[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 213 (Tuesday, November 4, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65327-65339]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-26177]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 213 / Tuesday, November 4, 2014 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 65327]]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
15 CFR Part 902
50 CFR Part 216
[Docket No. 130404331-4881-02]
RIN 0648-BD12
Marine Mammals; Subsistence Taking of Northern Fur Seals; St.
George Island, Alaska
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule modifies the subsistence harvest regulations
for the Eastern Pacific stock of northern fur seals (Callorhinus
ursinus) based on a petition from the Pribilof Island Aleut Community
of St. George Island, Traditional Council (Council). The final rule
authorizes Pribilovians of St. George Island to harvest up to 150 male
young of the year fur seals annually during a new autumn harvest season
from all breeding and hauling grounds, consistent with traditional
practices, to meet the community's nutritional and cultural needs.
Harvests of sub-adult male fur seals will continue to be authorized
during the summer season as under existing regulations, and will be
allowed at additional locations. The total number of fur seals
harvested annually will remain within the range of 300-500 male animals
that has been in place since 1997. Harvests will be coordinated between
NMFS and the Council under an existing co-management agreement.
DATES: Effective October 30, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of the Final Supplemental Environmental
Impact Statement (SEIS), scoping report, St. George Tribal Resolution,
proposed rule, and other related documents are available at: http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other
aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this
final rule may be submitted by mail to NMFS, Alaska Region, P.O. Box
21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668, Attn: Ellen Sebastian, Records Officer;
in person at NMFS, Alaska Region, 709 West 9th Street, Room 420A,
Juneau, AK; or by email to [email protected] or fax to (202)
395-5806.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Williams, NMFS Alaska Region,
907-271-5117, [email protected]; or Shannon Bettridge, NMFS
Office of Protected Resources, 301-427-8402,
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
NMFS published a proposed rule on July 24, 2014 (79 FR 43007) to
modify the subsistence harvest regulations for northern fur seals on
the Pribilof Islands based on the petition from the Council (75 FR
21233; April 23, 2010). The proposed rule included several
modifications to the existing regulations for the sub-adult harvest, in
addition to proposing new regulations to authorize a separate young of
the year harvest. This final rule implements the regulations for the
young of the year harvest, and implements only a portion of the
proposed modifications that would affect the sub-adult harvest.
Specifically, this action removes restrictions on the locations
available for the sub-adult harvest, adds a measure to suspend harvests
if two females are killed, adds a measure to terminate harvests if
three females are killed, and makes non-substantive organizational
changes to other regulatory provisions governing the sub-adult harvest.
This regulatory action affects Pribilovians on St. George Island and
reorganizes existing regulatory text to separate provisions applicable
only to St. George Island from those applicable only to St. Paul
Island.
St. George Island is a remote island located in the Bering Sea
whose residents rely upon marine mammals as a major food source and
cornerstone of their culture, and the harvest of sub-adult male
northern fur seals has occurred there for well over 200 years. Food
security for the residents of St. George is an ever present concern as
a result of regular delays in barge and air traffic. The residents of
St. George conduct an annual controlled subsistence harvest from the
Northern fur seal stock under the authority of the Fur Seal Act (FSA)
(16 U.S.C. 1155, 1161) and the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) (16
U.S.C. 1371(b)). Pursuant to section 119 of the MMPA, NMFS entered into
a co-management agreement with the Pribilof Islands Aleut Community of
St. George Island in 2001 (16 U.S.C. 1388). NMFS is guided by this co-
management agreement as it works with St. George to cooperatively
implement subsistence harvest activities and monitoring programs.
Regulations governing subsistence harvest of fur seals appear at 50 CFR
part 216, subpart F.
The United States (U.S.) government began regulating the harvest of
northern fur seals by the people of St. George Island in 1867 after the
purchase of Alaska. From 1870 through 1890 the U.S. managed the
commercial harvest of fur seals under a 20-year lease arrangement with
private companies that were responsible for harvesting fur seals and
selling the pelts on the world market. During this period, at least
501,324 fur seals (mean annual harvest = 23,872) were harvested for
their pelts from St. George Island during the summer. The lease
arrangement also stipulated that the Pribilovians were provided a
subsistence food harvest in the autumn, and this subsistence harvest
was directed at male young of the year. The subsistence food harvest of
young of the year was 28,064 (mean annual harvest = 1,477) for this 20-
year period, and the Pribilovians were allowed to keep the pelts from
the food harvest for trade and barter. A second 20-year lease
arrangement, between the North American Commercial Company and the
U.S., required the Pribilovians to collect fresh meat from the
commercial harvest during the summer, and did not allow them to obtain
their preferred fresh fur seal meat in the autumn from young of the
year prior to the fur seals' winter migration from the islands.
Consequently, the summer commercial land harvest of sub-adult males
became the primary means for
[[Page 65328]]
Pribilovians to obtain fresh meat for subsistence. The prohibition on
harvesting young of the year has been retained to the present day.
In 1910, after the expiration of the second 20-year lease, the U.S.
no longer delegated the management of the commercial harvests on the
Pribilof Islands to the lessees. The U.S. managed and implemented the
commercial harvest of fur seals on the Pribilof Islands until 1984. The
subsistence harvest of northern fur seals is the focus of this
regulatory action, but NMFS's understanding of harvest effects on the
fur seal population is based on over 100 years of commercial harvest
management, population assessment, and behavioral research. The SEIS
(NMFS, 2014) analyzes the available evidence of the effects of the
subsistence harvest of male fur seals and concludes that the harvest of
up to 350 sub-adult and 150 young of the year male fur seals would have
an insignificant effect on the St. George population of about 72,828
fur seals. NMFS has not detected a relationship between the number of
sub-adult male fur seals killed or harassed during harvests and the
abundance and trend of the population.
NMFS commercially harvested an average of 8,152 sub-adult males
annually from 1963-1972 on St. George Island. In 1972, the U.S. began
the first large-scale investigation into the effects of commercial fur
seal harvesting (Gentry, 1998). Since 1972, the St. George fur seal
population decreased to its present size, showing no positive response
to the reduction in the harvest of sub-adult male fur seals. From 1973
through 1975, the U.S. prohibited the St. George commercial harvest of
sub-adult fur seals for their pelts in order to conduct research on the
population dynamics and effects of harvesting. NMFS provided some
excess fur seal meat to St. George residents from the St. Paul
commercial harvest due to the harvest prohibition on St. George.
Between 1976 and 1979, NMFS authorized subsistence harvests on St.
George at Northwest and Staraya Artil hauling grounds. From 1980 to
1984, NMFS allowed subsistence harvests only at the Northeast hauling
ground. In 1986 NMFS published fur seal subsistence harvest regulations
(51 FR 24828; July 9, 1986) authorizing harvests on St. George Island
at Northeast and Zapadni hauling grounds. These restrictions on St.
George Island subsistence harvest locations were intended to preserve
experimental and control sites for scientific investigations during the
commercial harvest period (Gentry, 1998), which are no longer being
pursued.
In 1984, the U.S. did not ratify the protocol to extend the
Convention on the Conservation of Fur Seals, which had allowed
commercial harvests of fur seals. This action resulted in the
termination of the commercial harvest of fur seals on the Pribilof
Islands, and inadvertently changed the way either community could
obtain fresh fur seal meat. NMFS published an emergency interim rule
(50 FR 27914; July 8, 1985) under the FSA and the MMPA to govern the
subsistence harvest of northern fur seals on the Pribilof Islands for
the 1985 season. NMFS acknowledged in the proposed rule (51 FR 17900;
May 15, 1986) that the additional restrictions on St. George may not
allow Pribilovians on St. George to satisfy their subsistence needs. On
July 9, 1986, NMFS published a final rule that restricted the
subsistence harvest of northern fur seals by sex, age, and season for
herd management purposes to limit the take to a sustainable level while
providing for the legitimate subsistence needs of the Pribilovians (51
FR 24828). NMFS subsequently designated the Pribilof northern fur seal
population as depleted under the MMPA in 1988 (53 FR 17888; May 18,
1988). In the preamble to the proposed rule for the depleted
designation, NMFS stated that it did not contemplate further rulemaking
to restrict Alaska Native subsistence harvest of fur seals as a
consequence of a depleted designation (51 FR 47156; December 30, 1986).
In 2001, NMFS and the Council entered into a co-management
agreement pursuant to section 119 of the MMPA. The purpose of that
agreement is to conserve northern fur seals and Steller sea lions
through cooperative effort and consultation regarding subsistence
harvests. The Council has sampled, managed, monitored, and reported the
sub-adult male subsistence fur seal harvest independently since the
late 1990s, consistent with current regulations.
