International Fisheries; Pacific Tuna Fisheries; Restrictions for 2005 and 2006 Purse Seine and Longline Fisheries in the Eastern Tropical Pacific Ocean, 70549-70553 [05-22991]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 224 / Tuesday, November 22, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
not, such as passengers. This policy
does not apply to the following:
Identities of air carriers, repair
stations, or other organizational entities
whether or not the air carrier, repair
station or other organizational entity is
owned or operated by an individual;
records generated or maintained by
entities other than the FAA such as
electronic records of accidents and/or
incidents maintained by the National
Transportation Safety Board; this policy
does not apply to written records of
accidents or incidents because it is the
FAA’s current policy to destroy those
records pursuant to the retention
guidelines contained in FAA Order
1350.15C.
This policy statement is published
because the subject is a matter of general
interest in the aviation community.
FAA Recordkeeping
The FAA maintains records of
accidents and incidents in the Accident
and Incident Data System (AIDS), and
with paper documents. All records
contain identifying information such as
name, date of birth, and certificate
number. The records also contain
information about each accident or
incident such as the date and place of
the event as well as a description of
what happened.
AIDS is an automated data base
system that contains summaries of all
FAA accident and incident
investigations. Copies of paper
documents associated with an accident
or incident are not included in AIDS
records. AIDS is the primary source of
summary information for the FAA and
the public concerning any accident or
incident investigated by the FAA.
Expunction Policy
Electronic accident and incident
records identifying an individual will
now be maintained for five years from
the date of the accident or incident. In
that regard, it is believed that after five
years, any information about an
individual’s identity will be of little, if
any, value. Under this expunction
policy, any information which identifies
the individual will be removed from the
AIDS record, including the individual’s
name and FAA certificate number. The
case report number will not be removed,
nor will the rest of the information, such
as the pilot’s experience, the description
of the event, the N number and type of
aircraft involved. This information will
be maintained so that the FAA will be
able to research the accident history of
an aircraft or conduct statistical research
of data.
In all cases, if at the time an AIDS
record is due to be expunged, a
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Nov 21, 2005
Jkt 208001
subsequent AIDS record has been
opened, the first record will not be
expunged unless and until the
subsequent record is eligible for
expungement.
Implementation of the AIDS
Expunction Policy
Issued in Washington, DC on November 17,
2005.
Marion Blakey,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 05–23101 Filed 11–21–05; 8:45am]
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 300
[Docket No. 050719189–5286–03; I.D.
071405C]
The FAA currently has several
decades of records which will be
expunged under this policy. It is
expected that the initial expunction of
eligible AIDS records will be completed
in stages.
Changes will be made to the AIDS
program so that AIDS data eligible to be
expunged is identified and
automatically expunged from the AIDS
computer base. The FAA expects that
the necessary hardware and software
changes to the AIDS data base system
will be completed by [November 1,
2005].
Once this expunction system is fully
functioning, the FAA intends to
expunge identifying information from
eligible AIDS records on a monthly
basis. An individual may expect his or
her AIDS records to be expunged during
the month following the eligibility for
expunction under this policy. The FAA
maintains a large number of records in
AIDS. Therefore, it is impossible for the
Agency to assure the expunction of any
particular record in strict accordance
with this policy. If an individual
becomes aware of any AIDS data eligible
for expunction that has not been
expunged, he or she may request
amendment of the record under the
Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a(d). Any
request to amend an individual’s AIDS
record must be made in writing to the
systems manager in accordance with the
procedures prescribed in 49 CFR part
10.
BILLING CODE 4910–13–M
70549
RIN 0648–AT33
International Fisheries; Pacific Tuna
Fisheries; Restrictions for 2005 and
2006 Purse Seine and Longline
Fisheries in the Eastern Tropical
Pacific Ocean
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NMFS publishes this final
rule to implement the 2005 and 2006
management measures to prevent
overfishing of the eastern tropical
Pacific Ocean (ETP) tuna stocks,
consistent with recommendations by the
Inter-American Tropical Tuna
Commission (IATTC) that have been
approved by the Department of State
(DOS) under the Tuna Conventions Act.
The purse seine fishery for tuna in the
ETP will be closed for a 6–week period
beginning November 20, 2005, through
December 31, 2005, and beginning
November 20, 2006, through December
31, 2006. In this final rule, NMFS also
announces that the longline fishery will
close when a 150–mt limit has been
reached. These actions are taken to limit
fishing mortality on tuna stocks caused
by purse seine fishing and longline
fishing in the Convention Area and
contribute to the long-term conservation
of tuna stocks at levels that support
healthy fisheries.
DATES: The 2005 tuna purse seine
fishery closure is effective November 20,
2005, through December 31, 2005. The
2006 tuna purse seine fishery closure is
effective November 20, 2006, through
December 31, 2006. For 2006, the bigeye
longline fishery will close when the
bigeye tuna catch reaches 150 mt. NMFS
will publish a notification in the
Federal Register announcing the
effective date of that closure.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the regulatory
impact review/final regulatory
flexibility analysis (FRFA) may be
obtained from the Southwest Regional
Administrator, Southwest Region,
NMFS, 501 W. Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200,
Long Beach, CA 90902–4213.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: J.
Allison Routt, Sustainable Fisheries
E:\FR\FM\22NOR1.SGM
22NOR1
70550
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 224 / Tuesday, November 22, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
Division, Southwest Region, NMFS,
(562) 980–4030.
This Federal Register document is
also accessible via the Internet at the
Office of the Federal Register’s website
at https://www.gpoaccess.gov/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
United States is a member of the IATTC,
which was established under the
Convention for the Establishment of an
Inter-American Tropical Tuna
Commission signed in 1949
(Convention). The IATTC was
established to provide an international
arrangement to ensure the effective
international conservation and
management of highly migratory species
of fish in the Convention Area. For the
purposes of these closures, the
Convention Area is defined to include
the waters of the ETP bounded by the
coast of the Americas, the 40° N. and
40° S. parallels, and the 150° W.
meridian. The IATTC has maintained a
scientific research and fishery
monitoring program for many years and
annually assesses the status of stocks of
tuna and the fisheries to determine
appropriate harvest limits or other
measures to prevent overexploitation of
tuna stocks and promote viable
fisheries.
Under the Tuna Conventions Act, 16
U.S.C. 951–962, NMFS must publish
regulations to carry out IATTC
recommendations and resolutions that
have been approved by DOS. A
proposed rule to carry out the IATTCrecommended and DOS-approved
closures for the ETP purse seine and
longline tuna fisheries for 2005 and
2006 was published in the Federal
Register on August 15, 2005 (70 FR
47774). The Southwest Regional
Administrator also is required by
regulations at 50 CFR 300.25(b)(3) to
issue a direct notice to the owners or
agents of U.S. vessels that operate in the
ETP of actions recommended by the
IATTC and approved by the DOS. In
May 2005 and September 2005, the
Regional Administrator, Southwest
Region, sent notices to owners and
agents of U.S. fishing vessels describing
the actions recommended by the IATTC
June 2004 Resolution and approved by
the DOS.
