Appointments and Call for Nominations | Written Public Comment Changes | Scallops | BSAI Halibut ABM of the Am 80 PSC Limit | Sablefish Pots and IFQ Committee Report | IFQ Access Opportunities | RQE Funding Mechanism | Salmon Genetics and Avoidance Plans | EDR and the SSPT | Research Priorities | Annual Community Engagement and Participation Overview | Staff Tasking | Northern Edge 2021 Exercises | EFH Review | Upcoming Meetings
Appointments and Call for Nominations
Interim Advisory Panel appointment
Between the February and April Council meetings, the Council Chair appointed Marissa Wilson to the Advisory Panel, on an interim basis until the end of the calendar year, to fill the vacancy left by Jamie O’Connor’s resignation.
Call for Nominations
The Council is soliciting nominations for the reconstituted Community Engagement Committee (CEC). The Terms of Reference for that Committee. The committee will continue to develop tools and recommendations to facilitate improved communication and engagement between rural communities and tribes for the Council, but not conduct community engagement itself, nor provide fishery management policy advice to the Council. Staff will contact all existing CEC members who are interested in continuing on, however the Council is also interested in expanding the CEC to solicit up to an additional two members representative of small communities off the road system. Interested members of the public should send a letter of interest to Kate Haapala by May 28, 2021. The timing of the first committee meeting is uncertain.
The Council is also accepting nominations for a pollock trawl CP representative on the Council’s Fishery Monitoring Advisory Committee (FMAC) (formerly the Observer Advisory Committee). The FMAC convenes industry members, agency representatives, observers, and observer/EM coverage providers to advise the Council on issues related to all types of monitoring in Alaskan fisheries. Please submit a letter of interest to Kate Haapala by April 30, 2021, as the next FMAC meeting will take place virtually on May 17th.
Written Public Comment Changes
The Council has approved a number of changes to the current written public comment procedures. The Council process should be a welcoming environment for all public, and the comment process should encourage people to be respectful when commenting. Input from written comments is exceedingly valuable to the Council process, to understand the diversity of perspectives on potential Council action. At the same time, there have recently been instances of profanity or threats being included among the comments. Without moderation to filter out inappropriate content, the comment section can quickly begin to read like a blog with comments on comments, and disrespectful dialogue. As a result, staff will implement the following changes:
- Post written comment policy on Council website and summarize on eAgenda
- Clarify one comment per person per agenda item; however an individual can submit comments on behalf of their organization as well as on behalf of themself
- Consistent with the Department of Commerce policy: no vulgar language, personal attacks, offensive terms targeting protected classes, promoting service or products, non-fisheries-related (off topic), unsupported accusations
- Allow staff to remove comments that are inconsistent with policy
- Allow staff to sort comments to the appropriate agenda item as practicable (comments that are not associated with an agenda item would go in staff tasking)
- Changes to commenting period
- Open commenting later, once materials post online
- Close commenting earlier (Wednesday or Thursday before the start of the meeting) to allow staff to review comments for adherence to the policy
- Do not display comments publicly until after comment deadline closes
Please email email@example.com if you have questions.
The Council reviewed the 2021 Alaska Weathervane Scallop SAFE report and specified scallop ABC for the 2021/2022 fishing year at 1.156 million pounds (524 t) of shucked scallop meats, a level equivalent to 90% of OFL, which is 1.284 million pounds (582 t). The federal specification of scallop OFL and ABC applies to all waters off Alaska, while guideline harvest levels (GHLs) for the State’s scallop registration areas and districts are established by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.
To reduce review time, the Scallop Plan Team prepared an abbreviated SAFE report this year while still providing the most recent information on stock status, scallop harvest, and socioeconomic conditions. According to the Scallop SAFE report, total harvest off Alaska in the 2019/20 season was 246,900 lb (112 t) of shucked scallop meats, and preliminary harvest for the 2020/21 season is 226,130 lb (103 t). Guideline harvest levels were achieved in the Kodiak Northeast, Kodiak Shelikof, and Kodiak Southwest districts. COVID precautions limited air travel for scallop crew members and left scallop beds in Dutch Harbor unfished by the fleet.
Restaurant demand for scallops was greatly reduced in 2020 and scallop prices were down by 7%. These factors, and the travel restrictions that limited harvest, contributed to the lowest total first wholesale revenue historically at $2.359 million. Port landings of scallops in Alaska were limited to Kodiak and Yakutat.
