![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS); U.S. Atlantic Billfish Tournament Management Measures
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: March 15, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 50)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 12154-12158]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr15mr07-39]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 635
[Docket No. 070307055-7055-01; I.D. 022607F]
RIN 0648-AV25
Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS); U.S. Atlantic Billfish
Tournament Management Measures
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to temporarily suspend circle hook requirements
for anglers participating in Atlantic billfish tournaments. The final
rule implementing the Final Consolidated HMS Fishery Management Plan
(FCHMS FMP) published in the Federal Register on October 2, 2006, and
restricted anglers fishing from HMS permitted vessels and participating
in Atlantic billfish tournaments to deploying only non-offset circle
hooks when using natural baits or natural bait/artificial lure
combinations, effective 12:01 am, January 1, 2007. The purpose of the
final rule was to reduce post-release mortality of Atlantic billfish
and other species with which billfish tournament anglers may interact.
NMFS has continued to receive public comment since publication of the
Final CHMS FMP regarding the perceived impacts of the billfish
tournament non-offset circle hook requirement. The objective of this
proposed rulemaking is to increase post-release survival of Atlantic
billfishes by improving long-term compliance with billfish tournament
non-offset circle hook regulations.
DATES: Written comments on the proposed rule must be received by March
30, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on the proposed rule or the Draft
Environmental Assessment (Draft EA) may be submitted to Russell Dunn or
Randy Blankinship, Fisheries Management Specialists, Highly Migratory
Species Management Division, using any of the following methods:
? E-mail: 0648-AV25@noaa.gov Please include the following in
the subject line: ``Comments on Proposed Billfish Circle Hook Rule.''
? Mail: NOAA/NMFS HMS Management Division, 263 13th Avenue
South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701. Please mark the outside of the
envelope ``Comments on Proposed Billfish Circle Hook Rule''.
? Fax: 727-824-5398.
? Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Include in the subject line the following identifier: ``I.D. 022607F.''
The hearing locations are:
1. March 27, 2007 from 7 - 9 p.m. Worcester County Library, Snow
Hill Branch, 307 North Washington Street, Snow Hill, Maryland, 21863.
2. March 28, 2007 from 7 - 9 p.m. Broward County Library, Main
Library, 100 South Andrews Avenue, Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301.
3. March 29, 2007 from 7 - 9 p.m. Carteret Community College,
Joslyn Hall, H.J. McGee, Jr. Building, 3505 Arendell Street, Morehead
City, NC 28557-2989.
Copies of the Draft EA, the 2006 FCHMS FMP and other relevant
documents are available from the Highly Migratory Species Management
Division website at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms or by contacting
Russell Dunn or Randy Blankinship (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Russell Dunn or Randy Blankinship, by
phone: 727-824-5399; by fax: 727-824-5398.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The U.S. recreational fishery for Atlantic billfish is managed
under the Consolidated HMS FMP. Implementing regulations at 50 CFR part
635 are issued under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act)(16 U.S.C. 1801
et seq.), and the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (ATCA) (16 U.S.C. 971
et seq.).
Atlantic billfish management strategies have been guided by
international and domestic considerations and mechanisms since the
1970s. Domestic management of Atlantic billfish resources has been
developed, modified, and implemented in four primary stages and through
a series of other rulemakings. In January 1978, NMFS published the
Preliminary Fishery Management Plan (PMP) for Atlantic Billfish and
Sharks (43 FR 3818), which was supported by an EIS (42 FR 57716). This
PMP was developed and implemented under the authority of the Secretary
of Commerce.
Building upon the PMP for Atlantic Billfish and Sharks was the
Fishery Management Plan for the Atlantic Billfishes (53 FR 21501). This
plan was jointly developed by five Atlantic regional fishery management
councils (Caribbean, Gulf, South Atlantic, Mid-Atlantic, New England)
and implemented in October 1988 (53 FR 37765). The 1988 FMP defined the
Atlantic billfish management unit to include sailfish from the western
Atlantic Ocean, white marlin and blue marlin from the North Atlantic
Ocean, and longbill spearfish from the entire Atlantic Ocean; described
objectives for the Atlantic billfish fishery; and established
management measures to achieve the objectives.
