[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 66 (Monday, April 7, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16519-16538]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-8738]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 229
[Docket No. 970129015-7072-02; I.D. 031997B]
RIN 0684-AI84
Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Commercial Fishing
Operations; Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Plan Regulations
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS by this action proposes a take reduction plan and
implementing regulations to reduce serious injury and mortality of four
large whale stocks that occur incidental to certain fisheries. The
whales stocks consist of the North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena
glacialis), Western North Atlantic stock, humpback whale (Megaptera
novaeangliae), Western North Atlantic stock, fin whale (Balaenoptera
physalus), Western North Atlantic stock, and minke whale (Balaenoptera
acutorostrata), Canadian East Coast stock. Covered by the proposed plan
are fisheries: for multiple species, including monkfish and dogfish in
the New England Multispecies sink gillnet fishery; for multiple species
in the U.S. mid-Atlantic coastal gillnet fisheries; for lobster in the
Gulf of Maine and U.S. mid-Atlantic trap/pot fisheries; and for sharks
in the Southeastern U.S. Atlantic driftnet fishery. NMFS seeks comments
on this proposed plan and the proposed regulations to implement the
plan.
DATES: Comments on the proposed plan and proposed regulations to
implement the plan must be received by May 15, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Chief, Marine Mammal Division, Office of
Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-33226. Copies of the Team Report and
draft Environmental Assessment (EA) may be obtained by written request
from the Office of Protected Resources, or by telephoning one of the
contacts listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim Thounhurst, NMFS, Northeast
Region, 508/281-9368; Bridget Mansfield, NMFS, Southeast Region, 813/
570-5312; or Michael Payne, NMFS, Office of Protected Resources, 301/
713-2322.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Since it was first passed in 1972, one of the underlying goals of
the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) has been to reduce the
incidental serious injury and mortality of marine mammals permitted in
the course of commercial fishing operations to insignificant levels
approaching a zero mortality and serious injury rate (section 101(a)(2)
of the MMPA). The 1994 Amendments to the MMPA reaffirm this Zero
Mortality Rate Goal (ZMRG) (section 118 (b)(1)).
To facilitate reduction of incidental serious injury and mortality
to high priority marine mammal stocks, section 118(f) requires NMFS to
develop and implement a take reduction plan to assist in the recovery
or to prevent the depletion of each strategic stock that interacts with
a Category I or II fishery. Category I or II fisheries are fisheries
that have frequent or occasional incidental mortality and serious
injury of marine mammals, respectively. A strategic stock is a stock:
(1) For which the level of direct human-caused
[[Page 16520]]
mortality exceeds the potential biological removal (PBR) level; (2)
which is declining and is likely to be listed under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA) in the foreseeable future; or (3) which is listed as
a threatened or endangered species under the ESA or as a depleted
species under the MMPA. The immediate goal of a take reduction plan
(TRP) is to reduce, within 6 months of its implementation, the
mortality and serious injury of strategic stocks incidentally taken in
the course of commercial fishing operations to below the PBR levels
established for such stocks. The long-term goal of the plan is to
reduce, within 5 years of its implementation, the incidental mortality
and serious injury of strategic marine mammals taken in the course of
commercial fishing operations to insignificant levels approaching a
zero mortality and serious injury rate.
NMFS established the Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Team (Team
or ALWTRT) on August 6, 1996 (61 FR 40819) to prepare a draft Atlantic
Large Whale Take Reduction Plan to reduce takes of humpback, fin and
right whales, which are listed as endangered species under the ESA (and
are thus considered strategic stocks under the MMPA) by commercial
fisheries. Although minke whales are not considered strategic at this
time, the Team was also asked to consider measures that would reduce
takes of minke whales. The Team prepared a report and submitted it to
NMFS; a more complete discussion of the Team Report and associated
recommendations is provided below.
The New England Multispecies sink gillnet fishery is a Category I
fishery that has an historical incidental bycatch of humpback, minke,
and possibly fin whales. This gear type has been documented to take
right whales in Canadian waters. Additionally, entanglements of right
whales in unspecified gillnets have been recorded historically for U.S.
waters, although U.S. sink gillnets have not been conclusively
identified as having taken right whales. The Gulf of Maine/U.S. mid-
Atlantic lobster trap/pot fishery is a Category I fishery that has an
historical incidental bycatch of right, humpback, fin and minke whales.
The mid-Atlantic coastal gillnet fisheries are considered a Category II
fisheries complex that has an historical incidental bycatch of humpback
whales. The Southeastern U.S. Atlantic drift gillnet fishery for sharks
is a Category II fishery that is believed to be responsible for bycatch
of at least one right whale. These fisheries are therefore addressed in
this proposed Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Plan (ALWTRP or
Plan). The pelagic drift gillnet fishery has recorded takes of large
whales, but those interactions are not being addressed in this Plan,
since it will be addressed in the Atlantic Offshore Cetacean Take
Reduction Plan, which is being developed.
In addition, the Team Report identified several other fisheries
operating on the U.S. Atlantic Coast which either use gear similar in
construction to gear used by the fisheries covered by this proposed
plan, and may therefore represent similar entanglement threat, or which
may have documented serious injury or mortality entanglements of right,
humpback, fin and/or minke whales. These fisheries include the tuna
hand line/hook-and-line fishery, groundfish (bottom) longline/hook-and-
line fishery, surface gillnet fishery for small pelagic fishes, pot
fisheries other than lobster pot, finfish staked trap fisheries, and
weir/stop seine fisheries. Currently, these fisheries are either
classified as Category III or are unclassified. NMFS is considering the
appropriateness of these classifications and may impose gear-marking
requirements and/or restrictions on some or all of these other
fisheries in the final plan. NMFS specifically invites comments on
whether these other fisheries utilize the same or similar gear as the
fisheries considered in this plan, whether the gear is fished in a
manner which causes or has the potential to cause serious injury or
mortality to marine mammals, whether efficient administration,
effective enforcement or similar considerations warrant uniform
regulations for similar gear types, and whether the gear-marking
requirements and/or other restrictions should apply to all fisheries
using similar gear.
The Team was tasked with developing a draft plan for reducing
mortality and serious injury to strategic large whale stocks, and minke
whales if time permitted, in the specified fisheries. The Team included
representatives of NMFS, the Marine Mammal Commission, Maine Department
of Marine Resources, Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, Rhode
Island Division of Fish and Wildlife, Maryland Department of Natural
Resources, Virginia Marine Resources Commission, North Carolina
Division of Marine Fisheries, Georgia Department of Natural Resources,
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, New England Fishery
Management Council, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council,
environmental organizations, academic and scientific organizations, and
participants in the fisheries considered in this plan. In selecting
these team members, NMFS sought an equitable balance among
representatives of resource user and non-user interests.
The team met six times between September 1996 and January 1997 and
submitted a report to NMFS on February 5, 1997 (Although the report was
entitled ``Draft Large Whale Take Reduction Plan'', consensus was not
reached. Consequently, it is referred to as the ``ALWTRT Report'' or
``Team Report''). While consensus was not reached, the Team provided a
significant and useful framework for NMFS to develop this proposed
ALWTRP and the associated implementing regulations. The report
submitted by the Team includes: (1) A review of the current information
on the status of the affected strategic marine mammal stocks; (2)
descriptions of the New England multispecies sink gillnet fishery, the
mid-Atlantic coastal gillnet fisheries, the Gulf of Maine and U.S. mid-
Atlantic lobster trap/pot fisheries, and the Southeastern U.S. Atlantic
drift gillnet fishery for sharks; (3) comments on potential measures to
reduce the bycatch of large whales; and (4) other comments regarding
research needs for implementation of the plan.
NMFS evaluated the Team Report and subsequent comments submitted by
team members in developing this proposed ALWTRP. NMFS considered
possible take reduction measures in terms of their potential
effectiveness toward reaching both the 6-month and the 5-year goals.
This ALWTRP includes specific take reduction goals as well as means to
monitor progress toward those goals.
Take Reduction Goals
Most of the measures in this proposed plan focus on ways to reduce
the risk of serious injury and mortality to right whales, both because
the right whale's population status is more critical than that of
either humpback or fin whales, and because right whales are the only
endangered large whale in U.S. Atlantic waters for which PBR is known
to be exceeded. The proposed measures are also expected to reduce the
risk of serious injury and mortality to humpback and fin whales due to
entanglement, and may reduce the same risks for minke whales. There is
overlap in several areas where fishing occurs and where right,
humpback, fin and minke whales are also known to occur, although
concurrent use of these areas by all species does not occur during much
of the year. Therefore, certain measures directed at reducing right
whale entanglements (such as required gear modifications) are proposed
to be expanded to year-round coverage
[[Page 16521]]
beginning in 1998 to be effective for all species considered by the
Plan.
Some entanglements of large whales were observed by the NMFS sea
sampling program; however, most records come from reports from various
sources such as small vessel operators. Limitations of the available
entanglement data include: (1) Not all observed events are reported;
(2) most reports are opportunistic rather than from systematic data
collection; consequently, conclusions cannot be made regarding actual
entanglement levels; (3) identifying gear type or the fishery involved
is often problematic; and (4) identifying the location where the
entanglement first occurred is often difficult since the first
observation usually occurs after the animal has left the original
location.
Right Whales
Based on data from 1991 through 1995, U.S. fishing gear is
estimated to be responsible for approximately 35 percent (6 events) of
known human-caused serious injury and mortality to right whales, while
Canadian fisheries are estimated to be responsible for 18 percent (3
events); the remaining 47 percent (8 events) is attributed to ship
strikes. The MMPA requires that TRPs include measures to reduce takes
of strategic marine mammals incidental to U.S. commercial fisheries to
below PBR levels.
NMFS estimates that a minimum of 1.2 right whales from the western
North Atlantic stock are seriously injured or killed annually by
entanglement in U.S. fishing gear. Of those entangled whales, lobster
gear is estimated to have entangled an annual average of 0.4 whales
over the last 5 years. The Southeastern U.S. drift gillnet fishery for
sharks is assumed to have entangled an annual average of 0.2 whales
over the same period. Whales entangled in unidentified gillnet gear
have been observed. The pelagic drift gillnet fishery is estimated to
be responsible for 0.4 fishery-induced mortalities and serious injuries
of right whales annually. The remaining known entanglements are from
unknown fisheries. With the exception of the swordfish driftnet take,
which was documented by the NMFS observer program, these entanglement
rates are considered minimum estimates based on known events.
Unobserved entanglements are known to occur, based on observed scarred
animals. These entanglements may be unobserved because less serious
entanglements may be brief in duration, mortality may be rapid, or the
entanglement may occur in an area where there is little sighting effort
(and, consequently, lower chances of observation and reporting). NMFS
is unable to estimate the number of these unobserved events.
NMFS has determined that to meet the 6-month goal set by the MMPA
to reduce takes by commercial fisheries to below the PBR level of 0.4
for this stock, the probability of entanglement of right whales by all
U.S. Atlantic fisheries must be reduced by more than 67% (from 1.2 to
less than 0.4). Reduction of takes in the pelagic drift gillnet fishery
will be considered in the Atlantic Offshore Cetacean Take Reduction
Plan (AOCTRP). A draft AOCTRP was submitted to NMFS on November 25,
1996, and publication of the proposed plan in the Federal Register is
expected in the near future.
NMFS estimates annual serious injury and mortality rates based on a
5-year period. Expected rates of entanglement during any 6-month period
may vary from the 5-year annual average. This variation may be most
pronounced where the sample size is particularly small, as is the case
with right whale entanglements. Consequently, it will be difficult to
establish whether the goal of reducing incidental takes of right whales
to below the PBR level is achieved within 6 months of the plan is
implemented. Since the PBR level for right whales is 0.4, if more than
two serious injuries or mortalities incidental to commercial fishing
operations occur within 5 years after the plan is promulgated, then the
PBR goal will not have been achieved.
Progress toward the 5-year goal may be more feasible to monitor
than that toward the 6-month goal. However, defining the 5-year goal is
somewhat more difficult, since at this time, NMFS has not issued a
final quantitative definition for ZMRG. NMFS expects to address the
regulatory definition of ZMRG in the near future. However, more than
one incident of serious injury or mortality in the fisheries covered
under the ALWTRP (which does not include all fisheries) during the
first 3 years after the plan is implemented would be a strong indicator
that the plan was not achieving its goals. Right whale entanglement
rates are proposed to be monitored as described below.
Humpback Whales
NMFS has determined that a reduction in take for the western North
Atlantic stock of humpback whales is not required to meet the 6-month
goal, because the estimated annual serious injury and mortality level
due to entanglement (in the four fisheries groups covered in this plan)
for this stock (3.4 minimum annual average for 1991-1995) is below the
stock's PBR level of 9.7.
As with right whales, a quantitative goal to achieve the 5-year
goal of ZMRG for humpback whales cannot be prescribed until ZMRG has
been defined in terms other than ``insignificant levels approaching a
zero mortality rate.'' If entanglement rates are observed to be
reduced, progress toward ZMRG would be assumed, but could not be
assessed more accurately until ZMRG is defined more precisely. The
humpback whale entanglement rate is proposed to be monitored as
described below.
Fin Whales
Although serious injury and mortality due to entanglement has been
documented for this stock of fin whales over the 1991-1995 period, none
of those events can be conclusively attributed to any of the four
fisheries groups covered in this plan, and the estimated total take due
to entanglement is below PBR for this stock. Therefore, NMFS has
determined that a reduction in take for the western North Atlantic
stock of fin whales is not required for these fisheries to meet the 6-
month goal. However, entanglement of fin whales in lobster pot gear and
gillnet gear has been documented historically, and some reduction in
take may be necessary to achieve the ZMRG. As with right and humpback
whales, a quantitative goal to achieve the 5-year goal of ZMRG for fin
whales cannot be established with numerical precision at this time.
However, measures implemented to reduce the entanglement rate of right
and humpback whales would also be expected to reduce the entanglement
rate for fin whales, facilitating progress of that stock toward ZMRG.
Fin whale entanglement rate are to be monitored, as feasible, although
it should be noted that known entanglements are rare, and it may be
difficult to determine whether there has been a reduction.
