Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Snapper-Grouper Fishery Off the Southern Atlantic States; Amendment 17A, 76874-76890 [2010-30394]
Download as PDF
76874
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 622
[Docket No. 0907271170–0576–03]
RIN 0648–AY10
Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of
Mexico, and South Atlantic; SnapperGrouper Fishery Off the Southern
Atlantic States; Amendment 17A
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
NMFS issues this final rule to
implement Amendment 17A to the
Fishery Management Plan for the
Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South
Atlantic Region (FMP), as prepared and
submitted by the South Atlantic Fishery
Management Council (Council). This
final rule establishes an annual catch
limit (ACL) of zero for red snapper,
which means all harvest and possession
of red snapper in or from the South
Atlantic exclusive economic zone (EEZ)
is prohibited, and for a vessel with a
Federal commercial or charter vessel/
headboat permit for South Atlantic
snapper-grouper, harvest and possession
of red snapper is prohibited in or from
State or Federal waters. This rule also
implements an area closure for South
Atlantic snapper-grouper that extends
from southern Georgia to northern
Florida where harvest and possession of
all snapper-grouper species is
prohibited (except when fishing with
black sea bass pots or spearfishing gear
for species other than red snapper), and
requires the use of non-stainless steel
circle hooks when fishing for snappergrouper species with hook and line gear
north of 28° N. latitude in the South
Atlantic EEZ. Additionally, Amendment
17A establishes a rebuilding plan for red
snapper and requires a monitoring
program as the accountability measure
(AM) for red snapper. The intended
effects of this rule are to end overfishing
of South Atlantic red snapper and
rebuild the stock.
DATES: This rule is effective December 3,
2010, except for the amendments to
§ 622.35, which are effective January 3,
2011, and the amendments to § 622.41,
which are effective March 3, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS),
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(FRFA), and Record of Decision (ROD)
may be obtained from Kate Michie,
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES4
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:39 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 263
13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL
33701: telephone 727–824–5305; fax
727–824–5308.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate
Michie, telephone: 727–824–5305; fax:
727–824–5308; e-mail:
Kate.Michie@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The South
Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery is
managed under the FMP. The FMP was
prepared by the Council and
implemented by NMFS under the
authority of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) by
regulations at 50 CFR part 622.
Background
On July 29, 2010, NMFS published a
notice of availability for Amendment
17A and requested public comment (75
FR 44753). On August 13, 2010, NMFS
published the proposed rule to
implement Amendment 17A and
requested public comment (75 FR
49447). NMFS approved Amendment
17A on October 27, 2010. The rationale
for the measures contained in
Amendment 17A is provided in the
amendment and in the preamble to the
proposed rule and is not repeated here.
Effectiveness of Management Measures
Prohibition on Harvest and Possession
of Red Snapper
The prohibition on the harvest and
possession of red snapper in the South
Atlantic EEZ, and in State or Federal
waters for a person on board a vessel for
which a valid Federal commercial or
charter vessel/headboat permit for
South Atlantic snapper-grouper has
been issued, and the prohibition on the
sale or purchase of red snapper
harvested from or possessed in the
South Atlantic (including State and
Federal waters) for a vessel for which a
valid Federal commercial permit for
South Atlantic snapper-grouper has
been issued, will be effective December
3, 2010.
The interim rule implementing these
red snapper prohibitions will expire on
December 5, 2010. Therefore, to prevent
a lapse in these prohibitions, these
measures must become effective on or
before December 5, 2010.
A red snapper benchmark assessment
was completed through the Southeast
Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR)
process in late October 2010, which
provides additional information on the
effectiveness of these prohibitions. A
final report of the assessment was
published on October 25, 2010, and is
available at https://www.sefsc.noaa.gov/
sedar/download/SEDAR%2024_SAR_
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
October%202010_26.pdf?id=
DOCUMENT. The assessment indicates
that red snapper are overfished and
undergoing overfishing and that the
current harvest prohibition for red
snapper is providing substantial
protection to the stock. A lapse could
also lead to more severe harvest
reductions for the snapper-grouper
fishery as a whole with associated
adverse socioeconomic impacts.
Snapper-Grouper Area Closure
The new benchmark assessment
(SEDAR 24) has recently been
completed for red snapper and has been
reviewed by the Council’s Scientific and
Statistical Committee (SSC) and will be
considered by the Council at their
meeting in December 2010. The
assessment has determined that red
snapper are overfished and experiencing
overfishing, but the stock is in better
condition than indicated by the
previous assessment (SEDAR 15) with
the magnitude of overfishing less than
what was indicated in the previous
assessment. Results of the new
assessment suggest less restrictive
management measures, such as a
smaller area closure, would be adequate
to end overfishing of red snapper.
Therefore, NMFS is considering using
the emergency action authority under
section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act to address the implications of the
new assessment and to provide the
Council time to determine whether
modifications should be made to the red
snapper management measures based
upon the results of SEDAR 24, if
appropriate.
Circle Hooks
NMFS is delaying the requirement in
§ 622.41(n) to use non-stainless steel
circle hooks when fishing for South
Atlantic snapper-grouper with hookand-line gear and natural baits north of
28° N. latitude for 3 months. The circle
hook requirement will be effective
March 3, 2011. This delay in
effectiveness will provide additional
time for manufacturers and retail outlets
to prepare for the demand for these
newly required products and will
provide time for commercial and
recreational fishers to comply with
these new gear requirements.
Comments and Responses
NMFS received 138 comments on
Amendment 17A and the proposed rule,
including 1 comment from a State
agency, 1 comment from a Federal
agency, 1 petition signed by 45
individuals, 5 letters from nongovernmental organizations, one of
which was endorsed by 30,388
E:\FR\FM\09DER4.SGM
09DER4
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES4
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
individuals who support approval of
Amendment 17A, and 130 comments
from individuals (including 41 copies of
an identical postcard from an
Amendment 17A opposition postcard
campaign). Of these comments, 111
expressed opposition to Amendment
17A, 24 expressed support, and 3
comments were unrelated to
Amendment 17A actions. Specific
comments relevant to the actions
contained in the amendment and the
rule as well as NMFS’ respective
responses, are summarized below.
Comment 1: The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and 4 nongovernmental organizations are
concerned that the rebuilding schedule
favors fishermen to the maximum
extent, rather than balancing benefits to
the resource and socioeconomic impacts
on the fishing community. The EPA
suggests that fishing pressure from
fisheries for species that co-occur with
red snapper should be reduced in order
to reduce red snapper bycatch, and red
snapper bycatch should be kept as
landings and counted towards the cooccurring species’ fishery quotas.
Additionally, the EPA suggests that
adaptive management measures should
be applied over the recovery period;
however, such adaptive management
measures should balance impacts on the
fishing community and on the resource.
Response: Thirty-five years is the
maximum rebuilding schedule
recommended for South Atlantic red
snapper based on the Magnuson-Stevens
Act National Standard 1 Guidelines and
is consistent with the MagnusonStevens Act mandate to rebuild the
fishery as quickly as possible, taking
into account the status and biology of
the stock, the needs of fishing
communities, and other factors. The
Council chose this schedule recognizing
that based on the information provided
to them from SEDAR 15, a total red
snapper harvest prohibition alone was
not sufficiently restrictive to end
overfishing and that shorter rebuilding
schedules would require impractical
reductions in red snapper bycatch.
NMFS acknowledges the cumulative
effects of the Amendment 17A proposed
regulations, recent fisheries regulations,
and other circumstances other than
regulations (rise in fuel costs, decrease
in dock space, national economic
recession leading to a decrease in forhire trips, etc.) will likely have negative
economic and social effects on snappergrouper fishermen. By choosing the 35year rebuilding schedule, negative
socioeconomic impacts will be
minimized to the extent practicable
while still achieving conservation
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:39 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
objectives, consistent with the
Magnuson-Stevens Act.
The shortest possible rebuilding
schedule (15 years) would require most
or all of the EEZ and State waters be
closed to fishing over the 15-year period
to eliminate all incidental mortality of
red snapper. The significant and
irreversible socioeconomic impacts of
such an action makes a 15-year
rebuilding schedule impractical. While
the 25-year schedule evaluated in the
amendment would have less adverse
socioeconomic effects when compared
to a 15-year rebuilding plan, such effects
are not warranted by the limited
biological benefits of achieving the
rebuilding goal just 10 years earlier than
under the 35-year rebuilding schedule.
It is not possible to implement a
shorter rebuilding schedule without
significantly increasing the magnitude
of negative socioeconomic impacts.
Because red snapper are widely
distributed and co-occur with other
snapper-grouper species, even slight
increases in the rate at which the red
snapper stock rebuilds greatly increases
the need for more restrictive
management measures. Economic
analyses indicate it is unlikely that the
future benefits of rebuilding the red
snapper stock more quickly would
outweigh the short-term costs associated
with the more restrictive regulations
required by shorter rebuilding
schedules.
The Council is exploring, through
Amendment 22 to the Snapper-Grouper
FMP, alternative strategies for managing
red snapper catch and bycatch as the
stock rebuilds, which could include a
bycatch retention policy if that is
determined to be a feasible option.
Comment 2: Two commenters
expressed support for the exemption to
fish with black sea bass pots within the
snapper-grouper closed area. One
commenter expressed opposition to this
exemption. The EPA questioned how
‘‘ghost fishing’’ with black sea bass pots
was addressed in the Council’s decision
to allow the use of black sea bass pots
within the closed area.
Response: The majority of the black
sea bass component of the snappergrouper fishery is north of the closed
area, and only a small percentage of red
snapper are taken in black sea bass pots.
Therefore, the Council determined this
gear type was sufficiently selective so
that it may be deployed within the
closed area without adversely affecting
the rebuilding efforts of red snapper.
Allowing this gear also helps to offset,
to some degree, some of the negative
socioeconomic impacts expected from
the area closure.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
76875
During its March 2010 meeting, after
the draft environmental impact
statement (DEIS) was filed with the EPA
for publication in the Federal Register,
the Council chose not to exempt the use
of black sea bass pots within the closed
area, citing concerns about the ‘‘ghost
fishing’’ that takes place in lost pots and
the potential interactions with protected
species. However, at its June 2010
meeting, the Council modified its
decision to allow the use of black sea
bass pots, because they are a highly
selective gear type that could be used to
fish for species other than red snapper
within the closed area without affecting
red snapper rebuilding. Additionally,
the Council is developing Amendment
18A to the FMP, which includes actions
to limit the number of black sea bass
pots allowed per vessel, thereby limiting
participation in the black sea bass
component of the snapper-grouper
fishery, and requires pots to be returned
to port at the completion of a fishing
trip. If approved, these controls should
limit effort shift into the black sea bass
component of the snapper-grouper
fishery, minimizing the occurrence of
black sea bass pot ‘‘ghost fishing’’ on
snapper-grouper species, and
interactions with protected species.
Comment 3: Two commenters
expressed support for the exemption to
use spearfishing gear within the
snapper-grouper closed area when
fishing for species other than red
snapper. One commenter expressed
opposition to this exemption. The EPA
expressed concerns with the exemption
related to potential collection of
undersized fish, exceeding quotas, and
spearfishing injury.
Response: Overall, spearfishing gear is
considered a highly selective gear type
that is least likely to produce red
snapper bycatch or bycatch mortality,
and it is the most selective gear type
available if the user is well-versed in
species identification. Therefore, the use
of spearfishing gear within the closed
area for species other than red snapper
is unlikely to adversely affect red
snapper rebuilding efforts, while
helping to offset, to a small degree, some
of the negative socioeconomic impacts
expected from the area closure.
Amendment 17A analyses conclude
that spearfishing does have the potential
to remove greater biomass of reef fish
than rod and reel fishing. Spearfishing
has been shown to result in the removal
of larger fish from the population than
with rod and reel. According to the
biological impact analysis in
Amendment 17A, removing larger fish
from a population can have a negative
effect on overall ecosystem health by
altering the composition of the natural
E:\FR\FM\09DER4.SGM
09DER4
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES4
76876
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
communities; however, any such effect
is expected to be more than offset by the
conservation benefits derived from the
hook-and-line gear prohibition within
the area closure. If the use of
spearfishing gear increases as a result of
this exemption, it may be reasonable to
assume incidences of spear-related
injuries may also increase. However, the
Council determined the potential
negative impacts of allowing the use of
spearfishing gear did not outweigh the
potential offset of negative
socioeconomic impacts that may result
from the area closure.
Comment 4: Eighteen commenters
expressed support for the requirement
to use non-stainless steel circle hooks
north of 28° N. latitude with live bait.
Three commenters expressed opposition
to the circle hook requirement, citing
that it would inhibit effective harvest of
certain species and would incur a
significant economic burden. The EPA
expressed support of the requirement,
but stated that regulatory discard
mortalities are often related to
barotrauma caused by rapid surfacing
rather than hooking injuries, and certain
species such as yellowtail snapper and
mangrove snapper are not readily
caught with circle hooks.
Response: Many studies indicate that
hooking injuries are a major source of
mortality in red snapper. Requiring
circle hooks in the area of the South
Atlantic EEZ north of 28° N. latitude
may help reduce discard mortality of
red snapper where they are most
abundant, although the exact amount is
not quantifiable at this time. However,
the Council concluded that taking
advantage of any reasonable method to
reduce red snapper bycatch mortality is
warranted considering its overfished
condition.
Barotrauma is also cited as a
significant cause of bycatch mortality
for red snapper. NMFS previously
considered a Council-approved measure
to use venting tools for snapper-grouper
species to reduce bycatch mortality
caused by barotraumas in Amendment
16 to the FMP. The measure requiring
the use of venting tools was
disapproved based on data indicating
the benefits of venting are not clear for
all species, including red snapper, and
venting could potentially cause harm in
some cases. NMFS determined that
additional guidance is needed to
identify species that would benefit from
venting to ensure the maximum benefit
is provided to these species. If future
research on the use of venting tools,
and/or any other barotrauma mitigation
methods, indicate red snapper would
benefit from the required use of such
tools or techniques, the Council has the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:39 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
option to consider the issue again in a
future FMP amendment.
During the development of
Amendment 17A, some constituents
expressed concern that circle hooks
would preclude them from being able to
catch some specific fish species
including yellowtail snapper and
mangrove snapper due to the physical
structure of a fish’s mouth and the way
the fish takes bait. The majority of the
species of concern are landed south of
28° N. latitude where red snapper are
less abundant; therefore, the Council
chose to limit the circle hook
requirement to areas north of 28° N.
latitude.
Comment 5: The EPA supported
fishery-independent monitoring for red
snapper, as well as fishery-dependent
monitoring where fishermen work
together with researchers.
Response: The Council chose to
require implementation of a fisheryindependent monitoring program for red
snapper to augment and expand the
existing fishery-independent data
program for snapper-grouper because
fishery-independent data can be less
variable and more verifiable than
fishery-dependent data. The choice to
utilize a fishery-independent
monitoring program for red snapper
does not in any way infer that fisherydependent data collection programs
may not be used for monitoring red
snapper in the South Atlantic. The AM
chosen by the Council and approved by
NMFS includes a fishery-dependent
data gathering component that will be
used to monitor catch per unit effort
(CPUE) throughout the rebuilding
process. Furthermore, it is likely that in
the future, some research and
monitoring efforts may be designed to
include hybrid sampling programs that
use both fishery-independent and
fishery-dependent data gathering
methods.
Comment 6: If the approved
rebuilding schedule is not adequate in
minimizing socioeconomic impacts, the
EPA recommended additional offsets be
considered by NMFS and the Council
for fishery participants of all
demographics, particularly any affected
minority and low-income fishermen.
Response: Amendment 17A contains
a detailed analysis of potential
socioeconomic impacts of the actions to
end overfishing of red snapper and
rebuild the stock to a sustainable level.
The Council has chosen, and NMFS has
approved, alternatives intended to
minimize, to the extent practicable,
adverse socioeconomic impacts as
required under the Magnuson-Stevens
Act. A Fishery Impact Statement (FIS)
and a Social Impact Analysis (SIA) were
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
completed as part of the Amendment
17A development process. The SIA
included an analysis of potential
impacts of this rule on low-income and
minority groups. The full FIS and SIA
can be found in Appendix U of
Amendment 17A. The alternatives
chosen are also projected to effectively
end overfishing of South Atlantic red
snapper and rebuild the population
within the designated rebuilding
timeframe.
A new benchmark assessment for red
snapper conducted through the SEDAR
process (SEDAR 24; 2010) indicates the
stock is undergoing overfishing and is
overfished to lesser degrees than
estimated in the previous SEDAR
assessment (SEDAR 15) and in
Amendment 17A. Therefore, additional
action may be appropriate to further
minimize the unavoidable adverse
economic impacts of ending overfishing
and rebuilding the stock. The Council
will review the results of SEDAR 24 at
their December 2010 meeting and may
propose additional actions at that time,
as appropriate.
Comment 7: The EPA and one
individual requested a discussion of
potential impacts of the Deepwater
Horizon/BP oil spill event on red
snapper and the fishing community.
Response: Thus far, there has been no
indication that oil from the Deepwater
Horizon/BP oil spill, which occurred on
April 20, 2010, has made its way into
South Atlantic waters. The spill
remained concentrated in the northern
Gulf of Mexico before it was capped and
is no longer considered a significant
threat for dispersing oil. Therefore,
implementation of Amendment 17A is
not expected to be impacted by oil spillrelated events that have transpired in
the Gulf of Mexico over the past 7
months.
Comment 8: Seventeen commenters
specifically oppose the prohibition on
harvest and possession of red snapper in
the South Atlantic EEZ and in State
waters for vessels holding Federal
snapper-grouper permits. Five
commenters specifically support the
prohibition on red snapper harvest.
Response: The 2008 red snapper
SEDAR stock assessment (SEDAR 15)
concluded that red snapper are
overfished and undergoing overfishing.
When a determination is made that a
stock is experiencing overfishing or is
overfished, the Magnuson-Stevens Act
requires NMFS and the Council to
develop a plan to end overfishing and
rebuild the stock. The prohibition on
red snapper harvest and possession
implemented through Amendment 17A
is required to meet this statutory
mandate. SEDAR 15 indicates a harvest
E:\FR\FM\09DER4.SGM
09DER4
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES4
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
prohibition in State and Federal waters
alone is not capable of ending
overfishing because many red snapper
taken incidentally when harvesting
other snapper-grouper species do not
survive capture and release. For this
reason, NMFS also is approving the
Council’s proposal to establish an area
closure within which all harvest and
possession of snapper-grouper is
prohibited (except when fishing with
black sea bass pots or spearfishing gear
for species other than red snapper).
These management measures are
expected to end overfishing as required
by the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
Comment 9: Twenty-two commenters
specifically oppose the snapper-grouper
area closure, and three commenters
support it.
Response: Based on the results of the
SEDAR 15 benchmark assessment,
prohibiting the harvest of red snapper
alone will not end overfishing because
red snapper are often incidentally
captured and discarded while fishermen
are targeting co-occurring species.
Additionally, the release mortality of
red snapper is very high. Therefore, to
sufficiently reduce the overall mortality
of red snapper enough to end
overfishing and rebuild the stock, NMFS
approved a prohibition on all harvest
and possession of red snapper in the
South Atlantic EEZ and also approved
an area closure within which harvest
and possession of all snapper-grouper
species is prohibited except when using
spearfishing gear or black sea bass pots
to fish for species other than red
snapper.
The area closure alternative proposed
by the Council and approved by NMFS
encompasses an area where large
amounts of red snapper are harvested.
