River Herring Bycatch Measures
The following information was excerpted from Commercial Fisheries News (Feb 2012 issue), and was provided to stakeholders by the New England Fishery Management Council.
Amendment 5 to the Atlantic Herring Fishery Management Plan Overview
Section 3.3 of Volume 1 of the Draft Amendment 5 document contains the measures to address river herring bycatch.
Alternative 2 (for directed permits, proposed for incidental and open access permits)
- Monitoring/Avoidance Options
- 100% Observer Coverage
- Closed Area 1 Sampling
- Trigger-based Monitoring
- Two-phase bycatch avoidance
Alternative 3 (for directed permits, proposed for incidental and open access permits)
- Protection Options
- Closed Areas
- Trigger-based Closed Areas
Section 3.4- Measures to address midwater trawl access to groundfish closed areas for all permit categories.
Note on River Herring Catch Caps
The Council will consider establishing a river herring catch cap for the Atlantic herring fishery among the several potential measures to reduce bycatch. the catch cap would be considered by the Council through a framework adjustment to the Herring Plan or the Atlantic herring fishery specifications process once the Atlantic states Marine Fisheries Commission completes its stock assessment.
Q&A
Why is it important to address river herring bycatch in Amendment 5?
...Because of the steep declines in the population abundance and the bycatch of river herring in small mesh fisheries such as Atlantic herring and others, river herring continues to be a significant concern of fishery managers. As a result, Amendment 5 proposes a range of options to address the problem.
How is the Council planning to address the problem?
It may be helpful to look at the alternatives to address river herring as two packages of measures, each with options. One of the packages would address the concerns by establishing monitoring avoidance areas, while another includes areas that would be closed under defined circumstances.
The first package of river herring monitoring and avoidance measures includes stepped up monitoring of river herring bycatch and encourages bycatch avoidance in defined areas on a bimonthly basis with increased observer coverage and sampling on declared herring trips. The additional monitoring would apply during certain times and in certain areas where river herring encounters with the herring fishery were observed between 2005 and 2009.
Options call for 100% coverage of A, B and possibly C vessels or alternatively, A, B and C as well as open access category D vessels. Other options include sampling protocols that are similar to the current requirements for Closed Area 1 and sub-options with or less than 100% observer coverage. The idea is to collect enough information to later develop strategies that target areas where interactions are observed or anticipated.
A subset of the measures described above would require additional monitoring in the bimonthly River Herring Monitoring/Avoidance Areas when a specified river herring catch trigger is reached within any of three general areas. Trigger areas include Statistical Area 521 (Cape Cod), the Gulf of Maine, and Southern New England. When the catch trigger in a specified trigger area(s) is reached, one of two additional monitoring options would apply to the smaller Monitoring/Avoidance Areas for the remainder of that fishing year.
The Monitoring/Avoidance Areas associated with catch triggers mirror the areas discussed earlier. They will vary according to each bi-monthly map provided in the Amendment 5 documents.
A third options uses an avoidance approach and is based on a pilot program... includes identification of bycatch avoidance areas, increased monitoring and sampling as necessary and the development of a mechanism for implementing long-term avoidance strategies. The Council has expressed support for these ongoing efforts until they are completed in late 2012. Further evaluation will take place at that time with a possibility of implementing the program through a framework adjustment to the Herring Plan.
What about the proposed river herring protection areas? Do they involve actual area closures vs. increased monitoring, as described In the first package above?
Yes. The second package of proposal includes seasonal closures that are intended to minimize river herring bycatch in the Atlantic herring fishery. One option to accomplish this would be based on times and areas where significant river herring encounters with the fishery were observed between 2005 and 2009, according to NEFOP data [federal observer data]. Once a threshold bycatch level is reached directed herring fishing would be prohibited in the quarter degree squares identified as River Herring Protection Areas in the Amendment 5 document. The closures would vary for each bi-monthly period during the year, and no closures would be scheduled from May through August.
Another scenario for closing areas is predicated on catch triggers using the same trigger areas [described above]. The actual triggers would be based on several options generated by the Herring Plan Development Team to produce the best estimates of river herring removals in recent years.
Potential areas slated for closure are the quarter-degree square Protection Areas found within the geographic range of the trigger areas. They function in a way that is similar to the avoidance area package scenario described earlier, but are not identical to them. Again, the actual protection areas vary with each bi-monthly period and once closed, directed herring fishing would be prohibited for the rest of the fishing year.
Vessels that possess A, B, C, or D herring permits and are fishing with mesh greater than 5.5 inches (and with no small mesh on board) would be exempt from the closed area provisions and limited access vessels could declare out of the fishery for a period of time.