Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Fisheries Off West Coast States; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan; Amendment 29; 2021-22 Biennial Specifications and Management Measures
| Citation | 85 FR 62492 |
| Record Number | 2020-21783 |
| Published date | 02 October 2020 |
| Court | National Oceanic And Atmospheric Administration |
Federal Register, Volume 85 Issue 192 (Friday, October 2, 2020)
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 192 (Friday, October 2, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 62492-62537]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-21783]
[[Page 62491]]
Vol. 85
Friday,
No. 192
October 2, 2020
Part VI
Department of Commerce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 660
Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Fisheries Off West Coast States;
Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery
Management Plan; Amendment 29; 2021-22 Biennial Specifications and
Management Measures; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 85 , No. 192 / Friday, October 2, 2020 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 62492]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 660
[Docket No. 200928-0257]
RIN 0648-BJ74
Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Fisheries Off West Coast States;
Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery
Management Plan; Amendment 29; 2021-22 Biennial Specifications and
Management Measures
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This proposed rule would establish the 2021-22 harvest
specifications for groundfish taken in the U.S. exclusive economic zone
off the coasts of Washington, Oregon, and California, consistent with
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and the
Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan (PCGFMP). This
proposed rule would also revise the management measures that are
intended to keep the total annual catch of each groundfish stock or
stock complex within the annual catch limits. These proposed measures
are intended to help prevent overfishing, rebuild overfished stocks,
achieve optimum yield, and ensure that management measures are based on
the best scientific information available. Additionally, this proposed
rule announces the receipt of exempted fishing permit applications.
NMFS has made a preliminary determination that these applications
warrant further consideration. NMFS requests public comment on these
applications. This action also would implement Amendment 29 to the
PCGFMP, which would designate shortbelly rockfish as an ecosystem
component species, and would make changes to the trawl/non-trawl
allocations for blackgill rockfish within the southern slope complex
south of 40[deg]10' North latitude (N lat.), petrale sole, lingcod
south of 40[deg]10' N lat., and widow rockfish.
DATES: Comments must be received no later than November 2, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2020-0098, by
either of the following methods:
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2020-0098, click the ``Comment Now!'' icon,
complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments. The
exempted fishing permit (EFP) applications will be available under
Supporting Documents through the same link.
Mail: Submit written comments to Barry Thom, Regional
Administrator, West Coast Region, NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE,
Seattle, WA 98115-0070.
Instructions: NMFS may not consider comments if they are sent by
any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after
the comment period ends. All comments received are a part of the public
record and NMFS will post for public viewing on www.regulations.gov
without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name,
address, etc.), confidential business information, or otherwise
sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender is publicly
accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter ``N/A'' in the
required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).
Electronic Access
This rule is accessible via the internet at the Office of the
Federal Register website at https://www.federalregister.gov/.
Background information and documents including an integrated analysis
for this action (Analysis), which addresses the statutory requirements
of the Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act), the National Environmental Policy Act,
Presidential Executive Order 12866, and the Regulatory Flexibility Act
are available at the NMFS West Coast Region website at http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/fisheries/groundfish/index.html and at
the Pacific Fishery Management Council's website at http://www.pcouncil.org. The final 2020 Stock Assessment and Fishery
Evaluation (SAFE) report for Pacific Coast groundfish, as well as the
SAFE reports for previous years, are available from the Pacific Fishery
Management Council's website at http://www.pcouncil.org.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Palmigiano, phone: 206-526-4491
or email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Chapter 5 of the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan
(PCGFMP) requires the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) to
assess the biological, social, and economic conditions of the Pacific
coast groundfish fishery and use this information to develop harvest
specifications and management measures at least biennially. This
proposed rule is based on the Council's final recommendations for
harvest specifications and management measures for the 2021-22 biennium
made at its April and June 2020 meetings.
The Council deemed the proposed regulations necessary and
appropriate to implement these actions in an August, 26, 2020, letter
from Council Executive Director, Chuck Tracy, to Regional Administrator
Barry Thom. Under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), NMFS is required to publish
proposed rules for comment after preliminarily determining whether they
are consistent with applicable law. We are seeking comment on the
proposed regulations in this action and whether they are consistent
with the PCGFMP, the Magnuson-Stevens Act and its National Standards,
and other applicable law.
Concurrent with this proposed rule, NMFS also published a Notice of
Availability (NOA) to announce the proposed Amendment 29 to the PCGFMP.
The NOA requests public review and comment on proposed changes to the
Council fishery management plan document (85 FR 54529; September 2,
2020).
A. Specification and Management Measure Development Process
The Northwest Fisheries Science Center (NWFSC) conducted full stock
assessments in 2019 for 7 of the 128 stocks \1\ currently included
under the PCGFMP as stocks that require conservation and management
(cabezon, big skate, longnose skate, sablefish, cowcod, gopher
rockfish, and black-and-yellow rockfish). Additionally, the NWFSC
reviewed assessment updates for Petrale sole and widow rockfish, as
well as catch-only assessment updates for a number of previously
assessed stocks (black rockfish, blackgill rockfish, California blue/
deacon rockfish north of Point Conception, canary rockfish, China
rockfish, darkblotched rockfish, Dover sole, lingcod, longspine
thornyheads, rougheye and blackspotted rockfishes, and shortspine
thornyhead). The NWFSC did not update assessments for the remaining
stocks, so harvest
[[Page 62493]]
specifications for these stocks are based on assessments from previous
years. The full stock assessments used to set catch limits for this
biennium are available on the Council website (https://www.pcouncil.org/).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Stocks for which annual catch limits (ACLs) or ACL
contributions to stock complex ACLs are calculated. Assessments do
not include stocks designated as ecosystem component species.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Council's stock assessment review panel (STAR panel) reviewed
the stock assessments, including assessments on stocks for which some
biological indicators are available, as described below, for technical
merit, and to determine that each stock assessment document was
sufficiently complete. Finally, the Council's Scientific and
Statistical Committee (SSC) reviewed the stock assessments and STAR
panel reports and made its recommendations to the Council (Agenda Item
H.5, September 2019 Council Meeting).
The Council considered the new stock assessments, stock assessment
updates, catch-only updates, public comment, recommendations from the
SSC, and advice from its advisory bodies over the course of six Council
meetings during development of its recommendations for the 2021-22
harvest specifications and management measures. At each Council meeting
between June 2019 and June 2020, the Council made a series of decisions
and recommendations that were, in some cases, refined after further
analysis and discussion. Table 2 in the Analysis describes the
Council's meeting schedule for developing the 2021-22 biennial harvest
specifications. Additionally, detailed information, including the
supporting documentation the Council considered at each meeting, is
available at the Council's website, www.pcouncil.org.
The 2021-22 biennial management cycle was the third cycle following
PCGFMP Amendment 24 (80 FR 12567, March 10, 2015), which established
default harvest control rules and was analyzed through an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) (Final Environmental Impact Statement for
Pacific Coast Groundfish Harvest Specifications and Management Measures
for 2015-2016 and Biennial Periods Thereafter, and Amendment 24 to the
PCGFMP, published January 2015). The EIS described the ongoing
implementation of the PCGFMP and default harvest control rules, along
with 10-year projections for harvest specifications and a range of
management measures. Under Amendment 24, the default harvest control
rules used to determine the previous biennium's harvest specifications
(i.e., overfishing limits [OFLs], acceptable biological catches (ABCs),
and annual catch limits [ACLs]) are applied automatically to the best
scientific information available to determine the future biennium's
harvest specifications. NMFS implements harvest specifications based on
the default harvest control rules used in the previous biennium unless
the Council makes a recommendation to deviate from the default.
Therefore, this rule implements the default harvest control rules,
consistent with the last biennium (2019-20), for most stocks, and
discusses Council-recommended departures from the defaults. The
Analysis supporting this action identifies the preferred harvest
control rules, management measures, and other management changes that
were not described in the 2015 EIS, and will be posted on the NMFS West
Coast Region web page (see Electronic Access).
Information regarding the OFLs, ABCs, and ACLs proposed for
groundfish stocks and stock complexes in 2021-22 is presented below,
followed by a discussion of the proposed management measures for
commercial and recreational groundfish fisheries.
II. Proposed Harvest Specifications
This proposed rule would set 2021-22 harvest specifications and
management measures for 127 of the 128 groundfish stocks which
currently have ACLs or ACL contributions to stock complexes managed
under the PCGFMP, except for Pacific whiting. Pacific whiting harvest
specifications are established annually through a separate bilateral
process with Canada. Shortbelly rockfish, which is currently managed
with harvest specifications, would no longer be managed with harvest
specifications beginning in the 2021-22 biennium and would instead be
classified as an ecosystem component species. The change to shortbelly
management is made through Amendment 29 to the PCGFMP and is discussed
in detail in the NOA for that amendment. Public comment is open on the
NOA (see ADDRESSES).
The proposed OFLs, ABCs, and ACLs are based on the best available
biological and socioeconomic data, including projected biomass trends,
information on assumed distribution of stock biomass, and revised
technical methods used to calculate stock biomass. The PCGFMP specifies
a series of three stock categories for the purpose of setting maximum
sustainable yield (MSY) \2\, OFLs, ABCs, ACLs, and rebuilding
standards. Category one represents the highest level of information
quality available, while category three represents the lowest. Category
one stocks are the relatively few stocks for which the NWFSC can
conduct a ``data rich'' quantitative stock assessment that incorporates
catch-at-age, catch-at-length, or other data. The SSC can generally
calculate OFLs and overfished/rebuilding thresholds for these stocks,
as well as ABCs, based on the uncertainty of the biomass estimated
within an assessment or the variance in biomass estimates between
assessments for all stocks in this category. The set of category two
stocks includes a large number of stocks for which some biological
indicators are available, yet status is based on a ``data-moderate''
quantitative stock assessment. The category three stocks include minor
stocks which are caught, but for which there is, at best, only
information on landed biomass. For stocks in this category, there is
limited data available for the SSC to quantitatively determine MSY,
OFL, or an overfished threshold. Typically, catch-based methods (e.g.,
depletion-based stock reduction analysis, depletion corrected average
catch, and average catches) are used to determine the OFL for category
three stocks. A detailed description of each of these categories can be
found in Section 4.2 of the PCGFMP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ MSY is the largest long-term average catch that can be taken
from a fish stock under prevailing environmental and fishery
conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Proposed OFLs for 2021 and 2022
The OFL serves as the maximum amount of fish that can be caught in
a year without resulting in overfishing. Overfishing occurs when a
stock has a harvest rate, denoted as Fx, is set
higher than the rate that produces the stock's MSY. The SSC derives
OFLs for groundfish stocks with stock assessments by applying the
harvest rate to the current estimated biomass (B). Harvest rates
represent the rates of fishing mortality (F) that will reduce the
female spawning potential ratio (SPR) to X percent of its unfished
level. As an example, a harvest rate of F40 is more
aggressive than F45 or F50
harvest rates because F40 allows more fishing
mortality on a stock (as it allows a harvest rate that would reduce the
stock to 40 percent of its unfished level). The OFL does not account
for scientific or management uncertainty, so the SSC typically
recommends an ABC that is lower than the OFL in order to account for
this uncertainty. Usually, the greater the amount of scientific
uncertainty, the lower the ABC is set compared to the OFL.
