1. Draft Addendum XXVII for Public Comment
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission
I’m going go through the summer flounder portion of the document first, will take any questions, but ask folks to hold public comment until after I go through the black sea bass portion of the document

2. Addendum XXVII Public Hearing was held in East Setauket on Thursday,
January 7 at 6PM
It was poorly attended. Addendum is available at
Written public comment can still be submitted until Thursday, January 21, 2016:
By with Draft Add. XXVII as subject
Or mail: Kirby Rootes-Murdy, FMP Coordinator
1050 N. Highland Street, Suite 200 A-N
Arlington, VA 22201
Or fax: (703)

3. Board Initiated Draft Addendum October 2015
Board Approval of Draft Addendum for Public Comment
December 2015
Public Comment
Dec-Jan 2016
Board Considers Final Addendum
February 2016
Pg 1
The Board initiated the addendum in October 2015 at the ASMFC Annual Meeting
The Board approved the draft addendum for public comment at the Dec 2015 joint ASMFC/MAFMC
Public comment runs through January
The Board will vote for final action on this addendum at the February 2016 meeting
NOTE: The Board moved to extend the provisions of Addendum XXVI through the status quo regional management alignment. If the Board does not approve the Summer Flounder portion of the document today for public comment, status quo regional management will be allowed under conservation equivalency. BUT IT WOULD EXPIRE AFTER 2016.
I will try to get all comments down tonight, but please feel free to send me any comments
The document has fax and contact information for the submitting public comment

4. Draft Addendum XXVII for Public Comment (Summer Flounder)

5. Summer Flounder 2015 - 2018 Note the declining catch limits
Assessment update for Summer Flounder will be
completed for ~July 2016 ↓↑ ????

6. Recreational Summer Flounder (continued)
The RHL for 2016 is ~27% lower than it was in
Every state except for NY and VA harvested a lot less fluke in 2015 than was expected.
Especially NJ! (~41% of 2014)
Regulations didn’t change
No regulatory reduction is required for 2016

8. Option 2: Adaptive Regional Management
States implement same bag & size limit* management measures within region
Seasons may vary within region
Proposed measures would be similar to previous years’ regulation
Not intended to implement state allocations & not intended to set a precedent for state allocations.
TC would develop regional measures Board review & approve
Dividing the coastal states into regions allows states the flexibility to mitigate potential disproportionate impacts resulting from coastwide measures while providing consistent measures to states within the same region, in many cases sharing the same fishing grounds.
Under regional management, states within regions would implement management measures prescribed by the Technical Committee that when combined, would constrain the coastwide harvest to the RHL. The adaptive regional management approached is designed to give the coast a more equitable harvest opportunity than under state-by-state management while providing consistent measures to the states within the same region.
Under this approach the Technical Committee would develop proposed measures for each region that when combined would constrain the coastwide harvest to the RHL. The proposed measures would be developed to be similar to the previous years' regulations but allow for some flexibility to allow for consistent harvest opportunity among the regions.
States within each region would be required to implement the same bag and size limits. The Technical Committee prescribed measures would include a number of days each state can be open within the region. A season length outside of the prescribed number of days must be reviewed by the Technical committee and approved by the Board. Each state would implement a season that when combined with the other states’ seasons and the regional bag and size limit constrained the region to the harvest target. Once the Technical Committee developed proposed measures for each region the Board would review and approve a set of regional regulations that when combined would constrain the coastwide harvest to the RHL.
Any number of size, possession, and season combinations can be evaluated when looking at regional management. One example of possible measures is given for each region for use in this public comment document (this example may change as additional MRIP data are released).
Again, this option is not intended to implement state allocations and is not intended to set a precedent for state allocations.

9. Option 2A: Adaptive Regional Management Status Quo
On page 11
Regional Option 2A: Regional Management Status Quo
Under this alternative the coastwide recreational harvest limit would be divided into five regions: 1) Massachusetts 2) Rhode Island 3) Connecticut-New Jersey 4) Delaware-Virginia and 5) North Carolina.
Note: the status quo option lists the status quo measures incorrectly for Massachusetts and Rhode Island IN THE DOCUMENT. If the summer flounder proportion of the document is approved for public comment, this table will be corrected.

10. Regional Option 2B: New Jersey Delaware Bay Region
On page 12
Regional Option 2B New Jersey Delaware Bay Region
Under this alternative the coastwide recreational harvest limit would be divided into six regions: 1) Massachusetts 2) Rhode Island 3) Connecticut-New York 4) New Jersey 5) Delaware-Virginia and 6) North Carolina.
Seeting the

