Nature Conservancy EM project
January 22, 2016
John Bullard, Regional Administrator
National Marine Fisheries Service
Northeast Regional Office
55 Great Republic Drive
Gloucester, MA 01930
National Marine Fisheries Service
Northeast Regional Office
55 Great Republic Drive
Gloucester, MA 01930
Dear Mr. Bullard:
Attached is an application for an Exempted Fishing Permit to implement an electronic monitoring program on fishing vessels in the New England Multispecies fishery in Fishing Year 2016. The Nature Conservancy has partnered with the Cape Cod Commercial Fishermen’s Alliance, the Maine Coast Fishermen’s Association, and the Gulf of Maine Research Institute; and fishermen from Northeast Fishery Sector XI, the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector, and the Maine Coast Community Sector; and has worked closely with NMFS staff from GARFO and the NEFSC Fisheries Sampling Branch, to develop electronic monitoring in the region. This program has been awarded funding by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and is scheduled to begin May 1st, 2016.
Thank you for your consideration of this application.
Sincerely,
Christopher McGuire
Marine Program Director
Marine Program Director
cc:
Ryan Silva
Barry Clifford
Brett Alger
Amy Martins
Nichole Rossi
Ryan Silva
Barry Clifford
Brett Alger
Amy Martins
Nichole Rossi
Application for an Exempted Fishing Permit (EFP):
To conduct experiments in the area of authority of the New England Fishery Management Council:
To conduct experiments in the area of authority of the New England Fishery Management Council:
Application date: January 22, 2016
Project Title: Electronic Monitoring for New England’s Groundfish Fishery
Project timing: Fishing year 2016; May 1st, 2016 thru April 30th 2017
Project Title: Electronic Monitoring for New England’s Groundfish Fishery
Project timing: Fishing year 2016; May 1st, 2016 thru April 30th 2017
EFP Primary Contact:
Christopher McGuire, Marine Program Director
The Nature Conservancy in Massachusetts
99 Bedford Street, 5th Floor, Boston MA, 02111
E-mail: [email protected]
Phone: 617-532-8351
Christopher McGuire, Marine Program Director
The Nature Conservancy in Massachusetts
99 Bedford Street, 5th Floor, Boston MA, 02111
E-mail: [email protected]
Phone: 617-532-8351
Project partners:
Maine Coast Fishermen’s Association/Maine Coast Community Sector:
Ben Martens, 207- 619-1755, [email protected]
NEFS Sector XI & NEFS Sector V: Daniel Salerno, 401-932-0070, [email protected]
Cape Cod Commercial Fishermen’s Alliance/Georges Bank Fixed Gear Sector: Claire Fitz-Gerald, 847-721-8186, [email protected]
Gulf of Maine Research Institute: Mark Hager, 508-269-8138, [email protected]
The Nature Conservancy in Maine: Geoffrey Smith, 207-607-4805, [email protected]
Maine Coast Fishermen’s Association/Maine Coast Community Sector:
Ben Martens, 207- 619-1755, [email protected]
NEFS Sector XI & NEFS Sector V: Daniel Salerno, 401-932-0070, [email protected]
Cape Cod Commercial Fishermen’s Alliance/Georges Bank Fixed Gear Sector: Claire Fitz-Gerald, 847-721-8186, [email protected]
Gulf of Maine Research Institute: Mark Hager, 508-269-8138, [email protected]
The Nature Conservancy in Maine: Geoffrey Smith, 207-607-4805, [email protected]
Project Summary:
The Nature Conservancy, in partnership with the Cape Cod Commercial Fishermen’s Alliance, the Maine Coast Fishermen’s Association, and the Gulf of Maine Research Institute; and fishermen from the Northeast Fishery Sectors XI & V, the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector, and the Maine Coast Community Sector; is requesting an Exempted Fishing Permit (EFP) to implement an electronic monitoring (EM) program on groundfish fishing vessels in the New England Multispecies fishery in Fishing Year 2016 (FY16). The EFP would authorize the conduct of a small-scale EM monitoring program to refine proposed standards for a comprehensive EM program. This project has been awarded federal funding from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) to support EM implementation in FY16. The project will install EM equipment, and document the first year of an operational electronic monitoring program that allows groundfish sector vessels to verify area fished and regulated groundfish discards by species, for the purposes of monitoring sector utilization of annual catch entitlement. Participating vessels will use EM instead of an At-Sea Monitor (ASM), and in addition to a NEFOP observer, to verify regulated groundfish discards on those groundfish trips selected for observer coverage.
This EFP is requested for a one year period beginning May 1, 2016. During the course of the EFP, we will continue our efforts to improve the functionality of EM monitoring systems and to refine and optimize fish handling protocols by participating fishermen. These efforts will support continued development of EM systems as a tool to support the transition to a VTR audit or optimized-retention monitoring approach, rather than the 100% video review approach outlined in this EFP application.
The Nature Conservancy, in partnership with the Cape Cod Commercial Fishermen’s Alliance, the Maine Coast Fishermen’s Association, and the Gulf of Maine Research Institute; and fishermen from the Northeast Fishery Sectors XI & V, the GB Cod Fixed Gear Sector, and the Maine Coast Community Sector; is requesting an Exempted Fishing Permit (EFP) to implement an electronic monitoring (EM) program on groundfish fishing vessels in the New England Multispecies fishery in Fishing Year 2016 (FY16). The EFP would authorize the conduct of a small-scale EM monitoring program to refine proposed standards for a comprehensive EM program. This project has been awarded federal funding from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) to support EM implementation in FY16. The project will install EM equipment, and document the first year of an operational electronic monitoring program that allows groundfish sector vessels to verify area fished and regulated groundfish discards by species, for the purposes of monitoring sector utilization of annual catch entitlement. Participating vessels will use EM instead of an At-Sea Monitor (ASM), and in addition to a NEFOP observer, to verify regulated groundfish discards on those groundfish trips selected for observer coverage.
This EFP is requested for a one year period beginning May 1, 2016. During the course of the EFP, we will continue our efforts to improve the functionality of EM monitoring systems and to refine and optimize fish handling protocols by participating fishermen. These efforts will support continued development of EM systems as a tool to support the transition to a VTR audit or optimized-retention monitoring approach, rather than the 100% video review approach outlined in this EFP application.
Specific Objectives Include:
1. Demonstrate that EM can provide accurate third-party accounting of regulated groundfish discards and fishing information (date/time/location) for the purpose of sector ACE monitoring.
2. Incentivize and demonstrate accurate catch eVTR reporting by participating fishermen.
3. Refine fish handling protocols to ensure accurate identification and measurement of all discarded regulated groundfish species.
4. Refine protocols for fish where species, disposition, or measurement of an individual cannot be derived from video (e.g. poor video quality, obstructed view, crew mishandling, system failure)
5. Develop an expedient feedback-loop between video reviewer and captain/crew for accelerated learning.
6. Inform the development of pass/fail criteria for discard summary file compared to eVTR and appropriate audit percentages for future audit approach to EM.
