Endangered Species Act 


Biennial Report to Congress 


Status of Recovery Programs 


January, 1992 - June, 1994 


U.S. Departme@ of Commerce 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

National Marine Fisheries Se~ce 

Officeof Protected Resources 
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMlMERCE 

hbtbru( 0g.m-d A- AmNATIONAL MINE FISHERIES SERVYT 

1335 Eeat-Ww Highwey 

SihrerSp*ng. MDX3910 

THE DIRECTOR 

SEP 8 1994 

able Ernest Hollings 


Committee on Commerce, 


and Transportation 


ates Senate 


n, D.C. 20510-2602 


Dear ~irl: 


I ah pleased to submit the Biennial Report for January 1992- 

June 199 of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) 

regardin the status of efforts.to develop and implement recove~ry 

plans fo species listed pursuant to section 4 of the Endangered 

Species 1ct (ESA). The report includes the status of all species 

recovery plans have been developed, as required by 


of the ESA, the status of all other species 


jurisdiction, species proposed for listing, 


as depleted under the Marine Mammal Protection 


Act. 


Sincerely, 


1 Rolland A. ~chmi+ten 

THE ASSISTANT ADMINETRATOR 


FOR FISHERIES 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENTOF COMIMERCE 

--rdA~AdminblWdon 

NATWI]NALNIARC\IERSHERlESSERVK=E 

1335--We HSilver Spring MO 20910 

ME DlRECTOR 

SEP 8 I994 

Dear Sir 4 

I a pleased to submit the Biennial Report for January 1992- 


June 199 of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) 


regardin the status of efforts to develop and implement recovery 


plans fo species listed pursuant to section 4 of the Endangered 


Species ct (ESA). The report includes the status of all species 


tor whic recovery plans have been developed, as required by 


section (f)(3) of the ESA, the status of all other species 


listed u der NMFS8 jurisdiction, species proposed for listing, 


and spec es listed as depleted under the Marine Mammal Protection 


Act. 
 1 


Sincerely, 


1 Rolland A. ~chmjkten 

THE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR 

FOR FISHERIES 
During t e 1988 reauthorization of the Endangered 

Speciestct of 1973 (ESA), an amendment was added 

the Secretaries of Commerceahd 

a biennial report "on the status 

implement recovery plans 

to this sedion and on 

such plans have 

To satis this reporting requirement, a summary of 


recovery fforts for species under National Marine 


Fisheries e~ce
 (NMFS)jurisdiction for the period 

1992 thro gh 1993 has been prepared. Included in 

this repo is the most current species status and 

trends inf I 
 rmation available. 

Federal efforts to protect endangered 

species began with the passage of the 

Conservation Act of 1969 

r the 1973 Convention on 

dangered Species of Wild 

rder to avoid continued losses of 

eral abilities to protect 

and to develop measures for their 

recovery. 

of the Act, amendments 

gained in 

Wildlife SeFce (FWS) and NMFS develop and 

implement kecovery plans for species under their 

jurisdiction, 

Accounting Office conducted an 

recovery programs. The 

The report stated that 

for many listed 

neither FWSnor NMFS had mechanisms for tracking 

and updating the status of species. 

NMFS has developed an information management 

system that tracks: (1) the status of endangered or 

threatened marine species; (2) the developlment and 

implementation of recovery plans to promote suNival 

&species; and (3) exp&ditures and resources utilized 

in these efforts. This report was generated from the 

data in the information management systein. 

The ESA requires development and imple~nentation 

of recovery plans unless such plans will not promote 

the conservation of the species. Although ithe Act 

does not diflerentiate between domestic and foreign 

species in this regard, specific management actions 

are often not feasible for species whose range is 

either totally or primarily outside of US. jurisdiction. 

The range of a number of listed marine species is 

totally outside U.S. jurisdiction. In other cases, the 

range in areas under the jurisdiction of the 'United 

States is limited, and management actions inthe U.S. 

portion of their range are not likely to contl~ite to 

recovery. Therefore, NMFS has focused ramvery 

plans to those species primarily under U.S. 

jurisdiction. 

SinceNMFS'last Biennial Report for FY 1989-1991, 

eight recovery plans have been approved: 

Green turtle - U.S. Atlantic population 

Humpback whale 

Northern right whale -

Loggerhead turtle - U.S. Atlantic population 

Leatherback turtle - U .S. Caribh/Atlantic/ 

Gulf of Mexiw 

Kemp's ridley turtle 

Stellet (Northern) sea lion 

Hawksbill turtle - U.S. CaribbeanIAtlanticl 

Gulf of Mexico 

Recovery plans are in progress for Snake River 

salmon, the gulf sturgeon, and the shortnose sturgeon. 

The Hawaiian monk seal recove~y plan, approved in 

1983, is updated annua.and a monitoring pllan has 

been developed for the graywhale. 

Also included in this report is information on species 

proposed for listing under the ESA, the Gulf' of 

Maine population of harbor porpoise and Jolhnson's 

sea grass; as well as information on species designated 

as depleted under the Marine Mammal Protection 

Act; the Northern fur seal and the Mid-Atlan~tic 

coastal migratory population of bottlenose dolphins. 

Recovery 


Programs 

The Final Recovery Plan was approved and 

distribut in 1991. I 4 

coordination under Section 7 of 

s are protected by ensuring that 

t likely to jeopardize the 

ence of the species. Minerals 

authorization of oil and gas 

rps of Engineers' authorization of 

edging activities, Navy explosive 

and Environmental Protection 

dredged material disposal 

ubject to consultations. 

The major pions recommended in the plan are: 

manage nesting habitat. 

laws on beach armoring, and 

~nsurdlaws regulating construction and beach 

armori/ng are enforced. 

Aquqe in fee-title all undeveloped nesting 

beacheb between Melbourne and Wabasco 

Beach, Florida 

Protect qd manage populations on nesting 

beaches. 

Monitdr trends in nesting activity by means of 

standandized surveys. 

Evaluate nest sum and implement 

appropriate nest protection measures. 

Protect and manage populations in the nzarine 

- environment. - Determine seasonal distribution, abundance and 

status of sea turtles in the nearshore m~arine 

environment. 

Determine etiology of sea turtle fibropapillomas 

and monitor mortality of those turtles affected. 

NMFShas made a major effort to reduce green turtle 

mortalityin the shrimp trawl fishery. In 1989, 

regulations requiring the use of Turtle Excluder 

Devices (TEDs) in all areas, year round, became 

effective. Many of the other tasksidentified in the 

recovery plan have been initiated in the last 2years. 

NMFS has provided the resources to collect a range 

of basic biological information on sea turtles. Projects 

are being conducted to determine species 

composition, relative abundance, and seaso~nal 

distribution of sea Mles in the inshore waters of 

North Carolina and South Carolina. A continuing 

project to determine distnion and species 

composition is being carried out in the Cedar Key 

area of Florida's west coast. Historically, this area 

supported large numbers of green turtles.A similar 

study has been initiated to determine distniution and 

size/species composition in pelagic waters. 

NMFSlaboratories are conducting research on sea 

turtle habitat utilization in the Gulf of Mexitm. The 

project focuses on known sea turtle develop~mental 

habitats. 

Analyses of sea turtle strandings have been conducted 

to monitor the level of strandings and possible causes 

of mortality. 

Research has been conducted on the effects of 

pollutants on sea turtles. 

NFMS is currently conducting research on the 

etiology and epidemiology of fibropapillornas in green 

turtles from Hawaiian waters and the Atlantiic. 
United States can 

4. AU priority 1 tasks have been su~fu~ 

Six major actions are *ceded to achieve recovery 

1. Provide long-term firotection to important nesting 

2. Ensure at least 60% success on major nesting 

4. Determine distributhn and seasonal movements 

for all life stages in m&e environment; 

5. Minimize mortality @om commercial fisheries; and 

6. Reduce threats to pdpulation and habitat from 
Analyses of sea turtle strandings have been conducted 

to monitor the level of strandings and possible causes 

The major actions recommended in the plan are: 

Identify important nesting beaches. 

Ensure long-term protection of important nesting 

Ensure long-term protection of marine habitat. 

Prevent degradation or destruction of marine 

Ian for the Atlantic population of the habitats from upland erosion and siltation. 

a turtle was approved in September 1984. 

was established in 1989to revise Prevent degradation of reef habitat from oil, 

sewage, and other pollutants. 

Monitor trends in nesting actii. 

Evaluate nest success and implement nest 

protection measures. 

Ensure law enforcement activities prevent 

poaching on nesting beaches. 

Determine nesting beach origins for juvenile and 

Quantify threats to adults and juveniles on foraging 

Increase law enforcement to reduce poaching in 

in the Caribbean. In 1992, regulations requiring the 
Physiological research has been conducted on the 

PLAN APPROVED D 

Because of Kemp's ridleys' aggregated nesting 

behavior, restricted breeding range, and increasing 

threats from the expanding global human population 

KEMPS RKDLEY 	 and general environmental degradation, complete 

recovery (delisting) may not be achievable. Sincethe 

principal nesting beach is in Mexico, continued, 

long-term cooperation between the US.and Mexico 

is necessary to recover the species. The goal of this 

recovery plan is to upgrade the species from 

er Section 7 of 	 endangered to threatened status. Criteria for delistin 

will be addressed in future revisions of the recovery 

Criteria for upgrading the status are as follows: 

ridley mortality in the 

e use of turtle excluder 

and achievefull compliance with the regulations 

stance to the Government requiring TED use. 

(3)Attain a population of at least 10,000nesting 

The major actions necessary for recovery are to: 

1)Assist Mexico to ensure long-term protection of 

the major nesting beach and its environs, including 

the protection of adult breeding stock and enhanced 

productionls~alof hatching turtles. 

2) ContinueTEDregulation enforcement in U.S. 

waters, expanding the areas and seasonality of 

required TEDuse to reflect the distribution of the 
3) Fill in aps in knowledge of Kemp's ridley lie 

histoq t tat will result in better management 

decisions\ 

and maximize 

we should: determine distniution and - all life stages, determine critical 

behaviors and physiology, 

and recruitment. 

The major actions recommended in the plan are: 1 

Mexico to expand and codify the 

Natural Reserve at Rancho Nuevo. 

I 

Rede e and codify regulations for better reseme 

protect%n. 

Encour e Mexico to restrict development that 

may deitade the nesting habitat. 

Identify important marine habitat. 

Protect pesting females at Rancho Nuevo. 

Protect ests and increasehatchling protection at 

Ranchobuevo. 

Monitor(popu1ation trends at Rancho Nuevo. 

~etermihejuvenile and subadult nearshore habitat 

use. 

Determ$e migration routes and foraging areasof 

adults. 

Enforce ;pnd expand TEDregulations. 

Enforce tihe trawling prohibitions near Rancho 

Nuevo. 

Promote TED use in Mexico. 
PLAN STAGE:FKNAL 

PLANAPPROVEDDATE: 04/06/92 I I 

I LEA-ACK TURTLE 

(ATLANTIC) 

Through interagency coordination under Section 7 of 

the ESA, leatherback turtles are protected by 

ensuring that Federal actions are not likely to 

jeopardize the continw existence of the species. 

Minerals Managemenk Se~ce's authorizations of oil 

and gas activities, Arnay Corps of Engineers' 

authorizations of oil ad gas and dredging activities, 

Navy explosive testing, programs, and Environmental 

Protection Agency designations of dredged material 

disposal sites have bean subject to consultations. 

Analyses of sea turtle $trandings have been conducted 

to monitor the levels of strandings and possible causes 

of mortality. 

The major actions recommended in the recovery plan 

are: 

Identify and ensure long-term protection of 

important nesting b6aches. 

Identify important marine habitat. 

Monitor trends in nating activity on important 

nesting beaches with standardized surveys. 

Evaluate nest success and implement appropriate 

nest protection measures. 

Implement measures to reduce capture and 

mortality in the shrimp trawl fishery. 

Evaluate extent of entanglement in and ingestion 

of marine debris. 

Implement and enforp MARPOL. 

The goal of the recovery plan is to kelist the US. 

pdpulation of leatherback turtles. Delisting would be 

considered when the following conditions &e met: 

1)The adult female population increases over the 

i&t 25 years, as evideked by a statistically significant 

increase in the number of nests at Culebra, Puerto 

Rim; St. Croix, USVI;and along the east coast of 

Florida. 

2) Nesting habitat encompassing at least 75% of 

nesting activity in the U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rim 

and Florida is in public ownership. 

3) All priority 1tasks have been sumfully 

implemented. 
nekhore waters 

PLANSTAlGE: FINAL I PLAN APPROVED DATE: 12/26/91 -Implement and enforce TEDregulation!;.

I 

-

Through interagency coordination under Section 7 of 

the ESA, loggerhead turtles are protected by ensuring 

that Federal actions are not likely to jeopardize the 

continued existence of the species. Minerals 

Management Service's authorizations of oil and gas 

activities, Army Corps of Engineers' authorizations of 

oil and gas and dredging activities, Navy explosive 

testing programs, and Environmental Protection 

Agency designations of dredged material disposal 

sites have ;been subject to consultations. 

NMFS has made a major effort to reduce loggerhead 

Mle meaty in the shrimp fishery. In 1992, 

regulatiom requiring the use of TEDsin all waters, 

year round became effective. 

Analysesof sea turtle strandings have been conducted 

to monitor the level of strandings and possible causes 

of mortality. 

The major actions recommended in the plan are: 

Evaluate current laws on beach armoring. 

Enforce laws regarding coastal construction. 

Acquire nesting beaches between Melbourne and 

Wabasso Beach, FL. 

Monitor trends in nesting activity. 

Evaiuate nest success and implement nest 


protection measures. 

PLAN STAGE:DWE3RIM 


PLAN APPROVED DATE NIA 


HAWKSBLLLTURTLEi 

LEATHERBACKTUR'llLE 

GREEN TURTLE 

O m RIDLEY TURm 

A recovery plan for Hawaiian sea turtles was drafted 


by a recovery team appointed in 1985.This was 


published as an Interim Plan in February of 1992. 


Hawksbill turtles: 


The major actions recommended for hawksbill turtles 


in the interim plan am: 


Eliminate adverse human induced habitat 

alteration in order tb maintain foraging and resting 

habitats and nesting beaches. 

Monitor trends in nesting activityand develop an 

index to track the population. 

The major actions recommended for green turtles in 

the interim plan are: 

Continue census of adults through mark-recapture 

Monitor subadults and adults in resident nearshore 

Goals of the Interim Recovery Plan are to secure 

Hawksbill turtle: 

and maintained at levels that ensure maximum 

hatchling production. 

The firststep in this recovery process will be to 

and maintained at levels that ensure maximum 

hatchling production. 

Leatherback and olive ridley turtles: 

A determination of conditions for the recovery of th 

leatherback and olive ridley in Hawaiian waters will 

only be possible when adequate knowledge becomes 

available on their life history and ecology. 
I PLANSTAGE: NONE 

PLAN APPROVED DATE: NIA 

I LOGG~~I~~~TURTLE 

(PACIFIC) 

A Pacific Basin SeaTurtle recovery team hasbeen 

appointedi but no plan has been prepared. A draft 

recovery plan is expected to be availableby 

December, 1994. 

I 

PLAN STAGE:PENDIN 

PLAN APPROVED DATE: NIA 

CHINOOKSALMON 

(SACRQMENTOrn--RUN) 

The Sacramento Riveir winter-run chinook salmon 

was listed as threaten@ on an emergency basis on 

August 4,1989, and listed as threatened on 

November 30,1990. In response to a petition 

received in June 19911 NMFS reclassified this species 

as endangeredin Janljary 1994. A recovery team has 

Most of the recovery actions for the winter-run 

chinooksalmon invohte consultations under section 7 

of the ESA with Federal agencies that either control 

the diversion of water linthe river or permit activities 

by other water users. phis species' depends on an 

adequate flow of water at a specific temperature in 

the Sacramento River iwhere drought conditions have 

existed for the past 7years. 

NMFSis a member of the Bureau of Reclamation's 

Temperature Advisory Committee, and is working 

with the Bureau on teIfiperature management 

strategies to attract wi*ter-run as far up the 

Sacramento River as possible and increase the 

amount of spawning inl the reach of the river that the 

Bureau canmanage wah available water. NMFS is 

also working with the &ate of California by reviewing 

impacts of state action$ on winter-run chinook. 

In 1988, NMFS,the State of California, the Fish and 

Wildlife Service, and the Bureau of Reclamation 

estoration Plan includes 

I 

I 

temperatures at levels below lethallimits in the reac 

-ofriver above Red Bluff Dam that is used for 

In June 1991, NMFS issued a biological opinion to t 

because GCID did not plan to install new fish screen 

that would exclude fish when water is diverted from 

the Sacramento River. NMFSrequested that GCID 

take immediate action to prevent a take of juvenile 

winter-run chinook before they would pass GCID's 

NMFS has consulted under section 7with the Pacific 

Fishery Management Council. Because a direct take 

of Sacramento River winter-run chinook salmon by 

sport or commercial fishermen is not allowed, the 

biological opinion includes measures in the incident 

take statement to decrease the potential incidental 

take of the species. Thesemeasures include not 

early south of Point Arena. 
PLAN STAQE:PENDING 

PLAN APPROVED DATE: N/A 

CHINOOK $ALMON 


(SNAKERlTkRSPRZNG/SCIUMER) 


CHINOOK SALMON 

(WAKENWR FALL) 

SOCKEYE SALMON 


(SNAKE-) 


A Snake Wer Salmon Recovery Team wasformed in 

1991. Theteam submitted recommendations for a 

NMFS recbvery plan in June 1994. NMFSis 

preparing adraft recovery plan for public comment. 

