Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Fisheries Off West Coast States and in the Western Pacific; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Biennial Specifications and Management Measures; Correction, 22807-22825 [05-8817]
Download as PDF
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
22808
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 660
[Docket No.; 040830250–5109–04; I.D.
081304C]
RIN 0648–AS27
Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions;
Fisheries Off West Coast States and in
the Western Pacific; Pacific Coast
Groundfish Fishery; Biennial
Specifications and Management
Measures; Correction
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule; request for
comments; correction.
AGENCY:
This final rule establishes the
2005 fishery specifications for Pacific
whiting (whiting) in the U.S. exclusive
economic zone (EEZ) and state waters
off the coasts of Washington, Oregon,
and California, as authorized by the
Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery
Management Plan (FMP). It also adjusts
the bycatch limits in the whiting
fishery. This Federal Register document
also corrects the final rule implementing
the specifications and management
measures, which was published
December 23, 2004. These specifications
include the level of the acceptable
biological catch (ABC), optimum yield
(OY), tribal allocation, and allocations
for the non-tribal commercial sectors.
The intended effect of this action is to
establish allowable harvest levels of
whiting based on the best available
scientific information.
DATES: Effective April 28, 2005.
Comments on the revisions to bycatch
limits must be received no later than 5
p.m., l.t. on May 18, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by I.D. 081304C by any of the
following methods:
• E-mail: Whiting0506.nwr@noaa.gov:
Include 081304C in the subject line of
the message.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 206–526–6736, Attn: Becky
Renko
• Mail: D. Robert Lohn,
Administrator, Northwest Region,
NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE,
Seattle, WA 98115–0070, Attn: Becky
Renko.
Copies of the final environmental
impact statement (FEIS) for this action
SUMMARY:
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
are available from Donald McIsaac,
Executive Director, Pacific Fishery
Management Council (Council), 7700
NE Ambassador Place, Portland, OR
97220, phone: 503–820–2280. These
documents are also available online at
the Council’s website at https://
www.pcoucil.org. Copies of additional
reports referred to in this document may
also be obtained from the Council.
Copies of the Record of Decision (ROD),
final regulatory flexibility analysis
(FRFA), and the Small Entity
Compliance Guide are available from D.
Robert Lohn, Administrator, Northwest
Region (Regional Administrator), NMFS,
7600 Sand Point Way, NE, Seattle, WA
98115–0070.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Becky Renko (Northwest Region, NMFS)
206–526–6150.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
This final rule is accessible via the
Internet at the Office of the Federal
Register’s Website at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/.
Background information and documents
are available at the NMFS Northwest
Region website at https://
www.nwr.noaa.gov/1sustfsh/
gdfsh01.htm.
Background
A proposed rulemaking to implement
the 2005–2006 specifications and
management measures for the Pacific
Coast groundfish fishery was published
on September 21, 2004 (69 FR 56550).
NMFS requested public comment on the
proposed rule through October 21, 2004.
During that comment period, NMFS
received five letters of comment that
were addressed in the preamble of the
final rule published on December 23,
2004 (69 FR 77012). Comments
regarding bycatch of overfished species,
including bycatch of overfished species
in the whiting fishery were received and
responded to in the final rule. NMFS
received no comments specific to the
whiting ABC or OY. These comments
were addressed in the preamble of the
final rule. For further information on
these comments, see the preamble of the
final rules for the 2005–2006 annual
specifications and management
measures.
Management Process
The FMP requires that fishery
specifications be evaluated biennially or
annually and revised as necessary, that
OYs be specified for groundfish species
or species groups that need protection,
and that management measures
designed to achieve the OYs be
published in the Federal Register.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Specifications include ABCs and
harvest levels (OYs, harvest guidelines,
allocations, or quotas). In November
2003, the U.S. and Canada signed an
agreement regarding the conservation,
research, and catch sharing of whiting.
The whiting catch sharing arrangement
that was agreed upon provides 73.88
percent of the total catch OY to the U.S.
fisheries and 26.12 percent to the
Canadian fisheries. At this time, both
countries are taking steps to bring this
agreement into force. Until the
agreement is ratified and implementing
legislation effective, the negotiators
recommended that each country apply
the agreed upon provisions.
In anticipation of the ratification of
the U.S.-Canada agreement and a new
stock assessment, and given the small
amount of whiting that is typically
landed under trip limits prior to the
April 1 start of the primary season, the
Council adopted a range for OY and
ABC in the 2005–2006 specifications,
and delayed adoption of a final 2005
ABC and OY until its March 2005
meeting. To date, the international
agreement has not yet been ratified and
implementing legislation has not yet
been made effective. The ABC and OY
values recommended by the Council as
final ABC and OY values for 2005 are
based on a stock assessment update and
are within the range of those considered
in the EIS for the 2005 and 2006
management measures.
Stock Status
In general, whiting is a very
productive species with highly variable
recruitment (the biomass of fish that
mature and enter the fishery each year)
and a relatively short life span when
compared to other overfished
groundfish species. In 1987, the whiting
biomass was at a historical high level
due to an exceptionally large number of
fish that spawned in 1980 and 1984
(fished spawned during a particular year
are referred to as year classes). As these
large year classes of fish passed through
the population and were replaced by
moderate sized year classes, the stock
declined. The whiting stock stabilized
between 1995 and 1997, but then
declined to its lowest level in 2001.
The 2002 whiting stock assessment
estimated the female spawning biomass
to be less than 20 percent of the
unfished biomass in 2001 and was
declared overfished on April 15, 2002
(67 FR 18117). Since 2001, the whiting
stock has increased substantially as a
strong 1999 year class has matured and
entered the spawning population. In
retrospect, the abundance of the whiting
stock in 2001, as estimated from the
current stock assessment, is now
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
believed to have been at 28 percent of
its unfished biomass in 2001 when a
survey catchability coefficient of 1.0 is
applied, and at 34 percent of its
unfished biomass in 2001 when a
survey catchability coefficient of 0.6 is
applied. With the publication of the
2004 harvest specifications for whiting
(April 30, 2004; 69 FR 23667), NMFS
announced that the whiting stock was
estimated to be above the target
rebuilding biomass and was no longer
considered to be an overfished stock. On
June 30, 2004, the court lifted the
requirement it had initially imposed in
the case of Natural Resources Defense
Council v. Evans, 290 F. Supp. 2d 1051,
1057 (N.D. Calif. 2003) that NMFS
prepare a rebuilding plan for whiting.
2005 Stock Assessment Update
An age-structured assessment model
was used in 2005 to update the 2004
whiting stock assessment. New
information in this stock assessment
included updated catch data through
2004 and recruitment indices from the
2004 Santa Cruz juvenile index survey.
The stock assessment was examined by
a joint U.S./Canada Pacific Hake
(Whiting) Stock Assessment Review
(STAR) panel in early February 2005.
As in 2004, the amount of whiting
that the 2003 hydroacoustic survey was
able to measure relative to the total
whiting in the surveyed area (survey
catchability coefficient or q) was
identified as a major source of
uncertainty in the 2005 stock
assessment update. Since 2005 was an
assessment update, the model structure
was not reexamined. The STAR panel
could not reach consensus on the most
appropriated value within the range for
q of 0.6 to 1.0. The more optimistic or
less risk averse model runs assumed
that q equaled 0.6, while the less
optimistic or more risk averse model
runs assumed that q equaled 1.0. A
catchability coefficient of 1.0 is the
value that has been used in the previous
assessments. Additional models runs
with q set at 0.8 were developed
following the STAR panel meeting.