At the June 2004 IATTC meeting, a
new resolution was adopted by the
Commission. The June 2004 resolution
offers Parties a choice for closing the
purse seine fishery in the Convention
Area: either a 6–week closure beginning
August 1, or a 6–week closure beginning
November 20. The closure will target
fishing activity that results in high
catches of juvenile tuna.
The June 2004 resolution also calls
upon each Party and cooperating non-
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Nov 21, 2005
Jkt 208001
Party to take measures necessary to
ensure that each nation’s longline catch
of bigeye tuna in the Convention Area
during 2005 and 2006 will not exceed
the total longline catch by the nation in
the Convention Area in 2001. The U.S.
catch level for 2001 is estimated to have
been 150 mt in the Convention Area.
This final rule allows the United States
to comply with the June 2004
resolution.
The IATTC action at the June 2004
meeting came after considering a variety
of measures, including the use of quotas
and partial fishery closures as
implemented in 1999 through 2002 and
the full month purse seine closure used
in 2003. The resolution of June 2004
incorporated flexibility for nations to
administer the purse seine closure in
accordance with national legislation and
national sovereignty. The selected
measures should provide protection
against overfishing of the stocks in a
manner that is fair, equitable, and
readily enforceable. The DOS has
approved the IATTC recommendations.
The conservation and management
measures are based on 2004 assessments
of the condition of the tuna stocks in the
ETP and historic catch and effort data
for different portions of the ETP, as well
as records relating to implementation of
quotas and closures in prior years. The
measures are believed by the IATTC to
be sufficient to reduce the risk of
overfishing of tuna stocks. The IATTC
met in June 2005 and reviewed new
tuna stock assessments and fishery
information and considered the new
assessment and fishery stock assessment
information. In evaluating possible
management measures for 2004 and
future years, the IATTC selected a
multi-annual time/area approach to
conserve and manage the tuna stocks in
the Convention Area.
This final rule implements the 6–
week closure to purse seining in the
Convention Area beginning November
20, 2005, and beginning November 20,
2006. These closures were chosen in
response to comment supportive of this
closure period rather than the period
beginning on August 1. This final rule
also provides that the U.S. longline
fishery for bigeye tuna in the
Convention Area will close for the
remainder of the calendar year 2006 if
the catch reaches 150 mt, the catch level
of 2001. If necessary, this closure will
prohibit U.S. longline bigeye tuna
vessels from retaining bigeye tuna in the
Convention Area. Longline vessels will
not be subjected to this closure if the
permit holder declares to NMFS under
the Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for
the Pelagic Fisheries of the Western
Pacific Region that they intend to
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
shallow-set to target swordfish (50 CFR
660.23). NMFS will provide notice of
closure of the longline fishery. These
actions ensure that U.S. vessels fish in
accordance with the conservation and
management measures that the IATTC
recommended in June 2004.
On September 2, 2005, NMFS
determined that the 150 mt-catch level
had been reached for the 2005 season
and closed the U.S. longline fishery for
bigeye tuna in the IATTC Convention
Area under an emergency rule (70 FR
52324–52325). This closure prohibited
U.S. longline bigeye tuna vessels from
retaining bigeye tuna in the Convention
Area. Longline vessels were not subject
to the emergency rule if the permit
holder declared to NMFS under the
FMP for the Pelagic Fisheries of the
Western Pacific Region that they intend
to shallow-set to target swordfish (50
CFR 660.23).
Comments and Responses
During the comment period for the
proposed rule, NMFS received
comments from tuna industry
organizations, environmental
organizations, members of the public,
and the Western Pacific Fishery
Management Council (Western Pacific
Council). Key issues and concerns are
summarized below and responded to as
follows:
Timing of the Closures
Comment 1: Comments were received
that vessel owners support the closure
period set forth in the proposed rule.
The vessel owners have two specific
reasons for preferring the year-end
closure. First, the weather conditions on
the high seas and in the Convention
Area at year-end are normally more
problematic than during the AugustSeptember period. Fishing conditions
are affected by weather, and the vessel
owners would prefer that the closure
not take place during the period when
the weather is least likely to adversely
affect fishing. Second, there is currently
a short supply of fish, and fish prices
have finally begun to return to levels
that support economically profitable
fishing. A mid-year closure could
prevent U.S. vessels from capitalizing
on this opportunity. Finally, a later
closure allows better opportunity for
planning operations and scheduling
repairs and maintenance during the
closure. For these reasons U.S. vessel
owners would prefer to delay the
closure until later in the year.
Response: NMFS has decided to
implement the late closure supported by
industry for the reasons presented.
Comment 2: One commenter
expressed a preference for the August 1
E:\FR\FM\22NOR1.SGM
22NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 224 / Tuesday, November 22, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
through September 11, 2005, closure.
This commenter stated that his/her
businesses would be economically
disadvantaged by the later closure.
Response: NMFS considered this
closure. However, the overwhelming
majority of commenters favored of the
6–week closure beginning November 20.
For the reasons stated in Comment 1,
NMFS has chosen to implement the
later closure. The impacts discussed in
the RIR are the same under both closure
options.
2001 U.S. Longline Catch
Comment 3: It is probably wrong to
assume that the catch of bigeye in the
ETP by U.S. flagged longline vessels is
no more than 150 mt.
Response: NMFS has concluded that
the catch in 2001 was 150 mt. In 2004,
NMFS scientists evaluated the U.S.
longline catch of bigeye tuna for 2001.
NMFS scientists estimated the longline
bigeye tuna catch east of 150° W.
meridian by multiplying the numbers of
fish reported as retained in log books
from the Hawaii and California based
longline fleets times the mean weight of
bigeye tuna from the Hawaii-based
longline fishery. Three data sets were
used to estimate bigeye catches east of
150° W. meridian. These were the
Hawaii-based longline logbook data
(1999–2003), the Honolulu market
sample data (1999), and the State of
Hawaii Fish Dealer Data (2000–2003). In
addition, U.S. flagged longline vessels
operate out of California and catch
bigeye tuna east of 150° W. These
vessels are required to fill in either the
NMFS Western Pacific Daily Longline
Fishing Log or High Seas Pelagic
Longline Logs and submit them to the
NMFS Southwest Regional Office in
Long Beach, California. These logbook
data provide fishing location and catch
by species. The estimated U.S. longline
bigeye tuna catch was 150 mt in 2001.
The relatively low yields in 2001 and
2002 were probably caused by
constrained fishing patterns that
reflected regulatory initiatives to the
U.S. longline fleet targeting swordfish in
the ETP.