Since OFL and ABC have not changed for the scallop fishery for several years, the SSC discussed setting multi-year specifications, as is done for some stocks in the groundfish and crab SAFE reports. The Council cannot follow that model yet for scallops since the SAFE report must still be produced every year. To address this, the Council may consider an FMP amendment that would allow the scallop SAFE to be prepared less frequently and would facilitate multiyear specifications of scallop OFL/ABC.
Staff contact is Jim Armstrong.
BSAI Halibut Abundance-based Management of the Amendment 80 PSC Limit
The Council reviewed and made some adjustments to options for a proposed management measure to link the Pacific halibut prohibited species catch (PSC) limit for the Amendment 80 commercial groundfish trawl sector in the BSAI to halibut abundance. The objective of linking the PSC limit to abundance is to minimize halibut PSC to the extent practicable under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) National Standard 9 and to achieve optimum yield in the BSAI groundfish fisheries on a continuing basis under MSA National Standard 1. The action should provide incentives for the Amendment 80 sector to minimize halibut mortality at all times. Achievement of the objectives could promote conservation of the halibut stock and may result in additional harvest opportunities for the directed halibut fishery. The Council reviewed a preliminary draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) including a Social Impact Assessment (SIA).
The Council modified some of the options which apply to the action alternatives, but did not select a Preliminary Preferred Alternative (PPA) at this time, electing instead to make the determination of a Preferred Alternative at final action. There are four alternatives under consideration: a no action alternative (Alternative 1, that keeps the status quo Amendment 80 PSC limit at 1,745 t) and three action alternatives. Under Alternatives 2 through 4, the Amendment 80 sector halibut PSC limits would be prescribed annually based on look up tables where the level of the PSC limit (metric tons of halibut mortality) is determined based on halibut abundance using a combination of two survey index values: the EBS shelf trawl survey index and the IPHC setline survey index in Area 4ABCDE. The PSC limits in Alternatives 2 through 4 establish values that range, depending on halibut abundance, from 45 percent below the current limit to 15 percent above the current PSC limit.
Options that are applied to the action alternatives were modified by the Council and now include the following:
Option 1: PSC limit is determined using a 3-year rolling average of survey index values instead of the most recent survey value.
Option 2: In the first year of implementation, the PSC limit varies no more than (i: 10% or ii: 15%) from the status quo limit (1,745 mt).
Option 3: Establish an annual limit of (i: 80% or ii: 90%) of the PSC limit generated by the look-up table. In 3 of 7 years, the A80 sector may exceed the annual limit up to the PSC limit generated by the look-up table. If the A80 sector has exceeded the annual limit in 3 of the past 7 years, then the annual limit is a hard cap for the following year.
After extensive review and discussion, the Council recommended releasing the analysis for final action after addressing the SSC comments to the extent practicable. Some of SSC’s major recommendations include the following: to use the closed loop halibut modeling effort for context only (rather than in a predictive capacity); to revise assessment of directed halibut catch impacts using a range of values between 0-1; to provide some additional information on the spatial distribution of PSC historically by area within Area 4 and the historical and potential impacts on the directed halibut fisheries; and to provide additional information on halibut encounter rates in the A80 sector.
The DEIS will be revised and published over the summer. A 45-day comment period will be provided with a summary of public comments provided to the Council at final action. Final action is scheduled for December 2021. Staff contacts are Diana Stram and Anna Henry.
Sablefish Pots and IFQ Committee Report
The Council received reports reviewing the Gulf of Alaska sablefish pot fishery and recommendations from the IFQ committee. The GOA sablefish pot review summarized 3-4 years of fishery data as well as information gathered from speaking with fishery participants, managers, and stock assessment scientists. The review and subsequent testimony highlighted aspects of the fishery management that could be improved. The IFQ Committee considered prioritization of this and other IFQ-related issues.
After receiving the GOA sablefish pot review, Committee report and public testimony, the Council initiated an analysis to revise several regulatory components of the IFQ Program. The Council included two purpose and need statements as the basis for the analysis. The first highlights the need to increase operational efficiency and reduce administrative burden in the GOA sablefish fishery. The motion initiated analysis of alternatives and elements including requirements on biodegradable panels, pot gear configuration, gear retrieval, and pot limits. One element of the proposed analysis would also authorize jig gear as a legal gear type for harvesting sablefish IFQ.