Three sets of projections, with
different assumptions about the survey
catchability, were brought forward to
the Council for decision making. This
range of projections was intended to
represent a plausible range of the stock’s
status. The Council’s Scientific and
Statistical Committee (SSC) also
reviewed the assessment, but did not
recommend a specific value for q.
The stock was estimated to be at 50
percent of its unfished biomass in 2004
(2.5 million mt of age 3+ fish) if a survey
catchability coefficient of 1.0 were
applied and at 55 percent (4.0 million
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
mt of age 3+ fish) of its unfished
biomass in 2004 if a survey catchability
coefficient of 0.6 were applied.
However, in the absence of another large
year class after 1999, the stock is
projected to decline. In 2005, the stock
is estimated to be at 38 percent of its
unfished biomass when a survey
catchability coefficient of 1.0 is applied
and at 41 percent when a survey
catchability coefficient of 0.6 is applied.
The U.S. Canada Treaty provisions
include the use of a default harvest rate
of F40% with a 40/10 adjustment, a
precautionary harvest adjustment
described in the FMP at section 4.5.1. A
rate of F40% can be explained as that
which reduces spawning potential per
female to 40 percent of what it would
have been under natural conditions (if
there were no mortality due to fishing).
ABC/OY Recommendations
The range of ABCs and OYs
considered by the Council and analyzed
in the EIS for 2005 included: a low
ABC/OY of 181,287 mt, which
represents 50 percent of the medium
ABC/OY; a medium ABC/OY of 362,573
mt, based on the results of the 2004
assessment with the OY being set equal
to the ABC because the stock biomass is
greater than 40 percent of the unfished
biomass; and a high OY of 725,146 mt,
which is twice the amount of the
medium ABC/OY.
At its March 2005 meeting in
Sacramento, CA, the Council reviewed
the results of the new whiting stock
assessment. The U.S. OYs considered by
the Council at its March meeting were
223,343 mt (q=1.0, F45%), 264,296 mt
(q=1.0, F40%), 264,296 mt (q=0.8, F45%),
316,904 mt (q=0.8, F40%), 356,766 mt
(q=0.6, F45%), and 441,525 mt (q=0.6,
F40%). Because the whiting biomass is
estimated to be below 40 percent of its
unfished biomass, the 40/10 adjustment
was applied. The SSC recommended
that the Council use the decision table
presented in the whiting stock
assessment (Table 14) to evaluate the
consequences of alternate OY options
on the whiting biomass.
Following discussion and public
testimony, the Council recommended
adopting a U.S. OY of 269,069 mt with
a U.S. ABC of 269,545 mt. In making
this decision, the Council considered
the true state of nature as shown in the
assessment decision table 14. With an
F40% harvest rate proxy, if a q value of
1.0 is used and the true state of nature
is actually 0.6, in 2006 the stock would
be at 31 percent of its unfished biomass.
However, if a q value of 0.6 is used and
the true state of nature is actually 1.0,
the stock is projected to fall below the
overfished threshold by 2006.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22809
With the publication of the 2004
harvest specifications for whiting (April
30, 2004; 69 FR 23667), NMFS
announced that the U.S. whiting ABC
was 514,441 mt. However, the 515,441
mt value corresponds with the
coastwide (U.S./Canada) ABC. The 2004
U.S. share of the whiting ABC was
actually 380,069 mt.
Overfished Species
The availability of overfished species
as incidental catch, particularly Pacific
ocean perch, canary, darkblotched, and
widow rockfish, may prevent the
industry from harvesting the entire
whiting OY during 2005. However, in
order to allow the industry to have the
opportunity to harvest the higher OY,
the Council recommended bycatch
limits for certain overfished species.
Under this structure, the industry has
the opportunity to harvest a larger
amount of whiting, if they can do so
while keeping the incidental catch of
overfished species within adopted
bycatch limits. In recent years, the most
constraining overfished species for the
whiting fishery have been darkblotched,
canary and widow rockfish. In the final
rule for the 2005–2006 specification and
management measures, whiting sector
bycatch limits were put into place for
canary and widow rockfish, 50 CFR
660.373 (b)(4). The amount of canary
rockfish that would be available to the
entire whiting fishery was 7.3 mt and
the amount of widow rockfish was 231.8
mt in 2005.
At the March 2005 Council meeting,
the Council’s groundfish management
team (GMT) considered the 2005
whiting OY alternatives in relation to
the impacts of incidental catch of
overfished species. In 2004, the
estimated bycatch of widow rockfish
was most constraining, relative to the
amounts of each overfished species. For
2005, it is estimated that widow bycatch
under the final recommended OY would
be 136.25 mt, which is well within the
pre-existing 231.8 mt bycatch limit for
all sectors of the fishery. The Council
recommended that the amount of
widow rockfish specified for the nontreaty whiting sectors be adjusted to 200
mt, which should accommodate the
needs of the fishery. For 2005, it is
estimated that canary rockfish bycatch
for the entire whiting fishery under the
final recommended OY would be 9.22
mt, which would exceed the preexisting bycatch limit of 7.30 mt. The
GMT projected that a canary rockfish
bycatch limit of 7.3 mt would support
a whiting OY of 208,069 mt. Since the
regulations at 50 CFR 370(c)(1)(ii)
provide for the closure of the non-tribal
portion of the whiting fishery upon
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
22810
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
attainment of a bycatch limit, the
Council recommended the limit be
adjusted to only cover the harvest by
non-tribal sectors, in order to ensure the
total canary OY is not exceeded. Thus,
the Council recommended that the
amount of canary rockfish specified for
the non-treaty whiting sectors be
adjusted to 4.7 mt. NMFS agrees with
the bycatch limits, which are intended
to keep the whiting fishery from causing
premature closure to the non-whiting
fisheries.
Allocations
In 1994, the United States formally
recognized that the four Washington
coastal treaty Indian tribes (Makah,
Quileute, Hoh, and Quinault) have
treaty rights to fish for groundfish in the
Pacific Ocean. In general terms, the
quantification of those rights is 50
percent of the harvestable surplus of
groundfish that pass through the tribes’
usual and accustomed ocean fishing
areas (described at 60 CFR 660.324).
The Pacific Coast Indian treaty fishing
rights, described at 50 CFR 660.385,
allow for the allocation of fish to the
tribes through the specification and
management measures process. A tribal
allocation is subtracted from the species
OY before limited entry and open access
allocations are derived. The tribal
whiting fishery is a separate fishery, and
is not governed by the limited entry or
open access regulations or allocations.
To date, only the Makah Tribe has
participated. It regulates, and in
cooperation with NMFS, monitors this
fishery so as not to exceed the tribal
allocation.
Beginning in 1999, NMFS set the
tribal allocation according to an
abundance-based sliding scale
allocation method, proposed by the
Makah Tribe in 1998. See; 64 FR 27928,
27929 (May 29, 1999); 65 FR 221, 247
(January 4, 2000); 66 FR 2338, 2370
(January 11, 2001). Details on the
abundance-based sliding scale
allocation method and related litigation
are discussed in the preamble to the
proposed rule (69 FR 56570; September
21, 2004) and are not repeated here. On
December 28, 2004, the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals upheld the sliding
scale approach in Midwater Trawler
Cooperative v. Daley, 393 F. 3d 994 (9th
Cir. 2004). Under the sliding scale
allocation method, the tribal allocation
varies with U.S. whiting OY, ranging
from a low of 14 percent (or less) of the
U.S. OY when OY levels are above
250,000 mt, to a high of 17.5 percent of
the U.S. OY when the OY level is at or
below 145,000 mt. For 2005, using the
sliding scale allocation method, the
tribal allocation will be 35,000 mt. The
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
Makah are the only Washington Coast
tribe that requested a whiting allocation
for 2005.
