Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS); U.S. Atlantic Billfish Tournament Management Measures, 26735-26741 [E7-9097]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 91 / Friday, May 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Species1
Where Listed
Common name
(23) Puget Sound Steelhead
Citation(s) for Listing Determinations
U.S.A., WA, Distinct Population Segment including all naturally spawned
anadromous O. mykiss (steelhead)
populations, from streams in the river
basins of the Strait of Juan de Fuca,
Puget Sound, and Hood Canal,
Washington, bounded to the west by
the Elwha River (inclusive) and to
the north by the Nooksack River and
Dakota Creek (inclusive), as well as
the Green River natural and Hamma
Hamma winter-run steelhead hatchery stocks.
[Insert FEDERAL REGISTER page citation]May
11, 2007
Scientific name
Oncorhynchus
mykiss
26735
Citation(s) for Critical Habitat
NA
*****
1Species includes taxonomic species, subspecies, distinct population segments (DPSs) (for a policy statement, see 61 FR 4722, February 7,
1996), and evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) (for a policy statement, see 56 FR 58612, November 20, 1991)
[FR Doc. E7–9089 Filed 5–10–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 635
[Docket No. 070307055–7099–02; I.D.
022607F]
RIN 0648–AV25
Atlantic Highly Migratory Species
(HMS); U.S. Atlantic Billfish
Tournament Management Measures
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This final rule suspends
mandatory circle hook requirements for
participants in Atlantic billfish fishing
tournaments through December 31,
2007. Circle hook requirements will be
reinstated unchanged effective 12:01
a.m., January 1, 2008. The suspension is
intended to increase post-release
survival rates of Atlantic billfish in the
long-term by providing an additional
phase-in period during which Atlantic
billfish tournament anglers can become
more proficient and familiar with circle
hooks and their ecological benefits,
respectively.
DATES: In this final rule, § 635.21,
paragraph (e)(2)(iii), is suspended from
May 11, 2007 to December 31, 2007, and
is revised effective January 1, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final
Environmental Assessment/Regulatory
Impact Review/Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (Final EA/RIR/
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:01 May 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
FRFA) are available from the Highly
Migratory Species Management Division
website at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms
or can be obtained by contacting Russell
Dunn or Randy Blankinship (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Russell Dunn or Randy Blankinship, by
phone: 727–824–5399; by fax: 727–824–
5398.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S.
recreational fishery for Atlantic billfish
is managed under the Consolidated
Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Fishery
Management Plan (FMP). Implementing
regulations at 50 CFR part 635 are
issued under the authority of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act) (16 U.S.C. 1801
et seq.), and the Atlantic Tunas
Convention Act (ATCA) (16 U.S.C. 971
et seq).
Background
NMFS recently finalized a
Consolidated HMS FMP (October 2,
2006; 71 FR 58058) that consolidated
and replaced previous FMPs for Atlantic
Billfish and Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish,
and Sharks. The Consolidated HMS
FMP is implemented by regulations at
50 CFR part 635.
Prior to January 1, 2007, the
recreational Atlantic billfish fishery was
subject to regulations that required
fishing permits, limited allowable gears
to rod and reel only, established
minimum legal size limits, specified
landing form of retained billfish,
mandated reporting of billfish landings,
required registration of all recreational
HMS fishing tournaments and reporting
by tournaments that are selected for
reporting, prohibited the retention of
longbill spearfish, and prohibited sale of
any billfish, among other measures. The
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
final rule implementing the
Consolidated HMS FMP implemented
additional regulations that applied to
the Atlantic recreational billfish fishery.
Effective January 1, 2007, these
regulations require anglers fishing from
HMS permitted vessels and
participating in Atlantic billfish
tournaments to use only non-offset
circle hooks when deploying natural
baits or natural bait/artificial lure
combinations. The regulations allow the
use of J-hooks (the hook-type
traditionally used in this fishery) with
artificial lures in tournaments, and do
not impose hook requirements on
recreational fishermen fishing outside of
Atlantic billfish tournaments.
Additionally, the final rule limits U.S.
landings of Atlantic blue and white
marlin to 250 individual fish, combined,
on an annual basis.
In response to continuing public
input on the Atlantic billfish
tournament circle hook regulations,
NMFS released a draft environmental
assessment and published a proposed
rule on March 15, 2007 (72 FR 12154),
that included a preferred alternative to
suspend Atlantic billfish tournament
circle hook requirements through
December 31, 2007. The EA considered
three alternatives. Information regarding
these alternatives was provided in the
proposed rule and is not repeated here.
Response to Comments
The public comment period for the
proposed rule was open from March 15,
2007 to March 30, 2007. During that
time, NMFS held three public hearings
and received comments from 111
individuals or organizations. A
summary of the major comments
received, along with NMFS’ responses
are provided below.
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
26736
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 91 / Friday, May 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Comment 1: Several commenters in
favor of Alternative 1, the no action
alternative (status quo), stated that the
existing measure is necessary to protect
Atlantic white marlin stocks and
promote rebuilding. Similarly other
commenters felt that maintaining the
circle hook requirement would be
beneficial in reducing the likelihood of
listing white marlin as endangered or
threatened under the Endangered
Species Act.
Response: NMFS agrees that
maintaining the circle hook requirement
would continue to provide post-release
hooking mortality benefits; however,
given the short duration of the circle
hook suspension, NMFS projects that it
will result in a one-time limited number
of additional white marlin post-release
mortalities that would not adversely
affect the Atlantic wide stock in a
measurable way. NMFS believes that the
provision of an additional phase-in
period during which anglers can
become more proficient, comfortable,
and accepting of circle hooks will, in
the long-term, offset the short-term
increase in mortalities by resulting in
greater long-term compliance with circle
hook regulations. The white marlin
listing review, conducted under the
Endangered Species Act, is currently
underway. The biological review team
conducting the review may consider the
impacts of all fishery management
measures in effect including circle hook
requirements when making its
recommendations. NMFS cannot predict
the outcome of the review team’s
deliberations or the direct impact that
any particular regulation may have on
the outcome of such deliberations.
Comment 2: NMFS received comment
in support of Alternative 1, the no
action alternative (status quo), because
commenters felt there are many
different ways of rigging baits with
circle hooks that have been tested and
proven to work.
Response: NMFS received similar
comment during and following
development of the circle hook
requirement from anglers stating that
successful methods of rigging baits with
circle hooks exist and are practiced.
NMFS agrees that appropriate rigging
techniques for circle hooks exist which
allow anglers to successfully catch
Atlantic billfish. Further, Prince et al.
2002, found no statistical difference
between catch rates between circle
hooks and J-hooks using both natural
dead bait trolling and live bait drifting/
kite fishing techniques. Additionally,
several popular articles have been
published in major sportfishing
magazines that highlight some of these
methods. However, NMFS believes that
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:01 May 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
an improved long-term ecological
benefit can be achieved by allowing an
additional phase-in period for the
reasons discussed in the response to
Comment 1.
Comment 3: The Maryland
Department of Natural Resources
(MDNR) expressed support for
alternative 1, the no action alternative
(status quo). MDNR cited its work with
the recreational fishing community and
the billfish tournament directors in
Maryland to educate anglers regarding
the conservation benefits of circle hook
use and stated that the major billfish
tournaments in Maryland anticipated
the circle hook requirement and
prepared for it. MDNR cited success
with implementation of circle hook
requirements in Maryland’s special
catch and release fishery for striped bass
in the Chesapeake Bay and stated that
suspending the circle hook requirement
for Atlantic billfish tournaments would
send the wrong message to recreational
anglers.
Response: NMFS appreciates the
conservation efforts of the MDNR. The
suspension of the circle hook
requirement in Atlantic billfish
tournaments is a temporary measure
with the purpose of providing
additional time for anglers to become
more familiar with techniques for
rigging and fishing with circle hooks in
Atlantic billfish tournaments, thus
resulting in improved long-term
compliance with the circle hook
requirement upon reimplementation.
NMFS has worked to increase
awareness among anglers of the benefits
of circle hooks and will continue to do
so during and following the temporary
suspension.
Comment 4: NMFS received comment
in support of alternative 1, the no action
alternative (status quo), because of the
lack of time for tournament operators to
get the word to all potential participants
about what gear is allowed.
Alternatively, NMFS received comment
in support of the preferred alternative so
that tournament rules would not have to
be rewritten this year as some
tournaments may have published their
rules using 2006 regulations.
Response: NMFS received comment
from multiple tournament operators
indicating that some tournaments
prepared for the circle hook requirement
when it was implemented on January 1,
2007, while others were unaware or did
not prepare. NMFS appreciates the
concerns of tournament operators and
anglers regarding the need to know what
gear configurations are available for use
in advance. NMFS also appreciates
those constituents that were aware of
and prepared for the requirement and
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
regrets that tournament rules may need
to be reprinted as a result of the
temporary suspension of the regulation.
NMFS also points out that tournaments
in some areas of the Atlantic and Gulf
of Mexico have voluntarily
implemented circle hook requirements
in recent years and the temporary
suspension of the requirement does not
prevent this. NMFS encourages anglers
and tournament operators to stay
informed of HMS management issues
and actions by visiting https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/ and
signing up for the electronic bulletin,
Atlantic HMS News.