For 2021-22, the Council maintained its policy of using a default
harvest rate as a proxy for the fishing mortality rate that is expected
to achieve FMSY. The Council also maintained the same
default harvest rate proxies as used in
[[Page 62494]]
the 2019-20 biennium, based on the SSC's recommendations:
F30 for flatfish (meaning an SRP harvest rate that
would reduce the stock to 30 percent of its unfished level),
F50 for rockfish (including longspine and shortspine
thornyheads), F50 for elasmobranchs, and
F45for other groundfish such as sablefish and
lingcod. For unassessed stocks, the Council recommended using a
historical catch-based approach (e.g., average catch, depletion-
corrected average catch, or depletion-based stock reduction analysis)
to set the OFL. See Tables 1a and 2a to Part 660, Subpart C in the
proposed regulatory text supporting this rule for the proposed 2021-22
OFLs.
A detailed description of the scientific basis for all of the SSC-
recommended OFLs proposed in this rule is included in the SAFE document
for 2020, available at the Council's website, www.pcouncil.org.
B. Proposed ABCs for 2021 and 2022
The ABC is the stock or stock complex's OFL reduced by an amount
associated with scientific uncertainty. The SSC-recommended P star-
sigma approach determines the amount by which the OFL is reduced to
account for this uncertainty. Under this approach, the SSC recommends a
sigma ([sigma]) value. The [sigma] value is generally based on the
scientific uncertainty in the biomass estimates generated from stock
assessments and is usually related to the stock category. After the SSC
determines the appropriate [sigma] value, the Council chooses a P star
(P*) based on its chosen level of risk aversion considering the
scientific uncertainties. A P* of 0.5 equates to no additional
reduction for scientific uncertainty beyond the [sigma] value
reduction. The PCGFMP specifies that the upper limit of P* will be
0.45. The P*-sigma approach is discussed in detail in the proposed and
final rules for the 2011-12 (75 FR 67810, November 3, 2010; 76 FR
27508, May 11, 2011) and 2013-14 (77 FR 67974, November 12, 2012; 78 FR
580, January 3, 2013) biennial harvest specifications and management
measures.
The SSC recently endorsed new [sigma] values that increase the
scientific uncertainty estimate and reduce the proposed ABCs and ACLs
relative to what they could have been under the [sigma] and P* values
used in the previous biennium. The new [sigma] values, endorsed by the
Council at its March 2019 meeting, include a new base reduction for
Category 1 stocks of 0.5 and an increase in the buffer between the OFL
and ABC as the age of the assessment increases. Currently, [sigma] is
the same for each year regardless of the age of the assessment. Table 1
provides the [sigma] values used in previous biennium and the new
[sigma] values with a higher base year deduction and progressively
increasing [sigma] values with the age of the assessment.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.000
Based on the new methodology, the SSC quantified major sources of
scientific uncertainty in the estimates of OFLs and generally
recommended a [sigma] value of 0.5 for category one stocks (previously
0.36), a [sigma] value of 1.0 for category two stocks (previously
0.72), and a [sigma] value of 2.0 for category three stocks (previously
1.44). For category two and three stocks, there is greater scientific
uncertainty in the OFL estimate because the assessments for these
stocks are informed by less data than the assessments for category one
stocks. Therefore, the scientific uncertainty buffer is generally
greater than that recommended for stocks with data-rich stock
assessments. Assuming the same P* is applied, a larger [sigma] value
results in a larger reduction from the OFL. For 2021-22, the Council
continued the general policy of using the SSC-recommended [sigma]
values for each stock category.
For 2021-22, the Council maintained the P* policies it established
for the previous biennium for most stocks, except Oregon black
rockfish, cowcod south of 40[deg]10' N lat., sablefish, and shortbelly
rockfish. The Council considered alternative P* values for Petrale sole
but ultimately decided to stay with the default P* value used in the
previous biennium. As was done in 2015-16, 2017-18, and 2019-20, the
Council recommended using P* values of 0.45 for all individually
managed category one stocks, except sablefish and yelloweye rockfish.
Combining the category one [sigma] value of 0.5 with the P* value of
0.45 results in a reduction of 6.1 percent from the OFL when deriving
the ABC. For category two stocks, the Council's general policy was to
apply a P* of 0.4, with a few exceptions. The Council recommended
applying a P* of 0.45 for big skate, cowcod south of 34[deg]27' N lat.,
English sole, longnose skate, Pacific ocean perch, and all of the
stocks managed in the Oregon blue/deacon/black rockfish complex,
[[Page 62495]]
Nearshore Rockfish complexes, and the Other Fish complex. When combined
with the [sigma] values of 1.00 for category two, a P* value of 0.45
corresponds to an 11.8 percent reduction and a P* value of 0.40
corresponds to a 22.4 percent reduction. For category three stocks, the
Council's general policy was to apply a P* value of 0.45 for these
stocks, except the Council recommended a P* value of 0.40 for cowcod
between 40[deg]10' N lat. and 34[deg]27' N lat., Pacific cod, starry
flounder, and all stocks in the Other Flatfish complex. When combined
with the [sigma] values of 2.00 for category three, a P* value of 0.45
corresponds to 22.2 percent reduction and a P* value of 0.40
corresponds to a 39.8 percent reduction. See Tables 1-3 in Agenda Item
H.8, Supplemental Attachment 2, September 2019 Council meeting for the
full description of [sigma] and P* values by stock. See Tables 1a and
2a to Part 660, Subpart C in the in the proposed regulatory text of
this proposed rule for the proposed 2021-22 ABCs.
C. Proposed ACLs for 2019 and 2020
The Council recommends ACLs for each stock and stock complex that
is in need of conservation and management or ``in the fishery,'' as
defined in the PCGFMP. To determine the ACL for each stock, the Council
will determine the best estimate of current stock abundance and its
relation to the precautionary and overfished/rebuilding thresholds.
Under the PCGFMP, the biomass level that produces MSY, or
BMSY, is defined as the precautionary threshold. When the
biomass for an assessed category one or two stock falls below
BMSY, the ACL is set below the ABC using a harvest rate
reduction to help the stock return to the BMSY level, which
is the management target for groundfish stocks. If a stock biomass is
larger than BMSY, the ACL may be set equal to the ABC, or
the ACL may be set below the ABC to address conservation objectives,
socioeconomic concerns, management uncertainty, or other factors
necessary to meet management objectives. The overfished/rebuilding
threshold is 25 percent of the estimated unfished biomass level for
non-flatfish stocks or 50 percent of BMSY, if known. The
overfishing/rebuilding threshold for flatfish stocks is 12.5 percent of
the estimated unfished biomass level. When a stock is below
BMSY (the precautionary threshold) but above the
overfishing/rebuilding threshold, it is considered to be in the
precautionary zone.
Under PCGFMP Amendment 24, the Council set up default harvest
control rules, which established default policies that would be applied
to the best available scientific information to set ACLs each biennial
cycle, unless the Council has reasons to diverge from that harvest
control rule. A complete description of the default harvest control
rules for setting ACLs is described in the proposed and final rule for
the 2015-16 harvest specifications and management measures and PCGFMP
Amendment 24 (80 FR 687, January 6, 2015; 80 FR 12567, March 10, 2015).
The PCGFMP defines the 40-10 harvest control rule for stocks with a
BMSY proxy of B40 that are in the
precautionary zone as the standard reduction. The analogous harvest
control rule with the standard reduction for assessed flatfish stocks
is the 25-5 harvest control rule for flatfish stocks with a
BMSY proxy of B25. The further the stock
biomass is below the precautionary threshold, the greater the reduction
in ACL relative to the ABC, until at B10 for a stock
with a BMSY proxy of B40, or
B5 for a stock with a BMSY proxy of
B25, the ACL would be set at zero.
Under the PCGFMP, the Council may recommend setting the ACL at a
different level than what the default harvest control rules specify as
long as the ACL does not exceed the ABC and complies with the
requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (see Chapter 8 of the analysis
for information on the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws).
For most of the stocks and all the stock complexes managed with harvest
specifications for 2021-22, the Council chose to maintain the default
harvest control rules from the previous biennial cycle. For four
stocks, Oregon Black rockfish, cowcod south of 40[deg]10' N lat.,
sablefish, and shortbelly rockfish, the Council recommended deviating
from the default harvest control rule. Table 2 presents a summary table
of the proposed changes to default harvest control rules for certain
stocks for 2021-22. Each of these changes is discussed further below.
[[Page 62496]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.001
Cowcod South of 40[deg]10' N Lat.
A new cowcod assessment conducted by the NWFSC in 2019 indicated
the stock south of 40[deg]10' N lat. had transitioned from a rebuilding
stock to a stock with current depletion estimate at the start of 2019
of 57 percent of unfished spawning output (Agenda Item H.5. Attachment
9, September 2019), which is far above the precautionary threshold of
50 percent. When a stock is determined to be rebuilt, its harvest
control rule automatically reverts back to the default harvest control
rule for the next biennium. For the 2021-22 biennium, cowcod south of
40[deg]10' N lat. was the only stock declared rebuilt.
Consistent with the Council's preferred alternative, this action
proposes that the cowcod south of 40[deg]10' N lat. ACL would be set
equal to the ABC with a P* of 0.4, resulting in ACLs of 84 mt in 2021
and 82 mt in 2022. The Council recommended a lower P* value for cowcod
south of 40[deg]10' N lat. than what would have been applied under the
default P* value (P* = 0.45) to address the relatively high uncertainty
in the estimated biomass and productivity in the cowcod assessment due
to a lack of adequate data (particularly age data) for estimating
growth, natural mortality, and recruitment. The revised P* value of
0.40 is consistent with other category two stocks. See Section 2.2.2.2
of the Analysis for more information on the Council's consideration of
alternative harvest specifications for cowcod south of 40[deg]10' N
lat.
The resulting ACLs would increase by more than eight times the
amount in place in 2019 (10 mt). As an additional precaution due to the
uncertainty in the assessment, the Council also recommended, and NMFS
is proposing, an ACT of 50 mt for cowcod south of 40[deg]10' N lat. The
ACT is a management measure and is discussed further in Section III of
this preamble.
Oregon Black Rockfish
Oregon black rockfish is a category two stock, managed as part of
the Oregon blue/deacon/black rockfish complex. Oregon black rockfish
was first assessed as a single stock in 2015. In 2019, the Oregon black
rockfish stock was estimated to be at 56 percent of its unfished
spawning output. For 2021-22, the NWFSC conducted a catch-only update
to the 2015 assessment by adding realized catch data from 2015-2018 and
estimates of catch for 2019 and 2020. In Oregon, realized catches were
closer to projected catches in 2015-2017, but lower in 2018 resulting
in OFL projections for 2021 and 2022 that are slightly higher than the
projections in the previous assessment. In addition to the catch data
update, the SSC applied the newly endorsed [sigma] values to each year
in the forecast (as discussed above in B. Proposed ABCs for 2021 and
2022). Because Oregon black rockfish is a category two stock, a base
[sigma] value of 1.0 was applied to years 2021-2030 (Table 1-2 in
Agenda Item H.5, Attachment 15, September 2019). Black rockfish was
last assessed in 2015, so the stock is also subject to further [sigma]
value reductions. However, the Council recommended and NMFS is
proposing a
[[Page 62497]]
phased-in approach to incorporating this additional ABC reduction.
