Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act Provisions; American Lobster Fishery, 13027-13039 [06-2441]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 14, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13027-13039]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-2441]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 697

[Docket No. 010413093-6056-04; I.D. 032301C]
RIN 0648-AP18


Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act Provisions; 
American Lobster Fishery

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: NMFS amends regulations to modify the management measures 
applicable to the Federal American lobster (Homarus americanus) 
fishery. This action is in response to recommendations by the Atlantic 
States Marine Fisheries Commission (Commission) in Addenda II and III 
to Amendment 3 of the Interstate Fishery Management Plan for American 
Lobster (ISFMP). The lobster management measures are intended to 
increase protection to American lobster broodstock throughout the 
stock's range, and will apply to lobsters harvested in one or more of 
seven Lobster Conservation Management Areas (LCMA). In addition, NMFS 
will clarify existing Federal lobster regulations. To allow adequate 
time to modify lobster trap gear to meet new gear configuration 
requirements, the effective date of actions identified in this final 
rule is May 1, 2006.

DATES: Effective May 1, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the American lobster Environmental Assessment/
Regulatory Impact Review/Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/
FRFA) prepared for this regulatory action are available upon request 
from Harold Mears, Director, State, Federal and Constituent Programs 
Office, NMFS, One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Ross, NMFS, Northeast Region, 
(978) 281-9234, fax (978) 281-9117.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Statutory Authority

    These final regulations modify Federal lobster conservation 
management measures in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) under the 
authority of section 803(b) of the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries 
Cooperative Management Act (Atlantic Coastal Act), 16 U.S.C. 5101 et 
seq., which states that, in the absence of an approved and implemented 
Fishery Management Plan under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation 
and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) and, 
after consultation with the appropriate Fishery Management Council(s), 
the Secretary of Commerce may implement regulations to govern fishing 
in the EEZ, i.e., from 3 to 200 nautical miles (nm) offshore. These 
regulations must be (1) compatible with the effective implementation of 
an ISFMP developed by the Commission and (2) consistent with the 
national standards set forth in section 301 of the Magnuson-Stevens 
Act.

Purpose and Need for Management

    American lobster are managed within the framework of the 
Commission. The Commission is a deliberative body comprised of 
representatives both from the Atlantic coastal states and the Federal 
Government. The Commission serves to develop fishery conservation and 
management strategies for certain coastal species and coordinates the 
efforts of the states and Federal Government toward concerted 
sustainable ends. The Commission decides upon a management strategy, 
then forwards that strategy to the states and Federal Government along 
with a recommendation that the states and Federal Government take 
action (e.g., enact regulations) in furtherance of this strategy.
    The Commission reports that American lobster (Homarus americanus) 
experience high fishing mortality rates and are growth overfished 
throughout their range (U.S./Canada border to Cape Hatteras, North 
Carolina). Overfishing is a rate of removal that is too high and, if 
continued, the removals would not be sustainable. Growth overfishing, 
under the Commission ISFMP, means that most lobsters are harvested at 
or just above the legal minimum size and the maximum yield is not 
produced because of high fishing mortality on these smaller lobsters. 
In March 2000, the Commission issued an American lobster stock 
assessment report that concluded that the resource is growth 
overfished. That assessment was further evaluated by an external peer 
review, which took place during May 2000. The stock assessment external 
peer review concluded that fishing rates are unacceptably high, 
recruitment overfishing is occurring, and that a precautionary approach 
in management of the resource is warranted to sustain future viability 
of the lobster fishery. Recruitment overfishing, under the Commission 
ISFMP, means that the number of new lobsters available to the fishery 
each year is reduced by high fishing mortality rates. Since most egg 
production is from recruits and the first molt group above the minimum 
legal size, a decline in recruitment would lead to a decline in egg 
production. The Peer Review Report provided several management 
recommendations on the implications of the stock assessment report, 
including recommendations to address increasing lobster mortality and 
to rebuild stocks. The Commission completed an updated and peer 
reviewed American lobster stock assessment in late 2005. Results of the 
assessment and peer review recommendations are being evaluated at this 
time by the Commission. Based on the peer reviewed stock assessment 
information currently available, measures identified in this regulatory 
action will not be contrary to the updated assessment results.
    The Commission has developed a plan to end the overfishing and has 
requested assistance from the Federal Government in the form of 
compatible Federal regulations. The Atlantic Coastal Act directs the 
Federal Government to support the management efforts of the Commission. 
Additionally, to the extent the Federal Government seeks to regulate a 
Commission species, those Federal regulations must be compatible with 
the Commission plan. The measures in this regulatory action respond to: 
the biological need to address increasing lobster mortality and to 
rebuild stocks; the practical need to have uniform state and Federal 
regulations; and, the legal need to support the Commission plan in 
complementary fashion.

Background

    The Commission set forth the foundation of its American lobster 
fishery management plan in Amendment 3 to the ISFMP (Amendment 3) in 
December 1997. The Federal Government issued compatible regulations 
that complemented Amendment 3 in December 1999. The Amendment 3 
regulations established assorted measures to directly, even if 
preliminarily, address overfishing (e.g., trap caps and minimum gauge 
sizes). Amendment 3 created seven lobster

[[Page 13028]]

