Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules 35033

Species

Historic range Family Status When listed Critical

habitat

Special

rules Scientific name Common name

*******

Osmoxylon

mariannense.

None ....................... Western Pacific

Ocean—U.S.A.

(Commonwealth

of the Northern

Mariana Islands).

Araliaceae ............... E .................... NA NA

*******

Tabernaemontana

rotensis.

None ....................... Western Pacific

Ocean—U.S.A.

(Commonwealth

of the Northern

Mariana Islands

and Guam).

Apocynaceae .......... E .................... NA NA

*******

Dated: May 2, 2000.

Jamie Rappaport Clark,

Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 00–13707 Filed 5–31–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018–AGO4

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

and Plants; Proposed Endangered

Status for the Buena Vista Lake Shrew

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service (Service), propose to

list the Buena Vista Lake shrew, Sorex

ornatus relictus, as endangered pursuant

to the Endangered Species Act of 1973,

as amended (Act). Prior to 1986, this

subspecies had not been observed since

it was first described in 1932. In 1986,

three Buena Vista Lake shrews were

observed at a permanent pond located

within a former preserve, approximately

26 kilometers (km) (16 miles (mi)) south

of Bakersfield, CA. No more than 38

individuals have been observed since

they were rediscovered in 1986. The

only known extant Buena Vista Lake

shrew population is threatened

primarily by agricultural activities,

modifications and potential impacts to

local hydrology, uncertainty of water

delivery, possible toxic effects from

selenium poisoning, and random

naturally occurring events. This

proposal, if made final, would

implement the Federal protection and

recovery provisions afforded by the Act

for the Buena Vista Lake shrew.

DATES: We must receive comments from

all interested parties by July 31, 2000.

Public hearing requests must be

received by July 17, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Send your comments and

materials concerning this proposal to

the Field Supervisor, Sacramento Fish

and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, 2800 Cottage Way, Rm

W–2605, Sacramento, California 95825.

Comments and materials received, as

well as the supporting documentation

used in preparing the rule, will be

available for public inspection, by

appointment, during normal business

hours at the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dwight Harvey, Sacramento Fish and

Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section)

(telephone 916/414–6600; facsimile

916/414–6710).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Buena Vista Lake shrew, Sorex

ornatus relictus, is one of nine

subspecies within the ornate shrew

Sorex ornatus species complex known

to occur in California (Hall 1981; Owen

and Hoffmann 1983; Maldonado 1992).

Sorex ornatus belongs to the order

Insectivora and family Soricidae,

subfamily Soricinae, and the tribe

Soricini, with three subgenera (Owen

and Hoffmann 1983; Junge and

Hoffmann 1981).

Sorex ornatus relictus are primarily

insectivorous mammals that are the

approximate size of a mouse. They have

a long snout, tiny bead-like eyes, ears

that are concealed, or nearly concealed,

by soft fur, and five toes on each foot

(Ingles 1965; Burt and Grossenheider

1964). Sorex ornatus relictus are active

day or night. When they are not

sleeping, they are searching for food.

These shrews eat more than their own

weight each day (Burt and

Grossenheider 1964) to withstand

starvation and maintain their body

weight at high rates of metabolism

(McNab 1991). Sorex ornatus relictus

can have an impact on surrounding

plant communities by consuming large

quantities of insects, slugs, and other

invertebrates that can influence such

things as plant succession and control

the irruptions of pest insects

(Maldonado 1992; Williams 1991).

Sorex ornatus relictus also may be an

important prey species for raptors,

snakes, and carnivores (Maldonado

1992).

Grinnell (1932) was the first to

describe Sorex ornatus relictus.

According to Grinnell’s description, the

Buena Vista Lake shrew’s back is

predominantly black with a buffy-brown

speckling pattern, its sides are more

buffy-brown than the upper surface, and

its underside is smoke-gray. The tail is

faintly bicolor and blackens toward the

end both above and below. The Buena

Vista Lake shrew weighs approximately

4 grams (g) (0.14 ounces (oz)) (Kathy

Freas, Stanford University, pers. comm.

1994) and has a total length ranging

from 98 to 105 millimeters (mm) (3.85

to 4.13 inches (in.)) with a tail length of

35 to 39 mm (1.38 to 1.54 in.) (Grinnell

1932). The Buena Vista Lake shrew

differs from its geographically closest

subspecies, the ornate shrew Sorex

ornatus spp. ornatus, by having darker,

grayish-black coloration, rather than

brown. In addition, S. o. ssp. relictus

has a slightly larger body size; shorter

tail; skull with a shorter, heavier

rostrum; and a higher and more angular

brain-case in dorsal view than S. o. ssp.

ornatus (Grinnell 1932).

Ornate shrews, on the average, rarely

live longer than 12 months, and

evidence indicates that the normal

35034 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules

lifespan does not exceed 16 months

(Rudd 1955). In montane woodlands,

shrews have a well-defined

reproductive season that lasts from midMay through August (Williams 1991).

They give birth to up to two litters per

year containing four to six young. The

number of litters depends on how early

or late in the year the young are born

and can become sexually active (Owen

and Hoffmann 1983). The Buena Vista

Lake shrew has a breeding season that

begins in February or March, and may

either extend later in the year, based on

habitat quality and availability of water,

or end with the onset of the dry season

in May or June (Jesus Maldonado,

University of California-Los Angeles,

pers. comm. 1998).

The Buena Vista Lake shrew was

originally described by Grinnell (1932)

as a new subspecies, Sorex ornatus

relictus, based on the type specimen and

two other specimens collected around

the old Buena Vista Lake bed. On

October 21, 1909, a single specimen of

S. o. ssp. relictus was collected at

Buttonwillow, a town approximately 40

km (25 mi) northwest of Buena Vista

Lake (Williams 1986; Doug Long,

California Academy of Sciences, pers.

comm. 1998). Grinnell (1932) noted

evidence that integration between the

subspecies Sorex ornatus ornatus and S.

o. ssp. relictus occurred in areas of

geographic overlap. This integration

prompted Freas (1990) to question the

legitimacy of the Buena Vista Lake

shrew’s status as a distinct subspecies.