Comment 4: Why were the 2001 levels
used and not earlier years that may be
more indicative of U.S. historical
catches?
Response: The IATTC Secretariat
recommended and the IATTC chose the
year 2001 for the bigeye longline
benchmark because this was the most
recent year that nations party to or
cooperating with the IATTC were able
to supply a complete annual data set
and because this represented the last
year before a substantial increase in
eastern Pacific longline fishing. Parties
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Nov 21, 2005
Jkt 208001
to the IATTC wanted to limit longline
effort to this lower level.
Bigeye Longline Quota
Comment 5: Several comments
received stated that the longline bigeye
tuna limit would be unfair to U.S.
interests.
Response: At the June 2005 IATTC
annual meeting, the U.S. delegation
lobbied for relief for our U.S. interests
for the longline bigeye tuna fishery. The
U.S. delegation was not successful in
persuading all other IATTC member
nations to amend the June 2004
Resolution. NMFS and the DOS
continue to hear from constituents that
the current longline bigeye tuna limit is
unfair to U.S. interests. NMFS
appreciates these concerns and has
taken these concerns to the U.S.
delegation. The U.S. delegation will
continue to work through the proper
channels towards balanced treatment for
the U.S. longline bigeye tuna fleet
within the bounds of the IATTC
consensus-based process.
Comment 6: NMFS does not have a
timely system for collection and
processing of longline catch data so that
the industry can be given an advance
notification of a prospective closing date
for the longline fishery in the ETP.
Response: The NMFS Pacific Islands
Regional Office will collaborate with the
U.S. longline bigeye tuna industry in
developing a more efficient monitoring
program for 2006.
Comment 7: NMFS is aware that the
longline bigeye tuna quota of 150 mt
was exceeded in both 2004 and 2005.
This clearly indicates that there is
additional demand beyond 150 mt.
Response: NMFS is aware that the
longline bigeye tuna quota of 150 mt
was exceeded in both years. As a
solution to exceeding the quota, NMFS
Pacific Islands Regional Office will
collaborate with the U.S. longline bigeye
tuna industry in developing a more
efficient monitoring program for 2006.
While exceeding the quota could be
indicative of additional demand beyond
150 mt, the IATTC June 2004 Resolution
did not give NMFS discretion to
increase the U.S. quota beyond 150 mt.
At the June 2005 annual meeting of the
IATTC, the U.S. delegation was not
successful in persuading all other
IATTC member nations to amend the
June 2004 Resolution.
Comment 8: A commenter asked who
conducted the analysis on which the
initial estimate of 100 mt of bigeye tuna
was based and questioned if it was
based on the best available data.
Further, the commenter wanted to know
what protocols govern the monitoring of
U.S. longline bigeye catches in the
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
70551
IATTC area, and which NMFS office is
taking the lead on this issue. The
commenter requested NMFS
communicate better on issues within the
Convention Area that may affect
fisheries by vessels based different
regions.
Response: The initial estimate of 2001
U.S. longline catch of bigeye tuna in the
Convention Area was derived by the
NMFS Southwest Region using landings
and log book data from both Hawaii and
California. While the preliminary
estimate of the U.S. catch in 2001 was
100 mt, after receiving public comments
in 2004, NMFS reviewed the initial
estimate and made adjustments based
on a sound statistical basis. NMFS will
implement a protocol for monitoring
U.S. longline bigeye catches in the
IATTC Convention Area so that the
fishery can be closed if the U.S. catch
limit for 2006 is reached before the end
of the year. This protocol for monitoring
includes direct notice to fishing vessel
owners and operators. The Southwest
Region has the lead for collaborating
with the DOS and constituents in
implementing conservation
recommendations of the IATTC. The
Southwest Region recognizes that
longline vessels based in Hawaii may
fish in the Convention Area and thus
could be affected by measures
recommended by the IATTC and
approved by DOS. The Southwest
Region will increase its efforts to
communicate with all stakeholders
including the relevant fishery
management councils, the Pacific
Fishery Management Council (Pacific
Council) and the Western Pacific
Council, prior to IATTC meetings to
ensure that the interests of all U.S.
fisheries are considered in development
of U.S. positions at IATTC. (The Pacific
Council and the Western Pacific Council
are two of eight regional fishery
management councils established by the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act) for the purpose
of developing FMPs to govern fisheries
off the coasts of the United States.) As
soon after IATTC meetings as
practicable, the Southwest Region will
inform the Pacific and Western Pacific
Councils of IATTC actions that affect
fisheries in the Councils’ areas of
concern. NMFS fully recognizes that the
Pacific and Western Pacific Councils
have roles as principals in highly
migratory species fisheries management
under the Magnuson-Stevens Act and is
working to ensure that measures under
international conventions are
compatible and coordinated to the
extent necessary.
E:\FR\FM\22NOR1.SGM
22NOR1
70552
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 224 / Tuesday, November 22, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
Comment 9: One commenter stated
that the longline requirements of the
June 2004 IATTC Resolution pertain
only to large-scale tuna longline vessels
(LSTLV’s)(greater than 24 meters in
length).
Response: The June 2004 IATTC
Resolution applies to ‘‘longline vessels’’
of all sizes. As an additional
requirement, the June 2004 IATTC
Resolution requires that nations with
LSTLV’s provide to the IATTC Director
monthly catch reports of tuna harvested
with longline gear.
General Comments
Comment 10: One organization stated
that they had no opposition to the
proposed closures and other elements of
the proposed rule for restrictions on the
tuna purse seine fishery or the longline
fishery for bigeye tuna in the ETP for
2005 and 2006. This organization
expressed their continuing concerns
regarding conservation of tunas in the
ETP and asked that NMFS continue to
work towards multilateral solutions to
the multilateral fisheries of this
proposed rule. This organization stated
that the June 2004 IATTC resolution
does not address the full problem and
overfishing will continue, with
subsequent depletion of the stocks.
Response: NMFS thanks the
organization for their support. NMFS
agrees that the issues of conservation
and management of the tuna stocks in
the ETP need to be addressed
multilaterally. Under the IATTC, NMFS
and DOS will continue to work with the
nations party to the IATTC to conserve
and manage tuna stocks in the ETP.
Comment 11: One commenter asked
that NMFS shut down tuna fisheries in
the Pacific Ocean for 6 months. The
commenter stated that the current
proposal steals our children’s heritage
by commercial fishermen and greedy
profiteers.
Response: The tuna fishery closures
in the Pacific Ocean were negotiated on
a multilateral basis and strike a balance
between many competing interests. The
measures are believed by the IATTC to
be sufficient to reduce the risk of
overfishing of tuna stocks.
