Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Fisheries of the Gulf of Alaska; Amendment 89 to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska, 33040-33044 [2013-13050]
Download as PDF
33040
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 106 / Monday, June 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules
observer must immediately stop fishing
and return to port after each slippage
event. NMFS shall implement these
restrictions in accordance with the APA.
■ 12. In § 648.204, paragraph (b) is
revised to read as follows:
§ 648.204
Possession restrictions.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Each vessel working cooperatively
in the herring fishery, including vessels
pair trawling, purse seining, and
transferring herring at-sea, must be
issued a valid herring permit to fish for,
possess, or land Atlantic herring and are
subject to the most restrictive herring
possession limit associated with the
permits issued to vessels working
cooperatively.
■ 13. Section 648.205 is revised to read
as follows:
§ 648.205
VMS requirements.
The owner or operator of any limited
access herring vessel or vessel issued an
Areas 2/3 Open Access Permit, with the
exception of fixed gear fishermen, must
install and operate a VMS unit
consistent with the requirements of
§ 648.9. The VMS unit must be installed
on board, and must be operable before
the vessel may begin fishing. Atlantic
herring carrier vessels are not required
to have VMS. (See § 648.10(m) for VMS
notification requirements.)
■ 14. In § 648.206, paragraphs (b)(30)
and (b)(31) are revised, and paragraphs
(b)(32) through (39) are added to read as
follows:
§ 648.206
Framework provisions.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(30) AMs;
(31) Changes to vessel trip notification
and declaration requirements;
(32) Adjustments to measures to
address net slippage, including
sampling requirements, exceptions for
trip termination threshold, trip
termination threshold amounts/
divisions by area and/or gear type;
(33) Adjustments to requirements for
observer coverage levels;
(34) Provisions related to industryfunded catch monitoring program
(including cost allocation provisions,
service provider requirements, waivers);
(35) River Herring Monitoring/
Avoidance Areas;
(36) Provisions for river herring
incidental catch avoidance program,
including adjustments to the
mechanism and process for tracking
fleet activity, reporting incidental catch
events, compiling data, and notifying
the fleet of changes to the area(s); the
definition/duration of ‘test tows,’ if test
tows would be utilized to determine the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:25 May 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
extent of river herring incidental catch
in a particular area(s); the threshold for
river herring incidental catch that
would trigger the need for vessels to be
alerted and move out of the area(s); the
distance that vessels would be required
to move from the area(s); and the time
that vessels would be required to remain
out of the area(s).
(37) Changes to criteria/provisions for
access to Northeast Multispecies Closed
Areas;
(38) River herring catch caps; and
(39) Any other measure currently
included in the FMP.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2013–13172 Filed 5–31–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 679
RIN 0648–BB76
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Fisheries of the Gulf
of Alaska; Amendment 89 to the
Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of availability of fishery
management plan amendment; request
for comments.
AGENCY:
The North Pacific Fishery
Management Council has submitted
Amendment 89 to the Fishery
Management Plan for Groundfish of the
Gulf of Alaska (FMP). Amendment 89
would modify the FMP in two ways, if
approved. First, Amendment 89 would
establish a protection area in Marmot
Bay, northeast of Kodiak Island, and
close that area to fishing with trawl gear
except for directed fishing for pollock
with pelagic trawl gear to reduce
bycatch of Tanner crab (Chionoecetes
bairdi) in Gulf of Alaska (GOA)
groundfish fisheries. Second,
Amendment 89 would require the use of
modified nonpelagic trawl gear when
directed fishing for flatfish in the
Central Regulatory Area of the GOA and
would provide authority in the FMP to
specify in regulation the modifications
that are required to raise portions of the
gear off the sea floor. The use of
modified nonpelagic trawl gear in these
fisheries would reduce the unobserved
injury and mortality of Tanner crab and
the potential adverse impacts of
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
nonpelagic trawl gear on bottom habitat.
This action is intended to promote the
goals and objectives of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act, the FMP, and other
applicable law. Comments from the
public are encouraged.
DATES: Comments on the amendment
must be received on or before August 2,
2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on this document, identified by NOAA–
NMFS–2011–0294, by any of the
following methods:
• Electronic Submission: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to
www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-20110294, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon,
complete the required fields, and enter
or attach your comments.
• Mail: Address written comments to
Glenn Merrill, Assistant Regional
Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries
Division, Alaska Region NMFS, Attn:
Ellen Sebastian. Mail comments to P.O.
Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802–1668.
• Fax: Address written comments to
Glenn Merrill, Assistant Regional
Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries
Division, Alaska Region NMFS, Attn:
Ellen Sebastian. Fax comments to 907–
586–7557.
Instructions: Comments must be
submitted by one of the above methods
to ensure that the comments are
received, documented, and considered
by NMFS. Comments sent by any other
method, to any other address or
individual, or received after the end of
the comment period, may not be
considered. All comments received are
a part of the public record and will
generally be posted for public viewing
on www.regulations.gov without change.
All personal identifying information
(e.g., name, address) submitted
voluntarily by the sender will be
publicly accessible.
Do not submit confidential business
information, or otherwise sensitive or
protected information. 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 or Excel, WordPerfect,
or Adobe PDF file formats only.
Electronic copies of Amendment 89,
the EA/RIR/IFRA prepared for the Area
Closures for Tanner Crab Protection in
Gulf of Alaska Groundfish Fisheries
(Area Closures EA/RIR/IRFA), and the
EA/RIR/IRFA for Trawl Sweep
Modification in the Flatfish Fishery in
the Central Gulf of Alaska (Trawl Sweep
EA/RIE/IRFA) are available from https://
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 106 / Monday, June 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
www.regulations.gov or from the NMFS
Alaska Region Web site at https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom
Pearson, 907–481–1780.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS
manages the groundfish fisheries in the
exclusive economic zone under the
Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the GOA (FMP). The
North Pacific Fishery Management
Council (Council) prepared the FMP
under the authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens
Act), 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Regulations
governing U.S. fisheries and
implementing the FMP appear at 50
CFR parts 600 and 679.
