Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Spiny Dogfish Fishery, 22805-22807 [05-8815]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
Response 4
The proposed finding of attainment
for 1-hour ozone and CO relied upon
monitoring data through year 2003. In
response to this comment, we have
reviewed the latest available data (i.e.,
the data for year 2004) collected at the
Washoe County monitors and input to
AQS and have found no exceedances of
either the 1-hour ozone or CO NAAQS.
The highest 1-hour ozone concentration
measured in 2004 in Washoe County
was 0.09 ppm (recorded at both the
Reno State Street and Sparks Fourth
Street stations) and the highest CO
concentrations were 5.9 ppm, one-hour
average, and 4.0 ppm, eight-hour
average, as recorded at the Sparks
Fourth Street station and Reno Galletti
station, respectively. In contrast, the 1hour ozone NAAQS is 0.12 ppm and the
CO NAAQS are 35 ppm, one-hour
average, and 9 ppm, eight-hour average.
Thus, the 2004 data add further support
to our finding of attainment for Washoe
County (with respect to the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS) and Truckee Meadows
(with respect to the CO NAAQS).
III. Final Action
No comments were submitted that
change our assessment that the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS has been attained in
Washoe County and that the CO
NAAQS has been attained in the
Truckee Meadows portion of Washoe
County. Therefore, we are taking final
action, pursuant to sections 179(c),
181(b)(2) and 186(b)(2) of the Act, to
determine that the Washoe County
‘‘marginal’’ nonattainment area has
attained the NAAQS for 1-hour ozone
by the applicable attainment date and
has continued to attain the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS since that time and, further,
that the Truckee Meadows ‘‘moderate’’
nonattainment area has attained the
NAAQS for CO by the applicable
attainment date and has continued to
attain the CO NAAQS since that time.
These findings relieve the State of
Nevada from the additional
requirements under the Clean Air Act
for the next higher nonattainment
classifications for the 1-hour ozone and
CO standards.
It should be noted that this action
does not redesignate these areas from
‘‘nonattainment’’ to ‘‘attainment’’.
Under section 107(d)(3)(E), the Clean
Air Act requires that, for an area to be
redesignated from nonattainment to
attainment, five criteria must be
satisfied including the submittal by the
State (and approval by EPA) of a
maintenance plan as a SIP revision.
Therefore, the designations for Washoe
County (for 1-hour ozone) and Truckee
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
Meadows (for CO) in 40 CFR part 81 are
unaffected by this action, and Washoe
County will remain a ‘‘marginal’’
nonattainment area for 1-hour ozone
and ‘‘moderate’’ for CO until such time
as EPA finds that the State of Nevada
has met the Clean Air Act requirements
for redesignation to attainment.
IV. Administrative Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and
therefore is not subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget. For
this reason, this action is also not
subject to Executive Order 13211,
‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This action merely finds that
an area has attained a national ambient
air quality standard based on an
objective review of measured air quality
data. This action will not impose any
new regulations, mandates, or
additional enforceable duties on any
public, nongovernmental, or private
entity. Accordingly, the Administrator
certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule
does not impose any additional
enforceable duty, it does not contain
any unfunded mandate or significantly
or uniquely affect small governments, as
described in the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4).
This rule also does not have tribal
implications because it will not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
action also does not have federalism
implications because it does not have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the
National Government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). This action merely
finds that an area has attained a national
ambient air quality standard, and does
not alter the relationship or the
distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22805
April 23, 1997), because it is not
economically significant.
This rule does not involve
establishment of technical standards,
and thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This
rule does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. section 801 et seq., as added by
the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,
generally provides that before a rule
may take effect, the agency
promulgating the rule must submit a
rule report, which includes a copy of
the rule, to each House of the Congress
and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report
containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S.
House of Representatives, and the
Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. section 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by July 5, 2005.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this rule for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: April 20, 2005.
Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 05–8788 Filed 5–2–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
22806
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
The possession limits are 600 lb (272 kg)
for quota period 1, and 300 lb (136 kg)
for quota period 2, to discourage a
directed fishery.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 050302053-5112-02; I.D.
022805C]
RIN 0648-AS24
Fisheries of the Northeastern United
States; Spiny Dogfish Fishery
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule, 2005 specifications.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NMFS announces final
specifications for the 2005 fishing year,
which is May 1, 2005, through April 30,
2006.