Comment 5: NMFS received comment
in support of the preferred alternative,
temporarily suspend the Atlantic
billfish circle hook requirement, that
expressed a desire for NMFS to use the
suspension period to accomplish several
tasks. These suggestions include:
improve the circle hook definition;
investigate the availability of circle
hooks for the recreational billfishing
tackle market; investigate the postrelease hooking mortality rates of J-hook
and circle hook rigged natural and
natural bait/artificial lure combination
baits trolled at high speed such as is
used frequently when targeting blue
marlin; investigate the possibility of a
minimum size J-hook that could be
allowed when high speed trolling for
blue marlin; investigate post-release
mortality of billfish when lures with
double hooks are used; investigate how
the circle hook requirement affects
tournaments with mixed target species;
investigate whether the circle hook
requirement would accomplish its
intended objective or not; and
investigate post-release hooking
mortality differences between different
presentations of J-hooks with live baits.
Response: NMFS agrees that
information from studies such as some
of those mentioned during public
comment may be useful for refining
management of the billfish fishery in the
future as additional data become
available. NMFS is working on a
number of these issues including
improving the definition of circle hooks
and the potential for additional postrelease mortality studies examining
various gear and technique
configurations.
Comment 6: NMFS received comment
in favor of the preferred alternative,
temporarily suspend the Atlantic
billfish circle hook requirement;
however, commenters expressed a
desire for modifications to the circle
hook requirement upon reimplementation. Commenters indicated
that these modifications are popular for
use when targeting blue marlin and are
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 91 / Friday, May 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
less damaging to all billfish than J-hooks
used with live or dead natural baits on
light tackle. Some commenters making
this suggestion stated that some of these
modifications would help reduce the
impact to anglers fishing in mixed
species tournaments. Some commenters
stated that these modifications would
allow the continuation of North
Carolina’s historic and traditional
method of fishing for blue marlin using
heavy tackle and/or lure/bait
combinations rigged with J-hooks and
trolled at high speed. Suggested
modifications included creating an
exemption to the circle hook
requirement to allow J-hook use with
heavy tackle and/or lure/bait
combinations trolled at high speed and
creating an exemption to the circle hook
requirement to allow J-hook use if the
main line is less than 50 lb. test, less
than 80 lb. test, leader size is less then
200 lb. test, hook is at least a certain size
that cannot be be swallowed easily by
a billfish (hook size suggestions were 9/
0, 10/0, 11/0 and 12/0), or some
combination of these criteria.
Response: NMFS acknowledges that
limited information from the few blue
marlin tagged with pop-off satellite
archival tags (PSATs) (9 fish) in the
study by Graves et al. (2001) shows
relatively low rates of post-release
mortality for blue marlin caught on Jhooks when certain gear configurations
and techniques are employed. However,
the sample size of this one study is
limited and no information exists on the
impacts of combination baits with Jhooks on white marlin and other billfish
species. NMFS implemented the
regulations requiring circle hooks on
natural baits and natural bait/artificial
lure combinations based on a number of
considerations that are detailed in the
Final Environmental Impact Statement
(FEIS) for the Consolidated HMS FMP.
The basis for that decision included, but
was not limited to: the post-release
survival benefits of circle hooks for
billfish and many other species
identified in a number studies,
comparable catch rates of billfish
between circle hooks and J-hooks
identified in available studies, the poor
stock status of some Atlantic billfish
species, the limited amount of available
data on various gear configurations, and
enforcement issues. NMFS will consider
new information on the effects of the
fishing methods mentioned above on
fish condition and post-release mortality
as it becomes available. NMFS
acknowledges that the circle hook
requirement in Atlantic billfish
tournaments may have impacts on
secondary fisheries including wahoo,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:01 May 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
king mackerel, dolphin, tunas, and other
fisheries and has limited these impacts
to the extent feasible in the creation of
the circle hook requirement by applying
it narrowly to only HMS permitted
vessels participating in tournaments
with award categories for Atlantic
billfish. NMFS will consider new
information on ways to limit impacts of
HMS requirements on non-HMS
fisheries as it becomes available. NMFS
acknowledges that a traditional
recreational fishery exists for blue
marlin in the Atlantic and Gulf of
Mexico that utilizes different fishing
techniques in different locations and
situations. The fishing technique of
using heavy tackle and/or lure/bait
combinations rigged with J-hooks and
trolled at high speed is used in several
locations throughout the Atlantic and
Gulf of Mexico. The fishery
management strategy employed to
reduce post-release hooking mortality of
Atlantic billfish through the circle hook
requirement in Atlantic billfish
tournaments is a modification of the
techniques used in this fishery. NMFS
received public comment during and
following development of the circle
hook requirement from anglers that
successful methods of rigging baits with
circle hooks exist and are practiced.
Additionally, several articles have been
published in major sportfishing
magazines that highlight some of these
methods. NMFS believes that through
this and other fishery management
strategies, the traditional recreational
fishery for blue marlin and other
Atlantic billfish may be improved by
promoting stock rebuilding.
Comment 7: NMFS received comment
from the North Carolina Division of
Marine Fisheries (NCDMF) indicating
their support for the preferred
alternative, temporarily suspend the
Atlantic billfish circle hook
requirement. NCDMF stated that the
current rule may negatively impact
angler’s ability to catch blue marlin.
Concern was expressed over the impacts
of mandating circle hook use for natural
baits and natural bait/combinations for
all tackle sizes. NCDMF encouraged
NMFS to explore the circle hook
definition, conduct research on release
mortality of billfish released on heavy
tackle with J-hooks, research the
difference in catch rates of circle and Jhooks for non-billfish species targeted
in tournaments, and explore recently
raised questions concerning post-release
mortality of billfish caught on double
hooked lures. NCDMF expressed
concern that a shortage of large nonoffset circle hooks to supply the billfish
fishery may exist.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
26737
Response: NMFS appreciates the
comments of the NCDMF. The purpose
of the temporary suspension of the
circle hook requirement in Atlantic
billfish tournaments is to allow
additional time for anglers to become
more familiar with techniques for
rigging and fishing with circle hooks in
Atlantic billfish tournaments, thus
resulting in improved long-term
compliance with the requirement upon
reimplementation. As discussed in the
response to Comment 6, NMFS received
comment during and following
development of the circle hook
requirement from anglers stating that
successful methods of rigging baits with
circle hooks exist and are practiced.
Additionally, several articles have been
published in major sportfishing
magazines that highlight some of these
methods.
Regarding the application of the circle
hook requirement for all tackle sizes,
NMFS developed the requirement with
consideration for several different
concerns which included application to
the targeted fishery and the ease of
enforcement, as well as other
considerations identified in the
response to Comment 6 and discussed
in detail in the FEIS for the
Consolidated HMS FMP. NMFS believes
that the requirements for the use of
circle hooks by permitted HMS
fishermen when natural bait and natural
bait/artificial lures are deployed in
billfish tournaments improve its
enforceability. Related to application of
the requirement to all tackle sizes and
researching post-release mortality for
various tackle types, NMFS will
consider new information on the effects
of the fishing methods on fish condition
and post-release hooking mortality, as it
becomes available. NMFS has not
received information indicating that a
shortage of large non-offset circle hooks
exists other than that contained in
NCDMF’s comment. The circle hook
requirement was finalized in October
2006 and became effective January 1,
2007, providing time for circle hook
manufacturers and retail stores to
increase inventory. The Atlantic billfish
tournament season is protracted and
peaks in the late spring and summer
months, thereby providing additional
time for manufacturers and retailers to
prepare for demand. The preferred
alternative to temporarily suspend the
circle hook requirement in Atlantic
billfish tournaments may dampen the
peak in demand for circle hooks in 2007
as anglers will not be required to use
circle hooks, but may still desire to
practice with them in preparation for reimplementation of the requirement on
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
26738
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 91 / Friday, May 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
January 1, 2008. However, as
mentioned, NMFS has received no
information from anglers, distributors,
tackle shops, tournament operators, or
manufacturers that a real or potential
shortage of hooks exists.
Comment 8: NMFS received comment
in favor of non-preferred alternative 3,
remove Atlantic billfish tournament
circle hook requirements, for various
reasons including: insufficient data to
implement a circle hook requirement in
billfish tournaments; voluntary use of
circle hooks should continue to be
encouraged; fear that similar
requirements will be imposed in all
offshore trolling for any species to
reduce billfish post-release mortality;
concerns that circle hooks lodging in the
corner of the jaw actually are the most
painful and cause long-term damage to
the fish resulting in a decreased ability
of the fish to feed and increased rates of
death relative to billfish caught with Jhooks.
Response: NMFS disagrees that there
is insufficient data to implement a circle
hook requirement in billfish
tournaments. NMFS has relied on
publicly available peer-reviewed
scientific papers and available
recreational data sets in developing its
analyses. The assumptions made to
support the use of circle hooks are
clearly articulated in Chapter 4 of the
Consolidated HMS FMP. NMFS agrees
that voluntary circle hook use in HMS
fisheries outside of Atlantic billfish
tournaments should be encouraged.
Voluntary use of circle hooks was
promoted in the years prior to
implementation of the circle hook
regulation on January 1, 2007; however,
this voluntary promotion only achieved
limited success in transitioning
recreational anglers to circle hooks in
the Atlantic billfish fishery. NMFS does
not anticipate that continued promotion
of voluntary circle hook use alone by
tournament anglers would result in
achieving the maximum conservation
benefit possible of reduced post-release
mortality of Atlantic billfish relative to
the no action alternative. NMFS
acknowledges that requiring circle
hooks in all HMS fisheries could have
impacts on secondary fisheries,
including tunas, sharks, dolphin,
wahoo, king mackerel, etc., and other
inshore fisheries and has taken steps to
minimize these impacts, as discussed
under the response to comment 6.