Population Status
NMFS manages the northern fur seal population as two stocks in the
U.S.: the Eastern Pacific and the San Miguel stocks. Neither stock is
listed under the Endangered Species Act. The Eastern Pacific stock
includes northern fur seals breeding on Sea Lion Rock and St. Paul, St.
George, and Bogoslof islands. NMFS designated the Pribilof Islands
northern fur seal population as depleted under the MMPA on May 18, 1988
(53 FR 17888) after it had declined to less than 50 percent of levels
observed in the late 1950s (about 2.1 million fur seals). Loughlin et
al. (1994) estimated approximately 1.3 million northern fur seals
existed worldwide, and the Pribilof Islands represented about 982,000
(74 percent of the total) in 1992. The 2012 abundance of fur seals on
the Pribilof Islands was about 44 percent lower (546,720 fur seals)
than the 1992 estimate (Towell et al., 2013). NMFS estimates an annual
decline in pup production for the Pribilof Islands of about 4 percent
since 1998, and the annual decline for St. Paul (4.84 percent) is
higher than for St. George, where the most recent trend (2004-2012) is
stable and not significantly different from zero (Towell et al., 2013).
The causes of the current fur seal decline on the Pribilof Islands are
unknown.
Northern fur seals seasonally occupy specific breeding and non-
breeding sites on St. George. The age and breeding status is the main
determinant of where male fur seals are found during the breeding and
non-breeding season. During the breeding season sub-adult males are
excluded from the breeding sites (i.e., rookeries) by adult males and
occupy resting sites known as hauling grounds (Figure 1 to part 216).
Each of the six breeding sites has at least one distinct non-breeding
hauling ground nearby (Figure 1). During the non-breeding season
beginning about September 1, sub-adult males can be found on both
rookeries and hauling grounds together with the remainder of the
population.
Petition for Rulemaking
In September 2006, the Council submitted a tribal resolution to
NMFS indicating the Federal government had previously allowed the
community to harvest male fur seal young of the year in autumn for
subsistence purposes. The Council requested that NMFS change the
subsistence harvest regulations to allow residents of St. George the
opportunity to return to their historic subsistence harvest patterns,
including the harvesting of up to 350 sub-adult males in the summer and
the harvesting of up to 150 male young of the year in the autumn each
year. On April 23, 2010, NMFS published a notice of receipt of a
petition (the tribal resolution) from the Council to revise the
subsistence regulations for St. George Island to allow taking male
northern fur seal young of the year during an autumn season (75 FR
21233). NMFS received no comments on the notice. Subsequently, NMFS
worked with the Council to clarify the petition to define the second
harvest season from September 16 to November 30, to discuss young of
the year harvest methods and areas, and to outline the process to
proceed with rulemaking. In
[[Page 65329]]
2011, NMFS held scoping meetings on St. George Island and in Anchorage,
AK, and provided a 60-day public comment period to consider possible
alternatives. NMFS received scoping input during the St. George Island
community meeting, and no one commented during the Anchorage scoping
meeting. NMFS received only two letters during the comment period and
both supported the Council's petition in the cultural and historic
context of traditional and customary uses of marine mammals by Aleuts
(NMFS, 2012). NMFS supplemented the 2005 environmental impact
statement, and considered four alternatives in the SEIS to evaluate the
impacts of the proposed action on the human environment (79 FR 31110;
May 30, 2014). NMFS received two comment letters on a draft of the SEIS
and provided responses to those comments in the final SEIS (79 FR
49774; August 22, 2014).
Changes to the St. George Northern Fur Seal Harvest Regulations
This action revises the subsistence harvest regulations at 50 CFR
part 216, subpart F, to allow the harvest of northern fur seals to meet
the subsistence needs of Pribilovians on St. George Island. This action
allows St. George residents to carry out subsistence harvests focused
on male young of the year during a second season (September 16 through
November 30), in addition to the longstanding practice for St. George
residents to harvest sub-adult fur seals. The new regulatory measures
also implement new conservation controls on the St. George subsistence
harvest. These include: (1) suspension of the harvest if two female fur
seals are killed and a review of harvest practices by NMFS before the
harvest may resume; (2) termination of the harvest for the season if
three female fur seals are killed; (3) prohibition of take of young of
the year fur seals from any breeding or resting areas when the most
recent pup production estimate has fallen below levels capable of
sustaining a harvest; and (4) equal geographic distribution of the
young of the year harvest, based on the most recent estimate of pups
born at the various breeding areas. The final rule provides increased
management flexibility in the seasonal and geographical aspects of the
harvest, consistent with historical and cultural practices on St.
George.
The final rule authorizes the subsistence harvests at a greater
number of sites than under the current regulations governing the sub-
adult harvest, such that the harvest effort would not be concentrated
in time or space, thus minimizing effects on fur seals. The final rule
also clarifies the Tribal and Federal responsibilities to co-manage the
subsistence harvest of fur seals.
The final rule revises the following provisions of the existing (51
FR 24828; July 9, 1986) subsistence harvest regulations:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR part 216 Revision
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 216.72(c)............................ Removed and reserved.
Sec. 216.72(d)............................ Revised to create distinct provisions applicable to St. George
Island for sub-adult harvests and for young of the year harvests.
Sec. 216.72(d)(1)......................... Renumbered and retained provisions specifying the sub-adult seal
size limit, harvest season, and harvest suspension if the lower
end of the allowable range is reached.
Sec. 216.72(d)(2)......................... Renumbered and retained provisions specifying the allowable sub-
adult harvest locations and frequency of harvests.
Sec. 216.72(d)(3)......................... Renumbered and retained provision that only NMFS scientists can
direct sealers to take seals with tags and/or entangling debris.
Sec. 216.72(d)(4)......................... Renumbered and retained provision for harvest scheduling, sealer
experience requirements, and traditional harvest methods
requirements.
Sec. 216.72(d)(5)......................... Renumbered and retained prohibition on taking adult fur seals or
the intentional taking of sub-adult female fur seals.
Sec. 216.72(d)(6)......................... Added to define the young of the year harvest season from
September 16 through November 30. Added the young of the year
harvest limit of 150 males or up to the lower end of the harvest
range established in paragraph (b).
Sec. 216.72(d)(7)......................... Added to distribute the young of the year harvest equally
according to population size by allowing up to 50 male young of
the year from each of the three regional pairs of rookeries, and
to describe the method of harvest as stunning and immediate
exsanguination.
Sec. 216.72(d)(8)......................... Added to define the scheduling and methods restrictions for the
young of the year harvest.
Sec. 216.72(d)(9)......................... Added to prohibit any harvest of sub adult or adult male fur seals
or the intentional harvest of female fur seals.
Sec. 216.72(d)(10)........................ Added to prohibit taking young of the year from any breeding areas
when the most recent annual pup production estimate is below
levels capable of sustaining harvest.
Sec. 216.72(d)(11)........................ Added to require NMFS and the Council to review harvest practices
no later than 120 days after the last harvest each year.
Sec. 216.72(e)(1)--(e)(6)................. Reorganized to retain for St. Paul Island the current sub-adult
male fur seal subsistence harvest provisions.
Sec. 216.72(f)(1)(i)--(f)(1)(iii)......... Redesignated from paragraphs (e)(1)(i)--(e)(1)(iii).
Sec. 216.72(f)(1)(iv)..................... Added to suspend the harvest if two female fur seals of any age
are killed on St. George Island.
Sec. 216.72(f)(2) and (f)(3).............. Redesignated from paragraphs (e)(2) and (e)(3).
Sec. 216.72(f)(4)......................... Added to review and lift suspensions issued under new paragraph
(f)(1)(iv) for killing of two females if a remedy can be
identified and implemented to prevent additional killings.
Sec. 216.72(g)............................ Redesignated from paragraph (f).
Sec. 216.72(g)(1)......................... Added to establish termination of the St. George young of the year
harvest on November 30 and retain termination of the sub-adult
male harvest on August 8.
Sec. 216.72(g)(2)......................... Added to retain the termination of the harvest when subsistence
needs have been satisfied or the upper end of the range has been
reached.
Sec. 216.72(g)(3)......................... Added to terminate the harvest on St. George when three female fur
seals of any age have been killed during harvest on St. George.
[[Page 65330]]
Sec. 216.74............................... Revised to create separate subsections for St. George and St.
