EoAEGONI
Oregon
Oregon Fish
Fish and
andWildlife
Wildlife Commission
Commission
October 7,2005
7,2005
El
I
I
EXHIBIT
D
I
Fish &WiI!jfe
SUBJECT
SUBJECT
Commercial Dungeness Crab Briefing and 200 Mile
Mile Limited
Limited Entry
Entry Rules
Rules
PRINCIPAL
PRINCIPAL
STAFF PERSON
Patricia M. Burke, Marine
Marine Resources Program Manager
Patricia
COMMISSION
COMMISSION
ACTION
REQUESTED
REQUESTED
Briefing and Rule
DOCUMENTS
DOCUMENTS
ATTACHED
ATTACHED
Agenda
Agenda Item
Item Summary
Summary
2. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
2.
3. Economic Impact
Impact Statement
Statement
3.
4. Proposed Rules
5. 2005 Oregon
Oregon Dungeness
Dungeness Crab
Crab Commission
Commission Survey
Survey
6. 2005 Oregon Dungeness Crab Summit
Summit Summary
Summaw
6.
7. Oregon House Bill 3472A
7.
8. Crab Pot Estimate Figure
by State and
and Vessel Size
9. West Coast Crab Permits by
9.
10.
Public
Comments
10.
RELATED
RELATED
STATUTES
STATUTES
ORS 506.109,
506.109, 506.119,
506.119,and
and 506.129
506.129
RELATED
RELATED
RULES
OAR Chapter 635,
635, Division 005
(541) 867-0300
867-0300 x226
1.
1.
1 ~Read
e a and
d
Approved by:
Approved
by:
DivisionAdministrator
Administrator
Division
_________DateS
Date
Attorney General
Date
Director
Date____________________
Date
Attachment 11
Agenda
Agenda Item
Item Summary
Summary
BACKGROUND
record commercial
commercial Dungeness
Dungeness crab season
season in
in Oregon,
Oregon,
During this year's record
an
there
been three
events affecting
fishery: 1)
there have
have been
three events
affecting the
the future
future of
of the
the fishery:
I) an
implement a
Oregon Dungeness Crab Summit, 2) a Tri-State
Tn-State discussion to implement
3) the
the passing
passing of
of House
House
limited entry 200 mile provision (LE 200), and 3)
Bill 3472A. The
Themajority
majority of
of this
this brief
brief focuses
focuses on
on LE
LE 200
200 because
because of
of the
the
immediate timing of this issue.
issue. LB
LE 200
200 would
would require
require coordination
coordination with
with
LE 200
Washington, and both Oregon and Washington agreed to present LB
to their
their Fish
Fish and
andWildlife
Wildlife Commissions.
Commissions. If
If adopted,
adopted, reciprocal
reciprocal rules
rules
implemented in
in Oregon
Oregon and
and Washington
Washington in
in time
time for
forthe
the 2005-06
2005-06
would be implemented
crab season.
season.
coast Dungeness crab fishery
fishery isis managed
managed collectively
collectively
Currently, the west coast
the federal
federal
Oregon, California,
California, and Washington
Washington under delegation
delegation by
by the
by Oregon,
states have jurisdiction over
over their
their respective
respective permit
permit
government. The three states
holders
who makes
makes landings
landings within
within their
their state.
state.
holders as well as
as control
control over
over who
From shore to three miles, West Coast commercial crabbers must have
have a
valid permit
permit for
the state
state waters
waters they
they are
are fishing.
fishing. However,
However, aa state
state
valid
for the
commercial crab permit for Oregon,
Oregon, California,
Califomia, or Washington
Washington is
is valid
valid
commercial
fro1113 to 200 miles anywhere within the Tri-State
from
Tn-State area.
Under
Under LB
LE 200, when fully
fully implemented,
implemented, each state
state could
could manage
manage their
their
independently for
purpose of
of reducing
reducing the
the effort
effort
crab fishery more independently
for the purpose
between the three states. A
A state
statewould
would restrict
restrict its
its state
state commercial
commercial
shift between
fishing with that
that permit
permit isis valid.
valid.
crab permit by defining the area where fishing
example, Oregon
Oregon would
For example,
would prevent
prevent its
its permittees
permittees from
from fishing
fishing off
off of
Washington and
200 miles
miles and
and vice
vice versa,
versa,
Washington
and California
Californiawaters
watersout
outto
to 200
thereby giving all three states
states the ability
ability to
to manage
manage their
their own
own fisheries
fisheries
thereby
without the potential
without
potential for an influx of effort
effort from
from the
the neighboring
neighboring states'
states'
permit holders.
Crab Committee
Committee Tn-State
Tri-State
During the September
During
September 30, 2004
2004 Dungeness
Dungeness Crab
meeting, state representatives
representatives agreed
consider the
the potential
potential problems
problems
meeting,
agreed to consider
200, including
including gathering
gathering industry
industry
opportunities associated
associated with
and opportunities
with LE 200,
1, 2005, the Tn-State
Tri-State Committee
Committee met
met to
to present
present their
their
feedback. On June 1,
preliminary
preliminary findings.
findings. Washington
Washingtonwas
was strongly
stronglyinin favor
favor of
of LE
LB 200
200 and
75 respondents
respondents supported
supported
reported
of 75
reported that an industry survey showed 61 of
the rule, S8 did not support it, and 6 remained undecided. At the time of the
meeting, Oregon's
Oregon's crab fleet representatives
reported similar
similar levels
levels of
meeting,
representatives reported
Oregon permit holders
holders (this survey was initiated by the
support from the Oregon
the specific
specific details
details
industry and not all permittees were queried, nor were the
of the
LB
200
provision
supplied).
California
had
not
conducted
the LE 200 provision supplied). California had not conducted an
industry survey.
survey. All
states expressed
expressed similar
similar concerns
concerns about
about the
the
industry
All three states
details of
LE 200,
200, particularly
particularly with
would be
be
details
of LE
with respect
respecttoto how
how it would
implemented and
also concerned
concerned about
about the
the
implemented
and enforced.
enforced. Oregon
Oregon was
was also
uncertainty of California's
California's future adoption of LB
LE 200.
200. California
Califomia would
uncertainty
need to take
take legislative
legislative action
action in order to adopt
adopt LB
LE 200.
200. While
While a bill
passed the California
California Legislature
Legislature to authorize
authorize this,
this, we
we understand
understand the
the
passed
it. Absent California
Califomia action, only Washington vessels
Governor will veto it.
would
restricted from
Oregon. The next step
step for
for the
the
would be restricted
from fishing
fishing off
off of
of Oregon.
Oregon Dungeness
Dungeness Crab
Commission (ODCC)
send aa survey
survey
Oregon
Crab Commission
(ODCC) was
was to
to send
(Attachment
5) to
to each
partnered with
with ODCC
ODCC to
to
(Attachment 5)
each permittee.
permittee. ODFW
ODFW partnered
public Summit
Summit(July
(July 27-2
27-28,2005).
conduct aa public
8, 2005).
In addition
addition to LB
LE 200,
200, the
the2005
2005Oregon
OregonDungeness
Dungeness Crab
CrabSummit
Summit
attendees
attempted to determine
determine what
what an
an
attendees discussed
discussedpot
pot limits
limits and
and attempted
include. Attendees were
were not
not able
able to
tofind
findconsensus
consensus
acceptable plan would include.
any one
one proposed
proposed plan,
plan, but
but some
some plan
plancriteria
criteriadid
didreceive
receivemajority
majority
on any
support
6).
support (Attachment
(Attachment 6).
Tn-State Dungeness Crab
At the most recent Tri-State
Crab Committee
Committee Meeting
Meeting (August
16, 2005),
agreed to
to present
2005), Oregon
Oregon and
and Washington
Washington agreed
present LE 200 to
to their
their
respective
and Wildlife
Wildlife Commissions
Commissions on
October 7, 2005.
2005. The
The
respective Fish
Fish and
on October
California Department
Game (CDFG)
(CDFG) isis unable
unable to
to propose
propose
California
Department of
of Fish
Fish and Game
did report
report survey
survey results
results from
from
such changes without legislative action, but did
156 respondents were in favor.
favor. It is
is unlikely
unlikely
their permit holders: 128 of 156
that California will be able to act in time for the 2005-06 season.
The other issue addressed at the August 16,
16, 2005
2005 Tn-State
Tri-State meeting
meeting was
was
preseason testing
testing for softshell
preseason
softshell condition
condition in Dungeness
Dungeness crab.
crab. The three
three
states agreed on
on several
several points
points that will
will further
furtherstandardize
standardizeand
and improve
improve
preseason testing.
Additionally, in
in recent
recent years
years some
some of the
the Oregon
Oregon fleet
fleet have
have been
been
concerned about the trend of permits being transferred to larger vessels. It
was suggested that over time this trend could
could change
change the
the character
character of
of the
the
was passed
passed during
during the 2005
2005
fleet. As a result,
result, Oregon
Oregon House Bill 3472A was
state legislative
legislative session
session restricting
restricting boat
length expansion
expansion on
on permit
permit
state
boat length
transfers (Attachment
(Attachment 7).
PUBLIC
INVOLVEMENT
rNVOLVEMENT
200: An
An initial
initial industry-conducted
industry-conducted survey
survey was
was distributed
distributed to
to Oregon
Oregon
LE 200:
permittees in some ports by advisor groups in early
early 2005
2005 (respondents:
(respondents: 96
against, and
and 20
20 undecided).
undecided). A similar
similar survey
survey was
was mailed
mailed by
by
in favor, 22 against,
the ODCC to all permittees (respondents: 150 in favor, 36 against, and 17
(Attachment 5).
5).
undecided) (Attachment
On July 27th and 28th 2005, ODFW and the ODCC co-sponsored the first
Oregon
preparation of the
the Summit,
Summit, ODFW
ODFW
Oregon Dungeness
Dungeness Crab Summit. In preparation
mailed background
background information
Oregon
informationon
on LE
LB 200
200 and
and pot limits to all Oregon
permit holders
permit
holders and processors.
processors. During
During the
the Summit,
Summit, approximately
approximately 50
50
crabbers
represents approximately
crab fleet)
fleet) and
and
crabbers (this
(this represents
approximately10%
10%ofof the
the crab
processors provided
provided their
their positions
positionson
on two
two key
key issues
processors
issues which
which had been
been
identified
for action
identified for
action by the
the industry
industry and
and ODCC
ODCC surveys:
surveys: extending
limited entry
entry authority
miles and
and crab
crab pot
pot limits.
limits. Summit
Summit
limited
authority out
out to
to 200
200 miles
entire coast,
coast, each
each port,
port, and
and
attendees consisted of representation from the entire
various sectors of the fleet. Participants
Participants included
included people
people who have had a
A
long history in the fishery as well
well as those who have entered recently.
recently A
summary of the Summit including an outline of the 200 mile and pot limit
discussions was
out to
to all participants
participants on August
August 10, 2005
2005
discussions
was sent
sent out
(Attachment 6).