The draft will include a section contrasting any 

differences between the team's recommendations and 

the draft recovery plan. An approved Snake River 

Salmon Recovery Plan is expected in late December, 

1994. 
PLAN STAGE:DRAFT 

PLAN APPROVED DATE. N/A 

GULF .STURGEON 

The U.S.Fish & Wildlife Service has released a draft 

recovery plan for the Gulf sturgeon. 

The major actions rmmmended in the plan are: 

Conduct and refine field investigations to locate 

important habitats. 

Characterize riverine, estuarine, and neritic 

essential habitat. 

Develop and implement population sampling and 

monitoring techniques. 

Eliminate potential for introductions of non-native 

stock or other sturgeon. 

Conduct life historystudies on the requirements of 

little-known life stzyles. 

Identify potential harmful chemical and water 


quantity and quality changes associated with 


surface water restrictions. 


Identify and eliminate point and non-point sources 

of chemical contaminants. 

Seekresolution of conflict between authorized 

projects and restoration of fish populations. 

Reduce or eliminate incidental mortality. 

Restore natural riverine habitats. 

Increase effectiveness and enforcement of state 

and federal take prohibitions. 

Identify and eliminate known and potential impact 

to water quantity and quality associated with 

existing and proposed uses and water diiersions. 

Assess the relationship between groundwater 

pumping and reduction of groundwater flows and 

quantify loss of riverine habitat related to reduced 

groundwater in-flows. 

The primary short-term recovery objective is to 

prevent further reduction of existing wild populatio 

of Gulf sturgeon within the subspecies' range. The 

long-term recovery objective is to establish populatio 

levels that would allow delisting of the Gulf sturgeon 

in discrete management units. Delisting could be 

considered within 30years. Following delisting, a 

long-term fishery.management objective is to 

establish a self-sustaining population that could 

withstand directed fishing pressure within discrete 

management units. 
I PLAN STAGE:PENDING 


PLAN APPkOVED DATE: N/A 


A new shortnose sturgeon recovery team was 

appointed by NMFS in 1993. A team appointed in 

the late 19f70s did not continue meeting after 

submitting a draft recovery plan to NMFSin 1981. 

The new taam, which began meeting in November, 

1993,will submit a drat3 recovery plan by Fall,1994. 

While the vecovery plan is being drafted, NMFSis 

implementing recovery actions through the ESA 

section 7consultation process and has issued scientific 

research pannits directed at recovery of the species. 

I 	 Recently isued scienti£ic research permits allow 

studiesin t$e southern rivers where there is a lack of 

information on shortnose sturgeon. Current research 

is being conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, the Georgia Department of Natural 

Resources, the South Carolina Wildlife and Marine 

Resources Department, and North Carolina State 

University. 

I 

I 


I 

PLAN STAGEFINAL 

PLAN APPROVED DAm 04/01/83 

I HAWAIIAN MONK SEAL 

The first Hawaiian Monk Seal Recovery Team, 

appointed in 1980, submitted its final recovery plan to 

NMFS in 1982. The plan, which includes a 

comprehensive research and management plan for 

the recovery of the Hawaiian monk seal, was 

published by NMFS in March 1983. A new recovery 

team was appointed by NMFS in 1989. After the new 

team's first meeting in 1989, recommendations were 

submitted to NMFS. Subjectsaddressed included 

research programs, data analyses, the Kure Atoll 

Head Start Project, a male mobbing problem, 

population monitoring, recovery actions at Midway 

Island, the repair of facilities at Tern Island, and 

priorities for the 1990 field season. The team has 

recommended placing observers aboard long-line 

swordfish vessels operating near the Northwest 

Hawaiian Islands. In December, 1993, the point at 

which Hawaiian monk seals may be considered 

recovered was discussed. 

The new recovery team concluded that the 1983 

recovery plan still provides a useful guide to overall 

recovery needs. Instead of producing a new plan, the 

team recommended updating the 1983 plan with 

results of subsequent annual program reviews. 

The major actions recommended in the plan are: 

1.Identify and, where possible, mitigate the natural 

factors causing or contributing to the decreased 

survival and productivity of monk seals. 

2. Characterize the marine and terrestrial habitat 

requirements of the monk seal, including use patterns 

and feeding habits. 

4. Document, and where possible, mitigate the direct 

and indirect-effects of human actwes on monk seals. 

5. Implement appropriate management actions 

leading to conservation and recovery of the species. I 

6. Develop an education program to foster greater 

conservation efforts among the users of the 

Northwestern Hawaiian Islands and the public. 

In May 1988, NMFS designated critical habitat for the 

Hawaiian monk seal out from shore to 20 fathoms in 

10 areas of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. 

NMFS believes these areas require special 

management consideration or protection now and in 

the reasonably foreseeable future. Critical habitat 

designation directly affectsonly Federal agencies and 

those who need Federal authorization or funding for 

their actions. The agencies most likely to be affected 

by this designation include the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. 

Navy, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Minerals 

Management Service, Western Pacific Regional 

Fishery Management Council, and NMFS. 

Using the 1983 recovery plan, the recommendations 

of the recovery team, and the recommendations of 

the Marine Mammal Commission, NMFShas 

developed a draft 3-year comprehensive work plan 

that will serve as the mechanism for identifying 

funding needs for fiscalyears 1994-1996. The 

identified tasksfocus on recovery of monk seal 

populations in the western portion of the species' 

range, resolution of the mobbing problem at Laysan 

and Lisianski Islands and monitoring monk seal 

populations at the five major breeding locations of 

French Frigate Shoals, Laysan Island, Lisianski 

Island, Pearl and Hermes Reef, and Kure Atoll. 

Since 1985, NMFShas been studying abnormal 

mobbing behavior by adult male seals at Laysan 

Island. This behavior can result in the death or 

serious injury of adult females and young animals. 

Since 1982,43 seals were known to have died from 

mobbing, and an additional 17 disappeared after 

receiving severe wounds from mobbing. Of these 60 

seals, 28 were adult females. With the concurrence of 
1 

the recovery team, NMFShas proposed to remove up 

to 30 adult male monk seals from the Laysan Island 

population in order to decrease the incidence of 

mobbing attacks and thereby increase female sunival. 

Removals are scheduled to begin in 1994. Males will 

be placed in captivityor relocated in the wild. 

From 19811-1991, NMFS considered a Head Start 

Project to help rebuild a breeding population at Kure 

Atoll. The program involved removing newly weaned 

female pups from the beaches of Kure, placing them 

in an enclosed pen on the shoreline, raising them 

through their first summer of life, and then releasing 

them at Kure. From 1981 to 1991, a total of 33 pups 

were headbtarted, 21 of which were alive in 1993. To 

supplement these efforts, small pups unlikely to 

survive on their own were taken from French Frigate 

Shoals, rehabilitated at facilities in Honolulu, and 

released at Kure. From 1985 to 1993,20 rehabilitated 

pups were released at Kure Atoll, 14 of which were 

alive in 1993. Also, five normal-sized female pups 

were taken from French Frigate Shoals after weaning 

and released at Kure in 1990. The efforts to rebuild 

the Kure population have been successful. Average 

beach counts have increased at an estimated 3% per 

year since 1981. 

Based on recommendations made in the recovery 

plan, NMFShas monitored populations of monk seals 

at allprimary breeding locations since 1983. Each site 

requires individual attention since each area is 

unique. Same counts include information on the age 

and sex composition of the population which helps to 

predict future trends. The ratio of juveniles and 

subadults to adults varies significantly among atolls. 

Tagging of seals on these five sites has shown high 

survival of immature monk seals, but three island 

populations are not growing. The decline in the 

Laysan and Lisianski Island populations since the late 

1950's appears to have been sustained through the 

last decade because of mobbing activity. At French 

Frigate Shaals, birth rate and juvenile survival have 

dropped dramatically, and the population has 

declined by approximately 14% per yearsince 1989. 

Thesechanges appear to be from a reduction in prey 

availabiity, which is thought to be related to an 

increase in ocean temperature and a decrease in 

marine productivity. The precipitous decline of this 

population continued in 1993. 

In response to reports of Hawaiian monk seals being I I 

incidentally taken by long-line swordfish operations 

off French Frigate Shoals, Nh4FS investiga1:e.d island 

beaches for evidence of interactions between monks 

seals and fishing operations. Enforcement agents 

interviewed all long-line, lobster, and botto~mfish 

gshermen returning froL fishing trips.In November 

1990,NMFS published an emergency rule submitted 

by the Western Paci£ic Fishery Management Council 

that requires any fishing vessel operating within 50 

miles of the Northwest Hawaiian Island to notify 

NMFSwho willthen determine whether that vessel 

should carry an observer. It also requires long-line 

vessels to obtain permits from NMFSand submit 

daily fishing logs on interactions with monks seals and 

other protected species. A final rule implenlenting 

the above was published in October 1991. 

Becauseof the limited terrestrial habitat available to 

the Hawaiian monk seal, pupping, nursing and 

haulout areas are critical to the survival of the species. 

Also, any former habitat than can be regainled will 

promote recovery. Recently, monk seals have been 

sighted regularly around Kauai, the westemmost of 

the main Hawaiian Islands. The boundaries of the 

small Kilauea Point National Wildlife Refuge which 

serves asmonk seal habitat on the island, do not 

extend seaward of the shoreline. The nearshore 

waters areincluded in the proposed "Hurnpl~ack 

Whale National Marine Sanctuary." 

Tern Island, which has served asa permanenlt field 

station for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Se~a: since 

1979, provides an essential basefor NMFS to monitor 

all islands in French Frigate Shoals. 'Ihese s,hoals 

provide habitat for nearly half of the total pcbpulation 

of Hawaiian monk seals.In the late 1980s, USFWS 

considered abandoning the station becausecdthe 

expense involved in its operation and maintenance. 

However, after completing recommendations for a 

long-term course of action for the field station at 

Tern Island, USFWS has refurbished a portiton of the 

island's facilities. Restoration of the island's seawall 

will require the cooperation of USFWS, Navy, Corps 

of Engineers, and Coast Guard. 

At the present time, "recovery" has not been 
I 

quantitatively defined by the Hawaiian Monk Seal 

Recovery Team because 1) the species continues to 

decline and itsstatus is, at best, perilous, 2) the 

species has experienced at least three episodes of 

catastrophic decline since the late 1950'4 none of 

which can be fbUy explained, and 3) even with 

complete reversal of downward trends and population 

growth at the maximum rate, monk seal populations 

would probably not reach historic levels for 20-30 

years. 

However, the following goals have been identified. (1) 

Stopping the downward trend in numbers of monk 

seals in the central and western portions of the 

species range; (2) Taking action to develop positive 

growth rates at most or all islands; (3) Identifying or 

preventing human activities that could result in the 

degradation or destruction of habitats or habitat 

components critical to the survival and recovery of the 

species;and (4) Determining the population level 

which will result in maximum net productivity. 

The major areasof action described in the Recovery 

Plan Status are designed to stop the downward 

population trends in the central and western portions 

of the species' range, stimulate positive growth at all 

depleted populations, and prevent human activities 

that could result in the degradation or destruction of 

monk sealhabitat essential to their survival and 

recovery. 
PLANSTAGE:FINAL 

PLAN APPROVED DATE: 12/30/92 -

I sreLLER(NORTHERN)SEALION 

On November 21,1989, the Environmental Defense 

Fund and 17 other environmental organizations 

petitioned NMFS to publish an emergency rule listing 

the Steller sea lion as an endangered species and to 

initiate a rulemaking to make the listing permanent. 

On February 22,1990, NMFS determined that under 

Wion 4 of the ESA,the petition presented 

substantial information indicating that the action may 

be warranted and requested comments (55 FR 6301). 

On April 5,1990, NMFS issued an emergency interim 

rule (55 FR 12645) listing the Steller sea lion as 

threatened. 

I 

On July 20,1990, NMFSproposed listing the Steller 

sea lion as a threatened species. (55FR 29793) On 

the same date, NMFS also issued an advanced notice 

of proposed rulemaking (55 FR 29792) requesting 

public comments to assistNMFS in itsefforts to 

develop separate, more comprehensive protective 

regulations and critical habitat designation. 

-

NMFS took this dual-track rulemaking approach 

because it wanted to avoid any lapse between the 

expiration of the emergency interim listing and the 

final listing. There was not sufficient time to issue a 

proposed rule with comprehensive protective 

regulations including a proposed critical habitat 

designation, solicit public comments, provide an 

opporhlnity for public hearings, conduct the required 

regulatory and economic analyses, and issue a final 

rule by the time the emergency listing expired at the 

end of the 240 days on December 3,1990. 

Further NMFS believed that it was preferable to 

information provided in the recovery 

publishing comprehensive protective 

(55 FR 49204) with a-limited set of 

measures and proposed more comprehensive 

protective regulations and 

- critical habitat in1 a

separate rulemaking. 

In March 1990, NMFS appointed the Steller Sea Lion 

Recovery Team which was responsible for drafting a 1 

recovery plan and providing r&mmendations toNMFS on necessary protective regulations for the 

Steller sea lion. The draft Steller Sea Lion IZecovery I 

Plan was completed and made available for public 

comment on March 15,1991 (56 FR 11204). The 

comments were reviewed and the draft recovery plan I 

revised. A final recovery plan was approvedl addistributed in December of 1992. 

The major actions recommended in the plan are: 

1.Identify species habitat requirements and protect 

areas of special biological significance. 

2. Identify specific management stocks. 

3. Monitor population status and trends. 

4. Conduct age class sex ratio studies on rookeries 

and tag animals for future studies. 

5. Determine and minimize causesof mortallity. 

6. Investigate feeding ecologyand factors aflEecting 

energetics. 

Through interagency wordination under Section 7of 

the ESA, Steller sea lions are protected Ikon1 Federal 

actions that are likely to jeopardize the cont.inued 

eistence of the species. Activities that present a 

potential conflict include fisheries and oil exploration. 

A number of recovery actions identified in tlhe 

recovery plan have alreadybeen initiated. Pc~pulation 

surveys and researchon population dynamics are 

continuing. Research to determine primary prey 

species has been conducted. Analysesof tisswes have 

been done to determine levels of organochk~~e 

pollutant residues and levels of heavy metals:. 

Satellite telemetry is being used to monitor sfeller sea 
designated as critical habitat. 

The following protective regulations have been 

1.Discharge of a firearm at or within 100 yards of a 

Steller sea lion is prohibited with certain 

exceptions. Exceptions include: for government 

officialsif taking is in a humane manner, for the 

protection or welfare of the animal, the protection 

of the public health and welfare, or the nonlethal 

removal of nuisance animals; and for subsistence 

2. Buffer zones of 3 nautical miles were established 

around all principal Steller sea lion rookeries in the 

Gulf of Alaska and the Aleutian Islands. Generally, 

no vessel will be allowed to operate within the 

3-mile buffer zones and no person will be allowed 

to approach on land closer than one-half mile with 

certain exceptions. Exceptions include: for 

government officials if taking is in a humane 

manner, for the protection and wel£are of the 

animal, the protection of the public health and 

%Hare, or the nonlethal removal of nuisance 

animals; for government officials conducting 

activities necessary for national defense or the 

performance of other legitimate government 

activities; and for emergency situations that present 

a threat to the health, safety or life of a person or a 

significant threat to a vessel or property. 

Additionally, a mechanism is provided where the 

Alaska Regional Director may issue exemptions for 

traditional or historic activities (including 

subsistence taking) that do not have asignificant 

adverse effect on sea lions and for which there is no 

readily available and acceptable alternative. Notice 

of all such exemptions will be published in the 

3. An annual incidental kill quota of 675 Steller sea 

lions was established for Alaskan waters and 

adjacent areas of the Exclusive Economic Zone 

(EEZ) west of 141 W. Longitude. To monitor this 

quota,NMFSretained the observer authority of the 

emergency rule to allow the Alaska Regional 

In January 1992, NMFS amended the Bering Sea and 

Aleuthian Islands (BSAI) and Gulf& Alaska (GOA) 

~ioundfishFishery Management Plans (FMPs) to 

prohibit trawling year round within 10 miles of listed 

Steller sea lion rookeries in the Bering Sea, Aleutian 

Islands, and Gulf of Alaska Trawl closures around 

six of the BSAI rookeries were expanded seasonally 

to 20 nautical miles during the BSAI winter pollock 

fishery. Coincident with the rookery closures, NMFS 

also amended the GOA Fh4P to spatially and 

temporally allocate GOA pollock harvests. These 

management actions were taken to reduce the 

possible adverse effects of spatially and temporally 

concentrated groundfish fishery removal on Steller 

sea lions and to reduce opportunities for incidental 

and intentional takes. 

On April 1,1993, NMFS proposed a rule to designate 

critical habitat for the Steller sea lion. The rule 

became final on August 27,1993. Critical habitat 

includes all Steller sea lion rookeries and major 

haulouts within US. borders, and a 20 nautical mile 

zone around the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands 

(BSAI) and Gulf of Alaska (GOA) Steller sea lion 

listed rookeries and major haulouts. Three aquatic 

zones have also been designated as critical habitat; 

one is located in the GOA (Shelikof Strait and 

adjacent waters), and two are located in the BSAI 

area (Bogoslof Island area and Sequam Pass) - becauseof their geographic location relative to Steller 

sea lion areasof abundance, they are known foraging 

areas, and they support large concentrations (and a 

d~ersity)of prey items. 

Because of a continuing decline in the Alaskan 

portion of the Steller sea lion population, NMFS 

initiated a status review in November 1993 to 

determine whether a change in status to endangered 

is warranted. The status review will incorporate 

results from the 1994 range-wide Steller sea lion 

population survey., a preliminary determination is 

expected in late 1994. 
activities that may be detrimental to the survival or 

recovery of the population. Immediate objectives are 

to identify factors that-are limiting the population, ' 

actions neaswy to stop the population decline, and 

actions necessary to cause the population to increase. 

