32304 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2001 / Proposed Rules

[FR Doc. 01–15020 Filed 6–13–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Parts 223 and 224

[Docket No. 010522134–1134–01; I.D.

050201D]

RIN 0648–XA69

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

and Plants; 90-Day Finding for a

Petition to list Bocaccio (Sebastes

paucispinis) as Threatened

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration,

Commerce.

ACTION: Notification of 90-day petition

finding and request for comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS has received a petition

to list the southern bocaccio (Sebastes

paucispinis) as a threatened species and

to designate critical habitat concurrent

with the listing. NMFS finds that the

petition presents substantial scientific

and commercial information indicating

that the request for listing may be

warranted. Therefore, NMFS is

conducting a status review to determine

whether the petitioned action is

warranted. To assure that the review is

comprehensive, NMFS is soliciting

information and data regarding this

species and its habitat from any

interested party. NMFS will use

information received during the

comment period and other information

in its review of the status of the

southern bocaccio.

DATES: Comments and information must

be received by August 13, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the

petition and comments regarding the

listing of bocaccio should be submitted

to Jim Lecky, Assistant Regional

Administrator for Protected Resources,

501 W. Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long

Beach, CA, 90802–4213. The petition

and supporting data are available for

public inspection by appointment,

Monday through Friday, at the same

address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim

Lecky, NMFS Southwest Region, 562/

980–4000; or Marta Nammack, NMFS

Office of Protected Resources, 301/713–

1401, ext. 116.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 4 of the Endangered Species

Act (ESA) contains provisions allowing

interested persons to petition the

Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary

of Commerce (Secretary) to add a

species to or remove a species from the

List of Endangered and Threatened

Wildlife and to designate critical

habitat. On January 30, 2001, NMFS

received a petition from the Natural

Resources Defense Council, Center for

Biological Diversity, and Center for

Marine Conservation (Petitioners) to list

the central/southern distinct population

segment of bocaccio, or, in the

alternative, bocaccio throughout its

entire range as threatened under the

ESA and to designate critical habitat.

Petitioners contend that bocaccio

have suffered precipitous population

declines over the last several decades

and that these population declines

threaten bocaccio with extinction and

compromise its ability to recover. The

primary factor identified by Petitioners

is overutilization, specifically

overfishing by fisheries targeting

bocaccio and as bycatch in other

fisheries. Other factors identified by

Petitioners as contributing to the status

of bocaccio include inadequate

regulatory mechanisms, habitat

modification due to bottom trawl fishing

gear, pollution of nearshore habitat used

by juvenile bocaccio, and shifts in

oceanographic conditions.

NMFS has recognized two separate

West Coast bocaccio populations,

divided at approximately 36° N.

latitude. The southern population

(south of 36° N. latitude), which ranges

from Cape Mendocino to Baja

California, Mexico, is the stock for

which NMFS has received a petition

and is synonymous with what

Petitioners have called the central/

southern population of bocaccio. In the

1999 stock assessment report for

southern bocaccio, the spawning output

of the southern bocaccio stock was

estimated to be 2.1 percent of the

estimated spawning output at its

unfished level. This stock was

designated as overfished under the

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act on

March 3, 1999.

Initial stock rebuilding measures were

implemented through the 2000 annual

specifications and management

measures for Pacific coast groundfish.

These measures included the setting of

a conservative allowable biological

catch level and optimum yield level.

These conservative levels precluded any

directed targeting of bocaccio and

reserved allowable catch to incidental

catch in other fisheries. On September

5, 2000, NMFS announced formal

approval of the rebuilding plan for

southern bocaccio (65 FR 53646).

On December 29, 2000, NMFS

published a final rule (65 FR 82947)

approving Amendment 12 to the Pacific

Coast Groundfish Fishery Management

Plan and disapproving three overfished

stock rebuilding plans, including the

plan previously approved for bocaccio.

Amendment 12 provides framework

procedures for developing overfished

species rebuilding plans, for setting

guidelines for rebuilding plan contents,

and procedures for submitting

rebuilding plans to NMFS for review

and approval/disapproval. The three

rebuilding plans that were disapproved

in that action were disapproved because

of inconsistencies with the new

procedure and guidelines established by

Amendment 12, not because the harvest

limits were inadequate to provide for

rebuilding of the stock. The Pacific

Fishery Management Council (PFMC)

will resubmit recommended rebuilding

plans for review by NMFS, consistent

with the requirements of Amendment

12, for the 2002 fishing year cycle.

In the presentation of their petition,

Petitioners rely on the information

produced by NMFS and the PFMC in

their evaluation of southern bocaccio

relative to overfishing criteria and a

review of published literature on the

status, distribution, and ecology of

bocaccio.

Finding

NMFS finds that Petitioners present

substantial scientific and commercial

information indicating that a listing may

be warranted, based on the criteria

specified in 50 CFR 424.14(b)(2).

Although a positive 90-day finding

under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA is

not a decision to list a species, this

finding requires that a review of the

status of southern bocaccio be

completed within 12 months of

receiving the petition (by January 30,

2002) to determine whether the

petitioned action is warranted.

Listing Factors and Basis For

Determinations

Under section 4 (a) (1) of the ESA, a

species can be determined to be

endangered or threatened for any of the

following reasons: (1) The present or

threatened destruction, modification, or

curtailment of its habitat or range; (2)

overutilization for commercial,

recreational, scientific, or educational

purposes; (3) disease or predation; (4)

the inadequacy of existing regulatory

mechanisms; or (5) other natural or

manmade factors affecting its continued

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2001 / Proposed Rules 32305

existence. Listing determinations are

based solely on the best scientific and

commercial data available, after

conducting a review of the status of the

species and taking into account efforts

made by states or foreign nations to

protect such species.