DATES: Effective June 2, 2005, through
April 30, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Copies of supporting
documents used by the Joint Spiny
Dogfish Committee and the Spiny
Dogfish Monitoring Committee
(Monitoring Committee); the
Environmental Assessment, Regulatory
Impact Review, Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/IRFA); and
the Essential Fish Habitat Assessment
(EFHA) are available from Daniel
Furlong, Executive Director, MidAtlantic Fishery Management Council
(MAFMC), Federal Building, Room
2115, 300 South Street, Dover, DE
19904. The EA, RIR, IRFA and EFHA are
accessible via the Internet at http:/
www.nero.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric
Jay Dolin, Fishery Policy Analyst,
(978)281–9259, fax (978)281–9135.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
A proposed rule for this action was
published in the Federal Register on
March 11, 2005 (70 FR 12168), with
public comment accepted through
March 28, 2005. The final specifications
are unchanged from those that were
proposed. A complete discussion of the
development of the specifications
appears in the preamble to the proposed
rule and is not repeated here.
2005 Specifications
The commercial spiny dogfish quota
for the 2005 fishing year is 4 million lb
(1.81 million kg), to be divided into two
semi-annual periods as follows:
2,316,000 lb (1.05 million kg) for quota
period 1 (May 1, 2005 – Oct. 31, 2005);
and 1,684,000 lb (763,849 kg) for quota
period 2 (Nov. 1, 2005 – April 30, 2006).
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
Comments and Responses
There were 73 comments submitted
on the proposed measures, by 71
individuals, a fishing company, and a
non-governmental organization.
Comment 1: Two commenters
supported the proposed rule and
encouraged NMFS to continue
rebuilding the spiny dogfish stock.
Response: NMFS is implementing
measures that will continue the
rebuilding of the spiny dogfish stock.
Comment 2: Two commenters wanted
NMFS to implement a male-only and
subadult female fishery for dogfish,
contending that optimum yield can be
achieved and bycatch reduced by such
measures. The commenters claimed
that, with a 1,500-lb (680-kg) possession
limit, such a fishery would not
compromise the rebuilding of the stock.
Response: The MAFMC
recommended that a 1,500-lb (680-kg)
male-only possession limit should be
established to allow for a limited
directed fishery. NMFS determined that
a directed fishery is inappropriate in
light of the overfished condition of the
spiny dogfish stock, even with a
prohibition on possession of female
dogfish. The MAFMC’s staff analysis of
the MAFMC recommendation noted
that, if a directed fishery for male
dogfish developed, it could require the
discard of female dogfish, and may
increase the associated discard mortality
of these animals. The MAFMC staff
analysis expressed concern that this
may have a negative impact on the
rebuilding program as it could increase
the mortality of mature females. The
measure recommended by the
commenters would allow the possession
of up to 1,500 lb (680 kg) of males or
subadult females. NMFS notes that a
directed fishery for subadult females
would be inconsistent with the
rebuilding program, as it is necessary to
allow those animals to reach maturity so
that they can spawn and contribute to
stock rebuilding.
NMFS also notes that the Atlantic
States Marine Fisheries Commission’s
Interstate Fishery Management Plan
requires the states to establish
possession limits of 600 lb (272 kg) in
quota period 1, and 300 lb (136 kg) in
quota period 2. As a result, it would not
be possible for a vessel operator to land
1,500 lb (680 kg) of dogfish in any state.
Comment 3: One commenter
suggested that all quotas should be cut
by 50 percent this year and by 10
percent each succeeding year, but
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
provided no basis for these
recommendations.
Response: The commercial quota
established by this action is based on
extensive analyses conducted by the
MAFMC and reviewed by NMFS, and is
based on the best available scientific
information. There is no information to
support the reductions suggested by the
commenter.
Comment 4: Sixty-five commenters
stated that there were too many dogfish
in the ocean. Most of them requested
that NMFS implement no management
measures and, therefore, allow an
unlimited directed fishery. Most of the
commenters felt that NMFS should not
be worrying about dogfish because they
prey on other more valuable commercial
fish species and, by virtue of their great
numbers, make it difficult for
commercial and recreational fishermen
to catch the fish they are targeting. Some
commenters stated that the science on
dogfish is faulty and that dogfish are not
overfished.
Response: Dogfish are overfished and,
as such, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation Management Act
(MSFCMA) requires the development of
a management program to rebuild the
stock. The ≥overfished≥ determination
for dogfish is restricted to adult females.
