Endangered and Threatened Species; Recovery Plans, 57303-57307 [E7-19812]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 194 / Tuesday, October 9, 2007 / Notices
Oceans and Atmosphere on matters
relating to the U.S. commercial remote
sensing industry and NOAA’s activities
to carry out responsibilities of the
Department of Commerce set forth in
the Land Remote Sensing Policy Act of
1992 (15 U.S.C. Secs. 5621–5625).
The Committee meets at least twice a
year. Committee members serve in a
representative capacity for a term of two
years and may serve up to two
consecutive terms, if reappointed. No
less than 12 and no more than 15
individuals may serve on the
Committee. Membership is comprised of
highly qualified individuals
representing the commercial spacebased remote sensing industry, spacebased remote sensing data users,
government (Federal, state, local), and
academia from a balance of geographical
regions. Nominations are encouraged
from all interested persons and
organizations representing interests
affected by the U.S. commercial spacebased remote sensing industry.
Nominees must possess demonstrable
expertise in a field related to the spacebased commercial remote sensing
industry or exploitation of space-based
commercial remotely sensed data and be
able to attend committee meetings that
are held at least two times per year. In
addition, selected candidates must
apply for and obtain a security
clearance. Membership is voluntary,
and service is without pay.
Each nomination submission should
include the proposed committee
member’s name and organizational
affiliation, a cover letter describing the
nominee’s qualifications and interest in
serving on the Committee, a curriculum
vitae or resume of the nominee, and no
more than three supporting letters
describing the nominee’s qualifications
and interest in serving on the
Committee. Self-nominations are
acceptable. The following contact
information should accompany each
submission: The nominee’s name,
address, phone number, fax number,
and e-mail address, if available.
Nominations should be sent to David
Hasenauer, NOAA/NESDIS
International and Interagency Affairs,
1335 East West Highway, Room 7311,
Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 and
nominations must be received by
November 8, 2007. The full text of the
Committee Charter and its current
membership can be viewed at the
Agency’s Web page at https://
www.accres.noaa.gov/.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Hasenauer, NOAA/NESDIS
International and Interagency Affairs,
1335 East West Highway, Room 7311,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Oct 05, 2007
Jkt 214001
Silver Spring, Maryland 20910;
telephone (301) 713–2024 x207, fax
(301) 713–2032, e-mail David
Hasenauer@noaa.gov.
Mary E. Kicza,
Assistant Administrator for Satellite and
Information Services.
[FR Doc. E7–19791 Filed 10–5–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–HR–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XD02
Endangered and Threatened Species;
Recovery Plans
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration,
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Availability.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) announces the
adoption of an Endangered Species Act
(ESA) recovery plan for the Upper
Columbia River Spring-Run Chinook
Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)
evolutionarily significant unit (ESU)
and the Upper Columbia River steelhead
(Oncorhynchus mykiss) distinct
population segment (DPS). The Upper
Columbia Spring Chinook Salmon and
Steelhead Recovery Plan (the Plan)
contains 27 appendices.
ADDRESSES: Additional information
about the Plan may be obtained by
writing to Lynn Hatcher, National
Marine Fisheries Service, 304 S. Water
Street, Suite #201, Ellensburg, WA
98926, or by calling (509) 962–8911.
Electronic copies of the Plan and the
summary of and response to public
comments on the Proposed (Draft)
Recovery Plan are available online at
www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-RecoveryPlanning/Recovery-Domains/InteriorColumbia/Upper-Columbia/Index.cfm,
or the Upper Columbia Salmon
Recovery Board website,
www.ucsrb.com/. A CD-ROM of these
documents can be obtained by calling
Sharon Houghton at (503) 230–5418 or
by e-mailing a request to
sharon.houghton@noaa.gov, with the
subject line ‘‘CD-ROM Request for Final
ESA Recovery Plan for Upper Columbia
Salmon and Steelhead.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lynn Hatcher, NMFS Upper Columbia
Salmon Recovery Coordinator at (509)
962–8911, or Elizabeth Gaar, NMFS
Salmon Recovery Division, at (503) 230–
5434.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
57303
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Recovery plans describe actions
beneficial to the conservation and
recovery of species listed under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA),
as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The
ESA requires that recovery plans, to the
extent practicable, incorporate: (1)
objective, measurable criteria which,
when met, would result in a
determination that the species is no
longer threatened or endangered; (2)
site-specific management actions that
may be necessary to achieve the plan’s
goals; and (3) estimates of the time
required and costs to implement
recovery actions. The ESA requires the
development of recovery plans for listed
species unless such a plan would not
promote the recovery of a particular
species.
