Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Revisions to Commercial Atlantic Blacknose and Recreational Atlantic Shark Fisheries Management Measures

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 2 (Monday, January 5, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 2 (Monday, January 5, 2026)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 215-227]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-24264]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 635

[Docket No. 251121-0173]
RIN 0648-BM88

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Revisions to Commercial
Atlantic Blacknose and Recreational Atlantic Shark Fisheries Management
Measures

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS is proposing several changes for commercial and
recreational Atlantic shark fisheries. Specifically, NMFS is
considering options to remove the blacknose shark management boundary
in the Atlantic region, modify the commercial retention limit for
blacknose sharks in the Atlantic region, revise the recreational
minimum size limits for Atlantic shark species, and revise the
recreational retention limits for Atlantic shark species. In this
action, NMFS would also remove commercial management group quota
linkages, consistent with Amendment 14 to the 2006 Consolidated
Atlantic Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP),
and make technical changes to clarify certain HMS regulations. This
action is responsive to the framework for implementing management
measures established in Amendment 14, findings from the Atlantic Shark
Fishery Review (SHARE) document, public comments from scoping for
Amendment 16 to the HMS FMP, and recent domestic laws and international
agreements that are having direct and indirect impacts on shark
fisheries. The goal of this action is to increase management
flexibility to react to changes in the Atlantic shark fisheries and
optimize the ability of the commercial and recreational shark fisheries
to harvest quota to the extent practicable.

DATES: Written comments must be received by March 6, 2026.

ADDRESSES: A plain language summary of this proposed rule is available
at: <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/docket/NOAA-NMFS-2024-0039">https://www.regulations.gov/docket/NOAA-NMFS-2024-0039</a>. You may
submit comments on this document, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2024-0039, by
electronic submission. Submit all electronic public comments via the
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> and
enter ``NOAA-NMFS-2024-0039'' in the Search box. Click on the
``Comment'' icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach
your comments.
Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other
address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period,
may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the
public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on
<a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address), confidential business information,
or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender
will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter
``N/A'' in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).
NMFS will hold two public hearing via conference call/webinar on
this proposed rule. For specific location, date and time, see the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Additional information related to this proposed rule, including
electronic copies of the supporting documents are available from the
HMS Management Division website at <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/proposed-rule-revisions-commercial-atlantic-blacknose-and-recreational-atlantic-shark">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/proposed-rule-revisions-commercial-atlantic-blacknose-and-recreational-atlantic-shark</a> or by contacting Ann Williamson
(<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e1808f8fcf96888d8d88808c928e8fa18f8e8080cf868e97">[email&#160;protected]</a>) by phone at 301-427-8503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Guy DuBeck (<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#284f5d51064c5d4a4d4b436846474949064f475e">[email&#160;protected]</a>), Ann
Williamson (<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6a0b0404441d030606030b071905042a04050b0b440d051c">[email&#160;protected]</a>), or Karyl Brewster-Geisz
(<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#93f8f2e1eaffbdf1e1f6e4e0e7f6e1bef4f6fae0e9d3fdfcf2f2bdf4fce5">[email&#160;protected]</a>) at 301-427-8503.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS, on behalf of the Secretary of
Commerce, is responsible for managing Federal Atlantic HMS fisheries
(i.e., sharks, tunas, billfish and swordfish), pursuant to the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-
Stevens Act) (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) and consistent with the Atlantic
Tunas Convention Act (ATCA) (16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.). The term HMS is
defined at 16 U.S.C. 1802(21), and the provisions for the management of
HMS are found at 16 U.S.C. 1854(g)(1). ATCA is the implementing statute
for binding recommendations of the International Commission for the
Conservation of Atlantic Tunas. NMFS manages HMS fisheries under the
HMS FMP and its amendments. HMS implementing regulations are at 50 CFR
part 635.
NMFS is proposing several changes for commercial and recreational
Atlantic shark fisheries. This action is responsive

[[Page 216]]

to the framework for implementing management measures established in
Amendment 14 (88 FR 4157, January 24, 2023), findings from the SHARE
document (88 FR 16944, March 21, 2023), public comments from scoping
for Amendment 16 (Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement; 88 FR 29617, May 8, 2023), and recent domestic laws and
international agreements that are having direct and indirect impacts on
shark fisheries (e.g., the Shark Fin Sales Elimination Act (James M.
Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023, Pub. L.
117-263, 136 Stat. 2395, section 5946 (December 23, 2022)) and the 2023
listing of additional Atlantic shark species under appendix II of the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna
and Flora). Specifically, in this rule, NMFS is considering options to
remove the blacknose shark management boundary in the Atlantic region,
modify the commercial retention limit for blacknose sharks in the
Atlantic region, revise the recreational minimum size limits for
Atlantic shark species, and revise the recreational retention limits
for Atlantic shark species. In this action, NMFS would also remove
commercial management group quota linkages consistent with Amendment 14
and make technical changes to clarify certain HMS regulations. The goal
of this action is to increase management flexibility to react to
additional factors affecting Atlantic shark fisheries and optimize the
ability of the commercial and recreational shark fisheries to harvest
available quota to the extent practicable.
NMFS has prepared a draft Environmental Assessment (EA), Regulatory
Impact Review (RIR), and an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA), which present the alternatives considered for this proposed
rule and analyze their anticipated environmental, social, and economic
impacts. A brief summary of background information and the alternatives
considered is provided below. Additional information regarding this
action and Atlantic shark management overall can be found in the draft
EA/RIR/IRFA, the HMS FMP and its amendments, the annual HMS Stock
Assessment and Fishery Evaluation Reports, and online at: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/topic/atlantic-highly-migratory-species">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/topic/atlantic-highly-migratory-species</a>.

Statutory Authority

The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires measures necessary for the
conservation and management of the fishery to be consistent with the 10
National Standards set forth in 16 U.S.C. 1851(a). Specific to the
objectives of this action, the National Standards state that measures
must do the following: prevent overfishing while achieving optimum
yield from the fishery (National Standard 1); be based on the best
scientific information available (National Standard 2); to the extent
practicable, manage the stock throughout its range and manage
interrelated stocks as a unit or in close coordination (National
Standard 3); take into account and allow for variations among
fisheries, fishery resources, and catches (National Standard 6); and
minimize bycatch, and, to the extent bycatch cannot be avoided,
minimize the mortality of bycatch (National Standard 9). Furthermore,
the Magnuson-Stevens Act allows for management actions to designate
zones where, and periods when, fishing shall be limited, or shall not
be permitted, or shall be permitted only by specified types of fishing
vessels or with specified types and quantities of fishing gear (16
U.S.C. 1853(b)(2)(A)). The Magnuson-Stevens Act also allows for
management actions to establish specified limitations which are
necessary and appropriate on the catch of fish (based on area, species,
size, number, weight, sex, bycatch, total biomass, or other factors)
(16 U.S.C. 1853(b)(3)(A)).

Background

NMFS finalized the first FMP for Sharks of the Atlantic Ocean in
1993 (1993 FMP) (58 FR 21931, April 26, 1993). The 1993 FMP established
many of the management measures still in place today, including
management complexes, commercial quotas, and recreational minimum size
and retention limits. NMFS then revised the 1993 FMP to include
swordfish and tunas in the 1999 FMP for Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish, and
Sharks (64 FR 29090, May 28, 1999), which included numerous measures to
rebuild or prevent overfishing of sharks in commercial and recreational
fisheries (1999 FMP). The 1999 FMP, among other things, established a
recreational minimum size limit for most shark species of 54 inches
(137 centimeters (cm)) fork length (FL) and reduced recreational
retention limits for all sharks to one shark per vessel per trip. In
2006, NMFS consolidated the Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish, and Shark FMP
and its amendments with the Atlantic Billfish FMP and its amendments
into the HMS FMP (71 FR 58058, October 2, 2006). Since then, 17
amendments to the HMS FMP have been made or initiated.
In 2008, NMFS implemented Amendment 2 to the HMS FMP (73 FR 40657,
July 7, 2008, corrected at 73 FR 40658, July 15, 2008), which included,
among other things, management measures that expanded the shark species
authorized for recreational retention and modified recreational
retention limits. The shark species then authorized for recreational
retention included tiger sharks, non-ridgeback large coastal sharks
(LCS) (i.e., blacktip, spinner, bull, lemon, nurse, great hammerhead,
smooth hammerhead, and scalloped hammerhead sharks), small coastal
sharks (SCS) (bonnethead, Atlantic sharpnose, finetooth, and blacknose
sharks), and pelagic sharks (i.e., shortfin mako, common thresher,
oceanic whitetip, blue, and porbeagle sharks). Recreational retention
limits were set at one Atlantic sharpnose shark and one bonnethead
shark per person per trip with no minimum size limit, and one per
person per vessel for all other authorized shark species greater than
54 inches (137 cm) FL. Amendment 2 also set commercial retention limits
to no limit for SCS for Directed shark limited access permit (LAP)
holders and 16 SCS for Incidental shark LAP holders.
In 2007, Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR) completed a
stock assessment for SCS (SEDAR 13). Consequently, NMFS determined
blacknose sharks to be overfished with overfishing occurring (73 FR
25665, May 7, 2008). NMFS then implemented management measures in
Amendment 3 to the HMS FMP (75 FR 30484, June 1, 2010) to, among other
things, rebuild and end overfishing of blacknose sharks. Specifically,
Amendment 3 linked the non-blacknose SCS and blacknose shark fisheries
so that both fisheries would close when landings of either reached 80
percent of its quota.
In 2010, SEDAR conducted another stock assessment on blacknose
sharks (SEDAR 21, 2011) and identified two separate stocks of blacknose
sharks (one in the Atlantic Ocean and one in the Gulf of America).
Accordingly, NMFS determined the Atlantic stock of blacknose sharks to
be overfished with overfishing occurring, and, the Gulf of America
stock of blacknose sharks to have an unknown stock status. Thus, NMFS
developed Amendment 5a to the HMS FMP (78 FR 40317, July 3, 2013), in
part, to address overfishing and rebuild the Atlantic blacknose shark
stock. Consistent with the stock assessment determination, Amendment 5a
divided the blacknose and non-blacknose SCS quotas into separate
regional quotas (i.e., Atlantic and Gulf of America). In the commercial
shark fishery, NMFS established regional quota linkages between
management

