Browse: Departments Dates Agencies
Docket ID: [Docket No. 020215032-2032-01; I.D. 110701D]
RIN ID: RIN 0648-AP59
SUBJECT CATEGORY: Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Proposed 2002 Specifications for the Atlantic Bluefish Fishery
DOCUMENT SUMMARY: NMFS proposes 2002 specifications for the Atlantic bluefish fishery, including total allowable landings (TAL), statebystate commercial quotas, and recreational harvest limits and possession limits for Atlantic bluefish off the East Coast of the United States. The intent of the specifications is to conserve and manage the bluefish resource and provide for sustainable fisheries.
SUMMARY: Northeastern United States fisheries—; Atlantic bluefish,
The Council's recommendations must include supporting
documentation, as appropriate, concerning the environmental, economic,
and social impacts of the recommendations. NMFS is responsible for
reviewing these recommendations to ensure that they achieve the FMP
objectives, and may modify them if they do not. NMFS then publishes
proposed specifications in the Federal Register. After considering
public comment, NMFS will publish final specifications in the Federal Register.
Proposed 2002 Specifications
On August 9, 2001, the Council adopted specifications for the 2002 Atlantic bluefish fishery. NMFS has reviewed documents submitted by the Council in support of its recommendation for the 2002 specifications and has found that the Council has complied with the FMP objectives and other applicable law. Therefore, NMFS is proposing to implement the Council's recommended specifications. For the 2002 fishery, the stock rebuilding program in the FMP would restrict F to 0.41. However, the 2000 fishery produced an F of only 0.326. So, in accordance with the FMP, the TAL proposed for 2002 was set to achieve F=0.326. The resulting Total Allowable Catch (TAC) recommended by the Council and proposed by NMFS is 29.1 million lb (13.2 million kg). The TAL is calculated by deducting discards, estimated at 2.2 million lb (0.99 million kg) for 2002, from the TAC. Therefore, the proposed TAL for 2002 is 26.866 million lb (12.19 million kg).
If the TAL for the 2002 fishery were allocated based on the percentages specified in the FMP, the commercial quota would be 4.567 million lb (2.07 million kg) with a recreational harvest limit of 22.299 million lb (10.12 million kg). However, actual recreational landings from the last several years were much lower than this allocation, ranging between 8.30 and 14.3 million lb (3.76 and 6.49 million kg). There is no reason to expect that recreational landings in 2002 will exceed this range from prior years. Thus, the recreational fishery is not projected to land a 22.299 millionlb (10.12 million kg) harvest limit in 2002. As such, the FMP and the implementing regulations authorize the specification of a commercial quota of up to 10.5 million lb (4.76 million kg) for 2002. NMFS proposes to transfer 5.933 million lb from the initial 2002 recreational allocation of 22.299 million lb (10.12 million kg), resulting in 16.365 million lb (7.42 million kg) for the proposed 2002 recreational harvest limit and a proposed 2002 commercial quota of 10.5 million lb (4.76 million kg). The proposed 2002 commercial quota would be an increase from the 2001 quota (9.58 million lb (4.35 million kg)) implemented by NMFS and the states under the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission's (Commission) Interstate Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Bluefish. A recreational possession limit of 15 fish/person and a 2percent TAL research setaside are also proposed. The FMP allows the Council to set a bag limit of between 5 and 20 fish that would allow the recreational fishery to harvest an amount of fish that does not exceed the proposed harvest limit. From the implementation of the FMP in 1989, until 2001, the bag limit remained at 10 fish. In 2001, the Council determined that a 15fish bag limit would increase recreational harvest by only 5 percent when compared to the 10fish bag limit. Since the recreational harvest is estimated to remain low relative to the recreational harvest limit, the Council has concluded that continuing the 15fish bag limit is appropriate to protect the bluefish stock. Some or all of the research setaside amount will be allocated if research proposals to utilize it are approved. A Request for Proposals was published to solicit proposals for 2002, based on research priorities identified by the Council (66 FR 38636, July 25, 2001, and 66 FR 45668, August 29, 2001). The deadline for submission was September 14, 2001, and proposals are currently under review. If all of the bluefish research setaside is allocated, the commercial quota would be 10.290 million lb (4.67 million kg) and the recreational harvest limit would be 16.038 million lb (7.28 million kg). The quota setasides, the commercial quota, and the recreational harvest limit will be adjusted in the final rule establishing the annual specifications for the bluefish fishery, if necessary, to reflect setaside allocations to projects forwarded to the NOAA Grants Office for award. If the awards are not made for any reason, NMFS will publish a notification in the Federal Register to restore the unused setaside amount to the annual commercial and recreational allocations.
