Sea Turtle Conservation; Shrimp Trawling Requirements, 27411-27415 [2012-11201]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 91 / Thursday, May 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules
27411
Therefore, the Service finds that the
information provided in the petition, as
well as other information in our files,
presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that
the petitioned action may be warranted
due to other natural or manmade
factors.
Dated: May 1, 2012.
David L. Cottingham,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
Finding
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
On the basis of our determination
under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we
determine that the petition presents
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that listing the
eastern diamondback rattlesnake
throughout its entire range may be
warranted. This finding is based on
information provided under factors A,
B, D, and E. We determine that the
information provided under factor C is
not substantial.
Because we have found that the
petition presents substantial
information indicating that listing the
eastern diamondback rattlesnake may be
warranted, we are initiating a status
review to determine whether listing the
eastern diamondback rattlesnake under
the Act is warranted.
The ‘‘substantial information’’
standard for a 90-day finding differs
from the Endangered Species Act’s ‘‘best
scientific and commercial data’’
standard that applies to a status review
to determine whether a petitioned
action is warranted. A 90-day finding
does not constitute a status review
under the Act. In a 12-month finding,
we will determine whether a petitioned
action is warranted after we have
completed a thorough status review of
the species, which is conducted
following a substantial 90-day finding.
Because the Act’s standards for 90-day
and 12-month findings are different, as
described above, a substantial 90-day
finding does not mean that the
12-month finding will result in a
warranted finding.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
submit Confidential Business
Information or otherwise sensitive or
protected information. We will accept
anonymous comments (enter N/A in the
required fields, if you wish to remain
anonymous). You may submit
attachments to electronic comments in
Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or
Adobe PDF file formats only.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Barnette, 727–551–5794.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
50 CFR Part 223
Background
References Cited
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
A complete list of references cited is
available on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov and upon request
from the Panama City, FL, Ecological
Services Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Author
The primary authors of this notice are
the staff members of the Panama City,
FL, Ecological Services Office.
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 May 09, 2012
Jkt 226001
[FR Doc. 2012–11230 Filed 5–9–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
[Docket No. 120328230–1019–01]
RIN 0648–BC10
Sea Turtle Conservation; Shrimp
Trawling Requirements
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments; notice of public hearings.
AGENCY:
We are proposing to withdraw
the alternative tow time restriction and
require all skimmer trawls, pusher-head
trawls, and wing nets (butterfly trawls)
rigged for fishing to use turtle excluder
devices (TEDs) in their nets. The intent
of this proposed rule is to reduce
incidental bycatch and mortality of sea
turtles in the southeastern U.S. shrimp
fisheries, and to aid in the protection
and recovery of listed sea turtle
populations.
SUMMARY:
DATES: Written comments (see
ADDRESSES) will be accepted through
July 9, 2012. Public hearings on the
proposed rule will be held in May and
June 2012. See SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION for meeting dates, times,
and locations.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on this proposed rule, identified by
0648–BC10, by any of the following
methods:
• Electronic Submissions: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov.
• Mail: Michael Barnette, Southeast
Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th
Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701.
• Fax: 727–824–5309; Attention:
Michael Barnette.
Instructions: All comments received
are a part of the public record and will
generally be posted to https://
www.regulations.gov without change.
All Personal Identifying Information (for
example, name, address, etc.)
voluntarily submitted by the commenter
may be publicly accessible. Do not
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
All sea turtles in U.S. waters are listed
as either endangered or threatened
under the Endangered Species Act of
1973 (ESA). The Kemp’s ridley
(Lepidochelys kempii), leatherback
(Dermochelys coriacea), and hawksbill
(Eretmochelys imbricata) turtles are
listed as endangered. The loggerhead
(Caretta caretta; Northwest Atlantic
distinct population segment) and green
(Chelonia mydas) turtles are listed as
threatened, except for breeding
populations of green turtles in Florida
and on the Pacific coast of Mexico,
which are listed as endangered.
Sea turtles are incidentally taken, and
some are killed, as a result of numerous
activities, including fishery-related
trawling activities in the Gulf of Mexico
and along the Atlantic seaboard. Under
the ESA and its implementing
regulations, taking (harassing, injuring
or killing) sea turtles is prohibited,
except as identified in 50 CFR 223.206,
according to the terms and conditions of
a biological opinion issued under
section 7 of the ESA, or according to an
incidental take permit issued under
section 10 of the ESA. Incidentally
taking threatened sea turtles during
shrimp trawling is exempted from the
taking prohibition of section 9 of the
ESA if the conservation measures
specified in the sea turtle conservation
regulations (50 CFR 223.206) are
followed. The same conservation
measures also apply to endangered sea
turtles (50 CFR 224.104).
The regulations require most shrimp
trawlers operating in the southeastern
United States to have a NMFS-approved
TED installed in each net that is rigged
for fishing, to allow sea turtles to
escape. TEDs currently approved by
NMFS include single-grid hard TEDs
and hooped hard TEDs conforming to a
generic description and one type of soft
TED—the Parker soft TED (see 50 CFR
223.207). However, skimmer trawls,
pusher-head trawls, and vessels using
wing nets currently may employ
alternative tow time restrictions in lieu
of TEDs, under 50 CFR
223.206(d)(2)(ii)(A). The alternative tow
E:\FR\FM\10MYP1.SGM
10MYP1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
27412
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 91 / Thursday, May 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules
time restrictions currently limit tow
times to 55 minutes from April 1
through October 31, and 75 minutes
from November 1 through March 31.
TEDs incorporate an escape opening,
usually covered by a webbing flap,
which allows sea turtles to escape from
trawl nets. To be approved by NMFS, a
TED design must be shown to be 97
percent effective in excluding sea turtles
during testing based upon specific
testing protocols (50 CFR 223.207(e)(1)).
Most approved hard TEDs are described
in the regulations (50 CFR 223.207(a))
according to generic criteria based upon
certain parameters of TED design,
configuration, and installation,
including height and width dimensions
of the TED opening through which the
turtles escape.
Over the past two years we have
documented elevated sea turtle
strandings in the northern Gulf of
Mexico, particularly throughout the
Mississippi Sound area. In the first three
weeks of June 2010, over 120 sea turtle
strandings were reported from
Mississippi and Alabama waters, none
of which exhibited any signs of external
oiling to indicate effects associated with
the Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil spill
event. A total of 644 sea turtle
strandings were reported in 2010 from
Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama
waters, 561 (87 percent) of which were
Kemp’s ridley sea turtles. During March
through May of 2011, 267 sea turtle
strandings were reported from
Mississippi and Alabama waters alone.