6). Following
summary mail-out,
mail-out, ODFW
ODFW
Following the
the Summit and summary
and ODCC
ODCC have
have received
received numerous
numerous correspondences
correspondences regarding
regarding LE 200
(Attachment
(Attachment 10).
10).
16th
Tn-State meeting,
held a
In
preparation for the
the August
August 16"
Tri-State
meeting, ODFW
ODFW held
In preparation
conference call (August 15,
2005)
with
the
Oregon
contingent
of
Tn-State
15,2005)
Tri-State
advisors
LE 200.
200.
advisors to gather additional feedback about LE
ISSUE 11
ISSUE
Pot Limits
Pot
Limits
ANALYSIS
The total
total number
number of
of crab
crab pots
pots in
in waters
waters off
offOregon
Oregon has
hasincreased
increased
The
dramatically
through time
time to
to an estimated
dramatically through
estimated 185,000
185,000 pots
pots (Attachment
(Attachment 8).
Concerns have been raised about gear conflicts, resource wastage through
ghost fishing,
fishing, the
the littering
littering of
of the
the ocean
ghost
ocean floor with lost
lost pots,
pots, and
and pots
pots
number
placed primarily to reserve ocean floor real estate in excess of the number
required to fish effectively. Industry,
Industry, regulatory
regulatory agencies,
agencies, and the public
have suggested pot limits as a method
method of
of reducing
reducing these
these impacts.
impacts. A oneoneyear interim
interim pot limit
limit plan proposed
proposed to the
the Oregon
Oregon Fish
Fish and
andWildlife
Wildlife
Commission in August, 2002 was not adopted.
Washington implemented
implemented aa pot
pot limit
limit plan
plan beginning with the 1999-2000
Washington
1999-2000
That plan
plan limits
limits boats
boats to
to either
either 300
300 pots
pots or 500
season. That
500 pots based on
coast wide landings between December 1, 1996
1996 and
and September
September 15,
15, 1999.
1999.
Legislature passed
passedaa bill
bill which
which includes
includes a pot limit plan
The California Legislature
for the area
for
area south
south of
of Point
Point Arena;
Arena; aa similar
similar measure
measure was
was vetoed
vetoed in
in
California last year.
Several
basic concepts
concepts of
of aa plan
upon by
by the
Several basic
plan were generally
generally agreed
agreed upon
portion of the fleet and processors in attendance
attendance at
at the
the Crab
Crab Summit:
Summit:
A target for the total number of pots in Oregon
Oregon of
of approximately
approximately
150,000
150,000
An appeals board to hear special cases
August 14,2001
14,2001 established
The control date of August
established by
by the
the Commission
Commission
be maintained as a criteria for qualification
Landings are likely to
to be
be used
used as
as an
an allocation criteria
After initial allocations, pot numbers may be reduced incrementally
incrementally to
to
achieve aa final
final goal
goal
Permit
stacking (stacked
permanently, half the pots
pots
Permit stacking
(stacked permits
permits retired
retired permanently,
added to the purchaser's
purchaser's permit pot limit, up to
to aa cap)
cap) was
was generally
generally
supported as a part of the reduction plan
Buoy
tags will
will likely
likely be
be required
required to
to allow
allow for
for effective
effective
Buoy and
and pot
pot tags
enforcement
A process for subsequent review and adaptive management should be
identify the level of success of the plan
plan and
and consider
consider any
any
included to identi
potential modifications
Many questions remain
an equitable
equitable pot limit
limit plan.
remain as to how to fashion an
At the Summit,
Summit, 29 attendees supported basing pot allocations on historical
landings and 25 attendees supported historical pot declarations
declarations rather
rather than
Ofthese
these two
two approaches,
approaches, crab
crab landings
landings constitute
constitute a much more
landings. Of
complete and robust data set. The
The number
number of
of tiers
tiers that
that should
should be
be included
included
in any plan is contentious.
single pot limit
limit for all
contentious. Opinions
Opinions range from aa single
boats, to plans that include 2 (like WA), 5, or 10
10 or
or more
more tiers, to aa plan
plan
that would
pot limit
would have
have an individual
individual pot
limit for each
each of
of the
the 434
434permits.
permits.
There are also related issues hinging on
on whether or
or not
not Oregon
Oregon institutes
institutes
jurisdiction that will require consideration,
200 mile jurisdiction
consideration, such as the
the impacts
impacts
of different pot limits in Oregon
Oregon and Washington.
Washington.
should continue
continue
Commission to provide direction on whether the Agency should
to work
work with
with fleet
fleet and
and processors
processors to
to develop
develop aa simple,
simple, enforceable,
enforceable, and
and
equitable plan for OFWC consideration.
consideration.
OPTIONS
OPTIONS
ISSUE
ISSUE 2
ANALYSIS
ANALYSIS
1
implementation
Implementation ofilouse
of HouseBill
Bill3472A
3472A
permit transfer
transfer conditions
conditions
HB3472A (Attachment 7) made changes to the permit
for commercial Dungeness
Dungeness crab fisheries.
fisheries. Beginning
Beginning on
on January
January 1,
1, 2006,
2006,
a permit may not be transferred to a vessel that is more than 10
10 feet longer
than the vessel
vessel which
which held
held the permit
permit on
on that
that date.
date. However,
However, the
than
Commercial
Fishery Permit
Permit Board
Board may
may waive
waive this length
Commercial Fishery
length restriction
restriction for
reasons of undue
undue hardship
hardship for the
the person
person seeking
seeking the
the transfer.
transfer. The
The
reasons
Commission will be required to define "undue hardship" by rule.
To implement
HB3472A, the
the department
department notified
notified all
implement the provisions
provisions of
of HB3472A,
holders of Oregon
Oregon commercial Dungeness crab permits of
of the
the new
new permit
permit
transfer provisions.
Permit holders
holders are offered
provisions. Permit
offered an opportunity
opportunity to correct
correct
errors in
in boat
boat length
length by
by submission
submission of
of appropriate
appropriate documentation
documentation to
to
any errors
1, 2006.
2006. Staff will
will return
return with
with proposed
proposed
January 1,
ODFW Licensing by January
language
language to
to define
define "undue
"undue hardship"
hardship" later.
later.
OPTIONS
OPTIONS
Commission
Commission input
input welcome.
welcome.
ISSUE 3
Limited Entry
Entry (LE
200 Mile Limited
(LE 200)
200)
ANALYSIS
The amount of effort in the Oregon Dungeness crab fishery has increased
increased
dramatically (Attachment 8). Current estimates suggest that there may be
pots in the Oregon fishery.
as many as 185,000
185,000 pots
fishery. At the time of
of limited
limited
estimated that there
there were
were approximately
approximately 140,000
140,000
entry (1995-96), it was estimated
pots in the fishery. These estimates do not include
include out-of-state
out-of-state fishermen
Oregon.
crabbing in federal waters (3-200 miles) off of Oregon.
Washington state
state has
has used
used season
season delays
delays for the non-tribal
fishery as its
Washington
non-tribal fishery
primary mechanism to provide more opportunity
opportunity for the
the Tribal
Tribal fisheries,
fisheries,
as they are required to do by a federal court
court case.
case.
Washington Tribes currently
currently harvest
harvest between
between 25
25 and 28%
28% of the crab off
Washington each year and their capacity to
to harvest
harvest crab
crab has
has been
been steadily
steadily
increasing. Under
Under the federal
federal court
court decision,
decision, Washington
Washington Tribes
Tribes are
are
eligible to
to harvest
harvest 50% of the crab in the
eligible
the tribal
tribal "usual
"usual and
andaccustomed"
accustomed"
areas off of Washington.
Washington. The
The Ttribes
Ttribes will
will continue
continue to
to require
require opportunity
opportunity
to harvest crab and thereby increase their percentage
percentage of
of the annual
annual catch.
catch.
Washington vessels
vessels may
may choose to fish
If this happens, more non-Tribal Washington
further to the south in Oregon waters (3-200 miles).
LB 200 was suggested as a means of stabilizing or preventing effort shifts
LE
and increases
and
increases in the West
West Coast
Coast crab
crab fishery.
fishery. Following
Following its
its proposal,
proposal,
Oregon
evaluating the potential
potential impacts
impacts of
of implementation
implementation of
Oregon has been evaluating
LE 200.
200. California
California and
and Washington
Washington have also
also considered
considered this
this option;
option;
unable to
to implement this
this type
type of regulation without
however, California is unable
legislative
legislative action. Oregon
Oregon and
and Washington
Washington have
have continued
continueddiscussions
discussions
LE 200 even though California may not be able to act.
about LB
Oregon considered three options during its analysis
analysis of
of LB
LE 200:
1) Oregon,
Oregon, California
California and Washington
Washington would
would place
place restrictions
restrictions on
on
crab permits
permits to prohibit
their respective
respective state commercial
commercial crab
prohibit vessels
vessels from
from
fishing off of neighboring
neighboring states'
states waters out
out to
to 200 miles;
(2) Oregon
(2)
Oregon and
and Washington
Washington would
would place
place restrictions on
on their
their
would take no action; and
respective state permits but California would
(3) No change to state jurisdiction
jurisdiction beyond three miles.
If Oregon
Oregon and
and Washington
Washington place
place restrictions
restrictions on their
their respective
respective state
state
commercial crab permits, the effect would be that
that Oregon
Oregon crabbers
crabbers would
would
from fishing
fishing in
in waters
waters off of
be prohibited
prohibited from
of Washington
Washington (shore
(shore to 200
200
miles). Likewise, Washington commercial crab permit holders would also
fishing in
in waters
waters off of Oregon
Oregon (shore to 200
200 miles).
miles).
be prohibited from fishing
Dual Oregon and Washington permit holders would not be restricted from
either of the two states
states and
and could
could continue
continue to
to fish
fish and
andmake
make landings
landings in
in
both states.
states. California permit holders could
could continue
continue to
to fish
fish in
in Oregon
Oregonand
and
miles. Oregon
Oregon and
Washington waters
waters outside
outside three miles.
and Washington
Washington
Washington
be able to
to fish California waters outside 3 miles. It
permittees would also be
has been noted that dual California-Oregon permitted
permitted vessels
vessels will still be
and land
land into Oregon. According
According to Lt. Dave
able to fish off Washington and
Cleary (OSP), enforcement of the boundaries would
would require
require cooperation
cooperation
between Oregon and Washington enforcement agencies,
agencies, but would not
not be
unreasonably difficult.
