Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act Provisions; American Lobster Fishery, 24495-24497 [05-9331]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 10, 2005 / Proposed Rules
• Federal e-Rulemaing Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Include in the
subject line the following identifier: I.D.
040605D.
Copies of the petition are available
upon request at the address specified
above and are also available on the
internet at https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
sfa/hms.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jackie Wilson or Karyl Brewster-Geisz
by phone: 301–713–2347 or by fax: 301–
713–1917.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Petition for Rulemaking
On March 7, 2005, NMFS received a
request from the Petitioner to initiate
rulemaking for a regulatory amendment
to 50 CFR 635.2 in the definition of the
‘‘Mid-Atlantic shark closed area.’’ The
proposal would reduce the current
closed area by changing the boundary
from 55 fathoms to only include waters
out to 15 fathoms coastwide for North
Carolina. The Petitioner has stated that
this action would allow North Carolina
fishermen access to the larger sharks in
deeper waters from 15 to 55 fathoms
and minimize discards of juvenile and
protected sharks to a reasonable extent.
The Petitioner states that the available
data suggest that juvenile sharks occur
predominately near shore. Thus, the
Petitioner proposes that closing out to
15 fathoms along the entire North
Carolina coastline instead of out to 55
fathoms for the northern part of North
Carolina will still attain the
management goal of protecting juvenile
sandbar and prohibited dusky sharks.
The Petitioner believes that the offshore
extent of the current closed area
encompasses the primary shark fishing
grounds off North Carolina and severely
restricts access to the shark quota off
North Carolina, particularly during the
first trimester.
The Petitioner asserts that the current
time/area closure off of North Carolina
is not justified based on available data,
and has been implemented in violation
of at least three National Standards (e.g.,
ι4, 8, and 10) of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act. The Petitioner notes that the
proposed change could address the
above concerns and have positive
significant economic benefits to
fishermen, dealers, and fishing
communities in the South Atlantic.
During the proposed rule stage of
Amendment 1 (August 1, 2003, 68 FR
45196) of the Highly Migratory Species
Fishery Management Plan, NMFS took
comment on a much larger time/area
closure (31,387 square nautical miles
from VA to SC) than the current time/
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:32 May 09, 2005
Jkt 205001
area closure. Based on comments from
fishermen, NMFS conducted additional
analyses and adjusted the time/area
closure’s seaward boundary to follow
the 60 to 80 fathom contour (4,490
square nautical miles). This area was
selected to include all observed catches
of dusky and sandbar sharks while
mitigating social and economic impacts
on fishing communities in North
Carolina compared to the originally
proposed closed area. The analyses
conducted in Amendment 1 indicated
that the current time/area closure
should reduce dusky shark catch by 79
percent, and neonate and juvenile
sandbar shark catch by 55 percent.
Because the rebuilding plan for large
coastal sharks (LCS) incorporated the
mortality reductions anticipated for the
existing time/area closure, it is possible
that changes to the closure of the
magnitude suggested by the Petitioner
would require an amendment to the
rebuilding plan.
In the final rule, NMFS also delayed
implementation of the time/area closure
for a year to allow fishermen time to
adjust to the new regulations (December
24, 2003, 68 FR 74746). Thus, this
closure has not yet been in place for a
full year.
The Petitioner notes that North
Carolina’s interest in changing the time/
area closure is on record. In addition, on
March 23, 2005, the Petitioner presented
this issue to the HMS Advisory Panel
(AP), stating that the time/area closure
disproportionately affects fishermen
operating from home ports in the State
of North Carolina. AP members noted
that the LCS stock assessments
determined that sandbar and dusky
sharks have been overfished and are not
currently rebuilt, thus warranting
further management actions to rebuild
these stocks. AP members also stated
that any amendment to the current time/
area closure must not increase mortality
on large juvenile sandbar or dusky
sharks because rebuilding these stocks
requires lowering the mortality rate of
large juveniles. AP members also
discussed alternatives, such as the
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries
Commission working with other East
Coast states for more statewide
compliance with regulations at least as
restrictive as Federal regulations.
