12154 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 50 / Thursday, March 15, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 635 

[Docket No. 070307055–7055–01; I.D. 

022607F] 

RIN 0648–AV25 

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species 

(HMS); U.S. Atlantic Billfish 

Tournament Management Measures 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to 

temporarily suspend circle hook 

requirements for anglers participating in 

Atlantic billfish tournaments. The final 

rule implementing the Final 

Consolidated HMS Fishery Management 

Plan (FCHMS FMP) published in the 

Federal Register on October 2, 2006, 

and restricted anglers fishing from HMS 

permitted vessels and participating in 

Atlantic billfish tournaments to 

deploying only non-offset circle hooks 

when using natural baits or natural bait/ 

artificial lure combinations, effective 

12:01 am, January 1, 2007. The purpose 

of the final rule was to reduce postrelease mortality of Atlantic billfish and 

other species with which billfish 

tournament anglers may interact. NMFS 

has continued to receive public 

comment since publication of the Final 

CHMS FMP regarding the perceived 

impacts of the billfish tournament nonoffset circle hook requirement. The 

objective of this proposed rulemaking is 

to increase post-release survival of 

Atlantic billfishes by improving longterm compliance with billfish 

tournament non-offset circle hook 

regulations. 

DATES: Written comments on the 

proposed rule must be received by 

March 30, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the 

proposed rule or the Draft 

Environmental Assessment (Draft EA) 

may be submitted to Russell Dunn or 

Randy Blankinship, Fisheries 

Management Specialists, Highly 

Migratory Species Management 

Division, using any of the following 

methods: 

• E-mail: 0648–AV25@noaa.gov 

Please include the following in the 

subject line: ‘‘Comments on Proposed 

Billfish Circle Hook Rule.’’

• Mail: NOAA/NMFS HMS 

Management Division, 263 13th Avenue 

South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701. Please 

mark the outside of the envelope 

‘‘Comments on Proposed Billfish Circle 

Hook Rule’’. 

• Fax: 727–824–5398. 

• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Include in the 

subject line the following identifier: 

‘‘I.D. 022607F.’’

The hearing locations are: 

1. March 27, 2007 from 7 – 9 p.m. 

Worcester County Library, Snow Hill 

Branch, 307 North Washington Street, 

Snow Hill, Maryland, 21863. 

2. March 28, 2007 from 7 – 9 p.m. 

Broward County Library, Main Library, 

100 South Andrews Avenue, Ft. 

Lauderdale, FL 33301. 

3. March 29, 2007 from 7 – 9 p.m. 

Carteret Community College, Joslyn 

Hall, H.J. McGee, Jr. Building, 3505 

Arendell Street, Morehead City, NC 

28557–2989. 

Copies of the Draft EA, the 2006 

FCHMS FMP and other relevant 

documents are available from the Highly 

Migratory Species Management Division 

website at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ 

sfa/hms or by contacting Russell Dunn 

or Randy Blankinship (see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Russell Dunn or Randy Blankinship, by 

phone: 727–824–5399; by fax: 727–824–

5398. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The U.S. recreational fishery for 

Atlantic billfish is managed under the 

Consolidated HMS FMP. Implementing 

regulations at 50 CFR part 635 are 

issued under the authority of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson-Stevens Act)(16 U.S.C. 1801 

et seq.), and the Atlantic Tunas 

Convention Act (ATCA) (16 U.S.C. 971 

et seq.). 

Atlantic billfish management 

strategies have been guided by 

international and domestic 

considerations and mechanisms since 

the 1970s. Domestic management of 

Atlantic billfish resources has been 

developed, modified, and implemented 

in four primary stages and through a 

series of other rulemakings. In January 

1978, NMFS published the Preliminary 

Fishery Management Plan (PMP) for 

Atlantic Billfish and Sharks (43 FR 

3818), which was supported by an EIS 

(42 FR 57716). This PMP was developed 

and implemented under the authority of 

the Secretary of Commerce. 

