[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 247 (Monday, December 27, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 77158-77167]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-28167]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on 
a Petition To List Three Species of Lampreys as Threatened or 
Endangered

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of petition finding.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a 
90-day finding on a petition to list three species of lampreys: Pacific 
lamprey (Lampetra tridentata), western brook lamprey (Lampetra 
richardsoni), and river lamprey (Lampetra ayresii), as threatened or 
endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). 
We find that the petition and additional information in our files does 
not present substantial scientific or commercial information indicating 
that listing these species may be warranted. We will not be initiating 
a further status review in response to this petition. We ask the public 
to submit to us any new information that becomes available concerning 
the status of or threats to the species. This information will help us 
monitor and encourage the conservation of these species.
    The Kern brook lamprey (Lampetra hubbsi) was also identified in the 
petition. However, this species is being addressed in a separate 
finding, which is being prepared by the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife 
Office in California, and is not addressed in this notice.

DATES: The finding announced in this document was made on December 27,

[[Page 77159]]

2004. You may submit new information concerning this species for our 
consideration at any time.

ADDRESSES: Data, information, or questions concerning this petition or 
this 90-day finding should be sent to Kemper McMaster, State 
Supervisor, Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, 2600 SE. 98th Avenue, Suite 100, Portland, OR 97266. The 
petition finding and supporting information are available for public 
inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the above 
address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bianca Streif, Lamprey Coordinator, 
Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section above) 
(telephone 503/231-6179; facsimile 503/231-6195).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires that we make a finding on 
whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents 
substantial information to indicate that the petitioned action may be 
warranted. To the maximum extent practicable, this finding is to be 
made within 90 days of receipt of the petition, and the finding is to 
be published promptly in the Federal Register.
    This finding summarizes information included in the petition and 
information available to us at the time of the petition review. Our 
review of a 90-day finding under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 
section 424.14(b) of our regulations is limited to a determination of 
whether the information in the petition meets the ``substantial 
information'' threshold. Our standard for substantial information 
within the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90-day 
listing petition finding is ``that amount of information that would 
lead a reasonable person to believe that the measure proposed in the 
petition may be warranted'' (50 CFR 424.14(b)).
    We do not conduct additional research at this point, nor do we 
subject the petition to rigorous critical review. Rather, at the 90-day 
finding stage, we accept the petitioner's sources and characterizations 
of the information, to the extent that they appear to be based on 
accepted scientific principles (such as citing published and peer 
reviewed articles, or studies done in accordance with valid 
methodologies), unless we have specific information to the contrary.
    On January 27, 2003, we received the petition, dated January 23, 
2003, from the Siskiyou Regional Education Project and 10 other 
organizations, requesting we list the Pacific lamprey, western brook 
lamprey, river lamprey, and Kern brook lamprey in Oregon, Washington, 
Idaho, and California. The petitioners also requested designation of 
critical habitat for the range of the species or for distinct 
population segments (DPSs) comprised of one or more major river basins. 
The petition identified itself as such and contained the names, 
addresses, and signatures of the petitioning organizations' 
representative. The petition provided information relating to one or 
more of the petitioned lamprey species, including: life history 
information; population status and local distribution; destruction, 
modification, or curtailment of habitat or range; other natural or 
manmade factors affecting the species' continued existence; predation; 
overutilization for commercial or recreational purposes; inadequacy of 
existing mechanisms; and a conclusion for each lamprey species.
    In response to the petition to list these species, we sent a letter 
to the petitioners dated March 12, 2003, stating that we would not be 
able to address their petition before fiscal year 2004, which was to 
begin October 1, 2003. The reason for this delay was that complying 
with existing court orders and settlement agreements for other listing 
actions required nearly all of our listing funding for fiscal year 
2004. In March 2004, we received a 60-day notice of intent to sue, and 
on May 26, 2004, a complaint regarding our failure to carry out the 90-
day and 12-month findings on the status of the four species of 
lampreys. On November 23, 2004, we reached an agreement with the 
plaintiffs to complete the 90-day finding by December 20, 2004, and, if 
appropriate, to complete the 12-month finding by November 15, 2005.

General Biology

    The petitioned lampreys belong to the genus Lampetra in the family 
Petromyzontidae and subfamily Petromyzontinae, a primitive group of 
fishes that are eel-like in form but lack the jaws and paired fins. 
These species have a round sucker-like mouth (oral disc), no scales, 
and breathing holes instead of gills. Most lamprey species have a 
similar life cycle: all begin life in freshwater, but some are 
anadromous (going from ocean to freshwater tributaries to spawn). In 
the beginning of their life cycle, the lamprey eggs hatch and the young 
ammocoetes (larvae) drift downstream to areas of low velocity and silt 
or sand substrate. They remain burrowed in the stream bottom, living as 
filter feeders for 2 to 7 years, filter-feeding on algae and detritus 
(Kostow 2002; Moyle 2002).
    Metamorphosis of ammocoetes to macropthalmia (juvenile phase) 
occurs gradually over several months as they develop eyes, teeth, and 
become free swimming. Depending on the species, macropthalmia mature 
into adults and then either begin their migration to salt water or 
remain in fresh water (Kostow 2002; Moyle 2002). Lampreys lack paired 
fins and their elongated body shape causes them to swim by using an 
undulatory (snakelike) movement (Mesa et al. 2002; Moyle 2002) and they 
do not have swim bladders that allow them to maintain neutral buoyancy 
and must, therefore, swim constantly or hold fast to objects to 
maintain their position (Liao 2002; Mesa et al. 2002).
    Pacific and river lampreys are parasitic as adults and feed on a 
variety of marine and anadromous fish. Nonparasitic western brook 
lampreys remain in fresh water, not feeding as adults, resulting in a 
short life span (Wydoski and Whitney 2003). After the adult feeding 
phase, both Pacific and river lampreys migrate to spawning areas and 
cease feeding. Their degree of fidelity to their natal streams is 
unknown. Adult lampreys spawn in gravel bottomed streams, at the 
upstream end of riffle habitat, typically above suitable ammocoete 
habitat (Moyle 2002). Both sexes construct the nests, often moving 
stones with their mouths. After the eggs are deposited and fertilized, 
the adults typically die within 3 to 36 days (Kostow 2002).
    Pacific, river, and western brook lamprey ammocoetes are nearly 
indistinguishable from each other. Although there is some color 
differentiation between the species, this characteristic is not 
reliable (Kostow 2002). Moyle (2002) states, ``Classification and 
identification of lampreys depends largely on the number, structure, 
and position of horny plates (teeth) of the sucking disc found in adult 
lampreys.''

Pacific Lamprey

    Adult Pacific lampreys are characterized by the presence of 3 large 
sharp teeth (cusps) and posterior teeth on the oral disc (Wydoski and 
Whitney 1979; Moyle 2002). The two dorsal fins are slightly separated 
and the second dorsal fin is continuous with the caudal fin. The anal 
fin, distinctive in females, is lacking in males. The ammocoetes at age 
5 ranges in size from approximately 4 to 8.5 inches (in) (9.5 to 22 
centimeters (cm)), depending on the geographic area (Wydoski and 
Whitney 2003).

