Groundfish Fleet Restructuring Information and Analysis Project

Appendix C - Reduction Scenarios

Graphs

Gear Types

The first graph shows the number of vessels by gear use in the base year and after each resulting reduction scenario. It is important to note that these are not unique vessels, but numbers of "vessel instances". Each vessel may record multiple landings in a port with different gears, accounting for multiple records in each port. Vessels may also land fish in more then one port, therefore they can be double counted.

Size

The second graph shows the number of vessels, this time by vessel size, in the base year and each reduction scenario. Since vessels may record multiple landings in different ports the may be double count.

 

Reduction Scenarios

Using the capacity estimates from section 4.1.2, we consider four numerical scenarios for reducing the 2000 fleet capacity: a) by the total number of excess, i.e. "unneeded" vessels, b) by 50% in each sector at random, c) by 50% in each sector while preserving fleet diversity, and d) by selecting vessels to remain in the fleet that meet minimum ex vessel revenue levels in each sector, respectively. It is important to note that these numerical manipulations of the data are blind to the political and practical exigencies that would influence a capacity reduction measure in reality.

What these "dumb" numerical scenarios illustrate, however, is that different reduction schemes have substantially different effects on different parts of the coast and on fleet diversity (defined here in terms of the gear types and vessel size). The scenarios also have different implications for the overall amount of income that is redistributed from those vessels exiting the fleet to those remaining in it, and thus may be useful for considering mitigation and compensatory measures to facilitate the transition of coastal communities. The numeric scenarios considered here are intended for illustrating the GFR framework and the significance of factors like fleet composition in achieving capacity-reduction goals.

 

Scenario 1: Removing all excess capacity.

The first is the most extreme scenario, and captures what would happen if all the unneeded vessels were removed from the fishery and capacity was perfectly matched to the harvest targets, at least in the year 2000. In other words, only exactly as many boats remain in the fishery as the SSC analysis found necessary.

 

Scenario 2: Reducing capacity by 50% at random in each fleet sector.

This scenario is an apolitical version of the PFMC goal articulated in the Strategic Plan. Since the council has yet to identify the method by which to remove 50% of the capacity in each sector, we picked vessels at random.

 

Scenario 3: Removing 50% of vessels in each size class within each fleet sector.

With this scenario we tried to approximate the goal articulated in the Strategic Plan of preserving fleet diversity. In this scenario, we removed 50% of all vessels in each fleet sector by removing the low producers in each size class up to half of that class. The remainder of the fleet thus represents the high producers in each vessel size class, and each fleet sector has the same proportion of large and small vessels as before the reduction exercise.

 

Scenario 4: Reducing capacity in each sector while preserving economic viability.

The fourth scenario, we consider a different kind of capacity reduction logic. Rather than letting the capacity calculation determine how many vessels exit the fleet, we explore another often cited goal for capacity reductions, i.e. to make the remainder of the fleet more economically viable.

We eliminated from the fleet all vessels that did not achieve a minimum level of revenues. These cut-off points were, respectively,

• Ex vessel revenues greater than $50,000 for vessels in the LE trawl sector;
• Greater than $10,000 in the LE non-trawl/non-sablefish sector;
• Greater than $20,000 in the sablefish-exclusive sector;
• And greater than $5,000 in the open access fishery.

 

Scenario 5: Stacking permits in the limited entry trawl sector.

In the fifth and final scenario, we sorted each vessel size group within the trawl sector by ex vessel revenue. The vessels that comprised the top 50% in ex vessel revenue in each size group became the "stackers" (i.e. buying the permits of other boats to continue fishing), and the bottom 50% were the "stackees" (i.e. vessels selling their permits and exiting). Essentially the top 50% buys out the bottom 50% in each size class. The top "stacker" buys out the top "stackee" and then the second "stacker" buys out the second "stackee", and so on, if there is an odd number then the that vessel is the last "stacker." The "stacker" then assumes the revenue of the "stackee", using a constant percentage that was calculated for each vessel based on their stacked ("stacker" and "stackee" combined) ex vessel revenue minus their original ("stacker") ex vessel revenue then divided by the original ("stacker") ex vessel revenue. This percentage was multiplied to each annualized fish ticket record with the resulting revenue change added to the ex vessel revenue for each record. This was done to account for trawlers landing fish in more then one port. "This scenario ONLY applies to the limited entry sector. Correspondingly, the graphs show only vessels remaining in the fleet in that sector for each of the ports. This cannot and should not be compared to the baseline numbers. It is included for illustrative purposes only."

 

Graphing the Reduction Scenarios

To clearly demonstrate how each scenario affects a sector or a port we created a number of graphs. Each graph compares the number of vessels that would remain in the fleet after each reduction scenario versus the number of vessels that already exist (Base). The resulting data for each sector was summarized for all the ports into two sets of graphs, the first set shows the total number of vessels by gear use and the second set shows the total number of vessels by size class. In addition to the sets of graphs just described, there are two graphs for each port. These graphs are summarized for the entire port rather than broken out by each sector.

The first graph for each port shows the total number of vessels by gear use in the base year and after each resulting reduction scenario. It is important to note that these are not unique vessels, but numbers of "vessel instances". Each vessel may record multiple landings in a port with different gears, accounting for multiple records in each port. Vessels may also land fish in more then one port, therefore they can be double counted.

The second graph for each port shows the total number of vessels, this time by vessel size, in the base year and each reduction scenario. Since vessels may record multiple landings in different ports the may be double counted.

About Get Data Links

 

Find your watershed

You are here:
Inforain.org » Research » Groundfish Fleet Restructuring Information and Analysis Project » Appendix C