# Presentation: 857018

## Magnuson-Stevens Act Reauthorization A Presentation to the NOAA Science Advisory Board

- Dr. William T. Hogarth
- Assistant Administrator for Fisheries
- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
- November 9, 2005

## Purpose

- Provide the SAB with:
- 	- Update on the Administration’s reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA)
- 	- Information on portions of the bill relating to science and data collection activities
- Seek SAB feedback on MSA Science and Data Collection:
- 	- Current Proposal
- 	- Future Needs

## Issue

- Relationship of MSA General Changes:
- Market Based Systems
- Regional Councils
- Management Processes
- MSA to Science Changes:
- establishing a national data collection program, registering all anglers, expanding social and economic data collection
- formal peer review
- advance ecosystem approaches and rebuilding stocks

## Magnuson Stevens Act ReauthorizationAdministration Bill

- Important Component in the Implementation of the President's Ocean Action Plan
- Responsive to the Recommendations Contained in the US Commission on Ocean Policy Report
- Advances NOAA’s ability to accomplish its Mission

**Notes:**
Ocean Action Plan – some blurbs from the OAP
Achieving Sustainable Marine Fisheries
Work with Regional Fisheries Councils to Promote Greater use of Market-based System for
Fisheries Management.
Foster a Balanced Representation for Regional Fishery Management Councils.
Establish Guidelines and Procedures for the Use of Science in Fisheries Management.

US Ocean Commission – quote from Executive Summary
The Commission’s recommendations to improve fishery management can be grouped
into six areas: 
re-emphasizing the role of science in the management process; 
Strengthening the Regional Fishery Management Council (RFMC) system and clarifying jurisdictions;
expanding the use of dedicated access privileges; 
improving enforcement; 
adopting an ecosystem-based management approach; and 
strengthening international management.

NOAA Mission

MISSION
To understand and predict changes in Earth’s environment
and conserve and manage coastal and marine resources to
meet our Nation’s economic, social, and environmental needs

## Improve scientific support 
Advance ecosystem approaches to management
Promote market-based management systems
 Strengthen rebuilding provisions
Improve enforcement provisions

- Advance ecosystem approaches to management
- Promote market-based management systems
-  Strengthen rebuilding provisions
- Improve enforcement provisions

**Magnuson Stevens Act Reauthorization**Goals

**Notes:**
OAP legislative mandates
Market-based
Councils

OAP other
Rec. data
Use of science
Ecosystems in general

## Market-based Systems

- Specifically authorizes the use of dedicated access privileges (DAPs)
- individual fishing quotas
- community quotas
- fishing cooperatives
- area-based quotas
- Establishes requirements for the fair allocation and transfer of these privileges
- Requires recovery of program implementation costs (2 to 15% of ex-vessel value)

**Notes:**
Policy Objectives and Safeguards:  Mandates and directives to help ensure equity, and address the issues of economic performance, social impacts, eligibility, and excessive shares.  
Allocations and Transfers:  Standards and procedures governing initial DAP allocations and the transferability (sale or lease) of quota shares, including a requirement that each DAP program establish a policy on share transferability. 
Cost Recovery/Fees:  Cover the costs of management, science, data collection and analysis, observer coverage, and enforcement activities in a DAP fishery.
Program Review:  Obligations to conduct regular reviews and to monitor fishing operations and transfers in DAP programs.    

Market-based approaches can help solve many problems inherent in open-access fisheries.  Since 1990, NOAA and the Councils have implemented DAPs in eight fisheries that together have an annual ex-vessel value over $600 million.  Commercial fishermen have enjoyed increased profits, decreased costs of gear and labor, and a safer and more stable industry.  In 2001, the Alaska pollock catcher/processor cooperative fleet yielded 49 percent more products from each pound of fish harvested than in 1998.  The Alaska halibut and sablefish season went from less than 5 days per year to 245 days.  DAP programs have led to higher profits because of decreases in operating costs and higher valued product.  Authorizing a broader range of DAP programs, with appropriate controls and guidelines, will provide fishery managers the tools they need to improve fishery management and enhance the economic performance of the nation’s fisheries.