[[Page 77160]]

    Pacific lampreys are found in streams from Hokkaido Island, Japan, 
and along the Pacific Rim, including Alaska, Canada, Washington, 
Oregon, Idaho, and California to Punta Canoas, Baja California, Mexico 
(Nawa et al. 2003). Pacific lampreys are the most widely distributed 
lamprey species on the west coast of the United States (U.S.). Their 
distribution includes major river systems such as the Fraser, Columbia, 
Klamath-Trinity, Eel, and Sacramento-San Joaquin Rivers. Pacific 
lamprey distribution patterns are similar to that of anadromous 
salmonids (Simpson and Wallace 1982; Close et al. 1995; Close et al. 
2002).
    Adult Pacific lampreys parasitize a wide variety of ocean fishes, 
including Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.), flatfish (such as 
Pleuronectes spp. and Platichthys spp.), rockfish (Sebastes spp.), and 
pollock (Theragra chalcogramma), and are preyed upon by sharks, sea 
lions, and other marine animals. They have been caught in depths 
ranging from 300 to 2,600 feet (ft) (90 to 800 meters (m)), and as far 
as 62 miles off the coast (mi) (100 kilometers (km)) in ocean haul nets 
(Close et al. 2002).
    After spending 1 to 3 years in the marine environment, Pacific 
lampreys return to freshwater between February and June (Kostow 2002; 
Moyle 2002). They are thought to overwinter and remain in freshwater 
habitat for approximately 1 year before spawning. In freshwater they 
may shrink in size up to 20 percent (Beamish 1980). Pacific lampreys 
primarily migrate upstream at night and adult size at the time of 
migration ranges from about 15 to 24.5 in (38 to 62 cm). They spawn 
between March and July, depending upon location within their range 
(Beamish 1980). Fecundity is high but variable, with females producing 
between 20,000 and 200,000 eggs (Moyle 2002). After the eggs are 
fertilized and deposited in the nest, embryos hatch in approximately 19 
days at 59[deg] Fahrenheit (F) (15[deg] Celsius (C)). Once the 
ammocoetes reach about 6 in (15 cm), they begin metamorphosis into 
macropthalmia (Moyle 2002; Wydoski and Whitney 2003).

Population Distribution and Trends

    The petition provides both anecdotal and empirical information on 
Pacific lamprey occurrences and documented declines in Oregon, 
Washington, and California; less information for British Columbia and 
Alaska; and little information for Idaho, Mexico, or the extensive area 
of their range from Alaska to Japan. In our review of the petition and 
other information, we found additional information for Idaho and 
northwestern California that suggests a decline in Pacific lamprey 
abundance and reduction in distribution (Cochnauer and Claire 2004; 
Service, in litt. 2004a).
    Some data indicating a decline in Pacific lampreys on the west 
coast of the U.S. come from dam window counts and stream salmonid 
surveys. Limitations of these data for evaluating trends include 
uncertainty about consistency in reporting lampreys, and a lack of 
standardized counts at dams over time designed to document lamprey 
(Close et al. 1995). In addition, data based on ammocoete counts can 
include the similar-appearing western brook and river lampreys.
    Historically, Pacific lampreys were thought to be distributed 
wherever salmon and steelhead once occurred (Simpson and Wallace 1982; 
Close et al. 1995; Close et al. 2002). Based on the information in the 
petition and Service files, the distribution of the Pacific lamprey has 
been reduced in specific drainages in the 4 States identified in the 
petition. They are extirpated in parts of southern California, above 
dams and other impassable barriers in coastal streams and larger 
rivers, and in the upper Snake and Columbia Rivers.

California

    In California, Pacific lampreys are currently found as far south as 
Malibu Creek, Los Angeles County (Moyle 2002). In 1997, a single 
Pacific lamprey ammocoete was collected from the San Luis Rey River in 
San Diego County (Moyle 2002), but there is no further evidence of 
lampreys in this area. Pacific lampreys spawned in the Los Angeles 
River basin including the Los Angeles, San Gabriel, and Santa Ana 
Rivers, until 1955 (Swift et al. 1993). Lampreys were not recorded 
again until an adult was observed near the mouth of the Santa Ana River 
in 1991 (Swift et al. 1993). Comprehensive historical and current 
abundance data for Pacific lampreys in specific streams of southern 
California is lacking.
    For the central and south coast of California, the petition 
identifies Pacific lampreys occurring either currently or historically 
in Malibu Creek, Santa Clara River, Sespe Creek, Santa Ynez River, 
Santa Margarita River (the petition identifies this drainage as 
occurring in San Luis Obispo County; we assume this refers to Santa 
Margarita Creek, which is a tributary of the Salinas River in San Luis 
Obispo County), Salinas River, and San Lorenzo River. In addition to 
streams identified in the petition, Pacific lampreys have been 
documented in the Pajaro, Santa Maria, Ventura, Carmel, and Big Sur 
Rivers, and Big, San Carpoforo, Arroyo de la Cruz, and San Luis Obispo 
Creeks (Swift et al. 1993; Entrix and Lee and Pierce 2003). There is 
little comparative data between historical and current distribution and 
abundance.
    Pacific lampreys have been historically or recently documented in 
many streams of the San Francisco Bay area, including: Alameda, Walnut, 
Walker, Lagunitas, Coyote, Dry, Pena and Sonoma Creeks, and the Napa 
River. Information for these streams consists primarily of presence or 
absence surveys. Long-term trend data are not available.
    Pacific lampreys occur within the Sacramento River and many of its 
tributaries. This species also occurs in the lower San Joaquin River 
and many of its tributaries, including the Stanislaus, Tuolumne, 
Merced, and Kings Rivers (Brown and Moyle 1993). Data are limited and 
mostly incidental from surveys designed to sample salmonids over the 
past 5 to 10 years. Anecdotal data for the Mokelumne, Sacramento, and 
San Joaquin Rivers indicate negative trends in the last 5 to 10 years.
    In northwestern California, Pacific lampreys are documented from 
the Garcia, Big, Eel, Van Duzen, Mattole, Mad, Klamath, Scott, Trinity, 
and Smith Rivers. However, the actual distribution and abundance have 
not been determined for individual lamprey species because most 
lampreys captured in these rivers are not identified to the species 
level. Anecdotal evidence from early historical accounts and Tribal 
interviews suggest that Pacific lampreys have undergone substantial 
declines in the Eel and Lower Klamath Rivers in recent decades. 
Preliminary analysis of Service rotary trap data from the Klamath and 
Trinity Rivers suggests a declining trend from 1997 to 2004 for all 
life stages, with a notable decline in adult captures for the Klamath 
River system (Service, in litt. 2004a). We do not have lamprey 
population trend data for other streams in the area.