This motion also included a separate (but not mutually exclusive) purpose and need statement and an action alternative to remove the Adak community quota entity (CQE) residency requirement for five years to provide more opportunity for the Adak CQE to fully harvest its allocation.
The Council identified the regulatory changes identified in the omnibus analysis as its priority with regards to IFQ program changes. In order to provide for as quick an implementation as possible, the Council may choose to bifurcate the omnibus analytical package at a future date if some actions prove complicated. While testimony highlighted interest in also prioritizing an action to allow release of small sablefish, the Council has chosen to prioritize the actions that seemed to be most straightforward before proceeding with further action on the small sablefish analysis.
The Council’s motion also included a statement of support for NMFS under its authority to initiate rule making to remove the requirement for sablefish pot fishermen to use pot tags. The Council also requested NMFS Office of Law Enforcement clarify that they have the discretion to waive gear tending requirements in the case of a documented mechanical breakdown or a severe weather event.
Additionally, the Council discussed other IFQ items and took action to remove the hired masters discussion paper and the IFQ QS transfers discussion paper from the list of untasked/ unscheduled items on the three-meeting outlook. This means a new motion would be needed to re-initiate these or similar analyses.
Staff contacts are Sara Cleaver and Sarah Marrinan.
IFQ Access Opportunities
The Council reviewed an expanded discussion paper on an IFQ Access pool of halibut and sablefish quota share that would facilitate entry level opportunities for crew and owner-operators, and took no further action. The discussion paper outlined an access pool that would target entry level fishermen, defined as those owning less than 5,000 pounds of combined QS in 2019 values (QS:IFQ ratio). Participation in the access pool would be temporary, access pool QS units could not be sold, and fishing of the annual IFQ would be subject to observer and cost recovery fees. The QS in the access pool would be sourced from either: (1) newly created QS units equal to 1% of 2019 QS for halibut and sablefish in all IFQ areas, or (2) a deduction of 0.5% or 1% on all QS transfers. An entity such as a Regional Fishery Association or other existing or newly formed regional association would receive and distribute the access pool allocation based on criteria established by the entity and approved by the Council.
The Council recognized that barriers to entry and access in the IFQ program are difficult issues that were identified in the program review and have been challenging for the Council to address. However, the Council was concerned that the approach in the discussion paper would reallocate quota share from second generation participants who have worked hard to invest in the IFQ program under the current regulatory structure, and would provide no guarantee of a viable path to ownership for access pool recipients. Given the number of uncertain variables and outstanding issues at this stage, the Council determined it would require considerable staff resources to develop an access pool into a workable program. The Council encouraged stakeholders to work to refine a proposal that would have more broad-based support in the industry, focusing on alternative funding mechanisms, a feasibility study to assess potential paths to ownership, and to define eligibility criteria examples that would more specifically identify the targeted recipients.
Staff Contact: Anna Henry
Recreational Quota Entity Funding Mechanism
After reviewing a discussion paper outlining a stamp program as a potential funding mechanism for the recently-formed charter halibut recreational quota entity (RQE), the Council initiated an analysis to describe potential methods for the collection of fees from charter vessel operators and a mechanism to distribute those funds to the RQE. The RQE would be able to utilize funds to purchase additional halibut quota from willing sellers in the commercial sector, and the increased quota would loosen charter management restrictions such as bag limits, day of the week closures, and size restrictions for charter anglers. The Council requested that the analysis should explore a range of potential fee collection methods currently used for North Pacific fisheries and similar programs.
Legislation has been proposed by the U.S. Congress to grant the Council and NMFS the authority to develop and implement a fee collection mechanism for charter vessel operators that could be used by the RQE to fund administrative costs and purchase of halibut quota share as specified in the RQE program. In anticipation of the potential enactment of this legislation, the Council would begin the analytical process to explore the administrative requirements necessary to implement a fee collection program for charter vessel operators.
Salmon Genetics and Avoidance Plans
The Council received a number of status reports related to BSAI and GOA salmon bycatch, including genetic stock of origin reports for chum and Chinook encountered as bycatch in both the GOA and BSAI, eastern Bering Sea pollock fishery incentive plan agreement (IPA) reports, and an update from the SeaShare food donation program. These annual reports were provided for two years because the April 2020 Council meeting was cancelled.
Geneticists from the NMFS AFSC Auke Bay lab provided reports on the stock of origin of Chinook and chum salmon bycatch for the 2018-2019 Bering Sea pollock fishery, the GOA pollock fishery, GOA rockfish (and arrowtooth) catcher vessel trawl fishery and the GOA non-pollock catcher processor trawl fisheries. Results were presented at a finer scale spatial and temporal resolution than in past years. On average in the Bering Sea, the relative proportion of western Alaskan rivers represented in the bycatch increased from low levels in 2017 to contributions more consistent with previous years. There were proportional declines in the contribution from British Columbian stocks, from previous estimates. Chum bycatch continues to be dominated by Asian-origin fish. Age-specific stock composition results are lacking for Chinook but a backlog of scales for both Chinook and chum is being processed for ageing.
The Council requested prioritization for ageing backlogged Chinook scales in order to update the age-length key used in the BSAI Chinook adult equivalence (AEQ) model, and as soon as that information is available, requested an update of the model and the analysis of the impact of bycatch on Western Alaskan Chinook stocks. The Council looks forward to continued progress updates from the inter-agency Salmon Bycatch Workgroup on work to improve the efficiency of stock identification and other innovations to improve information available for management.
Per regulation, eastern Bering Sea pollock IPA representatives provide written annual reports on their measures to reduce and avoid Chinook and chum bycatch. The reports from all three sectors (inshore catcher vessel, catcher processor, and mothership) are posted online, and representatives gave verbal presentations to the Council. A voluntary update was provided by SeaShare, a non-profit food donation program which is authorized to accept salmon and halibut bycatch for hunger relief. This organization continues extensive efforts to provide fish to communities across Alaska. The Council appreciates ongoing work by the industry and the donation program.
Staff contact is Diana Stram.
Economic Data Reporting and the Social Science Planning Team
At this meeting the Council received reports and presentations on a series of stakeholder and SSPT meetings that have taken place to assist the Council in revisions to its EDR Programs, and made adjustments to its outstanding analysis. The Council had mostly recently reviewed its EDR revisions analytical package at the Jan/Feb 2020 Council meeting, where they included an alternative to consider removing the EDR reporting requirements. At this meeting, in response to the SSPT recommendations as well as information provided through the workshops, the Council slightly amended its alternative set to break that alternative into options for the four specific programs (i.e., GOA trawl, Crab, BSAI Amendment 80, BSAI Amendment 91). This provides analysts more explicit direction to evaluate, by fishery, what information would be no longer available if an EDR was discontinued. This analysis will return to the Council with the possibility of final action, at which time the Council can speak to its intention for each EDR. The Council can also respond to the SSPT recommendation, and consider whether the EDR purpose and need statement originally created by the Council for each fishery is still relevant.
The Council has had two separate EDR actions listed on its three-meeting outlook; at this meeting, the Council stated that it considered its EDR “issue 2” (motion from April 2019) to be fulfilled by the SSPT and stakeholder workshops process. Content gathered during the discussions with stakeholders and SSPT will be informative for the outstanding EDR analysis, and analysts may fold in any issues highlighted in the “issue 2” motion to the extent helpful.
The SSPT also identified a number of smaller changes to BSAI crab and Amendment 80 forms that may reduce burden and increase clarity and quality of data collection derived from the EDRs. These modifications do not require regulatory changes. The Council requested AFSC staff consult stakeholders to address these issues and provide an update in the NMFS management report of any changes prior to implementation.
Staff contact is Sarah Marrinan.
The Council adopted research priorities for 2022-2024 as recommended by the SSC, including their suggested process changes for future reviews that incorporate SSPT and FEP research priorities. The SSC’s recommendations updated the comprehensive list of projects maintained on the Council’s online research priorities database as well as the projects the SSC is recommending for the “Top Ten” projects in need of funding (Table below). The SSC will provide their overall process recommendations at the June 2021 Council meeting and as directed by the Council, staff will develop a graphic to improve transparency about the overall review process including points (onramps) for stakeholder input. In accordance with the MSA, the Council’s research priorities will be transmitted to the Secretary of Commerce and the Alaska Fishery Science Center, and will also be shared with a number of universities and funding entities in order to inspire progress on research in support of its management decisions.
The NPFMC’s research priorities cover a wide range of topics and are organized and managed within a publicly accessible database. Priority ranking of research topics is done to emphasize the correspondence of research to the Council’s time horizon of management concerns. The Top Ten list of Council research priorities identified at the April 2021 Council meeting is provided on the Council’s website.
Annual Community Engagement and Participation Overview
At the April 2021 Council meeting, the SSC received a presentation on a new report produced by the Alaska Fisheries Science Center – the Annual Community Engagement and Participation Overview (ACEPO). ACEPO is an annual report that provides social and economic information at the community level for those fishing communities which are substantially dependent on, or engaged in, the North Pacific Groundfish and Crab fisheries.
The SSC commended the authors on producing a community-level analysis that is guided by NPFMC management objectives and National Standard 8, and felt it would be useful resource for staff in the preparation of FMP and program review analyses as well as for the public. Because ACEPO will be updated annually, the SSC also recommended that future iterations incorporate highly engaged communities outside of Alaska and prioritize adding additional information would be useful resource for staff in the preparation of FMP and program review analyses as well as for the public.
Staff contact is Kate Haapala.
The Council discussed the relative priority and scheduling of previously tasked projects, and identified new tasking. The revised 3 meeting outlook reflects this guidance. Council meetings, including Plan Team and Committee meetings, will be held virtually through September 2021 at least. The Council provided feedback about returning to in-person meetings, and staff will develop a more detailed proposal to discuss in June. Staff will include an option for remote testimony during the transition back to in-person, but members cannot participate remotely unless that group’s meeting is entirely virtual. The Council is currently contemplating holding the first in-person meeting in October 2021.
The Council was briefed on staff progress on implementing the Council’s community engagement Community Engagement Committee (CEC)’s recommendations as endorsed by the Council in February 2021. Responsibilities for a Rural Fisheries Community and Tribal Liaison role have been assigned to Dr. Kate Haapala, on Council staff. It is envisioned that in that role, she will also support the reconstituted CEC and work with NMFS to receive and understand the results of Tribal Consultation meetings as early in the process as possible. Staff will attend a virtual cultural awareness training program later this year, in advance of similar training for Council members.
The Council also heard the report of the Council’s Executive Committee. The Committee approved revisions to the AP and SSC handbooks that were reviewed with those groups in February, and affirmed the current practice for recording Council meetings during virtual, and archiving recordings. Additionally, the Council approved a number of changes to the current written public comment policy.
The Council directed staff to write the following letters:
- To the U.S. Navy, thanking them for the presentation on the upcoming Northern Edge exercises in the Gulf of Alaska, and requesting a report later this year on how the exercises transpired.
- To the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the USCG, in favor of allowing AIS to be used to identify fishing gear locations.
The Council also provided the following additional direction:
- The Council tasked a discussion paper to consider identifying longline pots as legal gear for Bering Sea Greenland turbot.
- The Council requested the Ecosystem Committee to assess the FAO guidance on Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) and how the Alaska fishery conservation areas would qualify, or if they do not, what potential additional actions might be considered.
- The Council endorsed the SSC suggestions regarding the agency’s approach to preparing the EFH 5-year review for 2022, including additional SSC review of various components as they are being developed. The Council also identified its intent to consider the utility of a HAPC nomination process after receiving the full 5-year review summary report (currently scheduled for June 2022).
- In response to comments raised by the SSC, the Council directed the Groundfish Plan Teams to include an agenda item in September to review spatial distribution data on blackspotted-rougheye rockfish, potential tools to augment the current maximum subarea species catch management, and to identify priority areas for further research.
The Council appreciates notification of collaborative efforts underway by industry participants to find solutions to avoid stranding Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands, and to develop a proposal for access opportunities to the IFQ fisheries that address concerns raised at this meeting.
Finally, the Council discussed the work of upcoming Committees, and approved the revised Terms of Reference for the reconstituted CEC. The Council issued a call for nominations for members of a reconstituted CEC, and for a new member of the Fishery Monitoring Advisory Committee.
Northern Edge 2021 Exercises
Representatives from the U.S. Navy updated the Council on upcoming Northern Edge 2021 joint training exercise in the Gulf of Alaska, scheduled to occur May 3-14, and the Navy’s marine species monitoring projects. The Council appreciated the presentations and looks forward to a report back on the results of the May 2021 training exercise and ongoing Chinook salmon research.
The Northern Edge exercise is a joint forces training involving Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, Army, and the Coast Guard. The exercise is biennial, occurring in odd years, and last occurred in May 2019. The at-sea Navy events occur in the Temporary Maritime Activities Area (TMAA; see map). During the exercise, there are no restrictions on civilian navigation to fishing vessels. The TMAA is beyond 12 nautical miles from the coast, and most at-sea activities occur far offshore and avoid other vessel traffic. The exercise this year is expected to be similar in size to the Northern Edge 2019 exercise. Extensive mitigations that have been developed in coordination with NMFS include:
- Use of mitigation zones for sonar and weapons activities, with trained marine species lookouts
- Minimize use of live explosive during weapons training
- No use of explosive during training activities in the Portlock Bank area
- Coordinate with regulatory agencies for adaptive management
- Conduct population surveys and other Marine Species Monitoring projects.
Presenters also described the U.S. Navy’s Marine Species Monitoring Program, and in particular, a research project on telemetry and genetic identification of Chinook salmon that overlap with U.S. Navy training area. The ongoing research identifies specific Chinook salmon populations in the training areas using genetic tissue samples, and through telemetry, provides data on Chinook salmon migration routes including on-shelf vs off-shelf migration while returning to river systems of origin (see insert).
Staff contact is Jon McCracken.
Essential Fish Habitat Review
EFH 5-year review
The Council and SSC reviewed the work plan for the 2022 Essential Fish Habitat 5-year review. The document described work to date and plans for completing the 5-year review. The report again laid out the Agency priorities for EFH review including EFH descriptions and maps, fishing effects, non-fishing effects, EFH conservation and enhancement, prey species updates, and research and information needs. The schedule calls for review of these components by the stock assessment authors between March and August 2021, groundfish and crab plan teams in September 2021, and final review by stock authors in January 2022. A summary report on these components will then be presented to the Council in June 2022. If the Council chooses to revise the FMPs based on this summary report, the requisite analyses will be conducted to present initial review to the Council in October 2022 and final review by the Council in December 2022.
The SSC appreciated the analysts’ responsiveness to previous reviews but felt that additional review and oversight by the SSC and stock assessment authors was necessary. The SSC requested a review of the SDM model results and an overview of discussion or recommendations from stock assessment authors at the October 2021 SSC meeting. The SSC also requested an additional review focused on the FE model at the February or April 2022 SSC meetings. Finally, the SSC considers consultation with the assessment authors to be a critical link in evaluation model configuration and output and is pleased that the stock assessment authors will have the opportunity to evaluate those models.
The Council endorsed the SSC suggestions for the EFH review, specifically evaluating the SDM models and the FE model separately and sequentially, responding to the SSC comments, review of the draft EFH research plan, and ensuring the transparent and public review process.
The Council also noticed that they intend to consider the utility of a Habitat Areas of Particular Concern process after receiving the summary report for the 5-year review.
EFH Consultation Report
The Council received the annual overview of consultations on actions that may adversely affect EFH in Alaska. Ms. Gretchen Harrington, Assistant Regional Administrator for Habitat Conservation Division provided the overview. Every year NMFS AR receives notice of 100-200 non-fishing actions that may affect living marine resources. The Agency provides review for those activities that may adversely affect EFH, including aquaculture sites, harbor improvements, navigation dredging, mining, forestry, oil and gas exploration, Naval training exercises, hydropower development, and transportation infrastructure projects. Specific projects that the agency is currently reviewing that may be of interest to the Council include mining activities near Nome, laying of fiber optic cable in the Eastern Aleutians, and scuttling of vessels offshore. The presentation also included a summary of tools for EFH consultations including the Alaska EFH web application, ShoreZone mapping system, the Nearshore Fish Atlas, and Non-Fishing Activities report.
Staff will continue to work with HCD to keep the Council updated on projects, as warranted. Staff contact is Steve MacLean.
Council Committees, Plan Teams, and Taskforces
The Council will be holding all meetings virtually through at least September 2021.
The following meetings are currently anticipated through the summer:
- Partial Coverage Fishery Monitoring Advisory Committee (PCFMAC) – April 19, 2021
- Ecosystem Committee – April 20, 2021
- Bering Sea Fishery Ecosystem Plan Team – May 3 and May 24-25, 2021
- BSAI Crab Plan Team – May 17-21, 2021
- EM Trawl Committee – May 21, 2021
- Fishery Monitoring Advisory Committee (FMAC) – May 17, 2021
- Bering Sea Fishery Ecosystem Plan Climate Change Taskforce – May 10 and 13, 2021
While not a Council-sponsored meeting, the Pacific Sablefish Transboundary Assessment Team (PSTAT) is organizing a workshop on April 27-28, 2021, for stakeholders from the US and Canada to learn more about their sablefish management strategy evaluation project and to provide feedback on the MSE goals and objectives. Please visit https://www.pacificsablefishscience.org/ for more information.