Endangered And Threatened Species; Proposed Endangered Status for North Atlantic Right Whales, 77704-77716 [E6-22182]
Download as PDF
77704
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
constructive dialogue concerning this
proposed rule. We encourage the
public’s involvement in such ESA
matters.
Classification
National Environmental Policy Act
The 1982 amendments to the ESA, in
section 4(b)(1)(A), restrict the
information that may be considered
when assessing species for listing to the
best scientific and commercial data
available. Based on this limitation of
criteria for a listing decision and the
opinion in Pacific Legal Foundation v.
Andrus, 675 F 2d 825 (6th Cir.1981), we
have concluded that ESA listing actions
are not subject to the environmental
assessment requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act. (see also
NOAA Administrative Order 216–6.)
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866,
Regulatory Flexibility Act and
Paperwork Reduction Act
As noted in the Conference Report on
the 1982 amendments to the ESA,
economic impacts cannot be considered
when assessing the status of a species.
Therefore, the economic analysis
requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act are not applicable to the
listing process. In addition, this rule is
exempt from review under E. O. 12866.
This proposed rule does not contain a
collection-of-information requirement
for the purposes of the Paperwork
Reduction Act.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federalism
E.O. 13132 requires agencies to take
into account any federalism impacts of
regulations under development. It
includes specific consultation directives
for situations where a regulation will
preempt state law, or impose substantial
direct compliance costs on state and
local governments (unless required by
statute). Neither of these circumstances
is applicable to this proposed listing
determination. In keeping with the
intent of the Administration and
Congress to provide continuing and
meaningful dialogue on issues of mutual
State and Federal interest, this proposed
rule will be given to the relevant state
agencies in each state in which the
North Pacific right whale is believed to
occur, who will be invited to comment.
Government-to-Government
Relationship With Tribes E.O. 13175
The longstanding and distinctive
relationship between the Federal and
tribal governments is defined by
treaties, statutes, executive orders,
judicial decisions, and agreements,
which differentiate tribal governments
from the other entities that deal with, or
VerDate Aug<31>2005
21:39 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
are affected by, the Federal Government.
This relationship has given rise to a
special Federal trust responsibility
involving the legal responsibilities and
obligations of the United States toward
Indian Tribes and the application of
fiduciary standards of due care with
respect to Indian lands, tribal trust
resources, and the exercise of tribal
rights. E. O. 13175 - Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments- outlines the
responsibilities of the Federal
Government in matters affecting tribal
interests.
We have determined the proposed
listing of the North Pacific right whale
would not have tribal implications, nor
affect any tribal governments or issues.
The North Pacific right whale is not
hunted by Alaskan Natives for
traditional use or subsistence purposes.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
in this rulemaking is available upon
request from the NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 224
Administrative practice and
procedure, Endangered and threatened
species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation.
Dated: December 20, 2006.
Samuel D. Rauch III.,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, we propose to amend 50 CFR
part 224 as follows:
PART 224 ENDANGERED MARINE
AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES
1. The authority citation for part 224
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531–1543 and 16
U.S.C. 1361 et seq.
2. Revise § 224.101(b) to read as
follows:
§ 224.101 Enumeration of endangered
marine and anadromous species.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Marine mammals. Blue whale
(Balaenoptera musculus); Bowhead
whale (Balaena mysticetus); Caribbean
monk seal (Monachus tropicalis);
Chinese river dolphin (Lipotes
vexillifer); Cochito (Phocoena sinus);
Fin or finback whale (Balaenoptera
physalus); Hawaiian monk seal
(Monachus schauinslandi); Humpback
whale (Megaptera novaeangliae); Indus
River dolphin (Platanista minor);
Mediterranean monk seal (Monachus
monachus); North Pacific right whale
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(Eubalaena japonica); Saimaa seal
(Phoca hispida saimensis); Sei whale
(Balaenoptera borealis); Sperm whale
(Physeter catodon); Western North
Pacific (Korean) gray whale
(Eschrichtius robustus); Steller sea lion,
western population, (Eumetopias
jubatus), which consists of Stellar sea
lions from breeding colonies located
west of 144° W. longitude.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 06–9908 Filed 12–26–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 224
[Docket No. 061212328–6328–01; I.D.
120706B]
RIN 0648–XB58
Endangered And Threatened Species;
Proposed Endangered Status for North
Atlantic Right Whales
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, NMFS, have completed a
comprehensive status review of right
whales in the northern hemisphere
under the Endangered Species Act
(ESA). Based on the findings from the
status review, we have concluded these
right whales exist as two species, the
North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena
glacialis) and the North Pacific right
whale (E. japonicus). We have also
determined that each of these species is
in danger of extinction throughout its
range. To reflect this taxonomic
revision, we are issuing two proposed
rules to designate each separately as an
endangered species. This proposed rule
is to list the North Atlantic right whale;
a proposed rule to list the North Pacific
right whale is issued separately. We are
soliciting public comment on this
proposed listing determination.
DATES: Comments on this proposed rule
must be received by close of business on
February 26, 2007. Requests for public
hearings must be made in writing by
February 12, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Mark
Minton on the North Atlantic right
whale. Comments may be submitted by:
• E-mail:
NARW.ProposedRule@noaa.gov.
Include in the subject line the following
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
document identifier: ‘‘NARW Proposed
Rule.’’ E-mail comments, with or
without attachments, are limited to 5
megabytes.
• Webform at the Federal eRulemaking
Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions at that site for submitting
comments.
• Mail: Mark Minton, NMFS Northeast
Region, One Blackburn Drive,
Gloucester, MA 01930
• Hand delivery to: NMFS Northeast
Region, One Blackburn Drive,
Gloucester, MA 01930
• Fax: 978–281–9394
The proposed rule and other materials
relating to this proposed rule can be
found on NMFS’ Northeast Region
website: https://www.nero.noaa.gov/.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mark Minton, NMFS, Northeast Region,
978–281–9328, ext. 6534; or Marta
Nammack, NMFS, Office of Protected
Resources, 301–713–1401, ext. 180.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Status Review
We have completed a status review
report that assesses the status of right
whales in the North Atlantic and North
Pacific Oceans. Specifically, we
describe the population structure and
examine the extent to which
phylogenetic uniqueness exists between
right whales found in the North Atlantic
and North Pacific. We also examine the
biological status and adverse impacts on
the right whale and its habitat in those
oceans.
Biology of Right Whales in the North
Atlantic Ocean
The right whale is a large baleen
whale. Adults are generally between 45
and 55 feet (13.7 - 16.8 m) in length and
can weigh up to 70 tons (63.5 metric
tons). Females are larger than males.
The distinguishing features of right
whales include a stocky body, generally
black coloration (although some
individuals have white patches on their
undersides), lack of a dorsal fin, large
head (about 1/4 of the body length),
strongly bowed margin of the lower lip,
and callosities on the head region. Two
rows of long (up to about eight feet (2.4
m) in length), dark baleen plates hang
from the upper jaw, with about 225
plates on each side. The tail is broad,
deeply notched, and all black with
smooth trailing edge.
The International Whaling
Commission (IWC) recognizes two right
whale populations in the North
Atlantic: a western and eastern
population (IWC, 1986). The current
distribution and migration patterns of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:37 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
the eastern North Atlantic right whale
population are unknown. Based on
whaling records, it appears that the
eastern population migrated along the
coast from northern Europe to northwest
Africa. Sighting surveys from the
eastern Atlantic Ocean suggest that right
whales present in this region are rare
(Best et al., 2001). The western North
Atlantic population is believed to
contain only about 300 individuals, and
it is unclear whether its abundance is
remaining static, undergoing modest
growth, or declining, as recent modeling
exercises suggest (Caswell et al., 1999).
Prior to extensive exploitation, the
North Atlantic right whale was found
distributed in temperate, subarctic,
coastal and continental shelf waters
throughout the North Atlantic Ocean
rim (Perry et al., 1999). Right whales
prefer shallow coastal waters, but their
distribution is also strongly correlated to
the distribution of zooplankton prey. In
both northern and southern
hemispheres, right whales are observed
in low latitudes and in nearshore waters
during winter where calving takes place.
During the summer and fall months,
right whales tend to migrate to the high
latitudes where their distribution is
likely linked to the patchy distribution
of their principal zooplankton prey
(Winn et al., 1986; Perry et al., 1999).
In the western North Atlantic, right
whales migrate along the North
American coast from Nova Scotia to
Florida. Considerable data exist
documenting use of areas in the western
North Atlantic Ocean where right
whales presently occur. Right whales
have been observed from the MidAtlantic Bight northward through the
Gulf of Maine during all months of the
year. Foraging right whales (and their
habitat) appear to be concentrated in
New England waters. In New England,
peak abundance of right whales in
feeding areas occurs in Cape Cod Bay
beginning in late winter. In early spring
(May), peak right whale abundance
occurs in Wilkinson Basin to the Great
South Channel (Kenney et al., 1995). In
late June and July, right whale
distribution gradually shifts to the
northern edge of Georges Bank. In late
summer (August) and fall, much of the
population is found in waters in the Bay
of Fundy and around Roseway Basin
(Winn et al., 1986; Kenny et al., 1995;
Kenny et al., 2001). Variation in the
abundance and development of suitable
food patches appears to modify the
general patterns of movement by
reducing peak numbers, stay durations,
and specific locales (Brown et al., 2001;
Kenny, 2001). In particular, large
changes in the typical pattern of food
abundance will dramatically change the
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
77705
general pattern of right whale habitat
use (Kenny, 2001). Known wintering
areas for the North Atlantic right whale
occur along the southeastern U.S. coast
where calving occurs from December
through March (Winn, 1984; Kraus et
al., 1986; IWC, 1986). In the North
Atlantic it appears that not all
reproductively active females return to
the calving grounds each year (Kraus et
al., 1986; Payne, 1986). The location of
the majority of the population during
the winter months remains unknown
(NMFS, 2005).
Knowlton et al. (1992) reported
several long-distance movements as far
north as Newfoundland, the Labrador
Basin, and southeast of Greenland; in
addition, recent resightings of
photographically identified individuals
have been made off Iceland, arctic
Norway, and in the old Cape Farewell
whaling ground east of Greenland. The
Norwegian sighting (September 1999)
represents one of only two sightings this
century of a right whale in Norwegian
waters, and the first since 1926.
Together, these long-range matches
indicate an extended range for at least
some individuals and perhaps the
existence of important habitat areas not
presently well described. Similarly,
records from the Gulf of Mexico (Moore
and Clark, 1963; Schmidly et al., 1972)
represent either geographic anomalies or
a more extensive historic range beyond
the sole known calving and wintering
ground in the waters of the southeastern
United States (Waring et al., 2004).
Listing Determinations under the ESA
The ESA defines an endangered
species as one that is in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range, and a threatened
species as one that is likely to become
endangered in the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range (sections 3(6) and 3(20),
respectively). The statute requires us to
determine whether any species is
endangered or threatened because of
any one of the following five factors: (1)
The 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) the inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms; or (5) other
natural or manmade factors affecting its
continued existence (section 4(a)(1)(A)(E)). We are to make this determination
based solely on the best available
scientific information after conducting a
review of the status of the species and
taking into account any efforts being
made by states or foreign governments
to protect the species. The focus of our
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
77706
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
evaluation of the ESA section 4(a)(1)
factors is to evaluate whether and to
what extent a given factor represents a
threat to the future survival of the
species. The focus of our consideration
of protective efforts is to evaluate
whether and to what extent they address
the identified threats and so ameliorate
a species’ risk of extinction. The steps
we follow in implementing this
statutory scheme are to: (1) delineate the
species under consideration; (2) review
the status of the species; (3) consider the
ESA section 4 (a)(1) factors to identify
threats facing the species; (4) assess
whether certain protective efforts
mitigate these threats; and (5) predict
the species’ future persistence.
Review of ‘‘Species’’ Delineation
Since 1974, NMFS has maintained the
right whale listing as originally listed by
the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) under the Endangered
Species Conservation Act of 1969, the
precursor to the Endangered Species Act
of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; the
ESA)(35 FR 18319, December 2, 1970) -Eubalaena spp., i.e., all the species
within the genus Eubalaena. The
USFWS maintains the official lists of
threatened and endangered species and
is required to add species to the official
lists when NMFS or USFWS determines
species under its jurisdiction should be
listed. The USFWS has changed the
nomenclature for right whales several
times over the years in various iterations
of the list of threatened and endangered
wildlife. NMFS also changed the
nomenclature for a period of time after
one of the USFWS changes, but later
reverted back to the original Eubalaena
spp. listing. The changes may have been
made as a reflection of the discussion in
the scientific literature over the
appropriate taxonomic status of right
whales. At no point did the USFWS
ever propose delisting any of the species
that were included in the original listing
of Eubalaena spp. Regardless of the
changes to the list, NMFS maintains that
right whale species were listed as
Eubalaena spp., which reflects the
predominant view that existed in 1974:
that right whale species are distinct
from bowhead whales (Balaena
mysticetus), they belong in the genus
Eubalaena, and the genus Eubalaena
contains at least two species: E. glacialis
in the northern hemisphere and E.
australis in the southern hemisphere.
Recent investigations of right whale
genetics confirm the distinction
between E. glacialis and E. australis at
the species level and suggest that the
North Pacific form of E. glacialis should
be recognized as a separate species and
named E. japonica, distinct from the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:37 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
other two species. NMFS is proposing to
adopt this view and, in a separate
rulemaking, to modify its listing to add
E. japonica to the current listing
Eubalaena spp. (which includes E.
glacialis and E. australis).
Taxonomy of Right Whales
All whales belong to the mammalian
order Cetacea, which is divided into two
suborders: Odontoceti (toothed whales)
and Mysticeti (baleen whales). The
Mysticeti are further divided into four
families: the Eschrichtidae, a monotypic
family (i.e., containing only one
species), the gray whale; Neobalaenidae,
another monotypic family containing
only the pygmy right whale; Balaenidae,
which contains two genera: Balaena
(bowhead whales) and Eubalaena (right
whales); and Balaenopteridae, which
contains all of the other baleen whales.
Balaena is the genus name for the
bowhead whale (Balaena mysticetus),
recognized by Linnaeus in 1758.
Eubalaena is the genus name for right
whales, first proposed by Gray in 1864.
The first right whale to be named was
what we today call the North Atlantic
right whale or Nord-Kaper (Balaena
glacialis, Muller, 1776), from North
Cape, Norway. The second right whale
to be named was what we today call the
North Pacific right whale (Balaena
japonica, Lacepede, 1818), from Japan.
And the third right whale to be named
was what we today call the Southern
right whale (Balaena australis,
Desmoulins, 1822), from Algoa Bay,
Cape of Good Hope, South Africa. In the
1970s when all baleen whales were
being considered for listing as
endangered under the Endangered
Species Conservation Act of 1969,
authors disagreed on the taxonomic
status of right whales. One view was
that they belonged in the genus Balaena
along with bowhead whales and that the
genus contains two species: Baleana
mysticetus and Baleana glacialis (Rice,
1977). The subspecific composition of
B. glacialis was unclear. The other view
was that right whales were distinct from
bowhead whales at the genus level and
that right whales should be identified as
Eubalaena (Schevill, 1986). This later
view is currently the prevailing view,
and it is the view embraced by USFWS
and NMFS.
There were also two views about the
species composition of Eubalaena. One
view was that there was only one
species Eubalaena glacialis containing
several subspecies (E. glacialis glacialis
(North Atlantic), E. glacialis sieboldii
(North Pacific), and E. glacialis australis
(Southern oceans)) (Tomilin, 1957).
Hershkovitz (1966) also describes these
three subspecies, except that he refers to
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
North Pacific right whales as E. glacialis
japonica. The other view was that
Eubalaena comprised two species E.
glacialis and E. australis (Omura, 1958;
Omura et al., 1969). This is the view
represented by the designation of
Eubalaena spp. in the original listing by
USFWS in 1970 and by NMFS in its first
listing in 1974. Generally accepted
taxonomic nomenclature recognized the
term ‘‘spp.’’ as an abbreviation for
multiple species within a genus.