Building upon the PMP for Atlantic 

Billfish and Sharks was the Fishery 

Management Plan for the Atlantic 

Billfishes (53 FR 21501). This plan was 

jointly developed by five Atlantic 

regional fishery management councils 

(Caribbean, Gulf, South Atlantic, MidAtlantic, New England) and 

implemented in October 1988 (53 FR 

37765). The 1988 FMP defined the 

Atlantic billfish management unit to 

include sailfish from the western 

Atlantic Ocean, white marlin and blue 

marlin from the North Atlantic Ocean, 

and longbill spearfish from the entire 

Atlantic Ocean; described objectives for 

the Atlantic billfish fishery; and 

established management measures to 

achieve the objectives. 

Atlantic blue and white marlin were 

identified as overfished in 1997 and 

Atlantic sailfish were identified as 

overfished in 1998. In response to 

Magnuson-Stevens Act requirements, 

and concurrent with efforts to develop 

the 1999 FMP for Atlantic Tunas, 

Swordfish, and Sharks, NMFS prepared 

Amendment One to the Atlantic Billfish 

Fishery Management Plan and 

published final regulations on May 28, 

1999 (64 FR 29090). Amendment One 

maintained the objectives of the original 

1988 Billfish FMP and identified a 

number of additional objectives. On Oct. 

2, 2006 (71 FR 58057), NMFS issued the 

final rule implementing the Final 

Consolidated HMS FMP. That document 

amended and consolidated the 

objectives and management measures of 

the Atlantic Billfish Fishery FMP with 

those of the 1999 Atlantic Tunas, 

Swordfish, and Sharks FMP, among 

other actions. 

The recent biomass level of Atlantic 

blue marlin most likely remains well 

below the level necessary to produce the 

maximum sustainable yield (Bmsy) that 

was estimated in 2000. Current and 

provisional estimates suggest that the 

fishing mortality rate (F) has recently 

declined and is possibly smaller than 

Freplacement, but larger than the Fmsy

estimated in the 2000 assessment. Over 

the period 2001 - 2005, several 

abundance indicators suggest that the 

decline in biomass has been at least 

partially arrested, but some other 

indicators suggest that abundance has 

continued to decline. 

The 1996, 2000, and 2002 stock 

assessments for white marlin all 

indicated that biomass of white marlin 

has been below Bmsy for more than two 

decades and the stock is overfished. The 

recent biomass of Atlantic white marlin 

most likely remains well below the Bmsy

estimated in the 2002 assessment. 

Current and provisional estimates 

suggest that F is probably smaller than 

Freplacement and probably also larger than 

the Fmsy estimated in the 2002 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 50 / Thursday, March 15, 2007 / Proposed Rules 12155 

assessment. Over the period 2001–2004, 

combined longline indices and some 

individual fleet indices suggest that the 

decline has been at least partially 

reversed, but some other individual fleet 

indices suggest that abundance has 

continued to decline. 

In 2002, the United States undertook 

a status review of white marlin pursuant 

to the Endangered Species Act (ESA). 

The status review team determined that 

white marlin stock status did not 

warrant a listing at that time. NMFS was 

subsequently sued with regard to its 

determination not to list Atlantic white 

marlin as endangered at that time. In 

accordance with a court approved 

settlement agreement, NMFS has 

initiated a second ESA listing review for 

Atlantic white marlin that will be 

completed by December 31, 2007. 

Prior to January 1, 2007, the 

recreational Atlantic billfish fishery was 

subject to regulations that required 

fishing permits, limited allowable gears 

to rod and reel only, established 

minimum legal size limits, specified 

landing form of retained billfish, 

mandated reporting of billfish landings, 

required registration of all recreational 

HMS fishing tournaments and reporting 

by tournaments that are selected for 

reporting, prohibited the retention of 

longbill spearfish, and prohibited sale of 

any billfish, among others. The final 

rule implementing the FCHMS FMP 

(October 2, 2006; 71 FR 58058) 

implemented additional regulations that 

applied to the Atlantic recreational 

billfish fishery. These regulations 

became effective January 1, 2007, and 

limited U.S. landings of Atlantic blue 

and white marlin to 250 individual fish, 

combined, on an annual basis. The final 

rule also implemented regulations that 

require anglers fishing from HMS 

permitted vessels and participating in 

Atlantic billfish tournaments to use only 

non-offset circle hooks when deploying 

natural baits or natural bait/artificial 

lure combinations. These regulations 

allow the use of traditional J-hooks with 

artificial lures in tournaments, and do 

not impose hook requirements on 

recreational fishermen fishing outside of 

Atlantic billfish tournaments. 

