Federal Register, Volume 75 Issue 124 (Tuesday, June 29, 2010)

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 124 (Tuesday, June 29, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37390-37405]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-15778]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XX12

Caribbean Fishery Management Council; Public Hearings

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of public hearings.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Caribbean Fishery Management Council will hold public
hearings to obtain input from fishers, the general public, and the
local agencies representatives on the Public Hearing Draft Document for
Amendment 2 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Queen Conch Fishery
of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands and Amendment 5 to the Reef
Fish Fishery Management Plan of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands
(with Draft Environmental Impact Statement).

DATES AND ADDRESSES: The public hearings will be held on the following
dates and locations:

In Puerto Rico

July 19, 2010, DoubleTree by Hilton San Juan Hotel, De Diego Avenue,
San Juan, Puerto Rico.
July 20, 2010, Centro de Usos M[uacute]ltiples de Fajardo, Apartado
865, Municipio de Fajardo, Fajardo, Puerto Rico.
July 21, 2010, Ponce Holiday Inn and Tropical Casino. 3315 Ponce By
Pass, Ponce, Puerto Rico.
July 22, 2010, Rincon of the Seas Grand Caribbean Hotel, Rd. 115, Km.
12.2, Rinc[oacute]n, Puerto Rico.

In U.S. Virgin Islands

July 20, 2010, The Buccaneer Hotel, Estate Shoys, Christiansted, St.
Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands.
July 21, 2010, Windward Passage Holiday Inn Hotel, 3400 Veterans Drive,
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.

All meetings will be held from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Caribbean Fishery Management Council,
268 Mu[ntilde]oz Rivera Avenue, Suite 1108, San Juan, Puerto Rico
00918-1920, telephone (787) 766-5926.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Caribbean Fishery Management Council
will hold public hearings to receive public input on the following
management alternatives:

4.0 Management Alternatives

The Council at its 134th Regular Meeting held April 7-8, 2010, in
St. Thomas selected the preferred alternatives for most actions in this
amendment. These are marked as (PREFERRED) for those cases when a
preferred alternative was identified. This does not mean that this is
the final decision by the Council. Instead, the alternatives including
the designated preferred alternatives will be vetted at public hearings
and then further discussed at the Council's 135th Regular meeting to be
held after public hearings.

4.1 Action 1: Amend the Stock Complexes in the Reef Fish Fishery
Management Units (FMU)

4.1.1 Action 1(a) Grouper Complex
Alternative 1. No action. Do not change the species groupings
within the grouper complex.
Alternative 2. (PREFERRED) Separate Grouper Unit 4 into Grouper
Unit 4 (yellowfin, red, tiger plus black grouper) and Grouper Unit 5
(yellowedge and misty grouper). Move creole-fish from Grouper Unit 3
into the `data collection only' unit.
Discussion: Action 1(a) proposes several changes to the grouper
Fishery Management Units for the U.S. Caribbean, including the removal
of creole-fish (Paranthias furcifer) from Unit 3, addition of black
grouper (Mycteroperca bonaci) to Unit 4, and movement of yellowedge
grouper (Epinephelus flavolimbatus) and misty grouper (E. mystacinus)
into a Unit of their own (Table 4.1.1).
4.1.2 Action 1(b) Snapper complex
Alternative 1. No action. Do not change the species groupings
within the snapper complex.
Alternative 2. (PREFERRED) Modify the snapper FMUs by adding
cardinal snapper (Pristipomoides macrophthalmus) to SU2 and moving
wenchman (Pristipomoides aquilonaris) into SU1.
Discussion: The wenchman, Pristipomoides aquilonaris, is currently
included in SU2 along with the queen snapper (Etelis oculatus).
However, the species commonly captured in the commercial fishery
apparently is locally known (particularly in Puerto Rico) as the
wenchman although it actually appears to be Pristipomoides
macrophthalmus. The latter is commonly referred to as the cardinal
snapper. The cardinal snapper clusters strongly with queen snapper
based upon analyses of landings records and habitat utilization
patterns by depth (SEDAR 2009). In contrast, P. aquilonaris is most
closely associated with those species comprising SU1, again based upon
similarities in habitat utilization by depth.

Table 4.1.1--Current and Proposed FMUs for Various Species of Caribbean Reef Fish
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reef Fish Complex Current Proposed
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grouper Unit 3.................. Red hind........... Rock hind.

[[Page 37391]]

Coney.............. Coney.
Rock hind.......... Rock hind.
Graysby............ Graysby.
Creole-fish........
Grouper Unit 4.................. Yellowfin.......... Yellowfin.
Red................ Red.
Tiger.............. Tiger.
Yellowedge......... Black.
Misty..............
Grouper Unit 5.................. ................... Yellowedge.
................... Misty.
Snapper Unit 1.................. Silk............... Silk.
Black.............. Black.
Blackfin........... Blackfin.
Vermilion.......... Vermilion.
................... Wenchman (Pristipomoides aquilonaris).
Snapper Unit 2.................. Queen.............. Queen.
Wenchman Cardinal (Pristipomoides macrophthalmus).
(Pristipomoides
aquilonaris).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4.2 Action 2: Management Reference Points

The MSA requires that FMPs specify a number of reference points for
managed fish stocks, including:
Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY)--The greatest amount or
yield that can be sustainably harvested under prevailing environmental
conditions.
Overfishing Threshold--The maximum rate of fishing a stock
can withstand (MFMT) or maximum yield a stock can produce (OFL),
annually, while still providing MSY on a continuing basis.
Overfished Threshold (MSST)--The biomass level below which
a stock would not be capable of producing MSY.
Annual Catch Limit (ACL)--The annual level to which catch
is limited in order to prevent overfishing from occurring.
Optimum Yield (OY)--The amount or yield that provides the
greatest overall benefit to the Nation, taking into account food
production, recreational opportunities and the protection of marine
ecosystems.
Together, these parameters are intended to provide the means to
measure the status and performance of fisheries relative to established
goals. Available data in the U.S. Caribbean are not sufficient to
support direct estimation of MSY and other key parameters. In such
cases, the National Standard 1 (NS1) guidelines direct regional fishery
management councils to adopt other measures of productive capacity,
including long-term average catch, which can serve as reasonable
proxies.
This section describes current reference points or proxies for
species/species groups comprising the snapper, grouper, parrotfish and
queen conch complexes, as well as alternative MSY proxies, overfishing
thresholds, and ACL and OY definitions, considered by the Council to
better comply with new mandates added to the MSA through the 2006 MSRA.
None of the parameter estimates considered here represents empirical
estimates derived from a comprehensive stock assessment; rather, all
are calculated based on landings data averaged over alternative time
series. The overfished threshold (MSST) of these species/species groups
is currently defined based on the default proxy recommended by Restrepo
et al. (1998) and is not being revisited here. That default proxy
effectively defines a more conservative threshold for less productive
species, such as snapper, grouper, and conch, which are not capable of
recovering to BMSY as quickly as other, more productive
species.
The Council at its 133rd meeting reviewed the alternatives taken to
scoping meetings (see Appendix 4 for Scoping Meeting information and
Appendix 5 for Alternatives Considered and Rejected) and the comments
received. Additional information regarding the need to redefine status
determination criteria or management reference points (or their
proxies) and to evaluate the data on recent catch were presented at the
133rd Council meeting and incorporated into this public hearing draft.
All the reference points considered here are closely interrelated,
and the MSA places several key constraints on what can be considered a
reasonable suite of alternatives. OY must be less than or equal to MSY.
ACL must be less than or equal to the acceptable biological catch (ABC)
level recommended by a Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee
(SSC) or other established peer-review process. And the ABC
recommendation must be less than or equal to the overfishing threshold.
4.2.1 Action 2(a) Snapper, Grouper and Parrotfish Complexes
Action 2(a) proposes to redefine management reference points or
proxies for species/species groups within the snapper, grouper, and
parrotfish complexes. The composition and classification of these
species/species groups in NMFS' report to Congress on the status of
U.S. marine fisheries is described in Table 2.2.1. Snapper Unit 1,
Grouper Units 1 and 4, and the Parrotfish Unit are classified as
undergoing overfishing; however, the status of these species groups has
not been assessed since the Council and NMFS implemented measures to
address overfishing through the Comprehensive SFA Amendment (CFMC
2005). Grouper Units 1, 2 and 4 are classified as overfished and are
entering the sixth year of rebuilding plans designed to rebuild those
species/species groups by 2029, 2034 and 2014, respectively.
Alternative 1. No action. Retain current management reference
points or proxies for species/species groups within the snapper,
grouper and/or parrotfish complexes.
Discussion: This alternative would retain the present MSY proxy,
OY, and overfishing threshold definitions specified in the
Comprehensive SFA Amendment for species/species groups within the
snapper, grouper, and/or parrotfish complexes. These definitions are
detailed in Table 4.2.1.

