Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Atlantic Tuna Fisheries; Pelagic and Bottom Longline Fisheries; Gear Authorization and Turtle Control Devices, 54721-54735 [E8-22261]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 23, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54721-54735]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22261]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Parts 600 and 635

[Docket No. 070801432-8663-02]
RIN 0648-AV92


Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Atlantic Tuna Fisheries; 
Pelagic and Bottom Longline Fisheries; Gear Authorization and Turtle 
Control Devices

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS authorizes green[dash]stick gear for the harvest of 
Atlantic tunas, including bluefin tuna (BFT), and requires a sea turtle 
control device in Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS) pelagic 
longline (PLL) and bottom longline (BLL) fisheries. At this time, NMFS 
is not authorizing harpoon gear for the harvest of Atlantic tunas in 
the Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Charter/Headboat (CHB) category as 
originally proposed. The purpose of this final rule is to ensure 
fishermen harvest Atlantic tunas within quotas, size limits, or other 
established limitations and to distinguish green[dash]stick fishing 
gear from current definitions of other authorized gear types. This 
final rule also addresses use of sea turtle control devices in the PLL 
and BLL fisheries to achieve and maintain low post[dash]release 
mortality of sea turtles thus maintaining consistency with the 2004 
Biological Opinion (BiOp) for the Atlantic PLL fishery and to increase 
safety at sea for fishermen when handling sea turtles caught or 
entangled in longline fishing gear. NMFS also has revised its list of 
equipment models that NMFS has approved as meeting the minimum design 
specifications for the careful release of sea turtles caught in hook 
and line fisheries.

DATES: The amendments to Sec.  600.725; Sec.  635.2; Sec.  635.21 
introductory text (first sentence), (c)(2)(v)(A), (c)(2)(v)(B), 
(c)(5)(iii)(C)(3), (e)(1)(ii), (e)(1)(iii), (e)(1)(v), (g); and Sec.  
635.71 are effective on October 23, 2008. The amendments to Sec.  
635.21 introductory text (second sentence), (c)(2)(v)(D), (c)(2)(v)(G), 
(c)(5)(i) introductory text, (c)(5)(i)(M), (c)(5)(ii)(A), and 
(c)(5)(ii)(C)(1) are effective on January 1, 2009.

ADDRESSES: For copies of the Final Environmental Assessment (EA), or 
other related documents, please write to the Highly Migratory Species 
Management Division, 1315 East[dash]West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 
20910, or call at (301)713[dash]2347 or fax to (301)713[dash]1917. 
Copies are also available on the HMS website at https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Randy Blankinship, 
727[dash]824[dash]5399, or Sarah McLaughlin, 978[dash]281[dash]9260.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Atlantic tunas are managed under the dual 
authority of the Magnuson[dash]Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
Management Act (Magnuson[dash]Stevens Act) and the Atlantic Tunas 
Convention Act (ATCA). ATCA authorizes the Secretary of Commerce 
(Secretary) to promulgate regulations, as may be necessary and 
appropriate, to implement recommendations by the International 
Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT). The 
authority to issue regulations under the Magnuson[dash]Stevens Act and 
ATCA has been delegated from the Secretary to the Assistant 
Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA). The implementing regulations 
for Atlantic HMS are at 50 CFR parts 600 and 635.
    On May 28, 1999, NMFS published in the Federal Register (64 FR 
29090) final regulations, effective July 1, 1999, implementing the 
Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish, and Sharks (1999 
FMP). Among other things, these regulations included a list of fishing 
gears authorized for harvest of HMS. On October 2, 2006, NMFS published 
in the Federal Register final regulations (71 FR 58058), effective 
November 1, 2006, implementing the ``Final Consolidated Atlantic HMS 
Fishery Management Plan'' (Consolidated HMS FMP), which consolidated 
the management of all Atlantic HMS (i.e., sharks, swordfish, tunas, and 
billfish) into one comprehensive FMP.

Background

    Background information about green[dash]stick gear authorization 
and sea turtle control device requirements was provided in the preamble 
to the proposed rule (73 FR 24924; May 6, 2008). Please see the 
proposed rule for complete background information. This final rule: (1) 
authorizes green[dash]stick gear for the harvest of Atlantic tunas by 
Atlantic Tunas General category permitted vessels; (2) authorizes 
green[dash]stick gear for the harvest of Atlantic tunas by HMS CHB 
permitted vessels; (3) authorizes green[dash]stick gear for harvest of 
Atlantic tunas by Atlantic Tunas Longline category permitted vessels 
(but continues to restrict BFT retention to incidental retention only); 
and (4) requires possession and use of a sea turtle control device as 
an addition to the already existing requirements for sea turtle bycatch 
mitigation gear in PLL and BLL fisheries. This action is published in 
accordance with the framework procedures set forth in the Consolidated 
HMS FMP and is supported by the analytical documents prepared for the 
Consolidated HMS FMP. As described in the Response to Comments and 
Changes from the Proposed Rule sections of this document, NMFS has 
reconsidered the proposed rule preferred alternative regarding 
authorization of harpoon use on HMS CHB vessels and has decided to 
maintain the status quo for regulations regarding authorized harpoon 
use as Atlantic tuna fishing gear.

[[Page 54722]]

Fishing Gear Authorization--Green[dash]Stick Gear

    Green[dash]stick gear is used primarily to catch yellowfin tuna 
(YFT) and consists of a mainline with hooks on leaders or gangions 
trolled from a long fiberglass or bamboo pole. Baits used with 
green[dash]stick gear may be artificial or natural. Green[dash]stick 
gear has been used in the Atlantic commercial and recreational bigeye 
(BET), albacore, YFT, skipjack (collectively referred to as BAYS 
tunas), and BFT fisheries since the mid[dash]1990s, but it was not 
originally included as a separate gear on the list of authorized HMS 
fishery gears in the 1999 FMP. Logbook records show that commercial 
catches of BAYS and BFT with green[dash]stick gear continued in the 
Atlantic Tunas General, Atlantic Tunas Longline, and the HMS CHB 
categories and were classified either as ``handgear'' catches in the 
Atlantic Tunas General and HMS CHB categories or as ``longline'' 
catches in the Atlantic Tunas Longline category, depending on gear 
configuration. In recent years, public comments indicate that 
green[dash]stick gear use, managed under those regulations, did not 
well suit the fishing methods and locations preferred by fishermen 
wanting to use the gear.
    The most recent YFT stock assessment, conducted in 2003, indicated 
that the stock may be approaching an overfished condition. YFT is the 
principal species of tropical tuna landed by U.S. fisheries in the 
western North Atlantic.
    The latest western Atlantic BFT stock assessment conducted in 2006 
indicated that the stock is overfished and overfishing is occurring. 
The ICCAT Standing Committee on Research and Statistics (SCRS) 
considered this and other information when making recommendations to 
ICCAT for setting total allowable catch (TAC) limits that would allow 
for stock rebuilding. The results of the 2008 SCRS BFT stock assessment 
will be available this fall.
    NMFS intends with this final rule to allow harvest of Atlantic 
tunas within existing quotas, size limits, or other established 
limitations with a gear that is generally efficient in harvesting 
target species and, at the same time, is low in bycatch and bycatch 
mortality. Allowing a gear with these characteristics may have benefits 
to target and non[dash]target species over gear with higher bycatch and 
bycatch mortality levels. As described above, green[dash]stick gear is 
used primarily for YFT; however, BFT is caught at times and represents 
a very low percentage of the catch with this gear.

