The Pacific Fishery Management Council considered implementation of the 2025 Pacific whiting fishery and expectations for at‑sea set‑aside (ATSI) management amid concerns from advisory panels and industry representatives.

Todd Phillips, who presented the agenda item overview, reminded the council that Pacific whiting is jointly managed by the United States and Canada under the Pacific Whiting Treaty and that the usual process starts with the Joint Technical Committee’s stock assessment followed by review by the Scientific Review Group and the Joint Management Committee (JMC). This year the JMC and its advisory panel meet midweek and their outcomes will not be available in time for the council to provide formal guidance on the coastwide total allowable catch (TAC). Phillips said the council should ‘‘consider making a formal statement that it does not intend to comment on the 2025 JMC recommendations due to the timing of that those advisory bodies meeting.’’

Why it matters: the JMC recommendation normally informs the council’s advice to the Secretary of Commerce; because the JMC meets during the council meeting this year, the council cannot complete its usual review ahead of final TAC decisions.

Advisory‑body reports and concerns: the Groundfish Advisory Subpanel (GAP), represented by Jeff Lackey and Chris Cooper, urged the council to ask the JMC and National Marine Fisheries Service to schedule future JMC and advisory panel meetings to occur before the March council meeting so the council can make timely recommendations. The GAP also urged NMFS to make every effort to open the whiting fishery on May 1, 2025.

ATSI set‑asides and cooperative management: GAP members and industry speakers emphasized that at‑sea set‑asides are the council’s preferred tool to manage non‑target groundfish mortality in the mothership (MS) and catcher‑processor (CP) sectors, but several cooperatives have exceeded their set‑aside amounts in recent seasons. The GAP recommended clarifying council expectations that "each sector is expected to make every effort to manage to their pro rata share of the at‑sea set asides in 2025, particularly for species like canary and shortspine thornyhead where there is currently no ACL buffer in the system." The GAP also asked that council reports show MS and CP sector catch separately and include pro‑rata columns (41.38% mothership / 58.62% CP) so advisory bodies and the public can compare sector performance against their shares.

Industry testimony: Heather Mann, executive director of the Midwater Trawlers Cooperative, told the council the mothership sector has tried to limit bycatch to protect multigenerational shore‑side businesses and asserted the catcher‑processor sector "fishes in areas that the mothership sector closes voluntarily for bycatch." Mann said confidentiality rules have limited public vessel‑level reporting in some years and warned that continued exceedances "could erode council trust in set aside management and or cooperative management."

Data and confidentiality: GAP members and staff discussed a Magnuson‑Stevens Act confidentiality issue that prevented publication of mothership sector catch in 2024’s PacFIN reports until some processors signed waivers. Staff said the regulation requires submission of vessel‑level coop data but does not by itself require public posting; some confidential versions are available to council members via the member dashboard.

Risk and stock assessment context: the Ecosystem Work Group (Tommy Moore) described the inclusion of a risk table in this year’s whiting stock assessment and SRG review; the risk table uses ecosystem indicators and highlighted that, despite an assessment suggesting high biomass, fishermen reported difficulty finding fish and unusual distributions, which complicates in‑season management and avoidance strategies.

Council expectations and actions: council discussion centered on in‑season communication, transparency and cooperative efforts. NOAA staff (Ryan Wolf) noted limited automatic authority for NMFS to take in‑season regulatory actions and said in‑season measures (for example, geographically targeted closures) have been analyzed and could be implemented only after council recommendation or an emergency process. Council members asked the at‑sea cooperatives to increase in‑season communication, to share steps they will take if they approach their pro‑rata set‑aside shares, and to keep NMFS informed. Council staff also told members it would seek to restore the usual JMC schedule in future years so council advice on TACs can be timely.

Ending: Council members expressed support for using set‑asides to retain flexibility while pressing cooperatives to communicate and act in season to avoid exceedances. Staff and the council’s treaty representative will proceed with available flexibility for next‑week JMC negotiations and monitor developments; the council will consider further follow‑up if in‑season conservation risks emerge.