[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 36 (Friday, February 22, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12273-12287]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-03990]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Parts 600 and 635
[Docket No. 120627194-3097-01]
RIN 0648-BC31
Highly Migratory Species; 2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly
Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan; Amendment 8
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This proposed rule to implement Amendment 8 to the 2006
Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Fishery Management
Plan (FMP) addresses North Atlantic swordfish commercial fishery
management measures. In recent years, the North Atlantic swordfish
stock has experienced significant growth due to ongoing domestic and
international conservation measures designed to reduce mortality,
protect juvenile swordfish, monitor international trade, reduce
bycatch, and improve data collection. The most recent stock assessment,
conducted in 2009, indicates that the North Atlantic swordfish
population is fully rebuilt (``not overfished'') and overfishing is no
longer occurring. Despite ongoing efforts to revitalize the U.S. North
Atlantic swordfish fishery, domestic catches have remained below the
U.S. North Atlantic swordfish quota allocated by the International
Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT). Fishing
gears such as rod and reel, handline, harpoon, bandit gear, and green-
stick are highly selective when compared to other gears, have low
bycatch interaction rates with protected species and marine mammals,
and may have low post-release mortality rates on non-target species and
undersized swordfish. However, the current swordfish Handgear permit is
a limited access permit, and is often difficult or expensive to obtain.
Based upon the rebuilt status of North Atlantic swordfish, renewed
interest in commercial handgears that are lower in bycatch and bycatch
mortality, and the availability of swordfish quota, through Amendment 8
to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP NFMS proposes to provide additional
commercial fishing opportunities for persons using swordfish handgears.
DATES: Written comments will be accepted until April 23, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this proposed rule to implement
Amendment 8 to the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP, identified by
NOAA-NMFS-2013-0026, 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-2013-0026, click the
``Comment Now!'' icon, complete the required fields, and enter or
attach your comments.
Mail: Submit written comments to Highly Migratory Species
Management Division, NMFS Office of Sustainable Fisheries, 1315 East-
West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Please mark on the outside of
the envelope ``Comments on Amendment 8 to the HMS FMP.''
Fax: 301-713-1917; Attn: Michael Clark or Jennifer Cudney
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 generally will 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. Do not submit confidential
business information, or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter ``N/A'' in the required
fields if you wish to remain anonymous). Attachments to electronic
comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF file
formats only.
NMFS will hold five public hearings on this proposed rule with two
being conducted on March 11, 2013, and the others on March 14, 2013,
March 28, 2013, and April 10, 2013. The public hearings will be held in
St. Petersburg, FL; Silver Spring, MD; Gloucester, MA; Fort Lauderdale,
FL; and via a public conference call and webinar. NMFS will also hold a
conference call and webinar on this proposed rule to consult with the
HMS Advisory Panel (HMS AP) on April 18, 2013. These public hearings
may be combined with public hearings for other relevant highly
migratory species management actions. For specific locations, dates and
times see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other
aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this
proposed rule may be submitted to Michael Clark, Highly Migratory
Species Management Division, NMFS Office of Sustainable Fisheries, 1315
East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910, and by email to [email protected] or fax to (202) 395-7285
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Pearson at 727-824-5399; Michael
Clark or Jennifer Cudney at 301-427-8503; or Steve Durkee at 202-670-
6637.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Atlantic tunas and swordfish are managed
under the dual authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation
and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) and the Atlantic Tunas
Convention Act (ATCA). Under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS must,
consistent with the National Standards, prevent overfishing while
achieving, on a continuing basis, the optimum yield (OY) from each
fishery and rebuild overfished fisheries. Under ATCA, the Secretary of
Commerce (Secretary) shall promulgate regulations as may be necessary
and appropriate to carry out recommendations by ICCAT. The authority to
issue regulations under the Magnuson-Stevens Act and ATCA has been
delegated from the Secretary to the Assistant Administrator for
Fisheries, NOAA (AA). On May 28, 1999, NMFS published in the Federal
Register (64 FR 29090) final regulations, effective July 1, 1999,
implementing the Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish,
and Sharks (1999 FMP). On October 2, 2006, NMFS published in the
Federal Register (71 FR 58058) final regulations, effective November 1,
2006, implementing the 2006 Consolidated Highly Migratory Species (HMS)
FMP, which details the management measures for Atlantic HMS fisheries,
including the North Atlantic swordfish handgear fishery.
[[Page 12274]]
Background
A brief summary of the background of this proposed action is
provided below. A more complete summary of Atlantic HMS management
measures can be found in the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP, in the
annual HMS Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation (SAFE) Reports, and
online at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/.
On June 1, 2009 (74 FR 26174), NMFS published an Advance Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) to inform the public about and request
comments concerning actions that NMFS was considering to increase
opportunities for U.S. fisheries to more fully harvest the U.S. North
Atlantic swordfish quota. One of the items contained in the ANPR was
the potential establishment of a new commercial permit to harvest
swordfish using handgear. The comment period for the ANPR ended on
August 31, 2009. In addition to issuing an ANPR, NMFS publicly
discussed a commercial swordfish handgear permit concept during HMS
Advisory Panel (AP) meetings from 2009-2012. A pre-draft of Amendment
8, including specific management alternatives, was presented to the HMS
AP and made publicly available online in March of 2012. NMFS received
numerous comments both in support of, and opposed to, the concept of a
new commercial swordfish handgear permit, and many suggestions for how
a new permit should be administered. All of the comments received on
the 2009 ANPR, the 2009-2012 HMS AP meetings, and the pre-draft to
Amendment 8, have been considered in the preparation of this proposed
rule. Based upon those comments and discussions, NMFS has decided not
to further analyze a swordfish body tagging program that was
preliminarily discussed in the pre-draft to Amendment 8 due to concerns
about its effectiveness at reliably identifying commercially-harvested
swordfish and, in particular, preventing the illegal sale of
recreationally-harvested fish.
NMFS anticipates that the proposed action would have a low level of
potential environmental impacts due to the relatively low swordfish
retention limits (zero to six fish) that are being considered for a new
permit and by restricting the authorized gears to traditional
handgears. Additionally, the potential impacts on protected and non-
target species and essential fish habitat (EFH) are expected to be
minimal due to the selective nature and low bycatch associated with the
handgears being considered in this proposed rule. Therefore, after
considering the potential environmental effects of the proposed
measures and substantive comments received through the ANPR, HMS AP
meetings, and the pre-draft for Amendment 8, NMFS has preliminarily
determined that an environmental assessment would provide an
appropriate level of review for Amendment 8, and that preparing an
environmental impact statement is not necessary.
The 1999 FMP established a limited access permit program for
vessels in the commercial Atlantic swordfish, shark, and tuna longline
fisheries to keep harvesting capacity consistent with the available
quotas and to reduce latent effort while preventing overcapitalization.
As a result, since 1999, persons interested in entering the commercial
swordfish fishery have had to obtain a limited access vessel permit
from an existing permit holder leaving the fishery. Two of the three
types of swordfish limited access permits (the directed and incidental
permits) also require vessel owners to obtain a shark limited access
permit and an Atlantic tunas Longline category permit to fish for, or
retain, North Atlantic swordfish. In addition to the Directed and
Incidental swordfish permits, which allow the use of longline and most
handgears, there is also a separate swordfish Handgear limited access
permit, which restricts gear use to most handgears (i.e., rod and reel,
handline, harpoon, buoy gear, and bandit gear, but not speargun gear).
Since 2005, the number of swordfish Handgear limited access permits
that have been renewed or transferred has ranged from 75-92 per year.
Because no new commercial swordfish vessel permits have been issued
since 1999, many of these limited access permits have substantially
increased in value and can be difficult to obtain, thereby presenting a
barrier to entry into the commercial swordfish handgear fishery.
In recent years, the North Atlantic swordfish stock has experienced
significant growth in biomass due largely to ongoing domestic and
international conservation measures designed to reduce mortality,
protect juvenile swordfish, monitor international trade, reduce
bycatch, and improve data collection. Several strong year classes in
the late 1990s and an overall reduction in catch since 1987 have
supported the recovery of the North Atlantic swordfish stock. The most
recent stock assessment for North Atlantic swordfish was conducted in
2009 by ICCAT's Standing Committee on Research and Statistics (SCRS),
using data through 2008. The SCRS found that fishing mortality had been
below FMSY (the fishing mortality that produces maximum
sustainable yield) since 2005. The trend for estimated relative biomass
showed a consistent increase since 2000 and was at or above
BMSY (1.05, range = 0.94-1.24). The SCRS indicated that
there was a greater than 50-percent probability that the stock is above
BMSY (sustainable biomass), and thus ICCAT's rebuilding
objective had been achieved. In 2009, NMFS declared the North Atlantic
swordfish population fully rebuilt (``not overfished'') with no
overfishing occurring, based upon the SCRS stock assessment
NMFS believes that there is high interest in providing additional
access to the commercial swordfish fishery. Before, and since, the
North Atlantic swordfish stock was declared fully rebuilt in 2009, NMFS
has made significant efforts to restructure its fisheries and adjust
regulatory constraints on its swordfish fishermen while not increasing
the incidental catch of sea turtles, marine mammals, or other protected
and non-target species. As a result of these ``revitalization'' efforts
and the increased availability of fish due to stock rebuilding, U.S.
swordfish catches have increased by nearly 40 percent since 2006.
However, domestic catches have continued to remain below the North
Atlantic swordfish quota recommended for the United States by ICCAT.
There has been a recent re-emergence of interest in using handgear,
including rod and reel, handline, harpoon, green-stick, and bandit
gear, to fish commercially for swordfish. These gears are tended and,
when compared to other gears, are highly selective, have low bycatch
interaction rates with protected species and marine mammals, and may
have low post-release mortality rates on non-target species and
undersized swordfish. The potential expansion of the commercial
swordfish handgear fishery is consistent with making steady progress
toward fully harvesting the United States' domestic swordfish quota
allocation while continuing to minimize the bycatch of protected
species, marine mammals, non-target species, and undersized swordfish.
As the swordfish stock has been declared rebuilt and more fish have
recruited to larger sizes, rod and reel, handline, harpoon, and bandit
gear have increasingly become more economically viable for commercial
swordfish fishing over a larger geographic range. Additionally, these
gears have the benefit of low bycatch and bycatch mortality rates.