Reproduction of dogfish, and ultimately
the future fishery, is closely tied to the
abundance of reproductive females. In
the 1990’s, the spiny dogfish population
biomass was at a historic high. The
rapid expansion of commercial harvest,
however, quickly depleted the number
of mature females in the stock. The
Spiny Dogfish Fishery Management
Plan (FMP) was implemented in 2000,
and established a rebuilding program
intended to protect mature female spiny
dogfish so that stock rebuilding could be
achieved as quickly as practicable.
However, complementary measures
were not implemented in state waters
until May 2004, and this, as well as
delays in the implementation of the
FMP, has delayed stock rebuilding.
Recent population projections by the
NMFS Northeast Fisheries Science
Center (NEFSC), which factor in U.S.
commercial harvest and stock removals
from all other sources (U.S. commercial
discards, Canadian commercial fishery
landings, U.S. recreational discards and
landings) suggest a time span of 15 to
20 years before the stock will have fully
recovered.
The most recent peer-reviewed
evaluation of the status of the Northwest
Atlantic spiny dogfish stock was
conducted at the 37th Northeast
Regional Stock Assessment Workshop
(SAW) in 2003. The mature female
component of the stock (spawning stock
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
biomass (SSB)) had declined from the
historic high in 1990 of roughly 500
million lb (226,796 mt) to about 115
million lb (52,163 mt) in 2003 (29
percent of the recommended biomass
target of 400 million lb (181,437 mt).
The low level of SSB was expected to
result in low recruitment for the next
several years, and recruitment estimates
from 1997 to 2003 were observed to
represent the seven lowest values in the
entire time series. The fishing mortality
rate (F) in 2002 was estimated to be
about 0.09. The 37th SAW
recommended that total removals
(landings, discards, Canadian catch) be
constrained below levels consistent
with F=0.03 (Frebuild).
The commenters noted that they
encounter dogfish in large numbers, and
stated that the overall population
remains relatively high. However, recent
data support the trends found by the
37th SAW. Due to high inter-year
variability in the NEFSC spring survey’s
catches of spiny dogfish, current
assessment methods use smoothed
estimates of biomass to characterize
population trends. According to the
latest (2004) spring survey values, the 3year moving average of total stock
biomass decreased from 916 million lb
(415,533 mt) in 2001-2003, to 857
million lb (388,767 mt) in 2002-2004.
Mature female biomass decreased from
144 million lb (65,466 mt) in 2001-2003,
to 132 million lb (60,033 mt) in 20022004. Pup abundance, however,
increased from 338 thousand lb (153 mt)
in 2001-2003 to 1.440 million lb (653
mt) in 2002-2004. While this increase in
pup adundance is encouraging, there is
still a long way to go before the stock
is rebuilt.
As for the concern about dogfish
preying on commercially important
species, NMFS notes that dogfish prey
on a wide range of species, not just
those that are commercially fished.
Analyses of over 40,000 stomach
samples over several decades reveals
high percentages of forage species,
especially herring and mackerel, and a
variety of invertebrates. Commercially
important species such as gadoids (cod,
haddock, pollock) and flatfish do not
exceed 10 percent of the total diet.
Invertebrates, notably comb jellies and
squid, make up about 50 percent of the
diet of spiny dogfish in NMFS autumn
samples. Several recent scientific papers
have documented the low occurrence of
commercially important finfish in
dogfish diets.
Classification
Included in this final rule is the FRFA
prepared pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 604(a).
The FRFA incorporates the discussion
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
that follows, the comments and
responses to the proposed rule, and the
initial regulatory flexibility analysis
(IRFA) and other analyses completed in
support of this action. A copy of the
IRFA is available from the Regional
Administrator (see ADDRESSES).
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Statement of Objective and Need
A description of the reasons why this
action is being considered, and the
objectives of and legal basis for this
action, is contained in the preamble to
the proposed rule and is not repeated
here.
Description and Estimate of Number of
Small Entities to Which the Rule Will
Apply
All of the potentially affected
businesses are considered small entities
under the standards described in NMFS
guidelines because they have gross
receipts that do not exceed $3.5 million
annually. Information from the 2003
fishing year was used to evaluate
impacts of this action, as that is the
most recent year for which data are
complete. According to unpublished
NMFS permit file data, 3,025 vessels
possessed Federal spiny dogfish permits
in 2003, while 94 of these vessels
contributed to overall landings.