NMFS disagrees that circle hooks
lodging in the corner of the jaw are more
damaging to fish in the long-term and
result in fish death more frequently than
with J-hooks. This comment is not
supported by peer reviewed scientific
literature showing lower post-release
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:01 May 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
mortality of white marlin when caught
with circle hooks in comparison with Jhooks and showing less damaging hook
location in sailfish and blue marlin
when caught with circle hooks in
comparison with J-hooks.
Comment 9: NMFS received comment
from lure manufacturers stating that
rigging circle hooks with hard headed
artificial lures and natural baits is an
ineffective method of catching billfish
and has resulted in substantial loss of
lure sales. One manufacturer stated that
the combined economic impact from
Central American circle hook
requirements and the domestic circle
hook requirement implemented in
January 2007, the requirement was large
enough to cause his company to go out
of business. Similarly, another lure
manufacturer stated that hard headed
lures with nylon skirts are designed to
be trolled at high speed in conjunction
with natural baits and J-hooks resulting
in almost all fish being hooked in the
mouth. One manufacturer expressed
support for alternative 3, removal of
Atlantic billfish tournament circle hook
requirements, and another requested
that NMFS further investigate an
exemption for artificial lure/natural bait
combinations rigged with J-hooks and
trolled at high speed.
Response: NMFS appreciates the
comment that economic impacts may
have occurred as a result of previous
rulemaking to implement the circle
hook requirement on January 1, 2007.
As discussed in the response to
Comment 6, NMFS received comment
during and following development of
the circle hook requirement from
anglers stating that successful methods
of rigging baits with circle hooks exist
and are practiced. Additionally, several
articles have been published in major
sportfishing magazines that highlight
some of these methods including
methods to rig and fish with hard
headed lures with nylon skirts used in
combination with natural baits. NMFS
acknowledges that investigating
questions about certain gear and rigging
types such as that mentioned above may
provide additional useful information in
the future and will consider these issues
when identifying future research
priorities.
Comment 10: NMFS received
comment that no data exists to support
application of the circle hook
requirement to blue marlin fishing
methods that employ circle hook rigged
baits trolled at high speed. These
comments stated that the damage to
billfish when J-hooks are used in baits
trolled at high speed is less than when
J-hooks are used with dead or live
natural baits on light tackle. These
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
comments also stated that no data exists
to support the concept of the circle hook
requirement that large baits, lures, or
artificial/natural combination baits
rigged with circle hooks and trolled at
high speed result in an adequate hookup rate.
Response: As discussed in the
response to Comment 6, NMFS
developed the circle hook requirement
in Atlantic billfish tournaments with
consideration for several different
concerns, including but not limited to:
the post-release survival benefits of
circle hooks for multiple billfish species
and other species identified in a several
studies, comparable catch rates of
various billfishes between circle hooks
and J-hooks as identified in available
studies, the poor stock status of some
Atlantic billfish species, and
enforcement issues. Accordingly, the
rule applies to natural and natural/
artificial combination baits. NMFS
acknowledges that limited information
from the few blue marlin tagged with
PSATs (9 fish) in the study by Graves et
al. (2001) shows relatively low rates of
post-release mortality for blue marlin
caught on J-hooks when certain gear
configurations and techniques are
employed. No information exists,
however, on the impacts of this fishing
technique on white marlin and other
billfish species. With this uncertainty of
impacts in particular to white marlin,
the regulation was developed in a
manner to provide additional protection
to severely overfished Atlantic
billfishes. NMFS will consider new
information on the effects of the fishing
methods mentioned above on fish
condition and post-release hooking
mortality, as it becomes available. As
discussed in the response to Comment
6, NMFS received comment during and
following development of the circle
hook requirement from anglers that
successful methods of rigging baits with
circle hooks exist and are practiced.
Additionally, several articles have been
published in major sportfishing
magazines that highlight some of these
methods including methods to rig and
fish with hard headed lures with nylon
skirts used in combination with natural
baits.
Comment 11: NMFS received
comment suggesting that fees be
assessed on all HMS recreational
permits and HMS registered
tournaments to fund PSAT tagging for
post- release mortality comparisons
between circle hooks and J-hooks.
Response: NMFS appreciates the
suggestion as funding for continued
post-release mortality studies in
Atlantic billfish fisheries is needed.
Suggestions for research funding will be
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 91 / Friday, May 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
considered as future research needs are
assessed.
Comment 12: NMFS received
comment that the existing circle hook
requirement is not compatible with
mixed species tournaments and will
reduce the ability of anglers to catch
wahoo, dolphin, tuna, and others.
Response: NMFS understands that the
circle hook requirement in Atlantic
billfish tournaments will affect anglers
in HMS permitted vessels targeting
species other than Atlantic billfish.
Many pelagic fish species are found in
the same areas as Atlantic billfish and
feed on similar prey. Atlantic billfish
may be caught in many areas using the
same fishing methods employed for
other pelagic species such as wahoo,
dolphin, tuna, king mackerel, and
others; therefore, circle hooks are
necessary in that portion of the
tournament fishery. NMFS sought to
minimize the impacts on secondary
species by limiting the applicability of
circle hook regulations as discussed in
the response to Comment 6.
Comment 13: NMFS received
comment that the existing circle hook
requirement is not enforceable and
relies on tournament operators as the
only enforcement agent. NMFS also
received public comment that the circle
hook requirement would be enforceable.
Response: The requirements for the
use of circle hooks by permitted HMS
fishermen when natural bait and natural
bait/artificial lures are deployed in
billfish tournaments can be adequately
enforced by NOAA Enforcement and the
United States Coast Guard. As most
tournament’s rules require anglers to
comply with all applicable state and
federal regulations, NMFS believes that
an important incentive for anglers to
comply with regulations is the potential
to have a prize-winning fish disqualified
for not deploying a circle hook when
required.
Comment 14: NMFS received
comment that all fishing tournaments
should be banned.
Response: NMFS disagrees. Atlantic
HMS tournaments represent an
important component of a robust
recreational fishery and provide
substantial socio-economic benefits to
many communities. Further,
tournaments represent an essential
mechanism for obtaining significant
amounts of data on many species that
are incorporated into fish population
assessments and management decisions.
Comment 15: NMFS received
comment that tournaments are venues
that could provide a large number of
interactions with marlin and should be
used to collect data to answer the post-
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:01 May 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
release hooking mortality questions for
blue and white marlin.
Response: NMFS appreciates the
interest in collecting post-release
hooking mortality information and
agrees that tournaments can provide, for
some fishery management issues, a
venue for collecting fisheries
information via appropriately designed
data collection protocols. Such
situations have been and continue to be
valuable for collecting billfish
information such as through the
Recreational Billfish Survey and other
life history studies. Such activity is not
affected by this rulemaking.
Comment 16: NMFS received
comment that the recreational fishing
mortality level for billfish does not
compare to the much larger pelagic
longline mortality level thus the circle
hook requirement in Atlantic billfish
tournaments is directed at the wrong
mortality source.
Response: The United States is
responsible for approximately 4.5
percent of reported white marlin catches
in the Atlantic. As explained in
Appendix C of the 2006 Consolidated
HMS FMP, average annual fishing
mortality levels imposed by the
domestic pelagic longline fishery and
the recreational tournament fishery on
Atlantic white marlin are roughly
comparable. Based on pelagic longline
logbook data and data from the
Recreational Billfish Survey, the level of
billfish mortality imposed by U.S.
recreational billfish tournament
fishermen is estimated to be
approximately 71% of levels imposed
by the U.S. pelagic longline fishery.
While the post-release mortality rate of
Atlantic white marlin is estimated to be
lower in recreational fisheries than in
the pelagic longline fishery, the size of
the recreational tournament fishery is
large enough to generally offset the
difference in mortality rates.
Comment 17: NMFS received several
comments that the preferred alternative,
suspend Atlantic billfish tournament
circle hook requirements through the
close of 2007, is not favorable. These
include: the proposed rule is not
precautionary; compliance with the
already established rule would be 100
percent; the proposed rule is not
supported by the record; there is a lack
of parity with this proposed rule as an
extended phase-in period is proposed
for recreational anglers, but there was
no grace period for commercial
fishermen when circle hooks were
required; the timing of proposed rule is
bad as tournaments are in May and June
and anglers should be practicing with
circle hooks already.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
26739
Response: NMFS appreciates the
comment that temporary suspension of
the circle hook rule is not precautionary
and that compliance would be 100
percent. NMFS disagrees that temporary
suspension of the circle hook
requirement is not supported by the
record as the rule will be reimplemented January 1, 2008. NMFS
agrees that maintaining the circle hook
requirement would continue to provide
post-release hooking mortality benefits;
however, given the short duration of the
circle hook suspension, NMFS projects
that it will result in a one-time limited
number of additional white marlin postrelease mortalities that would not affect
the Atlantic wide stock in a measurable
way. NMFS believes that the provision
of an additional phase-in period during
which anglers can become more
proficient, comfortable, and accepting of
circle hooks will, in the long-term, offset
the short-term increase in mortalities by
resulting in greater long-term
compliance with circle hook
regulations. NMFS disagrees that there
is a lack of parity between
implementation of the circle hook
requirement in Atlantic billfish
tournaments and the circle hook
requirement for the pelagic longline
(PLL) fishery because the bases for the
two actions are different. The circle
hook requirement in Atlantic billfish
tournaments is a domestic measure
intended to aid in rebuilding Atlantic
billfish stocks by reducing post-release
fishing mortality to the extent
practicable at this time. The circle hook
requirement in the Atlantic PLL fishery
responds to issuance of the 2004
Biological Opinion which determined
that continued operation of the pelagic
longline fishery without changes in
fishing gears or techniques would
jeopardize the existence of leatherback
sea turtles. Per the Endangered Species
Act, the Agency was required to
implement changes in the way the
pelagic longline operated. Rapid
implementation of the circle hook
requirement for PLL was necessary for
the fishery to continue operating. This
rulemaking is intended to reduce postrelease mortality of Atlantic billfish in
the long-term by temporarily
suspending the circle hook requirement
in Atlantic billfish tournaments to allow
tournaments and tournament anglers
additional time to become more familiar
with techniques for rigging and fishing
with circle hooks.