Paul, and to describe in the St. George subsection the co-
management relationship between NMFS and the Council under
section 119 of the MMPA and efforts by NMFS to partner with the
tribal government to consider best harvest practices and
facilitate scientific research.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The current subsistence fur seal harvest range is 300-500 male fur
seals annually on St. George Island (79 FR 45728; August 6, 2014). Of
the total potential harvest limit of 500 male fur seals, this action
authorizes the subsistence harvest of 150 young of the year males from
September 16 through November 30 each year. Thus, if the Pribilovians
on St. George intend to satisfy their subsistence needs in a given year
by harvesting the full 150 young of the year during the autumn harvest
season, they should harvest no more than 350 sub-adult male fur seals
from June 24 through August 8. If the lower end of the subsistence
harvest range for St. George is reached (currently set at 300; 79 FR
45728), and the Pribilovians have not satisfied their subsistence
needs, the rule enables the Council on behalf of the Pribilovians to
request that NMFS allow harvest up to the upper limit of the harvest
range. At the point when the lower end of the harvest range is reached,
the harvest is suspended for no more than 48 hours for NMFS and the
Council to discuss and determine within the co-management structure the
revised estimate of the number of seals required to satisfy the St.
George residents' subsistence need and how many seals from each age
class they intend to harvest.
Taking Male Young of the Year
The historical Aleut harvest of young of the year fur seals was
discussed in the preamble to the proposed rule (79 FR 43007; July 24,
2014). The estimated annual total subsistence harvest level for St.
George Island would remain consistent with the subsistence harvest
range estimates of 300 to 500 male fur seals that NMFS evaluated in
2005 under the preferred alternative in the environmental impact
statement for setting annual subsistence harvest levels (NMFS 2005) and
again in the 2014 SEIS (NMFS 2014). The harvest level would also remain
consistent with NMFS's most recent estimate of the annual subsistence
needs of Pribilovians on St. George (79 FR 45728; August 6, 2014).
NMFS does not expect that the harvest of young of the year males
will have adverse effects on the fur seal population. As described in
the preamble to the proposed rule (79 FR 43007; July 24, 2014), direct
evidence from Russian harvests of young of the year fur seals and
population modeling conducted by NMFS both indicate that a male young
of the year harvest with the control measures contained in this final
rule will be sustainable. In summary, NMFS (2014) analyzed numerous
lines of harvest evidence including the harvest of northern fur seal
pups from their Russian breeding islands (Kuzin 2010, Ream and Burkanov
pers. comm.), survival models (Towell 2007, Fowler et al., 2009), and
simplified direct additive losses (which assume all harvested males
four years and younger would have survived to become reproductively
active harem males) and concluded that no population level effects of
the subsistence harvest of sub-adult and young of the year males are
anticipated. Evidence provided in the SEIS and in the preamble to the
proposed rule (79 FR 43007; July 24, 2014) indicates that efforts to
protect female fur seals, whether or not they are sexually mature, are
the most likely to have direct conservation value for the fur seal
population. NMFS has included measures in the final rule, as summarized
below, to keep the accidental mortality of females as close to zero as
practical.
Establishment of a Second Harvest Season
The final rule establishes the second season, exclusively for male
young of the year fur seals, from September 16 until November 30. Those
dates ensure the young of the year harvest occurs after the breeding
season, which ends in August, and thus provide protection for late-
breeding young fur seals. The timing of the second season also allows
for young of the year to begin using sites separate from those used by
lactating adult female and sub-adult fur seals. Young of the year
wander and spend time away from the rookeries and hauling grounds
(Figure 1), thereby providing the opportunity for the harvest to reduce
incidental harassment of older seals still using the rookeries and
hauling grounds during the second harvest season. The end date of the
second subsistence harvest season coincides with the time when the
majority of the fur seal population migrates away from the Pribilof
Islands, which typically occurs by early December.
The final rule does not alter the requirement to terminate the
existing sub-adult male harvest by August 8 of each year. As discussed
in the preamble to the proposed rule (79 FR 43007; July 24, 2014),
ending the sub-adult harvest by August 8 minimizes the chance of
accidentally taking young female fur seals.
Distributing the Harvest
The young of the year harvest will occur during the non-breeding
season in locations that earlier in the year were both breeding and
non-breeding areas. Young of the year harvests could occur in any areas
occupied by young of the year. The final rule distributes the young of
the year harvest into three regions (North, East, and South) of fur
seal breeding to avoid concentrating harvest pressure on a subset of
the population and to provide adequate opportunity for the community to
satisfy its subsistence needs. Each region contains two breeding areas
and at least two hauling grounds. The North region includes two
separate and adjacent breeding areas (North and Staraya Artil
rookeries) that make up 32.9 percent of the island population based on
the most recent estimate of pups born. The East region includes East
Reef and East Cliffs rookeries, which account for 33.3 percent, and the
South region includes South and Zapadni rookeries which account for the
remaining island pup production (33.7 percent). Under the final rule,
up to 50 male pups could be harvested from each region (i.e., equal
distribution based pup production), reducing the possibility for
concentration of lethal or sub-lethal effects in particular areas.
Prohibition on Taking From Small Breeding Areas
Approximately 16,000 pups were born on St. George Island in 2012;
however, the numbers born at each breeding area vary widely (Towell et
al., 2013). Northern fur seals exhibit strong site fidelity (i.e.,
repeatedly return to a site over years) and philopatry (i.e., return to
the place of birth) (Gentry, 1998). These two behavioral tendencies
have allowed humans to harvest and study fur seals for many decades and
are summarized in the preamble to the
[[Page 65331]]
proposed rule (79 FR 43007; July 24, 2014) and described more fully in
the SEIS (NMFS, 2014).
The final rule prohibits young of the year harvests at breeding
locations determined to be at risk of reaching unsustainable population
levels due to low pup production. As discussed in the preamble to the
proposed rule (79 FR 43007; July 24, 2014), NMFS will use an annual
minimum pup production threshold of 500 to indicate breeding areas and
their associated hauling grounds at which young of the year harvest
would not be allowed. NMFS's determination is based on modelling and
empirical evidence. NMFS first evaluated models that consider the
maintenance of genetic diversity in a population (effective population
size, Ne) and the effects of demography and environmental variability
on population persistence (minimum viable population size, MVP).
Adapting model estimates from Olesiuk (2012), NMFS calculated minimum
sustainable pup production levels for the breeding sites, and these
ranged from 300 (Ne model) to 600 (MVP model) pups born (Johnson 2014).
NMFS then evaluated historical pup production data from 1912-1922, when
the population was recovering from its lowest levels in recorded
history, to provide an empirical estimate of minimum viable pup
production. NMFS identified only four rookeries that during the 1912-
1922 period had declined to (or below) the range of 300 to 600 pups
born; of these, three rookeries increased and remained above that
range, and one went extinct. NMFS records show the lowest number of
pups born during the period at Zapadni Reef, Ardiguen, and East Reef
rookeries was 186, 417, and 469, respectively. Each of these rookeries
fell within the modeled minimum viable population range of 300-600 and
all recovered to the present. Lagoon rookery fell to 388 pups born,
increased to 500 during the period, and subsequently went extinct in
the early 1940s. As new fur seal data or models become available, NMFS
may refine this threshold.
To evaluate whether the smallest breeding areas are susceptible to
extinction, NMFS will project estimated biennial pup production at each
breeding area 10 years into the future (see Johnson, 2014). If the
projections indicate a greater than 5 percent probability that pup
production at a breeding site will fall below 500 within the ten-year
time horizon, no young of the year harvest will be allowed at that
site. The ten-year time horizon allows for natural variability of pup
production into the future. Pup production for each rookery is
estimated separately every two years, and therefore rookery-specific
young of the year harvests can be managed separately during this
period. For example, using 2012 data the quasi-extinction analysis of
pup production and trend for Staraya Artil rookery indicates that the
population at that rookery has over a 65 percent probability of falling
below 500 during the next 10 years, and none of the other breeding
areas have greater than a 5 percent probability of reaching 500
(Johnson, 2014). NMFS adopted a 5 percent probability of reaching the
quasi-extinction threshold within ten years based on analysis from
Gerber and DeMaster (1999) and considers this threshold to be
conservative. Based on the quasi-extinction analysis using methods from
Johnson (2014), this action effectively prohibits all young of the year
harvests at Staraya Artil rookery until pup production from that
rookery increases to a level at which there is a 5 percent or lower
probability of pup production being below 500 during the next 10 years.
