Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; 2009 Specifications for the Spiny Dogfish Fishery, 20230-20234 [E9-10058]
Download as PDF
20230
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 83 / Friday, May 1, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
This emergency rule may be extended
for up to an additional 186 days,
provided that the public has had an
opportunity to comment on the rule and
provided that the Council is actively
preparing a plan amendment or
proposed regulations to address this
emergency on a permanent basis. Public
comments on this emergency rule are
invited and will be considered in
determining whether to maintain or
extend this rule to address the
incidental take and mortality of sea
turtles in the Gulf of Mexico. The
Council is preparing an FMP
amendment to address this issue on a
permanent basis which, if approved,
would be implemented through notice
and comment rulemaking.
Classification
The Assistant Administrator for
Fisheries, NOAA (AA), has determined
that this emergency rule is necessary to
reduce the incidental take and mortality
of sea turtles in the bottom longline
component of the reef fish fishery in the
Gulf of Mexico EEZ and is consistent
with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and
other applicable laws.
This emergency rule has been
determined to be not significant for
purposes of E.O. 12866.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the AA
finds good cause to waive prior notice
and opportunity for public comment.
Prior notice and opportunity for public
comment would be contrary to the
public interest, as delaying action to
reduce the incidental take and mortality
of sea turtles in the bottom longline
component of the reef fish fishery
would increase the likelihood of
additional sea turtle mortality in excess
of that allowed under the incidental
take statement established under the
ESA.
For the same reasons, the AA finds
good cause to waive the 30-day delay in
effective date under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
However, the effective date of this rule
will be delayed until 15 days after the
date of publication in the Federal
Register. A typical bottom longline
fishing trip lasts approximately 2 weeks.
Advance preparation for such a trip
often takes a couple of days for
purchasing and loading necessary
provisions and involves substantial
expenditures. Immediate, or nearly
immediate, implementation of this rule
would be very disruptive of trips for
which advance preparations and
expenses had already occurred or for
trips that had already been initiated and
provisioned based on the expectation of
a full 2-week trip. A 15-day delay will
provide adequate time to inform the
bottom longline component of the Gulf
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:38 Apr 30, 2009
Jkt 021701
of Mexico reef fish fishery of the
impending restrictions and allow them
to plan and adjust their fishing activities
accordingly.
Because prior notice and opportunity
for public comment are not required for
this rule by 5 U.S.C. 553 or any other
law, the analytical requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq. are inapplicable.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 622
Fisheries, Fishing, Puerto Rico,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Virgin Islands.
than Gulf reef fish may not possess Gulf
reef fish within the prohibited areas
specified in paragraphs (q)(1) of this
section or within the prohibited area
specified in paragraph (q)(2) of this
section when that prohibition is
applicable, unless the bottom longline
gear is appropriately stowed. For the
purposes of paragraph (q) of this
section, appropriately stowed means
that a longline may be left on the drum
if all gangions and hooks are
disconnected and stowed below deck;
hooks cannot be baited; and all buoys
must be disconnected from the gear but
may remain on deck.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: April 28, 2009.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E9–10042 Filed 4–28–09; 4:15 pm]
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 50 CFR part 622 is amended
as follows:
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
■
PART 622—FISHERIES OF THE
CARIBBEAN, GULF, AND SOUTH
ATLANTIC
1. The authority citation for part 622
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In § 622.34, paragraph (q) is added
to read as follows:
■
§ 622.34 Gulf EEZ seasonal and/or area
closures.
*
*
*
*
*
(q) Prohibitions applicable to bottom
longline fishing for Gulf reef fish. (1)
Bottom longlining for Gulf reef fish is
prohibited in the portion of the Gulf
EEZ east of 85°30′ W. long. that is
shoreward of rhumb lines connecting, in
order, the following points:
Point
North lat.
West
long.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
28°58.5′
28°42.5′
28°12.5′
27°52.0′
27°28.0′
26°28.5′
25°30.0′
25°04.0′
24°48.0′
24°39.5′
24°28.5′
24°25.0′
85°30.0′
85°05.0′
84°50.0′
84°30.0′
84°19.0′
83°50.0′
83°44.5′
83°44.5′
83°54.4′
83°41.0′
83°14.5′
83°00.0′
(2) If both the commercial deep-water
grouper and tilefish components of the
Gulf reef fish fishery are closed, bottom
longlining for Gulf reef fish is
prohibited in all waters of the Gulf EEZ
east of 85°30′ W. long.
(3) A vessel with bottom longline gear
on board or that is using bottom
longline gear to fish for species other
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 090206149–9658–02]
RIN 0648–AX57
Fisheries of the Northeastern United
States; 2009 Specifications for the
Spiny Dogfish Fishery
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: NMFS announces
specifications for the spiny dogfish
fishery for the 2009 fishing year (FY)
(May 1, 2009, through April 30, 2010),
and modifies existing management
measures. NMFS is implementing a
spiny dogfish quota of 12 million lb
(5,443.11 mt) for FY 2009, and a
possession limit of 3,000 lb (1.36 mt).
DATES: The rule is effective May 1, 2009.
The specifications are effective May 1,
2009 through April 30, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Copies of supporting
documents used by the Mid-Atlantic
Fishery Management Council (Council),
including the Environmental
Assessment (EA) and Regulatory Impact
Review (RIR)/Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), are
available from: Daniel T. Furlong,
Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic
Fishery Management Council, Room
2115, Federal Building, 300 South New
Street, Dover, DE 19904–6790. The EA/
RIR/IRFA is also accessible via the
Internet at https://www.nero.noaa.gov.
NMFS prepared a Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (FRFA), which is
E:\FR\FM\01MYR1.SGM
01MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 83 / Friday, May 1, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
contained in the Classification section
of this rule. Copies of the FRFA and the
Small Entity Compliance Guide are
available from the Regional
Administrator, Northeast Regional
Office, NMFS, 55 Great Republic Drive,
Gloucester, MA 01930 2276, and are
also available via the internet at https://
www.nero.nmfs.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jamie Goen, Fishery Policy Analyst,
phone: 978–281–9220, fax: 978–281–
9135.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
A proposed rule for this action was
published in the Federal Register on
March 19, 2009 (74 FR 11706), with
public comment accepted through April
3, 2009. The final specifications and
management measures are unchanged
from those that were proposed. A
complete discussion of the development
of the specifications and management
measures appears in the preamble to the
proposed rule and is not repeated here.
