File #: GF 17-008    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Groundfish Management Issue Status: Other Issue
File created: 1/2/2017 In control: North Pacific Council
On agenda: 1/30/2017 Final action:
Title: Stock Assessment Prioritization
Attachments: 1. D2 JPT Minutes, 2. D2 National Stock Assessment Prioritization Plan_Methot etal, 3. D2 Local Application of Stock Assessment Prioritization Discussion Paper, 4. PRESENTATION: Stock prioritization process to BSAI Crab, 5. PRESENTATION: Stock Prioritization Rec, 6. D2 Public Testimony Sign Up Sheet
Dan Hull, Chairman
Chris Oliver, Executive Director
SUBJECT: title
Stock Assessment Prioritization
end

STAFF CONTACT: Jim Armstrong

ACTION REQUIRED: recommended action
Review Plan Team Recommendations on Assessment Frequency
body
BACKGROUND:
In response to Council direction and in the context of the national stock assessment prioritization plan (Item 2) and its local application (Item 3), the groundfish plan teams convened a special meeting on Jan 11-12 at the AFSC in Seattle to develop recommendations relative to Council objectives. The Joint Plan Team (JPT) report is attached.
The Stock Assessment Prioritization Paper generated target frequencies for conducting assessments and "Scenario 4" was selected by the JPT for evaluation relative to status quo frequency. The JPT discussed the relevant issues and developed rationales considering: 1) alignment with survey frequencies, 2) low Catch/ABC ratio, 3) a current management concerns, and/or 4) the relative stability of abundance estimates across years. Where author recommendations, status quo, and scenario 4 were consistent, the Teams recommended no change in assessment frequency. Additionally, the JPT recommended how to proceed during stock assessment "off-years" to ensure that stocks would be appropriately monitored.
The JPT recommended decreasing the frequency of stock assessment for 13 stocks. One annual assessment (Greenland turbot) was recommended to become 2 years, one annual assessment (AI pollock) was recommended to become 4 years, and the remaining 11 stocks changed from 2-year to 4-year frequencies.
Two other main outcomes/recommendations from the meeting were:
1) To revisit assessment frequency again (say after 5 years) for evaluation recognizing that special requests and cases may cause for changes in assessment frequency;
2) To emphasize the importance to maintain (or increase) survey frequency and other multi-species data collection programs. The frequency of SAFE report chapter producti...

Click here for full text