89 Bering Sea Habitat Conservation
Purpose and Need
In February 2005, the Council took final action in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA) and Aleutian Islands (AI) to conserve essential fish habitat (EFH) by adopting a collection of management measures aimed to reduce the potential impacts of fishing on the areas. While the Bering Sea had been analyzed in the EIS, the Council chose not to take action because impacts of trawl fishing were lower and did not require immediate action like GOA and AI. The goal of the Council in their decision to proceed with an analysis of trawl restrictions in the Bering Sea was largely to isolate the footprint of the fleet. The Council decided to focus on reducing the effects of nonpelagic trawling in the EBS largely because trawling employs gear that fishes hard on the bottom, has high long-term effect indices (LEI) on habitat, and was widely distributed, which could have potentially increased dramatically with increases in total allowable catch (TAC) limits for flatfish.
Analysis
A 230-page EA and RIR analysis was prepared for this amendment. Three alternatives were analyzed, which in addition to the status quo considered area closures (Alternative 2 — termed an ‘open area’ approach where certain areas would be open to trawl fishing while others were prohibited) and gear modifications (Alternative 3 — specifically modifications to the trawl sweeps used in flatfish target fisheries). The analysis also included five options identifying specific closure areas. Any of the alternatives and options could be adopted in combination. Ultimately the Council adopted Alternative 2 and four of the area closure options. The Council did not adopt the proposed gear modification as part of Amendment 89 because the technology proposed had not been sufficiently tested. The EA found that there would be no significant impact on species in the area or habitat. The RIR analysis determined that the largest potential effect on revenue at risk would be from Alternative 2.
Regulation Summary
Amendment 89 closed a 133,000 square nautical mile area of the EBS to nonpelagic trawl fishing. The areas closed to nonpelagic trawling are:
- Bering Sea Habitat Conservation Area (HCA),
- St. Lawrence Island HCA,
- St. Matthew Island HCA,
- Nunivak Island, Etolin Strait, and Kuskokwim Bay HCA, and
- Northern Bering Sea Research Area (NBSRA).
The NBSRA was established as a part of this amendment to consider and identify protection measures for various species within the NBSRA, as well as subsistence needs of Western Alaska coastal communities in the nearshore area. Within the NBSRA trawl fishing may be allowed at some point pursuant to a scientific research plan.
Results
Amendment 89 succeeded in freezing the footprint of nonpelagic trawl fishing in the Bering Sea by prohibiting nonpelagic trawl in the northernmost shelf area and the deepwater basing (Bering Sea HCA and NBSRA) The creation of the NBSRA included a Council request for NMFS to develop a scientific research plan for the area, to identify where nonpelagic trawl fishing may be allowed, and to initiated an adaptive management experiment of the effects of nonpelagic trawl gear in previously untrawled areas. The AFSC began work on a research plan in 2010, but in June 2011, the Council suspended development of the plan in consideration of considerable testimony from tribes and members of communities adjacent to the research area opposing its development, as well as testimony from the trawl industry indicating that they were not actively interested in fishing in the area at that time. The analysis’ Alternative 3, which proposed gear modifications for all nonpelagic tawl gear used in flatfish target fisheries, was adopted two years later in Amendment 94.