NMFS implemented circle hook 

regulations in the FCHMS FMP 

consistent with the objectives of the 

FMP, including reducing post-release 

mortality of Atlantic billfish. Atlantic 

billfish tournament circle hook 

requirements were determined to be an 

effective mechanism to target a known 

source of billfish mortality in the 

directed recreational marlin fishery. 

Recent studies have shown that circle 

hooks can substantially reduce injury 

and post-hooking mortality of Atlantic 

billfish and other species relative to Jhooks. Horodysky and Graves (2005) 

found that circle hooks can reduce postrelease mortality of white marlin by 65.7 

percent relative to J-hooks. They also 

found that white marlin caught on Jhooks are 41 times more likely to be 

deeply hooked and 15 times more likely 

to sustain hook-induced trauma 

resulting in bleeding relative to fish 

caught on circle hooks. Prince et al. 

(2002), found similar results pertaining 

to sailfish. Prince et al., also found no 

statistical difference in catch per unit of 

effort between circle hooks and J-hooks 

when fishing for blue marlin. Cooke and 

Suski (2004) analyzed the results of 

more than 40 circle hook studies 

examining both marine and fresh water 

species. For all species examined, they 

found that mortality rates were 

approximately 50 percent lower when 

using circle hooks relative to J-hooks. 

During the analysis of the FCHMS FMP, 

NMFS found that between 1999 and 

2004, the number of Atlantic white 

marlin released alive during 

tournaments ranged from a low of 614 

to a high of 2,207. Based on an 

estimated 35 percent post-release 

mortality rate for white marlin caught 

on J-hooks (Horodysky and Graves, 

2005), this would equate to between 215 

and 773 Atlantic white marlin that 

would not be expected to survive the 

catch and release experience. Applying 

an estimated 12 percent post-release 

mortality rate for white marlin caught 

on circle hooks (Horodysky and Graves, 

2005) to the same number of released 

white marlin, this would equate to 

between 74 and 265 Atlantic white 

marlin that would not be expected to 

survive the catch and release 

experience. The difference between the 

two indicated a potential ecological 

benefit of between 141 and 508 Atlantic 

white marlin surviving the catch and 

release experience if anglers used circle 

hooks in tournaments rather then Jhooks. 

NMFS has continued to receive public 

comment on the perceived impacts of 

the billfish tournament circle hook 

requirement contained in the FCHMS 

FMP since release of that document in 

July of 2006. This included comments 

by anglers indicating that circle hooks 

will not work well for catching blue 

marlin; expressing a desire by anglers to 

continue using J-hooks while fishing for 

Atlantic blue marlin in tournaments; 

and noting that deploying J-hooks on 

mixed-baits with heavy fishing gear was 

an effective and popular technique 

employed by anglers during fishing 

tournaments. Comments also stated that 

fishing for billfish with J-hooks trolled 

at high speeds with heavy tackle did not 

result in high post-release hooking 

mortalities of Atlantic billfish species. 

Finally, some commenters supported 

full implementation of tournament 

circle hook requirements. In response to 

these concerns, NMFS considered 

development of an exempted fishing 

permit (EFP) program to collect 

additional data on this fishing activity 

in billfish tournaments. Comments 

received on the development of an EFP 

program to collect data within billfish 

tournaments expressed concern over the 

difficulty of standardizing fishing gear 

type and use in a tournament setting; 

concern over the quality of data 

collected in a tournament setting; and 

the scientific applicability of such data 

given the fishing characteristics of 

tournaments (fast paced activity, focus 

on catching and retaining specific 

species and/or size classes, and varying 

tournament rules), among others. 

Finally, comments were received that 

expressed a general lack of support for 

conducting research and/or data. 