Proposed state commercial allocations for the recommended 2002
commercial quotas are shown in the table below, based on the
percentages specified in the FMP and subtracting the proposed 2percent research setaside.
2002 2002 2002 2002
State % of quota Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial
Quota (lb) Quota (kg) Quota (lb) Quota (kg)
With 2 % With 2 %
Research Research
Set Aside Set Aside
ME 0.6685 70,193 31,839 68,789 31,202 [[Page 11278]]
NH 0.4145 43,523 19,741 42,652 19,347
MA 6.7167 705,254 319,898 691,148 313,500
RI 6.8081 714,851 324,251 700,553 700,553
CT 1.2663 132,962 60,310 130,302 59,104
NY 10.3851 1,090,436 494,613 1,068,627 484,721
NJ 14.8162 1,555,701 705,654 1,524,587 691,541
DE 1.8782 197,211 89,453 193,267 87,664
MD 3.0018 315,189 142,967 308,885 140,108
VA 11.8795 1,247,348 565,787 1,222,401 554,472
NC 32.0608 3,366,384 1,526,966 3,299,056 1,496,427
SC 0.0352 3,696 1,676 3,622 1,643
GA 0.0095 998 452 978 443
FL 10.0597 1,056,269 479,115 1,035,143 469,533
Total 100.0000 10,500,000 4,762,720 10,290,000 4,667,465 Classification
This action is authorized by 50 CFR part 648 and has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.
NMFS prepared an initial regulatory flexibility analysis that
describes the economic impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would
have on small entities. A description of the action, why it is being
considered, and the legal basis for this action are contained at the
beginning of this section in the preamble and in the SUMMARY section of the preamble. A summary of the analysis follows
The analysis considered three alternatives. Analysis of the
Preferred Alternative examined the impacts on industry that would
result from a TAL of 26.87 million lb (12.19 million kg), with 10.50
million lb (4.76 million kg) allocated to the commercial sector of the
fishery, which represents the maximum allowed under the FMP, and 16.37
million lb (7.42 million kg) allocated to the recreational sector with
a 15fish possession limit. Analysis of Alternative 2 considered a TAL
of 26.87 million lb (12.19 million kg) with a commercial allocation of
4.57 million lb (2.07 million kg); 22.30 million lb (10.11 million kg)
recreational; and a 15fish recreational possession limit. Analysis of
Alternative 3 considered a TAL of 26.87 million lb (12.19 million
kg);9.58 million lb (4.35 million kg) commercial, which represents the
commercial status quo ; 17.28 million lb (7.84 million kg) recreational; and a 15fish possession limit.
There is very little information available to empirically estimate
how sensitive the affected party/charter boat anglers might be to the
proposed fishing regulations. However, given the level of the
recreational harvest limit for 2002 and recreational landings in recent
years it is not anticipated that this management measure will affect
the demand for party/charter boat trips. Given that the recreational
harvest limit is over 61% higher than the 2000 landings, the possession
limit is expected to increase angler satisfaction and is not expected
to result in landings in excess of the recreational harvest limit.
The analysis assumed that in the absence of cost data, gross
revenue was a sufficient proxy for profitability. Furthermore, the
analysis identified all participants as small entities; therefore,
there are no negative effects on those small businesses from
disproportionate competitiveness with large entities. Results of their
analysis indicate that based on 2000 landings, on a coastwide basis,
the Preferred Alternative would yield a 1.10percent increase in
revenue to the commercial sector, Alternative 2 would yield a 60.79
percent decrease, and Alternative 3 would yield an 8.45 percent decrease.