Idaho

    The petition describes the Pacific lamprey declines from historical 
levels in Idaho, but contains little information on the Pacific lamprey 
in the Snake River drainage in this State. We reviewed other reports 
that document the overall decline of the Pacific lamprey in the Snake 
River basin and associated tributaries. The Snake River basin in Idaho 
comprises the Snake River from Asotin Creek, Washington, upstream to 
Shoshone Falls, as well as many tributaries of the Snake River

[[Page 77161]]

(Boise, Payette, Weiser, Powder, Wildhorse, and Indian Rivers), and the 
entire Clearwater and Salmon River drainages.
    Historical data indicate that the Pacific lamprey distribution 
included the Salmon, Clearwater, and Wildhorse Rivers, and the Snake 
River upstream to Shoshone Falls, and probably mirrored ranges of 
native salmon and steelhead (Scott and Crossman 1973; Simpson and 
Wallace 1982; Close et al. 1995; Groves et al. 2001). Pacific lampreys 
once ascended the Snake River in large numbers (Wydoski and Whitney 
1979). In the Hells Canyon area, R.J. Bell (Idaho Department of Fish 
and Game, in litt. 1958) collected 33 lampreys while operating a weir 
on the Wildhorse River during May 1958. Hammond (1979) completed a 
larval biology study on Pacific lampreys documenting occurrences from 
the Potlatch River, Lolo Creek, and South Fork Salmon River in the 
1970s. Pacific lampreys were easily collected at Lower Salmon Falls for 
use as white sturgeon bait (Gilbert and Everman cited in P. Bowler, in 
litt. 2004). Several sources of anecdotal information corroborate 
historical distribution of Pacific lampreys throughout the majority of 
the Salmon River basin (draft Salmon River Subbasin Assessment 2004).
    Currently, Pacific lampreys are distributed throughout much of the 
Salmon and Clearwater River basins, excluding the North Fork Clearwater 
River above Dworshak Dam. Pacific lampreys were once plentiful in the 
Snake River from Asotin Creek to Shoshone Falls (Scott and Crossman 
1973; Simpson and Wallace 1982; Close et al. 1995; Groves et al. 2001). 
The construction of several Hells Canyon dams, which do not provide for 
fish passage, has reduced lamprey distribution due to lack of passage 
(Cochnauer and Claire 2004). Because Pacific lampreys no longer have 
access to habitats upstream of Hells Canyon and Dworshak dams, their 
habitat has been reduced by 50 percent (Cochnauer and Claire 2004). In 
addition, the number of adult lamprey capable of navigating upstream 
through fish ladders at Columbia and Snake River dams is only a 
fraction of what was observed prior to the dams being built on those 
rivers (Claire 2004). Pacific lampreys are at a very low number in the 
Snake River basin based upon counts at lower Snake River dams (Kostow 
2002).

Oregon

    Potential distribution of Pacific lampreys in Oregon includes the 
Columbia River mainstem to McNary Dam, associated Columbia River 
tributaries in Oregon including the Willamette River, tributaries of 
the Snake River in Oregon, and Oregon coastal rivers (Kostow 2002). A 
significant portion of the Pacific lamprey historical range in upper 
reaches of many rivers has been lost because of construction of dams 
with no fish passage structures (i.e., upper Deschutes River and 
tributaries, Hood River, and many tributaries of the Willamette River) 
(Kostow 2002).
    There is anecdotal information that Pacific lamprey distribution 
and abundance have been reduced in recent decades, especially in Oregon 
rivers furthest from the Pacific Ocean such as the Umatilla, Walla 
Walla, John Day, and Grande Ronde Rivers (Jackson et al. 1996). 
Observations and records of adult Pacific lamprey passage at mainstem 
Columbia and Snake River dams indicate the species has declined 
substantially in these rivers and their tributaries in Oregon (Kostow 
2002). Dam counts suggest that the largest declines occurred in the 
1960s and 1970s. Although lamprey numbers have increased in recent 
years (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) 2003), we do not know 
whether these numbers are attributable to favorable ocean conditions 
resulting in greater host base or other factors, such as the recent 
inclusion of night counts at many dams, which has increased overall 
sampling efforts (Kostow 2002).
    The petition and other information provide some evidence that the 
Willamette River was, and may still be, an important area for Pacific 
lamprey production in the Columbia River basin (Kostow 2002). Although 
impassable dams and other artificial barriers have likely resulted in 
reduced distribution and abundance of lampreys in the Willamette River 
basin, information suggests that thousands of Pacific lampreys still 
ascend Willamette Falls and are still widely distributed in the 
Willamette Valley (Kostow 2002).
    There is a long history of commercial and Tribal harvest of Pacific 
lampreys at Willamette Falls. Commercial harvest records dating from 
the early 1900s show a peak of approximately 397,000 pounds (180,076 
kilograms) of Pacific lampreys in the mid-1940s. From 1943 to 1949, 
80,000 to 500,000 lampreys, estimated to be 10 to 20 percent of the 
run, were harvested (Close et al. 1995). As recently as 1994, about 
5,000 lampreys were harvested. Commercial harvest was ultimately 
eliminated in 2002 by the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission because 
it could not determine the percent of the total run harvested annually 
(Kostow 2002). The State of Oregon listed the Pacific lamprey as a 
sensitive species in 1993, and gave the species protected status in 
1996. Tribal and personal harvest continues under State permit.
    Detailed data in the petition from coastal Oregon comes from the 
Umpqua and Rogue Rivers (Nawa et al. 2003). Counts of Pacific lampreys 
at dams on both rivers indicate a dramatic decline over the past 40 
years. On the North Umpqua River, Pacific lamprey numbers have declined 
from a high of over 46,000 in 1966 to 15 in 1997 at the Winchester Dam 
(Nawa et al. 2003).
    Surveys conducted by various entities in the Alsea River basin 
documented Pacific lampreys to be well distributed, but generally 
absent from higher reaches above culverts (Kostow 2002). The Nestucca 
River and rivers draining to Tillamook Bay appear to be areas of low 
production for the Pacific lamprey, based on incidental data collected 
from salmonid smolt trap captures (Kostow 2002). For the majority of 
coastal streams in Oregon, however, there is little or no trend data 
and very little basin-specific distribution data in Oregon. The 
petition presents anecdotal evidence that lamprey populations have 
declined from historic numbers for the Applegate, Coquille, Siletz, and 
Siuslaw Rivers.
    For the remainder of the streams in Oregon mentioned in the 
petition, there is not sufficient data to determine historical or 
current distribution and abundance, or documented evidence of decline.

Washington

    Available information and abundance data for the Pacific lamprey in 
western Washington is limited and largely anecdotal (Molly Hallock, 
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), cited in Bob Vadas, 
WDFW, pers. comm. 2004). Much of the data references only ``lamprey.'' 
The current distribution of the Pacific lamprey in western Washington 
includes most large rivers and streams along the coast and the Strait 
of Juan de Fuca, throughout Puget Sound, including the Nisqually Reach, 
and parts of the Hood Canal systems (Cook-Tabor 1999; Wydoski and 
Whitney 2003). The species' range extends long distances inland in the 
Columbia, Snake, and Yakima River systems (Wydoski and Whitney 2003). 
Collection records show Pacific lampreys widely distributed on the 
Olympic Peninsula in Ozette Lake; the Big, Salmon, Hoh, Queets, 
Quinault, Humptulips, Ozette, and Satsop Rivers; Kalaloch Creek; and 
streams flowing into the Strait of Juan de Fuca (Mongillo and Hallock 
1997; Sam Brenkman,

[[Page 77162]]