Request for Comments
NMFS solicits comments from the
public regarding the need to proceed
with rulemaking to amend the current
Mid-Atlantic shark closed area. NMFS is
specifically requesting that the public
provide comments on the social,
economic, and biological impacts that a
potential regulatory amendment to the
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24495
closure would have on the LCS
rebuilding plan. NMFS will consider
this public input in determining the
need to amend regulations.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: May 3, 2005.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 05–9332 Filed 5–9–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 697
[Docket No. 050329085–5085–01; I.D.
032305A]
RIN 0648–AT31
Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative
Management Act Provisions; American
Lobster Fishery
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (ANPR), Notice of Intent
(NOI) to combine rulemaking and
prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS); request for comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NMFS announces its intent to
consider revisions to the Federal lobster
regulations in response to the effort
control recommendations of the Atlantic
States Marine Fisheries Commission
(Commission) in Addenda II, III, IV, V
and VI to Amendment 3 of the Interstate
Fishery Management Plan for American
Lobster (ISFMP), and prepare an EIS to
assess the impact on the human
environment of controlling fishing effort
in the American lobster fishery, in the
U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
Written comments are requested from
the public regarding issues that NMFS
should address in this EIS relative to
fishing effort reduction measures as
proposed in Addenda II through VI.
DATES: Written comments must be
received no later than 5 p.m. Eastern
Standard Time on or before June 9,
2005.
Written comments should
be sent to Harold C. Mears, Director,
State, Federal, and Constituent
Programs Office, Northeast Region,
NMFS, One Blackburn Drive,
Gloucester, MA 01930. Comments may
also be sent via email at
Lob0105@noaa.gov , via fax (978) 281–
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\10MYP1.SGM
10MYP1
24496
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 10, 2005 / Proposed Rules
9117, or via the Federal e-Rulemaking
Portal at www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas Fletcher, (978) 281–9349, fax
(978) 281–9117, e-mail
tom.fletcher@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Commission proposed a wide range of
measures in Addenda II through VI,
such as transferable trap programs, that
aim to control lobster fishing effort.
Because the effort control measures
contain similar interrelated elements
and might involve the creation of a
single management program, these
measures lend themselves to a single
rulemaking and analysis. Although
Addenda II and III have effort control
elements, those addenda principally
relate to broodstock protective
measures, and the effort control
measures are presented in less detail.
The Commission’s Addenda IV, V, and
VI recommendations, however,
principally involve effort control
measures and more robustly present
effort control measures. Accordingly,
NMFS proposes to combine measures
from all five addenda that control
fishing effort for the American Lobster
into one rulemaking and a single
environmental impacts analysis.
This action augments an earlier ANPR
and NOI (67 FR 56800) that NMFS
published on September 5, 2002, in
response to the Commission’s
recommendation that NMFS implement
regulations in the EEZ that are
compatible with Addenda II and III to
Amendment 3 of the ISFMP. That
earlier document explains NMFS’
intention to solicit written comments
and inform the public of the
development of an EIS relative to
Addenda II and III. In addition, that
earlier document further stated NMFS’
intention to combine the Addendum II
and Addendum III rulemakings because
the addenda involved similar subject
matter - namely management measures
designed to increase egg production and
protect broodstock. Those measures
included: a series of minimum gauge
size increases (increases to the
minimum legal length of the carapace,
defined as the unsegmented body shell
of the American lobster), and an
increase in the minimum escape vent
size of lobster trap gear fished in the
following state and Federal waters of
Lobster Conservation Management Area
2 (Area 2) (inshore Southern New
England), Area 3 (offshore area,
comprised entirely of Federal waters),
Area 4 (nearshore Northern MidAtlantic), Area 5 (nearshore Southern
Mid-Atlantic), and the Outer Cape Area
(nearshore waters east of Cape Cod); a
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:32 May 09, 2005
Jkt 205001
maximum gauge increase in Areas 4 and
5; a boundary change between Areas 3
and 5; and amending the timeline to end
overfishing. The effects of these
broodstock measures will be analyzed in
a forthcoming environmental
assessment.
