[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 249 (Thursday, December 28, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67063-67090]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-31252]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 229

[Docket No. 950605147-5288-03; I.D. 112895A]
RIN 0648-AH33


Final List of Fisheries for 1996

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, 
as amended (MMPA), NMFS publishes its MMPA final List of Fisheries 
(LOF) for 1996. The LOF classifies fisheries as either Category I, II, 
or III, based on their 

[[Page 67064]]
level of incidental mortalities and serious injuries of marine mammals. 
After February 29, 1996, the owner or authorized representative of a 
fishing vessel or nonvessel fishing gear (hereinafter vessel owner) 
which participates in a Category I or II fishery must register for and 
obtain a valid Authorization Certificate.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 1, 1996.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the Environmental Assessment (EA) prepared for the 
section 118 implementing regulations may be obtained by writing to 
Chief, Marine Mammal Division, Office of Protected Resources, National 
Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 
20910. Information and registration material for the region in which a 
fishery occurs, and reporting forms, may be obtained from the following 
addresses: NMFS, Northeast Region, One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 
01930-2298, Attn: Sandra Arvilla; NMFS, Southeast Region, 9721 
Executive Center Drive North, St Petersburg, FL 33702; NMFS, MMAP, 
Protected Species Management Division, 501 W. Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, 
Long Beach, CA 90802-4213; NMFS, Northwest Region, 7600 Sand Point Way 
NE, Seattle, WA 98115 Attn: Permits office; NMFS-PMRD, P.O. Box 22668, 
709 West 9th Street, Juneau, AK 99082.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robyn Angliss, Office of Protected 
Resources, 301-713-2322; Douglas Beach, Northeast Region, 508-281-9254; 
Charles Oravetz, Southeast Region, 813-570-5301; James Lecky, Southwest 
Region, 310-980-4015; Brent Norberg, Northwest Region, 206-526-6140; 
Steven Zimmerman, Alaska Region, 907-586-7235.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Publication of the LOF, which places all 
U.S. commercial fisheries into three categories based on their levels 
of incidental mortality and serious injury of marine mammals, is 
required by section 118 of the MMPA. The following provides the history 
of this final 1996 LOF, clarification of the process used to classify 
fisheries, and a description of difference between the LOF published 
under section 114 of the MMPA and this final 1996 LOF.

History of the Final List of Fisheries for 1996

    A proposed LOF for 1996 was published on June 16, 1995 (60 FR 
31666) with proposed regulations implementing section 118. An EA was 
prepared concurrently with the development of the proposed regulations 
and the LOF and was made available when the proposed regulations were 
published. The public comment period for the proposed regulations ended 
on July 31, 1995; the public comment period for the proposed LOF ended 
September 14, 1995.
    The process used to develop the proposed and final rule 
implementing section 118 included many opportunities for public 
involvement, such as working sessions, public hearings, written 
comments, press releases, and a regulatory alert. Additional details on 
these activities are found in the preamble to the final regulations 
implementing section 118, published on August 30, 1995 (60 FR 45086).
    During July 1995, NMFS held 10 public hearings at various locations 
throughout the country to receive comments on the proposed implementing 
regulations and proposed LOF. A total of 86 individuals attended these 
hearings, 28 of whom submitted oral comments on the proposed rule, LOF 
or both. NMFS also received 23 written letters of comment specifically 
on the LOF. Comments were received from fishers, fishing industry 
groups, environmental groups, animal rights groups, state departments 
of fisheries, other executive branch departments, and members of the 
general public.
    This final LOF responds only to those public comments addressing 
the proposed LOF. Comments addressing the proposed implementing 
regulations for section 118 were included in the preamble to the 
section 118 final implementing regulations.

Definitions of Category I, II, and III Fisheries

    The regulations implementing section 118 of the MMPA introduced a 
new three category fishery classification scheme (50 CFR part 229) 
based on a two-tiered, stock-specific approach that first addresses the 
total impact of all fisheries on each marine mammal stock and then 
addresses the impact of individual fisheries on each stock. This 
approach is based on the rate, in numbers of animals per year, of 
serious injuries and mortalities due to commercial fishing relative to 
a stock's potential biological removal (PBR) level.
    Tier 1: If the total annual mortality and serious injury across all 
fisheries that interact with a stock is less than or equal to 10 
percent of the PBR of such a stock, then all fisheries interacting with 
this stock are placed in Category III. Otherwise, these fisheries are 
subject to the next tier to determine their classification.
    Tier 2--Category I: Annual mortality and serious injury of a stock 
in a given fishery is greater than or equal to 50 percent of the PBR 
level.
    Tier 2--Category II: Annual mortality and serious injury in a given 
fishery is greater than 1 percent but less than 50 percent of the PBR 
level.
    Tier 2--Category III: Annual mortality and serious injury in a 
given fishery is less than or equal to 1 percent of the PBR level.
    Tier 1, therefore, considers the cumulative fishery mortality and 
serious injury for a particular stock, while Tier 2 considers fishery-
specific mortality for a particular stock. Additional details regarding 
how threshold percentages between the categories were determined are 
provided in the final rule implementing section 118.

Differences Between the LOF Under Section 114 and the LOF Under Section 
118

    There are several key differences between the LOF required and 
prepared under expired section 114 and the new LOF required and 
prepared under section 118.
    Under section 114, fisheries were classified based on the number of 
incidental takes of marine mammals. As defined in 50 CFR 216.3, takes 
include harassment. Under section 118, fisheries are to be classified 
based on the number of serious injuries and mortalities that occur 
incidental to that fishery. Also, under section 118 intentional lethal 
mortalities and serious injuries of marine mammals are prohibited. 
Thus, incidental or intentional harassment, or intentional lethal takes 
are no longer used to classify fisheries into a particular category.
    The fishery classification criteria under section 114 were 
dependent on the rate of all marine mammal takes per 20 days. The 
criteria are now based on the annual rate of incidental, species-
specific serious injury and mortality of marine mammals relative to a 
particular marine mammal stock's PBR level.
    Under section 114, fisheries were typically classified primarily 
based on observer data and logbook data, although analogy to fisheries 
with similar gear types could be made. Under the new regulations 
pursuant to section 118, observer data, logbook data, stranding data, 
fishers' reports, anecdotal reports, and analogy are used to classify 
fisheries.
    Both sections 114 and 118 require that the marine mammal species 
involved in interactions with each fishery be identified in the LOF. 
Under section 114, ``involved'' was interpreted broadly and included 
those marine mammals 

[[Page 67065]]
known or reported to be harassed by fisheries, and those marine mammals 
suspected to be injured, killed, or harassed incidental to commercial 
fishing operations. The list of marine mammal species identified in the 
final LOF for 1996 includes only those marine mammals that have been 
documented as having been injured or killed in observer programs, 
logbook reports, strandings data, or by fishers' reports or anecdotal 
reports. This list includes only those marine mammals that have been 
injured or killed incidental to commercial fisheries since 1989.

Registration Requirements for Vessels Participating in Category I 
and II Fisheries

    Vessel owners participating in Category I or II fisheries must 
register under the MMPA, as required by 50 CFR 229.4. Registration 
under the MMPA is conducted on a NMFS Region-specific basis. Thus, how 
registration materials are distributed and the cost of registration 
differ between Regions. Under 50 CFR 229.4, the granting and 
administration of Authorization certificates is to be integrated and 
coordinated with existing fishery license, registration, or permit 
systems and related programs, whenever possible. Alternative 
registration programs have been or are being implemented in the Alaska 
Region, Northwest Region, and Southeast Region. Special procedures and 
instructions for registration in these Regions appear below.
    If the granting and/or administration of authorizations has not 
been integrated with state licensing, registration, or permit systems, 
vessel owners may obtain registration forms from the NMFS Region in 
which their fishery operates. NMFS Regional Offices will endeavor to 
send these packets to known participants in Category I or II fisheries. 
The registration packet will typically include an MMAP registration 
form, a list of those fisheries in each region that require 
authorization in order to incidentally kill or injure marine mammals 
(Category I and II fisheries), and an explanation of the new management 
regime, including instructions on reporting requirements. The 
registration packet may also include an explanation of the changes in 
the fishery classification criteria, guidance on deterring marine 
mammals, and a reminder that intentional lethal takes of marine mammals 
are no longer permitted except under certain specific conditions.
    Vessel owners must submit the registration form and the $25 fee to 
the NMFS Regional Office in which their fishery operates. NMFS will 
send the vessel owner an Authorization Certificate, program decals, and 
reporting forms within 60 days of receiving the registration form and 
application fee.
    Procedures for registering in each NMFS region are outlined in the 
following section.

Region-Specific Registration Requirements for Category I and II 
Fisheries

    If the granting and administration of authorizations under 50 CFR 
229.4 is not integrated or coordinated with existing fishery licenses, 
registrations, or related programs, requests for registration forms and 
completed registration forms should be sent to the NMFS Regional 
Offices listed in this notice under ADDRESSES.

Alaska Region (AKR) MMAP Registration for 1996

    Vessel owners in Category I and II state and Federal fisheries, as 
well as all vessel owners with Alaska Department of Fish and Game 
commercial vessel licenses, will receive a registration packet. Fishers 
may not register with other regions for Alaska fisheries. If a fisher 
plans to participate in a Category I or II fishery and does not receive 
a registration packet, AKR should be contacted see ADDRESSES.

Northwest Region (NWR) MMAP Registration for 1996

    Oregon: Under an agreement developed between NMFS and the Oregon 
Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW), information collected for 
licensing purposes by the state of Oregon will be provided to NMFS in 
lieu of NMFS requiring a separate MMAP registration. Vessel owners in 
Oregon who apply for and obtain a Developmental Fisheries Permit to 
harvest and land swordfish using drift gillnet gear (CA/OR thresher 
shark/swordfish drift gillnet fishery; Category I) or a Developmental 
Fisheries Permit to harvest and land swordfish or blue shark using 
surface longline gear (OR swordfish/blue shark surface longline 
fishery; Category II) will automatically receive an Authorization for 
the incidental take of marine mammals at the time of permit issuance. 
Vessel owners will receive marine mammal injury and mortality reporting 
forms along with their fisheries permit and Authorization.
    The number of available Developmental Permits for these fisheries 
is limited and the information necessary to fulfill the requirements of 
the MMPA is already being collected by ODFW for Developmental Permit 
processing. NMFS will provide limited support to ODFW for the issuance 
of the Authorizations. Processing costs for ODFW are expected to be 
minimal, and hence, MMAP registration fees will not be charged to 
Developmental Fishery permitholders in 1996.
    Since the Authorization will be issued in combination with the 
Developmental Fisheries Permit, it is specific to the permit and will 
only authorize the incidental take of marine mammals during fishing 
activities conducted under this permit. Fishers who participate in the 
CA/OR thresher shark/swordfish drift gillnet fishery under permits to 
harvest and land in California must apply for and obtain a MMAP 
Authorization Certificate from the NMFS Southwest Region.
    ODFW will provide NMFS with the following information:
    (1) Name, address, and phone number of the Vessel Owner;
    (2) Name, address, and phone number of the Permit Holder;
    (3) Vessel name, U.S. Coast Guard documentation number, or state 
registration (OR) number (as applicable), and ODFW Developmental 
Fishery Permit number for the permitted vessel. NMFS will incorporate 
the information into a national data base of registered Category I and 
II fishers.
    Washington: Under an agreement developed between NMFS and the 
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), information 
collected by the State for licensing purposes will be provided to NMFS 
in lieu of NMFS requiring a separate MMAP registration. Vessel owners 
in Washington who apply for and obtain a Puget Sound Gillnet License to 
harvest and land salmon using drift gillnet gear (WA Puget Sound Region 
salmon drift gillnet fishery; includes all inland waters south of US-
Canada border and eastward of the Bonilla-Tatoosh line--Treaty Indian 
fishing is excluded; Category II) will automatically receive an 
Authorization for the incidental take of marine mammals at the time of 
license issuance. Fishers will receive marine mammal injury/mortality 
reporting forms along with their fisheries license and Marine Mammal 
Authorization.
    The information necessary to fulfill the requirements of the MMPA 
is already being collected by WDFW for Fishing License processing and 
NMFS will provide limited support for the issuance of the 
Authorization. Processing costs for WDFW are expected to be minimal, 
and hence, MMAP registration fees will not be charged to licenseholders 
in 1996. Since the 

[[Page 67066]]
Authorization will be issued in combination with the Puget Sound 
Gillnet License, it is specific to this license and will only authorize 
the incidental take of marine mammals during fishing activities 
conducted under this state-issued license. Fishers who participate in 
other Category I or II fisheries to harvest and land fish in other 
States must apply for and obtain an MMAP Authorization Certificate from 
the appropriate NMFS regional office to cover that activity (see 
procedures for the applicable state/Federal fishing activity).
    WDFW will provide NMFS with a copy of the following information:
    (1) Name, address, and phone number of the Owner of the Designated 
Vessel;
    (2) Name(s), address(es), and phone number(s) of License Owner, 
Primary Operator, and Alternate Operators;
    (3) Vessel name, U.S. Coast Guard documentation number, or state 
registration (WN) number (as applicable), and WDFW registration number 
of the designated vessel. NMFS will incorporate the information into a 
national data base of registered Category I and II fishers.

Southwest Region (SWR) MMAP Registration for 1996

    SWR is in the process of integrating MMAP registration for Category 
I and II fisheries that occur in California with the California 
Department of Fish and Game's commercial fishery permit registration 
program. However, this integration will not be completed before 1997. 
For this reason, Category I and II vessel owners in California will 
continue to register with SWR. In December 1995, vessel owners who 
engaged in a Category I or II fishery in 1995 will receive a 
registration packet in the mail. Any Category I or II vessel owner who 
has not received an application package by December 1, 1995, may 
request one from NMFS SWR (see ADDRESSES).

Southeast Region (SER) MMAP Registration for 1996

    The only state fisheries in Category I or II that are under SER 
jurisdiction occur in North Carolina. State fishers in North Carolina 
will receive a registration packet in the mail. If a fisher plans to 
participate in any state or federal fishery in Category I or II and a 
registration packet is not received, fishers should contact SER (see 
ADDRESSES).

Northeast Region (NER) MMAP Registration for 1996

    NER will distribute registration packets to those fishers on 
existing lists of registrants in the MMEP program, fishing vessel 
permit holder lists, and lists of state fishers obtained from New 
Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia. Fishers participating in 
Category I or II fisheries should contact NER (see ADDRESSES).
Extension of Effective Period for Current List of Fisheries and 
Extension of Current Registrations of Vessel Owners
    The preamble to the final regulations implementing section 118 
stated that vessel owners holding a valid Exemption Certificate under 
section 114 will be deemed by NMFS to have registered under section 118 
through December 31, 1995. Because it has taken longer than expected to 
publish the MMPA final LOF for 1996, the current MMPA LOF will remain 
in effect until March 1, 1996, and vessel owners holding a valid 
Exemption Certificate under section 114 will be deemed to have 
registered under section 118 until March 1, 1996. This extension will 
also allow vessel owners sufficient time to register under section 118 
of the MMPA. In general, NMFS recommends that completed registration 
forms be submitted as soon as possible in advance of fishing in order 
to ensure that a valid Authorization Certificate has been received.

Extension of Interim Permit for the Incidental Taking of Threatened 
or Endangered Marine Mammals

    On August 31, 1995, NMFS issued a single interim permit, valid 
through December 31, 1995, to certain vessel owners currently 
registered in Category I and II commercial fisheries for the 
incidental, but not intentional, taking of marine mammal stocks listed 
as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (60 FR 
45399). Individual permits for 1996, 1997, and 1998 will be issued in 
conjunction with the issuance Authorization Certificates under section 
118 of the MMPA. Because the current MMPA LOF will remain in effect 
until March 1, 1996, and vessel owners holding a valid Exemption 
Certificate under section 114 will be deemed to have registered under 
section 118 until March 1, 1996, NMFS hereby extends the interim permit 
until March 1, 1996.

Reporting Requirements for All Vessels

    Vessel owners or operators in Category I, II, or III fisheries must 
comply with 50 CFR 229.6 and report all incidental mortality and injury 
of marine mammals during the course of commercial fishing operations to 
NMFS Headquarters or appropriate NMFS Regional Office. ``Injury'' is 
defined in 50 CFR 229.2 as a wound or other physical harm. In addition, 
any animal that ingests fishing gear, or any animal that is released 
with fishing gear entangling, trailing or perforating any part of the 
body will be considered injured and must be reported. Instructions for 
submission of reports is found in 50 CFR 229.6(a).

Responses to Comments

    Many comments were lengthy and raised many points of concern. Key 
issues and concerns are summarized and responded to as follows:

Comments on Fisheries in the Alaska Region

    Comment 1: Incidental and intentional mortality of marine mammals 
appear to be under reported for the Alaska Yakutat salmon set gillnet 
fishery, indicating the fishery should be in Category I instead of 
Category II. It is strongly recommended that an observer program be 
established in Yakutat and Dry Bay, so that more reliable information 
on intentional killing of marine mammals might be available.
    Response: The intentional lethal take of marine mammals was made 
illegal by the 1994 amendments to the MMPA, except in situations where 
it is imminently necessary in self defense or to save the life of a 
person in immediate danger. Since intentional lethal takes are no 
longer authorized, NMFS cannot use rates of this type of take to 
categorize fisheries for the section 118 regime. Incidental, but not 
intentional, marine mammal serious injury or mortality rates, are used 
for categorizing fisheries for this final LOF. With the information 
available to NMFS at this time, the incidental serious injury and 
mortality rate of marine mammals in the Yakutat set gillnet fishery 
places them in Category II. Fishery categories are evaluated each year, 
and as more information becomes available, it will be used in these 
evaluations.
    Comment 2: The report of low injury rates to humpback whales and 
Steller sea lions in many fisheries appears to be due to a lack of data 
rather than to a solid understanding of the rate of injury.
    Response: NMFS agrees that there is a lack of data regarding 
serious injury and mortality rates for many fisheries in Alaska. Only 
three fisheries are regularly observed for marine mammal interactions, 
and only three other fisheries have ever been observed; one for two 
seasons and two others for one season each. NMFS is currently 
evaluating observer needs in the region and intends to formulate and 
implement a long-term plan for observer coverage of Alaska fisheries. 
The extent of future 