The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires
that each regional fishery management
council submit any fishery management
plan amendment it prepares to NMFS
for review and approval, disapproval, or
partial approval by the Secretary of
Commerce. The Magnuson-Stevens Act
also requires that NMFS, upon receiving
a fishery management plan amendment,
immediately publish a notice in the
Federal Register announcing that the
amendment is available for public
review and comment. This notice
announces that proposed Amendment
89 to the FMP is available for public
review and comment.
Background
Since the implementation of the FMP
in 1978, the Council and NMFS have
adopted measures intended to control
the catch of species taken incidentally
in groundfish fisheries. Certain species
are designated as ‘‘prohibited’’ in the
FMP, because they are the target of other
fully utilized domestic fisheries. The
FMP and implementing regulations at
§ 679.21 require that catch of these
species and species groups must be
avoided while fishing for groundfish,
and when incidentally caught, they
must be immediately returned to sea
with a minimum of injury. These
species include Pacific halibut, Pacific
herring, Pacific salmon, steelhead trout,
king crab, and Tanner crab. The
incidental catch of prohibited species
under § 679.21 require prohibited
species to be discarded at sea with
minimum injury, or retained but not
sold under the Prohibited Species
Donation Program at § 679.26. The
Magnuson-Stevens Act refers to species
which must be discarded by regulation
as ‘‘bycatch.’’
The Council has recommended in
both the Bering Sea and Aleutian
Islands Management Area (BSAI) and
GOA, and NMFS has implemented,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:25 May 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
measures to: (1) Close areas with a high
occurrence of prohibited species, or
where there is a relatively high level of
prohibited species catch; (2) require the
use of gear specifically modified to
minimize prohibited species catch and
effects on bottom habitat; and (3)
establish prohibited species catch (PSC)
limits in specific Alaska groundfish
fisheries. A summary of these measures
is in Section 1 of the Area Closures EA/
RIR/IRFA (see ADDRESSES).
The Council has recommended, and
NMFS has implemented, closure areas
to protect king crab stock in the GOA.
These area closures limit the use of gear
that fish on or close to the sea floor,
such as nonpelagic trawl and pot gears,
to minimize the bycatch of crab species
and adverse impacts on crab habitat.
Specifically, in the Central GOA,
regulations implementing Amendment
15 to the FMP (52 FR 12183, April 15,
1987) established closures near Kodiak,
AK, to protect king crab habitat. These
closure areas were subsequently
expanded and revised under regulations
implementing Amendment 26 to the
FMP (58 FR 503, January 6, 1993). Time
and areas closures to the use of
nonpelagic trawl gear have been shown
to reduce injury and mortality to crab
species in both the BSAI and GOA. For
this reason, NMFS is proposing closure
to vessels using trawl gear except for
vessels directed fishing for pollock with
pelagic trawl gear to protect Tanner crab
in a portion of the Central GOA.
Recently, NMFS implemented
regulations that require the use of
modified nonpelagic trawl gear in the
Bering Sea flatfish fisheries to reduce
the bycatch of crab and minimize the
impact of this gear on bottom habitat.
See Amendment 94 to the FMP for
Groundfish of the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Management Area
(BSAI FMP) for additional detail (75 FR
61642, October 6, 2010). NMFS is
proposing to also require the use of
raised trawl sweeps in the GOA.
In 2005, the Council initiated a series
of reviews on prohibited species
bycatch in the GOA groundfish
fisheries. These reviews led the Council
to focus action on two prohibited
species and two regulatory areas with
potentially high bycatch levels: Chinook
salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)
bycatch in pollock fisheries in the
Central and Western GOA, and Tanner
crab bycatch in the Central GOA. The
Council addressed Chinook salmon
bycatch in the GOA through
Amendment 93 to the FMP (77 FR
42629, July 20, 2012). In October 2009,
the Council initiated an analysis of
potential protection measures for
Tanner crab in the Central GOA. In
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
33041
April 2010, the Council initially
reviewed alternative bycatch control
measures, subsequently revised and
refined these alternatives, and in
October 2010, recommended that the
FMP be amended to establish a
protection area in Marmot Bay,
northeast of Kodiak Island, and that the
area be closed to fishing with trawl gear
except for directed fishing for pollock
with pelagic trawl gear.
When the Council recommended the
Marmot Bay Area closure in October
2010, it directed its staff to review the
practicality of requiring the use of
modified nonpelagic trawl gear by
vessels directed fishing for flatfish in
the Central GOA. The Council
recommended this review as a first step
in considering additional measures to
reduce the potential adverse effects of
nonpelagic trawl gear on bottom habitat
and to reduce unobserved Tanner crab
injury and mortality. The Council’s
recommendation was based on past
experience with the use of modified
nonpelagic trawl gear to reduce
potential adverse effects on bottom
habitat in Bering Sea flatfish fisheries.
In 2008, NMFS, the NMFS Office of Law
Enforcement, and the fishing industry
tested modified nonpelagic fishing gear
in the Bering Sea under normal fishing
conditions to determine if this gear
could be used safely and effectively in
ways that may reduce potential adverse
effects on bottom habitat while
maintaining effective catch rates for
flatfish target species. These initial tests
were successful, and in October 2009,
the Council recommended Amendment
94 to the FMP for Groundfish of the
BSAI, which requires vessels directed
fishing for flatfish in the Bering Sea
subarea to use modified nonpelagic
trawl gear. In 2010, NMFS published
final regulations implementing BSAI
Amendment 94 (75 FR 61642, October
6, 2010).
In February 2012, the Council
reviewed an analysis of potential
impacts of expanding the required use
of modified nonpelagic trawl gear to
vessels in the Central GOA flatfish
fisheries. After additional review in
April 2012, the Council recommended
requiring that vessels directed fishing
for flatfish in the Central GOA use
modified nonpelagic trawl gear. GOA
Amendment 89 incorporates both of the
Council’s recommendations, intended to
be taken as a suite of protection
measures for Tanner crab in the Central
GOA.
The Council identified several reasons
for protection measures for Tanner crab
in the GOA groundfish fisheries:
• Tanner crab is identified in the
FMP as a prohibited species that is
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 106 / Monday, June 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
incidentally caught in the Central GOA
groundfish trawl, pot, and longline
fisheries. Tanner crab is incidentally
caught in relatively high proportion by
vessels using nonpelagic trawl gear in
the Central GOA.