The majority
of opposition
in Oregon
Oregon has
has been voiced
The
majority of
opposition in
voiced by North
North coast
fishermen with
with Oregon-only
permitted vessels.
vessels. Their main concern was
fishermen
Oregon-only permitted
that the 27 Oregon-only
Oregon-only permitted
permitted vessels
vessels that
that fished
fished outside
outside 3 miles
miles in
Washington and landed into Oregon last year would no longer
longer be able
able to
to
fish in Washington,
resulting in more
Washington, possibly resulting
more effort
effort in
in Oregon.
Oregon. Some
Some
Washington permittees
permittees would
would also
also lose
lose their ability to fish
Washington
fish off
off Oregon,
Oregon,
but the number of vessels in
in this position is
is smaller
smaller (about
(about 7).
7). Those
Those who
who
oppose LE 200 are also worried about
about the ramifications
ramifications of
of aa Washington
Washington
55 vessels with both Oregon
Oregon
state sponsored buyback program. There are 55
9). The
The majority
majority of
of these
these vessels
vessels are
are
(Attachment 9).
and Washington permits (Attachment
may
from Washington. If a buyback occurs in Washington,
Washington, these vessels may
sell their Washington permits and keep their Oregon
Oregon permits.
permits. Oregon
Oregon has
has
approximately
100 latent
latent crab
crab permits
permits which
which may be
approximately 100
be obtained
obtained as
as well.
well.
Concern was
expressed about
Washington has
Concern
was also
also expressed
about the
the fact
fact that Washington
has a pot
limit, while Oregon does
does not.
not. This may result in an
an effort
effort increase
increase off
Upton, ODFW
ODFW
Oregon. Fiscal
Fiscal impact
impact estimates,
estimates, developed
developed by Harry
Harry Upton,
Oregon.
economist,
(Attachment3)3) indicate
indicate that
that implementation
of LE
LE 200
economist, (Attachment
implementation of
200
provisions may result in total personal income losses in the range of 1.3
1.3 to
2.8 million dollars.
ODFW
Tri-State meeting
meeting that
ODFW recognized
recognized at
at the
the August
August 16, 2005
2005 Crab Tn-State
by those
those who
who oppose
would be
some of the concerns expressed
expressed by
oppose LE 200 would
fair start
start provision
provision at
at the
the
alleviated if Oregon and Washington institute aa fair
Oregon-Washington boundary.
Oregon-Washington
boundary. Both
Both states recognize that vessels should
not
be allowed
allowed two
two openers.
openers. Without
Without aa fair
fair start
start provision,
provision, if
the
not be
if the
Washington
fishery opens
opens after
after the
OregonWashington fishery
the Oregon
Oregon fishery,
fishery, dual
dual OregonWashington permitted
openers. These
These vessels
vessels
Washington
permitted vessels
vessels could
could fish
fish both openers.
advantage because the majority of
of the
the crab
crab is
is caught
caught
would have an unfair advantage
during
the first
few weeks
weeks following
following season
season opening.
opening. A
fair start
first few
A fair
during the
provision would
would prevent
prevent vessels
vessels from
from fishing
fishing two openers by requiring
provision
vessels declare
declare which
which state they will fish
that dual
dual Oregon-Washington
Oregon-Washington vessels
fish
like the softshell
softshell declaration
declaration process, vessels would
would need
first. Much like
need to
wait a given
given amount
amount of time, 30 days for
for example,
example, before
before exercising the
permit. The
The specific
specific details of how
how the
the fair
fair start
start provision
provision
other state's permit.
would be need to be consistently adopted/implemented by both states.
Summary
of LE
LE 200
Summary of
Pros
LE
shifts and
and increases
increases in the
the
LB 200 may stabilize or prevent effort shifts
West Coast crab fishery
Out-of-state permit
Out-of-state
permit holders
holders would
would not
not be allowed to fish in water
adjacent to Oregon
Oregon will be able to more accurately assess the level of effort in
the Oregon crab fishery
Both
provision if
Both states
states would
would need
need to
to agree
agree to
to aa "fair start" provision
if one
state delays its season opening
.
Cons
OPTIONS
OPTIONS
Some
Some Oregon
Oregon permit
permit holders
ho!ders would
would lose
lose traditional
traditional fishing
fishing
grounds in Washington
Crab population
population density
density and quality
quality shifts
shifts from
from Oregon
Oregon to
to
Crab
LE 200
200 would
would prevent
prevent
Washington on
year-to-year basis
Washington
on a year-to-year
basis and LB
single-permitted fishers
fishers from accessing crab opportunity when the
quality crab and densities are north of the state border.
There are more Washington vessels with Oregon and
and Washington
Washington
permits than Oregon vessels with Washington
Washington permits.
permits.
A Washington
200 mile
mile agreement
agreement
Washington buyback program following aa 200
could increase pressure in Oregon
There appears to be a negative economic impact for Oregon
about how
softshell delays and
There are
are uncertainties about
how softshell
Washington non-tribal fishing delays will interrelate
The details of the Oregon-Washington
Oregon-Washington interstate
interstate and
and Washington
Washington
intrastate declaration process are not explicit
explicit at
at this time
Unless
transfers are suspended
suspended during
during season
season opening
opening
Unless permit
permit transfers
1 51h), some transfers
negotiations
negotiations (November
(November 15 through January 15th),
may
nith
may enable
enable vessels
vessels to have
have two
two openers
openers during
during seasons
seasons with
sofishell
delays
in
parts
of
the
Tn-State
fishing
area
softshell
parts of the Tri-State
Option1:1:Adopt
Adopt aa rule
rule to
to prohibit
prohibit Oregon
Oregon permittees
pennittees from
from fishing
fishing from 33
Qption
to 200 miles off of Washington (if Washington
Washington takes
takes reciprocal
reciprocal action).
action).
Option
2:Status
Status quo
Option 2:
Option
STAFF
Option 11
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION
DRAFT MOTION
EFFECTJYE
DATE
EFFECTIVE DATE
I move, to adopt the changes to OAR' 635-005- as shown on Attachment 4
[with the following exceptions
exceptions.. .]
1,2005
December 1,
2005
Attachment 2
State
Secretary of State
OF PROPOSED
PROPOSED RULEMAKING
RULEMAKING IIEARING*
HEAlUNG*
NOTICE OF
Statement ofNeed
of Needand
andFiscal
Fiscal Impact
impact accompanies
accompanies thia
this fonn.
farm.
A Statement
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW)
(ODFW) Fish Division
635
635
Agency
Agenry and
and Division
Dlil~i0"
Administrative Roles Chapter Number
Katie Thiel
Thiel
Katie
(503) 947-6033
Rules Coordinator
Coordinator
Rules
Telephone
3406 Cherrv
Cherry Avenue
AvenueNE,
NE, Salem,
Salem, OR
OR 97303
Address
October 7,2005
7,2005
8:00 a.m.
am.
Resting
Hoanng Date
Date
Time
Trm*
ODFW Commission
Commission Room
Room
ODFW
3406 Cherry Avenue NE
Salem, OR 97303
97303
Fish and Wildlife
Wildlife Commission
Commission
Heanngr
Ueauinga off1oir
Officer
Location
LocalLon
Are auxiliary
auxiliary aids
aids for
for persons
persons with
with disabilities
disabilitiesavailable
available upon advance
advance request?
request? Yes
Are
No
RULEMAKING ACTION
ADOPT:
secure
awm,ral oofn,Je
f m l e nuanbera
n m b e i s with
filing
Secure approval
withthe
theAdmiinsaatlaatle
AdministrativeRules
knits Unitpnoiro
Unitprior to filing.
Rules in Chapter 635, Divisions 005 and 006
AMEND:
AMEMD:
Rules in Chapter 635, Divisions 005 and 006
REPEAL:
Rules in Chapter 635, Divisions 005
005 and
and 006
006 may
may be
be repealed
repealed as
as determined
determined justified.
o f m l enumbers
numberssvith
withthe
theAdministrative
Adminishafive Rules
RulesUnit
Unitprior
ptior to
fa filing.
Renumber:
Renumber:Secure
Secvreapproval ofntle
numbers with
prior to filinz.
fling.
Amend and
andRenumber:
Renumber:Secure
Secureapproval
approvalofmle
ofrulenumbers
withthe
theAdeniniafralive
A d m i n i r h t i u rRules
Rules Unie
Unitpziai
ORS506.109
506.109 and ORS
506.1 19
ORS
ORS 506.119
Stan.
Auth.:
Stat. Auth.:
Other Authority
other
Aurhoziry
ORS
ORS506.129
506.129
Ststs.
Sf-. Implemented:
Implemented:
RULE SUMMARY
SUMMARY
commercial Dungeness
Consider regulation changes
changes to
to implement
implement state jurisdiction
jurisdiction out
out to 200 miles in the commercial
OregoniWashmgton border,
crab fishery by restricting Oregon permitted vessels to fish for crab south of the Oregon/Washington
and allowing
crab legally
legally taken
taken in the Pacific Ocean
River to be landed
allowing crab
Ocean and Columbia
Columbia River
landed in
in Oregon
Oregon with
with aa
valid Oregon permit.
permit. Housekeeping
Housekeeping and
and technical
technical corrections
corrections to
to the
the regulations
regulations may occur to ensure rule
consistency.
consistency.
requests public comment on whether other options should be considered for achieving the rule's substantive
ORS 183.335(2)(G)
183.335(2)(G) requests
substantivegoals
goals while
while
reducing negative economic impact of the rule on business.
