Rule2025-10069
Fisheries Off West Coast States; Coastal Pelagic Species Fisheries; Amendment 23 to the Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery Management Plan
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
June 3, 2025
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Abstract
On May 30, 2025, the Regional Administrator of the West Coast Region, NMFS, with the concurrence of the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, approved Amendment 23 to the Coastal Pelagic Species (CPS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP). Amendment 23 implements a revised rebuilding plan for the northern subpopulation of Pacific sardine in response to a court order.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 105 (Tuesday, June 3, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 105 (Tuesday, June 3, 2025)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23461-23464]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-10069]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 660
[RTID 0648-XE531]
Fisheries Off West Coast States; Coastal Pelagic Species
Fisheries; Amendment 23 to the Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery
Management Plan
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notification of agency decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On May 30, 2025, the Regional Administrator of the West Coast
Region, NMFS, with the concurrence of the Assistant Administrator for
Fisheries, approved Amendment 23 to the Coastal Pelagic Species (CPS)
Fishery Management Plan (FMP). Amendment 23 implements a revised
rebuilding plan for the northern subpopulation of Pacific sardine in
response to a court order.
DATES: The amendment was approved on May 29, 2025.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the CPS FMP as amended through Amendment 23 are
available at the Pacific Fishery Management Council, 7700 NE Ambassador
Place, Suite 101, Portland, OR 97220-1384, or at this URL; <a href="https://www.pcouncil.org/coastal-pelagic-species/fishery-management-plan-and-amendments/">https://www.pcouncil.org/coastal-pelagic-species/fishery-management-plan-and-amendments/</a>. The final Environmental Assessment (EA) prepared pursuant
to the National Environmental Policy Act
[[Page 23462]]
(NEPA) for Amendment 23 is available on NMFS' website at <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/west-coast/laws-and-policies/west-coast-region-national-environmental-policy-act-documents">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/west-coast/laws-and-policies/west-coast-region-national-environmental-policy-act-documents</a>.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katie Davis, Sustainable Fisheries
Division, NMFS, at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c9a2a8bda0ace7ada8bfa0ba89a7a6a8a8e7aea6bf"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="771c16031e12591316011e04371918161659101801">[email protected]</span></a> or (323) 372-2126; or Katrina
Bernaus, Pacific Fishery Management Council, at
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#543f3520263d3a357a3631263a3521271424373b213a373d387a3b2633"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0d666c797f64636c236f687f636c787e4d7d6e6278636e646123627f6a">[email protected]</span></a> or (503) 820-2420.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Amendment 23 revises section 4.5 of the CPS FMP, the rebuilding
plan for Pacific sardine, in response to an order from the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of California (Oceana, Inc.,
v. Raimondo, et al., No. 5:21-cv-05407-VKD (N.D. Cal., filed July 14,
2021)). There are no implementing regulations associated with Amendment
23.
NMFS published a Notice of Availability (NOA) for Amendment 23 on
March 12, 2025 (90 FR 11817), and solicited public comments through May
12, 2025. NMFS summarizes and responds to the public comments below in
the Comments and Responses section. We considered all public comments
received on the NOA and EA. Now, on behalf of the Secretary of
Commerce, we are announcing the approval of Amendment 23. As discussed
in greater detail in the NOA, Amendment 23 revises the Pacific sardine
rebuilding plan in section 4.5 of the CPS FMP to update the
T<INF>TARGET</INF> (the specified time period for rebuilding the stock)
to 17 years and to include annual catch limits (ACLs) for Pacific
sardine as follows:
<bullet> Overfished status--If the age 1+ biomass is 50,000 metric
tons (mt) or less in a given fishing year, the ACL for that year will
be set at 2,200 mt or the calculated acceptable biological catch (ABC),
whichever is less.
<bullet> Rebuilding status--If the age 1+ biomass is greater than
50,000 mt but less than 150,000 (rebuilding target) in a given fishing
year, the ACL will be set at 5 percent of the age 1+ biomass for that
year or the calculated ABC, whichever is less.
Comments and Responses
NMFS received two public comments supporting Amendment 23, one from
a prominent fishing industry group, the California Wetfish Producers
Association, and one from a private citizen. Additionally, NMFS
received one comment from a private citizen stating support for the
overall objective of the rebuilding plan but providing a variety of
suggestions they think should be made to the plan or that NMFS could do
in the future. Although some of those suggestions are outside the scope
of this action, NMFS nevertheless provides responses to them for
additional clarity. NMFS received two public comments opposing
Amendment 23, one from the environmental non-governmental organization
Oceana and one from an anonymous commenter who opposed commercial
fishing of any kind.