2009 Specifications and Management
Measures
The commercial spiny dogfish quota
for the 2009 fishing year is 12 million
lb (5,443.11 mt). As specified in the
FMP, quota Period 1 (May 1 through
October 31) is allocated 57.9 percent of
the quota, 6,948,000 lb (3,151.56 mt),
and quota Period 2 (November 1
through April 30) is allocated 42.1
percent of the quota, 5,052,000 lb
(2,291.55 mt). The possession limits,
specified in regulations at 50 CFR
648.235, are revised from 600 lb (272 kg)
to 3,000 lb (1.36 mt) for both quota
periods.
Comments and Responses
NMFS received 23 comments on the
proposed measures from 9 organizations
and 14 individuals.
Comment 1: Two organizations
(including processors) and three
individuals, all from either New York,
New Jersey, or Massachusetts, support
the increased quota and possession
limits for spiny dogfish for FY 2009 as
described in the proposed rule.
Response: NMFS agrees with these
comments for the reasons described in
the preamble to the proposed rule for
this action.
Comment 2: Five organizations
(including processors) and nine
individuals, all from Massachusetts,
support the increased quota but oppose
the increased possession limits for the
spiny dogfish fishery in Federal waters
as proposed. Six commenters
recommended keeping the possession
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:03 Apr 30, 2009
Jkt 217001
limit somewhere between 600 lb (272
kg) and approximately 2,000 lb (907 kg)
for the entire fishing year. Eight
commenters recommended starting the
fishing year with the status quo
possession limit, 600 lb (272 kg), and
increasing the quota to between 1,500 lb
(680 kg) and 3,000 lb (1.36 mt) starting
September 1, 2009, to better match the
existing markets for the fishery and to
mirror Massachusetts Division of
Marine Fisheries (MA DMF) proposed
action. Many of these commenters
expressed concern that higher
possession limits will flood the market.
They claim that there are not enough
processors willing to buy dogfish, and
also claim that the large supply of
dogfish will drive down the price. Some
commenters also stated concern that a
3,000 lb (1.36 mt) possession limit at the
start of the fishery may cause the fishery
to close early and preclude a state
fishery in the fall.
Response: For the first time in years,
the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries
Commission (Commission), the group
that develops fishery management for
state waters from 0 to 3 nm, and the
parties involved in management of the
Federal spiny dogfish fishery from 3 to
200 nm (the Mid-Atlantic Fishery
Management Council, the New England
Fishery Management Council and
NMFS) have agreed on the quota and
possession limits for spiny dogfish.
Management of the spiny dogfish
resource in both Federal and state
waters is intended to be collaborative
and covers the entire spiny dogfish
population along the Atlantic coast of
the U.S. (i.e., in both state and Federal
waters from 0 to 200 nm). Agreement on
the quota and possession limits between
the Commission, Councils, and NMFS is
a step in the right direction for
management of the dogfish fishery.
Both the Commission and the Council
process for the FY 2009 spiny dogfish
specifications started in the fall of 2008
and both processes relied on the best
available science first presented at the
Commission’s Spiny Dogfish Technical
Committee meeting on October 16,
2008. The best available science was an
update of the spiny dogfish stock status
from the Northeast Fisheries Science
Center (NEFSC) using the model from
the 43rd Northeast Regional Stock
Assessment Workshop (SAW)/Stock
Assessment Review Committee (SARC),
2007 catch data, and results from the
2008 trawl survey. Even though both the
Commission and Council processes rely
on the same scientific advice, they do
not always agree on what quota and
possession limits should result from
that advice. However, for 2009, they
have agreed on a 12–million-lb
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
20231
(5,443.11–mt) quota and 3,000–lb (1.36–
mt) possession limit for both Federal
and state waters. While the Commission
has adopted a 3,000–lb (1.36–mt)
possession limit for state waters along
the east coast, the individual states may
have more restrictive measures.
The measures recently proposed by
the MA DMF under the Commission
plan would establish more restrictive
possession limits than this action. The
MA DMF has proposed a 600–lb (272–
kg) possession limit for May through
August, and a 1,500 (680–kg) to 2,000–
lb (907–kg) possession limit beginning
September 1, 2009, depending on the
level of landings at that time. Once the
Commission’s 58 percent regional
allocation (described in more detail
below) of the 12–million-lb (5,443.11–
mt) quota is reached, the state fisheries
(Maine through Connecticut) will close.
Federal spiny dogfish permit holders
who possess or land dogfish in
Massachusetts would be subject to these
more restrictive measures. MA DMF is
proposing these possession limits in
response to feedback from members of
the fishing industry who are concerned
with flooding the market with dogfish
too early in the season and driving
down the price paid for dogfish.
As previously stated, individual states
may have more restrictive quotas and
possession limits than those adopted by
the Commission and Council. In
addition, fishermen may choose to land
less than the possession limit if they
conclude that it is in their best interest
to do so. The possession limit
established by this rule provides gives
fishermen the flexibility to land any
amount up to 3,000 lb (1.36 mt).
The concern over the dogfish fishery
closing before the fall when dogfish
prices are better is moderated by the fact
that the Federal spiny dogfish
commercial quota is distributed
between two periods (Period 1 is May 1
through October 31 and Period 2 is
November 1 through April 30) based on
the historical percentage of commercial
landings for each semi-annual period
during the years 1990 through 1997.
Period 1 is allocated 57.9 percent of the
quota (6,948,000 lb (3,151.56 mt)) and
Period 2 is allocated 42.1 percent
(5,052,000 lb (2,291.55 mt)). This was
intended to preserve the traditional
distribution of landings, both
geographically and seasonally. If the
Period 1 fishery closes early due to
quota attainment, the Period 2 fishery
would open in the fall starting
November 1, 2009. However, for state
waters, the Commission has removed
this seasonal quota beginning in 2009.
Instead, the Commission has adopted an
annual regional quota for state waters
E:\FR\FM\01MYR1.SGM
01MYR1
20232
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 83 / Friday, May 1, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
with 58 percent of the quota going to
Maine through Connecticut, 26 percent
of the quota going to New York through
Virginia, and 16 percent of the quota
going to North Carolina. This means that
while the Federal seasonal allocation of
the quota (Period 1 and Period 2) would
preserve a fall fishery, it could be
possible that fishing by non-federally
permitted vessels in state waters would
result in early attainment of the 12–
million-lb (5,443.11–mt) quota. This is
the only inconsistency between the state
and Federal programs, and could cause
the Federal Period 2 fishery not to open
or to open with less than the full
amount allocated to Period 2 remaining
for harvest. There is no current
provision in the Federal FMP that
would enable NMFS to address this
inconsistency.
