Stellwagen Bank FEIS/MP Appendices 



Page G13 



Finally, NOAA's analysis of this issue presents 

 information that the projected need for these 

 materials does not indicate that extraction of sand 

 and gravel from Stellwagen Bank is even necessary. 

 None of the large public works projects currently 

 underway in the metropolitan Boston area (MWRA 

 wastewater treatment facility in Boston Harbor, 

 MDPW Central Artery project and MDPW Third 

 Harbor Tunnel project) has identified a need for 

 sand and gravel resources from Stellwagen Bank. 

 Moreover, completion of these projects will not, 

 according to a recent report to the New England 

 Governors Conference, create a shortage of sand 

 and gravel resources. To the extent sand and gravel 

 are subsequently needed for construction projects, 

 there are alternate sources on land and sea, 

 including the use of dredged material. Use of 

 dredged material for construction aggregate would 

 further the missions of DOI and COE without 

 threatening a disturbance of the natural balance at 

 Stellwagen Bank. 



On balance, therefore, NOAA has determined that 

 the proposed prohibition on sand and gravel 

 extraction activities is a warranted and supportable 

 means of ensuring the long-term protection 

 mandated by Title III. 



N. nSHING ACTIVITIES 



Management of Commercial and Recreational 

 Fisheries Should Be The Sole Responsibility Of 

 The National Marine Fisheries Service And The 

 New England Fishery Management Council. 



The New England Fishery Management Council 

 (NEFMC), as well as several commercial 

 fishermen's organizations, commented that 

 regulation of fisheries in the Sanctuary should 

 remain entirely the responsibility of NMFS and the 

 NEFMC. In particular, the NEFMC stated that 

 NOAA should permanently exempt fishing activities 

 from any Sanctuary regulation. Additionally, the 

 NEFMC stated its belief that the Magnuson 

 Fishery Conservation and Management Act 

 (MFCMA) provides exclusive authority for fisheries 

 management within the Exclusive Economic Zone 

 to NMFS and Regional Fishery Management 

 Councils. 



Additionally, the NEFMC commented that the 

 regulatory language in the proposed Sanctuary 

 Designation Document (Article VI, § 2 of App. A 

 of the DEIS/MP), contradicts the intent of the 

 MFCMA, by providing that "if any valid regulation 

 issued by any Federal, State, or local authority 

 . . . conflicts with a Sanctuary regulation, the 

 regulation deemed by the Director [of OCRM] to 

 be more protective of Sanctuary resources and 

 qualities shall govern." 



NOAA Response : NOAA agrees that the MFCM/v 

 provides comprehensive authority for management, 

 including regulation, over fisheries to Regional 

 Fishery Management Councils and NMFS. 

 Moreover, NOAA/NOS agrees with the Council's 

 determination, made in response to NOAA's 

 consultation early in the Sanctuary designation 

 process, that adequate legal mechanisms exist tii 

 provide appropriate management of fisheries in 

 general, and thus no supplementary fishing 

 regulations currently appear to be necessary to 

 address Sanctuary resource protection concerns. 



During the process of its consideration of 

 Stellwagen Bank for Sanctuary designation, 

 NOAA/NOS has identified fisheries as a resource 

 of national significance, and is therefore obligated 

 under Title III of the Marine Protection, Research 

 and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) to ensure adequate 

 mechanisms exist to properly manage and protect 

 the long-term viability of this resource within the 

 Sanctuary. In meeting this obligation, NOAA/NOS 

 has further defined and discussed the current status 

 of fishery stocks and the present fisheries 

 management structure in the Sanctuary area. (See 

 FEIS, at Part Two, Section II.C.l., Commercial 

 Fishing). 



NOAA/NOS has determined that while the 

 regulatory structure for management of fisheries is 

 adequate, current implementation of that structure 

 is not fully attaining the objectives mandated under 

 MFCMA. The NEFMC and NMFS are currently 

 responding to a Court order to revise the FTvlP's for 

 groundfish species, so as to design a rebuilding 

 program for those stocks. NOAA/NOS believes 

 this is an appropriate mechanism to address the 

 current problems related to groundfish stocks. 

 Therefore, NOAA/NOS is neither regulating 