Additionally, there is now adequate swordfish quota available to
provide additional access to the fishery. From 2007-2011, on average,
[[Page 12275]]
the United States caught approximately 70 percent of its baseline quota
allocation of North Atlantic swordfish. From 2006-2011, the ICCAT
recommendation allowed the United States to carry over up to half of
its baseline quota of uncaught swordfish to the following year. This
carryover was reduced to a 25-percent rollover allowance starting in
2012. In 2011, the most recent year for which complete data are
available, the United States caught approximately 74 percent of its
baseline swordfish quota and approximately 50 percent of its adjusted
quota. For these reasons, NMFS is proposing increasing commercial
access to the swordfish resource by establishing a new commercial
swordfish handgear permit, and through modifications to existing
permits. NMFS recognizes that newly implemented swordfish management
measures and recent fishery behavior in 2012 and beyond could affect
the amount of quota available for the new and modified commercial
handgear permits. During the first half of 2012, changes to the ICCAT
quota rollover allowance, a new minimum size requirement (77 FR 45273;
July 31, 2012), and a continuing increase in landings have occurred.
Therefore, NMFS will continue to carefully monitor the swordfish
fishery to determine if, and how, these recent changes in the fishery
could affect the establishment of new and modified commercial swordfish
handgear permits.
The primary purpose of the proposed action is to provide additional
opportunities for U.S. fishermen to harvest swordfish using selective
gears that result in lower bycatch rates, given the rebuilt status of
swordfish and their resulting increased availability. The goal is for
the United States to more fully utilize its domestic swordfish quota
allocation, which is based upon the ICCAT recommendation. A secondary
purpose of the proposed rule is to implement regulatory adjustments to
update a telephone number and remove outdated references in the HMS
regulations at 50 CFR part 635. Consistent with the 2006 Consolidated
HMS FMP objectives, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other relevant
Federal laws, the specific objectives for this action are to:
Implement conservation and management measures that
prevent overfishing while achieving, on a continuing basis, the optimum
yield (OY) from the U.S. North Atlantic swordfish fishery;
Provide increased opportunities for the United States to
more fully utilize its ICCAT-recommended domestic swordfish quota
allocation;
Implement a North Atlantic swordfish management system to
make fleet capacity commensurate with resource status to improve both
economic efficiency and biological conservation, and provide additional
access for traditional fishing gears;
Provide commercial swordfish fishing opportunities for
U.S. fishermen within established quota levels using selective fishing
gears that have minimal bycatch and maximize the survival of any
released species;
Enact management measures to establish new and modified
commercial vessel permits that would allow for a limited number of
swordfish to be caught on rod and reel, handline, harpoon, bandit gear,
or green-stick gear and sold commercially;
Examine and implement regionally tailored North Atlantic
swordfish management strategies, as appropriate; and
Improve the Agency's capability to monitor and sustainably
manage the North Atlantic swordfish fishery.
The proposed action would implement new and modified commercial
vessel permits that allow fishermen to retain and sell a limited number
of swordfish caught on rod and reel, handline, harpoon, bandit gear,
and green-stick. Specifically this action proposes to implement: (1)
New and modified swordfish vessel permits and authorized gears; and,
(2) swordfish retention limits associated with the new and modified
permits. Current swordfish reporting requirements, including the
submission of monthly logbooks if a vessel is selected for reporting,
would be applicable to any new or modified vessel permit. The
alternatives that have been analyzed represent a range of options that
NMFS has considered to allow for a limited number of swordfish (zero to
six) caught on handgear (rod & reel, handline, harpoon, bandit gear,
and green-stick) to be retained and sold commercially, as well as to
provide NMFS with an improved ability to sustainably manage the North
Atlantic swordfish fishery.
With respect to vessel permitting and authorized gears, NMFS
considered three alternatives and four sub-alternatives, ranging from a
no-action alternative, which maintains the current swordfish permit
structure, to creating a new and/or modified commercial swordfish
handgear permit. Alternative 1.1 would maintain the current swordfish
limited access permit structure and would not create a new and/or
modified commercial swordfish permit. Alternative 1.2, a preferred
alternative, would establish a new open access commercial swordfish
permit and modify existing open access HMS permits to allow for the
commercial retention of swordfish. Current swordfish reporting
requirements, including the submission of monthly logbooks if a vessel
is selected for reporting, would apply to all of the sub-alternatives
for Alternative 1.2. Sub-alternative 1.2.1 would modify the existing
open access Atlantic Tunas General category permit to allow for the
commercial retention of swordfish using handgears. Sub-alternative
1.2.2 would modify the existing open-access Atlantic tunas Harpoon
category permit to allow for the commercial retention of swordfish
using harpoon. Sub-alternative 1.2.3, a preferred alternative, would
modify the existing HMS Charter/Headboat permit holder requirements to
allow fishing under open access swordfish commercial regulations (with
rod and reel and handline only) when fishing commercially (i.e., not on
a for-hire trip with paying passengers). Sub-Alternative 1.2.4, a
preferred alternative, would create a new, separate open-access
commercial swordfish permit to allow landings of swordfish using
handgears. Alternative 1.3 would establish a new limited-access
commercial swordfish permit that authorizes using rod and reel,
handline, bandit gear, harpoon, and green-stick gear. Current swordfish
reporting requirements, including the submission of monthly logbooks if
a vessel is selected for reporting, would also apply under Alternative
1.3.
The preferred alternative and sub-alternatives for permitting (1.2,
1.2.3, and 1.2.4) are anticipated to have minor to neutral ecological
impacts in the short and long-term. However, these alternatives could
result in a minor increase in rod and reel, handline, harpoon, bandit
gear, and green-stick gear commercial fishing effort if previously
inactive fishermen obtain the new and modified permits and begin
fishing. Preferred Alternatives 1.2.3 and 1.2.4 could also cause a
minor increase in swordfish discards and discard mortality if fishing
effort increases in areas with large concentrations of swordfish.
Although the preferred alternative would establish a new open-access
commercial swordfish permit, NMFS expects that most new permit
applicants would be current recreational swordfish fishery participants
with HMS Angling category permits, resulting in a shift of effort from
the recreational fishery to the commercial fishery. Some current
Atlantic Tunas
[[Page 12276]]
General category and Harpoon category permit holders could also obtain
the new permit, and current HMS Charter/Headboat permit holders'
existing permits would be modified to allow them to fish commercially
for swordfish with rod and reel and handline on non for-hire trips.
These permit holders would likely participate in the commercial
swordfish fishery to supplement their primary fishing activities (i.e.,
tuna fishing and charter fishing). All new commercial swordfish fishery
participants would be restricted to using only authorized handgears and
would be required to comply with applicable regional retention limits
(ranging from zero to six swordfish per vessel per trip). Thus, NMFS
anticipates only a minor increase in overall swordfish fishery effort
because of the low proposed retention limits and the authorization of
handgears exclusively. Overall, NMFS anticipates that direct and
indirect, short- and long-term ecological impacts on swordfish, non-
target species, ESA-protected species, essential fish habitat, and
marine mammals from handgear and green-stick gear would be minor to
neutral, primarily because these gears are closely tended and rarely
interact with benthic habitat.
Swordfish handgear is very selective because it is deployed at
times, depths, and locations where swordfish, as opposed to other
coastal species, are typically encountered. Hooks and bait are designed
to target large pelagics exclusively. Thus, bycatch in the fishery is
very low and bycatch mortality is presumably low as well, with most
non-target species released immediately. Any landings associated with
the new or modified permits would be reported through weekly dealer
reports to ensure that they remain within the ICCAT-recommended U.S.
swordfish quota, which has already been analyzed.
The effects of most handgear fishing on ESA-listed species was most
recently analyzed under a Biological Opinion (BiOp) issued on June 14,
2001, entitled ``Reinitiation of Consultation on the Atlantic Highly
Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan and its Associated
Fisheries'' (http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/HMS060801.pdf). In the
2001 BiOp, NMFS indicated that it anticipates that, because the
potential for take in these fisheries (i.e., harpoon/handgear
fisheries, hook and line, etc.) was low, the continued operation of
these fisheries would result in documented takes of no more than three
ESA-listed sea turtles, of any species, in combination, per calendar
year. Additionally, the Atlantic HMS hook and line/harpoon fishery and
green-stick fishery are classified as Category III under the MMPA (76
FR 73912, November 29, 2011), meaning that these fisheries have a
remote likelihood of incidental mortality or serious injury to marine
mammals. Also, as described in Amendment 1 to the Consolidated HMS FMP
(74 FR 28018, June 12, 2009), minimal impacts on EFH are anticipated
because handgears are deployed in the water column and rarely interact
with ocean bottom substrate. Some handgears such as rod and reel and
bandit gear may have the ability to contact the ocean bottom, depending
upon the method selected to fish; however, this contact was determined
to not produce significant effects on EFH, including benthic habitats.
Overall, the swordfish handgear fishery has negligible adverse physical
impacts on mid-water environments, the substrate, and most sensitive
benthic habitats. For this reason, Alternative 1.2 is anticipated to
have neutral short- and long-term ecological impacts in the Atlantic.
Under Alternative 1.2, NMFS considers four sub-alternatives. Ecological
impacts on target, non-target, and ESA-protected species, marine
mammals, and EFH would be the same as Alternative 1.2 under each of the
four sub-alternatives.
The preferred alternatives and sub-alternatives for permitting
(1.2, 1.2.3, and 1.2.4) are expected to have direct economic benefits
in the short- and long-term through increased opportunities to
commercially fish for swordfish, and through increased gross revenues
from swordfish sales for fishermen that obtain the new permit, or for
HMS Charter/Headboat permit holders that could fish commercially for
swordfish on non for-hire trips. Indirect minor beneficial economic
impacts are expected in the short- and long-term for seafood dealers,
marinas, bait, tackle, and ice suppliers, restaurants, and similar
establishments which could experience a minor increase in sales due to
increased participation in the commercial swordfish fishery. There may
be potential short- and long-term negative economic impacts on existing
swordfish limited access permit holders due to a reduction in permit
values and ex-vessel swordfish prices, but any such impacts are
expected to be minor due to the low retention limits being established
for the new and modified permits. Swordfish retention limits for
existing limited access permit holders are much higher or, in some
cases, unlimited. NMFS has proposed low retention limits for the new
and modified permits, in part to help maintain the value of existing
limited access permits.