Currently, the entire Sorex ornatus

complex (consisting of eight subspecies

in California and one in Baja California)

is undergoing additional genetic and

morphological evaluation (J.

Maldonado, pers. comm. 1998).

Preliminary results from strictly

morphological measurements for this

group were equivocal throughout

California. However, mitochondrial

DNA and micro-satellite nuclear

sequences and allozyme data have aided

in determining subspecies ranges. From

these data, researchers determined that

the Buena Vista Lake shrew is a distinct

subspecies from other S. ornatus

subspecies; it is unlike any other

sampled throughout the southern San

Joaquin Valley (J. Maldonado, pers.

comm. 1998).

Based on Grinnell’s (1933) records in

the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology at

Berkeley (three museum specimens and

related field notes), the distribution of

the Buena Vista Lake shrew was

historically limited to the marshlands of

the southern San Joaquin Valley south

from approximately where the waters of

the Kings River divide toward the San

Joaquin River and bed of Tulare Lake,

with the animals living in the swampy

margins of Kern, Buena Vista, Goose,

and Tulare Lakes. However, by the time

the shrew was discovered, Grinnell

stated that the beds of these lakes were

already dry and mostly cultivated with

only sparse remnants of the original

fauna (Grinnell 1932). Williams (1986)

stated that nearly all of the valley floor

in the Tulare Basin is cultivated and

that most of the lakes and marshes had

been drained and cultivated.

The Buena Vista Lake shrew was

likely historically distributed in the

marshlands of the San Joaquin Valley

throughout most of the Tulare Basin

(Grinnell 1933; U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service 1997). The Buena Vista Lake

shrew occurs on property owned by the

J.R. Boswell Company (Company),

formerly known as the Kern Lake

Preserve (Preserve), on the old Kern

Lake bed, in Kern County, California

(California Natural Diversity Data Base

(CNDDB)1986). This property totals

about 33.5 hectares (ha) (83 acres (ac)),

and the only known viable population

of Buena Vista Lake shrews inhabits a

small 1.2-ha (3-ac) wetland area that

exists there. Although the Preserve has

remained relatively unchanged since the

Buena Vista Lake shrew was detected at

this site in 1986, the future management

of the Preserve and the future existence

of this subspecies is uncertain.

Water is a necessary component of the

Buena Vista Lake shrew’s environment.

Moisture is required to support a

diverse insect fauna, which is the

primary food source needed to maintain

the shrew’s high metabolism. During

surveys conducted on the Preserve in

1988 and 1990, Freas (1990) found a

clear trend in preference of moderately

moist (mesic) habitats over drier (xeric)

habitats by the shrew, with 25 animals

being captured in the mesic

environments and none in xeric habitat.

Maldonado (1992) also acknowledged

this type of habitat preference, stating

that the shrew is closely associated with

dense, riparian understories that

provide food, cover, and moisture.

The permanent pond where the

subspecies occurs is located within the

Preserve, called Gator Pond, which is

not an artesian system. It is dry for

many years, filling only when there is

adequate flood runoff, or as in 1986,

when the Company used the area for

storage of excess water (The Nature

Conservancy (TNC) in litt. 1986; Rick

Hewett, TNC, in litt. 1987). The Rim

Ditch forms the southern border of the

Preserve, and another ditch was

installed by the Company to convey

irrigation flows to agricultural land

north of the Rim Ditch. The land in and

around the pond has a high (perched)

water table because it is underlined

with a natural hardpan soil layer that is

somewhat impervious to water. In the

past, this hardpan soil layer kept the

area very wet and prevented it from

being productively farmed. In 1982, the

company installed a system of

perforated tile line (drain pipes), which

drains water from west to east under the

Preserve, then northeast to the South

Sump. Within 1 year, the perched water

table began to subside, and the pond

remained dry for the next 3 years

(CNDDB 1986). As a result of the

installation of the tile line, the areas

northeast of the pond and southwest of

the South Sump became arable allowing

wheat and sorghum to be grown in these

areas (TNC, in litt. 1986). The land west

of the pond has never been farmed, but

weeds are cleared off once a year. The

land around the pond was disked

annually until 1985, when TNC signed

a lease and took over the management

of the 33.5-ha (83-ac) Preserve. Only

about 12 ha (30 ac) around the pond is

now suitable habitat for the shrew (J.

Maldonado, pers. comm. 1994).

All water that runs north from the

Rim Ditch into the tile lines ends up in

the South Sump. The water, referred to

as tail water, is pumped back to the Rim

Ditch. The Company agreed they could

supply the excess tail water to the

Preserve in the early fall for the TNC

leased area. June through August are the

critical irrigation months for the

Company’s cotton and alfalfa

production. During that period, all

available water is presumably used for

these purposes. In 1986, the Company

allowed TNC to install a separate pipe

from the Rim Ditch directly to the pond

as a way of providing water to this area.

Three Buena Vista Lake shrew were

discovered during the digging of a ditch

for this pipe. (CNDDB 1986).

The Company originally supplied

sufficient water to maintain the marshes

on the Preserve. This water was sold to

TNC through a lease agreement

(Company, in litt. 1995). The Company

committed to supplying water only

during the years when quantities would

be available in excess of that required

for other corporate uses, primarily

agriculture. Without this supplemental

water supply, the remaining marshlands

will dry up (J. Maldonado, pers. comm.

1994). In 1994, the Fish and Wildlife

Service asked the Company to commit

to a conservation agreement that would

support the long-term maintenance of

the Preserve and the survival of the

Buena Vista Lake shrew, but the

Company declined. (Edward Gierman,

J.G. Boswell Company, in litt. 1995).

TNC was concerned about the long-term

health of the Preserve, but considered it

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules 35035

a ‘‘non-defensible parcel’’ because the

land surrounding the Preserve has been

converted to cotton (Reed Tollefson,

TNC, pers. comm. 1994). Water diverted

away from the Preserve for agricultural

purposes has caused a drop in the

already shallow water table, thereby

eliminating most of the habitat that

historically supported the shrew (R.

