Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List the Yellow-Billed Loon as Threatened or Endangered, 31256-31264 [E7-10823]
Download as PDF
31256
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 6, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Authority
The authority for this action is section
4 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: May 25, 2007.
Randall B. Luthi,
Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 07–2812 Filed 6–5–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a
Petition To List the Yellow-Billed Loon
as Threatened or Endangered
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition
finding and initiation of status review.
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list the
yellow-billed loon (Gavia adamsii) as
threatened or endangered, under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended. We find that the petition
presents substantial scientific
information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. As
a result of this action, the Service also
announces the commencement of a
thorough status review to determine if
listing the yellow-billed loon may be
warranted. We ask the public to submit
to us any pertinent information
concerning the status of or threats to
this species. We will also be working
with other agencies to gain additional
data where gaps in our current
information on this species exist. In
addition, together with the Bureau of
Land Management, the Alaska
Departments of Fish and Game and
Natural Resources, the U.S. Geological
Survey, and the National Park Service,
we have developed a Conservation
Agreement for the yellow-billed loon,
which addresses a subset of threats to
the loon in a subset of the species’
range. We invite comments on
management strategies and research
needs that should be considered in
annual reviews of the Conservation
Agreement.
The finding announced in this
document was made on June 6, 2007. To
be considered in the 12-month finding
for this petition comments and
information must be submitted to us by
August 6, 2007.
DATES:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:18 Jun 05, 2007
Jkt 211001
Data, information, and
comments concerning this finding may
be submitted by any one of the
following methods:
1. You may mail or hand-deliver
written comments and information to:
Yellow-billed Loon Comments,
Endangered Species Branch, Fairbanks
Fish and Wildlife Field Office, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, 101–12th Ave.,
Room 110, Fairbanks, AK 99701.
2. You may fax your comments to
(907) 456–0208. Please clearly indicate
that you are submitting comments for
the Yellow-billed Loon finding on the
cover sheet.
3. You may send your comments by
electronic mail (e-mail) to
YBLoon@fws.gov. Please see the Public
Information Solicited section of this
document for information on submitting
e-mail comments.
4. You may submit comments via the
Internet at the Federal eRulemaking
Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting
comments.
The petition, findings, and supporting
information are available for public
inspection, by appointment, during
normal business hours, at the Fairbanks
Fish and Wildlife Field Office at the
address listed above. The Yellow-billed
Loon Conservation Agreement, which
addresses a subset of threats to the loon
in a subset of the species’ range, is
available at or can be requested from the
address listed above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Ted Swem, Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife
Field Office (see ADDRESSES) (telephone
907–456–0441; facsimile 907–456–
0208).
ADDRESSES:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Information Solicited
When we make a finding that
substantial information is presented to
indicate that listing a species may be
warranted, we are required to promptly
commence a review of the status of the
species. To ensure that the status review
is complete and based on the best
available scientific and commercial
information, we are particularly seeking
the following information on the
yellow-billed loon:
(1) Additional information on the life
history, ecology, and distribution of the
species;
(2) The status of the species and any
trend information from the United
States, Canada, Europe, and Asia;
(3) Potential threats to the species on
its nesting grounds, wintering areas, or
migration corridors;
(4) Ongoing management measures
that may be important with regard to the
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
conservation of the yellow-billed loon
throughout its range;
(5) The extent and nature of the use
of the species for subsistence purposes;
(6) The species’ tolerance for human
interaction and studies documenting
flushing distances;
(7) The incidence of mortality as a
result of bycatch from fishing on lakes
and at sea;
(8) Conservation and management
strategies that should be considered for
inclusion in annual reviews of the
Yellow-billed Loon Conservation
Agreement; and
(9) Whether the U.S. breeding
population constitutes a distinct
population segment.
If you wish to comment, you may
submit your comments and materials
concerning this finding to the
Endangered Species Branch Chief (see
ADDRESSES). If you wish to comment by
e-mail, please include ‘‘Attn: Yellowbilled Loon’’ in the beginning of your
message. Please include your name and
return address in your e-mail message
(anonymous comments will not be
considered). If you do not receive a
confirmation from the system that we
have received your e-mail message, or in
the event that our Internet connection is
not functional, please submit your
comments in writing using one of the
alternate methods described above.
Before including your address, phone
number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act)
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that we
make a finding on whether a petition to
list, delist, or reclassify a species
presents substantial scientific or
commercial information to indicate that
the petitioned action may be warranted.
We are to base this finding on
information provided in the petition,
supporting information submitted with
the petition, and information otherwise
available in our files at the time we
make the determination. To the
maximum extent practicable, we are to
make this finding within 90 days of our
receipt of the petition and publish our
notice of this finding promptly in the
Federal Register.
E:\FR\FM\06JNP1.SGM
06JNP1
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 6, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Our standard for substantial
information within the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90day petition finding is ‘‘that amount of
information that would lead a
reasonable person to believe that the
measure proposed in the petition may
be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we
find that substantial information was
presented, we are required to promptly
commence a review of the status of the
species.
In making this finding, we relied on
information provided by the petitioners
and evaluated that information in
accordance with 50 CFR 424.14(b). Our
process of coming to a 90-day finding
under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act and
section 424.14(b) of our regulations is
limited to a determination of whether
the information in the petition meets the
‘‘substantial information’’ threshold. A
substantial finding should be made
when the Service deems that adequate
and reliable information has been
presented that would lead a reasonable
person to believe that the petitioned
action may be warranted.
On April 5, 2004, we received a
petition from the Center for Biological
Diversity (CBD) (Sitka, AK), Natural
Resources Defense Council
(Washington, DC), Pacific Environment
(San Francisco, CA), Trustees for Alaska
(Anchorage, AK), Kaira Club (Chukotka,
Anadyr, Russia), Kronotsky Nature
Preserve (Kamchatka Region, Russia),
Taiga Rangers (Khabarovsk Region,
Russia), Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk Local
Public Fund (Sakhalin Region, Russia),
Interregional Public Charitable
Organization of Far Eastern Resource
Centers (Vladivostok, Russia),
Kamchatka Branch of Pacific Institute of
Geography (Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky,
Russia), and Kamchatka League of
Independent Experts (PetropavlovskKamchatsky, Russia) to list the yellowbilled loon (Gavia adamsii) as
endangered or threatened throughout its
range, or as a Distinct Population
Segment, and to designate critical
habitat once listed. The petition
summarizes threats to the species based
on CBD’s review of Fair’s (2002) report,
prepared for the Natural Resources
Defense Council and Trustees for
Alaska, on the status and significance of
the species in Alaska as well as CBD’s
review of the scientific literature. The
63-plus page petition describes multiple
threats to the yellow-billed loon,
including destruction or modification of
habitats due to development and
pollution, lack of regulatory protection,
and other factors such as mortality from
hunting and drowning in gill nets. The
petition also emphasizes that additional
factors, including limited and specific
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:18 Jun 05, 2007
Jkt 211001
breeding habitats, a small global
population, and low reproductive rate,
make yellow-billed loon populations
more susceptible to the abovementioned threats and less likely to
recover after population declines.
Development of a Conservation
Agreement
Yellow-billed loons may benefit
greatly from a Conservation Agreement
among agencies (the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM), the National Park
Service, and the Service) with
management and conservation
responsibilities on public lands that
include much of the loon’s breeding
range in the United States. At present,
the Service and the Alaska Department
of Fish and Game cooperatively
promulgate migratory bird hunting and
subsistence regulations, and the U.S.
Geological Survey has ongoing yellowbilled loon studies. The BLM and the
Service, with other agencies, have
developed a Conservation Agreement
(Agreement) dated September 30, 2006,
for the yellow-billed loon that addresses
a subset of threats (including fisheries
bycatch, habitat loss from industrial
development, and disturbance) for
yellow-billed loons breeding in northern
and western Alaska. We will be
conducting annual review of the
Agreement and as such, we welcome
suggestions for conservation and
management strategies that should be
considered. The strategies for
conservation in the Agreement include:
(1) Implement specific actions to protect
yellow-billed loons and their breeding
habitats in Alaska from potential
impacts of land uses and management
activities, including oil and gas
exploration and development; (2)
inventory and monitor yellow-billed
loon breeding populations in Alaska; (3)
determine and reduce, if significant, the
impact of subsistence activities on
yellow-billed loons (including
subsistence fisheries and hunting) in
Alaska; and (4) conduct biological
research on yellow-billed loons,
including response to management
actions.
Biology and Distribution
The following information regarding
the description and natural history of
the yellow-billed loon (American
Ornithologist’s Union (AOU) 2003) has
been condensed from these sources:
Earnst et al. (2006, 2005), Evers (2004),
Mallek et al. (2004), Johnson et al.
(1999, 1998, 1997, 1996), Larned et al.
(2003), Fair (2002), North (1994), Smith
et al. (1994, 1993), Field et al. (1993),
and North and Ryan (1989). These and
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
31257
other references are cited for data of
particular relevance to this finding.
The yellow-billed loon (Order
Gaviiformes, Family Gaviidae) is one of
the largest of the five loon species and
similar in appearance to the common
loon (Gavia immer). Yellow-billed loons
are distinguished from common loons
by their larger yellow or ivory bill.
Adults weigh 4,000 to 6,000 grams (8.8
to 13.2 pounds) and are 774 to 920
millimeters (30 to 37 inches) in length.
Presumably, as with common loons,
average male body mass and size is
greater than female mass and size.
Breeding (alternate) plumage of adults
of both sexes is black above with white
spots on the wings and underside, and
white stripes on the neck. Non-breeding
(basic) plumage is gray-brown with
fewer and less distinct white spots than
breeding plumage, with paler
undersides and head, and a blue-gray
bill. Hatchlings have dark brown and
gray down, and juveniles are gray with
a paler head. There are no recognized
subspecies or geographic variations.
Yellow-billed loons are specialized for
aquatic foraging and are unable to fly
from land, with a streamlined shape and
legs near the rear of the body.
Yellow-billed loons nest exclusively
in coastal and inland low-lying tundra
from 62 to 74° N latitude, in association
with permanent, fish-bearing lakes.
Populations are thought to be limited
primarily by breeding habitat,
specifically nesting and brood-rearing
lakes (North 1994, p. 16). Lakes that
support breeding loons have abundant
fish populations; depths greater than 2
meters (m) or 6.5 feet (ft) and water
under the ice during winter; large areas
(at least 13.4 hectares [ha] or 33 acres
[ac]) (North & Ryan 1989, p. 302); often
connections to streams that may supply
fish; highly convoluted, vegetated, and
low-lying shorelines; clear water; and
dependable water levels (Earnst et al.
2006, p. 227; North 1994, p. 6). Breeding
lakes may be near major rivers, but are
usually not connected to them, possibly
because fluctuating water levels can
flood nests or cause turbidity that
compromises foraging success.
Breeding territories (areas defended
against conspecifics and other loon
species, particularly Pacific loons
[Gavia pacifica]), may include one or
more lakes or parts of lakes. Territory
size, dependent upon lake size and
quality, ranged from 13.8 to greater than
100 ha (34 to greater than 247 ac) on the
Colville River Delta, AK (North 1986, as
cited in North 1994, p. 10). It is thought
that loons occupy the same breeding
territory throughout their reproductive
life; certainly, breeding lakes are
‘‘known to be reoccupied over long time
E:\FR\FM\06JNP1.SGM
06JNP1
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
31258
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 6, 2007 / Proposed Rules
spans’’ (North 1994, p. 10), most likely
by the same monogamous pair (North
1994, p. 10), similar to common loons
(Evers 2004, p. 13).
Yellow-billed loons feed on fish and
aquatic invertebrates. Marine prey
species include sculpins (Leptocottus
armatus, Myoxocephalus sp.); tomcod
(Microgadus proximus) and rock cod
(Sebastodes sp.); invertebrates such as
amphipods, isopods, shrimps, hermit
crabs (Pagarus sp.), and marine worms
(Nereus sp.); and Pacific sand dabs
(Citharichthys sordidus). During the
breeding season, freshwater prey may
include ninespine sticklebacks
(Pungitius pungitius), Alaska blackfish
(Dallia pectoralis), fourhorn sculpins
(M. quadricornus), least cisco
(Coregonus sardinella), and freshwater
amphipods, isopods, insects, and
spiders. Freshwater foraging habitats
include lakes, rivers, and the nearshore
marine environment for non-breeders;
young are fed almost entirely from the
brood-rearing lake (North 1994, p. 14).
Nest sites are usually located on
islands, hummocks, or peninsulas,
along low shorelines, within 1 m (3 ft)
of water. The nest location, which may
be used in multiple years, usually
provides a better view of the
surrounding land and water than other
available lakeshore locations. Nests are
constructed of mud or peat, and are
often lined with vegetation. One or two
large, smooth, mottled brown eggs are
laid in mid-to late June; hatching occurs
after 27 to 28 days of incubation by both
sexes. Although the actual age at which
young are capable of flight is unknown,
it is probably similar to common loons
(8 to 9, possibly 11, weeks). The young
leave the nest soon after hatching, and
the family may move between natal and
brood-rearing lakes. Both males and
females participate in feeding and
caring for young. In spite of the
occasional replacement of eggs after nest
predation, the short Arctic summer
makes it impossible to raise more than
one brood.