Although it is not clear what factors have contributed 

to the Steller sea lion population decline, and it is 

apparent that a great deal of information vital to the 

effective management of the species is lacking, there 

is an urgent need to take immediate actions to 

safeguard against further population declines, and to 

provide for recovery of the species. 
The International Whaling Commission (WC)is 


PLANSTAGE:NONE going to undertake a population assessment of 


PLANAPPROVED DATE: NIA bowhead wh-des at its 1994 meeting To date, the 


IWC has not initiated the development of a 

management scheme for aboriginal whaling, as it has 

for commercial whaling. Efforts have been initiated 

within the U.S.IWC delegation to evaluate the 

BOWHEAD WHALE 	 subsistence whaling. This issue will atso be add 


at the 1994 IWC meeting. A current populatio 


model for the western Arctic stock of bowhead 


whales was presented at the 1993 IWC meeting. 


Also, the western Arctic bowhead whale population i 

No recovery plan for this species has been prepared, increasing, albeit at a slow rate. In May, 1991, the 

nor has a recovery team been established. The IWCs Scientific Committee estimated that the 

principal cause of the decline in bowhead whales was population was approximately 7500individuals, and 

commercial whaling. There is a prohibition on increased at a rate approaching 3percent per year 

commercial harvest dthis species. Although there is between 1978 and 1988. These estimates may have 

a limited subsistence take, the magnitude of the been optimistic as current assessments indicate an 

threat from direct takes is low. increase much closer to 15percent per year. This is 

recovery rate lower than that expected for large 

whales, and activity in the western Beaufort, aswell 

subsistence, have been implicated as inhibiting the 

maximum growth potential for this population. 

Through interagency coordination under Section 7 of 

the ESA, the speciesisprotected by ensuring that A recovery plan developed following the 1994 IWC 

Federal actions are not likely to jeopardize the meeting will be based on the latest scientific 

species. Regulations that allow a take of bowhead information, and a more significant contribution to 

whales incidental to energy exploration in the Arctic the recovery of the species. 

include requirements to monitor the effects of these 

activities on bowhead whales. Research data on the 

reaction of whales to various oil exploration noises is 

being acquired. Although a recovery plan has not 

been prepared, NMFShas supported a number of 

studies to gain basic biological information on this 

species. During 1990, an analysis of data accumulated 

between 1984 and 1990 on life history and ecology 

was initiated. In 1992 and 1993 hydroacoustical 

surveys were conducted to determine population 

At present, research on bowhead whales is 

coordinated through the NMFS Office of the Alaska 

Regional Director. Research is being conducted by 

the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission, the 

ervice, the North Slope 


.Issues that address habitat 

PLAN STAGE NONE 

PLAN APPROVED DATE: NIA 

I GRAY WKALE 

(EASTERN NORTHPACIFICJ 

No recovery plan for this species was prepared, nor 

has a recovery team been established. 

Preparation of a recovery plan for the eastern Pacific 

stock is not under consideration because the species 

appears to have fully recovered from commercial 

whaling. 

Through interagency coordination under Section 7 of 

the ESA, the species is protected from Federal 

actions that might adversely affect recovery. 

In 1993, WS published a determination that the 

eastern North Pacific stock of graywhales had 

recovered and was no longer in danger of extinction. 

In accordance with the requirements of the ESA, a 

5-year research and monitoring plan to ensure that 

the eastern North Pacific stockof gray whales is no 

longer in danger of extinction has been designed by 

NMFS. 

The following research is recommended for the £irst 

5-year monitoring plan, in order of priority: 

1)Estimation of abundance from biennial surveys (or 

other appropriate sampling period) during the 

southbound migration; 

2) Estimation of calf production during the 

northbound migration; 

3) ~etedation of potential biases in methods used 

4) Determination of trends in pregnancy rates from 

animals taken in any subsistence harvests thlat may be 

conducted by Russia on -behalf of itsnative; in 

Siberian Arctic; 

5) Estimation of the number of animals killed in any 

subsistence harvests that may be conducted by Russia 1 

on behalf of its natives in Siberian Arctic; 

6) Use of Bayesian synthesis to evaluate current status 

of the population; 

7) Determination of the degree to which 

anthropogenic factors (e.g. chemical contanlinants, 

marine noise) may compromise the viability of this 

population (including its habitat). 
I PIANSAGE:FINAL 

PIAN APPROVED DATE: 11/01/91 


I HUMPBACK WHALE 


(NORTHATLQNTIC) 


(NORTH PACIFIC) I I "MpBAcKWHALE 

During 198811989,the Humpback Whale Recovery 

Team developed a draft recovery plan, which was 

distriiuted to the public for comment in October 

1989. Comments we* received from Federal and 

state agencies, academia, scientific and environmental 

communities and the public. The recovery team 

reviewed and incorporated comments received and 

submitted a draft final plan to NMFS. The plan was 

approved and distriiuted in November of 1991. 

The major actions recommended in the plan are: 

1. Maintain and Enhance HabitatsUsed by 

Humpback Whales Currently or Historically. 

Identify and designate critical habitat. 

Examine history of occupancy and potential for 

repopulation of important habitats. 

Identify and minimize possible adverse impacts 

of human activities and pollution on important 

habitat. 

Monitor parasite bad and anthropogenic 

contaminant level in tissues of whales and their 

Prey. 

Develop Federal-state-local partnerships for 

protecting humpback whale habitats. 

cooperation to protect 

2. Identify and Reduce Direct Human-Related Injury 

and Mortality. 

Continue prohibition on commgercial hunting of 

humpback whales. 

Continue to identify sources and rates of 

human-induced inju~y and mortality and use 

information to reduce those factors (e.g. reduce 

fishing gear entanglement). 

3. Measure and Monitor Key Population Parameters. 

Estimate and re-evaluate historic population 

sizes. 

Improve current population estimates by 

evaluating and reanalyzing existing data with 

improved techniques and systematize sampling 

methods for estimating population size. 

Maintain and develop facilities for obtaining, 

archiving, and analyzing data on humpback 

whales. 

Perform new field studies on population 

dynamics. 

Assess population status and trends. 

4. Improve Administration and Coordination of 

Recovery Program for Humpback Whales. 

Improve coordination with governmental and 

non-governmental agencies. 

Appoint a recovery implementation team, 

update the recovery plan and prepare 

comprehensive work plans for each stock. 

Collect and archive available information on 

humpback whales, including translation of 

foreign literature. 

Improve process for obtaining permits to do 

research on marine mammals. 

Maintain coordination with other recovery 

programs. 
Reass, as appropriate, the goals for 

population recovery. 

Develop educational materials in support of 

recovery plan objectives. 

The plan summarizes the team's understanding of the 

status of those humpback whale populations that are 

wholly or partly under U.S. jurisdiction. It 

recommends management activities to assist these 

and other populations to increase in numbers, and 

research activities to measure rates of population 

change. It emphasizes two major waysto achieve 

population growth: (1) protection of habitats and (2) 

reduction of human activities that inteffere with 

annual liecycleprocesses. 

Specific actions necessary for the recovery of the 

species hwe been identified, and many dired 

recovery actions are being implemented. During the 

last 2year$, projects have included: maintenance of 

an ind~dbalphoto-identification system on both 

coasts so tlhat reproductive rates can be determined; a 

project to estimate abundance on the east coast; a 

project to determine genetic relationships among 

whales; and a study of habitat requirements and 

utilization. Research on the North Atlantic 

populatiom is being coordinated under an 

International research effort known as the Years of 

the North Atlantic Humpback (YONAH). 

Identification, behavioral, and genetic data have been 

collected £torn both winter mating/calving grounds 

and summer feeding grounds. Thesedata will be used 

to determine the population status, stock st~cture, 

and habitat use of humpback whales throughout the 

North Atlantic range. Analysis will directly apply to 

recovery plan goals. 

A formal %ion 7consultation on proposed Outer 

Continental Shelf Oil and Gas LeaseSale 149(Lower 

Cook Inlet and Shelikof Strait) was completed in 

October, 1993. The consultation concluded that the 

activity is mt likely to jeopardize humpback whales. 

The biological opinion recommended monitoring of 

whale activityin the area and further research on the 

species stock identification and distribution in the 

area. 

A formal S P 
ion 7consultation was initiated with 

EPA in 1993to consider the effects of discharge from 

a pulp mill in Silver Bay near Sitka. Silver Bay is an 

important feeding area for humpback whalles. The 

permit was subsequently withdrawn from 

consideration due to the closing of the pulp mill and 

.the consultation was teFminated. 

NFMScontinues to consult with the National Park 

Service regarding the impacts of vessel traf6c in 

Glacier Bay on humpback whales. A biological 

opinion prepared in 1993by the NMFS Alaska 

Region concluded that proposed numbers (ofvessel 

entries into Glacier Bay is not likely to jeopardize the 

North Pacific population of humpback whades. 

AU reported stranded humpback whales arc: receiving 

priority response by NFMS Regions in order to 

maximize the collection of biological idomlation. 

The goal of the recovery plan is to inaease humpback 

whale populations to at least 60% of either the 

number existing before commercial exploitation or 

the current environmental capacity. The intlerim goal 

is to double existing population sizes within the next 

20 years. Acceptable evidence of ongoing population 

recovery will be data showing: (1) Statistically 

signi£icant trends of population increase as 

determined by accepted analytical methods and (2) 

Statistically significant trends of population increase 

in portions of the range known to have beer1occupied 

in historical times. 
PLAN STAGE: FINAL 

PLANAPPROVED DATE: 1U01191 

NORTHERN RIGHTWHALE 

(NORTHATIMU~C) 

NORTHERNRIGHTWHALE 

(NORTH PACIFIC) 

comment in Februaryi 1990. Comments were received 

from Federal, state *d local governments, 

conservation org&tions, and private individuals. 

Appropriate comments were incorporated into the 

plan. The plan was approved and distributed in 

December of 1991. 

The major actions recommended in the plan are: 

1.Reduce or eliminate injury or mortality caused by 

Identify the causes of ship collisions with northern 

2. Reduce or eliminate injury and mortality caused by 

fisheries and fishing gear. 

Develop or modify Lhing gear to reduce the threat 

of entrapment or entanglement. 

Implement appropriate seasonal or geographic 


regulations for use of certain fishing gear in 


northern right whale habitats. 


Characterize habitats of special importance to the 


northern fight whale and protechhabitats already 


. -known to .beof special importance to the northern 


utilize their habitats. 

Identify other habitats used by the northern right 

whale and protect these newly discovered habitats. 

4. Minimize effects of vessel disturbance. 

Establish a program to improve the educational 

aspects of whale watching. 

5. Continue international ban on hunting and other 

6. Monitor the population size and trends in 

abundance of the northern right whale. 

Maintain the northern right whale 

photo-identification catalog and sighting database. 

Continue a program to monitor annual 

reproductive success. 

Design and implement other programs for 

population monitoring. 

Identify pre-exploitation population numbers for 

the western North Atlantic stock. 

Encourage development of new technology useful 

for population monitoring. 
7. Maximhe efforts to freeentangled or stranded 


northern right whales and acquire scientific 


information from dead specimens. 


Improve and maintain the system for reporting 

stranded or distressed northern right whales. 

Develop an improved program for handling live 

stranded or distressed northern right whales. 

Improve the existing program to maximize data 

collected from dead northern right whales. 

Establiih or identify funding sources for emergency 

rescue and rehabilitation efforts. 

Through +teragency coordination under Section 7of 

the ESA,northern right whales are protected from 

Federal *ions that might jeopardize the species. A 

number of the recommended recovery actions are 

being implemented through the section 7consultation 

process. Ibredge projects along the southeast coast 

are required to have obse~ers on board to watch for 

northern dight whales when the dredges are transiting 

to and from spoil dump sites. The designation of 

dump site$ are also subject to consultation, as are 

Outer Cofitinental Shelf oil and gas activities. 

A number of recovery actions identified in the final 

recovery plan have been implemented during the last 

2 years. Rlesearch has been conducted on population 

dynamics and migration patterns. The agency has 

also provided funding for the maintenance of an 

individual photo-identification system. Research has 

also been conducted on habitat requirements and 

utilization. 

NEMS hasl established a system of identifying the 

seasonal ateas of concentration of right whales in the 

Great Soujh Channel off Cape Cod, Massachusetts. 

Mariners we informed of the possibility of right whale 

and other endangered whales in the area during the 

spring months. Theyare advised to monitor NOAA 

Weather Radio and a special NFMS fishery broadcast 

frequency for updated locations provided by whale 

researcher$ and other interested boaters. NMFS has 

also estab shed a program with EPA to have right 

whale and ther endangered species tissue, obtained 

either thro gh strandings or biopsy darts, to be 'i 

analyzed for the presence of contaminants. In 

addition, NMFS has joined with nine other agencies . and organizations in a collaborative effort to mitigate 

ship strikes on right whales in their wintering and 

c_alvinggrounds in coastal waters of the southeastern 

- United States. ~rogr~corn~onents include 


education of mariners, an Early Warning Network, 


and research directed at providing informaition 


required for management decisions. 


NMFS was petitioned by the recovery team to 


designate three areas along the Eastern Seabard 


(Cape Cod Bay, Great South Channel, and the calving 


ground off the FloridalGeorgia coast) as criitical 


habitat for the northern right whale. Comments and 


further information were solicited from the public in 


July 1990. Based on the petition and ongoing 


research, NMFS proposed critical habitat for the 
 I 

northern right whaleon May 19,1993. Criti(c.1 habitat 


was designated on June 3,1994. 


Southeast Implementation Team: 


NMFS considers it imperative to protect breeding 


right whales while on the winter calving grounds off 


Georgia and Florida. Several Federal agencies are 


already participating in research and monitoring 


efforts to protect the northern right whale. The 


ACOE for example, has worked cooperativcAy with 


the United States Department of the Navy 1:o protect 


right whales on their calving grounds in the 


southeastern United States from shipstrikai during 


hopper dredging activities. NMFSconvenad a 


meeting on August 26,1993, to discuss the ~nonitoring 


program that needed to be in place prior to the arrival 


of northern right whales on their winter ground. The 


following monitoring efforts were considered 


necessary to protect whales from December through 


March at the SEUS: 


- Daily aerial surveys during the right whale calving 

season; 

- Monitoring right whale movements, and 


habitat-use by mothers and calves during the right 


whale calving season; 


- Restriction of vessel speeds when right whales are 

known to be in an area and visibiity is limited. The 

actual speed reduction necessary is defined as the 

minimum safe speed to insure the safety of the 

vessel; 

- Dedicated right whale observers that would 

accompany pilots on vessels as they enter and leave 

ports; 
During the August 26th meeting, the Southeastern 

United States Right Whale Recovery Plan 

Implementation Team was formed. The team 

consists of representbtives from the Georgia 

Department of Natural Resources (Chairman); 

Florida Department of Environmental Protection; 

NMFSBoutheast Fisheries Center and Southeast 

Regional Office; United States Navy, Naval Air 

Station, Jacksonville, Florida; United States Navy, 

Submarine Group, Qngs Bay, Georgia; Georgia Ports 

Authoriy, Canaveral Port Authority; Glynn County 

Commission, Glynn County, Georgia; University of 

Georgia; United Staw ACOE, South Atlantic 

Division; United Staqes Environmental Protection 

Agency, Port of Fe dina, Fernandina, Florida; and 

the United StatesTt Guard. At this meeting 

several committees &re established including: 

Education/Awarenes$, Early Warning 

Suweys/Communicatbn; Funding of SUNW, 

Research; and Reloc;Ction of Ocean Disposal Sites. 

A second meeting of the team occurred on December 

14,1993, and the follOwing accomplishments of the 

various committees were discussed: 

AwareneWEducat+n Committee: The Canaveral 

Port Authority had developed an endangered 

species pamphlet wvering whales, manatees and 

turtles and is being Uistributed regionally. As a 

group, the Port Authorities developed a series of 

posters descriiig the time right whales are in their 

waters, a phone number on who to contact if a 

whale is seen, and mention of right whale habitat. 

This poster is being~distributed by the harbor pilots 

when they board a vessel for navigation. 

A standard brochure on right whales in the SEUS 

is being developed with input from the Georgia 

Department of Nawral Resources (DNR), Florida 

Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), 

New England Aqu+um and others. The brochure 

isdesigned for boatkrs (commercial and public) but 

implemented a local Notice to Mariners broadcast 

about right whale calving grounds. This notice is 

broadcast four times daily by the United States 

Coast Gugrd on VHF. The hrstbroadcast was 

-bece&r.6,1993, and broadcasts will run throug 

March 31,1994. A slightly longer version is 

published in the Weekly local Notice to Mariners. 

This notice may also be published daily along with 

the tides and weather in regional newspapers. 

Several press releases have occurred, the initial 

one occurred when the first right whales were 

sighted by a Savannah River Pilot Captain on 

December 4,1993. A regional press release was 

alsoput out describing the implementation team, 

members to contact if a whale is seen, and other 

information on the need for protection of right 

whales in the SEUS. 

The University of Georgia is su~eying~localgroup 

and their right whale efforts, to ensure that there i 

no duplication in the development of educational 

materials and to provide a network to combine 

Early Warning Committee: Daily monitoring is 

ocx3urring in 1994 throughout the SEUS until 

Communications Committee-. A communication 

flow chart was developed to illustrate the 

communication network and how information 

should be distributed among the appropriate 

agenciedgroups: priorityriediate notification 

from the air, daily notification after flights,and 

weekly notification. This network is considered th 

ideal communication scheme to relay right whale 

sightings from air to land-based operations, and 

back to the vessels. It is essential to the Early 

of right whales in the SEUS. The system is upd 

Recovery Plan and Research Committee: It was 


agreed that a Right Whale research initiative for 


the southeast needed to be reconsidered and a 


meeting was scheduled for January 1994. 