NMFS’ goal is to restore endangered
and threatened Pacific salmon and
steelhead to the point that they are again
self-sustaining members of their
ecosystems and no longer need the
protections of the ESA. NMFS believes
it is critically important to base its
recovery plans on the many state,
regional, tribal, local, and private
conservation efforts already underway
throughout the region. Therefore, the
agency supports and participates in
locally led collaborative efforts to
develop recovery plans, involving local
communities, state, tribal, and Federal
entities, and other stakeholders. As the
lead ESA agency for listed salmon,
NMFS is responsible for reviewing these
locally produced recovery plans and
deciding whether they meet ESA
statutory requirements and merit
adoption as ESA recovery plans.
The Upper Columbia River SpringRun Chinook Salmon (O. tshawytscha)
ESU was listed as endangered under the
ESA on March 24, 1999 (64 FR 14307).
The Upper Columbia River Steelhead
(O. mykiss) DPS was listed as
endangered on August 18, 1997 (62 FR
43937), and reclassified as threatened
on January 5, 2006 (71 FR 834). The
2006 reclassification of the steelhead
DPS was invalidated as the result of a
decision in U.S. District Court on June
13, 2007 (Trout Unlimited, et al. v.
Lohn, No. CV–06–1493–ST). Thus, the
present status of the Upper Columbia
River Steelhead DPS is endangered.
On December 30, 2005, the Upper
Columbia Salmon Recovery Board
(UCSRB) presented its locally developed
Draft Recovery Plan to NMFS. The
UCSRB includes representatives from
Chelan County, Douglas County,
Okanogan County, Yakama Nation, and
the Confederated Tribes of the Colville
E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM
09OCN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
57304
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 194 / Tuesday, October 9, 2007 / Notices
Reservation. A variety of additional
partners, representing Federal agencies,
Washington State agencies, regional
organizations, special purpose districts,
and members of the public, also
participated in the planning process.
After NMFS reviewed the Draft
Recovery Plan, NMFS and the UCSRB
revised it to clarify how it satisfies ESA
recovery plan requirements and to
address additional elements as needed.
The jointly revised Draft Recovery Plan
was made available for public review as
a Proposed Recovery Plan, and a notice
of availability soliciting public
comments on the Proposed Recovery
Plan was published in the Federal
Register on September 29, 2006 (71 FR
57472). NMFS received 73 comment
letters on the Proposed Recovery Plan.
An itemized record of all comments is
included in the final Plan as Appendix
O.4. NMFS summarized the public
comments and prepared responses, now
available on the NMFS website at
www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-RecoveryPlanning/Recovery-Domains/InteriorColumbia/Upper-Columbia/Index.cfm.
Public hearings were conducted on
November 8, 2006, in Okanogan,
Washington, and on November 9, 2006,
in Wenatchee, Washington. Complete
copies of the Proposed Recovery Plan
were placed in the Twisp, Entiat,
Okanogan, and Wenatchee, Washington,
public libraries. NMFS and the UCSRB
again revised the plan based on the
comments received, and this final
version now constitutes the ESA
Recovery Plan for Upper Columbia
Spring Chinook Salmon and Upper
Columbia Steelhead.
By endorsing this locally developed
recovery plan, NMFS is making a
commitment to implement the actions
in the plan for which it has authority,
to work cooperatively on
implementation of other actions, and to
encourage other Federal agencies to
implement recovery plan actions for
which they have responsibility and
authority. NMFS will also encourage the
State of Washington to seek similar
implementation commitments from
state agencies and local governments.
NMFS expects the Plan to help NMFS
and other Federal agencies take a more
consistent approach to future ESA
section 7 consultations and other ESA
decisions. For example, the Plan will
provide greater biological context for the
effects that a proposed action may have
on the listed ESU and DPS. Science
described in the Plan will become a
component of the ’’best available
information’’ reviewed for ESA section
7 consultations, section 10 permits and
habitat conservation plans (HCPs), and
other ESA decisions. Such information
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Oct 05, 2007
Jkt 214001
includes viability criteria for the ESU,
DPS, and their independent
populations; better understanding of
and information on limiting factors and
threats facing the ESU and DPS; better
information on priority areas for
addressing specific limiting factors; and
better geographic context for assessing
risk to the ESU and DPS.
The Recovery Plan
The Plan is one of many ongoing
salmon recovery planning efforts funded
under the Washington State Strategy for
Salmon Recovery. The State of
Washington designated the UCSRB as
the Lead Entity for salmon recovery
planning for the Upper Columbia. The
UCSRB has consistently involved the
public in its recovery planning process,
making changes based on extensive
comments received during public
comment periods for the Draft Recovery
Plan in January, April, and June of 2005,
and during the public comment period
for the Proposed Recovery Plan from
September 2006 to February 2007.
The Plan is an outgrowth and
culmination of several conservation
efforts in the Upper Columbia Basin,
including current efforts related to the
ESA, state- and tribally sponsored
recovery efforts, subbasin planning, and
watershed planning.
