[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 110 (Thursday, June 8, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30263-30264]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-13965]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 227

[I.D. 042795A]


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

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of petition finding; request for information.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS has received a petition to list chinook salmon 
(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) throughout its range in California, Oregon, 
Washington, and Idaho, and to designate critical habitat under the 
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA). The petition presents substantial 
scientific information indicating that the request for listing may be 
warranted. Therefore, NMFS is initiating a status review to determine 
if the petitioned action is warranted. To ensure that the review is 
comprehensive, NMFS is soliciting information and data regarding this 
action. Information received during the comment period for this status 
review will be used in NMFS' ongoing review of West Coast chinook 
salmon populations.

DATES: Comments and information must be received by August 7, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the petition and comments regarding 
the species populations in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho should be 
submitted to Dr. Jacqueline Wyland, Chief, Environmental and Technical 
Services Division, NMFS, 525 NE Oregon Street, Suite 500, Portland, OR 
97232. Comments regarding species populations in California should be 
submitted to James H. Lecky, Chief, Protected Species Management 
Division, NMFS, Southwest Region, 501 W. Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long 
Beach, CA 90802-4213.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Garth Griffin, 503-231-2005; Craig 
Wingert, 310-980-4021; or Marta Nammack, 301-713-1401.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Section 4 of the ESA contains provisions allowing interested 
persons to petition the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of 
Commerce (Secretary) to add a species to or remove a species from the 
List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and to designate critical 
habitat. Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA requires that, to the maximum 
extent practicable, within 90 days after receiving such a petition, the 
Secretary make a finding whether the petition presents substantial 
scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned 
action may be warranted.

Petition Received

    On February 1, 1995, the Secretary received a petition from the 
Oregon Natural Resources Council (ONRC) and Richard K. Nawa to list 
chinook salmon throughout its range in California, Oregon, Washington, 
and Idaho, and to designate critical habitat under the ESA. The 
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), makes a finding that 
the petition presents substantial scientific information indicating 
that a listing may be warranted based on the criteria specified in 50 
CFR 424.14(b)(2), and based on evidence presented in the petition that 
the petitioned populations may qualify as ``species'' under the ESA, in 
accordance with NMFS' Policy on Applying the Definition of Species 
under the Endangered Species Act to Pacific Salmon (56 FR 58612, 
November 20, 1991). Under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA, this finding 
requires that a review of the status of chinook salmon populations in 
California, Oregon, [[Page 30264]] Washington, and Idaho be conducted 
to determine if the petitioned action is warranted. Information 
received during this status review will be used in NMFS' ongoing review 
of West Coast chinook salmon populations (59 FR 46808, September 12, 
1994).

Listing Factors and Basis for Determination

    Under section 4(a)(1) of the ESA, a species can be determined to be 
endangered or threatened for any of the following reasons: (1) Present 
or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat 
or range; (2) overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, 
or educational purposes; (3) disease or predation; (4) inadequacy of 
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (5) other natural or manmade factors 
affecting its continued existence. In addition, under section 4(b)(7) 
of the ESA, the Secretary may at any time issue an emergency regulation 
if there exists a significant risk to the well-being of the species. In 
such a case, the Secretary must publish a Federal Register notice 
detailing the reasons for an emergency listing. Listing determinations 
are made solely on the best scientific and commercial data available.

Information Solicited

    To ensure that the chinook salmon status review is complete and is 
based on the best available scientific and commercial data, NMFS is 
soliciting information and comments concerning: (1) Whether or not the 
populations qualify as ``species'' under the ESA in accordance with 
NMFS' Policy on Applying the Definition of Species Under the Endangered 
Species Act (56 FR 58612, November 20, 1991); and (2) whether or not 
the populations are endangered or threatened based on the above listing 
criteria. Specifically, NMFS is soliciting information in the following 
areas: Influence of historical and present hatchery fish releases on 
naturally spawning populations of chinook salmon, separation of 
hatchery and natural chinook salmon escapement, alteration of chinook 
salmon freshwater and marine habitats, disease epizootiology of chinook 
salmon, age structure of chinook salmon populations, migration timing 
and behavior of juvenile and adult chinook salmon, and interactions of 
chinook salmon with other salmonids. This information should address 
all chinook salmon populations in California, Oregon, Washington, and 
Idaho. NMFS is also soliciting information regarding factors which have 
contributed to the decline of west coast chinook salmon populations, 
and any efforts being made to protect this species. In conducting this 
status review, NMFS will consider information received in response to a 
very similar request for information published in the Federal Register 
(59 FR 46808, September 12, 1994) in conjunction with NMFS' decision to 
conduct a review of West Coast chinook salmon populations. 
Consequently, it is not necessary for parties to submit the same 
information for this request. Copies of the petition are available (see 
ADDRESSES).

Critical Habitat

    NMFS is also requesting information on areas that may qualify as 
critical habitat for California, Oregon, Washington, and Idaho 
populations of chinook salmon. Areas that include the physical and 
biological features essential to the recovery of the species should be 
identified. Areas outside the present range should also be identified 
if such areas are essential to the recovery of the species. Essential 
features should include, but are not limited to: (1) Space for 
individual and population growth, and for normal behavior; (2) food, 
water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological 
requirements; (3) cover or shelter; (4) sites for reproduction and 
rearing of offspring; and (5) habitats that are protected from 
disturbance or are representative of the historic geographical and 
ecological distributions of the species.
    For areas potentially qualifying as critical habitat, NMFS is 
requesting information describing: (1) The activities that affect the 
area or could be affected by the designation, and (2) the economic 
costs and benefits of additional requirements of management measures 
likely to result from the designation.
    The economic cost to be considered in the critical habitat 
designation under the ESA is the probable economic impact of the 
(critical habitat) designation upon proposed or ongoing activities (50 
CFR 424.19). NMFS must consider the incremental costs specifically 
resulting from a critical habitat designation that are above the 
economic effects attributable to listing the species. Economic effects 
attributable to listing include actions resulting from section 7 
consultations under the ESA to avoid jeopardy to the species and from 
the taking prohibitions under section 9 of the ESA. Comments concerning 
economic impacts should distinguish the costs of listing from the 
incremental costs that can be directly attributed to the designation of 
specific areas as critical habitat.
    Data, information, and comments should include: (1) Supporting 
documentation such as maps, bibliographic references, or reprints of 
pertinent publications; and (2) the person's name, address, and 
association, institution, or business.

    Dated: June 2, 1995.
William W. Fox, Jr.,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 95-13965 Filed 6-7-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F