Comment 3: One organization and
two individuals commented on the
status of the spiny dogfish resource and
the resulting quota. One commenter
requested that NMFS report on the
population trends of the species, and
asked why the specifications are set
consistent with a fishing mortality rate
of 0.11 (Frebuild) versus the target fishing
mortality rate for a rebuilt stock
(F=0.28). The commenter asked about
the uncertainty associated with these
estimates of F. One commenter stated
that NMFS should manage the fishery
for the longer term recovery of the stock
and with an ecosystem perspective.
One commenter noted that the
proposed rule does not follow the
recommendations of the 2007 report of
the ASMFC Spiny Dogfish Technical
Committee. The commenter questioned
how a species can be considered ‘‘not
overfished’’ given the skewed sex ratio,
declining size of females, and reduction
in the number of pups. The commenter
recommended allowing the stock more
time to recover before increasing the
quota or possession limits.
One commenter recommended that
the quota be reduced by a certain
percentage each year. The commenter
also stated that environmentalists
should have a seat on the Council’s
Committees.
Response: Trends in the status of the
spiny dogfish resource are reported
through the stock assessment and,
between stock assessments, through
stock status updates. Stock assessments
include biomass estimates going back to
the 1960s and projections on future
trends. The most recent stock
assessment for the spiny dogfish
resource occurred at the NEFSC’s 43rd
SAW/SARC (https://
www.nefsc.noaa.gov/nefsc/publications/
crd/crd0625/). The most recent stock
status update was provided at the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:03 Apr 30, 2009
Jkt 217001
Commission’s Spiny Dogfish Technical
Committee and the Council’s Spiny
Dogfish Monitoring Committee and the
Joint Committee meetings in the fall of
2008. As explained in the proposed
rule, the stock status update used the
model from the 43rd SAW/SARC, the
2007 catch data, and results from the
2008 trawl survey to provide the
information that was used to develop
these specifications.
The FMP for spiny dogfish specifies
that the biomass threshold below which
spiny dogfish would be considered
overfished is the value equal to half the
maximum female spawning stock
biomass (1⁄2 SSBmax) (or 100,000 mt).
The proposed rule for Framework
Adjustment 2 to the Spiny Dogfish FMP
(74 FR 9208, March 3, 2009) proposes a
process to change the stock status
determination criteria and provides
options for other biological parameters
to define dogfish as overfished.
Specifically, the rule proposes to define
dogfish as overfished if the minimum
stock size threshold (MSST) reaches half
the biomass necessary to support the
maximum sustainable yield (1⁄2 BMSY or
a reasonable proxy thereof). The MSST
may be defined as a function of (but not
limited to): total stock biomass,
spawning stock biomass, total pup
production, and may include males,
females, both, or combinations and
ratios thereof which provide the best
measure of productive capacity for
spiny dogfish. While spiny dogfish is
currently considered ‘‘not overfished,’’
as one commenter suggests, if
Framework 2 is approved, the
determination of whether spiny dogfish
is considered overfished may change in
the future if different biological
parameters are used to determine the
stock’s overfished status.
The stock update that provides the
basis for these specifications evaluated
the uncertainty associated with the most
recent estimate of fishing mortality for
the stock, and concluded that the
probability that F in 2006 was lower
than the F threshold is near 100 percent.
The analysis concluded that 75 percent
of the computed values for SSB
exceeded the target biomass value.
In light of the likelihood that the stock
could be considered rebuilt, the
advisory bodies to the Commission and
Councils could have recommended
increasing the fishing mortality above
F=0.11 and up to the fishing mortality
associated with a rebuilt stock
(Ftarget=0.28). However, the advisory
bodies took a more risk averse approach
given concern over the biology of the
stock (concentrated size frequency of
the female population, low pup
production, skewed sex ratio); and
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
concern that projections of future
biomass include assumptions about pup
survivorship and selectivity of gear that
may be optimistic. Because of these
concerns and uncertainty, the advisory
bodies recommended keeping the
fishing mortality at the level associated
with rebuilding the dogfish stock
(F=0.11) to ensure the long-term
recovery of the stock. The resulting 12–
million-lb (5,443.11–mt) quota is much
higher than previous years because the
stock biomass has been increasing.
One commenter noted that the
proposed rule does not follow the
recommendations of the Spiny Dogfish
Technical Committee report (2007) by
the ASMFC. As mentioned in the
response to Comment 2 above, both the
Commission and the Council process for
the FY 2009 spiny dogfish specifications
started in the fall of 2008 and both
processes relied on the best available
science first presented at the
Commission’s Spiny Dogfish Technical
Committee meeting on October 16,
2008. The best available science was an
update on the spiny dogfish stock status
from the NEFSC using the model from
the 43rd SAW/SARC, 2007 catch data,
and results from the 2008 trawl survey.
The Commission action to establish a
12–million-lb (5,443.11–mt) quota and
3,000–lb (1.36–mt) maximum
possession limit was consistent with the
recommendations of the Spiny Dogfish
Technical Committee’s 2008
recommendation, not the
recommendation from 2007.
NMFS does not agree with the
comment that the quota should be
reduced by an arbitrary percentage each
year. The FMP specifies the process for
establishing the spiny dogfish
management measures and that
methodology resulted in a risk averse
quota for FY 2009, as discussed above.
NMFS agrees with the comment that
environmentalists should provide input
to the Councils’ process. While there is
not a voting seat reserved on the
Council’s Committees specifically for an
environmentalist, such constituents are
included on the Advisory Panel to the
Council and are actively involved in
public meetings.
Comment 4: One organization
opposed the 15-day public comment
period on the proposed rule for this
action, claiming that it did not provide
reasonable notice and opportunity to
comment. The commenter also
suggested NMFS provide more widely
publicized notice to the public.
Response: The Administrative
Procedures Act (APA) (5 U.S.C.
Subchapter II) outlines the rulemaking
process for Federal agencies, including
‘‘notice and comment’’ rulemaking.
E:\FR\FM\01MYR1.SGM
01MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 83 / Friday, May 1, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
While NMFS may allow more than 15
days for public comment, a 15-day
comment period is consistent with the
APA. In this instance, because the spiny
dogfish specifications for FY 2009
relieve a restriction for the fishing
community, NMFS determined that a
shortened public comment period was
reasonable and appropriate in order to
have the final rule effective at the start
of the fishery, May 1, 2009. In addition,
the public had several opportunities to
comment on the development of the
spiny dogfish specifications and
management measures in writing or
verbally through the Council process,
including the Council meetings and
meetings of its advisory bodies that
were held starting in the fall of 2008.