Comment 12: NMFS received a
comment regarding the number of
current participants in the West Coast
Longline Fishery. The commenter stated
that our current number of participants
was incorrect.
Response: NMFS agrees and has
corrected this participant number in the
final analysis. NMFS recognizes that
this number could increase in the future
and is not a static number.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Nov 21, 2005
Jkt 208001
Classification
This action is consistent with the
Tuna Conventions Act, 16 U.S.C. 51–
962. This action is consistent with the
regulations governing the Pacific Tuna
Fisheries at 50 CFR 300.25.
A 30–day delay in effectiveness is
generally required under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3) for rules with substantive
impact on the public. For the following
reasons, the Assistant Administrator for
Fisheries finds good cause to waive the
30–day delay in effectiveness of this
rule. First, delaying closure of the U.S.
tuna purse seine fishery in the ETP
beyond November 20 would contravene
the U.S. obligations to adhere to a
binding resolution of the IATTC, and its
obligations to manage tuna stocks in a
sustainable manner under the Tuna
Conventions Act. Second, delaying the
effectiveness of this rule may result in
the U.S. purse seine vessels continuing
to fish in the ETP after November 20,
thereby placing further pressure on tuna
stocks. That said, beginning in 2004,
NMFS gave actual notice of this closure
several times to each of the vessel
owners and operators affected by this
closure; NMFS will also provide each
owner with a copy of this Federal
Register document.
On December 8, 1999, NMFS
prepared a biological opinion (BO)
assessing the impacts of the fisheries as
they would operate under the interim
final regulations implementing the
International Dolphin Conservation
Program Act (IDCPA)65 FR 47, January
3, 2000). In this BO, NMFS concluded
that the fishing activities conducted
under those regulations are not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of
any endangered or threatened species
under the jurisdiction of NMFS or result
in the destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat. Because
this closure does not alter the scope of
the fishery management regime
analyzed in the IDCPA rule, or the scope
of the impacts considered in that
consultation, NMFS is relying on that
analysis to conclude that this final rule
will have no different effect than what
was concluded in the BO.
On October 4, 2005, NMFS concluded
that the Hawaii-based pelagic, deep-set,
tuna longline fishery managed under the
Fishery Management Plan for the
Pelagic Fisheries of the Western Pacific
Region is not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of any endangered
or threatened species under the
jurisdiction of NMFS or result in the
destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat. This final rule will not
result in any changes in the fishery such
that there would be impacts beyond
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
those considered in that BO. Therefore,
NMFS has determined that additional
ESA consultation is not required for this
action.
Under its Consolidated Resolution on
Bycatch, the IATTC has adopted
conservation measures to reduce sea
turtle injury and mortality from
interactions in the purse seine fishery.
As a result, impacts of the fisheries on
sea turtle injury and mortality should be
lower than in the past. NMFS has
implemented the IATTC conservation
measures to reduce sea turtle injury and
mortality at 50 CFR 300.25(e).
A FRFA was prepared that describes
the economic impact of this final rule.
A copy of this analysis is available from
NMFS (see ADDRESSES). Comments were
received on the initial regulatory
flexibility analysis for the proposed
rule. The comments have been
addressed and are reflected in the FRFA
for this final rule and in the summary
below. A summary of the analysis
follows.
A statement of the need for, and
objectives of, the rule is provided in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
above.
Small vessels, purse seine or longline,
are categorized as small business
entities (revenues below $3.5 million
per year).
This action would prohibit the use of
purse seine gear to harvest tuna in the
ETP for a 6–week period beginning
November 20, through December 31, for
both the 2005 and 2006 calendar years
and limit the annual 2006 U.S. catch of
bigeye tuna caught by longline in the
ETP to 150 metric tons.
The purse seine closure applies to the
U.S. tuna purse seine fleet, which
consists of 10–20 small vessels (carrying
capacity below 400 short tons (363
metric tons)) and 4–6 large vessels
(carrying capacity 400 short tons (363
metric tons) or greater).
The small purse seine vessels fish out
of California in the U.S. exclusive
economic zone most of the year for
small pelagic fish (Pacific sardine,
Pacific mackerel) and for market squid
in summer. Some small vessels harvest
tuna seasonally when they are available.
NMFS believes that the time/area
closure will have no effect on small
purse seine vessels because they do not
have the endurance and markets to fish
that far from their coastal home ports.
The large purse seine vessels usually
fish outside U.S. waters and deliver
their catch to foreign ports or transship
to processors outside the mainland
United States. The large vessels are
categorized as large business entities
(revenues in excess of $3.5 million per
year). A large purse seine vessel
E:\FR\FM\22NOR1.SGM
22NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 224 / Tuesday, November 22, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
typically generates 4,000 to 5,000 metric
tons of tuna valued at between $4 and
$5 million per year. The closure should
not significantly affect their operations
as they are capable of fishing in other
areas that would remain open.
The 2004 IATTC Tuna Convention
Resolution offers each country a choice
for closing the fishery for a 6–week
period beginning either August 1 or
November 20, of each of the years in
2004, 2005, and 2006. NMFS considered
the alternative of the 6–week closure
beginning on August 1, but based on
public comments on the proposed rule
in 2005, NMFS chose the 6–week
closures to begin on November 20, 2005
and November 20, 2006. In particular,
the U.S. purse seine fleet prefers a
closure later in the fishing year because
the winter weather is not conducive to
fishing. Also, throughout the history of
this fishery shipyards are prepared to
accept vessels for scheduled repairs
during the winter months. The fishery
closure later in the year allows the
industry to plan for and mitigate
economic impacts while still providing
the conservation benefits to the tuna
resources in the ETP. NMFS also
considered the ‘‘no action’’ alternative
of not implementing a purse seine
closure, which would have imposed no
economic costs on small entities.
However, failure to implement measures
that have been agreed on pursuant to
this Convention would violate the
United States’ obligations under the
Convention and the Tuna Conventions
Act.
The U.S. longline fishery for bigeye
tuna in the ETP is relatively small.
Vessels in the fishery are characterized
as small business entities, the majority
of which are based in Hawaii. The
Hawaii fleet (approximately 120 active
vessels) has pursued a mix of swordfish
targeting, tuna targeting, and mixed trip
fishing. While the fleet usually fishes
west of the ETP, there have been trips
into the ETP or in which a portion of the
effort was deployed in the ETP. Based
on logbook data analyses, NMFS has
determined that the catch of bigeye in
the ETP in 2001 was 150 mt. In 2003,
a total of 49 Hawaii and California based
longline vessels made 92 whole or
partial trips east of 150° W. long.
landing 232 mts of bigeye tuna. In 2004,
52 longline vessels made 87 whole or
partial trips landing 158 mts of bigeye
tuna. NMFS recognizes that this closure
places a hardship on this fishery.
