Agenda Item E.6 Supplemental PPT Presentation April 2015 Final Action On Widow Rockfish Reallocation And Divestiture Issues Agenda Item E.6 Outline of Presentation • Review Situation • Summary of Alternatives • Criteria Used in Alternatives and Emphasis • Allocational Results • Impacts of Divestiture Suboptions (Sup Att 3) 1
Outline of Presentation • Review Situation • Summary of Alternatives • Criteria Used in Alternatives and Emphasis • Allocational Results • Impacts of Divestiture Suboptions (Sup Att 3) Widow QS Reallocation Situation • Amendment 20 – Consider IFQ reallocation upon rebuilding – No change to at ‐ sea co ‐ op allocations • Widow rebuilt as of 2013 2
Widow Rockfish Shoreside Trawl Allocations 3.5 3.0 2.5 Millions of lbs 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Divestiture Delay Situation • Amendment 20 QS Control Limits – individual species – aggregate non ‐ whiting control limit • Individuals allocated QS using allocation formulas • Some received amounts in excess of control limits • Original divestiture deadline – End of 2014 • Deadline moved to – 11/30/2015 (except for widow) • QS trading moratorium on widow rockfish • Vessel QP limits not affected (>control limits) 3
Outline of Presentation • Review Situation • Summary of Alternatives • Criteria Used in Alternatives and Emphasis • Allocational Results • Impacts of Divestiture Suboptions (Sup Att 3) Widow Rockfish Reallocation and Divestiture Decisions Alt 2 – Alt 3 – Target + Alt 4 – Pound Neutral: a. Widow Alt 1 – Reallocation No Target Revenue: 70% not reallocated to Formula: but Alt 2 + 2003-2010 ensure 2014 QP levels in Alternatives Action end in 2002 nonwhtg rev 2016 4
Widow Rockfish Reallocation and Divestiture Decisions a. Widow Alt 1 – Alt 2 – Alt 3 – Target + Alt 4 – Pound Neutral: Target Revenue: 70% not reallocated to Reallocation No Alternatives Action Formula: but Alt 2 + 2003-2010 ensure 2014 QP levels in end in 2002 nonwhtg rev 2016 Suboption B Suboption A Use the 2016 Use the 2016 ACL ABC as the ACL for the split for the split between whiting between whiting and nonwhiting and nonwhiting trips trips Widow Rockfish Reallocation and Divestiture Decisions Alt 2 – Alt 3 – Target + Alt 4 – Pound Neutral: a. Widow Alt 1 – Reallocation No Target Revenue: 70% not reallocated to Formula: but Alt 2 + 2003-2010 ensure 2014 QP levels in Alternatives Action end in 2002 nonwhtg rev 2016 Suboption A Suboption B Drop 3 worst years No Drop Years 5
Widow Rockfish Reallocation and Divestiture Decisions a. Widow Alt 1 – Alt 2 – Alt 3 – Target + Alt 4 – Pound Neutral: Target Revenue: 70% not reallocated to Reallocation No Alternatives Action Formula: but Alt 2 + 2003-2010 ensure 2014 QP levels in end in 2002 nonwhtg rev 2016 If No Action, b. Divestiture consider delay to Deadline allow those over Suboption A – 2015 Suboption B – 12 Delays limits more than Deadline: Month Delay: 12 2 months to Set an 11/30/15 deadline to months after widow QS Widow Individual divest. QS Control Limit divest (currently no deadline). becomes transferrable. (5.1%) . Suboption A – Suboption B – Suboption C – Suboption D – Aggregate 5-Year Review 2015 Deadline: 2015 Deadline, 12 Month Non-Whiting QS Keep 11/30/15 Exclude Widow: Delay: Delay: Delay Control Limit until after the 5- aggregate deadline. 