[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 182 (Tuesday, September 21, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57431-57436]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-23486]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Parts 223 and 224

[Docket No. 100903415-04-02]
RIN 0648-XW96


Listing Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day 
Finding on a Petition to List Atlantic Bluefin Tuna as Threatened or 
Endangered under the Endangered Species Act

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: 90-day petition finding; request for information.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY:  We, NMFS, announce a 90-day finding for a petition to list 
Atlantic bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) as endangered or threatened 
under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and to designate critical 
habitat concurrently with a listing. We find that the petition presents 
substantial scientific information indicating the petitioned action may 
be warranted. We will conduct a status review of Atlantic bluefin tuna 
to determine if the petitioned action is warranted. To ensure that the 
review is comprehensive, we solicit information pertaining to this 
species from any interested party.

DATES:  Information related to this petition finding must be received 
by November 22, 2010.

ADDRESSES:  You may submit comments, identified by RIN 0648-XW96, by 
any of the following methods:
    <bullet> Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public 
comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal http//www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    <bullet> Mail or hand-delivery: Assistant Regional Administrator, 
NMFS, Northeast Regional Office, 55 Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, 
MA 01930.
    All comments received are a part of the public record and will 
generally be

[[Page 57432]]

posted to http://www.regulations.gov without change. All Personal 
Identifying Information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily 
submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit 
Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected 
information.
    NMFS will accept anonymous comments. Attachments to electronic 
comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or 
Adobe PDF file formats only.
    The petition and other pertinent information are also available 
electronically at the NMFS website at http://www.nero.noaa.gov/prot_res/CandidateSpeciesProgram/csr.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim Damon-Randall, NMFS, Northeast 
Regional Office (978) 282-8485 or Marta Nammack, NMFS, Office of 
Protected Resources (301) 713-1401.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On May 24, 2010, we received a petition from the Center for 
Biological Diversity (CBD) to list Atlantic bluefin tuna (Thunnus 
thynnus) as threatened or endangered under the ESA and designate 
critical habitat concurrently with its listing. The petition contains 
information on the species, including the taxonomy, historical and 
current distribution, physical and biological characteristics of its 
habitat and ecosystem relationships, population status and trends, and 
factors contributing to the species' decline. In its petition, CBD 
references information contained in the proposal prepared by Monaco for 
the 15th Conference of the Parties (CoP15) to the Convention on 
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora 
(CITES) to list Atlantic bluefin tuna under Appendix I. This document 
is referenced in this finding as ``CITES, 2010.'' CBD contends that 
``Atlantic bluefin tuna suffers from mismanagement by an ineffective 
international organization, rampant illegal fishing as a consequence of 
extraordinary market demand, complicated and poorly understood 
population dynamics, and a diversity of habitat threats.'' The 
petitioner presents information in the petition regarding the declining 
trend of both the eastern Atlantic/Mediterranean and western Atlantic 
stocks and what it characterizes as the lack of management measures 
both nationally and internationally to fully address and reverse the 
declines. The petitioner presents genetic information and life history 
information, asserting that at least two distinct population segments 
(DPS) of Atlantic bluefin tuna exist. CBD also contends that the 
Deepwater Horizon/BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico occurred during 
spawning in the only known spawning grounds of the western Atlantic 
stock and is likely to have significant long-term effects on bluefin 
tuna, possibly having the potential to ``devastate the population.''