The final rule distributes the young of the year harvest limit
equally across the three regions of two rookeries each. Thus, while
Staraya Artil rookery and its single hauling ground remains closed to
young of the year harvests at this time, harvesters could take up to 50
male young of the year from the other rookery (North Rookery) in the
North Region. This geographic dispersion of effort and prohibition on
the taking from areas with small population size will allow NMFS and
the Council to ensure that individual breeding locations do not reach
population sizes low enough that recovery is highly uncertain. NMFS and
the Council will review and update the statistical analysis as new data
are available, and during annual co-management meetings will determine
the locations where young of the year harvests can occur based on the
updated analysis.
Suspension or Termination of the Harvest
Historically, the northern fur seal population has declined during
periods when there were no prohibitions on intentional or un-
intentional harvest of females. The northern fur seal population
declined through 1979, well beyond expectations of the member nations
to the Fur Seal Treaty of 1911 (York and Hartley, 1981), as a result of
female harvests. Trites and Larkin (1989) estimated that an annual 2 to
5 percent reduction in adult female survival over the period of 1950 to
1987 was the most likely contributor to the lack of recovery by the
Pribilof fur seal population. NMFS population modeling indicates female
young of the year may have at least five to six times higher
reproductive value than male young of the year (NMML unpublished data),
primarily due to their reproductive ecology whereby one male
inseminates many females.
The final rule maintains all prohibitions on taking during the sub-
adult male harvest season. The final rule creates new prohibitions on
the harvest of sub-adults, adults, or the intentional harvest of young
of the year female fur seals during the male young of the year harvest
season. From 1985 to 2013, five sub-adult females were harvested
accidentally on St. George Island out of a total harvest of 4,994 seals
(0.1 percent accidental sub-adult female harvest rate).
Under the final rule, NMFS would suspend the harvest in the event
of two female mortalities and terminate the harvest in the event of a
third female mortality in a given calendar year. These measures create
a powerful incentive for St. George harvesters to spend adequate time
to identify sex correctly and avoid killing females. NMFS's intent in
defining the upper limit of female mortalities at three per year is to
encourage harvesters to develop and improve best practices as part of
the young of the year harvest to ensure that the accidental female
harvest rate under the new regulations remains close to zero. Female
mortalities that would trigger the suspension or termination of the
harvest include direct harvest mortalities as well as indirect
mortalities due to trampling or other disturbance associated with the
harvest.
If two females are killed and NMFS suspends the harvest, NMFS could
reverse the suspension upon review of the circumstances of the female
mortalities and identification by St. George and NMFS of a remedy to
minimize the risk of additional accidental mortality of any female fur
seals. If the harvest is resumed and another female is killed, then the
harvest will be terminated for the year.
Cooperative Management of the Subsistence Harvest
In 2000 and 2001, NMFS signed co-management agreements with Aleut
Community of St. Paul Island, Tribal Government and the Aleut Community
of St. George Island, Traditional Council. These agreements set in
place a process for NMFS and the tribes to communicate, partner, and
cooperate on issues related to the subsistence harvest of northern fur
seals. This process has developed a collaborative relationship that has
created both greater and more
[[Page 65332]]
cost effective opportunities for NMFS to collect information about fur
seal disease, health, and age composition by training local tribal
members and building that capacity within the tribal governments. In
addition, tribal government staff has disentangled fur seals, recorded
tag numbers, and collected information about the locations of seals
captured in the harvest round-ups and reported this information
annually in their harvest reports with minimal involvement by NMFS.
Through co-management NMFS has also worked with both tribal governments
to conduct research. The final rule aligns the purposes of the co-
management agreement between NMFS and the Council with the subsistence
harvest regulations with the subsistence harvest regulations for St.
George, and retains the subsistence harvest regulations for St. Paul.
The collaborative relationship built under co-management will be
strengthened by NMFS and the Council continuing to work jointly to
develop best harvest practices, which balance conservation,
sustainability, and cultural interests. NMFS and the Council will
refine these harvest practices as young of the year harvest experience
is gained, and will formalize those practices via the co-management
council. NMFS will post the best harvest practices on the NMFS Alaska
Region Web site.
The best harvest practices will include a description of jointly
agreed-upon measures to consider before each young of the year harvest.
Further description of the intent of the best harvest practices is
provided in the preamble to the proposed rule (79 FR 43007; July 24,
2014).
The Council has expressed its intention during co-management
meetings to utilize the same harvest methodology for the young of the
year harvest as it uses for the existing sub-adult harvest, whereby a
crew is organized in advance and assesses those locations most likely
to be harvested. From those likely harvest locations the crew would
consider the prevailing weather conditions, presence of harvestable
young of the year, accessibility and space for harvest, presence of
non-harvestable seals, and the impact those non-harvestable seals would
have on the implementation of the harvest. Whether those methods
defined as traditional in the emergency final rule (51 FR 24828; July
9, 1986) will be applicable to the harvest of young of the year is
unknown because a young of the year harvest has not occurred for over
120 years. The final rule will ensure humane harvesting of young of the
year via stunning and immediate exsanguination, but flexibility in some
of the specific harvest methods is required to achieve the outcomes of
reduced stress, injury, and disturbance to harvested and un-harvested
seals and to minimize taking of female seals. NMFS's intent is to
encourage innovation and improvements to the subsistence harvest
methods for fur seals.
Comments and Responses
NMFS received comments on the proposed rule to change the
subsistence harvest regulations (79 FR 43007; July 24, 2014) from the
Humane Society of the United States, the Marine Mammal Commission
(Commission), and one individual. A summary of the comments received
and NMFS's responses follows.
Comment 1: One commenter objected to the fur seal harvest overall,
and stated that the harvest is about money, not food or culture, and
that the culture on St. George has changed tremendously such that the
harvest is not justified as a cultural need.
Response: NMFS disagrees. The existing subsistence harvest of
northern fur seals on St. George is set at a maximum of 500 sub-adult
males and represents less than 1 percent of the entire population of
fur seals residing on St. George Island. The Fur Seal Act and MMPA both
provide for the subsistence harvest of northern fur seals to meet the
dietary and cultural needs of the Pribilof Island Alaska Native
residents (Pribilovians). The subsistence harvest remains very
important to the culture of the Pribilovians, even with changes that
have taken place on the Pribilof Islands in modern times. The final
rule includes new harvest control measures that will further ensure the
sustainability of the subsistence harvest.
Comment 2: A commenter stated that the announcement of the
availability of the draft SEIS should have been published in the
Federal Register rather than simply being sent to a small universe of
previously interested commenters.
Response: As NMFS noted in the response to comment section in the
SEIS, and as is standard practice, NMFS worked with the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) to publish the Notice of Availability for the
draft SEIS in the Federal Register on May 30, 2014 (79 FR 31110).
Likewise NMFS worked with EPA to publish a Notice of Availability for
the final SEIS in the Federal Register on August 22, 2014 (79 FR
49774).
Comment 3: The proposed regulations adopt the ``proposed action''
alternative in the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement.
Based on the short space of time between the close of the comment
period on the DSEIS and the start of the comment period on the proposed
rule, it is not clear that NMFS considered or addressed concerns raised
during the comment period on the DSEIS.
Response: NMFS responded to all of the comments on the DSEIS in the
response to comments section of the SEIS (79 FR 49774; August 22, 2014)
as required by NEPA. NMFS considered those comments received on the
DSEIS and addressed public comments on the proposed rule in the
preamble to this final rule.
Comment 4: A commenter stated that for reasons that are poorly
understood, during 1998-2010, pup production declined 5.46% per year on
St. Paul Island and 2.09% per year on St. George Island with the
estimated pup production in 2010 below the 1916 level on both St. Paul
and St. George Islands. There is every indication that the decline has
not stopped. NMFS's management decisions related to this stock
emphasize the importance of protecting females and increasing pup
survival. The 2005 EIS, which the SEIS supplements, states that harvest
extensions beyond the first week of August in 1986 and 1987 resulted in
an increased number of female fur seals taken. Expanding the harvest to
the fall as proposed increases the risk that females will be killed
unintentionally.
Response: NMFS agrees that protecting female fur seals and their
future reproductive potential is important. NMFS disagrees with the
commenter's assertion that the decline in pup production has not
stopped on St. George. NMFS examined data for the period since the 2005
EIS and the pup production trend for St. George Island between 2004 and
2012 was stable (i.e., not increasing or declining, SE = 0.79, P <
0.69), as noted on page 33 of the final SEIS. By including new
conservative harvest controls, this action will provide greater
protection for female fur seals and promote future reproductive
potential by increasing female survival.
