Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Revise Maximum Retainable Amounts for Skates in the Gulf of Alaska, 39734-39744 [2015-16935]
Download as PDF
39734
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 132 / Friday, July 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules
observer coverage is providing more
data for quota management and
assessment science than was available
to NMFS prior to implementation of
Amendment 16.
On February 18, 2014, in Oceana, Inc.
v. Pritzker, 1:13–cv–00770 (D.D.C.
2014), the Court upheld our use of a 30percent CV standard to set sector
observer coverage levels. In addition to
upholding our determination of
sufficient coverage levels, the Court
noted that the current sector observer
coverage is not the sole method of
monitoring compliance with ACLs,
there are many reporting requirements
that vessels adhere to, and there are
strong incentives for vessels to report
accurately because each sector is held
jointly and severally liable for overages
and misreporting of catch and bycatch.
Conclusion
We remain concerned about the status
of GOM cod, but have determined that
the current FMP, as adjusted by
Framework 53, along with recreational
measures and planned future Council
and agency actions, provide the
appropriate regulatory mechanisms for
addressing the concerns regarding this
stock that were raised in the petition for
rulemaking. We will continue to
carefully monitor stock indicators
leading into the 2015 assessment to
fully inform our re-evaluation of the
GOM cod catch limit, and the need to
balance conservation and management
objectives. Therefore, we are denying
this petition; no other rulemaking is
necessary in response to the petition for
rulemaking.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: July 6, 2015.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2015–16891 Filed 7–9–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 150126078–5078–01]
RIN 0648–BE85
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Revise Maximum
Retainable Amounts for Skates in the
Gulf of Alaska
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jul 09, 2015
Jkt 235001
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
NMFS proposes regulations to
reduce the maximum retainable amount
(MRA) of skates using groundfish and
halibut as basis species in the Gulf of
Alaska (GOA) from 20 percent to 5
percent. Reducing skate MRAs is
necessary to decrease the incentive for
fishermen to target skates and slow the
catch rate of skates in these fisheries.
This proposed rule would enhance
conservation and management of skates
and minimize skate discards in GOA
groundfish and halibut fisheries. This
proposed rule is intended to promote
the goals and objectives of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act, the
Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982,
the Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska, and
other applicable laws.
DATES: Comments must be received no
later than August 10, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on this document, identified by NOAA–
NMFS–2015–0015, 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-20150015, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon,
complete the required fields, and enter
or attach your comments.
• Mail: Submit 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.
Instructions: 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 by NMFS. 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),
confidential business information, or
otherwise sensitive information
submitted voluntarily by the sender will
be publicly accessible. NMFS will
accept anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/
A’’ in the required fields if you wish to
remain anonymous).
Electronic copies of the draft
Environmental Assessment/Regulatory
Impact Review/Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (collectively the
‘‘Analysis’’), Alaska Groundfish Harvest
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Specifications Final Environmental
Impact Statement (Final EIS),
Supplementary Information Report (SIR)
to the Final EIS, and the Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
for the Gulf of Alaska Groundfish
Harvest Specifications for 2015 and
2016 (Harvest Specifications IRFA)
prepared for this action are available
from https://www.regulations.gov or from
the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at
https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Peggy Murphy, 907–586–7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority for Action
NMFS manages the groundfish
fisheries in the exclusive economic zone
of the GOA under the Fishery
Management Plan for Groundfish of the
Gulf of Alaska (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 groundfish
fishing in the GOA and implementing
the FMP appear at 50 CFR parts 600 and
679. The Council and NMFS manage
skates (Raja and Bathyraja species) as a
groundfish species under the FMP.
Background
NMFS proposes to modify regulations
that specify the MRA for skates in the
GOA. An MRA is the maximum amount
of a species closed to directed fishing
(i.e., skate species) that may be retained
onboard a vessel. MRAs are calculated
as a percentage of the weight of catch of
each groundfish species or halibut open
to directed fishing (the basis species)
that is retained onboard the vessel.
MRAs assist in limiting catch of a
species within its annual total allowable
catch (TAC). Once the TAC for a species
is reached, retention of that species
becomes prohibited and all catch of that
species must be discarded. NMFS closes
a species to directed fishing before the
entire TAC is taken to leave sufficient
amounts of the TAC available for
incidental catch. The amount of the
TAC remaining available for incidental
catch is managed by a species-specific
MRA. MRAs are a management tool to
slow down the rate of harvest and
reduce the incentive for targeting a
species closed to directed fishing.
NMFS has established a single MRA
percentage for big skate (Raja
binoculata), longnose skate (Raja rhina),
and for all remaining skate species
(Bathyraja spp.). The skate MRA in the
GOA is set at 20 percent. The proposed
rule would reduce the MRA for skates
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 132 / Friday, July 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules
in the GOA from 20 percent to 5
percent. The reduced MRA would apply
to all vessels directed fishing for
groundfish species or halibut in the
GOA. Under the proposed rule, the
round weight of the retained skate
species could be no more than 5 percent
of the round weight of the basis species.
The Council recommended and
NMFS proposes to reduce the skate
MRA to decrease the incentive for
fishermen to target skates while directed
fishing for groundfish and halibut, and
to slow the harvest rate of skates in GOA
groundfish and halibut fisheries.
Information from recent years of skate
catch in directed groundfish and halibut
fisheries indicates that some fishermen
have maximized their retention of skates
early in the year by deliberately
targeting them while directed fishing for
other species. Over a period of years, the
TAC of big skate and longnose skate has
been exceeded in the Central GOA and
Western GOA, respectively. In response,
NMFS has prohibited retention of skates
earlier in the year to reduce incentives
to target skates and maintain catch at or
below the TACs established for skate
species in specific GOA regulatory
areas. A prohibition on retention results
in mandatory discard of all skate catch
for the remainder of the year.
This proposed rule would limit the
amount of skates that could be retained
while directed fishing for other
groundfish and halibut. The proposed
rule would slow the harvest rate of
skates and would enhance NMFS’
ability to limit the catch of skates to the
skate TACs. In addition, the proposed
rule is expected to minimize discards of
skates by reducing the likelihood that
NMFS would need to prohibit retention
of a skate species in a GOA management
area during the year to maintain skate
catch at or below its TAC.
This proposed rule would make four
amendments to regulations. First, this
proposed rule would amend regulations
to reduce the skate MRA for all vessels
fishing for groundfish and halibut in the
GOA. This proposed rule would amend
regulations that establish a skate MRA
for all groundfish and halibut basis
species in Table 10 to 50 CFR part 679
and for the fisheries under the Central
GOA Rockfish Program in Table 30 to 50
CFR part 679. Second, this proposed
rule would make minor clarifications in
MRA regulations applicable to the
Central GOA Rockfish Program. Third,
this proposed rule would make minor
corrections to incorrect cross references
in regulations in §§ 679.7 and 679.28.
Finally, this proposed rule would revise
Table 2a to 50 CFR part 679 by adding
whiteblotched, Alaska, and Aleutian
skates as well as the scientific names for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jul 09, 2015
Jkt 235001
individual skate species that were
inadvertently removed by a previous
rule making.
The following sections describe (1)
management of skates in the GOA and
the fisheries that would be affected by
the rule; (2) the need for the proposed
rule; and (3) the proposed rule.
Management of Skates in the GOA and
the Fisheries Affected by the Proposed
Rule
Management of Skates in the GOA
In the GOA, the Council and NMFS
manage skates as a groundfish species
under the FMP. Management of skates
in the GOA is described in Section 3.1.2
of the Analysis. Big skate and longnose
skate are managed as single species, and
all other skate species are managed in
the ‘‘other skates’’ species group.
GOA skate catches are managed
subject to annual limits on the amounts
of each species of skate, or group of
skate species, that may be taken. The
annual limits are defined in the FMP
and referred to as ‘‘harvest
specifications.’’ The overfishing limits
(OFLs), acceptable biological catch
(ABCs), and TACs for skates are
specified through the annual ‘‘harvest
specification process.’’ The FMP
requires that the Council recommend
and NMFS specify these annual limits
for each species or species group of
groundfish on an annual basis. A
detailed description of the annual
harvest specification process is
provided in the Final EIS, the SIR, and
the final 2015 and 2016 harvest
specifications for groundfish of the GOA
(80 FR 10250, February 25, 2015) and is
briefly summarized here.
Section 3.2.1 of the FMP defines the
OFL as the annual amount of catch that
results whenever a stock or stock
complex is subjected to a level of fishing
mortality or annual total catch that
jeopardizes the capacity of a stock or
stock complex to produce maximum
sustainable yield on a continuing basis.
The OFL is the catch level above which
overfishing is occurring. NMFS manages
fisheries to ensure that no OFLs are
exceeded in any year.
Section 3.2.1 of the FMP defines the
ABC as the level of a stock or stock
complex’s annual catch that accounts
for the scientific uncertainty in the
estimate of OFL and any other scientific
uncertainty. The ABC is set below the
OFL.
Section 3.2.1 of the FMP defines the
TAC as the annual catch target for a
stock or stock complex, derived from
the ABC by considering social and
economic factors and management
uncertainty (i.e., uncertainty in the
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
39735
ability of managers to constrain catch so
the annual catch limit is not exceeded,
and uncertainty in quantifying the true
catch amount). Section 3.2.3.4.1 of the
FMP requires that the TAC must be set
lower than or equal to the ABC. Section
3.2.3.4.3.2 of the FMP clarifies that
TACs can be apportioned by regulatory
area. There are three regulatory areas
specified in the GOA management area:
Western GOA, Central GOA, and
Eastern GOA.
Big skate and longnose skate have
OFLs and ABCs defined for the GOA
management area. The ABCs for big
skate and longnose skate are
apportioned to each of the regulatory
areas in the GOA management area
according to the proportion of the
biomass estimated in each regulatory
area. NMFS specifies TACs for big skate
and longnose skate for the Western
GOA, Central GOA, and Eastern GOA
equal to the ABC for each of these
regulatory areas. All other species of
skates are assigned to the ‘‘other skates’’
species group. The other skates species
group has an OFL and ABC, and TAC
specified for the GOA management area
(i.e., NMFS does not establish separate
ABCs or TACs for the Western GOA,
Central GOA, and Eastern GOA). NMFS
does not establish regulatory areaspecific ABCs or TACs for other skates
because harvest is generally more
broadly dispersed throughout the entire
GOA, and they are not generally
retained. All retained and discarded
catch of skates accrues to the TACs,
ABCs, and OFLs specified for the
species. Additional detail on skate
biomass and harvest specifications is
available in Section 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 of
the Analysis, respectively.
NMFS ensures that OFLs, ABCs, and
TACs are not exceeded by requiring
vessel operators participating in
groundfish fisheries in the GOA to
comply with a range of restrictions,
such as area, time, gear, and operationspecific fishery closures. Regulations at
§ 679.20(d)(1), (d)(2), and (d)(3) describe
the range of management measures that
NMFS uses to maintain total catch at or
below the TAC.