## Regional Councils

- Expands Council member qualifications to include knowledge of ecosystems and a “*demonstrated commitment to sustainable fisheries*”
- Requires the Secretary to consider members who represent the “*conservation and management of fishery resources and marine ecosystems*”
- Requires Governors to publish a solicitation for candidates

**Notes:**
Amends the required qualifications of Council members to include knowledge of the ecosystems that support fisheries and “a commitment to sustainable fisheries.”
 Directs the Secretary to appoint Council members who represent constituencies concerned with “conservation and management of the fishery resources and marine ecosystems” in addition to representatives of commercial and recreational users.
Directs the Governors, when soliciting nominees as Council members, to publish a solicitation notice.
Authorizes the Secretary, in the event that a Governor submits nominees who are unqualified or do not adequately represent broad and diverse representation, to “notify the appropriate Governor of that determination.” 

Does not to propose any fundamental change in the Councils’ role in the management process, but does propose that the Councils should be more broadly representative.  The purpose is to promote a broader and more balanced representation of constituent interests on the Councils.  These provisions will ensure that Council voting members represent interests other than those of commercial and recreational users.  The bill does not mandate fixed ratios of commercial, recreational, and non-users.  Fisheries and constituencies vary significantly from region to region and from Council to Council, and the make-up of Council representatives should reflect such variation.

## Management Processes

- Authorizes development of procedures to better integrate the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act with the MSA
- Authorizes the use of framework actions for implementing management measures
- Allows Secretary to return a plan to a council immediately instead of following a 60-day comment period
- Authorizes the recovery of costs directly related to management, science, data collection and analysis, observer coverage, and enforcement

**Notes:**
NEPA reviews generate valuable public policy benefits and provide a workable decision-making process with which NOAA Fisheries Service and the Councils have gained valuable experience while meeting the mandates.  However, there are duplications inherent in assessments and reviews mandated by NEPA and MSA.  Considerable time and resources are consumed in preparing NEPA reviews, particularly preparation of environmental impact statements.  

To address this issue, the Administration proposes to streamline completion of environmental assessments and make the process more effective without compromising the benefits of the NEPA. 

The Administration’s MSA bill directs the Secretary, working with the Councils and CEQ, to revise and update procedures for the assessment of impacts of proposed management measures under NEPA provisions.  Revised procedures shall be proposed within 12 months and promulgated after 24 months. 

## Science-Related Highlights from the 

**Administration’s MS Bill**

-  Improve Fishery-Dependent Data, National Data collection Programs & Recreational Registration Program in absence of State Licenses, improved Social & Economic Data
-  Improved Science supporting Management: Formalize Peer Review, stipends for some S&S Committee members, Funding for Observer Programs
- Optimum Yield (OY) redefined as Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) AS REDUCED BY economic or environmental factors & _Scientific Uncertainty_ (caution under uncertainty)
-  Advance Ecosystem Approaches to Fisheries Management (builds from the 1999 FEP Report by Fluharty et al.)

## Science and Data Collection

- Fishery Permitting and Registration
- Establishes a national permit program for commercial fishermen
- Establishes a national registration program for recreational fishermen to fill gaps in existing state systems
- Current NRC study of recreational fishing completing its business, will inform the process of MSA
- States of Delaware, North and Hawaii have no state license programs, even states with licenses may have exclusions

**Notes:**
The commercial permit program will facilitate the development and administration of limited entry and DAP programs, as well as buybacks, all of which require reliable information on historical and current participation.
A national commercial fish permitting system will provide an integrated body of information to support the fisheries law enforcement programs of NOAA Fisheries Service and the U.S. Coast Guard.
Would create a national angler database to improve data collection efforts.  States would share angler information with NOAA. 
NOAA would defer to state licensing/registration programs, but would a program to obtain angler information if the state does not have a program.
NOAA would collect fees to administer the national database and support fisheries management.
Both databases would improve the ability of Councils and NOAA to monitor the activity of vessels fishing in more than one Region or fishery. 