Description of Projected Reporting,
Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
This action does not contain any new
collection-of-information, reporting,
recordkeeping, or other compliance
requirements. It does not duplicate,
overlap, or conflict with any other
Federal rules.
Minimizing Significant Economic
Impacts on Small Entities
Impacts were assessed by the
MAFMC, the New England Fisheries
Management Council (NEFMC), and
NMFS for two sets of measures that
were evaluated as alternatives to the
measures enacted by this rule. The first
alternative would have set the
commercial quota at the same level as
this rule, but would have established
different possession limits for vessels
landing dogfish. It would not increase
the overall landings of spiny dogfish
and, therefore, would not minimize
economic impacts on the small entities
participating in the fishery.
The second alternative would have
eliminated the commercial quota and
possession limits, and was projected to
result in landings of about 25 million lb
(11.3 million kg), the level observed in
the unregulated period of the fishery.
This would constitute a 525-percent
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22807
increase in landings compared to the
status quo quota of 4.0 million lb (1.81
million kg), and a 696-percent increase
in landings compared to actual 2003
landings of 3.14 million lb (1.42 million
kg). Although the short-term social and
economic benefits of an unregulated
fishery would be positive because of the
revenue generated for the fishery
participants, this unregulated harvest
would be inconsistent with the
requirements of the FMP and the
MSFCMA, and would lead to depletion
of the spiny dogfish population.
Therefore, this alternative was rejected
by the MAFMC, the NEFMC, and
NMFS.
Small Entity Compliance Guide
Section 212 of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 states that, for each rule, or group
of related rules, for which an agency is
required to prepare a FRFA, the agency
shall publish one or more guides to
assist small entities in complying with
the rule and shall designate such
publications as ≥small entity
compliance guides.≥ The agency shall
explain the actions a small entity is
required to take to comply with a rule
or group of rules. As part of this
rulemaking process, a small entity
compliance guide will be sent to all
holders of permits issued for the spiny
dogfish. In addition, copies of this final
rule and guide (i.e., permit holder letter)
are available from the Regional
Administrator (see ADDRESSES) and may
be found at the following web site:
https://www.nmfs.gov/ro/doc/nero.html.
Dated: April 28, 2005.
John Oliver,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Operations, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 05–8815 Filed 5–2–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 3, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22805-22807]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-8815]
[[Page 22806]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 050302053-5112-02; I.D. 022805C]
RIN 0648-AS24
Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Spiny Dogfish
Fishery
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule, 2005 specifications.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS announces final specifications for the 2005 fishing year,
which is May 1, 2005, through April 30, 2006.
DATES: Effective June 2, 2005, through April 30, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Copies of supporting documents used by the Joint Spiny
Dogfish Committee and the Spiny Dogfish Monitoring Committee
(Monitoring Committee); the Environmental Assessment, Regulatory Impact
Review, Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/IRFA); and the
Essential Fish Habitat Assessment (EFHA) are available from Daniel
Furlong, Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council
(MAFMC), Federal Building, Room 2115, 300 South Street, Dover, DE
19904. The EA, RIR, IRFA and EFHA are accessible via the Internet at
http:/www.nero.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Jay Dolin, Fishery Policy
Analyst, (978)281-9259, fax (978)281-9135.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
A proposed rule for this action was published in the Federal
Register on March 11, 2005 (70 FR 12168), with public comment accepted
through March 28, 2005. The final specifications are unchanged from
those that were proposed. A complete discussion of the development of
the specifications appears in the preamble to the proposed rule and is
not repeated here.
2005 Specifications
The commercial spiny dogfish quota for the 2005 fishing year is 4
million lb (1.81 million kg), to be divided into two semi-annual
periods as follows: 2,316,000 lb (1.05 million kg) for quota period 1
(May 1, 2005 - Oct. 31, 2005); and 1,684,000 lb (763,849 kg) for quota
period 2 (Nov. 1, 2005 - April 30, 2006). The possession limits are 600
lb (272 kg) for quota period 1, and 300 lb (136 kg) for quota period 2,
to discourage a directed fishery.
Comments and Responses
There were 73 comments submitted on the proposed measures, by 71
individuals, a fishing company, and a non-governmental organization.
Comment 1: Two commenters supported the proposed rule and
encouraged NMFS to continue rebuilding the spiny dogfish stock.
Response: NMFS is implementing measures that will continue the
rebuilding of the spiny dogfish stock.
