Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2012/04/18/2012-9335/endangered-and-threatened-species-proposed-delisting-of-eastern-dps-of-steller-sea-lions
Timestamp: 2018-02-18 07:39:49
Document Index: 617024420

Matched Legal Cases: ['§\u2009224', '§\u2009224', 'art 222', '§\u2009223', '§\u2009223', '§\u2009224']

Federal Register :: Endangered and Threatened Species; Proposed Delisting of Eastern DPS of Steller Sea Lions
A Proposed Rule by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on 04/18/2012
77 FR 23209
23209-23220 (12 pages)
Docket No. 110901553-2072-01
2012-9335
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2012-9335 https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2012-9335
Under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA), we, NMFS, issue this proposed rule to remove the eastern distinct population segment (DPS) of Steller sea lions from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. After receiving two petitions to delist this DPS, we completed a comprehensive review of the status of the eastern DPS of Steller Sea Lions. Based on the information presented in the draft Status Review, the factors for delisting in section 4 (a)(1) of the ESA, the objective recovery criteria in the 2008 Recovery Plan, and the continuing efforts to protect the species, we have determined, subject to further consideration following public comment, that this DPS has recovered and no longer meets the definition of a threatened species under the ESA: it is not in danger of extinction or likely to become endangered throughout all or a significant portion of its range within the foreseeable future. Thus, we find that the delisting of the DPS, as requested by the two petitions, is warranted. This rule also proposes technical changes that would recodify existing regulatory provisions and which are necessary to clarify that existing regulatory protections for the western distinct population segment of Steller sea lions will continue to apply. We seek public comments on this proposed action, the draft Status Review, and the draft Post-Delisting Monitoring Plan.
Hand-delivery: Assistant Regional Administrator, Protected Resources Division, NMFS, Alaska Regional Office, Attn: Ellen Sebastian, Juneau Federal Building, 709 West 9th Street, Room 420A, Juneau, AK 99802-1668.
Facsimile (fax): (907) 586-7557.
Once we receive a petition to delist a species, the ESA requires the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to make a finding on whether the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)). In the context of a petition to delist a species, the ESA-implementing regulations provide that “substantial information” is that amount of information that would lead a reasonable person to believe that delisting may be warranted (50 CFR 424.14(b)(1)). In determining whether substantial information exists, we take into account several factors, including any information noted in the petition or otherwise 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 published promptly in the Federal Register. If the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) finds that the petition presents substantial information that may warrant the requested action, the Secretary must conduct a status review of the species concerned and, within 12 months of the receipt of the petition, make a finding whether the petitioned action is warranted. The Secretary has delegated the authority for these actions to the NOAA Assistant Administrator for Fisheries.
We specifically reiterate several points set forth in the draft policy. “The Act does not define `significant' as it relates to SPR, and the legislative history does not elucidate Congressional intent. Dictionary definitions of `significant' provide a number of possible meanings; one of the most prominent is `important' ” (76 FR 76993, December 9, 2011). We conclude that “a definition of `significant' that is biologically based best conforms to the purposes of the Act, is consistent with judicial interpretations, and best ensures species' conservation” (76 FR 76993). The definition of “significant” set forth above:
The following sections provide a brief history of efforts to manage and conserve the eastern DPS of the Steller sea lion under the ESA and through the Recovery Plan for the Steller Sea Lion. We also discuss the petitions to delist this species and the subsequent draft Status Review that supports the determination that the delisting of this population segment is warranted. We summarize the basis of our determination that the eastern DPS is no longer a threatened species, as supported by the Status Review. Specifically, we summarize the abundance and health of the population, the present distribution and population estimates across its range; and, as required by the ESA, we summarize those factors currently affecting the population. We conclude by discussing the agency's plans to continue to monitor, study, and evaluate the biology and the health of the eastern DPS of Steller sea lions should delisting occur.
In 1990, in the Final Rule to list, we considered the entire Steller sea lion species as a single population, including those in areas where abundance was increasing or not declining significantly, because at the time scientists did not have sufficient information to consider animals in different geographic regions as separate populations. Similarly, the first Steller Sea Lion Recovery Plan, released in 1993, did not distinguish two separate population segments, but identified recovery tasks, reclassification criteria, and delisting criteria for the species as a whole. Then, in late 1994, the Steller Sea Lion Recovery Team re-convened to evaluate the adequacy of ongoing research and management, and recommended recognizing two distinct population segments, east and west of 144° W, based on demographic and genetic dissimilarities. The Team further recommended elevating the listing status of the western population segment to endangered status and keeping the eastern population segment listed as threatened.
