Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Amendment 8, 43573-43576 [2019-18032]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 21, 2019 / Proposed Rules
The FMP recognizes that discarding
incidental catches of fish is wasteful
and should be minimized. The FMP also
recognizes that halibut are not managed
as a target species, but as a prohibited
species, under the FMP. Therefore, to
remove the incentive to covertly target
halibut, the FMP prohibits retention of
halibut caught in target groundfish
fisheries, except for when authorized. In
the evaluation of retention of IFQ or
CDQ halibut in a pot gear fishery for IFQ
or CDQ halibut or IFQ or CDQ sablefish
in the BSAI, the Council balanced the
tenets of minimizing halibut discard
with the IFQ Program, and the Council
recommended retention of halibut in
pot gear used to fish IFQ or CDQ halibut
or IFQ or CDQ sablefish. Retention of
halibut caught with pot gear used to fish
IFQ or CDQ halibut or IFQ or CDQ
sablefish is consistent with general
provisions of the FMP.
The Council’s recommendation to
require retention of halibut in pot gear
was conditioned on the IPHC adopting
complementary regulations that would
allow NMFS to promulgate regulations
implementing the requirements
specified by the Council. The IPHC
approved the annual Pacific Halibut
Fishery Regulations in January 2019.
The 2019 annual regulations
recommended by the IPHC and
approved by the U.S. include approval
of harvest of halibut in pot gear as legal
gear for the commercial halibut fishery
in Alaska when NMFS regulations
permit the use of this gear to retain
halibut (84 FR 9243, March 14, 2019).
Amendment 118 to the FMP would
amend Table ES–2 and section 3.5.2.1.1
in the FMP to prohibit all pot gear in the
Pribilof Islands Habitat Conservation
Zone. NMFS is soliciting public
comments on proposed Amendment 118
through the end of the comment period
(see DATES). NMFS intends to publish in
the Federal Register and seek public
comment on a proposed rule that would
implement Amendment 118, following
NMFS’s evaluation of the proposed rule
under the Magnuson-Stevens Act. All
comments received by the end of the
comment period on Amendment 118,
whether specifically directed to the
FMP amendment or the proposed rule,
will be considered in the approval/
disapproval decision on Amendment
118. Comments received after that date
may not be considered in the approval/
disapproval decision on Amendment
118. To be certain of consideration,
comments must be received, not just
postmarked or otherwise transmitted, by
the last day of the comment period.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Aug 20, 2019
Jkt 247001
Dated: August 16, 2019.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2019–18033 Filed 8–20–19; 8:45 a.m.]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 648
RIN 0648–BI80
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
Provisions; Fisheries of the
Northeastern United States;
Amendment 8
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Availability of proposed fishery
management plan amendment; request
for comments.
AGENCY:
The New England Fishery
Management Council developed
Amendment 8 to the Atlantic Herring
Fishery Management Plan to specify a
long-term acceptable biological catch
control rule for herring and address
localized depletion and user group
conflict. This amendment would
establish an acceptable biological catch
control rule that accounts for herring’s
role in the ecosystem and prohibit
midwater trawling in inshore Federal
waters from the U.S./Canada border to
the Rhode Island/Connecticut border.
Amendment 8 is intended to support
sustainable management of the herring
resource and help ensure that herring is
available to minimize possible
detrimental biological impacts on
predators of herring and associated
socioeconomic impacts on other user
groups.
DATES: Public comments must be
received on or before October 21, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on this document, identified by NOAA–
NMFS–2019–0078, by any of the
following methods:
• Electronic Submission: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal eRulemaking Portal.
1. Go to www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-20190078;
2. Click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon
and complete the required fields; and
3. Enter or attach your comments.
• Mail: Submit written comments to
Michael Pentony, Regional
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43573
Administrator, National Marine
Fisheries Service, 55 Great Republic
Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the
outside of the envelope, ‘‘Comments on
Herring Amendment 8.’’
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 us. 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, etc.),
confidential business information, or
otherwise sensitive information
submitted voluntarily by the sender will
be publicly accessible. We will accept
anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/A’’ in
the required fields if you wish to remain
anonymous).