Additionally, the number of entangled fin whale sightings is likely to
be negatively biased because carcasses usually sink immediately and are
therefore less likely to be observed.
Minke Whales
Although minke whales are not considered strategic at this time
(human-caused mortality and serious injury are not known to exceed the
PBR level of 21 for this stock, and this species is not listed as
threatened or endangered under the ESA or as depleted under the MMPA),
serious injuries and mortalities incidental to at least two of the
fisheries groups covered in this proposed plan are known to
[[Page 16522]]
occur. Therefore, the Team was asked to consider measures that would
reduce takes of minke whales in these fisheries. In light of the strict
time frame available to develop a TRP, the Team did not have time to
consider specific needs or measures to reduce entanglements of minke
whales. However, measures implemented to reduce the entanglement rate
of right and humpback whales may reduce the entanglement rate for minke
whales, facilitating progress of that stock toward ZMRG. The minke
whale entanglement rate is proposed to be monitored, to the extent
feasible. If entanglement rates are observed to be reduced, progress
toward ZMRG would be assumed, but could not be assessed more accurately
until ZMRG is defined more precisely. As with fin whales, minke
entanglement levels are likely to be underestimated because carcasses
are likely to sink immediately.
Monitoring Strategies
The following strategies for monitoring progress in take reduction
were outlined in the Team Report: (1) Collect adequate photographic
data to evaluate the incidence of new entanglement scarring and assess
presumed mortality levels; (2) expand field survey efforts for a
minimum of six years after implementation of gear modifications, to
assess population abundance and distribution; and (3) evaluate
effectiveness of gear modifications on future entanglement events. The
success of the take reduction measures that are implemented will be
evaluated at future Team meetings, with subsequent comments and
recommendations forwarded to NMFS.
NMFS will continue to monitor entanglements of all large whale
species. Assessment of the success in bycatch reduction measures will
be based on reports from the NMFS observer program, examination of
stranded whales, abundance and distribution surveys, fishermen's
reports and opportunistic reports of entanglement events. NMFS is
considering expanding field survey efforts to assess population
abundance and distribution. The effectiveness of implemented take
reduction measures may be most apparent through monitoring the
entanglement rate for humpback whales, since this species has the
highest known entanglement rate of the large whales on the U.S.
Atlantic coast. A decrease in entanglements of humpback whales will be
taken as supportive evidence that the risk of entangling right, fin and
minke whales has been reduced.
It should be emphasized that not all whale entanglements result in
serious injury or mortality. Levels of entanglement-related
scarification in the right whale population have been analyzed (Kraus,
1990). Monitoring of scarification and comparison of historic levels in
the population, as noted in the Team Report, may help provide a basis
for determining whether the various take reduction measures in the
final plan are effective in decreasing levels of interaction between
whales and fishing gear. This must be considered together with
determining the effectiveness of gear modifications (which may leave
scars on whales, but not result in serious injuries and mortalities) in
decreasing the severity of entanglement-related injuries. The level of
non-serious injuries resulting from entanglements will provide further
indication of whether the 6-month and 5-year goals of the ALWTRP are
being achieved.
Monitoring fishing effort levels in conjunction with assessment of
gear effectiveness may provide another indicator of entanglement rates.
This will be considered when the Team periodically convenes to evaluate
the success of the ALWTRP. If fishing effort is reduced, entanglement
risk may also decline, although a linear relationship cannot be
assumed. Rather, entanglement risk may decrease by an unknown
percentage depending on the degree of overlap between historical
fishing effort and whale distribution.
Some marking of lobster pots, gillnets and associated surface gear
(e.g., buoys, high-fliers, or flags) is currently required or being
considered under Federal or state fishery management plans for the four
groups of fisheries covered by this plan. However, most lines and nets
in the water column remain unmarked. Most sightings of entangled whales
involve gear which cannot be conclusively tracked to a particular
fishery or area, due to the fact that only a fragment of line or net is
present.
Several entanglement records indicates that whales are capable of
dragging gear great distances. In one known instance, a right whale
that became entangled in a lobster pot trawl in the Bay of Fundy
dragged fragments of the trawl to Cape Cod, Massachusetts, where the
whale was struck by a vessel and washed up on the beach. Due to these
factors and the low per-gear interaction rate, NMFS believes that the
traditional observer program will not be effective in detecting or
monitoring large whale entanglements in most fisheries.
To increase the value of information from future entanglement
events, NMFS is proposing gear marking requirements to monitor the
effectiveness of this plan and to determine whether entanglements are
occurring in gear which has been damaged or displaced by storms or
user-group conflicts. NMFS seeks to implement this requirement in as
simple a manner as possible as described in the gear modifications
section below.
Take Reduction Strategies
The primary measures for take reduction discussed in the Team
Report include modifications to fishing gear and practices, area
restrictions, reduction of inactive fishing gear as marine debris, and
improved disentanglement efforts. Supplementary initiatives for take
reduction contained in the Team Report include fisher education and
outreach, better monitoring of the distribution of whale stocks and
entanglements, joint initiatives with Canada to reduce whale bycatch in
commercial fisheries, and exploration of market incentives to reduce
large whale bycatch in these fisheries. In this action, NMFS is
proposing strategies that seem best suited to follow the intent of the
Team and to achieve the goals set forth by the MMPA. NMFS expects that,
if implemented, these measures, taken together, would have a
significant effect in reducing the risk of entanglement of large whales
in the fisheries considered in this plan to levels that meet both the
6-month and 5-year goals.
Whales are extremely mobile and entanglements have occurred outside
the bounds of known high risk areas. It is, therefore, not possible to
identify all areas of risk. It is likewise difficult to determine if
the measures proposed in this plan will be sufficient to reduce
entanglements that result in serious injury and mortality to below PBR
levels, and eventually to the ZMRG, or to maintain take rates below
those levels. Further restrictions will be applied if these measures
are not successful.
It is not possible to conclusively quantify the decrease in risk of
entanglement that will result from the proposed measures in this
ALWTRP. The Team was presented with the best available data on large
whale distribution and abundance patterns in the Atlantic, as well as
similar information on fisheries effort and distribution. These data
were analyzed and compared to determine areas and times that represent
``high risk'' to whales based on high probability of whale occurrence
and/or high fishing effort. This analysis was used by the Team to
provide comments to NMFS regarding locations and times for area
[[Page 16523]]
closures or gear restrictions. For an analysis of the level of
entanglement risk from the Northeast sink gillnet fishery for all
areas, which was done by overlaying right and humpback whale densities
on fishing effort for different times of the year and assigning low,
medium or high risk, see the appendix 11 and other materials in the
ALWTRT Report. Whale densities during certain months in some areas are
such that the Team believed it was important to prevent future
expansion of fishery effort until effective gear modifications have
been developed and demonstrated. In other areas periodic increased
whale densities combined with certain levels of fishing effort may
create anomalous high risk periods.
The proposed requirements would govern fishing by all vessels in
New England multispecies sink gillnet fisheries, the mid-Atlantic
coastal gillnet fisheries, the Gulf of Maine/U.S. mid-Atlantic lobster
trap/pot fishery and the Southeastern U.S. Atlantic drift gillnet
fishery for sharks. As stated earlier, there are additional trap/pot,
gillnet or other gear that may have the potential to entangle whales.
These are primarily Category III fisheries which will be evaluated
during the 1998 List of Fisheries process for potential interaction
levels with large whales and possible elevation to Category I or II.
Although these fisheries are not included in take reduction or gear
marking measures under this proposed rule, the final rule may include
such measures.
Research Initiatives and Monitoring Strategies
The Team recommended initiation of a gear research and development
program to design and implement fishing techniques and technologies
that will reduce the entanglement rate and/or severity of injuries and
mortalities of large whales. The Team recommended that NMFS work with
industry and gear specialists to develop criteria for: (1) Certifying
individuals and institutions as qualified to design and evaluate
modifications for use consistent with requirements of the ALWTRP and
other TRPs; and (2) evaluating gear effectiveness toward reducing
marine mammal entanglements.
The Team Report identified several initial gear modifications for
investigation. These are the development of: (1) Tag lines (lightweight
line that poses no risk to whales, but would hold a buoy at the surface
and allow retrieval of a functional buoy line); (2) biodegradable or a
weak link at the bottom of the buoy line; (3) improvement of a weak
link at the top of the buoy line; (4) smooth or non-snagging gillnet
head rope; (5) biodegradable gear and gear components; (6) using
weights to sink floating pot trawl groundline, development of other
functional equivalents of sinking groundline, or requiring sinking
groundline; and (7) ``noisy'' gear, or gear more easily detected by
whales. Also identified in the Team Report as areas for further
investigation are the evaluation of the breaking strengths of weak
links and the performance of weak links in gillnets both between and
within net panels. The Team Report further comments that successful
gear modifications be considered for future incorporation into the plan
as implementation measures.
NMFS is forming a gear review and technical advisory group to work
with industry and gear technology specialists to develop gear and
fishing practices to reduce the number and impact of large whale
entanglements. NMFS recognizes that the current low rate of observed
entanglement and other difficulties in evaluating gear makes it
difficult or impossible to demonstrate conclusively that any gear
modification would reduce entanglement or serious injury and mortality
resulting from entanglement. Nonetheless, NMFS has included certain
gear modifications in this proposed rule although these measures have
not yet been evaluated by the NMFS gear review and technical advisory
group. NMFS believes that these modifications will reduce the risk of
entanglement, but seeks further review of these measures.
It is anticipated that the NMFS gear review group will conduct an
initial review of the proposed gear modifications prior to publication
of the final rule implementing this plan. NMFS proposes to immediately
implement the most stringent restrictions in areas and times when right
whale concentrations are highest. This strategy was initiated in
regulations implementing Framework Adjustment 23 to the Northeast
Multispecies Fishery Management Plan and emergency regulations for the
lobster fishery under the MMPA. The proposed rule incorporates these
restrictions and phases in additional restrictions.
Through gear marking requirements, NMFS hopes to obtain more useful
data regarding when and where entanglements occur, as well as in which
parts of the gear they are most likely to occur. This measure will not
reduce bycatch, but is expected to facilitate in monitoring
entanglement rates and assist in designing future bycatch reduction
measures to achieve ZMRG.
NMFS seeks to implement the gear marking requirement in as simple a
manner as possible. A system entailing color-coded marks is proposed.
The marking would include three color schemes, one color representing
the gear type corresponding to one of the fisheries in this plan, and
the second mark consisting of two colors indicating the region in which
the gear is being fished. Regions would include Cape Cod Bay critical
habitat, Great South Channel critical habitat, the Stellwagen Bank/
Jeffreys Ledge area, other Northeast waters, Mid-Atlantic coastal
waters, and Southeast waters. Gear marking must be accomplished so that
the result is a smooth line with no snags which could catch in a
whale's baleen.
Marking of buoy lines (within 2 feet of the buoy and approximately
midway in the water column) would be required by January 1, 1998, and
marking of nets (at both ends of each net in a string of gillnets and
every 100 feet in panels > 300 feet) and lobster pot trawl groundlines
(approximately midway between each pot) would be required by January 1,
1999. NMFS solicits comments on these proposed gear marking measures
and alternative suggestions. In addition, NMFS also requests comments
on whether gear-marking should be required for the other fisheries
discussed above which utilize similar gear.
Primary Take Reduction Initiatives
Fishing Method / Gear Modifications and Area Restrictions by Fishery
and Area
All Fisheries:
Documented whale behavior and information from actual entanglement
records suggest that both vertical (e.g., buoy lines) and horizontal
(e.g., gillnets or lobster pot trawl groundlines) components of fishing
gear represent entanglement risks. For example, of the 9 records of
right whale entanglements in gear identified as lobster gear since
1970, 4 apparently involved only the buoy line, 2 probably involved
only groundline, and 3 involved line that was from an unknown part of
the gear. Modifications to the current practices of rigging buoy lines
are proposed to reduce the number of vertical lines and to ensure that
pot trawls are not rigged with more than two vertical lines. Although
the level of risk reduction cannot be quantified because the current
number of vertical lines is unknown, implementation of these measures
will likely directly reduce the entanglement risk presented by vertical
buoy lines.
[[Page 16524]]
Sinking Buoy Line Requirement (except for driftnet gear): Buoy
lines are typically constructed of a section of sinking line near the
surface which is spliced or knotted to a longer section of floating
line that is attached to the anchor of a gillnet or the first pot of a
lobster pot trawl. Sinking line is preferred near the surface to
decrease the chance that the line will be severed by propellers of
vessels passing through an area. The attached floating line is less
expensive than sinking line and has several additional benefits. Using
floating line near the bottom can prevent the line from wrapping around
gear or rocks on the bottom and chafing as the gear is moved by
currents in the area. The length of buoy line used can depend on water
depth and tidal influence. In some areas the buoy line may be longer
than twice the water depth, and the tautness of the line is influenced
by the tidal cycle and other currents. Therefore, the line may be slack
during part of the current cycles in certain areas.
Slack floating line appears to represent a greater risk of
entanglement than taut line, particularly if the line is laying at or
near the surface. Right whales may be particularly susceptible to
entanglement in lines laying at or near the surface because of the
feeding behavior known as ``skim feeding'' during which whales move
slowly forward through a patch of zooplankton, keeping the mouth
slightly ajar for hours at a time. Right and humpback whales are also
known to feed at depth; however, the behavior when feeding near the
bottom or in the water column is poorly understood.
NMFS proposes to require sinking buoy lines or modified sinking
buoy lines, by January 1, 1998, in all lobster pot gear and gillnet
gear used by anchored gillnet fisheries covered by this plan be
required by January 1, 1998. In order to accommodate regional
differences in the practice of rigging buoy lines due to oceanographic
conditions, NMFS proposes to allow fishers to use a section of floating
line near the bottom of buoy lines in some areas. The Team discussed
using 10 fathoms (18.3 m) for this bottom floating section in some
areas such as the Great South Channel. Several TRT members mentioned
that allowing this amount of floating line in the buoy line in portions
of Stellwagen Bank and even the Great South Channel would represent
very little reduction in risk, since the water is not much deeper than
10 fathoms (18.3 m) in certain parts of those regions. Because
requiring one length, even for one area such as the Great South Channel
right whale critical habitat, is problematic, NMFS is proposing that
the floating line at the bottom of a modified sinking buoy line be no
longer than 10% of the depth of the water. NMFS is requesting comments
on whether 10 fathoms, 1 fathom, or other lengths is more appropriate
or whether a different percentage of the water column depth should be
specified as the minimum length.