7. Develop vessel monitoring plan (VMP) compliance metrics and sector penalty schedule.
8. Compare EM discard reports with NEFOP discard reports on the same trip.
9. Develop protocols for determining vessel-specific discard rates, rather than assumed discard rates based on strata currently used
1. Demonstrate that EM can provide accurate third-party accounting of regulated groundfish discards and fishing information (date/time/location) for the purpose of sector ACE monitoring.
2. Incentivize and demonstrate accurate catch eVTR reporting by participating fishermen.
3. Refine fish handling protocols to ensure accurate identification and measurement of all discarded regulated groundfish species.
4. Refine protocols for fish where species, disposition, or measurement of an individual cannot be derived from video (e.g. poor video quality, obstructed view, crew mishandling, system failure)
5. Develop an expedient feedback-loop between video reviewer and captain/crew for accelerated learning.
6. Inform the development of pass/fail criteria for discard summary file compared to eVTR and appropriate audit percentages for future audit approach to EM.
7. Develop vessel monitoring plan (VMP) compliance metrics and sector penalty schedule.
8. Compare EM discard reports with NEFOP discard reports on the same trip.
9. Develop protocols for determining vessel-specific discard rates, rather than assumed discard rates based on strata currently used
Background and Rationale for Research:
Vision for and Importance of Electronic Monitoring: Long term, we envision Sector groundfish vessels throughout New England operating with approved EM systems to affordably meet their catch monitoring requirements. Vessels will utilize traditional groundfish gear, such as: sink gillnet, benthic longline, rod and reel/handgear, or otter trawl. Regional and federal groundfish data management systems will have evolved to meet the needs of this program and will incorporate data and analyses into decision-making. The groundfish industry, NGOs, the private sector, and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) will collaborate to ensure the success of this program.
Vision for and Importance of Electronic Monitoring: Long term, we envision Sector groundfish vessels throughout New England operating with approved EM systems to affordably meet their catch monitoring requirements. Vessels will utilize traditional groundfish gear, such as: sink gillnet, benthic longline, rod and reel/handgear, or otter trawl. Regional and federal groundfish data management systems will have evolved to meet the needs of this program and will incorporate data and analyses into decision-making. The groundfish industry, NGOs, the private sector, and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) will collaborate to ensure the success of this program.
We believe that EM can improve catch accountability, and that without improvements in catch accountability across the fleet, presently depleted stocks will continue to struggle to rebuild. EM is a promising tool for groundfish sectors to adopt in order to improve accountability at a manageable cost. EM can be used to validate fisheries-dependent data for use in the management of our fish stocks (Stanley,2011. Stanley 2014, Pria, 2014), use these data for real-time decision-making, and to eventually incorporate these data into robust stock assessments. EM, supplemented with biological
data collected by NEFOP observers, offers an important opportunity to improve our existing monitoring program and allow fishermen to serve as the primary stewards of the marine resources they depend upon.
New England fishermen have piloted and supported the use of EM technology for 12 years (McElderry, 2004). All participants in these pilot studies hold a strong belief that a successful EM program can provide a cost-effective, less obtrusive, safer, individually accountable and more accurate system of real-time catch and effort information. Given the groundswell of national support for EM, the ongoing economic crisis in the New England groundfish fishery, and limited government funding to meet observer coverage requirements, there is the need for this solution now more than ever.
Some EM protocols can best be refined during an operational fishing activity. This EFP will test protocols as follows:
1. Catch handling:
a. When length is indeterminate because of inadequate handling.
b. When unable to determine if discarded or not.
2. Unusable video:
a. Feedback to a vessel operator if catch handling or cleaning is required.
3. Video review and discard estimation
a. Identify discarded species and document length of individual fish:
i. Distinguish flatfish species.
b. Under EFP, data from useable hauls used to calculate rates.
c. Under a large scale program, data used for eVTRs comparisons.
d. Video review rates for future audit approach.
1. Catch handling:
a. When length is indeterminate because of inadequate handling.
b. When unable to determine if discarded or not.
2. Unusable video:
a. Feedback to a vessel operator if catch handling or cleaning is required.
3. Video review and discard estimation
a. Identify discarded species and document length of individual fish:
i. Distinguish flatfish species.
b. Under EFP, data from useable hauls used to calculate rates.
c. Under a large scale program, data used for eVTRs comparisons.
d. Video review rates for future audit approach.
Project Outcomes
A successful project will result in 12-20 sector groundfish vessels from 3-5 sectors operating with EM systems in lieu of human at-sea monitors in FY 2016, with additional vessels opting into the program in future years. This EM program will be supported by NMFS data management systems, which will have evolved to meet electronic monitoring requirements through the ongoing ‘fishery data modernization initiative’ and will be capable of incorporating data and analyses into timely decision making, as described in the Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office and Northeast Fisheries Science Center Electronic Technology Implementation Plan.
If successful, this project will result in refined data collection, review, and reporting protocols that will resolve several of the outstanding questions that have hampered the wide scale implementation of EM, which are outlined above.
A successful project will result in 12-20 sector groundfish vessels from 3-5 sectors operating with EM systems in lieu of human at-sea monitors in FY 2016, with additional vessels opting into the program in future years. This EM program will be supported by NMFS data management systems, which will have evolved to meet electronic monitoring requirements through the ongoing ‘fishery data modernization initiative’ and will be capable of incorporating data and analyses into timely decision making, as described in the Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office and Northeast Fisheries Science Center Electronic Technology Implementation Plan.
If successful, this project will result in refined data collection, review, and reporting protocols that will resolve several of the outstanding questions that have hampered the wide scale implementation of EM, which are outlined above.
Methods
1) Scope
a) This EFP is effective while the permitted vessel is fishing on an “EFP trip”, defined as all three below criteria being met:
i) any groundfish sector trip that results in sector ACE accounting and;
ii) where the trip has been selected for an At-Sea Monitor through the Pre-Trip Notification System or equivalent process and;
iii) the vessel is identified as a participating vessel in the EFP and has an operational EM system installed.
b) Vessels may additionally run EM systems for training or testing on non-‘EFP trips’. The data from these trips will be the private property of the vessel and will not be archived or required to be shared with NMFS, but may be used by the project team for analysis
c) The Regional Administrator may terminate this permit or remove a participant by any of the following:
i) At the request of the EFP holder;
ii) The Regional Administrator determines it is necessary to issue amended EFPs containing additional or revised terms and conditions;
iii) Superseding Federal regulations become effective;
iv) NMFS finds that the EFP has unintended impacts;
v) NMFS finds that an EFP participant no longer meets the eligibility criteria; and/or,
vi) NMFS finds that an EFP participant failed to comply, in a more than minor way, with the terms and conditions of the permit.