• Directed fisheries for Tanner crab in
the Central GOA are fully allocated
under the current limited entry system
managed by the State of Alaska. Details
of this crab fishery are described in
Section 3.5 in the Area Closures EA/
RIR/IRFA.
• No specific conservation measures
exist in the Central GOA to address
adverse interactions with Tanner crab
by vessels using trawl gear to directed
fish for groundfish.
• Tanner crab is a bottom-dwelling
species, and limits on the use of
nonpelagic trawl gear may reduce
Tanner crab PSC and adverse effects on
Tanner crab habitat.
Proposed Action 1: Marmot Bay Tanner
Crab Protection Area
With one exception, Amendment 89
would close the Marmot Bay Area yearround to directed fishing for groundfish
by vessels using trawl gear. The term
‘‘directed fishing’’ is defined in
regulation at § 679.2. Directed fishing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:25 May 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
Amendment 89 to the GOA FMP
would establish an area called the
Marmot Bay Tanner Crab Protection
Area (Marmot Bay Area). The proposed
Marmot Bay Area is northeast of Kodiak
Island and would extend westward from
151 degrees 47 minutes W longitude to
State waters between 58 degrees N
latitude and 58 degrees 15 minutes N
latitude. The proposed Marmot Bay
Area would share borders with two
existing areas, the Type 1 Marmot Flats
Area and the Type 3 Outer Bay Area.
The southern and eastern borders of the
proposed Marmot Bay Area would be
the same latitude and longitude as the
northern and eastern borders,
respectively, of the existing Marmot
Flats Area. The Marmot Flats Area is
closed to directed fishing with
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
nonpelagic trawl gear (see
§ 679.22(b)(1)(i) and Figure 5 to part
679). Under current regulations, the
Outer Marmot Bay Area is open to
directed fishing with nonpelagic trawl
gear unless otherwise closed. The
proposed Marmot Bay Area and the
existing Marmot Flats and Outer
Marmot Bay Areas are shown in Figure
1. Where the proposed Marmot Bay
Area overlaps the Type 3 Outer Marmot
Bay Area, the more restrictive proposed
regulation, the year round closure to the
use of trawl gear (excepted as noted) in
the Marmot Bay Area would apply.
State of Alaska waters to the west of
both the proposed Marmot Bay Area and
the existing Marmot Flats Area are
closed year-round to the use of
nonpelagic trawl gear under existing
state regulations (5 AAC 39.164).
for pollock by vessels using pelagic
trawl gear would be exempt from this
closure. Overall, the effect of the
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
EP03JN13.000
33042
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 106 / Monday, June 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules
proposed Marmot Bay Area closure
would be to extend closures on the use
of trawl gear to the north and east of
State and Federal waters that are
currently closed to nonpelagic trawl
gear. The Marmot Bay Area closure also
would prohibit the use of all trawl gear,
other than pelagic trawl gear used in the
directed fishery for pollock. The
Council recommended this exemption
due to the limited potential reductions
of Tanner crab PSC that would occur if
the pelagic trawl pollock fishery were
subject to the closure. The use of pelagic
trawl gear for species other than pollock
was not identified in the Marmot Bay
Area; therefore, no additional
exemptions to the trawl closure were
warranted. See Section 3.3.2 of the Area
Closures EA/RIR/IRFA for additional
detail.
The Council recommended the
Marmot Bay Area trawl gear closure
based primarily on the high observed
rate of Tanner crab mortality by
nonpelagic trawl gear in the Marmot
Bay Area relative to other areas in the
Central GOA. (See Section 3.3 of the
Area Closures EA/RIR/IRFA for
additional detail.) The areas with the
greatest abundance of crab are the
Marmot Bay Area, northeast of Kodiak
Island; the Chiniak Gully east of Kodiak
Island; and Alaska Department of Fish
and Game (ADF&G) Statistical Areas
525702 and 525630, southeast of Kodiak
Island. The Marmot Bay Area had the
highest average mortality rate of crab
per metric ton (mt) of groundfish catch
by vessels using nonpelagic trawl gear
in the Kodiak District between 2001 and
2009 (the most recent years of available
data) at 7.68 crab/mt groundfish. (See
Section 3.3 of the Area Closures EA/
RIR/IRFA for additional detail.)
The Council considered a range of
alternative closure areas to limit the use
of nonpelagic trawl gear and pot gear in
the Marmot Bay Area, ADF&G Statistical
Areas 525702 and 525630, and the
Chiniak Gully. Ultimately, the Council
recommended limiting the closure to
most trawl gear in the Marmot Bay Area
based on: (1) The high rate of Tanner
crab mortality in the Marmot Bay Area
relative to other areas; (2) the
observation of mature male and female
Tanner crab populations within the
Marmot Bay Area; (3) the occurrence of
known Tanner crab habitat within the
Marmot Bay Area; (4) the high rate of
Tanner crab bycatch by vessels using
trawl gear relative to pot gear; and (5)
the limited impact that the Marmot Bay
Area closure would likely have on
existing nonpelagic trawl participants
relative to closures in other areas. See
Section 3.1 of the Area Closures EA/
RIR/IRFA for additional detail of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:25 May 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
alternatives considered. The Council
considered but rejected closing areas to
pot, longline, and pelagic trawl gear
used in the directed pollock fishery
given the relatively small amount of
Tanner crab bycatch by these gear types
relative to nonpelagic trawl gear. (See
Section 3.3.3 of the Area Closures EA/
RIR/IRFA for additional detail.)
The Marmot Bay Area closure would
be consistent with past measures the
Council has recommended, and NMFS
has implemented, to limit impacts of
nonpelagic trawl gear on crab
populations, directly by limiting injury
and mortality, and indirectly by
reducing potential adverse habitat
impacts. Overall, observed Tanner crab
mortality in the Central GOA accounts
for less than one fifth of one percent of
the assessed crab population in the
Central GOA. See Section 3.3.3 of the
Area Closures EA/RIR/IRFA for
additional detail. Because overall crab
bycatch in the GOA groundfish fisheries
can be small in relation to crab
population, but potentially concentrated
in certain areas or at certain times, time
and area closures are more effective
than Tanner crab PSC limits in reducing
the potential impacts of nonpelagic
trawl gear on crab stocks. The proposed
closure for the Marmot Bay Area may
assist in the conservation of the Tanner
crab stock by reducing injury and
mortality and potential adverse effects
of nonpelagic trawl gear on bottom
habitat used by Tanner crab.
