[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 146 (Tuesday, July 30, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45894-45896]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18260]



[[Page 45894]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 622

[Docket No. 120510052-3615-02]
RIN 0648-BC20


Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; 
Reef Fish Fishery of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands; 
Parrotfish Management Measures in St. Croix

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this final rule to implement management measures 
described in Regulatory Amendment 4 to the Fishery Management Plan for 
the Reef Fish Fishery of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands (FMP), 
as prepared by the Caribbean Fishery Management Council (Council). This 
rule establishes minimum size limits for parrotfish in the exclusive 
economic zone (EEZ) off St. Croix in the U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI). 
The purpose of this final rule is to provide protection from harvest to 
parrotfish and to assist the stock in achieving optimum yield (OY).

DATES: This rule is effective August 29, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of the regulatory amendment, which 
includes an environmental assessment, a Regulatory Flexibility Act 
analysis, and a regulatory impact review may be obtained from the 
Southeast Regional Office Web site at http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/sustainable_fisheries/caribbean/reef_fish/reg_am4/index.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Britni Tokotch, Southeast Regional 
Office, NMFS, telephone 727-824-5305; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The reef fish fishery of Puerto Rico and the 
USVI is managed under the FMP, which was prepared by the Council and 
implemented through regulations at 50 CFR Part 622 under the authority 
of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 
(Magnuson-Stevens Act).
    On March 11, 2013, NMFS published a proposed rule for Regulatory 
Amendment 4 and requested public comment (78 FR 15338). The proposed 
rule and Regulatory Amendment 4 outline the rationale for the actions 
contained in this final rule. A summary of the actions implemented by 
this final rule is provided below.

Management Measure Contained in This Final Rule

    This final rule establishes minimum size limits for parrotfish 
species in the EEZ off St. Croix. These limits apply to both the 
commercial and recreational sectors. This rule establishes a minimum 
size limit of 8 inches (20.3 cm), fork length, for redband parrotfish 
(Sparisoma aurofrenatum), and 9 inches (22.9 cm), fork length, for all 
other parrotfish. The current harvest prohibition for midnight, blue, 
and rainbow parrotfish remains in effect.
    This rule implements a minimum size limit of 9 inches (22.9 cm) for 
all but one of the parrotfish species for which harvest is allowed, 
because this size limit best captures the range of sizes at maturity 
for these species. This rule sets a minimum size limit of 8 inches 
(20.3 cm), fork length, for redband parrotfish because they are 
relatively smaller fish and they reach maturity at a smaller size than 
the other managed parrotfish species. A minimum size limit reduces 
mortality of smaller (generally female) parrotfish, thereby enhancing 
spawning biomass and the supply of gametes (especially eggs), and 
ultimately increasing yield-per-recruit from the stock (assuming 
discard mortality is low). Parrotfish discard mortality is assumed to 
be low because spears are the predominant gear used to harvest 
parrotfish and therefore the fish are individually targeted. In 
addition, discard mortality of parrotfish harvested by trap is expected 
to be low because parrotfish are harvested in relatively shallow 
waters, thus reducing the threat of barotrauma related mortality. A 
minimum size limit also reduces the likelihood of recruitment 
overfishing that might otherwise lead to a stock biomass level below 
maximum sustainable yield. Therefore, this final rule sets a minimum 
size limit to increase the number of juvenile parrotfish that can reach 
sexual maturity and assist the stock in achieving OY.