Atlantic blue and white marlin were identified as overfished in
1997 and Atlantic sailfish were identified as overfished in 1998. In
response to Magnuson-Stevens Act requirements, and concurrent with
efforts to develop the 1999 FMP for Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish, and
Sharks, NMFS prepared Amendment One to the Atlantic Billfish Fishery
Management Plan and published final regulations on May 28, 1999 (64 FR
29090). Amendment One maintained the objectives of the original 1988
Billfish FMP and identified a number of additional objectives. On Oct.
2, 2006 (71 FR 58057), NMFS issued the final rule implementing the
Final Consolidated HMS FMP. That document amended and consolidated the
objectives and management measures of the Atlantic Billfish Fishery FMP
with those of the 1999 Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish, and Sharks FMP, among
other actions.
The recent biomass level of Atlantic blue marlin most likely
remains well below the level necessary to produce the maximum
sustainable yield (Bmsy) that was estimated in 2000. Current
and provisional estimates suggest that the fishing mortality rate (F)
has recently declined and is possibly smaller than
Freplacement, but larger than the Fmsy estimated
in the 2000 assessment. Over the period 2001 - 2005, several abundance
indicators suggest that the decline in biomass has been at least
partially arrested, but some other indicators suggest that abundance
has continued to decline.
The 1996, 2000, and 2002 stock assessments for white marlin all
indicated that biomass of white marlin has been below Bmsy
for more than two decades and the stock is overfished. The recent
biomass of Atlantic white marlin most likely remains well below the
Bmsy estimated in the 2002 assessment. Current and
provisional estimates suggest that F is probably smaller than
Freplacement and probably also larger than the Fmsy
estimated in the 2002
[[Page 12155]]
assessment. Over the period 2001-2004, combined longline indices and
some individual fleet indices suggest that the decline has been at
least partially reversed, but some other individual fleet indices
suggest that abundance has continued to decline.
In 2002, the United States undertook a status review of white
marlin pursuant to the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The status review
team determined that white marlin stock status did not warrant a
listing at that time. NMFS was subsequently sued with regard to its
determination not to list Atlantic white marlin as endangered at that
time. In accordance with a court approved settlement agreement, NMFS
has initiated a second ESA listing review for Atlantic white marlin
that will be completed by December 31, 2007.
Prior to January 1, 2007, the recreational Atlantic billfish
fishery was subject to regulations that required fishing permits,
limited allowable gears to rod and reel only, established minimum legal
size limits, specified landing form of retained billfish, mandated
reporting of billfish landings, required registration of all
recreational HMS fishing tournaments and reporting by tournaments that
are selected for reporting, prohibited the retention of longbill
spearfish, and prohibited sale of any billfish, among others. The final
rule implementing the FCHMS FMP (October 2, 2006; 71 FR 58058)
implemented additional regulations that applied to the Atlantic
recreational billfish fishery. These regulations became effective
January 1, 2007, and limited U.S. landings of Atlantic blue and white
marlin to 250 individual fish, combined, on an annual basis. The final
rule also implemented regulations that require anglers fishing from HMS
permitted vessels and participating in Atlantic billfish tournaments to
use only non-offset circle hooks when deploying natural baits or
natural bait/artificial lure combinations. These regulations allow the
use of traditional J-hooks with artificial lures in tournaments, and do
not impose hook requirements on recreational fishermen fishing outside
of Atlantic billfish tournaments.