The Council, in analyzing the impacts of the three alternatives on
fishermen in individual states, concluded that the increase in revenues
under the Preferred Alternative and Alternative 3 would occur in all
states except New York and North Carolina. Under Alternative 2, all
states would show decreases in revenue. The Council's analysis was
based on the FMP requirement that an overage of the quota for an
individual state in 2001 be subtracted from the quota for that state in
the following year. At the time the Council prepared their analysis,
both New York and North Carolina had exceeded their quota, and the
Council based their analysis on the premise that quotas would be
reduced in these states for the 2002 fishery. The Council assumed that
preexisting overages in 2001 could force reductions in available quota
to the states of New York and North Carolina in 2002 at the rates of 71.86 percent and 10.76 percent, respectively.
The Council further indicated that under the Preferred Alternative
and Alternative 3, the significantly negative economic impacts to the
states of New York and North Carolina could easily be mitigated by a
transfer of commercial quota from another state, as allowed under the
FMP, making the impacts negligible. This was accomplished under the FMP
for the 2001 fishery, thus, making their initial analysis regarding the impacts of 2001 overages on the 2002 fishery moot.
In sum, in the absence of perfect information regarding transfers
for the 2001 fishery, the Council offered 2 scenarios one with
transfers, in which they concluded there would be negligible economic
impacts, and one without transfers, in which they concluded that
significantly negative economic impacts would occur due to the
requirement to reduce 2002 quotas to account for 2001 overages.
However, the Council did not take into account that fishermen in the
states of North Carolina and New York have recorded landings in 2001
that far exceed the proposed 2002 quotas for those States. This
presents a quandary since it is uncertain as to whether transfers will
take place in 2002 and if they do, to what extent those transfers will
affect total 2002 landings. A comparison of actual 2001 state landings
and the proposed 2002 state quotas and a discussion of their impacts is found below.
New information gathered by NMFS has made it possible to more
accurately predict economic impacts of the proposed 2002 specifications
to New York and North Carolina by comparing actual 2001 landings to
proposed 2002 state allocations of the bluefish TAL. The Council did
not have complete 2001 landings data at the time it prepared its PREE.
The Preferred Alternative of 10.50 million lb of bluefish TAL would
[[Page 11279]]
allocate 1,090,436 lb (494,613 kg) of bluefish to New York and
3,366,384 lb (1,526,966 kg) to North Carolina. Actual 2001 landings
amounted to 1,186,843 lb (538,495 kg) for New York and 3,584,627 lb
(1,626,418 kg) for North Carolina. All other states landed less in 2001
than their proposed 2002 allocation of the total bluefish TAL, and, therefore, would not be impacted.
Under the assumption that 2002 allocations for New York and North
Carolina represent harvest constraints to those fisheries, there would
be an 8percent reduction in bluefish revenues in New York and a 6
percent reduction in North Carolina associated with the Preferred
Alternative when compared to 2001 landings, 16 and 14percent
reductions associated with Alternative 3, and 60and 59percent
reductions associated with Alternative 2. Under Alternative 2, even
with transfers of quota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, and
Massachusetts would show a significant decrease in revenues for a
substantial number of vessels according to the PREE. Implicit in this
analysis is the assumption that when a state's quota is reached and the
fishery is closed, the state will not be able to take advantage of a
transfer provision under the FMP that allows states that have a surplus
quota to transfer a portion or all of that quota to a state that has or
will reach its quota. The transfer provision was implemented by
Amendment 1 to the FMP as a tool to mitigate the adverse economic
effects of prematurely closing a fishery when surplus quota exists.
The Council, in its analysis, was correct in assuming that it is
highly unlikely that reductions in revenues would occur since
allocations to the states can be adjusted inseason through transfers.