2005
October 7,
7,2005
Last Day for
ommmmmmt
for Public
Public C
Comment
Signature
Sagnature and
atari Date
Date
June LeTarte
aebmimd to
AdmintuttalsveRatea Unit, Oeegoe
state
*ma
DngonBIBiin
published
n h ethe
l aise
o fsfeaeh
each munhandupdateshedrulrulrulrul
m d in!he
Orsson AdmmistratsveRetsa
AdmuliitraiiveRulcsCompilation,
Compilation Notice
N o b i eforms
f o n r issuatbe
m u f bcrvhmimd
tothe
thrAdmini*MveRdesUnit,
Oregon Statr
5The Ore
gee llieI/eliesisis
publishedo sss
mends and updates the rule testhfeund
is the Oregon
Archive.,
Summor Street
0 0 pm
l ~ rthis
i deadline
Sunday or
legal holiday
holiday when
w h e nNotes
N ~ tferns,
i c ~ f are
oare
meeeepted
ar~rpted
mill S:Oopm
i0Opman
Archives. 800
tee summer
Street NE,
NE, SBirm,
Salem,Oregon
Oregon97310
973lt by
by 95:00
pmon
onthe
thelSVi
tsth day
dayofihr
ofeheprecdngmonth
preceding meekm
u,trsa
this
deadlinefalls
rant on
setaSaturday,
Saturday, suaday
sr legal
until
en
the preceding
pircemng ssorkdey.
iwrkday.
ARC
ARC 920-1997
910-1997
Secretary of State
State
Secretary
STATEMENT OF
OF NFED
NEED AND FISCAL IMPACT
STATEMENT
A Notice of haposed
Rulemaking accompanies this
this form,
form
Proposed Rulemaking
Rulemaking Hearing
Hearing or
orea Notice of
of Proposed Rulemalcing
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife -- Fish Division
Division
635
635
Administrative Rules Chapter
Adrninisbative
Chapter Number
Agency and
and Division
Division
Matter of
of amendment
amendment of
of
In the Matter
005,
OAR Chapter 635, Divisions
Divisions 005,
and 006 relating to Commercial
Shellfish Fishery
)
)
1
Statutory Authority,
Statutes Implemented,
)
of Need,
Statement of
Principal Documents Relied Upon,
Statement
1
Statementof
of Fiscal
Fiscal Impact
Impact
Statutory Authority: ORS
506119
506.109 and ORS 506.119
ORS 506.109
Other Authority:
Authority:
Statutes
Statutes Implemented: ORS
ORS506.129
506.129
Need
Need for
for the
the Rule(s):
Rule(s):
TriThe rules are needed to: Implement
Implement Oregon's
Oregon's authority to regulate the crab fishery out to 200 miles if agreed by the TnState Dungeness Crab Committee. These measures may reduce the growing number of vessels and
and gear
gear originating
originating from
from
Washington
Washington by preventing fishing
fishing for crab
crab in federal
federal waters
waters adjacent
adjacent to
to Oregon
Oregon without
without an
anOregon
Oregonpermit.
permit.Washington
Washington
implementing measures
restrict Washington
Washington vessels
Oregon and
and Oregon
Oregon isisimplementing
implementing
is implementing
measures to
to restrict
vessels from
from fishing
fishing off Oregon
complementary
complementiuy measures to restrict Oregon vessels
vessels from
from Washington
Washington waters.
Documents
Documents Relied Upon:
a. 2005 Oregon Dungeness Crab Summit
2005
Summit Summary
Summary Letter,
Letter, dated
dated August
August 10,
10,2005
b. Staff
2005
Staff Report prepared for Oregon
Oregon Fish and
and Wildlife
Wildlife Commission
Commission Meeting
Meetingof
of October
October7,7,2005
The above
above documents
documents are available
available for public
public inspection
inspection in
in the
the Department
Department of
of Fish
Fish and
andWildlife,
Wildlife,Fish
FishDivision,
Division,Third
Third
Floor,
Avenue NE,
NE, Salem,
Oregon, between
between 8:00
8:00 a.m.
am, and 4:30
Salem, Oregon,
4:30 p.m.,
p.m., on normal
normal working
working days,
days, Monday
Monday
Floor, 3406 Cherry
Cherry Avenue
through Friday.
Friday.
Fiscal and
and Economic
Economic Impact:
Please see
see attached.
attached
Administrative
Advisory Committee
Committee consulted?:
consulted?: Yes
Administrative Rule Advisory
Yes
If not, why?:
why?:
If not,
coastal constituents,
constituents, to
to aapublic
public meeting
meeting (2005
(2005Crab
CrabSummit)
Summit)to
to
ODFW invited the entire industry, including interested coastal
solicit
statejurisdiction
solicit public
public input on the issue. At the Summit, industry participants provided feedback on state
jurisdiction out
outto
to 200
200 miles.
miles.
In
In addition,
addition, the
the results
results of
of an
an industry-wide
industry-wide survey
survey were
were considered.
considered.
Authorized Signer
Signer and Date
Date
Authorized
June
June LeTarte
LeTarte
Administrative Rules
Rules Unit, Archives
Archives Division,
Division, Secretary
Secretaryof
of State,
State,800
800 Summer
Summer Street
Street NE, Salem,
Salem, Oregon
Oregon 97310.
97310.
Administrative
-
925 - 1997
ARC 925
ARC
1997
Attachment 3
Economic Impact Statement
7, 2005 Rulemaking involving the Amendment of
Statement for the October 7,2005
Rules Relating to the
the Management
Management of
of the
the Commercial
Commercial Dungeness
DungenessCrab
CrabFisheries
Fisheries
Theproposed
proposedrules
rules will
will affect
affect state
stateagencies,
agencies,units
unitsof
oflocal
local
Fiscal and economic impact: The
the public,
public, respectively, as discussed
discussed below.
below. The
government and the
The proposed
proposed rules
rules would
would place
place aa
restriction on all Oregon Dungeness crab permit holders from fishing in Washington waters (O(0200 miles). Likewise, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife would enact an
administrative rule which would prohibit Washington permitted vessels
vessels from fishing in Oregon
waters (0-200 miles). Dual Oregon and Washington permit holders would not be affected by
by the
proposed plan, and would continue to be allowed to fish and deliver within both Oregon and
Washington boundaries.
a. State
Stateagencies
agencieswhich
which could
couldbe
be affected
affected by
by rules
rules relating
relating to
to crab
crab management
management regulations
regulations are
are
No
the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) and the Oregon State Police (OSP). No
major changes from the current levels of these agencies' operations or expenditures are expected
as a result of these particular rules. Some
Someadditional
additionalenforcement
enforcementactivities
activitiesmay
may be
be required
requiredto
to
ensure that vessels comply with
with the
the new
new restrictions.
restrictions.
The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife collects catch fees in the amount prescribed by
Fish Fund.
Fund. The
The fee is calculated by
by
ORS 508.505 that are deposited into the Commercial Fish
of food
food fish,
fish, except
exceptfor
for salmon
salmon and
and steelhead,
steelhead,by
by 0.0
0.0109
at the
multiplying the value of
109 (1.09%) at
point of landing. Since more crab is landed by Oregon vessels fishing in Washington waters than
Washington vessels fishing in Oregon waters, a net decease in crab landings is likely. Assuming
the net losses in landed value calculated in section c, Department revenue losses would be nearly
$14,000 using 2004-05 landing levels and prices,
prices, and
and approximately $7,000 using
using average
landings and prices from the last ten seasons. (See part c for discussion of landings and
revenues)
6. Units
Unitsof
oflocal
local government
government which
which could
could be affected by these regulations include port
b.
port
authorities and county governments.
govermuents. Port
Portauthorities
authoritiesand
and county
county governments
govemmentsmay
may derive
derive
revenues and experience costs related to
to the
the provision
provision of
ofmoorage.
moorage. However, no significant
result of
of these
these rules.
rules.
changes are expected as a result
c. The
Thepublic
public which
which may
may be
be economically
economically affected by the adoption of the proposed rule
amendments include Dungeness crab harvesters and processors in the state of Oregon. Oregon
would not be able to take, possess or deliver crab
crabbers who do not have a Washington permit would
from Washington waters. Preliminary fish ticket data for the
the 2004-05 season indicate that 27
.1 million pounds of
Oregon vessels would be affected.
affected. These
These vessels
vessels caught
caught approximately
approximately 11.1
crab off Washington and landed them in Oregon. Using
Using the
the average 2004-05 price of $1.47 per
per
pound, Oregon crabbers would forego $1.66 million in ex-vessel revenue. Washington crabbers
who do not have an Oregon permit would be prohibited
prohibited from crabbing south of the border and
Preliminary data for this season indicate that seven Washington
from delivering in Oregon. Preliminsuy
vessels that landed 277,000 pounds would be affected. The ex-vessel revenue foregone by
Washington crabbers would be approximately
approximately $408
$408 thousand.
thousand.
both Washington
Washingtonand
and Oregon
Oregoncrabbers
crabbersare
arerestricted,
restricted,ititmay
maybe
beassumed
assumedthat
thatOregon
Oregon
IfIf both
harvesters would
would recover
recover aa portion of
of their
their losses
losses that
that is
is equal
equal to the
the level
level of
of landings
landings made
made by
harvesters
Washington harvesters
harvesters in
in Oregon
Oregonwaters.
waters.Therefore,
Therefore,the
thelevel
levelofofrevenue
revenuelost
losttotoOregon
Oregoncrab
crab
Washington
harvesterswould
would be
be the
the difference
difference of
of approximately
approximately $1,255,000
$1,255,000annually.
annually.
harvesters
However, 2004-05
2004-05 was
was an
an unusual year
year with record landings.
landings. Therefore, these
these revenue
revenue estimates
estimates
However,
are likely
likely to
to be
be higher
higher than those in
in aa typical
typical year.
year. To
To obtain
obtain aa more representative estimate,
estimate, itit is
is
are
assumed that
that the
the level
level of
of landings
landings by
by Oregon
Oregon vessels from
from Washington waters
waters would
would be in
in
assumed
proportion to
to the
the average
average landings
landings and
and value
value over
over the last
last decade.
decade. By
By using
using the
the ten-year
ten-year average
average
proportion
of total
total landings,
landings, the
the annual
annual revenue
revenue loss
loss would decrease from
from $1,255,000
$1,255,000 to $664,000.
$664,000. Both
Both
of
estimates depend
depend on
on only
only one
one season
season of
of data
data because landings
landings by area
area are
are not
not available
available for
for
estimates
previous crab
crab seasons.
seasons. The
The 2004-05
2004-05 season
season was
was also
also atypical
atypical because
because the
the season
season north
north of
of Cape
Cape
previous
Falcon opened
opened 45
45 days
days late.
late. Potential
Potential bias
bias associated
associated with
with only
only one
one season
season of
of area
area reporting
reporting isis
Falcon
losses provided in
in section
section a.
a.
unknown. These
Theserevenue
revenue losses
losses were
used to
to calculate department losses
were used
unknown.