As explained in detail in Appendix 1B, there is extensive morphological, ecological, behavioral, and genetic evidence that the two DPSs are discrete. For example, the population genetics of Steller sea lions have been studied extensively since the final listing in 1997, and these newer data confirm the genetic discreteness of the eastern and western DPSs (e.g., Bickman et al. 1998). Philips et al. (2009) concluded that the existing data are actually sufficient to justify a subspecies classification for the eastern and western DPSs. Analyses of mitochondrial DNA for eastern rookeries from California also indicate there is no genetic basis to further subdivide the California portion from the eastern DPS (Bickman 2010). More specifically, this study indicates this portion of the population is genetically highly variable and includes only mitochondrial DNA haplotypes known from the eastern DPS. Because the eastern DPS constitutes about 47% of the global population, and its loss would eliminate all breeding areas from Southeast Alaska to Central California, the eastern DPS is considered significant to the species as a whole (NMFS 2010; Appendix 1B). Thus, the DPS analysis confirmed the validity of the two currently identified distinct population segments.
We considered these two petitions in making the required 90-day finding and found that the petitions present substantial information that the petitioned action may be warranted, necessitating a status review of the eastern DPS (75 FR 77602; December 13, 2010). We provided a 60 day comment period in connection with this finding. We completed a draft Status Review to address all issues required in a 5-year review and to inform a determination of whether delisting is warranted. The draft Status Review underwent independent peer review by four scientists with expertise in population ecology and management of eastern DPS Steller sea lions. Peer reviewer comments were incorporated into the draft Status Review, which is available online at http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/protectedresources/stellers/edps/status.htm.
There are numerous federal, state, and/or provincial commercial fisheries, recreational fisheries and subsistence fisheries within the range of the eastern DPS of Steller sea lion. These include fisheries for salmon, herring, demersal shelf rockfish, ling cod, and black and blue rockfish in state waters of southeast Alaska, fisheries for herring, hake, sardines, salmon, and groundfish in British Columbia, salmon and herring in state waters off Washington and Oregon, and groundfish fisheries along the US west coast in the US EEZ of the northeast Pacific Ocean. Mechanisms by which fisheries can have indirect effects (e.g., nutritional stress) on Steller sea lions have been reviewed extensively in the scientific literature and in recent NMFS actions (e.g., 75 FR 77535, December 13, 2010). Given the sustained significant increases in non-pup abundance and increases in pup production of eastern DPS Steller sea lions concurrent with the ongoing prosecution of these fisheries, current and anticipated fisheries management procedures and regulatory mechanisms, there is no indication that fisheries are directly or indirectly competing with eastern DPS Steller sea lions to the point where the level of fisheries related competition constitutes a threat to the survival or recovery of the eastern DPS of Steller sea lions. Subject to further consideration following public comment, we conclude the indirect effects of these fisheries are not likely to cause the eastern DPS to become in danger of extinction in the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
The Status Review identified research and management programs that provide for inclusion of Steller sea lion habitat requirements within fisheries management and other programs. Ongoing federal fisheries management within the breeding range of the eastern DPS, agreement between the State of Alaska and NMFS regarding State fishery management (NMFS 2012; Appendix 2), ongoing research, law enforcement, and the Post Delisting Monitoring Plan (NMFS 2012; Appendix 3), as well as existing regulations that govern authorization of incidental take of marine mammals under the MMPA provide a means to maintain and monitor marine habitats and prey populations consistent with the above recommendations. Consistent with the primary goals of the MMPA, Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSFMCA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and other laws provide mechanisms to ensure human activities do not result in harm to sea lions or their habitat. To comply with the MMPA, projects that have a high probability of negatively impacting eastern DPS Steller sea lions would need to obtain authorization from NMFS to incidentally harass or incidentally take Steller sea lions. NMFS imposes project-specific monitoring requirements for each incidental take authorization the agency issues under the MMPA.