[[Page 217]]

groups whose species are often caught together to prevent exceeding
newly established quotas through discarded bycatch. In the recreational
shark fishery, NMFS set the minimum size limit for all hammerhead
sharks to 78 inches (198.1 cm) FL.
In 2015, NMFS implemented Amendment 6 to the HMS FMP (80 FR 50073,
August 18, 2015), which, among other things, established a management
boundary in the Atlantic region along lat. 34[deg]00' N (approximately
at Wilmington, North Carolina) for the SCS shark fishery, maintained
SCS quota linkages south of the lat. 34[deg]00' N management boundary,
and prohibited the retention of blacknose sharks north of the lat.
34[deg]00' N management boundary. Also in 2015, NMFS implemented
Amendment 9 to the HMS FMP (80 FR 73128, November 24, 2015) which,
among other things, established management measures for smoothhound
sharks in the Atlantic and Gulf of America regions. Specifically, in
the recreational shark fishery, Amendment 9 established no retention
limit for smoothhound sharks (i.e., smooth dogfish) with no minimum
size limit.
In 2017, NMFS implemented a final rule (81 FR 90241, December 14,
2016) that established a commercial retention limit of eight blacknose
sharks for all Directed and Incidental shark LAP holders in the
Atlantic region south of lat. 34[deg]00' N. The intent of this action
was to maximize the utilization of the non-blacknose SCS quota while
minimizing mortality and discards of blacknose sharks, consistent with
the existing rebuilding plan, and other SCS.
In 2023, NMFS finalized Amendment 14 (88 FR 4157, January 24,
2023), which, among other things, revised the framework for
establishing quotas and related management measures for Atlantic shark
fisheries, and incorporated for potential use several optional fishery
management tools that were adopted in the revised guidelines for
implementing National Standard 1 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (81 FR
71858, October 18, 2016). Specifically, Amendment 14 modified the
general procedures for establishing the acceptable biological catch and
annual catch limits (ACL), and included measures to actively monitor
all commercial and recreational sector ACLs. NMFS anticipates that the
revised framework for establishing quota and related management
measures for Atlantic shark fisheries, as established in Amendment 14,
may be implemented through Amendment 16.
In 2023, NMFS conducted scoping to identify significant issues
related to the management of Atlantic shark fisheries (88 FR 29617, May
8, 2023). The scoping document for Amendment 16 considered extensive
changes to commercial and recreational shark fisheries' management. The
management options presented for public comment included changes to
commercial and recreational shark management measures related to
commercial and recreational quotas, management groups, retention
limits, and size limits. During scoping for Amendment 16, a number of
commenters noted that Amendment 16 was too large and recommended that
NMFS split management measures into multiple smaller actions. As such,
NMFS decided to remove some actions from Amendment 16 and consider them
separately in this rule. Thus, NMFS has already received input on many
of the management options considered in this action from the public,
including fishery participants and the HMS Advisory Panel. NMFS does
not expect to release Draft Amendment 16 and the associated proposed
rule until early 2026.

Proposed Measures

NMFS is proposing to (1) remove the blacknose shark management
boundary in the Atlantic region; (2) modify the commercial retention
limit for blacknose sharks in the Atlantic region; (3) revise the
recreational minimum size limits for Atlantic shark species; and (4)
revise the recreational retention limits for Atlantic shark species. As
described below, NMFS considered two alternatives concerning the
blacknose shark management boundary, three alternatives concerning the
blacknose shark commercial retention limit, five alternatives
concerning recreational minimum size limits, and three alternatives
concerning recreational retention limits. These alternatives included
both no action and the preferred alternatives. The purpose of this
action is to increase management flexibility to react to additional
factors affecting Atlantic shark fisheries and optimize the ability of
the commercial and recreational shark fisheries to harvest available
quota to the extent practicable.

Blacknose Shark Management Boundary in the Atlantic Region

NMFS is proposing, under preferred Alternative A2, to remove the
lat. 34[deg]00' N blacknose shark management boundary in the Atlantic
region. Under this alternative, vessels issued a Directed or Incidental
shark LAP would be able to commercially harvest blacknose sharks in the
entire Atlantic region. Currently, vessels issued a Directed or
Incidental shark LAP can commercially harvest blacknose sharks only
south of lat. 34[deg]00' N (Alternative A1).
NMFS originally implemented this management boundary under
Amendment 6 in order, in part, to keep the non-blacknose SCS fishery
open if there is available quota. The blacknose and non-blacknose SCS
fisheries are linked management groups, and at the time, a high volume
of blacknose shark landings was leading to early closures of both
fisheries. The blacknose shark management boundary allowed the non-
blacknose SCS fishery to remain open, north of lat. 34[deg]00' N,
regardless of blacknose shark landings. However, in recent years,
landings of both blacknose and non-blacknose SCS have decreased and
neither fishery has closed early nor has either quota been fully
harvested. From 2017 through 2022, commercial fishermen harvested on
average approximately 36 percent of the blacknose shark commercial
quota.
Additionally, as blacknose shark migratory patterns continue to
expand northward in the Atlantic region (i.e., north of the current
blacknose shark management boundary), maintaining the blacknose shark
management boundary may increase the number of blacknose sharks
discarded dead. These dead discards are more likely to occur if
fishermen who catch blacknose sharks cannot retain them under their
existing fishing permit(s) and they are dissuaded from obtaining an
applicable fishing permit due to the management boundary. Removing the
blacknose shark management boundary in the Atlantic region, under
preferred Alternative A2, would facilitate full utilization of the
available blacknose shark quota and be consistent with the removal of
the quota linkages as approved in Amendment 14 (see the Miscellaneous
Regulatory Changes and Related Rulemaking section for more
information).

Blacknose Shark Commercial Retention Limit in the Atlantic Region

NMFS is proposing, under preferred Alternative B2, to establish a
flexible commercial retention limit of 0 to 60 blacknose sharks per
vessel per trip for vessels issued a Directed shark LAP in the Atlantic
region. The default commercial retention limit that would apply at the
start of each fishing year would be 25 blacknose sharks per vessel per
trip for vessels issued a Directed shark LAP in the Atlantic region.
Under the preferred alternative, NMFS would monitor the fishery and
could adjust the commercial retention limit during the fishing year,
based on the inseason trip limit adjustment criteria at

[[Page 218]]