Information Solicited

To ensure that the southern

population of bocaccio (Sebastes

paucispinis) status review is complete

and based on the best available

scientific and commercial data, NMFS is

soliciting information and comments on

whether the southern population of

bocaccio is threatened by any of the

listing criteria described above.

Specifically, NMFS is soliciting

information in the following areas:

Historical abundance, current

abundance, factors contributing to

population declines, sources of

mortality other than commercial and

recreational fishing, habitat use, habitat

condition, factors affecting habitat

condition, and distinctness of the

southern population. NMFS is also

soliciting information on efforts to

conserve bocaccio and the adequacy of

those efforts in achieving their intended

purpose.

Critical Habitat

NMFS is also requesting information

on areas that may qualify for critical

habitat for the southern population of

bocaccio. Areas that include the

physical and biological features

essential to the conservation of the

species and which may require special

management considerations of

protection should be identified. Areas

outside the current range of the species

may be included if they are necessary

for the conservation of the species.

Essential features should include, but

are not limited to: (1) space for

individual growth and for normal

behavior; (2) food, water, air, light,

minerals, or other nutritional or

physiological requirements; (3) cover or

shelter; (4) sites for reproduction and

development of offspring; and (5)

habitats that are protected from

disturbance or are representative of the

historical, geographical, and ecological

distribution of the species.

For areas potentially qualifying as

critical habitat, NMFS is requesting

information describing: (1) the activities

that affect the areas or could be affected

by the designation; and (2) the economic

costs and benefits of additional

requirements of management measures

likely to result from the designation.

Comments should include: (1)

supporting documentation, such as

maps, bibliographic references, or

reprints of pertinent publications, if

applicable, and (2) the commenting

party’s name, address, and association,

institution, or business.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; 16

U.S.C. 742a et seq.; 31 U.S.C. 9701; and 16

U.S.C. 1361 et seq.

Dated: June 7, 2001.

William T. Hogarth,

Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,

National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 01–15058 Filed 6–13–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Parts 223 and 224

[Docket No. 010522135–1135–01; I.D.

041601B]

RIN 0648–XA70

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

and Plants: 90-Day Finding for a

Petition To List Eastern North Pacific

Gray Whales as Threatened or

Endangered Under the Endangered

Species Act (ESA)

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Notification of 90-day petition

finding.

SUMMARY: NMFS received a petition to

list Eastern North Pacific gray whales

(Eschrichtius robustus) as threatened or

endangered under the ESA. NMFS finds

that the petition does not present

substantial scientific or commercial

information to warrant the petitioned

action.

DATES: This petition finding was made

on May 21, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the petition may

be obtained by writing to Chief, Marine

Mammal Conservation Division, NMFS,

1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring,

MD 20910.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

Thomas Eagle at (301) 713–2322, ext.

105, e-mail tom.eagle@noaa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 4 (b)(3) of the ESA contains

provisions concerning petitions from

interested persons requesting the

Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to

list species under the ESA. Section

4(b)(3)(A) requires that, to the maximum

extent practicable, within 90 days after

receiving such a petition, the Secretary

make a finding whether the petition

presents substantial scientific or

commercial information indicating that

the petitioned action may be warranted.

NMFS’ regulations define ‘‘substantial

information’’ as the amount of

information that would lead a

reasonable person to believe that the

measure proposed in the petition may

be warranted (see 50 CFR 424.14).

Section 424.14(b)(2) of these regulations

contains factors the Secretary considers

in evaluating a petitioned action.

NMFS received a petition on March

28, 2001, from D.J. Schubert (Petitioner),

on behalf of Australians for Animals,

The Fund for Animals, and ‘‘several

other organizations,’’ to list the Eastern

North Pacific stock of gray whales as

threatened or endangered under the

ESA. Petitioner claims that listing the

stock as threatened or endangered is

necessary to protect the stock or its

habitat from substantial threats. These

suggested threats include an apparent

decline in benthic amphipods (the gray

whale’s primary food supply) and a lack

of adequate regulatory mechanisms to

protect the gray whale and its habitat.

Petitioner claims that threats to

amphipods are caused by direct,

indirect and cumulative impacts of

global warming and El Nin ̃ o-Southern

Oscillation (ENSO) events, the

destruction of benthic amphipods and

their habitat by bottom trawling, and

contaminant impacts to amphipod

survival and production. In light of the

suggested threats to its food supply and

inadequacy of regulatory mechanisms,

Petitioner also claims that gray whales

are threatened by aboriginal harvests,

documented and undocumented

mortality, oil and gas exploration, and

other impacts.

Gray Whales and the ESA

Prior to enactment of the ESA of 1973,

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

(FWS) included gray whales (among

several genera of baleen whales) on its

1970 list of endangered species (35 FR

8491, June 2, 1970). This list was

compiled from information submitted

by international conservation

organizations, foreign fish and wildlife

agencies, individual scientists, and

trade sources. The endangered species

list was appended to regulations that

established conservation measures for

endangered species through general

restrictions on importation of listed

species.

NMFS completed its first status

review of gray whales in 1984 and

concluded that the stock was not in

danger of extinction. That status review

recommended a change in the status of