33760 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1986–0008, Notice 3; 

FRL–8578–8] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Notice of intent to delete the 

Double Eagle Refinery Site from the 

National Priorities List. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 6 is issuing a 

Notice of Intent to Delete the Double 

Eagle Refinery Co. Superfund Site (Site) 

located in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 

from the National Priorities List (NPL) 

and requests public comments on this 

proposed action. The NPL, promulgated 

pursuant to section 105 of the 

Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is 

found at Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300 

which is the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and 

the State of Oklahoma, through the 

Oklahoma Department of Environmental 

Quality (ODEQ), have determined that 

all appropriate response actions under 

CERCLA, other than operation and 

maintenance and five-year reviews, 

have been completed. However, this 

deletion does not preclude future 

actions under Superfund. 

DATES: Comments concerning the 

proposed deletion of this Site from the 

NPL must be received by July 14, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–

SFUND–1989–0008, Notice 3, by one of 

the following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: walters.donn@epa.gov. 

• Fax: 1–214–665–6660. 

• Mail: Donn Walters, Community 

Involvement, U.S. EPA, Region 6 (6SF–

TS), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 

75202–2733, (214) 665–6483 or 1–800–

533–3508. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1989–

0008, Notice 3. EPA’s policy is that all 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available online at 

http://www.regulations.gov, including 

any personal information provided, 

unless the comment includes 

information claimed to be Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Do not submit 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the following information repositories: 

U.S. EPA Online Library System at 

http://www.epa.gov/natlibra/ols.htm; 

U.S. EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, 

(214) 665–6617, by appointment only 

Monday through Friday 9 a.m. to 12 

p.m. and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.; 

Ralph Ellison Library, 2000 Northeast 

23, Oklahoma City, OK 73111, (409) 

643–5979, Monday through 

Wednesday 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., Thursday 

and Friday 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., Saturday 

10 a.m. to 4 p.m.; 

Oklahoma Department of Environmental 

Quality (ODEQ), 707 North Robinson, 

Oklahoma City, OK 73101, (512) 239–

2920, Monday through Friday 8 a.m. 

to 5 p.m. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Bartolome Canellas, Remedial Project 

Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 6, 6SF–RL, 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, 

canellas.bart@epa.gov or (214) 665–

6662 or 1–800–533–3508. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of 

today’s Federal Register, we are 

publishing a direct final Notice of 

Deletion of the Double Eagle Refinery 

Co. Superfund Site without prior Notice 

of Intent to Delete because we view this 

as a noncontroversial revision and 

anticipate no adverse comment. We 

have explained our reasons for this 

deletion in the preamble to the direct 

final deletion. If we receive no adverse 

comment(s) on this Notice of Intent to 

Delete or the direct final Notice of 

Deletion, we will not take further action 

on this Notice of Intent to Delete. If we 

receive adverse comment(s), we will 

withdraw the direct final Notice of 

Deletion, and it will not take effect. We 

will, as appropriate, address all public 

comments in a subsequent final deletion 

notice based on this Notice of Intent to 

Delete. We will not institute a second 

comment period on this Notice of Intent 

to Delete. Any parties interested in 

commenting must do so at this time. 

For additional information see the 

direct final Notice of Deletion located in 

the Rules section of this Federal 

Register. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous 

waste, Hazardous substances, 

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Superfund, Water 

pollution control, Water supply. 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 

9601–9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 

1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923; 

3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193. 

Dated: May 23, 2008. 

Richard E. Greene, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. E8–13366 Filed 6–12–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 229 

[Docket No. 080204115–8135–01] 

RIN 0648–AW48 

List of Fisheries for 2009 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Department of Commerce. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33761 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The National Marine 

Fisheries Service (NMFS) publishes its 

proposed List of Fisheries (LOF) for 

2009, as required by the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). The 

proposed LOF for 2009 reflects new 

information on interactions between 

commercial fisheries and marine 

mammals. NMFS must categorize each 

commercial fishery on the LOF into one 

of three categories under the MMPA 

based upon the level of serious injury 

and mortality of marine mammals that 

occurs incidental to each fishery. The 

categorization of a fishery in the LOF 

determines whether participants in that 

fishery are subject to certain provisions 

of the MMPA, such as registration, 

observer coverage, and take reduction 

plan requirements. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

August 12, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments by anyone 

of the following methods. 

(1) Electronic Submissions: Submit all 

electronic comments through the 

Federal eRulemaking portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov (follow 

instructions for submitting comments). 

(2) Mail: Chief, Marine Mammal and 

Sea Turtle Conservation Division, Attn: 

List of Fisheries, Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West 

Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. 

Comments regarding the burden-hour 

estimates, or any other aspect of the 

collection of information requirements 

contained in this proposed rule, should 

be submitted in writing to Chief, Marine 

Mammal and Sea Turtle Conservation 

Division, Office of Protected Resources, 

NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver 

Spring, MD 20910, or to David Rostker, 

OMB, by fax to 202–395–7285 or by 

email to DavidlRostker@omb.eop.gov. 

Instructions: All comments received 

are a part of the public record and will 

generally be posted to http:// 

www.regulations.gov without change. 

All personal identifying information (for 

example, name, address, etc.) 

voluntarily submitted by the commenter 

may be publicly accessible. Do not 

submit confidential business 

information or otherwise sensitive or 

protected information. NMFS will 

accept anonymous comments. 

Attachments to electronic comments 

will be accepted in Microsoft Word, 

Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file 

formats only. 

See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for a 

listing of all Regional Offices. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Melissa Andersen, Office of Protected 

Resources, 301–713–2322; David 

Gouveia, Northeast Region, 978–281–

9328; Nancy Young, Southeast Region, 

727–824–5312; Elizabeth Petras, 

Southwest Region, 562–980–3238; Brent 

Norberg, Northwest Region, 206–526–

6733; Bridget Mansfield, Alaska Region, 

907–586–7642; Lisa Van Atta, Pacific 

Islands Region, 808–944–2257. 

Individuals who use a 

telecommunications device for the 

hearing impaired may call the Federal 

Information Relay Service at 1–800–

877–8339 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. 

Eastern time, Monday through Friday, 

excluding Federal holidays. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Availability of Published Materials 

Information regarding the LOF and 

the Marine Mammal Authorization 

Program, including registration 

procedures and forms, current and past 

LOFs, observer requirements, and 

marine mammal injury/mortality 

reporting forms and submittal 

procedures, may be obtained at: http:// 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/interactions/lof/ 

, or from any NMFS Regional Office at 

the addresses listed below. 

Regional Offices 

NMFS, Northeast Region, One 

Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 

01930–2298, Attn: Marcia Hobbs; 

NMFS, Southeast Region, 263 13th 

Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701, 

Attn: Teletha Mincey; 

NMFS, Southwest Region, 501 W. 

Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, 

CA 90802–4213, Attn: Lyle Enriquez; 

NMFS, Northwest Region, 7600 Sand 

Point Way NE, Seattle, WA 98115, Attn: 

Permits Office; 

NMFS, Alaska Region, Protected 

Resources, P.O. Box 22668, 709 West 

9th Street, Juneau, AK 99802, Attn: 

Bridget Mansfield; or 

NMFS, Pacific Islands Region, 

Protected Resources, 1601 Kapiolani 

Boulevard, Suite 1100, Honolulu, HI 

96814–4700, Attn: Lisa Van Atta. 

What is the List of Fisheries? 

Section 118 of the MMPA requires 

NMFS to place all U.S. commercial 

fisheries into one of three categories 

based on the level of incidental serious 

injury and mortality of marine mammals 

occurring in each fishery (16 U.S.C. 

1387(c)(1)). The categorization of a 

fishery in the LOF determines whether 

participants in that fishery may be 

required to comply with certain 

provisions of the MMPA, such as 

registration, observer coverage, and take 

reduction plan requirements. NMFS 

must reexamine the LOF annually, 

considering new information in the 

Marine Mammal Stock Assessment 

Reports (SAR) and other relevant 

sources, and publish in the Federal 

Register any necessary changes to the 

LOF after notice and opportunity for 

public comment (16 U.S.C. 1387 

(c)(1)(C)). 

How Does NMFS Determine in which 

Category a Fishery is Placed? 

The definitions for the fishery 

classification criteria can be found in 

the implementing regulations for section 

118 of the MMPA (50 CFR 229.2). The 

criteria are also summarized here. 

Fishery Classification Criteria 

The fishery classification criteria 

consist of a two-tiered, stock-specific 

approach that first addresses the total 

impact of all fisheries on each marine 

mammal stock, and then addresses the 

impact of individual fisheries on each 

stock. This approach is based on 

consideration of the rate, in numbers of 

animals per year, of incidental 

mortalities and serious injuries of 

marine mammals due to commercial 

fishing operations relative to the 

potential biological removal (PBR) level 

for each marine mammal stock. The 

MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1362 (20)) defines the 

PBR level as the maximum number of 

animals, not including natural 

mortalities, that may be removed from a 

marine mammal stock while allowing 

that stock to reach or maintain its 

optimum sustainable population. This 

definition can also be found in the 

implementing regulations for section 

118 of the MMPA (50 CFR 229.2). 

Tier 1: If the total annual mortality 

and serious injury of a marine mammal 

stock, across all fisheries, is less than or 

equal to 10 percent of the PBR level of 

the stock, all fisheries interacting with 

the stock would be placed in Category 

III (unless those fisheries interact with 

other stock(s) in which total annual 

mortality and serious injury is greater 

than 10 percent of PBR). Otherwise, 

these fisheries are subject to the next 

tier (Tier 2) of analysis to determine 

their classification. 

Tier 2, Category I: Annual mortality 

and serious injury of a stock in a given 

fishery is greater than or equal to 50 

percent of the PBR level. 

Tier 2, Category II: Annual mortality 

and serious injury of a stock in a given 

fishery is greater than 1 percent and less 

than 50 percent of the PBR level. 

Tier 2, Category III: Annual mortality 

and serious injury of a stock in a given 

fishery is less than or equal to 1 percent 

of the PBR level. 

While Tier 1 considers the cumulative 

fishery mortality and serious injury for 

a particular stock, Tier 2 considers 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
33762 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

fishery-specific mortality and serious 

injury for a particular stock. Additional 

details regarding how the categories 

were determined are provided in the 

preamble to the proposed rule 

implementing section 118 of the MMPA 

(60 FR 45086, August 30, 1995). 

Because fisheries are categorized on a 

per-stock basis, a fishery may qualify as 

one Category for one marine mammal 

stock and another Category for a 

different marine mammal stock. A 

fishery is typically categorized on the 

LOF at its highest level of classification 

(e.g., a fishery qualifying for Category III 

for one marine mammal stock and for 

Category II for another marine mammal 

stock will be listed under Category II). 

Other Criteria That May Be Considered 

In the absence of reliable information 

indicating the frequency of incidental 

mortality and serious injury of marine 

mammals by a commercial fishery, 

NMFS will determine whether the 

fishery qualifies for Category II by 

evaluating other factors such as fishing 

techniques, gear used, methods used to 

deter marine mammals, target species, 

seasons and areas fished, qualitative 

data from logbooks or fisher reports, 

stranding data, and the species and 

distribution of marine mammals in the 

area, or at the discretion of the Assistant 

Administrator for Fisheries (50 CFR 

229.2). 

How Does NMFS Determine which 

Species or Stocks are Included as 

Incidentally Killed or Seriously Injured 

in a Fishery? 

The LOF includes a list of marine 

mammal species or stocks incidentally 

killed or seriously injured in each 

commercial fishery, based on the level 

of mortality or serious injury in each 

fishery relative to the PBR level for each 

stock. To determine which species or 

stocks are included as incidentally 

killed or seriously injured in a fishery, 

NMFS annually reviews the information 

presented in the current SARs. The 

SARs are based upon the best available 

scientific information and provide the 

most current and inclusive information 

on each stock’s PBR level and level of 

mortality or serious injury incidental to 

commercial fishing operations. NMFS 

also reviews other sources of new 

information, including observer data, 

stranding data, and fisher self-reports. 

In the absence of reliable information 

on the level of mortality or serious 

injury of a marine mammal stock, or 

insufficient observer data, NMFS will 

determine whether a species or stock 

should be added to, or deleted from, the 

list by considering other factors such as: 

Changes in gear used, increases or 

decreases in fishing effort, increases or 

decreases in the level of observer 

coverage, and/or changes in fishery 

management that are expected to lead to 

decreases in interactions with a given 

marine mammal stock (such as a fishery 

management plan or a take reduction 

plan). NMFS will provide case-specific 

justification in the LOF for changes to 

the list of species or stocks incidentally 

killed or seriously injured. 

How Does NMFS Determine the Level of 

Observer Coverage in a Fishery? 

Data obtained from observers and the 

level of observer coverage are important 

tools in estimating the level of marine 

mammal mortality and serious injury in 

commercial fishing operations. The best 

available information on the level of 

observer coverage, and the spatial and 

temporal distribution of observed 

marine mammal interactions, is 

presented in the SARs. Starting with the 

2005 SARs, each SAR includes an 

appendix with detailed descriptions of 

each Category I and II fishery in the 

LOF, including observer coverage. The 

SARs generally do not provide detailed 

information on observer coverage in 

Category III fisheries because, under the 

MMPA, Category III fisheries are not 

required to accommodate observers 

aboard vessels due to the remote 

likelihood of mortality and serious 

injury of marine mammals. Information 

presented in the SARs’ appendices 

includes: level of observer coverage, 

target species, levels of fishing effort, 

spatial and temporal distribution of 

fishing effort, characteristics of fishing 

gear and operations, management and 

regulations, and interactions with 

marine mammals. Copies of the SARs 

are available on the NMFS Office of 

Protected Resource’s website at: http:// 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. 

Additional information on observer 

programs in commercial fisheries can be 

found on the NMFS National Observer 

Program’s website: http:// 

www.st.nmfs.gov/st4/nop/. 

How Do I Find Out if a Specific Fishery 

is in Category I, II, or III? 

This proposed rule includes three 

tables that list all U.S. commercial 

fisheries by LOF Category. Table 1 lists 

all of the fisheries in the Pacific Ocean 

(including Alaska); Table 2 lists all of 

the fisheries in the Atlantic Ocean, Gulf 

of Mexico, and Caribbean; Table 3 lists 

all U.S.-authorized fisheries on the high 

seas. A fourth table, Table 4, lists all 

fisheries managed under applicable take 

reduction plans or teams. 

Are High Seas Fisheries Included on 

the LOF? 

NMFS received public comments for 

the 2007 LOF (72 FR 14466, March 28, 

2007, comment/response 9) and the 

2008 LOF (72 FR 66048, November 27, 

2007, comment/response 5) requesting 

NMFS include high seas fisheries on the 

LOF. In response to these comments, 

NMFS analyzed the relationship 

between MMPA sections 117 and 118 

and the High Seas Fishing Compliance 

Act (HSFCA) and determined that it is 

appropriate to include U.S. fishers 

fishing on the high seas on the LOF. 

Beginning with the 2009 LOF, NMFS 

proposes to include high seas fisheries 

in Table 3 of the LOF. NMFS compiled 

information on vessels issued a HSFCA 

permit to identify fisheries operating on 

the high seas and to ensure that all high 

seas fisheries are included in the LOF, 

particularly those that do not have a 

component within waters under the 

jurisdiction of the United States (e.g., 

State waters, the U.S. territorial sea, and 

the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone 

(EEZ); hereafter referred to as ‘‘U.S. 

waters’’). 

NMFS acknowledges that many 

fisheries currently operate in both U.S. 

waters and on the high seas, creating 

some overlap between the fisheries 

listed in Tables 1 and 2 and those in 

Table 3. NMFS has designated those 

fisheries in Tables 1, 2, and 3 by a ‘‘*’’

after the fishery’s name. The number of 

HSFCA permits listed in Table 3 for the 

high seas components of these U.S. 

waters fisheries do not necessarily 

represent additional fishers that are not 

accounted for in Tables 1 and 2. Many 

fishers holding these permits also fish 

within U.S. waters and are included in 

the number of vessels and participants 

operating within those fisheries in Table 

1 and 2. For example, the fishers 

participating in the Category I ‘‘CA/OR 

thresher shark/swordfish drift gillnet 

fishery’’ may operate in both U.S. waters 

and the adjacent high seas, thus the high 

seas component of this fishery (listed in 

Table 3 as the ‘‘Pacific Highly Migratory 

Species’’ drift gillnet) is not a separate 

fishery, but an extension of the fishery 

operating within U.S. waters (listed in 

Table 1). 