management areas and established industry led lobster management teams 
that make recommendations for future measures to end overfishing. 
Examples of such more specific measures were set forth in Amendment 3 
addenda: measures to limit future access to LCMAs 3, 4, and 5 in 
Addendum I to Amendment 3 (Addendum I) (Commission approved August 
1999--compatible Federal regulations enacted March 2003); measures to 
increase protection of the American lobster broodstock described in 
this final rule as recommended in Addendum II to Amendment 3 (Addendum 
II) (Commission approved February 2001); and Addendum III to Amendment 
3 (Addendum III) (Commission approved February 2002); and, measures to 
control fishing effort being analyzed in a separate rulemaking action 
recommended in Addendum IV to Amendment 3 (Addendum IV) (Commission 
approved December 2003), Addendum V to Amendment 3 (Addendum V) 
(Commission approved March 2004), Addendum VI to Amendment 3 (Addendum 
VI) (Commission approved February 2005), and Addendum VII to Amendment 
3 (Addendum VII) (Commission approved November 2005).
    Protection of broodstock lobsters is one of the overarching 
objectives in the Commission's lobster management plan. Although 
Addendum II pre-dates Addendum III, both addenda involve protections 
designed to increase the abundance of broodstock lobsters and thereby 
increase egg production. The Commission's recommendations to implement 
the broodstock measures in Addenda II and III form the basis of the 
measures described in this final rule. Broodstock protective measures 
specified in this regulatory action, and in Addenda II and III, are the 
following: increase in the minimum legal gauge size in LCMAs 2, 3, 4, 
5, and the Outer Cape; increase in the size of escape vents on lobster 
traps in LCMAs 2, 3, 4, 5, and the Outer Cape; implementation of a 
maximum legal gauge size for female lobsters in LCMA 4 and 5; require 
mandatory V-notching of female lobsters carrying eggs in LCMA 1 and in 
LCMA 3 above the 42[deg] 30' North latitude line; and require a zero 
tolerance definition of V-notched female lobsters in LCMA 1.
    In response to the Commission's Addendum II recommendations, NMFS 
published an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) in the 
Federal Register on May 24, 2001 (66 FR 28726). The agency responded to 
the Commission's Addendum III by filing in the Federal Register an ANPR 
and a notice of intent (NOI) to prepare an environmental impact 
statement (EIS) on September 5, 2002 (67 FR 56801). This notice 
declared NMFS' intention to combine the Addendum II and Addendum III 
rulemakings because the Addenda involved similar subject matter--namely 
management measures designed to protect brood lobster stock. Addenda II 
and III, however, also contain numerous other effort control management 
measures, such as a trap transferability program for the Outer Cape 
Management Area and a mandatory so-called ``choose and use'' program 
for LCMA 3 fishers that would require qualified permit holders to 
permanently designate LCMA 3 when renewing Federal lobster permits each 
year. Because these control measures are so intimately a part of the 
subsequently developed Commission's Addenda IV, V, VI, and VII, NMFS 
determined that those effort control programs in Addenda II and III be 
analyzed contemporaneously with the Addenda IV-VII measures in a 
forthcoming EIS. Accordingly, NMFS published its ANPR along with an NOI 
to address these lobster fishing effort control measures in a Federal 
Register notice dated May 10, 2005 (70 FR 24995).
    While the measures in this final rule address Commission 
recommendations for gauge increases and escape vent size increases as 
scheduled through 2005 in Addenda II and III to Amendment 3 of the 
ISFMP, these same addenda also call for additional broodstock 
management measures that have yet to be implemented by NMFS. These 
include four additional \1/32\ inch (0.08 cm) gauge increases that 
would result in a 3 \1/2\ inch (8.89 cm) minimum gauge size requirement 
for LCMA 3 and the Outer Cape by July 1, 2008; escape vent size 
increases in LCMA 3 and the Outer Cape to 2 \1/16\ inches X 5 \3/4\ 
inches rectangular (5.24 cm X 14.61 cm) or two circular vents at 2 \11/
16\ inches diameter (6.83 cm) by July 1, 2008; and an increase to the 
escape vent size in LCMA 1 to 2 inches X 5 \3/4\ inches rectangular 
(5.08 cm X 14.61 cm) or two circular vents at 2 \5/8\ inches (6.67 cm) 
in diameter by July 1, 2007. In response to the Commission's 
recommendations to implement additional broodstock management measures, 
on December 13, 2005, NMFS published an ANPR (70 FR 73717), announcing 
its intention to evaluate additional measures deemed necessary to 
further increase protection of the American lobster broodstock 
recommended by the Commission in Addenda II and III. Therefore, 
measures in this final rule will implement specified lobster broodstock 
measures from Addenda II and III. The other two separate regulatory 
actions stated above will evaluate: the effort control measures 
specified in Addenda II-VII; and the additional broodstock measures 
deemed necessary to further increase protection of the American lobster 
broodstock specified in Addenda II and III.
    At present, most states have issued their complementary Addenda II 
and III regulations, but the Federal Government has not. As a result, 
there is presently a regulatory incongruence with the Commission's 
American lobster ISFMP, at least insofar as it pertains to the 
broodstock measures identified in Addenda II and III. Most Federal 
lobster permit holders also hold a state lobster license, and they must 
abide by the ISFMP measures by virtue of their state license, even if 
the same restrictions have not yet been placed on their Federal permit. 
Measures in this final rule will primarily impact Federal lobster 
permit holders from states that have not implemented all measures in 
the Commission's ISFMP. Generally, the exception to state coverage of 
all lobster ISFMP measures, under the Commission's ISFMP, is for states 
that are classified as de minimis states. Certain states located at the 
southern end of the range can qualify for de minimis status under the 
Commission's lobster ISFMP if a given state's declared annual landings, 
averaged over a 2-year period, amount to less than 40, 000 lbs (18,144 
kg) of American lobster. While de minimis states are required to 
promulgate all coastwide measures contained in Amendment 3, many of the 
area-specific management measures, including the broodstock measures 
specified in this final rule, are not required to be implemented by the 
de minimis states under the Commission's lobster ISFMP. However, 
Federal lobster regulations apply to all Federal lobster permit 
holders, including permit holders residing in and landing in de minimis 
states. Four states (North Carolina, Virginia, Delaware, and Maryland) 
are classified under the Commission's lobster ISFMP as de minimis 
states in 2005. Based on the analysis completed for this action, 
approximately ten percent of current Federal lobster permit holders are 
from de minimis states or reside in states that may not have fully 
implemented all Commission ISFMP management measures.

Comments and Responses

    The proposed rule for this regulatory action was published in the 
Federal Register on September 2, 2005 (70 FR 52346); comments were 
solicited until

[[Page 13029]]