There is no reliable scientific
information on lifespan and
survivorship, but as large-bodied birds
with low clutch size, yellow-billed
loons are probably K-selected (longlived and dependent upon high annual
adult survival to maintain populations).
Assuming demography similar to
common loons (Evers 2004, p. 17–18),
individuals on average reach sexual
maturity at three years of age, but
competition for breeding territories may
delay successful reproduction until six
or seven years of age.
Reproductive success, although
studied rarely and with differing
methodologies, is low and highly
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:18 Jun 05, 2007
Jkt 211001
variable. For example, on the Colville
River Delta, the percent of territorial
pairs that nested were 76, 79, 42, and 71
in 1983, 1984, 1989, and 1993
respectively (Smith et al. 1994, p. 18;
Field et al. 1993, p. 329). Aerial surveys
on the Colville River Delta from 1993 to
2003 documented annual variation in
number of nests (16 to 26), number of
broods (3 to 14), and total number of
chicks (3 to 17) from 1993 to 2003
(Johnson 2004; Wildman 2004a; Johnson
et al. 1999, p. 48). Specifically, in 2000
and 2001, there were only 3 young
among 16 observed nests and 4 young
among 20 observed nests, respectively,
which is relatively low compared to
other years, possibly due to late summer
storms, severe spring flooding, or both
(Wildman 2004b). In 1995 to 2000 on
the Colville River Delta, Earnst (2004a,
p. 1) also documented high annual
variability in several reproductive
parameters, including number of
territorial pairs nesting, clutch size,
hatch date, proportion of eggs hatching,
and proportion of chicks surviving to
six weeks of age.
Yellow-billed loons breed in the
freshwater treeless tundra of Alaska
(sparsely in western Alaska and the
foothills of the Brooks Range, more
abundantly on the North Slope), in
Canada east of the Mackenzie Delta and
west of Hudson’s Bay, in arctic Russia
in the relatively narrow strip of coastal
tundra from the Chukchi Peninsula in
the east to the Taymyr Peninsula and
the areas of the Novaya Zemlya and
Pechora Rivers in the west, and rarely
in far northern Norway and Finland.
Because preferred breeding habitats are
patchy and sparsely distributed across
the yellow-billed loon’s range, breeding
birds are found in clumped and
concentrated distributions. Based on
aerial survey data (1998 to 2001 U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska
Coastal Plain (ACP) and North Slope
Eider (NSE) surveys), most of the
population in Alaska occurred within 6
concentrations, which together covered
only 15 percent of the surveyed area yet
contained 84 percent of yellow-billed
loon sightings. The largest concentration
area was between the Meade and
Ikpikpuk Rivers. It covered only 5
percent of the survey area, but had 30
percent of yellow-billed loon sightings.
Other notable concentration areas were
on the Colville River Delta and west,
southwest, and east of Teshukpuk Lake.
In Canada, concentration areas include
Banks Island; western Victoria Island;
the mainland south of the Kent
Peninsula, east of Bathhurst Inlet and
west of Ellice River; the west side of
Boothia Peninsula, and the lake district
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
between Great Slave Lake and Baker
Lake, including the Thelon Game
Sanctuary (North 1994, p. 3). In Russia,
breeding concentrations have been
identified east of Chaun Bay on the
Chukchi Peninsula (Fair 2002, pp. 17
and 19), and along the Kolyma River
Delta (Earnst 2004a, p. 1).
The wintering range of the yellowbilled loon includes nearshore coastal
waters from southcentral Alaska south
to Puget Sound; from the Pacific coast
of Siberia south to the Yellow Sea; and
occasionally in northern Europe from
Great Britain to Norway. Wintering
habitats have less specific
characteristics than breeding habitats
but are primarily in protected nearshore
marine waters. A small proportion of
yellow-billed loons breeding in interior
North America may winter on large
inland freshwater lakes (North 1994, p.
3).
Yellow-billed loon migration routes
are thought to be primarily marine,
sometimes far offshore. Migration route
and timing is possibly influenced by
ocean ice conditions, although inland
breeders may migrate along chains of
inland lakes. In 2002 and 2003, 11
yellow-billed loons along the North
Slope of Alaska were outfitted with
satellite transmitters. All 11 of these
loons migrated to Asia, predominantly
along the Russian coastline, and
wintered in the Yellow Sea off China,
North Korea, Russia, and Japan (near
Hokkaido) (Schmutz 2004, p. 1). Most of
these yellow-billed loons departed
breeding areas in late September,
arrived in wintering locations in midNovember, started spring migration in
April, and arrived on breeding grounds
in the first half of June; these are similar
to breeding ground arrival dates
reported by North (1994, p. 5). Nonbreeders or failed nesters may start fall
migration in July; non-breeders and
juveniles may forego spring migration
altogether and spend the summer in
wintering areas. Yellow-billed loons are
thought to migrate singly or in pairs,
although large groups are occasionally
seen at staging (temporary resting or
loafing) areas.
The only known comprehensive
population estimates of yellow-billed
loons are derived from the two Arctic
coastal plain waterfowl surveys
conducted in Alaska annually in early
June (NSE survey) and late June (ACP
survey) by the Service’s Migratory Bird
Management program. The long-term
(1986 to 2003) mean estimate of yellowbilled loons on the Arctic coastal plain
is 2,919 (95 percent confidence interval
= 2,450 to 3,387) (ACP estimate; Mallek
et al. 2004, p. 10); a 12-year mean (1992
to 2003) based on both surveys and a
E:\FR\FM\06JNP1.SGM
06JNP1
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 6, 2007 / Proposed Rules
visibility correction factor results in a
similar estimate (Earnst et al. 2005, p.
289). A 1-year (1993) estimate of
breeding yellow-billed loons on the
Seward Peninsula was 680. There is
anecdotal information of 50 yellowbilled loons on St. Lawrence Island and
approximately the same number in the
Selawik wetlands. When these are
added to the coastal plain estimates, the
estimated total number of yellow-billed
loons on Alaska breeding grounds is
approximately 3,500 to 4,000. (Not all
are breeders; the ACP and NSE surveys
include, but do not distinguish between,
breeding and non-breeding yellowbilled loons. The 3- to 5-year-old
reproductively mature individuals are
capable of breeding, yet due to limited
availability of suitable breeding
territories, only a portion of these
individuals may be present and,
therefore, visible on the breeding
grounds. The 1- to 2-year-old juveniles
likely stay at sea and are not counted.)
The total Alaska yellow-billed loon
population, including those birds not
occupying breeding areas during
summer, may be between 3,700 to 4,900,
assuming yellow-billed loon
demography (age-specific survival,
productivity, and average age of first
breeding) is similar to that of common
loons (Evers 2004, p. 16–20).
The Service is unaware of
scientifically valid population estimates
for other areas. Yellow-billed loons are
not summarized in the North American
Spring Waterfowl Surveys (U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service 2003, p. 1–53), and
Canadian population estimates do not
exist (https://www.bsc-eoc.org/cllsbw1.html, accessed January 17, 2006).
However, Fair (2002, p. 29) speculated,
based on anecdotal local density and
habitat information, that 8,000 yellowbilled loons breed in Canada and 5,000
breed in Russia. Combining these
estimates, the worldwide breedingground yellow-billed loon population is
estimated at 16,500.
Given the lack of comprehensive
scientific information relative to
population estimates, there are few
ways to assess population trends. In
Alaska, the total number of yellowbilled loons counted in surveys is small
(resulting in wide confidence intervals
around annual estimates), but estimates
over the last two decades do not suggest
a change in the number of adults on
Alaskan breeding grounds. Additional
analysis of ACP and NSE survey data,
using a multivariate model to account
for the confounding factors of spring
timing and observer experience, also
indicates no discernible trend in
population numbers. However, the
statistical power (or ability to detect a
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:18 Jun 05, 2007
Jkt 211001
significant change) is relatively low; a
minimum of 10.4 years is required to
detect a 50 percent decline in the
surveyed population (based on NSE
data; Larned et al. 2003, Fig. 8). Thus,
in Alaska, the breeding ground
population could decline to less than
2,000 individuals before current survey
methods would detect a significant
declining trend. The total Alaska
population could decline by a larger
percentage because breeding ground
surveys do not include population
components that remain at sea during
the breeding season (pre-breeding and
reproductively mature but non-breeding
individuals). Thus, a significant decline
in these population components in
Alaska could not be readily detected
with current surveys. Further, any
decline in yellow-billed loons in Russia
and Canada could not be detected
because these are not currently
surveyed. Finally, a decline in the
breeding component may be masked by
movement of previously uncounted
individuals to vacated territories
(resulting in sinks rather than
productive breeding habitats); this
decline would not be detected with
current surveys.
Conservation Status
Pursuant to section 4(a) of the Act, we
may list a species or subspecies of fish
or wildlife or plants, or distinct
population segment (DPS) of a
vertebrate taxa, on the basis of any of
the following five factors: (A) 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; (D) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; and (E)
other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence. The
petition asserts that yellow-billed loons
are subject to threats primarily under
Factors A, C, D, and E, above. We used
information provided by the petitioners
and available in our files to address the
relationship of these factors to the
yellow-billed loon and its habitats.
Certain intrinsic aspects of yellowbilled loon ecology and demography,
including low and variable productivity,
adult survival, and low population
numbers, are important to consider
when evaluating the species’ status and
its threats. Healthy populations of Kselected species, such as the yellowbilled loon, are characterized by low
annual productivity rates balanced with
high annual survival rates, meaning that
individuals must live many years to
replace themselves with offspring that
survive to recruit into the breeding
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
31259
population. Low productivity means
that depleted K-selected species have
lower recovery potential and slower
recovery rates following population
declines than r-selected species, which
are characterized by high annual
productivity. Factors that reduce
productivity, including loss of
productive breeding habitats, reduction
in prey populations, or increases in nest
predators, may further constrain a Kselected species’ recovery. Further, most
arctic species are characterized by
variable annual productivity, given the
vagaries and severity of arctic weather,
fluctuations in predator–prey
relationships (e.g., reproductive success
of many predators fluctuates with large
annual variation in lemming
abundance), and other aspects of arctic
ecology. The population impact of
threats that reduce productivity could
be magnified if coincident with a rare
year of otherwise high productivity.
Although factors that compromise
productivity can cause populations to
decline, adult survival may be the most
important determinant of a K-selected
species’ population size and persistence
(Smith and Smith 2001, p. 235). If
adults are removed from the population
prior to replacing themselves (i.e., adult
survival is decreased), the population
will decline. Perhaps most pertinent to
a discussion of extinction, rare
species—those with low numbers—are
intrinsically closer to a threshold below
which recovery is not possible (i.e.,
minimum viable population) (Hunter
1996, p. 137). Species can be rare
because of restriction to a rare type of
habitat, limitation to a small geographic
range, or occurrence at low densities
(Hunter 1996, p. 129), all of which are
true for yellow-billed loons. Because
rare species are closer to extinction to
begin with, potential threats become
more urgent and imminent, even if we
have not studied and therefore not
documented their occurrence or effects.
A. Present or Threatened Destruction,
Modification, or Curtailment of a
Species’ Habitat or Range
The petitioners assert that yellowbilled loon freshwater breeding habitats
are threatened by oil, gas, and mineral
development, and that marine wintering
and migrating habitats are threatened by
degradation of the marine environment.
Disturbance from human presence and
noise from construction and aerial
traffic, changes in freshwater chemistry
or pollutant loads, and changes in
freshwater hydrology associated with oil
and gas development are addressed by
the petitioners under Factor E, but
warrant discussion under Factor A
because they are potential mechanisms
E:\FR\FM\06JNP1.SGM
06JNP1
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
31260
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 6, 2007 / Proposed Rules
for rendering breeding habitats
unsuitable. (Additional impacts
associated with development on the
breeding grounds, such as increased
predation, are discussed under Factors
C and E.)
Discussion of disturbance, pollution,
hydrologic alterations, and other
impacts from development that may
reduce the suitability of breeding
habitats is relevant because much of the
yellow-billed loon’s limited, specific,
and concentrated breeding habitat in
Alaska is available for oil and gas
leasing and development.