[[Page 37392]]

Table 4.2.1--Current MSY Proxy, OY and Overfishing Threshold Definitions
for Species/Species Groups Within the Snapper, Grouper and Parrotfish
Complexes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference point Status quo definition
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum Sustainable Yield......... MSY proxy = C/[(Fcurr/FMSY) x (Bcurr/
Bmsy)]; where C is calculated based
on commercial landings for the
years 1997-2001 for Puerto Rico and
1994-2002 for the USVI, and on
recreational landings for the years
2000-2001.
Overfishing Threshold............. MFMT = Fmsy
Optimum Yield..................... OY = average yield associated with
fishing on a
continuing basis at Foy; where Foy =
0.75Fmsy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The current MSY proxy is based on average catch (C) and on
estimates of where stock biomass and fishing mortality rates are in
relation to MSY levels during the period over which catches are
averaged. The overfishing threshold (MFMT) is defined as a rate of
fishing which exceeds that which would produce MSY. And OY is defined
as the amount of fish produced by fishing at a rate equal to 75% of
that which would produce MSY. The numerical values associated with
these parameters are provided in Table 4.2.2 under the columns titled,
``Alternative 1.''
The Comprehensive SFA Amendment in which these reference points
were established pre-dated the MSRA provisions requiring FMPs to
specify ACLs; consequently, the Comprehensive SFA Amendment did not
explicitly specify this parameter for managed species/species groups.
However, the ABC estimates derived from the Council's MSY control rule
could be considered to represent the ACLs of snapper, grouper, and
parrotfish species if no additional action were taken to revise
management reference points in this amendment.
The average catch estimate used to calculate the Caribbean-wide MSY
proxy for each species/species group was derived from commercial
landings data recorded during 1997-2001 for Puerto Rico and during
1994-2002 for the USVI, and recreational landings data recorded during
2000-2001. These time series were considered to represent the longest
time periods of consistently reliable data at the time the
Comprehensive SFA Amendment was approved. Commercial catch data were
derived from trip ticket reports collected by the state governments.
Recreational data for Puerto Rico were derived from MRFSS. Recreational
data for the USVI were derived by assuming the same commercial-
recreational relationship and species composition reported by MRFSS for
Puerto Rico. Those data indicated recreational catches averaged about
44% of commercial catch levels during 2000-2001.

Table 4.2.2--Extant and Alternative U.S. Caribbean Reference Points or Proxies Calculated Based on the Alternative Time Series Described in Section 4.2.1. Also Included Are the Average
Landings for the Two Years (2006-2007) Following Enactment of the Comprehensive SFA Amendment
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) Proxy Overfishing Threshold
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4
Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 1 (MFMT) (OFL) (OFL) (OFL)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Queen Conch.................................. 452,000 512,718 488,073 525,152 Undefined........................ 512,718 488,073 525,152
Snapper...................................... 1,551,000 2,004,003 1,861,538 1,725,798 Undefined........................ 2,004,003 1,861,538 1,725,798
Unit 1....................................... 493,000 .............. .............. .............. ................................. .............. .............. ..............
Unit 2....................................... 151,000 .............. .............. .............. ................................. .............. .............. ..............
Unit 3....................................... 542,000 .............. .............. .............. ................................. .............. .............. ..............
Unit 4....................................... 365,000 .............. .............. .............. ................................. .............. .............. ..............
Grouper...................................... 257,000-289,00 396,483 354,853 337,178 Undefined........................ 396,483 354,853 337,178
0
Unit 1....................................... 2,000-25,000 .............. .............. .............. ................................. .............. .............. ..............
Unit 2....................................... 2,000-11,000 .............. .............. .............. ................................. .............. .............. ..............
Unit 3....................................... 158,000 .............. .............. .............. ................................. .............. .............. ..............
Unit 4....................................... 95,000 .............. .............. .............. ................................. .............. .............. ..............
Parrotfish................................... 304,000 507,059 496,656 512,201 Undefined........................ 507,059 496,656 512,201
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Optimum Yield (OY)/Annual Catch Limit (ACL)
Unit -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alt. 1 (OY/ABC) Alt. 2(c) Alt. 2(d) Alt. 2(e) Alt. 2(f) Alt. 2(g) Alt. 2(h) Alt. 3(c) Alt. 3(d) Alt. 3(e)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Queen Conch................... 424,000/--...... 107,720....... 91,562........ 80,790........ 53,860........ 50,000........ 0............. 116,899....... 99,364........ 87,674
Snapper....................... 1,455,000/ 2,004,003..... 1,703,403..... 1,503,002..... 1,002,002..... .............. N/A........... 1,861,538..... 1,582,307..... 1,396,154
1,428,000.
Unit 1........................ 463,000/370,000. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. ..............
Unit 2........................ 142,000/151,000. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. ..............
Unit 3........................ 508,000/542,000. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. ..............
Unit 4........................ 342,000/365,000. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. ..............
Grouper....................... 237,000/229,000. 396,483....... 337,011....... 297,362....... 198,242....... .............. N/A........... 354,853....... 301,625....... 266,140
Unit 1........................ 1,880-23,440/--. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. 0............. .............. .............. ..............
Unit 2........................ 1,880-10,310/--. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. 0............. .............. .............. ..............

[[Page 37393]]

Unit 3........................ 148,000/158,000. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. ..............
Unit 4........................ 89,000/71,000... .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. ..............
Parrotfish.................... 285,000/228,000. 507,059....... 431,000....... 380,294....... 253,530....... 430,000....... N/A........... 496,656....... 422,158....... 372,492
Unit.......................... Alt 3(f)........ Alt 3(g)...... Alt 3(h)...... Alt 4(c)...... Alt 4(d)...... Alt 4(e)...... Alt 4(f)...... Alt 4(g)...... Alt 4(h)...... 06-07 Avg.
Queen Conch................... 58,450.......... 50,000........ 0............. 138,587....... 117,799....... 103,940....... 69,294........ 50,000........ 0............. 401,705
Snapper....................... 930,769......... ----.......... N/A........... 1,725,798..... 1,466,928..... 1,294,349..... 862,899....... .............. N/A........... 1,360,996
Unit 1........................ ................ .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. ..............
Unit 2........................ ................ .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. ..............
Unit 3........................ ................ .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. ..............
Unit 4........................ ................ .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. ..............
Grouper....................... 177,427......... .............. N/A........... 337,178....... 286,601....... 252,884....... 168,589....... .............. N/A........... 214,118
Unit 1........................ ................ .............. 0............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. 0............. ..............
Unit 2........................ ................ .............. 0............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. 0............. ..............
Unit 3........................ ................ .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. ..............
Unit 4........................ ................ .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. ..............
Parrotfish.................... 248,328......... 430,000....... N/A........... 512,201....... 435,371....... 384,151....... 256,101....... 430,000....... N/A........... 464,819
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Because data are insufficient to estimate biomass and fishing
mortality rates in the U.S. Caribbean, the remaining information needed
to calculate MSY proxies was derived from the informed judgment of the
SFA Working Group regarding whether each species/species group was at
risk of overfishing and/or overfished during the time period when
catches were averaged.\1\ This approach followed guidance provided by
Restrepo et al. (1998), which notes that ``in cases of severe data
limitations, qualitative approaches [to determining stock status and
fishery status] may be necessary, including [the use of] expert opinion
and consensus-building methods.'' The determinations of the SFA Working
Group were based on available scientific and anecdotal information
(including anecdotal observations of fishermen as reported by fishery
managers), life history information, and the status of individual
species as evaluated in other regions. ABC estimates were developed
using the natural mortality rate of each species/species group as a
proxy for FMSY. The actual yield associated with the current
OY definition was estimated to equal 93.75% of MSY.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ The SFA Working Group was a Council-advisory group, which
included staff from the Council, NMFS' Southeast Regional Office and
SEFSC, USVI and Puerto Rico fishery management agencies, and several
environmental non-governmental organizations. The discussion of
biomass and fishing mortality rate estimates took place at the
October 23-24, 2002 meeting of the SFA Working Group in Carolina,
Puerto Rico. Notice of the meeting location, date, and agenda was
provided in the Federal Register (67 FR 63622).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alternative 2. (PREFERRED) Redefine management reference points or
proxies for the snapper, grouper and/or parrotfish complexes based on
the longest time series of pre-Comprehensive SFA Amendment catch data
that is considered to be consistently reliable across all islands.
Discussion: Alternative 2 would define aggregate management
reference points or proxies for the snapper, grouper and/or parrotfish
complexes based on what the Council considers to be the longest time
series of catch data prior to the implementation of the Comprehensive
SFA Amendment that is consistently reliable across all islands.
Specific definitions are detailed in Table 4.2.3. The Council chose to
omit several years of landings data collected in Puerto Rico prior to
1999 in favor of selecting a more consistent baseline across all
islands, noting the inclusion of those earlier landings data would not
appreciably alter the various reference point estimates.
The MSY proxy specified by Alternative 2 would equate to average
catch, calculated using commercial landings data from 1999-2005 for
Puerto Rico and St. Croix and from 2000-2005 for St. Thomas/St. John,
and recreational landings data from 2000-2005 for Puerto Rico only.
Commercial data would be derived from trip ticket reports collected by
the state governments. Recreational data would be derived from the
MRFSS.
The overfishing threshold (OFL) would be defined as the amount of
catch corresponding to the MSY proxy, and overfishing would be
determined to occur if annual catches exceeded the overfishing
threshold (Alternative 2(a)) or if annual catches exceeded the
overfishing threshold and scientists (in consultation with managers)
attributed the overage to increased catches versus improved data
collection and monitoring (Alternative 2(b)).