Comments and Responses

    NMFS received two comment submissions on Regulatory Amendment 4 and 
the proposed rule. NMFS received one submission that expressed general 
support for the actions contained in the proposed rule. We acknowledge 
this comment, but do not respond in detail. NMFS also received one 
submission from a Federal agency that included several specific 
comments. The comments from the Federal agency are summarized and 
responded to below.
    Comment 1: The effects of the proposed size limits on the 
recreational and commercial sectors cannot be determined because of the 
admitted lack of information on the number of commercial and 
recreational fishers who harvest parrotfish in Federal waters. In 
addition, information on effort and catch per unit effort is not 
included in Regulatory Amendment 4, which means that catch and landings 
data cannot accurately be interpreted. This lack of information makes 
it impossible to determine whether the proposed size limits are 
necessary and appropriate for the conservation and management of the 
species.
    Response: NMFS acknowledges that pertinent information on 
parrotfish biology, ecology, and harvest within the reef fish fishery 
in the U.S. Caribbean is limited. However, NMFS disagrees that this 
lack of information makes it impossible to determine whether the 
proposed minimum size limits are necessary and appropriate for the 
conservation and management of the species. National Standard 2 of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act requires that NMFS and the Council use the best 
scientific information available. The maturity schedules used to inform 
the Council decisions on the appropriate minimum size limits for 
parrotfish species represent the best information presently available. 
Further, despite the level at which parrotfish may be harvested by any 
sector of the reef fish fishery, the Council concluded and NMFS agrees 
that the best scientific information available indicates that 
implementing the minimum size limits will help ensure that maturing 
females are given an opportunity to spawn at least once prior to 
potentially being harvested in the reef fish fishery. As more pertinent 
information becomes available, for any species of parrotfish presently 
managed in U.S. Caribbean Federal waters, the Council can reevaluate 
the minimum size limits and adjust them as necessary.
    Comment 2: A report cited in Regulatory Amendment 4 as ``SERO-LAPP-
2012-02'' was not available on the NMFS Southeast Regional Office Web 
site, making it difficult to determine where the numbers in the 
document originate.
    Response: The final report in Regulatory Amendment 4 that is cited 
as SERO-LAPP-2012-02 describes analysis conducted by NMFS that 
estimates the percent reduction in landings that would occur if various 
minimum size limits were implemented in the U.S. Caribbean. This 
analysis was used in Regulatory Amendment 4 to evaluate some of the 
biological impacts

[[Page 45895]]

of establishing the various minimum size limits considered in the 
amendment, which is one of many factors the Council considers as 
required by applicable law. The report was inadvertently not posted on 
the Southeast Regional Office Web site but was readily available if 
requested. NMFS did not receive any requests for the report and it is 
now posted at http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/sustainable_fisheries/caribbean/reef_fish/reg_am4/index.html.
    Comment 3: Regulatory Amendment 4 reads like a decision has already 
been made.
    Response: When the Council voted to submit Regulatory Amendment 4 
to NMFS for implementation, the Council was making a final decision on 
the preferred alternatives and the document submitted to NMFS reflects 
that decision. However, no final decision is made on whether to 
implement the actions in Regulatory Amendment 4 until NMFS determines 
that the regulations submitted by the Council are consistent with the 
FMP, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable laws, considers 
comments on the proposed rule, and publishes a final rule.
    Comment 4: With the previous implementation of Caribbean parrotfish 
annual catch limits (ACLs) and accountability measures (AMs), the 
proposed minimum size limits are not necessary to prevent recruitment 
overfishing and may focus harvest on the larger older mature fish. The 
Council and NMFS should ensure that implementation of the parrotfish 
minimum size limits does not reduce reproductive output to the point of 
recruitment overfishing.
    Response: NMFS disagrees that implementation of the parrotfish ACLs 
and AMs makes it unnecessary to establish a minimum size limit. The 
ACLs and AMs are intended to prevent overfishing but do not address the 
proportion of immature fish that are removed as part of the allowable 
harvest. Thus, even if landings remain under the ACL, immature 
individuals could still be harvested, which may result in recruitment 
overfishing. NMFS agrees that a minimum size limit can result in 
increased fishing pressure on larger fish. However, establishing a 
minimum size limit increases the likelihood that smaller individuals 
have an opportunity to reach maturity and contribute to the 
reproductive output of the population.
    With respect to ensuring that the minimum size limits do not result 
in recruitment overfishing, the Council acknowledged that there is some 
uncertainty regarding the consequences of establishing minimum size 
limits for parrotfish. However, the Council determined, and NMFS 
agrees, that if new information indicates that the minimum size limits 
are resulting in unintended consequences, the Council can reevaluate 
the size limits and take appropriate action.
    Comment 5: The length and complexity of Regulatory Amendment 4 
likely makes it difficult for busy fishermen to read and understand.
    Response: NMFS agrees that Regulatory Amendment 4 may be considered 
lengthy and that some information in the amendment is complex. However, 
the information in Regulatory Amendment 4 is necessary to comply with 
the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable law, 
such as the National Environmental Policy Act. To assist interested 
persons in understanding the actions in the amendment, the Council held 
public hearings throughout the U.S. Caribbean in July 2012. In 
addition, the establishment of parrotfish minimum size limits was 
discussed at several Council meetings, each of which was announced in 
the Federal Register, open to the public, and included a public comment 
period. There was no indication during the development of Regulatory 
Amendment 4 that fishermen did not understand the proposed actions or 
the reasons why the Council selected the preferred alternatives.

