[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 147 (Wednesday, July 31, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46322-46325]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18444]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Docket No. 130702582-3582-01]
RIN 0648-XC747


Endangered and Threatened Species; 90-Day Finding on Petition To 
Delist the Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast Evolutionarily 
Significant Unit of Coho Salmon Under the Endangered Species Act

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

ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition finding.

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

SUMMARY: We, NMFS, announce a 90-day finding on a petition to delist 
the Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast (SONCC) Evolutionarily 
Significant Unit (ESU) of coho salmon

[[Page 46323]]

(Oncorhynchus kisutch) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). We find 
that the petition does not present substantial scientific or commercial 
information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the petition are available at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/ or upon request from the Assistant Regional 
Administrator, Protected Resources Division, NMFS, Southwest Regional 
Office, 501 West Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Craig Wingert, NMFS, Southwest Region 
Office, (562) 980-4021; or Dwayne Meadows, Office of Protected 
Resources, (301) 427-8403.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)) requires 
that we make a finding as to whether a petition to list, delist, or 
reclassify a species presents substantial scientific or commercial 
information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. The 
Secretary has delegated the authority for these actions to the NOAA 
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries. ESA implementing regulations 
define ``substantial information'' as the ``amount of information that 
would lead a reasonable person to believe that the measure proposed in 
the petition may be warranted'' (50 CFR 424.14(b)(1)). In determining 
whether a petition presents substantial scientific or commercial 
information to list or delist a species, we take into account 
information submitted with, and referenced in, the petition and all 
other information readily available in our files. To the maximum extent 
practicable, this finding is to be made within 90 days of the receipt 
of the petition, followed by prompt publication in the Federal Register 
(16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)). ESA implementing regulations state that a 
species may be delisted only if the best scientific and commercial data 
available substantiate that it is neither endangered nor threatened for 
one or more of the following reasons: the species is extinct; the 
species is recovered; or subsequent investigations show the best 
scientific or commercial data available when the species was listed, or 
the interpretation of such data, were in error (50 CFR 424.11(d)).
    On May 30, 2013, we received a petition from the Siskiyou County 
Water Users Association (SCWUA) requesting that we delist the 
threatened Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast (SONCC) coho 
salmon Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) pursuant to the ESA. This 
ESU includes all naturally spawning populations of coho salmon in 
coastal streams between Cape Blanco, Oregon and Punta Gorda, 
California, as well as three artificially produced hatchery stocks (70 
FR 37160; June 28, 2005). The SCWUA has previously submitted several 
petitions to us requesting that we delist this ESU. We analyzed each of 
those petitions and found they did not present substantial scientific 
or commercial information indicating that delisting of the ESU may be 
warranted. Negative 90-day findings were published for these petitions 
on October 7, 2011 (76 FR 62375), January 11, 2012 (77 FR 1668), and 
September 10, 2012 (77 FR 55458).

SCWUA Petition

    In this new petition, the SCWUA asserts that our original listing 
of the SONCC coho salmon ESU as threatened under the ESA (62 FR 24588; 
May 6, 1997) was unlawful, arbitrary and capricious because the primary 
causative factor for the low abundance of coho salmon at the time of 
listing in 1997 was poor ocean conditions in the North Pacific Ocean, 
rather than human-caused activities (e.g., dams, agriculture, etc.). 
The SCWUA petition bases the assertion that our 1997 listing 
determination for this ESU was in error because it did not consider a 
1997 scientific paper (Mantua et al., 1997) that describes an 
interdecadal climate oscillation pattern in the Pacific Ocean (named by 
the authors as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation or PDO) and its impact 
on salmon abundance in the North Pacific. The SCWUA petition does not 
provide a summary of the actual Mantua et al. (1997) paper, but does 
provide an internet link to an article on our Northwest Fisheries 
Science Center (NWFSC) Web site that summarizes research conducted by 
Dr. Nathan Mantua and his colleagues about the PDO and its relationship 
to the survival and abundance of salmon populations in the Pacific 
Northwest. A key point made in the NWFSC web article is that the 
listing of many salmon stocks as threatened and endangered under the 
ESA in the 1990s coincided with a prolonged period of poor ocean 
conditions and low salmon abundance. The SCWUA petition simply repeats 
verbatim the article on the NWFSC Web site with no analysis or 
interpretation of how ocean conditions or other factors (e.g., habitat 
degradation, hatchery practices, harvest, etc.) influence the abundance 
of coho salmon populations, or why the SONCC coho salmon ESU should be 
delisted. The SCWUA petition implies, however, that we did not consider 
information about the relationship between ocean conditions and salmon 
abundance when we listed the SONCC coho salmon ESU as threatened under 
the ESA in 1997. The SCWUA petition does not provide any information on 
the status (i.e., past or present information on abundance or 
distribution) of the SONCC coho salmon ESU, any new information or 
analysis of the threats to the ESU, or any analysis of why the ESU 
should be delisted based on a consideration of the ESA section 4(a)(1) 
listing factors.