NMFS implemented circle hook regulations in the FCHMS FMP
consistent with the objectives of the FMP, including reducing post-
release mortality of Atlantic billfish. Atlantic billfish tournament
circle hook requirements were determined to be an effective mechanism
to target a known source of billfish mortality in the directed
recreational marlin fishery. Recent studies have shown that circle
hooks can substantially reduce injury and post-hooking mortality of
Atlantic billfish and other species relative to J-hooks. Horodysky and
Graves (2005) found that circle hooks can reduce post-release mortality
of white marlin by 65.7 percent relative to J-hooks. They also found
that white marlin caught on J-hooks are 41 times more likely to be
deeply hooked and 15 times more likely to sustain hook-induced trauma
resulting in bleeding relative to fish caught on circle hooks. Prince
et al. (2002), found similar results pertaining to sailfish. Prince et
al., also found no statistical difference in catch per unit of effort
between circle hooks and J-hooks when fishing for blue marlin. Cooke
and Suski (2004) analyzed the results of more than 40 circle hook
studies examining both marine and fresh water species. For all species
examined, they found that mortality rates were approximately 50 percent
lower when using circle hooks relative to J-hooks. During the analysis
of the FCHMS FMP, NMFS found that between 1999 and 2004, the number of
Atlantic white marlin released alive during tournaments ranged from a
low of 614 to a high of 2,207. Based on an estimated 35 percent post-
release mortality rate for white marlin caught on J-hooks (Horodysky
and Graves, 2005), this would equate to between 215 and 773 Atlantic
white marlin that would not be expected to survive the catch and
release experience. Applying an estimated 12 percent post-release
mortality rate for white marlin caught on circle hooks (Horodysky and
Graves, 2005) to the same number of released white marlin, this would
equate to between 74 and 265 Atlantic white marlin that would not be
expected to survive the catch and release experience. The difference
between the two indicated a potential ecological benefit of between 141
and 508 Atlantic white marlin surviving the catch and release experience
if anglers used circle hooks in tournaments rather then J-hooks.
NMFS has continued to receive public comment on the perceived
impacts of the billfish tournament circle hook requirement contained in
the FCHMS FMP since release of that document in July of 2006. This
included comments by anglers indicating that circle hooks will not work
well for catching blue marlin; expressing a desire by anglers to
continue using J-hooks while fishing for Atlantic blue marlin in
tournaments; and noting that deploying J-hooks on mixed-baits with
heavy fishing gear was an effective and popular technique employed by
anglers during fishing tournaments. Comments also stated that fishing
for billfish with J-hooks trolled at high speeds with heavy tackle did
not result in high post-release hooking mortalities of Atlantic
billfish species. Finally, some commenters supported full
implementation of tournament circle hook requirements. In response to
these concerns, NMFS considered development of an exempted fishing
permit (EFP) program to collect additional data on this fishing
activity in billfish tournaments. Comments received on the development
of an EFP program to collect data within billfish tournaments expressed
concern over the difficulty of standardizing fishing gear type and use
in a tournament setting; concern over the quality of data collected in
a tournament setting; and the scientific applicability of such data
given the fishing characteristics of tournaments (fast paced activity,
focus on catching and retaining specific species and/or size classes,
and varying tournament rules), among others. Finally, comments were
received that expressed a general lack of support for conducting
research and/or data.
Based on public comment, NMFS has since determined that the
collection of data to evaluate the impacts of J-hooks and heavy tackle
on Atlantic blue marlin during billfish tournaments would be
problematic because of the varying conditions and methodologies
discussed above that would likely occur within and between tournaments,
among others. For these reasons, NMFS chose not to issue EFPs to
Atlantic billfish tournaments (72 FR 4691; February 1, 2007). Available
data indicate that hook type (circle hook versus J-hook) is not a major
factor influencing catch rates of blue marlin. Nevertheless, many
anglers believe circle hooks to be ineffective and that J-hooks can be
deployed in a manner resulting in low post-release mortality. The
result has been strong resistance to implementation of circle hooks in
certain circumstances and regions. Available studies clearly
demonstrate the benefits of circle hooks for billfish and other
species, and NMFS believes that concerns over the effectiveness of
circle hooks when fishing for Atlantic blue marlin, as well as
resistance to their use by tournament anglers, can be overcome as
anglers become more familiar and proficient with them.