Regulations at § 679.20(d)(1)(i) specify
that NMFS may establish a directed
fishing allowance (DFA) for a species or
species group when any allocation or
apportionment of a target species or
species group allocated or apportioned
to a fishery will be reached. Regulations
at § 679.20(d)(1)(ii)(B) specify that
NMFS must also consider the amount of
a species or species group closed to
directed fishing that will be taken in
directed fishing for other species when
establishing a DFA. NMFS implements
this provision through the annual
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
39736
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 132 / Friday, July 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules
harvest specifications process by
subtracting the estimated amount of
incidental catch of a species or species
group taken in directed fishing for other
species from the TAC of that species or
species group. If an insufficient amount
of TAC is available for a directed fishery
for that species or species group, NMFS
establishes the DFA for that species or
species group as zero metric tons (mt)
and, in accordance with
§ 679.20(d)(1)(iii), prohibits directed
fishing for that species or species group.
Directed fishing for groundfish in the
GOA is defined at § 679.2 as any fishing
activity that results in the retention of
an amount of a species or species group
onboard a vessel that is greater than the
MRA for that species or species group.
Therefore, when directed fishing for a
species or species group is prohibited,
retention of the species or species group
is limited to an MRA. These species are
referred to as incidental catch species.
NMFS established MRAs to allow vessel
operators fishing for species or species
groups open to directed fishing to retain
a specified amount of incidental catch
species.
NMFS has determined that the TACs
specified for all skate species in the
GOA are needed to support incidental
catch of skates in other groundfish and
halibut fisheries. As a result, there are
insufficient TACs for these species to
support directed fisheries, the DFA for
skates is set to zero mt, and directed
fishing for skates is prohibited at the
beginning of the fishing year. When
directed fishing for skates is prohibited,
the catch of skates is limited by an
MRA.
The skate MRA is specified by basis
species in Table 10 and Table 30 to 50
CFR part 679. The skate MRA is not
specified by skate species. Instead, the
skate MRA is based on the combined
round weight of all skate species
retained onboard a vessel. A single MRA
for all skates was established because
fishermen and processors may have
difficulty identifying skate species and
may not be able to easily determine if
they have reached an MRA for a specific
skate species. Therefore, a separate
MRA for each species would be difficult
to manage and enforce. Additional
detail on the designation of a single
skate MRA is provided in Section 4.1 of
the Analysis.
Currently, the skate MRA for all basis
species in the GOA is 20 percent of the
basis species round weight retained
onboard a vessel. This means the
maximum amount of big, longnose, and
other skate species that may be retained
onboard a vessel must not exceed 20
percent of the round weight of other
groundfish species and halibut (basis
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jul 09, 2015
Jkt 235001
species) retained onboard a vessel. For
example, a vessel operator fishing
Pacific cod, a basis species open to
directed fishing, may retain big,
longnose, and other skates in an amount
up to 20 percent of the round weight
equivalent of Pacific cod that is onboard
the vessel at any point in time during a
fishing trip.
Amounts of skates onboard the vessel
that are below or equal to the MRA may
be retained. Amounts of skates in excess
of the MRA must be discarded. An MRA
applies at all times and to all areas for
the duration of a fishing trip (see
§ 679.20(e)(3)). Vessel operators may
retain incidental catch species while
directed fishing for other groundfish
species or halibut up to the MRA
percentage of the basis species retained
catch until the TAC for the incidental
catch species is met.
Regulations at § 679.20(d)(2) specify
that if the TAC for the incidental catch
species is met, NMFS will prohibit
retention of the incidental catch species
for the remainder of the year.
Regulations at § 679.21(b) specify that if
retention of a species is prohibited, the
operator of each vessel engaged in
directed fishing for groundfish in the
GOA must return the prohibited species
to the sea immediately, with a minimum
of injury, regardless of its condition.
Therefore, when NMFS prohibits
retention of an incidental catch species,
such as skates, vessel operators must
discard all catch of that species. The
primary purpose of requiring discards is
to remove any incentive for vessel
operators to increase incidental catch of
the species as a portion of other
fisheries and to minimize the catch of
that species.
Although MRAs limit the incentive to
target on an incidental catch species,
fishermen can ‘‘top off’’ their retained
groundfish and halibut catch with
incidental catch species up to the
maximum permitted under the MRA.
Fishermen are top-off fishing when they
deliberately target and retain incidental
catch species up to the MRA instead of
harvesting the species incidentally.
Thus, MRAs reflect a balance between
NMFS’ need to limit the harvest rate of
incidental catch species and minimize
regulatory discards of the incidental
catch species while providing fishermen
an opportunity to harvest available
incidental species TAC through limited
retention.
Fisheries That Would Be Affected by the
Proposed Rule
Skates are caught in the GOA
primarily by vessels directed fishing for
groundfish with non-pelagic trawl gear
and by vessels directed fishing for
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
groundfish and halibut with hook-andline gear. Very limited amounts of
skates are also caught by vessels using
pelagic trawl, pot, and jig gear in
directed groundfish fisheries in the
GOA. Section 3.1.1 of the Analysis
presents detailed information on GOA
skate catch by species, management
area, gear, and target fishery for two
time periods: From 2008 through 2012,
and in 2013 and 2014. This information
is briefly summarized below.
Catch data are divided into these two
periods, because the individual fishing
quota (IFQ) halibut and small catcher
vessel hook-and-line Pacific cod
fisheries were largely unobserved before
2013. Data on the incidental catch of
skate species from these fisheries prior
to 2013 is limited or not available. In
2013, the North Pacific Groundfish
Observer Program was restructured
(Restructured Observer Program) and
observers were deployed in the IFQ
halibut fishery and on smaller vessels
(77 FR 70062, November 21, 2012). As
a result, new observer data on skate
catch were included in NMFS’ catch
accounting system. The improved
observer data since 2013, and
information on the amount of at-sea
discards of skates from the IFQ halibut
fishery and smaller hook-and-line
vessels, show that an increased
proportion of skate catch occurs on
vessels using hook-and-line gear.
Based upon NMFS’ catch accounting
system, big skate catch occurs primarily
in the Central GOA. Less than one tenth
of the catch comes from the Western
GOA or the Eastern GOA. NMFS data
show that from 2008 through 2012, an
average of 67 percent of the big skate
catch was caught by vessels using nonpelagic trawl gear and 32 percent was
caught by vessels using hook-and-line
gear. During 2013 and 2104, the
proportion of big skate catch by vessels
using non-pelagic trawl gear decreased
to 54 percent, and the proportion caught
by vessels using hook-and-line gear
increased to 46 percent. Big skate catch
by vessels using non-pelagic trawl gear
occurs predominantly in the arrowtooth
flounder directed fishery. Big skate
catch by vessels using hook-and-line
gear occurs predominantly in the Pacific
cod and halibut directed fisheries. Less
than 1 percent of the big skate catch was
caught by vessels using other types of
gear.
The analysis indicates that
congregations of big skate in the spring
enable catcher vessel operators using
non-pelagic trawl gear and hook-andline gear to engage in top-off fishing.
NMFS groundfish landings data on big
skate confirm that specific areas have
higher retention of big skate when
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 132 / Friday, July 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
compared to other areas (see Section
3.1.3 of the Analysis).
Longnose skate are caught
predominantly in the Central GOA, with
more limited catch in the Eastern GOA,
and the least amount of catch in the
Western GOA. NMFS data show that
from 2008 through 2012, an average of
53 percent of the longnose skate catch
was caught by vessels using hook-andline gear and 44 percent was caught by
vessels using non-pelagic trawl gear.
During 2013 and 2014, the proportion of
longnose skate catch by vessels using
hook-and-line gear increased to 67
percent, and the proportion of catch by
vessels using non-pelagic trawl gear
decreased to 31 percent. Longnose skate
catch by vessels using hook-and-line
gear occurs predominantly in Pacific
cod, halibut, and sablefish directed
fisheries. Longnose skate catch by
vessels using non-pelagic trawl gear
occurs predominantly in the arrowtooth
flounder and flatfish directed fisheries.
Approximately 2 percent of the
longnose skate catch was caught by
vessels using other types of gear.
Other skates are caught primarily in
the Central GOA. From 2008 through
2012, an average of 78 percent of the
other skate catch was caught by vessels
using hook-and-line gear, and 20
percent was caught by vessels using
non-pelagic trawl gear. During 2013 and
2014, the proportion of catch of other
skate catch by vessels using hook-andline gear increased to 90 percent and the
proportion of catch by vessels using
non-pelagic trawl gear decreased to 10
percent. Other skate catch by vessels
using hook-and-line gear occurs
predominantly in the Pacific cod,
halibut, and sablefish directed fisheries.
Other skate catch by vessels using nonpelagic trawl gear occurs predominantly
in the arrowtooth and deep-water
flatfish target fisheries. Less than 1
percent of the other skate catch was
caught by vessels using other types of
gear.
Need for the Proposed Rule
In December 2013, the Council
received public testimony that the
current MRA for skates in the GOA
allows fishermen to deliberately target
skates while ostensibly directed fishing
for other groundfish or halibut. This
‘‘topping-off’’ pattern of maximizing
skate catch up to the MRA limit of 20
percent of the basis species onboard a
vessel has increased the harvest rate of
skates. In recent years, skate catch has
exceeded the TAC in some areas. The
estimated catch of big skate exceeded
the TAC in the Central GOA in 2010,
2011, 2012, and 2013, and the estimated
catch of longnose skates exceeded the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jul 09, 2015
Jkt 235001
TAC in the Western GOA in 2009, 2010,
and 2013. The catch of other skates has
not exceeded the TACs established for
the GOA management area; however, in
2013 and 2014, the catch of other skates
was estimated at 93 percent and 98
percent of the 2013 and 2014 TACs,
respectively.
When fishery managers estimated the
big or longnose skate TACs would be
exceeded, NMFS prohibited retention of
big or longnose skates in the directed
fisheries for groundfish and halibut and
required discard of all big or longnose
skate catch for the remainder of the
calendar year. The earlier in the year
that big or longnose skate retention is
prohibited, the more regulatory discards
of big or longnose skate can occur since
groundfish and halibut fisheries will
continue to catch these skates
incidentally.
The Council determined and NMFS
agrees that reducing the skate MRA
would decrease the incentive for
fishermen to engage in top-off fishing
for skates and slow the harvest rate of
skates to levels that more accurately
reflect the rate of incidental catch of
skates in the directed groundfish and
halibut fisheries in the GOA. Reducing
the skate MRA would slow the skate
harvest rate and accrual of skate catch
against the TAC. A slower harvest rate
may reduce the potential that NMFS
will have to prohibit skate retention to
avoid exceeding a skate species’ TAC. In
addition, a slower harvest rate could
extend skate retention throughout the
year and result in lower regulatory
discards of skates.
This proposed rule would help ensure
that skate catch in the future does not
exceed a TAC, ABC, or OFL. The
Council and NMFS analyzed four
alternative MRAs to reduce the
incentive for fishermen to pursue top-off
fishing for skates and slow the rate of
skate harvest. In addition to the status
quo of an MRA of 20 percent, the
Council and NMFS evaluated
alternatives to reduce skate MRAs to 15,
10, and 5 percent. To estimate impacts
of the alternative MRAs, the Analysis
considered two metrics.