Breakaway Buoy or Weak Buoy Line Requirement (except for driftnet
gear): NMFS proposes that by January 1, 1998, all buoy lines in lobster
pot gear and anchored gillnet gear considered in this plan be equipped
with a breakaway buoy at the top of the buoy line, or that traditional
buoy lines be replaced with a weak buoy line. The breakaway buoy or
weak buoy line would be designed to break in a whale entanglement
situation. Based on comments by the Team, NMFS is considering requiring
a maximum breaking strength of 150, 300 and 500 lbs (68 kg, 136 kg, and
227 kg, respectively). NMFS is proposing a 150 lb (68 kg) breaking
strength, which is the initial value recommended by the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts Endangered Whale Working Group and which was also
discussed by the Team. Comments are requested on the appropriateness
and practicality of these and other possible breaking strengths.
The purpose of this requirement is to reduce the serious injury and
mortality associated with an entanglement in the buoy line of fixed
gear. The goal of a breakaway buoy is to ensure that the buoy itself
does not contribute to the entanglement problem. A line without a buoy
or knot at the bitter end is expected to pass more easily through the
baleen of a whale and to slip more easily past an appendage. A line
which does not get hung up on the baleen or on an appendage because
there are no knots or buoys is believed to be less likely to initiate
thrashing behavior. It is believed that once a whale starts to thrash,
line can be wrapped around appendages and/or begin to cut into tissue.
The breakaway buoy is intended to prevent the entanglement from
progressing to that stage. While this modification may not reduce the
incidence of entanglement, breakaway buoys might be expected to at
least reduce the severity of an entanglement.
The intent of a weak buoy line is that it would snap if a whale
entangled in it but would be strong enough to haul up a heavier,
traditional buoy line that would in turn be used to haul up the fishing
gear. This measure may be the most effective gear modification of any
discussed by the Team for reducing the serious injury and mortality
rate from entanglement. As mentioned above, buoy line appears to have
been the part of the gear responsible for at least 4 of the 9 known
right whale entanglements in lobster pot gear. Right and humpback
whales have also been sighted entangled in buoy lines of sink gillnet
gear. If a brittle buoy line could be designed to break every time it
was encountered by a whale, this modification could reduce and possibly
eliminate the risk that entanglement would occur or at least ensure
that entanglement in a buoy line would result in serious injury or
mortality. NMFS assumes that use of such a brittle buoy line may not be
practicable, but that a weak line can be developed that will break at
least half of the time.
Since a breakaway buoy is not expected to reduce the possibility of
injury once a whale gets wrapped in line, the weak buoy line may
represent a greater conservation gain than would be achieved through
the breakaway buoy. However, the development of a weak buoy line is not
as far along as the development of a breakaway buoy. In addition, the
cost of developing and implementing a weak buoy line system may be
substantially greater than a breakaway buoy system. NMFS proposes to
require the use of breakaway buoys in 1998, but weak buoy lines are
encouraged to be used as an alternative. Comments are requested on
approaches to phasing in this requirement.
Gear inspection requirement: This proposed rule includes a
requirement that all gear used by the four specified fisheries be
hauled at least once every 30 days for inspection. This provision was
discussed by the ALWTRT for certain gear types to encourage fishers not
to ``store'' gear at sea.
Closures: In addition to gear modifications, the Team discussed the
use of time/area closures for sink gillnet and lobster pot gear in
areas of high use by right whales until fishing gear has been developed
that poses minimal risk of serious injury or mortality from
entanglement. Only gear demonstrated to pose minimal risk to whales
will be allowed in the restricted area.
Contingency Measures: Closure or other restrictions in the event of
an entanglement in modified gear: As noted above, NMFS is aware that it
will be difficult to determine with surety that required gear
modifications will reduce the rate of serious injury and mortality as
expected. NMFS proposes that if an injury or mortality of a right whale
occurs as the result of an entanglement in modified gear, NMFS will
assess the circumstances, including the level of injury, and determine
if
[[Page 16525]]
there is indication that the modification is not sufficient to reduce
the rate of serious injury or mortality to right whales. If such a
serious injury or mortality is attributable to modified gear in a
critical habitat area, NMFS would close the critical habitat area
during the restricted period. If such a serious injury or mortality is
attributable to modified gear in another restricted area, NMFS could
close the area or impose additional restrictions to ensure the
protection of right whales.
If the entanglement involved only the non-serious injury of a right
whale, or involved another large whale species, NMFS would again
investigate and determine whether the interaction was attributable to
modified gear. If the entanglement was attributable to modified gear,
NMFS could impose additional gear modifications or alternative fishing
practices, or close the area through a publication in the Federal
Register.
This measure would enable NMFS to take prompt action to protect
endangered whales if modified gear is not sufficiently effective. NMFS
will examine each entanglement event on a case by case basis to
determine whether the gear responsible is modified gear, and whether
the entanglement resulted in serious injury or mortality.
Closures or other restrictions based on unusual concentrations of
right whales: The measures in this rule are proposed to be implemented
in various areas based on current knowledge of migratory patterns of
right whales. Right whale movements are unpredictable, however, and
there are periods when right whales occur in certain U.S. waters at
other than expected times of the year and in areas other than right
whale critical habitat. Some of these times and areas may have large
amounts of fixed gear in the water. The risk of entanglement may be
particularly high in these unpredictable situations. For example, all
right whale entanglements in U.S. lobster gear where the location was
known occurred either outside critical habitat or outside the peak
season in critical habitat. As an added measure to reduce the
likelihood of entanglement in the anomalous years with unusual right
whale distribution patterns, the proposed regulations allow NMFS to
extend gear requirements or to close a restricted area. Notification of
such action would be published in the Federal Register. Under the
proposed rule, special area restrictions would be considered if four or
more right whales are sighted in an area for two consecutive weeks.
Right whales would be judged to have left the area if there are no
confirmed sightings for one week or more. NMFS requests comments on the
criteria for determining concentrations of right whales that may
require additional protection and suggestions for alternative criteria.
Risk reduction through other MMPA actions or fishery management
plan regulations: In addition to this proposed rule, certain other
measures that are expected to decrease the risk of entanglement of
whales in sink gillnets are either currently in effect or under
consideration, such as reductions in allowable days at sea and seasonal
or year-round area closures to protect groundfish. Additionally, area
closures for harbor porpoise conservation are in effect for
Massachusetts Bay, the Gulf of Maine ``mid-coast'' and ``northeast''
areas, and southern New England. With the exception of the harbor
porpoise closure in southern New England, all of these closures
coincide with times that right whales are also present in the area,
further decreasing the likelihood of entanglement. Effort reduction
measures under Framework Adjustment 20 to the Northeast Multispecies
Fishery Management Plan are expected to reduce total sink gillnet
effort by 50 to 80 percent, which is expected to reduce the risk of
large whale entanglement associated with this gear by some fraction of
the same amount.
NMFS further notes that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the
New England Fishery Management Council (NEFMC) are considering net caps
in the sink gillnet fishery for future implementation to conserve
groundfish. These measures, if implemented, may further reduce the risk
of entanglement of right whales in sink gillnet gear, but are not a
part of this plan.
Some level of lobster pot gear effort reduction may occur under
gear conflict management measures such as those implemented by the
NEFMC in Southern New England. Further, NMFS is aware that the Atlantic
States Marine Fisheries Commission is currently considering reducing
effort in the lobster fishery. Any effort reduction measures
implemented for the lobster fishery are likely to reduce the risk of
entanglement of whales in that gear, but are not a part of this plan.
Fishery-Specific Measures: The following measures are proposed for
the four groups of fisheries covered in the ALWTRP. The measures are
intended to decrease the risk of entangling large whales in gillnets
and lobster gear. Although they did not reach consensus, the Team
provided NMFS with a significant and useful framework for developing
proposed implementing regulations. The gear modifications proposed by
NMFS generally reflect the intent of the Team to reduce the risk of
entanglement without creating an undue burden on the fishing industry.
NMFS also considered whether the recommended measures would meet the
goals of the MMPA. Certain areas, identified as high use areas by large
whales during certain times of the year, were targeted for closures or
a high level of gear restrictions. The following area closures and gear
restrictions are intended to be implemented beginning in 1998 for the
period specified, except for measures proposed for the Southeast drift
gillnet fishery for sharks, which would be implemented beginning in
November 1997.
American Lobster Trap/Pot Fisheries
In addition to the buoy line requirements and contingency measures
described above for all fisheries, NMFS proposes the following area-
specific measures for the lobster trap/pot fisheries covered in this
plan.
As discussed above, groundlines of lobster pot trawls represent an
entanglement risk to whales, although the degree of risk relative to
other parts of the gear is unknown. The lobster industry uses either
sinking or floating groundline, depending on substrate and/or gear
densities. Floating line is preferred in many areas to avoid snagging
on rocky bottom or on other pots as well as to reduce chafing caused by
contact with pots and with the bottom. The degree to which line floats
between pots is unknown. Because right and humpback whales are known to
use the lower part of the water column for feeding or other activities,
even a modest curve to the groundline could still represent an
entanglement threat, especially where the length of groundline between
pots may be as long as the depth of the water column. The requirement
of sinking groundline would reduce the potential for a high profile of
the groundline and therefore reduce the entanglement threat represented
by that part of the pot trawl.
NMFS proposes to require modifications to lobster pot trawl
groundlines only in certain areas with primarily sandy bottoms to
minimize the amount of snagging and/or severing on rocky outcrops.
Restricting sinking lines to these areas would not be expected to have
a significant negative impact on the effectiveness in reducing whale
entanglements involving accidental encounters, since whales are not
likely to feed close to the bottom in rocky areas. However, there may
be cases when whales, particularly juveniles, are attracted to gear
even along rocky bottom, so some potential for entanglement remains.
The NMFS
[[Page 16526]]
gear review and technical advisory group is expected to consider
recommendations for alternatives to sinking groundline.
Cape Cod Bay Critical Habitat Area: Based on comments in the Team
Report, NMFS proposes to restrict fishing with lobster pot gear in the
Cape Cod Bay critical habitat area, including both Federal and
Commonwealth waters, from January 1 through May 15 of each year. Only
certain types of lobster pot gear would be allowed during this period
of high use by right whales. NMFS proposes to prohibit the use of
single lobster pots or trawls of less than 4 pots during this time
period. In addition, trawls could not be rigged with no more than 2
buoy lines. The purpose of these requirements is to reduce and/or
prevent an increase in the number of vertical lines in the water that a
whale might encounter. NMFS also proposes to require that all
groundlines used in lobster pot trawls in this area consist of sinking
line.
Based on comments in the Team Report, NMFS also proposes to
restrict fishing with lobster pot gear in the Cape Cod Bay critical
habitat area from May 16 through December 31. NMFS does not propose to
prohibit the use of single pots from May 16 through December 31,
because the likely response to this requirement may be for fishermen
who now use single pots in optimal lobster habitat to add pots to their
trawls rather than to decrease the number of buoy lines. Only one buoy
line would be allowed on trawls of less than 4 pots. Otherwise, gear
modifications proposed for the May 16 through December period are
similar to those for the January 1 through May 15 period and would
include breakaway buoy or weak buoy line, sinking buoy lines, and
sinking groundlines.
Great South Channel Critical Habitat Area: Based on comments in the
Team Report, NMFS proposes to close all of the Great South Channel
critical habitat area from April 1 to June 30 of each year to lobster
pot gear until the Assistant Administrator determines that alternative
fishing practices or gear modifications have been developed which
reduce the risk of serious injury or mortality to whales to acceptable
levels. As noted above, if right whale concentrations outside the usual
``high-use'' period warrant additional action, the area may be closed,
through a publication in the Federal Register.
Although not allowing lobster pot gear in the area west of the
Loran C 13710 line from April 1 to June 30 appears inconsistent with
what NMFS proposes for sink gillnet gear in this area, NMFS believes
that lobster pot gear poses a greater threat to right whales than does
sink gillnet gear in this area. The offshore location generally
requires that gillnetters tend their gear, whereas lobster pot gear in
this area is often not checked for extended periods especially if there
is bad weather.
NMFS is proposing closure of the Great South Channel critical
habitat to lobster pot gear during the high right whale use period, but
proposes gear modifications in the Cape Cod Bay critical habitat over
the comparable period. The rationale for this difference is that there
is a higher likelihood that an entangled whale in Cape Cod Bay will be
sighted and reported, due to the high level of vessel traffic and more
research efforts in that area. Potential whale entanglements in Cape
Cod Bay are considered more likely to be observed and reported to the
disentanglement network. In addition, NMFS believes that
disentanglement efforts may be more effective in reducing the potential
for serious injuries and mortalities in these relatively shallow,
nearshore waters than in offshore waters. The Great South Channel
critical habitat is further offshore and little whale watching or
survey effort exists there. The likelihood of observing an entangled
whale offshore is lower, and offshore disentanglement efforts are
subject to greater logistical impediments.
In addition, differences in oceanographic conditions in the two
regions may make a particular gear modification less effective in one
area relative to the other. For example, the Great South Channel is
much deeper than Cape Cod Bay and exhibits much stronger tides,
requiring different fishing practices. NMFS' gear review and technical
advisory group will be asked to consider oceanographic conditions in
the Great South Channel in making gear recommendations that might be
effective and practicable in that area.
Although the Team Report contains discussion regarding the closure
of Groundfish Management Area I, which covers part of the Great South
Channel right whale critical habitat, to lobster fishing during the
high whale use period, NMFS does not propose closing the area to
lobster pot fishing at this time, as the frequency of right whale
sightings in this area (already closed to gillnet gear for groundfish
conservation measures) is quite low and the fishing effort minimal.