Although designed principally as
broodstock protection plans, Addenda II
and III contain other management
measures aimed at reducing fishing
effort in the American lobster fishery.
These measures are set forth in greater
detail and relate to different lobster
management areas in the subsequently
developed Addenda IV, V and VI.
A brief outline of lobster effort control
measures in Addenda II through VI are
summarized in the following sections.
Background
The following is a summary of effort
control measures approved by the
Commission and recommended for
Federal rulemaking.
Addenda II through VI are part of an
overall management regime set forth in
Amendment 3 to the ISFMP. The intent
of Amendment 3, approved by the
Commission in December of 1997, is to
achieve a healthy American lobster
resource and to develop a management
regime that provides for sustained
harvest, maintains opportunities for
participation, and provides for the
cooperative development of
conservation measures by all
stakeholders. Amendment 3 employed a
participatory management approach by
creating the seven lobster management
areas, each with its own lobster
conservation management team (LCMT)
comprised of industry members.
Amendment 3 tasked the LCMTs with
providing recommendations for areaspecific management measures to the
Commission’s American Lobster
Management Board (Board) to meet the
lobster egg production and effort
reduction goals of the ISFMP. Certain
effort reduction measures of the area
plans were approved by the Board in
August of 1999 as part of Addendum I
to Amendment 3 (Addendum I). After
technical evaluation, the Board
approved the egg production measures
as Addenda II and III in February 2001,
and February 2002, respectively, and
recommended that NMFS implement
complementary Federal regulations.
NMFS has the authority under the
Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative
Management Act (ACFCMA) to
implement regulations in Federal waters
that are compatible with the effective
implementation of the ISFMP and
consistent with the National Standards
of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act.
These Federal regulations are
promulgated pursuant to the ACFCMA
and are codified at 50 CFR part 697.
In Addendum I, the Commission
implemented a plan that limited fishing
access to Areas 3, 4 and 5, allocated
traps to qualifiers and capped the
number of traps that can be fished.
Addendum II established a timeline for
additional trap reductions for qualified
permit holders in Area 3. Each trap
allocation in Area 3, that exceeds 1,200
traps, would be reduced on a sliding
scale over four years, with reductions
not going below a baseline of 1,200
traps. Allocations of less than 1,200
traps would remain at their initial
qualifying level. This measure was
implemented by Federal rulemaking
dated March 27, 2003, (68 FR 14902).
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Addendum II Summary
Addendum II, approved on February
1, 2001, updated the lobster egg
production rebuilding schedule and
reconvened the LCMTs to develop
recommendations for area management
based on the stock assessment
completed in 2000. The measure that
addresses effort control is the following:
Trap Reduction Schedule for Areas 3, 4,
and 5
Addendum III Summary
Addendum III, approved February 20,
2002, was developed in response to an
Addendum II requirement whereby each
LCMT was asked to review the revised
egg rebuilding schedule and area
management plan and present the Board
with alternative measures that are
intended to achieve the stock rebuilding
targets. Measures that address lobster
effort control include:
Trap Reduction in the Outer Cape Area
In Addendum III, the Commission
proposed limiting fishing access to the
Outer Cape Area, allocating traps to
qualifiers and then reducing the
numbers allocated, and allowing traps
to be transferred among those permit
holders who qualify for access.
Beginning in 2002 and extending
through 2008, a 20–percent reduction in
trap allocations was proposed for the
Outer Cape Area. These trap allocations
may be transferred among Outer Cape
lobster fishers to allow an individual
business to build up or down within the
maximum allowable 800 trap limit. Any
trap transfer invokes a 10–percent trap
reduction or ‘‘conservation tax’’ on the
number of traps involved in the transfer.