First, the Analysis examined the rate
of big skate catch relative to groundfish
catch by directed fishery before and
after big skate retention was prohibited
in 2013 and 2014 (see Section 4.5.1.1 of
the Analysis). The Analysis assumed
that once big skate retention was
prohibited by regulation, a vessel
operator would not be engaging in topoff fishing for big skates if they were
encountered while directed fishing for
groundfish or halibut. Thus, the
Analysis assumed that the relative catch
rates of big skate after retention was
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
39737
prohibited were a reasonable estimate of
the likely incidental catch rate of big
skate.
The Analysis examined big skate
catch rates because they are the most
abundant skates in the GOA and
significant proportions of big skate
catches are retained compared to the
catch of longnose and other skates. The
2013 and 2014 period was selected for
analysis because NMFS prohibited
retention of big skates in the Central
GOA during these years, allowing a
clear comparison of changes in catch
rates after retention was prohibited.
NMFS also has more complete data on
big skate catch rates after 2013 due to
the Restructured Observer Program.
Results from the analysis of big skate
harvest rates indicate that after big skate
retention was prohibited the harvest rate
for big skate dropped from as much as
8.6 percent of the total groundfish and
halibut catch to a harvest rate that
ranged from 6.3 percent to 0.1 percent
of the total groundfish and halibut catch
depending on the year, gear type, and
target fishery. These data indicate that
participants in various target fisheries
could avoid the incidental catch of big
skate when there was not an incentive
to retain big skates.
Second, the Analysis used a model of
retained skate catch of all skate species,
in all areas and by vessels using all gear
types under a range of hypothetical
MRAs ranging from one percent to 20
percent of the basis species. The model
allowed the Council and NMFS to
compare the amount of retained skate
catch that would be likely under these
alternative MRAs (see Section 4.5.1.4 of
the Analysis).
Results from the model indicate that
as the MRA becomes more restrictive,
the incentive for vessel operators to
engage in top-off fishing is reduced and
overall skate catch may be reduced as
fishermen avoid areas where skates are
encountered. The model estimated that
a reduction in the skate MRA ranging
from 20 percent to 10 percent would
have relatively limited impacts on the
amount of GOA skates that are retained
relative to the current 20 percent MRA.
Therefore, NMFS expects reducing the
MRA to 15 or 10 percent would not
result in a significantly lower catch rate
of GOA skates. The model indicates that
reducing the skate MRA below 10
percent would be expected to result in
more limited top-off fishing and lower
overall catch of skates. The model
indicates that a 5 percent MRA would
best ensure that NMFS did not have to
prohibit the retention of skates and that
skate TACs would not be exceeded.
In December 2014, following public
comment and input from its advisory
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
39738
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 132 / Friday, July 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules
bodies, the Council unanimously
recommended reducing the MRA for
skates from 20 percent to 5 percent for
all basis species in the GOA. Overall,
reducing the skate MRA would
primarily affect vessel operators who
retained big skate at an amount greater
than 5 percent of their basis species in
the Central GOA. Reducing the skate
MRA to 5 percent would have the
greatest effect on vessels retaining big
skates in the Central GOA because big
skate catches have consistently
exceeded the big skate TAC in the
Central GOA, and data indicate that
vessel operators can and do engage in
topping-off for big skates. This proposed
rule would have a relatively limited
impact on vessel retention of longnose
and other skates given these species
have not been found to congregate like
big skates and are not currently subject
to the same patterns of top-off fishing.
This proposed rule is not likely to have
significant impacts on the conservation
or management of groundfish or halibut
in the GOA because this proposed rule
would only limit the amount of skates
that may be retained.
This proposed rule would affect all
catcher vessels and catcher/processors
directed fishing for groundfish and
halibut in the GOA that may harvest any
species of skate. Section 4.6.1.1 of the
Analysis estimates the annual revenue
at risk for all catcher vessels and
catcher/processors that could be
affected by this proposed rule at $2.4
million. However, the impact relative to
each vessel that retains skates in the
GOA is quite small. Analysis of the
gross revenue data for vessels that
retained GOA skates indicates that from
2008 through 2013 the average
percentage of annual gross revenue
derived from skate catch by catcher
vessels ranged between 0.7 percent and
1.28 percent of their total annual gross
revenue; the average percentage of
annual gross revenue derived from skate
catch by catcher/processors ranged
between 0.26 percent and 0.77 percent
of their total annual gross revenue (see
Section 4.6.1.1 of the Analysis). In
general, vessels that catch and retain
skates show relatively little dependence
on GOA skates for their gross revenues.
The actual impact on gross revenue for
a specific vessel may vary from year to
year depending on the total abundance
of skates, total catch of skates, market
conditions, and ex-vessel price. Section
4.5.1.4 of the Analysis describes the
effect of the 5 percent MRA on specific
vessel operations in greater detail.
The impact of this proposed rule on
communities is discussed in Section
4.6.2 of the Analysis. Impacts would be
most pronounced on Kodiak, AK,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jul 09, 2015
Jkt 235001
where, from 2008 through 2014, 87
percent to 93 percent of skates retained
by catcher vessels were delivered.
Kodiak accounted for between 84
percent and 91 percent of the first
wholesale value of shoreside skate
processing in Alaska, which ranged
between $3.2 and $5.1 million annually.
Skates accounted for between 0.98
percent and 1.38 percent of the first
wholesale value of production at
Kodiak.
Although this proposed rule could
limit the total amount of skates
delivered, it is also possible that skate
deliveries would continue under the 5
percent MRA, but would be distributed
throughout the year provided a TAC
limit is not reached. Therefore, the
impact on total landings on any
community may be limited.
Communities in the State of Alaska
where skates and processed skate
products are landed may realize lower
tax revenues from the State of Alaska
Fisheries Business Tax and Fishery
Resource Landing Tax, but only if total
skate landings decline.
Proposed Rule
This proposed rule would make four
changes to the regulations. First, this
proposed rule would revise skate MRAs
in Table 10 to 50 CFR part 679, Gulf of
Alaska Retainable Percentages, and in
Table 30 to 50 CFR part 679, Rockfish
Program Retainable Percentages. NMFS
would reduce the incidental catch
species MRAs for skates for each basis
species listed in Tables 10 and 30 from
20 percent to 5 percent. NMFS notes the
basis species termed ‘‘Aggregated
amount of non-groundfish species’’
includes all legally retained IFQ halibut
as explained in footnote 12 to Table 10.
If the proposed reductions in skate
MRAs are approved, then skate MRAs
would be set equal to 5 percent in
Tables 10 and 30 on the effective date
of the final rule.
Second, this proposed rule would
correct two regulatory cross-reference
errors. These errors resulted from
reorganizing and renumbering the
Federal Fisheries Permit requirements
in § 679.4(b) and were implemented in
a final rule published on October 21,
2014 (79 FR 62885). Current regulations
at § 679.7(a)(18) and § 679.28(f)(6)(i)
incorrectly refer to the FFP
requirements at § 679.4(b)(5)(vi), a
paragraph that no longer exists. This
proposed rule would correct those cross
references to § 679.4(b).
Third, this proposed rule would
modify regulatory text to clarify that a
vessel fishing under a Rockfish Program
cooperative quota (CQ) permit may
harvest groundfish species not allocated
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
as CQ up to the MRA for that species as
established in Table 30 to 50 CFR part
679. This proposed rule would remove
the last sentence in regulations at
§ 679.20(f)(2), because the sentence
makes an incorrect statement. The
heading in the last column in Table 30
correctly states that the MRA for vessels
fishing under the Rockfish Program is
calculated as ‘‘a percentage of total
retained rockfish primary species and
rockfish secondary species’’. This
proposed rule would correct this
discrepancy by removing the last
sentence of § 679.20(f)(2). The current
regulations at § 679.81(h)(4)(i) and (h)(5)
use the term ‘‘incidental catch species’’
in the calculation of an MRA to refer to
‘‘groundfish species not allocated as
cooperative quota (CQ).’’ This proposed
rule would add the referenced text to
§ 679.81(h)(4)(i) and (h)(5) to ensure
consistent use of terminology in the
regulations.
Fourth, this proposed rule would
revise Table 2a to 50 CFR part 679 to
add whiteblotched, Alaska, and
Aleutian skates, as well as the scientific
names for individual skate species.
Adding these individual skate species
and the scientific names would facilitate
the reporting of individual skate species
taken during groundfish harvest and
provides more detailed information
regarding skate harvests for stock
assessments and fisheries management.
This revision would support managing
skates as a target species group or as
individual target species. These skate
species and scientific names were added
to Table 2a in final regulations
implementing changes to groundfish
management in the BSAI and GOA on
October 6, 2010 (75 FR 61639).
Subsequent regulations published on
July 11, 2011 (76 FR 40628), amended
Table 2a to 50 CFR part 679 and that
revision inadvertently removed the
skate species codes implemented on
October 6, 2010. The proposed addition
of these skate species and scientific
names would correct this error that was
noticed during the preparation of this
proposed rule. The proposed addition of
species codes does not change the
management of skates or the other
provisions of this proposed rule.
Classification
Pursuant to sections 304 (b)(1)(A) and
305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the
NMFS Assistant Administrator has
determined that this proposed rule is
consistent with the FMP, other
provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act, and other applicable law, subject to
further consideration after public
comment.
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 132 / Friday, July 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
This proposed rule has been
determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
NMFS prepared an Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) as required
by section 603 of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA). The IRFA
describes the economic impact this
proposed rule, if adopted, would have
on small entities. A copy of the Analysis
is available from NMFS (see
ADDRESSES). A summary of the IRFA
follows. A description of the proposed
rule, why it is being considered, and the
legal basis for this proposed rule are
contained elsewhere in the preamble,
and are not repeated here.
This proposed rule, a reduction in
GOA skate MRAs, directly regulates all
entities fishing for groundfish and
halibut in the GOA that have the
potential to catch any species of skate.
These entities operate vessels that are
directly regulated by the GOA
groundfish harvest specifications.
On June 12, 2014, the Small Business
Administration issued an interim final
rule revising the small business size
standards for several industries effective
July 14, 2014 (79 FR 33647, June 12,
2014). The rule increased the size
standard for Finfish Fishing from $19.0
million to $20.5 million. The new size
standards were used to prepare the
IRFA for this proposed rule.
The IRFA estimates that this proposed
rule would directly regulate 1,153 small
entities. Of these small entities, the
IRFA estimates that this proposed rule
would directly regulate 1,073 small
catcher vessels fishing with hook-andline gear (including jig gear), 116 small
catcher vessels fishing with pot gear,
and 32 small catcher vessels fishing
with trawl gear. In addition, this
proposed rule would directly regulate 2
small catcher/processors fishing with
hook-and-line gear, and one small
catcher/processor fishing with trawl
gear. Specific revenue data for these
small catcher/processors are
confidential but are less than $20.5
million annually. The IRFA estimates
that the average gross revenues for 2013
(the most recent year of complete
revenue data) are $380,000 for small
hook-and-line catcher vessels, $960,000
for small pot catcher vessels, and $2.8
million for small trawl catcher vessels.