11. Decision 1 (Under Adaptive Regional Man.)
Status Quo Or
Allow special regulations for NJ Delaware Bay ONLY

12. Proposed Management Timeframe: Summer Flounder
(Decision 2)
Option 1: No extension (2016 only)
Option 2: One year (thru 2017)
Option 3: Two year (thru 2018)
Option 4: no sunset
***Make clear that options 2 & 3 are years AFTER 2016: option 1 is just for 2016; option 2 is for 2016 and 2017; option 3 is for 2016, 2017, and 2018; option 4 means it would be possible for 2016 and beyond. A new addendum would be needed to do something different with regional management***
Pgs 13
3.1.1 Timeframe for Summer Flounder Measures
Option 1: No extension
The measures approved through the addendum would expire at the end of After 2016, measures would revert back to the FMP status quo: The Board and Council specify coastwide measures to achieve a coastwide recreational harvest limit or conservation equivalent management measures using guidelines agreed upon by both management authorities in Framework 2 and Addenda XIV and XVII. Under conservation equivalency, states can implement state-by-state measures or adjacent/contiguous states can voluntarily enter into an agreement forming regions. Under either option, the combined measures of all the states or regions need to constrain recreational landings to the coastwide RHL.
Option 2: One year with the option to extend for one year
The Board would take action, through a Board vote, to extend the addendum for one year, expiring at the end of After 2017, measures would revert back to the FMP status quo coastwide measures
Option 3: Two year
The Board would take action, through a Board vote, to extend the addendum for up to two years, expiring at the end of After 2018, measures would revert back to the FMP status quo coastwide measures
Option 4: No sunsent
The Board would take action, through a Board vote, to extend the addendum indefinitely. A new addendum would be needed to utilize a different regional alignment in the future.

13. Summer Flounder Regional Management Options
Option 2: Adaptive Regional Management
(page 9)
Regional Management Option 2A: (Regional Approach used in 2014 and 2015; MA, RI, CT-NJ, DE-VA, NC)
Regional Management Option 2B: New Jersey-Delaware Bay Proposed Region(MA,RI, CT-NY, NJ, DE-VA, NC)
Decision Tree continued
Set Time Frame
Set Time Frame 2

14. Draft Addendum XXVII for Public Comment (Black Sea Bass)

15. NOTES on Black Sea Bass 2015 RHL was 2.33 million pounds
2015 Estimated harvest will be 3.6 million pounds
2016 RHL is 2.82 million pounds
~25% reduction will be required
(the exact number is subject to change, Wave 6 estimates are not available until mid February)
97% of harvest occurs from MA to NJ

16. Proposed Management Program: Black Sea Bass
Option 2: Ad Hoc Regional Measures
Two Regions :
Northern Region (MA-NJ)
Southern Region (DE-NC)
Pg 13-14
Under Option 2, Two regions will be established.
Each region will implement recreational black sea bass management programs that utilize minimum size limits, maximum possession limits, and seasonal closures that are designed to achieve a specific harvest reduction that, when combined with the other regions in the management unit, achieve the required coastwide limit for 2016.
The northern region will contain the states of Massachusetts through New Jersey and the southern region will contain the states of Delaware through North Carolina (North of Cape Hatteras). All states will agree to the regulations implemented within the region. While not required, states will work to develop consistent regulations to allow for a seamless as possible recreational management program within the region.
NOTE; Under this option, the states of Massachusetts through New Jersey would reduce their regulations to achieve the coastwide reduction. The reduction amount is based preliminary data from 2015 through wave 4
The states of Delaware through North Carolina (North of Cape Hatteras) will set their measures consistent with federal regulations (12.5 inch TL minimum fish size, 15 fish possession limit, and open season from May 15-September 21 and October 22-December 31).

17. Proposed Management Timeframe: Black Sea Bass
(Decision 3)
Option 1: No extension
Option 2: One year
Option 3: Two year
Option 4: no sunset
***Make clear that options 2 & 3 are years AFTER 2016: option 1 is just for 2016; option 2 is for 2016 and 2017; option 3 is for 2016, 2017, and 2018; option 4 means it would be possible for 2016 and beyond. A new addendum would be needed to do something different with regional management***
Pg 15
3.1.1 Timeframe for Black Sea Bass Measures
Option 1: No extension
The measures approved through the addendum would expire at the end of After 2016, measures would revert back to the FMP status quo: The Board and Council specify coastwide measures to achieve a coastwide recreational harvest limit or conservation equivalent management measures using guidelines agreed upon by both management authorities in Framework 2 and Addenda XIV and XVII. Under conservation equivalency, states can implement state-by-state measures or adjacent/contiguous states can voluntarily enter into an agreement forming regions. Under either option, the combined measures of all the states or regions need to constrain recreational landings to the coastwide RHL.
Option 2: One year with the option to extend for one year
The Board would take action, through a Board vote, to extend the addendum for one year, expiring at the end of After 2017, measures would revert back to the FMP status quo coastwide measures
Option 3: Two year
The Board would take action, through a Board vote, to extend the addendum for one year, expiring at the end of After 2018, measures would revert back to the FMP status quo coastwide measures
Option 4: No sunsent
The Board would take action, through a Board vote, to extend the addendum indefinitely. A new addendum would be needed to utilize a different regional alignment in the future.

18. Recreational Black Sea Bass (continued)
A memo was made available to MRAC councilors:
Preliminary options
Get conversation started
Available on MRAC website
Wave 6 data available Mid-February
Final reduction will be known
Armed w/ constituent input, we can hone in on final options

19. APAIS conduct by NYS Access Point Angler Intercept Survey
This is the catch sampling portion of MRIP
Procedures will not change very much
NYSDEC BMR will have:
Direct oversight of field samplers
Immediate review of fishing sites visited
Success still depends on YOUR COOPERATION
More catch samples ≠ larger estimates
Effort Survey is the other part of the equation
Changing to a mail based survey (from phone) in next few years