NMFS considered three main alternatives and five sub-alternatives
with respect to swordfish retention limits applicable to the new and
modified permits. Alternative 2.1 would establish a fishery-wide zero-
to-six swordfish retention limit range for the new and modified
permits, and codify a specific fishery-wide retention limit within that
range. The upper limit, for this alternative and all others, is equal
to the current maximum swordfish retention limit for the open access
HMS Charter/Headboat permit with six paying passengers onboard.
Alternative 2.2 would establish a fishery-wide zero-to-six swordfish
retention limit range for the new and modified permits, and codify a
specific fishery-wide retention limit within that range with in-season
adjustment authority to change the limit based on pre-established
criteria (e.g., dealer reports, landing trends, available quota,
variations in seasonal distribution, abundance, or migration patterns,
etc.).
Alternative 2.3, a preferred alternative, would establish a zero-
to-six swordfish retention limit range for the new and modified
permits, and establish swordfish management regions with specific
retention limits with authority to adjust the regional retention limits
in-season based on pre-established criteria (e.g., dealer reports,
landing trends, available quota, variations in seasonal distribution,
abundance, or migration patterns, etc.). For all of the sub-
alternatives under Alternative 2.3, NMFS is proposing to require that
vessels may not possess, retain, or land any more swordfish than is
specified for the region in which the vessel is located. For swordfish
captured outside of the regions, vessels may not land any more
swordfish than is specified for the region in which the swordfish are
landed. This restriction will aid in the effectiveness and enforcement
of the proposed retention limits by ensuring that vessels comply with
the retention limits associated with the region in which they are
located and in which the fish are landed.
Alternative 2.3 has five sub-alternatives, which consider different
geographic options for the swordfish management regions.
Sub-alternative 2.3.1 would base the regions upon existing major
United States domestic HMS fishing areas as reported to ICCAT
(Northeast Distant area (NED), Northeast Coastal area (NEC), Mid-
Atlantic Bight area (MAB), South Atlantic Bight (SAB), Florida East
Coast (FEC), Gulf of Mexico (GOM),
[[Page 12277]]
Caribbean (CAR), and the Sargasso Sea (SAR)).
Sub-alternative 2.3.2, a preferred alternative, would establish
larger regions by merging the major domestic regions discussed in
Alternative 2.3.1 into three larger regions (Northwest Atlantic, Gulf
of Mexico, and Caribbean) and then adding a separate Florida Swordfish
Management Area. NMFS is proposing to codify a retention limit of one
swordfish per vessel per trip in the Florida Swordfish Management Area,
two swordfish per vessel per trip in the Caribbean region (consistent
with the swordfish retention limit for the U.S. Caribbean established
in Amendment 4 to the 2006 Consolidated HMS FMP), and three swordfish
per vessel per trip in the Northwest Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico
regions. These regional retention limits fall within the range of zero
to six swordfish discussed for all of the alternatives and, if
selected, could be adjusted, either upward or downward, in the future
through in-season adjustment procedures similar to those currently
codified for bluefin tuna at Sec. 635.27 (a)(8).
A one-fish initial default limit is proposed for the Florida
Swordfish Management Area to provide for the orderly establishment of a
small-scale commercial swordfish handgear fishery off Florida's east
coast while potentially limiting the number of vessels participating
and any associated ecological impacts. A two-fish initial default limit
is proposed for the Caribbean region to be consistent with the limit
recently implemented for the Caribbean Commercial Small Boat permit.
The small-scale commercial HMS fishery in the Caribbean consists
primarily of small vessels that are limited by hold capacity, crew
size, trip length, fishing gears, and market infrastructure. A higher
initial default limit of three swordfish per vessel per trip is being
proposed for the Northwest Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico to
compensate for higher operating costs in these regions because a
greater distance is required to travel to productive fishing grounds. A
three-fish retention limit is in the middle of the range being
considered for all of the alternatives. NMFS believes it is an
appropriate default limit for these regions, based upon the size and
hold capacity of most vessels participating in the swordfish handgear
fishery. For many small- to medium-sized vessels, three swordfish would
be considered a successful trip. It could become difficult to properly
handle and store more than three large swordfish aboard a smaller
vessel to ensure that the product maintains its quality and safety. The
initial proposed default retention limits are purposefully conservative
for the proposed implementation of a new open-access swordfish permit.
As additional fishery information becomes available, they could be
reconsidered in the future. For these reasons, NMFS proposes initial
default limits of one, two, and three swordfish for the Florida
Swordfish Management Area, Caribbean region, and the Northwest Atlantic
and Gulf of Mexico regions, respectively. There are three different
sub-alternatives that consider a potential Florida Swordfish Management
Area (under sub-alternative 2.3.2).
Sub-alternative 2.3.2.1, a preferred sub-alternative, would
establish a Florida Swordfish Management Area in the Atlantic Ocean
area seaward of the inner boundary of the U.S. EEZ from a point
intersecting the inner boundary of the U.S. EEZ at 31[deg]00' N. lat.
near Jekyll Island, GA, and proceeding due east to connect by straight
lines the following coordinates in the order stated: 31[deg]00' N.
lat., 78[deg]00' W. long.; 28[deg]17'10'' N. lat., 79[deg]11'24'' W.
long.; then proceeding along the outer boundary of the EEZ to the
intersection of the EEZ with 24[deg]00' N. lat.; then proceeding due
west to 24[deg]00' N. lat., 82[deg]0' W. long, then proceeding due
north to intersect the inner boundary of the U.S. EEZ at 82[deg]0' W.
long. near Key West, FL. This management area also includes the area
west of Monroe County, Florida, from 82[deg]0' W. long., 25[deg]48' N.
lat.; then proceeding clockwise east along the inner boundary of the
U.S. EEZ to a point located at 82[deg]0' W. long., 24[deg]46' N. lat.;
and then proceeding due north to 82[deg]0' W. long., 25[deg]48' N. lat.
Sub-alternative 2.3.2.2 would establish a Florida Swordfish
Management Area in Federal waters extending from the Georgia-Florida
border to Federal waters off the westernmost tip of Key West, FL
(81[deg]48' W longitude).
Sub-alternative 2.3.2.3 would establish a Florida Swordfish
Management Area in Federal waters adjacent to the Florida counties of
St. Lucie, Martin, Palm Beach, Broward, Dade and Monroe (including the
Federal waters of Florida Bay).
The creation of a special swordfish management area off Florida is
expected to have positive ecological impacts. The east coast of
Florida, and in particular the Florida Straits, contains one of the
richest concentrations of marine life in the Atlantic Ocean. A 2003
United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization study stated that the
Florida Straits had the highest biodiversity in the Atlantic Ocean, and
is home to 25 endemic species. A special swordfish management area with
a lower retention limit is being considered due to its unique
importance as juvenile swordfish habitat and as a migratory corridor.
This area was closed to pelagic longline gear in 2001 to reduce the
bycatch of several species. It provides important habitat for many
highly migratory species and protected species, including swordfish,
marlin, sailfish, sea turtles and marine mammals. A separate Florida
Swordfish Management Area would help to conserve juvenile and adult
swordfish in and near the Florida Straits and help to reduce gear
conflicts that could potentially occur due to the large number of
fishermen in, and in proximity to, the area. Comments received from the
public and the HMS Advisory Panel indicated a concern about increased
fishing mortality in this area. For these reasons, NMFS is proposing a
low default initial retention limit of one swordfish per vessel per
trip in this area. This low retention limit would provide for the
orderly establishment of a small-scale commercial swordfish handgear
fishery off Florida's east coast while potentially limiting the number
of vessels participating and any associated ecological impacts,
including swordfish discards, discard mortality, and the incidental
catch of non-target and protected species.
Preferred sub-alternative 2.3.2.1 would establish swordfish
management regions in the Northwest Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico,
Caribbean, and a Florida Swordfish Management Area encompassing the
East Florida Coast Pelagic Longline Closed Area and Federal waters
adjacent to Monroe County, FL (including Florida Bay). This preferred
sub-alternative would also establish a zero-to-six swordfish retention
limit range within each region for the new and modified permits and
codify specific regional retention limits with authority to adjust the
regional limits in-season based on pre-established criteria.
Establishing unique swordfish regions would allow NMFS to tailor
management practices geographically to the specific biological and
other factors affecting a particular region, and would likely have
positive direct and indirect ecological benefits. Providing authority
to adjust the regional swordfish retention limits in-season (from zero
to six fish) using regulatory procedures similar to those codified for
bluefin tuna at Sec. 635.27 (a)(8) would provide NMFS with the ability
to quickly modify the retention limit, so any potential adverse
ecological impacts (e.g., higher than
[[Page 12278]]
anticipated landings) that are detected could be addressed
expeditiously, as necessary.
The six-fish limit is equivalent to the current maximum swordfish
retention limit for the open-access HMS Charter/Headboat permit with
six paying passengers onboard. If the regional retention limit is set
at zero, no change in fishing effort or ecological impacts is
anticipated. If the regional limit is set at any level above zero, sub-
alternative 2.3.2.1 could provide for the additional harvest of
swordfish--a species that is fully rebuilt and of which the U.S. quota
has not been fully caught in recent years. It could cause a minor
increase in rod and reel, handline, harpoon, bandit gear, and green-
stick commercial fishing effort if previously inactive fishermen obtain
the new and modified permits and begin fishing. Also, this sub-
alternative could cause a minor increase in swordfish discards and
discard mortality if fishing effort increases substantially in areas
with large concentrations of juvenile swordfish. For these reasons,
NMFS is proposing low initial default swordfish retention limits for
the new and modified permits, including a one-fish limit in the Florida
Swordfish Management Area.
Overall, NMFS anticipates only neutral to minor ecological impacts
on ESA-listed species, non-target species, marine mammals, and
undersized swordfish associated with all of the preferred alternatives
and sub-alternatives. As indicated in the June 14, 2001 BiOp issued for
the Atlantic HMS handgear fishery, since the potential for takes in
these fisheries (i.e., harpoon/handgear fisheries, hook and line, etc.)
is low, NMFS anticipates that the continued operation of these
fisheries would result in documented takes of no more than three ESA-
listed sea turtles, of any species, in combination, per calendar year.
Additionally, the Atlantic swordfish and pelagic hook and line/harpoon
fisheries are classified as Category III under the Marine Mammal
Protection Act (MMPA), meaning that these fisheries have a remote
likelihood of incidental mortality or serious injury to marine mammals
(see MMPA List of Fisheries for 2012, 76 FR 73912, November 29, 2011).
Finally, minimal impacts on EFH are anticipated from the preferred
alternatives because handgears rarely interact with the ocean bottom
substrate or benthic habitat.
