First Bigeye Management Workshop

The Harvest Strategy Workplan contained in CMM 2022-03 scheduled the refinement of candidate bigeye MPs to be done in 2025, with adoption targeted by the end of 2026. Work focuses on ensuring that fishery controls and HCR settings are designed to operate cohesively with other MP components, including data collection and the estimation method. 

Current technical discussions highlight key HCR design options, based on WCPFC22 guidance, including the PNA+ Bigeye MP guidance, and approaches to capture the balance between longline and purse seine fisheries. The analytical approach developed in response to this guidance will be presented. An update will also be provided on the development of the estimation method, taking into account guidance provided by the Commission at WCPFC21 and by SC21.  

An overview of the necessary assumptions that underpin the Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE) will be provided, including the levels of fishing of bigeye that occur outside the proposed spatial range of the MP. Additionally, the Commission has requested sensitivity analyses to address uncertainties in the archipelagic fisheries of Indonesia & Philippines, and coastal fisheries of Vietnam. It will be necessary to confirm the spatial range of the MP and candidate catch levels for areas outside the MP’s control.

Candidate performance indicators will be presented, including the probability of the stock remaining above Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY), as requested by the Commission at WCPFC22.

It will be necessary to confirm whether the MP should generate catch controls or effort controls, and the frequency of MP implementation (e.g., a three-year management cycle). In addition, the spatial scope and fleet coverage of the bigeye MP within the mixed-fishery framework must be finalized, ensuring consistency with existing MPs for skipjack and south Pacific albacore. As with the adopted MP for south Pacific albacore, the output of a catch or effort control for a fishery component by the MP does not prevent or preclude practical implementation through the alternative management measure, such as through effort or catch limits, respectively.

BMW01 should provide guidance on the implementation of meta-rules, such as a ±10% constraint on changes in management levels, to ensure sectoral stability and prevent disruptive fluctuations in catch or effort between management periods.

Decision points

• Spatial range of the bigeye MP (if not defined under Agenda Item 3);

• Fisheries managed through the bigeye MP (if not defined under Agenda Item 3);

• General shape and operation of the HCR;

• Duration of management period (WCPFC22 guidance was a 3 year period);

• Assumed future catch levels of bigeye in areas outside of the spatial range of the bigeye MP (for ‘reference set’ evaluations and additional ‘robustness set’ tests);

• Candidate performance indicators, noting that a smaller set of indicators is preferred to facilitate stakeholder decision-making;

• Output controls of the bigeye MP, e.g., longline catch or effort; purse seine FAD closure period. Desired increment of change, for example, in FAD closure period (e.g., +/- month, week(s)); and

• Meta rule(s) for evaluation, e.g., constraints on the maximum change in fishing pressure between management periods.