October 17, 2005, and a total of 41 public comments were received by 
NMFS during the 45-day public comment period. Of the total comments 
received, 20 comments were from recreational divers in the mid-Atlantic 
that opposed implementation of a maximum carapace size requirement in 
Areas 4 and 5 on recreational divers. Respondents in opposition to the 
maximum carapace size restriction on recreational divers also 
questioned the biological benefits of protecting large lobsters. Seven 
respondents requested a public hearing on the proposed measures or an 
extension to the public comment period. Seven respondents requested 
NMFS immediately implement additional minimum gauge increases, from 3 
\3/8\ inches (8.57 cm) to 3 \1/2\ inches (8.89 cm), for Area 3 as 
proposed in the ISFMP. Six respondents supported the proposed rule 
measures identified in the preferred alternatives. All comments were 
carefully considered. Specific questions, concerns, and opposition to 
elements of the proposed rule, are more thoroughly addressed in this 
section.
    Comment 1: Twenty comments were received in opposition to the 
imposition of a maximum carapace size requirement in Areas 4 and 5 on 
recreational divers, two respondents opposed any exemptions for 
recreational divers, and one respondent stated that Federal regulations 
should allow an exemption for the recreational dive sector to possess 1 
or 2 large female lobsters in excess of the maximum size specified for 
Area 4 and Area 5. Many of the comments in opposition cited that a 
prohibition on large lobsters had a chilling effect on one of the 
principal lobster diving incentives--i.e., the thrill in seeking a 
trophy sized lobster.
    Response: The agency believes this final rule provides biological 
protection for lobster brood stock while acknowledging the issues 
brought forward by the diving community in its commentary. As a 
preliminary matter, this final rule allows for divers to catch trophy 
sized lobsters, although not without limitation as had existed before 
this final rule. Specifically, the maximum size prohibition set forth 
in this final rule does not pertain to male lobsters. (See Response No. 
9 for additional explanation and detail). Additionally, this final rule 
sets a one maximum size female bag limit for divers.
    The agency maintains that a one maximum size female bag limit will 
not impact the biological objectives of this final rule or the 
Commission ISFMP because the agency believes that few trophy sized 
females are present for catch by divers, and/or that few would actually 
be harvested by divers. The agency maintains, however, that the best 
available information suggests a measurable harvest of lobster by the 
dive sector. (See Response No. 8 for additional detail and 
information). And, although the vast majority of that increased harvest 
undoubtedly involves lobsters below the maximum size, the agency 
believes that this final rule's bag limit guards against further 
expansion of effort, particularly on lobster brood stock.
    Comment 2: Seven respondents from the recreational dive sector 
requested NMFS hold public hearings on the proposed rule and/or 
requested an extension to the public comment period to address the 
proposed implementation of a maximum carapace size requirement in Areas 
4 and 5 on the recreational dive sector.
    Response: NMFS believes the 45-day public comment period provided 
in the proposed rule was an adequate period of time to allow for 
interested parties to acquire all necessary supporting documents, and 
provide written comments. The draft EA and proposed rule were available 
in hard copy format, the proposed rule was available on the Federal 
Register website https://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/, and both 
documents were available on the NMFS Northeast Region web site at 
www.nero.noaa.gov. In addition, written notice was provided to all 
Federal lobster permit holders, all state fishery agencies from Maine 
to North Carolina, and all interested parties that registered on the 
Northeast Region website to receive information on American lobster. 
NMFS allowed comments on this Proposed rule to be sent to the Northeast 
Region in writing, via email to the E-comment mailbox called 
Lob0305@noaa.gov, via fax to (978) 281-9117, or via the Federal E-
Rulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov. Further, the majority of the 
commentary received was, in fact, from the recreational dive sector, 
which suggests that the sector did, in fact, have notice. The agency 
does not believe that a further hearing or an extension of the comment 
period were necessary to allow public participation in this rulemaking.
    Comment 3: Seven respondents requested NMFS immediately announce in 
the Federal Register its intent to begin rulemaking to implement 
additional minimum carapace size increases from 3 \3/8\ inches (8.57 
cm) to 3 \1/2\ inches (8.89 cm), by 2008, for Area 3 as proposed in the 
Commission's ISFMP.
    Response: Originally, additional gauge increases, up to 3 \1/2\ 
inches (8.89 cm), were included in the ISFMP for implementation only if 
it was determined that they were necessary for conservation. However, 
by the time the Commission determined that the measures were, in fact, 
necessary, (the Commission determined the states had to implement these 
``as necessary'' measures by July 1, 2005), NOAA Fisheries had already 
begun this rulemaking. Accordingly, NOAA Fisheries undertook 
consideration of the ``if necessary'' issues in a new rulemaking 
announced on December 13, 2005 (70 FR 73717).
    Although present Federal and state gauge regulations may differ at 
this time, the regulations do not conflict. Specifically, Federal 
regulations at 50 CFR 697.3 state that ``The regulations in this part 
do not preempt more restrictive state laws, or state enforcement of 
more restrictive state laws.'' Accordingly, NMFS expects that states 
with more restrictive gauge and vent regulations should be able to 
enforce those regulations because the Federal Government has expressly 
stated that it has not preempted the field relative to more restrictive 
gauge and vent sizes. In this particular instance, dual state/Federal 
permit holders would be able to comply with both state and Federal 
regulations by complying with the more restrictive state regulation, 
and indeed a state might so enforce such compliance. The ``more 
restrictive'' regulatory concept embodied in 50 CFR 697.3 becomes 
especially germane in situations where the Federal Government is in the 
process of creating compatible regulations in response to Commission 
recommendations. Federal rulemaking, with the numerous statutory 
obligations attendant thereto, can be a far more time consuming process 
than rulemaking at the state level. Accordingly, states are often able 
to promulgate regulations in response to Commission regulations quicker 
than the Federal Government. Thus, the Federal regulation at 50 CFR 
697.3 provides a degree of regulatory stability during the Federal 
rulemaking inter period.
    Comment 4: Six respondents supported specific management measures 
recommended by the Commission and specified in the Proposed rule, 
including: the vent size increase to be compatible with the proposed 
gauge increase; the mandatory v-notch and v-notch definition in Area 3; 
and the Area 3 and Area 5 overlap boundary. In addition, these 
respondents supported additional Commission recommendations associated 
with fishing effort control, including an individual transferable

[[Page 13030]]