Changes From the Proposed Rule

    On April 17, 2013, NMFS published in the Federal Register an 
interim final rule to reorganize the regulations in 50 CFR part 622 for 
the Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and the Caribbean (78 FR 22950). 
That interim final rule did not create any new rights or obligations; 
rather, it reorganized the existing regulatory requirements in the Code 
of Federal Regulations into a new format. This final rule incorporates 
this new format into the regulatory text; it does not change the 
specific regulatory requirements that were contained in the proposed 
rule. Therefore, as a result of this reorganization, the parrotfish 
minimum size limit regulatory text will be located at Sec.  622.436(a) 
and (b) rather than Sec.  622.37(a).

Classification

    The Regional Administrator, Southeast Region, NMFS has determined 
that this final rule is necessary for the conservation and management 
of the species within Regulatory Amendment 4 and is consistent with the 
FMP, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law.
    This final rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    A Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) was prepared. The 
FRFA incorporates the initial regulatory flexibility analysis prepared 
for the proposed rule. A description of the action, why it is being 
considered and the legal basis for the rule are contained in the 
preamble of the proposed rule and in the preamble of this final rule. A 
summary of the FRFA follows. None of the public comments concerned the 
IRFA, and there are no changes in this final rule as a result of public 
comment. Therefore, there are no changes in the estimates of either the 
number of small businesses affected or the potential adverse economic 
impacts.
    This final rule will affect up to 80 percent (142) of St. Croix, 
USVI, licensed commercial fishermen, and every licensed fisherman is 
assumed to represent a small business in the Finfish Fishing Industry 
(NAICS 114111). The 142 small businesses are largely minority owned and 
managed businesses and are divided by full-time versus part-time 
enterprises and by gear used to catch fish.
    Each of the small businesses will have to obtain a measuring tool 
and use it to ensure that the parrotfish species they keep and land are 
equal to or greater in size than the minimum size limit. Any individual 
fish less than the minimum size limit will have to be discarded. Thus, 
the adverse impacts of this rule are divided into four parts: (1) Cost 
of obtaining the measuring tool; (2) additional time-related trip costs 
to use the tool; (3) loss of revenue from fish that now have to be 
discarded because they are undersized; and (4) additional fuel, bait 
and gear costs if fishermen act to mitigate for above losses of 
revenue.
    A measuring tool is estimated to cost from $5 to $10, and the total 
cost to 142 businesses to acquire the tool would be from $710 to 
$1,420. The use of the measuring tool will impose to the fishers an 
additional 4 to 5 seconds per parrotfish caught; however, the frequency 
of its use will be dependent on both the current sizes of parrotfish 
that are landed and the gear used to harvest parrotfish. Three 
different scenarios are presented to represent the range of the 
potential adverse economic impacts beyond the $5 to $10 cost of 
acquiring the tool.
    In the first scenario, it is theorized that, as a result of the 
recently imposed St. Croix parrotfish ACL of 240,000 lb (108,863 kg), 
round weight, all commercial fishermen have foregone catching and 
landing smaller parrotfish so as to minimize the cost of producing