Approximately three-quarters of the
yellow-billed loons that nest in Alaska,
and over 90 percent of those that nest
on Alaska’s North Slope, occur within
the 9.5-million-ha (23.5-million-ac)
National Petroleum Reserve–Alaska
Plan (NPR–A), and information
available in our files indicates that some
of the highest-density yellow-billed loon
breeding areas overlap with areas of
high economic oil potential. The
petitioners cite National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) planning documents
for oil and gas leasing and exploration
in NPR–A to support their assertion that
oil and gas exploration and
development will occur. The BLM has
conducted four lease sales in the NPR–
A since 1999. In the Northeast Planning
Area, sales held in May 1999 and June
2002 resulted in leases covering 404,685
ha (1.45 million ac) (https://
www.blm.gov/ak/ak940/fluids/
boe_npra_index.html, accessed March
30, 2007), on which 21 exploration
wells were drilled from 2000 to 2007
(https://www.blm.gov/ak/ak940/fluids/
boe_explrtn_actvty.html, accessed
March 30, 2007). In the Northwest
Planning Area, sales held in June 2004
and September 2006 resulted in leases
covering 809,371 ha (2.34 million ac),
on which 3 exploration wells were
drilled in 2006 and 2007 (https://
www.blm.gov/ak/ak940/fluids/
boe_explrtn_actvty.html, accessed
March 30, 2007). If exploration drilling
results in discovery of a commercially
viable field, ‘‘* * * it typically takes an
additional 4 to 10 years for further
study, design, and installation of
facilities before production can begin.’’
(USDOI–BLM 2006, p. 2–6). Because
most of yellow-billed loon breeding
habitats are in NPR–A, and because
approximately half of the high-density
breeding areas overlap with leased areas
that have high potential for
economically recoverable oil, the
likelihood of threats from oil and gas
development to the species occurring
within the next ten years is high.
The petitioners assert that loons as a
genus are extremely susceptible to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:18 Jun 05, 2007
Jkt 211001
disturbance, and information in our files
suggests that yellow-billed loons may be
very sensitive to human presence (North
1994, p. 16). Disturbance can cause
yellow-billed loons to abandon
reproductive efforts or leave eggs or
chicks unattended and exposed to
predators or bad weather. A yellowbilled loon’s normal behavior can be
interrupted at a distance of up to 1.6
kilometers (1 mile) from humans,
although these behavioral changes can
vary by individual and circumstance
(Earnst 2004b, p. 1). When undisturbed,
yellow-billed loons rarely leave eggs or
chicks, and they effectively defend both
from aerial predators (Earnst 2004b, p.
1). Further, although information
available in our files suggests displaced
common loons may successfully breed
in alternative sites (e.g., common loons
not accustomed to human activity have
relocated breeding activities in response
to human presence) (numerous studies
cited in Evers 2004, p. 35), alternative
suitable breeding sites are likely not
available for yellow-billed loons, as
evidenced by inter- and intra-specific
competition for nesting and broodrearing lakes of suitable size and depth,
and the species’ philopatric behavior
(North 1994, p. 16).
The petitioners assert that oil spills
and other chemical contamination that
would occur with oil and gas
development will also impact loons,
citing information on oil toxicity and
prevalence of oil spills on Alaska’s
North Slope. Information in our files
suggests that changes in freshwater
chemistry or pollutant loads, including
oil spills, associated with oil and gas
development may render breeding
habitats unsuitable, and both have been
documented on Alaska’s North Slope
(NRC 2003, p. 6–7, 73–74). Yellowbilled loons, like other aquaticdependent birds, are susceptible to
oiling in the event of a spill. Severe
effects are expected to result for birds
contacted by oil spills in NPR–A
(USDOI–BLM 2005, p. 4–105). Further,
oil spills may have long-term effects on
tundra waters by killing prey and
vegetation (USDOI–BLM 2005, p. 4–78,
4–88), thereby reducing food availability
and cover. Oil spills in arctic marine
habitats may also affect juvenile and
non-breeding yellow-billed loons
(USDOI–BLM 2005, p. 4–105). The
majority of spills that have occurred in
association with oil and gas
development on Alaska’s North Slope
are relatively small and cause minimal
impacts to surrounding habitats or
wildlife. The risks from larger and
potentially more frequent spills need to
be examined however.
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The petitioners assert that water
depletion or drawdown may affect
connectedness, depth, or melt date of
yellow-billed loon nesting or broodrearing lakes and may render such areas
unsuitable as breeding habitats.
Information in our files indicates that
industrial development on the North
Slope has affected freshwater flow and
drainage as a result of water
withdrawals to build ice roads or
drilling pads, and through permafrost
decay consequent to infrastructure
placement, vegetation damage, or fluid
extraction and injection (NRC 2003, p.
1–11). North (1994, p. 16) and North
and Ryan (1989, p. 303) suggested that
permafrost decay consequent to
infrastructure placement and
disturbance of vegetation may cause
breaching of rivers into yellow-billed
loon breeding lakes, rendering them
unsuitable due to fluctuating water
levels (causing drowned nests) or
increased turbidity (negatively affecting
foraging success). Additionally, the
petitioners assert and we concur that ice
roads on breeding lakes may compact
lake ice and delay melting (USDOI–BLM
1998, p. IV–3–b–1–b), thus delaying or
discouraging yellow-billed loon
breeding.
Water withdrawals used for ice roads
and pads could have additional effects
on habitat suitability by affecting fish
populations that breeding yellow-billed
loons depend upon to feed themselves
and young. Although water withdrawal
stipulations in oil and gas planning
documents are designed to protect and
monitor fish-bearing lakes, their
adequacy for protecting fish that serve
as yellow-billed loon prey is not
currently known. The Service is
working with the BLM and others to
evaluate these and other
accommodations that are either in place
or are proposed for the protection of this
species.
Areas within the yellow-billed loon’s
arctic breeding range in Russia and
Canada may face similar developmental
pressures. The petitioners assert that
mineral and oil development in Russia
is either unregulated or regulations are
not enforced, resulting in long-term
environmental impacts. In Canada, oil
and gas developments within the
yellow-billed loon’s breeding and
staging areas have been proposed. If it
occurs, overlap of development
(particularly unregulated development)
with the specific and limited breeding
areas required by yellow-billed loons
will result in destruction, modification,
or curtailment of habitats or range in
Russia and Canada. Further, the Service
and the petitioners are unaware of
assessment or monitoring data to
E:\FR\FM\06JNP1.SGM
06JNP1
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 6, 2007 / Proposed Rules
evaluate these effects on yellow-billed
loons in Eurasia (including Russia).
There is little documentation of the
degradation of marine habitats resulting
in destruction or modification of
yellow-billed loon habitat. However, the
marine environment is clearly important
for yellow-billed loons, as that is where
they spend their first three years, and
subsequently at least eight months per
year. Particular examples of marine
degradation listed by the petitioners
include pollution (although oil and
chemical spills are discussed under
Factor E), and the effects of fishing
practices such as drowning in fishing
nets and depletion of the prey base
through overfishing or other destructive
fishing practices. The negative effects of
these examples are likely to be on
individual condition or survival; high
survival rates, especially of breeding
adults, are required for yellow-billed
loon population maintenance.
Information available in our files
indicates that the Yellow Sea, where all
11 Alaska-breeding yellow-billed loons
with satellite transmitters wintered
(Schmutz 2004, p. 1), is being degraded.
There are approximately six million
humans in surrounding watersheds, and
the Yellow Sea is impacted by loss of
wetland habitat, depleted fisheries, and
industrial, agricultural, and domestic
pollution (https://www.gefonline.org/
projectDetails.cfm?projID=790),
accessed January 17, 2006). The
Australian Government, in a summary
of the Yellow Sea’s importance to
shorebirds, noted that declining river
flows, pollution, and unsustainable
harvesting of benthic fauna are leading
to reduced benthic productivity and
food declines for shorebirds (https://
www.deh.gov.au/biodiversity/migratory/
waterbirds/yellow-sea/, accessed
January 17, 2006). These impacts on the
aquatic system would also affect
wintering loon food availability,
potentially reducing individual fitness
prior to spring migration and breeding.
We find the petition provided
substantial information to support its
assertions that the threat of past, current
and probable future destruction,
modification, or curtailment of yellowbilled loon habitat is sufficient to
warrant additional review of the
species’ status. In freshwater breeding
areas, factors associated with oil and gas
exploration and development (i.e.,
disturbance, pollution, and hydrologic
changes) can make breeding habitats
unsuitable. Marine habitats, where
yellow-billed loons spend much of the
year, are being degraded through
overfishing and pollution.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:18 Jun 05, 2007
Jkt 211001
B. Overutilization for Commercial,
Recreational, Scientific, or Educational
Purposes
The petitioners assert that
overutilization for commercial,
recreational, or educational purposes is
unlikely. Although the petitioners list
research-related nest disturbance under
this Factor, they also state that it is
likely to be a minor Factor affecting the
species and that the benefits of such
research outweigh any adverse effects.
C. Disease or Predation
The petitioners assert that yellowbilled loons may be subjected to
increased nest predation if
infrastructure associated with resource
development occurs in their breeding
areas. Increasing numbers of ravens,
gulls, and arctic foxes, some of which
are documented predators of yellowbilled loon nests or young (North 1994,
p. 11), have been associated with oil
field infrastructure development and
human-generated food sources on the
North Slope of Alaska (NRC 2003, p. 6).
When combined with increased
predation opportunities resulting from
disturbance (discussed under Factor A),
the effect of increased predator numbers
could be amplified. The petitioners
assert that disease does not appear to be
a risk to yellow-billed loons. However,
since receiving the petition the highly
pathogenic avian influenza has been
documented in Asia where yellowbilled loons winter.
We find the petition provided
substantial information to support its
assertions that the threat of increased
predation associated with resource
development infrastructure is sufficient
to warrant additional review of the
species’ status. Additionally, the
potential impacts of avian influenza on
the loon are not know at this time and
may warrant further investigation.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory
Mechanisms
The petitioners assert that the yellowbilled loon is not protected or is
inadequately protected by existing
regulations, including international
conventions or agreements against
threats such as development and
hunting. The yellow-billed loon is not
currently listed under the Convention
on International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
(CITES). The species is listed under the
United Nations Environment Program
Convention on the Conservation of
Migratory Species of Wild Animals
(UNEP-CMS), yet the United States,
Russia, Canada, and most Asian nations
are not signatories (https://www.cms.int/
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
31261
, accessed January 17, 2006). Although
it is listed in the Russian Red Data book,
and the species and its habitat are
nominally protected under the U.S.
Migratory Bird Treaty with the former
Soviet Union (P.L. 95–616), the
petitioners assert that current economic
and social conditions in Russia limit the
implementation and enforcement of
these regulations. In Canada, the yellowbilled loon is protected under the
Migratory Birds Convention Act, but
subsistence hunting is allowed and is
not regulated or tracked. In Canada, the
yellow-billed loon is not listed on
Schedule 1 (i.e., specified as ‘‘at risk’’)
of the Species at Risk Act of 2002,
legislation similar to the Act. Currently,
the species is not covered under
Canadian Provincial laws or regulations
and, thus, receives no protections or
conservation considerations in Canada.
Within the United States, the yellowbilled loon has protection under several
laws and regulations, but the petitioners
assert that these are inadequate given
the vulnerabilities of, and the specific
threats facing, the species and its
habitat. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA) makes it unlawful to kill or take
eggs or nests of yellow-billed loons, but
does not provide protection for habitats,
a primary concern in relation to
development in breeding areas. Yellowbilled loons are not open for subsistence
hunting in Alaska under migratory bird
spring subsistence harvest regulations
(69 FR 17318–17329). The Service and
State of Alaska have recognized the
yellow-billed loon as a potentially
vulnerable species under the Birds of
Conservation Concern (68 FR 6179) and
State Comprehensive Wildlife
Conservation Strategy (https://
www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/statewide/
ngplan/, accessed January 17, 2006),
respectively. These designations
provide management and research
funding prioritization.
The BLM has adopted stipulations
and required operating procedures for
the NW and NE NPR–A (USDOI–BLM
2004, p. 2–22–23; USDOI–BLM 2005, p.
2–2–45) in order to minimize potential
impacts to yellow-billed loons, such as
disturbance of nesting birds and broods.
These include water withdrawal
standards for deep fish-bearing lakes
(discussed under Factor A) and setbacks
for exploratory drilling and permanent
facilities near fish-bearing and deep
lakes (greater than 3.9 m (13 ft) deep).
While exceptions may be authorized for
all stipulations and required operating
procedures, the stipulations and
required operating procedures were
proposed to minimize impacts,
including disturbance, to yellow-billed
loons within BLM-managed areas. At
E:\FR\FM\06JNP1.SGM
06JNP1
31262
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 6, 2007 / Proposed Rules
this time, however, data are not
available to determine how effective the
stipulations and required operating
procedures will be in minimizing or
eliminating adverse impacts to the
species. Further, the petitioners assert
that some information is not provided or
is erroneous and leads to unsupported
conclusions about probability or
magnitude of potential impacts. They
note, for example, in the 1998 NE NPR–
A Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS), that vehicle travel was encouraged
to occur more than 30 m (100 ft) from
streams or lakes bearing overwintering
fish, a stipulation not included in the
2005 NE NPR–A Final Amended EIS
(USDOI–BLM 2005) or in the NW NPR–
A Record of Decision (ROD)(USDOI–
BLM 2004). While the rationale for
removal of the stipulation was that
travel on lakes is limited to specified
areas (water pumping stations and ice
roads), thus reducing ice and snow
compaction, there are other reasons for
restricting travel near fish-bearing water
bodies, including reducing
contamination from spills or ice-road
maintenance activities. The petitioners
also claim that the Final EIS for the
Minerals Management Service’s (MMS)
1996 Beaufort Sea Planning Area Oil
and Gas Lease Sale 144 fails to
acknowledge documented use of marine
foraging areas on the North Slope
(USDOI–MMS 1996, p. IV–B–21). The
Service is working with BLM and others
to thoroughly review the biological
needs of the yellow-billed loon, evaluate
the conservation measures proposed by
BLM to conserve this species, and
identify any other measures that would
help to avoid and minimize impacts to
the species in its range within NPR–A.
