Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 38 / Monday, March 1, 2021 / Rules and Regulations Response: Sections 3.5.7 and 3.5.8 in the Analysis describes rockfish products, markets, and associated wholesale market values See ADDRESSES. Section 4.1 of the Analysis goes into detail on how each National Standard is met See ADDRESSES. The Rockfish Program establishes CQ
allocations that allow stakeholders and groups of stakeholders to more efficiently utilize the CGOA resource relative to the limited access management that would go into place with no action. Efficiency is enhanced by allowing CQ holders to scale effort spatially and temporally to reduce costs and increase value.
In addition, there is a downward trend for rockfish products; however, it is attributed to currency valuation and rising secondary processing costs, not slower fishing time. At this time, NMFS
is not aware of reduced quality control under the Rockfish Program, either at this present time or at implementation of the Pilot Program, when the LAPP
was established. As such, NMFS does not provide training procedures that address quality control in an established LAPP.
Comment 11: One commenter questioned if this rule supports the common or great good and if this rule is against the rights of other businesses fishing in the area for their own productivity.
Response: In recommending Amendment 111, the Council considered the 10 National Standards as contained in the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
The National Standards are principles with which fishery management plans and their implementing regulations must be consistent, thereby ensuring sustainable and responsible fishery management. Section 4.1 of the Analysis goes into detail on how each National Standard is met See ADDRESSES. This final rule promotes National Standards 5 and 6, specifically, in terms of community and economic considerations. This final rule maintains existing fish harvesting efficiencies under the Rockfish Program and modifies specific administrative provisions to improve operational efficiency of the Rockfish Program. The Rockfish Program takes into account the unique nature of the CGOA rockfish fishery in terms of its timing during the fishing year and value to the community of Kodiak. The Rockfish Program allows the fishery to be prosecuted during a longer period of time and avoid conflicts with the salmon fisheries that take place during July.
Comment 12: In the preamble of the proposed rule, NMFS omitted mention of thornyhead rockfish Sebastolobus
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:15 Feb 26, 2021

Jkt 253001

alaskanus, which is a secondary species for both catcher vessel and catcher processor cooperatives.
Response: NMFS acknowledges the error in the preamble of the proposed rule. The secondary species rationalized under the Rockfish Program include Pacific cod, rougheye rockfish, shortraker rockfish, sablefish, and thornyhead rockfish. The regulatory text correctly specifies Rockfish Program secondary species. In Section 2.2 of the Analysis, thornyhead rockfish are discussed in detail as a secondary species See ADDRESSES.
Comment 13: The proposed regulation will undermine both the environmental and economic protections Congress intended with the MSA by increasing the TACs while simultaneously removing the sensible reporting and monitoring of this commercial activity.
The past disasters, both for rockfish and for the people who depend on them for their livelihood, show a clear need for sensible common sense restrictions on fishing and continued reporting mandates.
Response: One of the goals of the Rockfish Program is to enhance resource conservation in the CGOA rockfish fisheries. The Rockfish Program, as implemented by this rule and Amendment 111 to the GOA FMP, continues the cooperative management structure that provides the fleet with tools to minimize bycatch to the extent practicable, reduce discards and improve utilization of groundfish species.
Overfishing Limits OFLs and TACs are set each year with conservation in mind. The Rockfish Programs primary and secondary species are not subject to overfishing and are not overfished;
TACs are set in a precautionary manner.
The current harvest specifications process and authorities for in-season management prevent overfishing and provide for the Rockfish Program to achieve optimum yield on a continuing basis. As described in the proposed rule and Section 2.2 of the Analysis, and this final rule, harvest of Rockfish Program quota will continue to be established by the Council and NMFS through the annual harvest specifications 85 FR
13802, March 10, 2020 See ADDRESSES. Amendment 111 and this final rule do not substantively change conservation and management of the species managed under the CGOA
Rockfish Program.
As described in the response to comment 8, this final rule makes minor administrative changes to the Rockfish Program, none of which modify the types of information that NMFS relies on to make fishery management
PO 00000

Frm 00043

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

11899

decisions. This final rule does not change the data sources used to monitor the harvest of species allocated under the Rockfish Program.
Comment 14: The MSA states that any conservation efforts in the area must take into account any potential effects it could have on surrounding fishing communities. Fishing communities are defined as a social or economic group whose members reside in a specific location and share a common dependency on commercial, recreational, or subsistence fishing.
This would include many of the regions indigenous communities. Amendment 111 has not demonstrated sufficient concern towards the cultural and health impacts it will have on Alaska Native communities.
Putting the areas rockfish population at risk of overharvesting would have direct negative impacts on Alaska Native communities who have long depended on rockfish for nutritional and cultural needs. Lack of precautions to assure sustainable catch of rockfish populations could have negative impacts on food insecurity. The ambition of industry should not curtail the cultural and subsistence use of wild fish stocks by Native Alaskans. We request that the agency review and weigh the impact that this rulemaking will have on Native Alaskan communities.
Response: As explained in the response to comment 12, Amendment 111 and this final rule do not substantively change conservation and management of the species managed in the CGOA Rockfish Program. Section 2.2 of the Analysis and the response to comment 12 describe how the GOA
rockfish population is not at risk of being overfished or subjected to overfishing See ADDRESSES.
This final rule and Amendment 111
are consistent with National Standard 8
and maintain the existing management structure of the Rockfish Program. As described in Section 3.5.6 of the Analysis and the Social Impact Assessment, no issues were identified for this final rule that would put the sustained participation of any fishing communities, including Alaska Native communities, at risk. Implementing this final rule would not change the community protection measures built into the Rockfish Program and previously found to be functioning as intended. The Rockfish Program is likely to have continued beneficial impacts on fishing communities.
Patterns of community participation in the CGOA rockfish fisheries are unlikely to change with implementation of the final rule. Among communities
E:FRFM01MRR1.SGM

01MRR1