Listing Endangered and Threatened Species and Designating Critical Habitat: Petition To List Steelhead Throughout its Range in Washington, Oregon, California, and Idaho

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 227

[I.D. 050294D]

Listing Endangered and Threatened Species and Designating

Critical Habitat: Petition To List Steelhead Throughout its Range in

Washington, Oregon, California, and Idaho

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of finding; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS has received a petition to list steelhead (Oncorhynchus

mykiss) throughout its range in Washington, Oregon, California, and

Idaho and to designate critical habitat under the Endangered Species

Act of 1973 (ESA). In accordance with section 4 of the ESA, NMFS has

determined that the petition presents substantial scientific

information indicating that the request for a listing may be warranted.

Therefore, NMFS is initiating a status review to determine if the

petitioned action is warranted. To ensure that the review is

comprehensive, NMFS is soliciting information and data regarding this

action. Information received during the comment period for this status

review will be used in NMFS' ongoing review of coastal steelhead

populations in California, Oregon, and Washington (including Puget

Sound).

DATES: Comments and information must be received by July 26, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the petition are available from, and comments

should be submitted to, Merritt Tuttle, Chief, Environmental and

Technical Services Division, NMFS, 911 NE 11th Avenue, Room 620,

Portland, OR 97232.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Garth Griffin, NMFS, Northwest Region

(503) 230-5430; Jim Lecky, NMFS, Southwest Region, (310) 980-4015; or

Marta Nammack, NMFS, Office of Protected Resources, (301) 713-2322.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 4 of the 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. Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA requires that, to the maximum

extent practicable, within 90 days after receiving such a petition, the

Secretary determine whether the petition presents substantial

scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned

action may be warranted.

Petition Received

On February 16, 1994, the Secretary received a petition from the

Oregon Natural Resources Council (ONRC) and 15 co-petitioners to list

steelhead (O. mykiss) throughout its range in Washington, Oregon,

California, and Idaho and to designate critical habitat under the ESA.

The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, (AA) found that the

petition presents substantial scientific information indicating that a

listing may be warranted based on the criteria specified in 50 CFR

424.14(b)(2), and based on evidence presented in the petition that the

petitioned populations may qualify as a ``species'' under the ESA in

accordance with NMFS' ``Policy on Applying the Definition of Species

Under the Endangered Species Act to Pacific Salmon'' (56 FR 58612,

November 20, 1991). Under section 4(b)(3)(B) of the ESA, this finding

requires that a review of the status of steelhead populations in

Washington, Oregon, California, and Idaho be conducted to determine if

the petitioned action is warranted. In keeping with section 4(b)(3)(B)

of the ESA, the Secretary will make his determination on the ONRC et

al. petition within 12 months of February 16, 1994, the date it was

received.

Ongoing Status Review

On May 6, 1992, the Secretary received a petition from ONRC and ten

co-petitioners to list the Illinois River (tributary to the Rogue

River, Southern Oregon) winter steelhead and to designate critical

habitat under the ESA. The AA determined that while ``there is

insufficient evidence to demonstrate that the Illinois River winter

steelhead by themselves represent an evolutionary significant unit

(ESU), and hence a 'species' under the ESA, Illinois River winter

steelhead are undoubtedly part of a larger ESU whose extent has not yet

been determined.'' Moreover, in light of the general decline in many

West Coast populations of steelhead, NMFS initiated its own

comprehensive status review that will assess steelhead populations in

coastal streams of California, Oregon, and Washington (including Puget

Sound). The first objective of the larger steelhead status review is to

define the boundaries of the ESU that contain Illinois River winter

steelhead and determine whether they are threatened or endangered. In

accordance with section 4 of the ESA, NMFS published a notice of

determination and request for information (58 FR 29390, May 20, 1993)

on an expanded status review of coastal steelhead populations. Although

the geographic scope of the ONRC et al. petition is similar to the area

addressed in the ongoing NMFS coastal steelhead status review,

additional information about steelhead populations east of the Cascade

Mountain Range is needed. Therefore, information received during the

comment period for the ONRC et al. petition will be used in NMFS'

ongoing review of steelhead populations in coastal streams of

California, Oregon, and Washington (including Puget Sound).

Listing Factors and Basis for Determination

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) 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) inadequacy of

existing regulatory mechanisms; or (5) other natural or manmade factors

affecting its continued existence. All listing determinations are made

solely on the best scientific and commercial data available.

Biological Information Solicited

NMFS is soliciting information and comments concerning: (1) Whether

or not the stocks qualify as a ``species'' under the ESA (56 FR 58612,

November 20, 1991) and (2) whether or not the stocks are endangered or

threatened based on the above listing criteria. Specifically, NMFS is

soliciting information in the following areas: Migration timing and

behavior of juvenile and adult steelhead; age structure of steelhead;

interactions of steelhead with other salmonids; alteration of steelhead

freshwater and marine habitats; disease epizootiology of steelhead;

influence of historical and present hatchery fish releases on naturally

spawning stocks of steelhead; and separation of hatchery and natural

steelhead escapement. This information should address all steelhead

populations in California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and British

Columbia. Because a very similar request for information was published

in the May 20, 1993, Federal Register notice announcing NMFS' decision

to conduct a review of coastal steelhead populations, it is not

necessary for parties to submit the same information for this request.

Copies of the petition are available (see ADDRESSES).

It is important to note that the determination to list a species is

based solely on the best available scientific and commercial

information regarding a species' status, without reference to possible

economic or other impacts of such a determination (50 CFR 424.11(b)).

Critical Habitat

NMFS is also requesting information on areas that may qualify as

critical habitat for Washington, Oregon, California, and Idaho stocks

of steelhead (see also October 15, 1991, 56 FR 51684). Areas that

include the physical and biological features essential to the recovery

of the species should be identified. Areas outside the present range

should also be identified if such areas are essential to the recovery

of the species. Essential features should include, but are not limited

to: (1) Space for individual and population 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 rearing of offspring; and (5) habitats that are

protected from disturbance or are representative of the historic

geographical and ecological distributions of the species.

For areas potentially qualifying as critical habitat, NMFS is

requesting information describing: (1) the activities that affect the

area 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.

The economic cost to be considered in the critical habitat

designation under the ESA is the probable economic impact ``of the

(critical habitat) designation upon proposed or ongoing activities''

(50 CFR 424.19). NMFS must consider the incremental costs specifically

resulting from a critical habitat designation that are above the

economic effects attributable to listing the species. Economic effects

attributable to listing include actions resulting from section 7

consultations under the ESA to avoid jeopardy to the species and from

the taking prohibitions under section 9 of the ESA. Comments concerning

economic impacts should distinguish the costs of listing from the

incremental costs that can be directly attributed to the designation of

specific areas as critical habitats.

Data, information, and comments should include: (1) Supporting

documentation such as maps, bibliographic references, or reprints of

pertinent publications, and (2) the commentor's name, address, and

association, institution, or business.

Dated: May 20, 1994.

William W. Fox, Jr.,

Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries

Service.

[FR Doc. 94-13002 Filed 5-26-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-F