[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 147 (Wednesday, July 31, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46322-46325]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18444]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[Docket No. 130702582-3582-01]
RIN 0648-XC747
Endangered and Threatened Species; 90-Day Finding on Petition To
Delist the Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast Evolutionarily
Significant Unit of Coho Salmon Under the Endangered Species Act
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition finding.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, NMFS, announce a 90-day finding on a petition to delist
the Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast (SONCC) Evolutionarily
Significant Unit (ESU) of coho salmon
[[Page 46323]]
(Oncorhynchus kisutch) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). We find
that the petition does not present substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the petition are available at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/ or upon request from the Assistant Regional
Administrator, Protected Resources Division, NMFS, Southwest Regional
Office, 501 West Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Craig Wingert, NMFS, Southwest Region
Office, (562) 980-4021; or Dwayne Meadows, Office of Protected
Resources, (301) 427-8403.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)) requires
that we make a finding as to whether a petition to list, delist, or
reclassify a species presents substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. The
Secretary has delegated the authority for these actions to the NOAA
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries. ESA implementing regulations
define ``substantial information'' as the ``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)(1)). In determining
whether a petition presents substantial scientific or commercial
information to list or delist a species, we take into account
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, followed by prompt publication in the Federal Register
(16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)). ESA implementing regulations state that a
species may be delisted only if the best scientific and commercial data
available substantiate that it is neither endangered nor threatened for
one or more of the following reasons: the species is extinct; the
species is recovered; or subsequent investigations show the best
scientific or commercial data available when the species was listed, or
the interpretation of such data, were in error (50 CFR 424.11(d)).
On May 30, 2013, we received a petition from the Siskiyou County
Water Users Association (SCWUA) requesting that we delist the
threatened Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast (SONCC) coho
salmon Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) pursuant to the ESA. This
ESU includes all naturally spawning populations of coho salmon in
coastal streams between Cape Blanco, Oregon and Punta Gorda,
California, as well as three artificially produced hatchery stocks (70
FR 37160; June 28, 2005). The SCWUA has previously submitted several
petitions to us requesting that we delist this ESU. We analyzed each of
those petitions and found they did not present substantial scientific
or commercial information indicating that delisting of the ESU may be
warranted. Negative 90-day findings were published for these petitions
on October 7, 2011 (76 FR 62375), January 11, 2012 (77 FR 1668), and
September 10, 2012 (77 FR 55458).
SCWUA Petition
In this new petition, the SCWUA asserts that our original listing
of the SONCC coho salmon ESU as threatened under the ESA (62 FR 24588;
May 6, 1997) was unlawful, arbitrary and capricious because the primary
causative factor for the low abundance of coho salmon at the time of
listing in 1997 was poor ocean conditions in the North Pacific Ocean,
rather than human-caused activities (e.g., dams, agriculture, etc.).
The SCWUA petition bases the assertion that our 1997 listing
determination for this ESU was in error because it did not consider a
1997 scientific paper (Mantua et al., 1997) that describes an
interdecadal climate oscillation pattern in the Pacific Ocean (named by
the authors as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation or PDO) and its impact
on salmon abundance in the North Pacific. The SCWUA petition does not
provide a summary of the actual Mantua et al. (1997) paper, but does
provide an internet link to an article on our Northwest Fisheries
Science Center (NWFSC) Web site that summarizes research conducted by
Dr. Nathan Mantua and his colleagues about the PDO and its relationship
to the survival and abundance of salmon populations in the Pacific
Northwest. A key point made in the NWFSC web article is that the
listing of many salmon stocks as threatened and endangered under the
ESA in the 1990s coincided with a prolonged period of poor ocean
conditions and low salmon abundance. The SCWUA petition simply repeats
verbatim the article on the NWFSC Web site with no analysis or
interpretation of how ocean conditions or other factors (e.g., habitat
degradation, hatchery practices, harvest, etc.) influence the abundance
of coho salmon populations, or why the SONCC coho salmon ESU should be
delisted. The SCWUA petition implies, however, that we did not consider
information about the relationship between ocean conditions and salmon
abundance when we listed the SONCC coho salmon ESU as threatened under
the ESA in 1997. The SCWUA petition does not provide any information on
the status (i.e., past or present information on abundance or
distribution) of the SONCC coho salmon ESU, any new information or
analysis of the threats to the ESU, or any analysis of why the ESU
should be delisted based on a consideration of the ESA section 4(a)(1)
listing factors.
