Listing Endangered and Threatened Species and Designating Critical Habitat: Petition To List Eighteen Species of Marine Fishes in Puget Sound, Washington

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Parts 223 and 224

[Docket No. 990614161-9161-01; I.D. 061199B]

Listing Endangered and Threatened Species and Designating

Critical Habitat: Petition To List Eighteen Species of Marine Fishes in

Puget Sound, Washington

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

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of finding; request for information and comments.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS has received a petition to list 18 species of Puget Sound

marine fishes and to designate critical habitat under the Endangered

Species Act (ESA). The petitioned fishes include 1 herring, 1 cod, 1

hake, 1 pollock, and 14 rockfish species. NMFS determines that the

petition presents substantial scientific information indicating that

the petitioned action may be warranted for seven of the species:

Pacific herring, Pacific cod, Pacific hake, walleye pollock, brown

rockfish, copper rockfish, and quillback rockfish. NMFS solicits

information and comments pertaining to these seven species in Puget

Sound and seeks suggestions from the public for peer reviewers for the

agency's review of the petitioned action.

DATES: Information and comments on the action must be received by

September 20, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Information and comments on this action should be submitted

to Chief, Protected Resources Division, NMFS, 525 NE Oregon Street -

Suite 500, Portland, OR 97232.

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

(503) 231-2005, or Marta Nammack, NMFS, Office of Protected Resources

(301) 713-1401.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On February 8, 1999, the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) received

a petition from Sam Wright of Olympia, Washington, to list and

designate critical habitat for 18 species of marine fishes in Puget

Sound, Washington. The following are the species petitioned: Pacific

herring (Clupea pallasi), Pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus), Pacific

hake (Aka Pacific whiting) (Merluccius productus), walleye pollock

(Theragra chalcogramma), brown rockfish (Sebastes auriculatus), copper

rockfish (S. caurinus), greenstripe rockfish (S. elongatus), widow

rockfish (S. entomelas), yellowtail rockfish (S. flavidus), quillback

rockfish (S. maliger), black rockfish (S. melanops), blue rockfish (S.

mystinus), China rockfish (S. nebulosus), tiger rockfish (S.

nigrocinctus), bocaccio (S. paucispinis), canary rockfish (S.

pinniger), redstripe rockfish (S. proriger), and yelloweye rockfish (S.

ruberrimus). Although the petitioner identified Pacific herring as ``C.

harengus pallasi,'' NMFS has followed the naming convention of Robins

et al. (1991) which considers C. harengus (Atlantic herring) and C.

pallasi as separate species. Therefore, NMFS considered only the latter

as the petitioned species. Copies of this petition are available from

NMFS (See ADDRESSES).

Analysis of Petition

Section 4(b)(3) of the ESA contains provisions concerning petitions

from interested persons requesting the Secretary to list species under

the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)). Section 4(b)(3)(A) requires that, to

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

petition, the Secretary make a finding whether the petition presents

substantial scientific information indicating that the petitioned

action may be warranted. NMFS' ESA implementing regulations define

``substantial information'' as the

[[Page 33038]]

amount of information that would lead a reasonable person to believe

that the measure proposed in the petition may be warranted. In

evaluating a petitioned action, the Secretary considers several

factors, including whether the petition contains a detailed narrative

justification for the recommended measure, describing, based on

available information, past and present numbers and distribution of the

species involved and any threats faced by the species (50 CFR.

424.14(b)(2)(ii)). In addition, the Secretary considers whether the

petition provides information regarding the status of the species over

all or a significant portion of its range (50 CFR. 424.14(b)(2)(iii).

Under the ESA, a listing determination can address a species,

subspecies, or distinct population segment (DPS) of a species (16

U.S.C. 1532(15)). The petitioner requested listings for ``species/

populations' or evolutionary[sic] significant units'' in Puget Sound.

The term Evolutionarily Significant Unit or ``ESU'' is currently

defined only for DPSs of Pacific salmonids (see 56 FR 58612, November

20, 1991). For these petitioned species, NMFS would instead rely on the

DPS framework described in a NMFS/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service policy

regarding the identification of distinct vertebrate population segments

(61 FR 4722, February 7, 1996). Since the petitioner focused on stocks

within Puget Sound (rather than on the entire species or subspecies),

NMFS considered the petition in the context of defining DPSs in this

area that may warrant listing under the ESA.