Since reliable catch data by area are unavailable for seasons before 2004-2005,
2004-2005, there is
is a high
Since
degree of
of uncertainty
uncertainty associated
associated with
with these
these estimates.
estimates. The
The degree
degree to
to which
which displaced
displaced Oregon
Oregon
degree
vessels may
may recoup
recoup ex-vessel
ex-vessel revenue
revenue in
in Oregon
Oregon waters
waters may
may be greater
greater than
than these
these estimates.
estimates.
vessels
However, presumably Oregon
Oregon vessels fished in
in these areas because profits were
were higher
higher than
than their
However,
next
next best
best alternative.
alternative. Although
Although aa great
great deal
deal of uncertainty exists,
exists, generally the
the impacts
impacts of
of this
this
additional constraint are likely to include
include greater competition for the crab resource in
in Oregon
Oregon
additional
waters, lower
lower industry
industry and
and vessel
vessel profits,
profits, and
and aa decrease
decrease in
in total landings.
landings.
waters,
Dungeness crab
crablandings
landingsand
andex-vessel
ex-vessel revenue
revenueof
of vessels
vessels with Oregon
Oregon permits
permitsfishing
fishinginin
Dungeness
Washington
Washington waters,
waters, vessels
vessels with Washington permits fishing in Oregon waters and
and average
average
total
total Oregon
Oregon landings
landings and
andat-vessel
ex-vesselrevenue
revenueover
overthe
thelast
lastdecade.
decade.
Season
2004-05
Assuming 10 yr avg.
Vessels with OR Permits in WA
Landed value
Landings (lbs)
1,131,075
$1,662,680
511,000
879,000
$
Average Price/lb
$1.47
$
1.72
Vessels WA Permits in OR
2004-05
Assuming 10 yr avg.
$407,876
$215,000
277,467
125,000
$1.47
$1.72
Entire Oregon Fishery
2004-05
Avg. last 10 seasons
Assuming 2004-05
Assuming 10 yr avg.
49,384,714
$26,100,000
Potential Oregon Revenue Losses
853,608
$1,255,000
33,595,044
15,175,000
$
386,000
$
664,000
$1.47
$1.72
$1.47
$1.72
Economic contributions
conb.ibutions may be
be defined
defined as
as a measure of the income received by
by households
households in
in
Economic
industq. The
The estimate
estimate of personal income includes
includes wages
wages and
and
Oregon due
due to the fishing industry.
Oregon
crewmen and captains during harvesting, workers
workers at
at processing
proprietary income
income made by crewmen
proprietary
2
2
plants, and people working at suppliers for fishing industry businesses. It also
also includes
includes rere(Research Group
Group 2004).
2004). The
The
spending of wages
wages throughout the economy (the multiplier effect) (Research
estimated marginal impact on state level personal income (direct, indirect and induced)
induced) per
per
pound of ocean caught Dungeness Crab harvested and processed in Oregon was
was about
about $3.13
$3.13 per
pound in 2001 or $3.31
represents a measure of the per
per
$3.3 1 per pound in 2004 dollars. This estimate represents
personal income
income which
which would
would be
be associated
associated with
with increases
increases or
or
unit effect on state level total personal
decreases in ocean Dungeness Crab harvests. Using this estimate, the
the total
total impact
impact on
on Oregon
Oregon
2004-05 season
season would
would be approximately
approximately $2.83
$2.83 million,
million, or
orusing
usingthe
the
personal income using the 2004-05
ten year average would be $1.28 million. Since total personal income estimates are based on
landings and revenue information, they are also subject to the same
same uncertainties
uncertainties that
that were
were cited
cited
earlier in this document.
Most businesses affected
affected by these
these rules
rules are
are believed
believed to
to be
be "small
"small business."
business."
We do not believe that a less intrusive or less costly alternative adaptation to only small business
of the rule.
is consistent with the purpose of
The rules are believed to be fully compatible with
with legislative direction on the goals of wildlife
management in Oregon.
References
References
The Research Group. 2004. Oregon's Commercial
Commercial Fishing Industry,
Industly, Preliminary Review of Year
2003 and Outlook for 2004. ODFW
ODFW and
and OCZMA.
OCZMA.
Attachment 44
Dungeness Crab Fishery
Fishery
635-005-0042
635-005-0042
-,b"o
Areas
-
Oreqon Dunqeness crab permits are valid onlv in Oreqon state waters and the Pacific Ocean in
federal waters south of an east-west line extendinq 200 nautical miles westward at 46" 15' 0 0 N.
Lat. (OreqonlWashinqton border).
Stat. Auth.: ORS 506.109, ORS 506.119
506.119 and
and ORS
ORS506.129
506.129
506.129
Stats. Implemented: ORS 506.129
Hist.:
Hist.:
635-005-0047
Possession and
and Landing
Landing Limits
Limits
from the second
(1) ItIt is unlawful,
second Monday
Monday in June
June through
through August
August 14,
14, for
for any
anypermitted
permitted ocean
ocean
unlawful, from
(1)
Dungeness
crab vessel
vessel to
to take, land or
Dungeness crab
or possess
possess more than 1200
1200 pounds
pounds of
of Dungeness
Dungeness crab
crab per
perweek
week
from the Pacific
Pacific Ocean
Ocean and
and Columbia
Columbia River.
River.
(2) Landinq Dunqeness crab leqally taken from the Pacific Ocean and Columbia River is allowed
in Oreqon with a valid Oreqon D u ~ R ~ crab
~ ~ permit.
s s
()
(3)[(2)J
[(?)ICommercial
Commercialfishers
fishersmust
mustretain
retaincopies
copies of
of fish
fish landing
landing receipts
receipts for
for aa minimum
minimum of
of 90
90days
days on
on board
board
Dungeness crab under
vessels landing Dungeness
under the
the cumulative
cumulative catch
catch limit
limit described
described in
in section
section(1)
(1)of
ofthis
thisrule.
rule.The
The
receipts
must be available
officials and by
receipts must
available for inspection
inspection by
by authorized
authorized enforcement
enforcement officials
by employees
employees of
of
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW).
(ODFW). Legal
Legal landing
landing receipts
receipts are
are defined
defined in
in section
section [(s)]
[faf] (4).
(i).
(3)[(3)]
[(a)] For purposes of this rule, the following
following definitions apply:
(4)
(a) "Landing" and
and "Land
"Land" means to
to begin transfer of
of Dungeness crab
crab from
from aa fishing
fishing vessel.
vessel. Once transfer
transfer
aboard the vessel
vessel are
are counted as part
part of
of the
the landing;
landing;
begins, all Dungeness crab aboard
(b) "Landing
receipt" means
means either
either an
an ODFW-issued
Fish Receiving
ReceivingTicket
Ticket or
or aa fish dealer dock ticket
"Landing receipt"
ODFW-issued Fish
identified with
with a fish dealer's logo
logo or letterhead
letterhead and
and that must
must include
include the
the following:
following:
(A) Fish dealer's name and dealer
dealer license
license number;
number;
Dungeness crab;
crab;
(B) Date of receipt of the Dungeness
(C) Name of fisher from whom the Dungeness
Dungeness crab were purchased;
purchased;
(0)
(D) Vessel
Vessel name, vessel license number, and the federal document or State Marine Board number of the
vessel from which catch was made;
landing;
(E) Port name of landing;
used by
by the
the fisher;
fisher;
(F) Fishing gear used
(G) Gross pounds of Dungeness
Dungeness crab received
received and price
price paid per
per pound;
pound; and
and
making the landing
landing and the individual
individual preparing
preparing the
the dock
dock ticket.
ticket.
(H) Signature of both the fisher making
(c) "Week"
"Week" means
means the
the period
period beginning
beginning 12:Ol
12:01 a.m.
a.m. local
localtime
time Monday
Mondaythrough
through 12
12midnight
midnight Sunday.
Sunday.
~~~
~
~
Stat. Auth.:
Auth.: ORS 506.109,
506.109, ORS
ORS 506.119
506.119and
and ORS
ORS506.129
506.129
Stats. Implemented:
Implemented:ORS 506.129
506.129
Hist.:
Hist.:
Attachment
Attachment 55
2005 Crab Survey Results
OREGON
BOATS
YES
NO
170
15
Do youpport 200-mi. States jurisdiction for crab?
Should we continue Pre-Seasqpprice negotiations?
Should the 10' increase on license transfers be one time only?
150
36
17
19
181
7
12
30
2
1
131
62
7
22
15
3
Do you want to see changes to Pre-Season Testing?
132
45
25
16
14
3
79
105
17
12
22
5
Should we make the recoveryjte 24% statewide? (vs 23/25%)
106
50
41
24
8
2
Do you want to continue the use of haul-out boats?
95
94
7
9
25
3
Should we have one opener in state for Domoic or soft-shell?
52
116
30
16
19
2
Should the state allow cotton blend vs. 100% cotton bio's?
137
49
10
22
13
2
Do you support some kind of pot limit?
ou want to
for
Do you
to see 'Individual
'IndividualFishery
FisheryQuotas'
Quotas' (IFQ's)
(IFQ's) for
crab?
135
43
13
17
14
5
36
149
11
18
144
Do you support poundage limits or trip limits?
68
116
18
9
22
5
Should we ask the State to allow a small % of short crab?
Should crewman sign affidavit stating knowledge of 'short-crab'
reg's?
73
116
9
19
15
1
113
61
15
18
163
In 'split' openers, do you support a 30 or a 90 day delay period?
144
28
26
29
3
±
Should crab buoy's be tagged with permit-holder information?
45
129
29
13
21
3
Did you participate in the Oregon Crab Fishery prior to Aug. 14,
2001?
Do you support changing to a December
10th
Opener?
U
YES
NO
24
6
U
Attachment 6
Attachment
emorandum
Memorandum
egon Department
epartment of
of Fish and Wildlife
Wildlife
anne Resources
Marine
Resources Program
Program
SE. Marine
2040 S.E.
Marine Science
Science Drive
Drive
Newport, OR 97365
(541)
FAX (541)867-0311
(541)867-0311
(541) 867-4741 FAX
TO:
TO:
FROM:
FROM:
RE:
Oregon Dungeness Crab Industry Participants
Patricia
Patricia Burke,
Burke, Manager,
Manager, Marine
Marine Resources
Resources Program
Program ODFW
ODFW
2005 Oregon Dungeness Crab Summit
Summit
10,2005
August 10,
2005
the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW),
(ODFW), I want to
to extend our appreciation to all of the
On behalf of the
sincere, candid
industry members who attended the 2005 Oregon Dungeness Crab Summit. The participants were sincere,
and provided
provided excellent
excellent advice
advice and
and information
information throughout
throughoutthe
thetwo
twodays.
days. Their
Theft hard
hard work made the
the Summit
Summit aa
the strong
strong co-sponsorship
co-sponsorship by
by the
the Oregon
Oregon
success. In
In addition,
addition, the Summit
Summit would not have been possible without the
Dungeness Crab Commission. We
for
We are
are extremely
extremely grateful
grateful to Nick Furman, Hugh Link and the Commissioners for
their advice and assistance. Bob
BobJacobson
Jacobsonwas
wasthe
themeeting
meetingfacilitator
facilitatorand
andproved
provedto
tobe
heaasignificant
significantfactor
factor in
in the
the
successful outcome of the Summit.