Black rockfish is the primary target for the Oregon recreational
and commercial nearshore fisheries. In 2017, Oregon recreational
fisheries were shut down early because of black rockfish concerns, and
the Council received public testimony as to the severe negative
consequences for charter business operators and tourist-revenue
dependent coastal communities resulting from this closure. Due to the
constraining nature of black rockfish in Oregon and the biomass level
being above the precautionary threshold, the Oregon Department of Fish
and Wildlife (ODFW) requested the Council consider an alternative for
the 2021-22 biennium where the 2020 ABC (512 mt) is specified for 2021
and 2022, and the ACLs are set equal to ABCs. The Magnuson-Stevens Act
and the PCGFMP allow the SSC to recommend an ABC that differs from the
ABC control rule on a case by case basis, provided the SSC offers
justification for its recommended deviation. In 2023, the current
default harvest control rule (ABC = ACL, P* of 0.45) would once again
apply to Oregon black rockfish. In this case, long-term projections
under the Council's default harvest control rule and the alternative
2021 and 2022 ABC both result in a projected stock biomass at 54
percent of its unfished spawning output in 2030. Stocks with biomass
estimates greater than 40 percent depletion are above the precautionary
thresholds in the PCGFMP. Because the biomass is the same under either
option, the SSC recommended the alternative 2021 and 2022 ABC.
Therefore based on the Analysis, the Council has recommended and
NMFS is proposing alternative harvest specifications for Oregon black
rockfish as part of the Oregon blue/deacon/black rockfish complex. The
alternative harvest control rule would implement an ACL for the 2021
and 2022 biennium of 512 mt in each year. This ACL contributes to the
overall stock complex ACL.
Sablefish
The NWFSC completed a full stock assessment for sablefish in 2019
(Agenda Item H.5. Attachment 7, September 2019). In 2019, the sablefish
stock is estimated to be at 39 percent of unfished spawning output.
However, biomass is projected to increase, and the spawning output is
projected to be above the precautionary threshold (B40) in
2021. The expected increase in biomass is driven in part by the
estimated, but highly uncertain, size of the 2016 year class. Now that
sablefish biomass is projected to be above BMSY, the Council
considered alternative harvest specifications for the 2021-22 biennium.
Additionally, the Council recommended revising the apportionment of
the ACL north and south 36[deg] N Lat. Each biennium, the coastwide
sablefish ABC is apportioned to ACLs for the areas north and south of
36[deg] N Lat. based on a percentage. In 2019-20, the Council used the
average swept area biomass from the trawl survey to determine this
percentage. However, for the 2021-22 biennium, the Council recommended
updating its methods for determining this percentage and will now be
using a rolling 5-year average of the swept area biomass instead of the
long-term average. This results in an increase in the percentage of the
sablefish apportioned north of 36[deg] N Lat. ACL from 73.7 percent to
78.4 percent and a decrease in the percentage of the sablefish
apportioned south of 36[deg] N Lat. ACL from 26.3 percent to 21.5
percent. The change in apportionment of the north and south sablefish
ACLs is expected to result in higher attainment of both of the ACLs and
should better align with recent catches by area.
Under the default harvest control rule, the ABC would be set equal
to the ACL with a P* value of 0.4. The P* value of 0.4 was set when the
unfished spawning output was below 40 percent. Under a P* value of 0.4,
the unfished spawning output is estimated to be at 46 percent in 2021
and 47 percent by 2030 assuming full ACL removals each year. The ACLs
would no longer be subject to the 40-10 rule reduction because the
stock would be above the BMSY proxy in 2021 and would
therefore be set equal to the ABC. The ACLs under the default harvest
control rule and the revised apportionment percentages would be 6,435
mt for north of 36[deg] N Lat. and 1,773 mt for south of 36[deg] N Lat.
in 2021. In 2022, the ACL would be 6,124 mt for north of 36[deg] N Lat.
and 1,687 mt for south of 36[deg] N Lat.
Based on the 2019 sablefish stock assessment, the Council
recommended an alternative harvest specifications for sablefish using a
P* value of 0.45 for the 2021-22 biennium. Under the increased P*
value, the unfished spawning output is estimated to be at 46 percent in
2021 and 44 percent by 2030, assuming full ACL removals each year. No
reduction to the ACL would be necessary, similar to the default,
because the stock's unfished spawning output is above 40 percent.
Therefore, under the P* value of 0.45, the 2021 ACLs for the north and
south would be 6,479 mt and 2,312, mt, respectively. The 2022 ACLs for
the north and south would be 6,172 mt and 2,203 mt, respectively.
Therefore, the Council recommended, and NMFS is proposing, to
implement an alternative harvest control rule for sablefish for the
2021-22 biennium. The alternative harvest control rule would set the
ABC equal to the ACL with a P* value of 0.45 resulting in ACLs that are
higher than under the Council's No Action default harvest control rule
for sablefish.
Shortbelly Rockfish
Shortbelly rockfish has been a topic of discussion on every Council
agenda beginning in November 2018 due to higher than anticipated
bycatch in recent years. Shortbelly rockfish is currently a species
managed within the PCGFMP in section 3.1 of the PCGFMP and directed
fishing is allowed even though it is not the target of a directed
fishery.
As part of the 2021-22 biennium, the Council recommended and NMFS
is proposing to reclassify shortbelly rockfish as an ecosystem
component species through Amendment 29 to the PCGFMP. For more
information on this reclassification, see the NOA for Amendment 29 (see
ADDRESSES).
Stocks in Rebuilding Plans
When a stock has been declared overfished, the Council must develop
and manage the stock in accordance with a rebuilding plan. For
overfished stocks in the PCGFMP, this means that the harvest control
rule for overfished stocks sets the ACL based on the rebuilding plan.
The proposed rules for the 2011-12 (75 FR 67810, November 3, 2010) and
2013-14 (77 FR 67974, November 14, 2012) harvest specifications and
management measures contain extensive discussions on the management
approach used for overfished stocks, which are not repeated here. In
addition, the SAFE document posted on the Council's website at http://www.pcouncil.org/groundfish/safe-documents/ contains a detailed
description of each overfished stock, its status and management, as
well as the SSC's approach for rebuilding analyses. This document
provides information on cowcod south of 40[deg]10' N lat., which has
rebuilt since the last biennium, and yelloweye rockfish which is the
only remaining rebuilding stock in the PCGFMP. The Council proposed
yelloweye rockfish ACLs for 2021 and 2022 based on the current
yelloweye rockfish rebuilding plan, so additional details are not
repeated here. Appendix F to the PCGFMP contains the most recent
rebuilding plan parameters, as well as a
[[Page 62498]]
history of each overfished stock, and can be found at http://www.pcouncil.org/groundfish/fisherymanagement-plan/.
Yelloweye rockfish was declared overfished in 2002. The Council
adopted a rebuilding plan for the stock in 2004, and revised the
rebuilding plan in 2011 under Amendment 16-4 to the PCGFMP, and again
during the 2019-20 biennium.
Additionally, the Council recommended, and NMFS is proposing, to
establish annual catch targets (ACTs) within the nontrawl allocation
harvest guideline (HG). The nontrawl sector includes the limited entry
fixed gear (LEFG) and open access (OA) fisheries as well as the
recreational fisheries for Washington, Oregon, and California. The
nearshore fisheries occur off of Oregon and California and are subject
to both Federal and state HGs as well as other state-specific
management measures. The non-nearshore fisheries include the limited
entry and Federal open access fixed gear fleets. Tables 3 and 4 outline
the proposed harvest specifications for 2021 and 2022 for yelloweye
rockfish.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.002
The Council recommended using ACTs for the nontrawl sector as a
precaution. As discussed in the Analysis, because yelloweye rockfish
catch has been restricted for many years, it is difficult to project
encounter rates. This precautionary approach to higher catch limits
would allow more access to target fisheries for the nontrawl sector,
while also managing for the uncertainty and volatility in catch of this
rebuilding stock by this sector.
D. Summary of ACL Changes From 2019 to 2021-22
Table 5 compares the ACLs for major stocks for 2019, 2020, and
2021-22. Under this proposed rule, nine stocks would have higher ACLs
in 2021 and 2022 than in 2019. Of the 43 stocks and stock complexes
managed with ACLs in 2020, 21 stocks have ACLs that would decrease in
2021 from 2020 and 12 stocks have ACLs that would be close to the
amount in place in 2020 (Table 4.6 of the Analysis). Shortbelly
rockfish are proposed to be no longer be managed with an ACL and one
stock, Pacific cod, would have the same ACLs in 2020, 2021, and 2022.
Two stocks (big skate and cowcod south of 40[deg]10' N lat.) have ACLs
that would increase more than 100 percent, and one stock complex,
Washington's cabezon/kelp greenling, has an ACL that would increase by
92.3 percent. These increases are due to new information provided in
the 2019 stock assessments for these stocks. The ACL for the shelf
rockfish north complex would decrease by 26.5 percent, which is the
largest ACL decrease between 2020 and 2021, followed by the ACL for
arrowtooth flounder, which would decrease by 22.1 percent. These
decreases are due to updated projections based on the new sigma values.
[[Page 62499]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.003
[[Page 62500]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.004
III. Proposed Management Measures
This section describes proposed management measures (i.e., biennial
fishery harvest guidelines and set-asides) used to further allocate the
ACLs to the various components of the fishery and control fishing.
Management measures for the commercial fishery modify fishing behavior
during the fishing year to ensure that catch does not exceed the ACL,
and include trip and cumulative landing limits, time/area closures,
size limits, and gear restrictions. Management measures for the
recreational fisheries include bag limits, size limits, gear
restrictions, fish dressing requirements, and time/area closures.
A. Deductions From the ACLs
Before making allocations to the primary commercial and
recreational components of groundfish fisheries, the Council recommends
``off-the-top deductions,'' or deductions from the ACLs to account for
anticipated mortality for certain types of activities: Harvest in
Pacific Coast treaty Indian tribal fisheries; harvest in scientific
research activities; harvest in non-groundfish fisheries (incidental
catch); and harvest that occurs under EFPs. These off-the-top
deductions are proposed for individual stocks or stock complexes and
can be found in the footnotes to Tables 1a and 2a to part 660, subpart
C. The details of the EFPs are discuss below in Section III., J.
B. Tribal Fisheries
The Quileute Tribe, Quinault Indian Nation, Makah Indian Tribe, and
Hoh Indian Tribe (collectively, ``the Pacific Coast Tribes'') implement
management measures for Tribal fisheries both independently as
sovereign governments and cooperatively with the management measures in
the Federal regulations. The Pacific Coast Tribes may adjust their
Tribal fishery management measures inseason to stay within the Tribal
harvest targets and estimated impacts to overfished stocks. Table 6
provides the proposed Tribal harvest targets proposed for the 2021-22
biennium.
[[Page 62501]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.005
The Pacific Coast Tribes proposed trip limit management in Tribal
fisheries for 2021-22 for several stocks, including several rockfish
stocks and stock complexes. This rule proposes the trip limits for
Tribal fisheries as provided to the Council at its April 2020 meeting
in Supplemental Tribal Report 1, Agenda Item G.6.a. For rockfish
stocks, Tribal regulations will continue to require full retention of
all overfished rockfish stocks and marketable non-overfished rockfish
stocks. The Pacific Coast Tribes will continue to develop management
measures, including depth, area, and time restrictions, in the directed
Tribal Pacific halibut fishery in order to minimize incidental catch of
yelloweye rockfish.
