The Pacific Fishery Management Council on June 15 concluded its Phase 2 stock‑definition deliberations and adopted a sequence of motions that set preliminary and final preferred alternatives for most of the 47 stocks under review. Council members combined scientific reports and advisory body recommendations to decide which stocks remain in the groundfish Fishery Management Plan (FMP), which should be designated ecosystem component (EC) species, and which require additional 10‑factor analysis before a final decision.

Why it matters: stock definitions determine whether a species is subject to federal conservation and management within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Those determinations affect monitoring, assessment schedules, harvest specifications and the council’s ability to implement federal measures.

What the council decided: through multiple motions led primarily by Council member Lynn Mattis, the council:
- Adopted final preferred alternatives (FPAs) or maintained the preliminary preferred alternatives (PPAs) as FPAs for numerous species with already defined stocks in the FMP (including sablefish, yelloweye, vermilion and others) and adopted coast‑wide single‑stock definitions where the advisory reports recommended them.
- Adopted a PPA to keep a set of nearshore Washington and Oregon stocks (black rockfish off WA/OR, blue and Deacon, copper and quillback in certain state waters, kelp greenling off WA, and others) in the FMP for further consideration.
- Adopted a PPA that proposed removing a set of species from the FMP (several shallow and deep nearshore rockfishes and other low‑mortality stocks) and another PPA to designate multiple species as ecosystem component species rather than active management stocks.
- Adopted FMP language revisions and asked staff to bring back conforming regulatory text.

Key votes and amendments: the council processed a sequence of five motions from Mattis and several amendments. One amendment by Mark Guralnick removed California quillback rockfish from the removal list; that change was later followed by a separate motion to include quillback (California) as in need of federal conservation and management (i.e., remain in the FMP). Most motions passed; some carried a single abstention as recorded on the floor.

Advisory guidance used: the council relied heavily on the GMT, GAP and SSC reports and on the Habitat Committee’s prior input. The GAP and GMT provided species‑by‑species rationales and categorized stocks for council consideration. The council noted that the 10‑factor national standard analysis is required for removals, and that decisions on “removal” versus “EC designation” would remain species specific.

Process notes and next steps: staff will prepare conforming FMP language and regulatory text based on the adopted motions and present the language for council review. The council emphasized that if a formerly removed or EC‑designated stock shows signs of an emerging fishery, the council can re‑examine that designation and consider re‑entry into the FMP (the council cited big skate as a precedent). Where the council set PPAs, members asked for additional analyses before final action in September or later meetings.

Quotes from the floor: Council member Lynn Mattis, explaining a motion, said, “I move the council adopt as final preferred alternative, maintaining the following species with already defined stocks in the ground fish FMP.” Council staff lead Keely Kent advised members that “we have to go through all 10 [factors] anyways if we were going to look at removing a species.”

Why the debate mattered: council members and advisory bodies repeatedly cited time constraints on analysis and the need for species‑specific detail. Several advisers and members urged more time for assessment by the GMT and SSC for species where the advisory bodies reported data or analysis gaps; others argued for finalizing PPAs to give fisheries regulatory certainty. The council balanced those concerns by advancing a set of decisions while flagging a limited number of species for additional 10‑factor review.

Practical effect: the adopted stock‑definition decisions will determine which stocks proceed in the 2027–2028 harvest‑specifications cycle as federally managed stocks, which will be monitored as EC species, and which will be subject to further 10‑factor assessment before any removal from federal management is finalized.