Based on public comment, NMFS has 

since determined that the collection of 

data to evaluate the impacts of J-hooks 

and heavy tackle on Atlantic blue 

marlin during billfish tournaments 

would be problematic because of the 

varying conditions and methodologies 

discussed above that would likely occur 

within and between tournaments, 

among others. For these reasons, NMFS 

chose not to issue EFPs to Atlantic 

billfish tournaments (72 FR 4691; 

February 1, 2007). Available data 

indicate that hook type (circle hook 

versus J-hook) is not a major factor 

influencing catch rates of blue marlin. 

Nevertheless, many anglers believe 

circle hooks to be ineffective and that Jhooks can be deployed in a manner 

resulting in low post-release mortality. 

The result has been strong resistance to 

implementation of circle hooks in 

certain circumstances and regions. 

Available studies clearly demonstrate 

the benefits of circle hooks for billfish 

and other species, and NMFS believes 

that concerns over the effectiveness of 

circle hooks when fishing for Atlantic 

blue marlin, as well as resistance to 

their use by tournament anglers, can be 

overcome as anglers become more 

familiar and proficient with them. 

In this action, NMFS proposes to 

temporarily suspend existing 

regulations that require Atlantic billfish 

tournament participants who are fishing 

from HMS permitted vessels and 

deploying natural bait or natural bait/ 

artificial lure combinations to use nonoffset circle hooks. The preferred 

alternative is intended to increase postrelease survival of Atlantic billfishes by 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
12156 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 50 / Thursday, March 15, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

improving long-term compliance with 

circle hook regulations. To accomplish 

this, the proposed rule would provide 

additional time for recreational billfish 

tournament anglers to become more 

familiar and proficient with circle hooks 

and increase awareness among 

tournament anglers of circle hook 

conservation benefits. NMFS has 

received input from numerous anglers 

and tournament operators who 

voluntarily switched to using circle 

hooks prior to the existing tournament 

requirement who now indicate a strong 

preference for circle hooks over J-hooks 

based on conservation benefits and who 

claim a lower rate of lost fish on circle 

hooks. Based on the economic 

incentives discussed above, the input 

from experienced billfish anglers who 

have acquired expertise with circle 

hooks, and existing studies (Prince et 

al., 2002) indicating that hook type 

(circle hook vs. J-hook) is not a 

significant factor in catchability of 

Atlantic blue marlin, NMFS is confident 

that the concerns of anglers regarding 

the effectiveness of circle hooks for 

catching blue marlin and the resistance 

to using circle hooks stemming from 

preconceived ideas of circle hook 

efficacy and a lack of experience with 

circle hooks will be overcome if anglers 

are given more time to become familiar 

and proficient with them through an 

additional phase-in period. 

Fishing techniques vary by species, 

region, time of day, weather conditions, 

type of gear and bait deployed, and 

numerous other factors. There are 

significant differences in the techniques 

employed by fishermen when using Jhooks or circle hooks. Two examples are 

the technique of ‘‘setting the hook’’ with 

J-hooks and baiting techniques. With Jhooks, anglers are taught to ‘‘set the 

hook’’ at a given time by jerking hard on 

the pole and line. This action is meant 

to drive the point of the J-hook deep 

into the flesh of the fish to help ensure 

that the fish cannot escape by throwing 

the hook loose during the fight. With 

circle hooks, setting the hook is 

ineffective because of the hook shape 

and is a technique that often leads to a 

loss of the fish. Anglers must not set the 

hook, but rather wait for the fish to hook 

itself. This is a significant change in 

fishing technique for virtually all 

anglers and learning the subtleties of 

effective circle hook fishing can take a 

significant amount of practice. Baiting 

techniques or configurations can 

substantially vary between J-hooks and 

circle hooks. One example is with Jhooks, fishermen may bury the J-hook in 

the body of the bait, with only the point 

exposed through a slit in the stomach. 

With circle hooks, the hook must be free 

of obstructions and is thus sometimes 

attached to a halter made of fishing line 

above the head of a bait by rubber 

bands. Baiting techniques for circle 

hooks vary by bait species and target 

species. It may take a substantial 

amount of time for anglers to learn new 

baiting techniques effective with circle 

hooks. 

This proposed rule would suspend 

existing Atlantic billfish tournament 

circle hook regulations until January 1, 

2008, providing approximately seven 

months for anglers to learn fishing and 

baiting techniques appropriate for 

Atlantic billfishes prior to reimplementation of tournament circle 

hook requirements. As discussed above, 

NMFS is confident that the provision of 

additional time for anglers to adjust to 

circle hook fishing and baiting 

techniques will help assuage the 

concerns of anglers and lead to 

increased compliance with circle hook 

requirements. 

As of January 29, 2007, the potential 

universe of affected anglers includes: 

24,664 HMS Angling category permit 

holders; 4,140 HMS Charter/Headboat 

category permit holders, and 4,345 

General Category permit holders. All of 

the aforementioned permit holders are 

eligible to participate in registered 

Atlantic HMS tournaments. 

This proposed rule would be expected 

to have limited short-term adverse 

ecological impacts as it would 

temporarily suspend billfish tournament 

non-offset circle hook requirements for 

a limited period of time; approximately 

seven months (May 15 - December 31). 

This may result in temporary increases 

in injuries and post-release mortalities 

for species with which Atlantic billfish 

fishermen interact. Tournament catch 

data indicate that tournament 

interactions with billfish decline to 

relatively low levels during the last 

quarter of the year (October - December), 

with the exception being blue marlin in 

Puerto Rico. An examination of the 

tournament catch data indicate that the 

preferred alternative could result in 

approximately 317 additional Atlantic 

white marlin mortalities as a result of Jhook use instead of circle hook use in 

tournaments. As NMFS cannot quantify 

the proportion of anglers who may 

continue to use non-offset circle hooks 

in billfish tournaments, this estimate 

assumes all billfish tournament anglers 

will deploy J-hooks for the period May 

15, 2007 - December 31, 2007. NMFS is 

unable to quantify relative changes in 

mortality for Atlantic blue marlin or 

sailfish because of a lack of data 

regarding post-release survival of these 

species. NMFS recognizes that some 

unquantifiable proportion of billfish 

tournament anglers will continue to use 

circle hooks. As a result, the actual 

number of additional Atlantic white 

marlin mortalities resulting from J-hook 

use in tournaments may be lower than 

the estimate provided above. 

The preferred alternative that would 

suspend billfish tournament circle hook 

requirements and allow the use of Jhooks on natural baits is not anticipated 

to increase fishing effort in any 

measurable way because no decrease in 

effort was anticipated when tournament 

circle hook requirements went into 

effect. Based on the pace of 2007 

tournament registrations, no decrease 

has been identified, and in fact, 

tournament registrations for 2007 have 

been received at a near record pace. It 

is also not anticipated to result in 

increased interactions with protected 

resources. NMFS has received one 

anecdotal report of such an interaction 

in HMS recreational fisheries since late 

2002. Thus, interactions between the 

directed Atlantic billfish fishery and 

protected species appear to be extremely 

rare. Further, if the proposed rule 

results in improved long term 

compliance with circle hook 

requirements, as anticipated, it may also 

contribute to a long-term reduction in 

interactions, injuries, and mortalities of 

protected resources, and other species 

with which billfish tournament 

fishermen interact as a result of hooking 

mechanics, improved hooking location, 

and decreased damage of vital tissues 

generally associated with the use of 

circle hooks. 

Should anglers better accept and 

comply with tournament circle hook 

restrictions in the long-term as 

anticipated, NMFS believes that there 

could be an unquantifiable long-term 

ecological benefit stemming from 

increased use of circle hooks both in 

tournaments and outside of 

tournaments. The non-tournament 

ecological benefit may accrue as nontournament anglers frequently view 

tournament anglers as innovative 

leaders and seek to emulate their 

successful fishing techniques. NMFS 

believes that this pattern of nontournament anglers emulating the 

fishing techniques of successful 

tournament anglers will hold true with 

the adoption of circle hooks by 

tournament anglers as well. 

Under the proposed measure, NMFS 

anticipates minimal social or economic 

impacts. Atlantic billfish anglers likely 

already possess both circle hooks and Jhooks, and the proposed measure is not 

anticipated to affect angler participation 

in tournaments. However, there could 

be a minor temporary boost to angler’s 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 50 / Thursday, March 15, 2007 / Proposed Rules 12157 

willingness to pay and/or angler 

consumer surplus based on the 

perceived ability to more readily catch 

Atlantic billfish on J-hooks. As stated 

above, any such changes would likely 

be so small as to be not measurable. 