The Upper Columbia planning effort
was supported by a NMFS-appointed
science panel, the Interior Columbia
Technical Recovery Team (ICTRT). This
panel of 11 scientific experts from
Federal, state, local, and private
organizations identified historical
populations and recommended ESU
viability criteria (ICTRT 2005 and 2007).
The ICTRT reviewed early drafts of the
plan and provided scientific peer review
of the Proposed Recovery Plan. In
addition, staff biologists of the
Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
U.S. Forest Service, Yakama Nation,
Confederated Tribes of the Colville
Reservation, Okanogan County, Douglas
County, and Chelan County reviewed
the UCSRB Plan at each stage. NMFS
Northwest Region staff biologists also
reviewed draft versions of the Plan and
provided substantial guidance for
revisions.
The Plan incorporates the NMFS
viable salmonid population (VSP)
framework (McElhany et al., 2000) as a
basis for biological status assessments
and recovery goals for Upper Columbia
River spring Chinook salmon and Upper
Columbia River steelhead.
ESU Addressed and Planning Area
The Plan will be implemented within
the range of the Upper Columbia River
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Spring-Run Chinook Salmon ESU and
the Upper Columbia River Steelhead
DPS. The planning area includes parts
of Okanogan, Douglas, Chelan, and
Grant counties.
The ICTRT identified three
independent populations in the spring
Chinook salmon ESU (Wenatchee,
Entiat, and Methow), and five
independent populations in the
steelhead DPS (Wenatchee, Entiat,
Methow, Okanogan, and Crab Creek).
These independent populations were
identified based on the genetic,
geographic, and habitat characteristics
they share within the ESU or the DPS.
Each population’s size category (very
large, large, medium, or basic) was
based on its historical population size.
The Upper Columbia tributaries were
further divided into Major Spawning
Areas and Minor Spawning Areas based
on the within-population complexity of
tributary spawning habitats.
The Plan’s Recovery Goals, Objectives
and Criteria
The Plan’s goal is to achieve recovery
and delisting of spring Chinook salmon
and steelhead by ensuring the long-term
persistence of viable populations of
naturally produced fish distributed
across their native range. The Plan bases
biological status assessments and
recovery goals on the four VSP
parameters: abundance, productivity,
spatial structure, and diversity
(McElhany et al. 2000).
Evaluating a species for potential
delisting requires an explicit analysis of
population or demographic parameters
(biological recovery criteria) and also of
threats under the five ESA listing factors
in ESA section 4(a)(1) (threats criteria).
Together these make up the ‘‘objective,
measurable criteria’’ required under
section 4(f)(1)(B). While the ESU or DPS
is the listed entity under the ESA, the
viability criteria are based on the
collective viability, characteristics, and
distribution of the individual
populations that make up the ESU or
DPS.
The Plan identifies two levels of
recovery objectives. The first level
relates to reclassifying the endangered
species as threatened and the second
relates to recovery (delisting). The
reclassification objectives include
increasing the abundance, productivity,
and distribution of naturally produced
steelhead and spring Chinook salmon
sufficient to lead to reclassification as
threatened, and conserving their genetic
and phenotypic diversity.
The Plan’s recovery (delisting)
objectives include increasing the
abundance of naturally produced spring
Chinook salmon and steelhead
E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM
09OCN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 194 / Tuesday, October 9, 2007 / Notices
spawners within each population in the
Upper Columbia River ESU/DPS to
levels considered viable; increasing the
productivity (spawner:spawner ratios
and smolts/ redds) of naturally
produced spring Chinook salmon and
steelhead within each population to
levels that result in low risk of
extinction; restoring the distribution of
naturally produced spring Chinook
salmon and steelhead to previously
occupied areas where practical; and
conserving their genetic and phenotypic
diversity.
The Plan sets forth specific criteria to
meet the recovery objectives, based on
the ICTRT’s recommended criteria,
which, if met, would indicate a high
probability of persistence into the future
for Upper Columbia River spring
Chinook salmon and steelhead. The
Plan establishes criteria for 95 percent
probability of persistence (5 percent
extinction risk) for all Upper Columbia
River spring Chinook salmon
populations, and all but one population
of the steelhead DPS. The Plan
concludes that the Upper Columbia
River steelhead DPS may be recovered
without attaining the 95 percent
probability of persistence for the Crab
Creek population, based on the
possibility that this population was not
viable historically because of
environmental conditions (e.g.,
intermittent stream flows and high
water temperatures).
The ICTRT recently recommended
that, in an ESU/DPS containing only
one major population group (MPG), as is
the case for both Upper Columbia River
spring-run Chinook salmon and Upper
Columbia River steelhead, at least two
populations should meet abundance/
productivity criteria representing a 1–
percent extinction risk (99–percent
probability of persistence) over a 100–
year period (ICTRT 2005b, p. 46). The
ICTRT considers the 5 percent risk level
’’viable’’ and the 1 percent risk level
’’highly viable.’’ The Plan does not
adopt this more recent recommendation,
but instead adopts the 5 percent
extinction risk for abundance/
productivity for all populations in the
Chinook salmon ESU and all but one in
the steelhead DPS, as stated above.
