Center for Biological Diversity
NOAARulemakingNOAA-NMFS-2008-0096

Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Annual Catch Limits; National Standard Guidelines

RIN
Last modified
Apr 2, 2022
Comment window
closed 6518d ago
Center for Biological Diversity filings
2

Activity

Center for Biological Diversity filed 2 comments on this docket between Nov 20, 2008 and Nov 25, 2008. 22 other organizations filed here. The comment window closed 6518d ago.

What Center for Biological Diversity filed (2)

Nov 25, 2008· Comment from Andrea Treece, Center for Biological Diversity· NOAA-NMFS-2008-0096-0051

Re: 0648-AV60; Comments on Annual Catch Limits Proposed Rule Dear Mr. Millikan, The Center for Biological Diversity offers these comments the National Marine Fisheries Service?????????s (?????????NMFS?????????) proposed revisions to the guidelines for National Standard 1 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (?????????MSA?????????). 73 Fed. Reg. 32526 (June 9, 2008). Overall, we support many aspects of the proposed rule that will improve efforts to end overfishing. However, several aspects of the rule must be strengthened if it is to be successful. We discuss these items below. The purpose of the proposed rule is to put in place mechanisms necessary to end overfishing in overfished fisheries by 2010 and to prevent or end overfishing in all fisheries by 2011. Such measures are crucial. Too many fisheries around the nation are overfished or are experiencing overfishing. Data gaps, bycatch mortality, lack of coordination at state, federal, and international levels, and failure to formulate and implement effective management measures have contributed to the degradation of our fisheries. The accountability measures (?????????AMs?????????) and conservative methods for setting catch limits contained in the proposed rule are critical to addressing these chronic management problems. We support NMFS?????????s proposal to set acceptable biological catch (?????????ABC?????????) levels lower than overfishing limits (?????????OFL?????????) and annual catch targets (?????????ACT?????????) lower than annual catch limits (????????? ACL?????????). Doing so accounts for uncertainty in estimating the OFL as well as uncertainty in accounting for catch and delays in halting catch once the ACT is reached. Leaving a buffer between the number of fish allowed to be caught the maximum number that can be caught sustainably is crucial to preventing overfishing. In addition, we support the accountability measures contained in the proposed rule. These measures, which are aimed at preventing ACL overages from occurring during a particular year or recurring in future years, are particularly important for rebuilding fish stocks. NMFS?????????s proposal to reduce the ACL for a stock in a rebuilding plan in the next fishing year by the full amount of the ACL overage in the current year is a common sense approach to ensuring that the rebuilding plan will succeed. Similarly, NMFS has proposed more stringent measures for rebuilding severely depleted fish stocks. We agree that when fishery managers fail to meet their deadline for rebuilding such fish stocks, it is appropriate and necessary to set catch limits at no more than 75% of the OFL. As with any fish stock, the actual catch limit set should ultimately be dictated by the best available science. The final rule should make clear that fishery managers may not simply set catch limits for severely depleted stocks at 75% of OFL if the best available science dictates a lower catch limit ????????? or no catch at all. While we support aspects of the proposed rule, we also see room for improvement. For instance, the rule should require, rather than simply recommend, that catch limits be set using the best available science and account for scientific and management uncertainty. Given that fishery managers must often rely on incomplete data and less than perfect modeling exercises to predict ABC, OFL, ACT, and ACL, catch limits must be set at levels that prevent overfishing and allow rebuilding even when uncertainty in estimating stock levels or fishing effort results in greater impacts on the stock than expected. Indeed, the historic failure to take this precautionary approach has resulted in sustained overfishing and prevented the recovery of many of the nation?????????s fish populations. A precautionary approach must also be taken with respect to multiple fish stocks that are managed as a single unit. The danger in managing stocks as a unit is that the catch limits may be…

Nov 20, 2008· Comment from Andrea Treece, Center for Biological Diversity· NOAA-NMFS-2008-0096-0007

Filed on regulations.gov — full text not in the inline record.

Abstract

NMFS proposes revisions to the guidelines for National Standard 1 (NS1) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA). This action is necessary to provide guidance on how to comply with new annual catch limit (ACL) and accountability measure (AM) requirements for ending overfishing of fisheries managed by federal fishery management plans (FMPs). It also clarifies the relationship between ACLs, maximum sustainable yield (MSY), optimum yield (OY), and other applicable reference points. The intent of this action is to facilitate compliance with requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act to end and prevent overfishing, rebuild overfished stocks and achieve OY.

View on regulations.gov →