trap program and a proposal to require Area 3 permit holders to 
designate (i.e. ``choose and use'') Area 3 on their Federal permits 
when renewing Federal permits each year. The respondents proposed that, 
if a permit holder did not choose Area 3, then that permit holder would 
be prohibited from designating Area 3 on the vessel permit in future 
years. In that event, the permit would still retain its Area 3 
qualification, and each successive owner would be given the opportunity 
to either permanently designate Area 3 or drop the Area 3 designation 
for the duration of possession of the qualified permit.
    Response: NMFS, in this final rule, will implement the lobster 
minimum size increases and escape vent size increases in lobster 
conservation management areas (Areas) 2, 3, 4, 5 and the Outer Cape 
Management Area; implement a maximum carapace size in Area 4 and Area 
5, except for recreational divers; mandatory v-notching of egg-bearing 
female lobster in Area 1 and in the Gulf of Maine portion of Area 3; a 
zero tolerance definition of v-notching in Area 1; and a 5-mile (8-km) 
overlap zone along the common boundary of Area 3 and Area 5, as 
specified in the proposed rule. In response to the additional 
Commission recommendations associated with fishing effort control, 
including the individual transferable trap program and the choose and 
use proposal, NMFS published its ANPR along with an NOI to address 
these lobster fishing effort control measures in a Federal Register 
notice dated May 10, 2005 (70 FR 24995). Therefore, measures proposed 
in this action would implement specified lobster broodstock measures 
from Addenda II and III, and a separate rulemaking will evaluate the 
effort control measures specified in Addenda II-VII.
    Comment 5: Five respondents supported, and one respondent opposed 
the proposed rule measure to exempt lobster trap gear retrieval by a 
substitute vessel from provisions of the exempted fishing regulations 
when a federally permitted vessel is inoperable or mechanically 
impaired. The comment in opposition did not state a rationale for that 
opposition.
    Response: NMFS, in this final rule, will exempt lobster trap gear 
retrieval by a substitute vessel from provisions of the exempted 
fishing regulations when a federally permitted vessel is inoperable or 
mechanically impaired. This action will merely reiterate already 
existing agency policy and will allow the vessel owner to retrieve trap 
gear in a timely manner that may otherwise be lost to adverse weather 
conditions or other mobile gear operating in the same area. In 
addition, since current MMPA requirements prohibit leaving fixed gear 
in the water for longer than 30 days, this exemption will allow permit 
holders to retrieve their trap gear more expeditiously, while providing 
benefits to protected resources by avoiding the potential for up to a 
60-day administrative delay imposed by exempted fishing requirements.
    Comment 6: Four respondents stated that NMFS provided no data to 
show that protection of large lobsters would benefit the lobster 
population, or that large female lobsters are good egg-bearers.
    Response: NMFS referred to several scientific studies in section 
4.2 of the EA completed for this action that state the importance of 
large lobsters to the broodstock population. The studies in the EA note 
that predation pressures seem related to size and habitat. Mortality 
due to predation decreases as the lobster grows, and larger lobsters 
greater than 4 inches carapace length (10.2 cm) may be immune to 
predation. In addition, scientific studies indicate that larger 
lobsters produce eggs with greater energy content, and thus may produce 
larvae with higher survival rates, as well as noting that larger 
females can spawn twice between molts, making their relative fecundity 
greater than females within one molt of legal size.
    Comment 7: Three respondents stated that the restrictions proposed 
in this action are not stringent enough.
    Response: The cooperative state and Federal approach to American 
lobster management is not predicated upon a single measure, nor is it 
contained within a single document. Rather, the structure is based on 
facilitating ongoing adaptive management with necessary elements 
implemented over time. The Commission set forth the foundation of its 
American Lobster fishery management plan in Amendment 3 in December 
1997. The Federal Government issued compatible regulations that 
complemented Amendment 3 in December 1999. The Amendment 3 regulations 
established assorted measures to directly, even if preliminarily, 
address overfishing (e.g., trap caps and minimum gauge sizes). Examples 
of such more specific measures were recently set forth in the following 
Amendment 3 addenda: measures to limit future access to Areas 3, 4, and 
5 in Addendum I (Commission approved August 1999--compatible Federal 
regulations enacted March 2003); measures to increase protection of the 
American lobster broodstock described in this action as recommended in 
Addendum II (Commission approved February 2001) and Addendum III 
(Commission approved February 2002); and measures to control fishing 
effort being analyzed in a separate rulemaking action recommended in 
Addendum III, Addendum V (Commission approved March 2004), Addendum VI 
(Commission approved February 2005), and Addendum VII (Commission 
approved November 2005). NMFS announced its intent to continue 
compatible rulemaking on the above referenced fishing effort control 
measures in a Federal Register Notice of intent to prepare an 
environmental impact statement dated May 10, 2005 (70 FR 24495).
    Comment 8: Three respondents stated that NMFS exceeded Commission 
recommendations to the Federal Government to implement compatible 
regulations by including recreational divers in the maximum size 
prohibitions specified for Area 4 and Area 5.
    Response: Although there is limited quantitative information on the 
volume of lobster harvested by the recreational sector, survey 
information collected by the State of New Jersey in 2000 indicated that 
recreational divers harvested over 17,000 legal lobsters during 
approximately 37,000 dives on wrecks and artificial reefs. Assuming 
each legal lobster harvested by recreational divers weighed 
approximately 1.25 lbs (0.57 kg)--a generally applicable weight for 
lobsters caught at the minimum size--these divers accounted for 
approximately 2.4 percent of all lobsters landed in NJ in 2000. This 
volume of harvest by recreational divers approximates the historic non-
trap harvest of lobsters by commercial fishing vessels, a segment of 
the industry that has bycatch limits in place. Since, based on the most 
recent stock assessment, the American lobster resource is growth 
overfished and overfishing is continuing in Area 4 and Area 5, NMFS 
feels the imposition of broodstock management measures on recreational 
users, and commercial non-trap fishing vessels is appropriate.
    Comment 9: Three respondents stated that NMFS should revise the 
regulatory text specified in the proposed rule associated with the 
maximum size prohibition specified for Area 4 and Area 5, to specify 
the prohibition applies only to female lobsters.
    Response: NMFS notes this oversight and agrees. The Commission's 
recommendation and subsequent Federal analysis of impacts as provided 
in the draft EA and preamble to the proposed rule clearly specified the

[[Page 13031]]

maximum size prohibition specified for Area 4 and Area 5 is intended to 
apply only to female lobsters. This final rule corrects the error by 
revising the regulatory text in the final rule associated with the 
maximum size prohibition specified for Area 4 and Area 5 to specify 
this maximum size measure applies only to female lobsters.
    Comment 10: One respondent stated that lobster management measures 
should be consistent in all Areas. One respondent stated that Federal 
regulations should protect both male and female large lobsters in Area 
4 and Area 5, one respondent stated that Federal regulations should 
require a larger minimum carapace size in Area 1, and one respondent 
stated that Federal regulations should require a maximum size in Areas 
2, 3, and the Outer Cape.
    Response: NMFS acknowledges the complexities associated with 
differing management measures amongst management areas. The agency 
further acknowledges that uniformity and standardization amongst 
management areas would simplify some of these complexities. The agency, 
however, has to balance the utility in having a uniform management 
scheme against its obligation to support a Commission management 
program that has, as two of its objectives, the maintenance of flexible 
regional programs and maintenance of existing social and cultural 
features of the industry wherever possible. Both such objectives form 
the foundation of the area management scheme established in Amendment 3 
to the Commission's ISFMP. This final rule seems to achieve balance. It 
simplifies overall lobster management, thereby facilitating 
enforcement, by making Federal lobster regulations more consistent with 
existing state regulations. Yet, the rule remains supportive of the 
area management construct set forth in the ISFMP by acknowledging that 
lobster biology and industry practices differ throughout the vast range 
of this fishery, and thus, a ``one-size-fits-all'' approach, although 
potentially easier to enforce (but only if all states endorsed such an 
approach--if some states made their regulations uniform, but others did 
not, then enforcement might actually become more complicated) might 
undermine the objectives of area management.
    Comment 11: Two respondents stated that NMFS should stop drafting 
new regulations, and instead, NMFS should uphold and enforce current 
regulations.
    Response: NMFS understands that enforcement is a significant 
component to effective management, and further that broad based 
industry support and enhanced compliance with both state and Federal 
lobster regulations is a key benefit resulting from active industry 
involvement in the development of area-specific management measures 
under the Commission LCMT process.
    Comment 12: One respondent supported, and one respondent opposed 
the 5-mile (8-km) overlap area between Areas 3 and 5. The comment in 
opposition did not state a rationale for that opposition.
    Response: Lobster management in the southern end of the range is 
complicated by a number of factors, including distinct seasonality, 
limited abundance of lobsters, reliance on multiple mixed fisheries, 
and the similarity between finfish traps and fishing methods used to 
harvest American lobster. With the Federal implementation of a 
historical participation based limited entry program for continued 
access to Area 3, effective March 27, 2003 (68 FR 14902), those lobster 
fishers in Area 5 fishing near the boundary with Area 3 were 
disadvantaged. Specifically, a requirement to document annual lobster 
landings in excess of 25,000 lbs ( 11,340 kg) to qualify for continued 
access to Area 3 was deemed problematic for Area 5 lobster fishers, 
because resource availability is variable at the southern end of the 
range. Following discussions between the LCMTs 3 and 5 to address these 
issues, the Commission, in Addendum III, proposed a 5-mile (8-km) 
overlapping boundary zone between Areas 3 and 5 and recommended that 
the Federal Government implement regulations consistent therewith. In 
the environmental assessment completed for this action, an evaluation 
of the environmental consequences indicated that a 5-mile (8-km) 
overlapping boundary zone between Areas 3 and 5 would more effectively 
mitigate the impacts for those lobster fishers in Area 5 fishing near 
the boundary with Area 3 that were disadvantaged, yet result in no 
significant adverse impacts to the lobster resource, protected 
resources, or the habitat.
    Comment 13: One respondent stated that imposition of a maximum size 
restriction on possession of female lobsters in Areas 4 and 5 would 
necessitate educating recreational users to ensure they can distinguish 
between a male and female lobster and identify the dividing line 
between Area 4 and 5.
    Response: NMFS agrees that imposition of the maximum size 
restriction on possession of female lobsters in Areas 4 and 5 would 
necessitate educating recreational users to ensure they can distinguish 
between a male and female lobster and identify the dividing line 
between Area 4 and 5. However, the impact of the maximum size 
requirement is likely to be mitigated to an unknown degree by providing 
a one maximum carapace size female bag limit per recreational diver in 
Areas 4 and 5. In addition, information is available--Federal 
regulations at 50 CFR 697.18 contain management area information, 
including a chart and corresponding latitude and longitude coordinates 
for each of the seven lobster Areas. NMFS also maintains a website 
containing information on Federal lobster regulations, including 
information on each of the seven lobster Areas at: https://
www.nero.noaa.gov/StateFedOff/. NMFS agrees that the ability to 
distinguish between male and female lobsters harvested in Areas 4 and 5 
is more problematic. NMFS will provide information on the American 
lobster website to effectively distinguish between male and female 
lobsters, and copies of this information can be obtained from the 
Director, State, Federal and Constituent Programs Office--see 
ADDRESSES.