Hewett, in litt. 1987). TNC staff

estimated that proper management of

the Preserve would require 1.9–2.5

hectare-meters (15–20 acre-feet) of water

per year (R. Tollefson, pers. comm.

1995). Without a reliable water source,

TNC declined to renew the lease and

terminated their arrangement with the

Company to maintain the Preserve

(Sabin Phelps, TNC, pers. comm. 1995).

Since the rediscovery of the Buena

Vista Lake shrew at the Preserve, the

subspecies has been found only three

other times. In 1992, one shrew was

found alive under a sprinkler cover, and

another was found dead in a manager’s

residence at the Kern National Wildlife

Refuge (Refuge), Kern County, California

(Morgan Cook, Service, pers. comm.

1995). One additional shrew was found

dead in 1994 within the same residence

on the Refuge. This residence is

currently the Refuge headquarters and is

one of two buildings located on a 4-ha

(10-ac) compound surrounded by lawns

and trees (Jack Allen, Service, pers.

comm. 1998). The Refuge is located

approximately 80 km (50 mi) northwest

of the Preserve (Joseph Engler, Service,

in litt. 1994).

Water management practices at the

Refuge have focused on waterfowl, and

riparian habitat has not received

adequate water over the years to

maintain riparian diversity (J. Engler, in

litt. 1994). If Sorex ornatus relictus still

exists, it would probably be found

around a 323-ha (800-ac) marsh unit

located on the south side of the Refuge

where emergent vegetation, such as

willows and cottonwoods exist. The

marsh unit also remains moist longer

than most other marshes on the Refuge

(J. Allen, pers. comm. 1998). The

constant lawn, shrub, and tree watering

and the ponds at the Refuge

headquarters may be sufficient to

maintain any potential shrew

populations (J. Engler, in litt. 1994).

Recent genetic data have confirmed

that the shrews found at the Refuge

were Buena Vista Lake shrews (J.

Maldonado, pers. comm. 1998). No

additional Buena Vista Lake shrews, nor

any other shrew species, have been

found at the Refuge.

The elimination of most of the

riparian vegetation with associated

marsh habitat that once occurred in the

southern San Joaquin Valley has

drastically reduced the amount of

suitable habitat available to the shrew,

and may have restricted the animal to

the Preserve. Rapid agricultural, urban,

and energy developments since the

early 1900s have severely reduced and

fragmented native habitats. Historically,

the Tulare Basin, including the former

Tulare, Buena Vista, Goose, and Kern

Lakes with their respective overflow

marshes, provided 19 percent of the

Tulare Basin valley floor habitat

(Werschkull et al. 1992). Around the

turn of the 20th century, the Tulare

Basin had 104,890 ha (259,189 ac) of

valley fresh water marsh, 177,005 ha

(437,388 ac) of valley mixed riparian

forests, and 105,333 ha (260,283 ac) of

valley sink scrub, making a total of

387,229 ha (956,860 ac) of potentially

suitable Buena Vista Lake shrew habitat.

By the early 1980s, the combined total

had been reduced to 19,019 ha (46,996

ac), less than 5 percent of the original

habitat (Werschkull et al. 1992). As of

1995, intensive irrigated agriculture

comprised 1,239,961 ha (3,064,000 ac)

or about 96 percent of the total lands

within the Tulare Basin. Cotton, grapes,

and alfalfa represented the top three

crops (California Department of Water

Resources (DWR) 1998).

All of the natural plant communities

in the Tulare Basin have been affected

by the transformation of this area to

production of food, fiber, and fuel at the

expense of the natural biological

diversity (Spiegel and Anderson 1992;

Griggs et al. 1992). As more canals were

built, and more water was diverted for

irrigation of the floodplains of the major

rivers of the southern San Joaquin

Valley, less water was available to keep

the riparian forests alive, and less water

reached the lakes. By the early 1930s,

the former Tulare, Buena Vista, Goose,

and Kern Lakes were virtually dry and

open for cultivation (Griggs 1992).

Irrigation, combined with subsurface

drainage, have caused naturally

occurring selenium to be leached from

agricultural soils in the San Joaquin

Valley. Elevated concentrations of

selenium are believed to have caused

major wildlife mortalities in places like

the Kesterson National Wildlife Refuge

(Kesterson) (Moore et al. 1989). The

leaching of selenium has increased in

recent times due to the increased supply

of irrigation water for the cultivation of

crops in the Tulare Basin. In 1984,

elevated selenium levels in the blood

and liver were measured in several

small and large mammals from

Kesterson (Clark 1987; Clark et al.

1989). Ornate shrews captured around

Kesterson showed selenium

concentrations (parts per million (ppm)

dry weight) 3 to 25 times greater than

those found for any other small mammal

at the same site (Clark 1987). As with

other forms of wildlife, selenium

toxicity represents a serious threat to the

continued existence of the Buena Vista

Lake shrew.

Previous Federal Action

The September 18, 1985, Notice of

Review (50 FR 37958), included the

Buena Vista Lake shrew as a category 2

candidate species for possible future

listing as threatened or endangered.

Category 2 candidates were those taxa

for which listing as threatened or

endangered might be warranted, but for

which adequate data on biological

vulnerability and threats were not

available to support issuance of listing

proposals.

We received a petition dated April 18,

1988, from Ms. Doris Dixon of The

Interfaith Council for the Protection of

Animals and Nature to list the Buena

Vista Lake shrew and three additional

shrew species as endangered species.

We determined that the petition

presented substantial information

indicating that the requested action may

be warranted. We announced this

finding in the Federal Register on

December 30, 1988 (53 FR 53030). The

Buena Vista Lake shrew remained a

category 2 candidate in the January 6,

1989, Notice of Review (54 FR 554). In

the November 21, 1991, Notice of

Review (56 FR 58804), the Buena Vista

Lake shrew was elevated to category 1

status based on new information

received by us. Category 1 taxa were

those taxa for which we had on file

sufficient information on biological

vulnerability and threats to support

preparation of a listing proposal.

