Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Spiny Dogfish; Framework Adjustment 2, 30012-30013 [E9-14882]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
30012
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 090129076–9926–02]
RIN 0648–AX56
Fisheries of the Northeastern United
States; Spiny Dogfish; Framework
Adjustment 2
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: NMFS announces approval of
Framework Adjustment 2 (Framework
2) to the Spiny Dogfish Fishery
Management Plan (FMP), which was
developed by the Mid-Atlantic and New
England Fishery Management Councils
(Councils). Framework 2 broadens the
FMP stock status determination criteria
for spiny dogfish, while maintaining
objective and measurable criteria to
identify when the stock is overfished or
approaching an overfished condition.
The framework action also establishes
acceptable categories of peer review of
new or revised stock status
determination criteria for the Council to
use in its specification-setting process
for spiny dogfish. This action is
necessary to ensure that changes or
modification to the stock status
determination criteria, constituting the
best available, peer-reviewed scientific
information, are accessible to the
management process in a timely and
efficient manner, consistent with
National Standards 1 and 2 of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act). This action
modifies the process for defining and
peer-reviewing the stock status
determination criteria, as defined in the
FMP and does not implement or change
any regulations.
DATES: Effective July 24, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Copies of Framework
Adjustment 2 are available from Daniel
T. Furlong, Executive Director, MidAtlantic Fishery Management Council,
Room 2115, Federal Building, 300 South
New Street, Dover, DE 19904–6790. The
framework document is also accessible
via the Internet at https://
www.nero.noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Emily Bryant, Fishery Policy Analyst,
phone: 978–281–9244, fax: 978–281–
9135.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:46 Jun 23, 2009
Jkt 217001
Background
A proposed rule for this action was
published in the Federal Register on
March 3, 2009 (74 FR 9208), with public
comment accepted through April 2,
2009. This final rule is unchanged from
the proposed rule. A complete
discussion of the development of
Framework 2 appears in the preamble to
the proposed rule and is not repeated
here.
Framework 2 is designed to improve
the time frame in which peer reviewed
information can be utilized in the
management process, as well as
providing guidance on peer review
standards and how to move forward in
the management process when peer
review results are not clear. Framework
2:
1. Redefines, in general terms, the
stock status determination criteria for
spiny dogfish;
2. Defines what constitutes an
acceptable level of peer review; and
3. Provides guidance on how the
Council may engage its Scientific and
Statistical Committee (SSC), including
cases when approved peer review
processes fail to provide a consensus
recommendation or clear guidance for
management decisions.
Redefined Stock Status Determination
Criteria
Framework 2 redefines the stock
status determination criteria for spiny
dogfish in the FMP. The maximum
fishing mortality rate (F) threshold is
defined as Fmsy; which is the fishing
mortality rate associated with the
maximum sustainable yield (MSY) for
spiny dogfish. The maximum fishing
mortality rate threshold, or a reasonable
proxy thereof, may be defined as a
function of (but not limited to): Total
stock biomass, spawning stock biomass,
or total pup production; and may
include males and/or females, or
combinations and ratios thereof, that
provide the best measure of productive
capacity for spiny dogfish. Exceeding
the established fishing mortality rate
threshold constitutes overfishing.
The minimum stock size threshold is
defined as 1/2 of the biomass at MSY
(Bmsy) (or a reasonable proxy thereof)
as a function of productive capacity.
The minimum stock size threshold may
be defined as (but not limited to): Total
stock biomass, spawning stock biomass,
or total pup production; and may
include males and/or females, or
combinations and ratios thereof, that
provide the best measure of productive
capacity for spiny dogfish. The
minimum stock size threshold is the
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
level of productive capacity associated
with the relevant 1/2 Bmsy level.
Should the measure of productive
capacity for the stock or stock complex
fall below this minimum threshold, the
stock or stock complex is considered
overfished. The target for rebuilding is
specified as Bmsy, under the same
definition of productive capacity as
specified for the minimum stock size
threshold.
Under Framework 2, the stock status
determination criteria are made more
general by removing specific references
to how maximum fishing mortality
threshold, minimum stock size
threshold, and biomass are calculated.
