Fisheries Off West Coast States and in the Western Pacific; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Specifications and Management Measures, 75115-75148 [05-24205]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Atlantic mackerel limited access
program in Amendment 10 to the FMP.
NMFS informed the public of the
Council’s decision in a subsequent
notice on June 9, 2005 (70 FR 33728).
Since then, the Council has been
notified that it must develop a stock
rebuilding program for butterfish as a
result of that stock being designated as
overfished. The Council was also
informed that the stock rebuilding
program for butterfish must be
developed in an amendment to the FMP
rather than in a framework adjustment
as the Council had originally intended.
Consequently, Amendment 10 will now
include a plan to rebuild the overfished
butterfish stock. The Council has
concluded that Amendment 10 will
require only an Environmental
Assessment under the requirements of
the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA). As a result, the Council hereby
notifies the public that the mackerel
limited access program will now be
developed in Amendment 11 to the
FMP. Other than the sequencing of the
amendments to this FMP and a slight
time delay, the Council anticipates that
the development of the limited access
program for mackerel will proceed as
described in previous notices to the
public. The public will have the
opportunity to comment on the
measures and alternatives being
considered by the Council for
Amendment 11 through public meetings
and public comment periods required
by NEPA, the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act, and the Administrative Procedure
Act. This notification also reminds the
public that interested participants
should locate and preserve records that
substantiate and verify their
participation in the Atlantic mackerel
fishery in Federal waters.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et. seq.
Dated: December 13, 2005.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 05–24206 Filed 12–16–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 660
[Docket No. 051014263–5330–02; I.D.
120805A]
RIN 0648–AU00
Fisheries Off West Coast States and in
the Western Pacific; Pacific Coast
Groundfish Fishery; Specifications and
Management Measures
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes a rule to
implement revisions to the 2006
commercial and recreational groundfish
fishery management measures for
groundfish taken in the U.S. exclusive
economic zone (EEZ) off the coasts of
Washington, Oregon, and California.
Proposed management measures that are
new for 2006 are intended to: achieve
but not exceed optimum yields (OYs);
prevent overfishing; rebuild overfished
species; and reduce and minimize the
bycatch and discard of overfished and
depleted stocks. NMFS additionally
proposes to revise the 2006
darkblotched rockfish OY, at the request
of the Pacific Fishery Management
Council (Pacific Council), and under the
authority of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). These
actions, which are authorized by the
Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery
Management Plan (FMP) and the
Magnuson-Stevens Act, are intended
allow fisheries to access more abundant
groundfish stocks while protecting
overfished and depleted stocks. Finally,
NMFS announces with this Federal
Register document that the coastwide
lingcod stock is no longer considered
overfished and is fully rebuilt.
DATES: Comments on this proposed rule
will be accepted through January 15,
2006.
You may submit comments,
identified by I.D. 120805A by any of the
following methods:
• E-mail:
GroundfishInseason6.nwr@noaa.gov.
Include the I.D. number 120805A in the
subject line of the message.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
75115
• Fax: 206–526–4646, Attn: Jamie
Goen.
• Mail: D. Robert Lohn,
Administrator, Northwest Region,
NMFS, Attn: Jamie Goen, 7600 Sand
Point Way NE, Seattle, WA 98115–0070.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jamie Goen (Northwest Region, NMFS),
phone: 206–526–6140; fax: 206–526–
6736; and e-mail: jamie.goen@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
This Federal Register document is
available on the Government Printing
Office’s website at: www.gpoaccess.gov/
fr/.
Background information and
documents are available at the NMFS
Northwest Region website at:
www.nwr.noaa.gov/1sustfsh/
gdfsh01.htm and at the Pacific Council′s
website at: www.pcouncil.org.
Background
The Pacific Coast Groundfish FMP
and its implementing regulations at title
50 in the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), part 660, subpart G, regulate
fishing for over 80 species of groundfish
off the coasts of Washington, Oregon,
and California. Groundfish
specifications and management
measures are developed by the Pacific
Council, and are implemented by
NMFS. The specifications and
management measures for 2005–2006
were codified in the CFR (50 CFR part
660, subpart G). They were published in
the Federal Register as a proposed rule
on September 21, 2004 (69 FR 56550),
and as a final rule on December 23, 2004
(69 FR 77012). The final rule was
subsequently amended on March 18,
2005 (70 FR 13118); March 30, 2005 (70
FR 16145); April 19, 2005 (70 FR
20304); May 3, 2005 (70 FR 22808); May
4, 2005 (70 FR 23040); May 5, 2005 (70
FR 23804); May 16, 2005 (70 FR 25789);
May 19, 2005 (70 FR 28852); July 5,
2005 (70 FR 38596); August 22, 2005 (70
FR 48897); August 31, 2005 (70 FR
51682); October 5, 2005 (70 FR 58066);
October 20, 2005 (70 FR 61063); October
24, 2005 (70 FR 61393); and November
1, 2005 (70 FR 65861).
Acceptable biological catches (ABCs)
and OYs are established for each year.
Management measures are established at
the start of the biennial period, and are
adjusted throughout the biennial
management period, to keep harvest
within the OYs. At the Pacific Council′s
October 31 - November 4, 2005, meeting
in San Diego, CA, the Pacific Council′s
Groundfish Management Team (GMT)
considered 2005 catch data and new
West Coast Groundfish Observer
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
75116
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Program (WCGOP) data and made
recommendations to adjust groundfish
management measures for December
2005 and for all of 2006. Those
adjustments were implemented via an
inseason action (70 FR 72385, December
5, 2005). The management measures for
the remainder of 2006 (March through
December) are being implemented
through this proposed rule.
The following changes to current
groundfish management measures for
March through December 2006 were
recommended by the Pacific Council, in
consultation with Pacific Coast Treaty
Indian Tribes and the States of
Washington, Oregon, and California, at
its October 31–November 4, 2005,
meeting in San Diego, CA. The changes
recommended by the Pacific Council
include: (1) adjustments to the limited
entry fixed gear and open access
sablefish daily trip limit (DTL) fishery
north of 36° N. lat., (2) adjustments to
limited entry trawl cumulative limits for
sablefish, thornyheads, Dover sole, other
flatfish, petrale sole, arrowtooth
flounder, slope rockfish, splitnose
rockfish, and lingcod, (3) adjustments to
limited entry fixed gear and open access
cumulative limits for shelf, shortbelly,
and widow rockfish south of 34°27′ N.
lat. and minor nearshore and black
rockfish between 42° N. lat. and 40°10′
N. lat., (4) adjustments to the Rockfish
Conservation Area (RCA) boundaries,
(5) adjustments to Washington, Oregon
and California′s recreational groundfish
fisheries, (6) establishment of limited
entry trawl, limited entry fixed gear, and
open access trip limits for Pacific cod
and spiny dogfish, (7) adjustments to
the tribal management measures for
Pacific cod, spiny dogfish and
thornyheads and (8) clarification of the
non-groundfish trawl rockfish
conservation area (RCA). Pacific Coast
groundfish landings will be monitored
throughout the year, and further
adjustments to trip limits, RCAs, or
management measures will be made as
necessary to allow achievement of, or to
avoid exceeding, OYs.
Limited Entry Trawl Fisheries
The trawl bycatch model was updated
with bycatch and discard rates based on
new WCGOP data from September 2004
through April 2005. This update also
incorporated four months of data
(January through April 2005) from when
selective flatfish gear was required
shoreward of the trawl RCA north of
40°10′ N. lat. The GMT used the
updated trawl bycatch model to analyze
adjustments to trawl RCA boundaries
and bimonthly limits for target species
(sablefish, thornyheads, Dover sole,
petrale sole, other flatfish, arrowtooth,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
slope rockfish, and splitnose rockfish)
for 2006. Management measures for
March through December are being
proposed in this rule.
The Pacific Council recommended
adjustments to limited entry trawl
cumulative limits for certain target
species coastwide, such as sablefish,
thornyheads, Dover sole, other flatfish,
and arrowtooth flounder, based on
projections from the trawl bycatch
model. These adjustments for 2006 are
projected to keep harvest within the
OYs. NMFS concurs with this
recommendation; and therefore, is
proposing adjusted cumulative limits
for these species during March through
December 2006 are shown in Table 3
(North) and Table 3 (South).
Adjustments to limited entry trawl
cumulative limits for other target
species are described in detail below.
Petrale Sole
In order to avoid exceeding the
petrale sole ABC in 2006 and promote
year round fishing opportunities, the
Pacific Council recommended
establishing cumulative limits in the
bottom trawl fishery during Period 6
(November through December). In the
past, petrale sole landings were not
limited during this period. NMFS
concurs with this recommendation; and
therefore, is proposing that north of
40°10′ N. lat., limited entry trawl large
and small footrope limits would be
60,000 lb (27,216 kg) per 2 months
during November and December. North
of 40°10′ N. lat., limited entry selective
flatfish trawl limits would be 25,500 lb
(11,567 kg) per 2 months during
November and December. South of
40°10′ N. lat., limited entry trawl limits
would be 60,000 lb (27,216 kg) per 2
months during November and
December.
In response to higher than anticipated
catches of petrale sole in 2005, trawl
RCA boundaries were adjusted inseason
(70 FR 58066, October 5, 2005) to
reduce the catch of petrale sole in
Period 6. The implementation of petrale
sole cumulative limits for Periods 1 and
6 of 2006 should prevent these higher
than anticipated catches from
reoccurring in 2006. Therefore, the
Pacific Council recommended for 2006,
to restore the position of the trawl RCA
that was initially scheduled for Period
6 in 2005. NMFS concurs with this
recommendation; and therefore, is
proposing the position of the trawl RCA
during Period 6 would be defined by
coordinates approximating the
following depth contours: (1) north of
40°10′ N. lat., it extends between the
200–fm (366–m), modified to exclude
certain petrale sole areas from the RCA,
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and the 75–fm (137–m) depth contours;
(2) between 40°10′ N. lat. and 34°27′ N.
lat., it extends between the 150–fm
(274–m) and the 75–fm (137–m) depth
contours; and (3) south of 34°27′ N. lat.,
it extends between the 150–fm (274–m)
and the 75–fm (137–m) depth contours
along the mainland coast and between
the 150–fm (274–m) depth contour and
the shoreline around islands.
Slope and Splitnose Rockfish Limits
Between 40≥10′ N. lat. and 38≥ N. lat.
At the most recent Pacific Council
meeting, the GMT considered a request
to liberalize management measures for
minor slope and splitnose rockfish in
2006. The harvest of these species has
been constrained in recent years
because they co-occur with
darkblotched rockfish, an overfished
rockfish species.
Darkblotched rockfish are not
distributed uniformly along the coast
but instead are most concentrated in
waters off Washington and northern
Oregon, with a gradient of decreasing
density extending south. Only about
three percent of the NMFS triennial
bottom trawl survey′s cumulative catchper-unit-effort of darkblotched rockfish
occurs south of 38° N. lat. This
observation of decreased density led to
implementation of a management line at
38° N. lat. that allows slope
management south of 38° N. lat. to be
separated from management actions
needed to rebuild darkblotched, and
allows the severity of management
measures between 40°10′ N. lat. and 38°
N. lat. to be intermediate to those for
areas south of 38° N. lat. and north of
40°10′ N. lat.
Darkblotched rockfish bycatch rates
between 40°10′ N. lat. and 38° N. lat. at
depths greater than 150–fm (274–m) are
considerably lower than those for the
same depth range north of 40°10′ N. lat.
When bycatch rates for darkblotched
rockfish between 40°10′ N. lat. and 38°
N. lat. are compared to bycatch rates
from depths greater than 200 fm (366 m)
north of 40°10′ N. lat., the rates are
similar. Given this information, the
GMT does not recommend greatly
increasing slope and splitnose rockfish
cumulative limits as well as
implementing a shallower trawl RCA,
such as the trawl RCA that is in place
south of 38° N. lat., in the area between
40°10′ N. lat. and 38° N. lat. Cumulative
slope and splitnose rockfish limits on
the order of 20,000 lb (9,072 kg) per 2
months could likely be allowed if the
seaward trawl RCA boundary
approximated the 200–fm (366–m)
depth contour. However, availability of
slope and splitnose rockfish species is
limited at depths greater than 200–fm
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
(366–m). Alternatively, slope and
splitnose rockfish cumulative limits of
8,000 lb (3,628 kg) per 2 months could
be used in conjunction with a seaward
trawl RCA boundary approximating the
150–fm (274–m) depth contour. The
Pacific Council continues to recommend
management measures for this area that
are intermediate in severity to those
used in the areas north of 40°10′ N. lat.
and south of 38° N. lat. After feedback
from the Pacific Council′s Groundfish
Advisory Panel and the trawl industry,
the Pacific Council recommended minor
adjustments to cumulative limits and
the position of the trawl RCA.
NMFS concurs with this
recommendation. Therefore, slope and
splitnose rockfish cumulative limits are
proposed to be increased from 4,000
(1,814 kg) per 2 months to 8,000 lb
(3,628 kg) per 2 months and the seaward
trawl RCA boundary would
approximate the 150–fm (274–m) depth
contour, rather than the 200–fm (366–m)
depth contour for the area between
40°10′ N. lat. and 38° N. lat for 2006.
This regulatory change is expected to
allow trawl fisheries in this area to
access more abundant slope rockfish
species while still maintaining a low
incidental catch of darkblotched
rockfish.
Lingcod
Lingcod has rebuilt quickly in recent
years and is being caught in greater
numbers in a range of fisheries
coastwide. WCGOP data shows that
there is considerable discard of lingcod
in the limited entry bottom trawl fishery
and suggests that allowing increased
retention of lingcod may reduce discard.
In 2005, north of 40°10′N. lat., the
lingcod selective flatfish trawl limit was
800 lb (363 kg) per 2 months for January
through April and September through
December, while it was 1,000 lb (454 kg)
per 2 months for May through July. The
lingcod large and small footrope limits
for 2005 were 500 lb (227 kg) per 2
months. South of 40°10′N. lat., the
lingcod small footrope limit was 800 lb
(363 kg) per 2 months for January
through April and September through
December, and was 1,000 lb (454 kg) per
2 months for May through July. The
lingcod midwater limit south of
40°10′N. lat. was 500 lb (227 kg) per 2
months. In 2005, the lingcod large
footrope limits were the same north and
south of 40°10′ N. lat. While a
substantial increase in lingcod
cumulative limits may encourage
targeting of lingcod and allow
additional bycatch of overfished species
(which tend to reside in areas of similar
rocky habitat), the Pacific Council
believed that a modest increase in
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
lingcod retention could be allowed
without negatively affecting lingcod or
co-occurring overfished species. In 2004
and 2005, lingcod harvest has been well
under its rebuilding OY (by more than
100 mt) and these cumulative limit
increases are not projected to affect total
lingcod mortality but instead change
lingcod discard into landings.
Therefore, the Pacific Council
recommended that lingcod cumulative
limits in the limited entry trawl fishery
be increased to 1,200 lb (544 kg) per 2
months coastwide for all gear types.
NMFS concurs with this
recommendation and proposes to
implement this adjustment.
Canary Rockfish
Based on landings of canary rockfish
in the 2005 fishery and discard rate
estimates from the WCGOP, the
mortality of canary rockfish in the
limited entry bottom trawl fishery is
higher than originally predicted for the
year. In order to reduce mortality of
canary rockfish in the 2006 fishery, the
GMT modeled options expanding the
size of the trawl RCA north of 40°10′ N.
lat. by moving the shoreward boundary
from approximating the 100–fm (183–m)
depth contour to approximating the 75–
fm (137–m) depth contour during
Periods 2 , 3, and 5. This expansion
should reduce the catch of canary
rockfish catch shoreward of the trawl
RCA in areas north of 40°10′ N. lat.