Sea Turtle Control Device

    The 2004 BiOp for the PLL fishery found that the long[dash]term 
continued operation of the Atlantic PLL fishery as proposed was likely 
to jeopardize the continued existence of leatherback sea turtles, a 
species listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). 
Reasonable and prudent alternatives (RPAs) under section 7 of the ESA 
(50 CFR 402.02) were developed and implemented to avoid jeopardy by, 
among other things, reducing post[dash]release mortality of leatherback 
turtles. The RPAs included several measures to accomplish these goals, 
one of which was to require the use of gear removal measures to 
maximize post[dash]release survival. On July 6, 2004, NMFS published 
the final rule (69 FR 40736) implementing sea turtle bycatch and 
bycatch mortality mitigation measures for the PLL fishery and provided 
for additional rulemaking and non[dash]regulatory actions, as 
necessary, to implement any other management measures required under 
the 2004 BiOp.
    This final rule requires possession and use of a sea turtle control 
device as an addition to the already existing requirements for sea 
turtle bycatch mitigation gear. Two types of sea turtle control 
devices, the Turtle Tether and T&G Ninja Sticks (Figures 1 and 2), 
whether purchased or constructed, are approved to meet this 
requirement. These devices were developed by fishermen in the PLL 
fishery in response to safety concerns for fishing vessel crew members 
and for incidentally captured sea turtles, as well as to facilitate the 
likelihood of maximum gear removal and reducing post[dash]release 
mortality. Subsequently, information collected by the NMFS Southeast 
Fisheries Science Center showed that use of these two types of sea 
turtle control devices better enabled fishermen to remove fishing hooks 
and line from sea turtles by better controlling the animals, thus 
likely reducing post[dash]release hooking mortality of sea turtles.

[[Page 54723]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23SE08.000


[[Page 54724]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23SE08.001

    The function of a turtle control device is to control the front 
flippers of the sea turtle so that the animal can be controlled at the 
side of the vessel while the gear is removed. Restraint is most 
effective when a pair of turtle control devices is used (two sets of 
turtle tethers, two sets of T&G ninja sticks, or one of each style). 
This rule requires that one turtle control device be possessed and used 
onboard; however, NMFS strongly recommends that two devices be 
possessed and used if vessel and crew size allow.
    See Table 1 for a revised list of equipment models that NMFS has 
approved as meeting the minimum design specifications for the careful 
release of sea turtles caught in hook and line fisheries. The list 
includes both the required gears and NMFS[dash]approved models of 
equipment that may be used as options to meet the requirements for gear 
that must be carried on board vessels participating in the Atlantic PLL 
and BLL fisheries (50 CFR 635.21(c)(5)(i) and (d)(3)(i)). Equipment

[[Page 54725]]

may also be fabricated and used by individuals according to the minimum 
design specifications (50 CFR 635.21(c)(5)(i)). The benefit of using 
these gears is to maximize safe and efficient gear removal from 
incidentally captured sea turtles thereby minimizing the potential for 
serious injury or mortality of the sea turtles.