Comments on this decision are requested.
The Team Report provided comments on the lobster pot fisheries in
the Great South Channel critical habitat area outside of the known high
right whale use period. NMFS proposes to restrict lobster fishing in
the Great South Channel right whale critical habitat area from January
1 through March 31 and July 1 through December 31 of each year
(beginning in 1998). Proposed restrictions during this time period
include only sinking or modified sinking buoy lines, and breakaway
buoys or weak buoy lines.
Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys Ledge Area: NMFS proposes to define the
Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys Ledge (SB/JL) area as the area delineated by
the following points: the shoreline at 43\1/2\ deg. 00' N out to
70 deg. W, then south along that line to 42 deg. N, then west along
that line to the Massachusetts shoreline at the western end of Cape Cod
Bay, excluding right whale critical habitat. The Team Report includes
comments indicating a different northern boundary (43 deg.15' rather
than 43 deg.30'). The northern and eastern boundaries proposed here are
consistent with one of the groundfish area closures in the Northeast
Multispecies Fishery Management Plan.
Based on the Team Report and subsequent comments regarding this
area, NMFS proposes to restrict lobster fishing in the SB/JL area from
January 1 through December 31 of each year (beginning in 1998).
Proposed restrictions during this time period include sinking
groundline, sinking or modified sinking buoy lines, and breakaway buoys
or weak buoy lines.
Fishers should be aware that humpback and/or right whales are
present in the SB/JL area most months of the year. If the gear
modifications are not sufficient to reduce serious injury and mortality
to right and humpback whales to achieve the 6-month PBR goal or the 5-
year ZMRG goal, additional restrictions or closures of certain portions
of SB/JL may be necessary.
All Other Areas throughout the East Coast Range of the American
Lobster Pot Fishery not Addressed by Previous Measures: NMFS proposes
to restrict fishing with American lobster pot gear from January 1 to
December 31 in all other U.S. state and Federal waters north of 41 deg.
N latitude and from December 1 to March 31 in all state and Federal
waters south of 41 deg. N latitude. Beginning January 1, 1998, NMFS
proposes to restrict these areas to allow only lobster pot gear that
has sinking buoy lines or modified sinking buoy lines. NMFS requests
comments on the possible exemption of waters landward of barrier
islands, such as those in New Jersey and North Carolina, and other
shallow water areas where whales are less likely to occur.
[[Page 16527]]
New England Multispecies Sink Gillnet Fishery
In addition to the buoy line requirements and contingency measures
described above for all fisheries, NMFS proposes the following area-
specific measures. Consistent with the comments of the Team Report,
NMFS proposes a suite of modifications specific to sink gillnets. The
purpose of these modifications is to maximize the probability that a
whale will be able to break free of a sink gillnet. The modifications
include prohibiting floating line everywhere except the headrope (cork
line) and the bottom-most section of the buoy line, placing weak links
between the net panels on the headrope and footrope (lead line) to
reduce amount of gear attached to whale in case of entanglement,
increasing length of the lines which connect the net to the anchor to
maximize the holding power of the anchors, and limiting the thickness
of headrope to enhance the likelihood that it will part when
encountered by a whale. These measures would be implemented
simultaneously because weak links are not expected to function properly
without sufficient anchoring and scope of the groundline/bridle, and
using more anchoring power without weak links could result in increased
rate of drowning. Industry TRT members indicated that some of these
modifications, such as an increased bridle-to-anchor length and
increased anchoring power, are already in use to minimize loss of gear
to mobile gear. NMFS solicits comments on the likely effectiveness of
this suite of gear modifications and in particular on minimal breaking
strengths of weak links which could be used while still allowing
fishermen to haul their gear. In addition, NMFS also requests comments
on typical depth or height of gillnets and whether that depth warrants
the requirement of weak links in the footrope as well as the headrope.
Cape Cod Bay Critical Habitat Area: The Team Report treated state
and Federal waters of right whale critical habitat in Cape Cod Bay
separately and did not reach consensus on gillnet restriction measures
in the Federal portion of these waters. The Team Report discussed
adopting for the state waters of Cape Cod Bay critical habitat the area
and gear restrictions implemented by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
for this same area. NMFS supports the regulations adopted by the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts for protecting right whales from
entanglement in critical habitat within Massachusetts state waters of
Cape Cod Bay. To provide consistent protection for right whales
throughout the critical habitat area, NMFS proposes to treat state and
Federal waters as one unit in Cape Cod Bay. NMFS intends to work
closely with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts as the State
regulations, which were implemented under emergency authority, are
reviewed and modified through regular rulemaking procedures. NMFS will
review State regulations in the context of this take reduction plan and
its inherent goals.
Based on comments in the Team Report, NMFS proposes that the entire
right whale critical habitat in Cape Cod Bay be closed to sink gillnet
gear from January 1 through May 15 of each year, until the Assistant
Administrator determines that alternative fishing practices or gear
modifications which significantly reduce the risk of serious injury or
mortality to whales have been developed. As noted above, if whale
concentrations outside the usual ``high-use'' period warrant additional
action, the area may be closed for additional periods, through a
publication in the Federal Register.
To provide additional protection for all large whales, NMFS
proposes to restrict sink gillnet fishing in the entire Cape Cod Bay
critical habitat area from May 16 through December 31 of each year to
allow only sink gillnet gear that has been modified as described above.
Great South Channel Critical Habitat Area: Based on comments in the
Team Report, NMFS proposes to close the portion of right whale critical
habitat east of Loran C line 13710/43940 (Northwest Boundary) and
13710/43650 (Southwest Boundary) from April 1 through June 30 to sink
gillnet gear until the Assistant Administrator determines that
alternative fishing practices or gear modifications have been developed
which reduce the risk of serious injury or mortality to whales to
acceptable levels. As discussed above, if whale concentrations outside
the usual ``high-use'' period warrant additional action, the area may
be closed.
NMFS recognizes that the Team Report did not recommend a complete
closure of the entire Great South Channel critical habitat area to sink
gillnets. In the narrow band west of the Loran C points 13710/43940 and
13710/43650, the Team considered the likelihood of entanglement of
right whales remote. A recent NMFS analysis indicates that only 3% of
historical right whale sightings occurred along that western edge of
critical habitat. Further, this band is economically important to the
sink gillnet fishery.
Based on comments in the Team Report, NMFS proposes to restrict
sink gillnet fishing in the portions of the Great South Channel right
whale critical habitat area east of the Loran C 13710 line from January
1 to March 31 and July 1 to December 31 of each year and the portion of
right whale critical habitat west of Loran C 13710/43940 (Northwest
Boundary) and 13710/43650 (Southwest Boundary) (the ``sliver area'')
from January 1 through December 31 of each year to allow only sink
gillnet gear that has been modified according to the specifications
described above.
Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys Ledge: This area is defined as for the
lobster pot fishery. Based on comments in the Team Report, NMFS
proposes year-round restrictions in the SB/JL area to allow only sink
gillnet gear that has been modified according to specifications
described above. Fishers should be aware that humpback and/or right
whales are present in the SB/JL area most months of the year and that
if gear modifications are not sufficient to reduce serious injury and
mortality to right and humpback whales to levels required under the
MMPA, additional restrictions or closures may be necessary.
All Other Areas throughout the Range of the Northeast Sink Gillnet
Fishery not Addressed by Previous Measures: NMFS proposes to restrict
fishing with sink gillnet gear from January 1 to December 31 in U.S.
state and Federal waters east of 72 deg. 30' W (dividing line between
Northeast sink gillnet fishery and mid-Atlantic coastal gillnet
fishery) and north of a line running due east from the North Carolina/
South Carolina border. Beginning January 1, 1998, NMFS proposes to
restrict sink gillnet fishing in this area to gear with sinking buoy
lines or modified sinking buoy lines, and breakaway buoys or weak buoy
lines. Beginning in 1999, the full suite of measures described above
are proposed to be required.
Since gillnet fisheries in Long Island Sound (inside a line from
Orient Point-Plum Island-Fishers Island-Watch Hill), and waters
landward of the first bridge embayments in Rhode Island and southern
Massachusetts are classified as Category III inshore gillnet fisheries
rather than as part of the Category I northeast sink gillnet fishery,
those inshore fisheries would be exempt under this proposed rule.
U.S. Mid-Atlantic Coastal Gillnet Fisheries
All anchored gillnet fisheries: NMFS proposes to restrict fishing
with all anchored gillnet gear from December 1 through March 31 in mid-
Atlantic waters from Shinnecock Inlet on the southern Long Island, New
York shore
[[Page 16528]]
south to a line running due east from the North Carolina-South Carolina
border. Mid-Atlantic gillnet fisheries classified as Category III
inshore gillnet fisheries are exempt from this proposed rule. NMFS
requests comments on the possible exemption of waters landward of
barrier islands, such as those in New Jersey and North Carolina, and
other shallow water areas where whales are less likely to occur.
Beginning January 1, 1998, and in addition to the buoy line
requirements and contingency measures described above for all
fisheries, NMFS proposes to restrict sink gillnet fishing in this area
during the period from December 1 through March 31 to gear that has
been modified according to the suite of measures outlined above for
Northeast sink gillnet gear.
Beginning in 1998, with respect to mid-Atlantic coastal gillnet
anchored gear that is not sink gillnet gear, NMFS proposes to require
only the standard requirements for sinking buoy lines or modified
sinking buoy lines, and breakaway buoys or weak buoy lines during the
winter/spring period from December 1 through March 31. Weak links are
not proposed for anchored gillnets other than sink gillnets because the
weak link system is not designed for nets fished on the surface or in
the upper \2/3\ of the water column.
Floating/drift gillnets: For the area and time outlined above, NMFS
proposes to require all vessels using driftnets to haul all such gear
and stow all such gear on the vessel before returning to port.
Southeast U.S. Driftnet Fishery
Based on comments in the Team Report, NMFS proposes that the area
from Sebastian Inlet, FL (27 deg.51 N latitude) to Savannah, GA
(32 deg. N latitude) out to 80 deg. W longitude, be closed to driftnet
fishing, except for strikenetting, each year from November 15 to March
31. Strikenetting would be permitted under certain conditions set forth
in the rule. Most of this area is right whale critical habitat.
Also based on comments in the Team Report, NMFS proposes to require
observer coverage for the use of driftnets in the area from West Palm
Beach (26 deg.46.5' N latitude) to Sebastian Inlet (27 deg.51' N
latitude), from November 15 to March 31 of each year. Notifications
must be provided at least 48 hours prior to the fishing trip so that
arrangements for an observer may be made. An observer must be taken on
a fishing trip in this area if requested by NMFS.
Reduction of Inactive Fishing Gear as Marine Debris. The Team
Report discusses measures that could be taken to minimize the amount of
fishing gear that has been damaged and set adrift, either by storms or
user group conflicts, as it is believed that some marine mammal
entanglements may involve such gear. Specific measures in the Team
Report include: (1) Encourage participants in all fisheries to avoid
discarding gear at sea; (2) encourage vessel operators to retrieve and
deposit on shore any inactive gear encountered (existing penalties that
would discourage this should be eliminated); (3) require any commercial
fishing vessel that accidentally captures or snags fixed gear in a
trawl or by other means or sets fixed gear adrift to retrieve all such
gear and deposit it on shore (existing penalties that would discourage
this should be eliminated); (4) require that such gear deposited on
shore which carries any identifying markings be reported to the
appropriate authorities. A system for tracking such gear should be
established, allowing owners to retrieve gear; (5) NMFS should take
appropriate measures for reducing gear conflicts that can result in
gear set adrift (examples are implementation of the Gear Conflict
Resolution for Offshore New England and the use of Vessel Tracking
Systems); (6) require use of biodegradable, corrodible, or other
rapidly degrading gear components where appropriate; (7) establish
dockside disposal/recycling facilities at all ports used by commercial
fisheries; and (8) make use of existing programs for recycling and
disposing of inactive gear.
NMFS agrees that the reduction of ``ghost'' gear may reduce the
number of entanglements of marine mammals in fishing gear. NMFS intends
to notify all Atlantic fisheries permit holders of the importance of
bringing gear back to shore to be discarded properly. Additionally,
NMFS proposes to review regulations currently in place concerning
fishing gear or fishing practices that may increase or decrease marine
``ghost'' gear and to determine what additional measures may be useful
in reducing the potential for whale entanglement by this gear.
NMFS has not included a Vessel Tracking System provision in this
proposed rule pending the outcome and final disposition of this
electronic monitoring system within the commercial fishing industry.
NMFS invites comments on this issue. This system may encourage mobile
gear vessels to avoid towing through areas where fixed gear is set and
may encourage vessels to pick up damaged and inactive gear.
Disentanglement Efforts. When entangled in most fishing gear, other
than extremely heavy or anchored gear, whales may swim off with some or
all of the gear still trailing. Some whales may eventually free
themselves or survive for substantial periods of time while trailing
gear, but the continued survival of such animals may be severely
jeopardized by this gear.
In 1984, the Center for Coastal Studies (CCS) in Provincetown, MA
developed an approach for disentangling free-swimming large whales.
This process can be very dangerous, and CCS is currently the only
organization authorized to attempt such disentanglements on the U.S.
Atlantic coast. NMFS has contracted CCS to perform this service in the
Northeast area by supporting current efforts and the establishment of a
regional Disentanglement Network (Network). Criteria for participation
in the Network have been established, and experienced teams have been
formed for New England waters. Additionally, rapid response capability
has been developed to allow deployment to remote coasts or at sea. A
relationship has been established with the Canadian Department of
Fisheries and Oceans and whale biologists operating in the Bay of Fundy
to respond to entanglement events in Canadian waters of the Gulf of
Maine. Local teams have been identified for other areas along the U.S.
Atlantic coast. These resources were developed primarily for response
to entangled right whales.