By applying the discard rates from the
WCGOP inseason, it was estimated that
the limited entry trawl fishery had
caught 9.5 mt of canary rockfish by the
end of September 2005. The position of
the trawl RCA (extending between the
250–fm (457–m) depth contour to the
shoreline) from October 1 - December
31, 2005, is anticipated to effectively
keep canary total catch at 9.5 mt
through the end of 2005. Using the
revised bycatch rates from the WCGOP,
including data through April 2005, the
proposed limited entry trawl trip limits
for 2006 would result in an estimated
canary rockfish impact of 7.3 mt. When
these revised bycatch rates are used in
conjunction with 2005 management
measures, the bycatch model is able to
closely approximate the amount of
canary rockfish estimated to be taken
during 2005. However, the updated
model does not include new bycatch
data beyond Period 2 in 2005 and the
Pacific Council and NMFS are still
concerned with the degree of
uncertainty in projections of the catch of
overfished species with selective flatfish
trawl gear. Groundfish fisheries will
continue to be monitored in 2006 and
further inseason adjustments may be
necessary.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
75117
Therefore, the Pacific Council
recommended and NMFS is proposing a
trawl RCA that extends between specific
latitude and longitude coordinates
approximating the 200–fm (366–m)
depth contour to coordinates
approximating the 75–fm (137–m) depth
contour for Periods 2, 3, and 5 north of
40°10′ N. lat. During Period 4, in the
area north of 40°10′ N. lat., the trawl
RCA would extend between coordinates
approximating the 200–fm (366–m)
depth contour and the 100–fm (183–m)
depth contour as was previously
scheduled.
Limited Entry Fixed Gear and Open
Access Fisheries Sablefish Limits North
of 36° N. lat.
In recent years, the sablefish daily trip
limit (DTL) fishery north of 36° N. lat.
has caught substantially less than its
allocation. Therefore, the GMT believes
that some liberalization of sablefish DTL
cumulative limits is warranted. In 2005,
the sablefish limited entry and open
access DTL limits for January through
September were 300 lb (136 kg) per day,
or 1 landing per week up to 900 lb (408
kg), not to exceed 3,600 lb (1,633 kg) per
2 months. These sablefish DTL
cumulative limits were increased for
October through December to 500 lb
(227 kg) per day, or 1 landing per week
up to 1,500 lb (680 kg), not to exceed
9,000 lb (4,082 kg) per 2 months. The
GMT is concerned with the lack of effort
controls in this fishery and
recommended a cautious approach to
increasing its cumulative sablefish
limits. The Pacific Council considered
two options for increasing sablefish DTL
limits. The first option maintained the
previously scheduled daily limit of 300
lb (136 kg) per day, increased the
weekly limit to 1,000 lb (454 kg), and
increased the two month limit to 5,000
lb (2,268 kg). The second option
increased the daily limit to 400 lb (181
kg), increased the weekly limit to 1,200
lb (544 kg), and increased the 2–month
limit to 4,800 lb (2,177 kg). Because
radical changes in effort for this fishery
have historically been driven by
changes in the daily and weekly limit,
there is a greater risk of needing to
restrict the fishery later in the year
associated with the second option. Total
catch in the sablefish DTL fishery can be
managed under either option, but
restricting the fishery later in the year
may result in an inequitable distribution
of catch and revenues because this
fishery starts earlier in southern areas
than in northern areas.
Therefore, the Pacific Council
recommended and NMFS is proposing
sablefish limited entry fixed gear and
open access cumulative limits of 300 lb
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
75118
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
(136 kg) per day, or 1 landing per week
up to 1,000 lb (454 kg), not to exceed
5,000 lb (2,268 kg) per 2 months for the
area north of 36° N. lat.
Shelf, Shortbelly, and Widow Rockfish
South of 34°27′ N. lat.
At its most recent meeting, the Pacific
Council also considered a request to
increase shelf rockfish, shortbelly, and
widow rockfish cumulative limits from
2,000 lb (907 kg) per 2 months to 3,000
lb (1,361 kg) per 2 months for limited
entry fixed gear and from 500 lb (227 kg)
per 2 months to 750 lb (340 kg) per 2
months for open access fixed gear. In
2005, these cumulative limit increases
were implemented inseason for July
through December. After reviewing the
GMT′s analysis of landings during 2005,
the Pacific Council determined that the
requested increase could be
accommodated in 2006.
Therefore, the Pacific Council
recommended and NMFS is proposing a
shelf, shortbelly, and widow rockfish
limited entry cumulative limit of 3,000
lb (1,361 kg) per 2 months and an open
access cumulative limit of 750 lb (340
kg) per 2 months for the area south of
34°27′ N. lat.
Minor Nearshore and Black Rockfish
between 40°10′ N. lat. and 42° N. lat.
In 2005, the minor nearshore and
black rockfish limited entry fixed gear
and open access limits were increased
inseason from 5,000 lb (2,268 kg) per 2
months, no more than 1,200 lb (544 kg)
of which may be species other than
black or blue rockfish, to 6,000 lb (2,722
kg) per 2 months, no more than 1,200
lb (544 kg) of which may be species
other than black or blue rockfish, for
July through December. As with the
previously discussed adjustments to
cumulative limits, the Pacific Council
received a request to continue these
2005 inseason adjustments into 2006. A
review of 2005 PacFIN data revealed no
higher than anticipated catch of black
rockfish, particularly with respect to
black rockfish state harvest guidelines
and commercial/recreational catch
sharing.
Therefore, the Pacific Council
recommended and NMFS is proposing
the minor nearshore and black rockfish
limited entry fixed gear and open access
cumulative limit of 6,000 lb (2,722 kg)
per 2 months, no more than 1,200 lb
(544 kg) of which may be species other
than black or blue rockfish.
Establish Trip Limits for Pacific Cod
and Spiny Dogfish
Recent harvest levels and the
potential for new markets developing off
the West Coast has highlighted the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
potential need for further management
measures, such as trip limits, to control
harvest of Pacific cod and spiny dogfish
in 2006.
Both of these stocks have harvest
specifications (also known as acceptable
biological catch (ABC) and OY) set for
2005 and 2006. Pacific cod has its own
ABC/OY north of 43° N. lat. and Pacific
cod (south of 43° N. lat. only) and spiny
dogfish are included in the ‘‘other fish’’
ABC/OY.
The ABC levels for Pacific cod and
‘‘other fish’’ have been based on
historical landings. When determining
numerical OYs for individual species
and species groups for which the ABC
is based on a non-quantitative
assessment, the Pacific Council may
apply precautionary adjustments. Since
2000, the Pacific Council has adjusted
the OYs for several unassessed stocks to
50 percent of the historical average
catch levels. Although the ABCs for
Pacific cod and ‘‘other fish’’ have been
based on historical landings,
precautionary adjustments were not
used to establish OYs until the 2005–
2006 biennial management cycle.
Neither Pacific cod nor spiny dogfish
has ever been formally assessed on the
West Coast. A formal stock assessment
for West Coast spiny dogfish is
recommended for the next assessment
cycle (2007). Even in the absence of a
formal assessment, life history
information indicates that
characteristics of the spiny dogfish
(slow growing, late maturing, low
fecundity) make it susceptible to
overfishing. Dogfish populations have
been depressed as a result of fishing in
areas of Puget Sound and have been
declared overfished off the U.S. East
Coast. Pacific cod, on the other hand, is
a transboundary stock with most of its
biomass distributed north of the U.S.Canada border. Pacific cod stocks are
depressed off the West Coast of Canada.
In recent years, commercial fishermen
targeting spiny dogfish have been
constrained by their assumed bycatch of
yelloweye and canary rockfish, two
species which have been declared
overfished, and are managed under
rebuilding plans. To provide protection
for these overfished stocks, NMFS
implemented RCAs, which are large
areas closed to fishing with designated
gear types. While there are limited entry
programs in place for trawl and fixed
gear, there is also an open access
fishery, which is allowed to target
groundfish with fixed gear. Since effort
is not limited, the fishery has a potential
to overharvest spiny dogfish and Pacific
cod and/or exceed the projected bycatch
associated with the fisheries inseason,
even with the RCAs in place. To address
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the potential of exceeding the estimated
amounts of canary and yelloweye
rockfish bycatch, which was anticipated
for the open access fishery in 2005, the
NMFS adopted an emergency rule to set
bycatch limits for the directed
groundfish open access fishery. These
limits were originally set at 1.0 mt for
canary rockfish and 0.6 mt for
yelloweye rockfish; these limits were
raised inseason to 3.0 mt of each
species, based on updated projections
using WCGOP data.
Based on the life history
characteristics of spiny dogfish, their
status in other areas, and the lack of
effort control in this fishery, the Council
recommended that NMFS adopt harvest
control regulations (i.e., trip limits),
beginning in 2006. Given that a spiny
dogfish assessment is likely to occur in
2007, the Council decided to set a
separate ABC and OY for spiny dogfish
following the next assessment cycle
(i.e., for the 2009–2010 management
period).
Neither stock has had management
measures, such as trip limits, specified
in the past. This is a potential
management concern given the
conservation issues of these stocks and,
for Pacific cod, 2004 harvests that
approached the 2005 OY. Under the
Pacific Coast Groundfish FMP at 6.2.1,
new routine management measures
must be established through a full
rulemaking process (proposed and final
rule). This action follows the Pacific
Coast Groundfish FMP′s guidance at
6.2.1 for spiny dogfish and Pacific cod.
In order to develop trip limits for
spiny dogfish and Pacific cod, the GMT
did trip frequency analyses for both
species using fish ticket data from the
2000–2004 fisheries. The trip limits
recommended by the Pacific Council
were developed to generally
accommodate current harvest levels on
a two-month cumulative basis. It is
anticipated that, if participation in the
groundfish fishery remains at the
current level, these trip limits would
keep total fishing mortality during each
year within the ABC/OY established for
that year.
In addition, the Makah Tribe has
requested a harvest guideline for Pacific
cod of 350–400 mt to accommodate the
tribal fisheries. While the Makah Tribe
requested and the Pacific Council
recommended a range of 350–400 mt to
be set aside from the Pacific cod OY,
NMFS will implement the more
conservative end of the Pacific Council’s
request for the tribes, 400 mt. Tribal
harvest of Pacific cod was 254 mt in
2003 and 350 mt in 2004, which is a
substantial portion of the harvest off the
northern Washington coast. Currently,
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
this tribal harvest is accounted for in the
overall OY, which is shared by tribal
and non-tribal fisheries. As proposed,
the tribal harvest guideline would be
subtracted from the overall OY, and
would reduce the amount of the
commercial harvest guideline that is
available for non-tribal fisheries. The
proposed trip limits for the non-tribal
fisheries may need to be adjusted
inseason to stay within the non-tribal
portion of the OY.
In 2005, concerns over unanticipated
participants in the open access fisheries,
and the estimated amounts of targeted
species harvest and potential bycatch of
overfished rockfish, were addressed
through bycatch limits for canary and
yelloweye rockfish that were established
for the open access sector through
emergency rule (70 FR 23804, May 5,
2005; revised at 70 FR 38596, July 5,
2005; renewed at 70 FR 65861,
November 1, 2005) and were extended
through May 1, 2006. If trip limits for
spiny dogfish and Pacific cod are
implemented for March through
December 2006, the Pacific Council
recommended that the bycatch limits for
canary and yelloweye rockfish for the
open access sector not be extended into
2006. Thus, if this rule is implemented,
NMFS proposes to remove the bycatch
limits with implementation of a final
rule for this action.
Therefore, the Pacific Council
recommended and NMFS is proposing a
tribal harvest guideline of 400 mt of the
2006 Pacific cod OY, removal of open
access bycatch caps, designating trip
limits as routine for spiny dogfish and
Pacific cod at § 660.370(c), and
establishing trip limits for Pacific cod
and spiny dogfish as follows: (1)
Limited entry trawl trip limits for
Pacific cod coastwide will be 30,000 lb
(13,608 kg) per 2 months in Periods 2
(March-April) and 6 (NovemberDecember) and 70,000 lb (31,752 kg) per
2 months in Periods 3 through 5 (MayOctober); (2) Limited entry fixed gear
and open access trip limits coastwide
for Pacific cod will be 1,000 lb (454 kg)
per 2 months in Periods 2 through 6; (3)
Limited entry trawl, limited entry fixed
gear and open access trip limits for
spiny dogfish coastwide will be 200,000
lb (90,719 kg) per 2 months in Period 2,
150,000 lb (68,039 kg) per 2 months in
Period 3 (May-June), and 100,000 lb
(45,359 kg) per 2 months in Periods 4–
6 (July-December).
At the November Pacific Council
meeting, the Pacific Council also
recommended and NMFS is proposing
that the tribes manage tribal dogfish
fisheries within the non-tribal dogfish
trip limits.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
Tribal Commercial Fisheries
The Makah Tribe is planning a bottom
trawl fishery targeting Dover sole,
longspine thornyheads, shortspine
thornyheads, and sablefish (DTS) for
2006. In order to prosecute a DTS
fishery, the tribes would need a
modification of their current
management regime. Rather than fish
under the current 300 lb (136 kg) per
trip limit of combined thornyhead
species, the Makah Tribe proposes to
operate under the limited entry trawl
trip limits for both shortspine and
longspine thornyheads. The Pacific
Council agreed with this proposal.
Therefore, in addition to the tribal
harvest guideline of 400 mt being
proposed for Pacific cod and the tribal
fisheries for spiny dogfish operating
under trip limits as mentioned above in
the preamble, the Pacific Council
recommended and NMFS is proposing
to allow the tribes to operate under the
limited entry trawl trip limits for both
shortspine and longspine thornyheads.
RCAs
This rule also proposes revisions to
specific latitude and longitude
coordinates that comprise RCA
boundaries. In general, these revisions
correct mistakes such as the
transposition of latitude and longitude
coordinates, single coordinates that are
either incorrect or missing, and single
coordinates that deviate from the depth
contour. Affected RCA boundaries are
the 30–fm (55–m) and 60–fm (110–m)
boundaries around the northern
Channel Islands and the coastwide 150–
fm (274–m) boundary.
Non-Groundfish Trawl RCA
The non-groundfish trawl RCA has, in
the past, generally followed the same
RCA boundary lines as the limited entry
trawl RCA. Therefore, when referring
generally to the ‘‘trawl RCA,’’ it has
meant both limited entry trawl and nongroundfish trawl. However, RCA
boundaries for these two sectors, limited
entry trawl and non-groundfish trawl,
may differ. The trip limit tables for these
sectors, Tables 3 and 5, differentiate the
trawl RCAs by calling those in Table 5
(open access trip limit table), nongroundfish trawl RCA. However, in
Section 660.383 of the regulations, open
access fishery management measures,
the general term ‘‘trawl RCA’’ is used.
Therefore, in order to be more clear,
NMFS proposes to replace the term
‘‘trawl RCA’’ in Section 660.383 with
the term ‘‘non-groundfish trawl RCA.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
75119
Washington’s Recreational Groundfish
Fishery
The Washington Department of Fish
and Wildlife (WDFW) took inseason
action in August 2005 to close the
Washington recreational bottomfish
fisheries seaward of the recreational
RCA, a line approximating the 30–fm
(55–m) depth contour north of
Leadbetter Pt., WA (46°38.17′ N. lat.),
since the canary and yelloweye rockfish
catches were approaching the state′s
recreational harvest targets for those
species. NMFS took conforming action
through the inseason action published
in the Federal Register on October 5,
2005 (70 FR 58066). Because the state
recreational harvest targets are annual
targets that are used to stay within joint
WA/OR annual harvest guidelines, the
Pacific Council recommended that the
prohibition on fishing seaward of a
boundary line approximating the 30–fm
(55–m) depth contour be removed for
the 2006 Washington recreational
fishery, beginning January 1, 2006, but
remain available as an option for
inseason action in 2006 should the
canary or yelloweye rockfish harvest
target be approached.
Therefore, the Pacific Council
recommended and NMFS proposes
removing the prohibition on fishing
seaward of the 30–fm (55–m) boundary
line between the U.S./Canada border
and 46°38.17′ N. lat. (Leadbetter Point,
WA) and maintaining the availability of
that boundary for inseason management
in 2006.
Oregon’s Recreational Groundfish
Fishery
In addition to other bag limit
reductions in 2005, the Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife
(ODFW) took inseason action in July
2005 to reduce the daily recreational
marine fish bag limit from 8 fish to 5
fish to slow the harvest of black
rockfish. ODFW took additional action
in August 2005 to prohibit retention of
cabezon in the recreational ocean boat
fishery, due to attainment of the annual
state harvest guideline for cabezon.
NMFS took conforming action on both
of these items through the inseason
action published in the Federal Register
on October 5, 2005 (70 FR 58066). The
Federal and state harvest guidelines are
set on an annual basis, and the inseason
actions taken in 2005 were in response
to attainment of harvest guidelines set
for the 2005 fishing year. The Pacific
Council recommended that the
recreational bag limit regulations that
were in place in January 2005 be
implemented in January 2006 to allow
fisheries access to available harvest. In
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
75120
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
March 2005, NMFS published an
inseason action (70 FR 16145, March 30,
2005) which, in part, revised the Federal
marine fish species list for Oregon to
match the list used in Oregon state
regulation. Therefore, in addition to the
wording in the January 2005
regulations, NMFS will include the
revised species list in the 2006 Oregon
recreational language. ODFW
anticipates requesting Federal inseason
action on their recreational regulations
in March 2006, pending Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife
Commission approval of regulations
governing the 2006 recreational fishery.