Notification of these meetings and
opportunities were publicized widely
by the Councils on their websites and in
mailings to interested members of the
public.
Classification
Pursuant to section 304 (b)(1)(A) of
the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS
Assistant Administrator has determined
that this rule is consistent with the
Spiny Dogfish FMP, other provisions of
the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other
applicable law.
This final rule has been determined to
be not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866.
Because this rule relieves a restriction
by increasing the spiny dogfish quota
and possession limits, it is not subject
to the 30-day delayed effectiveness
provision of the APA pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 553(d)(1). The Spiny Dogfish
FMP was first implemented in 2000 in
response to the classification of the
stock as overfished in 1998. Since the
FMP was implemented, the commercial
quota has been set at 4 million lb
(1,814.37 mt) and the possession limits
have been no higher than 600 lb (272
kg). These restrictions on the harvest of
spiny dogfish were necessary to rebuild
the stock. As explained in the preamble
to the proposed rule (74 FR 11706,
March 19, 2009), the latest Northeast
Fisheries Science Center stock status
update from the fall of 2008 estimated
that the spiny dogfish female spawning
stock biomass is likely to be above the
most recently calculated maximum
sustainable yield biomass (Bmsy),
which would indicate the stock is not
overfished and could be considered
rebuilt. This action maintains a
conservative rebuilding fishing
mortality value (F value) of 0.11 as the
target in FY 2009, as opposed to the F
= 0.28 target that is associated with a
rebuilt stock, and still results in a 12–
million-lb (5,443.11 mt) quota for FY
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:49 Apr 30, 2009
Jkt 021701
2009. This quota represents a 200
percent increase from the 4–million-lb
(1,814.37–mt) quota from prior years.
Because the best available science
shows that the stock biomass is at a
level that could support a higher quota
and possession limit, the fishing
community should be allowed to
harvest that available spiny dogfish
biomass. This rule relieves a restriction
by increasing the commercial quota
from 4 million lb (1,814.37 mt) to 12
million lb (5,443.11 mt) and increasing
the possession limits from 600 lb (272
kg) to 3,000 lb (1.36 mt).
Waiving the 30-day delayed
effectiveness provision avoids
unnecessary economic harm to the
fishing industry that would result from
confining them to the lower 600–lb
possession limit. Confining fishermen to
the lower possession limits would
reduce their potential economic benefits
on the trip level of being able to land a
larger amount of dogfish. In addition,
processors may have already made
business plans (e.g., additional
personnel to process, trucking services)
in anticipation of the increased Federal
possession limits.
Waiving the 30-day delayed
effectiveness provision also reduces
confusion by making the Federal
regulations and those adopted by the
Commission for state waters consistent
at the start of the fishery, May 1, 2009.
Otherwise, the Federal fishery will start
with the lower 600–lb possession limit,
while the possession limits in state
waters may be up to 3,000 lb. This will
cause confusion because of the different
Federal and state limits and will likely
push effort in to state waters. Federal
spiny dogfish permit holders may
relinquish their Federal permit, an open
access permit, to fish in state waters
until the Federal quota and possession
limit is effective.
NMFS, pursuant to section 604 of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, has prepared
a final regulatory flexibility analysis
(FRFA), included in this final rule, in
support of the 2009 spiny dogfish
specifications and management
measures. The FRFA describes the
economic impact that this final rule,
along with other non-preferred
alternatives, will have on small entities.
The FRFA incorporates the economic
impacts and analysis summarized in the
IRFA, a summary of the significant
issues raised by the public, and a
summary of analyses prepared to
support the action (i.e., the EA and the
RIR). The contents of these documents
are not repeated in detail here. A copy
of the IRFA, the RIR, and the EA are
available upon request (see ADDRESSES).
A complete description of the reasons
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
20233
why this action is being considered, and
the objectives of and legal basis for this
action, is contained in the preamble to
the proposed rule and is not repeated
here.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Statement of Objective and Need
A description of the reasons why this
action is being considered, and the
objectives of and legal basis for this
action, is contained in the preamble to
the proposed rule (74 FR 11706, March
19, 2009) and is not repeated here.
Summary of Public Comment on IRFA
and Agency Response
No comments were received about the
IRFA. However, eight comments
received during the public comment
period mentioned the general economic
effects of the proposed rule. One
comment supported the economic
benefit of the higher quota and
possession limits. Seven comments, all
from Massachusetts, recommended a
lower possession limit from May
through August to preserve the
economic markets that are stronger in
the fall. NMFS response to these
comments are included in the response
to Comment 2 in the preamble of this
rule.
Description and Estimate of Number of
Small Entities to Which the Rule Will
Apply
All of the potentially affected
businesses are considered small entities
under the standards described in NMFS
guidelines because they have gross
receipts that do not exceed $3.5 million
annually. Therefore, there are no
disproportionate economic impacts on
small entities. Information from FY
2007 was used to evaluate impacts of
this action, as that is the most recent
year for which data are complete.
According to NMFS permit file data,
3,142 vessels were issued Federal spiny
dogfish permits in FY 2007, while 257
of these vessels contributed to overall
landings.
Description of Projected Reporting,
Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
This action does not contain any new
collection-of-information, reporting,
recordkeeping, or other compliance
requirements. It does not duplicate,
overlap, or conflict with any other
Federal rules.
Minimizing Significant Economic
Impacts on Small Entities
The Council’s analysis, the EA/RIR/
IRFA, considered three alternatives. The
action recommended in this rule,
E:\FR\FM\01MYR1.SGM
01MYR1
20234
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 83 / Friday, May 1, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
Alternative 1, includes a commercial
quota of 12 million lb (5,443.11 mt), and
the possession limit at 3,000 lb (1.36
mt), for both quota periods during FY
2009. Alternative 2 is the same as
Alternative 1, but with a more liberal
quota of 36.5 million lb (16,556.14 mt).
Alternative 3, the status quo/no action
alternative, would result in commercial
quota of 4 million lb (1,814.37 mt) and
a possession limit of 600 lb (272 kg) for
both quota periods.