How Does NMFS Authorize U.S. Vessels 

to Participate in High Seas Fisheries? 

NMFS issues high seas fishing 

permits, valid for five years, under the 

HSFCA. To fish under a high seas 

permit, a fisherman must also possess 

any required permits issued under the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(MSA) (with the exception of the South 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33763 

Pacific Tuna Treaty fisheries, the Pacific 

Tuna Fisheries (Eastern Tropical Pacific 

purse seine vessels) and the South 

Pacific Albacore Troll fishery), and any 

permits issued by NMFS to fish within 

the convention area of a Regional 

Fishery Management Organization. 

Under the current permitting system, 

however, a fisherman can obtain a high 

seas permit prior to obtaining any 

necessary MSA permits. Similarly, a 

fisherman may have a HSFCA permit 

that was issued prior to changes in 

permits issued under the MSA. 

Therefore, some fishers possess valid 

HSFCA permits without the ability to 

fish under the permit. For this reason, 

the number of HSFCA permits 

displayed in Table 3 of this proposed 

rule is likely higher than the actual 

fishing effort by U.S. vessels on the high 

seas. 

As of 2004, NMFS issues HSFCA 

permits only for high seas fisheries 

analyzed in accordance with the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act 

(ESA). There are currently seven U.S.- 

authorized high seas fisheries: Atlantic 

Highly Migratory Species Fisheries, 

Pacific Highly Migratory Species 

Fisheries, Western Pacific Pelagic 

Fisheries, South Pacific Albacore Troll 

Fishing, Pacific Tuna Fisheries, South 

Pacific Tuna Fisheries, and Antarctic 

Marine Living Resources. The LOF will 

not include the ‘‘Pacific (Eastern 

Tropical) Tuna Fisheries’’ because these 

fisheries are managed under Title III of 

the MMPA, separate from those fisheries 

subject to the LOF under section 118. 

Permits obtained prior to 2004 for 

fisheries that are no longer authorized 

by the HSFCA, but for which the 5–year 

permit is still valid, are included on the 

LOF as ‘‘unspecified.’’ The 

‘‘unspecified’’ fisheries will be removed 

from the LOF once those permits have 

expired, and the permit holder is 

required to renew the permit under one 

of the seven authorized fisheries. 

The authorized high seas fisheries are 

broad in scope and encompass multiple 

specific fisheries identified by gear type. 

Therefore, the seven U.S.-authorized 

high seas fisheries, exclusive of the 

‘‘Pacific (Eastern Tropical) Tuna 

Fisheries’’, are subdivided on the LOF 

based on gear types (e.g., trawls, 

longlines, purse seines, gillnets, etc.), as 

listed on each individual’s permit 

application, to provide more detail on 

composition of effort within these 

fisheries. 

How Will NMFS Categorize High Seas 

Fisheries on the LOF? 

As discussed in the previous sections 

of this preamble, commercial fisheries 

operating within U.S. waters are 

categorized on the LOF based on the 

level of mortality and serious injury of 

marine mammal stocks incidental to 

commercial fishing as related to the 

stock’s PBR level. PBR levels are 

calculated based on the stock’s 

abundance using data presented in the 

SARs. Section 117 of the MMPA (16 

U.S.C. 1386) requires NMFS to prepare 

SARs for marine mammal stocks 

occurring ‘‘in waters under the 

jurisdiction of the United States.’’

NMFS does not develop SARs or 

calculate PBR levels for marine mammal 

stocks on the high seas; therefore, NMFS 

does not possess the same information 

to categorize high seas fisheries as is 

used to categorize fisheries operating 

within U.S. waters. 

NMFS proposes to categorize the 

majority of high seas fisheries on the 

LOF as Category II. Category II is the 

appropriate category for new fisheries 

for which NMFS does not have adequate 

information to accurately categorize, 

unless there is reliable information to 

categorize it otherwise, or until further 

information becomes available. 

Categorizing a fishery as a Category II 

allows NMFS to place observers on 

vessels in that fishery, providing NMFS 

the opportunity to obtain information 

needed to most accurately catagorize a 

commercial fishery. For fisheries that 

operate both within U.S. waters and on 

the high seas, the fishery will be 

classified according to its status in U.S. 

waters. Therefore, for a Category I or 

Category III fishery within U.S. waters, 

the high seas component would also be 

classified as Category I or Category III, 

accordingly. For example, the ‘‘Atlantic 

Ocean, Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico large 

pelagics longline fishery’’ is a Category 

I fishery targeting highly migratory 

species within U.S. waters. Vessels in 

this fishery regularly cross into the high 

seas while fishing. Therefore, the high 

seas ‘‘Atlantic Highly Migratory 

Species’’ longline fishery would also be 

classified as Category I because it is the 

same fishery regardless of whether a 

vessel is fishing within U.S. waters or 

crosses the boundary into the high seas. 

Please see below under ‘‘Summary of 

changes to the LOF for 2009’’ for more 

details. NMFS will continue to gather 

available information on the authorized 

high seas fisheries and recategorize 

fisheries in Table 3, if necessary, as 

more information becomes available. 

How Will NMFS Determine which 

Species or Stocks to Include as 

Incidentally Killed or Seriously Injured 

in a High Seas Fishery? 

All serious injury and mortality of 

marine mammals incidental to 

commercial fishing operations, both in 

U.S. waters and on the high seas, must 

be reported to NMFS. High seas fishers 

are provided with Marine Mammal Take 

Reporting Forms to record such 

incidents. (Very few marine mammal 

takes by U.S. vessels participating in 

high seas fisheries, however, have been 

reported on these forms to date.) 

Observer programs for fisheries 

operating within U.S. waters also collect 

data on the high seas if the vessel 

should cross into high seas waters. 

Additionally, some fisheries that 

operate exclusively on the high seas 

have formal observer programs that 

provide data on interactions. In these 

cases, the MSA, NEPA, or ESA 

documents supporting the authorization 

of the seven U.S.-authorized high seas 

fisheries review observer documented 

interactions and list the marine mammal 

species taken in those fisheries. This 

information is used to identify marine 

mammals killed/injured in these 

fisheries in Table 3 on the LOF. For 

other fisheries without observer data, 

the MSA, NEPA, and ESA documents 

supporting the authorization of the 

seven U.S.-authorized high seas 

fisheries present information on marine 

mammal interactions from anecdotal 

and other reports, which do not always 

specify the marine mammal species 

involved in the interactions. Therefore, 

marine mammal species killed or 

injured in the high seas fisheries 

without observer data that are listed in 

Table 3 would be designated as 

‘‘undetermined’’ until additional 

information on marine mammal 

populations and fishery interactions on 

the high seas become available. 

For high seas fisheries with an 

associated fishery operating within U.S. 

waters, as discussed above, Table 3 

would list the same marine mammal 

species killed or injured (excluding 

coastal species that would not be found 

on the high seas) as those killed or 

injured by that fishery operating within 

U.S. waters. For example, the ‘‘CA/OR 

thresher shark/swordfish drift gillnet 

(≥14 in, mesh)’’ lists Risso’s dolphins as 

killed or injured in the fishery operating 

within U.S. waters. This species occurs 

both within U.S. waters and the 

adjacent high seas and vessels in this 

fishery often cross into the high seas to 

fish. NMFS assumes that these vessels 

pose the same risk to the species on 

both sides of the EEZ boundary. 

Therefore, NMFS will also list Risso’s 

dolphins under the high seas 

component of this fishery, the ‘‘Pacific 

Highly Migratory Species’’ drift gillnet 

fishery. NMFS will add and delete 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
33764 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

species from the LOF as additional 

information becomes available. 

Am I Required to Register Under the 

MMPA? 

Owners of vessels or gear engaging in 

a Category I or II fishery are required 

under the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1387(c)(2)), 

as described in 50 CFR 229.4, to register 

with NMFS and obtain a marine 

mammal authorization to lawfully take 

a marine mammal incidental to 

commercial fishing. Owners of vessels 

or gear engaged in a Category III fishery 

are not required to register with NMFS 

or obtain a marine mammal 

authorization. 

How Do I Register? 

NMFS has integrated the MMPA 

registration process, the Marine 

Mammal Authorization Program 

(MMAP), with existing state and Federal 

fishery license, registration, or permit 

systems for all Category I and II fisheries 

on the LOF. Participants in these 

fisheries are automatically registered 

under the MMAP and NMFS will issue 

vessel or gear owners an authorization 

certificate. Participants in these fisheries 

are not required to submit registration or 

renewal materials directly under the 

MMAP. The authorization certificate, or 

a copy, must be on board the vessel 

while it is operating in a Category I or 

II fishery, or for non-vessel fisheries, in 

the possession of the person in charge 

of the fishing operation (50 CFR 

229.4(e)). Although efforts are made to 

limit the issuance of authorization 

certificates to only those vessel or gear 

owners that participate in Category I or 

II fisheries, not all state and Federal 

permit systems distinguish between 

fisheries as classified by the LOF. 

Therefore, some vessel or gear owners in 

Category III fisheries may receive 

authorization certificates even though 

they are not required for Category III 

fisheries. Individuals fishing in Category 

I and II fisheries for which no state or 

Federal permit is required must register 

with NMFS by contacting their 

appropriate Regional Office (see 

ADDRESSES). 

How Do I Receive My Authorization 

Certificate and Injury/Mortality 

Reporting Forms? 

All vessel or gear owners will receive 

their authorization certificates and/or 

injury/mortality reporting forms via U.S. 

mail, except those vessel owners 

participating in the Northeast and 

Southeast Regional Integrated 

Registration Program. Vessel or gear 

owners participating in the Northeast 

and Southeast Regional Integrated 

Registration Program will receive their 

authorization certificates as follows: 

1. Northeast Region vessel or gear 

owners participating in Category I or II 

fisheries for which a state or Federal 

permit is required may receive their 

authorization certificate and/or injury/ 

mortality reporting form by contacting 

the Northeast Regional Office at 978–

281–9300 x6505 or by visiting the 

Northeast Regional Office Web site 

(http://www.nero.noaa.gov/protlres/) 

and following instructions for printing 

the necessary documents. 

2. Southeast Region vessel or gear 

owners participating in Category I or II 

fisheries for which a Federal permit is 

required, as well as fisheries permitted 

by the states of North Carolina, South 

Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, 

Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas may 

receive their authorization certificate 

and/or injury/mortality reporting form 

by contacting the Southeast Regional 

Office at 727–824–5312 or by visiting 

the Southeast Regional Office Web site 

(http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pr.htm) 

and following instructions for printing 

the necessary documents. 

How Do I Renew My Registration 

Under the MMPA? 

Vessel or gear owners that participate 

in Pacific Islands, Southwest, or Alaska 

regional fisheries are automatically 

renewed and should receive an 

authorization certificate by January 1 of 

each new year. Vessel or gear owners in 

Washington and Oregon fisheries 

receive authorization with each 

renewed state fishing license, the timing 

of which varies based on target species. 

Vessel or gear owners who participate in 

these regions and have not received 

authorization certificates by January 1 or 

with renewed fishing licenses must 

contact the appropriate NMFS Regional 

Office (see ADDRESSES). 

Vessel or gear owners participating in 

Southeast or Northeast regional fisheries 

may receive their authorization 

certificates by calling the relevant 

NMFS Regional Office or visiting the 

relevant NMFS Regional Office Web site 

(see How Do I Receive My 

Authorization Certificate and Injury/ 

Mortality Reporting Forms). 

Am I Required to Submit Reports When 

I Injure or Kill a Marine Mammal 

During the Course of Commercial 

Fishing Operations? 

In accordance with the MMPA (16 

U.S.C. 1387(e)) and 50 CFR 229.6, any 

vessel owner or operator, or gear owner 

or operator (in the case of non-vessel 

fisheries), participating in a Category I, 

II, or III fishery must report to NMFS all 

incidental injuries and mortalities of 

marine mammals that occur during 

commercial fishing operations. ‘‘Injury’’

is defined in 50 CFR 229.2 as a wound 

or other physical harm. In addition, any 

animal that ingests fishing gear or any 

animal that is released with fishing gear 

entangling, trailing, or perforating any 

part of the body is considered injured, 

regardless of the presence of any wound 

or other evidence of injury, and must be 

reported. Injury/mortality reporting 

forms and instructions for submitting 

forms to NMFS can be downloaded 

from: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/ 

pdfs/interactions/ 

mmaplreportinglform.pdf. Reporting 

requirements and procedures can be 

found in 50 CFR 229.6. 

Am I Required to Take an Observer 

Aboard My Vessel? 

Fishers participating in a Category I or 

II fishery are required to accommodate 

an observer aboard vessel(s) upon 

request. Observer requirements can be 

found in 50 CFR 229.7. 

Am I Required to Comply With Any 

Take Reduction Plan Regulations? 

Fishers participating in a Category I or 

II fishery are required to comply with 

any applicable take reduction plans. 

Refer to Table 4 in this document for a 

list of fisheries affected by take 

reduction teams and plans. Take 

reduction plan regulations can be found 

at 50 CFR 229.30–35. 

Sources of Information Reviewed for 

the Proposed 2009 LOF 

NMFS reviewed the marine mammal 

incidental serious injury and mortality 

information presented in the SARs for 

all observed fisheries to determine 

whether changes in fishery 

classification were warranted. NMFS’

SARs are based on the best scientific 

information available at the time of 

preparation, including the level of 

serious injury and mortality of marine 

mammals that occurs incidental to 

commercial fisheries and the PBR levels 

of marine mammal stocks. The 

information contained in the SARs is 

reviewed by regional Scientific Review 

Groups (SRGs) representing Alaska, the 

Pacific (including Hawaii), and the U.S. 

Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean. 

The SRGs were created by the MMPA to 

review the science that informs the 

SARs, and to advise NMFS on 

population status and trends, stock 

structure, uncertainties in the science, 

research needs, and other issues. 

NMFS also reviewed other sources of 

new information, including marine 

mammal stranding data, observer 

program data, fisher self-reports, fishery 

management plans, ESA documents, 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33765 

and other information that may not be 

included in the SARs. 

The proposed LOF for 2009 was 

based, among other things, on 

information provided in the NEPA and 

ESA documents analyzing authorized 

high seas fisheries, and the final SARs 

for 1996 (63 FR 60, January 2, 1998), the 

final SARs for 2001 (67 FR 10671, 

March 8, 2002), the final SARs for 2002 

(68 FR 17920, April 14, 2003), the final 

SARs for 2003 (69 FR 54262, September 

8, 2004), the final SARs for 2004 (70 FR 

35397, June 20, 2005), the final SARs for 

2005 (71 FR 26340, May 4, 2006), the 

final SARs for 2006 (72 FR 12774, 

March 19, 2007), the final SARs for 2007 

(73 FR 21111, April 18, 2008), and the 

draft SARs for 2008. All the SARs are 

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

pr/sars/. 

Fishery Descriptions 

NMFS described each Category I and 

II fishery on the LOF for 2008 in the 

final 2008 LOF (72 FR 66048, November 

27, 2007). Below, NMFS briefly 

describes each fishery listed as a 

Category I or II fishery appearing on the 

LOF for the first time. Additional details 

for Category I and II fisheries operating 

in U.S. waters are included in the SARs, 

Fishery Management Plans (FMPs), and 

Take Reduction Plans (TRPs), or 

through state agencies. Additional 

details for Category I and II fisheries 

operating on the high seas are included 

in various FMPs, NEPA, or ESA 

documents. 