Comment 18: NMFS received
comment that circle hook specifications
should be defined and field tested.
Commenters also stated that circle hook
rigging workshops should be held or
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
26740
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 91 / Friday, May 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
videos should be developed. NMFS also
received comment that 3 different circle
hooks were used in recent research and
all 3 worked well in reducing postrelease mortality even with differences
in their general design. Additionally,
comment was received that it is
important to stay consistent with what
the international community is using as
a definition of circle hooks because of
tackle manufacturing and to reduce
confusion.
Response: NMFS appreciates the
numerous comments received about
circle hook definition issues and is
involved in discussions with hook
manufacturers and gear experts to
address many of these concerns.
Further, NMFS is not aware of an
internationally accepted definition of
circle hooks. The Agency may consider
this issue in future rulemaking, as
appropriate.
Changes from the Proposed Rule
There are no changes from the
proposed rule.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
Classification
This final rule is published under the
authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act,
16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. NMFS has
determined that this final rule is
consistent with the national standards
of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, other
provisions of the Act, and other
applicable laws.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), the
Assistant Administrator finds that this
final action relieves a restriction and
therefore may be made effective upon its
filing with the Office of the Federal
Register. Specifically, the final action
relieves a restriction for persons fishing
from HMS permitted vessels in Atlantic
billfish tournaments to fish only with
non-offset circle hooks when using
natural or natural/ artificial combination
baits. Without this action, NMFS would
continue to require anglers to use nonoffset circle hooks when using natural
or natural/artificial combination baits in
Atlantic billfish tournaments and would
not afford anglers an additional time to
become more proficient with methods
used to rig and fish with circle hooks
and these baits. NMFS expects that this
action will improve expertise and
familiarity with methods for rigging and
fishing with circle hooks in Atlantic
billfish tournaments. As a result, NMFS
expects improved long-term compliance
with the regulation to use circle hooks
in billfish tournaments when it goes
back into effect on January 1, 2008. This
final rule has been determined to be not
significant for purposes of Executive
Order 12866.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:01 May 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
In compliance with 5 U.S.C. 604, a
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(FRFA) was prepared for this rule. The
FRFA analyzes the anticipated impacts
of the preferred alternative and any
significant alternatives to the final rule
that could minimize significant
economic impacts on small entities.
Each of the statutory requirements of
section 604 has been addressed, and a
summary of the FRFA is provided
below.
Section 604(a)(1) requires the Agency
to state the objective and need for the
rule. As stated in the preamble of the
proposed rule, the objective of this final
rule is to increase post-release survival
of Atlantic billfishes by improving longterm compliance with billfish
tournament non-offset circle hook
regulations. Maximizing post-release
survival of Atlantic billfishes is an
important facet of rebuilding overfished
Atlantic billfish stocks.
Section 604(a)(2) requires the Agency
to summarize significant issues raised
by the public in response to the Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), a
summary of the assessment of the
agency of such issues, and a statement
of any changes made in the rule as a
result of such comments. NMFS
received numerous comments on the
proposed rule and draft EA during the
public comment period. A summary of
these comments and the Agency’s
responses is included in this final rule.
NMFS did not receive any comments
specific to the IRFA, but did receive one
comment related to economic issues and
concerns. Specifically, one fishing gear
manufacturer stated that the combined
impacts of a circle hook requirement
imposed by a Central American country
and the U.S. Atlantic billfish
tournament circle hook requirement
implemented domestically in January
2007 (cited previously) cost his
company and others several hundred
thousand dollars in lost revenues which
was large enough to cause his company
to go out of business. As such, this
commenter supported a repeal of the
circle hook regulations.
NMFS appreciates that economic
impacts may have occurred as a result
of previous rulemaking to implement
the circle hook requirement on January
1, 2007; however, as noted by the
commenter, these impacts resulted from
a combination of foreign regulations and
a previous domestic rulemaking. This
comment is responded to fully with
other comments (see Comment 9). The
preferred alternative in this final rule
could have minor short-term positive
impacts on the sales of fishing lures
used in conjunction with natural baits
by temporarily allowing anglers to
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
utilize J-hooks. While the final rule has
the effect of temporarily allowing
anglers to utilize J-hooks, the circle
hook suspension was not made as a
result of this comment.
Section 604(a)(3) of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act requires the Agency to
describe and provide an estimate of the
number of small entities to which the
rule will apply. NMFS considers all
HMS permit holders to be small entities
because they either had gross receipts
less than $4.0 million for fishharvesting, gross receipts less than $6.5
million for charter/party boats, or 100 or
fewer employees for wholesale dealers.
These are the Small Business
Association size standards for defining
a small versus large business entity in
these industries. As of January 29, 2007,
the potential universe of affected anglers
included: 24,664 HMS Angling category
permit holders; 4,140 HMS Charter/
Headboat category permit holders, and
4,345 General category permit holders.
All of the aforementioned permit
holders are eligible to participate in
registered Atlantic HMS tournaments.
Section 604(a)(4) of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act requires the Agency to
describe the projected reporting, record
keeping, and other compliance
requirements of the final rule, including
an estimate of the classes of small
entities which would be subject to the
requirements of the report or record.
None of the alternatives considered for
this final rule would result in additional
reporting, recordkeeping, and
compliance requirements.
Section 604(a)(5) of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act requires the Agency to
describe the steps taken to minimize the
significant economic impact on small
entities consistent with the stated
objectives of applicable statutes. NMFS
believes that this final rule minimizes
impacts on small entities by temporarily
suspending circle hook requirements for
HMS tournaments, to allow participants
additional time to become proficient in
the use of circle hooks and familiar with
their ecological benefits. The alternative
to permanently suspend the circle hook
requirement would not achieve MSA
rebuilding objectives for these fisheries.
As described below, NMFS
considered three alternatives in this
final rulemaking and provides
justification for selection of the
preferred alternative to achieve the
desired objective.
The alternatives considered included:
maintain existing non-offset circle hook
requirements for anglers fishing from
HMS permitted vessels and
participating in Atlantic billfish
tournaments (alternative 1, No Action);
suspend non-offset circle hook
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 91 / Friday, May 11, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES
requirements for anglers fishing from
HMS permitted vessels and
participating in Atlantic billfish
tournaments through December 31, 2007
(alternative 2, preferred alternative);
and, remove Atlantic billfish
tournament circle hook requirements
and promote voluntary use of circle
hooks by tournament anglers
(alternative 3).
Alternative 1 is considered the no
action alternative since it would
maintain unchanged the Atlantic
billfish circle hook regulations that were
implemented on January 1, 2007. This
alternative is not preferred because, in
part, it is less likely to improve longterm compliance with circle hook
regulations, and thus be less likely to
maximize post-release survival of
Atlantic billfish than the preferred
alternative because it does not provide
adequate time for anglers to familiarize
themselves with circle hooks and
increase angler’s acceptance of them.
Alternative 1, the No Action alternative,
would have no new economic impacts
beyond those that were included in
previous rulemaking. Alternative 2
could result in a minor short-term
increase in billfish tournament
participation given the perceptions held
by many anglers that J-hooks may
increase the odds of landing a billfish.
No additional costs for billfish
tournament participants are likely
because NMFS anticipates that anglers
already possess J-hook related tackle, as
this was the standard gear used in the
fishery prior to January 1, 2007, and is
still authorized for use outside of
billfish tournaments.
Alternative 3 was considered, but not
fully analyzed in the Environmental
Assessment because voluntary
promotion of circle hook use in the
years prior to implementation of the
circle hook regulation on January 1,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:01 May 10, 2007
Jkt 211001
2007, did not achieve a high percentage
of recreational angler use of circle hooks
in the Atlantic billfish fishery. As such,
NMFS does not anticipate that
continued promotion of voluntary circle
hook use alone by tournament anglers
would result in achieving the maximum
conservation benefit possible of reduced
post-release mortality of Atlantic billfish
relative to the no action alternative.
Alternative 3 could result in minor
short-term increases in angler consumer
surplus and/or willingness to pay, as
anglers may perceive that their shortterm catch rates of Atlantic billfish may
increase with the use of J-hooks.
However, alternative 3 would not be
expected to increase either consumer
surplus or willingness to pay in the
long-term as it would result in an
increase in post-release hooking
mortality and thus be less likely to
contribute to rebuilding of Atlantic
billfish populations. For the reasons
discussed above, this alternative was
not selected as the preferred alternative.
