in the atlantic herring and mackerel fisherys3.amazonaws.com/nefmc.org/13.-nefmc_mtg_012815... ·...

River Herring Bycatch Avoidance in the Atlantic Herring and Mackerel Fishery

Midwater Trawl Vessels

Mike Armstrong, PhD

Bill Hoffman

Brad Schondelmeier

Midwater Trawl Vessels

Rhode Island Bottom Trawl Vessels

Kevin Stokesbury, PhD

Dave Bethoney, PhD

Ray Jarvis

Presentation Overview1. Introduction and Program History

2. Portside Sampling – MA DMF

Objectives, Design, Improvements, Results

3. River Herring Bycatch Avoidance– MA DMF/SMAST/ MWT and RI SMBT


Massachusetts MarineFisheries


4. Program Evaluation – Does it work?

Shortcomings, Successes and Take-aways

5. Research Set-Aside Summary–

Review 2014, discuss 2015

Introduction - Participating Fisheries• Midwater Trawl Vessels (MWT)- Avg. 61,653mt/year since 2008

- Concentrate on MA landings only (>63% of MWT landings from Area1A, 1B, 2)

Credit: JJ Johnson


• Small-mesh Bottom Trawl Vessels (SMBT)- Avg. 4,500mt/year since 2008- Concentrate on RI landings only (>85% of BOT herring landings)

Credit: www.boatbanter.com

1. Program History

MA DMF Portside Sampling Program

1 Full-time BiologistMA-based MWT

Vessels

NFWF funds50% MA/MWT

sampling, RHBA

Rhode Island Small-mesh BT vessels

TNC funds RI SMBT sampling, extension of

RHBA Program

TNC funds both MWT and RI SMBT RHBAs �

Bridge $ gap to RSA


sampling, RHBA Program

MWT

RHBA Program

RI SMBT

RSA…

Bridge $ gap to RSA

2. Portside SamplingMA DMF

OBJECTIVES:

• Characterize Landings

• Sampling Goals

– 50%+ of MWT trips (landing in MA)

– 25-50% of RI SMBT trips (as $ allows)

• Provide RH%, tow locations to RHBA daily


• Collect river herring LFs and samples

– Age&Growth analysis

– Genetic studies

• Supplement NEFOP sampling

DESIGN:

• Representative, whole-boat samples

- Subsampling of unsorted landings

- Expand species %s � vessel hail

• ID all fish to species level

- 100 random LFs on target spp



- 100 random LFs on target spp

• LFs on all priority spp (RH/Shad, GFish)

• Digital, waterproof scales

- More accurate weights, fewer

samplers needed

IMPROVEMENTS:

2008-2010 � Subsample, Lot sample and Census samples

Co-sampled Trip (Portside vs. At-sea) Analysis

1. Cieri/Corriea (July 2010, 52 trips)� “Relatively low levels of agreement of

occurrence”, “no correlations between PS and AS estimates of trip weight”

2. Dean (May 2011, 30 trips)� Lot and Census sampling not representative of NEFOP

sampling



From Dean 2011: “None of the trips where both protocols [Portside Unsorted (PU) and At-sea

(AS)] detected a species had significant differences in bycatch estimates,” and…

“For the 24 trips that were sampled by both methods, 75% had a higher sample size under PU

sampling. As a result, the average CV from PU sampling was 42% less than that achieved under

AS on the same trips.”

Micah Dean 2011

2012-current � Only subsamples of

unsorted fish, whole-boat offloads

sampled

RESULTS:


Grant/

FisheryTime Period

# Trips

Sampled

Tons

Sampled

% Coverage # Vessels

SampledBy trip By wgt

NFWF (MWT) Oct’10-May’13 271 55,528 50% 53% 13

TNC (SMBT) Dec’11-current 230 6,241 31% 32% 8

TNC (MWT) Dec’13-current 30 5,271 prelim prelim 11


RESULTS:

301 trips (and 61,759 mt) for $288,906 in MWT fishery (since 2010)

230 trips (and 5,106 mt) for $101,297 in SMBT fishery (since 2011)

Costs include:

– Contracting of Portside Samplers

– 1 Field Coordinator (75%MWT/25%SMBT)

– Indirect

– Supplies



– Supplies

– SMAST support

Cost / Trip 2011 2012 2013 2014 AVERAGE

MWT $ 1,067 $ 959 $ 1,562 prelim $ 1,126

SMBT $ - $ 674 $ 326 $ 523 $ 416

Cost / 100mt 2011 2012 2013 2014 AVERAGE

MWT $ 526 $ 461 $ 826 prelim $ 557

SMBT $ - $ 1,872 $ 2,408 $ 1,997 $ 1,979

3. River Herring Bycatch Avoidance ProgramsMADMF/SMAST/MWT/SMBT

OBJECTIVES:

NFWF

• Reduce RH bycatch by 50%,

• Bycatch reduction independent of

management action

TNC


TNC

• Replicate NFWF RHBA,

• Make data available to managers,

• Modernize communications with vessels

• Increase fishermen’s awareness of RH

bycatch issues/trends

• Create real-time data communication

system

35 tows (of ≈350) > 2,000kg

80% of bycatch by weight

Observed bycatch

Mid-Water trawls 2000-Sept2010

High: Alosine weight >1.25% of target species weight

Moderate: Alosine weight between 1.25% and 0.2%

Low: Alosine weight <0.2%

2013 MWT Grids

DESIGN:

Vessels: catch and trip logs � DMF: data and RH% � SMAST: advisories/reports

SMAST

Classify Trip: HIGH MODERATE

Create Advisory

Participating Vessels

MWTRI SMBT



Advisories – “High RH bycatch in cell H2, moderate bycatch cell J2”

SMAST/DMF – Provide outreach (letters, meetings, presentations…)

SMAST website – www.smast.edu/bycatch

DMF Port Sampling

Species Comp.Tow LocationsTrip Level Data

NEFOP/Study Fleet

•Observer Logs

within 14 days

•Study Fleet trip

sampling

Data in

<24 hours

Sample

>50%

PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS:

Incorporate all data sources (NEFOP, Study Fleet, DMR, other fisheries)

DMF/SMAST share RHBA duties, streamlineParticipatingSFC Vessels

withNEFOP Observers

(send tow/RH data daily)

Advisories <100% trips



Increased cooperation/accountability � access from vessels

Communications Upgrades� Boatracs emails � BTVessel and BTForms

Changed Bycatch Thresholds (High/Moderate/Low) to reflect RH Catch Caps:

Area2 MWT: 124mt RHS cap / 21,000mt harvest goal=

CC/521 MWT: 13mt RHS cap / 5,200mt harvest goal=

Advisories

when

necessary

MA DMF and SMAST Coordinators

Sample Unobserved TripsAggregate data

<100% trips

sampled

0.6% HIGH (was 1.25%)

0.25% HIGH


Increased cooperation/accountability � access from vessels




• Faster /easier communications � Boatracs to BTVessel and BTForms

- Info. necessary to administer RHBA � real-time



RESULTS:

• All MWT vessels participating (9/9 vessels report NEFOP data from at sea)

• Majority of RI SMBT vessels participating (6/8 that had>100mt last 2 yrs)

• Over 350 comms. sent by vessels each year, awareness greatly increased…



• Over 200 BTVessel Tow Reports sent so far

• Over 100 bycatch advisories sent by DMF/SMAST since 2011

- Weekly and Immediate (for HIGH events)

• BIG QUESTION…Bycatch Reduction?

Successes, Shortcomings and Take-aways

• Very high participation, Good communication from captains (>1000 emails)

4. Program EvaluationSuccesses, Shortcomings and Take-aways

• Not a scientific study design

• RH abundance variable

• Limited fleet, sparse spatiotemporal data

• Differing degrees of collaboration

• Very high participation, Good communication from captains (>1000 emails)

• High sampling rates, sampling data used to inform management, decrease RH

estimate CVs

• Buy in from NGOs- Funding from

Nature Conservancy, interest/support

from others

• 3 publications, with more to follow

• Reactive� Real-time (often proactive)

• Made Portside Sampling a viable option for cost-effective fishery monitoring…


Micah Dean

4. Program EvaluationSuccesses, Shortcomings and Take-aways

Low RH Bycatch-

– Accountability and Collaboration

– Familiar fishing grounds, if not� Test tows

– Choice of multiple fishing grounds

– Net staying 1+fm off bottom


Higher RH bycatch-

– Race to fish, derby fishery

– Unfamiliar fishing grounds

– Scratching

– Towing on/near bottom

– Re-entries

‘Lose a trip to save a season’

4. Program EvaluationDid we reduce River Herring bycatch?

Many Caveats…

No control group

↑ variable data

Degree of captains behavior modification

What would they have caught?


RH populations highly variable

No RH assessment or index

Area sub-ACLs ↑ variable (1A: 21k mt � 4k mt)

Landings outside MA� lower sampling rates

RH bycatch a function of X,Y (as well as Z, and time)

But…

Looking at 10 years of RH bycatch expansions…


RH Bycatch ExpansionData Sources:


Data Sources:

2005-2007 Cieri, Nelson, Armstrong (ASMFC)

2008-2012Micah Dean,Herring PDT (FW3, AppendixII)

2013-2014DMF preliminary(using portside and NEFOP)


% Above/Below 10-year RH/S Average

Sampling data source NEFOP NEFOP/MADMF/MEDMR NEFOP/MADMF

Publication Cieri et al NEFMC FW3 Appendix II MADMF prelim.