The two-species view is summarized
by Perry et al.’s (1999) summary of
morphological (Muller, 1954) and
genetic data (Schaeff et al., 1991), both
of which recognized distinct species in
the northern and southern hemispheres.
Cummings (1985) used E. australis for
all right whales below the equator
(southern right whales). The
International Whaling Commission also
recognizes the presence of two distinct
species, E. glacialis and E. australis, in
the schedule appended to the
Convention in which species under
purview of the Commission are listed.
Conclusion
Although the listing of right whales
has changed from the original
nomenclature of Eubalaena spp., there
is no indication in the record that
USFWS ever intended to delist any of
the species contained in the original
listing of the entire genus. Since the
original 1970 listing was described as
‘‘Eubalaena spp.’’, the logical
interpretation is that at least two species
of right whale were listed, the northern
right whale (E. glacialis) and the
southern right whale (E. australis), since
‘‘spp.’’ refers to more than one species,
not ‘‘subspecies.’’ Even if three separate
species had been recognized in 1970,
southern right whale (E. australis)
would have been one of them. Each
plausible scenario results in the right
whale in the Southern Hemisphere
being recognized as a separate species.
Since NMFS has maintained its listing
as ‘‘Right whales, Eubalaena spp.’’, and
USFWS has never proposed delisting
any of the species included in the
original listing, we conclude that both E.
glacialis and E. australis were listed in
1970, carried forward to the list created
pursuant to the ESA, and determined to
be endangered in our listing in 1974.
Right Whale Species Currently Being
Considered for Listing
As discussed above, genetic data now
provide unequivocal support to
distinguish three right whale lineages as
separate phylogenetic species: (1) the
North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena
glacialis), ranging in the North Atlantic
Ocean; (2) the North Pacific right whale
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
(Eubalaena japonica), ranging in the
North Pacific Ocean, and (3) the
southern right whale (Eubalaena
australis), historically ranging
throughout the southern hemisphere’s
oceans (Rosenbaum et al., 2000). Based
on evidence from recent genetic studies
(Gaines et al., 2005), we conclude that
the current taxonomic classification of
right whales in the northern hemisphere
should be revised consistent with the
generally accepted analyses by
Rosenbaum et al. (2000). We have
determined that listing right whales in
the North Atlantic and the North Pacific
as two separate species is warranted in
light of the compelling evidence
provided by recent scientific studies on
right whale taxonomy and classification.
In accordance with the applicable
statutory definitions and requirements,
the North Atlantic right whale (E.
glacialis) and the North Pacific right
whale (E. japonica) are being considered
for listing as separate species under the
ESA.
Refining the taxonomy of these
endangered cetaceans is critical to the
recovery planning and conservation of
these species. The separate listings of
these two species in the northern
hemisphere will allow for consistent
scientific practice and management
policies in recovering these species.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Status of the Three Right Whale Species
The determination that right whales
in the North Atlantic and North Pacific
Oceans are two separate species requires
us to consider these species separately
for the purposes of listing under the
ESA. We will consider the status of the
North Atlantic right whale (E. glacialis)
in this proposed rule and that of the
North Pacific right whale (E. japonica)
in a separate proposed rule in today’s
issue of the Federal Register. At the
final rule stage, we will address both
species in the same rule so that any
changes become effective together. The
southern right whale, E. australis, will
remain listed as endangered, though we
intend to conduct a 5-year review of its
status in the near future. In the
following discussion of the status of the
North Atlantic right whale, E. glacialis,
we provide the rationale for today’s
proposal to list this species as a separate
endangered species. The other proposed
rule in today’s issue of the Federal
Register, referenced above, provides the
rationale for the proposal to list the
North Pacific right whale, E. japonica,
as a separate endangered species. We
also identify the southern right whale,
E. australis (one of two species that was
listed in 1970 and is still listed) in the
regulatory language as a separate
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:37 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
endangered species and remove
Eubalaena spp. from the list.
Status of the North Atlantic Right
Whale (Eubalaena glacialis)
Abundance and Trends
Sighting surveys from the eastern
Atlantic Ocean suggest that right whales
present in this region are rare (Best et
al,. 2001). In 1992, based on a census of
individual whales identified using
photo-identification techniques and the
assumption that whales not seen for 7
years are dead, the western North
Atlantic stock size was estimated to be
295 individuals (Knowlton et al.,1994).
In 1998, an updated analysis using the
same method gave an estimate of 299
animals (Kraus et al., 2001). Because
this was a nearly complete census, it is
assumed that this represents a minimum
population size estimate. However, no
estimate of abundance with an
associated coefficient of variation has
been calculated for this population.
Calculation of a reliable point estimate
is likely to be difficult, given the known
problem of heterogeneity of distribution
in this population. An IWC workshop
on status and trends of western North
Atlantic right whales gave a minimum
direct-count estimate of 263 right
whales alive in 1996 and noted that the
true population was unlikely to be
substantially greater than this (Best et
al., 2001).
The population growth rate for North
Atlantic right whale reported for the
period 1986–1992 by Knowlton et al.
(1994) was 2.5 percent (coefficient of
variation=0.12), suggesting that the
stock was showing signs of slow
recovery. In contrast, southern right
whale populations (those off Argentina,
Australia, and South Africa) are
increasing at annual rates on the order
of 7 to 8 percent (IWC, 1998). However,
Caswell et al. (1999) found that crude
survival probabilities for North Atlantic
right whale decreased from about 0.99
per year in 1980 to about 0.94 in 1994,
and that population growth rate
declined from about 5.3 percent in 1980
to a negative 2.4 percent in 1994
(Caswell et al., 1999). The decline was
statistically significant. This model
suggested that the western population of
North Atlantic right whales was headed
for extinction with an upper bound on
the expected time to extinction of 191
years (Caswell et al., 1999). Modified
versions of the Caswell et al. (1999)
model as well as several other models
were reviewed at the 1999 IWC
workshop (Best et al., 2001). Despite
differences in approach, all of the
models indicated a decline in right
whale survival in the 1990s relative to
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
77707
the 1980s with female survival, in
particular, apparently affected (Best et
al., 2001; Waring et al., 2002).
In 2002, our Northeast Fisheries
Science Center (NEFSC) hosted a
workshop to review right whale
population models to examine: (1)
potential bias in the models, and (2)
changes in the subpopulation trend
based on new information collected in
the late 1990s (Clapham et al., 2002).
Three different models were used to
explore right whale survivability and to
address potential sources of bias.
Although biases were identified that
could negatively affect the results, all
three modeling techniques resulted in
the same conclusion; survival has
continued to decline and seems due to
female mortalities (Clapham et al.,
2002).
Life History Characteristics
Females give birth to their first calf at
an average age of 9 years (Best et al.,
1998; Hamilton et al., 1998a). Standard
reproductive rates for the western North
Atlantic population have yet to be
calculated. The calving interval for right
whales is between 2 and 7 years, with
means ranging from 3.12 (95 percent
confidence interval (CI) 3.05–3.17) to
3.67 years (95 percent CI 3.3–4.1)
(Knowlton et al., 1994; Best et al., 2001;
Burwell, 2001; Cooke et al., 2001). In the
western North Atlantic, there was a
significant increase in the calving
interval from 3.67 years for the period
1980 to 1992 (Knowlton et al., 1994) to
5.8 years for the period 1990 to 1998
(Kraus et al. 2001). The increase in the
calving interval is of particular concern
and, together with other perplexing
biological parameters, may suggest the
population is under rather unusual
biological, energetic, or reproductive
stress. Most recently (2001–2005), a
dramatic increase in North Atlantic
right whale calving (23 calves per year)
may have decreased the interval to
levels more similar to that of the
southern right whale (Kraus et al., in
press).
Since 1999, 125 right whale calves
have been observed, including 31 right
whale births during a record calving
season in 2000–2001 (B. Pike, New
England Aquarium, pers. comm.).
Calving numbers have been sporadic,
with large differences among years. The
three calving years (1997–2000) prior to
the record year in 2000–2001 provided
low recruitment with only 10 calves
born. The last five calving seasons
(2001–2005) have been substantially
better (31, 21, 19, 16, and 28 calves,
respectively). Despite improved calving
rates over the last several years,
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
77708
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
mortalities of calves, juveniles, and
adults have continued.
An analysis of the age structure of this
population suggests that it contains a
smaller proportion of juvenile whales
than expected (Hamilton et al., 1998a;
Best et al., 2001), which may reflect low
recruitment and/or high juvenile
mortality. In addition, it is possible that
the apparently low reproductive rate is
due in part to unstable age structure or
to decreased reproduction due to aging
(i.e., reproductive senescence) on the
part of some females (Waring et al.,
2004).
Genetic Diversity
The size of the western population of
the North Atlantic right whale at the
cessation of whaling is unknown, but
generally it is believed to have been
very small. Such a reduction of
population size may have resulted in a
loss of genetic diversity that could affect
the ability of the current population to
successfully reproduce (e.g., decreased
conceptions, increased abortions,
increased neonate mortality). Studies by
Schaeff et al. (1997) and Malik et al.
(2000) indicate that the western
population of the North Atlantic right
whale is less genetically diverse than
southern right whale populations.
However, several apparently healthy
populations of cetaceans, such as sperm
whales and pilot whales, have even
lower genetic diversity than observed in
the western North Atlantic right whales
(IWC, 2001b).
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Summary of Factors Affecting the North
Atlantic Right Whale
Section 4(a)(1) of the ESA requires the
Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to
determine whether a species is
endangered or threatened because of
any of the following factors: (A) the
present or threatened destruction,
modification or curtailment of a species’
habitat or range; (B) overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (c) disease or
predation factors; (D) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; (E)
other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence. A
discussion of these considerations
follows:
The Present or Threatened Destruction,
Modification, or Curtailment of its
Habitat or Range
Habitat loss or degradation is not
believed to be a causal factor placing the
North Atlantic right whale in danger of
extinction at this time or in the
foreseeable future. Unlike many
terrestrial species, right whales and
other cetaceans do not compete directly
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:37 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
with human populations for space
(Clapham et al., 1999). Because right
whales are dependent on coastal waters
adjacent to highly developed coastline,
however, habitat degradation may
adversely affect this species.
Consequently, threats to right whales
may arise from onshore and near shore
activities.
Right whales frequent coastal waters
where dredging and dredge spoil
disposal occur on a regular basis, such
as along the southeastern U.S. coast
(Perry et al., 1999). Dredging of harbors
and port channels occurs in a number
of locations in or near areas where right
whales aggregate. Noise, increased ship
traffic, disposal of dredge material, and
related activities may all contribute to
degrade right whale habitat. It is
unknown to what extent these activities
affect right whales (Perry et al., 1999).
It appears that more information is
needed to determine specific habitat
impacts, if any, from these activities.
Increased ship traffic associated with
dredging activities may increase the risk
of ship strikes of right whales resulting
in serious injury and mortality. At
present, efforts made to reduce adverse
effects on right whales include posting
observers on ships transporting dredge
spoils to reduce the risk of ship strikes.
One potential source of habitat
degradation for baleen whales is oil
pollution. General concerns with regard
to oil pollution, some of which are
direct impacts on the whales rather than
habitat impacts, are ingestion of
contaminated prey, potential irritation
of skin and eyes, inhalation of toxic
fumes, and abandonment of polluted
feeding habitat (Geraci and St. Aubin,
1980; Geraci, 1990). However, data on
the effects of oil pollution on cetaceans
are inconclusive, and the large baleen
whales appear to be generally
unaffected by oil per se (Geraci, 1990;
Loughlin, 1994).
Offshore oil and gas exploration
activities have been proposed off the
U.S. Atlantic coast. At the present time
however, there are no known plans for
oil exploration in the major habitats of
the western population of the North
Atlantic right whale, but the possibility
remains for future oil and gas
exploration and development activity.
In addition to oil and gas exploration
and production, the undersea
exploration and development of
techniques for mining minerals deposits
could threaten the North Atlantic right
whale and its habitat (Perry et al., 1999).
An additional potential source of
habitat degradation for right whales is
chemical contaminants. The impact of
pollution on right whales is debatable.
O’Shea and Brownell (1994) conclude
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
that there is currently no evidence for
significant contaminant-related
problems in baleen whales. Although
more research is needed, the existing
data on mysticetes support the view that
the lower trophic levels at which these
animals feed should result in lower
levels of contaminant accumulation
than would be expected in many
odontocetes, which typically show
concentrations that differ from those of
baleen whales by an order of magnitude
(O’Shea and Brownell, 1994). However,
the manner in which pollutants
negatively impact animals is complex
and difficult to study, particularly in
taxa such as large whales for which
many of the key variables and pathways
are unknown (Aguilar, 1987; O’Shea
and Brownell, 1994). A more plausible
potential problem is that of
transgenerational accumulation
(Colborn and Smolen, 1996), but this
remains unstudied in right whales or
any other cetacean species.
Overutilization for Commercial,
Recreational, Scientific, or Educational
Purposes
Right whales have not been the target
of commercial hunting in the North
Atlantic since 1935, and relatively few
catches were made in the 20th century
prior to that date. Historical whaling
activities are responsible for the
significant depletion of the eastern
population of the North Atlantic right
whale and the current severely depleted
numbers of individuals remaining in the
western population. The small
population size of the North Atlantic
right whale is probably the most
significant factor affecting its continued
existence because small populations are
subject to extinction from a variety of
factors that would not seriously affect a
larger population. The North Atlantic
right whale is in danger of extinction
throughout its range because of
historical whaling. Unlike right whales
in the North Pacific, there is no
evidence of the illegal harvest of right
whales.
An estimate of pre-exploitation
population size is not available. Basque
whalers may have taken substantial
numbers of right whales at times during
the 1500s in the Strait of Belle Isle
region (Aguilar, 1986), and the stock of
right whales may have already been
substantially reduced by the time
colonists began whaling in the
Plymouth area in the 1600s (Reeves and
Mitchell, 1987). A modest but persistent
whaling effort along the coast of the
eastern United States lasted 3 centuries,
and the records include one report of 29
whales killed in Cape Cod Bay in a
single day during January 1700. Based
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
on incomplete historical whaling data,
Reeves and Mitchell (1987) could
conclude only that there were at least
some hundreds of right whales present
in the western North Atlantic during the
late 1600s. In a later study (Reeves et al.,
1992), a series of population trajectories
using historical data and an estimated
present population size of 350 were
plotted. The results suggest that there
may have been at least 1,000 right
whales in this population during the
early to mid–1600s, with the greatest
population decline occurring in the
early 1700s. The authors cautioned,
however, that the record of removals is
incomplete, the results were
preliminary, and refinements are
required. Based on back calculations
using the present population size and
growth rate, the population may have
numbered fewer than 100 individuals
by the time international protection for
right whales came into effect in 1935
(Hain, 1975; Reeves et al., 1992; Kenney
et al., 1995). However, too little is
known about the population dynamics
of right whales in the intervening years
to estimate a pre-exploitation
population size with confidence.
An intense period of whaling in the
eastern North Atlantic between 1902
and 1967 (including harvest off the
Shetlands, Hebrides, and Ireland in the
years 1906–1910) was particularly
catastrophic for the eastern North
Atlantic right whale population. Since
that time, there have only been sporadic
sightings of right whales in the eastern
North Atlantic (Best et al., 2001). In two
recent winter surveys of Cintra Bay (off
the northwestern coast of Africa), no
evidence was found to suggest that right
whales still use the area; this absence of
evidence also corresponds to a lack of
recent observations in northern
European waters (Reeves, 2001). Based
on the paucity of sighting information,
current distribution and migration
patterns of the eastern North Atlantic
right whale population are unknown.
With respect to recreational and
educational use, problems may arise
from vessels whose operations are
directed at the whales themselves (i.e.,
whale watching from either commercial
or recreational vessels). These activities
have the potential to disturb right
whales or disrupt their activities and
behavior such as feeding, courtship, and
nursing. The impact of such harassment
on the reproductive success of
individuals has not been studied and is
unknown. Currently, Federal
regulations prohibit the close approach
by vessels within 500 yards (457.2 m) of
North Atlantic right whales in U.S.
waters. This activity is allowed,
however, in Canadian waters.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:37 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
Scientific research on right whales
frequently involves close approaches to
the animals for the purpose of
photographic, genetic, or behavioral
sampling. These activities are controlled
by permits in both U.S. and Canadian
waters, and the potential adverse impact
on the animals is considered during the
permitting process. Efforts are needed to
ensure coordination of research
activities between the United States and
Canada, as well as among U.S.
researchers themselves to minimize any
potential adverse impact to right
whales.
Disease or Predation
Disease and predation are not
believed to be factors causing the North
Atlantic right whale to be in danger of
extinction. Unlike in some dolphin and
pinniped (i.e., seals and sea lions)
species, there have been no recorded
epizootics in baleen whales. The
occurrence of skin lesions on the bodies
of North Atlantic right whales has been
documented in recent years, with an
apparent increase in frequency
culminating in a peak in 1995 when
they were observed on 24 percent of
photographed individuals (Marx et al.,
1999). The origins and significance of
these lesions are unknown. Further
research is required to determine
whether they represent a topical or
systemic health problem for the affected
animals.
In October 2006, we declared an
unusual mortality event (UME) for
humpback whales in the Northeast
United States. At least 17 dead
humpback whales have been discovered
since March 2006. There has also been
a documented bloom of Alexandrium
sp., a toxic dinoflagellate that causes red
tide from Maine to Massachusetts. Prior
to the most recent UME, there had been
only three other known cases of a mass
mortality involving large whale species
along the east coast: 1987–1988, 2003,
and 2005. Geraci et al. (1989) provide
strong evidence that, in the former case,
these deaths of humpback whales
resulted from the consumption of
mackerel whose livers contained high
levels of saxitoxin, a naturally occurring
red tide toxin, the origin of which
remains unknown. It has been suggested
that the occurrence of a red tide event
is related to an increase in freshwater
runoff from coastal development,
leading some observers to suggest that
such events may become more common
among marine mammals as coastal
development continues. There is
currently no conclusive evidence
linking red tide toxins to the deaths or
chronic health problems in right whales.
Doucette et al. (2006) assessed the
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
77709
occurrence of paralytic shellfish
poisoning (PSP) toxins in right whales
and in co-occurring zooplankton
assemblages dominated by Calanus
finmarchicus, the primary food of the
North Atlantic right whale. Samples of
right whale feces collected from at least
11 different whales by these researchers
in the Bay of Fundy tested positive for
PSP toxins. These results suggest that
trophic transfer of marine algal toxins
may be a factor inhibiting the recovery
of the North Atlantic right whale.
Predation of right whales by killer
whales and large shark species is likely
to occur, but the level is not
documented. North Atlantic right
whales bearing scars thought to be from
killer whale attacks have been
photographed (Kraus, 1990), but the
number of whales killed by this
predator is unknown (Perry et al., 1999).
Mehta (2004) more recently concluded
that scars recorded on the flukes and
bodies of North Atlantic right whales
are more consistent with harassment by
some smaller cetacean, possibly pilot
whales (Globicephala spp) and do not
originate from killer whales.
The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory
Mechanisms
Right whales are protected under both
U.S. and Canadian law, and
internationally by the IWC. Death and
serious injury resulting from ship strikes
and fishing gear interactions are
significant factors that, at current rates,
place the North Atlantic right whale in
danger of extinction throughout its
range. There are numerous ongoing
conservation efforts to reduce the
impact of ship strikes on the survival
and recovery of the species. These
efforts involve Federal, state, local,
conservation, academic, and industry
agencies and organizations. We, in
cooperation with other state, Federal,
industry, and private groups and
organizations, have developed a plan to
implement a broad Ship Strike
Reduction Strategy (SSRS) designed to
reduce the impacts of vessel interactions
on the survival of the North Atlantic
right whale.
The SSRS consists of both regulatory
and non-regulatory components. As part
of efforts to implement the SSRS, we
published an advanced notice of
proposed rulemaking (ANPR) on June 1,
2004 (69 FR 30857) and proposed
regulations on June 14, 2006, that
contain speed restrictions and routing
measures to reduce the likelihood of
collisions between vessels and
endangered North Atlantic right whales
(71 FR 36299).
We have implemented a number of
measures to reduce the impact to right
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
77710
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
whale survival due to fishing gear
interactions. We, with the assistance of
the Atlantic Large Whale Take
Reduction Team (ALWTRT), developed
the Atlantic Large Whale Take
Reduction Plan (ALWTRP). The goal of
this plan is to reduce the level of serious
injury and mortality of three strategic
stocks of large whales, including North
Atlantic right whales, in commercial
gillnet and trap/pot fisheries. In general,
the ALWTRP consists of a combination
of regulatory and non-regulatory
programs, including broad gear
modifications, time-area closures,
expanded disentanglement efforts,
extensive outreach efforts in key areas,
gear research, and an expanded right
whale surveillance program to
supplement the Mandatory Ship
Reporting System.
Since its implementation in 1997, the
ALWTRP has been modified on several
occasions in response to the serious
injury and mortality of large whales in
gillnet and lobster trap/pot gear. Recent
amendments to the ALWTRP include
restrictions to the Southeast Atlantic
gillnet fishery (67 FR 59471, September
23, 2002; 68 FR 19464, April 21, 2003).
Other amendments to the ALWTRP
include additional gear modifications
for lobster trap/pot gear in particular
management areas and changes to the
lobster trap/pot and gillnet take
reduction technology lists (67 FR 1300,
January 10, 2002; 67 FR 15493, April 2,
2002), a Seasonal Area Management
(SAM) program (67 FR 1142, January 9,
2002; 67 FR 65722, October 28, 2002),
a Dynamic Area Management (DAM)
program (67 FR 1133, January 9, 2002;
67 FR 65722, October 28, 2002), and
implementation of gear modifications
determined to sufficiently reduce the
risk of entanglement to right whales (68
FR 10195, March 4, 2003; 68 FR 51195,
August 26, 2003).
We continue to work with the
ALWTRT to evaluate the ALWTRP and
determine whether additional
modifications are necessary to meet the
goals of the MMPA and the ESA. On
June 30, 2003, we published a Notice of
Intent (NOI) to announce the agency’s
intent to prepare an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) to analyze the
impacts of alternatives for amending the
ALWTRP (68 FR 38676). On June 21,
2005, we also published a proposed rule
(70 FR 35894) that details how
modifications to the ALWTRP would be
implemented.
Despite previous efforts, ship strikes
and fishing gear interactions remain a
serious factor negatively affecting the
continued survival and recovery of the
species. As the new conservation
measures discussed above are
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:37 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
implemented, the frequency of ship
strikes and fishing gear interactions will
need to be monitored to assess the
effectiveness of measures in reducing
the impact of these factors on the
survival of the species. Based on the
efficacy of these measures, it may be
necessary to continue or enhance
existing regulations or promulgate new
regulations to reduce or eliminate the
effect of these factors on the survival
and recovery of the species.
Other Natural or Manmade Factors
Affecting its Continued Existence
Ship strikes and fishing gear
interactions are the most common
anthropogenic causes of mortality in
western North Atlantic right whales,
and place the North Atlantic right whale
in danger of extinction throughout its
range. The available evidence strongly
suggests that the North Atlantic right
whale cannot sustain the current
number of deaths that result from vessel
collisions and fishing gear interactions.
If mortality from these activities
continues at current rates, it is likely to
result in the extinction of the North
Atlantic right whale.
Ship Strikes - Collisions with ships
are the single largest cause of right
whale mortality in the western North
Atlantic. Of 45 confirmed deaths of
western North Atlantic right whales
between 1970 and 1999, 16 are known
to have been caused by ship strikes, and
two additional collisions were possibly
fatal (Knowlton and Kraus, 1998). There
were two known ship strike right whale
deaths in 2001, one in both 2002 and
2003, and two in 2004. The low
incidence (7 percent) of
photographically identified whales
showing scars and wounds from ship
propellers compared to the high rate of
ship propeller wounds on stranded
carcasses indicates that a high
proportion of interactions between ships
and whales are fatal to the whale (Kraus,
1990). It should be noted that with
improved reporting and more thorough
necropsies in recent years, the rate of
detection and confirmation of shipstrike deaths has probably increased.
This may confound efforts to determine
trends in the frequency of collisions.
Concern has been raised over the
possible adverse effects of whale
watching and scientific research
activities on right whale aggregations,
particularly in the western North
Atlantic (e.g., Cape Cod Bay and lower
Bay of Fundy). On February 13, 1997,
we published an interim final rule (62
FR 6729) to prohibit both boats and
aircraft from approaching any right
whale closer than 500 yards (457.2 m).
These minimum distance regulations
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
are designed to reduce the potential to
disturb right whales or disrupt their
activities and to reduce the adverse
effect of vessel collisions. However,
collisions between whale-watching
boats and a humpback (2001) and a
minke whale (1998) indicate that much
more serious consequences (e.g., death
or serious injury) are also possible. In
addition, the number of high-speed
(capable of speeds ≤ 28 knots) whale
watching vessels, ferries, and other craft
has increased recently in areas where
right whales occur. Consequently, the
threat of collisions has potentially
grown. It may be necessary to examine
the effects of whale watching in the
vicinity of right whales and issue
additional regulations and/or guidelines
regarding the number of vessels, and
their speed, manner, and distances of
approaches near whales.
Scientific research on right whales
frequently involves close approaches to
the animals for the purpose of
photographic, genetic, or behavioral
sampling. These activities are controlled
by permits in both U.S. and Canadian
waters, and the potential adverse impact
on the animals is considered during the
permitting process. Efforts are needed to
ensure coordination of research
activities between the U.S. and Canada,
as well as among U.S. researchers
themselves to minimize any potential
adverse impact to right whales.
Fishing Gear Interactions - The exact
magnitude and nature of fisheries
interactions with right whales is not
known. Kraus (1990) estimated that 57
percent of right whales in the western
North Atlantic bear scars and injuries
indicating fishing gear interactions.
More recent analysis estimated that 61.6
percent of right whales exhibit evidence
of fishing gear entanglement (Hamilton
et al., 1998b). The 1998 North Atlantic
Stock Assessment Report (Waring et al.,
1999) indicated NMFS-monitored
fisheries showed a mean annual
mortality of 1.0 right whale from 1992
through 1996. Sources of interaction are
mainly gillnets, lobster pots, seine nets,
and fish weirs (NMFS, 1991), which,
with the exception of gillnet fisheries,
are largely not monitored. Gear
entanglement was estimated to account
for 7 percent of the known mortality in
right whales in the western North
Atlantic from 1970 through early 1993
(Kenney and Kraus, 1993). There were
at least two additional entanglement
deaths between late 1993 and 1999
(Knowlton and Kraus, 2001). Since 2001
there has been at least one additional
mortality due to entanglement. These
mortalities involved entanglements with
fixed fishing gear. Of 45 known deaths
between 1970 and 1999, three were
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
directly linked to entanglements, and
eight were suspected to have been
linked to entanglements (NMFS, 2005).
Entanglements may be responsible for
more deaths than indicated by the
stranding and necropsy data. It is
possible that fishing gear was
responsible for some of the deaths for
which a cause could not be determined.
In addition, some whales may become
entangled, drown, and fail to resurface.
Injuries and entanglements that are not
initially lethal may result in a gradual
weakening of entangled individuals,
making them more vulnerable to some
other direct cause of mortality (Kenney
and Kraus, 1993). For example,
entanglement may reduce a whale’s
ability to maneuver, making it more
susceptible to ship strikes.
Entanglement-related stress may
decrease an individual’s reproductive
success or reduce its life span. This may
in turn depress population growth.
Noise - The effect on behavior (e.g.,
foraging, mating, nursing) of noise
pollution from shipping or oil and gas
development is unclear, though various
observations suggest that marine
mammals can habituate well to even
quite high levels of sound (Geraci and
St. Aubin, 1980; Richardson et al.,
1995). Playback experiments on gray
and bowhead whales indicate that
whales will actively avoid a very loud
sound source (Malme et al., 1983), but
whether real-life sources (such as
drilling platforms) negatively impact
behavior to the point that it diminishes
reproductive success and population
productivity is unclear. It appears that
right whale sensitivity to noise
disturbance and vessel activity is related
to the behavior and activity in which
they are engaged in at the time
(Watkins, 1986; Perry et al., 1999).
Recreational boat traffic - Some
studies suggest increased recreational
boat traffic can disrupt whale behavior
(Glockner-Ferrari and Ferrari, 1990).
Pleasure boat traffic occurs in various
coastal areas with little regulation or
enforcement; however, its impact on
right whales is unknown.
Conservation Measures
Section 4(b)(1)(a) of the ESA requires
that determinations of whether a species
is threatened or endangered be based
solely on the best scientific and
commercial data available and after
taking into account those efforts, if any,
being made to protect the species. Right
whales have been listed under the ESA
for many years and numerous
conservation measures have been
implemented in order to protect and
conserve the species. On March 28,
2003, we and the USFWS (the Services)
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:37 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
published the final policy for evaluating
conservation efforts (PECE)(68 FR
15100). The PECE provides guidance on
evaluating current protective efforts
identified in conservation agreements,
conservation plans, management plans,
or similar documents (developed by
Federal agencies, state and local
governments, tribal governments,
businesses, organizations, and
individuals) that have not yet been
implemented, or have been
implemented but have not yet
demonstrated effectiveness. The PECE
establishes two basic criteria for
evaluating current conservation efforts:
(1) the certainty that the conservation
efforts will be implemented, and (2) the
certainty that the efforts will be
effective. The PECE provides specific
factors under these two basic criteria
that direct the analysis of adequacy and
efficacy of existing conservation efforts.
Right whales were protected by the
1931 Convention for the Regulation of
Whaling, which took effect in 1935.
Since 1949, right whales have been
protected from commercial whaling by
the IWC and its implementing
convention. In U.S. waters, right whales
are protected by the MMPA and the
ESA.
Current North Atlantic right whale
conservation efforts in the North
Atlantic are extensive. These efforts
reflect a cooperative collaboration
between numerous state and Federal
agencies, industry groups, conservation
organizations, academic institutions,
and other interested parties and
individuals. These efforts are vital to the
survival and recovery of the North
Atlantic right whale.
Current conservation efforts have
resulted in the implementation of a
number of regulatory and nonregulatory measures intended to
enhance the survival and recovery of the
species, particularly fishing gear
modifications and ship strike reduction
strategies. Moreover, a number of
conservation measures being developed
and/or considered will further reduce
the adverse affect of fishing gear
interactions and ship strikes. However,
despite these ongoing efforts to mitigate
factors affecting the species, right
whales have continued to suffer serious
injury and mortalities due to ship
strikes and fishing gear interactions.
As discussed, direct and indirect
impacts from human activities,
particularly vessel collisions and fishing
gear entanglements, place the species in
danger of extinction throughout its
range and have contributed to a lack of
recovery. Currently, we are working
with state, Federal, private, and
industry groups to address these two
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
77711
factors affecting the survival and
recovery of the species.
Vessel Interactions
As discussed, ship strikes are
responsible for the majority of humancaused right whale mortalities (Jensen
and Silber, 2003). The ESA provides
authority to the Secretary to establish
implementation teams to, among other
things, review recovery activities and
provide recommendations to NMFS on
actions necessary for the survival and
recovery of the species. Two such teams
have been formed: one in the
southeastern U.S., the second in the
northeastern U.S. Although both teams
have addressed a variety of right whale
conservation issues over the years, they
have evolved over time to focus on
issues related primarily to the reduction
of ship strikes of right whales.
Southeastern U.S. Implementation
Team (SEIT) - In August 1993, the SEIT
was formed. The team consists of
representatives from Federal, state, and
local agencies, as well as other private
organizations. Since its inception, the
SEIT has met regularly and has been
active in a number of areas related to
ship strike mitigation. Among other
things, the SEIT was instrumental in
developing a system of aircraft surveys
and communication systems that alert
mariners to the presence of right whales
in the southeast United States (SEUS) in
real time. Two agencies represented on
the SEIT, the Georgia Department of
Natural Resources (GDNR) and the
United States Coast Guard (USCG),
implemented a local Notice to Mariners
broadcast about right whale calving
grounds. Additionally, the USCG and
the GDNR have developed and
implemented procedures for
broadcasting right whale locations over
NAVTEX (the USCG international
communication system). The SEIT has
also coordinated a number of efforts to
educate mariners about the threat of
ship strikes, including development and
distribution of brochures, pamphlets,
and posters. In addition, the SEIT
provides us with recommendations
regarding measures to reduce the
possibility of ship strikes, development
of safe operating procedures for large
vessels transiting right whale habitat,
minimum vessel approach distances,
research needs, and measures necessary
to reduce fishing gear interactions in
right whale calving areas.
Northeast U.S. Implementation Team
(NEIT) - The NEIT was established in
1994 and is coordinated by our
Northeast Regional Office. The NEIT
was originally created to implement
recovery tasks for both the North
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
77712
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Atlantic right whale and the humpback
whale.
The NEIT’s responsibilities have
evolved since its inception in 1994.
Initially, the NEIT’s focus was the
mitigation of the threat to right whales
of fishing gear interactions. More
recently the NEIT’s charge has shifted to
focus primarily on issues related to ship
strike reduction. The NEIT Ship Strike
Subcommittee assisted in the
development of NOAA’s SSRS. The
NEIT most recently has been
reorganized to function as a
continuation of the former Northeast
Large Whale Recovery Plan
Implementation Team’s Ship Strike
Committee. The goal is for the NEIT to
assist, where possible, with various
ship-strike reduction-related strategies.
SSRS
We, in cooperation with other state,
Federal, industry, and private groups
and organizations, have developed a
broad SSRS designed to reduce the
danger posed by vessel interactions to
the survival of the North Atlantic right
whale. The SSRS is an Atlantic coast
initiative consisting of both regulatory
and non-regulatory components. The
ship strike reduction conservation
efforts have been implemented, in large
part, under the statutory authority of the
ESA and the MMPA. Certain details of
the SSRS are still under development.
The SSRS consists of five elements: (1)
Establishment of new operational
measures for the shipping industry,
including consideration of routing
measures and speed restrictions; (2)
negotiation of a Right Whale
Conservation Agreement with the
Canadian Government to address the
issue of ship strikes; (3) development
and implementation of ship strike
education and outreach programs; (4)
initiation of Section 7 consultations
under the ESA with all Federal agencies
that have vessels operating in waters
inhabited by right whales; and (5)
continuation of ongoing research and
conservation activities.
Ship Strike Reduction Strategy
Proposed Rule - We published an
advanced notice of proposed
rulemaking (ANPR) on June 1, 2004 (69
FR 30857), and proposed regulations on
June 26, 2006 (71 FR 36299). The
proposed regulations would establish
speed restrictions and routing measures
to reduce the likelihood of collisions
between vessels and endangered North
Atlantic right whales.
Mandatory Ship Reporting System - In
1998, the USCG, on behalf of the U.S.
Government, submitted a proposal
developed by NOAA with the assistance
of the Marine Mammal Commission and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:37 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
the International Fund for Animal
Welfare to the International Maritime
Organization (IMO). The proposal
requested approval of two mandatory
ship reporting systems. The proposal
received IMO endorsement and systems
became operational in 1999. The
systems obligate all commercial ships
300 gross tons (272 metric tons) and
greater entering areas designated as right
whale critical habitat to call into a
shore-based station. The systems
provide information on right whales
directly to mariners as they enter right
whale habitat, the right whales’
vulnerability to ship strikes, and steps
that can be taken to reduce the chance
of collision. They also provide a means
to obtain information on ship traffic
volume and routes to assist in
identifying measures to reduce future
ship strikes. The systems are
administered primarily by the USCG.
Aerial Surveys - In 1993, the SEIT
developed a system to help alert area
ship traffic to the presence of right
whales, thereby reducing the possibility
of ship strikes. The central feature of the
system has been an aerial survey
program designed to obtain accurate,
current information on the locations of
whales. Aerial surveys were initiated in
1993 in the waters off the SEUS and
have continued each year since.
Continuously updated right whale
sighting information from survey teams
is immediately relayed to area mariners
via centralized communication systems
operated by the USCG and the U.S.
Navy. Information is provided through a
number of real time media, including
USCG Broadcast Notices to Mariners,
NAVTEX and NOAA Weather Radio.
Among other measures, vessels are
advised to proceed at reduced speeds to
reduce the likelihood of serious injury
or death if a collision occurs. However,
even in very good sighting conditions,
not all whales are detected. Therefore,
whales may be present but not always
reported to mariners.
In 1997, an aerial survey program was
initiated in waters off the northeastern
United States. These efforts focused on
Cape Cod Bay (CCB) and the Great
South Channel (GSC) in late winter and
early spring. From 1997 to present,
aerial surveys supported by NMFS and
the State of Massachusetts have been
conducted to cover peak abundance
periods, principally between January
and March in CCB, and between March
and early July in the GSC . Aerial
surveys have been recently expanded in
the Gulf of Maine and waters of Rhode
Island, New York, and New Jersey.
Sightings from aerial survey
platforms, right whale researchers, and
multiple other sources are reported to
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
our NEFSC. These data are plotted using
a Geographic Information System with
sightings grouped and ’circled’ with a
buffer zone. Right whale sighting
advisories, or ’alerts,’ are disseminated
to notify mariners of the presence of
right whales via a number of
mechanisms. The USCG issues
Broadcast Notices to Mariners and via
NAVTEX. NOAA Weather Radio
provides geographic and positional data
on the sightings periodically. The Cape
Cod Canal Traffic Controllers contact
ships and provide positions and a
radius for each sighting.
Notifications to individual ships,
commercial fishing vessels, and military
vessels are made directly from the
aircraft when observed vessels are
transiting close to a whale. In addition,
these surveys have provided sightings of
entangled and floating right whales, and
provide photo identification data for
numerous studies. Current plans are to
continue the surveys into the
foreseeable future. While dedicated
aircraft surveys may be the best
available means to attempt to alert
mariners about the presence of right
whales, these programs have a number
of limitations. For example, aerial
surveys are costly to implement. Also,
the surveys are limited by weather and
can be conducted only in daylight and
under the best of survey conditions. In
addition, it is likely that, even under
good conditions, many whales are
missed by observers, especially since
only those whales at or near the surface
can be seen. Nonetheless, until effective
alternatives are identified, the surveys
are expected to continue.
Vessel Approach Regulations - As
discussed, on February 13, 1997, an
interim final rule (62 FR 6729) was
published that prohibits both boats and
aircraft from approaching any right
whale closer than 500 yards (457.2 m).
Exceptions for closer approach are
provided for emergency situations and
where certain authorizations are
provided.
Updating Navigational Publications The National Ocean Service publishes
and periodically updates nautical charts
and a series of regional books called
U.S. Coast Pilots. These are basic
references on regional environmental
conditions, navigation hazards, and
rules. In U.S. waters, captains of ships
greater than 1,200 gross tons (1,088
metric tons) are required to carry Coast
Pilots. Information contained in the
Coast Pilots covering the entire eastern
United States has been updated to
include information on the status of
right whales, the times and areas where
they occur, the threats posed to whales
by ships, and advice on measures
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
mariners might take to avoid hitting
right whales. Also, updated information
regarding right whale critical habitat
and regulations about approaching right
whales are published on nautical charts
when they are re-printed.
Educational Materials and Outreach A number of agencies and organizations
have collaborated on developing
brochures, pamphlets, and
informational papers to educate
mariners about the vulnerability of right
whales to ship strikes. We have
published magazine articles directed to
the shipping industry. Also, as noted
above, a video on this subject was
prepared and is being distributed to the
shipping industry. The SEIT and NEIT
are developing a comprehensive
education and outreach strategy and
have played a key role in past education
and outreach efforts. These efforts
include providing training at mariner
academies and local marinas.
Boston Harbor Ship Routing Measures
- Part of NOAA’s SSRS includes
consideration of ship traffic routing
measures, including shifting the port of
Boston’s Traffic Separation Scheme
(TSS). In 2006, NOAA developed a
proposal that was submitted by the
USCG on behalf of the U.S. Government
to the IMO to narrow and re-align the
northern leg of the Boston TSS 12
degrees to the north to redirect shipping
traffic through areas with lower
densities of right whales and other
baleen species. The shift is expected to
significantly reduce the risk of ship
strikes for both right whales and other
baleen whale species. The IMO
endorsed the proposal in December
2006. The United States expects to
implement the change by July 2007.
Canadian Ship Routing Measures - In
July 2003, with approval from the IMO,
Canada moved shipping lanes in the
Bay of Fundy four nautical miles (7.4
km) to the east to protect the feeding
whales from ship collisions. During
summer and early fall, right whales
aggregate to feed in the Bay of Fundy,
between New Brunswick and Nova
Scotia, Canada. During this time the
whales are exposed to heavy vessel
traffic in major shipping channels that
pass through the area.
Fishing Gear Entanglement
Death and serious injury resulting
from entanglement in fishing gear are
significant factors causing the North
Atlantic right whale to be in danger of
extinction throughout its range. Under
the MMPA, we are required to develop
a List of Fisheries (LOF) that classifies
all U.S. commercial fisheries into one of
three categories based on the level of
marine mammal deaths and serious
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:37 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
injuries that occur incidental to the
fishery. The categorization of a fishery
in the LOF determines whether
participants in that fishery may be
required to comply with certain
provisions of the MMPA, such as
registration, observer coverage, and take
reduction plan requirements.
The Atlantic Large Whale Take
Reduction Plan - Numerous actions and
activities have been implemented to
reduce the danger posed by gear
entanglement to the survival and
recovery of the North Atlantic right
whale. Under the 1994 amendments to
the MMPA, we are required to establish
take reduction teams (TRT) to develop
and implement take reduction plans
(TRP). The principle goal of the TRT
process is to reduce the levels of
mortality and serious injury of strategic
stocks of marine mammals in Category
I and II fisheries (i.e., those with
frequent or occasional mortality and
serious injury of marine mammals). In
general, the purpose of the TRT is to
provide recommendations and assist us
in developing management measures as
part of the take reduction planning
process. Take reduction teams are
composed of representatives from the
fishing industry, fishery management
councils, state and Federal resource
management agencies, the scientific
community, and conservation
organizations. After a plan is
implemented, the TRT provides us with
recommendations on implementation
activities, feedback on the effectiveness
of current management measures, and
strategies for modifying the plan as
necessary.
We, with the assistance of the
ALWTRT, developed the ALWTRP to
reduce the level of serious injury and
mortality of three strategic stocks of
large whales, including North Atlantic
right whales in commercial gillnet and
trap/pot fisheries. In general, the
ALWTRP consists of a combination of
regulatory and non-regulatory programs,
including broad gear modifications,
time-area closures, expanded
disentanglement efforts, extensive
outreach efforts in key areas, gear
research, and an expanded right whale
surveillance program to supplement the
Mandatory Ship Reporting System.
Since its implementation in 1997, the
ALWTRP has been modified on several
occasions to address the serious injury
and mortality of large whales in gillnet
and lobster trap/pot gear. Recent
amendments to the ALWTRP include
restrictions to the Southeast Atlantic
gillnet fishery (67 FR 59471, September
23, 2002; 68 FR 19464, April 21, 2003).
Other amendments to the ALWTRP
include additional gear modifications
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
77713
for lobster trap/pot gear in particular
management areas and changes to the
lobster trap/pot and gillnet take
reduction technology lists (67 FR 1300,
January 10, 2002; 67 FR 15493, April 2,
2002).
In addition, a Seasonal Area
Management (SAM) program was
implemented (67 FR 1142, January 9,
2002; 67 FR 65722, October 28, 2002),
which identified two management areas
based on annual predictable
aggregations of right whales. The SAM
program also requires gear
modifications for lobster trap/pot and
anchored gillnet gear in these areas on
a seasonal basis.
A Dynamic Area Management (DAM)
program (67 FR 1133, January 9, 2002;
67 FR 65722, October 28, 2002) was also
implemented to protect unexpected
aggregations of right whales that met an
appropriate trigger by temporarily
restricting lobster trap/pot and anchored
gillnet fishing in a designated DAM
area. Subsequent to the introduction of
the DAM program, gear modifications
determined to sufficiently reduce the
risk of entanglement to right whales
and, therefore, deemed acceptable for
fishing in DAM zones were
implemented (68 FR 10195, March 4,
2003; 68 FR 51195, August 26, 2003).
We reconvened the ALWTRT in 2003
to help evaluate the ALWTRP and
discuss additional modifications
necessary to meet the goals of the
MMPA and the ESA. Particular
emphasis was placed on those options
designed to reduce the potential for
entanglements and minimize adverse
impacts if entanglements occur. On June
30, 2003, we published a NOI to prepare
an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) that would analyze the impacts of
alternatives for amending the ALWTRP
(68 FR 38676). On June 21, 2005, we
also published a proposed rule (70 FR
35894) that discussed how
modifications to the ALWTRP would be
implemented.
Disentanglement Efforts - The 1991
right whale recovery plan called for
establishment of a marine mammal
disentanglement program. We
established a team of scientists from the
Center for Coastal Studies and the New
England Aquarium to respond to all
marine mammal entanglements, with an
emphasis on right whale and humpback
whale entanglements. The current
disentanglement effort consists of one
primary team and basic field support in
the Bay of Fundy, Gulf of Maine, the
mid-Atlantic, and Georgia/Florida. The
program covers nearshore
disentanglement events along the
eastern seaboard, though the team can
be deployed in some offshore locations.
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
77714
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
There are, however, limitations; for
example, the northern Gulf of Maine/
Bay of Fundy field stations are
operational only when biologists are
conducting seasonal whale research,
and, even then, disentanglement
response relies on the timely transfer of
the team and its equipment to the
entanglement site. In the southeast
United States, trained biologists are
available to assist, and disentanglement
equipment caches have been established
at key locations.
Coordination of Federal Agency
Recovery Activities under the ESA
Under section 7(a)(1) of the ESA all
Federal agencies, in consultation with
and with the assistance of the Secretary,
must use their authorities in the
furtherance of the ESA by carrying out
programs for the conservation of
endangered and threatened species
listed pursuant to section 4 of the ESA.
Under Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA, all
Federal agencies must ensure that any
action they authorize, fund, or carry out
is not likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of endangered or threatened
species or destroy or adversely modify
designated critical habitat. These
agencies must consult with us on any
action that may affect listed species or
critical habitat for species under our
jurisdiction (including right whales). As
a result of these consultations, we issue
either a letter of concurrence that the
activity is not likely to adversely affect
a species or critical habitat, or a
Biological Opinion for activities likely
to adversely affect a species or critical
habitat. A Biological Opinion evaluates
whether the activity is likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of
the species or result in the destruction
or adverse modification of critical
habitat and, if so, provides reasonable
and prudent alternatives to the activity.
In those cases where we conclude that
an action (or implementation of any
reasonable and prudent alternatives)
and the resultant incidental take of
listed species is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of listed
species, we specify reasonable and
prudent measures necessary and
appropriate to minimize effects of the
action on the species of concern.
We have consulted under section
7(a)(2) of the ESA with the ACOE,
USCG, and the U.S. Navy on several
occasions for a variety of activities. We
have also conducted consultations on
our fishery management plans.
Canadian Recovery Efforts
In 2000, the Canadian Department of
Fisheries and Oceans published a
recovery plan for the North Atlantic
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:37 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
right whale (E. glacialis). The recovery
plan proposes five broad recovery
strategies for the North Atlantic right
whale: (1) reduction of vessel collisions;
(2) reduction of the impacts of
encounters with fishing gear; (3)
reduction of disturbance from human
activities; (4) reduction of exposure to
contaminants and habitat degradation;
and (5) population monitoring and
research.
Despite ongoing conservation efforts,
the North Atlantic right whale remains
in danger of extinction throughout its
range.
Proposed Listing Determination
The best available scientific and
commercial data supports the
classification of right whales in the
North Atlantic as a separate species
under the ESA. Based on the review of
the status of this species and the section
4(a)(1) factors (see above), and after
taking into account any ongoing
conservation efforts to protect the
species, we conclude that the North
Atlantic right whale is in danger of
extinction throughout its range because
of the following factors:
Overutilization for Commercial,
Recreational, Scientific, or Educational
Purposes
Historically, North Atlantic right
whale populations were severely
depleted by commercial whaling. While
North Atlantic right whales have been
protected since 1931 under the
Convention for the Regulation of
Whaling and more recently by the IWC
(circa 1949) and in U.S. waters under
the MMPA (1972) and the ESA (1973),
the North Atlantic right whale is in
danger of extinction throughout its
range because of past whaling and has
not exhibited signs of recovery from the
effects of commercial whaling.
The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory
Mechanisms
While regulatory mechanisms have
provided increased protection to right
whales in the North Atlantic, human
activities still result in serious injuries
and mortalities of right whales. The
inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms is a factor that places the
North Atlantic right whale in danger of
extinction throughout its range.
Other Natural or Manmade Factors
Affecting Its Continued Existence
The most significant factor currently
placing the North Atlantic right whale
in danger of extinction remains humanrelated mortality, most notably, ship
collisions and entanglement in fishing
gear. The available evidence strongly
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
suggests that the western population of
North Atlantic right whale cannot
sustain the number of deaths that result
from ship strikes and fishing gear
interactions. If the impact of these
activities continue at current rates, it is
likely to result in the extirpation of the
western population of North Atlantic
right whales. Given the low population
size of North Atlantic right whales in
the eastern Atlantic Ocean, the
extirpation of right whales in the
western Atlantic Ocean would render
the entire species effectively extinct. No
natural factors are known to be
threatening the continued existence of
the North Atlantic right whale at this
time.
Conclusion
Based on an analysis of the best
scientific and commercial data
available, the North Atlantic right whale
is a separate species, E. glacialis. There
is reason for serious concern about the
future of the North Atlantic right whale.
Due to the continued anthropogenic
factors affecting the survival of the
species, and the whale’s life history, the
North Atlantic right whale is in danger
of extinction throughout its range.
Because the right whale is a long-lived
species, extinction may not occur in the
immediate future, but the possibility of
biological extinction in the next century
is very real. Based on an analysis of the
best scientific and commercial data
available and after taking into
consideration current population trends
and abundance, demographic risk
factors affecting the continued survival
of the species, and ongoing conservation
efforts, it is clear that the North Atlantic
right whale is in danger of extinction
throughout its range and because of: (1)
overutilization for commercial,
recreational scientific, or educational
purposes; (2) the inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms; and (3) other
natural and manmade factors affecting it
continued existence.
Prohibitions and Protective Measures
Section 9 of the ESA prohibits certain
activities that directly or indirectly
affect endangered species. These
prohibitions apply to all individuals,
organizations, and agencies subject to
U.S. jurisdiction.
Sections 7(a)(2) and (4) of the ESA
require Federal agencies to consult with
us to ensure that activities they
authorize, fund, or conduct are not
likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of a listed species or a species
proposed for listing, or to destroy or
adversely modify critical habitat or
proposed critical habitat. If a Federal
action may affect a listed species or its
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
critical habitat, the responsible Federal
agency must enter into consultation
with us. Examples of Federal actions
that may affect the North Atlantic right
whale include coastal development, oil
and gas development, seismic
exploration, point and non-point source
discharge of contaminants,
contaminated waste disposal, water
quality standards, emerging chemical
contaminant practices, vessel operations
and noise level standards, and fishery
management practices.
Sections 10(a)(1)(A) and (B) of the
ESA authorize us to grant exceptions to
the ESA’s Section 9 ’’take’’ prohibitions.
Section 10(a)(1)(A) scientific research
and enhancement permits may be
issued to entities (Federal and nonfederal) for scientific purposes or to
enhance the propagation or survival of
a listed species. The type of activities
potentially requiring a section
10(a)(1)(A) research/enhancement
permit include scientific research that
targets North Atlantic right whales.
Under section 10(a)(1)(B), the Secretary
may permit takings otherwise
prohibited by section 9(a)(1)(B) if such
taking is incidental to, and not the
purpose of, the carrying out of an
otherwise lawful activity.
NMFS Policies on Endangered and
Threatened Fish and Wildlife
On July 1, 1994, we and FWS
published a series of policies regarding
listings under the ESA, including a
policy for peer review of scientific data
(59 FR 34270) and a policy to identify,
to the maximum extent possible, those
activities that would or would not
constitute a violation of section 9 of the
ESA (59 FR 34272).
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Role of Peer Review
The intent of the peer review policy
is to ensure that listings are based on the
best scientific and commercial data
available. Prior to a final listing, we will
solicit the expert opinions of three
qualified specialists, concurrent with
the public comment period.
Independent specialists will be selected
from the academic and scientific
community, Federal and state agencies,
and the private sector.
Identification of Those Activities That
Would Constitute a Violation of Section
9 of the ESA
The intent of this policy is to increase
public awareness of the effect of our
ESA listing on proposed and ongoing
activities within the species’ range. We
will identify, to the extent known at the
time of the final rule, specific activities
that will be considered likely to result
in violation of section 9, as well as
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:37 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
activities that will not be considered
likely to result in violation. Activities
that we believe could result in violation
of section 9 prohibitions against ’’take’’
of the North Atlantic right whale
include, but are not limited to, the
following: (1) Operating vessels in a
manner that results in ship strikes or
disrupts foraging, resting, or care for
young or results in noise levels that
disrupt foraging, communication,
resting, or care for young; (2) fishing
practices that can result in entanglement
when lines, nets, or other gear are
placed in the water column; (3) coastal
development that adversely affects
North Atlantic right whales (e.g.,
dredging, waste treatment); (4)
discharging or dumping toxic chemicals
or other pollutants into areas used by
North Atlantic right whales; (5)
scientific research activities; (6) Land/
water use or fishing practices that result
in reduced availability of prey species
during periods when North Atlantic
right whales are present.
We believe, based on the best
available information, the following
actions will not result in a violation of
ESA Section 9: (1) federally funded or
approved projects for which ESA
section 7 consultation has been
completed, and that are conducted in
accordance with any terms and
conditions we provide in an incidental
take statement accompanying a
biological opinion; and (2) takes of
North Atlantic right whales that have
been authorized by NMFS pursuant to
section 10 of the ESA.
These lists are not exhaustive. They
are intended to provide some examples
of the types of activities that we might
or might not consider as constituting a
take of North Atlantic right whales.
Critical Habitat
Critical habitat is defined in section 3
of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1532(3)) as: ‘‘(i)
the specific areas within the
geographical area occupied by a species,
at the time it is listed in accordance
with the provisions of [section 4 of this
Act], on which are found those physical
or biological features (I) essential to
conservation of the species and (II)
which may require special management
considerations or protection; and (ii)
specific areas outside the geographical
area occupied by a species at the time
it is listed in accordance with the
provisions of [section 4 of this Act],
upon a determination by the Secretary
that such areas are essential for the
conservation of the species.’’
Conservation means to use and the use
of all methods and procedures needed
to bring the species to the point at
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
77715
which listing under the ESA is no
longer necessary.
Section 4(a)(3)(a) of the ESA (16
U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(A)) requires that, to
the maximum extent prudent and
determinable, critical habitat shall be
designated concurrent with making a
determination that a species is an
endangered species or threatened
species, unless some limited exceptions
apply.
In July 2002, we received a petition to
revise the current critical habitat
designation for right whales in the
North Atlantic. On August 28, 2003, we
published a determination that the
petitioned action was not warranted at
that time (68 FR 51758). This notice
stated that we would continue to
analyze the physical and biological
habitat features (PCEs) essential to the
conservation of the species. Our
Northeast Region and Southeast Region
are developing a proposed rule to
designate critical habitat for the North
Atlantic right whale.
Public Comments Solicited
We are soliciting public comments
and information from the public, other
concerned governmental agencies, the
scientific community, industry, and any
other interested parties on this proposed
listing of the North Atlantic right whale
(E. glacialis) under the ESA as an
endangered species throughout its
range.
Classification
National Environmental Policy Act
The 1982 amendments to the ESA, in
section 4(b)(1)(A), restrict the
information that may be considered
when assessing species for listing to the
best scientific and commercial data
available. Based on this limitation of
criteria for a listing decision and the
opinion in Pacific Legal Foundation v.
Andrus, 675 F. 2d 825 (6th Cir. 1981),
we have concluded that ESA listing
actions are not subject to the
requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act. (See NOAA
Administrative Order 216 6.)
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866,
Regulatory Flexibility Act, and
Paperwork Reduction Act
As noted in the Conference Report on
the 1982 amendments to the ESA,
economic impacts cannot be considered
when assessing the status of a species.
Therefore, the economic analysis
requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act are not applicable to the
listing process. In addition, this
proposed rule is exempt from review
under E.O. 12866. This proposed rule
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
77716
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 27, 2006 / Proposed Rules
does not contain a collection-ofinformation requirement for the
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction
Act.
E.O. 13132 - Federalism
E.O. 13132 requires agencies to take
into account any federalism impacts of
regulations under development. It
includes specific consultation directives
for situations where a regulation will
preempt state law, or impose substantial
direct compliance costs on state and
local governments (unless required by
statute). Neither of these circumstances
is applicable to this proposed listing
determination. In keeping with the
intent of the Administration and
Congress to provide continuing and
meaningful dialogue on issues of mutual
state and Federal interest, we intend to
provide this proposed rule to relevant
state agencies and invite their comments
on it.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
References Cited
The status review report of the right
whales in the North Atlantic and North
Pacific forms the basis for the proposed
listing determinations for both the North
Atlantic and the North Pacific right
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:37 Dec 26, 2006
Jkt 211001
whales. This status review report and a
complete list of references used in its
preparation is available online on our
website at https://www.nero.noaa.gov/
and is available upon request from our
Northeast Regional Office in Gloucester,
Massachusetts (see ADDRESSES).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 224
Administrative practice and
procedure, Endangered and threatened
species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation.
Dated: December 20, 2006.
Samuel D. Rauch III.,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, we propose to amend 50 CFR
part 224 as follows:
PART 224—ENDANGERED MARINE
AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES
1. The authority citation for part 224
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531–1543 and 16
U.S.C. 1361 et seq.
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2. Revise § 224.101(b) to read as
follows:
§ 224.101 Enumeration of endangered
marine and anadromous species.
(b) Marine mammals. Blue whale
(Balaenoptera musculus); Bowhead
whale (Balaena mysticetus); Caribbean
monk seal (Monachus tropicalis);
Chinese river dolphin (Lipotes
vexillifer); Cochito (Phocoena sinus);
Fin or finback whale (Balaenoptera
physalus); Hawaiian monk seal
(Monachus schauinslandi); Humpback
whale (Megaptera novaeangliae); Indus
River dolphin (Platanista minor);
Mediterranean monk seal (Monachus
monachus); North Atlantic right whale
(Eubalaena glacialis); Saimaa seal
(Phoca hispida saimensis); Sei whale
(Balaenoptera borealis); Sperm whale
(Physeter catodon); Western North
Pacific (Korean) gray whale
(Eschrichtius robustus); Steller sea lion,
western population, (Eumetopias
jubatus), which consists of Stellar sea
lions from breeding colonies located
west of 144[deg] W. longitude.
[FR Doc. E6–22182 Filed 12–26–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 248 (Wednesday, December 27, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 77704-77716]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-22182]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 224
[Docket No. 061212328-6328-01; I.D. 120706B]
RIN 0648-XB58
Endangered And Threatened Species; Proposed Endangered Status for
North Atlantic Right Whales
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, NMFS, have completed a comprehensive status review of
right whales in the northern hemisphere under the Endangered Species
Act (ESA). Based on the findings from the status review, we have
concluded these right whales exist as two species, the North Atlantic
right whale (Eubalaena glacialis) and the North Pacific right whale (E.
japonicus). We have also determined that each of these species is in
danger of extinction throughout its range. To reflect this taxonomic
revision, we are issuing two proposed rules to designate each
separately as an endangered species. This proposed rule is to list the
North Atlantic right whale; a proposed rule to list the North Pacific
right whale is issued separately. We are soliciting public comment on
this proposed listing determination.
DATES: Comments on this proposed rule must be received by close of
business on February 26, 2007. Requests for public hearings must be
made in writing by February 12, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Mark Minton on the North Atlantic right
whale. Comments may be submitted by:
E-mail: NARW.ProposedRule@noaa.gov. Include in the subject
line the following
[[Page 77705]]
document identifier: ``NARW Proposed Rule.'' E-mail comments, with or
without attachments, are limited to 5 megabytes.
Webform at the Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions at that site for
submitting comments.
Mail: Mark Minton, NMFS Northeast Region, One Blackburn
Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930
Hand delivery to: NMFS Northeast Region, One Blackburn
Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930
Fax: 978-281-9394
The proposed rule and other materials relating to this proposed
rule can be found on NMFS' Northeast Region website: https://www.nero.noaa.gov/.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Minton, NMFS, Northeast Region,
978-281-9328, ext. 6534; or Marta Nammack, NMFS, Office of Protected
Resources, 301-713-1401, ext. 180.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Status Review
We have completed a status review report that assesses the status
of right whales in the North Atlantic and North Pacific Oceans.
Specifically, we describe the population structure and examine the
extent to which phylogenetic uniqueness exists between right whales
found in the North Atlantic and North Pacific. We also examine the
biological status and adverse impacts on the right whale and its
habitat in those oceans.
Biology of Right Whales in the North Atlantic Ocean
The right whale is a large baleen whale. Adults are generally
between 45 and 55 feet (13.7 - 16.8 m) in length and can weigh up to 70
tons (63.5 metric tons). Females are larger than males. The
distinguishing features of right whales include a stocky body,
generally black coloration (although some individuals have white
patches on their undersides), lack of a dorsal fin, large head (about
1/4 of the body length), strongly bowed margin of the lower lip, and
callosities on the head region. Two rows of long (up to about eight
feet (2.4 m) in length), dark baleen plates hang from the upper jaw,
with about 225 plates on each side. The tail is broad, deeply notched,
and all black with smooth trailing edge.
The International Whaling Commission (IWC) recognizes two right
whale populations in the North Atlantic: a western and eastern
population (IWC, 1986). The current distribution and migration patterns
of the eastern North Atlantic right whale population are unknown. Based
on whaling records, it appears that the eastern population migrated
along the coast from northern Europe to northwest Africa. Sighting
surveys from the eastern Atlantic Ocean suggest that right whales
present in this region are rare (Best et al., 2001). The western North
Atlantic population is believed to contain only about 300 individuals,
and it is unclear whether its abundance is remaining static, undergoing
modest growth, or declining, as recent modeling exercises suggest
(Caswell et al., 1999).
