Supplementary Information
On April
7, 2004, NMFS published a final rule (69 FR 18444) to implement the
Fishery Management Plan for U.S. West Coast Fisheries for Highly
Migratory Species (HMS FMP) that included annual specification
guidelines at 50 CFR 660.709. These guidelines establish a process for
the Council to take final action at its regularly-scheduled November
meeting on any necessary harvest guideline, quota, or other management
measure and recommend any such action to NMFS. At their November 2014,
meeting, the Council adopted a recommendation (
http://www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/1114decisions.pdf)
to modify the existing daily bag limit regulations at 50 CFR 660.721
for sport caught PBF harvested in the EEZ off the coast of California
and to promulgate at-sea fillet regulations applicable south of Santa
Barbara as routine management measures for the 2014-2015 biennial
management cycle. The Council's recommendation and NMFS' proposed
rulemaking are intended to reduce fishing mortality and aid in
rebuilding the PBF stock, which is overfished and subject to overfishing
(78 FR 41033, July 9, 2013; 80 FR 12621, March 9, 2015) and to satisfy
the United States' obligation to reduce catches of PBF by sportfishing
vessels in accordance with Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission
(IATTC) Resolution C-14-06. (
http://www.iattc.org/PDFFiles2/Resolutions/C-14-06-Conservation-of-bluefin-2015-2016.pdf).
Resolution C-14-06 requires that “in 2015, all IATTC Members and
Cooperating non-Members (CPCs) must take meaningful measures to reduce
catches of PBF by sportfishing vessels operating under their
jurisdiction to levels comparable to the levels of reduction applied
under this resolution to the EPO commercial fisheries until such time
that the stock is rebuilt.” The proposed daily bag limit of two fish per
day being considered under this proposed rule would reduce the U.S.
recreational harvest of PBF by approximately 30 percent, which is
consistent with the IATTC scientific staff's conservation recommendation
for a 20-45 percent PBF harvest reduction and meets the requirements of
IATTC Resolution C-14-06. The filleting-at-seameasures will assist in
the enforcement of the proposed regulations by enabling enforcement
personnel to differentiate PBF from other tuna species. This proposed
rule is consistent with procedures established at 50 CFR 660.709(a)(4)
of the implementing regulations for the HMS FMP.
The proposed regulations would reduce the existing bag limit of 10
PBF per day to 2 PBF per day and the maximum multiday possession limit (
i.e.,
for trips of 3 days or more) from 30 PBF to 6 PBF. For fishing trips of
less than 3 days, the daily bag limit is multiplied by the number of
days fishing to determine the multiday possession limit (
e.g.,
the possession limit for a 1-day trip would be two fish and for a 2-day
trip, four fish). A day is defined as a 24-hour period from the time of
departure. Thus a trip spanning 2 calendar days could count as only 1
day for the purpose of enforcing possession limits.
Most PBF caught by U.S. anglers are taken in the EEZ of Mexico, both
on private vessels and on Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessels (CPFV).
The bulk of these trips originate from and return to San Diego, CA,
ports. During 2004 through 2013, approximately 78 percent of the fishing
effort for PBF (measured by angler days) by U.S. West Coast
recreational fishing vessels occurred in Mexico's EEZ. Fishing by U.S.
recreational vessels in Mexico's EEZ is a permitted activity that is
subject to management by the Government of Mexico, which has imposed bag
and possession limits.
The daily bag and multiday possession limits being proposed for the
U.S. EEZ off the coast of California might be more or less conservative
than Mexico's limits. The proposed U.S. recreational limits would not
apply to U.S. anglers while in Mexico's waters, but to facilitate
enforcement and monitoring, the limits would apply to U.S. vessels in
the U.S. EEZ or landing to U.S. ports, regardless of where the fish were
harvested.
The proposed regulations would also establish requirements for filleting tuna at-sea (
e.g.,
each fish must be cut into six pieces placed in an individual bag so
that certain diagnostic characteristics are left intact), which will
assist law enforcement personnel in accurately identifying different
species given morphometric and phenotypic similarities between tuna
species, specifically, yellowfin (
Thunnus albacares) and PBF. These requirements would apply to any tuna species caught south of Santa Barbara (
i.e.,
south of a line running west true from Point Conception, Santa Barbara
County (34°27′ N. lat.)) In addition to enhancing enforcement, the
proposed fillet measures would also assist port samplers and fishery
biologists conducting fishery surveys in accurately identifying tuna
species.
The State of California has informed NMFS that it intends to
implement companion regulations to the Federal regulations being
proposed here by imposing daily PBF bag limits applicable to
recreational angling and possession of fish in state waters (0-3 nm).
Currently, California State regulations allow, by special permit, the
retention of up to three daily bag limits for a trip occurring over
multiple, consecutive days. California State regulations also allow for
two or more persons angling for finfish aboard a vessel in ocean waters
off California to continue fishing until boat limits are reached. NMFS
and the Council consider these additional state restrictions to be
consistent with Federal regulations implementing the HMS FMP, including
this proposed rule if implemented. The proposed fillet requirements
differ from current State of California requirements, which allow tuna
filleting as long as a 1-inch square patch of skin is left on the
fillet.
Several comments received during public scoping for this action
called for an exception to the fillet requirements for skipjack tuna,
Katsuwonus pelamis.
The Council recommendation to NMFS did not provide an exception for
skipjack tuna. However, the California Fish and Game Commission is
considering a possible exception, such that skipjack tuna taken from and
possessed aboard a vessel south of Point Conception (Santa Barbara
County) may be processed by removing the entire fillet on each side and
shall bear the entire skin attached. Skipjack tuna possess distinct
horizontal bands on their belly that remain visible and distinct
allowing for accurate identification, even after the fish or fillet has
been frozen. NMFS is seeking further guidance from the public on the
issue of a possible exception to the proposed fillet requirements for
skipjack tuna.
