[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 63 (Tuesday, April 3, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15865-15866]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-6173]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[I.D. 032207D]


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Notice of 
Availability of the Status Review Report for Atlantic Sturgeon in the 
United States

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

ACTION: Notice of Availability of the Status Review Report for Atlantic 
Sturgeon in the United States.

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

SUMMARY: We, NMFS, convened a Status Review Team (SRT) consisting of 
Federal biologists from NMFS, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). The SRT has completed a Status Review 
Report of Atlantic sturgeon in the United States. This notice makes 
this report available to the public in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Requests for a copy of the Status Review Report should be 
addressed to Marcia Hobbs, NMFS, Northeast Regional Office, Protected 
Resources Division, One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. A copy 
of the Status Review Report can also be downloaded from the following 
web address: http://www.nero.noaa.gov/prot_res/CandidateSpeciesProgram/csr.htm

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim Damon-Randall, NMFS Northeast 
Region, 978-281-9300 ext. 6535, or Dr. Stephania Bolden, NMFS Southeast 
Region,727-824-5312.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On June 2, 1997, we and FWS (jointly, the Services) received a 
petition from the Biodiversity Legal Foundation requesting us to list 
Atlantic sturgeon (Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus), in the United 
States where it continues to exist, as threatened or endangered under 
the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and to designate critical habitat 
within a reasonable period of time following the listing. A notice was 
published in the Federal Register on October 17, 1997, stating the 
Services had determined substantial information existed indicating the 
petitioned action may be warranted (62 FR 54018). The ESA requires the 
Services to make listing determinations based on the best scientific 
and commercial information available after conducting a review of the 
status of species and after taking into account efforts to protect the 
species.
    On September 21, 1998, after completing a comprehensive status 
review, the Services published a 12-month determination in the Federal 
Register announcing that listing was not warranted at that time (63 FR 
50187). On the same date, Atlantic sturgeon were retained on the NMFS 
candidate species list (63 FR 50211; subsequently changed to the 
Species of Concern List (69 FR 19975; April 15, 2004)). Concurrently, 
the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) completed 
Amendment 1 to the 1990 Atlantic Sturgeon Fishery Management Plan that 
imposed a 20-40 year moratorium on all U.S. Atlantic sturgeon fisheries 
until the Atlantic Coast spawning stocks could be restored to a level 
where 20 subsequent year classes of adult females were protected 
(ASMFC, 1998). In 1999, pursuant to section 804(b) of the Atlantic 
Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act (16 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.), 
we followed this action by closing the Exclusive Economic Zone to 
Atlantic sturgeon retention.
    In 2003, we sponsored a workshop with ASMFC and FWS on the ``Status 
and Management of Atlantic Sturgeon'' in Raleigh, North Carolina, to 
discuss the current status of sturgeon along the Atlantic Coast and 
determine what obstacles, if any, were impeding the recovery of 
Atlantic sturgeon (Kahnle et al., 2005). The results of the workshop 
reported ``mixed'' reviews where some populations seemed to be 
recovering while others were declining. Bycatch and habitat degradation 
were noted as possible causes for some population declines.Based on the 
information gathered by the participants during the 2003 workshop on 
Atlantic sturgeon, we decided that a second review of Atlantic sturgeon 
status was needed to determine if listing as threatened or endangered 
under the ESA was warranted. In 2006, we convened a SRT to conduct a 
thorough review of the status of the species.

The 2007 Status Review Report

    On February 23, 2007, the SRT finalized its report on the status of 
Atlantic sturgeon (Status Review for Atlantic Sturgeon (Acipenser 
oxyrinchus oxyrinchus)). The status review report was also reviewed and 
supplemented by eight state and regional experts who provided 
individual expert opinions on the information contained in the status 
review report and provided additional information to ensure the report 
provided the best available data. Lastly, the report was peer reviewed 
by six experts from academia and received favorable reviews. The final 
report incorporates edits and information in light of this peer review 
and the expert reviews. Consistent with the February 7, 1996, joint FWS 
and NMFS Distinct Vertebrate Population Segment Policy (61 FR 4722), 
the SRT concluded that Atlantic sturgeon populations should be divided 
into five distinct population segments (DPSs). The five DPSs were 
named: (1) Gulf of Maine, (2) New York Bight, (3) Chesapeake Bay, (4) 
Carolina, and (5) South Atlantic. These Atlantic sturgeon DPSs were 
discrete because they were markedly separated from each other based on 
physical, genetic, and physiological factors. They were also 
significant to the species because they: (1) were located in a unique 
ecological setting; (2) had unique genetic characteristics; and (3) 
would represent a significant gap in the range of the taxon if any one 
of them were to become extirpated. Canadian populations were considered 
to be discrete from the Gulf of Maine DPS because there were 
significant differences in control of exploitation and regulatory 
mechanism for the populations (i.e., still support a commercial 
fishery). Further support for discreteness between Canadian populations 
and the Gulf of Maine DPS was the marked separation between them based 
on genetic, physiological, and habitat features. Therefore, Canadian 
populations were not included in the Gulf of Maine DPS, and they were 
not considered further in the status review report.
    The SRT evaluated the status of Atlantic sturgeon DPSs by analyzing 
the impacts of the factors listed in section 4(a)(1) of the ESA on each 
subpopulation within each DPS and considering whether the 
subpopulations constituted significant portions of the range of each 
DPS. The SRT identified 15 stressors within these factors and

[[Page 15866]]

summarized their impacts on Atlantic sturgeon using a semi-quantitative 
extinction risk analysis (ERA), similar to that used by other status 
review reports. Of the stressors evaluated, bycatch mortality, water 
quality, lack of adequate state and/or Federal regulatory mechanisms, 
and dredging activities were most often identified as the most 
significant threats to the viability of Atlantic sturgeon 
subpopulations. Additionally, some subpopulations were impacted by 
unique stressors, such as habitat impediments (e.g., Cape Fear and 
Santee-Cooper rivers) and apparent ship strikes (e.g., Delaware and 
James rivers).
    The SRT used the ERA to conclude that three of the five DPSs (New 
York Bight, Chesapeake Bay, and Carolina) were likely (>50 percent 
chance) to become endangered in the foreseeable future, which was 
defined as 20 years. The remaining DPSs (Gulf of Maine and South 
Atlantic) were found to have a moderate risk (<50 percent chance) of 
becoming endangered in the next 20 years. The ERA of these two 
remaining DPSs suggested that the DPSs do not warrant listing, though 
the available science may not be sufficient to allow a full assessment 
of these DPSs.
    Currently, we are considering the information presented in the 
final status review report, the comments from the peer reviewers, and 
the response of the SRT to the peer reviewers to determine if action 
under the ESA is warranted. A decision regarding our listing 
determination will be published in the Federal Register.

Authority

    The authority for this action is the ESA, as amended (16 U.S.C. 
1531 et seq.).

    Dated: March 27, 2007.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E7-6173 Filed 4-2-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S