Fisheries Off West Coast States; West Coast Salmon Fisheries; Management Measures To Limit Fishery Impacts on Sacramento River Winter Chinook Salmon, 7650-7653 [2018-03596]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 36 (Thursday, February 22, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7650-7653]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03596]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 660

[Docket No. 171031999-8160-01]
RIN 0648-BH40


Fisheries Off West Coast States; West Coast Salmon Fisheries; 
Management Measures To Limit Fishery Impacts on Sacramento River Winter 
Chinook Salmon

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to approve new fishery management measures to 
limit incidental catch of endangered Sacramento River winter Chinook 
salmon (SRWC) in fisheries managed under the Pacific Fishery Management 
Council's (Council) Pacific Salmon Fishery Management Plan (FMP). These 
new management measures replace existing measures, which have been in 
place since 2012, with updated salmon abundance modeling methods that 
utilize the best available science and address concerns that the 
existing measures were overly conservative.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule must be received on or before 
March 9, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2017-0139, 
by any one of the following methods:
     Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public 
comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to 
www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2017-0139, click the 
``Comment Now!'' icon, complete the required fields, and enter or 
attach your comments.
     Mail: Barry A. Thom, Regional Administrator, West Coast 
Region, NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, WA 98115-0070.
    Instructions: Comments must be submitted by one of the above 
methods to ensure that the comments are received, documented, and 
considered by NMFS. Comments sent by any other method, to any other 
address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, 
may not be considered. All comments received are a part of the public 
record and will generally be posted for public viewing on https://www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying 
information (e.g., name, address, etc.) submitted voluntarily by the 
sender will be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential business 
information or otherwise sensitive or protected information. NMFS will 
accept anonymous comments (enter N/A in the required fields if you wish 
to remain anonymous).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Mundy at 206-526-4323.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    Ocean salmon fisheries off the coasts of Washington, Oregon, and 
California are managed by the Council according to the FMP. The FMP 
includes harvest controls that are used to manage salmon stocks 
sustainably. The FMP also requires that the Council manage fisheries 
consistent with ``consultation standards'' for stocks listed as

[[Page 7651]]

endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) for 
which NMFS has issued biological opinions. NMFS has issued biological 
opinions for every ESA listed salmon species impacted by the fisheries 
governed by the FMP, and reminds the Council of requirements to 
maintain consistency with those opinions (``consultation standards'') 
in its annual guidance letter to the Council regarding development of 
the annual ocean salmon management measures.
    SRWC has been listed as endangered under the ESA since 1990 (55 FR 
46515, November 5, 1990). These fish are impacted by ocean salmon 
fisheries south of Point Arena, California; thus NMFS has consulted on 
these impacts under section 7 of the ESA. Since the original 
consultation, NMFS has periodically reinitiated consultation on the 
impacts of ocean salmon fisheries on SRWC, most recently in 2010. In 
its 2010 biological opinion, NMFS determined that ocean salmon 
fisheries were likely to jeopardize the continued existence of SRWC, 
but not modify or destroy critical habitat. To address this jeopardy 
conclusion, NMFS issued and implemented an interim reasonable and 
prudent alternative (RPA) for fisheries in 2010 and 2011, and required 
development of an abundance-based framework for limiting impacts on 
SRWC during this interim period. In 2012, NMFS issued and implemented 
the current RPA to limit impacts of fisheries on SRWC. The RPA consists 
of two parts: Part one includes fishing season and size limit 
restrictions (see Table 1, below); part two specifies an abundance-
based harvest control rule. The harvest control rule uses a forecast 
abundance that is based on the 3-year geometric mean of prior spawning 
escapement. At 3-year geometric mean abundance greater than 5,000, no 
impact rate cap is imposed. At 3-year geometric mean abundance between 
5,000 and 4,000, the impact rate cap is 20 percent. At 3-year geometric 
mean abundance between 4,000 and 500, the impact rate cap declines 
linearly from 20 percent at 4,000 abundance to 10 percent at 500 
abundance. At 3-year geometric mean abundance below 500, the impact 
rate cap is zero percent.