Overall, a closure should not
significantly affect their operations as
they are capable of fishing in other areas
that would remain open, outside the
boundaries of the IATTC Convention
Area. NMFS recognizes that this closure
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Nov 21, 2005
Jkt 208001
places a further hardship on the West
Coast fishery because of the difficulties
involved in traveling outside the
boundaries of the IATTC Convention
Area for bigeye tuna.
NMFS considered the ‘‘no action’’
alternative of not implementing the
longline closure provided in the 2004
IATTC Tuna Convention Resolution.
This alternative would have imposed no
economic costs on small entities.
However, failure to implement measures
that have been agreed on pursuant to
this Convention would violate the
United States’ obligations under the
Convention, and would violate the Tuna
Conventions Act. The IATTC did not
provide for alternatives in setting the
150 mt bigeye quota, which was
approved by the DOS. As a result,
NMFS has no discretion to refrain from
promulgating the quota. Further, the
Tuna Conventions Act does not provide
authority for the Untied States to take
independent action to conserve and
manage fisheries subject to management
under the IATTC Convention.
For both the purse seine and the
longline tuna fisheries, the closures will
have a temporary impact as vessels can
return to the fishery on January 1.
This rule does not impose any new
reporting or recordkeeping
requirements.
This final rule has been determined to
be not significant for the purposes of
Executive Order 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 951–962. and 971 et
seq.
Dated: November 15, 2005.
James W. Balsiger,
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 05–22991 Filed 11–17–05; 1:24 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
70553
SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting directed
fishing for Pacific cod by catcher/
processor vessels using pot gear in the
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
management area (BSAI). This action is
necessary to prevent exceeding the 2005
total allowable catch (TAC) of Pacific
cod specified for catcher/processor
vessels using pot gear in the BSAI.
DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local
time (A.l.t.), November 17, 2005, until
2400 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Josh
Keaton, 907–586–7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS
manages the groundfish fishery in the
BSAI according to the Fishery
Management Plan for Groundfish of the
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
Management Area (FMP) prepared by
the North Pacific Fishery Management
Council under authority of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act.
Regulations governing fishing by U.S.
vessels in accordance with the FMP
appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600
and 50 CFR part 679.
The 2005 Pacific cod TAC allocated to
catcher/processor vessels using pot gear
in the BSAI is 3,352 metric tons as
established by the 2005 and 2006 final
harvest specifications for groundfish in
the BSAI (70 FR 8979, February 24,
2005) and the reallocation on October 5,
2005 (70 FR 58983, October 11, 2005).
See § 679.20(c)(3)(iii) and (c)(5), and
(a)(7)(i)(C).
In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(iii),
the Administrator, Alaska Region,
NMFS, has determined that the 2005
Pacific cod TAC allocated to catcher/
processor vessels using pot gear in the
BSAI will soon be reached.
Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting
directed fishing for Pacific cod by
catcher/processor vessels using pot gear
in the BSAI.
After the effective date of this closure
the maximum retainable amounts at
§ 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time
during a trip.
50 CFR Part 679
Classification
[Docket No. 041126332–5039–02; I.D.
111705A]
This action responds to the best
available information recently obtained
from the fishery. The Assistant
Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA
(AA), finds good cause to waive the
requirement to provide prior notice and
opportunity for public comment
pursuant to the authority set forth at 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest. This requirement is
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest as it would prevent NMFS from
responding to the most recent fisheries
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod by
Catcher/Processor Vessels Using Pot
Gear in the Bering Sea and Aleutian
Islands Management Area
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Temporary rule; closure.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\22NOR1.SGM
22NOR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 224 (Tuesday, November 22, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70549-70553]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22991]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 300
[Docket No. 050719189-5286-03; I.D. 071405C]
RIN 0648-AT33
International Fisheries; Pacific Tuna Fisheries; Restrictions for
2005 and 2006 Purse Seine and Longline Fisheries in the Eastern
Tropical Pacific Ocean
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS publishes this final rule to implement the 2005 and 2006
management measures to prevent overfishing of the eastern tropical
Pacific Ocean (ETP) tuna stocks, consistent with recommendations by the
Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) that have been approved
by the Department of State (DOS) under the Tuna Conventions Act. The
purse seine fishery for tuna in the ETP will be closed for a 6-week
period beginning November 20, 2005, through December 31, 2005, and
beginning November 20, 2006, through December 31, 2006. In this final
rule, NMFS also announces that the longline fishery will close when a
150-mt limit has been reached. These actions are taken to limit fishing
mortality on tuna stocks caused by purse seine fishing and longline
fishing in the Convention Area and contribute to the long-term
conservation of tuna stocks at levels that support healthy fisheries.
DATES: The 2005 tuna purse seine fishery closure is effective November
20, 2005, through December 31, 2005. The 2006 tuna purse seine fishery
closure is effective November 20, 2006, through December 31, 2006. For
2006, the bigeye longline fishery will close when the bigeye tuna catch
reaches 150 mt. NMFS will publish a notification in the Federal
Register announcing the effective date of that closure.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the regulatory impact review/final regulatory
flexibility analysis (FRFA) may be obtained from the Southwest Regional
Administrator, Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 W. Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200,
Long Beach, CA 90902-4213.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: J. Allison Routt, Sustainable
Fisheries
[[Page 70550]]
Division, Southwest Region, NMFS, (562) 980-4030.
This Federal Register document is also accessible via the Internet
at the Office of the Federal Register's website at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States is a member of the IATTC,
which was established under the Convention for the Establishment of an
Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission signed in 1949 (Convention).
The IATTC was established to provide an international arrangement to
ensure the effective international conservation and management of
highly migratory species of fish in the Convention Area. For the
purposes of these closures, the Convention Area is defined to include
the waters of the ETP bounded by the coast of the Americas, the 40[deg]
N. and 40[deg] S. parallels, and the 150[deg] W. meridian. The IATTC
has maintained a scientific research and fishery monitoring program for
many years and annually assesses the status of stocks of tuna and the
fisheries to determine appropriate harvest limits or other measures to
prevent overexploitation of tuna stocks and promote viable fisheries.
Under the Tuna Conventions Act, 16 U.S.C. 951-962, NMFS must
publish regulations to carry out IATTC recommendations and resolutions
that have been approved by DOS. A proposed rule to carry out the IATTC-
recommended and DOS-approved closures for the ETP purse seine and
longline tuna fisheries for 2005 and 2006 was published in the Federal
Register on August 15, 2005 (70 FR 47774). The Southwest Regional
Administrator also is required by regulations at 50 CFR 300.25(b)(3) to
issue a direct notice to the owners or agents of U.S. vessels that
operate in the ETP of actions recommended by the IATTC and approved by
the DOS. In May 2005 and September 2005, the Regional Administrator,
Southwest Region, sent notices to owners and agents of U.S. fishing
vessels describing the actions recommended by the IATTC June 2004
Resolution and approved by the DOS.