In this action, NMFS proposes to temporarily suspend existing
regulations that require Atlantic billfish tournament participants who
are fishing from HMS permitted vessels and deploying natural bait or
natural bait/artificial lure combinations to use non-offset circle
hooks. The preferred alternative is intended to increase post-release
survival of Atlantic billfishes by
[[Page 12156]]
improving long-term compliance with circle hook regulations. To
accomplish this, the proposed rule would provide additional time for
recreational billfish tournament anglers to become more familiar and
proficient with circle hooks and increase awareness among tournament
anglers of circle hook conservation benefits. NMFS has received input
from numerous anglers and tournament operators who voluntarily switched
to using circle hooks prior to the existing tournament requirement who
now indicate a strong preference for circle hooks over J-hooks based on
conservation benefits and who claim a lower rate of lost fish on circle
hooks. Based on the economic incentives discussed above, the input from
experienced billfish anglers who have acquired expertise with circle
hooks, and existing studies (Prince et al., 2002) indicating that hook
type (circle hook vs. J-hook) is not a significant factor in
catchability of Atlantic blue marlin, NMFS is confident that the
concerns of anglers regarding the effectiveness of circle hooks for
catching blue marlin and the resistance to using circle hooks stemming
from preconceived ideas of circle hook efficacy and a lack of
experience with circle hooks will be overcome if anglers are given more
time to become familiar and proficient with them through an additional
phase-in period.
Fishing techniques vary by species, region, time of day, weather
conditions, type of gear and bait deployed, and numerous other factors.
There are significant differences in the techniques employed by
fishermen when using J-hooks or circle hooks. Two examples are the
technique of ``setting the hook'' with J-hooks and baiting techniques.
With J-hooks, anglers are taught to ``set the hook'' at a given time by
jerking hard on the pole and line. This action is meant to drive the
point of the J-hook deep into the flesh of the fish to help ensure that
the fish cannot escape by throwing the hook loose during the fight.
With circle hooks, setting the hook is ineffective because of the hook
shape and is a technique that often leads to a loss of the fish.
Anglers must not set the hook, but rather wait for the fish to hook
itself. This is a significant change in fishing technique for virtually
all anglers and learning the subtleties of effective circle hook
fishing can take a significant amount of practice. Baiting techniques
or configurations can substantially vary between J-hooks and circle
hooks. One example is with J-hooks, fishermen may bury the J-hook in
the body of the bait, with only the point exposed through a slit in the
stomach. With circle hooks, the hook must be free of obstructions and
is thus sometimes attached to a halter made of fishing line above the
head of a bait by rubber bands. Baiting techniques for circle hooks
vary by bait species and target species. It may take a substantial
amount of time for anglers to learn new baiting techniques effective
with circle hooks.
This proposed rule would suspend existing Atlantic billfish
tournament circle hook regulations until January 1, 2008, providing
approximately seven months for anglers to learn fishing and baiting
techniques appropriate for Atlantic billfishes prior to re-
implementation of tournament circle hook requirements. As discussed
above, NMFS is confident that the provision of additional time for
anglers to adjust to circle hook fishing and baiting techniques will
help assuage the concerns of anglers and lead to increased compliance
with circle hook requirements.
As of January 29, 2007, the potential universe of affected anglers
includes: 24,664 HMS Angling category permit holders; 4,140 HMS
Charter/Headboat category permit holders, and 4,345 General Category
permit holders. All of the aforementioned permit holders are eligible
to participate in registered Atlantic HMS tournaments.
This proposed rule would be expected to have limited short-term
adverse ecological impacts as it would temporarily suspend billfish
tournament non-offset circle hook requirements for a limited period of
time; approximately seven months (May 15 - December 31). This may
result in temporary increases in injuries and post-release mortalities
for species with which Atlantic billfish fishermen interact. Tournament
catch data indicate that tournament interactions with billfish decline
to relatively low levels during the last quarter of the year (October -
December), with the exception being blue marlin in Puerto Rico. An
examination of the tournament catch data indicate that the preferred
alternative could result in approximately 317 additional Atlantic white
marlin mortalities as a result of J-hook use instead of circle hook use
in tournaments. As NMFS cannot quantify the proportion of anglers who
may continue to use non-offset circle hooks in billfish tournaments,
this estimate assumes all billfish tournament anglers will deploy J-
hooks for the period May 15, 2007 - December 31, 2007. NMFS is unable
to quantify relative changes in mortality for Atlantic blue marlin or
sailfish because of a lack of data regarding post-release survival of
these species. NMFS recognizes that some unquantifiable proportion of
billfish tournament anglers will continue to use circle hooks. As a
result, the actual number of additional Atlantic white marlin
mortalities resulting from J-hook use in tournaments may be lower than
the estimate provided above.