By making the stock status
determination criteria more general, the
results of peer reviewed best available
science are more readily adopted
through the specification-setting
process. The Councils would still
provide specific definitions for the stock
status determination criteria in the
specifications and management
measures, future framework
adjustments, and amendments,
including, where necessary, information
on changes to the definitions.
Peer Review Standards
While the Northeast Fisheries Science
Center’s (NEFSC) Stock Assessment
Workshop (SAW) and Stock Assessment
Review Committee (SARC) process
remains the primary process utilized in
the Northeast Region to develop
scientific stock assessment advice,
including stock status determination
criteria for federally managed species,
Framework 2 includes several
additional scientific review bodies and
processes that would constitute an
acceptable peer review to develop
scientific stock assessment advice for
spiny dogfish stock status determination
criteria.
Guidance on Unclear Scientific Advice
Resulting from Peer Review
In many formal peer reviews, the
terms of reference provided in advance
of the review instruct the reviewers to
formulate specific responses on the
adequacy of information and to provide
detailed advice on how that information
may be used for fishery management
purposes. As such, most stock
assessment peer reviews result in clear
recommendations on stock status
determination criteria for use in the
management of fish stocks. However,
there are occasional peer review results
where panelists disagree and no
consensus recommendation is made
regarding the information. Or, the terms
of reference may not be followed and no
recommendations for the suitability of
E:\FR\FM\24JNR1.SGM
24JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
the information for management
purposes may be made. In such
instances, it is unclear what then
constitutes the best available
information for management use.
Framework 2 states that, when clear
consensus recommendations are made
by any of the acceptable peer review
groups, the information is considered
the best available and may be utilized
by the Council in the management
process for spiny dogfish. Similarly,
when the consensus results of a peer
review are to reject proposed changes to
the stock assessment methods or the
stock status determination criteria,
Framework 2 states that the previous
information on record would still
continue to constitute the best available
information and should be used in the
management process.
When peer review recommendations
do not result in consensus, are unclear,
or do not make recommendations on
how the information is to be used in the
management process, Framework 2
states that the Councils engage their
SSCs or a subset of their SSCs with
appropriate stock assessment expertise,
to review the information provided by
the peer review group. The SSCs would
then seek to clarify the information and
provide advice to the Councils to either
modify, change, or retain the existing
stock status determination definitions as
the best available information for use in
the development of specifications and
management measures.
Comments and Responses
No comments specific to Framework
2 were received during the public
comment period. NMFS received three
comments under the Framework 2
proposed rule, but all were actually
regarding the spiny dogfish 2009
specifications and management
measures proposed rule (74 FR 11706,
March 19, 2009), which was open for
public comment at the same time.
NMFS responded to those comments in
the final rule for the spiny dogfish 2009
specifications and management
measures (74 FR 20230, May 1, 2009).
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.
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of
the Department of Commerce certified
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:46 Jun 23, 2009
Jkt 217001
Small Business Administration during
the proposed rule stage that this action
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The factual basis for the
certification was published in the
proposed rule and is not repeated here.
No comments were received regarding
this certification. As a result, a
regulatory flexibility analysis was not
required and none was prepared.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: June 18, 2009.
Samuel D. Rauch III
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E9–14882 Filed 6–23–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 0810141351–9087–02]
RIN 0648–XP97
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Greenland Turbot,
Arrowtooth Flounder, and Sablefish by
Vessels Participating in the
Amendment 80 Limited Access Fishery
in Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
Management Area
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Temporary rule; closure.
SUMMARY: NMFS is closing directed
fishing for Greenland turbot, arrowtooth
flounder, and sablefish by vessels
participating in the Amendment 80
limited access fishery in the Bering Sea
and Aleutian Islands management area
(BSAI). This action is necessary to
prevent exceeding the 2009 halibut
bycatch allowance specified for the
trawl Greenland turbot, arrowtooth
flounder, and sablefish fishery category
by vessels participating in the
Amendment 80 limited access fishery in
the BSAI.
DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local
time (A.l.t.), June 19, 2009, through
2400 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Whitney, 907–586–7269.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS
manages the groundfish fishery in the
BSAI according to the Fishery
Management Plan for Groundfish of the
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
30013
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
Management Area (FMP) prepared by
the North Pacific Fishery Management
Council under authority of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act.
Regulations governing fishing by U.S.
vessels in accordance with the FMP
appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600
and 50 CFR part 679.