We find the petition provided
substantial information to support its
assertions that the yellow-billed loon’s
habitat is not currently protected by
existing regulatory mechanisms in the
U.S. and Canada.
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors
Affecting the Species’ Continued
Existence
The petitioners assert that other
natural or manmade factors may
threaten yellow-billed loons. These
factors include small population size
and low productivity; vulnerability to
oil spills and other contaminants; water
depletion associated with oil and gas
development; incidental bycatch in
commercial or subsistence fishing nets;
and hunting. Increased predation,
disturbance, and water withdrawals
associated with oil and gas
development, and marine pollution,
were discussed under Factors A and C.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:18 Jun 05, 2007
Jkt 211001
As previously discussed, small
population size, low and variable
productivity, and dependence upon
high adult survival are all ecological
characteristics of yellow-billed loons, a
K-selected species. These characteristics
mean that the yellow-billed loon is
inherently more vulnerable to
perturbations that impact their survival
and reproductive success because their
population would take longer to recover
from declines than a more common or
fecund species. Additionally, many of
the factors discussed under Factor E
may affect adult survival, which may be
more important to population
maintenance in these long-lived birds
than annual productivity (Smith and
Smith 2001, p. 235). K-selected species
like the yellow-billed loon also tend to
be specialists, efficiently using
particular environments, but they are
often at or near carrying capacity,
resource-limited, poor colonizers, and
generally do not do well in disturbed
environments (Smith and Smith 2001,
p. 235). They are also highly vulnerable
to random environmental or
anthropogenic events, such as the
threats described below.
Yellow-billed loons, like other loons,
are potentially vulnerable to oil and
chemical spills throughout their range.
Of the 30,000 bird carcasses recovered
after the Exxon Valdez oil spill,
approximately 1.5 percent (450) were
loons (with an unknown percentage of
yellow-billed loons; Piatt et al. 1990, p.
391). As recovered carcasses represent
only a fraction of actual oil spill
mortality (Wiens 1996, p. 596), yellowbilled loon loss may have been high
relative to population size (Piatt et al.
1990, p. 395). Habitat alterations
associated with oil, gas, and mineral
development were addressed in Factor
A, and although an oil spill may make
habitats unsuitable, perhaps the effect of
most concern is mortality. Because
loons in general are so dependent upon
the aquatic environment and spend so
little time on land, they are particularly
at risk for exposure during an oil spill.
Oiled birds die primarily from
hypothermia because oil coats their
normally insulating and buoyant
feathers, preventing efficient
thermoregulation. They can also die
from oil ingested during preening. Egg
viability can be diminished through
contact with even small amounts of oil
on feathers of incubating adults (e.g.,
Harfenist et al. 1990, p. 902). Oil spills
may also alter foraging habitats, acutely
by killing large numbers of prey, or
chronically by altering community
structure via long-term exposure to oil
or its components (e.g., Peterson et al.
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1996, p. 2637). In migrating and
wintering areas of the Pacific, current
and future oil and gas development will
only increase, such as in the Yellow Sea
(https://www.china.org.cn/english/
7352.htm), accessed January 17, 2006),
or on Sakhalin Island, Russia.
Anecdotal data indicate that loons,
including yellow-billed loons, may die
as incidental bycatch in commercial and
subsistence gill nets, although more data
are needed to accurately quantify this
threat. Service law enforcement agents
have been told that yellow-billed loons
are routinely and unavoidably caught in
subsistence fishing nets on the Ikpikpuk
River (Roberts 2004), and this
presumably occurs on other North Slope
rivers with gillnetting. Additionally,
intensive commercial fishing, a likely
source of bycatch mortality, occurs in
yellow-billed loon wintering areas in
Asia, particularly the Yellow Sea
(Elvidge et al. 2001, Fig. 2).
Yellow-billed loons have also been
hunted for subsistence purposes,
especially for their feathers for use in
traditional dance regalia. Hunting is not
allowed under current spring
subsistence hunting regulations in
Alaska (i.e., they are not on the list of
‘‘open’’ species). Annual subsistence
harvest surveys conducted in Alaska
from 1990 to 1999 indicate a total
estimated harvest of 98 yellow-billed
loons (Wentworth and Wong 2001, p.
107). In Russia and Canada, traditional
or subsistence use of yellow-billed loons
is not regulated. Specifically, many
subsistence species may be taken at
higher rates in Russia than in Alaska,
because of the relative lack of paying
jobs, and yellow-billed loons are
included as customary and traditional
subsistence-use species on the 1996
protocol amending the 1916 Convention
for the Protection of Migratory Birds
between the United States and Canada
(Letter of Submittal dated May 20, 1996,
as cited in 70 FR 55691–55699).
We find the petition provided
substantial information to support its
assertions that the threats of other
natural and manmade factors, including
small population size, low productivity,
vulnerability to spilled oil and other
contaminants, water depletion
associated with resource development,
incidental bycatch, and hunting , are
sufficient to warrant additional review
of the species’ status.
Finding
We have reviewed the petition and
supporting information. We have found:
(1) On April 5, 2004, we received a
petition from the Center for Biological
Diversity and others to list the yellowbilled loon as endangered or threatened
E:\FR\FM\06JNP1.SGM
06JNP1
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 6, 2007 / Proposed Rules
throughout its range or as a Distinct
Population Segment and to designate
critical habitat. The petition describes
multiple threats to the yellow-billed
loon, including destruction or
modification of habitats due to
development and pollution, lack of
regulatory protection, and other factors
such as mortality from drowning in
fishing nets and hunting. The petition
emphasized that certain other factors,
including limited and specific breeding
habitats, a small global population, and
low reproductive rate, make yellowbilled loons more susceptible to the
threats identified in the petition and
less likely to recover after declines. The
petitioners assert that yellow-billed loon
freshwater breeding habitats are
threatened by oil, gas, and mineral
development, and that marine wintering
and migrating habitats are threatened by
degradation of the marine environment.
(2) Yellow-billed loons breed in
remote circumpolar areas, generally
above the Arctic Circle, with harsh
climates and low human population
densities. Yellow-billed loons nest
exclusively in coastal and inland lowlying tundra from 62 to 74° N latitude,
in association with permanent, fishbearing lakes in Alaska, Canada, Russia,
and rarely in far northern Norway and
Finland. Populations are thought to be
limited primarily by availability of
breeding habitat, specifically nesting
and brood-rearing lakes.
(3) Our knowledge of the status of the
yellow-billed loon is far from complete,
but the worldwide population is
believed to be relatively small. The only
known comprehensive yellow-billed
loon population estimates are from
Alaska. The total Alaska yellow-billed
loon population may be 3,700 to 4,900.
The Service is unaware of scientifically
valid population estimates for other
areas. However, anecdotal density and
habitat information have caused at least
one scientist to speculate that 8,000
yellow-billed loons breed in Canada and
5,000 breed in Russia. Combining these
estimates, the worldwide breedingground yellow-billed loon population
may be roughly 16,500.
(4) Given the lack of comprehensive
scientific information relative to yellowbilled loon population estimates, there
are few means with which to assess
population trends. In Alaska, the
number of yellow-billed loons counted
in surveys is small (resulting in wide
confidence intervals around annual
estimates). Although estimates over the
last two decades do not show a change
in the number of adults on the breeding
grounds, the ability to statistically
detect a significant change is relatively
low. Thus, the Alaska breeding ground
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:18 Jun 05, 2007
Jkt 211001
population could decline significantly
before current survey methods would
detect a declining trend. Other breeding
areas are not surveyed at all.
(5) Yellow-billed loons have relatively
low annual recruitment but relatively
high annual adult survival, meaning
that individuals must live many years to
replace themselves with offspring that
survive to recruit into the breeding
population. Biologists identify species
such as the yellow-billed loon as Kselected species, which are especially
vulnerable to threats and are less likely
to recover after declines.
(6) While comprehensive information
on the biology of the yellow-billed loon
is not complete, available scientific
information and the professional
judgment of knowledgeable biologists
suggests that loons in general are
relatively sensitive to human activity,
and development and infrastructure
located close to breeding lakes will
affect the species and may cause
reduced breeding success and declining
populations. Flushing or other changes
in normal nesting behavior can cause
eggs or young to be vulnerable to cold
and predation. Increased predation of
eggs and chicks due to human
disturbance has been documented in
loons.
(7) Approximately 75 percent of the
yellow-billed loons that nest in Alaska
are found within the NPR–A (25 percent
in NE NPR–A and 50 percent in NW
NPR–A), which is managed by BLM. Of
the 1.9 million ha (4.6 million ac) in NE
NPR–A, a 1998 Record of Decision
(ROD) made 87 percent available for oil
and gas leasing. In June 2004, the BLM
released a draft amended EIS that may
allow an increase in the area available
for leasing to 95 percent of the unit. In
the 3.6 million ha (8.8 million ac) of NW
NPR–A, a January 2004 ROD made all
BLM-administered lands available for
leasing. The EIS process for the 4.1
million-ha (10.1 million-ac) S NPR–A
has begun. In summary, much of the
higher density loon breeding area lies
within the area identified as having high
potential for oil development and
exploration and development has begun
in certain areas and will likely begin in
others soon (i.e., within the next ten
years).
(8) As exploration and development
occurs in the NPR–A, the potential for
disturbance, pollution, hydrologic
alterations, and other impacts on the
yellow-billed loon and its limited,
specific, and concentrated breeding
habitat will need to be addressed.
Additionally, increased predator
numbers are often associated with
industrial development in Arctic areas
and could adversely impact nesting
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
31263
success without careful planning and
management.
(9) Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.),
requires that we make a finding on
whether a petition to list, delist, or
reclassify a species presents substantial
scientific or commercial information to
indicate that the petitioned action may
be warranted. Our standard for
substantial scientific information with
regard to a 90-day petition finding is
‘‘that amount of information that would
lead a reasonable person to believe that
the measure proposed in the petition
may be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)).
When a substantial finding is made, we
are required to promptly begin a
thorough review of the status of the
species, if one has not already been
initiated.
We have determined that the
information in the petition would lead
a reasonable person to believe that the
measure proposed by the petition may
be warranted. Therefore, we find that
the petition presents substantial
information indicating that listing the
yellow-billed loon may be warranted.
While we note the lack of documented
scientific information on the effects of
threats to yellow-billed loons, the
yellow-billed loon is restricted in its
breeding habitat and, in Alaska, it
breeds primarily within a geographic
area that has significant development
potential. Therefore, the responsible
course of action is to review in detail
the threats and vulnerabilities listed in
the petition and to thoroughly review
the scientific literature and other
information to determine if listing the
species is warranted. To do otherwise
could subject the species to significant
risks from which it may have difficulty
recovering. We have also developed,
together with the BLM and other
agencies, a Conservation Agreement that
addresses a subset of threats to the loon
in a portion of the species’ range. The
strategies for conservation in the
Agreement include: Implement specific
actions to protect yellow-billed loons
and their breeding habitats in Alaska
from potential impacts of land uses and
management activities, including oil
and gas exploration and development;
inventory and monitor yellow-billed
loons breeding populations in Alaska;
determine and reduce, if significant, the
impact of subsistence activities on
yellow-billed loons (including
subsistence fisheries and hunting) in
Alaska; and conduct biological research
on yellow-billed loons, including
response to management actions. We
invite comments on management
strategies and research needs that
E:\FR\FM\06JNP1.SGM
06JNP1
31264
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 108 / Wednesday, June 6, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition
finding and initiation of status review.
valvata snail may be warranted, and are
initiating a status review. We plan to
conduct this review concurrent with the
ongoing status review initiated on April
11, 2006 (71 FR 18345), which we are
required to make every 5 years under
section 4(c)(2)(A) of the Act. We are
requesting submission of any new
information on the Utah valvata snail
since its original listing as an
endangered species in 1992. At the
conclusion of these simultaneous
reviews, we will make the requisite
recommendation under section
4(c)(2)(B) of the Act and will issue a 12month finding on the petition, as
provided in section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act.
DATES: The finding announced in this
document was made on June 6, 2007. To
be considered in the 12-month finding
on this petition or the 5-year review,
comments and information must be
submitted to us by September 4, 2007.
ADDRESSES: You may submit new
information, materials, comments, or
questions concerning this species by
any one of the following methods:
1. You may submit comments and
information to the Field Supervisor,
Attention: Utah Valvata Snail
Comments, Snake River Fish and
Wildlife Office, 1387 S. Vinnell Way,
Suite 368, Boise, ID 83709.