NMFS accepts the UCSRB’s
recommended recovery (delisting)
criteria because they call for all known
extant populations within the Chinook
ESU and steelhead DPS to be viable.
Furthermore, NMFS believes that it is
not possible at this time to distinguish
between the levels of effort needed to
attain 95 vs. 99 percent probability of
persistence; therefore, the Plan’s actions
would not change at this time in
response to the ICTRT’s more recently
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Oct 05, 2007
Jkt 214001
recommended criterion. Finally, NMFS
will re-evaluate ESU and DPS status and
the appropriateness of the recovery
criteria in 5 years or less based on
additional data from monitoring and
research on critical uncertainties, and
could modify the recovery plan
accordingly.
Causes for Decline and Current Threats
The ESA includes five factors, in
section 4(a)(1), to be evaluated when the
initial determination to list a species for
protection is made. These factors are: (a)
the present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of a
species’ habitat or range; (b)
overutilization for commercial,
recreational, or educational purposes;
(c) disease or predation; (d) the
inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; and (e) other natural or
manmade factors affecting the species’
continued existence (16 U.S.C.
1533[a][1]). These five factors may or
may not still be limiting recovery when,
in the future, NMFS reevaluates the
status of the species to determine
whether the protections of the ESA are
sill warranted, and whether the species
can be delisted. In the Plan, NMFS
provides criteria for each of the relevant
listing/delisting factors to help ensure
that underlying causes of decline have
been addressed and mitigated before
considering the species for delisting.
The Plan identifies the main causes
for the decline of the Upper Columbia
River steelhead and spring Chinook
salmon as: (1) human adaptation and
destruction of habitat; (2) the effects of
hydroelectric operations; (3) the effects
of commercial, sport, and tribal
fisheries; and (4) the impacts of
hatchery programs and practices.
Habitat: Human activities have
altered and/or curtailed habitat-forming
processes and limited the habitat
suitable for spring Chinook salmon and
steelhead in the Upper Columbia River
tributaries. Although recent land and
water management practices have
improved, some storage dams,
diversions, roads and railways,
agriculture, residential development,
and forest management continue to
cause changes in water flow, water
temperature, sedimentation, floodplain
dynamics, riparian function, and other
aspects of the ecosystem, that are
deleterious to spring Chinook salmon
and steelhead and their habitat.
Hydroelectric Operations: Conditions
for Upper Columbia River spring
Chinook salmon and steelhead have
been fundamentally altered throughout
the Columbia River basin by the
construction and operation of mainstem
dams and reservoirs for power
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
57305
generation, navigation, and flood
control. Upper Columbia River salmon
and steelhead are adversely affected by
hydrosystem-related flow and water
quality effects, obstructed and/or
delayed passage, and ecological changes
in impoundments.
Harvest: Harvest of Upper Columbia
River spring Chinook salmon and
steelhead occurs in commercial,
recreational, and tribal fisheries in the
mainstem Columbia and in some
tributaries. Upper Columbia River
spring Chinook salmon and steelhead
are rarely taken in ocean fisheries; most
harvest of these listed species occurs in
the Columbia mainstem and some
tributaries. Aggregate harvest rates (from
fishing in all areas) have generally been
reduced from their peak periods as a
result of international treaties, fisheries
conservation acts, the advent of weakstock management in the 1970s and
1980s, regional conservation goals, and
the listing of many salmon ESUs and
steelhead DPSs under the ESA. While
fisheries do not target weak stocks of
listed salmon or steelhead, listed fish
are incidentally caught in fisheries
directed at hatchery and unlisted wild
stocks.
Hatcheries: In the Upper Columbia
region, the 12 hatcheries currently
producing spring Chinook salmon and
steelhead are operated to mitigate for
loss of habitat and for passage
mortalities resulting from the Columbia
River hydrosystem. These hatcheries
provide valuable mitigation and/or
conservation benefits but can cause
substantial adverse impacts if not
properly managed. The Plan describes
the risks to listed fish from these
hatcheries, including genetic effects that
reduce fitness and survival, ecological
effects such as competition and
predation, facility effects on passage and
water quality, mixed stock fishery
effects, and masking of the true status of
wild populations.
Additional Factors: The Plan
considers that there could be additional
factors that affect Upper Columbia River
spring Chinook salmon and steelhead,
including changes in estuarine habitat,
global climate change, inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms,
fluctuating ocean cycles, and predation.