Furthermore, the preferred area closure
minimized to the extent practicable the
unavoidable adverse economic impacts
of ending overfishing as required by the
Magnuson-Stevens Act. Amendment
17A also includes an action to require
a fishery-independent monitoring
program to track the progress of
rebuilding efforts, in order to reduce the
size of the area closure and allow the
harvest of red snapper as the stock
rebuilds.
A new benchmark assessment just
completed for red snapper, SEDAR 24,
indicates the stock is undergoing
overfishing and is overfished to a lesser
degree than estimated in SEDAR 15.
Therefore, additional action may be
appropriate to further minimize the
unavoidable adverse economic impacts
of ending overfishing and rebuilding the
stock. The Council will review the
results of SEDAR 24 at their December
2010 meeting and may propose
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:39 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
additional actions at that time, as
appropriate.
Comment 10: Two commenters stated
the proposed area closure could push
effort inshore or offshore and thus
negatively impact juvenile populations
of red snapper and other coastal
fisheries, and/or deepwater snappergrouper species.
Response: The extent to which effort
may shift as a result of the proposed
area closure is not known so it is not
possible to quantify the impact of such
a shift on snapper-grouper species.
However, any such effort shift is not
expected to have a significant adverse
impact on red snapper rebuilding or on
the status of other deepwater snappergrouper species. The red snapper
harvest prohibition is expected to
reduce the handling time of red
snapper, as fishermen will no longer
need to measure fish to determine if
they are of legal size. If fishing effort
moves closer to shore, then it is
expected that the survival of discarded
red snapper and other snapper-grouper
species would be greater than for fish
discarded in deeper water because
depth-related discard mortality would
be less in shallow water. The model
used to develop the closed area
alternatives was designed to account for
reduced inshore release mortality in the
closed area as well as in all areas around
the closure.
Effort shifts into water deeper than
the closed area may be mitigated by the
deepwater snapper-grouper closure that
is proposed in Amendment 17B to the
FMP. (Amendment 17B and proposed
implementing regulations are available
for public comment through November
22, 2010, and November 26, 2010,
respectively.) This proposed deepwater
closure would prohibit harvest of six
deepwater snapper-grouper species
beyond a depth of 240 ft (73 m), which
is also the seaward boundary of the
Amendment 17A area closure. These
species include snowy grouper, blueline
tilefish, yellowedge grouper, misty
grouper, queen snapper, and silk
snapper. In addition to prohibiting
harvest and possession of the previously
mentioned species, Amendment 17B
also prohibits the possession and
harvest of speckled hind and warsaw
grouper. If Amendment 17B is approved
and implemented, prohibiting the
harvest and possession of these species
beyond a depth of 240 ft (73 m) greatly
diminishes the incentive to fish for
deepwater snapper-grouper.
Comment 11: One commenter
expressed concern regarding a potential
influx of imported seafood as a result of
the red snapper harvest restrictions.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
76877
Response: The prohibition on the
harvest and possession of red snapper
and the closure of certain areas in the
South Atlantic to snapper-grouper
fishing under Amendment 17A are
estimated to result in an annual
reduction of approximately 213,000 lb
(96,615 kg) of commercially harvested
snapper-grouper, of which about
120,000 lb (54,431 kg) are red snapper,
based on expected harvest resulting
from regulations implemented through
Amendment 16 to the FMP. Total
imports of snappers and groupers into
the U.S. have been increasing and
averaged approximately 48,000,000 lb
(21,772,434 kg) between 2003 and 2007.
Within this aggregate weight of snappergrouper imports, the amount of red
snapper imported into the U.S. cannot
be estimated with the current available
information. It is recognized that fish
dealers, restaurants, and other
establishments may substitute imports
for snappers and groupers harvested in
U.S. waters as a result of the prohibition
on the harvest and possession of red
snapper and the area closure. However,
the reduction in the domestic landings
of snapper-grouper is not expected to
trigger an influx of imported snappers
and groupers, because the amount of
such reduction is small relative to the
amount of imported snappers and
groupers (about 0.44 percent of
imports).
Comment 12: Thirty-one commenters
opposed the red snapper management
measures in Amendment 17A based on
potential adverse economic impacts.
Several of these commenters are
concerned there is an inadequate
economic analysis of the impacts on the
recreational fishing community in the
amendment.
Response: Amendment 17A and
associated final environmental impact
statement, regulatory flexibility act
analysis, regulatory impact review, and
social impact assessment/fishery impact
statement thoroughly analyze the
potential economic impacts of the
Council’s proposed red snapper
management measures, based on the
best scientific information available.
The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires the
Council and NMFS to end the
overfishing of red snapper. SEDAR 15
indicates the stock is being fished at five
times the sustainable rate, and that
significant reductions in mortality, 76
percent, are needed to end overfishing
and rebuild the population. The adverse
short-term economic impacts of such
reductions are unavoidable. However,
SEDAR assessments indicate the stock is
producing only a fraction of its potential
yield and that the long-term economic
benefits of stock rebuilding are expected
E:\FR\FM\09DER4.SGM
09DER4
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES4
76878
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
to be substantial. A framework
amendment is being developed to allow
for adjustments to the closed area, as
appropriate, based on the results of a
new benchmark assessment (SEDAR
24). Additionally, draft Amendment 22
to the FMP will explore new approaches
for managing red snapper catch and
bycatch as the stock rebuilds that may
allow the Council to provide for some
level of red snapper harvest over time.
Comment 13: Eighty-two commenters
stated the data used in determining the
magnitude of red snapper overfishing,
and general population estimates, are
flawed. Several of the same commenters
also questioned the adequacy and
reliability of recreational landings data
currently available to fishery managers.
Response: Amendment 17A is based
upon the SEDAR 15 assessment, and the
assessment was completed in 2008
using data through 2006. SEDAR 15
found the South Atlantic red snapper
stock is overfished and undergoing
overfishing.
Data used for the assessment consists
of records of commercial catches
provided by dealer and fishermen
reports since the 1940s, headboat
fishery catch records from the Southeast
Headboat Survey since 1972, and
recreational catch records from the
Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics
Survey (MRFSS) since 1981. MRFSS
conducts telephone surveys of coastal
households and for-hire businesses, as
well as in-person access-point angler
intercept surveys. These surveys are
used to collect information on
recreational fishery participation,
fishing effort, and catch, in addition to
demographic, social, and economic
characteristics of the participants.
NMFS recognizes that MRFSS data are
highly uncertain for infrequently
encountered species and is working
with recreational and for-hire fishermen
to explore novel approaches to address
this issue through the Marine
Recreational Information Program
(MRIP). SEDAR 15 also includes U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service recreational
fisheries survey data from 1960, 1965,
and 1970. Landings and effort
information are provided by dealer and
fishermen reports and surveys.
Information on catch lengths and ages is
provided by fishing port sampling
programs that support the catch
statistics programs. Information on
biological characteristics, such as age,
growth, and reproduction, is provided
by various research studies. All of the
data used in the assessment are
described in the SEDAR 15 red snapper
stock assessment report available on the
SEDAR Web site at https://
www.sefsc.noaa.gov/sedar/. The SEDAR
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:39 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
Web site also provides extensive
supporting documentation that
describes data collection programs and
research findings.
SEDAR is a cooperative process
initiated in 2002 to improve the quality
and reliability of fishery stock
assessments in the South Atlantic, Gulf
of Mexico, and U.S. Caribbean. SEDAR
is managed by the Caribbean, Gulf of
Mexico, and South Atlantic Regional
Fishery Management Councils in
coordination with NMFS and the
Atlantic and Gulf States Marine
Fisheries Commissions. SEDAR seeks
improvements in the scientific quality
of stock assessments and greater
relevance of information available to
address existing and emerging fishery
management issues. SEDAR emphasizes
constituent and stakeholder
participation in assessment
development, transparency in the
assessment process, and a rigorous and
independent scientific review of
completed stock assessments. SEDAR is
organized around three workshops. The
first is a data workshop where data sets
are documented, analyzed, and
reviewed and data for conducting
assessment analyses are compiled. The
second is an assessment workshop
where quantitative population analyses
are developed and refined and
population parameters are estimated.
The third is a review workshop where
a panel of independent experts reviews
the data and assessment and
recommends the most appropriate
values of critical population and
management quantities. All SEDAR
workshops are open to the public.
Public testimony is accepted in
accordance with each fishery
management council’s standard
operating procedures. Workshop times
and locations are noticed in advance
through the Federal Register.
The findings and conclusions of each
SEDAR workshop are documented in a
series of reports, which are ultimately
reviewed and discussed by the
appropriate Council and its SSC. At its
June 2008 meeting, the Council’s SSC
determined that the SEDAR 15 is based
upon the best available science. In July
2010, NMFS’ Southeast Fisheries
Science Center (SEFSC) certified the
conservation and management measures
in Amendment 17A are based upon the
best scientific information available.
SEDAR 15 is controversial with
fishermen who feel the findings
contradict their experience of
encountering more and larger red
snapper in recent years. Landings and
discard data corroborate fisher reports
that catches increased between 2007
and 2009. A spike in 2007 discards and
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
2008–2009 landings is likely due to a
strong year class, which occurred in
2006. Even so, the age structure of the
red snapper population is severely
truncated (there are not enough older
fish). Red snapper live to at least 54
years of age, but the SEDAR 15 indicates
that most red snapper are less than 10
years old.
The SEFSC evaluated the concerns
raised by fishermen regarding SEDAR
15 and subsequent analyses. The SEFSC
concluded that altering model
assumptions based on fishermen’s
concerns would impact the magnitude
of required harvest reductions but
would not change the assessment
conclusions regarding the status of red
snapper. Overfishing is occurring and
must be addressed within the
requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act.
A new red snapper SEDAR stock
assessment (SEDAR 24) was completed
in late October 2010, and evaluated
more recent catch data than that used in
SEDAR 15. The results of SEDAR 24
also support the SEDAR 15 conclusion
that red snapper is overfished and
experiencing overfishing, although the
rate of overfishing may be lower than
the rate from SEDAR 15. The Council’s
SSC reviewed SEDAR 24 and the
Council will review SEDAR 24 and the
SSC’s recommendations at their next
meeting during the week of December 5,
2010. The Council is poised to take
action at that time to make any needed
adjustments to the area closure as
appropriate.
Comment 14: Two commenters,
including the State of Florida, felt
actions related to limiting the harvest of
red snapper should be postponed until
the 2010 benchmark assessment is
completed.
Response: The Council is scheduled
to receive the results of the 2010 SEDAR
benchmark stock assessment for red
snapper (SEDAR 24) at the December
2010 Council meeting. However, red
snapper continue to be overfished and
undergoing overfishing and the
prohibition on the harvest and
possession of red snapper must be
effective by December 5, 2010, to avoid
a lapse in those prohibitions
implemented through the interim rule.
Additionally, implementation of
Amendment 17A cannot be further
delayed based on the Magnuson-Stevens
Act requirements to prepare and
implement an FMP amendment to end
overfishing and implement conservation
and management measures to rebuild
red snapper. SEDAR 24 findings support
the current prohibitions on the harvest
and possession of red snapper, and
indicate a lapse in these prohibitions
E:\FR\FM\09DER4.SGM
09DER4
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES4
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
could lead to more severe harvest
reductions for the snapper-grouper
fishery as a whole with associated
adverse socioeconomic impacts. The
assessment also indicates the snappergrouper area closure included in
Amendment 17A is larger than
necessary to end overfishing and rebuild
the stock, and NMFS is considering
using the emergency action authority
under section 305(c) of the MagnusonStevens Act to address the implications
of the new assessment, as appropriate,
and to provide the Council time to
determine whether modifications
should be made to the area closure
based upon the new assessment. The
Council will consider the SEDAR 24
results at their December 2010 meeting,
and determine whether or not a
modification to the area closure is
warranted. If so, adjustments to the area
closure will be promulgated through a
regulatory amendment.
Comment 15: One commenter
attributed red snapper overfishing to the
shrimp trawl fisheries off the southeast
United States and recommended a 2year ban on shrimp trawling in the
South Atlantic.
Response: No evidence exists that
shrimp trawl fleets in the South Atlantic
EEZ capture juvenile red snapper.
Confusion about shrimp bycatch likely
results from evidence that the fishery for
penaeid shrimp (pink, white, and brown
shrimp), in the Gulf of Mexico, catches
a high level of juvenile red snapper.
However, no evidence exists that the
penaeid shrimp fishery in the South
Atlantic has the same level of red
snapper bycatch. In fact, the Southeast
Area Monitoring and Assessment
Program—South Atlantic Coastal Survey
has not documented any red snapper
caught during shallow-water trawl
studies since 2007, and no more than
two red snapper in any year during
1995–2007.
Comment 16: Four commenters stated
the commercial sector is responsible for
the current overfished and overfishing
status of red snapper and expressed
support for banning commercial red
snapper fishing, while allowing
recreational red snapper fishing to
continue.
Response: SEDAR 15 and SEDAR 24
indicate that red snapper is overfished
and experiencing overfishing. The
commercial sector is responsible for
approximately 20 to 25 percent of the
total red snapper landings in the South
Atlantic based on data collected since
2006; thus, the number of red snapper
taken by the recreational sector far
exceeds the amount taken by the
commercial sector. Therefore,
overfishing would continue if
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:39 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
management measures were only
applied to the commercial sector. The
measures implemented through this
final rule must apply to both the
commercial and recreational sectors to
effectively end the overfishing of red
snapper.
Comment 17: One commenter stated
they do not typically see red snapper
when fishing off the east coast of
Florida.
Response: Amendment 17A and its
implementing regulations were
developed based upon the SEDAR 15
(2008) assessment, which shows that
red snapper are overfished and
undergoing overfishing. The stock
assessment also indicates red snapper
abundance is significantly lower now
than it has been in previous decades.
Most of the stock is currently
concentrated in areas off of northern
Florida and southern Georgia.
Overfishing of the species has possibly
diminished the range of the species and
has led to decreased encounter rates in
areas where red snapper once may have
been plentiful, including the Florida
Keys. This final rule is intended to end
the overfishing of red snapper and
rebuild the stock to sustainable levels.
Comment 18: Twelve commenters
offered several alternative management
methods for red snapper including bag
limits, trip limits, reduced size limits,
slot sizes, seasonal area closures,
spawning season closures, artificial reef
establishment, venting tool
requirements, circle hooks with wire
appendages, state-by-state quotas, and a
voluntary buy-out program.
Response: Amendment 4 to the FMP
(1991), implemented a 20-inch (50.8 cm)
total length (TL) minimum size limit
and a 2-fish red snapper bag limit
within a 10-fish snapper-grouper
aggregate bag limit in an effort to reduce
harvest of red snapper. Unfortunately
the implementation of a size limit and
bag limit was not enough to end the
overfishing of red snapper at the time,
and overfishing continued despite the
implementation of a limited access
program for the commercial snappergrouper fishery via Amendment 8 to the
FMP (1998).
In developing red snapper
management measures in Amendment
17A, the Council considered an option
to allow red snapper harvest based on
a quota for the commercial sector, a
quota for the for-hire sector (utilizing
electronic logbooks), and a quota for the
private recreational sector (based on a
quota tag system administered by the
states), with dead discards inshore of
98 ft (73 m) to be subtracted from the
overall allowable harvest level before
quotas are established. The suggested
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
76879
AM for this alternative stated that once
the catch limits are reached in Georgia,
South Carolina, and Florida, bottom
fishing would be prohibited beyond 98
ft (73 m). However, based on catch rates
of landed and discarded red snapper in
2007 and 2008, the allowable catch for
each sector would be estimated to be
met in less than one month.
Furthermore, allowing the level of
harvest outlined above would require
extensive observer coverage,
implementation of electronic logbooks,
and establishment of a tagging system.
Not all states possess the administrative
resources needed to implement a
tagging program at this time. Discarded
red snapper would require close
tracking, and harvest and releasemortality rates would need to be applied
to the discards to ensure total removals
allocated to states and sectors are not
exceeded. The SSC has strongly
opposed tracking discards as a means of
monitoring fishery catch levels and
depending on self-reported discards
may create a disincentive to report, if
the fishery closes as a result of these
self-reported data. However, the Council
is exploring through draft Amendment
22 to the Snapper-Grouper FMP,
alternative strategies for managing red
snapper catch and bycatch (including a
fish tag program) that may allow the
Council to provide for some level of red
snapper harvest over time as the stock
rebuilds.
Several commenters suggested
reducing the minimum size limit from
20 inches (50.8 cm) TL to 16 inches
(40.6 cm) TL, establishing a slot limit or
eliminating the size limit altogether.
These minimum size limit
modifications were considered by the
Council but were removed from detailed
analysis and moved to the considered
but rejected portion of the amendment
because they would not end overfishing.
Reduction or elimination of a minimum
size limit could increase the magnitude
of total removals because a greater
number of fishermen would be able to
fill the 2-fish bag limit with fish that
formerly were discarded and survived
the trauma of capture.
Reductions in the bag limits were also
considered by the Council and NMFS.
Reduction in the bag limit to 1 fish per
person (resulting in a 5-percent
reduction in harvest with a 40-percent
release mortality rate) or a vessel limit
of 4 fish per vessel per day (resulting in
a 3-percent reduction for private
recreational vessels and a 34-percent
reduction for headboats) would not be
sufficient to end overfishing based on
the results of SEDAR 15.
Another option discussed by the
Council was a seasonal-area closure for
E:\FR\FM\09DER4.SGM
09DER4
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES4
76880
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
all snapper-grouper species with a total
prohibition on harvest and possession of
red snapper. A seasonal area closure for
all snapper-grouper species may be
effective in reducing bycatch mortality
of red snapper for the duration of the
closure; however, bycatch mortality
would be expected to resume during the
open season. Based on the results from
SEDAR 15, a very large seasonal
snapper-grouper area closure would be
required to end red snapper overfishing,
and thus would incur greater negative
socioeconomic impacts than the current
area closure in Amendment 17A.
Moreover, the longer the open season,
the larger the closed area would need to
be to account for increased bycatch
mortality of red snapper. Because of
these factors, the Council did not
consider seasonal area closures a
feasible option for ending overfishing in
this case. This does not, however,
preclude the future use of seasonal-area
closures as a management measure.
Suggestions concerning the
establishment of more artificial reefs
have been made several times
throughout the amendment’s
development process. Some studies
suggest that artificial reefs increase
populations of red snapper while others
suggest artificial reefs attract fish in
general. As artificial reefs are usually
well marked, the stock could be
negatively impacted by making large
concentrations of red snapper more
accessible to fishermen. Regardless, the
reduction needed to end overfishing and
rebuild red snapper would not be
achieved by creating more artificial reefs
as the only management measure.
Requiring the use of venting tools was
previously considered in Amendment
16 to the FMP. This requirement was
disapproved based on public comments
and new information opposing the use
of venting tools, along with scientific
studies that suggest the use of venting
tools may actually increase mortality of
some species depending on capture
depth. Furthermore, the requirement for
the possession and use of venting tools
was determined to be overly broad and
not in accordance with the
administrative record developed for
Amendment 16. Required use of venting
tools in the snapper-grouper fishery may
be considered again in the future if
guidance is provided on the tools that
should be used, the appropriate
techniques for venting, and the species
that benefit most from venting. NOAA is
funding a collaborative workshop to be
hosted by the Atlantic States Marine
Fisheries Commission in spring 2011 to
examine how best to reduce barotrauma
in recreational fisheries.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:39 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
One commenter recommended the
use of circle hooks with a wire
appendage be required for the snappergrouper fishery. Appendaged circle
hooks were discussed in the biological
analysis for the circle hook action in
Amendment 17A. The analysis cites one
study that compared circle hooks and Jhooks with and without wire
appendages and their effects on
reducing the catch of small and guthooked snapper by recreational fishers
in the Hauraki Gulf of New Zealand.