Copies of Amendment 8, including
the Environmental Impact Statement,
the Regulatory Impact Review, and the
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(EIS/RIR/IRFA) prepared in support of
this action are available from Thomas A.
Nies, Executive Director, New England
Fishery Management Council, 50 Water
Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950.
The supporting documents are also
accessible via the internet at: https://
www.nefmc.org.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Carrie Nordeen, Fishery Policy Analyst,
phone: (978) 281–9272 or email:
Carrie.Nordeen@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The goal of the Atlantic Herring
Fishery Management Plan (FMP) is to
manage the herring fishery at long-term
sustainable levels and objectives of the
FMP include providing for full
utilization of the optimum yield (OY)
and, to the extent practicable, controlled
opportunities for participants in other
New England and Mid-Atlantic
fisheries. The Herring FMP describes
OY as the amount of fish that will
provide the greatest overall benefit to
the Nation, particularly with respect to
food production and recreational
opportunities, taking into account the
protection of marine ecosystems,
including maintenance of a biomass that
supports the ocean ecosystem, predator
consumption of herring, and
biologically sustainable human harvest.
This includes recognition of the
importance of herring as one of many
forage species of fish, marine mammals,
and birds in the Greater Atlantic Region.
Consistent with these aims, the goals for
Amendment 8 are to: (1) Account for the
role of herring within the ecosystem,
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
43574
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 21, 2019 / Proposed Rules
including its role as forage; (2) stabilize
the fishery at a level designed to achieve
OY; and (3) address localized depletion
in inshore waters.
On February 26, 2015 (80 FR 10458),
the New England Fishery Management
Council (Council) published a notice of
intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS for
Amendment 8 to consider long-term
harvest strategies for herring, including
an ABC control rule that addresses the
biological and ecological requirements
of the herring resource. The importance
of herring as a forage species was
underscored by the Council’s specified
intent to consider a wide range of ABC
control rule alternatives, including
those that explicitly account for
herring’s role in the ecosystem. The
Council held scoping meetings during
March and April of 2015 to solicit
comments on ABC control rule
alternatives.
The Council developed alternatives
for a herring ABC control rule using a
Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE).
MSE is a decision-making tool that uses
computer modeling to compare the
performance of alternatives
(management strategies) under various
management scenarios to achieve
multiple, competing objectives. The
Council held two public workshops to
generate stakeholder input to help
identify objectives for the MSE analysis.
Results of the MSE informed the range
of ABC control rule alternatives and
impact analysis of those alternatives in
Amendment 8.
On August 21, 2015 (80 FR 50825),
the Council published a supplemental
NOI announcing it was expanding the
scope of Amendment 8 to consider
localized depletion in inshore waters.
The supplemental NOI defined localize
depletion as harvesting more fish from
an area than can be replaced within a
given time period. It also explained the
Council was seeking input from the
interested public as to how to define;
measure; evaluate impacts; and
minimize inshore, localized depletion
in the herring fishery as part of
Amendment 8. Public comment during
the supplemental scoping made it clear
that localized depletion concerns voiced
by many stakeholders were not just
related to the biological impacts of
herring removals on the herring stock
and on predators of herring. Public
comment also indicated that impacts of
localized depletion should be measured
and evaluated relative to competing
uses for the herring resource and
potentially negative economic impacts
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Aug 20, 2019
Jkt 247001
on businesses that rely on predators of
herring. In response, the Council’s
consideration of localized depletion
included a consideration of competing
interests for how herring should be
utilized, and it identified this
consideration of the localized depletion
issue as user group conflict. Minimizing
user group conflict became an important
Council consideration in Amendment 8
and, in part, the basis for its
recommended measures in the
amendment.
On May 11, 2018 (83 FR 22060), the
Environmental Protection Agency
announced the public comment period
for the Amendment 8 draft
environmental impact statement (DEIS).
The 45-day public comment period
extended until June 25, 2018. During
that time, the Council held public
hearings on the DEIS in Rockland and
Portland, Maine; Gloucester and
Chatham, Massachusetts; Narragansett,
Rhode Island; Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania; and via webinar. The
Council adopted Amendment 8 on
September 25, 2018, and submitted the
amendment to us for review in 2019.
Proposed Measures
Amendment 8 would establish a longterm ABC control rule for herring.