NMFS agrees with the commenter that distinguishing between sub-
adult male and female fur seals is difficult. This action creates
separate young of the year harvest season that is distinct from the
sub-adult harvest, and thus it should have no effect on sub-adult
female mortality. The 1986 and 1987 fur seal harvest extensions noted
in the 2005 EIS extended the harvest of sub-adult males, and this final
rule does not authorize an extension to the August 8 end date for the
sub-adult male harvest season. This
[[Page 65333]]
action authorizes a second season to allow for the exclusive harvest of
young of the year fur seals, which, unlike sub-adult fur seals, can be
safely handled to distinguish females from males prior to selection for
harvest. As an additional measure to protect the population, the final
rule includes a hard limit on female mortality: the subsistence harvest
will be suspended if two female fur seals are killed and terminated if
three females are killed. No such thresholds exist for accidental
mortality of sub-adult females under current regulations.
The limits on accidental mortalities of female fur seals are
precautionary measures. NMFS does not expect that these limits will be
reached because female mortality has been very low during the sub-adult
male harvest (the practices for which would not change under the final
rule) and the young of the year male harvest would include practices to
safely and effectively distinguish males from females. Therefore, NMFS
believes that the final rule will reduce the risks of accidental female
fur seal mortality and is more protective than the existing
regulations.
Comment 5: Self-reporting of the sex of harvested fur seals by the
tribal government would go against the self-interest of the hunters,
since reporting dead females can terminate the hunt. Moreover, self-
reporting generally results in under-reporting. Independent monitoring
should occur to ensure accurate reporting, particularly during any fall
hunt for young of the year animals, which may unintentionally result in
the deaths of young females.
Response: NMFS disagrees that self-reporting generally results in
under-reporting of accidental take of females or that the harvester's
self-interest creates an incentive not to report. The Council has self-
reported from 2003 to the present and during this time the annual rate
of accidental female mortality in the sub-adult subsistence harvest is
0.36 female seals killed per year. The self-reported rate of 0.36
female seals killed per year is not different from the rate reported by
NMFS observers (0.37 female seals killed per year) who were present at
100 percent of the subsistence harvests prior to 2003. This indicates
that the sub-adult subsistence harvest monitoring process developed
through co-management with the Council yields accurate data on
accidental take of females during the sub-adult harvest.
Even with the addition of a hard cap that will terminate the
harvest if three females are killed, NMFS has no indication that female
mortalities will go undetected. As noted in the SEIS, male and female
young of the year are not segregated within the breeding areas or
hauling grounds, yet sealers can handle young of the year fur seals
safely to accurately distinguish male from female fur seals. During the
first three years of the autumn harvest season, NMFS will strive to
have staff present during 100 percent of the young of the year
harvests. NMFS and the Council will work in close coordination to
ensure that harvesters accurately identify and release female young of
the year fur seals prior to harvesting each animal. This close
coordination will ensure that NMFS and the Council's efforts are
consistently aligned with the harvest regulations and conservation of
northern fur seals, that accidental mortality of females will not
likely approach the limit of three, and that the number of female
animals killed during the fall harvest season is reported accurately.
NMFS also notes that, as co-managers of the harvest, the Pribilovians
on St. George Island have a strong interest in avoiding mortality of
female fur seals because they want the harvest to continue sustainably
into the future. Further, in a continuation of its longstanding
collaboration with NMFS on scientific research related to fur seals,
the Council plans to collect canine teeth from 100 percent of the
harvested young of the year seals for aging and sex determination by
NMFS. NMFS intends to use the canine teeth to independently sex
harvested seals, which will deter the Council from falsely reporting
the sex of harvested seals.
Comment 6: It is not clear how the harvest on St. George will be
conducted. As the proposed regulations are currently written, harvests
could be conducted simultaneously on more than one rookery or by
multiple sealing crews. NMFS should address possible simultaneous
harvests more explicitly in the final rule and how monitoring will
occur to ascertain whether female fur seals are being killed. If the
St. George community will not conduct simultaneous harvests, this
should be specified in the rule and appropriate changes made to the
regulatory language.
Response: During the past 30 years of sub-adult male harvests under
the subsistence regulations, simultaneous harvests were never proposed
by the sealers, tribe, or community. NMFS does not expect simultaneous
harvests to occur, and even if they do, the planned methods for
ascertaining and reporting female fur seal mortality during single
harvests would be equally effective for simultaneous harvests.
Therefore, NMFS does not agree that the regulations need to include any
special monitoring provisions to address simultaneous harvests by
multiple sealing crews.
Comment 7: It is not clear what fur seal harvest monitoring will be
carried out. Section 216.74 of the proposed rule recognizes that NMFS
representatives are responsible for compiling information related to
sources of human-caused mortality and serious injury of marine mammals,
and that the Pribilovians are responsible for reporting on the ``actual
level of subsistence take.'' This provision of the proposed rule is
vague on how these tasks will be accomplished and in what timeframe. It
is unclear whether efforts to avoid taking female pups will be
successful or whether the suspension and termination thresholds will be
reached quickly. Sufficient monitoring is needed to ascertain on a near
real-time basis whether female seals are being killed and that those
responsible for managing the harvest are notified promptly when the
female fur seal threshold is reached. NMFS should provide more detail
in the preamble on what monitoring will be conducted. NMFS should
specify the applicable monitoring and reporting requirements in
regulations more precisely to ensure that those requirements are
sufficient to provide timely information to decision makers whenever
female seals are killed.
Response: As explained in response to Comment 5, based on nearly 30
years of sub-adult male harvests on St. George Island, NMFS expects
that the young of the year harvest practices will effectively limit
mortality of females. Every young of the year fur seal will be handled
and sexed prior to harvest. NMFS will strive to be present during all
young of the year harvests during the first three years and will then
reassess what degree of NMFS monitoring is needed over the longer term.
The measures specified in the final rule provide adequate assurance
that female mortality will be very limited and that any accidental
harvest of females will be reported.
Comment 8: It appears that NMFS and the Pribilovians intend to
apply harvest methods similar to those used for sub-adult male harvests
to the harvest of young of the year to determine whether they are
effective or whether changes need to be made. The preamble to the final
rule should provide additional detail about how the proposed changes to
the harvest protocol, if any, would be identified, considered, and
approved.
Response: NMFS appreciates this comment, and has included
additional information regarding young of the year
[[Page 65334]]
harvest methods in the preamble to this final rule. The Council will
work with NMFS via co-management to evaluate how the specific methods
that have been used effectively for the sub-adult harvest should be
adapted to provide for an effective young of the year harvest. These
methods will be documented and refined over time through a written set
of best harvest practices, as described in the preamble to the proposed
rule (79 FR 43007; July 24, 2014).
Comment 9: Two comments expressed general support for the new
conservation measure that would prohibit the harvest of young of the
year fur seals from any breeding area where the recent analysis
projects that pup production has greater than a 5 percent probability
of falling below a level capable of sustaining a harvest in 10 years.
One commenter expressed support for including conservatism in this
metric.
Response: NMFS acknowledges the supportive comments and agrees that
conservative controls are appropriate.
Comment 10: NMFS intends to use 500 as the pup-production lower
threshold for evaluating quasi-extinction or minimum sustainable pup-
production size. Lagoon Rookery reached a low of 388 pup births, and
although it later returned to 500 births, it eventually went extinct.
NMFS needs to consider establishing a higher pup-production threshold
as the appropriate standard.
Response: NMFS identified four rookeries that had declined during
the 1912-1922 period to (or below) the range of 300 to 600 pups born;
of these, three rookeries increased and remained above that range, and
one went extinct. NMFS records show the lowest number of pups born
during the period at Zapadni Reef, Ardiguen, and East Reef rookeries
was 186, 417, and 469, respectively, and all recovered and have
remained above the minimum viable population size range of 300 to 600
to the present. The commenter is correct that Lagoon rookery fell to
388 pups born, increased to 500 during the period, and subsequently
went extinct in the early 1940s. NMFS determined that 500 is an
appropriate pup production threshold because three of the four
rookeries for which records are available recovered from pup production
numbers that dipped to or below that level, and because the final rule
is coupling the pup production threshold of 500 with a prohibition on
the harvest of young of the year fur seals from any breeding area where
the analysis projects greater than a 5 percent probability that pup
production will fall below that level within 10 years. NMFS is not
certain that 500 is the optimal pup production threshold to select
within the modeled minimum viable population size range of 300 to 600,
but NMFS chose 500 based upon empirical evidence as a reasonable
indicator of the level of pup production below which there would be
concern about whether harvests may be sustainable. NMFS may identify a
different threshold in the future, higher or lower than 500, if new
modelling or empirical evidence emerges to suggest that 500 is not the
appropriate threshold.