1) Scope
a) This EFP is effective while the permitted vessel is fishing on an “EFP trip”, defined as all three below criteria being met:
i) any groundfish sector trip that results in sector ACE accounting and;
ii) where the trip has been selected for an At-Sea Monitor through the Pre-Trip Notification System or equivalent process and;
iii) the vessel is identified as a participating vessel in the EFP and has an operational EM system installed.
b) Vessels may additionally run EM systems for training or testing on non-‘EFP trips’. The data from these trips will be the private property of the vessel and will not be archived or required to be shared with NMFS, but may be used by the project team for analysis
c) The Regional Administrator may terminate this permit or remove a participant by any of the following:
i) At the request of the EFP holder;
ii) The Regional Administrator determines it is necessary to issue amended EFPs containing additional or revised terms and conditions;
iii) Superseding Federal regulations become effective;
iv) NMFS finds that the EFP has unintended impacts;
v) NMFS finds that an EFP participant no longer meets the eligibility criteria; and/or,
vi) NMFS finds that an EFP participant failed to comply, in a more than minor way, with the terms and conditions of the permit.
2) Definitions:
a) Regulated groundfish: The 13 species which will be enumerated by video reviewers (cod, haddock, yellowtail flounder, pollock, American plaice, witch flounder, white hake, windowpane flounder, Atlantic halibut, winter flounder, redfish, Atlantic wolffish, and ocean pout)
b) Downloaded EM Data: Unmodified video and sensor data archived or placed on a server from the original EM vessel hard drive.
c) Processed EM Data: Video and sensor data that have been analyzed using EM software and includes both downloaded data and data annotations
d) eVTR: electronic vessel trip report.
e) EM discard summary report: Report submitted to GARFO of weight and piece count of regulated groundfish discards by species, gear type, and location and including other pertinent metadata.
f) EM Feedback memo: Feedback directly to vessel from EM provider. Designed to improve catch handling and data collection performance. This does not include catch information.
g) VMP: Vessel Monitoring Plan: Unique vessel plan, accepted by NMFS, describing in detail the EM system specifications and catch handling procedures. See section 3(c).
a) Regulated groundfish: The 13 species which will be enumerated by video reviewers (cod, haddock, yellowtail flounder, pollock, American plaice, witch flounder, white hake, windowpane flounder, Atlantic halibut, winter flounder, redfish, Atlantic wolffish, and ocean pout)
b) Downloaded EM Data: Unmodified video and sensor data archived or placed on a server from the original EM vessel hard drive.
c) Processed EM Data: Video and sensor data that have been analyzed using EM software and includes both downloaded data and data annotations
d) eVTR: electronic vessel trip report.
e) EM discard summary report: Report submitted to GARFO of weight and piece count of regulated groundfish discards by species, gear type, and location and including other pertinent metadata.
f) EM Feedback memo: Feedback directly to vessel from EM provider. Designed to improve catch handling and data collection performance. This does not include catch information.
g) VMP: Vessel Monitoring Plan: Unique vessel plan, accepted by NMFS, describing in detail the EM system specifications and catch handling procedures. See section 3(c).
3) General requirements:
a) EM system installed by ‘accepted’ service provider. See NMFS “EM system specifications” memo for guidance.
b) Installation. The EFP participant must enable installation and operation of the EM system and associated equipment, including providing suitable camera mounts, power supply, wire runs and bulkhead thru-fittings, lighting, and fittings for hydraulic lines to enable connection of a pressure transducer (where applicable).
c) VMP: The vessel must have and adhere to a NMFS-accepted VMP on board the vessel at all times while fishing under this EFP. On behalf of the EFP participant, the EM service provider will prepare a draft VMP for each vessel and submit it to NMFS for acceptance. A standard VMP which includes many of the following will be submitted in advance of the vessel specific VMPs. The VMP shall include descriptions and diagrams (as required) of the following:
i) General vessel information including the vessel name, gear type(s), home port, captain(s) name, and hull number;
ii) Vessel layout;
iii) The number and location and rationale for placement of cameras and corresponding views;
iv) Location of lighting, control center, GPS, sensors, monitor, and other EM equipment;
v) Frame rates, image resolution, frequency of data logging, sensor trigger threshold values, and other EM system specifications;
vi) Description (or image) of the location and specs of the measuring strip or grid;
vii) List of regulated groundfish to be passed over measuring strip and discarded in view of designated cameras. All other allowable discards will be discarded at one of the designated discard control points within full view of the camera;
viii) Instructions for catch handling, including designated discard control points within camera view and procedures for measuring discards;
ix) Instructions for EM system operation;
x) Instructions for completing a logged EM system test and interpreting the results (e.g. hard drive space available, system errors etc.);
xi) Instructions for handling system malfunctions and points of contact for service provider;
xii) Instructions for removal, replacement and shipping of hard drives;
xiii) Types of errors – critical and non-critical;
xiv) Informational material collaboratively designed between EM provider and FSB will be disseminated by FSB for observers, providing advice on how and where to conduct observer activities there by reducing interference with EM system operations;
xv) Notes and changes made to VMP and system configuration, including date modified.
These provisions can be modified through a revised VMP submitted by the EFP holder and accepted by NMFS, in consultation with the EM service provider.
d) Maintenance: The vessel will schedule time as needed with the EM service provider for installation, catch handling feedback, equipment maintenance and service.
e) Signed agreement between fisherman and the Sector to adhere to established processes and timelines for the EM program
e) Signed agreement between fisherman and the Sector to adhere to established processes and timelines for the EM program
4) Before Trip:
a) The captain or owner will enter their intent to conduct a groundfish sector trip through PTNS as required: if selected for an ASM, the vessel will use the EM system instead of carrying an At Sea Monitor.
i) If selected for a NEFOP observer, vessel intends to run the EM system to facilitate direct comparisons, but this will not be an ‘EFP trip’ and NEFOP collected information will be used for catch accounting.
ii) If not selected for a monitor or an observer, the vessel will not be required to run the EM system for sector ACE accounting purposes, but may do so for training or project development.
a) The captain or owner will enter their intent to conduct a groundfish sector trip through PTNS as required: if selected for an ASM, the vessel will use the EM system instead of carrying an At Sea Monitor.
i) If selected for a NEFOP observer, vessel intends to run the EM system to facilitate direct comparisons, but this will not be an ‘EFP trip’ and NEFOP collected information will be used for catch accounting.
ii) If not selected for a monitor or an observer, the vessel will not be required to run the EM system for sector ACE accounting purposes, but may do so for training or project development.
b) System Test
i) A system test will be conducted and logged before leaving the dock at the start of every fishing trip, even on non-EFP trips.
(1) If system test shows a failure on a non-selected day the fisherman must notify service provider as soon as practicable.
(2) If system test shows a failure on an EM day see section c) below.
ii) The vessel operator must also ensure that the system has adequate memory to record the entire trip before departing port. Information regarding storage capacity and checking is located in the VMP.
i) A system test will be conducted and logged before leaving the dock at the start of every fishing trip, even on non-EFP trips.
(1) If system test shows a failure on a non-selected day the fisherman must notify service provider as soon as practicable.
(2) If system test shows a failure on an EM day see section c) below.
ii) The vessel operator must also ensure that the system has adequate memory to record the entire trip before departing port. Information regarding storage capacity and checking is located in the VMP.
c) System Malfunction
i) If EM system malfunctions before the start of an EFP trip
(1) Call EM service provider’s 24 hour technical support number immediately.
