Endangered and Threatened Species; Recovery Plans, 29121-29126 [E7-10074]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 100 (Thursday, May 24, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29121-29126]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-10074]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XA47


Endangered and Threatened Species; Recovery Plans

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

ACTION: Notice of availability; recovery plan

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

SUMMARY: The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) announces the 
adoption of an Endangered Species Act (ESA) Recovery Plan (Recovery 
Plan) for the Hood Canal and Eastern Strait of Juan de Fuca Summer Chum 
Salmon (Oncorhynchus keta) Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU). The 
Recovery Plan consists of two documents: the Hood Canal and Eastern 
Strait of Juan de Fuca Summer Chum Salmon Recovery Plan prepared by the 
Hood Canal Coordinating Council (HCCC Plan), and a NMFS Final 
Supplement to the HCCC Plan (Supplement). The Final Supplement contains 
revisions and additions in consideration of public comments on the 
proposed Recovery Plan for Hood Canal summer chum salmon.

ADDRESSES: Additional information about the Recovery Plan may be 
obtained by writing to Elizabeth Babcock, National Marine Fisheries 
Service, 7600 Sandpoint Way N.E., Seattle, WA 98115, or calling (206) 
526-4505.

[[Page 29122]]

    Electronic copies of the Recovery Plan and the summary of and 
response to public comments on the proposed Recovery Plan are available 
online at www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon Recovery Planning/Recovery Domains/
Puget Sound/Index.cfm, or the Hood Canal Coordinating Council website, 
www.hccc.wa.gov/. A CD-ROM of the documents can be obtained by calling 
Sharon Houghton at (503) 230-5418 or by e-mailing a request to 
sharon.houghton@noaa.gov, with the subject line ``CD-ROM Request for 
Final ESA Recovery Plan for Hood Canal Summer Chum Salmon.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Babcock, NMFS Puget Sound 
Salmon Recovery Coordinator at (206) 526-4505, or Elizabeth Gaar, NMFS 
Salmon Recovery Division at (503) 230-5434.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Recovery plans describe actions beneficial to the conservation and 
recovery of species listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 
(ESA), as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The ESA requires that 
recovery plans, to the extent practicable, incorporate (1) objective, 
measurable criteria which, when met, would result in a determination 
that the species is no longer threatened or endangered; (2) site-
specific management actions that may be necessary to achieve the plan's 
goals; and (3) estimates of the time required and costs to implement 
recovery actions. The ESA requires the development of recovery plans 
for listed species unless such a plan would not promote the recovery of 
a particular species.
    NMFS' goal is to restore endangered and threatened Pacific salmon 
ESUs and steelhead distinct population segments (DPSs) to the point 
that they are again self-sustaining members of their ecosystems and no 
longer need the protections of the ESA. NMFS believes it is critically 
important to base its recovery plans on the many state, regional, 
tribal, local, and private conservation efforts already underway 
throughout the region. Therefore, the agency supports and participates 
in locally led collaborative efforts to develop recovery plans, 
involving local communities, state, tribal, and Federal entities, and 
other stakeholders. As the lead ESA agency for listed salmon, NMFS is 
responsible for reviewing these locally produced recovery plans and 
deciding whether they meet ESA statutory requirements and merit 
adoption as ESA recovery plans.
    On November 15, 2005, the Hood Canal Coordinating Council (HCCC), a 
regional council of governments, presented its locally developed listed 
species recovery plan (HCCC Plan) to NMFS. The HCCC is a watershed-
based council of governments that was established in 1985 in response 
to concerns about water quality problems and related natural resource 
issues in the watershed. It was incorporated in 2000 as a 501(c)(3) 
Public Benefit Corporation under RCW 24.03. Its board of directors 
includes the county commissioners from Jefferson, Kitsap, and Mason 
counties, and elected tribal council members from the Skokomish and 
Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribes. It also includes a slate of ex-officio 
board members composed of representatives from state and Federal 
agencies.
    After reviewing the HCCC Plan, NMFS prepared a Supplement, 
clarifying how the HCCC Plan satisfies ESA recovery plan requirements 
and addressing additional elements needed to comply with those 
requirements. A notice of availability soliciting public comments on 
the proposed Recovery Plan was published in the Federal Register on 
August 16, 2006 (71 FR 47180). NMFS received three comment letters on 
the HCCC Plan and draft Supplement. NMFS summarized the public comments 
and prepared responses, now available on the NMFS website at 
www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-Recovery-Planning/Recovery-Domains/Puget-Sound/
Hood-Canal-Plan.cfm. NMFS has revised its Supplement based on the 
comments received. The HCCC Plan and the Final Supplement now, 
together, constitute the ESA Recovery Plan for the Hood Canal and 
eastern Strait of Juan de Fuca summer-run chum salmon.
    By endorsing this locally developed recovery plan, NMFS is making a 
commitment to implement the actions in the plan for which it has 
authority, to work cooperatively on implementation of other actions, 
and to encourage other Federal agencies to implement Recovery Plan 
actions for which they have responsibility and authority. NMFS will 
also encourage the State of Washington to seek similar implementation 
commitments from state agencies and local governments. NMFS expects the 
Recovery Plan to help NMFS and other Federal agencies take a more 
consistent approach to future ESA Section 7 consultations and other ESA 
decisions. For example, the Recovery Plan will provide greater 
biological context for the effects that a proposed action may have on 
the listed ESU. Recovery Plan science will become a component of the 
``best available information'' reviewed for ESA section 7 
consultations, section 10 permits and habitat conservation plans, and 
other ESA decisions. Such information includes viability criteria for 
the ESU and its independent populations, better understanding of and 
information on limiting factors and threats facing the ESU, better 
information on priority areas for addressing specific limiting factors, 
and better geographic context for assessing where the ESU can tolerate 
varying levels of risk while still maintaining overall viability.