High Seas Atlantic Highly Migratory 

Species Fisheries 

The Atlantic Highly Migratory 

Species (HMS) high seas fisheries are 

similar to fisheries targeting Atlantic 

HMS within U.S. waters, but primarily 

use pelagic longline gear. Atlantic 

swordfish and bigeye tuna are the 

primary target species on the high seas, 

with Atlantic yellowfin, albacore and 

skipjack tunas, and pelagic and some 

deepwater sharks also caught and 

retained for sale. Bluefin tuna are caught 

incidental to pelagic longline 

operations, both on the high seas and 

within U.S. waters, and may be retained 

subject to specific target catch 

requirements. 

Within U.S. waters, HMS commercial 

fishers use several gear types. 

Authorized gear for tuna include 

speargun (except when targeting 

bluefin), rod and reel, handlines, bandit 

gear, harpoon, pelagic longline, trap 

(pound net and fish weir), and purse 

seine. Purse seines used to target bluefin 

tuna must have a mesh size of less than 

or equal to 4.5 in (11.4 cm) and at least 

24–count thread throughout the net. 

Only rod and reel gear may be used to 

target billfish and commercial 

possession of Atlantic billfish is 

prohibited. Authorized gear for sharks 

includes rod and reel, handline, bandit 

gear, longline, and gillnet. Gillnets must 

be less than or equal to 2.5 km (1.6 mi) 

in length. Authorized gear for swordfish 

includes handline, handgear (including 

buoy gear), and longline for north 

Atlantic swordfish, and longline for 

south Atlantic swordfish. North Atlantic 

swordfish incidentally taken in squid 

trawls may be retained. The fishery 

management area for Atlantic HMS 

includes U.S. waters and the adjacent 

high seas. 

Atlantic HMS are managed under 

regulations implementing the 

Consolidated Atlantic HMS FMP (2006), 

under the authority of the MSA and the 

Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (ATCA). 

Regulations issued under the MSA 

address the target fish species, as well 

as bycatch of species protected by the 

ESA, MMPA, and Migratory Bird Treaty 

Act. The MSA regulations (50 CFR part 

635) require vessel owners and 

operators targeting Atlantic HMS with 

longline or gillnet gear to complete 

protected species (sea turtles and 

marine mammals) safe handling, 

release, and identification workshops. 

The regulations also require shark 

dealers to complete an Atlantic shark 

identification workshop. 

The high seas components of Atlantic 

HMS fisheries are extensions of various 

Category I II, and III fisheries operating 

in U.S. waters (Tables 1 and 2). The 

longline fishery targeting Atlantic HMS 

in U.S. waters is the Category I, 

‘‘Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean, Gulf of 

Mexico large pelagics longline fishery.’’

NMFS is currently developing 

regulations to implement the Pelagic 

Longline Take Reduction Plan (PLTRP) 

for this fishery. The gillnet fishery 

targeting Atlantic HMS in U.S. waters is 

the Category II, ‘‘Southeastern U.S. 

Atlantic shark gillnet’’ fishery. This 

fishery is subject to the Bottlenose 

Dolphin TRP (BDTRP) (50 CFR 229.35), 

for coastal gillnetting only, and the 

Atlantic Large Whale TRP (ALWTRP) 

(50 CFR 229.32). The purse seine fishery 

targeting Atlantic HMS in U.S. waters is 

the Category III, ‘‘Atlantic tuna purse 

seine fishery.’’

For more information on the Atlantic 

HMS fisheries and details on the 

management and regulations of these 

fisheries, please see the Consolidated 

Atlantic HMS FMP (http:// 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/ 

hmsdocumentlfiles/FMPs.htm) and the 

regulations for Atlantic HMS fisheries in 

50 CFR part 635. 

High Seas Pacific Highly Migratory 

Species Fisheries 

The Pacific HMS high seas fisheries 

are virtually the same as fisheries 

targeting Pacific HMS within U.S. 

waters. Pacific HMS fisheries target 

tunas (North Pacific albacore, yellowfin, 

bigeye, skipjack, and bluefin), billfish 

(striped marlin), sharks (common 

thresher, pelagic thresher, bigeye 

thresher, shortfin mako, and blue), 

swordfish, and dorado (i.e., dolphinfish) 

using several gear types. Authorized 

gear include surface hook-and-line 

(including troll, rod and reel, handline, 

albacore jig, and live bait), harpoon 

(non-mechanical), drift gillnet (14 in 

(35.5 cm) stretch mesh or greater), 

pelagic longline, and purse seine 

(including ring, drum, and lampara 

nets). Pacific HMS incidentally caught 

by unauthorized gear may be landed 

under certain circumstances. Species 

prohibited in Pacific HMS fisheries 

include any salmon species, great white 

shark, basking shark, megamouth shark, 

and Pacific halibut. The fishery 

management area for Pacific HMS 

covers U.S. waters from the U.S.-Mexico 

border to the U.S.- Canada border, and 

the adjacent high seas. 

Pacific HMS are managed under 

regulations implementing the FMP for 

U.S. West Coast Fisheries for HMS, 

adopted in April 2004. The MSA 

regulations (50 CFR part 660, subpart K) 

address the target fish species as well as 

species protected by the ESA and 

MMPA. The MSA regulations lay out 

multiple restrictions for fishing for 

Pacific HMS with longline gear. Vessels 

fishing longline gear may not target 

HMS within U.S. waters. Targeting 

swordfish with shallow set longline gear 

or possessing a light stick on board the 

vessel west of 150° W. long. and north 

of the equator is prohibited. From April 

1–May 31, longline gear is prohibited in 

the area bounded on the south by the 

equator, north by 15° N. lat., east by 

145° W. long., and west by 180° long. 

Longline vessels must have a valid 

protected species workshop certificate 

onboard, along with safe handling and 

release tools for sea turtles and seabirds. 

Along with the MSA requirements, 

including area closures for marine 

mammal and sea turtle protection, drift 

gillnet fishing for Pacific HMS is 

managed under the MMPA through the 

Pacific Offshore Cetacean Take 

Reduction Plan (POCTRP) (50 CFR 

229.31). The POCTRP regulations 

require multiple gear modifications 

during the May 1–January 31 fishing 

season, including a requirement that all 

extenders (buoy lines) be at least 6 

fathoms (36 ft; 10.9 m) in length, all 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
33766 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

floatlines be fished at a minimum of 36 

ft (10.9 m) below the surface, all nets 

have operational pingers to a water 

depth of a least 100 fathoms (600 ft; 

182.9 m). Also, all drift gillnet vessel 

operators must attend skipper education 

workshops before each fishing season. 

The high seas components of Pacific 

HMS fisheries are extensions of various 

Category I, II, and III fisheries operating 

within U.S. waters (Tables 1 and 2). The 

drift gillnet fishery targeting Pacific 

HMS, the Category I ‘‘CA/OR thresher 

shark/swordfish drift gillnet (≥14in. 

mesh) fishery,’’ is managed under the 

POCTRP. The purse seine fishery 

targeting Pacific HMS within U.S. 

waters is the Category II ‘‘CA tuna purse 

seine fishery.’’ While longline fishing 

for Pacific HMS is prohibited within 

U.S. waters, the LOF includes the 

Category II ‘‘CA pelagic longline 

fishery’’ to account for swordfish caught 

outside U.S. waters, but landed into the 

U.S. West coast. The troll fishery 

targeting Pacific HMS is an extension of 

U.S. waters Category III ‘‘AK North 

Pacific halibut, AK bottom fish, WA/ 

OR/CA albacore, groundfish, bottom 

fish, CA halibut non-salmonid troll 

fisheries.’’

For more information on the Pacific 

HMS fisheries and details on the 

management and regulations of these 

fisheries, please see the Pacific HMS 

FMP (http://www.pcouncil.org/hms/ 

hmsfmp.html#final), the Pacific HMS 

FMP Biological Opinion (BiOp) (http:// 

swr.nmfs.noaa.gov/ 

HMSlFMPlOpinionlFinal.pdf), and 

the regulations for Pacific HMS in 50 

CFR part 660, subpart K. 

High Seas Western Pacific Pelagic 

Fisheries 

The Western Pacific pelagic high seas 

fisheries are virtually the same as 

fisheries targeting Wester Pacific pelagic 

species in U.S. waters. Western Pacific 

pelagic fisheries target tunas (albacore, 

bigeye, yellowfin, bluefin, and skipjack), 

billfish (Indo-Pacific blue marlin, black 

marlin, striped marlin, shortbill 

spearfish), sharks (pelagic thresher, 

bigeye thresher, common thresher, silky, 

oceanic whitetip, blue, shortfin mako, 

longfin mako, and salmon), swordfish, 

sailfish, wahoo, kawakawa, moonfish, 

pomfret, oilfish, and other tuna 

relatives. The main gears used to fish in 

the Western Pacific Pelagic fisheries are 

pelagic longline, troll, and handline. 

The Western Pacific Pelagic fisheries 

take place in the Western Pacific 

Fishery Management Area (including 

waters shoreward of the EEZ boundary 

around American Samoa, Guam, 

Hawaii, the Northern Mariana Islands, 

Midway, Johnston and Palmyra Atolls, 

Kingman Reef, and Wake, Jarvis, Baker, 

and Howland Islands) and the adjacent 

high seas waters. 

Western Pacific Pelagic fisheries are 

managed under regulations 

implementing the FMP for the Pelagic 

Fisheries of the Western Pacific Region 

developed by the Western Pacific 

Fishery Management Council (WPFMC). 

The MSA regulations (50 CFR part 665, 

subpart C) address target fish species as 

well as bycatch of species protected 

under the ESA, MMPA, and Migratory 

Bird Treaty Act. The MSA regulations 

outline restrictions on effort, observer 

coverage requirements, longline fishing 

prohibited areas, sea turtle and seabird 

bycatch mitigation measures, annual 

fleetwide limits on interactions with 

leatherback and loggerhead sea turtles, 

and a requirement for owners of 

longline vessels to participate in annual 

protected species workshops. Drift 

gillnet fishing in the fishery 

management area is prohibited, except 

where authorized by an experimental 

fishery permit. 

The high seas components of the 

Western Pacific Pelagic longline fishery 

are extensions of the Category I ‘‘HI 

deep-set (tuna target) longline/set line 

fishery’’ and the Category II ‘‘HI 

shallow-set (swordfish target) longline/ 

set line fishery’’ (proposed to be split 

into two fisheries from the ‘‘HI 

swordfish, tuna, billfish, mahi mahi, 

wahoo, oceanic sharks longline/set line 

fishery’’ in this proposed rule) operating 

within U.S. waters. All requirements for 

vessels fishing longline gear within U.S. 

waters remain effective in high seas 

waters (as described in the above 

paragraph). 

For more information on the Western 

Pacific Pelagic fisheries and details on 

the management and regulations of 

these fisheries, please see the Western 

Pacific Pelagic FMP BiOp (http:// 

www.fpir.noaa.gov/Library/PUBDOCs/), 

the Western Pacific Pelagic FMP 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

(http://www.fpir.noaa.gov/Library/ 

PUBDOCs/), and the regulations for 

Western Pacific Pelagic fisheries in 50 

CFR 665, Subpart C. 

High Seas South Pacific Albacore Troll 

Fisheries 

The South Pacific albacore troll high 

seas fisheries target South Pacific 

albacore using mostly longline or troll 

gear in waters solely outside of any 

nation’s EEZ. Longline gear, set with 

1,000 or more hooks suspended from a 

horizontally buoyed mainline several 

miles long, accounts for 86 percent of 

the catch. Trolling vessels (including 

jigs or live bait) attach 10–20 fishing 

lines of various lengths to the vessel’s 

outriggers on a slow-moving boat (5–6 

knots). The total U.S. catch of South 

Pacific albacore has accounted for less 

than 5 percent of the total international 

catch in recent years. 

U.S. vessels fish in the South Pacific 

albacore fishery from November/ 

December-April. Many vessels then 

participate in the larger North Pacific 

albacore fishery from April-October. 

South Pacific albacore fishing occurs 

outside any nation’s EEZ in an area 

bounded by approximately 110° W. 

long. and 180° W. long., and by 25° S. 

lat. and 45° S. lat. Most U.S. troll vessels 

depart from the U.S. West Coast or 

Hawaii and unload in American Samoa, 

Fiji, or Tahiti. 

The South Pacific albacore troll 

fishery is not managed by regulations 

implementing any FMP. The WPFMC 

has concluded, and NMFS agrees, that 

conservation and management measures 

for this fishery are not warranted as the 

stock in not overfished and there are no 

known protected species interactions. 

Sea turtles and marine mammals do not 

prey on the bait species used by these 

vessels and vessels are typically slowmoving and would therefore likely able 

to avoid a collision with a whale. As of 

2001, the HSFCA requires U.S. albacore 

troll vessel operators to file logbooks 

with NMFS for fishing in the South 

Pacific. 

For more information on the South 

Pacific albacore troll fishery, please see 

the 2004 U.S. South Pacific albacore 

troll fishery Environmental Assessment 

(EA) (http://www.fpir.noaa.gov/Library/ 

PUBDOCs/). There are no regulations 

governing these fisheries. 

High Seas South Pacific Tuna Fisheries 

The South Pacific Tuna Treaty (SPTT) 

manages access of U.S. purse seine 

vessels targeting tuna (skipjack and 

yellowfin) within the EEZs of 16 Pacific 

Island Countries in the Western and 

Central Pacific Ocean that are party to 

the Treaty. The SPTT Area includes the 

waters from north of 60° S. lat. and east 

of 90° E. long. subject to the fishing 

jurisdiction of Pacific Island parties, and 

all waters within rhumb lines 

connecting multiple geographic 

coordinates, and north along the 152° E. 

long. out to Australia’s EEZ border. The 

Treaty Area includes portions of waters 

in the EEZs of most of the Pacific Island 

Countries included in the Treaty. The 

SPTT is intended to apply only to U.S. 

purse seine vessels; however, provisions 

have been made to accommodate high 

seas fishing by U.S. albacore tuna troll 

and U.S. longline vessels within the 

Treaty Area. Both a SPTT and a HSFCA 

permit are required to fish in SPTT 

waters. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33767 

Under the SPTT, observers are 

recruited from the Pacific Island 

Countries and then trained and 

deployed by the Forum Fisheries 

Agency (FFA) in Honiara in the 

Solomon Islands. Many of the FFA 

deployed observers serve in and have 

experience from domestic observer 

programs active in each observer’s 

respective country. The target observer 

level coverage is 20 percent of U.S. 

purse seine vessels, the full costs of 

which are the responsibility of the U.S. 

purse seine vessel owners. Observers 

collect a range of data, including a form 

for recording information on 

interactions with seabirds, sea turtles, 

marine mammals, and sharks. Fishery 

observers undergo training in species 

identification for target and bycatch 

species; however, marine mammal 

species identification has only recently 

been placed as a priority matter for 

reporting. Observer data from January 

1997–June 2002 show that 11 sets 

resulted in interactions with marine 

mammals. However, the data indicate 

only that the animals were 

‘‘unidentified whales, marine mammals, 

or dolphin/porpoise.’’ The International 

Fisheries Division in the NMFS Pacific 

Islands Region is working with the FFA 

observer program to better train 

observers in marine mammal 

identification. 

For additional information on the 

South Pacific Tuna Treaty and details 

on the management and regulations of 

these fisheries, see the South Pacific 

Tuna Treaty EA (http:// 

www.fpir.noaa.gov/Library/PUBDOCs/) 

and the regulations for the South Pacific 

Tuna Treaty in 50 CFR 300, subpart D. 

High Seas Antarctic Living Marine 

Resources Fisheries 

The Commission for the Conservation 

of Antarctic Marine Living Resources 

(Convention or CCAMLR) conserves and 

manages Antarctic marine living 

resources (AMLR) in waters 

surrounding Antarctica. The Convention 

applies to AMLR in the waters from 60° 

S. lat. south to the Antarctic 

Convergence, with limited exceptions, 

covering 32.9 million square kilometers. 

Both an AMLR and a HSFCA permit are 

required to fish in CCAMLR waters. 

There are multiple gear types used to 

target multiple species in the 

Convention Area. Gear types include 

pelagic and bottom trawl, trap/pot, 

gillnet, and longline. Target species 

include krill and Antarctic finfish 

(rockcod species, toothfish species, 

icefish species, silverfish, cod, and 

lanternfish), mollusks, and crustaceans. 

