[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 4 (Thursday, January 6, 1994)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 869-871]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-92]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: January 6, 1994]


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


DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
50 CFR Part 17

 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Notice of 1-Year 
Finding on a Petition to List the Longfin Smelt

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of petition finding.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) announces a 1-
year finding on a petition to list the longfin smelt (Spirinchus 
thaleichthys) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended 
(Act). The Service determines that the petitioned action is not 
warranted at this time. The longfin smelt occurs from the San Francisco 
Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin River Estuary in California to Prince 
William Sound in Alaska. Although the southernmost populations are 
declining, little or no population trend data are available for 
estuaries in Oregon and Washington. The species may be surviving and 
reproducing in Puget Sound, Skagit Bay, Grays Harbor, Willapa Bay, the 
Columbia River, Yaquina Bay, and Coos Bay. Large numbers are found in 
the Gulf of Alaska 5 to 6 miles off shore. The listing of a Sacramento-
San Joaquin River estuary vertebrate population segment is also not 
warranted at this time because that population does not seem to be 
biologically significant to the species as a whole, and may not be 
sufficiently reproductively isolated.

DATES: Comments from all interested parties will be accepted until 
further notice.

ADDRESSES: Comments and materials concerning this document should be 
submitted to the Acting Field Supervisor, Sacramento Field Office, U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, 2800 Cottage Way, E-1803, Sacramento, 
California 95825-1846.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: H. Dale Hall, Assistant Regional 
Director, Ecological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 911 NE. 
11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232-4181 (503/231-6150).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 5, 1992, the Service received a 
petition from Mr. Gregory A. Thomas of the Natural Heritage Institute 
to add the longfin smelt to the List of Endangered and Threatened 
Wildlife and to designate critical habitat in the Sacramento and San 
Joaquin Rivers and estuary. In his letter, Mr. Thomas identified the 
following eight organizations as co-petitioners: American Fisheries 
Society, Bay Institute of San Francisco, Natural Heritage Institute, 
Planning and Conservation League, Save San Francisco Bay Association, 
Friends of the River, San Francisco Baykeeper, and the Sierra Club. On 
June 24, 1993, the Service issued a 90-day finding, a notice of which 
was published in the Federal Register on July 6, 1993 (58 FR 36184), 
that the petition presented substantial information indicating that the 
requested action may be warranted. The Service initiated a status 
review and analyzed available data on this species (Meng 1993). 
Additional sources of information describing the human factors and 
projects that may affect this species include expert testimonies 
presented to the California State Water Resources Control Board's 1987 
Water Quality/Water Rights Proceeding on the San Francisco Bay and 
Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and 1992 Water Rights Phase of the 
Bay-Delta Estuary Proceedings.
    Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act requires that the Service issue a 
finding within 1 year of the receipt of the petition on whether the 
petitioned action is (a) not warranted, (b) warranted, or (c) warranted 
but precluded from immediate proposal by other pending proposals of 
higher priority.
    In casual conversations, the petitioner indicated that he intended 
the petition to be a request to list the Sacramento-San Joaquin River 
estuary population. However, the Service did not receive this request 
in writing and, in any case, was required to review the status of the 
species on a rangewide basis prior to considering the appropriateness 
of listing individual population segments. The Service determines that 
listing of the Sacramento-San Joaquin estuary population segment of the 
longfin smelt is not warranted.
    Longfin smelt is an euryhaline species with a 2-year life cycle 
(Moyle 1976, Moyle and Yoshiyama 1992). Spawning occurs in fresh water 
over sandy-gravel substrates, rocks, or aquatic plants. Spawning may 
take place as early as November and extend into June, although the peak 
spawning period is from February to April (Wang 1986). After hatching, 
larvae move up into surface waters and are transported downstream into 
brackish-water nursery areas. Sacramento-San Joaquin River outflow into 
Suisun and San Pablo Bays has been positively correlated with longfin 
smelt recruitment (Stevens and Miller 1983) because higher outflow 
increases larval dispersal and the area available for rearing (Wang 
1986). The main food of longfin smelt is opossum shrimp, although 
copepods and other crustaceans also are eaten (Moyle 1976). Longfin 
smelt are preyed upon by fishes, birds, and marine mammals (Monaco et 