The preferred alternative that would suspend billfish tournament
circle hook requirements and allow the use of J-hooks on natural baits
is not anticipated to increase fishing effort in any measurable way
because no decrease in effort was anticipated when tournament circle
hook requirements went into effect. Based on the pace of 2007
tournament registrations, no decrease has been identified, and in fact,
tournament registrations for 2007 have been received at a near record
pace. It is also not anticipated to result in increased interactions
with protected resources. NMFS has received one anecdotal report of
such an interaction in HMS recreational fisheries since late 2002.
Thus, interactions between the directed Atlantic billfish fishery and
protected species appear to be extremely rare. Further, if the proposed
rule results in improved long term compliance with circle hook
requirements, as anticipated, it may also contribute to a long-term
reduction in interactions, injuries, and mortalities of protected
resources, and other species with which billfish tournament fishermen
interact as a result of hooking mechanics, improved hooking location,
and decreased damage of vital tissues generally associated with the use
of circle hooks.
Should anglers better accept and comply with tournament circle hook
restrictions in the long-term as anticipated, NMFS believes that there
could be an unquantifiable long-term ecological benefit stemming from
increased use of circle hooks both in tournaments and outside of
tournaments. The non-tournament ecological benefit may accrue as non-
tournament anglers frequently view tournament anglers as innovative
leaders and seek to emulate their successful fishing techniques. NMFS
believes that this pattern of non-tournament anglers emulating the
fishing techniques of successful tournament anglers will hold true with
the adoption of circle hooks by tournament anglers as well.
Under the proposed measure, NMFS anticipates minimal social or
economic impacts. Atlantic billfish anglers likely already possess both
circle hooks and J-hooks, and the proposed measure is not anticipated
to affect angler participation in tournaments. However, there could be
a minor temporary boost to angler's
[[Page 12157]]
willingness to pay and/or angler consumer surplus based on the
perceived ability to more readily catch Atlantic billfish on J-hooks.
As stated above, any such changes would likely be so small as to be not
measurable. Long-term positive impacts on angler's willingness to pay
and/or angler consumer surplus are possible if increased acceptance of
circle hooks in tournaments contributes to stock rebuilding and an
increased abundance of Atlantic billfish in the future. This measure is
proposed because it could lead to increased survival of released
Atlantic billfish in the long-term by improving acceptance and
compliance with recreational circle hook regulations, and thus
contribute to rebuilding of these stocks.
Classification
This proposed rule is published under the authority of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act and ATCA. NMFS has preliminarily determined that
this action is consistent with section 304(b)(1) of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act, including the national standards, and other applicable law.
An EA has been prepared that describes the impact on the human
environment that could result from implementation of the preferred
alternative to improve post-release survival of Atlantic billfishes by
improving acceptance and compliance with tournament circle hook
regulations. Based on the EA, Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), and
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, and a review of the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) criteria for significance evaluated above (NAO 216-6 Section
6.02), no significant effect on the quality of the human environment is
anticipated from this action.
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866. In compliance with Section 603 of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act, an Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis was prepared for this rule. The IRFA analyzes the anticipated
economic impacts of the preferred actions and any significant
alternatives to the proposed rule that could minimize economic impacts
on small entities. A summary of the IRFA is below. The full IRFA and
analysis of economic and ecological impacts are available from NMFS
(see ADDRESSES).
