[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 148 (Wednesday, July 31, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 39940-39943]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-19464]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 622

[Docket No. 960123012-6196-02; I.D. 011995A]
RIN 0648-AF78


Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Red Grouper Size Limit

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

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS announces that it is withdrawing the proposed rule to 
change the minimum allowable size of red grouper, currently 20 inches 
(50.8 cm), to 18 inches (45.7 cm) for persons not subject to the bag 
limit.

DATES: This proposed rule is withdrawn on July 31, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael E. Justen, 813-570-5305.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The reef fish fishery of the Gulf of Mexico 
is managed under the Fishery Management Plan for Reef Fish Resources of 
the Gulf of Mexico (FMP). The FMP was prepared by the Gulf of Mexico 
Fishery Management Council (Council) and is implemented by regulations 
at 50 CFR part 622 (formerly at 50 CFR part 641).
    Under the framework procedure for adjusting FMP management 
measures, the Council proposed a regulatory amendment (RA) (50 CFR part 
641) to change the minimum allowable size for red grouper from 20 
inches (50.8 cm) to 18 inches (45.7 cm) for persons not subject to the 
bag limit. The proposed rule to implement the RA was published in the 
Federal Register on January 31, 1996 (61 FR 3369); comments were 
requested on or before March 1, 1996. Five members of the Council 
submitted a minority report opposing the RA. NMFS specifically 
requested comments on the following concerns: (1) Long- and

[[Page 39941]]

short-term economic and social effects of the rule; (2) potential for 
creating user conflicts; (3) consistency with the Magnuson Act's 
National Standards and with certain FMP objectives; and (4) 
difficulties with enforcing differential minimum size limits for the 
commercial and recreational fisheries.
    NMFS received written comments from 586 entities on the 
advisability of the 18-inch (45.7-cm) minimum size limit. All but one 
commenter were from Florida.

Summary of Public Comments and Agency Responses

1. Long- and Short-Term Economic and Social Effects

    Comment: Thirty-three commenters provided information on this 
issue. Five commercial associations and one commercial fisherman 
supported the reduction in minimum size. They believed the long- and 
short-term socioeconomic effects on recreational and commercial 
fisheries would be positive; that is, the rule would result in an 
increase of 5 to 10 percent in gross income. These commenters did not 
expect a derby fishery to develop as a result of the proposed minimum 
size reduction.
    Twenty-seven commenters opposed the minimum size reduction for 
socioeconomic reasons. Six charter vessel/headboat operators stated 
that commercial fishermen would obtain more profits but would 
experience a fishery closure due to the quota being reached. They 
believed reduction in the size limit would cause negative responses 
among recreational anglers because few legal sized red grouper would be 
available for recreational anglers. They suggested that the smaller 
commercial size limit would devastate the resource because 18-inch fish 
(45.7-cm) would not have a chance to reproduce potentially causing a 
negative long term socioeconomic impact. These commenters believed that 
charterboat income and Florida's sales tax receipts would decrease.
    Eight commercial fishermen stated that the commercial fishery would 
experience a short-term increase in income but ultimately would 
experience a long-term loss because the red grouper resource could not 
withstand the increased fishing pressure. They feared that if the quota 
were reached, and NMFS closed the fishery, very few fishermen could 
financially withstand the closure. They contended that a derby fishery 
would develop in future years similar to what has happened in the red 
snapper fishery. They also stated that the influx of smaller fish would 
depress market prices and reduce overall income to fishermen.
    The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and 
Florida Marine Fisheries Commission (FMFC) stated that the proposed 
reduction in the size limit would not create any benefits.
    In a minority report, five Council members stated they expected a 
short-term glut of 18- to 20-inch (45.7- to 50.8- cm) fish and cited 
testimony from dealers and fishermen indicating that smaller fish could 
result in size grading and reduced values.
    One individual suggested that the commercial fishery would benefit 
in the short term but suffer in the long term due to overfishing. One 
recreational association indicated that the smaller size limit would 
cause overfishing. Four recreational anglers stated that no benefits 
would result from the reduction in the size limit.
    Response: NMFS agrees with the 27 commenters that any short-term 
benefit to the commercial fishery would be offset by negative long- and 
short-term socioeconomic effects on the recreational fishery and by 
negative long-term socioeconomic effects on the commercial fishery.

2. Potential for User Conflicts

    Comment: Thirty-one commenters provided information on this issue. 
Five commercial associations and one commercial fisherman supported the 
minimum size limit reduction. They believed it would minimize the 
potential for user conflicts because commercial fishermen target larger 
fish in deeper waters where recreational fishermen generally do not 
operate and the sedentary nature of red grouper should keep the two 
fisheries separated.
    Twenty-five commenters opposed a reduction in the minimum size 
limit because of user conflict concerns. Six charter vessel/headboat 
operators stated that recreational anglers would object to commercial 
fishermen taking smaller fish and recommended the same size limit for 
all fishermen. Seven commercial fishermen were concerned about the 
potential for conflicts due to recreational anglers blaming commercial 
fishermen for the unavailability of 20-inch (50.8-cm) fish. They 
believed user conflicts would arise as commercial fishermen move 
shoreward to catch the smaller fish.
    The FDEP and FMFC stated that the smaller commercial minimum size 
limit would cause conflicts between user groups.
    Five Council members stated in a minority report that most 
recreational anglers opposed the size limit change.
    One individual and one recreational association stated that the 
smaller commercial size limit would cause conflicts between the 
commercial and recreational fishermen. Three recreational anglers 
supported no change in the current commercial size limit because 
minimal conflicts occur under existing regulations.
    Response: NMFS agrees with the 25 commenters that the smaller 
commercial size limit would cause conflicts between the commercial and 
recreational fishermen.