The processing of this proposed rule

conforms with our listing priority

guidance published in the Federal

Register on October 22, 1999 (64 FR

57114). This guidance clarifies the order

in which we will process future

rulemakings. The highest priority is

processing emergency listing rules for

any species determined to face a

significant and imminent risk to its

well-being (Priority 1). The second

priority (Priority 2) is processing final

determinations on proposed additions

to the lists of endangered and

threatened wildlife and plants. The

third priority is processing new

proposals to add species to the lists. The

processing of administrative petition

findings (petitions filed under section 4

of the Act) is the fourth priority. This

proposed rule ranks as a Priority 3

action.

35036 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Summary of Factors Affecting the

Species

Section 4 of the Endangered Species

Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16

U.S.C. 1533 et seq.), and regulations (50

CFR part 424) promulgated to

implement the listing provisions of the

Act set forth the procedures for adding

species to the Federal List of

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. A

species may be determined to be

endangered or threatened based on one

or more of the five factors described in

section 4(a)(1) of the Act. These factors

and their application to the Buena Vista

Lake shrew, Sorex ornatus relictus, are

as follows:

A. The Present or Threatened

Destruction, Modification, or

Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range

The amount of suitable habitat for the

Buena Vista Lake shrew has been

significantly reduced over time due to

the systematic drainage of land and

shallow lakes for the purpose of

agricultural crop production. As a

result, over 95 percent of the riparian

vegetation and associated marsh habitat

of the southern San Joaquin Valley has

been eliminated. The Buena Vista Lake

shrew appears to be restricted to the

Preserve location.

Clark et al. (1982) were unsuccessful

in capturing any Buena Vista Lake

shrews in suitable habitat found on

TNC’s Paine Wildflower Preserve or at

the Voice of America site west of

Delano. The Paine Wildflower Preserve

is about 13 km (8 mi) south of the Kern

National Wildlife Refuge and 72 km (45

mi) northwest of the Preserve. The

Voice of America site is located 40 km

(25 mi) due east of the Kern Refuge and

80 km (50 mi) north of the Preserve. No

Buena Vista Lake shrews were found

after conducting surveys for small

mammals along the Kern River Parkway

in 1987 (Beedy et al. 1992). This area

supports 68 ha (168 ac) of riparian

woodlands, as well as 9 ha (22 ac) of

freshwater marshes, and it is located 30

km (19 mi) due north of the Preserve. In

1991, surveys were conducted in

suitable habitat on the Tule Elk State

Reserve, 32 km (20 mi) northwest of the

Preserve. No shrews were captured in

these surveys (Maldonado 1992). In a

1995 survey at the Preserve, a total of 10

individuals were trapped (Maldonado

1998).

The only known remaining

population of Buena Vista Lake shrews

exists on the Preserve. Water delivery to

maintain the Preserve and support the

Buena Vista Lake shrew habitat cannot

be assured because the natural water

table has been lowered by past and

present agricultural practices on and

around the Preserve. Despite available

water supplies, the Company supplies

water to the Preserve only during years

of high runoff, at times when excess

water is available at the end of the

growing season, and after commercial

crop needs are met. This process occurs

through an informal agreement between

the Company and the lease holder of the

property. Without a dependable water

supply of approximately 1.9–2.5

hectare-meters (15–20 acre-feet)

required to maintain the Preserve’s

marshes, the continued existence of the

Buena Vista Lake shrew is unlikely.

Other remnant patches of suitable

habitat that might support the Buena

Vista Lake shrew include areas within

the Buena Vista Lake Aquatic

Recreation Area, the Buena Vista Golf

Course, and along the Buena Vista

Slough, Goose Lake Slough, and the

Kern River west of Bakersfield, CA

(Maldonado 1994; J. Maldonado, pers.

comm. 1998; U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service 1997). Additional areas of

suitable moist locations that might

provide remnant shrew habitat occur

within the Pixley National Wildlife

Refuge west of the former Tulare Lake

bed, as well as around the former Goose

Lake bed. However, small habitat

patches within these areas are marginal

at best and would not likely support a

significant number of animals (J.

Maldonado, pers. comm. 1998). In

addition, these areas represent highly

disjunct and fragmented habitat that

may not be reconnected in the

foreseeable future.

B. Overutilization for Commercial,

Recreational, Scientific, or Educational

Purposes

The subspecies has no known

commercial or recreational value. The

only known extant population of the

Buena Vista Lake shrew is on private

property.

C. Disease or Predation

Although there are no documented

cases of disease related to Buena Vista

Lake shrews, the possibility of disease

and associated threats exists. The small

population size and restricted

distribution increases their vulnerability

to epidemic diseases. Buena Vista Lake

shrews, like most small mammals, are

host to numerous internal and external

parasites, such as round worms, mites,

ticks, and fleas, that may infest

individuals and local populations in

varying degrees with varying adverse

effects (J. Maldonado, pers. comm.

1998). However, the significance of the

threat of disease and parasites to the

Buena Vista Lake shrew is not known.

Most carnivores of the Tulare Basin,

such as coyotes, foxes, weasels,

raccoons, feral cats and dogs, as well as

certain avian predators such as hawks,

owls, herons, jays and egrets, are all

known predators of small mammals

(Ingles 1965; J. Maldonado, pers. comm.

1998).

D. The Inadequacy of Existing

Regulatory Mechanisms

The primary cause of decline of the

Buena Vista Lake shrew is the loss and

fragmentation of habitat due to human

activities. Federal, State, and local laws

have not been adequate in preventing

destruction of the limited Buena Vista

Lake shrew habitat.

Under section 404 of the Clean Water

Act (33 U.S.C. 1344 et seq.), the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)

regulates the discharge of fill material

into waters of the United States,

including wetlands. Section 404

regulations require applicants to obtain

a permit for projects that involve the

discharge of fill material into waters of

the United States. However, many

farming activities do not require a

permit due to their exemption under the

Clean Water Act (53 FR 20764; R.