Under the proposed control rule, when
biomass is at or above 50 percent of the
biomass associated with maximum
sustainable yield (BMSY) or its proxy,
ABC is the catch associated with a
maximum fishing mortality (F) of 80
percent of FMSY or its proxy. When
biomass falls below 50 percent of BMSY
or its proxy, F declines linearly to 0 at
10 percent of BMSY or its proxy. The
control rule would set ABC for a threeyear period but would allow ABC to
vary year-to-year in response to
projected changes in biomass. The
control rule could be revised via a
framework adjustment if a quantitative
assessment is not available, if
projections are producing ABCs that are
not justified or consistent with available
information, or if the stock requires a
rebuilding program.
The proposed control rule is intended
to explicitly account for herring as
forage in the ecosystem by limiting F to
80 percent of FMSY when biomass is
high and setting it at zero when biomass
is low. It is also intended to generate an
ABC consistent with specific criteria
identified by the Council, including low
variation in yield, low probability of the
stock becoming overfished, low
probability of a fishery shutdown, and
catch limits set at a relatively high
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
proportion of MSY. The Council
anticipates that short-term negative
economic impacts on participants in the
herring or lobster fisheries, resulting
from a reduced herring harvest in
response to low herring biomass, may
become a long-term economic benefit
for industry participants, especially if
the proposed control rule results in low
variation in yield, low probability of a
fishery shutdown, and low probability
of overfishing. Relative to other control
rules considered by the Council, the
proposed control rule is designed to
more effectively balance the goal and
objectives of the Herring FMP, including
managing the fishery at long-term
sustainable levels, taking forage for
predators into account to support the
ocean ecosystem, and providing a
biologically sustainable harvest as a
source of revenue for fishing
communities and bait for the lobster
fishery.
Shortly before the Council took final
action on Amendment 8, an updated
stock assessment concluded that herring
biomass is low, and the probability of
overfishing and the stock becoming
overfished is high. While not directly
applicable to a long-term harvest policy,
the Council noted that under herring’s
current condition of low biomass,
setting catch more conservatively than
status quo may increase the likelihood
of stock growth. In turn, this would
have positive impacts on the herring
fishery, predators, and predator
fisheries.
Amendment 8 would also prohibit the
use of midwater trawl gear inshore of 12
nautical miles (22 km) from the U.S./
Canada border to the Rhode Island/
Connecticut border and inshore of 20
nautical miles (37 km) off the east coast
of Cape Cod. Specifically, federally
permitted vessels would be prohibited
from using, deploying, or fishing with
midwater trawl gear within the inshore
midwater trawl restricted area located
shoreward of the 12-nautical mile (22km) territorial sea boundary from
Canada to Connecticut and within
thirty-minute squares 114 and 99 off
Cape Cod (Figure 1). Midwater trawl
vessels would be able to transit the
inshore midwater trawl restricted gear
area provided gear was stowed and not
available for immediate use. The
proposed measure would be in addition
to the existing prohibition on midwater
trawling for herring in Area 1A during
June 1 through September 30.
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 3510–22–C
The Council recommended the
proposed inshore midwater trawl
restricted area to minimize local
depletion and user group conflict when
midwater trawl vessels harvesting
herring overlap with other user groups
(i.e., commercial fisheries, recreational
fisheries, ecotourism) that rely on
herring as forage and provide inshore
conservation benefits. The Council
focused on midwater trawl gear to
mitigate potential negative
socioeconomic impacts on other user
groups in response to short duration,
high volume herring removals by
midwater trawl vessels that are
relatively more mobile and capable of
fishing in offshore areas than vessels
using other gear types. Information to
quantify the impact of midwater
trawling on other user groups is scarce,
so the amendment analyzed the degree
of overlap between midwater trawl
vessels and other user groups. The
proposed measure is intended to
incorporate areas with a high degree of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Aug 20, 2019
Jkt 247001
overlap between midwater trawl vessels
and other user groups throughout the
year. Specifically, it incorporates the
overlap with predator fisheries in the
Gulf of Maine and southern New
England throughout the year, as well as
the overlap with ecotourism and the
tuna fishery in Area 1A during the fall.
