[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 84 (Wednesday, May 1, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21598-21599]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-10692]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 622

[I.D. 010302D]
RIN 0648-AL86


Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; 
Comprehensive Sustainable Fishery Act Amendment to the Fishery 
Management Plans of the U.S. Caribbean

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

ACTION: Notice of agency action.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS has disapproved the Comprehensive Amendment Addressing 
Sustainable Fishery Act Definitions and Other Required Provisions of 
the Magnuson-Stevens Act in the Fishery Management Plans of the U.S. 
Caribbean (Comprehensive SFA Amendment) submitted by the Caribbean 
Fishery Management Council (Council). Under the procedures of the 
Magnuson-Stevens

[[Page 21599]]

Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), NMFS 
determined that the Comprehensive SFA Amendment was inconsistent with 
the requirements of the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 (SFA) and the 
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peter Eldridge, telephone: 727-570-
5305; fax: 727-570-5583; e-mail: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The SFA requires NMFS and the Councils to 
comply with new overfishing, rebuilding, and bycatch provisions. 
Fishery Management Plans (FMPs) are required to assess and specify the 
present and probable future condition of, and the maximum sustainable 
yield and optimum yield from each fishery. FMPs must assess and satisfy 
the nature and extent of scientific data, which is needed for effective 
implementation of the plan. Also, the SFA requires fishery managers to 
establish a standardized reporting methodology to assess the amount and 
type of bycatch occurring in fisheries. Conservation and management 
measures shall, to the extent practicable, minimize bycatch and, to the 
extent bycatch cannot be avoided, minimize the mortality of such 
bycatch.
    The Council subsequently developed and submitted a Comprehensive 
SFA Amendment that addressed SFA requirements for Caribbean FMPs. On 
January 25, 2002, NMFS published a notice of availability (NOA) of the 
Comprehensive SFA Amendment to the Caribbean FMPs and requested public 
comments through March 26, 2002 (67 FR 3679).
    On April 25, 2002, after considering extensive comments received 
during the public comment period for the amendment, NMFS disapproved 
the Caribbean Comprehensive SFA Amendment primarily because NMFS 
believes that an environmental impact statement (EIS) should be 
developed that provides a more comprehensive set of alternatives for 
SFA parameters, rebuilding schedules, and bycatch reporting standards. 
A summary of comments received and responses is given below.

Comments and Responses

    Three environmental organizations, 60 individual commenters and one 
petition with 548 individuals listed provided a similar set of comments 
on the Comprehensive SFA Amendment.
    Comment 1: One environmental organization stated, ``In its current 
state, the Comprehensive Amendment violates the SFA, fails to prevent 
overfishing, fails to rebuild fish populations, and fails to address 
the fishery's bycatch problem. Hence, in its current state, the 
Comprehensive Amendment is a major federal action significantly 
adversely affecting the environment. On the other hand, should NMFS 
choose to revise the Comprehensive Amendment so as to comply with the 
SFA, it would be a major federal action significantly benefitting the 
human environment. Either, way, NMFS must develop an EIS.''
    Response: NMFS does not completely endorse all aspects of the 
comment. Nonetheless, the comment highlights the importance of the 
Amendment and is persuasive that additional alternatives should be 
considered to produce a better document. NMFS, working with the 
Council, intends to develop an EIS on the above issues and incorporate 
the findings of the EIS into a revised Comprehensive SFA Amendment that 
will address the concerns noted in public comments.
    Comment 2: Two environmental organizations noted that the SFA 
mandates that fishery managers establish a standardized 
reporting methodology to assess the amount and type of bycatch 
occurring in the fishery. The national standard guidelines 
also require that ``[a] review and, where necessary, improvement of 
data collection methods, data sources, and application of data must be 
initiated for each fishery to determine the amount, type, disposition, 
and other characteristics of bycatch and bycatch mortality in each 
fishery.'' The organizations recommended that the NMFS disapprove this 
aspect of the Comprehensive SFA Amendment.
    Response: NMFS agrees. Bycatch reporting will be addressed in the 
revised Amendment.
    Comment 3: One environmental organization recommended that 
commercial landings in the U.S. Virgin Islands be reported by species 
rather than gear. Further, such landings should be reported similar to 
those in Puerto Rico.
    Response: NMFS agrees that commercial landings, wherever possible, 
should be reported by species or species groups, but notes that this 
could require additional resources. This issue will be addressed in the 
revised Amendment.
    Comment 4: All commenters objected to the way that the reef fish 
SFA parameters (maximum sustainable yield, optimum yield, minimum stock 
size threshold, and maximum fishing mortality threshold) were developed 
by using only the average landings for the period 1983 through 1999. 
They noted that landings for many species had declined during that 
period and that there was reason to believe that some species were 
either overfished or undergoing overfishing. They believe that the 
assumption that the current levels of harvest are sustainable is 
incorrect and would continue overfishing as well as prevent rebuilding 
of overfished stocks. Further, they recommended that average landings 
developed from either a 4-year or 8-year time period would provide 
better results.
    Response: Due to the data-poor nature of fisheries in the 
Caribbean, it is not clear which series of landings data would provide 
the best SFA proxies. Despite this, it is reasonable to consider 
alternative series of landings, and this will be done in the revised 
Amendment.
    Comment 5: Commenters noted that the Comprehensive SFA Amendment 
did not contain regulatory measures that would immediately address 
overfishing or overfished species. They stated that the Amendment 
should have and cited this as a deficiency.
    Response: Upon consideration of the public comments received, NMFS 
believes that it would be appropriate to consider regulatory measures, 
including rebuilding schedules, in the revised Amendment that would 
address overfishing and overfished species. It should be noted that 
Amendment 2 to the Queen Conch FMP, currently under development, would 
prohibit the possession and harvest of queen conch in the EEZ until 
this resource is rebuilt.

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

    Dated: April 25, 2002.
William T. Hogarth,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 02-10692 Filed 4-30-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S