Endangered and Threatened Species: Proposed Endangered Status for Five ESUs of Steelhead and Proposed Threatened Status for Five ESUs of Steelhead in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Parts 222 and 227

[Docket No. 960730210-6210-01; I.D. 050294D]

Endangered and Threatened Species: Proposed Endangered Status for

Five ESUs of Steelhead and Proposed Threatened Status for Five ESUs of

Steelhead in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California

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

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS has completed a comprehensive status review of West Coast

steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss, or O. mykiss) populations in

Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California, and has identified 15

Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESUs) within this range. NMFS is now

issuing a proposed rule to list five ESUs as endangered and five ESUs

as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The endangered

steelhead ESUs are located in California (Central California Coast,

South/Central California Coast, Southern California, and Central Valley

ESUs) and Washington (Upper Columbia River ESU). The threatened

steelhead ESUs are dispersed throughout all four states and include the

Snake River Basin, Lower Columbia River, Oregon Coast, Klamath

Mountains Province, and Northern California ESUs. NMFS is also

designating the Middle Columbia River ESU as a candidate species.

NMFS is requesting public comments on the biological issues

pertaining to this proposed rule and suggestions on integrated local/

state/Federal conservation measures that might best achieve the

purposes of the ESA relative to recovering the health of steelhead

populations and the ecosystems upon which they depend. Should the

proposed listings be made final, protective regulations under the ESA

would be put into effect and a recovery program would be implemented.

DATES: Comments must be received by November 7, 1996. NMFS will

announce the dates and locations of public hearings in Washington,

Oregon, Idaho, and California in a separate Federal Register document.

Requests for additional public hearings must be received by September

23, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposed rule and requests for public

hearings or reference materials should be sent to the Protected Species

Branch, Environmental and Technical Services Division, NMFS, Northwest

Region, 525 NE Oregon Street, Suite 500, Portland, OR 97232-2737.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Garth Griffin, 503-231-2005, Craig

Wingert, 310-980-4021, or Marta Nammack, 301-713-1401.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On May 5, 1992, NMFS received a petition to list Illinois River

winter steelhead from the Oregon Natural Resources Council, the

Siskiyou Regional Education Project, Federation of Fly Fishers,

Kalmiopsis Audubon Society, Siskiyou Audubon Society, Klamath/Siskiyou

Coalition, Headwaters, The Wilderness Society, North Coast

Environmental Center, The Sierra Club--Oregon Chapter, and the National

Wildlife Federation. On July 31, 1992, NMFS published a notice stating

that the petition presented substantial information indicating that a

listing might be warranted (57 FR 33939) and concurrently solicited

information about the status of this population. NMFS completed a

status review (Busby et al. 1993) that was summarized in a May 20,

1993, determination (58 FR 29390). NMFS concluded that Illinois River

winter steelhead did not represent a ``species'' under the ESA and

therefore, a proposal to list this population was not warranted.

However, NMFS recognized that this population was part of a larger ESU

whose extent had not yet been determined, but whose status might

warrant listing because of declining trends in steelhead abundance

observed in several southern Oregon streams.

In its May 20, 1993, finding regarding Illinois River winter

steelhead, NMFS announced that it would conduct an expanded status

review to identify all coastal steelhead ESU(s) within California,

Oregon, and Washington, and to determine whether any identified ESU(s)

warrant listing under the ESA. Subsequently, on February 16, 1994, NMFS

received a petition from the Oregon Natural Resources Council and 15

co-petitioners to list all steelhead (or

[[Page 41542]]

specific ESUs, races, or stocks) within the states of California,

Oregon, Washington, and Idaho. In response to this petition, NMFS

announced the expansion of its status review of steelhead to include

inland steelhead populations occurring in eastern Washington and Oregon

and the State of Idaho (59 FR 27527, May 27, 1994).

On September 21, 1993, NMFS received a petition from Washington

Trout to list Deer Creek summer steelhead. On December 23, 1993, NMFS

concluded that the petition presented substantial information

indicating that listing may be warranted (58 FR 68108). NMFS completed

a status review which concluded that Deer Creek summer steelhead did

not represent a ``species'' under the ESA (59 FR 59981, November 21,

1994), and, therefore, a proposal to list this population under the ESA

was not warranted. However, NMFS further concluded that Deer Creek

summer steelhead were part of a larger ESU that may warrant listing

under the ESA and for which a status review was currently underway.

On March 16, 1995, NMFS published a proposed rule to list Klamath

Mountains Province steelhead as threatened (60 FR 14253). This proposal

included steelhead populations occurring in coastal streams between

Cape Blanco, OR, and the Klamath River Basin in Oregon and California,

inclusive. A brief summary of this ESU is included in the current

proposed rule. Public comments were received on this earlier proposal.

During the coastwide steelhead status review, NMFS assessed the

best available scientific and commercial data, including technical

information from Pacific Salmon Biological Technical Committees

(PSBTCs) and interested parties in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and

California. The PSBTCs consisted primarily of scientists (from Federal,

state, and local resource agencies, Indian tribes, industries,

universities, professional societies, and public interest groups)

possessing technical expertise relevant to steelhead and their

habitats.

A NMFS Biological Review Team, composed of staff from NMFS'

Northwest Fisheries Science Center and Southwest Regional Office, as

well as a representative of the National Biological Service, has

completed a coastwide status review for steelhead [Memorandum to

William Stelle and Hilda Diaz-Soltero from M. Schiewe, July 17, 1995,

Review of the Status of Steelhead (O. mykiss) from Washington, Idaho,

Oregon, and California under the U.S. Endangered Species Act]. Copies

of the memorandum are available upon request (see ADDRESSES section).

The review, summarized below, identifies 15 ESUs of steelhead in the

four states. NMFS is proposing to list five ESUs as endangered and five

ESUs as threatened under the ESA. In addition, NMFS is proposing to add

the Middle Columbia River ESU to the candidate species list. The

complete results of NMFS' status review of steelhead populations will

be published in a forthcoming NOAA Technical Memorandum (Busby et al.,

in press).

Steelhead Life History

Steelhead exhibit one of the most complex suite of life history

traits of any salmonid species. Steelhead may exhibit anadromy (meaning

that they migrate as juveniles from fresh water to the ocean, and then

return to spawn in fresh water) or freshwater residency (meaning that

they reside their entire life in fresh water). Resident forms are

usually referred to as ``rainbow'' or ``redband'' trout, while

anadromous life forms are termed ``steelhead.'' Few detailed studies

have been conducted regarding the relationship between resident and

anadromous O. mykiss and as a result, the relationship between these

two life forms is poorly understood. Recently however, the scientific

name for the biological species that includes both steelhead and

rainbow trout was changed from Salmo gairdneri to O. mykiss. This

change reflects the premise that all trouts from western North America

share a common lineage with Pacific salmon.

Steelhead typically migrate to marine waters after spending 2 years

in fresh water. They then reside in marine waters for typically 2 or 3

years prior to returning to their natal stream to spawn as 4- or 5-

year-olds. Unlike Pacific salmon, steelhead are iteroparous, meaning

that they are capable of spawning more than once before they die.

However, it is rare for steelhead to spawn more than twice before

dying; most that do so are females. Steelhead adults typically spawn

between December and June (Bell, 1990). Depending on water temperature,

steelhead eggs may incubate in ``redds'' (nesting gravels) for 1.5 to 4

months before hatching as ``alevins'' (a larval life stage dependent on

food stored in a yolk sac). Following yolk sac absorption, alevins

emerge from the gravel as young juveniles or ``fry'' and begin actively

feeding. Juveniles rear in fresh water from 1 to 4 years, then migrate

to the ocean as ``smolts.''

Biologically, steelhead can be divided into two reproductive

ecotypes, based on their state of sexual maturity at the time of river

entry and the duration of their spawning migration. These two ecotypes

are termed ``stream maturing'' and ``ocean maturing.'' Stream maturing

steelhead enter fresh water in a sexually immature condition and

require several months to mature and spawn. Ocean maturing steelhead

enter fresh water with well-developed gonads and spawn shortly after

river entry. These two reproductive ecotypes are more commonly referred

to by their season of freshwater entry (e.g., summer and winter

steelhead).

Two major genetic groups or ``subspecies'' of steelhead occur on

the west coast of the United States: a coastal group and an inland

group, separated in the Fraser and Columbia River Basins by the Cascade

crest approximately (Huzyk & Tsuyuki, 1974: Allendorf, 1975; Utter &

Allendorf, 1977; Okazaki, 1984; Parkinson, 1984; Schreck et al., 1986;

Reisenbichler et al., 1992). Behnke (1992) proposed to classify the

coastal subspecies as O. m. irideus and the inland subspecies as O. m.

gairdneri. These genetic groupings apply to both anadromous and

nonanadromous forms of O. mykiss. Both coastal and inland steelhead

occur in Washington and Oregon. California is thought to have only

coastal steelhead while Idaho has only inland steelhead.

Historically, steelhead were distributed throughout the North

Pacific Ocean from the Kamchatka Peninsula in Asia to the northern Baja

Peninsula. Presently, the species distribution extends from the

Kamchatka Peninsula, east and south along the Pacific coast of North

America, to at least Malibu Creek in southern California. There are

infrequent anecdotal reports of steelhead continuing to occur as far

south as the Santa Margarita River in San Diego County (McEwan &

Jackson, 1996). Historically, steelhead likely inhabited most coastal

streams in Washington, Oregon, and California as well as many inland

streams in these states and Idaho. However, during this century, over

23 indigenous, naturally-reproducing stocks of steelhead are believed

to have been extirpated, and many more are thought to be in decline in

numerous coastal and inland streams in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and

California. Forty-three stocks have been identified by Nehlsen et al.

(1991) as being at moderate or high risk of extinction.

Consideration as a ``Species'' Under the ESA

To qualify for listing as a threatened or endangered species, the

identified populations of steelhead must be considered ``species''

under the ESA.

[[Page 41543]]

The ESA defines a ``species'' 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.'' NMFS

published a policy (56 FR 58612, November 20, 1991) describing the

agencies application of the ESA definition of ``species'' to anadromous

Pacific salmonid species. NMFS's policy provides that a Pacific

salmonid population will be considered distinct and, hence, a species

under the ESA if it represents an ESU of the biological species. A

population must satisfy two criteria to be considered an ESU: (1) It

must be reproductively isolated from other conspecific population

units, and (2) it must represent an important component in the

evolutionary legacy of the biological species. The first criterion,

reproductive isolation, need not be absolute, but must be strong enough

to permit evolutionarily important differences to accrue in different

population units. The second criterion is met if the population

contributes substantially to the ecological/genetic diversity of the

species as a whole. Guidance on the application of this policy is

contained in a scientific paper ``Pacific Salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.)

and the Definition of `Species' under the Endangered Species Act'' and

a NOAA Technical Memorandum ``Definition of `Species' Under the

Endangered Species Act: Application to Pacific Salmon,'' which are

available upon request (see ADDRESSES). The following sections describe

the genetic, ecological, and life history characteristics, as well as

human-induced genetic changes that NMFS assessed to determine the

number and geographic extent of steelhead ESUs.

Reproductive Isolation

Genetic data provide useful indirect information on reproductive

isolation because they integrate information about migration and gene

flow over evolutionarily important time frames. During the status

review, NMFS worked in cooperation with the States of California,

Oregon, Idaho, and Washington to develop a genetic stock identification

data base for steelhead. Natural and hatchery steelhead were collected

by NMFS, California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), Oregon

Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW), Idaho Department of Fish and

Game (IDFG), Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), and

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for protein electrophoretic

analysis by NMFS and WDFW. Existing NMFS data for Columbia and Snake

River Basin steelhead were also included in the data base.

In addition to the new studies, published results from numerous

studies of genetic characteristics of steelhead populations were

considered. These included studies based on protein electrophoresis

(Huzyk & Tsuyuki, 1974; Allendorf, 1975; Utter & Allendorf, 1977;

Okazaki, 1984; Parkinson, 1984; Campton & Johnson, 1985; Milner & Teel,

1985; Schreck et al., 1986; Hershberger & Dole, 1987; Berg & Gall,

1988; Reisenbichler & Phelps, 1989; Reisenbichler et al., 1992; Currens

& Schreck, 1993; Waples et al., 1993; Phelps et al., 1994; Leider et

al., 1995). Supplementing these protein electrophoretic studies were

two studies based on mitochondrial DNA (Buroker, unpublished; Nielsen,

1994) and chromosomal karyotyping studies conducted by Thorgard (1977,

1983) and Ostberg and Thorgard (1994).

Genetic information obtained from allozyme, DNA, and chromosomal

sampling indicate a strong differentiation between coastal and inland

subspecies of steelhead. Several studies have identified coastal and

inland forms of O. mykiss as distinct genetic life forms. Allendorf

(1975) first identified coastal and inland steelhead life forms in

Washington, Oregon, and Idaho based on large and consistent allele

frequency differences which applied to both anadromous and resident O.

mykiss. In the Columbia River, it was determined that the geographic

boundary of these life forms occurs at about the Cascade crest.

Subsequent studies have supported this finding (Utter & Allendorf,

1977; Okazaki, 1984; Schreck et al., 1986; Reisenbichler et al., 1992).

Recent genetic data from WDFW further supports the major

differentiation between coastal and inland steelhead forms.

Few detailed studies have explored the relationship between

resident and anadromous O. mykiss residing in the same location.

Genetic studies generally show that, in the same geographic area,

resident and anadromous life forms are more similar to each other than

either is to the same form from a different geographic area. Recently,

Leider et al. (1995) found that results from comparisons of rainbow

trout in the Elwha and Cedar Rivers and Washington steelhead indicate

that the two forms are not reproductively isolated. Further, Leider et

al. (1995) also concluded that, based on preliminary analyses of data

from the Yakima and Big White Salmon Rivers, resident trout would be

genetically indistinguishable from steelhead. Based on these studies,

it appears that resident and anadromous O. mykiss from the same

geographic area may share a common gene pool, at least over

evolutionary time periods.

Based on the available genetic information, it was the consensus of

NMFS scientists, as well as regional fishery biologists, that resident

fish should generally be considered part of the steelhead ESUs.

However, even though NMFS requested data regarding resident rainbow

trout abundance during its west coast steelhead status review, very

little was received, making status determinations with respect to

resident rainbow trout problematic. Because available information does

not clearly define the relationship between resident rainbow trout and

steelhead, NMFS is not proposing to list resident rainbow trout at this

time. However, through this proposed rule, NMFS is requesting public

comment regarding the inclusion of resident rainbow trout in proposed

steelhead ESUs. Prior to the final listing determination, NMFS will

work with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and other

fisheries comanagers to examine the relationship between resident and

anadromous O. mykiss in the ESUs proposed for listing.