 Table 1. NMFS[dash]Approved Models For Equipment Needed For The Careful
        Release of Sea Turtles Caught In Hook And Line Fisheries
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Required Item                    NMFS-Approved  Models
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) Long-handled line cutter, with one set   LaForce Line Cutter; or
 of replacement blades\*\                     Arceneaux Line Clipper
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(B) Long-handled dehooker for ingested       ARC Pole Model Deep-Hooked
 hooks\*\                                     Dehooker (Model BP11)\1\;
                                              or NOAA/Bergmann
                                              Dehooker\2\ on long-handle
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(C) Long-handled dehooker for external       ARC Model LJ6P (6 ft (1.83
 hooks\3*\                                    m)); or ARC Model LJ36; or
                                              ARC Pole Model Deep-Hooked
                                              Dehooker (Model BP11)\1\;
                                              or ARC 6 ft. (1.83 m) Pole
                                              Big Game Dehooker (Model
                                              P610); or Robey Dehooker
                                              on long-handle; or NOAA/
                                              Bergmann Dehooker on long-
                                              handle
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(D) Long-handled device to pull an           ARC Model LJ6P (6 ft.)(1.83
 ``inverted V''\4*\                           m); or Davis Telescoping
                                              Boat Hook to 96 in. (2.44
                                              m) (Model 85002A); or West
                                              Marine  F6H5 Hook
                                              and  F6-006
                                              Handle
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(E) Dipnet\**\                               ARC 12-ft. (3.66-m)
                                              Breakdown Lightweight Dip
                                              Net Model DN6P (6 ft.
                                              (1.83 m)); or ARC Model
                                              DN08 (8 ft.(2.44 m)); or
                                              ARC Model DN 14 (12 ft.
                                              (3.66 m)); or ARC Net
                                              Assembly & Handle (Model
                                              DNIN); or Lindgren-Pitman,
                                              Inc. Model NMFS Turtle Net
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(F) Standard automobile tire\**\             Any standard automobile
                                              tire free of exposed steel
                                              belts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(G) Short-handled dehooker for ingested      ARC 17-inch (43.18-cm) Hand-
 hooks\**\                                    Held Bite Block Deep-
                                              Hooked Turtle Dehooking
                                              Device (Model ST08)\1\; or
                                              NOAA/Bergmann Dehooker\2\
                                              on short-handle
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(H) Short-handled dehooker for external      ARC Hand-Held Large J-Style
 hooks\5**\                                   Dehooker (Model LJ07); or
                                              ARC Hand-Held Large J-
                                              Style Dehooker (Model
                                              LJ24); or ARC 17-inch
                                              (43.18-cm) Hand-Held Bite
                                              Block Deep-Hooked Turtle
                                              Dehooking Device (Model
                                              ST08)\1\; or Scotty's
                                              Dehooker; or Robey
                                              Dehooker on short-handle;
                                              or NOAA/Bergmann Dehooker
                                              on short-handle
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(I) Long-nose or needle-nose pliers\**\      12-in. (30.48-cm) S.S.
                                              NuMark Model 
                                              030281109871; or any 12-
                                              inch (30.48-cm) stainless
                                              steel long-nose or needle-
                                              nose pliers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(J) Bolt cutter\**\                          H.K. Porter Model 1490 AC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(K) Monofilament line cutter\**\             Jinkai Model MC-T
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(L) Two of the following mouth openers and   ...........................
 mouth gags\**\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(L1) Block of hard wood                      Any block of hard wood
                                              meeting design standards
                                              (e.g., Olympia Tools Long-
                                              Handled Wire Brush and
                                              Scraper (Model 974174))
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(L2) Set of (3) canine mouth gags            Jorvet Model 4160,
                                              4162, and 4164
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(L3) Set of (2) sturdy dog chew bones        Nylaboner[reg] (a trademark
                                              owned by T.F.H.
                                              Publications, Inc.); or
                                              Gumaboner[reg] (a
                                              trademark owned by T.F.H.
                                              Publications, Inc.); or
                                              Galileor[reg] (a trademark
                                              owned by T.F.H.
                                              Publications, Inc.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(L4) Set of (2) rope loops covered with      Any set of (2) rope loops
 hose                                         covered with hose meeting
                                              design standards
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(L5) Hank of rope                            Any size soft braided nylon
                                              rope is acceptable,
                                              provided it creates a hank
                                              of rope approximately 2 -
                                              4 inches (5.08 cm - 10.16
                                              cm) in thickness
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(L6) Set of (4) PVC splice couplings         A set of (4) Standard
                                              Schedule 40 PVC splice
                                              couplings (1-inch (2.54-
                                              cm), 1 \1/4\-inch 3.175-
                                              cm), 1 \1/2\-inch (3.81-
                                              cm), and 2-inch (5.08-cm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(L7) Large avian oral speculum               Webster Vet Supply (Model
                                              85408); or Veterinary
                                              Specialty Products (Model
                                              VSP 216-08); or Jorvet
                                              (Model J-51z); or Krusse
                                              (Model 273117)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(M) Turtle control device\***\               Turtle Tether and extended
                                              reach handle; or T&G Ninja
                                              Sticks and extended reach
                                              handles
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\*\Items (A) [dash] (D), and (M) are required for turtles not boated.
\**\Items (E) [dash] (L) are required for boated turtles.
\***\Only one turtle control device is required, but NMFS recommends the
  use of two devices to secure both front flippers.
\1\The pigtail portion of the ARC dehooker may be modified by creating a
  notch in the pigtail curl where the shank of the hook comes into
  contact with the dehooker when the line is tightly pulled parallel to
  the handle.
\2\The NOAA/Bergman dehooker should not be used to remove ingested J-
  hooks.
\3\The long-handled dehooker for Item B would meet the requirement for
  Item C.
\4\If a 6-ft (1.83 m) J-Style dehooker is used to satisfy the
  requirement for Item C, it would also satisfy the requirement for Item
  D.
\5\The short-handled dehooker for Item G would meet the requirement for
  Item H.

Response to Comments

    A number of individuals and groups provided both written and verbal 
comments on the proposed rule during the 41[dash]day comment period 
which ended on June 16, 2008. Six public hearings were held in Saint 
Petersburg, FL; Manteo, NC; Manahawkin, NJ; Gloucester, MA; Belle 
Chasse, LA; and Orlando, FL. Public comments were also

[[Page 54726]]

heard at meetings of the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council and 
the HMS Advisory Panel. These comments contributed to a change from the 
proposed rule, i.e., NMFS' decision to maintain the status quo 
regarding harpoon authorization for HMS CHB permitted vessels. The 
comments are summarized below together with NMFS' responses. The 
comments are grouped by major issue (green[dash]stick gear 
authorization, harpoon authorization, and sea turtle control device) 
and are numbered consecutively, starting with 1, at the beginning of 
each issue.