Changes from the Proposed Rule

    The proposed rule included a regulatory measure to prohibit the 
possession of a female lobster with a carapace size in excess of 5 \1/
4\ inches (13.34 cm) in LCMA 4 and 5 \1/2\ inches (13.97 cm) in LCMA 5. 
Many scientists believe that lobster can be a long-lived species, up to 
and over 50 years of age, and can achieve weights of 40 pounds (18 kg) 
or more. It is further believed by many scientists that bigger lobsters 
are more successful breeders and produce more eggs. For that reason, 
maximum size gauge restrictions on lobster can improve egg production 
by prohibiting harvest of the bigger, and potentially, better breeding 
lobsters, forcing their return to the sea and allowing further 
reproduction. A majority of the public comments on the proposed rule 
were provided by the recreational dive community, and they voiced 
opposition to the imposition on recreational divers of a maximum 
carapace size requirement in LCMAs 4 and 5. Many of the comments in 
opposition cited that a prohibition on large lobsters would have a 
chilling effect on one of the principal lobster diving incentives--
i.e., the thrill in seeking a trophy-sized lobster.
    Based upon public comment and additional information provided by 
the recreational dive community in the mid-Atlantic, NMFS has 
determined that it would be appropriate to allow recreational divers to 
harvest one female

[[Page 13032]]

lobster in excess of the maximum size in LCMAs 4 and 5. The agency 
believes the final rule provides biological protection for lobster 
brood stock while acknowledging the issues brought forward by the 
diving community in its commentary. The final rule allows for divers to 
catch trophy-sized lobsters, although not without limitation as had 
existed before this final rule. Specifically, consistent with the 
Commission recommendations, the maximum size prohibition set forth in 
the final rule does not pertain to male lobsters in LCMAs 4 and 5. 
Additionally, the final rule allows recreational divers to harvest one 
female lobster in excess of the maximum size in LCMAs 4 and 5. The 
agency maintains that a one maximum size female bag limit will not 
impact the biological objectives of the rule or the Commission ISFMP 
because the agency believes that few trophy-sized females are present 
for catch by divers, and/or that few would actually be harvested by 
divers. The agency maintains, however, that the best available 
information suggests a measurable harvest of lobster by the dive 
sector. Additional information, provided by representatives of the 
recreational dive community from a survey of New Jersey's recreational 
wreck and artificial reef fisheries conducted in 2000 by the State of 
New Jersey, indicated that recreational divers harvested over 17,000 
legal lobsters during approximately 37,000 dives on wrecks and 
artificial reefs. Assuming each legal lobster harvested by recreational 
divers weighed approximately 1.25 lbs (0.6 kilograms)--a generally 
applicable weight for lobsters caught at the minimum size--these divers 
accounted for approximately 2.4 percent of all lobsters landed in NJ in 
2000. This volume of harvest by recreational divers approximates the 
historic non-trap harvest of lobsters by commercial fishing vessels, a 
segment of the industry that has bycatch limits in place. Although the 
vast majority of that increased harvest undoubtedly involves lobsters 
below the maximum size, the agency believes that this final rule's bag 
limit guards against further expansion of effort, particularly on 
lobster brood stock.

Revisions Implemented by This Action

    This Federal lobster management action will implement the following 
specific management measures, as described here.

Modify Egg Production Schedule

    The American lobster resource is considered overfished when the 
fishing mortality rate (F) results in a reduction in estimated egg 
production per harvestable lobster to 10 percent (F10 percent) or less 
of a non-fished population. In other words, lobsters are considered 
overfished when harvest so reduces the amount of lobsters remaining in 
the water that the remaining lobsters can produce no more than 10 
percent of the eggs that an unfished population would produce. If 
lobsters are overfished--i.e., the remaining uncaught lobsters are so 
few that they can only produce as a group 10 percent of the number of 
eggs that an unfished population would collectively produce, then the 
present Commission lobster plan recommends that managers act to restore 
egg production to 10 percent or greater by a date certain, presently 
December 31, 2005.
    Originally, in Addendum I, the Commission targeted a rough deadline 
(December 31, 2005) by which they hoped to end overfishing. In so 
doing, the Commission used the best available stock information, but 
admittedly dated information, to extrapolate out an egg production 
schedule--a time line with interim objectives--that would meet the 
targeted deadline of December 31, 2005. The Commission acknowledged, 
however, that the Addendum I schedule and target deadline would need to 
be adjusted in later addenda following the peer reviewed stock 
assessment conducted in 2000.
    The May 2000 the peer-reviewed American lobster stock assessment 
confirmed that overfishing of American lobster stocks is occurring 
throughout the species' range. Based upon the year 2000 stock 
assessment, the Commission revised its target deadline to end 
overfishing to December 31, 2008. Accordingly, the Commission, in 
Addendum II and its recommendations to the Federal Government, revised 
the schedule for increasing egg production to account for updated 
information on the status of the stock. Although the Commission 
completed an updated and peer reviewed stock assessment in November 
2005, the results of the assessment and peer review recommendations are 
being evaluated at this time by the Commission. However, a preliminary 
review by NMFS indicates measures identified in this action, including 
the revision to the overfishing timeline, will not be contrary to the 
2005 assessment results.
    This Federal action will revise and extend the egg production 
schedule timeline by three years, from December 31, 2005, to December 
31, 2008. Accordingly, this Federal action announces the revision to 
the timeline to restore egg production in each of the management areas 
to 10 percent or greater of the egg production of an unfished 
population (i.e., the present overfishing definition) by December 31, 
2008. This action is recommended by the Commission.