CCAMLR Conservation Measures 

require or recommend several measures 

for fisheries in the Convention area. 

Mandatory measures include 

requirements for reporting; operating a 

Vessel Monitoring System while in the 

Convention area; longline gear 

modifications to reduce seabird 

interactions; mesh sizes restrictions for 

trawl gear. Recommendations include 

seal bycatch mitigation measures, such 

as a seal excluder device. 

CCAMLR has identified two types of 

scientifically trained observers to collect 

information required in CCAMLRmanaged fisheries, including 

information on entanglements and 

incidental mortality of seabirds and 

marine mammals. The first type of 

observer is a ‘‘national observer,≥such 

as a U.S. observer placed on a U.S. 

vessel by the U.S. Government. The 

second type of observer is an 

‘‘international observer,’’ or an observer 

operating in accordance with bilateral 

arrangements between the Nation whose 

vessel is fishing and the nation 

providing the observer. CCAMLR 

Conservation measures require all 

fishing vessels in the Convention area 

(except vessels fishing for krill) to carry 

at least one international observer and, 

where possible, an additional observer. 

The United States requires all of its 

vessels fishing in the CCAMLR area, for 

any target species and with any gear, to 

carry an observer. In certain exploratory 

toothfish fisheries, the vessel must carry 

two observers, with at least one being an 

international observer. 

For additional information on the 

fishing activities in the CCAMLR region 

and details on the management and 

regulations of these fisheries, see the 

CCAMLR Programmatic EIS http:// 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/domeslfish/ 

newsloflnote.htm#ccamlr), the 

CCAMLR Schedule of Conservation 

Measures in Force (http:// 

www.ccamlr.org), and the regulations 

for the harvesting of AMLR in 50 CFR 

300, subpart D. 

CA spot prawn pot 

The ‘‘CA spot prawn pot fishery’’

(proposed to be listed as a Category II 

in this rule) operates from Central CA 

southward to the Mexican border. 

Strings of 10–50 oblong cylindrical traps 

are commonly fished at depths usually 

greater than 100 fathoms. This is a 

limited access fishery managed by the 

state of CA. A tiered permit system has 

been implemented allowing a maximum 

of 150 or 500 traps to be fished at one 

time depending on the fishing history 

associated with the permit. A maximum 

of 300 traps may be located within state 

waters (inside 3 miles), regardless of 

permit tier. North of Point Arguello, the 

season is open from August 1–April 30. 

South of Point Arguello, the season runs 

from February 1–October 30. 

CA Dungeness crab pot 

The ‘‘CA Dungeness crab pot fishery’’

(proposed to be listed as a Category II 

in this rule) operates along the central 

and northern coastal waters of CA in 

depths typically from 10–40 fathoms. 

The cylindrical or rectangular pots used 

in the fishery are buoyed, or fished, 

individually, although fishing strings of 

multiple traps are allowed in the central 

region. There is no limit on the number 

of traps which may operated by a 

fisherman at one time. This is a limited 

access fishery managed in part by the 

State of California and the Tri-State 

Committee agreement for Dungeness 

crab, which also includes the states of 

OR and WA. The fishery is divided into 

two management areas. The central 

region (south of the Mendocino-Sonoma 

county line) is open November 15–June 

30. The northern region (north of the 

Mendocino-Sonoma county line) can 

open on December 1, but may be 

delayed by the California Department of 

Fish and Game (CDFG) based on the 

condition of market crabs, and 

continues until July 15. 

OR Dungeness crab pot 

The ‘‘OR Dungeness crab pot fishery’’

(proposed to be listed as a Category II 

in this rule) operates along the coastal 

waters of OR in depths typically from 

10–40 fathoms. This is a limited access 

fishery managed by the OR Department 

of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) in 

conjunction with the Tri-State 

Committee agreement for Dungeness 

crab, which also includes the states of 

CA and WA. The Dungeness crab season 

runs from December 1–August 14, 

although the state may delay the 

opening based on the condition of the 

crabs. Additionally, the state may close 

the season after the end of May if catch 

rates are still high to protect molting 

crab. A three-tiered pot limitation 

system has been implemented allowing 

a maximum 200, 300, or 500 pots to be 

fished at once depending on previous 

landing history. Logbook reporting of 

effort and catch data to the state is now 

required. The cylindrical or rectangular 

pots used in the fishery are fished 

individually by law. 

WA/OR/CA sablefish pot 

The ‘‘CA/OR/WA sablefish pot 

fishery’’ (proposed to be listed as a 

Category II in this rule) sets gear in 

waters past the 100 fathom curve off the 

West coast of the U.S. In CA, gear is set 

outside 150 fathoms, with an average 

depth of 190 fathoms. There are two 

separate trap fisheries, open access and 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
33768 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

limited entry, and both have quotas. 

Open access fishers will usually fish 1 

to 8 strings of 3–4 pots, each with a float 

line and buoy stick. The gear sometimes 

soaks for long periods. Fishers in the 

limited entry fishery will normally fish 

20–30 pot strings. The fishery operates 

year round and effort varies from 

southern CA to the Canadian border. 

This fishery is managed under 

regulations implementing the West 

Coast Groundfish FMP developed by 

Pacific Fishery Management Council. 

Access to the limited entry fishery is 

granted under a limited entry permit 

system, in addition to gear 

endorsements required by the 

individual states. Open access privileges 

are currently available to any fisherman 

with the requisite state gear 

endorsement, but involve much more 

restrictive limitations in catch quotas 

and additional area closures than the 

primary limited entry permit. Open 

access quotas vary based upon the area 

being fished. The limited entry fishery 

is open from April 1–October 31, while 

open access is available year-round. 

Limited entry permits are tiered based 

on the annual cumulative landings 

allowed by each permit. Permits are 

transferable, but the tier category 

remains fixed. Up to three limited entry 

permits may be stacked on a single 

vessel. As with most pot gear fished out 

in deeper waters, sablefish traps are set 

in strings of multiple traps. 

Summary of Changes to the LOF for 

2009 

The following summarizes changes to 

the LOF for 2009 in fishery 

classification, fisheries listed in the 

LOF, the number of participants in a 

particular fishery, and the species and/ 

or stocks that are incidentally killed or 

seriously injured in a particular fishery. 

The classifications and definitions of 

U.S. commercial fisheries for 2009 are 

identical to those provided in the LOF 

for 2008 with the proposed changes 

discussed below. State abbreviations 

used in the following paragraphs 

include: AK (Alaska), AL (Alabama), CA 

(California), DE (Delaware), FL (Florida), 

GA (Georgia), HI (Hawaii), LA 

(Louisiana), MA (Massachusetts), ME 

(Maine), MS (Mississippi), NC (North 

Carolina), NJ (New Jersey), NY (New 

York), OR (Oregon), RI (Rhode Island), 

SC (South Carolina), TX (Texas), VA 

(Virginia), and WA (Washington). 

Commercial Fisheries on the High Seas 

NMFS proposes to add high seas 

fisheries to the LOF, beginning with the 

2009 LOF. NMFS is soliciting public 

comments on the proposed process for 

including high seas fisheries on the LOF 

(presented in the preamble under the 

section ‘‘Are high seas fisheries 

included on the LOF?’’), the fishery 

descriptions for the authorized high seas 

fisheries (presented in the preamble 

under the section ‘‘Fishery 

descriptions’’), and the proposed fishery 

additions described below. 

Addition of Fisheries to the LOF 

High Seas Atlantic Highly Migratory 

Species Fisheries 

NMFS proposes to add the U.S.- 

authorized high seas Atlantic HMS 

fisheries to the LOF. The Atlantic HMS 

high seas fisheries include all fisheries 

using multiple gear types to target 

Atlantic HMS (described in the ‘‘Fishery 

Descriptions’’ section in the preamble of 

this proposed rule). Due to the lack of 

specific information on marine mammal 

abundance and marine mammal-fishery 

interactions on the high seas, NMFS 

proposes to categorize all fisheries 

targeting Atlantic HMS on the high seas 

with gear other than longline and purse 

seine (e.g., gillnet, trawl, handline, and 

troll gear) as Category II. Category II is 

the appropriate classification for new 

fisheries on the LOF for which there is 

little information on which to base 

classification. NMFS proposes to 

categorize the longline component of 

this fishery as a Category I because it is 

an extension of the Category I ‘‘Atlantic 

Ocean, Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico large 

pelagics longline’’ fishery operating 

within U.S. waters. The gear used, 

fishing methods, and target species are 

the same, and longline vessels targeting 

Atlantic HMS regularly cross into the 

high seas, and back, when fishing. 

NMFS proposes to categorize the purse 

seine component of this fishery as a 

Category III because it is an extension of 

the Category III ‘‘U.S. Atlantic tuna 

purse seine fishery’’ operating within 

U.S. waters. There are 88 valid HSFCA 

permits for fishers targeting Atlantic 

HMS on the high seas with all gear 

types. As noted in the preamble, the 

number of valid permits may not 

accurately account for annual fishing 

effort on the high seas. Please see the 

discussion on the HSFCA permitting 

process under the section ‘‘Are high 

seas fisheries included on the LOF?’’ in 

the preamble of this proposed rule for 

additional details. 

Many marine mammal species 

interacting with Atlantic HMS fisheries 

operating in U.S. waters also inhabit the 

high seas. Observer coverage for the 

Category I pelagic longline fishery 

extends into the high seas, so 

information is available on which 

marine mammal stocks are incidentally 

taken by this fishery on the high seas. 

For this reason, NMFS proposes to list 

the marine mammal species that have 

been documented killed or injured in 

the Category I high seas longline 

component of Atlantic HMS fisheries in 

Table 3. 

Similar observer data are not available 

for the high seas Atlantic HMS drift 

gillnet fishery, which is an extension of 

the Category II ‘‘Southeastern U.S. 

Atlantic shark gillnet fishery’’; or the 

purse seine fishery, which is an 

extension of the Category III ‘‘Atlantic 

tuna purse seine fishery.’’ For those 

fisheries where no interaction data 

(observer or other data) exist on the high 

seas, NMFS proposes to list all the noncoastal marine mammal species/stocks 

killed or injured in the portion of the 

fishery that operates in U.S. waters as 

injured or killed in the same fishery 

operating on the high seas in Table 3. 

Specifically, NMFS proposes to add all 

non-coastal marine mammal species 

killed or injured in the Category II 

‘‘Southeastern U.S. Atlantic shark 

gillnet fishery’’ (operating within U.S. 

waters) as injured or killed in the 

Category II drift gillnet component of 

the Atlantic HMS fisheries (operating on 

the high seas). Also, NMFS proposes to 

list all non-coastal marine mammal 

species killed or injured in the Category 

III purse seine component of the 

Atlantic HMS fisheries (operating 

within U.S. waters) as injured or killed 

in the Category III ‘‘Atlantic tuna purse 

seine fishery’’ (operating on the high 

seas). 

There is little information on 

interactions between marine mammals 

and fishing gear used to target Atlantic 

HMS on the high seas, other than that 

listed in the previous paragraphs. Given 

the lack of data on marine mammal 

abundance and interactions with high 

seas Atlantic HMS fisheries (excluding 

the longline, drift gillnet, and purse 

seine components), NMFS proposes to 

list the marine mammal species killed 

or injured in these fisheries as 

‘‘undetermined’’ in Table 3. 

High Seas Pacific Highly Migratory 

Species Fisheries 

NMFS proposes to add the U.S.- 

authorized high seas Pacific HMS 

fisheries to the LOF. The Pacific HMS 

fisheries include all fisheries using 

multiple gear types to target Pacific 

HMS (described in the ‘‘Fishery 

Descriptions’’ section in the preamble of 

this proposed rule). Due to the lack of 

specific information on marine mammal 

abundance and interactions with Pacific 

HMS high seas fisheries, NMFS 

proposes to categorize all fisheries 

targeting Pacific HMS on the high seas 

with gear other than drift gillnet and 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33769 

troll (e.g., longline, gillnet, trawl, purse 

seine, and handline gear) as Category II. 

Category II is the appropriate 

classification for new fisheries on the 

LOF for which there is little information 

on which to base classification as 

described in the definition for ‘‘Category 

II’’ in 50 CFR 229.2. NMFS proposes to 

categorize the drift gillnet component of 

this fishery as a Category I because it is 

an extension of the Category I ‘‘CA/OR 

thresher shark/swordfish drift gillnet 

(≥14 in. mesh) fishery’’ operating within 

U.S. waters. The gear used, fishing 

methods, and target species are the same 

in U.S. waters and on the high seas. 

Similarly, NMFS proposes to categorize 

the troll component of this fishery as a 

Category III because it is an extension of 

the Category III ‘‘AK North Pacific 

halibut, AK bottom fish, WA/OR/CA 

albacore, groundfish, bottom fish, CA 

halibut non-salmonid troll fisheries’’

operating within U.S. waters. 

There are 344 valid HSFCA permits 

for fishers targeting Pacific HMS on the 

high seas using all gear types. As noted 

in the preamble, the number of valid 

permits may not accurately account for 

annual fishing effort on the high seas. 

Please see the discussion on the HSFCA 

permitting process under the section 

‘‘Are high seas fisheries included on the 

LOF?’’ in the preamble of this proposed 

rule for additional details. 

Many marine mammal species 

interacting with Pacific HMS fisheries 

operating in U.S. waters also inhabit the 

high seas. Thus, fishing vessels that 

cross into the high seas are also likely 

to interact with these marine mammals 

once they cross into the high seas. For 

those fisheries where no interaction data 

(observer or other data) exist on the high 

seas, NMFS proposes to list all the noncoastal marine mammal species/stocks 

killed or injured in the portion of the 

fishery that operates in U.S. waters as 

injured or killed in the same fishery 

operating on the high seas in Table 3. 

NMFS proposes to add all non-coastal 

marine mammal species killed or 

injured in the Category I ‘‘CA/OR 

thresher shark/swordfish drift gillnet 

(>14 in mesh) fishery’’ (operating within 

U.S. waters) as injured or killed in the 

associated drift gillnet component of 

Pacific HMS fisheries (operating on the 

high seas). 

NMFS proposes to add all non-coastal 

marine mammal species killed or 

injured in the Category II ‘‘CA tuna 

purse seine fishery’’ (operating within 

U.S. waters) as injured or killed in the 

associated purse seine component of the 

Pacific HMS fisheries (operating on the 

high seas). 

NMFS proposes to list all marine 

mammal species killed or injured in the 

Category II ‘‘CA pelagic longline 

fishery’’ as injured or killed in the 

associated longline component of the 

Pacific HMS fisheries (operating on the 

high seas). This fishery is currently 

prohibited within U.S. waters, but 

remains listed on Table 1 because catch 

is landed on the U.S. West coast. 

Therefore, the marine mammal species 

listed as killed or injured in this fishery 

were observed taken on the high seas. 

There is little information on 

interactions between marine mammals 

and fishing gear used to target Pacific 

HMS on the high seas, other than that 

listed in the previous paragraphs. Given 

the lack of data on marine mammal 

abundance and interactions with high 

seas Pacific HMS fisheries (excluding 

the longline, drift gillnet, and purse 

seine components), NMFS proposes to 

list the marine mammal species killed 

or injured in these fisheries as 

‘‘undetermined’’ in Table 3. 

High Seas Western Pacific Pelagic 

Fisheries 

NMFS proposes to add the U.S.- 

authorized high seas Western Pacific 

pelagic fisheries to the LOF. The 

Western Pacific pelagic fisheries include 

all fisheries using multiple gear types to 

target Western Pacific pelagic species 

(described in the ‘‘Fishery Descriptions’’

section in the preamble of this proposed 

rule). Due to the lack of specific 

information on marine mammal 

abundance and interactions with 

fisheries on the high seas, NMFS 

proposes to categorize all fisheries 

targeting Western Pacific pelagic species 

on the high seas with gear other than 

longline (e.g., trawl, purse seine, pot, 

handline, and troll gear) as Category II. 