3. Consistency With the Magnuson Act's National Standards and With 
Certain FMP Objectives

    Comment: Twenty commenters provided information on this issue. Five 
commercial associations and one commercial fisherman supporting the 
minimum size reduction doubted the smaller commercial minimum size 
limit would cause commercial landings to reach the annual quota (9.8 
million pounds, 4.45 million kg) for the shallow water grouper complex 
which includes red grouper. The commercial fisherman did not believe 
that the change in the commercial size limit would alter fishing 
patterns. These commenters concluded that the proposed reduction in 
minimum size is consistent with the Magnuson Acts National Standards 
and the FMP objectives.
    Fourteen commenters opposed reduction in the commercial minimum 
size limit for reasons relating to the National Standards or FMP 
objectives. Two charter vessel/headboat operators and five commercial 
fishermen contended that reduction in the commercial size limit would 
lead to overfishing, a derby fishery, and conflicts with recreational 
fishermen. The FDEP stated that the reduction was inconsistent with the 
Magnuson Act's National Standards. In a minority report, five Council 
members contended that the smaller size limit was contrary to the 
Magnuson Act and certain FMP objectives because it might result in 
overfishing, a derby fishery, and conflicts with the recreational 
sector. A recreational angler stated the reduction discriminated 
against his user group.
    Response: NMFS agrees with the 14 commenters to the extent that the 
proposed reduction in the commercial size limit is inconsistent with 
National Standard 1 and certain FMP objectives (i.e., FMP Objective 4--
minimize user conflicts; FMP Amendment 1, Objective 7--maximize net 
economic benefits; FMP Amendment 8 Objective 3--protect juveniles; and 
FMP Amendment 8, Objective 2--avoid a derby fishery).

[[Page 39942]]

4. Difficulties With Enforcing Differential Size Limits

    Comment: Thirty commenters provided information on this issue. Five 
commercial associations and one commercial fisherman stated that 
different size limits for recreational and commercial fishermen were 
enforceable because commercial fishermen must have a Federal permit to 
operate and, therefore, would be readily distinguishable from 
recreational fishermen. They noted the concept of different size limits 
for recreational and commercial fishermen has been tested and found 
acceptable, from the enforcement standpoint, in the amberjack and red 
snapper fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico.
    Twenty-four commenters indicated that differing recreational and 
commercial minimum size limits complicate enforcement, especially when 
Federal and state size limits differ. Four charter vessel/headboat 
operators and eight commercial fishermen commented that compatible 
Federal and state regulations would simplify enforcement of minimum 
size limits. The FDEP, the Florida Department of Community Affairs 
(FDCA), and the FMFC believe that Federal regulations different from 
the state's would adversely impact Florida's ability to enforce its 
regulations.
    The five Council members who filed a minority report pointed out 
that a size limit for red grouper that differs from the size limit for 
other grouper species would make enforcement more difficult.
    Response: NMFS agrees with the 25 commenters that different minimum 
size limits for recreational and commercial fisheries would complicate 
enforcement, especially since Federal and Florida's size limits would 
be different.

5. Consistency With Florida's Coastal Management Plan

    Comment: On November 28, 1995, the FDCA notified the Council that 
the proposed minimum size reduction is inconsistent with Florida's 
Coastal Management Program. Florida has a 20-inch (50.8-cm) commercial 
minimum size limit for red grouper, and the FDCA claimed that reducing 
the Federal size limit to 18 inches (45.7-cm) would undermine Florida's 
efforts to manage its fishery resources. Florida also opposed the size 
reduction because 18-inch red grouper are sexually immature, and 
harvesting red grouper prior to reproduction increases the potential 
for overfishing.
    Response: Disapproval of the regulatory amendment renders Florida's 
inconsistency determination moot.

6. Summary of Public Responses

    During the comment period, 586 commenters provided written comments 
on the advisability of implementing the proposed 18-inch 45.7-cm) 
minimum size limit for red grouper. All but one commenter was from 
Florida. Table 1 summarizes the responses.

[[Page 39943]]



Table 1.--Comments on the Proposal To Reduce the Commercial Minimum Size
              Limit for Red Grouper to 18 Inches (45.7 cm)              
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Constituent group                 For   Against   *Other
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial Associations.........................    5  ........  .......
Charter Vessel/Headboat Operators...............    3         9        1
Commercial Fishermen............................    2        84  .......
Environmental Groups............................  ...  ........        1
State Government Agencies.......................    1         3  .......
Gulf Council (Minority Report)..................  ...         5  .......
Private Individuals.............................   12       140        1
Recreational Associations.......................  ...         4  .......
Recreational Anglers............................  ...       314        1
                                                 -----------------------
      Total.....................................   23       559       4 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Commenters who did not take a position on the size limit               

Agency Decision

    After reviewing the RA, supporting documents, minority report, and 
comments received during the public comment period, NMFS has concluded 
that the proposed reduction in the commercial size limit is neither 
necessary nor appropriate for the conservation and management of red 
grouper. In particular, it is likely that the smaller commercial size 
limit would create conflicts between commercial and recreational 
fishermen and would not result in long-term benefits to the fisheries. 
NMFS is also concerned about the ineffectiveness of the proposed 
commercial size limit in preventing overfishing as required under 
National Standard 1 of the Magnuson Act. Accordingly, NMFS has 
disapproved the RA and withdraws the proposed rule to change the 
minimum size limit for red grouper for persons not subject to the bag 
limit.
    This action has been determined to be not significant for purposes 
of E.O. 12866.

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

    Dated: July 25, 1996.
Charles Karnella,
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 96-19464 Filed 7-30-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P