Therefore, the Pacific Council
recommended and NMFS is proposing
recreational groundfish fishery
regulations off of Oregon as they read at
the beginning of 2005, with the
exception that NMFS is maintaining the
revised species list as published in the
Federal Register on March 30, 2005 (70
FR 16145) so that it is clear that
Oregon′s marine fish bag limit also
excludes salmonids, hybrid bass, and
offshore pelagic species.
California’s Recreational Groundfish
Fishery
The Pacific Council recommended a
change in the recreational RCAs south
of 34°27′ N. lat. for 2006 from a closed
shoreward of a boundary line
approximating the 30–fm (55–m) depth
contour and a closed seaward of a
boundary line approximating the 60–fm
(110–m) depth contour (i.e., open
between the 30–fm (55–m) and 60–fm
(110–m) boundary lines) to closed either
seaward of a boundary line
approximating the 30–fm (55–m) depth
contour or closed seaward of a boundary
line approximating the 60–fm (110–m)
depth contour, depending on the
season. This change is expected to
alleviate confusion among recreational
anglers on what depths are closed to
fishing and provide for a more
enforceable depth restriction. The
California Department of Fish and Game
conducted an impact analysis using
projected catch estimates for 2006
(based on 2004 California Recreational
Fisheries Survey estimates). The
analysis indicated that this change will
not significantly increase groundfish
catches in this area during this time
period and will keep the harvest within
the current harvest targets.
In addition, management measures for
recreational fisheries off California in
December 2006 are adjusted to conform
Federal and state regulations for the
recreational RCA between 40°10′ N. lat.
and 36° N. lat. At the Pacific Council′s
April 2005 meeting, the Pacific Council
recommended, in part, that the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
recreational RCA prohibit fishing
seaward of the 20–fm (37–m) depth
contour for July through December.
NMFS inadvertently missed this
recommendation as it applied to
December in the May inseason action
(70 FR 23040, May 4, 2005) and,
therefore, Federal regulations
implemented a recreational RCA
extending between the shoreline and the
EEZ during December.
Therefore, the Pacific Council
recommended and NMFS is proposing
2006 California recreational groundfish
fishery RCA regulations as follows:
(1) Between 40°10′ N. lat. and 36° N.
lat., recreational fishing for all
groundfish (except ‘‘other flatfish’’) is
prohibited seaward of the 20–fm (37–m)
depth contour along the mainland coast
and along islands and offshore
seamounts from July 1 through
December 31; and is closed entirely
from January 1 through June 30 (i.e.,
prohibited seaward of the shoreline).
(2) South of 34°27.00′ N. latitude,
recreational fishing for all groundfish
(except California scorpionfish and
‘‘other flatfish’’) is prohibited seaward
of a boundary line approximating the
60–fm (110–m) depth contour from
March 1 through August 30 and
November 1 through December 31 along
the mainland coast and along islands
and offshore seamounts; recreational
fishing is also prohibited seaward of a
boundary line approximating the 30–fm
(55–m) depth contour from September 1
through October 31; except in the CCAs
where fishing is prohibited seaward of
the 20–fm (37–m) depth contour when
the fishing season is open. Recreational
fishing for all groundfish (except ‘‘other
flatfish’’) is closed entirely from January
1 through February 28 (i.e., prohibited
seaward of the shoreline). Recreational
fishing for California scorpionfish south
of 34°27.00′ N. latitude is prohibited
seaward of a boundary line
approximating the 30–fm (55–m) depth
contour from October 1 through October
31, and seaward of the 60–fm (110–m)
depth contour from November 1 through
December 31, except in the CCAs where
fishing is prohibited seaward of the 20–
fm (37–m) depth contour when the
fishing season is open. Recreational
fishing for California scorpionfish south
of 34°27.00′ N. latitude is closed
entirely from January 1 through
September 30 (i.e., prohibited seaward
of the shoreline).
Reduction to the 2006 Darkblotched
Rockfish OY
In August 2005, the agency received
a Court of Appeals ruling in Natural
Resources Defense Council v. National
Marine Fisheries Service, 421 F.3d 872
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(9th Cir. 2005). The Court of Appeals
reversed an earlier District Court′s
holding that the Agency had not
violated the Magnuson-Stevens Act in
setting its 2002 harvest specifications
for darkblotched rockfish. The Court of
Appeals also remanded the case to the
District Court for any further
proceedings.
At this November 2005 meeting, the
Pacific Council began consideration of
the groundfish harvest specifications
and management measures for 2007–
2008. The Council is next scheduled to
address this issue in April 2006, with
final adoption in June 2006. NMFS will
then publish the Council′s
recommendations for the 2007–2008
harvest specifications and management
measures in the Federal Register for
public notice and comment. The agency
expects to implement the 2007–2008
groundfish specifications and
management measures by January 1,
2007. When considering both the Court
of Appeals ruling and its own schedule
for developing 2007–2008 harvest
specifications and management
measures, the Council recommended
interim measures to address
darkblotched rockfish rebuilding in
2006 and a process for revising all of the
overfished species rebuilding plans for
2007 and beyond.
For darkblotched rockfish in 2006, the
Council asked its GMT to analyze the
expected effects on darkblotched
rockfish of reducing the previously
adopted 2006 OY of 294 mt, using the
conclusions of the 2005 darkblotched
stock assessment, the best available
science. (A draft assessment document
was reviewed in May 2005 by a Councilsponsored Stock Assessment Review
(STAR) Panel, which included two
independent reviewers from the Center
for Independent Experts. Following
changes to the model and document
based on the STAR Panel review, the
assessment was reviewed by the
Council’s Scientific and Statistical
Committee, which recommended the
assessment to the Council at its
September 2005 meeting. At the same
meeting, the Council approved the
assessment.) In order to illustrate the
effects of different OYs on darkblotched
rebuilding, the GMT analyzed a variety
of potential 2006 OYs ranging from 0–
696 mt. The GMT estimated that with a
darkblotched OY of zero, the stock
would be rebuilt by June 2009; with an
OY of 200 mt, the stock would be rebuilt
by March 2010; and with the OY based
on the current harvest rate (OY of 269
mt in 2005 and 294 mt in 2006), the
stock would be rebuilt by June 2010.
Darkblotched rockfish harvest in 2005
was much lower than the available OY
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
due to management measures intended
to protect canary rockfish, which can
co-occur with darkblotched at some
depths and in some areas. The GMT
analysis of a 2006 OY level of 200 mt
is based on the projected estimates of
darkblotched rockfish assuming a
continuation of the currently planned
management measures, which are
intended to constrain the total catch of
all overfished species. At a 2006
darkblotched rockfish OY of 200 mt, the
stock is expected to rebuild to the MSY
level by March 2010. An OY of 200 mt
is not expected to noticeably alter the
economic impacts of the 2005–2006
harvest specifications and management
measures on the public, since
darkblotched rockfish harvest is
projected to already be constrained at
this level by measures intended to
protect canary rockfish.
This action proposes using
Magnuson-Stevens Act authority at
Section 305(c)(2)(B) to implement an
interim measure to reduce the 2006
darkblotched rockfish OY from 294 mt
to 200 mt. The Pacific Council
recommended this reduction in
consideration of the recent 9th Circuit
Court of Appeals decision in Natural
Resources Defense Council v. NMFS,
421 F.3d 872 (9th Cir. 2005). In response
to that decision, the Pacific Council is
developing Amendment 16–4 to revise
all rebuilding time periods to be ‘‘as
short as possible,’’ while taking into
account the status and biology of the
overfished stocks, the needs of the
fishing communities, and the
interaction of the overfished stocks
within the marine ecosystem.
For 2006, the Pacific Council
recommended establishing the
darkblotched OY at 200 mt, which is
based on the most recent information to
derive projections of 2006 catch of
darkblotched (192 mt), assuming the
current restrictive management
measures remain in place. Of the 200
mt, 5.2 mt are anticipated to be taken
during research activity, leaving 194.8
mt available to the commercial fishery.
This revised OY would minimize the
potential that the actual harvest in 2006
could exceed the amount that is
currently estimated to be harvested
under on the current management
regime. In making this recommendation,
the Council rejected a harvest rate of
zero (and corresponding OY of zero)
because it would ignore entirely the
needs of fishing communities and
would have devastating economic
impacts while at the same time reducing
by less than one year the time to rebuild
the stock, relative to an OY of 200 mt.
NMFS agrees with the
recommendation of the Pacific Council.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
It represents a good faith interim step to
maintain, during the development and
implementation for 2007 of a revised
rebuilding period and associated
measures, the darkblotched rockfish
mortality at current levels without
increasing the economic impacts on the
already heavily restricted fishery. NMFS
proposes to implement the reduction via
this proposed rule in order to give the
public the opportunity to comment on
the reduction before it is promulgated as
a final rule. On December 2, 2005,
District Judge Breyer ordered that: this
proposed rule be filed by December 15,
2005; the comment period shall run
through January 15, 2006; and the final
rule shall be filed no later than February
15, 2006. NMFS would intend for the
reduction in the 2006 darkblotched
rockfish OY to be in effect for all of
2006, once implemented.
For 2007 and beyond, the Council
adopted a revised schedule for
developing the 2007–2008 groundfish
harvest specifications and management
measures that includes revisions to all
of the overfished species rebuilding
plans. While developing the 2007–2008
groundfish specifications and
management measures, the Council
intends to develop Amendment 16–4 to
the FMP. Amendment 16–4 would
revise all of the rebuilding plans in the
FMP using the Court of Appeals
guidance to set target dates for
rebuilding plans and associated
allowable harvest levels for overfished
species.
Lingcod Rebuilt
At its October 31 – November 4
meeting, the Council adopted the 2005
groundfish stock assessments that will
be used to derive the 2007–2008 harvest
specifications and management
measures. Council adoption of stock
assessments follows the detailed Stock
Assessment Review panel (STAR)
process, which culminates in Scientific
and Statistical Committee (SSC) review
of the stock assessments and STAR
panel reviews of those assessments. The
SSC makes recommendations to the
Council on the appropriateness of using
the different stock assessments for
management, after which the Council
considers whether to adopt those stock
assessments.
Lingcod was initially declared
overfished in 1999 (64 FR 49092,
September 10, 1999.) The 2005 lingcod
stock assessment estimates that the
coastwide lingcod stock in 2005 is at 64
percent of its unfished biomass level,
with the northern component of the
stock (north of Cape Mendocino, CA) at
87 percent of its unfished biomass level
and the southern component of the
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
75121
stock at 27 percent of its unfished
biomass level. Because lingcod is
managed as a single coastwide stock, the
stock is considered to be rebuilt above
the MSY level, which the FMP sets as
40 percent of a stock′s unfished
biomass. The SSC endorsed the 2005
lingcod stock assessment as the best
available science, and the Council
adopted the assessment for use in 2007–
2008 management.
Based on the recommendations of the
SSC and the Council, this Federal
Register document announces that
NMFS considers the lingcod stock off
the U.S. West Coast to be rebuilt.
Because the 2006 lingcod harvest levels
were set through a biennial management
process based on a 2003 stock
assessment, lingcod harvest in 2006 will
continue to be constrained by the
lingcod rebuilding plan. As the Council
develops Amendment 16–4 to the FMP,
it plans to consider removing the
lingcod rebuilding plan from the FMP.
Classification
NMFS has determined that the
proposed rule is consistent with the
FMP and has preliminarily determined
that the rule is consistent with the
Magnuson-Stevens Act and other
applicable laws and is based on the
most recent data available. The
aggregate data upon which these actions
are based are available for public
inspection at the Office of the
Administrator, Northwest Region,
NMFS, (see ADDRESSES) during business
hours.This action contains a variety of
proposed revisions to management
measures and harvest specifications.
With respect to the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA), all of the
revisions proposed in this action, except
trip limits for Pacific cod and spiny
dogfish, are within the scope of the
analysis conducted for the proposed and
final rules to implement the 2005–2006
groundfish harvest specifications and
management measures. The Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
for the 2005–2006 specifications and
management measures was summarized
in the preamble to the proposed rule
published on September 21, 2004 (69 FR
56550,) at pages 56572–56573, and
concluded that the then proposed action
would have intermediary effects
between the different specifications and
management measures alternatives
considered. The Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis was summarized in
the final rule published on December
23, 2004 (69 FR 77012,) at pages 77025–
77026, and confirmed the conclusions
of the IRFA with regard to the effects of
the action on small entities. A copy of
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
75122
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
this analysis is available from the
Council (see ADDRESSES).
For the management measures that are
new for 2006, trip limits for spiny
dogfish and Pacific cod, NMFS prepared
an IRFA as required by section 603 of
the RFA. The IRFA describes the
economic impact this proposed rule, if
adopted, would have on small entities.
A description of the action, why it is
being considered, and the legal basis for
this action are contained in the
preamble. A copy of this analysis is
available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
A summary of the analysis follows.
The Pacific coast groundfish fisheries,
which include fisheries for spiny
dogfish and Pacific cod, are covered by
the Pacific Coast Groundfish FMP and
developed by the Pacific Council in
collaboration with the NMFS. The
proposed rule would establish
management measures to constrain total
fishing mortality to within harvest
specifications for spiny dogfish and
Pacific cod, and co-occurring species.
These management measures will be
established for the calendar year 2006,
although they are considered within the
context of past management and longterm sustainability of managed fish
stocks. Separate harvest specifications
(ABC/OY) have already been established
for each year, 2005 and 2006;
management measures are intended to
keep total fishing mortality during each
year within the ABC/OY established for
that year.
The management measures in this
proposed rule would constrain
commercial harvests in 2006 to levels
that will ensure the spiny dogfish and
Pacific cod stocks, and co-occurring
species, are maintained at, or restored
to, sizes and structures that will
produce the highest net benefit to the
nation, while balancing environmental
and social values. Currently, there are
no specific effort controls on the Pacific
cod and dogfish fisheries. Although
there is a limited entry program for
Pacific Coast groundfish, there is also an
open access fishery and neither of these
fisheries has specific trip limits. In
response to a potential increase in effort
and capacity from new entrants in the
open access portion of the fishery,
NMFS implemented an emergency rule
in 2005. This rule set bycatch limits in
the directed open access groundfish
fishery, which includes spiny dogfish
and Pacific cod (70 FR 23804, May 5,
2005; revised at 70 FR 38596, July 5,
2005; renewed at 70 FR 65861,
November 1, 2005). These limits were
set to specifically assure that an increase
in effort in the spiny dogfish fishery
would not lead to overfishing on canary
and yelloweye rockfish and thus lead to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
potential closures of economically
important commercial and recreational
groundfish fisheries off the West Coast.
As described in the Environmental
Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/
IRFA, there is not only a concern about
the bycatch of overfished species, but
also about the spiny dogfish and Pacific
cod resources as well. Neither of these
resources has been formally assessed,
while neighboring stocks are depressed
(i.e., Puget sound spiny dogfish and
Canadian Pacific cod). The management
measures in this proposed rule will
ensure spiny dogfish and Pacific cod are
harvested within ABC/OY limits during
2006 and in a manner consistent with
the Groundfish FMP and National
Standards Guidelines (50 CFR 600
Subpart D), using routine management
tools available to the specifications and
management measures process (FMP at
6.2.1, 50 CFR 660.370(c)).
The economic impact of these
management measures for Pacific cod
and spiny dogfish will be shared among
groundfish buyers and commercial
harvesters. It is estimated there are
about 730 groundfish buyers and 1,700
commercial vessels coastwide that may
be affected by these actions. Most of
these entities would likely qualify as
small businesses under the Small
Business Administration′s criteria, with
the exception of fewer than 5 buyers/
processors. The proposed action would
affect commercial fisheries primarily off
the coasts of Washington and Oregon.
The alternatives analyzed for this
action ranged from Alternative 1, status
quo or unlimited trip limits for spiny
dogfish and Pacific cod, to Alternative
3, the most conservative or constraining
trip limits. Alternatives 2 and 2a are
intermediate trip limit levels. The
preferred alternatives, proposed via this
action are Alternative 2 for Pacific cod
and Alternative 2a for spiny dogfish.