At the June 2004 IATTC meeting, a new resolution was adopted by the
Commission. The June 2004 resolution offers Parties a choice for
closing the purse seine fishery in the Convention Area: either a 6-week
closure beginning August 1, or a 6-week closure beginning November 20.
The closure will target fishing activity that results in high catches
of juvenile tuna.
The June 2004 resolution also calls upon each Party and cooperating
non-Party to take measures necessary to ensure that each nation's
longline catch of bigeye tuna in the Convention Area during 2005 and
2006 will not exceed the total longline catch by the nation in the
Convention Area in 2001. The U.S. catch level for 2001 is estimated to
have been 150 mt in the Convention Area. This final rule allows the
United States to comply with the June 2004 resolution.
The IATTC action at the June 2004 meeting came after considering a
variety of measures, including the use of quotas and partial fishery
closures as implemented in 1999 through 2002 and the full month purse
seine closure used in 2003. The resolution of June 2004 incorporated
flexibility for nations to administer the purse seine closure in
accordance with national legislation and national sovereignty. The
selected measures should provide protection against overfishing of the
stocks in a manner that is fair, equitable, and readily enforceable.
The DOS has approved the IATTC recommendations.
The conservation and management measures are based on 2004
assessments of the condition of the tuna stocks in the ETP and historic
catch and effort data for different portions of the ETP, as well as
records relating to implementation of quotas and closures in prior
years. The measures are believed by the IATTC to be sufficient to
reduce the risk of overfishing of tuna stocks. The IATTC met in June
2005 and reviewed new tuna stock assessments and fishery information
and considered the new assessment and fishery stock assessment
information. In evaluating possible management measures for 2004 and
future years, the IATTC selected a multi-annual time/area approach to
conserve and manage the tuna stocks in the Convention Area.
This final rule implements the 6-week closure to purse seining in
the Convention Area beginning November 20, 2005, and beginning November
20, 2006. These closures were chosen in response to comment supportive
of this closure period rather than the period beginning on August 1.
This final rule also provides that the U.S. longline fishery for bigeye
tuna in the Convention Area will close for the remainder of the
calendar year 2006 if the catch reaches 150 mt, the catch level of
2001. If necessary, this closure will prohibit U.S. longline bigeye
tuna vessels from retaining bigeye tuna in the Convention Area.
Longline vessels will not be subjected to this closure if the permit
holder declares to NMFS under the Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for the
Pelagic Fisheries of the Western Pacific Region that they intend to
shallow-set to target swordfish (50 CFR 660.23). NMFS will provide
notice of closure of the longline fishery. These actions ensure that
U.S. vessels fish in accordance with the conservation and management
measures that the IATTC recommended in June 2004.
On September 2, 2005, NMFS determined that the 150 mt-catch level
had been reached for the 2005 season and closed the U.S. longline
fishery for bigeye tuna in the IATTC Convention Area under an emergency
rule (70 FR 52324-52325). This closure prohibited U.S. longline bigeye
tuna vessels from retaining bigeye tuna in the Convention Area.
Longline vessels were not subject to the emergency rule if the permit
holder declared to NMFS under the FMP for the Pelagic Fisheries of the
Western Pacific Region that they intend to shallow-set to target
swordfish (50 CFR 660.23).
Comments and Responses
During the comment period for the proposed rule, NMFS received
comments from tuna industry organizations, environmental organizations,
members of the public, and the Western Pacific Fishery Management
Council (Western Pacific Council). Key issues and concerns are
summarized below and responded to as follows:
Timing of the Closures
Comment 1: Comments were received that vessel owners support the
closure period set forth in the proposed rule. The vessel owners have
two specific reasons for preferring the year-end closure. First, the
weather conditions on the high seas and in the Convention Area at year-
end are normally more problematic than during the August-September
period. Fishing conditions are affected by weather, and the vessel
owners would prefer that the closure not take place during the period
when the weather is least likely to adversely affect fishing. Second,
there is currently a short supply of fish, and fish prices have finally
begun to return to levels that support economically profitable fishing.
A mid-year closure could prevent U.S. vessels from capitalizing on this
opportunity. Finally, a later closure allows better opportunity for
planning operations and scheduling repairs and maintenance during the
closure. For these reasons U.S. vessel owners would prefer to delay the
closure until later in the year.
Response: NMFS has decided to implement the late closure supported
by industry for the reasons presented.
Comment 2: One commenter expressed a preference for the August 1
[[Page 70551]]
through September 11, 2005, closure. This commenter stated that his/her
businesses would be economically disadvantaged by the later closure.
Response: NMFS considered this closure. However, the overwhelming
majority of commenters favored of the 6-week closure beginning November
20. For the reasons stated in Comment 1, NMFS has chosen to implement
the later closure. The impacts discussed in the RIR are the same under
both closure options.
2001 U.S. Longline Catch
Comment 3: It is probably wrong to assume that the catch of bigeye
in the ETP by U.S. flagged longline vessels is no more than 150 mt.
Response: NMFS has concluded that the catch in 2001 was 150 mt. In
2004, NMFS scientists evaluated the U.S. longline catch of bigeye tuna
for 2001. NMFS scientists estimated the longline bigeye tuna catch east
of 150[deg] W. meridian by multiplying the numbers of fish reported as
retained in log books from the Hawaii and California based longline
fleets times the mean weight of bigeye tuna from the Hawaii-based
longline fishery. Three data sets were used to estimate bigeye catches
east of 150[deg] W. meridian. These were the Hawaii-based longline
logbook data (1999-2003), the Honolulu market sample data (1999), and
the State of Hawaii Fish Dealer Data (2000-2003). In addition, U.S.
flagged longline vessels operate out of California and catch bigeye
tuna east of 150[deg] W. These vessels are required to fill in either
the NMFS Western Pacific Daily Longline Fishing Log or High Seas
Pelagic Longline Logs and submit them to the NMFS Southwest Regional
Office in Long Beach, California. These logbook data provide fishing
location and catch by species. The estimated U.S. longline bigeye tuna
catch was 150 mt in 2001. The relatively low yields in 2001 and 2002
were probably caused by constrained fishing patterns that reflected
regulatory initiatives to the U.S. longline fleet targeting swordfish
in the ETP.
Comment 4: Why were the 2001 levels used and not earlier years that
may be more indicative of U.S. historical catches?
Response: The IATTC Secretariat recommended and the IATTC chose the
year 2001 for the bigeye longline benchmark because this was the most
recent year that nations party to or cooperating with the IATTC were
able to supply a complete annual data set and because this represented
the last year before a substantial increase in eastern Pacific longline
fishing. Parties to the IATTC wanted to limit longline effort to this
lower level.