Wayland III, Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA), in litt. 1996). Projects

that are subject to regulation may

qualify for authorization to place fill

material into headwaters and isolated

waters, including wetlands, under

several nationwide permits. Moreover,

these projects can normally be

permitted with minimal environmental

review by the Corps. An individual

permit may be required by the Corps if

a project otherwise qualifying under a

nationwide permit would have greater

than minimal adverse environmental

impacts. No activity that is likely to

jeopardize the continued existence of a

threatened or endangered species, or

that is likely to destroy or adversely

modify the critical habitat of such

species, is authorized under any

nationwide permit.

However, the Corps typically confines

its evaluation of impacts only to those

areas under its jurisdiction (i.e.,

wetlands and other waters of the United

States). Impacts to uplands and

mitigation for upland habitat losses are

not typically addressed by the Corps

unless such actions affect a listed

species. More importantly, the

termination of water sales to the

Preserve does not fall under Corps

jurisdiction. The lack of a guaranteed

water supply is one of the major reasons

TNC determined that the habitat on the

Preserve could not remain viable and

led to TNC’s refusal to renew the lease

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules 35037

and manage the Preserve (S. Phelps,

pers. comm. 1995).

The California Environmental Quality

Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code

§ 21000–21177) requires a full

disclosure of the potential

environmental impacts of proposed

projects. The public agency with

primary authority or jurisdiction over a

project is designated as the lead agency

and, therefore, is responsible for

conducting a review of the project and

consulting with the other agencies

concerned with the resources affected

by the project. Section 15065 of the

CEQA Guidelines, as amended, requires

a finding of significance if a project has

the potential to ‘‘reduce the number or

restrict the range of a rare or endangered

plant or animal.’’ Once significant

effects are identified, the lead agency

has the option to require mitigation for

effects through changes in the project or

to decide that overriding considerations

make mitigation infeasible (CEQA

§ 21002). In the latter case, projects may

be approved that cause significant

environmental damage, such as

destruction of listed endangered species

and/or their habitat. Protection of listed

species through CEQA is, therefore,

dependent upon the discretion of the

agency involved.

E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors

Affecting Its Continued Existence

As stated previously, selenium

toxicity represents a serious threat to the

continued existence of the Buena Vista

Lake shrew. No cases of widespread

selenium poisoning (selenosis) among

native mammals in nature have been

well documented. The lowest dietary

threshold for mammalian toxicity was

1.4 parts per million (ppm) (dry weight)

as associated with sublethal effects from

lifetime exposure in rats (Eisler 1985).

Longevity was reduced at 3 ppm in the

lifetime diet. Olson (1986) reports a

minimum dietary exposure associated

with reproductive selenosis in rats of 3

ppm. Although stomach content data for

the Buena Vista Lake shrew is lacking,

aquatic insects such as brine flies

Diptera ephydridae, damselflies

Odonata zygoptera, and midge flies

Diptera chironomidae, have been found

in the stomachs of other shrew species

(Churchfield 1991), and could be a

dietary source for the highly

insectivorous Buena Vista Lake shrew.

Selenium concentrations have been

measured in the above species of flies

collected at agricultural drainage

evaporation ponds throughout the

Tulare Basin (Moore et al. 1989).

Concentrations of selenium have been

measured from 1.4 to 26.9 ppm (dry

weight) in these flies from six

evaporation ponds located a few miles

west of the Preserve to the northern

border of the Kern National Wildlife

Refuge (Moore et al. 1989). The

potential dietary selenium

concentration levels are well within the

known range that is toxic to small

mammals (Olsen 1986), and could

potentially adversely affect the Buena

Vista Lake shrew. Such effects could

include, but may not be limited to,

reduced reproductive output or

premature death (Eisler 1985).

Some of the highest selenium levels

(greater than 200 parts per billion) have

been measured from ground water

throughout the historic range of the

Buena Vista Lake shrew within the

Tulare Basin, and specifically, in

evaporation ponds within the

agricultural lands immediately

surrounding the only known population

of shrews at the Preserve (DWR 1997).

The increased supply of imported water

and little or no exported drain water has

resulted in the raising of the ground

water table throughout the Tulare Basin

(DWR 1997). Water table levels have

been measured at 1.5 to 3 m (5 to 10 ft)

beneath the Preserve and have steadily

moved upwards since 1988 (DWR 1997).

As selenium and other dissolved salts

move upward with the elevated water

table (perched water table), the surface

vegetation takes up selenium with the

water via root transpiration and enters

the food chain of the shrew by becoming

concentrated in insects that forage on

the vegetation or reside in aquifers that

concentrate these salts (Saiki and Lowe

1987; Moore et al. 1989).

Due to the hardpan soil layer beneath

the Preserve, the water table is high and

frequently floods despite the installation

of tile drains. In dry years, the water

supply is controlled by a single ditch or

small pipe. These unpredictable

variables limit the maintenance of

suitable moist habitat for this

population of Buena Vista Lake shrews.

These conditions restrict alternative

land management practices for shrews

on the Preserve in the event of drought,

flooding, harsh winter conditions, or

human-induced environmental impacts.

The only known population of Buena

Vista Lake shrews is vulnerable to the

risks associated with small, restricted

populations. Impacts to species

populations that can lead to extinction

include the loss or alteration of essential

elements, such as habitat or food, the

introduction of limiting factors into the

environment, such as poison or

predators, and catastrophic random

changes or environmental perturbations,

such as floods, droughts, or disease

(Gilpin and Soule ́ 1986). Many

extinctions are the result of a severe

reduction of population size by some

deterministic event, followed by a

random natural event that extirpates the

species. The smaller a population is, the

greater its vulnerability to such

perturbations (Terbough and Winter

1980; Gilpin and Soule ́ 1986; Shaffer

1987). The elements of risk that are

amplified in very small populations

include: (1) The impact of high death

rates or low birth rates; (2) the effects of

genetic drift (random fluctuations in

gene frequencies) and inbreeding; and

(3) deterioration in environmental

quality (Gilpin and Soule ́ 1986). When

the number of individuals in the sole

population of a species or subspecies is

sufficiently low, the effects of

inbreeding may result in the expression

of deleterious genes in the population

(Gilpin 1987). Deleterious genes reduce

individual fitness in various ways, most

typically by decreasing survivorship of

young. Genetic drift in small

populations decreases genetic variation

due to random changes in gene

frequency from one generation to the

next. This reduction of variability

within a population limits the ability of

that population to adapt to

environmental changes.

