[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 6, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38776-38778]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-16361]
[[Page 38776]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[Docket No. 100427199-0266-01]
RIN 0648-XW22
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding for
a Petition to List Puget Sound Coho Salmon as Endangered or Threatened
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of petition finding.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, NMFS, have received a petition to list Puget Sound
populations of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) as an endangered or
threatened species and to designate critical habitat under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA). We determine that the petition does not
present substantial evidence to indicate that the petitioned action may
be warranted. Accordingly, we will not initiate a status review of the
species at this time.
ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the petition and comments regarding
Puget Sound coho salmon should be submitted to Chief, Protected
Resources Division, NMFS, 1201 NE Lloyd Boulevard, Suite 1100,
Portland, OR 97232. The petition and supporting data are available for
public inspection, by appointment, Monday through Friday at this
address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Murray, NMFS, Northwest Region,
(503) 231-2378 or Marta Nammack, NMFS, Office of Protected Resources,
(301) 713-1401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 4 of the ESA contains provisions allowing interested
persons to petition the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of
Commerce (Secretary) to add a species to or remove a species from the
List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and to designate critical
habitat. On February 23, 2010, we received a petition from Mr. Sam
Wright of Olympia, Washington, to list and designate critical habitat
for Puget Sound populations of coho salmon.
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531
1544) requires that we determine whether a petition to list, delist, or
reclassify a species presents substantial scientific or commercial
information to indicate that the petitioned action may be warranted. In
making this determination, we consider information submitted with and
referenced in the petition, and all other information readily available
in our files. To the maximum extent practicable, this finding is to be
made within 90 days of the receipt of the petition, and the finding is
to be published promptly in the Federal Register.
In evaluating a petition, we consider whether it (1) describes past
and present numbers and distribution of the species and any threats
faced by the species (50 CFR 424.14(b)(2)(ii)); (2) provides
information regarding the status of the species over all or a
significant portion of its range (50 CFR 424.14(b)(2)(iii)); and (3) is
accompanied by appropriate supporting documentation (50 CFR
424.14(b)(2)(iv)).
The ESA defines ``species'' to include subspecies and any distinct
population segment of a vertebrate species which interbreeds when
mature (16 U.S.C. 1532(16)). To identify distinct population segments
of salmon, we follow our Policy on Applying the Definition of Species
under the ESA to Pacific Salmon (56 FR 58612; November 20, 1991). This
policy states that we consider evolutionarily significant units (ESU)
of salmon to be distinct population segments under the ESA. We consider
populations of salmon to be an ESU if they are substantially
reproductively isolated from other populations of the same species and
represent an important component in the evolutionary legacy of the
species. The petitioner requested listing the ``populations of Puget
Sound coho salmon.'' We evaluated whether the information provided or
cited in the petition met the ESA's standard for ``substantial
information.'' We also reviewed other information readily available to
us (currently within our files).
Previous Status Review of Puget Sound Coho Salmon
We announced our completion of a coastwide status review of coho
salmon in a Federal Register document dated July 25, 1995 (60 FR
38011). In that document, we delineated several ESUs of coho salmon
throughout the west coast, including a Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia
ESU. We proposed several ESUs of coho salmon as threatened under the
ESA, but determined that listing the Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia ESU
was not warranted. In making this finding, we determined that,
``relative to the other coho salmon ESUs, populations in the Puget
Sound/Strait of Georgia ESU are abundant, and with some exceptions, run
sizes and natural spawning escapements have been generally stable.''
In this previous Federal Register document we identified the Puget
Sound/Strait of Georgia ESU to include coho salmon populations from
drainages in Puget Sound and Hood Canal, the eastern Olympic Peninsula
(east of Salt Creek), and the Strait of Georgia from the eastern side
of Vancouver Island and the British Columbia mainland (north to and
including Campbell and Powell rivers), excluding the upper Fraser
River. While we expressed some uncertainty about including the Strait
of Georgia populations, we concluded ``that at least until further
information is developed, the geographic boundaries of this ESU extend
into Canada to include drainages from both sides of the Strait of
Georgia as far as the north end of the Strait.''
In the 1995 status review report we found that abundance in the
Canadian populations in the ESU had declined more severely than in the
U.S. populations. Available data showed a long-term decline in coho
abundance on Vancouver Island and along the south-central British
Columbia coast (excluding the Fraser River) over the entire historical
period of record for the species, based on comparison of 1800s
abundance with 1953-1992 average abundance. Abundance decline for these
areas was also apparent over the most recent shorter term period (1953-
1992). On Vancouver Island, coho salmon escapements had declined from
more than 300,000 in the mid-1950s to about 150,000 through the time of
the status review. Along the south-central coast, escapement declines
in the same period were more dramatic, from about 500,000 in the mid-
1950s to less than 100,000 through the early 1990s. By contrast,
estimated average run sizes of coho salmon in the U.S. portion of the
ESU were comparable to the estimated historical (1896) abundance of
1.25 million (although at least half of these were hatchery-origin coho
salmon).