A total of 525 sea turtle strandings were
reported in 2011 from Louisiana,
Mississippi, and Alabama waters, with
the majority (455) occurring from March
through July, 390 (86 percent) of which
were Kemp’s ridley sea turtles. These
stranding numbers are significantly
greater than reported in past years;
Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama
reported 42 and 73 total sea turtle
strandings for 2008 and 2009,
respectively. Strandings typically
represent only a small fraction of actual
mortality; therefore, these stranding
events represent significant amounts of
sea turtle mortality. However, it should
be noted that stranding coverage has
increased considerably due to the DWH
oil spill event, which has increased the
likelihood of observing stranded
animals.
Necropsy results indicate a significant
number of stranded turtles from both
the 2010 and 2011 events likely
perished due to forced submergence
(drowning), which is commonly
associated with fishery interactions.
Additionally, information from NMFS
and Mississippi Department of Marine
Resources (MDMR) enforcement,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 May 09, 2012
Jkt 226001
stemming from the monitoring of
Mississippi Sound skimmer trawl
vessels in 2010, indicate the vessels in
the skimmer trawl fleet exceed
alternative tow time requirements.
Because of the elevated strandings in
2010 and 2011, as well as issues
identified within the shrimp fisheries
that indicated an evaluation of
alternative tow time restrictions within
the skimmer trawl sector was warranted,
NMFS began developing a draft
environmental impact statement (DEIS);
a notice of availability is expected to
publish in the Federal Register on May
18, 2012. The analysis included in the
DEIS demonstrates that withdrawing the
alternative tow time restriction and
requiring all skimmer trawls, pusherhead trawls, and wing nets rigged for
fishing to use TEDs in their nets would
reduce incidental bycatch and mortality
of sea turtles in the southeastern U.S.
shrimp fisheries and, therefore, may be
a necessary and advisable action to
conserve threatened sea turtle species.
While the recent stranding events
acted as a catalyst for examining sea
turtle bycatch issues within the shrimp
fisheries and, ultimately, this proposed
rule, NMFS has previously considered a
TED requirement for skimmer trawls,
pusher-head trawls, and wing nets
(butterfly trawls). For example, on May
8, 2009, NMFS published a notice of
intent (NOI) to prepare an
environmental impact statement and
conduct public scoping meetings, and
made available a scoping document
presenting various approaches to
regulating trawl fisheries in the Atlantic
Ocean (74 FR 21627). The scoping
document suggested using a phased
approach to implement regulations to
reduce sea turtle captures by requiring
capture mitigation strategies (i.e., TEDs)
as technology becomes available. ‘‘Phase
I’’ would have further regulated the
summer flounder and Atlantic sea
scallop fisheries, as well as introduce
regulations for the whelk, croaker/
weakfish, and calico scallop trawl
fisheries. Regulation of fisheries in
‘‘Phase II,’’ which included sheepshead,
black drum, king whiting, porgy,
southeastern U.S. shrimp (skimmer
trawl and trynets), Spanish sardine,
scad, ladyfish, squid, mackerel,
butterfish, and Northeast multispecies
(large- and small-mesh) trawl fisheries,
would be evaluated for subsequent
rulemaking. Finally, ‘‘Phase III’’
regulations would have been developed
for the skate, horseshoe crab, monkfish,
bluefish, spiny dogfish, and herring
trawl fisheries, and any other trawl
fisheries not previously identified or
considered. The NOI and scoping
document acknowledged, however, that
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the implementation sequence could
shift we obtain testing results and new
information about additional trawl
fisheries.
Additionally, in June 2010, NMFS
prepared but never published an
emergency rule in accordance with
Section 4(b)(7) of the ESA (16 U.S.C.
1533(b)(7)) to require TEDs for all
skimmer trawls, pusher-head trawls,
and wing nets (butterfly trawls) rigged
for fishing in Mississippi and Alabama
state waters. Before the emergency rule
could be implemented, however, oil
from the DWH oil spill event reached
nearshore areas of the Northern Gulf of
Mexico, and the states closed their
waters to all fishing.
Skimmer Trawls, Pusher-Head Trawls,
and Wing Nets
Developed in the early 1980s, the
skimmer trawl was intended for use in
some areas primarily to catch white
shrimp, which have the ability to jump
over the headrope of standard trawls
while being towed in shallow water.
The skimmer net frame allows the net
to be elevated above the water while the
net is fishing, thus preventing shrimp
from escaping over the top. Owing to
increased shrimp catch rates, less debris
and/or fish and other bycatch, and
lower fuel consumption than otter
trawlers, the use of skimmer nets
quickly spread throughout Louisiana,
Mississippi, and Alabama. The basic
components of a skimmer trawl include
a frame, the net, heavy weights, skids or
‘‘shoes,’’ and tickler chains. The net
frame is usually constructed of steel or
aluminum pipe or tubing and is either
L-shaped (with an additional stiff leg) or
a trapezoid design. When net frames are
deployed, they are aligned
perpendicularly to the vessel and
cocked or tilted forward and slightly
upward. This position allows the net to
fish better and reduces the chance of the
leading edge of the skid digging into the
bottom and subsequently damaging the
gear. The frames are maintained in this
position by two or more stays or cables
to the bow. The outer leg of the frame
is held in position with a ‘‘stiff leg’’ to
the horizontal pipe and determines the
maximum depth at which each net is
capable of working. The skid, or ‘‘shoe,’’
is attached to the bottom of the outer
leg, which allows the frame to ride
along the bottom, rising and falling with
the bottom contour. The bottom of the
gear includes tickler chains and lead
lines. The skimmer trawl is the most
popular trawl type after the otter trawl,
and is widely utilized in Louisiana
waters.
Vietnamese fishermen who moved
into Louisiana in the early 1980s
E:\FR\FM\10MYP1.SGM
10MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 91 / Thursday, May 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
introduced the pusher-head trawl, also
known as the ‘‘xipe’’ or chopstick net.
The pusher-head trawl net is attached to
a rigid or flexible frame similar to the
wing net; however, the frame mounted
on the bow of the boat is attached to a
pair of skids and fished by pushing the
net along the bottom.
