[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 200 (Tuesday, October 18, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-25672]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: October 18, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
50 CFR Part 678
[Docket No. 920409-4205; I.D. 110493B]
RIN 0648-AD12
Atlantic Shark Fisheries
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues this final rule to implement certain measures
authorized by the Fishery Management Plan for Sharks of the Atlantic
Ocean (FMP) that were part of an interim final rule. Final measures
implemented by this rule: Clarify operation of vessels with a Federal
commercial permit, establish a fishing year, consolidate the
regulations for drift gillnets, require dealers to obtain a permit to
purchase sharks, require dealer reports, establish recreational bag
limits, establish quotas for commercial landings and provide for
commercial fishery closures when quotas are reached. The intended
effect of this rule is to prevent overfishing of shark resources,
encourage consistent Federal and state management of shark stocks,
increase the benefits from shark resources to the Nation while
preventing waste, and standardize data reporting requirements among
different fisheries to avoid confusion among fishermen with multiple
permits.
EFFECTIVE DATES: November 17, 1994, except for Secs. 678.4(a)(2),
678.5(b), and 678.7(y), which are effective January 1, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the FMP and related documents, including the
Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (RFA),
and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), may be obtained from the
Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 9450 Koger Boulevard, St. Petersburg,
FL 33702, (813) 893-3161.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: C. Michael Bailey, 301-713-2347, FAX
301-713-2299, Kevin Foster, 508-281-9260, or Michael E. Justen, 813-
893-3161.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FMP was prepared by NMFS under authority
of section 304(f)(3) of the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (Magnuson Act). The development and current status of
the recreational and commercial shark fisheries, the status of the
shark stocks, the history of FMP preparation, the proposed management
measures, and the anticipated impacts of the proposed management
measures were discussed in the preamble to the proposed rule to
implement the FMP (57 FR 24222, June 8, 1992) and are not repeated
here. The interim final rule was published on April 26, 1993 (58 FR
21931), with a request for comments on the permit condition, fishing
year, bag limits, commercial quotas, the allocation of the large
coastal species group between the commercial and recreational sectors,
and mandatory dealer permitting and reporting. A summary of the public
comments and NMFS responses on the FMP and the proposed rule were
provided in the preamble of the interim final rule and are not repeated
here.
Comments and Responses
The interim final rule requested comments on the fishing year
(Sec. 678.20), bag limits (Sec. 678.22), commercial quotas
(Sec. 678.23), permit conditions (Sec. 678.4), potential changes
involving the allocation of the large coastal species group between the
commercial and recreational sectors, and mandatory dealer permitting
and reporting requirements. Comments were to be received by June 25,
1993. Agency responses to the public comments follow.
1. Permit Conditions
Comment. Florida and Georgia contended that the Federal
regulations, as drafted, enabled commercial fishermen with a Federal
permit to fish for sharks in state waters and not comply with the more
restrictive state fishing, catch, and gear measures. Furthermore,
Florida contended that the interim final rule was inconsistent with the
State's Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP) and stated that it planned
to request mediation under the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA).
Response. It is NMFS' intent that any fisherman issued a Federal
permit must comply with the Federal requirements, regardless of where
he/she is fishing. However, to enable states to enforce their more
restrictive regulations on anyone fishing in state waters, NMFS has
agreed to change the permit conditions to allow Florida and any other
state to enforce their more restrictive regulations on federally
permitted fishermen when they fish in state waters.
2. Bag Limit--Large Coastal Species and Pelagic Shark Species
Comment. A regional fishery management council, a commercial
fishing association, a scientific association, and a conservation
association recommended that NMFS reduce the bag limit for the large
coastal/pelagic shark species, combined, from four to two sharks per
trip per vessel. The purpose of the reduction would be to afford
additional protection to the large coastal species. The FMP determined
that sharks of the large coastal species group were overfished.
Response. NMFS does not agree that the bag limits need
modification. NMFS applied a four-fish bag limit to recreational
fishermen because the projected percentage reduction in catch would be
28 percent and roughly equivalent to the reduction in landings of large
coastal species for the commercial sector.