Alternatives 2, 2a and 3 vary only
slightly in their trip limit levels and
were structured to maintain current
participation in the fishery without
encouraging new participation. The
alternatives accommodate most of the
recent harvest levels in the fishery, with
Alternative 3 being slightly constraining
to some vessels.
Because the alternatives analyzed for
this action are intended to maintain
current levels of fishery participation
without opening the possibility of largescale new entrants to the fishery, all of
the alternatives are expected to have
little to no impact on current fishery
participants. However, this action could
foreclose opportunity for large vessels
that may wish to enter the fishery in the
future, since the trip limits proposed via
this action are based on harvest levels
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
commonly taken by the current smallersized participating vessels.
All of the management measures in
this proposed rule, except the spiny
dogfish and Pacific cod trip limits, are
within the scope of the EIS prepared for
the 2005–2006 Pacific Coast groundfish
specifications and management
measures. NMFS prepared and EA for
the spiny dogfish and Pacific cod trip
limits which discussed a range of
alternative trip limits which were
considered by the Pacific Council. The
alternatives ranged from Alternative 1,
status quo or unlimited trip limits for
spiny dogfish and Pacific cod, to
Alternative 3, the most conservative or
constraining trip limits. Alternatives 2
and 2a are intermediate trip limit levels.
The preferred alternatives were
Alternative 2 for Pacific cod and
Alternative 2a for spiny dogfish.
Alternatives 2, 2a and 3 vary only
slightly in their trip limit levels and
were structured to maintain current
participation in the fishery without
encouraging new participation. The
alternatives accommodate most of the
recent harvest levels in the fishery, with
Alternative 3 being slightly constraining
to some vessels. No significant
economic impacts are expected for
small entities from this action.
There are no new reporting or recordkeeping requirements that are proposed
as part of this action. No Federal rules
have been identified that duplicate,
overlap, or conflict with the
alternatives. Public comment is hereby
solicited, identifying such rules, if any.
In accordance with E.O. 13175, this
proposed rule was developed after
meaningful consultation and
collaboration with the tribal
representative on the Pacific Council
and tribal officials from the tribes
affected by this action. Under the
Magnuson-Stevens Act at 16 U.S.C.
1852(b)(5), one of the voting members of
the Pacific Council must be a
representative of an Indian tribe with
federally recognized fishing rights from
the area of the Council′s jurisdiction.
The tribal representative on the Council
made a motion to adopt the
management measures in this rule that
would affect tribal fishery participants,
which was passed by the Council.
This proposed rule has been
determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660
Administrative practice and
procedure, American Samoa, Fisheries,
Fishing, Guam, Hawaiian Natives,
Indians, Northern Mariana Islands,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Dated: November 13, 2005.
James W. Balsiger,
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 50 CFR part 660 is proposed
to be amended as follows:
PART 660—FISHERIES OFF WEST
COAST STATES AND IN THE
WESTERN PACIFIC
1. The authority citation for part 660
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In § 660.370, paragraph (c)(1)(i)
introductory text, (c)(1)(ii), and (d) are
revised and paragraphs (c)(1)(iii),
(c)(1)(iv) and (i) are removed to read as
follows:
§ 660.370 Specifications and management
measures.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Trip landing and frequency limits,
size limits, all gear. Trip landing and
frequency limits have been designated
as routine for the following species or
species groups: widow rockfish, canary
rockfish, yellowtail rockfish, Pacific
ocean perch, yelloweye rockfish, black
rockfish, blue rockfish, splitnose
rockfish, chilipepper rockfish, bocaccio,
cowcod, minor nearshore rockfish or
shallow and deeper minor nearshore
rockfish, shelf or minor shelf rockfish,
and minor slope rockfish; DTS complex
which is composed of Dover sole,
sablefish, shortspine thornyheads, and
longspine thornyheads; petrale sole, rex
sole, arrowtooth flounder, Pacific
sanddabs, and the flatfish complex,
which is composed of those species plus
any other flatfish species listed at
§ 660.302; Pacific whiting; lingcod;
Pacific cod; spiny dogfish; and ‘‘other
fish’’ as a complex consisting of all
groundfish species listed at § 660.302
and not otherwise listed as a distinct
species or species group. Size limits
have been designated as routine for
sablefish and lingcod. Trip landing and
frequency limits and size limits for
species with those limits designated as
routine may be imposed or adjusted on
a biennial or more frequent basis for the
purpose of keeping landings within the
harvest levels announced by NMFS, and
for the other purposes given in
paragraphs (c)(1)(i)(A) and (B) of this
section.
*
*
*
*
*
(ii) Differential trip landing limits and
frequency limits based on gear type,
closed seasons. Trip landing and
frequency limits that differ by gear type
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
and closed seasons may be imposed or
adjusted on a biennial or more frequent
basis for the purpose of rebuilding and
protecting overfished or depleted stocks.
To achieve the rebuilding of an
overfished or depleted stock, the Pacific
whiting primary seasons described at
§ 660.373(b), may be closed for any or
all of the fishery sectors identified at
§ 660.373(a) before the sector allocation
is reached if any of the bycatch limits
identified at § 660.373(b)(4) are reached.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Automatic actions. Automatic
management actions may be initiated by
the NMFS Regional Administrator
without prior public notice, opportunity
to comment, or a Council meeting.
These actions are nondiscretionary, and
the impacts must have been taken into
account prior to the action. Unless
otherwise stated, a single notice will be
published in the Federal Register
making the action effective if good cause
exists under the Administrative
Procedure Act to waive notice and
comment. Automatic actions are used in
the Pacific whiting fishery to close the
fishery or reinstate trip limits when a
whiting harvest guideline, commercial
harvest guideline, or a sector′s
allocation is reached, or is projected to
be reached; or to reapportion unused
allocation to other sectors of the fishery.
*
*
*
*
*
3. In § 660.383, paragraph (c)(4) is
revised and paragraph (f) is removed to
read as follows:
§ 660.383 Open access fishery
management measures.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(4) Non-groundfish Trawl Rockfish
Conservation Areas for the open access
non-groundfish trawl fisheries. (i)
Fishing with any non-groundfish trawl
gear in the open access fisheries is
prohibited within the non-groundfish
trawl RCA coastwide, except as
authorized in this paragraph. Trawlers
operating in the open access fisheries
with legal groundfish trawl gear are
considered to be operating in the nongroundfish trawl fishery and are,
therefore, prohibited from fishing in the
non-groundfish trawl RCA. Coastwide,
it is unlawful to take and retain,
possess, or land any species of fish
taken with non-groundfish trawl gear
within the non-groundfish trawl RCA,
except as permitted in this paragraph for
vessels participating in the pink shrimp
and ridgeback prawn trawl fisheries.
Boundaries for the non-groundfish trawl
RCA throughout the year in the open
access fishery are provided in Table 5
(North) and Table 5 (South) of this
subpart and may be modified by NMFS
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
75123
inseason pursuant to § 660.370(c). Nongroundfish trawl RCA boundaries are
defined by specific latitude and
longitude coordinates which are
specified below at §§ 660.390 through
660.394. The non-groundfish trawl RCA
is closed coastwide to open access nongroundfish trawl fishing, except as
follows:
(A) Pink shrimp trawling is permitted
in the non-groundfish trawl RCA, and
(B) When the shoreward line of the
non-groundfish trawl RCA is shallower
than 100–fm (183–m), the ridgeback
prawn trawl fishery south of 34°27.00′
N. lat. may operate out to the 100–fm
(183–m) boundary line specified at
§ 660.393 (i.e., the shoreward boundary
of the non-groundfish trawl RCA is at
the 100–fm (183–m) boundary line all
year for the ridgeback prawn trawl
fishery in this area).
(ii) For the non-groundfish trawl gear
fisheries, non-groundfish trawl RCAs, if
applicable, are generally described in
the non-groundfish trawl gear sections
at the bottom of Tables 5 (North) and 5
(South) of this subpart. Retention of
groundfish caught by non-groundfish
trawl gear is prohibited in the
designated RCAs, except that:
(A) pink shrimp trawl may retain
groundfish caught both within and
shoreward and seaward of the nongroundfish trawl RCA subject to the
limits in Tables 5 (North) and 5 (South)
of this subpart, and
(B) South of 34°27′ N. lat., ridgeback
prawn trawl may retain groundfish
caught both within the non-groundfish
trawl RCA out to 100–fm (183–m) when
the shoreward boundary of the nongroundfish trawl RCA is shallower than
100–fm (183–m) (i.e., the shoreward
boundary of the non-groundfish trawl
RCA is at the 100–fm (183–m) boundary
line all year for the ridgeback prawn
trawl fishery in this area) and shoreward
and seaward of the non-groundfish
trawl RCA subject to the limits in Tables
5 (North) and 5 (South) of this subpart.
(iii) If a vessel fishes in the nongroundfish trawl RCA, it may not
participate in any fishing on that trip
that is prohibited by the restrictions that
apply within the non-groundfish trawl
RCA. [For example, if a vessel
participates in the pink shrimp fishery
within the RCA, the vessel cannot on
the same trip participate in the DTS
fishery seaward of the RCA.] Nothing in
these Federal regulations supercedes
any state regulations that may prohibit
trawling shoreward of the 3–nm state
waters boundary line.
*
*
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
75124
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
4. In § 660.384, paragraphs (c)(1)(i)(B),
(c)(2)(i) and (iii), (c)(3)(i)(A)(2) and (4)
are revised to read as follows:
§ 660.384 Recreational fishery
management measures.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) Recreational Rockfish
Conservation Area. Fishing for
groundfish with recreational gear is
prohibited within the recreational RCA.
It is unlawful to take and retain,
possess, or land groundfish taken with
recreational gear within the recreational
RCA. A vessel fishing in the recreational
RCA may not be in possession of any
groundfish. [For example, if a vessel
participates in the recreational salmon
fishery within the RCA, the vessel
cannot be in possession of groundfish
while in the RCA. The vessel may,
however, on the same trip fish for and
retain groundfish shoreward of the RCA
on the return trip to port.] Off
Washington, if recreational fishing for
all groundfish is prohibited seaward of
a boundary line approximating the 30–
fm (55–m) depth contour, a document
will be published in the Federal
Register inseason pursuant to
§ 660.370(c). Coordinates for the
boundary line approximating the 30–fm
(55–m) depth contour are listed in
§ 660.391.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) Recreational Groundfish
Conservation Areas off Oregon. Fishing
for groundfish with recreational gear is
prohibited within the recreational RCA,
a type of closed area or GCA. It is
unlawful to take and retain, possess, or
land groundfish taken with recreational
gear within the recreational RCA. A
vessel fishing in the recreational RCA
may not be in possession of any
groundfish. [For example, if a vessel
participates in the recreational salmon
fishery within the RCA, the vessel
cannot be in possession of groundfish
while in the RCA. The vessel may,
however, on the same trip fish for and
retain groundfish shoreward of the RCA
on the return trip to port.] Off Oregon,
from June 1 through September 30,
recreational fishing for groundfish is
prohibited seaward of a recreational
RCA boundary line approximating the
40–fm (73–m) depth contour.
Coordinates for the boundary line
approximating the 40–fm (73–m) depth
contour are listed at § 660.391.
Recreational fishing for all groundfish
may be prohibited inseason seaward of
the 20–fm (37–m) depth contour or
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
seaward of a boundary line
approximating the 30–fm (55–m) depth
contour. If the closure seaward of the
20–fm (37–m) depth contour or a
boundary line approximating the 30–fm
(55–m) depth contour is implemented
inseason, a document will be published
in the Federal Register pursuant to
§ 660.370(c). Coordinates for the
boundary line approximating the 30–fm
(55–m) depth contour are listed at
§ 660.391.
*
*
*
*
*
(iii) Bag limits, size limits. The bag
limits for each person engaged in
recreational fishing in the EEZ seaward
of Oregon are two lingcod per day,
which may be no smaller than 24 in (61
cm) total length; and 10 marine fish per
day, which excludes Pacific halibut,
salmonids, tuna, perch species,
sturgeon, sanddabs, lingcod, striped
bass, hybrid bass, offshore pelagic
species and baitfish (herring, smelt,
anchovies and sardines), but which
includes rockfish, greenling, cabezon
and other groundfish species. The
minimum size limit for cabezon
retained in the recreational fishery is 16
in (41 cm) and for greenling is 10 in (26
cm). Taking and retaining canary
rockfish and yelloweye rockfish is
prohibited.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(3) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(2) Between 40°10′ N. lat. and 36° N.
lat., recreational fishing for all
groundfish (except ‘‘other flatfish’’) is
prohibited seaward of the 20–fm (37–m)
depth contour along the mainland coast
and along islands and offshore
seamounts from July 1 through
December 31; and is closed entirely
from January 1 through June 30 (i.e.,
prohibited seaward of the shoreline).
Closures around the Farallon Islands
(see paragraph (c)(3)(i)(C) of this
section) and Cordell Banks (see
paragraph (c)(3)(i)(D) of this section)
also apply in this area.
*
*
*
*
*
(4) South of 34°27.00′ N. latitude,
recreational fishing for all groundfish
(except California scorpionfish as
specified below in this paragraph and in
paragraph (v) and ‘‘other flatfish’’ as
specified in paragraph (c)(3)(iv) of this
section) is prohibited seaward of a
boundary line approximating the 60–fm
(110–m) depth contour from March 1
through August 30 and November 1
through December 31 along the
mainland coast and along islands and
offshore seamounts; and is prohibited
seaward of a boundary line
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
approximating the 30–fm (55–m) depth
contour from September 1 through
October 31; except in the CCAs where
fishing is prohibited seaward of the 20–
fm (37–m) depth contour when the
fishing season is open (see paragraph
(c)(3)(i)(B) of this section). Recreational
fishing for all groundfish (except ‘‘other
flatfish’’) is closed entirely from January
1 through February 28 (i.e., prohibited
seaward of the shoreline). Recreational
fishing for California scorpionfish south
of 34°27.00′ N. latitude is prohibited
seaward of a boundary line
approximating the 30–fm (55–m) depth
contour from October 1 through October
31, and seaward of the 60–fm (110–m)
depth contour from November 1 through
December 31, except in the CCAs where
fishing is prohibited seaward of the 20–
fm (37–m) depth contour when the
fishing season is open. Recreational
fishing for California scorpionfish south
of 34°27.00′ N. latitude is closed
entirely from January 1 through
September 30 (i.e., prohibited seaward
of the shoreline). Coordinates for the
boundary line approximating the 30–fm
(55–m) and 60–fm (110–m) depth
contours are specified in § 660.391 and
660.392.
*
*
*
*
*
5. In § 660.385, paragraphs (b)(2) and
(d) are revised and paragraphs (f) and (g)
are added to read as follows:
§ 660.385 Washington coastal tribal
fisheries management measures.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) The tribe will manage their
fisheries so that fishermen are either
subject to a 300 lb trip limit for
thornyheads or subject to the limited
entry trip limits for thornyheads.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Flatfish and other fish. Treaty
fishing vessels using bottom trawl gear
are subject to the limits applicable to the
non-tribal limited entry trawl fishery for
English sole, rex sole, arrowtooth
flounder, and other flatfish that are
published at the beginning of the year.
Treaty fishing vessels are restricted to a
50,000 lb (22,680 kg) per 2–month limit
for petrale sole for the entire year.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) There is a tribal harvest guideline
of 400 mt of Pacific cod. The tribes will
manage their fisheries within this
harvest guideline.
(g) The tribes will manage their spiny
dogfish fishery within the trip limits for
the non-tribal fisheries.
*
*
*
*
*
6. In § 660.391, paragraph (e) is
revised to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
§ 660.391 Latitude/longitude coordinates
defining the 27 fm (49 m) through 40 fm (73
m) depth contours.