[[Page 67067]]
coverage will depend on the availability of funds.
    Comment 3: The Bering Sea and the Aleutian Islands trawl fisheries 
should be separated for the purpose of setting categories. Many of the 
commercial fishing quotas are set separately for the Bering Sea and 
Aleutian districts and the ecosystems have somewhat different 
characteristics. There is no justification for declaring both areas the 
same fishery for purposes of categorization if marine mammal 
interactions occur in only one area. To classify all the Bering Sea and 
Aleutian trawl fisheries as the same category for marine mammal 
interactions that occur in only one target fishery or in only one 
portion of the area is arbitrary and capricious and inflicts 
unwarranted regulations on a large number of vessels.
    Response: Splitting the fishery into smaller statistical areas 
would isolate the portions of those fisheries that are responsible for 
marine mammal takes. However, because the Bering Sea and Aleutian 
Islands statistical areas are contiguous and most participants fish in 
both areas, categorizing the two areas separately would have little 
practical value and would make management difficult.
    Comment 4: Being classified as a Category I or II fishery imposes 
serious reporting requirements on many small business entities.
    Response: Since the publication of the final implementing 
regulations for section 118 of the MMPA, on August 30, 1995, logbooks 
of fishing effort and marine mammal interactions are no longer required 
to be kept and turned in annually. The reporting requirements now in 
effect have been reduced to submitting a one-page report on a form 
supplied by NMFS within 48 hours of returning from the fishing trip (or 
from tending non-vessel gear) in which an incidental injury or 
mortality to a marine mammal occurred. Thus, the reporting requirements 
are limited to occurrences of an injury or mortality to a marine mammal 
in the course of fishing operations.
    Comment 5: Although commenters supported the use of scientific 
evidence to determine the total allowable fishery induced mortality for 
a marine mammal stock, serious questions were raised regarding the data 
used to classify the Bering Sea/Aleutian Island (BSAI) groundfish trawl 
fishery. The take of two killer whales during the period 1990-93 
resulted in moving BSAI trawl fisheries from Category III to Category 
II. However, the 1995 marine mammal stock assessment for killer whales 
indicates that the minimum population estimate is based on a direct 
count, with no available correction factors. Commenters also indicated 
that no reliable data on the population abundance of killer whale 
stocks were available and neither was a reliable estimate of maximum 
net productivity rate. Therefore the use of overly conservative 
measures in setting the acceptable level of fishing induced mortality 
should be discouraged. Better and more relevant data are needed before 
reclassifying all BSAI trawl fisheries as Category II.
    In the NMFS stock assessment report (SAR) for the Alaska region, 
the killer whale chapter is divided into two sections, resident (759 
animals) and non-resident (245 animals) populations. The total 
population size is 1004 animals. The total killer whale take is two 
animals--the population from which each was taken is listed as unknown. 
A commenter calculated the PBR level based on the entire population 
(1004  x  0.02  x  0.5) which resulted in a PBR level of 10.4 animals. 
The annual take as reported in the SAR is 0.8 animals per year. This 
number (0.8) divided by 10.4 animals (PBR) results in a take of 7.69 
percent of PBR, not 10 percent as stated in the proposed LOF. It should 
be noted that the two sections of the killer whale chapter each 
calculate PBR level separately, 7.6 for resident killer whales and 2.4 
for the non-resident population. The proposed LOF notice does not say 
which number was used to move the BSAI trawl fishery into Category II. 
Obviously, the killer whale population was not considered as a whole.
    Response: NMFS believes that calculating the percentages of the PBR 
level separately for the two killer whale stocks is the most risk-
averse approach.
    The BSAI groundfish trawl fishery will be classified in Category 
III. This fishery was proposed to be classified in Category II in the 
proposed LOF based on serious injuries and mortalities of killer 
whales. However, because the level of serious injury and mortality to 
killer whales in this fishery is low (0.8 to 1.4 animals per year), the 
fishery is observed with over 60 percent observer coverage, and the 
population estimates for both the resident and transient stocks of 
killer whales are direct counts of known individuals and thus 
underestimate the total stock size, it is likely that the serious 
injury or mortality of approximately one killer whale per year is not 
adversely impacting the population. In addition, the final SARs for 
resident and transient killer whales notes that these stocks are not 
considered to be strategic.
    If information becomes available that indicates that this observed 
fishery has excessive incidental serious injuries or mortalities from 
killer whale stocks or other stocks of marine mammals, it will be 
reclassified as necessary.
    Comment 6: The August 9, 1994, draft stock assessment shows 
``zero'' Pacific coast fishery mortalities of humpback whales. Yet the 
current proposed LOF would reclassify the Southeast Alaska salmon purse 
seine fishery from Category III to Category II, because ``total known 
humpback whale mortality and serious injury level across all fisheries 
exceed 10 percent of this stock's PBR, and the known serious injury 
level for this fishery is 0.4 animals per year.'' The EA implies that 
the take in this fishery was documented through a single voluntary 
report, but does not describe the nature of the interaction (i.e., 
mortality, entanglement, etc). According to the proposed LOF, the 
Southeast Alaska salmon drift gillnet fishery also has a known 
mortality and serious injury rate of 0.13 animals per year, but the EA 
makes no mention of any humpback takes by this fishery.
    Response: The reports of humpback whale mortalities in the 
Southeast Alaska purse seine fishery were identified after the 
publication of the August 9, 1994 draft stock assessments. There were 
two mortalities of humpback whales in this fishery, one in 1989 and one 
in 1994. In both cases, individual whales became entangled in purse 
seine nets being actively fished. One whale was entangled in the bunt 
and subsequently in the net. The second whale became entangled in the 
lead line and then wrapped in the net as it tried to free itself. The 
fishers involved tried to free the whales, but were unsuccessful. Data 
on humpback whale entanglements in the Southeast Alaska salmon drift 
gillnet fishery came from stranding network data, but, in addition, 
there have been several cases where fishers have notified the Coast 
Guard or NMFS, and NMFS personnel assisted with freeing the whales. 
This kind of cooperation is greatly appreciated by NMFS.
    Comment 7: One commenter was disturbed by the weight one 
unsubstantiated anecdotal report of a marine mammal take was given in 
determining the category status of the Southeast Alaska salmon purse 
seine fishery and believed the procedures used to document and 
authenticate this report were seriously lacking. The commenter asserted 
that while NMFS may be erring on the side of caution because humpback 
whales are a strategic stock and because of a low population estimate, 
a low estimate does not validate an unconfirmed 

[[Page 67068]]
report. Based on the commenter's experience, mortalities and serious 
injuries to humpback whales due to interactions with purse seine gear 
are extremely rare, and seiners will expend a great deal of effort to 
avoid any interaction with whales because of damage to the gear and a 
substantial loss of fishing time. The commenter believed that a 
Category III listing is more appropriate for this fishery. Even if the 
Southeast Alaska salmon purse seine fishery were to remain in Category 
III, NMFS could still use alternative monitoring methods to acquire 
reliable information on the fishery's humpback interactions.
    Response: Fisheries are classified based on the annual number of 
incidental serious injuries and mortalities relative to the PBR level 
for each marine mammal stock. Thus, a fishery could be placed in 
Category I or II as a result of a high mortality level or a low 
population abundance estimate, or some combination of the two. The 
weight that any number of serious injuries or mortalities in a given 
marine mammal stock has on categorization of fisheries is directly 
related to the PBR level for that stock. In the case of the central 
North Pacific stock of humpback whales, the PBR level is 2.8 animals. 
There were three mortalities reported for all fisheries between 1989 
and 1994. In a Tier I categorization evaluation, this calculates to a 
rate of 0.5 animals per year, or 17.9 percent of the PBR level. Because 
this rate is higher than 10 percent of the PBR level, the effects of 
individual fisheries must be evaluated. There were two reported 
mortalities to humpbacks in the Southeast Alaska purse seine fishery, 
one in 1989 and one in 1994. The mortality rate for this fishery 
calculates to 0.33 animals per year, or 11.9 percent of the PBR level. 
Because this rate is greater than 1 percent, but less than 50 percent 
of the PBR level, the fishery is placed in Category II.
    NMFS does not consider these Category III reports to be unreliable 
and has full confidence in their veracity. These data were reported by 
a crew member aboard the vessel(s) that interacted with the whales. The 
reports have been given no special treatment or additional weight.
    NMFS agrees that the mortality and serious injury rate of humpbacks 
in the Southeast Alaska salmon purse seine fishery were low. However, 
the annual rate of serious injury and mortality in this fishery does 
fit the definition of a Category II fishery. If the categorization 
criteria were ignored, and the fishery was placed in Category III, NMFS 
would have no mechanism except for voluntary cooperation of Category 
III fishers, short of an emergency rule, to monitor the fishery 
interactions with humpbacks. Because the incidental serious injury or 
mortality of a humpback whale in a purse seine net is a ``no-win'' 
situation for all parties concerned, NMFS would like to work with the 
fishing industry to understand the nature of these interactions and 
develop means for fishers to avoid them, as well as effective responses 
if an interaction does occur.
    Comment 8: Using the PBR level to classify fisheries has 
advantages, but it is only as accurate as the data being used. It is 
our understanding that the population estimate for humpbacks is 12 
years old and is based on a survey done in Hawaii. How often will NMFS 
update its population estimates for strategic stocks?
    Response: Stock assessment reports (SAR) for strategic stocks are 
required by the MMPA to be reviewed annually. Additional data for 
population estimates will be gathered according to the greatest need 
and subject to the availability of funds.
    NMFS acknowledges that the population estimates for the Central 
North Pacific stock of humpback whales are problematic, and intends to 
address them in the next couple of years through new analyses of recent 
data and population surveys.
    Comment 9: The Alaska Peninsula/Aleutian Island salmon drift 
gillnet should be classified in Category III and not in Category II as 
proposed. The rationale presented for a Category III categorization is 
that the drift gillnet fishery takes 1.8 percent of the PBR level for 
Dall's porpoise, although the Alaskan Dall's porpoise stock is one of 
the few stocks for which a determination has been made that the optimum 
sustainable population level is met. The PBR level is calculated to be 
1,537 and the SAR indicates total estimated fishery mortality is 41 per 
year, well less than 10 percent of the PBR level. This, by itself, 
should result in a Category III classification. Further, using 
extrapolated data, the estimated mortality rate for the Alaska 
Peninsula drift gillnet fishery is 1.8 percent, just over the Tier 2 
threshold of 1 percent of the PBR level for a Category II 
classification.
    Response: NMFS agrees that classification of commercial fisheries 
should be based on reliable information. The most reliable source for 
this information are observer programs, which can be employed for 
fisheries classified in Category I or II but can only be employed for a 
Category III fishery if emergency regulations are in effect. Because of 
this statutory limitation, NMFS is uncomfortable with classifying a 
fishery as Category III if data exist that suggest the marine mammal 
incidental take level may be above the relevant threshold. The Alaska 
Peninsula/Aleutian Islands salmon drift gillnet fishery, like other 
salmon drift gillnet fisheries in Alaska, has documented takes of a 
variety of marine mammal stocks (Dall's porpoise, harbor porpoise, 
harbor seals, northern fur seals, walrus and unidentified small 
cetaceans). Because of inadequate observer coverage across fisheries in 
Alaska, NMFS considers the current information on take levels for many 
stocks to be underestimates. Dall's porpoise serious injury and 
mortality is documented in the logbooks from six fisheries. Based on 
those levels, NMFS believes that if more accurate observer information 
were available, the level of Dall's porpoise takes would exceed the 10 
percent threshold across all fisheries. In that case, the Alaska 
Peninsula drift gillnet fishery, with its Dall's porpoise take level of 
1.8 percent the PBR level, would be classified in Category II.
    Additional support for placement of this fishery in Category II is 
based on low levels of harbor porpoise serious injuries and mortalities 
documented in logbook reports submitted in this fishery. Because the 
documented annual serious injury and mortality of harbor porpoise in 
Alaska is greater than the 10 percent threshold level across all 
fisheries, and because logbook reports represent an underestimate of 
the total number of serious injuries and mortalities in a fishery, the 
total impact to the harbor porpoise population may be above the 1 
percent of PBR level that would cause this fishery to be classified as 
Category II.
    Comment 10: The rationale regarding the proposed Category II 
classification of Alaska Peninsula set gillnet fishery is weak. It 
states that this fishery takes a substantial number of marine mammals. 
The proposed LOF does not discuss what data suggest that levels of 
mortality and serious injury may exceed 10 percent of each stock's PBR 
level if observer information were available, why it is to be expected 
that incidental mortality may exceed certain levels, or why this 
fishery would interact with similar species as do set gillnet fisheries 
in other areas. In this case, classification is too speculative and 
supports classification of the Alaska Peninsula/Aleutian Islands salmon 
set gillnet fishery in Category III.
    Response: Because this fishery has documented mortalities and 
serious injuries to marine mammals at an unknown rate, has never been 
observed, 

[[Page 67069]]
and uses a gear type with the potential to take various species of 
marine mammals, NMFS believes that placing this fishery in Category II 
is warranted until additional information can be collected. When more 
reliable information becomes available, the level of marine mammal 
mortality and serious injury in this fishery will be reassessed. (See 
response to Comment 9 regarding the level of harbor porpoise serious 
injuries and mortalities in this fishery.)
    Comment 11: One commenter noted that there is no mention of 
humpback whale interactions with the Prince William Sound salmon drift 
gillnet or the AK Peninsula/Aleutians salmon drift gillnet fisheries. 
The commenter believed that this species may have been inadvertently 
omitted from the list of species involved in interactions with these 
fisheries.
    Response: NMFS has no information regarding any humpback 
mortalities or serious injuries in the Prince William Sound or Alaska 
Peninsula/Aleutian Islands drift gillnet fisheries.
    Comment 12: The proposed LOF states that the classification of the 
Southeast Alaska salmon drift gillnet fishery is based on observer and 
strandings data and does not mention logbook data. The stock assessment 
for humpback whales mentions that logbook data from salmon and herring 
gillnet fisheries indicate that humpbacks are entangled. The commenter 
presumed that since the Southeast Alaska salmon drift gillnet fishery 
is the only gillnet fishery with humpbacks listed as taken, it is 
logbook reports from this fishery that led to the statement in the 
SARs. Given that logbooks are known to under report interactions, the 
commenter believed that this fishery might be more appropriately 
classified as a Category I fishery.
    Response: Stranding data is used to document humpback whale 
interactions with the Southeast Alaska salmon drift gillnet fishery. 
There are no reported humpback mortalities or serious injuries for this 
fishery in the logbook data. The currently available data support 
placing this fishery in Category II based on humpback whale and harbor 
porpoise mortalities. The annual level of harbor porpoise mortality and 
serious injury in this fishery based on logbook reports was 3.25 per 
year, or 1.3 percent of the PBR level. There were no humpback 
mortalities or serious injuries reported in logbooks for drift gillnet 
fisheries, but there were Category III reports from fishers indicating 
mortalities occurred in 1989 and 1994, not 1993 and 1994 as stated in 
the SAR.
    Comment 13: Drift and set gillnet fisheries in Cook Inlet, Yakutat, 
Alaska Peninsula/Aleutian Islands, Kodiak Island and Bristol Bay are 
not listed as interacting with humpback whales. Given the information 
in the SARs that logbook data from salmon and herring gillnet fisheries 
indicate that humpbacks are entangled, these fisheries should be 
considered to interact with this species. It also seems likely that 
these fisheries all interact with harbor porpoise. The commenter noted 
that a NMFS Federal Register notice dealing with harbor porpoise 
acknowledged that wherever harbor porpoise and gillnets coincide, 
harbor porpoise are caught. Further, in the Federal Register notice (60 
FR 45399) that lists fisheries permitted to take endangered and 
threatened species under section 101(a)(5)(e) of the MMPA, these set 
gillnet fisheries are specifically permitted to take Steller sea lions, 
although no Steller sea lions are listed in the LOF as interacting with 
these fisheries. Also, the Southeast Alaska salmon purse seine, Alaska 
herring roe food/bait purse seine fisheries and salmon troll do not 
have humpbacks listed as a species with which it interacts, even though 
the SARs indicate they do interact. Finally, there are fisheries with 
``none documented'' listed as their interactions, but the commenter 
believes that analogy to other fisheries might indicate otherwise.
    Response: The list of marine mammals that interact with each 
fishery has been revised. Only marine mammal species that have incurred 
documented mortalities and injuries in a given fisheries are included 
in this list. Analogy is not used to determine which stocks interact 
with a particular fishery.
    There may be discrepancies between the list of marine mammal 
species identified in the LOF published pursuant to section 118 and the 
list published pursuant to section 101(a)(5)(E), due to an attempt by 
NMFS to issue interim permits to all fisheries that may have 
interactions with marine mammal species listed under the Endangered 
Species Act, while the section 118 LOF includes only those marine 
mammal species or stocks with documented injuries and mortalities 
incidental to a particular commercial fishery.
    Comment 14a: The Alaska Kuskokwim, Yukon, Norton Sound, Kotzebue 
salmon gillnet fisheries are acknowledged as likely to have occasional 
interactions with marine mammals, yet have been placed in Category III 
because these interactions are believed to ``result in directed takes 
for subsistence purposes.'' Because these fisheries do not have 
observer data available, and given that they interact with harbor 
porpoise and beluga whales, the commenter believes these fisheries 
should be placed in Category II and be subject to observer coverage.
    Response: NMFS believes that virtually all takes of marine mammals 
related to these fisheries are actually directed takes by Alaska 
Natives for subsistence use. Any marine mammals that are taken 
incidentally in these fisheries are likewise retained for subsistence 
use by Alaskan Natives. NMFS is currently developing co-operative 
agreements with Alaska Native organizations for the management of 
marine mammals in Alaska used for subsistence purposes. The number of 
animals taken in the above fisheries and used for subsistence will be 
considered through co-management agreements rather than under section 
118.
    Comment 14b: The Alaska salmon troll and sablefish longline/set 
line fisheries intentionally killed orcas in the past, and it is 
optimistic to believe that these intentional killings will cease simply 
because they are now illegal. The commenter believes that these 
fisheries warrant further monitoring and should be placed in Category 
II.
    Response: See the response to Comment 1 for explanation of how 
intentional lethal takes will be addressed by NMFS. NMFS does not have 
data documenting incidental mortalities or serious injuries of killer 
whales for these fisheries.

Comments on Fisheries in the Northwest Region

    Comment 15: The Columbia River salmon fishery is appropriately 
placed in Category III.
    Response: NMFS agrees.
    Comment 16: The California/Oregon/Washington (CA/OR/WA) thresher 
shark/swordfish/blue shark drift gillnet fishery should be renamed in 
the final LOF to accurately reflect the target species and the current 
state licensing practices for the fishery. The Washington portion of 
the fishery should be deleted since there is no Washington licensed 
swordfish gillnet fishery.
    Response: The CA/OR thresher shark/swordfish drift gillnet fishery 
has been renamed. The reference to blue shark has been removed because 
this species may not be landed in Oregon and is not a target species in 
the California fishery. The reference to Washington has been removed 
because this fishery does not occur in waters off Washington, nor does 
Washington State permit the 

[[Page 67070]]
harvest or landing of either thresher shark or swordfish.
    Comment 17: NMFS should retain commercial fisheries classified in 
Categories I or II under the Interim Exemption on the basis of 
intentional lethal take in those categories until it has been 
demonstrated that the intentional lethal takes have ceased.
    Response: Because intentional lethal takes of marine mammals are 
now illegal, except in cases of self defense or in order to save the 
life of a person in imminent danger, and because fisheries must be 
categorized based on incidental serious injury or mortality, commercial 
fisheries will not be classified on the basis of the number of 
intentional lethal takes. In addition, NMFS does not believe that 
continuing registration requirements for fisheries that have been moved 
to Category III based on the available information will have any effect 
on the degree of compliance with the intentional lethal take 
prohibition. To the extent that reporting requirements are consistent 
for all fisheries, regardless of category, NMFS anticipates that 
fishers reports will continue to provide qualitative information as an 
indicator of incidental take levels. This qualitative information can 
be useful in determining the need for more intensive monitoring. NMFS 
will continue to investigate illegal takes of marine mammals regardless 
of whether vessels are registered.
    Comment 18: No information on incidental takes of marine mammals is 
available for the Washington/Oregon (WA/OR) herring, smelt, shad, 
sturgeon, bottom fish, mullet, perch, rockfish gillnet fishery. A lack 
of information does not mean that no serious injuries or mortalities 
have occurred. Analogy with other gillnet fisheries could justify 
placing this fishery in Category II.
    Response: As indicated in the EA, non-salmon gillnet fisheries in 
the Northwest, (i.e., WA/OR herring, smelt, shad, sturgeon, bottomfish, 
mullet, perch, and rockfish gillnet) are predominantly in-river 
fisheries. NMFS is not aware of any information indicating that 
incidental takes of marine mammals are occurring in these fisheries.
    Comment 19: Because salmon net pen and ranch fisheries, and the 
California/Oregon/Washington (CA/OR/WA) salmon troll fisheries have 
histories of lethal takes of pinnipeds, these fisheries should remain 
in Category II until NMFS receives documentation that the lethal takes 
have ceased.
    Response: The incidence of intentional lethal take was not used for 
categorizing fisheries under section 118 of the MMPA. (See response to 
Comment 17.)
    Comment 20: Serious injuries and mortalities of humpback whales 
caused the Southeast Alaska salmon purse seine fishery to be proposed 
for Category II. By analogy, the Washington (WA) salmon purse seine 
should also be placed in Category II and the humpback whale should be 
listed in the LOF as an interacting species.
    Response: There are no records of interactions between the 
Washington salmon purse seine fishery and humpback whales. Humpback 
whales are only rarely sighted in the inland waters of Washington where 
the fishery operates.
    Comment 21: The humpback whale should be listed in the LOF as an 
interacting species for the Washington/Oregon/California (WA/OR/CA) 
groundfish, bottomfish longline/set line fishery, and this fishery 
should be considered for classification in Category II.
    Response: There are no records of humpback whale interactions with 
this fishery; thus this fishery is placed in Category III.
    Comment 22: Analogy to the intentional lethal takes that occur 
during commercial net pen fisheries should be used to place salmon 
enhancement rearing pens in Category II.
    Response: Because salmon enhancement rearing pens have not been 
considered a commercial fishing operation, in the past they have not 
been subject to requirements of section 118. If NMFS were to consider 
this a commercial fishery, analogy would indicate correct placement of 
salmon enhancement rearing pens in Category III, because interactions 
would be similar to commercial net pens without any active deterrence 
methods. As indicated in the EA, the incidence of mortality or serious 
injury resulting from gear interactions with net pens is less than one 
percent of the PBR for the stocks that interact with net pen fishery 
operations (harbor seals and California sea lions).
    Because enhancement rearing pens are typically not considered 
commercial fisheries, NMFS will consider proposing to remove this 
fishery from the LOF in a future proposed LOF.