The 2005 non-tribal commercial OY
for whiting is 232,069 mt. This is
calculated by deducting the 35,000–mt
tribal allocation and 2,000 mt for
research catch and bycatch in nongroundfish fisheries from the 269,069
mt total catch OY. Regulations at 50
CFR 660.323(a)(4) divide the
commercial OY into separate allocations
for the non-tribal catcher/processor,
mothership, and shore-based sectors of
the whiting fishery.
The catcher/processor sector is
comprised of vessels that harvest and
process whiting. The mothership sector
is comprised of catcher vessels that
harvest whiting for delivery to
motherships. Motherships are vessels
that process, but do not harvest,
whiting. The shoreside sector is
comprised of vessels that harvest
whiting for delivery to shoreside
processors. Each sector receives a
portion of the commercial OY, with the
catcher/processors getting 34 percent
(78,903 mt), motherships getting 24
percent (55,696 mt), and the shore-based
sector getting 42 percent (97,469 mt).
All whiting caught in 2005 before the
effective date of this action will be
counted toward the new 2005 OY. As in
the past, the specifications include fish
caught in state ocean waters (0–3
nautical miles (nm) offshore) as well as
fish caught in the EEZ (3–200 nm
offshore).
This document also contains
corrections to the Tables 1a and 1b of
the final rule implementing the
specifications and management
measures for the 2005 and 2006 fishing
years which was published December
23, 2004 (69 FR 77012). The value in
Table 1a and 1b for bocaccio rockfish
that indicates the proportions allocated
to the limited entry sectors was a
typographical error in the specifications
final rule and is being corrected from
52.7 to 55.7. Because bocaccio is an
overfished species, the use of these
values has been suspended for 2005 and
2006; the allocation amount is provided
for reference only.
Classification
The final whiting specifications and
management measures for 2005 are
issued under the authority of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act)and are in
accordance with 50 CFR part 660, the
regulations implementing the FMP.
The whiting fisheries are generally
very fast paced and vessels tend to
incidentally catch overfished species at
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
sporadic and unpredictable rates.
Protection of overfished species is
required by the FMP and implementing
regulations. This action revises canary
and widow rockfish bycatch limits for
the whiting fisheries to keep the harvest
of overfished species within their OYs.
The proposed rulemaking to implement
the 2005 specifications and management
measures, published on September 21,
2004 (69 FR 56550), and the final rule
published on December 23, 2004 (69 FR
77012) addressed this issue and
established bycatch limits for canary
and widow rockfish in the whiting
fishery. These limits were identified as
routine management measures and as
such may be adjusted inseason.
If the revision of bycatch limits for
canary and widow rockfish was delayed
for a public notice and comment period,
the 4.7 mt of canary rockfish and 200 mt
of widow rockfish available to the
fisheries could be taken before the
completion of the public comment
period. Therefore, delaying this final
rule could result in unexpectedly high
bycatch of canary rockfish such that the
annual OY established for rebuilding is
exceeded, or that many other portions of
the groundfish fishery would have to be
closed to make up for bycatch in the
whiting fishery.
Allowing the fisheries to exceed an
overfished species’ OY would be
contrary to the public’s interest in
rebuilding these overfished species,
thus NMFS finds good cause to waive
public notice and comment on these
revisions, under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).
The FMP requires that fishery
specifications be evaluated each year
using the best scientific information
available. A stock assessment update for
whiting was prepared in early 2005. In
anticipation of the ratification of the
U.S.-Canada agreement and the new
2005 stock assessment, the Council
delayed adoption of a final 2005 ABC
and OY until its March 2005 meeting.
Thus these final values were not
available to the Council or NMFS in
time for the publication of either the
proposed (September 21, 2004; 69 FR
56550) or the final rule (December 23,
2004; 69 FR 77012) for the harvest
specifications and management
measures. Finally, since the major
fishery for whiting does not start until
April 1, there was time to delay the
adoption of the new ABC and OY, until
the new assessment information was
available to the Council in March 2005.
The proposed rulemaking to
implement the 2005 specifications and
management measures, published on
September 21, 2004 (69 FR 56550),
addressed the delay in adopting the
whiting ABC and harvest specifications.
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
NMFS requested public comment on the
proposed rule through October 21, 2004.
The final rule was published on
December 23, 2004 (69 FR 77012) and
again explained that the range in the
specifications would be adjusted
following the Council’s March 2005
meeting and announced in the Federal
Register as a final rule shortly
thereafter. This action has been
publicized widely through the Council
process.
For all of the reasons in the waiver for
notice and comment plus the additional
reasons described above, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 553(d)(3), there exists good cause
to waive the 30–day delay in
effectiveness, so that this final rule may
become effective as soon as possible
after the April 1, 2005, fishery start date.
Correcting the ABC/OY tables to
provide correct bocaccio allocation
amounts between limited entry and
open access fisheries merely ensures
that the tables correctly state agency
policy. These allocations do not apply
to the fisheries because bocaccio
allocations have been suspended while
that species is subject to an overfished
species rebuilding plan. NMFS finds
good cause to waive public notice and
comment on this statement of agency
policy under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), because
providing notice and comment on these
corrections would be unnecessary.
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(2) a statement of
agency policy that has no effect on the
public is not subject to a 30–day delay
in effectiveness.
The environmental impacts associated
with the Pacific whiting harvest levels
being adopted by this action were
considered in the final environmental
impact statement for the 2005–2006
specification and management
measures. Copies of the FEIS and the
ROD are available from the Council (see
ADDRESSES).
The Council prepared an Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and
NMFS prepared a FRFA for the 2005–
2006 harvest specifications and
management measures which included
the impacts of this action on small
entities. The Initial Regulatory
Flexibility (IRFA) was summarized in
the proposed rule published on
September 21, 2004 (69 FR 56550). The
following is a summary of the FRFA
analysis that was published in the final
rule on December 23, 2004 (69 FR
77012). The need for and objectives of
this final rule are contained in the
SUMMARY and in the Background section
under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
NMFS did not receive any comments on
the IRFA or on the proposed rule
regarding the economic effects of this
final rule. The final 2005–2006
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
specifications and management
measures were intended to allow West
Coast commercial and recreational
fisheries participants to fish the
harvestable surplus of more abundant
stocks while also ensuring that those
fisheries do not exceed the allowable
catch levels intended to protect
overfished and depleted stocks. The
form of the specifications, in ABCs and
OYS, follows the guidance of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act, the national
standard guidelines, and the FMP for
protecting and conserving fish stocks.
Fishery management measures include
trip and bag limits, size limits, time/area
closures, gear restrictions, and other
measures intended to allow year-round
West Coast groundfish landings without
compromising overfished species
rebuilding measures.
Approximately 1,700 vessels
participated in the West Coast
commercial groundfish fisheries in
2001. Of those, about 420 vessels were
registered to limited entry permits
issued for either trawl, longline, or pot
gear. Of the remaining approximately
1,280 vessels, about 770 participated in
the open access fisheries and derived
more than 5 percent of their fisheries
revenue from groundfish landings. All
but 10–20 of the 1,700 vessels
participating in the groundfish fisheries
are considered small businesses by the
Small Business Administration. In the
2001 recreational fisheries, there were
106 Washington charter vessels engaged
in salt water fishing outside of Puget
Sound, 232 charter vessels active on the
Oregon coast, and 415 charter vessels
active on the California coast. Although
some charter businesses, particularly
those in or near large California cities,
may not be small businesses, all are
assumed to be small businesses for
purposes of this discussion.