Northeast Impleinentation Team: 


Recovery Plan implementation for the northern ri 

whale has been ongoing at some level within the 

NMFS, Nbrtheast Region (NER)since December 

1990, and has involved most of the key agency staff 

and scientific experts in the area. NER began 

coordinatjon with the Environmental Protection 

Agency @PA), Region I, in April 1990. The most ' 

recent M$Wl Biological Opinion (issued September 

8,1993), qnd associated conservation 

recommelbdations, make up a small part of the 

recommelbdations and programs that have been 

instituted bin= 1990 in the NER that address 

Recovery plan tasks from both plans. NMFSis 

coordinating the development of a New England 

Right WhFe and Humpback Whale Recovery Plan 

Implemenjtation Team for the Northeastern United 

States. ais team will address the possible cumulative 

impactst right and humpback whales in 

Massachu tts Bay and Cape Cod Bay from discharge 

and dispo activities. The Recovery Plans also 

recognizethat commercial fishing and large vessel 

traffic, thr ugh entanglement and ship-strike 

mortality, espectively, may potentially affect the 

recovery o protected whale species in these, and 

adjacent d. ulf of Maine, waters. These issues will also 

be addresw by this implementation team. NMFSis 

planning t$e initial Northeast Implementation Team 

meeting inllate June or early July 1994. 

Recovery Plan Research Program. 

In addition to the management (monitoring) program, 

NMFSbe* developing a 3-5 year research plan that 

will focus Qn implementing those priorities in the 

Northern lkight Whale Recovery Plan that indicate 

serious gap in our present understanding of the 

biology of the northern right whale. The current 1 	 research pqogram isthe result of several meetings 

that have rbiewed research priorities specified in the 

Recovery Rlan, and the management and research 

objectives dhat may have a potential effect on the rate 

of species mvery. One meeting took place on April 

14-15,1994, in Silver Spring; a June 18,1993, meeting 

convened i$ Brunswick, Georgia, to discuss 

implemen tion of the Northern Right Whale 

Recovery an in the southeast United States; and a 

July 16,19 3, NMFS meeting was held to review the 

Recovery P an priority one items relative to the 

implement!tion of the Recovery Plan over the next 

3-5 year pe$od. Based on these discussions, the 

following gpals were identified as priorities to be 

accomplish^ within this time period: 

of northern right whales in the northwesl. Atlantic 

through the deployment of satellite tags in the Bay 

of Fundy or Scotian Shelf may lead to the "other" 

winter ground(s); 

- 2. to determine daiIy,%cal movements within the 

wintering/calving area. Tagging with VHE; tagsin 

the SEUS could determine the daily mwements of 

these animals. This would be useful to determine a 

long-term monitoring program to reduce ship 

strikes in the SEUS; 

3. to determine where the third matriline occursin 

the summer. There are 3matrilinealstoclks of 

northern right whales that have been recognized. 

One of the stocks does not visit the Bay oE Fundy 

but is seen in the GSCand CCBduring spring. 

Satellite tagging in the GSC or CCB in the spring of 

a female from the third matriline (these have 

already been determined from mt DNA analyses 

and photoidentification) might lead to the location 

of the other summer location of northern right 

whales in the North Atlantic; 

4. to determine "bottlenecks" in the rate of 


recovery. The northern right whale has a low 


reproductive rate relative to southern henlisphere 


right whales. The possible unbreedy of mida is 


one possibility that can be determined £ro;m the 


genetidmolecular identification through mntDNA 


biopsy sampling, and sexing using molecular 


techniques; and 


5. to determine the best location and methods to 

monitor the trends (recovery) of this population. 

The longest time-series of counts is at the GSC. 

Given the variance in counts and methods that have 

been used, and the small population that we are 

studying, several questions arise: How many years 

of monitoring would be required before a trend 

could be detected, and with what level of 

confidencecanwe monitor this trend? NhlLFS 

needs to determine whether we can address the 

successor lack-of-success of the impleme~ltation of 

the recovery plan through monitoring. 

The goal of the recovery plan is to achieve the level of 

7000 animals for in the North Atlantic. The interim 

1.To det mine the wintering location(s) of most goal is to change the status from endangered to 1 f 
threatened. For the *orth Atlantic Population, this 

change would be con$idered when the following 

conditions are met: 1)The size of the North Atlantic 

population recovers + a level of 6000 animals;2) The 

population has been increasing for at least 20 years at 

a rate of 2% or more per year; and 3) An effective 

program is in place tq control known mortality factors 

and ensure that detertioration of habitat is not likely to 

occur so as to prevent the species increase. 

Due to the inherently slow rate of population increase 

and the small size of t/he population, it is likely to 

require 150years or ore for the North Atlantic 

population to achievI'a level that would permit the 

changing of the staw to threatened, and even longer 

than that for the ~odh Pacific population, 

considering its smallet estimated current population 

size. 

Specific conditions for the recovery of the North 

Pacific population ha+e not yet been set. 
Species 


Status 


C~MMONNAME GREENTURTIE 

SCIENI&KC NAME: CHELONU MYDAS 

LISTING ?ATE: 07/28/78 

SPECIES$ATUS: END~T 

SPECIES +$REWl:INCREASING 

CURRENTIXlTMATED POPULATION: UNKNOWN 

CRlTlWHABlTAT NONE DESIGNATED 

REGIONS :SER NER 

was listed as endangerweatend 

have continued to 

populations off Florida and the 

are listed as endangered while 

I 

Total popllation estimates for the green turtle are 

unavailable, and trends are particularly difficult to 

assess because of wide year-to-year fluctuations in 

numbers of nesting females, difficulties of conducting 

d, Florida, over the period 1971- ing levels have been low on other 

pulation estimates given are for 

nesting females in Florida. Populations 

d Tortuguero, Costa Rica, may be 

The recovery team for the green 

that the species status has not 

improved ;ippreciably since listing. 

cause of decline in green turtle 

commercial harvest for eggs and food. 

are used for leather and jewelry, 

shrimp trawlers is a 

adverselyaffects 

recovery. 

Adult green turtles commonly reach a size of 1m 

long and 150 kg mass. The carapaceis smooth and is 

colored grey, green, brown and black. The ]plastron is 

yellowish white. Hatchlings weigh about 25 g, and are 

about 50 mm long. Hatchlingsare black on top and 

white on the bottom. Age at sexual maturity is 

estimated at 20-50 years. 

In U.S. Atlantic waters, green turtles arefoimd 

around the U.S. VirginIslands, Puerto Ricc~, and the 

continental U.S. from Texas to Massachuseitts. 

Important feeding grounds in Florida include Indian 

River Lagoon,the Florida Keys,Florida Bay, 

Homosassa, Crystal River and Cedar Key. The 

primarynesting sites in U.S. Atlantic waters are along 

the east coast of Florida, with additional sites in the 

U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico. 

I) Impacts to nesting activities: 

A) In the Unites States, killing of nesting green 

turtles is infrequent. However, in a number of areas, 

egg poaching is common. 

B) Erosion of nesting beaches can result in koss of 

nesting habitat. 

C) Development of beachfronts results in forti£ication 
D) Beach nourishmeqt during the nesting season 

buries nests and diqbs nesting turtles. 

E) Artificial lighting 

misorientation of bo 

areas may cause problems 

aking of nesting beaches by 

t in compact sand and 

causesWe ruts 

es by humans may also 

success due to sand 

balls, balloons and plastic pellets. Effectsof 

consumption include interference in metabolism or 

gut function, even at low levels of ingestion, as well 

absorption of toxic byproducts. NMFS is currently 

aia@ingstr-anding data and avail&le necropsy 

information to determine the magnitude of debris 

C) Commercial fishing 

1) It is estimated that before the implementation o 

TEDrequirements, the offshore commercial 

shrimp fleet captured about 925green turtles a 

year, of which approximately 225would die. Most 

turtles killed are juveniles and sub-adults. Bluefish, 

croaker and flounder trawl fishing are also serious 

2) Turtles are be taken by purse seine fisheries in 

the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico, but the magnitud 

of take is currently not known. 

3) Several thousand vessels are involved in hook 

and lime fishing for various coastal species. The 

capturing of turtles is not uncommon, but the 

number is not known. 

4) Signi£icant numbers of turtles may be killed by 

gill and trammel net fisheries off the eastern coast 

of central Florida. An exact number is not known. 

5) Pound net fisheries are primarily a problem in 

waters off of Virginia and North Carolina, where 

Mles get tangled in the gear and drown. 

6) Over 330sea turtles of various types (a few of 

which were green) were captured in the Atlantic 

and Gulf of Mexico EEZin the Japanese Ma 

longline fishery from 1978-1981.Due to expansion 

of this type of fishing, it may have a significant 

impact on sea turtle recovery. The number of 

deaths is unknown. 

7) Green turtles become entangled in trap lines 

and drown. The impact on the population has not 

been determined. 

D) In areas where recreational boating and ship 
are at risk when encountering an oil 

skin, blood chemistry and salt gland 

F) Pestici es, heavy metals and PCB's have been 

detected ' turtles and eggs, but their effect is 


unknown.^ 


i 

dock development can cause foraging 

or damaged. It can also lead 

increasing the risk of 

have been caught in saltwater intake 

coastal power plants. The mortality rate of 

involved is estimated at 7%. 

explosions (e.g. gas and oil structure 

using explosives) can kill or injure 

or damage habitat. 

caught in discarded fishing gear. The 

is unknown, but is potentially 

significant 

K) Illegal arvesting of green turtles is uncommon in 

the U.S.N estimates of take exist. Illegal take of 

green turtl s in the Caribbean, particularly near 

Puerto Ri1,is a significant problem. 
I 

I 


COMMON NAME- +WKSBILLTURTLE 

S C ~ C NAME E~ETMOCHELYSIMBRIUTA

LISITNG DATE: 06/02/7 

CRlTICALHABITAT: N~NEDESIGNATED 

PRIMARYREGION NSIBLE SER 

The hawksbill turtle's has not changed since it 

or estimates are 

the continued declin 

.Weight is typically 

,with a record weight 

e about 42 mm straight 

weight from 135-195 g. 

distinguish the hawksbill 

bones of the shell are the tortiseshell of commerce. 

They are unusually thick, and overlap posteriorly on 

the carapace in all but hatchlings and very old 

individuals. Carpacid scutes are often richly 

patterned with irregularly radiating streaks of brown 

be pinkish-orange in mature individuals. The scales 

of the head and forelimbs are dark brown or black 

with sharply defined yellow borders. There are 

typically four pairs of inframarginal scales. The head 

is elongate and tapers sharply to a point. The lower 

Hawksbills utilize different habitats at different stages 

of their life cycle. Posthatchling hawksbills occupy 

the pelagic environment, taking shelter in weedlines 

that accumulate at convergence points. Hawksbills 

reenter coastal waters when they reach approximately 

20-25 cm carapace length. Coral reefs are widely 

recognized as the resident foraging habitat of 

juveniles, subadults and adults. This habitat 

association is undoubtedly related to their diet of 

sponges, which need solid substrate for attachment. 

The ledges and caves of the reef provide shelter for 

resting both during the day and night. Hawksbills are 

also found around rocky outcrops and high energy 

shoals, which are also optimum sites for sponge 

growth. Hawksbills are also known to inhabit 

mangrove-fringed bays and estuaries, particularly 

along the eastern shore of continents where coral 

reefs are absent. In Texas,juvenile hawksbills are 

associated with stone jetties. 
beaches ' tropical oceans of the world. ~oth insulk 

and mai d nesting sites are known. Hawksbills will 

nest on s all pocket beaches, and, because of their 

small bod size and great agility, can traverse £ringif;g 

reefsthat ' 't access by other species. They exhibit a 

wide tole ce for nesting substrate type. Nests are 

typicallyIp aced under vegetation. 

into the reef 

35n length would begin breeding 

required to reach 

As a result, actual age at 

The hawksbill occursin tropical and subtropical seas 

tic, Pacific and Indian Oceans. The 

ely distributed in the Caribbean Sea and 

western A1;lanticOcean,with representatives of at 

least some life history stages regularly occurring in 

southern Florida and the northern Gulf of Mexico 

Texas); in the Greater and Lesser Antilles; (especially

and along ,the Central American mainland southto 

Brazil. WiShin the United States, hawksbills are most 

common ir. Puerto Rico and its associated islands, and 

in the U.S. Virgin Islands. In the continental U.S, the 

species is recorded from all the gulfstates and from 

along the eastern seaboard as far north as 

Massachusetts, but sightings north of Florida arerare. 

reefs off Palm Beach County, where 

current passes close to shore, 

Texas is the only other state 

with any regularity. 

and juveniles. 

southeastern United States occurs 

erto Rico and the US. Virgin Islands, 

being Mona Island and Buck 

occurs on other beaches of St. 

Island, Vieques Island, 

St. John and St. Thomas. 

United States, nesting is 

he southeast coast of Florida and 

I) Impacts in the nesting environment 

- A) The greatest thrz on nesting beaches is 

poaching. Poaching of hawksbitl eggs is a.serious 

problem in Puerto Rico, and alsooccurs;at lower 

levels in St. Thomas and St. Croix. Adult females 

are stillbutchered for their tortiseshell, but the 

practice is decreasing with better enforcement. 

B) Erosion of nesting beaches canresult in lossof 


nesting habitat. However, natural processes of 


beach erosion are not generally a signi£icarnt threat. 


C) Fortification of beachfronts to protect property 

from erosion can cause the loss of a dry nesting I 

beach. It can alsoprevent females from getting to 


nesting sites and wash out nests. Beach 


nourishment buries nests and disturbsnesting 


turtles. Nourishment also results in heavy 


machinery, pipelines, inad human activity and 


artificial lighting on a project beach. This can 


create barriers for nesting sea turtles eme,rging 


from the ocean,preventing them from building 


nests, and it also disturbs nesting turtles on the 


beach. 


D) Remwal of sand for construction aggregate or 


renourishment of other beachesis a senoils threat 


throughout the Caribbean. Sand removecl from 


above the tide line is replaced very slowly hm 


subtidal areas, a process which cantake decades. 


Subtidal sand removal results in beach sand moving 


offshore. 


E) Most nesting beaches are in private hands, and 


many of these have been developed. Devt:lopment 


and landscaping of these nesting beaches cm create 


impediments for nesting turtles. In addition, exotic 


plants such as sea oats can damage or destroy nests 


through root action. 


F)Artificial lighting can cause disorientatlion or 


misorientation of both adults and hatchlin~gs. Turtle 


hatchlings are attracted to light, ignoring or coming 


out of the ocean to go towards a light source, 


increasing their chances of death or injury. In 


addition, as nesting females avoid areas with 


intense lighting, highly developed areasmay cause 


problems for turtles trying to nest. 

can result in heavy 

moving across a nest and 

as causing tire ruts which 

Rakes can penetrate 

a nest. Disposing 

nests and may 

H) The most 

compaction. 

of nighttime use of a 

nesting females. Heavy 

by humans may also 

due to sand 

vehicles on beaches is a 

areas. It may result in 

J) A variety of natu al and introduced predators 

such as hogs, mong ses, ghost crabs and ants prey 

on hawksbill eggs Id hatchlings. 

11) Impacts in the marfne environment 

magnitude of debris 

ingestion and entan 

B) Hawksbill a wide variety of debris 

and styrofoam pieces, 

in metabolism or 

C) Incidental catch ring fishing operations is an 

unquantified and po entially significant source of 

mortality. Gill nets, nglines and shrimp trawls all 

take turtles in Gulf o Mexicowaters. In Puerto 

Rico, hawksbills are ptured by a variety of fishing 

gear, including dri£tn ts, gillnets, seines and 

spearguns. Gillnets I 
 d seines are widely deployed 

and are a particularly serious problem; these nets 

are sometimes set speci6cally for turtles. 

D) In areas where recreational boating and ship 

traffic is i@ense, propeller and co_llision injuries are 

iot uncommon. 

E)In Puerto Rim, damage to coral reefs and other 

shallow water benthic systems from sedimentation 

and siltation has not been assessed as yet, but is 

known to be a serious problem in some areas, with 

some coral reefs completely destroyed by siltation. 

F)Pesticides, heavy metals and PCB's have been 

detected in turtles and eggs, but their effect is 

unknown. 

G) Raw sewage in Puerto Rim and the U.S.Virgin 

Islands has been released directly into nearshore 

waters. While a regional treatment plant has just 

been completed in Puerto Rim, monitoring has not 

been initiated. 

H) The illegal take of hawksbills at sea has not yet 

been fully quantified, but it is a continuing problem. 

I) Marine turtles are at risk when encountering an 

oil spill. Respiration, skin, blood chemistry and salt 

gland functions are affected. 

J) The hawksbill's dependence on coral reefs for 

shelter and food link its well-being to the condition 

of reefs. Destruction of reefs from vessels 

anchoring, striking or grounding is a growing 

problem. Cruiseships and yachts are destroying 

portions of coral reefs with their anchors and 

anchor chains in the USVI,Puerto Rim, the BVI 

and Cayman Islands, Belize, and elsewhere. There 

is also damage from recreational, diving and fishing 

boats anchoring indiscriminantly on reefs. 

