Comment by Maine Department of Marine Resources on AR78

Copy of letter sent as attachment: March 21, 2007 Patricia A. Kurkul Regional Administrator NMFS, Northeast Regional Office 1 Blackburn Drive Gloucester, Ma. 01930 Re: RIN 0648-AR78 Dear Pat, I am writing to provide the Maine Department of Marine Resources (DMR) comments on the proposed definition additions/revisions and procedural and technical changes to the regulations addressing scientific research activities, exempted fishing permits, and exempted educational activities under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The stated purpose of these changes is to clarify regulations, ensure necessary information to complete required analyses is requested and made available, and provide for expedited review of permit applications where possible. DMR supports any measures that would streamline the EFP process, although it is not immediately apparent how the proposed measures would achieve this stated goal. DMR generally favors the provision of LOAs rather than EFPs for scientific research as the EFP process is time consuming, which can prevent research from being conducted within necessary timelines. The proposed definition of compensation fishing states compensation fishing could be covered by an LOA unless exemptions from regulations are required. However, it is not clear from the proposed definition what types of research activities could employ compensation fishing, other than Research Set Aside Programs. As such, it is difficult to comment on the need for an EFP versus an LOA. DMR supports the proposed definition of conservation engineering, but is wary of the requirement that at-sea research occur aboard a scientific research vessel. DMR would like to ensure that the definition of ?scientific research vessel? is inclusive of commercial fishing vessels chartered by scientific organizations or state agencies. DMR would also like to ensure that the definition of conservation engineering based on the promotion of ?efficient harvest of target species? be interpreted broadly to allow for environmental efficiency (for instance, testing of gear/methods to reduce fuel consumption by fishing vessels). Because this comment request addresses scientific research, DMR highlights the need to address an issue of particular importance to our agency and the fishermen with whom we collaborate. When engaged in collaborative research, two questions often arise: ?Why can?t fish the fish caught on these activities be sold to cover part of research expenses?? and ?Why must A DAS be used when research is being conducted?? Both of these questions are pertinent to the proposed definition for ?compensation fishing? and ?conservation engineering?. However this notice does not address either of these questions. Although compensation fishing has now been well defined, it is still unclear when it may be authorized. It is also unclear whether A DAS must be used when engaged in scientific research activity. In summary DMR is supportive of any actions that streamline the LOA and EFP process in order to facilitate scientific research, and requests that NMFS continue the streamlining process by providing better information and justification concerning whether and when compensation fishing is allowed, and whether and when A DAS must be used for scientific research. I appreciate the opportunity to comment and would be pleased to follow up with you on these issues as needed. Sincerely, Terry Stockwell Director of External Affairs