Of the U.S. populations examined in the 1995 status review report,
two had significant downward trends, five had significant upward
trends, and the remaining 10 had no significant trend. Only three
populations had long-term data sets (over 50 years) available for
review. Two declined in the 1960s and 1970s, with some evidence of
recovery in the 1980s. The third neither increased nor decreased in
abundance. Long-term (1896-1992) abundance trends for naturally-
reproducing Puget Sound coho salmon were not statistically significant,
but a marked short-term decline in abundance trends
[[Page 38777]]
was observed within this period (between 1935 and 1975)
The 1995 status review report also evaluated potential threats to
the viability of the ESU, including overharvest in fisheries and
hatchery operations. Prior to 1995, overall ocean exploitation rates on
the U.S. portion of the ESU (as estimated from coded wire tag data)
were relatively high but showed no apparent trend. Harvest rates on
naturally-reproducing populations were substantially lower than harvest
rates on hatchery-dominated populations. We expressed considerable
concern that over half of the U.S. portion of the run was hatchery
fish. Little information was available about hatchery contributions to
the Canadian portion of the ESU, except that hatchery production had
rapidly increased relative to low historical levels. The average size
of adult coho salmon in the Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia ESU had also
decreased (this was observed beginning in the 1950s, but documented
first in the 1970s) along with fecundity (Weitkamp et al., 1995). The
decrease in size and fecundity was expected to decrease productivity in
the ESU as a whole. Other threats identified in the assessment included
widespread habitat degradation, droughts, and changes in ocean
productivity, all of which were expected to reduce ESU productivity.
Despite the threats facing this ESU in the described 1995 status
review report, we noted that total abundance of naturally-reproducing
fish was fairly high and apparently stable. For this reason, we
concluded that listing was not warranted (60 FR 38011; July 25, 1995).
However, because of the threats to the overall health of this ESU, we
added it to the Candidate List (later to become known as the ``Species
of Concern List''). The Species of Concern List can aid in the
conservation of species by highlighting needed research and stewardship
opportunities. We did not conduct a new status review until we were
petitioned because we did not have information in our files to indicate
that the species might warrant ESA protection.
Analysis of Petition
When reviewing a petition to list a species under the ESA, we
consider information provided in the petition as well as information
readily available in agency files. We first review information from the
petition and our files regarding delineation of the Puget Sound/Strait
of Georgia coho salmon ESU, and next review information from the
petition and our files regarding the status of coho salmon in Puget
Sound.
The petition states that ``any connectivity [of the Puget Sound
coho salmon populations] with Canadian stocks has been effectively
severed by 35 years of managing the entire Nooksack River system as a
Hatchery Salmon Management Zone. The Skagit River system now forms the
northern boundary of a much smaller and isolated viable ESU that now
has its southern boundary formed by the Snohomish river system.'' The
petitioner refers to this proposed, truncated Puget Sound population
(representing a smaller proportion of the ESU than that delineated and
reviewed by NMFS in 1995) as being a ``new and much smaller viable
ESU.'' Without agreeing with the petitioner that creation of a
truncated Puget Sound coho ESU is warranted, the petition is correct
that Nooksack River coho continue to be managed for hatchery
production, a management approach unchanged from the strategy in effect
when we reviewed the status of the ESU in 1995. The Nooksack River
watershed represents just one of seven coho management units making up
the ESU, five of which are managed for wild coho production. We
determined in 1995 that, based on the relatively healthy viability
status of these wild coho populations and considering the standing of
threats to their viability, hatchery production in the Nooksack River
did not constitute a significant threat to the ESU as a whole. This
previous finding is further supported by new scientific evidence
indicating the tendency for hatchery-origin coho salmon not to
successfully interbreed with native Nooksack watershed coho salmon
(Small et al., 2004). These researchers reached this conclusion through
comparison of microsatellite DNA variation in wild-spawning and
hatchery-strain coho salmon from the Nooksack River. Significant
heterogeneity in genotype frequencies was detected between wild-
spawning coho salmon from the upper North Fork Nooksack River and
Kendall Creek Hatchery coho salmon, which were descendants of primarily
native Nooksack River broodstock. These findings suggest that a
distinct Nooksack River wild coho salmon population persists, amidst
continued management of the watershed for hatchery coho production, and
that the wild population contributes positively to the abundance,
diversity, and spatial structure of the ESU. Considering this new
information, and that the petition presents no new information
regarding threats to ESU viability associated with hatchery fish
management in the Nooksack watershed, we reach the same conclusion that
we reached in 1995, that hatchery management in the Nooksack does not
pose a significant threat to the ESU.