1. Green[dash]Stick Gear Authorization

    Comment 1: NMFS should authorize green[dash]stick gear for Atlantic 
Tunas General, HMS CHB, and Atlantic Tunas Longline permitted vessels 
because green[dash]stick gear is selective in what species fishermen 
catch, results in minimal bycatch and low bycatch mortality, and 
increases fishery operational flexibility in harvesting Atlantic tunas 
within established limitations. Comments included support from the 
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries, the South Atlantic Fishery 
Management Council, and representatives of several diverse 
constituencies on the HMS AP.
    Response: NMFS considered these characteristics of green[dash]stick 
gear when developing the alternatives. Green[dash]stick gear is an 
actively trolled and tended gear. When fished, the hooks and baits are 
suspended at or above the surface of the water which reduces the 
likelihood of catching species that do not strike moving prey at or 
above the surface of the water. Since the gear is tended, animals that 
are caught are quickly retrieved to the vessel and either kept, if the 
species is desired, or released, if it is undersized or an unintended 
species. Quick retrieval and release of unwanted or unintended animals 
causes less physiological stress on an animal than some other gears 
such as longline and results in a higher likelihood of survival.
    Increased operational flexibility in harvesting Atlantic tunas 
results from fishermen having another option or choice in the type of 
fishing gear they use, particularly when fishing for YFT. This 
flexibility may be beneficial to help offset increasing operational 
costs due to factors such as high fuel prices. The availability of 
green[dash]stick gear as an option provides a gear that is low in 
bycatch and bycatch mortality and may be chosen by some fishermen for 
this reason.
    Comment 2: Comments were received that NMFS is discriminatory 
against Longline category vessels if those vessels that do not have 
longline gear onboard are still required to abide by the incidental 
catch requirements and if the BFT that they catch are not counted 
against the General category quota instead of the Longline quota. The 
premise of these comments is that an Atlantic Tunas Longline permitted 
vessel that does not have PLL or BLL gear onboard and is fishing with a 
gear that is also authorized in another permit category should be 
treated according to the regulations for that other category. In this 
case, the other category would be General category, thus allowing BFT 
to be targeted and counted against the General category's quota.
    Response: The action to authorize green[dash]stick gear for 
Atlantic tunas does so within existing quotas, size limits, or other 
established limitations. Currently established retention limits are 
some of the existing limitations of permit categories such as Atlantic 
Tunas Longline and are not modified by this action. This includes the 
incidental catch requirements described in the response to Comment 3.
    The BFT management structure, developed in the 1999 FMP, created 
quota allocations, effort controls, retention limits, and size limits 
associated with the various quota categories in an effort to rebuild 
BFT while allowing for continued BFT harvest. The 1999 FMP also 
solidified the BFT Longline category as incidental by definition yet 
provided for limited retention of BFT bycatch. The directed BFT fishery 
is also managed with a suite of permits and associated regulations such 
as authorized fishing gears, retention limits, restricted fishing days, 
and limited access for Purse Seine category. NMFS manages fisheries 
throughout the United States with different permit types and various 
regulatory restrictions respective to those permit types in order to 
achieve the goals of applicable domestic fisheries laws and 
international agreements. The type of permit(s) that an individual 
holds may be changed at the discretion of the vessel owner, according 
to established regulations, among individual persons and/or vessels 
over time. As such, the distinctive management measures among permit 
types are not discriminatory.
    Comment 3: Comments were received that the target catch 
requirements of the Atlantic Tunas Longline permit should not apply if 
a vessel is fishing with green[dash]stick gear and without longline 
gear onboard.
    Response: The action to authorize green[dash]stick gear for 
Atlantic tunas does so within existing quotas, size limits, or other 
established limitations. Currently established retention limits are one 
such existing limitation on permit categories such as Atlantic Tunas 
Longline and are not modified by this action. The Atlantic Tunas 
Longline permit allows for the take of BFT only as incidental to other 
targeted species. The target catch requirements of this permit are 
found at Sec.  635.23(f), which states that one large medium or giant 
BFT per vessel per trip may be landed, provided that at least 2,000 lb 
(907 kg) of species other than BFT are legally caught, retained, and 
offloaded from the same trip and are recorded on the dealer weighout 
slip as sold. Two large medium or giant BFT per vessel per trip may be 
landed, provided that at least 6,000 lb (2,727 kg) of species other 
than BFT are legally caught, retained, and offloaded from the same trip 
and are recorded on the dealer weighout slip as sold. Three large 
medium or giant BFT per vessel per trip may be landed, provide that at 
least 30,000 lb (13,620 kg) of species other than BFT are legally 
caught, retained, and offloaded from the same trip and are recorded on 
the dealer weighout slip as sold.
    These existing target catch requirements, along with existing 
retention limits, quota management structure, size limits, restricted 
fishing days, and other established limitations, serve to constrain the 
harvest of, effort on, and bycatch of BFT. These constraints are 
necessary amid ongoing concerns about the overfished status of BFT and 
the continuing need to avoid increases in BFT bycatch and levels of 
directed effort that might negatively impact BFT stocks. The existence 
of these constraining regulations is a major factor in the decision to 
allow the use of green[dash]stick gear as provided by this final rule. 
Additionally, modifying retention limits or target catch requirements 
as provided for at Sec.  635.23(f)(2) was not within the scope of the 
proposed rule; therefore, adjustment of the target catch is not 
considered in this final rule.
    Comment 4: NMFS should maintain the target catch requirements of 
the Atlantic Tunas Longline permit.
    Response: As stated in the response to Comment 2, this action 
authorizes green[dash]stick gear within existing quotas, size limits, 
or other established limitations. This action does not change the 
existing BFT incidental catch requirements of the Atlantic Tunas 
Longline Permit and thus, maintains the incidental nature of the 
Longline category. The existing target catch requirements will remain 
in effect and are listed in the response to Comment 2 above.

[[Page 54727]]

