Form and Function of Fishery Management Councils. Marine Resource Education Program September 2013

Transcription

1 Form and Function of Fishery Management Councils Marine Resource Education Program September 2013

2 Our Itinerary History of fisheries management The Councils Role of a Council member Advisory process Management process

3 History of Fishery Management To appreciate the history of the Magnuson Act is to appreciate the history of environmental stewardship in the United States and the progress made in conservation over the last three decades.

4 The Magnuson-Stevens Act Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976 Set up the regional Council system Extended control of the U.S. waters to 200 miles offshore Phased out foreign fishing activities Created measures to: Prevent overfishing Allow overfished stocks to recover Conserve & manage fishery resources

5 Magnuson-Stevens Act Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 Rebuild overfished fisheries Protect essential fish habitat Reduce bycatch Consider the effects of management decisions on communities

6 Ten National Standards 1. Prevent overfishing while achieving optimum yield; 2. Use best scientific information available; 3. Manage stocks as a unit; 4. Allocate fair & equitably, promote conservation, and prevent excessive shares; 5. Consider efficiency but do not base management solely on economic allocation; 6. Consider and allow for variations among fisheries, fishery resources, and catches; 7. Minimize costs/avoid duplication; 8. Provide for sustained participation by fishing communities; 9. To extent practicable, minimize bycatch and bycatch mortality; 10. To extent practicable, promote safety at sea.

7 Increasing Landed Catch lbs. Magnuson-Stevens Act MSA Reauthorization of 2006 Mandates the use of Annual Catch Limits and Accountability Measures Overfishing Limit (OFL) Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) Annual Catch Limit (ACL) Annual Catch Target (ACT) OFL ABC ACL ACT

8 Magnuson-Stevens Act Gave the Scientific and Statistical Committee a greater responsibility for estimating: SSC Role OFL ABC Scientific Uncertainty Science- Management feedback loop Science- Management feedback loop Management Uncertainty ACL ACL ABC ACT Council Role

9 Magnuson-Stevens Act Tightens rebuilding timelines. Provides for widespread market-based fishery management through limited access programs. Calls for increased international cooperation.

10 What is a Fishery Management Council? The Council system encourages local level participation & representation during the decision-making process.

11 Who is the Council? Regional Administrator of NOAA Fisheries Officials from State or Commonwealth marine resource management agencies Non-voting members: U.S. Coast Guard U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Department of State Marine Fisheries Commission (excluding CFMC)

12 Who is the Council? Members who, by reason of their occupational or other experience, scientific expertise, or training, are knowledgeable regarding the conservation and management or the commercial or recreational harvest of the fishery resources or the geographical area. Appointments shall ensure fair and balanced apportionment, on a rotating or other basis of the active participants in the commercial & recreational fisheries.

13 The Role of a Council Member Protect the public interest in the fisheries by balancing competing interests to make decisions for the greatest overall benefit to the Nation.

14 The Oath of a Council Member I, as a duly appointed member of a Regional Fishery Management Council established under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, hereby promise to conserve and manage the living marine resources of the United States of America by carrying out the business of the Council for the greatest overall benefit of the Nation. I recognize my responsibility to serve as a knowledgeable and experienced trustee of the Nation s marine fisheries resources, being careful to balance competing private or regional interests and always aware and protective of the public interest in those resources. I commit myself to uphold the provisions, standards, and requirements of the Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and other applicable law, and shall conduct myself at all times according to the rules of conduct prescribed by the Secretary of Commerce. This oath is given freely and without mental reservation or purpose of evasion.

15 Conduct as a Federal Official Cannot accept compensation in exchange for influence or act with personal financial interest. Cannot contact other federal agencies or court with intent to influence Government action on issues or on behalf of individuals that are related to Council business. Cannot use appropriated funds to influence Congress to favor or oppose any legislation unless responding to a request from Congress. Cannot engage in criminal, infamous, dishonest, immoral, or disgraceful conduct.

16 Advisory Process Advisory Panel SSC Council Committee Full Council The Council draws upon the expertise of knowledgeable people from other state and federal agencies, universities, and the public.

17 Advisory Panels The Councils draw upon the expertise of the public to review fishery management issues and provide recommendations: State and federal agency employees Academics Recreational, commercial, and for-hire fishermen Fish dealers Members of non-profit organizations The Councils solicit resumes and appoint panel members.

18 Scientific & Statistical Committee Council draws upon the scientific, technical, social, & economic expertise of: Economists Biologists Sociologists Natural resource attorneys SSC members are paid for the time they spend meeting for Council business.