Alternatives 1 and 2 have higher
quotas than prior years. Assuming that
the quota implemented would be
attained, Alternatives 1 and 2 would be
expected to increase overall revenue
from dogfish landings, a beneficial
economic impact on small entities. FY
2008 revenue is estimated using the
average FY 2007 price/lb ($0.20) and the
FY 2008 state quota of 8 million lb
(3,628.74 mt) to equal $1.6 million. The
increase in revenue in FY 2009
compared to FY 2008 could amount to
$800,000 under Alternative 1 (preferred)
and Alternative 3, and $5.7 million
under Alternative 2. Alternative 3 is
expected to result in a revenue increase
because landings for spiny dogfish
would presumably continue in state
waters even after Federal waters closed
until the 12–million-lb (5,443.11–mt)
state quota implemented by the ASMFC
for FY 2009 was reached. The net
economic benefits by alternative would
be greatest under Alternative 2, then
Alternative 1 (preferred), and lastly by
Alternative 3. As noted in the preamble,
however, Alternative 2 was not
recommended by the Councils or NMFS
because, while stock biomass has
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:49 Apr 30, 2009
Jkt 021701
increased, there are several other
biological indicators that continue to
raise concern about the condition of the
stock. Although total dogfish revenues
may be the same under Alternative 1
and 3, the lower trip limit under
Alternative 3 would distribute revenues
at a lower rate over a longer period.
Alternatives 1 and 2 would have a
beneficial economic impact on small
entities, including fishermen,
processors, and the businesses that
support them.
Small Entity Compliance Guide
Section 212 of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 states that, for each rule or group
of related rules for which an agency is
required to prepare a FRFA, the agency
shall publish one or more guides to
assist small entities in complying with
the rule, and shall designate such
publications as ‘‘small entity
compliance guides.’’ The agency shall
explain the actions a small entity is
required to take to comply with a rule
or group of rules. As part of this
rulemaking process, a letter to permit
holders that also serves as small entity
compliance guide (guide) was prepared
and will be sent to all holders of permits
issued for the spiny dogfish fishery. In
addition, copies of this final rule and
guide (i.e., permit holder letter) are
available from the Northeast Regional
Administrator (see ADDRESSES) and may
be found at the following web site:
https://www.nero.noaa.gov/nero/.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648
Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Dated: April 27, 2009
John Oliver,
Deputy Assistant Administrator For
Operations, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 50 CFR part 648 is amended
as follows:
■
PART 648—FISHERIES OF THE
NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
1. The authority citation for part 648
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In § 648.235, paragraphs (a) and (b)
are revised to read as follows:
■
§ 648.235 Possession and landing
restrictions.
(a) Quota Period 1. From May 1
through October 31, vessels issued a
valid Federal spiny dogfish permit
specified under § 648.4(a)(11) may:
(1) Possess up to 3,000 lb (1.36 mt) of
spiny dogfish per trip; and
(2) Land only one trip of spiny
dogfish per calendar day.
(b) Quota Period 2. From November 1
through April 30, vessels issued a valid
Federal spiny dogfish permit specified
under § 648.4(a)(11) may:
(1) Possess up to 3,000 lb (1.36 mt) of
spiny dogfish per trip; and
(2) Land only one trip of spiny
dogfish per calendar day.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E9–10058 Filed 4–30–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
E:\FR\FM\01MYR1.SGM
01MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 83 (Friday, May 1, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20230-20234]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-10058]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 090206149-9658-02]
RIN 0648-AX57
Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; 2009 Specifications
for the Spiny Dogfish Fishery
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS announces specifications for the spiny dogfish fishery
for the 2009 fishing year (FY) (May 1, 2009, through April 30, 2010),
and modifies existing management measures. NMFS is implementing a spiny
dogfish quota of 12 million lb (5,443.11 mt) for FY 2009, and a
possession limit of 3,000 lb (1.36 mt).
DATES: The rule is effective May 1, 2009. The specifications are
effective May 1, 2009 through April 30, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Copies of supporting documents used by the Mid-Atlantic
Fishery Management Council (Council), including the Environmental
Assessment (EA) and Regulatory Impact Review (RIR)/Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), are available from: Daniel T. Furlong,
Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, Room 2115,
Federal Building, 300 South New Street, Dover, DE 19904-6790. The EA/
RIR/IRFA is also accessible via the Internet at https://www.nero.noaa.gov.
NMFS prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA), which
is
[[Page 20231]]
contained in the Classification section of this rule. Copies of the
FRFA and the Small Entity Compliance Guide are available from the
Regional Administrator, Northeast Regional Office, NMFS, 55 Great
Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930 2276, and are also available via
the internet at https://www.nero.nmfs.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jamie Goen, Fishery Policy Analyst,
phone: 978-281-9220, fax: 978-281-9135.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
A proposed rule for this action was published in the Federal
Register on March 19, 2009 (74 FR 11706), with public comment accepted
through April 3, 2009. The final specifications and management measures
are unchanged from those that were proposed. A complete discussion of
the development of the specifications and management measures appears
in the preamble to the proposed rule and is not repeated here.
2009 Specifications and Management Measures
The commercial spiny dogfish quota for the 2009 fishing year is 12
million lb (5,443.11 mt). As specified in the FMP, quota Period 1 (May
1 through October 31) is allocated 57.9 percent of the quota, 6,948,000
lb (3,151.56 mt), and quota Period 2 (November 1 through April 30) is
allocated 42.1 percent of the quota, 5,052,000 lb (2,291.55 mt). The
possession limits, specified in regulations at 50 CFR 648.235, are
revised from 600 lb (272 kg) to 3,000 lb (1.36 mt) for both quota
periods.
Comments and Responses
NMFS received 23 comments on the proposed measures from 9
organizations and 14 individuals.
Comment 1: Two organizations (including processors) and three
individuals, all from either New York, New Jersey, or Massachusetts,
support the increased quota and possession limits for spiny dogfish for
FY 2009 as described in the proposed rule.
Response: NMFS agrees with these comments for the reasons described
in the preamble to the proposed rule for this action.
Comment 2: Five organizations (including processors) and nine
individuals, all from Massachusetts, support the increased quota but
oppose the increased possession limits for the spiny dogfish fishery in
Federal waters as proposed. Six commenters recommended keeping the
possession limit somewhere between 600 lb (272 kg) and approximately
2,000 lb (907 kg) for the entire fishing year. Eight commenters
recommended starting the fishing year with the status quo possession
limit, 600 lb (272 kg), and increasing the quota to between 1,500 lb
(680 kg) and 3,000 lb (1.36 mt) starting September 1, 2009, to better
match the existing markets for the fishery and to mirror Massachusetts
Division of Marine Fisheries (MA DMF) proposed action. Many of these
commenters expressed concern that higher possession limits will flood
the market. They claim that there are not enough processors willing to
buy dogfish, and also claim that the large supply of dogfish will drive
down the price. Some commenters also stated concern that a 3,000 lb
(1.36 mt) possession limit at the start of the fishery may cause the
fishery to close early and preclude a state fishery in the fall.