One scenario where loss of habitat

may lead to extinction is when the

species is a local endemic (because of its

isolation and restricted range) (Gilpin

and Soule ́ 1986). The Buena Vista Lake

shrew is a limited local endemic

subspecies (Williams and Kilburn 1992),

which has never been found to be

locally abundant, and lives in very

restricted areas of marshy wetland

habitat (Bradford 1992). Because the

sole population is small (only 10 known

individuals as of 1995) and occurs in a

single small location (12 ha (30 ac)), the

Buena Vista Lake shrew is extremely

vulnerable to natural or human-caused

environmental impacts. No known

viable populations of Buena Vista Lake

shrews exist outside the former Kern

Lake Preserve for recolonization if a

catastrophic event were to occur at this

site. While the subspecies still occurs

within its limited range, whether the

population is declining, how habitat

conditions may be affecting the

population, or how small population

size may be affecting genetic and

behavioral stability is unknown. Based

on the vulnerability of this small

population in its limited range and the

extremely limited potential for suitable

habitat outside this range, we believe

that threats to currently occupied or

potential habitat and individuals put

this subspecies at a high risk for

extinction.

In developing this proposed rule, we

have carefully assessed the best

35038 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules

scientific and commercial information

available regarding the past, present,

and future threats facing this

subspecies. The Buena Vista Lake shrew

is threatened primarily by agricultural

activities, modifications and potential

impacts to local hydrology, uncertainty

of water delivery to the Preserve,

possible toxic effects from selenium

poisoning, and by random naturally

occurring events. Only one known

population exists, and any decrease in

its numbers could result in decreased

genetic variability. Because of the high

potential that these threats, if realized,

will result in the extinction of the Buena

Vista Lake shrew, the preferred action is

to list the subspecies as endangered. Not

listing the subspecies or listing it as

threatened would not provide adequate

protection and would not be consistent

with the Act.

Critical Habitat

Critical habitat is defined in section 3

of the Act as: (i) The specific areas

within the geographical area occupied

by the species, at the time it is listed in

accordance with the Act, on which are

found those physical or biological

features (I) essential to the conservation

of the species and (II) that may require

special management considerations or

protection and; (ii) specific areas

outside the geographical area occupied

by a species at the time it is listed, upon

a determination that such areas are

essential for the conservation of the

species. ‘‘Conservation’’ means the use

of all methods and procedures needed

to bring the species to the point at

which listing under the Act is no longer

necessary.

Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as

amended, and implementing regulations

(50 CFR 424.12) require that, to the

maximum extent prudent and

determinable, we designate critical

habitat at the time the species is

determined to be endangered or

threatened. Our regulations (50 CFR

424.12(a)(1)) state that the designation

of critical habitat is not prudent when

one or both of the following situations

exist—(1) the species is threatened by

taking or other human activity, and

identification of critical habitat can be

expected to increase the degree of threat

to the species, or (2) such designation of

critical habitat would not be beneficial

to the species.

We propose that critical habitat is

prudent for Sorex ornatus relictus. In

the last few years, a series of court

decisions have overturned Service

determinations regarding a variety of

species that designation of critical

habitat would not be prudent (e.g.,

Natural Resources Defense Council v.

U.S. Department of the Interior 113 F.

3d 1121 (9th Cir. 1997); Conservation

Council for Hawaii v. Babbitt, 2 F. Supp.

2d 1280 (D. Hawaii 1998)). Based on the

standards applied in those judicial

opinions, we believe that designation of

critical habitat would be prudent for

Sorex ornatus relictus.

In the absence of a finding that critical

habitat would increase threats to a

species, if any benefits would result

from critical habitat designation, then a

prudent finding is warranted. In the

case of this species, designation of

critical habitat may provide some

benefits. The primary regulatory effect

of critical habitat is the section 7

requirement that Federal agencies

refrain from taking any action that

destroys or adversely modifies critical

habitat. While a critical habitat

designation for habitat currently

occupied by this species would not be

likely to change the section 7

consultation outcome because an action

that destroys or adversely modifies such

critical habitat would also be likely to

result in jeopardy to the species, in

some instances, section 7 consultation

might be triggered only if critical habitat

is designated. Examples could include

unoccupied habitat or occupied habitat

that may become unoccupied in the

future. Designating critical habitat may

also provide some educational or

informational benefits. Therefore, we

find that critical habitat is prudent for

the Buena Vista Lake shrew.

As explained in detail in the Final

Listing Priority Guidance for FY 2000

(64 FR 57114), our listing budget is

currently insufficient to allow us to

immediately complete all of the listing

actions required by the Act. We plan to

employ a priority system for deciding

which outstanding critical habitat

designations should be addressed first.

We will focus our efforts on those

designations that will provide the most

conservation benefit, taking into

consideration the efficacy of critical

habitat designation in addressing the

threats to the species, and the

magnitude and immediacy of those

threats. Deferral of the critical habitat

designation for the Buena Vista Lake

shrew will allow us to concentrate our

limited resources on higher priority

critical habitat and other listing actions,

while allowing us to put in place

protections needed for the conservation

of the Buena Vista Lake shrew without

further delay. We will make the final

critical habitat determination with the

final listing determination for the shrew.