12 mo. post widow 12 mo. post (2.7%) trading to divest. widow trading. year prog rev. c. For Those Alternative 1 – Alternative 2 – Abandonment Over Aggregate Forced Divestiture Option, Followed by Forced Control Limit For anyone who did not Divestiture – Abandonment options on Deadline meet divest deadline. prior to the divestiture deadline. Outline of Presentation • Review Situation • Summary of Alternatives • Criteria Used in Alternatives and Emphasis • Allocational Results • Impacts of Divestiture Suboptions (Sup Att 3) 6
Criteria Used in Alternatives and Emphasis – Equal Allocation – Bycatch needs • Nonwhiting trips • Shoreside Whiting trips – Other Nonwhiting Trip Criteria • 1994 ‐ 2002 widow history • 2003 ‐ 2010 nonwhiting revenue – AMP • Policy Question: relevance and degree of emphasis for each criteria? Emphasis AMP Alternative 2a Whiting Equal Alternative 1 10.0% AMP Trip ‐ Pro Allocation Whtg Trip 10.0% Rata 0.0% ‐ Pro Rata 28.1% 12.3% Equal Non ‐ whtg 28.6% Trip Widow Non ‐ whtg Lndg Trip ‐ History Bycatch 49.1% Needs 61.9% Whtg Trip Alternative 4 (w 2a) Whtg Trip ‐ Alternative 3 (w 2a) AMP AMP ‐ Pro Rata Pro Rata 10.0% 10.0% 12.3% 23.3% Equal 8.6% Non ‐ whtg Non ‐ whtg Equal Trip Trip Widow 28.6 Revenue Lndg % 24.6% History & Non ‐ whtg Trip Widow Bycatch Lndg History Needs 24.6% 58.1% 7
Emphasis Whtg Trip ‐ Alternative 2a AMP Alternative 2b Whtg Trip ‐ AMP Pro Rata 10.0% Pro Rata 10.0% 12.3% 5.7% Equal 28.6% Non ‐ whtg Trip Non ‐ whtg Equal Widow Trip Widow 30.6% Lndg Lndg History History 49.1% 53.7% Outline of Presentation • Review Situation • Summary of Alternatives • Criteria Used in Alternatives and Emphasis • Allocational Results • Impacts of Divestiture Suboptions (Sup Att 3) 8
Status Quo v. 1994 ‐ 2002 Widow Lndgs (Figure 4 ‐ 6) 3.5% 1994-2002 average annual share of widow landings (drop 3 worst years) 3.0% Alt 1 - No Action 2.5% 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% Dummy LE Permit IDs Landing History vs. Revenue (Figure 4 ‐ 8) 2003-2010 average annual share of nonwhiting 2003-2010 average annual share of nonwhiting revenue per year (drop 3 worst years) revenue per year (drop 3 worst years) 3% 2% 1% 0% 0% 1% 2% 3% 1994-2002 average annual share of weight of widow landings (drop 3 worst years) 9
Comparing Alt 1, 2(a), and 3 (Permits) (Figure 4 ‐ 9) 2.5% Alt 1 ‐ No Action Alt 2 '94 ‐ '02 wt ‐ Sub a (2,000 mt ACL) Alt 3 ‐ '03 ‐ '10 Rev ‐ Sub a (drop 3 yrs) (w/Alt 2 Sub a) 2.0% 1.5% Widow QS 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% 0 50 100 150 Equal Allocation Level Groundfish Permits Ordereed from Lowest to Highest Widow QS Comparing Alt 1, 2(a), and 3 (Permits) (Figure 4 ‐ 9 Corrected) 2.5% Alt 1 ‐ No Action Alt 2 ‐ '94 ‐ '02 wt ‐ Sub a (2,000 mt ACL) Alt 3 ‐ '03 ‐ '10 Rev ‐ Sub a (drop 3 yrs) (w/Alt 2 Sub a) 2.0% 1.5% Widow QS 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Equal Allocation Level Groundfish Permits Ordered from Lowest to Highest Widow QS 10