This approach balances access to the resource by the recreational
sector with reasonable limitations to allow for recovery of the
resource. Recreational anglers do not have to harvest the trip limit of
sharks, since they have the option of releasing their catch and
voluntarily conserving the resource. This trip limit merely sets the
upper limit for the recreational catch.
3. Commercial Quotas--Large Coastal and Pelagic Shark Species
Comment. Two commercial fishermen's associations, a scientific
association, an animal rights association, and a conservation
association commented on the commercial quotas for the large coastal
and pelagic species. One commercial fishermen's association generally
supported the level of the quotas for the large coastal and pelagic
species groups. This association requested that NMFS dedicate the
amount of the pelagic quota to the mako, porbeagle, and thresher
sharks. The association commented that the quota could be filled
prematurely due to the possible emergence of a directed fishery for
blue sharks or any other species. The other commercial fishermen's
association argued that the level of the harvest of large coastal
sharks was significantly understated due to under-reporting,
misreporting, and misclassification of the landings by species.
Accordingly, the amount of the quota was understated and should be
higher. The impact of the reduced quotas would be severe on these
fishermen. The scientific association, animal rights group, and the
conservation association stated that the level of harvest was too high
and the quota for the large coastal species group should be reduced. In
addition, the conservation association recommended that NMFS select the
most conservative alternative (Option 3) developed by a scientific peer
committee consisting of outside scientific experts and NMFS scientists
(Review Committee).
Response. NMFS believes that the quota is set at an appropriate
level. To ensure that all FMP management measures were based upon the
best scientific information available, a revised assessment of the
condition of the large coastal species group was completed by the
Southeast Fisheries Science Center, NMFS, using new or corrected
information obtained from commercial fishermen and other entities
during the public comment periods. At the time that this review was
conducted, shark landings data were available only through 1991, and
these were used to establish quotas for 1993 through 1995. The Review
Committee reviewed the revised assessment, agreed that the large
coastal species group was overfished, recommended that the calendar
year 1993 landings for the large coastal species group be reduced below
the calendar year 1991 landings level of 4,319 metric tons dressed
weight (mt dw) to rebuild the resource, and provided three options for
either maintaining the resource at current levels or providing the
conditions for rebuilding the resource to a fully exploited level. NMFS
selected the Review Committee's second option, which established 1993
total landings of 2,900 mt dw for the large coastal species group.
Landings of large coastal species in 1992 were 4,461 mt, and in 1993
reached the quota level of 2,900 mt.
Based on historical patterns of reported landings over the period
1986-91, NMFS allocated the allowable harvest levels among the
commercial and recreational user groups. The commercial quota of 2,436
mt represented a 29-percent reduction from the average annual
commercial landings during the period 1986-91, or a 34-percent
reduction from 1991 commercial landings. The recreational bag limit of
four large coastal or pelagic shark species combined was expected to
reduce recreational landings by 28 percent from the average annual
recreational landings during the period 1986-91. These measures will
provide the conditions for the resource to recover.
Option 3 would have established 1993 total landings of 2,311 mt dw
(a 50-percent reduction from the 1991 landings, which is a 44-percent
reduction from the 1986-91 annual average landings) for the large
coastal species group. NMFS considered and rejected Option 3 because
this alternative would have required a much larger initial reduction in
landings in the commercial and recreational fisheries than Option 2.
Therefore, Option 3 would have had a greater adverse economic impact on
fishermen who are dependent on these fisheries.
The quota for the pelagic species group was designed to maintain
current harvest levels. At present, a commercial fishery for blue
sharks has not developed. Changes to the regulatory regime for the
large coastal or pelagic species groups could be made through the FMP's
regulatory adjustment procedure, should new information requiring
change in the allowable catch of large coastal sharks become available
or if a commercial fishery for blue sharks or any other species
develops. NMFS published a notice in February of 1994, requesting
additional historical shark landings data and information.
Subsequently, NMFS held a stock assessment workshop in March, 1994 to
consider new data and revisions to stock estimates. Based on the
revised stock assessment for the large coastal species group the
workshop committee recommended that the projected commercial quota
increase for 1995 be delayed indefinitely.
4. Potential Changes Involving the Allocation of the Large Coastal
Species Group Between the Commercial and Recreational Sectors
Comment. A regional fishery management council recommended that the
1979-1992 recreational and commercial landings of sharks be used to
allocate the different groups of sharks. The two commercial fishermen's
associations recommended that no change be made.
Response. NMFS does not believe that the allocation needs to be
adjusted. The allocation of the total allowable catch between the
commercial (84 percent) and recreational (16 percent) sectors was based
on landings data used in the revised assessment. NMFS prepared the
revised assessment based on corrected landing data from the commercial
sector for years 1986-91 and the best available data on the
recreational sector for 1986-91. NMFS excluded recreational data from
the Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey (MRFSS) prior to
1986 for four reasons. First, the MRFSS data are extremely variable
among years, e.g., 1979 landings were 11,512 mt whole weight (ww),
whereas 1980 landings were 3,210 mt ww; 1981 landings within the Gulf
of Mexico were 7,604 mt ww, whereas 1982 landings were 660 mt ww.
Second, sharks in the MRFSS were grouped into one multispecies category
that includes some species that are not included in the FMP management
unit. Third, the MRFSS grouping was not aligned to the three species
groups used in the FMP (large coastal, small coastal, and pelagic
species). Fourth, the methodology for collecting recreational data in
the MRFSS changed in 1986, when Texas began to collect data on
recreational fisheries within the State and to provide the information
to NMFS.
5. Mandatory Dealer Permitting and Reporting
Comment. Two regional fishery management councils, one commercial
fishermen's association, a scientific organization, and a conservation
organization supported mandatory dealer permitting and reporting.
Response. NMFS agrees and is implementing these measures in this
rule. The implemented system is limited to the use of current forms and
collection of data elements already collected voluntarily from dealers.
Permitted dealers can purchase sharks only from fishermen possessing a
valid Federal permit, unless the sharks were harvested by a non-
permitted vessel that fishes exclusively in state waters. Permitted
fishermen can sell sharks only to permitted dealers. The requirement is
designed to provide accurate reports from both harvesters and dealers.
Further, this rule modifies the prerequisite condition for a Federal
permit regarding the sale, by a vessel that fishes in the EEZ, of a
shark ``in or from the EEZ'' to the sale of a shark harvested ``from
its management unit.'' This change in the Federal permit condition
reflects the basic intent of the FMP to protect and conserve the
species in the management unit throughout the range of the resource. No
permit, however, is required for vessels that fish exclusively in state
waters.
This final rule amends Secs. 678.2 and 678.4 to provide for a
dealer permit system and Sec. 678.5 to provide for mandatory dealer
reporting. Section 678.7 has been revised to provide prohibitions to
support the provisions for the dealer permit system and mandatory
dealer reporting system. Additionally, redesignated Sec. 678.26 has
been amended to institute certain restrictions on sale upon landing
under the permit program.
6. Ratio of Fin to Dressed Carcass Weight
Comment. A scientific organization, a regional fishery management
council, and a commercial fishermen's organization recommended that the
ratio of fins to dressed carcass weight be raised from 5 to 6 percent
because fishermen are landing minor fins, fin lobes, and other portions
called ``chips.'' Two conservation and one animal rights organization
opposed any change. These commenters were concerned that raising the
percentage would encourage finning to continue and make the measure
more difficult to enforce.
Response. NMFS believes that the ratio is appropriate. Since
raising this percentage could encourage the finning of sharks with
undesirable flesh and desirable fins, such as hammerheads, NMFS prefers
to delay changes in the ratio of fins to dressed carcass weights until
a scientific study on the relationship between the weight of the fins
and the dressed carcass weight is conducted. Such changes would be the
subject of a separate rulemaking in order to obtain more public
comments, detailed analyses of the impacts on the user groups and the
resource, and more data from fishermen.
7. Control Date
Comment. Two commercial fishermen's organizations and a regional
fishery management council recommended that NMFS establish a control
date advising new entrants that, after that date, NMFS may deny access
to the fishery.
Response. NMFS established a control date of February 22, 1994 (59
FR 8457, 02/22/94).