Table 4.2.3--Management Reference Points or Proxies Proposed for
Snapper, Grouper and/or Parrotfish Complexes Under Alternative 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference point Alternative 2 (preferred)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum Sustainable Yield.... MSY proxy = average annual commercial
catch from 1999-2005 for Puerto Rico and
STX and from 2000-2005 for STT/STJ +
average annual recreational catch from
MRFSS during 2000-2005 for Puerto Rico.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overfishing Threshold
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative 2(a)............. OFL = MSY proxy; overfishing occurs when
annual catches exceed the OFL.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 37394]]

Alternative 2(b) (PREFERRED). OFL = MSY proxy; overfishing occurs when
annual catches exceed the OFL, unless
NMFS' Southeast Fisheries Science Center
(in consultation with the Caribbean
Fishery Management Council and its
Scientific and Statistical Committee)
determines the overage occurred because
data collection/monitoring improved,
rather than because catches actually
increased.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Optimum Yield/Annual Catch Limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative 2(c)............. OY = ACL = OFL.
Alternative 2(d)............. OY = ACL = OFL x (0.85).
Alternative 2(e) (PREFERRED). OY = ACL = OFL x (0.75) (PREFERRED for
snappers, groupers and parrotfish).
Alternative 2(f)............. OY = ACL = OFL x (0.50)
Alternative 2(g)............. OY = ACL = ABC specified by Scientific
and Statistical Committee.
Alternative 2(h) (PREFERRED). OY = ACL = 0 (Grouper Units 1 and 2,
midnight parrotfish, blue parrotfish,
rainbow parrotfish) (PREFERRED for GU1
and GU2 and for midnight, blue and
rainbow parrotfish).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The OY and ACL would be equal values, and the same socioeconomic
and ecological tradeoffs would be considered in the determination of
where to set both of these parameters. Most of the alternative ACL
definitions considered here are more restrictive than the current OY
definition and would prevent the fishery from achieving OY as currently
defined.
ACL (= OY) Alternatives 2(c) through 2(f) would set those
parameters equal to some proportion (100-50%) of the OFL to take into
account uncertainty, ecological factors, and other concerns.
Alternative 2(g) would set the ACL (= OY) equal to the ABC recommended
by the Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee; however, of the
complexes considered here, the SSC recommended an ABC only for
parrotfish. Alternative 2(h) would set the ACL (= OY) equal to zero for
Grouper Unit 1 (Nassau grouper) and/or Grouper Unit 2 (goliath
grouper), indicating that take of these species should be prohibited to
prevent overfishing. The Council chose to include three of the
parrotfish (blue, midnight and rainbow) in Alternative 2(h) thereby
creating the option to set OY and ACL equal to zero for these species
as well.
The specific numerical values associated with the various
Alternative 2 definitions are described in Table 4.2.2 under the
columns titled, ``Alternative 2.''
The CFMC, at its 134th Regular Meeting held in St. Thomas, USVI
during April 7-8 2010, chose the following alternatives as preferred
alternatives to be taken to public hearings. These are not to be
considered final actions by the CFMC. Instead, the Council will convene
later in 2010, following the public hearings, to take final action on
these alternatives.
In Action 2(a), Alternative 2 was chosen as the preferred
alternative because it includes the longest pre-Comprehensive SFA
Amendment data series for the commercial and recreational sectors. In
2005, implementation of the Comprehensive SFA Amendment to the reef
fish and conch FMPs included a suite of management measures designed to
curb or end overfishing, including for example seasonal and area
closures. As a result, the management regime changed drastically in
2005. The Council therefore decided to use the pre-Comprehensive SFA
Amendment time series for redefining management reference points
because that time series does not include post-2005 years that are
influenced by those potentially substantial changes in management and
resultant reduction in catch. Moreover, Caribbean coral reefs and their
associated community experienced a major bleaching event and an above-
normal number of hurricanes and storms in 2005 (Wilkinson and Souter
2008), further complicating the interpretation of post-2005 harvest
data.
The CFMC chose Alternative 2(b) as a preferred alternative in the
public hearing draft document to ensure that AMs are not triggered
indiscriminately without considering the effect of improved reporting
and data collection efforts. The Council recognized the efforts that
the local governments, fishers, and the SEFSC are undertaking to
provide the necessary information for stock assessments in the region.
In making the determination, the agency will assess the quality of the
incoming data on an improved and timely schedule, and monitor along
with the local governments the quality of the data. Additional
information could be collected to determine if the increase in catches
is due to more accurate reporting, including increases in the number of
complete catches being sampled.
The Council preferred Alternatives 2(e), a scalar of 0.75, for the
snapper complex, the grouper complex, and the parrotfish unit. This
precautionary approach was taken in consideration of the combined
management and scientific uncertainty inherent in the data, but also
considering the many changes that have taken place in the U.S.
Caribbean since 2005. Alternative 2(h) was chosen as a preferred
alternative for GU1 (Nassau grouper), GU2 (goliath grouper), and for
blue, midnight, and rainbow parrotfish. For Nassau and goliath grouper,
fishing and possession of these species already is prohibited in all
state and territorial waters and in the EEZ.
This amendment includes, as an alternative, a prohibition on
fishing for and possession of midnight, blue, and rainbow parrotfish,
as recommended by the SSC. The Council also chose Action 4(a)
Alternative 2 prohibiting fishing for and possession of these
parrotfish as the preferred alternative. This alternative, for the
three species of parrotfish, responds to the important role these
larger parrotfish have on the ecological health of the coral reefs and
the testimony at Council public meetings (including scoping meetings on
ACLs) on the decrease in numbers of these species on U.S. Caribbean
coral reefs.
Alternative 3. Redefine management reference points or proxies for
the snapper, grouper and/or parrotfish complexes based on the longest
time series of catch data that is considered to be consistently
reliable across all islands.

[[Page 37395]]