In October 2010, the Council also
recommended that NMFS incorporate
statistically robust observer information
from certain vessels using pot gear in
the Marmot Bay Area and certain
vessels using nonpelagic trawl or pot
gear in two other specific areas near
Kodiak, AK (ADF&G Statistical Area
525702 and Chiniak Gully). Overall, the
intent of the Council’s recommendation
was to improve estimates of Tanner crab
bycatch data in the GOA groundfish
fisheries that occur within these areas.
At the same meeting that the Council
recommended enhanced observer
coverage for these three areas, the
Council also recommended Amendment
86 to the BSAI FMP and Amendment 76
to the GOA FMP which
comprehensively restructured the
funding and deployment of onboard
observers under the North Pacific
Groundfish Observer Program (Observer
Program). The Council included as part
of its recommendation for improved
estimates of Tanner crab bycatch that
NMFS ‘‘incorporate, to the extent
possible, in [the restructured Observer
Program], an observer deployment
strategy that ensures adequate coverage
to establish statistically robust
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
33043
observations’’ in the three specific areas
near Kodiak, AK.
NMFS published a notice of
availability for Amendments 86 and 76
to the FMPs on March 14, 2012 (77 FR
15019), and a proposed rule for the
restructured Observer Program on April
18, 2012 (77 FR 23326). On June 7,
2012, the Secretary of Commerce
approved Amendments 86 and 76 to the
FMPs for the restructured Observer
Program in the Alaska groundfish
fisheries, and the final rule to
implement the amendments, effective
January 1, 2013, was published on
November 21, 2012 (77 FR 70062).
Details of the restructured Observer
Program are available in the proposed
and final rules for that action.
The restructured Observer Program
improves the quality of fisheries data,
including Tanner crab bycatch
information in the GOA groundfish
fisheries. Vessels under the restructured
Observer Program are either fully or
partially observed. A detailed list of
vessels in the full and partial observer
coverage categories is provided in the
restructured Observer Program proposed
rule (77 FR 23326, April 18, 2012). A
randomized system for the assignment
of observer coverage throughout the
GOA for partially observed vessels is
used to reduce potential bias in the
observer data. Selecting specific
locations in the Central GOA for
increased observer coverage would
reduce the ability to randomize observer
assignments and therefore potentially
bias observer data. Because the
restructured Observer Program
incorporates an observer deployment
strategy that ensures adequate coverage
to establish statistically robust
observations for the GOA, NMFS has
determined that the Council’s
recommendation has been implemented
by Amendments 86 and 76 and no
additional measures are needed with
Amendment 89. NMFS intends to use
the regulations and deployment process
established under the restructured
Observer Program to obtain fishery
catch and bycatch data without specific
observer coverage requirements in
specific areas in the GOA. In order to
ensure that the Council’s desire to
obtain better observer data is being met,
NMFS will present a deployment plan
for observers annually for the Council’s
review.
Proposed Action 2: Modification of
Nonpelagic Trawl Gear Used in the
Central GOA Directed Flatfish Fisheries
Amendment 89 would amend the
FMP to require the use of modified
nonpelagic trawl gear when directed
fishing for flatfish in the Central GOA
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
33044
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 106 / Monday, June 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
and would provide authority in the FMP
to specify in regulation the
modifications that are required to raise
portions of the gear off the sea floor. In
the GOA, the flatfish fisheries include
the directed fisheries for shallow-water
flatfish, deep-water flatfish, arrowtooth
flounder, rex sole, and flathead sole, as
defined in Table 10 to 50 CFR part 679.
While the proposed amendments to
the FMP under Amendment 89 are
general, the Council provided detailed
recommendations on the specific
modifications that would be required to
nonpelagic trawl gear through
regulation. The primary effect of the
proposed rule to implement this aspect
of Amendment 89 would be to require
modifications to a specific component
of the gear. Nonpelagic trawl gear uses
a pair of long lines called ‘‘sweeps’’ to
herd fish into the net. The sweeps drag
across the bottom and may adversely
impact benthic organisms (e.g., crab
species, sea whips, sponges, and basket
stars). Approximately 90 percent of the
bottom contact of nonpelagic trawl gear
used in directed fishing for flatfish is
from the sweeps, which can be more
than 1,000 feet (304.8 m) in length.
NMFS studies in the Bering Sea have
shown that elevating the trawl sweeps
can reduce the adverse effects of
nonpelagic trawl gear on Tanner, snow,
and red king crab by reducing the
unobserved mortality and injury of
these species. In addition, elevating the
trawl sweeps can reduce impacts on
benthic organisms, such as basketstars
and sea whips. Further research was
conducted in 2011 in the GOA to
identify the appropriate construction of
modified nonpelagic trawl gear, and to
identify and resolve any
implementation issues specific to the
GOA. Field testing in the GOA of the
modified nonpelagic trawl gear
demonstrated that the participants in
the GOA flatfish fishery can meet the
same performance standard and
construction requirements that apply to
the Bering Sea flatfish fishery under
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:25 May 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
regulations at § 679.24(f). Additional
information on these studies and tests is
provided in Section 1.5.5 of the Trawl
Sweep EA/RIR/IRFA.
Proposed regulations implementing
Amendment 89 would require that
vessels using nonpelagic trawl gear to
directed fish for flatfish in the Central
GOA meet the performance standard
and construction requirements set forth
in § 679.24(f), which require the use of
elevating devices to raise the elevated
section of the sweeps at least 2.5 inches.
Elevating devices would be placed on
the sweeps to meet this performance
standard. Details of the performance
standard and construction requirements
are at § 679.24(f).
As noted in Section 1.8 of the Trawl
Sweep EA/RIR/IRFA, it is not possible
to quantify a benefit to crab stocks in the
Central GOA from modified nonpelagic
trawl gear without further testing to
understand how sediment conditions in
the Central GOA flatfish fishery
compare to the areas in which the
Bering Sea experiments occurred.