19 Scientific & Statistical Committee Review assessments (SEDAR) Advise on stock status Assist with development of Fishery Management Plans Make recommendations for Acceptable Biological Catch, preventing overfishing, achieving rebuilding targets Develop research priorities

20 Interdisciplinary Planning Team A team of people from the Council staff, NOAA Fisheries, and the Southeast Science Center responsible for developing fishery management documents. Who is included? Lead from Council staff Lead from NOAA Fisheries NOAA General Counsel NEPA expert Science Center technical advisor

21 The Process Issue Identified Initial Review Closed Framework Open Traditional Fishery Management Plan Amendment Environmental Assessment/Environment al Impact Statement Immediate Emergency Rule Interim Rule Scoping Options Paper Public Hearing Final Action Rule Making

22 Issue Identified Initial Review Traditional Fishery Management Plan Amendment Environmental Assessment/Environment al Impact Statement Plan Amendment Takes the most time. Allows for the most public input. Scoping Options Paper Public Hearing Final Action Rule Making

23 Issue Identified Initial Review Traditional Fishery Management Plan Amendment Environmental Assessment/Environment al Impact Statement Scoping Regulatory action begins when a fishery issue is identified Stock Assessment Policy Change Public Request Options Paper Public Hearing Final Action Rule Making

24 Issue Identified Initial Review Traditional Fishery Management Plan Amendment Environmental Assessment/Environmental Impact Statement Scoping Options Paper Public Hearing Final Action Rule Making Requirement of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Environmental Assessment Determines if a proposed action will have significant environmental impacts. Concise summary of the need for action, the alternatives, and the possible environmental impacts. Environmental Impact Statement When a proposed action does have significant environmental impacts Detailed analysis ensuring the policies and goals in NEPA are infused into the proposed actions. Includes alternatives that minimize adverse impacts & enhance the quality of the human environment. 45-day comment period for draft and 30-day comment period for final.

25 Issue Identified Initial Review Traditional Fishery Management Plan Amendment Environmental Assessment/Environment al Impact Statement The Goal of Scoping To identify issues, potential impacts, and reasonable alternatives so that reasonable management actions and alternatives can be developed. Scoping Options Paper Public Hearing Final Action Rule Making

26 Issue Identified Initial Review Traditional Fishery Management Plan Amendment Environmental Assessment/Environment al Impact Statement Options Paper A list of management options and alternatives based on input received during scoping. Scoping Options Paper Public Hearing Final Action Rule Making

27 Issue Identified Initial Review Traditional Fishery Management Plan Amendment Environmental Assessment/Environment al Impact Statement The Purpose of Public Hearings To gather feedback on potential impacts of the proposed alternatives and to suggest other possible alternatives as appropriate. Scoping Options Paper Public Hearing Final Action Rule Making

28 Issue Identified Initial Review Traditional Fishery Management Plan Amendment Environmental Assessment/Environment al Impact Statement Final Action The Council votes to decide a management strategy is appropriate and submits it to the Secretary of Commerce. Scoping Options Paper Public Hearing Final Action Rule Making

29 Immediate Track Issue Identified* Initial Review Immediate Emergency Rule Interim Rule Final Action Proposed Rule* Used to make changes to fisheries regulations when urgent action is necessary. Emergency Rule Used under emergency situations to address unanticipated events or problems. Interim Rule Used for fish that are deemed overfished and/or experiencing overfishing.

30 Framework Track Closed Issue Identified* Initial Review Framework Open Public Hearing* Final Action A standardized way to implement management measures that are relevant to the terms of the Fishery Management Plan. Open Council retains control. Closed NOAA Fisheries has authority to make management adjustments. Proposed Rule*

31 Public Issue Identified Involvement in Fishery Management Plan Development Advisory Panels Public Comment Council Initial Review Environmental Assessment/Environment al Impact Statement NOAA Comment Period Scoping Public is asked to identify possible solutions to the fishery issue Options Paper Public Hearing Final Action Rule Making Public is asked which solution they prefer Advisory panel gives advice Final public opportunity for input at Council level NOAA Comment Period

32 Technical Issue Identified Initial Review Responsibilities in Fishery Management Plan Development Policy Change SEDAR Staff performs a literature review. Scientific and Statistical Committee may comment. Environmental Assessment/Environment al Impact Statement Interdisciplinary Planning Team (IPT) develops an initial analysis of the fishery issue. Scoping Options Paper Public Hearing Final Action Rule Making IPT develops document to solicit potential solutions. IPT defines possible actions and alternatives to solve fishery management issue. IPT performs impact analysis (economic, social, biological). IPT finalizes document to reflect Council decisions. Staff transmits amendment to the Secretary of Commerce.

33 Council Issue Identified Initial Review Responsibility in Fishery Management Plan Development Determines if issue should be addressed. Directs staff to provide initial review. Council decides how the issue should be addressed (framework, plan amendment, interim rule, etc.). Environmental Assessment/Environment al Impact Statement Scoping Options Paper Public Hearing Final Action Rule Making Council reviews scoping document and initiates the scoping process. Council reviews scoping comments and directs staff how to move forward with options. Council reviews public hearing document and initiates public hearing process. Council reviews public hearing comments and advisory panel recommendations and selects preferred alternatives from proposed fishery management actions. Directs staff to transmit to Secretary of Commerce.

34 Rule Making Final Action Proposed Rule Comment Period Once the Council takes final action, fishery management measures are submitted to the Secretary of Commerce for rulemaking. Final Decision Implementation

35 Any Questions?