Alternative 2 may result in minor
increases in printing and distribution
costs to tournament operators if
tournament rules need to be reprinted
and redistributed. Tournaments could
avoid additional printing costs if they
voluntarily chose to maintain an all
circle hook tournament format, which
some tournaments have notified NMFS
that they will do. There may be a longterm increase in angler consumer
surplus resulting from rebuilding efforts
through either alternatives 1 or 2, and
therefore resulting in a potential
increase in demand for billfish
tournament participation. However,
these benefits may be realized sooner
under alternative 2, should it lead to
increased acceptance and use of circle
hooks. As such, and based on the
analysis included in the EA for this
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
26741
rulemaking, alternative 2 was selected
the preferred alternative.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 635
Fish, Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing
vessels, Management.
Dated: May 8, 2007.
William T. Hogarth
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
For reasons set out in the preamble, 50
CFR part 635 is amended as follows:
I
PART 635—ATLANTIC HIGHLY
MIGRATORY SPECIES
1. The authority citation for part 635
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.; 16 U.S.C.
1801 et seq.
2. In § 635.21, paragraph (e)(2)(iii) is
suspended from May 11, 2007 to
December 31, 2007, and is revised
effective January 1, 2008, to read as
follows:
I
§ 635.21 Gear operation and deployment
restrictions.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) After December 31, 2007, persons
who have been issued or are required to
be issued a permit under this part and
who are participating in a
‘‘tournament’’, as defined in § 635.2,
that bestows points, prizes, or awards
for Atlantic billfish must deploy only
non-offset circle hooks when using
natural bait or natural bait/artificial lure
combinations, and may not deploy a Jhook or an offset circle hook in
combination with natural bait or a
natural bait/artificial lure combination.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E7–9097 Filed 5–10–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
E:\FR\FM\11MYR1.SGM
11MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 91 (Friday, May 11, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26735-26741]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-9097]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 635
[Docket No. 070307055-7099-02; I.D. 022607F]
RIN 0648-AV25
Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS); U.S. Atlantic Billfish
Tournament Management Measures
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule suspends mandatory circle hook requirements
for participants in Atlantic billfish fishing tournaments through
December 31, 2007. Circle hook requirements will be reinstated
unchanged effective 12:01 a.m., January 1, 2008. The suspension is
intended to increase post-release survival rates of Atlantic billfish
in the long-term by providing an additional phase-in period during
which Atlantic billfish tournament anglers can become more proficient
and familiar with circle hooks and their ecological benefits,
respectively.
DATES: In this final rule, Sec. 635.21, paragraph (e)(2)(iii), is
suspended from May 11, 2007 to December 31, 2007, and is revised
effective January 1, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final Environmental Assessment/Regulatory
Impact Review/Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (Final EA/RIR/FRFA)
are available from the Highly Migratory Species Management Division
website at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms or can be obtained by contacting
Russell Dunn or Randy Blankinship (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Russell Dunn or Randy Blankinship, by
phone: 727-824-5399; by fax: 727-824-5398.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. recreational fishery for Atlantic
billfish is managed under the Consolidated Highly Migratory Species
(HMS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP). Implementing regulations at 50 CFR
part 635 are issued under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) (16 U.S.C. 1801
et seq.), and the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (ATCA) (16 U.S.C. 971
et seq).
Background
NMFS recently finalized a Consolidated HMS FMP (October 2, 2006; 71
FR 58058) that consolidated and replaced previous FMPs for Atlantic
Billfish and Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish, and Sharks. The Consolidated
HMS FMP is implemented by regulations at 50 CFR part 635.
Prior to January 1, 2007, the recreational Atlantic billfish
fishery was subject to regulations that required fishing permits,
limited allowable gears to rod and reel only, established minimum legal
size limits, specified landing form of retained billfish, mandated
reporting of billfish landings, required registration of all
recreational HMS fishing tournaments and reporting by tournaments that
are selected for reporting, prohibited the retention of longbill
spearfish, and prohibited sale of any billfish, among other measures.
The final rule implementing the Consolidated HMS FMP implemented
additional regulations that applied to the Atlantic recreational
billfish fishery.
Effective January 1, 2007, these regulations require anglers
fishing from HMS permitted vessels and participating in Atlantic
billfish tournaments to use only non-offset circle hooks when deploying
natural baits or natural bait/artificial lure combinations. The
regulations allow the use of J-hooks (the hook-type traditionally used
in this fishery) with artificial lures in tournaments, and do not
impose hook requirements on recreational fishermen fishing outside of
Atlantic billfish tournaments. Additionally, the final rule limits U.S.
landings of Atlantic blue and white marlin to 250 individual fish,
combined, on an annual basis.
In response to continuing public input on the Atlantic billfish
tournament circle hook regulations, NMFS released a draft environmental
assessment and published a proposed rule on March 15, 2007 (72 FR
12154), that included a preferred alternative to suspend Atlantic
billfish tournament circle hook requirements through December 31, 2007.
The EA considered three alternatives. Information regarding these
alternatives was provided in the proposed rule and is not repeated
here.
Response to Comments
The public comment period for the proposed rule was open from March
15, 2007 to March 30, 2007. During that time, NMFS held three public
hearings and received comments from 111 individuals or organizations. A
summary of the major comments received, along with NMFS' responses are
provided below.
[[Page 26736]]
Comment 1: Several commenters in favor of Alternative 1, the no
action alternative (status quo), stated that the existing measure is
necessary to protect Atlantic white marlin stocks and promote
rebuilding. Similarly other commenters felt that maintaining the circle
hook requirement would be beneficial in reducing the likelihood of
listing white marlin as endangered or threatened under the Endangered
Species Act.
Response: NMFS agrees that maintaining the circle hook requirement
would continue to provide post-release hooking mortality benefits;
however, given the short duration of the circle hook suspension, NMFS
projects that it will result in a one-time limited number of additional
white marlin post-release mortalities that would not adversely affect
the Atlantic wide stock in a measurable way. NMFS believes that the
provision of an additional phase-in period during which anglers can
become more proficient, comfortable, and accepting of circle hooks
will, in the long-term, offset the short-term increase in mortalities
by resulting in greater long-term compliance with circle hook
regulations. The white marlin listing review, conducted under the
Endangered Species Act, is currently underway. The biological review
team conducting the review may consider the impacts of all fishery
management measures in effect including circle hook requirements when
making its recommendations. NMFS cannot predict the outcome of the
review team's deliberations or the direct impact that any particular
regulation may have on the outcome of such deliberations.
Comment 2: NMFS received comment in support of Alternative 1, the
no action alternative (status quo), because commenters felt there are
many different ways of rigging baits with circle hooks that have been
tested and proven to work.
Response: NMFS received similar comment during and following
development of the circle hook requirement from anglers stating that
successful methods of rigging baits with circle hooks exist and are
practiced. NMFS agrees that appropriate rigging techniques for circle
hooks exist which allow anglers to successfully catch Atlantic
billfish. Further, Prince et al. 2002, found no statistical difference
between catch rates between circle hooks and J-hooks using both natural
dead bait trolling and live bait drifting/kite fishing techniques.
Additionally, several popular articles have been published in major
sportfishing magazines that highlight some of these methods. However,
NMFS believes that an improved long-term ecological benefit can be
achieved by allowing an additional phase-in period for the reasons
discussed in the response to Comment 1.
Comment 3: The Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MDNR)
expressed support for alternative 1, the no action alternative (status
quo). MDNR cited its work with the recreational fishing community and
the billfish tournament directors in Maryland to educate anglers
regarding the conservation benefits of circle hook use and stated that
the major billfish tournaments in Maryland anticipated the circle hook
requirement and prepared for it. MDNR cited success with implementation
of circle hook requirements in Maryland's special catch and release
fishery for striped bass in the Chesapeake Bay and stated that
suspending the circle hook requirement for Atlantic billfish
tournaments would send the wrong message to recreational anglers.
Response: NMFS appreciates the conservation efforts of the MDNR.
The suspension of the circle hook requirement in Atlantic billfish
tournaments is a temporary measure with the purpose of providing
additional time for anglers to become more familiar with techniques for
rigging and fishing with circle hooks in Atlantic billfish tournaments,
thus resulting in improved long-term compliance with the circle hook
requirement upon reimplementation. NMFS has worked to increase
awareness among anglers of the benefits of circle hooks and will
continue to do so during and following the temporary suspension.
Comment 4: NMFS received comment in support of alternative 1, the
no action alternative (status quo), because of the lack of time for
tournament operators to get the word to all potential participants
about what gear is allowed. Alternatively, NMFS received comment in
support of the preferred alternative so that tournament rules would not
have to be rewritten this year as some tournaments may have published
their rules using 2006 regulations.
Response: NMFS received comment from multiple tournament operators
indicating that some tournaments prepared for the circle hook
requirement when it was implemented on January 1, 2007, while others
were unaware or did not prepare. NMFS appreciates the concerns of
tournament operators and anglers regarding the need to know what gear
configurations are available for use in advance. NMFS also appreciates
those constituents that were aware of and prepared for the requirement
and regrets that tournament rules may need to be reprinted as a result
of the temporary suspension of the regulation. NMFS also points out
that tournaments in some areas of the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico have
voluntarily implemented circle hook requirements in recent years and
the temporary suspension of the requirement does not prevent this. NMFS
encourages anglers and tournament operators to stay informed of HMS
management issues and actions by visiting https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/
hms/ and signing up for the electronic bulletin, Atlantic HMS News.