Genetic Changes Due to Human Activities

The effects of artificial propagation and other human activities

can be relevant to ESA listing determinations in two ways. First, such

activities can genetically change natural populations so much that they

no longer represent an evolutionarily significant component of the

biological species (Waples, 1991). For example, in 1991, NMFS concluded

that, as a result of massive and prolonged effects of artificial

propagation, harvest, and habitat degradation, the agency could not

identify natural populations of coho salmon (O. kisutch) in the lower

Columbia River that qualified for ESA listing consideration (56 FR

29553, June 27, 1991). Second, risks to the viability and genetic

integrity of native salmon populations posed by human activities may

contribute to their threatened or endangered status (Goodman, 1990;

Hard et al., 1992). The severity of these effects on natural

populations depends both on the nature of the effects (e.g., harvest

rate, gear size, or type of hatchery practice) and their magnitude

(e.g., duration of a hatchery program and number and life-history stage

of hatchery fish involved).

In the case of west coast steelhead, artificial propagation is a

common practice to supplement stocks for recreational fisheries.

However, in many

[[Page 41544]]

areas, a significant portion of the naturally spawning population

consists of hatchery-produced steelhead. In several of the steelhead

ESUs, over 50 percent of the naturally spawning fish are from

hatcheries. Many of these hatchery-produced fish are derived from a few

stocks which may or may not have originated from the geographic area

where they are released. Artificial propagation of steelhead has been,

and continues to be, a common occurrence throughout the range of west

coast steelhead. However, in several of the ESUs analyzed, insufficient

or uncertain information exists regarding the interactions between

hatchery and natural fish, and the relative abundance of hatchery and

natural stocks. The impacts of hatchery activities in specific ESUs is

discussed below under Status of Steelhead ESUs.

Ecological/Genetic Diversity

Several types of physical and biological evidence were considered

in evaluating the contribution of steelhead from Washington, Oregon,

Idaho, and California to the ecological/genetic diversity of the

biological species throughout its range. Factors examined included: (1)

The physical environment--geology, soil type, air temperature,

precipitation, river flow patterns, water temperature, and vegetation;

(2) biogeography--marine, estuarine, and freshwater fish distributions;

and (3) life history traits--age at smolting, age at spawning, river

entry timing, and spawning timing. An analysis of the physical

environment and life history traits provides important insight into the

ecological/genetic diversity of the species and can reflect unusual or

distinctive adaptations that promote evolutionary processes. Following

is a brief summary of the relevance of these factors for each ESU.

ESU Determinations

The ESU determinations described here represent a synthesis of a

large amount of diverse information. In general, the proposed

geographic boundaries for each ESU (i.e., the watersheds within which

the members of the ESU are typically found) are supported by several

lines of evidence that show similar patterns. However, the diverse data

sets are not always entirely congruent (nor would they be expected to

be), and the proposed boundaries are not necessarily the only ones

possible. For example, in some cases (e.g., in the Middle Columbia

River near the Cascade Crest), environmental changes occur over a

transition zone rather than abruptly.

Based on the best available scientific and commercial information,

including the biological effects of human activities, NMFS has

identified 15 ESUs that include steelhead populations from Washington,

Oregon, Idaho, and California. The 15 ESUs are briefly described and

characterized below. Genetic data (from studies of protein

electrophoresis and DNA) were the primary evidence considered for the

reproductive isolation criterion, supplemented by inferences about

barriers to migration created by natural geographic features and human-

induced changes resulting from artificial propagation and harvest.

Factors considered to be most informative in evaluating ecological/

genetic diversity include data pertaining to the physical environment,

ocean conditions/upwelling, vegetation, estuarine and freshwater fish

distributions, river entry, and spawning timing.

(1) Puget Sound

The geographic boundaries of this coastal steelhead ESU extend from

the United States/Canada border and include steelhead in river basins

of the Strait of Juan de Fuca, Puget Sound, and Hood Canal, WA.

Included are river basins east of and including the Elwha River and

north to include the Nooksack River. This region is in the rain shadow

of the Olympic Mountains, is therefore drier than the rainforest area

of the western Olympic Peninsula, and is dominated by western hemlock

forests. Streams are characterized by cold water, high average flows,

and a relatively long duration of peak flows that occur twice each

year.

Recent genetic data provided by WDFW show that steelhead in the

Puget Sound area generally form a coherent group distinct from

populations elsewhere in Washington. Chromosomal studies show that

steelhead from the Puget Sound area have a distinctive karyotype not

found in other regions. No recent genetic comparisons have been made

between Puget Sound and British Columbia steelhead; however, Nooksack

River steelhead tend to differ genetically from other Puget Sound

stocks, indicating a genetic transition zone in northern Puget Sound.

In life history traits, there appears to be a sharp transition

between steelhead populations from Washington, which smolt primarily at

age 2, and those in British Columbia, which most commonly smolt at age

3. This pattern holds for comparisons across the Strait of Juan de Fuca

as well as for comparisons of Puget Sound and Strait of Georgia

populations. At the present time, therefore, evidence suggests that the

northern boundary for this ESU coincides approximately with the United

States/Canada border. This ESU is primarily composed of winter

steelhead but includes several stocks of summer steelhead, usually in

subbasins of large river systems and above seasonal hydrologic

barriers.

(2) Olympic Peninsula

This coastal steelhead ESU occupies river basins of the Olympic

Peninsula, WA, west of the Elwha River and south to, but not including,

the rivers that flow into Grays Harbor, WA. Streams in the Olympic

Peninsula are similar to those in Puget Sound and are characterized by

high levels of precipitation and cold water, high average flows, and a

relatively long duration of peak flows that occur twice a year. In

contrast to the more inland areas of Puget Sound where western hemlock

is the dominant forest cover at sea level, lowland vegetation in this

region is dominated by Sitka spruce.

Genetic data collected by WDFW indicate that steelhead in this

region are substantially isolated from other regions in western

Washington. Only limited life history information is available for

Olympic Peninsula steelhead, and the information that does exist is

primarily from winter-run fish. As with the Puget Sound ESU, known life

history attributes of Olympic Peninsula steelhead are similar to those

for other west coast steelhead, the notable exception being the

difference between United States and Canadian populations in age at

smolting. This ESU is primarily composed of winter steelhead but

includes several stocks of summer steelhead in the larger rivers.

(3) Southwest Washington

This coastal steelhead ESU occupies the river basins of, and

tributaries to, Grays Harbor, Willapa Bay, and the Columbia River below

the Cowlitz River in Washington and below the Willamette River in

Oregon. Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor in southwest Washington have

extensive intertidal mud and sand flats and differ substantially from

estuaries to the north and south. This similarity between the Willapa

Bay and Grays Harbor estuaries results from the shared geology of the

area and the transportation of Columbia River sediments northward along

the Washington coast. Rivers draining into the Columbia River have

their headwaters in increasingly drier areas, moving from west to east.

Columbia River tributaries that drain the Cascade Mountains have

proportionally higher flows in late summer and early fall than rivers

on the Oregon coast.

[[Page 41545]]

Recent genetic data (Leider et al., 1995) show consistent

differences between steelhead populations from the southwest Washington

coast and coastal areas to the north, as well as Columbia River

drainages east of the Cowlitz River. Genetic data do not clearly define

the relationship between southwest Washington steelhead and lower

Columbia River steelhead. This ESU is primarily composed of winter

steelhead but includes summer steelhead in the Humptulips and Chehalis

River Basins.

(4) Lower Columbia River

This coastal steelhead ESU occupies tributaries to the Columbia

River between the Cowlitz and Wind Rivers in Washington and the

Willamette and Hood Rivers in Oregon. Excluded are steelhead in the

upper Willamette River Basin above Willamette Falls, and steelhead from

the Little and Big White Salmon Rivers in Washington. Similar to

Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor in southwest Washington, the lower

Columbia River has extensive intertidal mud and sand flats and differs

substantially from estuaries to the north and south. This similarity

results from the shared geology of the area and the transportation of

Columbia River sediments northward along the Washington coast. Rivers

draining into the Columbia River have their headwaters in increasingly

drier areas, moving from west to east. Columbia River tributaries that

drain the Cascade Mountains have proportionally higher flows in late

summer and early fall than rivers on the Oregon coast.

Steelhead populations in this ESU are of the coastal genetic group

(Schreck et al., 1986; Reisenbichler et al., 1992; Chapman et al.,

1994), and a number of genetic studies have shown that they are part of

a different ancestral lineage than inland steelhead from the Columbia

River Basin. Genetic data also show steelhead from this ESU to be

distinct from steelhead from the upper Willamette River and coastal

streams in Oregon and Washington. WDFW data showed genetic affinity

between the Kalama, Wind, and Washougal River steelhead. The data show

differentiation between the Lower Columbia River ESU and the Southwest

Washington and Middle Columbia River Basin ESUs. This ESU is composed

of winter steelhead and summer steelhead.

(5) Upper Willamette River

This coastal steelhead ESU occupies the Willamette River and its

tributaries, upstream from Willamette Falls. The Willamette River Basin

is zoogeographically complex. In addition to its connection to the

Columbia River, the Willamette has had connections with coastal basins

through stream capture and headwater transfer events (Minckley et al.,

1986).

Steelhead from the upper Willamette River are genetically distinct

from those in the lower river. Reproductive isolation from lower river

populations may have been facilitated by Willamette Falls, which is

known to be a migration barrier to some anadromous salmonids. For

example, winter steelhead and spring chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha)

occurred historically above the falls, but summer steelhead, fall

chinook salmon, and coho salmon did not (PGE, 1994).

The native steelhead of this basin are late-migrating winter

steelhead, entering fresh water primarily in March and April (Howell et

al., 1985), whereas most other populations of west coast winter

steelhead enter fresh water beginning in November or December. As early

as 1885, fish ladders were constructed at Willamette Falls to aid the

passage of anadromous fish. The ladders have been modified and rebuilt,

most recently in 1971, as technology has improved (Bennett, 1987; PGE,

1994). These fishways facilitated successful introduction of Skamania

stock summer steelhead and early-migrating Big Creek stock winter

steelhead to the upper basin. Another effort to expand the steelhead

production in the upper Willamette River was the stocking of native

steelhead in tributaries not historically used by that species. Native

steelhead primarily used tributaries on the east side of the basin,

with cutthroat trout predominating in streams draining the west side of

the basin.

Nonanadromous O. mykiss are known to occupy the Upper Willamette

River Basin; however, most of these nonanadromous populations occur

above natural and manmade barriers (Kostow, 1995). Historically,

spawning by Upper Willamette River steelhead was concentrated in the

North and Middle Santiam River Basins (Fulton, 1970). These areas are

now largely blocked to fish passage by dams, and steelhead spawning is

now distributed throughout more of the Upper Willamette River Basin

than in the past (Fulton, 1970). Due to introductions of nonnative

steelhead stocks and transplantation of native stocks within the basin,

it is difficult to formulate a clear picture of the present

distribution of native Upper Willamette River Basin steelhead, and

their relationship to nonanadromous and possibly residualized O. mykiss

within the basin.

(6) Oregon Coast

This coastal steelhead ESU occupies river basins on the Oregon

coast north of Cape Blanco, excluding rivers and streams that are

tributaries of the Columbia River. Most rivers in this area drain the

Coast Range Mountains, have a single peak in flow in December or

January, and have relatively low flow during summer and early fall. The

coastal region receives fairly high precipitation levels, and the

vegetation is dominated by Sitka spruce and western hemlock. Upwelling

off the Oregon coast is much more variable and generally weaker than

areas south of Cape Blanco. While marine conditions off the Oregon and

Washington coasts are similar, the Columbia River has greater influence

north of its mouth, and the continental shelf becomes broader off the

Washington coast.

Recent genetic data from steelhead in this ESU are limited, but

they show a level of differentiation from populations from Washington,

the Columbia River Basin, and coastal areas south of Cape Blanco. Ocean

migration patterns also suggest a distinction between steelhead

populations north and south of Cape Blanco. Steelhead (as well as

chinook and coho salmon) from streams south of Cape Blanco tend to be

south-migrating rather than north-migrating (Everest, 1973; Nicholas &

Hankin, 1988; Pearcy et al., 1990; Pearcy, 1992).

The Oregon Coast ESU primarily contains winter steelhead; there are

only two native stocks of summer steelhead. Summer steelhead occur only

in the Siletz River, above a waterfall, and in the North Umpqua River,

where migration distance may prevent full utilization of available

habitat by winter steelhead. Alsea River winter steelhead have been

widely used for steelhead broodstock in coastal rivers. Populations of

nonanadromous O. mykiss are relatively uncommon on the Oregon coast, as

compared with other areas, occurring primarily above migration barriers

and in the Umpqua River Basin (Kostow, 1995).

Little information is available regarding migration and spawn

timing of natural steelhead populations within this ESU. Age structure

appears to be similar to other west coast steelhead, dominated by 4-

year-old spawners. Iteroparity is more common among Oregon coast

steelhead than populations to the north.

(7) Klamath Mountains Province

This coastal steelhead ESU occupies river basins from the Elk River

in Oregon to the Klamath and Trinity Rivers in California, inclusive. A

detailed discussion of this ESU is presented in a previous NMFS status

review (Busby et al., 1994). Geologically, this region includes the

[[Page 41546]]

Klamath Mountains Province, which is not as erosive as the Franciscan

formation terrains south of the Klamath River Basin. Dominant

vegetation along the coast is redwood forest, while some interior

basins are much drier than surrounding areas and are characterized by

many endemic species. Elevated stream temperatures are a factor

affecting steelhead and other species in some of the larger river

basins. With the exception of major river basins such as the Rogue and

Klamath, most rivers in this region have a short duration of peak

flows. Strong and consistent coastal upwelling begins at about Cape

Blanco and continues south into central California, resulting in a

relatively productive nearshore marine environment.

Protein electrophoretic analyses of coastal steelhead have

indicated genetic discontinuities between the steelhead of this region

and those to the north and south (Hatch, 1990; Busby et al., 1993,

1994). Chromosomal studies have also identified a distinctive karyotype

that has been reported only from populations within this ESU. Steelhead

within this ESU include both winter and summer steelhead as well as the

unusual ``half-pounder'' life history (characterized by immature

steelhead that return to fresh water after only 2 to 4 months in salt

water, overwinter in rivers without spawning, then return to salt water

the following spring).

Among the remaining questions regarding this ESU is the

relationship between O. mykiss below and above Klamath Falls, OR.

Behnke (1992) has proposed that the two groups are in different

subspecies, and that the upper group, a redband trout (O. m.

newberrii), exhibited anadromy until blocked by the Copco dams in the

early 1900's. However, Moyle (1976) stated that Klamath Falls was the

upstream barrier to anadromous fish prior to construction of the dams.

(8) Northern California

This coastal steelhead ESU occupies river basins from Redwood Creek

in Humboldt County, CA to the Gualala River, inclusive. Dominant

vegetation along the coast is redwood forest, while some interior

basins are much drier than surrounding areas and are characterized by

many endemic species. This area includes the extreme southern end of

the contiguous portion of the Coast Range Ecoregion (Omernick, 1987).