Response: For the first time in years, the Atlantic States Marine
Fisheries Commission (Commission), the group that develops fishery
management for state waters from 0 to 3 nm, and the parties involved in
management of the Federal spiny dogfish fishery from 3 to 200 nm (the
Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, the New England Fishery
Management Council and NMFS) have agreed on the quota and possession
limits for spiny dogfish. Management of the spiny dogfish resource in
both Federal and state waters is intended to be collaborative and
covers the entire spiny dogfish population along the Atlantic coast of
the U.S. (i.e., in both state and Federal waters from 0 to 200 nm).
Agreement on the quota and possession limits between the Commission,
Councils, and NMFS is a step in the right direction for management of
the dogfish fishery.
Both the Commission and the Council process for the FY 2009 spiny
dogfish specifications started in the fall of 2008 and both processes
relied on the best available science first presented at the
Commission's Spiny Dogfish Technical Committee meeting on October 16,
2008. The best available science was an update of the spiny dogfish
stock status from the Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) using
the model from the 43rd Northeast Regional Stock Assessment Workshop
(SAW)/Stock Assessment Review Committee (SARC), 2007 catch data, and
results from the 2008 trawl survey. Even though both the Commission and
Council processes rely on the same scientific advice, they do not
always agree on what quota and possession limits should result from
that advice. However, for 2009, they have agreed on a 12-million-lb
(5,443.11-mt) quota and 3,000-lb (1.36-mt) possession limit for both
Federal and state waters. While the Commission has adopted a 3,000-lb
(1.36-mt) possession limit for state waters along the east coast, the
individual states may have more restrictive measures.
The measures recently proposed by the MA DMF under the Commission
plan would establish more restrictive possession limits than this
action. The MA DMF has proposed a 600-lb (272-kg) possession limit for
May through August, and a 1,500 (680-kg) to 2,000-lb (907-kg)
possession limit beginning September 1, 2009, depending on the level of
landings at that time. Once the Commission's 58 percent regional
allocation (described in more detail below) of the 12-million-lb
(5,443.11-mt) quota is reached, the state fisheries (Maine through
Connecticut) will close. Federal spiny dogfish permit holders who
possess or land dogfish in Massachusetts would be subject to these more
restrictive measures. MA DMF is proposing these possession limits in
response to feedback from members of the fishing industry who are
concerned with flooding the market with dogfish too early in the season
and driving down the price paid for dogfish.
As previously stated, individual states may have more restrictive
quotas and possession limits than those adopted by the Commission and
Council. In addition, fishermen may choose to land less than the
possession limit if they conclude that it is in their best interest to
do so. The possession limit established by this rule provides gives
fishermen the flexibility to land any amount up to 3,000 lb (1.36 mt).
The concern over the dogfish fishery closing before the fall when
dogfish prices are better is moderated by the fact that the Federal
spiny dogfish commercial quota is distributed between two periods
(Period 1 is May 1 through October 31 and Period 2 is November 1
through April 30) based on the historical percentage of commercial
landings for each semi-annual period during the years 1990 through
1997. Period 1 is allocated 57.9 percent of the quota (6,948,000 lb
(3,151.56 mt)) and Period 2 is allocated 42.1 percent (5,052,000 lb
(2,291.55 mt)). This was intended to preserve the traditional
distribution of landings, both geographically and seasonally. If the
Period 1 fishery closes early due to quota attainment, the Period 2
fishery would open in the fall starting November 1, 2009. However, for
state waters, the Commission has removed this seasonal quota beginning
in 2009. Instead, the Commission has adopted an annual regional quota
for state waters
[[Page 20232]]
with 58 percent of the quota going to Maine through Connecticut, 26
percent of the quota going to New York through Virginia, and 16 percent
of the quota going to North Carolina. This means that while the Federal
seasonal allocation of the quota (Period 1 and Period 2) would preserve
a fall fishery, it could be possible that fishing by non-federally
permitted vessels in state waters would result in early attainment of
the 12-million-lb (5,443.11-mt) quota. This is the only inconsistency
between the state and Federal programs, and could cause the Federal
Period 2 fishery not to open or to open with less than the full amount
allocated to Period 2 remaining for harvest. There is no current
provision in the Federal FMP that would enable NMFS to address this
inconsistency.
Comment 3: One organization and two individuals commented on the
status of the spiny dogfish resource and the resulting quota. One
commenter requested that NMFS report on the population trends of the
species, and asked why the specifications are set consistent with a
fishing mortality rate of 0.11 (Frebuild) versus the target
fishing mortality rate for a rebuilt stock (F=0.28). The commenter
asked about the uncertainty associated with these estimates of F. One
commenter stated that NMFS should manage the fishery for the longer
term recovery of the stock and with an ecosystem perspective.
One commenter noted that the proposed rule does not follow the
recommendations of the 2007 report of the ASMFC Spiny Dogfish Technical
Committee. The commenter questioned how a species can be considered
``not overfished'' given the skewed sex ratio, declining size of
females, and reduction in the number of pups. The commenter recommended
allowing the stock more time to recover before increasing the quota or
possession limits.
One commenter recommended that the quota be reduced by a certain
percentage each year. The commenter also stated that environmentalists
should have a seat on the Council's Committees.
Response: Trends in the status of the spiny dogfish resource are
reported through the stock assessment and, between stock assessments,
through stock status updates. Stock assessments include biomass
estimates going back to the 1960s and projections on future trends. The
most recent stock assessment for the spiny dogfish resource occurred at
the NEFSC's 43rd SAW/SARC (https://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/nefsc/publications/crd/crd0625/). The most recent stock status update was
provided at the Commission's Spiny Dogfish Technical Committee and the
Council's Spiny Dogfish Monitoring Committee and the Joint Committee
meetings in the fall of 2008. As explained in the proposed rule, the
stock status update used the model from the 43rd SAW/SARC, the 2007
catch data, and results from the 2008 trawl survey to provide the
information that was used to develop these specifications.