This proposed rule does not create
new recordkeeping and reporting
requirements, or alter existing
requirements.
The IRFA prepared for this proposed
rule has not identified Federal rules that
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the
preferred alternative (a 5 percent MRA).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jul 09, 2015
Jkt 235001
An IRFA should include a description
of any significant alternatives to the
proposed rule that accomplish the
stated objectives, are consistent with
applicable statutes, and that would
minimize the significant economic
impact of the proposed rule on small
entities.
The Council and NMFS considered
four alternatives in the development of
this proposed rule. This proposed rule
would implement Alternative 4, a 5
percent skate MRA. The significant
alternatives to this proposed rule are
Alternatives 1, 2, and 3, a 20 percent, 15
percent, and 10 percent skate MRA,
respectively. As discussed in Section
4.7 and 4.8 of the Analysis, these
proposed alternatives are not expected
to reduce the incentive for fishermen to
target and retain skates and thus, would
not accomplish the objectives of this
proposed rule—to slow the harvest rate
of skates that may be incidentally
retained to ensure that the TACs for
skate species are not exceeded. The
Analysis did not identify any other
alternatives that would more effectively
meet the RFA criteria to minimize
adverse economic impacts on directly
regulated small entities.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries.
Dated: July 7, 2015.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, NMFS proposes to amend 50
CFR part 679 as follows:
PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE
EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF
ALASKA
1. The authority citation for part 679
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1801 et
seq.; 3631 et seq.; Pub. L. 108–447; Pub. L.
111–281.
2. In § 679.7, revise paragraph (a)(18)
to read as follows:
■
§ 679.7
Prohibitions.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(18) Pollock, Pacific Cod, and Atka
Mackerel Directed Fishing and VMS.
Operate a vessel in any Federal
reporting area when a vessel is
authorized under § 679.4(b) to
participate in the Atka mackerel, Pacific
cod, or pollock directed fisheries and
the vessel’s authorized species and gear
type is open to directed fishing, unless
the vessel carries an operable NMFSapproved Vessel Monitoring System
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
39739
(VMS) and complies with the
requirements in § 679.28(f).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. In § 679.20, revise paragraph (f)(2)
to read as follows:
§ 679.20
General limitations.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(2) Retainable amounts. Any
groundfish species for which directed
fishing is closed may not be used to
calculate retainable amounts of other
groundfish species. Only fish harvested
under the CDQ Program may be used to
calculate retainable amounts of other
CDQ species.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. In § 679.28, revise paragraph
(f)(6)(i) to read as follows:
§ 679.28 Equipment and operational
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(6) * * *
(i) You operate a vessel in any
reporting area (see definitions at § 679.2)
off Alaska while any fishery requiring
VMS, for which the vessel has a species
and gear endorsement on its Federal
Fisheries Permit under § 679.4(b), is
open.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. In § 679.81, revise paragraphs
(h)(4)(i) and (h)(5) introductory text to
read as follows:
§ 679.81 Rockfish Program annual
harvester privileges.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(4) * * *
(i) The MRA for groundfish species
not allocated as CQ (incidental catch
species) for vessels fishing under the
authority of a CQ permit is calculated as
a proportion of the total allocated
rockfish primary species and rockfish
secondary species on board the vessel in
round weight equivalents using the
retainable percentage in Table 30 to this
part; except that—
*
*
*
*
*
(5) Maximum retainable amount
(MRA) calculation and limits—catcher/
processor vessels. The MRA for
groundfish species not allocated as CQ
(incidental catch species) for vessels
fishing under the authority of a CQ
permit is calculated as a proportion of
the total allocated rockfish primary
species and rockfish secondary species
on board the vessel in round weight
equivalents using the retainable
percentage in Table 30 to this part as
determined under § 679.20(e)(3)(iv).
*
*
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
39740
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 132 / Friday, July 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules
6. Revise Table 2a to part 679 to read
as follows:
TABLE 2A TO PART 679—SPECIES
CODES: FMP GROUNDFISH—Continued
■
TABLE 2A TO PART 679—SPECIES
CODES: FMP GROUNDFISH
Species description
Code
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Atka mackerel (greenling) ..................
Flatfish, miscellaneous (flatfish species without separate codes) ..........
FLOUNDER:
Alaska plaice ...................................
Arrowtooth .......................................
Bering ..............................................
Kamchatka ......................................
Starry ...............................................
Octopus, North Pacific ........................
Pacific cod ..........................................
Pollock ................................................
ROCKFISH:
Aurora (Sebastes aurora) ...............
Black (BSAI) (S. melanops) ............
Blackgill (S. melanostomus) ...........
Blue (BSAI) (S. mystinus) ...............
Bocaccio (S. paucispinis) ................
Canary (S. pinniger) ........................
Chilipepper (S. goodei) ...................
China (S. nebulosus) ......................
Copper (S. caurinus) .......................
Darkblotched (S. crameri) ...............
Dusky (S. variabilis) ........................
Greenstriped (S. elongatus) ............
Harlequin (S. variegatus) ................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jul 09, 2015
Jkt 235001
193
120
133
121
116
117
129
870
110
270
185
142
177
167
137
146
178
149
138
159
172
135
176
Species description
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Species description
Code
Northern (S. polyspinis) ..................
Pacific Ocean Perch (S. alutus) .....
Pygmy (S. wilsoni) ..........................
Quillback (S. maliger) .....................
Redbanded (S. babcocki) ...............
Redstripe (S. proriger) ....................
Rosethorn (S. helvomaculatus) ......
Rougheye (S. aleutianus) ...............
Sharpchin (S. zacentrus) ................
Shortbelly (S. jordani) .....................
Shortraker (S. borealis) ...................
Silvergray (S. brevispinis) ...............
Splitnose (S. diploproa) ..................
Stripetail (S. saxicola) .....................
Thornyhead (all Sebastolobus species) .............................................
Tiger (S. nigrocinctus) .....................
Vermilion (S. miniatus) ....................
Widow (S. entomelas) .....................
Yelloweye (S. ruberrimus) ..............
Yellowmouth (S. reedi) ...................
Yellowtail (S. flavidus) .....................
Sablefish (blackcod) ...........................
Sculpins ..............................................
SHARKS:
Other (if salmon, spiny dogfish or
Pacific sleeper shark—use specific species code) .......................
PO 00000
TABLE 2A TO PART 679—SPECIES
CODES: FMP GROUNDFISH—Continued
136
141
179
147
153
158
150
151
166
181
152
157
182
183
143
148
184
156
145
175
155
710
160
Pacific sleeper .................................
Salmon ............................................
Spiny dogfish ..................................
SKATES:
Whiteblotched (Bathyraja maculata)
Aleutian (B. aleutica) .......................
Alaska (B. parmifera) ......................
Big (Raja binoculata) ......................
Longnose (R. rhina) ........................
Other (if Whiteblotched, Aleutian,
Alaska, Big or Longnose skate—
use specific species code listed
above) ..........................................
SOLE:
Butter ...............................................
Dover ...............................................
English ............................................
Flathead ..........................................
Petrale .............................................
Rex ..................................................
Rock ................................................
Sand ................................................
Yellowfin ..........................................
Squid, majestic ...................................
Turbot, Greenland ..............................
692
690
691
705
704
703
702
701
700
126
124
128
122
131
125
123
132
127
875
134
7. Revise Table 10 to part 679 to read
as follows:
■
689
Code
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:25 Jul 09, 2015
Table 10 to Part 679-Gulf of Alaska Retainable Percentages
Jkt 235001
Species
Code
Pacific
Pollock
cod
DW
Flat
(2)
Rex
sole
Flathead
sole
sw
Flat
(3)
Arrowtooth
Aggregated SR!RE
Sablefish
rockfish18l ERA
(I)
DSR
SEO
(C/Ps
only)
AUw
mackerel
Aggregated
forage
fish00l
Skates
(!])
PO 00000
Frm 00023
136
Fmt 4702
141
Sfmt 4725
143
152/
151
193
Pacific cod
lArrow tooth
!Flathead sole
~ex sole
!Northern
ockfish
Pacific ocean
perch
lrhomyhead
Shortraker/
ougheye '1 !
Atka
~ackerel
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
~70
Pollock
1710 Sab1efish
!Flatfish, deep~ater121
!Flatfish, shallow~ater'3 !
~ockfish, other 141
10JYP1
~ockfish, pelagic 151
~ockfish, DSR-SEO
6)
111
Skates
pther species 17 l
!Aggregated amount
pf non-groundfish
20
20
20
n/a
20
20
n/a
20
20
20
20
20
35
n/a
35
35
1
1
7
7
5
5
15
15
(!)
5
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
35
7
15
20
20
20
20
20
20
35
7
20
20
20
20
20
20
35
20
20
20
20
20
20
35
20
5
20
20
nJal91
(13}
8
1
20
20
20
20
2
2
2
2
5
5
5
5
20
20
20
20
7
1
20
2
5
20
15
7
I
20
2
5
20
8
7
15
7
1
20
2
5
20
7
15
nla
1
20
2
5
20
8
8
10
nla
2
5
20
8
8
8
8
0
7
7
10
0
Grenadiers
(')
(b)
110
121
122
125
Other
specie
s
I
(l)
8
8
8
8
20
20
20
20
20
20
35
1
5
nla
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
35
35
1
n/a
5
15
(IJ
7
10
1
20
20
2
2
5
5
20
20
20
20
n/a
20
20
20
35
7
15
7
1
20
2
5
20
20
20
20
20
20
nla
35
1
5
(!)
10
20
2
5
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
35
35
7
7
15
15
7
7
I
1
20
20
2
2
5
5
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
35
7
15
7
nla
20
2
5
20
8
8
8
(lJ
lO
(!)
10
20
20
2
2
n/a
5
20
nla
8
8
(!)
10
20
2
5
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 132 / Friday, July 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules
INCIDENTAL CATCH SPECIES (for DSR caught on catcher vessels in the SEO, see§ 679.20 (j) 6 )
BASIS
SPECIES
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
35
35
1
1
5
5
20
20
20
20
20
20
35
1
5
8
8
~pecies 112 J
39741
EP10JY15.009
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
39742
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 132 / Friday, July 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules
17:25 Jul 09, 2015
EP10JY15.010
Notes to Table 10 to Part 679
l Shortraker/rougheye rockfish
Shorlraker rockfish (152)
SR/RE
Rougheye rockfish ( 151)
SR/RE ERA Shortraker/rougheye rockfish in the Eastern Regulatory Area (ERA).
Where numerical percentage is not indicated, the retainable percentage of SR/RE is included under Aggregated Rockfish
2 Deep-water flatfish
Dover sole, Greenland turbot, and deep-sea sole
3 Shallow-water flatfish
Flatfish not including deep-water flatfish, flathead sole, rex sole, or arrowtooth flounder
4 Other rockfish
Western Regulatory Area
means slope rockfish and demersal shelf rockfish
Central Regulatory Area
West Yakutat District
Southeast Outside District
means slope rockfish
Slope rockfish
S. aurora (aurora)
S. variegates (harlequin)
S. brevi~pinis (silvergrey)
S. melanoswmus (blackgill)
S. wilsoni (pygmy)
S. diploproa (splitnose)
S. paucispinis (bocaccio)
S. hahcocki (redbanded)
S. saxicola (stripetail)
S. ~oodei (chilipepper)
S. miniarus (vermilion)
S. prori~er (redstripe)
S. zacentrus (sharpchin)
S. crameri (darkblotch)
S. reedi (yellowmouth)
S. jordani (shortbelly)
S. elongatus (greenstriped)
In the Eastern GOA only, Slope rockfish also includes S. polvspinis (northern)
S. variabilis (dusky)
S. flavidus (yellowtail)
5 Pelagic shelf rockfish
S. entomelas (widow)
S. pinnizer (canary)
S. malizer (quillback)
6 Demersal shelf
S. ruberrimus (yelloweye)
rockfish (DSR)
S. nebulosus (china)
S. helvomaculatus (rosethorn)
S. caurinus (copper)
S. nigrocinctus (tiger)
DSR-SEO =Demersal shelf rockfish inlhe SouUteast Outside District (SEO)(see § 679.7(b)(4) and§ 679.20(i)).
7 Other species
Sculpins
Octopus
I Sharks
I Squid
8 Aggregated rockfish
Means rockfish as defined at~ 679.2 except in:
Southeast Outside District
where DSR is a separate category for those species marked with a numerical percentage
Eastern Rcgulatorv Area
where SR/RE is a separate category for those species marked with a numerical percentage
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
11
12
10JYP1
13
Skates Species and
Groups
Aggregated nongroundfish
Grenadiers
Bristlemouths, lightfishes, and anglemouths (family Gonostomatidae)
Capelin smelt (family Osmeridae)
Deep-sea smells (family BathylaRidae)
Eulachon smelt (family Osmeridae)
Gunnels (family Pholidae)
Krill (order P.uphausiacea)
Laternfishes (family Myctophidae)
Pacific Sand fish (family Trichodontidae)
Pacific Sand lance (family Ammodvtidae)
Pricklebacks, war-bom1els, eelblemrys, cockscombs and Shmmys (family
Stichaeidae)
Surf smell (familv Osmeridae)
Big Skates (Raja binoculata)
209
516
773
511
207
800
772
206
774
208
515
702
701
Longnosc Skates (R. rhina)
700
Other Skates (all skates that are not Big Skate or Longnose Skate)
AIllegally retained species offish and shellfish, including TFQ halibut, that are not listed as FMP groundfish in Tables 2a and 2c to this
part.
Giant grenadiers (Alhatrossia pectoralis)
214
Other grenadiers
213
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 132 / Friday, July 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules
17:25 Jul 09, 2015
Noles lo Table 10 lo Parl679
9
I Not applicable
nla
10 Aggregated forage fish (all species of the following taxa)
39743
EP10JY15.011
39744
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 132 / Friday, July 10, 2015 / Proposed Rules
8. Revise Table 30 to part 679 to read
as follows:
■
TABLE 30 TO PART 679—ROCKFISH PROGRAM RETAINABLE PERCENTAGES
[In round wt. equivalent]
MRA as a
percentage of total
retained rockfish
primary species
and rockfish
secondary species
Fishery
Incidental catch species
Sector
Rockfish Cooperative Vessels fishing under a
CQ permit.
Pacific cod ......................
Shortraker/Rougheye aggregate catch.
Catcher/Processor .........................................
Catcher Vessel ..............................................
4.0
2.0
See rockfish non-allocated species for ‘‘other species’’
Rockfish non-allocated Species for Rockfish Cooperative vessels fishing under a Rockfish CQ
permit.
Pollock ............................
Deep-water flatfish ..........
Rex sole ..........................
Flathead sole ..................
Shallow-water flatfish ......
Arrowtooth flounder ........
Other rockfish .................
Atka mackerel .................
Aggregated forage fish ...
Skates .............................
Other species .................
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Catcher/Processor
Longline gear Rockfish Entry Level Fishery ........
Opt-out vessels ....................................................
Rockfish Cooperative Vessels not fishing under
a CQ permit.
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
and
Catcher
Catcher
Catcher
Catcher
Catcher
Catcher
Catcher
Catcher
Catcher
Catcher
Catcher
See Table 10 to this part.
See Table 10 to this part.
See Table 10 to this part.
[FR Doc. 2015–16935 Filed 7–9–15; 8:45 am]
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:31 Jul 09, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\10JYP1.SGM
10JYP1
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
Vessel
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
20.0
35.0
15.0
20.0
2.0
5.0
20.0
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 132 (Friday, July 10, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 39734-39744]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16935]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 150126078-5078-01]
RIN 0648-BE85
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Revise
Maximum Retainable Amounts for Skates in the Gulf of Alaska
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to reduce the maximum retainable
amount (MRA) of skates using groundfish and halibut as basis species in
the Gulf of Alaska (GOA) from 20 percent to 5 percent. Reducing skate
MRAs is necessary to decrease the incentive for fishermen to target
skates and slow the catch rate of skates in these fisheries. This
proposed rule would enhance conservation and management of skates and
minimize skate discards in GOA groundfish and halibut fisheries. This
proposed rule is intended to promote the goals and objectives of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the Northern
Pacific Halibut Act of 1982, the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish
of the Gulf of Alaska, and other applicable laws.
DATES: Comments must be received no later than August 10, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this document, identified by
NOAA-NMFS-2015-0015, 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-2015-0015, click the
``Comment Now!'' icon, complete the required fields, and enter or
attach your comments.
Mail: Submit 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.
Instructions: 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 by NMFS. 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), confidential business information,
or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender
will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter
``N/A'' in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).
Electronic copies of the draft Environmental Assessment/Regulatory
Impact Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (collectively the
``Analysis''), Alaska Groundfish Harvest Specifications Final
Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS), Supplementary Information
Report (SIR) to the Final EIS, and the Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (IRFA) for the Gulf of Alaska Groundfish Harvest
Specifications for 2015 and 2016 (Harvest Specifications IRFA) prepared
for this action are available from https://www.regulations.gov or from
the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Murphy, 907-586-7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority for Action
NMFS manages the groundfish fisheries in the exclusive economic
zone of the GOA under the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the
Gulf of Alaska (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 groundfish fishing in the GOA
and implementing the FMP appear at 50 CFR parts 600 and 679. The
Council and NMFS manage skates (Raja and Bathyraja species) as a
groundfish species under the FMP.
Background
NMFS proposes to modify regulations that specify the MRA for skates
in the GOA. An MRA is the maximum amount of a species closed to
directed fishing (i.e., skate species) that may be retained onboard a
vessel. MRAs are calculated as a percentage of the weight of catch of
each groundfish species or halibut open to directed fishing (the basis
species) that is retained onboard the vessel. MRAs assist in limiting
catch of a species within its annual total allowable catch (TAC). Once
the TAC for a species is reached, retention of that species becomes
prohibited and all catch of that species must be discarded. NMFS closes
a species to directed fishing before the entire TAC is taken to leave
sufficient amounts of the TAC available for incidental catch. The
amount of the TAC remaining available for incidental catch is managed
by a species-specific MRA. MRAs are a management tool to slow down the
rate of harvest and reduce the incentive for targeting a species closed
to directed fishing. NMFS has established a single MRA percentage for
big skate (Raja binoculata), longnose skate (Raja rhina), and for all
remaining skate species (Bathyraja spp.). The skate MRA in the GOA is
set at 20 percent. The proposed rule would reduce the MRA for skates
[[Page 39735]]
in the GOA from 20 percent to 5 percent. The reduced MRA would apply to
all vessels directed fishing for groundfish species or halibut in the
GOA. Under the proposed rule, the round weight of the retained skate
species could be no more than 5 percent of the round weight of the
basis species.
The Council recommended and NMFS proposes to reduce the skate MRA
to decrease the incentive for fishermen to target skates while directed
fishing for groundfish and halibut, and to slow the harvest rate of
skates in GOA groundfish and halibut fisheries. Information from recent
years of skate catch in directed groundfish and halibut fisheries
indicates that some fishermen have maximized their retention of skates
early in the year by deliberately targeting them while directed fishing
for other species. Over a period of years, the TAC of big skate and
longnose skate has been exceeded in the Central GOA and Western GOA,
respectively. In response, NMFS has prohibited retention of skates
earlier in the year to reduce incentives to target skates and maintain
catch at or below the TACs established for skate species in specific
GOA regulatory areas. A prohibition on retention results in mandatory
discard of all skate catch for the remainder of the year.
This proposed rule would limit the amount of skates that could be
retained while directed fishing for other groundfish and halibut. The
proposed rule would slow the harvest rate of skates and would enhance
NMFS' ability to limit the catch of skates to the skate TACs. In
addition, the proposed rule is expected to minimize discards of skates
by reducing the likelihood that NMFS would need to prohibit retention
of a skate species in a GOA management area during the year to maintain
skate catch at or below its TAC.
This proposed rule would make four amendments to regulations.
First, this proposed rule would amend regulations to reduce the skate
MRA for all vessels fishing for groundfish and halibut in the GOA. This
proposed rule would amend regulations that establish a skate MRA for
all groundfish and halibut basis species in Table 10 to 50 CFR part 679
and for the fisheries under the Central GOA Rockfish Program in Table
30 to 50 CFR part 679. Second, this proposed rule would make minor
clarifications in MRA regulations applicable to the Central GOA
Rockfish Program. Third, this proposed rule would make minor
corrections to incorrect cross references in regulations in Sec. Sec.
679.7 and 679.28. Finally, this proposed rule would revise Table 2a to
50 CFR part 679 by adding whiteblotched, Alaska, and Aleutian skates as
well as the scientific names for individual skate species that were
inadvertently removed by a previous rule making.
The following sections describe (1) management of skates in the GOA
and the fisheries that would be affected by the rule; (2) the need for
the proposed rule; and (3) the proposed rule.
Management of Skates in the GOA and the Fisheries Affected by the
Proposed Rule
Management of Skates in the GOA
In the GOA, the Council and NMFS manage skates as a groundfish
species under the FMP. Management of skates in the GOA is described in
Section 3.1.2 of the Analysis. Big skate and longnose skate are managed
as single species, and all other skate species are managed in the
``other skates'' species group.
GOA skate catches are managed subject to annual limits on the
amounts of each species of skate, or group of skate species, that may
be taken. The annual limits are defined in the FMP and referred to as
``harvest specifications.'' The overfishing limits (OFLs), acceptable
biological catch (ABCs), and TACs for skates are specified through the
annual ``harvest specification process.'' The FMP requires that the
Council recommend and NMFS specify these annual limits for each species
or species group of groundfish on an annual basis. A detailed
description of the annual harvest specification process is provided in
the Final EIS, the SIR, and the final 2015 and 2016 harvest
specifications for groundfish of the GOA (80 FR 10250, February 25,
2015) and is briefly summarized here.
Section 3.2.1 of the FMP defines the OFL as the annual amount of
catch that results whenever a stock or stock complex is subjected to a
level of fishing mortality or annual total catch that jeopardizes the
capacity of a stock or stock complex to produce maximum sustainable
yield on a continuing basis. The OFL is the catch level above which
overfishing is occurring. NMFS manages fisheries to ensure that no OFLs
are exceeded in any year.
Section 3.2.1 of the FMP defines the ABC as the level of a stock or
stock complex's annual catch that accounts for the scientific
uncertainty in the estimate of OFL and any other scientific
uncertainty. The ABC is set below the OFL.
Section 3.2.1 of the FMP defines the TAC as the annual catch target
for a stock or stock complex, derived from the ABC by considering
social and economic factors and management uncertainty (i.e.,
uncertainty in the ability of managers to constrain catch so the annual
catch limit is not exceeded, and uncertainty in quantifying the true
catch amount). Section 3.2.3.4.1 of the FMP requires that the TAC must
be set lower than or equal to the ABC. Section 3.2.3.4.3.2 of the FMP
clarifies that TACs can be apportioned by regulatory area. There are
three regulatory areas specified in the GOA management area: Western
GOA, Central GOA, and Eastern GOA.
Big skate and longnose skate have OFLs and ABCs defined for the GOA
management area. The ABCs for big skate and longnose skate are
apportioned to each of the regulatory areas in the GOA management area
according to the proportion of the biomass estimated in each regulatory
area. NMFS specifies TACs for big skate and longnose skate for the
Western GOA, Central GOA, and Eastern GOA equal to the ABC for each of
these regulatory areas. All other species of skates are assigned to the
``other skates'' species group. The other skates species group has an
OFL and ABC, and TAC specified for the GOA management area (i.e., NMFS
does not establish separate ABCs or TACs for the Western GOA, Central
GOA, and Eastern GOA). NMFS does not establish regulatory area-specific
ABCs or TACs for other skates because harvest is generally more broadly
dispersed throughout the entire GOA, and they are not generally
retained. All retained and discarded catch of skates accrues to the
TACs, ABCs, and OFLs specified for the species. Additional detail on
skate biomass and harvest specifications is available in Section 3.1.1
and 3.1.2 of the Analysis, respectively.
NMFS ensures that OFLs, ABCs, and TACs are not exceeded by
requiring vessel operators participating in groundfish fisheries in the
GOA to comply with a range of restrictions, such as area, time, gear,
and operation-specific fishery closures. Regulations at Sec.
679.20(d)(1), (d)(2), and (d)(3) describe the range of management
measures that NMFS uses to maintain total catch at or below the TAC.
Regulations at Sec. 679.20(d)(1)(i) specify that NMFS may
establish a directed fishing allowance (DFA) for a species or species
group when any allocation or apportionment of a target species or
species group allocated or apportioned to a fishery will be reached.
Regulations at Sec. 679.20(d)(1)(ii)(B) specify that NMFS must also
consider the amount of a species or species group closed to directed
fishing that will be taken in directed fishing for other species when
establishing a DFA. NMFS implements this provision through the annual
[[Page 39736]]
harvest specifications process by subtracting the estimated amount of
incidental catch of a species or species group taken in directed
fishing for other species from the TAC of that species or species
group. If an insufficient amount of TAC is available for a directed
fishery for that species or species group, NMFS establishes the DFA for
that species or species group as zero metric tons (mt) and, in
accordance with Sec. 679.20(d)(1)(iii), prohibits directed fishing for
that species or species group.
Directed fishing for groundfish in the GOA is defined at Sec.
679.2 as any fishing activity that results in the retention of an
amount of a species or species group onboard a vessel that is greater
than the MRA for that species or species group. Therefore, when
directed fishing for a species or species group is prohibited,
retention of the species or species group is limited to an MRA. These
species are referred to as incidental catch species. NMFS established
MRAs to allow vessel operators fishing for species or species groups
open to directed fishing to retain a specified amount of incidental
catch species.
NMFS has determined that the TACs specified for all skate species
in the GOA are needed to support incidental catch of skates in other
groundfish and halibut fisheries. As a result, there are insufficient
TACs for these species to support directed fisheries, the DFA for
skates is set to zero mt, and directed fishing for skates is prohibited
at the beginning of the fishing year. When directed fishing for skates
is prohibited, the catch of skates is limited by an MRA.
The skate MRA is specified by basis species in Table 10 and Table
30 to 50 CFR part 679. The skate MRA is not specified by skate species.
Instead, the skate MRA is based on the combined round weight of all
skate species retained onboard a vessel. A single MRA for all skates
was established because fishermen and processors may have difficulty
identifying skate species and may not be able to easily determine if
they have reached an MRA for a specific skate species. Therefore, a
separate MRA for each species would be difficult to manage and enforce.
Additional detail on the designation of a single skate MRA is provided
in Section 4.1 of the Analysis.
Currently, the skate MRA for all basis species in the GOA is 20
percent of the basis species round weight retained onboard a vessel.
This means the maximum amount of big, longnose, and other skate species
that may be retained onboard a vessel must not exceed 20 percent of the
round weight of other groundfish species and halibut (basis species)
retained onboard a vessel. For example, a vessel operator fishing
Pacific cod, a basis species open to directed fishing, may retain big,
longnose, and other skates in an amount up to 20 percent of the round
weight equivalent of Pacific cod that is onboard the vessel at any
point in time during a fishing trip.
Amounts of skates onboard the vessel that are below or equal to the
MRA may be retained. Amounts of skates in excess of the MRA must be
discarded. An MRA applies at all times and to all areas for the
duration of a fishing trip (see Sec. 679.20(e)(3)). Vessel operators
may retain incidental catch species while directed fishing for other
groundfish species or halibut up to the MRA percentage of the basis
species retained catch until the TAC for the incidental catch species
is met.
Regulations at Sec. 679.20(d)(2) specify that if the TAC for the
incidental catch species is met, NMFS will prohibit retention of the
incidental catch species for the remainder of the year. Regulations at
Sec. 679.21(b) specify that if retention of a species is prohibited,
the operator of each vessel engaged in directed fishing for groundfish
in the GOA must return the prohibited species to the sea immediately,
with a minimum of injury, regardless of its condition. Therefore, when
NMFS prohibits retention of an incidental catch species, such as
skates, vessel operators must discard all catch of that species. The
primary purpose of requiring discards is to remove any incentive for
vessel operators to increase incidental catch of the species as a
portion of other fisheries and to minimize the catch of that species.
Although MRAs limit the incentive to target on an incidental catch
species, fishermen can ``top off'' their retained groundfish and
halibut catch with incidental catch species up to the maximum permitted
under the MRA. Fishermen are top-off fishing when they deliberately
target and retain incidental catch species up to the MRA instead of
harvesting the species incidentally. Thus, MRAs reflect a balance
between NMFS' need to limit the harvest rate of incidental catch
species and minimize regulatory discards of the incidental catch
species while providing fishermen an opportunity to harvest available
incidental species TAC through limited retention.
Fisheries That Would Be Affected by the Proposed Rule
Skates are caught in the GOA primarily by vessels directed fishing
for groundfish with non-pelagic trawl gear and by vessels directed
fishing for groundfish and halibut with hook-and-line gear. Very
limited amounts of skates are also caught by vessels using pelagic
trawl, pot, and jig gear in directed groundfish fisheries in the GOA.
Section 3.1.1 of the Analysis presents detailed information on GOA
skate catch by species, management area, gear, and target fishery for
two time periods: From 2008 through 2012, and in 2013 and 2014. This
information is briefly summarized below.
Catch data are divided into these two periods, because the
individual fishing quota (IFQ) halibut and small catcher vessel hook-
and-line Pacific cod fisheries were largely unobserved before 2013.
Data on the incidental catch of skate species from these fisheries
prior to 2013 is limited or not available. In 2013, the North Pacific
Groundfish Observer Program was restructured (Restructured Observer
Program) and observers were deployed in the IFQ halibut fishery and on
smaller vessels (77 FR 70062, November 21, 2012). As a result, new
observer data on skate catch were included in NMFS' catch accounting
system. The improved observer data since 2013, and information on the
amount of at-sea discards of skates from the IFQ halibut fishery and
smaller hook-and-line vessels, show that an increased proportion of
skate catch occurs on vessels using hook-and-line gear.
Based upon NMFS' catch accounting system, big skate catch occurs
primarily in the Central GOA. Less than one tenth of the catch comes
from the Western GOA or the Eastern GOA. NMFS data show that from 2008
through 2012, an average of 67 percent of the big skate catch was
caught by vessels using non-pelagic trawl gear and 32 percent was
caught by vessels using hook-and-line gear. During 2013 and 2104, the
proportion of big skate catch by vessels using non-pelagic trawl gear
decreased to 54 percent, and the proportion caught by vessels using
hook-and-line gear increased to 46 percent. Big skate catch by vessels
using non-pelagic trawl gear occurs predominantly in the arrowtooth
flounder directed fishery. Big skate catch by vessels using hook-and-
line gear occurs predominantly in the Pacific cod and halibut directed
fisheries. Less than 1 percent of the big skate catch was caught by
vessels using other types of gear.
The analysis indicates that congregations of big skate in the
spring enable catcher vessel operators using non-pelagic trawl gear and
hook-and-line gear to engage in top-off fishing. NMFS groundfish
landings data on big skate confirm that specific areas have higher
retention of big skate when
[[Page 39737]]
compared to other areas (see Section 3.1.3 of the Analysis).
Longnose skate are caught predominantly in the Central GOA, with
more limited catch in the Eastern GOA, and the least amount of catch in
the Western GOA. NMFS data show that from 2008 through 2012, an average
of 53 percent of the longnose skate catch was caught by vessels using
hook-and-line gear and 44 percent was caught by vessels using non-
pelagic trawl gear. During 2013 and 2014, the proportion of longnose
skate catch by vessels using hook-and-line gear increased to 67
percent, and the proportion of catch by vessels using non-pelagic trawl
gear decreased to 31 percent. Longnose skate catch by vessels using
hook-and-line gear occurs predominantly in Pacific cod, halibut, and
sablefish directed fisheries. Longnose skate catch by vessels using
non-pelagic trawl gear occurs predominantly in the arrowtooth flounder
and flatfish directed fisheries. Approximately 2 percent of the
longnose skate catch was caught by vessels using other types of gear.
Other skates are caught primarily in the Central GOA. From 2008
through 2012, an average of 78 percent of the other skate catch was
caught by vessels using hook-and-line gear, and 20 percent was caught
by vessels using non-pelagic trawl gear. During 2013 and 2014, the
proportion of catch of other skate catch by vessels using hook-and-line
gear increased to 90 percent and the proportion of catch by vessels
using non-pelagic trawl gear decreased to 10 percent. Other skate catch
by vessels using hook-and-line gear occurs predominantly in the Pacific
cod, halibut, and sablefish directed fisheries. Other skate catch by
vessels using non-pelagic trawl gear occurs predominantly in the
arrowtooth and deep-water flatfish target fisheries. Less than 1
percent of the other skate catch was caught by vessels using other
types of gear.
Need for the Proposed Rule
In December 2013, the Council received public testimony that the
current MRA for skates in the GOA allows fishermen to deliberately
target skates while ostensibly directed fishing for other groundfish or
halibut. This ``topping-off'' pattern of maximizing skate catch up to
the MRA limit of 20 percent of the basis species onboard a vessel has
increased the harvest rate of skates. In recent years, skate catch has
exceeded the TAC in some areas. The estimated catch of big skate
exceeded the TAC in the Central GOA in 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013, and
the estimated catch of longnose skates exceeded the TAC in the Western
GOA in 2009, 2010, and 2013. The catch of other skates has not exceeded
the TACs established for the GOA management area; however, in 2013 and
2014, the catch of other skates was estimated at 93 percent and 98
percent of the 2013 and 2014 TACs, respectively.
When fishery managers estimated the big or longnose skate TACs
would be exceeded, NMFS prohibited retention of big or longnose skates
in the directed fisheries for groundfish and halibut and required
discard of all big or longnose skate catch for the remainder of the
calendar year. The earlier in the year that big or longnose skate
retention is prohibited, the more regulatory discards of big or
longnose skate can occur since groundfish and halibut fisheries will
continue to catch these skates incidentally.
The Council determined and NMFS agrees that reducing the skate MRA
would decrease the incentive for fishermen to engage in top-off fishing
for skates and slow the harvest rate of skates to levels that more
accurately reflect the rate of incidental catch of skates in the
directed groundfish and halibut fisheries in the GOA. Reducing the
skate MRA would slow the skate harvest rate and accrual of skate catch
against the TAC. A slower harvest rate may reduce the potential that
NMFS will have to prohibit skate retention to avoid exceeding a skate
species' TAC. In addition, a slower harvest rate could extend skate
retention throughout the year and result in lower regulatory discards
of skates.
This proposed rule would help ensure that skate catch in the future
does not exceed a TAC, ABC, or OFL. The Council and NMFS analyzed four
alternative MRAs to reduce the incentive for fishermen to pursue top-
off fishing for skates and slow the rate of skate harvest. In addition
to the status quo of an MRA of 20 percent, the Council and NMFS
evaluated alternatives to reduce skate MRAs to 15, 10, and 5 percent.
To estimate impacts of the alternative MRAs, the Analysis considered
two metrics.
First, the Analysis examined the rate of big skate catch relative
to groundfish catch by directed fishery before and after big skate
retention was prohibited in 2013 and 2014 (see Section 4.5.1.1 of the
Analysis). The Analysis assumed that once big skate retention was
prohibited by regulation, a vessel operator would not be engaging in
top-off fishing for big skates if they were encountered while directed
fishing for groundfish or halibut. Thus, the Analysis assumed that the
relative catch rates of big skate after retention was prohibited were a
reasonable estimate of the likely incidental catch rate of big skate.
The Analysis examined big skate catch rates because they are the
most abundant skates in the GOA and significant proportions of big
skate catches are retained compared to the catch of longnose and other
skates. The 2013 and 2014 period was selected for analysis because NMFS
prohibited retention of big skates in the Central GOA during these
years, allowing a clear comparison of changes in catch rates after
retention was prohibited. NMFS also has more complete data on big skate
catch rates after 2013 due to the Restructured Observer Program.
Results from the analysis of big skate harvest rates indicate that
after big skate retention was prohibited the harvest rate for big skate
dropped from as much as 8.6 percent of the total groundfish and halibut
catch to a harvest rate that ranged from 6.3 percent to 0.1 percent of
the total groundfish and halibut catch depending on the year, gear
type, and target fishery. These data indicate that participants in
various target fisheries could avoid the incidental catch of big skate
when there was not an incentive to retain big skates.
Second, the Analysis used a model of retained skate catch of all
skate species, in all areas and by vessels using all gear types under a
range of hypothetical MRAs ranging from one percent to 20 percent of
the basis species. The model allowed the Council and NMFS to compare
the amount of retained skate catch that would be likely under these
alternative MRAs (see Section 4.5.1.4 of the Analysis).
Results from the model indicate that as the MRA becomes more
restrictive, the incentive for vessel operators to engage in top-off
fishing is reduced and overall skate catch may be reduced as fishermen
avoid areas where skates are encountered. The model estimated that a
reduction in the skate MRA ranging from 20 percent to 10 percent would
have relatively limited impacts on the amount of GOA skates that are
retained relative to the current 20 percent MRA. Therefore, NMFS
expects reducing the MRA to 15 or 10 percent would not result in a
significantly lower catch rate of GOA skates. The model indicates that
reducing the skate MRA below 10 percent would be expected to result in
more limited top-off fishing and lower overall catch of skates. The
model indicates that a 5 percent MRA would best ensure that NMFS did
not have to prohibit the retention of skates and that skate TACs would
not be exceeded.
In December 2014, following public comment and input from its
advisory
[[Page 39738]]
bodies, the Council unanimously recommended reducing the MRA for skates
from 20 percent to 5 percent for all basis species in the GOA. Overall,
reducing the skate MRA would primarily affect vessel operators who
retained big skate at an amount greater than 5 percent of their basis
species in the Central GOA. Reducing the skate MRA to 5 percent would
have the greatest effect on vessels retaining big skates in the Central
GOA because big skate catches have consistently exceeded the big skate
TAC in the Central GOA, and data indicate that vessel operators can and
do engage in topping-off for big skates. This proposed rule would have
a relatively limited impact on vessel retention of longnose and other
skates given these species have not been found to congregate like big
skates and are not currently subject to the same patterns of top-off
fishing. This proposed rule is not likely to have significant impacts
on the conservation or management of groundfish or halibut in the GOA
because this proposed rule would only limit the amount of skates that
may be retained.
This proposed rule would affect all catcher vessels and catcher/
processors directed fishing for groundfish and halibut in the GOA that
may harvest any species of skate. Section 4.6.1.1 of the Analysis
estimates the annual revenue at risk for all catcher vessels and
catcher/processors that could be affected by this proposed rule at $2.4
million. However, the impact relative to each vessel that retains
skates in the GOA is quite small. Analysis of the gross revenue data
for vessels that retained GOA skates indicates that from 2008 through
2013 the average percentage of annual gross revenue derived from skate
catch by catcher vessels ranged between 0.7 percent and 1.28 percent of
their total annual gross revenue; the average percentage of annual
gross revenue derived from skate catch by catcher/processors ranged
between 0.26 percent and 0.77 percent of their total annual gross
revenue (see Section 4.6.1.1 of the Analysis). In general, vessels that
catch and retain skates show relatively little dependence on GOA skates
for their gross revenues. The actual impact on gross revenue for a
specific vessel may vary from year to year depending on the total
abundance of skates, total catch of skates, market conditions, and ex-
vessel price. Section 4.5.1.4 of the Analysis describes the effect of
the 5 percent MRA on specific vessel operations in greater detail.
The impact of this proposed rule on communities is discussed in
Section 4.6.2 of the Analysis. Impacts would be most pronounced on
Kodiak, AK, where, from 2008 through 2014, 87 percent to 93 percent of
skates retained by catcher vessels were delivered. Kodiak accounted for
between 84 percent and 91 percent of the first wholesale value of
shoreside skate processing in Alaska, which ranged between $3.2 and
$5.1 million annually. Skates accounted for between 0.98 percent and
1.38 percent of the first wholesale value of production at Kodiak.
Although this proposed rule could limit the total amount of skates
delivered, it is also possible that skate deliveries would continue
under the 5 percent MRA, but would be distributed throughout the year
provided a TAC limit is not reached. Therefore, the impact on total
landings on any community may be limited. Communities in the State of
Alaska where skates and processed skate products are landed may realize
lower tax revenues from the State of Alaska Fisheries Business Tax and
Fishery Resource Landing Tax, but only if total skate landings decline.
Proposed Rule
This proposed rule would make four changes to the regulations.
First, this proposed rule would revise skate MRAs in Table 10 to 50 CFR
part 679, Gulf of Alaska Retainable Percentages, and in Table 30 to 50
CFR part 679, Rockfish Program Retainable Percentages. NMFS would
reduce the incidental catch species MRAs for skates for each basis
species listed in Tables 10 and 30 from 20 percent to 5 percent. NMFS
notes the basis species termed ``Aggregated amount of non-groundfish
species'' includes all legally retained IFQ halibut as explained in
footnote 12 to Table 10. If the proposed reductions in skate MRAs are
approved, then skate MRAs would be set equal to 5 percent in Tables 10
and 30 on the effective date of the final rule.
Second, this proposed rule would correct two regulatory cross-
reference errors. These errors resulted from reorganizing and
renumbering the Federal Fisheries Permit requirements in Sec. 679.4(b)
and were implemented in a final rule published on October 21, 2014 (79
FR 62885). Current regulations at Sec. 679.7(a)(18) and Sec.
679.28(f)(6)(i) incorrectly refer to the FFP requirements at Sec.
679.4(b)(5)(vi), a paragraph that no longer exists. This proposed rule
would correct those cross references to Sec. 679.4(b).
Third, this proposed rule would modify regulatory text to clarify
that a vessel fishing under a Rockfish Program cooperative quota (CQ)
permit may harvest groundfish species not allocated as CQ up to the MRA
for that species as established in Table 30 to 50 CFR part 679. This
proposed rule would remove the last sentence in regulations at Sec.
679.20(f)(2), because the sentence makes an incorrect statement. The
heading in the last column in Table 30 correctly states that the MRA
for vessels fishing under the Rockfish Program is calculated as ``a
percentage of total retained rockfish primary species and rockfish
secondary species''. This proposed rule would correct this discrepancy
by removing the last sentence of Sec. 679.20(f)(2). The current
regulations at Sec. 679.81(h)(4)(i) and (h)(5) use the term
``incidental catch species'' in the calculation of an MRA to refer to
``groundfish species not allocated as cooperative quota (CQ).'' This
proposed rule would add the referenced text to Sec. 679.81(h)(4)(i)
and (h)(5) to ensure consistent use of terminology in the regulations.
Fourth, this proposed rule would revise Table 2a to 50 CFR part 679
to add whiteblotched, Alaska, and Aleutian skates, as well as the
scientific names for individual skate species. Adding these individual
skate species and the scientific names would facilitate the reporting
of individual skate species taken during groundfish harvest and
provides more detailed information regarding skate harvests for stock
assessments and fisheries management. This revision would support
managing skates as a target species group or as individual target
species. These skate species and scientific names were added to Table
2a in final regulations implementing changes to groundfish management
in the BSAI and GOA on October 6, 2010 (75 FR 61639). Subsequent
regulations published on July 11, 2011 (76 FR 40628), amended Table 2a
to 50 CFR part 679 and that revision inadvertently removed the skate
species codes implemented on October 6, 2010. The proposed addition of
these skate species and scientific names would correct this error that
was noticed during the preparation of this proposed rule. The proposed
addition of species codes does not change the management of skates or
the other provisions of this proposed rule.
