Draft Actions and Alternatives for the Draft Environmental Impact Statements (DEIS) SERO Island-Based Fishery Management Plans (FMPs) 159th Caribbean Fishery Management Council Regular Meeting April 18-19, 2017 St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands

Draft Actions and Alternatives Draft Environmental Impact Statements (DEIS) for the Island-Based FMPs Action 1 - Determine Species to be Included for Management in the X Island FMP Action 2 - Establish Stocks or Stock Complexes in the X Island FMP Action 3 - Management Reference Points Action 4 - Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Description and Identification for Species Not Previously Managed in Federal Waters of X Island Action 5 - Framework Procedures for the X Island FMP

Action 1: Determine Species to be Included for Management in each of the St. Croix (STX), St. Thomas/St. John (STT), and Puerto Rico (PR) FMPs Preferred Alternative 2 – For those species for which landings data are available, indicating the species is in the fishery, the Council will follow a stepwise application of a set of criteria to determine inclusion/exclusion in FMPs Criterion A. Include: overfished species, prohibited harvest species due to ecological importance, or species with seasonal closures or size limits. Criterion B. From the remaining species, exclude: species that infrequently occur in federal waters based on expert analysis guided by available data. Criterion C. From the remaining species, include biologically vulnerable species or species with essential ecological value, as determined by expert analysis. Criterion D. From the remaining species, include economically important species based on threshold of landings or value and important bycatch species, as established by expert analysis.

Action 1: Determine Species to be Included for Management in each of the (STX, STT, and PR) FMPs Puerto Rico FMP Queen conch (1), spiny lobster (1), sea cucumbers, sea urchins, all coral, and 63 finfish species (*18 new finfish species) Finfish Species New to Management under the Puerto Rico FMP Family Species common names Snappers Cubera snapper Groupers Yellowmouth Triggerfishes Gray triggerfish Jacks Crevalle jack, African pompano, Rainbow runner Eagle and Manta Manta, spotted eagle ray, sting ray Mackerels and Tunas Little tunny, Blackfin tuna, King mackerel, Cero, Wahoo, Tripletail Barracudas Great barracuda Dolphin fishes Dolphin, Pompano dolphin

Action 1: Determine Species to be Included for Management in each of the STX, STT, and PR FMPs St. Croix FMP Queen conch (1), spiny lobster (1), sea cucumbers, sea urchins, all coral, and 43 finfish species (* 2 new finfish species) Finfish Species New to Management under the St. Croix FMP Family Species common names Mackerels and Tunas Wahoo Dolphin fishes Dolphin St. Thomas/St. John FMP Queen conch (1), spiny lobster (1), sea cucumbers, sea urchins, all coral, and 47 finfish species (*3 new finfish species) Finfish Species New to Management under the St. Thomas/St. John FMP Family Species common names Groupers Yellowmouth Mackerels and Tunas Wahoo Dolphin fishes Dolphin

Action 2: Establish stocks or stock complexes in each of the (STT, STX, PR) FMPs Alternative 1. No Action. In the X Island FMP, retain the stocks/stock complexes presently used for management in the X Island EEZ under the Reef Fish, Spiny Lobster, Queen Conch, and Corals and Reef Associated Plants and Invertebrates (Coral) FMPs. Alternative 2. Do not organize the species in the X Island FMP in stock complexes. Species would be managed as individual stocks.   Alternative 3. Manage species in the X Island FMP as individual stocks or as stock complexes, based on scientific analysis, including one or more of the following: cluster analysis based on landings patterns; outcomes from the SEDAR Caribbean Data Evaluation Workshop (2009) (only for species previously managed that will remain in the FMP); biological/life history similarities and vulnerability (for all species); or, expert opinion from the scientific and fishing communities (for all species). (Tables) Alternative 4. Where there are stock complexes, select an indicator stock based on any of the following (Sub-Alternatives TBD)

Action 2: Establish stocks or stock complexes in each of the (STT, STX, PR) FMPs Alternative 3. (DRAFT) – Recommendations from SSC and DAPs for PUERTO RICO * Indicator species (draft)

Alternative 3. (DRAFT) – Recommendations from SSC and DAPs (Puerto Rico...)