Comment 1: Oceana claimed that Alternative 6 does not meet NMFS's
legal obligations, and that to be compliant with the law, the ACL must
be set at no greater than 5 percent of the estimated biomass for the
year (or the calculated ABC, whichever is less). Oceana states that the
revised rebuilding plan would increase the relative harvest rate as the
stock declines below 44,000 mt. They argued that the modeling analysis
indicates that the stock could rebuild within a reasonable timeframe
under a fixed 2,200 mt ACL, assuming the stock began at 29,598 mt and
grew each year (vs. declined), but that NMFS does not provide any
analysis indicating that a 2,200 mt fixed ACL will rebuild the stock
when biomass is below 29,598 mt. They further state that without an
analysis incorporating the recent stock status or a new analysis of the
rebuilding alternatives when the stock is below 2020 levels [29,598
mt], there is no clear evidence that Alternative 6 will rebuild the
population. To account for this, Oceana recommends the rebuilding plan
include additional restrictions on the fishery when the biomass falls
below a specified threshold biomass level, such as 25,000 mt.
Response: When determining whether the revisions to this rebuilding
plan comply with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (MSA; 16 U.S.C. 1801 et. seq.) and other applicable law,
NMFS took into account the impacts to the status and potential
rebuilding timelines of the stock, as well as the environment and the
fisheries (``Councils should consider the management objectives of
their FMPs and their management framework to determine the relevant
social, economic, and ecological factors used to determine optimum
yield. There will be inherent trade-offs when determining the
objectives of the fishery.'' (50 CFR 600.310(e)(3)(iii)(B))). The
modeling analysis conducted to support the development of Amendment 18
(the original rebuilding plan) reported a difference of one year
between the rebuilding timelines of a 5 percent and fixed 2,200 mt
annual harvest scenario. Considering the environmentally-linked
population swings of sardines are on the order of decades, a one-year
difference is negligible. The potential economic impact of further
constraining the fisheries that catch sardines, however, could be
significant. The rebuilding plan does not increase the harvest rate at
low biomass levels, but instead implements ACLs that ensure the
fisheries are harvesting at sustainable levels (allowing the stock to
rebuild in the shortest amount of time while the fisheries maintain
average harvest levels). In addition to the ACL implemented by
Amendment 23, if the stock were to approach lower biomass levels (less
than approximately 18,000 mt age 1+ biomass, based on recent harvest
control rule parameters), the CPS FMP dictates that the ABC would
supersede the ACL, resulting in further reductions in catch as the
stock declines. Oceana also does not provide a scientific rationale
explaining why the catch limit should be reduced below 5 percent at
certain biomass levels when the modeling shows the stock can rebuild
with a static 2,200 mt ACL.
In modeling rebuilding scenarios for a stock, it is standard
practice to project the biomass using the current biomass as the
starting point. The 2020 modeling analysis projected the estimated 2020
spawning stock biomass (SSB; 29,598 mt from the 2020 benchmark stock
assessment) under different fishing rates and recruitment scenarios.
Uncertainty in the rebuilding analysis and therefore how the ``model
stock'' would potentially rebuild was accounted for in a variety of
ways. For example, the spawner-recruit relationship used a high sR
(total recruitment variability) value, allowing for large fluctuations
in recruitment in all rebuilding projections. For scenarios that
rebuilt the stock, although the probability of rebuilding increased
over time, the projected median spawning stock biomass did not always
increase from each year to the next. Considering the 2024 benchmark
assessment reported that the SSB has not, in any year since 2020,
decreased below the amount analyzed in 2020 (for reference, the most
recent estimate of SSB for 2024 was 36,190 mt) \1\, NMFS has determined
that additional modeling of the rebuilding alternatives below 2020
levels was not warranted and that the catch limits implemented by this
revised rebuilding plan will prevent
[[Page 23463]]
overfishing and support rebuilding of the stock under varied biomass
levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Allen Akselrud CA, Jensen AJ, Kuriyama PT, Hill KT,
Zwolinski JP. 2025. Update assessment of the Pacific sardine
resource in 2025 for U.S. management in 2025-2026. U.S. Department
of Commerce. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-719. <a href="https://doi.org/10.25923/z1xh-b932">https://doi.org/10.25923/z1xh-b932</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment 2: Oceana claimed that the revised rebuilding plan does not
address what they state are fundamental flaws with overfishing limit
(OFL) and ABC. They state that Amendment 23 continues to rely on the
California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigation (CalCOFI)-based
E<INF>MSY</INF> as a central parameter for calculating catch limits,
that it violates the MSA's requirements to base management measures on
the best available science, prevent overfishing, and rebuild the
population, and cite the April 22, 2024 court order that ``the record
reflects that use of the CalCOFI temperature index to calculate
E<INF>MSY</INF> consistently and materially overstates the productivity
of the Pacific sardine.'' They further reference concerns raised in
recent years by the Council's advisory bodies that the relationship
between the CalCOFI index and productivity is flawed, and their support
for re-evaluating the E<INF>MSY</INF> parameter.