ESA Statutory Provisions and Policy Considerations

    Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)) requires 
that we make a finding as to whether a petition to list, delist, or 
reclassify a species presents substantial scientific or commercial 
information indicating the petitioned action may be warranted. ESA 
implementing regulations define substantial information as the amount 
of information that would lead a reasonable person to believe the 
measure proposed in the petition may be warranted (50 CFR 
424.14(b)(1)). In determining whether substantial information exists 
for a petition to list a species, we take into account several factors, 
including information submitted with, and referenced in, the petition 
and all other information readily available in our files. To the 
maximum extent practicable, this finding is to be made within 90 days 
of the receipt of the petition (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)), and the 
finding is to be published promptly in the Federal Register. If we find 
that a petition presents substantial information indicating that the 
requested action may be warranted, section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA 
requires the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to conduct a status 
review of the species. Section 4(b)(3)(B) requires the Secretary to 
make a finding as to whether or not the petitioned action is warranted 
within 12 months of the receipt of the petition. The Secretary has 
delegated the authority for these actions to the NOAA Assistant 
Administrator for Fisheries.
    The ESA defines an endangered species as ``any species which is in 
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its 
range'' (ESA section 3(6)). A threatened species is defined as a 
species that is ``likely to become an endangered species within the 
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its 
range'' (ESA section 3(19)). Under the ESA, a listing determination can 
address a species, subspecies, or a DPS of a vertebrate species (16 
U.S.C. 1532 (16)). Under section 4(a)(1) of the ESA, a species may be 
determined to be threatened or endangered as a result of any one of the 
following factors: (A) present or threatened destruction, modification, 
or curtailment of habitat or range; (B) over-utilization for 
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C) 
disease or predation; (D) inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; 
or (E) other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued 
existence. Listing determinations are made solely on the basis of the 
best scientific and commercial data available, after conducting a 
review of the status of the species and taking into account efforts 
made by any state or foreign nation to protect such species.

Life History of the Atlantic Bluefin Tuna

    Atlantic bluefin tuna are found throughout the North Atlantic Ocean 
and adjacent seas, including the Mediterranean Sea. They are pelagic, 
highly migratory species occupying coastal and open ocean areas up to 
depths of 200 meters (m) (SCRS, 2008). Based on reproductive isolation 
due to the existence of separate spawning grounds and the absence of 
spawning in the middle of the North Atlantic, associated genetic 
differentiation, and differing ages at maturity, the International 
Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) manages this 
highly migratory species as two separate stocks the eastern Atlantic 
and western Atlantic (SCRS, 2008).
    The Atlantic bluefin tuna is the largest of the tuna species. 
Maximum lengths can exceed 4 meters (m) (13.1 feet), and weights of up 
to 900 kilograms (kg) (1,984.2 lb) have been reported in various 
fisheries in the western Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea (SCRS, 2008). 
As large predators, bluefin tuna play an important role in pelagic 
ecosystems (Rooker et al., 2007). Juveniles prey primarily on fish, 
crustaceans, and cephalopods, and adults feed primarily on fish such as 
herring, anchovy, sand lance, sardine, sprat, bluefish, and mackerel 
(Fromentin, 2006).
    The western Atlantic stock is believed to reach maturity at 8 or 
more years of age while the eastern Atlantic stock is believed to 
mature at 4 to 6 years of age (Medina et al., 2002 cited in Fromentin 
and Powers, 2005). The western Atlantic stock spawns in the Gulf of 
Mexico from March through May, while in the Mediterranean spawning 
occurs from May to June in the eastern portion and June to July in the 
central and western portions (Nishikawa et al., 1985; Mather et al., 
1995; Schaefer, 2001, cited in Fromentin and Powers, 2005). Bluefin 
tuna are oviparous (i.e., lay eggs) and iteroparous (i.e., spawn 
regularly), and are multiple batch spawners (Schaefer, 2001, cited in 
Fromentin and Powers,

[[Page 57433]]

2005). According to Teo et al. (2007), bluefin tuna appear to spawn in 
consecutive years. Fecundity (i.e., the number of eggs produced) is 
size dependent. Fromentin (2006) determined that fertilization takes 
place directly in the water column, and hatching occurs without 
parental care after 2 days. Larvae are pelagic and resorb the yolk sac 
within a few days (Fromentin and Powers, 2005).

Analysis of Petition and Information Readily Available in NMFS Files

    In the following sections, we use the information presented in the 
petition and in our files to: (1) describe the distribution of Atlantic 
bluefin tuna; (2) determine whether Atlantic bluefin tuna populations 
may meet the criteria for being identified as DPSs; and, (3) evaluate 
whether Atlantic bluefin tuna populations proposed by the petitioners 
are at abundance levels that would lead a reasonable person to conclude 
that listing under the ESA may be warranted due to any of the factors 
listed under section 4(a)(1) of the ESA.