Category II is the appropriate 

classification for new fisheries on the 

LOF for which there is little information 

on which to base classification, as 

described in the definition for ‘‘Category 

II’’ in 50 CFR 229.2. NMFS proposes to 

categorize the deep-set longline 

component of this fishery in U.S. waters 

as Category I, and the shallow-set 

longline component of this fishery in 

U.S. waters as Category II, because they 

are extensions of the Category I ‘‘ HI 

deep-set (tuna target) longline/set line 

fishery’’ and the Category II ‘‘HI 

shallow-set (swordfish target) longline/ 

set line fishery,’’ respectively. (The ‘‘HI 

swordfish, tuna, billfish, mahi mahi, 

wahoo, oceanic sharks longline/set line 

fishery’’ is proposed to be split into 

these two fisheries in this proposed 

rule, as stated below). The gear used, 

fishing methods, and target species are 

the same, and longline vessels targeting 

Western Pacific pelagic species 

regularly cross over into the high seas 

when fishing. 

There are 219 valid HSFCA permits 

for fishers targeting Western Pacific 

pelagic species with all gear types on 

the high seas. As noted in the preamble, 

the number of valid permits may not 

accurately account for annual fishing 

effort on the high seas. Please see the 

discussion on the HSFCA permitting 

process under the section ‘‘Are high 

seas fisheries included on the LOF?’’ in 

the preamble of this proposed rule for 

additional details. 

Many marine mammal species are 

also found on the high seas and the 

Western Pacific pelagic fishery operates 

the same on both sides of the EEZ 

boundary. Fishing vessels that cross into 

the high seas are likely to also interact 

with these marine mammal stocks once 

they cross the EEZ boundary. For those 

fisheries where no interaction data 

(observer or other data) exist on the high 

seas, NMFS proposes to list all the noncoastal marine mammal species/stocks 

killed or injured in the portion of the 

fishery that operates in U.S. waters as 

injured or killed in the same fishery 

operating on the high seas in Table 3. 

NMFS proposes to add all non-coastal 

marine mammal species killed or 

injured in the Category I ‘‘HI deep-set 

(tuna target) longline/set line fishery’’

(operating within U.S. waters) as injured 

or killed in the Category I ‘‘Western 

Pacific Pelagic fishery (deep-set 

component)’’ (operating on the high 

seas). 

NMFS proposes to add all non-coastal 

marine mammal species killed or 

injured in the Category II ‘‘HI shallowset (swordfish target) longline/set line 

fishery’’ (operating within U.S. waters) 

as injured or killed in the Category II 

‘‘Western Pacific Pelagic fishery 

(shallow-set component)’’ (operating on 

the high seas). 

There is little information on 

interactions between marine mammals 

and fishing gear used to target Western 

Pacific pelagic species on the high seas, 

other than that listed in the previous 

paragraphs. Given the lack of data on 

marine mammal abundance and 

interactions with high seas Western 

Pacific pelagic fisheries (excluding 

longline effort), NMFS proposes to list 

the marine mammal species killed or 

injured in these fisheries as 

‘‘undetermined’’ in Table 3. 

High Seas South Pacific Albacore Troll 

Fisheries 

NMFS proposes to add the high seas 

South Pacific albacore troll fisheries to 

the LOF. While the main gear types 

used are troll and longline, the South 

Pacific albacore troll fisheries include 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
33770 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

all fisheries using multiple gear types to 

target South Pacific albacore tuna. 

While marine mammals are unlikely to 

be injured or killed in troll gear because 

of the nature of trolling methods and the 

bait used (South Pacific Albacore Troll 

EA), there is no official observer 

program for this fishery. Therefore, 

NMFS proposes to categorize all 

fisheries targeting South Pacific albacore 

on the high seas with trawl, purse seine, 

pot, longline, handline, and troll gear as 

Category II (the appropriate 

classification for new fisheries on the 

LOF for which there is little information 

on which to base classification). There 

are 83 valid HSFCA permits for vessels 

participating in the South Pacific 

albacore troll fisheries on the high seas 

with all gear types. As noted in the 

preamble, the number of valid permits 

may not accurately account for annual 

fishing effort on the high seas. Please 

see the discussion on the HSFCA 

permitting process under the section 

‘‘Are high seas fisheries included on the 

LOF?’’ in the preamble of this proposed 

rule for additional details. 

There are no records of incidental 

mortality or serious injury of marine 

mammals in the South Pacific albacore 

troll fisheries. While there is little 

indication of marine mammal 

interactions with South Pacific albacore 

troll fishing, NMFS proposes to list the 

marine mammal species killed or 

injured in these fisheries as 

‘‘undetermined’’ in Table 3 due to the 

lack of an observer program covering 

these fisheries. 

High Seas South Pacific Tuna Fisheries 

NMFS proposes to add the high seas 

South Pacific tuna fisheries, as 

authorized under the South Pacific 

Tuna Treaty, to the LOF. While a formal 

observer program exists for fishing in 

the Treaty area, information on marine 

mammal stock abundance in the area is 

scarce and observer reports of fishery 

interactions are not yet specific enough 

to determine the level of marine 

mammal serious injury and mortality. 

Therefore, NMFS proposes to categorize 

all fisheries participating in the South 

Pacific tuna fishery as Category II (the 

appropriate classification for new 

fisheries on the LOF for which there is 

little information on which to base 

classification). There are 26 valid 

HSFCA permits for vessels participating 

in the South Pacific tuna fishery. This 

number is considered to accurately 

reflect the effort by U.S. vessels in the 

SPTT area because it closely matches 

the number of U.S. vessels with a valid 

SPTT license. 

Under the SPTT, U.S. purse seine 

vessels are observed with a target of 20 

percent coverage. While observer data 

document interactions with marine 

mammals, the data only currently 

identify the animals as unidentified 

whales, marine mammals, or dolphin/ 

porpoise. For this reason, Table 3 lists 

the marine mammal species killed/ 

injured in these fisheries as 

‘‘undetermined.’’

High Seas Antarctic Living Marine 

Resources Fisheries 

NMFS proposes to add the high seas 

Antarctic Living Marine Resources (or 

CCAMLR) fisheries to the LOF. The 

CCAMLR fisheries include all fisheries 

using multiple gear types to target living 

marine resources in the CCAMLR region 

(described in the ‘‘Fishery Descriptions’’

section in the preamble of this proposed 

rule). While a formal observer program 

exists for fishing under CCAMLR, 

specific information on marine mammal 

abundance and fishery interactions 

levels has not been calculated in the 

manner necessary to categorize the 

fisheries based on a marine mammal 

stock’s PBR (as described in the 

preamble). Therefore, NMFS proposes to 

categorize all fisheries operating in the 

CCAMLR region as Category II (the 

appropriate classification for new 

fisheries on the LOF for which there is 

little information on which to base 

classification). There are no valid 

HSFCA permits for vessels participating 

in the CCAMLR fisheries for the 2008 

fishing season, which accurately reflects 

effort by U.S. vessels in the CCAMLR 

area. Therefore, CCAMLR fisheries do 

not appear on Table 3 (Commercial 

Fisheries on the High Seas) in this 

proposed rule. When a HSFCA permit is 

requested and granted for a U.S. vessel 

to participate in the CCAMLR fisheries, 

this information will appear in Table 3 

of the LOF. 

In fishing seasons prior to 2004, 

Antarctic fur seals have been observed 

incidentally injured and killed by U.S. 

vessels in the CCAMLR trawl fishery for 

krill. These takes were drastically 

reduced in the 2004/2005 fishing season 

due to a requirement to include a seal 

excluder device on all trawls (CCAMLR 

EA). Due to the large population size of 

Antarctic fur seals, the current low rate 

of serious injury and mortality is likely 

not a conservation risk. There are no 

documented interactions between other 

marine mammal species and U.S. 

vessels when using other gear types in 

the CCAMLR region. 

Commercial Fisheries in the Pacific 

Ocean 

Fishery Classification 

HI swordfish, tuna, billfish, mahi mahi, 

wahoo, oceanic sharks longline/set line 

fishery 

NMFS proposes to split the Category 

I ‘‘HI swordfish, tuna, billfish, mahi 

mahi, wahoo, oceanic sharks longline/ 

set line fishery’’ (hereinafter the current 

HI-based longline fishery) and list it in 

the 2009 LOF as two separately 

managed commercial fisheries: (1) The 

‘‘HI deep-set (tuna target) longline/set 

line fishery≥; and (2) the ‘‘HI shallowset (swordfish target) longline/set line 

fishery.’’ NMFS believes such a split is 

warranted because the shallow-set and 

deep-set fisheries have different target 

species, operating patterns, management 

regimes, and marine mammal 

interaction rates. See the Fishery 

Descriptions section in the Final 2008 

LOF for additional information (72 FR 

66048; November 27, 2007). NMFS has 

split other fisheries in prior LOFs based 

upon similar factors. 

The current HI-based longline fishery 

is listed as a Category I fishery as a 

result of the fishery’s serious injuries or 

mortalities to false killer whales 

(Pseudorca crassidens), which currently 

exceed the stock’s PBR. NMFS proposes 

that splitting the current HI-based 

longline fishery into two fisheries for 

purposes of the LOF would result in a 

Category I deep-set fishery and a 

Category II shallow-set fishery. The 

definitions for the fishery classification 

criteria can be found in the 

implementing regulations for section 

118 of the MMPA (50 CFR 229.2) and 

in the preamble of this proposed rule. 

The ‘‘HI deep-set (tuna target) 

longline/set line fishery’’ will remain a 

Category I fishery because the fishery’s 

serious injuries or mortalities to false 

killer whales currently exceed the 

stock’s PBR. Observer coverage in the 

deep-set fishery is approximately 20 

percent annually. 

The ‘‘HI shallow-set (swordfish target) 

longline/set line fishery’’ was closed 

from 2001 to 2004. Since 2004, this 

fishery has been subject to strict 

management measures including: 

prescribed use of large circle hooks and 

fish bait, restricted annual effort, annual 

limits on turtle captures, and 100–

percent onboard observer coverage 

because of sea turtle interactions. NMFS 

considered data from 2004 to 2007 in 

the tier analysis, which takes into 

account operation of the shallow-set 

fishery under this new management 

regime. While there were no 

documented interactions with false 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33771 

killer whales in the shallow-set fishery 

during this period, there have been 

observed serious injuries or mortalities 

to the following marine mammal stocks: 

Risso’s dolphin (Grampus griseus) (one 

serious injury in 2005; one serious 

injury and one mortality in 2006; three 

serious injuries in 2007); bottlenose 

dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) (one 

serious injury in 2006; three serious 

injuries in 2007); and humpback whale 

(Megaptera novaeangliae) (one serious 

injury in 2006). There was also an 

interaction with a Bryde’s whale 

(Balaenoptera edeni) in 2005 that did 

not result in a serious injury or 

mortality. 

Each of these serious injuries or 

mortalities occurred outside U.S. 

waters. Section 117(a) of the MMPA 

requires NMFS to prepare a draft stock 

assessment for each marine mammal 

stock which occurs in waters under the 

jurisdiction of the United States. Each 

draft stock assessment must include, 

among other things, an estimate of the 

PBR level for the stock. Because the 

serious injuries and mortality of Risso’s 

dolphins and bottlenose dolphins 

occurred outside U.S. waters, there is no 

PBR for these stocks upon which to 

conduct a tier analysis (as described in 

the preamble of this proposed rule). 

However, there is a high degree of 

certainty that the humpback whale from 

the 2006 interaction was from the 

Central North Pacific stock of humpback 

whales, which migrates seasonally 

between breeding grounds in HI and 

foraging areas in AK. The PBR of this 

stock is 12.9; the annual mortality and 

serious injury of this stock in the 

shallow set fishery is 1.94 percent of 

PBR (one animal during the four-year 

period 2004–2007, or 0.25 per year). 

Because the annual mortality and 

serious injury of this humpback whale 

stock is greater than 1 percent and less 

than 50 percent of the PBR level, NMFS 

has determined that the shallow-set 

portion of the longline fishery merits 

recategorization as a Category II fishery. 

CA angel shark/halibut and other 

species set gillnet (>3.5 in mesh) 

NMFS proposes to reclassify the ‘‘CA 

angel shark/halibut and other species 

set gillnet (>3.5 mesh size) fishery’’

(proposed to be renamed ‘‘CA halibut/ 

white seabass and other species set 

gillnet (>3.5 in mesh) fishery’’ in this 

proposed rule) from a Category I to a 

Category II fishery. This fishery was 

classified as Category I due to serious 

injury and mortality to the Monterey 

Bay and Morro Bay stocks of central CA 

harbor porpoises. Since 2002, however, 

there has been a ban on set gillnetting 

in central CA. As a result, effort in this 

fishery shifted and is now concentrated 

in southern CA, south of the range of 

these harbor porpoise stocks. The 

elimination of this fishery from the 

stocks’ range removed the threat of 

mortality and serious injury to the 

stocks. Because interactions ceased as of 

2002, no tier analysis was conducted for 

the level of annual mortality and serious 

injury of these stocks in this fishery for 

this proposed reclassification. The mean 

annual mortality and serious injury of 

CA sea lions in this fishery is 1,138, or 

13 percent of PBR (PBR=8,511); the 

mean annual mortality and serious 

injury of harbor seals (CA stock) is 386, 

which is 20 percent of PBR 

(PBR=1,896). Thus, the mean annual 

serious injury and mortality of CA sea 

lions and harbor seals (CA stock) in this 

fishery is greater than 1–percent and 

less than 50 percent of the stocks’ PBR 

levels, thereby further supporting a 

Category II classification. Observer 

coverage in this fishery is approximately 

5 percent. 

West Coast trap/pot fisheries 

NMFS proposes the recategorization 

of various West Coast trap and pot 

fisheries from Category III to Category II 

based on interactions with humpback 

whales (CA/OR/WA stock). Below, 

NMFS provides a review of the analysis 

conducted to support the proposed 

recategorizations. Comments are 

specifically requested from the public 

on the proposed recategorizations of 

these fisheries. 

From January 1, 2002, through 

December 31, 2006, NMFS documented 

13 sightings of free-swimming 

humpback whales entangled in trap 

gear, pot gear, or unidentified gear along 

the U.S. West Coast. Twelve of the 

thirteen observations occurred off the 

coast of CA and one was off the coast 

of OR. One stranded dead humpback 

whale was reported in OR, and it is 

believed that this humpback whale was 

one of the 13 free-swimming entangled 

whales reported to NMFS. 

A review of the available data from 

the NMFS Large Whale Disentanglement 

Network (LWDN) was initiated to 

understand the nature of the 13 

entangled humpback whales (Table 5). 

Four animals were observed with pots 

or traps on their bodies during the 

reported entanglement, including one 

with spot prawn gear and one with 

sablefish gear. Of these, three were not 

disentangled from the gear and, due to 

the amount of trailing gear reported on 

these animals, these three are 

considered seriously injured. One of the 

four observed entangled animals was 

disentangled from pot gear and released 

without injury; however, the animal 

would have been considered seriously 

injured if it had not been observed, 

tracked, and disentangled. One whale 

was observed off OR entangled in gear 

which has been identified as likely to 

have been Dungeness crab pot gear 

based upon photos of the animal. An 

additional three humpback whales were 

reported to NMFS as being entangled in 

crabpot line, although there is no way 

to determine if the line was actually 

from pot or trap gear. Five humpback 

whales were reported to NMFS 

entangled in line or netting, with no 

means of identifying the type of fishing 

gear involved. Details of these 

entanglements can be found in Table 5. 

For this analysis, NMFS has been 

conservative in attributing records of 

entanglements to the pot and traps 

fisheries. It is difficult to identify fishing 

gear based upon observations of gear on 

animals; for most reports there are no 

photographs of the animals. Therefore, 

only confirmed and probable 

entanglements of humpback whales are 

attributed to a particular pot/trap 

fishery. Using this criterion, it is 

estimated that four humpback whales 

were seriously injured or killed between 

2002 and 2006 due to entanglements 

with pot or trap gear. This number 

should be considered a minimum 

estimate of seriously injured animals 

because it is based upon opportunistic 

sightings reported to NMFS and thus do 

not represent observer data or 

comprehensive surveys. The entire 

record of seriously injured or killed 

humpback whales is used in the Tier 1 

evaluation, but only the three confirmed 

serious injuries are used in the Tier 2 

evaluation of the pot and trap fisheries. 