Table 4.2.4--Management Reference Points or Proxies Proposed for
Snapper, Grouper and/or Parrotfish Complexes Under Alternative 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference point Alternative 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum Sustainable Yield.... MSY proxy = average annual commercial
catch from 1999-2007 for Puerto Rico and
STX and from 2000-2007 for STT/STJ +
average annual recreational catch from
MRFSS during 2000-2007 for Puerto Rico.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overfishing Threshold
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative 3(a)............. OFL = MSY proxy; overfishing occurs when
annual catches exceed the OFL.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative 3(b)............. OFL = MSY proxy; overfishing occurs when
annual catches exceed the OFL, unless
NMFS' Southeast Fisheries Science Center
(in consultation with the Caribbean
Fishery Management Council and its
Scientific and Statistical Committee)
determines the overage occurred because
data collection/monitoring improved,
rather than because catches actually
increased.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Optimum Yield/Annual Catch Limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative 3(c)............. OY = ACL = OFL.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative 3(d)............. OY = ACL = OFL x (0.85).
Alternative 3(e)............. OY = ACL = OFL x (0.75).
Alternative 3(f)............. OY = ACL = OFL x (0.50).
Alternative 3(g)............. OY = ACL = ABC specified by Scientific
and Statistical Committee.
Alternative 3(h)............. OY = ACL = 0 (Grouper Units 1 and 2 and/
or parrotfish).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion: Alternative 3 would define aggregate management
reference points or proxies for the snapper, grouper and/or parrotfish
complexes based on what the Council considers to be the longest time
series of catch data that is consistently reliable across all islands.
Specific definitions are detailed in Table 4.2.4.
The Council chose to omit several years of landings data collected
in Puerto Rico prior to 1999 in favor of selecting a more consistent
baseline across all islands, noting the inclusion of those earlier
landings data would not appreciably alter the various reference point
estimates.
The MSY proxy defined by Alternative 3 would equate to average
catch, calculated using commercial landings data from 1999-2007 for
Puerto Rico and St. Croix and from 2000-2007 for St. Thomas/St. John,
and recreational landings data from 2000-2007 for Puerto Rico only.
Commercial data would be derived from trip ticket reports collected by
the state governments. Recreational data would be derived from the
MRFSS. Alternative definitions for the overfishing threshold, OY, and
ACL parameters are the same as those considered under Alternative 2.
The specific numerical values associated with the various Alternative 3
definitions are described in Table 4.2.2 under the columns titled,
``Alternative 3.''
Alternative 4. Redefine management reference points or proxies for
the snapper, grouper and/or parrotfish complexes based on the most
recent five years of available catch data.
Discussion: Alternative 4 would define aggregate management
reference points or proxies for the snapper, grouper and/or parrotfish
complexes based on the most recent five years of available catch data
as requested by the Council. Specific definitions are detailed in Table
4.2.5.
The MSY proxy defined by Alternative 4 would equate to average
catch, calculated using commercial landings data from 2003-2007 for
Puerto Rico and the USVI, and recreational landings data from 2003-2007
for Puerto Rico only. Commercial data would be derived from trip ticket
reports collected by the state governments. Recreational data would be
derived from the MRFSS. Alternative definitions for the overfishing
threshold, OY and ACL parameter are the same as those considered under
Alternatives 2 and 3. The specific numerical values associated with the
various Alternative 4 definitions are described in Table 4.2.2 under
the columns titled, ``Alternative 4.''

Table 4.2.5--Management Reference Points or Proxies Proposed for
Snapper, Grouper and/or Parrotfish Complexes Under Alternative 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference point Alternative 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum Sustainable Yield.... MSY proxy = average annual commercial
catch from 2003-2007 for Puerto Rico and
the USVI + average annual recreational
catch from MRFSS during 2003-2007 for
Puerto Rico.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overfishing Threshold
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative 4(a)............. OFL = MSY proxy; overfishing occurs when
annual catches exceed the OFL.
Alternative 4(b)............. OFL = MSY proxy; overfishing occurs when
annual catches exceed the OFL, unless
NMFS' Southeast Fisheries Science Center
(in consultation with the Caribbean
Fishery Management Council and its
Scientific and Statistical Committee)
determines the overage occurred because
data collection/monitoring improved,
rather than because catches actually
increased.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 37396]]

Optimum Yield/Annual Catch Limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative 4(c)............. OY = ACL = OFL.
Alternative 4(d)............. OY = ACL = OFL x (0.85).
Alternative 4(e)............. OY = ACL = OFL x (0.75).
Alternative 4(f)............. OY = ACL = OFL x (0.50).
Alternative 4(g)............. OY = ACL = ABC specified by Scientific
and Statistical Committee.
Alternative 4(h)............. OY = ACL = 0 (Grouper Units 1 and 2 and/
or parrotfish).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

4.2.2 Action 2(b): Queen Conch Complex
Action 2(b) proposes to redefine management reference points or
proxies for the queen conch complex. Queen conch is currently
classified as overfished and subject to overfishing in NMFS' report to
Congress on the status of U.S. marine fisheries. However, the status of
this species has not been assessed since the Council and NMFS
implemented measures to address overfishing through the Comprehensive
SFA Amendment (CFMC 2005). Queen conch is currently entering the sixth
year of a rebuilding plan designed to rebuild the stock by 2019.
Alternative 1. No action. Retain current management reference
points or proxies for the queen conch complex.

Table 4.2.6--Current MSY Proxy, OY, and Overfishing Threshold
Definitions for Queen Conch
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference point Status quo definition
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum Sustainable Yield.... MSY proxy = C/[(FCURR/FMSY) x (BCURR/
BMSY)]; where C is calculated based on
commercial landings for the years 1997-
2001 for Puerto Rico and 1994-2002 for
the USVI, and on recreational landings
for the years 2000-2001.
Overfishing Threshold........ MFMT = FMSY.
Optimum Yield................ OY = average yield associated with
fishing on a
continuing basis at FOY; where FOY =
0.75FMSY.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion: This alternative would retain the present MSY proxy,
OY, and overfishing threshold definitions specified in the
Comprehensive SFA Amendment for queen conch. These definitions are
detailed in Table 4.2.6.
The current MSY proxy is based on C and on estimates of where stock
biomass and fishing mortality rates are in relation to MSY levels
during the period over which catches are averaged. The overfishing
threshold (MFMT) is defined as a rate of fishing which exceeds that
which would produce MSY, and OY is defined as the amount of queen conch
produced by fishing at a rate equal to 75% of that which would produce
MSY. The numerical values associated with these parameters are provided
in Table 4.2.2 under the columns titled, ``Alternative 1.''
The Comprehensive SFA Amendment in which these reference points
were established pre-dated the MSRA provisions requiring FMPs to
specify ACLs; consequently, the Comprehensive SFA Amendment did not
explicitly specify this parameter for managed species/species groups.
However, the ABC estimates derived from the Council's MSY control rule
could be considered to represent the ACL of queen conch if no
additional action were taken to revise management reference points in
this amendment.
The average catch estimate used to calculate the MSY proxy was
derived from commercial landings data recorded during 1997-2001 for
Puerto Rico and during 1994-2002 for the USVI, and recreational
landings data recorded during 2000-2001. These time series were
considered to represent the longest time periods of relatively reliable
data at the time the Comprehensive SFA Amendment was approved.
Commercial catch data were derived from trip ticket reports collected
by the state governments. Recreational catch data for Puerto Rico were
derived from a two-month MRFSS survey specific for queen conch.
Recreational catches for the USVI were assumed to equal 50% of USVI
commercial landings based on information from Valle-Esquivel (pers.
comm.).
Because data are insufficient to estimate biomass and fishing
mortality rates in the U.S. Caribbean, the remaining information needed
to calculate the MSY proxy was derived from the informed judgment of
the SFA Working Group regarding whether queen conch was at risk of
overfishing and/or overfished during the time period when catches were
averaged. This is the same approach described in Section 4.2.1 for the
snapper, grouper, and parrotfish complexes. ABC estimates were
developed using the natural mortality rate of queen conch as a proxy
for FMSY. The actual yield associated with the current OY
definition was estimated to equal 93.75% of MSY.
Alternative 2. (PREFERRED) Redefine management reference points or
proxies for queen conch based on the longest time series of pre-
Comprehensive SFA Amendment catch data that is considered to be
consistently reliable across all islands.

[[Page 37397]]

