Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2010/06/02/2010-13233/endangered-and-threatened-wildlife-and-plants-final-rulemaking-to-establish-take-prohibitions-for
Timestamp: 2017-06-28 16:06:04
Document Index: 494060737

Matched Legal Cases: ['art2', 'art 223', '§\u2009223', '§\u2009223', '§\u2009223', '§\u2009223', '§\u2009223', 'art 222', '§\u2009223', '§\u2009223']

:: Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Final Rulemaking To Establish Take Prohibitions for the Threatened Southern Distinct Population Segment of North American Green Sturgeon
30714-30730
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2010-13233
Whether take prohibitions or other protective regulations are necessary or advisable is in large part dependent on Start Printed Page 30715the biological status of the species and potential impacts of various activities on the species. Green sturgeon have persisted for millions of years through cycles of naturally occurring perturbations that have likely presented short- and long-term challenges to the species' survival. We conclude that the threatened Southern DPS of North American green sturgeon is currently at risk of extinction primarily because of human-induced “takes” involving elimination of freshwater spawning habitat, degradation of freshwater and estuarine habitat quality, water diversions, fishing, and other causes. Therefore, we conclude that extending the take prohibitions to the Southern DPS is necessary and advisable.
Comment 5: Two commenters felt that the five alternative approaches need to be described in greater detail and that the geographic limitations and distinctions of the proposed rule and alternatives are not clearly laid out. Further clarification was requested.Start Printed Page 30716
Response: The final EA was revised to more clearly describe the geographic limitations and distinctions between the various alternatives considered.
Comment 14: One commenter felt that the requirement that research or monitoring that involves action, permitting or funding by a Federal agency must still comply with the Start Printed Page 30717requirements of ESA section 7(a)(2) negates the exception from the take prohibitions for all researchers and stated that Federal employees who can fulfill all other requirements cannot use this exception. If non-Federal studies do not need to be analyzed in order to ensure that they would not jeopardize the species, then it seems counterintuitive that Federal studies with the same requirements would create jeopardy. The commenter also felt that the requirement that the activity must comply with required state reviews or permits negates the exception because as part of the application process, state permits require a copy of the authorization from NMFS when working with species listed under the ESA.
Sections 10(a)(1)(A) and 10(a)(1)(B) provide exceptions to the section 9 take prohibitions. NMFS can authorize research and enhancement through section 10(a)(1)(A) permits and Start Printed Page 30718incidental take through section 10(a)(1)B) permits. While this rule applies the section 9 take prohibitions to any activity that takes the Southern DPS, we wanted to determine which activities would most likely impede efforts necessary to conserve and recover the Southern DPS. To do this, we considered the following questions: (1) For which activities do we have evidence of take of Southern DPS fish; (2) for those activities where evidence of Southern DPS take does not exist, is there evidence of take of surrogate species that share similar biological requirements with Southern DPS fish; (3) are protective/conservation measures underway to reduce or minimize take imposed by some activities; and (4) are there additional protective/conservation measures that, if taken, would reduce take to low enough levels such that particular activities could proceed without appreciably reducing the likelihood of survival and recovery of the Southern DPS?
Green sturgeon are also taken, though rarely, in tribal commercial and subsistence salmon fisheries occurring in freshwater and coastal marine waters of Washington, including the Strait of Juan de Fuca, Georgia and Rosario straits, and Puget Sound (W. Beattie, NW Indian Fisheries Commission, 2008, personal communication). The Yurok Start Printed Page 30719and Hoopa Tribes harvest green sturgeon in the Klamath River in California, but most of the fish are believed to be Northern DPS green sturgeon (J. Israel, UC Davis, 2006, unpublished data). Overall, the take of green sturgeon in tribal fisheries has been low compared to non-tribal fisheries. Measures that may be implemented to conserve the Southern DPS include a commitment by the Quinault Tribe, and perhaps other Tribes within the occupied range of the Southern DPS, to minimize take and monitor incidental catch of green sturgeon over the long-term.
Increased input or runoff of fine sediments into streams may result from a number of activities including, but not limited to, mining, logging, farming, grazing, and bridge and road construction. Increased erosion and sediment input or runoff into streams caused by land use and other human activities have been found to reduce the survival and successful development of eggs and embryos of salmon and other fish species (Scrivener and Brownlee, 1989; Owen et al., 2005). The effects on green sturgeon eggs and embryos are likely to be similar. Green sturgeon eggs are large and dense and likely sink into rock crevices or attach to hard surfaces (Deng et al., 2002; Kynard et al., 2005). Once hatched, green sturgeon embryos remain near the bottom and use rocks as cover (Kynard et al., 2005). Excess fine sediments can compromise successful development by burying already-deposited eggs, reducing interstitial dissolved oxygen available for eggs (Scrivener and Brownlee, 1989), or filling areas used by embryos for cover. Thus, Southern DPS eggs or embryos Start Printed Page 30720may be taken due to habitat-altering activities that increase input of fine sediments or runoff into spawning or rearing habitat. The effect that increased input of fine sediments or runoff has at the individual, population and species levels will depend on the temporal and spatial extent of habitat change. The only way to determine this is to analyze particular activities on a case-by-case basis.
The operation of water diversions, power generating projects, and dredging activities pose entrainment and impingement threats to all life stages of the Southern DPS. We define entrainment to mean the incidental trapping of any life stage of fish within waterways or structures that carry water being diverted for anthropogenic use. We define impingement to mean the entrapment of any life stage of fish on the outer part of any structure (e.g., intake structures, screening devices) that separates water traveling a natural course of passage from water that is being diverted for anthropogenic use. Unscreened water diversions number in the hundreds to thousands in the Sacramento River and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Herren and Kawasaki, 2001). Factors that determine the entrainment risk of fish at diversions include the location and size of fish. A study of fish entrainment at an unscreened diversion in the Sacramento River documented entrainment of fish ranging in size from 9 to 59 mm fork length (FL) in July 2000 and 2001 (Nobriga et al., 2004). Green sturgeon were not among the species documented in the study, but Southern DPS larvae and small juveniles within the size range of 9-59 mm FL occur in the Sacramento River at that time of year and are believed to also be at risk of entrainment at unscreened diversions. Entrainment of juvenile green sturgeon has been documented at the state and Federal fish facilities in the south Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, where fish are salvaged before they enter the pumps (Adams et al., 2006). Programs to install fish screens at water diversions are being implemented and many major diversions have already been screened. Installation of fish screens, construction of bypass and other fish protection facilities (Bigelow and Johnson, 1996; Gaines and Martin, 2002), adjustments Start Printed Page 30721in the timing of operations, and continuation of fish salvage operations, where applicable, would help minimize and mitigate entrainment of Southern DPS fish at water diversions.
We apply the prohibitions listed under ESA sections 9(a)(1)(A) through 9(a)(1)(G) for the Southern DPS, including all the ESA section 9(a)(1)(B) and 9(a)(1)(C) prohibitions (the “take prohibitions”) except for specific activities described below (see Exceptions, Criteria for Exceptions, and Start Printed Page 30722Reporting Requirements). ESA section 9(a)(1)(A) states that it is unlawful to import or export endangered species into or from the United States; ESA section 9(a)(1)(B) states that it is illegal to take endangered species within the United States or the territorial sea of the United States; ESA section 9(a)(1)(C) states that it is illegal to take endangered species upon the high seas; ESA section 9(a)(1)(D) states that it is illegal to possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or ship, by any means whatsoever, endangered species taken in violation of 9(a)(1)(B) and 9(a)(1)(C); ESA section 9(a)(1)(E) states that it is illegal to deliver, receive, carry, transport, or ship in interstate or foreign commerce by any means whatsoever and in the course of a commercial activity, endangered species; ESA section 9(a)(1)(F) states that it is illegal to sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign commerce, endangered species; and ESA section 9(a)(1)(G) states that it is illegal to violate any regulation pertaining to endangered species or to any threatened species of fish or wildlife listed pursuant to section 4 of the ESA and promulgated by the Secretary pursuant to authority provided by the ESA.
(3) Habitat restoration activities, including barrier removal or Start Printed Page 30723modification to restore water flows, riverine or estuarine bed restoration, natural bank stabilization, restoration of native vegetation, removal of non-native species, or removal of contaminated sediments, that reestablish self-sustaining habitats for the Southern DPS, if they adhere to all of the following: (a) Compliance with required state and Federal reviews and permits; (b) a detailed description of the restoration activity sent to the NMFS Southwest Regional Office (see
A tribe intending to exercise a tribal right to fish or undertake other resource management actions that may impact the threatened Southern DPS could create a tribal resource management plan (Tribal Plan) that would assure that those actions would not appreciably reduce the likelihood of survival and recovery of the species. Tribal Plans Start Printed Page 30724should be sent to the NMFS Southwest Regional Office (see
Federally funded, authorized, or implemented activities that may require take coverage (see Proposed 4(d) Protective Regulations for the Southern DPS), and are not covered under Exceptions, Criteria for Exceptions, and Reporting Requirements or Exemptions Provided by NMFS-approved 4(d) Programs above, will be examined on a case-by-case basis through interagency consultation as prescribed by ESA section 7. All other activities (i.e., those Start Printed Page 30725not federally funded, authorized, or implemented) that may require take coverage, and are not covered under Exceptions, Criteria for Exceptions, and Reporting Requirements or Exemptions Provided by NMFS-approved 4(d) Programs above, will be examined on a case-by-case basis as prescribed by ESA section 10.
ActivityTakeTake of surrogate speciesProtective/Conservation measures or benefitsTake authorization necessaryMethods of take authorizationESA section 7 or 104(d) ProgramFishingCommercialY YYYYRecreationalY YYYYTribalY YYYYPoachingNYNN/ANNCollection or Handling Research/monitoring Federal, State or Private-sponsored (compliant with Exceptions)Y YN State-sponsored (outside scope of Exceptions)Y YYYYFederal or Private-sponsored (outside scope of Exceptions)Y YYYNEmergency Rescue (compliant with Exceptions)NYYN Emergency Rescue (outside scope of Exceptions)NYNYYNDetrimental Habitat-Altering ActivitiesActivities that Eliminate, Obstruct, or Delay PassageDam installation, repair, modification, operationY YYYNDiversion installation, repair, modification, operationY YYYNActivities that Destroy, Modify, or Curtail Spawning or Rearing HabitatInput of fine sediments/runoffNYYYYNDam installation, repair, modification, operationY YYYNDiversion installation, repair, modification, operationY YYYNFilling/isolation of channels/intermittent watersNNYYYNRemoval/alteration of physical structure that provides spawning/rearing habitatNNYYYNHabitat Restoration (compliant with Exceptions)Barrier removal/modification to restore flowsNNYN Start Printed Page 30726Riverine or estuarine bed restorationNNYN Natural bank protectionNNYN Restoration of native vegetationNNYN Removal of non-native speciesNNYN Removal of contaminated sedimentsNNYN Habitat Restoration (outside scope of Exceptions)NNNYYNEntrainment/ImpingementWater diversionsY YYYNPower generating projectsY YYYNDredgingNYYYYNPesticide/Pollutant DischargeNYYYYNNon-native Species IntroductionsNYYN/ANN
This final ESA 4(d) rule has specific requirements for regulatory compliance and sets an enforceable performance standard (do not take listed fish) when conducting specific activities unless those activities are within a carefully circumscribed set of activities on which NMFS will not impose the take prohibitions. Hence, the universe of entities reasonably expected to be Start Printed Page 30727directly or indirectly impacted by the prohibition is broad.
This final rule contains collection-of-information requirements subject to the PRA, which have been submitted to OMB for review and approval. Public reporting burden per response for this collection of information is estimated to average: (1) 40 hours for development of a Fisheries Management and Evaluation Plan; (2) 20 hours for development of a Tribal Fishery Management Plan; (3) 40 hours for development of a State-sponsored scientific research program; (4) 5 hours to prepare reports on emergency rescue, salvage, or disposal of Southern DPS fish; (5) 40 hours to prepare reports on restoration activities; Start Printed Page 30728and (6) 40 hours to prepare reports on Federal and private-sponsored research and monitoring. These estimates include the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. We invite comments regarding these burden estimates, or any other aspect of this data collection, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to NMFS (see
Start Amendment Part2. In subpart B of part 223, add § 223.210 to read as follows:End Amendment Part
§ 223.210 North American green sturgeon.