Analysis of DPS Information

    To be considered for listing under the ESA, a group of organisms 
must constitute a ``species.'' A ``species'' is defined in section 3 of 
the ESA to include ``any subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, and 
any distinct population segment of any species of vertebrate fish or 
wildlife which interbreeds when mature.'' On February 7, 1996, NMFS and 
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (collectively, the ``Services'') 
adopted a policy to clarify their interpretation of the phrase 
``distinct population segment of any species of vertebrate fish or 
wildlife'' (61 FR 4722). The joint DPS policy describes two criteria 
that must be considered when identifying DPSs: (1) the discreteness of 
the population segment in relation to the remainder of the species (or 
subspecies) to which it belongs; and (2) the significance of the 
population segment to the remainder of the species (or subspecies) to 
which it belongs. As further stated in the joint policy, if a 
population segment is discrete and significant (i.e., it is a DPS), its 
evaluation for endangered or threatened status will be based on the 
ESA's definition of those terms and a review of the five factors 
enumerated in section 4(a)(1) of the ESA.
    Under the DPS policy, a population segment may be determined to be 
discrete if: (1) it is markedly separated from other populations of the 
same taxon as a consequence of physical, physiological, ecological or 
behavioral factors; and/or (2) the population is delimited by 
international boundaries within which differences in control of 
exploitation, management of habitat, conservation status, or regulatory 
mechanisms exist that are significant in light of section 4(a)(1)(D) of 
the ESA. As noted previously in the petition, CBD presents information 
to support its claim that there are at least two DPSs of Atlantic 
bluefin tuna. CBD contends that Atlantic bluefin tuna meet at least 
one, if not both, of the discreteness criteria. The spawning grounds of 
the eastern and western stocks are separated (e.g., Gulf of Mexico and 
Mediterranean Sea), and there are significant genetic differences and 
unique ages of maturity (markedly separated from other populations of 
the same taxon). Bluefin tuna in the Mediterranean mature at 
considerably younger ages (e.g., 4 to 6 years) than fish from the Gulf 
of Mexico, which were described to mature at age 8 or older and at much 
larger sizes (SCRS, 2008). Fromentin et al. (2005) and several other 
authors have confirmed that bluefin tuna exhibits a strong homing 
behavior and strong spawning site fidelity. ICCAT manages the species 
as two separate stocks with separate Total Allowable Catch (TAC) levels 
for the western stock and eastern stock (which are delimited by 
international boundaries within which there are significant management 
differences).
    The DPS policy also cites examples of potential considerations 
indicating significance, including: (1) persistence of the discrete 
population segment in an ecological setting unusual or unique for the 
taxon; (2) evidence that loss of the discrete population segment would 
result in a significant gap in the range of the taxon; (3) evidence 
that the DPS represents the only surviving natural occurrence of a 
taxon that may be more abundant elsewhere as an introduced population 
outside its historic range; or, (4) evidence that the discrete 
population segment differs markedly from other populations of the 
species in its genetic characteristics.
    CBD presents information to support its claim that the two discrete 
populations are significant, including evidence that: (1) they persist 
in ecological settings that are unusual or unique for the taxon; (2) 
loss of a population would result in a significant gap in the range of 
the species; and (3) there are significant genetic differences between 
the two stocks. CBD notes that the habitat in the Gulf of Mexico is 
unique from that found in the Mediterranean. Carlsson et al. (2007) 
provide information on trans-Atlantic migrations of the species as well 
as genetic evidence indicating that the two populations are genetically 
diverse. According to CBD, the genetic differentiation between the two 
stocks supports the assertion that, if one population were to be lost, 
this would result in the significant loss of genetic diversity and, 
therefore, a significant gap in the range of the taxon. Based on the 
information in the petition, and on information readily available in 
our files prior to receipt of the petition, there is evidence that the 
eastern and western Atlantic stocks of Atlantic bluefin tuna may be 
discrete and significant. Thus, a full DPS analysis will be undertaken.

Abundance

    CBD asserts that the eastern Atlantic bluefin tuna population is 
critically imperiled and faces imminent risk of extinction, basing this 
contention on information which suggests that the population has 
declined more than 80 percent since 1970 (CITES, 2010). CBD cites a 
stock assessment conducted in 2008 by SCRS who determined that the 
spawning stock biomass (SSB) for the eastern Atlantic stock in 2007 was 
78,724 tonnes (t). This contrasts with the biomass peak of 305,136 t in 
1958 and 201,479 t in 1997 (CITES, 2010). As noted in the petition, 
CITES (2010) indicates that the absolute extent of decline over the 50-
year historical period from 1957 to 2007 is estimated to be 74.2 
percent, and the majority of that decline occurred in the last 10 
years.
    CBD also contends that the western Atlantic bluefin tuna population 
is at imminent risk of extinction. According to the petition, a history 
of intense fishing pressure has resulted in declines of over 80 percent 
since 1970 (CITES, 2010). The SSB for the western Atlantic stock was 
estimated in 2007 to be 8,693 t, declining from 49,482 t in 1970 (SCRS, 
2009). This represents an 82.4 percent decline over the 38-year 
historical period (SCRS, 2009). Since the early 1990s, the SSB has 
remained relatively stable at approximately 15-18 percent of its pre-
exploitation biomass (SCRS, 2009).
    CBD notes that at the 2010 CITES Conference of the Parties (CoP15), 
the Principality of Monaco proposed to include the Atlantic bluefin 
tuna in Appendix I (CBD, 2010). According to the CITES definitions, 
Appendix I lists species that ``are the most endangered among CITES-
listed animals and plants. They are threatened with extinction, and 
CITES prohibits the international trade in specimens of these species 
except when the purpose of the import is not commercial, for instance 
for scientific research.'' The listing proposal did not receive the 
votes that it needed

[[Page 57434]]

to be adopted at CoP15. While the United States voted in favor of 
Monaco's proposal, its support was based on problems with compliance in 
the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean fishery, as well as the fact 
that the 2010 quota level adopted by ICCAT for this stock was not as 
low as the United States believed was necessary. Without improvement in 
these areas, the United States had concerns about the long-term 
viability of the bluefin tuna stock and fishery. A ban on the 
international commercial trade of bluefin tuna offered an additional 
tool to reduce fishing pressure and improve control of the eastern 
stock in order to enhance its conservation in order to meet ICCAT 
objectives (K. Blankenbeker, NMFS, personal communication, 2010).
    Also, as noted in the petition, the International Union for 
Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has listed western Atlantic bluefin tuna 
as critically endangered with an extremely high risk of extinction in 
the wild in the immediate future. According to IUCN, the population 
meets the critically endangered criteria of having declined in excess 
of 80 percent over the last 10 years or 3 generations. Eastern Atlantic 
bluefin tuna are classified by IUCN as endangered, meaning that this 
population is at very high risk of extinction in the wild in the near 
future based on a reduction of at least 50 percent over the last 10 
years or 3 generations. While the criteria for listing species under a 
CITES appendix or under IUCN are different from those used under the 
ESA, the information used to make these decisions may be informative 
and will be considered during the development of the status review 
where appropriate.

ESA Section 4(a)(1) Factors

Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of 
Habitat or Range
    In the petition, CBD states that worldwide habitat loss and 
degradation is one of the primary causes of the decline of Atlantic 
bluefin tuna. It indicates that threats to habitat from pollution and 
ocean climate change are having significant impacts globally. CBD cites 
information from the NMFS Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Essential Fish 
Habitat (EFH) assessment in which it is stated that habitat for these 
species is comprised of open ocean environments occurring over broad 
geographic ranges, and ``large-scale impacts such as global climate 
change that affect ocean temperatures, currents, and potentially food 
chain dynamics, are most likely to have an impact and pose the greatest 
threat to HMS EFH'' (NMFS, 2009). CBD indicates that effects from 
climate change are already impacting the North Atlantic Ocean with 
increasing water temperatures and sea levels, increased acidification, 
and changes in circulation patterns and nutrient supplies (Bindoff et 
al. 2007; Beaugrand, 2009). It asserts that changing ocean conditions 
as a result of climate change and ocean acidification may result in 
species shifts and ecosystem changes that may negatively affect 
Atlantic bluefin tuna. CBD states that climate change could impact 
Atlantic bluefin tuna prey availability, behavior, and water quality. 
According to CBD, ocean acidification may also decrease the sound 
absorption in seawater, which could affect spawning habitat, resulting 
in physiological or anatomical effects to the auditory systems, 
potential behavioral alterations, and auditory masking.
    The petitioners contend that oil and gas activities in the Gulf of 
Mexico pose a significant threat to the only known spawning grounds for 
the western Atlantic bluefin tuna population. According to CBD, the 
Deepwater Horizon/BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico occurred during 
spawning in the only known spawning grounds of the western Atlantic 
stock and is, therefore, likely to have significant long-term effects 
on bluefin tuna, possibly having the potential to devastate the 
population. In response to the oil spill, NMFS is examining, among 
other things, the historical distributions of spawners and larvae, as 
well as the distributions expected this year based on maps of optimal 
larval habitat, to determine the overlap of the oil spill with spawning 
bluefin tuna and their progeny (C. Porch, NMFS, personal communication, 
2010). It is not known how long the oil will remain in the Gulf and 
what the long-term effects to fish exposed to non-lethal concentrations 
of oil may be; however, the best available information on the effects 
from the oil spill to Atlantic bluefin tuna will need to be considered 
during the status review, including the results of current research and 
analyses being undertaken by NMFS.
Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific or Education 
Purposes
    In 2008, the ICCAT Standing Committee on Research and Statistics 
(SCRS) advised that, unless fishing mortality rates on the eastern 
Atlantic and Mediterranean stock of bluefin tuna were substantially 
reduced in the future, further reduction of SSB was likely, which could 
lead to a risk of fisheries and stock collapse (SCRS, 2009). For the 
eastern Atlantic bluefin tuna population, CBD notes that the SCRS 
indicated that continued fishing mortality rates at the 2007 levels 
were expected to drive the SSB to very low levels (approximately 18 
percent of the SSB in 1970 and 6 percent of the unfished SSB). CBD 
cites MacKenzie et al. (2009) who predicted that the adult eastern 
bluefin tuna population in 2011 will be 75 percent lower than in 2005 
and that the fishing quotas will permit the capture of all remaining 
adult fish. These authors noted that, at these low population sizes, 
reproduction of eastern Atlantic bluefin tuna is increasingly uncertain 
and could be limited by spawner biomass (MacKenzie et al., 2009). They 
conclude that the population is at risk of collapse in the next few 
years, which translates to a 90 percent decline in adult biomass within 
3 generations (MacKenzie et al., 2009). It is important to note that 
MacKenzie et al. (2009) made population projections based on the TAC 
levels ICCAT established for 2008 through 2010 (22,000 t, 19,950 t, and 
18,500 t, respectively). However, the TAC for 2010 has been reduced to 
13,500 t; therefore, the projections that were made may not reflect the 
current fishing pressure on the stock and may be overly pessimistic (G. 
Diaz, NMFS, personal communication, 2010).
    CBD asserts that the western Atlantic bluefin tuna population is 
also in imminent danger of extinction due to severe declines and 
ongoing fishing pressures. As stated previously, according to CBD, this 
stock has declined over 80 percent since 1970 due primarily to 
overfishing (CITES, 2010). The SSB has declined approximately 82.4 
percent over the 38-year historical period; however, since the early 
1990s, it has remained relatively stable at approximately 15-18 percent 
of its pre-exploitation biomass (SCRS, 2009). In 2008, the SCRS 
determined that the western Atlantic stock has been below the level 
required to produce the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) since the mid-
1970s, and fishing mortality rates have been above that which would 
produce MSY throughout the time series used in the stock assessment 
(which started in 1970). The SCRS also determined that 10 years after 
ICCAT adopted a rebuilding program (half way through the 20-year 
rebuilding period), the 2007 SSB was estimated to be 7 percent below 
the level of the rebuilding plan's first year (SCRS, 2008). Since 1998, 
the stock has generally stabilized, increasing in some years and 
decreasing in others (G. Diaz, NMFS, personal

[[Page 57435]]

communication, 2010). According to CITES (2010), there is also great 
uncertainty regarding potential recruitment of the western Atlantic 
stock. In addition, Safina and Klinger (2008) suggest that the western 
Atlantic stock is currently in danger of extinction and that a 
moratorium on fishing this stock should be implemented.
    According to the last ICCAT stock assessment (2008), the most 
pessimistic recruitment scenario indicates that even a closure of the 
fishery would not achieve rebuilding of the stock by 2019. However, 
under different assumptions of recruitment, recovery is projected to 
occur within this timeframe (SCRS, 2009). Fishing mortality of large 
western Atlantic bluefin tuna has declined recently, and the TAC was 
not taken for several years primarily because of U.S. underharvest, 
which ranged from 40 to 80 percent of its national quota in 2006-2008 
(SCRS, 2009). SCRS has indicated that there are two plausible 
explanations for this: (1) the availability of fish to the U.S. fishery 
has been abnormally low due to a change in the spatial distribution of 
the stock; and/or (2) the overall size of the population in the Western 
Atlantic declined substantially from the level of recent years (SCRS, 
2009). It is important to note that U.S. catches have steadily 
increased since 2006, and in 2009, the United States caught its entire 
base quota.
Predation and Disease
    According to CBD, emerging environmental stress on Atlantic bluefin 
tuna may make them more vulnerable to disease, and tuna ranching may 
also increase the prevalence and spread of disease. CBD asserts that 
confined or escaped fish present a threat to wild fish from the spread 
of disease and parasites, as confined fish are particularly vulnerable 
to disease. It also notes that diseases in confined fish that are 
controlled through the use of antibiotics can result in more virulent 
strains of disease that are then resistant to antibiotics. While it 
presents some information in the petition regarding disease, CBD does 
state that disease and predation are not primary threats responsible 
for the decline of the species.
Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
    CBD states that existing regulatory mechanisms for Atlantic bluefin 
tuna are inadequate. The petition indicates that the responsibility for 
overfishing and the poor status of Atlantic bluefin tuna stocks falls 
on ICCAT and its member countries, and CBD asserts that there is 
consensus that the ICCAT process is failing the species.
    In the petition, CBD states that in 2008, ICCAT failed to adopt the 
measures suggested by ICCAT scientists for eastern Atlantic and 
Mediterranean bluefin tuna. Based on the 2008 stock assessment, SCRS 
had advised that the maximum TAC for the eastern Atlantic stock be set 
on the order of 15,000 t or less. SCRS also advised that a time and 
area closure during the spawning months could greatly facilitate the 
implementation and monitoring of rebuilding. Additionally, SCRS 
indicated that a moratorium over the East Atlantic and Mediterranean 
Sea during 1, 3, or 5 years followed by an F0.1 management strategy 
would increase the probability of rebuilding the stock by 2023 (SCRS, 
2009). In 2008, ICCAT established TACs for eastern bluefin tuna that 
declined annually for the years 2009 through 2011 (22,000 t, 19,950 t, 
and 18,500 t, respectively). However, in the petition, CBD did not 
recognize that, in 2009, ICCAT adopted new 2010 TAC levels for eastern 
bluefin tuna of 13,500 t, which is within the range of scientific 
advice, and agreed that, at its 2010 meeting, it would establish TACs 
for 2011-2013 with the goal of achieving biomass at maximum sustainable 
yield (Bmsy) through 2022 (the end of the eastern/Mediterranean bluefin 
tuna recovery period) with at least 60 percent probability, on the 
basis of 2010 SCRS advice (ICCAT, 2009). CBD also presents information 
regarding an independent review that ICCAT initiated in 2008 in 
response to concerns expressed at the United Nations and other 
international fora about the sustainable management of high seas 
fisheries. According to CBD, although the review covered all species 
within ICCAT's management jurisdiction, the Executive Summary of the 
final report noted that ICCAT's international reputation ``will be 
based largely on how ICCAT manages fisheries on bluefin tuna.'' They 
cite that Hurry et al. (2008) stated that ``ICCAT's members' 
performance in managing fisheries on bluefin tuna particularly in the 
eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea is widely regarded as an 
international disgrace.'' The petition indicates that the independent 
review panel concluded that the ICCAT Convention Objectives were not 
met for either of the two bluefin tuna stocks. The petition goes on to 
state that the panel recommended that ICCAT suspend fishing on bluefin 
tuna in the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean until ICCAT members 
fully comply with ICCAT recommendations on this stock of bluefin tuna, 
and also that ICCAT consider an immediate closure of all known bluefin 
tuna spawning grounds at least during known spawning periods. According 
to CBD, ICCAT did not follow these recommendations.
    CBD states that ICCAT's management performance for the western 
Atlantic bluefin tuna stock is also poor. According to the petition, in 
2008, it was concluded that the 20-year rebuilding plan that was 
initiated in 1998 has not resulted in the rebuilding that was 
projected. CBD notes that the review panel attributed the slow 
rebuilding of the stock to two potential causes: (1) ICCAT's adoption 
of quotas at levels that fail to meet rebuilding goals, and (2) the 
rate of mixing between the two stocks. The SCRS (2008) noted that 
mixing rates are important as even a small amount of mixing between the 
larger eastern stock and the smaller western stock could have 
significant effects on the recovery of the latter.
    CBD also cites the lack of data as a significant problem plaguing 
the management of the eastern bluefin tuna stock. It notes that 
reported catches from the mid 1970s to 2007 were inaccurate, often 
underestimating the actual catch. Therefore, according to CBD, the 
extent of the Atlantic bluefin tuna decline is underestimated. 
According to the petition, this then leads to overfishing and severe 
population decline because quotas are not based on the high catch that 
actually occurred, and there are no fishery independent data that would 
better characterize the decline.
    CBD contends that U.S. fishery management also fails to meet its 
domestic legal obligation to manage fisheries in order to attain 
optimum yield. It states that the U.S. management measures for western 
Atlantic bluefin tuna in the Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory 
Species Fishery Management Plan (HMS FMP) are ineffective at 
maintaining stocks and meeting the requirements to rebuild the 
population to healthy levels as mandated by the Magnuson Stevens Act. 
The petition also references a proposed rule that NMFS recently 
published to increase the maximum daily retention limit and lengthen 
the season of the General category fishery and increase the Harpoon 
category daily incidental retention limit (74 FR 57128; November 4, 
2009), and indicates that these proposals were made despite the lack of 
success of recovery efforts for the western Atlantic bluefin tuna 
stock. It is important to note, however, that the information available 
in our files indicates that western bluefin tuna biomass levels are not 
in decline at this time and have remained stable, at low

