[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 74 (Monday, April 19, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19111-19113]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-9700]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 990226056-9056-01; I.D. 122498C]
RIN 0638-AL31
Northeast Multispecies Fishery; Amendment 9 to the Northeast
Multispecies Fishery Management Plan; Supplement to the Proposed Rule
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Supplement to the proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues this supplement to the proposed rule for Amendment
9 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Northeast Multispecies
Fishery. The supplement is intended to provide information
inadvertently omitted from the summary of the initial regulatory
flexibility analysis (IRFA) prepared for Amendment 9 published with the
proposed rule. Specifically, this supplement summarizes information
about alternatives that the New England Fishery Management Council
(Council) considered, but rejected, for the Amendment.
DATES: Public comments will be accepted from April 14, 1999 through May
3, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to Jon C. Rittgers, Acting Regional
Administrator, NMFS, Northeast Regional Office, One Blackburn Drive,
Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the outside of the envelope, ``Comments on
the initial regulatory flexibility analysis of Amendment 9.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan A. Murphy, Fishery Policy
Analyst, 978-281-9252.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Analytical documents in Amendment 9
pertaining to requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act include
``Volume I,'' October 9, 1998; ``Supplement,'' November 14, 1998; and
``Supplement,'' January 27, 1999. This supplement to the proposed rule
for Amendment 9 republishes, for the convenience of the public, the
portion of the classification section of that proposed rule (64 FR
13952; March 23, 1999) that addressed the Regulatory Flexibility Act
and adds information inadvertently omitted from that classification
section relevant to alternatives considered, but rejected, by the
Council for Amendment 9.
Classification
NMFS prepared an IRFA for this proposed rule, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
603, without regard to whether the proposal would have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Measures analyzed in
the IRFA include the brush-sweep trawl gear prohibition, the one-fish
halibut possession limit, and the winter flounder fish size increase.
The following is a brief discussion of the measures analyzed in the
IRFA.
Amendment 9 proposes the prohibition of brush-sweep trawl gear on
vessels fishing for multispecies. The cost of the brush-sweep trawl
gear is estimated to be between $8,000 and $15,000, depending on the
individual vessel. Excessive wear and tear on the gear requires that
the gear be replaced
[[Page 19112]]
often. The overall cost to vessels impacted by this action would be
based on the loss of the use of the gear which, when utilized, wears
out in a few months to a year. The potential universe of vessels that
could be impacted by the brush-sweep trawl gear prohibition is
approximately 900 vessels, i.e., based on NMFS Regional Office
database, the number of permit holders who fish for multispecies with
otter trawl gear. Therefore, the one-time cost to the industry would
likely be between $7.2 million (900 x $8,000) and $13.5 million (900 x
$15,000) since there are approximately 900 vessels that fish for
multispecies with otter trawl gear. This assumes that all 900 vessels
are currently using brush sweep gear. NMFS is seeking information on
the number of vessel fishing with brush sweep trawl gear.
A one-fish halibut possession limit with a minimum fish size of 36
inches (91.4 cm) is also proposed. Commercial vessels wishing to retain
the one-fish possession limit would be required to obtain a
multispecies permit. The economic costs associated with the proposed
halibut restrictions include lost revenues from restricted or
prohibited landings, as well as the added costs of enforcing new
regulations and administering the new open-access permits. For the
years 1996 and 1997, Vessel Trip Reports indicate that 134 and 139
vessels, respectively, reported landing halibut. Based on recent
landings data reported to NMFS, halibut landings have averaged less
than 50,000 lb (22,680 kg), and more recently have declined from 31,542
lb (14,307 kg) in 1996 to 17,078 lb (7,746.5 kg) in 1997. Annual
landings per vessel averaged 235 lb (106.5 kg) in 1996 and 123 pounds
in 1997. Annual revenues per vessel during this time averaged $1,059
and $553,000, respectively. The total exvessel revenue from halibut was
$141,906 (134 x $1,059) in 1996 and $76,867 (139 x $553) in 1997. The
number of vessels affected by the proposed one-fish halibut restriction
may amount to 1,050 vessels based on the number of permitted vessels in
the multispecies fishery. This number includes active limited access
multispecies permit holders (1,000) combined with a subset of the
estimated 100 active participants in the directed halibut fishery who
do not possess a Federal fisheries permit, approximately 50. In 1996 or
1997, 134 to 139 active vessels (those that reported landings of
halibut in recent years) are estimated to be only those vessels that
caught at least one halibut.
An increase in the minimum fish size for winter flounder to 13
inches (33.0 cm) from the current minimum size of 12 inches (30.5 cm)
for both commercial and recreational fishing vessels is proposed in
Amendment 9. For the commercial fishery, economic impacts of increasing
the winter flounder fish size involve revenue loss from prohibiting
landings of fish that are between 12 and 13 inches (30.5 and 33.0 cm)
and revenue gains from the increased yield per recruit and price per
pound for higher market category once 12-inch (30.5 cm) size fish grow
to 13-inch (33.0 cm) size and above.