While overlap with the midwater trawl
vessels does not necessarily translate
into negative biological impacts on
predators, less overlap may reduce
potential user conflicts, provided
midwater trawl effort does not shift into
other areas and generate additional
overlap.
The Herring FMP specifies that
herring research set-aside (RSA) can
equal up to three percent of the subannual catch limit for a herring
management area. RSA compensation
fishing using midwater trawl gear would
be permitted within the inshore
midwater trawl restricted area. The
Council recommended permitting RSA
compensation fishing within the inshore
midwater trawl restricted area to help
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43575
ensure the RSA would be harvested and
those funds would be available to
support the projects awarded RSA.
Vessels engaged in herring RSA
compensation fishing typically operate
as authorized by an exempted fishing
permit (EFP) so they can request
exemptions from certain regulations that
would otherwise restrict herring
harvest. While vessels would be
permitted to use midwater trawl gear
within the inshore midwater trawl
restricted area while RSA compensation
fishing, it does not mean that
compensations trips would be without
restrictions. Terms and conditions of the
EFP must be consistent with the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act), other
applicable law, and Herring FMP.
Additionally, we would consider
whether additional terms and
conditions would be required for EFPs
to ensure RSA compensation trips do
not exacerbate the overlap between
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
EP21AU19.002</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 21, 2019 / Proposed Rules
jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
43576
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 21, 2019 / Proposed Rules
midwater trawl vessels and other user
groups.
Amendment 8 would allow the
inshore midwater trawl restricted area
or new closures to address localized
depletion and/or user group conflict to
be modified or implemented via
framework adjustment. The list of
framework provisions at § 648.206
already includes closed areas; this
amendment would add the inshore
midwater trawl restricted area to that
list.
The Council’s recommendation to
prohibit midwater trawling in inshore
areas is an allocation decision intended
to balance the needs of user groups and
provide conservation benefits.
Consistent with objectives in the
Herring FMP, the proposed measure is
intended to facilitate an efficient, fair,
and equitable accommodation of social,
economic, and ecological factors
associated with achieving OY, in part by
providing, to the extent practicable,
controlled opportunities for participants
in other New England and Mid-Atlantic
fisheries. Because midwater trawl
vessels historically harvested a larger
percentage of herring than other gear
types and are able to fish offshore, the
Council recommended prohibiting them
from inshore waters to help ensure
herring was available inshore for other
user groups and predators of herring.
The proposed inshore midwater trawl
restricted area is designed to be
reasonably large enough to address the
overlap between midwater trawl vessels
and other user groups and, ultimately,
user group conflict in inshore waters.
This proposed measure is likely to
negatively impact the midwater trawl
fleet, with potentially increased trip
costs and lower annual catches, but the
Council believes that, on balance, the
benefits to other user groups, such as
potentially reduced trips costs, higher
annual catches, and improved safety,
outweigh the costs to midwater trawl
vessels. The proposed measure may also
have biological benefits if moving
midwater trawl vessels offshore
minimizes catch of river herring and
shad, reduces fishing pressure on the
inshore component of the herring stock,
and helps ensure herring are available to
predators. Herring is currently assessed
as one stock, but it likely has stock
components. Reducing fishing pressure
inshore would benefit an inshore stock
component. Analyses in Amendment 8
estimate that in recent years
approximately 30 percent of the
midwater trawl fleet’s annualized
revenue came from within the proposed
inshore midwater trawl restricted area.
Negative economic impacts on the
midwater trawl fleet may be mitigated if
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Aug 20, 2019
Jkt 247001
the fleet is able to offset lost revenue
from inshore areas with increased
revenue from offshore areas. Herring
catch limits are currently low, so the
fishery has the capacity to harvest the
OY. Recent midwater trawl landings
(2007–2015) offshore of the proposed
midwater trawl restricted area (36,903
mt) are much higher than the Councilrecommended OY for 2020 and 2021
(11,621 mt). In the longer-term, the
fishery will likely adapt to be able
harvest an increased OY, provided
vessels are able to locate herring.