    Comment 5: NMFS should avoid increasing directed fishing pressure 
on BFT.
    Response: Directed fishing pressure on BFT is not expected increase 
beyond a minimal amount as a result of this rule. Green[dash]stick gear 
is used primarily to harvest YFT, although catch of BFT also occurs at 
a much lower level. According to coastal and pelagic logbook reports, 
which include reports from Atlantic Tunas General, HMS CHB, and 
Atlantic Tunas Longline permitted vessels, YFT and BFT represent 
approximately 82 percent and 2 percent (or less) of the catch, 
respectively, both by number and weight. The use of green[dash]stick 
gear by Atlantic Tunas General, HMS CHB, and Atlantic Tunas Longline 
permitted vessels has occurred since at least the mid[dash]1990s. Any 
potential for an increase in directed fishing pressure on BFT as a 
result of this rule exists within the General category where directed 
BFT fishing is allowed. Both Atlantic Tunas General and HMS CHB (when 
selling BFT) permitted vessels operate within the BFT General category. 
Increases in directed fishing pressure on BFT are not expected in the 
Longline category due to the target catch requirements in place for 
Atlantic Tunas Longline permitted vessels as described in the response 
to Comment 3 above. Also, targeted fishing for BFT is not allowed in 
the Gulf of Mexico, an important BFT spawning area; therefore, 
increases in directed fishing pressure for BFT would not occur in the 
Gulf of Mexico as a result of this final rule.
    While the potential for an increase in directed or incidental 
effort on BFT exists considering the increase in number of hooks 
allowed, such increases in effort over existing practices are expected 
to be minor because the gear is already being used and has been used 
since the mid[dash]1990s. There is potential for additional vessels not 
currently using green[dash]stick gear to begin to do so as more 
fishermen become aware of green[dash]stick gear efficiency in catching 
Atlantic tunas and of the high quality of fish product that can be 
delivered to the dock resulting in higher ex[dash]vessel value. 
Green[dash]stick gear could also be deployed at times and in ways that 
enable more hooks to be fished during a trip, such as while a vessel is 
in transit between fishing locations where other authorized gears may 
be deployed. Such increases in effort, if they were to occur, are 
expected to be minor as green[dash]stick gear use has developed to its 
current level over a period of several years. The growth of 
green[dash]stick gear use is somewhat constrained by the capital 
investments involved in rigging a vessel to use green[dash]stick gear. 
A green[dash]stick rig with fiberglass pole and hydraulic 
haul[dash]back capability is estimated to cost $5,300 $9,300.
    If directed use of green[dash]stick gear for YFT or BFT increases 
above its current level, there may be benefits in improved bycatch 
mortality compared to some other fishing gears. Bycatch mortality of 
released fish is anticipated to be low given that baits on 
green[dash]stick gear are trolled at high speed and deployed at or 
slightly above the surface of the water. Fish are hooked as they strike 
the baits which most frequently results in hooking locations in the jaw 
or other mouth area and does not often result in deep[dash]hooking. 
Additionally, because green[dash]stick gear is usually rigged with 
power haul[dash]back capability, the mainline can be quickly retrieved, 
thereby enabling undersized or non[dash]target fish to be released with 
a minimum of stress and physical trauma. Due to this characteristic of 
green[dash]stick gear, NMFS anticipates that there may be beneficial 
effects for target and non[dash]target species when compared to other 
fishing gears, such as longline and rod and reel, because improving 
post[dash]release survival of fish reduces overall fishing mortality. 
Finally, while authorization of green[dash]stick gear is not expected 
to result in a great increase in BFT landings, if an increase were to 
occur, repeated quota under[dash]harvests in recent years indicate that 
sufficient quota exists to allow for some additional landings despite 
the latest bluefin tuna stock assessment that indicates that the stock 
is overfished.
    Comment 6: NMFS should maintain enforceability of PLL closed areas 
by ensuring that PLL gear is not onboard vessels fishing with 
green[dash]stick gear in PLL closed areas.
    Response: This final rule does not change the requirement that PLL 
or BLL gear be removed from an Atlantic Tunas Longline permitted vessel 
when the vessel is in a PLL or BLL closed area. Green stick gear will, 
however, by allowed in the closed area. The rule distinguishes 
green[dash]stick gear from PLL and BLL by defining it as ``an actively 
trolled mainline attached to a vessel and elevated or suspended above 
the surface of the water with no more than 10 hooks or gangions 
attached to the mainline. The suspended line, attached gangions and/or 
hooks, and catch may be retrieved collectively by hand or mechanical 
means. Green[dash]stick does not constitute a PLL or a BLL as defined 
in this section or as described at Sec.  635.21(c) or Sec.  635.21(d), 
respectively.'' The distinguishing characteristics that separate the 
gears are that green[dash]stick gear is actively trolled and does not 
have floats capable of supporting the mainline, as with PLL gear, nor 
weights and/or anchors capable of maintaining contact between the 
mainline and the ocean bottom, as with BLL gear. NMFS believes that 
these characteristics are recognizable and, with the definition and 
distinctions made between the gears, enforceability of longline 
restrictions in the closed areas will be maintained.
    Comment 7: NMFS should maintain the enforceability of the circle 
hook requirement on PLL vessels.
    Response: This action does not change the requirement that only 
circle hooks may be used on PLL gear. It does provide for the 
possession of up to 20 J[dash]hooks for use only with green[dash]stick 
gear if green[dash]stick gear is onboard. NMFS believes that the 
definition of green[dash]stick gear allows the gear to be recognized by 
enforcement agents and distinguishes it from PLL, thus enabling 
enforcement agents to know when the possession of 20 J[dash]hooks is 
allowed.
    Comment 8: NMFS should maintain enforceability of the live bait 
prohibition in the Gulf of Mexico.
    Response: This action does not change the live bait prohibition in 
the Gulf of Mexico. In order to enhance enforcement capability of the 
live bait prohibition and prevent the use of bait catching rigs such as 
``sabiki'' rigs (which use small hooks) under the guise of 
green[dash]stick gear, a minimum hook size is established for 
J[dash]hooks that are allowed to be used with green[dash]stick gear 
onboard Atlantic Tunas Longline Permitted vessels. Under this 
provision, the use of J[dash]hooks less than 1.5 inch (38.1 mm, 
approximately the size of a standard 2/0 to 3/0 J[dash]hook), when 
measured in a straight line over the longest distance from the eye to 
any other part of the hook, is prohibited.
    Comment 9: NMFS should require that any BFT caught on 
green[dash]stick gear in the GOM be released regardless of permit 
category in order to protect BFT in the spawning area.
    Response: This action authorizes green[dash]stick gear for Atlantic 
tunas within existing quotas, size limits, or other established 
limitations. Directed fishing for BFT remains prohibited in the GOM. 
This action does not change existing provisions to protect BFT in the 
GOM. Green[dash]stick gear is authorized for use by Atlantic Tunas 
General, HMS CHB, and Atlantic Tunas Longline permitted vessels. 
Atlantic Tunas General category vessels may not retain BFT in the GOM. 
Atlantic[dash]wide, when selling BFT, HMS CHB permitted vessels operate 
under the rules for General category, and General category

[[Page 54728]]

vessels may not retain BFT in the GOM. This means that HMS CHB vessels 
may not retain BFT for commercial purposes in the GOM. For recreational 
fishing in the GOM, which also applies to HMS CHB permitted vessels, 
one ``trophy'' BFT (73 in CFL) is allowed to be retained per vessel per 
year only as incidental to targeted fishing for other species.
    Comment 10: Comments were received in support of increased data 
collection on green[dash]stick gear fishing to include designating a 
green[dash]stick gear code. Also, comments were received in support of 
improved data collection on green[dash]stick gear fishing that would 
allow for appropriate monitoring of effort and landings to enable 
changes or problems in the fishery to be addressed as soon as possible. 
In addition, improved data collection could show benefits of 
green[dash]stick gear such as low bycatch and the possible elimination 
of protected species interactions.
    Response: NMFS has designated a gear code which will facilitate 
improved gear[dash]specific data collection via dealer reporting 
through trip tickets in the southeast and dealer reporting systems in 
the northeast. The gear code may also aid in improved 
gear[dash]specific data collection via logbooks. Data collection on 
green[dash]stick gear and other gears is important for assessing the 
need for and appropriateness of future management measures.