Sec. 635.24(a)(8). The current commercial retention limit (Alternative
B1) is fixed at eight blacknose sharks per vessel per trip. As
described above, under the current retention limit, the commercial
quota has been under harvested for several years. Additionally,
commercial fishermen often catch more blacknose sharks per trip than
can be harvested under the current retention limit, leading to
regulatory discards. The ability to adjust the retention limit
throughout the fishing year could allow the quota to be fully harvested
while also limiting dead discards. NMFS is not considering changes to
the blacknose shark commercial retention limit for vessels used an
Incidental shark LAP in the Atlantic region (i.e., eight blacknose
sharks per vessel per trip) in this action.
NMFS used a maximum commercial retention limit of 60 blacknose
sharks per vessel per trip for preferred Alternative B2 based on the
Southeast Fisheries Science Center Observer Program data from 2017
through 2022, which showed that commercial fishermen fishing with
gillnet and bottom longline gears have interacted with up to 54
blacknose sharks on a single trip in the Atlantic region. A maximum
commercial retention limit of 60 blacknose sharks per vessel per trip
encompasses the maximum number of blacknose shark interactions observed
on a commercial fishing trip in the last several years, and therefore
would minimize regulatory discards and maximize the efficiency of
trips. A maximum of 60 would also include an added buffer for
management flexibility, should interactions increase or other
conditions change that warrant a higher retention limit.
NMFS used a default commercial retention limit of 25 blacknose
sharks for preferred Alternative B2 based on a number of factors,
including the commercial blacknose shark quota, fishing trends from the
most active participants in the fishery, and interactions between
blacknose sharks and commercial fishermen in the Atlantic region. The
commercial blacknose shark quota is 37,921 pounds (lb) dressed weight
(dw) (17.2 metric tons (mt) dw) and, based on Southeast Fisheries
Science Center Observer Program data from 2017 through 2022, the
average weight of a blacknose shark landed on commercial trips is 11.4
lb dw (0.01 mt dw). NMFS based the analysis for this alternative on the
five vessels that land the majority of blacknose sharks because they
are the fishery participants that target blacknose sharks on their
fishing trips, whereas the remaining fishery participants generally
opportunistically retain only incidentally caught blacknose sharks.
Thus, it would take landing approximately 3,326 sharks to harvest the
blacknose shark quota (37,921 lb dw (17,2 mt lb)/11.4 lb dw (0.01 mt
dw) average per shark = 3,326.4 sharks). According to the HMS
electronic dealer reporting system (eDealer) data from 2017 through
2022, 5 vessels account for the majority (78 percent) of blacknose
shark landings and take an average of 137 trips a year. Thus, NMFS
calculated that the top 5 most active vessels in the fishery could
retain as many as 24 blacknose sharks per vessel per trip to harvest
the blacknose shark quota without a fishery closure (3,326 sharks/137
trips = 24.3 sharks/trip). NMFS prefers a default commercial retention
limit of 25 blacknose sharks per vessel per trip to optimize the number
of blacknose sharks that could be retained per trip without
significantly impacting the total number of fishing trips that could be
taken in a given year to land the full quota. Additionally, a default
retention limit of 25 blacknose sharks provides a buffer so Directed
shark LAP holders can retain most or all blacknose shark catch on any
given fishing trip.

Recreational Minimum Size Limits

NMFS is proposing, under preferred Alternative C4, to group certain
shark species together and establish a recreational minimum size limit
range for each group. Under this preferred alternative, the default
recreational minimum size limit would be based on a midpoint value of
the female sizes at maturity for the shark species in that group, or
else it would remain consistent with current HMS regulations (Sec.
635.20(e)). The recreational minimum size limit range would encompass
the female sizes at maturity for all shark species in each group, and
allow the minimum size limit to be set above the female sizes at
maturity for each group. This proposed approach is a change from the
status quo (Alternative C1) where all sharks, unless otherwise
specified, must be at least 54 inches (137 cm) FL; all hammerhead
sharks must be at least 78 inches (198.1 cm) FL; and there is no size
limit for Atlantic sharpnose, bonnethead, or smoothhound sharks.
Under preferred Alternative C4, NMFS grouped shark species based on
a number of factors, including species that look similar, have similar
sizes at maturity, or anglers could catch them in similar areas using
similar fishing techniques. NMFS used the following rationale for
grouping shark species together under preferred Alternative C4:
<bullet> Atlantic sharpnose, bonnethead, and smoothhound sharks:
Atlantic sharpnose and bonnethead sharks could be caught in similar
areas using similar fishing techniques. Currently, Atlantic sharpnose,
bonnethead, and smoothhound sharks are similarly managed in the
recreational shark fishery (i.e., no minimum size limit) and under
preferred Alternative C4, these species would continue to have no
minimum size limit. Thus, these species are grouped together.
<bullet> Blacknose and finetooth sharks: Blacknose and finetooth
sharks have similar sizes at maturity. Additionally, they look similar
and can be very difficult to distinguish. To avoid misidentification
during recreational fishing activities, these species are grouped
together.
<bullet> Blacktip and spinner sharks: Blacktip and spinner sharks
look similar and can be very difficult to distinguish. To avoid
misidentification during recreational fishing activities, these species
are grouped together.
<bullet> Great hammerhead, scalloped hammerhead, and smooth
hammerhead sharks: Hammerhead species have similar sizes at maturity.
Additionally, they look very similar and distinguishing hammerhead
sharks from each other is quite difficult even for the most seasoned
fishermen. However, hammerhead species can be distinguished easily from
other LCS. Thus, these species are grouped together.
<bullet> Bull, lemon, nurse, and tiger sharks: These LCS are
grouped together because most of them have similar sizes at maturity,
and they could be caught in similar areas using similar fishing
techniques.
<bullet> Blue, common thresher, and porbeagle sharks: These pelagic
shark species are grouped together because they have similar sizes at
maturity and they could be caught in similar areas using similar
fishing techniques.
Under preferred Alternative C4, NMFS would set a maximum
recreational minimum size limit equal to the status quo minimum size
limit (i.e., 54 inches (137.2 cm) FL) for small coastal and smoothhound
sharks. For other shark species, NMFS would set a maximum recreational
minimum size limit that is approximately 12 inches (30.5 cm) FL longer
than the shark species in that group with the longest female size at
maturity, with the exception of the two larger LCS groups (i.e.,
hammerhead (great, scalloped and smooth), and bull, lemon, nurse, and
tiger sharks) which would have the same maximum recreational minimum
size limits, to simplify the measures for

[[Page 219]]

fishermen. For example, blue, common thresher, and porbeagle sharks
reach female size at maturity at 73 inches (185.4 cm) FL, 83 inches
(210.8 cm) FL, and 82 inches (208.3 cm) FL, respectively. Of the three
species in the group, common thresher shark has the longest female size
at maturity (83 inches (210.3 cm) FL). Under this alternative, the
maximum recreational minimum size limit would be 95 inches (241.3 cm)
FL, which is 12 inches (30.5 cm) longer than the female size at
maturity for common thresher shark. This would allow the recreational
minimum size limit for a species group to be set equal to, above, or
below the female sizes at maturity of the individual species in the
group, within the defined minimum size limit range for the group.
Additionally, under this alternative, NMFS could remove the
recreational minimum size limit for a shark group under certain
conditions. The recreational minimum size limit may be adjusted, or
removed, to increase or decrease harvest rates, based on relevant
factors, such as the landings and landing trends over the past 3
calendar years, the relevant recreational retention limit, and other
relevant factors (e.g., health of the stock, new scientific
information, and other fishery conditions).
Under preferred Alternative C4, the default recreational minimum
size limits would be revised for shark groups where the midpoint value
of the female sizes at maturity for the shark species in that group is
smaller than the current default recreational retention limit for those
species. Thus, under preferred Alternative C4, NMFS would revise the
default recreational minimum size limits for the blacknose and
finetooth shark group and the blacktip and spinner shark group because
their female sizes at maturity are well below the current minimum size
limit for these species (i.e., 54 inches (137 cm) FL). NMFS selected
the default minimum size limits based on a midpoint of the sizes at
maturity for the shark species grouped together. A midpoint value would
result in a minimum size limit that balances differing sizes at
maturity for grouped species while limiting the unintentional harvest
of immature individuals of any species in the group.
Under preferred Alternative C4, the default recreational minimum
size limits for other recreationally authorized shark species would
continue to be consistent with current HMS regulations (Sec.
635.20(e)). Maintaining the status quo as the default minimum size
limit would avoid unnecessarily constraining the recreational shark
fishery with higher minimum size limits, given that recreational
harvest is low. See table 1 for proposed shark groups and their
respective recreational minimum size limit ranges and default minimum
size limits under Alternative C4.

Table 1--Proposed Recreational Minimum Size Limit Ranges for Shark
Groups Under Preferred Alternative C4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recreational minimum size limit (FL)
(inches (cm))
Shark group ---------------------------------------
Range Default
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlantic sharpnose, bonnethead, Up to 54 (137.2), No limit.
and smoothhound. or no limit.
Blacknose and finetooth......... Up to 54 (137.2), 38 (96.5).
or no limit.
Blacktip and spinner............ Up to 70 (177.8), 48 (121.9).
or no limit.
Great hammerhead, scalloped Up to 115 (292.1), 78 (198.1).
hammerhead, and smooth or no limit.
hammerhead.
Bull, lemon, nurse, and tiger... Up to 115 (292.1), 54 (137.2).
or no limit.
Blue, common thresher, and Up to 95 (241.3), 54 (137.2).
porbeagle. or no limit.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

In Amendment 14, NMFS set forth a revised framework for
establishing quotas that included, among other things, a method to
actively monitor the recreational sector ACLs. In short, if
recreational ACLs are established, NMFS could adjust the recreational
sector ACLs annually based on data from the past 3 years. The most
recent 3 years of data should account for the high variability of
recreational harvest and mortality, and would provide an updated
representation of the recreational harvest and mortality in the
fisheries outside of a stock assessment. In addition to adjusting the
ACLs, as needed, NMFS could consider management measures to control
mortality, such as adjustments to minimum size limits, if needed to
account for underharvest and overharvest of the recreational catch. For
example, in a situation where a shark species or group's recreational
ACL is not fully harvested based on the average from the previous 3
years, NMFS could reduce minimum size limits to increase fishing
opportunities in the following year. If a shark species or group's ACL
is overharvested based on the average from the previous 3 years, NMFS
could increase size limits in the following year to reduce the rate of
harvest. In other words, once NMFS establishes ACLs for the
recreational shark fisheries, preferred Alternative C4 would allow NMFS
to effectively manage the recreational shark fishery by adjusting the
minimum size to increase or decrease harvest rates based on updated
mortality estimates consistent with the framework established in
Amendment 14.