The FMP for spiny dogfish specifies that the biomass threshold
below which spiny dogfish would be considered overfished is the value
equal to half the maximum female spawning stock biomass (\1/2\
SSBmax) (or 100,000 mt). The proposed rule for Framework
Adjustment 2 to the Spiny Dogfish FMP (74 FR 9208, March 3, 2009)
proposes a process to change the stock status determination criteria
and provides options for other biological parameters to define dogfish
as overfished. Specifically, the rule proposes to define dogfish as
overfished if the minimum stock size threshold (MSST) reaches half the
biomass necessary to support the maximum sustainable yield (\1/2\
BMSY or a reasonable proxy thereof). The MSST may be defined
as a function of (but not limited to): total stock biomass, spawning
stock biomass, total pup production, and may include males, females,
both, or combinations and ratios thereof which provide the best measure
of productive capacity for spiny dogfish. While spiny dogfish is
currently considered ``not overfished,'' as one commenter suggests, if
Framework 2 is approved, the determination of whether spiny dogfish is
considered overfished may change in the future if different biological
parameters are used to determine the stock's overfished status.
The stock update that provides the basis for these specifications
evaluated the uncertainty associated with the most recent estimate of
fishing mortality for the stock, and concluded that the probability
that F in 2006 was lower than the F threshold is near 100 percent. The
analysis concluded that 75 percent of the computed values for SSB
exceeded the target biomass value.
In light of the likelihood that the stock could be considered
rebuilt, the advisory bodies to the Commission and Councils could have
recommended increasing the fishing mortality above F=0.11 and up to the
fishing mortality associated with a rebuilt stock
(Ftarget=0.28). However, the advisory bodies took a more
risk averse approach given concern over the biology of the stock
(concentrated size frequency of the female population, low pup
production, skewed sex ratio); and concern that projections of future
biomass include assumptions about pup survivorship and selectivity of
gear that may be optimistic. Because of these concerns and uncertainty,
the advisory bodies recommended keeping the fishing mortality at the
level associated with rebuilding the dogfish stock (F=0.11) to ensure
the long-term recovery of the stock. The resulting 12-million-lb
(5,443.11-mt) quota is much higher than previous years because the
stock biomass has been increasing.
One commenter noted that the proposed rule does not follow the
recommendations of the Spiny Dogfish Technical Committee report (2007)
by the ASMFC. As mentioned in the response to Comment 2 above, both the
Commission and the Council process for the FY 2009 spiny dogfish
specifications started in the fall of 2008 and both processes relied on
the best available science first presented at the Commission's Spiny
Dogfish Technical Committee meeting on October 16, 2008. The best
available science was an update on the spiny dogfish stock status from
the NEFSC using the model from the 43rd SAW/SARC, 2007 catch data, and
results from the 2008 trawl survey. The Commission action to establish
a 12-million-lb (5,443.11-mt) quota and 3,000-lb (1.36-mt) maximum
possession limit was consistent with the recommendations of the Spiny
Dogfish Technical Committee's 2008 recommendation, not the
recommendation from 2007.
NMFS does not agree with the comment that the quota should be
reduced by an arbitrary percentage each year. The FMP specifies the
process for establishing the spiny dogfish management measures and that
methodology resulted in a risk averse quota for FY 2009, as discussed
above.
NMFS agrees with the comment that environmentalists should provide
input to the Councils' process. While there is not a voting seat
reserved on the Council's Committees specifically for an
environmentalist, such constituents are included on the Advisory Panel
to the Council and are actively involved in public meetings.
Comment 4: One organization opposed the 15-day public comment
period on the proposed rule for this action, claiming that it did not
provide reasonable notice and opportunity to comment. The commenter
also suggested NMFS provide more widely publicized notice to the
public.
Response: The Administrative Procedures Act (APA) (5 U.S.C.
Subchapter II) outlines the rulemaking process for Federal agencies,
including ``notice and comment'' rulemaking.
[[Page 20233]]
While NMFS may allow more than 15 days for public comment, a 15-day
comment period is consistent with the APA. In this instance, because
the spiny dogfish specifications for FY 2009 relieve a restriction for
the fishing community, NMFS determined that a shortened public comment
period was reasonable and appropriate in order to have the final rule
effective at the start of the fishery, May 1, 2009. In addition, the
public had several opportunities to comment on the development of the
spiny dogfish specifications and management measures in writing or
verbally through the Council process, including the Council meetings
and meetings of its advisory bodies that were held starting in the fall
of 2008. Notification of these meetings and opportunities were
publicized widely by the Councils on their websites and in mailings to
interested members of the public.
Classification
Pursuant to section 304 (b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the
NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this rule is
consistent with the Spiny Dogfish FMP, other provisions of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law.
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
Because this rule relieves a restriction by increasing the spiny
dogfish quota and possession limits, it is not subject to the 30-day
delayed effectiveness provision of the APA pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(1). The Spiny Dogfish FMP was first implemented in 2000 in
response to the classification of the stock as overfished in 1998.
Since the FMP was implemented, the commercial quota has been set at 4
million lb (1,814.37 mt) and the possession limits have been no higher
than 600 lb (272 kg). These restrictions on the harvest of spiny
dogfish were necessary to rebuild the stock. As explained in the
preamble to the proposed rule (74 FR 11706, March 19, 2009), the latest
Northeast Fisheries Science Center stock status update from the fall of
2008 estimated that the spiny dogfish female spawning stock biomass is
likely to be above the most recently calculated maximum sustainable
yield biomass (Bmsy), which would indicate the stock is not overfished
and could be considered rebuilt. This action maintains a conservative
rebuilding fishing mortality value (F value) of 0.11 as the target in
FY 2009, as opposed to the F = 0.28 target that is associated with a
rebuilt stock, and still results in a 12-million-lb (5,443.11 mt) quota
for FY 2009. This quota represents a 200 percent increase from the 4-
million-lb (1,814.37-mt) quota from prior years. Because the best
available science shows that the stock biomass is at a level that could
support a higher quota and possession limit, the fishing community
should be allowed to harvest that available spiny dogfish biomass. This
rule relieves a restriction by increasing the commercial quota from 4
million lb (1,814.37 mt) to 12 million lb (5,443.11 mt) and increasing
the possession limits from 600 lb (272 kg) to 3,000 lb (1.36 mt).