Establishing regions under preferred alternative 2.3.2 would allow
NMFS to address region-specific management concerns. Providing NMFS
with in-season adjustment authority would allow for timely adjustments
to regional retention limits; however, it could provide less certainty
than Alternative 2.1 to fishermen and law enforcement regarding changes
to the swordfish retention limit. Conversely, positive economic
benefits could occur if the retention limit were adjusted upward based
upon information indicating that ample quota was available, or upon
other pre-established criteria. Generally, the impacts associated with
a region would depend upon its size, the number of fishery participants
in the region, and the swordfish retention limits established for the
region.
Establishing a retention limit range of zero to six swordfish is
anticipated to provide a seasonal, or secondary, fishery for most
participants. For example, current Atlantic tunas General category
permit holders could fish for swordfish overnight while targeting
bluefin tuna at other times. Similarly, they could harpoon a swordfish
if one were spotted during a tuna trip. A zero-to-six fish retention
limit range is not likely to facilitate a full-time, year-round
fishery, with the possible exception of some fishery participants in
south Florida, where swordfish can be available on a year-round basis.
However, it would provide some fishermen with the ability to
commercially land swordfish, thereby resulting in positive economic
benefits if the limit were set above zero. If a regional retention
limit is set at zero, no change in socio-economic impacts is
anticipated. The Agency received some comments, particularly in
response to the 2009 ANPR, raising concerns about the potential for
over-capitalization to occur in the swordfish fishery, potentially
leading to depressed market prices and other adverse socio-economic
impacts. Increasing the number of swordfish permits and the amount of
swordfish in the market could potentially reduce the value of existing
swordfish limited access permits and ex-vessel swordfish prices.
However, any potential negative impacts on current swordfish limited
access permit holders are expected to be mitigated by establishing
lower retention limits for the new open-access permit than those that
exist for swordfish limited access permits.
For preferred sub-alternative 2.3.2.1, NMFS proposes an initial
swordfish retention limit of one per vessel per trip for the Florida
Swordfish Management Area, two swordfish per vessel per trip for the
U.S. Caribbean, and three swordfish per vessel per trip for the
Northwest Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. These limits fall within the
range discussed under Alternative 2.3 above, and could be modified in
the future using in-season adjustment procedures similar to those
codified at Sec. 635.27(a)(8). Under all of the retention limit
alternatives, NMFS anticipates direct and indirect positive economic
benefits if the limits are set above zero.
Administrative Adjustments
There are two regulatory administrative adjustments in this
proposed rule. NMFS is proposing to remove a portion of the last
sentence in Sec. 635.4(j)(3), which contains outdated language
referencing dates in 2008. Also, NMFS proposes to update a telephone
number for the HMS Division Chief in the definitions at Sec. 635.2.
These administrative adjustments would have no impact on the public or
the environment.
Request for Comments
Comments on this proposed rule may be submitted via http://www.regulations.gov, mail, or fax. Comments may also be submitted at a
public hearing (see Public Hearings and Special Accommodations below).
These comments will be used to assist in the development and
finalization of Amendment 8 to the Consolidated HMS FMP. NMFS solicits
comments on this proposed rule by April 23, 2013 (see DATES and
ADDRESSES).
NMFS requests specific public comment on the following issues:
(1) What are the appropriate boundaries for the regions and for the
Florida Swordfish Management Area?
(2) What are appropriate swordfish retention limits under the new
and modified permits? For all vessels issued the new and modified
permits under preferred sub-alternative 2.3.2, should NMFS implement
initial retention limits of one swordfish per vessel per trip for the
Florida Swordfish Management Area, two swordfish per vessel per trip
for the U.S. Caribbean, and three swordfish per vessel per trip limit
for the Northwest Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico regions?
(3) Are the criteria for inseason adjustment of the regional
retention limits proposed at Sec. 635.24 (b)(4)(iv) sufficiently
inclusive?
(4) Is the proposed requirement to comply with the regional
swordfish retention limits both at sea and upon landing at Sec.
635.24(b)(4)(ii) clear and sufficient for the purposes of this
rulemaking?
Public Hearings and Special Accommodations
NMFS will hold public hearings in Massachusetts, Florida (2),
Maryland, and hold a public conference call and webinar to provide the
public with an opportunity to comment on the proposed management
measures. NMFS
[[Page 12279]]
will also hold a public conference call and webinar to consult with the
HMS AP. NMFS expects to consult with the HMS AP on April 18, 2013, as
the scheduled public comment period does not overlap with an HMS
Advisory Panel meeting. These public hearings may be combined with
public hearings for other relevant highly migratory species management
actions. These public hearings will be physically accessible to people
with disabilities.
Table 1--Time and Locations of Upcoming Public Hearings and Phone Conferences
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Time Meeting locations Address
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 11, 2013............... 1:00-3:00 p.m............... Public Conference To participate in conference
Call & Webinar. call, call: (800) 369-8439
Passcode: 69854. To participate
in webinar, RSVP at: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/958913664 958913664 A confirmation email
with webinar log-in information
will be sent after RSVP is
registered.
March 11, 2013............... 5:00-7:00 p.m............... NMFS Southeast 263 13th Avenue South, St.
Regional Office Petersburg, FL 33701.
(SERO) 1st Floor Phone: 727-824-5301.
Conference Room.
March 14, 2013............... 1:00-4:00 p.m............... NMFS Headquarters 1301 East-West Highway, Silver
Science Center Spring, MD 20910.
Auditorium.
March 28, 2013............... 5:30-7:30 p.m............... NMFS Northeast 55 Great Republic Drive
Regional Office Gloucester, MA 01930.
(NERO) 1st Floor Phone: 978-281-9300.
Conference Room.
April 10, 2013............... 5:00-7:00 p.m............... Broward County 100 South Andrews Ave., Fort
Main Library Lauderdale, Florida 33301.
Auditorium. Phone: 954-357-7544.
April 18, 2013............... 2:30-4:30 p.m............... HMS Advisory To participate in conference
Panel call, call: (800) 369-8439,
Consultation Passcode: 69854
Call. To participate in webinar, RSVP
at: https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/592965928 592965928 A confirmation email
with webinar log-in information
will be sent after RSVP is
registered.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids
should be directed to Rick Pearson at (727) 824-5399 at least 7 days
prior to the workshop date. The public is reminded that NMFS expects
participants at public hearings, council meetings, and phone
conferences to conduct themselves appropriately. At the beginning of
each meeting, a representative of NMFS will explain the ground rules
(e.g., alcohol is prohibited from the meeting room; attendees will be
called to give their comments in the order in which they registered to
speak; each attendee will have an equal amount of time to speak;
attendees may not interrupt one another; etc.). The NMFS representative
will structure the meeting so that all attending members of the public
will be able to comment, if they so choose, regardless of the
controversial nature of the subject(s). Attendees are expected to
respect the ground rules, and those that do not will be asked to leave
the meeting.
Classification
The NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that the proposed
rule is consistent with the 2006 Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP,
Amendment 8 and other amendments to that FMP, the Magnuson-Stevens Act,
ATCA, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after
public comment.
NMFS prepared an environmental assessment that discusses the impact
on the environment as a result of this rule. In this proposed action,
NMFS is considering options to provide additional commercial swordfish
fishing opportunities using selective fishing gears that have minimal
bycatch and few discards to allow the United States to more fully
utilize its domestic swordfish quota allocation. A copy of the
environmental assessment is available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
An initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) was prepared, 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 description of the action, why it is
being considered, and the legal basis for this action are contained at
the beginning of this section in the preamble and in the SUMMARY
section of the preamble. A summary of the analysis follows. A copy of
this analysis is available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
The proposed action is being considered to provide additional
opportunities to harvest swordfish using selective gears that have low
rates of bycatch, given the rebuilt status of the swordfish stock and
resulting increased availability of swordfish and availability of U.S.
quota. The goal is for the United States to more fully utilize its
domestic swordfish quota allocation, which is based upon the
recommendation of ICCAT, and provide economic benefits to U.S.
fishermen with minimal adverse environmental impacts.
Section 603(b)(2) of the RFA requires that we describe the action's
objectives. This proposed rulemaking is intended to implement
conservation and management measures that prevent overfishing while
achieving, on a continuing basis, the optimum yield (OY) from the U.S.
North Atlantic swordfish fishery; provide increased opportunities to
more fully utilize the ICCAT-recommended domestic North Atlantic
swordfish quota allocation; implement North Atlantic swordfish
management measures to make fleet capacity commensurate with resource
status; provide additional commercial fishing opportunities for U.S.
fishermen using selective fishing gears that have minimal bycatch rates
and maximize the survival of any released species; provide additional
access for traditional swordfish fishing gears; implement regionally-
tailored North Atlantic swordfish management strategies, as
appropriate; and, improve the Agency's ability to monitor and
sustainably manage the North Atlantic swordfish fishery. The proposed
action is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the 2006
Consolidated HMS FMP and its amendments to implement recommendations of
ICCAT pursuant to ATCA and to achieve domestic management objectives
under the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
[[Page 12280]]
Section 603(b)(3) of the RFA requires Federal agencies to provide
an estimate of the number of small entities to which the rule would
apply. The current U.S. North Atlantic commercial swordfish fishery is
comprised of 334 fishing vessel owners who hold either a limited access
swordfish Handgear permit, or a limited access directed or incidental
swordfish permit, and the related industries of seafood dealers and
processors, fishing gear manufacturers and distributors, marinas, bait
houses, restaurants, and other equipment suppliers. Specifically, the
proposed rule would apply to small-scale handgear vessel owners that
fish in the Atlantic Ocean, including the Gulf of Mexico and the U.S.
Caribbean, that do not currently hold a commercial swordfish limited
access permit. Using the number of current Atlantic tunas General
category permit holders as a proxy, NMFS estimates that the universe of
fishermen who might purchase and fish under a new commercial swordfish
permit would be approximately 4,084 individuals, with some potential
shift of fishermen currently permitted in the recreational HMS Angling
category. These calculations are explained in greater detail below.
This estimate is based upon the number of persons currently issued an
Atlantic tunas General category permit, which is the commercial permit
most similar to the ones being considered in the proposed action. NMFS
used the following thresholds from the Small Business Administration
(SBA) size standards to determine if an entity regulated under this
action would be considered a small entity: average annual receipts less
than $4.0 million for fish-harvesting, average annual receipts less
than $6.5 million for charter/party boats, 100 or fewer employees for
wholesale dealers, or 500 or fewer employees for seafood processors.