Wing nets (butterfly trawls or
‘‘paupiers’’) were introduced in the
1950s and used on stationary platforms
and on shrimp boats either under power
or while anchored. A wing net consists
of square metal frame which forms the
mouth of the net. Webbing is attached
to the frame and tapers back to a cod
end. The net can be fished from a
stationary platform or a pair of nets can
be attached to either side of a vessel.
The vessel is then anchored in tidal
current or the nets are ‘‘pushed’’
through the water by the vessel. The
contents of the wing net, as well as the
contents of skimmer and pusher-head
trawls, can be picked up and dumped
without raising the entire net out of the
water, which is necessary with an otter
trawl. While wing nets, as well as
pusher-head trawls, are allowable gear
types in the Northern Gulf of Mexico,
they are not as common as skimmer
trawls. For example, while the MDMR
does not differentiate gear type within
their shrimp fishery, a 2008 survey of
trip tickets indicated there were
approximately 247 otter trawl, 56
skimmer trawl, 4 butterfly net, and 2
pusher-head trawls active in
Mississippi.
Sea Turtle Bycatch in Skimmer Trawls,
Pusher-Head Trawls, and Wing Nets
While there is available information
documenting sea turtle captures in the
skimmer trawl fisheries (e.g., Price and
Gearheart 2011), skimmer trawls,
pusher-head trawls, and wing nets were
initially allowed to use alternative tow
time restrictions in lieu of TEDs under
the assumption that the trawl bags were
typically retrieved at intervals that
would not be fatal to most sea turtles
that were captured in the net. The
December 2, 2002 biological opinion
(NMFS 2002) noted that the tow-time
authorization instead of TEDs was for
fisheries that, ‘‘out of physical,
practical, or economic necessity, require
fishermen to limit their tow times
naturally.’’ But information from MDMR
indicates that some participants in their
skimmer trawl fishery are not aware of
the tow time restrictions, and violations
of the tow time restrictions have
occurred and still occur within the
fishery.
Moreover, tow times restrictions are
difficult to enforce. Documenting a tow
time violation requires enforcement
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 May 09, 2012
Jkt 226001
personnel to be in close proximity of a
skimmer trawl to monitor gear
deployment and recovery, and to record
the time when the codend enters the
water until it is removed. Also,
enforcement personnel need to remain
undetected for at least 55 minutes—
practically impossible at sea—or else
their presence may bias a vessel
captain’s operational procedure. There
are also concerns repeated captures may
result in turtle mortality in times and
areas where sea turtle abundance and
skimmer trawl fishing effort is high
(Sasso and Epperly 2006).
In the DEIS, we calculated sea turtle
catch per unit effort rates based on
observed effort in the skimmer trawl
fisheries and relative abundances of sea
turtle species. These rates were
multiplied by overall effort (i.e., 585,576
effort hours in the Northern Gulf of
Mexico skimmer trawl fisheries and
6,576 effort hours in the North Carolina
skimmer trawl fishery) to determine
total sea turtle take in the skimmer trawl
fisheries. The analysis resulted in a total
anticipated take of 28,127 captured sea
turtles in the combined skimmer trawl,
pusher-head trawl, and wing net
fisheries.
If skimmer trawl vessels regularly
exceed the tow time restrictions and kill
incidentally captured sea turtles,
requiring TEDs instead of tow times
may significantly reduce sea turtle
mortality by allowing them to escape
the net and avoid drowning. In order to
extrapolate the sea turtle capture
estimates to obtain an associated
mortality estimate for the skimmer trawl
fisheries operating with installed TEDs,
the DEIS analysis considered both the
benefits of exclusion through properly
installed TEDs and the effect of TED
violations on sea turtle capture rates and
total mortalities. This analysis was
accomplished by calculating overall
compliance and non-compliance rates
in the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic
otter trawl shrimp fisheries (to serve as
a proxy for the skimmer trawl fisheries,
assuming TED compliance would be
similar between the two gear types)
based on vessel boarding data from TED
inspections. Using this data, we
estimate that withdrawing the
alternative tow time restriction in the
preferred alternative would prevent
5,515 sea turtle mortalities in the
combined skimmer trawl fisheries.
Therefore, we preliminarily determined
that the measures proposed here are a
necessary and advisable to conserve
threatened sea turtle species. We have
further preliminarily determined that
the measures proposed here are
necessary and appropriate to enforce the
requirements of the ESA.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
27413
We anticipate to make this proposed
TED requirement effective by the start of
the 2013 shrimping season, not later
than March 15, 2013.
Classification
This proposed rule has been
determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
NMFS prepared an Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), as required
by Section 603 of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, for this proposed rule.
The IRFA describes the economic
impact this proposed rule, if
implemented, would have on small
entities. A description of the proposed
rule, why it is being considered, the
objectives of, and legal basis for this
proposed rule are contained at the
beginning of this section in the
preamble and in the SUMMARY section of
the preamble. A copy of the full analysis
is available from NMFS (see
ADDRESSES). A summary of the IRFA
follows.
No duplicative, overlapping, or
conflicting Federal rules have been
identified.
We expect this proposed rule will
directly affect fishermen who use
skimmer trawls, pusher-head trawls,
and wing nets (butterfly trawls). This
gear is only used in Louisiana,
Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, and
North Carolina. Florida already requires
vessels employing this gear to use TEDs.
Among the remaining states,
approximately 2,435 active vessels have
been identified that use this gear (2,248
in Louisiana, 62 in Mississippi, 60 in
Alabama, and 65 in North Carolina). We
expect this rule, if implemented, will
affect all of these vessels.
The Small Business Administration
has established size criteria for all major
industry sectors in the U.S. including
fish harvesters. 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 million
(North American Industry Classification
System code 114112, shellfish fishing)
for all its affiliated operations
worldwide.
We estimate the average annual
revenue (2008 dollars) for vessels
harvesting shrimp using skimmer
trawls, pusher-head trawls, or wing nets
(butterfly trawls) as approximately
$22,500 for Louisiana vessels, $21,400
for Alabama vessels, and $2,700 for
North Carolina vessels. However,
fishermen, including shrimpers,
commonly participate in multiple
fisheries, and these results may not
E:\FR\FM\10MYP1.SGM
10MYP1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
27414
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 91 / Thursday, May 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules
include revenue from non-shrimp
species. Comparable information for
Mississippi vessels is not available
because no shrimp landings from
Mississippi vessels using this gear were
recorded in the comparable time period
(2006–2010). Although some
Mississippi vessels are expected to be
actively using this gear, we do not know
whether these vessels are landing their
shrimp harvests in other states, selling
directly to the public and not through
dealers, or engaging in some other
practice that has resulted in the absence
of recorded landings. Based on the
average revenue estimates, all
commercial fishing vessels expected to
be directly affected by this proposed
rule, if implemented, are for the purpose
of this analysis considered to be small
entities.
If the affected entities are required to
pay for their TEDs, we expect this
proposed rule will result in an
estimated average first-year cost of
$2,120 for fishermen in Louisiana,
$1,000 for fishermen in Mississippi,
$2,061 for fishermen in Alabama, and
$1,133 for fishermen in North Carolina.
These results are based on an estimated
cost of $350 per TED, the use of two
TEDs per vessel, an annual maintenance
cost of $300 per vessel, and an
estimated 4.97 percent reduction in
shrimp harvest. Based on the average
annual revenue estimates provided
above, these first-year costs equal
approximately 9.4 percent of average
annual shrimp revenue for affected
entities in Louisiana, 9.6 percent in
Alabama, and 42.4 percent in North
Carolina. The total average effect per
entity would be reduced if these
fishermen also operate in other
fisheries, which we expect is the case
for most entities. Total revenues from all
species for the affected fishermen are
not known. However, the estimated
average annual net revenue across all
Gulf states, including revenue from all
species, for operations in the inshore
shrimp sector, which includes the
entities described here, is negative,
indicating the average vessel is
operating at a loss. As a result, any
increased costs or reduced revenues are
expected to compound these losses.
Similar information is not available for
North Carolina fishermen, but this
analysis assumes the average net
revenue for North Carolina fishermen is
comparable to that of inshore shrimp
fishermen in the Gulf of Mexico.
As previously discussed, a
comparable analysis for entities in
Mississippi cannot be completed
because we lack appropriate revenue
information. As a result, the estimated
effect for entities in Mississippi simply
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 May 09, 2012
Jkt 226001
reflects the cost of the TEDs. The cost
associated with TED purchase, however,
may be overstated, particularly for
Mississippi vessels. The National Fish
and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF)
allocated funds received from oil
recovery income as a result of the DWH
oil spill event for Gulf of Mexico
restoration efforts. In 2010, funding was
made available to purchase and
distribute TEDs for skimmer trawl
vessels and, to date, an estimated 360
TEDs have been distributed to 180
Mississippi shrimp vessels. Therefore,
we believe the majority of skimmer
trawl vessels operating in Mississippi
already possess TEDs.
Because a TED is a durable device, the
cost of a new TED is not an annual
expense. The estimated replacement
cycle for a TED is at least three years,
barring net damage and TED loss. In a
year in which a new TED is not
purchased, the effect of this rule would
be limited to TED maintenance costs
and reduced shrimp harvest associated
with TED use. These costs then would
be approximately $1,420 for Louisiana
vessels, $1,361 for Alabama vessels, and
$433 for North Carolina vessels. It may
also be possible to reduce shrimp losses
over time through changes in fishing
practices or increased experience with
TED use.
The cost of initial TED purchases
would be reduced if special funding is
available, similar to the NFWF funding
in 2010 or a comparable project. This
analysis does not assume that TEDs will
be provided. If TEDs are provided, the
initial and recurring expected effects of
this proposed rule would be reduced to
the costs of TED maintenance,
replacement TEDs, and shrimp loss.
This proposed rule would not
establish any new reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance
requirements beyond the requirement to
use a TED when using skimmer trawls,
pusher-head trawls, and wing nets
(butterfly trawls). TEDs are installed by
the net dealer, so no special skills
would be expected to be required of
fishermen for TED installation. Some
learning may be required for the
maintenance and routine use of the
TED. Use of TEDs, however, is common
in the general shrimp fisheries and the
skills required in their use are
consistent with the skill set and
capabilities of commercial shrimp
fishermen in general. As a result, special
professional skills would not be
expected to be necessary.
We considered eight alternatives,
including the proposed rule and the noaction alternative, to reduce incidental
bycatch and mortality of sea turtles in
the southeastern U.S. shrimp fisheries.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The no-action alternative would not
have changed any current management
measures and was not selected because
it would not to result in any reduction
in the incidental bycatch and mortality
of sea turtles.
Two other management alternatives
also considered TED use instead of the
current tow time authorization for
varying portions of the skimmer trawl
fleets. The remaining four alternatives
considered different time/area closures
for the shrimp fisheries.
The two alternatives that considered
alternative tow time restrictions would
have, alternatively, required TED use in
lieu of tow time restrictions based on
vessel length, or limited TED use either
to vessels 30 feet and longer, or to those
20 feet and longer. Both alternatives
would have affected fewer vessels
(1,471 and 2,211 vessels, respectively)
and resulted in lower adverse economic
effects (by 40 percent and 9 percent,
respectively) than the proposed rule.
However, we did not select these
alternatives because they would not
sufficiently reduce the incidental
bycatch and mortality of sea turtles in
general, and would also incentivize an
effort shift to smaller vessels, thereby
reducing the net benefits of TED use by
larger vessels.
The four alternatives that considered
closures varied by geographic coverage,
either the Texas-Louisiana or LouisianaMississippi state borders through the
Alabama-Florida state border; or by
duration, either March 1 through May
31 or April 1 through May 15. The
expected economic effects of these
alternatives would result from reduced
shrimp harvests, and range from
aggregates losses of approximately
$50,000 to approximately $14 million.
While three of these alternatives would
likely result in lower adverse economic
effects for affected entities than the
proposed action, none of these
alternatives was selected because the
low fishing effort during the time
periods considered means that the total
reduction in the incidental bycatch and
mortality of sea turtles would be
insufficient to afford these species the
necessary protection.
The Endangered Species Act provides
the statutory basis for the rule.
Locations and Times of Public Hearings
Public hearings will be held at the
following locations:
1. Morehead City—Crystal Coast Civic
Center, 3505 Arendell Street, Morehead
City, NC 28557.
2. Larose—Larose Regional Park and
Civic Center, 307 East 5th Street, Larose,
LA 70373.
E:\FR\FM\10MYP1.SGM
10MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 91 / Thursday, May 10, 2012 / Proposed Rules
3. Belle Chasse—Belle Chasse
Community Center, 8398 Highway 23,
Belle Chasse, LA 70037.
4. D’Iberville—L.H. ‘‘Red’’ Barnett
Senior Center, 10450 Lamey Bridge
Road, D’Iberville, MS 39540.
5. Bayou La Batre—Bayou La Batre
Community Center, 12745 Padgett
Switch Road, Bayou La Batre, AL 36509.
The public hearing dates are:
1. May 30, 2012, 2 p.m. to 4 p.m.,
Morehead City, NC.
2. June 4, 2012, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m.,
Larose, LA.
3. June 5, 2012, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m., Belle
Chasse, LA.
4. June 6, 2012, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m.,
Biloxi, MS.
5. June 13, 2012, 2 p.m. to 4 p.m.,
Bayou La Batre, AL.
References
States, under the Sea Turtle
Conservation Regulations and as
Managed by the Fishery Management
Plans for Shrimp in the South Atlantic
and Gulf of Mexico. December 2, 2002.
Price, A.B. and J.L. Gearhart. 2011.
Evaluations of turtle excluder device
(TED) performance in the U.S. southeast
Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico skimmer
trawl fisheries. NOAA Technical
Memorandum NMFS–SEFSC–615, 15
pp.
Sasso, C.R. and S.P. Epperly. 2006. Seasonal
sea turtle mortality risk from forced
submergence in bottom trawls. Fisheries
Research 81:86–88.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 223
Endangered and threatened species;
Exports; Imports; Transportation.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
NMFS. 2002. Endangered Species Act
Section 7 Consultation on Shrimp
Trawling in the Southeastern United
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 May 09, 2012
Jkt 226001
27415
Dated: May 3, 2012.
Paul N. Doremus,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Operations, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 50 CFR part 223 is proposed
to be amended as follows:
PART 223—THREATENED MARINE
AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES
1. The authority citation for part 223
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531–1543; subpart B,
§ 223.201–202 also issued under 16 U.S.C.
1361 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 5503(d) for
§ 223.206(d)(9).
§ 223.206
[Amended]
2. In § 223.206, paragraph
(d)(2)(ii)(A)(3) is removed and reserved.
[FR Doc. 2012–11201 Filed 5–8–12; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\10MYP1.SGM
10MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 91 (Thursday, May 10, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27411-27415]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-11201]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 223
[Docket No. 120328230-1019-01]
RIN 0648-BC10
Sea Turtle Conservation; Shrimp Trawling Requirements
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments; notice of public hearings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are proposing to withdraw the alternative tow time
restriction and require all skimmer trawls, pusher-head trawls, and
wing nets (butterfly trawls) rigged for fishing to use turtle excluder
devices (TEDs) in their nets. The intent of this proposed rule is to
reduce incidental bycatch and mortality of sea turtles in the
southeastern U.S. shrimp fisheries, and to aid in the protection and
recovery of listed sea turtle populations.
DATES: Written comments (see ADDRESSES) will be accepted through July
9, 2012. Public hearings on the proposed rule will be held in May and
June 2012. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for meeting dates, times, and
locations.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this proposed rule, identified by
0648-BC10, by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public
comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Mail: Michael Barnette, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS,
263 13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701.
Fax: 727-824-5309; Attention: Michael Barnette.
Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted to https://www.regulations.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. We will accept anonymous
comments (enter N/A in the required fields, if you wish to remain
anonymous). You may submit attachments to electronic comments in
Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Barnette, 727-551-5794.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
All sea turtles in U.S. waters are listed as either endangered or
threatened under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA). The Kemp's
ridley (Lepidochelys kempii), leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), and
hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata) turtles are listed as endangered.
The loggerhead (Caretta caretta; Northwest Atlantic distinct population
segment) and green (Chelonia mydas) turtles are listed as threatened,
except for breeding populations of green turtles in Florida and on the
Pacific coast of Mexico, which are listed as endangered.
Sea turtles are incidentally taken, and some are killed, as a
result of numerous activities, including fishery-related trawling
activities in the Gulf of Mexico and along the Atlantic seaboard. Under
the ESA and its implementing regulations, taking (harassing, injuring
or killing) sea turtles is prohibited, except as identified in 50 CFR
223.206, according to the terms and conditions of a biological opinion
issued under section 7 of the ESA, or according to an incidental take
permit issued under section 10 of the ESA. Incidentally taking
threatened sea turtles during shrimp trawling is exempted from the
taking prohibition of section 9 of the ESA if the conservation measures
specified in the sea turtle conservation regulations (50 CFR 223.206)
are followed. The same conservation measures also apply to endangered
sea turtles (50 CFR 224.104).
The regulations require most shrimp trawlers operating in the
southeastern United States to have a NMFS-approved TED installed in
each net that is rigged for fishing, to allow sea turtles to escape.
TEDs currently approved by NMFS include single-grid hard TEDs and
hooped hard TEDs conforming to a generic description and one type of
soft TED--the Parker soft TED (see 50 CFR 223.207). However, skimmer
trawls, pusher-head trawls, and vessels using wing nets currently may
employ alternative tow time restrictions in lieu of TEDs, under 50 CFR
223.206(d)(2)(ii)(A). The alternative tow
[[Page 27412]]
time restrictions currently limit tow times to 55 minutes from April 1
through October 31, and 75 minutes from November 1 through March 31.
TEDs incorporate an escape opening, usually covered by a webbing
flap, which allows sea turtles to escape from trawl nets. To be
approved by NMFS, a TED design must be shown to be 97 percent effective
in excluding sea turtles during testing based upon specific testing
protocols (50 CFR 223.207(e)(1)). Most approved hard TEDs are described
in the regulations (50 CFR 223.207(a)) according to generic criteria
based upon certain parameters of TED design, configuration, and
installation, including height and width dimensions of the TED opening
through which the turtles escape.
Over the past two years we have documented elevated sea turtle
strandings in the northern Gulf of Mexico, particularly throughout the
Mississippi Sound area. In the first three weeks of June 2010, over 120
sea turtle strandings were reported from Mississippi and Alabama
waters, none of which exhibited any signs of external oiling to
indicate effects associated with the Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil spill
event. A total of 644 sea turtle strandings were reported in 2010 from
Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama waters, 561 (87 percent) of which
were Kemp's ridley sea turtles. During March through May of 2011, 267
sea turtle strandings were reported from Mississippi and Alabama waters
alone. A total of 525 sea turtle strandings were reported in 2011 from
Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama waters, with the majority (455)
occurring from March through July, 390 (86 percent) of which were
Kemp's ridley sea turtles. These stranding numbers are significantly
greater than reported in past years; Louisiana, Mississippi, and
Alabama reported 42 and 73 total sea turtle strandings for 2008 and
2009, respectively. Strandings typically represent only a small
fraction of actual mortality; therefore, these stranding events
represent significant amounts of sea turtle mortality. However, it
should be noted that stranding coverage has increased considerably due
to the DWH oil spill event, which has increased the likelihood of
observing stranded animals.
Necropsy results indicate a significant number of stranded turtles
from both the 2010 and 2011 events likely perished due to forced
submergence (drowning), which is commonly associated with fishery
interactions. Additionally, information from NMFS and Mississippi
Department of Marine Resources (MDMR) enforcement, stemming from the
monitoring of Mississippi Sound skimmer trawl vessels in 2010, indicate
the vessels in the skimmer trawl fleet exceed alternative tow time
requirements.
Because of the elevated strandings in 2010 and 2011, as well as
issues identified within the shrimp fisheries that indicated an
evaluation of alternative tow time restrictions within the skimmer
trawl sector was warranted, NMFS began developing a draft environmental
impact statement (DEIS); a notice of availability is expected to
publish in the Federal Register on May 18, 2012. The analysis included
in the DEIS demonstrates that withdrawing the alternative tow time
restriction and requiring all skimmer trawls, pusher-head trawls, and
wing nets rigged for fishing to use TEDs in their nets would reduce
incidental bycatch and mortality of sea turtles in the southeastern
U.S. shrimp fisheries and, therefore, may be a necessary and advisable
action to conserve threatened sea turtle species.
While the recent stranding events acted as a catalyst for examining
sea turtle bycatch issues within the shrimp fisheries and, ultimately,
this proposed rule, NMFS has previously considered a TED requirement
for skimmer trawls, pusher-head trawls, and wing nets (butterfly
trawls). For example, on May 8, 2009, NMFS published a notice of intent
(NOI) to prepare an environmental impact statement and conduct public
scoping meetings, and made available a scoping document presenting
various approaches to regulating trawl fisheries in the Atlantic Ocean
(74 FR 21627). The scoping document suggested using a phased approach
to implement regulations to reduce sea turtle captures by requiring
capture mitigation strategies (i.e., TEDs) as technology becomes
available. ``Phase I'' would have further regulated the summer flounder
and Atlantic sea scallop fisheries, as well as introduce regulations
for the whelk, croaker/weakfish, and calico scallop trawl fisheries.
Regulation of fisheries in ``Phase II,'' which included sheepshead,
black drum, king whiting, porgy, southeastern U.S. shrimp (skimmer
trawl and trynets), Spanish sardine, scad, ladyfish, squid, mackerel,
butterfish, and Northeast multispecies (large- and small-mesh) trawl
fisheries, would be evaluated for subsequent rulemaking. Finally,
``Phase III'' regulations would have been developed for the skate,
horseshoe crab, monkfish, bluefish, spiny dogfish, and herring trawl
fisheries, and any other trawl fisheries not previously identified or
considered. The NOI and scoping document acknowledged, however, that
the implementation sequence could shift we obtain testing results and
new information about additional trawl fisheries.
Additionally, in June 2010, NMFS prepared but never published an
emergency rule in accordance with Section 4(b)(7) of the ESA (16 U.S.C.
1533(b)(7)) to require TEDs for all skimmer trawls, pusher-head trawls,
and wing nets (butterfly trawls) rigged for fishing in Mississippi and
Alabama state waters. Before the emergency rule could be implemented,
however, oil from the DWH oil spill event reached nearshore areas of
the Northern Gulf of Mexico, and the states closed their waters to all
fishing.
Skimmer Trawls, Pusher-Head Trawls, and Wing Nets
Developed in the early 1980s, the skimmer trawl was intended for
use in some areas primarily to catch white shrimp, which have the
ability to jump over the headrope of standard trawls while being towed
in shallow water. The skimmer net frame allows the net to be elevated
above the water while the net is fishing, thus preventing shrimp from
escaping over the top. Owing to increased shrimp catch rates, less
debris and/or fish and other bycatch, and lower fuel consumption than
otter trawlers, the use of skimmer nets quickly spread throughout
Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. The basic components of a skimmer
trawl include a frame, the net, heavy weights, skids or ``shoes,'' and
tickler chains. The net frame is usually constructed of steel or
aluminum pipe or tubing and is either L-shaped (with an additional
stiff leg) or a trapezoid design. When net frames are deployed, they
are aligned perpendicularly to the vessel and cocked or tilted forward
and slightly upward. This position allows the net to fish better and
reduces the chance of the leading edge of the skid digging into the
bottom and subsequently damaging the gear. The frames are maintained in
this position by two or more stays or cables to the bow. The outer leg
of the frame is held in position with a ``stiff leg'' to the horizontal
pipe and determines the maximum depth at which each net is capable of
working. The skid, or ``shoe,'' is attached to the bottom of the outer
leg, which allows the frame to ride along the bottom, rising and
falling with the bottom contour. The bottom of the gear includes
tickler chains and lead lines. The skimmer trawl is the most popular
trawl type after the otter trawl, and is widely utilized in Louisiana
waters.
Vietnamese fishermen who moved into Louisiana in the early 1980s
[[Page 27413]]
introduced the pusher-head trawl, also known as the ``xipe'' or
chopstick net. The pusher-head trawl net is attached to a rigid or
flexible frame similar to the wing net; however, the frame mounted on
the bow of the boat is attached to a pair of skids and fished by
pushing the net along the bottom.
Wing nets (butterfly trawls or ``paupiers'') were introduced in the
1950s and used on stationary platforms and on shrimp boats either under
power or while anchored. A wing net consists of square metal frame
which forms the mouth of the net. Webbing is attached to the frame and
tapers back to a cod end. The net can be fished from a stationary
platform or a pair of nets can be attached to either side of a vessel.
The vessel is then anchored in tidal current or the nets are ``pushed''
through the water by the vessel. The contents of the wing net, as well
as the contents of skimmer and pusher-head trawls, can be picked up and
dumped without raising the entire net out of the water, which is
necessary with an otter trawl. While wing nets, as well as pusher-head
trawls, are allowable gear types in the Northern Gulf of Mexico, they
are not as common as skimmer trawls. For example, while the MDMR does
not differentiate gear type within their shrimp fishery, a 2008 survey
of trip tickets indicated there were approximately 247 otter trawl, 56
skimmer trawl, 4 butterfly net, and 2 pusher-head trawls active in
Mississippi.
Sea Turtle Bycatch in Skimmer Trawls, Pusher-Head Trawls, and Wing Nets
While there is available information documenting sea turtle
captures in the skimmer trawl fisheries (e.g., Price and Gearheart
2011), skimmer trawls, pusher-head trawls, and wing nets were initially
allowed to use alternative tow time restrictions in lieu of TEDs under
the assumption that the trawl bags were typically retrieved at
intervals that would not be fatal to most sea turtles that were
captured in the net. The December 2, 2002 biological opinion (NMFS
2002) noted that the tow-time authorization instead of TEDs was for
fisheries that, ``out of physical, practical, or economic necessity,
require fishermen to limit their tow times naturally.'' But information
from MDMR indicates that some participants in their skimmer trawl
fishery are not aware of the tow time restrictions, and violations of
the tow time restrictions have occurred and still occur within the
fishery.
Moreover, tow times restrictions are difficult to enforce.
Documenting a tow time violation requires enforcement personnel to be
in close proximity of a skimmer trawl to monitor gear deployment and
recovery, and to record the time when the codend enters the water until
it is removed. Also, enforcement personnel need to remain undetected
for at least 55 minutes--practically impossible at sea--or else their
presence may bias a vessel captain's operational procedure. There are
also concerns repeated captures may result in turtle mortality in times
and areas where sea turtle abundance and skimmer trawl fishing effort
is high (Sasso and Epperly 2006).
In the DEIS, we calculated sea turtle catch per unit effort rates
based on observed effort in the skimmer trawl fisheries and relative
abundances of sea turtle species. These rates were multiplied by
overall effort (i.e., 585,576 effort hours in the Northern Gulf of
Mexico skimmer trawl fisheries and 6,576 effort hours in the North
Carolina skimmer trawl fishery) to determine total sea turtle take in
the skimmer trawl fisheries. The analysis resulted in a total
anticipated take of 28,127 captured sea turtles in the combined skimmer
trawl, pusher-head trawl, and wing net fisheries.
If skimmer trawl vessels regularly exceed the tow time restrictions
and kill incidentally captured sea turtles, requiring TEDs instead of
tow times may significantly reduce sea turtle mortality by allowing
them to escape the net and avoid drowning. In order to extrapolate the
sea turtle capture estimates to obtain an associated mortality estimate
for the skimmer trawl fisheries operating with installed TEDs, the DEIS
analysis considered both the benefits of exclusion through properly
installed TEDs and the effect of TED violations on sea turtle capture
rates and total mortalities. This analysis was accomplished by
calculating overall compliance and non-compliance rates in the Gulf of
Mexico and the Atlantic otter trawl shrimp fisheries (to serve as a
proxy for the skimmer trawl fisheries, assuming TED compliance would be
similar between the two gear types) based on vessel boarding data from
TED inspections. Using this data, we estimate that withdrawing the
alternative tow time restriction in the preferred alternative would
prevent 5,515 sea turtle mortalities in the combined skimmer trawl
fisheries. Therefore, we preliminarily determined that the measures
proposed here are a necessary and advisable to conserve threatened sea
turtle species. We have further preliminarily determined that the
measures proposed here are necessary and appropriate to enforce the
requirements of the ESA.
We anticipate to make this proposed TED requirement effective by
the start of the 2013 shrimping season, not later than March 15, 2013.
Classification
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
NMFS prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), as
required by Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, for this
proposed rule. The IRFA describes the economic impact this proposed
rule, if implemented, would have on small entities. A description of
the proposed rule, why it is being considered, the objectives of, and
legal basis for this proposed rule are contained at the beginning of
this section in the preamble and in the SUMMARY section of the
preamble. A copy of the full analysis is available from NMFS (see
ADDRESSES). A summary of the IRFA follows.
No duplicative, overlapping, or conflicting Federal rules have been
identified.
We expect this proposed rule will directly affect fishermen who use
skimmer trawls, pusher-head trawls, and wing nets (butterfly trawls).
This gear is only used in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, and
North Carolina. Florida already requires vessels employing this gear to
use TEDs. Among the remaining states, approximately 2,435 active
vessels have been identified that use this gear (2,248 in Louisiana, 62
in Mississippi, 60 in Alabama, and 65 in North Carolina). We expect
this rule, if implemented, will affect all of these vessels.
The Small Business Administration has established size criteria for
all major industry sectors in the U.S. including fish harvesters. 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 million (North American Industry
Classification System code 114112, shellfish fishing) for all its
affiliated operations worldwide.
We estimate the average annual revenue (2008 dollars) for vessels
harvesting shrimp using skimmer trawls, pusher-head trawls, or wing
nets (butterfly trawls) as approximately $22,500 for Louisiana vessels,
$21,400 for Alabama vessels, and $2,700 for North Carolina vessels.
However, fishermen, including shrimpers, commonly participate in
multiple fisheries, and these results may not
[[Page 27414]]
include revenue from non-shrimp species. Comparable information for
Mississippi vessels is not available because no shrimp landings from
Mississippi vessels using this gear were recorded in the comparable
time period (2006-2010). Although some Mississippi vessels are expected
to be actively using this gear, we do not know whether these vessels
are landing their shrimp harvests in other states, selling directly to
the public and not through dealers, or engaging in some other practice
that has resulted in the absence of recorded landings. Based on the
average revenue estimates, all commercial fishing vessels expected to
be directly affected by this proposed rule, if implemented, are for the
purpose of this analysis considered to be small entities.
If the affected entities are required to pay for their TEDs, we
expect this proposed rule will result in an estimated average first-
year cost of $2,120 for fishermen in Louisiana, $1,000 for fishermen in
Mississippi, $2,061 for fishermen in Alabama, and $1,133 for fishermen
in North Carolina. These results are based on an estimated cost of $350
per TED, the use of two TEDs per vessel, an annual maintenance cost of
$300 per vessel, and an estimated 4.97 percent reduction in shrimp
harvest. Based on the average annual revenue estimates provided above,
these first-year costs equal approximately 9.4 percent of average
annual shrimp revenue for affected entities in Louisiana, 9.6 percent
in Alabama, and 42.4 percent in North Carolina. The total average
effect per entity would be reduced if these fishermen also operate in
other fisheries, which we expect is the case for most entities. Total
revenues from all species for the affected fishermen are not known.