Genetics data available in our files since our last review do
suggest that a change in ESU configuration may be warranted. That
information suggests that coho salmon in Canadian and U.S. rivers may
be reproductively isolated and therefore represent different ESUs. Even
if that is the case, before initiating a status review we must
determine whether the petitioned action of listing a potential coho ESU
in Puget Sound may be warranted. We, therefore, consider information in
the petition and our files to determine whether it indicates that
listing of a Puget Sound ESU may be warranted.
The petition claims that Puget Sound coho salmon face a variety of
threats including: (1) the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife,
which has deliberately planned for overfishing on many populations and
has failed to set escapement goals for many populations; (2) the
decrease in size of adult coho salmon in the State of Washington; and
(3) pre-spawning mortality associated with land use practices. With the
exception of pre-spawning mortality, the petition presents no new
information on these threats beyond what we considered in our 1995
review. As previously mentioned, the petitioner indicates that a
different ESU configuration may exist; however, there is no information
available to indicate that the severity of threats or ESU viability
would increase if a smaller, Puget Sound ESU was established. In fact,
the opposite may be true. In our 1995 review, we noted that declines in
abundance in the Canadian portion of the Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia
ESU were much more severe than in the U.S. portion of the ESU. If the
ESU was reconfigured to include stocks only within Puget Sound, it is
likely that overall ESU viability would improve and the severity of
threats facing this smaller ESU would decrease.
Regarding the high harvest rates that were highlighted in our last
assessment, the petition fails to provide any recent data to indicate
whether these trends have continued and therefore still present risks
to the ESU. A review of data available in our files suggests that the
risk from harvest has decreased in recent years. With the near complete
cessation of coho salmon fisheries by Canada on the West Coast of
Vancouver Island since the time of our last status review, overall
fisheries exploitation rates for all key naturally-reproducing coho
populations in Puget Sound have been markedly reduced. For example,
[[Page 38778]]
total harvest rates for Skagit naturally-reproducing coho salmon have
been reduced from an average of 51 percent in the early to mid 1990s,
to an average of 30 percent for the period 1999--2008. Similarly,
average total fishery harvest rates have been reduced from 57 percent
to 21 percent for Stillaguamish naturally-reproducing coho; 57 percent
to 22 percent for Snohomish naturally-reproducing coho; 57 percent to
35 percent for Hood Canal naturally-reproducing coho; and 39 percent to
8 percent for Strait of Juan de Fuca naturally-reproducing coho (L.
LaVoy, NMFS Sustainable Fisheries Division data, pers. comm., April 9,
2010). Harvest rates have also been substantially reduced on Deschutes
River coho salmon (from 85 percent to 45 percent), a population the
petition mentions in particular.
Regarding the decrease in size of adult coho, we considered this
decrease in our 1995 review. The petitioner provides no details and no
new information since our previous review nor do we have any additional
information in our files on this matter.
Regarding pre-spawning mortality, the petition includes a 2004
report titled ``Land Use and Coho Pre-spawning Mortality in the
Snohomish Watershed, Washington.'' The petition does not demonstrate
that this is a new phenomenon, and does not explain how this
information affects the overall status of coho in Puget Sound in a way
not considered in the 1995 review. The petition also includes smolt
(juvenile salmon) production data for Big Beef Creek, describing it as
representing a decline. In contrast to the petition's characterization
of the data as showing a decline, it actually suggests that recent
smolt production is comparable to or exceeds that of previous years.
Although we did not explicitly consider effects of pre-spawning
mortality in the 1995 review, there is no information in the petition
or our files indicating that this mortality is different from what it
was in 1995.
Petition Finding
After reviewing the petition, as well as information readily
available to us, we have determined that the petition does not present
substantial scientific information indicating the petitioned action may
be warranted. The petition correctly states that the scientific
information used in NMFS' previous review is at least 15 years old.
However, the petition does not offer adequate new information on the
status, trends, and threats to the Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia ESU of
coho salmon to warrant the initiation of a status review at this time.
Moreover, information available to us does not suggest that listing may
be warranted.
If new information becomes available to suggest that the Puget
Sound populations of coho salmon may warrant listing under the ESA, we
will reconsider conducting a species status review.
References
A complete list of all references cited herein is available upon
request (see ADDRESSES section).
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 742a et seq.; 31
U.S.C. 9701; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.
Dated: June 29, 2010.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-16361 Filed 7-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S