Previous Reviews of SONCC Coho Salmon ESU Under the ESA
We have evaluated the status of the SONCC coho salmon ESU under the
ESA on three separate occasions (62 FR 24588, May 6, 1997; 70 FR 37160,
June 28, 2005; and 76 FR 50447, August 15, 2011). As part of each
review, we fully considered the effects of ocean productivity on coho
salmon populations in this ESU based on the best available information
at the time. The following discussion provides an overview of our past
listing decisions for this ESU, with special emphasis on how ocean
productivity was considered, including consideration of Mantua et al.,
1997.
We published our original determination to list the SONCC coho
salmon ESU as threatened on May 6, 1997 (62 FR 24588). In this
determination, we concluded that coho salmon populations in this ESU
were very depressed from historic levels, that anthropogenic threats to
these populations were numerous and varied (e.g., habitat degradation,
harvest, and artificial propagation) and that anthropogenic threats
likely exacerbated the adverse effects of natural environmental
variability caused by drought, flooding and ocean productivity
conditions. In our analysis of factors affecting the ESU, we concluded
that long-term trends in rainfall and marine productivity associated
with atmospheric conditions in the North Pacific Ocean likely had a
major influence on coho salmon production, but that it was unclear
whether the climactic conditions causing population declines
represented a long-term change that would continue to adversely affect
coho salmon stocks in the future or whether the conditions were short-
term and could be expected to reverse themselves in the near future.
Mantua et al. (1997), which described the PDO phenomenon and its
relationship to abundance of salmon populations in the North Pacific,
was published after our review was completed, and so we did not
consider it in our analysis of whether the ESU
[[Page 46324]]
was threatened or endangered. However, we did consider many other
sources of information regarding the relationship between ocean
productivity in the North Pacific and salmon population abundance in
the analysis of the ESA section 4(a)(1) listing factors that informed
our final listing determination. In our review of the effects of ocean
productivity and El Nino events on salmon populations, we found that
several researchers had suggested mechanisms linking atmospheric and
ocean physics and ocean fish populations (e.g., Rogers, 1984;
Nickelson, 1986; and several others) and that others had tried to
correlate the production and survival of salmon with environmental
factors (e.g., Pearcy, 1992; Neeley, 1994). We also cited studies that
had reported on the relationship between salmon survival and sea
surface temperatures and salinity during the first few months that
salmonids are at sea (Vernon, 1958; Holtby and Scrivener, 1989; Holtby
et al., 1990) and others that had found relationships between salmon
production and sea surface temperatures (Francis and Sibley, 1991;
Roger, 1984; Cooney et al., 1993). We also cited studies that had tried
to link salmon production to oceanic and atmospheric climate change
(Beamish and Bouillon, 1993; Ward, 1993) and reported that Francis and
Sibley (1991) and Francis et al. (1992) had developed a model linking
decadal-scale atmospheric variability and salmon production. Finally,
we cited studies by Scarnecchia (1981) that suggested nearshore ocean
conditions during the spring and summer along the California coast may
dramatically affect year class strength of salmon populations from this
area and by Bottom et al. (1986) that suggested coho salmon populations
along the California and Oregon coasts might be especially sensitive to
upwelling patterns because the region lacks extensive bays and
estuaries such as those found further north.
In response to the 1991 U.S. District Court decision in the Alsea
Valley Alliance v. Evans, 161 F.Supp.2d 1154 (D. Or. 2001), appeal
dismissed, 358 F.3d 1181 (9th Cir. 2004), and several petitions, we
conducted updated status reviews of all west coast salmon and steelhead
ESUs, including the SONCC coho salmon ESU, in the early 2000s (Good et
al., 2005). Following completion of this review and development of a
new policy for considering hatchery populations in our listing
decisions, we published listing determinations in 2005 for 16 ESUs of
west coast salmon, including the SONCC coho salmon ESU (70 FR 37160;
June 28, 2005). We determined that this ESU continued to warrant
listing as threatened. In the proposed listing determination for west
coast salmon and steelhead ESUs (69 FR 33102; June 14, 2004), we
specifically reviewed marine productivity and its relationship to the
abundance of salmon populations. We concluded there was evidence
demonstrating that recurring, decadal scale patterns of ocean-
atmosphere climate variability in the North Pacific (Mantua et al.,
1997; Zhang et al., 1997) were correlated with salmon population
abundance in the Pacific Northwest and Alaska (Hare et al., 1999;
Mueter et al., 2002) and that survival rates in the marine environment
are strong determinants of salmon and steelhead population abundance.