The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires
that actions taken to implement FMPs
be consistent with the ten national
standards, one of which requires that
conservation and management measures
shall, consistent with the conservation
requirements of the Act, take into
account the importance of fishery
resources to fishing communities in
order to (A) provide for the sustained
participation of such communities and,
(B) to the extent practicable, minimize
adverse economic impacts on such
communities. Fishing communities that
rely on the groundfish resource and
people who participate in the
groundfish fisheries have weathered
many regulatory changes in recent
years. NMFS and the Council
introduced the first overfished species
rebuilding measures in 2000, which
severely curtailed the fisheries from
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22811
previous fishing levels. Since then,
NMFS has implemented numerous
management measures and regulatory
programs intended to rebuild overfished
stocks and to better monitor the catch
and bycatch of all groundfish species.
These programs are expected to improve
the status of West Coast groundfish
overfished stocks over time and, by
extension, the economic health of the
fishing communities that depend on
those stocks. Initially, however, the
broad suite of new regulatory programs
that NMFS has introduced since 2000
have: reduced overall groundfish
harvest levels, increased costs of
participating in the fisheries, and
caused confusion for fishery
participants trying to track new
regulatory regimes.
The Council considered five
alternative specifications and
management measures regimes for 2005
and 2006: the no action alternative,
which would have implemented the
2004 regime for 2005 and 2006; the low
OY alternative, which set a series of
conservative groundfish harvest levels
that were either intended to achieve
high probabilities of rebuilding within
TMAX for overfished species or modest
harvest levels for more abundant stocks;
the high OY alternative, which set
harvest levels that were either intended
to achieve lower probabilities of
rebuilding within TMAX for overfished
species or higher harvest levels for more
abundant stocks; the medium OY
alternative, which set harvest levels
intermediate to those of the low and
high alternatives, and; the Council OY
alternative (preferred alternative,) which
was the same as the medium OY
alternative, but with more precautionary
OY levels for lingcod, Pacific cod,
cowcod, canary and yelloweye rockfish.
Each of these alternatives included both
harvest levels (specifications) and
management measures needed to
achieve those harvest levels, with the
most restrictive management measures
corresponding to the lowest OYS. The
most notable difference between the
Council’s preferred alternative and the
other alternatives is that alternative’s
requirement that trawl vessels operating
north of 40°10′ N. lat. use selective
flatfish trawl gear. Because selective
flatfish trawl gear has lower rockfish
bycatch rates than conventional trawl
gear, the targeted flatfish amounts
available to the trawl fisheries are
higher under the Council’s preferred
alternative than under the other
alternatives.
Each of the alternatives analyzed by
the Council was expected to have
different overall effects on the economy.
Among other factors, the EIS for this
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
22812
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
action reviewed alternatives for
expected changes in revenue and
income from 2003 levels. The low OY
alternative was expected to decrease
annual commercial income from the no
action alternative by $1.99 million in
2005 and 2006, decrease commercial
fishery-related annual employment from
the no action alternative by 0.3 percent
in 2005 and 2006, and result in no
changes in recreational fishery income
from the no action alternative. The high
OY alternative was expected to increase
annual commercial income from the no
action alternative by $2.54 million in
2005 and 2006, increase commercial
fishery-related annual employment from
the no action alternative by 0.4 percent
in 2005 and 2006, and result in no
changes in recreational fishery income
from the no action alternative. The
medium OY alternative was expected to
increase annual commercial income
from the no action alternative by $1.51
million in 2005 and 2006, increase
commercial fishery-related annual
employment from the no action
alternative by 0.3 percent in 2005 and
2006, and result in no changes in
recreational fishery income from the no
action alternative. The Council’s OY
alternative was expected to increase
annual commercial income from the no
action alternative by $3.02 million in
2005 and 2006, increase commercial
fishery-related annual employment from
the no action alternative by 0.5 percent
in 2005 and 2006, and result in no
changes in recreational fishery income
from the no action alternative. The
Council’s preferred alternative would
have had commercial fisheries effects
that were similar to or less beneficial
than the medium OY alternative had the
Council preferred alternative not
included the requirement that trawl
vessels north of 40°10′ N. lat. fish with
selective flatfish trawl gear in nearshore
waters. The Council’s preferred
alternative is intended to meet the
conservation requirements of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act while reducing
to the extent practicable the adverse
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
economic impacts of these conservation
measures on the fishing industries and
associated communities.
Pursuant to Executive Order 13175,
this final rule was developed after
meaningful consultation with tribal
officials during the Council process.
This final rule has been determined to
be not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660
Administrative practice and
procedure, American Samoa, Fisheries,
Fishing, Guam, Hawaiian Natives,
Indians, Northern Mariana Islands,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Date: April 28, 2005.
John Oliver,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Operations, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble,
50 CFR part 660 is amended as follows:
I
PART 660—FISHERIES OFF WEST
COAST STATES AND IN THE
WESTERN PACIFIC
1. The authority citation for part 660
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In § 660.323, (a)(2) is revised to read
as follows:
I
§ 660.323 Pacific whiting allocations,
allocation attainment.
(a)* * *
(2) The non-tribal commercial harvest
guideline for whiting is allocated among
three sectors, as follows: 34 percent for
the catcher/processor sector; 24 percent
for the mothership sector; and 42
percent for the shoreside sector. No
more than 5 percent of the shoreside
allocation may be taken and retained
south of 42° N. lat. before the start of the
primary whiting season north of 42° N.
lat. These allocations are harvest
guidelines unless otherwise announced
in the Federal Register. The non-tribal
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Pacific whiting allocations in 2005 are
as follows:
(i) Catcher/processor sector–78,903
mt(24 percent);
(ii) Mothership sector–55,696 mt(34
percent);
(iii) Shore-based sector–97,469 mt(42
percent). No more than 5 percent (4,873
mt) of the shore-based whiting
allocation may be taken before the
shore-based fishery begins north of 42°
N. lat. on June 15, 2005.
*
*
*
*
*
I 3. In § 660.373, paragraph (b)(4) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 660.373 Pacific whiting (whiting) fishery
management.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(4) 2005–2006 bycatch limits in the
whiting fishery. The bycatch limits for
the whiting fishery may be used
inseason to close a sector or sectors of
the whiting fishery to achieve the
rebuilding of an overfished or depleted
stock, under routine management
measure authority at § 660.370 (c)(1)(ii).
These limits are routine management
measures under § 660.370 (c) and, as
such, may be adjusted inseason or may
have new species added to the list of
those with bycatch limits. For 2005, the
whiting fishery bycatch limits for the
sectors identified § 660.323(a) are 4.7 mt
of canary rockfish and 200 mt of widow
rockfish. For 2006, the whiting fishery
bycatch limits are 7.3 mt of canary
rockfish and 243.2 mt of widow
rockfish.
*
*
*
*
*
I 4. In § 660.385, paragraph (e)is revised
to read as follows:
§ 660.385 Washington coastal tribal
fisheries management measures.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Pacific Whiting. The tribal
allocation is 35,000 mt.