Previous Reviews of SONCC Coho Salmon ESU Under the ESA

    We have evaluated the status of the SONCC coho salmon ESU under the 
ESA on three separate occasions (62 FR 24588, May 6, 1997; 70 FR 37160, 
June 28, 2005; and 76 FR 50447, August 15, 2011). As part of each 
review, we fully considered the effects of ocean productivity on coho 
salmon populations in this ESU based on the best available information 
at the time. The following discussion provides an overview of our past 
listing decisions for this ESU, with special emphasis on how ocean 
productivity was considered, including consideration of Mantua et al., 
1997.
    We published our original determination to list the SONCC coho 
salmon ESU as threatened on May 6, 1997 (62 FR 24588). In this 
determination, we concluded that coho salmon populations in this ESU 
were very depressed from historic levels, that anthropogenic threats to 
these populations were numerous and varied (e.g., habitat degradation, 
harvest, and artificial propagation) and that anthropogenic threats 
likely exacerbated the adverse effects of natural environmental 
variability caused by drought, flooding and ocean productivity 
conditions. In our analysis of factors affecting the ESU, we concluded 
that long-term trends in rainfall and marine productivity associated 
with atmospheric conditions in the North Pacific Ocean likely had a 
major influence on coho salmon production, but that it was unclear 
whether the climactic conditions causing population declines 
represented a long-term change that would continue to adversely affect 
coho salmon stocks in the future or whether the conditions were short-
term and could be expected to reverse themselves in the near future. 
Mantua et al. (1997), which described the PDO phenomenon and its 
relationship to abundance of salmon populations in the North Pacific, 
was published after our review was completed, and so we did not 
consider it in our analysis of whether the ESU

[[Page 46324]]