Recreational Retention Limits

NMFS is proposing, under preferred Alternative D2, to establish
flexible recreational retention limits for shark species. The default
recreational retention limits in preferred Alternative D2 would be
consistent with current HMS regulations (Sec. 635.22(c)), with the
exception of Atlantic sharpnose, bonnethead and blacktip sharks, which
would have separate default recreational retention limits. NMFS would
set all recreational retention limits based on a number of sharks per
vessel per trip, to simplify regulations and reduce confusion regarding
which species have vessel- or person-specific retention limits. Thus,
NMFS would no longer manage Atlantic sharpnose and bonnethead sharks
under an additional one-shark-per-person-per-vessel recreational
retention limit, but under a shark(s) per-vessel-per-trip basis.
Under preferred Alternative D2, NMFS would set maximum recreational
retention limits for shark species as shown in table 2. These limits
are generally consistent with recreational regulations in state waters
of relevant states, which is where the majority of recreational shark
catches occur. The recreational retention limit for a given species or
group of species may be adjusted within the defined retention

[[Page 220]]

limit range for the species or group of species, or removed entirely,
to increase or decrease harvest rates, based on the inseason trip limit
adjustment criteria listed in Sec. 635.24(a)(8). If a recreational
retention limit is removed for a species, or group of species, per the
criteria listed in Sec. 635.24(a)(8), there would be no limit to the
number of sharks of that species, or group of species, that could be
retained per vessel per trip. See table 2 for the proposed recreational
retention limit ranges, including the default retention limit, for
shark species under Alternative D2. This preferred alternative would be
a shift from the status quo (Alternative D1) where the retention limit
is fixed at one shark per vessel per trip for most species; one
Atlantic sharpnose shark and one bonnethead shark per person per trip;
and no retention limit for smoothhound sharks.

Table 2--Proposed Recreational Retention Limit Ranges for Sharks Under
Preferred Alternative D2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recreational retention limit (sharks/
vessel/trip)
Shark species ---------------------------------------
Range Default
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sharks from the following list: 1 to 3, or no 1.
blacknose, blue, bull, common limit.
thresher, finetooth, great
hammerhead, scalloped
hammerhead, smooth hammerhead,
lemon, nurse, porbeagle,
spinner, and tiger.
Atlantic sharpnose.............. 1 to 4, or no 1.
limit.
Bonnethead...................... 1 to 4, or no 1.
limit.
Blacktip........................ 1 to 5, or no 1.
limit.
Smoothhound..................... 1 to 4, or no No limit.
limit.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

As discussed above, NMFS intends in the future to begin actively
monitoring and adjusting the recreational sector ACLs. When doing this,
as needed, NMFS would consider adjustments to recreational retention
limits to control mortality and account for underharvests and
overharvests of the recreational sector ACLs. This alternative would
allow NMFS to adjust accountability measures annually based on updated
mortality estimates from the previous 3 years and more effectively
manage the recreational shark fishery. Flexible recreational retention
limits would allow NMFS to update the recreational retention limits
consistent with the framework established in Amendment 14.

Other Alternatives Considered

In addition to the proposed measures described above, in the EA for
this action, NMFS analyzed four no action alternatives (i.e.,
Alternatives A1, B1, C1, and D1) that would maintain the status quo in
the commercial and recreational shark fisheries. NMFS does not prefer
the no action alternatives because they do not meet the objectives of
the rulemaking. The EA for this action also describes the impacts of
other alternatives. In the commercial shark fishery, there is one other
alternative, to remove the blacknose shark commercial retention limit
in the Atlantic region (Alternative B3). In the recreational shark
fishery, there are four other alternatives regarding minimum size and
retention limits: establish minimum size limits for sharks based on
each species' female size at maturity (Alternative C2); establish
minimum size limits for shark groups based on grouped species' female
sizes at maturity (Alternative C3); remove minimum size limits for
sharks (Alternative C5); and remove retention limits (Alternative D3).
At this time, NMFS does not prefer any alternative that would remove
accountability measures (retention limits and minimum size limits) in
commercial and recreational shark fisheries and reduce NMFS' ability to
actively manage shark fisheries and ensure equitable fishing
opportunities for all fishermen. Additionally, NMFS does not prefer any
alternative that would not increase management flexibility and allow
for additional opportunities to harvest available quota to achieve
optimum yield, consistent with National Standard 1 and the objective of
this rulemaking.

Additional Proposed Regulatory Changes

NMFS is proposing to remove commercial management group quota
linkages specified in Sec. 635.28(b)(3) and (4), consistent with
Amendment 14. In Amendment 14, NMFS approved a management option to
remove commercial management group quota linkages to allow fisheries to
remain open all year and ensure that each shark management group or
species' quota is fully utilized. Once an ACL is reached, NMFS would
close that fishery to prevent overharvest. Amendment 14 did not include
any implementing regulations; therefore, NMFS is proposing to remove
the commercial management group quota linkages.
NMFS is proposing to clarify some of the existing references to
thresher shark in the regulations to specify to which species of
thresher shark (i.e., common or bigeye) the regulations apply.
Currently, the regulations refer to ``common thresher'' shark and
``thresher'' shark interchangeably as an authorized species in
commercial and recreational shark fisheries and ``bigeye thresher''
shark as a prohibited species. Because there are two species of
thresher shark (i.e., common and bigeye), the use of ``thresher'' shark
in the regulations could cause confusion for fishery participants and
enforcement regarding which species of thresher shark the regulations
apply to. Revising ``thresher'' shark to ``common thresher'' shark
would create consistency with other references to the common thresher
shark in HMS regulations and reduce the potential for confusion with
the prohibited bigeye thresher shark. The regulations themselves are
not changing; the applicable commercial and recreational fishery
management measures would continue to apply to common thresher shark
and bigeye thresher shark would continue to be a prohibited species.
For example, under Sec. 635.24, the shark species previously referred
to as ``thresher'' shark would be changed to ``common thresher'' shark.
Accordingly, in table 1 of appendix A to part 635--Oceanic Sharks, and
table 2 of appendix A to part 635--Pelagic Species, the shark species
previously referred to as ``Thresher shark, Alopias vulpinus'' would be
changed to ``Common thresher shark, Alopias vulpinus.''
NMFS is also proposing to update the name of the management group
``pelagic sharks other than blue or porbeagle'' to ``common thresher
and shortfin mako sharks'' throughout the HMS regulations. This change
is to clarify that the only shark species that can be harvested from
this management group is common thresher shark and, when

[[Page 221]]

authorized, shortfin mako shark. This revision does not change the
species within this management group (i.e., common thresher and
shortfin mako sharks) or within the pelagic shark complex.
NMFS is proposing to remove several references to oceanic whitetip
sharks in commercial fishery regulations in Sec. Sec.
635.21(c)(1)(ii), 635.31(c)(6), and 635.71(d)(19). On January 3, 2024,
NMFS published a final rule (89 FR 278) that prohibited the retention
and possession of oceanic whitetip sharks in commercial and
recreational fisheries in Federal waters of the Atlantic Ocean,
including the Gulf of America and Caribbean Sea, effective February 2,
2024. In that rulemaking, NMFS inadvertently left several references to
oceanic whitetip sharks in the commercial fishery regulations. Removing
the references to oceanic whitetip sharks in commercial fisheries would
further clarify the intent of the final rule that prohibited the
retention and possession of oceanic whitetip sharks in all HMS
fisheries.
NMFS is also proposing several technical changes. In Sec.
635.20(e)(6) (redesignated to paragraph (e)(8) in this action), NMFS
would revise ``fork length'' to ``FL'' for consistency with the defined
acronym and use of ``FL'' for ``fork length'' in HMS regulations. In
Sec. 635.28(b)(1)(iii) and (v), NMFS would revise the references to
publication of a notice in the Federal Register to a more general
reference of publication in the Federal Register for consistency with
other references in HMS regulations. Section 635.28(b)(5) (which would
be redesignated as paragraph (b)(4) by this proposed action) would also
be revised for grammatical improvement and to update a Code of Federal
Regulations reference to the paragraph level. These clarifications
would improve the administration of HMS regulations and are consistent
with previously analyzed and approved management measures.