C. Biennial Fishery Allocations
The Council routinely recommends 2-year trawl and nontrawl
allocations during the biennial specifications process for stocks
without formal allocations (as defined in Section 6.3.2 of the PCGFMP)
or stocks where the long-term allocation is suspended because the stock
is declared overfished. As part of the 2021-22 biennium, the Council
also decided to revise the 2-year allocations for canary rockfish, as
well as Petrale sole, widow rockfish, lingcod south of 40[deg]10' N
lat., and the slope rockfish complex south of 40[deg]10' N lat., which
were established through Amendment 21 to the PCGFMP (75 FR 32993, June
10, 2010), to better align these allocations with current harvest
trends. The changes to these allocations are proposed as part of
Amendment 29 to the PCGFMP (see I. Background).
The trawl and nontrawl allocations, with the exception of sablefish
north of 36[deg] N lat., are based on the fishery harvest guideline.
The fishery harvest guideline is the tonnage that remains after
subtracting the off-the-top deductions described in Section III., A,
entitled ``Deductions from the ACLs,'' in this preamble. The trawl and
nontrawl allocations and recreational harvest guidelines are designed
to accommodate anticipated mortality in each sector as well as
variability and uncertainty in those mortality estimates. Additional
information on the Council's allocation framework and formal
allocations can be found in Section 6.3 of the PCGFMP and Sec. 660.55
of the Federal regulations. Allocations described below are detailed in
the harvest specification tables appended to 50 CFR part 660, subpart
C, in the regulatory text of this proposed rule.
The Council's recommended and NMFS' proposed allocations are shown
Tables 1b and 2b in the proposed regulatory text for this proposed rule
and summarized below.
Big Skate
The Council recommended and NMFS is proposing the allocations shown
in Table 7 for big skate in 2021 and 2022. These allocations are
anticipated to accommodate estimates of mortality of big skate, by
sector, in 2021-22. Allocations of big skate are determined on a
biennial basis. For 2021-22, the Council elected to maintain the
current big skate split of 95 percent to the trawl fishery and 5
percent to the non-trawl fishery
[[Page 62502]]
resulting in a trawl allocation of 1,348.7 mt and a non-trawl
allocation of 71 mt in 2021 and 2022. No further allocations or
deductions are made.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.006
Bocaccio South of 40[deg]10' N Lat.
Specifications for bocaccio are determined through the biennial
specifications process. For 2021-22, the Council recommended and NMFS
is proposing the allocations shown in Table 8 for bocaccio in 2021 and
2022, which maintain the allocation structure from the previous
biennium. These allocations are anticipated to accommodate estimates of
mortality of bocaccio, by sector, in 2021-22. In each year, the fishery
harvest guideline is split with 39 percent going to the trawl sectors
and 61 percent to the non-trawl sectors. For the trawl sector this
results in an allocation of 663.8 mt in 2021 and 654.4 mt in 2022. The
non-trawl sectors would receive 1,036.4 mt in 2021 and 1,021.8 mt in
2022. The non-trawl allocation is then distributed between the
commercial (nearshore and non-nearshore fisheries) and California
recreational fisheries. In 2021, the commercial sector would receive
30.9 percent of the non-trawl allocation or 320.2 mt, and the
California recreational sector would receive 716.2 mt. In 2022, the
same percentage would remain in place with the commercial sector
receiving 315.7 mt and the California recreational sector receiving
706.1 mt.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.007
Canary Rockfish
The Council recommended and NMFS is proposing the allocations in
Table 9 for canary rockfish in 2021 and 2022, which maintain the status
quo proportions from the 2017-18 biennium, but also combine the
commercial fixed gear harvest guideline for the nearshore and non-
nearshore fisheries. These allocations are anticipated to accommodate
estimates of mortality of canary rockfish, by sector, in 2021-22. For
canary rockfish, the fishery harvest guideline is distributed to the
trawl and non-trawl sectors with trawl receiving 72.3 percent and non-
trawl sectors receiving 27.7 percent each year. In 2021, the trawl
sector would receive 917 mt of canary rockfish, of which 36 mt would be
deducted to account for bycatch in the at-sea sectors, and the
remaining 881.2 mt would be distributed to the shorebased individual
fishing quota (IFQ) sector. The non-trawl sector would receive 351.4 mt
which is distributed to the commercial nontrawl (126.5 mt), WA
recreational (43.2 mt), OR recreational (65 mt), and CA recreational
(116.7 mt) fisheries. In 2022, the trawl sector would receive 894.6 mt
of canary rockfish, of which 36 mt would be deducted to account for
bycatch in the at-sea sectors, and the remaining 858.6 mt would be
distributed to the shorebased IFQ sector. The non-trawl sector would
receive 343.1 mt, which is distributed to the commercial nontrawl
sector (123.5 mt), WA recreational (42.2 mt), OR recreational (63.5
mt), and CA recreational (113.9 mt) fisheries.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.008
[[Page 62503]]
Cowcod
For 2021-22, the Council recommended and NMFS is proposing setting
a cowcod ACT below the fishery harvest guideline at 50 mt, and having
it function as a fishery harvest guideline similar to the ACT in the
2017-18 and 2019-20 bienniums. The ACT would be allocated across
groundfish fisheries. Table 9 shows the trawl/nontrawl allocations for
cowcod for 2021 and 2022. NMFS anticipates the proposed allocation
structure will keep catch below the 2021-22 cowcod ACT. The ACT is
distributed to the trawl and non-trawl sectors, with the trawl sector
receiving 36 percent and the non-trawl sector receiving 64 percent each
year. In 2021 and 2022, the trawl sector would receive 18 mt of cowcod.
The non-trawl sector would receive 32 mt, which is distributed to the
commercial and recreational sectors as a 50/50 split.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.009
Lingcod South of 40[deg]10' N Lat.
The Council recommended and NMFS is proposing the trawl/nontrawl
allocations for lingcod south of 40[deg]10' N lat. in Table 10. These
allocations are anticipated to accommodate estimates of mortality of
lingcod, by sector, in 2021-22. Specifications of lingcod south of
40[deg]10' N lat. were established through Amendment 21 with a trawl/
non-trawl allocation set at 45 percent to trawl and 55 percent to non-
trawl. For the 2021-22 biennium, the Council recommended revising the
fixed percentages through Amendment 29 to the PCGFMP to better align
with current catch levels and provide some relief to the nontrawl
sector which is usually constrained by lingcod south of 40[deg]10' N
lat. Therefore, beginning with the 2021-22 biennium, the Council
recommended and NMFS is proposing changing trawl/non-trawl allocations
of lingcod south of 40[deg]10' N lat., so that 40 percent of the
harvest guideline for lingcod south of 40[deg]10' N lat. is allocated
to the trawl sector and 60 percent is allocated to the nontrawl sector.
In 2021, the distribution results in 435.6 mt to the trawl sector and
653.4 mt to the non-trawl sectors. In 2022, the distribution results in
463.6 mt to the trawl sectors and 695.4 mt to the non-trawl sectors. No
further allocations or distributions are made. The NOA for Amendment 29
is available for public comment (see ADDRESSES).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.010
Longnose Skate
The Council recommended and NMFS is proposing the trawl/nontrawl
allocations for longnose skate in Table 11. The allocation percentages,
90 percent to trawl and 10 percent to nontrawl, reflect historical
catch of longnose skate in the two sectors. These allocations are
anticipated to accommodate estimates of mortality of longnose skate
rockfish, by sector, in 2021-22. In 2021, the 90/10 distribution
results in 1,414.4 mt to the trawl sectors and 157.2 mt to the non-
trawl sectors. In 2022, the distribution results in 1,358.6 mt to the
trawl sectors and 151 mt to the non-trawl sectors.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.011
Minor Shelf Rockfish
Allocations for Minor Shelf Rockfish are recommended by the Council
and proposed by NMFS for each biennial cycle. The proposed allocations
for 2021 and 2022 are shown in Table 12. Specifications for the shelf
rockfish complex north of 40[deg]10' N lat. were established through
the biennial process with a trawl/non-trawl allocation for the 2021-22
specifications of 60.2 percent to trawl sectors and 39.8 percent to
non-trawl sectors. In 2021, the distribution results in 864.2 mt to the
trawl sectors and 571.4 mt to the non-trawl sectors. In 2022, the
distribution results in 827.5 mt to the trawl sectors and 547.1 mt to
[[Page 62504]]
the non-trawl sectors. Of the amount going to the trawl sectors, 35 mt
is deducted each year from the trawl allocation to account for bycatch
in the at-sea whiting sectors, with the remaining 829.2 mt in 2021 and
792.49 mt in 2022 going to the shorebased IFQ fishery. No further
allocations or distributions are made.
Specifications for the shelf rockfish complex south of 40[deg]10' N
lat. were established through the biennial process with a trawl/non-
trawl allocation for the 2021-22 specifications of 12.2 percent to
trawl sectors and 87.8 percent to non-trawl sectors. In 2021, the
distribution results in 161.7 mt to the trawl sectors and 1,163.6 mt to
the non-trawl sectors. In 2022, the distribution results in 160.5 mt to
the trawl sectors and 1,154.8 mt to the non-trawl sectors. No further
allocations or distributes are made.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.012
Slope Rockfish Complex
The slope rockfish complex south of 40[deg]10' N lat. is a fixed
allocation with a trawl/non-trawl allocation of 63 percent to trawl and
37 percent to non-trawl. For the 2021-22 biennium, the Council
recommended the fixed allocation be revised through Amendment 29 to the
PCGFMP and made into a 2-year allocation, with custom shares for
blackgill rockfish, to be reviewed each biennium. In 2021, the
distribution results in 556.9 mt to the trawl sectors and 152.1 mt to
the non-trawl sectors. In 2022, the distribution results in 515.6 mt to
the trawl sectors and 142.1 mt to the non-trawl sectors. The NOA for
Amendment 29 is open for public comment (see ADDRESSES).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.013
Petrale Sole
The Council recommended and NMFS is proposing the trawl/nontrawl
allocations for Petrale sole in Table 14. These allocations are
anticipated to accommodate estimates of mortality of Petrale sole, by
sector, in 2021-22. Petrale sole has a fixed allocation with a trawl/
non-trawl allocation of the fishery harvest guideline of 95 percent to
the trawl fishery and 5 percent to the non-trawl fishery. As part of
the 2021-22 biennium, the Council recommended changing the fixed
allocation to a biennial allocation through Amendment 29 to the PCGFMP
and revising the percentages to better align with current catch by
sector. Therefore, beginning in 2021, specifications for Petrale sole
will be determined as part of the biennial specifications process. For
the 2021-22 biennium, 30 mt of Petrale sole will be allocated to the
nontrawl sector and the remainder will go to the trawl sector each
year. This would shift around 150 and 130 mt to the shorebased IFQ
sector in 2021 and 2022, respectively, and would not constrain the
nontrawl sector. In 2021, the distribution results in 3,697.9 mt to the
trawl sector. In 2022, the trawl sector would receive 3,242.5 mt. The
NOA for Amendment 29 is open for public comment (see ADDRESSES).
