[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 50 (Thursday, March 15, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12154-12158]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-1216]



[[Page 12154]]

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

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 post-release 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 non-offset circle hook requirement. The objective of this 
proposed rulemaking is to increase post-release survival of Atlantic 
billfishes by improving long-term 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:
    <bullet> E-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#023234363a2f43543037426c6d63632c656d74"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="deeee8eae6f39f88eceb9eb0b1bfbff0b9b1a8">[email protected]</span></a> Please include the following in 
the subject line: ``Comments on Proposed Billfish Circle Hook Rule.''
    <bullet> 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''.
    <bullet> Fax: 727-824-5398.
    <bullet> 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, Mid-Atlantic, 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 (B<INF>msy</INF>) that was estimated in 2000. Current 
and provisional estimates suggest that the fishing mortality rate (F) 
has recently declined and is possibly smaller than 
F<INF>replacement</INF>, but larger than the F<INF>msy</INF> 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 B<INF>msy</INF> 
for more than two decades and the stock is overfished. The recent 
biomass of Atlantic white marlin most likely remains well below the 
B<INF>msy</INF> estimated in the 2002 assessment. Current and 
provisional estimates suggest that F is probably smaller than 
F<INF>replacement</INF> and probably also larger than the F<INF>msy</INF> 
estimated in the 2002

[[Page 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 J-hooks. Horodysky and 
Graves (2005) found that circle hooks can reduce post-release mortality 
of white marlin by 65.7 percent relative to J-hooks. They also found 
that white marlin caught on J-hooks 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 J-
hooks.
    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 J-hooks 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 non-offset circle 
hooks. The preferred alternative is intended to increase post-release 
survival of Atlantic billfishes by

[[Page 12156]]

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 J-hooks or circle hooks. Two examples are the 
technique of ``setting the hook'' with J-hooks and baiting techniques. 
With J-hooks, 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 J-hooks, 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 re-
implementation 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 J-hook 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 J-hooks 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 non-
tournament anglers frequently view tournament anglers as innovative 
leaders and seek to emulate their successful fishing techniques. NMFS 
believes that this pattern of non-tournament 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 J-hooks, and the proposed measure is not anticipated 
to affect angler participation in tournaments. However, there could be 
a minor temporary boost to angler's

[[Page 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 Magnuson-
Stevens 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 Magnuson-Stevens 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 re-implementation 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

[[Page 12158]]

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 long-term, the additional 
time provided to anglers to become more familiar and proficient with 
circle hooks may lead to higher levels of compliance with circle-hook 
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 J-hooks 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 short-term 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 Sec.  635.21, paragraph (e)(2)(iii) is revised to read as 
follows:


Sec.  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 non-
offset circle hooks when using natural bait or natural bait/artificial 
lure combinations, and may not deploy a J-hook 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


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>