     Table 1--Fishing Season and Size Restrictions for Ocean Chinook Salmon Fisheries, South of Point Arena,
                                                   California
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Shall open no      Shall close no     Minimum size limit (total
        Fishery               Location          earlier than        later than          length \1\) shall be
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recreational...........  Between Point       1st Saturday in    2nd Sunday in      20 inches.
                          Arena and Pigeon    April.             November.
                          Point.
                         Between Pigeon      1st Saturday in    1st Sunday in      .............................
                          Point and the       April.             October.
                          U.S./Mexico
                          border.
Commercial.............  Between Point       May 1............  September 30       26 inches.
                          Arena and the                          [dagger].
                          U.S./Mexico
                          border [dagger].
                        ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           [dagger] Exception: Between Point Reyes and Point San Pedro, there may be an October
                              commercial fishery conducted Monday through Friday, but shall end no later than
                                                                October 15.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Total length of salmon means the shortest distance between the tip of the snout or jaw (whichever extends
  furthest while the mouth is closed) and the tip of the longest lobe of the tail, without resort to any force
  or mutilation of the salmon other than fanning or swinging the tail (50 CFR 660.402).

    Since implementation of the RPA, two issues with the control rule 
have arisen from Council discussion. First, the control rule does not 
allow for any fishery impacts when the most recent 3-year geometric 
mean of spawning escapement for SRWC falls below 500. This would result 
in closure of all salmon fisheries south of Point Arena, CA, which the 
Council felt was unnecessarily restrictive. Second, because the control 
rule is based on spawning escapement, it is not responsive to more 
forward looking indicators of stock productivity, e.g., poor juvenile 
salmon survival during the prolonged California drought. The Council 
did not raise any issues with respect to the fishing season and size 
limit restrictions that formed the first part of the 2012 RPA; and 
continues to consider this part of the applicable ESA ``consultation 
standard.'' Thus NMFS includes maintaining those restrictions as part 
of this action.
    In 2015, the Council created an ad hoc SRWC Workgroup to develop a 
new harvest control rule that would address the two issues mentioned 
above; the SRWC workgroup comprised staff from NMFS, California 
Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service. The SRWC Workgroup's meetings to develop and analyze 
alternative harvest control rules were open to the public. 
Additionally, the SRWC Workgroup presented their reports to the Council 
at regularly scheduled Council meetings in 2016 and 2017. These 
workgroup and Council meetings were noticed in the Federal Register, 
public input was invited, and the meetings were open to the public 
through either in-person attendance, webinar, conference call, or live 
streaming on the internet. At the Council's September 2017 meeting, the 
Council selected four of the alternatives developed by the Workgroup 
for final analysis. The Council then selected a final preferred 
alternative at their November 2017 meeting. Documents considered by the 
Council are available on the Council website: (https://www.pcouncil.org/resources/archives/briefing-books/november-2017-briefing-book/#salNov2017). The Council transmitted their 
recommendation to NMFS on December 6, 2017.

Council's Recommended Harvest Control Rule

    The new harvest control rule recommended by the Council uses 
juvenile survival (i.e., fry to the end of age-2 in the ocean) to model 
a forecast of age-3 escapement absent fishing (E\0\3). The 
model used is a modification of Winship et al. (2014) and is detailed 
in O'Farrell et al. (2016). The recommended control rule will provide a 
forward-looking forecast rather than the current hind-cast methodology.
    The new harvest control rule sets the maximum allowable age-three 
impact rate based on the forecast age-three escapement in the absence 
of fisheries (E\0\3). At E\0\3 above 3,000, the 
allowable impact rate is fixed at 20 percent. At E\0\3 
between 3,000 and 500, the allowable impact rate declines linearly from 
20 percent to 10 percent. At E\0\3 between 500 and 0, the 
allowable impact rate declines linearly from 10 percent to 0