For each of the petitioned species, NMFS evaluated whether the

information provided or cited in the petition met the ESA's standard

for ``substantial information.'' The agency also reviewed other

information readily available to NMFS scientists (i.e., currently

within agency files) and consulted with state and tribal experts on

these species to determine whether there was general agreement on

issues related to the uniqueness, distribution, abundance, and threats

to the petitioned species/populations. With respect to uniqueness, NMFS

assessed whether the petitioner's and otherwise available information

might support the identification of DPSs that may warrant listing under

the ESA.

Information submitted by the petitioner varied considerably for

each of the 18 species, and the level of detail was generally the

greatest for the herring and cod species. In addition, some of the

information was largely speculative or not directly relevant to the

petitioner's request. Hence, the amount and quality of information in

the petition played a major role in NMFS' decision on whether to

initiate a status review for a particular species.

For all of the petitioned species, the petitioner theorized that

Puget Sound's unique hydrological and physical characteristics (i.e.,

numerous fjord-like estuarine basins with sills and constricted

entrances) could contribute to genetic differentiation and population

subdivision (i.e., the formation of DPSs). While this is plausible,

NMFS assessed whether more direct measures of distinctness (in

particular, genetic or life history data) are evident in this area.

NMFS also assessed whether the petitioner accurately reflected any

known trends in abundance or threats to the 18 species and, moreover,

whether these trends/threats would lead a reasonable person to believe

that listing under the ESA may be warranted. A summary of the results

of this assessment follows; members of the family Scorpaenidae (i.e.,

rockfishes) were assessed together because of the paucity of data for

most of the species.

Pacific herring - The petitioner noted that several stocks have

been identified in Puget Sound (Bargmann, 1998) and that life history

differences (e.g., spawning timing and growth rates) and spawning site

fidelity may contribute to stock separation. Populations in Puget Sound

have not been examined in detail for genetic distinctness, but plans

are being made to conduct genetic sampling for this species in the

range petitioned. Also, several studies conducted in other areas of the

North Pacific may help shed light on whether DPSs are present in Puget

Sound.

The petitioner cited recent studies indicating that some Puget

sound stocks are in ``critical'' or ``depressed'' condition, and noted

that the 1998 run size was the lowest on record for at least one

herring stock. The petitioner also expressed concern over the apparent

increase in natural mortality and the concurrent decrease in number of

age classes for some stocks. NMFS' initial assessment corroborated

that, overall, catches of Pacific herring reached a peak in the mid-

1970s and then declined and have remained at low levels since the

1980s. The petitioner suggested that harvest, marine mammal predation,

and urbanization/industrial development have played a role in the

species' decline (but noted that the decline of the Discovery Bay stock

may not be attributable to overharvest or habitat degradation).

NMFS has determined that the available information is substantial

and that the petitioned action may be warranted. Therefore, the agency

will initiate a status review of Pacific herring in Puget Sound.

Pacific cod - The petitioner noted that three stocks have been

identified in Puget Sound (Palsson, 1990) and that tagging studies

indicate that adults of the species may remain near specific spawning

grounds. Also, the petition cited a study reporting high growth rates

and egg production rates that may indicate the presence of DPSs of

Pacific cod in Puget Sound (Palsson et al., 1997). Allozyme studies

show a major genetic demarcation across the North Pacific, but little

genetic population structure has been detected among local stocks

within these two major groups (Grant et al., 1987).

The petitioner cited commercial and recreational catch data and

recent surveys indicating that some Puget Sound cod stocks may have

collapsed in the late 1970s and 1980s (Palsson, 1990; Palsson et al.,

1997). Also cited were recent acoustic surveys indicating that Agate

Passage (south Puget Sound) populations may be at a critical or near-

extinct level. NMFS has verified that Puget Sound cod populations have

undergone a long-term decline since the mid-1970s and a marked decline

since the late-1980s. The petitioner did not identify specific threats

to this species, although the petition suggests that overharvest,

marine mammal predation, and marine, estuarine, and terrestrial habitat

degradation are potential factors in the species' decline.