Harpoon Authorization

    Comment 1: NMFS received a wide range of comments on authorization 
of harpoon gear for use by HMS CHB permitted vessels, from full support 
to complete opposition. The majority of comments received on the 
harpoon authorization issue opposed the action, as described below. 
Comments in support of harpoon use authorization for all HMS CHB trips 
included: 1) the BFT fishing industry needs all the help it can get and 
NMFS should do all it can to maximize fishing opportunities within 
current quotas, particularly because harpoon fishing is already limited 
by the need for good weather conditions; 2) the action would provide 
fishermen the flexibility of gear choice, which would be beneficial 
given current high operating costs, and would increase opportunities to 
harvest BFT within the General category daily retention limit 
(currently 3 BFT/vessel); and 3) authorization of harpoon gear on HMS 
CHB vessels would not significantly increase competition for current 
HMS CHB permit holders as very few vessel owners would make the large 
capital investment to outfit their vessels to use harpoon gear in the 
HMS CHB category.
    Comments supporting harpoon authorization for HMS CHB vessels on 
non[dash]for[dash]hire trips only include: 1) this alternative would 
work well for HMS CHB captains and crew, who could harpoon BFT in the 
early season (when BFT are more readily caught at the water's surface 
in the Gulf of Maine) and switch to rod and reel use in the late summer 
for use on charter trips; and 2) there is no reason for harpoons to be 
used on charter trips with paying passengers aboard.
    The majority of comments received on the harpoon authorization 
issue opposed the action. Comments include: 1) NMFS needs to take a 
more precautionary approach in regard to the BFT fishery, which is 
overfished, and in which overfishing is occurring; 2) this action would 
be inconsistent with efforts to rebuild BFT; 3) new measures should not 
be adopted in the name of quota utilization; 4) the action could lead 
to shorter seasons and lower retention limits for HMS CHB vessels; and 
5) the action could lead to disruption by new harpooners of Harpoon 
category fishing activities, and/or dilution of the historical HMS CHB 
business by historical harpooners (contradicting the rationale NMFS 
used in establishing a separate HMS CHB permit category).
    Response: NMFS has considered these comments, some of which were 
also made at the April 2008 HMS Advisory Panel meeting. Based on the 
relative lack of public support, and on consideration of the various 
concerns raised by NMFS and the public, including concerns about 
bycatch, enforcement and safety (discussed further in responses below), 
and BFT stock status generally, NMFS has decided, at this time, to 
maintain the status quo regarding authorized harpoon use, i.e., 
authorized harpoon use by the General and Harpoon categories only.
    Comment 2: NMFS received several comments specifically regarding 
potential increases in BFT dead discards, bycatch (of undersized fish), 
and bycatch mortality that may result from the proposed harpoon 
authorization. Comments expressed concern that now is not the time to 
increase fishing effort on BFT as it could further strain the resource. 
Examples of this resource strain were increased mortality of BFT that 
are harpooned and lost, undersized BFT that are harpooned 
unintentionally by less experienced crew while targeting 
commercial[dash]sized BFT, or BFT that are discarded in the process of 
highgrading. Comments from those supportive of the action stated that 
authorization of harpoon gear on HMS CHB vessels would not 
significantly increase BFT bycatch and bycatch mortality as effort is 
unlikely to substantially increase due to the large capital investment 
for owners to outfit their vessels to use harpoon gear in the HMS CHB 
category.
    Response: NMFS does not have information with which to estimate 
quantitatively the potential increase in discards, bycatch, and bycatch 
mortality that could result from HMS CHB harpoon use. NMFS anticipates 
that the number of HMS CHB operators that would outfit their vessels 
with harpoon gear would be low. However, to the extent that 
inexperienced users may inadvertently strike an undersized BFT, bycatch 
and bycatch mortality likely would increase with the proposed 
authorization. NMFS believes that harpoon use by HMS CHB vessels could 
result in increased discard mortality of BFT over the discard mortality 
that occurs with gear currently authorized for HMS CHB use (rod and 
reel, bandit gear, and handline) and green[dash]stick gear to be 
authorized by this final rule.
    Comment 3: NMFS received several comments regarding enforceability 
of the harpoon authorization. Comments opposing harpoon authorization 
stated that enforcement would be difficult if harpoons are authorized 
on non[dash]for[dash]hire trips only. Some of these comments further 
state that the proposed action may provide an incentive for captains to 
convert recreational trips to commercial trips and highgrade, or to use 
harpoon gear expressly for the satisfaction of paying passengers. Some 
indicated that harpoon authorization could exacerbate both the 
nonreporting of catch and landings and the illegal sale of BFT. A 
comment supportive of the action suggested that NMFS could require that 
the pulpit be stowed in the upright position while the vessel is on 
for[dash]hire trips.
    Response: Field and dockside enforcement of harpoon authorization 
for only certain HMS CHB trips would be more challenging than if the 
authorization applied to all HMS CHB trips. Although NMFS recognizes 
the possibility that harpoon authorization on for[dash]hire trips would 
increase the incentive to discard and/or not report fish since HMS CHB 
crew may fill either the commercial or recreational retention limit on 
any given fishing day, it is not possible to estimate quantitatively 
the increase in discards and non[dash]reporting that may occur. As NMFS 
is not taking action to authorize harpoon use on HMS CHB vessels at 
this time, consideration of specific gear stowage requirements is not 
necessary.
    Comment 4: NMFS received a few comments regarding safety 
implications

[[Page 54729]]

of the proposed action. Some believed that liability and safety of 
passengers is the captain's responsibility, and as it would be very 
unlikely that a paid passenger would be allowed to use the harpoon 
gear, authorization of harpoon gear should be for all trips. A few 
commenters asked why NMFS raised safety concerns regarding HMS CHB use 
of harpoon gear but not of green[dash]stick gear.
    Response: NMFS must ensure that management measures, to the extent 
practicable, promote the safety of human life at sea. Authorization of 
harpoon gear on HMS CHB vessels, particularly if authorized on all 
trips, presents the possibility of charter passengers walking out to 
and standing on a pulpit and/or handling harpoon gear, which may be 
capable of passing an electric current. Therefore, it is appropriate 
for NMFS to consider safety concerns and to engage the public in a 
discussion of these issues. In the proposed rule, NMFS selected harpoon 
authorization as the preferred subalternative on non[dash]for[dash]hire 
trips only as it would reduce the incentive for both crew and 
passengers to use the gear for recreational[dash]sized BFT fishing, 
thus reducing potential safety concerns. Green[dash]stick gear has been 
used on charter vessels for several years, including on for[dash]hire 
trips, and neither existing green[dash]stick gear use or use of the 
gear as proposed raised novel or substantial safety concerns.
    Comment 5: If NMFS authorizes harpoon gear use on HMS CHB vessels, 
NMFS should allow permit holders a category change (not currently 
allowed for the 2008 fishing year as the May 31 deadline has passed) so 
that vessels could make use of the HMS CHB harpoon authorization this 
year.
    Response: As NMFS is not implementing the proposed HMS CHB harpoon 
authorization at this time, allowances for permit category changes are 
not needed at this time.