8. Permit System
Comment. Two commercial fishermen's organizations recommended that
NMFS implement a three-tiered permit system that would identify
fishermen in the directed fishery for sharks, fisheries with an
incidental catch of sharks, and the recreational fisheries where sharks
caught under the bag limit are sold. Qualifications for the different
permits would be as follows: For the directed shark fishery permit, the
applicant must derive 50 percent of his/her income from the sale of
sharks during any 2 of the last 3 years; for the incidental shark
fishery permit, the applicant must have documented shark landings and
valid swordfish permits; and for the commercial angler permit, the
applicant would have to apply and meet the non-income tests for all
applicants. Implementation of the commercial angler permit would
require creation of a quota from the recreational sector and would
enable permittees to sell their fish, subject to the bag limit.
Comment. A scientific organization recommended that the permit
condition be limited to individuals who derive 50 percent of their
income from the sale of shark or shark products.
Response. At present, NMFS does not believe it has enough
information to assess adequately the impact of implementing a three-
tiered system of permitting fishermen or to limit the permittees to
those individuals who derived a substantial portion of their livelihood
from the sale of sharks or shark products. As part of a future
rulemaking action, NMFS may consider such a system.
9. Small Coastal Shark Fisheries
Comment. A conservation organization recommended that NMFS develop
a quota and other measures for this fishery to prevent overfishing.
Response. At present, NMFS does not believe that the commercial or
recreational quotas for the small coastal species groups need
adjustment. NMFS will continue to monitor the fisheries and establish
quotas when warranted by available information. Quotas may be
established in a timely manner using the regulatory amendment process
as established in the FMP.
10. Incidental Catch of Sharks
Comment. Due to the bycatch of sharks in the different fisheries,
two conservation organizations were concerned that the commercial
quotas were too high. These organizations recommended that NMFS reduce
these quotas, since overfishing would continue through the incidental
catch in other fisheries.
Response. NMFS disagrees. Fishermen who catch sharks on an
incidental basis must obtain the same permit to sell them, and follow
the anti-finning prohibition and other requirements. Therefore, these
incidental catches of sharks are considered in developing the
management regime.
11. Fishing Year
No comments were received; NMFS adopts the fishing year without
change.
In addition to adopting the interim final rule, NMFS is
implementing, by this final rule, several technical amendments designed
to implement a statutory prohibition. Section 1857 of the Magnuson Act
prohibits use of large-scale drift gillnets by U.S. fishing vessels. To
conform these regulations to the statutory requirement, this final rule
adds a definition of a drift gillnet to Sec. 678.2, a prohibition on
use of large-scale drift gillnets to Sec. 678.7(z), and a new
Sec. 678.21 entitled ``Gear restrictions.''
Classification
NMFS has determined that the provisions of this rule that prohibit
the use of large-scale drift gillnets by U.S. fishermen may be
published as final without prior notice and an opportunity for public
comment because these provisions merely codify a statutory provision.
As such, good cause exists to waive notice and comment under authority
set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), because such procedures are
unnecessary.
NMFS prepared a regulatory flexibility analysis as part of the
Regulatory Impact Review (RIR) that concluded the rule implementing the
FMP has significant impacts on a substantial number of small entities,
as specified under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Those small entities
directly involved in the fishery and affected by the rule include
commercial fishing vessels (approximately 800) and processors/dealers
(about 850). The final rule implementing the FMP is likely to result in
a reduction in annual gross revenues of about 5 percent for some, but
not necessarily all, of these small entities. This final rule does not
change the original conclusions, because it makes only minor changes in
the April 1993 rule. A copy of this analysis is available from NMFS
(See ADDRESSES).
This rule contains two new collection of information requirements
and refers to an existing information requirement, all of which are
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The existing annual
vessel permit requirement and the new mandatory dealer reporting have
been approved by the Office of Management and Budget under Control
Numbers 0648-0205 and 0648-0013, respectively. The new dealer permit
requirement has been submitted to the Office of Management for review
under the PRA and will not be implemented until approval is received.
The public reporting burdens for these collections are estimated to
average 20 minutes for a vessel permit application, 10 minutes for a
dealer report, and 5 minutes for a dealer permit application. These
estimates include the time for reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments
regarding these burden estimates or any other aspect of these
collections of information to NMFS at 1315 East-West Highway, Silver
Spring, MD 20910, and to the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Washington DC, 20503 (Attn:
NOAA Desk Officer).
This rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of
E.O. 12866.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 678
Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 12, 1994.
Gary Matlock,
Program Management Officer, National Marine Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 678 is amended
as follows:
PART 678--ATLANTIC SHARKS
1. The authority citation for part 678 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In Sec. 678.2, definitions of ``dealer'' and ``drift
gillnet'' are added, in alphabetical order, to read as follows:
Sec. 678.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Dealer means the person in the United States who first receives by
way of purchase, barter, or trade, sharks harvested from the management
unit.
Drift gillnet, sometimes called a drift entanglement net or drift
net, means a flat net, unattached to the ocean bottom, whether or not
it is attached to a vessel, designed to be suspended vertically in the
water to entangle the head or other body parts of a shark that attempts
to pass through the meshes.
* * * * *
3. In Sec. 678.4, paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) are redesignated
as paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (a)(1)(iv), respectively; paragraph (c)
is redesignated as paragraph (l); a heading for paragraph (a)(1) and
new paragraphs (a)(2) and (c) are added; and paragraphs (d), (e)(1),
(g), (h), redesignated paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (l), and the last
sentence of redesignated paragraph (a)(1)(iv) are revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 678.4 Permits and fees.
(a) * * *
(1) Annual vessel permit. (i) As a prerequisite to sell shark from
the management unit or to be eligible for exemption from the bag limits
specified in Sec. 678.23(b), an owner or operator of a vessel that
fishes in the EEZ must obtain an annual vessel permit; except that
there is no Federal requirement for a permit for a vessel that fishes
exclusively within state waters.
* * * * *
(iv) * * * However, when a vessel fishes in the waters of a state
that has more restrictive regulations on shark fishing, those more
restrictive regulations may be applied by that state to fishing, catch,
and gear in its waters.
(2) Annual dealer permit. A dealer who receives sharks from the
management unit must have an annual dealer permit.
* * * * *
(c) Application for an annual dealer permit. (1) An application for
a dealer permit must be submitted and signed by the dealer or an
officer of a corporation acting as a dealer. The application must be
submitted to the Regional Director at least 30 days prior to the date
on which the applicant desires to have the permit made effective.
(2) A permit applicant must provide the following information:
(i) A copy of each state wholesaler's license held by the dealer.
(ii) Business name; mailing address, including zip code, of the
principal office of the business; employer identification number, if
one has been assigned by the Internal Revenue Service; and date the
business was formed.
(iii) The address of each physical facility at a fixed location
where the business receives fish.
(iv) Applicant's name; official capacity in the business; address,
including zip code; telephone number; social security number; and date
of birth.
(v) Any other information that may be necessary for the issuance or
administration of the permit, as requested by the Regional Director and
included on the application form.
(d) Fees. A fee is charged for each permit application submitted
under paragraph (b) or (c) of this section. The amount of the fee is
calculated in accordance with the procedures of the NOAA Finance
Handbook for determining the administrative costs of each special
product or service. The fee may not exceed such costs and is specified
with each application form. The appropriate fee must accompany each
application.
(e) * * *
(1) The Regional Director will issue a permit at any time to an
applicant if the application is complete and, in the case of the annual
vessel permit specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, the
applicant meets the earned income requirement specified in paragraph
(b)(2)(vi) of this section. An application is complete when all
requested forms, information, and documentation have been received and
the applicant has submitted all applicable reports specified at
Sec. 678.5 (a) or (b).
* * * * *
(g) Transfer. (1) A vessel permit issued under paragraph (b) of
this section is not transferable or assignable. A person purchasing a
permitted vessel who desires to conduct activities for which a permit
is required must apply for a permit in accordance with the provisions
of paragraph (b) of this section. The application must be accompanied
by a copy of a signed bill of sale.
(2) A dealer permit issued under paragraph (c) of this section may
be transferred upon sale of the dealer's business. However, such
transferred permit remains valid for a period not to exceed 30 days
after sale of the dealer's business. A person purchasing a permitted
dealership who desires to conduct activities for which a permit is
required after that 30-day period must apply promptly for a permit in
accordance with paragraph (c) of this section.
(h) Display. A vessel permit issued pursuant to paragraph (b) of
this section must be carried on board the vessel and such vessel must
be identified as required by Sec. 678.6. A dealer permit issued
pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section must be available on the
dealer's premises. The operator of a vessel or a dealer must present
the permit for inspection upon the request of an authorized officer.
* * * * *
(l) Change in application information. The owner or operator of a
vessel with a permit or a dealer with a permit must notify the Regional
Director within 30 days after any change in the application information
required by paragraph (b) or (c) of this section. The permit is void if
any change in the information is not reported within 30 days.
4. In Sec. 678.5, in the second to the last sentence of paragraph
(a)(2), the word ``third'' is removed and the word ``fifth'' is added
in its place; paragraphs (b) and (c) are redesignated as paragraphs (c)
and (d), respectively; and a new paragraph (b) is added to read as
follows:
Sec. 678.5 Recordkeeping and reporting.
* * * * *
(b) Dealer reports. (1) A dealer who has been issued a dealer
permit pursuant to Sec. 678.4 must submit a report to the Science and
Research Director as specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section. A
report form is available from the Science and Research Director. The
following information must be included in each report:
(i) Name, address, and permit number of the dealer.
(ii) Names and official numbers of fishing vessels from which shark
were received.
(iii) Dates of receipt of shark.
(iv) Listed by each port and county where shark were off-loaded
from fishing vessels:
(A) Total weight (pounds) by market category for shark, if
applicable, and for other species received with the shark, including,
but not limited to, swordfish, yellowfin tuna, bigeye tuna, and
albacore; and
(B) Price per pound or total value paid by market category for
shark and other species, to the extent that such price information is
known at the time of reporting.
(2) A report of shark and other applicable species received by a
dealer on the first through the 15th days of each month must be
submitted to the Science and Research Director postmarked not later
than the 20th day of that month. A report of shark and other applicable
species received by the dealer on the 16th through the last day of each
month must be submitted to the Science and Research Director postmarked
not later than the fifth day of the following month. If no shark was
received during the reporting period, a report so stating must be
submitted postmarked as specified for that respective reporting period.
(3) The reporting requirement of paragraph (b)(1) of this section
may be satisfied by providing a copy of each appropriate weigh-out
sheet and/or sales record, provided such weigh-out sheet and/or sales
record, by itself or combined with the form available from the Science
and Research Director, includes all of the required information.
(4) For purposes of this paragraph (b), for a shark offloaded from
a fishing vessel in an Atlantic coastal state from Maine through
Virginia, ``Science and Research Director'' means the Science and
Research Director, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, NMFS, Woods
Hole, MA 02543, telephone 617-548-5123, or a designee. For a shark
offloaded from a fishing vessel in an Atlantic coastal state from Maine
through Virginia, in lieu of providing a required report to the Science
and Research Director by mail, as specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this
section, a dealer may provide a report to a state or Federal fishery
port agent designated by the Science and Research Director. Reports so
provided must be delivered to such port agent not later than the
prescribed postmark date for submitting each such report.
* * * * *
5. In Sec. 678.7, in paragraph (d), the reference to
``Sec. 678.5(c)'' is removed and the reference ``Sec. 678.5(d)'' is
added in its place; paragraphs (a), (c), (k) through (q), and (s)
through (v) are revised; and new paragraphs (y) and (z) are added to
read as follows:
Sec. 678.7 Prohibitions.
* * * * *
(a) Falsify information required in Sec. 678.4(b) and (c) on an
application for a permit.
* * * * *
(c) Falsify or fail to provide information required to be
maintained, submitted, or reported, as specified in Sec. 678.5.
* * * * *
(k) Remove the fins from a shark and discard the remainder, as
specified in Sec. 678.22 (a)(1).
(l) Possess shark fins, carcasses, or parts, aboard or offload
shark fins from a fishing vessel, except as specified in Sec. 678.22,
or possess shark carcasses or parts aboard, or offload shark fins,
carcasses, or parts, from a vessel, except as specified in
Sec. 678.22(b).
(m) Fail to release a shark in the manner specified in
Sec. 678.22(d).
(n) Exceed the bag limits, as specified in Sec. 678.23 (a) through
(c).
(o) Operate a vessel with a shark aboard in excess of the bag
limits, as specified in Sec. 678.23(d).
(p) Land or possess on any trip, shark in excess of the vessel trip
limit, as specified in Sec. 678.22(c)(1).
