[Federal Register: November 17, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 222)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 67829-67834]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr17no08-38]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 0808041043-81412-01]
RIN 0648-AX16
Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Mackerel,
Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries; Specifications and Management Measures
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule, request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes 2009 specifications and management measures for
Atlantic mackerel, squid, and butterfish (MSB). This action proposes to
maintain quotas for Atlantic mackerel (mackerel), Illex squid (Illex),
and butterfish at the same levels as 2008, while increasing the quota
for Loligo squid (Loligo). Additionally, this action proposes to
increase the incidental possession limit for mackerel and requests
public comment concerning the possibility of an inseason adjustment to
increase the mackerel quota, if landings approach proposed harvest
limits. These proposed specifications and management measures promote
the utilization and conservation of the MSB resource.
DATES: Public comments must be received no later than 5 p.m., eastern
standard time, on December 17, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Copies of supporting documents used by the Mid-Atlantic
Fishery Management Council (Council), including the Environmental
Assessment (EA) and Regulatory Impact Review (RIR)/Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), are available from: Daniel Furlong,
Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, Room 2115,
Federal Building, 300 South New Street, Dover, DE 19904-6790. The EA/
RIR/IRFA is accessible via the Internet at http://www.nero.nmfs.gov.
You may submit comments, identified by 0648-AX16, by any one of the
following methods:
Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public
comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking portal http://
www.regulations.gov;
Fax: (978) 281-9135, Attn: Carrie Nordeen;
Mail to NMFS, Northeast Regional Office, One Blackburn
Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the outside of the envelope
``Comments on 2009 MSB Specifications.''
Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted to http://www.regulations.gov without
change. All Personal Identifying Information (e.g., name, address)
voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do
not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or
protected information. NMFS will accept anonymous comments. Attachments
to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel,
WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF formats only.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carrie Nordeen, Fishery Policy
Analyst, 978-281-9272, fax 978-281-9135.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Regulations implementing the Fishery Management Plan for the
Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries (FMP) appear at 50
CFR part 648, subpart B. Regulations governing foreign fishing appear
at 50 CFR part 600, subpart F. These regulations at Sec. 648.21 and
600.516(c), require that NMFS, based on the maximum optimum yield (Max
OY) of each fishery as established by the regulations, annually publish
a proposed rule specifying the amounts of the initial optimum yield
(IOY), allowable biological catch (ABC), domestic annual harvest (DAH),
and domestic annual processing (DAP), as well as, where applicable, the
amounts for total allowable level of foreign fishing (TALFF) and joint
venture processing (JVP) for the affected species managed under the
FMP. In addition, these regulations allow specifications to be
specified for up to 3 years, subject to annual review. The regulations
found in Sec. 648.21 also specify that IOY for squid is equal to the
combination of research quota (RQ) and DAH, with no TALFF specified for
squid. For butterfish, the regulations specify that a butterfish
bycatch TALFF will be specified only if TALFF is specified for
mackerel.
At its June 10-12, 2008, meeting in Atlantic City, NJ, the Mid-
Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) recommended 2009 MSB
specifications. The recommended specifications for mackerel, Illex, and
butterfish are the same as those implemented in 2008. For Loligo, the
Council recommended increasing the Max OY, ABC, IOY, DAH, and DAP based
on updated biological reference points implemented in Amendment 9 to
the FMP and based on the most recent stock assessment. The Council also
recommended increasing the incidental possession limit for mackerel
during summer months to reduce the potential for the regulatory
discarding of mackerel by the Atlantic herring fleet. With the
exception of the incidental possession limit for mackerel, all other
management measures (e.g., fishery closure thresholds, possession
limits, gear requirements) are the same as those implemented in 2008.
Research Quota
Framework Adjustment 1 to the FMP established the Mid-Atlantic
Research Set-Aside (RSA) Program, which allows research projects to be
funded through the sale of fish that has been set-aside from the total
annual quota. The RQ may vary between 0 and 3 percent of the overall
quota for each species. The Council has recommended that 3 percent of
the 2009 Loligo, Illex, butterfish, and mackerel quotas be set aside to
fund projects selected under the 2009 Mid-Atlantic RSA Program.
NMFS solicited research proposals under the 2009 Mid-Atlantic RSA
Program through the Federal Register (73 FR 7528, February 8, 2008).