However, the Council and NMFS did
not choose to pursue a requirement for
appendaged hooks until additional
information on their use and
effectiveness becomes available. A circle
hook workshop will be held May 4–6,
2011, in Miami, Florida, and more
information on this workshop may be
found at: https://
www.circlehooksymposium.org/. NMFS’
approval of the requirement to use nonstainless steel circle hooks north of 28°
N. latitude does not preclude the
Council or NMFS from considering the
use of appendaged circle hooks in the
future.
The Council discussed the
establishment of a buy-out program for
commercial snapper-grouper fishermen
in Georgia. A buy-out program for the
commercial sector would require a great
deal of planning, time, funds, and
acceptance from fishery participants.
Because of these limiting factors and the
need to act to end overfishing promptly,
a buy-out program was not pursued by
the Council or NMFS during the
Amendment 17A development process.
The Council considered alternatives that
would allocate the red snapper ACL by
state and sector. The Council moved
these alternatives to the considered but
rejected section of the amendment
because the Council determined that
both a harvest prohibition and an area
closure for snapper-grouper species was
needed to end red snapper overfishing.
The Council may consider alternatives
for allocating red snapper harvest
among states and sectors when the stock
rebuilds to a biomass level that would
support some level of harvest.
Comment 19: One fishing association
submitted a comment, endorsed by 12
commenters, stating the comment
period on the proposed rule
intentionally ended 2 days before the
SEDAR 24 assessment results became
public. This comment also stated
NMFS’ scientific position changed
when the decision was made to conduct
a full benchmark assessment instead of
an update to the SEDAR 15 (2008)
assessment, implying an admission that
SEDAR 15 (2008) was not based upon
the best scientific information available.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
The same commenter stated that SEDAR
15 did not use a ‘‘continuity run.’’
Response: The Magnuson-Stevens Act
required the Council to develop a plan
to end overfishing within one year, if
notified of a stock’s overfished status
prior to July 12, 2009. Therefore,
waiting to implement Amendment 17A
until after the new stock assessment
(SEDAR 24) is completed would further
delay this required action. NMFS is
aware of the coincidental timelines
associated with the completion of
SEDAR 24 and the implementation of
Amendment 17A. The Council and
NMFS are prepared to act expeditiously
to modify management measures if the
Council concludes that the results of
SEDAR 24 indicate such an adjustment
is appropriate.
SEDAR 15 (2008) concluded that red
snapper is overfished and undergoing
overfishing, requiring the Council to
prepare a plan amendment to end
overfishing and rebuild the stock.
During the amendment’s development,
fishermen expressed concern that
SEDAR 15 did not capture the spike in
discards and landings that occurred
during 2007–2009 because the
assessment considered data only
through 2006. In order to include these
landings and apply additional statistical
methods to the analysis, the SEDAR
steering committee requested SEDAR
replace the scheduled red snapper
assessment update with a new
benchmark assessment (SEDAR 24).
SEDAR 15 (2008) was subjected to an
external review by the Center for
Independent Experts (CIE) and was also
reviewed by the Council’s SSC, both of
which approved the assessment report.
Furthermore, in a memorandum dated
July 22, 2010, the SEFSC certified that
Amendment 17A is based upon the best
scientific information available.
Continuity runs of SEDAR 15 with the
red snapper assessment conducted in
1997 were not performed because such
runs would have been based upon prior
research that used several assumptions,
such as a 15-year life span for red
snapper, which are now known to be
inaccurate.
The results of the new SEDAR 24
benchmark assessment support the
SEDAR 15 conclusion that red snapper
is overfished and experiencing
overfishing, although the rate of
overfishing appears to be lower than
estimated in the SEDAR 15 assessment.
Although the SEDAR 24 assessment
shows some signs of stock
improvement, overfishing is still
occurring and must be addressed within
the requirements of the MagnusonStevens Act. The SEDAR 24 findings
support the current red snapper harvest
E:\FR\FM\09DER4.SGM
09DER4
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES4
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
prohibitions and indicate a lapse in
these prohibitions could lead to more
severe harvest reductions for the
snapper-grouper fishery as a whole,
with associated adverse socioeconomic
impacts. NMFS and the Council are
prepared to act expeditiously to modify
management measures if the results of
SEDAR 24 indicate such an adjustment
is appropriate.
Comment 20: One commenter stated
that closing an area will open the same
area to fishing by foreign fleets.
Response: Closing an area to snappergrouper fishing under Amendment 17A
will not open up that area to fishing by
foreign fleets. The Magnuson-Stevens
Act authorizes the Federal Government
to regulate fishing in the exclusive
economic zone (EEZ) (3 to 200 nautical
miles offshore), and it prohibits foreign
fishing in the EEZ unless specifically
conducted pursuant to an international
fishery agreement and permit.
Comment 21: Two commenters stated
the fishing mortality at maximum
sustainable yield (FMSY) proxy approved
by NMFS is inadequate and does not
follow the SSC’s FMSY proxy
recommendation.
Response: Stock assessments have not
been able to reliably estimate the MSY
of South Atlantic red snapper. In such
cases, the Magnuson-Stevens Act
National Standard 1 Guidelines direct
regional fishery management councils to
adopt other measures of reproductive
capacity as reasonable MSY proxies. In
1998, through Amendment 11 to the
Snapper-Grouper FMP, the Council
defined the MSY of red snapper to equal
the yield associated with fishing at FMSY
or F30%SPR.
At its December 2008 meeting, the
Council’s SSC discussed the positive
and negative effects of maintaining the
current proxy for FMSY (F30%SPR) versus
establishing a new proxy for FMSY at
F40%SPR. Some SSC members supported
the CIE’s recommendation, based on
SEDAR 15, to use F40%SPR and cited
literature and examples that showed
that F40%SPR is a more appropriate proxy
for FMSY. Other SSC members stated
F30%SPR should be maintained because it
was approved by the Council for red
snapper and other species in
Amendment 11 to the FMP, and its
corresponding steepness value (the
magnitude of recruitment) is
approximately 0.90, which was close to
the estimated value of 0.95 in the base
model.
The Council was very concerned
about the implications of establishing a
proxy that has not been previously used
for red snapper. Specifying F40%SPR as a
new proxy could set a precedent that is
not appropriate for all species in the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:39 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
snapper-grouper fishery management
unit. After thoroughly considering the
implications associated with the more
conservative alternative FMSY proxy of
F40%SPR, as well as input from their SSC
and NMFS, the Council elected to take
no action to change the current
definition of the FMSY proxy.
Amendment 17A specifies the
numerical value for MSY associated
with this definition as 2,431,000 lb
(1,102,683 kg), whole weight, based on
the most recent, completed, red snapper
stock assessment at the time of final
Council action (SEDAR 15 2008).
The more conservative FMSY proxy of
F40%SPR recommended by the SSC
would have resulted in a lower MSY
value equal to 2,304,000 lb (1,102,683
kg), whole weight, and would have
required greater harvest reductions to
end overfishing and rebuild the stock on
schedule. Choosing that proxy would
have resulted in increased adverse
economic impacts from ending
overfishing on fishing communities.
Therefore, the Council recommended
that the SEFSC conduct a
comprehensive review of how FMSY
proxies should be applied across all
southeastern fisheries, and that the
decision to apply a specific FMSY proxy
be made at the regional level rather than
on a species-by-species basis.
Comment 22: Three commenters state
Amendment 17A fails to specify an
acceptable biological catch (ABC) or
ABC control rule for red snapper.
Response: The SSC provided an
overfishing limit (OFL) and ABC
recommendations in terms of pounds of
fish at its June 2008 meeting, but the
SSC did not have an ABC control rule
to assist them with estimating ABC and
indicated that they considered the
values to be ‘‘interim’’ until more robust
methods for estimating these parameters
could be made available. At its
December 2008 SSC meeting, the SSC
considered the guidance given in the
proposed Magnuson-Stevens Act
National Standard 1 Guidelines and
rescinded all estimates of ABC from its
June 2008 meeting (except for an ABC
of zero for speckled hind and warsaw
grouper). The SSC also recommended at
its December 2008 meeting that the ABC
levels for snowy grouper, black sea bass,
and red snapper be set consistent with
the rebuilding plans for those species
until they can be further amended on
better scientific information. The SSC
met in March and June of 2009 to
determine ABC control rules for data
rich species, and met in April and
August of 2010 to identify the protocol
for determining the ABC for data poor
species. The SSC recommended that
current ABC levels for red snapper be
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
76881
set consistent with the rebuilding plan
until they can be further amended.
Comment 23: Two commenters stated
that by choosing to rely on an OFL
based on the FMSY proxy of F30%SPR,
which is equivalent to 146,939 lb
(66,650 kg), and then setting the ABC at
97 percent of the Council’s OFL, or
144,000 lb (65,317 kg), the Council set
the ABC for red snapper well above the
SSC-recommended OFL of 104,124 lb
(47,230 kg). Furthermore, the
commenter states the Council’s ABC of
144,000 lb (65,317 kg) is also well above
the 101,000 lb (45, 813 kg) catch level
that is based on the rebuilding plan
under the SSC’s recommended FMSY
proxy.
Response: Section 1.4.2 of
Amendment 17A discusses the SSC’s
recommendation of ABC and OFL.
Initially, the SSC recommended an
interim OFL and ABC for red snapper
equal to the yield at 75 percent FMSY. At
its December 2008 meeting, the SSC
withdrew its OFL and ABC
recommendations, and instead
recommended the ABC level be set
consistent with the rebuilding plan in
Amendment 17A, which specifies an
FOY equal to 98 percent FMSY (98
percent F30%SPR) and rebuilds the stock
in 35 years. Therefore, ABC is consistent
with the rebuilding plan outlined in
Amendment 17A.
Comment 24: One commenter stated
that Amendment 17A violates the
requirement for the Council to set ACLs
that do not exceed the ABC
recommendation of the SSC.
Response: The Magnuson-Stevens Act
requires the Council to develop ACLs
that may not exceed the fishing level
recommendation of its SSC. The
National Standard 1 Guidelines state
that the SSC recommendation most
relevant to ACLs is ABC, as both are
levels of annual catch. The SSC’s ABC
recommendation for red snapper is that
the ABC should be consistent with the
rebuilding plan. Therefore, the ABC is
specified as an FOY equal to 98 percent
FMSY (98 percent F30%SPR) and rebuilds
in 35 years. This allows a total red
snapper mortality (in the form of dead
discards) of 144,000 lb (65,317 kg)
whole weight in year one of rebuilding.
Total mortality is calculated from
rebuilding projections of spawning
stock biomass, recruitment, allowable
removals from the population, and
probability of stock recovery, under
different fishing mortality rates
developed by the SEFSC. This
rebuilding plan is consistent with the
current FMSY proxy (F30%SPR), which
requires a 76 percent reduction in
harvest of red snapper. The Council’s
preferred alternative in Amendment
E:\FR\FM\09DER4.SGM
09DER4
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES4
76882
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
17A establishes an ACL of 0 lb (0 kg)
based on landed catch.
The Council considered including
both landed catch and discards in the
specification of the red snapper ACL;
however, the SSC concluded that
existing data collection and reporting
systems are not adequate to support
monitoring discarded red snapper in the
commercial and recreational fisheries
and expressed concern that doing so
may create an incentive for fishermen to
under-report red snapper discards.
Comment 25: Two commenters stated
the AMs specified in Amendment 17A
are based on the ACL, which includes
landings only (all red snapper landings
would be prohibited under this final
rule), and therefore are not adequate
because they do not correspond to total
mortality. Additionally, the amendment
does not include AMs that will be
triggered annually if the total mortality
exceeds the ABC.
Response: Through this final rule,
NMFS establishes an ACL of zero for red
snapper, which is applied to directed
harvest. Therefore, a year-round closure
is created for commercial and
recreational harvest of red snapper
throughout the entire South Atlantic
EEZ. Additionally, the results of SEDAR
15 required the Council to reduce the
bycatch mortality of red snapper in
order to end overfishing. The Council
thus imposed a 4,827 square mile (7,763
square km) closed area from Cape
Canaveral, Florida, to southern Georgia
to all snapper-grouper fishing (except
when using black sea bass pots or
spearfishing gear) to achieve the fishing
mortality reduction required by SEDAR
15.
The Council considered including
both landed catch and discards in the
specification of the red snapper ACL;
however, the SSC concluded that
existing data collection and reporting
systems are not adequate to support
monitoring discarded red snapper in the
commercial and recreational fisheries
and expressed concern that doing so
may create an incentive for fishermen to
under-report red snapper discards.
Prohibiting all directed harvest of red
snapper is the most stringent AM that
could be implemented for the species.
The preferred red snapper AM
alternative includes a provision for
tracking catch per unit effort (CPUE) via
fishery-dependent and fisheryindependent monitoring programs, and
periodically evaluating the CPUE data to
determine if adjustments to the ACL and
management measures are appropriate.
If the data indicate an adjustment is
warranted, action could be taken
expeditiously through a framework
amendment. The Council did consider
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:39 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
establishing annual catch targets (ACTs)
as part of the accountability mechanism
for red snapper. However, the
commercial and recreational harvest of
red snapper is prohibited, therefore, it
was determined that ACTs are not
necessary at this time. It is anticipated
that red snapper harvest will be allowed
in the future, at which time the Council
may consider establishing ACTs.
Comment 26: One commenter stated
Amendment 17A violates the
Magnuson-Stevens Act because it does
not clearly specify an OFL for red
snapper.
Response: According to the
Magnuson-Stevens Act National
Standard 1 Guidelines, OFL is an
annual amount of catch that
corresponds to the estimate of
maximum fishing mortality threshold
(MFMT) applied to a stock or complex’s
abundance. Amendment 11 to the FMP
defines MFMT as the yield at FMSY
where F30%SPR is the default FMSY
proxy. Amendment 17A retains the
status quo proxy for FMSY at F30%SPR,
which when applied to the red snapper
stock would be the equivalent to the
OFL. The numerical value of this
parameter will change annually as stock
biomass increases in response to the
rebuilding plan, and is estimated as
2,431,000 lb (1,102,683 kg), whole
weight, when the stock is at equilibrium
based on the SEDAR 15 assessment.
Comment 27: Two commenters stated
Amendment 17A management measures
are based on unsubstantiated discard
mortality assumptions, and unrealistic
compliance rates.
Response: The discard mortality rates
used in Amendment 17A are provided
by the SEDAR 15 (2008) assessment.
The stock assessment evaluated findings
from numerous studies to estimate
release mortality of red snapper. SEDAR
15 (2008) panel participants considered
a previous assessment of the red
snapper population along the Atlantic
coast that used point estimates of 10
percent and 25 percent for release
mortality based on observations by
NMFS personnel. These estimates are
low when compared to data in the 2009
Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper Assessment
Update to SEDAR 7 (2004). Panel
members also considered recent
observer data collected from the
headboat sector on the Atlantic coast
and commercial sectors on the Atlantic
coast and in the Gulf of Mexico. After
examining the results from the many
different release mortality studies,
SEDAR 15 (2008) recommended the
release mortality be set at 40 percent (30
to 50 percent selectivity range) for the
recreational sector and 90 percent (80 to
100 percent selectivity range) for the
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
commercial sector. Discard mortality
was evaluated through sensitivity runs
and was not a significant factor in the
fishing mortality or abundance
estimates.
Varying degrees of compliance were
discussed by the Council and NMFS,
and were included in the model
estimates of harvest reductions needed
to end overfishing. The model used
compliance assumptions ranging from
100 percent to 80 percent. Data on
compliance rates as they relate to closed
areas in the snapper-grouper fishery are
limited. The fishery does not require
vessel monitoring systems, and
therefore does not have a highly
accurate method to predict compliance
for the subject closure. The Council
determined it was reasonable to assume
a compliance rate of 90 percent or less
at this time, and adjust rebuilding
measures as appropriate in response to
new information. Therefore, the model
scenarios incorporating less than 90
percent compliance were used to inform
their selection of the preferred closed
area alternative. NMFS agrees with this
determination and concluded the
conservation and management measures
proposed in Amendment 17A are based
on the best scientific information
available.
Comment 28: One commenter stated
the SEFSC disagreed with the Council’s
decision to base its selected catch limits
necessary to end overfishing on a ‘‘very
high recruitment’’ scenario.
Response: The Council and SEFSC
considered projections with very high
recruitment to be a reasonable approach
as the 2008 and 2009 red snapper
landings in the U.S. South Atlantic were
much higher than have been observed in
recent years, and high landings followed
a spike in discards, which occurred in
2007. As the majority of fish being
landed are near the legal limit of 20
inches (50.8 cm) TL and age information
from red snapper collected in 2009
indicated approximately 80 percent of
the fish were age 3 and 4, there was
evidence that the high landings are
being driven by a particularly strong
year-class entering the fishery. At its
September 2009 meeting, the Council
expressed concern that rebuilding
projections in Amendment 17A did not
consider recent high recruitment since
the SEDAR 15 assessment only included
landings data through 2006. As a result,
the Council stated the projections could
underestimate the magnitude of
expected discards, and the yield at
target fishing mortality could be higher.
In response, the Council requested new
projections, which incorporate the high
recruitment that appears to have
occurred in 2006.
E:\FR\FM\09DER4.SGM
09DER4
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES4
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
To examine the effects of such a pulse
of recruitment on projections, the
SEFSC produced projections where the
2006 year-class was inflated to one of
three levels, corresponding to 50
percent, 100 percent, and 150 percent of
the maximum recruitment event
observed in the SEDAR 15 assessment
over the years 1974–2006. The three
levels were labeled as ‘‘high’’, ‘‘very
high’’, and ‘‘extremely high.’’
At the September 2009 Council
meeting, the SEFSC advised the Council
the use of ‘‘very high’’ recruitment
estimates were most appropriate for red
snapper in the South Atlantic. While the
SSC expressed concern in its Consensus
Statements and Report from the
December 2009 Meeting that adoption of
the ‘‘very high’’ recruitment estimate
was overly optimistic, they
acknowledged that assumptions
regarding recent recruitment pulses
would be tested in SEDAR 24. That
assessment, which was completed in
late October 2010, confirms that notably
strong year classes occurred in 2006 and
2007.
Comment 29: Three commenters
stated that Amendment 17A fails to take
into account management uncertainty
when establishing management
measures to end overfishing.
Response: The Council and NMFS
considered management uncertainty
during the deliberative process of
choosing management measures
intended to end overfishing of red
snapper and rebuild the stock within
the specified timeframe. The Council
and NMFS utilized a specialized model
to estimate the percentage reductions
gained in total red snapper mortality
under various scenarios. Each scenario
took into account the effects of
management uncertainty that could
result from impacts of recently
implemented regulations, estimated
compliance rates, and variations in
offshore and inshore release mortality
rates. These assumptions are discussed
in detail in Appendix E of Amendment
17A.
Comment 30: Two commenters stated
that Amendment 17A actions prioritize
the minimization of socioeconomic
harm over conservation.
Response: Amendment 17A was
developed by the Council and NMFS
pursuant to Magnuson-Stevens Act
requirements to end overfishing of red
snapper and rebuild the overfished
stock within the specified rebuilding
schedule. NMFS must also minimize, to
the extent practicable, the unavoidable
negative socioeconomic impacts of
achieving these conservation objectives.
The Council chose, and NMFS
approved, the management measures
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:39 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
that best minimized these
socioeconomic impacts without
compromising conservation objectives.
