40754 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 146 / Wednesday, July 30, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

actively supported and implemented by

all the Federal and state agencies

involved in marine fisheries and

recommended that NMFS strive to

include these agencies and upgrade the

document from an NMFS to a United

States Government Implementation

Plan.

Response: NMFS has determined that,

since it is the Federal agency

responsible for marine fisheries, it is

appropriate at this time for NMFS to

take the lead in implementation of the

Code of Conduct for Responsible

Fisheries and move forward with its

Implementation Plan. At the same time,

NMFS will work closely with other

Federal, state, and local agencies on

various elements of the Implementation

Plan, as noted in the Implementation

Plan. The intent to collaborate closely

with these other government agencies,

especially with respect to fisheries

management, marine aquaculture,

international fisheries agreements, and

trade is stressed in the Implementation

Plan.

Comment: One response

recommended that the treatment of

aquaculture be more detailed,

proactively developmental, less

regulatory, and more specific about

resources that NMFS can make available

in this area.

Response: The final Implementation

Plan’s treatment of aquaculture reflects

the fact that, in April 1997, the Strategic

Plan was approved, with a significantly

modified section on marine aquaculture

development. Therefore, the revised

Implementation Plan includes more

specific information regarding the

NMFS marine aquaculture objective: To

promote robust and environmentally

sound aquaculture.

Comment: One comment was critical

of the prominence assigned to

individual transferable quotas (ITQs) as

a means to deal effectively with

overfishing and overcapitalization.

Response: NMFS believes that ITQs

are a potentially useful management

tool. However, largely in view of the fact

that the SFA mandates that the National

Academy of Sciences conduct a study of

their effectiveness, NMFS agreed to

identify ITQs as a type of limited entry

in the revised Implementation Plan.

Comment: Some comments noted that

the Implementation Plan generally dealt

more with goals than with the specific

means to reach those goals and

suggested that it should be more

forthcoming about particular action

steps.

Response: In some instances, it was

felt that the comment had some validity,

and the Implementation Plan was

modified. As examples, the treatments

of aquaculture, recreational fisheries,

and the agency’s obligations under the

Convention for International Trade in

Endangered Species and the Endangered

Species Act are stated with greater

specificity. More generally, an entirely

new section was added to the end of the

Implementation Plan, ‘‘Implementation

Steps,’’ that details the agency’s resolve

to work with all our constituencies,

mainly through the regional Fishery

Management Councils, to develop

specific implementation plans on

certain issues. On the other hand, NMFS

is presently unable to spell out precise

action steps in all areas for a variety of

reasons, including the needs to

complete Congressionally mandated

studies, and to await future

appropriation decisions.

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

Dated: July 21, 1997.

David Evans,

Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,

National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 97–20042 Filed 7–29–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 679

[Docket No. 961126334–7052–02; I.D.

072397A]

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic

Zone Off Alaska; ‘‘Other Rockfish’’

Species Group in the Western

Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Closure.

SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting retention

of the ‘‘other rockfish’’ species group in

the Western Regulatory Area of the Gulf

of Alaska (GOA). NMFS is requiring that

catch of the ‘‘other rockfish’’ species

group in this area be treated in the same

manner as prohibited species and

discarded at sea with a minimum of

injury. This action is necessary because

the ‘‘other rockfish’’ species group 1997

total allowable catch (TAC) in this area

has been reached.

DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local

time (A.l.t.), July 25, 1997, until 2400

hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mary Furuness, 907–586-7228.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

groundfish fishery in the GOA exclusive

economic zone is managed by NMFS

according to the Fishery Management

Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of

Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North

Pacific Fishery Management Council

under authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and

Management Act. Fishing by U.S.

vessels is governed by regulations

implementing the FMP at subpart H of

50 CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.

The 1997 TAC of the ‘‘other rockfish’’

species group in the Western Regulatory

Area of the GOA was established by the

Final 1997 Harvest Specifications of

Groundfish for the GOA (62 FR 8179,

February 24, 1997) as 20 metric tons

(mt). See § 679.20(c)(3)(ii).

In accordance with § 679.20(d)(2), the

Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS,

has determined that the 1997 TAC for

the ‘‘other rockfish’’ species group in

the Western Regulatory Area of the GOA

has been reached. Therefore, NMFS is

requiring that further catches of the

‘‘other rockfish’’ species group in the

Western Regulatory Area of the GOA be

treated as prohibited species in

accordance with § 679.21(b).

Classification

This action responds to the best

available information recently obtained

from the fishery. It must be

implemented immediately to prevent

overharvesting the 1997 TAC for the

‘‘other rockfish’’ species group in the

Western Regulatory Area of the GOA.

Providing an opportunity for prior

notice and comment would be

impracticable and contrary to public

interest. The fleet has already taken the

directed fishing allowance for the ‘‘other

rockfish’’ species group. Further delay

would only result in overharvest and

disrupt the FMP’s objective of allowing

incidental catch to be retained

throughout the year. NMFS finds for

good cause that the implementation of

this action cannot be delayed for 30

days. Accordingly, under 5 U.S.C.

553(d), a delay in the effective date is

hereby waived.

This action is required by § 679.20

and is exempt from review under E.O.

12866.

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

Dated: July 24, 1997.

Bruce Morehead,

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 97–20007 Filed 7–25–97; 9:24 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F