Response: E<INF>MSY</INF> is a parameter in the OFL and ABC harvest
control rules, which were part of the FMP before Amendment 18 was
adopted. The CPS FMP does not mandate the use of a CalCOFI-based
E<INF>MSY</INF> to determine the OFL and/or ABC. Amendment 18 also did
not mandate its use or specify any methodology for calculating
E<INF>MSY</INF> and neither does Amendment 23. The specific
E<INF>MSY</INF> value used in the OFL and ABC is based upon the annual
recommendation of the Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee
(SSC) to the Council in making recommendations for annual harvest
specifications, and reviewed by NMFS during the annual rulemaking
process. However, in light of the court ruling that NMFS failed to
demonstrate that it relied on the best scientific information available
when exclusively using the CalCOFI-based E<INF>MSY</INF> to set the
overfishing limit in the 2023-2024 harvest specifications, NMFS
provides the following response.
Under the MSA, the SSC provides scientific advice for NMFS'
consideration in fishery management decisions, including ABC and
preventing overfishing. Per National Standard 2 at 50 CFR
600.315(a)(2), scientific information that is used to inform decision-
making should include an evaluation of its uncertainty and management
decisions should recognize the risks, such as those to overfishing,
associated with the sources of uncertainty. As we explained in the
final rule setting Pacific sardine harvest specifications for the 2024-
2025 fishing year (89 FR 93522, November, 27, 2024), in recommending an
OFL and ABC for that year that were calculated, in part, by using a
CalCOFI-based E<INF>MSY</INF>, the SSC appropriately accounted for any
scientific uncertainty and gaps in scientific information that may have
existed, including any surrounding E<INF>MSY</INF>, in the information
used to calculate the recommended reference points.
To help inform the SSC's recommendations during the 2025-2026
harvest specifications process, NMFS conducted a correlation analysis
of the CalCOFI-based temperature with sardine productivity (recruits-
per-spawner) for the years 1983-2023; an update from the last analysis
in 2013 that examined data from 1984 to 2008. In February 2025, NMFS
presented the analysis to the SSC's CPS Subcommittee, which reported
that ``there is still valid statistical evidence for a relationship
between CalCOFI [sea surface temperature] and recruits-per-spawner.''
At the April 2025 Council meeting, the full SSC reviewed the analysis
and reported that the result ``does not compel a change at this time.''
The SSC recommended the 2025-2026 OFL and ABC be calculated using the
``status quo approach to E<INF>MSY</INF>,'' which utilizes the CalCOFI
temperature index.
Comment 3: A private citizen commented that the documentation for
this amendment lacks detail on how E<INF>MSY</INF>, BUFFER, and the
fixed DISTRIBUTION factor are derived in calculating the ABC.
Response: The referenced parameters are long-standing parameters of
Pacific sardine management that are unchanged by this action. The
commenter can find descriptions of these parameters in the CPS FMP, as
well in section 1.4.2 of the EA for Amendment 23.
Comment 4: A private citizen commented that the rebuilding
framework should include periodic stock reassessments--ideally on a
biennial basis--to update recruitment estimates and refine the
steepness parameter as new data become available. According to the
commenter, this would ensure that the SB<INF>0</INF> estimate, and thus
the rebuilding target, remains current.
Response: Per MSA section 304(e)(7) and National Standard
guidelines at 50 CFR 600.310, the rebuilding plan process includes
routine reviews of the applicable plan to ensure adequate progress is
being made towards the rebuilding of the stock. Additionally, extensive
analysis, some of which is mentioned by the commenter, went into the
choice of an appropriate rebuilding target. This included examining
different productivity periods, extent of data and a variety of
uncertainties and NMFS has determined that choice represents the best
available scientific information.
Comment 5: A private citizen stated that the ACL control rule
should be modified to include an automatic precautionary adjustment
mechanism, whereby ACLs are reduced if recruitment indices fall below a
predefined benchmark that reflects the lower productivity regime.
Response: Although not exactly as described by the comment, under
this rebuilding plan, ACLs are conditional upon certain tiered biomass
levels, allowing the ACL to adjust based on the status of the stock.