Comments on Fisheries in the Northeast and Southeast Regions

    Comment 23: The mid-water squid fishery defined in the proposed LOF 
does not exist. It's a bottom trawl fishery, and not mid-water. It 
should not be lumped with other mid-water gear.
    Response: Mackerel, butterfish, and squid are fished by trawl in a 
similar manner, with minimal modifications to gear. A mid-water squid 
trawl fishery does exist, although it is not the preferred fishing 
method for this species at this time. NMFS agrees that ``Atlantic mid-
water trawl'' may not be an accurate description of the fishery. In 
this final LOF, this fishery is renamed ``Atlantic Squid, Mackerel, 
Butterfish Trawl'' with no reference to the depth at which the gear is 
fished. This fishery is placed in Category II based on serious injuries 
and mortalities of pilot whales recorded in fishers' logbooks. In 
addition, and regardless of the trawl method used, a potential for 
incidental interactions between this fishery and marine mammals exists, 
because squid, mackerel, and butterfish are important prey species for 
marine mammals.
    Comment 25: The number of marine mammal mortalities and serious 
injuries as published in the proposed LOF and the method used to 
extrapolate raw data into a total estimated take needs to be explained, 
especially with regard to pilot whale mortalities in the longline 
fishery. In addition, the source of the data indicating humpback whale 
and minke whale interactions with the longline fishery should be cited. 
The number of participants listed in Table 2, 830, is a considerable 
overestimate of the total number of vessels in the fleet. If this 
information were used to extrapolate the observer data, the total 
number of takes in the fishery would be greatly overestimated. The 
Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico swordfish, tuna, and shark 
longline fishery should not be listed as a Category I fishery but 
should remain in Category II.
    Response: NMFS observers recorded one mortality of a pilot whale in 
coverage scheduled between late 1992 and 1993. The mortality occurred 
in the U.S. Atlantic Ocean. In addition, 24 non-lethal interactions (2 
injuries and 22 unspecified interactions) of pilot whales have been 
observed in the fishery. It is unknown how many of these animals 
eventually died due to injuries resulting from entanglement. Observed 
kills of other species include one Risso's dolphin in 1993, which 
occurred in the Gulf of Mexico.
    The annual level of serious injury and mortality for this fishery 
was not calculated by extrapolating observed serious injuries and 
mortalities to the entire fishery using the number of permitted 
vessels. Rather, it was calculated by extrapolating observed serious 
injury and mortality in the whole fishery using the total number of 
sets reported in the mandatory fishing 

[[Page 67071]]
vessel logbooks. The pilot whale mortality was not reported as coming 
from the long- or short-finned stock; however, the estimated total 
mortality of pilot whales exceeds the 50 percent of the PBR threshold 
for either long-finned or short-finned pilot whales. Therefore 
classification in Category I is warranted.
    In addition, section 114 Marine Mammal Exemption Program (MMEP) 
logbook data support a Category I classification. Injuries and 
mortalities reported in the MMEP from 1990 through 1992 indicate that 
an average of nine pilot whales are injured or killed in longline gear 
each year. A variety of other marine mammal species, including but not 
limited to bottlenose dolphins, harbor porpoise, Risso's dolphins, and 
unidentified large cetaceans, have also been recorded as injured or 
killed. NMFS has also received sighting reports (both at sea and 
stranded) of whales carrying gear which may be attributable to the 
pelagic longline fishery. Species listed in these reports include 
humpback whale, sperm whale, long-finned pilot whale, and minke whale.
    Comment 26: The Rhode Island, southern Massachusetts (to Monomoy 
Island), and New York Bight (Raritan and Lower New York Bays) inshore 
gillnet fishery, Long Island Sound inshore gillnet fishery, Delaware 
Bay inshore gillnet fishery, and North Carolina inshore gillnet fishery 
are currently, and incorrectly, listed as Category III fisheries. These 
fisheries interact on a sufficiently high level with humpback whales, 
minke whales, bottlenose dolphins and harbor porpoise that they should 
be moved to Category II.
    Response: These inshore and bay fisheries were divided out from 
other mid-Atlantic coastal gillnet fisheries, because there were no 
observed takes in these areas, and because it is believed that there is 
a low probability of interaction. In the last several years, an 
interaction problem with small cetaceans has been identified in the 
mid-Atlantic based on observations of stranded animals. It is possible 
to identify evidence of gillnet interactions from a stranded specimen, 
but it is not yet possible to determine conclusively which gillnet 
fishery is responsible for the interaction unless the gear is recovered 
with the carcass, which is not usually the case. Based on the 
geographic distribution of strandings, marine mammal high-use areas, 
and concentrations of fishing gear, NMFS believes that the gillnet 
interactions in the mid-Atlantic occur largely in areas outside the 
``inshore'' fishery division lines. Placement of these inshore 
fisheries into Category II is not warranted at this time. However, 
recent information (1994-1995) indicates that marine mammal incidental 
serious injury and mortality in some of these inshore fisheries may be 
higher than originally believed. These fisheries will be re-evaluated 
based on an examination of more recent stranding data when developing 
the next proposed LOF.
    Comment 27: The pair trawl fishery should be renamed, as it occurs 
between Cape Hatteras and the Hague Line, and not in the Caribbean 
Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, or off the Grand Banks of Newfoundland. The 
references to sharks should also be deleted from the name of the 
fishery, as sharks are not targeted and are, in fact, minimally 
represented in the bycatch. In addition, the number of participants in 
the fishery needs to be updated, as the number included in the proposed 
LOF is incorrect.
    Response: NMFS agrees that the fishery should be renamed. 
Therefore, the fishery is now listed as ``U.S. Atlantic Large Pelagics 
Pair Trawl'' and the number of participants has been updated in the 
final LOF.
    Comment 28: The average annual serious injury and mortality 
(extrapolated from observer data, 1992-93) of marine mammals 
incidentally taken in the pair trawl fishery appears to be highly 
inflated when compared to actual data, leading constituents to suspect 
that the data used to compile this information were not correct. Data 
from 1994 should be used in order for the LOF to be based on the best 
available information. Members of the fishing community have worked to 
change those aspects of the pair trawl fishery to reduce the number of 
marine mammal takes that occur incidental to the fishery, and none of 
those changes will have any significance in this final LOF. It is 
unfair to impose additional regulations on the fishing community 
without using every piece of data collected over all the years.
    Response: See the response to Comment 25 for an explanation of how 
observer data are extrapolated to provide an annual estimate of the 
total serious injuries and mortalities of marine mammals in a 
commercial fishery.
    Development of the new fisheries data reporting and analysis 
systems for the NMFS pair trawl observer program is ongoing. Observed 
serious injuries and mortalities from the pair trawl fishery in 1994 
cannot be extrapolated to total kill numbers until the fishing effort 
data are available for the calculation. Data from the first half of 
1994 were collected but were not available in the form necessary for 
the calculations used in developing the proposed LOF and cannot be 
finalized in time to allow the final LOF to be published before January 
1, 1996. These data will be available for future consideration in 
making any necessary revisions for the next proposed LOF. Although 
serious injury and mortality of marine mammals incidental to the pair 
trawl fishery may have been below average in 1994, preliminary analysis 
of serious injury and mortality levels for 1995 suggests a bycatch 
increase and indicates an increase in the number of marine mammal 
species involved.
    Comment 29: Data on marine mammal incidental mortalities and 
serious injuries from the 1994 pair trawl fishery have been made 
available to NMFS through reports and presentations in public forums. 
Because observer coverage was very high in 1994, this data set 
represents the most complete information for the pair trawl fishery to 
date. This information should be used to classify the pair trawl 
fishery.
    Response: NMFS agrees that observer coverage was most intensive in 
1994. However, incorporation of non-NMFS data presented in the 
aforementioned report would not result in reclassifying the pair trawl 
fishery as Category II. For example, if the non-NMFS information on the 
number of observed mortalities of the offshore stock of bottlenose 
dolphin and common dolphins are assumed to approximate the actual 
values, averaging these values with NMFS mortality and serious injury 
estimates from 1992 and 1993 results in average estimated serious 
injuries and mortalities of 53 and 22 animals, respectively. Both 
values exceed 50 percent of the PBR level for these stocks. In 
addition, the serious injury and mortality levels in 1995 seem to have 
increased substantially over the 1994 levels. To date, 25 marine 
mammals have been observed seriously injured or killed, including three 
dolphin species and long-finned pilot whales. Classifying this fishery 
as Category I is warranted.
    Comment 30: In order to categorize a particular fishery, it is 
imperative that NMFS know how many vessels there are and where they 
fish. It is incumbent upon NMFS to make this number reflect reality to 
the best of its ability, because the extrapolation will make an 
erroneous result that could have extraordinary consequences. For 
example, for the pelagic longline fishery, NMFS has used 830 vessels to 
extrapolate the estimate of the ``takes'' for the fishery. According to 
the NMFS database, there were only 147 vessels that landed more than 
one swordfish in each of 5 or more months in 1993. 

[[Page 67072]]

    Response: NMFS appreciates the information regarding the total 
number of participants in the pelagic longline fishery. The numbers in 
the ``Estimated number of vessels/persons'' column in the proposed LOF 
sometimes represented the total number of permitted vessels/persons, 
and sometimes represented the total number of active vessels/persons. 
Because the number of active vessels/participants is a more valid 
indicator of the total effort in a fishery, this was included in the 
proposed LOF when that information was available. If the number of 
active participants was not available, the number of, or an estimate 
of, the permitted participants was used.
    The number of vessels in the longline fishery was originally 
estimated based on the number of swordfish permits issued. There were 
361 vessels reporting swordfish catch in 1994. (See response to Comment 
25 regarding extrapolation of observer data.)
    Comment 31: A more appropriate method of calculating effort for the 
fishery is the number of hooks used. If the reported number of hooks 
were used for calculating this estimate, NMFS must recognize that a 
hook in the Gulf of Mexico and a similar hook at the Grand Banks have a 
very different likelihood of interacting with a particular marine 
mammal species. NMFS should investigate splitting the longline fleet 
into different statistical areas, preferably using the five areas used 
by the fisheries statisticians.
    It would be especially important to separate the fishery into 
northern and southern components, as many of the interactions occur in 
the northern portion of the fishery. For instance, it would be 
unjustified to severely restrict or close the yellowfin tuna fishery in 
the Gulf of Mexico if a northern marine mammal stock's PBR is taken. 
This approach would be consistent with the approach used for some of 
the Northwest Pacific fisheries that catch the same Pacific species 
with the same fishing gear but are separately categorized by the bays, 
inlets, sounds, etc., where they fish. Despite the effort involved to 
consider the variables and complexity of this fishery, NMFS must not 
take the ``easy'' way by leaving this wide-ranging fleet vulnerable to 
a complete closure that may not be warranted.
    Response: NMFS agrees that the pelagic longline data should be 
analyzed to determine whether the fishery could be separated into 
different statistical areas. The most logical division based on the 
demographics of the fishery may be into a U.S. Atlantic component and a 
U.S. Gulf of Mexico component. This will be investigated during the 
development of the next proposed LOF.
    The Take Reduction Teams that will be established pursuant to the 
1994 MMPA amendments will consider all fisheries known to interact with 
each strategic marine mammal stock. NMFS anticipates that the teams 
will make recommendations on whether or not to proceed with a 
geographic partitioning of the fishery. In addition, it does not 
necessarily follow that the yellowfin tuna fishery in the Gulf of 
Mexico would be closed if a northern marine mammal stock's PBR is 
taken. Closures designed to protect marine mammals would most likely be 
designed to encompass areas where those marine mammals occur. For 
example, closures restricting groundfish gillnet effort in the Gulf of 
Maine to reduce porpoise bycatch are designed to encompass areas of 
high porpoise bycatch, not all areas where gillnetting traditionally 
occurs.
    Comment 32: The pelagic longline fishery is classified based on the 
annual level of serious injury and mortality for pilot whales. The PBR 
for pilot whales is based upon conservative calculations using dated 
surveys.
    Response: The 1995 SARs were prepared using the best available 
data. Because NMFS conducted surveys in 1995, this information will be 
incorporated in future calculations of PBR for pilot whale stocks. As 
both short- and long-finned pilot whales are considered strategic 
stocks, the SARs addressing these stocks must be reviewed on an annual 
basis, and new information can be incorporated at that time.
    Comment 33: Atlantic commercial passenger fishing vessels should be 
categorized in the LOF to be consistent with the categorization of the 
Pacific commercial passenger fishing vessels.
    Response: The 1996 LOF contains a listing of ``Atlantic Commercial 
Passenger Vessel'' in Category III. An estimate of 4000 participants is 
also given.
    Comment 34: Some fishery names in the proposed LOF are vague. For 
example, there is a reference to the Atlantic mid-water trawl fishery, 
which is proposed to include the ``Mid-Atlantic squid trawl,'' and the 
``Mid-Atlantic mackerel trawl.'' There is a small amount of mackerel 
caught by mid-water trawl, but the vast majority of squid are caught 
using bottom trawl gear.
    Response: See response to Comment 23 for a discussion of this 
fishery.
    Comment 35: The designation of the lobster fishery as Category III 
should be revisited, given the interactions of lobster gear with 
endangered right whales.
    Response: NMFS will consider proposing to reclassify the lobster 
fishery as Category II in developing the next proposed LOF. 
Entanglement records indicate interactions between lobster pot 
fisheries and right whales, humpback whales, finback whales, and minke 
whales, but NMFS has no way of extrapolating these reports to the whole 
fishery.
    Comment 36: The commenter questioned whether the estimated total 
take of 1.75 dolphins per year for the Atlantic menhaden fleet 
justifies classifying this fishery in Category II. Subjecting a fleet 
of vessels to permitting, decal, and observer requirements in these 
circumstances appears to be excessive given the size of the interaction 
and the fact that this particular fishery has been subject to intensive 
bycatch analysis in the past few years by agency scientists.
    Response: The bottlenose dolphin takes were incorrectly attributed 
to the menhaden purse seine fishery. Because of this error, this 
fishery was inappropriately proposed for classification in Category II 
in the proposed LOF. This fishery is placed in Category III in this 
final LOF.
    Comment 37: The classification of the menhaden purse seine fishery 
as a Category II fishery is based on a mortality and serious injury 
rate of 1.75 Atlantic coastal bottlenose dolphins per year in the 
entire fishery. As stated in the preamble to the proposed LOF, this 
species does not occur in the Gulf of Maine and therefore ``it may be 
appropriate to separate this fishery into northern and southern 
components.'' In view of the absence of bottlenose dolphins from the 
Gulf of Maine, the menhaden fishery should be separated into two 
components north and south of Cape Cod, and the Gulf of Maine menhaden 
purse seine fishery should continue to be classified as a Category III 
fishery.
    Response: See response to Comment 36 regarding takes of bottlenose 
dolphins in the mid-Atlantic component of the menhaden purse seine 
fishery. However, because of the geographic ranges of the fisheries, 
the differences in marine mammal species likely to be encountered, and 
the harvested age-class in the two fisheries, the Gulf of Maine 
menhaden purse seine and the mid-Atlantic menhaden purse seine are 
separate fisheries in the final LOF.
    Comment 38: Serious injuries and mortalities of the western North 
Atlantic coastal bottlenose dolphin drive the classification of several 
fisheries (mid-