Based on the considerations for Factor C, and subject to further consideration following public comment, we conclude disease, parasitism, or predation are not likely to cause the eastern DPS of Steller sea lions to become in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
Both NMFS and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game have outreach programs devoted to Steller sea lion conservation and management in an effort to educate commercial fishermen and the general public about the ongoing need to protect and conserve Steller sea lions. Various forms of outreach activities are conducted for the public, commercial fishermen, Alaska Native organizations, and others (Web pages, trainings, classroom presentations, videos, bumper sticker campaigns, interpretive displays, etc.). NMFS Alaska Region and Northwest Region both have Marine Mammal Stranding Programs and the stranding network is operational (e.g. see http://www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/ protectedresources/strandings.htm). Therefore the recommended actions under this listing factor criterion have been accomplished.
The 1982 amendments to the ESA, in section 4(b)(1)(A), restrict the information that may be considered when assessing species for listing. Based on this limitation of criteria for a listing decision and the opinion in Pacific Legal Foundation v. Andrus, 657 F. 2d 829 (6th Cir. 1981), we have concluded that NEPA does not apply to ESA listing actions. (See NOAA Administrative Order 216-6.)
2. In § 224.103, revise paragraph (d) to read as follows:
(d) Special prohibitions relating to endangered Steller sea lion protection.—(1) General Prohibitions. The following regulatory provisions shall apply to the western population of Steller sea lions:
(i) No discharge of firearms. Except as provided in paragraph (d)(2) of this section, no person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States may discharge a firearm at or within 100 yards (91.4 meters) of a Steller sea lion west of 144 °W longitude. A firearm is any weapon, such as a pistol or rifle, capable of firing a missile using an explosive charge as a propellant.
(ii) No approach in buffer areas. Except as provided in paragraph (d)(2) of this section:
(iii) Listed sea lion rookery sites. Listed Steller sea lion rookery sites consist of the rookeries in the Aleutian Islands and the Gulf of Alaska listed in Table 1.
Table 1 to § 224.103—Listed Steller Sea Lion Rookery Sites 1
1. Outer I 59°20.5 N 150°23.0 W 59°21.0 N 150°24.5 W 16681 S quadrant.
2. Sugarloaf I 58°53.0 N 152°02.0 W 16580 Whole island.
3. Marmot I 58°14.5 N 151°47.5 W 58°10.0 N 151°51.0 W 16580 SE quadrant.
4. Chirikof I 55°46.5 N 155°39.5 W 55°46.5 N 155°43.0 W 16580 S quadrant.
5. Chowiet I 56°00.5 N 156°41.5 W 56°00.5 N 156°42.0 W 16013 S quadrant.
6. Atkins I 55°03.5 N 159°18.5 W 16540 Whole island.
7. Chernabura I 54°47.5 N 159°31.0 W 54°45.5 N 159°33.5 W 16540 SE corner.
8. Pinnacle Rock 54°46.0 N 161°46.0 W 16540 Whole island.
9. Clubbing Rks (N) 54°43.0 N 162°26.5 W 16540 Whole island.
Clubbing Rks (S) 54°42.0 N 162°26.5 W 16540 Whole Island.
10. Sea Lion Rks 55°28.0 N 163°12.0 W 16520 Whole island.
11. Ugamak I 54°14.0 N 164°48.0 W 54°13.0 N 164°48.0 W 16520 E end of island.
12. Akun I 54°18.0 N 165°32.5 W 54°18.0 N 165°31.5 W 16547 Billings Head Bight.
13. Akutan I 54°03.5 N 166°00.0 W 54°05.5 N 166°05.0 W 16520 SW corner, Cape Morgan.
14. Bogoslof I 53°56.0 N 168°02.0 W 16500 Whole island.
15. Ogchul I 53°00.0 N 168°24.0 W 16500 Whole island.
16. Adugak I 52°55.0 N 169°10.5 W 16500 Whole island.
17. Yunaska I 52°42.0 N 170°38.5 W 52°41.0 N 170°34.5 W 16500 NE end.
18. Seguam I 52°21.0 N 172°35.0 W 52°21.0 N 172°33.0 W 16480 N coast, Saddleridge Pt.
19. Agligadak I 52°06.5 N 172°54.0 W 16480 Whole island.
20. Kasatochi I 52°10.0 N 175°31.5 W 52°10.5 N 175°29.0 W 16480 N half of island.
21. Adak I 51°36.5 N 176°59.0 W 51°38.0 N 176°59.5 W 16460 SW Point, Lake Point.
22. Gramp rock 51°29.0 N 178°20.5 W 16460 Whole island.
23. Tag I 51°33.5 N 178°34.5 W 16460 Whole island.
24. Ulak I 51°20.0 N 178°57.0 W 51°18.5 N 178°59.5 W 16460 SE corner, Hasgox Pt.
25. Semisopochnoi 51°58.5 N 179°45.5 E 51°57.0 N 179°46.0 E 16440 E quadrant, Pochnoi Pt.
Semisopochnoi 52°01.5 N 179°37.5 E 52°01.5 N 179°39.0 E 16440 N quadrant, Petrel Pt.