Prior to extensive exploitation, the North Atlantic right whale was
found distributed in temperate, subarctic, coastal and continental
shelf waters throughout the North Atlantic Ocean rim (Perry et al.,
1999). Right whales prefer shallow coastal waters, but their
distribution is also strongly correlated to the distribution of
zooplankton prey. In both northern and southern hemispheres, right
whales are observed in low latitudes and in nearshore waters during
winter where calving takes place. During the summer and fall months,
right whales tend to migrate to the high latitudes where their
distribution is likely linked to the patchy distribution of their
principal zooplankton prey (Winn et al., 1986; Perry et al., 1999).
In the western North Atlantic, right whales migrate along the North
American coast from Nova Scotia to Florida. Considerable data exist
documenting use of areas in the western North Atlantic Ocean where
right whales presently occur. Right whales have been observed from the
Mid-Atlantic Bight northward through the Gulf of Maine during all
months of the year. Foraging right whales (and their habitat) appear to
be concentrated in New England waters. In New England, peak abundance
of right whales in feeding areas occurs in Cape Cod Bay beginning in
late winter. In early spring (May), peak right whale abundance occurs
in Wilkinson Basin to the Great South Channel (Kenney et al., 1995). In
late June and July, right whale distribution gradually shifts to the
northern edge of Georges Bank. In late summer (August) and fall, much
of the population is found in waters in the Bay of Fundy and around
Roseway Basin (Winn et al., 1986; Kenny et al., 1995; Kenny et al.,
2001). Variation in the abundance and development of suitable food
patches appears to modify the general patterns of movement by reducing
peak numbers, stay durations, and specific locales (Brown et al., 2001;
Kenny, 2001). In particular, large changes in the typical pattern of
food abundance will dramatically change the general pattern of right
whale habitat use (Kenny, 2001). Known wintering areas for the North
Atlantic right whale occur along the southeastern U.S. coast where
calving occurs from December through March (Winn, 1984; Kraus et al.,
1986; IWC, 1986). In the North Atlantic it appears that not all
reproductively active females return to the calving grounds each year
(Kraus et al., 1986; Payne, 1986). The location of the majority of the
population during the winter months remains unknown (NMFS, 2005).
Knowlton et al. (1992) reported several long-distance movements as
far north as Newfoundland, the Labrador Basin, and southeast of
Greenland; in addition, recent resightings of photographically
identified individuals have been made off Iceland, arctic Norway, and
in the old Cape Farewell whaling ground east of Greenland. The
Norwegian sighting (September 1999) represents one of only two
sightings this century of a right whale in Norwegian waters, and the
first since 1926. Together, these long-range matches indicate an
extended range for at least some individuals and perhaps the existence
of important habitat areas not presently well described. Similarly,
records from the Gulf of Mexico (Moore and Clark, 1963; Schmidly et
al., 1972) represent either geographic anomalies or a more extensive
historic range beyond the sole known calving and wintering ground in
the waters of the southeastern United States (Waring et al., 2004).
Listing Determinations under the ESA
The ESA defines an endangered species as one that is in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range, and a
threatened species as one that is likely to become endangered in the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range
(sections 3(6) and 3(20), respectively). The statute requires us to
determine whether any species is endangered or threatened because of
any one of the following five factors: (1) The 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) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (5) other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence (section 4(a)(1)(A)-(E)). We are to
make this determination based solely on the best available scientific
information after conducting a review of the status of the species and
taking into account any efforts being made by states or foreign
governments to protect the species. The focus of our
[[Page 77706]]
evaluation of the ESA section 4(a)(1) factors is to evaluate whether
and to what extent a given factor represents a threat to the future
survival of the species. The focus of our consideration of protective
efforts is to evaluate whether and to what extent they address the
identified threats and so ameliorate a species' risk of extinction. The
steps we follow in implementing this statutory scheme are to: (1)
delineate the species under consideration; (2) review the status of the
species; (3) consider the ESA section 4 (a)(1) factors to identify
threats facing the species; (4) assess whether certain protective
efforts mitigate these threats; and (5) predict the species' future
persistence.
Review of ``Species'' Delineation
Since 1974, NMFS has maintained the right whale listing as
originally listed by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) under the Endangered Species Conservation Act of 1969, the
precursor to the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.; the ESA)(35 FR 18319, December 2, 1970) -- Eubalaena spp., i.e.,
all the species within the genus Eubalaena. The USFWS maintains the
official lists of threatened and endangered species and is required to
add species to the official lists when NMFS or USFWS determines species
under its jurisdiction should be listed. The USFWS has changed the
nomenclature for right whales several times over the years in various
iterations of the list of threatened and endangered wildlife. NMFS also
changed the nomenclature for a period of time after one of the USFWS
changes, but later reverted back to the original Eubalaena spp.
listing. The changes may have been made as a reflection of the
discussion in the scientific literature over the appropriate taxonomic
status of right whales. At no point did the USFWS ever propose
delisting any of the species that were included in the original listing
of Eubalaena spp. Regardless of the changes to the list, NMFS maintains
that right whale species were listed as Eubalaena spp., which reflects
the predominant view that existed in 1974: that right whale species are
distinct from bowhead whales (Balaena mysticetus), they belong in the
genus Eubalaena, and the genus Eubalaena contains at least two species:
E. glacialis in the northern hemisphere and E. australis in the
southern hemisphere.
Recent investigations of right whale genetics confirm the
distinction between E. glacialis and E. australis at the species level
and suggest that the North Pacific form of E. glacialis should be
recognized as a separate species and named E. japonica, distinct from
the other two species. NMFS is proposing to adopt this view and, in a
separate rulemaking, to modify its listing to add E. japonica to the
current listing Eubalaena spp. (which includes E. glacialis and E.
australis).
Taxonomy of Right Whales
All whales belong to the mammalian order Cetacea, which is divided
into two suborders: Odontoceti (toothed whales) and Mysticeti (baleen
whales). The Mysticeti are further divided into four families: the
Eschrichtidae, a monotypic family (i.e., containing only one species),
the gray whale; Neobalaenidae, another monotypic family containing only
the pygmy right whale; Balaenidae, which contains two genera: Balaena
(bowhead whales) and Eubalaena (right whales); and Balaenopteridae,
which contains all of the other baleen whales.
Balaena is the genus name for the bowhead whale (Balaena
mysticetus), recognized by Linnaeus in 1758. Eubalaena is the genus
name for right whales, first proposed by Gray in 1864. The first right
whale to be named was what we today call the North Atlantic right whale
or Nord-Kaper (Balaena glacialis, Muller, 1776), from North Cape,
Norway. The second right whale to be named was what we today call the
North Pacific right whale (Balaena japonica, Lacepede, 1818), from
Japan. And the third right whale to be named was what we today call the
Southern right whale (Balaena australis, Desmoulins, 1822), from Algoa
Bay, Cape of Good Hope, South Africa. In the 1970s when all baleen
whales were being considered for listing as endangered under the
Endangered Species Conservation Act of 1969, authors disagreed on the
taxonomic status of right whales. One view was that they belonged in
the genus Balaena along with bowhead whales and that the genus contains
two species: Baleana mysticetus and Baleana glacialis (Rice, 1977). The
subspecific composition of B. glacialis was unclear. The other view was
that right whales were distinct from bowhead whales at the genus level
and that right whales should be identified as Eubalaena (Schevill,
1986). This later view is currently the prevailing view, and it is the
view embraced by USFWS and NMFS.
There were also two views about the species composition of
Eubalaena. One view was that there was only one species Eubalaena
glacialis containing several subspecies (E. glacialis glacialis (North
Atlantic), E. glacialis sieboldii (North Pacific), and E. glacialis
australis (Southern oceans)) (Tomilin, 1957). Hershkovitz (1966) also
describes these three subspecies, except that he refers to North
Pacific right whales as E. glacialis japonica. The other view was that
Eubalaena comprised two species E. glacialis and E. australis (Omura,
1958; Omura et al., 1969). This is the view represented by the
designation of Eubalaena spp. in the original listing by USFWS in 1970
and by NMFS in its first listing in 1974. Generally accepted taxonomic
nomenclature recognized the term ``spp.'' as an abbreviation for
multiple species within a genus.
The two-species view is summarized by Perry et al.'s (1999) summary
of morphological (Muller, 1954) and genetic data (Schaeff et al.,
1991), both of which recognized distinct species in the northern and
southern hemispheres. Cummings (1985) used E. australis for all right
whales below the equator (southern right whales). The International
Whaling Commission also recognizes the presence of two distinct
species, E. glacialis and E. australis, in the schedule appended to the
Convention in which species under purview of the Commission are listed.
Conclusion
Although the listing of right whales has changed from the original
nomenclature of Eubalaena spp., there is no indication in the record
that USFWS ever intended to delist any of the species contained in the
original listing of the entire genus. Since the original 1970 listing
was described as ``Eubalaena spp.'', the logical interpretation is that
at least two species of right whale were listed, the northern right
whale (E. glacialis) and the southern right whale (E. australis), since
``spp.'' refers to more than one species, not ``subspecies.'' Even if
three separate species had been recognized in 1970, southern right
whale (E. australis) would have been one of them. Each plausible
scenario results in the right whale in the Southern Hemisphere being
recognized as a separate species. Since NMFS has maintained its listing
as ``Right whales, Eubalaena spp.'', and USFWS has never proposed
delisting any of the species included in the original listing, we
conclude that both E. glacialis and E. australis were listed in 1970,
carried forward to the list created pursuant to the ESA, and determined
to be endangered in our listing in 1974.
Right Whale Species Currently Being Considered for Listing
As discussed above, genetic data now provide unequivocal support to
distinguish three right whale lineages as separate phylogenetic
species: (1) the North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena glacialis),
ranging in the North Atlantic Ocean; (2) the North Pacific right whale
[[Page 77707]]
(Eubalaena japonica), ranging in the North Pacific Ocean, and (3) the
southern right whale (Eubalaena australis), historically ranging
throughout the southern hemisphere's oceans (Rosenbaum et al., 2000).
Based on evidence from recent genetic studies (Gaines et al., 2005), we
conclude that the current taxonomic classification of right whales in
the northern hemisphere should be revised consistent with the generally
accepted analyses by Rosenbaum et al. (2000). We have determined that
listing right whales in the North Atlantic and the North Pacific as two
separate species is warranted in light of the compelling evidence
provided by recent scientific studies on right whale taxonomy and
classification. In accordance with the applicable statutory definitions
and requirements, the North Atlantic right whale (E. glacialis) and the
North Pacific right whale (E. japonica) are being considered for
listing as separate species under the ESA.
Refining the taxonomy of these endangered cetaceans is critical to
the recovery planning and conservation of these species. The separate
listings of these two species in the northern hemisphere will allow for
consistent scientific practice and management policies in recovering
these species.
Status of the Three Right Whale Species
The determination that right whales in the North Atlantic and North
Pacific Oceans are two separate species requires us to consider these
species separately for the purposes of listing under the ESA. We will
consider the status of the North Atlantic right whale (E. glacialis) in
this proposed rule and that of the North Pacific right whale (E.
japonica) in a separate proposed rule in today's issue of the Federal
Register. At the final rule stage, we will address both species in the
same rule so that any changes become effective together. The southern
right whale, E. australis, will remain listed as endangered, though we
intend to conduct a 5-year review of its status in the near future. In
the following discussion of the status of the North Atlantic right
whale, E. glacialis, we provide the rationale for today's proposal to
list this species as a separate endangered species. The other proposed
rule in today's issue of the Federal Register, referenced above,
provides the rationale for the proposal to list the North Pacific right
whale, E. japonica, as a separate endangered species. We also identify
the southern right whale, E. australis (one of two species that was
listed in 1970 and is still listed) in the regulatory language as a
separate endangered species and remove Eubalaena spp. from the list.
Status of the North Atlantic Right Whale (Eubalaena glacialis)
Abundance and Trends
Sighting surveys from the eastern Atlantic Ocean suggest that right
whales present in this region are rare (Best et al,. 2001). In 1992,
based on a census of individual whales identified using photo-
identification techniques and the assumption that whales not seen for 7
years are dead, the western North Atlantic stock size was estimated to
be 295 individuals (Knowlton et al.,1994). In 1998, an updated analysis
using the same method gave an estimate of 299 animals (Kraus et al.,
2001). Because this was a nearly complete census, it is assumed that
this represents a minimum population size estimate. However, no
estimate of abundance with an associated coefficient of variation has
been calculated for this population. Calculation of a reliable point
estimate is likely to be difficult, given the known problem of
heterogeneity of distribution in this population. An IWC workshop on
status and trends of western North Atlantic right whales gave a minimum
direct-count estimate of 263 right whales alive in 1996 and noted that
the true population was unlikely to be substantially greater than this
(Best et al., 2001).
The population growth rate for North Atlantic right whale reported
for the period 1986-1992 by Knowlton et al. (1994) was 2.5 percent
(coefficient of variation=0.12), suggesting that the stock was showing
signs of slow recovery. In contrast, southern right whale populations
(those off Argentina, Australia, and South Africa) are increasing at
annual rates on the order of 7 to 8 percent (IWC, 1998). However,
Caswell et al. (1999) found that crude survival probabilities for North
Atlantic right whale decreased from about 0.99 per year in 1980 to
about 0.94 in 1994, and that population growth rate declined from about
5.3 percent in 1980 to a negative 2.4 percent in 1994 (Caswell et al.,
1999). The decline was statistically significant. This model suggested
that the western population of North Atlantic right whales was headed
for extinction with an upper bound on the expected time to extinction
of 191 years (Caswell et al., 1999). Modified versions of the Caswell
et al. (1999) model as well as several other models were reviewed at
the 1999 IWC workshop (Best et al., 2001). Despite differences in
approach, all of the models indicated a decline in right whale survival
in the 1990s relative to the 1980s with female survival, in particular,
apparently affected (Best et al., 2001; Waring et al., 2002).
In 2002, our Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) hosted a
workshop to review right whale population models to examine: (1)
potential bias in the models, and (2) changes in the subpopulation
trend based on new information collected in the late 1990s (Clapham et
al., 2002). Three different models were used to explore right whale
survivability and to address potential sources of bias. Although biases
were identified that could negatively affect the results, all three
modeling techniques resulted in the same conclusion; survival has
continued to decline and seems due to female mortalities (Clapham et
al., 2002).
Life History Characteristics
Females give birth to their first calf at an average age of 9 years
(Best et al., 1998; Hamilton et al., 1998a). Standard reproductive
rates for the western North Atlantic population have yet to be
calculated. The calving interval for right whales is between 2 and 7
years, with means ranging from 3.12 (95 percent confidence interval
(CI) 3.05-3.17) to 3.67 years (95 percent CI 3.3-4.1) (Knowlton et al.,
1994; Best et al., 2001; Burwell, 2001; Cooke et al., 2001). In the
western North Atlantic, there was a significant increase in the calving
interval from 3.67 years for the period 1980 to 1992 (Knowlton et al.,
1994) to 5.8 years for the period 1990 to 1998 (Kraus et al. 2001). The
increase in the calving interval is of particular concern and, together
with other perplexing biological parameters, may suggest the population
is under rather unusual biological, energetic, or reproductive stress.
Most recently (2001-2005), a dramatic increase in North Atlantic right
whale calving (23 calves per year) may have decreased the interval to
levels more similar to that of the southern right whale (Kraus et al.,
in press).
Since 1999, 125 right whale calves have been observed, including 31
right whale births during a record calving season in 2000-2001 (B.
Pike, New England Aquarium, pers. comm.). Calving numbers have been
sporadic, with large differences among years. The three calving years
(1997-2000) prior to the record year in 2000-2001 provided low
recruitment with only 10 calves born. The last five calving seasons
(2001-2005) have been substantially better (31, 21, 19, 16, and 28
calves, respectively). Despite improved calving rates over the last
several years,
[[Page 77708]]
mortalities of calves, juveniles, and adults have continued.