Request for Comments

NMFS is requesting comments on this proposed rule, which may be
submitted via <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> or at a public hearing. NMFS
solicits comments on this action by March 6, 2026 (see DATES and
ADDRESSES sections).
During the comment period, NMFS will hold two public hearings via
webinar for this proposed action, as shown in table 3. Requests for
sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed
to Ann Williamson at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e8898686c69f8184848189859b8786a886878989c68f879e">[email&#160;protected]</a> or 301-427-8503, at least
7 days prior to the meeting. In addition, any requests for in-person
public hearings during the comment period should be directed to Ann
Williamson at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7b1a1515550c121717121a160814153b15141a1a551c140d">[email&#160;protected]</a> or 301-427-8503.

Table 3--Dates and Times of Upcoming Public Hearing Webinars
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dates and times Webinar information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 22, 2026, 10 a.m.-12 p.m. ET... https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/
January 29, 2026, 2 p.m.-4 p.m. ET..... action/proposed-rule-revisions-
commercial-atlantic-blacknose-
and-recreational-atlantic-
shark.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The public is reminded that NMFS expects participants at the public
hearings to conduct themselves appropriately. At the beginning of each
public hearing, a representative of NMFS will explain the ground rules
(e.g., alcohol is prohibited from the hearing room, attendees will be
called to give their comments in the order in which they registered to
speak, each attendee will have an equal amount of time to speak, and
attendees should not interrupt one another). At the beginning of each
webinar, the moderator will explain how the webinar will be conducted
and how and when participants can provide comments. The NMFS
representative(s) will attempt to structure the webinar so that all
attending members of the public will be able to comment, if they so
choose, regardless of the controversial nature of the subject(s).
Attendees are expected to respect the ground rules, and if they do not,
they may not be allowed to speak during the webinar.

Classification

The NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed
rule is consistent with the HMS FMP and its amendments, other
provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, ATCA, and other applicable law,
subject to further consideration after public comment.
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of E.O. 12866.
This final rule is not an E.O. 14192 regulatory action because this
action is not significant under E.O. 12866.
An IRFA was prepared, as required by section 603 of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The IRFA describes the
economic impact that this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on
small entities. A description of the action, why it is being
considered, and the legal basis for this action are contained at the
beginning of this section in the preamble and in the SUMMARY section of
the preamble. A summary of the analysis follows. A copy of this
analysis is available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES section).
Section 603(b)(1) requires agencies to describe the reasons why the
action is being considered. The purpose of this proposed rulemaking is
to increase management flexibility to react to additional factors
impacting Atlantic shark fisheries and optimize the ability of the
commercial and recreational shark fisheries to harvest available quota
to the extent practicable, consistent with the objectives of the HMS
FMP and its amendments, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable
laws. Implementation of the proposed rule would further the management
goals and objectives stated in the HMS FMP and its amendments.
Section 603(b)(2) of the RFA requires agencies to state the
objectives of, and legal basis for, the proposed action. The objective
of this proposed rulemaking is to be responsive to the framework for
implementing management measures established in Amendment 14, findings
from the SHARE document, public comments from scoping for Amendment 16,
and recent domestic laws and international agreements that are having
direct and indirect impacts on the commercial fishery. The legal basis
for the proposed rule is the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
Section 603(b)(3) of the RFA requires agencies to provide an
estimate of the number of small entities to which the proposed rule
would apply. For RFA compliance purposes, NMFS established a small
business size standard of $11 million in annual gross receipts for all
businesses in the commercial fishing industry (North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) 11411). The Small Business Administration
(SBA) has established size standards for all other major industry
sectors in the United States, including the scenic and sightseeing
transportation (water) sector (NAICS code 487210), which includes for-
hire (charter/party boat) fishing

[[Page 222]]

entities. The SBA has defined a small entity under the scenic and
sightseeing transportation (water) sector as one with average annual
receipts (i.e., revenue) of less than $14 million. Therefore, NMFS
considers all HMS permit holders, both commercial and for-hire, to be
small entities because they had average annual receipts of less than
their respective sector's standard of $11 million and $14 million. The
2022 total ex-vessel annual revenue for the shark fishery was
approximately $2.2 million. Since a small business is defined as having
annual receipts not in excess of $11 million, each individual shark
fishing entity would fall within the small business definition. Thus,
all of the entities affected by this rulemaking are considered to be
small entities for the purposes of the RFA.
As of October 2023, there were 188 Shark Directed permits and 221
Shark Incidental permits. As of December 2023, there were 4,324 HMS
Charter/Headboat permits (with 3,085 shark endorsements and 2,014
commercial sale endorsements), 24,552 HMS Angling permits (with 12,840
shark endorsements), and 3,471 Atlantic Tunas General and Swordfish
General Commercial permits (with 1,709 shark endorsements). For more
information regarding the distribution of these permits across states
and territories please see the HMS Stock Assessment and Fishery
Evaluation Report.
Section 603(b)(4) of the RFA requires agencies to describe any new
reporting, record-keeping, and other compliance requirements. This
proposed rule does not contain any new collection of information,
reporting, or record-keeping requirements. This proposed rule would
remove the blacknose shark management boundary in the Atlantic region,
modify the commercial retention limit for blacknose sharks in the
Atlantic region, revise the recreational minimum size limits for
Atlantic shark species, and revise the recreational retention limits
for Atlantic shark species.
Under section 603(b)(5) of the RFA, agencies must identify, to the
extent practicable, relevant Federal rules which duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with the proposed action. Fishermen, dealers, and managers in
these fisheries must comply with a number of international agreements,
domestic laws, and other fishery management measures. These include,
but are not limited to, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, ATCA, the High Seas
Fishing Compliance Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the
Endangered Species Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the
Paperwork Reduction Act, and the Coastal Zone Management Act. This
proposed action has been determined not to duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with any Federal rules.
Under section 603(c) of the RFA, agencies must describe any
significant alternatives to the proposed rule which accomplish the
stated objectives of applicable statutes and which minimize any
significant economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities.
Specifically, section 603(c)(1)-(4) of the RFA lists four general
categories of significant alternatives to assist an agency in the
development of significant alternatives. These categories of
alternatives 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 of the rule, or any part
thereof, for small entities.
Regarding the first, second, and fourth categories, all of the
businesses impacted by this proposed rule are considered small
entities, and thus the requirements are already designed for small
entities. Regarding the third category, NMFS does not know of any
performance or design standards that would satisfy the aforementioned
objectives of this rulemaking. As described below, NMFS analyzed
several different alternatives in this proposed rulemaking and provides
rationales for identifying the preferred alternatives to achieve the
desired objectives.
The alternatives considered and analyzed are described below. The
IRFA assumes that each vessel will have similar catch and gross
revenues to show the relative impact of the proposed action on vessels.
Under Alternative A1, the No Action alternative, NMFS would
continue management based on the current blacknose shark management
boundary in the Atlantic region. Currently, blacknose sharks may be
commercially harvested only south of lat. 34[deg]00' N by vessels
issued a Directed or Incidental shark LAP. Vessels issued a Directed or
Incidental shark LAP would not be allowed to retain blacknose sharks
north of lat. 34[deg]00' N. Thus, Alternative A1 would not result in
any additional economic impact for HMS permit holders, and would have
neutral economic impacts on the small entities participating in this
fishery.
Under Alternative A2 (preferred), NMFS would remove the blacknose
shark management boundary and allow blacknose sharks to be commercially
harvested in the entire Atlantic region by vessels issued a Directed or
Incidental shark LAP. This alternative would expand fishing
opportunities for commercial vessels issued a Directed or Incidental
Shark LAP, including those that operate north and south of lat.
34[deg]00' N, as they would be able to fish for and retain blacknose
sharks caught anywhere in the Atlantic region. This is particularly
significant, given that the commercial quota is under harvested (from
2017 through 2022, on average only 36.3 percent of the quota was
utilized), and the stock's range is expanding further northward along
the Atlantic coast. Thus, Alternative A2 would have minor beneficial
economic impacts on the small entities participating in the fishery, as
they would further optimize the commercial fishery's ability to fully
utilize the available quota and earn additional income from the sale of
blacknose sharks.
Under Alternative B1, the No Action alternative, NMFS would
maintain the current commercial retention limit of eight blacknose
sharks per vessel per trip for vessels issued a Directed shark LAP in
the Atlantic region. Alternative B1 would not result in any change in
fishing effort, and would have neutral economic impacts on the small
entities participating in the fishery.
Under Alternative B2 (preferred), NMFS would establish a flexible
commercial retention limit of 0 to 60 blacknose sharks per vessel per
trip for vessels issued a Directed shark LAP in the Atlantic region.
The default commercial retention limit that would apply at the start of
each fishing year would be 25 blacknose sharks per vessel per trip. The
commercial retention limit could be adjusted during the fishing year
based on the inseason trip limit adjustment criteria at Sec.
635.24(a)(8). Under this alternative, the potential gross revenue for
each vessel that has landed the default retention limit for blacknose
sharks would be approximately $402 per vessel per trip, with gross
revenue per trip from blacknose sharks ranging from approximately $0 to
$964 under the 0-to-60 blacknose shark commercial retention limit,
respectively (see table 4.5 in the EA). A higher default commercial
retention limit for blacknose sharks would provide new economic
benefits to Directed shark LAP holders. While revenue could increase on
a per-trip basis, the total potential revenue per year available to the
entire fleet would not change because the blacknose shark commercial