In addition, we recognized that many salmon and steelhead populations
in the Pacific Northwest had experienced low ocean survival during a
period of unfavorable ocean conditions from approximately 1977-1997 and
that there was evidence of an important change in the PDO starting in
1998 that likely resulted in increased salmon survival and population
abundance through the early 2000s. Although we found that the
relationship between ocean productivity, ocean survival and salmon
population abundance appeared to be well established, we concluded that
our ability to predict future changes in ocean-climate regimes and
their influence on salmon productivity and population abundance was
limited. For this reason, we were reluctant to make any assumptions or
predictions about the future behavior of ocean-climate regimes or their
effects on the distribution and abundance of salmon populations in our
listing determinations. Although we recognized that salmon populations
would likely respond positively to favorable ocean-climate regimes and
increased ocean productivity, we felt such population increases might
only be temporary and that they could mask the adverse impacts of
underlying threats such as habitat degradation and loss, harvest
impacts and adverse hatchery impacts, all of which are recognized as
threats to west coast salmon and steelhead ESUs, including the SONCC
coho salmon ESU. We concluded our analysis by indicating that our
principal concern was not if and how salmon and steelhead populations
would respond to favorable ocean conditions, but rather how they would
respond during periods of poor ocean survival when their freshwater and
estuarine habitat was degraded.
In 2011 we completed a 5-year review of the SONCC coho salmon ESU
that concluded its status had worsened because of continued low
population abundance levels, ongoing anthropogenic threats, and other
factors including poor ocean conditions (Williams et al., 2011; 76 FR
50447, August 15, 2011). Although the 5-year review did not
specifically cite Mantua et al. (1997), it did cite and rely upon Good
et al. (2005), which discussed that paper. In addition, we specifically
considered the effects of ocean conditions on marine survival and
abundance of coho salmon in this ESU as part of our analysis of the ESA
section 4(a)(1) listing factors. Our analysis of ocean conditions
indicated that marine survival for coho salmon from the Cole Rivers
hatchery in Oregon varied substantially between 2000 and 2006. Survival
averaged approximately 2.2 percent from 2000 to 2004, but was extremely
low for the 2005 and 2006 broodyears (0.05-0.07 percent). We found that
strong upwelling in 2007 resulted in better ocean conditions
(MacFarlane et al., 2008; Peterson et al., 2010) and that marine
conditions were also favorable in 2008 and 2009 (NWFSC, 2011). However,
despite the favorable ocean conditions in 2007 and 2008, we also
determined that 2005 and 2006 broodyears experienced poor marine
survival. We concluded that improved ocean conditions had not resulted
in improved marine survival and increased abundance of coho salmon
populations as expected, and that poor marine survival had contributed
to recent population declines, which were a significant threat to the
ESU.
Petition Finding
We carefully analyzed the information in the SCWUA petition and our
record associated with past listing determinations for the SONCC coho
salmon ESU. Based on this review, we conclude that our listing
determinations for the SONCC coho salmon ESU have fully evaluated the
relationship between ocean conditions, the PDO, and coho salmon
abundance using the best scientific and commercial data available and
that the SCWUA petition does not provide any additional substantial
scientific or commercial information that we ignored or did not
consider in our listing determinations. The SCWUA petition does not
present any additional substantial scientific or commercial information
related to whether the SONCC coho salmon ESU is recovered; extinct; or
the best scientific or commercial data available when the species was
listed, or the interpretation
[[Page 46325]]
of such data, were in error. Moreover, none of the information in the
petition modifies the underlying scientific basis for our original
determination to list the SONCC coho salmon ESU or causes us to re-
evaluate our analysis of delisting petitions that were previously
submitted by the petitioner. Accordingly, we find that the SCWUA
petition does not present substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the petitioned action to delist the SONCC
coho salmon ESU may be warranted.
References Cited
A complete list of the references used in this finding is available
upon request (see ADDRESSES).
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.
Dated: July 26, 2013.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Performing the functions and
duties of the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-18444 Filed 7-30-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P