2. You may hand-deliver written
comments and information to the above
address.
3. You may fax your comments to
208–378–5262.
4. You may go to the Federal
rulemaking Internet portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
5. You may e-mail your comments to
fw1srbocomment@fws.gov.
Please include ‘‘Utah Valvata Snail
Comments’’ in the subject line for faxes
and e-mails. Please submit electronic
comments in unformatted text, and
avoid the use of special characters and
encryption.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susan Burch, Fish and Wildlife
Biologist, Snake River Fish and Wildlife
Office (see ADDRESSES); telephone: 208–
378–5243; or e-mail:
susan_burch@fws.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to remove
the Utah (desert) valvata snail (Valvata
utahensis) from the Federal List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
(List) pursuant to the Endangered
Species Act (Act). We find that the
petition presents substantial scientific
information that delisting the Utah
Public Information Solicited
When we make a finding that
substantial information exists to
indicate that listing or delisting a
species may be warranted, we are
required to promptly commence a
review of the status of the species. To
ensure that the status review is
complete and based on the best
available scientific and commercial
should be considered during scheduled
annual reviews of the Conservation
Agreement.
Following completion of the status
review, we will evaluate whether the
species or a Distinct Population
Segment warrant listing as endangered
or threatened. The petitioners also
requested that critical habitat be
designated for this species. We always
consider the need for critical habitat
designation when listing species. If we
determine in our 12-month finding that
listing the yellow-billed loon is
warranted, we will address the
designation of critical habitat at the time
of the proposed rulemaking.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
herein is available upon request from
the Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field
Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(see ADDRESSES).
Author
The primary author of this document
is Dr. Angela Matz, Fairbanks Fish and
Wildlife Field Office, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Fairbanks, Alaska.
Authority: The authority for this action is
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)
Dated: May 11, 2007.
Kenneth Stansell,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
[FR Doc. E7–10823 Filed 6–5–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a
Petition To Remove the Utah (Desert)
Valvata Snail (Valvata utahensis) from
the List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:18 Jun 05, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
information, we are soliciting any
additional information, comments, or
suggestions on the Utah valvata snail
from the public, State and Federal
agencies, Tribes, the scientific
community, industry or environmental
entities, or any other interested parties.
Information sought includes any data
regarding historical and current
distribution, biology and ecology,
ongoing conservation measures for the
species or its habitat, and threats to the
species or its habitat. We also request
information regarding the adequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms.
Please note that comments merely
stating support or opposition to the
actions under consideration without
providing supporting information,
although noted, will not be considered
in making a determination, as section
4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that
determinations as to whether any
species is a threatened or endangered
species shall be made ‘‘solely on the
basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.’’ At the
conclusion of the status review, we will
issue the 12-month finding on the
petition, as provided in section
4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.).
If you wish to comment or provide
information, you may submit your
comments and materials concerning this
finding to the Field Supervisor (see
ADDRESSES) by the date listed in the
DATES section.
Before including your address, phone
number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so. If you wish us to withhold your
name and/or address, you must state
this prominently at the beginning of
your comment. However, we will not
consider anonymous comments.
Comments and materials received will
be available for public inspection, by
appointment, during normal business
hours at the address listed in the
ADDRESSES section.
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered
Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that we
make a finding on whether a petition to
list, delist, or reclassify a species
presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that
the petitioned action may be warranted.
E:\FR\FM\06JNP1.SGM
06JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 108 (Wednesday, June 6, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31256-31264]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-10823]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on
a Petition To List the Yellow-Billed Loon as Threatened or Endangered
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition finding and initiation of status
review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list the yellow-billed loon (Gavia
adamsii) as threatened or endangered, under the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended. We find that the petition presents substantial
scientific information indicating that the petitioned action may be
warranted. As a result of this action, the Service also announces the
commencement of a thorough status review to determine if listing the
yellow-billed loon may be warranted. We ask the public to submit to us
any pertinent information concerning the status of or threats to this
species. We will also be working with other agencies to gain additional
data where gaps in our current information on this species exist. In
addition, together with the Bureau of Land Management, the Alaska
Departments of Fish and Game and Natural Resources, the U.S. Geological
Survey, and the National Park Service, we have developed a Conservation
Agreement for the yellow-billed loon, which addresses a subset of
threats to the loon in a subset of the species' range. We invite
comments on management strategies and research needs that should be
considered in annual reviews of the Conservation Agreement.
DATES: The finding announced in this document was made on June 6, 2007.
To be considered in the 12-month finding for this petition comments and
information must be submitted to us by August 6, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Data, information, and comments concerning this finding may
be submitted by any one of the following methods:
1. You may mail or hand-deliver written comments and information
to: Yellow-billed Loon Comments, Endangered Species Branch, Fairbanks
Fish and Wildlife Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 101-
12th Ave., Room 110, Fairbanks, AK 99701.
2. You may fax your comments to (907) 456-0208. Please clearly
indicate that you are submitting comments for the Yellow-billed Loon
finding on the cover sheet.
3. You may send your comments by electronic mail (e-mail) to
YBLoon@fws.gov. Please see the Public Information Solicited section of
this document for information on submitting e-mail comments.
4. You may submit comments via the Internet at the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions
for submitting comments.
The petition, findings, and supporting information are available
for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours, at
the Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field Office at the address listed
above. The Yellow-billed Loon Conservation Agreement, which addresses a
subset of threats to the loon in a subset of the species' range, is
available at or can be requested from the address listed above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ted Swem, Fairbanks Fish and
Wildlife Field Office (see ADDRESSES) (telephone 907-456-0441;
facsimile 907-456-0208).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Information Solicited
When we make a finding that substantial information is presented to
indicate that listing a species may be warranted, we are required to
promptly commence a review of the status of the species. To ensure that
the status review is complete and based on the best available
scientific and commercial information, we are particularly seeking the
following information on the yellow-billed loon:
(1) Additional information on the life history, ecology, and
distribution of the species;
(2) The status of the species and any trend information from the
United States, Canada, Europe, and Asia;
(3) Potential threats to the species on its nesting grounds,
wintering areas, or migration corridors;
(4) Ongoing management measures that may be important with regard
to the conservation of the yellow-billed loon throughout its range;
(5) The extent and nature of the use of the species for subsistence
purposes;
(6) The species' tolerance for human interaction and studies
documenting flushing distances;
(7) The incidence of mortality as a result of bycatch from fishing
on lakes and at sea;
(8) Conservation and management strategies that should be
considered for inclusion in annual reviews of the Yellow-billed Loon
Conservation Agreement; and
(9) Whether the U.S. breeding population constitutes a distinct
population segment.
If you wish to comment, you may submit your comments and materials
concerning this finding to the Endangered Species Branch Chief (see
ADDRESSES). If you wish to comment by e-mail, please include ``Attn:
Yellow-billed Loon'' in the beginning of your message. Please include
your name and return address in your e-mail message (anonymous comments
will not be considered). If you do not receive a confirmation from the
system that we have received your e-mail message, or in the event that
our Internet connection is not functional, please submit your comments
in writing using one of the alternate methods described above.
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be
able to do so.
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that we make a finding
on whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents
substantial scientific or commercial information to indicate that the
petitioned action may be warranted. We are to base this finding on
information provided in the petition, supporting information submitted
with the petition, and information otherwise available in our files at
the time we make the determination. To the maximum extent practicable,
we are to make this finding within 90 days of our receipt of the
petition and publish our notice of this finding promptly in the Federal
Register.
[[Page 31257]]
Our standard for substantial information within the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90-day petition finding is ``that
amount of information that would lead a reasonable person to believe
that the measure proposed in the petition may be warranted'' (50 CFR
424.14(b)). If we find that substantial information was presented, we
are required to promptly commence a review of the status of the
species.
In making this finding, we relied on information provided by the
petitioners and evaluated that information in accordance with 50 CFR
424.14(b). Our process of coming to a 90-day finding under section
4(b)(3)(A) of the Act and section 424.14(b) of our regulations is
limited to a determination of whether the information in the petition
meets the ``substantial information'' threshold. A substantial finding
should be made when the Service deems that adequate and reliable
information has been presented that would lead a reasonable person to
believe that the petitioned action may be warranted.
On April 5, 2004, we received a petition from the Center for
Biological Diversity (CBD) (Sitka, AK), Natural Resources Defense
Council (Washington, DC), Pacific Environment (San Francisco, CA),
Trustees for Alaska (Anchorage, AK), Kaira Club (Chukotka, Anadyr,
Russia), Kronotsky Nature Preserve (Kamchatka Region, Russia), Taiga
Rangers (Khabarovsk Region, Russia), Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk Local Public
Fund (Sakhalin Region, Russia), Interregional Public Charitable
Organization of Far Eastern Resource Centers (Vladivostok, Russia),
Kamchatka Branch of Pacific Institute of Geography (Petropavlovsk-
Kamchatsky, Russia), and Kamchatka League of Independent Experts
(Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, Russia) to list the yellow-billed loon
(Gavia adamsii) as endangered or threatened throughout its range, or as
a Distinct Population Segment, and to designate critical habitat once
listed. The petition summarizes threats to the species based on CBD's
review of Fair's (2002) report, prepared for the Natural Resources
Defense Council and Trustees for Alaska, on the status and significance
of the species in Alaska as well as CBD's review of the scientific
literature. The 63-plus page petition describes multiple threats to the
yellow-billed loon, including destruction or modification of habitats
due to development and pollution, lack of regulatory protection, and
other factors such as mortality from hunting and drowning in gill nets.
The petition also emphasizes that additional factors, including limited
and specific breeding habitats, a small global population, and low
reproductive rate, make yellow-billed loon populations more susceptible
to the above-mentioned threats and less likely to recover after
population declines.
Development of a Conservation Agreement
Yellow-billed loons may benefit greatly from a Conservation
Agreement among agencies (the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the
National Park Service, and the Service) with management and
conservation responsibilities on public lands that include much of the
loon's breeding range in the United States. At present, the Service and
the Alaska Department of Fish and Game cooperatively promulgate
migratory bird hunting and subsistence regulations, and the U.S.
Geological Survey has ongoing yellow-billed loon studies. The BLM and
the Service, with other agencies, have developed a Conservation
Agreement (Agreement) dated September 30, 2006, for the yellow-billed
loon that addresses a subset of threats (including fisheries bycatch,
habitat loss from industrial development, and disturbance) for yellow-
billed loons breeding in northern and western Alaska. We will be
conducting annual review of the Agreement and as such, we welcome
suggestions for conservation and management strategies that should be
considered. The strategies for conservation in the Agreement include:
(1) Implement specific actions to protect yellow-billed loons and their
breeding habitats in Alaska from potential impacts of land uses and
management activities, including oil and gas exploration and
development; (2) inventory and monitor yellow-billed loon breeding
populations in Alaska; (3) determine and reduce, if significant, the
impact of subsistence activities on yellow-billed loons (including
subsistence fisheries and hunting) in Alaska; and (4) conduct
biological research on yellow-billed loons, including response to
management actions.
Biology and Distribution
The following information regarding the description and natural
history of the yellow-billed loon (American Ornithologist's Union (AOU)
2003) has been condensed from these sources: Earnst et al. (2006,
2005), Evers (2004), Mallek et al. (2004), Johnson et al. (1999, 1998,
1997, 1996), Larned et al. (2003), Fair (2002), North (1994), Smith et
al. (1994, 1993), Field et al. (1993), and North and Ryan (1989). These
and other references are cited for data of particular relevance to this
finding.
The yellow-billed loon (Order Gaviiformes, Family Gaviidae) is one
of the largest of the five loon species and similar in appearance to
the common loon (Gavia immer). Yellow-billed loons are distinguished
from common loons by their larger yellow or ivory bill. Adults weigh
4,000 to 6,000 grams (8.8 to 13.2 pounds) and are 774 to 920
millimeters (30 to 37 inches) in length. Presumably, as with common
loons, average male body mass and size is greater than female mass and
size. Breeding (alternate) plumage of adults of both sexes is black
above with white spots on the wings and underside, and white stripes on
the neck. Non-breeding (basic) plumage is gray-brown with fewer and
less distinct white spots than breeding plumage, with paler undersides
and head, and a blue-gray bill. Hatchlings have dark brown and gray
down, and juveniles are gray with a paler head. There are no recognized
subspecies or geographic variations. Yellow-billed loons are
specialized for aquatic foraging and are unable to fly from land, with
a streamlined shape and legs near the rear of the body.
Yellow-billed loons nest exclusively in coastal and inland low-
lying tundra from 62 to 74[deg] N latitude, in association with
permanent, fish-bearing lakes. Populations are thought to be limited
primarily by breeding habitat, specifically nesting and brood-rearing
lakes (North 1994, p. 16). Lakes that support breeding loons have
abundant fish populations; depths greater than 2 meters (m) or 6.5 feet
(ft) and water under the ice during winter; large areas (at least 13.4
hectares [ha] or 33 acres [ac]) (North & Ryan 1989, p. 302); often
connections to streams that may supply fish; highly convoluted,
vegetated, and low-lying shorelines; clear water; and dependable water
levels (Earnst et al. 2006, p. 227; North 1994, p. 6). Breeding lakes
may be near major rivers, but are usually not connected to them,
possibly because fluctuating water levels can flood nests or cause
turbidity that compromises foraging success.