[[Page 7652]]

percent, thus providing fishing opportunity at all levels of SRWC 
abundance. See Figure 1.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP22FE18.008

    The SRWC Workgroup compared the alternative harvest control rules 
with respect to extinction risk to SRWC and how the alternatives would 
affect fishing opportunity. With respect to extinction risk, the 
workgroup found little contrast among the alternatives in their 
simulation analyses. With respect to fishing opportunity, the workgroup 
did find differences among the alternatives, and concluded that the 
Council's recommended alternative was intermediate in constraining the 
fishery compared to the other alternatives under consideration. 
Fisheries south of Point Arena, where SRWC are contacted, impact 
several salmon stocks. In the six years that the current harvest 
control rule has been in place, these fisheries have been constrained 
by impacts to SRWC as well as California Coastal Chinook (ESA-listed as 
threatened), Sacramento River fall Chinook (not ESA-listed), and 
Klamath River fall Chinook (not ESA-listed). However, in recent years, 
the only closures of the fishery south of Point Arena were due to 
Sacramento River fall Chinook (2008, 2009). Under the new control rule 
for SRWC, fishing impacts would be allowed at all non-zero forecast 
abundance of SRWC; therefore, the new control rule would not, in 
itself, result in a fishery closure.
    The harvest control rule recommended by the Council would address 
the issues raised by the current harvest control rule. The new harvest 
control rule would allow for fishing opportunity in the affected area 
at all levels of abundance of SRWC, and uses juvenile productivity and 
survival to develop a responsive, forward-looking abundance forecast. 
The new harvest control rule is expected to accomplish these goals 
without appreciably increasing the extinction risk to SRWC over the 
current harvest control rule. The new harvest control rule was 
developed in a public process with opportunity for the States, Tribes, 
and the public to provide input. The Council recommended and NMFS 
proposes to implement this new harvest control rule, together with the 
size and fishing season limits described above, beginning with the 2018 
ocean salmon fishing season that will begin May 1, 2018.

References Cited

O'Farrell, M., N. Hendrix, and M. Mohr. 2016. An evaluation of 
preseason abundance forecasts for Sacramento River winter Chinook 
salmon. Pacific Fishery Management Council Briefing Book for 
November 2016, 35p.
SRWC Workgroup. 2017. Further evaluation of Sacramento River winter 
Chinook control rules, dated October 18, 2017. Pacific Fishery 
Management Council Briefing Book for November 2017, 9 p.
Winship, A.J., M.R. O'Farrell, and M.S. Mohr. 2014. Fishery and 
hatchery effects on an endangered salmon population with low 
productivity. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 143, 
957-971.

Classification

    Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the MSA, the NMFS Assistant 
Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with 
the Pacific Salmon Fishery Management Plan, the MSA, and other 
applicable law, subject to further consideration after public comment.
    The West Coast Regional Administrator has determined that the 
actions of this proposed rule will be analyzed in an environmental 
assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act.
    This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    As required by section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 
an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was prepared. The 
IRFA describes the economic impact this proposed rule, if adopted, 
would have on small entities. A summary of the analysis follows. A copy 
of this analysis is available from NMFS.
    Provision is made under SBA's regulations for an agency to develop 
its own industry-specific size standards after consultation with 
Advocacy and an opportunity for public comment (see 13 CFR 121.903(c)). 
NMFS has established

[[Page 7653]]