al. 1991). Longfin smelt play a role in maintaining the structure and 
function of estuarine ecosystems because they are important as food for 
birds and piscivorous fishes.
    As presently described, longfin smelt range from the San Joaquin-
Sacramento River estuary and South San Francisco Bay, California, to 
Prince William Sound, Alaska (Miller and Lea 1972). The present-day 
distribution of longfin smelt is probably due to lower sea levels in 
the Pleistocene, which would have enlarged estuaries up and down the 
Pacific coast and shortened the distances between estuaries, as well as 
provide more habitat (Peter Moyle, University of California, Davis, 
pers. comm., 1993). Unverified reports of off-shore collection of 
longfin smelt exist, approximately 5 to 6 miles off shore in Alaska 
(Bruce Wing, National Marine Fisheries Service, Auke Bay, Alaska, pers. 
comm., 1993) and 3 to 4 miles off shore in northern California (Larry 
Quirollo, California Department of Fish and Game, pers. comm., 1993).
    Based on inferred abundance, longfin smelt may be common in Willapa 
Bay, Skagit Bay, and Puget Sound in Washington and Coos Bay and Yaquina 
Bay in Oregon (Monaco et al. 1990). Largely using sampling data, Monaco 
et al. (1990) also reported that longfin smelt were common to highly 
abundant in the Columbia River and Grays Harbor, Washington. Few data 
exist on the recent status of the Oregon and Washington longfin smelt; 
however, indications are that this species may be reproducing and 
surviving in the Oregon and Washington estuaries (Bob Emmett, National 
Marine Fisheries Service, Hammond, Oregon, pers. comm., 1993). A land-
locked population exists in Harrison Lake in British Columbia. British 
Columbia longfin smelt have also been recorded at the Fraser River 
estuary and near Prince Rupert and Vancouver (Hart 1973). Alaska 
longfin smelt are found at the Dixon Entrance, Yakutat Bay, Prince 
William Sound, and Cook Inlet (Wing, pers. comm., 1993). In California, 
the longfin smelt occurs (or did occur) in the Klamath River mouth, 
Humboldt Bay, Eel River mouth, Van Duzen River mouth, and the San 
Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary (Moyle 1976; Moyle and 
Yoshiyama 1992; Ron Fritzsche, Humboldt State University, pers. comm., 
1993). The Estuary supports the largest and most southerly longfin 
smelt population in California (Lee et al. 1980).
    The strongest information on the decline of longfin smelt comes 
from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Estuary of California. Longfin 
smelt were once one of the most abundant fish caught by trawl surveys 
in the Sacramento-San Joaquin (Herbold et al. 1992) and Humboldt Bay 
estuaries (Barnhart, pers. comm., 1993). Longfin smelt numbers in the 
Estuary fluctuated widely in the past, but since 1983 abundance has 
dropped dramatically and remained at record lows. In Humboldt Bay, 
longfin smelt were the fourth most abundant fish captured in trawls in 
the late 1960s and early 1970s (Roger Barnhart, National Biological 
Survey, pers. comm., 1993). However, since 1988, no longfin smelt have 
been captured in Humboldt Bay using similar sampling methods (Tim 
Mulligan, Humboldt State University, pers. comm., 1993). Historical 
records of longfin smelt from the mouth of the Van Duzen River exist; 
however, in recent years, no evidence of the fish exists for this 
location (Fritzsche, pers. comm., 1993). The Eel River, which is about 
3.2 kilometers (2 miles) from Humboldt Bay, is relatively small and 
probably contains little habitat appropriate for longfin smelt. Longfin 
smelt likely occurred in the Eel River only when high river outflows 
introduced fish from Humboldt Bay. Longfin smelt numbers probably 
declined in the Eel River at the same time declines occurred in 
Humboldt Bay. Recent surveys have not found the longfin in the Eel 
estuary (Moyle, pers. comm., 1993). In Oregon and Washington, no 
population trend data exist for any of the estuaries, although the 
indications are that the species is surviving and reproducing in 
several estuaries (Emmett, pers. comm., 1993). In Alaska, large numbers 
of longfin smelt are found in the Gulf of Alaska (Bruce Wing, National 
Marine Fisheries Service, pers. comm., 1993).
    In the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Estuary the decline in longfin 
smelt abundance is associated with fresh water diversions from the 
Delta to support California's agricultural industry in the Central 
Valley and the vast urban areas of southern California. Strong 
relationships between outflow and longfin smelt abundance indicate that 
outflows less than 3,400 cubic feet per second (cfs) result in 
reproductive failure for longfin smelt (Moyle and Yoshiyama 1992). 
Because of its 2-year life span, such flows for more than 2 or 3 
consecutive years could push this species toward extinction. From 1986 
to 1991, outflows hovered close to that number, partly due to high 
proportions of inflow diverted. Movement of the entrapment zone (mixing 
zone at the freshwater-saltwater interface) up-river due to low 
outflows has constricted the range of the longfin smelt and made it 
increasingly vulnerable to diversion into man-made structures. Low 
outflows have failed to disperse larvae downstream to the productive 
nursery areas in Suisun Bay away from the pumps. The water exports from 
the Delta by far exceed those from any other estuary on the west coast 
of North America.
