[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 148 (Wednesday, July 31, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 39940-39943]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-19464]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 622
[Docket No. 960123012-6196-02; I.D. 011995A]
RIN 0648-AF78
Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Red Grouper Size Limit
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS announces that it is withdrawing the proposed rule to
change the minimum allowable size of red grouper, currently 20 inches
(50.8 cm), to 18 inches (45.7 cm) for persons not subject to the bag
limit.
DATES: This proposed rule is withdrawn on July 31, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael E. Justen, 813-570-5305.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The reef fish fishery of the Gulf of Mexico
is managed under the Fishery Management Plan for Reef Fish Resources of
the Gulf of Mexico (FMP). The FMP was prepared by the Gulf of Mexico
Fishery Management Council (Council) and is implemented by regulations
at 50 CFR part 622 (formerly at 50 CFR part 641).
Under the framework procedure for adjusting FMP management
measures, the Council proposed a regulatory amendment (RA) (50 CFR part
641) to change the minimum allowable size for red grouper from 20
inches (50.8 cm) to 18 inches (45.7 cm) for persons not subject to the
bag limit. The proposed rule to implement the RA was published in the
Federal Register on January 31, 1996 (61 FR 3369); comments were
requested on or before March 1, 1996. Five members of the Council
submitted a minority report opposing the RA. NMFS specifically
requested comments on the following concerns: (1) Long- and
[[Page 39941]]
short-term economic and social effects of the rule; (2) potential for
creating user conflicts; (3) consistency with the Magnuson Act's
National Standards and with certain FMP objectives; and (4)
difficulties with enforcing differential minimum size limits for the
commercial and recreational fisheries.
NMFS received written comments from 586 entities on the
advisability of the 18-inch (45.7-cm) minimum size limit. All but one
commenter were from Florida.
Summary of Public Comments and Agency Responses
1. Long- and Short-Term Economic and Social Effects
Comment: Thirty-three commenters provided information on this
issue. Five commercial associations and one commercial fisherman
supported the reduction in minimum size. They believed the long- and
short-term socioeconomic effects on recreational and commercial
fisheries would be positive; that is, the rule would result in an
increase of 5 to 10 percent in gross income. These commenters did not
expect a derby fishery to develop as a result of the proposed minimum
size reduction.
Twenty-seven commenters opposed the minimum size reduction for
socioeconomic reasons. Six charter vessel/headboat operators stated
that commercial fishermen would obtain more profits but would
experience a fishery closure due to the quota being reached. They
believed reduction in the size limit would cause negative responses
among recreational anglers because few legal sized red grouper would be
available for recreational anglers. They suggested that the smaller
commercial size limit would devastate the resource because 18-inch fish
(45.7-cm) would not have a chance to reproduce potentially causing a
negative long term socioeconomic impact. These commenters believed that
charterboat income and Florida's sales tax receipts would decrease.
Eight commercial fishermen stated that the commercial fishery would
experience a short-term increase in income but ultimately would
experience a long-term loss because the red grouper resource could not
withstand the increased fishing pressure. They feared that if the quota
were reached, and NMFS closed the fishery, very few fishermen could
financially withstand the closure. They contended that a derby fishery
would develop in future years similar to what has happened in the red
snapper fishery. They also stated that the influx of smaller fish would
depress market prices and reduce overall income to fishermen.
The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and
Florida Marine Fisheries Commission (FMFC) stated that the proposed
reduction in the size limit would not create any benefits.
In a minority report, five Council members stated they expected a
short-term glut of 18- to 20-inch (45.7- to 50.8- cm) fish and cited
testimony from dealers and fishermen indicating that smaller fish could
result in size grading and reduced values.
One individual suggested that the commercial fishery would benefit
in the short term but suffer in the long term due to overfishing. One
recreational association indicated that the smaller size limit would
cause overfishing. Four recreational anglers stated that no benefits
would result from the reduction in the size limit.
Response: NMFS agrees with the 27 commenters that any short-term
benefit to the commercial fishery would be offset by negative long- and
short-term socioeconomic effects on the recreational fishery and by
negative long-term socioeconomic effects on the commercial fishery.
2. Potential for User Conflicts
Comment: Thirty-one commenters provided information on this issue.
Five commercial associations and one commercial fisherman supported the
minimum size limit reduction. They believed it would minimize the
potential for user conflicts because commercial fishermen target larger
fish in deeper waters where recreational fishermen generally do not
operate and the sedentary nature of red grouper should keep the two
fisheries separated.
Twenty-five commenters opposed a reduction in the minimum size
limit because of user conflict concerns. Six charter vessel/headboat
operators stated that recreational anglers would object to commercial
fishermen taking smaller fish and recommended the same size limit for
all fishermen. Seven commercial fishermen were concerned about the
potential for conflicts due to recreational anglers blaming commercial
fishermen for the unavailability of 20-inch (50.8-cm) fish. They
believed user conflicts would arise as commercial fishermen move
shoreward to catch the smaller fish.
The FDEP and FMFC stated that the smaller commercial minimum size
limit would cause conflicts between user groups.
Five Council members stated in a minority report that most
recreational anglers opposed the size limit change.
One individual and one recreational association stated that the
smaller commercial size limit would cause conflicts between the
commercial and recreational fishermen. Three recreational anglers
supported no change in the current commercial size limit because
minimal conflicts occur under existing regulations.