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 10-yr AVG

MWT

GOM -43% -82% -78% 135% 121% 196% -91% -86% -73% -97% 46.42

CC/521 -17% -96% 484% -3% -100% -98% -79% -7% -63% -22% 54.38

SNE -66% -75% -25% 295% -23% -70% -70% 30% 101% -98% 151.24

SMBT SNE -66% 253% -100% 22% -29% -42% -65% 99% -73% 80.36

Annual Total -61% -76% 124% 138% 1% -21% -67% -13% 54% -79% 332.40


Expanded River Herring/

Shad (metric tons) RHBA AVG Non-RHBA AVG

RHBA AVG/

non-RHBA AVG % Reduction

MWT

GOM 6.8 72.8 9.30% 90.70%

CC/521 31.2 69.8 44.67% 55.33%

SNE 137.2 160.6 85.43% 14.57%

SMBT SNE 70.1 85.5 81.99% 18.01%

Annual Total 227.7 388.8 58.58% 41.42%

NEFOP/MADMF/MEDMR NEFOP/MADMF

NEFMC FW3 Appendix II MADMF prelim.RHBA AVG/

non-RHBA AVGRH/S Proportion 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 7-yr AVG % Reduction

MWT

GOM 0.0069 0.0050 0.0082 0.0004 0.0017 0.0023 0.0002 0.0035 17.16% 82.84%

CC/521 0.0073 0.0002 0.0020 0.0041 0.0047 0.0043 0.0038 100.67% -0.67%

SNE 0.0209 0.0032 0.0021 0.0046 0.0107 0.0155 0.0005 0.0082 89.60% 10.40%

SMBT SNE 0.0163 0.0122 0.0097 0.0050 0.0201 0.0074 0.0118 85.08% 14.92%

RHBA vs nonRHBA years:

Expanded RH (metric tons)(2005-2014)

RH Bycatch Rates(2008-2014 only)

Current StatusSampling winter herring fisheries (MWT-15 trips and SMBT-33 trips)

integrating NEFOP data daily

Administering two River Herring Bycatch Avoidance Programs

MWT (as of 1/16/2015) SMBT (as of 1/16/2015)

Herring/Shad


Using funds from TNC and RSA

Herring/Shad

Source: www.umassd.edu/smast/bycatch

Low (less than 0.5% River Herring/Shad

Moderate (0.5% to 1.0%)

High (above 1.0%)

5. 2014 RSA Summary2014 RSA Statistics

• 8 Participating RSA Vessels

• 1A RSA harvested from late Oct. – early Dec.Area RSA Quota

Distributed

RSA Herring

Landed

River Herring

bycatch

Funds

Generated

1A 936mt 757.5mt 4.0mt $56,813

1B 138mt 0 0 0

2 900mt 0 0 0


• 15 total trips (100% sampled; 13 MA DMF, 4 NEFOP)

Species composition

(DMF portside data)

Weight (mt) % of All RSA

catch

Atl. Mackerel 1,887.49 69.98%

Atl. Herring 775.74 28.76%

Silver Hake (Whiting) 27.89 1.03%

Blueback Herring 2.19 0.08%

Alewife 1.78 0.07%

Long Finned Squid 0.77 0.03%

Haddock 0.65 0.02%

Spiny Dogfish 0.28 0.01%

American Shad 0.13 0.00%

Other 0.20 0.01%2014 1A MWT

(including RSA)

5. 2015 RSAImprovements

• RSA Trips held to higher standard

• DMF sampling confirm Atl. Herring hails (create weigh-out slips)

• Responsible Fishing Agreement-


Hoping for increased RSA productivity in 2015

AcknowledgementsMWT Industry

Fishing Vessels: Western Venture, Osprey, Endeavour, Challenger, Enterprise,

Retriever, Sunlight, Starlight, Providian, Voyager, Jean McCausland, Isabel

Taylor, Nordic Explorer, Dona Martita

Numerous Industry members: Owners, managers, captains, shoreside

personnel

SMBT Industry


Fishing Vessels: Heather Lynn, Ocean State, Sea Breeze Too, Darana R, Prevail,

Lightning Bay, Elizabeth&Katherine

Numerous Industry members: Owners, captains, shoreside personnel

Funding Sources

Alison Bowden

CollaboratorsNortheast Fisheries Observer Program

Maine Dept. of Marine Resources

NOAA Study Fleet

A.I.S., Inc.

Questions and Comments


in the atlantic herring and mackerel fisherys3.amazonaws.com/nefmc.org/13.-nefmc_mtg_012815... ·...

Documents