In compliance with Section 603(b)(1) and (2) of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, the purpose of this proposed rulemaking is, consistent
with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and ATCA, to improve post-release
survival of Atlantic billfishes by improving acceptance and compliance
with tournament circle hook regulations. Section 603(b)(3) requires
Agencies to provide an estimate of the number of small entities to
which the rule would apply. The proposed actions to modify recreational
billfish tournament circle hook regulations could directly affect
24,664 HMS Angling category permit holders; 4,140 HMS Charter/Headboat
category permit holders; and 4,345 General Category permit holders. All
of the aforementioned permit holders are eligible to participate in
registered Atlantic HMS tournaments. Of these, 8,475 permit holders
(the combined number of HMS Charter/Headboat category permit holders
and General Category permit holders) are considered small business
entities according to the Small Business Administration's standard for
defining a small entity.
This proposed rule does not contain any new reporting, record
keeping, or other compliance requirements (5 U.S.C. 603(c)(1)-(4)).
Similarly, this proposed rule does not conflict, duplicate, or overlap
with other relevant Federal rules (5 U.S.C. 603(b)(5).
One of the requirements of an IRFA, under Section 603 of the
Regulatory flexibility Act, is to describe any alternatives to the
proposed rule that accomplish the stated objectives and that minimize
any significant economic impacts (5 U.S.C. 603(c)). Additionally, the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 (c)(1)-(4)) lists four
categories for alternatives that must be considered. These categories
are: (1) establishment of differing compliance or reporting
requirements or timetables that take into account the resources
available to small entities; (2) clarification, consolidation, or
simplification of compliance and reporting requirements under the rule
for such small entities; (3) use of performance rather than design
standards; and (4) exemptions from coverage for small entities.
In order to meet the objectives of this proposed rule, consistent
with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, ATCA, and the Endangered Species Act
(ESA), NMFS cannot exempt small entities or change the reporting
requirements only for small entities. Thus, there are no alternatives
that fall under the first and fourth categories described above. In
addition, none of the alternatives considered would result in
additional reporting or compliance requirements (category two above).
NMFS does not know of any performance or design standards that would
satisfy the aforementioned objectives of this rulemaking while,
concurrently, complying with the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
NMFS considered three different alternatives to increase post-
release survival of Atlantic billfishes by improving long-term
compliance with circle hook regulations. As previously described, and
as expanded upon below, NMFS has provided justification for the
selection of the preferred alternative to achieve the desired objectives.
Alternative 1 is the no action, or status quo alternative. Under
current regulations, anglers fishing from an HMS permitted vessel and
participating in an Atlantic billfish tournament must use only non-
offset circle hooks when deploying natural bait or natural bait/
artificial lure combinations. Under alternative 1, there would be no
change in the existing regulations, and as such no change is
anticipated in the current baseline economic and social impacts
associated with the status quo alternative. This alternative is not
preferred because other alternatives may allow for a greater long-term
conservation benefit for Atlantic billfish by potentially achieving better
acceptance of, and compliance with, tournament circle hook requirements.
Under alternative 2, existing Atlantic billfish tournament circle
hook requirements, as described in the discussion of alternative 1
above, would be temporarily suspended through December 31, 2007.
Current Atlantic billfish tournament circle hook requirements would be
reinstated unchanged at 12:01 am January 1, 2008. This alternative
would provide roughly seven additional months for anglers to become
familiar and proficient with circle hooks as well as better understand
their benefits. NMFS anticipates that tournament anglers will practice
with circle hooks outside of tournaments during the suspension to gain
proficiency with circle hooks to improve their chances of winning prize
money in tournaments upon re-implementation of the circle hook
requirement in 2008. Motivation for anglers to do so includes vying for
top tournament prizes, which in the largest tournaments have exceeded
one million dollars for a winning fish. Anglers who have not gained
substantial expertise with circle hooks will have a diminished chance
of catching a prize winning fish.