Based on these thresholds, NMFS determined that all HMS permit holders
are small entities.
This proposed rule contains new reporting, recordkeeping, or other
compliance requirements. The proposed Federal open-access commercial
swordfish handgear permit would allow NMFS to collect additional data
regarding participants in the swordfish fishery and landings through
Federal dealer reports. The new permit would require an application
similar to some other current HMS permits. The information collected on
the application would include vessel information and owner
identification and contact information. A modest fee to process the
application and annual renewal fee of approximately $25 may be
required. The proposed rule also would also adopt standard commercial
HMS permit reporting requirements for this permit. Currently, in
Atlantic HMS fisheries, all commercial fishing vessels and Charter/
Headboat vessels are required to submit logbooks for all HMS trips if
they are selected for reporting. Selected permit holders are required
to submit logbooks to NMFS postmarked no later than seven days after
unloading a trip. If no fishing activity occurred during a calendar
month, a ``no fishing'' report must be submitted to NMFS, and be
postmarked within seven days after the end of the month. Currently, the
permits most similar to the ones being considered in this action (HMS
Charter/Headboat, Atlantic tunas General category, and Atlantic tunas
Harpoon category permit) are not selected for submitting logbooks,
although they are eligible for selection.
This proposed rule would not conflict, duplicate, or overlap with
other relevant Federal rules. Fishermen, dealers, and managers in these
fisheries must comply with a number of international agreements,
domestic laws, and other FMPs. These include, but are not limited to,
the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act, the High
Seas Fishing Compliance Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the
Endangered Species Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the
Paperwork Reduction Act, and the Coastal Zone Management Act. NMFS does
not believe that the proposed regulations duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with any relevant regulations, Federal or otherwise.
Under 5 U.S.C. 603(c), agencies are required to describe any
alternatives to the proposed rule that accomplish the stated objectives
and which minimize any significant economic impacts. These impacts are
discussed below and in the draft Environmental Assessment for the
proposed action. Additionally, the RFA (5 U.S.C. 603(c)(1)-(4)) lists
four general categories of significant alternatives that would assist
an agency in the development of significant alternatives: (1)
Establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or
timetables that take into account the resources available to small
entities; (2) clarification, consolidation, or simplification of
compliance and reporting requirements under the rule for such small
entities; (3) use of performance rather than design standards; and (4)
exemptions from coverage of the rule for small entities.
In order to meet the objectives of this proposed rule, consistent
with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS cannot exempt small entities or
change the reporting requirements only for small entities because all
the entities affected are considered small entities. Thus, there are no
alternatives discussed that fall under the first and fourth categories
described above. NMFS does not know of any performance or design
standards that would satisfy the aforementioned objectives of this
rulemaking while, concurrently, complying with the Magnuson-Stevens
Act. Thus, there are no alternatives considered under the third
category. All of the permit alternatives being considered, except for
the no-action alternative, could result in additional reporting
requirements (category two above) due to the issuance of new permits if
new permit holders are selected for reporting. These are standard
reporting requirements required of all HMS commercial permit holders.
Thus, there are no alternatives discussed that fall under the second
category described above. This proposed action would improve
information collection by allowing NMFS to collect important fishery
dependent data, if necessary, that could be used for quota monitoring
and stock assessments.
In this rulemaking, NMFS considered two different categories of
issues to address swordfish management measures where each issue had
its own range of alternatives and sub-alternatives that would meet the
objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the 2006 Consolidated HMS
FMP. The first category of alternatives (Alternatives 1.1-1.3 and sub-
alternatives) addresses swordfish permitting alternatives. The second
category of alternatives (Alternatives 2.1-2.3 and sub-alternatives)
addresses swordfish retention limits. The expected economic impacts
these alternatives and sub-alternatives may have on small entities are
summarized below. The full IRFA and all its analyses can be found in
draft Amendment 8. In total, NMFS analyzed 15 different alternatives
and sub-alternatives, and provided rationales for identifying the
preferred alternatives. The seven permit alternatives range from
maintaining the status quo for U.S. North Atlantic swordfish fisheries
to creating a new commercial swordfish handgear permit and modifying
the HMS Charter/Headboat permit to allow fishing for and sales of
swordfish under specific limitations. NMFS analyzed eight alternatives
that would allow NMFS to implement swordfish retention limits
applicable to the new permit in a range from zero-to-six fish. Seven of
these alternatives would allow NMFS to modify daily trip limits using
in-season
[[Page 12281]]
adjustment procedures similar to those codified for bluefin tuna at
Sec. 635.27(a)(8). NMFS assessed the impacts of the retention limit
alternatives on both a fishery-wide basis and utilizing an approach
which could be tailored on a regional basis.
Alternative 1.1, the no action alternative, maintains the existing
swordfish limited access permit program and would not establish a new
swordfish permit. Under Alternative 1.1, NMFS does not anticipate any
substantive change in economic impacts as the U.S. swordfish fishery is
already operating under the current regulations. Entry into the
commercial swordfish fishery would remain difficult due to high limited
access permit costs and the current scarcity of available permits. In
terms of available and unutilized swordfish quota, this alternative
could contribute to a loss of potential income for fishermen who would
like to fish commercially for swordfish, but are not able to obtain
limited access permits. Under ATCA (16 U.S.C. 971 et. seq.) and the
Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS is required to provide U.S. fishing vessels
with a reasonable opportunity to harvest the ICCAT-recommended quota.
Although there is sufficient quota to allow U.S. fishermen to catch
more swordfish and remain within the ICCAT-recommended quota, current
difficulties associated with obtaining a limited access permit may be a
constraining factor. For this reason, the ``no action'' alternative is
not preferred at this time.
Alternative 1.2, a preferred alternative, would establish a new
open-access commercial swordfish permit and modify existing open access
HMS permits to allow for the commercial retention of swordfish using
handgears. NMFS anticipates positive economic impacts for some U.S.
fishermen under alternative 1.2. It would allow small-scale U.S.
fishermen to use handgear (rod and reel, handline, harpoon, bandit
gear, and green-stick), to fish for and commercially sell a limited
amount of swordfish (zero to six fish per vessel per trip) to permitted
swordfish dealers. This alternative would reduce economic barriers to
the commercial swordfish fishery, provide more opportunities to fish
commercially for swordfish, and potentially provide economic benefits
to some fishermen. For example, if a new entrant landed 10 swordfish
per year under this alternative, they could realize an increase in
annual gross revenues of approximately $4,329.60. One trip landing six
swordfish could yield $2,598 in gross revenues.
NMFS received comments from some current swordfish limited access
permit holders during public meetings to discuss the 2009 ANPR (74 FR
26174, June 1, 2009) expressing concern that establishing a new
swordfish permit could reduce ex-vessel swordfish prices and the value
of existing limited access swordfish permits. It is not possible to
precisely predict the number of new applicants for open access
commercial swordfish permits, but NMFS expects that some current
recreational fishermen with HMS Angling permits will remain
recreational, rather than shift to commercial fishing. There are
numerous commercial fishing vessel safety requirements and management
regulations to comply with when operating a commercial fishing business
that may discourage some recreational fishermen from obtaining a
commercial permit. Under the proposed regulations, similar to the
regulations that apply to the Atlantic tunas General category permit,
fishermen issued a new Swordfish General Commercial permit would not be
able to obtain an HMS Angling category permit. Therefore, a
recreational fisherman who obtains a Swordfish General Commercial
permit would forfeit the ability to fish for Atlantic billfishes,
unless they are fishing in a registered HMS tournament, because fishing
for these species is permissible only when issued an HMS Angling or
Charter/Headboat permit. Additionally, the ability to fish
recreationally for Atlantic tunas and sharks would be forfeited unless
they are fishing in a registered HMS tournament or hold appropriate
commercial tuna and/or shark permits. Negative impacts on current
swordfish limited access permit holders could be mitigated by
establishing lower retention limits for the new open access permit than
the limits that currently exist for limited access permits. NMFS
prefers Alternative 1.2 at this time, because it would increase access
to the commercial swordfish fishery, would have positive socio-economic
impacts for fishermen who are currently unable to obtain a swordfish
limited access permit, and would have neutral to minor ecological
impacts. Additionally, this alternative would provide increased
opportunities to more fully utilize the ICCAT-recommended domestic
North Atlantic swordfish quota allocation and thus could have long-term
benefits to all swordfish fisherman by improving the United States'
position with regard to maintaining its quota share at ICCAT.
Sub-alternative 1.2.1 would modify the existing open-access
Atlantic tunas General category permit to allow for the commercial
retention of swordfish using handgears (rod and reel, handline,
harpoon, bandit gear, and green-stick) and rename the modified permit
as, potentially, the Atlantic tunas and swordfish General category
permit. It would result in many of the same socio-economic impacts as
Alternative 1.2. In addition, sub-alternative 1.2.1 would minimize the
costs associated with obtaining the new swordfish permit for persons
that have already been issued the Atlantic Tunas General category
permit because they would only need to obtain one permit rather than
two.
Sub-alternative 1.2.2 would modify the existing open-access
Atlantic tunas Harpoon category permit to allow for the commercial
retention of swordfish using harpoon gear. This alternative would
result in many of the same impacts as Alternative 1.2. Additionally, it
would minimize the costs associated with obtaining the new permit for
persons that have already been issued the Atlantic Tunas Harpoon
category permit because they would only need to obtain one permit
rather than two. Specifically, it would provide economic benefits to
current Atlantic tunas Harpoon category permit holders that want to
both harpoon swordfish and also fish for tunas under Atlantic tunas
Harpoon category regulations.
Sub-alternative 1.2.3, a preferred alternative, would allow HMS
Charter/Headboat permit holders to fish under open access swordfish
commercial regulations using rod and reel and handlines when fishing
commercially (i.e., not on a for-hire trip with paying passengers). It
would result in many of the same impacts as Alternative 1.2 and provide
economic benefits to CHB permit holders when fishing commercially
(i.e., not on a for-hire trip). It could also streamline permit
issuance because CHB vessels would not need to obtain another permit.