The 2009 halibut bycatch allowance
specified for the trawl Greenland turbot,
arrowtooth flounder, and sablefish
fishery category by vessels participating
in the Amendment 80 limited access
fishery in the BSAI is 5 metric tons as
established by the final 2009 and 2010
harvest specifications for groundfish in
the BSAI (74 FR 7359, February 17,
2009).
In accordance with
§ 679.21(e)(3)(vi)(B) and
§ 679.21(e)(7)(v), the Administrator,
Alaska Region, NMFS, has determined
that the 2009 halibut bycatch allowance
specified for the trawl Greenland turbot,
arrowtooth flounder, and sablefish
fishery category by vessels participating
in the Amendment 80 limited access
fishery in the BSAI has been caught.
Consequently, NMFS is closing directed
fishing for Greenland turbot, arrowtooth
flounder, and sablefish by vessels
participating in the Amendment 80
limited access fishery in the BSAI.
After the effective date of this closure
the maximum retainable amounts at
§ 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time
during a trip.
Classification
This action responds to the best
available information recently obtained
from the fishery. The Assistant
Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA
(AA), finds good cause to waive the
requirement to provide prior notice and
opportunity for public comment
pursuant to the authority set forth at 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest. This requirement is
impracticable and contrary to the public
interest as it would prevent NMFS from
responding to the most recent fisheries
data in a timely fashion and would
delay the closure of directed fishing for
Greenland turbot, arrowtooth flounder,
and sablefish by vessels participating in
the Amendment 80 limited access
fishery in the BSAI. NMFS was unable
to publish a notice providing time for
public comment because the most
recent, relevant data only became
available as of June 18, 2009.
The AA also finds good cause to
waive the 30-day delay in the effective
date of this action under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3). This finding is based upon
E:\FR\FM\24JNR1.SGM
24JNR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 24, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30012-30013]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-14882]
[[Page 30012]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 090129076-9926-02]
RIN 0648-AX56
Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Spiny Dogfish;
Framework Adjustment 2
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS announces approval of Framework Adjustment 2 (Framework
2) to the Spiny Dogfish Fishery Management Plan (FMP), which was
developed by the Mid-Atlantic and New England Fishery Management
Councils (Councils). Framework 2 broadens the FMP stock status
determination criteria for spiny dogfish, while maintaining objective
and measurable criteria to identify when the stock is overfished or
approaching an overfished condition. The framework action also
establishes acceptable categories of peer review of new or revised
stock status determination criteria for the Council to use in its
specification-setting process for spiny dogfish. This action is
necessary to ensure that changes or modification to the stock status
determination criteria, constituting the best available, peer-reviewed
scientific information, are accessible to the management process in a
timely and efficient manner, consistent with National Standards 1 and 2
of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act). This action modifies the process for defining
and peer-reviewing the stock status determination criteria, as defined
in the FMP and does not implement or change any regulations.
DATES: Effective July 24, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Copies of Framework Adjustment 2 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 framework document is also accessible via the Internet
at https://www.nero.noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Emily Bryant, Fishery Policy Analyst,
phone: 978-281-9244, fax: 978-281-9135.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
A proposed rule for this action was published in the Federal
Register on March 3, 2009 (74 FR 9208), with public comment accepted
through April 2, 2009. This final rule is unchanged from the proposed
rule. A complete discussion of the development of Framework 2 appears
in the preamble to the proposed rule and is not repeated here.
Framework 2 is designed to improve the time frame in which peer
reviewed information can be utilized in the management process, as well
as providing guidance on peer review standards and how to move forward
in the management process when peer review results are not clear.
Framework 2:
1. Redefines, in general terms, the stock status determination
criteria for spiny dogfish;
2. Defines what constitutes an acceptable level of peer review; and
3. Provides guidance on how the Council may engage its Scientific
and Statistical Committee (SSC), including cases when approved peer
review processes fail to provide a consensus recommendation or clear
guidance for management decisions.
Redefined Stock Status Determination Criteria
Framework 2 redefines the stock status determination criteria for
spiny dogfish in the FMP. The maximum fishing mortality rate (F)
threshold is defined as Fmsy; which is the fishing mortality rate
associated with the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) for spiny dogfish.