[[Page 45896]]

those 240,000 lb (108,863 kg) (76 FR 82404, December 30, 2011). In this 
scenario, all commercial fishermen are presently catching and landing 
larger parrotfish that are visibly greater than the minimum size limit 
and rarely, if at all, are catching any that will require a 
measurement. If true, the final rule will have little to no adverse 
economic impact beyond the $5 to $10 cost of acquiring a measuring tool 
and an additional 4 to 5 seconds needed to measure a rare small fish.
    In the second scenario, it is assumed that commercial fishermen are 
not catching and landing larger parrotfish, and they cannot mitigate 
for losses of landings due to discarded undersized fish. If true, this 
final rule will result in an estimated total annual loss of parrotfish 
landings between 960 lb (435 kg) and 13,920 lb (6,314 kg). If the 
average ex-vessel price were $5 per pound, the total annual revenue 
loss would be between $4,800 and $69,600, and the average revenue loss 
per small business would be from approximately $34 to $490 per year. 
Added to the loss of annual revenue will be higher time-related trip 
costs, especially fuel costs, because it takes 4 to 5 seconds to 
measure each of the parrotfish that are caught. The magnitudes of the 
revenue loss and additional trip costs will not be distributed equally 
among parrotfish harvest methods. Because pot-and-trap fishermen have 
landed the greatest percentage of smaller parrotfish compared to other 
methods of harvest, they will experience the greatest percent losses of 
annual revenues and greatest increase in time-related trip costs.
    In the third scenario, fishermen are presumed to act to mitigate 
for potential losses of parrotfish landings by increasing fishing time 
and any bait and/or gear costs so that they catch enough legally sized 
parrotfish or other species to offset the pounds discarded in 
undersized parrotfish. In this third scenario, annual landings and 
revenues from those landings will be the same as baseline landings and 
revenues, but the costs of producing the landings increase. It is 
expected that small businesses that use pots and traps will incur the 
greatest increases in fuel, bait, and gear costs to mitigate for 
potential losses of parrotfish landings and revenues.
    The second and third scenarios show disproportionate adverse 
economic impacts on fishermen who use pots and traps to catch 
parrotfish. It is unknown if the disproportionate adverse impacts also 
represent disproportionate adverse impacts on small businesses that are 
either owned and/or managed by individuals of a specific race, 
ethnicity, or age, located within a small geographic area of St. Croix, 
or differentiated by business size.
    Considered, but rejected, alternatives would have established 
larger minimum size limits for parrotfish in the St. Croix EEZ and 
caused larger adverse economic impacts. Also among the considered, but 
rejected, alternatives were establishing minimum size limits for 
parrotfish in the areas of the EEZ off Puerto Rico and St. Thomas/St. 
John, USVI, which would have increased the number of small businesses 
regulated and the magnitude of the adverse economic impacts.
    Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness 
Act of 1996 states that, for each rule or group of related rules for 
which an agency is required to prepare a FRFA, the agency shall publish 
one or more guides to assist small entities in complying with the rule, 
and shall designate such publications as small entity compliance 
guides. As part of the rulemaking process, NMFS prepared a fishery 
bulletin, which also serves as a small entity compliance guide. The 
fishery bulletin will be sent to all interested parties.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 622

    Fisheries, Fishing, Minimum size limit, Parrotfish, St. Croix, 
Virgin Islands.

    Dated: July 25, 2013.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, performing the functions and 
duties of the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, 
National Marine Fisheries Service.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 622 is amended 
as follows:

PART 622--FISHERIES OF THE CARIBBEAN, GULF OF MEXICO, AND SOUTH 
ATLANTIC

0
1. The authority citation for part 622 continues to read as follows:

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


0
2. In Sec.  622.436, paragraph (a) is revised and paragraphs (b) and 
(c) are added to read as follows:


Sec.  622.436  Size limits.

* * * * *
    (a) Yellowtail snapper. The minimum size limit for yellowtail 
snapper is 12 inches (30.5 cm), TL.
    (b) Parrotfishes. The minimum size limit for parrotfishes, except 
for redband parrotfish, in the St. Croix Management Area only (as 
defined in Table 2 of Appendix E to Part 622) is 9 inches (22.9 cm), 
fork length. See Sec.  622.434(c) for the current prohibition on the 
harvest and possession of midnight parrotfish, blue parrotfish, or 
rainbow parrotfish.
    (c) Redband parrotfish. The minimum size limit for red band 
parrotfish in the St. Croix Management Area only (as defined in Table 2 
of Appendix E to Part 622) is 8 inches (20.3 cm), fork length.

[FR Doc. 2013-18260 Filed 7-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P