Action 2: Establish stocks or stock complexes in each of the (STT, STX, PR) FMPs Alternative 3. (DRAFT) – Recommendations from SSC and DAPs (PUERTO RICO)

Action 2: Establish stocks or stock complexes in each of the (STT, STX, PR) FMPs Alternative 3. (DRAFT) – Recommendations from SSC and DAPs for ST.CROIX

Action 2: Establish stocks or stock complexes in each of the (STT, STX, PR) FMPs Alternative 3. (DRAFT) – Recommendations from SSC and DAPs for ST. CROIX

Action 2: Establish stocks or stock complexes in each of the (STT, STX, PR) FMPs Alternative 3. (DRAFT) – Recommendations from SSC and DAPs for ST.THOMAS/ST. JOHN

Action 2: Establish stocks or stock complexes in each of the (STT, STX, PR) FMPs (Continue) Alternative 3. (DRAFT) – Recommendations from SSC and DAPs for ST. THOMAS/ST. JOHN

Action 2: Establish stocks or stock complexes in each of the (STT, STX, PR) FMPs (Continue) Alternative 3. (DRAFT) – Recommendations from SSC and DAPs for ST. THOMAS/ST. JOHN

Action 3: Define Management Reference Points for Stocks/Stock complexes in each of the Puerto Rico, St. Thomas/St. John and St Croix FMPs (*UNDER DEVELOPMENT) (DRAFT) Action  3(A): Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) Control Rule for Stocks/Stocks Complexes in the X Island FMP.   Alternative 1. No action. Retain the specification of an ABC control rule by the methods used in the 2010 and 2011 Caribbean ACL Amendments, as applicable (varies per Island). For those species not previously managed in federal waters of X Island, no ABC control rule is established.   Alternative 2. The OFL and ABC will be set by the Council’s SSC on an ad hoc basis for each stock/stock complex. Alternative 3. For a stock/stock complex in the X Island FMP, adopt the ABC Control Rule described in Table X. See Flowchart

(DRAFT) Action  3A Flowchart 

DRAFT Alternatives (TBD*) Action  3(B): Annual Catch Limits for Stocks/Stocks Complexes in the X Island FMP.   Things to Consider Council establishes management uncertainty Optimum Yield (OY) = the amount of fish which 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. OY was set as = ACL in the 2010 and 2011 Caribbean ACL Amendments The AM Triggers Amendment is based on the relationship between the ACL and OY. DRAFT Alternatives (TBD*) Alternative 1. The ACL would be derived by the methods used in the 2010 and 2011 Caribbean ACL Amendments, as applicable. For species not previously managed in federal waters, no ACL is determined. Alternative 2. For a stock/stock complex in the X Island FMP, determine the ACL based on the formula in one of the sub-alternatives below and the ABC established in Action 3(A). Sub-Alternatives 2a -2x. ACL = ABC x buffer ; B. is prescribed as such on the basis of the maximum sustainable yield from the fishery, as reduced by any relevant economic, social, or ecological factor; and C. in the case of an overfished fishery

Separation of recreational and commercial sectors Action  3(B)(ii): Annual Catch Limit Allocation and Management (Puerto Rico FMP only) Separation of recreational and commercial sectors Alternative 1. No action. Do not specify sector-specific ACLs. Alternative 2. Specify separate commercial and recreational ACLs Need to specify separate ACLs based on ??

Action 4. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Description and Identification for Species Not Previously Managed in Federal Waters of X Island EFH: "those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding or growth to maturity.” Identification and Description of EFH must occur for any new species added to the FMPs and any existing designations removed for species not included in the island- based FMPs.  Alternative 1. No action. Do not describe and identify EFH for species not previously managed in federal waters of X Island. Alternative 2. Describe and identify EFH according to functional relationships between life history stages of federally-managed species and X Island marine and estuarine habitats. - Functional relationships are modeled on the basis of utilization and degrees of utilization of habitats by species and life stages. This alternative requires information on both habitat utilization and the location and extent of habitats in order to map EFH. (This is how EFH was designated in our FMPs