Comment 5: NMFS received comment in support of the preferred
alternative, temporarily suspend the Atlantic billfish circle hook
requirement, that expressed a desire for NMFS to use the suspension
period to accomplish several tasks. These suggestions include: improve
the circle hook definition; investigate the availability of circle
hooks for the recreational billfishing tackle market; investigate the
post-release hooking mortality rates of J-hook and circle hook rigged
natural and natural bait/artificial lure combination baits trolled at
high speed such as is used frequently when targeting blue marlin;
investigate the possibility of a minimum size J-hook that could be
allowed when high speed trolling for blue marlin; investigate post-
release mortality of billfish when lures with double hooks are used;
investigate how the circle hook requirement affects tournaments with
mixed target species; investigate whether the circle hook requirement
would accomplish its intended objective or not; and investigate post-
release hooking mortality differences between different presentations
of J-hooks with live baits.
Response: NMFS agrees that information from studies such as some of
those mentioned during public comment may be useful for refining
management of the billfish fishery in the future as additional data
become available. NMFS is working on a number of these issues including
improving the definition of circle hooks and the potential for
additional post-release mortality studies examining various gear and
technique configurations.
Comment 6: NMFS received comment in favor of the preferred
alternative, temporarily suspend the Atlantic billfish circle hook
requirement; however, commenters expressed a desire for modifications
to the circle hook requirement upon re-implementation. Commenters
indicated that these modifications are popular for use when targeting
blue marlin and are
[[Page 26737]]
less damaging to all billfish than J-hooks used with live or dead
natural baits on light tackle. Some commenters making this suggestion
stated that some of these modifications would help reduce the impact to
anglers fishing in mixed species tournaments. Some commenters stated
that these modifications would allow the continuation of North
Carolina's historic and traditional method of fishing for blue marlin
using heavy tackle and/or lure/bait combinations rigged with J-hooks
and trolled at high speed. Suggested modifications included creating an
exemption to the circle hook requirement to allow J-hook use with heavy
tackle and/or lure/bait combinations trolled at high speed and creating
an exemption to the circle hook requirement to allow J-hook use if the
main line is less than 50 lb. test, less than 80 lb. test, leader size
is less then 200 lb. test, hook is at least a certain size that cannot
be be swallowed easily by a billfish (hook size suggestions were 9/0,
10/0, 11/0 and 12/0), or some combination of these criteria.
Response: NMFS acknowledges that limited information from the few
blue marlin tagged with pop-off satellite archival tags (PSATs) (9
fish) in the study by Graves et al. (2001) shows relatively low rates
of post-release mortality for blue marlin caught on J-hooks when
certain gear configurations and techniques are employed. However, the
sample size of this one study is limited and no information exists on
the impacts of combination baits with J-hooks on white marlin and other
billfish species. NMFS implemented the regulations requiring circle
hooks on natural baits and natural bait/artificial lure combinations
based on a number of considerations that are detailed in the Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Consolidated HMS FMP. The
basis for that decision included, but was not limited to: the post-
release survival benefits of circle hooks for billfish and many other
species identified in a number studies, comparable catch rates of
billfish between circle hooks and J-hooks identified in available
studies, the poor stock status of some Atlantic billfish species, the
limited amount of available data on various gear configurations, and
enforcement issues. NMFS will consider new information on the effects
of the fishing methods mentioned above on fish condition and post-
release mortality as it becomes available. NMFS acknowledges that the
circle hook requirement in Atlantic billfish tournaments may have
impacts on secondary fisheries including wahoo, king mackerel, dolphin,
tunas, and other fisheries and has limited these impacts to the extent
feasible in the creation of the circle hook requirement by applying it
narrowly to only HMS permitted vessels participating in tournaments
with award categories for Atlantic billfish. NMFS will consider new
information on ways to limit impacts of HMS requirements on non-HMS
fisheries as it becomes available. NMFS acknowledges that a traditional
recreational fishery exists for blue marlin in the Atlantic and Gulf of
Mexico that utilizes different fishing techniques in different
locations and situations. The fishing technique of using heavy tackle
and/or lure/bait combinations rigged with J-hooks and trolled at high
speed is used in several locations throughout the Atlantic and Gulf of
Mexico. The fishery management strategy employed to reduce post-release
hooking mortality of Atlantic billfish through the circle hook
requirement in Atlantic billfish tournaments is a modification of the
techniques used in this fishery. NMFS received public comment during
and following development of the circle hook requirement from anglers
that successful methods of rigging baits with circle hooks exist and
are practiced. Additionally, several articles have been published in
major sportfishing magazines that highlight some of these methods. NMFS
believes that through this and other fishery management strategies, the
traditional recreational fishery for blue marlin and other Atlantic
billfish may be improved by promoting stock rebuilding.
Comment 7: NMFS received comment from the North Carolina Division
of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF) indicating their support for the preferred
alternative, temporarily suspend the Atlantic billfish circle hook
requirement. NCDMF stated that the current rule may negatively impact
angler's ability to catch blue marlin. Concern was expressed over the
impacts of mandating circle hook use for natural baits and natural
bait/combinations for all tackle sizes. NCDMF encouraged NMFS to
explore the circle hook definition, conduct research on release
mortality of billfish released on heavy tackle with J-hooks, research
the difference in catch rates of circle and J-hooks for non-billfish
species targeted in tournaments, and explore recently raised questions
concerning post-release mortality of billfish caught on double hooked
lures. NCDMF expressed concern that a shortage of large non-offset
circle hooks to supply the billfish fishery may exist.
Response: NMFS appreciates the comments of the NCDMF. The purpose
of the temporary suspension of the circle hook requirement in Atlantic
billfish tournaments is to allow additional time for anglers to become
more familiar with techniques for rigging and fishing with circle hooks
in Atlantic billfish tournaments, thus resulting in improved long-term
compliance with the requirement upon reimplementation. As discussed in
the response to Comment 6, NMFS received comment during and following
development of the circle hook requirement from anglers stating that
successful methods of rigging baits with circle hooks exist and are
practiced. Additionally, several articles have been published in major
sportfishing magazines that highlight some of these methods.
Regarding the application of the circle hook requirement for all
tackle sizes, NMFS developed the requirement with consideration for
several different concerns which included application to the targeted
fishery and the ease of enforcement, as well as other considerations
identified in the response to Comment 6 and discussed in detail in the
FEIS for the Consolidated HMS FMP. NMFS believes that the requirements
for the use of circle hooks by permitted HMS fishermen when natural
bait and natural bait/artificial lures are deployed in billfish
tournaments improve its enforceability. Related to application of the
requirement to all tackle sizes and researching post-release mortality
for various tackle types, NMFS will consider new information on the
effects of the fishing methods on fish condition and post-release
hooking mortality, as it becomes available. NMFS has not received
information indicating that a shortage of large non-offset circle hooks
exists other than that contained in NCDMF's comment. The circle hook
requirement was finalized in October 2006 and became effective January
1, 2007, providing time for circle hook manufacturers and retail stores
to increase inventory. The Atlantic billfish tournament season is
protracted and peaks in the late spring and summer months, thereby
providing additional time for manufacturers and retailers to prepare
for demand. The preferred alternative to temporarily suspend the circle
hook requirement in Atlantic billfish tournaments may dampen the peak
in demand for circle hooks in 2007 as anglers will not be required to
use circle hooks, but may still desire to practice with them in
preparation for re-implementation of the requirement on
[[Page 26738]]
January 1, 2008. However, as mentioned, NMFS has received no
information from anglers, distributors, tackle shops, tournament
operators, or manufacturers that a real or potential shortage of hooks
exists.
Comment 8: NMFS received comment in favor of non-preferred
alternative 3, remove Atlantic billfish tournament circle hook
requirements, for various reasons including: insufficient data to
implement a circle hook requirement in billfish tournaments; voluntary
use of circle hooks should continue to be encouraged; fear that similar
requirements will be imposed in all offshore trolling for any species
to reduce billfish post-release mortality; concerns that circle hooks
lodging in the corner of the jaw actually are the most painful and
cause long-term damage to the fish resulting in a decreased ability of
the fish to feed and increased rates of death relative to billfish
caught with J-hooks.
Response: NMFS disagrees that there is insufficient data to
implement a circle hook requirement in billfish tournaments. NMFS has
relied on publicly available peer-reviewed scientific papers and
available recreational data sets in developing its analyses. The
assumptions made to support the use of circle hooks are clearly
articulated in Chapter 4 of the Consolidated HMS FMP. NMFS agrees that
voluntary circle hook use in HMS fisheries outside of Atlantic billfish
tournaments should be encouraged. Voluntary use of circle hooks was
promoted in the years prior to implementation of the circle hook
regulation on January 1, 2007; however, this voluntary promotion only
achieved limited success in transitioning recreational anglers to
circle hooks in the Atlantic billfish fishery. NMFS does not anticipate
that continued promotion of voluntary circle hook use alone by
tournament anglers would result in achieving the maximum conservation
benefit possible of reduced post-release mortality of Atlantic billfish
relative to the no action alternative. NMFS acknowledges that requiring
circle hooks in all HMS fisheries could have impacts on secondary
fisheries, including tunas, sharks, dolphin, wahoo, king mackerel,
etc., and other inshore fisheries and has taken steps to minimize these
impacts, as discussed under the response to comment 6. NMFS disagrees
that circle hooks lodging in the corner of the jaw are more damaging to
fish in the long-term and result in fish death more frequently than
with J-hooks. This comment is not supported by peer reviewed scientific
literature showing lower post-release mortality of white marlin when
caught with circle hooks in comparison with J-hooks and showing less
damaging hook location in sailfish and blue marlin when caught with
circle hooks in comparison with J-hooks.