The deadline for submission was March 24, 2008. On July 5, 2008, NMFS
convened a Review Panel to review the comments submitted by technical
reviewers. At this time, the project selection and award process for
the 2009 Mid-Atlantic RSA Program has not concluded. Based on
discussions between NMFS staff, technical review comments, and Review
Panel comments, projects requesting Loligo RQ will be forwarded to the
NOAA Grants Office for award. If any portion of the RQ is not awarded,
NMFS will return any un-awarded RQ to the commercial fishery either
through the final 2009 MSB specification rulemaking process or through
the publication of a separate notice in the
[[Page 67830]]
Federal Register notifying the public of a quota adjustment.
Vessels harvesting RQ in support of approved research projects
would be issued exempted fishing permits (EFP) authorizing them to
exceed Federal possession limits and to fish during Federal quota
closures. The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires that interested parties be provided an
opportunity to comment on all proposed EFPs. These exemptions are
necessary to allow project investigators to recover research expenses,
as well as adequately compensate fishing industry participants
harvesting RQ. Vessels harvesting RQ would operate within all other
regulations that govern the commercial fishery, unless otherwise
exempted through a separate EFP.
2009 Proposed Specifications and Management Measures
Table 1. Proposed Specifications, in Metric Tons (mt), for Atlantic
Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish for 2009 Fishing Year.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifications Loligo Illex Mackerel Butterfish
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Max OY 32,000 24,000 N/A 12,175
ABC 19,000 24,000 156,000 1,500
IOY 13,300\1\ 24,000 115,000\2 500
\
DAH 13,300 24,000 115,000\3 500
\
DAP 13,300 24,000 100,000 500
JVP 0 0 0 0
TALFF 0 0 0 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes 5,700 mt (3 percent of the IOY) for RQ.
\2\ IOY may be increased during the year, but the total ABC will not
exceed 156,000 mt.
\3\ Includes a 15,000 mt catch of Atlantic mackerel by the recreational
fishery.
Atlantic Mackerel
The status of the Atlantic mackerel stock was most recently
assessed at the 42nd Stock Assessment Review Committee (SARC) in late
2005. SARC 42 concluded that the mackerel stock is not overfished and
overfishing is not occurring. According to the FMP, mackerel ABC must
be calculated using the formula ABC = T -- C, where C is the estimated
catch of mackerel in Canadian waters for the upcoming fishing year and
T is the yield associated with a fishing mortality rate that is equal
to the target fishing mortality rate (F). Based on projections from
SARC 42, the yield associated with the target F of 0.12 in 2008 is
211,000 mt. SARC 42 did not project yields for 2009, but the yield
projections from 2008 will be used as a proxy until new projections are
calculated in the next mackerel stock assessment, currently scheduled
for 2009. Canadian catch of mackerel has been increasing in recent
years; therefore, the estimate of Canadian catch for 2009 has been
increased from the 2007 estimate of 52,000 mt to 55,000 mt. Thus,
211,000 mt minus 55,000 mt results in a proposed 2009 mackerel ABC of
156,000 mt.
This action proposes a mackerel IOY of 115,000 mt. The Council
believes that this level of harvest would provide the greatest overall
benefit to the Nation with respect to food production and recreational
opportunities, and would allow for an increase in domestic landings. In
recent years, domestic mackerel landings have been increasing due to
major investments in the domestic mackerel processing sector. Mackerel
landings in 2003 totaled 35,071 mt, while landings for 2006 totaled
58,279 mt. The Council concluded, based on industry testimony, that
U.S. vessels will continue to increase their landings and that
shoreside processing capacity has increased to the point that it can
process all of the DAH. Industry has indicated that the relatively low
landings in 2007 (26,429 mt) as compared to 2006 were because mackerel
were farther offshore than in recent years and thus less available to
the fishery. If mackerel are available to the fishery in 2009, industry
expects to land the entire IOY. The proposed 115,000-mt IOY is
consistent with mackerel regulations at Sec. 648.21(b)(2)(ii), which
state that IOY is a modification of ABC, based on social and economic
factors, and must be less than or equal to ABC.
