Atlantic Shark Fisheries

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

50 CFR Part 678

[Docket No. 920409-4205; I.D. 110493B]

RIN 0648-AD12

Atlantic Shark Fisheries

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this final rule to implement certain measures

authorized by the Fishery Management Plan for Sharks of the Atlantic

Ocean (FMP) that were part of an interim final rule. Final measures

implemented by this rule: Clarify operation of vessels with a Federal

commercial permit, establish a fishing year, consolidate the

regulations for drift gillnets, require dealers to obtain a permit to

purchase sharks, require dealer reports, establish recreational bag

limits, establish quotas for commercial landings and provide for

commercial fishery closures when quotas are reached. The intended

effect of this rule is to prevent overfishing of shark resources,

encourage consistent Federal and state management of shark stocks,

increase the benefits from shark resources to the Nation while

preventing waste, and standardize data reporting requirements among

different fisheries to avoid confusion among fishermen with multiple

permits.

EFFECTIVE DATES: November 17, 1994, except for Secs. 678.4(a)(2),

678.5(b), and 678.7(y), which are effective January 1, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the FMP and related documents, including the

Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (RFA),

and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), may be obtained from the

Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 9450 Koger Boulevard, St. Petersburg,

FL 33702, (813) 893-3161.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: C. Michael Bailey, 301-713-2347, FAX

301-713-2299, Kevin Foster, 508-281-9260, or Michael E. Justen, 813-

893-3161.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FMP was prepared by NMFS under authority

of section 304(f)(3) of the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and

Management Act (Magnuson Act). The development and current status of

the recreational and commercial shark fisheries, the status of the

shark stocks, the history of FMP preparation, the proposed management

measures, and the anticipated impacts of the proposed management

measures were discussed in the preamble to the proposed rule to

implement the FMP (57 FR 24222, June 8, 1992) and are not repeated

here. The interim final rule was published on April 26, 1993 (58 FR

21931), with a request for comments on the permit condition, fishing

year, bag limits, commercial quotas, the allocation of the large

coastal species group between the commercial and recreational sectors,

and mandatory dealer permitting and reporting. A summary of the public

comments and NMFS responses on the FMP and the proposed rule were

provided in the preamble of the interim final rule and are not repeated

here.

Comments and Responses

The interim final rule requested comments on the fishing year

(Sec. 678.20), bag limits (Sec. 678.22), commercial quotas

(Sec. 678.23), permit conditions (Sec. 678.4), potential changes

involving the allocation of the large coastal species group between the

commercial and recreational sectors, and mandatory dealer permitting

and reporting requirements. Comments were to be received by June 25,

1993. Agency responses to the public comments follow.

1. Permit Conditions

Comment. Florida and Georgia contended that the Federal

regulations, as drafted, enabled commercial fishermen with a Federal

permit to fish for sharks in state waters and not comply with the more

restrictive state fishing, catch, and gear measures. Furthermore,

Florida contended that the interim final rule was inconsistent with the

State's Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP) and stated that it planned

to request mediation under the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA).

Response. It is NMFS' intent that any fisherman issued a Federal

permit must comply with the Federal requirements, regardless of where

he/she is fishing. However, to enable states to enforce their more

restrictive regulations on anyone fishing in state waters, NMFS has

agreed to change the permit conditions to allow Florida and any other

state to enforce their more restrictive regulations on federally

permitted fishermen when they fish in state waters.

2. Bag Limit--Large Coastal Species and Pelagic Shark Species

Comment. A regional fishery management council, a commercial

fishing association, a scientific association, and a conservation

association recommended that NMFS reduce the bag limit for the large

coastal/pelagic shark species, combined, from four to two sharks per

trip per vessel. The purpose of the reduction would be to afford

additional protection to the large coastal species. The FMP determined

that sharks of the large coastal species group were overfished.

Response. NMFS does not agree that the bag limits need

modification. NMFS applied a four-fish bag limit to recreational

fishermen because the projected percentage reduction in catch would be

28 percent and roughly equivalent to the reduction in landings of large

coastal species for the commercial sector.

This approach balances access to the resource by the recreational

sector with reasonable limitations to allow for recovery of the

resource. Recreational anglers do not have to harvest the trip limit of

sharks, since they have the option of releasing their catch and

voluntarily conserving the resource. This trip limit merely sets the

upper limit for the recreational catch.