Fines/penalties must be large enough that potential violators will consider the consequences of illegal actions.  If the fines and penalties are not high enough, too many potential violators will accept them as a cost of doing business.  
A significant number of violations have been committed several times over long periods, or by large firms.  The economic impact of these violations is considerable and justifies a stiff enforcement response.  In addition, the US has taken an active role in promoting international actions to combat illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing in domestic and high seas waters.  One element in mitigating IUU activities is an effective fisheries law enforcement program.

## Peer Review

- Requires formal, peer review of science used by the councils (SSCs, SAW, SEDAR, STAR, etc)
- Directs the Secretary to establish a National data collection system to improve data quality
- national standardized bycatch reporting
- single permit identifier
- Clarifies current information sharing provisions
- Allows additional socio-economic data collection to improve analyses

**Notes:**
Strengthens the peer review of scientific information used in fisheries management by mandating formalized peer review processes.  It also authorizes the payment of stipends to scientists who serve on Council Scientific and Statistical Committees. 
The Secretary is directed to establish a “national data collection system.”
The bill expands the categories of social and economic information that may be required to be submitted, providing access to processors’ economic data on fishing operations and processors.  This information will help improve the assessment of management impacts.
Authorizes the disclosure of information to certain other federal agencies for the purposes of homeland and national security.  

## Ecosystem Approaches

- Adds “*promoting the health and productivity of fishery ecosystems*” to the purposes of the Act
- Directs the Secretary to prepare guidance relative to ecosystem considerations
- Authorizes councils to prepare fishery ecosystem plans containing principles that apply to all fishery resources
- Authorizes designation of discrete subunits of  essential fish habitat – habitat areas of particular concern

**Notes:**
The bill includes provisions to redirect fishery management policies and procedures away from the traditional emphasis on single target species and toward a much broader ecosystem-based approach
Amends the statement of findings, purposes, and policy by affirming the importance of ecosystems and ecosystem-related objectives.  
“Ecosystem” is defined as “a geographically specified system of living marine resources, the people, the environment, and the processes that control its dynamics.”
Authorizes the Councils to take ecosystem considerations into account when developing fishery management plans and plan amendments.
The Secretary is directed to prepare guidance on incorporating ecosystem considerations in the fishery management process.
Councils are authorized, not required, to prepare “fishery ecosystem plans.” 

While some Councils are willing and able to take bold steps, others believe that existing mandates provide a sufficient basis to move in an EAF direction.  So, the purpose is to give the Councils the overall direction and tools needed to make meaningful progress toward EAF.  This proposal is discretionary rather than mandating actions that, in some instances, may not be necessary or may exceed the current capabilities of ecosystem science. 

## Intersection of NOAA EEZ authority under MSA and Regional Ecosystem Boundaries

## Rebuilding Stocks

- Uses the term “*depleted*” rather than overfished to better reflect reasons that stock size may be at a low level
- Requires Councils to develop a plan to end overfishing within 1 year
- Plans must end overfishing as soon as possible, not to exceed 2 years
- Rebuilding plan timelines would be consistent with the biology of the stock instead of the current 10-year rebuilding requirement

**Notes:**
The focus in the bill is on ending overfishing.  The proposed bill would require that overfishing be ended as soon as possible, but no later than 3 years.  There is no hard time limit in the MSA currently.

The bill would replace the 10-year time limit for rebuilding with the time it takes to rebuild at F-zero (no fishing) plus one mean generation time.  This eliminates the illogical discontinuity around 10 years, and is consistent with the current guidelines (and practice) for stocks that cannot rebuild at F-zero in less than 10 years.

The term "overfished" is changed to "depleted" to designate stocks that are in need of rebuilding.  “Depletion” is more accurate because many factors, besides overfishing, can cause a downturn in the biomass.  This is also more consistent with an ecosystem approach to stewardship.

Regardless of the terminology or the cause of depletion, depleted stocks must be subject to a rebuilding plan within one year of designation as depleted.