Increased Minimum Harvest Size in LCMAs 2, 3, 4, 5, and the Outer Cape

    One key Addendum II broodstock management measure was to increase 
the minimum legal harvest size of American lobster from 3 \1/4\ inches 
to 3 \3/8\ inches (8.26 cm to 8.57 cm) carapace length in certain 
LCMAs. The carapace is the unsegmented body shell of the American 
lobster. Carapace length is the straight line measurement from the rear 
of the eye socket parallel to the center line of the carapace to the 
posterior edge of the carapace. Many scientists believe that many 
lobsters are harvested before they have had an opportunity to 
reproduce. Hence, increasing the minimum legal size of lobster would 
force fishers to throw back lobsters at the present legal minimum size, 
allowing those lobsters an additional season to remain in the water, 
mature and reproduce. Accordingly, increasing the minimum carapace 
length or minimum gauge size will protect a larger number of mature 
female American lobsters, the broodstock, and increase egg production 
by allowing reproduction in a sector of the population that many 
believe has heretofore been harvested before reaching maturity.
    Addendum II includes a series of minimum gauge size increases in 
state and Federal waters of LCMAs 2, 3, 4, 5, and the Outer Cape, but 
not LCMA 1 and LCMA 6 (Long Island Sound). By approving Addendum II, 
the states agreed to implement annual Area-specific gauge increases 
beginning December 31, 2001. NMFS received a recommendation from the 
Commission to implement complementary Federal measures for Federal 
waters of LCMAs 2, 4, 5, and the Outer Cape, as well as in LCMA 3 
(comprised entirely of Federal waters). Specifically, the minimum 
allowable harvest size of American lobster in state waters of LCMAs 2, 
4, 5, and the Outer Cape increased \1/32\ inches (0.08 cm) annually 
until 2004 to an ultimate minimum size of 3 \3/8\ inches (8.57 cm), 
except for the de minimis states and the State of Maine. The Commission 
recommends that the gauge increases in Federal waters of LCMA 2, 4, 5, 
and the Outer Cape, as well as in LCMA 3 increase to an ultimate 
minimum size of 3 \3/8\ inches (8.57 cm).
    This Federal management measure will implement a single \1/8\ inch 
(0.32

[[Page 13033]]

cm) increase in the Federal minimum allowable harvest size of American 
lobster in LCMAs 2, 3, 4, 5, and the Outer Cape. The lobster minimum 
size increase would result in a change of the current minimum harvest 
size from 3 \1/4\ inches to 3 \3/8\ inches (8.26 cm to 8.57 cm) in 
LCMAs 2, 3, 4, 5, and the Outer Cape. LCMA 1 and LCMA 6 would retain 
the current minimum harvest size of 3 \1/4\ inches (8.26 cm). Although 
a 4-year phased in Federal implementation of the 3 3/8-inch (8.57-cm) 
minimum harvest size in LCMAs 2, 3, 4, 5, and the Outer Cape is 
technically the Commission's recommendation, as specified in a letter 
dated February 13, 2001, due to the passage of time and compatible 
state regulations currently at 3 \3/8\ inches (8.57 cm) minimum harvest 
size, it likely no longer represents the Commission's preference.

Modify Size of Lobster Trap Escape Vents in LCMAs 2, 3, 4, 5, and the 
Outer Cape

    Lobster trap escape vents are another management measure designed 
to increase egg production. Conceptually, escape vents are holes 
intentionally placed in the trap that are large enough to allow 
sublegal lobsters caught in a trap to exit, yet be small enough to 
prevent legal sized lobsters from escaping.
    Addendum II called for an increase in the rectangular escape vent 
minimum size from 1 \15/16\ inches by 5 \3/4\ inches (4.92 cm by 14.61 
cm) to 2 inches by 5 \3/4\ inches (5.08 cm by 14.61 cm). These 
recommendations were made to the Federal Government in a letter dated 
February 13, 2001, and are consistent with and follow the Commission's 
recommended increase in the minimum harvest size of American lobster 
from the current minimum harvest size of 3 \1/4\ inches to 3 \3/8\ 
inches (8.26 cm to 8.57 cm). As with the increased minimum gauge size, 
the Commission recommended that the increase in the trap escape vent 
size apply only to lobster trap gear fished in state and Federal waters 
of LCMAs 2, 3, 4, 5, and the Outer Cape, but not LCMA 1 and LCMA 6. An 
increase in the size of the escape vent opening by \1/16\ inch ( 0.16 
cm), by requiring at least one rectangular escape vent with an 
unobstructed opening not less than 2 inches by 5 \3/4\ inches (5.08 cm 
by 14.61 cm) per trap, or at least two circular escape vents per trap 
measuring 2 \5/8\ inches (6.67 cm) in diameter, was evaluated by the 
Commission's Lobster Technical Committee and determined to provide the 
maximum escapement of sublegal lobsters under 3 \3/8\ inches (8.57 cm), 
which is consistent with 100 percent retention of legal lobsters.
    This Federal management measure will implement a single \1/16\-inch 
(0.16-cm) increase in the Federal minimum lobster trap rectangular 
escape vent opening of lobster traps in LCMAs 2, 3, 4, 5, and the Outer 
Cape. The increase will require at least one rectangular escape vent 
with an unobstructed opening not less than 2 inches by 5 \3/4\ inches 
(5.08 cm by 14.61 cm) per trap or at least two circular escape vents 
per trap measuring 2 \5/8\ inches (6.67 cm) in diameter. At the current 
time, Federal regulations require that all lobster trap gear must have 
a rectangular escape vent with an unobstructed opening not less than 1 
\15/16\ inches by 5 \3/4\ inches (4.92 cm by 14.61 cm) or two circular 
escape vents with unobstructed openings not less than 2 \7/16\ inches 
(6.19 cm) in diameter. LCMA 1 and LCMA 6 will retain the current 
Federal rectangular and circular lobster trap escape vent requirements.

Require Mandatory V-Notching in LCMA 1 and in LCMA 3 above the 
42[deg]30' North Latitude Line

    Mandatory v-notching is another management measure designed to 
increase egg production. V-notching is a process wherein a lobster 
fisher cuts a v-shaped notch into the flipper in the tail of an egg-
bearing female lobster. Any subsequent lobster fisher catching that v-
notched lobster must return it to the sea. As such, v-notching is a 
management measure designed to specifically protect the female lobster 
broodstock. At present, there is no Federal requirement to cut a v-
shaped notch into the flipper in the tail of an egg-bearing female 
lobster, although Federal regulations currently prohibit possession of 
female lobsters possessing a v-notch. The Commission has recommended 
that the Federal Government require mandatory v-notching for all 
Federal vessels fishing in LCMA 1 and in LCMA 3 above the 42[deg]30' 
North latitude line.
    This Federal management measure will require all Federal lobster 
fishers with LCMA 1 permits to v-notch all egg bearing lobsters and 
will mandate all Federal permit holders fishing in LCMA 3 above the 
42[deg]30' North latitude line to v-notch all egg-bearing female 
lobsters. There will be no requirement to v-notch all egg-bearing 
female lobsters in LCMAs 2, 4, 5, 6, the Outer Cape or LCMA 3 below the 
42[deg]30' North latitude line.