3. Commercial Quotas--Large Coastal and Pelagic Shark Species

Comment. Two commercial fishermen's associations, a scientific

association, an animal rights association, and a conservation

association commented on the commercial quotas for the large coastal

and pelagic species. One commercial fishermen's association generally

supported the level of the quotas for the large coastal and pelagic

species groups. This association requested that NMFS dedicate the

amount of the pelagic quota to the mako, porbeagle, and thresher

sharks. The association commented that the quota could be filled

prematurely due to the possible emergence of a directed fishery for

blue sharks or any other species. The other commercial fishermen's

association argued that the level of the harvest of large coastal

sharks was significantly understated due to under-reporting,

misreporting, and misclassification of the landings by species.

Accordingly, the amount of the quota was understated and should be

higher. The impact of the reduced quotas would be severe on these

fishermen. The scientific association, animal rights group, and the

conservation association stated that the level of harvest was too high

and the quota for the large coastal species group should be reduced. In

addition, the conservation association recommended that NMFS select the

most conservative alternative (Option 3) developed by a scientific peer

committee consisting of outside scientific experts and NMFS scientists

(Review Committee).

Response. NMFS believes that the quota is set at an appropriate

level. To ensure that all FMP management measures were based upon the

best scientific information available, a revised assessment of the

condition of the large coastal species group was completed by the

Southeast Fisheries Science Center, NMFS, using new or corrected

information obtained from commercial fishermen and other entities

during the public comment periods. At the time that this review was

conducted, shark landings data were available only through 1991, and

these were used to establish quotas for 1993 through 1995. The Review

Committee reviewed the revised assessment, agreed that the large

coastal species group was overfished, recommended that the calendar

year 1993 landings for the large coastal species group be reduced below

the calendar year 1991 landings level of 4,319 metric tons dressed

weight (mt dw) to rebuild the resource, and provided three options for

either maintaining the resource at current levels or providing the

conditions for rebuilding the resource to a fully exploited level. NMFS

selected the Review Committee's second option, which established 1993

total landings of 2,900 mt dw for the large coastal species group.

Landings of large coastal species in 1992 were 4,461 mt, and in 1993

reached the quota level of 2,900 mt.

Based on historical patterns of reported landings over the period

1986-91, NMFS allocated the allowable harvest levels among the

commercial and recreational user groups. The commercial quota of 2,436

mt represented a 29-percent reduction from the average annual

commercial landings during the period 1986-91, or a 34-percent

reduction from 1991 commercial landings. The recreational bag limit of

four large coastal or pelagic shark species combined was expected to

reduce recreational landings by 28 percent from the average annual

recreational landings during the period 1986-91. These measures will

provide the conditions for the resource to recover.

Option 3 would have established 1993 total landings of 2,311 mt dw

(a 50-percent reduction from the 1991 landings, which is a 44-percent

reduction from the 1986-91 annual average landings) for the large

coastal species group. NMFS considered and rejected Option 3 because

this alternative would have required a much larger initial reduction in

landings in the commercial and recreational fisheries than Option 2.

Therefore, Option 3 would have had a greater adverse economic impact on

fishermen who are dependent on these fisheries.

The quota for the pelagic species group was designed to maintain

current harvest levels. At present, a commercial fishery for blue

sharks has not developed. Changes to the regulatory regime for the

large coastal or pelagic species groups could be made through the FMP's

regulatory adjustment procedure, should new information requiring

change in the allowable catch of large coastal sharks become available

or if a commercial fishery for blue sharks or any other species

develops. NMFS published a notice in February of 1994, requesting

additional historical shark landings data and information.

Subsequently, NMFS held a stock assessment workshop in March, 1994 to

consider new data and revisions to stock estimates. Based on the

revised stock assessment for the large coastal species group the

workshop committee recommended that the projected commercial quota

increase for 1995 be delayed indefinitely.

4. Potential Changes Involving the Allocation of the Large Coastal

Species Group Between the Commercial and Recreational Sectors

Comment. A regional fishery management council recommended that the

1979-1992 recreational and commercial landings of sharks be used to

allocate the different groups of sharks. The two commercial fishermen's

associations recommended that no change be made.

