.
Jennifer: Hi everyone, and welcome to the first edition of Thirty Thousand Feet, the new Pacific Fishery Management Council podcast. I’m Jennifer Gilden, your host today, and today on our inaugural episode we are talking to Kerry Griffin, the staff officer for coastal pelagic species for the Council, about how CPS species are managed. Kerry, can you give me an overview?
Kerry: Yes, one of our four fishery management plans is the coastal pelagic species, CPS, fishery management plan. You should think of CPS as the forage fish, the bait fish sometimes they’re called —- the small fish like anchovies and sardines and mackerels and things like that. And some of those are under Federal management; some are not under Federal management, like herring, but a lot of them are: anchovies and mackerel and also market squid.
Jennifer: Do we set management measures for market squid?
Kerry: We do not set annual management measures because it’s primarily—or at least historically has been primarily—a California fishery. The Federal management defers to a California total allowable catch each year, and we monitor that.
Squid are a very odd species. Their life cycle is less than one year; it averages something like seven months. They’re a boom-and-bust type of species, like a lot of the CPS stocks are, so they are under Federal management and we have a standing allowable harvest that is based on California’s management. We just take that and apply it as the Federal limit as well.
Jennifer: Can you tell me a little about krill? I know we prohibited harvest of krill species a while back.
Kerry: Yeah, that’s right, that’s another really good topic. Krill species, which are these little shrimp-like euphausiids, they are called, are also managed under the Federal CPS FMP, and they were included for the specific purpose of prohibiting harvest, as you mentioned. Krill really does form the basis of the food web, so we want to make sure that fisheries don’t develop on krill species.
We also have ecosystem components (EC) species that are part of that CPS FMP. There’s a couple that are specifically listed that are Pacific herring and also Jack smelt. EC species are typically not highly targeted. We kind of keep an eye on them, watch them, but we don’t set harvest specifications; they don’t have essential fish habitat designated for them.
We also have what we call “common EC species” across all FMPs, and that was part of the forage fish initiative a few years ago that stemmed from our fishery ecosystem plan efforts. The Council came up with a whole list of currently unmanaged and generally untargeted forage fish and put them all in this forage fish management plan that says “you can’t fish on these unless you really prove up that it can be done sustainably, safely.” A bunch of the species are included as EC species across all four of our FMPs. So it’s a way to protect forage fish and the ecosystem.
Jennifer: So what are some of the major challenges in the CPS world right now?
Kerry: CPS stocks are tricky to manage because they tend to have this boom-and-bust cycle, and anyone who pays attention to this kind of stuff knows that species like anchovy and sardines, their populations grow really high, you know, exponentially. They’ll become very common all up and down the coast, and then they will wane, and follow this boom-and-bust cycle. Some people theorize that they’re on about a 60-year cycle for Pacific sardine, it’s a little less clear with anchovies, but they’re pretty short-lived species, and when the environmental conditions are right, the populations will just explode. And when environmental conditions are poor, then they will not do so well.
Jennifer: So that sardines you’re talking about?
Kerry: Yeah that was sardines, but they pretty much all have these boom and bust cycles. They’re short-lived, really just a few years. A good kind of counterpoint is something like a rockfish that might live to be 50 or 80 or 100 years old, and they’re very predictable, and you know how many offspring they’re going to produce, and it’s easier in a way to plan for things like proper harvest levels or recovery plans or rebuilding plans. But with CPS species you just don’t know what you’re gonna get from year to year. so it’s a little tricky. You gotta manage conservatively, but also allow a reasonable amount of fishing when the fish are around.
Jennifer: Right. And so what’s going on anchovies now?
Kerry: Yeah, anchovies—right now we appear to be in one of the boom cycles. Really just a few years ago, four or so years ago, the anchovy population had apparently declined quite a bit. There was a lot of attention to it and a lot of concern that we were still allowing fishing on anchovies, but we do allow a certain amount of fishing on these stocks, recognizing that they are prone to these wide swings in population, even aside or not resulting from fishing pressure. So what’s going on right now is there is an abundance of anchovies, something like 1.5 million metric tons is the estimated biomass. We’re not sure how long it’ll stay that way, because you just don’t know about these fish. Sardines have declined in population, conversely, over the last several years; really more like 10 or 15 years, they’ve been on the decline. There’s still a lot in the Southern California Bight, but overall that population is a little bit declined.
Jennifer: So would someone who’s fishing for sardines switch over to anchovies when anchovies are doing well and vice versa?
Kerry: That’s a great question, and yes, what you’ll hear from the CPS fleets is that they really depend on an array of different species to target, because sometimes they’re there, and sometimes they’re not. So if there’s no sardine, they’ll be turning to other things like anchovies, mackerel and squid. Squid is highly desirable, so they would prefer to go after that, especially where they’re most prevalent down in California, but then they need to have these other opportunities available to them.
Jennifer: Right, that makes sense. So where do all those anchovies end up?
Kerry: A lot of them are packed and shipped overseas. I don’t think it’s a majority of the harvest, but they’re often block frozen. Markets really determine whether and how much the fleet is able to go out and fish for these stocks. Some of it is used for things like tuna net pens or longline fishing for maybe albacore tuna, that kind of thing. So they’re used as bait or to produce other higher-end products. Some do go to the canned market. I think a little bit goes to the fresh market.