The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides that the specification of TALFF,
if any, shall be that portion of the optimum yield (OY) of a fishery
that will not be harvested by vessels of the United States. TALFF would
allow foreign vessels to harvest U.S. fish and sell their product on
the world market, in direct competition with the U.S. industry efforts
to expand exports. The Council expressed its concern, supported by
industry testimony, that an allocation of TALFF would threaten the
expansion of the domestic industry. The Council noted that this would
prevent the U.S. industry from taking advantage of declines in the
European production of Atlantic mackerel that have resulted in an
increase in world demand for U.S. fish. The only economic benefit
associated with a TALFF is the foreign fishing fees it generates. On
the other hand, there are economic benefits associated with the
development of the domestic mackerel fishery. Increased mackerel
production generates jobs both for plant workers and other support
industries. More jobs generate additional sources of income for
residents of coastal communities and generally enhance the social
fabric of these communities.
For these reasons, and consistent with the Council's
recommendation, NMFS proposes to specify IOY at a level that can be
fully harvested by the domestic fleet, thereby precluding the
specification of a TALFF, in order to assist the expansion of the U.S.
mackerel industry. This would yield positive social and economic
benefits to both U.S. harvesters and processors. Given the trends in
landings, and the industry's testimony that it has experienced
significant growth, NMFS concurs that it is reasonable to assume that,
in 2009, the commercial fishery has the ability to harvest 100,000 mt
of mackerel. Thus DAH would be 115,000 mt, which is the commercial
harvest plus the 15,000 mt allocated for the recreational fishery.
Because IOY = DAH, this specification is consistent with the Council's
recommendation that the level of IOY should not provide for a TALFF.
NMFS proposes to maintain JVP at zero (the most recent allocation
was 5,000 mt of JVP in 2004), consistent with the Council's
recommendation. In previous years, the Council recommended a JVP
greater than zero because it believed U.S. processors lacked the
ability to process the total
[[Page 67831]]
amount of mackerel that U.S. harvesters could land. However, for the
past 5 years, the Council has recommended zero JVP because the surplus
between DAH and DAP has been declining as U.S. shoreside processing
capacity for mackerel has expanded. The Council received testimony from
processors and harvesters that the shoreside processing sector of this
industry has continued to expand since 2002-2003. Subsequent industry
testimony estimated current processing capacity at 2,500 mt per day.
The Council also heard from the industry that the availability (i.e.,
size, distribution, and abundance) of mackerel to the fishery, rather
than processing capacity, has curtailed catch in recent years. Based on
this information, the Council concluded that processing capacity is no
longer a limiting factor relative to domestic production of mackerel.
Furthermore, the Council concluded that the U.S. mackerel processing
sector has the potential to process the DAH, so JVP would be specified
at zero.
Mackerel Incidental Possession Limit
Regulations at Sec. 648.25(a) specify that, during closures of the
directed mackerel fishery, the incidental possession limit for mackerel
is 20,000 lb (9.08 mt). At the Council's June 2008 meeting, the
industry requested increasing the incidental mackerel possession limit
to minimize the potential for regulatory discard of mackerel by the
Atlantic herring fleet. Mackerel and Atlantic herring are known to co-
occur in the Gulf of Maine during summer months. To minimize the
potential for the regulatory discarding of mackerel by the Atlantic
herring fleet during a closure of the directed mackerel fishery, the
industry requested that the mackerel incidental possession limit be
increased during summer months. Industry identified a 50,000-lb (22.7-
mt) incidental mackerel possession limit, to be effective after June 1,
as an appropriate limit to minimize the potential for regulatory
discarding by the Atlantic herring fleet in the Gulf of Maine, without
creating directed fishing for mackerel during a closure of the mackerel
fishery. When considering this incidental possession limit increase,
the Council discussed that, relative to the quota, few mackerel are
landed after June 1, because they move offshore and are largely
unavailable to U.S. pelagic fishing fleets. The Council also recognized
that this measure was not anticipated to result in a quota overage
because it was unlikely that the buffer between the threshold at which
the directed mackerel fishery closes (103,500 mt) and the IOY (115,000
mt) would be landed between June 1 and December 31.