Action 4. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Description and Identification for Species Not Previously Managed in Federal Waters of X Island Alternative 3. Use other method(s) to describe and identify EFH for species not previously managed in federal waters of X Island. The March 2004 Final EIS for the Generic EFH Amendment explored a number of concepts that could be used depending on data availability. Some of these methods for describing EFH include: Designating EFH based on distribution data (distribution of habitat types, fish species and fishing effort) (Level 1 data – surveys of presence/absence; simple habitat/species associations). Designating EFH based on habitat-related densities of the species (EFH would be defined as the area where the density or relative abundance of a species life stage is above a threshold level) (Level 2 – Survey/fishery related CPUE as proxy for density; or spatial modeling of probability of occurrence, or other forms of habitat suitability models). Using spatial data to designate EFH (Level 2 - would use spatially explicit, qualitative or quantitative information that link fish distributions and habitat to describe and identify EFH). (Continues on next slide)

6) Designating EFH based on production rates by habitat. Action 4. Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Description and Identification for Species Not Previously Managed in Federal Waters of X Island Habitat suitability models (uses habitat suitability modeling prepared by NOS to infer information about species distribution, and possibly relative density (i.e. assuming that habitats with a higher suitability support greater abundances of a species life stage). Designating EFH based on data on growth, reproduction, or survival rates within habitats (obtained from tagging data (growth), fecundity data by area). 6) Designating EFH based on production rates by habitat.

Action 5: Framework Procedures for each of the Island-Based FMPs The purpose of the framework is to allow the Council to more expeditiously adjust reference points and management measures in response to changing fishery conditions (usually takes less time than an amendment) Alternative 1. No action. Do not modify the existing framework procedure for implementing management measures in the X Island FMP. Alternative 2. Adopt the base Framework Procedure listed in Table X. Alternative 3. Adopt the more broad Framework Procedure listed in Table Y. Alternative 4. Adopt the more narrow Framework Procedure listed in Table Z. See summary of alternatives in next page

Types of Open Frameworks Abbreviated Framework Types of Framework Procedures Open frameworks address issues where there is more policy discretion in selecting among various management options developed to address an identified management issue, such as changing a size limit to reduce harvest. Takes less time than an amendment to an FMP. Example: Changing the commercial quota for queen conch in STX in 2013 (Regulatory Amendment 2 to the Queen Conch FMP). Alternative 2 (base) has two types of open frameworks: Types of Open Frameworks Abbreviated Framework Standard Framework Can be used for routine or insignificant changes Regulatory changes that do not qualify as routine or insignificant. Request is made with letter or memo from the Council to the RA with supporting analyses (biological, social, economic) Requires a completed framework document with supporting analyses If RA concurs and approves action, it will be implemented through publication of FR Notice. Council to specify the list of Actions that can be taken under each Framework (set thresholds of what can be done under each, for example, bag limit change of 1 fish (Abbreviated)

Closed Frameworks address much more specific factual circumstances, where the FMP and implementing regulations identify specific action to be taken in the event of specific facts occurring, such as closing a sector of a fishery after their quota has been harvested. The action’s ecological, economic, and social impacts have already been described in the analyses prepared when the framework measure was adopted. These actions are taken by “rule-related notices” Example: AM-based closures in 2016 fishing year when an ACL has been exceeded. Federal Register Notice announcing the closures.

Action 5: Framework Procedures - Summary comparison of draft alternatives Alternative 2 (base) Alternative 3 (broad) Alternative 4 (narrow) Types of Framework (FMW) Processes Open abbreviated (Abbv.) Open Standard Closed Open When can open framework be used New stock assessment or other comparable scientific information. New info or circumstances When changes are required to comply with applicable law or court order. Abbreviated FMW can be used for minor or insignificant changes. Standard framework for all other allowed changes. In response to any additional information or changed circumstances. Only when there is a new assessment. Actions that can be taken Abbreviated Open FMW can be used for actions that are considered minor and insignificant Standard Open FMW. Used for all others. List of actions that can be taken under Abbv. And Standard Open FMW are given. Closed FMW can be used for a specific list of actions. Open FMW can be used for a representative list of actions, plus other measures deemed appropriate by the Council. Closed FMW can be used for a specific list of actions, plus any other immediate actions specified in the regulations. Open FMW can only be used for specific listed actions. Public Input Requires public discussion in at least one Council meeting. Requires public discussion at one Council meeting Requires public discussion during at least three Council meetings, and discussion at separate public hearings within the areas most affected by the proposed measures. APs/SSC participation The Council may convene its SSC or an AP(s), as appropriate Convening the SSC or an AP(s) prior to final action is not required. The Council shall convene its SSC and an AP(s). How is a request of action made Abbv. requires a letter or memo from the Council with supporting analyses Standard requires a completed FMW document with supporting analyses. Via letter, memo, or the completed FMW document with supporting analyses.