[[Page 223]]

quota would not change. Thus, preferred Alternative B2 would likely
result in neutral to minor beneficial economic impacts on the small
entities participating in this fishery since the default commercial
retention limit is set above the status quo commercial retention limit,
which would result in Directed shark LAP holders realizing higher trip
revenues by selling more blacknose sharks per trip. The impacts could
be minor adverse if the commercial quota is harvested and the fishery
closes early in the year. However, an early fishery closure is unlikely
because NMFS would actively monitor the quota and if catch rates are
high, NMFS could reduce the retention limit to extend the commercial
fishery.
Under Alternative B3, NMFS would remove the commercial retention
limit for blacknose sharks in the Atlantic region. For commercial
vessels issued a Directed shark LAP, there would be no trip limit for
blacknose sharks, as long as catch rates remain within the available
blacknose shark quota. Based on average ex-vessel prices from 2017
through 2022 ($1.41 per pound dressed weight), the commercial fleet
earned an average of $19,394 in revenue per year from blacknose sharks.
During the same time, on average only 36.3 percent of the quota was
harvested by an average of 17 active vessels (78 percent of the
landings were from five vessels). Fully harvesting the blacknose shark
commercial quota could result in an estimated annual total fleet
revenue of approximately $53,532 and an individual vessel revenue of
approximately $3,149 (across the fleet) or approximately $10,706 (for
the top five vessels). However, the opportunity to retain blacknose
sharks without a retention limit could lead to a faster harvest of the
available commercial quota and an early fishery closure. This may
create a sense of urgency for Directed shark LAP holders to harvest the
quota as quickly as possible. Furthermore, removing the commercial
retention limit would eliminate an accountability measure for ensuring
equitable fishing opportunities for all Directed shark LAP holders.
Thus, Alternative B3 would likely result in minor adverse economic
impacts on the small entities participating in this fishery because the
absence of a commercial retention limit could result in reaching and/or
exceeding the commercial quota earlier in the fishing year and
necessitate early fishery closure, which could limit opportunities to
earn revenue from blacknose sharks year round.
The recreational minimum size and retention limit alternatives
considered in this proposed rule apply to HMS Angling and HMS Charter/
Headboat permit holders, and Atlantic Tunas General category and
Swordfish General Commercial permit holders when participating in a
registered HMS tournament. HMS Angling permit holders are not
considered to be small entities under RFA. Small entity impacts from
recreational minimum size and retention limit alternatives would
primarily be associated with HMS Charter/Headboat permit holders, and
to a less extent, the occasional participation of Atlantic Tunas
General category and Swordfish General Commercial permit holders in
registered HMS tournaments.
Under Alternative C1, the No Action alternative, NMFS would
maintain the current recreational minimum size limits for sharks, as
follows: all sharks, unless otherwise specified, must be at least 54
inches (137 cm) FL; all hammerhead sharks must be at least 78 inches
(198.1 cm) FL; and there is no size limit for Atlantic sharpnose,
bonnethead, or smoothhound sharks. Alternative C1 would not result in
any change in fishing effort, and would have neutral economic impacts
on the small entities, primarily HMS Charter/Headboat permit holders,
participating in the fishery.
Under Alternative C2, NMFS would establish recreational minimum
size limits that are specific to the female size at maturity for each
species. While this alternative would increase opportunities to harvest
shark species that mature at lengths shorter than the current
recreational minimum size limit, there would be decreased opportunities
to harvest shark species that mature at lengths longer than the current
minimum size limit. Additionally, charter crew would need to keep track
of a large number of minimum size limits and identify each shark to the
species level. If a prohibited or undersized shark is retained due to
misidentification or other reasons, a civil penalty could be assessed.
Thus, Alternative C2 could have minor adverse economic impacts on the
small entities participating in the fishery.
Under Alternative C3, NMFS would group certain shark species
together and set a recreational minimum size limit for each group,
based on a midpoint value for the female sizes at maturity for the
shark species in that group. Similar to Alternative C2, this
alternative would increase opportunities to harvest shark species that
mature at lengths shorter than the current recreational minimum size
limit, and reduce opportunities to harvest shark species that mature at
lengths longer than the current minimum size limit. Also similar to
Alternative C2, this alternative would require charter crew to track a
larger number of minimum size limits compared to the status quo and to
identify sharks at the species level, which could result in increased
unintentional illegal harvest of undersized individuals due to
misidentification. However, by grouping species together, this
alternative would simplify management compared to Alternative C2 while
reducing the harvest of immature or misidentified sharks. Thus,
Alternative C3 would have neutral economic impacts on the small
entities participating in the fishery.
Under Alternative C4 (preferred), NMFS would group certain shark
species together and establish flexible recreational minimum size
limits for each group. Default recreational minimum size limits would
be based on a midpoint value of the female sizes at maturity for the
shark species in that group, or be consistent with current HMS
regulations. Specifically, NMFS would revise the default recreational
minimum size limits for shark groups where the midpoint value of the
female sizes at maturity for the shark species in that group is smaller
than the current default recreational retention limit for those
species. This alternative would increase opportunities to harvest shark
species that mature at lengths shorter than the current recreational
minimum size limit, and if minimum size limits are reduced below the
default, further opportunities for harvest may be realized. However, if
minimum size limits are increased above the default, there would be
decreased opportunities to harvest those shark species. Thus,
Alternative C4 would have neutral to minor beneficial economic impacts
on the small entities participating in the fishery.
Under Alternative C5, NMFS would remove recreational minimum size
limits for shark species and thus allow the retention of recreationally
authorized shark species of any size. While the absence of recreational
minimum size limits would increase opportunities for shark harvest,
high rates of harvest would risk a fishery closure. However, given the
catch-and-release nature of the recreational shark fishery, substantial
increases in shark harvest rates are unlikely. Additionally, removing
recreational minimum size limits would eliminate an accountability
measure to control harvest levels, and a management tool to aid in
rebuilding some shark species by allowing sharks to be harvested before
they reach maturity, which could

[[Page 224]]

impact fishing opportunities in the future. Thus, Alternative C5 would
have minor adverse to neutral economic impacts on the small entities
participating in the fishery.
Under Alternative D1, the No Action alternative, NMFS would
maintain the current recreational retention limits. The current
recreational retention limit allows one shark from the following list
per vessel per trip: Atlantic blacktip, Gulf of America blacktip, bull,
great hammerhead, scalloped hammerhead, smooth hammerhead, lemon,
nurse, spinner, tiger, blue, common thresher, porbeagle, Atlantic
sharpnose, finetooth, Atlantic blacknose, Gulf of America blacknose,
and bonnethead. Additionally, there is a recreational retention limit
of one shark per person per trip for Atlantic sharpnose and bonnethead.
There is no recreational retention limit for smoothhound sharks.
Alternative D1 would not result in any change in fishing effort, and
would have neutral economic impacts on the small entities participating
in the fishery.
Under Alternative D2 (preferred), NMFS would establish flexible
recreational retention limits for sharks. Default recreational
retention limits would be consistent with current HMS regulations,
except for Atlantic sharpnose, bonnethead, and blacktip sharks, which
will have separate default recreational retention limits on a per-
vessel-per-trip basis. This alternative would increase opportunities to
harvest sharks, particularly those species that would have separate
recreational retention limits (e.g., blacktip sharks). These
opportunities would be further expanded if the recreational retention
limits are increased above the default limits; conversely,
opportunities could be decreased if the retention limits are lowered
below the default limits. Additionally, higher recreational retention
limits would increase opportunities for HMS Charter/Headboat permit
holders to offer more attractive offshore shark trips (particularly for
pelagic sharks) given the potentially higher retention limits, and thus
potentially earn more revenue from higher priced charters and/or
greater demand for charter trips. Thus, Alternative D2 would likely
result in minor beneficial economic impacts on the small entities
providing for-hire fishing trips in the fishery.
Under Alternative D3, NMFS would remove recreational retention
limits for sharks, allowing the retention of an unlimited number of
sharks on a per-trip basis. This alternative would increase
opportunities to harvest sharks. Additionally, the absence of
recreational retention limits would increase opportunities for HMS
Charter/Headboat permit holders to offer more attractive offshore shark
trips (particularly for pelagic sharks) without retention limits, and
thus potentially earn more revenue from higher priced charters and/or
greater demand for charter trips. Increased opportunities to
potentially increase for-hire revenue would potentially be offset by a
fishery closure if harvest levels exceed the available quotas. However,
without recreational retention limits, NMFS would be unable to control
harvest levels in the recreational shark fishery and high catch rates
could lead to fishery closures. Closures in the recreational shark
fishery could have negative economic impacts, particular for HMS
Charter/Headboat permit holders. Thus, Alternative D3 would have
neutral to minor adverse economic impacts on the small entities
participating in the fishery.
This proposed rule contains no information collection requirements
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 635

Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing vessels, Foreign relations, Imports,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Statistics,
Treaties.