An additional 5–percent reduction, per
year, in trap allocations may be
employed in 2006 and 2007, if
E:\FR\FM\10MYP1.SGM
10MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 10, 2005 / Proposed Rules
minimums, an anti-monopoly clause,
and a 10–percent trap reduction or
‘‘conservation tax’’ on any trap transfers.
necessary, to meet lobster egg
production goals and objectives.
Choose and Use in Area 3
The Commission in Addendum III
approved a management measure
specific to Area 3 entitled ‘‘Choose and
Use’’. Currently, Federal permit holders
are allowed to elect which Area(s) they
intend to fish on an annual basis.
However, Choose and Use would
obligate Area 3 permit holders to
designate (i.e. ‘‘choose’’) Area 3 on their
Federal permits when renewing Federal
permits each year. If a permit holder did
not choose Area 3, then that permit
holder would be prohibited from
designating Area 3 on the vessel permit
in future years. The permit would still
retain its Area 3 qualification, and each
successive owner would be given the
opportunity to either permanently
designate Area 3 or drop the Area 3
designation for the duration of
possession of the qualified permit.
Addendum IV Summary
Addendum IV, approved December
17, 2003, addresses four issues: an effort
reduction proposal from the Area 3
LCMT; broodstock and effort control
measures in Area 2; new information
about escape vent selectivity; and a
change to the interpretation of the most
restrictive rule. Measures that address
effort control include:
Trap Reduction in Area 3
Addendum IV includes a plan to
increase trap reductions by 10–percent
(5–percent in each year for 2007 and
2008) for all qualified Area 3 permit
holders.
Trap Transferability and Passive
Reduction in Area 3
The Area 3 transferable trap plan
includes measures that would allow
transfers of trap allocations among
qualified Area 3 permit holders. These
measures include: trap transfer
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:32 May 09, 2005
Jkt 205001
Changes to the Most Restrictive Rule
In Amendment 3, the ISFMP for
American lobster required multiple area
fishermen to comply with the most
restrictive management measures of all
areas fished including the smallest
number of traps allocated to them for
each of the areas fished. The original
intention of the most restrictive rule was
to allow multi-area fishermen to
continue to fish in the areas that they
historically have fished in while
maintaining the conservation benefits
unique to each area. With the
implementation of Amendment 3,
permit holders in all areas were
restricted to a maximum of 800 to 1,800
traps; however, qualification for historic
participation in several areas resulted in
individual area-specific trap allocations
that vary from the initial fixed trap
limits in Amendment
3. An unintended consequence of this
rule limited multi-area fishermen to the
lowest number of traps they have been
allocated in any Area.
Effort Control in Area 2
The Commission approved an effort
control plan developed by the Area 2
LCMT that proposed limiting fishing
access to Area 2, allocating traps to
qualifiers, allowing traps to be
transferred among qualifiers, and a
passive trap reduction or ‘‘conservation
tax’’ on any trap transfers. Due to
implementation concerns identified by
the impacted regulatory agencies, the
effort control components of the Area 2
plan were withdrawn in Addendum VI
in February 2005, and will be amended
in a forthcoming Addendum.
Addendum V Summary
Addendum V, approved March 2004,
was initiated to address one particular
aspect of the Area 3 trap transferability
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24497
program approved in Addendum IV: a
new proposal that reduced the overall
trap cap from 2,600 to 2,200, with a
higher passive reduction or
‘‘conservation tax’’ imposed when the
purchaser owns 1,800 to 2,200 traps
rather than 2,200 to 2,600 traps.
Measures that address effort reduction
include:
Total Trap Cap and Conservation Tax
A conservation tax (passive reduction)
of 10–percent would be assessed for
each transfer that equates to a purchaser
owning up to 1,800 traps. For all
transfers where the transfer of traps
results in a permit exceeding 1,800
traps, those traps over 1,800 would be
taxed at 50–percent, up to the total trap
cap of 2,200. This measure would be
applicable to Area 3 permit holders
only.