75125
(22) 33°52.79′ N. lat., 120°01.81′ W.
long.;
(45) 34°05.69′ N. lat., 120°25.82′ W.
long.;
(23) 33°52.51′ N. lat., 120°03.08′ W.
long.;
(46) 34°07.24′ N. lat., 120°24.98′ W.
long.;
(24) 33°53.12′ N. lat., 120°04.88′ W.
long.;
(47) 34°06.00′ N. lat., 120°23.30′ W.
long.;
(25) 33°53.12′ N. lat., 120°05.80′ W.
long.;
(48) 34°05.64′ N. lat., 120°21.44′ W.
long.;
(26) 33°52.94′ N. lat., 120°06.50′ W.
long.;
(49) 34°03.61′ N. lat., 120°18.40′ W.
long.;
(27) 33°54.03′ N. lat., 120°10.00′ W.
long.;
(50) 34°03.25′ N. lat., 120°16.64′ W.
long.;
(28) 33°54.58′ N. lat., 120°11.82′ W.
long.;
(51) 34°04.33′ N. lat., 120°14.22′ W.
long.;
(29) 33°57.08′ N. lat., 120°14.58′ W.
long.;
(52) 34°04.11′ N. lat., 120°11.17′ W.
long.;
(30) 33°59.50′ N. lat., 120°16.72′ W.
long.;
(53) 34°03.72′ N. lat., 120°09.93′ W.
long.;
(31) 33°59.63′ N. lat., 120°17.88′ W.
long.;
(54) 34°03.81′ N. lat., 120°08.96′ W.
long.;
(32) 34°00.30′ N. lat., 120°19.14′ W.
long.;
(55) 34°03.36′ N. lat., 120°06.52′ W.
long.;
(33) 34°00.02′ N. lat., 120°19.68′ W.
long.;
(56) 34°04.80′ N. lat., 120°04.00′ W.
long.;
(34) 34°00.08′ N. lat., 120°21.73′ W.
long.;
(57) 34°03.48′ N. lat., 120°01.75′ W.
long.;
(12) 33°56.93′ N. lat., 119°48.00′ W.
long.;
(35) 34°00.94′ N. lat., 120°24.82′ W.
long.;
(58) 34°04.00′ N. lat., 120°01.00′ W.
long.;
(13) 33°56.45′ N. lat., 119°49.12′ W.
long.;
(36) 34°01.09′ N. lat., 120°27.29′ W.
long.;
(59) 34°03.99′ N. lat., 120°00.15′ W.
long.;
(14) 33°58.54′ N. lat., 119°52.80′ W.
long.;
(37) 34°00.96′ N. lat., 120°28.09′ W.
long.;
(60) 34°03.51′ N. lat., 119°59.42′ W.
long.;
(15) 33°59.95′ N. lat., 119°54.49′ W.
long.;
(38) 34°01.56′ N. lat., 120°28.71′ W.
long.;
(61) 34°03.79′ N. lat., 119°58.15′ W.
long.;
(16) 33°59.83′ N. lat., 119°56.00′ W.
long.;
(39) 34°01.80′ N. lat., 120°28.31′ W.
long.;
(62) 34°04.72′ N. lat., 119°57.61′ W.
long.;
(17) 33°59.18′ N. lat., 119°57.17′ W.
long.;
(40) 34°03.60′ N. lat., 120°28.87′ W.
long.;
(63) 34°05.14′ N. lat., 119°55.17′ W.
long.;
(18) 33°57.83′ N. lat., 119°56.74′ W.
long.;
(41) 34°05.20′ N. lat., 120°29.38′ W.
long.;
(64) 34°04.66′ N. lat., 119°51.60′ W.
long.;
(19) 33°55.71′ N. lat., 119°56.89′ W.
long.;
(42) 34°05.35′ N. lat., 120°28.20′ W.
long.;
(65) 34°03.79′ N. lat., 119°48.86′ W.
long.;
(20) 33°53.89′ N. lat., 119°57.68′ W.
long.;
(43) 34°05.30′ N. lat., 120°27.33′ W.
long.;
(66) 34°03.79′ N. lat., 119°45.46′ W.
long.;
(21) 33°52.93′ N. lat., 119°59.80′ W.
long.;
(44) 34°05.65′ N. lat., 120°26.79′ W.
long.;
(67) 34°03.27′ N. lat., 119°44.17′ W.
long.;
(e) The 30 fm (55 m) depth contour
around the northern Channel Islands off
the state of California is defined by
straight lines connecting all of the
following points in the order stated:
(1) 34°00.98′ N. lat., 119°20.46′ W.
long.;
(2) 34°00.53′ N. lat., 119°20.98′ W.
long.;
(3) 34°00.17′ N. lat., 119°21.83′ W.
long.;
(4) 33°59.65′ N. lat., 119°24.45′ W.
long.;
(5) 33°59.68′ N. lat., 119°25.20′ W.
long.;
(6) 33°59.95′ N. lat., 119°26.25′ W.
long.;
(7) 33°59.87′ N. lat., 119°27.27′ W.
long.;
(8) 33°59.55′ N. lat., 119°28.02′ W.
long.;
(9) 33°58.63′ N. lat., 119°36.48′ W.
long.;
(10) 33°57.62′ N. lat., 119°41.13′ W.
long.;
(11) 33°57.00′ N. lat., 119°42.20′ W.
long.;
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
75126
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
(68) 34°03.29′ N. lat., 119°43.30′ W.
long.;
(69) 34°01.71′ N. lat., 119°40.83′ W.
long.;
(70) 34°01.74′ N. lat., 119°37.92′ W.
long.;
(71) 34°02.07′ N. lat., 119°37.17′ W.
long.;
§ 660.392 Latitude/longitude coordinates
defining the 50 fm (91 m) through 75 fm (137
m) depth contours.
(g)The 30 fm (55 m) depth contour
around Santa Catalina Island off the
state of California is defined by straight
lines connecting all of the following
points in the order stated:
(1) 34°09.16′ N. lat., 120°26.31′ W.
long.;
(2) 34°06.69′ N. lat., 120°16.43′ W.
long.;
(17) 33°59.32′ N. lat., 119°55.59′ W.
long.;
(18) 33°57.52′ N. lat., 119°55.19′ W.
long.;
(19) 33°56.10′ N. lat., 119°54.25′ W.
long.;
(20) 33°50.28′ N. lat., 119°56.02′ W.
long.;
(21) 33°48.51′ N. lat., 119°59.67′ W.
long.;
(72) 34°02.93′ N. lat., 119°36.52′ W.
long.;
(3) 34°06.38′ N. lat., 120°04.00′ W.
long.;
(73) 34°03.48′ N. lat., 119°35.50′ W.
long.;
(4) 34°07.36′ N. lat., 119°52.06′ W.
long.;
(74) 34°03.56′ N. lat., 119°32.80′ W.
long.;
(5) 34°04.84′ N. lat., 119°36.94′ W.
long.;
(75) 34°02.72′ N. lat., 119°31.84′ W.
long.;
(6) 34°04.84′ N. lat., 119°35.50′ W.
long.;
(76) 34°02.20′ N. lat., 119°30.53′ W.
long.;
(7) 34°05.04′ N. lat., 119°32.80′ W.
long.;
(25) 33°58.53′ N. lat., 120°20.46′ W.
long.;
(77) 34°01.49′ N. lat., 119°30.20′ W.
long.;
(8) 34°04.00′ N. lat., 119°26.70′ W.
long.;
(26) 34°00.12′ N. lat., 120°28.12′ W.
long.;
(78) 34°00.66′ N. lat., 119°28.62′ W.
long.;
(9) 34°02.80′ N. lat., 119°21.40′ W.
long.;
(27) 34°08.09′ N. lat., 120°35.85′ W.
long.;
(79) 34°00.66′ N. lat., 119°27.57′ W.
long.;
(10) 34°02.36′ N. lat., 119°18.97′ W.
long.;
(80) 34°01.41′ N. lat., 119°26.91′ W.
long.;
(11) 34°00.65′ N. lat., 119°19.42′ W.
long.;
(28) 34°08.80′ N. lat., 120°34.58′ W.
long.; and
(29) 34°09.16′ N. lat., 120°26.31′ W.
long.
*
*
*
*
*
8. In § 660.393, paragraph (h)(157) is
revised to read as follows:
(81) 34°00.91′ N. lat., 119°24.28′ W.
long.;
(82) 34°01.51′ N. lat., 119°22.06′ W.
long.;
(83) 34°01.41′ N. lat., 119°20.61′ W.
long.; and
(84) 34°00.98′ N. lat., 119°20.46′ W.
long.
*
*
*
*
*
7. In § 660.392, paragraph (g) is
revised to read as follows:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
(12) 33°59.45′ N. lat., 119°22.38′ W.
long.;
(13) 33°58.68′ N. lat., 119°32.36′ W.
long.;
(14) 33°56.14′ N. lat., 119°41.09′ W.
long.;
(15) 33°55.84′ N. lat., 119°48.00′ W.
long.;
(16) 33°57.22′ N. lat., 119°52.09′ W.
long.;
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(22) 33°49.14′ N. lat., 120°03.58′ W.
long.;
(23) 33°51.93′ N. lat., 120°06.50′ W.
long.;
(24) 33°54.36′ N. lat., 120°13.06′ W.
long.;
§ 660.393 Latitude/longitude coordinates
defining the 100 fm (183 m) through 150 fm
(274 m) depth contours.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(157) 40°21.90′ N. lat., 124°25.18′ W.
long.;
*
*
*
*
*
9. In part 660, subpart G, Tables 2a
and 2b are revised to read as follows:
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
75127
EP19DE05.000
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
EP19DE05.001
75128
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
75129
EP19DE05.002
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
EP19DE05.003
75130
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
75131
EP19DE05.004
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
EP19DE05.005
75132
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
75133
EP19DE05.006
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
EP19DE05.007
75134
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
75135
EP19DE05.008
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
EP19DE05.009
75136
10. In part 660, subpart G, Tables 3
(both North and South), Tables 4 (both
North and South) and Tables 5 (both
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
North and South) are revised to read as
follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
75137
EP19DE05.010
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
EP19DE05.011
75138
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
75139
EP19DE05.012
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
EP19DE05.013
75140
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
75141
EP19DE05.014
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
EP19DE05.015
75142
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
75143
EP19DE05.016
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
EP19DE05.017
75144
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
75145
EP19DE05.018
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
EP19DE05.019
75146
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
75147
EP19DE05.020
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
75148
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 / Proposed Rules
BILLING CODE 3510–22–C
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:15 Dec 16, 2005
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19DEP1.SGM
19DEP1
EP19DE05.021
[FR Doc. 05–24205 Filed 12–14–05; 3:57 pm]
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 242 (Monday, December 19, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 75115-75148]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-24205]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 660
[Docket No. 051014263-5330-02; I.D. 120805A]
RIN 0648-AU00
Fisheries Off West Coast States and in the Western Pacific;
Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Specifications and Management
Measures
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes a rule to implement revisions to the 2006
commercial and recreational groundfish fishery management measures for
groundfish taken in the U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ) off the
coasts of Washington, Oregon, and California. Proposed management
measures that are new for 2006 are intended to: achieve but not exceed
optimum yields (OYs); prevent overfishing; rebuild overfished species;
and reduce and minimize the bycatch and discard of overfished and
depleted stocks. NMFS additionally proposes to revise the 2006
darkblotched rockfish OY, at the request of the Pacific Fishery
Management Council (Pacific Council), and under the authority of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-
Stevens Act). These actions, which are authorized by the Pacific Coast
Groundfish Fishery Management Plan (FMP) and the Magnuson-Stevens Act,
are intended allow fisheries to access more abundant groundfish stocks
while protecting overfished and depleted stocks. Finally, NMFS
announces with this Federal Register document that the coastwide
lingcod stock is no longer considered overfished and is fully rebuilt.
DATES: Comments on this proposed rule will be accepted through January
15, 2006.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by I.D. 120805A by any
of the following methods:
E-mail: GroundfishInseason6.nwr@noaa.gov. Include the I.D.
number 120805A in the subject line of the message.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Fax: 206-526-4646, Attn: Jamie Goen.
Mail: D. Robert Lohn, Administrator, Northwest Region,
NMFS, Attn: Jamie Goen, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, WA 98115-
0070.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jamie Goen (Northwest Region, NMFS),
phone: 206-526-6140; fax: 206-526-6736; and e-mail:
jamie.goen@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
This Federal Register document is available on the Government
Printing Office's website at: www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/.
Background information and documents are available at the NMFS
Northwest Region website at: www.nwr.noaa.gov/1sustfsh/gdfsh01.htm and
at the Pacific Council's website at: www.pcouncil.org.
Background
The Pacific Coast Groundfish FMP and its implementing regulations
at title 50 in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), part 660, subpart
G, regulate fishing for over 80 species of groundfish off the coasts of
Washington, Oregon, and California. Groundfish specifications and
management measures are developed by the Pacific Council, and are
implemented by NMFS. The specifications and management measures for
2005-2006 were codified in the CFR (50 CFR part 660, subpart G). They
were published in the Federal Register as a proposed rule on September
21, 2004 (69 FR 56550), and as a final rule on December 23, 2004 (69 FR
77012). The final rule was subsequently amended on March 18, 2005 (70
FR 13118); March 30, 2005 (70 FR 16145); April 19, 2005 (70 FR 20304);
May 3, 2005 (70 FR 22808); May 4, 2005 (70 FR 23040); May 5, 2005 (70
FR 23804); May 16, 2005 (70 FR 25789); May 19, 2005 (70 FR 28852); July
5, 2005 (70 FR 38596); August 22, 2005 (70 FR 48897); August 31, 2005
(70 FR 51682); October 5, 2005 (70 FR 58066); October 20, 2005 (70 FR
61063); October 24, 2005 (70 FR 61393); and November 1, 2005 (70 FR
65861).
Acceptable biological catches (ABCs) and OYs are established for
each year. Management measures are established at the start of the
biennial period, and are adjusted throughout the biennial management
period, to keep harvest within the OYs. At the Pacific Council's
October 31 - November 4, 2005, meeting in San Diego, CA, the Pacific
Council's Groundfish Management Team (GMT) considered 2005 catch data
and new West Coast Groundfish Observer
[[Page 75116]]
Program (WCGOP) data and made recommendations to adjust groundfish
management measures for December 2005 and for all of 2006. Those
adjustments were implemented via an inseason action (70 FR 72385,
December 5, 2005). The management measures for the remainder of 2006
(March through December) are being implemented through this proposed
rule.
The following changes to current groundfish management measures for
March through December 2006 were recommended by the Pacific Council, in
consultation with Pacific Coast Treaty Indian Tribes and the States of
Washington, Oregon, and California, at its October 31-November 4, 2005,
meeting in San Diego, CA. The changes recommended by the Pacific
Council include: (1) adjustments to the limited entry fixed gear and
open access sablefish daily trip limit (DTL) fishery north of 36[deg]
N. lat., (2) adjustments to limited entry trawl cumulative limits for
sablefish, thornyheads, Dover sole, other flatfish, petrale sole,
arrowtooth flounder, slope rockfish, splitnose rockfish, and lingcod,
(3) adjustments to limited entry fixed gear and open access cumulative
limits for shelf, shortbelly, and widow rockfish south of 34[deg]27' N.
lat. and minor nearshore and black rockfish between 42[deg] N. lat. and
40[deg]10' N. lat., (4) adjustments to the Rockfish Conservation Area
(RCA) boundaries, (5) adjustments to Washington, Oregon and
California's recreational groundfish fisheries, (6) establishment of
limited entry trawl, limited entry fixed gear, and open access trip
limits for Pacific cod and spiny dogfish, (7) adjustments to the tribal
management measures for Pacific cod, spiny dogfish and thornyheads and
(8) clarification of the non-groundfish trawl rockfish conservation
area (RCA). Pacific Coast groundfish landings will be monitored
throughout the year, and further adjustments to trip limits, RCAs, or
management measures will be made as necessary to allow achievement of,
or to avoid exceeding, OYs.
Limited Entry Trawl Fisheries
The trawl bycatch model was updated with bycatch and discard rates
based on new WCGOP data from September 2004 through April 2005. This
update also incorporated four months of data (January through April
2005) from when selective flatfish gear was required shoreward of the
trawl RCA north of 40[deg]10' N. lat. The GMT used the updated trawl
bycatch model to analyze adjustments to trawl RCA boundaries and
bimonthly limits for target species (sablefish, thornyheads, Dover
sole, petrale sole, other flatfish, arrowtooth, slope rockfish, and
splitnose rockfish) for 2006. Management measures for March through
December are being proposed in this rule.
The Pacific Council recommended adjustments to limited entry trawl
cumulative limits for certain target species coastwide, such as
sablefish, thornyheads, Dover sole, other flatfish, and arrowtooth
flounder, based on projections from the trawl bycatch model. These
adjustments for 2006 are projected to keep harvest within the OYs. NMFS
concurs with this recommendation; and therefore, is proposing adjusted
cumulative limits for these species during March through December 2006
are shown in Table 3 (North) and Table 3 (South). Adjustments to
limited entry trawl cumulative limits for other target species are
described in detail below.