Public Comment Instructions
The Magnuson-Stevens Act allows us
to approve, partially approve, or
disapprove measures recommended by
the Council in an amendment based on
whether the measures are consistent
with the fishery management plan, plan
amendment, the Magnuson-Stevens Act
and its National Standards, and other
applicable law. The Council develops
policy for its fisheries and we defer to
the Council on policy decisions unless
those policies are inconsistent with the
Magnuson-Steven Act or other
applicable law. As such, we are seeking
comment on whether measures in
Amendment 8 are consistent with the
Herring FMP, the Magnuson-Stevens
Act and its National Standards, and
other applicable law. Public comments
on Amendment 8 and its incorporated
documents may be submitted through
the end of the comment period stated in
this notice of availability. A proposed
rule to implement the amendment,
including draft regulatory text, will be
published in the Federal Register for
public comment. Public comments on
the proposed rule received by the end
of the comment period provided in this
notice of availability will be considered
in the approval/disapproval decision on
the amendment. All comments received
by October 21, 2019, whether
specifically directed to Amendment 8 or
the proposed rule for this amendment,
will be considered in the approval/
disapproval decision on the
Amendment 8. Comments received after
that date will not be considered in the
decision to approve or disapprove the
amendment. To be considered,
comments must be received by close of
business on the last day of the comment
period.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: August 16, 2019.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2019–18032 Filed 8–20–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 679
RIN 0648–BJ02
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod
Management in the Groundfish
Fisheries of the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of availability of fishery
management plan amendment; request
for comments.
AGENCY:
The North Pacific Fishery
Management Council submitted
Amendment 120 to the Fishery
Management Plan (FMP) for Groundfish
of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
(BSAI) Management Area (BSAI FMP)
and Amendment 108 to the Fishery
Management Plan for Groundfish of the
Gulf of Alaska (GOA) (GOA FMP;
collectively Amendments 120/108) to
the Secretary of Commerce for review. If
approved, Amendment 120 would limit
the number of catcher/processors (C/Ps)
acting as motherships receiving and
processing Pacific cod from catcher
vessels (CVs) directed fishing for Pacific
cod in the BSAI non-Community
Development Quota (CDQ) Program
trawl fishery. If approved, Amendments
120/108 would prohibit replaced
Amendment 80 C/Ps from receiving and
processing Pacific cod harvested and
delivered by CVs directed fishing for
Pacific cod in the BSAI and GOA.
DATES: Comments must be received no
later than October 21, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on this document, identified by NOAA–
NMFS–2019–0060, 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-20190060, 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. Mail
comments to P.O. Box 21668, Juneau,
AK 99802–1668.
Instructions: Comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 21, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43573-43576]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-18032]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 648
RIN 0648-BI80
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Amendment 8
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Availability of proposed fishery management plan amendment;
request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The New England Fishery Management Council developed Amendment
8 to the Atlantic Herring Fishery Management Plan to specify a long-
term acceptable biological catch control rule for herring and address
localized depletion and user group conflict. This amendment would
establish an acceptable biological catch control rule that accounts for
herring's role in the ecosystem and prohibit midwater trawling in
inshore Federal waters from the U.S./Canada border to the Rhode Island/
Connecticut border. Amendment 8 is intended to support sustainable
management of the herring resource and help ensure that herring is
available to minimize possible detrimental biological impacts on
predators of herring and associated socioeconomic impacts on other user
groups.
DATES: Public comments must be received on or before October 21, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this document, identified by
NOAA-NMFS-2019-0078, by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public
comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal.
1. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2019-0078;
2. Click the ``Comment Now!'' icon and complete the required
fields; and
3. Enter or attach your comments.
Mail: Submit written comments to Michael Pentony, Regional
Administrator, National Marine Fisheries Service, 55 Great Republic
Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the outside of the envelope,
``Comments on Herring Amendment 8.''
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 us. 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, etc.), confidential business
information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily
by the sender will be publicly accessible. We will accept anonymous
comments (enter ``N/A'' in the required fields if you wish to remain
anonymous).