After considering these factors, NMFS proposes that the mackerel
incidental possession limit be increased from a 20,000-lb (9.08-mt)
incidental possession limit to a 20,000-lb (9.08-mt) limit if the
directed mackerel fishery closes prior to June 1, and a 50,000-lb
(22.7-mt) limit if the directed mackerel fishery closes on or after
June 1. This proposed incidental possession limit is consistent with
the Council's recommendation.
Inseason Adjustment of the Mackerel IOY
Regulations at Sec. 648.21(e) provide that specifications may be
adjusted inseason during the fishing year by the NMFS Northeast
Regional Administrator (Regional Administrator), in consultation with
the Council, by publishing a notice in the Federal Register and
providing a 30-day public comment period. At the June 2008 Council
meeting, in response to recent growth in the domestic harvesting and
processing sectors of the mackerel fishery, both the mackerel industry
and the Council voiced interest in increasing the 2009 mackerel IOY if
landings approach 115,000 mt during the most active part of the fishing
year (January-April). However, the mackerel fishing season is short,
and it would be difficult to implement a separate inseason action
during the fishing season. To facilitate a timely inseason adjustment
to the mackerel IOY, if necessary, this action proposes and seeks
comment on such an inseason adjustment. In 2009, as in 2008, NMFS's
Northeast Fishery Statistic Office will summarize mackerel landings
from dealer reports on a weekly basis and post this information on the
Northeast Regional Office website (http://www.nero.noaa.gov/). NMFS
staff will closely monitor these landings and industry trends to
determine if an inseason adjustment is necessary. If, using landings
projections and all other available information, the Regional
Administrator determines that 70 percent of the Atlantic mackerel IOY
will be landed during the 2009 fishing year, the Regional Administrator
will make available additional quota for a total IOY of 156,000 mt of
Atlantic mackerel for harvest during 2009. Additionally, if an inseason
adjustment of the IOY is warranted, the Regional Administrator will
notify the Council and the inseason adjustment will be published in the
Federal Register.
Atlantic Squids
Loligo
Amendment 9 to the FMP (Amendment 9) (73 FR 37382, July 1, 2008)
revised the proxies for Loligo target and threshold fishing mortality
rates, FTarget and FThreshold, respectively, to
reflect the analytical advice provided by the most recent Loligo stock
assessment review committee (SARC 34). While Amendment 9 revised the
formulas and values for these reference points, the function of the
reference points remains unchanged. FTarget is the basis for
determining OY and FThreshold determines whether overfishing
is occurring.
Because Loligo is a sub-annual species (i.e., has a lifespan of
less than 1 year), the stock is solely dependent on sufficient
recruitment year to year to prevent stock collapse. The revised proxies
for FTarget and FThreshold implemented in Amendment 9 are fixed values
based on average fishing mortality rates achieved during a time period
when the stock biomass was fairly resilient (1987--2000). The revised
proxies are calculated as follows: FTarget is the 75th
percentile of fishing mortality rates during 1987--2000 and
FThreshold is the average fishing mortality rates during the
same period. The revised proxy for FTarget (0.32) is used as
the basis for establishing Loligo OY. The use of a proxy is necessary
because it is currently not possible to accurately predict Loligo stock
biomass because recruitment, which occurs throughout the year, is
highly variable inter-annually and influenced by changing environmental
conditions.
Based on the revised biological reference points for Loligo, the
Council recommended an increase to the 2009 Loligo Max OY, ABC, IOY,
DAH, and DAP. In 2008, the Loligo Max OY was 26,000 mt and the ABC,
IOY, DAH, and DAP was 17,000 mt. For 2009, the proposed Loligo Max OY
is 32,000 mt and the proposed ABC, IOY, DAH, DAP is 19,000 mt. Using
the revised Loligo biological reference points, the Monitoring
Committee initially calculated the proposed 2009 Loligo ABC, IOY, DAH,
and DAP to be 23,000 mt. The Monitoring Committee subsequently reduced
the proposed 2009 Loligo ABC, IOY, DAH, and DAP to 19,000 mt, to be
consistent with SARC 34 management recommendation that harvest not
exceed 20,000 mt, and due to uncertainty associated with the Loligo
stock assessment model.
NMFS concurs with the Council's recommendation, therefore, this
action proposes a 2009 Loligo Max OY of 32,000 mt and an ABC, IOY DAH,
and
[[Page 67832]]
DAP of 19,000 mt. The FMP does not authorize the specification of JVP
and TALFF for the Loligo fishery because of the domestic industry's
capacity to harvest and process the OY for this fishery; therefore,
there would be no Loligo JVP or TALFF in 2009.