Sea Turtle Control Device

    Comment 1: NMFS should require a sea turtle control device in PLL 
and BLL fisheries to achieve and maintain low post[dash]release 
mortality of sea turtles.
    Response: The proposed and final rule do require a sea turtle 
control device in the PLL and BLL fisheries to achieve and maintain low 
post[dash]release mortality of sea turtles. The implementation of sea 
turtle bycatch mitigation measures in the PLL and BLL fisheries, in 
accordance with the 2004 BiOp, which includes the mandatory use of 
circle hooks in the PLL fishery, possession and use of sea turtle 
handling and release gears in the PLL and BLL fisheries, and mandatory 
participation in protected species safe handling and release workshops, 
has reduced the post[dash]release mortality of sea turtles. Sea turtle 
control devices have been recommended in these fisheries and are now 
required to better enable fishermen to remove fishing gear from sea 
turtles. Maximizing the removal of fishing gear from sea turtles 
results in improved post[dash]release mortality.
    Comment 2: NMFS should require two sea turtle control devices 
instead of one in order to better control sea turtles by securing both 
front flippers.
    Response: NMFS considered requiring two sea turtle control devices 
instead of one in order to better control sea turtles by securing both 
front flippers, but did not prefer this as an alternative. Some BLL 
vessels are small and requiring two devices onboard is impractical, at 
this time, due to limited available space. Also, requiring the use of 
two devices when there are often only two crew members onboard raises 
concerns about safety at sea, especially in heavy seas and/or currents 
when one crew member must remain at the wheel while the other crew 
member retrieves the longline gear. In such circumstances, one crew 
member could reasonably be expected to use one sea turtle control 
device and remove fishing gear from the sea turtle, while the use of 
two devices and removal of the fishing gear would be an unreasonable 
expectation.
    Comment 3: NMFS should not require a sea turtle control device in 
PLL and BLL fisheries because the shark fishing fleet cannot afford the 
device to meet the requirement.
    Response: NMFS considered cost of the sea turtle control devices 
when developing this requirement and made options available for 
construction of the devices with inexpensive materials. The amount of 
time required for construction of these devices is minimal. Fishermen 
may already have many of these materials on hand. Construction costs 
for the T&G ninja sticks and turtle tether range from $25 to $85. Only 
one device is required to be carried onboard and used.

Changes from the Proposed Rule (73 FR 24922; May 6, 2008)

    NMFS made seven changes to the proposed rule as outlined below.
    1. Following requests from an organization representing a portion 
of the Atlantic tunas commercial handgear fishery and discussion by the 
HMS Advisory Panel at its October 2007 meeting, NMFS proposed 
authorization of harpoon gear for the commercial harvest of Atlantic 
tunas, including BFT, for HMS CHB permitted vessels. NMFS requested 
public comment on the potential authorization of the gear, for both 
for[dash]hire and non[dash]for[dash]hire fishing trips. After 
considering comment received during the comment period and discussions 
of the issue at the April 2008 HMS Advisory Panel meeting, both of 
which revealed little public support for the action, and the 
implications of authorizing a directed fishing gear that is used almost 
exclusively to target BFT, at this time, NMFS has decided to maintain 
the status quo regarding authorized harpoon gear use in the Atlantic 
tuna fisheries. For more information, please see the Response to 
Comments section. The selection of the status quo alternative regarding 
this subject does not preclude NMFS from taking future action regarding 
fishing gear authorization, in general or specifically regarding 
harpoon use.
    2. In Sec.  635.21, a clarification of how green[dash]stick gear 
will be allowed for Atlantic Tunas Longline permitted vessels is made 
that establishes a minimum allowable hook size restriction for 
J[dash]hooks used with green[dash]stick gear. J[dash]hooks used with 
green[dash]stick gear onboard Atlantic Tunas Longline permitted vessels 
may be no smaller than 1.5 inch (38.1 mm) when measured in a straight 
line over the longest distance from the eye to any other part of the 
hook. In the Gulf of Mexico, PLL vessels are prohibited from using live 
bait in order to reduce the incidental catch of Atlantic billfish. NMFS 
is concerned about the effect that the 20 J[dash]hook allowance, as 
described above, may have on enforcement of the live bait prohibition 
because fishing rigs that catch live bait utilize small J[dash]hooks. 
The possession of such J[dash]hooks is currently prohibited. NMFS' 
concern is that bait catching rigs could be used under the guise of 
green[dash]stick gear, thus making enforceability of the live bait 
prohibition more difficult. In the proposed rule, NMFS sought public 
comment on establishing a minimum hook size for J[dash]hooks allowed 
with green[dash]stick gear onboard Atlantic Tunas Longline permitted 
vessels and received comments in favor of such a restriction. The 
minimum size limit for J[dash]hooks in specific units of length is 
necessary as hook sizes such as 1/0, 2/0, 3/0, etc. are not 
standardized among hook manufacturers. The 1.5 inch minimum length 
limit will prevent the use of small hooks used with bait catching rigs 
which are normally 1/0 sized hooks or smaller. A 1.5 inch J[dash]hook 
is approximately the size of a 2/0 or 3/0 standard J[dash]hook 
depending on the manufacturer and style. J[dash]hooks used

[[Page 54730]]

with green[dash]stick gear when fishing for Atlantic tunas (usually 7/0 
to 11/0) are much larger than the 1.5 inch minimum size limit 
established by this action. This minimum J[dash]hook size limit only 
applies to Atlantic Tunas Longline permitted vessels; however, it 
applies to these vessels throughout the Atlantic.
    3. In Sec.  635.71, a prohibition is established for the possession 
and use of J[dash]hooks onboard a vessel that has pelagic longline gear 
onboard, except when green[dash]stick gear is onboard. The addition of 
this prohibition is necessary to better distinguish between regulations 
that apply to PLL vessels when green[dash]stick gear is or is not 
onboard and to establish the way that green[dash]stick gear will be 
managed. Regulations requiring the possession and use of circle hooks 
were established at 69 FR 40734 (July 6, 2004). These regulations 
required vessels fishing in the Northeast Distant gear restricted area 
(NED) and that have PLL gear onboard to only possess and use 18/0 or 
larger circle hooks with an offset not to exceed 10 degrees and when 
fishing outside the NED and having PLL gear onboard, to only possess 
and use 18/0 or larger circle hooks with an offset not to exceed 10 
degrees and 16/0 or larger non[dash]offset circle hooks.
    4. In Sec.  635.71, a prohibition of the use of J[dash]hooks with 
pelagic longline is established. This prohibition is established for 
the same reason described in change number 3 above.
    5. In Sec.  635.71, a prohibition of the possession of more than 20 
J[dash]hooks onboard a vessel when possessing both pelagic longline 
gear, as described at Sec.  635.21 (c), and green[dash]stick gear is 
established. This prohibition establishes the way that green[dash]stick 
gear will be managed.
    6. In Sec.  635.71, a prohibition of the use of more than 10 hooks 
at one time with each green[dash]stick gear is established. This 
prohibition establishes the way that green[dash]stick gear will be 
managed.
    7. In Sec.  635.71, a prohibition of the possession and use of 
J[dash]hooks smaller than 1.5 inch (38.1 mm) onboard Atlantic Tunas 
Longline permitted vessels is established for the same purpose as 
explained in change number 2 above.