The Team Report discussed the following actions to improve and
expand the effort to disentangle large whales along the east coast of
the U.S.: (1) Continue authorization and support for the current
Disentanglement Network; (2) expand the Network to the U.S. Mid-
Atlantic region by training identified response/support teams in
Virginia, North Carolina and the Southeastern U.S. right whale critical
habitat regions, and by developing protocols appropriate to each
region; (3) support education and training of fishermen in
identification, reporting and disentangling large whales, where
appropriate, in all identified risk areas; (4) increase monitoring of
at-risk whales in the region through opportunistic and dedicated
surveys; (5) request support from the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) in the SE
Region similar to the level of support committed in the NE region, to
achieve a coordinated effort; (6) seek support and coordination with
other agencies with similar or overlapping responsibilities; (7) ensure
fishermen are informed of requirements for reporting and
indemnification resulting from the issuance of incidental take permits,
and explore further possible
[[Page 16529]]
incentives for reporting entangled whales; (8) allow the Network to
authorize individuals to stand by or attach tracking equipment to
entangled gear; (9) consider all ways the 500-yard approach regulation
may affect right whale protection; (10) consider reimbursing vessel
operators for real expenses or loss of regulated fishing days when
standing by a whale confirmed by an authorized group as entangled; (11)
work with appropriate groups to ensure accurate, thorough and
standardized reporting of entanglements and results in a central
database; and (12) develop an analytical approach for future
entanglement reports which considers an increase in reporting due to
the actions referenced above, and which counts successful
disentanglements in assessments of take reduction.
NMFS intends to continue its authorization of and work to improve
the current Disentanglement Network. NMFS has been working
cooperatively with the Network and the USCG to extend the
disentanglement efforts into mid-Atlantic and Southeastern waters.
Currently, NMFS provides funds only for disentanglement in the
Northeast. Disentanglement efforts have already been initiated outside
New England waters; for example, during the winter of 1996, NMFS, USCG,
the states of Georgia and Florida, the New England Aquarium and the
Center for Coastal Studies worked cooperatively to attempt
disentanglement and subsequent tracking of a right whale off the east
coast of Florida. NMFS will work with CCS to form local ``first
response'' teams which can respond to entanglements in other areas and
of other species prior to (or in some cases in lieu of) dispatching the
CCS rapid response teams. Included among improvements to the
Disentanglement Network will be a strong educational component, to
train fishers to identify and report entangled large whales. Such
education will be included during skippers workshops planned under the
``Education and Outreach'' portion of this ALWTRP. Additional training
specific to the Disentanglement Network may also be held separately, as
needed. NMFS is also funding and/or working cooperatively with other
groups to expand the current survey effort to better monitor at-risk
areas. For example, year-round aerial and vessel surveys in the mid-
Atlantic have recently been funded. These surveys will increase
opportunities for sighting entangled whales.
NMFS has been working cooperatively with the USCG in the Southeast
U.S. as well as in the northeast to provide protection to whales. The
USCG helps fund the southeast and northeast Early Warning Systems,
which involve an aerial monitoring program designed to help avoid
collisions between vessels and right whales on their calving grounds.
The USCG also has been very helpful in providing vessel support for
disentanglement efforts and carcass recovery in the southeast. In order
to formalize this cooperative effort, NMFS may enter into a Memorandum
of Understanding with the southeastern USCG districts, as has been
accomplished with the First Coast Guard District operating in the
northeast. NMFS is already cooperating extensively with coastal state
agencies such as the Georgia Department of Environmental Resources and
the Florida Department of Environmental Protection in disentanglements
and other right whale recovery efforts. NMFS will continue working
cooperatively with these state agencies, and will seek to expand such
efforts to other state agencies involved with endangered marine species
issues. Recently, the states of Maine and Massachusetts have been
working with NMFS and the Disentanglement Network to develop whale
identification materials and information on disentanglement to be
distributed to vessels for use at sea.
NMFS understands that cooperation by fishermen and others in
reporting entangled whales is essential for the ultimate success of the
ALWTRP. Reporting entanglement events creates the opportunity for the
successful disentanglement of a whale that is entangled in fishing gear
and is still alive. Additionally, reports of entangled whales, both
dead or alive, improves the information available for assessing the
success of this plan and developing future measures.
Takes of marine mammals that are not listed as endangered or
threatened are authorized under section 118 of the MMPA for vessels
that are registered in the Marine Mammal Authorization Program.
However, takes of endangered species can only be authorized under
certain conditions specified in section 101(a)(5)(e) of the MMPA and if
an incidental take statement is issued under the Endangered Species Act
(ESA). Among other requirements, NMFS must determine that the expected
level incidental serious injury or mortality of a threatened or
endangered marine mammal resulting from commercial fishing operations
will have a negligible impact on such stock. Until these conditions
have been met, NMFS could not authorize takes of endangered whales,
even if a take occurs by a vessel operating in compliance with the
ALWTRP. Currently, takes from the western North Atlantic stocks of
right, humpback and fin whales are not authorized.
Consequently, NMFS does not have the authority to exempt fishers
from ESA provisions that prohibit taking endangered whales. NMFS does,
however, exercise broad prosecutorial discretion in deciding on a case
by case basis when to prosecute and what level of penalty to seek. When
exercising such discretion, NMFS will consider whether the taking was
reported promptly, and will regard timely reporting as a mitigating
factor when determining the appropriate enforcement response. This
approach balances NMFS' statutory duty to endorse provisions of the ESA
with its strong desire to minimize non-reporting for fear of
prosecution.
NMFS has considered the potential effects of the 500-yard interim
final rule on future disentanglement efforts, and has incorporated into
that rule an exception to allow approaches to investigate a right whale
or injury or to assist in disentanglement provided that permission is
received from NMFS designee prior to the approach. In addition, in
order to facilitate greater success of disentanglement events, NMFS is
considering other actions so that vessels operating in the Northeast
Multispecies and American lobster fisheries may assist in
disentanglement efforts. NMFS has no mechanism for authorizing
disbursement of funds for reimbursing vessel operators for expenses,
but encourages conservation organizations to consider implementing such
a program. NMFS will approach the fishery management councils regarding
reimbursing any loss of regulated fishing days resulting from a
fisher's participation in a disentanglement effort. A similar
provision, called the ``good samaritan'' provision, exists in several
fishery management plans to obtain credit for fishing time lost while
assisting search and rescue operations.
NMFS currently maintains a centralized entanglement data base, and
intends to work cooperatively with appropriate groups to improve the
quality of the data and standardize reporting. Improvements to the
current entanglement data base would include incorporation of
supplementary data from original sources and information from
examination of gear seen on or removed from whales. Tracking of
successful disentanglements are to be incorporated in the data base,
and
[[Page 16530]]
would be considered in assessing progress of take reduction measures.
As stated above, not all whale entanglements result in serious
injury or mortality. Monitoring of scarification and comparison of
historic levels in the population, as noted by the Team, may help
provide a basis for determining whether the various take reduction
measures proposed in this plan have been effective in decreasing levels
of interaction between whales and fishing gear.
Supplementary Take Reduction Initiatives
Fisher Education and Outreach
The Team Report acknowledges that effective implementation of the
ALWTRP will require the active participation of a majority of the
fishing industry. To encourage this, the Team Report suggests that NMFS
form an advisory group to assist in the implementation of educational
workshops and outreach strategies to disseminate information to
fishermen on measures to reduce large whale entanglements. The report
recommends that education and outreach workshops be held to: (1) Inform
fishermen of provisions of the ESA and MMPA, as well as intent and
requirements of the ALWTRP; (2) train fishermen in deployment and
maintenance of proposed gear modifications; (3) distribute fact sheets
for use in whale identification and provision of information on
seasonal distribution patterns; (4) train fishermen in protocol for
whale disentanglement; (5) supply observer, stranding and entanglement
data to fishermen; (6) encourage timely reporting of marine mammals
that may be entangled in fishing gear; and (7) solicit information from
fishermen on how to reduce marine mammal interactions. The Team Report
recommends that such workshops be held throughout the Northeast, Mid-
Atlantic and Southeast regions of the U.S. Atlantic coast, and that
fishermen be notified by mail of dates, locations and times of the
proposed workshops. The Team Report also recommends that public
relations materials should be developed and distributed through
newsletters, newspapers, radio, television news, and the Internet.
NMFS concurs with the recommendations of the Team Report to conduct
fishermen education workshops, as well as other outreach strategies.
Although NMFS does not propose to form a formal advisory group, NMFS
intends to seek assistance concerning the workshops from SeaGrant and
other groups that are experienced in outreach on marine issues.
Workshops are proposed to be held throughout the areas of the affected
fisheries to inform fishers of gear and area requirements as well as to
address other topics as outlined in the Team Report.
Other recommendations contained in the report include promotion of
``responsible fishing practices.'' For example, the Team Report
discusses the following measures with respect to the mid-Atlantic
gillnet fisheries: (1) Gillnets and other fishing gear should not be
set near whales; (2) gear should be removed as soon as possible if
whale(s) move into the area being fished; (3) fishers using un-anchored
gillnet gear during the high-risk period (December 1--March 31) should
remain with actively fishing gear; and (4) any observed entanglements
should be reported. NMFS proposes that such practices be discussed and
supported during the fishermen education workshops described above.
Monitoring of Whale Stock Distribution and Entanglements
The Team Report acknowledges that the long-term success of the plan
depends on the ability to monitor interactions between whales and
fisheries, as well as an improved knowledge of whale distribution and
movements. The Team Report asserts that successful real-time monitoring
of whale distribution could lead to better dynamic management (i.e.,
flexible area closures and/or gear modifications required during
certain periods in certain areas) designed to avoid or respond to
entanglements of large whales in fishing gear. The Team Report comments
that data collection and monitoring programs should be created where
needed, or existing programs improved to achieve a dynamic approach to
reducing large whale entanglements, as well as to assess the success of
the ALWTRP. The following items were included in the Team Report as
significant aspects of an overall take reduction program:
Whale Distribution and Movement Patterns
Issues to be addressed: (1) Distribution of whales; (2) movement
patterns; and (3) stability of distribution in high-use/critical
habitat areas. Possible measures to address these issues include
establishing long-term and real time monitoring of whale distribution
via aerial and vessel surveys, telemetry and photo documentation.
Whale Entanglements and Mortalities
Issues to be addressed: (1) Mechanisms of whale entanglements; (2)
geographic areas and portions of water column where whales become
entangled; (3) gear whales are entangled in, rate of entanglement,
serious injury and mortality; (4) effect on population size and
recovery; (5) survivorship of entangled whales; and (6) survivorship of
disentangled whales. Possible measures to address these issues are: (1)
train personnel to recognize signs of entanglement-related injuries and
improve stranding report consistency and accuracy; (2) establish
repository for gear removed from stranded and/or entangled whales and
develop process for examination and identification; and (3) develop
entanglement/interaction reporting protocols to encourage fisher
participation in monitoring and disentanglement efforts.
Fishing Effort
Issues to be addressed: (1) Status of current information on
occurrence and distribution regarding effort and gear type; and (2)
identification of information needed for effective monitoring. Possible
measures to address these issues are: (1) Improve reporting of fishing
effort for area fished, amount of gear, and species targeted, by day;
(2) develop improved methods for gear identification and reporting of
gear loss; (3) examine fishing practices other than those considered in
this ALWTRP for potential impacts to large whales; and (4) improve
fishery participation in data collection needs.
Dynamic Management
Issues to be addressed: (1) Surveillance-based management is useful
for supporting research for implementation of the ALWTRP; and (2)
research should echo the State of Massachusetts Plan for reducing right
whale takes. Possible measures to address these issues are: (1) NMFS
should work with appropriate agencies and research groups to develop a
surveillance-based management plan to protect right whales; and (2)
establish a narrow and appropriately focused system of dynamic
management.
NMFS agrees that the issues raised are important elements in
understanding the nature of whale entanglements and developing
subsequent management measures to reduce such entanglements. NMFS
currently monitors whale distribution and movement patterns, and
supports additional efforts for photo-identification, life history and
other studies. Real-time monitoring of whale movements for fishery
[[Page 16531]]
management purposes is being used by the State of Massachusetts in
conjunction with the newly established early warning system for ship
strikes in Cape Cod Bay. The success of this program will be reviewed
and may be expanded to other areas, if appropriate.
NMFS plans to seek ways to incorporate the comments in the Team
Report regarding entanglements and resulting mortalities into the
existing Disentanglement Network efforts. Additional research may be
supported through alternate funding sources such as Saltonstall-Kennedy
grants or other such sources. Improving current information on fishery
participation in data collection, methods for gear identification, and
reporting gear loss will be effected through a combination of
regulations and fisher education and outreach workshops. NMFS proposes
to investigate and consult with the appropriate state agencies to
improve information on fishery effort distribution. Monitoring effort
in terms of the amount of gear present in the water (e.g., number of
vertical lines or length of net) is an important element of determining
whether effort reduction measures have been successful, or whether it
has simply been displaced to other areas where whale entanglements may
still occur.
Joint Initiatives With Canada to Reduce Whale Bycatch in Commercial
Fisheries
Large whales are known to be taken in lobster, gillnet, trap and
weir fisheries in Canadian waters. The Team Report recognizes that
regulatory and management regimes differ between Canada and the U.S.,
and agrees with the position of Canada that there is need to develop
similar and complementary strategies to reduce the incidental take of
large whales by commercial fisheries in Canadian Atlantic waters. It is
the understanding of the Team that the Canadian Government is
considering legislation which, if implemented, would require recovery
plans for whale species identified as endangered, threatened or
vulnerable. Canada is expected to establish a consultative program
similar to the Team. This program would develop, within existing
regulatory and management frameworks, programs that are compatible and
complementary to the measures proposed by the Team. The Team Report
comments that once the ALWTRP is open to public comment, NMFS should
initiate discussions with the Canadian Department of Fisheries and
Oceans (DFO) to: (1) Obtain comments from DFO on the ALWTRP; (2) urge
Canada to develop a joint recovery plan under its Endangered Species
Act, when final; (3) institute mechanisms to reduce large whale
entanglements in Canadian waters, as well as a means to evaluate the
effectiveness of any proposed take reduction strategies; and (4)
outline a timetable for meetings between NMFS officials, Team
representatives and DFO to review progress toward reducing
entanglements of large whales in U.S. and Canadian waters.