Implement Zero Tolerance V-Notching in LCMA 1

    Zero tolerance v-notching of female lobsters relates both to the 
interpretation of what constitutes a v-notch and the limited latitude 
that the government will grant a violator possessing a v-notched 
lobster. Commission guidelines, as well as state and Federal 
regulations, prohibit the harvesting of v-notched lobsters. Prior to 
Addendum III, however, the ISFMP, and current Federal regulations for 
all LCMAs, provided only one definition of what constituted a v-notched 
lobster, i.e., the Commission and current Federal regulations defined 
``v notch'' as being a straight-sided cut, without setal hairs, at 
least \1/4\ inch (0.64 cm) in depth and tapering to a point. In 
contrast, lobster fishers from Maine had long considered a v-shaped 
notch to be a cut 'of any size' in the flipper next to and to the right 
of the center flipper, and Maine State regulations prohibited 
possession based on that more restrictive definition. Possessors of v-
notched lobsters outside of Maine State waters in LCMA 1, often argued 
that a clearly v-notched lobster was legal to possess because the v-
notch was less than \1/4\ inch (0.64 cm) or that the cut was not 
obviously straight sided. Maine argued that its definition ensured 
protection of female lobsters beyond the first molt, since after the 
first molt, possession was prohibited if there was a notch of any size 
discernable. The Commission, in Addendum III, supported and approved 
recommendations that sought to define ``v-notch'' in LCMA 1 as being a 
v-shaped notch of any size in the flipper next to and to the right of 
the center flipper as viewed from the rear of the female lobster. The 
Commission recommended that the Federal regulations be amended 
consistent therewith.
    This Federal management measure will amend the Federal v-notch 
definition to include a second, so called zero tolerance definition of 
a v-notched lobster to mean a v-shaped notch of any size in the flipper 
next to and to the right of the center flipper as viewed from the rear 
of the female lobster in all of LCMA 1. Federal regulations will retain 
the current definition of a v-notched lobster in all other LCMAs (LCMAs 
2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and the Outer Cape), as being a straight-sided cut, 
without setal hairs, at least \1/4\ inch (0.64 cm) in depth and 
tapering to a point.

Implement a Maximum Harvest Size in LCMA 4 and LCMA 5

    Another management measure designed to protect lobster broodstock 
is

[[Page 13034]]

the implementation of a maximum harvest size for lobster. A maximum 
size gauge restriction on lobster can improve egg production by 
prohibiting harvest of bigger, and potentially, better breeding 
lobsters, forcing their return to the sea and allowing further 
reproduction. In Amendment 3, the Commission set a 5-inch (12.7-cm) 
maximum gauge size (carapace length) on all male and female lobsters 
caught in LCMA 1. The Amendment 3 recommendations have already been 
incorporated into Federal law. The Commission, in Addendum III, called 
for a 5 \1/4\-inch (13.34-cm) maximum gauge size on all female lobsters 
harvested in LCMA 4, and a 5 \1/2\-inch (13.97-cm) maximum gauge size 
on all female lobsters harvested in LCMA 5. The Commission requested 
that the Federal Government implement compatible maximum gauge size 
regulations in LCMAs 4 and 5.
    This Federal management measure will amend Federal lobster 
regulations to set a maximum size restriction for possession of female 
lobsters in LCMA 4 and LCMA 5. This measure will prohibit the 
possession of a female lobster with a carapace size in excess of 5 \1/
4\ inches (13.34 cm) for Federal permit holders fishing in, or electing 
to fish in LCMA 4 and will prohibit the possession of a female lobster 
with a carapace size in excess of 5 \1/2\ inches (13.97cm) for Federal 
permit holders fishing in, or electing to fish in LCMA 5. However, 
based on public comment and additional information provided by the 
recreational dive community, NMFS has determined that it would be 
appropriate to allow recreational divers to harvest one female lobster 
in excess of the maximum size in LCMAs 4 and 5 (for additional 
information on this determination, see Changes from the proposed rule).

Establish a Overlap Zone Between LCMA 3 and LCMA 5

    Lobster management in the southern end of the range is complicated 
by a number of factors, including distinct seasonality, limited 
abundance of lobsters, reliance on multiple mixed fisheries, and the 
similarity between finfish traps and fishing methods used to harvest 
American lobster. With the approval of Addendum I and the establishment 
of a historical participation based limited entry program for continued 
access to LCMA 3, those lobster fishers in LCMA 5 fishing near the 
boundary with LCMA 3 were impacted. Specifically, a requirement to 
document annual lobster landings in excess of 25,000 lbs to qualify for 
continued access to LCMA 3 was deemed problematic for LCMA 5 lobster 
fishers, because resource availability is variable at the southern end 
of the range. The Commission, in Addendum III, proposed a 5-mile (8-km) 
overlapping boundary zone between LCMAs 3 and 5, extending in to LCMA 3 
along the length of the eastern most border of LCMA 5 for 5 miles (8 
km), and recommended that the Federal Government implement regulations 
consistent therewith.
    This Federal management action will establish a 5-mile (8-km) 
overlapping boundary zone between LCMAs 3 and 5, extending along the 
length of the eastern most border of LCMA 5 for 5 miles (8 km) in to 
LCMA 3. Federal lobster vessels in possession of an LCMA 5 lobster 
permit, but not an LCMA 3 permit, will not be bound by LCMA 3 
regulations within the overlap zone. Federal lobster vessels in 
possession of an LCMA 3 permit, but not an LCMA 5 permit, will not be 
bound by LCMA 5 regulations within the overlap zone. Federal lobster 
vessels in possession of an LCMA 3 and LCMA 5 permit will be required 
to comply with the most restrictive regulations applicable within the 
overlap zone.
    The New LCMA 3/LCMA 5 coordinates are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Current Coordinates                New Overlap Coordinates
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Latitude ([deg]N)/                   Latitude ([deg]N)/
   Point:       Longitude ([deg]W)       Point:      Longitude ([deg]W)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
V             39[deg]50' 73[deg]01'   V1           39[deg]50' 72[deg]55'
X             38[deg]39.5'            X1           38[deg]38.2'
               73[deg]40'                           73[deg]33.8'
Y             38[deg]12' 73[deg]55'   Y1           38[deg]10.4'
                                                    73[deg]49'
Z             37[deg]12' 74[deg]44'   Z1           37[deg]10.6'
                                                    74[deg]38'
ZA            35[deg]34' 74[deg]'     ZA1          35[deg]31.9'
                                                    74[deg]45.5'
ZB            35[deg]14.5'            ZB1          35[deg]14.5'
               75[deg]31'                           75[deg]19.3'
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    From point V, current coordinates extending out to new overlap 
coordinates, back to point ZB.