(2) The EM service provider technician will troubleshoot, and if not resolved will determine if the malfunction is critical or non-critical. A critical malfunction is one that prevents the data collection objectives of the EFP from being adequately monitored. Specific errors are listed in the VMP.
(a) Non-Critical EM System Malfunction: If the malfunction cannot be fixed in a timely fashion, the vessel operator may depart on the scheduled trip, but must follow the EM service provider’s instructions to adjust operations for that trip, if necessary. An example of a non-critical malfunction might be a
i) If EM system malfunctions before the start of an EFP trip
(1) Call EM service provider’s 24 hour technical support number immediately.
(2) The EM service provider technician will troubleshoot, and if not resolved will determine if the malfunction is critical or non-critical. A critical malfunction is one that prevents the data collection objectives of the EFP from being adequately monitored. Specific errors are listed in the VMP.
(a) Non-Critical EM System Malfunction: If the malfunction cannot be fixed in a timely fashion, the vessel operator may depart on the scheduled trip, but must follow the EM service provider’s instructions to adjust operations for that trip, if necessary. An example of a non-critical malfunction might be a
failed pressure sensor.
(b) Critical EM System Malfunction: If the malfunction is critical and not repairable, the vessel must contact NMFS FSB for a waiver. If granted a waiver, the vessel can make that trip, and subsequent trips granted a waiver or selected for NEFOP coverage in PTNS, until the vessel is again selected for EM coverage. The vessel may not sail the next ‘EFP trip’ until the equipment is deemed functional by the EM service provider.
(3) Inform program manager and/or Sector Manager
(b) Critical EM System Malfunction: If the malfunction is critical and not repairable, the vessel must contact NMFS FSB for a waiver. If granted a waiver, the vessel can make that trip, and subsequent trips granted a waiver or selected for NEFOP coverage in PTNS, until the vessel is again selected for EM coverage. The vessel may not sail the next ‘EFP trip’ until the equipment is deemed functional by the EM service provider.
(3) Inform program manager and/or Sector Manager
5) During EM Trip:
a) EM System on and operational
i) Operator is responsible for keeping all cameras clean and camera view unobstructed at all times, as per VMP.
ii) Operator ensures adequate and functioning deck lighting from 30 minutes before sunset to 30 minutes after sunrise.
a) EM System on and operational
i) Operator is responsible for keeping all cameras clean and camera view unobstructed at all times, as per VMP.
ii) Operator ensures adequate and functioning deck lighting from 30 minutes before sunset to 30 minutes after sunrise.
b) System Malfunction
i) If a system malfunction occurs at sea the operator will attempt to contact service provider’s help line by phone or by email. See procedures in Section 4 (c)
ii) If a critical malfunction cannot be resolved then trip can be completed, but may be considered unobserved by NMFS. The vessel may not sail on their next ‘EFP trip’ until the system is deemed functional by the EM provider.
i) If a system malfunction occurs at sea the operator will attempt to contact service provider’s help line by phone or by email. See procedures in Section 4 (c)
ii) If a critical malfunction cannot be resolved then trip can be completed, but may be considered unobserved by NMFS. The vessel may not sail on their next ‘EFP trip’ until the system is deemed functional by the EM provider.
c) Catch Handling:
i) Operator will ensure catch is handled according to the VMP.
ii) Groundfish species
(1) All regulated groundfish discards must be passed through the dedicated discard measuring areas specified in the VMP. All fish to be discarded will be returned to the sea as soon as practicable once data collection has occurred and in view of camera.
(2) All hake species (white, red, silver and offshore) will be landed.
(3) Legal Unmarketable Fish (LUMF): vessel will be allowed to discard these at sea as long as this exemption is listed in the vessel’s sector specific LOA. All LUMF will be discarded in view of the groundfish discard camera view and will be included in eVTR reports as discarded weights and piece counts.
(4) Other specific catch handling protocols, designed to facilitate correct species identification, will be detailed in the VMP.
iii) Non-groundfish species
(1) Species other than regulated groundfish that are not passed through the dedicated discard measuring area or chute (e.g. dogfish, skates) will be discarded in view of a camera at one of the designated discard control points, as specified by the VMP.
iv) Prohibited species (Marine mammals, sea turtles, seabirds, etc.) may be discarded per the VMP. A Marine Mammal Authorization Program mortality/injury report form must also be completed for interactions with any marine mammals (50 CFR 229.4). Forms are available at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/interactions/mmap_reporting_form.pdf
i) Operator will ensure catch is handled according to the VMP.
ii) Groundfish species
(1) All regulated groundfish discards must be passed through the dedicated discard measuring areas specified in the VMP. All fish to be discarded will be returned to the sea as soon as practicable once data collection has occurred and in view of camera.
(2) All hake species (white, red, silver and offshore) will be landed.
(3) Legal Unmarketable Fish (LUMF): vessel will be allowed to discard these at sea as long as this exemption is listed in the vessel’s sector specific LOA. All LUMF will be discarded in view of the groundfish discard camera view and will be included in eVTR reports as discarded weights and piece counts.
(4) Other specific catch handling protocols, designed to facilitate correct species identification, will be detailed in the VMP.
iii) Non-groundfish species
(1) Species other than regulated groundfish that are not passed through the dedicated discard measuring area or chute (e.g. dogfish, skates) will be discarded in view of a camera at one of the designated discard control points, as specified by the VMP.
iv) Prohibited species (Marine mammals, sea turtles, seabirds, etc.) may be discarded per the VMP. A Marine Mammal Authorization Program mortality/injury report form must also be completed for interactions with any marine mammals (50 CFR 229.4). Forms are available at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/interactions/mmap_reporting_form.pdf
d) Reporting
i) Operator will report haul level catch and discard weights on eVTR for all fish, in addition to all other required fields.
ii) In addition, operator will report haul level piece counts on eVTR for all regulated groundfish discards to facilitate video comparison.
i) Operator will report haul level catch and discard weights on eVTR for all fish, in addition to all other required fields.
ii) In addition, operator will report haul level piece counts on eVTR for all regulated groundfish discards to facilitate video comparison.
6) After trip:
Operator will provide the EM hard drive to service provider for review (by mail or to technician as described in VMP) the next business day after landing, unless they are conducting back to back trips, in which case it will be delivered the next business day after consecutive trips. This schedule may be revised mid-year if appropriate.
a) eVTRs will be submitted to NMFS and Sector Manager as currently required. eVTRs will not be provided to the EM reviewers.
b) Providers will log into PTNS system and note if a trip scheduled for EM was not completed.
Operator will provide the EM hard drive to service provider for review (by mail or to technician as described in VMP) the next business day after landing, unless they are conducting back to back trips, in which case it will be delivered the next business day after consecutive trips. This schedule may be revised mid-year if appropriate.
a) eVTRs will be submitted to NMFS and Sector Manager as currently required. eVTRs will not be provided to the EM reviewers.
b) Providers will log into PTNS system and note if a trip scheduled for EM was not completed.