The data for NMFS 1997 winter flounder landings data, including all
sizes of fish, were approximately 11.7 million pounds, or 14 percent of
the total regulated species landings. Exvessel revenues of winter
flounder during this period amounted to $15.6 million (8.5 percent) of
the total exvessel revenues ($183.5 million) from all species for
vessels that landed winter flounder. Although some fishers have
commented that fish in the 12- to 13-inch (30.5-33 cm) size range
accounted for up to 30 - 40 percent of their winter flounder catch,
many other fishers have reported that very few fish in the 12- to 13-
inch (30.5-33 cm) range are retained by nets unless the vessel is
fishing with nets that are less than the minimum regulated mesh size.
Landing reports from the New Bedford, MA, auction indicate that 12-inch
(30.5 cm) fish make up less than 10 percent of winter flounder sold in
this port. Assuming that 30 - 40 percent of winter flounder landed were
in the 12- to 13-inch (30.5-33 cm) size range, the decrease in exvessel
revenue would likely be between 2.6 percent ($4.68 million of $183.5
million) and 3.4 percent ($6.24 million of $183.5 million) in the first
year for all vessels that reported landings of winter flounder.
Compliance costs associated with increasing the minimum winter
flounder fish size would result from the cost of modifying trawl
codends to reduce the bycatch of 12-inch (30.5 cm) size fish. However,
because codends are expandable and replaced often due to constant wear
and tear, annual costs associated with this measure would be part of
normal gear replacement cost.
Approximately 1,650 vessels have limited access permits and could
land winter flounder regardless of whether it was the target species.
Based on the NMFS 1997 landings data, 971 of the active multispecies
vessels landed winter flounder. On average, reduction in gross revenue
per vessel would likely be between $4,820 and $6,430 in the first year,
assuming uniform landings across vessels. Otter trawl vessels accounted
for the majority of the landings (64 percent), followed by gillnet
vessels (18 percent). Thus, otter trawl vessels could lose between $3.0
million and $4.0 million in the first year. Gillnet vessels could lose
between $0.8 million and $1.1 million in the first year.
Alternatives Considered, But Rejected by the Council
1. The Council considered taking ``no action'' in terms of the use
of brush sweep trawl gear but was concerned about the lack of
information about its overall use or about how it may impact specific
species and other related impacts. The Council was concerned that the
efficiency of the gear may be so greatly improved so as to undermine
the effectiveness of the days at sea (DAS) reduction program. The basis
for this concern is that, if vessels with limited DAS could increase
their catch per day significantly, the number of DAS allocated would
have to be reduced to achieve the set fishing mortality goal. Because
the impacts of the gear are not known at this time, the Council has
chosen a precautionary approach by prohibiting use of the gear but
recommends comparative studies of roller, rockhopper, chain, brush
sweep and other bottom tending trawl gear (not including scallop
dredges) be conducted to assess bycatch, gear efficiency and such other
impacts as effects on bottom habitat.
2. The Council chose as its preferred alternative for Atlantic
halibut to add that species to the management unit for the FMP, and
establish a 1-fish possession limit and a minimum fish size of 36
inches (91.4 cm) to begin rebuilding this overfished fish stock.
Additionally, the Council considered, but rejected, four other
alternatives for halibut management: (1) No action alternative, (2) add
Atlantic halibut to the management unit and prohibit possession on
halibut, (3) add Atlantic halibut to the management unit and implement
a 1-fish possession limit with a maximum fish size of 48 inches (121
cm), and (4) add Atlantic halibut to the management unit and implement
a 1-fish possession limit with a maximum fish size limit of 48 inches
(121 cm) and a minimum fish size of 36 inches (91.4 cm). The two
alternatives that included a maximum fish size limit were rejected
based on public comment that capture of a large fish only to determine
if it was of illegal size would result in excessive discard mortality.
NMFS declared Atlantic halibut to be overfished in its September 1997
and 1998 Reports to Congress. The Council rejected the no action
alternative given the overfished condition of halibut and the
[[Page 19113]]
requirement under the Sustainable Fisheries Act to prepare a plan to
rebuild overfished stocks. The Council also decided the species needs
specific management measures to begin rebuilding. It adopted a one-fish
possession limit rather than total prohibition in part to minimize the
economic effects on the few vessels (believed to be about 50) that are
considered to be part of a directed fishery, even though their catch of
halibut is only occasional and mostly in state waters.
3. In addition to the preferred alternative of an increase in
minimum fish size for winter flounder, the Council considered, but
rejected, a possession limit of between 5,000 and 12,000 lb (2268 and
5443.2 kg) of winter flounder for Southern New England and a mesh
change for the Gulf of Maine/Georges Bank area. There were a strong
opposition by industry to the mesh-size change alternative and a
concern over a trip limit being confined to one area. The Council
rejected the no action alternative because most stocks of winter
flounder are considered overfished and in need of further protection of
spawning size fish for rebuilding stock abundance.
NMFS seeks comments regarding the IRFA. In particular, NMFS is
seeking information on the number of vessels using brush sweep trawl
gear, the number of vessels currently fishing for halibut, and the
number of vessels impacted by the proposed increase in the winter
flounder fish size. Copies of the IRFA are available (see ADDRESSES).
Dated: April 14, 1999.
Andrew A. Rosenberg,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 99-9700 Filed 4-14-99; 4:07 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