Comment 11: It is not clear why the proposed conservation measure
to prohibit harvests at breeding areas that have low pup production and
a low probability of sustaining harvest over a 10-year period should
only be applicable to the harvest of the young of the year. The final
rule should also prohibit sub-adult harvest in breeding areas that NMFS
projects will have a greater than 5 percent probability of falling
below a level capable of sustaining harvest in ten years.
Response: NMFS appreciates this suggestion and will consider
whether to apply this conservation control to the sub-adult male
harvest via a separate rulemaking.
Comment 12: Revising regulations at 50 CFR 216.74 by removing the
requirement that subsistence harvesters cooperate with scientists
engaged in fur seal research is concerning. Scientific sampling of
whiskers, organs, and other tissues is needed to understand possible
changes in the fur seal diet that may contribute to the stock's decline
and to ascertain toxin exposure. It is unclear how reliance on
voluntary cooperation between harvesters and scientists pursuant to a
co-management agreement will assure proper sampling required for
assessment of species and ecosystem health. If 50 CFR 216.74 is
revised, the revised regulations should continue to provide a mandate
that subsistence harvesters assist in scientific monitoring, managing,
sampling, and reporting during the two harvest seasons while supporting
the co-management process.
Response: Neither the Council nor NMFS intend to eliminate
cooperation with scientific samplers during the harvest. NMFS has
provided additional explanation in the preamble to this final rule to
describe how the co-management process has developed an improved and
more effective means for harvesters and tribal members to support and
participate in fur seal sampling and research assessing fur seal health
and human-caused mortality. The co-management agreement creates a
partnership between the Council and NMFS, and the Council has asked
NMFS to ensure that subsistence needs during the harvest are of equal
priority and not secondary to data collection for scientific
investigations. The revisions to 50 CFR 216.74 will better reflect this
collaborative approach. To further clarify that data collection should
continue, NMFS added the phrase ``and to facilitate scientific
research'' at the end of Sec. 216.74.
NMFS and the Council will continue to use co-management as a means
to provide opportunities for scientists to collect samples from seals
taken for subsistence purposes. The final rule does not include a
mandate for cooperation with researchers, as suggested by the
commenter, because NMFS's experience is that a co-management approach
is more effective than a prescriptive mandate. For example, evidence of
morbillivirus exposure of pinnipeds in the North Pacific represented an
unknown risk to fur seals and other pinnipeds in 2010. In 2011, NMFS
did not have resources to collect samples from fur seals to determine
whether fur seals were exposed to morbillivirus. NMFS and the tribal
governments on both islands agreed within the co-management process to
support such sampling from the subsistence harvest. On St. George
Island all of the samples were collected by harvesters or tribal
council members in 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014. The St. George Council
staff labelled and stored the samples for transfer to NMFS for
analysis. Similar examples of the success of the co-management
partnership are evident in the reporting of entangled seals and the
disentanglement of those seals when practical during the subsistence
harvests on both islands. The subsistence harvest reports are available
on the NMFS Alaska Region Web site to verify the actions taken by
harvesters and tribal government staff from both islands which have
contributed to NMFS understanding of sources of fur seal mortality and
disease exposure.
Comment 13: Because the harvest of young of the year has not been
authorized for more than 100 years, it is less clear who should be
authorized to harvest the seals and by what method. The proposed rule
tries to address this by eliminating the requirement that sealers on
St. George be experienced and by specifying that harvest methods
ultimately selected will be designed to ``reduce disturbance, injury,
and accidental take of females.'' The proposed regulations indicate
that those methods are expected to include organized drives from
congregating areas to inland killing fields, followed
[[Page 65335]]
by stunning and immediate exsanguination, unless NMFS, in consultation
with the Pribilovians conducting the harvest, determines that
alternative methods will not result in increased stress to harvested
and unharvested seals, increased disturbance or injury to resting
seals, or the accidental take of females. Adopted harvest methods
should be designed to achieve these goals. Making these determinations
will require collection and analysis of fairly detailed information on
the responses to seals of harvest practices and may benefit from review
by veterinarians as well as biologists.
Response: NMFS acknowledges the comment. As noted above in this
preamble, NMFS will work with the Council via the co-management process
to develop and refine a set of best harvest practices to minimize
disturbance and injury of fur seals and to minimize the possibility of
accidental mortality of female fur seals.
Comment 14: Because it is unclear whether the harvesting methods
employed for sub-adult males will be appropriate for harvesting young
of the year, some degree of flexibility is needed. However, at the
outset only ``experienced sealers'' (i.e., those with experience taking
sub-adult males) should be allowed to participate in the harvest of
young of the year.
Response: NMFS agrees that flexibility is needed to allow
harvesters to be innovative in devising efficient ways to achieve
conservation outcomes. Thus, the Council will work in partnership with
NMFS to develop and refine a set of best harvest practices to minimize
effects on harvested and non-harvested seals, incidental disturbance of
seals, and mortality of females. NMFS is not requiring participating
sealers to be experienced because experience harvesting sub-adults is
not the best indicator of whether a given sealer will be able to carry
out a young of the year harvest in a way that minimizes negative
effects such as harassment of harvested and non-harvested seals and
mortality of females. Residents of St. George are generally very
familiar with fur seal behavior and harvests whether they have
participated in the sub-adult harvest or not, and the community has a
vested interest in conducting the young of the year harvest in an
efficient and sustainable manner. NMFS therefore determined that
implementing this final rule together with the planned development of
best harvest practices via the co-management process provides
sufficient safeguards for a sustainable harvest.
Comment 15: NMFS proposed to remove from the St. George regulations
the requirement that sealers on St. George be ``experienced'' and
proposed to remove ``traditional'' from the description of methods for
sealing, yet the provisions would be retained for St. Paul. NMFS also
proposed to remove from the St. George regulations the requirement that
``Seals with tags and/or entangling debris may only be taken if so
directed by NMFS scientists'' yet the same provision would be retained
for St. Paul. Furthermore, NMFS proposed to drop the maximum size
restriction (124.5 cm) for harvesting sub-adult males on St. George,
but did not provide an explanation.
Response: This final rule does not finalize the proposed
regulations that would have rescinded the sub-adult harvest regulatory
requirements that harvesters be ``experienced,'' that harvesters use
``traditional'' harvesting methods, that harvesters may ``only take
seals with tags and/or entangled debris if so directed by NMFS
scientists,'' or that imposed a size restriction that harvesters may
only take sub-adult males of 124.5 cm or less. These provisions are
retained in the final rule; NMFS may further revise the regulations for
the sub-adult harvest at a later date.
Comment 16: Current regulations limit harvest at each haulout on
St. George to no more than twice per week, but the proposed rule
provided no indication regarding the frequency of harvests at a
particular site during the season, possibly due to an oversight. NMFS
should consider changing the frequency of harvests of any approved
sites on St. George from twice per week to once per week.
Response: The commenter is correct that NMFS inadvertently omitted
a limit on the frequency of harvests from the proposed rule. The final
rule retains the regulatory requirement that no area may be harvested
more than twice per week. NMFS may further revise this regulatory limit
in a future rulemaking.
Comment 17: A commenter suggested that NMFS restructure the
proposed regulatory text applicable to St. George into distinct
sections that apply to the sub-adult harvest and to the young of the
year harvest.
Response: NMFS agrees and has restructured the regulatory text
accordingly to improve clarity.
Comment 18: A commenter suggested that the proposed changes to
Sec. 216.81, which would provide that authorized subsistence
harvesters of fur seals are allowed on rookeries from September 16 to
November 30, would create ambiguity regarding permissible access.
Response: NMFS agrees and is not implementing those proposed
changes.
Comment 19: NMFS received comments identifying citation errors and
inadvertent omissions.
Response: NMFS made appropriate revisions as described in the
following subsection.
Changes From the Proposed Rule to the Final Rule
In addition to the changes discussed above in response to public
comments, NMFS made the following changes in the final rule.
The renumbered Sec. 216.72(d) now provides distinct regulatory
provisions applicable to St. George sub-adult harvest and the St.