The Recovery Plan

    The HCCC Plan is one of many ongoing salmon recovery planning 
efforts funded under the Washington State Strategy for Salmon Recovery. 
The State of Washington designated the HCCC as the Lead Entity for 
salmon recovery planning for the Hood Canal watershed. The HCCC has 
consistently involved the public in its recovery planning process.
    The HCCC Plan draws extensively on the research and publications of 
the Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative (SCSCI) (WDFW and PNPTT 
2000), an ongoing planning forum initiated in 2000 by the Point No 
Point Treaty Tribes (PNPTT) and Washington Department of Fish and 
Wildlife (WDFW) (WDFW and PNPTT 2000). PNPTT and WDFW are the co-
managers directly responsible for fisheries harvest and hatchery 
management for the Hood Canal and eastern Strait of Juan de Fuca 
watersheds. The PNPTT comprises the Skokomish, Port Gamble S'Klallam, 
Jamestown S'Klallam, and Lower Elwha Klallam Tribes, which have Treaty 
rights to usual and accustomed fishing in this area. The SCSCI provides 
a mechanism for the development and implementation of harvest 
management regimes and supplementation programs designed to bring about 
the recovery of summer chum salmon when integrated with habitat 
protection and restoration, also considered in the process. Annual 
reviews are documented in supplemental reports (e.g., WDFW and PNPTT 
2003 and PNPTT and WDFW 2003), which can be found at wdfw.wa.gov/fish/
chum/chum.htm.
    The HCCC Plan makes extensive use of the SCSCI and subsequent 
supplemental reports, as well as the watershed plans for Watershed 
Resource Inventory Areas 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18 (Correa, 2002; Correa, 
2003; Kuttel, 2003). The fishery co-managers (WDFW and PNPTT) 
participated in the development of aspects of this plan, and it is 
designed to support and complement the co-managers' fisheries