7) Video review for Catch Accounting:
a) Prior to video analysis, NEFOP/EM specific discard rates will be used for initial catch accounting on EM selected trips.
b) Metadata: The reviewer will document any time gaps, system failures or missing data.
c) Sample rate: 100% of the video collected on ‘EFP trips’ will be reviewed to account for all regulated groundfish species discards.
d) Haul data: Haul end location, time, and date will be recorded for each haul. Haul end is when the last piece of gear is retrieved onto the vessel.
e) Video data: The reviewer will provide feedback on image quality of the haul (e.g., high quality, medium quality, low quality, unusable). A description of these quality levels will be in the report.
f) Discard data: The reviewer will document the number of each regulated groundfish species discarded and obtain a length for each fish discarded from the video. Length-Weight Relationships For 74 Species Collected During NEFSC Research Vessel Bottom Trawl Surveys, 1992-99 (Wigley, 2003) will be used to convert the length to weight for each fish. Any protected species interactions will be reported.
g) Observed trip passing criteria
i) In order for a completed trip to be considered an ‘observed’ trip most of the hauls
a) Prior to video analysis, NEFOP/EM specific discard rates will be used for initial catch accounting on EM selected trips.
b) Metadata: The reviewer will document any time gaps, system failures or missing data.
c) Sample rate: 100% of the video collected on ‘EFP trips’ will be reviewed to account for all regulated groundfish species discards.
d) Haul data: Haul end location, time, and date will be recorded for each haul. Haul end is when the last piece of gear is retrieved onto the vessel.
e) Video data: The reviewer will provide feedback on image quality of the haul (e.g., high quality, medium quality, low quality, unusable). A description of these quality levels will be in the report.
f) Discard data: The reviewer will document the number of each regulated groundfish species discarded and obtain a length for each fish discarded from the video. Length-Weight Relationships For 74 Species Collected During NEFSC Research Vessel Bottom Trawl Surveys, 1992-99 (Wigley, 2003) will be used to convert the length to weight for each fish. Any protected species interactions will be reported.
g) Observed trip passing criteria
i) In order for a completed trip to be considered an ‘observed’ trip most of the hauls
(specified below) must have usable video quality (see 7e).
ii) NMFS will use EM data that has “passed” for calculating discards/rates on unobserved hauls/trips
iii) To begin the year, 60% of the hauls (rounded up) from a trip must pass to consider the trip observed:
• 2 hauls (both must pass), 3 hauls (2 must pass, 66%), 4 hauls (3 must pass, 75%), 5 hauls (3 must pass, 60%), etc.
iv) On or around September 1 NMFS and the project team will evaluate a shift to a standard of 70% of the hauls must pass to consider the trip observed:
• 2 hauls (both must pass), 3 hauls (all must pass), 4 hauls (3 must pass, 75%), 5 hauls (4 must pass, 80%), 6 hauls (5 must pass, 83%), 7 hauls (5 must pass, 71%).
v) Trips that fail these criteria will be considered unobserved for the purposes of catch accounting.
ii) NMFS will use EM data that has “passed” for calculating discards/rates on unobserved hauls/trips
iii) To begin the year, 60% of the hauls (rounded up) from a trip must pass to consider the trip observed:
• 2 hauls (both must pass), 3 hauls (2 must pass, 66%), 4 hauls (3 must pass, 75%), 5 hauls (3 must pass, 60%), etc.
iv) On or around September 1 NMFS and the project team will evaluate a shift to a standard of 70% of the hauls must pass to consider the trip observed:
• 2 hauls (both must pass), 3 hauls (all must pass), 4 hauls (3 must pass, 75%), 5 hauls (4 must pass, 80%), 6 hauls (5 must pass, 83%), 7 hauls (5 must pass, 71%).
v) Trips that fail these criteria will be considered unobserved for the purposes of catch accounting.
8) EM Reporting
a) EM Feedback Memo: The provider will send an EM feedback memo for each reviewed trip, at the time of review, to the sector manager and vessel captain providing specific feedback on each trip, including any recommended catch handling or system changes.
b) EM Discard Summary Report: Provider will submit an EM discard summary report to NMFS within 14 days of the trip landing.
c) If an ‘EFP trip’ fails (see sec. 7g) the EM provider will contact FSB to make necessary changes.
a) EM Feedback Memo: The provider will send an EM feedback memo for each reviewed trip, at the time of review, to the sector manager and vessel captain providing specific feedback on each trip, including any recommended catch handling or system changes.
b) EM Discard Summary Report: Provider will submit an EM discard summary report to NMFS within 14 days of the trip landing.
c) If an ‘EFP trip’ fails (see sec. 7g) the EM provider will contact FSB to make necessary changes.
9) Other
a) Video handling
i) Hard drives will be tamper evident to preserve chain of custody. Specific details of chain of custody handling will be provided by each service provider.
ii) Once the hard drive is received by the service provider the downloaded video and data from the hard drive will be copied, and the copy will be used for data processing or video enhancements.
b) Video Ownership, Access and Archiving
i) Fishermen own their video.
i) Upon completion of video review the vessel operator, vessel owner, and sector manager will be able to view the video, upon request.
ii) Until specific protocols are established the service provider will archive all downloaded video for three years from the trip end date.
iii) NMFS staff will have access to any and all video and sensor data upon request to the provider. Once NMFS takes possession of these data it assumes responsibility of long-term storage. Specific process to be determined. The provider may retain a copy of NMFS requested video data.
c) Data Confidentiality. The fishing activities recorded under this permit are for the purpose of collecting catch information. Information about fishing activities from the EM system, including video, sensors, and GPS, will be treated as confidential, in the same manner as observer data, and consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
d) Discard rates:
i) NMFS will create EM specific discard rates within each sector, regardless of the number of vessels, using both EM and NEFOP reports.
ii) kAll will be estimated using NEFOP if available or eVTR information.
e) Prohibitions. It is unlawful and in violation of this EFP for any person to do any of the following while fishing under this EFP. Sector penalties and expulsion from the EFP will apply for these violations.
i) Take an ‘EFP trip’ with a vessel that does not have properly installed and functioning EM equipment, or a NMFS waiver.
ii) Tamper with, disconnect, damage, destroy, alter, or in any way distort, render useless, inoperative, ineffective, or inaccurate any component of the EM unit required by this EFP;
iii) Fail to provide: a continuous power supply to the EM unit or notice to the EM provider of any interruption in the power supply to the EM unit;
iv) Fail to deliver an EM hard drive and eVTR to provider.
f) Leaving the EFP: Participating vessels may leave the EFP, but cannot re-join in the same fishing year. Vessels will be removed from the EFP by the project team for repeated or egregious failures to comply with VMP.
g) Joining the EFP: The Project team can request that new vessels join this EFP during the fishing year.
a) Video handling
i) Hard drives will be tamper evident to preserve chain of custody. Specific details of chain of custody handling will be provided by each service provider.
ii) Once the hard drive is received by the service provider the downloaded video and data from the hard drive will be copied, and the copy will be used for data processing or video enhancements.
b) Video Ownership, Access and Archiving
i) Fishermen own their video.