Olympic National Park, pers. comm. 2004). However, no population status 
and trend data are available.
    Pacific lampreys in the Columbia River basin have declined from 
their pre-1940s population numbers based on individuals counted at 
Columbia and Snake River dams (Close et al. 1995; Pirtle et al. 2003). 
Substantial declines in the distribution and abundance of Pacific 
lampreys in Washington have apparently occurred in tributaries of the 
Columbia and Snake Rivers, and in the Elwha River and Salt Creek on the 
Olympic Peninsula. R. Fuller (WDFW, in litt. 2004) indicates the 
species was more common in the 1980s, then declined in the 1990s, and 
has increased in counts in 2003 and 2004, although not to past levels. 
WDFW biologists noted this pattern of change in the Stillaguamish, 
Snohomish, Skagit, Green, Tolt, and Quillayute Rivers, Hood Canal, and 
the Strait of Juan de Fuca (R. Fuller, in litt. 2004). Pacific lamprey 
redds (a spawning nest formed by fish in a river bed where their eggs 
and sperm are deposited) and individuals have been observed less 
frequently in the past 10 years in streams and rivers of the Strait of 
Juan de Fuca (B. Vadas, pers. comm. 2004).
    Tribal elders of the Elwha Klallam Tribe report that Pacific 
lampreys were historically abundant in the Elwha River and other north 
Olympic Peninsula rivers, including the Pysht, Hoko, and Dungeness 
Rivers, and Salt Creek (Mike McHenry, Elwha Klallam Tribe, pers. comm. 
2004). Anecdotal information suggests current numbers may represent 
less than 5 percent of their historical observations (M. McHenry, pers. 
comm. 2004). Only one Pacific lamprey (a juvenile in 2003) has been 
recorded on the Elwha River, below the dam, in the last 20 years (M. 
McHenry, pers. comm. 2004).
    In southwest Washington, Pacific lampreys are common in Mill Creek 
and in the Grays, Skamokawa, Elochoman, Abernathy, Germany, Kalama, 
South Fork Toutle, and Green Rivers (R. Fuller, in litt. 2004). In the 
1960s, Pacific lampreys were common in the Chehalis River system (Nawa 
et al. 2003), and appeared to be more common on the coast than in the 
Puget Trough (R. Fuller, in litt. 2004). From 1997 to 2000, thousands 
of lampreys were trapped on the North Fork Toutle River, but numbers 
have declined from 2000 to 2004 (R. Fuller, in litt. 2004). Pacific 
lampreys have been documented in Cedar Creek and its tributaries 
(Pirtle et al. 2003), at the Speelyai Hatchery on the Lewis River (R. 
Fuller, in litt. 2004), and in streams near Franz Lake National 
Wildlife Refuge in Skamania County (Nawa et al. 2003).
    In eastern Washington, Pacific lampreys historically occurred in 
numerous other basins, including the Spokane River and Asotin Creek 
(ACCDLSC 1995; Wydoski and Whitney 2003). The purported historical 
occurrence of Pacific lampreys in the mainstem Columbia River above 
Chief Joseph Dam and Grand Coulee Dam prior to their construction 
(BioAnalysts, Inc. 2000) is supported by historical documentation of 
remnant Pacific lamprey at Kettle Falls and in the Spokane River up to 
Spokane Falls (Wydoski and Whitney 2003).
    Where historical information does exist for river basins (Walla 
Walla, Wenatchee, Tucannon, Asotin), Pacific lampreys were described as 
``abundant,'' ``common,'' or ``likely had large runs'' (Service 1959; 
ACCDLSC 1995; G. Mendel, WDFW, pers. comm. 1994, cited in Jackson et 
al. 1996; Lane and Lane cited in Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla 
Indian Reservation (CTUIR) 2004; Swindell cited in CTUIR 2004). In 
1999, surveys found Pacific lamprey ammocoetes were absent from reaches 
in the Walla Walla River subbasin (Bronson cited in CTUIR 2004). Adult 
Pacific lampreys have not been documented in the Asotin Creek watershed 
since at least 1980, although small lampreys of unknown species have 
been observed (ACCDLSC 1995). A 2002 trapping study designed to capture 
emigrating Chinook salmon in the Entiat River found Pacific lampreys to 
be the most numerous species captured during the time of the study. 
Most out-migration of lampreys occurred during the highest stream flows 
of the trapping period (Service, in litt. 2002). Although Pacific 
lampreys are occasionally caught incidentally at a screw trap on the 
Tucannon River, lamprey production in this subbasin is considered low 
(Close 2000) because the population has rapidly declined since 1981 (G. 
Mendel, pers. comm. 1994, cited in Jackson et al. 1996).
    Pacific lampreys occur throughout the mid-Columbia and Snake Rivers 
and many associated river basins, including the Tucannon, Walla Walla, 
Yakima, Wenatchee, Entiat, and Methow Rivers. The Pacific lamprey 
distribution currently extends up to Chief Joseph Dam on the Columbia 
River, and to Hells Canyon Dam on the Snake River (Nass et al. 2003; 
CTUIR 2004).
    Passage data from numerous mainstem Columbia (McNary, Rock Island, 
Rocky Reach, and Wells) and Snake River dams (Ice Harbor) suggest that, 
although annual numbers fluctuate widely at each project, there is a 
decreasing trend in the number of adult Pacific lampreys counted at 
each project (BioAnalysts, Inc. 2000). Data indicate that large 
declines occurred during the late 1960s and 1970s, and that current 
counts continue to be well below historical levels (Close et al. 1995; 
BioAnalysts, Inc. 2000; Corps 2003). For example, the number of adult 
Pacific lampreys counted at the fish ladder at Ice Harbor Dam on the 
Snake River declined from 50,000 in 1963 to approximately 1,700 in 2003 
(Corps 2003).
    Although adult lamprey counts have increased at Snake River dams 
(Ice Harbor, Lower Monumental, Little Goose, and Lower Granite) and 
Columbia River dams (McNary, Priest Rapids, Rock Island, Rocky Reach, 
and Wells) in recent years, they are still considered to be well below 
historical levels (Close et al. 1995; Corps 2003; BioAnalysts, Inc. 
2004). For example, counts at Rocky Reach Dam have shown a decline from 
more than 17,000 adult Pacific lampreys in 1969 to an average of 330 
between 1983 and 2001. However, counts increased to 1,842 and 2,521 
adult Pacific lampreys in 2002 and 2003, respectively (BioAnalysts, 
Inc. 2004). Increased numbers of lampreys in recent years may be an 
artifact of increased sampling or due to increased food abundance in 
the ocean (BioAnalysts, Inc. 2000).

Mexico, Alaska, Canada, and Pacific Ocean

    Information on Pacific lampreys in areas beyond the coterminous 
U.S. is lacking. Only a few observations of Pacific lampreys have been 
documented in Baja California, and no information was found on Pacific 
lampreys for areas beyond Alaska around the Pacific Rim to Japan. Some 
information is available from British Columbia, Canada.
    Pacific lampreys, first recorded in Canada in 1891, were 
historically abundant off the entire coast of British Columbia (Hart 
1973). They were probably present in all coastal streams (Carl et al. 
1977) and found in all major rivers, including the Columbia River in 
British Columbia, and the Fraser and Thompson Rivers upstream as far as 
Shuswap Lake (Scott and Crossman 1973). The Nicola River is a major 
producer of Pacific lampreys in the Fraser River drainage (Beamish and 
Levings 1991). Large numbers of recently metamorphosed adult Pacific 
lampreys migrating out of the Nicola River during 1984 and 1985 and 
from 1987 to 1988 indicate Pacific lampreys were abundant in the Fraser 
and Nicola Rivers at least through the 1980s (Beamish and Levings 
1991).

[[Page 77163]]

    Little information is available for the Pacific lamprey in Alaska. 
Surveys have been limited or nonexistent. We have only seven records of 
Pacific lampreys in southeast Alaska (Dan Cushing, Service, in litt. 
2004). Information for other parts of Alaska is not available due to 
the lack of surveys (Mark Lisac, Service, in litt. 2004; Jim Larson, 
Service, in litt. 2004).
    The petition presents data on the number of lampreys (both Pacific 
and unidentified lampreys combined) captured in ocean hauls between 
1980 and 2001 along the Pacific coast off Washington, Oregon, and 
California. Fewer lampreys were caught off the coast of California than 
coastal Oregon and Washington. The petition also presents data on the 
percent occurrence of lampreys in those ocean hauls that indicate an 
increasing trend between 1977 and 2001.