Response. NMFS does not believe that the allocation needs to be

adjusted. The allocation of the total allowable catch between the

commercial (84 percent) and recreational (16 percent) sectors was based

on landings data used in the revised assessment. NMFS prepared the

revised assessment based on corrected landing data from the commercial

sector for years 1986-91 and the best available data on the

recreational sector for 1986-91. NMFS excluded recreational data from

the Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey (MRFSS) prior to

1986 for four reasons. First, the MRFSS data are extremely variable

among years, e.g., 1979 landings were 11,512 mt whole weight (ww),

whereas 1980 landings were 3,210 mt ww; 1981 landings within the Gulf

of Mexico were 7,604 mt ww, whereas 1982 landings were 660 mt ww.

Second, sharks in the MRFSS were grouped into one multispecies category

that includes some species that are not included in the FMP management

unit. Third, the MRFSS grouping was not aligned to the three species

groups used in the FMP (large coastal, small coastal, and pelagic

species). Fourth, the methodology for collecting recreational data in

the MRFSS changed in 1986, when Texas began to collect data on

recreational fisheries within the State and to provide the information

to NMFS.

5. Mandatory Dealer Permitting and Reporting

Comment. Two regional fishery management councils, one commercial

fishermen's association, a scientific organization, and a conservation

organization supported mandatory dealer permitting and reporting.

Response. NMFS agrees and is implementing these measures in this

rule. The implemented system is limited to the use of current forms and

collection of data elements already collected voluntarily from dealers.

Permitted dealers can purchase sharks only from fishermen possessing a

valid Federal permit, unless the sharks were harvested by a non-

permitted vessel that fishes exclusively in state waters. Permitted

fishermen can sell sharks only to permitted dealers. The requirement is

designed to provide accurate reports from both harvesters and dealers.

Further, this rule modifies the prerequisite condition for a Federal

permit regarding the sale, by a vessel that fishes in the EEZ, of a

shark ``in or from the EEZ'' to the sale of a shark harvested ``from

its management unit.'' This change in the Federal permit condition

reflects the basic intent of the FMP to protect and conserve the

species in the management unit throughout the range of the resource. No

permit, however, is required for vessels that fish exclusively in state

waters.

This final rule amends Secs. 678.2 and 678.4 to provide for a

dealer permit system and Sec. 678.5 to provide for mandatory dealer

reporting. Section 678.7 has been revised to provide prohibitions to

support the provisions for the dealer permit system and mandatory

dealer reporting system. Additionally, redesignated Sec. 678.26 has

been amended to institute certain restrictions on sale upon landing

under the permit program.

6. Ratio of Fin to Dressed Carcass Weight

Comment. A scientific organization, a regional fishery management

council, and a commercial fishermen's organization recommended that the

ratio of fins to dressed carcass weight be raised from 5 to 6 percent

because fishermen are landing minor fins, fin lobes, and other portions

called ``chips.'' Two conservation and one animal rights organization

opposed any change. These commenters were concerned that raising the

percentage would encourage finning to continue and make the measure

more difficult to enforce.

Response. NMFS believes that the ratio is appropriate. Since

raising this percentage could encourage the finning of sharks with

undesirable flesh and desirable fins, such as hammerheads, NMFS prefers

to delay changes in the ratio of fins to dressed carcass weights until

a scientific study on the relationship between the weight of the fins

and the dressed carcass weight is conducted. Such changes would be the

subject of a separate rulemaking in order to obtain more public

comments, detailed analyses of the impacts on the user groups and the

resource, and more data from fishermen.

7. Control Date

Comment. Two commercial fishermen's organizations and a regional

fishery management council recommended that NMFS establish a control

date advising new entrants that, after that date, NMFS may deny access

to the fishery.

Response. NMFS established a control date of February 22, 1994 (59

FR 8457, 02/22/94).

8. Permit System

Comment. Two commercial fishermen's organizations recommended that

NMFS implement a three-tiered permit system that would identify

fishermen in the directed fishery for sharks, fisheries with an

incidental catch of sharks, and the recreational fisheries where sharks

caught under the bag limit are sold. Qualifications for the different

permits would be as follows: For the directed shark fishery permit, the

applicant must derive 50 percent of his/her income from the sale of

sharks during any 2 of the last 3 years; for the incidental shark

fishery permit, the applicant must have documented shark landings and

valid swordfish permits; and for the commercial angler permit, the

applicant would have to apply and meet the non-income tests for all

applicants. Implementation of the commercial angler permit would

require creation of a quota from the recreational sector and would

enable permittees to sell their fish, subject to the bag limit.

Comment. A scientific organization recommended that the permit

condition be limited to individuals who derive 50 percent of their

income from the sale of shark or shark products.

Response. At present, NMFS does not believe it has enough

information to assess adequately the impact of implementing a three-

tiered system of permitting fishermen or to limit the permittees to

those individuals who derived a substantial portion of their livelihood

from the sale of sharks or shark products. As part of a future

rulemaking action, NMFS may consider such a system.

9. Small Coastal Shark Fisheries

Comment. A conservation organization recommended that NMFS develop

a quota and other measures for this fishery to prevent overfishing.

Response. At present, NMFS does not believe that the commercial or

recreational quotas for the small coastal species groups need

adjustment. NMFS will continue to monitor the fisheries and establish

quotas when warranted by available information. Quotas may be

established in a timely manner using the regulatory amendment process

as established in the FMP.

10. Incidental Catch of Sharks

Comment. Due to the bycatch of sharks in the different fisheries,

two conservation organizations were concerned that the commercial

quotas were too high. These organizations recommended that NMFS reduce

these quotas, since overfishing would continue through the incidental

catch in other fisheries.

Response. NMFS disagrees. Fishermen who catch sharks on an

incidental basis must obtain the same permit to sell them, and follow

the anti-finning prohibition and other requirements. Therefore, these

incidental catches of sharks are considered in developing the

management regime.

11. Fishing Year

No comments were received; NMFS adopts the fishing year without

change.

In addition to adopting the interim final rule, NMFS is

implementing, by this final rule, several technical amendments designed

to implement a statutory prohibition. Section 1857 of the Magnuson Act

prohibits use of large-scale drift gillnets by U.S. fishing vessels. To

conform these regulations to the statutory requirement, this final rule

adds a definition of a drift gillnet to Sec. 678.2, a prohibition on

use of large-scale drift gillnets to Sec. 678.7(z), and a new

Sec. 678.21 entitled ``Gear restrictions.''

Classification

NMFS has determined that the provisions of this rule that prohibit

the use of large-scale drift gillnets by U.S. fishermen may be

published as final without prior notice and an opportunity for public

comment because these provisions merely codify a statutory provision.

As such, good cause exists to waive notice and comment under authority

set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), because such procedures are

unnecessary.

NMFS prepared a regulatory flexibility analysis as part of the

Regulatory Impact Review (RIR) that concluded the rule implementing the

FMP has significant impacts on a substantial number of small entities,

as specified under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Those small entities

directly involved in the fishery and affected by the rule include

commercial fishing vessels (approximately 800) and processors/dealers

(about 850). The final rule implementing the FMP is likely to result in

a reduction in annual gross revenues of about 5 percent for some, but

not necessarily all, of these small entities. This final rule does not

change the original conclusions, because it makes only minor changes in

the April 1993 rule. A copy of this analysis is available from NMFS

(See ADDRESSES).

This rule contains two new collection of information requirements

and refers to an existing information requirement, all of which are

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The existing annual

vessel permit requirement and the new mandatory dealer reporting have

been approved by the Office of Management and Budget under Control

Numbers 0648-0205 and 0648-0013, respectively. The new dealer permit

requirement has been submitted to the Office of Management for review

under the PRA and will not be implemented until approval is received.

The public reporting burdens for these collections are estimated to

average 20 minutes for a vessel permit application, 10 minutes for a

dealer report, and 5 minutes for a dealer permit application. 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 burden estimates or any other aspect of these

collections of information to NMFS at 1315 East-West Highway, Silver

Spring, MD 20910, and to the Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Washington DC, 20503 (Attn:

NOAA Desk Officer).

This rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of

E.O. 12866.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 678

Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: October 12, 1994.