Comment 9: NMFS received comment from lure manufacturers stating
that rigging circle hooks with hard headed artificial lures and natural
baits is an ineffective method of catching billfish and has resulted in
substantial loss of lure sales. One manufacturer stated that the
combined economic impact from Central American circle hook requirements
and the domestic circle hook requirement implemented in January 2007,
the requirement was large enough to cause his company to go out of
business. Similarly, another lure manufacturer stated that hard headed
lures with nylon skirts are designed to be trolled at high speed in
conjunction with natural baits and J-hooks resulting in almost all fish
being hooked in the mouth. One manufacturer expressed support for
alternative 3, removal of Atlantic billfish tournament circle hook
requirements, and another requested that NMFS further investigate an
exemption for artificial lure/natural bait combinations rigged with J-
hooks and trolled at high speed.
Response: NMFS appreciates the comment that economic impacts may
have occurred as a result of previous rulemaking to implement the
circle hook requirement on January 1, 2007. As discussed in the
response to Comment 6, NMFS received comment during and following
development of the circle hook requirement from anglers stating that
successful methods of rigging baits with circle hooks exist and are
practiced. Additionally, several articles have been published in major
sportfishing magazines that highlight some of these methods including
methods to rig and fish with hard headed lures with nylon skirts used
in combination with natural baits. NMFS acknowledges that investigating
questions about certain gear and rigging types such as that mentioned
above may provide additional useful information in the future and will
consider these issues when identifying future research priorities.
Comment 10: NMFS received comment that no data exists to support
application of the circle hook requirement to blue marlin fishing
methods that employ circle hook rigged baits trolled at high speed.
These comments stated that the damage to billfish when J-hooks are used
in baits trolled at high speed is less than when J-hooks are used with
dead or live natural baits on light tackle. These comments also stated
that no data exists to support the concept of the circle hook
requirement that large baits, lures, or artificial/natural combination
baits rigged with circle hooks and trolled at high speed result in an
adequate hook-up rate.
Response: As discussed in the response to Comment 6, NMFS developed
the circle hook requirement in Atlantic billfish tournaments with
consideration for several different concerns, including but not limited
to: the post-release survival benefits of circle hooks for multiple
billfish species and other species identified in a several studies,
comparable catch rates of various billfishes between circle hooks and
J-hooks as identified in available studies, the poor stock status of
some Atlantic billfish species, and enforcement issues. Accordingly,
the rule applies to natural and natural/artificial combination baits.
NMFS acknowledges that limited information from the few blue marlin
tagged with PSATs (9 fish) in the study by Graves et al. (2001) shows
relatively low rates of post-release mortality for blue marlin caught
on J-hooks when certain gear configurations and techniques are
employed. No information exists, however, on the impacts of this
fishing technique on white marlin and other billfish species. With this
uncertainty of impacts in particular to white marlin, the regulation
was developed in a manner to provide additional protection to severely
overfished Atlantic billfishes. NMFS will consider new information on
the effects of the fishing methods mentioned above on fish condition
and post-release hooking mortality, as it becomes available. As
discussed in the response to Comment 6, NMFS received comment during
and following development of the circle hook requirement from anglers
that successful methods of rigging baits with circle hooks exist and
are practiced. Additionally, several articles have been published in
major sportfishing magazines that highlight some of these methods
including methods to rig and fish with hard headed lures with nylon
skirts used in combination with natural baits.
Comment 11: NMFS received comment suggesting that fees be assessed
on all HMS recreational permits and HMS registered tournaments to fund
PSAT tagging for post- release mortality comparisons between circle
hooks and J-hooks.
Response: NMFS appreciates the suggestion as funding for continued
post-release mortality studies in Atlantic billfish fisheries is
needed. Suggestions for research funding will be
[[Page 26739]]
considered as future research needs are assessed.
Comment 12: NMFS received comment that the existing circle hook
requirement is not compatible with mixed species tournaments and will
reduce the ability of anglers to catch wahoo, dolphin, tuna, and
others.
Response: NMFS understands that the circle hook requirement in
Atlantic billfish tournaments will affect anglers in HMS permitted
vessels targeting species other than Atlantic billfish. Many pelagic
fish species are found in the same areas as Atlantic billfish and feed
on similar prey. Atlantic billfish may be caught in many areas using
the same fishing methods employed for other pelagic species such as
wahoo, dolphin, tuna, king mackerel, and others; therefore, circle
hooks are necessary in that portion of the tournament fishery. NMFS
sought to minimize the impacts on secondary species by limiting the
applicability of circle hook regulations as discussed in the response
to Comment 6.
Comment 13: NMFS received comment that the existing circle hook
requirement is not enforceable and relies on tournament operators as
the only enforcement agent. NMFS also received public comment that the
circle hook requirement would be enforceable.
Response: The requirements for the use of circle hooks by permitted
HMS fishermen when natural bait and natural bait/artificial lures are
deployed in billfish tournaments can be adequately enforced by NOAA
Enforcement and the United States Coast Guard. As most tournament's
rules require anglers to comply with all applicable state and federal
regulations, NMFS believes that an important incentive for anglers to
comply with regulations is the potential to have a prize-winning fish
disqualified for not deploying a circle hook when required.
Comment 14: NMFS received comment that all fishing tournaments
should be banned.
Response: NMFS disagrees. Atlantic HMS tournaments represent an
important component of a robust recreational fishery and provide
substantial socio-economic benefits to many communities. Further,
tournaments represent an essential mechanism for obtaining significant
amounts of data on many species that are incorporated into fish
population assessments and management decisions.
Comment 15: NMFS received comment that tournaments are venues that
could provide a large number of interactions with marlin and should be
used to collect data to answer the post-release hooking mortality
questions for blue and white marlin.
Response: NMFS appreciates the interest in collecting post-release
hooking mortality information and agrees that tournaments can provide,
for some fishery management issues, a venue for collecting fisheries
information via appropriately designed data collection protocols. Such
situations have been and continue to be valuable for collecting
billfish information such as through the Recreational Billfish Survey
and other life history studies. Such activity is not affected by this
rulemaking.
Comment 16: NMFS received comment that the recreational fishing
mortality level for billfish does not compare to the much larger
pelagic longline mortality level thus the circle hook requirement in
Atlantic billfish tournaments is directed at the wrong mortality
source.
Response: The United States is responsible for approximately 4.5
percent of reported white marlin catches in the Atlantic. As explained
in Appendix C of the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP, average annual fishing
mortality levels imposed by the domestic pelagic longline fishery and
the recreational tournament fishery on Atlantic white marlin are
roughly comparable. Based on pelagic longline logbook data and data
from the Recreational Billfish Survey, the level of billfish mortality
imposed by U.S. recreational billfish tournament fishermen is estimated
to be approximately 71% of levels imposed by the U.S. pelagic longline
fishery. While the post-release mortality rate of Atlantic white marlin
is estimated to be lower in recreational fisheries than in the pelagic
longline fishery, the size of the recreational tournament fishery is
large enough to generally offset the difference in mortality rates.
Comment 17: NMFS received several comments that the preferred
alternative, suspend Atlantic billfish tournament circle hook
requirements through the close of 2007, is not favorable. These
include: the proposed rule is not precautionary; compliance with the
already established rule would be 100 percent; the proposed rule is not
supported by the record; there is a lack of parity with this proposed
rule as an extended phase-in period is proposed for recreational
anglers, but there was no grace period for commercial fishermen when
circle hooks were required; the timing of proposed rule is bad as
tournaments are in May and June and anglers should be practicing with
circle hooks already.
Response: NMFS appreciates the comment that temporary suspension of
the circle hook rule is not precautionary and that compliance would be
100 percent. NMFS disagrees that temporary suspension of the circle
hook requirement is not supported by the record as the rule will be re-
implemented January 1, 2008. NMFS agrees that maintaining the circle
hook requirement would continue to provide post-release hooking
mortality benefits; however, given the short duration of the circle
hook suspension, NMFS projects that it will result in a one-time
limited number of additional white marlin post-release mortalities that
would not affect the Atlantic wide stock in a measurable way. NMFS
believes that the provision of an additional phase-in period during
which anglers can become more proficient, comfortable, and accepting of
circle hooks will, in the long-term, offset the short-term increase in
mortalities by resulting in greater long-term compliance with circle
hook regulations. NMFS disagrees that there is a lack of parity between
implementation of the circle hook requirement in Atlantic billfish
tournaments and the circle hook requirement for the pelagic longline
(PLL) fishery because the bases for the two actions are different. The
circle hook requirement in Atlantic billfish tournaments is a domestic
measure intended to aid in rebuilding Atlantic billfish stocks by
reducing post-release fishing mortality to the extent practicable at
this time. The circle hook requirement in the Atlantic PLL fishery
responds to issuance of the 2004 Biological Opinion which determined
that continued operation of the pelagic longline fishery without
changes in fishing gears or techniques would jeopardize the existence
of leatherback sea turtles. Per the Endangered Species Act, the Agency
was required to implement changes in the way the pelagic longline
operated. Rapid implementation of the circle hook requirement for PLL
was necessary for the fishery to continue operating. This rulemaking is
intended to reduce post-release mortality of Atlantic billfish in the
long-term by temporarily suspending the circle hook requirement in
Atlantic billfish tournaments to allow tournaments and tournament
anglers additional time to become more familiar with techniques for
rigging and fishing with circle hooks.
