Fishery conservation and management: Northeastern United States fisheries— Northeast multispecies,

[Federal Register: April 19, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 74)]

[Proposed Rules]

[Page 19111-19113]

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

[DOCID:fr19ap99-24]

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 648

[Docket No. 990226056-9056-01; I.D. 122498C]

RIN 0638-AL31

Northeast Multispecies Fishery; Amendment 9 to the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan; Supplement to the Proposed Rule

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

ACTION: Supplement to the proposed rule.

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this supplement to the proposed rule for Amendment 9 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Northeast Multispecies Fishery. The supplement is intended to provide information inadvertently omitted from the summary of the initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) prepared for Amendment 9 published with the proposed rule. Specifically, this supplement summarizes information about alternatives that the New England Fishery Management Council (Council) considered, but rejected, for the Amendment.

DATES: Public comments will be accepted from April 14, 1999 through May 3, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to Jon C. Rittgers, Acting Regional Administrator, NMFS, Northeast Regional Office, One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the outside of the envelope, ``Comments on the initial regulatory flexibility analysis of Amendment 9.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan A. Murphy, Fishery Policy Analyst, 978-281-9252.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Analytical documents in Amendment 9 pertaining to requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act include ``Volume I,'' October 9, 1998; ``Supplement,'' November 14, 1998; and ``Supplement,'' January 27, 1999. This supplement to the proposed rule for Amendment 9 republishes, for the convenience of the public, the portion of the classification section of that proposed rule (64 FR 13952; March 23, 1999) that addressed the Regulatory Flexibility Act and adds information inadvertently omitted from that classification section relevant to alternatives considered, but rejected, by the Council for Amendment 9.

Classification

NMFS prepared an IRFA for this proposed rule, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 603, without regard to whether the proposal would have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Measures analyzed in the IRFA include the brush-sweep trawl gear prohibition, the one-fish halibut possession limit, and the winter flounder fish size increase. The following is a brief discussion of the measures analyzed in the IRFA.

Amendment 9 proposes the prohibition of brush-sweep trawl gear on vessels fishing for multispecies. The cost of the brush-sweep trawl gear is estimated to be between $8,000 and $15,000, depending on the individual vessel. Excessive wear and tear on the gear requires that the gear be replaced

[[Page 19112]]

often. The overall cost to vessels impacted by this action would be based on the loss of the use of the gear which, when utilized, wears out in a few months to a year. The potential universe of vessels that could be impacted by the brush-sweep trawl gear prohibition is approximately 900 vessels, i.e., based on NMFS Regional Office database, the number of permit holders who fish for multispecies with otter trawl gear. Therefore, the one-time cost to the industry would likely be between $7.2 million (900 x $8,000) and $13.5 million (900 x $15,000) since there are approximately 900 vessels that fish for multispecies with otter trawl gear. This assumes that all 900 vessels are currently using brush sweep gear. NMFS is seeking information on the number of vessel fishing with brush sweep trawl gear.

A one-fish halibut possession limit with a minimum fish size of 36 inches (91.4 cm) is also proposed. Commercial vessels wishing to retain the one-fish possession limit would be required to obtain a multispecies permit. The economic costs associated with the proposed halibut restrictions include lost revenues from restricted or prohibited landings, as well as the added costs of enforcing new regulations and administering the new open-access permits. For the years 1996 and 1997, Vessel Trip Reports indicate that 134 and 139 vessels, respectively, reported landing halibut. Based on recent landings data reported to NMFS, halibut landings have averaged less than 50,000 lb (22,680 kg), and more recently have declined from 31,542 lb (14,307 kg) in 1996 to 17,078 lb (7,746.5 kg) in 1997. Annual landings per vessel averaged 235 lb (106.5 kg) in 1996 and 123 pounds in 1997. Annual revenues per vessel during this time averaged $1,059 and $553,000, respectively. The total exvessel revenue from halibut was $141,906 (134 x $1,059) in 1996 and $76,867 (139 x $553) in 1997. The number of vessels affected by the proposed one-fish halibut restriction may amount to 1,050 vessels based on the number of permitted vessels in the multispecies fishery. This number includes active limited access multispecies permit holders (1,000) combined with a subset of the estimated 100 active participants in the directed halibut fishery who do not possess a Federal fisheries permit, approximately 50. In 1996 or 1997, 134 to 139 active vessels (those that reported landings of halibut in recent years) are estimated to be only those vessels that caught at least one halibut.

An increase in the minimum fish size for winter flounder to 13 inches (33.0 cm) from the current minimum size of 12 inches (30.5 cm) for both commercial and recreational fishing vessels is proposed in Amendment 9. For the commercial fishery, economic impacts of increasing the winter flounder fish size involve revenue loss from prohibiting landings of fish that are between 12 and 13 inches (30.5 and 33.0 cm) and revenue gains from the increased yield per recruit and price per pound for higher market category once 12-inch (30.5 cm) size fish grow to 13-inch (33.0 cm) size and above.