Because red snapper is part of a
multispecies fishery, the SEDAR 15
assessment indicated that bycatch
mortality is high, and that an area
closure for all snapper-grouper fishing
was necessary to end overfishing. The
size of the area closure was the subject
of extensive deliberation. The Council
determined, and NMFS agrees, that the
preferred area closure, based on SEDAR
15 assessment results, is the best
balance between ending overfishing and
minimizing economic harm.
Data uncertainty surrounding SEDAR
15 made the Council’s task of
designating appropriate rebuilding goals
and management measures for red
snapper very difficult. Subsequently,
the Council has been criticized for
choosing reference points and
management measures that are either
not conservative enough, or too
conservative. Amendment 17A has been
cited as being overly optimistic in its
assumptions and capacity to rebuild the
stock. However, the recently completed
SEDAR assessment (SEDAR 24) affirms
that red snapper are overfished and are
undergoing overfishing. The results of
SEDAR 24 will be presented to the
Council at their December 2010
meeting. At that time, they may choose
to adjust the management measures,
which may be done through a regulatory
amendment according to the SnapperGrouper FMP Framework Procedures.
Comment 31: One commenter stated
that Amendment 17A fails to include
bycatch in the ACL.
Response: Establishing an ACL of
zero, based on landed catch, would not
require monitoring dead discards in
order to monitor the ACL. The SSC has
opposed on several occasions including
dead discards as part of the ACL since
discard data are self-reported and there
is greater uncertainty with discard data
than with estimates of landings. The
alternative ACL specification was also
zero, but it included landings and dead
discards. This option would require
NMFS to monitor discarded red snapper
in the commercial and recreational
sectors for the purposes of tracking the
ACL; though discard data will be
recorded and monitored via the fisheryindependent monitoring program
intended to track rebuilding progress. At
its March 2009 meeting, the SSC
indicated their recommendation of
acceptable biological catch of zero for
speckled hind and warsaw grouper was
based on landed catch only due to
concern about monitoring discards. The
SSC expressed concerns when
discussing ACLs based on dead discards
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
76883
for speckled hind and warsaw grouper
at its March 2009 meeting. The SSC was
not only concerned about the accuracy
of discard data from the recreational and
commercial sectors but also the
possibility that some members of the
fishing community might under-report
discarded fish if they believed further
restrictions might be imposed if levels
of dead discards became elevated. Based
on this recommendation from the SSC,
the Council and NMFS determined an
ACL equal to zero, based on landed
catch only, would be the most
appropriate ACL value for red snapper
in the South Atlantic. Estimates of dead
discards are incorporated in a model to
determine reductions in mortality
needed to end red snapper overfishing.
The model was used by Council to
reduce bycatch and end overfishing of
red snapper through the establishment
of a closed area where the harvest of all
snapper-grouper species would be
prohibited with all gear types except
black sea bass pots and spearfishing
gear.
Comment 32: Two commenters stated
that several of the options chosen by the
Council as preferred alternatives were
not included in the DEIS. As a result,
the alternatives did not receive adequate
review and analysis, and were not
subject to appropriate public notice,
review and comment, as required by
law.
Response: One alternative contained
in the FEIS was not identified as a
separate alternative in the DEIS, but it
was included in the range of alternatives
considered and analyzed in the DEIS.
This red snapper management measure,
Alternative 3E, was identified by the
Council as its preferred snapper-grouper
area closure alternative at its June 2010
meeting after reviewing public
comments on the DEIS, as well as new
information on the reduction in total
mortality needed to end overfishing as
defined by the status quo FMSY proxy of
F30%SPR. As this reduction was slightly
less than that required by the formerly
preferred F40%SPR proxy, the Council
included a new, preferred area closure
alternative that encompassed a smaller
area reflective of the reduced harvest
reductions needed under the status quo
FMSY proxy. The environmental impacts
of Alternative 3E fell within the scope
of those evaluated in the DEIS for the
closure alternatives considered, and
thus did not necessitate the publication
of a supplemental DEIS.
Comment 33: Two commenters stated
that NMFS chose to move forward with
approval of the rebuilding plan and
management measures in Amendment
17A despite a statement from the SSC
that the proposed management
E:\FR\FM\09DER4.SGM
09DER4
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES4
76884
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
measures may not be sufficient to end
overfishing of red snapper. One
commenter stated the FEIS does not
address the SSC’s concerns with
whether or not Amendment 17A would
end overfishing.
Response: In its Consensus Statement
and Report for the December 2009
Council meeting, the SSC stated that
none of the management options in draft
Amendment 17A appear to prevent
overfishing because the analyses and
alternatives are based on overly
optimistic assumptions regarding the
steepness of the stock-recruit curve, a
‘‘very high recruitment’’ pulse in 2006,
as well as expected rates of compliance
and effort shifting. However, SSC
representatives speaking to these issues
during the Council’s December 2009
Snapper-Grouper Committee meeting
acknowledged the SSC’s conclusion
assumed that the rate of overfishing was
defined using a more conservative FMSY
proxy (F40%SPR) than the status quo
proxy of F30%SPR, that steepness was
defined based on their recommendation
for short-term projections but it has
relatively little impact on the
effectiveness of management measures
in ending overfishing, and that
assumptions regarding recent
recruitment pulses were not overly risky
because they would be tested in the new
benchmark assessment SEDAR 24.
SEDAR 24, which was completed in late
October 2010, confirms that notably
strong year classes occurred in 2006 and
2007.
While rates of compliance and effort
shifting remain difficult to predict, the
Council determined it was reasonable to
assume a compliance rate of 90 percent
or less at this time, and adjust
rebuilding measures as appropriate in
response to new information. Therefore,
the model scenarios incorporating less
than 90 percent compliance were used
to inform the Council’s selection of the
preferred closed area alternative. The
Council also determined any effort
shifting would not be expected to have
a significant adverse impact on the red
snapper rebuilding plan because the
management measures proposed in
Amendment 17B, if approved, would
greatly diminish the incentive to target
snapper-grouper species in deep water
and discard mortality would be reduced
if effort shifted to inshore waters. NMFS
agrees with these assumptions and
certified that the conservation and
management measures in Amendment
17A are based on the best available
scientific information.
The new SEDAR assessment (SEDAR
24) also supports these assumptions,
indicating the rate of overfishing is
likely lower than that estimated by the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:39 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
base run in SEDAR 15 and that the red
snapper stock is in better shape than
portrayed by SEDAR 15. The Council
will review the results of SEDAR 24 at
their December 2010 meeting and may
propose additional action at that time,
as appropriate.
Comment 34: One commenter stated
the FEIS fails to disclose and analyze
the fundamental flaws in the scenarios
relied upon to determine that the
management measures will reduce
fishing mortality below the OFL,
especially with regard to bycatch
mortality estimates and projected
compliance rates.
Response: The biological analysis for
management actions in Amendment
17A and its associated FEIS, specifically
Appendix E of the document, provides
details regarding the analytical model
used to develop the area closure
alternatives. Appendix E also provides
information on the limitations
associated with the model’s
assumptions, which were used in
determining reductions in total
mortality provided by the proposed area
closures. The report accompanying the
model compares projected removal rates
under the following scenarios with or
without: (1) Elimination of directed
and/or targeted trips due to regulations;
(2) changes in overall release mortality;
(3) distinct inshore release mortality;
and (4) varying compliance rates.
Projected reductions in total removals
were computed from baseline 2005–
2007 data compiled from commercial
logbook, MRFSS, and headboat logbook
data for the U.S. South Atlantic. In
various scenarios, baseline removals
were reduced as a function of trip
elimination, spatial and bathymetric
closures, and changes in release
mortality. As with most projections,
certain assumptions must be made to
produce meaningful results. The
assumptions made in the model analysis
used to determine what level of harvest
reduction could be achieved under the
various area closure alternatives, are
based upon the best available
information from SEDAR 15, and
recommendations by the Council’s SSC.
Any assumptions used to operate the
model, which predicted overall harvest
reductions possible under various red
snapper management measure
alternatives, were disclosed and
subjected to public, SSC, and SEFSC
review.
Comment 35: One commenter stated
that the FEIS fails to consider: The
impacts of not selecting an explicit OFL
that is derived from the SSCrecommended MSY proxy; the impacts
of setting the ABC above the OFL that
is derived from the SSC-recommended
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
FMSY proxy; the impacts of basing the
ABC on the rebuilding plan as opposed
to basing it on an ABC control rule that
incorporates scientific uncertainty
contained within the overfishing level;
and the impacts on bycatch and
stopping overfishing with using an ACL
that is based on landings only.
Response: Amendment 17A and its
associated FEIS include analyses of the
potential impacts of all alternatives on
the biological, economic, social, and
administrative environments, including
the ‘‘No Action’’ alternatives as required
by the National Environmental Policy
Act. Analyses include the impacts of
adopting a new definition for the FMSY
proxy versus retaining the status quo
FMSY proxy. The FEIS for Amendment
17A satisfies all NEPA requirements.
Section 1.4.2 of Amendment 17A
discusses the SSC’s recommendation of
ABC and OFL. At its December 2008
meeting, the SSC recommended the
ABC level be set consistent with the
rebuilding plan in Amendment 17A.
Therefore, the ABC is specified to equal
FOY, which is defined as 98 percent
FMSY (98 percent F30%SPR), during the
rebuilding schedule. This allows a total
red snapper mortality of 144,000 lb
(65,317 kg) whole weight in year one of
rebuilding based on the status quo FMSY
proxy of F30%SPR, which requires a 76
percent reduction in red snapper
harvest.
According to the Magnuson-Stevens
Act National Standard 1 Guidelines,
OFL is an annual amount of catch that
corresponds to the estimate of MFMT
applied to a stock or complex’s
abundance. Amendment 11 to the FMP
defines MFMT as the yield at FMSY
where F30%SPR is the default FMSY proxy.
Amendment 17A retains the status quo
proxy for FMSY at F30%SPR, which when
applied to the red snapper stock would
be the equivalent to OFL. The numerical
value of this parameter will change
annually as stock biomass increases in
response to the rebuilding plan, and is
estimated as 2,431,000 lbs (ww) when
the stock is at equilibrium based on the
SEDAR 15 assessment. Therefore, ABC
is less that OFL, since OFL is based on
the status quo proxy for FMSY and ABC
is specified to equal FOY, which is
defined as 98 percent of the status quo
proxy for FMSY.
The Council considered including
both landed catch and discards in the
specification of the red snapper ACL;
however, the SSC concluded that
existing data collection and reporting
systems are not adequate to support
monitoring discarded red snapper in the
commercial and recreational fisheries
and expressed concern that doing so
E:\FR\FM\09DER4.SGM
09DER4
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES4
may create an incentive for fishermen to
under-report red snapper discards.
Classification
The Regional Administrator,
Southeast Region, NMFS, determined
that Amendment 17A is necessary for
the conservation and management of the
snapper-grouper fishery and is
consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens
Act and other applicable laws.
This final rule has been determined to
be not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866.
NMFS prepared an FEIS for this
amendment. A notice of availability for
the FEIS was published on August 20,
2010 (75 FR 51458). A copy of the ROD
is available from NMFS (see
ADDRESSES).
NMFS prepared a FRFA, as required
by 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
for this final rule. The FRFA
incorporates by reference the initial
regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA), a
summary of the significant issues raised
by public comments, NMFS responses
to those comments, and a summary of
the analyses completed to support the
action. A copy of the analysis is
available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
The FRFA follows.
No comments specific to the IRFA
were received. However, several
comments were submitted on the
economic effects of the proposed rule.
Most comments stated the proposed rule
would have devastating economic
effects on the fishing industry. Some
comments noted that the proposed rule
would create undue hardships on forhire crew, support industries, and
associated communities. Other
comments stated that the economic
analysis underestimated the adverse
economic effects of the proposed rule on
the for-hire sector in particular and the
recreational sector in general.
The economic analysis conducted for
the proposed rule estimated the
expected quantitative effects of each
alternative to the extent possible.
Qualitative discussions of expected
effects were provided where data or
analytical techniques were not
available. The analysis focused on the
expected change in economic value,
where economic value was measured by
net operating revenues for commercial
and for-hire vessels and consumer
surplus for recreational anglers. An
expenditure analysis was also
conducted to provide some insights into
the distributional effects of the proposed
rule. This analysis examined the direct
and indirect effects (sales/output,
income/value-added, and full-time
employment) of revenue reductions on
the commercial sector and of target trip
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:39 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
reductions on the recreational sector
due to the proposed rule. The economic
analysis concluded that, with the
exception of the no action alternatives,
practically all alternatives would result
in short-run adverse economic effects on
fishers, support industries, and
associated communities. The adverse
economic effects would be borne mostly
by commercial and for-hire operations
in northeast Florida and Georgia. Some
alternatives to the proposed rule would
be expected to result in lower adverse
economic effects but would not achieve
the Council’s objective for that
particular action. Other alternatives to
the proposed rule would achieve the
Council’s objectives but were projected
to result in larger adverse economic
effects.
NMFS agrees with the Council’s
choice of preferred alternatives as those
which would be expected to best
achieve the Council’s objectives while
minimizing to the extent practicable the
adverse effects on fishers, support
industries, and associated communities.
No changes in the final rule were
made in response to public comments.
The final rule, which consists of
several actions, would introduce
changes to the management of the South
Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery. This
rule would prohibit all commercial and
recreational harvest and possession of
red snapper year-round in the South
Atlantic EEZ. Prohibition of the harvest
and possession of red snapper applies in
the South Atlantic on board a vessel for
which a valid Federal charter vessel/
headboat or commercial permit for
South Atlantic snapper-grouper has
been issued, without regard to where
such species are harvested, i.e., in State
or Federal waters. Furthermore, this rule
would prohibit commercial and
recreational harvest and possession of
all snapper-grouper species year-round
in an area that includes commercial
logbook grids 2880, 2980, and 3080
between 98 ft (16 fathoms; 30 m) and
240 ft (40 fathoms; 73 m), except when
snapper-grouper (other than red
snapper) are harvested with (a) black sea
bass pots that have a valid identification
tag attached, or (b) spearfishing gear.
The prohibition on possession does not
apply to a person aboard a vessel that
is in transit with other snapper-grouper
species on board and with fishing gear
appropriately stowed. Finally, this rule
would require the use of non-stainless
steel circle hooks when fishing for
snapper-grouper with snapper-grouper
hook-and-line gear and natural baits
north of 28° N. latitude.
The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides
the statutory basis for the final rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
76885
No duplicative, overlapping, or
conflicting Federal rules have been
identified. The final rule would not alter
existing reporting, record keeping, or
other compliance requirements, except
when the vessel is in transit across the
closed area, during which, fishing gear
must be appropriately stowed, or when
the vessel is selected for the fisheryindependent monitoring program to
track the progress of red snapper.
This final rule is expected to directly
affect commercial harvesting and forhire fishing operations. The Small
Business Administration has established
size criteria for all major industry
sectors in the U.S. including fish
harvesters and for-hire operations. A
business involved in fish harvesting is
classified as a small business if it is
independently owned and operated, is
not dominant in its field of operation
(including its affiliates), and has
combined annual receipts not in excess
of $4.0 million (NAICS code 114111,
finfish fishing) for all its affiliated
operations worldwide. For for-hire
vessels, the other qualifiers apply and
the annual receipts threshold is $7.0
million (NAICS code 713990,
recreational industries).
In 2003–2007, an average of 944
vessels per year was permitted to
operate in the commercial snappergrouper sector. Of these vessels, 749
held transferable permits and 195 held
non-transferable permits. On average,
890 vessels landed 6.43 million lb (2.92
million kg) of snapper-grouper and 1.95
million lb (0.88 million kg) of other
species on snapper-grouper trips. Total
dockside revenues from snappergrouper species stood at $13.81 million
(2007 dollars) and from other species, at
$2.30 million (2007 dollars).
Considering revenues from both
snapper-grouper and other species, the
average revenues per vessel were
$18,101. An average of 27 vessels per
year harvested more than 50,000 lb
(22,680 kg) of snapper-grouper species
per year, generating at least, at an
average price of $2.15 (2007 dollars) per
pound, dockside revenues of $107,500.
Vessels that operate in the snappergrouper fishery may also operate in
other fisheries, the revenues of which
cannot be determined with available
data and are not reflected in these totals.
Although a vessel that possesses a
commercial snapper-grouper permit can
harvest various snapper-grouper
species, not all permitted vessels landed
all of the snapper-grouper species most
affected by this amendment, i.e. red
snapper, gag, vermilion snapper, black
sea bass, black grouper, and red grouper.
The following average number of vessels
landed the subject species in 2003–
E:\FR\FM\09DER4.SGM
09DER4
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES4
76886
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
2007: 292 vessels landed gag, 253
vessels landed vermilion snapper, 220
vessels landed red snapper, 237 vessels
landed black sea bass, 323 vessels
landed black grouper, and 402 vessels
landed red grouper. Combining
revenues from snapper-grouper and
other species on the same trip, the
average revenue (2007 dollars) per
vessel for vessels landing the subject
species were $20,551 for gag, $28,454
for vermilion snapper, $22,168 for red
snapper, $19,034 for black sea bass,
$7,186 for black grouper, and $17,164
for red grouper.
Based on revenue information, all
commercial vessels directly affected by
the final rule are considered small
entities.
The for-hire fleet is comprised of
charterboats, which charge a fee on a
vessel basis, and headboats, which
charge a fee on an individual angler
(head) basis. In 2003–2007, an average
of 1,635 vessels was permitted to
operate in the snapper-grouper for-hire
sector, of which 82 are estimated to
have operated as headboats. Within the
total number of vessels, 227 also
possessed a commercial snappergrouper permit and are included in the
summary information provided on the
commercial sector. The charterboat
annual average gross revenue is
estimated to range from approximately
$62,000–$84,000 for Florida vessels,
$73,000–$89,000 for North Carolina
vessels, $68,000–$83,000 for Georgia
vessels, and $32,000–$39,000 for South
Carolina vessels. For headboats, the
corresponding estimates are $170,000–
$362,000 for Florida vessels, and
$149,000–$317,000 for vessels in the
other States.
Based on these average revenue
figures, all for-hire operations directly
affected by the final rule are considered
small entities.
Some fleet activity may exist in both
the commercial and for-hire snappergrouper sectors but its extent is
unknown, and all vessels are treated as
independent entities in this analysis.
All entities that are expected to be
directly affected by the final rule are
considered small entities.
The final rule is expected to reduce
short-run harvests and fishing
opportunities of commercial and forhire vessels that, in turn, would reduce
their short-run revenues and profits. In
the following discussion, net operating
revenue is considered equivalent to
profit.
Prohibiting all commercial and
recreational harvest and possession of
red snapper year-round in the South
Atlantic EEZ and prohibiting all
commercial and recreational harvest
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:39 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
and possession of other species (except
when caught with spearfishing gear or
black sea bass pots that have a valid
identification tag issued by the RA
attached) in the snapper-grouper fishery
year-round in the area that includes
commercial logbook grids 2880, 2980,
and 3080 between 98 ft (16 fathoms; 30
m) and 240 ft (40 fathoms; 73 m) is
expected to reduce net operating
revenues of commercial vessels
operating in the South Atlantic by an
average of approximately $430,000 (4.8
percent), assuming the no action
alternatives in Amendment 17B to the
FMP, or $931,000 (10.3 percent) when
combined with the preferred
alternatives in Amendment 17B to the
FMP. This measure is also expected to
reduce the net operating revenues of forhire vessels operating in the South
Atlantic by approximately $5.04
million. Most of the effects would be
borne by commercial and for-hire
vessels operating in northeast Florida
and Georgia, and would comprise a
significant portion of these vessels’ net
operating revenues. Moreover, most of
the effects would fall on commercial
vessels using vertical lines and on
headboats. However, it is highly
probable that the effects on headboats
are overestimated due to overestimation
of affected target trips by headboats.
