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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 227

Listing Endangered and Threatened Species and Designating

Critical Habitat: Petition To List Coho Salmon Throughout Its Range in

Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California

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

Atmospheric Administration, Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of petition finding and request for information.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS has received a petition to list, either on an emergency

basis or through normal listing procedures, coho salmon (Oncorhynchus

kisutch) throughout its range in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and

California, and to designate critical habitat under the Endangered

Species Act of 1973 (ESA). The petition presents substantial scientific

information indicating that the request for a non-emergency 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 coho

salmon populations in California, Oregon, and Washington (including

Puget Sound).

DATES: Comments and information must be received on March 28, 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 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 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544) 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.

Petition Received

On October 20, 1993, the Secretary of Commerce received a petition

from The Pacific Rivers Council (PRC) and 22 co-petitioners to list,

either on an emergency basis or through normal listing procedures, coho

salmon throughout its range in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and

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

Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), has determined that

there is insufficient evidence demonstrating the existence of an

emergency posing a significant risk to the well-being of the species

and, thus, the request for an emergency rule is denied. The AA makes a

finding that the petition presents substantial scientific information

indicating that a non-emergency 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 ``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)(A) of the ESA, this finding requires that a review of the

status of coho salmon populations in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and

California 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 PRC et al. petition within 12 months

of the date it was received (October 12, 1993). Information received

during this status review will be used in NMFS' ongoing review of coho

salmon populations in California, Oregon, and Washington (58 FR 57770,

October 27, 1993).

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. In addition, under section 4(b)(7)

of the ESA, the Secretary of Commerce may at any time issue an

emergency regulation if there exists a significant risk to the well-

being of the species. In such a case, the Secretary must publish a

Federal Register notice detailing the reasons for an emergency listing.

Listing determinations are made solely on the best scientific and

commercial data available.

Biological Information Solicited

To ensure that the coho salmon status review is complete and is

based on the best available scientific and commercial data, NMFS is

soliciting information and comments concerning: (1) Whether or not the

populations qualify as ``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); and (2) whether or not the populations are endangered or

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

soliciting information in the following areas: Influence of historical

and present hatchery fish releases on naturally spawning populations of

coho salmon, separation of hatchery and natural coho salmon escapement,

alteration of coho salmon freshwater and marine habitats, disease

epizootiology of coho salmon, age structure of coho salmon populations,

migration timing and behavior of juvenile and adult coho salmon, and

interactions of coho salmon with other salmonids. This information

should address all coho salmon populations in California, Oregon,

Idaho, and Washington (including Puget Sound). Because a very similar

request for information was published in the Federal Register (58 FR

57770, October 27, 1993) announcing NMFS' decision to conduct a review

of West Coast coho salmon populations, it is not necessary for parties

to submit the same information for this request. Copies of the petition

are available (see ADDRESSES).

Critical Habitat

NMFS is also requesting information on areas that may qualify as

critical habitat for California, Oregon, Idaho, and Washington

populations of coho salmon. 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 habitat.

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

documentation such as maps, bibliographic references, or reprints of

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

association, institution, or business.

Dated: January 18, 1994.

Herbert W. Kaufman,

Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources.

[FR Doc. 94-1634 Filed 1-25-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-M