NMFS has been working cooperatively with the DFO towards take
reduction efforts for both harbor porpoise and large whales for some
time. NMFS anticipates continuation of these cooperative efforts. DFO
participated as an observer on the Team, and indicated that Canada is
expected to enact a new Endangered Species Act. Under this act, DFO
would develop a joint recovery plan with NMFS, and form their own TRT.
NMFS intends to continue to support and encourage these conservation
efforts, and will continue to invite DFO's participation on the Team as
a means of promoting effective bycatch reduction measures for large
whales throughout western North Atlantic waters.
Exploration of Market Incentives to Reduce Whale Bycatch in Commercial
Fisheries
The Team discussed the formation of a committee of Team members and
other interested parties to explore and develop incentives, including
market and other voluntary incentives, for reducing entanglements of
large whales. Also discussed was whether this committee should develop
a process for incorporating these incentives into the take reduction
effort. The committee, as envisioned by the Team, would include persons
with experience or expertise in conservation, market-based incentives,
seafood processing and distribution, and various fishing strategies.
NMFS has not proposed to include this aspect of the Team's Report
in the plan. NMFS believes it is more important to devote its resources
to other aspects of this plan. Such efforts may be considered at future
team meetings. Members of the Team and/or other interested parties may
form a committee to investigate market or other voluntary incentives to
reducing whale entanglements to present to the Team for consideration.
Classification
This proposed rule does not contain new collection-of-information
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act.
NMFS prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IFRA)
that describes the impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on
small entities. The American lobster pot, New England multispecies sink
gillnet, Mid-Atlantic coastal gillnet, and Southeast driftnet fisheries
are directly affected by the proposed action and are composed primarily
of small business entities. The number of state and federal permit
lobster permit holders is estimated to be 13,000. The numbers of
vessels in the New England multispecies sink gillnet, Mid-Atlantic
coastal gillnet, and Southeast shark driftnet fisheries are estimated
to be 350, 650, and 10, respectively. The proposed rule does not
include reporting or recordkeeping requirements, but does include
requirements that fishing gear be marked and that gear be modified in
various ways to reduce potential interactions with large whales. In
certain cases, area closures are proposed.
Currently, the American Lobster Fishery, the New England
Multispecies Fishery, the weakfish and striped bass portion of the mid-
Atlantic coastal gillnet fishery, and the Atlantic shark fishery are
subject to Federal regulations under 50 CFR Part 649, Subpart F of Part
648, Part 697, and Part 678, respectively. This proposed rule is
designed to complement those existing regulations and fishery
management objectives by reducing the bycatch of large whales in these
fisheries. A variety of regulatory alternatives were considered,
including no action, area closures, and various gear modifications and
restrictions as discussed above. With respect to some critical habitat
areas, area closures are proposed in order to provide the necessary
level of protection for the critically endangered northern right whale.
In most cases, however, gear modifications represent the preferred
alternative; the plan was designed to achieve the goals of the MMPA
while minimizing the economic impact on small entities.
The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, prepared a draft
environmental assessment (draft EA) for this proposed rule under the
National Environmental Policy Act. A copy of the draft EA and the IFRA
is available upon request (see ADDRESSES).
References
Blaylock, R.A., J.W. Hain, L.J. Hansen, D.L. Palka, and G.T.
Waring. 1995. U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Marine Mammal Stock
Assessments. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS, NOAA-TM-NMFS-SEFSC-363.
211p.
Team Report. 1997. Draft Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction
Report. Report prepared by the Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction
Team and submitted to the
[[Page 16532]]
National Marine Fisheries Service February 4, 1997. 79pp.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 229
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Fisheries, Marine mammals, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: April 1, 1997.
Charles Karnella,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 229 is
proposed to be amended to read as follows:
PART 229--AUTHORIZATION FOR COMMERCIAL FISHERIES UNDER THE MARINE
MAMMAL PROTECTION ACT OF 1972
1. The authority citation for part 229 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.
2. In section 229.2, definitions of ``American lobster or
Lobster'', ``Anchored gillnet'', ``Breakaway buoy'', ``Bridle'', ``Buoy
line'', ``Driftnet, drift gillnet or drift entanglement net'', ``Fish
with or fishing with'', ``Footrope'', ``Gillnet'', ``Groundline'',
``Headrope'', ``Lobster pot'', ``Lobster pot trawl'', Mid-Atlantic
coastal waters'', Northeast waters'', ``Other anchored gillnet'',
``Sink gillnet'', ``Sinking line'', Southeast waters'', ``Spotter
plane'', ``Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys Ledge area'', ``Strikenet or to
fish with strikenet gear'', ``Tended gear or tend'', ``U.S. waters'',
``Weak buoy line'', and ``weak link'' are added in alphabetical order
to read:
Sec. 229.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
American lobster or lobster means the species Homarus americanus.
Anchored gillnet means any gillnet gear, including sink gillnets,
that is set anywhere in the water column and which is anchored, secured
or weighted to the bottom.
* * * * *
Breakaway buoy means a buoy line equipped with a breakable section
near the top (buoy) end of the line that will part when subjected to
certain pull pressure and, after parting, will result in a knotless
end, not thicker than the diameter of the line.
Bridle means the lines connecting a gillnet to an anchor or buoy
line.
Buoy line means a line connecting fishing gear in the water to a
buoy at the surface of the water.
* * * * *
Driftnet, drift gillnet, or drift entanglement gear means gillnet
gear that is not anchored, secured or weighted to the bottom.
Fish with or fishing with means to use, set, or haul back gear or
allow gear that is set to remain in the water.
* * * * *
Footrope means the line, weighted or otherwise, to which the bottom
edge of a gillnet is attached.
Gillnet means fishing gear consisting of a wall of webbing or nets,
designed or configured so that the webbing or nets are held
approximately vertically in the water column designed to capture fish
by entanglement, gilling, or wedging. Gillnets include gillnets of all
types such as sink gillnets, other anchored gillnets, and drift
gillnets.
Groundline, with reference to lobster pot gear, means a line
connecting lobster pots in a lobster pot trawl, and, with reference to
gillnet gear, means a line connecting a gillnet or gillnet bridle to an
anchor or buoy line.
Headrope means the line at the top of a gillnet from which the mesh
portion of the net is hung.
* * * * *
Lobster pot means any trap, structure or other device that is
placed on the ocean bottom and is designed to or is capable of catching
lobsters.
Lobster pot trawl means more than one lobster pot attached to a
groundline.
Mid-Atlantic coastal waters means waters west of the area bounded
by the following points: the southern shoreline of Long Island, New
York at 72 deg.30'W, then due south to the intersection of 72 deg.30'W
with a line running due east from the North Carolina/South Carolina
border, then due west along that line to the North Carolina/South
Carolina border.
* * * * *
Northeast waters means those U.S. waters east of 72 deg.30'W and
north of a line running due east from the Virginia-North Carolina
border.
* * * * *
Other anchored gillnet means any anchored gillnet except sink
gillnet.
* * * * *
Sink gillnet has the meaning specified in 50 CFR 648.2.
Sinking line means line that sinks and does not float at any point
in the water column. Polypropylene line is not sinking line unless it
contains a lead core.
* * * * *
Southeast waters means waters south of a line extending due
eastward from the North Carolina/South Carolina border.
* * * * *
Spotter plane means a plane that is deployed for the purpose of
locating schools of target fish for a fishing vessel that intends to
set fishing gear on them.
* * * * *
Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys Ledge area means the area bounded by the
Maine shoreline at 43 deg.30' N, then due east to 43 deg.30'N/
70 deg.00' W, then south to 42 deg.00' N/70 deg.00'W, then due west to
the Massachusetts shoreline, then along the Cape Cod shoreline to
42 deg.04.8' N/70 deg.10' W, then to 42 deg.12' N/70 deg.15' W, to
42 deg.12' N/70 deg.30' W, to 42 deg.00' N/70 deg.30' W, then due west
to the Massachusetts shoreline at 42 deg.00'N.
Strikenet or to fish with strikenet gear means a gillnet, or a net
similar in construction to a gillnet, that is designed so that when it
is deployed, it encircles or encloses an area of water either with the
net, or by utilizing the shoreline to complete encirclement.
* * * * *
Tended gear or tend means active fishing gear that is physically
attached to a vessel or to fish so that active gear is attached to the
vessel.
U.S. waters means both state waters and waters of the U.S.
exclusive economic zone along the east coast of the United States from
the Canadian/U.S. border southward to a line extending eastward from
the southernmost tip of Florida on the Florida shore.
* * * * *
Weak buoy line means a buoy line that will part when subjected to
certain pull pressure and, after parting, will result in a knotless
end, not thicker than the diameter of the line.
Weak link means a breakable device that will part when subjected to
certain pull pressure.
3. In Sec. 229.3, paragraphs (g) through (j) are added to read as
follows:
Sec. 229.3 Prohibitions.
* * * * *
(g) It is prohibited to fish with lobster pot gear in the areas and
for the times specified in Sec. 229.32(b) (3), (4), (5), (6) and (7)
unless the lobster pot gear meets the marking requirements specified in
Sec. 229.32(b)(1) and complies with the closures, modifications, and
restrictions specified in Sec. 229.32(b) (2), (3), (4), (5), (6) and
(7).
(h) It is prohibited to fish with sink gillnet gear in the areas
and for the times specified in Sec. 229.32(c) (3), (4), (5), (6) and
(7) unless the sink gillnet gear meets the marking requirements
specified in Sec. 229.32(c)(1) and complies with the closures,
modifications, and restrictions specified in Sec. 229.32(c) (2), (3),
(4), (5), (6) and (7).
[[Page 16533]]
(i) It is prohibited to fish with coastal gillnet in the areas and
for the times specified in Sec. 229.32(d)(3) unless the coastal gillnet
gear meets the marking requirements specified in Sec. 229.32(d)(1) and
complies with the restrictions specified in Sec. 229.32(d) (2) and (3).
(j) It is prohibited to fish with shark driftnet gear in the areas
and for the times specified in Sec. 229.32(e) (2) and (3) unless the
coastal gillnet gear meets the marking requirements specified in
Sec. 229.32(e)(1) and complies with the restrictions and requirements
specified in Sec. 229.32(e) (2) and (3).
4. A new Sec. 229.32 is added to subpart C to read as follows:
Subpart C--Take Reduction Plan Regulations and Emergency
Regulations
Sec. 229.32 Atlantic large whale take reduction plan regulations.
(a) Gear marking provisions. (1) Gear marking required for
specified gear. (i) Specified gear. Specified fishing gear consists of:
lobster pot gear or sink gillnet gear in Northeast waters; lobster pot
gear or mid-Atlantic coastal gillnet gear in the mid-Atlantic coastal
waters area; and shark driftnet gear in Southeast waters.
(ii) Requirement. On or after January 1, 1998 and as otherwise
required in paragraphs (b)(1), (c)(1), (d)(1), and (e)(1) of this
section, any person who owns or fishes with specified fishing gear must
mark that gear in order to identify the gear type and the region where
it is used according to the gear marking code specified by paragraphs
(a)(2) and (3) of this section, unless otherwise required by the
Assistant Administrator under paragraph (f) of this section.
(2) Gear-type color code. Gear must be marked with the appropriate
color to designate gear-type as follows:
Lobster pot gear........................... Red.
Sink gillnet gear.......................... Green.
Other anchored gillnet gear................ Yellow.
Driftnet gear.............................. Blue.
(3) Region color code. Gear must be marked with the appropriate
color to designate the area where the gear is set as follows:
Cape Cod Bay critical habitat area..... Blue/orange.
Great South Channel critical habitat Red/blue.
area.
Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys Ledge area.... Yellow/orange.
Other Northeast waters................. Green/orange.
Mid-Atlantic coastal waters............ Red/orange.
Southeastern U.S. waters............... Green/red.
(4) Markings. Each color of the color codes must be permanently
marked on or along the line or lines specified under paragraphs (b)(1),
(c)(1), (d)(1), and (e)(1) of this section. Each color of the color
codes must be marked so that the colors are clearly visible when the
gear is hauled or removed from the water. Each color of the region
color code must be between 2 and 3 inches (5.1-7.6 cm) wide. The gear-
type color code must be between 4 and 5 inches (10.2-12.7 cm) wide. The
color codes must be placed on the line either in the following order or
in reverse order: The first color of the region color code, the second
color of the region code, and the gear color code. All colors of these
color codes must be placed immediately next to each other. If the color
of the line next to a color code is the same or similar to a color
code, an area of one to 2 inches (2.5-5.1 cm) next to that color code
must be permanently marked with a white band. In marking or affixing
the color code or associated neutral band, the line may be dyed or
marked with thin colored whipping line, thin colored plastic or heat
shrink tubing, or other material, or thin line may be woven into or
through the line, but the marking material must not be connected by a
knot in the line or increase the diameter of the line by more than 5
percent of its original diameter. If the Assistant Administrator
revises the gear marking requirements under paragraph (f) of this
section, the gear must be marked in compliance with those requirements.
(5) Inspection of gear and marking. At least once every 30 days,
all specified gear that is in the water must be hauled and inspected to
ensure that the gear is properly marked and otherwise in compliance
with this section.
(b) Restrictions applicable to lobster pot gear. (1) Gear marking
requirements. No person may fish with lobster pot gear unless that gear
is marked by gear type and region according to the gear marking code
specified under paragraph (a) of this section. On and after January 1,
1998, all buoy lines must be marked within 2 feet (0.6 m) of the top of
the buoy line and approximately midway along the length of each buoy
line according to the gear type and region. On and after January 1,
1999, each section of groundline must be marked approximately midway
between each pot according to gear type and region.