[[Page 29123]]

and salmon recovery goals and objectives.
    As in other regional domains defined by NMFS Northwest Region, the 
Hood Canal planning effort was supported by a NMFS-appointed science 
panel, the Puget Sound Technical Recovery Team (PSTRT). This panel of 
seven scientific experts from Federal, state, local, private, and 
tribal organizations identified historical populations and recommended 
ESU viability criteria. They provided scientific review of the HCCC 
Plan. In addition, staff biologists of the Skokomish and Port Gamble 
S'Klallam Tribes reviewed the HCCC Plan at each stage, and County staff 
reviewed the land use planning sections. NMFS Northwest Region staff 
biologists also reviewed draft versions of the HCCC Plan and provided 
substantial guidance for revisions.
    The Recovery Plan incorporates the NMFS viable salmonid population 
(VSP) framework as a basis for biological status assessments and 
recovery goals for Hood Canal summer chum salmon, and the Supplement 
incorporates the most recent work of the PSTRT on viability criteria 
for this ESU.

ESU Addressed and Planning Area

    The Recovery Plan will be implemented within the range of the Hood 
Canal summer-run chum salmon ESU (Oncorhynchus keta), listed as 
threatened on March 25, 1999 (64 FR 14508). NMFS reviewed the ESU in 
2005 and determined that it still warranted ESA protection (Good et 
al., 2005). The range of the Hood Canal summer-run chum salmon is the 
northeastern portion of the Olympic Peninsula in Washington State. The 
ESU includes summer-run chum salmon populations that spawn naturally in 
tributaries to Hood Canal as well as in Olympic Peninsula rivers 
between Hood Canal and Dungeness Bay. The recovery planning area 
includes portions of the Washington counties of Jefferson, Mason, 
Kitsap, and Clallam; the reservations of the Skokomish, Port Gamble 
S'Klallam, and Jamestown S'Klallam Tribes; and portions of Water 
Resource Inventory Areas 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18.
    The Recovery Plan focuses on the recovery of Hood Canal summer chum 
salmon. Two other ESA-listed salmonid species, Puget Sound Chinook 
salmon and Coastal/Puget Sound bull trout, are indigenous to the Hood 
Canal and eastern Strait of Juan de Fuca regions encompassed by the 
Recovery Plan. On June 30, 2005, the Shared Strategy for Puget Sound, a 
nonprofit organization that coordinates recovery planning for Puget 
Sound Chinook, submitted a recovery plan for Puget Sound Chinook salmon 
to NMFS. On December 27, 2005, NMFS published a Notice of Availability 
of the Shared Strategy plan as a proposed recovery plan for Puget Sound 
Chinook (70 FR 76445). The final Puget Sound Chinook Salmon Recovery 
Plan was published January 19, 2007. Coastal/Puget Sound bull trout are 
under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 
and are the subject of a recovery plan published by the USFWS in May 
2004. Many of the actions identified in the Hood Canal summer chum 
salmon plan will also benefit the latter two species. The Shared 
Strategy and HCCC will work together to make their respective recovery 
efforts consistent and complementary.
    The PSTRT identified two independent populations of Hood Canal 
summer chum. The Strait of Juan de Fuca population spawns in rivers and 
streams entering the eastern Strait and Admiralty Inlet. The Hood Canal 
population includes all spawning aggregations within the Hood Canal 
watershed (Sands et al., 2007).
    Sixteen historically present ``stocks,'' of which eight are extant, 
made up the Hood Canal Summer-Run Chum Salmon ESU. The co-managers 
identified these stocks in the SCSCI and subsequent supplemental 
reports (WDFW and PNPTT 2000, 2003). The PSTRT considers these stocks 
``subpopulations, which contribute to either the Hood Canal or Strait 
of Juan de Fuca population, depending on their geographical location'' 
(Currens, 2004, p. 19). As noted in the HCCC Plan, the PSTRT report 
stated that summer chum salmon in the Hood Canal and eastern Strait are 
probably ``a single metapopulation held together historically by a 
stepping stone pattern of demographic exchange'' (Currens, ibid.), 
created by straying between adjacent streams.
    For planning purposes, the HCCC Plan assigned the 16 stocks to six 
geographic groupings called ``conservation units.'' The HCCC Plan 
organizes descriptions of population status, limiting factors and 
threats, and recommended site-specific actions based on these 
conservation units.