Tier 1 evaluation: NMFS began by 

considering the total annual mortality 

and serious injury of the CA/OR/WA 

humpback whale stock across all U.S. 

fisheries. The draft 2008 SARs lists the 

total observed mortalities and serious 

injuries of humpback whales from 2002 

through 2006 as 13 (this number 

includes one animal reported to the 

NMFS entangled in unidentified gillnet 

gear). This results in an annual mean 

take of 2.6 humpback whales per year, 

which exceeds 10 percent of the PBR 

level (2.5) for this stock. 

Tier 2 evaluation: Three humpback 

whales (CA/OR/WA) have been 

positively identified as being entangled 

and seriously injured in pot/trap gear 

between January 1, 2002, and December 

31, 2006. A single serious injury or 

mortality of a humpback whale in a 

trap/pot fishery results in a level of take 

of 0.2 animals per year, or 8 percent of 

the PBR (PBR=2.5 animals), which is 

consistent with a Category II 

categorization (the total estimated 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
33772 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

annual serious injury of mortality is 

greater than 1 percent and less than 50 

percent of PBR). Category II is also the 

appropriate category for fisheries for 

which reliable information on the 

frequency of marine mammal serious 

injury or mortalities is lacking. Fisheries 

are placed in Category II after evaluating 

such factors as the type of gear being 

used, stranding records, the distribution 

of marine mammals in the area of the 

fishery, and at the discretion of the 

Assistant Administrator for Fisheries 

(see 50 CFR 229.3). As described in the 

2007 Final LOF (72 FR 14466, March 28, 

2007), the available information from 

the LWDN alone is not sufficient to 

identify which of the numerous pot and 

trap fisheries may interact with 

humpback whales and cause serious 

injuries or mortalities. Therefore, other 

methods must be used to determine 

which pot and trap fisheries should be 

listed as Category II. 

As described in the 2008 Final LOF 

(72 FR 66048, November 27, 2007), 

NMFS recently prepared, with 

assistance from the states, a 

characterization of the current 

commercial trap/pot fisheries off the 

CA, OR, and WA coasts. NMFS has also 

been working closely with the states to 

obtain the best available information on 

these trap/pot fisheries and has 

integrated this into its analysis. NMFS 

used the reported entanglement of 

humpback whales as the data that drives 

the recategorization of some fisheries. 

As part of the analysis, some 

assumptions were necessary and are 

outlined here. NMFS assumes that the 

time and area in which the 

entanglement was reported is the 

location where the entanglement 

occurred, as with a humpback whale 

entangled off San Francisco in 

December 2005. NMFS acknowledges 

that it is possible that a whale could 

travel from other areas carrying gear. 

NMFS also assumes that the reported 

entanglements are a fraction of the total 

mortalities and serious injury caused by 

trap/pot gear, and the reports are best 

used to represent areas where fisheries 

and humpback whales interact. Under 

this assumption, all entanglements 

characterized as confirmed 

entanglements in trap/pot gear and 

unconfirmed but probable entanglement 

with trap/pot gear (see Table 5) were 

used to determine which commercial 

fisheries are most likely to interact with 

humpback whales. Finally, NMFS 

assumed that the distribution of trap/pot 

fishing effort and the distribution of 

humpback whales are not likely to 

drastically change in the near future; 

therefore, past interactions are 

reasonable predictors of future events. 

NMFS acknowledges that 

environmental variability can change 

the distribution of fishing effort and 

marine mammals; NMFS will continue 

to monitor both and make 

recommendations for changes to the 

LOF as appropriate. 

To determine which pot and trap 

fisheries should be listed as Category II, 

NMFS asked the following questions: (1) 

Has the fishery been identified as 

causing one of the entanglements of 

humpback whales?; and (2) Does the 

fishery operate in the area and time 

when a humpback was reported 

entangled in pot and trap gear? Fisheries 

that did not meet either of these 

criterion were eliminated from possibly 

causing humpback whale mortalities or 

serious injuries and remained Category 

III fisheries. 

Once NMFS identified which 

fisheries met either of the criterion 

above, NMFS considered the following: 

(1) Does the fishery overlap, spatially 

and temporally, with the known 

distribution of the Eastern North Pacific 

stock of humpback whales?; and (2) 

Does the fishery currently have a 

substantial amount of effort and is there 

likely to be change in this level of effort 

in the future? These second two 

questions address whether future 

interactions, based upon observed 

entanglements, would be likely. NMFS 

considered these factors because while 

one observed interaction may be 

insufficient to recategorize a fishery; a 

likelihood of entanglement supports the 

recategorization of some fisheries. 

Based on the analysis described 

above, the following are being proposed 

to be classified as Category II fisheries 

(all were Category III on the 2008 LOF 

or included within the Category III ‘‘CA 

lobster, prawn, shrimp, rock crab, fish 

pot’’ [proposed to be renamed the ‘‘CA 

spiny lobster, coonstrip shrimp, finfish, 

rock crab, tanner crab pot or trap’’]): 

(1) The ‘‘CA spot prawn pot fishery’’

(see name change explanation for this 

fishery described below under ‘‘West 

Coast trap/pot fisheries’’ discussion in 

section ‘‘Fishery Name and 

Organizational Changes and 

Clarifications’’) as a Category II fishery. 

A humpback whale was reported 

entangled and seriously injured in this 

gear type in September 2005 at 

Monterey. As described above, a single 

humpback whale serious injury or 

mortality is equal to 8 percent of the 

stock’s PBR; therefore, a Category II 

categorization is appropriate. The 

estimated number of vessels or 

participants in the ‘‘CA spot prawn pot 

fishery’’ is 29. 

(2) The ‘‘WA/OR/CA sablefish pot 

fishery’’. A humpback whale was 

reported entangled in this gear type in 

September 2006 off Monterey, CA. As 

described above, a single humpback 

whale serious injury or mortality is 

equal to 8 percent of the stock’s PBR; 

therefore, a Category II categorization is 

appropriate. The estimated number of 

vessels or participants in the ‘‘WA/OR/ 

CA sablefish pot fishery’’ is 155, 

including both limited and open access 

permits (there are 32 limited access 

permits). 

(3) The ‘‘OR Dungeness crab pot 

fishery’’ (see name change explanation 

for this fishery described below under 

‘‘West Coast trap/pot fisheries’’

discussion in section ‘‘Fishery Name 

and Organizational Changes and 

Clarifications’’). A humpback whale was 

observed and photographed entangled 

in gear in May 2006 off the coast of OR. 

This animal is believed to be the same 

animal that stranded on a beach in OR 

with marks consistent with the type of 

entanglement observed. Based upon the 

gear observed on the animal in the field 

and in photographs, and the unusually 

high amount of Dungeness crab gear in 

the water during that time, it is most 

likely that this is the type of gear that 

entangled the animal. As described 

above, a single humpback whale serious 

injury or mortality is equal to 8 percent 

of the stock’s PBR; therefore, a Category 

II categorization is appropriate. The 

estimated number of vessels or 

participants in the ‘‘OR Dungeness crab 

pot fishery’’ is 433 (433 permits exist, 

364 landings were made in 2006). 

(4) The ‘‘CA Dungeness crab pot 

fishery’’ (see name change explanation 

for this fishery described below under 

‘‘West Coast trap/pot fisheries’’

discussion in section ‘‘Fishery Name 

and Organizational Changes and 

Clarifications’’). Two of the reported 

humpback whale entanglements (shown 

in Table 5) could not be identified to a 

type of pot or trap fishery by gear type, 

thus NMFS considered whether this 

fishery could be listed as Category II by 

analogy to other West Coast trap/pot 

fisheries proposed for Category II 

classification in this rule, because it 

operates with similar gear in the same 

location as confirmed humpback whale 

serious injury events. NMFS reviewed 

the entanglements and identified which 

pot and trap fisheries were operating in 

the time and area of the reported 

entanglements. The ‘‘CA Dungeness 

crab pot’’ and the ‘‘CA spot prawn trap’’

fisheries were both operating at the time 

and place of the two humpback whale 

entanglements, thus either of these 

could have caused the serious injury to 

the humpback whales. Therefore, NMFS 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33773 

proposes to reclassify the ‘‘CA 

Dungeness crab pot fishery’’ as a 

Category II fishery by analogy. The 

estimated number of vessels or 

participants in the ‘‘CA Dungeness crab 

pot fishery’’ is 625 (625 permits exist, 

435 landings were made in 2006). 

NMFS acknowledges that other pot 

and trap fisheries may overlap in space 

and time with humpback whales 

feeding or migrating along the West 

Coast, but in the absence of evidence of 

interactions, NMFS cannot justify 

placing these fisheries in Category II at 

this time. If additional information 

becomes available, NMFS will consider 

recategorization of other trap/pot 

fisheries. 

NMFS also reviewed the level of gray 

whale takes in all West coast 

commercial fisheries, including trap and 

pot fisheries, and determined that it was 

well below 10 percent of the stock’s 

PBR, thus re-categorization of trap and 

pot fisheries based upon gray whale 

takes is not warranted. Entanglements of 

gray whales in trap and pot gear have 

been reported; however, NMFS has not 

yet determined which specific fisheries 

may be involved. Therefore, gray whales 

will remain listed under the Category 

III, ‘‘CA lobster, prawn, shrimp, rock 

crab, fish pot fishery’’ (proposed to be 

renamed as the ‘‘CA spiny lobster, 

coonstripe shrimp, finfish, rock crab, 

tanner crab pot or trap fishery’’ in this 

proposed rule) and under the proposed 

Category II trap and pot fisheries 

discussed below (gray whales have been 

listed as injured or killed in these 

fisheries since the 2005 and 2007 LOFs, 

respectively). Data related to 

interactions with gray whales and the 

newly categorized Category II trap and 

pot fisheries will be reviewed and 

discussed in future LOFs. 

Addition of Fisheries to the LOF 

NMFS proposes to add the ‘‘HI deepset (tuna target) longline/set line 

fishery’’ as a Category I (see the 

discussion in the previous section for 

details). 

NMFS proposes to add the ‘‘HI 

shallow-set (swordfish target) longline/ 

set line fishery’’ as a Category II (see the 

discussion in the previous section for 

details). 

NMFS proposes to add the ‘‘CA spot 

prawn trap fishery’’ as a Category II (see 

the discussion in the previous section 

for details). 

NMFS proposes to add the ‘‘CA 

Dungeness crab pot fishery’’ as a 

Category II (see the discussion in the 

previous section for details). 

NMFS proposes to add the ‘‘OR 

Dungeness crab pot fishery’’ as a 

Category II (see the discussion in the 

previous section for details). 

NMFS proposes to add the ‘‘WA 

Dungeness crab pot fishery’’ as a 

Category III (see the discussion in the 

previous section for details). 

NMFS proposes to add ‘‘AK statewide 

miscellaneous finfish pot fishery’’ as a 

Category III fishery. There are 293 

participants in this fishery and no 

documented takes of marine mammals. 

NMFS proposes to add ‘‘AK shrimp 

pot, except Southeast fishery’’ as a 

Category III fishery. There are 15 

participants in this fishery and no 

documented takes of marine mammals. 

Removal of Fisheries from the LOF 

NMFS propose to remove the 

Category II ‘‘AK Metlakatla/Annette 

Island salmon drift gillnet’’ fishery from 

the LOF. NMFS received a comment on 

the 2008 LOF stating that this fishery is 

an exclusively tribal fishery (72 FR 

66048, November 27, 2007, comment/ 

response 27). As an exclusively tribal 

fishery, this fishery is not subject to the 

LOF (Final rule implementing section 

118 of the MMPA, 60 FR 45086, August 

30, 1995, comment/response 68). Tribal 

governments have developed 

regulations for the management of tribal 

fishing under treaties. NMFS and other 

fisheries regulatory agencies have 

participated with the tribes during this 

regulatory development. 

Fishery Name and Organizational 

Changes and Clarifications 

NMFS proposes to change the name of 

the ‘‘CA angel shark/halibut and other 

species set gillnet (>3.5 mesh size)’’

fishery to the ‘‘CA halibut/white seabass 

and other species set gillnet (>3.5 in. 

mesh) fishery’’ to more accurately 

reflect the current target species of the 

fishery. 

NMFS proposes to change the name of 

the Category III ‘‘AK state-managed 

waters groundfish longline/set line 

(including sablefish, rockfish, and 

miscellaneous finfish’’ to ‘‘AK statemanaged waters longline/set line 

(including sablefish, rockfish, lingcod, 

and miscellaneous finfish’’ to more 

accurately reflect the current target 

species of the fishery. 

NMFS proposes to change the name of 

the Category III ‘‘AK North Pacific 

halibut handline and mechanical jig 

fishery’’ to ‘‘AK North Pacific halibut 

handline/hand troll and mechanical jig 

fishery’’ to more accurately reflect the 

gear used in the fishery. 

NMFS proposes to change the name of 

the Category III ‘‘AK miscellaneous 

finfish handline and mechanical jig 

fishery’’ to ‘‘AK miscellaneous finfish 

handline/hand troll and mechanical jig 

fishery’’ to more accurately reflect the 

gear used in the fishery. 

NMFS proposes to remove the 

superscript ‘‘1’’ following Steller sea 

lion, Western U.S. stock, under the 

Category II ‘‘AK Bristol Bay salmon drift 

gillnet fishery’’ in Table 1. Although 

Steller sea lions (Western U.S. stock) 

were reported taken in this fishery in 

logbook entries prior to the 1996 LOF 

(2007 SAR, Appendix 7), there have 

been no reported interactions since 

1993. Therefore, this Steller sea lion 

stock is not driving the categorization of 

this fishery. However, this fishery is 

classified as a Category II based on 

analogy with other Category II AK 

gillnet fisheries because it operates in 

the same manner as other AK gillnet 

fisheries and it has not been observed by 

the Alaska Marine Mammal Observer 

Program. Therefore, the superscript ‘‘2’’

will remain after the fishery’s name in 

Table 1. 

West Coast trap/pot fisheries 

NMFS conducted a review of all West 

Coast commercial pot and trap fisheries 

in response to reports of humpback 

whale entanglements in this gear type 

and public comment requests for a 

review on previous LOFs. As described 

in the ‘‘Fishery Classification’’ section 

above, NMFS is proposing to 

recategorize a number of West Coast 

commercial pot and trap fisheries based 

upon interactions with humpback 

whales. The fisheries as currently 

named do not allow NMFS to categorize 

them appropriately, thus NMFS 

proposes to rename certain West Coast 

trap/pot fisheries by splitting and 

combining them based upon the 

probability of interactions with the gear 

and humpback whales and the current 

management structure. 

NMFS proposes to split the prawn 

portion of the ‘‘CA lobster, prawn, 

shrimp, rock crab, and fish pot fishery’’

into a separate fishery, the ‘‘CA spot 

prawn fishery,’’ and rename the 

remaining portion of the fishery the ‘‘CA 

spiny lobster, coonstripe shrimp, 

finfish, rock crab, tanner crab pot or trap 

fishery.’’ NMFS has determined that the 

current name of the fishery does not 

reflect the current fisheries and 

proposes to list the ‘‘CA spot prawn trap 

fishery’’ as a separate Category II fishery 

due to an observed entanglement with a 

humpback whale. Further, the ‘‘CA spot 

prawn trap fishery’’ operates in a time 

and area when humpback whales are 

found off of the coast of CA. NMFS 

proposes to rename the remaining 

portion of the fishery the ‘‘CA spiny 

lobster, coonstripe shrimp, finfish, rock 

crab, tanner crab pot or trap fishery’’

because these fisheries are all managed 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
33774 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

by the State of CA and the available data 

from the LWDN shows a low likelihood 

of interactions with humpback whales 

because of the areas and times in which 

fishery effort occurs and the amount of 

gear used in these fisheries. This fishery 

will remain a Category III fishery on the 

LOF. 