Sunurnit.
For those that were unable to
to attend,
attend, a condensed
condensed summary
summary of
ofthe
the Summit
Summitisisprovided
providedbelow.
below. MANY details and
were discussed
discussed that
that are
are not
not included
included in
in this
this brief
briefsummary.
summary. Small
issues were
Smallgroup
group notes
notes and
and staff
staff notes
notes of
of the Summit
Summit
comments
comments have been recorded to assist
assist staff in review of the advice received.
SUMMARY: On
OnJuly
July27th
27thand
and28th
28th2005,
2005,ODFW
ODFW and
and the
the Oregon
Oregon Dungeness
Dungeness Crab
Crab Commission
Commission (ODCC)
cosponsored the
the first Oregon Dungeness
Dungeness Crab
Crab Summit.
Summit. During the Summit, between 40 and 50 crabbers and
processors (attendee
(attendee list on reverse) provided their positions on two key issues which were
were identified
identified for action
action in
in a
extending limited
limited entry authority out to 200 miles (i.e., preventing
recent industry1ODCC
industry/ODCC distributed survey: extending
fishing within 200 miles off Washington
Washington and/or California
California and reciprocal
vessels holding only Oregon permits from fishing
limits. Summit
Summit attendees
attendees consisted of an excellent
excellent representation
representation of the entire
entire
action by those states); and crab pot limits.
Participants included people who have had a long history
coast, each port, and various
various sectors of the
the fleet.
fleet. Participants
history in
in the
the
fishery as well as those who have entered
entered recently.
In addition to industry participants, Director Lindsay Ball (ODFW), and Oregon
Oregon Fish and
and Wildlife
Wildlife Commissioner
Commissioner
provided opening
opening comments.
comments. Also
Dave
Jon Englund provided
Also present were representatives
representatives from Oregon State Police, (Lt. Dave
Cleary and Sgt. Bill Vanderberg), Assistant Attorney General Steve Sanders
Sanders and various
various staff
staff and
and managers from
ODFW. They
ODFW.
Theywere
wereavailable
availableto
toanswer
answerquestions
questionsduring
during discussions.
discussions.
Furman
m a n and Patty Burke, Director Lindsay Ball acknowledged
acknowledged the industry
industry
Following opening remarks by Nick F
preference (via
to have
have ODFW
ODFW adopt new regulations with respect to these two issues. He
He urged
urged
(via industry
industry surveys) to
industry to
absent industry
to take advantage of this Summit to provide specifics so that ODFW would not have to act absent
leadership. Without
Without that
that advice,
advice, ODFW
ODFW will
will develop a plan:
plan. Commissioner
CommissionerJon
Jon Englund
Englund also
alsospoke
spoke (and
(and attended
attended
the entire two-day Summit).
Summit). His message
message was
was that he has heard from
from industry participants
participants over
over recent
recent years
years that
that
change was
industry-driven proposal (on pot limits) would never come forward.
forward.
was needed and that they feared that an industry-driven
He encouraged attendees to work hard to arrive at specific recommendations.
recommendations.
Success of the
discussion
the Summit is defined by the ability of ODFW to build recommendations
recommendations to bring forward for discussion
and Commission consideration.
The following
following two attachments outline the 200-mile and pot limit discussions
consideration. The
discussions at
at
Summit.
the Summit.
200 Mile
Mile State
State Permit
Permit Authority:
Authority: Summit
Summit Results
Results Summary
Summary
Discussions
began with
with state limited
limitedentry
entrypermit
permitjurisdiction
jurisdictiontoto200
200miles.
miles. During an
Discussions began
an informational
informational
with three
three options:
options: (1)
(1) Oregon,
Oregon,California
California
presentation on this issue, industry participants were presented with
and Washington
Washington would
would place restrictions on their respective state
and
state commercial
commercial crab
crab permits to
to prohibit
prohibit
fishing off of neighboring state's waters out to 200 miles; (2)
Orego11
vessels from fishing
(2)Place
Placerestrictions
restrictionson
onOregon
and Washington permits but not California; and (3) No change
change to
to state
state jurisdiction beyond
beyond three
three miles.
miles.
The Summit concluded
concluded that option 1 is unlikely for
for the
the 2005-06
2005-06 season given
given California's
California's inability to
act to allow the
make the change by administrative rule. Hopefully, California's legislature will act
its crab
crab fishery
fishery in
in the
the near
near future.
future.
California Department of Fish and Game to adopt rules to regulate its
participants raised a number of excellent issues related to the application of this regulation.
Summit participants
regulation.
on each
each of
of six
six questions
questions prepared
preparedduring
duringthe
the
Once the issue was thoroughly discussed, a vote was taken on
discussion. The
imple~nentationof
of option
option 1,
1,but
but absent
absent action
action by
by the
the
The majority
majority of
of attendees
attendees favored
favored implementation
There was
was some
some opposition
opposition expressed
expressed from
from Columbia
Columbia River
River
California Legislature, supported option 2.
2. There
summary of
of the issues
issues raised as
as well
well as
as voting
voting results
results
crabbers and processors
processors were split on
on the
the issue.
issue. A summary
the reverse of this summary sheet.
are on the
If Oregon and Washington
Washington place
place restrictions
restrictions on their
their respective
respective state commercial
commercial crab
crab permits,
permits, the
the effect
effect
would be that: Oregon commercial crab permits would have a restriction which prohibits fishing in
Washington commercial
commercial crab
crab permit
waters off of
of Washington
Washington from shore to
to 200
200 miles.
miles. Likewise, Washington
would also
also be
be prohibited from
from fishing in
in waters
waters off
off of
of Oregon shore to
to 200
200 miles. Dual Oregon
holders would
and Washington permit
permit holders would not be
be restricted from
from either of
of the
the two
two states and could continue
continue to
to
fish and
and make
make landings
landings in both
both states.
states. California
California permit
permit holders
holders could
could continue
continue to
to fish
fish in
in Oregon and
and
Washington
Washington waters
waters outside three
three miles.
miles. Oregon
Oregon and
and Washington
Washington permitees
permitees would
would also
also be
be able to
to fish
fish
California waters
waters outside three
three miles.
miles. According
According to
to Lt.
Lt. Dave
Dave Cleary (OSP),
(OSP), enforcement
enforcement of the
the boundaries
boundaries
would require cooperation
cooperation between
between Oregon and
and Washington
Washington police,
police, but
but would
would not
not be
be unreasonably
difficult.
difficult.
STEPS
NEXT STEPS
The
Tri-statemeeting
meeting in
in Portland
Portland and
and ifif approved
The 200
200 mile
mileprovision
provisionwill
willbe
bepresented
presentedatatthe
theAugust
August16th
l6 Tn-state
there, will
Oregon Fish
Fish and
and Wildlife
Wildlife Commission
Commission Meeting
Meeting in
in Salem
Salem for
for
will be discussed at the October 7th Oregon
of implementation for the 2005-6 season.
consideration of
200
Permit Authority:
Authority: Summit
200 Mile State Permit
SummitResults
Results Summary
Summary
1. Does the Summit
Summit support
support the
the general
generalpolicy
policy of
of developing
developingrestrictions
restrictionson
onOregon
Oregonpermits
permitstoto
1.
prohibit
their
use
in
either
CA
or
WA
waters
shore
to
200
miles
as
long
as
both
states
actininconcert
concerttoto
200
miles
as
long
as
both
states
act
prohibit their use in either CA or WA waters shore to
restrict their
their state
statepermits?
permits?
restrict
VOTE: (Permit
(PermitHolders:
Holders: 36
36yes,
yes, 77no)
no)(Processors:
(Processors: 33 yes,
yes, 33 no)
no)
VOTE:
OR-WA permits,
permits, leaving
leaving no
no restrictions
restrictions
2. Does
Does the
the Summit
Summitsupport
supportaa rule
rule which
which applies
applies only
only to the
the OR-WA
on OR vessels fishing
fishing in
in CA
CA and
and no
no limitations
limitations on
on CA
CA permits?
permits?
on
2.
no)
VOTE: (Permit
(PermitHolders:
Holders: 35
35 yes,
yes, 55 no)
no) (Processors:
(Processors: 33 yes,
yes, 33 no)
VOTE:
3.Does
Does the
the Summit
Summitsupport
supportthe
the implementation
implementation of
of this authority
authority for
for the
the 2005-6
2005-6 season?
season?
3.
VOTE: (Permit
(PermitHolders:
Holders: 36
36 yes,
yes, 66 no)
no) (Processors:
(Processors: 33 yes,
yes, 33 no)
no)
VOTE:
4. Should
ShouldODFW
ODFWinclude
includelanguage
languagethat
thatenables
enablesthis
thislimitation
limitationon
onOregon
Oregonand
andCalifornia
Californiavessels
vessels
4.
if/when CA-DFG
CA-DFG or
or the CA
CA legislature adopts a law to enable such permit restrictions?
if/when
(PermitHolders:
Holders: 39
39 yes,
yes, 22 no)
no) (Processors:
(Processors: 33 yes,
yes, 33 no)
no)
VOTE: (Permit
5. If 200
200 mile permit
permit limits
limits are
are applied,
applied, and
and either
either WA or OR
OR (or
(or CA
CA if applicable),
applicable),
crab fisheries are closed
closed after
after December 1,
1, should landings continue to be allowed in the closed state
crab
(if an OR
OR vessel has
has an
an OR
OR and
and WA
WA permit,
permit, can
can the
the OR
ORvessel
vessel fish
fishininOR
ORwaters
watersand
andland
landininWA?...
WA? ...
(if
Or vice
vice versa)?
versa)?
Or
5.