Recovery Goals, Objectives and Criteria

    The overall goal of the HCCC Plan is to achieve recovery and 
delisting of the summer-run chum salmon in Hood Canal and the eastern 
Strait of Juan de Fuca. The HCCC Plan's recovery strategy focuses on 
habitat protection and restoration throughout the geographic range of 
the ESU; the plan incorporates the co-managers' harvest management and 
hatchery supplementation programs that are ongoing as part of the 
SCSCI. The HCCC Plan also includes reintroduction of natural-origin 
summer chum salmon aggregations to several streams where they were 
historically present.

ESU Viability Criteria

    Evaluating a species for potential delisting requires an explicit 
analysis of population or demographic parameters (biological recovery 
criteria) and also of threats under the five ESA listing factors in ESA 
section 4(a)(1). Together these make up the ``objective, measurable 
criteria'' required under section 4(f)(1)(B). While the ESU is the 
listed entity under the ESA, the ESU-level viability criteria are based 
on the collective viability of the individual populations that make up 
the ESU their characteristics and their distribution throughout the 
ESU's geographic range.
    The Recovery Plan adopts both long-term viability criteria and 
short-term recovery goals or targets for the two populations of Hood 
Canal summer chum. The long-term viability criteria were identified by 
the PSTRT (Sands et al., 2007) and describe characteristics predicted 
to result in a negligible risk of extinction for the ESU in 100 years. 
The short-term criteria are ``interim'' recovery goals for the next 10 
years that were developed by the co-managers in the SCSCI (PNPTT and 
WDFW 2003). These two sets of criteria are based on different, but 
compatible, approaches. Both may be refined as new information becomes 
available.
    The NMFS Supplement published in 2006 included viability criteria 
for each of the two independent populations of Hood Canal summer-run 
chum salmon identified by the PSTRT. In early 2007, the PSTRT completed 
additional viability modeling for both populations. That work was 
shared with state, tribal, and HCCC technical staff. NMFS updated the 
viability criteria for both populations based on the PSTRT's additional 
analysis and the input from technical staff. This ESA Recovery Plan 
includes viability criteria based on both methods of analysis.
    NMFS has asked the PSTRT to continue to work with HCCC staff and 
the co-managers to integrate the interim recovery goals described in 
the HCCC Plan with the long-term criteria for the ESU. This will not 
necessitate a revision of the HCCC Plan, but will be considered part of 
the adaptive management and implementation phase of the Recovery Plan.

[[Page 29124]]

Adaptive Management
    Adaptive management is the process of adjusting management actions 
and/or directions based on new information. It requires building an 
evaluation method into an implementation plan, so that selection and 
design of future recovery actions can be adjusted depending on the 
results of previous actions. Adaptive management is essential to salmon 
recovery planning. The HCCC Plan incorporates by reference the 
integrated program for monitoring, evaluation, and adaptive management 
included in the SCSCI (WDFW and PNPTT 2000, Part 4, Sections 4.2.5 and 
4.2.5). In addition, the HCCC is developing a monitoring and adaptive 
management element in its overall implementation plan. NMFS will 
continue to work with the HCCC on its adaptive management program as 
appropriate during plan implementation.