was threatened or endangered. However, we did consider many other 
sources of information regarding the relationship between ocean 
productivity in the North Pacific and salmon population abundance in 
the analysis of the ESA section 4(a)(1) listing factors that informed 
our final listing determination. In our review of the effects of ocean 
productivity and El Nino events on salmon populations, we found that 
several researchers had suggested mechanisms linking atmospheric and 
ocean physics and ocean fish populations (e.g., Rogers, 1984; 
Nickelson, 1986; and several others) and that others had tried to 
correlate the production and survival of salmon with environmental 
factors (e.g., Pearcy, 1992; Neeley, 1994). We also cited studies that 
had reported on the relationship between salmon survival and sea 
surface temperatures and salinity during the first few months that 
salmonids are at sea (Vernon, 1958; Holtby and Scrivener, 1989; Holtby 
et al., 1990) and others that had found relationships between salmon 
production and sea surface temperatures (Francis and Sibley, 1991; 
Roger, 1984; Cooney et al., 1993). We also cited studies that had tried 
to link salmon production to oceanic and atmospheric climate change 
(Beamish and Bouillon, 1993; Ward, 1993) and reported that Francis and 
Sibley (1991) and Francis et al. (1992) had developed a model linking 
decadal-scale atmospheric variability and salmon production. Finally, 
we cited studies by Scarnecchia (1981) that suggested nearshore ocean 
conditions during the spring and summer along the California coast may 
dramatically affect year class strength of salmon populations from this 
area and by Bottom et al. (1986) that suggested coho salmon populations 
along the California and Oregon coasts might be especially sensitive to 
upwelling patterns because the region lacks extensive bays and 
estuaries such as those found further north.
    In response to the 1991 U.S. District Court decision in the Alsea 
Valley Alliance v. Evans, 161 F.Supp.2d 1154 (D. Or. 2001), appeal 
dismissed, 358 F.3d 1181 (9th Cir. 2004), and several petitions, we 
conducted updated status reviews of all west coast salmon and steelhead 
ESUs, including the SONCC coho salmon ESU, in the early 2000s (Good et 
al., 2005). Following completion of this review and development of a 
new policy for considering hatchery populations in our listing 
decisions, we published listing determinations in 2005 for 16 ESUs of 
west coast salmon, including the SONCC coho salmon ESU (70 FR 37160; 
June 28, 2005). We determined that this ESU continued to warrant 
listing as threatened. In the proposed listing determination for west 
coast salmon and steelhead ESUs (69 FR 33102; June 14, 2004), we 
specifically reviewed marine productivity and its relationship to the 
abundance of salmon populations. We concluded there was evidence 
demonstrating that recurring, decadal scale patterns of ocean-
atmosphere climate variability in the North Pacific (Mantua et al., 
1997; Zhang et al., 1997) were correlated with salmon population 
abundance in the Pacific Northwest and Alaska (Hare et al., 1999; 
Mueter et al., 2002) and that survival rates in the marine environment 
are strong determinants of salmon and steelhead population abundance. 
In addition, we recognized that many salmon and steelhead populations 
in the Pacific Northwest had experienced low ocean survival during a 
period of unfavorable ocean conditions from approximately 1977-1997 and 
that there was evidence of an important change in the PDO starting in 
1998 that likely resulted in increased salmon survival and population 
abundance through the early 2000s. Although we found that the 
relationship between ocean productivity, ocean survival and salmon 
population abundance appeared to be well established, we concluded that 
our ability to predict future changes in ocean-climate regimes and 
their influence on salmon productivity and population abundance was 
limited. For this reason, we were reluctant to make any assumptions or 
predictions about the future behavior of ocean-climate regimes or their 
effects on the distribution and abundance of salmon populations in our 
listing determinations. Although we recognized that salmon populations 
would likely respond positively to favorable ocean-climate regimes and 
increased ocean productivity, we felt such population increases might 
only be temporary and that they could mask the adverse impacts of 
underlying threats such as habitat degradation and loss, harvest 
impacts and adverse hatchery impacts, all of which are recognized as 
threats to west coast salmon and steelhead ESUs, including the SONCC 
coho salmon ESU. We concluded our analysis by indicating that our 
principal concern was not if and how salmon and steelhead populations 
would respond to favorable ocean conditions, but rather how they would 
respond during periods of poor ocean survival when their freshwater and 
estuarine habitat was degraded.
    In 2011 we completed a 5-year review of the SONCC coho salmon ESU 
that concluded its status had worsened because of continued low 
population abundance levels, ongoing anthropogenic threats, and other 
factors including poor ocean conditions (Williams et al., 2011; 76 FR 
50447, August 15, 2011). Although the 5-year review did not 
specifically cite Mantua et al. (1997), it did cite and rely upon Good 
et al. (2005), which discussed that paper. In addition, we specifically 
considered the effects of ocean conditions on marine survival and 
abundance of coho salmon in this ESU as part of our analysis of the ESA 
section 4(a)(1) listing factors. Our analysis of ocean conditions 
indicated that marine survival for coho salmon from the Cole Rivers 
hatchery in Oregon varied substantially between 2000 and 2006. Survival 
averaged approximately 2.2 percent from 2000 to 2004, but was extremely 
low for the 2005 and 2006 broodyears (0.05-0.07 percent). We found that 
strong upwelling in 2007 resulted in better ocean conditions 
(MacFarlane et al., 2008; Peterson et al., 2010) and that marine 
conditions were also favorable in 2008 and 2009 (NWFSC, 2011). However, 
despite the favorable ocean conditions in 2007 and 2008, we also 
determined that 2005 and 2006 broodyears experienced poor marine 
survival. We concluded that improved ocean conditions had not resulted 
in improved marine survival and increased abundance of coho salmon 
populations as expected, and that poor marine survival had contributed 
to recent population declines, which were a significant threat to the 
ESU.

Petition Finding

    We carefully analyzed the information in the SCWUA petition and our 
record associated with past listing determinations for the SONCC coho 
salmon ESU. Based on this review, we conclude that our listing 
determinations for the SONCC coho salmon ESU have fully evaluated the 
relationship between ocean conditions, the PDO, and coho salmon 
abundance using the best scientific and commercial data available and 
that the SCWUA petition does not provide any additional substantial 
scientific or commercial information that we ignored or did not 
consider in our listing determinations. The SCWUA petition does not 
present any additional substantial scientific or commercial information 
related to whether the SONCC coho salmon ESU is recovered; extinct; or 
the best scientific or commercial data available when the species was 
listed, or the interpretation

[[Page 46325]]

of such data, were in error. Moreover, none of the information in the 
petition modifies the underlying scientific basis for our original 
determination to list the SONCC coho salmon ESU or causes us to re-
evaluate our analysis of delisting petitions that were previously 
submitted by the petitioner. Accordingly, we find that the SCWUA 
petition does not present substantial scientific or commercial 
information indicating that the petitioned action to delist the SONCC 
coho salmon ESU may be warranted.

References Cited

    A complete list of the references used in this finding is available 
upon request (see ADDRESSES).

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

    Dated: July 26, 2013.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Performing the functions and 
duties of the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, 
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-18444 Filed 7-30-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P