(ii) The activity is conducted by an employee or designee of NMFS or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), any Federal land management agency, or California Department of Fish and Game, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, or Alaska Department of Fish and Game;Start Printed Page 30729
(1) Scientific Research and Monitoring Exemptions. The prohibitions of paragraph (a) of this section relating to the threatened Southern DPS listed in § 223.102(c)(1) do not apply to ongoing or future state-sponsored scientific research or monitoring activities that are part of a NMFS-approved, ESA-compliant state 4(d) research program conducted by, or in coordination with, state fishery management agencies (California Department of Fish and Game, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, or Alaska Department of Fish and Game), or as part of a monitoring and research program overseen by, or coordinated by, one of these agencies. State 4(d) research programs must meet the following criteria:
(2) Fisheries Exemptions. The prohibitions of paragraph (a) of this section relating to the threatened Southern DPS listed in § 223.102(c)(1) do not apply to fisheries activities that are conducted in accordance with a NMFS-approved Fishery Management and Evaluation Plan (FMEP). If NMFS finds that an FMEP meets the criteria listed below, a letter of concurrence which sets forth the terms of the FMEP's implementation and the duties of the parties pursuant to the FMEP, will be issued to the applicant.
(iii) NMFS will provide a public comment period (≥30 days) before approval of new or amended FMEPs; provide a letter of concurrence for Start Printed Page 30730approved FMEPs that specifies the implementation and reporting requirements; evaluate FMEPs every 5 years and identify changes that would improve their effectiveness; and provide a public comment period (≥30 days) before withdrawing approval of an FMEP.
(3) Tribal Exemptions. The prohibitions of paragraph (a) of this section relating to the threatened Southern DPS listed in § 223.102(c)(1) do not apply to fishery harvest or other activities undertaken by a tribe, tribal member, tribal permittee, tribal employee, or tribal agent in Willapa Bay, WA, Grays Harbor, WA, Coos Bay, OR, Winchester Bay, OR, Humboldt Bay, CA, and any other area where tribal treaty fishing occurs, if those activities are compliant with a tribal resource management plan (Tribal Plan), provided that the Secretary determines that implementation of such Tribal Plan will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of survival and recovery of the Southern DPS. In making that determination the Secretary shall use the best available biological data (including any tribal data and analysis) to determine the Tribal Plan's impact on the biological requirements of the species, and will assess the effect of the Tribal Plan on survival and recovery, consistent with legally enforceable tribal rights and with the Secretary's trust responsibilities to tribes.
(d) The exceptions of section 10 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1539) and other exceptions under the ESA relating to endangered species, including regulations in part 222 of this chapter II implementing such exceptions, also apply to the threatened Southern DPS of North American green sturgeon listed in § 223.102(c)(1). Federal, state, and private-sponsored research activities for scientific research or enhancement purposes that are not covered under Scientific Research and Monitoring Exceptions as described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section or Scientific Research and Monitoring Exemptions as described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section, may take Southern DPS fish pursuant to the specifications of an ESA section 10 permit. Section 9(a)(1)(B) and (a)(1)(C) take prohibitions would not apply to ongoing research activities if an application for an ESA section 10(a)(1)(A) permit is received by NMFS, preferably through the NMFS online application Web site https://apps.nmfs.noaa.gov, no later than November 29, 2010. The take prohibitions would take effect if the permit application is rejected as insufficient or a permit is denied. If the permit application is received by November 29, 2010, ongoing research activities may continue without take prohibitions until NMFS issues or denies a permit.
(e) Affirmative Defense. In connection with any action alleging a violation of the prohibitions of paragraph (a) of this section with respect to the threatened Southern DPS of North American green sturgeon listed in § 223.102(c)(1), any person claiming that his or her take is authorized via methods listed in paragraph (b) of this section shall have a defense where the person can demonstrate that the take authorization is applicable and was in force, and that the person fully complied with the take authorization requirements at the time of the alleged violation. This defense is an affirmative defense that must be raised, pleaded, and proven by the proponent. If proven, this defense will be an absolute defense to liability under section 9(a)(1)(G) of the ESA with respect to the alleged violation.