(2) Gear modifications and restrictions (i) Type 1 lobster pot
gear. Type 1 lobster pot gear is gear which complies with the following
requirements:
(A) Multi-pot trawls. It is a multiple pot trawl consisting of four
or more lobster pots;
(B) Limit on buoy lines. No more than two buoy lines are used per
trawl;
(C) Sinking buoy lines. All buoy lines are sinking line;
(D) Breakaway buoys or weak buoy lines. All buoy lines and buoys
comply with one of the following:
(1) The buoy line is attached at the top of the line to a breakaway
buoy. Unless the Assistant Administrator revises the gear requirements
under paragraph (f) of this section, the breakaway buoy must be
designed with a breaking strength of no more than 150 pounds (68 kg);
or
(2) The buoy line has a weak buoy line that is at least as long as
the depth of the water at mean high water, is attached to the buoy at
the top of the line, and is attached to a functional buoy line resting
on the ocean bottom at the bottom of the weak buoy line. Unless the
Assistant Administrator revises the gear requirements under paragraph
(f) of this section, the weak buoy line must be designed with a
breaking strength of no more than 150 pounds (68 kg); and
(E) Sinking groundline. All groundlines are sinking line.
(ii) Type 2 lobster pot gear. Type 2 lobster pot gear is gear which
complies with the following requirements.
(A) Limit on buoy lines. No more than one buoy line is used per
trawl consisting of fewer than four pots, and no more than two buoy
lines are used on any trawl consisting of four or more pots; and
(B) Sinking buoy lines, breakway buoys or weak buoy lines, and
sinking groundline. The gear complies with the gear requirements of
paragraph (b)(2)(i) (C), (D) and (E) of this section.
(iii) Type 3 lobster pot gear. Type 3 lobster pot gear is gear
which complies with the following requirements:
(A) Sinking or modified sinking buoy lines. All buoy lines are
sinking line, except that floating line may be used if:
(1) The floating line is not attached to the buoy, is used only in
the bottom-
[[Page 16534]]
most section of the buoy line, and is not longer than 10 percent of
the depth of the water at mean low water;
(2) The floating line is not larger than \1/2\ inch (1.27 cm) in
diameter; and
(3) The floating line section of the buoy line is attached to the
sinking line by a splice and not by a knot; and
(B) Limit of buoy lines, breakaway buoys or weak buoy lines, and
sinking groundline. The gear complies with the gear requirements of
paragraph (b)(2)(i) (B), (D) and (E) of this section.
(iv) Type 4 lobster pot gear. Type 4 lobster pot gear is gear which
complies with the following requirements:
(A) Sinking or modified sinking buoy lines. It complies with the
requirements of paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(A) of this section.
(B) Limit on buoy lines and breakway buoys or weak buoy lines. It
complies with the gear requirements of paragraph (b)(2)(i) (B) and (D)
of this section.
(3) Cape Cod Bay. (i) Restricted area. The Cape Cod Bay restricted
area consists of the Cape Cod Bay Critical Habitat area specified under
50 CFR 216.13(b) (copies of a chart depicting this area are available
from the NE Regional Administrator upon request) unless the Assistant
Administrator extends that area under paragraph (f) of this section.
(ii) Type 1 gear restrictions. During the winter/spring restricted
period, no person may fish with lobster pot gear in the Cape Cod Bay
restricted area unless the lobster pot gear complies with the Type 1
gear requirements specified under paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section;
or, if the Assistant Administrator revises the gear requirements under
paragraph (f) of this section, the gear complies with those
requirements. The winter/spring restricted period for this area is from
January 1 until May 15 of each year unless the Assistant Administrator
revises the restricted period under paragraph (f) of this section.
(iii) Type 4 gear restrictions. On or after January 1, 1998, during
the summer/fall restricted period, no person may fish with lobster pot
gear in the Cape Cod Bay restricted area unless the lobster pot gear
complies with the Type 4 gear requirements specified under paragraph
(b)(2)(iv) of this section; or, if the Assistant Administrator revises
the gear requirements under paragraph (f) of this section, the gear
complies with those requirements. The summer/fall restricted period for
this area is from May 16 through December 31, unless the Assistant
Administrator revises the restricted period under paragraph (f) of this
section.
(4) Great South Channel. (i) Restricted area. The Great South
Channel restricted area consists of the Great South Channel Critical
Habitat area specified under 50 CFR 216.13(a) (copies of a chart
depicting this area are available from the NE Regional Administrator
upon request) unless the Assistant Administrator extends that area
under paragraph (f) of this section.
(ii) Closure. During the spring closed period, no person may fish
with lobster gear in the Great South Channel restricted area unless the
Assistant Administrator specifies gear modifications or alternative
fishing practices under paragraph (f) of this section and the gear or
practices comply with those specifications. The spring closed period
for this area is from April 1 until June 30 of each year unless the
Assistant Administrator revises the closed period under paragraph (f)
of this section.
(iii) Type 3 gear restrictions. Beginning on January 1, 1998,
during the winter/summer/fall restricted period, no person may fish
with lobster pot gear in the Great South Channel restricted area unless
the lobster pot gear complies with the Type 3 gear requirements
specified under paragraph (b)(2)(iii) of this section; or, if the
Assistant Administrator revises the gear modification requirements
under paragraph (f) of this section, the gear complies with those
requirements. The winter/summer/fall restricted period for this area is
from January 1 through March 31 and from July 1 through December 31 of
each year, unless the Assistant Administrator revises the restricted
period under paragraph (f) of this section.
(5) Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys Ledge. (i) Restricted area. The
Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys Ledge restricted area (copies of a chart
depicting this area are available from the NE Regional Administrator
upon request) consists of the area bounded by the Maine shoreline at
43 deg.30' N, then due east to 43 deg.30'N/70 deg.00' W, then south to
42 deg.00' N/70 deg.00'W, then due west to the Massachusetts shoreline,
then along the Cape Cod shoreline to 42 deg.04.8' N/70 deg.10' W, then
to 42 deg.12' N/70 deg.15' W, to 42 deg.12' N/70 deg.30' W, to
42 deg.00' N/70 deg.30' W, then due west to the Massachusetts shoreline
at 42 deg.00'N unless the Assistant Administrator extends that area
under paragraph (f) of this section.
(ii) Type 3 gear restrictions. On or after January 1, 1998, no
person may fish with lobster pot gear in the Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys
Ledge restricted area unless the lobster pot gear complies with the
Type 3 gear restriction requirements specified under paragraph
(b)(3)(iii) of this section; or, if the Assistant Administrator revises
the gear modification requirements under paragraph (f) of this section,
the gear complies with those requirements. This restriction applies
throughout the year unless the Assistant Administrator revises the
restricted period under paragraph (f) of this section.
(6) Other northern waters. (i) Description of the other northern
waters. Other northern waters consist of all U.S. waters north of
41 deg.00' N except the Cape Cod Bay restricted area, Great South
Channel restricted areas, and the Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys Ledge
restricted area.
(ii) Type 4 gear restrictions. On or after January 1, 1998, no
person may fish with lobster pot gear in other northern waters unless
the lobster pot gear complies with the Type 4 gear restriction
requirements specified under paragraph (b)(2)(iv) of this section; or,
if the Assistant Administrator revises the gear modification
requirements under paragraph (f) of this section, the gear complies
with those requirements. This restriction applies throughout the year
unless the Assistant Administrator revises the restricted period under
paragraph (f) of this section.
(7) All other lobster waters. (i) Description of all other lobster
waters. All other lobster waters consist of all U.S. waters south of
41 deg.00' N.
(ii) Type 4 gear restrictions. On or after January 1, 1998, during
the winter restricted period, no person may fish with lobster pot gear
in all other lobster waters unless the lobster pot gear complies with
the Type 4 gear restriction requirements specified under paragraph
(b)(2)(iv) of this section; or, if the Assistant Administrator revises
the gear modification requirements under paragraph (f) of this section,
the gear complies with those requirements. The winter restricted period
for this area is from December 1 through March 31, unless the Assistant
Administrator modifies the restricted period under paragraph (f) of
this section.
(c) Restrictions applicable to Northeast sink gillnet gear. (1)
Sink gillnet gear marking requirements. No person may fish with sink
gillnet gear in Northeast waters unless that gear is marked by gear
type and region according to the gear marking code specified under
paragraph (a) of this section. On and after January 1, 1998, all buoy
lines must be marked within 2 feet (0.6 m) of the top of the buoy line
and approximately midway along the length of the buoy line according to
gear type and region. On and after January 1, 1999, all net panels in
each string of a sink gillnet must be marked along the headrope at both
ends of each panel according to gear type and region.
[[Page 16535]]
(2) Gear modifications and restrictions. (i) Type 1 sink gillnet
gear modifications. Type 1 sink gillnet gear is gear which complies
with the following requirements:
(A) Sinking line. All groundlines, bridle lines, anchor lines and
other lines, except the headrope and bottom-most section of the buoy
lines, are sinking line;
(B) Headrope specifications. The headrope:
(1) Is equipped with net floats and the diameter of the headrope
does not exceed 5/16 inch (0.79 cm); or
(2) Has a foam core and the diameter of the headrope does not
exceed \1/2\ inch (1.27 cm);
(C) Sinking or modified sinking buoy lines. All buoy lines are
sinking line, except that floating line may be used if:
(1) The floating line is not attached to the buoy, is used only in
the bottom-most section of the buoy line, and is not longer than 10
percent of the depth of the water at mean low water;
(2) The floating line is not larger than \1/2\ inch (1.27 cm) in
diameter; and
(3) The floating line section of the buoy line is attached to the
sinking line by a splice and not by a knot;
(D) Breakaway buoys or weak buoy lines. All buoy lines and buoys
comply with one of the following:
(1) The buoy line is attached at the top of the line to a breakaway
buoy. Unless the Assistant Administrator revises the gear requirements
under paragraph (f) of this section, the breakaway buoy must be
designed with a breaking strength of no more than 150 pounds (68 kg);
or
(2) The buoy line has a weak buoy line that is at least as long as
the depth of the water at mean high water, is attached to the buoy at
the top of the line, and is attached to a functional buoy line resting
on the ocean bottom at the bottom of the weak buoy line. Unless the
Assistant Administrator revises the gear requirements under paragraph
(f) of this section, the weak buoy line must be designed with a
breaking strength of no more than 150 pounds (68 kg);
(E) Weak links. The gillnet is equipped with weak links on the
headrope and on the footrope between each net panel. Unless the
Assistant Administrator revises the gear requirements under paragraph
(f) of this section, each weak link must be designed with a breaking
strength of no more than 150 pounds (68 kg); and
(F) Securely anchored. Each gillnet is securely anchored so that
the anchor will not dislodge when there is a pull on any weak link of
more than the applicable maximum breaking strength for the weak link.
(G) Groundline. At each end of a string of net panels, an anchor is
attached to the gillnet by a groundline and bridle with a combined
length which is equal to or greater than 90 feet (27.7 m).
(ii) Type 2 sink gillnet gear modifications. Type 2 sink gillnet
gear is gear which complies with the requirements of paragraph
(c)(2)(i)(C) and (D) of this section (requirements for sinking buoy
lines or modified sinking buoy lines, and breakaway buoys or weak buoy
lines).
(3) Cape Cod Bay. (i) Restricted area. The Cape Cod Bay restricted
area consists of the Cape Cod Bay Critical Habitat area specified under
50 CFR 216.13(b) (copies of a chart depicting this area are available
from the NE Regional Administrator upon request) unless the Assistant
Administrator extends that area under paragraph (f) of this section.
(ii) Closure. During the winter/spring closed period, no person may
fish with sink gillnet gear in the Cape Cod Bay restricted area unless
the Assistant Administrator specifies gear modifications or alternative
fishing practices under paragraph (f) of this section and the gear or
practices comply with those specifications. The winter/spring closed
period for this area is from January 1 until May 15 of each year unless
the Assistant Administrator revises the closed period under paragraph
(f) of this section.
(iii) Type 1 gear restrictions. During the summer/fall restricted
period, no person may fish with sink gillnet gear in the Cape Cod Bay
restricted area unless the gear complies with the Type 1 gear
requirements specified under paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section; or,
if the Assistant Administrator revises the gear requirements under
paragraph (f) of this section, the gear complies with those
requirements. The summer/fall restricted period for this area is from
May 16 through December 31 of each year unless the Assistant
Administrator revises the restricted period under paragraph (f) of this
section.
(4) Great South Channel restricted area (excluding the sliver
area). (i) Restricted area. The Great South Channel restricted area,
excluding the sliver area, consists of the area bounded by lines
connecting the following four points: 41 deg.02.2' N/69 deg.02' W,
41 deg.43.5' N/69 deg.36.3' W, 42 deg.10' N/68 deg.31' W, and
41 deg.38' N/68 deg.13' W (copies of a chart depicting this area are
available from the NE Regional Administrator upon request), unless the
Assistant Administrator extends that area under paragraph (f) of this
section. This described area excludes the sliver area specified under
paragraph (c)(5)(i) of this section.
(ii) Closure. During the spring closed period, no person may fish
with sink gillnet gear in the Great South Channel restricted area,
excluding the sliver area, unless the Assistant Administrator specifies
gear modifications or alternative fishing practices under paragraph (f)
of this section. The spring closed period for this area is from April 1
until June 30 of each year unless the Administrator revises the closed
period under paragraph (f) of this section.
(iii) Type 1 gear restrictions. Beginning on January 1, 1998,
during the winter/summer/fall restricted period, no person may fish
with sink gillnet gear in the Great South Channel restricted area
unless the sink gillnet gear complies with the Type 1 gear requirements
specified under paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section; or, if the
Assistant Administrator revises the gear modification requirements
under paragraph (f) of this section, the gear complies with those
requirements. The winter/summer/fall restricted period for this area is
from January 1 through March 31 and from July 1 through December 31 of
each year, unless the Assistant Administrator revises the restricted
period under paragraph (f) of this section.
(5) Great South Channel sliver restricted area. (i) Restricted
area. The Great South Channel sliver restricted area consists of the
area bounded by lines connecting the following points: 41 deg.02.2'N/
69 deg.02'W, 41 deg.43.5'N/69 deg.36.3'W, 41 deg.40'N/69 deg.45'W, and
41 deg.00'N/69 deg.05'W, (copies of a chart depicting this area are
available from the NE Regional Administrator upon request), unless the
Assistant Administrator extends that area under paragraph (f) of this
section.