Long-term positive impacts on angler’s 

willingness to pay and/or angler 

consumer surplus are possible if 

increased acceptance of circle hooks in 

tournaments contributes to stock 

rebuilding and an increased abundance 

of Atlantic billfish in the future. This 

measure is proposed because it could 

lead to increased survival of released 

Atlantic billfish in the long-term by 

improving acceptance and compliance 

with recreational circle hook 

regulations, and thus contribute to 

rebuilding of these stocks. 

Classification 

This proposed rule is published under 

the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act and ATCA. NMFS has preliminarily 

determined that this action is consistent 

with section 304(b)(1) of the MagnusonStevens Act, including the national 

standards, and other applicable law. 

An EA has been prepared that 

describes the impact on the human 

environment that could result from 

implementation of the preferred 

alternative to improve post-release 

survival of Atlantic billfishes by 

improving acceptance and compliance 

with tournament circle hook 

regulations. Based on the EA, 

Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), and 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

(IRFA) under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act, and a review of the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

criteria for significance evaluated above 

(NAO 216–6 Section 6.02), no 

significant effect on the quality of the 

human environment is anticipated from 

this action. 

This proposed rule has been 

determined to be not significant for 

purposes of Executive Order 12866. In 

compliance with Section 603 of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, an Initial 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis was 

prepared for this rule. The IRFA 

analyzes the anticipated economic 

impacts of the preferred actions and any 

significant alternatives to the proposed 

rule that could minimize economic 

impacts on small entities. A summary of 

the IRFA is below. The full IRFA and 

analysis of economic and ecological 

impacts are available from NMFS (see 

ADDRESSES). 

In compliance with Section 603(b)(1) 

and (2) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 

the purpose of this proposed rulemaking 

is, consistent with the MagnusonStevens Act and ATCA, to improve 

post-release survival of Atlantic 

billfishes by improving acceptance and 

compliance with tournament circle 

hook regulations. Section 603(b)(3) 

requires Agencies to provide an estimate 

of the number of small entities to which 

the rule would apply. The proposed 

actions to modify recreational billfish 

tournament circle hook regulations 

could directly affect 24,664 HMS 

Angling category permit holders; 4,140 

HMS Charter/Headboat category permit 

holders; and 4,345 General Category 

permit holders. All of the 

aforementioned permit holders are 

eligible to participate in registered 

Atlantic HMS tournaments. Of these, 

8,475 permit holders (the combined 

number of HMS Charter/Headboat 

category permit holders and General 

Category permit holders) are considered 

small business entities according to the 

Small Business Administration’s 

standard for defining a small entity. 

This proposed rule does not contain 

any new reporting, record keeping, or 

other compliance requirements (5 U.S.C. 

603(c)(1)-(4)). Similarly, this proposed 

rule does not conflict, duplicate, or 

overlap with other relevant Federal 

rules (5 U.S.C. 603(b)(5). 

One of the requirements of an IRFA, 

under Section 603 of the Regulatory 

flexibility Act, is to describe any 

alternatives to the proposed rule that 

accomplish the stated objectives and 

that minimize any significant economic 

impacts (5 U.S.C. 603(c)). Additionally, 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 

603 (c)(1)-(4)) lists four categories for 

alternatives that must be considered. 

These categories are: (1) establishment 

of differing compliance or reporting 

requirements or timetables that take into 

account the resources available to small 

entities; (2) clarification, consolidation, 

or simplification of compliance and 

reporting requirements under the rule 

for such small entities; (3) use of 

performance rather than design 

standards; and (4) exemptions from 

coverage for small entities. 

In order to meet the objectives of this 

proposed rule, consistent with the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, ATCA, and the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA), NMFS 

cannot exempt small entities or change 

the reporting requirements only for 

small entities. Thus, there are no 

alternatives that fall under the first and 

fourth categories described above. In 

addition, none of the alternatives 

considered would result in additional 

reporting or compliance requirements 

(category two above). NMFS does not 

know of any performance or design 

standards that would satisfy the 

aforementioned objectives of this 

rulemaking while, concurrently, 

complying with the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act. 