Breeding territories (areas defended against conspecifics and other
loon species, particularly Pacific loons [Gavia pacifica]), may include
one or more lakes or parts of lakes. Territory size, dependent upon
lake size and quality, ranged from 13.8 to greater than 100 ha (34 to
greater than 247 ac) on the Colville River Delta, AK (North 1986, as
cited in North 1994, p. 10). It is thought that loons occupy the same
breeding territory throughout their reproductive life; certainly,
breeding lakes are ``known to be reoccupied over long time
[[Page 31258]]
spans'' (North 1994, p. 10), most likely by the same monogamous pair
(North 1994, p. 10), similar to common loons (Evers 2004, p. 13).
Yellow-billed loons feed on fish and aquatic invertebrates. Marine
prey species include sculpins (Leptocottus armatus, Myoxocephalus sp.);
tomcod (Microgadus proximus) and rock cod (Sebastodes sp.);
invertebrates such as amphipods, isopods, shrimps, hermit crabs
(Pagarus sp.), and marine worms (Nereus sp.); and Pacific sand dabs
(Citharichthys sordidus). During the breeding season, freshwater prey
may include ninespine sticklebacks (Pungitius pungitius), Alaska
blackfish (Dallia pectoralis), fourhorn sculpins (M. quadricornus),
least cisco (Coregonus sardinella), and freshwater amphipods, isopods,
insects, and spiders. Freshwater foraging habitats include lakes,
rivers, and the nearshore marine environment for non-breeders; young
are fed almost entirely from the brood-rearing lake (North 1994, p.
14).
Nest sites are usually located on islands, hummocks, or peninsulas,
along low shorelines, within 1 m (3 ft) of water. The nest location,
which may be used in multiple years, usually provides a better view of
the surrounding land and water than other available lakeshore
locations. Nests are constructed of mud or peat, and are often lined
with vegetation. One or two large, smooth, mottled brown eggs are laid
in mid-to late June; hatching occurs after 27 to 28 days of incubation
by both sexes. Although the actual age at which young are capable of
flight is unknown, it is probably similar to common loons (8 to 9,
possibly 11, weeks). The young leave the nest soon after hatching, and
the family may move between natal and brood-rearing lakes. Both males
and females participate in feeding and caring for young. In spite of
the occasional replacement of eggs after nest predation, the short
Arctic summer makes it impossible to raise more than one brood.
There is no reliable scientific information on lifespan and
survivorship, but as large-bodied birds with low clutch size, yellow-
billed loons are probably K-selected (long-lived and dependent upon
high annual adult survival to maintain populations). Assuming
demography similar to common loons (Evers 2004, p. 17-18), individuals
on average reach sexual maturity at three years of age, but competition
for breeding territories may delay successful reproduction until six or
seven years of age.
Reproductive success, although studied rarely and with differing
methodologies, is low and highly variable. For example, on the Colville
River Delta, the percent of territorial pairs that nested were 76, 79,
42, and 71 in 1983, 1984, 1989, and 1993 respectively (Smith et al.
1994, p. 18; Field et al. 1993, p. 329). Aerial surveys on the Colville
River Delta from 1993 to 2003 documented annual variation in number of
nests (16 to 26), number of broods (3 to 14), and total number of
chicks (3 to 17) from 1993 to 2003 (Johnson 2004; Wildman 2004a;
Johnson et al. 1999, p. 48). Specifically, in 2000 and 2001, there were
only 3 young among 16 observed nests and 4 young among 20 observed
nests, respectively, which is relatively low compared to other years,
possibly due to late summer storms, severe spring flooding, or both
(Wildman 2004b). In 1995 to 2000 on the Colville River Delta, Earnst
(2004a, p. 1) also documented high annual variability in several
reproductive parameters, including number of territorial pairs nesting,
clutch size, hatch date, proportion of eggs hatching, and proportion of
chicks surviving to six weeks of age.
Yellow-billed loons breed in the freshwater treeless tundra of
Alaska (sparsely in western Alaska and the foothills of the Brooks
Range, more abundantly on the North Slope), in Canada east of the
Mackenzie Delta and west of Hudson's Bay, in arctic Russia in the
relatively narrow strip of coastal tundra from the Chukchi Peninsula in
the east to the Taymyr Peninsula and the areas of the Novaya Zemlya and
Pechora Rivers in the west, and rarely in far northern Norway and
Finland. Because preferred breeding habitats are patchy and sparsely
distributed across the yellow-billed loon's range, breeding birds are
found in clumped and concentrated distributions. Based on aerial survey
data (1998 to 2001 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska Coastal Plain
(ACP) and North Slope Eider (NSE) surveys), most of the population in
Alaska occurred within 6 concentrations, which together covered only 15
percent of the surveyed area yet contained 84 percent of yellow-billed
loon sightings. The largest concentration area was between the Meade
and Ikpikpuk Rivers. It covered only 5 percent of the survey area, but
had 30 percent of yellow-billed loon sightings. Other notable
concentration areas were on the Colville River Delta and west,
southwest, and east of Teshukpuk Lake. In Canada, concentration areas
include Banks Island; western Victoria Island; the mainland south of
the Kent Peninsula, east of Bathhurst Inlet and west of Ellice River;
the west side of Boothia Peninsula, and the lake district between Great
Slave Lake and Baker Lake, including the Thelon Game Sanctuary (North
1994, p. 3). In Russia, breeding concentrations have been identified
east of Chaun Bay on the Chukchi Peninsula (Fair 2002, pp. 17 and 19),
and along the Kolyma River Delta (Earnst 2004a, p. 1).
The wintering range of the yellow-billed loon includes nearshore
coastal waters from southcentral Alaska south to Puget Sound; from the
Pacific coast of Siberia south to the Yellow Sea; and occasionally in
northern Europe from Great Britain to Norway. Wintering habitats have
less specific characteristics than breeding habitats but are primarily
in protected nearshore marine waters. A small proportion of yellow-
billed loons breeding in interior North America may winter on large
inland freshwater lakes (North 1994, p. 3).
Yellow-billed loon migration routes are thought to be primarily
marine, sometimes far offshore. Migration route and timing is possibly
influenced by ocean ice conditions, although inland breeders may
migrate along chains of inland lakes. In 2002 and 2003, 11 yellow-
billed loons along the North Slope of Alaska were outfitted with
satellite transmitters. All 11 of these loons migrated to Asia,
predominantly along the Russian coastline, and wintered in the Yellow
Sea off China, North Korea, Russia, and Japan (near Hokkaido) (Schmutz
2004, p. 1). Most of these yellow-billed loons departed breeding areas
in late September, arrived in wintering locations in mid-November,
started spring migration in April, and arrived on breeding grounds in
the first half of June; these are similar to breeding ground arrival
dates reported by North (1994, p. 5). Non-breeders or failed nesters
may start fall migration in July; non-breeders and juveniles may forego
spring migration altogether and spend the summer in wintering areas.
Yellow-billed loons are thought to migrate singly or in pairs, although
large groups are occasionally seen at staging (temporary resting or
loafing) areas.
The only known comprehensive population estimates of yellow-billed
loons are derived from the two Arctic coastal plain waterfowl surveys
conducted in Alaska annually in early June (NSE survey) and late June
(ACP survey) by the Service's Migratory Bird Management program. The
long-term (1986 to 2003) mean estimate of yellow-billed loons on the
Arctic coastal plain is 2,919 (95 percent confidence interval = 2,450
to 3,387) (ACP estimate; Mallek et al. 2004, p. 10); a 12-year mean
(1992 to 2003) based on both surveys and a
[[Page 31259]]
visibility correction factor results in a similar estimate (Earnst et
al. 2005, p. 289). A 1-year (1993) estimate of breeding yellow-billed
loons on the Seward Peninsula was 680. There is anecdotal information
of 50 yellow-billed loons on St. Lawrence Island and approximately the
same number in the Selawik wetlands. When these are added to the
coastal plain estimates, the estimated total number of yellow-billed
loons on Alaska breeding grounds is approximately 3,500 to 4,000. (Not
all are breeders; the ACP and NSE surveys include, but do not
distinguish between, breeding and non-breeding yellow-billed loons. The
3- to 5-year-old reproductively mature individuals are capable of
breeding, yet due to limited availability of suitable breeding
territories, only a portion of these individuals may be present and,
therefore, visible on the breeding grounds. The 1- to 2-year-old
juveniles likely stay at sea and are not counted.) The total Alaska
yellow-billed loon population, including those birds not occupying
breeding areas during summer, may be between 3,700 to 4,900, assuming
yellow-billed loon demography (age-specific survival, productivity, and
average age of first breeding) is similar to that of common loons
(Evers 2004, p. 16-20).
The Service is unaware of scientifically valid population estimates
for other areas. Yellow-billed loons are not summarized in the North
American Spring Waterfowl Surveys (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2003,
p. 1-53), and Canadian population estimates do not exist (https://
www.bsc-eoc.org/clls-bw1.html, accessed January 17, 2006). However,
Fair (2002, p. 29) speculated, based on anecdotal local density and
habitat information, that 8,000 yellow-billed loons breed in Canada and
5,000 breed in Russia. Combining these estimates, the worldwide
breeding-ground yellow-billed loon population is estimated at 16,500.
Given the lack of comprehensive scientific information relative to
population estimates, there are few ways to assess population trends.
In Alaska, the total number of yellow-billed loons counted in surveys
is small (resulting in wide confidence intervals around annual
estimates), but estimates over the last two decades do not suggest a
change in the number of adults on Alaskan breeding grounds. Additional
analysis of ACP and NSE survey data, using a multivariate model to
account for the confounding factors of spring timing and observer
experience, also indicates no discernible trend in population numbers.
However, the statistical power (or ability to detect a significant
change) is relatively low; a minimum of 10.4 years is required to
detect a 50 percent decline in the surveyed population (based on NSE
data; Larned et al. 2003, Fig. 8). Thus, in Alaska, the breeding ground
population could decline to less than 2,000 individuals before current
survey methods would detect a significant declining trend. The total
Alaska population could decline by a larger percentage because breeding
ground surveys do not include population components that remain at sea
during the breeding season (pre-breeding and reproductively mature but
non-breeding individuals). Thus, a significant decline in these
population components in Alaska could not be readily detected with
current surveys. Further, any decline in yellow-billed loons in Russia
and Canada could not be detected because these are not currently
surveyed. Finally, a decline in the breeding component may be masked by
movement of previously uncounted individuals to vacated territories
(resulting in sinks rather than productive breeding habitats); this
decline would not be detected with current surveys.
Conservation Status
Pursuant to section 4(a) of the Act, we may list a species or
subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, or distinct population
segment (DPS) of a vertebrate taxa, on the basis of any of the
following five factors: (A) 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; (D) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; and (E) other natural or manmade
factors affecting its continued existence. The petition asserts that
yellow-billed loons are subject to threats primarily under Factors A,
C, D, and E, above. We used information provided by the petitioners and
available in our files to address the relationship of these factors to
the yellow-billed loon and its habitats.
Certain intrinsic aspects of yellow-billed loon ecology and
demography, including low and variable productivity, adult survival,
and low population numbers, are important to consider when evaluating
the species' status and its threats. Healthy populations of K-selected
species, such as the yellow-billed loon, are characterized by low
annual productivity rates balanced with high annual survival rates,
meaning that individuals must live many years to replace themselves
with offspring that survive to recruit into the breeding population.
Low productivity means that depleted K-selected species have lower
recovery potential and slower recovery rates following population
declines than r-selected species, which are characterized by high
annual productivity. Factors that reduce productivity, including loss
of productive breeding habitats, reduction in prey populations, or
increases in nest predators, may further constrain a K-selected
species' recovery. Further, most arctic species are characterized by
variable annual productivity, given the vagaries and severity of arctic
weather, fluctuations in predator-prey relationships (e.g.,
reproductive success of many predators fluctuates with large annual
variation in lemming abundance), and other aspects of arctic ecology.
The population impact of threats that reduce productivity could be
magnified if coincident with a rare year of otherwise high
productivity.
Although factors that compromise productivity can cause populations
to decline, adult survival may be the most important determinant of a
K-selected species' population size and persistence (Smith and Smith
2001, p. 235). If adults are removed from the population prior to
replacing themselves (i.e., adult survival is decreased), the
population will decline. Perhaps most pertinent to a discussion of
extinction, rare species--those with low numbers--are intrinsically
closer to a threshold below which recovery is not possible (i.e.,
minimum viable population) (Hunter 1996, p. 137). Species can be rare
because of restriction to a rare type of habitat, limitation to a small
geographic range, or occurrence at low densities (Hunter 1996, p. 129),
all of which are true for yellow-billed loons. Because rare species are
closer to extinction to begin with, potential threats become more
urgent and imminent, even if we have not studied and therefore not
documented their occurrence or effects.
A. Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of a
Species' Habitat or Range
The petitioners assert that yellow-billed loon freshwater breeding
habitats are threatened by oil, gas, and mineral development, and that
marine wintering and migrating habitats are threatened by degradation
of the marine environment. Disturbance from human presence and noise
from construction and aerial traffic, changes in freshwater chemistry
or pollutant loads, and changes in freshwater hydrology associated with
oil and gas development are addressed by the petitioners under Factor
E, but warrant discussion under Factor A because they are potential
mechanisms
[[Page 31260]]
for rendering breeding habitats unsuitable. (Additional impacts
associated with development on the breeding grounds, such as increased
predation, are discussed under Factors C and E.)
Discussion of disturbance, pollution, hydrologic alterations, and
other impacts from development that may reduce the suitability of
breeding habitats is relevant because much of the yellow-billed loon's
limited, specific, and concentrated breeding habitat in Alaska is
available for oil and gas leasing and development. Approximately three-
quarters of the yellow-billed loons that nest in Alaska, and over 90
percent of those that nest on Alaska's North Slope, occur within the
9.5-million-ha (23.5-million-ac) National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska Plan
(NPR-A), and information available in our files indicates that some of
the highest-density yellow-billed loon breeding areas overlap with
areas of high economic oil potential. The petitioners cite National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) planning documents for oil and gas
leasing and exploration in NPR-A to support their assertion that oil
and gas exploration and development will occur. The BLM has conducted
four lease sales in the NPR-A since 1999. In the Northeast Planning
Area, sales held in May 1999 and June 2002 resulted in leases covering
404,685 ha (1.45 million ac) (https://www.blm.gov/ak/ak940/fluids/boe_
npra_index.html, accessed March 30, 2007), on which 21 exploration
wells were drilled from 2000 to 2007 (https://www.blm.gov/ak/ak940/
fluids/boe_explrtn_actvty.html, accessed March 30, 2007). In the
Northwest Planning Area, sales held in June 2004 and September 2006
resulted in leases covering 809,371 ha (2.34 million ac), on which 3
exploration wells were drilled in 2006 and 2007 (https://www.blm.gov/ak/
ak940/fluids/boe_explrtn_actvty.html, accessed March 30, 2007). If
exploration drilling results in discovery of a commercially viable
field, ``* * * it typically takes an additional 4 to 10 years for
further study, design, and installation of facilities before production
can begin.'' (USDOI-BLM 2006, p. 2-6). Because most of yellow-billed
loon breeding habitats are in NPR-A, and because approximately half of
the high-density breeding areas overlap with leased areas that have
high potential for economically recoverable oil, the likelihood of
threats from oil and gas development to the species occurring within
the next ten years is high.
The petitioners assert that loons as a genus are extremely
susceptible to disturbance, and information in our files suggests that
yellow-billed loons may be very sensitive to human presence (North
1994, p. 16). Disturbance can cause yellow-billed loons to abandon
reproductive efforts or leave eggs or chicks unattended and exposed to
predators or bad weather. A yellow-billed loon's normal behavior can be
interrupted at a distance of up to 1.6 kilometers (1 mile) from humans,
although these behavioral changes can vary by individual and
circumstance (Earnst 2004b, p. 1). When undisturbed, yellow-billed
loons rarely leave eggs or chicks, and they effectively defend both
from aerial predators (Earnst 2004b, p. 1). Further, although
information available in our files suggests displaced common loons may
successfully breed in alternative sites (e.g., common loons not
accustomed to human activity have relocated breeding activities in
response to human presence) (numerous studies cited in Evers 2004, p.
35), alternative suitable breeding sites are likely not available for
yellow-billed loons, as evidenced by inter- and intra-specific
competition for nesting and brood-rearing lakes of suitable size and
depth, and the species' philopatric behavior (North 1994, p. 16).
The petitioners assert that oil spills and other chemical
contamination that would occur with oil and gas development will also
impact loons, citing information on oil toxicity and prevalence of oil
spills on Alaska's North Slope. Information in our files suggests that
changes in freshwater chemistry or pollutant loads, including oil
spills, associated with oil and gas development may render breeding
habitats unsuitable, and both have been documented on Alaska's North
Slope (NRC 2003, p. 6-7, 73-74). Yellow-billed loons, like other
aquatic-dependent birds, are susceptible to oiling in the event of a
spill. Severe effects are expected to result for birds contacted by oil
spills in NPR-A (USDOI-BLM 2005, p. 4-105). Further, oil spills may
have long-term effects on tundra waters by killing prey and vegetation
(USDOI-BLM 2005, p. 4-78, 4-88), thereby reducing food availability and
cover. Oil spills in arctic marine habitats may also affect juvenile
and non-breeding yellow-billed loons (USDOI-BLM 2005, p. 4-105). The
majority of spills that have occurred in association with oil and gas
development on Alaska's North Slope are relatively small and cause
minimal impacts to surrounding habitats or wildlife. The risks from
larger and potentially more frequent spills need to be examined
however.
The petitioners assert that water depletion or drawdown may affect
connectedness, depth, or melt date of yellow-billed loon nesting or
brood-rearing lakes and may render such areas unsuitable as breeding
habitats. Information in our files indicates that industrial
development on the North Slope has affected freshwater flow and
drainage as a result of water withdrawals to build ice roads or
drilling pads, and through permafrost decay consequent to
infrastructure placement, vegetation damage, or fluid extraction and
injection (NRC 2003, p. 1-11). North (1994, p. 16) and North and Ryan
(1989, p. 303) suggested that permafrost decay consequent to
infrastructure placement and disturbance of vegetation may cause
breaching of rivers into yellow-billed loon breeding lakes, rendering
them unsuitable due to fluctuating water levels (causing drowned nests)
or increased turbidity (negatively affecting foraging success).
Additionally, the petitioners assert and we concur that ice roads on
breeding lakes may compact lake ice and delay melting (USDOI-BLM 1998,
p. IV-3-b-1-b), thus delaying or discouraging yellow-billed loon
breeding.
Water withdrawals used for ice roads and pads could have additional
effects on habitat suitability by affecting fish populations that
breeding yellow-billed loons depend upon to feed themselves and young.
Although water withdrawal stipulations in oil and gas planning
documents are designed to protect and monitor fish-bearing lakes, their
adequacy for protecting fish that serve as yellow-billed loon prey is
not currently known. The Service is working with the BLM and others to
evaluate these and other accommodations that are either in place or are
proposed for the protection of this species.
Areas within the yellow-billed loon's arctic breeding range in
Russia and Canada may face similar developmental pressures. The
petitioners assert that mineral and oil development in Russia is either
unregulated or regulations are not enforced, resulting in long-term
environmental impacts. In Canada, oil and gas developments within the
yellow-billed loon's breeding and staging areas have been proposed. If
it occurs, overlap of development (particularly unregulated
development) with the specific and limited breeding areas required by
yellow-billed loons will result in destruction, modification, or
curtailment of habitats or range in Russia and Canada. Further, the
Service and the petitioners are unaware of assessment or monitoring
data to
[[Page 31261]]
evaluate these effects on yellow-billed loons in Eurasia (including
Russia).
There is little documentation of the degradation of marine habitats
resulting in destruction or modification of yellow-billed loon habitat.
However, the marine environment is clearly important for yellow-billed
loons, as that is where they spend their first three years, and
subsequently at least eight months per year. Particular examples of
marine degradation listed by the petitioners include pollution
(although oil and chemical spills are discussed under Factor E), and
the effects of fishing practices such as drowning in fishing nets and
depletion of the prey base through overfishing or other destructive
fishing practices. The negative effects of these examples are likely to
be on individual condition or survival; high survival rates, especially
of breeding adults, are required for yellow-billed loon population
maintenance.
Information available in our files indicates that the Yellow Sea,
where all 11 Alaska-breeding yellow-billed loons with satellite
transmitters wintered (Schmutz 2004, p. 1), is being degraded. There
are approximately six million humans in surrounding watersheds, and the
Yellow Sea is impacted by loss of wetland habitat, depleted fisheries,
and industrial, agricultural, and domestic pollution (https://
www.gefonline.org/projectDetails.cfm?projID=790), accessed January 17,
2006). The Australian Government, in a summary of the Yellow Sea's
importance to shorebirds, noted that declining river flows, pollution,
and unsustainable harvesting of benthic fauna are leading to reduced
benthic productivity and food declines for shorebirds (https://
www.deh.gov.au/biodiversity/migratory/waterbirds/yellow-sea/, accessed
January 17, 2006). These impacts on the aquatic system would also
affect wintering loon food availability, potentially reducing
individual fitness prior to spring migration and breeding.
We find the petition provided substantial information to support
its assertions that the threat of past, current and probable future
destruction, modification, or curtailment of yellow-billed loon habitat
is sufficient to warrant additional review of the species' status. In
freshwater breeding areas, factors associated with oil and gas
exploration and development (i.e., disturbance, pollution, and
hydrologic changes) can make breeding habitats unsuitable. Marine
habitats, where yellow-billed loons spend much of the year, are being
degraded through overfishing and pollution.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
The petitioners assert that overutilization for commercial,
recreational, or educational purposes is unlikely. Although the
petitioners list research-related nest disturbance under this Factor,
they also state that it is likely to be a minor Factor affecting the
species and that the benefits of such research outweigh any adverse
effects.
C. Disease or Predation
The petitioners assert that yellow-billed loons may be subjected to
increased nest predation if infrastructure associated with resource
development occurs in their breeding areas. Increasing numbers of
ravens, gulls, and arctic foxes, some of which are documented predators
of yellow-billed loon nests or young (North 1994, p. 11), have been
associated with oil field infrastructure development and human-
generated food sources on the North Slope of Alaska (NRC 2003, p. 6).
When combined with increased predation opportunities resulting from
disturbance (discussed under Factor A), the effect of increased
predator numbers could be amplified. The petitioners assert that
disease does not appear to be a risk to yellow-billed loons. However,
since receiving the petition the highly pathogenic avian influenza has
been documented in Asia where yellow-billed loons winter.
We find the petition provided substantial information to support
its assertions that the threat of increased predation associated with
resource development infrastructure is sufficient to warrant additional
review of the species' status. Additionally, the potential impacts of
avian influenza on the loon are not know at this time and may warrant
further investigation.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
The petitioners assert that the yellow-billed loon is not protected
or is inadequately protected by existing regulations, including
international conventions or agreements against threats such as
development and hunting. The yellow-billed loon is not currently listed
under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of
Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). The species is listed under the United
Nations Environment Program Convention on the Conservation of Migratory
Species of Wild Animals (UNEP-CMS), yet the United States, Russia,
Canada, and most Asian nations are not signatories (https://www.cms.int/
, accessed January 17, 2006). Although it is listed in the Russian Red
Data book, and the species and its habitat are nominally protected
under the U.S. Migratory Bird Treaty with the former Soviet Union (P.L.
95-616), the petitioners assert that current economic and social
conditions in Russia limit the implementation and enforcement of these
regulations. In Canada, the yellow-billed loon is protected under the
Migratory Birds Convention Act, but subsistence hunting is allowed and
is not regulated or tracked. In Canada, the yellow-billed loon is not
listed on Schedule 1 (i.e., specified as ``at risk'') of the Species at
Risk Act of 2002, legislation similar to the Act. Currently, the
species is not covered under Canadian Provincial laws or regulations
and, thus, receives no protections or conservation considerations in
Canada.
Within the United States, the yellow-billed loon has protection
under several laws and regulations, but the petitioners assert that
these are inadequate given the vulnerabilities of, and the specific
threats facing, the species and its habitat. The Migratory Bird Treaty
Act (MBTA) makes it unlawful to kill or take eggs or nests of yellow-
billed loons, but does not provide protection for habitats, a primary
concern in relation to development in breeding areas. Yellow-billed
loons are not open for subsistence hunting in Alaska under migratory
bird spring subsistence harvest regulations (69 FR 17318-17329). The
Service and State of Alaska have recognized the yellow-billed loon as a
potentially vulnerable species under the Birds of Conservation Concern
(68 FR 6179) and State Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy
(https://www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/statewide/ngplan/, accessed January 17,
2006), respectively. These designations provide management and research
funding prioritization.
The BLM has adopted stipulations and required operating procedures
for the NW and NE NPR-A (USDOI-BLM 2004, p. 2-22-23; USDOI-BLM 2005, p.
2-2-45) in order to minimize potential impacts to yellow-billed loons,
such as disturbance of nesting birds and broods. These include water
withdrawal standards for deep fish-bearing lakes (discussed under
Factor A) and setbacks for exploratory drilling and permanent
facilities near fish-bearing and deep lakes (greater than 3.9 m (13 ft)
deep). While exceptions may be authorized for all stipulations and
required operating procedures, the stipulations and required operating
procedures were proposed to minimize impacts, including disturbance, to
yellow-billed loons within BLM-managed areas. At
[[Page 31262]]
this time, however, data are not available to determine how effective
the stipulations and required operating procedures will be in
minimizing or eliminating adverse impacts to the species. Further, the
petitioners assert that some information is not provided or is
erroneous and leads to unsupported conclusions about probability or
magnitude of potential impacts. They note, for example, in the 1998 NE
NPR-A Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), that vehicle travel was
encouraged to occur more than 30 m (100 ft) from streams or lakes
bearing overwintering fish, a stipulation not included in the 2005 NE
NPR-A Final Amended EIS (USDOI-BLM 2005) or in the NW NPR-A Record of
Decision (ROD)(USDOI-BLM 2004). While the rationale for removal of the
stipulation was that travel on lakes is limited to specified areas
(water pumping stations and ice roads), thus reducing ice and snow
compaction, there are other reasons for restricting travel near fish-
bearing water bodies, including reducing contamination from spills or
ice-road maintenance activities. The petitioners also claim that the
Final EIS for the Minerals Management Service's (MMS) 1996 Beaufort Sea
Planning Area Oil and Gas Lease Sale 144 fails to acknowledge
documented use of marine foraging areas on the North Slope (USDOI-MMS
1996, p. IV-B-21). The Service is working with BLM and others to
thoroughly review the biological needs of the yellow-billed loon,
evaluate the conservation measures proposed by BLM to conserve this
species, and identify any other measures that would help to avoid and
minimize impacts to the species in its range within NPR-A.
We find the petition provided substantial information to support
its assertions that the yellow-billed loon's habitat is not currently
protected by existing regulatory mechanisms in the U.S. and Canada.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting the Species' Continued
Existence
The petitioners assert that other natural or manmade factors may
threaten yellow-billed loons. These factors include small population
size and low productivity; vulnerability to oil spills and other
contaminants; water depletion associated with oil and gas development;
incidental bycatch in commercial or subsistence fishing nets; and
hunting. Increased predation, disturbance, and water withdrawals
associated with oil and gas development, and marine pollution, were
discussed under Factors A and C.
As previously discussed, small population size, low and variable
productivity, and dependence upon high adult survival are all
ecological characteristics of yellow-billed loons, a K-selected
species. These characteristics mean that the yellow-billed loon is
inherently more vulnerable to perturbations that impact their survival
and reproductive success because their population would take longer to
recover from declines than a more common or fecund species.
Additionally, many of the factors discussed under Factor E may affect
adult survival, which may be more important to population maintenance
in these long-lived birds than annual productivity (Smith and Smith
2001, p. 235). K-selected species like the yellow-billed loon also tend
to be specialists, efficiently using particular environments, but they
are often at or near carrying capacity, resource-limited, poor
colonizers, and generally do not do well in disturbed environments
(Smith and Smith 2001, p. 235). They are also highly vulnerable to
random environmental or anthropogenic events, such as the threats
described below.
Yellow-billed loons, like other loons, are potentially vulnerable
to oil and chemical spills throughout their range. Of the 30,000 bird
carcasses recovered after the Exxon Valdez oil spill, approximately 1.5
percent (450) were loons (with an unknown percentage of yellow-billed
loons; Piatt et al. 1990, p. 391). As recovered carcasses represent
only a fraction of actual oil spill mortality (Wiens 1996, p. 596),
yellow-billed loon loss may have been high relative to population size
(Piatt et al. 1990, p. 395). Habitat alterations associated with oil,
gas, and mineral development were addressed in Factor A, and although
an oil spill may make habitats unsuitable, perhaps the effect of most
concern is mortality. Because loons in general are so dependent upon
the aquatic environment and spend so little time on land, they are
particularly at risk for exposure during an oil spill. Oiled birds die
primarily from hypothermia because oil coats their normally insulating
and buoyant feathers, preventing efficient thermoregulation. They can
also die from oil ingested during preening. Egg viability can be
diminished through contact with even small amounts of oil on feathers
of incubating adults (e.g., Harfenist et al. 1990, p. 902). Oil spills
may also alter foraging habitats, acutely by killing large numbers of
prey, or chronically by altering community structure via long-term
exposure to oil or its components (e.g., Peterson et al. 1996, p.
2637). In migrating and wintering areas of the Pacific, current and
future oil and gas development will only increase, such as in the
Yellow Sea (https://www.china.org.cn/english/7352.htm), accessed January
17, 2006), or on Sakhalin Island, Russia.
Anecdotal data indicate that loons, including yellow-billed loons,
may die as incidental bycatch in commercial and subsistence gill nets,
although more data are needed to accurately quantify this threat.
Service law enforcement agents have been told that yellow-billed loons
are routinely and unavoidably caught in subsistence fishing nets on the
Ikpikpuk River (Roberts 2004), and this presumably occurs on other
North Slope rivers with gillnetting. Additionally, intensive commercial
fishing, a likely source of bycatch mortality, occurs in yellow-billed
loon wintering areas in Asia, particularly the Yellow Sea (Elvidge et
al. 2001, Fig. 2).
Yellow-billed loons have also been hunted for subsistence purposes,
especially for their feathers for use in traditional dance regalia.
Hunting is not allowed under current spring subsistence hunting
regulations in Alaska (i.e., they are not on the list of ``open''
species). Annual subsistence harvest surveys conducted in Alaska from
1990 to 1999 indicate a total estimated harvest of 98 yellow-billed
loons (Wentworth and Wong 2001, p. 107). In Russia and Canada,
traditional or subsistence use of yellow-billed loons is not regulated.
Specifically, many subsistence species may be taken at higher rates in
Russia than in Alaska, because of the relative lack of paying jobs, and
yellow-billed loons are included as customary and traditional
subsistence-use species on the 1996 protocol amending the 1916
Convention for the Protection of Migratory Birds between the United
States and Canada (Letter of Submittal dated May 20, 1996, as cited in
70 FR 55691-55699).
We find the petition provided substantial information to support
its assertions that the threats of other natural and manmade factors,
including small population size, low productivity, vulnerability to
spilled oil and other contaminants, water depletion associated with
resource development, incidental bycatch, and hunting , are sufficient
to warrant additional review of the species' status.
Finding
We have reviewed the petition and supporting information. We have
found:
(1) On April 5, 2004, we received a petition from the Center for
Biological Diversity and others to list the yellow-billed loon as
endangered or threatened
[[Page 31263]]
throughout its range or as a Distinct Population Segment and to
designate critical habitat. The petition describes multiple threats to
the yellow-billed loon, including destruction or modification of
habitats due to development and pollution, lack of regulatory
protection, and other factors such as mortality from drowning in
fishing nets and hunting. The petition emphasized that certain other
factors, including limited and specific breeding habitats, a small
global population, and low reproductive rate, make yellow-billed loons
more susceptible to the threats identified in the petition and less
likely to recover after declines. The petitioners assert that yellow-
billed loon freshwater breeding habitats are threatened by oil, gas,
and mineral development, and that marine wintering and migrating
habitats are threatened by degradation of the marine environment.
(2) Yellow-billed loons breed in remote circumpolar areas,
generally above the Arctic Circle, with harsh climates and low human
population densities. Yellow-billed loons nest exclusively in coastal
and inland low-lying tundra from 62 to 74[deg] N latitude, in
association with permanent, fish-bearing lakes in Alaska, Canada,
Russia, and rarely in far northern Norway and Finland. Populations are
thought to be limited primarily by availability of breeding habitat,
specifically nesting and brood-rearing lakes.
(3) Our knowledge of the status of the yellow-billed loon is far
from complete, but the worldwide population is believed to be
relatively small. The only known comprehensive yellow-billed loon
population estimates are from Alaska. The total Alaska yellow-billed
loon population may be 3,700 to 4,900. The Service is unaware of
scientifically valid population estimates for other areas. However,
anecdotal density and habitat information have caused at least one
scientist to speculate that 8,000 yellow-billed loons breed in Canada
and 5,000 breed in Russia. Combining these estimates, the worldwide
breeding-ground yellow-billed loon population may be roughly 16,500.
(4) Given the lack of comprehensive scientific information relative
to yellow-billed loon population estimates, there are few means with
which to assess population trends. In Alaska, the number of yellow-
billed loons counted in surveys is small (resulting in wide confidence
intervals around annual estimates). Although estimates over the last
two decades do not show a change in the number of adults on the
breeding grounds, the ability to statistically detect a significant
change is relatively low. Thus, the Alaska breeding ground population
could decline significantly before current survey methods would detect
a declining trend. Other breeding areas are not surveyed at all.
(5) Yellow-billed loons have relatively low annual recruitment but
relatively high annual adult survival, meaning that individuals must
live many years to replace themselves with offspring that survive to
recruit into the breeding population. Biologists identify species such
as the yellow-billed loon as K-selected species, which are especially
vulnerable to threats and are less likely to recover after declines.
(6) While comprehensive information on the biology of the yellow-
billed loon is not complete, available scientific information and the
professional judgment of knowledgeable biologists suggests that loons
in general are relatively sensitive to human activity, and development
and infrastructure located close to breeding lakes will affect the
species and may cause reduced breeding success and declining
populations. Flushing or other changes in normal nesting behavior can
cause eggs or young to be vulnerable to cold and predation. Increased
predation of eggs and chicks due to human disturbance has been
documented in loons.
(7) Approximately 75 percent of the yellow-billed loons that nest
in Alaska are found within the NPR-A (25 percent in NE NPR-A and 50
percent in NW NPR-A), which is managed by BLM. Of the 1.9 million ha
(4.6 million ac) in NE NPR-A, a 1998 Record of Decision (ROD) made 87
percent available for oil and gas leasing. In June 2004, the BLM
released a draft amended EIS that may allow an increase in the area
available for leasing to 95 percent of the unit. In the 3.6 million ha
(8.8 million ac) of NW NPR-A, a January 2004 ROD made all BLM-
administered lands available for leasing. The EIS process for the 4.1
million-ha (10.1 million-ac) S NPR-A has begun. In summary, much of the
higher density loon breeding area lies within the area identified as
having high potential for oil development and exploration and
development has begun in certain areas and will likely begin in others
soon (i.e., within the next ten years).
(8) As exploration and development occurs in the NPR-A, the
potential for disturbance, pollution, hydrologic alterations, and other
impacts on the yellow-billed loon and its limited, specific, and
concentrated breeding habitat will need to be addressed. Additionally,
increased predator numbers are often associated with industrial
development in Arctic areas and could adversely impact nesting success
without careful planning and management.
(9) Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that we make a finding
on whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents
substantial scientific or commercial information to indicate that the
petitioned action may be warranted. Our standard for substantial
scientific information with regard to a 90-day petition finding is
``that amount of information that would lead a reasonable person to
believe that the measure proposed in the petition may be warranted''
(50 CFR 424.14(b)). When a substantial finding is made, we are required
to promptly begin a thorough review of the status of the species, if
one has not already been initiated.
We have determined that the information in the petition would lead
a reasonable person to believe that the measure proposed by the
petition may be warranted. Therefore, we find that the petition
presents substantial information indicating that listing the yellow-
billed loon may be warranted. While we note the lack of documented
scientific information on the effects of threats to yellow-billed
loons, the yellow-billed loon is restricted in its breeding habitat
and, in Alaska, it breeds primarily within a geographic area that has
significant development potential. Therefore, the responsible course of
action is to review in detail the threats and vulnerabilities listed in
the petition and to thoroughly review the scientific literature and
other information to determine if listing the species is warranted. To
do otherwise could subject the species to significant risks from which
it may have difficulty recovering. We have also developed, together
with the BLM and other agencies, a Conservation Agreement that
addresses a subset of threats to the loon in a portion of the species'
range. The strategies for conservation in the Agreement include:
Implement specific actions to protect yellow-billed loons and their
breeding habitats in Alaska from potential impacts of land uses and
management activities, including oil and gas exploration and
development; inventory and monitor yellow-billed loons breeding
populations in Alaska; determine and reduce, if significant, the impact
of subsistence activities on yellow-billed loons (including subsistence
fisheries and hunting) in Alaska; and conduct biological research on
yellow-billed loons, including response to management actions. We
invite comments on management strategies and research needs that
[[Page 31264]]
should be considered during scheduled annual reviews of the
Conservation Agreement.
Following completion of the status review, we will evaluate whether
the species or a Distinct Population Segment warrant listing as
endangered or threatened. The petitioners also requested that critical
habitat be designated for this species. We always consider the need for
critical habitat designation when listing species. If we determine in
our 12-month finding that listing the yellow-billed loon is warranted,
we will address the designation of critical habitat at the time of the
proposed rulemaking.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited herein is available upon
request from the Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field Office, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (see ADDRESSES).
Author
The primary author of this document is Dr. Angela Matz, Fairbanks
Fish and Wildlife Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Fairbanks, Alaska.
Authority: The authority for this action is the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)
Dated: May 11, 2007.
Kenneth Stansell,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E7-10823 Filed 6-5-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P