Addendum VI Summary
Addendum VI withdrew the
Addendum IV effort control plan for
Area 2 except for two points; a
prohibition on issuance of any new
lobster permits for Area 2 and the
eligibility period for participation in the
fishery. It also directs all jurisdictions
with Area 2 permit holders and the Area
2 LCMT to develop a new effort control
plan, which caps effort at or near
current levels with the potential to
adjust the levels based on the outcome
of the upcoming stock assessment.
Classification
This ANPR has been determined to be
significant for the purposes of Executive
Order 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.
Dated: May 5, 2005.
Rebecca Lent,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 05–9331 Filed 5–9–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
E:\FR\FM\10MYP1.SGM
10MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 89 (Tuesday, May 10, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24495-24497]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-9331]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 697
[Docket No. 050329085-5085-01; I.D. 032305A]
RIN 0648-AT31
Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act Provisions;
American Lobster Fishery
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR), Notice of Intent
(NOI) to combine rulemaking and prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS); request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS announces its intent to consider revisions to the Federal
lobster regulations in response to the effort control recommendations
of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (Commission) in
Addenda II, III, IV, V and VI to Amendment 3 of the Interstate Fishery
Management Plan for American Lobster (ISFMP), and prepare an EIS to
assess the impact on the human environment of controlling fishing
effort in the American lobster fishery, in the U.S. Exclusive Economic
Zone (EEZ). Written comments are requested from the public regarding
issues that NMFS should address in this EIS relative to fishing effort
reduction measures as proposed in Addenda II through VI.
DATES: Written comments must be received no later than 5 p.m. Eastern
Standard Time on or before June 9, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to Harold C. Mears,
Director, State, Federal, and Constituent Programs Office, Northeast
Region, NMFS, One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Comments may
also be sent via email at Lob0105@noaa.gov , via fax (978) 281-
[[Page 24496]]
9117, or via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Fletcher, (978) 281-9349, fax
(978) 281-9117, e-mail tom.fletcher@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission proposed a wide range of
measures in Addenda II through VI, such as transferable trap programs,
that aim to control lobster fishing effort. Because the effort control
measures contain similar interrelated elements and might involve the
creation of a single management program, these measures lend themselves
to a single rulemaking and analysis. Although Addenda II and III have
effort control elements, those addenda principally relate to broodstock
protective measures, and the effort control measures are presented in
less detail. The Commission's Addenda IV, V, and VI recommendations,
however, principally involve effort control measures and more robustly
present effort control measures. Accordingly, NMFS proposes to combine
measures from all five addenda that control fishing effort for the
American Lobster into one rulemaking and a single environmental impacts
analysis.
This action augments an earlier ANPR and NOI (67 FR 56800) that
NMFS published on September 5, 2002, in response to the Commission's
recommendation that NMFS implement regulations in the EEZ that are
compatible with Addenda II and III to Amendment 3 of the ISFMP. That
earlier document explains NMFS' intention to solicit written comments
and inform the public of the development of an EIS relative to Addenda
II and III. In addition, that earlier document further stated NMFS'
intention to combine the Addendum II and Addendum III rulemakings
because the addenda involved similar subject matter - namely management
measures designed to increase egg production and protect broodstock.
Those measures included: a series of minimum gauge size increases
(increases to the minimum legal length of the carapace, defined as the
unsegmented body shell of the American lobster), and an increase in the
minimum escape vent size of lobster trap gear fished in the following
state and Federal waters of Lobster Conservation Management Area 2
(Area 2) (inshore Southern New England), Area 3 (offshore area,
comprised entirely of Federal waters), Area 4 (nearshore Northern Mid-
Atlantic), Area 5 (nearshore Southern Mid-Atlantic), and the Outer Cape
Area (nearshore waters east of Cape Cod); a maximum gauge increase in
Areas 4 and 5; a boundary change between Areas 3 and 5; and amending
the timeline to end overfishing. The effects of these broodstock
measures will be analyzed in a forthcoming environmental assessment.