Conservation Status of the Pacific Lamprey

    The petition identified and described a number of threats to 
Pacific lampreys, including artificial barriers to migration, poor 
water quality, harvest, predation by nonnative species, stream and 
floodplain degradation, loss of estuarine habitat, decline in prey, 
ocean conditions, dredging, and dewatering (Jackson et al. 1996; Close 
et al. 1999; BioAnalysts, Inc. 2000; Close 2000; Nawa et al. 2003). 
Much like salmon, there are many reasons for the observed reductions in 
range and abundance of Pacific lampreys, and not one single threat can 
be pinpointed as the primary reason for their apparent decline.
    Similar to salmon, barriers to Pacific lamprey spawning and rearing 
habitat may pose a large threat. Beamish and Northcote (1989) note that 
Pacific lampreys persist for only a few years above impassable barriers 
before dying out, and are unable to establish a non-anadromous form 
under these circumstances. Artificial structures such as dams, road 
culverts, and water diversions can impede upstream migrations by adult 
Pacific lampreys and downstream movement of ammocoetes and 
macropthalmia.
    Declining lamprey populations observed at dams indicate the effects 
barriers have on lamprey access to upstream spawning habitat. Since the 
completion of the Willamette Valley Project, which included 
construction of 13 dams by 1967, annual commercial harvest of lampreys 
decreased from an average of 218,000 pounds per year (1943 to 1952) to 
13,000 pounds per year (1969 to 2001) (Kostow 2002). Although these 
numbers do not reflect varying efforts in harvest, they do indicate a 
negative population trend (Kostow 2002; Nawa et al. 2003). In addition, 
as previously noted, passage is completely blocked by the Elwha Dam on 
the Elwha River in Washington, the Shasta Dam on the upper Sacramento 
River in California, Hells Canyon Dam on the Snake River in Idaho, 
Wells Dam on the Columbia River in Washington, and Iron Gate Dam on the 
Klamath River in California. Culverts may also act as a barrier to 
lampreys as determined in the Alsea Basin, where lampreys were often 
absent above road culverts (Kostow 2002).
    During downstream migrations, juvenile lampreys may be entrained in 
water diversions or turbine intakes. In many cases, these water 
diversions and hydroelectric projects have been screened to bypass 
juvenile salmonids. However, due to their size and weak swimming 
ability, juvenile lampreys are frequently impinged on the screens 
resulting in injury or death (Hammond 1979; Jackson et al. 1996; 
Moursund et al. 2000). In addition, downstream migrations through large 
reservoirs created by dams may increase susceptibility to predation, 
and alterations in reservoir levels may impact ammocoetes, as a result 
of dewatering areas where they are burrowed (BioAnalysts Inc. 2000).
    There is evidence that dams with fish ladders designed to pass 
salmonids do not effectively pass lampreys (Close et al. 1995; Vella et 
al. 1999; Kostow 2002). The excessive use of swimming energy required 
by Pacific lampreys to negotiate fishways at dams may be a factor in 
their decline (Mesa et al. 2003). Lampreys are unable to negotiate fish 
ladders or culverts designed with sharp angles because they cannot 
maintain suction with their mouth on discontinuous surfaces that, in 
combination with high water velocities, effectively block or restrict 
passage (Ocker et al. 2001). Although adult lamprey counts are not 
consistent or standardized (Close et al. 1995), the data available from 
the limited counts at dams indicate large population declines 
throughout the Columbia and Snake Rivers. Lamprey counts on the 
Columbia River from the 1960s to 2003 include the following; Bonneville 
Dam passed 350,000 lampreys in the early 1960s down to 177,027 in 2003; 
The Dalles Dam went from 300,000 lampreys in the early 1960s to 28,995 
in 2003; Ice Harbor Dam has gone from 50,000 adult Pacific lampreys in 
1963 to 1,702 in 2003 (Kostow 2002; Corps 2003; Nawa et al. 2003). 
Adult Pacific lamprey counts in 2003 on the mainstem Snake River at 
Lower Monumental, Little Goose, and Lower Granite dams were 468, 660, 
and 282, respectively (Corps 2003).
    Another identified threat associated with dams results from 
alterations in reservoir levels, which may dewater areas where 
ammocoetes occur (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 2002). Water 
diversions at dams for agricultural or municipal purposes may also dry 
up stream reaches where ammocoetes reside.
    Pacific lampreys are harvested for food or commercial purposes, 
which may present a threat, particularly if these activities are 
concentrated on rivers with low population numbers of these species. 
Pacific lampreys are culturally important to Tribes in the Pacific 
Coast for sustenance, medicinal, and ceremonial purposes. Harvest was 
historically more widespread for lampreys than at present (Close et al. 
2002). Although commercial harvest of Pacific lampreys for food, bait, 
animal feed, and fertilizer at the Willamette Falls on the Willamette 
River was discontinued by the State of Oregon in 2002, Tribal and 
personal use harvest at that location is still permitted (Kostow 2002). 
Due in part to declining numbers, harvest effort for Pacific lampreys 
is low across much of their range, except for California, which allows 
unlimited harvest of lampreys. There is evidence that lampreys are 
regularly collected for bait on the Mokelumne and American Rivers 
(Michelle Workman, East Bay Municipal Utility District, pers. comm. 
2004; Rob Titus, California Department of Fish and Game, pers. comm. 
2004).
    Nonnative freshwater fish prey on juvenile and adult Pacific 
lampreys (Close et al. 1995; Moyle 2002) and may pose a threat to 
lamprey abundance. Nonnative fishes such as bass (Micropterus spp.), 
sunfish (Lepomis spp.), walleye (Stizostedion vitreum vitreum), striped 
bass (Morone saxatilis), and catfish (Ictalurus spp.), among others, 
have become established over the last century in some rivers in the 
western U.S.
    Elevated water temperature has been documented as a factor 
resulting in mortality of eggs and early stage ammocoetes under 
laboratory conditions. Water temperatures at 72[deg]F (22[deg] C) may 
cause significant death or deformation of eggs or ammocoetes (Meeuwig 
et al. 2004). A water temperature of 72[deg]F (22[deg] C) or higher may 
be a common occurrence in degraded streams during the early-to-mid-
summer period of lamprey spawning and ammocoete development.
    In addition, because ammocoetes colonize specific areas for 2 to 7 
years, are relatively immobile in the stream substrates, and often 
occur in high

[[Page 77164]]

densities, they are prone to effects from chemical poisoning and from 
channel alterations that may affect many age classes from a single 
action (Scott and Crossman 1973; Kostow 2002; Nawa et al. 2003).
    The petition identified ocean conditions as a possible threat to 
the Pacific lamprey. Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.), Pacific hake 
(Merluccius productus), and walleye pollock (Theragra chalcogramma) 
have declined in numbers or are commercially harvested; reductions in 
the availability of these host/food species may present a threat to 
Pacific lampreys.
    Research and monitoring specifically designed to address the 
Pacific lamprey began in the 1990s, initiated by several Tribes in the 
Columbia River basin. More recently, Tribes in the Lower Klamath River 
have initiated research and monitoring studies on lampreys in the main 
stem Klamath River and its tributaries below Iron Gate Dam. Limited 
studies have also been done recently within the area of the Klamath 
River Hydroelectric Project by PacifiCorp. Along with many Tribes, 
State and Federal agencies are now beginning to incorporate the needs 
of lampreys into management and monitoring plans. For example, the 
Corps has funded many studies on lamprey passage issues and is 
researching ways to improve dam passage for lampreys. However, there is 
still a lack of knowledge of the species and little systematic 
monitoring of abundance and distribution.