[[Page 62505]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.014
Widow Rockfish
The Council recommended and NMFS is proposing the trawl/nontrawl
allocations for Widow rockfish in Table 15. These allocations are
anticipated to accommodate estimates of mortality of widow rockfish, by
sector, in 2021-22. Widow rockfish is an Amendment 21 species with a
trawl/non-trawl allocation of the fishery harvest guideline of 91
percent to the trawl fishery and 9 percent to the non-trawl fishery. As
part of the 2021-22 biennium, and through Amendment 29 to the PCGFMP,
the Council recommended making it a biennial allocation and providing a
fixed amount to the nontrawl sector to better align with current catch
by sector. Therefore, beginning in 2021, specifications for widow
rockfish will be determined as part of the biennial specifications
process. For the 2021-22 biennium, 400 mt of widow rockfish will be
allocated to the nontrawl sector and the remainder will go to the trawl
sector each year. This would shift just under 1,000 mt of widow
rockfish to the shorebased IFQ sector in 2021 and 2022, and would not
constrain the nontrawl sector. In 2021, the distribution results in
14,076.7 mt to the trawl sector. In 2022, the trawl sector would
receive 13,139.7 mt. The NOA for Amendment 29 is open for public
comment (see ADDRESSES).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.015
D. Corrections to Waypoints for Rockfish Conservation Areas
Rockfish Conservation Areas (RCAs) are large area closures intended
to reduce the catch of a stock or stock complex by restricting fishing
activity at specific depths. The boundaries for RCAs are defined by
straight lines connecting a series of latitude and longitude
coordinates that approximate depth contours. These sets of coordinates,
or lines, are not gear or fishery specific, but can be used in
combination to define an area. NMFS then implements fishing
restrictions for a specific gear and/or fishery within each defined
area.
For the 2021-22 biennium, the Council recommended and NMFS is
proposing minor adjustments to the 40 fathom (fm) depth contour
offshore of San Mateo in Central California, and the 100 fm depth
contours off of California to more accurately refine the depth
contours, as well as the addition of a 100 fm line around the Channel
Islands. See Chapter 2 of the Analysis for more details on these
changes.
E. Limited Entry Trawl
The limited entry trawl fishery is made up of the shorebased IFQ
program, whiting and non-whiting, and the at-sea whiting sectors. For
some stocks and stock complexes with a trawl allocation, an amount is
first set-aside for the at-sea whiting sector with the remainder of the
trawl allocation going to the shorebased IFQ sector. Set-asides are not
managed by NMFS or the Council except in the case of a risk to the ACL.
At-Sea Set Asides
For several species, the trawl allocation is reduced by an amount
set-aside for the at-sea whiting sector. This amount is designed to
accommodate catch by the at-sea whiting sector when they are targeting
Pacific whiting. The Council considered several proposals to generate
amounts for these set-asides. After much discussion and analysis, the
Council is recommending and NMFS is proposing the set-asides in Table
16 for the 2021-22 biennium.
[[Page 62506]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.016
Incidental Trip Limits for IFQ Vessels
For vessels fishing in the Shorebased IFQ Program, with either
groundfish trawl gear or nontrawl gears, the following incidentally-
caught stocks are managed with trip limits: Minor Nearshore Rockfish
north and south, black rockfish, cabezon (46[deg]16' to 40[deg]10' N
lat. and south of 40[deg]10' N lat.), spiny dogfish, shortbelly
rockfish, big skate, Pacific whiting, and the Other Fish complex. For
all these stocks except big skate, this rule proposes maintaining the
same IFQ fishery trip limits for these stocks for the start of the
2021-22 biennium as those in place in 2019. For big skate, the Council
proposes an unlimited trip limit to start the 2021 fishing year.
Additionally, the Council is recommending and NMFS is proposing a trip
limit for blackgill rockfish within the southern slope rockfish
complex. The trip limit would be unlimited to start the 2021 fishing
year. The purpose of the blackgill trip limit would be to allow the
Council to reduce targeting of blackgill rockfish inseason, if needed.
Trip limits for the IFQ fishery can be found in Table 1 North and Table
1 South to part 660, subpart D, in the regulatory text of this proposed
rule. Changes to trip limits would be considered a routine measure
under Sec. 660.60(c), and may be implemented or adjusted, if
determined necessary, through inseason action.
F. LEFG and OA Nontrawl Fishery
Management measures for the LEFG and OA nontrawl fisheries tend to
be similar because the majority of participants in both fisheries use
hook-and-line gear. Management measures, including area restrictions
(e.g., nontrawl RCA) and trip limits in these nontrawl fisheries, are
generally designed to allow harvest of target stocks while keeping
catch of overfished stocks low. For the 2021-22 biennium, the Council
considered increasing trip limits for almost all LEFG and OA fisheries,
many of which are decades old and do not reflect stocks rebuilding in
previous biennium and management changes (e.g., stock complex
reorganizations). LEFG and OA trip limits are specified in Table 2
(North), Table 2 (South) to subpart E for LEFG and in Table 3 (North)
and Table 3 (South) to subpart F for OA in the regulatory text of this
proposed rule.
Sablefish Trip Limits
Sablefish are managed separately north and south of 36[deg] N lat.
For the portion of the stock north of 36[deg] N lat., the Council
recommended and NMFS is proposing higher trip limits for the LEFG and
OA fisheries in 2021. For the portion south of 36[deg] N lat., the
Council recommended removing the daily trip limit for the OA fishery
but maintaining the same weekly and bimonthly trip limits as were in
place in the start of 2019. The proposed sablefish trip limits for
2021-22 are shown in Table 17.
[[Page 62507]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.017
LEFG and OA Trip Limits
The Council recommended, and NMFS is proposing higher trip limits
for LEFG and OA fisheries in 2021, including trip limits for shortspine
thornyhead, longspine thornyhead, widow rockfish, shelf rockfish,
shortbelly rockfish, canary rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, yellowtail
rockfish, slope rockfish, darkblotched rockfish, Lingcod, nearshore
rockfish, black rockfish, Other Flatfish, bocaccio south of 40[deg]10'
N lat., and chilipepper rockfish (Agenda Item G.6.a., Supplemental GMT
Report 2, April 2020). These increases in trip limits are meant to help
members of industry harvest more fish while still keeping total
mortality within the ACLs for these stocks and stock complexes. Further
information on these trip limits can be found in Section 4.3.5.1 of the
Analysis.
As part of the Council's recommended trip limits for the LEFG and
OA fisheries, the Council established an OA trip limit for shortspine
and longspine thornyheads in the area between 40[deg]10' N lat. and
34[deg]27' N lat. As part of the Council's action during the 2019-20
biennium, the Council recommended and NMFS implemented, trip limits for
OA fisheries for shortspine and longspine thornyheads north of
40[deg]10' N. lat. and south of 34[deg]27' N lat., but inadvertently
omitted the trip limit for the area between 40[deg]10' N lat. and
34[deg]27' N lat., leaving this area closed. The Council is
recommending, and NMFS is proposing, implementing a 50 lb (22.7 kg) per
month limit for OA fisheries targeting shortspine and longspine
thornyheads in the area between 40[deg]10' N lat. and 34[deg]27' N lat.
This is the same trip limit currently proposed for OA fisheries
targeting shortspine and longspine thornyheads north of 40[deg]10' N
lat. See Section 4.5.6.1 of the Analysis for more information on this
change.
Primary Sablefish Tier Limits
Some limited entry fixed gear permits are endorsed to receive
annual sablefish quota, or tier limits. Vessels registered with one,
two, or up to three of these permits may participate in the primary
sablefish fishery. The proposed tier limits are as follows: In 2021,
Tier 1 at 58,649 lb (26,602 kg), Tier 2 at 26,659 lb (12,092 kg), and
Tier 3 at 15,234 lb (6,910 kg). For 2022, Tier 1 at 55,858 lb (25,337
kg), Tier 2 at 25,390 lb (11,517 kg), and Tier 3 at 14,509 lb (6,581
kg).
Yellowtail Trip Limit for the Salmon Troll Fishery North of 40[deg]10'
N lat.
During public comment at the November 2019 Council meeting, there
was a request to increase the yellowtail rockfish ratio and monthly
limits in the salmon troll fishery north of 40[deg]10' N lat. The
current ratio and limit are 1lb (0.45 kg) of yelloweye rockfish for
every 2 lb (0.9 kg) of salmon landed, with a 200 lb (91 kg) monthly
limit. As part of the 2017-18 biennial cycle, yellowtail rockfish was
removed from the OA multi-stock trip limit, and a new separate trip
limit of 500 lb (227 kg) per month was recommended by the Council and
implemented by NMFS; however, the salmon troll yellowtail rockfish trip
limit did not reflect this change. Agenda Item G.6., Attachment 3
(April 2019) contains a detailed analysis of the salmon troll trip
limits considered by the Council. After consideration of the detailed
analysis, the Council recommended and NMFS is proposing increasing the
yellowtail rockfish limit in the salmon troll fishery north of
40[deg]10' N lat. from 200 lbs (91 kg) to 500 lbs (227 kg) and removing
the ratio for yellowtail to salmon.
Removal of Other Flatfish Gear Restriction Off California
Currently, Federal regulations in Table 2 (South) to Part 660,
Subpart E and Table 3 (South) to Part 660, Subpart F include a gear
restriction for vessels targeting stocks in the Other Flatfish complex
south of 42[deg] N lat. while inside the boundaries of the nontrawl
RCA. The gear restriction limits the number of hooks per line, size of
the hooks, and the number and size of the weights. Other flatfish
include butter sole, curlfin sole, Pacific sanddab, rex sole, rock
sole, and sand sole, as defined in 50 CFR 660.11. This management
measure was originally implemented in 2003 to protect bocaccio, which
was overfished at that time and was thought to provide protections to
other overfished groundfish stocks in following years (e.g., Petrale
sole) while still allowing an artisanal sanddab fishery off California.
However, it was determined in subsequent cycles that it was not
effective at preventing bycatch of overfished species. During the 2009-
10 harvest specifications cycle, this restriction was removed from
regulations for the recreational fishery but was kept for the
commercial fishery.
Since this measure was first implemented the stocks it was intended
to protect have all been rebuilt while the Other Flatfish complex
continues to be under-attained. Therefore, to provide more opportunity
to target stocks in the Other Flatfish complex, the Council recommended
and NMFS is proposing removing the gear restrictions for the LEFG and
OA fisheries targeting stocks in the Other Flatfish complex inside the
RCA south of 42[deg] N lat.
[[Page 62508]]
Nontrawl RCA Adjustments
Increasing the LEFG and OA trip limits, as proposed in Section III,
F., LEFG and OA Fishery, of this proposed rule is one way to help
increase attainment of many currently under-attained species. However,
as has been discussed under public comment at Council meetings during
development of this action, increasing trip limits without providing
access to the areas where those fish can be found does little to help
with attainments. Therefore, as part of the 2021-22 biennium, the
Council recommended and NMFS is proposing the following changes to the
Nontrawl RCA off Oregon and Washington:
Between 40[deg]10' N lat. and 46[deg]16' N lat. (the
Oregon-Washington border): Open the area between the 30- and 40-fm
management lines to hook-and-line gear except bottom longline and
dinglebar, as defined in the ``general definitions'' section of the
Federal regulations at 50 CFR 660.11;
Between 38[deg]57.5' N lat. and 34[deg]27' N lat., (Point
Arena to Point Conception): Open the area between 40 fm and 50 fm; and
South of 34[deg]27' N lat.: Open the area between 75 fm
and 100 fm.
These proposals, along with the proposed changes to recreational
conservation areas (discussed in Section III, H., Recreational
Fisheries) will provide much needed access to these areas for the LEFG
and OA fisheries to better attain their trip limits. Section 4.7.2 of
the Analysis provides a detailed assessment of the impacts of these
openings. Nontrawl RCA closures can be found in the LEFG and OA trip
limits in Table 2 (North), Table 2 (South) to subpart E for LEFG and in
Table 3 (North) and Table 3 (South) to subpart F for OA in the proposed
regulatory text of this proposed rule.