Bigeye Longline Quota
Comment 5: Several comments received stated that the longline
bigeye tuna limit would be unfair to U.S. interests.
Response: At the June 2005 IATTC annual meeting, the U.S.
delegation lobbied for relief for our U.S. interests for the longline
bigeye tuna fishery. The U.S. delegation was not successful in
persuading all other IATTC member nations to amend the June 2004
Resolution. NMFS and the DOS continue to hear from constituents that
the current longline bigeye tuna limit is unfair to U.S. interests.
NMFS appreciates these concerns and has taken these concerns to the
U.S. delegation. The U.S. delegation will continue to work through the
proper channels towards balanced treatment for the U.S. longline bigeye
tuna fleet within the bounds of the IATTC consensus-based process.
Comment 6: NMFS does not have a timely system for collection and
processing of longline catch data so that the industry can be given an
advance notification of a prospective closing date for the longline
fishery in the ETP.
Response: The NMFS Pacific Islands Regional Office will collaborate
with the U.S. longline bigeye tuna industry in developing a more
efficient monitoring program for 2006.
Comment 7: NMFS is aware that the longline bigeye tuna quota of 150
mt was exceeded in both 2004 and 2005. This clearly indicates that
there is additional demand beyond 150 mt.
Response: NMFS is aware that the longline bigeye tuna quota of 150
mt was exceeded in both years. As a solution to exceeding the quota,
NMFS Pacific Islands Regional Office will collaborate with the U.S.
longline bigeye tuna industry in developing a more efficient monitoring
program for 2006. While exceeding the quota could be indicative of
additional demand beyond 150 mt, the IATTC June 2004 Resolution did not
give NMFS discretion to increase the U.S. quota beyond 150 mt. At the
June 2005 annual meeting of the IATTC, the U.S. delegation was not
successful in persuading all other IATTC member nations to amend the
June 2004 Resolution.
Comment 8: A commenter asked who conducted the analysis on which
the initial estimate of 100 mt of bigeye tuna was based and questioned
if it was based on the best available data. Further, the commenter
wanted to know what protocols govern the monitoring of U.S. longline
bigeye catches in the IATTC area, and which NMFS office is taking the
lead on this issue. The commenter requested NMFS communicate better on
issues within the Convention Area that may affect fisheries by vessels
based different regions.
Response: The initial estimate of 2001 U.S. longline catch of
bigeye tuna in the Convention Area was derived by the NMFS Southwest
Region using landings and log book data from both Hawaii and
California. While the preliminary estimate of the U.S. catch in 2001
was 100 mt, after receiving public comments in 2004, NMFS reviewed the
initial estimate and made adjustments based on a sound statistical
basis. NMFS will implement a protocol for monitoring U.S. longline
bigeye catches in the IATTC Convention Area so that the fishery can be
closed if the U.S. catch limit for 2006 is reached before the end of
the year. This protocol for monitoring includes direct notice to
fishing vessel owners and operators. The Southwest Region has the lead
for collaborating with the DOS and constituents in implementing
conservation recommendations of the IATTC. The Southwest Region
recognizes that longline vessels based in Hawaii may fish in the
Convention Area and thus could be affected by measures recommended by
the IATTC and approved by DOS. The Southwest Region will increase its
efforts to communicate with all stakeholders including the relevant
fishery management councils, the Pacific Fishery Management Council
(Pacific Council) and the Western Pacific Council, prior to IATTC
meetings to ensure that the interests of all U.S. fisheries are
considered in development of U.S. positions at IATTC. (The Pacific
Council and the Western Pacific Council are two of eight regional
fishery management councils established by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) for the purpose
of developing FMPs to govern fisheries off the coasts of the United
States.) As soon after IATTC meetings as practicable, the Southwest
Region will inform the Pacific and Western Pacific Councils of IATTC
actions that affect fisheries in the Councils' areas of concern. NMFS
fully recognizes that the Pacific and Western Pacific Councils have
roles as principals in highly migratory species fisheries management
under the Magnuson-Stevens Act and is working to ensure that measures
under international conventions are compatible and coordinated to the
extent necessary.
[[Page 70552]]
Comment 9: One commenter stated that the longline requirements of
the June 2004 IATTC Resolution pertain only to large-scale tuna
longline vessels (LSTLV's)(greater than 24 meters in length).
Response: The June 2004 IATTC Resolution applies to ``longline
vessels'' of all sizes. As an additional requirement, the June 2004
IATTC Resolution requires that nations with LSTLV's provide to the
IATTC Director monthly catch reports of tuna harvested with longline
gear.
General Comments
Comment 10: One organization stated that they had no opposition to
the proposed closures and other elements of the proposed rule for
restrictions on the tuna purse seine fishery or the longline fishery
for bigeye tuna in the ETP for 2005 and 2006. This organization
expressed their continuing concerns regarding conservation of tunas in
the ETP and asked that NMFS continue to work towards multilateral
solutions to the multilateral fisheries of this proposed rule. This
organization stated that the June 2004 IATTC resolution does not
address the full problem and overfishing will continue, with subsequent
depletion of the stocks.
Response: NMFS thanks the organization for their support. NMFS
agrees that the issues of conservation and management of the tuna
stocks in the ETP need to be addressed multilaterally. Under the IATTC,
NMFS and DOS will continue to work with the nations party to the IATTC
to conserve and manage tuna stocks in the ETP.
Comment 11: One commenter asked that NMFS shut down tuna fisheries
in the Pacific Ocean for 6 months. The commenter stated that the
current proposal steals our children's heritage by commercial fishermen
and greedy profiteers.
Response: The tuna fishery closures in the Pacific Ocean were
negotiated on a multilateral basis and strike a balance between many
competing interests. The measures are believed by the IATTC to be
sufficient to reduce the risk of overfishing of tuna stocks.
Comment 12: NMFS received a comment regarding the number of current
participants in the West Coast Longline Fishery. The commenter stated
that our current number of participants was incorrect.
Response: NMFS agrees and has corrected this participant number in
the final analysis. NMFS recognizes that this number could increase in
the future and is not a static number.
Classification
This action is consistent with the Tuna Conventions Act, 16 U.S.C.
51-962. This action is consistent with the regulations governing the
Pacific Tuna Fisheries at 50 CFR 300.25.
A 30-day delay in effectiveness is generally required under 5
U.S.C. 553(d)(3) for rules with substantive impact on the public. For
the following reasons, the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries finds
good cause to waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness of this rule.