NMFS has determined that the available information is substantial

and that the petitioned action may be warranted. Therefore, the agency

will initiate a status review of Pacific cod in Puget Sound.

Pacific hake - The petitioner expressed principal concern for a

resident population that occurs in south Puget Sound and migrates

seasonally between Port Susan and Saratoga Passage. The petitioner

cited studies reporting that Puget Sound hake are genetically distinct

from coastal populations (Utter and Hodgins, 1971), and that hake

within Puget Sound may be distinguishable as two separate stocks (Goni,

1988). NMFS has confirmed these findings and also reviewed information

indicating that other species of hake tend to show subdivided

population structure around geographically complex coastlines (Roldan

et al., 1998), but not along linear coastlines (Grant et al., 1988;

Roldan, 1991)

The petitioner cited commercial catch data and recent surveys

documenting that south Puget Sound populations have declined from an

estimated adult biomass of over 45 million pounds in

[[Page 33039]]

1983 to approximately 1 to 3 million pounds in 5 of the past 6 years

(Palsson et al., 1997). The petition did not document the status of

north Puget Sound hake; however, Palson et al. (1997) reported that

abundance peaked in the late 1970s and early 1980s (approximately 7-33

lb./hour in terms of effort) with a decline thereafter to approximately

5 lb./hour. The petitioner identified overharvest and marine mammal

predation as important factors in the species' decline and suggested

that marine, estuarine, and terrestrial habitat degradation have also

played a role.

NMFS has determined that the available information is substantial

and that the petitioned action may be warranted. Therefore, the agency

will initiate a status review of Pacific hake in Puget Sound.

Walleye pollock - The petitioner noted that Puget Sound stocks of

this species represent the southernmost distribution of this species.

The petition cited unpublished data indicating stock separation between

north and south Puget Sound, with the latter stock being in the worse

condition. While NMFS did not find genetic data specific to populations

in Puget Sound, some studies have demonstrated genetic differences

between Japanese and Northeastern Pacific pollock populations (Grant

and Utter, 1980; Mulligan et al., 1992; Shields and Gust, 1995).

The petitioner cited recreational catch data, trawl surveys, and

cohort analysis indicating a decline (and possible collapse) in the

southern Puget Sound pollock stock since the mid-1980s (Palsson et al.,

1997). These authors suggest that the South Sound pollock population is

at a critical status and possibly extinct. No information was provided

on pollock populations in other areas of Puget Sound, although NMFS has

verified that a similar trend can be seen in the North Sound pollock

populations as well. The current status of North Sound stock is less

certain because of minimal catch data and because the status of pollock

stocks in the nearby Strait of Georgia is relatively healthy. The

petitioner did not identify specific threats to this species, although

the petition suggests that overharvest, marine mammal predation, and

marine, estuarine, and terrestrial habitat degradation are potential

factors in the species' decline.

NMFS has determined that the available information is substantial

and that the petitioned action may be warranted. Therefore, the agency

will initiate a status review of walleye pollock in Puget Sound.

Rockfishes - Although 14 species of rockfish are identified in the

petition, relatively little information was presented or is readily

available on the population characteristics and status of individual

species. Aside from the petitioner's general assertion that the

physical characteristics of Puget Sound may promote greater population

subdivision, the petitioner did not provide information specifically

addressing the distribution or population structure of each species in

Puget Sound. The petitioner noted that genetic studies using

conventional techniques have not consistently shown population

differentiation or structuring for Puget Sound rockfishes, adding that

other techniques may be required to show such distinctness. NMFS did

review evidence from high resolution molecular genetic data for some

rockfish species that suggests genetic differences may exist between

populations of these species within Puget Sound. However, these studies

are limited in sampling and scope and address only three of the

petitioned species (brown, copper, and quillback rockfish). The

petitioner also stated that there are differences in growth rates for

some species within Puget Sound, but failed to reference the particular

species.

The petitioner provided no species-specific information on trends

or past and current abundance, but did characterize three rockfishes

(brown, copper, and quillback rockfish) as the most common species

currently caught in Puget Sound. Instead, the petitioner relied on

composite data for all members of the genus Sebastes that suggest a

declining trend in recreational fisheries in both north and south Puget

Sound. While these data are the primary stock indicator for Puget

Sound, it is impossible to discern the status of particular species

from these data. NMFS did review limited supplemental survey data

(SCUBA and trawl) for south Puget Sound that demonstrate a reduction in

counts from the late 1980s to early 1990s, but these data also fail to

distinguish among species.