The proposed rule would apply only to recreational fisheries in
Federal waters off California. Although PBF are occasionally caught and
retained in Oregon and Washington, the catches are negligible.
Therefore, the benefits expected from monitoring and regulating PBF
catch in waters off those states does not justify the administrative or
regulatory burden of doing so.
Classification
Pursuant to
section 304(b)(1)(A) of the MSA, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has
determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the HMS FMP, other
provisions of the Act, and other applicable law, subject to further
consideration after public comment.
National Environmental Policy Act
The
Council prepared an environmental assessment (EA) for this action that
discusses the impact on the environment as a result of this proposed
rule. None of the bag and possession limit alternatives analyzed in the
EA are expected to jeopardize the sustainability of the PBF. However,
the preferred alternative, which reflects the action proposed in this
rule, is likely to have negative economic impacts on the affected
fishing communities. The alternatives, including the preferred
alternative, for tuna filleting procedures are not expected to result in
significant socioeconomic impacts.
Executive Order 12866
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The
Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration
(SBA) that this proposed rule, if implemented, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The factual basis for this determination under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) is as follows:
The proposed regulations would reduce the existing bag limit of 10
PBF per day to 2 PBF per day and the maximum multiday possession limit (
i.e.,
for trips of 3 days or more) from 30 PBF to 6 PBF. For fishing trips of
less than 3 days, the daily bag limit is multiplied by the number of
days fishing to determine the multiday possession limit (
e.g.,
the possession limit for a 1-day trip would be two fish and for a 2-day
trip, four fish). These limits will apply to recreational anglers in
U.S. waters off the West Coast or any other ocean waters that return to
U.S. waters and/or ports. This rule also proposes that tunas caught by
recreational anglers to be filleted according to specified
configurations for bag limit monitoring and enforcement purposes.
This proposed rule, if implemented, would not be expected to directly
affect any small entities. This proposed rule would change the PBF
recreational baglimit and the filleting requirements for caught tuna,
which affects only individual recreational anglers. Recreational
anglers, by definition, may not sell catch, and thus are not considered
to be a business. Because recreational anglers are not considered to be a
small entity under the RFA, the economic effects of this proposed rule
on these anglers are outside the scope of the RFA. Although the for-hire
sector of the sport fishery may experience indirect economic impacts
due to the imposition of reduced daily bag and possession limits, those
impacts are not required elements of the RFA analysis for this action.
Because this proposed rule, if implemented, would not be expected to
have a significant direct adverse economic effect on a substantial
number of small entities, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is
not required and none has been prepared.
Paperwork Reduction Act
There
are no new collection-of-information requirements associated with this
action that are subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, existing
collection-of-information requirements associated with the U.S. West
Coast Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan still apply.
These existing requirements have been approved by the Office of
Management and Budget under Control Number 0648-0204.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660
Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: April 15, 2015.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 660 is proposed to be amended as follows:
Part 660 Fisheries Off the West Coast States
1. The authority citation for part 660 continues to read as follows:
Authority
16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq., and 16 U.S.C. 7001 et seq.
2. In § 660.721, revise the section heading, introductory text,
paragraph (a) introductory text and paragraph (b), and add paragraph (e)
to read as follows:
§ 660.721
Recreational fishing bag limits and filleting requirements.
This section applies to recreational fishing for albacore tuna in the
U.S. EEZ off the coast of California, Oregon, and Washington and for
bluefin tuna in the U.S. EEZ off the coast of California. In addition to
individual fishermen, the operator of a U.S. sportsfishing vessel that
fishes for albacore or bluefin tuna is responsible for ensuring that the
bag and possession limits of this section are not exceeded. The bag
limits of this section apply on the basis of each 24-hour period at sea,
regardless of the number of trips per day. The provisions of this
section do not authorize any person to take and retain more than one
daily bag limit of fish during 1 calendar day. Federal recreational HMS
regulations are not intended to supersede any more restrictive state
recreational HMS regulations relating to federally-managed HMS.
(a)
Albacore Tuna Daily Bag Limit. Except pursuant to a
multi-day possession permit referenced in paragraph (c) of this section,
a recreational fisherman may take and retain, or possess onboard no
more than:
* * * * *
(b)
Bluefin Tuna Daily Bag Limit. A recreational fisherman may
take and retain, or possess on board no more than two bluefin tuna
during any part of a fishing trip that occurs in the U.S. EEZ off
California south of a line running due west true from the
California-Oregon border [42°00′ N. latitude].
* * * * *
(e)
Restrictions on Filleting of Tuna South of Point Conception.
South of a line running due west true from Point Conception, Santa
Barbara County (34°27′ N. latitude) to the U.S.-Mexico border, any tuna
that has been filleted must be individually bagged as follows:
(1) The bag must be marked with the species' common name, and
(2) the fish must be cut into the following six pieces with all skin
attached: the four loins, the collar removed as one piece with both
pectoral fins attached and intact, and the belly cut to include the vent
and with both pelvic fins attached and intact.
[FR Doc. 2015-09093 Filed 4-20-15; 8:45 am]
/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/gray/RMG7MB4ZDRH6DB7UNKZQ4I5IKY.png)
/https://tf-cmsv2-smithsonianmag-media.s3.amazonaws.com/filer_public/8b/ce/8bce9f5a-d5ff-48b2-a333-6cf7ad97a231/g-ocean-deep-divers-alt_web.jpg)