VOTE: (Permit
(PermitHolders:
Holders: 23
23 yes,
yes, 66 no)
no) (Processors:
(Processors: 66 yes,
yes, 00 no)
no)
VOTE:
6. (If
(If 1-5
1-5 approved),
approved), should
should there be a condition on WA and OR permits (by the respective states) to
OR?
prohibit landing
landing crab
crab caught
caught off
off of
of WA (on
(on the CA
CA permit) in
in OR?
prohibit
6.
Tlease note
note that
thatalthough
although this
this was
was supported
suppovfedby
by Summit
Summit participants,
participants, after
afterreceiving
receiving
VOTE: *Please
Depavtmentwas
was advised
advised that
thatthis
thisprovision
provision (#6)
(#61would
would be
be
furtherlegal
legaladvice
advice post-Summit, the
the Department
further
unlawful.
unlawful.
Pot Limit Results:
Results: Summit
Summit Results Summary
Excessive amounts
amounts
Participants focused
focused on a potential pot limit system for the
the remainder
remainder of the
the Summit. Excessive
vs,amount
amount
for reserving
reserving real
real estate
estatevs.
of gear in the water,
water, wastage, navigational problems, gear purchased for
A participant
participant suggested
suggested status
status quo
of gear needed
needed to
to fish effectively, were problems
problems that
that were
were identified.
identified. A
or individual fishmg
fishing quotas as an alternate approach. The
The moderator and
and ODFW
ODFW clarified
clarified that
that the
wasintended
intendedto
to develop
develop aapot
pot limit
limitproposal.
proposal. The goal here was to give the industry a process to
Summit was
specifically, on
on the
the design
designof
ofpot
potlimits.
limits. Two
weigh in, specifically,
Two examples
examples of
of pot
pot limit
limit plans
plans were presented to
A second
second issue
issue briefing
briefing was
was given
given to
to explain
explain additional
additional
give attendees aa starting point
point for discussion. A
sample pot
handouts to be
be used
used as guidelines for breakout
breakout group discussions.
discussions. Six
Six key parameters of the
the sample
limit plan were
were outlined for the participants to
to consider: the
the total number
number of
of pots
pots which
which should
should be
be
the number
number of
of tiers a pot
pot limit
limit plan
plan should
should have
have (if
(if tiers
tiers are
are
allowed in the
the fishery,
fishery, one pot
pot limit or
or tiers, the
the percentage
percentage of
of permits
permits in
in each
eachtier,
tier,the
thenumber
numberofofpots
potsper
pertier,
tier, qualifying
qualif'ing criteria
used), the
criteria (boat
(boat size,
size, pot
declaration history, historical participation, landings, etc.), and the fishing
fishing seasons/years
seasonslyearsthat
that might
might be
be
considered when determining qualification for each tier.
were randomly
randomly selected
selected by
by counting off in the
the main
main
Breakout groups of approximately 8-10 members were
room. Moderator Bob
each group.
group. Breakout
meeting room.
Bob Jacobson selected an industry spokesperson for each
acceptable
groups were
were given
giventwo
twoguiding
guidingprinciples
principleswith
withwhich
whichtotoevaluate
evaluatetheir
theirpot
potlimit
limitplans-an
plansan acceptable
1)administratively
administratively reasonable;
reasonable; and
and 2)
2) enforceable.
enforceable. Some
Some basic
basic pot
pot calculations
calculations tools
proposal must
must be:
be: 1)
Fromthen
thenon
onititwas
wasup
up to
to industry
industry participants
participants to
to work
work together
together to
were provided
provided to
to each group as well.
well. From
come up with a pot limit proposal.
Following initial breakout group discussions, there were several proposals which fell into two general
categories of
The first
first was
was aa five-tiered
five-tiered plan
plan including
including permit
permit stacking
stacking and
and 5%
5% across-theacross-theof approach.
approach. The
year until a target
target of 150,000 pots
pots is
is reached.
reached. The
The second was
was a percentage
percentage
board reductions each year
reduction over time for each permit holder until the target number of pots was reached and a baseline for
would be
be established based on pot
pot declarations. Over
each permit would
Over lunch,
lunch, these
these two
two approaches
approaches were
were
for each
each group. Each
written up for
Each spokesperson
spokesperson was
was asked
asked by
by the
the moderator
moderator to
to take
take both
both proposals
proposals back
back to
to
their breakout groups for one final session of deliberation. Later, spokespersons presented their group's
thoughts about the two proposals as well as any alternative plans that may have been developed.
Bob Jacobson concluded the meeting by asking attendees to vote andlor
and/or give a verbal response to many of
discussion of
of pot limits.
limits. Twenty
Twenty nine
nine attendees
attendees favored
favored aa pot
the ideas brought forward during the day's
day's discussion
limit system with
with tiers
tiers established
established through
through landings history
history and
and 25
25 attendees
attendees favored an across-the-board
reduction to all permit holders based on pot declaration history. Concern was significant regarding the
declarations as a basis for establishing aa floor for
for pot
pot reductions.
reductions. ODFW staff stated that
that we
we
accuracy of declarations
share these concerns. However,
However,those
thosewho
whosupport
supportthis
thisapproach
approachargued
arguedthat
that aa tiered
tiered system
system simply
simply
redistributes the pots from vessels that fish a larger number of pots to vessels that currently fish fewer
pots.
After discussion of the break-out groups, an 8 to 12 tiered option was
was suggested (36 attendees in favor and
12 against).
against).This
Thishad
hadnot
not been
been discussed
discussed in
in detail.
detail. In general, some attendees considered a plan with a
Therewas
was
higher number of tiers more equitable, but no consensus was developed on the number of tiers. There
strong support
support for
for using
using the
the current control date
date as aa way
way to
to establish
establish landing
landing records if those
those are to
to be
be
used. New
New entrants
entrants opposed
opposed this
this approach.
approach.
General Summit
These
Summit recommendations
recommendationswere
weremade
madeas
asfollows.
follows. No votes were taken on these issues. These
recommendations were elements that most groups brought forward with general support,
support, and
and which
which had
support in the final full Summit discussion; some had opposition (as noted):
Target of 150,000 pots (or less) for the entire Oregon
Oregon crab fishery (currently
(currently 185,000
185,000 pots
pots is
is aa
rough estimate for 2004-5)
and 10%
10% per permit after
after initial
initial
Consider further across the board pot reductions of between 5% and
pot limit implementation until the target is reached
Permit stacking (stacked permits retired permanently, half
half the
the pots
pots added to
to the
the purchaser's
purchaser's permit
limit, up to a cap) (very
(very strong
strong support)
support)
pot limit,
handle claims
claims of
of misallocation
misallocation (unanimous
(unanimous support)
support)
Establish an appeals board to handle
after 33 years (unanimous
(unanimous support)
support)
Formal review of the plan after
Required buoy and pot tags for enforcement purposes (OSP urged that this be aa requirement)
requirement)
Use of the existing control date in establishing criteria
criteria (supporters
(supporters of new entrants
entrants opposed)
opposed)
A vote was taken to gauge support for the across the board cut based on pot declarations
declarations (25
(25 support)
support) and
and
tier approach using
using landings history
history (29
(29 support).
support). This may be a good indicator of the overall split in
the tier
the fishery on this critical issue (i.e., whatever approach is chosen will engender significant
significant opposition).
opposition).
8-12 tiers
tiers (36
(36 yes, 12
12no)
no) and
and aarange
of 1,000
1,000pots
pots to
to 200
200pots
potsfor
fortiers
tiers
A vote was taken on support of 8-12
range of
(23 yes,
yes, 18 no).
no). Both
of
these
positions/issues
came
up
in
the
last
minutes
of
the
session
and
were
not
Both of these
by the break-out groups, therefore, these votes were not viewed as
as informed
informed as
as were
were the
the
fully discussed by
other Summit recommendations. ItIt was
was agreed that an
an initial
initial ODFW proposal would consider all of the
feedback from the Summit.
Sumnit.
Despite agreement on most elements of the pot limit proposal, the most divisive of
of the
the issues
issues remain
remain for
for
ODFW to
The Summit
Summit members
members did
did narrow the field enough to give ODFW guidance on the
to work out.
out. The
on aa final
final approach,
approach, but
but given the
the informed
pros and cons of each option. There will not be consensus on
support of the Summit participants, we feel that a proposal can be drafted and put out
out for
for comment.
comment.
NEXT STEPS:
STEPS:
ODFW, working
few months
months and
and will
will
working with OSP, will put together a draft pot limit approach over the next few
send itit out
out to
to all
all permit
permitholders
holdersand
andall
allSummit
Summitparticipants.
participants. Comments will be requested at that time.
NOTE: After
Afterconsideration
consideration post-Summit,
post-Summit, the
the option
option of
of using
using declarations
declarations as
as aa basis
basis for
for aa pot
pot limit
limit
program, ODFW staff has decided not to pursue that
that tool for
for qualification.
qualification. This does not preclude across
across
other options.
options.
the board cuts over time nor does it preclude other
presentation at the
the Oregon
Oregon Fish
Fish and
and Wildlife
Wildlife Commission early
early next
next
A proposal will be finalized for presentation
2006. AAgoal,
spring-summer 2006.
goal,ififpassed,
passed, would
would be
be to
to implement
implement in the 2006 season.
Attachment 77
Attachment
73rd OREGON
OREGON LEGISLATIVE
LEGISLATIVEASSEMBLY--2005
ASSEMBLY--2005Regular
RegularSession
Session
73rd
Enrolled
Enrolled
House Bill
3472
House
Bill 3472
Sponsored by Representative
Sponsored
RepresentativeKRIEGER
KRIEGER
CHAPTER .................................................
AN ACT
Relating to commercial fishing; creating new provisions; amending ORS 508.285, 508.936
508.936 and 508.947;
and declaring an emergency.
emergency.
Bee It
It Enacted bbyy the People of the State of Oregon:
B
SECTION 1. ORS 508.285
SECTION
508.285 is
is amended
amendedto
to read:
read:
508.285. (1) The fee for each license required
required by this chapter is as follows:
(a) Albacore tuna landing
landing license,
license,$20.
$20.
Resident boat
boat license,
license, $200.
$200.
(b) Resident
Nonresident boat
boatlicense,
license.($4003
($4001 $760.
(c) Nonresident
id) Resident commercial
commercial fishing
fishina license,
license.$50.
$50.
(d)
(e)
ie; Nonresident
Ncnresloenr commercial
corniercla fishing
t&ng license,
cerise. [$lOOj
[$lo01$290.
5290
II
Coimerc
a! ifishing
s n nq license
(f)
Commercial
years of age
?ens@for resident
res oe:l1 persons
Dersons 18 \ears
aqe
vo..nocr
525
- or younger,
.