Comment 2: Two commenters wanted NMFS to implement a male-only and
subadult female fishery for dogfish, contending that optimum yield can
be achieved and bycatch reduced by such measures. The commenters
claimed that, with a 1,500-lb (680-kg) possession limit, such a fishery
would not compromise the rebuilding of the stock.
Response: The MAFMC recommended that a 1,500-lb (680-kg) male-only
possession limit should be established to allow for a limited directed
fishery. NMFS determined that a directed fishery is inappropriate in
light of the overfished condition of the spiny dogfish stock, even with
a prohibition on possession of female dogfish. The MAFMC's staff
analysis of the MAFMC recommendation noted that, if a directed fishery
for male dogfish developed, it could require the discard of female
dogfish, and may increase the associated discard mortality of these
animals. The MAFMC staff analysis expressed concern that this may have
a negative impact on the rebuilding program as it could increase the
mortality of mature females. The measure recommended by the commenters
would allow the possession of up to 1,500 lb (680 kg) of males or
subadult females. NMFS notes that a directed fishery for subadult
females would be inconsistent with the rebuilding program, as it is
necessary to allow those animals to reach maturity so that they can
spawn and contribute to stock rebuilding.
NMFS also notes that the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries
Commission's Interstate Fishery Management Plan requires the states to
establish possession limits of 600 lb (272 kg) in quota period 1, and
300 lb (136 kg) in quota period 2. As a result, it would not be
possible for a vessel operator to land 1,500 lb (680 kg) of dogfish in
any state.
Comment 3: One commenter suggested that all quotas should be cut by
50 percent this year and by 10 percent each succeeding year, but
provided no basis for these recommendations.
Response: The commercial quota established by this action is based
on extensive analyses conducted by the MAFMC and reviewed by NMFS, and
is based on the best available scientific information. There is no
information to support the reductions suggested by the commenter.
Comment 4: Sixty-five commenters stated that there were too many
dogfish in the ocean. Most of them requested that NMFS implement no
management measures and, therefore, allow an unlimited directed
fishery. Most of the commenters felt that NMFS should not be worrying
about dogfish because they prey on other more valuable commercial fish
species and, by virtue of their great numbers, make it difficult for
commercial and recreational fishermen to catch the fish they are
targeting. Some commenters stated that the science on dogfish is faulty
and that dogfish are not overfished.
Response: Dogfish are overfished and, as such, the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation Management Act (MSFCMA) requires the development
of a management program to rebuild the stock. The
overfished determination for dogfish is
restricted to adult females. Reproduction of dogfish, and ultimately
the future fishery, is closely tied to the abundance of reproductive
females. In the 1990's, the spiny dogfish population biomass was at a
historic high. The rapid expansion of commercial harvest, however,
quickly depleted the number of mature females in the stock. The Spiny
Dogfish Fishery Management Plan (FMP) was implemented in 2000, and
established a rebuilding program intended to protect mature female
spiny dogfish so that stock rebuilding could be achieved as quickly as
practicable. However, complementary measures were not implemented in
state waters until May 2004, and this, as well as delays in the
implementation of the FMP, has delayed stock rebuilding. Recent
population projections by the NMFS Northeast Fisheries Science Center
(NEFSC), which factor in U.S. commercial harvest and stock removals
from all other sources (U.S. commercial discards, Canadian commercial
fishery landings, U.S. recreational discards and landings) suggest a
time span of 15 to 20 years before the stock will have fully recovered.
The most recent peer-reviewed evaluation of the status of the
Northwest Atlantic spiny dogfish stock was conducted at the 37th
Northeast Regional Stock Assessment Workshop (SAW) in 2003. The mature
female component of the stock (spawning stock
[[Page 22807]]
biomass (SSB)) had declined from the historic high in 1990 of roughly
500 million lb (226,796 mt) to about 115 million lb (52,163 mt) in 2003
(29 percent of the recommended biomass target of 400 million lb
(181,437 mt). The low level of SSB was expected to result in low
recruitment for the next several years, and recruitment estimates from
1997 to 2003 were observed to represent the seven lowest values in the
entire time series. The fishing mortality rate (F) in 2002 was
estimated to be about 0.09. The 37th SAW recommended that total
removals (landings, discards, Canadian catch) be constrained below
levels consistent with F=0.03 (Frebuild).
The commenters noted that they encounter dogfish in large numbers,
and stated that the overall population remains relatively high.