As provided in the Analysis, the purpose of opening these areas is
to provide LEFG and OA fisheries access to areas where they can catch
abundant target stocks, such as bocaccio, canary rockfish, yellowtail
rockfish, and widow rockfish. All of these stocks have been
underutilized by the LEFG and OA fisheries since they were rebuilt due
to limited access to the areas where they can be found. Opening these
areas of the nontrawl RCA, many of which are currently already open to
other types of fishing (i.e., trawl or recreational fishing with hook
and line gear), along with the increased LEFG and OA trip limits for
many of these stocks and stock complexes will likely result in greater
attainment of the nontrawl allocations and therefore the ACLs without
increasing the risks of exceeding these limits.
New Management Line at 38[deg]57.5' N lat.
In order to make some of the proposed changes to the Nontrawl RCA,
the Council also recommended and NMFS is proposing creating a new
management line at 38[deg]57.5' N lat., which is Point Arena,
California. Point Arena is already defined in Federal regulations under
the definition for North-South Management Areas, as a commonly used
geographic coordinate.
H. Recreational Fisheries
This section describes the recreational fisheries management
measures proposed for 2021-22. The Council primarily recommends depth
restrictions and groundfish conservation areas to constrain catch
within the recreational harvest guidelines for each stock. Washington,
Oregon, and California each proposed, and the Council recommended,
different combinations of seasons, bag limits, area closures, and size
limits for stocks targeted in recreational fisheries. These measures
are designed to limit catch of overfished stocks found in the waters
adjacent to each state while allowing target fishing opportunities in
their particular recreational fisheries. The following sections
describe the recreational management measures proposed in each state.
Washington
The state of Washington manages its marine fisheries in four areas:
Marine Area 1 extends from the Oregon/Washington border to Leadbetter
Point; Marine Area 2 extends from Leadbetter Point to the mouth of the
Queets Rivers; Marine Area 3 extends from the Queets River to Cape
Alava; and Marine Area 4 extends from Cape Alava to the Sekiu River.
This proposed rule would adopt the following season structure in Table
18.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.018
[[Page 62509]]
The aggregate groundfish bag limits in waters adjacent to
Washington would continue to be nine fish in all areas with a sub-bag
limit for cabezon (one per day), rockfish (seven per day), and lingcod
(two per day). The flatfish limit would increase from three fish to
five fish, and is not counted towards the groundfish bag limit of nine
but is in addition to it. The Council recommended these season and bag
limit changes, which allow more access to target stocks with fewer
restrictions.
Consistent with the 2019-20 biennium, the Council recommended and
NMFS is proposing to continue to prohibit recreational fishing for
groundfish and Pacific halibut inside the North Coast Recreational
Yelloweye Rockfish Conservation Area (YRCA), a C-shaped closed area off
the northern Washington coast. However, the Council recommended and
NMFS is proposing opening the South Coast Recreational YRCA and the
Westport Offshore YRCA to recreational fishing for the 2021-22
biennium. Coordinates for YRCAs are defined at Sec. 660.70.
Opening the South Coast Recreational YRCA and the Westport Offshore
YRCA would provide additional access to healthy underutilized stocks.
Originally closed to recreational fishing in 2007 to protect canary
rockfish and yelloweye rockfish, these closures may no longer be needed
since canary rockfish has been rebuilt and higher harvest guidelines
were implemented for yelloweye rockfish. As stated by the Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) in their analysis for this
proposal, the additional impacts to target and non-target species
expected from allowing recreational hook-and-line fishing in these
areas would be minimal because the areas to be opened are very small,
particularly in comparison to the overall area used by Washington
recreational fisheries (Agenda Item F.1.a, Supplemental WDFW Report 1,
June 2020).
Oregon
The Council proposed that Oregon recreational fisheries in 2021-22
would operate under an all months all depths season structure to start
the 2021 fishing year. The Council proposed maintaining the 2019-20
aggregate bag limits and size limits in Oregon recreational fisheries
for 2021-22. The proposed limits are: Three lingcod per day, with a
minimum size of 22 in (56 cm); 25 flatfish per day, excluding Pacific
halibut; and a marine fish aggregate bag limit of 10 fish per day,
where cabezon have a minimum size of 16 in (41 cm).
The ODFW also requested that the Council consider allowing
longleader gear fishing and ``all-depth'' Pacific halibut fishing on
the same trip, which had been requested by Oregon anglers during
discussion of the 2019 Pacific halibut Catch Sharing Plan process.
Currently, combining the two trip types is prohibited; this prohibition
was meant to limit interactions with yelloweye rockfish.
Impacts to yelloweye rockfish or other species of concern (e.g.,
Chinook and Coho salmon) are unlikely to increase significantly under
this proposed change as effort is not expected to increase by much.
Instead, removing the prohibition would allow anglers already
participating in one or the other fisheries to have additional
opportunity while offshore. As ODFW's analysis to the Council shows
(Agenda Item F.1.a, June 2020), over the past 2 years that the
longleader gear fishery has been allowed to operate, the average
encounter rates of yelloweye rockfish, Chinook salmon, and Coho salmon
has been extremely low at around 0.02, 0.6, and 6 fish per angler,
respectively. When added to the encounters from the traditional
bottomfish fishery, the total annual encounters would not be much
different than the recent years' total estimates, and should not
increase the potential for the total groundfish salmon thresholds to be
reached or exceeded. Therefore the Council recommended and NMFS is
proposing removing the prohibition on combining Oregon longleader trips
with all depths halibut trips.
California
The Council manages recreational fisheries in waters adjacent to
California in five separate management areas. Season and area closures
differ between California management areas to limit incidental catch of
overfished stocks while providing as much recreational fishing
opportunity as possible. The Council's proposed California season
structure includes additional time and depth opportunities, which are
supported by the proposed increase to the yelloweye rockfish ACL
described in Section C. Table 19 shows the proposed season structure
and depth limits by management area for 2021 and 2022.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.019
[[Page 62510]]
The Council recommended that size limits would remain the same as
for 2020 for all stocks. However, the Council recommended and NMFS is
proposing to eliminate the sub-bag limits for black rockfish, canary
rockfish, and cabezon, and establish a sub-bag limit for vermillion
rockfish of five fish.
J. Exempted Fishing Permits
This action is authorized by the PCGFMP and the regulations
implementing the Magnuson-Stevens Act at 50 CFR 600.745, which state
that EFPs may be used to authorize fishing activities that would
otherwise be prohibited.
At its June 2020 meeting, the Council recommended that NMFS approve
five EFP applications for the 2021 fishing year and preliminarily
approve the EFP applications for the 2022 fishing year. The Council
considered these EFP applications concurrently with the 2021-2022
biennial harvest specifications and management process because expected
catch under most EFP projects is included in the catch limits for
groundfish stocks. Three of the EFP applications are renewals, and
request to test hook-and-line gear that selectively targets
underutilized, midwater rockfish species (e.g., yellowtail rockfish)
while avoiding overfished, bottom-dwelling rockfish species (e.g.,
yelloweye rockfish). An EFP is necessary for these activities because
they will all occur in the non-trawl RCA, which is closed to fishing
with non-trawl fixed gear to protect overfished groundfish stocks. The
other two EFP applications are new, and request to retain certain
prohibited species in order to collect fishery-dependent data for
potential use in upcoming stock assessments. A summary of each EFP
application is provided below:
Groundfish EFP Proposal--Yellowtail Rockfish Jig Fishing
off California: The San Francisco Community Fishing Association (SFCFA)
and private open access fisherman Daniel Platt submitted a renewal
application for research that has been conducted since 2013. The
purpose of the EFP project is to continue testing the potential for a
commercial jig gear configured to target underutilized, midwater
yellowtail and shelf rockfish species while avoiding the rebuilding,
bottom-dwelling yelloweye rockfish. The EFP project would require
exemptions from: (1) The prohibition to fish inside the non-trawl RCA
with non-trawl gear (see Sec. 660.330(d)(12)(i)); (2) the prohibition
on transiting through the non-trawl RCA without non-trawl gear stowed
(see Sec. 660.330(d)(12)(ii)); and (3) the prohibition on retaining
and landing groundfish harvested from inside the non-trawl RCA with
non-trawl gear (see Sec. 660.330(d)(12)(iii)). If approved, NMFS would
authorize up to seven vessels to target midwater rockfish inside the
non-trawl RCA off the California coast--specifically between 40[deg]
10' north latitude (N lat.) and Point Conception, California, at depths
ranging from 35 to 150 fathoms (64 to 274 meters (m)).
Groundfish EFP Proposal--Commercial Midwater Hook-and-Line
Rockfish Fishing in the RCA off the Oregon Coast: Scott Cook, a private
fisherman of Coos Bay, Oregon submitted a renewal application to
continue research that has been conducted since 2019. The purpose of
the EFP project is to test a modified, midwater trolled longline gear
configured to target underutilized, midwater yellowtail, widow, and
canary rockfish, while avoiding the rebuilding, bottom-dwelling
yelloweye rockfish. The EFP project would require exemptions from: (1)
The prohibition to fish inside the non-trawl RCA with non-trawl gear
(see Sec. 660.330(d)(12)(i)); (2) the prohibition on transiting
through the non-trawl RCA without non-trawl gear stowed (see Sec.
660.330(d)(12)(ii)); and (3) the prohibition on retaining and landing
groundfish harvested from inside the non-trawl RCA with non-trawl gear
(see Sec. 660.330(d)(12)(iii)). If approved, NMFS would authorize up
to five vessels to target midwater rockfish inside the non-trawl RCA
off the Oregon Coast--specifically in the rocky reef habitat at depths
ranging from 30 to 100 fathoms (55 to 183 m).
Groundfish EFP Proposal--Monterey Bay Regional EFP
Chilipepper Rockfish: Real Good Fish of Moss Landing, California
submitted a renewal application to continue research that has been
conducted since 2019. The purpose of the EFP project is to test a
trolled hook-and-line gear configured to target underutilized, midwater
chilipepper rockfish and avoid the rebuilding, bottom-dwelling
yelloweye rockfish. The EFP project would require exemptions from: (1)
The prohibition to fish inside the non-trawl RCA with non-trawl gear
(see Sec. 660.330(d)(12)(i)); (2) the prohibition on transiting
through the non-trawl RCA without non-trawl gear stowed (see Sec.
660.330(d)(12)(ii)); and (3) the prohibition on retaining and landing
groundfish harvested from inside the non-trawl RCA with non-trawl gear
(see Sec. 660.330(d)(12)(iii)). If approved, NMFS would authorize up
to 10 vessels to target midwater rockfish inside the non-trawl RCA off
the California coast--specifically in areas with canyon edges and walls
that have historically produced high volumes of chilipepper rockfish
catch and at depths ranging from 40 to 150 fathoms (73 to 274 m).
Groundfish EFP Proposal--California Department of Fish and
Wildlife 2021-2022 EFP: The California Department of Fish and Wildlife
(CDFW) submitted a new EFP application to collect fishery-dependent
biological data for cowcod for inclusion in future stock assessments.
The EFP project would require an exemption from the prohibition to
retain cowcod in the California recreational fishery (see Sec.
660.360(c)(3)). The EFP would also provide that any cowcod taken and
retained would not count against the recreational bag limit for the
aggregate of rockfish, cabezon, and greenlings. If approved, NMFS would
authorize up to 20 vessels that participate in the California
recreational fishery to retain cowcod and transfer the cowcod to CDFW
groundfish staff upon landing.