Comparing Alt 1 and 4 (Permits) (Figure 4 ‐ 10) 2.5% 2.0% Alt 1 ‐ No Action Alt 4 (w/Alt 2 Sub a) 1.5% Widow QS 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% 0 50 100 150 Groundfish Permits Ordered from Lowest to Highest Widow QS Comparing Alt 1 and 4 (Permits) (Figure 4 ‐ 10 Corrected) 2.5% 2.0% Alt 1 ‐ No Action Alt 4 ‐ Lbs Neutral (w/Alt 2 Sub a) 1.5% Widow QS 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Groundfish Permits Ordered from Lowest to Highest Widow QS 11
Comparing Alt 1, 2(a), and 3 (Owners) (Figure 4 ‐ 11) 10% 9% Alt 1 - No Action 8% Alt 2 '94-'02 wt - Sub a (2,000 mt ACL) 7% Alt 3 - '03-'10 Rev - Sub a (drop 3 yrs) (w/Alt 2 Sub a) 6% Widow QS 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% 0 20 40 60 80 Business Entities Owning QS - Ordered from Least to Most Comparing Alt 1, 2(a), and 3 (Owners) (Figure 4 ‐ 11 Corrected) 10% 9% Alt 1 ‐ No Action 8% Alt 2 '94 ‐ '02 wt ‐ Sub a (2,000 mt ACL) 7% Alt 3 ‐ '03 ‐ '10 Rev ‐ Sub a (drop 3 yrs) (w/Alt 2 Sub a) 6% Widow QS 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% 0 20 40 60 80 Business Entities Owning QS ‐ Ordered from Least to Most 12
Comparing Alt 1 and 4 (Owners) (Figure 4 ‐ 12) 10% 9% 8% Alt 1 ‐ No Action Alt 4 ‐ Lbs Neutral (w/Alt 2 Sub a) 7% 6% Widow QS 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% 0 20 40 60 80 Business Entities Owning QS ‐ Ordered from Least to Most Comparing Alt 1 and 4 (Owners) (Figure 4 ‐ 12 Corrected) 10% 9% 8% Alt 1 ‐ No Action Alt 4 ‐ Lbs Neutral (w/Alt 2 Sub a) 7% 6% Widow QS 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% 0 20 40 60 80 Business Entities Owning QS ‐ Ordered from Least to Most 13
Suboptions ‐ Alt 2(a) vs. Alt 2(b) (Figure 4 ‐ 23) 2.5% Alt 2 - '94-'02 wt - Sub a (2,000 mt ACL) 2.0% Alt 2 - '94-'02 wt - Sub b (3,890 mt ACL) 1.5% Share of Total 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% Dummy IDs for LE Permits with Directed Whiting History Suboptions ‐ Alt 2(a) vs. Alt 2(b) (Figure 4 ‐ 23 ‐ Corrected) 2.5% Alt 2 ‐ '94 ‐ '02 wt ‐ Sub a (2,000 mt ACL) 2.0% Alt 2 ‐ '94 ‐ '02 wt ‐ Sub b (3,890 mt ACL) 1.5% Share of Total 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% Dummy IDs for LE Permits with Directed Whiting History 14
Suboptions ‐ Alt 2(a) vs. Alt 2(b) (Figure 4 ‐ 24) 2.5% Alt 2 ‐ '94 ‐ '02 wt ‐ Sub a (2,000 mt ACL) 2.0% Alt 2 ‐ '94 ‐ '02 wt ‐ Sub b (3,890 mt ACL) 1.5% Share of Total 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% Dummy IDs for LE Permits with No Directed Whting History Suboptions ‐ Alt 2(a) vs. Alt 2(b) (Figure 4 ‐ 24 Corrected) 2.5% Alt 2 ‐ '94 ‐ '02 wt ‐ Sub a (2,000 mt ACL) 2.0% Alt 2 ‐ '94 ‐ '02 wt ‐ Sub b (3,890 mt ACL) 1.5% Share of Total 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% Dummy IDs for LE Permits with No Directed Whting History 15
Recommend
More recommend