Dated: December 31, 2025.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS proposes to amend 50
CFR part 635 as follows:

PART 635--ATLANTIC HIGHLY MIGRATORY SPECIES

0
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.

0
2. In Sec. 635.2, revise the definition of ``management group'' to
read as follows:

Sec. 635.2 Definitions.

* * * * *
Management group in regard to sharks means a group of shark species
that are combined for quota management purposes. A management group may
be split by region or sub-region, as defined at Sec. 635.27(b)(1). A
fishery for a management group can be opened or closed as a whole or at
the regional or sub-regional levels. Sharks have the following
management groups: Atlantic aggregated LCS, Gulf of America aggregated
LCS, research LCS, hammerhead, Atlantic non-blacknose SCS, Gulf of
America non-blacknose SCS, and common thresher and shortfin mako
sharks.
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec. 635.20, revise paragraph (e) to read as follows:

Sec. 635.20 Size limits.

* * * * *
(e) Sharks. All size limits in this paragraph (e) and listed in
table 1 to paragraph (e) are recreational minimum size limits. No
person on a vessel that has been issued, or should have been issued, a
permit with a shark endorsement under Sec. 635.4 shall take, possess,
or retain a shark that is less than the relevant minimum size limit. At
the start of each fishing year and consistent with the retention limits
specified at Sec. 635.22(c), the default minimum size limits will
apply. During the fishing year, NMFS may adjust minimum size limits
within the range specified in table 1 to paragraph (e) based upon a
review of the landings and landing trends over the past 3 calendar
years, the relevant retention limit specified at Sec. 635.22(c), and
any other relevant factors. NMFS will announce any adjustments to
minimum size limits by publication in the Federal Register. The
adjusted minimum size limit(s) will remain in effect through the end of
the fishing year or until otherwise adjusted.

Table 1 to Paragraph (e)--Shark Recreational Minimum Size Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Default
recreational Recreational
Shark species minimum size limit minimum size limit
(FL) range (FL)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlantic sharpnose, bonnethead, No limit.......... 0 in (0 cm)-54 in
and smoothhound. (137.2 cm), or no
limit.
Blacknose and finetooth......... 38 in (96.5 cm)... 0 in (0 cm)-54 in
(137.2 cm), or no
limit

[[Page 225]]

Blacktip and spinner............ 48 in (121.9 cm).. 0 in (0 cm)-70 in
(177.8 cm), or no
limit.
Great hammerhead, scalloped 78 in (198.1 cm).. 0 in (0 cm)-115 in
hammerhead, and smooth (292.1 cm), or no
hammerhead. limit.
Bull, lemon, nurse, and tiger... 54 in (137.2 cm).. 0 in (0 cm)-115 in
(292.1 cm), or no
limit.
Blue common thresher, and 54 in (137.2 cm).. 0 in (0 cm)-95 in
porbeagle. (241.3 cm) or no
limit.
Shortfin mako................... Males: 71 in (180 No range.
cm).
Females: 83 in
(210 cm).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
0
4. In Sec. 635.21, revise paragraph (c)(1)(ii) to read as follows:

Sec. 635.21 Gear operation and deployment restrictions.

* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) Has pelagic longline gear on board, persons aboard that vessel
may not possess, retain, transship, land, sell, or store silky sharks
or scalloped, smooth, or great hammerhead sharks.
* * * * *
0
5. In Sec. 635.22, revise paragraph (c) to read as follows:

Sec. 635.22 Recreational retention limits.

* * * * *
(c) Sharks. (1) All retention limits in this paragraph (c)(1) and
listed in table 1 to Paragraph (c)(1) are recreational retention
limits. No person on a vessel that has been issued, or should have been
issued, a permit with a shark endorsement under Sec. 635.4, shall
take, possess, or retain more sharks than the relevant retention limit,
except as noted in paragraph (c)(3) of this section. At the start of
each fishing year and consistent with the minimum size limits specified
at Sec. 635.20(e), the default recreational limits will apply. During
the fishing year, NMFS may adjust retention limits within the range
specified in table 1 to Paragraph (c) based upon the inseason trip
limit adjustment criteria listed in Sec. 635.24(a)(8). NMFS will
announce any adjustments to retention limits by publication in the
Federal Register. The adjusted retention limit(s) will remain in effect
through the end of the fishing year or until otherwise adjusted.

Table 1 to Paragraph (c)--Shark Recreational Retention Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Default
recreational Recreational
Shark species retention limit retention limit
(sharks per vessel range (sharks per
per trip) vessel per trip)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sharks from the following list 1................. 0-3, or no limit.
combined: \1\ blacknose, blue,
bull, common thresher,
finetooth, great hammerhead,
\2\ scalloped hammerhead,\2\
smooth hammerhead,\2\ lemon,
nurse, porbeagle, spinner, and
tiger.
Atlantic sharpnose.............. 1................. 0-4, or no limit.
Bonnethead...................... 1................. 0-4, or no limit.
Blacktip........................ 1................. 0-5, or no limit.
Sandbar......................... 0................. 0.
Silky........................... 0................. 0.
Smoothhound..................... No limit.......... 0-4, or no limit.
Shortfin mako................... 0................. 0-1.
Prohibited sharks or parts of 0................. 0.
prohibited sharks.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The default or adjusted retention limit applies to the group of
listed shark species, as a whole. For example, under the default
retention limit, if one blacknose shark is retained, then the
retention limit for the group has been met, and no other shark from
the group may be retained.
\2\ No scalloped, smooth, or great hammerhead sharks may be retained,
possessed, or landed in or from the Caribbean, as defined at Sec.
622.2 of this chapter.

(2) A person on board a vessel that has been issued or is required
to be issued a permit with a shark endorsement under Sec. 635.4 is
required to use non-offset, corrodible circle hooks as specified in
Sec. 635.21(e) and (j) in order to retain sharks per the retention
limits specified in this section.
(3) For persons on board vessels issued both a commercial shark
permit and a permit with a shark endorsement, the recreational
retention limit and sale prohibition applies for shortfin mako sharks
at all times, even when the commercial common thresher and shortfin
mako sharks quota is open. If such vessels retain a shortfin mako shark
under the recreational retention limit, all other sharks retained by
such vessels may be retained only under the applicable recreational
retention limits and may not be sold. If a commercial Atlantic shark
quota is closed under Sec. 635.28(b), the recreational retention limit
for sharks and no sale provision in paragraph (a) of this section will
be applied to persons aboard a vessel issued a Federal Atlantic
commercial shark vessel permit under Sec. 635.4(e), if that vessel has
also been issued a permit with a shark endorsement under Sec. 635.4(b)
and is engaged in a for-hire fishing trip or is participating in a
registered HMS tournament per Sec. 635.4(c)(2).
* * * * *
0
6. In Sec. 635.24, revise paragraphs (a)(4)(i) through (iv) to read as
follows:

Sec. 635.24 Commercial retention limits for sharks, swordfish, and
BAYS tunas.

* * * * *
(a) * * *
(4) * * *

[[Page 226]]