NMFS considered three different 

alternatives to increase post-release 

survival of Atlantic billfishes by 

improving long-term compliance with 

circle hook regulations. As previously 

described, and as expanded upon 

below, NMFS has provided justification 

for the selection of the preferred 

alternative to achieve the desired 

objectives. 

Alternative 1 is the no action, or 

status quo alternative. Under current 

regulations, anglers fishing from an 

HMS permitted vessel and participating 

in an Atlantic billfish tournament must 

use only non-offset circle hooks when 

deploying natural bait or natural bait/ 

artificial lure combinations. Under 

alternative 1, there would be no change 

in the existing regulations, and as such 

no change is anticipated in the current 

baseline economic and social impacts 

associated with the status quo 

alternative. This alternative is not 

preferred because other alternatives may 

allow for a greater long-term 

conservation benefit for Atlantic billfish 

by potentially achieving better 

acceptance of, and compliance with, 

tournament circle hook requirements. 

Under alternative 2, existing Atlantic 

billfish tournament circle hook 

requirements, as described in the 

discussion of alternative 1 above, would 

be temporarily suspended through 

December 31, 2007. Current Atlantic 

billfish tournament circle hook 

requirements would be reinstated 

unchanged at 12:01 am January 1, 2008. 

This alternative would provide roughly 

seven additional months for anglers to 

become familiar and proficient with 

circle hooks as well as better understand 

their benefits. NMFS anticipates that 

tournament anglers will practice with 

circle hooks outside of tournaments 

during the suspension to gain 

proficiency with circle hooks to 

improve their chances of winning prize 

money in tournaments upon reimplementation of the circle hook 

requirement in 2008. Motivation for 

anglers to do so includes vying for top 

tournament prizes, which in the largest 

tournaments have exceeded one million 

dollars for a winning fish. Anglers who 

have not gained substantial expertise 

with circle hooks will have a 

diminished chance of catching a prize 

winning fish. 

NMFS has received input from 

numerous anglers and tournament 

operators who voluntarily switched to 

using circle hooks prior to the existing 

tournament requirement who now 

indicate a strong preference for circle 

hooks over J-hooks based on 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
12158 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 50 / Thursday, March 15, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

conservation benefits and who claim a 

lower rate of lost fish on circle hooks. 

Based on the economic incentives 

discussed above, the input from 

experienced billfish anglers who have 

acquired expertise with circle hooks, 

and existing studies (Prince et al., 2002) 

indicating that hook type (circle hook 

vs. J-hook) is not a significant factor in 

catchability of Atlantic blue marlin, 

NMFS is confident that the concerns of 

anglers regarding the effectiveness of 

circle hooks for catching blue marlin 

and the resistance to using circle hooks 

stemming from preconceived ideas of 

circle hook efficacy and a lack of 

experience with circle hooks will be 

overcome if anglers are given more time 

to become familiar and proficient with 

them through an additional phase-in 

period. NMFS believes that in the longterm, the additional time provided to 

anglers to become more familiar and 

proficient with circle hooks may lead to 

higher levels of compliance with circlehook requirements and increased use of 

circle hooks outside of tournaments 

thereby providing an increased 

conservation benefit for Atlantic billfish 

in the long-term. 

NMFS estimates that there will be few 

or no measurable social or economic 

impacts resulting from the preferred 

alternative. However, it is possible that 

the temporary suspension of billfish 

tournament circle hook requirements 

may provide for a short-term increase in 

angler’s willingness to pay based on the 

perception among many anglers that it 

is easier to catch a billfish with a Jhooks than a circle hook. Nonetheless, 

based in part on recent high levels of 

tournament registrations for 2007 

occurring under circle hook 

requirements, NMFS does not anticipate 

any measurable change in billfish 

tournament participation, increases in 

purchases of fuel or dockage, or other 

shore-side services. Should alternative 2 

result in an increased ecological benefit, 

there could be a long-term gain in 

angler’s willingness to pay if billfish 

stocks recover and interactions with 

billfish increase. 

