Summer Flounder - Squarespace · 2012 to 2013 assessments Summer Flounder Historical Retrospective...

Summer Flounder

2016-2018 Management Measures

August 12, 2015

New York, NY

Outline

1. Specifications Timeline

2. Stock Status

3. Regulatory Review

4. Recent Fishery Performance

5. Advisory Panel Fishery Performance Reports

6. Staff Recommendations

7. SSC Recommendations

8. Monitoring Committee Recommendations

9. Additional Advisor Comments

Specifications Timeline

• Advisory Panel meets to develop Fishery Performance Reports

June 17

• SSC meets to recommend ABCsJuly 22-23

• Monitoring Committee meets to recommend ACTs

July 23-24

• Advisory Panel webinar to review stock status and SSC/MC recommendations

July 29

• Joint Council and Board meetingAugust 12

STOCK STATUS

Stock Status

2013: Last benchmark assessment (SAW/SARC 57)

• Age-structured assessment program (ASAP)

• Not overfished, overfishing not occurring in 2012

2014: Data update only

• Catch, landings, discards, fishery independent survey indices

2015: Assessment update

• Not overfished, but overfishing was occurring in 2014

Biological Reference Points

Fishing mortality threshold

• F35% = FMSY proxy = 0.309

Biomass target

• SSB35% = SSBMSY = 137.56 mil lb (62,394 mt)

Biomass threshold

• Minimum stock size threshold = 1/2 SSBMSY =

68.78 mil lb (31,197 mt)

From SAW/SARC 57:

Fishing Mortality

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,0001

98

2

198

6

1990

199

4

199

8

200

2

200

6

2010

F (

ag

e 4

)

To

tal C

atc

h (

mt)

Total Catch and Fishing Mortality(from 2013 assessment)

Total Catch F (age 4) F35% = FMSY = 0.309

Fishing Mortality

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,0001

98

2

198

4

198

6

1988

199

0

199

2

199

4

199

6

199

8

200

0

200

2

200

4

200

6

200

8

201

0

201

2

2014

F (

ag

e 4

)

To

tal C

atc

h (

mt)

Total Catch and Fishing Mortality2015 Update

Total Catch F (age 4) FMSY= F35% = 0.309

SSB and Recruitment

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,0001

98

2

198

6

199

0

199

4

199

8

200

2

2006

201

0

R (

ag

e 0

, 0

00

s)

SS

B (

mt)

Spawning Stock Biomass (SSB) and Recruitment (R)

(from 2013 assessment)

R SSB SSB35% = SSBMSY = 62,394 mt

SSB threshold

SSB target

SSB and Recruitment

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

20

00

2002

2004

2006

20

08

2010

2012

2014

R (

ag

e 0

, 0

00

s)

SS

B (

mt)

Spawning Stock Biomass (SSB) and Recruitment (R)

2015 Update

R SSB

SSBMSY = SSB35% = 62,394 mt 1/2 SSBMSY = 1/2 SSB35% = 31,197 mt

SSB threshold

SSB target

Note: shift in F (up) and SSB (down)from 2011 to 2012 to 2013 assessments

Summer Flounder Historical Retrospective

1990-2015 Stock Assessments

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Fis

hin

g M

ort

ali

ty (

F)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Year

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

SS

B (

000s m

t)

0

15

30

45

60

75

Research Surveys

All ongoing survey indices (aggregate N) have declined since their most recent peak (generally in 2009-2012)

– NEFSC Spring -49%, NEFSC Fall -27%, MADMF Spring -57%,

MADMF Fall -43%, RIDFW Fall -64%, RIDFW Monthly -82%,

URIGSO -67%, CTDEEP Spring -22%, CTDEEP Fall -54%,

NYDEC -28%, NJDFW -40%, DEDFW -17%, VIMS ChesMMAP

-98%, NEAMAP Spring -51%, and NEAMAP Fall -60%.

YOY indices suggest good recruitment in 2002, 2004, and 2009, and poorer recruitment since then.