Clarify Existing Regulations

    These measures attempt to clarify existing Federal lobster 
regulations and will: allow a change in the LCMA designations upon sale 
or transfer of a fishing vessel with a Federal lobster permit, or 
within 45 days of the permit's effective date; clearly reference other 
laws and regulations applicable to Federal lobster permit holders; 
clearly prohibit hauling or possession of lobster trap gear belonging 
to another vessel; and, exempt lobster trap gear retrieval from 
provisions of the exempted fishing regulations by a substitute vessel 
if a federally permitted vessel is inoperable or mechanically impaired.

Allow a Change in the LCMA Designations

    Current Federal regulations at 50 CFR 697.4(a)(7)(iv) prohibit a 
Federal lobster permit owner from changing the permit's lobster 
management area designations during the fishing year. In other words, 
lobster fishers have yearly flexibility to designate new or different 
LCMAs when they renew their annual permit, but upon making that 
designation, fishers are bound by that choice for the remainder of the 
fishing year. This measure was designed in large part to close a 
potential regulatory loophole. That is, Federal regulations at Sec.  
697.4(a)(7)(v) mandate that permits with multiple LCMA designations 
must abide by ''...the most restrictive management measures in effect 
for any one of the specified areas, regardless of the area being 
fished, for the entire fishing year.'' Individuals, however, could 
circumvent this most restrictive provision if they were allowed to drop 
or add LCMA permit designations based on the seasonal availability of 
the resource, or if management measures within a certain management 
area became more or less restrictive during the year.
    Although the restriction on changing LCMA designations was designed 
to prevent speculative add/drop fishing practices, it was not intended 
to apply to vessel sales and transfers or unintended errors in the 
permit category selection noted upon issuance or renewal of a vessel 
permit. For example, the current regulation specifically allows a 
change in permit LCMA designation for a replacement vessel. The term 
``replacement vessel,'' however, could be interpreted narrowly

[[Page 13035]]

as pertaining to a vessel that replaces a former vessel for reasons 
other than the sale of that former vessel (e.g., the former vessel 
being permanently or temporarily decommissioned due to damage or engine 
trouble, etc.). Accordingly, the present regulatory text has confused 
some lobster fishers as to their ability to re-designate LCMAs upon the 
sale and receipt of a new vessel and permit. Furthermore, the existing 
regulatory text could be interpreted narrowly to prevent a correction 
to either a new vessel application or permit renewal, if an error 
occurs in the permitting process. This new rule change will allow a re-
designation of the vessel permit LCMA category upon sale or transfer of 
a vessel with a lobster permit. This new rule change will allow permit 
holders, upon initial receipt of a new or renewed permit, one 
opportunity to request a change in the permit LCMA category if 
requested within 45 days of the effective date of the vessel's permit. 
If such a request is not received within 45 days of the effective date 
of the vessel's permit, the vessel owner may not request a change in 
the permit category for the duration of the fishing year. NMFS believes 
the 45 day time period to be sufficiently limited to prevent 
speculative add/drop fishing practices. Furthermore, the provision for 
one opportunity to change categories, if requested within 45 days, will 
bring lobster permitting procedures in line with existing procedures 
currently in place for other Northeast vessel permit practices.
    This Federal action will clarify the existing regulations to 
specifically allow a lobster fisher to re-designate LCMAs on a newly 
purchased permit, a transferred permit, or within 45 days of the 
effective date of the vessel permit.

Clearly Reference Other Pertinent Federal Laws

    Presently, lobster regulations are issued under the Atlantic 
Coastal Act in Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 697--
Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management. Federal lobster 
permits, however, are also held subject to conditions contained in acts 
other than the Atlantic Coastal Act and regulatory parts other than 
part 697. Although there are clear links in part 697 to these other 
conditions, the pathway could be stated more plainly. For example, 
lobster permit conditions are stated in and through the regulation at 
50 CFR 697.4(b)--Vessel Permits and Trap Tags: Conditions. According to 
Sec.  697.4(b), a Federal lobster permit is held conditionally, subject 
to the permit holder abiding by all state and local laws, as well as 
''... the requirements of this part,'' which itself is regulatory 
parlance for ``subject to the requirements of Title 50 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations, Part 697--Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative 
Management. Included in ``this part'' (i.e., part 697) is Sec.  697.3--
Relation to Other Federal and State Laws. Within Section Sec.  697.3 is 
reference to and incorporation of Sec. Sec.  307 through 311 of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act, which generally relate to enforcement. Also 
within Sec.  697.3 is a statement incorporating by reference 50 CFR 
600.705-Relation to Other Laws, which sets forth other pertinent 
Federal laws that Federal lobster permit holders must abide by, 
including those regulations in Part 229--Authorization For Commercial 
Fisheries Under the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972. Still 
further, within part 229 are lobster restrictions pertaining to gear, 
time and area that are designed to benefit marine mammals. Thus, gear, 
time and area restrictions specified within part 229 are conditions of 
a Federal lobster permit held under Sec.  697.4(b), although it 
requires multiple steps to make the connection and could be written in 
more direct fashion.
    This Federal action will clarify the existing regulations to more 
directly reference lobster permit conditions that exist outside of part 
697. The agency will amend Sec.  697.4(b)-Conditions to include a 
direct statement that lobster permit holders are subject to the laws 
and regulations administered by NOAA, including the Endangered Species 
Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the gear, time and area 
restrictions thereunder, as well as the enforcement provisions of the 
Magnuson Stevens Act. The agency will also amend Sec.  697.7-
Prohibitions to track the newly added text in Sec.  697.4(b)-
Conditions.

Prohibit the Hauling or Possession of Another's Gear

    Current Federal regulations at 50 CFR 697.7(c)(1)(viii) generally 
prohibit permit holders from possessing or hauling improperly 
identified lobster trap gear. According to Federal regulations at 50 
CFR 697.21, lobster trap gear is improperly identified if the trap is 
not properly tagged to identify the vessel possessing or hauling it. In 
other words, a vessel may only possess or haul its own gear and not 
gear tagged to another. Other lobster regulations also address this 
gear possession/hauling prohibition but again do so in similarly 
circuitous, even if clear, fashion. For example, 50 CFR 
697.7(1)(c)(vii) prohibits hauling and possession of traps above a 
permit holder's trap limit, and 50 CFR 697.7(c)(xii) prohibits 
possession of a lobster trap tag issued to another vessel. Accordingly, 
hauling and possession of another vessel's lobster gear is presently 
prohibited but stating that prohibition more directly might reduce the 
perception of confusion on the issue. This Federal action will clarify 
the existing regulations to more directly state the present prohibition 
against the hauling and possession of another's lobster trap gear.

Exempt Gear Retrieval from Exempted Fishing Regulations

    Federal lobster regulations, specified at 50 CFR 697.22--Exempted 
fishing, allow the Regional Administrator to exempt any person or 
vessel from Federal lobster regulations for the conduct of exempted