Western Brook Lamprey

    Adult western brook lampreys are generally 7 in (18 cm) or less in 
total length (Wydoski and Whitney 1979; Moyle 2002). In the adult life 
stage, the oral disc is small and poorly developed and the two teeth 
(cusps) are rounded and nonfunctional (Wydoski and Whitney 2003). 
Adults are dark on the back and sides and yellow to white on the 
underside. Ammocoetes are sometimes distinguished by a dark tail and 
pigmentation of the head above the gill openings (Moyle 2002).
    Western brook lampreys are found from coastal southeast Alaska to 
California, which includes inland distribution in the Columbia, 
Sacramento, and San Joaquin River basins (Moyle 2002). They have been 
documented in the Columbia River as far upstream as the Yakima River 
basin; none have been confirmed in the Snake River basin. However, 
Mendel and others (Mendel, cited in Asotin County Conservation District 
Landowner Steering Committee (ACCDLSC) 1995) captured small lampreys 
that were either river or western brook lampreys in Asotin Creek, in 
Washington. Detailed information on western brook lamprey distribution 
is lacking.
    Spawning occurs from March to July, where between 1,100 to 5,500 
eggs per female are deposited (Kostow 2002; Moyle 2002; Wydoski and 
Whitney 2003). The newly hatched ammocoetes emerge about 10 days after 
spawning (Moyle 2002) and drift into silty backwater areas. Western 
brook lamprey ammocoetes have been observed at densities as high as 203 
per square yard (170 per square meter) (Scott and Crossman 1973). These 
lamprey ammocoetes are about 3.5 to 6 in (9 to 15 cm) in length, and 
are about 5 years old (Wydoski and Whitney 2003). Metamorphosis to 
adult stage occurs from February through July (Wydoski and Whitney 
2003), and at this time their gonads are not fully developed. They 
burrow into the stream substrate where they remain dormant through the 
winter months. In the spring when water temperatures are above 50[deg] 
F (10[deg] C), western brook lampreys emerge from their burrows 
sexually mature and they remain in freshwater where they may migrate 
short distances to spawn. Western brook lampreys are nonparasitic and 
do not feed as adults (Kostow 2002).

Population Status and Distribution

    The petition provides little information regarding the status or 
trends of the western brook lamprey. Historical and current abundance 
data, as well as information on their distribution are lacking. We 
found limited additional information that identified some local 
declines and extirpations, but this information does not indicate a 
broad reduction in abundance or distribution supporting the petition's 
claim.

California

    In California, the western brook lamprey has been observed 
primarily in the Sacramento River drainage (Moyle 2002), but has also 
been reported in San Francisco Bay streams such as Mark West Creek and 
Coyote Creek (Moyle 2002). A small population may occur in Kelsey 
Creek, a tributary to Clear Lake (Moyle 2002), and the species is rare 
or extirpated from the Putah and Cache Creek watersheds (P. Moyle, 
pers. comm. 2004). Ammocoetes previously collected from streams in the 
Los Angeles River may have been the western brook lamprey, although 
according to Swift et al. (1993), this population is now extirpated. 
Western brook lampreys are known to occur in the Navarro and Eel Rivers 
in Mendocino County and in Willow Creek in Humboldt County (Moyle 
2002), and are suspected to occur in other streams along the northern 
California coast. They apparently persist above the impassable Scott 
Dam on the upper Eel River (Moyle 2002).

Oregon

    Very little information exists for the western brook lamprey in 
Oregon. The distribution of the western brook lamprey in Oregon may 
include most coastal streams and the Columbia River upstream to the 
Yakima River (Kostow 2002). This distribution is based heavily on 
museum records as there are little recent data available on the 
distribution and abundance of this species. In a recent inventory by 
CTUIR, western brook lampreys were absent from all areas inventoried 
(rivers in northeast and northcentral Oregon), except for a small 
population observed in the South Fork Walla Walla River. Kostow (2002) 
also notes their historical abundance in these basins is unknown and 
they were perhaps naturally rare and irregularly distributed. The 
petition and Kostow (2002) suggest the status of the western brook 
lamprey in the lower Columbia Basin is largely unknown. Kostow (2002) 
also noted the difficulty in determining their status in the lower 
Columbia River because it is hard to differentiate between species in 
the ammocoete phase, and the only adults regularly observed are the 
Pacific lamprey.
    A systematic survey completed for both Pacific and the western 
brook lampreys in the Alsea River basin demonstrated that both western 
brook and Pacific lampreys were present, but that the Pacific lampreys 
were more common (Kostow 2002). Neither species was found in the 
upstream reaches of the basin above road culverts, apparently because 
culverts frequently prevent passage. Pacific lampreys were observed at 
higher densities than western brook lampreys (Kostow 2002).

Washington

    Although western brook lampreys were considered common in 
Washington in 1936 (Nawa et al. 2003), Morrow (1980) stated, without 
documentation, that the species ``is not particularly abundant anywhere 
as far as is known.'' The species' known distribution includes parts of 
the Olympic Peninsula, including streams on the southern and western 
boundaries of the Olympic Peninsula, but not streams on the northern 
and eastern boundaries (Mongillo and Hallock 1997). In surveys 
conducted during the

[[Page 77165]]

1930s, western brook lampreys were collected on the Olympic Peninsula 
from the Quillayute, Queets, Quinault, Humptulips, Wynoochee, and 
Satsop Rivers, but not the Hoh River, and from Chimacum Creek (Mongillo 
and Hallock 1997; Cooper cited in R. Fuller, in litt. 2004). Mongillo 
and Hallock (1997) include the Hoh River in the distribution of the 
western brook lamprey because the species is found in the adjacent 
Quillayute and Queets Rivers. Other observed localities include coastal 
and Puget Sound streams, including the lower reaches of the Nisqually 
River (Cook-Tabor 1999), North Creek near Seattle, and Dry Creek in 
Mason County (Froese and Pauly 2004). This species has also been 
recently reported from the Nooksack River (R. Fuller, in litt. 2004), 
the North Fork and South Fork Chelatchie Creeks, and tributaries of 
Cedar Creek in the Lewis River watershed (Pirtle et al. 2003).
    Historically, western brook lampreys were considered abundant in 
the Walla Walla River subbasin (Lane and Lane cited in CTUIR 2004; 
Swindell cited in CTUIR 2004). Numerous unidentified lampreys were 
documented as ``abundant'' at the Tumwater trap on the Wenatchee River 
in 1955 (Service 1959).
    Western brook lampreys are known to occur in the Yakima and Walla 
Walla River basins. While the abundance of the western brook lamprey is 
unknown, the populations in the Walla Walla River subbasin appear to be 
self sustaining (CTUIR 2004). In 1998, assessments of the Walla Walla 
River subbasin indicated that lampreys were present in 8 of 12 
subwatersheds inventoried (Mendel cited in CTUIR, in litt. 2004). 
Although not identified to species, these individuals were assumed to 
be western brook lampreys because Pacific lampreys have not been 
documented in recent sampling efforts (Bronson cited in CTUIR 2004). 
Western brook lampreys are thought to be in the Entiat River (Phil 
Archibald cited in Service, in litt. 2004b). Small river or western 
brook lampreys were documented in Asotin Creek by Mendel and others 
(ACCDLSC 1995).

