84 Modify Existing Chinook and Chum Salmon Savings Areas
Purpose and Need
In the mid-1990s the Council and NOAA implemented BSAI salmon bycatch mitigation measures in the pollock trawl fishery and established Chinook and Chum Salmon Savings Areas. A number of restrictions already existed in the BSAI pollock trawl fishery and there was concern that the bycatch measures were ineffective in protecting salmon and placed unnecessary constraints on the target groundfish fishery. Catch and observer data suggested that pollock trawl fishing restrictions in Salmon Savings Areas were counterproductive as there were greater bycatch rates outside of these areas. 2006 marked the highest salmon bycatch rates up until that point and trigger a closure in the Chinook Salmon Savings Area for the first time since the regulation was implemented. Due to the continued BSAI salmon bycatch rates in the pollock trawl fishery, the Council decided to discuss alternatives to the existing salmon bycatch control measures.
Analysis
A 152-page EA and 19-page RIR analysis were prepared for Amendment 84. Three alternatives were considered, two of which involved opening access to Salmon Savings Areas to various degrees. One considered eliminating the regulatory closures in the area, while the other suspended regulatory closures in the areas for pollock cooperatives and CDQ groups to practice their VRHS closure system. While both solved the problem of placing unnecessary economic and logistical burdens on the pollock trawl fishery, the Council favored the alternative that encouraged voluntary participation in a bycatch control system by penalizing the worst offenders. The RIR analysis cautioned relying too heavily on the estimates of foregone salmon ex vessel value. These estimates may overstate the true commercial ex vessel values foregone while understating the economic and social value when all uses and users are included. The RIR also found that the Council supported Alternative 3 would reduce management and enforcement costs as much of the cost would be placed on the industry.
Regulation Summary
Amendment 84 established Chinook and non-Chinook salmon PSC limits for the Bering Sea pollock trawl fishery. Bycatch reduction is based on a voluntary rolling hot spot (VRHS) closure system implemented by pollock cooperatives and CDQ groups. The closures of the Chum Salmon Savings Area and Chinook Salmon Savings Area would be suspended contingent upon the implementation of a VRHS. The Council would initiate subsequent action if it determines that the VRHS closure system does not effectively reduce salmon bycatch. When the non-Chinook PSC limit of 42,000 has been reached, NMFS will prohibit directed fishing for pollock with trawl gear in the Chum Salmon Savings Area. Similarly, when the PSC limit for Chinook salmon is met Chinook Salmon Savings Area 1 and 2 will be closed to the pollock trawl fleet. However, vessels operating under the VRHS can participate in directed pollock trawl fishing in area 2.
Results
Salmon bycatch was better controlled by flexible VRHS closures than regulatory closures. Further modification to salmon bycatch controls were made under Amendment 91.