However, the general similarity of GOA
trawl gear to that used in the Bering Sea
indicates that while the benefits may be
smaller due to different sediment
conditions in the GOA, they would still
be substantial. While requiring this gear
modification for vessels fishing in the
Central GOA flatfish fishery could
provide benefits to crab stocks by
reducing unobserved injury and
mortality, it would not be likely to
change reported crab PSC totals from
nonpelagic trawl fishing, which account
only for crabs that come up in the trawl
net. As noted in Section 2.9 of the Trawl
Sweep EA/RIR/IRFA, the proposed
action is not expected to result in a net
decrease in the target catch rates in the
Central GOA flatfish fishery.
The Council considered but rejected
alternatives that would have required
the use of modified nonpelagic trawl
gear in other nonpelagic trawl fisheries
(e.g., Pacific cod), and the use of
nonpelagic trawl gear in the Eastern and
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
Western GOA flatfish fisheries. Flatfish
fisheries in the Central GOA contribute
the greatest proportion of Tanner crab
PSC, while other nonpelagic trawl gear
fisheries in the GOA account for only a
modest proportion of Tanner crab PSC.
See Sections 1.1 and 1.5 of the Trawl
Sweep EA/RIR/IRFA for additional
detail (see ADDRESSES). The Council’s
recommendation targets the specific
fisheries that consistently have the
highest bycatch of Tanner crab in the
GOA.
Public Comments
NMFS is soliciting public comments
on the proposed FMP amendment
through August 2, 2013. A proposed
rule that would implement Amendment
89 will be published in the Federal
Register for public comment at a later
date, following NMFS’ evaluation
pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
Public comments on the proposed rule
must be received by the end of the
comment period on Amendment 89 in
order to be considered in the approval/
disapproval decision on the
amendment. All comments received on
the amendment by the end of the
comment period, whether specifically
directed to the amendment or to the
proposed rule, will be considered in the
approval/disapproval decision.
Comments received after that date will
not be considered in the approval/
disapproval decision on the
amendment. To be considered,
comments must be received—not just
postmarked or otherwise transmitted—
by 1700 hours, A.D.T., on the last day
of the comment period (See DATES and
ADDRESSES).
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: May 29, 2013.
Emily H. Menashes,
Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–13050 Filed 5–31–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 106 (Monday, June 3, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 33040-33044]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13050]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 679
RIN 0648-BB76
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Fisheries of
the Gulf of Alaska; Amendment 89 to the Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of availability of fishery management plan amendment;
request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery Management Council has submitted
Amendment 89 to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf
of Alaska (FMP). Amendment 89 would modify the FMP in two ways, if
approved. First, Amendment 89 would establish a protection area in
Marmot Bay, northeast of Kodiak Island, and close that area to fishing
with trawl gear except for directed fishing for pollock with pelagic
trawl gear to reduce bycatch of Tanner crab (Chionoecetes bairdi) in
Gulf of Alaska (GOA) groundfish fisheries. Second, Amendment 89 would
require the use of modified nonpelagic trawl gear when directed fishing
for flatfish in the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA and would
provide authority in the FMP to specify in regulation the modifications
that are required to raise portions of the gear off the sea floor. The
use of modified nonpelagic trawl gear in these fisheries would reduce
the unobserved injury and mortality of Tanner crab and the potential
adverse impacts of nonpelagic trawl gear on bottom habitat. This action
is intended to promote the goals and objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the FMP, and other applicable
law. Comments from the public are encouraged.
DATES: Comments on the amendment must be received on or before August
2, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this document, identified by
NOAA-NMFS-2011-0294, by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public
comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to
www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2011-0294, click the
``Comment Now!'' icon, complete the required fields, and enter or
attach your comments.
Mail: Address written comments to Glenn Merrill, Assistant
Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region
NMFS, Attn: Ellen Sebastian. Mail comments to P.O. Box 21668, Juneau,
AK 99802-1668.
Fax: Address written comments to Glenn Merrill, Assistant
Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region
NMFS, Attn: Ellen Sebastian. Fax comments to 907-586-7557.
Instructions: Comments must be submitted by one of the above
methods to ensure that the comments are received, documented, and
considered by NMFS. Comments sent by any other method, to any other
address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period,
may not be considered. All comments received are a part of the public
record and will generally be posted for public viewing on
www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address) submitted voluntarily by the sender
will be publicly accessible.
Do not submit confidential business information, or otherwise
sensitive or protected information. 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
or Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.
Electronic copies of Amendment 89, the EA/RIR/IFRA prepared for the
Area Closures for Tanner Crab Protection in Gulf of Alaska Groundfish
Fisheries (Area Closures EA/RIR/IRFA), and the EA/RIR/IRFA for Trawl
Sweep Modification in the Flatfish Fishery in the Central Gulf of
Alaska (Trawl Sweep EA/RIE/IRFA) are available from https://
[[Page 33041]]
www.regulations.gov or from the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Pearson, 907-481-1780.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS manages the groundfish fisheries in the
exclusive economic zone under the Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the GOA (FMP). The North Pacific Fishery Management
Council (Council) prepared the FMP under the authority of the Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act),
16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Regulations governing U.S. fisheries and
implementing the FMP appear at 50 CFR parts 600 and 679.
The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires that each regional fishery
management council submit any fishery management plan amendment it
prepares to NMFS for review and approval, disapproval, or partial
approval by the Secretary of Commerce. The Magnuson-Stevens Act also
requires that NMFS, upon receiving a fishery management plan amendment,
immediately publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing that
the amendment is available for public review and comment. This notice
announces that proposed Amendment 89 to the FMP is available for public
review and comment.
Background
Since the implementation of the FMP in 1978, the Council and NMFS
have adopted measures intended to control the catch of species taken
incidentally in groundfish fisheries. Certain species are designated as
``prohibited'' in the FMP, because they are the target of other fully
utilized domestic fisheries. The FMP and implementing regulations at
Sec. 679.21 require that catch of these species and species groups
must be avoided while fishing for groundfish, and when incidentally
caught, they must be immediately returned to sea with a minimum of
injury. These species include Pacific halibut, Pacific herring, Pacific
salmon, steelhead trout, king crab, and Tanner crab. The incidental
catch of prohibited species under Sec. 679.21 require prohibited
species to be discarded at sea with minimum injury, or retained but not
sold under the Prohibited Species Donation Program at Sec. 679.26. The
Magnuson-Stevens Act refers to species which must be discarded by
regulation as ``bycatch.''
The Council has recommended in both the Bering Sea and Aleutian
Islands Management Area (BSAI) and GOA, and NMFS has implemented,
measures to: (1) Close areas with a high occurrence of prohibited
species, or where there is a relatively high level of prohibited
species catch; (2) require the use of gear specifically modified to
minimize prohibited species catch and effects on bottom habitat; and
(3) establish prohibited species catch (PSC) limits in specific Alaska
groundfish fisheries. A summary of these measures is in Section 1 of
the Area Closures EA/RIR/IRFA (see ADDRESSES).
The Council has recommended, and NMFS has implemented, closure
areas to protect king crab stock in the GOA. These area closures limit
the use of gear that fish on or close to the sea floor, such as
nonpelagic trawl and pot gears, to minimize the bycatch of crab species
and adverse impacts on crab habitat. Specifically, in the Central GOA,
regulations implementing Amendment 15 to the FMP (52 FR 12183, April
15, 1987) established closures near Kodiak, AK, to protect king crab
habitat. These closure areas were subsequently expanded and revised
under regulations implementing Amendment 26 to the FMP (58 FR 503,
January 6, 1993). Time and areas closures to the use of nonpelagic
trawl gear have been shown to reduce injury and mortality to crab
species in both the BSAI and GOA. For this reason, NMFS is proposing
closure to vessels using trawl gear except for vessels directed fishing
for pollock with pelagic trawl gear to protect Tanner crab in a portion
of the Central GOA.
Recently, NMFS implemented regulations that require the use of
modified nonpelagic trawl gear in the Bering Sea flatfish fisheries to
reduce the bycatch of crab and minimize the impact of this gear on
bottom habitat. See Amendment 94 to the FMP for Groundfish of the
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (BSAI FMP) for
additional detail (75 FR 61642, October 6, 2010). NMFS is proposing to
also require the use of raised trawl sweeps in the GOA.
In 2005, the Council initiated a series of reviews on prohibited
species bycatch in the GOA groundfish fisheries. These reviews led the
Council to focus action on two prohibited species and two regulatory
areas with potentially high bycatch levels: Chinook salmon
(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) bycatch in pollock fisheries in the Central
and Western GOA, and Tanner crab bycatch in the Central GOA. The
Council addressed Chinook salmon bycatch in the GOA through Amendment
93 to the FMP (77 FR 42629, July 20, 2012). In October 2009, the
Council initiated an analysis of potential protection measures for
Tanner crab in the Central GOA. In April 2010, the Council initially
reviewed alternative bycatch control measures, subsequently revised and
refined these alternatives, and in October 2010, recommended that the
FMP be amended to establish a protection area in Marmot Bay, northeast
of Kodiak Island, and that the area be closed to fishing with trawl
gear except for directed fishing for pollock with pelagic trawl gear.
When the Council recommended the Marmot Bay Area closure in October
2010, it directed its staff to review the practicality of requiring the
use of modified nonpelagic trawl gear by vessels directed fishing for
flatfish in the Central GOA. The Council recommended this review as a
first step in considering additional measures to reduce the potential
adverse effects of nonpelagic trawl gear on bottom habitat and to
reduce unobserved Tanner crab injury and mortality. The Council's
recommendation was based on past experience with the use of modified
nonpelagic trawl gear to reduce potential adverse effects on bottom
habitat in Bering Sea flatfish fisheries. In 2008, NMFS, the NMFS
Office of Law Enforcement, and the fishing industry tested modified
nonpelagic fishing gear in the Bering Sea under normal fishing
conditions to determine if this gear could be used safely and
effectively in ways that may reduce potential adverse effects on bottom
habitat while maintaining effective catch rates for flatfish target
species. These initial tests were successful, and in October 2009, the
Council recommended Amendment 94 to the FMP for Groundfish of the BSAI,
which requires vessels directed fishing for flatfish in the Bering Sea
subarea to use modified nonpelagic trawl gear. In 2010, NMFS published
final regulations implementing BSAI Amendment 94 (75 FR 61642, October
6, 2010).
In February 2012, the Council reviewed an analysis of potential
impacts of expanding the required use of modified nonpelagic trawl gear
to vessels in the Central GOA flatfish fisheries. After additional
review in April 2012, the Council recommended requiring that vessels
directed fishing for flatfish in the Central GOA use modified
nonpelagic trawl gear. GOA Amendment 89 incorporates both of the
Council's recommendations, intended to be taken as a suite of
protection measures for Tanner crab in the Central GOA.
The Council identified several reasons for protection measures for
Tanner crab in the GOA groundfish fisheries:
Tanner crab is identified in the FMP as a prohibited
species that is
[[Page 33042]]
incidentally caught in the Central GOA groundfish trawl, pot, and
longline fisheries. Tanner crab is incidentally caught in relatively
high proportion by vessels using nonpelagic trawl gear in the Central
GOA.
Directed fisheries for Tanner crab in the Central GOA are
fully allocated under the current limited entry system managed by the
State of Alaska. Details of this crab fishery are described in Section
3.5 in the Area Closures EA/RIR/IRFA.
No specific conservation measures exist in the Central GOA
to address adverse interactions with Tanner crab by vessels using trawl
gear to directed fish for groundfish.
Tanner crab is a bottom-dwelling species, and limits on
the use of nonpelagic trawl gear may reduce Tanner crab PSC and adverse
effects on Tanner crab habitat.
Proposed Action 1: Marmot Bay Tanner Crab Protection Area
Amendment 89 to the GOA FMP would establish an area called the
Marmot Bay Tanner Crab Protection Area (Marmot Bay Area). The proposed
Marmot Bay Area is northeast of Kodiak Island and would extend westward
from 151 degrees 47 minutes W longitude to State waters between 58
degrees N latitude and 58 degrees 15 minutes N latitude. The proposed
Marmot Bay Area would share borders with two existing areas, the Type 1
Marmot Flats Area and the Type 3 Outer Bay Area. The southern and
eastern borders of the proposed Marmot Bay Area would be the same
latitude and longitude as the northern and eastern borders,
respectively, of the existing Marmot Flats Area. The Marmot Flats Area
is closed to directed fishing with nonpelagic trawl gear (see Sec.
679.22(b)(1)(i) and Figure 5 to part 679). Under current regulations,
the Outer Marmot Bay Area is open to directed fishing with nonpelagic
trawl gear unless otherwise closed. The proposed Marmot Bay Area and
the existing Marmot Flats and Outer Marmot Bay Areas are shown in
Figure 1. Where the proposed Marmot Bay Area overlaps the Type 3 Outer
Marmot Bay Area, the more restrictive proposed regulation, the year
round closure to the use of trawl gear (excepted as noted) in the
Marmot Bay Area would apply. State of Alaska waters to the west of both
the proposed Marmot Bay Area and the existing Marmot Flats Area are
closed year-round to the use of nonpelagic trawl gear under existing
state regulations (5 AAC 39.164).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP03JN13.000
With one exception, Amendment 89 would close the Marmot Bay Area
year-round to directed fishing for groundfish by vessels using trawl
gear. The term ``directed fishing'' is defined in regulation at Sec.
679.2. Directed fishing for pollock by vessels using pelagic trawl gear
would be exempt from this closure. Overall, the effect of the
[[Page 33043]]
proposed Marmot Bay Area closure would be to extend closures on the use
of trawl gear to the north and east of State and Federal waters that
are currently closed to nonpelagic trawl gear. The Marmot Bay Area
closure also would prohibit the use of all trawl gear, other than
pelagic trawl gear used in the directed fishery for pollock. The
Council recommended this exemption due to the limited potential
reductions of Tanner crab PSC that would occur if the pelagic trawl
pollock fishery were subject to the closure. The use of pelagic trawl
gear for species other than pollock was not identified in the Marmot
Bay Area; therefore, no additional exemptions to the trawl closure were
warranted. See Section 3.3.2 of the Area Closures EA/RIR/IRFA for
additional detail.
The Council recommended the Marmot Bay Area trawl gear closure
based primarily on the high observed rate of Tanner crab mortality by
nonpelagic trawl gear in the Marmot Bay Area relative to other areas in
the Central GOA. (See Section 3.3 of the Area Closures EA/RIR/IRFA for
additional detail.) The areas with the greatest abundance of crab are
the Marmot Bay Area, northeast of Kodiak Island; the Chiniak Gully east
of Kodiak Island; and Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G)
Statistical Areas 525702 and 525630, southeast of Kodiak Island. The
Marmot Bay Area had the highest average mortality rate of crab per
metric ton (mt) of groundfish catch by vessels using nonpelagic trawl
gear in the Kodiak District between 2001 and 2009 (the most recent
years of available data) at 7.68 crab/mt groundfish. (See Section 3.3
of the Area Closures EA/RIR/IRFA for additional detail.)
The Council considered a range of alternative closure areas to
limit the use of nonpelagic trawl gear and pot gear in the Marmot Bay
Area, ADF&G Statistical Areas 525702 and 525630, and the Chiniak Gully.
Ultimately, the Council recommended limiting the closure to most trawl
gear in the Marmot Bay Area based on: (1) The high rate of Tanner crab
mortality in the Marmot Bay Area relative to other areas; (2) the
observation of mature male and female Tanner crab populations within
the Marmot Bay Area; (3) the occurrence of known Tanner crab habitat
within the Marmot Bay Area; (4) the high rate of Tanner crab bycatch by
vessels using trawl gear relative to pot gear; and (5) the limited
impact that the Marmot Bay Area closure would likely have on existing
nonpelagic trawl participants relative to closures in other areas. See
Section 3.1 of the Area Closures EA/RIR/IRFA for additional detail of
the alternatives considered. The Council considered but rejected
closing areas to pot, longline, and pelagic trawl gear used in the
directed pollock fishery given the relatively small amount of Tanner
crab bycatch by these gear types relative to nonpelagic trawl gear.
(See Section 3.3.3 of the Area Closures EA/RIR/IRFA for additional
detail.)
The Marmot Bay Area closure would be consistent with past measures
the Council has recommended, and NMFS has implemented, to limit impacts
of nonpelagic trawl gear on crab populations, directly by limiting
injury and mortality, and indirectly by reducing potential adverse
habitat impacts. Overall, observed Tanner crab mortality in the Central
GOA accounts for less than one fifth of one percent of the assessed
crab population in the Central GOA. See Section 3.3.3 of the Area
Closures EA/RIR/IRFA for additional detail. Because overall crab
bycatch in the GOA groundfish fisheries can be small in relation to
crab population, but potentially concentrated in certain areas or at
certain times, time and area closures are more effective than Tanner
crab PSC limits in reducing the potential impacts of nonpelagic trawl
gear on crab stocks. The proposed closure for the Marmot Bay Area may
assist in the conservation of the Tanner crab stock by reducing injury
and mortality and potential adverse effects of nonpelagic trawl gear on
bottom habitat used by Tanner crab.
In October 2010, the Council also recommended that NMFS incorporate
statistically robust observer information from certain vessels using
pot gear in the Marmot Bay Area and certain vessels using nonpelagic
trawl or pot gear in two other specific areas near Kodiak, AK (ADF&G
Statistical Area 525702 and Chiniak Gully). Overall, the intent of the
Council's recommendation was to improve estimates of Tanner crab
bycatch data in the GOA groundfish fisheries that occur within these
areas. At the same meeting that the Council recommended enhanced
observer coverage for these three areas, the Council also recommended
Amendment 86 to the BSAI FMP and Amendment 76 to the GOA FMP which
comprehensively restructured the funding and deployment of onboard
observers under the North Pacific Groundfish Observer Program (Observer
Program). The Council included as part of its recommendation for
improved estimates of Tanner crab bycatch that NMFS ``incorporate, to
the extent possible, in [the restructured Observer Program], an
observer deployment strategy that ensures adequate coverage to
establish statistically robust observations'' in the three specific
areas near Kodiak, AK.
NMFS published a notice of availability for Amendments 86 and 76 to
the FMPs on March 14, 2012 (77 FR 15019), and a proposed rule for the
restructured Observer Program on April 18, 2012 (77 FR 23326). On June
7, 2012, the Secretary of Commerce approved Amendments 86 and 76 to the
FMPs for the restructured Observer Program in the Alaska groundfish
fisheries, and the final rule to implement the amendments, effective
January 1, 2013, was published on November 21, 2012 (77 FR 70062).
Details of the restructured Observer Program are available in the
proposed and final rules for that action.