K) International commerce in hawksbill shell 

(bekko) is the single most sigdcant factor 

endangering hawksbill populations around the 

world. Japanese imports of raw bekko between 

1970 and 1989 totaled 713,850 kg, representing 

more than 670,000 turtles; more than half the 

imports originated in the Caribbean and Latin 

America. While hawksbills are protected under 

CITES,trade continues for several reasons: 

1)Not all countries have ratified CITES; 
gnatoriesparticipate in trade by 
COMMON NAME: 


EXENlWIC NAME: 


are 34-45mm in diameter and 24-40 g in weight. 

ber of females 

Neonatal Kemp's ridleys feed on the available 

.The decline of this sargassum and associated infauna or other epipelagic 

human activities species found in the Gulf of Mexico. In post-pelagic 

stages, the ridley is largely a aab-eater, with a 

The major nesting beach for Kemp's ridleys is on the 

e ridley sea turtles are the 	 northeastern coast of Mexico. This location is near 

Rancho Nuevo in southern Tamaulipas. The species 

occursmainly in coastal areasof the Gulf of Mexico 

and the northwestern Atlantic Ocean. Adults of this 

shells are almost as long. Coloration changes 	 species are usually confined to the Gulf of Mexico, 

although adult-sized individuals are sometimes found 

on the eastern seaboard of the United States. 
I I) lmpacf in the nesting environment 

serious. Human 

increased threats to the 

of the Mexican decree 

commercial fishing 

camp at Rancho Nuevo. 

s for massive expansion of La 

m Brownsville, Texasto Barra del 

A threa resulting from management practices at 

Ranch uevo is relocating all of the nests in one 

corral t prevent poaching and predation. This 

concent ation makes the eggs more susceptible to 

reduced viablility from the manipulation, disease 

vectors f d inundation. 

11)1mpact4 in the marine environment 

ated that before the implementation 

commercial shrimp fleet killed 

mp's ridleys each year. Besides shrimp 

p's ridleys have been taken in pound 

gill nets, hook and line, crab traps, and 

trawlingby Mexican and illegal U.S.vessels 

regularly occurseach ~easo~within ad adjacent to 

the protected zone. 

- B) The Gulfof Mexico is an area of high density 

offshore oil extra&& with chronic low-level spi 

and occasional massive spills. The two p.rimary 

feeding grounds for adult Kemp's ridley ~hutles in 

the northern and southern Gulfof Mexicx, are both 

near major areas of near shore and offsh~ore oil 

exploration and production. The nesting, beach at 

Rancho Nuevo is alsovulnerable and has,been 

affected by oil spills. 

C) The vast amount of floating debris in ithe Gulf 

of Mexicoconstitutes an increasingly serious threat 

to Kemp's ridley turtles of all ages. Plastics, 

monofilament, discarded netting and many other 

waste items are either eaten by Kemp's ri~dleys or 

become death traps when the turtles become 

entangled. Injestion of plastic, rubber, fishing line 

and hooks, tar, cellophane, rope amd string, wax, 

styrofoam, charcoal, aluminum cans and cigarette 

filters has occurred in seaturtles. NMFS is. 

currently analyzing stranding data and available 

necropsy information to determine the magnitude 

of debris ingestion and entanglement. 

D) Dredging operations affect Kemp's riclley 

turtles through incidental take and by degpdiig 

the habitat. Incidental take of ridleys has been 

documented with hopper dredges. In adclition to 

direct take, channelization of the inshore and 

nearshore areas can degrade foraging andl 

migratory habitat through spoildumping, degraded 

water qualitylclarity and altered current flow. 

ban during the nesting season. Some 
USIZNG DATE: 06/02/7 

SPECIESTREND: 

UNKNOWN 

CRITICALHABITAT T 

listed as endangered 

2,1970. Nesting 

turtles are esDeciallv 

difficult to discern because the females freqiently 

change beaches. It is currently estimated that 21-100 

females nest in the U.S. Carribean, Atlantic and Gulf 

of Mexico. do not nest frequently 

to assess an accurate 

for the leatherback sea 

in the United 

Populations have ed in Malaysia, India, Sri 

Lanka, Thailand, ad, Tobago, and French 

Guiana. Habitat incidental catch in 

of eggs and flesh are 

of the leatherback. 

and black. In both adults and hatchlink the upper 

jaw bears two tooth-like projections at the 

premdary-mdary sutures. Age at sexual maturity 

is unknown. I 

I 

The leatherback turtle's range extends from Cape 

Sable, Nova Scotia, south to Puerto Rico and the U.S. 

Virgin Islands. Critical habitat for the leatherback 

includes the waters adjacent to Sandy Point, St. Croix, 

U.S. Virgin Islands, up to and inclusive of the waters 

from the hundred fathom curve shoreward to the 

level of mean high tide with boundaries at 17 42'12" N 

and 64 50'00" W. Nesting occurs from February -July 

with sites located from Georgia to the U.S. Virgin 

Islands. Duringthe summer, leatherbacks tend to be 

found along the east coast of the U.S. from the Gulf 

of Maine south to the middle of Florida 

' 1) Impacts in the nesting environment 

A) Historically, leatherback turtles were rarely 

taken for their meat. However, a few have been 

killed in recent years. In Puerto Ria, adults are 

occasionally taken for meat and oil. In addition, the 

poaching of eggs from nests continues at low levek 

in the U.S. Virgin Islands and is widespread in 

Puerto Rico. 

B) Leatherback turtles prefer to nest on open 

beaches. However, these beaches &e prone to 
causing egg loss. Nests are also lost to 

of beachfronts results in 

property Erom erosion, 

nesting beach. It can als6 

to nesting sites and 

D) Be h nourishment impacts turtles by burial of 

nests $d by disturbance to turtles. 

of both adults and hatchlings. 

to light, ignoring or coming 

towards a light source. This 

of death or injury. In 

avoid areas with 

areas may cause 

raking can result in heavy 

moving across a nest and 

as causing tire ruts which 

Rakes can penetrate 

a nest. Disposing 

nests and may 

G) The ost serious threat of nighttime use of a 

beach is he disturbance of nesting females. Heavy 

utilizati n of nesting beaches by humans may also 

result in lowered hatchling success due to sand 

compaction. 

of physical obstacles on a beach 

nesting attempts as well as 

eggs and the movement of 

off-road vehicles on beaches is a 

in many areas. It may result in 

hatchling success due to sand 

kill hatchlings. Tire mts 

the abilityof hatchlings to 

2) Impacts the marine environment 

become entangled in longlines, 

lines and other ropes and 

serious injuries and/or 

death by drowning. The setting of 'large mesh nets 

suitable for turtlingn iscommon in the waters of 

Puerto Rico. Although the practice was cautlawed in 

1984, it still continues. The nets are intended for 

- hawksbills and greentturtles, but leatherl~acks 

--.occasionally become entangled. 

B) Leatherback turtles eat a wide variety of marine 

debris such as plastic bags, plastic and styofoam 

pieces, tar balls, balloons and plastic pellets.EfEects 

of consumption include interference in n~etabolism 

or gut function, even at low levels of ingestion, as 

well as absorption of toxic byproducts. SIMFS is 

currently analyziing stranding data and available 

necropsy information to determine the magnitude 

of debris ingestion. 

C) It is estimated that before the implementation 

of TEDs, the offshore commercial shrimp fleet 

captured about 640 leatherbacks a year. Of those 

captured, approximately 160 died, and mimyothers 

were injured as a result of the difticulty of handling 

such a large animal on the deck of a shrinip boat. 

Theuseof TEDsis not expectedto reduce 

leatherback captures and mortality significantly, 

becauseTEDs are generally incapable of ]passing 

adult leatherbacks through the exit opening. 

D) Leatherbacks are vulnerable to boat u)llisions 

and strikes, particularly when in waters near shore. 

It is not known if open ocean collisions with large 

shipsoccur. 

E) Marine turtles are at risk when encountering an 

oil spill. Respiration, skin, blood chemistry and salt 

gland functions are affected. 
COMMON NAME: 

SCIENTIFICNAME: 

PULATION: UNKNOWN 

PRIMARY REGION 

in South Carolina and 

ed at an alarming rate on 

Carolina and Georgia. 

amas, Cuba, Greece, 

declining. This decline 

ncreased human use 

Adults and sub-adults have a reddish-brown carap 

Scales on the top and sides of the head and top oft 

flippers are also reddish-brown, but have yellow 

borders. The neck, shoulders and limb bases are dull 

Hatchlings are dull brown in color. Average size at 

hatching is 45 nun long; average weight is 20 g. 

Maturity is reached at 12-30years. Mating takes pl 

in late March-early June, and eggs are laid 

throughout the summer. 

The loggerhead turtle's range extends from 

are along the east coast of Florida, with additional 

I) Impacts in the nesting environment 

A) In the United States, killing of nesting loggerhead 

is infrequent. However, in a number of areas, egg 

poaching is common. 
C) Devel ment of beachfronts results in fortification B) Loggerhead turtles eat awide variety of ~rnarine 

to protect property from erosion, resulting in loss of a debrissuchas plastic bags, plastic and styrotbarn 

dry nestin beach. It can also prevent females from pieces, tar balls, balloons and raw plastic pellets. 

getting to r esting sites and wash out nests. Effects of consumption include interference in 

getabolism or gut function, even at low 1evt:ls of a

impacts turtles by burial of - - ingestion, aswell as aGrption of toxic byproducts. 

to nesting turtles. 

can cause disorientation or 

adults and hatchlings. Turtles 

or coming out of the 

increasing their 

to nest. 

raking of nesting beaches by 

in compact sand and 

or trap hatchlings. 

threat of nighttime use of a beach is the 

nesting females. Heavy utilization of 

by humans may also result in lowered 

due to sand compaction. 

of physical obstacles on a beach 

nesting attempts as well as 

eggs and the sea approach of 

hatchlings. 

off-road vehicles on beaches is a serious 

any areas. It may result in decreased 

due to sand compaction, or directly 

ruts may also interfere with the 

to get to the ocean. 

J) The inv ion of a nesting site by non-native beach 

vegetation lead to increased erosion and 

destruction of a nesting habitat. Trees shading a 

beach can so change nest temperatures, altering the 

natural sex i atio of the hatchlings. 

11)Impacts$I the marine environment 

can destroy resting or foraging habitats. 

dredges can also kill turtles caught 

NMFS is currently analyzing stranding data and 

available necropsy information to determine the 

magnitude of debris ingestion and entanglexnent. 

C)Commercial Fishing: 

1) It is estimated that before the implementiation of 

TEDs, the offshore commercial shrimp fleet killed 

between 5,000-50,000 loggerheads each year.Most 

turtles killed are juveniles and sub-adults. Inshore 

catch and mortality for shrimp trawlers is not known, 

but is thought to be significant. Bluefish, croaker and 

flounder trawl fishing are also a serious threat. 

2) Turtles are taken by purse seine fisheries iii the 

Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico, but the number is 

currently not known. 

3) Several thousand vessels are involved in hook and 

line fishing for various coastal species. The capturing 

of turtles isnot uncommon, but the number is 

currently not known. 

4) Significant numbers of turtles may be killed by gill 

and trammel net fisheries off the eastern coast of 

central Florida. An exact number is not yet known. 

5) Pound net fisheries are primarily a proble~rn in 

waters off of Virginia and North Carolina, wlhere 

turtles get tangled in the gear and drown. 

6) From 1978-1981,330 turtles were captured in the 

Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico EEZ in the Japanese 

tuna longline fishery. Due to expansion of this 

fishery, it may have a large impact on turtle r~ecovery. 

7) Loggerhead turtles are vulnerable to entanglement 

in trap fishery lines, and subsequent drowning. The . 

impact on the population has not been detenmined. 

D) In areas where recreational boating and slhip 

tra££ic is intense propeller and collision injuries are 

not uncommon. 

. .. &dalytcd SpeciesAct Bimntal Report* Stal~rqflbxway~ 
E) Sea turtles are when encountering an oil 

spill. Respiration, chemistry and salt gland 

functions are 

F)Pesticides, etals and PCB's have been 

eggs, but the effect on them is 

unknown. 

G) Marina and can cause foraging 

H) Turtles have bee in saltwater intake 

systems of coastal The mortality rate is 

estimated at 7%. 

I) Underwater explo can kill or injure turtles, 

and may destroy or 

J) The effects of offs ore lights are not known. They 

may attract hatchlin and interfere with proper 

offshore orientation, creasing the risk from 

predators. a 

discarded fishing gear. The 

but potentially 

significant. 

L) Illegal harvesting o loggerhead turtles is 

uncommon in the and Cariibean.No estimates 

I 
 of take exist. 


I 
HAWKSBUTURTLE 

ERElUOCHELYSlMBRICATA 

POPULATION: UNKNOWN 

PONSIBLE: SWR 

scutes that overlay the bones of the shell are: the 

tortiseshell of commerce. They are unusually thick, 

ot changed. The hawksbill 	 and overlap posteriorly on the carapace in allbut 

hatchlings and very old individuals. Carpacial scutes 

are often richly patterned with irregularly radiating 

streaks of brown or black on an amber background. 

The scutes of the plastron are usually clearyellow, 

with little or no dark pigmentation. The soft skin on 

al exploitation isthe major 	 the ventral side is cream or yellow, and may Ibe 

decline of the hawksbill sea 	 pinkish-orange in mature individuals. The scales of 

the head and forelimbs are dark brown or black with 

sharply defied yellow borders. There are typically 

four pairs of inframarginal scales. The head is 

elongate and tapers sharply to a point. The lower jaw 

reached regarding this Hawksbills utilize different habitats at different stages 

reenter coastal waters when they reach approximately 

20 to 25 cm carapacelength. Coral reefs are widely 

recognized as the resident foraging habitat of 

juveniles, subadults and adults. This habitat 

association is undoubtably related to their diet of 

sponges, organisms which need solid substrate for 

attachment. The ledges and caves of the reelf provide 

shelter for resting both during the day and niight. 

Hawksbills are also found around rocky outcrops and 

turtles: two pairs of high energy shoals, which are alsooptimumsitesfor 

mangrove-fringed bays and estuaries, particularly in 

areas where coral reefs are absent. 
e known. Hawksbiis will 

and, because of their 

a result, actual age at 

Molokai. Two 

nesting beach. It can also 

tting to nesting sites and 

wash out nests. 

renourishment of other beaches is a serious threat 

to hawksbill turtles. Sand removed from above 

removal results in beach sand moving offshore. 

E) When nesting beaches are in private hands, th 

may become hotel sites. Development and 

landscaping of these nesting beaches can create 

plants such as sea oats can damage or destroy nes 

through root action. 

I?) Artificial lighting can cause disorientation or 

misorientation of both adults and hatchlings. 

Turtles are attracted to light, ignoring or coming 

out of the ocean to go towards a light source, 

increasing their chances of death or injury.In 

addition, as nesting females avoid areas with 

intense lighting, highly developed areas may cause 

problems for turtles trying to nest. 

G) Mechanical raking can result in heavy 

machinery repeatedly moving across a nest and 

of debris on the high beach can cover nests and m 

alter nest temperature. 

H) The most serious threat of nighttime use of a 

beach is the disturbance of nesting females. Heavy 

utilization of nesting beaches by humans may also 

result in lowered hatchling success due to sand 

I) The use of off-road vehicles on beaches is a 

serious problem in many areas. It may result in 

decreased hatchling successs due to sand 

compaction, or directly kill hatchlings. Tireruts 

J) A variety of natural and introduced predators 

such as hogs, mongooses, ghost crabs and ants pr 

on hawksbill eggs and hatchlings. 
I 11)lmpaf in the marine environment 	 K) International commerce in hawksbill shell 

to which hawksbills are killed or 

becoming entangled in marine 

but it isbelieved to be a 

problem. -Hawksbills have - in monofilament gill nets, 

turtles eat a wide variety of marine 

plastic bags, plastic and styrofoam 

balloons and raw plastic pellets. 

include interference in 

even at low levels of 

of toxic byprodu~ts. 

catch during fishing activities is an 

and potentially significant source of 

and shrimp trawls all 

where recreational boating and ship 

propellor and collision injuries are 

to coral reefs and other shallow water 

as yet, but is known to be a 

heavy metals and PCB's have been 

and eggs, but their effect is 

take of hawksbills at sea has not yet 

but it is a continuing problem. 

turtles are at risk when encountering an 

skin, blood chemistry and salt 

endence on coral reefs for 

s well-being to the condition 

h their anchors and 

,diving and fishing boats 

@ekko) isthe single most significant £actor 


endangering hawksbill populations arowld the 


world. Japanese imports of raw bekko be:tween 


1970and 1989 totaled_ 713,85Okg, rep-nting 


-	 more than 670,000 Mles;more than hallf the 

importsoriginated in the Caribbean and Latin 

America. While hawksbills are protected under 

CITES, trade continues for several reasons: 

1)Not all countries have ratified CITES; 

2) Some treaty signatories participate intradeby 

falsmg documents of origin; 

3) Some treaty signatories ignore the treaty and 

trade openly in hawksbills and hawksbilll 

products; and 

4) Some treaty signatories have exercised their 

right to take exemption to treaty provis,ions as 

they affect seaturtles. 

L) In nearshore waters, hawksb'i are periodically 

capturedin the cooling water intakesof industrial 

facilities. 
COMMON NAME: 

SCIENTIFIC NAME: 

LI-G DATE: 06 

SPECIESTREND: 

POPULATION: UNKNOWN 

curved carapace length 

axillary-maxillary sutures. 

only seen by fishermenin 

1)Impacts in the nesting environment 

A) HistoricaJly, leatherback Mles were taken only 

rarely for their meat. however, a few have been 

killed in recent years. 

B) Leatherback turtles prefer to nest on open 

beaches. However, these beaches are prone to 

erosion, causing egg loss. 

C) Development of beachfronts result in 

fortification to protect property from erosion, 

resulting in loss of a dry nesting beach. It canalso 

prevent females from getting to nesting sites and 

wash out nests. 

D) Beach nourishment impacts turtles by burial of 

nests and by disturbance to nesting turtles. 

E) Artificial lights can cause disorientation or 

misorentation of both adults and hatchlings. Turtles 

are attracted to light, ignoring or coming out of the 

ocean to go towards a light source, increasing their 

chances of death or injury. In adddition, as nesting 

females avoid areas with intense lighting, highly 

developed areas may cause problems for turtles 

F)Mechanical raking can result in heavy 

machinery repeatedly moving across a nest and 

compacting sand as well as causing tire rutswhich 

may hinder or trap hatchlings. Rakescanpenetrate 

the surface and disturb or uncover a nest. Disposing 
the high beach can cover nests and may 

G) The most serious threat of nighttime use of a 

beach i the disturbance of nesting females. Heavy 

utilizati n of nesting beaches by humans may also 

result ' lowered hatchling success due to sand 

compion. 