- . $25.
bait fishing
fishing license,
license, $60.
$60.
(g) Commerciai
Commercial bait
Fish buyer
buyerlicense,
license,$1
$150.
(h) Fish
50.
$60.
(i) Fish bait dealer
dealer license,
license. $60.
(j) Food fish canner
canner license,
license, $350.
$350.
U)
canner license,
iicense, $350.
$350.
(k) Shellfish canner
(L) Single delivery
delivery license,
license, $100.
$100.
fish dealer
dealer license,
license. $350.
$350.
(m) Wholesale fish
means an actual bona fide resident of this state for at
(2) As used in this
this section,
section, "resident"
resident" means
least one year prior
prior to
to application
applicationfor
for aalicense.
license.
least
is amended
amended to
to read:
read:
SECTION 2. ORS 508.947 is
Wildlife may issue a black rockfish and blue
508.947. (1) The State Department of Fish and Wldlife
rockfish vessel
of aa vessel
vessel that
thatlanded
landedaa minimum
minimumof
of750
750pounds
poundsof
ofnontrawl
nontrawl
rocicfish
vessel permit
permit to
to an
an owner
owner of
rockfish, blue rockfish
rockfish or nearshore
nearshore fish in any one calendar
calendar year between
between January
January
caught black rockfish,
1,
1995, and
in the
the six-month
six-month period
periodbetween
betweenJanuary
January1,1,2001,
2001,and
andJuly
July 1,
1,
I, 1995,
and January
January 1,2001, o
orr in
licensed pursuant
pursuant to ORS 508.025.
2001, for delivery to a fish processor licensed
The department may issue a black rockfish and blue rockfish vessel permit with a nearshore
(2) The
o f aavessel
vessel that
that was
was issued
issued aa permit
permit under
under the Interim Nearshore
fish endorsement to an owner
owner of
Fisheries Plan through
throuah the Developmental
Fisheries
Develo~mentalFisheries
Fisheries Program.
Proaram.
(3) The
The department may renew a black rockfish andblue
and blue rockfish vessel permit or a black
errn nit with a nearshore
nearshore fish endorsement ifif the vessel made
made aa
rockfish and blue rockfish vessel permit
m n:r-.m o
f ve commercial
cornrnerca fish
fsn landings
a n a ~ f : ~during
o-!ing
s
me calendar
ca.enaar year
{ear prior
pror to ine
recies: for
fcr renewal
-aneua
minimum
off five
the
the request
for delivery
devery lo
fsn processor licensed
censea pursuant
pJrs..an: to ORS 508.025.
508 025
to a fish
4) Permits
Perm ts issued
' s s ~ e dunder
.nder rr
s sect
on ~expire
k re
3 on
31 of
cf each
eacn year.
year An owner
oiiner of a vesse
(4)
this
section
on DecemDer
December31
vessel
w 11 a permit
p e r r t must
mLst submit
subm 1 a renewal
renehs application
appl car on to
12 the
tne department
aeparment by
o i January
-an.av 11 of
of each
eacn year.
y6ar IfIf
with
the owner of a vessel with a permit
byJanuary
1, the
the department
department
permit does not submit a renewal application by
January 1,
shall, not later than February 1, send to the owner by certified letter a notice of the failure
a~~lication.
owner may
mav renew
renew a permit
errn nit later
later than
than January
Januarv 1,
1,but
but not
not
submit the renewal
renewal application.
to submit
An owner
required in
in ORS
O'RS 508.949.
508.949.
later than April 1, if the owner pays a $150 late iee
fee in addiiion
addition to the fee required
15) In making
makina determinations
reaardina initial eliaibilitv
renewal of a permit
Dermit issued
issued under
unde~
(5)
determinations regarding
eligibility
- . for and renewal
this section, the department
iepartment may consider
consider'bepattment
receipts and
and'accounts,
contracts
department records and receipts
accounts, contracts
and other business records of private parties that the department considers reliable.
(6) Except as
ORS 508.955,
as provided
provided in ORS
508.955,new
newvessel
vesselpermits
permitsmay
maynot
notbe
beissued
issuedunder
under this
this
section after
afterDecember
December30,
30, 2006.
2005.
section
(g)
SECTION 3. ORS 508.936 is amended
amended to
to read:
read:
508.936. (1) The svstem
system established
established under ORS 508.921 shall include Drovisions
provisions to
to make the
vessel ocean b"ngeness
Dungeness crab permit
permit required by ORS 508.926 transferable:
transferable:
another vessel; or
(a) To another
purchaser of
of the
the vessel
vesselwhen
when the
thevessel
vesselisissold.
sold.
(b) To the purchaser
(2) The
The vessel
vessel to
to which
which aa permit
permit is
istransferred
transferred[shall]
[shall may not be:
(a) More than
than 10 feet
feet longer than
than the
the vessel
vessel from which
which the
the permit is transferred;
transferred; [and] or
or
(b) More than 99 feet in length.
length.
(3) Nohvithstandina
Notwithstanding subsection
subsection (2) of this
this section, a ~ermit
permit issued
issued to a vessel:
vessel:
(3)
(aj Under
under ORS 508.931 (1)(e)
(I)(e) shall be transferred
transferred only to a vessel
length.
(a)
vessel that is 26 feet or less in length.
(b)
feet longer than the vessel
f b l May
Mav not be transferred to a vessel that is more than 10 feet
which the
(he permit
permitwas
was held
held on
on January
January 1,2006.
1,2006.However,
However, the
tho Commercial
~ o r n m i r c i aFishery
Fishery
l
Permit
for which
Permit
Board may
that strict
strict adherence
adherence
may waive
waive the
thelength
length restriction
restriction in this paragraph if the board finds that
length restriction
restriction would
wouldcreate
create undue
undue hardship,
hardship, as
as that
that term
term is
is defined
defined by
by
to the length
rule by the State Fish
Fish and
and Wildlife
Wildlife Commission,
Commission, for
for the
the individual seeking transfer of the
permii.
permit.
State Department
Department
(4) Transfer of a permit under this section is subject to the approval of the State
of Fish and Wildlife according to such rules as the State Fish and Wildlife Commission
Commission may adopt
adopt.
Any transfer of a permit from a vessel without the written consent of each person holding a security
security
interest in
in the vessel
vessel is
is void.
void.
interest
[(5) A vessel
vessel ocean
ocean Dungeness
Dungeness crab permit
shall not
not be transferred
transferred to another
another vessel
vessel more
than
permit shall
more than
[(5)
Permit Board
Board mav
may waive the waitinu
waiting
Fisherv Permit
once
once in
in a 60-month oeriod.
period. However, the
the Commercial
Commercial Fishery
period if the board finds
finds that
that strict
strict adherence
adherence to the waiting
waiting period
would create
create-undue
hardship for
fir
period would
undue hardship
the individual
individual seekina
of the
the permit.]
permit1
seeking transfer
transferor
length of a vessel shall be
be determined
determined by the manufacturer's
manufacturer's
[(6)]
[(6)] (5) For
For purposes of this section, the length
smcification
lenuth. United
lensth or a survey
survev
specification of overall length,
United States Coast Guard documentation
documentation statins
stating overall length
certified marine surveyor, as the State Fish and Wldlife
commission by
byrule
rule shall
of overall length by a certified
Wildlife Commission
establish.
establish.
operative
SECTION
SECTION 4.
4.The
Theamendments
amendments to
to ORS
ORS 508.936
508.936by
bysection
section 33 of
of this
this 2005
2005 Act
Act become operative
January 1,2006.
SECTION
SECTION5.
5.This
This2005
2005Act
Actbeing
beingnecessary
necessaryfor
forthe
theimmediate
immediatepreservation
preservationof
ofthe
the public
public
peace, health and
peace,
and safety,
safety, an
an emergency
emergency is
is declared
declared to
to exist,
exist, and this
this 2005
2005 Act
Act takes
takes effect
effect
its passage.
passage.
on its
Attachment 8
",
e "0.2
O>
eaOo+
s
/o
0
lo,
rn
a,
0
o0.*02
6
u
a,
#
'6%
@@@/
Qff
-s
86: 6;
IZ
=
0
W
s
9E
90, @/
$2
n
*a
s
"m
9
0
%
C
.-LLV)
PO>+
@@
+@,
/0
V)
V)
Lo\Off9
a,
s
0
Q
5
"
a,
E
$s,
9
Gs
*a
9
@/
@
/.
0
O
N
0
W
r
(
0
r
D
0
7
*
0
N
-
0
O
r
0
W
0
W
*
0
h
0
l
0
/a
@/
si
°
%
4m
7
@a
c 01
a>
V)
w
a,
*& @l
W
$
2
5
'CJ
.P
a,
%j
I?
"a, 9
m-
L.
G
n
.P
.%
.z
@a,
"a
=I
2
$
0
&a
s
5.
"
fJ'%
O0.ff @/
@@,a@/
Q)
.m
5
.-c
"0
"0, @/
$88
$0,
d@
rn
m-
02
~
Attachment99
Attachment
Number
Number of
ofPermits
Permitsby
byState
Stateand
andVessel
Vessel Size
Sizefor
for the
thePacific
PacificCoast
Coast
Dungeness Crab
CrabFishery
Fishery
Dungeness
State Issuing
Issuing
State
Permit
Permit
State of Residency
Number of
of OR
OR WA CA AK NV
Number
Permits
Permits
OR (2005)
WA (2005)
CA (2004)
433
228
622
339
OR+WA
OR+CA
CA+WA
55
12
43
53
4
41
2
9
1
3
CA+OR±WA
8
4
Vessel Size (ft)
<25
25-29
30-34
69
202
17
16
5
8
1
240
1
3
State Issuiiw Permit
OR WA CA
1
Total
32
12
34
65
37
15
116
168
122
209
58
109
106
190
45-49
73
20
28
39
84
196
50-54
41
25
42
108
55-59
34
48
22
104
60-69
39
23
21
83
70-79
19
9
5
33
80-89
8
1
2
11
90
3
3
8
Unknown
06
0
6
Totals
Totals
433
433
622
622
1283
1283
67
56
Data Files
Files Used:
Data
Used:
2
228
228
CA
Non-Resident
Non-Resident
1
[72
550
40-44
35-39
3
ID
2005 ODFW
CrabPermittees
Permittees
2005
ODFW Crab
2005 WDFW
WDFW Crab
Crab Permittees
Permittees
2005
2004 CDFG
CDFGCrab
CrabPermittees
Permittees
2004