Table 4.2.7--Management Reference Points or Proxies Proposed for Queen
Conch Under Alternative 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference point Alternative 2 (Preferred)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum Sustainable Yield.... MSY proxy = average annual commercial
catch from 1999-2005 for Puerto Rico and
STX and from 2000-2005 for STT/STJ.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overfishing Threshold
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative 2(a)............. OFL = MSY proxy; overfishing occurs when
annual catches exceed the OFL.
Alternative 2(b) (PREFERRED). OFL = MSY proxy; overfishing occurs when
annual catches exceed the OFL, unless
NMFS' Southeast Fisheries Science Center
(in consultation with the Caribbean
Fishery Management Council and its
Scientific and Statistical Committee)
determines the overage occurred because
data collection/monitoring improved,
rather than because catches actually
increased. (PREFERRED)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Optimum Yield/Annual Catch Limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative 2(c)............. OY = ACL = average annual landings from
1999-2005 for St. Croix.
Alternative 2(d)............. OY = ACL = average annual landings from
1999-2005 for St. Croix x (0.85).
Alternative 2(e)............. OY = ACL = average annual landings from
1999-2005 for St. Croix x (0.75).
Alternative 2(f)............. OY = ACL = average annual landings from
1999-2005 for St. Croix x (0.50).
Alternative 2(g) (PREFERRED). OY = ACL = ABC specified by Scientific
and Statistical Committee (PREFERRED).
Alternative 2(h)............. OY = ACL = 0.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion: Alternative 2 would redefine management reference
points or proxies for queen conch based on what the Council considers
to be the longest time series of catch data prior to the implementation
of the Comprehensive SFA Amendment that is considered reliable across
all islands. Specific definitions are detailed in Table 4.2.7. The
Council chose to omit several years of landings data collected in
Puerto Rico prior to 1999 in favor of selecting a more consistent
baseline across all islands, noting the inclusion of those earlier
landings data would not appreciably alter the various reference point
estimates.
The MSY proxy specified by Alternative 2 would equate to average
catch, calculated using commercial landings data from 1999-2005 for
Puerto Rico and St. Croix and from 2000-2005 for St. Thomas/St. John.
These data would be derived from trip ticket reports collected by the
state governments.
The OFL would be defined as the amount of catch corresponding to
the MSY proxy, and overfishing would be determined to occur if annual
catches exceeded the overfishing threshold (Alternative 2(a)) or if
annual catches exceeded the overfishing threshold and scientists (in
consultation with managers) attributed the overage to increased catches
versus improved data collection and monitoring (Alternative 2(b)).
The OY and ACL would be equal values, and the same socioeconomic
and ecological tradeoffs would be considered in the determination of
where to set both of these parameters. Most of the alternative ACL
definitions considered here are more restrictive than the current OY
definition and would prevent the fishery from achieving OY as currently
defined.
ACL (= OY) Alternatives 2(c) through 2(f) would set those
parameters equal to some proportion (100-50%) of the average annual
landings from 1999-2005 for St. Croix to take into account uncertainty,
ecological factors, and other concerns. Alternative 2(g) would set
those parameters equal to the 50,000 pound ABC recommended by the
Council's SSC for queen conch. Alternative 2(h) would set these
parameters equal to zero, indicating that queen conch take should be
prohibited to prevent overfishing. Note that the EEZ is closed to queen
conch harvest west of 64[deg] 34' W, with only the Lang Bank EEZ area
east of St. Croix open to queen conch harvest in federal waters.
The specific numerical values associated with the various
Alternative 2 definitions are described in Table 4.2.2 under the
columns titled, ``Alternative 2''.
Alternative 3. Redefine management reference points or proxies for
queen conch based on the longest time series of catch data that is
considered to be consistently reliable across all islands.
Discussion: Alternative 3 would define aggregate management
reference points or proxies for queen conch based on what the Council
considers to be the longest time series of catch data that is
consistently reliable across all islands. Specific definitions are
detailed in Table 4.2.8.
The Council chose to omit several years of landings data collected
in Puerto Rico prior to 1999 in favor of selecting a more consistent
baseline across all islands, noting the inclusion of those earlier
landings data would not appreciably alter the various reference point
estimates.

Table 4.2.8--Management Reference Points or Proxies Proposed for Queen
Conch Under Alternative 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference point Alternative 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum Sustainable Yield.... MSY proxy = average annual commercial
catch from 1999-2007 for Puerto Rico and
STX and from 2000-2007 for STT/STJ.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overfishing Threshold
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative 3(a)............. OFL = MSY proxy; overfishing occurs when
annual catches exceed the OFL.

[[Page 37398]]

Alternative 3(b)............. OFL = MSY proxy; overfishing occurs when
annual catches exceed the OFL, unless
NMFS' Southeast Fisheries Science Center
(in consultation with the Caribbean
Fishery Management Council and its
Scientific and Statistical Committee)
determines the overage occurred because
data collection/monitoring improved,
rather than because catches actually
increased.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Optimum Yield/Annual Catch Limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative 3(c)............. OY = ACL = average annual landings from
1999-2007 for St. Croix.

Alternative 3(d)............. OY = ACL = average annual landings from
1999-2007 for St. Croix x (0.85).

Alternative 3(e)............. OY = ACL = average annual landings from
1999-2007 for St. Croix x (0.75).

Alternative 3(f)............. OY = ACL = average annual landings from
1999-2007 for St. Croix x (0.50).

Alternative 3(g)............. OY = ACL = ABC specified by Scientific
and Statistical Committee.

Alternative 3(h)............. OY = ACL = 0.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The MSY proxy defined by Alternative 3 would equate to average
catch, calculated using commercial landings data only from 1999-2007
for Puerto Rico and St. Croix and from 2000-2007 for St. Thomas/St.
John. These data would be derived from trip ticket reports collected by
the state governments. Alternative definitions for the overfishing
threshold, OY, and ACL parameters are the same as those considered
under Alternative 2. The specific numerical values associated with the
various Alternative 3 definitions are described in Table 4.2.2 under
the columns titled, ``Alternative 3''.
Alternative 4. Redefine management reference points or proxies for
queen conch based on the most recent five years of available catch
data.
Discussion: Alternative 4 would define management reference points
or proxies for queen conch based on the most recent five years of
available catch data, as requested by the Council. Specific definitions
are detailed in Table 4.2.9.

Table 4.2.9.--Management Reference Points or Proxies Proposed for Queen
Conch Under Alternative 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference point Alternative 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum Sustainable Yield.... MSY proxy = average annual commercial
catch from 2003-2007 for Puerto Rico and
the USVI.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overfishing Threshold
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative 4(a)............. OFL = MSY proxy; overfishing occurs when
annual catches exceed the OFL.
Alternative 4(b)............. OFL = MSY; overfishing occurs when annual
catches exceed the OFL, unless NMFS'
Southeast Fisheries Science Center (in
consultation with the Caribbean Fishery
Management Council and its Scientific
and Statistical Committee) determines
the overage occurred because data
collection/monitoring improved, rather
than because catches actually increased.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Optimum Yield/Annual Catch Limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative 4(c)............. OY = ACL = average annual landings from
2003-2007 for St. Croix.
Alternative 4(d)............. OY = ACL = average annual landings from
2003-2007 for St. Croix x (0.85).
Alternative 4(e)............. OY = ACL = average annual landings from
2003-2007 for St. Croix x (0.75).
Alternative 4(f)............. OY = ACL = average annual landings from
2003-2007 for St. Croix x (0.50).
Alternative 4(g)............. OY = ACL = ABC specified by Scientific
and Statistical Committee.
Alternative 4(h)............. OY = ACL = 0.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The MSY proxy specified by Alternative 4 would equate to average
catch, calculated using commercial landings data only from 2003-2007
for Puerto Rico and the USVI. These data would be derived from trip
ticket reports collected by the state governments. Alternative
definitions for the overfishing threshold, OY, and ACL parameters are
the same as those considered under Alternatives 2 and 3. The specific
numerical values associated with the various Alternative 4 definitions
are described in Table 4.2.2 under the columns titled, ``Alternative
4''.

4.3 Action 3: Annual Catch Limit Allocation/Management

4.3.1 Action 3(a): Snapper and grouper unit allocation/management
Alternative 1. No action. Define reference points for sub-units
within the snapper and grouper units.

[[Page 37399]]

Alternative 2. Define aggregate reference points for the snapper
and grouper units:

A. Puerto Rico only.
B. USVI only.
C. Both Puerto Rico and the USVI.

Alternative 3. Define aggregate reference points for the grouper
unit:
A. Puerto Rico only.
B. USVI only.
C. Both Puerto Rico and the USVI.

Alternative 4. (PREFERRED) Define aggregate reference points for
snapper and grouper in the USVI and define aggregate reference points
for grouper but not snapper in Puerto Rico.