George young of the year harvest to improve clarity as suggested by a
commenter. NMFS added provisions retaining existing regulatory
requirements applicable to the sub-adult harvest. Specifically, these
provisions retain existing requirements concerning the 124.5 cm size
limit for sub-adults, the authority to take seals with tags or
entangling debris if so directed by NMFS scientists, the requirement
for harvesters to be experienced, the requirement to use traditional
harvest methods, and the prohibition on any taking of adult fur seals
or pups, or the intentional taking of sub-adult female fur seals. As a
result, the only changes to the sub-adult harvest as compared to the
existing regulations are the availability to harvest at additional
sites besides Northeast and Zapadni (per Sec. 216.72(d)(2)), the
suspension of the harvest if two female fur seals are killed (per Sec.
216.72(f)(1)(iv)), and the termination of the harvest if three female
fur seals are killed (per Sec. 216.72(g)(3)).
NMFS added a provision at Sec. 216.72(d)(9) applicable only to the
young of the year harvest on St. George to clearly prohibit any harvest
of adult or sub adult fur seals or intentional harvest of young of the
year female fur seals.
NMFS clarified that the subparagraph now appearing at Sec.
216.72(d)(10) applies to the hauling ground(s) associated with
designated breeding areas, and not only to the designated breeding
areas. Thus, no young of the year fur seals may be taken from any
designated breeding area or its associated hauling ground(s) where the
most recent NMFS analysis projects that pup production has greater than
a 5 percent probability of falling below a level capable of sustaining
a harvest in 10 years.
NMFS added scheduling provisions for the St. Paul harvest in Sec.
216.72(e) to correct an inadvertent omission from
[[Page 65336]]
the proposed rule of language that is consistent with the existing
regulations.
NMFS corrected an error in Sec. 216.72(f) where the proposed rule
incorrectly referenced section 215 and corrected text references in
Sec. Sec. 216.71 and 216.72.
NMFS clarified that Sec. 216.72(g)(3) applies only to St. George
Island.
NMFS inserted the phrase ``provided for in Sec. 216.71'' into
Sec. 216.72(g)(3) to clarify that take provided for in Sec. 216.71
shall terminate if a total of three female fur seals are killed during
the harvest season.
NMFS added the correct statutory references to Sec. 216.74. NMFS
also split Sec. 216.74 into two subsections, one for St. George Island
and one for St. Paul Island, to clarify that the language for Sec.
216.74 that NMFS included in the proposed rule was only intended to
apply to St. George. Subsection (a) is established by this rulemaking
to revise the description of how harvesters and Tribal and Federal
officials cooperate on St. George, and subsection (b) is identical to
the existing text for Sec. 216.74 but will now apply only to St. Paul.
OMB Revisions to Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) References in 15 CFR
902.1(b)
Section 3507(c)(B)(i) of the PRA requires that agencies inventory
and display a current control number assigned by the Director, Office
of Management and Budget (OMB), for each agency information collection.
Section 902.1(b) identifies the location of NOAA regulations for which
OMB approval numbers have been issued. Because this final rule adds a
data element for the reporting of the actual subsistence harvest within
a collection-of-information for recordkeeping and reporting
requirements, 15 CFR 902.1(b) is revised to reference correctly the
section resulting from this final rule.
Classification
NMFS has determined that this final rule is consistent with the
Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Fur Seal Act, and other applicable
laws. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d) the NMFS Assistant Administrator
finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in the effective date of
this rule because such a delay would be contrary to the public
interest. A delay in effectiveness of the revised regulations would
preclude St. George residents from meeting their subsistence needs by
delaying the resumption of the traditional young of the year fur seal
harvest for a full year until September 16, 2015, and would delay
regulatory revisions that would implement more sustainable subsistence
harvest practices in furtherance of the MMPA and the Fur Seal Act. In
addition, the Assistant Administrator finds that the regulations would
relieve some unnecessary subsistence harvest restrictions currently
imposed on St. George residents by expanding the number of areas on the
island where subsistence harvest activities may occur, by allowing for
subsistence harvests during a second season, and by allowing for
subsistence harvests of a younger age class of fur seals. The revised
regulations would allow for a sustainable harvest practice that
occurred historically but which the current regulations do not allow.
National Environmental Policy Act
NMFS prepared an SEIS evaluating the impacts on the human
environment of the subsistence harvest of northern fur seals on St.
George Island. A Notice of Availability for the final SEIS was
published in the Federal Register on August 22, 2014 (79 FR 49774).
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
This action has been determined to be not significant for purposes
of Executive Order (E.O.) 12866.
NMFS prepared an analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act that
carefully examined the potential impacts, including possible economic
benefits and costs, and potential adverse economic burdens, that may
accrue uniquely to small entities, attributable to the action described
above. NMFS certified at the proposed stage of this rule that it will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, and NMFS received no comments on that certification.
Executive Order 13132--Federalism
This action does not contain policies with federalism implications
sufficient to warrant preparation of a federalism assessment under E.O.
13132 because this action does not have substantial direct effects on
the states, on the relationship between the national government and the
states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. Nonetheless, NMFS worked closely with the
city and tribal governments on St. George Island in response to a
petition by the tribal government of St. George.
Executive Order 13175--Native Consultation
Executive Order 13175 of November 6, 2000, the executive Memorandum
of April 29, 1994, the American Indian Native Policy of the U.S.
Department of Commerce (March 30, 1995), and the Department of Commerce
Tribal Consultation and Coordination Policy Statement (78 FR 33331;
June 4, 2013) outline NMFS's responsibilities in matters affecting
tribal interests. Section 161 of Public Law 108-100 (188 Stat. 452) as
amended by section 518 of Public Law 108-447 (118 Stat. 3267), extends
the consultation requirements of E.O. 13175 to Alaska Native
corporations. NMFS contacted the tribal government of St. George Island
and their local Native corporation (Tanaq) about revising the
regulations regarding the subsistence harvest of northern fur seals on
St. George Island and their input is incorporated herein.
Collection of Information Requirements
This final rule contains a collection-of-information requirement
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and which has been
approved by OMB under control number 0648-0699. Public reporting burden
for harvest reporting is estimated to average 40 hours per response,
including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection of information. Estimated responses include
the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources,
gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing
the collection of information. Send comments regarding these burden
estimates or any other aspect of this data collection, including
suggestions for reducing the burden, to NMFS Alaska Region (see
ADDRESSES) and by email to [email protected], or fax to 202-
395-7285.
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays
a currently valid OMB Control Number. All currently approved NOAA
collections of information may be viewed at: http://www.cio.noaa.gov/services_programs/prasubs.html.
References Cited
A list of all the references cited in this rule may be found on
www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/protectedresources/seals/fur.htm (see
ADDRESSES).
List of Subjects
15 CFR Part 902
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
[[Page 65337]]
50 CFR Part 216
Alaska, Marine Mammals, Pribilof Islands, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 30, 2014.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS amends 15 CFR part
902 and 50 CFR part 216 as follows:
Title 15--Commerce and Foreign Trade
PART 902--NOAA INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT: OMB CONTROL NUMBERS
0
1. The authority citation for part 902 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 902.1, in the table in paragraph (b), under the entry ``50
CFR'', add an entry in alphanumeric order for ``216.74'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 902.1 OMB control numbers assigned pursuant to the Paperwork
Reduction Act.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current OMB
control No.
CFR part or section where the information collection (All numbers
requirement is located begin with
0648-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
50 CFR: ..............
* * * * *
216.74.................................................. -0699
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title 50--Wildlife and Fisheries
PART 216--REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE TAKING AND IMPORTING OF MARINE
MAMMALS
0
3. The authority citation for 50 CFR part 216 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq., unless otherwise noted.
0
4. In Sec. 216.72:
0
A. Remove and reserve paragraph (c);
0
B. Revise the section heading and paragraphs (d), (e), and (f); and
0
C. Add paragraph (g) to read as follows:
Sec. 216.72 Restrictions on subsistence fur seal harvests.
* * * * *
(d) St. George Island. The subsistence fur seal harvest
restrictions described in paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(5) of this
section apply exclusively to the harvest of sub-adult fur seals;
restrictions that apply exclusively to the harvest of young of the year
fur seals can be found in paragraphs (d)(6) through (d)(11) of this
section.
(1) Pribilovians may only harvest sub-adult male fur seals 124.5
centimeters or less in length from June 23 through August 8 annually on
St. George Island up to the lower end of the harvest range established
in paragraph (b) of this section. When the lower end of the range has
been reached paragraphs (f)(1)(iii) and (f)(3) of this section apply.
(2) Pribilovians may harvest sub-adult male fur seals at the
hauling grounds shown in Figure 1 to part 216. No hauling ground may be
harvested more than twice per week.