Causes for Decline and Current Threats

    Listing factors are those features that were evaluated under 
section 4(a)(1) when the initial determination was made to list the 
species for protection under the ESA. These factors are: (a) The 
present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of a 
species' habitat or range; (b) overutilization for commercial, 
recreational, or educational purposes; (c) disease or predation; (d) 
the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; and (e) other natural 
or man made factors affecting the species' continued existence. These 
may or may not still be limiting recovery when in the future NMFS 
reevaluates the status of the species to determine whether the 
protections of the ESA are no longer warranted and the species could be 
delisted. In the Recovery Plan, NMFS provides specific criteria for 
each of the relevant listing/delisting factors to help ensure that 
underlying causes of decline have been addressed and mitigated prior to 
considering the species for delisting.
    The HCCC Plan identifies the main causes for the decline of the 
Hood Canal summer chum as (1) climate-related changes in stream flow 
patterns, (2) past fishery exploitation, and (3) cumulative habitat 
loss.
    Climate change: NMFS agrees that summer chum are particularly 
sensitive to variations in instream flows, which vary naturally between 
years and perhaps over decades. However, NMFS cautions that possible 
changes in climate over the past 30 years were reasoned from flow 
records and have not been investigated by a detailed study. NMFS 
expects that current, ongoing research on impacts of climate change on 
salmon habitat restoration (e.g., Battin et al., 2007) will further 
clarify this question.
    Harvest: The Recovery Plan draws upon data and conclusions from the 
SCSCI indicating that harvest (including in U.S. and Canada) was a 
factor in the decline of summer chum salmon prior to 1992. Exploitation 
rates ranging from 21 percent for the Salmon/Snow and Jimmycomelately 
populations to 90 percent for the Quilcene population were seen to 
correlate with declines in escapements. Beginning in 1992 and 
culminating in the implementation of the SCSCI in 2000, the co-managers 
designed harvest management regimes to limit mortality from fishing to 
a rate that allows the vast majority of summer chum salmon to return to 
their natal spawning grounds. Implementation of the harvest management 
strategy since 2000 has worked as expected. Escapements have increased 
to all components of the ESU, and observed exploitation rates are even 
lower than anticipated (below 3 percent and 1 percent for Hood Canal 
and Strait of Juan de Fuca populations, respectively).
    Habitat: Chapter 6 of the HCCC Plan summarizes overall habitat 
issues for the ESU. More detail is included in the HCCC Plan's 
individual chapters on conservation units. NMFS' 2005 Report to 
Congress on the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund (PCSRF) described 
habitat-related factors for decline as the following: (1) Degraded 
floodplain and mainstem river channel structure; (2) degraded estuarine 
conditions and loss of estuarine habitat; (3) riparian area degradation 
and loss of in-river large woody debris in mainstem; (4) excessive 
sediment in spawning gravels; (5) reduced stream flow in migration 
areas; (6) degraded nearshore conditions. These factors are all covered 
in detail in the HCCC Plan.

Site-Specific Actions

    The HCCC Plan lists potential sources of funding, administrative 
paths, and target activities that could be undertaken for salmon 
recovery in the region (pp. 43-45), then makes site-specific 
recommendations based on conservation units (Chapters 7-12). A full 
range of policy options for acquiring, funneling, and allocating 
resources for salmon habitat conservation was developed and presented 
to the members of the HCCC Board for review and decision-making.
    Habitat: The HCCC provided a summary table for the Supplement, 
linking limiting factors and recommended habitat actions by 
conservation unit and stock.
    Harvest: The co-managers developed through the SCSCI a harvest 
management strategy called the Base Conservation Regime (BCR) (details 
in WDFW and PNPTT 2000, section 3.5.6.1). The intent of the BCR is to 
initiate rebuilding by fostering incremental increases in escapement 
over time, while providing a limited opportunity for fisheries 
conducted for the harvest of other salmon species. The BCR will pass 
through to spawning escapement, on average, in excess of 95 percent of 
the Hood Canal-Strait of Juan de Fuca summer chum salmon abundance in 
U.S. waters.
    The harvest management component of the SCSCI was provided to NMFS 
in 2000 as the co-managers' proposed joint Resource Management Plan 
(RMP) for managing salmon fisheries to meet summer chum salmon ESA 
conservation needs. NMFS subsequently determined that the RMP 
adequately addressed all requirements specified under Limit 6 of the 
ESA 4(d) Rule for Hood Canal summer chum salmon (66 FR 31600, June 12, 
2001). More information can be found at www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-
Harvest-Hatcheries/State-Tribal-Management/HC-Chum-RMP.cfm. NMFS and 
the co-managers will continue to evaluate the performance of the 
harvest management strategy as new information becomes available, 
consistent with the evaluation and adaptive management elements of the 
SCSCI and the Recovery Plan.
    Hatcheries: The HCCC Plan incorporates the supplementation and 
reintroduction approach implemented by the co-managers under the SCSCI 
beginning in 1992 to conserve summer chum salmon in the action area. 
Under the SCSCI, artificial production directed at summer chum recovery 
is applied only to preserve stocks identified as at moderate or high 
risk of extinction, and to reintroduce naturally spawning aggregations 
in selected watersheds from which the indigenous stocks have been 
extirpated. Hatchery supplementation programs use native broodstock, 
allow hatchery-origin fish to spawn naturally, are carefully monitored 
and evaluated, and are scheduled to be terminated in a maximum of three 
salmon generations. Four such programs have met their goals and have 
been terminated. In addition, implementation of conservation hatchery 
actions was guided by these premises: ``Commensurate, timely 
improvements in the condition of habitat critical for summer chum 
salmon survival are necessary to recover the listed populations to 
healthy levels. . . The intent of the supplementation efforts is to 
reduce the short-term