Discussion: Commercial harvest data have been collected from Puerto
Rico and USVI waters for many decades, but as explained in Section 3.3
the USVI landings data were generally reported by gear rather than
species until the late 1990s. As a result of those data limitations,
USVI commercial landings data only allow analysis to the family-group
(snapper, grouper, parrotfish) level since calendar year (CY) 1998 for
St. Croix (STX) and since CY 2000 for St. Thomas and St. John (STT/
STJ). Moreover, at the September 2009 meeting of the Council a motion
to include only data acquired since CY 1999 was presented and passed.
Thus, the start date for any analyses included in this amendment is CY
1999 or later. The rationale for this was because family-level data
were not available for STT/STJ until CY 2000, so that year represents
the earliest start date for STT/STJ. The Council also requested that
landings data for Puerto Rico adhere to this start year limitation
despite the fact that Puerto Rico data have been reported to species
for a longer period of time than family level data have been reported
for USVI landings. For all three island groups, commercial landings
data were available only through CY 2007 at the time of preparation of
this document. Thus, the data record for STX and Puerto Rico is 1999-
2007 and for STT/STJ it is 2000-2007. Consequently, reference points
for snapper and grouper will be based on similar time periods for all
islands.
A tangible goal of fisheries management in U.S. Caribbean waters is
to manage at the level of individual species. Considering the large
number of species being harvested in U.S. Caribbean waters, and given
the data limitations discussed above, adequate data with which to
conduct stock assessments and to set reference points for individual
species are generally not available for the U.S. Caribbean (SEDAR
2009). Thus, although it is a worthwhile goal to manage at the level of
the individual species, in practice this is difficult for many U.S.
Caribbean species due to data limitations.
4.3.2 Action 3(b): Commercial and recreational sector allocation/
management (Puerto Rico only)
Alternative 1. No action. Do not specify sector-specific annual
catch limits.
Alternative 2. (PREFERRED) Specify separate commercial and
recreational annual catch limits based on the preferred management
reference point time series.
Discussion: Action 3(b) applies only to Puerto Rico waters because
recreational harvest data are not available for the USVI. In Puerto
Rico, the MRFSS program has been underway since 2000. That program
obtains estimates of recreational harvest from statistically based
telephone surveys and face-to-face intercepts of recreational fishers,
for finfish species including snapper, grouper, and parrotfish. Queen
conch is not included in the program.
4.3.3 Action 3(c): Geographic allocation/management
Alternative 1. No Action. Maintain U.S. Caribbean-wide reference
points.
Alternative 2. (PREFERRED) Divide and manage annual catch limits by
island group (i.e., Puerto Rico, STT/STJ, STX) based on the preferred
management reference point time series (Table 4.3.1 and Action 2).
A. (PREFERRED) Use a mid-point or equidistant method for dividing
the EEZ among islands.
B. Use a straight line approach for dividing the EEZ among islands.
C. Use the St. Thomas Fishermen's Association line.
Discussion: Action 3(c) addresses the opportunity to partition the
EEZ consistent with the allocation of fishing regulations among the
islands (Puerto Rico and STX) or island groups (STT/STJ). Partitioning
management among the described islands or island groups has been
expressed as a desire of local fishers, the fishing community, and the
local governments. Those entities emphasize differences among the
islands in terms of culture, markets, gear preferences, and seafood
preferences as the basis for such a management regime.
Table 4.3.1. Average annual landings in pounds of conch,
parrotfish, snapper, and grouper from each of Puerto Rico, St. Thomas/
St. John, and St. Croix for each of the year-sequence (1999-2005, 1999-
2007, 2003-2007) alternatives discussed in Action 2 of this amendment.
Snapper and grouper FMUs are based upon the proposed species
composition as described in Table 4.1.1. Also included are averages for
2006-2007, the two available post-Comprehensive SFA Amendment years,
for comparison with the year-sequence alternatives. Table A summarizes
Puerto Rico commercial landings, Table B summarizes Puerto Rico
recreational landings in pounds (numbers of fish reported are in
parentheses), Table C summarizes St. Thomas/St. John commercial
landings, Table D summarizes St. Croix commercial landings, and Table E
provides the summary totals.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FMU/Year sequence 1999-2005 1999-2007 2003-2007 2006-2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) Puerto Rico average commercial landings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conch............................... 403,349 369,298 384,584 250,122
Parrotfish.......................... 127,980 111,614 101,084 54,332
Snapper:
Unit 1.......................... 334,923 294,118 240,463 151,300
Unit 2.......................... 171,666 167,075 192,721 151,007
Unit 3.......................... 406,794 357,281 321,952 183,987
Unit 4.......................... 439,171 394,787 351,629 239,445
Unclassified.................... 80,114 71,001 64,930 39,104

Total....................... 1,432,668 1,284,262 1,171,695 764,843
Grouper:
Unit 1.......................... 17,469 14,066 7,423 2,152
Unit 2.......................... 735 572 995 0
Unit 3.......................... 112,875 95,626 79,201 35,254

[[Page 37400]]

Unit 4.......................... 5,720 5,035 4,710 2,641
Unit 5.......................... 9,477 9,356 10,138 8,929
Unclassified.................... 62,563 54,138 44,474 24,649

Total....................... 208,839 178,793 146,941 73,625
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(B) Puerto Rico average recreational landings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conch............................... N/A N/A N/A N/A
Parrotfish.......................... 37,042 (22,128) 29,464 (17,853) 25,650 (13,726) 6,730 (5,027)
Snapper:
Unit 1.......................... 112,384 (97,879) 135,565 (112,851) 133,829 (120,137) 205,109 (157,768)
Unit 2.......................... 40,953 (9,250) 32,846 (7,860) 16,477 (6,027) 8,528 (3,690)
Unit 3.......................... 97,833 (91,793) 90,649 (92,272) 83,372 (80,233) 69,097 (93,711)
Unit 4.......................... 33,540 (32,783) 29,307 (32,071) 29,587 (34,226) 16,607 (29,935)
Unclassified.................... 8,130 (6,336) 6,098 (4,752) 0 (0) 0 (0)

Total....................... 292,840 (238,041) 294,465 (249,806) 263,265 (240,623) 299,341 (285,104)
Grouper:
Unit 1.......................... 6,172 (574) 7,975 (915) 11,251 (1,289) 13,383 (1,937)
Unit 2.......................... 6,501 (716) 4,875 (537) 0 (0) 0 (0)
Unit 3.......................... 72,063 (108,149) 62,994 (91,529) 69,430 (98,691) 35,788 (41,671)
Unit 4.......................... 4,581 (306) 4,945 (367) 6,162 (437) 6,035 (548)
Unit 5.......................... 1,522 (349) 1,142 (262) 1,361 (330) 0 (0)
Unclassified.................... 0 0 0 0

Total....................... 90,839 (110,094) 81,931 (93,610) 88,204 (100,747) 55,206 (44,156)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) St. Thomas/St. John average commercial landings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conch............................... 1,649 1,876 1,981 2,557
Parrotfish.......................... 48,818 47,245 49,353 42,528
Snapper............................. 157,382 159,594 156,792 166,231
Grouper............................. 60,999 59,952 64,201 56,812
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(D) St. Croix average commercial landings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conch............................... 107,720 116,899 138,587 149,026
Parrotfish.......................... 293,219 308,333 336,114 361,229
Snapper............................. 121,113 123,217 134,046 130,581
Grouper............................. 35,806 34,177 37,832 28,475
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(E) Summary U.S. Caribbean average commercial and recreational landings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conch............................... 512,718 488,073 525,152 401,705
Parrotfish.......................... 507,059 496,656 512,201 464,819
Snapper............................. 2,004,003 1,861,538 1,725,798 1,360,996
Grouper............................. 396,483 354,853 337,178 214,118
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BILLING CODE 3510-22-P

[[Page 37401]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29JN10.065

BILLING CODE 3510-22-C

4.4 Action 4: Management Measures

4.4.1 Action 4(a): Species-Specific Parrotfish Prohibitions
Alternative 1. No action. Do not establish species-specific
prohibitions on parrotfish harvest.
Alternative 2. (PREFERRED) Prohibit fishing for or possessing in
the EEZ:
A. Midnight parrotfish.
B. Blue parrotfish.
C. Rainbow parrotfish.
Discussion: Action 4(a) addresses concerns regarding the harvest of
parrotfish, particularly the three largest species of parrotfish
(midnight, blue, rainbow) that occur in U.S. Caribbean waters.
Regarding those three large parrotfish, concern relates to the
potential overharvest of these species due to their combination of
large body size, a high susceptibility to spear gear and fish traps
(Mumby et al. 2006), resultant relatively low resilience, and lack of
abundance compared with most

[[Page 37402]]

parrotfish occupying U.S. Caribbean waters (Table 4.4.1).

Table 4.4.1--Biological Characteristics of Common U.S. Caribbean Parrotfish
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Depth
Common name Genus/species Max size range Population doubling Resilience Abundance
(cm) (m) time
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blue parrotfish..................... Scarus coeruleus...... 120 3-25 1.4-4.4 yrs........... Medium................ occasional
Midnight parrotfish................. Scarus coelestinus.... 77 5-75 1.4-4.4 yrs........... Medium................ occasional
Rainbow parrotfish.................. Scarus guacamaia...... 120 3-25 1.4-4.4 yrs........... Medium................ occasional
Queen parrotfish.................... Scarus vetula......... 61 3-25 <15 months............ High.................. common
Princess parrotfish................. Scarus taeniopterus... 35 2-25 <15 months............ High.................. common
Striped parrotfish.................. Scarus iseri.......... 35 3-25 <15 months............ High.................. common
Redband parrotfish.................. Sparisoma aurofrenatum 28 2-20 1.4-4.4 years......... Medium................ common
Redfin parrotfish................... Sparisoma rubripinne.. 48 1-15 <15 months............ High.................. common
Redtail parrotfish.................. Sparisoma chrysopterum 46 1-15 <15 months............ High.................. common
Stoplight parrotfish................ Sparisoma viride...... 64 3-50 1.4-4.4 years......... Medium................ common
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Humann 1994 and http://www.fishbase.com.

4.4.2 Action 4(b): Recreational Bag Limits
Alternative 1. No action. Do not establish bag limit restrictions
on recreational reef fish harvest.
Alternative 2. Specify a 10-fish aggregate bag limit per person
(would not apply to a fisherman who has a valid commercial fishing
license issued by Puerto Rico or the USVI) for:
A. Species in the Snapper FMU.
B. Species in the Grouper FMU.
C. Species in the Parrotfish FMU.
Alternative 3. Specify a 5-fish aggregate bag limit per person
(would not apply to a fisherman who has a valid commercial fishing
license issued by Puerto Rico or the USVI) for:
A. Species in the Snapper FMU.
B. Species in the Grouper FMU.
C. Species in the Parrotfish FMU.
Alternative 4. Specify a 2-fish aggregate bag limit per person
(would not apply to a fisherman who has a valid commercial fishing
license issued by Puerto Rico or the USVI) for:
A. Species in the Snapper FMU.
B. Species in the Grouper FMU.
C. Species in the Parrotfish FMU.
Alternative 5. Establish a 0-fish aggregate bag limit per person
(would not apply to a fisherman who has a valid commercial fishing
license issued by Puerto Rico or the USVI) for species in the
Parrotfish FMU.
Alternative 6. Establish a vessel limit (would not apply to a
fisherman who has a valid commercial fishing license issued by Puerto
Rico or the USVI) equivalent to the combined bag limit of:
A. Two fishers.
B. Three fishers.
C. Four fishers.
Alternative 7. (PREFERRED) Establish an aggregate bag limit for
snapper, grouper and parrotfish FMUs of: 10 per fisher including not
more than two parrotfish per fisher or six parrotfish per boat, and 30
aggregate snapper, grouper, and parrotfish per boat on a fishing day.
Discussion: As noted in Action 3(b) above, there is concern on the
part of recreational fishing interests in the U.S. Caribbean that a
conglomerate annual catch limit for the recreational and commercial
sectors could create an unfair and economically untenable situation for
the recreational fishers, particularly charter boat interests. The
concern of the recreational fisher is that, in the race for a single
quota, the commercial sector would dominate and there would be
substantial losses of socioeconomic benefits to the recreational sector
because the combined fishery would close before recreational fishers
could achieve their historic average annual landings. It was therefore
suggested at the December 2009 meeting of the Council, and a motion
passed, to establish recreational bag limits for the U.S. Caribbean
EEZ. Action 4(b) addresses the establishment of recreational bag
limits. The goal of implementing bag limits would be to, when coupled
with sector-specific (i.e., recreational and commercial) ACLs, ensure
that the recreational ACL for each complex is not exceeded until as
near as possible to the end of the calendar year.

4.5 Action 5: Accountability Measures

Accountability Measures (AMs) are defined as management controls to
prevent ACLs, including sector-specific ACLs, from being exceeded, and
to correct or mitigate overages of the ACL if they occur (74 FR 3180).
4.5.1 Action 5(a): Triggering Accountability Measures
Action 3 includes alternatives to establish and allocate ACLs. If
an ACL is exceeded, AM alternatives are provided to redress overages.
Action 5 alternatives are presented in two parts, the first of which
addresses the triggering of AMs and the second of which addresses the
actual actions needed to redress overages.
Alternative 1. No Action. Do not trigger AMs.
Discussion: This alternative would maintain present status and no
trigger to put into place corrective action would be set. Consequently,
Alternative 1 would not achieve MSA compliance.
Alternative 2. Trigger AMs if the annual catch limit is exceeded
based upon:
A. A single year of landings beginning with landings from 2010.
B. A single year of landings beginning with landings from 2010,
then a 2-year running average of landings in 2011 (average of
2010+2011) and thereafter (i.e., 2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012, etc.).
C. A single year of landings beginning with landings from 2010, a
2-year average of landings in 2011 (average of 2010+2011), then a 3-
year running average of landings in 2012 (average of 2010+2011+2012)
and thereafter (i.e., 2010, 2010-2011, 2010-2012, 2011-2013, etc.).
Discussion: Alternative 2A would trigger AMs based on a single year
of landings beginning in 2010. By adopting this alternative, the
decision as to whether the ACL has been exceeded would be based on one
year of landings data. Currently, the process used to consolidate or
summarize landings data (i.e., available for use) takes approximately
two years. The landings data is initially acquired from fishers through
each local government's fishery statistics program (often referred to
as trip tickets in Puerto Rico and Commercial Catch Reports in the
USVI), is proofed by the local government, and electronically
transferred to the SEFSC.

[[Page 37403]]

The DPNER and the VIDPNR require commercial fishers to report landings
or trip tickets monthly. Upon receipt, the SEFSC formats and stores
landings data files and provides them to scientists and managers upon
request for analysis or decision making. There may be as much as a two-
year lag between the time catches are recorded and the data are
released for management applications. For Alternative 2A, when landings
data become available, they represent a single point of comparison to
the established ACL. Consequently, the first one-year comparison to the
originally established ACL should occur in 2012 or 2013. After that
point in time, annual single-point comparisons can be made to existing
ACLs.
In order to overcome the challenges of monitoring highly variable
landings, Alternative 2B would trigger AMs based on a single year of
landings beginning in 2010, and then a 2-year running average of
landings in 2011 (average of 2010 + 2011) and thereafter (2010, 2010-
2011, 2011-2012, etc.). Using the process described for Alternative 2A,
the information might not be available for consideration until 2013 or
2014. By adopting this alternative, the decision as to whether the ACL
has been exceeded would initially be based on landings from a single
year but subsequent year comparisons would be based on two-year landing
sets. Landings data can be highly variable; therefore, comparing
average landings with the ACL can buffer peaks in landings, which may
be a function of sampling or reporting rather than true estimation of
actual harvest. While such a comparison is more robust than
Alternatives 1 and 2A, a two-year average provides little information
with regard to precision of the comparison.
Similar to Alternative 2B, Alternative 2C would trigger AMs based
on a single year of landings beginning in 2010, then a 2-year average
of landings in 2011 (average of 2010 + 2011), then a 3-year average of
landings effective 2012 and thereafter (i.e., 2010, 2010-2011, 2010-
2012, 2011-2013, etc.). Using the process described for Alternative 2A,
the information might not be available for consideration until 2013 or
2014. By adopting this alternative, the decision as to whether the ACL
for each species/species group has been exceeded would initially be
based on landings from a single year but in 2011 the comparison would
be based on a two-year landing set (2010-2011), and subsequent
comparisons would be based on 3-year landing sets (2010-2012, 2011-
2013, etc.). Such a comparison is more robust than Alternatives 2A and
2B because it provides more information than a 1- or 2-year landings
average with regard to precision of the comparison. Alternatives 2B and
2C prescribe a sound method for dealing with data uncertainty and
provide a means by which any ACL overages may be accounted for in
subsequent fishing years.
Alternative 3. (PREFERRED) Trigger AMs if the annual catch limit is
exceeded as defined below and NMFS' SEFSC (in consultation with the
Caribbean Fishery Management Council and its Scientific and Statistical
Committee) determines the overage occurred because catches increased
versus data collection/monitoring improved:
A. A single year of landings effective beginning 2010.
B. A single year of landings effective beginning 2010, then a 2-
year running average of landings effective 2011 and thereafter (i.e.,
2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012, etc.).
C. (PREFERRED) A single year of landings effective beginning 2010,
a 2-year running average of landings effective 2011, then a 3-year
running average of landings effective 2012 and thereafter (i.e., 2010,
2010-2011, 2010-2012, 2011-2013, etc.).
Discussion: The explanation of Alternative 3 is similar to that for
Alternative 2 above with the addition of a consultation between the
SEFSC, the SSC, and Council prior to the decision to determine whether
an overage occurred. A data collection improvement program is under
development by the SEFSC and is focused to provide more precise and
accurate fishery landings information for the U.S. Caribbean, and there
is a real possibility that more accurate and comprehensive landings
data will be collected for each island mass. For Alternatives 3A-C a
determination will have to be made to examine whether an overrun of the
ACL was due to increased catches by fishers or to improved data
collection/monitoring efforts. The SEFSC and the SSC will provide an
analysis of the information and consult with the Council before any
determination is made. A single year of landings beginning in 2010 will
be the basis for the initial consultation and subsequent determination
regarding the cause of any ACL overage.
Alternative 3B is similar to Alternative 3A except that after the
initial single-year comparison (2010 information with established
ACLs), then a 2-year running average of landings will begin in 2011 and
thereafter (i.e., 2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012, etc.).
Alternative 3C is similar to Alternative 3B except that after the
initial single-year comparison (2010 information with established
ACLs), and a 2-year running average of landings comparison will be made
in 2011 (i.e., 2010, 2010-2011), after which a 3-year running average
of landings will begin in 2012 and thereafter (i.e., 2010, 2010-2011,
2010-2012, 2011-2013, etc.). Using two or three year running averages
of landings (Alternatives 3B and 3C) would provide a mechanism to deal
with data uncertainty that may be due to reporting errors,
underreporting, and highly variable landings.
4.5.2 Action 5(b): Applying Accountability Measures
Alternative 1. No Action. Do not apply AMs.
Alternative 2. (PREFERRED) If AMs are triggered, then reduce the
length of the fishing season for that species or species group the year
following the trigger determination by the amount needed to prevent
such an overage from occurring again. The needed changes will remain in
effect until modified.
Alternative 3. If AMs are triggered, then reduce the length of the
fishing season for that species or species group the year following the
trigger determination by the amount needed to prevent such an overage
from occurring again and to pay back the overage. The needed changes
will remain in effect until modified.
Discussion: Alternative 1 would not apply AMs when the ACL is
exceeded and, consequently, would not comply with MSA provisions.
Therefore, this is not a viable option when considering AMs. Reducing
the length of the fishing season by the amount needed to pay back the
overage in addition to shortening the season length to prevent a future
overage (Alternative 3) would likely have a greater biological benefit
than only reducing the length of the fishing season as specified in
Alternative 2. However, AMs that shorten the fishing season can
increase the magnitude of regulatory discards and may not be as
effective as AMs that lower the target level but still allow some
catch.

