Outline 1. Update from August 4 Committee mtg 1. Discussion of Compass Lexecon peer review 2. Development of A18 measures 1. Accumulation limits 2. Inshore/offshore 3. Data confidentiality 3. Other A18 business 2. Timeline 3. PDT tasks 2
Update – Discussion of Compass Lexecon peer review Panel comments (presented by coordinator, Chad Demarest): Panel generally agreed with CL that there is no evidence of market power in the fishery, but wished for more rigorous analysis. The 15.5% cap recommendation somewhat arbitrary. May reduce efficiency. Maintaining the HHI at <1,500 may be better. Concern about the potential for sector-level coordination. Committee discussion No evidence of market power in the most concentrated or limited stocks. Relevance of the competitive fringe in setting limits. More data on permit holdings may be helpful. Some critiques of CL may be fair and some may not be warranted. Some tasks that the panel wanted would be huge undertakings. No Committee motions to revise accumulation limit alternatives. 3
Update – Discussion of measures Accumulation Limits, Grandfathering and Disposition of Excess, Section 4.1.3 Wasn’t agreement on the intent of this section. Some felt that the purpose was to not create disruption on the front end, but not allow holdings to increase down the road. Others didn’t want to inhibit people from inheriting permits that would put them over the limit. Grandfathering. Consensus Statement: “In Section 4.1.3, Option A, only include sub- option B, that holdings as of the control date would be grandfathered.” Motion: “To move Section 4.1.3, Option A, Sub-option A (do not grandfather current holdings) to the Considered but Rejected section.” (7/1/0) The June Council motion said “insert an option”, but the OSC doesn’t want other choices. 4
Update – Discussion of measures Accumulation Limits, Section 4.1.3 Disposition of Excess Motion: “In Section 4.1.3, add a sub-Option C to Option B to allow the purchase of permits that exceed the PSC cap, with the stipulation that any PSC over the cap would be permanently deleted from that permit and redistributed to the remainder of the fleet annually in the manner described in Framework 45. It would not be used by the purchaser and would no longer be attached to that permit when it is sold.” (5/0/1) Motion: “In Section 4.1.3, add a sub-option D to Option B that would require relinquishment (permanent divestment) only of the PSC that is above the established cap.” (6/0/0) 5
Update – Discussion of measures Accumulation Limits, Section 4.1.3 Disposition of Excess OSC wants four distinct options 6 ABCD Can permits that put PSC over the limit be retained? YesNo?Yes Can the excess PSC be retained? Yesn/aNo Can the excess PSC be used?Non/a Distinct?
Update – Discussion of measures Inshore/Offshore GOM, Section 4.5 Views on Purpose. Committee clarified that they did not diminish the importance of fleet diversity. Want consistent access to inshore fish stocks to optimize quota utilization. Concentrated effort inshore is putting overall fleet diversity at risk. Don’t want to reconfigure the goals. Wasn’t agreement on how measures would apply to the recreational fishery. Consensus Statement: “The intent of the inshore/offshore measures (Section 4.5) is to address Goals 1 and 3 of Amendment 18.” Boundary Line. Consensus Statement: “In Section 4.5.1, part of the rationale for Alternative 2 Option B (boundary line at 70°15’) would be to create a distinction between the day-boat and the trip boat fishery. However, OSC didn’t go so far as to say that larger vessels couldn’t fish inshore. 7
Update – Discussion of measures Inshore/Offshore GOM, Section 4.5 Sub-ACLs. Wasn’t unanimous support for using a sub-ACL to achieve the goals. Didn’t want to reallocate the fishery. Motion: “In Section 4.5.2, Alternative 2, add sub-options to Options B and C that would have two time periods, a 10- or 20-year time series rolling forward (set in each specifications process). (5/1/0) Gear Restricted Area. Alternative 2 doesn’t align with the Council motion, b/c it wouldn’t “expand” the area. OSC thought they had articulated their vision. Declaration Time Periods. OSC thought they had articulated their vision. Wasn’t unanimous that this would support fleet diversity. Consensus Statement: “In Section 4.5.4, replace Alternative 2 with an alternative (and options) with declaration time periods at the trip level or higher (e.g., trip, season, annual).” Don’t want 3-month closures of the whole area. Grout inserted this @ Council mtg. Wanted declarations for days or months at a time. 8
Update – Discussion of measures Data Confidentiality, Section 4.4. Staff raised PDT’s concerns about the viability of Alternative 2 (releasing ACE trading data at the individual permit holder level). Lost meeting quorum just prior to the OSC discussion of this issue, so no motions. Very little discussion. 9
Update – Other A18 business Redfish Exemption Area FYI, the following motion was not considered, due to lack of quorum, but T. Alexander intends to bring this up in September. “Add to Amendment 18 and option for vessels to use a 5 1/2 inch cod end within the Red fish Exemption area (defined by coordinates below). 10 PointN. Lat.W. Long.Note A44°27.25'67°02.75' B44°16.25'67°30.00' C44°04.50'68°00.00' D43°52.25'68°30.00' E43°40.25'69°00.00' F43°28.25'69°30.00' G43°16.00'70°00.00' H42°00.00'70°00.00' I42°00.00'(67°00.63')(1) 1 The intersection of 42°00' N. latitude and the U.S.-Canada Maritime Boundary, approximate longitude in parentheses. This area is currently the Redfish 6 inch exempted area. Stipulations: 1)Prior to leaving the dock, vessel operators would be required to declare intent to fish in the Redfish Exemption area through the VMS by checking the box next to "Redfish Trip". 2)In the first part of the trip, vessel operators would be allowed to fish with conventional groundfish codends - 6.5 inch in the GOM and GB regulated mesh areas except when towing a separator trawl on GB where the codend may be 6 inch. 3)Vessel operators would be allowed to switch to 5.5 i nch codends at the end of the trip. 4)Vessel operators will report catch from the entire trip through the VMS prior to returning to port. 5)Vessel operators will submit a separate VTR to report catch or each codend.”
A18 Timeline 11 2014 Aug. 7PDT conference call Early Sept.PDT mtg. Sept. 9Documents due for RAP, GAP, OSC and Council mtgs. Sept. 16RAP (AM) and GAP (PM) mtgs. Sept. 17-18Committee mtg. Sept. 19Send documents to Council (w/o revision). Sept. 30-Oct.2NEFMC approves remaining Range of Alternatives (accumulation limits, inshore/offshore, data confidentiality). Oct.-Dec.Revised NOI, PDT develop DEIS, analyze probable effects.
PDT Tasks Find a way to help the OSC use their meeting time more effectively w/o circumventing the public process. Revise the Discussion Document Grandfathering and dealing with excess (4.1.3.) Determination of the sub-ACLs (220.127.116.11) Declaration time periods (18.104.22.168) Flesh out Affected Environment (PR, bio-physical) How other fisheries with accumulation limits have handled divestiture. Repeat PDT input on data confidentiality measures. Input (brief) on expected redfish motion. 12