[[Page 29125]]

extinction risk to existing wild populations, and to increase the 
likelihood of their recovery'' (HCCC Plan, p. 54).
    NMFS agrees with the PSTRT's conclusion in its 2005 review of the 
HCCC Plan that the hatchery strategy to supplement summer chum in Hood 
Canal is very well designed and has been well implemented throughout 
its tenure. The monitoring information resulting from the hatchery 
program is exemplary, and the co-managers have used the data to adjust 
their supplementation strategies as needed.

Time and Cost Estimates

    The ESA section 4(f)(1) requires that the recovery plan include 
``estimates of the time required and the cost to carry out those 
measures needed to achieve the plan's goal and to achieve intermediate 
steps toward that goal'' (16 U.S.C. 1533(f)(1)). Appendix D of the 
recovery plan (Costing of the Hood Canal Coordinating Council's Summer 
Chum Salmon Recovery Plan, August 2004) provides cost estimates to 
carry out specific recovery actions for the first 10 years of plan 
implementation. The cost estimates cover all capital projects judged to 
be feasible in the six conservation units, as well as non-capital work 
projected to occur over the 10-year period.
    The HCCC Plan contains an extensive list of actions that need to be 
undertaken to recover Hood Canal summer chum salmon; however, there are 
many uncertainties involved in predicting the course of recovery and in 
estimating total costs. Such uncertainties include biological and 
ecosystem responses to recovery actions as well as long-term and future 
funding. NMFS supports the HCCC Plan's determination to focus on the 
first 10 years of implementation, provided that, before the end of this 
first implementation period, specific actions and costs will be 
estimated for subsequent years, to achieve long-term goals and to 
proceed until a determination is made that listing is no longer 
necessary.
    NMFS estimates that recovery of the Hood Canal Summer Chum ESU, 
like recovery for most of the ESA-listed Pacific Northwest salmon, 
could take 50 to 100 years. The HCCC Plan provides a total estimated 
cost for the first ten years of approximately $136 million. This 
estimate includes approximately $2 million for continuing agency and 
organization costs, and it is conceivable that this level of effort 
will need to continue for the Plan's duration. Also, continued actions 
in the management of habitat, hatcheries, and harvest, including both 
capital and non-capital costs, will likely warrant additional 
expenditures beyond the first 10 years. Although it is not practicable 
to accurately estimate the total cost of recovery, it appears that most 
of the costs will occur in the first 10 years. The costs for the 
remaining years are expected to be lower, possibly ranging from a total 
of $15 million to $65 million.