Summary/Status of Draft Actions and Alternatives Draft Environmental Impact Statements (DEIS) for the Island-Based FMPs Action 1 - Determine Species to be Included for Management in the X Island FMP * Preliminary Preferred – Alternative 2 Action 2 - Establish Stocks or Stock Complexes in the X Island FMP * Final draft groupings recommended by SSC and DAPs. - Indicator species for some groups? Action 3 - Management Reference Points * Preliminary Preferred – Alternative 3 for all islands/species: Use ABC Control Rule (ABC CR) recommended by SSC Action 3 sub-actions and alternatives will be modified based on the ABC CR (see flowchart) New sub-action to allocate harvest between commercial and recreational sectors (Puerto Rico only)

Summary of Draft Actions and Alternatives DEIS’s for the Island-Based FMPs Action 4 - Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) Description and Identification for Species Not Previously Managed in Federal Waters of X Island * Alternatives: methods previously evaluated/used for rest of managed sps. Action 5 - Framework Procedures for the X Island FMP * Four alternatives modified from Gulf/SA/Caribbean Councils framework procedures.

Next steps: IPT continues developing the draft alternatives and effects analyses to include on each of the DEIS for each island management area. IPT incorporates recommendations from July SSC meeting on Action 3 (Management Reference Points) into first versions of DEIS’s Council reviews the draft alternatives and provides input at the August 2017 Meeting. The preferred alternative for each Action will become the management measure that will be included in the respective FMP.

IBFMP Draft Timeline (Updated 4/2017) December 2016 Council Meeting Reviewed DRAFT Actions and Alternatives; Goals and Objectives from PR, STT/STJ, STX; Action 3 guidance; Next steps February 2-6, 2017 SSC Meeting Finalized Action 1 species selection. Discussed Action 2 groupings. Scheduled new SSC Meeting for April 2017 to finalize Action 2 and Action 3 March 7-8, 2017 DAP Meetings Reviewed and Commented on Actions and Alternatives-emphasis groupings . Meanwhile, staff continued development of DRAFT FMPs Public Hearing Drafts and DEIS’s April 3-7, 2017 Finalized Action 2 groupings. Finalized Action 3 year sequences for Puerto Rico. Scheduled new SSC Meeting for July 2017 to finalize Action 3. April 18-19, 2017 SSC preliminary outcomes; DAP input Spring/Summer IPT Continue development of DEIS’s with info available July 10-14, 2017 Finalize Action 3 for all island management areas Summer 2017 Continue development of DEIS’s with information from SSC mtg. August 15-16, 2017 Review outcomes of July SSC Meeting; Review first draft of DEIS’s; Choose Preferred Alts* Fall 2017 Finalize FMPs PHDs and DEIS’s for December Council Meeting Dec 13-14, 2017 Council reviews FMPs PHDs and DEIS’s (if no changes needed approve for public hearings and DEIS’s publication) Winter 2018 Staff Publish DEIS’s for public comment. Hold Public Hearings Spring 2018 Council votes to submit FMPs for Secretarial approval

Additional Slides

*Action 5: Framework Procedures (DRAFT) Allows a class of actions to be undertaken pursuant to procedures described under the particular Island-Based FMP without requiring an amendment to the underlying FMP. Thus management actions can be adjusted within the scope and criteria established by the FMP and implementing regulations, which differs from revising management measures through a lengthier amendment to the FMP. In this action, framework measures are intended to describe future management actions, which would be implemented within a range as defined and analyzed in the FMPs and associated analyses. If the action proposed does not fall within the scope of the FMP, then the FMP must be amended and framework actions cannot be used. Management measures that could be adjusted through framework amendments include quotas adjustments, closures, bag/trip limits, gear rules, and reference point modifications. The purpose of the framework is to allow the Council to more expeditiously adjust reference points and management measures in response to changing fishery conditions