I 5. Tables 1a and 2a to Part 660, Subpart
G, are revised to read as follows:
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
22813
ER03MY05.008
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate jul<14>2003
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
ER03MY05.009
22814
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
22815
ER03MY05.010
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate jul<14>2003
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
ER03MY05.011
22816
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
22817
ER03MY05.012
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate jul<14>2003
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
ER03MY05.013
22818
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
22819
ER03MY05.014
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate jul<14>2003
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
ER03MY05.015
22820
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
22821
ER03MY05.016
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate jul<14>2003
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
ER03MY05.017
22822
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
22823
ER03MY05.018
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate jul<14>2003
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
ER03MY05.019
22824
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 3, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
22825
[FR Doc. 05–8817 Filed 4–28–05; 4:20 pm]
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:45 May 02, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\03MYR1.SGM
03MYR1
ER03MY05.020
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 3, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22807-22825]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-8817]
[[Page 22808]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 660
[Docket No.; 040830250-5109-04; I.D. 081304C]
RIN 0648-AS27
Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Fisheries Off West Coast States
and in the Western Pacific; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Biennial
Specifications and Management Measures; Correction
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule; request for comments; correction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule establishes the 2005 fishery specifications
for Pacific whiting (whiting) in the U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ)
and state waters off the coasts of Washington, Oregon, and California,
as authorized by the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan
(FMP). It also adjusts the bycatch limits in the whiting fishery. This
Federal Register document also corrects the final rule implementing the
specifications and management measures, which was published December
23, 2004. These specifications include the level of the acceptable
biological catch (ABC), optimum yield (OY), tribal allocation, and
allocations for the non-tribal commercial sectors. The intended effect
of this action is to establish allowable harvest levels of whiting
based on the best available scientific information.
DATES: Effective April 28, 2005. Comments on the revisions to bycatch
limits must be received no later than 5 p.m., l.t. on May 18, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by I.D. 081304C by any
of the following methods:
E-mail: Whiting0506.nwr@noaa.gov: Include 081304C in the
subject line of the message.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Fax: 206-526-6736, Attn: Becky Renko
Mail: D. Robert Lohn, Administrator, Northwest Region,
NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, WA 98115-0070, Attn: Becky
Renko.
Copies of the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) for this
action are available from Donald McIsaac, Executive Director, Pacific
Fishery Management Council (Council), 7700 NE Ambassador Place,
Portland, OR 97220, phone: 503-820-2280. These documents are also
available online at the Council's website at https://www.pcoucil.org.
Copies of additional reports referred to in this document may also be
obtained from the Council. Copies of the Record of Decision (ROD),
final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA), and the Small Entity
Compliance Guide are available from D. Robert Lohn, Administrator,
Northwest Region (Regional Administrator), NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way,
NE, Seattle, WA 98115-0070.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Becky Renko (Northwest Region, NMFS)
206-526-6150.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
This final rule is accessible via the Internet at the Office of the
Federal Register's Website at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/.
Background information and documents are available at the NMFS
Northwest Region website at https://www.nwr.noaa.gov/1sustfsh/
gdfsh01.htm.
Background
A proposed rulemaking to implement the 2005-2006 specifications and
management measures for the Pacific Coast groundfish fishery was
published on September 21, 2004 (69 FR 56550). NMFS requested public
comment on the proposed rule through October 21, 2004. During that
comment period, NMFS received five letters of comment that were
addressed in the preamble of the final rule published on December 23,
2004 (69 FR 77012). Comments regarding bycatch of overfished species,
including bycatch of overfished species in the whiting fishery were
received and responded to in the final rule. NMFS received no comments
specific to the whiting ABC or OY. These comments were addressed in the
preamble of the final rule. For further information on these comments,
see the preamble of the final rules for the 2005-2006 annual
specifications and management measures.
Management Process
The FMP requires that fishery specifications be evaluated
biennially or annually and revised as necessary, that OYs be specified
for groundfish species or species groups that need protection, and that
management measures designed to achieve the OYs be published in the
Federal Register. Specifications include ABCs and harvest levels (OYs,
harvest guidelines, allocations, or quotas). In November 2003, the U.S.
and Canada signed an agreement regarding the conservation, research,
and catch sharing of whiting. The whiting catch sharing arrangement
that was agreed upon provides 73.88 percent of the total catch OY to
the U.S. fisheries and 26.12 percent to the Canadian fisheries. At this
time, both countries are taking steps to bring this agreement into
force. Until the agreement is ratified and implementing legislation
effective, the negotiators recommended that each country apply the
agreed upon provisions.
In anticipation of the ratification of the U.S.-Canada agreement
and a new stock assessment, and given the small amount of whiting that
is typically landed under trip limits prior to the April 1 start of the
primary season, the Council adopted a range for OY and ABC in the 2005-
2006 specifications, and delayed adoption of a final 2005 ABC and OY
until its March 2005 meeting. To date, the international agreement has
not yet been ratified and implementing legislation has not yet been
made effective. The ABC and OY values recommended by the Council as
final ABC and OY values for 2005 are based on a stock assessment update
and are within the range of those considered in the EIS for the 2005
and 2006 management measures.
Stock Status
In general, whiting is a very productive species with highly
variable recruitment (the biomass of fish that mature and enter the
fishery each year) and a relatively short life span when compared to
other overfished groundfish species. In 1987, the whiting biomass was
at a historical high level due to an exceptionally large number of fish
that spawned in 1980 and 1984 (fished spawned during a particular year
are referred to as year classes). As these large year classes of fish
passed through the population and were replaced by moderate sized year
classes, the stock declined. The whiting stock stabilized between 1995
and 1997, but then declined to its lowest level in 2001.
The 2002 whiting stock assessment estimated the female spawning
biomass to be less than 20 percent of the unfished biomass in 2001 and
was declared overfished on April 15, 2002 (67 FR 18117). Since 2001,
the whiting stock has increased substantially as a strong 1999 year
class has matured and entered the spawning population. In retrospect,
the abundance of the whiting stock in 2001, as estimated from the
current stock assessment, is now
[[Page 22809]]
believed to have been at 28 percent of its unfished biomass in 2001
when a survey catchability coefficient of 1.0 is applied, and at 34
percent of its unfished biomass in 2001 when a survey catchability
coefficient of 0.6 is applied. With the publication of the 2004 harvest
specifications for whiting (April 30, 2004; 69 FR 23667), NMFS
announced that the whiting stock was estimated to be above the target
rebuilding biomass and was no longer considered to be an overfished
stock. On June 30, 2004, the court lifted the requirement it had
initially imposed in the case of Natural Resources Defense Council v.
Evans, 290 F. Supp. 2d 1051, 1057 (N.D. Calif. 2003) that NMFS prepare
a rebuilding plan for whiting.
2005 Stock Assessment Update
An age-structured assessment model was used in 2005 to update the
2004 whiting stock assessment. New information in this stock assessment
included updated catch data through 2004 and recruitment indices from
the 2004 Santa Cruz juvenile index survey. The stock assessment was
examined by a joint U.S./Canada Pacific Hake (Whiting) Stock Assessment
Review (STAR) panel in early February 2005.
As in 2004, the amount of whiting that the 2003 hydroacoustic
survey was able to measure relative to the total whiting in the
surveyed area (survey catchability coefficient or q) was identified as
a major source of uncertainty in the 2005 stock assessment update.