Elevated stream temperatures are a factor in some of the larger river

basins (greater than 20 deg.C), but not to the extent that they are in

river basins farther south. Precipitation is generally higher in this

geographic area than in regions to the south, averaging 100-200 cm of

rainfall annually (Donley et al., 1979). With the exception of major

river basins such as the Eel, most rivers in this region have peak

flows of short duration. Strong and consistent coastal upwelling begins

at about Cape Blanco and continues south into central California,

resulting in a relatively productive nearshore marine environment.

There are life history similarities between steelhead of the

Northern California ESU and the Klamath Mountains Province ESU. This

ESU includes both winter and summer steelhead, including what is

presently considered to be the southernmost population of summer

steelhead, in the Middle Fork Eel River. Half-pounder juveniles also

occur in this geographic area, specifically in the Mad and Eel Rivers.

Snyder (1925) first described the half-pounder from the Eel River;

however, Cramer et al. (1995) suggested that adults with the half-

pounder juvenile life history may not spawn south of the Klamath River

Basin. As with the Rogue and Klamath Rivers, some of the larger rivers

in this area have migrating steelhead year-round, and seasonal runs

have been named. River entry ranges from August through June and

spawning from December through April, with peak spawning in January in

the larger basins and late February and March in the smaller coastal

basins.

(9) Central California Coast

This coastal steelhead ESU occupies river basins from the Russian

River to Soquel Creek, Santa Cruz County (inclusive), and the drainages

of San Francisco and San Pablo Bays; excluded is the Sacramento-San

Joaquin River Basin of the Central Valley of California. This area is

characterized by very erosive soils in the coast range mountains;

redwood forest is the dominant coastal vegetation for these drainages.

Precipitation is lower here than in areas to the north, and elevated

stream temperatures (greater than 20 deg.C) are common in the summer.

Coastal upwelling in this region is strong and consistent, resulting in

a relatively productive nearshore marine environment.

Analysis of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) data suggests that genetic

transitions occur north of the Russian River and north of Monterey,

California. Allozyme data show large genetic differences between

steelhead populations from the Eel and Mad Rivers and those to the

south. Only winter steelhead are found in this ESU and those to the

south. River entry ranges from October in the larger basins, late

November in the smaller coastal basins, and continues through June.

Steelhead spawning begins in November in the larger basins, December in

the smaller coastal basins, and can continue through April with peak

spawning generally in February and March. Little other life history

information exists for steelhead in this ESU.

(10) South/Central California Coast

This coastal steelhead ESU occupies rivers from the Pajaro River,

located in Santa Cruz County, CA, to (but not including) the Santa

Maria River. Most rivers in this ESU drain the Santa Lucia Range, the

southernmost unit of the California Coast Ranges. The climate is drier

and warmer than in the north, which is reflected in the vegetational

change from coniferous forest to chaparral and coastal scrub. Another

biological transition at the north of this area is the southern limit

of the distribution of coho salmon (O. kisutch). The mouths of many of

the rivers and streams in this area are seasonally closed by sand berms

that form during periods of low flow in the summer. The southern

boundary of this ESU is near Point Conception, a well-known transition

area for the distribution and abundance of marine flora and fauna.

Mitochondrial DNA data provide evidence for a genetic transition in

the vicinity of Monterey Bay. Both mtDNA and allozyme data show large

genetic differences between populations in this area, but do not

provide a clear picture of population structure. Only winter steelhead

are found in this ESU. River entry ranges from late November through

March, with spawning from January through April. Little other life

history information exists for steelhead in this ESU. The relationship

between anadromous and nonanadromous O. mykiss, including possibly

residualized fish upstream from dams, is unclear, but likely to be

important.

(11) Southern California

This coastal steelhead ESU occupies rivers from (and including) the

Santa Maria River to the southern extent of the species range which is

presently considered to be Malibu Creek, in Los Angeles County (McEwan

& Jackson, 1996). Migration and life history patterns of southern

California steelhead depend more strongly on rainfall and streamflow

than is the case for steelhead populations farther north (Moore, 1980;

Titus et al., in press). River entry ranges from early November through

June, with peaks in January and February. Spawning primarily begins in

January and continues through early June, with

[[Page 41547]]

peak spawning in February and March. Average rainfall is substantially

lower and more variable in this ESU than regions to the north,

resulting in increased duration of sand berms across the mouths of

streams and rivers and, in some cases, complete dewatering of the

marginal habitats. Environmental conditions in marginal habitats may be

extreme (e.g., elevated water temperatures, droughts, floods, and

fires) and presumably impose selective pressures on steelhead

populations. The use of southern California streams and rivers with

elevated temperatures by steelhead suggests that populations within

this ESU are able to withstand higher temperatures than those to the

north. The relatively warm and productive waters of the Ventura River

resulted in more rapid growth of juvenile steelhead than occurred in

northerly populations. However, relatively little life history

information exists for steelhead from this ESU.

Genetic data show large differences between steelhead populations

within this ESU as well as between these and populations to the north.

Steelhead populations between the Santa Ynez River and Malibu Creek

show a predominance of a mtDNA type that is rare in populations to the

north. Allozyme data indicate that two samples from Santa Barbara

County are genetically among the most distinctive of any natural

populations of coastal steelhead yet examined.

Among the remaining questions regarding this ESU are the

distribution and abundance of steelhead south of Malibu Creek. For

example, in years of substantial rainfall there have been reports of

steelhead in some coastal streams as far south as the Santa Margarita

River, San Diego County (Hubbs, 1946; Barnhart, 1986; Higgins, 1991;

McEwan & Jackson, 1996; Titus et al., in press).

(12) Central Valley

This coastal steelhead ESU occupies the Sacramento and San Joaquin

Rivers and their tributaries. In the San Joaquin Basin, however, the

best available information suggests that the current range of steelhead

has been limited to the Stanislaus, Tuolumne, and Merced Rivers

(tributaries), and the mainstem San Joaquin River to its confluence

with the Merced River by human alteration of formerly available

habitat. The Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers offer the only migration

route to the drainages of the Sierra Nevada and southern Cascade

mountain ranges for anadromous fish. The distance from the Pacific

Ocean to spawning streams can exceed 300 km, providing unique potential

for reproductive isolation among steelhead. The Central Valley is much

drier than the coastal regions to the west, receiving on average only

10-50 cm of rainfall annually. The valley is characterized by alluvial

soils, and native vegetation was dominated by oak forests and prairie

grasses prior to agricultural development. Steelhead within this ESU

have the longest freshwater migration of any population of winter

steelhead. There is essentially one continuous run of steelhead in the

upper Sacramento River. River entry ranges from July through May, with

peaks in September and February. Spawning begins in late December and

can extend into April (McEwan & Jackson, 1996).

Steelhead ranged throughout the tributaries and headwaters of the

Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers prior to dam construction, water

development, and watershed perturbations of the 19th and 20th

centuries. Present steelhead distribution in the central valley

drainages has been greatly reduced (McEwan & Jackson, 1996),

particularly in the San Joaquin basin. While there is little historical

documentation regarding steelhead distribution in the San Joaquin River

system, it can be assumed (based on known chinook salmon distributions

in this drainage) that steelhead were present in the San Joaquin River

and its tributaries from at least the San Joaquin River headwaters

northward. With regards to the present distribution of steelhead, there

is also only limited information. McEwan and Jackson (1996) reported

that a small, remnant run of steelhead persists in the Stanislaus

River, that steelhead were observed in the Tuolumne River in 1983, and

that a few large rainbow trout that appear to be steelhead enter the

Merced River Hatchery annually.

Recent allozyme data show that samples of steelhead from Deer and

Mill Creeks and Coleman NFH on the Sacramento River are well

differentiated from all other samples of steelhead from California.

There are two recognized taxonomic forms of native O. mykiss within the

Sacramento River Basin: Coastal steelhead/rainbow trout (O. m. irideus,

Behnke, 1992) and Sacramento redband trout (O. m. stonei, Behnke,

1992). It is not clear how the coastal and Sacramento redband forms of

O. mykiss interacted in the Sacramento River prior to construction of

Shasta Dam in the 1940s. However, it appears the two forms historically

co-occurred at spawning time, but may have maintained reproductive

isolation.

Among the remaining questions regarding this ESU are the current

presence, distribution, and abundance of steelhead in the San Joaquin

River and its main tributaries (stanislaus, tuolumne, and Merced

Rivers), and whether these steelhead stocks historically represented a

separate ESU from those in the Sacramento River Basin. Also, the

relationship between anadromous and nonanadromous O. mykiss, including

possibly residualized fish upstream from dams, is unclear.

(13) Middle Columbia River Basin

This inland steelhead ESU occupies the Columbia River Basin from

Mosier Creek, OR, upstream to the Yakima River, WA, inclusive.

Steelhead of the Snake River Basin are excluded. Franklin and Dyrness

(1973) placed the Yakima River Basin in the Columbia Basin

Physiographic Province, along with the Deschutes, John Day, Walla

Walla, and lower Snake River Basins. Geology within this province is

dominated by the Columbia River Basalt formation, stemming from lava

deposition in the miocene epoch, overlain by plio-Pleistocene deposits

of glaciolacustrine origin (Franklin & Dyrness, 1973). This

intermontane region includes some of the driest areas of the Pacific

Northwest, generally receiving less than 40 cm of rainfall annually

(Jackson, 1993). Vegetation is of the shrub-steppe province, reflecting

the dry climate and harsh temperature extremes.

Genetic differences between inland and coastal steelhead are well

established, although some uncertainty remains about the exact

geographic boundaries of the two forms in the Columbia River (see

discussion above for the Lower Columbia River ESU). Electrophoretic and

meristic data show consistent differences between steelhead from the

middle Columbia and Snake Rivers. No recent genetic data exist for

natural steelhead populations in the upper Columbia River, but recent

WDFW data show that the Wells Hatchery stock from the upper Columbia

River does not have a close genetic affinity to sampled populations

from the middle Columbia River.

All steelhead in the Columbia River Basin upstream from The Dalles

Dam are summer-run, inland steelhead (Schreck et al., 1986;

Reisenbichler et al., 1992; Chapman et al., 1994). Steelhead in

Fifteenmile Creek, OR, are genetically allied with inland O. mykiss,

but are winter-run. Winter steelhead are also found in the Klickitat

and White Salmon Rivers, WA.

Life history information for steelhead of this ESU indicates that

most middle Columbia River steelhead smolt at 2 years and spend 1 to 2

years in salt

[[Page 41548]]

water (i.e., 1-ocean and 2-ocean fish, respectively) prior to re-

entering fresh water, where they may remain up to a year prior to

spawning (Howell et al., 1985; BPA, 1992). Within this ESU, the

Klickitat River is unusual in that it produces both summer and winter

steelhead, and the summer steelhead are dominated by 2-ocean steelhead,

whereas most other rivers in this region produce about equal numbers of

both 1- and 2-ocean steelhead.

(14) Upper Columbia River Basin

This inland steelhead ESU occupies the Columbia River Basin

upstream from the Yakima River, WA, to the United States/Canada Border.

The geographic area occupied by this ESU forms part of the larger

Columbia Basin Ecoregion (Omernik, 1987). The Wenatchee and Entiat

Rivers are in the Northern Cascades Physiographic Province, and the

Okanogan and Methow Rivers are in the Okanogan Highlands Physiographic

Province. The geology of these provinces is somewhat similar and very

complex, developed from marine invasions, volcanic deposits, and

glaciation (Franklin & Dyrness, 1973). The river valleys in this region

are deeply dissected and maintain low gradients except in extreme

headwaters. The climate in this area includes extremes in temperatures

and precipitation, with most precipitation falling in the mountains as

snow. Streamflow in this area is provided by melting snowpack,

groundwater, and runoff from alpine glaciers. Mullan et al. (1992)

described this area as a harsh environment for fish and stated that

``it should not be confused with more studied, benign, coastal streams

of the Pacific Northwest.''

Life history characteristics for Upper Columbia River Basin

steelhead are similar to those of other inland steelhead ESUs; however,

some of the oldest smolt ages for steelhead, up to 7 years, are

reported from this ESU. This may be associated with the cold stream

temperatures (Mullan et al., 1992). Based on limited data available

from adult fish, smolt age in this ESU is dominated by 2-year-olds.

Steelhead from the Wenatchee and Entiat Rivers return to fresh water

after 1 year in salt water, whereas Methow River steelhead are

primarily 2-ocean resident (Howell et al., 1985).

In 1939, the construction of Grand Coulee Dam on the Columbia River

(RKm 956) blocked over 1,800 km of river from access by anadromous fish

(Mullan et al., 1992). In an effort to preserve fish runs affected by

Grand Coulee Dam, all anadromous fish migrating upstream were trapped

at Rock Island Dam (RKm 729) from 1939 through 1943 and either released

to spawn in tributaries between Rock Island and Grand Coulee Dams or

spawned in hatcheries and the offspring released in that area (Peven,

1990; Mullan et al., 1992; Chapman et al., 1994). Through this process,

stocks of all anadromous salmonids, including steelhead, which

historically were native to several separate subbasins above Rock

Island Dam, were randomly redistributed among tributaries in the Rock

Island-Grand Coulee reach. Exactly how this has affected stock

composition of steelhead is unknown.

(15) Snake River Basin

This inland steelhead ESU occupies the Snake River Basin of

southeast Washington, northeast Oregon and Idaho. The Snake River flows

through terrain that is warmer and drier on an annual basis than the

upper Columbia Basin or other drainages to the north. Geologically, the

land forms are older and much more eroded than most other steelhead

habitat. The eastern portion of the basin flows out of the granitic

geological unit known as the Idaho Batholith. The western Snake River

Basin drains sedimentary and volcanic soils of the Blue Mountains

complex. Collectively, the environmental factors of the Snake River

Basin result in a river that is warmer and more turbid, with higher pH

and alkalinity, than is found elsewhere in the range of inland

steelhead.

Snake River Basin steelhead are summer steelhead, as are most

inland steelhead, and comprise 2 groups, A-run and B-run, based on

migration timing, ocean-age, and adult size. Snake River Basin

steelhead enter fresh water from June to October and spawn in the

following spring from March to May. A-run steelhead are thought to be

predominately l-ocean, while B-run steelhead are thought to be 2-ocean

(IDFG, 1994). Snake River Basin steelhead usually smolt at age-2 or -3

years (Whitt, 1954; BPA, 1992; Hassemer, 1992).

The steelhead population from Dworshak National Fish Hatchery (NFH)

is the most divergent single population of inland steelhead based on

genetic traits determined by protein electrophoresis. Additionally,

steelhead returning to Dworshak NFH are considered to have a

distinctive appearance and are the one steelhead population that is

consistently referred to as B-run. NMFS considered the possibility that

Dworshak NFH steelhead should be in their own ESU. However, little

specific information was available regarding the characteristics of

this population's native habitat in the North Fork Clearwater River,

which is currently unavailable to anadromous fish due blockage by

Dworshak Dam.