Although designed principally as broodstock protection plans,
Addenda II and III contain other management measures aimed at reducing
fishing effort in the American lobster fishery. These measures are set
forth in greater detail and relate to different lobster management
areas in the subsequently developed Addenda IV, V and VI.
Background
The following is a summary of effort control measures approved by
the Commission and recommended for Federal rulemaking.
Addenda II through VI are part of an overall management regime set
forth in Amendment 3 to the ISFMP. The intent of Amendment 3, approved
by the Commission in December of 1997, is to achieve a healthy American
lobster resource and to develop a management regime that provides for
sustained harvest, maintains opportunities for participation, and
provides for the cooperative development of conservation measures by
all stakeholders. Amendment 3 employed a participatory management
approach by creating the seven lobster management areas, each with its
own lobster conservation management team (LCMT) comprised of industry
members.
Amendment 3 tasked the LCMTs with providing recommendations for
area-specific management measures to the Commission's American Lobster
Management Board (Board) to meet the lobster egg production and effort
reduction goals of the ISFMP. Certain effort reduction measures of the
area plans were approved by the Board in August of 1999 as part of
Addendum I to Amendment 3 (Addendum I). After technical evaluation, the
Board approved the egg production measures as Addenda II and III in
February 2001, and February 2002, respectively, and recommended that
NMFS implement complementary Federal regulations. NMFS has the
authority under the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management
Act (ACFCMA) to implement regulations in Federal waters that are
compatible with the effective implementation of the ISFMP and
consistent with the National Standards of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act. These Federal regulations are
promulgated pursuant to the ACFCMA and are codified at 50 CFR part 697.
A brief outline of lobster effort control measures in Addenda II
through VI are summarized in the following sections.
Addendum II Summary
Addendum II, approved on February 1, 2001, updated the lobster egg
production rebuilding schedule and reconvened the LCMTs to develop
recommendations for area management based on the stock assessment
completed in 2000. The measure that addresses effort control is the
following:
Trap Reduction Schedule for Areas 3, 4, and 5
In Addendum I, the Commission implemented a plan that limited
fishing access to Areas 3, 4 and 5, allocated traps to qualifiers and
capped the number of traps that can be fished. Addendum II established
a timeline for additional trap reductions for qualified permit holders
in Area 3. Each trap allocation in Area 3, that exceeds 1,200 traps,
would be reduced on a sliding scale over four years, with reductions
not going below a baseline of 1,200 traps. Allocations of less than
1,200 traps would remain at their initial qualifying level. This
measure was implemented by Federal rulemaking dated March 27, 2003, (68
FR 14902).
Addendum III Summary
Addendum III, approved February 20, 2002, was developed in response
to an Addendum II requirement whereby each LCMT was asked to review the
revised egg rebuilding schedule and area management plan and present
the Board with alternative measures that are intended to achieve the
stock rebuilding targets. Measures that address lobster effort control
include:
Trap Reduction in the Outer Cape Area
In Addendum III, the Commission proposed limiting fishing access to
the Outer Cape Area, allocating traps to qualifiers and then reducing
the numbers allocated, and allowing traps to be transferred among those
permit holders who qualify for access. Beginning in 2002 and extending
through 2008, a 20-percent reduction in trap allocations was proposed
for the Outer Cape Area. These trap allocations may be transferred
among Outer Cape lobster fishers to allow an individual business to
build up or down within the maximum allowable 800 trap limit. Any trap
transfer invokes a 10-percent trap reduction or ``conservation tax'' on
the number of traps involved in the transfer. An additional 5-percent
reduction, per year, in trap allocations may be employed in 2006 and
2007, if
[[Page 24497]]
necessary, to meet lobster egg production goals and objectives.