Exempting from the closed area
prohibition the harvests of snappergrouper species, except red snapper,
caught with spearfishing gear or black
sea bass pots that have valid
identification tags would mitigate the
effects of the area closures on
commercial vessels. These effects are
already incorporated in the estimated
effects of the fishing prohibition on red
snapper and fishing prohibition on
snapper-grouper in the closed area.
Requiring the use of non-stainless
steel circle hooks when fishing for
snapper-grouper species with snappergrouper hook-and-line gear north of 28°
N. latitude is expected to increase the
fishing costs of some commercial and
for-hire vessels. Depending on the
physical structure of a fish’s mouth and
the way that the fish takes bait, the
circle hook requirement may reduce the
harvest of some desired species. The
potential cost increase and harvest
reduction cannot be estimated, although
they are deemed to be relatively small
considering that circle hooks are already
used on some vessels.
The estimated short-run reductions in
the net operating revenues of the
directly affected small entities,
particularly for-hire vessels, may be
considered substantial. Small entities
operating off of northeast Florida and
Georgia are expected to bear most of the
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
short-run adverse economic effects, with
these effects comprising a significant
portion of their net operating revenues.
For the various red snapper
management measures, there were 15
alternatives, and three sub-alternatives
considered. Four of the alternatives and
one of the sub-alternatives including:
(1) The red snapper prohibition; (2) the
snapper-grouper area closure; (3) the red
snapper ACL; and (4) the red snapper
AM, comprise the final action.
The first alternative for each of the
elements of the final action was the no
action alternative, which would not
conform to the Magnuson-Stevens Act
requirements to end the overfished and
overfishing conditions of red snapper.
The second alternative to the final
action would prohibit all commercial
and recreational harvest and possession
of red snapper year-round in the South
Atlantic EEZ. This alternative has been
determined to be insufficient to rebuild
the red snapper stock within the
specified timeframe due to discard
mortalities when fishing for cooccurring snapper-grouper species. The
third alternative to the final action
would close four logbook grids and
would close all water depths in the four
subject areas. This alternative would
result in larger short-run adverse
economic effects than the final action.
The fourth alternative to the final action
would close four logbook grids and
would close more water depths in the
shallower parts of the four subject areas.
This alternative would result in larger
short-run adverse economic effects than
the final action. The fifth alternative to
the final action is similar to the final
action, except that it would close four,
instead of three, logbook grids. This
alternative would result in slightly
larger short-run adverse economic
effects than the final action. The sixth
alternative to the final action would
close four logbook grids and would
close more water depths in the deeper
parts of the four subject areas. This
alternative would result in larger shortrun adverse economic effects than the
final action. The seventh alternative to
the final action differs from the final
action by closing four additional areas
and all water depths in the subject
seven areas. This alternative would
result in substantially larger short-run
adverse economic effects than the final
action. The eighth alternative to the
final action differs from the final action
by closing four additional areas and
more water depths in the shallower
parts of the subject seven areas. This
alternative would result in substantially
larger short-run adverse economic
effects than the final action. The ninth
alternative to the final action differs
E:\FR\FM\09DER4.SGM
09DER4
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES4
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
from the final action by closing four
additional areas. This alternative would
result in substantially larger short-run
adverse economic effects than the final
action. The tenth alternative to the final
action differs from the final action by
closing four additional areas and more
water depths in the deeper parts of the
subject seven areas. This alternative
would result in substantially larger
short-run adverse economic effects than
the final action. The eleventh alternative
to the final action would, in
combination with any of the alternatives
that would prohibit harvest and
possession of red snapper and close four
or seven areas to snapper-grouper
fishing, allow harvest and possession of
snapper-grouper species (except red
snapper) with bottom longline gear in
the closed areas deeper than 50 fathoms
(91 m). Relative to the final action, this
alternative would have smaller adverse
effects on commercial vessels and no
effects on for-hire vessels. Three subalternatives, including the final action,
were considered for vessels transiting
through the closed areas. The first subalternative would be less restrictive than
the final action by not requiring that
fishing gear be appropriately stowed
when vessels transit through the closed
areas. This alternative would slightly
mitigate the adverse economic effects of
the closed areas, but it could
compromise the effectiveness of
enforcing regulations in the closed
areas. The second sub-alternative to the
final action would be less restrictive
than the final action for vessels with
wreckfish on board. This alternative
would particularly avoid the potential
unintended adverse effects on vessels
fishing for wreckfish, but it could also
compromise the effectiveness of
enforcing regulations in the closed
areas.
Three alternatives, including the final
action, were considered for requiring
the use of circle hooks. The first
alternative to the final action, the no
action alternative, would not require the
use of circle hooks, and so would not
entail any additional fishing cost. On
the other hand, it would not take
advantage of the potential afforded by
circle hooks in reducing discard and
bycatch mortality of red snapper,
particularly in the center of the red
snapper fishing area. The second
alternative to the final action would
require the use of circle hooks
throughout the South Atlantic EEZ and
not just north of 28° N. latitude, as in
the final action. This alternative could
entail higher fishing costs than the final
action. It could also lower vessel
revenues when some species cannot be
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:39 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
effectively caught with circle hooks,
particularly in the southern areas where
red snapper harvest is relatively low.
In addition to the foregoing actions,
Amendment 17A also considered
various alternatives for modifying the
MSY proxy and establishing a
rebuilding schedule, a rebuilding
strategy, and a monitoring program for
red snapper.
The Council elected to take no action
to modify the status quo FMSY proxy for
red snapper, which is F30%SPR. The final
action on rebuilding strategy for red
snapper would define a rebuilding
strategy that sets the rebuilding goal
equal to SSBMSY and sets the catch rate
equal to FOY, which is 98 percent FMSY
(98%F30%SPR), and specify an ACL based
on landings, equal to zero in 2010 and
beyond 2010 until modified. OY at
equilibrium would be 2,425,000 lb
(1,099,961 kg) whole weight. The final
action on monitoring programs is to
establish a fishery-independent
monitoring program to track the
progress of red snapper. Sampling
would include deployment of chevron
traps, cameras, and snapper-grouper
hook-and-line at randomly selected
stations.
The Council considered modifying
the status quo FMSY proxy for red
snapper at the advice of their SSC.
Specifically, they evaluated the impacts
of adopting a more conservative proxy
of F40%SPR, which would provide more
assurance that overfishing would be
ended and the stock rebuilt within the
specified timeframe. However, after
thoroughly considering the implications
associated with this more conservative
proxy, as well as input from their SSC
and NMFS, they elected to take no
action to change the status quo
definition of MSY. Amendment 17A
specifies the numerical value associated
with this definition as 2,431,000 lbs
(ww) based on the most recent,
completed, red snapper stock
assessment at the time of final Council
action (SEDAR 15 2008). Instead, the
Council recommended that the SEFSC
conduct a comprehensive review of how
FMSY proxies should be applied across
all southeastern fisheries and are
considering developing a more generic
amendment to evaluate changing the
MSY/MSY proxy for red snapper and
other species, because it would allow
the Council to achieve some level of
consistency, where applicable, in
defining MSY/MSY proxies across many
species. Four alternatives, including the
final action, were considered for the red
snapper rebuilding schedule. The first
alternative to the final action, the no
action alternative, would not define a
rebuilding schedule for red snapper.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
76887
Considering that a previous rebuilding
schedule expired in 2006 and the stock
is overfished, this alternative would not
meet the Magnuson-Stevens Act
requirements. The second alternative to
the final action would define a
rebuilding schedule equal to 15 years,
which is the shortest possible period to
rebuild in the absence of fishing
mortality. Even if retention of red
snapper is prohibited, red snapper
would still be caught since they have
temporal and spatial coincidence with
other species fishermen target. Because
release mortality is estimated to be very
high for red snapper, a 15-year
rebuilding time period would require
most of the EEZ to be closed to fishing
for a majority of the snapper-grouper
species to eliminate all incidental
mortality of red snapper. The significant
and irreversible socioeconomic impacts
of such an action, which may or may
not be recouped in the long run, make
a 15-year schedule impracticable. The
third alternative to the final action
would define a rebuilding schedule
equal to 25 years, which is the midpoint between the shortest possible (15
years) and maximum recommended (35
years) timeframe to rebuild the stock.
This alternative would require more
stringent regulations in the short run
and thus more short-run adverse
economic effects than the final action.
Economic analyses indicate there is a
fairly low level of likelihood that the
future benefits of recovering the red
snapper stock more quickly would
outweigh the short-term costs to the red
snapper fleet and the larger snappergrouper fleet associated with the more
restrictive regulations required by
shorter rebuilding schedules.
Nine alternatives, including the final
action, were considered for the
rebuilding strategy, including the ACL
and AM. With the exception of the no
action alternative, each alternative
includes two sub-alternatives for the
ACL, and each ACL in turn includes
three alternatives for the AM. The three
AM alternatives, which all include
monitoring programs, are identical for
all alternatives and sub-alternatives, so
they do not merit additional discussions
here.
The rebuilding strategy is closely
linked to the proxy for FMSY since the
goal is to rebuild the stock to its
reproductive capacity at MSY (SSBMSY).
The current MSY definition requires a
76 percent reduction in total mortality
of red snapper in order to end
overfishing and rebuild the stock.
Because the Council used a tiered
approach in the development of
Amendment 17A, maintaining the status
quo FMSY proxy influenced the suite of
E:\FR\FM\09DER4.SGM
09DER4
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES4
76888
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
rebuilding strategy alternatives from
which the Council could choose a
preferred. Thus, the range of applicable
alternatives was ultimately narrowed to
those based on the status quo FMSY
proxy of F30%SPR (rebuilding strategy
Alternatives 6–9). Rebuilding strategy
Alternatives 2–5 are based on an FMSY
proxy of F40%SPR, and therefore, became
technically inconsistent with red
snapper management reference points
after the Council decided to take no
action to modify the FMSY proxy. The
Council chose a rebuilding strategy that
sets the rebuilding goal equal to SSBMSY
and sets the catch rate equal to FOY,
which is 98%FMSY (98%F30%SPR), with
an ACL equal to zero based on landings
only. Under this rebuilding strategy, the
fishery would have a 53 percent chance
of rebuilding to SSBMSY on schedule.
The first alternative to the final
action, the no action alternative, would
not specify an ACL and so would not
meet the Magnuson-Stevens Act
requirements. In addition, it would set
the rebuilding catch rate equal to FOY at
a level equivalent to 85 percent F40%SPR
such that OY at equilibrium equals
2,196,000 lb (996,089 kg) whole weight,
which is technically inconsistent with
the Council’s decision to maintain the
status quo FMSY proxy of F30%SPR. The
second alternative to the final action
would define a red snapper rebuilding
strategy that sets FOY at a level
equivalent to 85 percent F40%SPR such
that OY at equilibrium equals 2,199,000
lb (997,450 kg) whole weight, which is
technically inconsistent with the
Council’s decision to maintain the
status quo FMSY proxy of F30%SPR. The
first sub-alternative would base the ACL
on landings, with the ACL equal to zero
in 2010. This is identical to the final
action. The second sub-alternative
would base the ACL on total removal,
with the ACL equal to 89,000 lb (40,370
kg) whole weight in 2010. This would
still require prohibition of red snapper
harvest by both the commercial and
recreational sectors. In addition, this
would require monitoring of dead
discards so that total removal would not
exceed the ACL. The difficulty of
monitoring dead discards, together with
the likelihood that self-reported
discards would be understated, raises
concerns regarding the eventual
effectiveness of the rebuilding strategy.
The third alternative to the final action
would define a red snapper rebuilding
strategy that sets FOY at a level
equivalent to 75 percent F40%SPR such
that OY at equilibrium equals 2,104,000
lb (954,358 kg) whole weight, which is
technically inconsistent with the
Council’s decision to maintain the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:39 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
status quo FMSY proxy of F30%SPR. The
second sub-alternative would base the
ACL on total removal, with the ACL
equal to 79,000 lb (35,834 kg) whole
weight in 2010. This sub-alternative
raises similar issues of concern
associated with the monitoring of dead
discards. The fourth alternative to the
final action would define a red snapper
rebuilding strategy that sets FOY at a
level equivalent to 65 percent F40%SPR
such that OY at equilibrium equals
1,984,000 lb (899,927 kg) whole weight,
which is technically inconsistent with
the Council’s decision to maintain the
status quo FMSY proxy of F30%SPR. The
first sub-alternative is identical to the
final action. The second sub-alternative
would base the ACL on total removal,
with the ACL equal to 68,000 lb (30,844
kg) whole weight in 2010. This subalternative raises similar issues of
concern associated with the monitoring
of dead discards. The fifth alternative to
the final action would define a red
snapper rebuilding strategy that sets FOY
at a level equivalent to 97 percent
F40%SPR such that OY at equilibrium
equals 2,287,000 lb (1,037,366 kg) whole
weight, which is technically
inconsistent with the Council’s decision
to maintain the status quo FMSY proxy
of F30%SPR. The first sub-alternative is
identical to the final action. The second
sub-alternative would base the ACL on
total removal, with the ACL equal to
68,000 lb (30,844 kg) whole weight in
2010. This sub-alternative raises similar
issues of concern associated with the
monitoring of dead discards. The sixth
alternative to the final action would
define a red snapper rebuilding strategy
that sets FOY at a level equivalent to 85
percent F30%SPR such that OY at
equilibrium equals 2,392,000 lb
(1,084,993 kg) whole weight. This
alternative would imply more restrictive
measures than the final action in the
short run, resulting in larger short-run
adverse economic effects and
potentially lower long-run benefits
because of a lower OY. The first subalternative is identical to the final
action. The second sub-alternative
would base the ACL on total removal,
with the ACL equal to 125,000 lb
(56,699 kg) whole weight in 2010. This
sub-alternative raises similar issues of
concern associated with the monitoring
of dead discards, although the higher
ACL than that of previous subalternatives would tend to mitigate but
not erase such concerns. The seventh
alternative to the final action would
define a red snapper rebuilding strategy
that sets FOY at a level equivalent to 75
percent F30%SPR such that OY at
equilibrium equals 2,338,000 lb
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(1,060,499 kg) whole weight. This
alternative would imply more restrictive
measures in the short run, resulting in
lower short-run adverse economic
effects and potentially higher long-run
benefits because of a lower OY. The first
sub-alternative is identical to the final
action. The second sub-alternative
would base the ACL on total removal,
with the ACL equal to 111,000 lb
(50,349 kg) whole weight in 2010. This
sub-alternative raises similar issues of
concern associated with the monitoring
of dead discards, although the higher
ACL than that of some previous subalternatives would tend to mitigate but
not erase such concerns. The eighth
alternative to the final action would
define a red snapper rebuilding strategy
that sets FOY at a level equivalent to 65
percent F30%SPR such that OY at
equilibrium equals 2,257,000 lb
(1,023,758 kg) whole weight. This
alternative would imply more restrictive
measures than the final action in the
short run, resulting in lower short-run
adverse economic effects and
potentially lower long-run benefits
because of a lower OY. The first subalternative is identical to the final
action. The second sub-alternative
would base the ACL on total removal,
with the ACL equal to 97,000 lb (43,998
kg) whole weight in 2010. This subalternative raises similar issues of
concern associated with the monitoring
of dead discards, particularly that the
ACL is lower than that of some previous
sub-alternatives.
Three alternatives, including the final
action, were considered for the red
snapper monitoring program. The first
alternative, the no action alternative,
would not entail any additional cost by
utilizing existing data collection
programs. However, existing data
collection programs may not be
adequate to collect vital information on
red snapper during the time harvest of
the species is prohibited. The second
alternative to the final action would
establish a red snapper fisherydependent monitoring program
involving for-hire vessels. This
alternative offers some potential as does
the final action in collecting the needed
information on red snapper, especially
during the period when harvest of the
species is prohibited. Although the near
ideal approach is to combine this
alternative with the final action, funding
for both may not be available on a
continuing basis.
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 an FRFA, the agency
shall publish one or more guides to
E:\FR\FM\09DER4.SGM
09DER4
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES4
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
assist small entities in complying with
the rule, and shall designate such
publications as ‘‘small entity compliance
guides.’’ As part of this rulemaking
process, NMFS prepared a fishery
bulletin, which also serves as a small
entity compliance guide. The fishery
bulletin will be sent to all vessel permit
holders and permitted dealers in the
South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), there
is good cause to waive the 30-day delay
in effective date for the management
measures that implement the
prohibitions on harvest and possession
of red snapper in the South Atlantic.
Red snapper are overfished and
undergoing overfishing. An interim rule
implementing these measures was
promulgated on January 4, 2010 (74 FR
63673, December 4, 2009), extended on
June 3, 2010 (75 FR 27658, May 18,
2010), and will expire on December 5,
2010. The persons affected by these
management measures have been
provided with notice and the
opportunity to comment on these
measures via the public comment
period for the proposed interim rule,
Amendment 17A, and the proposed rule
for Amendment 17A, and they are aware
of the intent of the Council and NMFS
to continue the existing prohibitions
immediately upon expiration of the
interim rule. To prevent a lapse in these
prohibitions, amendments to § 622.32,
§ 622.37, § 622.39, and § 622.45 must
become effective on or before December
5, 2010.
A red snapper benchmark assessment
(SEDAR 24) was completed in late
October 2010, which provides
additional information on the
effectiveness of these prohibitions. The
assessment indicates that red snapper
are overfished and undergoing
overfishing and that the current harvest
prohibition for red snapper is providing
substantial protection to the stock.
Furthermore, the new assessment
indicates a strong year class entered the
fishery in 2006, and fishermen are
aware that there are more young red
snapper available than in previous
years. Therefore, should a lapse occur in
these prohibitions, it is expected that
there would be very high fishing
pressure on an unusually strong year
class, which needs to be protected to
help rebuild the stock. A lapse could
also lead to more severe harvest
reductions for the snapper-grouper
fishery as a whole with associated
adverse socioeconomic impacts. For all
of these reasons, a waiver of the 30-day
delay of effective date for these
measures is necessary.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:39 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 622
Fisheries, Fishing, Puerto Rico,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Virgin Islands.
Dated: November 30, 2010.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 50 CFR part 622 is amended
as follows:
■
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 § 622.32, paragraph (b)(3)(vi) is
added to read as follows:
■
§ 622.32 Prohibited and limited-harvest
species.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(3) * * *
(vi) Red snapper may not be harvested
or possessed in or from the South
Atlantic EEZ. Such fish caught in the
South Atlantic EEZ must be released
immediately with a minimum of harm.
In addition, for a person on board a
vessel for which a valid Federal
commercial or charter vessel/headboat
permit for South Atlantic snappergrouper has been issued, the provisions
of this closure apply in the South
Atlantic, regardless of where such fish
are harvested, i.e., in State or Federal
waters.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. In § 622.35, paragraph (l) is added
to read as follows:
§ 622.35 Atlantic EEZ seasonal and/or area
closures.
*
*
*
*
*
(l) Area closure for South Atlantic
snapper-grouper. (1) No person may
harvest or possess a South Atlantic
snapper-grouper in or from the South
Atlantic EEZ in the closed area defined
in paragraph (l)(2) of this section, except
a person harvesting South Atlantic
snapper-grouper (see § 622.32(b)(3) for
the current prohibitions on the harvest
and possession of red snapper and other
snapper-grouper species) with
spearfishing gear or with a sea bass pot
that has a valid identification tag issued
by the RA attached, as specified in
§ 622.6(b)(1)(i)(B). This prohibition on
possession does not apply to a person
aboard a vessel that is transiting through
the closed area with fishing gear
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
76889
appropriately stowed as specified in
paragraph (l)(3) of this section.