Status of Steelhead ESUs

The ESA defines the term ``endangered species'' as ``any species

which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant

portion of its range.'' The term ``threatened species'' is defined as

``any species which is likely to become an endangered species within

the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its

range.'' Thompson (1991) suggested that conventional rules of thumb,

analytical approaches, and simulations may all be useful in making this

determination. In previous status reviews (e.g., Weitkamp et al.,

1995), NMFS has identified a number of factors that should be

considered in evaluating the level of risk faced by an ESU, including:

(1) Absolute numbers of fish and their spatial and temporal

distribution; (2) current abundance in relation to historical abundance

and current carrying capacity of the habitat; (3) trends in abundance;

(4) natural and human-influenced factors that cause variability in

survival and abundance; (5) possible threats to genetic integrity

(e.g., from strays or outplants from hatchery programs); and (6) recent

events (e.g., a drought or changes in harvest management) that have

predictable short-term consequences for abundance of the ESU.

During the coastwide status review for steelhead, NMFS evaluated

both quantitative and qualitative information to determine whether any

proposed ESU is threatened or endangered according to the ESA. The

types of information used in these assessments are described below,

followed by a summary of results for each ESU.

Quantitative Assessments: A significant component of NMFS' status

determination was analyses of abundance trend data. Principal data

sources for these analyses were historical and recent runsize estimates

derived from dam and weir counts, stream surveys, and angler catch

estimates. Of the 160 steelhead stocks for which sufficient data

existed, 118 (74 percent) exhibited declining trends in abundance,

while the remaining 42 (26 percent) exhibited increasing trends in

abundance. Sixty-five of the stock abundance trends analyzed were

statistically significant. Of these, 57 (88 percent) indicated

declining trends in abundance and the remaining 8 (12 percent)

indicated increasing trends in

[[Page 41549]]

abundance. It should be noted that NMFS' analysis assumes that catch

trends reflect trends in overall population abundance. NMFS recognizes

that there are many problems with this assumption, with the result that

the index may not precisely represent trends in the total population in

a river basin. However, angler catch is the only information available

for many steelhead populations, and changes in catch still provide a

useful indication of trends in total population abundance.

Analyses of steelhead abundance indicate that across the species'

range, the majority of naturally-reproducing steelhead stocks have

exhibited declining long-term trends in abundance. The severity of

declines in abundance tends to vary by geographic region. Based on

historical and recent abundance estimates, stocks in the southern

extent of the coastal steelhead range (i.e., California's Central

Valley, South/Central and Southern California ESUs) appear to have

declined significantly, with widespread stock extirpations. Northern

areas of the coastal steelhead range tend to be relatively more stable

with larger overall population sizes. However, stocks in these areas

continue to exhibit downward abundance trends as well. In several

areas, a lack of accurate runsize and trend data make estimating

abundance difficult.

Qualitative Assessments: Numerous studies have attempted to

classify the status of steelhead populations on the west coast of the

United States. However, problems exist in applying results of these

studies to NMFS' ESA evaluations. A significant problem is that the

definition of ``stock'' or ``population'' varies considerably in scale

among studies, and sometimes among regions within a study. In several

studies, identified units range in size from large river basins, to

minor coastal streams and tributaries. Only two studies (Nehlsen et

al., 1991; Higgins et al., 1992) used categories which relate to the

ESA ``threatened'' or ``endangered'' status. However, these studies

applied their own interpretations of these terms to individual stocks,

not to broader geographic units such as those discussed here. Another

significant problem in applying previously published studies to this

evaluation is the manner in which stocks or populations were selected

to be included in the review. Several studies did not evaluate stocks

which were not perceived to be at risk; therefore, it is difficult to

determine the proportion of stocks they considered to be at risk in any

given area.

Nehlsen et al. (1991) considered salmon and steelhead stocks

throughout Washington, Idaho, Oregon, and California and enumerated all

stocks that they found to be extinct or at risk of extinction. They

considered 23 steelhead stocks to be extinct, one possibly extinct, 27

at high risk of extinction, 18 at moderate risk of extinction, and 30

of special concern. Steelhead stocks that do not appear in their

summary were either not at risk of extinction or there was insufficient

information to classify them. Higgins et al. (1992) used the same

classification scheme as Nehlsen et al. (1991), but provided a more

detailed review of northern California salmon stocks. Of the eleven

steelhead stocks Higgins et al. identified as being at some risk of

extinction, eight were classified as at high risk, two were classified

as at moderate risk, and one was classified as of concern. Nickelson et

al. (1992) rated coastal Oregon (excluding Columbia River Basin) salmon

and steelhead stocks on the basis of their status over the past 20

years, classifying stocks as ``depressed'' (spawning habitat

underseeded, declining trends, or recent escapements below long-term

average), ``healthy'' (spawning habitat fully seeded and stable or

increasing trends), or ``of special concern'' (300 or fewer spawners or

a problem with hatchery interbreeding). Of 27 coastal populations

identified, 5 were classified as healthy, 1 as of special concern, and

21 as depressed. Washington Department of Fisheries et al. (1993)

categorized all salmon and steelhead stocks in Washington on the basis

of stock origin (``native,'' ``non-native,'' ``mixed,'' or

``unknown''), production type (``wild,'' ``composite,'' or ``unknown'')

and status (``healthy,'' ``depressed,'' ``critical,'' or ``unknown'').

Of the 141 steelhead stocks identified in Washington, 36 were

classified as healthy, 44 as critical, 1 as depressed, and 60 as

unknown.

The following summaries draw on these quantitative and qualitative

assessments to describe NMFS' conclusions regarding the status of each

steelhead ESU.

(1) Puget Sound

No estimates of historical (pre-1960s) abundance specific to the

Puget Sound ESU are available. Total run size for Puget Sound for the

early 1980s can be calculated from estimates in Light (1987) as about

100,000 winter steelhead and 20,000 summer steelhead. Light (1987)

provided no estimate of hatchery proportion specific to Puget Sound

streams. For Puget Sound and coastal Washington combined, Light (1987)

estimated that 70 percent of steelhead in ocean runs were of hatchery

origin; the percentage in escapement to spawning grounds would be

substantially lower due to differential harvest and hatchery rack

returns. Recent 5-year average natural escapements for streams with

adequate data range from less than 100 to 7,200, with corresponding

total run sizes of 550 to 19,800. Total recent run size for major

stocks in this ESU was greater than 45,000, with total natural

escapement of about 22,000.

Of the 21 independent stocks for which adequate escapement

information exists, 17 stocks have been declining and 4 increasing over

the available data series, with a range from 18 percent annual decline

(Lake Washington winter steelhead) to 7 percent annual increase

(Skykomish River winter steelhead). Eleven of these trends (nine

negative, two positive) were significantly different from zero. The two

basins producing the largest numbers of steelhead (Skagit and Snohomish

Rivers) both have overall upward trends.

Hatchery fish in this ESU are widespread, spawn naturally

throughout the region, and are largely derived from a single stock

(Chambers Creek). The proportion of spawning escapement comprised of

hatchery fish ranged from less than 1 percent (Nisqually River) to 51

percent (Morse Creek). In general, hatchery proportions are higher in

Hood Canal and the Strait of Juan de Fuca than in Puget Sound proper.

Most of the hatchery fish in this region originated from stocks

indigenous to the ESU, but are generally not native to local river

basins. The WDFW has provided information supporting substantial

temporal separation between hatchery and natural winter steelhead in

this ESU. Given the lack of strong trends in abundance for the major

stocks and the apparently limited contribution of hatchery fish to

production of the late-run winter stocks, most winter steelhead stocks

in the Puget Sound ESU appear to be naturally sustaining at this time.

However, there are clearly isolated problems with sustainability of

some steelhead runs in this ESU, notably Deer Creek summer steelhead

(although juvenile abundance for this stock increased in 1994) and Lake

Washington winter steelhead. Summer steelhead stocks within this ESU

are all small, occupy limited habitat, and most are subject to

introgression by hatchery fish.

NMFS concludes that the Puget Sound steelhead ESU is not presently

in danger of extinction, nor is it likely to become endangered in the

foreseeable

[[Page 41550]]

future. Despite this conclusion, NMFS has several concerns about the

overall health of this ESU and about the status of certain stocks

within the ESU. Recent trends in stock abundance are predominantly

downward, although this may be largely due to recent climate

conditions. Trends in the two largest stocks (Skagit and Snohomish

Rivers) have been upward. The majority of steelhead produced within the

Puget Sound region appear to be of hatchery origin, but most hatchery

fish are harvested and do not contribute to natural spawning

escapement. NMFS is particularly concerned that the majority of

hatchery production originates from a single stock (Chambers Creek).

The status of certain stocks within the ESU is also of concern,

especially the depressed status of most stocks in the Hood Canal area

and the steep declines of Lake Washington winter steelhead and Deer

Creek summer steelhead.

(2) Olympic Peninsula

No estimates of historical (pre-1960s) abundance specific to the

Olympic Peninsula ESU are available. Total run size for the major

stocks in the Olympic Peninsula ESU for the early 1980's can be

calculated from estimates in Light (1987) as about 60,000 winter

steelhead. Light (1987) provided no estimate of hatchery proportion for

these streams. For Puget Sound and coastal Washington together, Light

(1987) estimated that 70 percent of steelhead were of hatchery origin.

Recent 5-year average natural escapements for streams with adequate

data range from 250 to 6,900, with corresponding total run sizes of 450

to 19,700. Total recent (1989-1993 average) run size for major streams

in this ESU was about 54,000, with a natural escapement of 20,000 fish.

Of the 12 independent stocks for which adequate information existed

to compute trends, 7 were declining and 5 increasing over the available

data series, with a range from 8 percent annual decline to 14 percent

annual increase. Three of the downward trends were significantly

different from zero. Three of the four river basins producing the

largest numbers of natural fish had upward trends in basinwide total

numbers.

Hatchery fish are widespread and escaping to spawn naturally

throughout the region, with hatchery production largely derived from a

few parent stocks. Estimated proportions of hatchery fish in natural

spawning areas range from 16 percent (Quillayute River) to 44 percent

(Quinault River), with the two largest producers of natural fish

(Quillayute and Queets Rivers) having the lowest proportions. The WDFW

has provided information supporting substantial temporal separation

between hatchery and natural winter steelhead in this ESU. Given the

lack of strong trends in abundance and the apparently limited

contribution of hatchery fish to production of the late-run winter

stocks, most winter steelhead stocks in the Olympic Peninsula ESU

appear to be naturally sustaining at this time. However, there are

clearly isolated problems with sustainability of some winter steelhead

runs in this ESU, notably the Pysht/Independents stock, which has a

small population with a strongly declining trend over the available

data series, and the Quinault River stock, which has a declining trend

and substantial hatchery contribution to natural spawning.

NMFS concludes that the Olympic Peninsula steelhead ESU is not

presently in danger of extinction, nor is it likely to become

endangered in the foreseeable future. Despite this conclusion, NMFS has

several concerns about the overall health of this ESU and about the

status of certain stocks within the ESU. The majority of recent trends

are upward (including three of the four largest stocks), although

trends in several stocks are downward. These downward trends may be

largely due to recent climate conditions. There is widespread

production of hatchery steelhead within this ESU, largely derived from

a few parent stocks, which could increase genetic homogenization of the

resource despite management efforts to minimize introgression of the

hatchery gene pool into natural populations.

(3) Southwest Washington

No estimates of historical (pre-1960's) abundance specific to this

ESU are available. Recent 5-year average natural escapements for

individual tributaries with adequate data range from 150 to 2,300, with

the Chehalis River and its tributaries representing the bulk of

production. Total recent (5-year average) natural escapement for major

streams in this ESU was about 13,000.

All but 1 (Wynoochee River) of the 12 independent stocks have been

declining over the available data series, with a range from 7 percent

annual decline to 0.4 percent annual increase. Six of the downward

trends were significantly different from zero. For Washington streams,

these trends are for the late run ``wild'' component of winter

steelhead populations; Oregon data included all stock components. Most

of the Oregon trends are based on angler catch, and so may not reflect

trends in underlying population abundance. In general, stock condition

appears to be healthier in southwest Washington than in the lower

Columbia River Basin.

Hatchery fish are widespread and escaping to spawn naturally

throughout the region, largely from parent stocks from outside the ESU.

This could substantially change the genetic composition of the resource

despite management efforts to minimize introgression of the hatchery

gene pool into natural populations. Estimates of the proportion of

hatchery fish on natural spawning grounds range from 9 percent

(Chehalis, the largest producer of steelhead in the ESU) to 82 percent

(Clatskanie). Available information suggests substantial temporal

separation between hatchery and natural winter steelhead in this ESU;

however, some Washington stocks (notably lower Columbia River

tributaries) appear to have received substantial hatchery contributions

to natural spawning.

NMFS concludes that the Southwest Washington steelhead ESU is not

presently in danger of extinction, nor is it likely to become

endangered in the foreseeable future. Almost all stocks within this ESU

for which data exist have been declining in the recent past, although

this may be partly due to recent climate conditions. NMFS is very

concerned about the pervasive opportunity for genetic introgression

from hatchery stocks within the ESU and about the status of summer

steelhead in this ESU. There is widespread production of hatchery

steelhead within this ESU, largely from parent stocks from outside the

ESU. This could substantially change the genetic composition of the

resource despite management efforts to minimize introgression of the

hatchery gene pool into natural populations.

(4) Lower Columbia River

No estimates of historical (pre-1960's) abundance specific to this

ESU are available. Total run size for the major stocks in the lower

Columbia River (below Bonneville Dam, including the upper Willamette

ESU) for the early 1980's can be calculated from estimates in Light

(1987) as approximately 150,000 winter steelhead and 80,000 summer

steelhead. Light (1987) estimated that 75 percent of the total run

(summer and winter steelhead combined) was of hatchery origin. Recent

5-year average natural escapements for streams with adequate data range

from less than 100 to 1,100. Total recent run size for major streams in

this ESU was greater than 16,000, but this total includes only the few

basins for which estimates are available.

[[Page 41551]]

Of the 18 stocks for which adequate adult escapement trend data

exists, 11 have been declining and 7 increasing, with a range from 24

percent annual decline to 48 percent annual increase. Eight of these

trends (5 negative, 3 positive) were significantly different from zero.

Most of the data series for this ESU are short, beginning only in the

late 1970's to the mid-1980's. Thus, they may be heavily influenced by

short-term climate effects. Some of the Washington trends (notably

those for the Cowlitz and Kalama River Basins) have been influenced

(positively or negatively) by the 1980 eruption of Mount Saint Helens.

For Washington streams, these trends are for the late run ``wild''

component of winter steelhead populations; Oregon data included all

stock components. Most of the Oregon trends are based on angler catch,

and so may not reflect trends in underlying population abundance.

Hatchery fish are widespread, and many stray to spawn naturally

throughout the region. Most of the hatchery stocks used originated

primarily from stocks within the ESU, but many are not native to local

river basins. The WDFW has provided information supporting substantial

temporal separation between hatchery and natural winter steelhead in

this ESU; however, some Washington stocks (notably Kalama River winter

and summer steelhead) appear to have substantial hatchery contribution

to natural spawning. ODFW estimates of hatchery composition indicate a

range from about 30 percent (Sandy River and Tanner Creek winter

steelhead) to 80 percent (Hood River summer steelhead) hatchery fish in

spawning escapements. Estimates for Hood River winter steelhead range

from 0 percent (ODFW, 1995b) to greater than 40 percent (ODFW, 1995a).

NMFS concludes that the Lower Columbia River steelhead ESU is not

presently in danger of extinction, but is likely to become endangered

in the foreseeable future. The majority of stocks within this ESU for

which data exist have been declining in the recent past, but some have

been increasing strongly. However, the strongest upward trends are

either non-native stocks (Lower Willamette River and Clackamas River

summer steelhead) or stocks that are recovering from major habitat

disruption and are still at low abundance (mainstem and North Fork

Toutle River). NMFS is very concerned about the pervasive opportunity

for genetic introgression from hatchery stocks within the ESU and about

the status of summer steelhead in this ESU. Concerns about hatchery

influence are especially strong for summer steelhead and Oregon winter

steelhead stocks, where there appears to be substantial overlap in

spawning between hatchery and natural fish.

(5) Upper Willamette River

No estimates of historical (pre-1960's) abundance specific to this

ESU are available. Total recent 5-year average run size for this ESU

can be estimated from counts at Willamette Falls for the years 1989-

1993. Dam counts indicate that the late-run (``native'') winter

steelhead average run size was approximately 4,200, while early-run

winter and summer steelhead averaged 1,900 and 9,700 respectively.

Adequate angler catch data are available to derive approximate average

winter steelhead escapement for three tributaries: Mollala River, 2,300

(predominantly non-native); North Fork Santiam River, 2,000; South Fork

Santiam River, 550.

Total basin run-size or escapement estimates for both total winter

and late winter steelhead exhibit declines, while summer steelhead

estimates exhibit an increase. All of these basin-wide estimates have

exhibited large fluctuations. Of the three tributary winter steelhead

stocks for which adequate adult escapement information exists to

compute trends, two have been declining and one increasing, with a

range from 4.9 percent annual decline to 2.4 percent annual increase.

None of these trends were significantly different from zero.

Hatchery fish are widespread and escaping to spawn naturally

throughout the region. Both summer steelhead and early-run winter

steelhead have been introduced into the basin and escape to spawn

naturally in substantial numbers. Indigenous late-run winter steelhead

are also produced in the Santiam River Basin. Estimates of hatchery

contribution to winter steelhead escapements are available only for the

North Fork Santiam River and the Mollala River and are variable,

ranging from 14 percent (ODFW, 1995b) to 54 percent (ODFW, 1995a) on

the North Fork Santiam River. There is probably some temporal and

spatial separation in spawning between the early and late winter

stocks. While little information exists on the actual contribution of

hatchery fish to natural production, given the generally low numbers of

fish escaping to tributaries and the general declines in winter

steelhead abundance in the basin, NMFS has substantial concern that the

majority of natural winter steelhead populations in this ESU may not be

self-sustaining. All summer steelhead within the range of this ESU are

introduced from outside the area (i.e., they are non-native), so are

not considered as part of the ESU. Natural reproduction by these

introduced summer steelhead may be quite limited.

NMFS concludes that the Upper Willamette steelhead ESU is not

presently in danger of extinction, nor is it likely to become

endangered in the foreseeable future. While historical information

regarding this ESU is lacking, geographic range and historical

abundance are believed to have been relatively small compared to other

ESUs, and current production probably represents a larger proportion of

historical production than is the case in other Columbia River Basin

ESUs. NMFS is concerned about the pervasive opportunity for genetic

introgression from hatchery stocks within the ESU, as well as the

potential ecological interactions between introduced stocks and native

stocks.

(6) Oregon Coast

No estimates of historical abundance specific to this ESU are

available, except for counts at Winchester Dam on the North Umpqua

River and angler catch records beginning in 1953. Estimated total run

size for the major stocks on the Oregon Coast (including areas south of

Cape Blanco) for the early 1980s are given by Light (1987) as

approximately 255,000 winter steelhead and 75,000 summer steelhead. Of

these, 69 percent of winter and 61 percent of summer steelhead were of

hatchery origin, resulting in estimated naturally-produced run sizes of

79,000 winter and 29,000 summer steelhead. Recent 5-year average total

(natural and hatchery) run sizes for streams with adequate data range

from 250 to 15,000, corresponding to escapements from 200 to 12,000.

Total recent (5-year average) run size for major streams in this ESU

was approximately 129,000 (111,000 winter, 18,000 summer), with a total

escapement of 96,000 (82,000 winter, 14,000 summer). These totals do

not include all streams in the ESU, so they may underestimate total ESU

run size and escapements.

Adequate adult escapement information was available to compute

trends for 42 independent stocks within this ESU. Of these, 36 data

series exhibit declines and six exhibit increases over the available

data series, with a range from 12 percent annual decline (Drift Creek

on the Siletz River) to 16 percent annual increase (North Fork Coquille

River). Twenty (18 decreasing, 2 increasing) of these trends were

significantly different from zero. Upward trends were only found in the

southernmost portion of the ESU, from

[[Page 41552]]

Siuslaw Bay south. In contrast, longer-term trends in angler catch

using data from the early 1950's to the present generally were

increasing. This may reflect long-term stability of populations or may

be an artifact of long-term increases in statewide fishing effort

coupled with the differences in bias correction of catch summaries

before and after 1970.

Hatchery fish are widespread and escaping to spawn naturally

throughout the region. Most of the hatchery stocks used in this region

originated from stocks indigenous to the ESU, but many are not native

to local river basins. The ODFW estimates of hatchery composition for

winter steelhead escapements are high in many streams, ranging from 10

percent (North Umpqua River) to greater than 80 percent (Drift Creek on

the Alsea River and Tenmile Creek south of Umpqua Bay). For summer

steelhead, hatchery composition (where reported) ranged from 38 percent

(South Umpqua River) to 90 percent (Siletz River). Several summer

steelhead stocks have been introduced to rivers with no native summer

runs. Overall, about half of the stocks in this ESU for which NMFS has

information have hatchery composition in excess of 50 percent. Few

stocks in the ESU are documented to have escapements above 1,000 fish

and no significant decline; most of these are in the southern portion

of the ESU and have high hatchery influence. While little information

exists on the actual contribution of hatchery fish to natural

production, given the substantial presence of hatchery fish in the few

stocks that are relatively abundant and stable or increasing, NMFS is

concerned that the majority of natural steelhead populations in this

ESU may not be self-sustaining.

NMFS concludes that the Oregon Coast steelhead ESU is not presently

in danger of extinction, but is likely to become endangered in the

foreseeable future. Most steelhead populations within this ESU have

been declining in the recent past (although this may be partly due to

recent climate conditions), with increasing trends restricted to the

southernmost portion (south of Siuslaw Bay). NMFS is very concerned

about the pervasive opportunity for genetic introgression from hatchery

stocks within the ESU, as well as the potential ecological interactions

between introduced stocks and native stocks.

(7) Klamath Mountains Province

NMFS has previously published a proposal to list this ESU as

threatened under the ESA (60 FR 14253, March 16, 1995). Although

historical trends in overall abundance within the ESU are not clearly

known, NMFS believes there has been a substantial replacement of

natural fish with hatchery-produced fish. While absolute abundance

remains fairly high, since about 1970, trends in abundance have been

downward in most steelhead populations for which NMFS has data within

the ESU, and a number of populations are considered by various agencies

and groups to be at some risk of extinction. Declines in summer

steelhead populations are of particular concern. Most natural

populations of steelhead within the area experience a substantial

infusion of naturally spawning hatchery fish each year.

Risk analyses for this and other ESUs are unusually difficult due

to the paucity of abundance data and, where data are available, the

possible biases associated with particular data sets (e.g., angler

catch records). Also, the Klamath Mountains Province status review was

the first NMFS assessment in which the issue of naturally spawning

hatchery fish and the questions they raise about the sustainability of

natural populations was an important consideration. NMFS will continue

to seek additional information and pursue assessments with Federal,

state, and tribal fisheries managers that should help clarify the risk

faced by Klamath Mountains Province Steelhead. Hence, NMFS will make a

final determination on the status of this ESU concurrently with final

listing determinations on all west coast steelhead ESUs.

(8) Northern California

Historical (pre-1960's) abundance information specific to this ESU

is available from dam counts in the upper Eel River (Cape Horn Dam--

annual average of 4,400 adult steelhead in the 1930's; McEwan &

Jackson, 1996), the South Fork Eel River (Benbow Dam--annual average of

19,000 adult steelhead in the 1940's; McEwan & Jackson, 1996), and the

Mad River (Sweasey Dam--annual average of 3,800 adult steelhead in the

1940's; Murphy & Shapovalov, 1951; CDFG, 1994).

In the mid-1960's, CDFG (1965) estimated that steelhead spawning

populations for many rivers in this ESU totaled 198,000 fish. Estimated

statewide total run size for the major stocks in California in the

early 1980's was given by Light (1987) as approximately 275,000 fish.

Of this total, 22 percent were estimated to be of hatchery origin,

resulting in a naturally-produced run size of 215,000 steelhead

statewide. Roughly half of this production was thought to be in the

Klamath River Basin (including the Trinity River), so the total natural

production for all ESUs south of the Klamath River was probably on the

order of 100,000 adults.

The only current run-size estimates for this area are dam counts on

the Eel River (Cape Horn Dam) and summer steelhead snorkel surveys in a

few tributaries that provide no total abundance estimate. Statewide

adult summer steelhead abundance is estimated at about 2,000 adults

(McEwan & Jackson, 1996). While no overall recent abundance estimate

for this ESU exists, the substantial declines in run size from historic

levels at major dams in the region indicate a probable similar overall

decline in abundance from historical levels.

Adequate adult escapement information was available to compute

trends for seven stocks (Redwood Creek, Mad River [winter and summer

runs], the mainstem, Middle Fork, and South Fork of the Eel River, and

the South Fork of the Van Duzen River). Of these, five data series

exhibit declines and two exhibit increases over the available data

series, ranging from a 5.8-percent annual decline (mainstem Eel River)

to a 3.5-percent annual increase (south Fork of the Van Duzen River).

Three (all decreasing) of these trends were significantly different

from zero. For one long-term data set (Eel River, Cape Horn Dam

counts), a separate trend for the last 21 years (1971-1991) was

calculated for comparison. The full-series trend showed a significant

decline, but the recent data showed a lesser, non-significant decline,

suggesting that the major stock decline occurred prior to 1970.

State hatchery planting records indicate that large numbers of out-

of-basin hatchery fish are planted throughout this ESU and are allowed

to spawn naturally throughout the region. According to McEwan and

Jackson (1996), ``despite the large number of hatchery smolts released,

steelhead runs in north coast drainages are comprised mostly of

naturally produced fish.'' There is little information on the actual

contribution of hatchery fish to natural spawning, and little

information on present total run sizes for this ESU. However, given the

preponderance of significant negative trends in the available data

series, there is concern that steelhead populations in this ESU may not

be self-sustaining.

NMFS concludes that the Northern California steelhead ESU is not

presently in danger of extinction, but is likely to become endangered

in the foreseeable future. Population abundances are very low relative

to historical estimates (1930's dam counts),

[[Page 41553]]

and recent trends are downward in stocks for which data exist, except

for two small summer steelhead stocks. Summer steelhead abundance is

very low. The abundance of introduced Sacramento squawfish

(Ptychocheilus grandis), a known predator of salmonids, in the Eel

River is also a concern. For certain rivers (particularly the Mad

River), NMFS is concerned about the influence of hatchery stocks, both

in terms of genetic introgression and potential ecological interactions

between introduced stocks and native stocks.

(9) Central California Coast

Only two estimates of historical (pre-1960's) abundance specific to

this ESU are available: an average of about 500 adults in Waddell Creek

in the 1930's and early 1940's (Shapovalov & Taft, 1954), and an

estimate of 20,000 steelhead in the San Lorenzo River before 1965

(Johnson, 1964). In the mid-1960's, CDFG (1965) estimated 94,000

steelhead spawning in many rivers of this ESU, including 50,000 and

19,000 fish in the Russian and San Lorenzo Rivers, respectively. NMFS

has comparable recent estimates for only the Russian (approximately

7,000 fish) and San Lorenzo (approximately 500 fish) Rivers. These

estimates indicate that recent total abundance of steelhead in these

two rivers is less than 15 percent of their abundance 30 years ago.

Additional recent estimates for several other streams (Lagunitas Creek,

Waddell Creek, Scott Creek, San Vincente Creek, Soquel Creek, and Aptos

Creek) indicate individual run sizes are 500 fish or less; however, no

recent estimates of total run size exist for this ESU. McEwan and

Jackson (1996) noted that steelhead in most streams tributary to San

Francisco and San Pablo Bays have been extirpated. Small ``fair to

good'' runs of steelhead apparently occur in coastal Marin County

tributaries.

Adequate adult escapement information was not available to compute

trends for any stocks within this ESU. However, general trends can be

inferred from the comparison of 1960's and 1990's abundance estimates

provided above, which indicate substantial rates of decline in the two

main steelhead stocks (Russian and San Lorenzo Rivers) within this ESU.

The principal hatchery production in this ESU is from Warm Springs

Hatchery on the Russian River and the Monterey Bay Salmon and Trout

Project (Big Creek Hatchery off Scott Creek and other facilities).

There are other small private and cooperative programs producing

steelhead within this ESU. Most of the hatchery stocks used in this

region originated from stocks indigenous to the ESU, but many are not

native to local river basins. Little information is available regarding

the actual contribution of hatchery fish to natural spawning, and

little information on present run sizes or trends for this ESU exists.

However, given the substantial rates of declines for those stocks where

data do exist, it is likely that the majority of natural production in

this ESU is not self-sustaining.

NMFS concludes that the Central California Coast steelhead ESU is

presently in danger of extinction. The southernmost portion of the ESU

(south of Scott and Waddell Creeks, including one of two major rivers

within the ESU) and the portion within San Francisco and San Pablo Bays

appear to be at highest risk. In the northern coastal portion of the

ESU, steelhead abundance in the Russian River has been reduced roughly

sevenfold since the mid-1960's, but abundance in smaller streams

appears to be stable at low levels. There is particular concern for

sedimentation and channel restructuring due to floods, apparently

resulting in part from poor land management practices.

(10) South/Central California Coast

Historical estimates of steelhead abundance are available for a few

streams in this region. In the mid-1960's, CDFG (1965) estimated a

total of 27,750 steelhead spawning in many rivers of this ESU. Recent

estimates for those rivers where comparative abundance information is

available show a substantial decline during the past 30 years. In

contrast to the CDFG (1965) estimates, McEwan and Jackson (1996)

reported runs ranging from 1,000 to 2,000 in the Pajaro River in the

early 1960's, and Snider (1983) estimated escapement of about 3,200

steelhead for the Carmel River for the 1964-1975 period. No recent

estimates for total run size exist for this ESU; however, recent run-

size estimates are available for five streams (Pajaro River, Salinas

River, Carmel River, Little Sur River, and Big Sur River). The total of

these estimates is less than 500 fish, compared with a total of 4,750

for the same streams in 1965, which suggests a substantial decline for

the entire ESU from 1965 levels.

Adequate adult escapement information was available to compute a

trend for only one stock within this ESU (Carmel River above San

Clemente Dam). This data series shows a significant decline of 22

percent per year from 1963 to 1993, with a recent 5-year average count

of only 16 adult steelhead at the dam. General trends can be inferred

from the comparison of 1960's and 1990's abundance estimates provided

above.

Presently, there is little hatchery production within this ESU.

There are small private and cooperative programs producing steelhead

within this ESU, as well as one captive broodstock program intended to

conserve the Carmel River steelhead strain (McEwan & Jackson, 1996).

Most of the hatchery stocks used in this region originated from stocks

indigenous to the ESU, but many are not native to local river basins.

Little information exists regarding the actual contribution of hatchery

fish to natural spawning, and little information on present total run

sizes or trends are available for this ESU. However, given the

substantial reductions from historical abundance or recent negative

trends in the stocks for which data does exist, it is likely that the

majority of natural production in this ESU is not self-sustaining.

NMFS concludes that the South-Central California Coast steelhead

ESU is presently in danger of extinction. Total abundance is extremely

low, and most stocks for which NMFS has data in the ESU show recent

downward trends. There is also concern about the genetic effects of

widespread stocking of rainbow trout.

(11) Southern California

Historically, steelhead occurred naturally south into Baja

California. Estimates of historical (pre-1960's) abundance for several

rivers in this ESU are available: Santa Ynez River, before 1950, 20,000

to 30,000 (Shapovalov & Taft, 1954; CDFG, 1982; Reavis, 1991; Titus et

al., in press); Ventura River, pre-1960, 4,000 to 6,000 (Clanton &

Jarvis, 1946; CDFG, 1982; AFS, 1991; Hunt et al., 1992; Henke, 1994;

Titus et al., in press); Santa Clara River, pre-1960, 7,000 to 9,000

(Moore, 1980; Comstock, 1992; Henke, 1994); Malibu Creek, pre-1960,

1,000 (Nehlsen et al., 1991; Reavis, 1991). ln the mid-1960's, CDFG

(1965) estimated steelhead spawning populations for smaller tributaries

in San Luis Obispo County as 20,000 fish; however, no estimates for

streams further south were provided.

The present estimated total run size for six streams (Santa Ynez

River, Gaviota Creek, Ventura River, Matilija Creek, Santa Clara River,

Malibu Creek) in this ESU are summarized in Titus et al. (in press),

and all are less than 200 adults. Titus et al. (in press) concluded

that populations have been extirpated from all streams south of Ventura

County, with the exception of Malibu Creek in Los Angeles County. While

there are no comprehensive stream

[[Page 41554]]

surveys conducted for steelhead trout occurring in streams south of

Malibu Creek, there continues to be anecdotal observations of steelhead

in rivers as far south as the Santa Margarita River, San Diego County,

in years of substantial rainfall (Barnhart, 1986; Higgins, 1991; McEwan

and Jackson, 1996). Titus et al. (in press) cited extensive loss of

steelhead habitat due to water development, including impassable dams

and dewatering.

No time series of data are available within this ESU to estimate

population trends. Titus et al. (in press) summarized information for

steelhead populations based on historical and recent survey

information. Of the populations south of San Francisco Bay (including

part of the Central California Coast ESU) for which past and recent

information was available, 20 percent had no discernable change, 45

percent had declined, and 35 percent were extinct. Percentages for the

counties comprising this ESU show a very high percentage of declining

and extinct populations.

The influence of hatchery practices on this ESU is not well

documented. In some populations, there may be genetic introgression

from past steelhead plants and from planting of rainbow trout (Nielsen

1991). Habitat fragmentation and population declines resulting in

small, isolated populations also pose genetic risk from inbreeding,

loss of rare alleles, and genetic drift.

NMFS concludes that the Southern California steelhead ESU is

presently in danger of extinction. Steelhead have already been

extirpated from much of their historical range in this ESU. There is

also concern about the genetic effects of widespread stocking of

rainbow trout.

(12) Central Valley

Historical abundance estimates are available for some stocks within

this ESU, but no overall estimates are available prior to 1961, when

Hallock et al. (1961) estimated a total run size of 40,000 steelhead in

the Sacramento River, including San Francisco Bay. In the mid-1960's,

CDFG (1965) estimated steelhead spawning populations for the rivers in

this ESU, totaling almost 27,000 fish. Limited data exist on recent

abundance for this ESU. The present total run size for this ESU based

on dam counts, hatchery returns, and past spawning surveys is probably

less than 10,000 fish. Both natural and hatchery runs have declined

since the 1960's. Counts at Red Bluff Diversion Dam averaged 1,400 fish

over the last 5 years, compared with runs in excess of 10,000 fish in

the late 1960's. Recent run-size estimates for the hatchery produced

American River stock average less than 1,000 fish, compared to 12,000

to 19,000 in the early 1970's (McEwan & Jackson, 1996).

Adequate adult escapement information was available to compute a

trend for only one stock within this ESU (Sacramento River above Red

Bluff Diversion Dam). Fish passing over this dam are primarily (70 to

90 percent) of hatchery origin (CDFG, 1995; McEwan & Jackson, 1996).

This data series shows a significant decline of 9 percent per year from

1966 to 1992. McEwan and Jackson (1996) cite substantial declines in

hatchery returns within the basin as well. The majority of native,

natural steelhead production in this ESU occurs in upper Sacramento

River tributaries (Antelope, Deer, Mill, and other Creeks) below Red

Bluff Diversion Dam, but these populations are nearly extirpated. The

American, Feather, and Yuba (and possibly the upper Sacramento and

Mokelumne) Rivers also have naturally-spawning populations (CDFG,

1995), but these populations have had substantial hatchery influence

and their ancestry is not clearly known. The Yuba River had an

estimated run size of 2,000 in 1984. Recent run size estimates for the

Yuba River are unknown, but the population appears to be stable and

supports a sport fishery (McEwan & Jackson, 1996). However, the status

of native, natural fish in this stock is unknown. This stock has been

influenced by Feather River Hatchery fish, and biologists familiar with

the stock report that the Yuba River supports almost no natural

production of steelhead (Hallock, 1989). However, CDFG (1995) asserted

that ``a substantial portion of the returning adults are progeny of

naturally spawning adults from the Yuba River.'' This stock currently

receives no hatchery steelhead plants and is managed as a naturally

sustained population (CDFG, 1995; McEwan & Jackson, 1996).

In the San Joaquin River Basin, there is little available historic

or recent information on steelhead distribution or abundance. According

to McEwan and Jackson (1996), there are reports of a small remnant

steelhead run in the Stanislaus River. Also, steelhead were observed in

the Tuolumne River in 1983, and large rainbow trout (possibly

steelhead) have been observed at Merced River Hatchery recently.

NMFS concludes that the Central Valley steelhead ESU is presently

in danger of extinction. Steelhead have already been extirpated from

most of their historical range in this ESU. Habitat concerns in this

ESU focus on the widespread degradation, destruction, and blockage of

freshwater habitats within the region, and the potential results of

continuing habitat destruction and water allocation problems. NMFS is

also very concerned about the pervasive opportunity for genetic

introgression from hatchery stocks within the ESU because of the

widespread production of hatchery steelhead, and the potential

ecological interactions between introduced stocks and native stocks.

(13) Middle Columbia River Basin

Estimates of historical (pre-1960's) abundance indicate that the

total historical run size for this ESU might have been in excess of

300,000. Total run sizes for the major stocks in the upper Columbia

River (above Bonneville Dam, including the Upper Columbia River, Snake

River Basin, and parts of the Southwest Washington and Lower Columbia

River ESUs) for the early 1980's were estimated by Light (1987) as

approximately 4,000 winter steelhead and 210,000 summer steelhead.

Based on dam counts for this period, the Middle Columbia River ESU

represented the majority of this total run estimate, so the run

returning to this ESU was probably somewhat below 200,000 at that time.

Light (1987) estimated that 80 percent of the total Columbia River

Basin run (summer and winter steelhead combined) above Bonneville Dam

was of hatchery origin. The most recent 5-year average run size was

142,000, with a naturally-produced component of 39,000. These data

indicate approximately 74 percent hatchery fish in the total run to

this ESU. Recent escapement or run size estimates exist for only five

basins in this ESU. For the main Deschutes River (counted at Sherars

Falls), total recent (5-year average) run size was approximately

11,000, with a natural escapement of 3,000. Hatchery escapement to

spawning grounds (calculated by subtracting Pelton Ladder and other

hatchery returns from the counts at Sherars Falls) has averaged about

4,000 adults over the last five brood years (BPA 1992). For the Warm

Springs River (steelhead passing above Warm Springs NFH), escapement

has averaged 150 adults over the last 5 years. In the Umatilla River

(counts at Three Mile Dam) escapement has averaged 1,700 adults over

the last 5 years. In the Yakima River, total escapement has averaged

1,300 adults, with a natural escapement of 1,200 adults, over the last

5 years. In addition to these estimates, ODFW (1995a) suggested that 5

sub-basins of the John Day River each have runs in excess of 1,000, so

the total run size for the John

[[Page 41555]]

Day River is probably in excess of 5,000 fish.

Stock trend data are available for various basins from dam counts,

spawner surveys, and angler catch. Of the 14 independent stock indices

for which trends could be computed, 10 have been declining and 4

increasing over the available data series, with a range from 20 percent

annual decline to 14 percent annual increase. Eight of these trends

(seven negative, one positive) were significantly different from zero.

Of the major basins, the Yakima, Umatilla, and Deschutes Rivers show

upward overall trends, although all tributary counts in the Deschutes

River are downward and the Yakima River is recovering from extremely

low abundance in the early 1980's. The John Day River probably

represents the largest native, natural spawning stock in the ESU, and

combined spawner surveys for the John Day River have been declining at

a rate of about 15 percent per year since 1985. However, estimates of

total run size for the ESU based on differences in counts at dams show

an overall increase in steelhead abundance, with a relatively stable

naturally-produced component.

Hatchery fish are widespread and straying to spawn naturally

throughout the region. Hatchery production in this ESU is derived

primarily from within-basin stocks. Recent estimates of the proportion

of natural spawners with hatchery origin range from low (Yakima River,

Walla Walla River, John Day River) to moderate (Umatilla River,

Deschutes River). Little information is available on the actual

contribution of hatchery production to natural spawning.

NMFS concludes that the Middle Columbia steelhead ESU is not

presently in danger of extinction, but has reached no conclusion

regarding its likelihood of becoming endangered in the foreseeable

future. NMFS remains concerned about the status of this ESU and will

carefully evaluate conservation measures affecting this ESU and

continue monitoring its status during the period between this proposed

rule and publication of a final rule. There is particular concern about

Yakima River stocks and winter steelhead stocks. Winter steelhead are

reported within this ESU only in the Klickitat River and Fifteenmile

Creek. No abundance information exists for winter steelhead in the

Klickitat River, but they have been declining in abundance in

Fifteenmile Creek. Total steelhead abundance in the ESU appears to have

been increasing recently, but the majority of natural stocks for which

NMFS has data within this ESU have been declining, including those in

the John Day River, which is the largest producer of native, natural

steelhead. NMFS is very concerned about the pervasive opportunity for

genetic introgression from hatchery stocks within the ESU. There is

widespread production of hatchery steelhead within this ESU, but

largely based on within basin stocks. Estimated proportion of hatchery

fish on spawning grounds ranges from low (Yakima River, Walla Walla

River, John Day River) to moderate (Umatilla River, Deschutes River).

(14) Upper Columbia River Basin

Estimates of historical (pre-1960s) abundance specific to this ESU

are available from fish counts at dams. Counts at Rock Island Dam from

1933 to 1959 averaged 2,600 to 3,700, suggesting a pre-fishery run size

in excess of 5,000 adults for tributaries above Rock Island Dam

(Chapman et. al., 1994). However, runs may already have been depressed

by lower Columbia River fisheries at this time. Recent 5-year (1989-93)

average natural escapements are available for two stock units:

Wenatchee River, 800 steelhead, and Methow and Okanogan Rivers, 450

steelhead. Recent average total escapement for these stocks were 2,500

and 2,400, respectively. Average total run size at Priest Rapids Dam

for the same period was approximately 9,600 adult steelhead.

Trends in total (natural and hatchery) adult escapement are

available for the Wenatchee River (2.6 percent annual increase, 1962-

1993) and the Methow and Okanogan Rivers combined (12 percent annual

decline, 1982-93). These two stocks represent most of the escapement to

natural spawning habitat within the range of the ESU; the Entiat River

also has a small spawning run (WDF et al., 1993).

Hatchery fish are widespread and escaping to spawn naturally

throughout the region. The hatchery stock used in this region

originated from stocks indigenous to the ESU during the Grand Coulee

Fish Maintenance Project, but represents a blend of fish from all

basins within the ESU (and from areas above Grand Coulee Dam). Spawning

escapement is strongly dominated by hatchery production, with recent

contributions averaging 65 percent (Wenatchee River) to 81 percent

(Methow and Okanogan Rivers). The WDFW estimated adult replacement

ratios of only 0.3:1.0 in the Wenatchee River and 0.25:1.0 in the

Entiat River, and concluded that both these stocks and the Methow/

Okanogan stock are not self-sustaining without substantial hatchery

production.

NMFS concludes that the Upper Columbia steelhead ESU is presently

in danger of extinction. While total abundance of populations within

this ESU has been relatively stable or increasing, this appears to be

true only because of major hatchery production programs. Estimates of

the proportion of hatchery fish in spawning escapement are 65 percent

(Wenatchee River) and 81 percent (Methow and Okanogan Rivers). The

major concern for this ESU is the clear failure of natural stocks to

replace themselves. NMFS is very concerned about problems of genetic

homogenization due to hatchery supplementation within the ESU.

Significant concern also exists regarding the apparent high harvest

rates on steelhead smolts in rainbow trout fisheries and the

degradation of freshwater habitats within the region.

(15) Snake River Basin

No estimates of historical (pre-1960's) abundance specific to this

ESU are available. Light (1987) estimated that 80 percent of the total

Columbia River Basin run (summer and winter steelhead combined) above

Bonneville Dam was of hatchery origin. All steelhead in the Snake River

Basin are summer steelhead, which for management purposes are divided

into ``A-run'' and ``B-run'' steelhead. Each has several life history

differences including spawning size, run timing, and habitat type.