Since 2005 was an assessment update, the model structure was not
reexamined. The STAR panel could not reach consensus on the most
appropriated value within the range for q of 0.6 to 1.0. The more
optimistic or less risk averse model runs assumed that q equaled 0.6,
while the less optimistic or more risk averse model runs assumed that q
equaled 1.0. A catchability coefficient of 1.0 is the value that has
been used in the previous assessments. Additional models runs with q
set at 0.8 were developed following the STAR panel meeting.
Three sets of projections, with different assumptions about the
survey catchability, were brought forward to the Council for decision
making. This range of projections was intended to represent a plausible
range of the stock's status. The Council's Scientific and Statistical
Committee (SSC) also reviewed the assessment, but did not recommend a
specific value for q.
The stock was estimated to be at 50 percent of its unfished biomass
in 2004 (2.5 million mt of age 3+ fish) if a survey catchability
coefficient of 1.0 were applied and at 55 percent (4.0 million mt of
age 3+ fish) of its unfished biomass in 2004 if a survey catchability
coefficient of 0.6 were applied. However, in the absence of another
large year class after 1999, the stock is projected to decline. In
2005, the stock is estimated to be at 38 percent of its unfished
biomass when a survey catchability coefficient of 1.0 is applied and at
41 percent when a survey catchability coefficient of 0.6 is applied.
The U.S. Canada Treaty provisions include the use of a default
harvest rate of F40% with a 40/10 adjustment, a precautionary harvest
adjustment described in the FMP at section 4.5.1. A rate of F40% can be
explained as that which reduces spawning potential per female to 40
percent of what it would have been under natural conditions (if there
were no mortality due to fishing).
ABC/OY Recommendations
The range of ABCs and OYs considered by the Council and analyzed in
the EIS for 2005 included: a low ABC/OY of 181,287 mt, which represents
50 percent of the medium ABC/OY; a medium ABC/OY of 362,573 mt, based
on the results of the 2004 assessment with the OY being set equal to
the ABC because the stock biomass is greater than 40 percent of the
unfished biomass; and a high OY of 725,146 mt, which is twice the
amount of the medium ABC/OY.
At its March 2005 meeting in Sacramento, CA, the Council reviewed
the results of the new whiting stock assessment. The U.S. OYs
considered by the Council at its March meeting were 223,343 mt (q=1.0,
F45%), 264,296 mt (q=1.0, F40%), 264,296 mt
(q=0.8, F45%), 316,904 mt (q=0.8, F40%), 356,766
mt (q=0.6, F45%), and 441,525 mt (q=0.6, F40%).
Because the whiting biomass is estimated to be below 40 percent of its
unfished biomass, the 40/10 adjustment was applied. The SSC recommended
that the Council use the decision table presented in the whiting stock
assessment (Table 14) to evaluate the consequences of alternate OY
options on the whiting biomass.
Following discussion and public testimony, the Council recommended
adopting a U.S. OY of 269,069 mt with a U.S. ABC of 269,545 mt. In
making this decision, the Council considered the true state of nature
as shown in the assessment decision table 14. With an F40% harvest rate
proxy, if a q value of 1.0 is used and the true state of nature is
actually 0.6, in 2006 the stock would be at 31 percent of its unfished
biomass. However, if a q value of 0.6 is used and the true state of
nature is actually 1.0, the stock is projected to fall below the
overfished threshold by 2006.
With the publication of the 2004 harvest specifications for whiting
(April 30, 2004; 69 FR 23667), NMFS announced that the U.S. whiting ABC
was 514,441 mt. However, the 515,441 mt value corresponds with the
coastwide (U.S./Canada) ABC. The 2004 U.S. share of the whiting ABC was
actually 380,069 mt.
Overfished Species
The availability of overfished species as incidental catch,
particularly Pacific ocean perch, canary, darkblotched, and widow
rockfish, may prevent the industry from harvesting the entire whiting
OY during 2005. However, in order to allow the industry to have the
opportunity to harvest the higher OY, the Council recommended bycatch
limits for certain overfished species. Under this structure, the
industry has the opportunity to harvest a larger amount of whiting, if
they can do so while keeping the incidental catch of overfished species
within adopted bycatch limits. In recent years, the most constraining
overfished species for the whiting fishery have been darkblotched,
canary and widow rockfish. In the final rule for the 2005-2006
specification and management measures, whiting sector bycatch limits
were put into place for canary and widow rockfish, 50 CFR 660.373
(b)(4). The amount of canary rockfish that would be available to the
entire whiting fishery was 7.3 mt and the amount of widow rockfish was
231.8 mt in 2005.
At the March 2005 Council meeting, the Council's groundfish
management team (GMT) considered the 2005 whiting OY alternatives in
relation to the impacts of incidental catch of overfished species. In
2004, the estimated bycatch of widow rockfish was most constraining,
relative to the amounts of each overfished species. For 2005, it is
estimated that widow bycatch under the final recommended OY would be
136.25 mt, which is well within the pre-existing 231.8 mt bycatch limit
for all sectors of the fishery. The Council recommended that the amount
of widow rockfish specified for the non-treaty whiting sectors be
adjusted to 200 mt, which should accommodate the needs of the fishery.
For 2005, it is estimated that canary rockfish bycatch for the entire
whiting fishery under the final recommended OY would be 9.22 mt, which
would exceed the pre-existing bycatch limit of 7.30 mt. The GMT
projected that a canary rockfish bycatch limit of 7.3 mt would support
a whiting OY of 208,069 mt. Since the regulations at 50 CFR
370(c)(1)(ii) provide for the closure of the non-tribal portion of the
whiting fishery upon
[[Page 22810]]
attainment of a bycatch limit, the Council recommended the limit be
adjusted to only cover the harvest by non-tribal sectors, in order to
ensure the total canary OY is not exceeded. Thus, the Council
recommended that the amount of canary rockfish specified for the non-
treaty whiting sectors be adjusted to 4.7 mt. NMFS agrees with the
bycatch limits, which are intended to keep the whiting fishery from
causing premature closure to the non-whiting fisheries.
Allocations
In 1994, the United States formally recognized that the four
Washington coastal treaty Indian tribes (Makah, Quileute, Hoh, and
Quinault) have treaty rights to fish for groundfish in the Pacific
Ocean. In general terms, the quantification of those rights is 50
percent of the harvestable surplus of groundfish that pass through the
tribes' usual and accustomed ocean fishing areas (described at 60 CFR
660.324).
The Pacific Coast Indian treaty fishing rights, described at 50 CFR
660.385, allow for the allocation of fish to the tribes through the
specification and management measures process. A tribal allocation is
subtracted from the species OY before limited entry and open access
allocations are derived. The tribal whiting fishery is a separate
fishery, and is not governed by the limited entry or open access
regulations or allocations. To date, only the Makah Tribe has
participated. It regulates, and in cooperation with NMFS, monitors this
fishery so as not to exceed the tribal allocation.
Beginning in 1999, NMFS set the tribal allocation according to an
abundance-based sliding scale allocation method, proposed by the Makah
Tribe in 1998. See; 64 FR 27928, 27929 (May 29, 1999); 65 FR 221, 247
(January 4, 2000); 66 FR 2338, 2370 (January 11, 2001). Details on the
abundance-based sliding scale allocation method and related litigation
are discussed in the preamble to the proposed rule (69 FR 56570;
September 21, 2004) and are not repeated here. On December 28, 2004,
the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the sliding scale approach in
Midwater Trawler Cooperative v. Daley, 393 F. 3d 994 (9th Cir. 2004).