4.6 Action 6: Framework Measures

4.6.1 Action 6(a): Establish Framework Measures for Reef Fish FMP
Alternative 1: No Action. Do not amend the framework measures for
the Reef Fish FMP
Alternative 2: Amend the framework procedures for the Reef Fish FMP
to provide a mechanism to expeditiously adjust the following reference
points

[[Page 37404]]

and management measures through framework action:
a. Quota Requirements.
b. Seasonal Closures.
c. Area Closures.
d. Fishing Year.
e. Trip/Bag Limit.
f. Size Limits.
g. Gear Restrictions or Prohibitions.
h. . Fishery Management Units (FMUs).
i. Total Allowable Catch (TAC).
j. Annual Catch Limits (ACLs).
k. Accountability Measures (AMs).
l. Annual Catch Targets (ACTs).
m. Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY).
n. Optimum Yield (OY).
o. Minimum Stock Size Threshold (MSST).
p. Maximum Fishing Mortality Threshold (MFMT).
q. Overfishing Limit (OFL).
r. Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) control rules.
s. Actions To Minimize the Interaction of Fishing Gear With
Endangered Species or Marine Mammals.
Alternative 3: Amend the framework procedures for the Reef Fish FMP
to provide the Council with a mechanism to expeditiously adjust a
subset of management measures outlined in Alternative 2.
4.6.2 Action 6(b): Establish Framework Measures for Queen Conch FMP
Alternative 1: No Action. Do not amend the framework measures for
the Queen Conch FMP.
Alternative 2: Amend the framework procedures for the Queen Conch
FMP to provide a mechanism to expeditiously adjust the following
reference points and management measures through framework action:
a. Quota Requirements.
b. Seasonal Closures.
c. Area Closures.
d. Fishing Year.
e. Trip/Bag Limit.
f. Size Limits.
g. Gear Restrictions or Prohibitions.
h. Total Allowable Catch (TAC).
i. Annual Catch Limits (ACLs).
j. Accountability Measures (AMs).
k. Annual Catch Targets (ACTs).
l. Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY).
m. Optimum Yield (OY).
n. Minimum Stock Size Threshold (MSST).
o. Maximum Fishing Mortality Threshold (MFMT).
p. Overfishing Limit (OFL).
q. Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) control rules.
r. Actions To Minimize the Interaction of Fishing Gear With
Endangered Species or Marine Mammals.
Alternative 3: Amend the framework procedures for the Queen Conch
FMP to provide the Council with a mechanism to expeditiously adjust a
subset of management measures outlined in Alternative 2.
Discussion: In order to modify regulations, the Council generally
must follow the FMP amendment procedure which takes longer to implement
than if the Council had the availability of a framework process. The
current process for amending a FMP is not the most expedient possible
for making timely preseason, in season, or other adjustments (see the
above list) to management measures. However, this amendment establishes
a process to make changes in a more expeditious manner via a regulatory
amendment. Regulatory amendments can be implemented in a shorter period
of time than plan amendments because the level of public participation
is not as extensive as for the full plan amendment process. In order to
complete a regulatory amendment, a framework section must be
established for each FMP to which changes will be made.
Action 6 lists the framework measures which may be adjusted under
regulatory amendment. This discussion section describes a framework
procedure and how each might be achieved. Such a procedure will provide
the Council with a mechanism to make management changes in the queen
conch or reef fish fisheries in a more timely fashion than provided
through the FMP amendment process.
Establish an assessment group and adjustments:
The following discussion outlines the procedure by which the
Council may make management changes through regulatory amendment. As
previously discussed, the purpose of frameworks and regulatory
amendments is to provide the most responsive and efficient
modifications to management measures. If an additional review process
was included, there could be substantial delays, thus resulting in a
longer lag time between identification of a problem and implementation
of a response.
1. When the Council determines that management measures require
modification, the Council will appoint an assessment group (Group) that
will assess the condition of species in the reef fish or queen conch
management units (including periodic economic and sociological
assessments as needed). The Group will present a report of its
assessment and recommendations to the Council.
2. The Council will consider the report and recommendations of the
Group and hold public hearings at a time and place of the Council's
choosing to discuss the Group's report. The Council may convene its
Scientific and Statistical Committee to provide advice prior to taking
final action. After receiving public input, the Council will make
decisions on the need for change.
3. If changes to management regulations are needed, the Council
will advise the Regional Administrator (RA) in writing of its
recommendations accompanied by the Group's report (where appropriate),
relevant background material, draft regulations, Regulatory Impact
Review, and public comments.
4. The RA will review the Council's recommendations, supporting
rationale, public comments, and other relevant information. If the RA
concurs that the Council's recommendations are consistent with the
goals and objectives of the fishery management plan, the national
standards, and other applicable laws, the RA will recommend that the
Secretary take appropriate regulatory action for the reef fish or queen
conch fisheries on such date as may be agreed upon with the Council.
5. Should the RA reject the recommendations, the RA will provide
written reasons to the Council for the rejection, and existing measures
will remain in effect until the issue is resolved.
6. Appropriate adjustments that may be implemented by the Secretary
include:
a. Specification of Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) or MSY proxy
and subsequent adjustment where this information is available;
b. Specification of an Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) control
rule and subsequent adjustment where this information is available;
c. Specification of TAC and subsequent adjustment where this
information is available;
d. Specification of Annual Catch Limits (ACLs) and subsequent
adjustment;
e. Specification of AMs and subsequent adjustment;
f. Specification of Optimum Yield (OY) and subsequent adjustment
where this information is available;
g. Specification of Minimum Stock Size Threshold (MSST) and
subsequent adjustment;
h. Specification of Maximum Fishing Mortality Threshold (MFMT) or
Overfishing Level (OFL) and subsequent adjustment;

[[Page 37405]]

i. Specification (or modification) of quotas (including zero
quotas), trip limits, bag limits (including zero bag limits), minimum
size limits, gear restrictions (ranging from modifying current
regulations to a complete prohibition), season/area closures (including
spawning closures), and fishing year;
j. Initial specification and subsequent adjustment of biomass
levels and age structured analyses.
Authority is granted to the RA to close any fishery, i.e. revert
any bag limit to zero and close any commercial fishery, once a quota
has been established through the procedure described above and such
quota has been filled.
If the NMFS decides not to publish the proposed rule of the
recommended management measures, or to otherwise hold the measures in
abeyance, then the RA must notify the Council of its intended action
and the reasons for NMFS's concern, along with suggested changes to the
proposed management measures that would alleviate the concerns. Such
notice shall specify: (1) The applicable law with which the amendment
is inconsistent; (2) the nature of such inconsistencies; and (3)
recommendations concerning the action that could be taken by the
Council to conform the amendment to the requirements of applicable law.

Dated: June 24, 2010.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-15778 Filed 6-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P