NMFS proposes to list the ‘‘CA spot 

prawn trap fishery’’ as a separate 

Category II fishery due to an observed 

entanglement with a humpback whale. 

Further, this fishery operates in a time 

and area when humpback whales are 

found off of the coast of CA. 

NMFS proposes to split the ‘‘WA/OR/ 

CA crab pot fishery’’ into three fisheries, 

the ‘‘CA Dungeness crab pot,’’ ‘‘OR 

Dungeness crab pot,’’ and ‘‘WA 

Dungeness crab pot’’ fisheries. Each of 

these fisheries is managed and 

permitted by the individual states and 

each state has different regulations and 

regulatory capacity for their fishery. 

Also, as explained previously, 

humpback whale entanglements have 

occurred in Dungeness crab pot gear off 

the states of CA and OR, but not WA. 

Thus by splitting and re-naming this 

fishery, NMFS is able to appropriately 

categorize only those Dungeness crab 

pot fisheries that are of most concern 

due to marine mammal interactions (i.e., 

categorize the CA and OR Dungeness 

crab pot fisheries as Category II, and the 

WA Dungeness crab pot fishery as 

Category III). 

Number of Vessels/Persons 

NMFS proposes to update the 

estimated number of vessels or persons 

in the Category III ‘‘CA lobster, prawn, 

shrimp, rock crab, and fish pot fishery’’

(proposed to be renamed the ‘‘CA spiny 

lobster, coonstripe shrimp, finfish, rock 

crab, tanner crab pot or trap fishery’’ in 

this rule) from 608 to 530. 

NMFS proposes to update the 

estimated number of vessels or persons 

in the Category III ‘‘OR/CA hagfish pot 

or trap fishery’’ from 25 to 54. 

NMFS proposes to update the 

estimated number of vessels or persons 

in the majority of the AK Category II 

fisheries because the information has 

not been updated in recent LOFs: AK 

Southeast salmon drift gillnet fishery 

from 481 to 476; AK Yakutat salmon set 

gillnet from 170 to 166; AK Prince 

William Sound salmon drift gillnet from 

541 to 537; AK Cook Inlet salmon drift 

gillnet from 576 to 571; AK Cook Inlet 

salmon set gillnet from 745 to 738; AK 

Peninsula/Aleutian Islands salmon drift 

gillnet from 164 to 162; AK Peninsula/ 

Aleutian Islands salmon set gillnet from 

116 to 115; AK Bristol Bay salmon drift 

gillnet from 1,903 to 1,862; AK Bristol 

Bay salmon set gillnet from 1,014 to 

983; AK Southeast salmon purse seine 

fishery from 416 to 415; AK Bering Sea, 

Aleutian Islands pollock trawl from 120 

to 95; AK Bering Sea, Aleutian Islands 

Pacific cod trawl from 114 to 54; AK 

Bering Sea, Aleutian Islands finfish 

trawl from 26 to 34. 

NMFS proposes to update the 

estimated number of vessels or persons 

in the majority of the AK Category III 

fisheries because the information has 

not been updated in recent LOFs: AK 

Kuskokwim, Yukon, Norton Sound, 

Kotzebue salmon gillnet from 1,922 to 

1,824 ; AK roe herring and food/bait 

herring gillnet from 2,034 to 986; AK 

miscellaneous finfish set gillnet from 3 

to 0; AK salmon purse seine (except 

Southeast AK, which is Category II) 

from 953 to 936; AK salmon beach seine 

from 34 to 31; AK roe herring and food/ 

bait herring purse seine from 624 to 361; 

AK roe herring and food/bait herring 

beach seine from 8 to 4; AK octopus/ 

squid purse seine from 2 to 0; AK 

salmon troll from 2,335 to 2,045; AK 

North Pacific halibut/bottom fish troll 

from 1,530 (330 AK) to 1,302 (102 AK); 

AK state-managed waters groundfish 

longline/set line (including sablefish, 

rockfish, and miscellaneous finfish) 

from 731 to 1,448; AK Gulf of Alaska 

rockfish longline from 421 to 0; AK Gulf 

of Alaska sablefish longline from 412 to 

291; AK Bering Sea, Aleutian Islands 

Greenland turbot longline from 12 to 29; 

AK Bering Sea, Aleutian Islands 

rockfish longline from 17 to 0; AK 

Bering Sea, Aleutian Islands sablefish 

longline from 63 to 28; AK halibut 

longline/set line (State and Federal 

waters) from 3,079 to 2,521; AK 

octopus/squid longline from 7 to 2; AK 

shrimp otter and beam trawl (statewide 

and Cook Inlet) from 58 to 32; AK Gulf 

of Alaska flatfish trawl from 52 to 41; 

AK Gulf of Alaska Pacific cod trawl 

from 101 to 62; AK Gulf of Alaska 

pollock trawl from 83 to 62; AK Gulf of 

Alaska rockfish trawl from 45 to 34; AK 

Bering Sea, Aleutian Islands Atka 

mackerel trawl from 8 to 9; AK Bering 

Sea, Aleutian Islands Pacific cod trawl 

from 87 to 93; AK Bering Sea, Aleutian 

Islands rockfish trawl from 9 to 10; AK 

miscellaneous finfish otter or beam 

trawl from 624 to 317; AK food/bait 

herring trawl from 3 to 4; AK Bering 

Sea, Aleutian Islands Pacific cod pot 

from 76 to 68; AK Bering Sea, Aleutian 

Islands crab pot from 329 to 297; AK 

Gulf of Alaska crab pot from unknown 

to 300; AK Southeast Alaska crab pot 

from unknown to 433; AK Southeast 

Alaska shrimp pot from unknown to 

283; AK octopus/squid pot from 72 to 

27; AK snail pot from 2 to 1; AK North 

Pacific halibut handline/hand troll and 

mechanical jig from 93 to 228; AK 

miscellaneous finfish handline/hand 

troll and mechanical jig from 100 to 445; 

AK octopus/squid handline form 2 to 0; 

AK Southeast herring roe/food/bait 

pound net from 3 to 6; AK dungeness 

crab (hand pick/dive) from 3 to 2; AK 

herring spawn on kelp (hand pick/dive) 

from 363 to 266; AK urchin and other 

fish/shellfish (hand pick/dive) from 471 

to 570; AK commercial passenger 

fishing vessel from >7,000 (1,107 AK) to 

>7,000 (2,702 AK). 

List of Species That are Incidentally 

Injured or Killed 

NMFS proposes to remove the harbor 

porpoise (central CA) from the list of 

marine mammal species and stocks 

incidentally killed/injured in the ‘‘CA 

angel shark/halibut and other species 

set gillnet (>3.5 mesh size) fishery’’

(proposed for recategorization to a 

Category II, and renamed as the ‘‘CA 

halibut/white seabass and other species 

set gillnet (>3.5 mesh size) fishery’’ in 

this proposed rule). As described above, 

there has been a ban on set gillnetting 

in central CA since 2002, which has 

eliminated the threat to the Monterey 

Bay stock and Morro Bay stock of harbor 

porpoise in this fishery. This fishery is 

now concentrated in southern 

California, south of the range of these 

stocks of harbor porpoise. 

NMFS proposes to remove the 

following marine mammals from the list 

of species/stocks incidentally killed/ 

injured in the ‘‘CA/OR thresher shark/ 

swordfish drift gillnet (≥14 in. mesh) 

fishery≥: Dall’s porpoise (CA/OR/WA), 

fin whale (CA/OR/WA), gray whale 

(Eastern North Pacific), humpback 

whale (CA/OR/WA), and sperm whale 

(CA/OR/WA). None of these species 

have been observed taken in the fishery 

from January 1, 2002 through December 

31, 2006 (the most recent available 

information). This fishery has been 

observed by NMFS at approximately 20 

percent annually during this five year 

period. 

NMFS proposes to remove humpback 

whales (CA/OR/WA) from the list of 

species/stocks incidentally killed/ 

injured in the Category II ‘‘WA 

Dungeness pot fishery’’ (proposed to be 

separated from the ‘‘WA/OR/CA crab 

pot fishery’’ in this proposed rule). 

There have been no recent interactions 

with this species. 

NMFS proposes to remove humpback 

whales (CA/OR/WA) and sea otters (CA) 

from the list of species/stocks 

incidentally killed/injured in the 

Category III ‘‘CA spiny lobster, 

coonstripe shrimp, finfish, rock crab, 

tanner crab pot or trap fishery’’

(currently listed as the ‘‘CA lobster, 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33775 

prawn, shrimp, rock crab, fish pot 

fishery’’). As described above in the 

discussion of West Coast trap/pot 

fisheries, NMFS analysis of the available 

information on humpback whale 

entanglements in pot and trap gear 

suggests that these gears are not likely 

to cause interactions. NMFS proposes to 

remove sea otter (CA) from the list of 

species/stocks incidentally killed/ 

injured due to a lack of recent data to 

indicate that sea otters are seriously 

injured or killed in this fishery. The 

only available information of a sea otter 

taken in one of a these types of pots or 

traps is from November 1987. Sea otters 

(CA) will not be listed as incidentally 

killed/injured in the proposed Category 

II ‘‘CA spot prawn trap’’ fisheries 

(proposed to be separated out from the 

renamed ‘‘CA spiny lobster, coonstripe 

shrimp, finfish, rock crab, tanner crab 

pot or trap fishery’’ in this proposed 

rule). The only available information of 

a sea otter taken in each of these types 

of pots or traps is from 1991. There have 

been no reports of interactions since 

1987 or 1991, respectively. 

NMFS proposes to change the stock 

name of humpback whales from 

humpback whales (Eastern North 

Pacific) to humpback whales (CA/OR/ 

WA) for all fisheries in Table 1 in which 

this species is listed as incidentally 

killed or injured to match the stock 

name in the most current SARs. The 

stock name was changed in the Final 

2007 SARs. 

Commercial Fisheries in the Atlantic 

Ocean, Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean 

Addition of Fisheries to the LOF 

NMFS proposes to add the ‘‘U.S. 

Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico trotline 

fishery’’ as a Category III fishery. 

Trotline gear can be described as 

longline which rests on the seafloor, 

attached to anchored floats or buoys at 

each end, to which a series of baited 

hooks are attached at intervals of 2–6 ft 

(0.6–1.8 m). The line is typically set 

parallel to the shore in water 5–12 ft 

(1.5–3.7 m) deep and the line can reach 

up to a mile (1.6 km) in length. Trotlines 

are typically worked from a boat where 

rollers are used to haul the line from the 

water. Target species include blue crab, 

catfish, and other finfish throughout the 

coastal Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. 

‘‘Hook and line’’ gear is defined at 50 

CFR 600.10 as ‘‘one or more hooks 

attached to one or more lines (can 

include a troll).’’ Therefore, NMFS 

proposes to classify the ‘‘U.S. Atlantic, 

Gulf of Mexico trotline fishery’’ under 

‘‘Longline/Hook-and-Line Fisheries’’ in 

Table 2 of the LOF. The number of 

participants in this fishery is unknown 

and there are no known takes of any 

marine mammal from trotline gear. 

Fishery Name and Organizational 

Changes and Clarifications 

Northeast sink gillnet fishery 

NMFS proposes to clarify and correct 

the boundary definition of the Category 

I ‘‘Northeast sink gillnet fishery.’’ The 

current boundaries are defined as 

‘‘excluding Long Island Sound or other 

waters where gillnet fisheries are listed 

as Category III. At this time, these 

Category II and II fisheries include...’’

(72 FR 66056, November 27, 2007). 

NMFS proposes to clarify this boundary 

definition by replacing this with the 

following language: ’’...excluding Long 

Island Sound and other waters where 

gillnet fisheries are listed as Category II 

and III. At this time, these Category II 

and III fisheries include...’’

Northeast anchored float gillnet fishery 

NMFS proposes to clarify the 

boundary definition of the Category II 

‘‘Northeast anchored float gillnet 

fishery.’’ The current fishery boundary 

is defined as ’’...from the U.S.- Canada 

border to Long Island, NY, at at 72° 30’

W. long south to 36° 33.03’ N. lat. and 

east to the eastern edge of the EEZ...’’

(72 FR 66056, November 27, 2007). 

NMFS proposes to clarify this boundary 

definition by adding the following 

language: ‘‘...from the U.S.-Canada 

border to Long Island, NY, at 72° 30’ W. 

long south to 36° 33.03’ N. lat. 

(corresponding with the VA/NC border) 

and east to the eastern edge of the 

EEZ...’’

Northeast drift gillnet fishery 

NMFS proposes to clarify the 

boundary definition of the Category II 

‘‘Northeast drift gillnet fishery.’’ The 

current fishery boundary is defined as 

occurring ’’...at any depth in the water 

column from the U.S.-Canada border to 

Long Island, NY, at 72° 30’ W. long. 

south to 36° 33.03’ N. lat. and east to the 

eastern edge of the EEZ...’’ (72 FR 

66056, November 27, 2007). NMFS 

proposes to clarify this boundary 

definition by adding the following 

language: ’’...at any depth in the water 

column from the U.S.-Canada border to 

Long Island, NY, at 72° 30’ W. long. 

south to 36° 33.03’ N. lat. 

(corresponding with the VA/NC border) 

and east to the eastern edge of the 

EEZ...’’

Mid-Atlantic mid-water trawl fishery 

NMFS proposes to modify the fishery 

description for the Category II ‘‘MidAtlantic mid-water trawl fishery.’’

NMFS received a comment on the 2008 

LOF suggesting that the ‘‘Mid-Atlantic 

mid-water trawl fishery’’ was an 

inaccurate characterization of the 

fishery targeting Ilex squid, Loligo 

squid, and Atlantic butterfish (72 FR 

66064, November 27, 2007, comment/ 

response 28). After consulting with the 

Northeast Fisheries Science Center, 

observer reports, and vessel trip report 

(VTR) data , NMFS concluded that the 

gear targeting these species is better 

characterized by the ‘‘Mid-Atlantic 

bottom trawl fishery’’ (Category II) 

rather than the ‘‘Mid-Atlantic mid-water 

trawl fishery’’ (Category II) as it is 

currently listed (72 FR 66048, November 

27, 2007). Additionally, NMFS has also 

become aware of additional species 

targeted by the ‘‘Mid-Atlantic mid-water 

trawl fishery’’ (2007 final SAR). To 

reflect this new information, NMFS 

proposes to replace the current ‘‘MidAtlantic mid-water trawl’’ fishery 

description with the following 

description: 

‘‘The ’Mid-Atlantic mid-water trawl 

fishery’ primarily targets Atlantic 

mackerel, chub mackerel, and 

miscellaneous other pelagic species. 

This fishery consists of both single and 

pair trawls, which are designed, 

capable, or used to fish for pelagic 

species with no portion of the gear 

designed to be operated in contact with 

the bottom. The fishery for Atlantic 

mackerel occurs primarily from 

southern New England through the midAtlantic from January to March and in 

the Gulf of Maine during the summer 

and fall (May to December). This fishery 

is managed under the Federal Atlantic 

Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish FMP 

using an annual quota system.’’