Groundfish EFP Proposal--Washington Department of Fish
Wildlife Enhanced Yelloweye Recreational Fishery Biological Sampling
EFP: The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) submitted a
new EFP application to collect fishery-dependent biological data for
yelloweye rockfish for inclusion in future stock assessments. The EFP
project would require an exemption from the prohibition to retain
yelloweye rockfish in the Washington recreational fishery (see Sec.
660.360(c)(1)(ii)). The EFP would also provide that any yelloweye
rockfish taken and retained would not count against the recreational
bag limit for rockfish. If approved, NMFS would authorize up to 10
vessels that participate in the Washington recreational fishery to
retain yelloweye rockfish and transfer the yelloweye rockfish to WDFW
staff upon landing.
During the 2-year period of EFP activities from 2021 to 2022, all
vessels participating in the non-trawl RCA EFP projects (i.e., the
renewal applications submitted by the SFCFA, Scott Cook, and Real Good
Fish) would adhere to EFP set-asides for targeted and incidental
groundfish and other species, which were considered and approved by the
Council at their June 2020 meeting. These EFP set-asides are off-the-
top deductions from the 2021-2022 applicable ACLs, meaning any landings
and discards that occur under these EFPs would be accounted for within
the applicable ACLs. These vessels are also required to have 100
percent observer coverage. All cowcod mortality under the CDFW EFP
project is expected to
[[Page 62511]]
occur in conjunction with routine recreational fishing activities and
will be calculated as part of the normal recreational catch estimation
process. All yelloweye rockfish taken under the WDFW EFP project would
be counted against the Washington recreational harvest guideline for
yelloweye rockfish. NMFS would not require 100 percent observer
coverage for vessels participating in the CDFW and WDFW EFP projects
because recreational vessels do not meet the minimum size requirements
under Federal regulations to carry an observer.
NMFS does not expect any impacts to the environment, essential fish
habitat, or protected or prohibited species from these EFPs beyond
those analyzed for the groundfish fishery as a whole in applicable
biological opinions 3 4 or the draft Environmental
Assessment (EA) for the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery 2021-2022
Harvest Specifications and Management Measures.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Available at: http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/publications/fishery_management/groundfish/s7-groundfish-biop-121117.pdf.
\4\ Available at: http://www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/F7_Att1_USFWS_2017_STALBiOp_NOV2017BB.pdf.
\5\ Draft available at: https://www.pcouncil.org/documents/2020/05/f-1-attachment-8-pacific-coast-groundfish-fishery-2021-2022-harvest-specifications-and-management-measures-analytical-document-organized-as-a-draft-environmental-assessment-chapters-1-5-electroni.pdf/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After publication of this document in the Federal Register, NMFS
may approve and issue permits for the proposed EFP projects for the
2021 fishing year after the close of the public comment period. All
five EFP applications are available under ``Supporting and Related
Materials'' (see ADDRESSES). NMFS will consider comments submitted in
deciding whether to approve the applications as requested. NMFS may
approve the applications in their entirety or may make any alterations
needed to achieve the goals of the EFP projects. NMFS would not issue
another Federal Register notice soliciting public comment on renewing
these EFP projects for 2022 unless: (1) The applicants modify and
resubmit their applications to NMFS; (2) changes to relevant fisheries
regulations warrant a revised set of exemptions authorized under the
EFP projects; or (3) NMFS' understanding of the current biological and
economic impacts from EFP fishing activities substantially changes.
IV. 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 PCGFMP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after
public comment. In making its final determination, NMFS will take into
account the complete record, including the data, views, and comments
received during the comment period.
Pursuant to Executive Order 13175, this proposed rule was developed
after meaningful consultation and collaboration with tribal officials
from the area covered by the PCGFMP. Under the Magnuson-Stevens Act at
16 U.S.C. 1852(b)(5), one of the voting members of the Pacific Council
must be a representative of an Indian tribe with federally recognized
fishing rights from the area of the Council's jurisdiction. In
addition, regulations implementing the PCGFMP establish a procedure by
which the tribes with treaty fishing rights in the area covered by the
PCGFMP request new allocations or regulations specific to the tribes,
in writing, before the first of the two meetings at which the Council
considers groundfish management measures. The regulations at 50 CFR
660.324(d) further direct NMFS to develop tribal allocations and
regulations in consultation with the affected tribes. The tribal
management measures in this proposed rule have been developed following
these procedures. The tribal representative on the Council made a
motion to adopt the non-whiting tribal management measures, which was
passed by the Council. Those management measures, which were developed
and proposed by the tribes, are included in this proposed rule.
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866. This proposed rule is not an
Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because this rule is not
significant under Executive Order 12866.
NMFS prepared an integrated Analysis for this action, which
addresses the statutory requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the
National Environmental Policy Act, Presidential Executive Order 12866,
and the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The full suite of alternatives
analyzed by the Council can be found on the Council's website at
www.pcouncil.org. This Analysis does not contain all the alternatives,
because an EIS was prepared for the 2015-16 biennial harvest
specifications and management measures and is available from NMFS (see
ADDRESSES). This EIS examined the harvest specifications and management
measures for 2015-16 and 10-year projections for routinely adjusted
harvest specifications and management measures. The 10-year projections
were produced to evaluate the impacts of the ongoing implementation of
harvest specifications and management measures and to evaluate the
impacts of the routine adjustments that are the main component of each
biennial cycle. Therefore, the EA for the 2021-22 cycle tiers from the
2015-16 EIS and focuses on the harvest specifications and management
measures that were not within the scope of the 10-year projections in
the 2015-16 EIS. A copy of the EA is available from NMFS (see
ADDRESSES). This action also announces a public comment period on the
EA.
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration that this proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The purpose of this proposed rule is to conserve Pacific Coast
groundfish stocks by preventing overfishing, while still allowing
harvest opportunity among the various fishery sectors. This will be
accomplished by implementing the 2021-2022 annual specifications in the
U.S. exclusive economic zone off the West Coast. The harvest
specifications affect large and small entities similarly, and for this
biennium, many of the catch limits are proposed to increase, providing
benefit to all participants. Additionally, this proposed rule contains
several of new management measures that are likely to benefit vessels,
specifically openings of previously closed fishing grounds. As a
result, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and
none has been prepared.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660
Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: September 28, 2020.
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 660 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 660--FISHERIES OFF WEST COAST STATES
0
1. The authority citation for part 660 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq., and
16 U.S.C. 7001 et seq.
[[Page 62512]]
0
2. In Sec. 660.11, amend the definition of ``North-South management
area'' by revising paragraph (2)(xviii) to read as follows:
Sec. 660.11 General definitions.
* * * * *
North-South management area * * *
(2) * * *
(xviii) Point Arena, CA--management line--38[deg]57.50' N lat.
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec. 660.40, revise the section heading, removing paragraph (a),
redesignating paragraph (b) as paragraph (a), and add a reserved
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 660.40 Rebuilding plans.
* * * * *
0
4. In Sec. 660.50, revise paragraphs (f)(2)(ii) and (f)(6) to read as
follows:
Sec. 660.50 Pacific Coast treaty Indian fisheries.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) The Tribal allocation is 689.2 mt in 2021 and 656.6 mt in 2022
per year. This allocation is, for each year, 10 percent of the Monterey
through Vancouver area (North of 36[deg] N lat.) ACL. The Tribal
allocation is reduced by 1.7 percent for estimated discard mortality.
* * * * *
(6) Petrale sole. For petrale sole, treaty fishing vessels are
restricted to a fleetwide harvest target of 350 mt each year.
* * * * *
0
5. Amend Sec. 660.71 as follows:
0
a. Redesignate paragraphs (o)(133) through (216) as paragraphs (o)(135)
through (218); and
0
b. Add new paragraphs (o)(133) and (134).
The additions read as follows:
Sec. 660.71 Latitude/longitude coordinates defining the 10-fm (18-m)
through 40-fm (73-m) depth contours.
* * * * *
(o) * * *
(133) 37[deg]25.00' N lat., 122[deg]38.66' W long.;
(134) 37[deg]20.68' N lat., 122[deg]36.79' W long.;
* * * * *
0
6. Amend Sec. 660.73 as follows:
0
a. Revise paragraphs (a)(309) through (315);
0
b. Add paragraphs (a)(316) through (321);
0
c. Revise paragraphs (b)(1) through (14);
0
d. Add paragraph (b)(15);
0
e. Revise paragraphs (c)(10) through (14);
0
f. Redesignate paragraphs (d) through (l) as paragraphs (e) through
(m); and
0
g. Add new paragraph (d).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 660.73 Latitude/longitude coordinates defining the 100 fm (183
m) through 150 fm (274 m) depth contours.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(309) 33[deg]2.81' N lat., 117[deg]21.17' W long.;
(310) 33[deg]1.76' N lat., 117[deg]20.51' W long.;
(311) 32[deg]59.90' N lat., 117[deg]19.38' W long.;
(312) 32[deg]57.29' N lat., 117[deg]18.94' W long.;
(313) 32[deg]56.15' N lat., 117[deg]19.54' W long.;
(314) 32[deg]55.30' N lat., 117[deg]19.38' W long.;
(315) 32[deg]54.27' N lat., 117[deg]17.17' W long.;
(316) 32[deg]52.94' N lat., 117[deg]17.11' W long.;
(317) 32[deg]52.66' N lat., 117[deg]19.67' W long.;
(318) 32[deg]50.95' N lat., 117[deg]21.17' W long.;
(319) 32[deg]47.11' N lat., 117[deg]22.98' W long.;
(320) 32[deg]45.60' N lat., 117[deg]22.64' W long.; and
(321) 32[deg]42.79' N lat., 117[deg]21.16' W long.
(b) * * *
(1) 33[deg]04.80' N lat., 118[deg]37.90' W long.;
(2) 33[deg]02.65' N lat., 118[deg]34.08' W long.;
(3) 32[deg]55.80' N lat., 118[deg]28.92' W long.;
(4) 32[deg]55.04' N lat., 118[deg]27.68' W long.;
(5) 32[deg]49.79' N lat., 118[deg]20.87' W long.;
(6) 32[deg]48.05' N lat., 118[deg]19.62' W long.;
(7) 32[deg]47.41' N lat., 118[deg]21.86' W long.;
(8) 32[deg]44.03' N lat., 118[deg]24.70' W long.;
(9) 32[deg]47.81' N lat., 118[deg]30.20' W long.;
(10) 32[deg]49.79' N lat., 118[deg]32.00' W long.;
(11) 32[deg]53.36' N lat., 118[deg]33.23' W long.;
(12) 32[deg]55.13' N lat., 118[deg]35.31' W long.;
(13) 33[deg]00.22' N lat., 118[deg]38.68' W long.;
(14) 33[deg]03.13' N lat., 118[deg]39.59' W long.; and
(15) 33[deg]04.80' N lat., 118[deg]37.90' W long.