REGULATORY REVIEW

Regulatory Review

Multi-year specifications were set for 2014-2015, based on 2013 assessment projections

In 2014: SSC and Council/Board reviewed 2015 catch limits – Data update

– No changes recommended

Regulatory Review

2013 assessment: Level 3

– Now: “SSC-modified OFL probability distribution” level

No alternative level of uncertainty in OFL provided in assessment as required for level 2

Regulatory Review

Specified a CV of 60%

– “Considerably more accurate” than other mid-Atlantic assessments

– 60% based on review of CVs in published simulation experiments where model fully reflected underlying population dynamics

Regulatory Review

2015 ABC derived using:

– 2015 OFL = 27.06 mil lb (12,275 mt)

– FMSY proxy = F35% = 0.309

– 2014 projected SSB/SSBMSY = 95%

– P* = 0.378

– Lognormal distribution of OFL with CV = 60%

2015 ABC = 22.77 mil lb (10,329 mt)

RECENT FISHERY PERFORMANCE

Fishery Performance

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Lan

din

gs (

Mill

ion

s o

f lb

)

Commercial Recreational

Total landings

Fishery Performance

Year

Comm.

Landings

(mil lb)

Comm.

Quota

(mil lb)

Comm. %

Overage

(+)/

Underage(-)

Rec.

Landings

(mil lb)

Rec.

Harvest

Limit

(mil lb)

Rec. %

Overage

(+)/

Underage(-)

2010 13.55 12.79 +6% 5.11 8.59 -41%

2011 16.57 17.38 -5% 5.96 11.58 -49%

2012 12.91 12.73 +1% 6.49 8.49 -24%

2013 12.49 11.44 +9% 7.39 7.63 -3%

2014 11.32 10.51 +8% 7.40 7.01 +6%

5-yr

Avg.+4% -22%

Quota Monitoring

ADVISORY PANEL FISHERY PERFORMANCE REPORT

Fishery Performance Report

Environmental and Ecological Issues

Fishery performing well biologically

Market and Economic Issues

Commercial fishery performance could be improved

Potential to increase profits by reducing operating costs


Market and Economic Issues

Current state-by-state regulations and landings restrictions result in significant steam time/high operating costs

Overall economy has had big impact on for-hire and private recreational sectors

Southern NJ negatively impacted by regional recreational management


General Management Issues

Current large size limits focus effort on large females

Management should focus on reducing waste and increasing utilization of catch

Assumed discard mortality rates for recreational fishery may be underestimates


Commercial Management Issues

Turtle Excluder Device (TED) requirements affect distribution of effort and landings (reduced effort in southern end of management unit)

Minimum size limit unnecessary given minimum mesh size

– Eliminate min. size to reduce regulatory discards


Commercial Management Issues

Regional differences in discard mortality due to use of conveyers in northern areas to sort fish on deck


Recreational Management Issues

Northern and Southern New Jersey should have different recreational measures

Discards have increased due to high minimum size limits

Reduced opportunity to keep fish has led to decreases in for-hire customers



Total length limit suggested

Restrictions on striped bass may explain some increased effort on summer flounder and sea bass

Some believe sector separation should be considered (for-hire vs. private), but basis for separation would be flawed if MRIP data used



Concern about accuracy of MRIP estimates

Effort survey is flawed; coastal household telephone surveys not working

NMFS should test phone/web app for recreational data collection



Management should make better use of for-hire VTR data

Education/outreach should be increased on flounder handling, release techniques, and optimal hook size


Research Needs

Sex-specific assessment model

Information about segregation by season and sex

Spawning areas and timing to inform potential management strategies

Fishermen input needed on trawl survey design

STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS

Initial Staff ABC Recommendation

July 9 Memo

Consistent with ABC projections in assessment update

Based on SSC’s previous methodology

– Uses OFL projections from assessment update

– Assumes 60% CV for OFL

– Iterative approach assuming that the ABC is taken in previous year and updating biomass projections accordingly

Initial Staff ABC Recommendation

YearABC

(mil lb)ABC (mt) F P*

SSB

(mil

lb)

SSB

(mt)

2015 22.77 10,329 0.385 n/a 93.53 42,423

2016 12.60 5,713 0.208 0.258 104.17 47,251

2017 15.20 6,894 0.222 0.292 114.38 51,880

2018 18.12 8,219 0.234 0.325 123.13 55,852

Revised Staff Recommendation

Initial ABC recommendation would result in 45% reduction from 2015 to 2016

Fisheries would not be able to effectively absorb such a large reduction in a single year

Severe negative economic impacts


July 17 Memo

Staff recommend 3-year phase-in of catch reductions

Regulations allow deviation from control rule, provided that the ABC does not exceed OFL and probability of overfishing does not exceed 50%


Staff recommends deviating from ABC control rule and applying reduced buffer between the OFL and ABC in 2016 and 2017 to address economic and social concerns

Buffer for scientific uncertainty

ABC

OFL


Start with calculated buffer for 2016 based on typical application of Council risk policy

Using that calculated % buffer:

– Apply 1/3 in 2016

– Apply 2/3 in 2017

– Full buffer in 2018

% buffer

ABC

OFL


July 17 staff memo recommendation is based on calculations assuming use of a 30% CV

Results in 17% buffer from OFL to ABC calculated for 2016


OFL

ABC

10% buffer

OFL

ABC

12% buffer6%

buffer

17% buffer

ABC

OFL

2016 2017 2018

Phase-in approach in July 17 memo (30% CV):

YearABC

(mil lb)ABC (mt) F P*

SSB

(mil

lb)

SSB

(mt)

2015 22.77 10,329 0.385 n/a 93.53 42,423

2016 16.98 7,702 0.289 0.417 100.57 45,617

2017 17.31 7,853 0.268 0.332 108.48 49,205

2018 18.21 8,258 0.252 0.263 117.00 53,072


MAFMC SSCABC Recommendation

Summer Flounder

2016 Fishing Year

1) The level of uncertainty that the SSC deems mostappropriate for the information content of the mostrecent stock assessment, based on criteria listed in theOmnibus Amendment.

• Model structure for update was unchanged from SARC 57, the last accepted benchmark.

SSC Decision: SSC-modified OFL probability

distribution

2) If possible, the level of catch (in weight) and theprobability of overfishing associated with theoverfishing limit (OFL).

• Accepted FMSY proxy=F35% = 0.309

SSC Decision:

2016 8,194 mt 18.064 M lbs

2017 8,991 mt 19.821 M lbs

2018 10,159 mt 22.396 M lbs

3) The level of catch (in weight) and the probability ofoverfishing associated with the acceptablebiological catch (ABC) for the stock based on anapproach which phases-in any required reductions inthe ABC specifications over a three-year period withoutexceeding the OFL or P* = 50%.

• SSC maintained the CV=60%

• ABC is ~ 90% of OFL in 2016

SSC Decision:

2016 7,375 mt 31.107 M lbs P*=0.425

2017 7,193 mt 28.397 M lbs P*=0.344

2018 7,111 mt 27.050 M lbs P*=0.260

3) The level of catch (in weight) and the probability ofoverfishing associated with the acceptablebiological catch (ABC) for the stock based on anapproach which phases-in any required reductions inthe ABC specifications over a three-year period withoutexceeding the OFL or P* = 50%.

• The phased in approach does not meet the Council’s risk policy in the first two years.

• The projected 2018 biomass is approx. equal to that expected if risk policy had been followed.

SSC Notes:

3) The level of catch (in weight) and the probability ofoverfishing associated with the acceptablebiological catch (ABC) for the stock.

• An updated assessment must be conducted for the SSC review of the Summer Flounder ABCs next year.

SSC Decision:

4) The most significant sources of scientific uncertaintyassociated with determination of OFL and ABC.

• Retrospective patterns evident in the assessment update have substantial implications for the reliability of model projections and inferences regarding the status of the stock. The causes of the retrospective pattern are unknown.

• Projections are made assuming the ABC will be harvested fully, but not exceeded. However, there are trends in harvest indicating an increasingly likelihood of catches exceeding ABCs.

SSC Decision (1 of 3):


• The potential exists for sex-specific differences in life history parameters.

• The existence of spatially distinct size distributions.

• NEFSC surveys and PMAFS fishery sampling confirm sexually-dimorphic and time-varying spatial differences in growth that are not fully accounted for in the stock assessment because not all fishery and survey catches were fully and independently sampled by sex.



• Landings from commercial fishery assume no under-reporting of Summer Flounder landings and thus should be considered minimal estimates.

• The current assumption for M remains an ongoing source of uncertainty. M is highly influential on assessment results and impacts nearly all aspects of the assessment and evaluation of status.

• The stock-recruitment relationship could not be defined internally in the model and thus an FMSY proxy was used to calculate the OFL.


5) Ecosystem considerations accounted for in the stockassessment.

SSC Decision: No additional ecosystem

recommendations were considered by the SSC

6) Research recommendations (1 of 2).

• The SSC recommends an expedited benchmark assessment to seek to improve model performance and reduce the retrospective bias present in the current assessment update.

6) Research recommendations (2 of 2).

• The SSC recognizes the research recommendations provided in the assessment report. In addition, the SSC recommends research be conducted to:

– Evaluate uncertainties in biomass to determine potential modifications to OFL CV employed;

– Evaluate fully the sex- and size distribution of landed and discarded fish, by sex, in the Summer Flounder fisheries;

– Evaluate past and possible future changes to size regulations on retention and selectivity in stock

assessments and projections; and

– Incorporate sex-specific differences in size at age into the stock assessment.

6) Certification that the recommendations provided bythe SSC represent the best scientificinformation available.

To the best of the SSC's knowledge, these

recommendations are based on the best

available scientific information.

MONITORING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

Monitoring Committee Recs.

Monitoring Committee met July 23-24 to recommend Annual Catch Targets (ACTs) to account for management uncertainty

Also began review of commercial management measures


Commercial monitoring and closure system is timely; has typically been successful in holding landings to quota

However – 2 years of above-average overages (2013 and 2014)

States and GARFO should identify reporting/monitoring problems


If larger overages continue, Committee may need to address through future ACTs

Committee recommends no reduction from the commercial ACL to ACT for 2016-2018


Recreational fishery has performed relatively well for the past 5 years

However, Monitoring and Technical Committees will need to carefully consider effects of proposed harvest limit decreases

– No in-season closure authority for recreational fishery


Committee will consider management uncertainty explicitly when recommending recreational measures this fall

Committee recommends no reduction from the recreational ACL to ACT for 2016-2018


Monitoring/Technical Committees will conduct a thorough evaluation of commercial management measures this fall, for Council/Board consideration in December

– Minimum fish size– Minimum mesh size – Seasonal possession limit triggers (incidental

possession limits) – Exemption programs (small mesh exemption

program and NC flynet exemption)

OFL

ABC

Commercial ACL Comm. landings plus discards

Commercial ACT

Commercial Quota ACT minus comm. discards

Recreational ACL Rec. landings plus discards

Recreational ACT

Recreational Harvest LimitACT minus rec. discards

State Quotas

Landings portion

Recreational landings

40% of landings portion (FMP)

Comm. discardsDiscards portion x avg. % of discards from comm. fishery,

2012-2014

Rec. discardsDiscards portion x avg. % of discards from rec. fishery,

2012-2014

Discards portion

Commercial landings

60% of landings portion (FMP)

2016-2018 SSC Recommendations

YearABC

(mil lb)ABC (mt)

% change

from 2015

2015 22.77 10,329 --

2016 16.26 7,375 -29%

2017 15.86 7,193 -30%

2018 15.68 7,111 -31%

Commercial Quotas

Management Measure2015 2016 2017 2018

mil lb mil lb mil lb mil lb

ABC 22.77 16.26 15.86 15.68

ABC landings portion 18.45 13.54 13.19 13.16

ABC discards portion 4.32 2.72 2.67 2.52

Commercial ACL=ACT 13.34 9.42 9.19 9.10

Projected comm.

discards2.27 1.30 1.28 1.21

Commercial quota 11.07 8.12 7.91 7.89

Rec Harvest Limits

Management Measure2015 2016 2017 2018

mil lb mil lb mil lb mil lb

ABC 22.77 16.26 15.86 15.68

ABC landings portion 18.45 13.54 13.19 13.16

ABC discards portion 4.32 2.72 2.67 2.52

Recreational ACL=ACT 9.44 6.84 6.67 6.58

Projected rec. discards 2.06 1.42 1.39 1.32

Recreational

harvest limit 7.38 5.42 5.28 5.26

ADDITIONAL ADVISOR COMMENTS

Additional Advisor Comments

Reiterated that fishery seems to be performing well

Need to better account for stock expansion and shift to the northeast

Concern that quota cuts and reduced fishing pressure will lead to further reduced recruitment


Catch limit cuts of this magnitude are too drastic and too fast

Will have devastating economic and social impacts

– Elimination of directed fishery in some areas; will not be economically feasible to target

– Effort shifts to other species, though many are low value or already very restricted


Concerns about trawl survey assessment inputs

– Timing

– Areas covered

– Gear configuration and flatfish catchability

– Calibration coefficients (Albatross vs. Bigelow)


Additional assessment concerns:

– Uncertainty with regard to other inputs, e.g., MRIP

– Discard mortality rate assumptions

– SSB target is too high

– Too much precaution built in


Other recommendations:

– Alternative recreational strategies (e.g., total cumulative length limit or slot limit)

– Lower minimum sizes to reduce pressure on large spawning females

– Reduce biomass of predator species

– Sex-based assessment

– Reduce discard mortality

– Spawning time/area management

QUESTIONS?

Date post:	18-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	dohanh
View:	220 times
Download:	1 times

Summer Flounder - Squarespace · 2012 to 2013 assessments Summer Flounder Historical Retrospective...

Documents