The restructured Observer Program improves the quality of fisheries
data, including Tanner crab bycatch information in the GOA groundfish
fisheries. Vessels under the restructured Observer Program are either
fully or partially observed. A detailed list of vessels in the full and
partial observer coverage categories is provided in the restructured
Observer Program proposed rule (77 FR 23326, April 18, 2012). A
randomized system for the assignment of observer coverage throughout
the GOA for partially observed vessels is used to reduce potential bias
in the observer data. Selecting specific locations in the Central GOA
for increased observer coverage would reduce the ability to randomize
observer assignments and therefore potentially bias observer data.
Because the restructured Observer Program incorporates an observer
deployment strategy that ensures adequate coverage to establish
statistically robust observations for the GOA, NMFS has determined that
the Council's recommendation has been implemented by Amendments 86 and
76 and no additional measures are needed with Amendment 89. NMFS
intends to use the regulations and deployment process established under
the restructured Observer Program to obtain fishery catch and bycatch
data without specific observer coverage requirements in specific areas
in the GOA. In order to ensure that the Council's desire to obtain
better observer data is being met, NMFS will present a deployment plan
for observers annually for the Council's review.
Proposed Action 2: Modification of Nonpelagic Trawl Gear Used in the
Central GOA Directed Flatfish Fisheries
Amendment 89 would amend the FMP to require the use of modified
nonpelagic trawl gear when directed fishing for flatfish in the Central
GOA
[[Page 33044]]
and would provide authority in the FMP to specify in regulation the
modifications that are required to raise portions of the gear off the
sea floor. In the GOA, the flatfish fisheries include the directed
fisheries for shallow-water flatfish, deep-water flatfish, arrowtooth
flounder, rex sole, and flathead sole, as defined in Table 10 to 50 CFR
part 679.
While the proposed amendments to the FMP under Amendment 89 are
general, the Council provided detailed recommendations on the specific
modifications that would be required to nonpelagic trawl gear through
regulation. The primary effect of the proposed rule to implement this
aspect of Amendment 89 would be to require modifications to a specific
component of the gear. Nonpelagic trawl gear uses a pair of long lines
called ``sweeps'' to herd fish into the net. The sweeps drag across the
bottom and may adversely impact benthic organisms (e.g., crab species,
sea whips, sponges, and basket stars). Approximately 90 percent of the
bottom contact of nonpelagic trawl gear used in directed fishing for
flatfish is from the sweeps, which can be more than 1,000 feet (304.8
m) in length.
NMFS studies in the Bering Sea have shown that elevating the trawl
sweeps can reduce the adverse effects of nonpelagic trawl gear on
Tanner, snow, and red king crab by reducing the unobserved mortality
and injury of these species. In addition, elevating the trawl sweeps
can reduce impacts on benthic organisms, such as basketstars and sea
whips. Further research was conducted in 2011 in the GOA to identify
the appropriate construction of modified nonpelagic trawl gear, and to
identify and resolve any implementation issues specific to the GOA.
Field testing in the GOA of the modified nonpelagic trawl gear
demonstrated that the participants in the GOA flatfish fishery can meet
the same performance standard and construction requirements that apply
to the Bering Sea flatfish fishery under regulations at Sec.
679.24(f). Additional information on these studies and tests is
provided in Section 1.5.5 of the Trawl Sweep EA/RIR/IRFA.
Proposed regulations implementing Amendment 89 would require that
vessels using nonpelagic trawl gear to directed fish for flatfish in
the Central GOA meet the performance standard and construction
requirements set forth in Sec. 679.24(f), which require the use of
elevating devices to raise the elevated section of the sweeps at least
2.5 inches. Elevating devices would be placed on the sweeps to meet
this performance standard. Details of the performance standard and
construction requirements are at Sec. 679.24(f).
As noted in Section 1.8 of the Trawl Sweep EA/RIR/IRFA, it is not
possible to quantify a benefit to crab stocks in the Central GOA from
modified nonpelagic trawl gear without further testing to understand
how sediment conditions in the Central GOA flatfish fishery compare to
the areas in which the Bering Sea experiments occurred. However, the
general similarity of GOA trawl gear to that used in the Bering Sea
indicates that while the benefits may be smaller due to different
sediment conditions in the GOA, they would still be substantial. While
requiring this gear modification for vessels fishing in the Central GOA
flatfish fishery could provide benefits to crab stocks by reducing
unobserved injury and mortality, it would not be likely to change
reported crab PSC totals from nonpelagic trawl fishing, which account
only for crabs that come up in the trawl net. As noted in Section 2.9
of the Trawl Sweep EA/RIR/IRFA, the proposed action is not expected to
result in a net decrease in the target catch rates in the Central GOA
flatfish fishery.
The Council considered but rejected alternatives that would have
required the use of modified nonpelagic trawl gear in other nonpelagic
trawl fisheries (e.g., Pacific cod), and the use of nonpelagic trawl
gear in the Eastern and Western GOA flatfish fisheries. Flatfish
fisheries in the Central GOA contribute the greatest proportion of
Tanner crab PSC, while other nonpelagic trawl gear fisheries in the GOA
account for only a modest proportion of Tanner crab PSC. See Sections
1.1 and 1.5 of the Trawl Sweep EA/RIR/IRFA for additional detail (see
ADDRESSES). The Council's recommendation targets the specific fisheries
that consistently have the highest bycatch of Tanner crab in the GOA.
Public Comments
NMFS is soliciting public comments on the proposed FMP amendment
through August 2, 2013. A proposed rule that would implement Amendment
89 will be published in the Federal Register for public comment at a
later date, following NMFS' evaluation pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens
Act. Public comments on the proposed rule must be received by the end
of the comment period on Amendment 89 in order to be considered in the
approval/disapproval decision on the amendment. All comments received
on the amendment by the end of the comment period, whether specifically
directed to the amendment or to the proposed rule, will be considered
in the approval/disapproval decision. Comments received after that date
will not be considered in the approval/disapproval decision on the
amendment. To be considered, comments must be received--not just
postmarked or otherwise transmitted--by 1700 hours, A.D.T., on the last
day of the comment period (See DATES and ADDRESSES).
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: May 29, 2013.
Emily H. Menashes,
Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-13050 Filed 5-31-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P