An analysis of the age structure of this population suggests that
it contains a smaller proportion of juvenile whales than expected
(Hamilton et al., 1998a; Best et al., 2001), which may reflect low
recruitment and/or high juvenile mortality. In addition, it is possible
that the apparently low reproductive rate is due in part to unstable
age structure or to decreased reproduction due to aging (i.e.,
reproductive senescence) on the part of some females (Waring et al.,
2004).
Genetic Diversity
The size of the western population of the North Atlantic right
whale at the cessation of whaling is unknown, but generally it is
believed to have been very small. Such a reduction of population size
may have resulted in a loss of genetic diversity that could affect the
ability of the current population to successfully reproduce (e.g.,
decreased conceptions, increased abortions, increased neonate
mortality). Studies by Schaeff et al. (1997) and Malik et al. (2000)
indicate that the western population of the North Atlantic right whale
is less genetically diverse than southern right whale populations.
However, several apparently healthy populations of cetaceans, such as
sperm whales and pilot whales, have even lower genetic diversity than
observed in the western North Atlantic right whales (IWC, 2001b).
Summary of Factors Affecting the North Atlantic Right Whale
Section 4(a)(1) of the ESA requires the Secretary of Commerce
(Secretary) to determine whether a species is endangered or threatened
because of any of the following factors: (A) the present or threatened
destruction, modification or curtailment of a species' habitat or
range; (B) overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (c) disease or predation factors; (D) the
inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; (E) other natural or
manmade factors affecting its continued existence. A discussion of
these considerations follows:
The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of
its Habitat or Range
Habitat loss or degradation is not believed to be a causal factor
placing the North Atlantic right whale in danger of extinction at this
time or in the foreseeable future. Unlike many terrestrial species,
right whales and other cetaceans do not compete directly with human
populations for space (Clapham et al., 1999). Because right whales are
dependent on coastal waters adjacent to highly developed coastline,
however, habitat degradation may adversely affect this species.
Consequently, threats to right whales may arise from onshore and near
shore activities.
Right whales frequent coastal waters where dredging and dredge
spoil disposal occur on a regular basis, such as along the southeastern
U.S. coast (Perry et al., 1999). Dredging of harbors and port channels
occurs in a number of locations in or near areas where right whales
aggregate. Noise, increased ship traffic, disposal of dredge material,
and related activities may all contribute to degrade right whale
habitat. It is unknown to what extent these activities affect right
whales (Perry et al., 1999). It appears that more information is needed
to determine specific habitat impacts, if any, from these activities.
Increased ship traffic associated with dredging activities may increase
the risk of ship strikes of right whales resulting in serious injury
and mortality. At present, efforts made to reduce adverse effects on
right whales include posting observers on ships transporting dredge
spoils to reduce the risk of ship strikes.
One potential source of habitat degradation for baleen whales is
oil pollution. General concerns with regard to oil pollution, some of
which are direct impacts on the whales rather than habitat impacts, are
ingestion of contaminated prey, potential irritation of skin and eyes,
inhalation of toxic fumes, and abandonment of polluted feeding habitat
(Geraci and St. Aubin, 1980; Geraci, 1990). However, data on the
effects of oil pollution on cetaceans are inconclusive, and the large
baleen whales appear to be generally unaffected by oil per se (Geraci,
1990; Loughlin, 1994).
Offshore oil and gas exploration activities have been proposed off
the U.S. Atlantic coast. At the present time however, there are no
known plans for oil exploration in the major habitats of the western
population of the North Atlantic right whale, but the possibility
remains for future oil and gas exploration and development activity.
In addition to oil and gas exploration and production, the undersea
exploration and development of techniques for mining minerals deposits
could threaten the North Atlantic right whale and its habitat (Perry et
al., 1999).
An additional potential source of habitat degradation for right
whales is chemical contaminants. The impact of pollution on right
whales is debatable. O'Shea and Brownell (1994) conclude that there is
currently no evidence for significant contaminant-related problems in
baleen whales. Although more research is needed, the existing data on
mysticetes support the view that the lower trophic levels at which
these animals feed should result in lower levels of contaminant
accumulation than would be expected in many odontocetes, which
typically show concentrations that differ from those of baleen whales
by an order of magnitude (O'Shea and Brownell, 1994). However, the
manner in which pollutants negatively impact animals is complex and
difficult to study, particularly in taxa such as large whales for which
many of the key variables and pathways are unknown (Aguilar, 1987;
O'Shea and Brownell, 1994). A more plausible potential problem is that
of transgenerational accumulation (Colborn and Smolen, 1996), but this
remains unstudied in right whales or any other cetacean species.
Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Right whales have not been the target of commercial hunting in the
North Atlantic since 1935, and relatively few catches were made in the
20th century prior to that date. Historical whaling activities are
responsible for the significant depletion of the eastern population of
the North Atlantic right whale and the current severely depleted
numbers of individuals remaining in the western population. The small
population size of the North Atlantic right whale is probably the most
significant factor affecting its continued existence because small
populations are subject to extinction from a variety of factors that
would not seriously affect a larger population. The North Atlantic
right whale is in danger of extinction throughout its range because of
historical whaling. Unlike right whales in the North Pacific, there is
no evidence of the illegal harvest of right whales.
An estimate of pre-exploitation population size is not available.
Basque whalers may have taken substantial numbers of right whales at
times during the 1500s in the Strait of Belle Isle region (Aguilar,
1986), and the stock of right whales may have already been
substantially reduced by the time colonists began whaling in the
Plymouth area in the 1600s (Reeves and Mitchell, 1987). A modest but
persistent whaling effort along the coast of the eastern United States
lasted 3 centuries, and the records include one report of 29 whales
killed in Cape Cod Bay in a single day during January 1700. Based
[[Page 77709]]
on incomplete historical whaling data, Reeves and Mitchell (1987) could
conclude only that there were at least some hundreds of right whales
present in the western North Atlantic during the late 1600s. In a later
study (Reeves et al., 1992), a series of population trajectories using
historical data and an estimated present population size of 350 were
plotted. The results suggest that there may have been at least 1,000
right whales in this population during the early to mid-1600s, with the
greatest population decline occurring in the early 1700s. The authors
cautioned, however, that the record of removals is incomplete, the
results were preliminary, and refinements are required. Based on back
calculations using the present population size and growth rate, the
population may have numbered fewer than 100 individuals by the time
international protection for right whales came into effect in 1935
(Hain, 1975; Reeves et al., 1992; Kenney et al., 1995). However, too
little is known about the population dynamics of right whales in the
intervening years to estimate a pre-exploitation population size with
confidence.
An intense period of whaling in the eastern North Atlantic between
1902 and 1967 (including harvest off the Shetlands, Hebrides, and
Ireland in the years 1906-1910) was particularly catastrophic for the
eastern North Atlantic right whale population. Since that time, there
have only been sporadic sightings of right whales in the eastern North
Atlantic (Best et al., 2001). In two recent winter surveys of Cintra
Bay (off the northwestern coast of Africa), no evidence was found to
suggest that right whales still use the area; this absence of evidence
also corresponds to a lack of recent observations in northern European
waters (Reeves, 2001). Based on the paucity of sighting information,
current distribution and migration patterns of the eastern North
Atlantic right whale population are unknown.
With respect to recreational and educational use, problems may
arise from vessels whose operations are directed at the whales
themselves (i.e., whale watching from either commercial or recreational
vessels). These activities have the potential to disturb right whales
or disrupt their activities and behavior such as feeding, courtship,
and nursing. The impact of such harassment on the reproductive success
of individuals has not been studied and is unknown. Currently, Federal
regulations prohibit the close approach by vessels within 500 yards
(457.2 m) of North Atlantic right whales in U.S. waters. This activity
is allowed, however, in Canadian waters.
Scientific research on right whales frequently involves close
approaches to the animals for the purpose of photographic, genetic, or
behavioral sampling. These activities are controlled by permits in both
U.S. and Canadian waters, and the potential adverse impact on the
animals is considered during the permitting process. Efforts are needed
to ensure coordination of research activities between the United States
and Canada, as well as among U.S. researchers themselves to minimize
any potential adverse impact to right whales.
Disease or Predation
Disease and predation are not believed to be factors causing the
North Atlantic right whale to be in danger of extinction. Unlike in
some dolphin and pinniped (i.e., seals and sea lions) species, there
have been no recorded epizootics in baleen whales. The occurrence of
skin lesions on the bodies of North Atlantic right whales has been
documented in recent years, with an apparent increase in frequency
culminating in a peak in 1995 when they were observed on 24 percent of
photographed individuals (Marx et al., 1999). The origins and
significance of these lesions are unknown. Further research is required
to determine whether they represent a topical or systemic health
problem for the affected animals.
In October 2006, we declared an unusual mortality event (UME) for
humpback whales in the Northeast United States. At least 17 dead
humpback whales have been discovered since March 2006. There has also
been a documented bloom of Alexandrium sp., a toxic dinoflagellate that
causes red tide from Maine to Massachusetts. Prior to the most recent
UME, there had been only three other known cases of a mass mortality
involving large whale species along the east coast: 1987-1988, 2003,
and 2005. Geraci et al. (1989) provide strong evidence that, in the
former case, these deaths of humpback whales resulted from the
consumption of mackerel whose livers contained high levels of
saxitoxin, a naturally occurring red tide toxin, the origin of which
remains unknown. It has been suggested that the occurrence of a red
tide event is related to an increase in freshwater runoff from coastal
development, leading some observers to suggest that such events may
become more common among marine mammals as coastal development
continues. There is currently no conclusive evidence linking red tide
toxins to the deaths or chronic health problems in right whales.
Doucette et al. (2006) assessed the occurrence of paralytic shellfish
poisoning (PSP) toxins in right whales and in co-occurring zooplankton
assemblages dominated by Calanus finmarchicus, the primary food of the
North Atlantic right whale. Samples of right whale feces collected from
at least 11 different whales by these researchers in the Bay of Fundy
tested positive for PSP toxins. These results suggest that trophic
transfer of marine algal toxins may be a factor inhibiting the recovery
of the North Atlantic right whale.
Predation of right whales by killer whales and large shark species
is likely to occur, but the level is not documented. North Atlantic
right whales bearing scars thought to be from killer whale attacks have
been photographed (Kraus, 1990), but the number of whales killed by
this predator is unknown (Perry et al., 1999). Mehta (2004) more
recently concluded that scars recorded on the flukes and bodies of
North Atlantic right whales are more consistent with harassment by some
smaller cetacean, possibly pilot whales (Globicephala spp) and do not
originate from killer whales.
The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Right whales are protected under both U.S. and Canadian law, and
internationally by the IWC. Death and serious injury resulting from
ship strikes and fishing gear interactions are significant factors
that, at current rates, place the North Atlantic right whale in danger
of extinction throughout its range. There are numerous ongoing
conservation efforts to reduce the impact of ship strikes on the
survival and recovery of the species. These efforts involve Federal,
state, local, conservation, academic, and industry agencies and
organizations. We, in cooperation with other state, Federal, industry,
and private groups and organizations, have developed a plan to
implement a broad Ship Strike Reduction Strategy (SSRS) designed to
reduce the impacts of vessel interactions on the survival of the North
Atlantic right whale.
The SSRS consists of both regulatory and non-regulatory components.
As part of efforts to implement the SSRS, we published an advanced
notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) on June 1, 2004 (69 FR 30857) and
proposed regulations on June 14, 2006, that contain speed restrictions
and routing measures to reduce the likelihood of collisions between
vessels and endangered North Atlantic right whales (71 FR 36299).
We have implemented a number of measures to reduce the impact to
right
[[Page 77710]]
whale survival due to fishing gear interactions. We, with the
assistance of the Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Team (ALWTRT),
developed the Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Plan (ALWTRP). The
goal of this plan is to reduce the level of serious injury and
mortality of three strategic stocks of large whales, including North
Atlantic right whales, in commercial gillnet and trap/pot fisheries. In
general, the ALWTRP consists of a combination of regulatory and non-
regulatory programs, including broad gear modifications, time-area
closures, expanded disentanglement efforts, extensive outreach efforts
in key areas, gear research, and an expanded right whale surveillance
program to supplement the Mandatory Ship Reporting System.
Since its implementation in 1997, the ALWTRP has been modified on
several occasions in response to the serious injury and mortality of
large whales in gillnet and lobster trap/pot gear. Recent amendments to
the ALWTRP include restrictions to the Southeast Atlantic gillnet
fishery (67 FR 59471, September 23, 2002; 68 FR 19464, April 21, 2003).
Other amendments to the ALWTRP include additional gear modifications
for lobster trap/pot gear in particular management areas and changes to
the lobster trap/pot and gillnet take reduction technology lists (67 FR
1300, January 10, 2002; 67 FR 15493, April 2, 2002), a Seasonal Area
Management (SAM) program (67 FR 1142, January 9, 2002; 67 FR 65722,
October 28, 2002), a Dynamic Area Management (DAM) program (67 FR 1133,
January 9, 2002; 67 FR 65722, October 28, 2002), and implementation of
gear modifications determined to sufficiently reduce the risk of
entanglement to right whales (68 FR 10195, March 4, 2003; 68 FR 51195,
August 26, 2003).
We continue to work with the ALWTRT to evaluate the ALWTRP and
determine whether additional modifications are necessary to meet the
goals of the MMPA and the ESA. On June 30, 2003, we published a Notice
of Intent (NOI) to announce the agency's intent to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to analyze the impacts of
alternatives for amending the ALWTRP (68 FR 38676). On June 21, 2005,
we also published a proposed rule (70 FR 35894) that details how
modifications to the ALWTRP would be implemented.
Despite previous efforts, ship strikes and fishing gear
interactions remain a serious factor negatively affecting the continued
survival and recovery of the species. As the new conservation measures
discussed above are implemented, the frequency of ship strikes and
fishing gear interactions will need to be monitored to assess the
effectiveness of measures in reducing the impact of these factors on
the survival of the species. Based on the efficacy of these measures,
it may be necessary to continue or enhance existing regulations or
promulgate new regulations to reduce or eliminate the effect of these
factors on the survival and recovery of the species.
Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting its Continued Existence
Ship strikes and fishing gear interactions are the most common
anthropogenic causes of mortality in western North Atlantic right
whales, and place the North Atlantic right whale in danger of
extinction throughout its range. The available evidence strongly
suggests that the North Atlantic right whale cannot sustain the current
number of deaths that result from vessel collisions and fishing gear
interactions. If mortality from these activities continues at current
rates, it is likely to result in the extinction of the North Atlantic
right whale.
Ship Strikes - Collisions with ships are the single largest cause
of right whale mortality in the western North Atlantic. Of 45 confirmed
deaths of western North Atlantic right whales between 1970 and 1999, 16
are known to have been caused by ship strikes, and two additional
collisions were possibly fatal (Knowlton and Kraus, 1998). There were
two known ship strike right whale deaths in 2001, one in both 2002 and
2003, and two in 2004. The low incidence (7 percent) of
photographically identified whales showing scars and wounds from ship
propellers compared to the high rate of ship propeller wounds on
stranded carcasses indicates that a high proportion of interactions
between ships and whales are fatal to the whale (Kraus, 1990). It
should be noted that with improved reporting and more thorough
necropsies in recent years, the rate of detection and confirmation of
ship-strike deaths has probably increased. This may confound efforts to
determine trends in the frequency of collisions.
Concern has been raised over the possible adverse effects of whale
watching and scientific research activities on right whale
aggregations, particularly in the western North Atlantic (e.g., Cape
Cod Bay and lower Bay of Fundy). On February 13, 1997, we published an
interim final rule (62 FR 6729) to prohibit both boats and aircraft
from approaching any right whale closer than 500 yards (457.2 m). These
minimum distance regulations are designed to reduce the potential to
disturb right whales or disrupt their activities and to reduce the
adverse effect of vessel collisions. However, collisions between whale-
watching boats and a humpback (2001) and a minke whale (1998) indicate
that much more serious consequences (e.g., death or serious injury) are
also possible. In addition, the number of high-speed (capable of speeds
> 28 knots) whale watching vessels, ferries, and other craft has
increased recently in areas where right whales occur. Consequently, the
threat of collisions has potentially grown. It may be necessary to
examine the effects of whale watching in the vicinity of right whales
and issue additional regulations and/or guidelines regarding the number
of vessels, and their speed, manner, and distances of approaches near
whales.