H)The lacement of physical obstacles on a beach 

can h per or deter nesting attempts as well as 

interfer with incubating eggs and hatchlings 

movmeft to the sea. 

of off-road vehicles on beaches is a 

in many areas. It may result in 

hatchling success due to sand 

kill hatchlings. Tire ruts 

the ability of hatchlings to 

2) 1mpadsl1in the marine environment 

become entangled in longlines, 

lines and other ropes and 

serious injuries and/or 

B) Leat erback turtles eat a wide variety of debris 

items su h as plastic bags, plastic and styrofoam 

balls, balloons and raw plastic pellets. 

Effects o consumtion include interference in 

metaboli m or gut function, even at low levels of 

ingestion pi- \ as well as absorption of toxic byproducts. 

C) Leath rbacks are vulnerable to boat collisions 

and strik particularly when in waters near shore. 

It is not own if open ocean collisions with large 

shipsi 

are at risk when encountering an 

skin, blood chemistry and salt 

heavy metals and PCB's have been 

and eggs, but the effect on the 
COMMON NAME 

SCIENTIFICNAME: 

SPECIESTREND: 

PRIMARY REGION NSIBLE. SWR 

resulting in loss of a dry nesting beach. It can also 

only reach a size of 1m 	 prevent females from getting to nesting sites and 

wash out nests. 

weigh about 25 g, and are 	 D) Beach nourishment impacts turtles by burial of 

nests and by disturbance to nesting turtles. 

E) Artificial lighting can cause disorientation or 

misorentation of both adults and hatchlings. Turtl 

ocean to go towards a light source, increasing their 

chances of death or injury. In adddition, as nesting 

females avoid areas with intense lighting, highly 

developed areas with bright lighting may cause 

problems for turtles trying to nest. 

F)Mechanical raking can result in heavy 

machinery repeatedly moving across a nest and 

of debris on the high beach can cover nests 

alter nest temperature. 

G) The most serious threat of nighttime use of a 

beach is the disturbance of nesting females. Heavy 

utilization of nesting beaches by humans may also 

result in lowered hatchling success due to sand 

H)The placement of physical obstacles on a beach 

can hamper or deter nesting attempts as well as 

interfere with incubating eggs and the sea approac 

Y-2 
of off-road vehicles on beaches is a . in many areas. It may result in 

hatchling successs due to sand 

kill hatchlings. Tire ruts 

the ability of hatchlings to 

get to thb ocean. 

habitat. Trees shading a 

11) 1mpact4 in the marine environment 

A) Dred 'ng can result in habitat destruction by 

disrupt' g resting or foraging grounds. The use of 

hopper redges can also kill turtles caught in 

draghefs. 

eat a wide variety of debris items 

plastic and styrofoam pieces, 

ingestion, as well 

C!)In Trrerecreational boating and ship 

traffic is tense propeller and collision injuries are 

not unco 

turtles are at risk when encountering an 

skin, blood chemistry and salt 

heavy metals and pcb's have been 

and eggs, but the effect on them 

dock development can cause 

to be destroyed or damaged. It also 

boat traffic, increasing the risk of 

G) Unde ater explosives can kill or injure turtles, 

and may testroy or damage habitat. 

of offshore lights are not known. 

hatchlings and interfere with 

increasing the risk 

1) Turtles get caught in discarded fishing gear.The 

number affected is unknown, but potentially 

significant. 

J) Illegal harvesting o*een turtlesis uncommon 

in the U.S. and Caribbean. No estimates o:E take 

exist. 
CQMMON NAME: 

SCIENTIFICNAME YS OLWACEA 

LISTING DATE0 

ON: UNKNOWN 

CRITICALHABITAT 

PRIMARY REGION NSIBLE: SWR 

" and threatened for 

ador and mixwith 

for international 

hinner shell, and a 

greater variation in the number of scutes. Other 

characteristicsaretwo pairs of prefrontal scales,a 

pore near the rear of the plates bordering the upper 

and lower shells, and shell plates that do not overlap. 

The shell is heart-shaped to round, and may be 

adult male's tail extends some distance beyond the 

rear edge of the shell. Males also have one of two 

claws on each forelimb enlarged and strongly curved. 

Olive ridleys may be long-lived in the wild, but the 

exact lifespan isnot known. At sexualmaturity, which 

likely takes at least 7-9years in wild populations, the 

shell usually is about 60-65 cm long and the turtle 

weighs about 36 kg. 

Prey includes pelagic crabs, jellylish and tunicates. 

Nesting usually occurs in aggregations called 

arribadas (meaning arrival)on mainland beaches at 

night. Specific nesting times vary with location, 

occurringyear round in Costa Rica, from 

June-August in Pacific Mexico,and from 

September-November in other areas of the eastern 

Pacific. Females usually nest in intervals ranging 

from 14to 48 days, depositing 2-3clutchesof eggs. 

Mean clutch size varies between 105-116 eggs which 

take 50-70 days to hatch. Hatchlings emerge at any 

time and make their way to the ocean. 
Ocean,the main foraging areasare 

and Mexim, along the northern 

es, heavy metals and PCB's have been 

turtles and eggs, but the effect on them is 

are at risk when encountering an oil 

skin, blood chemistry and salt gland 

turtleseat awide variety of marine 

at low levels of 

toxic byproducts. 

where recreational boating and ship 

propeller and collision injuries are 

not unconirnon. 
COMMON NAME: 


SCENTFIC NAME: 


POPULATION: UNKNOWN 

PRIMARY REGION PONSIBLESWR 

-IONS -7wR 

The loggerhead sea turtle is characterized by typically 

5 pairs of lateral sates, the anterior-most one 

rtebral scutes broader than 

inframarginals on the bridge. 

becomes smoother with age. 

of the carapaceisserrated 

live brown, often with 

.Limbsand tail are dark 

dish or olive brown. 

150kg. Adult femal 

inhabiting continental 

in temperate, 

Little to no commercial exploitation of loggerhead 

turtles has occured in the Pacific Ocean. Loggerhead 

turtles were the most commonly caught sea turtle in 

pelagic driftnet fishing in the north Pacific,but with 

international agreements to stop driftnetting, this is 

no longer a major issue. Available evidence also 

indicates that loggerheads arethe most common 

turtle hooked by pelagic longlining. 
SPECIES :NIA 

PRIMARY ION RESPONSIBlJ3 SWR I RmIoNs L:swR 

k salmon in the Sacramento River, 

and distinguishable from the 

of chinook salmon in the river based 

their upstream migration and 

the most part, the winter-run 

population is comprised of three 

return to spawn as 3-year-old fish. 

the winter-run chinook 

be listed as threatened under the ESA 

n has declined more than 97% over a 

than 20 years. From 1967 through 

run size was about 84,000 fish; in 1982 

the average wasabout 2,000 fish. In 

salmon returned to the river; in 1990, 

around 450 fish; in 1991,191 fish 

fish returned; and in 1993,341 

returned. 

primarily due to water 

which have modified the river 

water diversion which 

d hatch in ab&t 2 months. 1f thewater 

is too high (especially during the peak 

hatching months of July through 

hatch. Juveniles migrate 

into the spring months. Water 

management actions such 

diversion facilities canbe 

Adult fish begin 

ercial and 

recreational fishing for other sp&es of &,on. 

On January 4,1994, NMFSissued a determination 

that the Sacramento River winter-run chinook salmon 

shouldbe reclassified from threatened to endangered 

(59 FR 440). This determination was based on the 

continued decline and increased variability of run 

sizes since its first listing as threatened in 1989, the 

expectation of weak returns in certain years as the 

result of two small year classes (1991 and 1993) and 

continuing threats to the w~ulation. 

The chinook salmon is noted for the black spotting on 

back, dorsal fin, and both lobes of caudal £in,black 

pigment along the basesof the teeth and lease conical 

teeth in mature individuals. Salmon over 14 kg are 

likely to be chinooks. 

The Sacramento River winter-run chinook salmon 

spawns in the upper Sacramento River primarily 

between Red Bluff Diversion Dam and Kmvick Dam 

from late April to mid-August. The juveniles emerge 

in late June through September, beginning their 

downstream migration within several weeks of 

hatching. 

The distribution of Sacramento River winter-run 

chinook salmon has been dramatically reduced to a 

portion of its former range. The oonstructio~n of 

Shasta and Keswick Dams blocked access to all of the 
on their way to spawning 

the timing of their run 

of the chinooksalmon fishery, 

to threaten this species. 

winter-run chinoo 

Predators include 
SPECIES 


I REGIONS 

NAME: ONCORHIUCHUS MWi7XCHA 

:UNKNOWN 

UNKNO 

the Snake River probably exceeded 15 

chinook salmon for some years 

from 1950 to 1960 

Dam averaged 9,674 from 1980 to 

in 1980, high of 21,870 in 1988). 

return on record of jack spring 

salmon to Lower Granite Dam 

to 2,451 in 1989), adult and 

to drop considerably over 

ed for the black spotting on 

h lobes of caudal fin,black 

of the teeth and loose conical 

.Salmon over 14 kg are 

k. Snake River springlsummer 

rearing. They migrate to 

-type). Detailed life 

ion is available. In these two 

with higher fecundity 

ate in other areas. Adult 

enter the Columbia River in 

late April, arrive in natal tributaries in May imd June, 

hold in deep pools, and spawn in late ~u&t. Adult 

summer-run chinook reach the Snake River in June 

and July, arrive in natal tributaries by earlyJuly, and 

spawn in early September. 

Snake River springlsummer chinook spawn iii the 

many streams associated with the large, complex 

Clearwater, Grande Ronde, and Salmon Rivers and in 

the mainstem of the Tucannon and Imnaha :Rivers, as 

well as in Asotin, Granite, and Sheep Creeks 

(between Lower Granite and Hells Canyon Dams). 

1) Overfishing for chinook salmon in the late 1800's 

contributed significantly to the population decline. 

2) Hydropower development has resulted in the 

following: blockage and inundation of habitat; 

turbine-related mortality of juvenile fish., increased 

delay of juvenile migration through the Snake and 

Columbia rivers; increased predation on juvenile 

salmon in reservoirs, and increased delay of idults 

migrating to spawning grounds. Water withclrawal 

and storage, irrigation diversions, siltation and 

pollution from sewage, farming, grazing, logging, and 

mining have also degraded the Snake River 

springlsummer chinook salmon habitat. 

3) Current ocean and river harvest levels have been 

greatly curtailed in the commercial, recreational, and 

tribal fisheries due to low escapements and efforts to 
protect these runs. majority of current harvest 

4) The impacts of 

and parasitic 

is unknown. 

suxvival are the principal 

contributed to 

salmon production. 

disease. 
MATED POPULATION: UNKNO 

The distribution of Snake River fallchinook salmon 

has been dramatically reduced to a portion of its 

former range. The construction of Brownlee (1958), 

Oxbow (1961), and Hells Canyon (1967) Dams 

inindated spawning habitat and prevented iuesto 

r of fall chinook salmon redds the primary production areasof Snake River fall 

chinook salmon. 

7 through 1992 were 66,57,58,37,32, 

1) Hydropower development has resulted irl the 

following: blockage and inundation of habitat; 

spawning grounds. Water withdrawal and storage, 

irrigation diversions, siltation and pollution from 

sewage, farming, grazing, logging, and mining have 

also degraded the Snake River salmon habitat. 

Dam Reservoir to Hells Canyon Dam 2) Current ocean and river harvest levels ha,= been 

and the lower reaches of the Imnaha, curtailed in the commercial, recreational, and tribal 

fisheries due to low escapements and efforts to 

protect these runs. The majority of current harvest 

occursin the Columbia River net fisheries. 

3) The impacts of potential bacterial, proto.zoan, viral, 

and parasitic organisms on Snake River fall chinook 
salmon are largely Predators include the 

northern mammals such as 

the decline of 

is unknown. 

survival are the principal 

contributed to reduced 

The taking of Snake 

broodstock has 
SPECIES :UNKNOWN 

CRITICAL PROPOSED 

ms to Redfish Lake were 1,0,4,1, and 8 in 

,1991,1992 and 1993, respectively. NFMS 

kokanee salmon in ~edfishLake to be 

River sockeye salmon population 

This residual population shares 

salmon (anadromous) and kokanee 

are distinguished from other 

28 to 40 long, slender, closely 

first arch, by the few pyloric 

speckling on the back. 

and sockeye salmon do 

not differ. ~ature kokanee are gener& smaller 

than sockeye salmon; the usual length is 20 to 23 cm, 

although individuals as large as 53cm have been 

reported f r some lakes. A typical 

4-year-old lumbia River sockeye is 51 crn long and 

weighs 1.7 g. Fork length of most sockeye salmon 

measured t Redfish Lake Creek Weir ranged from 

I 

48 to 64 P 

arrive at Redfish Lake in July and 

spawn on the beach areas during 

r, and then die. Fecundity in 

upon the size of the female, ranging 

6 eggs per female. Sockeye fry 

avel in early spring (April and 

in Redfish Lake remain in the 

ars,migrate out to sea, and 

v I 

reside in the ocean for two to three years before 

returning to spawn. I 

Sockeye salmon are found along the North American 

coastline from the Klamath River in Califonnia to the 

Yukon in Alaska but occur in considerableruunbers 

only from the Columbia River north to Brisl:ol Bay in 

Alaska. Along the coast of the eastern Pacific they 

are reported from Cape Chaplina in the northern part 

of the Bering Sea southward around the Kiunchatka 

peninsula to the northern shore of the Okhc~tskSea. I 

The only remaining population of Snake River 

sockeye salmon spawns in Redfish Lake, whiich is 

located near the head of the middle fork of the 

Salmon River. Adults of this population travel a 

greater distance from the sea (almost 900 miies) and 

to a higher elevation (6,500 feet) than adults,of any 

other population. 

1)Hydropower development has resulted in blockage 

of habitat, turbine-related mortality of juvenile fish, 

delay of juvenile migration through the Snake and 

Columbia rivers, increased predation on juvt:nile 

salmon due to residualism in reservoirs and increased 

predator populations due to ideal foraging areas 

created by impoundments, and delay of adultson 

their way to spawning grounds. Water withdrawal and 

storage and irrigation diversions and blockage of 

habitat for purposes such as agriculture have: also 

contributed to the destruction of Snake River sockeye 

salmon habitat. 
recreational harvest 

isno information -

as harbor seals and rnia sea lions. The extent to 

Snake River sockeye 

salmon production. no direct evidence that 

the rivers, estuary and 

h sockeye salmon for 
AME: GULFSIWRGEON 


NAME: ACLPENSER OXYRYNCHUSDESOTOI 


SPECIES :NIA 


UNKNOWN 


I CnrnCAL TAT NONE DESIGNATED 

I I 


PRIMARYREGION RESPONSIBLE: SER 


REGIONSkWFNTED: SER 


and suwa""ee River systems, with adults returning to 

the same river systems in which they hatched I
in order 

;g~~g~j;$~$;g;g#i;$@~jjIj; 

.:.:?:.x:i.:.:.;:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.*:2m:*::: ..................

.............................................................................


............................... %.........................................................................................
 ............i..i

:?;:;:;:;:;:;:;

..........................
 :::;:;;:I :;:;:;:3;.;:M .; ............. :.:.:.:.:<.:.:.:.:.:..; :,:.....:.Y;...:.:.:.:.:.:.
 ....
 ........................ ......_ ............... 
 .......................................... 


I .... 

to breed. 

The Gulf sturgeon, also known asthe Gulf of Mexico 

sturgeon, is a subspecies of the Atlantic sturgeon. It is 

a large fish with an extended snout, vertical mouth, 

and with the upper lobe of the tail 

lower. Adults are 180 to 240 cm in 

femaies larger than adult males. 

brown dorsally and pale 

with 5 rows of bony plates. 

bottom feeders, eating primarily 

including brachiopods, insect larvae, 

and crustaceans. Gulf sturgeon are 

reproduction occurring in fresh 

feeding takes place in the Gulf of 

to breed in the river system in which 

is believed to occur in areas 

(rock, gravel or sand) 

and adhere in clumps or 

or other clean surfaces. 

the ages of 8 and 

the Gulf sturgeon occurred from the 

The fish is essentially 

The Gulf sturgeon formerly ranged from the 

Mississippi River eastward to the Tampa Bay area on 

the west coast of Florida Three major rivers (the 

Pearl in Mississippi, the Alabama in Alabama, and the 

Appalachicola in Florida) within the range cdthe Gulf 

sturgeon have been dammed, preventing us: of 

upstream areas for spawning. The Gulf sturgeon is 

apparently unable to pass through dam systt:ms. 

In addition to the structures preventing GulK sturgeon 

from reaching spawning areas, dredging, damagging, 

and spoil deposition carried out in connection with 

channel improvement and maintenance rep:resent a 

threat to the Gulf sturgeon. Although precjise 

spawning areas are not known, indications are that 

deep holes and rock surfacesare important for 

spawning. Modification of such features, especially in 

rivers in which upstream migration is limited by dams, 

could further jeopardize the reduced stocks of the 

Gulf sturgeon. 
ScENTETC NAME 

LISI'ING DATE: 0311116 

SPECIESSTATUS: 

SPECIESTREND: 

delisting the sturgeon because the population 

the Connecticut, Hudson and Delaware Rivers, 

NMFS recommended listing asthreatened (rather 

rivers, NMFS recommended maintaining the 

The sturgeon family is among the most primitive of 

and Wildlife Service the bony fishes. The shortnose sturgeon shares the 

from the rivers 

existence. The body surface contains five rows of 

bony plates or scutes. Sturgeon are large, long-lived 

fish that inhabit a great diversity of riverine habitat. 

