Chapter II — Species of Special Concern 



For the Gulf of Alaska region, the Council recom- 

 mended the following: 



• partitioning the fishery into four seasons, begin- 

 ning on 20 January ("A" season), 1 June ("B" 

 season), 1 September ("C" season), and no later 

 than 1 October and no sooner than five days after 

 closing the "C" season ("D" season); 



• establishing catch limits of 30 percent of the total 

 allowable catch for the "A" season, 20 percent for 

 the "B" season, 25 percent for the "C" season, 

 and 25 percent for the "D" season; 



• establishing pollock trawl exclusion zones around 

 Steller sea lion critical habitat and haul-out sites; 

 and 



• establishing a 136-mt (300,000-pound) trip limit 

 for directed pollock fishing in the western and 

 central management areas. 



The North Pacific Fishery Management Council 

 adopted a motion recommending certain changes to 

 the reasonable and prudent alternatives described in 

 the biological opinion. In response to the Council's 

 recommendations, on 16 December 1998 the Service 

 revised the reasonable and prudent alternatives that, 

 with a few modifications, continued to request signifi- 

 cant temporal and spatial dispersion of the Bering 

 Sea/Aleutian Islands pollock fishery and expansion 

 and addition of pollock trawl exclusion zones. As of 

 31 December 1998 differences between the Council 

 and the Service on implementing the reasonable and 

 prudent alternatives have not been resolved. 



The Council further requested that the Service, in 

 consultation with the Council, the Marine Mammal 

 Commission, the Alaska Department of Fish and 

 Game, and other relevant management agencies, 

 conduct an independent review of the biological data, 

 the biological opinion, and other information relating 

 to factors affecting Steller sea lions and their prey. 



Litigation 



On 15 April 1998 Greenpeace, American Oceans 

 Campaign, and the Sierra Club filed suit against the 

 National Marine Fisheries Service in the District 

 Court for the Western District of Washington chal- 

 lenging the Service's management of groundfish 

 fisheries in Alaska (Greenpeace v. NMFS). The 



plaintiffs alleged that the Service had violated section 

 7 of the Endangered Species Act because its biological 

 opinions on the fisheries did not adequately evaluate 

 the effects of the fisheries on Steller sea lions and 

 their critical habitat. The plaintiffs also claimed that 

 the Service had violated the National Environmental 

 Policy Act by failing to supplement its environmental 

 impact statements despite significant changes in the 

 fisheries and the environmental baseline and by 

 concluding in an environmental assessment that the 

 1998 fisheries would not have a significant impact on 

 the environment. Shortly after the suit was filed, 

 several fishery industry groups and Alaskan coastal 

 communities intervened as parties in the case. 



The plaintiffs never sought to enjoin the 1998 

 fishing operations, but filed a motion for summary 

 judgment on 8 August 1998, claiming that the alleged 

 violations would be relevant to the 1999 pollock 

 fishery. The government responded by seeking a stay 

 of the litigation, noting that the Service was in the 

 process of preparing a biological opinion and an 

 environmental impact statement that would be applica- 

 ble to the fisheries in 1999. The court granted the 

 government's request and stayed the litigation until 16 

 December, at which time the Service would be 

 expected to complete its review of the fisheries under 

 the National Environmental Policy Act and to produce 

 a biological opinion evaluating the effects of the 

 pollock and Atka mackerel fisheries on Steller sea 

 lions and their critical habitat. 



At a stams conference held on 18 December the 

 judge considered the parties' plans for the remainder 

 of the litigation. He gave the parties until 31 Decem- 

 ber 1998 to file additional claims they may have. In 

 response, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint 

 setting forth four causes of action. They claimed that 

 the supplemental environmental impact statement 

 published by the Service was inadequate. They also 

 argued that the biological opinion was flawed because 

 the reasonable and prudent alternatives did not ensure 

 that the pollock trawl fisheries in the Gulf of Alaska 

 and in the Bering Sea will not jeopardize the contin- 

 ued existence of Steller sea lions or adversely modify 

 critical habitat. The plaintiffs also contested the 

 Service's conclusion that the Atka mackerel trawl 

 fishery is not likely to jeopardize Steller sea lions or 

 adversely modify Steller sea lion critical habitat. 



65 