[[Page 67073]]
Atlantic menhaden purse seine, mid-Atlantic coastal gillnet fishery). 
How is this population defined? Has it been shown to be reproductively 
isolated from the offshore dolphin stock?
    Response: The final SAR states that there are ``two hematologically 
and morphologically distinct bottlenose dolphin ecotypes that 
correspond to a shallow, warm water ecotype and a deep, cold water 
ecotype . . . .'' (Blaylock, et al., 1995).
    Comment 39: The Gulf of Maine small pelagics surface gillnet 
fishery should be removed from Category 1. The EA states (p. 30) that 
this fishery no longer operates.
    Response: Additional research on the Gulf of Maine small pelagics 
surface gillnet fishery indicates that, although there are few vessels 
participating, the fishery is still operational. This fishery operates 
in areas of high marine mammal concentrations. One report indicated 
that a white-sided dolphin was killed incidental to this fishery, and 
another report indicated that a humpback whale became entangled 
incidental to fishing operations and was later released by divers. 
Because there was a report of a mortality in this fishery, and because 
information is not available to justify a placement in Category I or 
III, the fishery is placed in Category II.
    Comment 40: There is a small (5 boats) Gulf of Maine midwater trawl 
fishery for herring, separate from the Category II Atlantic midwater 
trawl fishery for squid and butterfish (620 boats). It should be listed 
as a Category III fishery. These boats also fish for herring in 
southern New England in the winter.
    Response: In this final LOF, the trawl fishery for Atlantic herring 
has been renamed the ``Northeast U.S. Atlantic Herring Trawl.'' This 
fishery is separated from fisheries in the Southern North Atlantic and 
Gulf of Mexico because the Atlantic herring species only ranges as far 
south as Cape Hatteras. This fishery is placed in Category III, as no 
incidental mortalities or serious injuries have been reported for this 
fishery, nor are incidental mortalities or serious injuries expected to 
occur incidental to this fishery.
    Comment 41: A commenter supports placement of new fisheries in 
Category II until observer data or other information can be used to 
properly place the fishery, unless information already exists to place 
a new fishery in a different category.
    Response: NMFS agrees. This approach was included in the final 
regulations implementing section 118.
    Comment 42: According to the proposed LOF, the U.S. mid-Atlantic 
coastal gillnet fishery interacts with humpback whales (PBR level = 1). 
Published data indicate that stranded humpback whales in the mid-
Atlantic may be interacting at a significant rate with these fisheries 
(Wiley et al., 1995). This information indicates that this fishery 
should be classified as Category I, as it may be responsible for 
greater than 1 percent of the annual mortality in this stock of 
humpbacks.
    Response: The PBR level for this humpback whale stock is currently 
set at 10 animals. The stranding records mentioned in Wiley (1995) 
demonstrate that stranded humpbacks in the mid-Atlantic have been 
entangled in commercial fishing gear. However, none of those humpback 
stranding records conclusively identify which fishery is responsible. 
One of the fundamental problems with linking a large whale entanglement 
to a particular fishery is that the whales are capable of carrying many 
kinds of gear great distances from the original point of entanglement. 
Reports received usually do not include gear identification information 
that would identify the location in which the gear was originally set.
    Recent cetacean entanglement records in the mid-Atlantic have been 
linked to this fishery. These records suggest that, although the level 
of humpback entanglement in coastal gillnets in the mid-Atlantic is 
greater than 1 percent of PBR, there is no evidence to suggest that it 
is greater than 50 percent of PBR. Therefore, classification of this 
fishery as Category I is not warranted at this time.
    Comment 43: There is no mention of interactions with northern right 
whales in the U.S. South Atlantic shark gillnet fishery. State 
officials concluded that a juvenile right whale that was entangled in 
netting that likely came from this fishery was subsequently killed by a 
large ship in 1994. Right whales should be added as an interacting 
stock and this fishery should be classified as a Category I fishery.
    Response: A seriously injured juvenile right whale was observed 
swimming with its mother off the coast of Georgia. Marks on the animal 
closely resembled the types of marks observed on other right whales 
that have been entangled in gill nets. The juvenile whale had 
apparently also been hit by the propellers of a ship, as its flukes had 
been nearly severed. No gear was recovered from this animal and it is 
unknown whether the animal actually died, although its demise was 
highly likely based upon its injuries. The only gillnet fishery 
operating in the vicinity was the Southeast U.S. Atlantic shark gill 
net fishery. Because this fishery's interaction with right whales is 
suspected but not confirmed, it is appropriate to place this fishery in 
Category II.
    Comment 44: The North Atlantic bottom trawl fishery was classified 
as a Category III fishery despite observer data indicating a take of 62 
percent of the PBR for striped dolphins. It is noted that there was 
minimal observer coverage (1 percent) and there is, therefore, a high 
coefficient of variation of the estimate. It is also possible with this 
high coefficient of variance that the mortality estimate is low. 
Furthermore, text in the proposed LOF states that the observers were 
not assigned to monitor marine mammal mortality but to ``monitor 
fishery management related issues.'' Similar observer objectives on the 
Gulf of Maine gillnet vessels resulted in an underestimate of marine 
mammal bycatch. NMFS should reconsider the category for this fishery.
    Response: A justification for categorizing the North Atlantic 
bottom trawl fishery in Category III was provided in the proposed LOF. 
Although concerns regarding some observer programs that focus on 
fishery monitoring have been raised, other observer programs with the 
same goals, such as those operating in the BSAI groundfish trawl 
fishery and the U.S. Atlantic large pelagics drift gillnet fishery, 
have provided important information on the level of marine mammal 
incidental serious injury and mortality. NMFS anticipates receiving 
additional marine mammal bycatch information on the bottom trawl 
fishery from observer programs directed at fish bycatch. This fishery 
will be re-evaluated for potential listing in Category II in a future 
proposed LOF. The trawl and gillnet fisheries have very different 
methods for hauling the gear and removing catch from the gear. It is 
much less likely that an observer will miss a marine mammal from a 
trawl haul than from a gillnet haul.
    Comment 45: It may be premature to place the finfish aquaculture 
fishery in Category III based on a presumption that, since intentional 
killing is now prohibited, participants will not shoot seals. Media 
accounts of fishers shooting hundreds of seals belie the NMFS 
contention that the industry is likely to stop killing seals 
(justifying reclassification from Category II to Category III). Thus, 
the fishery should remain in Category II.
    Response: The finfish aquaculture fishery was placed in Category II 
in the previous LOF, because intentional lethal takes of harbor seals 
and grey seals were 

[[Page 67074]]
thought to occur ``occasionally.'' The authority to intentionally kill 
the seals was revoked by the 1994 MMPA amendments. A fishery 
categorization under section 118 cannot be based on the supposition 
that aquaculturists will violate the law. Anyone who intentionally 
kills marine mammals to protect fishing gear or catch will be subject 
to enforcement actions. This fishery will be re-evaluated in developing 
a future proposed LOF based on recent seal entanglement records from 
the fishery.
    Comment 46: The Gulf of Mexico inshore gillnet fishery has not been 
classified correctly. There are over 40 discrete stocks of bottlenose 
dolphins in the Gulf of Mexico bay, sound and estuarine stocks, each 
with a PBR of between 0 and 3 animals per year. If this fishery were to 
be classified based on analogy to U.S. inshore fisheries in the mid-
Atlantic, then it must be supposed that it is likely to interact with 
bottlenose dolphins (see Long Island sound inshore gillnet, Delaware 
Bay inshore gillnet and North Carolina inshore gillnet). As such, this 
fishery should be either a Category I or II fishery, as it would have 
to kill 0.03 animals per year or less to be placed in Category III if 
it is operating in an area coincident with any of the Gulf bays stocks. 
If this fishery is not operating in bays, sounds and estuaries (as 
could be the case in an ``inshore'' fishery) and is instead interacting 
with coastal stocks, then the PBR for the Western Gulf of Mexico 
coastal stock is 29 animals (0.2=1 percent of PBR); the PBR level for 
the northern Gulf of Mexico coastal stock is 35 (0.3=1 percent of the 
PBR level); and the PBR level for the Eastern Gulf of Mexico coastal 
stock is 89 (0.8=1 percent of the PBR level). Thus, the fishery would 
have to kill less than one of these animals each year in order to 
properly be placed in Category III. This too appears unlikely, given 
the propensity of gillnets to interact with bottlenose dolphins. It 
would seem that this fishery is totally inappropriate for Category III. 
This new fishery should be either Category I or Category II based on 
its potential to interact with bottlenose dolphins.
    Response: Because NMFS has no documented, direct observations of 
serious injury or mortality to marine mammals in this fishery, it has 
been classified as category III by analogy with Atlantic inshore 
gillnet fisheries. However, as explained under responses to comments on 
those fisheries, NMFS believes there is potential for interaction with 
marine mammals in this fishery. Several bottlenose dolphins were 
incidentally caught in research-related tangle nets set for turtles 
between Texas and Louisiana between 1993 and 1995. These nets are 
similar to, and used like nets used in the inshore gillnet fishery. In 
addition, these nets were fully tended specifically to prevent marine 
mammal entanglements from occurring. This information and any 
additional information that can be obtained with respect to this 
fishery may be considered in developing a future proposed LOF.
    Comment 47: The offshore monkfish bottom gillnet fishery, a new 
fishery to the proposed LOF for 1996, was placed in Category III based 
on an expectation that there will be a remote likelihood of 
interactions between bottom gillnet gear and marine mammals. While it 
is true that deep-set gear is less likely to kill marine mammals, a 
number of stocks (e.g., sperm whales) do use deep water areas, and 
gillnets are the gear type most likely to interact with any marine 
mammal species in the area. Until such time as it can be ascertained 
that interactions are unlikely, this new fishery should be placed in 
Category II to allow observer coverage and the gathering of more 
reliable information on interactions.
    Response: This fishery may have been listed incorrectly as Category 
III in the proposed LOF. Because this fishery may have a high potential 
to take several cetacean species based on analogy with other shelf-edge 
fisheries such as the large pelagic drift gillnet fishery, NMFS will 
examine available data during the development of the next proposed LOF 
for reclassification of this fishery as Category II.
    Since the publication of the proposed LOF, two other components of 
the monkfish fishery have been recognized by NMFS. The following 
provides a description of each component, and its treatment in this 
final LOF:
U.S. Atlantic Monkfish Trawl Fishery, Unknown Number of Participants
    The monkfish trawl fishery harvests monkfish in deep waters off the 
Atlantic coast. Some participants in this fishery use a modified beam 
trawl; most use otter trawls. In addition, some participants in the 
scallop dredge fishery target monkfish using dredge gear during off-
days for scallops as well as simultaneously with scallops. Because the 
target species, gear type, and geographic range of this fishery is 
unique, it is considered a new fishery for the purposes of the LOF. 
There are no documented reports of incidental serious injury or 
mortality of marine mammals in this fishery, nor are incidental serious 
injuries or mortalities expected. Accordingly, this fishery is placed 
in Category III in this final LOF.
Monkfish Gillnetting in the Gulf of Maine
    Fishers participating in the New England multispecies sink gillnet 
fishery have targeted monkfish for several years. When targeting this 
species, a large mesh (10-14'' stretched mesh) sink gillnet is used, 
and the net is either tied down, or is set upright without floats using 
a polyfoam core floatline. Reports indicate that at least some fishers 
target monkfish in the Gulf of Maine near Jeffrey's Ledge. This fishery 
is an extension of the New England multispecies sink gillnet fishery, 
but has not been specifically included in the name of the fishery. 
Because of the increasing dominance of monkfish in the groundfish 
catch, the name of the New England multispecies sink gillnet fishery 
has been changed to the ``New England multispecies sink gillnet fishery 
(includes all species as defined in the Multispecies FMP, spiny 
dogfish, and monkfish)'' to clarify that sink gillnet fishers targeting 
monkfish are included.
    Comment 48: The Gulf of Maine, U.S. mid-Atlantic tuna, shark, 
swordfish hook-and-line/harpoon fishery is stated to have no documented 
interactions with marine mammals. This is incorrect. For example, NMFS 
records indicate that, on September 1, 1986 a humpback whale was 
reported by the U.S. Coast Guard off Nantucket shoals with tuna floats 
trailing; on November 14, 1986, the U.S. Coast Guard reported to NMFS 
that a right whale calf was seen with ``a tuna dart with line 
attached'' in its body; on July 7, 1989, a humpback whale was reported 
by the Cetacean Research Unit in Gloucester, MA, to have a tuna line 
from an identified Gloucester-based tuna boat around its left flipper 
and flukes, with the float attached. Furthermore, on August 29, 1995, a 
humpback whale was observed by both whale watching boats and the U.S. 
Coast Guard on Jeffreys Ledge, with a tuna boat anchor, line and float 
wrapped around and trailing from its body. While this most recent 
sighting may not yet have appeared in the main data base, the three 
earlier reports are from NMFS files. This information should be 
corrected in the LOF, and this fishery should be considered for 
reclassification.
    Response: Because NMFS chose to use the most current data 
available, entanglement references prior to the Marine Mammal Exemption 
Program (MMEP) inception in 1989 were not used in developing the 
proposed LOF. This fishery may be considered for re-

[[Page 67075]]
classification in Category II in a future proposed LOF based on recent 
entanglement records. A humpback entanglement in tuna hand gear was 
conclusively identified in 1995, and the recent references presented in 
Comment 47, along with additional records, may be used to support this 
re-classification.
    Comment 49: NMFS entanglement reports indicate that a number of 
animals have been seen entangled in trawl gear from an unspecified 
fishery. On February 15, 1983, a right whale calf was reported dead in 
an otter trawl, on February 23, 1986, a humpback whale was reported by 
the Cetacean Research Unit off Jeffreys Ledge ``caught in otter 
trawl,'' and on September 18, 1989, the Marine Mammal Stranding Center 
in New Jersey reported a failed attempt to rescue a humpback whale from 
trawl net and cable. Either the Gulf of Maine mackerel trawl or the 
mid-Atlantic multi-species trawl, or another trawl fishery operating in 
the area is apparently having interactions with endangered species. 
Thus, it may not be accurate to say that these fisheries have no 
documented interactions.
    Response: The right whale calf entangled in otter trawl gear in 
1983 was determined to have been dead and decomposed prior to this 
observation and should therefore not be attributed to the otter trawl 
fishery. The February 23, 1986 report of a humpback in an otter trawl 
was an incomplete report. The whale was still alive, but it is likely 
that the whale was weakened by a previous entanglement, a vessel 
collision, or other injury or disease. The carcass was not recovered, 
so no conclusions can be drawn from this incident. The September 18, 
1989, entanglement of a humpback in trawl gear in New Jersey was not 
conclusively linked to the specific trawl type, and there was no 
information obtained that would give a location for the original point 
of entanglement. Because the fishery that caused the above 
entanglements cannot be specifically identified, the information may 
not be used to classify fisheries at this time.
    Comment 50: It is stated that the Gulf of Maine, U.S. mid-Atlantic 
offshore lobster trap/pot fishery has no documented interactions. This 
is incorrect. A right whale, which washed up dead this summer (1995) in 
Rhode Island, was found with line from off-shore lobster gear wrapped 
so tightly around its flippers, that it cut through the bone and likely 
contributed to the animal's death. In addition, a NMFS report from 
April 25, 1981, states that a minke whale was found entangled in 
offshore lobster gear and released on April 28, 1981. Thus, it can be 
seen that this fishery does have interactions.
    Response: Because NMFS chose to use the most current data 
available, entanglement references prior to the MMEP program inception 
in 1989 were not used in developing the current proposed LOF. These 
records may be considered in developing a future proposed LOF. The 
right whale that stranded in Rhode Island in July of 1995 had been 
entangled as early as December 1993, although the original point of 
entanglement is unknown. Although entanglement experts on-scene 
believed that the gear on the whale was probably offshore lobster gear, 
this could not be confirmed because no identification unique to this 
fishery was recovered. NMFS also anticipates that both inshore and 
offshore lobster fisheries may be considered by the Take Reduction Team 
that will be established to make recommendations to NMFS on reducing 
interactions between fisheries and large cetaceans.
    Comment 51: A number of fisheries have had species of marine 
mammals listed as interacting species, based on analogy to similar 
fisheries that have interactions with marine mammal species known to 
occur in the area. The U.S. mid-Atlantic mixed species stop seine/weir 
fishery should therefore not have its interactions reported as ``none 
documented.'' Seines and weirs pose a significant interaction problem 
for a number of species of marine mammals. For instance, in 1981 a 
humpback whale was reported caught in a cod weir in Long Island and 
released by the Okeanos Research Center. In 1988, a weir in Truro, MA, 
caught two humpbacks: one on October 16 and one on December 6. Both 
animals were released by the Center for Coastal Studies. Furthermore, 
there is no justification for assuming that this fishery's interaction 
potential is significantly different than that of the Gulf of Maine 
herring and Atlantic stop seine/weir fishery, which has humpback, right 
whale, minke whale and harbor porpoise interactions. The final LOF 
should include these corrections.
    Response: The entanglement records mentioned by the commenter were 
not considered for the proposed LOF. These records and any records 
received since the development of the proposed LOF may be considered 
while developing a future proposed LOF. In general, NMFS believes that 
potential for serious injury or mortality due to these fisheries is 
low.

Comments on Fisheries in the Southwest Region

    Comment 52: Reclassify the California (CA) set/drift gillnet 
fisheries that use small mesh to Category II based on takes of central 
California harbor porpoise.
    Response: California gillnet fisheries that use a mesh size of 3.5 
inches or less target white croaker, bonito, flying fish, herring, 
smelt, shad sturgeon, bottomfish, mullet, perch, and rockfish. There 
have been no observed or reported incidental takes of central 
California harbor porpoise, or any marine mammal, in these fisheries. 
In addition, no mention of central California harbor porpoise 
mortalities or serious injuries in the small mesh gillnet fisheries 
were made in the final SAR. Due to the small mesh size used in this 
fishery, the likelihood of incidental marine mammal mortality and 
serious injury is very low. For these reasons, this fishery is placed 
in Category III.
    Comment 53: Reclassify the CA herring, sardine, and squid purse 
seine fisheries into Category II, because the interactions are similar 
to those that occur in the CA anchovy, mackerel, and tuna purse seine 
fishery.
    Response: The CA anchovy, mackerel, and tuna purse seine fishery 
has been classified as Category II, because mortality and serious 
injury of the offshore bottlenose dolphin stock across all fisheries is 
greater than 10 percent of this stock's PBR level, and the estimated 
annual average mortality and serious injury of this stock in the CA 
anchovy, mackerel, tuna purse seine fishery is 2 percent of this 
stock's PBR level. At this time, there are no data indicating that the 
herring, sardine, and squid purse seine fisheries have similar 
incidental serious injury and mortality rates to the anchovy, mackerel, 
and tuna purse seine fishery. For these reasons, the herring, sardine, 
and squid purse seine fisheries are placed in Category III.
    Comment 54: Hawaii (HI) lobster trap/crab trap fishery should be 
considered to interact with humpback whales based on analogy with 
interactions between trap fisheries and large cetaceans on the U.S. 
Atlantic coast.
    Response: There is no evidence to indicate that humpback whales 
interact with this fishery in Hawaii. Because there is no evidence of 
incidental mortality or serious injury of humpback whales, or other 
marine mammals in this fishery, this fishery is placed in Category III.

Changes from the Proposed LOF

    The following is a list of other changes that have not been 
discussed in 

[[Page 67076]]
the preamble or response to comments section, or that were made for 
editorial consistency:
    Marine mammal species list. According to statute, the LOF must 
include a description of the marine mammal stocks that interact with 
each commercial fishery. The proposed LOF included marine mammals that 
are known, reported, or strongly suspected to be injured, killed, 
entangled, or harassed in a particular commercial fishery. All marine 
mammals listed as interacting with a particular commercial fishery in 
the 1994 LOF were also included. In this final LOF, the list of marine 
mammals specified as interacting with commercial fisheries is limited 
to those that have had documented incidental injuries or mortalities in 
commercial fisheries between 1989 and 1995. Information from observer 
programs, logbook data, stranding reports, and anecdotal reports were 
used to develop the species list. In addition, the names of the marine 
mammal species/stock involved are listed instead of a code.
    Alaskan Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands groundfish trawl fishery. 
This fishery was proposed to move from Category III to Category II in 
the proposed LOF based on the serious injury and mortality of killer 
whales that is over 50 percent of the PBR. However, because the 
population estimates of both the resident and transient stocks of 
killer whales are known to be biased low, and because NMFS has good 
estimates of the level of mortality and serious injury in this observed 
fishery, this fishery will be placed in Category III.
    AK southern Bering Sea, Aleutian Islands, and Western Gulf of 
Alaska sablefish longline/set line (federally regulated waters). This 
fishery was placed in Category II in the 1994 LOF and was proposed to 
remain in Category II in the proposed LOF. The proposed classification 
was based on an annual level of serious injury and mortality of both 
the resident and transient stocks of killer whales that is greater than 
10 percent of the PBR level for all fisheries, and greater than 1 
percent of the PBR level for this fishery. However, because the 
population estimates of both the resident and transient stocks of 
killer whales are known to be biased low, this fishery is placed in 
Category III.
    Mid-Atlantic Menhaden Purse Seine. This fishery was erroneously 
proposed to be placed in Category II in the proposed LOF, because 
incidental takes of bottlenose dolphins that occurred in the Gulf of 
Mexico menhaden purse seine were attributed to the Mid-Atlantic 
menhaden purse seine. This error has been corrected, and the Mid-
Atlantic menhaden purse seine is placed in Category III in this final 
LOF.
    Gulf of Maine small pelagics surface gillnet. This fishery was 
identified in Category I in the 1994 LOF, and was proposed to remain in 
Category I in the proposed LOF, based on a lack of available 
information that could be used to place the fishery in a different 
category. Because only two reports of serious injury and mortality of 
marine mammals incidental to this fishery have been reported, Category 
I is not warranted. Thus, this fishery has been placed in Category II.
    Occasional anecdotal reports of mortalities and injuries of marine 
mammals incidental to this fishery have been reported. Because there 
have been reports of mortalities in this fishery, it will be placed in 
Category II.
    Atlantic squid, mackerel, butterfish trawl. The name of this 
fishery was the ``Atlantic mid-water trawl'' in the proposed LOF. In 
the proposed LOF, this fishery was defined as including those mid-water 
trawlers that target fish managed by the Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and 
Butterfish Fishery Management Plan (FMP). Because both mid- and bottom-
trawl gear are used to harvest squid, the name of this fishery has been 
changed to reflect the target species in lieu of the technique. Thus, 
this fishery is now called the ``Atlantic squid, mackerel, butterfish 
trawl'' in the final LOF.
    Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico large pelagics drift gillnet 
fishery. The name of this fishery was the ``Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean, 
Gulf of Mexico swordfish, tuna, shark drift gillnet'' in the proposed 
LOF. The name of this fishery has been changed in the final LOF because 
the species targeted in this fishery have changed in the past and may 
change in the future.
    U.S. Atlantic large pelagics pair trawl. The name of this fishery 
was proposed as the ``Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico 
Swordfish, Tuna, Shark Pair trawl'' in the proposed LOF. The name has 
been changed in the final LOF to encompass all large pelagic species 
targeted using this gear.
    Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico large pelagics longline. 
The name of this fishery was proposed as the ``Atlantic Ocean, 
Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico tuna, shark, swordfish longline'' in the 
proposed LOF. The name has been changed in the final LOF to encompass 
all large pelagic species targeted using this gear.
    To remain consistent throughout the United States, the Atlantic 
Ocean, Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean commercial passenger fishing 
vessel fishery has been added to the LOF. This fishery is placed in 
Category III, because there are no documented or suspected serious 
injuries or mortalities of marine mammals incidental to this fishery.
    Number of participants in commercial fisheries. The LOF tables 
include estimates of the number of participants in each commercial 
fishery. Comments were received updating the number of participants in 
certain commercial fisheries, and these updates are reflected in Tables 
1 and 2. The number of participants was updated for the following 
fisheries: Gulf of Mexico menhaden purse seine, Florida west coast 
purse seine, Southeast U.S. Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico snapper-grouper 
and other reef fish bottom longline/hook&line, and the Southeast U.S. 
Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, Caribbean spiny lobster trap/pot.
    All occurrences of ``South Atlantic'' in the fishery names in the 
LOF have been changed to ``Southeast U.S. Atlantic'' to more 
appropriately designate the geographic location of the commercial 
fisheries as occurring in southern U.S. waters and not south of the 
equator.
    ``Weakfish, mullet, spot, croaker'' were added to the list of 
target species in the ``Gulf of Mexico inshore gillnet'' fishery to 
better reflect the nature of the fishery.
    The name of the Gulf of Maine, South Atlantic coastal shad, 
sturgeon gillnet has been changed to ``Gulf of Maine, Southeast U.S. 
Atlantic coastal shad, sturgeon gillnet fishery'' to better reflect the 
geographical range of this fishery, and to specifically include the 
waters of North Carolina.
    The Gulf of Mexico, Southeast U.S. Atlantic coastal gillnet 
(includes mullet gillnet fishery in Louisiana and Mississippi) fishery 
has been separated into a Gulf of Mexico component and a Southeast U.S. 
Atlantic coastal gillnet, because the marine mammal stocks with which 
the fisheries interact are different.
    The Florida mullet gillnet fishery has been removed from the LOF. 
This fishery no longer operates due to the net ban in Florida state 
waters. Some participants in this fishery have moved their operations 
to Louisiana and Mississippi; thus, the phrase ``includes mullet 
gillnet fishing in LA and MS'' has been added to the name of the 
Southeast U.S. Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico coastal gillnet fishery. 