The maximum fishing mortality rate threshold, or a reasonable proxy
thereof, may be defined as a function of (but not limited to): Total
stock biomass, spawning stock biomass, or total pup production; and may
include males and/or females, or combinations and ratios thereof, that
provide the best measure of productive capacity for spiny dogfish.
Exceeding the established fishing mortality rate threshold constitutes
overfishing.
The minimum stock size threshold is defined as 1/2 of the biomass
at MSY (Bmsy) (or a reasonable proxy thereof) as a function of
productive capacity. The minimum stock size threshold may be defined as
(but not limited to): Total stock biomass, spawning stock biomass, or
total pup production; and may include males and/or females, or
combinations and ratios thereof, that provide the best measure of
productive capacity for spiny dogfish. The minimum stock size threshold
is the level of productive capacity associated with the relevant 1/2
Bmsy level. Should the measure of productive capacity for the stock or
stock complex fall below this minimum threshold, the stock or stock
complex is considered overfished. The target for rebuilding is
specified as Bmsy, under the same definition of productive capacity as
specified for the minimum stock size threshold.
Under Framework 2, the stock status determination criteria are made
more general by removing specific references to how maximum fishing
mortality threshold, minimum stock size threshold, and biomass are
calculated. By making the stock status determination criteria more
general, the results of peer reviewed best available science are more
readily adopted through the specification-setting process. The Councils
would still provide specific definitions for the stock status
determination criteria in the specifications and management measures,
future framework adjustments, and amendments, including, where
necessary, information on changes to the definitions.
Peer Review Standards
While the Northeast Fisheries Science Center's (NEFSC) Stock
Assessment Workshop (SAW) and Stock Assessment Review Committee (SARC)
process remains the primary process utilized in the Northeast Region to
develop scientific stock assessment advice, including stock status
determination criteria for federally managed species, Framework 2
includes several additional scientific review bodies and processes that
would constitute an acceptable peer review to develop scientific stock
assessment advice for spiny dogfish stock status determination
criteria.
Guidance on Unclear Scientific Advice Resulting from Peer Review
In many formal peer reviews, the terms of reference provided in
advance of the review instruct the reviewers to formulate specific
responses on the adequacy of information and to provide detailed advice
on how that information may be used for fishery management purposes. As
such, most stock assessment peer reviews result in clear
recommendations on stock status determination criteria for use in the
management of fish stocks. However, there are occasional peer review
results where panelists disagree and no consensus recommendation is
made regarding the information. Or, the terms of reference may not be
followed and no recommendations for the suitability of
[[Page 30013]]
the information for management purposes may be made. In such instances,
it is unclear what then constitutes the best available information for
management use.
Framework 2 states that, when clear consensus recommendations are
made by any of the acceptable peer review groups, the information is
considered the best available and may be utilized by the Council in the
management process for spiny dogfish. Similarly, when the consensus
results of a peer review are to reject proposed changes to the stock
assessment methods or the stock status determination criteria,
Framework 2 states that the previous information on record would still
continue to constitute the best available information and should be
used in the management process.
When peer review recommendations do not result in consensus, are
unclear, or do not make recommendations on how the information is to be
used in the management process, Framework 2 states that the Councils
engage their SSCs or a subset of their SSCs with appropriate stock
assessment expertise, to review the information provided by the peer
review group. The SSCs would then seek to clarify the information and
provide advice to the Councils to either modify, change, or retain the
existing stock status determination definitions as the best available
information for use in the development of specifications and management
measures.
Comments and Responses
No comments specific to Framework 2 were received during the public
comment period. NMFS received three comments under the Framework 2
proposed rule, but all were actually regarding the spiny dogfish 2009
specifications and management measures proposed rule (74 FR 11706,
March 19, 2009), which was open for public comment at the same time.
NMFS responded to those comments in the final rule for the spiny
dogfish 2009 specifications and management measures (74 FR 20230, May
1, 2009).
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.
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration during the proposed rule stage that this action would
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The factual basis for the certification was published in the
proposed rule and is not repeated here. No comments were received
regarding this certification. As a result, a regulatory flexibility
analysis was not required and none was prepared.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: June 18, 2009.
Samuel D. Rauch III
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E9-14882 Filed 6-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