Sub-alternative 1.2.4, a preferred alternative, would create a
separate open access commercial swordfish permit to allow landings
using handgear. This alternative would have similar impacts as
Alternative 1.2, above. However, it would increase the costs associated
with obtaining the permit for persons that have already been issued an
Atlantic Tunas General or Harpoon category permit. This alternative
would not streamline permit issuance for persons that want to
commercially fish for both tunas and swordfish, because they would need
to obtain two different permits to conduct these activities. NMFS
prefers sub-alternative 1.2.4 at this time, because it would increase
access to the commercial swordfish fishery, would have positive socio-
economic impacts for fishermen who are currently unable
[[Page 12282]]
to obtain a swordfish limited access permit, and would have neutral to
minor ecological impacts. Additionally, sub-alternative 1.2.4 would
better enable NMFS to differentiate between tuna and swordfish handgear
fishermen in order to better monitor and assess these fisheries.
Alternative 1.3 would allow for an unspecified number of new
swordfish limited access permits to be issued. Depending upon the
qualification criteria, this alternative could improve access to the
fishery and provide economic benefits to some fishermen that qualify
for the new limited access permit. However, it could also adversely
affect some fishermen who do not qualify for a limited access permit.
This alternative could limit any negative economic and social impacts
on current commercial swordfish limited access permit holders by
limiting the number of new swordfish permits issued. Selection of this
alternative may require, among other things, the establishment of
qualification criteria, control dates, application deadlines,
application procedures, and grievance/appeals procedures for persons
who have initially been determined as not eligible to qualify for a
limited access permit. These aspects could increase administrative
costs for NMFS and increase the reporting burden for the public to
demonstrate that they meet qualifying criteria.
Alternative 2.1 would establish a fishery-wide zero to six
swordfish retention limit range for the new and modified permits, and
codify a specific retention limit within that range. This alternative
could provide some fishermen with the ability to commercially land
swordfish, thereby resulting in positive economic benefits if the limit
were set above zero. Additionally, economic benefits are anticipated
for swordfish dealers and processors, fishing tackle manufacturers and
suppliers, bait suppliers, restaurants, marinas, and fuel providers.
NMFS anticipates a retention limit range of zero-to-six swordfish would
provide a seasonal, or secondary, fishery for most participants. This
alternative is not expected to facilitate a year-round fishery in most
areas, with the possible exception of south Florida, where swordfish
can be available year-round. There is a notable difference in the ex-
vessel revenue produced by a one swordfish/trip limit versus a six
swordfish/trip limit. A single swordfish is estimated to be worth
$432.96 ex-vessel, on average, whereas six swordfish would produce
$2,597.76 ex-vessel. For a vessel making 10 trips per year and
retaining the maximum allowable number of swordfish on each trip,
annual gross revenue derived from swordfish would range from $4,329.60
under a one-fish limit to $25,977.60 under a six-fish limit. Codifying
a single coast-wide swordfish retention limit would provide certainty
to both fishermen and law enforcement regarding the swordfish retention
limit for the new open access permit. However, this alternative would
not provide in-season adjustment authority to quickly modify the
swordfish retention limit regionally by using pre-established criteria
and thus would limit NMFS' management flexibility.
Alternative 2.2 would establish a coast-wide zero-to-six swordfish
retention limit range for the new and modified permits and codify a
specific retention limit within that range. In addition, it would
provide in-season adjustment authority for NMFS to modify the swordfish
retention limit within the range (zero to six) using in-season
adjustment procedures similar to those codified at Sec. 635.27 (a)(8).
This alternative would have the same social and economic impacts as
Alternative 2.1, but would provide less certainty to fishermen and law
enforcement regarding possible in-season changes to the swordfish
retention limit. Positive economic benefits could occur if the
retention limit was increased during the fishing season based upon
information indicating that sufficient quota was available, or upon
other pre-established criteria.
Alternative 2.3, a preferred alternative, would establish swordfish
management regions and a zero-to-six swordfish retention limit range
within each region for the new and modified permits and codify specific
regional limits within that range with authority to adjust the regional
limits in-season based on pre-established criteria. This alternative
would have similar social and economic impacts as Alternative 2.1. If a
regional retention limit is set at zero, NMFS expects no change in
socio-economic impacts. If a regional limit is set at any level above
zero, this alternative could provide economic benefits to some
commercial handgear fishermen if they were previously inactive and
obtain the new and modified permits and begin fishing. NMFS prefers
Alternative 2.3 at this time, because it would allow swordfish
retention limits to be quickly modified using in-season adjustment
authority and provide additional flexibility to manage swordfish
regionally.
Sub-Alternative 2.3.1 would establish regions based upon existing
major U.S. domestic fishing areas as reported to ICCAT (Northeast
Distant area, Northeast Coastal area, Mid-Atlantic Bight area, South
Atlantic Bight area, Florida East Coast area, Gulf of Mexico area,
Caribbean area, and the Sargasso Sea area). Socio-economic impacts
would be the same as Alternative 2.3 above. If this sub-alternative
were implemented, NMFS is considering an initial swordfish retention
limit of one swordfish per vessel per trip for the Florida East Coast
area, two swordfish per vessel per trip for the Caribbean area, and a
limit of three swordfish per vessel per trip for the Northwest Atlantic
and Gulf of Mexico regions. For vessels making 10 trips per year and
retaining the maximum allowable limit on each trip, annual gross
revenue derived from swordfish would range from $4,329.60 under a one-
fish limit, $8,659.20 under a two-fish limit, and $12,988.80 under a
three-fish limit.
Sub-Alternative 2.3.2, a preferred alternative, would establish
larger regions than sub-alternative 2.3.1, with the addition of a
separate Florida Swordfish Management Area (Northwest Atlantic, Gulf of
Mexico, Caribbean, and a Florida Swordfish Management Area as defined
below). Under this sub-alternative, swordfish management measures could
still be tailored geographically to the biological factors affecting a
particular region; however, the regions would be larger (with the
possible exception of the separate Florida Swordfish Management Area).
Under this alternative, NMFS would propose an initial swordfish
retention limit of one swordfish per vessel per trip for the Florida
Swordfish Management Area, two swordfish per vessel per trip for the
Caribbean area, and a limit of three swordfish per vessel per trip for
the Northwest Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico regions. These retention
limits fall within the range discussed under Alternative 2.3 above, and
could be modified in the future using in-season adjustment procedures
similar to those codified at Sec. 635.27(a)(8). For a vessel making 10
trips per year and retaining the maximum allowable limit on each trip,
annual gross revenue derived from swordfish would range from $4,329.60
under a one-fish limit, $8,659.20 under a two-fish limit, and
$12,988.80 under a three-fish limit.
To estimate the number of entities affected by a special Florida
Swordfish Management Area, NMFS first determined the number of Atlantic
tunas General category permits issued. In 2011, there were 4,084
Atlantic tunas General category permits issued. This number was used as
a proxy to estimate the total number of new Swordfish General
Commercial permits that could be issued fishery-wide. In 2011, 44
[[Page 12283]]
percent of all Directed and Incidental swordfish limited access permits
were issued in Florida. Additionally, in 2011, 63 percent of all
swordfish Handgear limited access permits were issued in Florida.
Taking the average of these two numbers provided an estimate of 53.5
percent, which is used as an estimate of the percent of new swordfish
permits that could be issued in Florida. Using an estimated rate of
53.5 percent of 4,084 potential new permits provides an estimate of
2,185 potential new commercial swordfish handgear permits that could be
issued in Florida. Assuming that two-thirds of these permits are issued
to vessels on the east coast of Florida, potentially 1,455 new open-
access swordfish permits could be issued on the east coast of Florida
(0.666 * 2,185 = 1,455).
Sub-Alternative 2.3.2.1, a preferred alternative, would establish a
Florida Swordfish Management Area that includes the East Florida Coast
pelagic longline closed area through the northwestern boundary of
Monroe County, FL, in the Gulf of Mexico (see Sec. 635.2 for bounding
coordinates). Approximately 1,455 new permit holders could derive up to
$4,329.60 annually under a one-fish limit, assuming they each took 10
trips per year and landed one fish on each trip. NMFS prefers sub-
alternative 2.3.2.1 at this time, because it provides flexibility to
manage the Florida commercial handgear swordfish fishery using
boundaries that are already established and which correspond to an area
that provides important habitat for many HMS and protected species,
including swordfish, marlin, sailfish, sea turtles, and marine mammals.
This area is also very accessible for large numbers of commercial and
recreational fishing vessels.
Sub-Alternative 2.3.2.2 would establish a Florida Swordfish
Management Area that extends from the Georgia/Florida border to Key
West, FL. This area is larger than, and includes, the East Florida
Coast pelagic longline closed area. Therefore, the economic impacts
described for sub-alternative 2.3.2.1 would also occur within this
area. Additionally, because this special management area would be
larger than sub-alternative 2.3.2.1, slightly more than 1,455 vessels
could potentially be affected by a one-fish retention limit.
Sub-Alternative 2.3.2.3 would establish a Florida Swordfish
Management Area that includes the Florida counties of St. Lucie,
Martin, Palm Beach, Broward, Dade, and Monroe. This area is smaller
than the previous two sub-alternatives, but specifically includes
oceanic areas with concentrations of swordfish that are readily
accessible to many anglers. Because this special management area would
be smaller than the areas in sub-alternative 2.3.2.1, slightly fewer
than 1,455 vessels would potentially be affected by the one-swordfish
per vessel per trip retention limit.
This proposed rule contains a collection-of-information requirement
subject to review and approval by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This requirement has
been submitted to OMB for approval. This collection-of-information
requirement would modify an existing (0648-0327) collection subject to
review and approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA).
Public reporting burden for a new Swordfish General Commercial permit
is estimated to average 30 minutes per application. This burden
estimate includes the time for reviewing instructions, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, submitting the permit application, and
completing and reviewing the collection information. On an annual
basis, the new Swordfish General Commercial permit would increase the
existing collection by 4,084 respondents/responses, 2,042 hours, and
costs by $81,706. In total, 0648-0327 would include 41,261 responses/
respondents, 11,843 hours, and cost $738,917 per year. Public comment
is sought regarding: Whether this proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of NMFS,
including whether the information shall have practical utility; the
accuracy of the burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize
the burden of the collection of information, including through the use
of automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology. Send comments on these or any other aspects of the
collection of information to Michael Clark, the Highly Migratory
Species Management Division, at the ADDRESSES above, and by email to
[email protected] or fax to (202) 395-7285. Notwithstanding
any other provision of the law, no person is required to respond to,
and no person shall be subject to penalty for failure to comply with, a
collection of information subject to the requirements of the PRA,
unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB
control number.
List of Subjects
50 CFR Part 600
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing vessels, Foreign relations,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Statistics.
50 CFR Part 635
Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing vessels, Penalties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Retention limits.
Dated: February 14, 2013.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, performing the functions and
duties of the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR parts 600 and 635
are proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 600--MAGNUSON-STEVENS ACT PROVISIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 600 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 561 and 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 600.725, paragraph (v), under the heading ``IX. Secretary
of Commerce,'' entry 1, revise A to read as follows:
Sec. 600.725 General prohibitions.
* * * * *
(v) * * *
IX--Secretary of Commerce
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
A. Swordfish handgear fishery............. A. Rod and reel, harpoon,
handline, bandit gear, buoy
gear, green-stick gear.
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
PART 635--ATLANTIC HIGHLY MIGRATORY SPECIES
0
3. The authority citation for part 635 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
0
4. In Sec. 635.2, revise the definition for ``Division Chief'' and add
the definition for ``Florida Swordfish Management Area'' in
alphabetical order to read as follows:
[[Page 12284]]
Sec. 635.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Division Chief means the Chief, Highly Migratory Species Management
Division, NMFS (F/SF1), 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD,
20910; (301) 427-8503.
* * * * *
Florida Swordfish Management Area means the Atlantic Ocean area
seaward of the inner boundary of the U.S. EEZ from a point intersecting
the inner boundary of the U.S. EEZ at 31[deg]00' N. lat. near Jekyll
Island, GA, and proceeding due east to connect by straight lines the
following coordinates in the order stated: 31[deg]00' N. lat.,
78[deg]00' W. long.; 28[deg]17'10'' N. lat., 79[deg]11'24'' W. long.;
then proceeding along the outer boundary of the EEZ to the intersection
of the EEZ with 24[deg]00' N. lat.; then proceeding due west to
24[deg]00' N. lat., 82[deg]0' W. long, then proceeding due north to
intersect the inner boundary of the U.S. EEZ at 82[deg] 0' W. long.
near Key West, FL. This management area also includes the area west of
Monroe County, Florida, from 82[deg] 0' W. long., 25[deg]48' N. lat.;
then proceeding clockwise east along the inner boundary of the U.S. EEZ
to a point located at 82[deg]0' W. long., 24[deg]46' N. lat.; and then
proceeding due north to 82[deg]0' W. long., 25[deg]48' N. lat. For
purposes of Sec. 635.24(b)(4)(ii), the area in which the retention
limit applies extends from the inner boundary of the U.S. EEZ to the
shore between 31[deg]00' N. lat. (southward of Jekyll Island, GA)
through the Florida Keys and northward along the Florida west coast to
25[deg]48' N. lat. (southward of the northwest boundary of Monroe
County, FL near Chokoloskee, FL).
* * * * *
0
5. In Sec. 635.4, paragraphs (b)(1), (c)(1), (c)(2), revise
introductory paragraph (f), (f)(1), (f)(2), (f)(4), introductory
paragraph (h)(1), (j)(3), and (m)(2), and add paragraphs (c)(4) and
(f)(5) to read as follows:
Sec. 635.4 Permits and fees.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) The owner of a charter boat or headboat used to fish for, take,
retain, or possess any Atlantic HMS must obtain an HMS Charter/Headboat
permit. A vessel issued an HMS Charter/Headboat permit for a fishing
year shall not be issued an HMS Angling permit, a Swordfish General
Commercial permit, or an Atlantic Tunas permit in any category for that
same fishing year, regardless of a change in the vessel's ownership.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) The owner of any vessel used to fish recreationally for
Atlantic HMS or on which Atlantic HMS are retained or possessed
recreationally, must obtain an HMS Angling permit, except as provided
in Sec. 635.4(c)(2). Atlantic HMS caught, retained, possessed, or
landed by persons on board vessels with an HMS Angling permit may not
be sold or transferred to any person for a commercial purpose. A vessel
issued an HMS Angling permit for a fishing year shall not be issued an
HMS Charter/Headboat permit, a Swordfish General Commercial permit, or
an Atlantic Tunas permit in any category for that same fishing year,
regardless of a change in the vessel's ownership.
(2) A vessel with a valid Atlantic Tunas General category permit
issued under paragraph (d) of this section or with a valid Swordfish
General Commercial permit issued under paragraph (f) of this section,
may fish in a recreational HMS fishing tournament if the vessel has
registered for, paid an entry fee to, and is fishing under the rules of
a tournament that has registered with NMFS' HMS Management Division as
required under Sec. 635.5(d). When a vessel issued a valid Atlantic
Tunas General category permit or a valid Swordfish General Commercial
permit is fishing in such a tournament, such vessel must comply with
HMS Angling category regulations, except as provided in paragraphs
(c)(3) and (c)(4) of this section.
* * * * *
(4) A vessel issued a Swordfish General Commercial permit fishing
in a tournament, as authorized under Sec. 635.4(c)(2), shall comply
with Swordfish General Commercial permit regulations when fishing for,
retaining, possessing, or landing Atlantic swordfish.
* * * * *
(f) Swordfish vessel permits. --(1) Except as specified in
paragraphs (n) and (o) of this section, the owner of a vessel of the
United States used to fish for or take swordfish commercially from the
management unit, or on which swordfish from the management unit are
retained, possessed with an intention to sell, or sold must obtain, an
HMS Charter/Headboat permit issued under paragraph (b) of this section,
or one of the following swordfish permits: A swordfish directed limited
access permit, swordfish incidental limited access permit, swordfish
handgear limited access permit, or Swordfish General Commercial permit.
These permits cannot be held in combination with each other on the same
vessel, except that an HMS Charter/Headboat permit may be held in
combination with a swordfish handgear limited access permit on the same
vessel. It is a rebuttable presumption that the owner or operator of a
vessel on which swordfish are possessed in excess of the recreational
retention limits intends to sell the swordfish.
(2) The only valid commercial Federal vessel permits for swordfish
are the HMS Charter/Headboat permit issued under paragraph (b) of this
section (and only when on a non for-hire trip), the Swordfish General
Commercial permit issued under paragraph (f), a swordfish limited
access permit issued consistent with paragraphs (l) and (m), or permits
issued under paragraphs (n) and (o).
* * * * *
(4) A directed or incidental limited access permit for swordfish is
valid only when the vessel has on board a valid limited access permit
for shark and a valid Atlantic Tunas Longline category permit issued
for such vessel.
(5) A Swordfish General Commercial permit may not be held on a
vessel in conjunction with an HMS Charter/Headboat permit issued under
paragraph (b) of this section, an HMS Angling category permit issued
under paragraph (c), a swordfish limited access permit issued
consistent with paragraphs (l) and (m), an Incidental HMS Squid Trawl
permit issued under paragraph (n), or an HMS Commercial Caribbean Small
Boat permit issued under paragraph (o). Except for the 2013 fishing
year, a vessel issued a Swordfish General Commercial open access permit
for a fishing year shall not be issued an HMS Angling permit or an HMS
Charter/Headboat permit for that same fishing year, regardless of a
change in the vessel's ownership. During the 2013 fishing year, vessel
owners applying for a Swordfish General Commercial permit must abandon
their HMS Angling or HMS Charter/Headboat permit if their vessel has
been issued either of these permits.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(1) Atlantic Tunas, HMS Angling, HMS Charter/Headboat, Swordfish
General Commercial, Incidental HMS Squid Trawl, and HMS Commercial
Caribbean Small Boat vessel permits.
* * * * *
(j) * * *
(3) A vessel owner issued an Atlantic tunas permit in the General,
Harpoon, or Trap category or an Atlantic HMS permit in the Angling or
Charter/Headboat category under paragraph (b), (c), or (d) of this
section may change the category of the vessel permit once within 10
calendar days of the date of
[[Page 12285]]
issuance of the permit. After 10 calendar days from the date of
issuance of the permit, the vessel owner may not change the permit
category until the following fishing season.
* * * * *
(m) * * *
(2) Shark and swordfish permits. The owner of a vessel of the
United States used to fish for or take sharks commercially from the
management unit, or on which sharks from the management unit are
retained, possessed with an intention to sell, or from which sharks
from the management unit are sold must obtain the applicable limited
access permit(s) issued pursuant to the requirements in paragraphs (e)
and (f) of this section, or an HMS Commercial Caribbean Small Boat
permit issued under paragraph (o) of this section. The owner of a
vessel of the United States used to fish for or take swordfish
commercially from the management unit, or on which swordfish from the
management unit are retained, possessed with an intention to sell, or
from which swordfish from the management unit are sold must obtain the
applicable limited access permit(s) issued pursuant to the requirements
in paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section, a Swordfish General
Commercial permit issued under paragraph (f) of this section, an
Incidental HMS Squid Trawl permit issued under paragraph (n) of this
section, an HMS Commercial Caribbean Small Boat permit issued under
paragraph (o) of this section, or an HMS Charter/Headboat permit issued
under paragraph (b) of this section which authorizes a Charter/Headboat
to fish commercially for swordfish on a non for-hire trip subject to
the retention limits atSec. 635.24(b)(4) . The commercial retention
and sale of swordfish for vessels issued an HMS Charter/Headboat permit
is permissable only when the vessel is on a non for-hire trip. Only
persons holding non-expired shark and swordfish limited access
permit(s) in the preceding year are eligible to renew those limited
access permit(s). Transferors may not renew limited access permits that
have been transferred according to the procedures in paragraph (l) of
this section.
* * * * *
0
6. In Sec. 635.21, revise paragraphs (e)(2)(i), (e)(2)(ii), (e)(4)(i),
(e)(4)(iv), and (g) and add paragraph (e)(4)(v) to read as follows:
Sec. 635.21 Gear operation and deployment restrictions.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) Only persons who have been issued a valid HMS Angling or valid
Charter/Headboat permit, or who have been issued a valid Atlantic Tunas
General category or Swordfish General Commercial permit and are
participating in a tournament as provided in 635.4 (c) of this part,
may possess a blue marlin, white marlin, or roundscale spearfish in, or
take a blue marlin, white marlin, or roundscale spearfish from, its
management unit. Blue marlin, white marlin, or roundscale spearfish may
only be harvested by rod and reel.
(ii) Only persons who have been issued a valid HMS Angling or valid
Charter/Headboat permit, or who have been issued a valid Atlantic Tunas
General category or Swordfish General Commercial permit and are
participating in a tournament as provided in Sec. 635.4(c) of this
part, may possess or take a sailfish shoreward of the outer boundary of
the Atlantic EEZ. Sailfish may only be harvested by rod and reel.
* * * * *
(4) * * *
(i) No person may possess north Atlantic swordfish taken from its
management unit by any gear other than handgear, green-stick, or
longline, except that such swordfish taken incidentally while fishing
with a squid trawl may be retained by a vessel issued a valid
Incidental HMS squid trawl permit, subject to restrictions specified in
Sec. 635.24(b)(2). No person may possess south Atlantic swordfish
taken from its management unit by any gear other than longline.
* * * * *
(iv) Except for persons aboard a vessel that has been issued a
directed, incidental, or handgear limited access swordfish permit, a
Swordfish General Commercial permit, an Incidental HMS squid trawl
permit, or an HMS Commercial Caribbean Small Boat permit under Sec.
635.4, no person may fish for North Atlantic swordfish with, or possess
a North Atlantic swordfish taken by, any gear other than handline or
rod and reel.
(v) A person aboard a vessel issued or required to be issued a
valid Swordfish General Commercial permit may only possess North
Atlantic swordfish taken from its management unit by rod and reel,
handline, bandit gear, green-stick, or harpoon gear.
* * * * *
(g) Green-stick gear. Green-stick gear may only be utilized when
fishing from vessels issued a valid Atlantic Tunas General, Swordfish
General Commercial, HMS Charter/Headboat, or Atlantic Tunas Longline
category permit. The gear must be attached to the vessel, actively
trolled with the mainline at or above the water's surface, and may not
be deployed with more than 10 hooks or gangions attached.
* * * * *
0
7. In Sec. 635.22, paragraphs (f), (f)(1) and (f)(2) are revised to
read as follows:
Sec. 635.22 Recreational retention limits.
* * * * *
(f) North Atlantic swordfish. The recreational retention limits for
North Atlantic swordfish apply to persons who fish in any manner,
except to persons aboard a vessel that has been issued an HMS Charter/
Headboat permit under Sec. 635.4(b) and only when on a non for-hire
trip, a directed, incidental or handgear limited access swordfish
permit under Sec. 635.4(e) and (f), a Swordfish General Commercial
permit under Sec. 635.4(f), an Incidental HMS Squid Trawl permit under
Sec. 635.4(n), or an HMS Commercial Caribbean Small boat permit under
Sec. 635.4(o).
(1) When on a for-hire trip as defined at Sec. 635.2, vessels
issued an HMS Charter/Headboat permit under Sec. 635.4(b), that are
charter boats as defined under Sec. 600.10 of this chapter, may
retain, possess, or land no more than one North Atlantic swordfish per
paying passenger and up to six North Atlantic swordfish per vessel per
trip. When such vessels are on a non for-hire trip, they must comply
with the commercial retention limits for swordfish specified at Sec.
635.24(b)(4).
(2) When on a for-hire trip as defined at Sec. 635.2, vessels
issued an HMS Charter/Headboat permit under Sec. 635.4(b), that are
headboats as defined under Sec. 600.10 of this chapter, may retain,
possess, or land no more than one North Atlantic swordfish per paying
passenger and up to 15 North Atlantic swordfish per vessel per trip.
When such vessels are on a non for-hire trip, they may land no more
than the commercial retention limits for swordfish specified at Sec.
635.24(b)(4).
* * * * *
0
8. In Sec. 635.24, paragraph (b)(4) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 635.24 Commercial retention limits for sharks, swordfish, and
BAYS tunas.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(4) Persons aboard a vessel that has been issued a Swordfish
General Commercial permit or an HMS Charter/Headboat permit (and only
when on a non for-hire trip) are subject to the regional swordfish
retention limits specified at paragraph (b)(4)(iii), which may be
adjusted during the fishing year
[[Page 12286]]
based upon the inseason regional retention limit adjustment criteria
identified in paragraph (b)(4)(iv) below.
(i) Regions. Persons aboard a vessel that has been issued a
Swordfish General Commercial permit or an HMS Charter/Headboat permit
(and only when on a non for-hire trip) may fish for or retain swordfish
in the management unit. Regional retention limits for swordfish apply
in four regions. For purposes of this section, these regions are: The
Florida Swordfish Management Area as defined in Sec. 635.2; the
Northwest Atlantic region (federal waters along the entire Atlantic
coast of the United States north of 28[deg]17' N. latitude, but not
inclusive of any water located in the Florida Swordfish Management Area
as defined in Sec. 635.2); the Gulf of Mexico region (any water
located in the EEZ in the entire Gulf of Mexico west of 82[deg] W.
longitude, but not inclusive of any water located in the Florida
Swordfish Management Area as defined in Sec. 635.2); and the Caribbean
region (the U.S. territorial waters within the Caribbean as defined in
Sec. 622.2 of this chapter).
(ii) Possession, retention, and landing restrictions. Vessels that
have been issued a Swordfish General Commercial permit or an HMS
Charter/Headboat permit (and only when on a non for-hire trip), as a
condition of these permits, may not possess, retain, or land any more
swordfish than is specified for the region in which the vessel is
located.
(iii) Regional retention limits. The swordfish regional retention
limits for each region will range between zero to six swordfish per
vessel per trip. At the start of each fishing year, the default
regional retention limits will apply. During the fishing year, NMFS may
adjust the default retention limits per the inseason regional retention
limit adjustment criteria listed in Sec. 635.24(b)(4)(iv), if
necessary. The default retention limits for the regions set forth under
paragraph (b)(4)(i) are:
(A) one swordfish per vessel per trip for the Florida Swordfish
Management Area.
(B) two swordfish per vessel per trip for the Caribbean region.
(C) three swordfish per vessel per trip for the Northwest Atlantic
region.
(D) three swordfish per vessel per trip for the Gulf of Mexico
region.
(iv) Inseason regional retention limit adjustment criteria. NMFS
will file with the Office of the Federal Register for publication
notification of any inseason adjustments to the regional retention
limits. Before making any inseason adjustments to regional retention
limits, NMFS will consider the following criteria and other relevant
factors:
(A) The usefulness of information obtained from biological sampling
and monitoring of the North Atlantic swordfish stock;
(B) The estimated ability of vessels participating in the fishery
to land the amount of swordfish quota available before the end of the
fishing year;
(C) The estimated amounts by which quotas for other categories of
the fishery might be exceeded;
(D) Effects of the adjustment on accomplishing the objectives of
the fishery management plan and its amendments;
(E) Variations in seasonal distribution, abundance, or migration
patterns of swordfish;
(F) Effects of catch rates in one region precluding vessels in
another region from having a reasonable opportunity to harvest a
portion of the overall swordfish quota; and
(G) Review of dealer reports, landing trends, and the availability
of swordfish on the fishing grounds.
* * * * *
0
9. In Sec. 635.27, paragraphs (c)(1)(i)(A) and (c)(1)(i)(B) are
revised to read as follows:
Sec. 635.27 Quotas.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) A swordfish from the North Atlantic stock caught prior to the
directed fishery closure by a vessel for which a directed swordfish
limited access permit, a swordfish handgear limited access permit, a
HMS Commercial Caribbean Small Boat permit, a Swordfish General
Commercial open access permit, or an HMS Charter/Headboat permit (and
only when on a non for-hire trip) has been issued or is required to
have been issued is counted against the directed fishery quota. The
total baseline annual fishery quota, before any adjustments, is 2,937.6
mt dw for each fishing year. Consistent with applicable ICCAT
recommendations, a portion of the total baseline annual fishery quota
may be used for transfers to another ICCAT contracting party. The
annual directed category quota is calculated by adjusting for over- or
underharvests, dead discards, any applicable transfers, the incidental
category quota, the reserve quota and other adjustments as needed, and
is subdivided into two equal semi-annual periods: One for January 1
through June 30, and the other for July 1 through December 31.
(B) A swordfish from the North Atlantic swordfish stock landed by a
vessel for which an incidental swordfish limited access permit, an
incidental HMS Squid Trawl permit, an HMS Angling permit, or an HMS
Charter/Headboat permit (and only when on a for-hire trip) has been
issued, or a swordfish from the North Atlantic stock caught after the
effective date of a closure of the directed fishery from a vessel for
which a swordfish directed limited access permit, a swordfish handgear
limited access permit, a HMS Commercial Caribbean Small Boat permit, a
Swordfish General Commercial open access permit, or an HMS Charter/
Headboat permit (when on a non for-hire trip) has been issued, is
counted against the incidental category quota. The annual incidental
category quota is 300 mt dw for each fishing year.
* * * * *
0
10. In Sec. 635.28, paragraphs (c)(1)(i)(C) and (c)(1)(i)(D) are added
to read as follows:
Sec. 635.28 Closures.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) No swordfish may be possessed, landed, or sold by vessels
issued a Swordfish General Commercial open access permit.
(D) No swordfish may be sold by vessels issued an HMS Charter/
Headboat permit.
* * * * *
0
11. In Sec. 635.34, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 635.34 Adjustment of management measures.
(a) NMFS may adjust the catch limits for BFT, as specified in Sec.
635.23; the quotas for BFT, shark and swordfish, as specified in Sec.
635.27; the regional retention limits for Swordfish General Commercial
permit holders, as specified at Sec. 635.23; the marlin landing limit,
as specified in Sec. 635.27(d); and the minimum sizes for Atlantic
blue marlin, white marlin, and roundscale spearfish as specified in
Sec. 635.20.
* * * * *
0
12. In Sec. 635.71, paragraphs (e)(8) and (e)(15) are revised, and
paragraph (e)(18) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 635.71 Prohibitions.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(8) Fish for North Atlantic swordfish from, possess North Atlantic
swordfish on board, or land North Atlantic swordfish from a vessel
using or having on board gear other than longline, green-stick gear, or
handgear, except as specified at Sec. 635.21(e)(4)(i).
* * * * *
[[Page 12287]]
(15) As the owner of a vessel permitted, or required to be
permitted, in the Atlantic HMS Angling or the Atlantic HMS Charter/
Headboat category (and only when on a for-hire trip), fail to report a
North Atlantic swordfish, as specified in Sec. 635.5(c)(2) or (c)(3).
* * * * *
(18) As the owner of a vessel permitted, or required to be
permitted, in the Swordfish General Commercial permit category, possess
North Atlantic swordfish taken from its management unit by any gear
other than rod and reel, handline, bandit gear, green-stick, or harpoon
gear.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-03990 Filed 2-21-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P