Alaska and Canada

    Historical distribution of the western brook lamprey in Canada 
includes the Cowichan River, Vancouver Island; tributaries of the 
Fraser River; Hooknose Creek, King Island; Cultus Lake on the lower 
mainland, and Lakelse Lake on the Skeena River system (Scott and 
Crossman 1973; Carl et al. 1977). Additional locations include Blake 
Creek and Burns Bog (Nawa et al. 2003) and the Queen Charlotte Islands 
(Nawa et al. 2003). A distinct, rare population of the western brook 
lamprey, having both parasitic and nonparasitic forms, may be endemic 
to the Morrison Creek watershed on Vancouver Island (Environment Canada 
2004). Between 1978 and 1984, the population was relatively stable, but 
numbers may have declined in recent years. The Morrison Creek 
population was listed as endangered under the Species at Risk Act in 
Canada in May 2000 (Environment Canada 2004).
    There is little information available for the western brook lamprey 
in Alaska. Surveys have been limited or nonexistent. We have four 
records of the western brook lampreys in southeast Alaska (D. Cushing, 
in litt. 2004).

Conservation Status of the Western Brook Lamprey

    The western brook lamprey distribution overlaps with a portion of 
the Pacific lamprey range in Oregon, Washington, California, Canada and 
Alaska. Consequently, this species may experience many of the same 
threats discussed for Pacific lampreys. However, western brook lampreys 
are not anadromous, and thus are not subject to threats associated with 
ocean conditions, loss of estuarine habitat, and barriers to and from 
ocean environments which are threats experienced by Pacific lampreys 
and river lampreys. No specific data from the petition or available 
from our files is available that documents threats to this species.

River Lamprey

    The adult river lamprey has two teeth (cusps) and no posterior 
teeth on the oral disc (Wydoski and Whitney 2003). Adult river lampreys 
average between 7 and 12 in (18 and 30 cm) in length. They are dark on 
the back and sides with silvery yellow on the belly and dark 
pigmentation on the tail (Moyle 2002). Except for the last 6 months to 
1 year of life, the western brook lamprey and the river lamprey are 
indistinguishable from each other (Kostow 2002).
    River lampreys are found from just north of Juneau, Alaska, to San 
Francisco Bay in California (Nawa et al. 2003). However, detailed 
information on their distribution is lacking. River lampreys are 
associated with large river systems such as the Fraser, Columbia, 
Klamath, Eel, and Sacramento Rivers. Beamish (1980) and others have 
noted that river lamprey production appears to be concentrated only in 
particular rivers, and only in the lower portions of these large 
rivers. The river lamprey is thought to be closely related to the 
resident western brook lamprey (Docker et al. 1999).
    Little information is available on river lamprey life history. 
Metamorphosis from the ammocoete to macropthalmia life stage occurs 
between July and April (Kostow 2002; Moyle 2002). At this time, 
macropthalmia are thought to live deep in the river channel, which may 
explain why they are rarely observed (Kostow 2002). As adults, their 
oral disc develops just before they enter the ocean between May and 
July (Kostow 2002; Moyle 2002). During the approximately 10 weeks they 
are at sea in the parasitic phase, they remain close to shore, feeding 
primarily on smelt and herring near the surface (Kostow 2002). 
According to Moyle (2002), their life span is 6 to 7 years. River 
lampreys lay 11,400 to 37,300 eggs per adult female (Kostow 2002; Moyle 
2002).

Population Status and Trends

    The petition provides little information regarding the status or 
trends of the river lamprey, and acknowledges the difficulty of 
acquiring data for this species (Nawa et al. 2003). Both historical and 
current abundance data as well as distribution data is lacking. Both 
the petition and other information in our files indicate some potential 
local declines, but we have no data to substantiate a significant 
decline in abundance or distribution of river lampreys.

California

    In California, most records for the river lamprey are for the lower 
Sacramento and San Joaquin River system tributaries in the Central 
Valley, especially in the Stanislaus and Tuolumne Rivers (Moyle 2002). 
River lampreys have been historically reported in the Alameda and Napa 
Rivers, and Sonoma and Cache Creeks, which are tributaries of San 
Francisco Bay (Wang 1986; Moyle et al. 1995; Moyle 2002). River 
lampreys appear to spawn regularly in Salmon Creek and in tributaries 
to the lower Russian River (Moyle 2002). River lamprey juveniles have 
been captured in recent years (1996, 1997, 1999, and 2004) in rotary 
trapping operations below the Red Bluff Diversion Dam, Sacramento River 
(Tom Kisanuki, Service, pers. comm. 2004). A single adult female was 
collected at Cape Horn Dam on the Eel River (Moyle 2002). River 
lampreys are known to occur in the Trinity and Klamath Rivers, where 
they are reported as being common in the incoming tides during spawning 
migration, although no quantitative estimates or historical comparisons 
of abundance data are available.

[[Page 77166]]

    River lamprey data are limited in California and long-term data are 
not available; most data are incidental to salmonid surveys. According 
to Moyle et al. (1995), the river lamprey has become uncommon in 
California. Anecdotal information suggests populations are declining 
because the Sacramento, San Joaquin, and Russian River systems have 
been altered by dams, diversions, pollution, and degradation of 
suitable spawning and rearing habitat in rivers and tributaries; 
however, there are no quantitative data to confirm this information. 
River lampreys are known to be extirpated from Cache Creek (P. Moyle, 
pers. comm. 2004).

Oregon

    In Oregon, information regarding the status of river lampreys is 
lacking because so few river lampreys have been recently documented in 
Oregon. River lamprey remains were identified in harbor seal (Phoca 
vitulina richardsi) scat in the Umpqua River estuary in 1997 and 1998 
(Orr et al. 2004). In 1980, river lampreys were caught in Yaquina Bay 
and from the Columbia River estuary (Bond et al. 1983). Most museum 
records are from the lower Columbia River, although there is a single 
record from the Columbia River Gorge, and several from small coastal 
streams (Kostow 2002).
    Lack of observations of river brook lampreys in Oregon may be 
because of the following reasons: the species are naturally rare; they 
are hard to detect in freshwater (Beamish 1980; Beamish and Youson 
1987); there have been a lack of appropriate surveys; and river 
lampreys have been misidentified as western brook lampreys.