Sturgeon are found from the fast-moving freshwater 

riverine environment downstream and, for some 

species, into the offshore marine environment of the 

continental shelf. 

ad enough information on The shortnose sturgeon is the smallest of the three 

northern rivers to 
with the fastest growth occurring among 

Maximum known age is 67 

seldom exceed 30 years 

adults is 1:lbut 

(41)for fish 

New York, and at age 10to 11in 

,Canada. Females hiit a similar 

feeders. Juveniles are 

and crustaceans. 

crustaceans are the primary food 

se sturgeon is anadromous, living mainly 

moving rive~e waters or nearshore 

and migrating periodically into faster 

areasto spawn. One partially 

is known in the Holyoke Pool, 

another landlocked group may 

the Santee River in South 

Carolina. 

in most major river systems 

seaboard of the United States. In 

the range, shortnose sturgeon are found in the 

Delaware River from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to 

Trenton, New Jew, the Hudson River in New York; 

the Connecticut River; the lower Merrimack River in 

Massachusetts and the Pjscataqua River in New 

-Hampshire; the Ke~ebec River in Maine; and the St. 

John River in New Brunswick, Canada.Data are 

lacking for the Chesepeake Bay area. 

Construction of dams and pollution of many large 

northeastern river systems during the period1 of 

industrial growth in the late 1800's and early 1900's 

may have resulted in substantial loss of suitable 

habitat. In addition, habitat alterations from 

discharges, dredging or disposal of material into 

rivers, or related development activities involving 

estuarine/riverine mudflats and marshes, remain 

constantthreats. 

Commercial exploitation of shortnose sturgeon 

occurred throughout its range starting in colonial 

times and continued periodically into the 1950's. 
COMMON NAME: 

LISTING DATE:11/23/76 


SPECIESTREND:DEC 


I PRIMARYREGION RES 

REGIONS S 

SPECIESPOPULATIO~STATUS. ..::::: . . . . . . .. . . 

.. . 

I 

The Hawaiian monk 

throughout its range 

have been made acthe 

they haul out in the no 

the late 1950s. NMFS 

I made in 1957-58. 

and Lisianski Islands. 

Atoll, Pearl and 

The Hawaiian monk 

. . 

was listed as endangered 

23,1976. Counts 

islands and reefswhere 

Hawaiian Islandssince 

that there are less 

the mid-to-late 

he near future 

Reef, Lisianski Island, 

currentlyfound 

Hawaiian Islands 

MidwayIslands, 

Island, French Frigate Shoals, Gardner Pinnacles, 

Necker Island and Nihoa Island. These islands form a 1 

chain approximately1840km long. Hawaiian monk 

seals are also occasionallyfound in the main 

Hawaiian islands. 

Factorswhich threaten the persistence and recovery 

of monk seal populations includedisturbanceby 

human activities,interactionswith fisheries, mobbing 

mortality at certain locations, and shark predation. 

Although not directly responsiblefor monk seal 

mortality, human activityon beaches, even at low 

levels,can buse monk sealsto abandon haul-out 

areas. Such disturbance is particularlydisruptiveto 

mother-puppairs, and can forcefemalesto pup at 

suboptimalsites. 

Interactionswith activefisheries also pose a threat. 

Bottomfish, longline, and lobster fisheries have all 

directly affected monk seals. Indirectly,fisheriesmay 

affectsealsthrough competition for prey or 

entanglementin fisheriesdebris, such aslostor 

discarded net and line. 

Mortality due to mobbing attackson adult and 

immaturefemalesis preventingthe recovery of the 

Laysan and Lisianskipopulations. Attacksby adult 

males result in known (minimum)deathsof up to 10 

or 11seals annuallyat LaysanIsland alone, roughly 

four percent of this island population. 

Monk seals have been found dead with apparent 

shark-inflicted wounds, and sharkshave been 

observed feeding on dead seals. Seals also have been 

sighted with all or part of an appendage missing, and 
harks. Hence,sharks contribute to monk 

ty,but their impact is probably not 
COMMON NAME: 

SCIENTIFIC NAME: 

SPECIESTREND: 


PRlMARY REGION 

Species abundance estimates during the late 1970s 

ranged from 248,000 to 300,000 adult and juvenile 

animals. However, counts at rookeries and haulout 

its range on December 4, sites throughout most of Alaska and the USSR in 

50 Steller sea lion 	 Steller sea lions are the largest otariid and show 

haulout sites have 	 marked sexual dimorphism with adult males larger 

than adult. females. The average length is 282 cm for 

adult males and 228 cm for adult females. Average 

adult weight is566 kg for males and 263 kg for 

females. Pelage is light buff to reddish brown and 

slightly darker on the chest and abdomen. Naked 

parts of the skin are black. Adult males have long, 

coarse hair on the chest, shoulders and back; the 

chest and neck are massive and muscular. Newborn 

pups are about 1m long, weigh 16-23 kg and have a 

thick, dark brown coat that molts to lighter brown 

after 6 months. Steller sea lions are polygamous, 

to 25,000 animals. dicates a decline of about 	 gregarious, and use traditional territorial sites for 

breeding and resting. The breeding season extends 

from late May to early July. Female sexual maturity is 

reached between 3 and 6 years. Males reach sexual 

maturity between 3and 7years, and reach physical 

Kenai-Kiska index 	 maturity at age 10. 

These data indicat the Steller sea lion 	 The Steller sea lion's range extends around the North 

Pacific Ocean rim from the Kuril Islands and Okhotsk 
the Aleutian Islands and Southern 

Alaska's southern coast and south 

large rookeries are in the Gulf of 

been gathered during the 

is poorly knh. 

I 1.~aturqimpacts 

Steller sea lions are preyed upon by 

there is no evidence to suggest that 

of predation is a significant factor in 

research to assess the nature 

in sea lions. 

C.Ch ges in physical factors might affect the 

suitab' ty of the environment for Steller sea lions. 

Enviro ental changes could have an effect on 

food su ply, adversely affecting survival and 

produf~tyof sea lions. 

11.~umdimpacts 

ugh commercial hunting had a major 

past, there has been no commercial 

natives have iconducted n the past and 

C App oximately 20,000 sea lions were taken 

inciden al to fishery activity between 1966-88. 

Since mid-1980's, the level of incidental take of 

Steller a lions in commercial fisheries has been 

greatly educed. Since 1990, NMFS estimates that 

inciden take in Alaska fisheries has been less 

than 30 lions per year. In addition, some sea 

lions we e shot deliberately by fishermen, who 

though he animals were interfering with their 

catch. e magnitude of this intentional taking is 

not kno ;shooting at sea lions has been 

prohibit i since the 1990 threatened species listing. 

D. Commercial fisheries hamest several species 

that sea lions rely upon for food. However, 

limitations of data and models make it difficult to 

determineiffisheries have had an effect on sea Lion -

,populations. e 

E. There have been few analyses of Stellea sea lion 

tissue to determine levels of organochloride 

pollutants. Preliminary results indicate that current 

levels of contaminants in Alaskan Steller sea lions 

are generally low. 

EWhile sea lions have been sighted entangled in 

packing bands and net fragments, it is a r,are 

occurrence, and it is unlikely this is a major factor 

in the population decline. 

G. The possible impacts on Steller sea lions of 

varioustypesof disturbance have not been 

specifically studied. They include wildlife: tourism, 

fisheries, and timber harvest. Deve1opmc:nt of 

outer continental shelf oil, gas and mineral 

resources may result in substantial amow~ts of off, 

on and near-shore activity that could result in 

disturbance having subtle but significant ceffects on 

the population. 
COMMON NAME: 

scrENTmc NAME: 

SPECIESSTATUS: 

ULATION: 7800 

these areas in recent years 

increased since 

ut 1914.Ice-based 

census sightings data 

bowhead whales 

whales struck bu 

long) of any baleen whale. The 

Bering Sea near the ice edge, and its summers in the 

Beaufort Sea between Point Barrow and Mackenzie 

Bay. Thebowhead gives biih to a single calfafter 

gestation of about one year. The female probably 

gives birth evely 3to 6 years.Although the age at 

sexual maturity is unknown for males, it appears to 

6 to 8years for females. C!gperiod is 

The Western Arctic stock contains the majority of th 

world's bowhead whales. Five stocks or populations 

existed at one time. One is thought to be extinct 

(Spitsbergen-East Greenland) and three others 

appear to exist in very low numbers (Davis 

Strait-Baffin Bay; Hudson Bay-Foxe Basin; Okhotsk 

Sea). The Western Arctic bowhead whale is thought 

to spend winter in the southwestern Bering Sea, near 

the ice edge, and summer feeding and calving in the 

Beaufort Sea off the coast of Canada and Alaska 

During the spring (usually beginning in April), 

bowhead whales migrate from the Bering Sea thro 

the Bering Strait into the Chukchi Sea (Arctic 

Ocean); then they follow the nearshore lead around 

Point Barrow to the Beaufort Sea area west of Banks 

Island and north of Mackenzie Bay.In September as 

the Arctic Ocean starts freezing up, they begin their 

return migration to the Bering Sea. The animals 

migrate westward from Mackenzie Bay past Kaktovik 

to Point Barrow and then proceed westward as far as 
I sland before returning south to the Bering 

from subsistence hunting and 

d gas development. The initial stock 

By the end of the commercial 

$,the numbers were at 600-1000. 

ercial whaling the numbers 

very slowly, with present estimated 

Western Arctic stock thought to be 

hough the commercial 

is species is prohibited, there is a limited 

ake by Alaskan Eskimos. The magnitude 

from thesedirect takes is low. Offshore 

thin its range may present 

ions that allow a 

ic include requirements 

ffectsof these activities on bowhead 

h data on the reactions of whales to 

various oil exploration noises isbeing acquired. 
LISTJNG DATE: MIOW0 

I CRITICALHABITAT N NE DESIGNATED P 

SPEClESFOPULATXON STATUS 

The gray whale was as endangered throughout 

its range on June Two stocks of gray whales 

stock of gray whales 

severely depleted. 

stock of gray 

I 2532% per year. stock has increased in spite of 

direct competition humans for coastal habitat, 

and a subsistence of 167 whales per year (5,006 

total) by the Soviet U

Y.on during the past 30 years. 

NMFS published a of Determination to delist 

the gray whale on 7,1993 (58 FR 3121). The 

U.S. Fish and published the final 

meters in length. 

cetaceans, are a 

Conception occurs on /the southward migration with a 

- I

I 

3-week period centering on 5 December. After a 

418day gestation period, calving takes place every 1 

two usually within a 5-6 week period centering 

on 27 January. Weaning occurs in approximately 7 

months. Gray whales reach sexual maturity at about 8 

years (5-11 years). 

While feeding on benthic amphipods occurs 

predominantly in waters off Alaska, opportunistic 

feeding on pelagic organisms and in the kelp beds also 

occurs at other times of the year. 

I 	 Each yearin the Eastern Pacific,gray whales 

undertake a 20,000 km trip between their feeding and 

breeding areas, the longest migration of any mammal. 

After 4 summer months in the Bering and Chukchi 

seas, the move south begins in late September and 

early October with females leading the way 

and other adults and yearlings following. They cross 

the Gulf of Alaska at a rate of about 185 km per day. I 

They are first seen from land in late November and 

early December in Oregon and Northern California, 

arriving off San Francisco in mid-December and San 

Diego at Christmas time. The migration takes two 

routes off Santa Barbara, with some whales taking the 

island route on to Guadalupe and Socorro and the 

rest hugging the coast. Most whales go into Scammon 

and San Ignacio lagoons on the western shore of the 

Baja Peninsula, but some go on to the area of Jalisco 

inside the Gulf of California. The migration north 

begins in Febmary and overlaps near San Diego with 

the last few stragglers still coming south. The 

northern movement is slower (becauseof the currents 

and the presence of young cakes) with an average 

rate of 80 km per day. Females with calves tend to 
north. the last leaving U.S.coastal 

tely 167 gray whales may be taken 

Russia under a quota established by the 

in the same areas that 
COMMON NAME: 


SCIENTLFICNAME: NOV'GLLQE 


usI'm0DATE 

ON. 5500 

whalers alone killed 

population centers 

activities throughou 

prey are affected by 

ors include subsistence 

hunting, incidental 

collision with ships, 

degradation or loss 	 ed with coastal 

ion with fisheries for prey 

whales. These factors 

Humpback whales are distinguished from other 

whales in the same family by extraordinarily long 

flippers and the use of very long, complex, repetitive 

vocalizations. Maximum recorded size is 18meters, 

with an average length of 145 meters for females an 

Greenland, Newfoundland and Labrador, as well as 

the Gulf of St Lawrence and the Gulf of Maine. 

During the winter, the principal range for the 

Western North Atlantic population is around the 

Greater and Lesser Antilles. Primary areas are at 

Silver and Navidad Banks, and along the coast of the 

Dominican Republic. Other concentrations include 

the westemedge of Puerto Rico and the area from 

the Lesser Antillles south to Venezuela. Whales also 

have been sighted around New England and 

Newfoundland, and some may remain there 

year-round. In addition, humpbacks have been 

sighted along the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico coasts 

of Horida. The summer and winter grounds for the 

Eastern North Atlantic (Iceland-Norway, Spain-Nort 

Africa) are not well known. 
hunting -Hunting from Bequia, St. 

through 1989.Only one whale was 

hunting has probably terminated. 

2) Entan ement in fishing gear -- Humpback whales 

are caugh in fishing traps and gillnets around 

Newfoun land, Canada, as well as along the east 

coast oft e iU.S. 

3) Collisi ns with ships --Whale/ship collisions arean 

increasin threat as ships get larger and faster. Major 

shipping l es cross important humpback feeding 

grounds, ch as Stellwagen Bank and the Great 

South Ch nel, in the Gulf of Maine. If whales either 

acclimate o the disturbance or ignore ships when 

feeding, t e risk of a collision increases. 

4) Acoust cdisturbance I i

i 

is planning to establish a 

e Labrador coast, in the 

ercial whale-watching boats and research 

these activities frequently operate 

concentrate for feeding and 

disturbance may displace whales 

industrial activities: The major 

underwater noise appear to be 

mining activities. These 

produce loud 

I 5) Habitat tegradation 

a) Chemical pollution, including petroleuun: The --

overall impact of pollution on habitats used by 

humpback whales isunknown.Contaminantscan 

be introduced through rivers, coastal runtoff, wind, 

- ocean dumping, sewge, and various industrial 

..... activities. The effects of short-term exposureto 

spilled oil or other petroleum compounds are being 

investigated. It is not known if humpbacks avoid oil 

spills. However, the greatest impact of a spill could 

occurindirectly, as a result of the destruction or 

shift in the distribution of a prey species. 

b) Coastal development: It is not certain id 

intensive human use of coastal areas has 1)recluded 

useby humpback whales. However, it mqr not be a 

coincidence that Silver Bank,the primary 

remaining breeding site for the humpback, is 

located over 100km from land, is relatively 

inaccessable to people and is protected born ship 

traf6icby a fringing reef. Most other apparently 

suitable wintering habitat in the Antillean area is 

exposed to rapid human population growth, and the 

associated increase in industry, recreation and 

tourism. The degree to which these activilies have 

restricted repopulation of the whales' wintering 

range is not known. 

6) Competition for resourceswith humans -- Humpbacks and fishermen in Newfoundlan~dcompete 

for the same prey. Becauseof this, humpbac:ks are 

seen as pestsby fishermen, and they tolerate the level 

of damage caused by the whales primarily bcxauseof 

the whales' endangered status. If damages ir~crease 

with an increase in the whale population, the 

tolerancemay end, and fishermen may not cooperate 

with programs to encourage population growth. 
COMMON NAME: 


SCIENTIFIC NAME: NOVAEANGLLQE 


SPECIESSTATUS: 

whales are the fourt 

th the total North Pacific 

Today, perhaps no more 

ors include subsistence 

hunting, incidental lement in fishing gear, 

sturbance or displacement 

pollution from oil, gas or 

and production; habitat 

ated with coastal 

Humpback whales are distinguished from other 

whales in the same family by extraordinarily long 

flippers, a more robust body, more variable dorsal £in, 

and use of very long, complex, repetitive 

vocalizations. Maximum recorded size is 18 meters, 

with an average length of 145 meters for females and 

135meters for males. Calving occursprimarily in the 

winter. Age at sexual maturity is 4-6 years. Most 

females give birth every 2-3years. Annual and 

multi-year (up to 5) calving has also been observed. 

During summer, humpback whales in the North 

and along the coastsof the Pacific Rim, from Point 

Conception, California north to the Gulf of Alaska, 

PrinceWillliam Sound and Kodiak Island. Humpback 

whales spend the winter in three separate wintering 

grounds: the coastal waters along Baja California and 

the mainland of Mexico; the main islands of Hawaii; 

1) Entanglement -Humpbacks have been caught in 

gillnets in the California and Alaska coastal regions. 

Several have died as a result of entanglement. 

2) Collisions with ships -- Whale/ship collisions are an 

increasing threat as ships get larger and faster. Major 

C 
cross important humpback feeding 

ships when feeding, the risk of a 

ships,tugboats with long 

boating pose potential 

coast of Hawaii. The 

as a result of collisions has 

3) ~cousticdisturbance 

ercial whale-watching boats and research 

these activities frequently operate 

concentrate for feeding and 

disturbance may displace whales 

industrial activities: the major 

underwater noise appear to be 

mining activities. These 

4) Habitat begradation 

pollution, including petroleum: The 

on habitats used by 

is unknown. Contaminants can 

rivers, coastal runoff, wind, 

and various industrial 

activities. The effects of short-term exposure to 

spilled oil or other petroleum compounds arebeing 

investigated. It isnot known if humpbacks avoid oil 

spills. However, the greatest impact of a spill could 

-occurindirectly, as a ~glt of the destruction or 


shifting of prey species. 


b) Coastal development: It is not known if 

intensive human use of coastal areas has precluded 

useby humpack whales. This may be occuuing off 

Oahu Island, Hawaii, where humpback wlhales were 

present along the coast from the 1930's to the late 

1960's, and have since appparently diqeared. 