[[Page 67077]]

Responses to Comments

Justification for the Categorization of Commercial Fisheries

    The following are justifications for the final categorization of 
commercial fisheries into Category I, II, or III based on the 
classification scheme defined in the final rule implementing section 
118 (60 FR 45086, August 30, 1995). Justifications are presented for 
only those fisheries placed in Category I and II, or those fisheries 
placed in Category III for which observer, logbook, stranding or other 
information exist. The evaluation of each fishery at both the Tier 1 
(total, species-specific marine mammal serious injuries and mortalities 
across all fisheries) and the Tier 2 (fishery-specific incidental 
marine mammal serious injury and mortality) levels is provided.

Commercial Fisheries in the Pacific Ocean

Category I

CA Angel Shark/Halibut and Other Species Using Large Mesh (>3.5 inches) 
Set Gillnet Fishery
    Tier 1 evaluation: Based on observer data and fishing effort during 
1991-93 (Barlow et al., 1994, NMFS 1995), annual mortality and serious 
injury of the central California harbor porpoise across all fisheries, 
including the California angel shark/halibut large-mesh set gillnet 
fishery, exceeds 10 percent of this stock's PBR level.
    Tier 2 evaluation: The CA angel shark/halibut large-mesh set 
gillnet fishery is responsible for an estimated annual removal level of 
50 percent or more of the Central California harbor porpoise's PBR 
level. CA/OR Thresher Shark/Swordfish Drift Gillnet Fishery
    Tier 1 evaluation: Based on observer data and fishing effort during 
1991-93 (Barlow et al., 1994, NMFS 1995), total annual mortality and 
serious injury of sperm whales across all fisheries, including the CA/
OR drift gillnet fishery, exceeds 10 percent of this stock's PBR level.
    Tier 2 evaluation: The CA/OR thresher shark/swordfish drift gillnet 
fishery is responsible for an estimated annual removal level of 50 
percent or more of the CA/OR/WA sperm whale stock's PBR level.

Category II

AK Prince William Sound Salmon Drift Gillnet
    Tier 1 evaluation: Total known harbor porpoise mortality and 
serious injury levels across all fisheries exceed 10 percent of the 
stock's PBR level.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Known harbor porpoise mortality and serious 
injury in this fishery exceed 1 percent of the stock's PBR.
AK Peninsula/Aleutian Islands Salmon Drift Gillnet
    Tier 1 evaluation: Total known harbor porpoise mortality and 
serious injury levels across all fisheries exceed 10 percent of the 
stock's PBR level.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Known harbor porpoise mortality and serious 
injury in this fishery exceed 1 percent of the stock's PBR level.
AK Peninsula/Aleutian Island Salmon Set Gillnet
    Tier 1 evaluation: Total known marine mammal mortality and serious 
injury levels across all fisheries does not exceed 10 percent of each 
stock's PBR level based on the current information. Low levels of 
observer coverage have been inadequate to determine mortality and 
serious injury levels for these stocks across all fisheries, and 
available data suggest that levels of mortality and serious injury may 
exceed 10 percent of some stocks' PBR levels if observer information 
were available, especially for harbor porpoise and Steller sea lions.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Low levels of marine mammal mortalities and 
serious injuries have been documented for this fishery. This fishery 
has not been observed, and because levels of marine mammal mortalities 
and serious injuries in this fishery are expected to be similar to 
levels of other set gillnet fisheries that interact with similar marine 
mammal species, especially for harbor porpoise, this fishery is placed 
in Category II.
Southeast Alaska Salmon Drift Gillnet
    Tier 1 evaluation: Total known harbor porpoise and humpback whale 
mortality and serious injury levels across all fisheries exceed 10 
percent of each stock's PBR level.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Known harbor porpoise and humpback whale 
mortality and serious injury levels in this fishery exceed 1 percent of 
each stock's PBR level.
AK Cook Inlet Drift Gillnet
    Tier 1 evaluation: Total known marine mammal mortality and serious 
injury levels across all fisheries do not exceed 10 percent of the PBR 
of each stock taken by this fishery with currently available 
information. Low levels of observer coverage have been inadequate to 
determine mortality and serious injury levels for these stocks across 
all fisheries, and available data suggest that levels of mortality and 
serious injury may exceed 10 percent of some stocks' PBRs if observer 
information were available.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Low levels of marine mammal mortalities and 
serious injuries have been documented for this fishery. Low levels of 
observer coverage have been inadequate to determine mortality and 
serious injury levels for these stocks, and available data suggest that 
levels of mortality and serious injury may exceed 1 percent of some 
stocks' PBR levels if observer information were available. Levels of 
marine mammal mortalities and serious injuries in this fishery are 
expected to be similar to levels of other drift gillnet fisheries that 
interact with similar marine mammal species.
AK Cook Inlet Salmon Set Gillnet
    Tier 1 evaluation: Total known marine mammal mortality and serious 
injury levels across all fisheries do not exceed 10 percent of each 
stock's PBR level with the current information. Low levels of observer 
coverage have been inadequate to determine mortality and serious injury 
levels for these stocks across all fisheries, and available data 
suggest that levels of mortality and serious injury may exceed 10 
percent of some stocks' PBR levels if observer information were 
available, especially for harbor porpoise.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Low levels of marine mammal mortalities and 
serious injuries have been documented for this fishery. Low levels of 
observer coverage have been inadequate to determine mortality and 
serious injury levels for these stocks, and available data suggest that 
levels of mortality and serious injury may exceed 1 percent of some 
stocks' PBR levels if observer information were available. Levels of 
marine mammal mortalities and serious injuries in this fishery are 
expected to be similar to levels of other set gillnet fisheries that 
interact with similar marine mammal species, especially for harbor 
porpoise.
AK Yakutat Salmon Set Gillnet
    Tier 1 evaluation: Total known harbor seal mortality and serious 
injury levels across all fisheries do not exceed 10 percent of the 
stock's PBR level with the current information. Low levels of observer 
coverage have been inadequate to determine mortality and serious injury 
levels for these stocks across all fisheries, and available data 
suggest that levels of mortality and serious injury may exceed 10 
percent of some stocks' PBR levels if observer information were 
available.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Known harbor seal mortality and serious injury 
levels 

[[Page 67078]]
exceed 1 percent of the stock's PBR level.
AK Kodiak Salmon Set Gillnet
    Tier 1 evaluation: Total known harbor porpoise mortality and 
serious injury levels across all fisheries exceed 10 percent of the 
stock's PBR level.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Known harbor porpoise mortality and serious 
injury levels in this fishery exceed 1 percent of the stock's PBR 
level.
AK Bristol Bay Drift Gillnet
    Tier 1 evaluation: Total known harbor seal and beluga whale 
mortality and serious injury levels across all fisheries do not exceed 
10 percent of each stock's PBR level with the current information. Low 
levels of observer coverage have been inadequate to determine mortality 
and serious injury levels for these stocks across all fisheries, and 
available data suggest that levels of mortality and serious injury may 
exceed 10 percent of some stocks' PBR levels if observer information 
were available.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Known harbor seal and beluga whale mortality and 
serious injury levels exceed 1 percent of each stock's PBR level.
AK Bristol Bay Set Gillnet
    Tier 1 evaluation: Total known marine mammal mortality and serious 
injury levels across all fisheries do not exceed 10 percent of each 
stock's PBR level with the current information. Low levels of observer 
coverage have been inadequate to determine mortality and serious injury 
levels for these stocks across all fisheries, and available data 
suggest that levels of mortality and serious injury may exceed 10 
percent of some stocks' PBR levels if observer information were 
available, especially for harbor porpoise, harbor seals and Steller sea 
lions.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Low levels of marine mammal mortalities and 
serious injuries have been documented for this fishery. Low levels of 
observer coverage have been inadequate to determine mortality and 
serious injury levels for these stocks, and available data suggest that 
levels of mortality and serious injury may exceed 1 percent of some 
stocks' PBR levels if observer information were available. Levels of 
marine mammal mortalities and serious injuries in this fishery are 
expected to be similar to levels of other set gillnet fisheries that 
interact with similar marine mammal species, especially for harbor 
porpoise, harbor seals and Steller sea lions.
AK Metlakatla/Annette Island Salmon Drift Gillnet
    This fishery is separated from the Southeast drift gillnet fishery 
only for purposes of registration. It is a tribal fishery and is thus 
exempt from the registration fee. For categorization purposes, it is 
considered the same as the Southeast drift gillnet fishery.
WA Puget Sound Region Salmon Drift Gillnet (Includes All Inland Waters 
South of the US-Canada Border and Eastward of the Bonilla-Tatoosh 
Line--Treaty Indian Fishing is Excluded)
    Tier 1 evaluation: As reported in the final SAR, the estimated 
total fishery-related mortality for the inland Washington stock of 
harbor porpoise (16), exceeds 10 percent of the calculated PBR level 
(2.7) and, therefore, can not be considered insignificant.
    Tier 2 evaluation: The reported incidental take estimate of 15 
harbor porpoise per year was calculated from observed take in the 
sockeye salmon fishery. However, that estimate includes Treaty Indian 
fishing effort, which constitutes about one half of the effort in Puget 
Sound. Therefore, the estimated take of harbor porpoise for the non-
tribal salmon drift gillnet fishery would be about one half of the 
total estimated take (7.5), which is greater than 1 percent but less 
than 50 percent of the calculated PBR level for this stock.
CA Anchovy, Mackerel, Tuna Purse Seine
    Tier 1 evaluation: Based on observer data and fishing effort during 
1991-93 and logbook data (1990-92) (Barlow et al., 1995, NMFS 1995), 
the average annual mortality and serious injury of the offshore 
bottlenose dolphin across all fisheries, including the CA anchovy, 
mackerel, tuna purse seine fishery, exceeds 10 percent of this stock's 
PBR levels.
    Tier 2 evaluation: The mortality and serious injury of the offshore 
bottlenose dolphin in the CA mackerel, anchovy, tuna purse seine 
fishery is two percent of this stock's PBR level.
AK Southeast Salmon Purse Seine
    Tier 1 evaluation: Total known humpback whale mortalities and 
serious injuries across all fisheries exceed 10 percent of the stock's 
PBR level.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Known humpback whale mortalities and serious 
injuries in this fishery exceed 1 percent of the stock's PBR level.
AK pair trawl
    This is a new fishery in Alaskan waters and is therefore 
categorized by analogy with pair trawl fisheries in the U.S. North 
Atlantic. The U.S. North Atlantic large pelagics pair trawl fishery has 
demonstrated high levels of mortalities and serious injury for some 
marine mammal species. The Alaska pair trawl fishery is classified as 
Category II pending additional information on the level of marine 
mammal serious injuries and mortalities in the fishery.
OR Swordfish/Blue Shark Surface Longline
    Categorization of this fishery is based on analogy with observed 
pelagic longline fisheries in the Atlantic Ocean. Based on observer 
data, the Atlantic Ocean pelagic longline fishery for swordfish and 
tuna has at least an occasional incidental serious injury and mortality 
of marine mammals. Accordingly, this fishery is placed in Category II.

Category III

AK Prince William Sound Set Gillnet
    Tier 1 evaluation: Total known harbor seal and Steller sea lion 
mortality and serious injury levels across all fisheries do not exceed 
10 percent of each stock's PBR level with the current information. Low 
levels of observer coverage have been inadequate to determine mortality 
and serious injury levels for these stocks across all fisheries, and 
available data suggest that levels of mortality and serious injury may 
exceed 10 percent of these stocks' PBR levels if observer information 
were available.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Marine mammal mortality and serious injury 
levels approaching 1 percent are not expected for any stock by this 
fishery.
AK Kuskokwim, Yukon, Norton Sound, Kotzebue Salmon Gillnet
    Interactions in these fisheries usually result in directed takes of 
marine mammals for subsistence purposes.
AK Roe Herring and Food/Bait Herring Gillnet
    Tier 1 evaluation: No marine mammal serious injuries or mortalities 
have been documented incidental to this fishery.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Although marine mammal mortalities and serious 
injuries have been documented for other gillnet fisheries, the roe 
herring gillnet fishery openers are of such short duration, marine 
mammal mortality and serious injury levels approaching 1 percent are 
not expected for any stock for this fishery. 

[[Page 67079]]

WA Willapa Bay Drift Gillnet
    Tier 1 evaluation: The estimated total fishery related mortality 
and serious injury for the Oregon and Washington coastal stock of 
harbor seals is greater than 10 percent of the PBR level.
    Tier 2 evaluation: No harbor seal mortalities were observed 
incidental to fishing effort in 1991. However, harbor seals did 
interact with the fishery. Two incidents of entanglement were observed 
in which the seals were released alive and uninjured. Based on observer 
data, incidental mortality was estimated to be a rare event which would 
not exceed 1 percent of the calculated PBR level for this stock.
WA Gray's Harbor Salmon Drift Gillnet (Excluding Treaty Tribal Fishing)
    Tier 1 evaluation: As reported in the final SAR, the estimated 
total fishery related mortality and serious injury for the Oregon & 
Washington coastal stock of harbor seals (233) is greater than 10 
percent of the PBR level (170).
    Tier 2 evaluation: The reported estimate of annual mortality and 
serious injury of harbor seals in this fishery (10), based on observer 
data, is less than 1 percent of the calculated PBR level for the stock 
(17).
WA, OR Lower Columbia River (Includes Tributaries) Drift Gillnet
    Tier 1 evaluation: The estimated total fishery related mortality 
and serious injury for the Oregon and Washington coastal stock of 
harbor seals (233) is not less than 10 percent of the PBR level (170).
    Tier 2 evaluation: Based on observations in 1991-92, the estimated 
annual mortality and serious injury of harbor seals in this fishery is 
213. However, during the observation period, all but one of the 
observed mortalities occurred during the winter season. The 
extrapolated annual mortality of harbor seals in this fishery from 1991 
to 1993 was 233 seals in 1991 (all during the winter season), 192 seals 
in 1992 (180 in the winter season and 12 in the fall), and 11 seals in 
1993 (all during the winter season). Although the estimated annual 
mortalities of harbor seals in 1991 and 1992 could justify placing this 
fishery in Category II, reduced fishing seasons and or season closures 
(due to restrictions on the fishery to minimize impacts on Snake River 
chinook salmon, which are listed under the Endangered Species Act 
(ESA)) are unlikely to result in the levels of harbor seal mortality 
observed in 1991 and 1992. The winter season of 1993, when an estimated 
11 harbor seals were taken, was restricted due to ESA considerations. 
The winter season was closed in 1994. The estimated annual harbor seal 
mortality for the fall fishery, 4 (0+11+0/3=3.66) is less than 1 
percent of the calculated PBR level for this stock (17).
CA Set and Drift Gillnet Fisheries That Use a Stretched Mesh Size of 
3.5 Inches or Less
    Tier 1 evaluation: Based on logbook data (1991-1994) (NMFS 1995, 
Joe Cordaro, pers. com., SWO, NMFS), no annual mortality and serious 
injury of marine mammals has been reported in the CA set and drift 
gillnet fishery with small mesh.
AK Miscellaneous Finfish Set Gillnet
    Tier 1 evaluation: No marine mammal serious injuries or mortalities 
have been documented incidental to this fishery.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Marine mammal mortality and serious injury 
levels approaching 1 percent are not expected for any stock by this 
fishery.
HI Gillnet
    Tier 1 evaluation: One bottlenose dolphin was reported entangled in 
a gill net in 1991 (Nitta and Henderson 1993); however, bottlenose 
dolphins are rarely reported as entangled in set gillnets in Hawaii. 
There are records of spinner dolphins being taken in nets or net 
fragments in Hawaiian waters, and one eyewitness account in 1990. There 
has been one reported incidental mortality of a Hawaiian monk seal in 
an inshore gillnet in 1976 (Barlow et al., 1995). Due to the rarity of 
these interactions, this fishery is placed in Category III.
CA Herring Purse Seine
    Tier 1 evaluation: Based on logbook data (1990-94) (Joe Cordaro, 
pers. comm.) the total mortality and serious injury of the CA coastal 
bottlenose dolphins across all fisheries, including the CA herring 
purse seine fishery, is less than 10 percent of this stock's PBR level 
(Barlow et al., 1995).
CA Sardine Purse Seine
    Tier 1 evaluation: Based on logbook data (1990-1992), no mortality 
or serious injury has been reported in this fishery.
CA Squid Purse Seine
    Tier 1 evaluation: Based on logbook data (1990-92), the total 
annual average mortality and serious injury of California sea lions 
across all fisheries, including the squid purse seine fishery, exceeds 
10 percent of this stock's PBR level.
    Tier 2 evaluation: The total annual average mortality and serious 
injury of California sea lions in the CA squid purse seine fishery is 
less than one percent of this stock's PBR level.
CA Squid Dip Net
    Tier 1 evaluation: Based on logbook data (1990-1992), no mortality 
or serious injury has been reported in the CA squid dip net fishery.
WA, OR Salmon Net Pens
    Tier 1 evaluation: As reported in the final SAR, the total 
estimated fishery related mortality and serious injury of the U.S. 
stock of California sea lions (2,446) based on observer data collected 
from 1991 to 1993 exceeds 10 percent of the calculated PBR level for 
this stock (505). However, preliminary estimates for the first three 
quarters of 1994 indicate that a large reduction in the mortality rate 
has taken place and that mortality may be less than 10 percent of the 
calculated PBR for 1994.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Based on logbook data the incidental take of 
marine mammals is infrequent and California sea lion mortality and 
serious injuries are at a level less than 1 percent of the calculated 
PBR level.
OR Salmon Ranch
    Tier 1 evaluation: No incidental, but not intentional, mortalities 
or serious injuries of marine mammals have been reported for this 
fishery.
AK Salmon Troll
    Tier 1 evaluation: Total known Steller sea lion mortalities and 
serious injuries across all fisheries do not exceed 10 percent of the 
stock's PBR level with the current information. Low levels of observer 
coverage have been inadequate to determine mortality and serious injury 
levels for these stocks across all fisheries, and available data 
suggest that levels of mortality and serious injury may exceed 10 
percent of some stocks' PBR levels if observer information were 
available.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Known Steller sea lion mortalities and serous 
injuries for this fishery do not exceed 1 percent of the stock's PBR 
level and current information does not indicate that this level would 
exceed 1 percent with observer coverage for this fishery.
CA/OR/WA Salmon Troll
    Tier 1 evaluation: Based on logbook data (1990-92), the mortality 
and serious injury of California sea lions across all fisheries, 
including the CA/OR/WA salmon troll fishery, exceeds 10 percent of this 
stock's PBR level.
    Tier 2 evaluation: A review of logbook data (1990-1992) indicated 
that the majority of fishers reported intentional 