Petrale Sole
In order to avoid exceeding the petrale sole ABC in 2006 and
promote year round fishing opportunities, the Pacific Council
recommended establishing cumulative limits in the bottom trawl fishery
during Period 6 (November through December). In the past, petrale sole
landings were not limited during this period. NMFS concurs with this
recommendation; and therefore, is proposing that north of 40[deg]10' N.
lat., limited entry trawl large and small footrope limits would be
60,000 lb (27,216 kg) per 2 months during November and December. North
of 40[deg]10' N. lat., limited entry selective flatfish trawl limits
would be 25,500 lb (11,567 kg) per 2 months during November and
December. South of 40[deg]10' N. lat., limited entry trawl limits would
be 60,000 lb (27,216 kg) per 2 months during November and December.
In response to higher than anticipated catches of petrale sole in
2005, trawl RCA boundaries were adjusted inseason (70 FR 58066, October
5, 2005) to reduce the catch of petrale sole in Period 6. The
implementation of petrale sole cumulative limits for Periods 1 and 6 of
2006 should prevent these higher than anticipated catches from
reoccurring in 2006. Therefore, the Pacific Council recommended for
2006, to restore the position of the trawl RCA that was initially
scheduled for Period 6 in 2005. NMFS concurs with this recommendation;
and therefore, is proposing the position of the trawl RCA during Period
6 would be defined by coordinates approximating the following depth
contours: (1) north of 40[deg]10' N. lat., it extends between the 200-
fm (366-m), modified to exclude certain petrale sole areas from the
RCA, and the 75-fm (137-m) depth contours; (2) between 40[deg]10' N.
lat. and 34[deg]27' N. lat., it extends between the 150-fm (274-m) and
the 75-fm (137-m) depth contours; and (3) south of 34[deg]27' N. lat.,
it extends between the 150-fm (274-m) and the 75-fm (137-m) depth
contours along the mainland coast and between the 150-fm (274-m) depth
contour and the shoreline around islands.
Slope and Splitnose Rockfish Limits Between 40[deg]10' N. lat. and
38[deg] N. lat.
At the most recent Pacific Council meeting, the GMT considered a
request to liberalize management measures for minor slope and splitnose
rockfish in 2006. The harvest of these species has been constrained in
recent years because they co-occur with darkblotched rockfish, an
overfished rockfish species.
Darkblotched rockfish are not distributed uniformly along the coast
but instead are most concentrated in waters off Washington and northern
Oregon, with a gradient of decreasing density extending south. Only
about three percent of the NMFS triennial bottom trawl survey's
cumulative catch-per-unit-effort of darkblotched rockfish occurs south
of 38[deg] N. lat. This observation of decreased density led to
implementation of a management line at 38[deg] N. lat. that allows
slope management south of 38[deg] N. lat. to be separated from
management actions needed to rebuild darkblotched, and allows the
severity of management measures between 40[deg]10' N. lat. and 38[deg]
N. lat. to be intermediate to those for areas south of 38[deg] N. lat.
and north of 40[deg]10' N. lat.
Darkblotched rockfish bycatch rates between 40[deg]10' N. lat. and
38[deg] N. lat. at depths greater than 150-fm (274-m) are considerably
lower than those for the same depth range north of 40[deg]10' N. lat.
When bycatch rates for darkblotched rockfish between 40[deg]10' N. lat.
and 38[deg] N. lat. are compared to bycatch rates from depths greater
than 200 fm (366 m) north of 40[deg]10' N. lat., the rates are similar.
Given this information, the GMT does not recommend greatly increasing
slope and splitnose rockfish cumulative limits as well as implementing
a shallower trawl RCA, such as the trawl RCA that is in place south of
38[deg] N. lat., in the area between 40[deg]10' N. lat. and 38[deg] N.
lat. Cumulative slope and splitnose rockfish limits on the order of
20,000 lb (9,072 kg) per 2 months could likely be allowed if the
seaward trawl RCA boundary approximated the 200-fm (366-m) depth
contour. However, availability of slope and splitnose rockfish species
is limited at depths greater than 200-fm
[[Page 75117]]
(366-m). Alternatively, slope and splitnose rockfish cumulative limits
of 8,000 lb (3,628 kg) per 2 months could be used in conjunction with a
seaward trawl RCA boundary approximating the 150-fm (274-m) depth
contour. The Pacific Council continues to recommend management measures
for this area that are intermediate in severity to those used in the
areas north of 40[deg]10' N. lat. and south of 38[deg] N. lat. After
feedback from the Pacific Council's Groundfish Advisory Panel and the
trawl industry, the Pacific Council recommended minor adjustments to
cumulative limits and the position of the trawl RCA.
NMFS concurs with this recommendation. Therefore, slope and
splitnose rockfish cumulative limits are proposed to be increased from
4,000 (1,814 kg) per 2 months to 8,000 lb (3,628 kg) per 2 months and
the seaward trawl RCA boundary would approximate the 150-fm (274-m)
depth contour, rather than the 200-fm (366-m) depth contour for the
area between 40[deg]10' N. lat. and 38[deg] N. lat for 2006. This
regulatory change is expected to allow trawl fisheries in this area to
access more abundant slope rockfish species while still maintaining a
low incidental catch of darkblotched rockfish.
Lingcod
Lingcod has rebuilt quickly in recent years and is being caught in
greater numbers in a range of fisheries coastwide. WCGOP data shows
that there is considerable discard of lingcod in the limited entry
bottom trawl fishery and suggests that allowing increased retention of
lingcod may reduce discard. In 2005, north of 40[deg]10'N. lat., the
lingcod selective flatfish trawl limit was 800 lb (363 kg) per 2 months
for January through April and September through December, while it was
1,000 lb (454 kg) per 2 months for May through July. The lingcod large
and small footrope limits for 2005 were 500 lb (227 kg) per 2 months.
South of 40[deg]10'N. lat., the lingcod small footrope limit was 800 lb
(363 kg) per 2 months for January through April and September through
December, and was 1,000 lb (454 kg) per 2 months for May through July.
The lingcod midwater limit south of 40[deg]10'N. lat. was 500 lb (227
kg) per 2 months. In 2005, the lingcod large footrope limits were the
same north and south of 40[deg]10' N. lat. While a substantial increase
in lingcod cumulative limits may encourage targeting of lingcod and
allow additional bycatch of overfished species (which tend to reside in
areas of similar rocky habitat), the Pacific Council believed that a
modest increase in lingcod retention could be allowed without
negatively affecting lingcod or co-occurring overfished species. In
2004 and 2005, lingcod harvest has been well under its rebuilding OY
(by more than 100 mt) and these cumulative limit increases are not
projected to affect total lingcod mortality but instead change lingcod
discard into landings.
Therefore, the Pacific Council recommended that lingcod cumulative
limits in the limited entry trawl fishery be increased to 1,200 lb (544
kg) per 2 months coastwide for all gear types. NMFS concurs with this
recommendation and proposes to implement this adjustment.
Canary Rockfish
Based on landings of canary rockfish in the 2005 fishery and
discard rate estimates from the WCGOP, the mortality of canary rockfish
in the limited entry bottom trawl fishery is higher than originally
predicted for the year. In order to reduce mortality of canary rockfish
in the 2006 fishery, the GMT modeled options expanding the size of the
trawl RCA north of 40[deg]10' N. lat. by moving the shoreward boundary
from approximating the 100-fm (183-m) depth contour to approximating
the 75-fm (137-m) depth contour during Periods 2 , 3, and 5. This
expansion should reduce the catch of canary rockfish catch shoreward of
the trawl RCA in areas north of 40[deg]10' N. lat.
By applying the discard rates from the WCGOP inseason, it was
estimated that the limited entry trawl fishery had caught 9.5 mt of
canary rockfish by the end of September 2005. The position of the trawl
RCA (extending between the 250-fm (457-m) depth contour to the
shoreline) from October 1 - December 31, 2005, is anticipated to
effectively keep canary total catch at 9.5 mt through the end of 2005.
Using the revised bycatch rates from the WCGOP, including data through
April 2005, the proposed limited entry trawl trip limits for 2006 would
result in an estimated canary rockfish impact of 7.3 mt. When these
revised bycatch rates are used in conjunction with 2005 management
measures, the bycatch model is able to closely approximate the amount
of canary rockfish estimated to be taken during 2005. However, the
updated model does not include new bycatch data beyond Period 2 in 2005
and the Pacific Council and NMFS are still concerned with the degree of
uncertainty in projections of the catch of overfished species with
selective flatfish trawl gear. Groundfish fisheries will continue to be
monitored in 2006 and further inseason adjustments may be necessary.
Therefore, the Pacific Council recommended and NMFS is proposing a
trawl RCA that extends between specific latitude and longitude
coordinates approximating the 200-fm (366-m) depth contour to
coordinates approximating the 75-fm (137-m) depth contour for Periods
2, 3, and 5 north of 40[deg]10' N. lat. During Period 4, in the area
north of 40[deg]10' N. lat., the trawl RCA would extend between
coordinates approximating the 200-fm (366-m) depth contour and the 100-
fm (183-m) depth contour as was previously scheduled.
Limited Entry Fixed Gear and Open Access Fisheries Sablefish Limits
North of 36[deg] N. lat.
In recent years, the sablefish daily trip limit (DTL) fishery north
of 36[deg] N. lat. has caught substantially less than its allocation.
Therefore, the GMT believes that some liberalization of sablefish DTL
cumulative limits is warranted. In 2005, the sablefish limited entry
and open access DTL limits for January through September were 300 lb
(136 kg) per day, or 1 landing per week up to 900 lb (408 kg), not to
exceed 3,600 lb (1,633 kg) per 2 months. These sablefish DTL cumulative
limits were increased for October through December to 500 lb (227 kg)
per day, or 1 landing per week up to 1,500 lb (680 kg), not to exceed
9,000 lb (4,082 kg) per 2 months. The GMT is concerned with the lack of
effort controls in this fishery and recommended a cautious approach to
increasing its cumulative sablefish limits. The Pacific Council
considered two options for increasing sablefish DTL limits. The first
option maintained the previously scheduled daily limit of 300 lb (136
kg) per day, increased the weekly limit to 1,000 lb (454 kg), and
increased the two month limit to 5,000 lb (2,268 kg). The second option
increased the daily limit to 400 lb (181 kg), increased the weekly
limit to 1,200 lb (544 kg), and increased the 2-month limit to 4,800 lb
(2,177 kg). Because radical changes in effort for this fishery have
historically been driven by changes in the daily and weekly limit,
there is a greater risk of needing to restrict the fishery later in the
year associated with the second option. Total catch in the sablefish
DTL fishery can be managed under either option, but restricting the
fishery later in the year may result in an inequitable distribution of
catch and revenues because this fishery starts earlier in southern
areas than in northern areas.
Therefore, the Pacific Council recommended and NMFS is proposing
sablefish limited entry fixed gear and open access cumulative limits of
300 lb
[[Page 75118]]
(136 kg) per day, or 1 landing per week up to 1,000 lb (454 kg), not to
exceed 5,000 lb (2,268 kg) per 2 months for the area north of 36[deg]
N. lat.
Shelf, Shortbelly, and Widow Rockfish South of 34[deg]27' N. lat.
At its most recent meeting, the Pacific Council also considered a
request to increase shelf rockfish, shortbelly, and widow rockfish
cumulative limits from 2,000 lb (907 kg) per 2 months to 3,000 lb
(1,361 kg) per 2 months for limited entry fixed gear and from 500 lb
(227 kg) per 2 months to 750 lb (340 kg) per 2 months for open access
fixed gear. In 2005, these cumulative limit increases were implemented
inseason for July through December. After reviewing the GMT's analysis
of landings during 2005, the Pacific Council determined that the
requested increase could be accommodated in 2006.
Therefore, the Pacific Council recommended and NMFS is proposing a
shelf, shortbelly, and widow rockfish limited entry cumulative limit of
3,000 lb (1,361 kg) per 2 months and an open access cumulative limit of
750 lb (340 kg) per 2 months for the area south of 34[deg]27' N. lat.
Minor Nearshore and Black Rockfish between 40[deg]10' N. lat. and
42[deg] N. lat.
In 2005, the minor nearshore and black rockfish limited entry fixed
gear and open access limits were increased inseason from 5,000 lb
(2,268 kg) per 2 months, no more than 1,200 lb (544 kg) of which may be
species other than black or blue rockfish, to 6,000 lb (2,722 kg) per 2
months, no more than 1,200 lb (544 kg) of which may be species other
than black or blue rockfish, for July through December. As with the
previously discussed adjustments to cumulative limits, the Pacific
Council received a request to continue these 2005 inseason adjustments
into 2006. A review of 2005 PacFIN data revealed no higher than
anticipated catch of black rockfish, particularly with respect to black
rockfish state harvest guidelines and commercial/recreational catch
sharing.
Therefore, the Pacific Council recommended and NMFS is proposing
the minor nearshore and black rockfish limited entry fixed gear and
open access cumulative limit of 6,000 lb (2,722 kg) per 2 months, no
more than 1,200 lb (544 kg) of which may be species other than black or
blue rockfish.
Establish Trip Limits for Pacific Cod and Spiny Dogfish
Recent harvest levels and the potential for new markets developing
off the West Coast has highlighted the potential need for further
management measures, such as trip limits, to control harvest of Pacific
cod and spiny dogfish in 2006.
Both of these stocks have harvest specifications (also known as
acceptable biological catch (ABC) and OY) set for 2005 and 2006.
Pacific cod has its own ABC/OY north of 43[deg] N. lat. and Pacific cod
(south of 43[deg] N. lat. only) and spiny dogfish are included in the
``other fish'' ABC/OY.
The ABC levels for Pacific cod and ``other fish'' have been based
on historical landings. When determining numerical OYs for individual
species and species groups for which the ABC is based on a non-
quantitative assessment, the Pacific Council may apply precautionary
adjustments. Since 2000, the Pacific Council has adjusted the OYs for
several unassessed stocks to 50 percent of the historical average catch
levels. Although the ABCs for Pacific cod and ``other fish'' have been
based on historical landings, precautionary adjustments were not used
to establish OYs until the 2005-2006 biennial management cycle.
Neither Pacific cod nor spiny dogfish has ever been formally
assessed on the West Coast. A formal stock assessment for West Coast
spiny dogfish is recommended for the next assessment cycle (2007). Even
in the absence of a formal assessment, life history information
indicates that characteristics of the spiny dogfish (slow growing, late
maturing, low fecundity) make it susceptible to overfishing. Dogfish
populations have been depressed as a result of fishing in areas of
Puget Sound and have been declared overfished off the U.S. East Coast.
Pacific cod, on the other hand, is a transboundary stock with most of
its biomass distributed north of the U.S.-Canada border. Pacific cod
stocks are depressed off the West Coast of Canada.
In recent years, commercial fishermen targeting spiny dogfish have
been constrained by their assumed bycatch of yelloweye and canary
rockfish, two species which have been declared overfished, and are
managed under rebuilding plans. To provide protection for these
overfished stocks, NMFS implemented RCAs, which are large areas closed
to fishing with designated gear types. While there are limited entry
programs in place for trawl and fixed gear, there is also an open
access fishery, which is allowed to target groundfish with fixed gear.
Since effort is not limited, the fishery has a potential to overharvest
spiny dogfish and Pacific cod and/or exceed the projected bycatch
associated with the fisheries inseason, even with the RCAs in place. To
address the potential of exceeding the estimated amounts of canary and
yelloweye rockfish bycatch, which was anticipated for the open access
fishery in 2005, the NMFS adopted an emergency rule to set bycatch
limits for the directed groundfish open access fishery. These limits
were originally set at 1.0 mt for canary rockfish and 0.6 mt for
yelloweye rockfish; these limits were raised inseason to 3.0 mt of each
species, based on updated projections using WCGOP data.
Based on the life history characteristics of spiny dogfish, their
status in other areas, and the lack of effort control in this fishery,
the Council recommended that NMFS adopt harvest control regulations
(i.e., trip limits), beginning in 2006. Given that a spiny dogfish
assessment is likely to occur in 2007, the Council decided to set a
separate ABC and OY for spiny dogfish following the next assessment
cycle (i.e., for the 2009-2010 management period).