Response: NMFS agrees with the 25 commenters that the smaller
commercial size limit would cause conflicts between the commercial and
recreational fishermen.
3. Consistency With the Magnuson Act's National Standards and With
Certain FMP Objectives
Comment: Twenty commenters provided information on this issue. Five
commercial associations and one commercial fisherman supporting the
minimum size reduction doubted the smaller commercial minimum size
limit would cause commercial landings to reach the annual quota (9.8
million pounds, 4.45 million kg) for the shallow water grouper complex
which includes red grouper. The commercial fisherman did not believe
that the change in the commercial size limit would alter fishing
patterns. These commenters concluded that the proposed reduction in
minimum size is consistent with the Magnuson Acts National Standards
and the FMP objectives.
Fourteen commenters opposed reduction in the commercial minimum
size limit for reasons relating to the National Standards or FMP
objectives. Two charter vessel/headboat operators and five commercial
fishermen contended that reduction in the commercial size limit would
lead to overfishing, a derby fishery, and conflicts with recreational
fishermen. The FDEP stated that the reduction was inconsistent with the
Magnuson Act's National Standards. In a minority report, five Council
members contended that the smaller size limit was contrary to the
Magnuson Act and certain FMP objectives because it might result in
overfishing, a derby fishery, and conflicts with the recreational
sector. A recreational angler stated the reduction discriminated
against his user group.
Response: NMFS agrees with the 14 commenters to the extent that the
proposed reduction in the commercial size limit is inconsistent with
National Standard 1 and certain FMP objectives (i.e., FMP Objective 4--
minimize user conflicts; FMP Amendment 1, Objective 7--maximize net
economic benefits; FMP Amendment 8 Objective 3--protect juveniles; and
FMP Amendment 8, Objective 2--avoid a derby fishery).
[[Page 39942]]
4. Difficulties With Enforcing Differential Size Limits
Comment: Thirty commenters provided information on this issue. Five
commercial associations and one commercial fisherman stated that
different size limits for recreational and commercial fishermen were
enforceable because commercial fishermen must have a Federal permit to
operate and, therefore, would be readily distinguishable from
recreational fishermen. They noted the concept of different size limits
for recreational and commercial fishermen has been tested and found
acceptable, from the enforcement standpoint, in the amberjack and red
snapper fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico.
Twenty-four commenters indicated that differing recreational and
commercial minimum size limits complicate enforcement, especially when
Federal and state size limits differ. Four charter vessel/headboat
operators and eight commercial fishermen commented that compatible
Federal and state regulations would simplify enforcement of minimum
size limits. The FDEP, the Florida Department of Community Affairs
(FDCA), and the FMFC believe that Federal regulations different from
the state's would adversely impact Florida's ability to enforce its
regulations.
The five Council members who filed a minority report pointed out
that a size limit for red grouper that differs from the size limit for
other grouper species would make enforcement more difficult.
Response: NMFS agrees with the 25 commenters that different minimum
size limits for recreational and commercial fisheries would complicate
enforcement, especially since Federal and Florida's size limits would
be different.
5. Consistency With Florida's Coastal Management Plan
Comment: On November 28, 1995, the FDCA notified the Council that
the proposed minimum size reduction is inconsistent with Florida's
Coastal Management Program. Florida has a 20-inch (50.8-cm) commercial
minimum size limit for red grouper, and the FDCA claimed that reducing
the Federal size limit to 18 inches (45.7-cm) would undermine Florida's
efforts to manage its fishery resources. Florida also opposed the size
reduction because 18-inch red grouper are sexually immature, and
harvesting red grouper prior to reproduction increases the potential
for overfishing.
Response: Disapproval of the regulatory amendment renders Florida's
inconsistency determination moot.
6. Summary of Public Responses
During the comment period, 586 commenters provided written comments
on the advisability of implementing the proposed 18-inch 45.7-cm)
minimum size limit for red grouper. All but one commenter was from
Florida. Table 1 summarizes the responses.
[[Page 39943]]
Table 1.--Comments on the Proposal To Reduce the Commercial Minimum Size
Limit for Red Grouper to 18 Inches (45.7 cm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Constituent group For Against *Other
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial Associations......................... 5 ........ .......
Charter Vessel/Headboat Operators............... 3 9 1
Commercial Fishermen............................ 2 84 .......
Environmental Groups............................ ... ........ 1
State Government Agencies....................... 1 3 .......
Gulf Council (Minority Report).................. ... 5 .......
Private Individuals............................. 12 140 1
Recreational Associations....................... ... 4 .......
Recreational Anglers............................ ... 314 1
-----------------------
Total..................................... 23 559 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Commenters who did not take a position on the size limit
Agency Decision
After reviewing the RA, supporting documents, minority report, and
comments received during the public comment period, NMFS has concluded
that the proposed reduction in the commercial size limit is neither
necessary nor appropriate for the conservation and management of red
grouper. In particular, it is likely that the smaller commercial size
limit would create conflicts between commercial and recreational
fishermen and would not result in long-term benefits to the fisheries.
NMFS is also concerned about the ineffectiveness of the proposed
commercial size limit in preventing overfishing as required under
National Standard 1 of the Magnuson Act. Accordingly, NMFS has
disapproved the RA and withdraws the proposed rule to change the
minimum size limit for red grouper for persons not subject to the bag
limit.
This action has been determined to be not significant for purposes
of E.O. 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: July 25, 1996.
Charles Karnella,
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 96-19464 Filed 7-30-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