If this final critical habitat

determination is that critical habitat

designation is prudent, we will develop

a proposal to designate critical habitat

for the Buena Vista Lake shrew as soon

as feasible, considering our workload

priorities.

Available Conservation Measures

Conservation measures provided for

species listed as endangered or

threatened under the Act include

recognition, recovery actions,

requirements for Federal protection, and

prohibitions against certain practices.

Recognition through listing results in

public awareness and conservation

actions by Federal, State, and local

agencies, private organizations, and

individuals. The Act provides for

possible land acquisition and

cooperation with the States, and

requires that recovery actions be carried

out for all listed species. The protection

required by Federal agencies and the

prohibitions against certain activities

are discussed, in part, below.

Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended,

requires Federal agencies to evaluate

their actions with respect to any species

that is proposed or listed as endangered

or threatened, and with respect to its

critical habitat, if any is being

designated. Regulations implementing

this interagency cooperation provision

of the Act are codified in 50 CFR part

402. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires

Federal agencies to ensure that activities

they authorize, fund, or carry out are not

likely to jeopardize the continued

existence of a listed species or destroy

or adversely modify its critical habitat.

If a Federal action may affect a listed

species or its critical habitat, the

responsible Federal agency must enter

into formal consultation with us.

Federal agency actions that may

require conference and/or consultation

as described in the preceding paragraph

include the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers and their authorization of

projects such as the construction of

drainage diversions, roads, bridges, and

dredging projects subject to section 404

of the Clean Water Act.

The Buena Vista Lake shrew has been

included as a candidate species in the

Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the

San Joaquin Valley of California

(Recovery Plan) (U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service 1998). Historically, the Buena

Vista Lake shrew was most common in

wetland habitat, and all of its extant and

potential habitat is included within the

habitats of the listed species that use

alkali sink and associated communities.

Because the subspecies is not federally

listed as endangered or threatened, the

recovery actions are identified as

conservation actions and are designed to

ensure long-term conservation. The

recovery actions include additional

surveys in areas of potentially suitable

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules 35039

habitat, habitat restoration and creation

on private as well as public lands, and

study of the feasibility of reintroduction

at the Tule Elk State Reserve near

Tupman, California. Also identified as

needed conservation actions are

population genetic studies, as well as

the continuous monitoring of the only

known viable population at the

Preserve.

The Act and its implementing

regulations set forth a series of general

prohibitions and exceptions that apply

to all endangered wildlife. The

prohibitions, codified at 50 CFR 17.21,

in part, make it illegal for any person

subject to the jurisdiction of the United

States to take (includes harass, harm,

pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap,

capture, or collect; or to attempt any of

these), import or export, ship in

interstate commerce in the course of

commercial activity, or sell or offer for

sale in interstate or foreign commerce

any endangered wildlife species. It is

also illegal to possess, sell, deliver,

carry, transport, or ship any such

wildlife that has been taken illegally.

Certain exceptions apply to our agents

and State conservation agencies.

Permits may also be issued to carry

out otherwise prohibited activities

involving endangered wildlife under

certain circumstances. Regulations

governing permits are codified at 50

CFR 17.22 and 17.23. Such permits are

available for scientific purposes, to

enhance the propagation or survival of

the species, and for incidental take in

connection with otherwise lawful

activities.

As published in the Federal Register

on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34272) our

policy, to identify to the maximum

extent practicable at the time a species

is listed those activities that would or

would not constitute a violation of

section 9 of the Act. The intent of this

policy is to increase public awareness of

the effect of a proposed listing on

proposed and ongoing activities within

a species’ range.

We believe that, based on the best

available information, the following

actions will not likely result in a

violation of section 9, provided these

actions are carried out in accordance

with any existing regulations and permit

requirements:

(1) Actions that may affect the Buena

Vista Lake shrew that are authorized,

funded, or carried out by a Federal

agency, when the action is conducted in

accordance with a biological opinion

issued by us pursuant to section 7 of the

Act; and

(2) Actions that may affect the Buena

Vista Lake shrew when the action is a

part of an approved habitat conservation

plan and conducted in accordance with

an incidental take permit issued by us

pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the

Act.

Activities that we believe could likely

result in a violation of section 9 include,

but are not limited to:

(1) Actions not authorized under

section 7 or 10 of the Act that lead to

the destruction or alteration of occupied

Buena Vista Lake shrew habitat through

the discharge of fill material, draining,

ditching, tiling, pond construction, rock

removal, stream channelization, or

diversion of ground water flow into or

out of riparian habitat of this subspecies

that are associated with activities such

as the construction or installation of

roads, impoundments, discharge or

drain pipes, and storm water detention

basins;

(2) Burning, cutting, or mowing of

riparian vegetation that results in death

of injury to Buena Vista Lake shrews or

that results in degradation of their

occupied habitat;

(3) Application of pesticides that

results in death of or injury to Buena

Vista Lake shrews; and

(4) Discharging or dumping toxic

chemicals or other pollutants (such as

sewage, oil, or gasoline) that results in

death of or injury to Buena Vista Lake

shrews.

Direct your questions regarding

whether specific activities may

constitute a violation of section 9 to the

Field Supervisor of the Sacramento Fish

and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES

section). Requests for copies of the

regulations concerning listed wildlife

and general inquiries regarding

prohibitions and permits may be

addressed to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service, Ecological Services,

Endangered Species Permits, 911 NE.

11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232–

4181 (telephone 503/231–2063;

facsimile 503/231–6243).

Public Comments Solicited

We intend that any final action

resulting from this proposal will be as

accurate and as effective as possible.

Therefore, comments or suggestions

from the public, other concerned

governmental agencies, the scientific

community, industry, or any other

interested party concerning this

proposed rule are hereby solicited. We

will follow our current peer review

policy (59 FR 34270) in the processing

of this rule. Comments are sought

particularly concerning:

(1) Biological, commercial, or other

relevant data concerning any threat (or

lack thereof) to the Buena Vista Lake

shrew;

(2) The location of any additional

populations of this subspecies and

habitat association (including specific

vegetation and soil type), and the

reasons why any habitat should or

should not be determined to be critical

habitat as provided by section 4 of the

Act;

(3) Additional information concerning

the range, distribution, and population

size and genetics of this subspecies;

(4) Current or planned activities in the

subject area and their possible impacts

on this subspecies; and

(5) Additional relevant information

concerning the life-history, habits, and

dispersal of this subspecies.