Classification

    This final rule is published under the authority of the 
Magnuson[dash]Stevens Act and ATCA. NMFS has determined that this final 
rule is necessary for the management of Atlantic tunas and protection 
and conservation of sea turtles consistent with the 
Magnuson[dash]Stevens Act, including the national standards; the ESA; 
and other applicable law.
    NMFS prepared an EA for this action and a notice of availability 
was published with the proposed rule on May 6, 2008 (73 FR 24922). This 
final rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of 
Executive Order 12866. This rule does not contain policies with 
federalism implications under E.O. 13132. There are no new information 
collection requirements proposed by this rule for Purposes of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act.
    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 final rule 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 final rule, the 
objective of this final rule is to ensure fishermen harvest Atlantic 
tunas within quotas, size limits, or other established limitations and 
to distinguish green[dash]stick fishing gear from current definitions 
of other authorized gear types. Additionally, the final rule addresses 
sea turtle control devices in the PLL and BLL fisheries to achieve and 
maintain low post[dash]release mortality of sea turtles thus 
maintaining consistency with the 2004 Biological Opinion (BiOp) for the 
Atlantic PLL fishery and to increase safety at sea for fishermen when 
handling sea turtles caught or entangled in longline fishing gear.
    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 several comments on the proposed 
rule and draft EA during the public comment period. A summary of these 
comments and the Agency's responses are included above. NMFS did not 
receive any comments specific to the Initial Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis (IRFA). During the public comment period, NMFS received an 
economic comment that NMFS should not require a sea turtle control 
device in PLL and BLL fisheries because the shark fishing fleet cannot 
afford the device to meet the requirement. NMFS understands that there 
may be some negative economic impact from this requirement and has 
attempted to minimize these impacts by allowing the devices to be 
constructed with low cost materials. Construction costs for the sea 
turtle control devices range from $25[dash]85 and may be constructed 
with materials that fishermen may already have on hand, thus reducing 
the construction cost. NMFS believes that the economic impacts to 
fishermen are not likely to be large with this final action. No changes 
were made to this final action 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 final rule will apply. The final rule to 
authorize green[dash]stick fishing gear for the harvest of Atlantic 
tunas, including BFT, and require sea turtle control devices in 
Atlantic HMS PLL and BLL fisheries could directly affect 3,616 Atlantic 
Tunas General, 3,901 HMS CHB, and 218 Atlantic Tunas Longline category 
permit holders (permit numbers as of November 30, 2007). All of these 
permit holders are considered small business entities according to the 
Small Business Administration's standard for defining a small entity.
    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 will be subject to the requirements of 
the report or record. None of the alternatives considered for this 
final rule will result in additional reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements. New compliance requirements will occur under the action 
to require the possession and use of a sea turtle control device 
onboard PLL and BLL vessels; however, the economic impacts are not 
expected to be significant.
    Section 604(a)(5) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act requires the 
Agency to describe the steps taken to minimize any significant economic 
impact on small entities consistent with the stated objectives of 
applicable statutes. NMFS believes that in regard to the portion of the 
final rule requiring a sea turtle control device, impacts on small 
entities are minimized through the development of options for fishermen 
to construct the device at minimal cost, thus simplifying compliance 
for all entities including small entities. Similarly, the design 
standards used to allow construction of a sea turtle control device at 
minimal cost satisfies the aforementioned objectives of this rulemaking 
while, concurrently, complying with the Magnuson[dash]Stevens Act and 
ESA.

[[Page 54731]]

    As described below, NMFS considered eight different alternatives to 
authorize fishing gear in Atlantic tuna fisheries to increase 
operational flexibility in the fishery while still achieving the 
objectives of the Consolidated HMS FMP; to allow harvest of Atlantic 
tunas with a gear that is generally efficient in harvesting target 
species and, at the same time, is low in bycatch and bycatch mortality; 
and to require a sea turtle control device in the PLL and BLL fisheries 
to achieve and maintain low post[dash]release mortality of sea turtles. 
Below, NMFS provides justification for selection of the final action to 
achieve the desired objectives.
    Alternative A1 is a no action, or the status quo alternative. This 
alternative would maintain existing regulations for harvesting Atlantic 
tunas, thereby allowing green[dash]stick gear use only as allowed under 
the current definitions and regulations for longline or handgear based 
on the gear configuration. Under Alternative A1, there would be no 
change in the existing regulations and, as such, no change in the 
current baseline economic impacts.
    The no action alternative would instead continue to consider 
green[dash]stick gear as being within the longline definition if 3 or 
more hooks are attached and as handgear if 2 or fewer hooks are 
attached. The allowable use of the gear in this way impedes operational 
and economic efficiency in the Atlantic Tunas General category or HMS 
CHB category because fishermen have used green[dash]stick gear rigged 
with up to 10 hooks historically for Atlantic tunas. Under alternative 
A1, the social and economic impacts are expected to be minimal, 
although unquantified social and economic impacts may occur to Atlantic 
Tunas General category and HMS CHB permitted vessel holders with the 
status quo because they would not be allowed to use green[dash]stick 
gear with 3 hooks or more, as they have historically, unless they 
purchased an Atlantic Tunas Longline permit and other associated 
limited access permits for swordfish and shark. This alternative was 
not selected because other alternatives increase operational 
flexibility in the fishery while still achieving the objectives of the 
Consolidated HMS FMP and allow fishermen additional opportunities to 
fulfill U.S. quota allocations.
    Under selected Alternative A2, which was preferred in the proposed 
rule, green[dash]stick gear will be defined and authorized for use in 
the commercial Atlantic tuna fishery for BAYS and BFT by Atlantic Tunas 
General category vessels. Vessels fishing under the Atlantic Tunas 
General category will continue to be subject to all current HMS 
regulations for that category (such as bag and size limits). NMFS does 
not anticipate greatly increased landings from Atlantic Tunas General 
category vessels as a result of this rule because green[dash]stick gear 
has been used in HMS fisheries since at least the mid[dash]1990s. While 
NMFS does not anticipate greatly increased landings, Alternative A2 
could result in a minor increase of overall effort deployed by this 
category of permit holders. This could occur if additional fishermen 
become aware of green[dash]stick gear efficiency in catching Atlantic 
tunas and of the high quality of fish product that can be delivered to 
the dock as a result. Higher quality fish product often commands high 
ex[dash]vessel prices, and thus could potentially improve the 
profitability of trips. Under Alternative A2, authorization of 
green[dash]stick gear use is expected to have generally positive social 
impacts as the gear is popular with Atlantic Tunas General category 
permit holders in areas of the Atlantic where it has been used.
    The economic impacts under Alternative A2 are expected to be 
positive. Authorization of green[dash]stick gear for harvest of 
Atlantic tunas will allow Atlantic Tunas General category permit 
holders additional opportunities for harvest. Tuna and other species 
harvested commercially with green[dash]stick gear are usually high in 
quality and command hi