Choose and Use in Area 3
The Commission in Addendum III approved a management measure
specific to Area 3 entitled ``Choose and Use''. Currently, Federal
permit holders are allowed to elect which Area(s) they intend to fish
on an annual basis. However, Choose and Use would obligate Area 3
permit holders to designate (i.e. ``choose'') Area 3 on their Federal
permits when renewing Federal permits each year. If a permit holder did
not choose Area 3, then that permit holder would be prohibited from
designating Area 3 on the vessel permit in future years. The permit
would still retain its Area 3 qualification, and each successive owner
would be given the opportunity to either permanently designate Area 3
or drop the Area 3 designation for the duration of possession of the
qualified permit.
Addendum IV Summary
Addendum IV, approved December 17, 2003, addresses four issues: an
effort reduction proposal from the Area 3 LCMT; broodstock and effort
control measures in Area 2; new information about escape vent
selectivity; and a change to the interpretation of the most restrictive
rule. Measures that address effort control include:
Trap Reduction in Area 3
Addendum IV includes a plan to increase trap reductions by 10-
percent (5-percent in each year for 2007 and 2008) for all qualified
Area 3 permit holders.
Trap Transferability and Passive Reduction in Area 3
The Area 3 transferable trap plan includes measures that would
allow transfers of trap allocations among qualified Area 3 permit
holders. These measures include: trap transfer minimums, an anti-
monopoly clause, and a 10-percent trap reduction or ``conservation
tax'' on any trap transfers.
Changes to the Most Restrictive Rule
In Amendment 3, the ISFMP for American lobster required multiple
area fishermen to comply with the most restrictive management measures
of all areas fished including the smallest number of traps allocated to
them for each of the areas fished. The original intention of the most
restrictive rule was to allow multi-area fishermen to continue to fish
in the areas that they historically have fished in while maintaining
the conservation benefits unique to each area. With the implementation
of Amendment 3, permit holders in all areas were restricted to a
maximum of 800 to 1,800 traps; however, qualification for historic
participation in several areas resulted in individual area-specific
trap allocations that vary from the initial fixed trap limits in
Amendment
3. An unintended consequence of this rule limited multi-area
fishermen to the lowest number of traps they have been allocated in any
Area.
Effort Control in Area 2
The Commission approved an effort control plan developed by the
Area 2 LCMT that proposed limiting fishing access to Area 2, allocating
traps to qualifiers, allowing traps to be transferred among qualifiers,
and a passive trap reduction or ``conservation tax'' on any trap
transfers. Due to implementation concerns identified by the impacted
regulatory agencies, the effort control components of the Area 2 plan
were withdrawn in Addendum VI in February 2005, and will be amended in
a forthcoming Addendum.
Addendum V Summary
Addendum V, approved March 2004, was initiated to address one
particular aspect of the Area 3 trap transferability program approved
in Addendum IV: a new proposal that reduced the overall trap cap from
2,600 to 2,200, with a higher passive reduction or ``conservation tax''
imposed when the purchaser owns 1,800 to 2,200 traps rather than 2,200
to 2,600 traps.
Measures that address effort reduction include:
Total Trap Cap and Conservation Tax
A conservation tax (passive reduction) of 10-percent would be
assessed for each transfer that equates to a purchaser owning up to
1,800 traps. For all transfers where the transfer of traps results in a
permit exceeding 1,800 traps, those traps over 1,800 would be taxed at
50-percent, up to the total trap cap of 2,200. This measure would be
applicable to Area 3 permit holders only.
Addendum VI Summary
Addendum VI withdrew the Addendum IV effort control plan for Area 2
except for two points; a prohibition on issuance of any new lobster
permits for Area 2 and the eligibility period for participation in the
fishery. It also directs all jurisdictions with Area 2 permit holders
and the Area 2 LCMT to develop a new effort control plan, which caps
effort at or near current levels with the potential to adjust the
levels based on the outcome of the upcoming stock assessment.
Classification
This ANPR has been determined to be significant for the purposes of
Executive Order 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.
Dated: May 5, 2005.
Rebecca Lent,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 05-9331 Filed 5-9-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S