Comment 18: NMFS received comment that circle hook specifications
should be defined and field tested. Commenters also stated that circle
hook rigging workshops should be held or
[[Page 26740]]
videos should be developed. NMFS also received comment that 3 different
circle hooks were used in recent research and all 3 worked well in
reducing post-release mortality even with differences in their general
design. Additionally, comment was received that it is important to stay
consistent with what the international community is using as a
definition of circle hooks because of tackle manufacturing and to
reduce confusion.
Response: NMFS appreciates the numerous comments received about
circle hook definition issues and is involved in discussions with hook
manufacturers and gear experts to address many of these concerns.
Further, NMFS is not aware of an internationally accepted definition of
circle hooks. The Agency may consider this issue in future rulemaking,
as appropriate.
Changes from the Proposed Rule
There are no changes from the proposed rule.
Classification
This final rule is published under the authority of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. NMFS has determined that this final
rule is consistent with the national standards of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act, other provisions of the Act, and other applicable laws.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), the Assistant Administrator finds
that this final action relieves a restriction and therefore may be made
effective upon its filing with the Office of the Federal Register.
Specifically, the final action relieves a restriction for persons
fishing from HMS permitted vessels in Atlantic billfish tournaments to
fish only with non-offset circle hooks when using natural or natural/
artificial combination baits. Without this action, NMFS would continue
to require anglers to use non-offset circle hooks when using natural or
natural/artificial combination baits in Atlantic billfish tournaments
and would not afford anglers an additional time to become more
proficient with methods used to rig and fish with circle hooks and
these baits. NMFS expects that this action will improve expertise and
familiarity with methods for rigging and fishing with circle hooks in
Atlantic billfish tournaments. As a result, NMFS expects improved long-
term compliance with the regulation to use circle hooks in billfish
tournaments when it goes back into effect on January 1, 2008. This
final rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866.
In compliance with 5 U.S.C. 604, a Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (FRFA) was prepared for this rule. The FRFA analyzes the
anticipated impacts of the preferred alternative and any significant
alternatives to the final rule that could minimize significant economic
impacts on small entities. Each of the statutory requirements of
section 604 has been addressed, and a summary of the FRFA is provided
below.
Section 604(a)(1) requires the Agency to state the objective and
need for the rule. As stated in the preamble of the proposed rule, the
objective of this final rule is to increase post-release survival of
Atlantic billfishes by improving long-term compliance with billfish
tournament non-offset circle hook regulations. Maximizing post-release
survival of Atlantic billfishes is an important facet of rebuilding
overfished Atlantic billfish stocks.
Section 604(a)(2) requires the Agency to summarize significant
issues raised by the public in response to the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), a summary of the assessment of the agency
of such issues, and a statement of any changes made in the rule as a
result of such comments. NMFS received numerous comments on the
proposed rule and draft EA during the public comment period. A summary
of these comments and the Agency's responses is included in this final
rule. NMFS did not receive any comments specific to the IRFA, but did
receive one comment related to economic issues and concerns.
Specifically, one fishing gear manufacturer stated that the combined
impacts of a circle hook requirement imposed by a Central American
country and the U.S. Atlantic billfish tournament circle hook
requirement implemented domestically in January 2007 (cited previously)
cost his company and others several hundred thousand dollars in lost
revenues which was large enough to cause his company to go out of
business. As such, this commenter supported a repeal of the circle hook
regulations.
NMFS appreciates that economic impacts may have occurred as a
result of previous rulemaking to implement the circle hook requirement
on January 1, 2007; however, as noted by the commenter, these impacts
resulted from a combination of foreign regulations and a previous
domestic rulemaking. This comment is responded to fully with other
comments (see Comment 9). The preferred alternative in this final rule
could have minor short-term positive impacts on the sales of fishing
lures used in conjunction with natural baits by temporarily allowing
anglers to utilize J-hooks. While the final rule has the effect of
temporarily allowing anglers to utilize J-hooks, the circle hook
suspension was not made as a result of this comment.
Section 604(a)(3) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act requires the
Agency to describe and provide an estimate of the number of small
entities to which the rule will apply. NMFS considers all HMS permit
holders to be small entities because they either had gross receipts
less than $4.0 million for fish-harvesting, gross receipts less than
$6.5 million for charter/party boats, or 100 or fewer employees for
wholesale dealers. These are the Small Business Association size
standards for defining a small versus large business entity in these
industries. As of January 29, 2007, the potential universe of affected
anglers included: 24,664 HMS Angling category permit holders; 4,140 HMS
Charter/Headboat category permit holders, and 4,345 General category
permit holders. All of the aforementioned permit holders are eligible
to participate in registered Atlantic HMS tournaments.
Section 604(a)(4) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act requires the
Agency to describe the projected reporting, record keeping, and other
compliance requirements of the final rule, including an estimate of the
classes of small entities which would be subject to the requirements of
the report or record. None of the alternatives considered for this
final rule would result in additional reporting, recordkeeping, and
compliance requirements.
Section 604(a)(5) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act requires the
Agency to describe the steps taken to minimize the significant economic
impact on small entities consistent with the stated objectives of
applicable statutes. NMFS believes that this final rule minimizes
impacts on small entities by temporarily suspending circle hook
requirements for HMS tournaments, to allow participants additional time
to become proficient in the use of circle hooks and familiar with their
ecological benefits. The alternative to permanently suspend the circle
hook requirement would not achieve MSA rebuilding objectives for these
fisheries.
As described below, NMFS considered three alternatives in this
final rulemaking and provides justification for selection of the
preferred alternative to achieve the desired objective.
The alternatives considered included: maintain existing non-offset
circle hook requirements for anglers fishing from HMS permitted vessels
and participating in Atlantic billfish tournaments (alternative 1, No
Action); suspend non-offset circle hook
[[Page 26741]]
requirements for anglers fishing from HMS permitted vessels and
participating in Atlantic billfish tournaments through December 31,
2007 (alternative 2, preferred alternative); and, remove Atlantic
billfish tournament circle hook requirements and promote voluntary use
of circle hooks by tournament anglers (alternative 3).
Alternative 1 is considered the no action alternative since it
would maintain unchanged the Atlantic billfish circle hook regulations
that were implemented on January 1, 2007. This alternative is not
preferred because, in part, it is less likely to improve long-term
compliance with circle hook regulations, and thus be less likely to
maximize post-release survival of Atlantic billfish than the preferred
alternative because it does not provide adequate time for anglers to
familiarize themselves with circle hooks and increase angler's
acceptance of them. Alternative 1, the No Action alternative, would
have no new economic impacts beyond those that were included in
previous rulemaking. Alternative 2 could result in a minor short-term
increase in billfish tournament participation given the perceptions
held by many anglers that J-hooks may increase the odds of landing a
billfish. No additional costs for billfish tournament participants are
likely because NMFS anticipates that anglers already possess J-hook
related tackle, as this was the standard gear used in the fishery prior
to January 1, 2007, and is still authorized for use outside of billfish
tournaments.
Alternative 3 was considered, but not fully analyzed in the
Environmental Assessment because voluntary promotion of circle hook use
in the years prior to implementation of the circle hook regulation on
January 1, 2007, did not achieve a high percentage of recreational
angler use of circle hooks in the Atlantic billfish fishery. As such,
NMFS does not anticipate that continued promotion of voluntary circle
hook use alone by tournament anglers would result in achieving the
maximum conservation benefit possible of reduced post-release mortality
of Atlantic billfish relative to the no action alternative. Alternative
3 could result in minor short-term increases in angler consumer surplus
and/or willingness to pay, as anglers may perceive that their short-
term catch rates of Atlantic billfish may increase with the use of J-
hooks. However, alternative 3 would not be expected to increase either
consumer surplus or willingness to pay in the long-term as it would
result in an increase in post-release hooking mortality and thus be
less likely to contribute to rebuilding of Atlantic billfish
populations. For the reasons discussed above, this alternative was not
selected as the preferred alternative.
Alternative 2 may result in minor increases in printing and
distribution costs to tournament operators if tournament rules need to
be reprinted and redistributed. Tournaments could avoid additional
printing costs if they voluntarily chose to maintain an all circle hook
tournament format, which some tournaments have notified NMFS that they
will do. There may be a long-term increase in angler consumer surplus
resulting from rebuilding efforts through either alternatives 1 or 2,
and therefore resulting in a potential increase in demand for billfish
tournament participation. However, these benefits may be realized
sooner under alternative 2, should it lead to increased acceptance and
use of circle hooks. As such, and based on the analysis included in the
EA for this rulemaking, alternative 2 was selected the preferred
alternative.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 635
Fish, Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing vessels, Management.
Dated: May 8, 2007.
William T. Hogarth
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
0
For reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 635 is amended as
follows:
PART 635--ATLANTIC HIGHLY MIGRATORY SPECIES
0
1. The authority citation for part 635 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 635.21, paragraph (e)(2)(iii) is suspended from May 11,
2007 to December 31, 2007, and is revised effective January 1, 2008, to
read as follows:
Sec. 635.21 Gear operation and deployment restrictions.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) After December 31, 2007, persons who have been issued or are
required to be issued a permit under this part and who are
participating in a ``tournament'', as defined in Sec. 635.2, that
bestows points, prizes, or awards for Atlantic billfish must deploy
only non-offset circle hooks when using natural bait or natural bait/
artificial lure combinations, and may not deploy a J-hook or an offset
circle hook in combination with natural bait or a natural bait/
artificial lure combination.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E7-9097 Filed 5-10-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S