Gary Matlock,

Program Management Officer, National Marine Fisheries Service.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 678 is amended

as follows:

PART 678--ATLANTIC SHARKS

1. The authority citation for part 678 continues to read as

follows:

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

2. In Sec. 678.2, definitions of ``dealer'' and ``drift

gillnet'' are added, in alphabetical order, to read as follows:

Sec. 678.2 Definitions.

* * * * *

Dealer means the person in the United States who first receives by

way of purchase, barter, or trade, sharks harvested from the management

unit.

Drift gillnet, sometimes called a drift entanglement net or drift

net, means a flat net, unattached to the ocean bottom, whether or not

it is attached to a vessel, designed to be suspended vertically in the

water to entangle the head or other body parts of a shark that attempts

to pass through the meshes.

* * * * *

3. In Sec. 678.4, paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) are redesignated

as paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (a)(1)(iv), respectively; paragraph (c)

is redesignated as paragraph (l); a heading for paragraph (a)(1) and

new paragraphs (a)(2) and (c) are added; and paragraphs (d), (e)(1),

(g), (h), redesignated paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (l), and the last

sentence of redesignated paragraph (a)(1)(iv) are revised to read as

follows:

Sec. 678.4 Permits and fees.

(a) * * *

(1) Annual vessel permit. (i) As a prerequisite to sell shark from

the management unit or to be eligible for exemption from the bag limits

specified in Sec. 678.23(b), an owner or operator of a vessel that

fishes in the EEZ must obtain an annual vessel permit; except that

there is no Federal requirement for a permit for a vessel that fishes

exclusively within state waters.

* * * * *

(iv) * * * However, when a vessel fishes in the waters of a state

that has more restrictive regulations on shark fishing, those more

restrictive regulations may be applied by that state to fishing, catch,

and gear in its waters.

(2) Annual dealer permit. A dealer who receives sharks from the

management unit must have an annual dealer permit.

* * * * *

(c) Application for an annual dealer permit. (1) An application for

a dealer permit must be submitted and signed by the dealer or an

officer of a corporation acting as a dealer. The application must be

submitted to the Regional Director at least 30 days prior to the date

on which the applicant desires to have the permit made effective.

(2) A permit applicant must provide the following information:

(i) A copy of each state wholesaler's license held by the dealer.

(ii) Business name; mailing address, including zip code, of the

principal office of the business; employer identification number, if

one has been assigned by the Internal Revenue Service; and date the

business was formed.

(iii) The address of each physical facility at a fixed location

where the business receives fish.

(iv) Applicant's name; official capacity in the business; address,

including zip code; telephone number; social security number; and date

of birth.

(v) Any other information that may be necessary for the issuance or

administration of the permit, as requested by the Regional Director and

included on the application form.

(d) Fees. A fee is charged for each permit application submitted

under paragraph (b) or (c) of this section. The amount of the fee is

calculated in accordance with the procedures of the NOAA Finance

Handbook for determining the administrative costs of each special

product or service. The fee may not exceed such costs and is specified

with each application form. The appropriate fee must accompany each

application.

(e) * * *

(1) The Regional Director will issue a permit at any time to an

applicant if the application is complete and, in the case of the annual

vessel permit specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, the

applicant meets the earned income requirement specified in paragraph

(b)(2)(vi) of this section. An application is complete when all

requested forms, information, and documentation have been received and

the applicant has submitted all applicable reports specified at

Sec. 678.5 (a) or (b).

* * * * *

(g) Transfer. (1) A vessel permit issued under paragraph (b) of

this section is not transferable or assignable. A person purchasing a

permitted vessel who desires to conduct activities for which a permit

is required must apply for a permit in accordance with the provisions

of paragraph (b) of this section. The application must be accompanied

by a copy of a signed bill of sale.

(2) A dealer permit issued under paragraph (c) of this section may

be transferred upon sale of the dealer's business. However, such

transferred permit remains valid for a period not to exceed 30 days

after sale of the dealer's business. A person purchasing a permitted

dealership who desires to conduct activities for which a permit is

required after that 30-day period must apply promptly for a permit in

accordance with paragraph (c) of this section.

(h) Display. A vessel permit issued pursuant to paragraph (b) of

this section must be carried on board the vessel and such vessel must

be identified as required by Sec. 678.6. A dealer permit issued

pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section must be available on the

dealer's premises. The operator of a vessel or a dealer must present

the permit for inspection upon the request of an authorized officer.