Although there is little information for most stocks within this ESU,

there are recent run-size and/or escapement estimates for several

stocks. Total recent-year average (1990-1994) escapement above Lower

Granite Dam was approximately 71,000, with a natural component of 9,400

(7,000 A-run and 2,400 B-run). Run-size estimates are available for

only a few tributaries within the ESU, all with small populations.

The aggregate trend in abundance for this ESU (indexed at Lower

Granite Dam) has been upward since 1975, although natural escapement

has been declining during the same period. However, the aggregate trend

has been downward (with wide fluctuations) over the past 10 years,

recently reaching levels below those observed at Ice Harbor Dam in the

early 1960's. Naturally-produced escapement has declined sharply in the

last ten years. Adult abundance trend information is available for

several individual stocks from a variety of sources, including spawner

surveys, dam counts, and angler catch. Of the thirteen stock indices

(excluding the Lower Granite

[[Page 41556]]

Dam counts discussed above) for which sufficient adequate information

exists to compute trends, nine have been declining and four increasing

over the available data series, with a range from 30 percent annual

decline to a 4 percent annual increase. Four of these trends (all

negative) were significantly different from zero. In addition to these

adult abundance data, the focus of IDFG's steelhead monitoring program

is juvenile (parr) surveys in areas designated as ``wild'' (i.e., sites

with limited hatchery influence) as well as in natural production

areas. Summaries in Leitzinger and Petrosky (in press) show declines in

average parr density over the past 7 or 8 years for both A- and B-run

steelhead in both wild and natural production areas. From 1985 to 1993,

estimates of mean percent of rated parr carrying capacity for these

surveys ranged from as low as 11.2 percent (wild-production B-run) to

62.1 percent (wild-production A-run). The U.S. v. Oregon Technical

Advisory Committee found that A-run steelhead densities were closer to

rated capacities than were B-run steelhead; it noted that ``percent

carrying capacity indicates that all surveyed areas are underseeded''

(TAC, 1991).

Hatchery fish are widespread and escaping to spawn naturally

throughout the region. During the past five years, an average of 86

percent of steelhead passing above Lower Granite Dam were of hatchery

origin. Only two hatchery composition estimates are available for

individual stocks: 0 percent for Joseph Creek (Grande Ronde River), and

57 percent for the Tucannon River. In general, there are wild

production areas with limited hatchery influence remaining in the

Selway River, lower Clearwater River, Middle and South Forks of the

Salmon River, and the lower Salmon River (Leitzinger & Petrosky, in

press). In other areas, such as the upper Salmon River, there appears

to be little or no natural production of locally-native steelhead

(IDFG, 1995). Given the relatively low natural run sizes to individual

streams for which estimates are available, the declines in natural

returns at Lower Granite Dam and in parr density estimates, and the

widespread presence of hatchery fish, NMFS concludes that the majority

of natural steelhead populations in this ESU are probably not self-

sustaining at this time.

NMFS concludes that the Snake River Basin steelhead ESU is not

presently in danger of extinction, but is likely to become endangered

in the foreseeable future. While total run size (hatchery and natural)

has increased since the mid-1970's, there has been a severe recent

decline in natural run size. The majority of natural stocks for which

adequate data exists within this ESU have been declining. Parr

densities in natural production areas have been substantially below

estimated capacity in recent years. Downward trends and low parr

densities indicate a particularly severe problem for B-run steelhead,

the loss of which would substantially reduce life-history diversity

within this ESU. NMFS is very concerned about the pervasive opportunity

for genetic introgression from hatchery stocks within the ESU. There is

widespread production of hatchery steelhead within this ESU. The total

Snake River steelhead run at Lower Granite Dam is estimated to average

86 percent hatchery fish in recent years. Estimates of proportion of

hatchery fish in spawning escapement for tributaries range from 0

percent (Joseph Creek) to above 80 percent (upper Salmon River, IDFG,

1995).

Existing Protective Efforts

Under Sec. 4(b)(1)(A) of the ESA, the Secretary of Commerce is

required to make listing determinations solely on the basis of the best

scientific and commercial data available and after taking into account

efforts being made to protect a species. During the status review for

west coast steelhead, NMFS reviewed an array of protective efforts for

steelhead and other salmonids, ranging in scope from regional

strategies to local watershed initiatives. NMFS has summarized some of

the major efforts in a document entitled ``Steelhead Conservation

Efforts: A Supplement to the Notice of Determination for West Coast

Steelhead under the Endangered Species Act.'' This document is

available upon request (see ADDRESSES section).

Despite numerous efforts to halt and reverse declining trends in

west coast steelhead, it is clear that the status of many native,

naturally-reproducing populations has continued to deteriorate. NMFS

therefore believes it highly likely that past efforts and programs to

address the conservation needs of these stocks have proven inadequate,

including efforts to reduce mortalities and improve the survival of

these stocks through all stages of their life cycle. Important factors

include the continued decline in the productivity of freshwater habitat

for a wide variety of reasons, significant potential negative impacts

from interactions with hatchery stocks, overfishing, and natural

environmental variability.

While NMFS recognizes that many of the ongoing protective efforts

are likely to promote the conservation of steelhead and other

salmonids, in the aggregate, they do not achieve steelhead conservation

at a scale that is adequate to protect and conserve ESUs. NMFS believes

that most existing efforts lack some of the critical elements needed to

provide a high degree of certainty that the efforts will be successful.

These elements include: (1) Identification of specific factors for

decline; (2) immediate measures required to protect the best remaining

populations and habitats and priorities for restoration activities; (3)

explicit and quantifiable objectives and timelines; and (4) monitoring

programs to determine the effectiveness of actions, including methods

to measure whether recovery objectives are being met.

The best available scientific information on the biological status

of the species supports a proposed listing of 10 steelhead ESUs under

the ESA (see Proposed Determination). NMFS concludes that existing

protective efforts are inadequate to alter the proposed determination

of threatened or endangered for these 10 steelhead ESUs. However,

during the period between publication of this proposed rule and

publication of a final rule, NMFS will continue to solicit information

regarding protective efforts (see Public Comments Solicited) and will

work with Federal, state and tribal fisheries managers to evaluate the

efficacy of the various salmonid conservation efforts. If, during this

process, NMFS determines that existing protective efforts are likely to

avert extinction and provide for the recovery of a steelhead ESU(s),

NMFS will modify this listing proposal.

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species

Section 2(a) of the ESA states that various species of fish,

wildlife, and plants in the United States have been rendered extinct as

a consequence of economic growth and development untempered by adequate

concern for ecosystem conservation. Section 4(a)(1) of the ESA and the

listing regulations (50 CFR part 424) set forth procedures for listing

species. NMFS must determine, through the regulatory process, if a

species is endangered or threatened based upon any one or a combination

of the following factors: (1) The present or threatened destruction,

modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (2)

overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or education

purposes; (3) disease or predation; (4) inadequacy of existing

regulatory mechanisms; or (5) other natural or human-made factors

affecting its continued existence.

[[Page 41557]]

NMFS has prepared a supporting document which addresses the factors

that have led to the decline of this species entitled ``Factors for

Decline: A supplement to the notice of determination for West Coast

steelhead.'' This report, available upon request (see ADDRESSES

section), concludes that all of the factors identified in section

4(a)(1) of the ESA have played a role in the decline of the species.

The report identifies destruction and modification of habitat,

overutilization for recreational purposes, and natural and human-made

factors as being the primary reasons for the decline of west coast

steelhead. The following discussion summarizes findings regarding

factors for decline across the range of west coast steelhead. While

these factors have been treated here in general terms, it is important

to underscore that impacts from certain factors are more acute for

specific ESUs. For example, impacts from hydropower development are

more pervasive for ESUs in the upper Columbia River Basin than for some

coastal ESUs.

Steelhead on the west coast of the United States have experienced

declines in abundance in the past several decades as a result of

natural and human factors. Forestry, agriculture, mining, and

urbanization have degraded, simplified, and fragmented habitat. Water

diversions for agriculture, flood control, domestic, and hydropower

purposes (especially in the Columbia River and Sacramento-San Joaquin

Basins) have greatly reduced or eliminated historically accessible

habitat. Studies indicate that in most western states, about 80 to 90

percent of the historic riparian habitat has been eliminated. Further,

it has been estimated that during the last 200 years, the lower 48

states have lost approximately 53 percent of all wetlands and the

majority of the rest are severely degraded. Washington and Oregon's

wetlands are estimated to have diminished by one-third, while

California has experienced a 91-percent loss of its wetland habitat.

Loss of habitat complexity has also contributed to the decline of

steelhead. For example, in national forests in Washington, there has

been a 58-percent reduction in large, deep pools due to sedimentation

and loss of pool-forming structures such as boulders and large wood.

Similarly, in Oregon, the abundance of large, deep pools on private

coastal lands has decreased by as much as 80 percent. Sedimentation

from land use activities is recognized as a primary cause of habitat

degradation in the range of west coast steelhead.

Steelhead support an important recreational fishery throughout

their range. During periods of decreased habitat availability (e.g.,

drought conditions or summer low flow when fish are concentrated), the

impacts of recreational fishing on native anadromous stocks may be

heightened. Steelhead are not generally targeted in commercial

fisheries. However, high seas driftnet fisheries in the past may have

contributed slightly to a decline of this species in local areas, but

this could not be solely responsible for the large declines in

abundance observed along most of the Pacific coast over the past

several decades.

Introductions of non-native species and habitat modifications have

resulted in increased predator populations in numerous river systems,

thereby increasing the level of predation experienced by salmonids.

Predation by marine mammals is also of concern in areas experiencing

dwindling steelhead runsizes. However, salmon and marine mammals have

coexisted for thousands of years and most investigators consider

predation an insignificant contributing factor to the large declines

observed in west coast steelhead populations.

Natural climatic conditions have served to exacerbate the problems

associated with degraded and altered riverine and estuarine habitats.

Persistent drought conditions have reduced already limited spawning,

rearing and migration habitat. Further, climatic conditions appear to

have resulted in decreased ocean productivity which, during more

productive periods, may help (to a small degree) offset degraded

freshwater habitat conditions.

In an attempt to mitigate the loss of habitat, extensive hatchery

programs have been implemented throughout the range of steelhead on the

West Coast. While some of these programs have been successful in

providing fishing opportunities, the impacts of these programs on

native, naturally-reproducing stocks are not well understood.

Competition, genetic introgression, and disease transmission resulting

from hatchery introductions may significantly reduce the production and

survival of native, naturally-reproducing steelhead. Furthermore,

collection of native steelhead for hatchery broodstock purposes may

result in additional negative impacts to small or dwindling natural

populations. It is important to note, however, that artificial

propagation could play an important role in steelhead recovery and that

some hatchery populations of steelhead may be deemed essential for the

recovery of threatened or endangered steelhead ESUs (see Proposed

Determination). In addition, alternative uses of supplementation, such

as for the creation of terminal fisheries, must be fully explored to

try to limit negative impacts to remaining natural populations. This

use must be tempered with the understanding that protecting native,

naturally-reproducing steelhead and their habitats is critical to

maintaining healthy, fully-functioning ecosystems.

Proposed Determination

The ESA defines an endangered species as any species in danger of

extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range, and a

threatened species as any species likely to become an endangered

species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant

portion of its range. Section 4(b)(1) of the ESA requires that the

listing determination be based solely on the best scientific and

commercial data available, after conducting a review of the status of

the species and after taking into account those efforts, if any, being

made to protect such species.

Based on results from its coastwide assessment, NMFS has determined

that on the west coast of the United States, there are fifteen ESUs of

steelhead which constitute ``species'' under the ESA. NMFS has

determined that five ESUs are currently endangered (Central California

Coast, South Central California Coast, Southern California, Central

Valley, and Upper Columbia ESUs) and another five ESUs are currently

threatened (Snake River Basin, lower Columbia River, Oregon Coast,

Klamath Mountains Province, and northern California ESUs) and NMFS

proposes to list them as such at this time. The geographic boundaries

(i.e., the watersheds within which the members of the ESU spend their

freshwater residence) for these ESUs are described under ``ESU

Determinations.''

The Klamath Mountains Province ESU was proposed for listing under a

previous determination (60 FR 14253, March 16, 1995). However, due to

unresolved issues and practical considerations, NMFS believes it more

prudent to make a final determination on Klamath Mountains Province

steelhead in the context of final determinations for West Coast

steelhead ESUs. NMFS has received comments on the previous proposal to

list this ESU and will seek additional information that should help

clarify the degree of risk faced by Klamath Mountains Province

steelhead. The agency will make a final determination on this ESU

concurrently with final listing

[[Page 41558]]

determinations on all west coast steelhead ESUs.

NMFS has determined that steelhead in the Middle Columbia River ESU

(the Columbia River Basin from Mosier Creek, OR, upstream to the Yakima

River, WA) do not warrant listing. However, because there is sufficient

concern regarding the health of steelhead in this region, NMFS is

adding this ESU to its candidate species list. NMFS will conduct a

thorough reevaluation of the status of this ESU before the final

listing determination.

In all 10 ESUs identified as threatened or endangered, only native,

naturally-reproducing steelhead are being proposed for listing. Prior

to the final listing determination, NMFS will examine the relationship

between hatchery and natural populations of steelhead in these ESUs,

and assess whether any hatchery populations are essential for their

recovery. This may result in the inclusion of specific hatchery

populations as part of a listed ESU in NMFS' final determination.

In addition, NMFS is proposing to list only anadromous life forms

of O. mykiss at this time due to uncertainties regarding the

relationship between resident rainbow trout and steelhead. Prior to the

final listing determination, NMFS will seek additional information on

this issue and work with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and

fisheries comanagers to better define the relationship between resident

and anadromous O. mykiss in the ESUs proposed for listing.

Conservation Measures

Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or

threatened under the ESA include recognition, recovery actions, Federal

agency consultation requirements, and prohibitions on taking.

Recognition through listing promotes public awareness and conservation

actions by Federal, state, and local agencies, private organizations,

and individuals.

Several conservation efforts are underway that may reverse the

decline of west coast steelhead and other salmonids. These include the

Northwest Forest Plan (on Federal lands within the range of the

northern spotted owl), Pacfish (on all additional Federal lands with

anadromous salmonid populations), Oregon's Coastal Salmon Restoration

Initiative, Washington's Wild Stock Restoration Initiative,

California's Coastal Salmon Initiative and Steelhead Management Plan,

NMFS' Proposed Recovery Plan for Snake River Salmon, and a Draft

Recovery Plan for Sacramento Winter-run Chinook Salmon. NMFS is very

encouraged by a number of these efforts and believes that they have or

may constitute significant strides in the efforts in the region to

develop a scientifically well grounded conservation plan for these

stocks. NMFS intends to support and work closely with these efforts--

staff and resources permitting--in the belief that they could have a

substantial impact on a final decision on the need to list these stocks

or on the type of final listing. The degree to which these conservation

efforts are able to provide reliable, scientifically well grounded

commitments through a variety of measures to provide for the

conservation of these stocks will have a direct and substantial effect

on any final listing determination of NMFS.