(3) Seals with tags and/or entangling debris may only be taken if
so directed by NMFS scientists.
(4) The scheduling of the sub-adult male harvest is at the
discretion of the Pribilovians, but must be such as to minimize stress
to the harvested seals. The Pribilovians must give adequate advance
notice of their harvest schedules to the NMFS representatives to allow
for necessary monitoring activities. No fur seal may be taken except by
experienced sealers using the traditional harvesting methods, including
stunning followed immediately by exsanguination. The harvesting method
shall include organized drives of sub-adult male fur seals to killing
fields, unless the NMFS representatives determine, in consultation with
the Pribilovians conducting the harvest, that alternative methods will
not result in increased disturbance to the rookery or the increased
accidental take of female seals.
(5) Any taking of adult fur seals or young of the year, or the
intentional taking of sub-adult female fur seals is prohibited.
(6) Pribilovians may only harvest male young of the year from
September 16 through November 30 annually on St. George Island.
Pribilovians may harvest up to 150 male fur seal young of the year
annually up to the lower end of the harvest range established for St.
George in the notice published pursuant to paragraph (b) of this
section. When the lower end of the harvest range has been reached
paragraphs (f)(1)(iii) and (f)(3) of this section apply.
(7) No more than 50 male young of the year may be harvested from
each of the following regions where fur seals congregate: East region
includes the breeding areas known as East Reef and East Cliffs
rookeries and the associated non-breeding hauling grounds; South region
includes the breeding areas known as Zapadni and South rookeries and
the associated non-breeding hauling grounds; and North region includes
the breeding areas known as North and Staraya Artil rookeries and
associated non-breeding hauling grounds, as shown in Figure 1 to part
216. No area may be harvested more than twice per week and must be in
accordance with paragraph (d)(10) of this section.
(8) The scheduling of the young of the year harvest is at the
discretion of the Pribilovians, but must be such as to minimize stress
to the harvested and un-harvested fur seals and minimize the take of
female fur seals. The Pribilovians must give adequate advance notice of
their harvest schedules to the NMFS representatives to allow for
necessary monitoring activities. No fur seal may be taken except by
sealers using the harvesting methods implemented to reduce disturbance,
injury, and accidental mortality of female fur seals. Pribilovians may
use, but are not limited to, organized drives of young of the year fur
seals from congregating areas to inland killing fields. Methods of
harvest must include identification of male young of the year, followed
by stunning and immediate exsanguination, unless the NMFS
representatives, in consultation with the Pribilovians conducting the
harvest, determine that alternative methods will not result in
increased stress to harvested and un-harvested fur seals, increased
disturbance or injury to resting fur seals, or the accidental mortality
of female seals.
(9) Any harvest of sub adult or adult fur seals or intentional
harvest of young of the year female fur seals is prohibited.
(10) No young of the year fur seals may be taken from any
designated breeding area or its associated hauling ground(s) where the
most recent NMFS analysis projects that pup production has greater than
a 5 percent probability of falling below a level capable of sustaining
a harvest in 10 years.
(11) No more than 120 days after the final subsistence harvest each
calendar year, NMFS representatives and St. George Island community
members must review the implementation of the harvest and consider best
harvest practices and determine if implementation can be improved to
better meet the subsistence needs of the St. George Island community or
reduce negative effects on fur seals.
(e) St. Paul Island. Seals may only be harvested from the following
haulout areas: Zapadni, English Bay, Northeast Point, Polovina,
Lukanin, Kitovi, and
[[Page 65338]]
Reef. No haulout area may be harvested more than once per week.
(1) The scheduling of the harvest is at the discretion of the
Pribilovians, but must be such as to minimize stress to the harvested
fur seals. The Pribilovians must give adequate advance notice of their
harvest schedules to the NMFS representatives to allow for necessary
monitoring activities.
(2) No fur seal may be taken on the Pribilof Islands before June 23
of each year.
(3) No fur seal may be taken except by experienced sealers using
the traditional harvesting methods, including stunning followed
immediately by exsanguination. The harvesting method shall include
organized drives of subadult males to killing fields unless it is
determined by the NMFS representatives, in consultation with the
Pribilovians conducting the harvest, that alternative methods will not
result in increased disturbance to the rookery or the increased
accidental take of female seals.
(4) Any taking of adult fur seals or pups, or the intentional
taking of subadult female fur seals is prohibited.
(5) Only subadult male fur seals 124.5 centimeters or less in
length may be taken.
(6) Seals with tags and/or entangling debris may only be taken if
so directed by NMFS scientists.
(f) Harvest suspension provisions. (1) The Assistant Administrator
is required to suspend the take provided for in Sec. Sec. 216.71 and
216.72 when:
(i) (S)He determines, after reasonable notice by NMFS
representatives to the Pribilovians on the island, that the subsistence
needs of the Pribilovians on the island have been satisfied; or
(ii) (S)He determines that the harvest is otherwise being conducted
in a wasteful manner; or
(iii) The lower end of the range of the estimated subsistence level
provided in the notice issued under paragraph (b) of this section is
reached; or
(iv) With regard to St. George Island, two female fur seals have
been killed on St. George Island.
(2) A suspension based on a determination under paragraph
(f)(1)(ii) of this section may be lifted by the Assistant Administrator
if (s)he finds that the conditions that led to the determination that
the harvest was being conducted in a wasteful manner have been
remedied.
(3) A suspension issued in accordance with paragraph (f)(1)(iii) of
this section may not exceed 48 hours in duration and shall be followed
immediately by a review of the harvest data to determine if a finding
under paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this section is warranted. If the harvest
is not suspended under paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this section, the
Assistant Administrator must provide a revised estimate of the number
of seals required to satisfy the Pribilovians' subsistence needs.
(4) A suspension based on a determination under paragraph
(f)(1)(iv) of this section may be lifted by the Assistant Administrator
if (s)he finds that the conditions that led to the killing of two
female fur seals have been remedied and additional or improved methods
to detect female fur seals in the harvest are being implemented.
(g) Harvest termination provisions. (1) The Assistant Administrator
shall terminate the annual take provided for in Sec. 216.71 on August
8 for sub-adult males on St. Paul and St. George Islands and on
November 30 for male young of the year on St. George Island.
(2) The Assistant Administrator shall terminate the take provided
for in Sec. 216.71 when (s)he determines under paragraph (f)(1)(i) or
(f)(1)(iii) of this section that the subsistence needs of the
Pribilovians on the island have been satisfied or the upper end of the
harvest range has been reached, whichever occurs first.
(3) The Assistant Administrator shall terminate the take on St.
George Island provided for in Sec. 216.71 if a total of three female
fur seals are killed during the season on St. George Island.
0
5. Section 216.74 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 216.74 Cooperation between fur seal harvesters, Tribal and
Federal Officials.
(a) St. George Island. Federal scientists and Pribilovians
cooperatively manage the subsistence harvest of northern fur seals
under section 119 of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 1388).
The Federally recognized tribes on the Pribilof Islands have signed
agreements describing a shared interest in the conservation and
management of fur seals and the designation of co-management councils
that meet and address the purposes of the co-management agreements for
representatives from NMFS, St. George and St. Paul tribal governments.
NMFS representatives are responsible for compiling information related
to sources of human-caused mortality and serious injury of marine
mammals. The Pribilovians are responsible for reporting their
subsistence needs and actual level of subsistence take. This
information is used to update stock assessment reports and make
determinations under Sec. 216.72. Pribilovians who take fur seals for
subsistence uses collaborate with NMFS representatives and the
respective Tribal representatives to consider best harvest practices
under co-management and to facilitate scientific research.
(b) St. Paul Island. The Pribilovians who engage in the harvest of
seals are required to cooperate with scientists engaged in fur seal
research on the Pribilof Islands who may need assistance in recording
tag or other data and collecting tissue or other fur seal samples for
research purposes. In addition, Pribilovians who take fur seals for
subsistence uses must, consistent with 5 CFR 1320.7(k)(3), cooperate
with the NMFS representatives on the Pribilof Islands who are
responsible for compiling the following information on a daily basis:
(1) The number of seals taken each day in the subsistence harvest,
(2) The extent of the utilization of fur seals taken, and
(3) Other information determined by the Assistant Administrator to
be necessary for determining the subsistence needs of the Pribilovians
or for making determinations under Sec. 215.32(e) of this chapter.
0
6. Add Figure 1 to part 216 as follows:
[[Page 65339]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR04NO14.000
[FR Doc. 2014-26177 Filed 10-30-14; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P