Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding for a Petition to List White Abalone (Haliotis sorenseni) as Endangered

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 223 and 224

[Docket No. 990910253-9253-01; I.D. 073099D]

RIN 0648-AM90

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding for

a Petition to List White Abalone (Haliotis sorenseni) as Endangered

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

Atmospheric Administration, Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of petition finding; request for information and

comments.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS has received a petition to list white abalone (Haliotis

sorenseni) as an endangered species on an emergency basis and to

designate critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). NMFS

finds that the petition presents substantial scientific and commercial

information indicating that the request for listing may be warranted.

Therefore, NMFS is conducting a status review to determine whether the

petitioned action is warranted. To assure that the review is

comprehensive, NMFS is soliciting information and data regarding this

species and potential critical habitat from any interested party. We

will use information received during the comment period, and other

information, in our review of the status of white abalone. The petition

does not present substantial evidence to warrant the listing of white

abalone on an emergency basis at this time.

DATES: Comments and information must be received by November 23, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the petition and comments regarding

white abalone should be submitted to Irma Lagomarsino, Division Manager

for Protected Resources, Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 W. Ocean Blvd.,

Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA, 90802-4213. The petition and supporting

data are available for public inspection, by appointment, Monday

through Friday at the address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irma Lagomarsino, NMFS Southwest

Region, 562/980-4016; Marta Nammack, NMFS Office of Protected

Resources, 301/713-1401.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Based on information indicating major declines in the abundance of

white abalone, NMFS designated the white abalone, a marine

invertebrate, as a candidate species under the Endangered Species Act

of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) on July 14, 1997 (62 FR

37560). In August 1998, NMFS contracted with Scripps Institution of

Oceanography for a review of the biological status of white abalone and

current and historical impacts to the species. NMFS received this

status review on April 21, 1999. In order to obtain an independent peer

review of the contracted status review, NMFS requested three non-

federal scientists to review and report on the scientific merits of the

document. The scientists will submit their anonymous reviews by the end

of August 1999.

Section 4 of the ESA contains provisions allowing interested

persons to petition the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of

Commerce (Secretary) to add a species to or remove a species from the

List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and to

[[Page 51726]]

designate critical habitat. On April 29, 1999, NMFS received a petition

from the Center for Biological Diversity and the Southwest Center for

Biological Diversity to list white abalone as an endangered species on

an emergency basis and designate critical habitat under the ESA.

On May 17, 1999, NMFS received a second petition to list white

abalone as an endangered species throughout its range and to designate

critical habitat under the ESA from the Marine Conservation Biology

Institute, Abalone and Marine Resources Council, Sonoma County Abalone

Network, Asociacion Interamericana para la Defensa del Ambiente,

Channnel Islands Marine Resource Institute, Proteus SeaFarms

International, Environmental Defense Fund and Natural Resources Defense

Council. NMFS will treat this second request as supplemental

information to the first petition. Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered

Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544) requires that the NMFS make a finding

on whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents

substantial scientific or commercial information to indicate that the

petitioned action may be warranted. In determining whether substantial

information exists for a petition to list a species, NMFS will take

into account information submitted with and referenced in the petition

and all other information readily available in NMFS' files. To the

maximum extent practicable, this finding is to be made within 90 days

of the receipt of the petition, and the finding is to be published

promptly in the Federal Register. If NMFS finds that a petition

presents substantial information indicating that the requested action

may be warranted, section 4(b)(3)(B) of the ESA requires NMFS to make a

finding as to whether or not the petitioned action is warranted within

1 year of the receipt of the petition.

The definition of ``species'' in section 3(16) of the ESA does not

provide for distinct population segments of invertebrate species to be

listed under the ESA. As a result, the white abalone would have to be

listed throughout its entire range, including Mexico, if the listing is

found to be warranted. In contrast, pursuant to 50 CFR 424.12(h), any

critical habitat designated for white abalone may not include Mexico.

The Secretary may, at any time, issue a regulation adding a species

to the list regarding to any emergency that poses a significant risk to

the well-being of a species under section 4(b)(7) of the ESA. Such

rules will, at the discretion of the Secretary, take effect immediately

on publication in the Federal Register and detail the reasons for an

emergency listing.