    Sediment production as a result of human activities and 
developments in the Humboldt, Eel, Van Duzen, and Klamath watersheds 
may be a cause of the decline of longfin smelt in those estuaries. Soil 
washed into the streams can deposit in estuaries downstream. 
Sedimentation in the spawning habitat could have reduced the spawning 
success of this species due to physical scouring or suffocation of eggs 
(Barnhart, pers. comm., 1993). Although human activities upstream of 
estuaries in Oregon, Washington, Canada, and Alaska would likely result 
in similar impacts, the Service does not have population trend data for 
these portions of the species' range.
    Longfin smelt disappeared from the Humboldt Bay estuary in the 
1980s (Barnhart, pers. comm., 1993), perhaps as a result of a dramatic 
loss of intertidal marsh habitat, which may have reduced productivity 
levels to a point at which they could no longer support the species. In 
addition, the loss of freshwater flows from the Mad River, as a result 
of water diversions and land reclamation, may have contributed to the 
loss of this species from the Humboldt Bay.
    Longfin smelt may be particularly sensitive to adverse habitat 
alterations or to stochastic events because their 2-year life cycle 
increases the likelihood of extinction after consecutive periods of 
reproductive failure due to drought or other factors. Relatively brief 
periods of reproductive failure could lead to extirpations.
    The Service has carefully assessed the best scientific and 
commercial information available regarding the past, present, and 
future threats faced by this species in this determination. This 
species does not appear to be threatened throughout all or a 
significant portion of its range or likely to become so in the 
foreseeable future. However, given the declines in the southern portion 
of the species' range and the general lack of population trend data for 
the remainder of its range, the Service will include the longfin smelt 
in category 2 of the next notice of review for animals.
    Though the petition was not limited to a portion of the species' 
range, the petitioner focused on the resident longfin smelt in the 
Sacramento-San Joaquin River estuary population. In telephone 
conversations, the petitioner indicated that he was most interested in 
a population listing. Longfin smelt numbers in this estuary have 
declined by 90 percent since 1984 and by 50 percent annually since 
1987.
    The Service has listed vertebrate population segments where the 
entity being listed represented the entire coterminous United States 
population (e.g., marbled murrelet, grizzly bear). Some reproductively 
isolated (or nearly so) vertebrate population segments that are clearly 
important to the conservation of an entire species have also been 
listed under the Act (e.g., Mojave population of the desert tortoise, 
coastal population of the western snowy plover).
    Although the longfin smelt reportedly is unable to swim between 
estuaries (Moyle, pers. comm., 1993), unverified reports of offshore 
collections exist (Quirollo, pers. comm., 1993; Wing, pers. comm., 
1993). Furthermore, the current distribution is thought to be the 
result of movements between estuaries that took place during the 
Pleistocene when lower sea levels reportedly would have enlarged 
estuaries along the Pacific coast and shortened the inter-estuarian 
distances (Moyle, pers. comm., 1993). Though geographically removed 
from the closest known extirpated or declining population (300 miles 
from the Eel River in California), this isolation does not necessarily 
indicate that the Sacramento-San Joaquin River estuary population is 
significant to a species that has a range of more than 1,900 miles. In 
addition, electrophoretic analysis revealed that the accumulated number 
of codon substitutions per locus (i.e., Nei's genetic distance) since 
the time of separation of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River estuary 
population and the longfin population in Lake Washington, Washington, 
connected to Puget Sound via a system of locks, has been small (0.005 
according to Stanley et al., submitted to Copeia). Thus, these 
populations, separated by approximately 1,000 miles, have genetically 
diverged only slightly since their separation.
    The Sacramento-San Joaquin River estuary is clearly an important 
and significant wetland ecosystem. The longfin smelt formerly was the 
fourth most abundant fish in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River estuary; 
however, the role of this declining species in the estuary today is 
unknown.
    Based on this evaluation the Service has determined that the 
listing of the longfin smelt under the Act is not warranted at this 
time. The listing of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River estuary 
population of the longfin smelt is also not warranted at this time.

References

    A complete list of references used in the preparation of this 
finding is available from the Associate Manager--Endangered Species, 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon (see ADDRESSES 
section).

Authority

    The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act (16 
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, and Transportation.

    Dated: December 22, 1993.
Richard N. Smith,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 94-92 Filed 1-5-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P