i) Upon completion of video review the vessel operator, vessel owner, and sector manager will be able to view the video, upon request.
ii) Until specific protocols are established the service provider will archive all downloaded video for three years from the trip end date.
iii) NMFS staff will have access to any and all video and sensor data upon request to the provider. Once NMFS takes possession of these data it assumes responsibility of long-term storage. Specific process to be determined. The provider may retain a copy of NMFS requested video data.
c) Data Confidentiality. The fishing activities recorded under this permit are for the purpose of collecting catch information. Information about fishing activities from the EM system, including video, sensors, and GPS, will be treated as confidential, in the same manner as observer data, and consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
d) Discard rates:
i) NMFS will create EM specific discard rates within each sector, regardless of the number of vessels, using both EM and NEFOP reports.
ii) kAll will be estimated using NEFOP if available or eVTR information.
e) Prohibitions. It is unlawful and in violation of this EFP for any person to do any of the following while fishing under this EFP. Sector penalties and expulsion from the EFP will apply for these violations.
i) Take an ‘EFP trip’ with a vessel that does not have properly installed and functioning EM equipment, or a NMFS waiver.
ii) Tamper with, disconnect, damage, destroy, alter, or in any way distort, render useless, inoperative, ineffective, or inaccurate any component of the EM unit required by this EFP;
iii) Fail to provide: a continuous power supply to the EM unit or notice to the EM provider of any interruption in the power supply to the EM unit;
iv) Fail to deliver an EM hard drive and eVTR to provider.
f) Leaving the EFP: Participating vessels may leave the EFP, but cannot re-join in the same fishing year. Vessels will be removed from the EFP by the project team for repeated or egregious failures to comply with VMP.
g) Joining the EFP: The Project team can request that new vessels join this EFP during the fishing year.
Regulations from which exemptions are being requested:
50 CFR 648.87 (b)(1)(v) (B)
Rationale for exemption: EM program details are not in the approved sector operations plan, and the EM program and EM providers are not yet approved by NMFS.
50 CFR 648.87 (b)(1)(v) (B)
Rationale for exemption: EM program details are not in the approved sector operations plan, and the EM program and EM providers are not yet approved by NMFS.
B) Independent third-party monitoring program. Beginning in fishing year 2013 (May 1, 2013), a sector must develop and implement an at-sea or electronic monitoring program to verify area fished, as well as catch and discards by species and gear type, and that is consistent with the goals and objectives of groundfish monitoring programs at § 648.11(l). The details of any at-sea or electronic monitoring program must be specified in the sector’s operations plan, pursuant to paragraph (b)(2)(xi) of this section, and must meet the operational standards specified in paragraph (b)(5) of this section. Electronic monitoring may be used in place of actual observers if the technology is deemed sufficient by NMFS for a specific trip type based on gear type and area fished, in a manner consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act. The level of coverage for trips by sector vessels is specified in paragraph (b)(1)(v)(B)(1) of this section. The at- sea/electronic monitoring program shall be reviewed and approved by the Regional Administrator as part of a sector’s operations plans in a manner consistent with the
Administrative Procedure Act. A service provider providing at-sea or electronic monitoring services pursuant to this paragraph (b)(1)(v)(B) must meet the service provider standards specified in paragraph (b)(4) of this section, and be approved by NMFS in a manner consistent with the Administrative Procedure Act.
The participating vessels will be required to comply with all other applicable requirements and restrictions specified at 50 CFR part 648, unless specifically exempted in this EFP or the sector operations plan.
Catch information:
a) Target Species: (for some participating vessels)
a. Pollock
b. Monkfish
c. Spiny Dogfish
d. White Hake
e. American Plaice
f. Atlantic Cod
g. Haddock
b) Estimated weight of kept catch (in lbs) Target Species Incidental Species
(Weights are 14% (projected coverage rate for FY16) of annual kept catch for all participating vessels combined)
a. Pollock – 123,000
b. Monkfish – 105,000
c. Spiny Dogfish – 95,000
d. White Hake – 28,000
e. American Plaice – 25,000
f. Atlantic Cod – 17,500
g. Haddock – 5,500
h. Witch Flounder – 7,300
i. Redfish – 5,200
j. Cusk – 1,800
k. Silver Hake – 1,000
l. American Lobster – 800
m. Yellowtail Flounder – 800
n. Winter Flounder – 755
o. Atlantic Halibut – 400
p. Red Hake – 300
q. Skates – 150
r. Bluefish – 80
c) Estimated weight of discards (in lbs)
(Weights are 14% of annual discards for all participating vessels combined)
a. Spiny Dogfish – 24,000
b. Shark species – 10,000
c. Pollock – 3,100
d. Crab species -3,000
e. Skate species – 2,400
f. Monkfish – 1,500
g. American Lobster – 1,300
h. Atlantic Cod – 900
i. Atlantic Halibut – 650
j. Sea Raven – 200
k. Haddock – 275
l. American Plaice – 66
m. Atlantic Wolffish – 40
a. Pollock
b. Monkfish
c. Spiny Dogfish
d. White Hake
e. American Plaice
f. Atlantic Cod
g. Haddock
b) Estimated weight of kept catch (in lbs) Target Species Incidental Species
(Weights are 14% (projected coverage rate for FY16) of annual kept catch for all participating vessels combined)
a. Pollock – 123,000
b. Monkfish – 105,000
c. Spiny Dogfish – 95,000
d. White Hake – 28,000
e. American Plaice – 25,000
f. Atlantic Cod – 17,500
g. Haddock – 5,500
h. Witch Flounder – 7,300
i. Redfish – 5,200
j. Cusk – 1,800
k. Silver Hake – 1,000
l. American Lobster – 800
m. Yellowtail Flounder – 800
n. Winter Flounder – 755
o. Atlantic Halibut – 400
p. Red Hake – 300
q. Skates – 150
r. Bluefish – 80
c) Estimated weight of discards (in lbs)
(Weights are 14% of annual discards for all participating vessels combined)
a. Spiny Dogfish – 24,000
b. Shark species – 10,000
c. Pollock – 3,100
d. Crab species -3,000
e. Skate species – 2,400
f. Monkfish – 1,500
g. American Lobster – 1,300
h. Atlantic Cod – 900
i. Atlantic Halibut – 650
j. Sea Raven – 200
k. Haddock – 275
l. American Plaice – 66
m. Atlantic Wolffish – 40
Expected catch disposition:
Legal sized regulated groundfish will be retained and landed as required by the groundfish FMP. All other species will be handled per normal commercial practice and returned to the sea as quickly as possible. There will be no landing of undersized fish or discarding of legal-size regulated groundfish (except as permitted through Sector exemptions).
Anticipated impacts on marine mammals or endangered species:
There are no anticipated additional impacts on marine mammals or endangered species as a result of this study.
Proposed industry participants: (Final list may be different)
Vessel, Permit Number, Registration Number, Homeport, Owner.