Recovery Strategies and Actions
The Plan’s initial approach is to target
reductions in all manageable threats and
limiting factors and to improve the
status of all extant Upper Columbia
River spring Chinook salmon and
steelhead populations. As monitoring
and evaluation programs improve
understanding of the effectiveness of
various actions and their benefits
E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM
09OCN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
57306
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 194 / Tuesday, October 9, 2007 / Notices
throughout the life cycle of salmon and
steelhead, adjustments may be made
through the adaptive management
framework described in the Plan.
The Plan describes objectives and
strategies and recommends specific
actions for Upper Columbia River spring
Chinook salmon and steelhead recovery.
Among the most significant
recommendations are the following:
Habitat: The Plan includes habitat
protection and restoration actions in all
streams that currently support or may
support (in a restored condition) listed
spring Chinook salmon and steelhead in
the Upper Columbia Basin. The
objectives and recommended actions are
derived from subbasin plans, watershed
plans, the Upper Columbia Biological
Strategy, the Douglas County public
utility district (PUD) and Chelan County
PUD Anadromous Fish Agreement and
Habitat Conservation Plans (AFAHCPs),
and other relicensing agreements. The
Plan emphasizes actions that (1) protect
existing areas where high ecological
integrity and natural ecosystem
processes persist; (2) restore
connectivity (access) throughout the
historical range, where feasible and
practical; (3) protect and restore riparian
habitat along spawning and rearing
streams and identify long-term
opportunities for riparian habitat
enhancement; (4) protect and restore
floodplain function and reconnection,
off-channel habitat, and channel
migration processes where appropriate;
and (5) increase habitat diversity by
rebuilding, maintaining, and adding
instream structures (e.g., large woody
debris or rocks) where long-term
channel form and function efforts are
not feasible.
Hydroelectric Operations: Upper
Columbia River spring Chinook salmon
and steelhead migrate through four
federally owned projects and three to
five projects owned by PUDs. These
projects are licensed by the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission. The
Plan acknowledges that hydropower
strategies and actions are being
implemented, reviewed, and considered
in several ongoing processes, including
Federal Columbia River Power System
(FCRPS) ESA section 7 consultations
(for the lower four Federal dams on the
Columbia River), the AFAHCPs, and
relicensing agreements. The Plan’s
recommended actions are intended to be
consistent with these processes. The
Plan emphasizes continued
implementation of the actions identified
in the AFAHCPs, which adopted a
standard of no net impact (NNI) on the
Upper Columbia River Spring-Run
Chinook Salmon ESU and Steelhead
DPS.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Oct 05, 2007
Jkt 214001
Harvest: Harvest objectives for treaty
and non-treaty salmon and steelhead
fisheries in the Columbia River Basin
are set by the applicable state, tribal,
and Federal agencies. Fishery objectives
from McNary Dam to the mouth of the
Columbia River (fishing zones 1–6) are
established by state, tribal, and Federal
parties in U.S. v. Oregon, 302 F. Supp.
899 (D. Or. 1969). While recognizing the
role of the treaty and non-treaty comanagers, the Plan proposes that the
U.S. v. Oregon parties incorporate
Upper Columbia recovery goals when
formulating fishery plans affecting
Upper Columbia River spring Chinook
salmon and steelhead. The Plan also
recommends that appropriate comanagers and fishery management
agencies work together with local
stakeholders to develop tributary
fisheries management goals and plans.
Hatcheries: The hatchery strategies
and actions in the Plan are being
reviewed and considered in several
ongoing processes, including the Chelan
County and Douglas County PUD
AFAHCPs, the Grant County biological
opinion, and U.S. v. Oregon. NMFS
expects that the Plan’s recommended
goals and actions will be implemented
through these ongoing processes. The
Plan emphasizes that hatchery programs
play an essential role in spring Chinook
salmon and steelhead recovery. Among
other measures, the Plan proposes that
hatchery programs employ mechanisms
to manage hatchery returns on spawning
grounds in balance with naturally
produced fish, while maintaining
production levels identified in various
agreements. It also proposes that, as the
populations recover, hatchery programs
should be modified to minimize adverse
impacts of hatchery fish on naturally
produced fish.
Integration: The Plan states that
recovery will depend on integrating
actions that address habitat, harvest,
and hydroelectric operations; moreover,
it emphasizes that recovery actions must
be implemented at both the ESU/DPS
and population scale.
Adaptive Management: Adaptive
management is the process of adjusting
management actions and/or directions
based on new information. It requires
building an evaluation method into an
implementation plan, so that selection
and design of future recovery actions
can be adjusted depending on the
results of previous actions. Adaptive
management is essential to salmon
recovery planning. The UCSRB is
developing a monitoring and evaluation
element (and associated costs) to
incorporate into its adaptive
management framework, which will
become a part of the overall
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
implementation plan. NMFS will
continue to work with the UCSRB on its
adaptive management program as
appropriate during plan
implementation.