NMFS does not anticipate that 

alternative 2 would result in additional 

expenditures to comply with the 

proposed regulations. Relative to 

expenditures that can quickly reach into 

the hundreds of thousands of dollars, or 

more, to purchase, equip, maintain, and 

fuel sportfishing vessels, hook 

expenditures are negligible. The FCHMS 

FMP identifies hook prices as ranging 

from $0.50 to $7.50 ($2.70 average) each 

for J-hooks and from $0.30 to $7.00 

($2.24 average) each for circle hooks 

(2006 dollars). Tournament anglers 

likely already possess circle hooks 

which have been required since January 

1, 2007, and which would be required 

upon reinstatement of existing 

requirements on January 1, 2008, under 

the preferred alternative. Further, 

existing regulations allow anglers to use 

J-hooks on artificial lures in 

tournaments and do not require anglers 

to utilize circle hooks outside of 

tournaments; because of this, anglers 

most likely already possess J-hooks, 

should they choose to stop using circle 

hooks in tournaments. Alternative 2 

does not mandate any particular 

terminal tackle, so anglers would be free 

to use any hook type, circle or J, 

available and which they already 

possess, which would further 

minimizing any potential compliance 

costs. 

Alternative 3, would remove Atlantic 

billfish tournament circle hook 

requirements and promote voluntary 

use of circle hooks by tournament 

anglers, and would be expected to have 

minimal impacts on businesses. Minor 

economic impacts would be incurred by 

those tournaments that choose to reprint 

tournament rules for distribution. 

Alternative 3 could result in minor 

short-term increases in angler-consumer 

surplus and/or willingness to pay, as 

anglers may perceive that their shortterm catch rates of Atlantic billfish may 

increase with the use of J-hooks. 

However, alternative 3 would not be 

expected to increase angler consumer 

surplus or willingness to pay in the 

long-term as it would result in an 

increase in post-release hooking 

mortality and thus be less likely to 

contribute to rebuilding of Atlantic 

billfish populations. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 635 

Fish, Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing 

vessels, Management. 

Dated: March 9, 2007. 

William T. Hogarth, 

Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

For reasons set out in the preamble, 

50 CFR part 635 is proposed to be 

amended as follows: 

PART 635—ATLANTIC HIGHLY 

MIGRATORY SPECIES 

1. The authority citation for part 635 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 

1801 et seq. 

2. In § 635.21, paragraph (e)(2)(iii) is 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 635.21 Gear operation and deployment 

restrictions. 

* * * * * 

(e)* * * 

(2)* * * 

(iii) After December 31, 2007, persons 

who have been issued or are required to 

be issued a permit under this part and 

who are participating in a 

‘‘tournament’’, as defined in 635.2, that 

bestows points, prizes, or awards for 

Atlantic billfish must deploy only nonoffset circle hooks when using natural 

bait or natural bait/artificial lure 

combinations, and may not deploy a Jhook or an offset circle hook in 

combination with natural bait or a 

natural bait/artificial lure combination. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 07–1216 Filed 3–12–07; 2:43 pm] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 648 

[Docket No. 061020273–7054–04; I.D. 

030107B] 

RIN 0648–AT60 

Fisheries of the Northeastern United 

States; Recreational Management 

Measures for the Summer Flounder, 

Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fisheries; 

Fishing Year 2007 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes recreational 

management measures for the 2007 

summer flounder, scup, and black sea 

bass fisheries. The implementing 

regulations for these fisheries require 

NMFS to publish recreational measures 

for the upcoming fishing year and to 

provide an opportunity for public 

comment. The intent of these measures 

is to prevent overfishing of the summer 

flounder, scup, and black sea bass 

resources. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

5 p.m. local time, on March 30, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the following methods: 

• E-mail: 

FSBrecreational2007@noaa.gov. Include 

in the subject line the following 

identifier: ‘‘Comments on 2007 Summer 

Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass 

Recreational Measures.’’

• Federal e-rulemaking portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov 

• Mail: Patricia A. Kurkul, Regional 

Administrator, NMFS, Northeast 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS