Fishery Management Report No. 33 of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission Amendment 1 to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Sea Herring February 1999 Fishery Management Report No. 33 of the ATLANTIC STATES MARINE FISHERIES COMMISSION Amendment 1 to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Sea Herring February 1999 Amendment 1 to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Sea Herring Prepared by Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission Atlantic Herring Plan Development Team in conjunction with New England Fishery Management Council Atlantic Herring Plan Development Team Team Members: Dr. Joseph C. Desfosse (ASMFC, co-Chair), Tom Nies (NEFMC, co-Chair), Dr. David Stevenson (Maine Department of Marine Resources), Dr. Michael Armstrong (Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries), Bruce Smith (New Hampshire Fish & Game), Dr. Kevin Friedland (National Marine Fisheries Service/ University of Massachusetts), Dr. William Overholtz, Dr. Phil Logan and Andrew Kitts (National Marine Fisheries Service - Northeast Fisheries Science Center), Dr. John Gates (University of Rhode Island), and Dr. Madeleine Hall-Arber (Massachusetts Institute of Technology). This Amendment was prepared in cooperation with the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission s Atlantic Herring Section, Atlantic Herring Technical Committee, the New England Fishery Management Council s Herring Oversight Committee, and the joint Commission/Council Atlantic Herring Advisory Panel. A report of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission pursuant to U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Award Nos. NA87 FG 0025 and NA97 FGO 0034. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. Introduction Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus) are distributed in U.S. waters from Maine to Cape Hatteras. Herring undergo extensive seasonal migrations, spending the summer months in the north while overwintering to the south. The U.S. Atlantic herring fishery is currently managed as a single stock complex along the East Coast from Maine to Cape Hatteras although there is evidence to suggest there are at least two separate biological stocks. Generally, the resource has been divided into an inshore Gulf of Maine (GOM) and an offshore Georges Bank (GB) component. Individual spawning aggregations have been identified, but quantitative data on their relative size is lacking. Intermixing among these aggregations outside of the spawning season has led to difficulties in accurately assessing the status of individual stocks. The most recent peer-reviewed assessment concluded that the abundance of the coastal stock complex is currently 2.9 million metric tons (mt), while the most recent estimate of spawning stock biomass (SS B) is 1.8 million mt (NEFSC 1998b). The current level of abundance has generated interest in new and expanded sectors of the herring fishery. These potentially competing interests have generated different views on how the herring fishery should be managed in the future. Additionally, the interest in rapid expansion of the fishery has raised concerns about potential overharvest, locally or on the entire stock complex. In the late 1960s and the early 1970s, excessive foreign fishing led to the collapse of the Georges Bank stock. There is currently concern from some sectors of the industry and fisheries managers over the condition of the Gulf of Maine (GOM) component of the Atlantic herring population, but existing data are insufficient to separate individual components such as the GOM, into genetically distinct stocks. Amendment 1 was developed in close coordination with the New England Fishery Management Council as the Council developed a plan for Atlantic herring fisheries in federal waters. When fully implemented, Amendment 1, in conjunction with the Council plan, is designed to minimize the chance of a population collapse due to overfishing, reduce the risk of recruitment failure, promote orderly development in the offshore fishery, reduce impacts to species which are ecologically dependent upon Atlantic herring, and minimize adverse effects on participants in the fishery. 2. Goals, Objectives, Management Unit, Overfishing Definition Amendment 1 to the Interstate Fishery Management Plan completely replaces all previous Commission management plans for Atlantic herring. The goals of Amendment 1 are: " To achieve, on a continuing basis, optimum yield (OY) for the United States fishing industry and to prevent overfishing of the Atlantic sea herring resource. Optimum yield is the amount of fish that will provide the greatest overall benefit to the Nation, particularly with respect to food production and recreational opportunities, taking into account the protection of marine ecosystems, including maintenance of a biomass that supports the ocean ecosystem, predator consumption of herring, and biologically sustainable human harvest. Optimum yield is based on the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) as reduced by any relevant economic, social, or ecological factor, and, in the case of an overfished fishery, provides for rebuilding to a level consistent with producing MSY. " To provide for the orderly development of the offshore and inshore fisheries, taking into account the viability of current participants in the fishery. " To provide controlled opportunities for fishermen and vessels in other mid-Atlantic and New England fisheries. ii In support of these goals, the following objectives are recommended for Amendment 1: 1) To harvest the U.S. Northwest Atlantic sea herring resource consistent with the definition of overfishing contained in the plan. 2) To prevent the overfishing of discrete spawning stock units consistent with the national standards. 3) To avoid patterns of fishing mortality by age which adversely affect the age structure of the stock. 4) To provide adequate protection for spawning herring and prevent damage to herring egg beds. 5) To promote U.S. and Canadian cooperation in order to establish complementary management practices. 6) To implement management measures in close coordination with other Federal and State FMP s. 7) To promote research and improve the collection of information in order to better understand herring population dynamics, biology and ecology, improve science in order to move to real-time management and to improve assessment procedures and cooperation with Canada. 8) To achieve full utilization from the catch of herring, including minimizing waste from discards in the fishery. 9) To maximize domestic use and encourage value-added product utilization. 10) To promote the utilization of the resource in a manner which maximizes social and economic benefits to the nation and taking into account the protection of marine ecosystems. 11) To facilitate the development of biologically and environmentally sound aquaculture projects in the EEZ that are compatible with traditional fisheries in the New England region, given that some projects may not occur in federal waters without modifying one or more Council fishery management plans. Amendment 1 modifies the three management areas contained in the previous fishery management plan by dividing Area 1 (Gulf of Maine) into two subareas. The area inshore of the line is Area 1A, which includes the inshore fishing grounds that have supported most of the catch to date; the area offshore of the line is Area 1B. This is based on knowledge of the seasonal distribution and availability of juvenile and adult fish within the management unit area, regional differences in the nature and degree of harvesting (different gear types) and processing activity (differences in size and age of fish processed), differences between the inshore and offshore fishing grounds and habitat, and location of known spawning grounds. One of the most important reasons for distinguishing management areas is to avoid over-exploitation of individual spawning populations that are included within the stock complex. Despite the fact that the management unit extends throughout the range of the species in U.S. waters, there is evidence that the U.S. Atlantic herring resource is comprised of separate spawning populations that occupy identifiable areas prior to and during spawning. For the reasons given above, it is appropriate to establish an overall management program that is consistent with unique conditions of the resource and the fishery within separate management areas, and allows for the cooperative management of the resource by different regulatory jurisdictions (the states, the ASMFC and the New England and M id-Atlantic Fishery Management Councils). The Commission and Council considered the advice of the 27th Stock Assessment Review Committee, the Atlantic Herring Plan Development Team, and the Overfishing Definition Review Panel before selecting an overfishing definition and biological reference points for Atlantic herring. BMSY is estimated to be 1.1 million mt, and MSY is estimated to be 317,000 mt. The maximum fishing mortality, Fthresho ld is equal to FMSY, estimated as 0.30, when stock biomass is equal to or larger than BMSY. The target fishing mortality when biomass is at or larger than BMSY is 0.28. If biomass declines to less than BMSY, the maximum fishing mortality is the mortality that has a 50% probability to rebuild stock biomass to BMSY in 5 years. The target fishing mortality when biomass is less than BMSY will be determined by applying the previously determined ratio of FMSY to F at the lower level of the 80% confidence interval (0.91) to the maxim um fishing mortality.