Finding

NMFS finds that the petitioners and comments on the petition

present substantial scientific and commercial information indicating

that a listing may be warranted, based on the criteria specified in 50

CFR 424.14(b)(2). Although a positive 90-day finding is not a decision

to list a species, under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA, this finding

requires that a review of the status of white abalone be completed

within 12 months of receiving the petition (by April 28, 2000) to

determine whether the petitioned action is warranted.

Emergency Listing

The petitioners express concern about the decline of white abalone

from its original abundance and believe that this decline constitutes

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

species. Consequently, the petitioners conclude that white abalone will

go extinct within 10 years unless immediate measures are taken to

restore the species. For these reasons, the petitioners request that

white abalone be listed as an endangered species on an emergency basis

under the ESA.

NMFS finds that there is not substantial evidence to warrant

listing white abalone on an emergency basis under the ESA and believes

that the normal rulemaking procedures are sufficient and appropriate

for the protection of white abalone. Based on NMFS' review of the

petition and on other available information, we believe the decline of

white abalone is primarily the result of over-harvesting in the early

1970s. Regulations limiting abalone harvest were instituted by

California as early as the 1880s and later included restrictions on

minimum size, harvest rate, and timing of harvest. The State of

California closed its commercial and recreational white abalone

fisheries in March 1996 and the best available information indicates

that white abalone habitat is not currently at risk from destruction or

modification.

Because fishery-independent assessment surveys of white abalone

abundance have been limited in number and spatial coverage, a peer

review of the NMFS-funded status review is necessary to determine

whether previous sampling adequately represents the current density of

white abalone. Since 80 percent of the historical white abalone

landings in California were taken from San Clemente Island, the

northern Channel Islands may never have supported high densities of

white abalone. Thus, the estimate of white abalone abundance throughout

its range using density estimates only from the surveys in the northern

Channel Islands may not provide representative estimates of current

abundance.

Thus, NMFS concludes that there is no emergency posing a

significant risk to the well-being of the species. For these reasons,

NMFS is not publishing a regulation to list white abalone as an

endangered species on an emergency basis at this time.

Listing Factors and Basis for Determinations

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

endangered or threatened for any of the following reasons: (1) The

present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its

habitat or range; (2) overutilization for commercial, recreational,

scientific, or educational purposes; (3) disease or predation; (4) the

inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or (5) other natural or

manmade factors affecting its continued existence. Listing

determinations are made solely on the best scientific and commercial

data available, after conducting a review of the status of the species

and taking into account efforts made by the State or foreign nations to

protect such species.

Information Solicited

To ensure that the white abalone status review is complete and

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

soliciting information and comments on whether the white abalone is

endangered or threatened based on the above listing criteria.

Specifically, NMFS is soliciting information in the following areas:

historical and current abundance of white abalone, current spatial

distribution, trends in abundance, historic harvest levels, and

possible threats to genetic integrity or demography due to reduced

numbers of white abalone individuals. NMFS is also soliciting

information regarding factors that have contributed to the decline of

white abalone and any efforts being made to protect the species. This

information should address white abalone throughout its range, from

Point Conception, California, U.S.A., to between Punta Tortugas and

Punta Abreojos, Baja California, Mexico.

Critical Habitat

NMFS is also requesting information on areas that may qualify as

critical habitat for white abalone in California. Areas that include

the physical and

[[Page 51727]]

biological features essential to the recovery of the species should be

identified. Areas outside the present range should also be identified

if such areas are essential to the recovery of the species. Essential

features should include, but are not limited to: (1) Space for

individual 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 development of offspring;

and (5) habitats that are protected from disturbance or are

representative of the historical, geographical, and ecological

distributions of the species.

For areas potentially qualifying as critical habitat, NMFS is

requesting the following 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 considers the incremental costs specifically

resulting from a critical habitat designation that are above the

economic effects attributable to listing the species. Economic effects

attributable to listing include actions resulting from section 7

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

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

economic impacts should distinguish the costs of listing from the

incremental costs that can be directly attributed to the designation of

specific areas as critical habitat.

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

documentation, such as maps, bibliographic references, or reprints of

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

association, institution, or business.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 742a et seq.; 31

U.S.C. 9701; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.

Dated: September 21, 1999.

Andrew A. Rosenberg,

Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries

Service.

[FR Doc. 99-24961 Filed 9-23-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-F