However, recent data support the trends found by the 37th SAW. Due to
high inter-year variability in the NEFSC spring survey's catches of
spiny dogfish, current assessment methods use smoothed estimates of
biomass to characterize population trends. According to the latest
(2004) spring survey values, the 3-year moving average of total stock
biomass decreased from 916 million lb (415,533 mt) in 2001-2003, to 857
million lb (388,767 mt) in 2002-2004. Mature female biomass decreased
from 144 million lb (65,466 mt) in 2001-2003, to 132 million lb (60,033
mt) in 2002-2004. Pup abundance, however, increased from 338 thousand
lb (153 mt) in 2001-2003 to 1.440 million lb (653 mt) in 2002-2004.
While this increase in pup adundance is encouraging, there is still a
long way to go before the stock is rebuilt.
As for the concern about dogfish preying on commercially important
species, NMFS notes that dogfish prey on a wide range of species, not
just those that are commercially fished. Analyses of over 40,000
stomach samples over several decades reveals high percentages of forage
species, especially herring and mackerel, and a variety of
invertebrates. Commercially important species such as gadoids (cod,
haddock, pollock) and flatfish do not exceed 10 percent of the total
diet. Invertebrates, notably comb jellies and squid, make up about 50
percent of the diet of spiny dogfish in NMFS autumn samples. Several
recent scientific papers have documented the low occurrence of
commercially important finfish in dogfish diets.
Classification
Included in this final rule is the FRFA prepared pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 604(a). The FRFA incorporates the discussion that follows, the
comments and responses to the proposed rule, and the initial regulatory
flexibility analysis (IRFA) and other analyses completed in support of
this action. A copy of the IRFA is available from the Regional
Administrator (see ADDRESSES).
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Statement of Objective and Need
A description of the reasons why this action is being considered,
and the objectives of and legal basis for this action, is contained in
the preamble to the proposed rule and is not repeated here.
Description and Estimate of Number of Small Entities to Which the Rule
Will Apply
All of the potentially affected businesses are considered small
entities under the standards described in NMFS guidelines because they
have gross receipts that do not exceed $3.5 million annually.
Information from the 2003 fishing year was used to evaluate impacts of
this action, as that is the most recent year for which data are
complete. According to unpublished NMFS permit file data, 3,025 vessels
possessed Federal spiny dogfish permits in 2003, while 94 of these
vessels contributed to overall landings.
Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
This action does not contain any new collection-of-information,
reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements. It does not
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other Federal rules.
Minimizing Significant Economic Impacts on Small Entities
Impacts were assessed by the MAFMC, the New England Fisheries
Management Council (NEFMC), and NMFS for two sets of measures that were
evaluated as alternatives to the measures enacted by this rule. The
first alternative would have set the commercial quota at the same level
as this rule, but would have established different possession limits
for vessels landing dogfish. It would not increase the overall landings
of spiny dogfish and, therefore, would not minimize economic impacts on
the small entities participating in the fishery.
The second alternative would have eliminated the commercial quota
and possession limits, and was projected to result in landings of about
25 million lb (11.3 million kg), the level observed in the unregulated
period of the fishery. This would constitute a 525-percent increase in
landings compared to the status quo quota of 4.0 million lb (1.81
million kg), and a 696-percent increase in landings compared to actual
2003 landings of 3.14 million lb (1.42 million kg). Although the short-
term social and economic benefits of an unregulated fishery would be
positive because of the revenue generated for the fishery participants,
this unregulated harvest would be inconsistent with the requirements of
the FMP and the MSFCMA, and would lead to depletion of the spiny
dogfish population. Therefore, this alternative was rejected by the
MAFMC, the NEFMC, and NMFS.
Small Entity Compliance Guide
Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act of 1996 states that, for each rule, or group of related rules, for
which an agency is required to prepare a FRFA, the agency shall publish
one or more guides to assist small entities in complying with the rule
and shall designate such publications as small entity
compliance guides. The agency shall explain the actions a
small entity is required to take to comply with a rule or group of
rules. As part of this rulemaking process, a small entity compliance
guide will be sent to all holders of permits issued for the spiny
dogfish. In addition, copies of this final rule and guide (i.e., permit
holder letter) are available from the Regional Administrator (see
ADDRESSES) and may be found at the following web site: https://
www.nmfs.gov/ro/doc/nero.html.
Dated: April 28, 2005.
John Oliver,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 05-8815 Filed 5-2-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