Time and Cost Estimates
ESA section 4(f)(1) requires that a
recovery plan include ’’estimates of the
time required and the cost to carry out
those measures needed to achieve the
Plan’s goal and to achieve intermediate
steps toward that goal’’ (16 U.S.C.
1533[f][1]). The Plan contains an
extensive list of actions that need to be
undertaken to recover spring Chinook
salmon and steelhead; however, there
are many uncertainties involved in
predicting the course of recovery and in
estimating total costs. Such
uncertainties include biological and
ecosystem responses to recovery actions
as well as long-term and future funding.
The Plan states that if its recommended
actions are implemented, recovery of
the Upper Columbia River Spring-Run
Chinook Salmon ESU and the Upper
Columbia River Steelhead DPS is likely
to occur within 10 to 30 years. The cost
estimates cover work projected to occur
within the first 10–year period. NMFS
supports the Plan’s determination to
focus on the first 10 years of
implementation, provided that, before
the end of this first implementation
period, specific actions and costs will be
estimated for subsequent years, to
achieve long-term goals and to proceed
until a determination is made that
listing is no longer necessary.
The estimated cost of restoring habitat
for spring Chinook salmon and
steelhead in the Upper Columbia Basin
is approximately $296 million over the
initial 10–year period. This estimate
includes expenditures by local, tribal,
state, and Federal governments, private
business, and individuals in
implementing both capital projects and
non-capital work. The estimate of $296
million does not include costs
associated with hatchery programs,
because the implementation of hatchery
actions is approved and budgeted in
processes established by the Upper
Columbia HCPs. These processes are
consistent with this recovery plan. The
cost estimate also does not include
expenses associated with implementing
actions within the lower Columbia
River, estuary, or FCRPS, or the cost of
implementing measures in the PUDs’
HCPs and Settlement Agreements. Cost
estimates for the estuary and FCRPS are
included in two modules that NMFS
developed because of the basin-wide
scope and applicability of the actions to
all 13 ESUs and DPSs listed as
threatened or endangered in the
E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM
09OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 194 / Tuesday, October 9, 2007 / Notices
Columbia Basin. These modules, as well
as the HCPs and Settlement Agreements,
are incorporated into the Plan by
reference. The modules are available on
the NMFS Web site: www.nwr.noaa.gov/
Salmon-Recovery-Planning/ESARecovery-Plans/Other- Documents.cfm.
The hydropower cost estimates will
be updated over time, as the section 7
consultation on the remanded 2004
FCRPS BiOp is completed. The estuary
recovery costs could be further refined
following public comment on the
module and on the ESA recovery plan
for the three listed lower Columbia
River ESUs and one listed lower
Columbia River steelhead DPS in 2007
or early 2008. There are virtually no
estimated costs for recovery actions
associated with harvest to report at this
time. This is because no actions are
currently proposed that go beyond those
already being implemented through U.S.
v. Oregon and other harvest
management forums. In the event that
additional harvest actions are
implemented through these forums,
those costs will be added during the
implementation phase of this recovery
plan. All cost estimates will be refined
and updated over time.
The Plan estimates it may cost a total
of $10 million ($1 million per year) to
cover state, tribal, and local agency and
organization staffing costs during the
first 10 years of plan implementation,
and it is conceivable that this level of
effort will need to continue for the
Plan’s duration. Also, continued actions
in the management of habitat,
hatcheries, and harvest, including both
capital and non-capital costs, will likely
warrant additional expenditures beyond
the first 10 years. Although it is not
practicable to accurately estimate the
total cost of recovery, it appears that
most of the costs will occur in the first
10 years. Annual costs are expected to
be lower for the remaining years, so that
the total for the entire period (years 11–
30) may possibly range from $150
million to $200 million.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Periodic Reviews
In accordance with its responsibilities
under ESA section 4(c)(2), NMFS will
conduct status reviews of the listed
Upper Columbia River Spring-Run
Chinook Salmon ESU and Upper
Columbia River Steelhead DPS at least
once every 5 years to evaluate their
status and determine whether the ESU
or DPS should be removed from the list
or changed in status. Such evaluations
will take into account the following:
• The biological recovery criteria
(ICTRT 2007) and listing factor (threats)
criteria described in the Plan.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:07 Oct 05, 2007
Jkt 214001
• The management programs in place
to address the threats.
• Principles presented in the Viable
Salmonid Populations paper (McElhany
et al., 2000).
• Best available information on
population and ESU/DPS status and
new advances in risk evaluation
methodologies.
• Other considerations, including: the
number and status of extant spawning
groups; linkages and connectivity
among populations; the diversity of life
history and phenotypes expressed; and
considerations regarding catastrophic
risk.
• Principles laid out in NMFS’
Hatchery Listing Policy (70 FR 37204,
June 28, 2005).