Based on historical evidence, under the 2000 and 2001 bluefish
fisheries, and, prior to 2000, under the Interstate Management Plan for
Atlantic Bluefish, states have been cooperative in transferring
commercial bluefish quota when needed by states running a deficit. In
fact, to harvest more than their allotted quota, New York and North
Carolina received 200,000 and 1,134,000 lb (90,744 and 514,599 kg) of
quota in 2001, respectively, from states that had surpluses. Given that
commercial coastwide landings have averaged 7.685 million lb (3.487
million kg) for the years 1998 through 2001, and the 2002 proposed TAL
is 10.500 million lb (4.768 million kg), the Council had a strong basis
to assume that transfers will again take place in 2002, thus reducing
impacts to vessels in New York and North Carolina or other states that may require additional quota to avoid a closure.
For all three alternatives, the Council notes that there is very
little information available to estimate how sensitive the affected
party/charter boat anglers might be to the proposed fishing
regulations. However, since the 2002 harvest limits are 61, 120, and 70
percent greater than 2000 recreational harvest, it can be assumed that
there would be no negative impacts on party/charterboats from the 2002 specifications.
An active participant in the commercial sector was defined as being
any vessel that reported having landed one or more lb of bluefish in
the Dealer data during calendar year 2000. These data cover activity by
unique vessels. Of the active vessels reported in 2000, 829 vessels
landed bluefish from Maine to North Carolina. The Dealer data do not
cover vessel activity in the South Atlantic. The Dealer data indicate
that 126 federally permitted vessels landed bluefish in North Carolina
in 2000. However, the North Carolina landings data for bluefish may be
incomplete in this data system. Trip Ticket Report data indicate that
1,088 vessels landed bluefish in North Carolina in 2000 (Lees Sabo,
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries, pers. comm., 2001). Some
of these vessels may be included in the 126 vessels identified as
landing bluefish in the Dealer data. As such, double counting is
possible. In addition, 136 vessels landed bluefish in Florida's east
coast in 1999. Bluefish landings in South Carolina and Georgia are
negligible compared to the total bluefish landing along the Atlantic
coast in 2000. As such, it was assumed there was no vessel activity for
those two states. In addition, it was estimated that in recent years
approximately 2,063 party/charter vessels may have been active and/or caught bluefish.
Alternatives which Minimize any Significant Economic Impact of the Proposed Rule on Small Entities
The Council and NMFS included a provision in the FMP that would minimize economic impacts to vessels in states that faced closure by allowing a transfer of quota within the coastwide allocation. However, under certain circumstances where state surplus quotas are not available, there are no alternatives to mitigate significant economic impact. It is more likely that this scenario would occur under Alternative 2 where the coastwide and state quotas are less than half the proposed quotas. The Preferred Alternative provides a commercial coastwide quota that would not put constraints on total landings based on previous years' total landings, thus allowing for transfers to take place. Also, the Preferred Alternative provides a recreational harvest limit that exceeds previous years' recreational harvest.
Thus, the Preferred Alternative offers the best opportunity for minimizing any negative impact on small entities.
This action is not controversial. This proposed rule does not
contain any collectionofinformation, reporting, or recordkeeping
requirements. It will not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other Federal rules.
Dated: March 7, 2002.
Rebecca Lent
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 026070 Filed 31202; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 351022S
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Myles A. Raizin, Fishery Policy Analyst, (978) 2819273, email at Myles.A.Raizin@noaa.gov, fax at (978) 2819135.
14 CFR Part 39 40 CFR Part 52 14 CFR Part 71 33 CFR Part 165 50 CFR Part 679 26 CFR Part 1 40 CFR Part 180 47 CFR Part 73 50 CFR Part 17 33 CFR Part 117 44 CFR Part 67 50 CFR Part 648 14 CFR Part 97 33 CFR Part 100 40 CFR Part 63 50 CFR Part 622 26 CFR Part 301 39 CFR Part 111 40 CFR Part 300 50 CFR Part 660 44 CFR Part 65 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 40 CFR Part 271 47 CFR Part 64 50 CFR Part 665 47 CFR Part 76 50 CFR Part 229 14 CFR Part 23 14 CFR Part 25 21 CFR Part 522