(2) The area closure for South Atlantic
snapper-grouper is bounded by rhumb
lines connecting, in order, the following
points:
Point
A ........................
B ........................
C ........................
D ........................
E ........................
F ........................
G .......................
H ........................
I .........................
J ........................
K ........................
A ........................
North lat.
28°00′00″
28°00′00″
29°31′40″
30°02′03″
31°00′00″
31°00′00″
30°52′54″
30°27′19″
29°54′31″
29°24′24″
28°27′20″
28°00′00″
West long.
80°00′00″
80°10′57″
80°30′34″
80°50′45″
80°35′19″
80°00′00″
80°00′00″
80°11′41″
80°15′51″
80°13′32″
80°00′00″
80°00′00″
(3) For the purpose of paragraph (l)(1)
of this section, continuous transiting or
transit through means that a fishing
vessel crosses the area closure on a
constant heading, along a continuous
straight line course, while underway,
making way, not anchored, and by
means of a source of power at all times
(not including drifting by means of the
prevailing water current or weather
conditions). Fishing gear appropriately
stowed means—
(i) A longline may be left on the drum
if all gangions and hooks are
disconnected and stowed below deck.
Hooks cannot be baited. All buoys must
be disconnected from the gear; however,
buoys may remain on deck.
(ii) A trawl or try net may remain on
deck, but trawl doors must be
disconnected from such net and must be
secured.
(iii) A gillnet, stab net, or trammel net
must be left on the drum. Any
additional such nets not attached to the
drum must be stowed below deck.
(iv) Terminal gear (i.e., hook, leader,
sinker, flasher, or bait) used with an
automatic reel, bandit gear, buoy gear,
trolling gear, handline, or rod and reel
must be disconnected and stowed
separately from such fishing gear. A rod
and reel must be removed from the rod
holder and stowed securely on or below
deck.
(v) A crustacean trap or golden crab
trap cannot be baited. All buoys must be
disconnected from the gear; however,
buoys may remain on deck.
(vi) Other stowage methods may be
authorized by the Regional
Administrator in the future. These
would be published in the Federal
Register and become effective at that
time.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. In § 622.37, paragraph (e)(1)(v) is
revised to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\09DER4.SGM
09DER4
76890
§ 622.37
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Size limits.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
(v) Red snapper—20 inches (50.8 cm),
TL, however, see ’ 622.32(b)(3)(vii) for
the current prohibition on the harvest
and possession of red snapper.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. In § 622.39, paragraph (d)(1)(iv) and
(d)(1)(viii) are revised and paragraph
(d)(1)(ix) is added to read as follows:
§ 622.39
Bag and possession limits.
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(1) * * *
(iv) Snappers, combined—10.
However, excluded from this 10-fish bag
limit are cubera snapper, measuring 30
inches (76.2 cm), TL, or larger, in the
South Atlantic off Florida, and red
snapper and vermilion snapper. (See
§ 622.32(b)(3)(vii) for the prohibition on
harvest and possession of red snapper
and § 622.32(c)(2) for limitations on
cubera snapper measuring 30 inches
(76.2 cm), TL, or larger, in or from the
South Atlantic EEZ off Florida.)
*
*
*
*
*
(viii) South Atlantic snapper-grouper,
combined—20. However, excluded from
this 20-fish bag limit are tomtate, blue
runner, and those specified in
paragraphs (d)(1)(i) through (vii), and
(ix) of this section.
(ix) No red snapper may be retained.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. In § 622.41, the introductory text in
paragraph (n) is revised and paragraph
(n)(2) is added to read as follows:
possessed in the South Atlantic, i.e.,
State or Federal waters, by a vessel for
which a Federal commercial permit for
South Atlantic snapper-grouper has
been issued.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2010–30394 Filed 12–3–10; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
*
§ 622.41
Species specific limitations.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES4
*
*
*
*
*
(n) Required gear in the South
Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery. For a
person on board a vessel to harvest or
possess South Atlantic snapper-grouper
in or from the South Atlantic EEZ, the
vessel must possess on board and such
person must use the gear as specified in
paragraphs (n)(1) and (n)(2) of this
section.
*
*
*
*
*
(2) Non-stainless steel circle hooks.
Non-stainless steel circle hooks are
required to be used when fishing with
hook-and-line gear and natural baits
north of 28E N. lat.
■ 7. In § 622.45, paragraph (d)(10) is
added to read as follows:
§ 622.45 Restrictions on sale and
purchase.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(10) No person may sell or purchase
a red snapper harvested from or
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:39 Dec 08, 2010
Jkt 223001
50 CFR Part 622
[Docket No. 101124587–0586–01]
RIN 0648–BA47
Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of
Mexico, and South Atlantic; SnapperGrouper Fishery Off the South Atlantic
States; Emergency Rule To Delay
Effectiveness of the Snapper-Grouper
Area Closure
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Temporary rule; emergency
action.
AGENCY:
NMFS issues this temporary
rule to delay the effective date of the
area closure for snapper-grouper
specified in Amendment 17A to the
Fishery Management Plan for the
Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South
Atlantic Region (FMP). The area closure
will become effective on January 3,
2011, through the final rule that
implements Amendment 17A. A
Southeast Data Assessment and Review
(SEDAR) benchmark stock assessment
for red snapper (SEDAR 24) was just
completed on October 25, 2010, and was
reviewed by the South Atlantic Fishery
Management Council’s (Council’s)
Scientific and Statistical Committee
(SSC) during its meeting from November
9–11, 2010. The new stock assessment
still shows red snapper to be overfished
and undergoing overfishing, however,
the rate of overfishing found in SEDAR
24 is less than the rate of overfishing
found in the previous stock assessment
(SEDAR 15). The SSC concluded that,
based on SEDAR 24, the snappergrouper area closure approved in
Amendment 17A is more conservative
that what is needed to end overfishing
of red snapper. Temporarily delaying
the effective date of the snapper-grouper
area closure specified in Amendment
17A will allow the Council time to
respond to the new stock assessment
information through a regulatory
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
amendment, which will be discussed at
the Council’s December meeting. This
emergency action is necessary to
mitigate negative socioeconomic
impacts associated with the snappergrouper area closure on South Atlantic
snapper-grouper fishermen and to
ensure the area closure is based upon
the best scientific information available.
DATES: This rule is effective January 3,
2010 through June 1, 2011, unless
NMFS publishes a superseding
document in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by ‘‘0648–BA47’’, by any one
of the following methods:
• Electronic submissions: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal https://
www.regulations.gov.
• Fax: 727–824–5308. Attn: Kate
Michie.
• Mail: Kate Michie, Southeast
Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th
Avenue S., St. Petersburg, FL 33701.
Instructions: No comments will be
posted for public viewing until after the
comment period has closed. All
comments received are a part of the
public record and will generally be
posted to https://www.regulation.gov
without change. All Personal Identifying
Information (for example, name,
address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by
the commenter may be publicly
accessible. Do not submit Confidential
Business Information or otherwise
sensitive or protected information.
To submit comments through the
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov, enter ANOAA–
NMFS–2010–0243’’ in the keyword
search, then check the box labeled
‘‘Select to find documents accepting
comments or submissions’’, then select
‘‘Send a Comment or Submission.’’
NMFS will accept anonymous
comments (enter N/A in the required
fields, if you wish to remain
anonymous). Attachments to electronic
comments will be accepted in Microsoft
Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe
PDF file formats only.
Copies of the supporting
documentation for this emergency rule,
as well as Amendment 17A and its
accompanying analyses, may be
obtained from Kate Michie, Southeast
Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th
Avenue S., St. Petersburg, FL 33701.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate
Michie, telephone 727–824–5305;
e-mail Kate.Michie@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The South
Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery is
managed under the FMP. The FMP was
prepared by the Council and is
implemented by NMFS under the
E:\FR\FM\09DER4.SGM
09DER4
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 236 (Thursday, December 9, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76874-76890]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30394]
[[Page 76873]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part IV
Department of Commerce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 622
Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic;
Snapper-Grouper Fishery Off the Southern Atlantic States; Amendment
17A; Emergency Rule To Delay Effectiveness of the Snapper-Grouper Area
Closure; Final Rule and Temporary Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 75 , No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 76874]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 622
[Docket No. 0907271170-0576-03]
RIN 0648-AY10
Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic;
Snapper-Grouper Fishery Off the Southern Atlantic States; Amendment 17A
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues this final rule to implement Amendment 17A to the
Fishery Management Plan for the Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South
Atlantic Region (FMP), as prepared and submitted by the South Atlantic
Fishery Management Council (Council). This final rule establishes an
annual catch limit (ACL) of zero for red snapper, which means all
harvest and possession of red snapper in or from the South Atlantic
exclusive economic zone (EEZ) is prohibited, and for a vessel with a
Federal commercial or charter vessel/headboat permit for South Atlantic
snapper-grouper, harvest and possession of red snapper is prohibited in
or from State or Federal waters. This rule also implements an area
closure for South Atlantic snapper-grouper that extends from southern
Georgia to northern Florida where harvest and possession of all
snapper-grouper species is prohibited (except when fishing with black
sea bass pots or spearfishing gear for species other than red snapper),
and requires the use of non-stainless steel circle hooks when fishing
for snapper-grouper species with hook and line gear north of 28[deg] N.
latitude in the South Atlantic EEZ. Additionally, Amendment 17A
establishes a rebuilding plan for red snapper and requires a monitoring
program as the accountability measure (AM) for red snapper. The
intended effects of this rule are to end overfishing of South Atlantic
red snapper and rebuild the stock.
DATES: This rule is effective December 3, 2010, except for the
amendments to Sec. 622.35, which are effective January 3, 2011, and
the amendments to Sec. 622.41, which are effective March 3, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS),
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA), and Record of Decision
(ROD) may be obtained from Kate Michie, Southeast Regional Office,
NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701: telephone 727-
824-5305; fax 727-824-5308.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate Michie, telephone: 727-824-5305;
fax: 727-824-5308; e-mail: Kate.Michie@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery
is managed under the FMP. The FMP was prepared by the Council and
implemented by NMFS under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) by regulations
at 50 CFR part 622.
Background
On July 29, 2010, NMFS published a notice of availability for
Amendment 17A and requested public comment (75 FR 44753). On August 13,
2010, NMFS published the proposed rule to implement Amendment 17A and
requested public comment (75 FR 49447). NMFS approved Amendment 17A on
October 27, 2010. The rationale for the measures contained in Amendment
17A is provided in the amendment and in the preamble to the proposed
rule and is not repeated here.
Effectiveness of Management Measures
Prohibition on Harvest and Possession of Red Snapper
The prohibition on the harvest and possession of red snapper in the
South Atlantic EEZ, and in State or Federal waters for a person on
board a vessel for which a valid Federal commercial or charter vessel/
headboat permit for South Atlantic snapper-grouper has been issued, and
the prohibition on the sale or purchase of red snapper harvested from
or possessed in the South Atlantic (including State and Federal waters)
for a vessel for which a valid Federal commercial permit for South
Atlantic snapper-grouper has been issued, will be effective December 3,
2010.
The interim rule implementing these red snapper prohibitions will
expire on December 5, 2010. Therefore, to prevent a lapse in these
prohibitions, these measures must become effective on or before
December 5, 2010.
A red snapper benchmark assessment was completed through the
Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR) process in late October
2010, which provides additional information on the effectiveness of
these prohibitions. A final report of the assessment was published on
October 25, 2010, and is available at https://www.sefsc.noaa.gov/sedar/download/SEDAR%2024_SAR_October%202010_26.pdf?id=DOCUMENT. The
assessment indicates that red snapper are overfished and undergoing
overfishing and that the current harvest prohibition for red snapper is
providing substantial protection to the stock. A lapse could also lead
to more severe harvest reductions for the snapper-grouper fishery as a
whole with associated adverse socioeconomic impacts.
Snapper-Grouper Area Closure
The new benchmark assessment (SEDAR 24) has recently been completed
for red snapper and has been reviewed by the Council's Scientific and
Statistical Committee (SSC) and will be considered by the Council at
their meeting in December 2010. The assessment has determined that red
snapper are overfished and experiencing overfishing, but the stock is
in better condition than indicated by the previous assessment (SEDAR
15) with the magnitude of overfishing less than what was indicated in
the previous assessment. Results of the new assessment suggest less
restrictive management measures, such as a smaller area closure, would
be adequate to end overfishing of red snapper. Therefore, NMFS is
considering using the emergency action authority under section 305(c)
of the Magnuson-Stevens Act to address the implications of the new
assessment and to provide the Council time to determine whether
modifications should be made to the red snapper management measures
based upon the results of SEDAR 24, if appropriate.
Circle Hooks
NMFS is delaying the requirement in Sec. 622.41(n) to use non-
stainless steel circle hooks when fishing for South Atlantic snapper-
grouper with hook-and-line gear and natural baits north of 28[deg] N.
latitude for 3 months. The circle hook requirement will be effective
March 3, 2011. This delay in effectiveness will provide additional time
for manufacturers and retail outlets to prepare for the demand for
these newly required products and will provide time for commercial and
recreational fishers to comply with these new gear requirements.
Comments and Responses
NMFS received 138 comments on Amendment 17A and the proposed rule,
including 1 comment from a State agency, 1 comment from a Federal
agency, 1 petition signed by 45 individuals, 5 letters from non-
governmental organizations, one of which was endorsed by 30,388
[[Page 76875]]
individuals who support approval of Amendment 17A, and 130 comments
from individuals (including 41 copies of an identical postcard from an
Amendment 17A opposition postcard campaign). Of these comments, 111
expressed opposition to Amendment 17A, 24 expressed support, and 3
comments were unrelated to Amendment 17A actions. Specific comments
relevant to the actions contained in the amendment and the rule as well
as NMFS' respective responses, are summarized below.
Comment 1: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and 4 non-
governmental organizations are concerned that the rebuilding schedule
favors fishermen to the maximum extent, rather than balancing benefits
to the resource and socioeconomic impacts on the fishing community. The
EPA suggests that fishing pressure from fisheries for species that co-
occur with red snapper should be reduced in order to reduce red snapper
bycatch, and red snapper bycatch should be kept as landings and counted
towards the co-occurring species' fishery quotas. Additionally, the EPA
suggests that adaptive management measures should be applied over the
recovery period; however, such adaptive management measures should
balance impacts on the fishing community and on the resource.
Response: Thirty-five years is the maximum rebuilding schedule
recommended for South Atlantic red snapper based on the Magnuson-
Stevens Act National Standard 1 Guidelines and is consistent with the
Magnuson-Stevens Act mandate to rebuild the fishery as quickly as
possible, taking into account the status and biology of the stock, the
needs of fishing communities, and other factors. The Council chose this
schedule recognizing that based on the information provided to them
from SEDAR 15, a total red snapper harvest prohibition alone was not
sufficiently restrictive to end overfishing and that shorter rebuilding
schedules would require impractical reductions in red snapper bycatch.
NMFS acknowledges the cumulative effects of the Amendment 17A
proposed regulations, recent fisheries regulations, and other
circumstances other than regulations (rise in fuel costs, decrease in
dock space, national economic recession leading to a decrease in for-
hire trips, etc.) will likely have negative economic and social effects
on snapper-grouper fishermen. By choosing the 35-year rebuilding
schedule, negative socioeconomic impacts will be minimized to the
extent practicable while still achieving conservation objectives,
consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
The shortest possible rebuilding schedule (15 years) would require
most or all of the EEZ and State waters be closed to fishing over the
15-year period to eliminate all incidental mortality of red snapper.
The significant and irreversible socioeconomic impacts of such an
action makes a 15-year rebuilding schedule impractical. While the 25-
year schedule evaluated in the amendment would have less adverse
socioeconomic effects when compared to a 15-year rebuilding plan, such
effects are not warranted by the limited biological benefits of
achieving the rebuilding goal just 10 years earlier than under the 35-
year rebuilding schedule.
It is not possible to implement a shorter rebuilding schedule
without significantly increasing the magnitude of negative
socioeconomic impacts. Because red snapper are widely distributed and
co-occur with other snapper-grouper species, even slight increases in
the rate at which the red snapper stock rebuilds greatly increases the
need for more restrictive management measures. Economic analyses
indicate it is unlikely that the future benefits of rebuilding the red
snapper stock more quickly would outweigh the short-term costs
associated with the more restrictive regulations required by shorter
rebuilding schedules.
The Council is exploring, through Amendment 22 to the Snapper-
Grouper FMP, alternative strategies for managing red snapper catch and
bycatch as the stock rebuilds, which could include a bycatch retention
policy if that is determined to be a feasible option.
Comment 2: Two commenters expressed support for the exemption to
fish with black sea bass pots within the snapper-grouper closed area.
One commenter expressed opposition to this exemption. The EPA
questioned how ``ghost fishing'' with black sea bass pots was addressed
in the Council's decision to allow the use of black sea bass pots
within the closed area.
Response: The majority of the black sea bass component of the
snapper-grouper fishery is north of the closed area, and only a small
percentage of red snapper are taken in black sea bass pots. Therefore,
the Council determined this gear type was sufficiently selective so
that it may be deployed within the closed area without adversely
affecting the rebuilding efforts of red snapper. Allowing this gear
also helps to offset, to some degree, some of the negative
socioeconomic impacts expected from the area closure.
During its March 2010 meeting, after the draft environmental impact
statement (DEIS) was filed with the EPA for publication in the Federal
Register, the Council chose not to exempt the use of black sea bass
pots within the closed area, citing concerns about the ``ghost
fishing'' that takes place in lost pots and the potential interactions
with protected species. However, at its June 2010 meeting, the Council
modified its decision to allow the use of black sea bass pots, because
they are a highly selective gear type that could be used to fish for
species other than red snapper within the closed area without affecting
red snapper rebuilding. Additionally, the Council is developing
Amendment 18A to the FMP, which includes actions to limit the number of
black sea bass pots allowed per vessel, thereby limiting participation
in the black sea bass component of the snapper-grouper fishery, and
requires pots to be returned to port at the completion of a fishing
trip. If approved, these controls should limit effort shift into the
black sea bass component of the snapper-grouper fishery, minimizing the
occurrence of black sea bass pot ``ghost fishing'' on snapper-grouper
species, and interactions with protected species.
Comment 3: Two commenters expressed support for the exemption to
use spearfishing gear within the snapper-grouper closed area when
fishing for species other than red snapper. One commenter expressed
opposition to this exemption. The EPA expressed concerns with the
exemption related to potential collection of undersized fish, exceeding
quotas, and spearfishing injury.
Response: Overall, spearfishing gear is considered a highly
selective gear type that is least likely to produce red snapper bycatch
or bycatch mortality, and it is the most selective gear type available
if the user is well-versed in species identification. Therefore, the
use of spearfishing gear within the closed area for species other than
red snapper is unlikely to adversely affect red snapper rebuilding
efforts, while helping to offset, to a small degree, some of the
negative socioeconomic impacts expected from the area closure.
Amendment 17A analyses conclude that spearfishing does have the
potential to remove greater biomass of reef fish than rod and reel
fishing. Spearfishing has been shown to result in the removal of larger
fish from the population than with rod and reel. According to the
biological impact analysis in Amendment 17A, removing larger fish from
a population can have a negative effect on overall ecosystem health by
altering the composition of the natural
[[Page 76876]]
communities; however, any such effect is expected to be more than
offset by the conservation benefits derived from the hook-and-line gear
prohibition within the area closure. If the use of spearfishing gear
increases as a result of this exemption, it may be reasonable to assume
incidences of spear-related injuries may also increase. However, the
Council determined the potential negative impacts of allowing the use
of spearfishing gear did not outweigh the potential offset of negative
socioeconomic impacts that may result from the area closure.