* * * * *

(l) Change in application information. The owner or operator of a

vessel with a permit or a dealer with a permit must notify the Regional

Director within 30 days after any change in the application information

required by paragraph (b) or (c) of this section. The permit is void if

any change in the information is not reported within 30 days.

4. In Sec. 678.5, in the second to the last sentence of paragraph

(a)(2), the word ``third'' is removed and the word ``fifth'' is added

in its place; paragraphs (b) and (c) are redesignated as paragraphs (c)

and (d), respectively; and a new paragraph (b) is added to read as

follows:

Sec. 678.5 Recordkeeping and reporting.

* * * * *

(b) Dealer reports. (1) A dealer who has been issued a dealer

permit pursuant to Sec. 678.4 must submit a report to the Science and

Research Director as specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section. A

report form is available from the Science and Research Director. The

following information must be included in each report:

(i) Name, address, and permit number of the dealer.

(ii) Names and official numbers of fishing vessels from which shark

were received.

(iii) Dates of receipt of shark.

(iv) Listed by each port and county where shark were off-loaded

from fishing vessels:

(A) Total weight (pounds) by market category for shark, if

applicable, and for other species received with the shark, including,

but not limited to, swordfish, yellowfin tuna, bigeye tuna, and

albacore; and

(B) Price per pound or total value paid by market category for

shark and other species, to the extent that such price information is

known at the time of reporting.

(2) A report of shark and other applicable species received by a

dealer on the first through the 15th days of each month must be

submitted to the Science and Research Director postmarked not later

than the 20th day of that month. A report of shark and other applicable

species received by the dealer on the 16th through the last day of each

month must be submitted to the Science and Research Director postmarked

not later than the fifth day of the following month. If no shark was

received during the reporting period, a report so stating must be

submitted postmarked as specified for that respective reporting period.

(3) The reporting requirement of paragraph (b)(1) of this section

may be satisfied by providing a copy of each appropriate weigh-out

sheet and/or sales record, provided such weigh-out sheet and/or sales

record, by itself or combined with the form available from the Science

and Research Director, includes all of the required information.

(4) For purposes of this paragraph (b), for a shark offloaded from

a fishing vessel in an Atlantic coastal state from Maine through

Virginia, ``Science and Research Director'' means the Science and

Research Director, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, NMFS, Woods

Hole, MA 02543, telephone 617-548-5123, or a designee. For a shark

offloaded from a fishing vessel in an Atlantic coastal state from Maine

through Virginia, in lieu of providing a required report to the Science

and Research Director by mail, as specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this

section, a dealer may provide a report to a state or Federal fishery

port agent designated by the Science and Research Director. Reports so

provided must be delivered to such port agent not later than the

prescribed postmark date for submitting each such report.

* * * * *

5. In Sec. 678.7, in paragraph (d), the reference to

``Sec. 678.5(c)'' is removed and the reference ``Sec. 678.5(d)'' is

added in its place; paragraphs (a), (c), (k) through (q), and (s)

through (v) are revised; and new paragraphs (y) and (z) are added to

read as follows:

Sec. 678.7 Prohibitions.

* * * * *

(a) Falsify information required in Sec. 678.4(b) and (c) on an

application for a permit.

* * * * *

(c) Falsify or fail to provide information required to be

maintained, submitted, or reported, as specified in Sec. 678.5.

* * * * *

(k) Remove the fins from a shark and discard the remainder, as

specified in Sec. 678.22 (a)(1).

(l) Possess shark fins, carcasses, or parts, aboard or offload

shark fins from a fishing vessel, except as specified in Sec. 678.22,

or possess shark carcasses or parts aboard, or offload shark fins,

carcasses, or parts, from a vessel, except as specified in

Sec. 678.22(b).

(m) Fail to release a shark in the manner specified in

Sec. 678.22(d).

(n) Exceed the bag limits, as specified in Sec. 678.23 (a) through

(c).

(o) Operate a vessel with a shark aboard in excess of the bag

limits, as specified in Sec. 678.23(d).

(p) Land or possess on any trip, shark in excess of the vessel trip

limit, as specified in Sec. 678.22(c)(1).

(q) Transfer a shark at sea, as specified in Secs. 678.22(c)(2) and

678.23(e).

* * * * *

(s) Sell, trade, or barter, or attempt to sell, trade or barter, a

shark from the management unit, except as an owner or operator of a

vessel with a permit, as specified in Sec. 678.26.

(t) Purchase, trade, or barter, or attempt to purchase, trade or

barter, shark meat or fins from the management unit from an owner or

operator of a vessel that does not possess a vessel permit, as

specified in Sec. 678.26(b); or sell, trade, or barter, or attempt to

sell, trade, or barter, a shark from the management unit, except to a

permitted dealer, as specified in Sec. 678.26(d).

(u) Sell, purchase, trade, or barter, or attempt to sell, purchase,

trade, or barter, shark fins that are disproportionate to the weight of

carcasses landed, as specified in Sec. 678.26(c).

(v) Interfere with, obstruct, delay, or prevent by any means an

investigation, search, seizure, or disposition of seized property in

connection with enforcement of the Magnuson Act.

* * * * *

(y) Purchase, trade, or barter, or attempt to purchase, trade, or

barter, a shark from the management unit without an annual dealer

permit, as specified in Sec. 678.4(a)(2).

(z) Fish for sharks with a drift gillnet that is 2.5 km or more in

length or possess a shark aboard a vessel possessing such drift

gillnet, as specified in Sec. 678.21.

Secs. 678.21 through 678.27 [Redesignated as Secs. 678.22 through

678.28]

6. Sections 678.21 through 678.27 are redesignated as Secs. 678.22

through 678.28, respectively, and a new Sec. 678.21 is added to read as

follows:

Sec. 678.21 Gear restrictions.

A drift gillnet with a total length of 2.5 km or more may not be

used to fish for shark. A vessel using or having aboard a drift gillnet

with a total length of 2.5 km or more may not possess a shark.

7. In redesignated Sec. 678.22, paragraph (c)(1) is revised to read

as follows:

Sec. 678.22 Harvest limitations.

* * * * *

(c) Vessel trip limits. (1) A vessel that has been issued a permit

pursuant to Sec. 678.4 may not possess on any trip, or land from any

trip, large coastal species in excess of 4,000 lb (1,814 kg), dressed

weight.

Sec. 678.25 [Amended]

8. In redesignated Sec. 678.25, paragraph (a) introductory text is

amended by removing the reference ``Sec. 678.23(b)'' and adding the

reference ``Sec. 678.24(b)'' in its place, and paragraph (a)(2) is

amended by removing the reference ``Sec. 678.22(b)'' and adding the

reference ``Sec. 678.23(b)'' in its place.

9. In redesignated Sec. 678.26, paragraph (c) is amended by

removing the reference to ``Sec. 678.21(a)(2)'' and adding the

reference to ``Sec. 678.22(a)(2)'' in its place, the introductory text

and paragraphs (a) and (b) are revised, and paragraph (d) is added to

read as follows:

Sec. 678.26 Restrictions on sale upon landing.

Subject to the restrictions of Sec. 678.25,

(a) Upon landing, meat or fins from a shark from the management

unit may be sold, traded, or bartered, or attempted to be sold, traded,

or bartered, only by an owner or operator of a vessel that has been

issued a permit pursuant to Sec. 678.4, except that this does not apply

to a shark harvested from a vessel that has not been issued a permit

under this part and that fished exclusively within the waters under the

jurisdiction of any state.

(b) Upon landing, meat or fins from a shark from the management

unit may be purchased, traded, or bartered, or attempted to be

purchased, traded, or bartered, only from the owner or operator of a

vessel that has been issued a permit pursuant to Sec. 678.4, except

that this does not apply to a shark harvested from a vessel that has

not been issued a permit under this part and that fished exclusively

within the waters under the jurisdiction of any state.

* * * * *

(d) A shark from the management unit may be sold, traded, or

bartered, or attempted to be sold, traded, or bartered, only to a

dealer having a permit under Sec. 678.4, except that this does not

apply to a shark harvested from a vessel that has not been issued a

permit under this part and that fished exclusively within the waters

under the jurisdiction of any state.

[FR Doc. 94-25672 Filed 10-17-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-W