a small business size standard for businesses, including their 
affiliates, whose primary industry is commercial fishing (80 FR 81194, 
December 29, 2015). This standard is only for use by NMFS and only for 
the purpose of conducting an analysis of economic effects in 
fulfillment of the agency's obligations under the RFA.
    NMFS' small business size standard for businesses, including their 
affiliates, whose primary industry is commercial fishing is $11 million 
in annual gross receipts. This standard applies to all businesses 
classified under North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 
code 11411 for commercial fishing, including all businesses classified 
as commercial finfish fishing (NAICS 114111), commercial shellfish 
fishing (NAICS 114112), and other commercial marine fishing (NAICS 
114119) businesses. (50 CFR 200.2; 13 CFR 121.201).
    The proposed rule would specify the annual amount of fishery impact 
that will be allowed on ESA-listed SRWC and, thereby, affect the 
fishing opportunity available in the area south of Point Arena, CA. 
This would affect commercial and recreational fisheries. Using the high 
from the last 3 years, 153 commercial trollers are likely to be 
impacted by this rule, all of whom would be considered small 
businesses. The 16-25 commercial vessels who have greater than 75 
percent of their annual revenue from Chinook salmon south of Point 
Arena would be most impacted by this rule. Charter license holders 
operating south of Point Arena will be directly regulated under the 
updated harvest control rule. The number of license holders has 
fluctuated with harvest levels, varying from 70 in 2010 to 93 in 2014. 
Of these, 20-50 vessels could be considered ``active'', landing more 
than 100 salmon in the year. The proposed rule would impact about 90 
charter boat entities, about 50 of whom were ``active'' in peak years 
(2013-2014). In summary, this rule will directly impact about 250 
entities made up of commercial and charter vessels, with about 75 of 
these highly active in the fishery and likely to experience the largest 
impacts, in proportion to their total participation.
    The proposed action includes a de minimis provision and would allow 
impacts at all non-zero forecast abundance. Because of this feature, 
this proposed action is unlikely to result in fishery closure in the 
analysis area. The alternative would also provide increased certainty 
to operators over the status quo, in which the Council has elected 
lower impact rates than specified by the current control rule. 
Therefore, this action would be expected to have a positive impact of 
low magnitude on economic benefits to fishery-dependent communities 
that would vary year-to-year, but not likely to be significant.
    Commercial trollers and charter operators face a variety of 
constraining stocks. In no year has SWRC been the only constraining 
stock. Entities are constrained by both ESA-listed and non-listed 
species; the years that had the most constrained fisheries in the last 
decade were 2008 and 2009, when fisheries in the analysis area were 
closed to limit impacts to Sacramento River fall Chinook, not an ESA-
listed species, rather than the ESA-listed species SRWC. Thus, while 
entities will likely continue to face constraints relative to fishing 
opportunities, because the proposed action is expected to provide low-
positive benefits to both commercial and charter operators, NMFS does 
not expect the rule to impose significant negative economic effects.
    This proposed rule would not establish any new reporting or 
recordkeeping requirements. This proposed rule does not include a 
collection of information. No Federal rules have been identified that 
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this action.
    This action is the subject of a consultation under section 7 of the 
ESA. NMFS is currently preparing a biological opinion on the effects of 
this action on SRWC, which will be completed prior to publishing a 
final rule. This action is not expected to have adverse effects on any 
other species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) or 
designated critical habitat. This action implements a new harvest 
control rule to limit impacts on SRWC from the ocean salmon fishery and 
would be used in the setting of annual management measures for West 
Coast salmon fisheries. NMFS has current ESA biological opinions that 
cover fishing under annual regulations adopted under the FMP on all 
listed salmon species. NMFS reiterates what is required for consistency 
with these opinions for all ESA-listed salmon and steelhead species in 
their annual guidance letter to the Council. Some of NMFS past 
biological opinions have found no jeopardy, and others have found 
jeopardy, but provided reasonable and prudent alternatives to avoid 
jeopardy. The annual management measures are designed to be consistent 
with the biological opinions that found no jeopardy, and with the 
reasonable and prudent alternatives in the jeopardy biological 
opinions.
    This proposed rule was developed after meaningful collaboration 
with West Coast tribes, through the Council process. Under the MSA at 
16 U.S.C. 1852(b)(5), one of the voting members of the Council must be 
a representative of an Indian Tribe with Federally recognized fishing 
rights from the area of the Council's jurisdiction. No tribes with 
Federally recognized fishing rights are expected to be affected by this 
rule.

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: February 15, 2018.
Samuel D. Rauch, III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-03596 Filed 2-21-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-22-P