Sardines, when they’re around, there is a niche market for them. They can get big enough to be sort of dinner-plate size, and so sometimes you’ll see them in white tablecloth restaurants when they’re around. Back in the day the anchovy fishing was really targeted or really aimed at the reduction fishery, where they took these fish and reduced them and made them into paste for fertilizer and things like that. But that is really prohibited. [Cat meows]. There’s no reduction fishing anymore for anchovies or sardines.
Jennifer: How long ago did they stop doing that?
Kerry: [cat meows again]. He wants an anchovy. [Laughs.] Using anchovies for reduction purposes stopped I think by the nineties. By the time we had the advent of Federal fisheries management for the CPS group, it was recognized that reduction fishing was not an optimal use for these stocks. They were catching huge amounts of fish and using it for purposes that weren’t viewed as the optimal use, not in the best interest of the nation’s fishery management.
Jennifer: So tell me what happened at the April council meeting in terms of CPS.
Kerry: Yeah, in April we have a standing agenda item to set Pacific sardine harvest specifications and management measures, and so that again was on the April agenda. We had a couple other things too, but that was the biggie. What was really interesting was because of the COVID crisis there were no Federal ship surveys that went out last year. We really depend on those coastwide surveys to get a handle on what the biomass is for Pacific sardine. So because we didn’t have any of that information, the stock assessment team did the best they could, but our Scientific and Statistical Committee ended up deferring or defaulting to last year’s stock assessment to set our management measures, just because there was so much uncertainty with this year. Because there was no data, so it was really guesswork. But we came through it, I think making a good decision, and we added some good buffers, and basically decreased the allowable harvest because of this sort of staleness of the biomass estimate.
Jennifer: You think that stock assessment issue is gonna to be resolved in time for next year?
Kerry: Well, the survey vessels are out now, and it’s looking pretty good that they’ve developed enough protocols and health protective measures so that they can get out and do their acoustic trawl surveys. There’s also some industry cooperative surveys that do help provide additional information, both from the biological side and also the biomass estimate side of things, so those are all up and operating right now. So I’m really hopeful that next year we’ll be able to get a good stock assessment with good fresh data.
Jennifer: So what’s coming up in June for CPS?
Kerry: We have a handful of CPS items on the agenda for June. Pacific mackerel also gets—well, it gets annual management measures, but we set them every two years, so this is one of the years, this June, where we will set them both for this upcoming season and for the following season after that. And then there’s some anchovy business on the June agenda. The CPS management team has worked up this flowchart to really help us determine when we do need to do a more full and robust anchovy stock assessment, because we don’t normally do those unless, you know, it’s not hardwired in. But there’s interest from the Council inn having a little more, you know, accountability maybe, or more opportunities to do assessments and reset management measures for anchovy. So we’ll be rolling that out at the June meeting.
Jennifer: So are there any sort of big picture issues you’re looking at outside of Council management?
Kerry: The ocean is a big place, and there’s a lot of international agreements, especially for straddling stocks—things like salmon and the highly migratory fish, the tunas and the swordfish. And even in the CPS world, there are CPS stocks that range beyond our borders down into Mexico and Canada sometimes. So we’re always keeping an eye on whether stocks should be subject to some sort of international agreement, and then also there’s often criticism or concern about the management of fisheries outside the United States system, right? We have a pretty aggressive fishery management system here that is pretty protective of the environment, as well as coastal communities. There’s a lot less we can do with foreign nations and how they manage their fisheries. So we do what we can to protect the stocks, and we encourage international cooperation as much as possible for the conservation of all these species.
Jennifer: Okay, thanks. How about that CPS essential fish habitat review?
Kerry: Right, yes. Periodically we’re supposed to review and revise as necessary the essential fish habitat (EFH) designations for our managed stocks. As part of the Magnuson Act reauthorization, I think it was 1996, it said that “Hey, for all your managed stocks, you need to describe what is the essential fish habitat,” and it applies some protective measures where if there’s an activity that may adversely affect a species’ habitat, then you need to consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service or with the Councils and come up with some measures to mitigate or minimize the impacts. And so we’ve done that with CPS, but they haven’t been reviewed in several years, and so we kicked off this period review and we’re looking at both the spatial extent of where EFH is for CPS stocks. And then we’re also looking at activities that may potentially harm habitat, whether those are fishing activities or non-fishing activities like offshore energy development or harbor dredging. So we’re kind of in the middle of that review right now. We just finished Phase 1, and now we will move on to Phase 2 to look at potential actual changes to the EFH descriptions and maps and things like that.
Jennifer: OK, thanks Kerry. Really appreciate you taking the time to talk to us about this. And thanks everyone for listening. If you need more information please go to our website, www.pcouncil.org. You can email us pfmc.comments@noaa.gov. And check out our other podcast this month talking to Robin Elke about salmon. This has been a production of Thirty Thousand Feet by the Pacific Fishery Management Council. Episode One, May 2021.