Neither stock has had management measures, such as trip limits,
specified in the past. This is a potential management concern given the
conservation issues of these stocks and, for Pacific cod, 2004 harvests
that approached the 2005 OY. Under the Pacific Coast Groundfish FMP at
6.2.1, new routine management measures must be established through a
full rulemaking process (proposed and final rule). This action follows
the Pacific Coast Groundfish FMP's guidance at 6.2.1 for spiny dogfish
and Pacific cod.
In order to develop trip limits for spiny dogfish and Pacific cod,
the GMT did trip frequency analyses for both species using fish ticket
data from the 2000-2004 fisheries. The trip limits recommended by the
Pacific Council were developed to generally accommodate current harvest
levels on a two-month cumulative basis. It is anticipated that, if
participation in the groundfish fishery remains at the current level,
these trip limits would keep total fishing mortality during each year
within the ABC/OY established for that year.
In addition, the Makah Tribe has requested a harvest guideline for
Pacific cod of 350-400 mt to accommodate the tribal fisheries. While
the Makah Tribe requested and the Pacific Council recommended a range
of 350-400 mt to be set aside from the Pacific cod OY, NMFS will
implement the more conservative end of the Pacific Council's request
for the tribes, 400 mt. Tribal harvest of Pacific cod was 254 mt in
2003 and 350 mt in 2004, which is a substantial portion of the harvest
off the northern Washington coast. Currently,
[[Page 75119]]
this tribal harvest is accounted for in the overall OY, which is shared
by tribal and non-tribal fisheries. As proposed, the tribal harvest
guideline would be subtracted from the overall OY, and would reduce the
amount of the commercial harvest guideline that is available for non-
tribal fisheries. The proposed trip limits for the non-tribal fisheries
may need to be adjusted inseason to stay within the non-tribal portion
of the OY.
In 2005, concerns over unanticipated participants in the open
access fisheries, and the estimated amounts of targeted species harvest
and potential bycatch of overfished rockfish, were addressed through
bycatch limits for canary and yelloweye rockfish that were established
for the open access sector through emergency rule (70 FR 23804, May 5,
2005; revised at 70 FR 38596, July 5, 2005; renewed at 70 FR 65861,
November 1, 2005) and were extended through May 1, 2006. If trip limits
for spiny dogfish and Pacific cod are implemented for March through
December 2006, the Pacific Council recommended that the bycatch limits
for canary and yelloweye rockfish for the open access sector not be
extended into 2006. Thus, if this rule is implemented, NMFS proposes to
remove the bycatch limits with implementation of a final rule for this
action.
Therefore, the Pacific Council recommended and NMFS is proposing a
tribal harvest guideline of 400 mt of the 2006 Pacific cod OY, removal
of open access bycatch caps, designating trip limits as routine for
spiny dogfish and Pacific cod at Sec. 660.370(c), and establishing
trip limits for Pacific cod and spiny dogfish as follows: (1) Limited
entry trawl trip limits for Pacific cod coastwide will be 30,000 lb
(13,608 kg) per 2 months in Periods 2 (March-April) and 6 (November-
December) and 70,000 lb (31,752 kg) per 2 months in Periods 3 through 5
(May-October); (2) Limited entry fixed gear and open access trip limits
coastwide for Pacific cod will be 1,000 lb (454 kg) per 2 months in
Periods 2 through 6; (3) Limited entry trawl, limited entry fixed gear
and open access trip limits for spiny dogfish coastwide will be 200,000
lb (90,719 kg) per 2 months in Period 2, 150,000 lb (68,039 kg) per 2
months in Period 3 (May-June), and 100,000 lb (45,359 kg) per 2 months
in Periods 4-6 (July-December).
At the November Pacific Council meeting, the Pacific Council also
recommended and NMFS is proposing that the tribes manage tribal dogfish
fisheries within the non-tribal dogfish trip limits.
Tribal Commercial Fisheries
The Makah Tribe is planning a bottom trawl fishery targeting Dover
sole, longspine thornyheads, shortspine thornyheads, and sablefish
(DTS) for 2006. In order to prosecute a DTS fishery, the tribes would
need a modification of their current management regime. Rather than
fish under the current 300 lb (136 kg) per trip limit of combined
thornyhead species, the Makah Tribe proposes to operate under the
limited entry trawl trip limits for both shortspine and longspine
thornyheads. The Pacific Council agreed with this proposal.
Therefore, in addition to the tribal harvest guideline of 400 mt
being proposed for Pacific cod and the tribal fisheries for spiny
dogfish operating under trip limits as mentioned above in the preamble,
the Pacific Council recommended and NMFS is proposing to allow the
tribes to operate under the limited entry trawl trip limits for both
shortspine and longspine thornyheads.
RCAs
This rule also proposes revisions to specific latitude and
longitude coordinates that comprise RCA boundaries. In general, these
revisions correct mistakes such as the transposition of latitude and
longitude coordinates, single coordinates that are either incorrect or
missing, and single coordinates that deviate from the depth contour.
Affected RCA boundaries are the 30-fm (55-m) and 60-fm (110-m)
boundaries around the northern Channel Islands and the coastwide 150-fm
(274-m) boundary.
Non-Groundfish Trawl RCA
The non-groundfish trawl RCA has, in the past, generally followed
the same RCA boundary lines as the limited entry trawl RCA. Therefore,
when referring generally to the ``trawl RCA,'' it has meant both
limited entry trawl and non-groundfish trawl. However, RCA boundaries
for these two sectors, limited entry trawl and non-groundfish trawl,
may differ. The trip limit tables for these sectors, Tables 3 and 5,
differentiate the trawl RCAs by calling those in Table 5 (open access
trip limit table), non-groundfish trawl RCA. However, in Section
660.383 of the regulations, open access fishery management measures,
the general term ``trawl RCA'' is used.
Therefore, in order to be more clear, NMFS proposes to replace the
term ``trawl RCA'' in Section 660.383 with the term ``non-groundfish
trawl RCA.''
Washington's Recreational Groundfish Fishery
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) took inseason
action in August 2005 to close the Washington recreational bottomfish
fisheries seaward of the recreational RCA, a line approximating the 30-
fm (55-m) depth contour north of Leadbetter Pt., WA (46[deg]38.17' N.
lat.), since the canary and yelloweye rockfish catches were approaching
the state's recreational harvest targets for those species. NMFS took
conforming action through the inseason action published in the Federal
Register on October 5, 2005 (70 FR 58066). Because the state
recreational harvest targets are annual targets that are used to stay
within joint WA/OR annual harvest guidelines, the Pacific Council
recommended that the prohibition on fishing seaward of a boundary line
approximating the 30-fm (55-m) depth contour be removed for the 2006
Washington recreational fishery, beginning January 1, 2006, but remain
available as an option for inseason action in 2006 should the canary or
yelloweye rockfish harvest target be approached.
Therefore, the Pacific Council recommended and NMFS proposes
removing the prohibition on fishing seaward of the 30-fm (55-m)
boundary line between the U.S./Canada border and 46[deg]38.17' N. lat.
(Leadbetter Point, WA) and maintaining the availability of that
boundary for inseason management in 2006.
Oregon's Recreational Groundfish Fishery
In addition to other bag limit reductions in 2005, the Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) took inseason action in July
2005 to reduce the daily recreational marine fish bag limit from 8 fish
to 5 fish to slow the harvest of black rockfish. ODFW took additional
action in August 2005 to prohibit retention of cabezon in the
recreational ocean boat fishery, due to attainment of the annual state
harvest guideline for cabezon. NMFS took conforming action on both of
these items through the inseason action published in the Federal
Register on October 5, 2005 (70 FR 58066). The Federal and state
harvest guidelines are set on an annual basis, and the inseason actions
taken in 2005 were in response to attainment of harvest guidelines set
for the 2005 fishing year. The Pacific Council recommended that the
recreational bag limit regulations that were in place in January 2005
be implemented in January 2006 to allow fisheries access to available
harvest. In
[[Page 75120]]
March 2005, NMFS published an inseason action (70 FR 16145, March 30,
2005) which, in part, revised the Federal marine fish species list for
Oregon to match the list used in Oregon state regulation. Therefore, in
addition to the wording in the January 2005 regulations, NMFS will
include the revised species list in the 2006 Oregon recreational
language. ODFW anticipates requesting Federal inseason action on their
recreational regulations in March 2006, pending Oregon Department of
Fish and Wildlife Commission approval of regulations governing the 2006
recreational fishery.
Therefore, the Pacific Council recommended and NMFS is proposing
recreational groundfish fishery regulations off of Oregon as they read
at the beginning of 2005, with the exception that NMFS is maintaining
the revised species list as published in the Federal Register on March
30, 2005 (70 FR 16145) so that it is clear that Oregon's marine fish
bag limit also excludes salmonids, hybrid bass, and offshore pelagic
species.
California's Recreational Groundfish Fishery
The Pacific Council recommended a change in the recreational RCAs
south of 34[deg]27' N. lat. for 2006 from a closed shoreward of a
boundary line approximating the 30-fm (55-m) depth contour and a closed
seaward of a boundary line approximating the 60-fm (110-m) depth
contour (i.e., open between the 30-fm (55-m) and 60-fm (110-m) boundary
lines) to closed either seaward of a boundary line approximating the
30-fm (55-m) depth contour or closed seaward of a boundary line
approximating the 60-fm (110-m) depth contour, depending on the season.
This change is expected to alleviate confusion among recreational
anglers on what depths are closed to fishing and provide for a more
enforceable depth restriction. The California Department of Fish and
Game conducted an impact analysis using projected catch estimates for
2006 (based on 2004 California Recreational Fisheries Survey
estimates). The analysis indicated that this change will not
significantly increase groundfish catches in this area during this time
period and will keep the harvest within the current harvest targets.
In addition, management measures for recreational fisheries off
California in December 2006 are adjusted to conform Federal and state
regulations for the recreational RCA between 40[deg]10' N. lat. and
36[deg] N. lat. At the Pacific Council's April 2005 meeting, the
Pacific Council recommended, in part, that the recreational RCA
prohibit fishing seaward of the 20-fm (37-m) depth contour for July
through December. NMFS inadvertently missed this recommendation as it
applied to December in the May inseason action (70 FR 23040, May 4,
2005) and, therefore, Federal regulations implemented a recreational
RCA extending between the shoreline and the EEZ during December.
Therefore, the Pacific Council recommended and NMFS is proposing
2006 California recreational groundfish fishery RCA regulations as
follows:
(1) Between 40[deg]10' N. lat. and 36[deg] N. lat., recreational
fishing for all groundfish (except ``other flatfish'') is prohibited
seaward of the 20-fm (37-m) depth contour along the mainland coast and
along islands and offshore seamounts from July 1 through December 31;
and is closed entirely from January 1 through June 30 (i.e., prohibited
seaward of the shoreline).
(2) South of 34[deg]27.00' N. latitude, recreational fishing for
all groundfish (except California scorpionfish and ``other flatfish'')
is prohibited seaward of a boundary line approximating the 60-fm (110-
m) depth contour from March 1 through August 30 and November 1 through
December 31 along the mainland coast and along islands and offshore
seamounts; recreational fishing is also prohibited seaward of a
boundary line approximating the 30-fm (55-m) depth contour from
September 1 through October 31; except in the CCAs where fishing is
prohibited seaward of the 20-fm (37-m) depth contour when the fishing
season is open. Recreational fishing for all groundfish (except ``other
flatfish'') is closed entirely from January 1 through February 28
(i.e., prohibited seaward of the shoreline). Recreational fishing for
California scorpionfish south of 34[deg]27.00' N. latitude is
prohibited seaward of a boundary line approximating the 30-fm (55-m)
depth contour from October 1 through October 31, and seaward of the 60-
fm (110-m) depth contour from November 1 through December 31, except in
the CCAs where fishing is prohibited seaward of the 20-fm (37-m) depth
contour when the fishing season is open. Recreational fishing for
California scorpionfish south of 34[deg]27.00' N. latitude is closed
entirely from January 1 through September 30 (i.e., prohibited seaward
of the shoreline).
Reduction to the 2006 Darkblotched Rockfish OY
In August 2005, the agency received a Court of Appeals ruling in
Natural Resources Defense Council v. National Marine Fisheries Service,
421 F.3d 872 (9th Cir. 2005). The Court of Appeals reversed an earlier
District Court's holding that the Agency had not violated the Magnuson-
Stevens Act in setting its 2002 harvest specifications for darkblotched
rockfish. The Court of Appeals also remanded the case to the District
Court for any further proceedings.
At this November 2005 meeting, the Pacific Council began
consideration of the groundfish harvest specifications and management
measures for 2007-2008. The Council is next scheduled to address this
issue in April 2006, with final adoption in June 2006. NMFS will then
publish the Council's recommendations for the 2007-2008 harvest
specifications and management measures in the Federal Register for
public notice and comment. The agency expects to implement the 2007-
2008 groundfish specifications and management measures by January 1,
2007. When considering both the Court of Appeals ruling and its own
schedule for developing 2007-2008 harvest specifications and management
measures, the Council recommended interim measures to address
darkblotched rockfish rebuilding in 2006 and a process for revising all
of the overfished species rebuilding plans for 2007 and beyond.
For darkblotched rockfish in 2006, the Council asked its GMT to
analyze the expected effects on darkblotched rockfish of reducing the
previously adopted 2006 OY of 294 mt, using the conclusions of the 2005
darkblotched stock assessment, the best available science. (A draft
assessment document was reviewed in May 2005 by a Council-sponsored
Stock Assessment Review (STAR) Panel, which included two independent
reviewers from the Center for Independent Experts. Following changes to
the model and document based on the STAR Panel review, the assessment
was reviewed by the Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee,
which recommended the assessment to the Council at its September 2005
meeting. At the same meeting, the Council approved the assessment.) In
order to illustrate the effects of different OYs on darkblotched
rebuilding, the GMT analyzed a variety of potential 2006 OYs ranging
from 0-696 mt. The GMT estimated that with a darkblotched OY of zero,
the stock would be rebuilt by June 2009; with an OY of 200 mt, the
stock would be rebuilt by March 2010; and with the OY based on the
current harvest rate (OY of 269 mt in 2005 and 294 mt in 2006), the
stock would be rebuilt by June 2010.
Darkblotched rockfish harvest in 2005 was much lower than the
available OY
[[Page 75121]]
due to management measures intended to protect canary rockfish, which
can co-occur with darkblotched at some depths and in some areas. The
GMT analysis of a 2006 OY level of 200 mt is based on the projected
estimates of darkblotched rockfish assuming a continuation of the
currently planned management measures, which are intended to constrain
the total catch of all overfished species. At a 2006 darkblotched
rockfish OY of 200 mt, the stock is expected to rebuild to the MSY
level by March 2010. An OY of 200 mt is not expected to noticeably
alter the economic impacts of the 2005-2006 harvest specifications and
management measures on the public, since darkblotched rockfish harvest
is projected to already be constrained at this level by measures
intended to protect canary rockfish.
This action proposes using Magnuson-Stevens Act authority at
Section 305(c)(2)(B) to implement an interim measure to reduce the 2006
darkblotched rockfish OY from 294 mt to 200 mt. The Pacific Council
recommended this reduction in consideration of the recent 9th Circuit
Court of Appeals decision in Natural Resources Defense Council v. NMFS,
421 F.3d 872 (9th Cir. 2005). In response to that decision, the Pacific
Council is developing Amendment 16-4 to revise all rebuilding time
periods to be ``as short as possible,'' while taking into account the
status and biology of the overfished stocks, the needs of the fishing
communities, and the interaction of the overfished stocks within the
marine ecosystem.
For 2006, the Pacific Council recommended establishing the
darkblotched OY at 200 mt, which is based on the most recent
information to derive projections of 2006 catch of darkblotched (192
mt), assuming the current restrictive management measures remain in
place. Of the 200 mt, 5.2 mt are anticipated to be taken during
research activity, leaving 194.8 mt available to the commercial
fishery. This revised OY would minimize the potential that the actual
harvest in 2006 could exceed the amount that is currently estimated to
be harvested under on the current management regime. In making this
recommendation, the Council rejected a harvest rate of zero (and
corresponding OY of zero) because it would ignore entirely the needs of
fishing communities and would have devastating economic impacts while
at the same time reducing by less than one year the time to rebuild the
stock, relative to an OY of 200 mt.