However, the estimated average annual net revenue across all Gulf
states, including revenue from all species, for operations in the
inshore shrimp sector, which includes the entities described here, is
negative, indicating the average vessel is operating at a loss. As a
result, any increased costs or reduced revenues are expected to
compound these losses. Similar information is not available for North
Carolina fishermen, but this analysis assumes the average net revenue
for North Carolina fishermen is comparable to that of inshore shrimp
fishermen in the Gulf of Mexico.
As previously discussed, a comparable analysis for entities in
Mississippi cannot be completed because we lack appropriate revenue
information. As a result, the estimated effect for entities in
Mississippi simply reflects the cost of the TEDs. The cost associated
with TED purchase, however, may be overstated, particularly for
Mississippi vessels. The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF)
allocated funds received from oil recovery income as a result of the
DWH oil spill event for Gulf of Mexico restoration efforts. In 2010,
funding was made available to purchase and distribute TEDs for skimmer
trawl vessels and, to date, an estimated 360 TEDs have been distributed
to 180 Mississippi shrimp vessels. Therefore, we believe the majority
of skimmer trawl vessels operating in Mississippi already possess TEDs.
Because a TED is a durable device, the cost of a new TED is not an
annual expense. The estimated replacement cycle for a TED is at least
three years, barring net damage and TED loss. In a year in which a new
TED is not purchased, the effect of this rule would be limited to TED
maintenance costs and reduced shrimp harvest associated with TED use.
These costs then would be approximately $1,420 for Louisiana vessels,
$1,361 for Alabama vessels, and $433 for North Carolina vessels. It may
also be possible to reduce shrimp losses over time through changes in
fishing practices or increased experience with TED use.
The cost of initial TED purchases would be reduced if special
funding is available, similar to the NFWF funding in 2010 or a
comparable project. This analysis does not assume that TEDs will be
provided. If TEDs are provided, the initial and recurring expected
effects of this proposed rule would be reduced to the costs of TED
maintenance, replacement TEDs, and shrimp loss.
This proposed rule would not establish any new reporting, record-
keeping, or other compliance requirements beyond the requirement to use
a TED when using skimmer trawls, pusher-head trawls, and wing nets
(butterfly trawls). TEDs are installed by the net dealer, so no special
skills would be expected to be required of fishermen for TED
installation. Some learning may be required for the maintenance and
routine use of the TED. Use of TEDs, however, is common in the general
shrimp fisheries and the skills required in their use are consistent
with the skill set and capabilities of commercial shrimp fishermen in
general. As a result, special professional skills would not be expected
to be necessary.
We considered eight alternatives, including the proposed rule and
the no-action alternative, to reduce incidental bycatch and mortality
of sea turtles in the southeastern U.S. shrimp fisheries. The no-action
alternative would not have changed any current management measures and
was not selected because it would not to result in any reduction in the
incidental bycatch and mortality of sea turtles.
Two other management alternatives also considered TED use instead
of the current tow time authorization for varying portions of the
skimmer trawl fleets. The remaining four alternatives considered
different time/area closures for the shrimp fisheries.
The two alternatives that considered alternative tow time
restrictions would have, alternatively, required TED use in lieu of tow
time restrictions based on vessel length, or limited TED use either to
vessels 30 feet and longer, or to those 20 feet and longer. Both
alternatives would have affected fewer vessels (1,471 and 2,211
vessels, respectively) and resulted in lower adverse economic effects
(by 40 percent and 9 percent, respectively) than the proposed rule.
However, we did not select these alternatives because they would not
sufficiently reduce the incidental bycatch and mortality of sea turtles
in general, and would also incentivize an effort shift to smaller
vessels, thereby reducing the net benefits of TED use by larger
vessels.
The four alternatives that considered closures varied by geographic
coverage, either the Texas-Louisiana or Louisiana-Mississippi state
borders through the Alabama-Florida state border; or by duration,
either March 1 through May 31 or April 1 through May 15. The expected
economic effects of these alternatives would result from reduced shrimp
harvests, and range from aggregates losses of approximately $50,000 to
approximately $14 million. While three of these alternatives would
likely result in lower adverse economic effects for affected entities
than the proposed action, none of these alternatives was selected
because the low fishing effort during the time periods considered means
that the total reduction in the incidental bycatch and mortality of sea
turtles would be insufficient to afford these species the necessary
protection.
The Endangered Species Act provides the statutory basis for the
rule.
Locations and Times of Public Hearings
Public hearings will be held at the following locations:
1. Morehead City--Crystal Coast Civic Center, 3505 Arendell Street,
Morehead City, NC 28557.
2. Larose--Larose Regional Park and Civic Center, 307 East 5th
Street, Larose, LA 70373.
[[Page 27415]]
3. Belle Chasse--Belle Chasse Community Center, 8398 Highway 23,
Belle Chasse, LA 70037.
4. D'Iberville--L.H. ``Red'' Barnett Senior Center, 10450 Lamey
Bridge Road, D'Iberville, MS 39540.
5. Bayou La Batre--Bayou La Batre Community Center, 12745 Padgett
Switch Road, Bayou La Batre, AL 36509.
The public hearing dates are:
1. May 30, 2012, 2 p.m. to 4 p.m., Morehead City, NC.
2. June 4, 2012, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m., Larose, LA.
3. June 5, 2012, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m., Belle Chasse, LA.
4. June 6, 2012, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m., Biloxi, MS.
5. June 13, 2012, 2 p.m. to 4 p.m., Bayou La Batre, AL.
References
NMFS. 2002. Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation on Shrimp
Trawling in the Southeastern United States, under the Sea Turtle
Conservation Regulations and as Managed by the Fishery Management
Plans for Shrimp in the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. December
2, 2002.
Price, A.B. and J.L. Gearhart. 2011. Evaluations of turtle excluder
device (TED) performance in the U.S. southeast Atlantic and Gulf of
Mexico skimmer trawl fisheries. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-
SEFSC-615, 15 pp.
Sasso, C.R. and S.P. Epperly. 2006. Seasonal sea turtle mortality
risk from forced submergence in bottom trawls. Fisheries Research
81:86-88.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 223
Endangered and threatened species; Exports; Imports;
Transportation.
Dated: May 3, 2012.
Paul N. Doremus,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 223 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 223--THREATENED MARINE AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES
1. The authority citation for part 223 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531-1543; subpart B, Sec. 223.201-202
also issued under 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 5503(d) for
Sec. 223.206(d)(9).
Sec. 223.206 [Amended]
2. In Sec. 223.206, paragraph (d)(2)(ii)(A)(3) is removed and
reserved.
[FR Doc. 2012-11201 Filed 5-8-12; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P