Comment 4: Eighteen commenters expressed support for the
requirement to use non-stainless steel circle hooks north of 28[deg] N.
latitude with live bait. Three commenters expressed opposition to the
circle hook requirement, citing that it would inhibit effective harvest
of certain species and would incur a significant economic burden. The
EPA expressed support of the requirement, but stated that regulatory
discard mortalities are often related to barotrauma caused by rapid
surfacing rather than hooking injuries, and certain species such as
yellowtail snapper and mangrove snapper are not readily caught with
circle hooks.
Response: Many studies indicate that hooking injuries are a major
source of mortality in red snapper. Requiring circle hooks in the area
of the South Atlantic EEZ north of 28[deg] N. latitude may help reduce
discard mortality of red snapper where they are most abundant, although
the exact amount is not quantifiable at this time. However, the Council
concluded that taking advantage of any reasonable method to reduce red
snapper bycatch mortality is warranted considering its overfished
condition.
Barotrauma is also cited as a significant cause of bycatch
mortality for red snapper. NMFS previously considered a Council-
approved measure to use venting tools for snapper-grouper species to
reduce bycatch mortality caused by barotraumas in Amendment 16 to the
FMP. The measure requiring the use of venting tools was disapproved
based on data indicating the benefits of venting are not clear for all
species, including red snapper, and venting could potentially cause
harm in some cases. NMFS determined that additional guidance is needed
to identify species that would benefit from venting to ensure the
maximum benefit is provided to these species. If future research on the
use of venting tools, and/or any other barotrauma mitigation methods,
indicate red snapper would benefit from the required use of such tools
or techniques, the Council has the option to consider the issue again
in a future FMP amendment.
During the development of Amendment 17A, some constituents
expressed concern that circle hooks would preclude them from being able
to catch some specific fish species including yellowtail snapper and
mangrove snapper due to the physical structure of a fish's mouth and
the way the fish takes bait. The majority of the species of concern are
landed south of 28[deg] N. latitude where red snapper are less
abundant; therefore, the Council chose to limit the circle hook
requirement to areas north of 28[deg] N. latitude.
Comment 5: The EPA supported fishery-independent monitoring for red
snapper, as well as fishery-dependent monitoring where fishermen work
together with researchers.
Response: The Council chose to require implementation of a fishery-
independent monitoring program for red snapper to augment and expand
the existing fishery-independent data program for snapper-grouper
because fishery-independent data can be less variable and more
verifiable than fishery-dependent data. The choice to utilize a
fishery-independent monitoring program for red snapper does not in any
way infer that fishery-dependent data collection programs may not be
used for monitoring red snapper in the South Atlantic. The AM chosen by
the Council and approved by NMFS includes a fishery-dependent data
gathering component that will be used to monitor catch per unit effort
(CPUE) throughout the rebuilding process. Furthermore, it is likely
that in the future, some research and monitoring efforts may be
designed to include hybrid sampling programs that use both fishery-
independent and fishery-dependent data gathering methods.
Comment 6: If the approved rebuilding schedule is not adequate in
minimizing socioeconomic impacts, the EPA recommended additional
offsets be considered by NMFS and the Council for fishery participants
of all demographics, particularly any affected minority and low-income
fishermen.
Response: Amendment 17A contains a detailed analysis of potential
socioeconomic impacts of the actions to end overfishing of red snapper
and rebuild the stock to a sustainable level. The Council has chosen,
and NMFS has approved, alternatives intended to minimize, to the extent
practicable, adverse socioeconomic impacts as required under the
Magnuson-Stevens Act. A Fishery Impact Statement (FIS) and a Social
Impact Analysis (SIA) were completed as part of the Amendment 17A
development process. The SIA included an analysis of potential impacts
of this rule on low-income and minority groups. The full FIS and SIA
can be found in Appendix U of Amendment 17A. The alternatives chosen
are also projected to effectively end overfishing of South Atlantic red
snapper and rebuild the population within the designated rebuilding
timeframe.
A new benchmark assessment for red snapper conducted through the
SEDAR process (SEDAR 24; 2010) indicates the stock is undergoing
overfishing and is overfished to lesser degrees than estimated in the
previous SEDAR assessment (SEDAR 15) and in Amendment 17A. Therefore,
additional action may be appropriate to further minimize the
unavoidable adverse economic impacts of ending overfishing and
rebuilding the stock. The Council will review the results of SEDAR 24
at their December 2010 meeting and may propose additional actions at
that time, as appropriate.
Comment 7: The EPA and one individual requested a discussion of
potential impacts of the Deepwater Horizon/BP oil spill event on red
snapper and the fishing community.
Response: Thus far, there has been no indication that oil from the
Deepwater Horizon/BP oil spill, which occurred on April 20, 2010, has
made its way into South Atlantic waters. The spill remained
concentrated in the northern Gulf of Mexico before it was capped and is
no longer considered a significant threat for dispersing oil.
Therefore, implementation of Amendment 17A is not expected to be
impacted by oil spill-related events that have transpired in the Gulf
of Mexico over the past 7 months.
Comment 8: Seventeen commenters specifically oppose the prohibition
on harvest and possession of red snapper in the South Atlantic EEZ and
in State waters for vessels holding Federal snapper-grouper permits.
Five commenters specifically support the prohibition on red snapper
harvest.
Response: The 2008 red snapper SEDAR stock assessment (SEDAR 15)
concluded that red snapper are overfished and undergoing overfishing.
When a determination is made that a stock is experiencing overfishing
or is overfished, the Magnuson-Stevens Act requires NMFS and the
Council to develop a plan to end overfishing and rebuild the stock. The
prohibition on red snapper harvest and possession implemented through
Amendment 17A is required to meet this statutory mandate. SEDAR 15
indicates a harvest
[[Page 76877]]
prohibition in State and Federal waters alone is not capable of ending
overfishing because many red snapper taken incidentally when harvesting
other snapper-grouper species do not survive capture and release. For
this reason, NMFS also is approving the Council's proposal to establish
an area closure within which all harvest and possession of snapper-
grouper is prohibited (except when fishing with black sea bass pots or
spearfishing gear for species other than red snapper). These management
measures are expected to end overfishing as required by the Magnuson-
Stevens Act.
Comment 9: Twenty-two commenters specifically oppose the snapper-
grouper area closure, and three commenters support it.
Response: Based on the results of the SEDAR 15 benchmark
assessment, prohibiting the harvest of red snapper alone will not end
overfishing because red snapper are often incidentally captured and
discarded while fishermen are targeting co-occurring species.
Additionally, the release mortality of red snapper is very high.
Therefore, to sufficiently reduce the overall mortality of red snapper
enough to end overfishing and rebuild the stock, NMFS approved a
prohibition on all harvest and possession of red snapper in the South
Atlantic EEZ and also approved an area closure within which harvest and
possession of all snapper-grouper species is prohibited except when
using spearfishing gear or black sea bass pots to fish for species
other than red snapper.
The area closure alternative proposed by the Council and approved
by NMFS encompasses an area where large amounts of red snapper are
harvested. Furthermore, the preferred area closure minimized to the
extent practicable the unavoidable adverse economic impacts of ending
overfishing as required by the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Amendment 17A also
includes an action to require a fishery-independent monitoring program
to track the progress of rebuilding efforts, in order to reduce the
size of the area closure and allow the harvest of red snapper as the
stock rebuilds.
A new benchmark assessment just completed for red snapper, SEDAR
24, indicates the stock is undergoing overfishing and is overfished to
a lesser degree than estimated in SEDAR 15. Therefore, additional
action may be appropriate to further minimize the unavoidable adverse
economic impacts of ending overfishing and rebuilding the stock. The
Council will review the results of SEDAR 24 at their December 2010
meeting and may propose additional actions at that time, as
appropriate.
Comment 10: Two commenters stated the proposed area closure could
push effort inshore or offshore and thus negatively impact juvenile
populations of red snapper and other coastal fisheries, and/or
deepwater snapper-grouper species.
Response: The extent to which effort may shift as a result of the
proposed area closure is not known so it is not possible to quantify
the impact of such a shift on snapper-grouper species. However, any
such effort shift is not expected to have a significant adverse impact
on red snapper rebuilding or on the status of other deepwater snapper-
grouper species. The red snapper harvest prohibition is expected to
reduce the handling time of red snapper, as fishermen will no longer
need to measure fish to determine if they are of legal size. If fishing
effort moves closer to shore, then it is expected that the survival of
discarded red snapper and other snapper-grouper species would be
greater than for fish discarded in deeper water because depth-related
discard mortality would be less in shallow water. The model used to
develop the closed area alternatives was designed to account for
reduced inshore release mortality in the closed area as well as in all
areas around the closure.
Effort shifts into water deeper than the closed area may be
mitigated by the deepwater snapper-grouper closure that is proposed in
Amendment 17B to the FMP. (Amendment 17B and proposed implementing
regulations are available for public comment through November 22, 2010,
and November 26, 2010, respectively.) This proposed deepwater closure
would prohibit harvest of six deepwater snapper-grouper species beyond
a depth of 240 ft (73 m), which is also the seaward boundary of the
Amendment 17A area closure. These species include snowy grouper,
blueline tilefish, yellowedge grouper, misty grouper, queen snapper,
and silk snapper. In addition to prohibiting harvest and possession of
the previously mentioned species, Amendment 17B also prohibits the
possession and harvest of speckled hind and warsaw grouper. If
Amendment 17B is approved and implemented, prohibiting the harvest and
possession of these species beyond a depth of 240 ft (73 m) greatly
diminishes the incentive to fish for deepwater snapper-grouper.
Comment 11: One commenter expressed concern regarding a potential
influx of imported seafood as a result of the red snapper harvest
restrictions.
Response: The prohibition on the harvest and possession of red
snapper and the closure of certain areas in the South Atlantic to
snapper-grouper fishing under Amendment 17A are estimated to result in
an annual reduction of approximately 213,000 lb (96,615 kg) of
commercially harvested snapper-grouper, of which about 120,000 lb
(54,431 kg) are red snapper, based on expected harvest resulting from
regulations implemented through Amendment 16 to the FMP. Total imports
of snappers and groupers into the U.S. have been increasing and
averaged approximately 48,000,000 lb (21,772,434 kg) between 2003 and
2007. Within this aggregate weight of snapper-grouper imports, the
amount of red snapper imported into the U.S. cannot be estimated with
the current available information. It is recognized that fish dealers,
restaurants, and other establishments may substitute imports for
snappers and groupers harvested in U.S. waters as a result of the
prohibition on the harvest and possession of red snapper and the area
closure. However, the reduction in the domestic landings of snapper-
grouper is not expected to trigger an influx of imported snappers and
groupers, because the amount of such reduction is small relative to the
amount of imported snappers and groupers (about 0.44 percent of
imports).
Comment 12: Thirty-one commenters opposed the red snapper
management measures in Amendment 17A based on potential adverse
economic impacts. Several of these commenters are concerned there is an
inadequate economic analysis of the impacts on the recreational fishing
community in the amendment.
Response: Amendment 17A and associated final environmental impact
statement, regulatory flexibility act analysis, regulatory impact
review, and social impact assessment/fishery impact statement
thoroughly analyze the potential economic impacts of the Council's
proposed red snapper management measures, based on the best scientific
information available. The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires the Council
and NMFS to end the overfishing of red snapper. SEDAR 15 indicates the
stock is being fished at five times the sustainable rate, and that
significant reductions in mortality, 76 percent, are needed to end
overfishing and rebuild the population. The adverse short-term economic
impacts of such reductions are unavoidable. However, SEDAR assessments
indicate the stock is producing only a fraction of its potential yield
and that the long-term economic benefits of stock rebuilding are
expected
[[Page 76878]]
to be substantial. A framework amendment is being developed to allow
for adjustments to the closed area, as appropriate, based on the
results of a new benchmark assessment (SEDAR 24). Additionally, draft
Amendment 22 to the FMP will explore new approaches for managing red
snapper catch and bycatch as the stock rebuilds that may allow the
Council to provide for some level of red snapper harvest over time.
Comment 13: Eighty-two commenters stated the data used in
determining the magnitude of red snapper overfishing, and general
population estimates, are flawed. Several of the same commenters also
questioned the adequacy and reliability of recreational landings data
currently available to fishery managers.
Response: Amendment 17A is based upon the SEDAR 15 assessment, and
the assessment was completed in 2008 using data through 2006. SEDAR 15
found the South Atlantic red snapper stock is overfished and undergoing
overfishing.
Data used for the assessment consists of records of commercial
catches provided by dealer and fishermen reports since the 1940s,
headboat fishery catch records from the Southeast Headboat Survey since
1972, and recreational catch records from the Marine Recreational
Fisheries Statistics Survey (MRFSS) since 1981. MRFSS conducts
telephone surveys of coastal households and for-hire businesses, as
well as in-person access-point angler intercept surveys. These surveys
are used to collect information on recreational fishery participation,
fishing effort, and catch, in addition to demographic, social, and
economic characteristics of the participants. NMFS recognizes that
MRFSS data are highly uncertain for infrequently encountered species
and is working with recreational and for-hire fishermen to explore
novel approaches to address this issue through the Marine Recreational
Information Program (MRIP). SEDAR 15 also includes U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service recreational fisheries survey data from 1960, 1965,
and 1970. Landings and effort information are provided by dealer and
fishermen reports and surveys. Information on catch lengths and ages is
provided by fishing port sampling programs that support the catch
statistics programs. Information on biological characteristics, such as
age, growth, and reproduction, is provided by various research studies.
All of the data used in the assessment are described in the SEDAR 15
red snapper stock assessment report available on the SEDAR Web site at
https://www.sefsc.noaa.gov/sedar/. The SEDAR Web site also provides
extensive supporting documentation that describes data collection
programs and research findings.
SEDAR is a cooperative process initiated in 2002 to improve the
quality and reliability of fishery stock assessments in the South
Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, and U.S. Caribbean. SEDAR is managed by the
Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic Regional Fishery
Management Councils in coordination with NMFS and the Atlantic and Gulf
States Marine Fisheries Commissions. SEDAR seeks improvements in the
scientific quality of stock assessments and greater relevance of
information available to address existing and emerging fishery
management issues. SEDAR emphasizes constituent and stakeholder
participation in assessment development, transparency in the assessment
process, and a rigorous and independent scientific review of completed
stock assessments. SEDAR is organized around three workshops. The first
is a data workshop where data sets are documented, analyzed, and
reviewed and data for conducting assessment analyses are compiled. The
second is an assessment workshop where quantitative population analyses
are developed and refined and population parameters are estimated. The
third is a review workshop where a panel of independent experts reviews
the data and assessment and recommends the most appropriate values of
critical population and management quantities. All SEDAR workshops are
open to the public. Public testimony is accepted in accordance with
each fishery management council's standard operating procedures.
Workshop times and locations are noticed in advance through the Federal
Register.
The findings and conclusions of each SEDAR workshop are documented
in a series of reports, which are ultimately reviewed and discussed by
the appropriate Council and its SSC. At its June 2008 meeting, the
Council's SSC determined that the SEDAR 15 is based upon the best
available science. In July 2010, NMFS' Southeast Fisheries Science
Center (SEFSC) certified the conservation and management measures in
Amendment 17A are based upon the best scientific information available.
SEDAR 15 is controversial with fishermen who feel the findings
contradict their experience of encountering more and larger red snapper
in recent years. Landings and discard data corroborate fisher reports
that catches increased between 2007 and 2009. A spike in 2007 discards
and 2008-2009 landings is likely due to a strong year class, which
occurred in 2006. Even so, the age structure of the red snapper
population is severely truncated (there are not enough older fish). Red
snapper live to at least 54 years of age, but the SEDAR 15 indicates
that most red snapper are less than 10 years old.
The SEFSC evaluated the concerns raised by fishermen regarding
SEDAR 15 and subsequent analyses. The SEFSC concluded that altering
model assumptions based on fishermen's concerns would impact the
magnitude of required harvest reductions but would not change the
assessment conclusions regarding the status of red snapper. Overfishing
is occurring and must be addressed within the requirements of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act.
A new red snapper SEDAR stock assessment (SEDAR 24) was completed
in late October 2010, and evaluated more recent catch data than that
used in SEDAR 15. The results of SEDAR 24 also support the SEDAR 15
conclusion that red snapper is overfished and experiencing overfishing,
although the rate of overfishing may be lower than the rate from SEDAR
15. The Council's SSC reviewed SEDAR 24 and the Council will review
SEDAR 24 and the SSC's recommendations at their next meeting during the
week of December 5, 2010. The Council is poised to take action at that
time to make any needed adjustments to the area closure as appropriate.
Comment 14: Two commenters, including the State of Florida, felt
actions related to limiting the harvest of red snapper should be
postponed until the 2010 benchmark assessment is completed.
Response: The Council is scheduled to receive the results of the
2010 SEDAR benchmark stock assessment for red snapper (SEDAR 24) at the
December 2010 Council meeting. However, red snapper continue to be
overfished and undergoing overfishing and the prohibition on the
harvest and possession of red snapper must be effective by December 5,
2010, to avoid a lapse in those prohibitions implemented through the
interim rule. Additionally, implementation of Amendment 17A cannot be
further delayed based on the Magnuson-Stevens Act requirements to
prepare and implement an FMP amendment to end overfishing and implement
conservation and management measures to rebuild red snapper. SEDAR 24
findings support the current prohibitions on the harvest and possession
of red snapper, and indicate a lapse in these prohibitions
[[Page 76879]]
could lead to more severe harvest reductions for the snapper-grouper
fishery as a whole with associated adverse socioeconomic impacts. The
assessment also indicates the snapper-grouper area closure included in
Amendment 17A is larger than necessary to end overfishing and rebuild
the stock, and NMFS is considering using the emergency action authority
under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act to address the
implications of the new assessment, as appropriate, and to provide the
Council time to determine whether modifications should be made to the
area closure based upon the new assessment. The Council will consider
the SEDAR 24 results at their December 2010 meeting, and determine
whether or not a modification to the area closure is warranted. If so,
adjustments to the area closure will be promulgated through a
regulatory amendment.
Comment 15: One commenter attributed red snapper overfishing to the
shrimp trawl fisheries off the southeast United States and recommended
a 2-year ban on shrimp trawling in the South Atlantic.
Response: No evidence exists that shrimp trawl fleets in the South
Atlantic EEZ capture juvenile red snapper. Confusion about shrimp
bycatch likely results from evidence that the fishery for penaeid
shrimp (pink, white, and brown shrimp), in the Gulf of Mexico, catches
a high level of juvenile red snapper. However, no evidence exists that
the penaeid shrimp fishery in the South Atlantic has the same level of
red snapper bycatch. In fact, the Southeast Area Monitoring and
Assessment Program--South Atlantic Coastal Survey has not documented
any red snapper caught during shallow-water trawl studies since 2007,
and no more than two red snapper in any year during 1995-2007.
Comment 16: Four commenters stated the commercial sector is
responsible for the current overfished and overfishing status of red
snapper and expressed support for banning commercial red snapper
fishing, while allowing recreational red snapper fishing to continue.
Response: SEDAR 15 and SEDAR 24 indicate that red snapper is
overfished and experiencing overfishing. The commercial sector is
responsible for approximately 20 to 25 percent of the total red snapper
landings in the South Atlantic based on data collected since 2006;
thus, the number of red snapper taken by the recreational sector far
exceeds the amount taken by the commercial sector. Therefore,
overfishing would continue if management measures were only applied to
the commercial sector. The measures implemented through this final rule
must apply to both the commercial and recreational sectors to
effectively end the overfishing of red snapper.