(c) * * *
(10) 33[deg]18.14' N lat., 118[deg]27.94' W long.;
(11) 33[deg]19.84' N lat., 118[deg]32.22' W long.;
(12) 33[deg]20.81' N lat., 118[deg]32.91' W long.;
(13) 33[deg]21.94' N lat., 118[deg]32.03' W long.;
(14) 33[deg]23.14' N lat., 118[deg]30.12' W long.;
* * * * *
(d) The 100 fm (183 m) depth contour around the northern Channel
Islands off the state of California is defined by straight lines
connecting all of the following points in the order stated:
(1) 34[deg]12.89' N lat., 120[deg]29.31' W long.;
(2) 34[deg]10.96' N lat., 120[deg]25.19' W long.;
(3) 34[deg]08.74' N lat., 120[deg]18.00' W long.;
(4) 34[deg]07.02' N lat., 120[deg]10.45' W long.;
(5) 34[deg]06.75' N lat., 120[deg]05.09' W long.;
(6) 34[deg]08.15' N lat., 119[deg]54.96' W long.;
(7) 34[deg]'07.17 N lat., 119[deg]48.54' W long.;
(8) 34[deg]05.66' N lat., 119[deg]37.58' W long.;
(9) 34[deg]04.76' N lat., 119[deg]26.28' W long.;
(10) 34[deg]02.93' N lat., 119[deg]18.06' W long.;
(11) 34[deg]00.97' N lat., 119[deg]18.78' W long.;
(12) 33[deg]59.38' N lat., 119[deg]21.71' W long.;
(13) 33[deg]58.62' N lat., 119[deg]32.05' W long.;
(14) 33[deg]57.69' N lat., 119[deg]33.38' W long.;
(15) 33[deg]57.40' N lat., 119[deg]35.84' W long.;
(16) 33[deg]56.07' N lat., 119[deg]41.10' W long.
(17) 33[deg]55.54' N lat., 119[deg]47.99' W long.;
(18) 33[deg]56.60' N lat., 119[deg]51.40' W long.;
(19) 33[deg]55.56' N lat., 119[deg]53.87' W long.;
(20) 33[deg]54.40' N lat., 119[deg]53.74' W long.;
(21) 33[deg]52.72' N lat., 119[deg]54.62' W long.;
(22) 33[deg]47.95' N lat., 119[deg]53.50' W long.;
(23) 33[deg]45.75' N lat., 119[deg]51.04' W long.;
(24) 33[deg]40.18' N lat., 119[deg]50.36' W long.;
(25) 33[deg]38.19' N lat., 119[deg]57.85' W long.;
(26) 33[deg]44.92' N lat., 120[deg]02.95' W long.;
[[Page 62513]]
(27) 33[deg]48.90' N lat., 120[deg]05.34' W long.;
(28) 33[deg]51.64' N lat., 120[deg]08.11' W long.;
(29) 33[deg]58.31' N lat., 120[deg]27.99' W long.;
(30) 34[deg]03.23' N lat., 120[deg]34.34' W long.;
(31) 34[deg]09.42' N lat., 120[deg]37.64' W long.; and
(32) 34[deg]12.89' N lat., 120[deg]29.31' W long.
* * * * *
0
7. Tables 1a through 1c to subpart C are revised to read as follows:
[[Page 62514]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.020
[[Page 62515]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.021
[[Page 62516]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.022
[[Page 62517]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.023
[[Page 62518]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.024
[[Page 62519]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.025
[[Page 62520]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.026
0
6. Tables 2a through 2c to subpart C are revised to read as follows:
[[Page 62521]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.027
[[Page 62522]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.028
[[Page 62523]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.029
[[Page 62524]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.030
[[Page 62525]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.031
[[Page 62526]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.032
[[Page 62527]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.033
0
7. In Sec. 660.140, revise paragraphs (d)(1)(ii)(D) to read as
follows:
Sec. 660.140 Shorebased IFQ Program.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) * * *
[[Page 62528]]
(ii) * * *
(D) Pacific whiting and non-whiting QP shorebased trawl
allocations. For the trawl fishery, NMFS will issue QP based on the
following shorebased trawl allocations:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.034
[[Page 62529]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.035
* * * * *
0
8. Revise Tables 1 (North) and 1 (South) to subpart D to read as
follows:
[[Page 62530]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.036
[[Page 62531]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.037
0
9. In Sec. 660.231, revise paragraph (b)(3)(i) to read as follows:
Sec. 660.231 Limited entry fixed gear sablefish primary fishery.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) * * *
(i) A vessel participating in the primary season will be
constrained by the sablefish cumulative limit associated with each of
the permits registered for use with that vessel. During the primary
season, each vessel authorized to fish in that season under paragraph
(a) of this section may take, retain, possess, and land sablefish, up
to the cumulative limits for each of the permits registered for use
with that vessel (i.e., stacked permits). If multiple limited entry
permits with sablefish endorsements are registered for use with a
single vessel, that vessel may land up to the total of all cumulative
limits announced in this paragraph for the tiers for those permits,
except as limited by paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section. Up to 3
permits may be registered for use with a single vessel during the
primary season; thus, a single vessel may not take and retain, possess
or land more than 3 primary season sablefish cumulative limits in any
one year. A vessel registered for use with multiple
[[Page 62532]]
limited entry permits is subject to per vessel limits for species other
than sablefish, and to per vessel limits when participating in the
daily trip limit fishery for sablefish under Sec. 660.232. In 2021,
the following annual limits are in effect: Tier 1 at 58,649 lb (26,602
kg), Tier 2 at 26,659 lb (12,092 kg), and Tier 3 at 15,234 lb (6,910
kg). In 2022 and beyond, the following annual limits are in effect:
Tier 1 at 55,858 lb (25,337 kg), Tier 2 at 25,390 lb (11,517 kg), and
Tier 3 at 14,509 lb (6,581 kg).
* * * * *
0
10. Revise Tables 2 (North) and 2 (South) to subpart E to read as
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.038
[[Page 62533]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.039
0
11. Revise Tables 3 (North) and 3 (South) to subpart F to read as
follows:
[[Page 62534]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.040
[[Page 62535]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.041
0
12. Amend Sec. 660.360 by revising paragraphs (c)(1) introductory
text, (c)(1)(i)(B), (C), and (D), (c)(2)(i)(B) and (D), (c)(3)(i)(A),
and (c)(3)(ii)(B) to read as follows:
Sec. 660.360 Recreational fishery--management measures.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) Washington. For each person engaged in recreational fishing off
the coast of Washington, the groundfish bag limit is 9 groundfish per
day, including rockfish, cabezon and lingcod. Within the groundfish bag
limit, there are sub-limits for rockfish, lingcod, and cabezon
[[Page 62536]]
outlined in paragraph (c)(1)(i)(D) of this section. In addition to the
groundfish bag limit of 9, there will be a flatfish limit of 5 fish,
not to be counted towards the groundfish bag limit but in addition to
it. The recreational groundfish fishery will open the second Saturday
in March through the third Saturday in October for all species. In the
Pacific halibut fisheries, retention of groundfish is governed in part
by annual management measures for Pacific halibut fisheries, which are
published in the Federal Register. The following seasons, closed areas,
sub-limits and size limits apply:
(i) * * *
(B) South coast recreational yelloweye rockfish conservation area.
Recreational fishing for groundfish and halibut is allowed within the
South Coast Recreational YRCA. The South Coast Recreational YRCA is
defined by latitude and longitude coordinates specified at Sec.
660.70.
(C) Westport offshore recreational yelloweye rockfish conservation
area. Recreational fishing for groundfish and halibut is allowed within
the Westport Offshore Recreational YRCA. The Westport Offshore
Recreational YRCA is defined by latitude and longitude coordinates
specified at Sec. 660.70.
(D) Recreational rockfish conservation area. Fishing for groundfish
with recreational gear is prohibited within the recreational RCA unless
otherwise stated. It is unlawful to take and retain, possess, or land
groundfish taken with recreational gear within the recreational RCA
unless otherwise stated. A vessel fishing in the recreational RCA may
not be in possession of any groundfish unless otherwise stated. [For
example, if a vessel participates in the recreational salmon fishery
within the RCA, the vessel cannot be in possession of groundfish while
in the RCA. The vessel may, however, on the same trip fish for and
retain groundfish shoreward of the RCA on the return trip to port.]
Coordinates approximating boundary lines at the 10- fm (18 m) through
40-fm (73-m) depth contours can be found at Sec. 660.71. The
Washington recreational fishing season structure is as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.042
* * * * *
(2) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) Recreational rockfish conservation area (RCA). Fishing for
groundfish with recreational gear is prohibited within the recreational
RCA, a type of closed area or groundfish conservation area, except with
long-leader gear (as defined at Sec. 660.351). It is unlawful to take
and retain, possess, or land groundfish taken with recreational gear
within the recreational RCA, except with long-leader gear (as defined
at Sec. 660.351). A vessel fishing in the recreational RCA may not be
in possession of any groundfish. [For example, if a vessel fishes in
the recreational salmon fishery within the RCA, the vessel cannot be in
possession of groundfish while within the RCA. The vessel may, however,
on the same trip fish for and retain groundfish shoreward of the RCA on
the return trip to port.] Off Oregon, from January 1 through December
31, recreational fishing for groundfish is allowed in all depths.
Coordinates approximating boundary lines at the 10-fm (18 m) through
40-fm (73-m) depth contours can be found at Sec. 660.71.
* * * * *
(D) In the Pacific halibut fisheries. Retention of groundfish is
governed in part by annual management measures for Pacific halibut
fisheries, which are published in the Federal Register. Between the
Columbia River and Humbug Mountain, during days open to the ``all-
depth'' sport halibut fisheries, when Pacific halibut are onboard the
vessel, no groundfish, except sablefish, Pacific cod, and other species
of flatfish
[[Page 62537]]
(sole, flounder, sanddab), may be taken and retained, possessed or
landed, except with long-leader gear (as defined at Sec. 660.351).
``All-depth'' season days are established in the annual management
measures for Pacific halibut fisheries, which are published in the
Federal Register and are announced on the NMFS Pacific halibut hotline,
1-800-662-9825.
* * * * *
(3) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) Recreational rockfish conservation areas. The recreational RCAs
are areas that are closed to recreational fishing for groundfish.
Fishing for groundfish with recreational gear is prohibited within the
recreational RCA, except that recreational fishing for species in the
Other Flatfish complex, petrale sole, and starry flounder is permitted
within the recreational RCA as specified in paragraph (c)(3)(iv) of
this section. It is unlawful to take and retain, possess, or land
groundfish taken with recreational gear within the recreational RCA,
unless otherwise authorized in this section. A vessel fishing in the
recreational RCA may not be in possession of any species prohibited by
the restrictions that apply within the recreational RCA. For example,
if a vessel fishes in the recreational salmon fishery within the RCA,
the vessel cannot be in possession of rockfish while in the RCA. The
vessel may, however, on the same trip fish for and retain rockfish
shoreward of the RCA on the return trip to port. If the season is
closed for a species or species group, fishing for that species or
species group is prohibited both within the recreational RCA and
shoreward of the recreational RCA, unless otherwise authorized in this
section. Coordinates approximating boundary lines at the 10- fm (18 m)
through 40-fm (73-m) depth contours can be found at Sec. 660.71. The
California recreational fishing season structure and RCA depth
boundaries by management area and month are as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02OC20.043
* * * * *
(ii) * * *
(B) Bag limits, hook limits. In times and areas when the
recreational season for the RCG Complex is open, there is a limit of 2
hooks and 1 line when fishing for the RCG complex and lingcod. The bag
limit is 10 RCG Complex fish per day coastwide, with a sub-bag limit of
5 fish for vermilion rockfish. This sub-bag limit counts towards the
bag limit for the RCG Complex and is not in addition to that limit.
Retention of yelloweye rockfish, bronzespotted rockfish, and cowcod is
prohibited. Multi-day limits are authorized by a valid permit issued by
California and must not exceed the daily limit multiplied by the number
of days in the fishing trip.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-21783 Filed 10-1-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