1. F/V Ann Marie, permit # 310609, reg. # 938382, Rye, NH, Ocean Pride Corp.
2. F/V Lady Victoria, permit # 131421), reg. # NH0001CF, Seabrook, NH, Charles H. Felch
3. F/V Heidi & Elisabeth, permit # 148106, reg. # ME6146M, Kittery, ME, James A. Hayward
4. F/V Sweet Misery, permit # 127422, reg. # NH2398AN, Rye, NH, Jayson J. Driscoll
5. F/V Brittany Lynn, permit # 151714, reg. # NH2470EL, Portsmouth, NH, King Marine LLC
6. F/V Danny Boy, permit # 251253, Portland, ME, Brian Pearce
Vessel, Permit Number, Registration Number, Homeport, Owner.
1. F/V Ann Marie, permit # 310609, reg. # 938382, Rye, NH, Ocean Pride Corp.
2. F/V Lady Victoria, permit # 131421), reg. # NH0001CF, Seabrook, NH, Charles H. Felch
3. F/V Heidi & Elisabeth, permit # 148106, reg. # ME6146M, Kittery, ME, James A. Hayward
4. F/V Sweet Misery, permit # 127422, reg. # NH2398AN, Rye, NH, Jayson J. Driscoll
5. F/V Brittany Lynn, permit # 151714, reg. # NH2470EL, Portsmouth, NH, King Marine LLC
6. F/V Danny Boy, permit # 251253, Portland, ME, Brian Pearce
7. F/V Safe Haven, permit # 242844, Harpswell, ME, Bryan Bichrest
8. F/V Gretchen Marie, permit # 220685, Portland, ME, John Daggett
9. F/V Bug Catcha, permit # 149638, Port Clyde ME, Gerry Cushman
10. F/V Ella Christine, permit # 250387, Port Clyde ME, Randy Cushman
11. F/V Free Bird, permit # 212165, Harpswell, ME, Brian Durant
12. F/V Theresa Irene III, permit # 140344, Kennebunk, Me, Tom Casamassa
13. F/V Pamela Grace, permit # 2422777, Harpswell, ME, Troy Bichrest
14. F/V Strangle Hold, Permit #149278, Reg #MS1102CD, Chatham, MA, Charlie Dodge.
15. F/V Miss Fitz, Permit #232108, Reg #983256, Chatham, MA, John Our.
16. F/V Tenacious II, Permit #242648, Reg #1108075, Chatham, MA, Eric Hesse.
17. F/V Zachary T, Permit #130772, Reg #MS4951BD, Harwichport, MA. Nicholas O’Toole.
18. F/V Dawn T, Permit #118641, Reg #MS9353BE, Chatham, MA, Nick Muto
19. F/V Constance Sea, Permit #146922, Reg #MS1332AD, Chatham, MA, Greg Connors.
8. F/V Gretchen Marie, permit # 220685, Portland, ME, John Daggett
9. F/V Bug Catcha, permit # 149638, Port Clyde ME, Gerry Cushman
10. F/V Ella Christine, permit # 250387, Port Clyde ME, Randy Cushman
11. F/V Free Bird, permit # 212165, Harpswell, ME, Brian Durant
12. F/V Theresa Irene III, permit # 140344, Kennebunk, Me, Tom Casamassa
13. F/V Pamela Grace, permit # 2422777, Harpswell, ME, Troy Bichrest
14. F/V Strangle Hold, Permit #149278, Reg #MS1102CD, Chatham, MA, Charlie Dodge.
15. F/V Miss Fitz, Permit #232108, Reg #983256, Chatham, MA, John Our.
16. F/V Tenacious II, Permit #242648, Reg #1108075, Chatham, MA, Eric Hesse.
17. F/V Zachary T, Permit #130772, Reg #MS4951BD, Harwichport, MA. Nicholas O’Toole.
18. F/V Dawn T, Permit #118641, Reg #MS9353BE, Chatham, MA, Nick Muto
19. F/V Constance Sea, Permit #146922, Reg #MS1332AD, Chatham, MA, Greg Connors.
Fishing vessel effort:
Vessel Name
a. Gear type
b. Trip duration
c. Number nets/hooks/tows
d. Soak duration/tow length
e. Avg number of trips per year
a. Gear type
b. Trip duration
c. Number nets/hooks/tows
d. Soak duration/tow length
e. Avg number of trips per year
1. Ann Marie (310609)
a. 6.5″ gillnets
b. average trip duration – 5 days
c. 3-4 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. average soak duration 150 hours+
e. 35 trips/year
2. Lady Victoria (131421)
a. 6.5″ & 12″ gillnets
b. average trip duration – 3 days
c. 3-4 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. average soak duration 96 hours
e. 35 trips/year
3. Heidi & Elisabeth (148106)
a. 6.5″ & 11″ gillnets
b. average trip duration – 1 day
c. 2-3 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. average soak duration 48 hours
e. 140 trips/year
4. Sweet Misery (127422)
a. 6.5″ gillnets
b. average trip duration – 2 days
c. 3-4 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. average soak duration 96 hours
e. 120 trips/year
5. Brittany Lynn (151714)
a. 6.5″ gillnets
b. average trip duration – 5 days
c. 3-4 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. average soak duration 150 hours
e. 30 trips/yr
6. Danny Boy ( 251253)
a. 6.5” Gillnets
b. Average trip duration- 4 days
c. 3-4 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. Average soak duration 24 hours
e. 25 trips/year
7. Safe Haven ( 242844)
a. 6.5” Gillnets
b. Average trip duration- 1 day
c. 3-4 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. Average soak duration 24 hours
e. 100 trips/year
8. Gretchen Marie (220685)
a. 6.5” trawler
b. Average trip duration- 3 day
c. 4 hauls per day
d. Average tow length 6 hours
e. 5trips/yr
9. F/V Bug Catcha, (49638)
a. Jigging Machines
b. Average trip duration- 0.5 days
c. 2 machines with 4 hooks each
d. NA
e. 15 trips/year
10. Ella Christine (250387)
a. 6.5” trawler
b. Average trip duration- 36 hours
c. 4 hauls per day
d. Average tow length 8 hours
e. 25 trips/year
11. Free Bird (212165)
a. 6.5” Gillnets
b. Average trip duration- 1 day
c. 3-4 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. Average soak duration 24 hours
e. 50 trips/year
12. Theresa Irene III (140344)
a. 6.5” Gillnets
b. Average trip duration- 1 day
c. 3-4 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. Average soak duration 24 hours
e. 40 trips/year
13. Pamela Grace (2422777)
a. 6.5” Gillnets
b. Average trip duration- 1 day
c. 3-4 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. Average soak duration 24 hours
e. 100 trips/year
14. F/V Strangle Hold (149278)
a. 6.5” gillnets
b. Day trips
c. 3-5 strings of 10 nets
d. Average soak 24 hours
e. 30 trips/year
15. Miss Fitz (232108)
a. 6.5” gillnets
b. Day trips
c. 3-5 strings of 10 nets
d. Average soak 24 hours
a. 6.5″ gillnets
b. average trip duration – 5 days
c. 3-4 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. average soak duration 150 hours+
e. 35 trips/year
2. Lady Victoria (131421)
a. 6.5″ & 12″ gillnets
b. average trip duration – 3 days
c. 3-4 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. average soak duration 96 hours
e. 35 trips/year
3. Heidi & Elisabeth (148106)
a. 6.5″ & 11″ gillnets
b. average trip duration – 1 day
c. 2-3 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. average soak duration 48 hours
e. 140 trips/year
4. Sweet Misery (127422)
a. 6.5″ gillnets
b. average trip duration – 2 days
c. 3-4 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. average soak duration 96 hours