NMFS has received input from numerous anglers and tournament
operators who voluntarily switched to using circle hooks prior to the
existing tournament requirement who now indicate a strong preference
for circle hooks over J-hooks based on
[[Page 12158]]
conservation benefits and who claim a lower rate of lost fish on circle
hooks. Based on the economic incentives discussed above, the input from
experienced billfish anglers who have acquired expertise with circle
hooks, and existing studies (Prince et al., 2002) indicating that hook
type (circle hook vs. J-hook) is not a significant factor in
catchability of Atlantic blue marlin, NMFS is confident that the
concerns of anglers regarding the effectiveness of circle hooks for
catching blue marlin and the resistance to using circle hooks stemming
from preconceived ideas of circle hook efficacy and a lack of
experience with circle hooks will be overcome if anglers are given more
time to become familiar and proficient with them through an additional
phase-in period. NMFS believes that in the long-term, the additional
time provided to anglers to become more familiar and proficient with
circle hooks may lead to higher levels of compliance with circle-hook
requirements and increased use of circle hooks outside of tournaments
thereby providing an increased conservation benefit for Atlantic
billfish in the long-term.
NMFS estimates that there will be few or no measurable social or
economic impacts resulting from the preferred alternative. However, it
is possible that the temporary suspension of billfish tournament circle
hook requirements may provide for a short-term increase in angler's
willingness to pay based on the perception among many anglers that it
is easier to catch a billfish with a J-hooks than a circle hook.
Nonetheless, based in part on recent high levels of tournament
registrations for 2007 occurring under circle hook requirements, NMFS
does not anticipate any measurable change in billfish tournament
participation, increases in purchases of fuel or dockage, or other
shore-side services. Should alternative 2 result in an increased
ecological benefit, there could be a long-term gain in angler's
willingness to pay if billfish stocks recover and interactions with
billfish increase.
NMFS does not anticipate that alternative 2 would result in
additional expenditures to comply with the proposed regulations.
Relative to expenditures that can quickly reach into the hundreds of
thousands of dollars, or more, to purchase, equip, maintain, and fuel
sportfishing vessels, hook expenditures are negligible. The FCHMS FMP
identifies hook prices as ranging from $0.50 to $7.50 ($2.70 average)
each for J-hooks and from $0.30 to $7.00 ($2.24 average) each for
circle hooks (2006 dollars). Tournament anglers likely already possess
circle hooks which have been required since January 1, 2007, and which
would be required upon reinstatement of existing requirements on
January 1, 2008, under the preferred alternative. Further, existing
regulations allow anglers to use J-hooks on artificial lures in
tournaments and do not require anglers to utilize circle hooks outside
of tournaments; because of this, anglers most likely already possess J-
hooks, should they choose to stop using circle hooks in tournaments.
Alternative 2 does not mandate any particular terminal tackle, so
anglers would be free to use any hook type, circle or J, available and
which they already possess, which would further minimizing any
potential compliance costs.
Alternative 3, would remove Atlantic billfish tournament circle
hook requirements and promote voluntary use of circle hooks by
tournament anglers, and would be expected to have minimal impacts on
businesses. Minor economic impacts would be incurred by those
tournaments that choose to reprint tournament rules for distribution.
Alternative 3 could result in minor short-term increases in angler-
consumer surplus and/or willingness to pay, as anglers may perceive
that their short-term catch rates of Atlantic billfish may increase
with the use of J-hooks. However, alternative 3 would not be expected
to increase angler consumer surplus or willingness to pay in the long-
term as it would result in an increase in post-release hooking
mortality and thus be less likely to contribute to rebuilding of
Atlantic billfish populations.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 635
Fish, Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing vessels, Management.
Dated: March 9, 2007.
William T. Hogarth,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
For reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 635 is proposed to
be amended as follows:
PART 635--ATLANTIC HIGHLY MIGRATORY SPECIES
1. The authority citation for part 635 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In Sec. 635.21, paragraph (e)(2)(iii) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 635.21 Gear operation and deployment restrictions.
* * * * *
(e)* * *
(2)* * *
(iii) After December 31, 2007, persons who have been issued or are
required to be issued a permit under this part and who are
participating in a ``tournament'', as defined in 635.2, that bestows
points, prizes, or awards for Atlantic billfish must deploy only non-
offset circle hooks when using natural bait or natural bait/artificial
lure combinations, and may not deploy a J-hook or an offset circle hook
in combination with natural bait or a natural bait/artificial lure
combination.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 07-1216 Filed 3-12-07; 2:43 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S