As described previously, the Council recommended that the Loligo RQ
for 2009 be up to 3 percent (5,700 mt) of the ABC. Scientific research
project proposals requesting Loligo RQ were recommended for approval
and will be forwarded to the NOAA Grants Office for award. The proposed
Loligo IOY, DAH, and DAP were adjusted to reflect the RQ and equal
13,300 mt. Any of the Loligo RQ that is not awarded to a scientific
research project will be made available to the commercial fishery after
the publication of a notice in the Federal Register.
Distribution of the Loligo DAH
As was done in 2007 and 2008, NMFS is proposing that the 2009
Loligo DAH be allocated into trimesters, consistent with the Council's
recommendation. The proposed 2009 trimester allocations would be as
follows:
Table 2. Proposed Trimester Allocation of Loligo Quota in 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Metric
Trimester Percent Tons\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I (Jan-Apr) 43 8,116
II (May-Aug) 17 3,208
III (Sep-Dec) 40 7,550
Total 100 13,300
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Trimester allocations after 5,700 mt RQ deduction.
Illex Squid
The Illex stock was most recently assessed at SARC 42 in late 2005.
While it was not possible to evaluate current stock status because
there are no reliable current estimates of stock biomass or fishing
mortality rate, qualitative analyses determined that overfishing had
not likely been occurring.
NMFS proposes to maintain the Illex specifications in 2009 at the
same levels as they were for the 2008 fishing year, consistent with the
Council's recommendation. This action proposes that the specification
of Max OY, IOY, ABC, and DAH would be 24,000 mt. This level of DAH
corresponds to a target fishing mortality rate of 75 percent
FMSY. The FMP does not authorize the specification of JVP
and TALFF for the Illex fishery because of the domestic fishing
industry's capacity to harvest and to process the OY from this fishery.
Butterfish
The status of the butterfish stock was most recently assessed at
SARC 38 in late 2004. The assessment concluded that, while overfishing
of the stock is not occurring, the stock is overfished because
estimates of stock biomass are below the minimum biomass threshold (\1/
2\ BMSY). SARC 38 estimated the butterfish stock at 8,700
mt, \1/2\ BMSY at 11,400 mt, and BMSY at 22,798
mt. Based on this information, the Council was notified by NMFS on
February 11, 2005, that the butterfish stock was designated as
overfished, pursuant to the requirements of section 304(e) of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act. The Council is developing a rebuilding plan for
the butterfish stock in Amendment 10 to the FMP. Therefore, as in 2008,
the Council recommended that the quota be restricted to recent landings
levels to prevent an expansion of the fishery and to protect the
rebuilding stocks. Without a current market for butterfish, a directed
butterfish fishery has not existed for several years, with landings
since 2003 ranging from 437 mt to 554 mt.
The MSB FMP specifies that maximum sustainable yield equals Max OY.
SARC 38 re-estimated butterfish maximum sustainable yield as 12,175 mt,
and the butterfish overfishing threshold at F of 0.38. Assuming that
butterfish discards equal twice the level of landings, the amount of
butterfish discards associated with approximately 500 mt of landings is
approximately 1,000 mt.
Therefore, in 2009, as implemented in 2008, the proposed
specifications would set the Max OY at 12,175 mt; the ABC at 1,500 mt;
and the IOY, DAH, and DAP at 500 mt. Harvest at these proposed levels
should prevent overfishing on the butterfish stock in 2009.
Additionally, consistent with MSB regulations, the Council recommended,
and NMFS is proposing, zero TALFF for butterfish in 2009 because zero
TALFF is proposed for mackerel.
Classification
Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the
NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is
consistent with the Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish FMP, other
provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law,
subject to further consideration after pubic comment.
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866 (E.O. 12866).
The Council prepared an IRFA, as required by section 603 of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The IRFA describes the economic
impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A
summary of the analysis follows. A copy of this analysis is available
from the Council or NMFS (see ADDRESSES) or via the Internet at http://
www.nero.noaa.gov.