Conclusion
NMFS has reviewed the Plan, the
public comments, and the conclusions
of the ICTRT from its reviews of the
Plan. Based on that review, NMFS
concludes that the Plan meets the
requirements in section 4(f) of the ESA
for developing a recovery plan.
Literature Cited
Interior Columbia Technical Recovery
Team. 2005. Updated population
delineation in the Interior Columbia
Basin. National Marine Fisheries
Service, Northwest Fisheries Science
Center. Memorandum. May 11, 2005.
Interior Columbia Technical Recovery
Team. 2007. Viability criteria for
application to Interior Columbia Basin
salmonid ESUs. National Marine
Fisheries Service, Northwest Fisheries
Science Center. March 2007.
McElhany, P., M. H. Ruckelshaus, M. J.
Ford, T. C. Wainwright, and E. P.
Bjorkstedt. 2000. Viable salmon
populations and the recovery of
evolutionarily significant units. U.S.
Dept. of Commerce, NOAA Tech.
Memo., NMFS NWFSC 42, 156 p.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.
Dated: October 2, 2007.
Angela Somma,
Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office
of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E7–19812 Filed 10–5–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
57307
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XC75
Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of
Mexico, and South Atlantic;
Amendment 3 to the Fishery
Management Plan for the Spiny
Lobster Fishery of Puerto Rico and the
U.S. Virgin Islands and Amendment 4
to the Reef Fish Fishery Management
Plan of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin
Islands
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; intent to prepare a draft
environmental impact statement (DEIS);
scoping meetings; request for comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Caribbean Fishery
Management Council (Council)in
conjunction with NMFS intends to
prepare a DEIS to describe and analyze
management alternatives to be included
in a joint amendment to the Fishery
Management Plan (FMP) for the Spiny
Lobster Fishery of Puerto Rico and the
U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI) and the FMP
for the Reef Fish Fishery of Puerto Rico
and the USVI. These alternatives will
consider measures to implement escape
vents in the trap fishery sector of both
fisheries. The purpose of this notice of
intent is to solicit public comments on
the scope of issues to be addressed in
the DEIS.
DATES: Written comments on the scope
of issues to be addressed in the DEIS
must be received by the Council or
NMFS (see ADDRESSES below) by
November 8, 2007. A series of scoping
meetings will be held in October 2007.
See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below
for the specific dates, times, and
locations of the scoping meetings.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on the proposed rule by any of the
following methods:
• E-mail: 0648–
XC75.Proposed@noaa.gov. Include in
the subject line the following document
identifier: 0648–XC75.
• Mail: Jason Rueter, Southeast
Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th
Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701.
• Fax: 727–824–5308.
• Mail: Graciela Garcia-Moliner,
Caribbean Fishery Management Council,
˜
268 Munoz Rivera Avenue, Suite 1108,
San Juan, PR 00918–25772203;
• Fax: 787–766–6239.
• E-mail: Graciela.GarciaMoliner@noaa.gov.
E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM
09OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 194 (Tuesday, October 9, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57303-57307]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-19812]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XD02
Endangered and Threatened Species; Recovery Plans
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) announces the
adoption of an Endangered Species Act (ESA) recovery plan for the Upper
Columbia River Spring-Run Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)
evolutionarily significant unit (ESU) and the Upper Columbia River
steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) distinct population segment (DPS). The
Upper Columbia Spring Chinook Salmon and Steelhead Recovery Plan (the
Plan) contains 27 appendices.
ADDRESSES: Additional information about the Plan may be obtained by
writing to Lynn Hatcher, National Marine Fisheries Service, 304 S.
Water Street, Suite 201, Ellensburg, WA 98926, or by calling
(509) 962-8911.
Electronic copies of the Plan and the summary of and response to
public comments on the Proposed (Draft) Recovery Plan are available
online at www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-Recovery-Planning/Recovery-Domains/
Interior-Columbia/Upper-Columbia/Index.cfm, or the Upper Columbia
Salmon Recovery Board website, www.ucsrb.com/. A CD-ROM of these
documents can be obtained by calling Sharon Houghton at (503) 230-5418
or by e-mailing a request to sharon.houghton@noaa.gov, with the subject
line ``CD-ROM Request for Final ESA Recovery Plan for Upper Columbia
Salmon and Steelhead.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynn Hatcher, NMFS Upper Columbia
Salmon Recovery Coordinator at (509) 962-8911, or Elizabeth Gaar, NMFS
Salmon Recovery Division, at (503) 230-5434.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Recovery plans describe actions beneficial to the conservation and
recovery of species listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1973
(ESA), as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The ESA requires that
recovery plans, to the extent practicable, incorporate: (1) objective,
measurable criteria which, when met, would result in a determination
that the species is no longer threatened or endangered; (2) site-
specific management actions that may be necessary to achieve the plan's
goals; and (3) estimates of the time required and costs to implement
recovery actions. The ESA requires the development of recovery plans
for listed species unless such a plan would not promote the recovery of
a particular species.
