[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 74 (Monday, April 19, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19067-19069]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-9728]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR part 660

[I.D. 103098A]
RIN 0648-AL49


Fisheries Off West Coast States and in the Western Pacific; 
Pelagic Fisheries, Amendment 8; Crustacean Fisheries, Amendment 10; 
Bottomfish and Seamount Groundfish Fisheries, Amendment 6; Precious 
Corals Fisheries, Amendment 4

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

ACTION: Notification of agency decision.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS announces the partial approval of a ``comprehensive 
amendment'' that addresses essential fish habitat (EFH), overfishing 
definitions, bycatch, fishing sectors, and fishing communities in the 
Western Pacific Fishery Management Council's

[[Page 19068]]

(Council) four fishery management plans.

DATES: This agency decision is effective February 3, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Amendments and Environmental Assessment may be 
obtained from the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council, 
1164 Bishop St., Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alvin Z. Katekaru, Fishery Management 
Specialist, Pacific Islands Area Office, NMFS, at 808- 973-2985.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 
(Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires each regional fishery management 
council to submit any fishery management plan or amendment to NMFS for 
review and approval, disapproval, or partial approval. The Magnuson-
Stevens Act also requires that NMFS, upon receiving an amendment, 
immediately publish a document in the Federal Register stating that the 
amendment is available for public review and comment. On November 5, 
1998, NMFS published a notice of availability (NOA) of the Western 
Pacific amendments in the Federal Register and requested public 
comments through January 4, 1999 (63 FR 59758).
    On February 3, 1999, after considering comments received, NMFS 
partially approved the Western Pacific comprehensive amendment. NMFS 
approved the definitions of EFH for each of the four FMPs. All of the 
amendments identify and describe EFH for the species managed under 
these FMPs. EFH-related research and information needs are consistent 
with NMFS goals. The non-fishing impacts on EFH are described, and 
mitigation measures to address adverse impacts of fishing on EFH 
already implemented are appropriate. No new measures would be 
practicable at this time. NMFS will work with the Council to better 
understand and minimize impacts of gear not originating in local 
fisheries, such as high seas driftnets, trawl gear, and lost fishing 
line that float into the Council's area from outside the Western 
Pacific exclusive economic zone. Disapproved sections of the 
comprehensive amendment include the bycatch provisions of Amendment 6 
to the FMP for Bottomfish and Seamount Groundfish, as well as those for 
Amendment 8 to the Pelagics FMP. Although both amendments adequately 
describe reporting procedures in place and provide a general 
description of bycatch, quantification of bycatch by all sectors of the 
fisheries managed by the Council is needed, as is a description of the 
adequacy and identification of any shortfalls in the data. Both 
amendments should include a more detailed discussion of specific 
measures taken to minimize bycatch and minimize the mortality of 
bycatch once taken.
    Amendment 8 to the Pelagics FMP also fails to address the fact that 
the catch of sea turtles has remained relatively consistent for the 
last several years. The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires FMPs to address 
measures to reduce this take, through modification of gear or fishing 
effort. There should also be a discussion of data and estimates of 
seabird incidental catch in the fishery.
    Also disapproved were the criteria for identifying when overfishing 
would occur in the bottomfish, pelagics, and crustaceans fisheries. The 
Council's use of spawning potential ratio (SPR) percentages or ranges 
as a proxy for maximum sustainable yield (MSY) in determining minimum 
stock size threshold as described in the amendment is not acceptable. 
SPR is not an appropriate proxy for MSY, because it does not provide a 
measure of stock biomass as required by the Magnuson-Stevens Act to 
determine the status of each stock. Further, the discussion of these 
fisheries uses the term ``control rule'' incorrectly. A control rule 
should contain two elements: A precautionary target (meaning a 
reference point that is precautionary with respect to the limit 
reference point and stocks status), which triggers action before the 
limit reference point is reached, and the action to be taken to 
expediently control (reduce) fishing mortality if such a point is 
reached. The identification of fishing communities is acceptable, with 
the exception of the categorization of the State of Hawaii as a fishing 
community. This categorization is overly broad. The Council needs to 
revisit its determination, specifically focusing on the definition of 
``fishing community'' in the Magnuson-Stevens Act, including the 
requirement to identify communities that are `` * * *substantially 
dependent on or substantially engaged in the harvest or processing of 
fishery resources to meet social and economic needs * * *'' [Sec. 
3(16)]. The NMFS National Standard Guidelines (63 FR 24212, May 1, 
1998), further stipulate a fishing community as an economic or social 
group that resides in a specific location and shares a common 
dependency on fishing or related fisheries dependent industries and 
services. Although NMFS recognizes that there are cases in which an 
island may be appropriately designated as a community, the Council 
should have provided additional background and analysis to justify the 
designations. In the case of Hawaii, a more narrow categorization needs 
to be developed.