Copies of Amendment 8, including the Environmental Impact
Statement, the Regulatory Impact Review, and the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (EIS/RIR/IRFA) prepared in support of this action
are available from Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, New England
Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA
01950. The supporting documents are also accessible via the internet
at: https://www.nefmc.org.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carrie Nordeen, Fishery Policy
Analyst, phone: (978) 281-9272 or email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The goal of the Atlantic Herring Fishery Management Plan (FMP) is
to manage the herring fishery at long-term sustainable levels and
objectives of the FMP include providing for full utilization of the
optimum yield (OY) and, to the extent practicable, controlled
opportunities for participants in other New England and Mid-Atlantic
fisheries. The Herring FMP describes OY as the amount of fish that will
provide the greatest overall benefit to the Nation, particularly with
respect to food production and recreational opportunities, taking into
account the protection of marine ecosystems, including maintenance of a
biomass that supports the ocean ecosystem, predator consumption of
herring, and biologically sustainable human harvest. This includes
recognition of the importance of herring as one of many forage species
of fish, marine mammals, and birds in the Greater Atlantic Region.
Consistent with these aims, the goals for Amendment 8 are to: (1)
Account for the role of herring within the ecosystem,
[[Page 43574]]
including its role as forage; (2) stabilize the fishery at a level
designed to achieve OY; and (3) address localized depletion in inshore
waters.
On February 26, 2015 (80 FR 10458), the New England Fishery
Management Council (Council) published a notice of intent (NOI) to
prepare an EIS for Amendment 8 to consider long-term harvest strategies
for herring, including an ABC control rule that addresses the
biological and ecological requirements of the herring resource. The
importance of herring as a forage species was underscored by the
Council's specified intent to consider a wide range of ABC control rule
alternatives, including those that explicitly account for herring's
role in the ecosystem. The Council held scoping meetings during March
and April of 2015 to solicit comments on ABC control rule alternatives.
The Council developed alternatives for a herring ABC control rule
using a Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE). MSE is a decision-making
tool that uses computer modeling to compare the performance of
alternatives (management strategies) under various management scenarios
to achieve multiple, competing objectives. The Council held two public
workshops to generate stakeholder input to help identify objectives for
the MSE analysis. Results of the MSE informed the range of ABC control
rule alternatives and impact analysis of those alternatives in
Amendment 8.
On August 21, 2015 (80 FR 50825), the Council published a
supplemental NOI announcing it was expanding the scope of Amendment 8
to consider localized depletion in inshore waters. The supplemental NOI
defined localize depletion as harvesting more fish from an area than
can be replaced within a given time period. It also explained the
Council was seeking input from the interested public as to how to
define; measure; evaluate impacts; and minimize inshore, localized
depletion in the herring fishery as part of Amendment 8. Public comment
during the supplemental scoping made it clear that localized depletion
concerns voiced by many stakeholders were not just related to the
biological impacts of herring removals on the herring stock and on
predators of herring. Public comment also indicated that impacts of
localized depletion should be measured and evaluated relative to
competing uses for the herring resource and potentially negative
economic impacts on businesses that rely on predators of herring. In
response, the Council's consideration of localized depletion included a
consideration of competing interests for how herring should be
utilized, and it identified this consideration of the localized
depletion issue as user group conflict. Minimizing user group conflict
became an important Council consideration in Amendment 8 and, in part,
the basis for its recommended measures in the amendment.
On May 11, 2018 (83 FR 22060), the Environmental Protection Agency
announced the public comment period for the Amendment 8 draft
environmental impact statement (DEIS). The 45-day public comment period
extended until June 25, 2018. During that time, the Council held public
hearings on the DEIS in Rockland and Portland, Maine; Gloucester and
Chatham, Massachusetts; Narragansett, Rhode Island; Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania; and via webinar. The Council adopted Amendment 8 on
September 25, 2018, and submitted the amendment to us for review in
2019.
Proposed Measures
Amendment 8 would establish a long-term ABC control rule for
herring. Under the proposed control rule, when biomass is at or above
50 percent of the biomass associated with maximum sustainable yield
(BMSY) or its proxy, ABC is the catch associated with a
maximum fishing mortality (F) of 80 percent of FMSY or its
proxy. When biomass falls below 50 percent of BMSY or its
proxy, F declines linearly to 0 at 10 percent of BMSY or its
proxy. The control rule would set ABC for a three-year period but would
allow ABC to vary year-to-year in response to projected changes in
biomass. The control rule could be revised via a framework adjustment
if a quantitative assessment is not available, if projections are
producing ABCs that are not justified or consistent with available
information, or if the stock requires a rebuilding program.
The proposed control rule is intended to explicitly account for
herring as forage in the ecosystem by limiting F to 80 percent of
FMSY when biomass is high and setting it at zero when
biomass is low. It is also intended to generate an ABC consistent with
specific criteria identified by the Council, including low variation in
yield, low probability of the stock becoming overfished, low
probability of a fishery shutdown, and catch limits set at a relatively
high proportion of MSY. The Council anticipates that short-term
negative economic impacts on participants in the herring or lobster
fisheries, resulting from a reduced herring harvest in response to low
herring biomass, may become a long-term economic benefit for industry
participants, especially if the proposed control rule results in low
variation in yield, low probability of a fishery shutdown, and low
probability of overfishing. Relative to other control rules considered
by the Council, the proposed control rule is designed to more
effectively balance the goal and objectives of the Herring FMP,
including managing the fishery at long-term sustainable levels, taking
forage for predators into account to support the ocean ecosystem, and
providing a biologically sustainable harvest as a source of revenue for
fishing communities and bait for the lobster fishery.
Shortly before the Council took final action on Amendment 8, an
updated stock assessment concluded that herring biomass is low, and the
probability of overfishing and the stock becoming overfished is high.
While not directly applicable to a long-term harvest policy, the
Council noted that under herring's current condition of low biomass,
setting catch more conservatively than status quo may increase the
likelihood of stock growth. In turn, this would have positive impacts
on the herring fishery, predators, and predator fisheries.
Amendment 8 would also prohibit the use of midwater trawl gear
inshore of 12 nautical miles (22 km) from the U.S./Canada border to the
Rhode Island/Connecticut border and inshore of 20 nautical miles (37
km) off the east coast of Cape Cod. Specifically, federally permitted
vessels would be prohibited from using, deploying, or fishing with
midwater trawl gear within the inshore midwater trawl restricted area
located shoreward of the 12-nautical mile (22-km) territorial sea
boundary from Canada to Connecticut and within thirty-minute squares
114 and 99 off Cape Cod (Figure 1). Midwater trawl vessels would be
able to transit the inshore midwater trawl restricted gear area
provided gear was stowed and not available for immediate use. The
proposed measure would be in addition to the existing prohibition on
midwater trawling for herring in Area 1A during June 1 through
September 30.
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[[Page 43575]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP21AU19.002
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
The Council recommended the proposed inshore midwater trawl
restricted area to minimize local depletion and user group conflict
when midwater trawl vessels harvesting herring overlap with other user
groups (i.e., commercial fisheries, recreational fisheries, ecotourism)
that rely on herring as forage and provide inshore conservation
benefits. The Council focused on midwater trawl gear to mitigate
potential negative socioeconomic impacts on other user groups in
response to short duration, high volume herring removals by midwater
trawl vessels that are relatively more mobile and capable of fishing in
offshore areas than vessels using other gear types. Information to
quantify the impact of midwater trawling on other user groups is
scarce, so the amendment analyzed the degree of overlap between
midwater trawl vessels and other user groups. The proposed measure is
intended to incorporate areas with a high degree of overlap between
midwater trawl vessels and other user groups throughout the year.
Specifically, it incorporates the overlap with predator fisheries in
the Gulf of Maine and southern New England throughout the year, as well
as the overlap with ecotourism and the tuna fishery in Area 1A during
the fall. While overlap with the midwater trawl vessels does not
necessarily translate into negative biological impacts on predators,
less overlap may reduce potential user conflicts, provided midwater
trawl effort does not shift into other areas and generate additional
overlap.
The Herring FMP specifies that herring research set-aside (RSA) can
equal up to three percent of the sub-annual catch limit for a herring
management area. RSA compensation fishing using midwater trawl gear
would be permitted within the inshore midwater trawl restricted area.