First, delaying closure of the U.S. tuna purse seine fishery in the ETP
beyond November 20 would contravene the U.S. obligations to adhere to a
binding resolution of the IATTC, and its obligations to manage tuna
stocks in a sustainable manner under the Tuna Conventions Act. Second,
delaying the effectiveness of this rule may result in the U.S. purse
seine vessels continuing to fish in the ETP after November 20, thereby
placing further pressure on tuna stocks. That said, beginning in 2004,
NMFS gave actual notice of this closure several times to each of the
vessel owners and operators affected by this closure; NMFS will also
provide each owner with a copy of this Federal Register document.
On December 8, 1999, NMFS prepared a biological opinion (BO)
assessing the impacts of the fisheries as they would operate under the
interim final regulations implementing the International Dolphin
Conservation Program Act (IDCPA)65 FR 47, January 3, 2000). In this BO,
NMFS concluded that the fishing activities conducted under those
regulations are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any
endangered or threatened species under the jurisdiction of NMFS or
result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.
Because this closure does not alter the scope of the fishery management
regime analyzed in the IDCPA rule, or the scope of the impacts
considered in that consultation, NMFS is relying on that analysis to
conclude that this final rule will have no different effect than what
was concluded in the BO.
On October 4, 2005, NMFS concluded that the Hawaii-based pelagic,
deep-set, tuna longline fishery managed under the Fishery Management
Plan for the Pelagic Fisheries of the Western Pacific Region is not
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or
threatened species under the jurisdiction of NMFS or result in the
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. This final
rule will not result in any changes in the fishery such that there
would be impacts beyond those considered in that BO. Therefore, NMFS
has determined that additional ESA consultation is not required for
this action.
Under its Consolidated Resolution on Bycatch, the IATTC has adopted
conservation measures to reduce sea turtle injury and mortality from
interactions in the purse seine fishery. As a result, impacts of the
fisheries on sea turtle injury and mortality should be lower than in
the past. NMFS has implemented the IATTC conservation measures to
reduce sea turtle injury and mortality at 50 CFR 300.25(e).
A FRFA was prepared that describes the economic impact of this
final rule. A copy of this analysis is available from NMFS (see
ADDRESSES). Comments were received on the initial regulatory
flexibility analysis for the proposed rule. The comments have been
addressed and are reflected in the FRFA for this final rule and in the
summary below. A summary of the analysis follows.
A statement of the need for, and objectives of, the rule is
provided in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section above.
Small vessels, purse seine or longline, are categorized as small
business entities (revenues below $3.5 million per year).
This action would prohibit the use of purse seine gear to harvest
tuna in the ETP for a 6-week period beginning November 20, through
December 31, for both the 2005 and 2006 calendar years and limit the
annual 2006 U.S. catch of bigeye tuna caught by longline in the ETP to
150 metric tons.
The purse seine closure applies to the U.S. tuna purse seine fleet,
which consists of 10-20 small vessels (carrying capacity below 400
short tons (363 metric tons)) and 4-6 large vessels (carrying capacity
400 short tons (363 metric tons) or greater).
The small purse seine vessels fish out of California in the U.S.
exclusive economic zone most of the year for small pelagic fish
(Pacific sardine, Pacific mackerel) and for market squid in summer.
Some small vessels harvest tuna seasonally when they are available.
NMFS believes that the time/area closure will have no effect on small
purse seine vessels because they do not have the endurance and markets
to fish that far from their coastal home ports.
The large purse seine vessels usually fish outside U.S. waters and
deliver their catch to foreign ports or transship to processors outside
the mainland United States. The large vessels are categorized as large
business entities (revenues in excess of $3.5 million per year). A
large purse seine vessel
[[Page 70553]]
typically generates 4,000 to 5,000 metric tons of tuna valued at
between $4 and $5 million per year. The closure should not
significantly affect their operations as they are capable of fishing in
other areas that would remain open.
The 2004 IATTC Tuna Convention Resolution offers each country a
choice for closing the fishery for a 6-week period beginning either
August 1 or November 20, of each of the years in 2004, 2005, and 2006.
NMFS considered the alternative of the 6-week closure beginning on
August 1, but based on public comments on the proposed rule in 2005,
NMFS chose the 6-week closures to begin on November 20, 2005 and
November 20, 2006. In particular, the U.S. purse seine fleet prefers a
closure later in the fishing year because the winter weather is not
conducive to fishing. Also, throughout the history of this fishery
shipyards are prepared to accept vessels for scheduled repairs during
the winter months. The fishery closure later in the year allows the
industry to plan for and mitigate economic impacts while still
providing the conservation benefits to the tuna resources in the ETP.
NMFS also considered the ``no action'' alternative of not implementing
a purse seine closure, which would have imposed no economic costs on
small entities. However, failure to implement measures that have been
agreed on pursuant to this Convention would violate the United States'
obligations under the Convention and the Tuna Conventions Act.
The U.S. longline fishery for bigeye tuna in the ETP is relatively
small. Vessels in the fishery are characterized as small business
entities, the majority of which are based in Hawaii. The Hawaii fleet
(approximately 120 active vessels) has pursued a mix of swordfish
targeting, tuna targeting, and mixed trip fishing. While the fleet
usually fishes west of the ETP, there have been trips into the ETP or
in which a portion of the effort was deployed in the ETP. Based on
logbook data analyses, NMFS has determined that the catch of bigeye in
the ETP in 2001 was 150 mt. In 2003, a total of 49 Hawaii and
California based longline vessels made 92 whole or partial trips east
of 150[deg] W. long. landing 232 mts of bigeye tuna. In 2004, 52
longline vessels made 87 whole or partial trips landing 158 mts of
bigeye tuna. NMFS recognizes that this closure places a hardship on
this fishery. Overall, a closure should not significantly affect their
operations as they are capable of fishing in other areas that would
remain open, outside the boundaries of the IATTC Convention Area. NMFS
recognizes that this closure places a further hardship on the West
Coast fishery because of the difficulties involved in traveling outside
the boundaries of the IATTC Convention Area for bigeye tuna.
NMFS considered the ``no action'' alternative of not implementing
the longline closure provided in the 2004 IATTC Tuna Convention
Resolution. This alternative would have imposed no economic costs on
small entities. However, failure to implement measures that have been
agreed on pursuant to this Convention would violate the United States'
obligations under the Convention, and would violate the Tuna
Conventions Act. The IATTC did not provide for alternatives in setting
the 150 mt bigeye quota, which was approved by the DOS. As a result,
NMFS has no discretion to refrain from promulgating the quota. Further,
the Tuna Conventions Act does not provide authority for the Untied
States to take independent action to conserve and manage fisheries
subject to management under the IATTC Convention.
For both the purse seine and the longline tuna fisheries, the
closures will have a temporary impact as vessels can return to the
fishery on January 1.
This rule does not impose any new reporting or recordkeeping
requirements.
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for the
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 951-962. and 971 et seq.
Dated: November 15, 2005.
James W. Balsiger,
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National
Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 05-22991 Filed 11-17-05; 1:24 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