e. 120 trips/year
5. Brittany Lynn (151714)
a. 6.5″ gillnets
b. average trip duration – 5 days
c. 3-4 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. average soak duration 150 hours
e. 30 trips/yr
6. Danny Boy ( 251253)
a. 6.5” Gillnets
b. Average trip duration- 4 days
c. 3-4 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. Average soak duration 24 hours
e. 25 trips/year
7. Safe Haven ( 242844)
a. 6.5” Gillnets
b. Average trip duration- 1 day
c. 3-4 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. Average soak duration 24 hours
e. 100 trips/year
8. Gretchen Marie (220685)
a. 6.5” trawler
b. Average trip duration- 3 day
c. 4 hauls per day
d. Average tow length 6 hours
e. 5trips/yr
9. F/V Bug Catcha, (49638)
a. Jigging Machines
b. Average trip duration- 0.5 days
c. 2 machines with 4 hooks each
d. NA
e. 15 trips/year
10. Ella Christine (250387)
a. 6.5” trawler
b. Average trip duration- 36 hours
c. 4 hauls per day
d. Average tow length 8 hours
e. 25 trips/year
11. Free Bird (212165)
a. 6.5” Gillnets
b. Average trip duration- 1 day
c. 3-4 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. Average soak duration 24 hours
e. 50 trips/year
12. Theresa Irene III (140344)
a. 6.5” Gillnets
b. Average trip duration- 1 day
c. 3-4 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. Average soak duration 24 hours
e. 40 trips/year
13. Pamela Grace (2422777)
a. 6.5” Gillnets
b. Average trip duration- 1 day
c. 3-4 strings of fifteen nets hauled per day
d. Average soak duration 24 hours
e. 100 trips/year
14. F/V Strangle Hold (149278)
a. 6.5” gillnets
b. Day trips
c. 3-5 strings of 10 nets
d. Average soak 24 hours
e. 30 trips/year
15. Miss Fitz (232108)
a. 6.5” gillnets
b. Day trips
c. 3-5 strings of 10 nets
d. Average soak 24 hours
e. 30 trips/year
16. Tenacious II (242648)
a. 600 hooks- benthic longline
b. 1-2 day trips
c. 1-4 longline sets
d. Average soak 1-2 hours
e. 20 trips/year
17. Zachary T (130772)
a. Handline
b. 1-2 day trips
c. N/A
d. N/A
e. 20 trip/year
18. F/V Dawn T (118641)
a. 6.5” gillnets
b. Day trips
c. 3-5 strings of 10 nets
d. Average soak 24 hours
e. 30 trips/year
19. F/V Constance Sea (146922)
a. 6.5” gillnets
b. Day trips
c. 3-5 strings of 10 nets
d. Average soak 24 hours
e. 40 trips/year
16. Tenacious II (242648)
a. 600 hooks- benthic longline
b. 1-2 day trips
c. 1-4 longline sets
d. Average soak 1-2 hours
e. 20 trips/year
17. Zachary T (130772)
a. Handline
b. 1-2 day trips
c. N/A
d. N/A
e. 20 trip/year
18. F/V Dawn T (118641)
a. 6.5” gillnets
b. Day trips
c. 3-5 strings of 10 nets
d. Average soak 24 hours
e. 30 trips/year
19. F/V Constance Sea (146922)
a. 6.5” gillnets
b. Day trips
c. 3-5 strings of 10 nets
d. Average soak 24 hours
e. 40 trips/year
Fishing location:
Fishing operations may occur within the entire range of the Northeast Multispecies Complex – the Gulf of Maine, Georges Bank and the Southern New England and Mid-Atlantic Region.
Fishing operations may occur within the entire range of the Northeast Multispecies Complex – the Gulf of Maine, Georges Bank and the Southern New England and Mid-Atlantic Region.
References:
Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office and Northeast Fisheries Science Center Electronic Technology Implementation Plan, 2015. www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/mediacenter/2015/february/garfonefscregionaletplan0 13015.pdf
McElderry, H., J. Illingworth, D. McCullough, and J. Schrader. 2004. Electronic Monitoring of the Cape Cod Haddock Fishery in the United States – A Pilot Study. Unpublished report prepared for the Cape Cod Commercial Hook Fishermen’s Association (CCCHFA) by Archipelago Marine Research Ltd., Victoria BC Canada.
Pria, M.J., McElderry, H. Stanley, R.D., Batty, A. 2014. New England electronic monitoring project report Phase III. Archipelago Marine Research Ltd report prepared for Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Fisheries Sampling Branch.
Stanley, R. D., McElderry, H., Mawani, T., and Koolman, J. 2011. The advantages of an audit over a census approach to the review of video imagery in fishery monitoring. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 68: 1621–1627.
Stanley, R. D., Karim, T., Koolman, J., and McElderry, H. 2014. Design and implementation of electronic monitoring in the British Columbia groundfish hook and line fishery: a retrospective view of the ingredients of success. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsu212.
Wigley, S.E., McBride, H.M. and McHugh, N.J., 2003. Length-weight relationships for 74 fish species collected during NEFSC research vessel bottom trawl surveys, 1992-99. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE, 171, p.26p.
Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office and Northeast Fisheries Science Center Electronic Technology Implementation Plan, 2015. www.greateratlantic.fisheries.noaa.gov/mediacenter/2015/february/garfonefscregionaletplan0 13015.pdf
McElderry, H., J. Illingworth, D. McCullough, and J. Schrader. 2004. Electronic Monitoring of the Cape Cod Haddock Fishery in the United States – A Pilot Study. Unpublished report prepared for the Cape Cod Commercial Hook Fishermen’s Association (CCCHFA) by Archipelago Marine Research Ltd., Victoria BC Canada.
Pria, M.J., McElderry, H. Stanley, R.D., Batty, A. 2014. New England electronic monitoring project report Phase III. Archipelago Marine Research Ltd report prepared for Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Fisheries Sampling Branch.
Stanley, R. D., McElderry, H., Mawani, T., and Koolman, J. 2011. The advantages of an audit over a census approach to the review of video imagery in fishery monitoring. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 68: 1621–1627.
Stanley, R. D., Karim, T., Koolman, J., and McElderry, H. 2014. Design and implementation of electronic monitoring in the British Columbia groundfish hook and line fishery: a retrospective view of the ingredients of success. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsu212.
Wigley, S.E., McBride, H.M. and McHugh, N.J., 2003. Length-weight relationships for 74 fish species collected during NEFSC research vessel bottom trawl surveys, 1992-99. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE, 171, p.26p.
Christopher McGuire
The Nature Conservancy
The Nature Conservancy