Comment 17: One commenter stated they do not typically see red
snapper when fishing off the east coast of Florida.
Response: Amendment 17A and its implementing regulations were
developed based upon the SEDAR 15 (2008) assessment, which shows that
red snapper are overfished and undergoing overfishing. The stock
assessment also indicates red snapper abundance is significantly lower
now than it has been in previous decades. Most of the stock is
currently concentrated in areas off of northern Florida and southern
Georgia. Overfishing of the species has possibly diminished the range
of the species and has led to decreased encounter rates in areas where
red snapper once may have been plentiful, including the Florida Keys.
This final rule is intended to end the overfishing of red snapper and
rebuild the stock to sustainable levels.
Comment 18: Twelve commenters offered several alternative
management methods for red snapper including bag limits, trip limits,
reduced size limits, slot sizes, seasonal area closures, spawning
season closures, artificial reef establishment, venting tool
requirements, circle hooks with wire appendages, state-by-state quotas,
and a voluntary buy-out program.
Response: Amendment 4 to the FMP (1991), implemented a 20-inch
(50.8 cm) total length (TL) minimum size limit and a 2-fish red snapper
bag limit within a 10-fish snapper-grouper aggregate bag limit in an
effort to reduce harvest of red snapper. Unfortunately the
implementation of a size limit and bag limit was not enough to end the
overfishing of red snapper at the time, and overfishing continued
despite the implementation of a limited access program for the
commercial snapper-grouper fishery via Amendment 8 to the FMP (1998).
In developing red snapper management measures in Amendment 17A, the
Council considered an option to allow red snapper harvest based on a
quota for the commercial sector, a quota for the for-hire sector
(utilizing electronic logbooks), and a quota for the private
recreational sector (based on a quota tag system administered by the
states), with dead discards inshore of 98 ft (73 m) to be subtracted
from the overall allowable harvest level before quotas are established.
The suggested AM for this alternative stated that once the catch limits
are reached in Georgia, South Carolina, and Florida, bottom fishing
would be prohibited beyond 98 ft (73 m). However, based on catch rates
of landed and discarded red snapper in 2007 and 2008, the allowable
catch for each sector would be estimated to be met in less than one
month.
Furthermore, allowing the level of harvest outlined above would
require extensive observer coverage, implementation of electronic
logbooks, and establishment of a tagging system. Not all states possess
the administrative resources needed to implement a tagging program at
this time. Discarded red snapper would require close tracking, and
harvest and release-mortality rates would need to be applied to the
discards to ensure total removals allocated to states and sectors are
not exceeded. The SSC has strongly opposed tracking discards as a means
of monitoring fishery catch levels and depending on self-reported
discards may create a disincentive to report, if the fishery closes as
a result of these self-reported data. However, the Council is exploring
through draft Amendment 22 to the Snapper-Grouper FMP, alternative
strategies for managing red snapper catch and bycatch (including a fish
tag program) that may allow the Council to provide for some level of
red snapper harvest over time as the stock rebuilds.
Several commenters suggested reducing the minimum size limit from
20 inches (50.8 cm) TL to 16 inches (40.6 cm) TL, establishing a slot
limit or eliminating the size limit altogether. These minimum size
limit modifications were considered by the Council but were removed
from detailed analysis and moved to the considered but rejected portion
of the amendment because they would not end overfishing. Reduction or
elimination of a minimum size limit could increase the magnitude of
total removals because a greater number of fishermen would be able to
fill the 2-fish bag limit with fish that formerly were discarded and
survived the trauma of capture.
Reductions in the bag limits were also considered by the Council
and NMFS. Reduction in the bag limit to 1 fish per person (resulting in
a 5-percent reduction in harvest with a 40-percent release mortality
rate) or a vessel limit of 4 fish per vessel per day (resulting in a 3-
percent reduction for private recreational vessels and a 34-percent
reduction for headboats) would not be sufficient to end overfishing
based on the results of SEDAR 15.
Another option discussed by the Council was a seasonal-area closure
for
[[Page 76880]]
all snapper-grouper species with a total prohibition on harvest and
possession of red snapper. A seasonal area closure for all snapper-
grouper species may be effective in reducing bycatch mortality of red
snapper for the duration of the closure; however, bycatch mortality
would be expected to resume during the open season. Based on the
results from SEDAR 15, a very large seasonal snapper-grouper area
closure would be required to end red snapper overfishing, and thus
would incur greater negative socioeconomic impacts than the current
area closure in Amendment 17A. Moreover, the longer the open season,
the larger the closed area would need to be to account for increased
bycatch mortality of red snapper. Because of these factors, the Council
did not consider seasonal area closures a feasible option for ending
overfishing in this case. This does not, however, preclude the future
use of seasonal-area closures as a management measure.
Suggestions concerning the establishment of more artificial reefs
have been made several times throughout the amendment's development
process. Some studies suggest that artificial reefs increase
populations of red snapper while others suggest artificial reefs
attract fish in general. As artificial reefs are usually well marked,
the stock could be negatively impacted by making large concentrations
of red snapper more accessible to fishermen. Regardless, the reduction
needed to end overfishing and rebuild red snapper would not be achieved
by creating more artificial reefs as the only management measure.
Requiring the use of venting tools was previously considered in
Amendment 16 to the FMP. This requirement was disapproved based on
public comments and new information opposing the use of venting tools,
along with scientific studies that suggest the use of venting tools may
actually increase mortality of some species depending on capture depth.
Furthermore, the requirement for the possession and use of venting
tools was determined to be overly broad and not in accordance with the
administrative record developed for Amendment 16. Required use of
venting tools in the snapper-grouper fishery may be considered again in
the future if guidance is provided on the tools that should be used,
the appropriate techniques for venting, and the species that benefit
most from venting. NOAA is funding a collaborative workshop to be
hosted by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission in spring
2011 to examine how best to reduce barotrauma in recreational
fisheries.
One commenter recommended the use of circle hooks with a wire
appendage be required for the snapper-grouper fishery. Appendaged
circle hooks were discussed in the biological analysis for the circle
hook action in Amendment 17A. The analysis cites one study that
compared circle hooks and J-hooks with and without wire appendages and
their effects on reducing the catch of small and gut-hooked snapper by
recreational fishers in the Hauraki Gulf of New Zealand. However, the
Council and NMFS did not choose to pursue a requirement for appendaged
hooks until additional information on their use and effectiveness
becomes available. A circle hook workshop will be held May 4-6, 2011,
in Miami, Florida, and more information on this workshop may be found
at: https://www.circlehooksymposium.org/. NMFS' approval of the
requirement to use non-stainless steel circle hooks north of 28[deg] N.
latitude does not preclude the Council or NMFS from considering the use
of appendaged circle hooks in the future.
The Council discussed the establishment of a buy-out program for
commercial snapper-grouper fishermen in Georgia. A buy-out program for
the commercial sector would require a great deal of planning, time,
funds, and acceptance from fishery participants. Because of these
limiting factors and the need to act to end overfishing promptly, a
buy-out program was not pursued by the Council or NMFS during the
Amendment 17A development process. The Council considered alternatives
that would allocate the red snapper ACL by state and sector. The
Council moved these alternatives to the considered but rejected section
of the amendment because the Council determined that both a harvest
prohibition and an area closure for snapper-grouper species was needed
to end red snapper overfishing. The Council may consider alternatives
for allocating red snapper harvest among states and sectors when the
stock rebuilds to a biomass level that would support some level of
harvest.
Comment 19: One fishing association submitted a comment, endorsed
by 12 commenters, stating the comment period on the proposed rule
intentionally ended 2 days before the SEDAR 24 assessment results
became public. This comment also stated NMFS' scientific position
changed when the decision was made to conduct a full benchmark
assessment instead of an update to the SEDAR 15 (2008) assessment,
implying an admission that SEDAR 15 (2008) was not based upon the best
scientific information available. The same commenter stated that SEDAR
15 did not use a ``continuity run.''
Response: The Magnuson-Stevens Act required the Council to develop
a plan to end overfishing within one year, if notified of a stock's
overfished status prior to July 12, 2009. Therefore, waiting to
implement Amendment 17A until after the new stock assessment (SEDAR 24)
is completed would further delay this required action. NMFS is aware of
the coincidental timelines associated with the completion of SEDAR 24
and the implementation of Amendment 17A. The Council and NMFS are
prepared to act expeditiously to modify management measures if the
Council concludes that the results of SEDAR 24 indicate such an
adjustment is appropriate.
SEDAR 15 (2008) concluded that red snapper is overfished and
undergoing overfishing, requiring the Council to prepare a plan
amendment to end overfishing and rebuild the stock. During the
amendment's development, fishermen expressed concern that SEDAR 15 did
not capture the spike in discards and landings that occurred during
2007-2009 because the assessment considered data only through 2006. In
order to include these landings and apply additional statistical
methods to the analysis, the SEDAR steering committee requested SEDAR
replace the scheduled red snapper assessment update with a new
benchmark assessment (SEDAR 24). SEDAR 15 (2008) was subjected to an
external review by the Center for Independent Experts (CIE) and was
also reviewed by the Council's SSC, both of which approved the
assessment report. Furthermore, in a memorandum dated July 22, 2010,
the SEFSC certified that Amendment 17A is based upon the best
scientific information available.
Continuity runs of SEDAR 15 with the red snapper assessment
conducted in 1997 were not performed because such runs would have been
based upon prior research that used several assumptions, such as a 15-
year life span for red snapper, which are now known to be inaccurate.
The results of the new SEDAR 24 benchmark assessment support the
SEDAR 15 conclusion that red snapper is overfished and experiencing
overfishing, although the rate of overfishing appears to be lower than
estimated in the SEDAR 15 assessment. Although the SEDAR 24 assessment
shows some signs of stock improvement, overfishing is still occurring
and must be addressed within the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act. The SEDAR 24 findings support the current red snapper harvest
[[Page 76881]]
prohibitions and indicate a lapse in these prohibitions could lead to
more severe harvest reductions for the snapper-grouper fishery as a
whole, with associated adverse socioeconomic impacts. NMFS and the
Council are prepared to act expeditiously to modify management measures
if the results of SEDAR 24 indicate such an adjustment is appropriate.
Comment 20: One commenter stated that closing an area will open the
same area to fishing by foreign fleets.
Response: Closing an area to snapper-grouper fishing under
Amendment 17A will not open up that area to fishing by foreign fleets.
The Magnuson-Stevens Act authorizes the Federal Government to regulate
fishing in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) (3 to 200 nautical miles
offshore), and it prohibits foreign fishing in the EEZ unless
specifically conducted pursuant to an international fishery agreement
and permit.
Comment 21: Two commenters stated the fishing mortality at maximum
sustainable yield (FMSY) proxy approved by NMFS is
inadequate and does not follow the SSC's FMSY proxy
recommendation.
Response: Stock assessments have not been able to reliably estimate
the MSY of South Atlantic red snapper. In such cases, the Magnuson-
Stevens Act National Standard 1 Guidelines direct regional fishery
management councils to adopt other measures of reproductive capacity as
reasonable MSY proxies. In 1998, through Amendment 11 to the Snapper-
Grouper FMP, the Council defined the MSY of red snapper to equal the
yield associated with fishing at FMSY or
F30[percnt]SPR.
At its December 2008 meeting, the Council's SSC discussed the
positive and negative effects of maintaining the current proxy for
FMSY (F30[percnt]SPR)
versus establishing a new proxy for FMSY at
F40[percnt]SPR. Some SSC members
supported the CIE's recommendation, based on SEDAR 15, to use
F40[percnt]SPR and cited literature
and examples that showed that F40[percnt]SPR
is a more appropriate proxy for FMSY. Other SSC members
stated F30[percnt]SPR should be
maintained because it was approved by the Council for red snapper and
other species in Amendment 11 to the FMP, and its corresponding
steepness value (the magnitude of recruitment) is approximately 0.90,
which was close to the estimated value of 0.95 in the base model.
The Council was very concerned about the implications of
establishing a proxy that has not been previously used for red snapper.
Specifying F40[percnt]SPR as a new
proxy could set a precedent that is not appropriate for all species in
the snapper-grouper fishery management unit. After thoroughly
considering the implications associated with the more conservative
alternative FMSY proxy of
F40[percnt]SPR, as well as input from
their SSC and NMFS, the Council elected to take no action to change the
current definition of the FMSY proxy. Amendment 17A
specifies the numerical value for MSY associated with this definition
as 2,431,000 lb (1,102,683 kg), whole weight, based on the most recent,
completed, red snapper stock assessment at the time of final Council
action (SEDAR 15 2008).
The more conservative FMSY proxy of
F40[percnt]SPR recommended by the SSC
would have resulted in a lower MSY value equal to 2,304,000 lb
(1,102,683 kg), whole weight, and would have required greater harvest
reductions to end overfishing and rebuild the stock on schedule.
Choosing that proxy would have resulted in increased adverse economic
impacts from ending overfishing on fishing communities. Therefore, the
Council recommended that the SEFSC conduct a comprehensive review of
how FMSY proxies should be applied across all southeastern
fisheries, and that the decision to apply a specific FMSY
proxy be made at the regional level rather than on a species-by-species
basis.
Comment 22: Three commenters state Amendment 17A fails to specify
an acceptable biological catch (ABC) or ABC control rule for red
snapper.
Response: The SSC provided an overfishing limit (OFL) and ABC
recommendations in terms of pounds of fish at its June 2008 meeting,
but the SSC did not have an ABC control rule to assist them with
estimating ABC and indicated that they considered the values to be
``interim'' until more robust methods for estimating these parameters
could be made available. At its December 2008 SSC meeting, the SSC
considered the guidance given in the proposed Magnuson-Stevens Act
National Standard 1 Guidelines and rescinded all estimates of ABC from
its June 2008 meeting (except for an ABC of zero for speckled hind and
warsaw grouper). The SSC also recommended at its December 2008 meeting
that the ABC levels for snowy grouper, black sea bass, and red snapper
be set consistent with the rebuilding plans for those species until
they can be further amended on better scientific information. The SSC
met in March and June of 2009 to determine ABC control rules for data
rich species, and met in April and August of 2010 to identify the
protocol for determining the ABC for data poor species. The SSC
recommended that current ABC levels for red snapper be set consistent
with the rebuilding plan until they can be further amended.
Comment 23: Two commenters stated that by choosing to rely on an
OFL based on the FMSY proxy of
F30[percnt]SPR, which is equivalent to
146,939 lb (66,650 kg), and then setting the ABC at 97 percent of the
Council's OFL, or 144,000 lb (65,317 kg), the Council set the ABC for
red snapper well above the SSC-recommended OFL of 104,124 lb (47,230
kg). Furthermore, the commenter states the Council's ABC of 144,000 lb
(65,317 kg) is also well above the 101,000 lb (45, 813 kg) catch level
that is based on the rebuilding plan under the SSC's recommended
FMSY proxy.
Response: Section 1.4.2 of Amendment 17A discusses the SSC's
recommendation of ABC and OFL. Initially, the SSC recommended an
interim OFL and ABC for red snapper equal to the yield at 75 percent
FMSY. At its December 2008 meeting, the SSC withdrew its OFL
and ABC recommendations, and instead recommended the ABC level be set
consistent with the rebuilding plan in Amendment 17A, which specifies
an FOY equal to 98 percent FMSY (98 percent
F30[percnt]SPR) and rebuilds the stock
in 35 years. Therefore, ABC is consistent with the rebuilding plan
outlined in Amendment 17A.
Comment 24: One commenter stated that Amendment 17A violates the
requirement for the Council to set ACLs that do not exceed the ABC
recommendation of the SSC.
Response: The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires the Council to develop
ACLs that may not exceed the fishing level recommendation of its SSC.
The National Standard 1 Guidelines state that the SSC recommendation
most relevant to ACLs is ABC, as both are levels of annual catch. The
SSC's ABC recommendation for red snapper is that the ABC should be
consistent with the rebuilding plan. Therefore, the ABC is specified as
an FOY equal to 98 percent FMSY (98 percent
F30[percnt]SPR) and rebuilds in 35
years. This allows a total red snapper mortality (in the form of dead
discards) of 144,000 lb (65,317 kg) whole weight in year one of
rebuilding. Total mortality is calculated from rebuilding projections
of spawning stock biomass, recruitment, allowable removals from the
population, and probability of stock recovery, under different fishing
mortality rates developed by the SEFSC. This rebuilding plan is
consistent with the current FMSY proxy
(F30[percnt]SPR), which requires a 76
percent reduction in harvest of red snapper. The Council's preferred
alternative in Amendment
[[Page 76882]]
17A establishes an ACL of 0 lb (0 kg) based on landed catch.
The Council considered including both landed catch and discards in
the specification of the red snapper ACL; however, the SSC concluded
that existing data collection and reporting systems are not adequate to
support monitoring discarded red snapper in the commercial and
recreational fisheries and expressed concern that doing so may create
an incentive for fishermen to under-report red snapper discards.
Comment 25: Two commenters stated the AMs specified in Amendment
17A are based on the ACL, which includes landings only (all red snapper
landings would be prohibited under this final rule), and therefore are
not adequate because they do not correspond to total mortality.
Additionally, the amendment does not include AMs that will be triggered
annually if the total mortality exceeds the ABC.
Response: Through this final rule, NMFS establishes an ACL of zero
for red snapper, which is applied to directed harvest. Therefore, a
year-round closure is created for commercial and recreational harvest
of red snapper throughout the entire South Atlantic EEZ. Additionally,
the results of SEDAR 15 required the Council to reduce the bycatch
mortality of red snapper in order to end overfishing. The Council thus
imposed a 4,827 square mile (7,763 square km) closed area from Cape
Canaveral, Florida, to southern Georgia to all snapper-grouper fishing
(except when using black sea bass pots or spearfishing gear) to achieve
the fishing mortality reduction required by SEDAR 15.
The Council considered including both landed catch and discards in
the specification of the red snapper ACL; however, the SSC concluded
that existing data collection and reporting systems are not adequate to
support monitoring discarded red snapper in the commercial and
recreational fisheries and expressed concern that doing so may create
an incentive for fishermen to under-report red snapper discards.
Prohibiting all directed harvest of red snapper is the most
stringent AM that could be implemented for the species. The preferred
red snapper AM alternative includes a provision for tracking catch per
unit effort (CPUE) via fishery-dependent and fishery-independent
monitoring programs, and periodically evaluating the CPUE data to
determine if adjustments to the ACL and management measures are
appropriate. If the data indicate an adjustment is warranted, action
could be taken expeditiously through a framework amendment. The Council
did consider establishing annual catch targets (ACTs) as part of the
accountability mechanism for red snapper. However, the commercial and
recreational harvest of red snapper is prohibited, therefore, it was
determined that ACTs are not necessary at this time. It is anticipated
that red snapper harvest will be allowed in the future, at which time
the Council may consider establishing ACTs.
Comment 26: One commenter stated Amendment 17A violates the
Magnuson-Stevens Act because it does not clearly specify an OFL for red
snapper.
Response: According to the Magnuson-Stevens Act National Standard 1
Guidelines, OFL is an annual amount of catch that corresponds to the
estimate of maximum fishing mortality threshold (MFMT) applied to a
stock or complex's abundance. Amendment 11 to the FMP defines MFMT as
the yield at FMSY where
F30[percnt]SPR is the default
FMSY proxy. Amendment 17A retains the status quo proxy for
FMSY at F30[percnt]SPR,
which when applied to the red snapper stock would be the equivalent to
the OFL. The numerical value of this parameter will cha