Under this approach, the ACL will be restricted to a low level (2,200
mt or the calculated ABC, whichever is less) when the biomass is at or
below the 50,000 mt minimum stock size threshold and only allowed to
increase when above that level. Additionally, because this framework is
based on annual estimates of biomass (based on a measure of recruitment
from fishery-independent survey data) and annual calculations of the
ABC, NMFS believes the approach is responsive to changing conditions.
Comment 6: A private citizen stated that the final rule ought to
explicitly acknowledge the limitations of the model.
Response: Understanding and acknowledging the limitations of the
model were an extensive part of the development process of this
rebuilding plan. For example, section 3.1 of the EA for Amendment 23
identifies certain model limitations. As explained in that document,
due to these limitations, NMFS did not rely exclusively on the modeling
analysis in the development of a rebuilding plan for Pacific sardine.
Comment 7: A private citizen commented that the Council should
conduct supplementary sensitivity analyses incorporating variable
fishing mortality regimes and environmental indices.
Response: The modeling analysis looked at a range of fishing
mortality regimes by the U.S. fishery (zero harvest, 5 percent harvest,
2,200 mt fixed annual harvest, and 18 percent harvest) as well as
scenarios for harvest by Mexico in order to compare the relative
performance of the alternatives in relation to rebuilding timelines.
Comment 8: A private citizen stated that to ensure sustained
recovery, NMFS should refine ``rebuilt'' to mean that the target
biomass is not only met but maintained as an average over a minimum
period (e.g., three years, not necessarily consecutive). The commenter
also asserted that NMFS
[[Page 23464]]
should evaluate trade-offs between 14-year and 17-year rebuilding
timeframes, and assess potential impacts on stock sustainability, yield
variability, and socioeconomic factors.
Response: Refining ``rebuilt'' is outside of the scope of NMFS'
authority under this action as the criteria for rebuilding an
overfished stock are established by statute in the MSA and in the
guidelines for National Standard 1 (Optimum Yield), which are found in
regulation at 50 CFR 600.310. As defined by National Standard 1, the
rebuilding target (B<INF>MSY</INF>) of 150,000 mt is established as the
long-term average size of the stock that would be achieved by fishing
at maximum sustainable yield. Although not stated in the comment, NMFS
assumes that the reason the commenter mentions an evaluation between a
14-year and 17-year rebuilding timeframe is that the T-target
associated with the previous rebuilding plan (Amendment 18) was 14
years. Although that comparison was not explicitly conducted, it was
concluded through the analysis in support of this revised rebuilding
plan, as well as the previous rebuilding plan, that no management
alternative was expected to significantly impact the ability of the
Pacific sardine resource to rebuild in the near or long term, as
fishing mortality is not the primary driver of stock biomass.
Additionally, because of the ecological dynamics of the California
Current Ecosystem, there would not be a measurable difference in
ecosystem or forage benefits among the expected rebuilding timelines
for Pacific sardine. Ultimately, with the closure of the primary
directed commercial fishery and harvest limited to the ACL under this
rebuilding plan by the live bait, minor directed, and incidental
fisheries, the environment will be the primary determinant for
increasing stock abundance.
Comment 9: A private citizen stated that NMFS should integrate
measurable environmental indices--such as seasonal sea surface
temperature and upwelling indices--into ACL-setting decisions. The
commenter suggested NMFS could develop and adopt an environmental
monitoring program that tracks key indicators--such as seasonal sea
surface temperature deviations, upwelling indices, and other relevant
metrics--establishing flexible threshold values rather than fixed ones
and explore linking ACL adjustments to these indices through periodic
reviews rather than via fixed automatic triggers.
Response: Seasonal sea surface temperature is integrated into the
calculation of the Pacific sardine OFL and ABC under the harvest
control rules established in the CPS FMP, which are unchanged by this
amendment. Since 2014, based on annual recommendations by the Council's
SSC, the E<INF>MSY</INF> for Pacific sardine has been based on a
temperature-recruitment relationship utilizing a running 3-year average
of the CalCOFI temperature index. CalCOFI is a long-term oceanographic
and marine ecosystem monitoring and research program formed in 1949 to
study the ecological aspects of the Pacific sardine collapse off
California. It surveys the physical, biogeochemical, and biological
dynamics of the marine environment.
Comment 10: A private citizen suggested that the final rule should
evaluate ecosystem dynamics to ensure the rebuilding plan supports
overall marine ecosystem health alongside direct stock recovery.
Response: Section 3 of the EA for Amendment 23 evaluates the impact
on the target species (Pacific sardine) and the environment (marine
predators) as well as potential cumulative impacts, as required under
NEPA.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: May 29, 2025.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2025-10069 Filed 6-2-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on June 3, 2025.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.