(i) Except as provided in Sec. 635.22(c)(3), a person who owns or
operates a vessel that has been issued a directed shark LAP may retain,
possess, land, or sell pelagic sharks if the pelagic shark fishery is
open per Sec. Sec. 635.27 and 635.28. Shortfin mako sharks may be
retained by persons aboard vessels using pelagic longline, bottom
longline, or gillnet gear only if NMFS has adjusted the commercial
retention limit above zero pursuant to paragraph (a)(4)(v) of this
section and only if the shark is dead at the time of haulback and
consistent with the provisions of Sec. Sec. 635.21(c)(1), (d)(5), and
(f)(6) and 635.22(c)(3).
(ii) A person who owns or operates a vessel that has been issued a
shark LAP and is operating in the Atlantic region, as defined at Sec.
635.27(b)(1), may retain, possess, land, or sell blacknose and non-
blacknose SCS if the respective blacknose and non-blacknose SCS
management groups are open per Sec. Sec. 635.27 and 635.28. At the
start of each fishing year, such persons may retain, possess, land, or
sell no more than 25 blacknose sharks per vessel per trip. During the
fishing year, NMFS may adjust the commercial retention limit for
blacknose sharks to a limit between 0 and 60 sharks per vessel per
trip, per the inseason trip limit adjustment criteria listed in
paragraph (a)(8) of this section. A person who owns or operates a
vessel that has been issued a shark LAP and is operating in the Gulf of
America region, as defined at Sec. 635.27(b)(1), may not retain,
possess, land, or sell any blacknose sharks, but may retain, possess,
land, or sell non-blacknose SCS if the respective non-blacknose SCS
management group is open per Sec. Sec. 635.27 and 635.28.
(iii) Consistent with paragraph (a)(4)(ii) of this section, a
person who owns or operates a vessel that has been issued an incidental
shark LAP may retain, possess, land, or sell no more than 16 SCS and
pelagic sharks, combined, per vessel per trip, if the respective
fishery is open per Sec. Sec. 635.27 and 635.28. Of those 16 SCS and
pelagic sharks per vessel per trip, no more than 8 shall be blacknose
sharks. Shortfin mako sharks may be retained only under the commercial
retention limits by persons using pelagic longline, bottom longline, or
gillnet gear only if NMFS has adjusted the commercial retention limit
above zero pursuant to paragraph (a)(4)(v) of this section and only if
the shark is dead at the time of haulback and consistent with the
provisions at Sec. 635.21(c)(1), (d)(5), and (f)(6). If the vessel has
also been issued a permit with a shark endorsement and retains a
shortfin mako shark, recreational retention limits apply to all sharks
retained and none may be sold, per Sec. 635.22(c)(3).
(iv) A person who owns, operates, or is aboard a vessel that has
been issued an HMS Commercial Caribbean Small Boat permit may retain,
possess, land, or sell any blacktip, bull, lemon, nurse, spinner,
tiger, Atlantic sharpnose, bonnethead, finetooth, and smoothhound
shark, subject to the HMS Commercial Caribbean Small Boat permit shark
retention limit. A person who owns, operates, or is aboard a vessel
that has been issued an HMS Commercial Caribbean Small Boat permit may
not retain, possess, land, or sell any hammerhead, blacknose, silky,
sandbar, blue, common thresher, shortfin mako, or prohibited shark,
including parts or pieces of these sharks. The shark retention limit
for a person who owns, operates, or is aboard a vessel issued an HMS
Commercial Caribbean Small Boat permit will range from zero to three
sharks per vessel per trip. At the start of each fishing year, the
default shark trip limit will apply. During the fishing year, NMFS may
adjust the default shark trip limit per the inseason trip limit
adjustment criteria listed in paragraph (a)(8) of this section. The
default shark retention limit for the HMS Commercial Caribbean Small
Boat permit is three sharks per vessel per trip.
* * * * *
0
7. In Sec. 635.27, revise paragraphs (b)(1)(i)(D), (b)(1)(iii)(D), and
(b)(4)(i) to read as follows:

Sec. 635.27 Quotas.

* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) * * *
(D) Atlantic blacknose sharks. The base annual commercial quota for
Atlantic blacknose sharks is 17.2 mt dw.
* * * * *
(iii) * * *
(D) Pelagic sharks. The base annual commercial quotas for pelagic
sharks are 273.0 mt dw for blue sharks, 1.7 mt dw for porbeagle sharks,
and 488.0 mt dw for common thresher and shortfin mako sharks.
* * * * *
(4) * * *
(i) The base annual quota for persons who collect LCS other than
sandbar, SCS, common thresher sharks, blue sharks, porbeagle sharks, or
prohibited species under a display permit or EFP is 57.2 mt ww (41.2 mt
dw).
* * * * *
0
8. In Sec. 635.28,
0
a. Revise paragraphs (b)(1)(iii) and (v) and (b)(2);
0
b. Remove paragraphs (b)(3) and (4);
0
c. Revise newly redesignated paragraph (b)(4); and,
0
d. Redesignate paragraphs (b)(5) through (7) as paragraphs (b)(3)
through (5).
The revisions read as follows:

Sec. 635.28 Fishery closures.

* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(iii) After accounting for overharvests as specified at Sec.
635.27(b)(2), the overall, regional, and/or sub-regional quota, as
applicable, is determined to be zero or close to zero and NMFS has
closed the fishery by publication in the Federal Register;
* * * * *
(v) Landings of the species and/or management group meet the
requirements specified in Sec. 635.28(b)(2) through (5) and NMFS has
closed the fishery by publication in the Federal Register.
* * * * *
(2) If the overall, regional, and/or sub-regional quota is
available, then that overall, regional, and/or sub-regional commercial
fishery for the shark species or management group will open as
specified in Sec. 635.27(b). When NMFS calculates that the overall,
regional, and/or sub-regional landings for a shark species and/or
management group, as specified in Sec. 635.27(b)(1), has reached or is
projected to reach 80 percent of the applicable available overall,
regional, and/or sub-regional quota as specified in Sec. 635.27(b)(1)
and is projected to reach 100 percent of the relevant quota by the end
of the fishing season, NMFS will file for publication with the Office
of the Federal Register a closure action, as applicable, for that shark
species and/or shark management group that will be effective no fewer
than 4 days from date of filing. From the effective date and time of
the closure until the start of the following fishing year or until NMFS
announces, via publication in the Federal Register, that additional
overall, regional, and/or sub-regional quota is available and the
season is reopened, the overall, regional, and/or sub-regional
fisheries for that shark species or management group are closed.
* * * * *
(4) When the overall, regional, and/or sub-regional fishery for a
shark species and/or management group is closed, owners and operators
of a fishing vessel issued a Federal Atlantic commercial shark permit
pursuant to Sec. 635.4 may not possess, retain, land, or sell a shark
of that species and/or management group that was caught within the
closed

[[Page 227]]

region or sub-region, except under the conditions specified in Sec.
635.22(a) and (c) or if the vessel possesses a valid shark research
permit under Sec. 635.32, a NMFS-approved observer is onboard, and the
sandbar and/or Research LCS fishery, as applicable, is open. A shark
dealer, issued a permit pursuant to Sec. 635.4, may not purchase or
receive a shark of that species and/or management group that was caught
within the closed region or sub-region from a vessel issued a Federal
Atlantic commercial shark permit, except that a permitted shark dealer
or processor may possess sharks that were caught in the closed region
or sub-region that were harvested, off-loaded, and sold, traded, or
bartered, prior to the effective date of the closure and were held in
storage. Under a closure for a shark species or management group, a
shark dealer, issued a permit pursuant to Sec. 635.4 may, in
accordance with State regulations, purchase or receive a shark of that
species or management group if the shark was harvested, off-loaded, and
sold, traded, or bartered from a vessel that fishes only in State
waters and that has not been issued a Federal Atlantic commercial shark
permit, HMS Angling permit, or HMS Charter/Headboat permit pursuant to
Sec. 635.4. Additionally, under an overall, a regional, or a sub-
regional closure for a shark species and/or management group, a shark
dealer, issued a permit pursuant to Sec. 635.4, may purchase or
receive a shark of that species group if the sandbar or Research LCS
fishery, as applicable, is open and the shark was harvested, off-
loaded, and sold, traded, or bartered from a vessel that has been
issued a valid shark research permit (pursuant to Sec. 635.32(f)) that
had a NMFS-approved observer on board during the trip on which the
shark was collected.
* * * * *
0
9. In Sec. 635.31, revise paragraph (c)(6) to read as follows:

Sec. 635.31 Restrictions on sale and purchase.

* * * * *
(c) * * *
(6) A dealer issued a permit under this part may not first receive
silky sharks or scalloped, smooth, or great hammerhead sharks from an
owner or operator of a fishing vessel with pelagic longline gear on
board, or from the owner of a fishing vessel issued both a HMS Charter/
Headboat permit with a commercial sale endorsement and a commercial
shark permit when tuna, swordfish or billfish are on board the vessel,
offloaded from the vessel, or being offloaded from the vessel.
* * * * *
0
10. In Sec. 635.71, revise paragraph (d)(19) to read as follows:

Sec. 635.71 Prohibitions.

* * * * *
(d) * * *
(19) Retain, possess, transship, land, store, sell or purchase
silky sharks or scalloped, smooth, or great hammerhead sharks as
specified in Sec. 635.21(c)(1)(ii), Sec. 635.22(a)(2), Sec. 635.24,
and Sec. 635.31(c)(6).
* * * * *
0
11. In table 1 of appendix A to part 635, revise the term ``Thresher
shark, Alopias vulpinus'' under the heading C to read as follows:

Appendix A to Part 635--Species Tables

Table 1 of Appendix A to Part 635--Oceanic Sharks

* * * * *

C. Pelagic Sharks

* * * * *

Common thresher shark, Alopias vulpinus

* * * * *
0
12. In table 2 of appendix A to part 635, revise the term ``Thresher
shark, Alopias vulpinus '' to read as follows:

Appendix A to Part 635--Species Tables

Table 2 of Appendix A to Part 635--Pelagic Species

* * * * *

Common thresher shark, Alopias vulpinus

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2025-24264 Filed 1-2-26; 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>

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Revisions to Commercial Atlantic Blacknose and Recreational Atlantic Shark Fisheries Management Measures

Federal Register Citation

Suggested Web Citation