[[Page 67080]]
lethal takes for deterrence in both the deterrence columns and the gear 
columns, owing to ambiguities in the reporting instructions. However, 
based on an earlier study (Miller et al., 1983) it is known that 
incidental mortalities in this fishery are the result of intentional 
deterrence efforts which are now illegal. Once the duplicate reports 
are removed, the annual average mortality and serious injury of 
California sea lions is below one percent.
AK State Waters Sablefish Longline/Set Line
    Tier 1 evaluation: No marine mammal serious injuries or mortalities 
have been documented incidental to this fishery.
HI Swordfish, Tuna, Billfish, Mahi Mahi, Wahoo, Oceanic Sharks 
Longline/Set Line
    Tier 1 evaluation: Evidence of interactions between the Hawaii 
pelagic longline fishery and Hawaiian monk seals began to accumulate in 
1990, including 5 hooked seals and 13 unusual seal wounds that some 
believe were the result of interactions with the longline gear (Barlow 
et al. 1995). In October 1991, a permanent protected species zone was 
established around the Northwest Hawaiian Islands, which precludes 
longline fishing. One Risso's dolphin was observed ``hooked'' and was 
released alive in 1993 (pers. comm., Gene Nitta, Southwest Region, 
NMFS). Preliminary analysis of observer data from the swordfish 
longline fishery indicates that two Risso's dolphins were incidentally 
taken during 85 observed longline trips between February 1994 and 
October 1995 (NMFS unpublished data). One animal had ingested a hook 
and another appeared to be hooked in the caudal peduncle region. Both 
animals were released alive and swam away. Also, one bottlenose dolphin 
had ingested a hook and was also released alive. In 1994, a pygmy 
killer whale was hooked and released from longline gear. Furthermore, 
in 1991, a humpback whale was observed entangled in longline gear in 
Hawaii. Although the estimated PBR level for the central North Pacific 
humpback whale is 2.8 animals, no estimates of annual average humpback 
whale mortality and serious injury in the Hawaii longline fishery are 
available at this time. Thus, it is not possible to compare annual 
mortality and serious injury of humpback whales with its estimated PBR 
level. Estimates of PBR levels and annual mortality and serious injury 
for the other marine mammal species that have been documented 
interacting with the Hawaiian longline fishery are currently not 
available. For these reasons, this fishery is placed in Category III.
AK Southern Bering Sea, Aleutian Islands, and Western Gulf of Alaska 
Sablefish Longline/Set Line (Federally Regulated Waters)
    Tier 1 evaluation: Total known mortalities or serious injuries of 
killer whales across all fisheries exceed 10 percent of the PBR level 
for transient, resident and transient and resident stocks together.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Known killer whale mortalities or serious 
injuries in this fishery exceed 1 percent of the PBR level for 
transient, resident and transient and resident stocks together.
    The majority of the serious injuries and mortalities of killer 
whales incidental to commercial fisheries occurred in the BSAI 
groundfish trawl. Because this trawl fishery has a high level of 
observer coverage, good mortality estimates for killer whales are 
available from this fishery. However, because the population estimates 
for killer whales are known to be underestimated and the low level of 
serious injury and mortality that occurs incidental to the trawl and 
longline fisheries are not likely to have a significant effect on the 
population, and because neither fishery has significant interactions 
with other species of marine mammals both fisheries are placed in 
Category III.
AK Gulf of Alaska Groundfish Trawl
    Tier 1 evaluation: Total known Steller sea lion, harbor seal, 
northern elephant seal and Dall's porpoise mortalities or serious 
injuries across all fisheries do not exceed 10 percent of each stock's 
PBR level with the current information. Low levels of observer coverage 
have been inadequate to determine mortality and serious injury levels 
for these stocks across all fisheries, and available data suggest that 
levels of mortality and serious injury would exceed 10 percent of some 
stocks' PBR levels if observer information were available.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Marine mammal mortalities and serious injuries 
levels approaching 1 percent are not expected for any stock by this 
fishery.
AK BSAI Groundfish Trawl
    Tier 1 evaluation: Total known mortalities or serious injuries of 
killer whales across all fisheries exceed 10 percent of the PBR level 
for transient, resident, and transient and resident stocks combined.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Known killer whale mortalities or serious 
injuries in this fishery exceed 1 percent of the PBR level for 
transient, resident and transient and resident stocks combined.
    Killer whales are seriously injured and killed incidental to two 
fisheries: The AK southern BSAI, and Western Gulf of Alaska sablefish 
longline/set line (federally regulated waters) fishery and the AK BSAI 
groundfish trawl fishery. However, the majority of the serious injuries 
and mortalities of killer whales incidental to commercial fisheries 
occurred in the BSAI groundfish trawl. Because this trawl fishery has a 
high level of observer coverage, good mortality estimates for killer 
whales are available from this fishery. However, because the population 
estimates for killer whales are known to be underestimated, and the low 
level of serious injury and mortality that occurs incidental to the 
trawl and longline fisheries are not likely to have a significant 
effect on the population, both fisheries are placed in Category III.
AK Bering Sea, Gulf of Alaska (GOA) Finfish Pot
    Tier 1 evaluation: Total known harbor seal mortalities or serious 
injuries across all fisheries do not exceed 10 percent of each stock's 
PBR level with the current information. Low levels of observer coverage 
have been inadequate to determine mortality and serious injury levels 
for these stocks across all fisheries, and available data suggest that 
levels of mortality and serious injury may exceed 10 percent of some 
stocks' PBR levels if observer information were available.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Marine mammal mortalities and serious injuries 
levels approaching 1 percent are not expected for any stock by this 
fishery.
CA Lobster, Prawn, Shrimp, Rock Crab, Fish Pot
    Tier 1 evaluation. Although the California Marine Mammal Stranding 
Network, NMFS, receives reports of gray whales entangled in lobster pot 
gear, these entanglements, while technically ``injuries'', do not 
appear to result in mortalities. No other reports of marine mammal 
incidental takes have been reported from these fisheries. For these 
reasons, this fishery is placed in Category III.

Commercial Fisheries in the Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean, and Gulf of 
Mexico

Category I

Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico Large Pelagics Pair Trawl
    Tier 1 evaluation: Annual incidental mortality and serious injury 
across all fisheries for all stocks known to interact 

[[Page 67081]]
with this fishery is greater than 10 percent of the PBR level.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Extrapolation of observer data results in an 
estimated total incidental serious injury and mortality of 79 offshore 
bottlenose dolphins and 33 common dolphins per year from 1992-93. These 
take levels represent an annual incidental mortality and serious injury 
that is greater than 50 percent of the PBR levels for both species.
Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico Large Pelagics Drift Gillnet 
Fishery
    Tier 1 evaluation: Incidental annual mortality and serious injury 
across all fisheries for all stocks (with known PBR levels) interacting 
with this fishery is greater than 10 percent of the PBR level.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Extrapolation of observer data results in an 
annual estimated total serious injuries and mortalities of 59 Risso's 
dolphins, 424 common dolphins, 61 pilot whales, and 53 offshore 
bottlenose dolphins per year from 1989-1993. These serious injury and 
mortality levels represent an annual incidental mortality and serious 
injury that is greater than 50 percent of the PBR levels for these 
species.
    The serious injury of a right whale in 1993 was reported by the 
observer program. It was not an observed mortality; therefore it was 
not reported as an ``observed kill.'' NMFS believes, however, that this 
whale probably died from injuries sustained in this incident. One 
serious injury or mortality of a right whale is greater than 50 percent 
of the PBR level for this species. Therefore, this fishery would also 
fall into Category I based on interactions with right whales. New 
England multispecies sink gillnet (including species as defined in the 
Multispecies Fisheries Management Plan and spiny dogfish and monkfish)
    Tier 1 evaluation: Incidental annual mortality and serious injury 
across all fisheries for all stocks interacting with this fishery--with 
the exception of grey seals--is greater than 10 percent of the PBR 
level.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Extrapolation of observer data results in an 
estimated total serious injury and mortality of 102 Atlantic white-
sided dolphins and 1,875 harbor porpoise per year from 1990-93. These 
serious injury and mortality levels represent an annual incidental 
mortality and serious injury that is greater than 50 percent of the PBR 
levels for these species.
Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico Large Pelagics Longline 
Fishery
    This fishery was listed as Category II in the previous LOF and is 
moved to Category I in this LOF and re-named ``Atlantic Ocean, 
Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico Large Pelagics Longline.''
    Tier 1 evaluation: Incidental annual mortality and serious injury 
across all fisheries for pilot whale stock(s) interacting with this 
fishery is greater than 10 percent of the PBR level.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Extrapolation of observer data results in an 
estimated total incidental mortality and serious injury of 26 pilot 
whales per year from 1992-93. This represents an annual incidental 
mortality and serious injury that is greater than 50 percent of the PBR 
level for either long-finned or short-finned pilot whales. Therefore, 
this fishery is moved from Category II to Category I.
    This reclassification is supported by MMEP logbook data, which 
includes reports of injury or mortality of an average of nine pilot 
whales (stock unspecified) per year for the years 1990 to 1992. NMFS 
has also received sighting reports (both at sea and stranded) of whales 
carrying gear that may be attributable to the pelagic longline fishery.

Category II

U.S. Mid-Atlantic Coastal Gillnet Fishery
    Tier 1 evaluation: Incidental mortality and serious injury across 
all fisheries for harbor porpoise, coastal bottlenose dolphins, and 
humpback whales, which are known to interact with this fishery, is 
greater than 10 percent of the PBR levels for these stocks. Therefore 
this fishery is subject to Tier 2 analysis.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Little observer coverage occurred in this 
fishery between 1989 and 1993. No serious injuries and mortalities were 
observed during those years. Therefore, no annual incidental mortality 
and serious injury from this fishery can be reported from observer data 
for these years. Based on observer coverage in 1994, entanglements of 
humpback whales and dolphins observed by NMFS and the public (not the 
observer program) and evidence of gillnet entanglement observed in 
stranded harbor porpoise, bottlenose dolphins, and humpback whales, 
NMFS believes that annual serious injury and mortality for these 
species due to this fishery is greater than 1 percent but less than 50 
percent of the PBR levels for these stocks. Therefore this fishery is 
placed in Category II. For clarification of how the stranding data were 
used in this analysis, see the proposed LOF (60 FR 31680, June 16, 
1995).
Gulf of Maine Small Pelagics Surface Gillnet
    Occasional anecdotal reports of mortalities and injuries of marine 
mammals incidental to this fishery have been reported. Because there 
have been reports of mortalities in this fishery, it is placed in 
Category II.
Southeast U.S. Atlantic Shark Gillnet Fishery
    Tier 1 evaluation: Incidental annual mortality and serious injury 
across all fisheries for the western North Atlantic coastal bottlenose 
dolphin stock interacting with this fishery are greater than 10 percent 
of the PBR level.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Observer data for this fishery indicate that 
mortality to the western North Atlantic coastal bottlenose dolphin 
stock due to this fishery is 4 percent; thus, the fishery belongs in 
Category II.
    In addition, a young right whale calf was observed off the northern 
coast of Florida, which had wounds indicative of interaction with 
gillnet gear in February 1994. The animal also exhibited propeller 
wounds believed by researchers investigating the incident to have been 
inflicted by the fishery vessel responsible for the net wounds. It was 
concluded that the shark gillnet fishery was the only large mesh 
gillnet fishery operating in that area at the time. The animal has not 
been sighted since, and is presumed to be dead. Another suspected 
interaction between this fishery and a right whale cow was also 
reported in this same year, although it is believed that this 
particular interaction was not fatal.
Atlantic Squid, Mackerel, Butterfish Trawl
    This fishery was proposed to combine ``Mid-Atlantic Squid Trawl'' 
and ``Mid-Atlantic Mackerel Trawl'' from the 1994 LOF. The proposed LOF 
called this fishery the ``Atlantic mid-water trawl.'' In the final LOF, 
the fishery is renamed ``Atlantic Squid, Mackerel, Butterfish Trawl'' 
with no reference to whether fishermen are using bottom or mid-water 
gear.
    Tier 1 evaluation: Based on MMEP logbook reports from the squid and 
mackerel trawl fisheries, incidental annual mortality and serious 
injury across all fisheries for all stocks reported to interact with 
this fishery are greater than 10 percent of the PBR level.
    Tier 2 evaluation: MMEP logbook data averaged over 1990-92 result 
in reported serious injuries and mortalities of five pilot whales per 
year. This represents a minimum serious injury and mortality level of 
greater than 1 

[[Page 67082]]
percent but less than 50 percent of the PBR level for either long-
finned or short-finned pilot whales. Therefore, this fishery is placed 
in Category II.
North Carolina Haul Seine
    Representatives of the North Carolina marine mammal stranding 
network have noted interactions between this gear and western North 
Atlantic coastal bottlenose dolphins. Three dolphins were observed as 
they were released live from this gear; on another occasion, one 
dolphin was recovered dead from an interaction with a haul seine. These 
observations support the decision to place this new fishery in Category 
II until NMFS has more data with which to support this or another 
classification.
North Carolina Roe Mullet Stop Net
    Tier 1 evaluation: Incidental annual mortality and serious injury 
across all fisheries for the coastal bottlenose dolphin stock 
interacting with this fishery is greater than 10 percent of PBR.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Evidence of mortality due to stop net 
entanglement observed in stranded western North Atlantic coastal 
bottlenose dolphins indicate that annual serious injury and mortality 
related to this fishery for this stock is greater than 1 percent but 
less than 50 percent of PBR. Therefore, this fishery is placed in 
Category II.

Category III

Rhode Island, Southern Massachusetts (to Monomoy Island), and New York 
Bight (Raritan and Lower New York Bays) Inshore Gillnet
    At this time there is no information available to suggest that 
serious injury and mortality of marine mammals occur incidental to this 
fishery. Based on patterns of marine mammal distribution, likelihood of 
encounters with cetaceans is low, but encounters with seals may occur. 
This fishery was separated from other Mid-Atlantic gillnet fisheries to 
account for differences in cetacean distribution. A closer examination 
of more recent stranding and entanglement records may provide 
information to support re-classification of this fishery in the future.
Long Island Sound Inshore Gillnet
    At this time there is no available information to suggest that 
serious injury and mortality of marine mammals occur incidental to this 
fishery. Based on patterns of marine mammal distribution, likelihood of 
encounters with cetaceans is low, but encounters with seals may occur. 
This fishery was separated from other Mid-Atlantic gillnet fisheries to 
account for differences in cetacean distribution. A closer examination 
of more recent stranding and entanglement records may provide 
information to support re-classification of this fishery in the future.
Delaware Bay Inshore Gillnet
    At this time, there is no available information to suggest that 
serious injury and mortality of marine mammals occur incidental to this 
fishery. Based on patterns of marine mammal distribution, likelihood of 
encounters is low. This fishery was separated from other Mid-Atlantic 
gillnet fisheries to account for differences in marine mammal 
distribution. A closer examination of more recent stranding and 
entanglement records may provide information to support re-
classification of this fishery in the future.
Chesapeake Bay Inshore Gillnet
    This fishery was listed as a Category III in the previous LOF and 
remains in Category III in this LOF. This listing was inadvertently 
omitted from the proposed LOF.
    At this time, there is no available information to suggest that 
serious injury and mortality of marine mammals occur incidental to this 
fishery. Based on patterns of marine mammal distribution, likelihood of 
encounters is low. This fishery was separated from other Mid-Atlantic 
gillnet fisheries to account for differences in marine mammal 
distribution. A closer examination of more recent stranding and 
entanglement records may provide information to support re-
classification of this fishery in the future.
North Carolina Inshore Gillnet
    No marine mammal serious injuries or mortalities have been 
documented incidental to this fishery. All marine mammal strandings 
exhibiting evidence of gillnet fishery interactions recovered by the 
North Carolina marine mammal stranding network since at least 1992 have 
been from offshore locations. However, as marine mammals stranded in 
the marshes are difficult to detect, stranding data will reflect this 
bias. NMFS agrees that there is potential for interaction and will 
continue to collect stranding and other information on this fishery.
Gulf of Mexico Inshore Gillnet (black drum, sheepshead, weakfish, 
mullet, spot, croaker)
    Inshore gillnet fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico have been 
classified by analogy with similar inshore fisheries in the mid-
Atlantic. The PBR levels for stocks of bottlenose dolphins in the Gulf 
of Mexico bays, sounds, and estuaries are low, because dolphin numbers 
and densities in many of these areas are low. These low densities also 
decrease the likelihood of a fishery interacting with dolphins in these 
areas. Net bans and restrictions in states such as Texas, Florida, and 
Louisiana, further decrease chances of gillnet fisheries interactions 
with marine mammals in inshore waters of Gulf states. However, 
researchers have noted that dolphin densities in some Gulf bays/sounds 
may be higher than that commonly observed in similar Atlantic bays. 
Also, detection of stranded animals is much less likely along marshy 
coastlines than on coastal beaches; thus, stranding data will reflect 
this bias. NMFS agrees that there is potential for interaction between 
marine mammals and this fishery.
Offshore Monkfish Bottom Gillnet
    This is a new fishery to the LOF and may have been listed 
incorrectly as Category III in the proposed LOF. Because this fishery 
may have a high potential to take many cetacean species based on 
analogy with other shelf-edge fisheries, such as the large pelagic 
drift net fishery, NMFS will examine available data during the 
development of the next proposed LOF for possible re-classification of 
this fishery as Category II.
Southeastern U.S. Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico Coastal Gillnet
    Although coastal gillnet fisheries have been banned in Florida 
State waters, and only shark and shad/sturgeon may be fished using 
gillnet in South Carolina and Georgia State waters, the ``Southeastern 
U.S. Atlantic'' component of this fishery will be retained in this 
final LOF. If there are no participants in this component of the 
coastal gillnet fishery when the next proposed LOF is developed, NMFS 
will consider proposing to remove this fishery from the LOF. Any 
strandings that can be determined to have occurred incidental to 
gillnet operations in Florida, Georgia, or South Carolina, would have 
to be attributed to the other gillnet operations that occur in these 
areas (i.e., shark gillnet or shad/sturgeon gillnet fisheries).
    Stranding data from the Gulf of Mexico indicate that gillnet 
interactions with coastal stocks of bottlenose dolphins may warrant 
classification of this fishery in Category II. This may be examined 
during preparation of a future proposed LOF.
Florida Mullet Gillnet
    This fishery has been removed from LOF due to the Florida net ban. 
Some 