Comments and Responses

    NMFS received two comments from the Marine Fish Conservation 
Network (MFCN) during the comment period on the NOA.
    Comment 1: The MFCN commented that the comprehensive amendment 
fails to evaluate the effects of all 35 gear types listed (63 FR 4030, 
January 27, 1999) as used in the Western Pacific, fails to evaluate the 
effect of the take of prey species as an effect on EFH, fails to 
minimize any identified adverse effects of fishing activities on EFH, 
and fails to establish research closure areas to evaluate further the 
impacts of fishing activities on EFH.
    Response: The amendment focuses on gear types predominantly used in 
the Western Pacific waters under Federal jurisdiction, the majority of 
which were defined as EFH. The amendment identifies these gears as 
longline, handline, troll, all variations of hook-and-line gear, and 
lobster traps. Examination of catch data from Hawaii, Guam, American 
Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands indicates that more than 88 
percent (by weight) of the 1997 catch from Federal waters (seaward of 
state waters) were landed by hook-and-line, longline, and trolling 
gear. Other gear types such as manned submersibles used to harvest 
precious corals, or harvest by hand (e.g., spear or small throw net) 
are unlikely to adversely affect habitat. The actual and potential 
effects of the predominant fishing gears on habitat within Federal 
waters were evaluated and found by the Council not to warrant 
additional measures at this time.
    The Council, however, previously took action to minimize the 
adverse impacts of fishing activities on EFH. For example, the Council 
evaluated several potentially destructive gear types and banned their 
use in Federal waters. These include bottomfish trawls, bottom-set 
gillnets, explosives, poisons, and tangle net dredges. Current Federal 
regulations also prohibit unattended lobster traps in order to prevent 
ghost fishing and to minimize the potential for lost gear that could 
have an adverse effect on EFH.
    Regarding the take of prey species resulting from fishing 
activities, no managed fisheries target such species. Although some 
prey species are taken as bycatch by tuna purse seiners operating 
around certain remote U.S. Pacific

[[Page 19069]]

island areas such as Palmyra Atoll, and the islands of Howland, Baker, 
and Jarvis, the quantity harvested annually is less than 10 mts. NMFS 
believes that this level of catch of prey species will not have an 
adverse effect on EFH.
    According to NMFS' EFH Guidelines (62 FR 66531, December 19, 1997), 
the establishment of research closure areas is not a mandatory element 
of fishery management plans. Even though the Council did not create 
specific research closure areas, currently established refugia, 
protected species study zones, and longline closed areas could be used 
as research closure areas for that purpose under experimental fishing 
permits.
    Comment 2: The MFCN also commented that the comprehensive amendment 
fails to comply with statutory mandates to create a standardized 
reporting methodology for bycatch and to minimize to the extent 
practicable bycatch and bycatch mortality in its fisheries.
    Response: NMFS recognized the shortcomings of the sections of the 
comprehensive amendment regarding bycatch in the bottomfishing and 
pelagics fisheries and disapproved them. Although the bycatch sections 
of the crustaceans and precious corals amendments could be strengthened 
by more specific discussion and analysis of all fishing gears used in 
the Western Pacific, NMFS has determined that they are adequate, but 
will work with the Council to improve them. No new management measures 
to address bycatch appear to be practicable at this time.

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

    Dated: April 13, 1999.
Gary C. Matlock,
Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 99-9728 Filed 4-16-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F