Under the sliding scale allocation method, the tribal allocation varies
with U.S. whiting OY, ranging from a low of 14 percent (or less) of the
U.S. OY when OY levels are above 250,000 mt, to a high of 17.5 percent
of the U.S. OY when the OY level is at or below 145,000 mt. For 2005,
using the sliding scale allocation method, the tribal allocation will
be 35,000 mt. The Makah are the only Washington Coast tribe that
requested a whiting allocation for 2005.
The 2005 non-tribal commercial OY for whiting is 232,069 mt. This
is calculated by deducting the 35,000-mt tribal allocation and 2,000 mt
for research catch and bycatch in non-groundfish fisheries from the
269,069 mt total catch OY. Regulations at 50 CFR 660.323(a)(4) divide
the commercial OY into separate allocations for the non-tribal catcher/
processor, mothership, and shore-based sectors of the whiting fishery.
The catcher/processor sector is comprised of vessels that harvest
and process whiting. The mothership sector is comprised of catcher
vessels that harvest whiting for delivery to motherships. Motherships
are vessels that process, but do not harvest, whiting. The shoreside
sector is comprised of vessels that harvest whiting for delivery to
shoreside processors. Each sector receives a portion of the commercial
OY, with the catcher/processors getting 34 percent (78,903 mt),
motherships getting 24 percent (55,696 mt), and the shore-based sector
getting 42 percent (97,469 mt).
All whiting caught in 2005 before the effective date of this action
will be counted toward the new 2005 OY. As in the past, the
specifications include fish caught in state ocean waters (0-3 nautical
miles (nm) offshore) as well as fish caught in the EEZ (3-200 nm
offshore).
This document also contains corrections to the Tables 1a and 1b of
the final rule implementing the specifications and management measures
for the 2005 and 2006 fishing years which was published December 23,
2004 (69 FR 77012). The value in Table 1a and 1b for bocaccio rockfish
that indicates the proportions allocated to the limited entry sectors
was a typographical error in the specifications final rule and is being
corrected from 52.7 to 55.7. Because bocaccio is an overfished species,
the use of these values has been suspended for 2005 and 2006; the
allocation amount is provided for reference only.
Classification
The final whiting specifications and management measures for 2005
are issued under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act)and are in
accordance with 50 CFR part 660, the regulations implementing the FMP.
The whiting fisheries are generally very fast paced and vessels
tend to incidentally catch overfished species at sporadic and
unpredictable rates. Protection of overfished species is required by
the FMP and implementing regulations. This action revises canary and
widow rockfish bycatch limits for the whiting fisheries to keep the
harvest of overfished species within their OYs. The proposed rulemaking
to implement the 2005 specifications and management measures, published
on September 21, 2004 (69 FR 56550), and the final rule published on
December 23, 2004 (69 FR 77012) addressed this issue and established
bycatch limits for canary and widow rockfish in the whiting fishery.
These limits were identified as routine management measures and as such
may be adjusted inseason.
If the revision of bycatch limits for canary and widow rockfish was
delayed for a public notice and comment period, the 4.7 mt of canary
rockfish and 200 mt of widow rockfish available to the fisheries could
be taken before the completion of the public comment period. Therefore,
delaying this final rule could result in unexpectedly high bycatch of
canary rockfish such that the annual OY established for rebuilding is
exceeded, or that many other portions of the groundfish fishery would
have to be closed to make up for bycatch in the whiting fishery.
Allowing the fisheries to exceed an overfished species' OY would be
contrary to the public's interest in rebuilding these overfished
species, thus NMFS finds good cause to waive public notice and comment
on these revisions, under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).
The FMP requires that fishery specifications be evaluated each year
using the best scientific information available. A stock assessment
update for whiting was prepared in early 2005. In anticipation of the
ratification of the U.S.-Canada agreement and the new 2005 stock
assessment, the Council delayed adoption of a final 2005 ABC and OY
until its March 2005 meeting. Thus these final values were not
available to the Council or NMFS in time for the publication of either
the proposed (September 21, 2004; 69 FR 56550) or the final rule
(December 23, 2004; 69 FR 77012) for the harvest specifications and
management measures. Finally, since the major fishery for whiting does
not start until April 1, there was time to delay the adoption of the
new ABC and OY, until the new assessment information was available to
the Council in March 2005.
The proposed rulemaking to implement the 2005 specifications and
management measures, published on September 21, 2004 (69 FR 56550),
addressed the delay in adopting the whiting ABC and harvest
specifications.
[[Page 22811]]
NMFS requested public comment on the proposed rule through October 21,
2004. The final rule was published on December 23, 2004 (69 FR 77012)
and again explained that the range in the specifications would be
adjusted following the Council's March 2005 meeting and announced in
the Federal Register as a final rule shortly thereafter. This action
has been publicized widely through the Council process.
For all of the reasons in the waiver for notice and comment plus
the additional reasons described above, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3),
there exists good cause to waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness, so
that this final rule may become effective as soon as possible after the
April 1, 2005, fishery start date.
Correcting the ABC/OY tables to provide correct bocaccio allocation
amounts between limited entry and open access fisheries merely ensures
that the tables correctly state agency policy. These allocations do not
apply to the fisheries because bocaccio allocations have been suspended
while that species is subject to an overfished species rebuilding plan.
NMFS finds good cause to waive public notice and comment on this
statement of agency policy under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), because providing
notice and comment on these corrections would be unnecessary. Under 5
U.S.C. 553(d)(2) a statement of agency policy that has no effect on the
public is not subject to a 30-day delay in effectiveness.
The environmental impacts associated with the Pacific whiting
harvest levels being adopted by this action were considered in the
final environmental impact statement for the 2005-2006 specification
and management measures. Copies of the FEIS and the ROD are available
from the Council (see ADDRESSES).
The Council prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and
NMFS prepared a FRFA for the 2005-2006 harvest specifications and
management measures which included the impacts of this action on small
entities. The Initial Regulatory Flexibility (IRFA) was summarized in
the proposed rule published on September 21, 2004 (69 FR 56550). The
following is a summary of the FRFA analysis that was published in the
final rule on December 23, 2004 (69 FR 77012). The need for and
objectives of this final rule are contained in the SUMMARY and in the
Background section under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. NMFS did not
receive any comments on the IRFA or on the proposed rule regarding the
economic effects of this final rule. The final 2005-2006 specifications
and management measures were intended to allow West Coast commercial
and recreational fisheries participants to fish the harvestable surplus
of more abundant stocks while also ensuring that those fisheries do not
exceed the allowable catch levels intended to protect overfished and
depleted stocks. The form of the specifications, in ABCs and OYS,
follows the guidance of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the national standard
guidelines, and the FMP for protecting and conserving fish stocks.
Fishery management measures include trip and bag limits, size limits,
time/area closures, gear restrictions, and other measures intended to
allow year-round West Coast groundfish landings without compromising
overfished species rebuilding measures.
Approximately 1,700 vessels participated in the West Coast
commercial groundfish fisheries in 2001. Of those, about 420 vessels
were registered to limited entry permits issued for either trawl,
longline, or pot gear. Of the remaining approximately 1,280 vessels,
about 770 participated in the open access fisheries and derived more
than 5 percent of their fisheries revenue from groundfish landings. All
but 10-20 of the 1,700 vessels participating in the groundfish
fisheries are considered small businesses by the Small Business
Administration. In the 2001 recreational fisheries, there were 106
Washington charter vessels engaged in salt water fishing outside of
Puget Sound, 232 charter vessels active on the Oregon coast, and 415
charter vessels active on the California coast. Although some charter
businesses, particularly those in or near large California cities, may
not be small businesses, all are assumed to be small businesses for
purposes of this discussion.