26. Amchitka I 51°22.5 N 179°28.0 E 51°21.5 N 179°25.0 E 16440 East Cape.
27. Amchitka I 51°32.5 N 178°49.5 E 16440 Column Rocks.
28. Ayugadak Pt 51°45.5 N 178°24.5 E 16440 SE coast of Rat Island.
29. Kiska I 51°57.5 N 177°21.0 E 51°56.5 N 177°20.0 E 16440 W central, Lief Cove.
30. Kiska I 51°52.5 N 177°13.0 E 51°53.5 N 177°12.0 E 16440 Cape St. Stephen.
31. Walrus I 57°11.0 N 169°56.0 W 16380 Whole island.
32. Buldir I 52°20.5 N 175°57.0 E 52°23.5 N 175°51.0 E 16420 Se point to NW point.
33. Agattu I 52°24.0 N 173°21.5 E 16420 Gillion Point.
34. Agattu I 52°23.5 N 173°43.5 E 52°22.0 N 173°41.0 E 16420 Cape Sabak.
35. Attu I 52°54.5 N 172°28.5 E 52°57.5 N 172°31.5 E 16681 S Quadrant.
1 Each site extends in a clockwise direction from the first set of geographic coordinates along the shoreline at mean lower low water to the second set of coordinates; or, if only one set of geographic coordinates is listed, the site extends around the entire shoreline of the island at mean lower low water.
(iv) Commercial Fishing Operations. The incidental mortality and serious injury of endangered Steller sea lions in commercial fisheries can be authorized in compliance with sections 101(a)(5) and 118 of the Marine Mammal Protection Act.
(2) Exceptions—(i) Permits. The Assistant Administrator may issue permits authorizing activities that would otherwise be prohibited under paragraph (d)(1) of this section in accordance with and subject to the provisions of part 222, subpart C of this chapter—General Permit Procedures.
(ii) Official activities. The taking of Steller sea lions must be reported within 30 days to the Regional Administrator, Alaska Region. Paragraph (d)(1) of this section does not prohibit or restrict a Federal, state or local government official, or his or her designee, who is acting in the course of official duties from:
(iii) Subsistence takings by Alaska natives. Paragraph (d)(1) of this section does not apply to the taking of Steller sea lions for subsistence purposes under section 10(e) of the Act.
(iv) Emergency situations. Paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this section does not apply to an emergency situation in which compliance with that provision presents a threat to the health, safety, or life of a person or presents a significant threat to the vessel or property.
(v) Exemptions. Paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this section does not apply to any activity authorized by a prior written exemption from the Director, Alaska Region, National Marine Fisheries Service. Concurrently with the issuance of any exemption, the Assistant Administrator will publish notice of the exemption in the Federal Register. An exemption may be granted only if the activity will not have a significant adverse affect on Steller sea lions, the activity has been conducted historically or traditionally in the buffer zones, and there is no readily available and acceptable alternative to or site for the activity.
(vi) Navigational transit. Paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this section does not prohibit a vessel in transit from passing through a strait, narrows, or passageway listed in this paragraph if the vessel proceeds in continuous transit and maintains a minimum of 1 nautical mile from the rookery site. The listing of a strait, narrows, or passageway does not indicate that the area is safe for navigation. The listed straits, narrows, or passageways include the following:
Akutan Island Akutan Pass between Cape Morgan and Unalga Island.
Clubbing Rocks Between Clubbing Rocks and Cherni Island.
Outer Island Wildcat Pass between Rabbit and Ragged Islands.
(3) Penalties. (i) Any person who violates this section or the Act is subject to the penalties specified in section 11 of the Act, and any other penalties provided by law.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531-1543.
4. In § 223.102, the table is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (a)(2).
5. Redesignate all figures in § 223.202 to the end of § 224.103 (d)(1)(iii).