[[Page 57436]]

levels, since the 1990s. It is also important to note that although 
NMFS' November 4, 2009, proposed rule was intended to more thoroughly 
utilize the available U.S. bluefin tuna quota established under the 20-
year rebuilding program as, in accordance with the Atlantic Tunas 
Convention Act (16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.), the United States cannot 
increase or decrease its bluefin tuna quota established by ICCAT. To 
date, the rule has not been finalized.
    Finally, the petition claims that there are no habitat protections 
for the western Atlantic bluefin tuna stock. It notes that NMFS 
designated an area of the Gulf of Mexico as a Habitat Area of 
Particular Concern and identified bluefin tuna spawning grounds as 
needing special protection. However, it states that NMFS did not 
implement any measures that would actually protect the habitat, and, 
thus, this designation has done little to protect the species.
Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Existence
    Chemical contaminants, such as endocrine disrupting chemicals 
(EDCs) and mercury, and offshore aquaculture in the Gulf of Mexico are 
presented by CBD as potential threats to Atlantic bluefin tuna. CBD 
cites Storelli et al. (2008) and Fossi et al. (2002) who warned that 
EDCs have the potential to result in reproductive alterations in 
bluefin tuna as a result of bioaccumulation. Storelli et al. (2008) 
concluded that exposure to EDCs over a long lifetime might ``create the 
prerequisite for the development of pathological conditions'' in 
Atlantic bluefin tuna in the Mediterranean. CBD also states that 
mercury may accumulate in the food chain due to low pH resulting from 
climate change induced ocean acidification, which will result in 
increased bioaccumulation in Atlantic bluefin tuna.
    The petitioner also suggests that offshore aquaculture in the Gulf 
of Mexico is an emerging threat to Atlantic bluefin tuna. CBD cites 
NMFS (2009), stating that potential impacts from offshore aquaculture 
include increased nutrient loading, habitat degradation, fish 
escapement, competition with wild Atlantic bluefin tuna, and spread of 
pathogens. CBD concludes that offshore aquaculture will affect Atlantic 
bluefin tuna.

Petition Finding

    Based on the above information and the criteria specified in 50 CFR 
424.14(b)(2), we find that the petition presents substantial scientific 
and commercial information indicating that the petitioned action 
concerning Atlantic bluefin tuna may be warranted. Under section 
4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA, this positive 90-day finding requires NMFS to 
commence a status review of the species. During our status review, we 
will consider whether there are multiple DPSs within the species' 
range, whether these are threatened or endangered, and whether the 
species is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant 
portion of its range or likely to become so in the foreseeable future. 
We now initiate this review, and thus, the Atlantic bluefin tuna is now 
considered to be a candidate species (69 FR 19976; April 15, 2004). 
Within 12 months of the receipt of the petition (May 24, 2011), we will 
make a finding as to whether listing Atlantic bluefin tuna or DPSs of 
Atlantic bluefin tuna as endangered or threatened is warranted, as 
required by section 4(b)(3)(B) of the ESA. If warranted, we will 
publish a proposed rule and solicit public comments before developing 
and publishing a final determination.

References Cited

    A complete list of the references used in this finding is available 
upon request (see ADDRESSES).

Information Solicited

    To ensure the status review is based on the best available 
scientific and commercial data, we solicit information pertaining to 
Atlantic bluefin tuna. Specifically, we solicit information in the 
following areas: (1) historical and current distribution and abundance 
of this species throughout its range; (2) historical and current 
condition; (3) population status and trends; (4) any current or planned 
activities that may adversely impact the species, especially as related 
to the five factors specified in section 4(a)(1) of the ESA and listed 
above; (5) ongoing efforts to protect and restore the species and its 
habitat; (6) genetic data or other information that would help us 
determine whether any population segments of Atlantic bluefin tuna meet 
the DPS policy criteria of discreteness and significance; and (7) 
whether any particular portions of the range of the Atlantic bluefin 
tuna constitute significant portions of the range of the species or of 
any potential DPSs that may exist. We request that all information be 
accompanied by: (1) supporting documentation such as maps, 
bibliographic references, or reprints of pertinent publications; and 
(2) the submitter's name, address, and any association, institution, or 
business that the person represents.

Peer Review

    On July 1, 1994, NMFS, jointly with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, published a series of policies regarding listings under the 
ESA, including a policy for peer review of scientific data (59 FR 
34270). The intent of the peer review policy is to ensure listings are 
based on the best scientific and commercial data available. We solicit 
the names of recognized experts in the field that could take part in 
the peer review process for this status review. Independent peer 
reviewers will be selected from the academic and scientific community, 
tribal and other Native American groups, Federal and state agencies, 
the private sector, and public interest groups.

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

    Dated: September 14, 2010.
Eric C. Schwaab,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-23486 Filed 9-16-10; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S