Periodic Status Reviews

    In accordance with its responsibilities under section 4(c)(2) of 
the Act, NMFS will conduct status reviews of Hood Canal summer chum 
salmon once every five years to evaluate the ESU's status and determine 
whether the ESU should be removed from the list or changed in status. 
Such evaluations will take into account the following:
     The biological recovery criteria (Sands et al., 2007) and 
listing factor (threats) criteria described in the Supplement.
     Management programs in place to address the threats.
     Principles presented in the Viable Salmonid Populations 
paper (McElhany et al., 2000).
     Co-managers' interim stock-level recovery goals.
     Best available information on population and ESU status 
and new advances in risk evaluation methodologies.
     Other considerations, including: the number and status of 
extant spawning groups; the status of the major spawning groups; 
linkages and connectivity among groups; diversity groups and the two 
populations; the diversity of life history and phenotypes expressed; 
and considerations regarding catastrophic risk.
     Principles laid out in NMFS' Hatchery Listing Policy (June 
28, 2005, 70 FR 37204).

Conclusion

    NMFS reviewed the HCCC Plan, the public comments, and the notes and 
conclusions of the PSTRT from its reviews of the HCCC Plan in May and 
July 2005. Based on that evaluation, NMFS concludes that the HCCC Plan, 
in combination with this NMFS Supplement, meets the requirements in 
section 4(f) of the ESA for developing a recovery plan.

Literature Cited

    Battin, J., M.W. Wiley, M.H. Ruckelshaus, R.N. Palmer, E. Korb, 
K.K. Bartz, and H. Imaki. 2007. Projected impacts of climate change on 
salmon habitat restoration. PNAS 104:16:6720-6725. April 17, 2007.
    Correa, G. 2002. Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Limiting Factors. 
Water Resource Inventory Area 17. Quilcene-Snow Basin. Washington State 
Conservation Commission. Final Report. November 2002. 316p.
    Correa, G. 2003. Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Limiting Factors. 
Water Resource Inventory Area 16. Dosewallips-Skokomish Basin. 
Washington State Conservation Commission. Final Report. June 2003. 
257p.
    Currens, K. 2004. Identification of independent populations of 
summer chum salmon and their recovery targets. January 29, 2004, draft 
document. Northwest Fisheries Science Center. NOAA Fisheries. Seattle, 
Washington. 18p.
    Good, T.P., R.S. Waples, and P. Adams (editors). 2005. Updated 
status of federally listed ESUs of West Coast salmon and steelhead. 
U.S. Dept. Commerce, NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-66. 598p.
    Kuttel, M., Jr. 2003. Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Limiting 
Factors. Water Resource Inventory Areas 15 (West), Kitsap Basin and 14 
(North) Kennedy-Goldsborough Basin. Washington State Conservation 
Commission. Final Report. June 2003. 312p.
    McElhany, P., M. H. Ruckelshaus, M. J. Ford, T. C. Wainwright, E. 
P. Bjorkstedt. 2000. Viable salmon populations and the recovery of 
evolutionarily significant units. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA Tech. 
Memo., NMFS-NWFSC-42. 156p.
    Point No Point Treaty Tribes (PNPTT) and Washington Department of 
Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2003. Summer chum salmon conservation 
initiative--an implementation plan to recover summer chum salmon in the 
Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca region.
    Supplemental report No. 5. Report on summer chum salmon interim 
recovery goals. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia, 
Washington. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia, 
Washington.
    Sands, N.J., K. Rawson, K. Currens, B. Graeber, M. Ruckelshaus, B. 
Fuerstenberg, and J. Scott. 2007. Dawgz 'n the Hood: The Hood Canal 
Summer Chum Salmon ESU. February 28, 2007 draft document available at: 
www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/trt/trt_puget.cfm.
    Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and the Point No 
Point Treaty Tribes (PNPTT). 2000. Summer chum salmon conservation 
initiative--an implementation plan to recover summer chum in the Hood 
Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca region. Fish Program, Washington 
Department

[[Page 29126]]

of Fish and Wildlife. Olympia, Washington. 424p. plus three appendices.
    2003. Summer chum salmon conservation initiative--an implementation 
plan to recover summer chum in the Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de 
Fuca region. Supplemental report No. 3. Annual report for the 2000 
summer chum salmon return to the Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca 
region. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, 
Washington. 123p.

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

    Dated: May 21, 2007.
Angela Somma,
Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office of Protected Resources, 
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E7-10074 Filed 5-23-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S