Statement of Objective and Need
This action proposes 2009 specifications and management measures
for mackerel, squid, and butterfish, and proposes to modify an
incidental possession limit for mackerel. A complete description of the
reasons why this action is being considered, and the objectives of and
legal basis for this action, are contained in the preamble to this
proposed rule and are not repeated here.
Description and Estimate of Number of Small Entities to Which the Rule
Will Apply
Based on permit data for 2007, the numbers of potential fishing
vessels in the 2009 fisheries are as follows: 383 for Loligo/
butterfish, 78 for Illex, 2,462 for mackerel, and 2,108 vessels with
incidental catch permits for squid/butterfish. There are no large
entities participating in this fishery, as defined in section 601 of
the RFA. Therefore, there are no disproportionate economic impacts on
small entities. Many vessels participate in more than one of these
fisheries; therefore, permit numbers are not additive.
Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
This action does not contain any new collection-of-information,
reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements. It does not
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other Federal rules.
Minimizing Significant Economic Impacts on Small Entities
Proposed Actions
The mackerel IOY proposed in this action (115,000 mt, with 15,000
mt allocated to recreational catch) represents status quo, as compared
to 2008, and is no constraint to vessels relative to the landings in
recent years. Mackerel landings for 2001-2003 averaged 24,294 mt.
Landings in 2004 were 55,528 mt, landings in 2005 were 43,246 mt,
landings in 2006 were 58,279 mt, and landings in 2007 were 24,446 mt.
This action also proposes an inseason adjustment, if landings approach
the IOY early in the fishing
[[Page 67833]]
year, to increase the IOY up to the ABC (156,000 mt). Therefore, no
reductions in revenues for the mackerel fishery are expected as a
result of this proposed action; in fact, an increase in revenues as a
result of the proposed action is possible. Based on 2007 data, the
mackerel fishery could increase its landings by 90,554 mt in 2009, if
it takes the entire IOY. In 2007, the last year for which complete
financial data are available, the average value for mackerel was $258
per mt. Using this value, the mackerel fishery could see an increase in
revenues of $23,362,932 as a result of the proposed 2009 IOY (115,000
mt), and an additional increase in revenues of $10,578,000 as a result
of the proposed adjustment to increase the IOY up to the ABC (156,000
mt).
The Loligo IOY (19,000 mt) proposed in this action represents a
potential for increased landings when compared to the 2008 IOY (17,000
mt). Loligo landings for 2001-2003 averaged 14,092 mt. Landings in 2004
were 15,447, landings in 2005 were 16,984 mt, landings in 2006 were
15,880 mt, and landings in 2007 were 12,342 mt. In 2007, the last year
for which complete financial data are available, the average value for
Loligo was $1,883 per mt. No reductions in revenues for the Loligo
fishery are expected as a result of this proposed action; in fact, an
increase in revenues as a result of the proposed action is possible.
Based on 2007 data, the Loligo fishery could increase its landings by
6,658 mt in 2009, if it takes the entire IOY. Using the average value
for Loligo from 2007 ($1,883 mt), the Loligo fishery could see an
increase in revenues of $12,537,014 as a result of the proposed 2009
IOY (19,000 mt),
The Illex IOY (24,000 mt) proposed in this action represents status
quo as compared to 2008. Illex landings for 2001-2003 averaged 4,350
mt. Landings in 2004 were 26,098 mt, landings in 2005 were 12,032 mt,
landings in 2006 were 13,944 mt, and landings in 2007 were 9,022 mt. In
2007, the last year for which complete financial data are available,
the average value for Illex was $428 per mt. Implementation of this
proposed action would not result in a reduction in revenue or a
constraint on the fishery in 2009. Based on 2007 data, the Illex
fishery could increase its landings by 14,978 mt in 2009, if it takes
the entire IOY. Using the average value for Illex from 2007 ($428 mt),
the Illex fishery could see an increase in revenues of $6,410,584 as a
result of the proposed 2009 IOY (24,000 mt).
The butterfish IOY proposed in this action (500 mt) represents
status quo, as compared to 2008, and represents only a minimal
constraint to vessels relative to the landings in recent years. Due to
market conditions, there has been not been a directed butterfish
fishery in recent years; therefore, recent landings have been low.