Classification
Pursuant to sections 304 (b)(1)(A) and 305(d) of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this
proposed rule is consistent with the FMP, other provisions of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law, subject to further
consideration after public comment.
[[Page 39739]]
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
NMFS prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) as
required by section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The
IRFA describes the economic impact this proposed rule, if adopted,
would have on small entities. A copy of the Analysis is available from
NMFS (see ADDRESSES). A summary of the IRFA follows. A description of
the proposed rule, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for
this proposed rule are contained elsewhere in the preamble, and are not
repeated here.
This proposed rule, a reduction in GOA skate MRAs, directly
regulates all entities fishing for groundfish and halibut in the GOA
that have the potential to catch any species of skate. These entities
operate vessels that are directly regulated by the GOA groundfish
harvest specifications.
On June 12, 2014, the Small Business Administration issued an
interim final rule revising the small business size standards for
several industries effective July 14, 2014 (79 FR 33647, June 12,
2014). The rule increased the size standard for Finfish Fishing from
$19.0 million to $20.5 million. The new size standards were used to
prepare the IRFA for this proposed rule.
The IRFA estimates that this proposed rule would directly regulate
1,153 small entities. Of these small entities, the IRFA estimates that
this proposed rule would directly regulate 1,073 small catcher vessels
fishing with hook-and-line gear (including jig gear), 116 small catcher
vessels fishing with pot gear, and 32 small catcher vessels fishing
with trawl gear. In addition, this proposed rule would directly
regulate 2 small catcher/processors fishing with hook-and-line gear,
and one small catcher/processor fishing with trawl gear. Specific
revenue data for these small catcher/processors are confidential but
are less than $20.5 million annually. The IRFA estimates that the
average gross revenues for 2013 (the most recent year of complete
revenue data) are $380,000 for small hook-and-line catcher vessels,
$960,000 for small pot catcher vessels, and $2.8 million for small
trawl catcher vessels.
This proposed rule does not create new recordkeeping and reporting
requirements, or alter existing requirements.
The IRFA prepared for this proposed rule has not identified Federal
rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the preferred
alternative (a 5 percent MRA).
An IRFA should include a description of any significant
alternatives to the proposed rule that accomplish the stated
objectives, are consistent with applicable statutes, and that would
minimize the significant economic impact of the proposed rule on small
entities.
The Council and NMFS considered four alternatives in the
development of this proposed rule. This proposed rule would implement
Alternative 4, a 5 percent skate MRA. The significant alternatives to
this proposed rule are Alternatives 1, 2, and 3, a 20 percent, 15
percent, and 10 percent skate MRA, respectively. As discussed in
Section 4.7 and 4.8 of the Analysis, these proposed alternatives are
not expected to reduce the incentive for fishermen to target and retain
skates and thus, would not accomplish the objectives of this proposed
rule--to slow the harvest rate of skates that may be incidentally
retained to ensure that the TACs for skate species are not exceeded.
The Analysis did not identify any other alternatives that would more
effectively meet the RFA criteria to minimize adverse economic impacts
on directly regulated small entities.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries.
Dated: July 7, 2015.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS proposes to amend 50
CFR part 679 as follows:
PART 679--FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ALASKA
0
1. The authority citation for part 679 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1801 et seq.; 3631 et seq.;
Pub. L. 108-447; Pub. L. 111-281.
0
2. In Sec. 679.7, revise paragraph (a)(18) to read as follows:
Sec. 679.7 Prohibitions.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(18) Pollock, Pacific Cod, and Atka Mackerel Directed Fishing and
VMS. Operate a vessel in any Federal reporting area when a vessel is
authorized under Sec. 679.4(b) to participate in the Atka mackerel,
Pacific cod, or pollock directed fisheries and the vessel's authorized
species and gear type is open to directed fishing, unless the vessel
carries an operable NMFS-approved Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) and
complies with the requirements in Sec. 679.28(f).
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec. 679.20, revise paragraph (f)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 679.20 General limitations.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(2) Retainable amounts. Any groundfish species for which directed
fishing is closed may not be used to calculate retainable amounts of
other groundfish species. Only fish harvested under the CDQ Program may
be used to calculate retainable amounts of other CDQ species.
* * * * *
0
4. In Sec. 679.28, revise paragraph (f)(6)(i) to read as follows:
Sec. 679.28 Equipment and operational requirements.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(6) * * *
(i) You operate a vessel in any reporting area (see definitions at
Sec. 679.2) off Alaska while any fishery requiring VMS, for which the
vessel has a species and gear endorsement on its Federal Fisheries
Permit under Sec. 679.4(b), is open.
* * * * *
0
5. In Sec. 679.81, revise paragraphs (h)(4)(i) and (h)(5) introductory
text to read as follows:
Sec. 679.81 Rockfish Program annual harvester privileges.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(4) * * *
(i) The MRA for groundfish species not allocated as CQ (incidental
catch species) for vessels fishing under the authority of a CQ permit
is calculated as a proportion of the total allocated rockfish primary
species and rockfish secondary species on board the vessel in round
weight equivalents using the retainable percentage in Table 30 to this
part; except that--
* * * * *
(5) Maximum retainable amount (MRA) calculation and limits--
catcher/processor vessels. The MRA for groundfish species not allocated
as CQ (incidental catch species) for vessels fishing under the
authority of a CQ permit is calculated as a proportion of the total
allocated rockfish primary species and rockfish secondary species on
board the vessel in round weight equivalents using the retainable
percentage in Table 30 to this part as determined under Sec.
679.20(e)(3)(iv).
* * * * *
[[Page 39740]]
0
6. Revise Table 2a to part 679 to read as follows:
Table 2a to Part 679--Species Codes: FMP Groundfish
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species description Code
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atka mackerel (greenling)....................................... 193
Flatfish, miscellaneous (flatfish species without separate 120
codes).........................................................
FLOUNDER:
Alaska plaice................................................. 133
Arrowtooth.................................................... 121
Bering........................................................ 116
Kamchatka..................................................... 117
Starry........................................................ 129
Octopus, North Pacific.......................................... 870
Pacific cod..................................................... 110
Pollock......................................................... 270
ROCKFISH:
Aurora (Sebastes aurora)...................................... 185
Black (BSAI) (S. melanops).................................... 142
Blackgill (S. melanostomus)................................... 177
Blue (BSAI) (S. mystinus)..................................... 167
Bocaccio (S. paucispinis)..................................... 137
Canary (S. pinniger).......................................... 146
Chilipepper (S. goodei)....................................... 178
China (S. nebulosus).......................................... 149
Copper (S. caurinus).......................................... 138
Darkblotched (S. crameri)..................................... 159
Dusky (S. variabilis)......................................... 172
Greenstriped (S. elongatus)................................... 135
Harlequin (S. variegatus)..................................... 176
Northern (S. polyspinis)...................................... 136
Pacific Ocean Perch (S. alutus)............................... 141
Pygmy (S. wilsoni)............................................ 179
Quillback (S. maliger)........................................ 147
Redbanded (S. babcocki)....................................... 153
Redstripe (S. proriger)....................................... 158
Rosethorn (S. helvomaculatus)................................. 150
Rougheye (S. aleutianus)...................................... 151
Sharpchin (S. zacentrus)...................................... 166
Shortbelly (S. jordani)....................................... 181
Shortraker (S. borealis)...................................... 152
Silvergray (S. brevispinis)................................... 157
Splitnose (S. diploproa)...................................... 182
Stripetail (S. saxicola)...................................... 183
Thornyhead (all Sebastolobus species)......................... 143
Tiger (S. nigrocinctus)....................................... 148
Vermilion (S. miniatus)....................................... 184
Widow (S. entomelas).......................................... 156
Yelloweye (S. ruberrimus)..................................... 145
Yellowmouth (S. reedi)........................................ 175
Yellowtail (S. flavidus)...................................... 155
Sablefish (blackcod)............................................ 710
Sculpins........................................................ 160
SHARKS:
Other (if salmon, spiny dogfish or Pacific sleeper shark--use 689
specific species code).......................................
Pacific sleeper............................................... 692
Salmon........................................................ 690
Spiny dogfish................................................. 691
SKATES:
Whiteblotched (Bathyraja maculata)............................ 705
Aleutian (B. aleutica)........................................ 704
Alaska (B. parmifera)......................................... 703
Big (Raja binoculata)......................................... 702
Longnose (R. rhina)........................................... 701
Other (if Whiteblotched, Aleutian, Alaska, Big or Longnose 700
skate--use specific species code listed above)...............
SOLE:
Butter........................................................ 126
Dover......................................................... 124
English....................................................... 128
Flathead...................................................... 122
Petrale....................................................... 131
Rex........................................................... 125
Rock.......................................................... 123
Sand.......................................................... 132
Yellowfin..................................................... 127
Squid, majestic................................................. 875
Turbot, Greenland............................................... 134
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
7. Revise Table 10 to part 679 to read as follows:
[[Page 39741]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY15.009
[[Page 39742]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY15.010
[[Page 39743]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY15.011
[[Page 39744]]
0
8. Revise Table 30 to part 679 to read as follows:
Table 30 to Part 679--Rockfish Program Retainable Percentages
[In round wt. equivalent]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MRA as a
percentage of
total retained
Fishery Incidental catch species Sector rockfish primary
species and
rockfish
secondary species
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rockfish Cooperative Vessels fishing Pacific cod.............. Catcher/Processor........ 4.0
under a CQ permit. Shortraker/Rougheye Catcher Vessel........... 2.0
aggregate catch.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
See rockfish non-allocated species for ``other species''
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rockfish non-allocated Species for Pollock.................. Catcher/Processor and 20.0
Rockfish Cooperative vessels fishing Deep-water flatfish...... Catcher Vessel. 20.0
under a Rockfish CQ permit. Rex sole................. Catcher/Processor and 20.0
Catcher Vessel.
Catcher/Processor and
Catcher Vessel.
Flathead sole............ Catcher/Processor and 20.0
Catcher Vessel.
Shallow-water flatfish... Catcher/Processor and 20.0
Catcher Vessel.
Arrowtooth flounder...... Catcher/Processor and 35.0
Catcher Vessel.
Other rockfish........... Catcher/Processor and 15.0
Catcher Vessel.
Atka mackerel............ Catcher/Processor and 20.0
Catcher Vessel.
Aggregated forage fish... Catcher/Processor and 2.0
Catcher Vessel.
Skates................... Catcher/Processor and 5.0
Catcher Vessel.
Other species............ Catcher/Processor and 20.0
Catcher Vessel.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Longline gear Rockfish Entry Level See Table 10 to this part.
Fishery.
Opt-out vessels........................ See Table 10 to this part.
Rockfish Cooperative Vessels not See Table 10 to this part.
fishing under a CQ permit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2015-16935 Filed 7-9-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P