[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 23, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 33075-33079]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-10891]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Parts 223 and 224

[Docket No. 230517-0132; RTID 0648-XR127]


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife; 90-Day Finding on a Petition 
To List the Smalltail Shark as Threatened or Endangered Under the 
Endangered Species Act

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

ACTION: 90-Day petition finding, request for information, and 
initiation of status review.

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

SUMMARY: We (NMFS) announce a positive 90-day finding on a petition to 
list the smalltail shark (Carcharhinus porosus) as threatened or 
endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The petitioner also 
requests that we designate critical habitat. We find that the petition 
and information readily available in our files present substantial 
scientific or commercial information indicating that listing the 
smalltail shark as threatened or endangered may be warranted. 
Therefore, we are commencing a review of the status of the smalltail 
shark to determine whether listing under the ESA is warranted. To 
support a comprehensive status review, we are soliciting scientific and 
commercial data regarding this species.

DATES: Scientific and commercial data pertinent to the petitioned 
action must be received by July 24, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this document, identified by 
NOAA-NMFS-2023-0031 by the following method:
    Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via 
the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to https://www.regulations.gov and 
enter NOAA-NMFS-2023-0031 in the Search box. Click on the ``Comment'' 
icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
    Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other 
address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, 
may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the 
public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on 
www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying 
information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business 
information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily 
by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous 
comments (enter ``N/A'' in the required fields if you wish to remain 
anonymous).
    Interested persons may obtain a copy of the petition online at the 
NMFS website: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/petitions-awaiting-90-day-findings.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe Heublein, NMFS Southeast Region, 
727-209-5962 or Adam Brame, NMFS Southeast Region, 727-209-5958.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On October 31, 2022, we received a petition from the Center for 
Biological Diversity to list the smalltail shark (Carcharhinus porosus) 
as an endangered or threatened species under the ESA, and to designate 
critical habitat concurrent with the listing. The petition also 
requests that, if we determine the smalltail shark warrants listing as 
a threatened species, we promulgate a protective regulation under 
section 4(d) of the ESA, and requests that we promulgate a regulation 
under section 4(e) of the ESA for species similar in appearance to the 
smalltail shark. The petitioner asserts that fishery overexploitation 
for meat, fins, oil, and other byproducts, in addition to climate 
change, habitat degradation, pollution, inadequacy of regulatory 
mechanisms, and life history characteristics, is driving this species 
towards extinction. Copies of this petition are available from us (see 
ADDRESSES, above).

ESA Statutory and Regulatory Provisions and Evaluation Framework

    Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 
et seq.), requires, to the maximum extent practicable, that within 90 
days of receipt of a petition to list a species as threatened or 
endangered, the Secretary of Commerce make a finding on whether that 
petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information 
indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted, and to promptly 
publish such finding in the Federal Register (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)). 
When we find that substantial scientific or commercial information in a 
petition indicates the petitioned action may be warranted (a ``positive 
90-day finding''), we are required to promptly commence a review of the 
status of the species concerned during which we conduct a comprehensive 
review of the best available scientific and commercial information. In 
such cases, we conclude the review with a finding as to whether, in 
fact, the petitioned action is warranted within 12 months of receipt of 
the petition. Because the finding at the 12-month stage is based on a 
more thorough review of the available information, as compared to the 
narrow scope of review at the 90-day stage, a ``may be warranted'' 
finding does not prejudge the outcome of the status review.
    Under the ESA, a listing determination must address a species, 
which is defined to also include subspecies and, for any vertebrate 
species, any distinct population segment (DPS) that interbreeds when 
mature (16 U.S.C. 1532(16)). A joint NMFS-U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service (USFWS) (jointly, ``the Services'') policy clarifies the 
agencies' interpretation of the phrase ``distinct population segment'' 
for the purposes of listing, delisting, and reclassifying a species 
under the ESA (61 FR 4722; February 7, 1996). A species, subspecies, or 
DPS is ``endangered'' if it is in danger of extinction throughout all 
or a significant portion of its range, and ``threatened'' if it is 
likely to become endangered within

[[Page 33076]]

the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its 
range (ESA Sections 3(6) and 3(20), respectively, 16 U.S.C. 1532(6) and 
(20)). Pursuant to the ESA and our implementing regulations, we 
determine whether species are threatened or endangered based on any one 
or a combination of the following five section 4(a)(1) factors: the 
present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of 
habitat or range; overutilization for commercial, recreational, 
scientific, or educational purposes; disease or predation; inadequacy 
of existing regulatory mechanisms to address identified threats; or any 
other natural or manmade factors affecting the species' existence (16 
U.S.C. 1533(a)(1), 50 CFR 424.11(c)).
    ESA-implementing regulations issued jointly by the Services (50 CFR 
424.14(h)(1)(i)) define ``substantial scientific or commercial 
information'' in the context of reviewing a petition to list, delist, 
or reclassify a species as credible scientific or commercial 
information in support of the petition's claims such that a reasonable 
person conducting an impartial scientific review would conclude that 
the action proposed in the petition may be warranted. Conclusions drawn 
in the petition without the support of credible scientific or 
commercial information will not be considered substantial information.
    Our determination as to whether the petition provides substantial 
scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned 
action may be warranted will depend in part on the degree to which the 
petition includes the following types of information: (1) information 
on current population status and trends and estimates of current 
population sizes and distributions, both in captivity and the wild, if 
available; (2) identification of the factors under section 4(a)(1) of 
the ESA that may affect the species and where these factors are acting 
upon the species; (3) whether and to what extent any or all of the 
factors alone or in combination identified in section 4(a)(1) of the 
ESA may cause the species to be an endangered species or threatened 
species (i.e., the species is currently in danger of extinction or is 
likely to become so within the foreseeable future), and, if so, how 
high in magnitude and how imminent the threats to the species and its 
habitat are; (4) information on adequacy of regulatory protections and 
effectiveness of conservation activities by States as well as other 
parties, that have been initiated or that are ongoing, that may protect 
the species or its habitat; and (5) a complete, balanced representation 
of the relevant facts, including information that may contradict claims 
in the petition. See 50 CFR 424.14(d).
    If the petitioner provides supplemental information before the 
initial finding is made and states that it is part of the petition, the 
new information, along with the previously submitted information, is 
treated as a new petition that supersedes the original petition, and 
the statutory timeframes will begin when such supplemental information 
is received. See 50 CFR 424.14(g).
    We may also consider information readily available at the time the 
determination is made. See 50 CFR 424.14(h)(1)(ii). We are not required 
to consider any supporting materials cited by the petitioner if the 
petitioner does not provide electronic or hard copies, to the extent 
permitted by U.S. copyright law, or appropriate excerpts or quotations 
from those materials (e.g., publications, maps, reports, or letters 
from authorities). See 50 CFR 424.14(c)(6).
    The substantial scientific or commercial information standard must 
be applied in light of any prior reviews or findings we have made on 
the listing status of the species that is the subject of the petition. 
Where we have already conducted a finding on, or review of, the listing 
status of that species (whether in response to a petition or on our own 
initiative), we will evaluate any petition received thereafter seeking 
to list, delist, or reclassify that species to determine whether a 
reasonable person conducting an impartial scientific review would 
conclude that the action proposed in the petition may be warranted 
despite the previous review or finding. Where the prior review resulted 
in a final agency action--such as a final listing determination, 90-day 
not-substantial finding, or 12-month not-warranted finding--a 
petitioned action will generally not be considered to present 
substantial scientific and commercial information indicating that the 
action may be warranted unless the petition provides new information or 
analysis not previously considered. See 50 CFR 424.14(h)(1)(iii).
    At the 90-day finding stage, we do not conduct additional research, 
and we do not solicit information from parties outside the agency to 
help us in evaluating the petition. We will accept the petitioners' 
sources and characterizations of the information presented if they 
appear to be based on accepted scientific principles, unless we have 
specific information in our files that indicates the petition's 
information is incorrect, unreliable, obsolete, or otherwise irrelevant 
to the requested action. Information that is susceptible to more than 
one interpretation or that is contradicted by other available 
information will not be dismissed at the 90-day finding stage, so long 
as it is reliable and a reasonable person conducting an impartial 
scientific review would conclude it supports the petitioners' 
assertions. In other words, conclusive information indicating the 
species may meet the ESA's requirements for listing is not required to 
make a positive 90-day finding. We will not conclude that a lack of 
specific information alone necessitates a negative 90-day finding if a 
reasonable person conducting an impartial scientific review would 
conclude that the unknown information itself suggests the species may 
be at risk of extinction presently or within the foreseeable future.
    To make a 90-day finding on a petition to list a species, we 
evaluate whether the petition presents substantial scientific or 
commercial information indicating the subject species may be either 
threatened or endangered, as defined by the ESA. First, we evaluate 
whether the information presented in the petition, in light of the 
information readily available in our files, indicates that the 
petitioned entity constitutes a ``species'' eligible for listing under 
the ESA. Next, we evaluate whether the information indicates that the 
species is at risk of extinction such that listing, delisting, or 
reclassification may be warranted; this may be indicated in information 
expressly discussing the species' status and trends, or in information 
describing impacts and threats to the species. We evaluate any 
information on specific demographic factors pertinent to evaluating 
extinction risk for the species (e.g., population abundance and trends, 
productivity, spatial structure, age structure, sex ratio, diversity, 
current and historical range, habitat integrity or fragmentation), and 
the potential contribution of identified demographic risks to 
extinction risk for the species. We then evaluate the potential links 
between these demographic risks and the causative impacts and threats 
identified in section 4(a)(1).
    Information presented on impacts or threats should be specific to 
the species and should reasonably suggest that one or more of these 
factors may be operative threats that act or have acted on the species 
to the point that it may warrant protection under the ESA. Broad 
statements about generalized threats to the species, or identification 
of factors that could negatively impact a species, do not constitute 
substantial

[[Page 33077]]

information indicating that listing may be warranted. We look for 
information indicating that not only is the particular species exposed 
to a factor, but that the species may be responding in a negative 
fashion; then we assess the potential significance of that negative 
response.
    Many petitions identify risk classifications made by 
nongovernmental organizations, such as the International Union for 
Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the American Fisheries Society, or 
NatureServe, as evidence of extinction risk for a species. Risk 
classifications by such organizations or made under other Federal or 
state statutes may be informative, but such classification alone will 
not alone provide sufficient basis for a positive 90-day finding under 
the ESA. For example, as explained by NatureServe, its assessments of a 
species' conservation status do not constitute a recommendation by 
NatureServe for listing under the U.S. Endangered Species Act because 
NatureServe assessments have different criteria, evidence requirements, 
purposes and taxonomic coverage than government lists of endangered and 
threatened species, and therefore these two types of lists should not 
be expected to coincide (https://explorer.natureserve.org/AboutTheData/DataTypes/ConservationStatusCategories). Additionally, species 
classifications under IUCN and the ESA are not equivalent; data 
standards, criteria used to evaluate species, and treatment of 
uncertainty are also not necessarily the same. Thus, when a petition 
cites such classifications, we will evaluate the source of information 
that the classification is based upon in light of the standards on 
extinction risk and impacts or threats discussed above.

Smalltail Shark Species Description

    Smalltail sharks (C. porosus) are members of the ground shark 
family (Carcharhinidae). These relatively small sharks--reaching a 
maximum length of about 5 ft (1.5 m, Compagno 1984)--are generally 
found in estuaries and nearshore waters of the western Atlantic Ocean 
from Brazil to the northern Gulf of Mexico, though they are generally 
absent throughout the Caribbean Islands (Compagno 1984). They tend to 
associate with the bottom and are generally found over mud substrates 
(Compagno 1984). Smalltail sharks have large eyes, a long, pointed 
snout and lack an interdorsal ridge. Uniquely, the origin of their 
second dorsal fin is found above the midpoint of the anal fin. Their 
coloration is gray on the dorsal surface and white on the ventral.
    Smalltail sharks are opportunistic predators and feed on bony 
fishes and invertebrates in shallow waters to depths of 275 ft (84 m). 
The smalltail shark is a relatively slow-growing viviparous shark with 
reproduction occurring year-round and a maximum litter size of nine 
embryos (Lessa et al. 1999). Both male and female smalltail sharks 
mature at approximately six years of age and maximum age has been 
documented as 12 years (Lessa and Santana 1998).

Analysis of the Petition

    We first evaluated the information presented in the petition. We 
find that the petitioners presented the information required in 50 CFR 
424.14(c) and sufficient information under 424.14(d) to allow us to 
review the petition. The petition contains information on the smalltail 
shark, including the species description, distribution, habitat, 
population status and trends, and factors contributing to the species' 
status. Further, the petitioner asserts that the smalltail shark is 
impacted by overexploitation, climate change, habitat degradation, 
pollution, and its life history characteristics and clearly stated the 
petitioned action requested of listing the smalltail shark as 
threatened or endangered. Finally, the petition included a discussion 
of the smalltail shark's taxonomy, and we conclude that the petitioned 
organism is a ``species'' eligible for further consideration of 
listing.

Population Status and Trends

    The petition separates discussion of abundance and population 
trends into two regions: Western Central Atlantic (i.e., United States 
Gulf of Mexico, Southern Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean) and Brazil 
(i.e., Northern Brazil, and Eastern and Southern Brazil). Overall, the 
petitioner states the global smalltail shark population has declined by 
more than 80 percent over three generations (27 years).
    Based on information readily available in our files, observations 
of the smalltail shark are rare in U.S. waters and appear restricted to 
sporadic interactions with fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico. Smalltail 
shark landing records were identified in U.S. fisheries reports from 
the Gulf of Mexico from 1984 to 2015, with records present in 14 years 
during this time period (NOAA Fisheries Southeast Fisheries Science 
Center, unpublished data). The petitioner references trend data 
involving other shark species and environmental modeling that estimates 
a reduction in catch probabilities of smalltail shark in the United 
States Gulf of Mexico. Information presented in the petition and 
available in our files do not indicate a clear trend in smalltail shark 
abundance in the United States Gulf of Mexico.
    The petitioner notes a reduction in smalltail shark abundance and 
landings in the Southern Gulf of Mexico based in part on limited 
landings and anecdotal data. In the Caribbean (the Central and South 
American coasts), the smalltail shark has been documented as a 
significant proportion of shark catch in some countries with varying 
abundance and trend data (Pollum et al. 2020). Overall, information 
presented in the petition and available in our files do not indicate a 
clear trend in abundance of smalltail sharks in the Western Central 
Atlantic Ocean.
    Available commercial fishing catch and landings data indicate that 
Brazil is the core of the smalltail shark distribution. Pollum et al. 
(2020) summarized information from multiple fisheries in Northern 
Brazil in the 1980s and 1990s where smalltail shark was the most 
commonly caught elasmobranch. Pollum et al. (2020) also noted that 
smalltail shark comprised up to 70% of catch weight in artisanal 
gillnet fisheries in Northern Brazil in the 1980s. The petitioner 
provides multiple lines of evidence, including catch rates, demographic 
modelling, and landings, suggesting a significant population decline 
(85-90% decline over 27 years) in this region. Furthermore, no recent 
recovery has been observed as ongoing fishing mortality is estimated to 
exceed population growth rates (Feitosa et al. 2020; Santana et al. 
2020). In Eastern and Southern Brazil, the petitioner notes that the 
smalltail shark was common in the 1970s and 1980s and observations and 
catch records have become increasingly rare or absent since that time. 
The petitioner notes range reduction and localized extinction of the 
smalltail shark throughout Brazil.
    Information presented in the petition and available in our files 
suggests a potential significant population decline and range 
contraction of the smalltail shark in Brazilian waters. Thus, the 
petition provides credible information that the species' current 
population status and trends may warrant the petitioned action.

Information on Impacts and Threats to the Species

    Next, we evaluated whether the petition, viewed in context of 
information readily available in our files, credibly suggests that one 
or more of the factors listed in ESA section 4(a)(1) may pose a risk of 
extinction for the smalltail shark. The petition states

[[Page 33078]]

that smalltail shark is threatened or endangered because of four of the 
five factors in section 4(a)(1): present or threatened destruction, 
modification, or curtailment of habitat or range; overutilization for 
commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; 
inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; and other natural or 
manmade factors affecting its continued existence. In the following 
sections, we summarize the information presented in the petition and in 
our files to determine whether the petitioned action may be warranted.

The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of 
the Smalltail Shark's Habitat or Range

    The petitioner includes a description of general threats to marine 
biodiversity and elasmobranchs (e.g., coastal development, agricultural 
and urban runoff) in Brazil, the Caribbean, and the U.S. Gulf of 
Mexico. The petition includes a description of the specific threat of 
contaminant exposure for smalltail sharks. Harmful levels of 
contaminants were documented in smalltail shark tissue from Trinidad 
and Tobago and Brazil (Mohammed and Mohammed 2017; Wosnick et al. 
2021). The petition, however, did not provide any evidence of a decline 
in the species due to threats to habitat or contaminant exposure. 
Overall, the petition fails to present substantial scientific or 
commercial information indicating that the present or threatened 
destruction, modification, or curtailment of habitat or range is a 
threat to the smalltail shark, nor do we have such information readily 
available in our files.

Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or 
Educational Purposes

    The petition states overutilization for fishing as the primary 
cause of the smalltail shark decline. The petition primarily includes 
discussion of the impacts of direct harvest of smalltail shark in 
Brazil for fin and meat trade, but does not specifically discuss 
overutilization of smalltail sharks in fisheries outside of Brazil. 
Impacts of fishing on the smalltail shark are summarized above in the 
Population Status and Trends section, and this information suggests a 
major population decline in Brazil due to fishing mortality. Therefore, 
we find that the petition presents substantial scientific information 
indicating that overutilization for commercial, recreational, 
scientific, or educational purposes is a threat to the smalltail shark.

Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms for Smalltail Shark 
Protection

    The petition includes discussion of smalltail shark fisheries 
regulations by country. In the United States, harvest of smalltail 
sharks is prohibited in state- and Federally-managed fisheries. Mexico 
and Colombia do not have specific prohibitions or fisheries regulations 
pertaining to smalltail sharks. As summarized above in the Population 
Status and Trends section, population abundance and trends of the 
smalltail shark in the Western Central Atlantic is inconclusive, and 
thus the adequacy of existing regulations in these counties is unknown.
    Information suggests a major decline of the smalltail shark 
population in Brazil, and the petition states overutilization for 
fishing as the primary cause of the smalltail shark decline. The 
petition notes that fisheries regulations in Brazil are insufficient to 
protect smalltail shark. The petition states that the legal framework 
protecting smalltail sharks and other elasmobranchs in Brazil is 
insufficient and that obsolete and the country has not had a nationally 
standardized fisheries data collection system since 2007. While 
smalltail shark was listed on the Brazilian Ordinance of the Ministry 
of Environment no. 445--which restricted the harvest and trade of 
species listed on Brazil's Red List of Endangered and Threatened 
Species--it was suspended in 2015, half of 2016, 2017, and half of 
2018. These details indicate that both inadequate regulations and low 
compliance and enforcement in Brazilian fisheries are failing to 
protect the species from fishing mortality. Therefore, we find that the 
petition presents substantial scientific and commercial information 
indicating that the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms is a 
threat to the smalltail shark.

Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence

    The majority of threats from climate change described in the 
petition are not specific to the smalltail shark or their habitat in 
the marine and estuarine waters of the Western Central Atlantic and 
Brazil. The petition fails to present credible new information or 
otherwise offer substantial scientific or commercial information 
indicating that other natural or manmade factors are a threat to the 
smalltail shark.

Petition Finding

    After reviewing the petition, the literature cited in the petition, 
and other information readily available in our files, we find that 
there is substantial scientific and commercial information indicating 
that listing the smalltail shark, C. porosus, as a threatened or 
endangered species may be warranted. Therefore, in accordance with 
section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA and NMFS' implementing regulations (50 
CFR 424.14(h)(2)), we will commence a status review of this species. 
During the status review, we will determine whether C. porosus is in 
danger of extinction (endangered) or likely to become so in the 
foreseeable future (threatened) throughout all or a significant portion 
of its range. As the petition did not request that we consider listing 
any specific DPSs, we will first assess the status of the taxonomic 
species, and then based on that assessment, consider whether additional 
analysis of potential DPSs is warranted and appropriate. As required by 
section 4(b)(3)(B) of the ESA, within 12 months of the receipt of the 
petition (October 31, 2022), we will make a finding as to whether 
listing the smalltail shark (or any DPSs) as an endangered or 
threatened species is warranted. If listing is warranted, we will 
publish a proposed rule and solicit public comments before developing 
and publishing a final rule. If applicable, the request to promulgate 
regulations under section 4(d) and section 4(e) of the ESA would be 
considered in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act (5 
U.S.C. 553) and applicable Departmental regulations, and appropriate 
action would be taken (50 CFR 424.14(j)).

Information Solicited

    To ensure that the status review is based on the best available 
scientific and commercial data, we are soliciting comments and 
information from interested parties on the status of the smalltail 
shark. Specifically, we are soliciting information in the following 
areas:
    (1) Historical and current abundance and population trends of C. 
porosus throughout its range;
    (2) Historical and current distribution and population structure of 
C. porosus;
    (3) Information on C. porosus site fidelity, population 
connectivity, and movements within and between populations (including 
estimates of genetic diversity across and within populations);
    (4) Historical and current condition of C. porosus habitat;
    (5) Information on C. porosus life history and reproductive 
parameters;
    (6) Data on C. porosus diet and prey;

[[Page 33079]]

    (7) Information and data on common C. porosus disease(s) and/or 
contaminant exposure;
    (8) Historical and current data on C. porosus catch, bycatch, and 
retention in industrial, commercial, artisanal, and recreational 
fisheries throughout its range;
    (9) Past, current, and potential threats, including any current or 
planned activities that may adversely impact C. porosus over the short-
term or long-term;
    (10) Data on trade of C. porosus products; and
    (11) Management, regulatory, or conservation programs for C. 
porosus, including mitigation measures related to any known or 
potential threats to the species throughout its range.
    We request that all data and information be accompanied by 
supporting documentation such as maps, bibliographic references, or 
reprints of pertinent publications. Please send any comments in 
accordance with the instructions provided in the ADDRESSES section 
above. We will base our findings on a review of the best available 
scientific and commercial data, including relevant information received 
during the public comment period.

References Cited

    A complete list of all references is available upon request from 
the Protected Resources Division of the NMFS Southeast Regional Office 
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

    Authority: The authority for this action is the Endangered 
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

    Dated: May 17, 2023.
Samuel D. Rauch, III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-10891 Filed 5-22-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P