Landings in 2004 were 537 mt, landings in 2005 were 437 mt, landings in
2006 were 554 mt, and landings in 2007 were 673 mt. Given the lack of a
directed butterfish fishery and low butterfish landings, the proposed
action is not expected to reduce revenues in this fishery more than
minimally. Based on 2007 data, the value of butterfish was $1,602 per
mt.
Alternatives to the Proposed Rule
The Council analysis evaluated three alternatives for mackerel, and
all of them would have set the ABC at 156,000 mt, IOY at 115,000 mt,
and maintained the status quo trigger for closing the directed fishery.
This ABC and IOY do not represent a constraint on vessels in this
fishery, so no negative impacts on revenues in this fishery are
expected as a result of these alternatives. These alternatives only
differed from the proposed action with respect to incidental possession
limits. The proposed action specifies the incidental mackerel
possession limit at 20,000 lb (9.08 mt) if the directed mackerel
fishery closes prior to June 1, and at 50,000 lb (22.7 mt) if the
directed mackerel fishery closes on or after June 1. The alternatives
to the proposed action specify incidental mackerel possession limits at
20,000 lb (9.08 mt)(status quo) and at 50,000 lb (22.7 mt)(least
restrictive). These alternatives were not adopted by the Council
because the status quo incidental possession limit may have resulted in
the regulatory discarding of mackerel by the Atlantic herring fishery
in the Gulf of Maine and, if mackerel are available to the fishery in
2009, the least restrictive incidental possession limit may have
encouraged targeting on mackerel during a fishery closure early in the
year (January-April). Differences in incidental possession limits may
affect behavior and effort during closures of the directed fishery;
however, all alternatives are expected to result in the same total
landings for 2009.
For Loligo, alternatives to the proposed action would have set the
Max OY at 26,000 mt and ABC, IOY, DAH, and DAP at 17,000 mt (status
quo) or Max OY at 32,000 mt and ABC, IOY, DAH, and DAP at 23,000 mt
(least restrictive). These alternatives were not adopted by the Council
because they were either not consistent with the revised reference
points from SARC 34 (status quo) or not consistent with the management
recommendations from SARC 34 and did not consider the uncertainty
associated with the Loligo stock assessment model (least restrictive).
For Illex, one alternative considered would have set Max OY, ABC,
IOY, DAH, and DAP at 30,000 mt. This alternative would allow harvest
far in excess of recent landings in this fishery. Therefore, there
would be no constraints and, thus, no revenue reductions, associated
with this alternative. However, the Council considered this alternative
unacceptable because an ABC specification of 30,000 mt may not prevent
overfishing in years of moderate to low abundance of Illex. Another
alternative considered would have set MAX OY at 24,000 mt and ABC, IOY,
DAH, and DAP at 19,000 mt. The Council considered this alternative
unacceptable because it was unnecessarily restrictive.
For butterfish, one alternative considered would have set the ABC
at 4,525 mt, and IOY, DAH, and DAP at 1,861 mt; while another would
have set ABC at 12,175 mt, and IOY, DAH, and DAP 9,131 mt. These
amounts exceed the landings of this species in recent years. Therefore,
neither alternative represents a constraint on vessels in this fishery
or would reduce revenues in the fishery. However, neither of these
alternatives were adopted by the Council because they would likely
result in overfishing and the additional depletion of the spawning
stock biomass of an overfished species.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648
Fisheries, Fishing, Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
Dated: November 12, 2008.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator For Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 648 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 648--FISHERIES OF THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
1. The authority citation for part 648 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In Sec. 648.25, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 648.25 Possession restrictions.
(a) Atlantic mackerel. During a closure of the directed Atlantic
mackerel fishery that occurs prior to June 1, vessels may not fish for,
possess, or land more than 20,000 lb (9.08 mt) of Atlantic mackerel per
trip at any time,
[[Page 67834]]
and may only land Atlantic mackerel once on any calendar day, which is
defined as the 24-hr period beginning at 0001 hours and ending at 2400
hours. During a closure of the directed fishery for butterfish that
occurs on or after June 1, vessels may not fish for, possess, or land
more than 50,000 lb (22.7 mt) of Atlantic mackerel per trip at any
time, and may only land Atlantic mackerel once on any calendar day.
[FR Doc. E8-27225 Filed 11-14-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S