Although the apparent disappearance could be 

related to increased commercial hunting tiuring the 

early 1960's, it is speculated that increaseci coastal 

development may have displaced the whales with 

noise from construction, increased runoff and 

increased boat and air traffic. Underwatei: noise, 

chemical contamination and increased turbidity 

may be the most important effects of devt:lopment. 

Thesearepadadarly signi6cant in Hawaii, 

becauselocalwaters are one of the primary sites 

for humpback whale reproducion. 
COMMONNAME: RIGHTWHALE 

GLACLQWS GLACLQWS 

SPECIESSTATUS: 

POPULATION: 300-350 

CRlTICALHABITAT 

300to 350 found in 


to 300 in the North 


ago and lasted well into 

whale. Since that 

position because a combination of human actions and 

natural forces appears to be preventing significant 

increasesin the number of animals. The 

preponderance of evidence suggests that certain 

human actions are significantly impeding the recovery 

of this species. Principal among these are (in 

(especially the areas where they feed), and 

There is reason to believe that if the human actions 

having a negative effect on the species were redud 

or eliminated, the chance for recovery would be 

significantly improved. Limits of knowledge of the 

genetic restrictions imposed upon the species by its 

present low numbers prevent NMFS from declaring 

with certaintythat, even if all adverse affects caused 

by humans were eliminated, the northern right whale 

would recover. In any case, recoverywill be not be 

quick. Even in the best of circumstances, rapid 

recovery cannot be anticipated. It is not expected 

that the northern right whale will increase in numbers 

in the next 75 years to a point where efforts can be 

The northern right whale is a robust, medium-sized 

baleen whale. Adults are 13.5 to 165 meters long. 

Distinctive features include: no dorsal fin,a large 

Callosities are used to identify individuals. A photo 
for at least 9 months. Age at 

with females giving birth 

population utilizes 5 areas: 

Cape Cod, MA, . 

The pop 	 ation migrates seasonally, spending spring 

er off the coast of New England, and late 

summer d fall in waters off southern Canada. The 

only kno calving area is the coastal waters of 

Georgia d Florida. 

The whales' habit of resting at 

skim feeding and surface 

them susceptible to ship 

from vessels: Data at this time is 

Studies indicate that sensitivity to 

but response varies. The effect 

and scientific research cruises on 

2) Entang ement in fishing gear t 

with fishing gear have been recorded 

and 1989.Analysis of photographic 

58% of the catalogued whales have 

indicative of rope and net cuts. 3 

to have died from 

3) ~abitat/degradation 

habitats are undergoing general 

potential exists for oil and gas 

east coast of the U.S., as well as 

for phosphate mining off the North Carc~lina, South 

Carolina and Georgia coasts. The impact of 

industry related noise, ship traffic and other 

activitiesis unknown. 

, '	Several municipalitit%adjacent to Massachusetts 

and Cape Cod bays have proposed plans to 

discharge untreated wastewater into bay.wate=. 

Dump sites have been designated by EPk4 the 

Corpsof Engineers and the Commonweillth of 

Massachusetts. Studies and monitoring efforts will 

soonbe initiated in the Massacghusetts Elay areato 

determine the effects of sewage discharge in the 

region. Dredging activities in the Bay also undergo 

continuous 0b~e~ati0n for endangered species 

presence. 

Extensive dredging activites occur in the rshipping 

channels, harbors and naval bases in North 

Carolina, Georgia and Florida The effects of the 

dredging and disposal activities need to be studied. 

The effect of habitat degradation on plankton 

distribution.is unknown. Plankton density appears 

to be a major factor in the use of a certain areaby 

whales. 

4) Hunting 

Although hunting had a major effect on the 

northern right whale population in the p;LEt, hunting 

is no longer allowed, and has no effect on the 

current population. 
COMMON NAME RIGHTWHAIE 

SCENTEICNAME: E GLQCWSJAPONICQ 

SPECIESSTATUS: 

N: 300 0RLeSS 

North Atlantic 

le to get most whaling 

natural forces appears to be preventing significant 

increases in the number of animals. The 

preponderance of evidence suggests that certain 

human actions are significantly impediig the recove 

of this species. Principal among these are (in 

decreasing order of importance) ship collisions, 

entanglement in certaintypesof fishing gear, 

degradation of the northern right whale's habitat 

(especially the areas where they feed), and 

disturbance. There is reason to believe that if the 

human actions having a negative effect on the species 

were reduced or eliminated, the chance for recovery 

would be significantly irnprwed. Limits of knowled 

of the genetic restridions imposed upon the species 

by itspresent low numbers prevent NMFS from 

declaringwith certainty that, even if all adverse. 

affectscaused by humans were eliminated, the 

northern right whale would recover. In any case, 

recovery will be not be quick. Even in the best of 

circumstances, rapid recovery cannot be anticipated. 

It is not expected that the northern right whale will 

increase in numbers in the next 75yearsto a point 

where efforts can be relaxed. 

The northern right whale is a robust, medium-sized 

baleen whale. Adults are 135to 165meters long. 

Distinctive features include: no dorsal fin, a large 
and far north as the Bering Sea and 

hem right whales use low 

communicate,increased 

t whale population in the past, hunting 

has been outlawed since1946. 

eswere taken. 54 

23 were taken for 
COMMON NAME 


SCIENTLFICNAME: 


ON: UNKNOWN 

approximately 12 months. Females give birth every 2 

f the world. The population 

eased off central 

Blue whales are found worldwide, with a 

e whales have been studied 

trends in abundance were not 

Blue whales were severely depleted by commercial 

whaling, until the 1966 IWCban. 

in the southern hemisphere 

all the southern oce 
:UNKNOWN 

120000 

I c-Y HABITAT NONE DESIGNATED 

PRIMAR REGION RESPONSIBLE FPR I REGIONS&: swNpR smmm 

I 

The fin w ale was listed as endangered throughout its Fin whales are found worldwide, between 20 and 

range on une 2,1970. The status of stocks of £in 75 N and between 20 and 75 S. Northern and 

whales is nknown, but the species was severely southern hemisphere stocks are thought to be 

depleted 1commercial whaling activities. In this reproductively distinct. 

century, aver 700,000 animals were landed in all 

oceans of the world. The present world population 

estimate is 120,000 individuals. While the species is 

to historical levels, it isconsidered 

to other large whale species. No There is currently a small subsistence take adowed in 

species are available. The East Greenland. 

the second largest baleen whale, with 


from 19.8 to 22.9 meters long and 


63 MT.Coloring is 


body, as well as the lei3 


and the right lip 


rs during a 5-month period in 


are born after a 12-month gestation 


ength at birth is approximately 6 


are weaned at 7 to 11months, at which 


an average length of approximately 12 


ale fin whales reach sexual 


n ages 5 and 15. Mature females bear 

COMMON NAME: 

SCIENTLFIC NAME: 

LISlTNG DATE: 06 

SPECIES STATUS: 

SPECIESTREND: 


POPULATION: 25000 

known about winter distribution. 

After the decline of blue and finwhales, nations 

started hunting sei whales.All commercial hunting 

was ended in 1977 after sei whales were declared 

endangered and were protected. 
CNAME: P~MACROCEPHAL.US 

:UNKNOWN 

I CRITICALHABITAT: NONE DESIGNATED 

I PRIMARYREGION RESPONSIBLE: FPR 


REGIONS A- SER NER SWR NWR AKR


ale was listed as endangered 

its range on June 2,1970. During the past 

took about 1,000,000 

high level of take, the 

ost abundant of the large 

world abundance is 

duals, which is over eight 

ned total of the other 

is the largest of the odontocetes 

reaching a length of 183 meters in 

in females. The sperm whale is 

large head, which takes 

length. It is the only 

situated on the left side of the head near 

lower jaw contains two rows 

the mouth and the surrounding area 

in contrast to the rest of the body, 

described asblack, dark bluish-gray, 

purplish-brown, grayish-brown or 

sperm whale has no dorsal £in, 

is present along the dorsal 

skin of the body is 

longitudinal ripples. 

observed diving over 33 6deep in dives la~sting 

almost an hour and a ha.. 

Sperm whales feed mainly on squid, including the 

giant squid. Wesare born after a gestation period 

of about 15months and are about 4 meters long. 

Females teachsexualmaturity at about 9 years, and 

have a calfevery 3-6 years. In males, puberty is 

prolonged, takingplace between ages9 and 20. 

Sperm whales inhabit alloceans of the worki. Their 

distributionis dependent on their food sourceand 

suitable conditions for breeding, and varieswith the 

sex and age composition of the group. Spertn whales 

tend to inhabit areas with a water depth of 600 meters 

or more, and are uncommon in waters less tlhan 300 

meters deep. 

The primary threat to the species was commercial 

whaling. With the cessation of whaling efforts, this 

threat no longer exists. 
COMMONNAME: 


SCIENTLFICNAME: USTROPICXIS 


SPECIESSl'ATUS: GERED ' 

POPULATION: UNKNOWN 

throughoutits range 

monksealoccurred in 

ave been reportedsince then. 

hat the species has been 
NAME GUADAWEFURSEAL 


CNAME: ARClVCEPHALUS TOWSENDI 


. . 


SPECIES :INcREA!aNG 


C -TED POPULATLON: UNKNOWN 


I PRIMAR REGION RESPONSIBLE:SWR 


rSGIONS SWR 


fur seal was listed as threatened Guadalupe fur seals breed along the eastern coast of 

on December 16,1985. Guadalupe Island, approximately 200 km wrest of Baja 

surveyof population California. In addition, individuals have been sighted 

conducted for some time, in the southern California Channel Islands:, including 

that the population two males who established territories on Sam Nicolas 

I 

scientists have Island. 


indicated that the numbers of animals on Guadalupe 


Island seem to be increasing. In addition, the species 


seems to be expanding its range. In addition to 


regular si htings of animals on San Miguel and San 

Nicolas I ands off the southern California coast, The major cause of the Guadalupe fut seal's decline 

anima~~ 4
observetih~ out on tjan was commercial hunting in the late 1700's and early

Island d ' g 1991. 	 1800's. The specieswas exterminated in muthern 

California waters by 1825. Commercial sealing 

continued in Mexicanwaters through 1894. 

seals are sexually dimorphic in size, 


being much larger than females, 


have been measured. 


are dark brown or dusky 


on the back of the neck 


Pups are born with a 


males are 


sites over a number of years. 


males lasts from 35-122 days. 


through July, with most 
COMMON NAME: OSEDOLPHIN 

SCIENTIFICNAME: TRCINCATUS 

LISTING DATE ;.. ..I ...i .I. -.r. I 

ON: 1200 

as a medium sized,robust 

e dorsal fin and dark 

light grey to black dorsally 

mid-Atlantic migratory stock tends to inhabit waters 

with surface temperatures ranging from about 10 Cto 

32 C.They migrate seasonally, with a more southerly 

distribution in the winter. 

Major impacts include: 

1). Parasites and diseases -During 1987-88a massive 

die-off affected the mid-Atlantic coastal migratory 

bottlenose dolphin population. It is estimated that 

over half the population died during the 11-month 

epidemic. Possible causes include brevetoxin 

produced by red tide organisms, environmental 

contaminants, or natural diseases. 

A. Fisheries Activities 

Bottlenose dolphins are taken in coastal gillnet 

fisheries throughout the mid-Atlantic region. The 

magnitude of this take is not yet quantified. 

B. Habitat encroachment and pollution: 

The impacts of habitat alteration and pollution 
SPECIES 

ESTIMATEDPOPULATION: 986000 

HABlTAT NONE DESIGNATED 

PRIMAR REGION RESPONSIBLE:AKR I .,IoN+Tmm:,,AKR 

w~my::. . .... . . 

sexual dimorphism in size begins at birth. 

I Although average length at birth is approximately 60 

cm for both sexes, male neonates average 5.4 kg and 

female neonates average 45 kg. Adult females grow 

of 140 cm and weigh 30-50 kg; males 

of 210 cm and weigh 175-275 kg. 

both sexes have a relatively small head 

snout. Rear flippers are 

vascularized. Pups are 

to a dark brown-black on 

white or sheq chest or 

when they areweaned. 

to black, with greyguard 

Adult mal arrive at the rookeries in late Maylearly 

June. Th establish territories, within which they 

guard and erd groups of up to 40 or more females to 

breed with Females arrive at rookeries thoughout 

June, and to early July and August. They give birth 

2 days a£te arriving at the rookery, and remain 

ashore for 8 days before coming into estrus and 

mating. i 

mature when 4 yearsold. 

of mature females give birth each 

sexual maturity at age 4-5 but 

Bulls have a brief 

for more than 2 seasons. 

50% for pups in 

- .- , 

their firstyear, 10-208 per year for 2-3 year olds, 

females. 

3238% for adult 

Maximum 

males 

longevity 

and 10-11% 

for northern 

for mature 

ffir 

I 

sealsis 
 I about 26 years. 
 I 

Northern fur seals are endemic to the Nortlh Pacific 

Ocean. They occurfrom southern California north to 

the Bering Sea and west to the Okhotsk Sea and 

Honshu Island, Japan. In the eastern North Pacific 

Ocean, fur sealsrange from the Pribilof andl Bogoslof 

Islands in the Bering Seato the Channel Islads in 

southern California. The majority of the paplation 

breeds on the Pniilof Islands in the southe~n Bering 

Sea. Additional rookeries are found on the 

Commander Islands in the western Bering Sea, 

Robben Island in the Okhotsk Sea, the Kuril Islands 

in the western North Pacific Ocean, and Sari Miguel 

Island off southern California. 

A. Commercial Fisheries 

Direct Take (Commercial and Subsistenae 


Harvest): Northern fur seals were harvested 


commercially until 1984. Commercial havesting . 


took 300,000 females between 1956 and 1968 as 


wellas 21-28,000 juvenile males per year between 


1976 and 1984. Since 1985, an annual subsistence 


hamest of 1258-3713 juvenile males has taken place 


on the Pribilof Islands. 

along the way, there is si@cant potential for the 

contaminants to impact northern fur seals. Illegal 

-	 itischarge<f petroleum product~%om the 

increasing vessel traffic is also a matter of concern. 

D. Petroleum Industry 

Fur sealsare vulnerable to the physiological effects 

of oiling and subsequent loss of control of thermal 

conductance. Crude oil fouling of fur seals 

increases the heat conductance of the pelage, and 

thereby facilitates heat loss. Any spill occurring in 

areas where fur seals concentrate could cause 

significant mortality. 

ery area. The development 

and, and the potential 

C. Toxic Substances 

me pollutant residues 

reproductive failure in 
C NAME: PHOCOENAPHOCOENA 

SPECIES :DECREASING 

E?srrMATED POPULATION: 47200 

HABITAP NONE DESIGNATeD 

PRIMAR REGION RESPONSIBLE: NER 


REGIONS AWECllD: SER NER
 I 1 

SPEClES~OPULATTONSTATUS 

: 

the harbor porpoise in the Gulf of Maine as 

threatened under the ESA, primarily due to mortality 

from gillnet fishing. This mortality level wasestimated 

estimates for the Gulfof 

over 4 years, at least 

proposed rule to 

rpoise is the smallest cetacean in U.S. 

maturity is reached at age 3to 4. 

one calf per year until age 10to 

herring. Harbor porpoises have a 

r population increase, and are 

sustain even moderate levels of 

The best available estimate of 

productivity for harbor porpoises in the 

f Fundy/US Atlantic coast 

exceed 4 to 5%of the population. 

nal migration along the Atlantic coast. 

harbor porpoises congregate in the 

Bay of Fundy. The winter 

known. However, there is a 

of the northern Gulf of 

October throughout winter. 

I 

Strandings and bycatch in winter and sprin,p occur 


from the Gulf of Maine south to Cape Hattaras, I NC,


but some strandings have been repoked as far south I asFlorida. I

I 

The multispecies sink-gillnet fishery in the (Gulfof 

Maine is a major causeof mortality for harlbor 

porpoises, catching, on average, 2000 porpoisedyear. 

The groundfish gillnet fishery in the Bay of Fundy is 

also a signi£icant causeof porpoise mortalily. In 

addition,weir fishingin the Bay of Fundy and along -

the Atlantic coast ofthe U.S. &d coastal gillnet 


fishing in U.S. waters south of the Gulf of Maine also 


has an impact on the population. 


NMFS will make a final determinationin the fall of 

1994on the proposed rule. The final detennination 

will depend, at least in part, on analyses of Ibycatch 

data through 1993; a demonstrated reductilon in 

bycatch mortality in the demersal gillnet fishery, and a 

bycatch reduction program that will maintain a low 

level of bycatch. 
COMMON NAME: 


SCIENTIFICNAME: 


LImG DATE. N/A 

POPULATION: UNKNOWN 

CIUTICALKABlTAl? 

Florida from central Bay to Sebastian Inlet. 

Johnson's seagrass is distniuted between St. 

been documented LakeWorth Inlet. The 

benthic habitat, breaching root systems and severing 

rhizomes, and significantly reducing the viabii of 

the community. Further, this condition is expected 

Maintenance dredging further jeopardizes essential 

habitat by redistributing sediments, burying plants, 

and destabalizing the bottom structure. 

may scourand redistribute sediments, thereby 

eroding or burying existing populations. 

Trampling due to human disturbance and inad 

land-use induced siltation can also threaten viability 

of the species. Degradation of water quality due to 

human impad is also athreat to the webe of 

seagrass communities. Nutrient over enrichment 

caused by inorganic and organic nitrogen and 

phosphorus loading via urban and agriculturalland 

run-off, canstimulate increased algal growth that m 

smother the understory of Johnson's seagrass, shade 

rooted vegetation and diminish the oxygen content o