Section 7(a)(4) of the ESA requires that Federal agencies confer

with NMFS on any actions likely to jeopardize the continued existence

of a species proposed for listing and on actions likely to result in

the destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat.

For listed species, section 7(a)(2) requires Federal agencies to ensure

that activities they authorize, fund, or conduct are not likely to

jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or to destroy or

adversely modify its critical habitat. If a Federal action may affect a

listed species or its critical habitat, the responsible Federal agency

must enter into consultation with NMFS.

Examples of Federal actions likely to affect steelhead include

authorized land management activities of the U.S. Forest Service and

U.S. Bureau of Land Management, as well as operation of hydroelectric

and storage projects of the Bureau of Reclamation and U.S. Army Corps

of Engineers (COE). Such activities include timber sales and harvest,

hydroelectric power generation, and flood control. Federal actions,

including the COE section 404 permitting activities under the Clean

Water Act, COE permitting activities under the River and Harbors Act,

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission licenses for non-Federal

development and operation of hydropower, and Federal salmon hatcheries,

may also require consultation.

Based on information presented in this proposed rule, general

conservation measures that could be implemented to help conserve the

species are listed below. This list does not constitute NMFS'

interpretation of a recovery plan under section 4(f) of the ESA.

1. Measures could be taken to promote land management practices

that protect and restore steelhead habitat. Land management practices

affecting steelhead habitat include timber harvest, road building,

agriculture, livestock grazing, and urban development.

2. Evaluation of existing harvest regulations could identify any

changes necessary to protect steelhead populations.

3. Artificial propagation programs could be required to incorporate

practices that minimize impacts upon native populations of steelhead.

4. Efforts could be made to ensure that existing and proposed dam

facilities are designed and operated in a manner that will not

adversely affect steelhead populations. For example, NMFS could require

that fish passage facilities at dams effectively pass migrating

juvenile and adult steelhead.

5. Water diversions could have adequate headgate and staff gauge

structures installed to control and monitor water usage accurately.

Water rights could be enforced to prevent irrigators from exceeding the

amount of water to which they are legally entitled.

6. Irrigation diversions affecting downstream migrating steelhead

trout could be screened. A thorough review of the impact of irrigation

diversions on steelhead could be conducted.

NMFS recognizes that, to be successful, protective regulations and

recovery programs for steelhead will need to be developed in the

context of conserving aquatic ecosystem health. NMFS intends that

Federal lands and Federal activities play a primary role in preserving

listed populations and the ecosystems upon which they depend. However,

throughout the range of all ten ESUs proposed for listing, steelhead

habitat occurs and can be affected by activities on state, tribal or

private land. Agricultural, timber, and urban management activities on

nonfederal land could and should be conducted in a manner that avoids

adverse effects to steelhead habitat.

NMFS encourages nonfederal landowners to assess the impacts of

their actions on potentially threatened or endangered salmonids. In

particular, NMFS encourages the formulation of watershed partnerships

to promote conservation in accordance with ecosystem principles. These

partnerships will be successful only if state, tribal, and local

governments, landowner representatives, and Federal and nonfederal

biologists all participate and share the goal of restoring steelhead to

the watersheds.

Section 9 of the ESA prohibits certain activities that directly or

indirectly affect endangered species. These prohibitions apply to all

individuals, organizations, and agencies subject to

[[Page 41559]]

U.S. jurisdiction. Section 4(d) of the ESA allows the promulgation of

protective regulations that modify or apply any or all of the

prohibitions of section 9 to threatened species. Section 9 prohibits

violations of protective regulations for threatened species promulgated

under section 4(d).

At this time, NMFS proposes to adopt protective measures to

prohibit ``taking,'' interstate commerce, and the other ESA

prohibitions applicable to endangered species, with the exceptions

provided under section 10 of the ESA, for the five ESUs of steelhead

proposed as threatened herein. Under the ESA, the term ``take'' means

to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or

collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. NMFS is proposing

to extend the provisions of section 9 and section 10 to these ESUs to

provide immediate protections to them upon final listing. However,

prior to the final listing determination, NMFS will consider adopting

specific regulations under section 4(d) that will apply to one or more

ESUs of steelhead identified as threatened (see Public Comments

Solicited). These regulations, promulgated pursuant to the

Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq., may be in lieu of

the Section 9 taking prohibition and Section 10 permit exception.

Sections 10(a)(1)(A) and 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA provide NMFS with

authority to grant exceptions to the ESA's ``taking'' prohibitions.

Section 10(a)(1)(A) scientific research and enhancement permits may be

issued to entities (Federal and non-Federal) conducting research that

involves a directed take of listed species. A directed take refers to

the intentional take of listed species. NMFS has issued section

10(a)(1)(A) research/enhancement permits for other listed species

(e.g., Snake River chinook salmon and Sacramento River winter-run

chinook salmon) for a number of activities, including trapping and

tagging, electroshocking to determine population presence and

abundance, removal of fish from irrigation ditches, and collection of

adult fish for artificial propagation programs.

Section 10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permits may be issued to non-

Federal entities performing activities which may incidentally take

listed species. The types of activities potentially requiring a section

10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permit include the operation and release of

artificially propagated fish by state or privately operated and funded

hatcheries, state or University research not receiving Federal

authorization or funding, and the implementation of state fishing

regulations. NMFS Policies on Endangered and Threatened Fish and

Wildlife

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) and a policy to identify, to the maximum extent possible, those

activities that would or would not constitute a violation of section 9

of the ESA (59 FR 34272).

Role of peer review: The intent of the peer review policy is to

ensure that listings are based on the best scientific and commercial

data available. Prior to a final listing, NMFS will solicit the expert

opinions of three qualified specialists, concurrent with the public

comment period. Independent peer reviewers will be selected from the

academic and scientific community, Tribal and other native American

groups, Federal and state agencies, and the private sector.

Identification of those activities that would constitute a

violation of Section 9 of the ESA: The intent of this policy is to

increase public awareness of the effect of this listing on proposed and

ongoing activities within the species' range. NMFS will identify, to

the extent known at the time of the final rule, specific activities

that will not be considered likely to result in violation of section 9,

as well as activities that will be considered likely to result in

violation. NMFS believes that, based on the best available information,

the following actions will not result in a violation of section 9:

(1) Possession of steelhead acquired lawfully by permit issued by

NMFS pursuant to section 10 of the ESA, or by the terms of an

incidental take statement pursuant to section 7 of the ESA.

(2) Federally approved projects that involve activities such as

silviculture, grazing, mining, road construction, dam construction and

operation, discharge of fill material, stream channelization or

diversion for which consultation has been completed, and when such

activity is conducted in accordance with any terms and conditions given

by NMFS in an incidental take statement accompanied by a biological

opinion.

Activities that NMFS believes could potentially harm the steelhead

and result in ``take'', include, but are not limited to:

(1) Unauthorized collecting or handling of the species. Permits to

conduct these activities are available for purposes of scientific

research or to enhance the propagation or survival of the species.

(2) Unauthorized destruction/alteration of the species' habitat

such as removal of large woody debris or riparian shade canopy,

dredging, discharge of fill material, draining, ditching, diverting,

blocking, or altering stream channels or surface or ground water flow.

(3) Discharges or dumping of toxic chemicals or other pollutants

(i.e., sewage, oil and gasoline) into waters or riparian areas

supporting the species.

(4) Violation of discharge permits.

(5) Pesticide applications in violation of label restrictions.

(6) Interstate and foreign commerce (commerce across State lines

and international boundaries) and import/export without prior

obtainment of an endangered species permit.

This list is not exhaustive. It is provided to give the reader some

examples of the types of activities that may be considered by the NMFS

as constituting a ``take'' of steelhead under the ESA and regulations.

Questions regarding whether specific activities will constitute a

violation of section 9, and general inquiries regarding prohibitions

and permits, should be directed to NMFS (see ADDRESSES).

Critical Habitat

Section 4(a)(3)(A) of the ESA requires that, to the extent prudent

and determinable, critical habitat be designated concurrently with the

listing of a species. While NMFS has completed its initial analysis of

the biological status of steelhead populations from Washington, Oregon,

Idaho, and California, it has not performed the analysis (including

economic analysis) necessary for designating critical habitat. Further,

NMFS is placing a higher priority on listings than on critical habitat

designations due to staffing and workload constraints resulting from

the lifting of the recent listing moratorium. In most cases, the

substantive protections of critical habitat designations are

duplicative of those of listings, however, in cases in which critical

habitat designation is deemed essential to the conservation of the

species, such a designation could warrant a higher priority. It is

NMFS' intention to develop and publish a critical habitat designation

for West Coast steelhead as time and workload permit.

Public Comments Solicited

To ensure that the final action resulting from this proposal will

be as accurate and effective as possible, NMFS is soliciting comments

and suggestions from the public, other

[[Page 41560]]

governmental agencies, the scientific community, industry, and any

other interested parties. Public hearings will be held in several

locations in the range of the proposed ESUs; details regarding

locations, dates, and times will be published in a forthcoming Federal

Register notice. NMFS recognizes that there are serious limits to the

quality of information available, and, therefore, NMFS has executed its

best professional judgment in developing this proposal. NMFS will

appreciate any additional information regarding, in particular: (1) The

relationship between rainbow trout and steelhead, specifically whether

rainbow trout and steelhead populations in the same geographic area

should be considered a single ESU; (2) biological or other relevant

data concerning any threat to steelhead or rainbow trout; (3) the

range, distribution, and population size of steelhead and rainbow trout

in all identified ESUs; (4) current or planned activities in the

subject areas and their possible impact on this species; (5) steelhead

escapement, particularly escapement data partitioned into natural and

hatchery components; (6) the proportion of naturally-reproducing fish

that were reared as juveniles in a hatchery; (7) homing and straying of

natural and hatchery fish; (8) the reproductive success of naturally-

reproducing hatchery fish (i.e., hatchery-produced fish that spawn in

natural habitat) and their relationship to the identified ESUs; (9)

efforts being made to protect native, naturally-reproducing populations

of steelhead and rainbow trout in Washington, Oregon, Idaho and

California; and (10) suggestions for specific regulations under section

4(d) of the ESA that should apply to threatened steelhead ESUs.

Suggested regulations may address activities, plans, or guidelines

that, despite their potential to result in the incidental take of

listed fish, will ultimately promote the conservation and recovery of

threatened steelhead.

NMFS is also requesting quantitative evaluations describing the

quality and extent of freshwater and marine habitats for juvenile and

adult steelhead as well as information on areas that may qualify as

critical habitat in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California for the

proposed ESUs. Areas that include the physical and biological features

essential to the recovery of the species should be identified. NMFS

recognizes that there are areas within the proposed boundaries of some

ESUs that historically constituted steelhead habitat, but may not be

currently occupied by steelhead. NMFS is requesting information about

steelhead in these currently unoccupied areas (in particular, for the

Southern California and Central Valley ESUs) and whether these habitats

should be considered essential to the recovery of the species or

excluded from designation. Essential features include, but are not

limited to: (1) Habitat 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.

NMFS will review all public comments and any additional information

regarding the status of the steelhead ESUs described herein and, as

required under the ESA, will complete a final rule within 1 year of

this proposed rule. The availability of new information may cause NMFS

to reassess the status of steelhead ESUs. In particular, NMFS will

conduct a thorough reevaluation of the status of the Middle Columbia

River ESU before the final listing determination. Although NMFS has

concluded that information available at the present time is not

sufficient to demonstrate that a listing is warranted for this ESU,

there is concern over the health of natural populations in this ESU.

NMFS is aware and strongly supportive of the current efforts by the

states of Oregon, Washington, and California to develop effective and

scientifically based conservation measures to address at-risk salmon

and steelhead stocks. NMFS believes that these efforts, if successful,

could serve as the central components of a broad conservation program

that would provide a steady, predictable, and well grounded road to

recovery and rebuilding of these stocks. NMFS intends to work closely

with these efforts and those of local or regional watershed groups, as

well as other involved Federal agencies, and hopes that this proposal

will add greater impetus to those efforts.

References

A complete list of all references cited herein is available upon

request (see ADDRESSES section).

Classification

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, 675 F. 2d 825 (6th Cir.

1981), NMFS has categorically excluded all ESA listing actions from

environmental assessment requirements of the National Environmental

Policy Act under NOAA Administrative Order 216-6.

This proposed rule is exempt from review under E.O. 12866.

Dated: July 31, 1996.

C. Karnella,

Acting Program Management Officer, National Marine Fisheries Service.

List of Subjects

50 CFR Part 222

Administrative practice and procedure, Endangered and threatened

wildlife, Exports, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,

Transportation.

50 CFR Part 227

Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Marine

mammals, Transportation.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR parts 222 and 227

are proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 222--ENDANGERED FISH OR WILDLIFE

1. The authority citation of Part 222 continues to read as follows:

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

[[Page 41561]]

Sec. 222.23 [Amended]

2. In Sec. 222.23, paragraph (a) is amended by adding the phrases

``Central California Coast steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss); South-

Central California Coast steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss); Southern

California steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss); Central Valley steelhead

(Oncorhynchus mykiss); and Upper Columbia River steelhead (Oncorhynchus

mykiss);'' immediately after the phrase ``Umpqua River cutthroat trout

(Oncorhynchus clarki clarki)''.

PART 227--THREATENED FISH AND WILDLIFE

1. The authority citation for part 227 continues to read as

follows:

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

2. In Sec. 227.4, paragraphs (n), (o), (p), and (q) are added to

read as follows:

Sec. 227.4 Enumeration of threatened species.

* * * * *

(n) Lower Columbia River steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss)

(o) Oregon Coast steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss)

(p) Northern California steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss)

(q) Snake River Basin steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss).

3. Section 227.21 is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 227.21 Threatened salmon.

(a) Prohibitions. The prohibitions of section 9 of the Act (16

U.S.C. 1538) relating to endangered species apply to threatened species

of salmon listed in Sec. 227.4 (f), (g), (j), (k), (l), (m), (n), (o),

(p), and (q) except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section.

(b) Exceptions. The exceptions of section 10 of the Act (16 U.S.C.

1539) and other exceptions under the Act relating to endangered

species, including regulations implementing such exceptions, also apply

to the threatened species of salmon listed in Sec. 227.4 (f), (g), (j),

(k), (l), (m), (n), (o), (p), and (q). This section supersedes other

restrictions on the applicability of parts 217 and 222 of this chapter,

including, but not limited to, the restrictions specified in

Secs. 217.2 and 222.22(a) of this chapter with respect to the species

identified in Sec. 227.21(a).

[FR Doc. 96-20030 Filed 8-8-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-P