NMFS agrees with the recommendation of the Pacific Council. It
represents a good faith interim step to maintain, during the
development and implementation for 2007 of a revised rebuilding period
and associated measures, the darkblotched rockfish mortality at current
levels without increasing the economic impacts on the already heavily
restricted fishery. NMFS proposes to implement the reduction via this
proposed rule in order to give the public the opportunity to comment on
the reduction before it is promulgated as a final rule. On December 2,
2005, District Judge Breyer ordered that: this proposed rule be filed
by December 15, 2005; the comment period shall run through January 15,
2006; and the final rule shall be filed no later than February 15,
2006. NMFS would intend for the reduction in the 2006 darkblotched
rockfish OY to be in effect for all of 2006, once implemented.
For 2007 and beyond, the Council adopted a revised schedule for
developing the 2007-2008 groundfish harvest specifications and
management measures that includes revisions to all of the overfished
species rebuilding plans. While developing the 2007-2008 groundfish
specifications and management measures, the Council intends to develop
Amendment 16-4 to the FMP. Amendment 16-4 would revise all of the
rebuilding plans in the FMP using the Court of Appeals guidance to set
target dates for rebuilding plans and associated allowable harvest
levels for overfished species.
Lingcod Rebuilt
At its October 31 - November 4 meeting, the Council adopted the
2005 groundfish stock assessments that will be used to derive the 2007-
2008 harvest specifications and management measures. Council adoption
of stock assessments follows the detailed Stock Assessment Review panel
(STAR) process, which culminates in Scientific and Statistical
Committee (SSC) review of the stock assessments and STAR panel reviews
of those assessments. The SSC makes recommendations to the Council on
the appropriateness of using the different stock assessments for
management, after which the Council considers whether to adopt those
stock assessments.
Lingcod was initially declared overfished in 1999 (64 FR 49092,
September 10, 1999.) The 2005 lingcod stock assessment estimates that
the coastwide lingcod stock in 2005 is at 64 percent of its unfished
biomass level, with the northern component of the stock (north of Cape
Mendocino, CA) at 87 percent of its unfished biomass level and the
southern component of the stock at 27 percent of its unfished biomass
level. Because lingcod is managed as a single coastwide stock, the
stock is considered to be rebuilt above the MSY level, which the FMP
sets as 40 percent of a stock's unfished biomass. The SSC endorsed the
2005 lingcod stock assessment as the best available science, and the
Council adopted the assessment for use in 2007-2008 management.
Based on the recommendations of the SSC and the Council, this
Federal Register document announces that NMFS considers the lingcod
stock off the U.S. West Coast to be rebuilt. Because the 2006 lingcod
harvest levels were set through a biennial management process based on
a 2003 stock assessment, lingcod harvest in 2006 will continue to be
constrained by the lingcod rebuilding plan. As the Council develops
Amendment 16-4 to the FMP, it plans to consider removing the lingcod
rebuilding plan from the FMP.
Classification
NMFS has determined that the proposed rule is consistent with the
FMP and has preliminarily determined that the rule is consistent with
the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws and is based on the
most recent data available. The aggregate data upon which these actions
are based are available for public inspection at the Office of the
Administrator, Northwest Region, NMFS, (see ADDRESSES) during business
hours.This action contains a variety of proposed revisions to
management measures and harvest specifications. With respect to the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), all of the revisions proposed in this
action, except trip limits for Pacific cod and spiny dogfish, are
within the scope of the analysis conducted for the proposed and final
rules to implement the 2005-2006 groundfish harvest specifications and
management measures. The Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
for the 2005-2006 specifications and management measures was summarized
in the preamble to the proposed rule published on September 21, 2004
(69 FR 56550,) at pages 56572-56573, and concluded that the then
proposed action would have intermediary effects between the different
specifications and management measures alternatives considered. The
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis was summarized in the final rule
published on December 23, 2004 (69 FR 77012,) at pages 77025-77026, and
confirmed the conclusions of the IRFA with regard to the effects of the
action on small entities. A copy of
[[Page 75122]]
this analysis is available from the Council (see ADDRESSES).
For the management measures that are new for 2006, trip limits for
spiny dogfish and Pacific cod, NMFS prepared an IRFA as required by
section 603 of the RFA. The IRFA describes the economic impact this
proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A description
of the action, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for this
action are contained in the preamble. A copy of this analysis is
available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). A summary of the analysis follows.
The Pacific coast groundfish fisheries, which include fisheries for
spiny dogfish and Pacific cod, are covered by the Pacific Coast
Groundfish FMP and developed by the Pacific Council in collaboration
with the NMFS. The proposed rule would establish management measures to
constrain total fishing mortality to within harvest specifications for
spiny dogfish and Pacific cod, and co-occurring species. These
management measures will be established for the calendar year 2006,
although they are considered within the context of past management and
long-term sustainability of managed fish stocks. Separate harvest
specifications (ABC/OY) have already been established for each year,
2005 and 2006; management measures are intended to keep total fishing
mortality during each year within the ABC/OY established for that year.
The management measures in this proposed rule would constrain
commercial harvests in 2006 to levels that will ensure the spiny
dogfish and Pacific cod stocks, and co-occurring species, are
maintained at, or restored to, sizes and structures that will produce
the highest net benefit to the nation, while balancing environmental
and social values. Currently, there are no specific effort controls on
the Pacific cod and dogfish fisheries. Although there is a limited
entry program for Pacific Coast groundfish, there is also an open
access fishery and neither of these fisheries has specific trip limits.
In response to a potential increase in effort and capacity from new
entrants in the open access portion of the fishery, NMFS implemented an
emergency rule in 2005. This rule set bycatch limits in the directed
open access groundfish fishery, which includes spiny dogfish and
Pacific cod (70 FR 23804, May 5, 2005; revised at 70 FR 38596, July 5,
2005; renewed at 70 FR 65861, November 1, 2005). These limits were set
to specifically assure that an increase in effort in the spiny dogfish
fishery would not lead to overfishing on canary and yelloweye rockfish
and thus lead to potential closures of economically important
commercial and recreational groundfish fisheries off the West Coast. As
described in the Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/
IRFA, there is not only a concern about the bycatch of overfished
species, but also about the spiny dogfish and Pacific cod resources as
well. Neither of these resources has been formally assessed, while
neighboring stocks are depressed (i.e., Puget sound spiny dogfish and
Canadian Pacific cod). The management measures in this proposed rule
will ensure spiny dogfish and Pacific cod are harvested within ABC/OY
limits during 2006 and in a manner consistent with the Groundfish FMP
and National Standards Guidelines (50 CFR 600 Subpart D), using routine
management tools available to the specifications and management
measures process (FMP at 6.2.1, 50 CFR 660.370(c)).
The economic impact of these management measures for Pacific cod
and spiny dogfish will be shared among groundfish buyers and commercial
harvesters. It is estimated there are about 730 groundfish buyers and
1,700 commercial vessels coastwide that may be affected by these
actions. Most of these entities would likely qualify as small
businesses under the Small Business Administration's criteria, with the
exception of fewer than 5 buyers/processors. The proposed action would
affect commercial fisheries primarily off the coasts of Washington and
Oregon.
The alternatives analyzed for this action ranged from Alternative
1, status quo or unlimited trip limits for spiny dogfish and Pacific
cod, to Alternative 3, the most conservative or constraining trip
limits. Alternatives 2 and 2a are intermediate trip limit levels. The
preferred alternatives, proposed via this action are Alternative 2 for
Pacific cod and Alternative 2a for spiny dogfish. Alternatives 2, 2a
and 3 vary only slightly in their trip limit levels and were structured
to maintain current participation in the fishery without encouraging
new participation. The alternatives accommodate most of the recent
harvest levels in the fishery, with Alternative 3 being slightly
constraining to some vessels.
Because the alternatives analyzed for this action are intended to
maintain current levels of fishery participation without opening the
possibility of large-scale new entrants to the fishery, all of the
alternatives are expected to have little to no impact on current
fishery participants. However, this action could foreclose opportunity
for large vessels that may wish to enter the fishery in the future,
since the trip limits proposed via this action are based on harvest
levels commonly taken by the current smaller-sized participating
vessels.
All of the management measures in this proposed rule, except the
spiny dogfish and Pacific cod trip limits, are within the scope of the
EIS prepared for the 2005-2006 Pacific Coast groundfish specifications
and management measures. NMFS prepared and EA for the spiny dogfish and
Pacific cod trip limits which discussed a range of alternative trip
limits which were considered by the Pacific Council. The alternatives
ranged from Alternative 1, status quo or unlimited trip limits for
spiny dogfish and Pacific cod, to Alternative 3, the most conservative
or constraining trip limits. Alternatives 2 and 2a are intermediate
trip limit levels. The preferred alternatives were Alternative 2 for
Pacific cod and Alternative 2a for spiny dogfish. Alternatives 2, 2a
and 3 vary only slightly in their trip limit levels and were structured
to maintain current participation in the fishery without encouraging
new participation. The alternatives accommodate most of the recent
harvest levels in the fishery, with Alternative 3 being slightly
constraining to some vessels. No significant economic impacts are
expected for small entities from this action.
There are no new reporting or record-keeping requirements that are
proposed as part of this action. No Federal rules have been identified
that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the alternatives. Public
comment is hereby solicited, identifying such rules, if any.
In accordance with E.O. 13175, this proposed rule was developed
after meaningful consultation and collaboration with the tribal
representative on the Pacific Council and tribal officials from the
tribes affected by this action. Under the Magnuson-Stevens Act at 16
U.S.C. 1852(b)(5), one of the voting members of the Pacific Council
must be a representative of an Indian tribe with federally recognized
fishing rights from the area of the Council's jurisdiction. The tribal
representative on the Council made a motion to adopt the management
measures in this rule that would affect tribal fishery participants,
which was passed by the Council.
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660
Administrative practice and procedure, American Samoa, Fisheries,
Fishing, Guam, Hawaiian Natives, Indians, Northern Mariana Islands,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
[[Page 75123]]
Dated: November 13, 2005.
James W. Balsiger,
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National
Marine Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 660 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 660--FISHERIES OFF WEST COAST STATES AND IN THE WESTERN
PACIFIC
1. The authority citation for part 660 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In Sec. 660.370, paragraph (c)(1)(i) introductory text,
(c)(1)(ii), and (d) are revised and paragraphs (c)(1)(iii), (c)(1)(iv)
and (i) are removed to read as follows:
Sec. 660.370 Specifications and management measures.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Trip landing and frequency limits, size limits, all gear. Trip
landing and frequency limits have been designated as routine for the
following species or species groups: widow rockfish, canary rockfish,
yellowtail rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, yelloweye rockfish, black
rockfish, blue rockfish, splitnose rockfish, chilipepper rockfish,
bocaccio, cowcod, minor nearshore rockfish or shallow and deeper minor
nearshore rockfish, shelf or minor shelf rockfish, and minor slope
rockfish; DTS complex which is composed of Dover sole, sablefish,
shortspine thornyheads, and longspine thornyheads; petrale sole, rex
sole, arrowtooth flounder, Pacific sanddabs, and the flatfish complex,
which is composed of those species plus any other flatfish species
listed at Sec. 660.302; Pacific whiting; lingcod; Pacific cod; spiny
dogfish; and ``other fish'' as a complex consisting of all groundfish
species listed at Sec. 660.302 and not otherwise listed as a distinct
species or species group. Size limits have been designated as routine
for sablefish and lingcod. Trip landing and frequency limits and size
limits for species with those limits designated as routine may be
imposed or adjusted on a biennial or more frequent basis for the
purpose of keeping landings within the harvest levels announced by
NMFS, and for the other purposes given in paragraphs (c)(1)(i)(A) and
(B) of this section.
* * * * *
(ii) Differential trip landing limits and frequency limits based on
gear type, closed seasons. Trip landing and frequency limits that
differ by gear type and closed seasons may be imposed or adjusted on a
biennial or more frequent basis for the purpose of rebuilding and
protecting overfished or depleted stocks. To achieve the rebuilding of
an overfished or depleted stock, the Pacific whiting primary seasons
described at Sec. 660.373(b), may be closed for any or all of the
fishery sectors identified at Sec. 660.373(a) before the sector
allocation is reached if any of the bycatch limits identified at Sec.
660.373(b)(4) are reached.
* * * * *
(d) Automatic actions. Automatic management actions may be
initiated by the NMFS Regional Administrator without prior public
notice, opportunity to comment, or a Council meeting. These actions are
nondiscretionary, and the impacts must have been taken into account
prior to the action. Unless otherwise stated, a single notice will be
published in the Federal Register making the action effective if good
cause exists under the Administrative Procedure Act to waive notice and
comment. Automatic actions are used in the Pacific whiting fishery to
close the fishery or reinstate trip limits when a whiting harvest
guideline, commercial harvest guideline, or a sector's allocation is
reached, or is projected to be reached; or to reapportion unused
allocation to other sectors of the fishery.
* * * * *
3. In Sec. 660.383, paragraph (c)(4) is revised and paragraph (f)
is removed to read as follows:
Sec. 660.383 Open access fishery management measures.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(4) Non-groundfish Trawl Rockfish Conservation Areas for the open
access non-groundfish trawl fisheries. (i) Fishing with any non-
groundfish trawl gear in the open access fisheries is prohibited within
the non-groundfish trawl RCA coastwide, except as authorized in this
paragraph. Trawlers operating in the open access fisheries with legal
groundfish trawl gear are considered to be operating in the non-
groundfish trawl fishery and are, therefore, prohibited from fishing in
the non-groundfish trawl RCA. Coastwide, it is unlawful to take and
retain, possess, or land any species of fish taken with non-groundfish
trawl gear within the non-groundfish trawl RCA, except as permitted in
this paragraph for vessels participating in the pink shrimp and
ridgeback prawn trawl fisheries. Boundaries for the non-groundfish
trawl RCA throughout the year in the open access fishery are provided
in Table 5 (North) and Table 5 (South) of this subpart and may be
modified by NMFS inseason pursuant to Sec. 660.370(c). Non-groundfish
trawl RCA boundaries are defined by specific latitude and longitude
coordinates which are specified below at Sec. Sec. 660.390 through
660.394. The non-groundfish trawl RCA is closed coastwide to open
access non-groundfish trawl fishing, except as follows:
(A) Pink shrimp trawling is permitted in the non-groundfish trawl
RCA, and
(B) When the shoreward line of the non-groundfish trawl RCA is
shallower than 100-fm (183-m), the ridgeback prawn trawl fishery south
of 34[deg]27.00' N. lat. may operate out to the 100-fm (183-m) boundary
line specified at Sec. 660.393 (i.e., the shoreward boundary of the
non-groundfish trawl RCA is at the 100-fm (183-m) boundary line all
year for the ridgeback prawn trawl fishery in this area).
(ii) For the non-groundfish trawl gear fisheries, non-groundfish
trawl RCAs, if applicable, are generally described in the non-
groundfish trawl gear sections at the bottom of Tables 5 (North) and 5
(South) of this subpart. Retention of groundfish caught by non-
groundfish trawl gear is prohibited in the designated RCAs, except
that:
(A) pink shrimp trawl may retain groundfish caught both within and
shoreward and seaward of the non-groundfish trawl RCA subject to the
limits in Tables 5 (North) and 5 (South) of this subpart, and
(B) South of 34[deg]27' N. lat., ridgeback prawn trawl may retain
groundfish caught both within the non-groundfish trawl RCA out to 100-
fm (183-m) when the shoreward boundary of the non-groundfish trawl RCA
is shallower than 100-fm (183-m) (i.e., the shoreward boundary of the
non-groundfish trawl RCA is at the 100-fm (183-m) boundary line all
year for the ridgeback prawn trawl fishery in this area) and shoreward
and seaward of the non-groundfish trawl RCA subject to the limits in
Tables 5 (North) and 5 (South) of this subpart.
(iii) If a vessel fishes in the non-groundfish trawl RCA, it may
not participate in any fishing on that trip that is prohibited by the
restrictions that apply within the non-groundfish trawl RCA. [For
example, if a vessel participates in the pink shrimp fishery within the
RCA, the vessel cannot on the same trip participate in the DTS fishery
seaward of the RCA.] Nothing in these Federal regulations supercedes
any state regulations that may prohibit trawling shoreward of the 3-nm
state waters boundary line.
* * * * *
[[Page 75124]]
4. In Sec. 660.384, paragraphs (c)(1)(i)(B), (c)(2)(i) and (iii),
(c)(3)(i)(A)(2) and (4) are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 660.384 Recreational fishery management measures.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) Recreational Rockfish Cons