Scientific research on right whales frequently involves close
approaches to the animals for the purpose of photographic, genetic, or
behavioral sampling. These activities are controlled by permits in both
U.S. and Canadian waters, and the potential adverse impact on the
animals is considered during the permitting process. Efforts are needed
to ensure coordination of research activities between the U.S. and
Canada, as well as among U.S. researchers themselves to minimize any
potential adverse impact to right whales.
Fishing Gear Interactions - The exact magnitude and nature of
fisheries interactions with right whales is not known. Kraus (1990)
estimated that 57 percent of right whales in the western North Atlantic
bear scars and injuries indicating fishing gear interactions. More
recent analysis estimated that 61.6 percent of right whales exhibit
evidence of fishing gear entanglement (Hamilton et al., 1998b). The
1998 North Atlantic Stock Assessment Report (Waring et al., 1999)
indicated NMFS-monitored fisheries showed a mean annual mortality of
1.0 right whale from 1992 through 1996. Sources of interaction are
mainly gillnets, lobster pots, seine nets, and fish weirs (NMFS, 1991),
which, with the exception of gillnet fisheries, are largely not
monitored. Gear entanglement was estimated to account for 7 percent of
the known mortality in right whales in the western North Atlantic from
1970 through early 1993 (Kenney and Kraus, 1993). There were at least
two additional entanglement deaths between late 1993 and 1999 (Knowlton
and Kraus, 2001). Since 2001 there has been at least one additional
mortality due to entanglement. These mortalities involved entanglements
with fixed fishing gear. Of 45 known deaths between 1970 and 1999,
three were
[[Page 77711]]
directly linked to entanglements, and eight were suspected to have been
linked to entanglements (NMFS, 2005). Entanglements may be responsible
for more deaths than indicated by the stranding and necropsy data. It
is possible that fishing gear was responsible for some of the deaths
for which a cause could not be determined. In addition, some whales may
become entangled, drown, and fail to resurface. Injuries and
entanglements that are not initially lethal may result in a gradual
weakening of entangled individuals, making them more vulnerable to some
other direct cause of mortality (Kenney and Kraus, 1993). For example,
entanglement may reduce a whale's ability to maneuver, making it more
susceptible to ship strikes. Entanglement-related stress may decrease
an individual's reproductive success or reduce its life span. This may
in turn depress population growth.
Noise - The effect on behavior (e.g., foraging, mating, nursing) of
noise pollution from shipping or oil and gas development is unclear,
though various observations suggest that marine mammals can habituate
well to even quite high levels of sound (Geraci and St. Aubin, 1980;
Richardson et al., 1995). Playback experiments on gray and bowhead
whales indicate that whales will actively avoid a very loud sound
source (Malme et al., 1983), but whether real-life sources (such as
drilling platforms) negatively impact behavior to the point that it
diminishes reproductive success and population productivity is unclear.
It appears that right whale sensitivity to noise disturbance and vessel
activity is related to the behavior and activity in which they are
engaged in at the time (Watkins, 1986; Perry et al., 1999).
Recreational boat traffic - Some studies suggest increased
recreational boat traffic can disrupt whale behavior (Glockner-Ferrari
and Ferrari, 1990). Pleasure boat traffic occurs in various coastal
areas with little regulation or enforcement; however, its impact on
right whales is unknown.
Conservation Measures
Section 4(b)(1)(a) of the ESA requires that determinations of
whether a species is threatened or endangered be based solely on the
best scientific and commercial data available and after taking into
account those efforts, if any, being made to protect the species. Right
whales have been listed under the ESA for many years and numerous
conservation measures have been implemented in order to protect and
conserve the species. On March 28, 2003, we and the USFWS (the
Services) published the final policy for evaluating conservation
efforts (PECE)(68 FR 15100). The PECE provides guidance on evaluating
current protective efforts identified in conservation agreements,
conservation plans, management plans, or similar documents (developed
by Federal agencies, state and local governments, tribal governments,
businesses, organizations, and individuals) that have not yet been
implemented, or have been implemented but have not yet demonstrated
effectiveness. The PECE establishes two basic criteria for evaluating
current conservation efforts: (1) the certainty that the conservation
efforts will be implemented, and (2) the certainty that the efforts
will be effective. The PECE provides specific factors under these two
basic criteria that direct the analysis of adequacy and efficacy of
existing conservation efforts.
Right whales were protected by the 1931 Convention for the
Regulation of Whaling, which took effect in 1935. Since 1949, right
whales have been protected from commercial whaling by the IWC and its
implementing convention. In U.S. waters, right whales are protected by
the MMPA and the ESA.
Current North Atlantic right whale conservation efforts in the
North Atlantic are extensive. These efforts reflect a cooperative
collaboration between numerous state and Federal agencies, industry
groups, conservation organizations, academic institutions, and other
interested parties and individuals. These efforts are vital to the
survival and recovery of the North Atlantic right whale.
Current conservation efforts have resulted in the implementation of
a number of regulatory and non-regulatory measures intended to enhance
the survival and recovery of the species, particularly fishing gear
modifications and ship strike reduction strategies. Moreover, a number
of conservation measures being developed and/or considered will further
reduce the adverse affect of fishing gear interactions and ship
strikes. However, despite these ongoing efforts to mitigate factors
affecting the species, right whales have continued to suffer serious
injury and mortalities due to ship strikes and fishing gear
interactions.
As discussed, direct and indirect impacts from human activities,
particularly vessel collisions and fishing gear entanglements, place
the species in danger of extinction throughout its range and have
contributed to a lack of recovery. Currently, we are working with
state, Federal, private, and industry groups to address these two
factors affecting the survival and recovery of the species.
Vessel Interactions
As discussed, ship strikes are responsible for the majority of
human-caused right whale mortalities (Jensen and Silber, 2003). The ESA
provides authority to the Secretary to establish implementation teams
to, among other things, review recovery activities and provide
recommendations to NMFS on actions necessary for the survival and
recovery of the species. Two such teams have been formed: one in the
southeastern U.S., the second in the northeastern U.S. Although both
teams have addressed a variety of right whale conservation issues over
the years, they have evolved over time to focus on issues related
primarily to the reduction of ship strikes of right whales.
Southeastern U.S. Implementation Team (SEIT) - In August 1993, the
SEIT was formed. The team consists of representatives from Federal,
state, and local agencies, as well as other private organizations.
Since its inception, the SEIT has met regularly and has been active in
a number of areas related to ship strike mitigation. Among other
things, the SEIT was instrumental in developing a system of aircraft
surveys and communication systems that alert mariners to the presence
of right whales in the southeast United States (SEUS) in real time. Two
agencies represented on the SEIT, the Georgia Department of Natural
Resources (GDNR) and the United States Coast Guard (USCG), implemented
a local Notice to Mariners broadcast about right whale calving grounds.
Additionally, the USCG and the GDNR have developed and implemented
procedures for broadcasting right whale locations over NAVTEX (the USCG
international communication system). The SEIT has also coordinated a
number of efforts to educate mariners about the threat of ship strikes,
including development and distribution of brochures, pamphlets, and
posters. In addition, the SEIT provides us with recommendations
regarding measures to reduce the possibility of ship strikes,
development of safe operating procedures for large vessels transiting
right whale habitat, minimum vessel approach distances, research needs,
and measures necessary to reduce fishing gear interactions in right
whale calving areas.
Northeast U.S. Implementation Team (NEIT) - The NEIT was
established in 1994 and is coordinated by our Northeast Regional
Office. The NEIT was originally created to implement recovery tasks for
both the North
[[Page 77712]]
Atlantic right whale and the humpback whale.
The NEIT's responsibilities have evolved since its inception in
1994. Initially, the NEIT's focus was the mitigation of the threat to
right whales of fishing gear interactions. More recently the NEIT's
charge has shifted to focus primarily on issues related to ship strike
reduction. The NEIT Ship Strike Subcommittee assisted in the
development of NOAA's SSRS. The NEIT most recently has been reorganized
to function as a continuation of the former Northeast Large Whale
Recovery Plan Implementation Team's Ship Strike Committee. The goal is
for the NEIT to assist, where possible, with various ship-strike
reduction-related strategies.
SSRS
We, in cooperation with other state, Federal, industry, and private
groups and organizations, have developed a broad SSRS designed to
reduce the danger posed by vessel interactions to the survival of the
North Atlantic right whale. The SSRS is an Atlantic coast initiative
consisting of both regulatory and non-regulatory components. The ship
strike reduction conservation efforts have been implemented, in large
part, under the statutory authority of the ESA and the MMPA. Certain
details of the SSRS are still under development. The SSRS consists of
five elements: (1) Establishment of new operational measures for the
shipping industry, including consideration of routing measures and
speed restrictions; (2) negotiation of a Right Whale Conservation
Agreement with the Canadian Government to address the issue of ship
strikes; (3) development and implementation of ship strike education
and outreach programs; (4) initiation of Section 7 consultations under
the ESA with all Federal agencies that have vessels operating in waters
inhabited by right whales; and (5) continuation of ongoing research and
conservation activities.
Ship Strike Reduction Strategy Proposed Rule - We published an
advanced notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) on June 1, 2004 (69 FR
30857), and proposed regulations on June 26, 2006 (71 FR 36299). The
proposed regulations would establish speed restrictions and routing
measures to reduce the likelihood of collisions between vessels and
endangered North Atlantic right whales.
Mandatory Ship Reporting System - In 1998, the USCG, on behalf of
the U.S. Government, submitted a proposal developed by NOAA with the
assistance of the Marine Mammal Commission and the International Fund
for Animal Welfare to the International Maritime Organization (IMO).
The proposal requested approval of two mandatory ship reporting
systems. The proposal received IMO endorsement and systems became
operational in 1999. The systems obligate all commercial ships 300
gross tons (272 metric tons) and greater entering areas designated as
right whale critical habitat to call into a shore-based station. The
systems provide information on right whales directly to mariners as
they enter right whale habitat, the right whales' vulnerability to ship
strikes, and steps that can be taken to reduce the chance of collision.
They also provide a means to obtain information on ship traffic volume
and routes to assist in identifying measures to reduce future ship
strikes. The systems are administered primarily by the USCG.
Aerial Surveys - In 1993, the SEIT developed a system to help alert
area ship traffic to the presence of right whales, thereby reducing the
possibility of ship strikes. The central feature of the system has been
an aerial survey program designed to obtain accurate, current
information on the locations of whales. Aerial surveys were initiated
in 1993 in the waters off the SEUS and have continued each year since.
Continuously updated right whale sighting information from survey teams
is immediately relayed to area mariners via centralized communication
systems operated by the USCG and the U.S. Navy. Information is provided
through a number of real time media, including USCG Broadcast Notices
to Mariners, NAVTEX and NOAA Weather Radio. Among other measures,
vessels are advised to proceed at reduced speeds to reduce the
likelihood of serious injury or death if a collision occurs. However,
even in very good sighting conditions, not all whales are detected.
Therefore, whales may be present but not always reported to mariners.
In 1997, an aerial survey program was initiated in waters off the
northeastern United States. These efforts focused on Cape Cod Bay (CCB)
and the Great South Channel (GSC) in late winter and early spring. From
1997 to present, aerial surveys supported by NMFS and the State of
Massachusetts have been conducted to cover peak abundance periods,
principally between January and March in CCB, and between March and
early July in the GSC . Aerial surveys have been recently expanded in
the Gulf of Maine and waters of Rhode Island, New York, and New Jersey.
Sightings from aerial survey platforms, right whale researchers,
and multiple other sources are reported to our NEFSC. These data are
plotted using a Geographic Information System with sightings grouped
and 'circled' with a buffer zone. Right whale sighting advisories, or
'alerts,' are disseminated to notify mariners of the presence of right
whales via a number of mechanisms. The USCG issues Broadcast Notices to
Mariners and via NAVTEX. NOAA Weather Radio provides geographic and
positional data on the sightings periodically. The Cape Cod Canal
Traffic Controllers contact ships and provide positions and a radius
for each sighting.
Notifications to individual ships, commercial fishing vessels, and
military vessels are made directly from the aircraft when observed
vessels are transiting close to a whale. In addition, these surveys
have provided sightings of entangled and floating right whales, and
provide photo identification data for numerous studies. Current plans
are to continue the surveys into the foreseeable future. While
dedicated aircraft surveys may be the best available means to attempt
to alert mariners about the presence of right whales, these programs
have a number of limitations. For example, aerial surveys are costly to
implement. Also, the surveys are limited by weather and can be
conducted only in daylight and under the best of survey conditions. In
addition, it is likely that, even under good conditions, many whales
are missed by observers, especially since only those whales at or near
the surface can be seen. Nonetheless, until effective alternatives are
identified, the surveys are expected to continue.
Vessel Approach Regulations - As discussed, on February 13, 1997,
an interim final rule (62 FR 6729) was published that prohibits both
boats and aircraft from approaching any right whale closer than 500
yards (457.2 m). Exceptions for closer approach are provided for
emergency situations and where certain authorizations are provided.
Updating Navigational Publications - The National Ocean Service
publishes and periodically updates nautical charts and a series of
regional books called U.S. Coast Pilots. These are basic references on
regional environmental conditions, navigation hazards, and rules. In
U.S. waters, captains of ships greater than 1,200 gross tons (1,088
metric tons) are required to carry Coast Pilots. Information contained
in the Coast Pilots covering the entire eastern United States has been
updated to include information on the status of right whales, the times
and areas where they occur, the threats posed to whales by ships, and
advice on measures
[[Page 77713]]
mariners might take to avoid hitting right whales. Also, updated
information regarding right whale critical habitat and regulations
about approaching right whales are published on nautical charts when
they are re-printed.
Educational Materials and Outreach - A number of agencies and
organizations have collaborated on developing brochures, pamphlets, and
informational papers to educate mariners about the vulnerability of
right whales to ship strikes. We have published magazine articles
directed to the shipping industry. Also, as noted above, a video on
this subject was prepared and is being distributed to the shipping
industry. The SEIT and NEIT are developing a comprehensive education
and outreach strategy and have played a key role in past education and
outreach efforts. These efforts include providing training at mariner
academies and local marinas.
Boston Harbor Ship Routing Measures - Part of NOAA's SSRS includes
consideration of ship traffic routing measures, including shifting the
port of Boston's Traffic Separation Scheme (TSS). In 2006, NOAA
developed a proposal that was submitted by the USCG on behalf of the
U.S. Government to the IMO to narrow and re-align the northern leg of
the Boston TSS 12 degrees to the north to redirect shipping traffic
through areas with lower densities of right whales and other baleen
species. The shift is expected to significantly reduce the risk of ship
strikes for both right whales and other baleen whale species. The IMO
endorsed the proposal in December 2006. The United States expects to
implement the change by July 2007.
Canadian Ship Routing Measures - In July 2003, with approval from
the IMO, Canada moved shipping lanes in the Bay of Fundy four nautical
miles (7.4 km) to the east to protect the feeding whales from ship
collisions. During summer and early fall, right whales aggregate to
feed in the Bay of Fundy, between New Brunswick and Nova Scotia,
Canada. During this time the whales are exposed to heavy vessel traffic
in major shipping channels that pass through the area.
Fishing Gear Entanglement
Death and serious injury resulting from entanglement in fishing
gear are significant factors causing the North Atlantic right whale to
be in danger of extinction throughout its range. Under the MMPA, we are
required to develop a List of Fisheries (LOF) that cla