[[Page 67083]]
fishers that previously fished in Florida waters may be working in 
Louisiana waters; what remains of this fishery is combined with the 
other Gulf of Mexico gillnet fisheries.
North Atlantic Bottom Trawl
    Tier 1 evaluation: Incidental annual mortality and serious injury 
across all fisheries for all marine mammal stocks interacting with this 
fishery is greater than 10 percent of the PBR levels.
    Tier 2 evaluation: Annual incidental mortality and serious injury 
from this fishery reported by the observer program (averaged over 1989-
93) is greater than 50 percent of the PBR level for striped dolphins, 
coastal bottlenose dolphins, and pilot whales. Therefore, this fishery 
would have been placed in Category I. However, because the observer 
coverage in this fishery is low, the estimated serious injury and 
mortality levels are statistically weak. Thus, NMFS believes this 
fishery should remain in Category III at this time. The proposed LOF 
included further justification for this decision (60 FR 31680-31681, 
June 16, 1995). NMFS anticipates having additional information from 
other observer programs that may result in a reclassification of this 
fishery in a future proposed LOF.
Mid-Atlantic, U.S. South Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico Shrimp Trawl
    Tier 1 evaluation: Incidental annual mortality and serious injury 
across all fisheries for all marine mammal stocks interacting with this 
fishery is less than 10 percent of the PBR level.
    Over 10,000 hours of observer effort in this fishery have been 
logged in the Atlantic, and over 17,000 have been logged in the Gulf. 
No takes of any marine mammal species have been observed. However, a 
Category III report submitted from a shrimp trawl fisher off Key West 
indicated a dolphin mortality occurred due to entanglement with the 
lazy line. This incident took place offshore, on the Gulf side of Key 
West, and thus likely involved the eastern coastal Gulf of Mexico stock 
of bottlenose dolphins.
Gulf of Maine Menhaden Purse Seine
    This fishery was grouped with the Mid-Atlantic menhaden purse seine 
fishery in the proposed LOF. In this final LOF, the fishery is divided 
into ``Gulf of Maine menhaden purse seine'' and ``Mid-Atlantic menhaden 
purse seine'' because serious injuries and mortalities of bottlenose 
dolphins in the Gulf of Maine portion of this fishery are unlikely.
    The Gulf of Maine menhaden purse seine fishery is placed in 
Category III based on a low probability of marine mammal encounters 
resulting in serious injury or mortality. This fishery may interact 
with harbor seals, minke whales, and humpback whales. However, NMFS 
believes that these interactions would not represent a serious injury 
or mortality level above 1 percent of PBR levels for these species and 
that the Gulf of Maine menhaden purse seine fishery is appropriately 
placed in Category III.
Mid-Atlantic Menhaden Purse Seine
    This fishery was grouped with the Gulf of Maine menhaden purse 
seine fishery in the proposed LOF. In this final LOF, the fishery is 
divided into ``Gulf of Maine menhaden purse seine,'' and ``Mid-Atlantic 
menhaden purse seine'' because serious injuries and mortalities of 
bottlenose dolphins in the Gulf of Maine portion of this fishery are 
unlikely.
    This fishery was erroneously proposed to be placed in Category II 
in the proposed LOF, because incidental takes of bottlenose dolphins 
that occurred in the Gulf of Mexico menhaden purse seine were 
attributed to the Mid-Atlantic menhaden purse seine. This error has 
been corrected, and the Mid-Atlantic menhaden purse seine is placed in 
Category III in this final LOF.
Gulf of Mexico Menhaden Purse Seine
    Information on bycatch studies in this fishery, recently made 
available to the NMFS Southeast Region, indicate that mortalities of 
bottlenose dolphin of the northern Gulf of Mexico coastal stock have 
been observed in this fishery (two observed mortalities in 1992, two 
caught live and released in 1994, and one mortality to date in 1995). 
Additionally, category III reports indicate that three dolphins were 
taken in 1993. Complete effort data for the bycatch study is not yet 
available; however, the available information indicates that 
reclassification of this fishery may be proposed in a future LOF. NMFS 
will continue to investigate available information as well as monitor 
future results of the bycatch study to determine whether 
reclassification is justified for this fishery.

Gulf of Maine, U.S. Mid-Atlantic Mixed Species Trap/Pot
U.S. Mid-Atlantic Black Sea Bass Trap/Pot
Gulf of Maine, U.S. Mid-Atlantic Inshore Lobster Pot
Gulf of Maine, U.S. Mid-Atlantic Offshore Lobster Trap/Pot
Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico Blue Crab Trap/Pot
U.S. South Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, Caribbean Spiny Lobster Trap/Pot

    Entanglements of cetacean stocks in pot and/or trap fisheries have 
been well documented. The degree to which marine mammals become 
entangled in pot and/or trap fisheries and whether a reclassification 
of some or all pot and/or trap fisheries is warranted, may be 
investigated in a future proposed LOF. Gulf of Maine Herring and 
Atlantic Mackerel Stop Seine/Weir
    No new information has been received which would change or confirm 
the placement of this fishery in Category III. NMFS believes that if 
interactions of this fishery with harbor porpoise occur, there would 
not be a serious injury or mortality level that would represent greater 
than 1 percent of the PBR level for harbor porpoise.
U.S. Mid-Atlantic Mixed Species Stop Seine/Weir (Except the North 
Carolina Roe Mullet Stop Net)
    This fishery includes the pound net fishery. The EA states that 
there is one report of a bottlenose dolphin mortality in the observed 
Chesapeake Bay pound net fishery. However, data indicates that more 
than one stranded dolphin has been found wrapped in pound net gear. In 
addition, a Kogia was recovered from pound net gear in North Carolina, 
in 1993. Classification of this fishery will be re-evaluated in a 
future proposed LOF.

List of Fisheries

    The following two tables list the commercial fisheries of the 
United States according to their MMPA section 118 categories. The 
estimated number of vessels is expressed in terms of the number of 
active participants in the fishery, when possible. If this information 
is not available, the estimated number of vessels or persons licensed 
for a particular fishery is provided. If no recent information is 
available on the number of participants in a fishery, the number from 
the 1994 LOF is used.
    The information on which marine mammal species/stocks are involved 
in interactions with the fishery is based on observer data, logbook 
data, stranding reports, and fishers' reports. Only those species or 
stocks known to incur injury or mortality incidental to specific 
fisheries are listed. An asterisk (*) indicates that the stock is a 
strategic stock; a plus (+) indicates that the stock is listed as 
threatened or endangered under the ESA.

                                                                                                                

[[Page 67084]]
                     Table 1.--List of Fisheries--Commercial Fisheries in the Pacific Ocean                     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Estimated                                                         
                                                No. of      Marine mammal species/stocks incidentally injured/  
            Fishery description                vessels/                           killed                        
                                               persons                                                          
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category I:                                                                                                     
    Gillnet fisheries:                                                                                          
        CA angel shark/halibut and other              80  Harbor porpoise, central CA; Common dolphin, short-   
         species large mesh (>3.5in) set                   beaked, CA/OR/WA; Common dolphin, long-beaked, CA;   
         gillnet fishery.                                  California sea lion, U.S.; Harbor seal, CA; Northern 
                                                           elephant seal, CA breeding.                          
        CA/OR thresher shark/swordfish               150  Steller sea lion, Eastern U.S.*+; Sperm whale, CA to  
         drift gillnet fishery.                            WA*+; Dall's porpoise, CA/OR/WA; Pacific white sided 
                                                           dolphin, CA/OR/WA; Risso's dolphin, CA/OR/WA;        
                                                           Bottlenose dolphin, CA/OR/WA offshore Common dolphin,
                                                           short-beaked, CA/OR/WA; Common dolphin, long-beaked, 
                                                           CA; Northern right whale dolphin, CA/OR/WA; Short-   
                                                           finned pilot whale, CA/OR/WA*; Baird's beaked whale, 
                                                           CA/OR/WA; Mesoplodont beaked whales, CA to WA*;      
                                                           Cuvier's beaked whale, CA/OR/WA; Pygmy sperm whale,  
                                                           CA/OR/WA*; California sea lion, U.S.; Harbor seal,   
                                                           CA; Northern elephant seal, CA breeding; Harbor      
                                                           porpoise, OR/WA coastal; Humpback whale, CA/OR/WA-   
                                                           Mexico.                                              
Category II:                                                                                                    
    Gillnet fisheries:                                                                                          
        AK Prince William Sound salmon               509  Steller sea lion, Western U.S.*+; Northern fur seal,  
         drift gillnet.                                    North Pacific*; Harbor seal, GOA; Pacific white-sided
                                                           dolphin, central North Pacific; Harbor porpoise, AK; 
                                                           Dall's porpoise, AK.                                 
        AK Peninsula/Aleutians salmon drift          107  Northern fur seal, North Pacific; Harbor seal, GOA;   
         gillnet fishery.                                  Harbor seal, Bering Sea; Harbor porpoise, AK; Dall's 
                                                           porpoise, AK; Northern (Alaska) sea otter, Pacific.  
        AK Peninsula/Aleutian Island salmon          120  Steller sea lion, Western U.S.*+; Harbor porpoise, AK.
         set gillnet.                                                                                           
        Southeast Alaska salmon drift                443  Steller sea lion, Eastern U.S.*+; Harbor seal,        
         gillnet fishery.                                  Southeast AK; Pacific white-sided dolphin, central   
                                                           North Pacific; Harbor porpoise, AK; Dall's porpoise, 
                                                           AK; Humpback whale, central North Pacific*+.         
        AK Cook Inlet drift gillnet........          554  Steller sea lion, Western U.S.*+; Harbor seal, GOA;   
                                                           Harbor porpoise, AK; Dall's porpoise, AK.            
        AK Cook Inlet salmon set gillnet...          633  Steller sea lion, Western U.S.*+; Harbor seal, GOA;   
                                                           Harbor porpoise, AK; Beluga, Cook Inlet.             
        AK Yakutat salmon set gillnet......          152  Harbor seal, Southeast AK.                            
        AK Kodiak salmon set gillnet.......          162  Harbor seal, GOA; Harbor porpoise, AK.                
        AK Bristol Bay drift gillnet.......        1,741  Steller sea lion, Western U.S.*+; Northern fur seal,  
                                                           North Pacific*; Harbor seal, Bering Sea; Beluga,     
                                                           Bristol Bay; Gray whale, Eastern North Pacific.      
        AK Bristol Bay set gillnet.........          888  Harbor seal, Bering Sea; Beluga, Bristol Bay; Gray    
                                                           whale, Eastern North Pacific.                        
        AK Metlakatla/Annette Island salmon           60  None documented.                                      
         drift gillnet.                                                                                         
        WA Puget Sound Region salmon drift         1,044  Harbor porpoise, inland WA; Dall's porpoise, CA/OR/WA;
         gillnet fishery (includes all                     Harbor seal, WA inland.                              
         inland waters south of US-Canada                                                                       
         border and eastward of the Bonilla-                                                                    
         Tatoosh line--Treaty Indian                                                                            
         fishing is excluded).                                                                                  
    Purse seine fisheries:                                                                                      
        CA anchovy, mackerel, tuna purse             150  Bottlenose dolphin, CA/OR/WA offshore; California sea 
         seine.                                            lion, U.S.; Harbor seal, CA.                         
        AK Southeast salmon purse seine....          443  Humpback whale, central North Pacific*+.              
    Trawl fisheries:                                                                                            
        AK pair trawl......................            2  None documented.                                      
    Longline fisheries:                                                                                         
        OR swordfish/blue shark surface               30  None documented.                                      
         longline fishery.                                                                                      
Category III:                                                                                                   
    Gillnet fisheries:                                                                                          
        AK Prince William Sound set gillnet           29  Steller sea lion, Western U.S.*+; Harbor seal, GOA.   
        AK Kuskokwim, Yukon, Norton Sound,         1,651  None documented.                                      
         Kotzebue salmon gillnet.                                                                               
        AK roe herring and food/bait                 162  None documented.                                      
         herring gillnet.                                                                                       
        WA, OR herring, smelt, shad,                 913  None documented.                                      
         sturgeon, bottom fish, mullet,                                                                         
         perch, rockfish gillnet.                                                                               
        WA Willapa Bay drift gillnet.......           82  Harbor seal, OR/WA coast; Northern elephant seal, CA  
                                                           breeding.                                            
        WA Grays Harbor salmon drift                  24  Harbor seal, OR/WA coast.                             
         gillnet (excluding treaty Tribal                                                                       
         fishing).                                                                                              
        WA, OR lower Columbia River                   40  California sea lion, U.S.; Harbor seal, OR/WA coast.  
         (includes tributaries) drift                                                                           
         gillnet.                                                                                               

[[Page 67085]]
                                                                                                                
        CA set and drift gillnet fisheries           341  None documented.                                      
         that use a stretched mesh size of                                                                      
         3.5 in or less.                                                                                        
        AK miscellaneous finfish set                   9  Steller sea lion, Western U.S.*+.                     
         gillnet.                                                                                               
        Hawaii gillnet.....................          115  Bottlenose dolphin, Hawaiian; Spinner dolphin,        
                                                           Hawaiian.                                            
    Purse seine, beach seine, round haul                                                                        
     and throw net fisheries:                                                                                   
        AK salmon purse seine (except              1,053  Harbor seal, GOA.                                     
         Southeast Alaska, which is in                                                                          
         Category II).                                                                                          
        AK salmon beach seine..............           34  None documented.                                      
        AK roe herring and food/bait                 866  None documented.                                      
         herring purse seine.                                                                                   
        AK roe herring and food/bait                  14  None documented.                                      
         herring beach seine.                                                                                   
        AK Metlakatla purse seine..........            3  None documented.                                      
        AK octopus/squid purse seine.......            3  None documented.                                      
        CA herring purse seine.............          100  Bottlenose dolphin, CA coastal; California sea lion,  
                                                           U.S.; Harbor seal, CA.                               
        CA sardine purse seine.............          120  None documented.                                      
        CA squid purse seine...............          145  California sea lion, U.S.                             
        AK miscellaneous finfish purse                 6  None documented.                                      
         seine.                                                                                                 
        AK miscellaneous finfish beach                 4  None documented.                                      
         seine.                                                                                                 
        WA salmon purse seine..............          440  None documented.                                      
        WA salmon reef net.................           53  None documented.                                      
        WA, OR herring, smelt, squid purse           130  None documented.                                      
         seine or lampara.                                                                                      
        WA (all species) beach seine or              235  None documented.                                      
         drag seine.                                                                                            
        HI purse seine.....................           18  None documented.                                      
        HI opelu/akule net.................           16  None documented.                                      
        HI throw net, cast net.............           47  None documented.                                      
    Dip net fisheries:                                                                                          
        WA, OR smelt, herring dip net......          119  None documented.                                      
        CA squid dip net...................          115  None documented.                                      
    Marine aquaculture fisheries:                                                                               
        WA, OR salmon net pens.............           21  California sea lion, U.S.                             
        CA salmon enhancement rearing pen..           >1  None documented.                                      
        OR salmon ranch....................            1  None documented.                                      
    Troll fisheries:                                                                                            
        AK salmon troll....................        1,450  Steller sea lion, Eastern U.S.*+.                     
        CA/OR/WA salmon troll..............        4,300  None documented.                                      
        AK north Pacific halibut, AK bottom        1,354  None documented.                                      
         fish, WA, OR, CA albacore,                                                                             
         groundfish, bottom fish, CA                                                                            
         halibut non-salmonid troll                                                                             
         fisheries.                                                                                             
        HI trolling, rod and reel..........        1,795  None documented.                                      
        Guam tuna troll....................           50  None documented.                                      
        Commonwealth of the Northern                  50  None documented.                                      
         Mariana Islands tuna troll.                                                                            
        American Samoa tuna troll..........          <50  None documented.                                      
        HI net unclassified................          106  None documented.                                      
    Longline/set line fisheries:                                                                                
        AK state waters sablefish long line/         240  None documented.                                      
         set line.                                                                                              
        Miscellaneous finfish/groundfish             838  Harbor seal, GOA; Harbor seal, Bering Sea; Northern   
         longline/set line.                                elephant seal, CA breeding.                          
        HI swordfish, tuna, billfish, mahi           140  Hawaiian monk seal, HI*+; Humpback whale, Central     
         mahi, wahoo, oceanic sharks                       North Pacific*+; Risso's dolphin, Hawaiian;          
         longline/set line.                                Bottlenose dolphin, Hawaiian.                        
        WA, OR North Pacific halibut                 350  None documented.                                      
         longline/set line.                                                                                     
        AK southern Bering Sea, Aleutian             226  Northern elephant seal, CA breeding; Killer whale,    
         Islands, and Western Gulf of                      resident; Killer whale, transient.                   
         Alaska sablefish longline/set line                                                                     
         (federally regulated waters).                                                                          

[[Page 67086]]
                                                                                                                
        AK halibut longline/set line (state          213  Steller sea lion, Western U.S.*+.                     
         and Federal waters).                                                                                   
        WA, OR, CA groundfish, bottomfish            367  None documented.                                      
         longline/set line.                                                                                     
        AK octopus/squid longline..........            1  None documented.                                      
        CA shark/bonito longline/set line..           10  None documented.                                      
    Trawl fisheries:                                                                                            
        WA, OR, CA shrimp trawl............          300  None documented.                                      
        AK shrimp otter trawl and beam                48  None documented.                                      
         trawl (statewide and Cook Inlet).                                                                      
        AK Gulf of Alaska groundfish trawl.          490  Steller sea lion, Western U.S.*+; Northern fur seal,  
                                                           North Pacific*; Harbor seal, GOA; Dall's porpoise,   
                                                           AK; Northern elephant seal, CA breeding.             
        AK Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands           490  Steller sea lion, Western U.S.*+; Northern fur seal,  
         groundfish trawl.                                 North Pacific*; Killer whale, resident; Killer whale,
                                                           transient; Pacific white-sided dolphin, central North
                                                           Pacific; Harbor porpoise, AK; Harbor seal, Bering    
                                                           Sea; Harbor seal, GOA; Bearded seal, AK; Ringed seal,
                                                           AK; Dall's porpoise, AK; Spotted seal, AK; Ribbon    
                                                           seal, AK; Northern elephant seal, CA breeding;       
                                                           Northern (Alaska) sea otter, Pacific; Walrus,        
                                                           Pacific.                                             
        AK state-managed waters of Cook                8  None documented.                                      
         Inlet, Kachemak Bay, Prince                                                                            
         William Sound, Southeast AK                                                                            
         groundfish trawl.                                                                                      
        AK miscellaneous finfish otter or            324  None documented.                                      
         beam trawl.                                                                                            
        AK food/bait herring trawl.........            2  None documented.                                      
        WA, OR, CA groundfish trawl........          585  Steller sea lion, Western U.S.*+; Northern fur seal,  
                                                           North Pacific*; Pacific white-sided dolphin, central 
                                                           North Pacific; Dall's porpoise, CA/OR/WA; California 
                                                           sea lion, U.S.; Harbor seal, OR/WA coast.            
    Pot, ring net, and trap fisheries:                                                                          
        AK crustacean pot..................        1,951  None documented.                                      
        AK Bering Sea, GOA finfish pot.....          226  Harbor seal, GOA; Northern (AK) sea otter, Pacific.   
        WA, OR, CA sablefish pot...........          176  None documented.                                      
        WA, OR, CA crab pot................        1,478  None documented.                                      
        WA, OR shrimp pot and trap.........          254  None documented.                                      
        CA lobster, prawn, shrimp, rock              608  None documented.                                      
         crab, fish pot.                                                                                        
        OR, CA hagfish pot or trap.........           25  None documented.                                      
        HI lobster trap....................           15  Hawaiian monk seal, HI*+.                             
        HI crab trap.......................           22  None documented.                                      
        HI fish trap.......................           19  None documented.                                      
        HI shrimp trap.....................            5  None documented.                                      
    Handline and jig fisheries:                                                                                 
        AK North Pacific halibut handline             84  None documented.                                      
         and mechanical jig.                                                                                    
        AK other finfish handline and                474  None documented.                                      
         mechanical jig.                                                                                        
        AK octopus/squid handline..........            2  None documented.                                      
        WA groundfish, bottomfish jig......          679  None documented.                                      
        HI aku boat, pole and line.........           54  None documented.                                      
        HI inshore handline................          650  Bottlenose dolphin, HI.                               
        HI deep sea bottomfish.............          434  Hawaiian monk seal, HI*+.                             
        HI tuna............................          144  Rough-toothed dolphin, HI; Bottlenose dolphin, HI;    
                                                           Hawaiian monk seal, HI*+.                            
        Guam bottomfish....................          <50  None documented.                                      
        Commonwealth of the Northern                 <50  None documented.                                      
         Mariana Islands bottomfish.                                                                            
        American Samoa bottomfish..........          <50  None documented.                                      
    Harpoon fisheries:                                                                                          
        CA swordfish harpoon...............          228  None documented.                                      
    Pound net/weir fisheries:                                                                                   
        AK Southeast Alaska herring food/              7  None documented.                                      
         bait pound net.                                                                                        
        WA herring brush weir..............            1  None documented.                                      
    Bait pens:                                                                                                  
        WA/OR/CA bait pens.................           13  None documented.                                      
    Dredge fisheries:                                                                                           
        Coastwide scallop dredge...........          106  None documented.                                      
    Dive, hand/mechanical collection                                                                            
     fisheries:                                                                                                 
        AK abalone.........................          177  None documented.                                      
        AK dungeness crab..................            1  None documented.                                      