(q) Transfer a shark at sea, as specified in Secs. 678.22(c)(2) and
678.23(e).
* * * * *
(s) Sell, trade, or barter, or attempt to sell, trade or barter, a
shark from the management unit, except as an owner or operator of a
vessel with a permit, as specified in Sec. 678.26.
(t) Purchase, trade, or barter, or attempt to purchase, trade or
barter, shark meat or fins from the management unit from an owner or
operator of a vessel that does not possess a vessel permit, as
specified in Sec. 678.26(b); or sell, trade, or barter, or attempt to
sell, trade, or barter, a shark from the management unit, except to a
permitted dealer, as specified in Sec. 678.26(d).
(u) Sell, purchase, trade, or barter, or attempt to sell, purchase,
trade, or barter, shark fins that are disproportionate to the weight of
carcasses landed, as specified in Sec. 678.26(c).
(v) Interfere with, obstruct, delay, or prevent by any means an
investigation, search, seizure, or disposition of seized property in
connection with enforcement of the Magnuson Act.
* * * * *
(y) Purchase, trade, or barter, or attempt to purchase, trade, or
barter, a shark from the management unit without an annual dealer
permit, as specified in Sec. 678.4(a)(2).
(z) Fish for sharks with a drift gillnet that is 2.5 km or more in
length or possess a shark aboard a vessel possessing such drift
gillnet, as specified in Sec. 678.21.
Secs. 678.21 through 678.27 [Redesignated as Secs. 678.22 through
678.28]
6. Sections 678.21 through 678.27 are redesignated as Secs. 678.22
through 678.28, respectively, and a new Sec. 678.21 is added to read as
follows:
Sec. 678.21 Gear restrictions.
A drift gillnet with a total length of 2.5 km or more may not be
used to fish for shark. A vessel using or having aboard a drift gillnet
with a total length of 2.5 km or more may not possess a shark.
7. In redesignated Sec. 678.22, paragraph (c)(1) is revised to read
as follows:
Sec. 678.22 Harvest limitations.
* * * * *
(c) Vessel trip limits. (1) A vessel that has been issued a permit
pursuant to Sec. 678.4 may not possess on any trip, or land from any
trip, large coastal species in excess of 4,000 lb (1,814 kg), dressed
weight.
Sec. 678.25 [Amended]
8. In redesignated Sec. 678.25, paragraph (a) introductory text is
amended by removing the reference ``Sec. 678.23(b)'' and adding the
reference ``Sec. 678.24(b)'' in its place, and paragraph (a)(2) is
amended by removing the reference ``Sec. 678.22(b)'' and adding the
reference ``Sec. 678.23(b)'' in its place.
9. In redesignated Sec. 678.26, paragraph (c) is amended by
removing the reference to ``Sec. 678.21(a)(2)'' and adding the
reference to ``Sec. 678.22(a)(2)'' in its place, the introductory text
and paragraphs (a) and (b) are revised, and paragraph (d) is added to
read as follows:
Sec. 678.26 Restrictions on sale upon landing.
Subject to the restrictions of Sec. 678.25,
(a) Upon landing, meat or fins from a shark from the management
unit may be sold, traded, or bartered, or attempted to be sold, traded,
or bartered, only by an owner or operator of a vessel that has been
issued a permit pursuant to Sec. 678.4, except that this does not apply
to a shark harvested from a vessel that has not been issued a permit
under this part and that fished exclusively within the waters under the
jurisdiction of any state.
(b) Upon landing, meat or fins from a shark from the management
unit may be purchased, traded, or bartered, or attempted to be
purchased, traded, or bartered, only from the owner or operator of a
vessel that has been issued a permit pursuant to Sec. 678.4, except
that this does not apply to a shark harvested from a vessel that has
not been issued a permit under this part and that fished exclusively
within the waters under the jurisdiction of any state.
* * * * *
(d) A shark from the management unit may be sold, traded, or
bartered, or attempted to be sold, traded, or bartered, only to a
dealer having a permit under Sec. 678.4, except that this does not
apply to a shark harvested from a vessel that has not been issued a
permit under this part and that fished exclusively within the waters
under the jurisdiction of any state.
[FR Doc. 94-25672 Filed 10-17-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-W
