Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Pacific Fishery Management Council finalizes Phase 2 stock definitions, splits dozens of nearshore species between federal and state management
Loading...
Summary
After multi-year work and weeks of meetings, the Pacific Fishery Management Council adopted preferred stock-definition alternatives for most Phase 2 species, keeping some species in the federal groundfish FMP, moving others to state management or to ecosystem-component status, and directed staff to develop checkpoints and implementation plans.
The Pacific Fishery Management Council on Sept. 15 adopted a suite of Phase 2 stock-definition decisions that reassign how more than 40 nearshore and shelf species will be managed.
Council staff said the action, part of agenda item G2, is meant to identify which stocks are “in need of conservation and management” in the Exclusive Economic Zone and to revise the groundfish Fishery Management Plan where appropriate. Katrina, the lead analyst, told members the council would adopt final preferred alternatives for 42 species and prepare necessary FMP language.
Lynn Mattis, who led the motions on the floor, told the council that the package was the product of lengthy interagency coordination and multiple advisory-body reviews. The council adopted ODFW’s Motion 1 to retain several species — including black rockfish (Washington), quillback rockfish off Washington and stripetail rockfish coastwide — in the federal groundfish FMP, citing predominance of catch in federal waters and SSC/GMT 10‑factor analyses.
The council also approved a separate motion to remove a long list of other species from the FMP (Alternative 2), citing minimal federal-water catch and existing state nearshore management processes. That motion passed with one recorded no vote. A third motion designated several additional taxa as “ecosystem component” (EC) species, not in need of active federal management, and asked council staff and the groundfish management team to create a mortality-based checkpoint to trigger reevaluation by November 2026.
The council’s actions reflect prolonged debate about where management responsibility should sit, council members said. Some members warned that moving species out of the FMP could complicate long‑standing collaborative monitoring and data collection, and urged careful implementation planning with states and tribes. Others said the Magnuson-Stevens Act’s predominance test and recent 10‑factor analyses make the changes legally defensible and operationally necessary.
Katrina told the council staff will update FMP language (agenda item G2 Attachment 2) to reflect the adopted decisions and report back on implementation timing. The council left eight stocks unresolved for further work over winter and asked staff to return proposals for how to sequence rulemaking and any necessary state–tribal coordination.
What’s next: The council directed staff to prepare the revised FMP text, coordinate implementation timelines with state and tribal co‑managers, and return in November and March with additional analyses and proposed rule packages. The November materials will include checkpoint details for EC species and the status of the eight stocks that were deferred.
Key quotes: “Change is hard,” Mattis said, urging patience and a staged implementation. Keely Kent, speaking for council staff, said implementation will be deliberate and include outreach to tribes and states. "We don’t want to create chaos in the system," Kent said. Ending: The council adjourned its Phase 2 action with the bulk of species decisions completed and follow‑up tasks assigned for the coming months.