(ii) Type 1 gear restrictions. On or after January 1, 1998, no
person may fish with sink gillnet gear in the Great South Channel
sliver restricted area unless the sink gillnet gear complies with the
Type 1 gear restrictions specified under paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this
section or, if the Assistant Administrator revises the gear
modification requirements under paragraph (f) of this section, the gear
complies with those requirements. This restriction applies throughout
the year unless the Assistant Administrator revises the restricted
period under paragraph (f) of this section.
(6) Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys Ledge restricted area. (i) Description
of the restricted area. The Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys Ledge restricted
area (copies of
[[Page 16536]]
a chart depicting this area are available from the NE Regional
Administrator upon request) consists of the area bounded by the Maine
shoreline at 43 deg.30' N due east 43 deg.3'N/70 deg.00' W, then south
to 42 deg.00' N/70 deg.00' W, then due west to the Massachusetts
shoreline at 42 deg.00'N, then along the Cape Cod shoreline to
42 deg.04.8' N/70 deg.10' W, then to 42 deg.12' N/70 deg.15' W, then to
42 deg.12' N/70 deg.30' W, then to 42 deg.00' N/70 deg.30' W, then west
to the Massachusetts shoreline (copies of a chart depicting this area
are available from the NE Regional Administrator upon request), unless
the Assistant Administrator extends that area under paragraph (f) of
this section.
(ii) Type 1 gear restrictions. On or after January 1, 1998, no
person may fish with sink gillnet gear in the Stellwagen Bank/Jeffreys
Ledge restricted area unless the sink gillnet gear complies with the
Type 1 gear restrictions specified under paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this
section; or, if the Assistant Administrator revises the gear
modification requirements under paragraph (f) of this section, the gear
complies with those requirements. This restriction applies throughout
the year unless the Assistant Administrator revises the restricted
period under paragraph (f) of this section.
(7) Other Northeast waters area. (i) Description of the other
Northeast waters area. The other Northeast waters area consists of all
Northeast waters except for the Cape Cod Bay restricted area, the Great
South Channel and Great South Channel sliver restricted areas, all
waters landward of the first bridge of any embayment in Rhode Island,
and southern Massachusetts (to Monomoy Island) and all waters west of a
line from the north fork of the eastern end of Long Island, NY (Orient
Point to Plum Island to Fisher Island) to Watch Hill Rhode Island.
(ii) Type 2 gear restrictions. From January 1 through December 31,
1998, no person may fish with sink gillnet gear in the other Northeast
waters area unless the sink gillnet gear complies with the Type 2 gear
modification requirements specified under paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this
section; or, if the Assistant Administrator revises the gear
modification requirements under paragraph (f) of this section, the gear
complies with those requirements. This restriction applies throughout
the year unless the Assistant Administrator revises the restricted
period under paragraph (f) of this section.
(iii) Type 1 gear restrictions. On or after January 1, 1999, no
person may fish with sink gillnet gear in the other Northeast waters
area unless the sink gillnet gear complies with the Type 1 gear
modification requirements specified under paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this
section; or, if the Assistant Administrator revises the gear
modification requirements under paragraph (f) of this section, the gear
complies with those requirements. This restriction applies throughout
the year unless the Assistant Administrator revises the restricted
period under paragraph (f) of this section.
(d) Restrictions applicable to mid-Atlantic coastal gillnet gear.
(1) Gear marking requirements. No person may fish with mid-Atlantic
coastal gillnet gear unless that gear is marked by gear type and region
according to the gear marking code specified under paragraph (a) of
this section. On and after January 1, 1998, all buoy lines must be
marked within 2 feet (0.6 m) of the top of the buoy line and midway
along the length of the buoy line according to gear type and region. On
and after January 1, 1999, all net panels in each string of a gillnet
must be marked along the headrope at both ends of each panel according
to gear type and region.
(2) Mid-Atlantic coastal gillnet gear modifications and
restrictions. (i) Type 1 mid-Atlantic coastal gillnet gear. Type 1 mid-
Atlantic coastal gillnet gear is sink gillnet gear which complies with
the following requirements:
(A) Sinking line. All groundlines, bridle lines, anchor lines and
other lines, except the headrope and bottom-most section of the buoy
lines, are sinking line;
(B) Headrope specifications. The headrope:
(1) Is equipped with net floats and the diameter of the headrope
does not exceed \5/16\ inch (0.79 cm); or
(2) Has a foam core and the diameter of the headrope does not
exceed \1/2\ inch (1.27 cm);
(C) Sinking or modified sinking buoy lines. All buoy lines are
sinking line, except that floating line may be used if:
(1) The floating line is not attached to the buoy, is used only in
the bottom-most section of the buoy line, and is not longer than 10
percent of the depth of the water at mean low water;
(2) The floating line is not larger than \1/2\ inch (1.27 cm) in
diameter; and
(3) The floating line section of the buoy line is attached to the
sinking line by a splice and not by a knot;
(D) Breakaway buoys or weak buoy lines. All buoy lines and buoys
comply with one of the following:
(1) The buoy line is attached at the top of the line to a breakaway
buoy. Unless the Assistant Administrator revises the gear requirements
under paragraph (f) of this section, the breakaway buoy must be
designed with a breaking strength of no more than 150 pounds (68 kg);
or
(2) The buoy line has a weak buoy line that is at least as long as
the depth of the water at mean high water, is attached to the buoy at
the top of the line, and is attached to a functional buoy line resting
on the ocean bottom at the bottom of the weak buoy line. Unless the
Assistant Administrator revises the gear requirements under paragraph
(f) of this section, the weak buoy line must be designed with a
breaking strength of no more than 150 pounds (68 kg);
(E) Weak links. The gillnet is equipped with weak links on the
headrope and on the footrope between each net panel. Unless the
Assistant Administrator revises the gear requirements under paragraph
(f) of this section, each weak link must be designed with a breaking
strength of no more than 150 pounds (68 kg);
(F) Securely anchored. Each gillnet is securely anchored so that
the anchor will not dislodge when there is a pull on any weak link of
more than the applicable maximum breaking strength for the weak; and
(G) Groundline. At each end of a string of net panels, an anchor is
attached to the gillnet by a groundline and bridle with a combined
length which is equal to or greater than 90 feet (27.7 m).
(ii) Type 2 mid-Atlantic coastal gillnet gear. Type 2 mid-Atlantic
coastal gillnet gear is anchored gillnet gear, other than sink gillnet
gear, which complies with the requirements of paragraph (d)(2)(i) (C)
and (D) of this section (sinking buoy lines or modified sinking buoy
lines, and breakaway buoys or weak buoy lines).
(3) Mid-Atlantic coastal waters area. (i) Description. The mid-
Atlantic coastal waters area consists of all mid-Atlantic waters except
that the following waters are excluded:
(A) Waters landward of the first bridge of any embayment in Raritan
and lower New York Bays in the New York Bight;
(B) Waters north of a line drawn from the southern point of
Nantuxent Cove (mouth of Cedar Creek, New Jersey) to the southern
boundary of Bombay Hook National Wildlife Refuge at Kelly Island,
Delaware (Port Mahon);
(C) Waters in the Chesapeake Bay north of the Chesapeake Bay
Bridge/Tunnel; and
(D) All waters between the Outer Banks and the mainland from
Morehead City, North Carolina, to the Virginia/North Carolina border.
[[Page 16537]]
(ii) Type 1 (sink gillnet) mid-Atlantic coastal gillnet gear
restrictions. On or after January 1, 1998, during the winter/spring
restricted period, no person may fish with sink gillnet gear in the
Mid-Atlantic coastal waters area unless the gillnet gear complies with
the Type 1 gillnet gear restrictions specified under paragraph
(d)(2)(i) of this section. The winter/spring restricted period for this
area is from December 1 through March 31 unless the Assistant
Administrator revises that restricted period under paragraph (f) of
this section.
(iii) Type 2 (other anchored gillnet) mid-Atlantic coastal gillnet
gear restrictions. On or after January 1, 1998, during the winter/
spring restricted period, no person may fish with other anchored
gillnet gear in the Mid-Atlantic coastal waters area unless the gillnet
gear complies with the Type 2 gillnet gear restrictions specified under
paragraph (d)(2)(ii) of this section. The winter/spring restricted
period for this area is from December 1 through March 31 unless the
Assistant Administrator revises that restricted period under paragraph
(f) of this section.
(iv) Driftnet gear--fishing practices requirements. No person may
fish at night with driftnet gear in the mid-Atlantic coastal waters
area unless that gear is tended. Before a vessel returns to port, all
driftnet gear set by that vessel in the mid-Atlantic coastal waters
area must be removed from the water and stowed on board the vessel.
(e) Restrictions on shark driftnet gear. (1) Gear marking
requirements. No person may fish with drift gillnet gear in Southeast
waters unless that gear is marked by gear type and region according to
the gear marking code specified under paragraph (a) of this section. On
and after November 1, 1998, all buoy lines must be marked within 2 feet
(0.6 m) of the top of the buoy line and midway along the length of the
buoy line according to gear type and region. On and after November 1,
1999, each net panel must be marked along both the float line and the
lead line and at least once every 100 feet (30.8 m) along the floatline
and bottom line.
(2) Management areas. (i) SEUS restricted area. The Southeast U.S.
restricted area consists of the SEUS critical habitat area described in
50 CFR 226.13(c) plus an additional area along the coast north to
32 deg.00' N (near Savannah, Georgia) from the shore and extending
eastward out 15 nautical miles from the shore, and an additional small
area along the coast south to 27 deg.51' N (near Sebastian Inlet,
Florida) and extending from the shore eastward out 5 nautical miles
from the shore (copies of a chart depicting this area are available
from the SE Regional Administrator upon request), unless the Assistant
Administrator extends that area under paragraph (f) of this section.
(ii) SEUS observer area. The SEUS observer area consists of the
area south of the SEUS restricted area and an additional area along the
coast south to 26 deg.46.05' N (near West Palm Beach, Florida) and
extending from the shore eastward out 5 nautical miles (copies of a
chart depicting this area are available from the SE Regional
Administrator upon request), unless the Assistant Administrator extends
that area under paragraph (f) of this section.
(3) Restrictions. (i) Closure. Except as provided under paragraph
(e)(3)(iii) of this section, no person may fish with driftnet gear in
the SEUS restricted area during the closed period. The closed period
for this area is from November 1 through March 31 of the following
year, unless the Assistant Administrator extends that closed period
under paragraph (f) of this section.
(ii) Observer requirement. No person may fish with driftnet gear in
the SEUS observer area unless the captain of the vessel calls the SE
Regional Office in St. Petersburg, Florida not less than 48 hours prior
to departing on any fishing trip in order to arrange for observer
coverage. If the Regional Office requests that an observer be taken on
a fishing trip, no person may fish with driftnet gear in the SEUS
observer area unless the observer is on board the vessel during the
trip.
(iii) Special provision for strikenets. Fishing with strikenet gear
is exempt from the restriction under paragraph (e)(3)(iii) of this
section if:
(A) No nets are set at night or when visibility is less than 500
yards (460 m);
(B) Each set is made under the observation of a spotter plane;
(C) No net is set within 3 nautical miles of a right, humpback or
fin whale; and
(D) If a right, humpback of fin whale moves within 3 nautical miles
of the set gear, the gear is removed immediately from the water.
(f) Contingency measures and other provisions. In addition to any
other emergency authority under the MMPA, the Endangered Species Act,
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, or other
appropriate authority, the Assistant Administrator may take action
under this section in the following situations:
(1) Unusual right whale patterns. The Assistant Administrator may
impose additional temporary restrictions on specified gear under
paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section for the purpose of reducing the
risk of interactions with right whales through a publication in the
Federal Register if right whales are determined to be resident in the
area. This determination will be based on sightings of four or more
right whales in the area for 2 or more consecutive weeks or on
alternative criteria specified by the Assistant Administrator under
this paragraph (f). These additional restrictions may extend any
restricted area specified under this section or restrict any other area
along the Atlantic coast of the U.S., may revise any closed or
restricted period specified under this section to regulate gear
specified under paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section, or take other
similar action. The Assistant Administrator may remove these additional
temporary restrictions through a publication in the Federal Register if
right whales are determined to have left the area. This determination
will be based on sighting efforts that produce no confirmed sightings
for 1 week or more or other evidence that the right whales have left
the area.
(2) Gear failure. If a serious injury or mortality of a northern
right whale occurs in an interaction with gear specified under
paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section in a restricted area and during a
restricted period specified under this section, NMFS will assess the
interaction. If NMFS determines that the interaction is attributable to
restricted gear used in a critical habitat area, the Assistant
Administrator shall close the area during the restricted period. If
NMFS determines that the interaction is attributable to restricted gear
used in any other restricted area, the Assistant Administrator shall
close the restricted area during the restricted period or impose
additional gear modifications or alternative fishing practices that
will significantly reduce the risk of serious injury or mortality to
right whales. The closure or additional restrictions will be imposed
through a publication in the Federal Register.
(3) Gear concerns. If an entanglement of a right whale or the
serious injury or mortality of any endangered whale occurs as a result
of an interaction with gear specified under paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this
section at any time or in any area, NMFS will assess the interaction.
If NMFS determines that the interaction is attributable to restricted
gear, the Assistant Administrator may impose additional gear
modifications or alternative fishing practices through a publication in
the Federal Register, or may close a restricted area or areas until
additional gear modifications or alternative fishing practices are
imposed through a publication in the Federal Register.
[[Page 16538]]
(4) Other special measures. If NMFS verifies that certain gear
restrictions are effective in reducing serious injuries and mortalities
of endangered whales; if new gear technology is developed and
determined to be appropriate; if revised breaking strengths are
determined to be appropriate; if new marking systems are developed and
determined to be appropriate; if alternative criteria for identifying
whether right whales are resident in an area is determined to be
appropriate; if gear testing operations are considered appropriate; or
for similar purposes, the Assistant Administrator may revise the
requirements of this section through a publication in the Federal
Register.
[FR Doc. 97-8738 Filed 4-4-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P