Waiving the 30-day delayed effectiveness provision avoids
unnecessary economic harm to the fishing industry that would result
from confining them to the lower 600-lb possession limit. Confining
fishermen to the lower possession limits would reduce their potential
economic benefits on the trip level of being able to land a larger
amount of dogfish. In addition, processors may have already made
business plans (e.g., additional personnel to process, trucking
services) in anticipation of the increased Federal possession limits.
Waiving the 30-day delayed effectiveness provision also reduces
confusion by making the Federal regulations and those adopted by the
Commission for state waters consistent at the start of the fishery, May
1, 2009. Otherwise, the Federal fishery will start with the lower 600-
lb possession limit, while the possession limits in state waters may be
up to 3,000 lb. This will cause confusion because of the different
Federal and state limits and will likely push effort in to state
waters. Federal spiny dogfish permit holders may relinquish their
Federal permit, an open access permit, to fish in state waters until
the Federal quota and possession limit is effective.
NMFS, pursuant to section 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
has prepared a final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA), included
in this final rule, in support of the 2009 spiny dogfish specifications
and management measures. The FRFA describes the economic impact that
this final rule, along with other non-preferred alternatives, will have
on small entities.
The FRFA incorporates the economic impacts and analysis summarized
in the IRFA, a summary of the significant issues raised by the public,
and a summary of analyses prepared to support the action (i.e., the EA
and the RIR). The contents of these documents are not repeated in
detail here. A copy of the IRFA, the RIR, and the EA are available upon
request (see ADDRESSES). A complete description of the reasons why this
action is being considered, and the objectives of and legal basis for
this action, is contained in the preamble to the proposed rule and is
not repeated here.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Statement of Objective and Need
A description of the reasons why this action is being considered,
and the objectives of and legal basis for this action, is contained in
the preamble to the proposed rule (74 FR 11706, March 19, 2009) and is
not repeated here.
Summary of Public Comment on IRFA and Agency Response
No comments were received about the IRFA. However, eight comments
received during the public comment period mentioned the general
economic effects of the proposed rule. One comment supported the
economic benefit of the higher quota and possession limits. Seven
comments, all from Massachusetts, recommended a lower possession limit
from May through August to preserve the economic markets that are
stronger in the fall. NMFS response to these comments are included in
the response to Comment 2 in the preamble of this rule.
Description and Estimate of Number of Small Entities to Which the Rule
Will Apply
All of the potentially affected businesses are considered small
entities under the standards described in NMFS guidelines because they
have gross receipts that do not exceed $3.5 million annually.
Therefore, there are no disproportionate economic impacts on small
entities. Information from FY 2007 was used to evaluate impacts of this
action, as that is the most recent year for which data are complete.
According to NMFS permit file data, 3,142 vessels were issued Federal
spiny dogfish permits in FY 2007, while 257 of these vessels
contributed to overall landings.
Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
This action does not contain any new collection-of-information,
reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements. It does not
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other Federal rules.
Minimizing Significant Economic Impacts on Small Entities
The Council's analysis, the EA/RIR/IRFA, considered three
alternatives. The action recommended in this rule,
[[Page 20234]]
Alternative 1, includes a commercial quota of 12 million lb (5,443.11
mt), and the possession limit at 3,000 lb (1.36 mt), for both quota
periods during FY 2009. Alternative 2 is the same as Alternative 1, but
with a more liberal quota of 36.5 million lb (16,556.14 mt).
Alternative 3, the status quo/no action alternative, would result in
commercial quota of 4 million lb (1,814.37 mt) and a possession limit
of 600 lb (272 kg) for both quota periods.
Alternatives 1 and 2 have higher quotas than prior years. Assuming
that the quota implemented would be attained, Alternatives 1 and 2
would be expected to increase overall revenue from dogfish landings, a
beneficial economic impact on small entities. FY 2008 revenue is
estimated using the average FY 2007 price/lb ($0.20) and the FY 2008
state quota of 8 million lb (3,628.74 mt) to equal $1.6 million. The
increase in revenue in FY 2009 compared to FY 2008 could amount to
$800,000 under Alternative 1 (preferred) and Alternative 3, and $5.7
million under Alternative 2. Alternative 3 is expected to result in a
revenue increase because landings for spiny dogfish would presumably
continue in state waters even after Federal waters closed until the 12-
million-lb (5,443.11-mt) state quota implemented by the ASMFC for FY
2009 was reached. The net economic benefits by alternative would be
greatest under Alternative 2, then Alternative 1 (preferred), and
lastly by Alternative 3. As noted in the preamble, however, Alternative
2 was not recommended by the Councils or NMFS because, while stock
biomass has increased, there are several other biological indicators
that continue to raise concern about the condition of the stock.
Although total dogfish revenues may be the same under Alternative 1 and
3, the lower trip limit under Alternative 3 would distribute revenues
at a lower rate over a longer period. Alternatives 1 and 2 would have a
beneficial economic impact on small entities, including fishermen,
processors, and the businesses that support them.
Small Entity Compliance Guide
Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act of 1996 states that, for each rule or group of related rules for
which an agency is required to prepare a FRFA, the agency shall publish
one or more guides to assist small entities in complying with the rule,
and shall designate such publications as ``small entity compliance
guides.'' The agency shall explain the actions a small entity is
required to take to comply with a rule or group of rules. As part of
this rulemaking process, a letter to permit holders that also serves as
small entity compliance guide (guide) was prepared and will be sent to
all holders of permits issued for the spiny dogfish fishery. In
addition, copies of this final rule and guide (i.e., permit holder
letter) are available from the Northeast Regional Administrator (see
ADDRESSES) and may be found at the following web site: https://www.nero.noaa.gov/nero/.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648
Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: April 27, 2009
John Oliver,
Deputy Assistant Administrator For Operations, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 648 is amended as
follows:
PART 648--FISHERIES OF THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
0
1. The authority citation for part 648 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 648.235, paragraphs (a) and (b) are revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 648.235 Possession and landing restrictions.
(a) Quota Period 1. From May 1 through October 31, vessels issued a
valid Federal spiny dogfish permit specified under Sec. 648.4(a)(11)
may:
(1) Possess up to 3,000 lb (1.36 mt) of spiny dogfish per trip; and
(2) Land only one trip of spiny dogfish per calendar day.
(b) Quota Period 2. From November 1 through April 30, vessels
issued a valid Federal spiny dogfish permit specified under Sec.
648.4(a)(11) may:
(1) Possess up to 3,000 lb (1.36 mt) of spiny dogfish per trip; and
(2) Land only one trip of spiny dogfish per calendar day.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E9-10058 Filed 4-30-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S