The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires that actions taken to implement
FMPs be consistent with the ten national standards, one of which
requires that conservation and management measures shall, consistent
with the conservation requirements of the Act, take into account the
importance of fishery resources to fishing communities in order to (A)
provide for the sustained participation of such communities and, (B) to
the extent practicable, minimize adverse economic impacts on such
communities. Fishing communities that rely on the groundfish resource
and people who participate in the groundfish fisheries have weathered
many regulatory changes in recent years. NMFS and the Council
introduced the first overfished species rebuilding measures in 2000,
which severely curtailed the fisheries from previous fishing levels.
Since then, NMFS has implemented numerous management measures and
regulatory programs intended to rebuild overfished stocks and to better
monitor the catch and bycatch of all groundfish species. These programs
are expected to improve the status of West Coast groundfish overfished
stocks over time and, by extension, the economic health of the fishing
communities that depend on those stocks. Initially, however, the broad
suite of new regulatory programs that NMFS has introduced since 2000
have: reduced overall groundfish harvest levels, increased costs of
participating in the fisheries, and caused confusion for fishery
participants trying to track new regulatory regimes.
The Council considered five alternative specifications and
management measures regimes for 2005 and 2006: the no action
alternative, which would have implemented the 2004 regime for 2005 and
2006; the low OY alternative, which set a series of conservative
groundfish harvest levels that were either intended to achieve high
probabilities of rebuilding within TMAX for overfished species or
modest harvest levels for more abundant stocks; the high OY
alternative, which set harvest levels that were either intended to
achieve lower probabilities of rebuilding within TMAX for
overfished species or higher harvest levels for more abundant stocks;
the medium OY alternative, which set harvest levels intermediate to
those of the low and high alternatives, and; the Council OY alternative
(preferred alternative,) which was the same as the medium OY
alternative, but with more precautionary OY levels for lingcod, Pacific
cod, cowcod, canary and yelloweye rockfish. Each of these alternatives
included both harvest levels (specifications) and management measures
needed to achieve those harvest levels, with the most restrictive
management measures corresponding to the lowest OYS. The most notable
difference between the Council's preferred alternative and the other
alternatives is that alternative's requirement that trawl vessels
operating north of 40[deg]10' N. lat. use selective flatfish trawl
gear. Because selective flatfish trawl gear has lower rockfish bycatch
rates than conventional trawl gear, the targeted flatfish amounts
available to the trawl fisheries are higher under the Council's
preferred alternative than under the other alternatives.
Each of the alternatives analyzed by the Council was expected to
have different overall effects on the economy. Among other factors, the
EIS for this
[[Page 22812]]
action reviewed alternatives for expected changes in revenue and income
from 2003 levels. The low OY alternative was expected to decrease
annual commercial income from the no action alternative by $1.99
million in 2005 and 2006, decrease commercial fishery-related annual
employment from the no action alternative by 0.3 percent in 2005 and
2006, and result in no changes in recreational fishery income from the
no action alternative. The high OY alternative was expected to increase
annual commercial income from the no action alternative by $2.54
million in 2005 and 2006, increase commercial fishery-related annual
employment from the no action alternative by 0.4 percent in 2005 and
2006, and result in no changes in recreational fishery income from the
no action alternative. The medium OY alternative was expected to
increase annual commercial income from the no action alternative by
$1.51 million in 2005 and 2006, increase commercial fishery-related
annual employment from the no action alternative by 0.3 percent in 2005
and 2006, and result in no changes in recreational fishery income from
the no action alternative. The Council's OY alternative was expected to
increase annual commercial income from the no action alternative by
$3.02 million in 2005 and 2006, increase commercial fishery-related
annual employment from the no action alternative by 0.5 percent in 2005
and 2006, and result in no changes in recreational fishery income from
the no action alternative. The Council's preferred alternative would
have had commercial fisheries effects that were similar to or less
beneficial than the medium OY alternative had the Council preferred
alternative not included the requirement that trawl vessels north of
40[deg]10' N. lat. fish with selective flatfish trawl gear in nearshore
waters. The Council's preferred alternative is intended to meet the
conservation requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act while reducing to
the extent practicable the adverse economic impacts of these
conservation measures on the fishing industries and associated
communities.
Pursuant to Executive Order 13175, this final rule was developed
after meaningful consultation with tribal officials during the Council
process.
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660
Administrative practice and procedure, American Samoa, Fisheries,
Fishing, Guam, Hawaiian Natives, Indians, Northern Mariana Islands,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Date: April 28, 2005.
John Oliver,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 660 is amended as
follows:
PART 660--FISHERIES OFF WEST COAST STATES AND IN THE WESTERN
PACIFIC
0
1. The authority citation for part 660 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 660.323, (a)(2) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 660.323 Pacific whiting allocations, allocation attainment.
(a)* * *
(2) The non-tribal commercial harvest guideline for whiting is
allocated among three sectors, as follows: 34 percent for the catcher/
processor sector; 24 percent for the mothership sector; and 42 percent
for the shoreside sector. No more than 5 percent of the shoreside
allocation may be taken and retained south of 42[deg] N. lat. before
the start of the primary whiting season north of 42[deg] N. lat. These
allocations are harvest guidelines unless otherwise announced in the
Federal Register. The non-tribal Pacific whiting allocations in 2005
are as follows:
(i) Catcher/processor sector-78,903 mt(24 percent);
(ii) Mothership sector-55,696 mt(34 percent);
(iii) Shore-based sector-97,469 mt(42 percent). No more than 5
percent (4,873 mt) of the shore-based whiting allocation may be taken
before the shore-based fishery begins north of 42[deg] N. lat. on June
15, 2005.
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec. 660.373, paragraph (b)(4) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 660.373 Pacific whiting (whiting) fishery management.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(4) 2005-2006 bycatch limits in the whiting fishery. The bycatch
limits for the whiting fishery may be used inseason to close a sector
or sectors of the whiting fishery to achieve the rebuilding of an
overfished or depleted stock, under routine management measure
authority at Sec. 660.370 (c)(1)(ii). These limits are routine
management measures under Sec. 660.370 (c) and, as such, may be
adjusted inseason or may have new species added to the list of those
with bycatch limits. For 2005, the whiting fishery bycatch limits for
the sectors identified Sec. 660.323(a) are 4.7 mt of canary rockfish
and 200 mt of widow rockfish. For 2006, the whiting fishery bycatch
limits are 7.3 mt of canary rockfish and 243.2 mt of widow rockfish.
* * * * *
0
4. In Sec. 660.385, paragraph (e)is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 660.385 Washington coastal tribal fisheries management measures.
* * * * *
(e) Pacific Whiting. The tribal allocation is 35,000 mt.
0
5. Tables 1a and 2a to Part 660, Subpart G, are revised to read as
follows:
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
[[Page 22813]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR03MY05.008
[[Page 22814]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR03MY05.009
[[Page 22815]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR03MY05.010
[[Page 22816]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR03MY05.011
[[Page 22817]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR03MY05.012
[[Page 22818]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR03MY05.013
[[Page 22819]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR03MY05.014
[[Page 22820]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR03MY05.015
[[Page 22821]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR03MY05.016
[[Page 22822]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR03MY05.017
[[Page 22823]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR03MY05.018
[[Page 22824]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR03MY05.019
[[Page 22825]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR03MY05.020
[FR Doc. 05-8817 Filed 4-28-05; 4:20 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S