Mid-Atlantic bottom trawl fishery 

NMFS proposes to modify the fishery 

description for the Category II ‘‘MidAtlantic bottom trawl fishery.’’ NMFS 

received a comment on the 2008 LOF 

regarding gear used for targeting Ilex 

squid, Loligo squid, and Atlantic 

butterfish (72 FR 66048, November 27, 

2007, comment/response 28). After 

consulting with the Northeast Fisheries 

Science Center, observer reports, and 

VTR data , NMFS concluded that the 

gear targeting these species is better 

characterized by the ‘‘Mid-Atlantic 

bottom trawl fishery’’ (Category II) 

rather than the ‘‘Mid-Atlantic mid-water 

trawl fishery’’ (Category II) as it is 

currently listed (72 FR 66057, November 

27, 2007). Additionally, NMFS has also 

become aware of additional species 

targeted by the ‘‘Mid-Atlantic bottom 

trawl fishery’’ (2007 final SAR). To 

reflect this new information, NMFS 

proposes to replace the current ‘‘MidAtlantic bottom trawl’’ fishery 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
33776 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

description with the following 

description: 

‘‘The Category II ‘Mid-Atlantic bottom 

trawl fishery’ uses bottom trawl gear to 

target species including but not limited 

to: bluefish, croaker, monkfish, summer 

flounder (fluke), winter flounder, silver 

hake (whiting), spiny dogfish, smooth 

dogfish, scup, black sea bass, Atlantic 

cod, haddock, pollock, yellowtail 

flounder, witch flounder, windowpane 

flounder, summer flounder, American 

plaice, Atlantic halibut, redfish, red 

hake, white hake, ocean pout, skate spp, 

Atlantic mackerel, Loligo squid, Ilex 

squid, and Atlantic butterfish. These 

fisheries occur year round from Cape 

Cod, MA, to Cape Hatteras, NC, in 

waters west of 72° 30’ W. long. and 

north of a line extending due east from 

the NC/SC border. While the gear 

characteristics for the mixed groundfish 

bottom trawl gear have not yet been 

determined, the Ilex and Loligo squid 

fisheries are dominated by small-mesh 

otter trawls. The Loligo fishery occurs 

mostly offshore near the edge of the 

continental shelf during fall and winter 

months (October to March) and inshore 

during spring and summer (AprilSeptember) though landings of Loligo 

are also taken by inshore pound nets 

and fish traps in the spring and summer. 

The fishery for Ilex occurs offshore, 

mainly in continental shelf and slope 

waters during summer months (JuneSeptember). The Ilex and Loligo 

fisheries are managed by moratorium 

permits, gear and area restrictions, 

quotas, and trip limits. Atlantic 

butterfish are mainly caught as bycatch 

in the directed squid and mackerel 

fisheries and observer data has 

suggested that there is a significant 

amount of butterfish discarding that 

occurs at sea.’’

Mid-Atlantic haul/beach seine fishery 

NMFS proposes to update the fishery 

description for the Category II ‘MidAtlantic haul/beach seine fishery.’ In 

the Final 2008 LOF (72 FR 66048, 

November 27, 2007), NMFS stated that 

it would consider revising the 

description of the fishery following 

rulemaking by the North Carolina 

Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF) 

involving the NC Atlantic Ocean striped 

bass beach seine fishery. In an effort to 

distinguish between beach-anchored 

gillnets and true beach seines, NCDMF 

recently finalized regulations, effective 

for the fall 2008 fishery, defining a 

beach seine for the Atlantic Ocean 

striped bass beach seine fishery. Fishers 

participating in the fishery will be 

required to use multifilament or multifiber webbing swipe nets fished from 

the ocean beach that are deployed from 

a vessel launched from the ocean beach 

where the fishing operation takes place. 

Therefore, NMFS proposes to add the 

following information to the description 

from the Final 2008 LOF: 

‘‘The NC component of this fishery 

operates primarily along the Outer 

Banks using small and large mesh nets. 

Small mesh nets are generally used in 

the spring and fall to target gray trout 

(weakfish), speckled trout, spot, kingfish 

(sea mullet), bluefish, and harvest fish 

(star butters). Large mesh nets are used 

to target Atlantic striped bass during the 

winter and are regulated via NC Marine 

Fisheries Commission rules and 

NCDMF proclamations. Construction 

and characteristics of the large and 

small mesh nets differ, but they 

generally both gill fish, rather than haul 

fish to shore in the manner of a 

traditional beach seine. Small mesh nets 

are generally constructed with a 

combination of multifilament and 

monofilament webbing or all 

monofilament webbing material. If a 

combination of materials is used, the 

construction design often consists of 

monofilament for the inshore (wash) 

and offshore (wing) portions of the net, 

while the middle (bunt) is constructed 

of twisted nylong. Conversely, large 

mesh nets are constructed of all 

monofilament material. Despite the 

difference in construction, they are set 

and hauled similarly. Nets are deployed 

out of the stern of surf dories and set 

perpendicular to the shoreline. A truck 

is generally used to haul the net ashore 

by attaching one end of the net to the 

truck and pulling it ashore while the 

other end remains fixed until the end of 

the haul. 

NC fishers previously referred to this 

type of gear as a beach seine because of 

the way the gear was set and hauled. 

Because of the manner in which both 

large and small mesh nets are 

constructed (i.e., inclusion of 

monofilament material) and fished, they 

operate as gillnets rather than beach 

seines, and NMFS considers them a 

component of the Category I, ‘MidAtlantic gillnet fishery.’ Once NCDMF’s 

regulation is effective, the Atlantic 

Ocean striped bass beach seine fishery 

will be the only fishery included under 

the ’Mid-Atlantic haul/beach seine 

fishery’ for NC. Therefore, small and 

large mesh nets constructed of 

monofilament and multifilament 

material will be considered part of the 

Category I ‘‘Mid-Atlantic gillnet 

fishery.’’

In addition to the NC component as 

described above, the ‘Mid-Atlantic haul/ 

beach seine fishery’ also includes haul 

seining in other areas of the midAtlantic, including VA, MD, and NJ. 

Because the net materials and fishing 

practices of the Atlantic Ocean striped 

bass beach seine fishery in NC are 

different from haul seining in other 

areas, NMFS may consider splitting this 

fishery in the future.’’

List of Species That are Incidentally 

Seriously Injured or Killed 

NMFS proposes to add white-side 

dolphin (Western North Atlantic [WNA] 

stock) to the list of marine mammal 

species and stocks incidentally injured 

or killed in the Category II ‘‘MidAtlantic bottom trawl fishery.’’

Information presented in the 2007 Final 

SAR states that one Atlantic white-sided 

dolphin incidental take was observed in 

1997 and another in 2005. 

NMFS proposes to add harbor seal 

(WNA stock) to the list of marine 

mammal species and stocks incidentally 

injured or killed in the Category II 

‘‘Northeast bottom trawl fishery.’’

Recent information presented in the 

2007 final SAR states that two harbor 

seal mortalities were observed between 

2001 and 2005. 

NMFS proposes to add bottlenose 

dolphins (WNA coastal stock) to the list 

of marine mammal species and stocks 

incidentally injured or killed in the 

Category III ‘‘FL spiny lobster trap/pot 

fishery.’’ The 2008 LOF includes the 

bottlenose dolphins (Eastern GMX 

coastal stock) as incidentally killed or 

injured in the fishery, but stranding data 

indicate that, though rare, interactions 

are also occurring in the Atlantic. Two 

bottlenose dolphins are known to have 

stranded with spiny lobster trap/pot 

gear in Miami Beach, FL: one on 

October 4, 1997, and one on August 17, 

2007. These animals fall within the 

WNA coastal bottlenose dolphin stock’s 

Central Florida Management Unit, 

which currently has an unknown PBR 

(2007 final SAR). Therefore, NMFS 

cannot determine whether this fishery 

requires reclassification until more 

information is available. There is no 

observer program for this fishery. 

NMFS proposes to add bottlenose 

dolphins (WNA coastal stock) to the list 

of marine mammal species and stocks 

incidentally injured or killed in the 

Category III ‘‘Southeastern U.S. Atlantic, 

Gulf of Mexico stone crab trap/pot 

fishery.’’ The 2008 LOF states that there 

are no documented marine mammal 

interactions with this fishery. However, 

stranding data indicate that bottlenose 

dolphins interact with this fishery. Two 

bottlenose dolphins stranded with stone 

crab trap/pot gear: one in Biscayne Bay, 

FL, on May 5, 2003, and one in Miami 

Beach, FL, on November 21, 2006. 

These animals fall within the WNA 

coastal bottlenose dolphin stock’s 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33777 

Central Florida Management Unit, 

which currently has an unknown PBR 

(2007 final SAR). Therefore, NMFS 

cannot determine whether this fishery 

requires reclassification until more 

information is available. There is no 

observer program for this fishery. 

List of Fisheries 

The following tables set forth the 

proposed list of U.S. commercial 

fisheries according to their classification 

under section 118 of the MMPA. In 

Tables 1 and 2, the estimated number of 

vessels/participants in fisheries 

operating within U.S. waters is 

expressed in terms of the number of 

active participants in the fishery, when 

possible. If this information is not 

available, the estimated number of 

vessels or persons licensed for a 

particular fishery is provided. If no 

recent information is available on the 

number of participants in a fishery, the 

number from the most recent LOF is 

used. For high seas fisheries, Table 3 

lists the number of currently valid 

HSFCA permits held by fishers. 

Although this likely overestimates the 

number of active participants in many 

of these fisheries, the number of valid 

HSFCA permits is the most reliable data 

at this time. 

Tables 1, 2, and 3 also list the marine 

mammal species and stocks incidentally 

killed or injured in each fishery based 

on observer data, logbook data, 

stranding reports, and fisher reports. 

This list includes all species or stocks 

known to be injured or killed in a given 

fishery, but also includes species or 

stocks for which there are anecdotal 

records of an injury or mortality. 

Additionally, species identified by 

logbook entries may not be verified. 

NMFS has designated those stocks 

driving a fishery’s classification (i.e., the 

fishery is classified based on serious 

injuries and mortalities of a marine 

mammal stock greater than 50 percent 

[Category I], or greater than 1 percent 

and less than 50 percent [Category II], of 

a stock’s PBR) by a ‘‘1≥after the stock’s 

name. 

In Tables 1 and 2, there are several 

fisheries classified in Category II that 

have no recent documented injuries or 

mortalities of marine mammals, or that 

did not result in a serious injury or 

mortality rate greater than 1 percent of 

a stock’s PBR level. NMFS has classified 

these fisheries by analogy to other gear 

types that are known to cause mortality 

or serious injury of marine mammals, as 

discussed in the final LOF for 1996 (60 

FR 67063, December 28, 1995), and 

according to factors listed in the 

definition of a ‘‘Category II fishery’’ in 

50 CFR 229.2. NMFS has designated 

those fisheries originally listed by 

analogy in Tables 1 and 2 by a ‘‘2’’ after 

the fishery’s name. 

There are several fisheries in Tables 1, 

2, and 3 in which a portion of the 

fishing vessels cross the EEZ boundary, 

and therefore operate within U.S. waters 

and on the high seas. NMFS has 

designated those fisheries in each Table 

by a ‘‘*’’ after the fishery’s name. 

Table 1 lists commercial fisheries in 

the Pacific Ocean (including Alaska); 

Table 2 lists commercial fisheries in the 

Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico, and 

Caribbean; Table 3 lists commercial 

fisheries on the High Seas; Table 4 lists 

fisheries affected by Take Reduction 

Teams or Plans. 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
33778 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.000</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33779 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.001</GPH>
33780 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.002</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33781 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.003</GPH>
33782 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.004</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33783 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.005</GPH>
33784 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.006</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33785 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.007</GPH>
33786 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.008</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33787 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.009</GPH>
33788 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.010</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33789 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.011</GPH>
33790 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.012</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33791 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.013</GPH>
33792 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.014</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33793 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.015</GPH>
33794 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.016</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33795 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.017</GPH>
33796 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.018</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33797 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.019</GPH>
33798 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.020</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 33799 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALSEP13jn08.021</GPH>
33800 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 115 / Friday, June 13, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

Classification 

The Chief Counsel for Regulation of 

the Department of Commerce certified 

to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 

Small Business Administration that this 

proposed rule would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The factual basis leading to the 

certification is set forth below. 

Under existing regulations, all fishers 

participating in Category I or II fisheries 

must register under the MMPA and 

obtain an Authorization Certificate. The 

Authorization Certificate authorizes the 

taking of marine mammals incidental to 

commercial fishing operations. 

Additionally, fishers may be subject to 

a Take Reduction Plan (TRP) and 

requested to carry an observer. NMFS 

has estimated that approximately 44,200 

fishing vessels, most of which are small 

entities, operate in Category I or II 

fisheries, and therefore, are required to 

register with NMFS. Each region has 

integrated the MMPA registration 

process with existing state and Federal 

registration programs. Fishers who have 

a Federal or state fishery permit or 

landing license, or who are authorized 

through another related Federal or state 

fishery registration program, are 

currently not required to register 

separately under the MMPA or pay the 

$25 registration fee under the MMPA. 

Therefore, there are no direct costs to 

small entities under this proposed rule. 

If a vessel is requested to carry an 

observer, fishers will not incur any 

direct economic costs associated with 

carrying that observer. Potential indirect 

costs to individual fishers required to 

take observers may include: lost space 

on deck for catch, lost bunk space, and 

lost fishing time due to time needed to 

process bycatch data. For effective 

monitoring, however, observers will 

rotate among a limited number of 

vessels in a fishery at any given time 

and each vessel within an observed 

fishery has an equal probability of being 

requested to accommodate an observer. 

Therefore, the potential indirect costs to 

individual fishers are expected to be 

minimal because observer coverage 

would only be required for a small 

percentage of an individual’s total 

annual fishing time. In addition, section 

118 of the MMPA states that an observer 

will not be placed on a vessel if the 

facilities for quartering an observer or 

performing observer functions are 

inadequate or unsafe, thereby exempting 

vessels too small to accommodate an 

observer from this requirement. As a 

result of this certification, an initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis is not 

required and was not prepared. In the 

event that reclassification of a fishery to 

Category I or II results in a TRP, 

economic analyses of the effects of that 

plan will be summarized in subsequent 

rulemaking actions. 

This proposed rule contains 

collection-of-information requirements 

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act. 

The collection of information for the 

registration of fishers under the MMPA 

has been approved by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) under 

OMB control number 0648–0293 (0.15 

hours per report for new registrants and 

0.09 hours per report for renewals). The 

requirement for reporting marine 

mammal injuries or mortalities has been 

approved by OMB under OMB control 

number 0648–0292 (0.15 hours per 

report). These estimates include the 

time for reviewing instructions, 

searching existing data sources, 

gathering and maintaining the data 

needed, and completing and reviewing 

the collection of information. Send 

comments regarding these reporting 

burden estimates or any other aspect of 

the collections of information, including 

suggestions for reducing burden, to 

NMFS and OMB (see ADDRESSES and 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). 

Notwithstanding any other provision 

of law, no person is required to respond 

to nor shall a person be subject to a 

penalty for failure to comply with a 

collection of information subject to the 

requirements of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act unless that collection of 

information displays a currently valid 

OMB control number. 

This proposed rule has been 

determined to be not significant for the 

purposes of Executive Order 12866. 

An environmental assessment (EA) 

was prepared under the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for 

regulations to implement section 118 of 

the MMPA in June 1995. NMFS revised 

that EA relative to classifying U.S. 

commercial fisheries on the LOF in 

December 2005. Both the 1995 EA and 

the 2005 EA concluded that 

implementation of MMPA section 118 

regulations would not have a significant 

impact on the human environment. This 

proposed rule would not make any 

significant change in the management of 

reclassified fisheries, and therefore, this 

proposed rule is not expected to change 

the analysis or conclusion of the 2005 

EA. If NMFS takes a management 

action, for example, through the 

development of a TRP, NMFS will first 

prepare an environmental document, as 

required under NEPA, specific to that 

action. 

This proposed rule will not affect 

species listed as threatened or 

endangered under the Endangered 

Species Act (ESA) or their associated 

critical habitat. The impacts of 

numerous fisheries have been analyzed 

in various biological opinions, and this 

proposed rule will not affect the 

conclusions of those opinions. The 

classification of fisheries on the LOF is 

not considered to be a management 

action that would adversely affect 

threatened or endangered species. If 

NMFS takes a management action, for 

example, through the development of a 

TRP, NMFS would conduct consultation 

under ESA section 7 for that action. 

This proposed rule will have no 

adverse impacts on marine mammals 

and may have a positive impact on 

marine mammals by improving 

knowledge of marine mammals and the 

fisheries interacting with marine 

mammals through information collected 

from observer programs, stranding and 

sighting data, or take reduction teams. 

This proposed rule will not affect the 

land or water uses or natural resources 

of the coastal zone, as specified under 

section 307 of the Coastal Zone 

Management Act. 

Dated: June 9, 2008. 

John Oliver, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Operations, National Marine Fisheries 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 08–1352 Filed 6–10–08; 3:04pm] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS