Beavers are important ecosystem restoration elements for salmon. (USFWS)
The purpose of the Council’s Fishery Ecosystem Plan (FEP) is to enhance species-specific management with more ecosystem science, broader ecosystem considerations, and policies that coordinate management across the Council’s fishery management plans and the California Current Ecosystem (the California Current affects the entire West Coast). The FEP helps the Council consider policy choices and tradeoffs as they affect managed species and the ecosystem.
The Council adopted the FEP in April 2013.
The FEP helps improve management decisions by providing biophysical and socioeconomic information on climate conditions, climate change, habitat conditions, and ecosystem interactions. For example, information generated through the FEP helps provide buffers against the uncertainties of environmental and human-caused impacts to the marine environment. The FEP also helps the Council prioritize research needs to address gaps in ecosystem knowledge and policies, particularly with respect to the cumulative effects of fisheries management on marine ecosystems and fishing communities.
The FEP is meant to be an informational document. Information in the FEP, results of the Integrated Ecosystem Assessment, and the annual California Current Ecosystem Status Report are available to the Council for use in management, but how these items will affect fishery management decisions is at the discretion of the Council.
Ecosystem initiatives
The FEP identifies “initiatives,” or actions the Council can take to promote ecosystem-based fishery management. These initiatives are meant to be broad-scale, affecting more than one fishery management plan.
When the Council adopted the FEP it identified these initiatives to consider taking up in future years:
Protection of Unfished Forage Fish
Potential Long-Term Effects of Council Harvest Policies on Age- and Size- Distribution in Managed Stocks
Bio-Geographic Region Identification and Assessment
Cross-FMP Bycatch and Catch Monitoring Policy
Cross-FMP Essential Fish Habitat
Cross-FMP Safety
Human Recruitment to the Fisheries
Cross-FMP Socio-Economic Effects of Fisheries Management
Cross-FMP Effects of Climate Shift
Indicators for Analyses of Council Actions
Optimum Yield Considerations
Every March, the Council decides whether to start working one of the initiatives listed above. Every two years, the Council has the opportunity to identify new initiatives for the future.
The first initiative taken up by the Council aimed to prohibit the development of new directed fisheries on forage species that are not currently managed, at least until the Council has had an adequate opportunity to assess the science relating to any proposed fishery and any potential impacts to our existing fisheries and communities.
The Council completed work on the initiative in 2015, and protective measures for forage species were added to each of the Council’s four fishery management plans in 2016.
Coordinated Ecosystem Indicator Review Initiative
The Council completed this initiative in 2016. Through this initiative, the Council and its advisory bodies recommended improvements to the annual California Current Ecosystem Status Report to ensure it better supports Council decision making.
Climate and Communities Initiative
The Council embarked on this initiative in 2017 by combining the Cross-FMP Effects of Climate Shift and the Cross-FMP Socio-Economic Effects of Fisheries Management initiatives. The goal of this initiative is to consider strategies for improving the flexibility and responsiveness of Council management actions to near-term climate shift and long-term climate change, and strategies for increasing the resiliency of Council-managed stocks and fisheries to those changes. This initiative is ongoing [learn more].
A list of legislation the Council is tracking is provided below. This list is updated monthly. Use the search field to find sponsors, topics, specific bill numbers, etc. For more information, search Govtrack.us or Congress.gov.
Reintroduction. Amends the IRS Code so that the 50% limitation on the deduction for meal expenses does not apply to meals provided on certain fishing boats or fish processing facilities
Reintroduction of FISH Act. Amends the Endangered Species Act to make Dept. of Interior responsible for anadromous and catadromous species, including salmon. The Council has commented on this bill.
Reintroduction. Amends the America COMPETES Act to establish certain scientific integrity policies for Federal agencies that fund, conduct, or oversee scientific research
Directs the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study of portions of the Los Angeles coastal area in the State of California to evaluate alternatives for protecting the resources of the coastal area
Amends the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to permanently prohibit the conduct of offshore drilling on the outer Continental Shelf off the coast of California, Oregon, and Washington.
To amend the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 to clarify ambiguous provisions, align the Act with relevant case law, reflect modern technologies, optimize interagency coordination, and facilitate a more efficient, effective, and timely environmental review process
To provide for a study by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine examining the impact of ocean acidification and other stressors in estuarine environments.
To provide incentives for agricultural producers to carry out climate stewardship practices, to provide for increased reforestation across the United States, to establish the Coastal and Estuary Resilience Grant Program
To amend the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act to make supplemental funds available for management of fish and wildlife species of greatest conservation need as determined by State fish and wildlife agencies
To establish an integrated national approach to respond to ongoing and expected effects of extreme weather and climate change by protecting, managing, and conserving the fish, wildlife, and plants of the United States, and to maximize Government efficiency and reduce costs, in cooperation with State, local, and Tribal Governments and other entities
A bill to establish an integrated national approach to respond to ongoing and expected effects of extreme weather and climate change by protecting, managing, and conserving the fish, wildlife, and plants of the United States, and to maximize Government efficiency and reduce costs, in cooperation with State, local, and Tribal governments and other entities
To amend the Federal Ocean Acidification Research and Monitoring Act of 2009 to establish an Ocean Acidification Advisory Board, to expand and improve the research on Ocean Acidification and Coastal Acidification, to establish and maintain a data archive system for Ocean Acidification data and Coastal Acidification data, and for other purposes.
To provide for a study by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine examining the impact of ocean acidification and other stressors in estuarine environments.
To direct the Secretary of Commerce, acting through the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, to improve science, data, and services that enable sound decision-making in response to coastal flood risk, including impacts of sea level rise, storm events, changing Great Lakes water levels, and land subsidence
To require the Secretary of Commerce, acting through the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to establish a website providing information about grants available to assist State, Tribal, and local governments with climate resiliency, adaptation and mitigation, and for other purposes.
To direct the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to provide for ocean-based climate solutions to reduce carbon emissions and global warming; to make coastal communities more resilient; and to provide for the conservation and restoration of ocean and coastal habitats, biodiversity, and marine mammal and fish populations; and for other purposes.
To direct the Secretary of Commerce, acting through the Administrator of NOAA, to provide for ocean-based climate solutions to reduce carbon emissions and global warming; to make coastal communities more resilient; and to provide for the conservation and restoration of ocean and coastal habitats, biodiversity, and marine mammal and fish populations; and for other purposes. (Very similar to Ocean Based Climate Solutions Act).
A bill to create dedicated funds to conserve butterflies in North America, plants in the Pacific Islands, freshwater mussels in the United States, and desert fish in the Southwest United States, and for other purposes.
Amends the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate certain river segments in the State of Oregon as components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System
A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior, through the Coastal Program of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, to work with willing partners and provide support to efforts to assess, protect, restore, and enhance important coastal areas that provide fish and wildlife habitat on which Federal trust species depend
To amend the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 to direct the Secretary of Commerce to establish a climate impact management plan for the conservation of certain marine mammal species, and for other purposes.
To allow coastal States to participate in regional ocean partnerships with one or more other coastal States that share a common ocean or coastal area with the coastal State to conserve living resources, expand and protect valuable habitats, enhance coastal resilience, and address such other issues related to the shared ocean or coastal area as are determined to be a shared, regional priority by those States.
To strengthen the role of the Chief Scientist of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in order to promote scientific integrity and advance the Administration’s world-class research and development portfolio.
To amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to provide for improved precision in the listing, delisting, and downlisting of endangered species and potentially endangered species.
To require the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to award grants to certain entities for purposes of carrying out climate-resilient living shoreline projects that protect coastal communities
To amend the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to affirm that the Migratory Bird Treaty Act’s prohibition on the unauthorized take or killing of migratory birds includes incidental take by commercial activities, and to direct the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to regulate such incidental take, and for other purposes.
To provide funding to rehabilitate, retrofit, and remove the Nation's dams to improve the health of the Nation's rivers, improve public safety, and increase clean energy production, and for other purposes.
To establish a grant program within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to award grants to eligible entities for the purpose of carrying out projects on the conservation, restoration, or management of kelp forest ecosystems.
NEPA, or the National Environmental Policy Act, was enacted in 1970. NEPA is a major environmental law which applies whenever Federal funds (your tax dollars) are used on a proposed project, such as removing a dam. Conservation and management of a renewable resource (for example, managing a fishery) must also abide by NEPA rules.
NEPA [42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.] establishes national environmental policy and goals for the protection, maintenance, and enhancement of the environment and provides a process for implementing these goals within Federal agencies.
NEPA requirements
NEPA requires Federal agencies to disclose the environmental consequences of a proposed action, and to investigate and document alternatives to the proposed action. Agencies must make all relevant information available to the public, with opportunities for public comment before a decision is made.
The NEPA process
There are three levels of analysis under NEPA: determining whether a categorical exclusion applies; preparing an environmental assessment (EA) leading to a finding of no significant impact (FONSI); and preparing an environmental impact statement (EIS).
Categorical Exclusion: An action may be categorically excluded from a detailed environmental analysis if d it falls within a category of actions a Federal agency has already determined has no significant environmental impact.
Environmental Assessment/FONSI: At the second level of analysis, a Federal agency prepares a written environmental assessment to determine whether or not an undertaking would significantly affect the environment. If the answer is no, the agency issues a “finding of no significant impact,” or FONSI, which may include measures to mitigate any impacts.
Environmental Impact Statement: An EIS is a more detailed evaluation of the proposed action and alternatives. If an agency expects a project to significantly impact the environment, and sometimes when a project is controversial, it may prepare an EIS without having to first prepare an EA.
The public, other agencies, and outside parties may provide input into the preparation of an EIS and then comment on the draft. After the final EIS is prepared and a decision is made, the agency must prepare a public record of its decision explaining how the findings of the EIS were incorporated into the decision‐making process.
Components of an environmental impact statement
The basic components of an EIS include:
Purpose and need of a proposed action (e.g., reduce overfishing of a rockfish)
Alternatives including the agency’s preferred alternative(end fishing altogether, allow a small amount of fishing, do nothing)
Affected environment (includes the fishermen, fishing communities, the resource, and the environment)
Environmental consequences (how will the action affect the economics of the fishery, the communities, the resource, etc.?)
The “no action” alternative
A “no action” or “status quo” alternative is required by NEPA and acts as a benchmark. For example, if the Council proposed to change how a fishery is managed, an EIS would need to document the consequences of not taking action along with the proposed action and other reasonable alternatives.
Choosing an alternative
The NEPA process requires the Council to weigh many factors when choosing a preferred alternative. For example, the biological effects of catch limits must be weighed against the economic and social impacts to the participants of the fishery before the Council chooses a preferred alternative. However, National Standard 1 of the Magnuson‐Stevens Act directs the Council to choose alternatives that prevent overfishing while achieving optimum yield.
NEPA and fisheries management
In order to simplify documentation for the public and decision‐makers, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the fishery management Councils have often combined fishery management plans, plan amendments, and proposed regulations and EISs into one integrated document. By including the four main requirements of NEPA (above) in an EIS, presenting the information to the public before a decision is made, and then presenting a preferred alternative based upon the research and public comment, NMFS and the Council will have made an informed decision, which is the goal of NEPA.
NEPA is just one of the many laws that apply to the fishery management process as dictated by the Magnuson‐Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (see our MSA fact sheet). Other laws include the Endangered Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, Coastal Zone Management Act, Executive Orders, Regulatory Flexibility Act, and Paperwork Reduction Act.
Why must the Council follow NEPA?
NMFS is the lead agency in implementing fishery management decisions, and takes responsibility for environmental documentation (although Council staff also contribute to NEPA analyses). Since NOAA is a Federal agency where Federal funds are used, NEPA is required. Since the Council submits its proposals to NMFS for review and implementation, it must collaborate with NMFS in meeting NEPA’s procedural requirements.
NEPA and public involvement
Both NEPA and the Magnuson‐Stevens Act encourage public involvement. In creating an EIS, the Council holds public scoping meetings and public hearings that serve as opportunities for public comment. In addition, the process includes comment periods during which the Council is open to receive written comments concerning a specific management plan. Responses to public comments are incorporated and into the final EIS.
Before NEPA, Federal agencies weren’t necessarily required to disclose information to the public before performing an action. Now, because of NEPA, agencies often hold hearings and meetings that provide the public with an opportunity to get involved in the process. The public can comment on proposed management alternatives or propose new solutions that the agency might have overlooked in satisfying a purpose and need. The Council highly values this public input. For more information, see our fact sheet “Getting Involved.”
The panel advises NOAA on operations and research issues related to navigation, hydrographic surveying, nautical charts, tides and currents, geodetic and geospatial data and measurements, Arctic priorities and coastal data and resilience. Applicants should have expertise in marine navigation, port administration, maritime shipping or other intermodal transportation industries, cartography and geographic information systems, geodesy, geospatial data, physical oceanography, coastal resource management, including coastal resilience and emergency response, or other science-related fields.
Due date and requirements:
Nominations are due via email no later than April 26, 2021, are limited to 8 pages, require a cover letter with response to 5 questions, a short bio and a resume as noted in the FRN below. While nominations are due on April 26 for a start date of January 1, 2022, you’re encouraged to make early submissions. There is a rolling admission – and if you miss the April 26, 2021 deadline, we will keep your nomination on file for future HSRP panel openings.
For the nomination requirements, background on the HSRP panel, and NOAA’s National Ocean Service navigation service programs, data and information, please find the following links below:
NOAA HSRP Nomination Information – Federal Register Notice & FAQs:
Pacific halibut (Hippoglossus stenolepis) are large flatfish found on the continental shelf from California to the Bering Sea. Halibut have flat, diamond-shaped bodies, can weigh up to 500 pounds, and can grow to eight feet long. The oldest halibut on record, both male and female, is 55 years old. The stock status of these fish is tracked by the International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC), which reports on the status every year at its annual meeting, and provides detailed life history information on their webpage.
REPRODUCTION
Female halibut mature at around 12 years, while males mature at around 8 years. Adult fish tend to remain in the same area year after year, except for their migration to spawning grounds. Adult halibut will migrate long distances from shallow summer feeding grounds to deeper winter spawning grounds. The number of eggs they lay depends on the female’s size. A 50-pound female can produce about 500,000 eggs, while a female over 250 pounds can produce four million eggs. The eggs float freely and drift in deep ocean currents and are fertilized externally. The eggs hatch 12-15 days after fertilization, and the larvae drift to shallow waters on the continental shelf. Larvae begin life in an upright position with eyes on both sides of their head. When they are about an inch long, the left eye migrates over the snout to the right side of the head, and the color of the left side fades. When the young fish are about six months old, they settle to the sea floor, where the protective coloring on their “eyed” side effectively camouflages them.
PREY AND FEEDING
Larval halibut feed on zooplankton, while juvenile and adults prey on cod, pollock, sablefish, rockfish, turbot, sculpins, other flatfish, sand lance, herring, octopus, crabs, clams, and occasionally smaller halibut. Adult halibut are sometimes eaten by marine mammals and sharks, but are rarely preyed upon by other fish.
The Management Context
Date
Halibut management action
January
International Pacific Halibut Commission sets the total allowable catch.
September Council meeting
Council solicits proposed changes to the Catch Sharing Plan.
Between Sept. & Nov. meetings
Council takes comments on proposed changes to Catch Sharing Plan.
November meeting
Council makes final recommendations for changes.
Halibut management schedule
Halibut have been fished for hundreds of years by native Americans on the west coast of the U.S. The U.S. commercial fishery started in 1888, when halibut were first landed in Tacoma, Washington.
Because halibut can be kept for long periods of time without spoiling, they soon became a popular target for commercial harvesters. In the 1890s, a fleet of sailing vessels with two-man dories fished for halibut from the west coast. Large steam-powered vessels soon entered the industry, and by the 1910s it became clear that halibut stocks were suffering from overfishing. In 1923 the U.S. and Canada signed a convention on halibut, creating what was eventually called the International Pacific Halibut Commission. In 1924 the Commission implemented a three-month winter closure – the first management action to affect halibut. The convention was revised several times over the years to allow the Commission to meet new conditions in the fishery. The most recent change occurred in the Protocol of 1979, which allowed each government to establish more restrictive regulations. Canada implemented a limited entry system at that time and an individual vessel quota system in 1991. In the U.S., Alaska implemented an individual fishing quota system in 1995, similar to the individual vessel quota program in Canada except that shares were issued to individuals instead of vessels. Also in 1995, non-tribal commercial fishers in Oregon, Washington, and California had to make a choice: participate in the sport charter industry for halibut, the commercial directed fishery, or the halibut incidental fishery in the salmon troll fishery.
Each year the IPHC conducts a stock assessment to estimate the abundance and trends of the Pacific halibut stock using commercial fishery data and scientific surveys. The Commission utilizes a decision table to report the results of the annual stock assessment, effectively separating the science from policy. The decision table, prepared annually by IPHC staff, presents the Commissioners with a range of coastwide harvest levels, each with accompanying estimates of potential risk in terms of stock and fishery trend and status metrics. The Commissioners consider the coastwide assessment, and the current harvest policy in determining the final catch targets for each year.
Total catch is set by the IPHC, and the Council then allocates that total among Area 2A fisheries (treaty Indian, commercial non-tribal, and recreational). For more information on how IPHC sets halibut catch limits, see the IPHC document “How are Halibut Catch Limits Determined?” To learn more on how harvest is divided off the west coast (Area 2A), see the Halibut Catch Sharing Plan described below and found under ‘Key Documents’.
The Fishery and Gear
The commercial halibut fishery on the West Coast was pioneered by fishers of Norwegian ancestry, many of whom had fished halibut in Norway. Many Nova Scotians and Newfoundlanders have also participated in the West Coast halibut fishery.
Halibut are one of the most valuable fish species in the northern Pacific. Pacific halibut fishing is an important part of several tribal cultures, and many tribal members participate in commercial, ceremonial and subsistence fisheries. Longlining is the main commercial gear used to target halibut, although there is some allowance for incidental catch in the commercial salmon troll and the primary sablefish fisheries. Vessel, trip and landing limits are all used to manage halibut harvest in non-tribal commercial fisheries.
Halibut is also a very popular target for sport fishers in Washington, Oregon, and California. Because halibut fishing is so popular, managers use closed seasons, bag limits, and possession limits to extend the halibut sport season as long as possible.
In 1995, the U.S. prohibited directed non-tribal commercial fishing north of Pt. Chehalis, Washington in order to allow the tribes to harvest their allocation of halibut.
Halibut Catch Sharing Plan
The Halibut Catch-Sharing Plan is a framework that dictates how the IPHC and NMFS will divide the total allowable catch (TAC) for Oregon, Washington, and California halibut fisheries (Area 2A). The total TAC is set each January by the IPHC, who also endorses the Catch Sharing Plan allocations set by the Council. Allocations between some recreational areas are subject to inseason and other changes. For a description of how the halibut harvest is shared, see the halibut catch sharing plan under “key documents” on this page.
Each year the Council solicits proposed changes to the Catch Sharing Plan for its September meeting and takes comments on proposed changes between its September and November meetings. The Council then makes final recommendations for changes at its November meeting. The proposed changes are described in the Council Newsletter and in the annual September decision document. If you would like to propose a change or comment on proposed changes, you can submit comments by mail, fax, or email, marked to the attention of Robin Ehlke, Pacific halibut staff officer.
Regulations
NMFS Area 2A Halibut Hotline (for sport fishing): 1-800-662-9825, press 5
Coastal pelagic species (CPS) are schooling fish that range from the shore to the open ocean. They are found near the surface or as deep as 1,000 meters. They are generally small, even as adults, ranging from about four inches (anchovies) to 24 inches (Pacific mackerel). CPS are sold for human consumption, bait for longline fishing, and feed for tuna aquaculture.
The Council’s CPS Fishery Management Plan (FMP) specifies a management framework for northern anchovy, market squid, Pacific sardine, Pacific mackerel, and jack mackerel. The plan prohibits harvest of all krill species in order to protect krill’s vital role in the marine ecosystem. Pacific herring and jacksmelt are included as ecosystem component species, which are not generally targeted, but whose stock landings and status are monitored.
Pacific sardine (Sardinops sagax) are small schooling fish. At times, they have been the most abundant fish species in the California current, the highly productive current that extends from Oregon to Baja California. When the population of Pacific sardine is large, it is abundant from the tip of Baja California to southeastern Alaska and throughout the Gulf of California. In the north, sardines tend to appear seasonally.
Sardines form three sub-populations. The northern subpopulation is most important to U.S. commercial fisheries, ranging from southeast Alaska to the northern portion of the Baja Peninsula. The southern subpopulation ranges from the southern Baja Peninsula to southern California, and the third population is in the Gulf of California.
Sardines may live as long as 13 years, but most landed fish are three to six years old. Like anchovies, they are taken by a wide variety of predators. For information on current Pacific sardine abundance and population trends, see the CPS Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation report (tinyurl.com/yc6smlog).
Pacific (chub) mackerel (Scomber japonicus) range from Mexico to southeastern Alaska. The “northeastern Pacific” stock of Pacific mackerel is harvested by fishers in the U.S. and Mexico. Mackerel are schooling fish, and they often school with other pelagic species such as jack mackerel and sardines. While young, they are heavily preyed upon by a variety of fish, mammals, and sea birds. But when larger, they can prey on smaller fish such as juvenile hake and other CPS.
Northern anchovy (Engraulis mordax) are small, short-lived fish that are typically found in schools near the surface. They are found from British Columbia to Baja California. Northern anchovies are divided into northern, central, and southern sub-populations. The central subpopulation ranges approximately from the Oregon/California border to Point Descanso, Mexico. The northern subpopulation ranges from the Oregon/California border north to British Columbia and sometimes SE Alaska. Northern anchovy are an important part of the food chain for other species, including other fish, birds, and marine mammals.
Jack mackerel (Trachurus symmetricus) are a schooling fish that range widely throughout the northeastern Pacific. They grow to about 60 cm and can live 35 years or longer. Much of their range lies outside Federal waters (more than 200 miles offshore). Small jack mackerel (up to six years of age) are most abundant in the Southern California Bight. Older, larger fish range from Cabo San Lucas to the Gulf of Alaska, where they are generally found offshore in deep water and along the coastline to the north of Point Conception.
In southern California waters, jack mackerel schools are often found over rocky banks, artificial reefs, and shallow rocky coastal areas. The peak spawning season for jack mackerel off California extends from March to July.
Market squid (Doryteuthis opalescens) appear from the southern tip of Baja California to southeastern Alaska. They are most abundant between Punta Eugenio, Baja California and Monterey Bay, California. They are harvested near the surface, but they can appear to depths of 800 meters or more. They prefer the salinity of the ocean and are rarely found in estuaries, bays, or river mouths. Squid are short-lived (up to ten months) and are important as forage foods to many fish, birds, and mammals, such as Chinook salmon, coho salmon, lingcod, rockfish, seals and sea lions, sea otters, porpoises, cormorants, and murres. Market squid have huge population fluctuations, sometimes appearing in great numbers and sometimes seeming to disappear almost completely. They are the most valuable CPS stock on the West Coast and are highly sought after.
CPS vessel in Morro Bay, California
The fishery and gear
In the 1940s and 1950s, about 200 vessels participated in the Pacific sardine fishery. Some of these boats are still fishing today, but the fleet is much smaller, with less than 60 Federal limited entry permit vessels.
CPS species are harvested directly and as bycatch in other fisheries. Generally, they are targeted with “round-haul” gear including purse seines, drum seines, lampara nets, and dip nets. These species are also taken incidentally with midwater trawls, pelagic trawls, gillnets, trammel nets, trolls, pots, hook-and-line, jigs, and beach seines.
Market squid are fished at night with the use of powerful lights, which attract the squid to the surface. They are either pumped directly from the sea into the hold of the boat, or caught with an encircling net. CPS species are caught primarily with purse seine vessels. A small amount is landed by beach seine and by hook and line.
Processors and buyers of CPS on the West Coast are located mostly in southern and central California, near the Columbia River port areas of Oregon and Washington, and in Grays Harbor, Washington. Most of the market squid and Pacific sardines caught in the U.S. are exported. Market squid are mainly exported to China, Japan, the United Kingdom, and Spain. Sardines are mainly exported to Japan, where they are used for human consumption and as bait for longline fisheries; and Australia, where they are used to feed farmed bluefin tuna. A small amount of sardines are sold to the restaurant market. Mackerel are exported to Europe and Asia for human consumption.
Management cycle
Pacific sardine and Pacific mackerel are “actively managed,” meaning they have biologically significant levels of catch, or biological or socioeconomic considerations requiring relatively intense harvest management procedures. Management measures are adopted annually. The three other CPS species are “monitored” stocks, meaning fisheries do not require intensive harvest management. They are assessed periodically, and harvest management is not changed on a regular basis. Stocks can be moved from “actively managed” to “monitored” or vice versa. Both active and monitored stocks are required to have annual harvest specifications including overfishing limits, acceptable biological catches, and annual catch limits.
Date
Pacific sardine management stage
February
Authors prepare draft assessments.
March
Draft stock assessment is reviewed by either a full Stock Assessment Review panel (for full assessments), or by the Scientific and Statistical Committee’s CPS Subcommittee (for update assessments)
April
Authors submit final assessments and harvest guideline recommendations for June briefing book. SSC reviews these. Council adopts specifications and management measures. Commerce implements recommendations.
July 1
Pacific sardine season begins.
Pacific sardine management schedule
Date
Sardine allocation stage
June 1— September 14
Forty percent of the harvest guideline is allocated coastwide. Any uncaught allocation is rolled into the second period fishery.
Sept 15—December 31
Twenty-five percent of the harvest guideline is released, plus any portion not harvested from the first period. Any uncaught allocation is rolled into the third period fishery.
January 1— June 30
Thirty-five percent of the harvest guideline, plus any portion not harvested from the initial allocation, is reallocated coastwide. Any uncaught allocation is not rolled into the subsequent period.
Pacific sardine allocation schedule
Management measures, including annual harvest levels, are set for monitored stocks and are only updated as the need arises. The fishing year for monitored stocks is January 1-December 31.
The market squid fishery is state managed and largely concentrated in California, with an April 1-March 31 season. However, the stock occasionally extends into Pacific northwest waters in harvestable numbers.
The fishing year for sardines and mackerel is from July 1 through June 30 of the following year. The NOAA Southwest Fisheries Science Center (SWFSC) assesses the sardine stock annually, with management measures set at the April Council, ahead of the July 1 start of the fishing year. The SWFSC assesses Pacific mackerel every other year, and the Council sets annual management measures in odd years at each June meeting, for two years in a row.
Date (odd years only)
Pacific mackerel management stage
April
Assessment authors prepare draft assessments.
May
Coastal Pelagic Species Management Team (CPSMT), Coastal Pelagic Species Advisory Subpanel (CPSAS), and public review draft assessments and recommended harvest guidelines.
June
Authors submit final assessments and harvest guideline recommendations for June briefing book. SSC reviews these. Council adopts specifications and management measures for two consecutive fishing years. Commerce implements recommendations.
July 1
Mackerel season begins.
March (of next year)
Council may consider Inseason action to transfer unused incidental set-aside to the directed fishery.
Pacific mackerel management schedule
Plan history and amendments
The CPS fishery management plan went into effect in 1999. Amendments addressing bycatch and tribal fishing rights, maximum fleet capacity, transfer of limited entry permits, maximum sustained yield for market squid, and allocation were adopted in the years following.
Amendment 12 (2006) banned commercial fishing for all species of krill in Federal waters off the west coast. State laws prohibit krill landings by state-licensed fishing vessels into California, Oregon, and Washington.
Amendment 13 established several new fishery management provisions pertaining to the Magnuson-Stevens Act, introducing overfishing levels, annual catch limits, annual catch targets, and accountability measures. Pacific herring and jacksmelt were also added to the FMP as ecosystem component species.
Amendment 14 established an maximum sustainable yield value for the northern subpopulation of northern anchovy.
Amendment 15 (2015) added a suite of lower trophic level species to the FMP’s list of ecosystem component species. It prohibits development of commercial fisheries for the ecosystem component species shared between all four FMPs until and unless the Council has assessed the scientific information relating to any proposed fishery and considered potential impacts to existing fisheries, fishing communities, and the ecosystem.
Amendment 16 (2018) allows for small-scale commercial fishing on CPS finfish to continue when the primary commercial fishery is otherwise closed. This sector accounts for a very small portion of the overall catch of any particular CPS stock, and has a negligible impact. However, it is an important source of income for some small ports and producers, especially when the directed fishery is closed. The amendment includes a maximum of one ton per vessel per day, with a one-trip-per-day limit.
Amendment 17 (2018) modifies the landing requirements for the live bait fishing sector when stocks are overfished. Before, once a CPS stock became overfished, landings would be automatically restricted to a pre-determined 15 percent incidental catch limit, with no directed fishing allowed. Amendment 17 requires the Council to consider management measures and landing limits at the time a stock is declared overfished.
Amendment 18 (2021) documents the Pacific sardine rebuilding plan. This amendment was obligated by NMFS notifying the Council in 2019 that the Pacific sardine biomass estimate had fallen below the 50,000 mt minimum stock size threshold.
Amendment 19 (2022) added descriptions of Standardized Bycatch Reporting Methodology (SBRM), which is a consistent procedure or procedures used to collect, record, and report bycatch data in an FMP managed fishery. The CPS SBRM consists of a suite of reporting and monitoring programs required by the states of California, Oregon, and Washington including logbooks, fish landing receipts, shorebased/dockside sampling, and observer programs for newly developing fisheries.
Amendment 20 (2023) removes management categories for CPS, specifically the nomenclature of “active” and “monitored” and describes management for each management unit species or stock individually. It was intended to improve clarity regarding the management approaches for stocks or species in the CPS FMP, but not revise the manner in which stocks or species are managed.
Amendment 21 (2024) provided a comprehensive administrative update of the FMP to improve clarity and did not make any changes to the management of CPS fisheries.
Council staff
Katrina Bernaus is the Staff Officer for coastal pelagic species. You may email her at katrina.bernaus@noaa.gov or call (503) 820-2420 (toll free (866) 806-7204).
Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) is soliciting proposals from a qualified person or group to facilitate a three-day webinar-based workshop scheduled for April 27-29, 2021 to solicit stakeholder recommendations for fishery objectives, performance metrics for assessing the attainment of fishery objectives, and alternative management strategies to be evaluated via a management strategy evaluation (MSE) of Northeast Pacific sablefish (Anoplopoma fimbria). The contractor will attend weekly planning meetings of the Pacific Sablefish Transboundary Assessment Team (PSTAT) to assist in planning the sablefish MSE workshop, provide guidance on meeting best practices, and prepare a workshop report detailing the key recommendations resulting from the sablefish MSE workshop.
For questions and request for proposal (RFP) information, please contact Ms. Patricia Crouse at the Council office.
Notifications/Deadlines
February 3, 2021 RFP will be posted online
February 15, 2021 5:00 PM (Pacific Standard Time) Deadline for proposals
“Highly migratory species” (HMS) include tuna, some shark species, and billfish—species that range widely through the ocean, often crossing international borders. These pelagic species live in the water of the open ocean, although they may spend part of their life cycle in nearshore waters.
HMS are harvested by U.S. commercial and recreational fishers and by foreign fishing fleets. For most Council-managed HMS stocks. only a small fraction of the total harvest is taken within U.S. waters.
The following species are managed under the Council’s highly migratory species fishery management plan:
Tunas: north Pacific albacore, yellowfin, bigeye, skipjack, and Pacific bluefin
Other: dorado (also known as dolphinfish and mahi-mahi)
Some species (such as pelagic thresher and bigeye thresher) are monitored for informational purposes. Others, including great white sharks, megamouth sharks, basking sharks, Pacific halibut, and Pacific salmon, are prohibited. These species must be released immediate by anyone accidentally catching them while targeting other species.
The fishery and gear
Several gear types are used to catch highly migratory species:
Vessels with troll gear and bait boats target albacore tuna off the west coast. On troll vessels, fishing lines are rigged to outriggers (trolling poles), which are deployed at about a 45 degree angle from the sea surface. Albacore are usually harvested by trollers with jigs or live bait. Bait boats release live bait into the water to encourage feeding and then use pole and line to catch the albacore.
A drift gillnet is a panel of netting suspended vertically in the water by floats, with weights along the bottom. Fish are entangled in the net. Drift gillnet gear is anchored to a vessel and drifts along with the current. It is usually used to target swordfish and common thresher shark. Drift gillnets are currently used off California.
Deep-set buoy gear is currently being tested with exempted fishing permits. This gear includes “standard buoy gear” and “linked buoy gear.” This type of gear could supplement other gears used to target swordfish.
Coastal purse seine. A purse seine is an encircling net that is closed by means of a purse line threaded through rings on the bottom of the net. This gear is effective in catching schooled tunas. “Coastal” purse seiners are smaller vessels that fish close to the California shore. They mainly harvest coastal pelagic species (sardines, anchovies, mackerel), but they also fish for bluefin and other tunas when they are available.
Large purse seine. Large purse seine gear is used in major fisheries in the eastern tropical Pacific and the central and western Pacific. This fishery is monitored and managed by the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC), the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC), and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). There are about 40 U.S. large-scale tuna purse seiners on the IATTC and WCPFC vessel registries.
Swordfish are also caught with harpoons (by only a few West Coast fishermen) and pelagic longliners (only Hawaii- permitted vessels). Pelagic longliners also target bigeye and yelloweye tuna.
Recreational fisheries. Recreational fisheries for HMS consist of private vessels and charter vessels using hook-and-line gear. In California, both private boats and a larger charterboat fleet fish for tunas, dorado, billfish, and sharks. Albacore tuna are a seasonally important recreational target off of Oregon and Washington. Charter vessels, mainly from San Diego, also fish in Mexico’s waters under license.
Date
Highly migratory species management action
June
The Council reviews proposals for exempted fishing permits (EFPs) and decides whether they merit further review at the next meeting.
September, even-numbered years
The Council finalizes its recommendations on any EFP proposals it considered in June. The Council also considers the status of the HMS fisheries and, as appropriate, proposes adjustments to the estimates used to determine the status of HMS stocks. If necessary, the Council directs the Highly Migratory Species Management Team (HMSMT) to prepare draft regulatory analysis to implement revised estimates of reference point values, ACLs, or other harvest objectives and/or management measures.
November, even-numbered years
If necessary, the Council directs the HMSMT to prepare a draft regulatory analysis to implement revised estimates of reference point values, ACLs, or other harvest objectives and/or management measures. The Council adopts for public review any proposed management measures.
March, even-numbered years
The Council adopts final recommendations to NMFS, the Department of State, and Congress for international measures to end overfishing and/or rebuild stocks and proposed regulations necessary for domestic fishery management.
HMS management schedule
Domestic management of HMS fisheries
Any commercial vessel landing HMS on the West Coast must obtain a Federal permit from NMFS. Both commercial and recreational charter boat harvesters of HMS species must keep logbooks documenting their catch. Some are required to carry fishery observers. These measures are intended to improve data about HMS catches.
Since HMS stocks move throughout large areas of the Pacific and are fished by many nations and gear types, management by the U.S. alone is not enough to ensure that harvests are sustainable.
The U.S. is a member of the IATTC, which is responsible for the conservation and management of fisheries for tunas and other species taken by tuna-fishing vessels in the eastern Pacific Ocean. The U.S. is also a member of the WCPFC, which plays a parallel role in the western and central Pacific (generally, west of 150° W. Longitude).
The fishery management plan provides a mechanism to meet U.S. responsibilities under the United Nations Agreement on the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks. The U.S. is also a member of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, which has developed a Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. As such, the U.S. is required to comply with international measures to reduce incidental catch of seabirds in longline fisheries, to conserve and manage sharks, to manage fishing capacity, and to prevent, deter, and eliminate illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing. In turn, the U.S. has developed national plans of action to meet these requirements.
Management issues
West Coast swordfish fishery. The Council has outlined goals and objectives to reduce finfish bycatch and incidental take of protected species in fisheries targeting swordfish off the West Coast. (Protected species affected by swordfish fisheries include some species of sea turtles, marine mammals, and seabirds.) While reducing these impacts, the Council wants to sustain an economically healthy fishery that can supply locally-caught fish. Measures to reduce bycatch in the California large-mesh drift gillnet fishery have been a focus of Council actions, but the Council also wants to encourage the use of other gear types with lower bycatch. Council measures include creating a Federal limited entry permit for this fishery. Furthermore, the California state assembly has passed legislation to phase out the fishery.
Vessels fishing out of Hawaii, under the Western Pacific Fishery Management Council’s Pelagic Species FMP, deliver more swordfish to the West Coast than other West Coast-based fisheries. Hawaii longliners operate under a regulatory framework mandating gear modifications and operating procedures to reduce the take of sea turtles when targeting swordfish. If a similar framework were implemented for West Coast vessels, Pacific Council-managed fisheries could target swordfish with this gear.
Overfishing. Special requirements in the Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA) are triggered when an internationally-managed stock is subject to overfishing or is designated as overfished. Consistent with the MSA, the Council responds by proposing measures to end overfishing and rebuild these stocks. Any response is complicated by the wide-ranging nature of the fish and the many nations, states, and regions involved. Effective management requires a great deal of cooperation among these entities. Therefore, the U.S. cannot rebuild HMS stocks alone. If the U.S. acts alone, U.S. harvesters could be penalized by having to comply with rules that other nations do not adhere to, and there would be little or no benefit to the fish stocks. Thus, the Council response focuses on ongoing interactions with international bodies (regional fishery management organizations) to develop cooperative ways to rebuild overfished stocks.
Sharks. Sharks are especially vulnerable to overfishing because of their biology and life history. The West Coast states have taken measures to protect sharks. A Federal law prohibits “shark finning,” where the fins are removed and the carcass is discarded. Including pelagic shark species in the FMP enables catches to be monitored and managed. The FMP also designates great white, megamouth, and basking sharks as prohibited species, meaning if these species are caught they may not be retained. This discourages intentional catch and, in cases where the shark survives the interaction, reduces fishing mortality.
Incomplete data. Improved data collection is needed in order to effectively manage highly migratory species, both in the commercial and recreational fisheries. The FMP includes provisions to increase and improve monitoring and reporting in HMS fisheries.
Acceptable biological catch (ABC). A scientific calculation of the sustainable harvest level of a fishery, used to set the upper limit of the annual total allowable catch.
Accountability measure (AM). A management control (such as a harvest limit) designed to prevent annual catch limits from being exceeded.
Anadromous. Fish that spend their adult life in the sea, but swim upriver to freshwater spawning grounds in order to reproduce.
Annual catch limit (ACL). ACLs are a cornerstone of the reauthorized Magnuson-Stevens Act of 2006. ACLs are vaguely defined in the Act as the calculated catch yield that cannot be exceeded for a particular species. Fisheries managers use the best available science to calculate the value of ACLs and seasonal limits.
Biological opinion (BO, BiOp). A scientific assessment issued by the National Marine Fisheries Service or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, as required by the Endangered Species Act for listed species. Determines the likelihood of an action to jeopardize the existence of a species listed under the Endangered Species Act.
Bycatch. Fish that are unintentionally captured in a fishery, but that are discarded (returned to the sea) rather than being sold, kept for personal use, or donated to a charitable organization. Bycatch plus landed catch equals the total catch, or total estimated fishing mortality.
Central Valley Index (CVI). A measure of the number of salmon produced by California’s Central Valley rivers, this is the sum of annual ocean fishery landings south of Point Arena, plus the spawning escapement of adult Central Valley stocks in the same year.
Coded-wire tag (CWT). A small piece of stainless steel wire that is injected into the snout of a hatchery-produced juvenile salmon or steelhead. Each tag is etched with a binary code that identifies its release group.
Conservation objective. Sometimes called the spawning escapement goal: the number of salmon needed to return to spawn in order to maintain the health of the stock.
de minimis. A restrictive harvest policy designed to minimize risks to stocks of concern while allowing minimal incidental impacts in fisheries targeting healthy and harvestable stocks.
Escapement. The number or proportion of fish surviving (escaping from) a given fishery at the end of the fishing season and reaching the spawning grounds.
Escapement goal. Same as “conservation objective” (see above).
Evolutionarily significant unit (ESU). A distinctive group of Pacific salmon, steelhead, or sea‐run cutthroat trout that is uniquely adapted to a particular area or environment and cannot be replaced.
Fishery management council. A fisheries management body established by the 1976 Magnuson‐Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to manage fishery resources in designated regions of the United States. There are eight regional Councils, including the Pacific Council.
FRAM. The Fishery Regulation Assessment Model, a model used in setting salmon harvest levels.
Klamath Management Zone (KMZ). The ocean zone between Humbug Mountain, Oregon, and Horse Mountain, California, where management emphasis is on Klamath River fall Chinook.
Management objective. An annual goal for spawning escapement, or a harvest rate, that may differ from the conservation objective.
Maximum sustainable yield (MSY). An estimate of the largest average annual catch or yield that can be continuously taken over a long period from a stock under prevailing ecological and environmental conditions. In Council management of naturally-spawning salmon stocks, MSY is usually approached as the number of adult spawners associated with this goal (Smsy).
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). A division of the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration. NMFS is responsible for conservation and management of offshore fisheries. The NMFS Regional Director is a voting member of the Council.
Optimum yield (OY). The amount of fish that will provide the greatest overall benefit to the Nation, particularly with respect to food production and recreational opportunities, and taking into account the protection of marine ecosystems. The OY is developed on the basis of the Maximum Sustained Yield from the fishery, taking into account relevant economic, social, and ecological factors.
Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC). The PSMFC is a non‐regulatory agency that serves Alaska, California, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. PSMFC (headquartered in Portland) administers salmon disaster relief funds, provides a communication exchange between the Pacific Fishery Management Council and the North Pacific Fishery Management Council, and provides information in the form of data services for various fisheries.
Preseason reports. Prior to the development of management options for the salmon season, the Council’s Salmon Technical Team develops four preseason reports: Review of Ocean Salmon Fisheries tallies catch and escapement from the most recent fishing season. Preseason I, Stock Abundance Analysis for [Year] Ocean Salmon Fisheries provides forecasts for stock abundance for the coming season. Preseason II, Analysis of Proposed Regulatory Options for [Year] Ocean Salmon Fisheries analyzes proposed regulatory options for the year’s ocean salmon fisheries. Preseason III, Analysis of Council Adopted Management Measures for [Year] Ocean Salmon Fisheries analyzes management measures adopted by the Council.
Rebuilding. The process of rebuilding an overfished stock. For salmon, rebuilding usually takes the form of reduced harvest limits.
Sacramento River fall Chinook (SRFC). Sacramento River fall Chinook are historically a significant stock in West Coast commercial and recreational fisheries.
Salmon Advisory Subpanel (SAS). A Council advisory body made up of commercial fishery, recreational fishery, tribal, and conservation representatives. These advisors play a large role in developing the Council’s annual salmon management options in March and April. SAS meetings are open to the public.
Salmon Technical Team (STT). The Salmon Technical Team helps the Council by summarizing data from the previous season, estimating the number of salmon in the coming season, and analyzing the effects of the Council’s recommendations and amendments. The STT is made up of scientists drawn from state, Federal, and tribal fisheries management agencies, all of whom have technical expertise in salmon management. STT meetings are open to the public.
Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC). A Council advisory body made up of scientists with biological and economic expertise. The SSC gathers and analyzes statistical, biological, ecological, economic, social, and other scientific information that is relevant to the management of Council fisheries.
Southern Oregon/Northern California coho (SONCC). SONCC coho salmon are found from Cape Blanco, OR south to the Mattole River, just north of Punta Gorda, CA. The Rogue and Klamath rivers support the two largest components of the stock complex. SONCC coho are listed under the Endangered Species Act as threatened.
Southern Resident killer whales (SRKW). A population of killer whales listed under the Endangered Species Act. The Council is required to consider the effects of Council-managed salmon fisheries on Southern Resident killer whales when setting salmon seasons.
Spawning. The production and depositing of eggs by salmon or other fish. For salmon, spawning occurs in rivers and tributaries meeting certain healthy environmental conditions.
Status determination criteria (SDC). Criteria (such as target and minimum escapement levels) which allow the Council to monitor a stock to determine annually, if possible, whether overfishing is occurring and whether the stock is overfished.
Tule Chinook. Columbia River fall Chinook exist in two basic forms: “brights” and “tules.” Brights enter the river first, mature slowly, and retain their silvery oceanic coloration well into the freshwater migration. Tules are later-timed, are sexually mature upon freshwater entry, and spawn in lower mainstem and tributary areas, primarily below the Dalles Dam.