The data for NMFS 1997 winter flounder landings data, including all sizes of fish, were approximately 11.7 million pounds, or 14 percent of the total regulated species landings. Exvessel revenues of winter flounder during this period amounted to $15.6 million (8.5 percent) of the total exvessel revenues ($183.5 million) from all species for vessels that landed winter flounder. Although some fishers have commented that fish in the 12- to 13-inch (30.5-33 cm) size range accounted for up to 30 - 40 percent of their winter flounder catch, many other fishers have reported that very few fish in the 12- to 13- inch (30.5-33 cm) range are retained by nets unless the vessel is fishing with nets that are less than the minimum regulated mesh size. Landing reports from the New Bedford, MA, auction indicate that 12-inch (30.5 cm) fish make up less than 10 percent of winter flounder sold in this port. Assuming that 30 - 40 percent of winter flounder landed were in the 12- to 13-inch (30.5-33 cm) size range, the decrease in exvessel revenue would likely be between 2.6 percent ($4.68 million of $183.5 million) and 3.4 percent ($6.24 million of $183.5 million) in the first year for all vessels that reported landings of winter flounder.

Compliance costs associated with increasing the minimum winter flounder fish size would result from the cost of modifying trawl codends to reduce the bycatch of 12-inch (30.5 cm) size fish. However, because codends are expandable and replaced often due to constant wear and tear, annual costs associated with this measure would be part of normal gear replacement cost.

Approximately 1,650 vessels have limited access permits and could land winter flounder regardless of whether it was the target species. Based on the NMFS 1997 landings data, 971 of the active multispecies vessels landed winter flounder. On average, reduction in gross revenue per vessel would likely be between $4,820 and $6,430 in the first year, assuming uniform landings across vessels. Otter trawl vessels accounted for the majority of the landings (64 percent), followed by gillnet vessels (18 percent). Thus, otter trawl vessels could lose between $3.0 million and $4.0 million in the first year. Gillnet vessels could lose between $0.8 million and $1.1 million in the first year.

Alternatives Considered, But Rejected by the Council

1. The Council considered taking ``no action'' in terms of the use of brush sweep trawl gear but was concerned about the lack of information about its overall use or about how it may impact specific species and other related impacts. The Council was concerned that the efficiency of the gear may be so greatly improved so as to undermine the effectiveness of the days at sea (DAS) reduction program. The basis for this concern is that, if vessels with limited DAS could increase their catch per day significantly, the number of DAS allocated would have to be reduced to achieve the set fishing mortality goal. Because the impacts of the gear are not known at this time, the Council has chosen a precautionary approach by prohibiting use of the gear but recommends comparative studies of roller, rockhopper, chain, brush sweep and other bottom tending trawl gear (not including scallop dredges) be conducted to assess bycatch, gear efficiency and such other impacts as effects on bottom habitat.

2. The Council chose as its preferred alternative for Atlantic halibut to add that species to the management unit for the FMP, and establish a 1-fish possession limit and a minimum fish size of 36 inches (91.4 cm) to begin rebuilding this overfished fish stock. Additionally, the Council considered, but rejected, four other alternatives for halibut management: (1) No action alternative, (2) add Atlantic halibut to the management unit and prohibit possession on halibut, (3) add Atlantic halibut to the management unit and implement a 1-fish possession limit with a maximum fish size of 48 inches (121 cm), and (4) add Atlantic halibut to the management unit and implement a 1-fish possession limit with a maximum fish size limit of 48 inches (121 cm) and a minimum fish size of 36 inches (91.4 cm). The two alternatives that included a maximum fish size limit were rejected based on public comment that capture of a large fish only to determine if it was of illegal size would result in excessive discard mortality. NMFS declared Atlantic halibut to be overfished in its September 1997 and 1998 Reports to Congress. The Council rejected the no action alternative given the overfished condition of halibut and the

   [[Page 19113]]

   requirement under the Sustainable Fisheries Act to prepare a plan to rebuild overfished stocks. The Council also decided the species needs specific management measures to begin rebuilding. It adopted a one-fish possession limit rather than total prohibition in part to minimize the economic effects on the few vessels (believed to be about 50) that are considered to be part of a directed fishery, even though their catch of halibut is only occasional and mostly in state waters.

3. In addition to the preferred alternative of an increase in minimum fish size for winter flounder, the Council considered, but rejected, a possession limit of between 5,000 and 12,000 lb (2268 and 5443.2 kg) of winter flounder for Southern New England and a mesh change for the Gulf of Maine/Georges Bank area. There were a strong opposition by industry to the mesh-size change alternative and a concern over a trip limit being confined to one area. The Council rejected the no action alternative because most stocks of winter flounder are considered overfished and in need of further protection of spawning size fish for rebuilding stock abundance.

   NMFS seeks comments regarding the IRFA. In particular, NMFS is seeking information on the number of vessels using brush sweep trawl gear, the number of vessels currently fishing for halibut, and the number of vessels impacted by the proposed increase in the winter flounder fish size. Copies of the IRFA are available (see ADDRESSES).

   Dated: April 14, 1999. Andrew A. Rosenberg, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

   [FR Doc. 99-9700Filed4-14-99; 4:07 pm]

   BILLING CODE 3510-22-F