[[Page 67087]]
                                                                                                                
        AK herring spawn-on-kelp...........          306  None documented.                                      
        AK urchin and other fish/shellfish.          127  None documented.                                      
        AK clam hand shovel................          125  None documented.                                      
        AK clam mechanical/hydraulic                   3  None documented.                                      
         fishery.                                                                                               
        WA herring spawn-on-kelp...........            4  None documented.                                      
        WA/OR sea urchin, other clam,                637  None documented.                                      
         octopus, oyster, sea cucumber,                                                                         
         scallop, ghost shrimp hand, dive,                                                                      
         or mechanical collection.                                                                              
        CA abalone.........................          111  None documented.                                      
        CA sea urchin......................          583  None documented.                                      
        HI squiding, spear.................          267  None documented.                                      
        HI lobster diving..................            6  None documented.                                      
        HI coral diving....................            2  None documented.                                      
        HI handpick........................          135  None documented.                                      
        WA shellfish aquaculture...........          684  None documented.                                      
        WA, CA kelp........................            4  None documented.                                      
        HI fish pond.......................           10  None documented.                                      
    Commercial passenger fishing vessel                                                                         
     (charter boat) fisheries:                                                                                  
        AK, WA, OR, CA commercial passenger        1,243  None documented.                                      
         fishing vessel.                                                                                        
        AK octopus/squid ``other''.........           19  None documented.                                      
        HI ``other''.......................          114  None documented.                                      
    Live finfish/shellfish fisheries:                                                                           
        CA finfish and shellfish live trap/           93  None documented.                                      
         hook-and-line.                                                                                         
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



     Table 2.--List of Fisheries--Commercial Fisheries in the Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Estimated                                                         
                                                No. of      Marine mammal species/stocks incidentally injured/  
           Description of fishery              vessels/                           killed                        
                                               persons                                                          
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category I:                                                                                                     
    Pair trawl fisheries:                                                                                       
        U.S. Atlantic large pelagics pair              7  Risso's dolphin, WNA; Long-finned pilot whale, WNA*;  
         trawl.                                            Common dolphin, WNA*; Bottlenose dolphin, WNA        
                                                           offshore*.                                           
    Gillnet fisheries:                                                                                          
        Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean, Gulf of            75  North Atlantic right whale, WNA*+; Humpback whale,    
         Mexico large pelagics drift                       WNA*+; Sperm whale, WNA*+; Dwarf sperm whale, WNA*;  
         gillnet.                                          Pygmy sperm whale, WNA*; Cuvier's beaked whale, WNA*;
                                                           True's beaked whale, WNA*; Gervais' beaked whale,    
                                                           WNA*; Blainville's beaked whale, WNA*; Risso's       
                                                           dolphin, WNA; Long-finned pilot whale, WNA*; Short-  
                                                           finned pilot whale, WNA*; White-sided dolphin, WNA*; 
                                                           Common dolphin, WNA*; Atlantic spotted dolphin, WNA*;
                                                           Pantropical spotted dolphin, WNA*; Striped dolphin,  
                                                           WNA; Spinner dolphin, WNA; Bottlenose dolphin, WNA   
                                                           offshore*; Harbor porpoise, GME/BF*.                 
        New England multispecies sink                341  North Atlantic right whale, WNA*+; Humpback whale,    
         gillnet (including species as                     WNA*+; Minke whale, Canadian east coast; Killer      
         defined in the Multispecies                       whale, WNA; White-sided dolphin, WNA*; Striped       
         Fisheries Management Plan and                     dolphin, WNA; Bottlenose dolphin, WNA offshore;      
         spiny dogfish and monkfish).                      Harbor porpoise, GME/BF*; Harbor seal, WNA; Gray     
                                                           seal, Northwest North Atlantic; Common dolphin; Fin  
                                                           whale; Spotted dolphin; False killer whale; Harp     
                                                           seal.                                                
    Longline fisheries:                                                                                         
        Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean, Gulf of           361  Humpback whale, WNA*+; Minke whale, Canadian east     
         Mexico large pelagics longline.                   coast; Risso's dolphin, WNA; Long-finned pilot whale,
                                                           WNA*; Short-finned pilot whale, WNA*; Common dolphin,
                                                           WNA*; Atlantic spotted dolphin, WNA*; Pantropical    
                                                           spotted dolphin, WNA; Striped dolphin, WNA;          
                                                           Bottlenose dolphin, WNA offshore*; Bottlenose        
                                                           dolphin, GMX Outer Continental Shelf; Bottlenose     
                                                           dolphin, GMX Continental Shelf Edge and Slope;       
                                                           Atlantic spotted dolphin, Northern GMX; Pantropical  
                                                           spotted dolphin, Northern GMX; Risso's dolphin,      
                                                           Northern GMX; Harbor porpoise, GME/BF*.              
Category II:                                                                                                    
    Gillnet fisheries:                                                                                          
        U.S. mid-Atlantic coastal gillnet           >655  Humpback whale, WNA*+; Minke whale, Canadian east     
         fishery.                                          coast; Bottlenose dolphin, WNA offshore*; Bottlenose 
                                                           dolphin, WNA coastal*+; Harbor porpoise, GME/BF*.    
        Gulf of Maine small pelagics                 133  Humpback whale, WNA*+; White-sided dolphin, WNA;      
         surface gillnet.                                  Harbor seal, WNA.                                    

[[Page 67088]]
                                                                                                                
        Southeastern U.S. Atlantic shark              10  Bottlenose dolphin, WNA coastal*; North Atlantic right
         gillnet fishery.                                  whale, WNA*+.                                        
    Trawl fisheries:                                                                                            
        Atlantic squid, mackerel,                    620  Common dolphin, WNA*; Risso's dolphin, WNA*; Long-    
         butterfish trawl.                                 finned pilot whale, WNA*; Short-finned pilot whale,  
                                                           WNA*; White-sided dolphin, WNA*.                     
    Haul seine fisheries:                                                                                       
        North Carolina haul seine..........      unknown  Bottlenose dolphin, WNA coastal*; Harbor porpoise, GME/
                                                           BF*.                                                 
    Stop net fisheries:                                                                                         
        North Carolina roe mullet stop net.           13  Bottlenose dolphin, WNA coastal*.                     
Category III:                                                                                                   
    Gillnet fisheries:                                                                                          
        Rhode Island, southern                        32  Humpback whale, WNA*+; Bottlenose dolphin, WNA        
         Massachusetts (to Monomoy Island),                coastal*+; Harbor porpoise, GME/BF*.                 
         and New York Bight (Raritan and                                                                        
         Lower New York Bays) inshore                                                                           
         gillnet.                                                                                               
        Long Island Sound inshore gillnet..           20  Humpback whale, WNA*+; Bottlenose dolphin, WNA        
                                                           coastal*+; Harbor porpoise, GME/BF*.                 
        Delaware Bay inshore gillnet.......           60  Humpback whale, WNA*+; Bottlenose dolphin, WNA        
                                                           coastal*+; Harbor porpoise, GME/BF*.                 
        Chesapeake Bay inshore gillnet.....           45  None documented.                                      
        North Carolina inshore gillnet.....           94  None documented.                                      
        Gulf of Mexico inshore gillnet                                                                          
         (black drum, sheepshead, weakfish,                                                                     
         mullet, spot, croaker)unknownNone                                                                      
         documented..                                                                                           
        Offshore monkfish bottom gillnet...          <50  None documented.                                      
        Gulf of Maine, Southeast U.S.              1,285  Minke whale, Canadian east coast; Harbor porpoise, GME/
         Atlantic coastal shad, sturgeon                   BF*; Bottlenose dolphin, WNA coastal*+.              
         gillnet (includes waters of North                                                                      
         Carolina).                                                                                             
        Gulf of Mexico coastal gillnet       ...........  Bottlenose dolphin, Western GMX coastal; Bottlenose   
         (includes mullet gillnet fishery                  dolphin, Northern GMX coastal; Bottlenose dolphin,   
         in LA and MS).                                    Eastern GMX coastal; Bottlenose dolphin, GMX Bay,    
                                                           Sound, & Estuarine*.                                 
        Southeastern U.S. Atlantic coastal          0.00  Bottlenose dolphin, WNA coastal*+.                    
         gillnet.                                                                                               
        Florida east coast, Gulf of Mexico           271  Bottlenose dolphin, Western GMX coastal; Bottlenose   
         pelagics king and Spanish mackerel                dolphin, Northern GMX coastal; Bottlenose dolphin,   
         gillnet.                                          Eastern GMX coastal; Bottlenose dolphin, GMX Bay,    
                                                           Sound, & Estuarine*.                                 
    Trawl fisheries:                                                                                            
        North Atlantic bottom trawl........        1,052  Long-finned pilot whale, WNA*; Short-finned pilot     
                                                           whale, WNA*; White-sided dolphin, WNA*; Striped      
                                                           dolphin, WNA; Bottlenose dolphin, WNA offshore*.     
        Mid-Atlantic, Southeastern U.S.          >18,000  Bottlenose dolphin, WNA coastal*+.                    
         Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico shrimp                                                                        
         trawl.                                                                                                 
        Gulf of Maine northern shrimp trawl          320  None documented.                                      
        Gulf of Maine mackerel trawl.......           30  None documented.                                      
        Gulf of Maine, Mid-Atlantic sea              215  None documented.                                      
         scallop trawl.                                                                                         
        Gulf of Maine, Southern North                  5  None documented.                                      
         Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico coastal                                                                       
         herring trawl.                                                                                         
        Mid-Atlantic mixed species trawl...       >1,000  None documented.                                      
        Gulf of Mexico butterfish trawl....            2  Atlantic spotted dolphin, Northern GMX; Pantropical   
                                                           spotted dolphin, Northern GMX.                       
        Georgia, South Carolina, Maryland             25  None documented.                                      
         whelk trawl.                                                                                           
        Calico scallops trawl..............          200  None documented.                                      
        Bluefish, croaker, flounder trawl..          550  None documented.                                      
        Crab trawl.........................          400  None documented.                                      
        U.S. Atlantic monkfish trawl.......      unknown  None documented.                                      
    Marine aquaculture fisheries:                                                                               
        Finfish aquaculture................           48  None documented.                                      
        Shellfish aquaculture..............      unknown  None documented.                                      
    Purse seine fisheries:                                                                                      
        Gulf of Maine Atlantic herring                30  Harbor porpoise, GME/BF*; Harbor seal, WNA; Gray seal,
         purse seine.                                      Northwest North Atlantic.                            

[[Page 67089]]
                                                                                                                
        Mid-Atlantic menhaden purse seine..           22  Bottlenose dolphin, WNA coastal*+.                    
        Gulf of Maine menhaden purse seine.           10  None documented.                                      
        Gulf of Mexico menhaden purse seine           50  Bottlenose dolphin, Northern GMX coastal.             
        Florida west coast sardine purse              10  Bottlenose dolphin, Eastern GMX coastal.              
         seine.                                                                                                 
        U.S. mid-Atlantic hand seine.......         >250  None documented.                                      
    Longline/hook-and-line fisheries:                                                                           
        Gulf of Maine tub trawl groundfish            46  Harbor seal, WNA; Gray seal, Northwest North Atlantic.
         bottom longline/ hook-and-line.                                                                        
        Southeastern U.S. Atlantic, Gulf of        3,800  None documented.                                      
         Mexico snapper-grouper and other                                                                       
         reef fish bottom longline/hook-and-                                                                    
         line.                                                                                                  
        Southeastern U.S. Atlantic, Gulf of          124  None documented.                                      
         Mexico shark bottom longline/hook-                                                                     
         and-line.                                                                                              
        Gulf of Maine, U.S. mid-Atlantic          26,223  None documented.                                      
         tuna, shark swordfish hook-and-                                                                        
         line/harpoon.                                                                                          
        Southeastern U.S. Atlantic, Gulf of        1,446  None documented.                                      
         Mexico & U.S. mid-Atlantic pelagic                                                                     
         hook-and-line/harpoon.                                                                                 
    Trap/pot fisheries--lobster and crab:                                                                       
        Gulf of Maine, U.S. mid-Atlantic             100  North Atlantic right whale, WNA*+; Humpback whale,    
         mixed species trap/pot.                           WNA*+; Minke whale, Canadian east coast; Harbor      
                                                           porpoise, GME/BF*; Harbor seal, WNA; Gray seal,      
                                                           Northwest North Atlantic.                            
        U.S. mid-Atlantic and Southeast               30  None documented.                                      
         U.S. Atlantic black sea bass trap/                                                                     
         pot.                                                                                                   
        U.S. mid-Atlantic eel trap/pot.....         >700  None documented.                                      
        Gulf of Maine, U.S. mid-Atlantic          10,613  North Atlantic right whale, WNA*+; Humpback whale,    
         inshore lobster trap/pot.                         WNA*+; Fin whale, WNA*; Minke whale, Canadian east   
                                                           coast; White-sided dolphin, Western North Atlantic;  
                                                           Harbor seal, WNA.                                    
        Gulf of Maine, U.S. mid-Atlantic           2,902  North Atlantic right whale, WNA*; Humpback whale,     
         offshore lobster trap/pot.                        WNA*+; Fin whale, WNA*; Minke whale, Canadian east   
                                                           coast; White-sided dolphin, WNA; Harbor seal, WNA.   
        Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico blue       20,500  Bottlenose dolphin, WNA coastal*; Bottlenose dolphin, 
         crab trap/pot.                                    Western GMX coastal; Bottlenose dolphin, Northern GMX
                                                           coastal; Bottlenose dolphin, Eastern GMX coastal;    
                                                           Bottlenose dolphin, GMX Bay, Sound, & Estuarine*;    
                                                           Florida manatee, FL*+.                               
        Southeastern U.S. Atlantic, Gulf of          750  Florida manatee, FL*+.                                
         Mexico, Caribbean spiny lobster                                                                        
         trap/pot.                                                                                              
    Stop seine/weir/pound fisheries:                                                                            
        Gulf of Maine herring and Atlantic            50  North Atlantic right whale, WNA*; Humpback whale,     
         mackerel stop seine/weir.                         WNA*+; Minke whale, Canadian east coast; Harbor      
                                                           porpoise, GME/BF*; Harbor seal, WNA; Gray seal,      
                                                           Northwest North Atlantic.                            
        U.S. mid-Atlantic mixed species              500  None documented.                                      
         stop/seine/weir (except the North                                                                      
         Carolina roe mullet stop net).                                                                         
        U.S. mid-Atlantic crab stop seine/         2,600  None documented.                                      
         weir.                                                                                                  
    Dredge fisheries:                                                                                           
        Gulf of Maine, U.S. mid-Atlantic             233  None documented.                                      
         sea scallop dredge.                                                                                    
        U.S. mid-Atlantic offshore surfclam          100  None documented.                                      
         and quahog dredge.                                                                                     
        Gulf of Maine mussel...............          >50  None documented.                                      
        U.S. mid-Atlantic/Gulf of Mexico           7,000  None documented.                                      
         oyster.                                                                                                
    Haul seine fisheries:                                                                                       
        Southeastern U.S. Atlantic,                  150  None documented.                                      
         Caribbean haul seine.                                                                                  
    Beach seine fisheries:                                                                                      
        Caribbean beach seine..............           15  Florida manatee, FL+.                                 

[[Page 67090]]
                                                                                                                
    Dive, hand/mechanical collection                                                                            
     fisheries:                                                                                                 
        Gulf of Maine urchin dive, hand/             >50  None documented.                                      
         mechanical collection.                                                                                 
        Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico,           20,000  None documented.                                      
         Caribbean shellfish dive, hand/                                                                        
         mechanical collection.                                                                                 
    Commercial passenger fishing vessel                                                                         
     (charter boat) fisheries:                                                                                  
        Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico,            4,000  None documented.                                      
         Caribbean commercial passenger                                                                         
         fishing vessel.                                                                                        
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Marine Mammal stock is strategic.                                                                              
+Stock is listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA, or as depleted under the MMPA.                      
                                                                                                                
List of Abbreviations Used in Table 2:                                                                          
  FL--Florida.                                                                                                  
  GA--Georgia.                                                                                                  
  GME/BF--Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy.                                                                           
  GMX--Gulf of Mexico.                                                                                          
  NC--North Carolina.                                                                                           
  SC--South Carolina                                                                                            
  TX--Texas.                                                                                                    
  WNA--Western North Atlantic.                                                                                  



Classification

    This action has been determined to be not significant for purposes 
of E.O. 12866.
    The Assistant General Counsel for Legislation and Regulation of the 
Department of Commerce certified to the Small Business Administration 
that this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. This rule will require certain 
fishers to pay a fee to obtain an Authorization Certificate that will 
allow the taking of marine mammals incidental to commercial fishing 
operations.
    Approximately 20,000 fishers were required to register under the 
old section 114 regime and pay a $30 fee. The fee under the new section 
118 regime is reduced to $25. This fee with respect to expected 
revenues is not significant.
    This final rule does not contain policies with federalism 
implications sufficient to warrant preparation of a federalism 
assessment under E.O. 12612.
    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required 
to respond to nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to 
comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of 
the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information 
displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.
    This final LOF determines which vessel owners must register under 
the MMPA, and which commercial fishers must report marine mammal 
mortalities and injuries within 48 hours of returning to port, as 
required by the section 118 implementing regulations. The collections 
associated with these registration and reporting requirements have been 
approved by OMB under OMB control numbers 0648-0224 and 0648-0225.

Dated: December 19, 1995.
Gary Matlock,
Program Management Officer, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 95-31252 Filed 12-20-95; 4:54 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-W