A final determination for this

subspecies will take into consideration

the comments and any additional

information received by us. Such

communications may lead to a final

determination that differs from this

proposal.

The Act provides for one or more

public hearings on this proposal, if

requested. Requests must be received

within 45 days of the date of publication

of the proposal in the Federal Register.

Such requests must be made in writing

and addressed to the Field Supervisor,

Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office

(see ADDRESSES section).

National Environmental Policy Act

We have determined that

environmental assessments and

environmental impact statements, as

defined in the National Environmental

Policy Act of 1969, need not be

prepared in connection with regulations

adopted pursuant to section 4(a) of the

Act. We published a notice outlining

our reasons for this determination in the

Federal Register on October 25, 1983

(48 FR 49244).

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not contain any new

collections of information other than

those already approved under the

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq., and assigned Office of

Management and Budget clearance

number 1018–0094. An agency may not

conduct or sponsor, and a person is not

required to respond to, a collection of

information unless it displays a

currently valid control number. For

additional information concerning

permit and associated requirements for

endangered species, see 50 CFR 17.21

and 17.22.

References Cited

A complete list of all references cited

herein is available upon request from

the Field Supervisor, Sacramento Fish

35040 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 106 / Thursday, June 1, 2000 / Proposed Rules

and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES

section).

Author

The primary author of this proposed

rule is Dwight Harvey, U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, Sacramento Fish and

Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

Endangered and threatened species,

Exports, Imports, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements,

Transportation.

Proposed Regulations Promulgation

Accordingly, we propose to amend

part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title

50 of the Code of Federal Regulations,

as set forth below:

PART 17—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 17

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 6 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C.

1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99–

625, 100 Stat. 3500, unless otherwise noted.

2. Section 17.11(h) is amended by

adding the following, in alphabetical

order under ‘‘MAMMALS,’’ to the List

of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife:

§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened

wildlife.

* * * * *

(h) * * *

Species

Historic range

Vertebrate population where endangered or threatened

Status When listed Critical

habitat

Special

rules Common name Scientific name

MAMMALS

*******

Shrew, Buena Vista

Lake.

Sorex ornatus

relictus.

U.S.A. (CA) ............. Entire ...................... E 699 NA NA

*******

Dated: May 16, 2000.

Jamie Rappaport Clark,

Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 00–13706 Filed 5–31–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 622

[Docket No. 000511131–0131–01; I.D.

021500A]

RIN 0648–AM75

Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of

Mexico, and South Atlantic; Coastal

Migratory Pelagic Resources of the

Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic;

Amendment 12

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to implement

Amendment 12 to the Fishery

Management Plan for the Coastal

Migratory Pelagic Resources of the Gulf

of Mexico and South Atlantic

(Amendment 12). This rule would

extend the current moratorium on the

issuance of commercial vessel permits

for king mackerel through October 15,

2005. The intended effects of this

proposed rule are to prevent speculative

entry into the fishery and provide

stability in the fishery.

DATES: Comments must be received no

later than 5 p.m., eastern standard time,

on July 3, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the

proposed rule must be sent to Dr. Steve

Branstetter, Southeast Regional Office,

NMFS, 9721 Executive Center Drive N.,

St. Petersburg, FL 33702. Comments

also may be sent via fax to 727–570–

5583. Comments will not be accepted if

submitted via e-mail or Internet.

Comments regarding the collection-ofinformation requirements contained in

this rule should be sent to Edward E.

Burgess, Southeast Regional Office,

NMFS, 9721 Executive Center Drive N.,

St. Petersburg, FL 33702, and to the

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget (OMB), Washington, DC 20503

(Attention: NOAA Desk Officer).

Copies of Amendment 12, which

includes an environmental assessment

and a regulatory impact review (RIR),

may be obtained from the Gulf of

Mexico Fishery Management Council,

Suite 1000, 3018 U.S. Highway 301

North, Tampa, FL 33619; telephone:

813–228–2815; fax: 813–225–7015; email: Gulf.Council@noaa.gov; or from

the South Atlantic Fishery Management

Council, Southpark Building, One

Southpark Circle, Suite 306, Charleston,

SC 29407–4699; telephone: 843–571–

4366; fax: 843–769–4520; e-mail:

Safmc@noaa.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

Steve Branstetter; telephone: 727–570–

5305; fax: 727–570–5583; e-mail:

Steve.Branstetter@noaa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

fisheries for coastal migratory pelagic

resources are managed under the

Fishery Management Plan for the

Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources of

the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic

(FMP). The FMP was prepared jointly

by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery

Management Council and the South

Atlantic Fishery Management Council

(Councils), approved by NMFS, and

implemented under the authority of the

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act

(Magnuson-Stevens Act) by regulations

at 50 CFR part 622.

Background

Amendment 8 to the FMP,

implemented in March 1998 (63 FR

10561, March 4, 1998), established a

moratorium on commercial king

mackerel permits through October 15,

2000. To obtain a king mackerel permit

under the moratorium, a vessel owner

must have owned a vessel with a

commercial vessel permit for king

mackerel on or before October 16, 1995,

the control date for the king mackerel

fishery (60 FR 53576, October 16, 1995).

The intent of the moratorium is to

prevent further increases in effort, to

stabilize the economic performance of

current participants, and possibly to

reduce the number of permittees in the

king mackerel fishery. The Councils

noted that the number of commercial

vessel permits for mackerel had

increased from 1,280 to 2,754 between

the 1987–88 and 1997–98 fishing years.

As of March 25, 1999, the number of

king and Spanish mackerel permits has

declined to 2,109.

Under section 303(d)(1)(A) of the

Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Councils are