Washington

    In Washington, there are no historical distribution records for 
river lamprey, although the species probably occurred in most major 
rivers (Wydoski and Whitney 1979). Morrow (1980) stated, without 
documentation, that the river lamprey ``does not appear to be 
particularly abundant anywhere within its range.'' The current 
distribution of river lamprey includes rivers and streams along the 
coast from the mouth of the Columbia River to the mouth of the Hoh 
River, throughout Puget Sound, and in the Lake Washington basin 
(Wydoski and Whitney 2003), but not on the Olympic Peninsula (Mongillo 
and Hallock 1997). Two records (1931 and 1959) of river lamprey in Lake 
Cushman (Mongillo and Hallock 1997; S. Brenkman, pers. comm. 2004), 
suggest this lake may have once supported an adfluvial (lake dwelling) 
population (Mongillo and Hallock 1997). The petition notes specimens 
were collected from the Bogachiel River in 1897, Lake Pleasant (date 
unknown), off the coast of Washington in 1999, and 4.0 mi (6.4 km) off 
La Push, Washington in 2002. River lamprey ammocoetes were trapped in 
the 1980s in the lower reach of the Nisqually River, but no river 
lamprey population estimates or in-stream distribution information are 
available (Cook-Tabor 1999).
    WDFW listed the river lamprey as a ``State Candidate'' in 1998 
because of its uncertain status. Surveys are ongoing to determine if 
the species should be listed as State endangered, threatened, or 
sensitive (Wydoski and Whitney 2003; WDFW 2004).
    River lampreys occur in the Columbia River and have been documented 
in the Yakima River basin. River lampreys were identified by the 
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (2004) in the Hanford Reach of 
the Columbia River. Numerous unidentified lamprey species were 
documented as ``abundant'' at the Tumwater trap on the Wenatchee River 
in 1955 (Service 1959), but may have been either river or western brook 
lampreys. Also, small lampreys documented in Asotin Creek by Mendel and 
others (Mendel cited in ACCDLSC 1995) were not identified to species 
and may have been either river or western brook lampreys.

Canada

    In Canada, the river lamprey was first recorded in British Columbia 
in 1942. Although considered uncommon in British Columbia (Carl et al. 
1977), river lampreys were more abundant in the southern part of the 
Province (Scott and Crossman 1973). Historical records from both fresh 
and salt water locations include the following: the Strait of Georgia, 
the sea off Discovery Island, Yellow Point, and the Sechelt Peninsula; 
English Bay; Porlier Pass; mouth of the Fraser River, Howe Sound, and 
the Skeena River; Powell Lake; and the Queen Charlotte Islands (Hart 
1973; Carl et al. 1977; Beamish 1980). In 1979, an estimated 6,500,000 
young adult river lampreys migrated out of the Fraser River (Beamish 
and Youson 1987).

Alaska

    Little information exists for river lampreys in Alaska. Surveys 
have been limited or non-existent. There are five river lamprey 
specimens that have been collected in southeast Alaska (D. Cushing, in 
litt. 2004).

Conservation Status of the River Lamprey

    River lampreys are likely susceptible to some of the threats 
discussed for Pacific lampreys because their distribution overlaps with 
a portion of the Pacific lamprey range in Oregon, Washington, 
California, Canada and Alaska. The threats to this species include 
activities such as dredging, loss of habitat, and poor water quality; 
all attributes common to the lower reaches of large developed rivers. 
Predation by nonnative fish species can also threaten the river lamprey 
because the diversity and abundance of nonnatives may be high in 
developed rivers (Moyle 2002). However, there is little documentation 
of specific threats to this species is in either the petition or in our 
files.

Summary

    Our evaluation of the petition and other information indicates 
there is a decline in Pacific lamprey historical abundance and 
distribution throughout California, Oregon, Washington, and Idaho and 
that threats to the species occur in much of the petitioned range of 
the species. However, the petition did not attempt to describe or 
justify a listable entity within the petitioned area, stating only 
that, ``Pacific lamprey populations could be subdivided into distinct 
population segments at spatial scales similar to the ESUs developed for 
listed salmon species (see Evolutionary Significant Units for steelhead 
in NMFS 1996). Petitioners believe that delineation of distinct 
population segments is best left to the discretion of USFWS'' (Nawa et 
al. 2003).
    The petition requested that we evaluate the Pacific lamprey within 
California, Oregon, Washington, and Idaho without providing information 
suggesting how that portion of the range, or any smaller portion, could 
be considered a potentially appropriate distinct population segment 
(e.g., what the discrete entity would be or the potential significance 
of the undefined population). Neither the information provided in the 
petition nor otherwise available in Service files presents substantial 
scientific or commercial information to demonstrate that the petition 
to list Pacific lamprey located in the lower 48 states may be 
warranted. Accordingly, we are unable to define a listable entity of 
the Pacific lamprey at this time and is, therefore, ineligible to be 
considered for listing, we did not evaluate its status as endangered or 
threatened on the basis of either the Act's definitions of those terms 
or the factors in section 4(a) of the Act.

[[Page 77167]]

    Little specific information was presented in the petition 
documenting significant declines to the western brook and river 
lamprey. The western brook lamprey and river lamprey distribution 
overlaps with the petitioned range of the Pacific lamprey. 
Consequently, these two species likely experience some of the same 
threats as documented for Pacific lampreys. Like the Pacific lamprey, 
the river lamprey may be prone to threats common to the lower reaches 
of large developed rivers. In contrast, the non-anadromous western 
brook lamprey is not known to be subject to threats associated with 
ocean conditions. Most lamprey abundance data is based on counts of 
ammocoetes that have not been identified to species. While declines or 
extirpations in specific locations have been documented, very little 
quantitative information is available to evaluate population trends 
compared to historical conditions. The petitioners contend that all of 
the petitioned lamprey species have been subjected to habitat losses 
and population declines due to a variety of threats. While we have no 
information to the contrary, the petition does not provide the 
substantial scientific or commercial information required indicating 
that listing the western brook lamprey or the river lamprey may be 
warranted.

Finding

    The Service has reviewed the petition to list the Pacific lamprey, 
western brook lamprey, and river lamprey, the literature cited in the 
petition that was available to us, and other available scientific 
literature and information in our files. Neither the information 
presented in the petition nor that available in Service files presents 
substantial scientific or commercial information to demonstrate that 
the Pacific lamprey located in the lower 48 states is a listable 
entity. Accordingly, we are unable to define a listable entity of the 
Pacific lamprey. Since the population of Pacific lamprey cannot be 
defined as a DPS at this time, thus ineligible to be considered for 
listing, we did not evaluate its status as endangered or threatened on 
the basis of either the Act's definitions of those terms or the factors 
in section 4(a) of the Act. We also find that there is not substantial 
scientific or commercial information indicating that listing the 
western brook lamprey or the river lamprey in California, Oregon, 
Washington, and Idaho may be warranted.
    Even though we did not find that substantial scientific or 
commercial information has been presented to indicate that the 
petitioned action may be warranted for these three species of lamprey, 
we encourage interested parties to continue to gather data that will 
assist with the conservation of the species. Although a nonsubstantial 
finding does not initiate a formal status review for these species, we 
encourage additional information gathering and research to increase our 
understanding of the status of these species on such topics as the 
following:
    (1) The Pacific, river, or western brook lamprey biology and 
ecology, their current and historical distribution and abundance, and 
habitat needs during all life stages;
    (2) The range, status, and trends of these species;
    (3) Specific threats to these species or their habitats;
    (4) Techniques for improving identification of lamprey ammocoetes 
to species;
    (5) Any other information that would aid in determining these 
species, population status, trends, and structure;
    (6) The adequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms to protect or 
conserve lampreys and their habitat.
    If you wish to provide information regarding any of the three 
lamprey species, you may submit your information or materials to the 
State Supervisor, Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES 
section above).

References Cited

    A complete list of all references cited herein is available, upon 
request, from the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES 
section above).

Author

    The primary author of this notice is the staff of the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES 
section above), with support from staff of Service offices in 
California, Oregon, Washington, and Idaho.

    Authority: The authority for this action is the Endangered 
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

    Dated: December 20, 2004.
Marshall P. Jones, Jr.,
Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 04-28167 Filed 12-23-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P