## 252 Major Stocks

- 38

- 145

- 53

- 5

- 11

## 32

- 131

- 48

- 29

- 11

## NOAA Coordination & Views

- Developed Bill in close coordination with:
- Regional Fishery Management Councils
- Commercial and recreational fishing interests
- NGOs
- States
- Congress
- NOAA has held a number of briefings with Hill staff, NGOs, and media to explain the provisions in the bill
- Congressional hearings are anticipated in the near future

## Magnuson Stevens Act ReauthorizationViews/Outlook

- The Outlook is Good for passage this Congress
**Congress is ready to act**
- HR 1431 (Rahall, D-WV)
- HR 3278 (Allen, D-ME)
- S 797 (Murkowski, R-AK)
- S 1723 (Collins, R-ME)
- Senate Staff Draft
**Strong Administration Support**
- President  -- eliminate overfishing by end of term
- Secretary Gutierrez -- work with Councils to double dedicated access privileges programs by 2010.
**Unprecedented Public Attention on Ocean Issues**

## Desired Outcome

- Informational
- With feedback on:
- 	- Science provisions and Ecosystem Approach for MSA
- Discussion / Questions

## Backup Slides

**Reauthorization Goals**
**Consensus Operational Objectives for**** Ecosystem Approaches Fisheries Management**
**The Challenges of Recreational Fishery Sampling**
**Other Provisions**

## Reauthorization Goals

- Improve scientific support
- Implement U.S. Ocean Action Plan
- Promote market-based management systems
- Foster balanced regional councils
- Advance ecosystem approaches to management
- Strengthen rebuilding provisions
- Enhance management processes
- Expand permitting and registration programs
- Improve enforcement provisions

**Notes:**
OAP legislative mandates
Market-based
Councils

OAP other
Rec. data
Use of science
Ecosystems in general

## Consensus Operational Objectives for Ecosystem Approaches Fisheries Management

-  Conserve and Manage Species
-  Minimize Bycatch
-  Manage Tradeoffs
-  Account for Feedback Effects
-  Establish Appropriate Ecosystem Boundaries
-  Maintain Ecosystem Productivity, Balance  Ecosystem Structure
- Account for Climate Variability
- Use Adaptive Approaches to Management

##  large number and variety of target species (some

**The Challenges of Recreational Fishery Sampling**

** ****large number and variety of target species (some**
**  ****rare events, some common)**
** ****incomplete sampling frames (e.g., license programs **
**by states)**
** ****recreational discards >60% of catch (and increasing)**

** ****sampling designs created long**
**before many management **
**needs were developed**
** **
** ****increasing need to provide**
**credible, precise estimates at **
**the stratum level for stock **
**assessment, allocation, and **
**compliance needs**

## Other Provisions

- Enforcement
- Increases maximum civil penalty to $240,000 and civil judicial penalty to $300,000
- Increases maximum criminal penalty to $500,000 for individuals or $1.0 million for organizations
- Revises definitions of bycatch, optimum yield, overfishing, and others
- Adds definitions of depleted, ecosystems, habitat areas of particular concern, and others

**Notes:**
The commercial permit program will facilitate the development and administration of limited entry and DAP programs, as well as buybacks, all of which require reliable information on historical and current participation.
A national commercial fish permitting system will provide an integrated body of information to support the fisheries law enforcement programs of NOAA Fisheries Service and the U.S. Coast Guard.
Would create a national angler database to improve data collection efforts.  States would share angler information with NOAA. 
NOAA would defer to state licensing/registration programs, but would a program to obtain angler information if the state does not have a program.
NOAA would collect fees to administer the national database and support fisheries management.
Both databases would improve the ability of Councils and NOAA to monitor the activity of vessels fishing in more than one Region or fishery. 

Fines/penalties must be large enough that potential violators will consider the consequences of illegal actions.  If the fines and penalties are not high enough, too many potential violators will accept them as a cost of doing business.  
A significant number of violations have been committed several times over long periods, or by large firms.  The economic impact of these violations is considerable and justifies a stiff enforcement response.  In addition, the US has taken an active role in promoting international actions to combat illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing in domestic and high seas waters.  One element in mitigating IUU activities is an effective fisheries law enforcement program.

## Other Provisions

- Clarifies judicial review of agency actions
- Improves the effectiveness of fishing capacity reduction programs
- Authorizes the establishment of mechanisms to fund observer programs
- Authorizes appropriations through 2010