With respect to threats facing the species, the petitioner

identified an array of factors potentially contributing to the decline

of Puget Sound rockfishes, including overharvest, marine mammal

predation, and marine, estuarine, and terrestrial habitat degradation.

The petitioner expressed particular concern over the lack of adequate

``no-take'' refuges for these species and the risks associated with

overfishing these relatively long-lived species.

NMFS concludes that the available information for Puget Sound

rockfish is insubstantial for most of the petitioned species. Still,

there are reasons to believe that some of the species may warrant ESA

protection. The agency believes that the best approach to identifying

candidates for an ESA status review includes determining which rockfish

species are most likely to yield conclusive information during the

review. It is clear from the assessment made to date that the majority

of the petitioned species have little or no prospects for yielding such

information in the time required to complete a status review (i.e., by

February 2000). However, NMFS believes that the petition provides

substantial information indicating serious threats and trends for

rockfish in general, and that the prospects are good for obtaining more

detailed information for three of the better-studied species, i.e.,

brown, copper, and quillback rockfish. Therefore, the agency will

initiate a status review of brown rockfish, copper rockfish, and

quillback rockfish in Puget Sound. In addition, NMFS is hopeful that

information obtained during status reviews for these three species may

help determine whether other Puget Sound rockfish may warrant

consideration for an ESA status review.

Petition Finding

After reviewing the information contained in the petition, as well

as information readily available to NMFS scientists, the Secretary

determines that the petition presents substantial scientific

information indicating the petitioned action may be warranted for seven

of the species identified in Puget Sound, namely: Pacific herring,

Pacific cod, Pacific hake, walleye pollock, brown rockfish, copper

rockfish, and quillback rockfish. In accordance with section 4(b)(3)(B)

of the ESA, the Secretary will make his determination whether the

petitioned action is warranted for these seven species within 12 months

from the date the petition was received (i.e., by February 8, 2000).

Listing Factors and Basis for Determination

Under section 4(a)(1) of the ESA, a species can be determined to be

threatened or endangered based on any of the following factors: (1) The

present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of a

species' habitat or range; (2) overutilization for commercial,

recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (3) disease or

predation; (4) inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or (5)

other natural or manmade factors affecting the species continuing

existence. Listing

[[Page 33040]]

determinations are based solely on the best available scientific and

commercial data after taking into account any efforts being made by any

state or foreign nation to protect the species.

Information Solicited

To ensure that the review is complete and is based on the best

available scientific and commercial data, NMFS solicits information and

comments concerning the status of Puget Sound populations of Pacific

herring, Pacific cod, Pacific hake, walleye pollock, brown rockfish,

copper rockfish, and quillback rockfish (see DATES and ADDRESSES). NMFS

specifically requests the following information: (1) Biological or

other relevant data that may help identify DPSs of any of these species

(e.g., age structure, genetics, migratory patterns, morphology); (2)

the range, distribution, and size of these species' populations in

Puget Sound and coastal waters of Washington and British Columbia; (3)

current or planned activities and their possible impact on this species

(e.g., harvest measures and habitat actions); and (4) efforts being

made to protect these species in Washington and British Columbia.

NMFS also requests quantitative evaluations describing the quality

and extent of estuarine and marine habitats for these species, as well

as information on areas that may qualify as critical habitat in

Washington. Areas that include the physical and biological features

essential to the recovery of the species should be identified.

Essential features include, but are not limited, to the following: (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 requests

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

resulting specifically 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 or 4(d) 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.

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). The intent of the peer review policy is to ensure that listings

are based on the best scientific and commercial data available. NMFS

now solicits the names of recognized experts in the field that could

take part in the peer review process for this status review.

Independent peer reviewers will be selected from the academic and

scientific community, tribal and other Native American groups, Federal

and state agencies, the private sector, and public interest groups.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.

Dated: June 15, 1999.

Penelope D. Dalton,

Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries

Services.

[FR Doc. 99-15721 Filed 6-18-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-F