The Council recommended permitting RSA compensation fishing within the
inshore midwater trawl restricted area to help ensure the RSA would be
harvested and those funds would be available to support the projects
awarded RSA. Vessels engaged in herring RSA compensation fishing
typically operate as authorized by an exempted fishing permit (EFP) so
they can request exemptions from certain regulations that would
otherwise restrict herring harvest. While vessels would be permitted to
use midwater trawl gear within the inshore midwater trawl restricted
area while RSA compensation fishing, it does not mean that
compensations trips would be without restrictions. Terms and conditions
of the EFP must be consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), other
applicable law, and Herring FMP. Additionally, we would consider
whether additional terms and conditions would be required for EFPs to
ensure RSA compensation trips do not exacerbate the overlap between
[[Page 43576]]
midwater trawl vessels and other user groups.
Amendment 8 would allow the inshore midwater trawl restricted area
or new closures to address localized depletion and/or user group
conflict to be modified or implemented via framework adjustment. The
list of framework provisions at Sec. 648.206 already includes closed
areas; this amendment would add the inshore midwater trawl restricted
area to that list.
The Council's recommendation to prohibit midwater trawling in
inshore areas is an allocation decision intended to balance the needs
of user groups and provide conservation benefits. Consistent with
objectives in the Herring FMP, the proposed measure is intended to
facilitate an efficient, fair, and equitable accommodation of social,
economic, and ecological factors associated with achieving OY, in part
by providing, to the extent practicable, controlled opportunities for
participants in other New England and Mid-Atlantic fisheries. Because
midwater trawl vessels historically harvested a larger percentage of
herring than other gear types and are able to fish offshore, the
Council recommended prohibiting them from inshore waters to help ensure
herring was available inshore for other user groups and predators of
herring. The proposed inshore midwater trawl restricted area is
designed to be reasonably large enough to address the overlap between
midwater trawl vessels and other user groups and, ultimately, user
group conflict in inshore waters. This proposed measure is likely to
negatively impact the midwater trawl fleet, with potentially increased
trip costs and lower annual catches, but the Council believes that, on
balance, the benefits to other user groups, such as potentially reduced
trips costs, higher annual catches, and improved safety, outweigh the
costs to midwater trawl vessels. The proposed measure may also have
biological benefits if moving midwater trawl vessels offshore minimizes
catch of river herring and shad, reduces fishing pressure on the
inshore component of the herring stock, and helps ensure herring are
available to predators. Herring is currently assessed as one stock, but
it likely has stock components. Reducing fishing pressure inshore would
benefit an inshore stock component. Analyses in Amendment 8 estimate
that in recent years approximately 30 percent of the midwater trawl
fleet's annualized revenue came from within the proposed inshore
midwater trawl restricted area. Negative economic impacts on the
midwater trawl fleet may be mitigated if the fleet is able to offset
lost revenue from inshore areas with increased revenue from offshore
areas. Herring catch limits are currently low, so the fishery has the
capacity to harvest the OY. Recent midwater trawl landings (2007-2015)
offshore of the proposed midwater trawl restricted area (36,903 mt) are
much higher than the Council-recommended OY for 2020 and 2021 (11,621
mt). In the longer-term, the fishery will likely adapt to be able
harvest an increased OY, provided vessels are able to locate herring.
Public Comment Instructions
The Magnuson-Stevens Act allows us to approve, partially approve,
or disapprove measures recommended by the Council in an amendment based
on whether the measures are consistent with the fishery management
plan, plan amendment, the Magnuson-Stevens Act and its National
Standards, and other applicable law. The Council develops policy for
its fisheries and we defer to the Council on policy decisions unless
those policies are inconsistent with the Magnuson-Steven Act or other
applicable law. As such, we are seeking comment on whether measures in
Amendment 8 are consistent with the Herring FMP, the Magnuson-Stevens
Act and its National Standards, and other applicable law. Public
comments on Amendment 8 and its incorporated documents may be submitted
through the end of the comment period stated in this notice of
availability. A proposed rule to implement the amendment, including
draft regulatory text, will be published in the Federal Register for
public comment. Public comments on the proposed rule received by the
end of the comment period provided in this notice of availability will
be considered in the approval/disapproval decision on the amendment.
All comments received by October 21, 2019, whether specifically
directed to Amendment 8 or the proposed rule for this amendment, will
be considered in the approval/disapproval decision on the Amendment 8.
Comments received after that date will not be considered in the
decision to approve or disapprove the amendment. To be considered,
comments must be received by close of business on the last day of the
comment period.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: August 16, 2019.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-18032 Filed 8-20-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