NMFS' goal is to restore endangered and threatened Pacific salmon
and steelhead to the point that they are again self-sustaining members
of their ecosystems and no longer need the protections of the ESA. NMFS
believes it is critically important to base its recovery plans on the
many state, regional, tribal, local, and private conservation efforts
already underway throughout the region. Therefore, the agency supports
and participates in locally led collaborative efforts to develop
recovery plans, involving local communities, state, tribal, and Federal
entities, and other stakeholders. As the lead ESA agency for listed
salmon, NMFS is responsible for reviewing these locally produced
recovery plans and deciding whether they meet ESA statutory
requirements and merit adoption as ESA recovery plans.
The Upper Columbia River Spring-Run Chinook Salmon (O. tshawytscha)
ESU was listed as endangered under the ESA on March 24, 1999 (64 FR
14307). The Upper Columbia River Steelhead (O. mykiss) DPS was listed
as endangered on August 18, 1997 (62 FR 43937), and reclassified as
threatened on January 5, 2006 (71 FR 834). The 2006 reclassification of
the steelhead DPS was invalidated as the result of a decision in U.S.
District Court on June 13, 2007 (Trout Unlimited, et al. v. Lohn, No.
CV-06-1493-ST). Thus, the present status of the Upper Columbia River
Steelhead DPS is endangered.
On December 30, 2005, the Upper Columbia Salmon Recovery Board
(UCSRB) presented its locally developed Draft Recovery Plan to NMFS.
The UCSRB includes representatives from Chelan County, Douglas County,
Okanogan County, Yakama Nation, and the Confederated Tribes of the
Colville
[[Page 57304]]
Reservation. A variety of additional partners, representing Federal
agencies, Washington State agencies, regional organizations, special
purpose districts, and members of the public, also participated in the
planning process.
After NMFS reviewed the Draft Recovery Plan, NMFS and the UCSRB
revised it to clarify how it satisfies ESA recovery plan requirements
and to address additional elements as needed. The jointly revised Draft
Recovery Plan was made available for public review as a Proposed
Recovery Plan, and a notice of availability soliciting public comments
on the Proposed Recovery Plan was published in the Federal Register on
September 29, 2006 (71 FR 57472). NMFS received 73 comment letters on
the Proposed Recovery Plan. An itemized record of all comments is
included in the final Plan as Appendix O.4. NMFS summarized the public
comments and prepared responses, now available on the NMFS website at
www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-Recovery-Planning/Recovery-Domains/Interior-
Columbia/Upper-Columbia/Index.cfm. Public hearings were conducted on
November 8, 2006, in Okanogan, Washington, and on November 9, 2006, in
Wenatchee, Washington. Complete copies of the Proposed Recovery Plan
were placed in the Twisp, Entiat, Okanogan, and Wenatchee, Washington,
public libraries. NMFS and the UCSRB again revised the plan based on
the comments received, and this final version now constitutes the ESA
Recovery Plan for Upper Columbia Spring Chinook Salmon and Upper
Columbia Steelhead.
By endorsing this locally developed recovery plan, NMFS is making a
commitment to implement the actions in the plan for which it has
authority, to work cooperatively on implementation of other actions,
and to encourage other Federal agencies to implement recovery plan
actions for which they have responsibility and authority. NMFS will
also encourage the State of Washington to seek similar implementation
commitments from state agencies and local governments. NMFS expects the
Plan to help NMFS and other Federal agencies take a more consistent
approach to future ESA section 7 consultations and other ESA decisions.
For example, the Plan will provide greater biological context for the
effects that a proposed action may have on the listed ESU and DPS.
Science described in the Plan will become a component of the ''best
available information'' reviewed for ESA section 7 consultations,
section 10 permits and habitat conservation plans (HCPs), and other ESA
decisions. Such information includes viability criteria for the ESU,
DPS, and their independent populations; better understanding of and
information on limiting factors and threats facing the ESU and DPS;
better information on priority areas for addressing specific limiting
factors; and better geographic context for assessing risk to the ESU
and DPS.
The Recovery Plan
The Plan is one of many ongoing salmon recovery planning efforts
funded under the Washington State Strategy for Salmon Recovery. The
State of Washington designated the UCSRB as the Lead Entity for salmon
recovery planning for the Upper Columbia. The UCSRB has consistently
involved the public in its recovery planning process, making changes
based on extensive comments received during public comment periods for
the Draft Recovery Plan in January, April, and June of 2005, and during
the public comment period for the Proposed Recovery Plan from September
2006 to February 2007.
The Plan is an outgrowth and culmination of several conservation
efforts in the Upper Columbia Basin, including current efforts related
to the ESA, state- and tribally sponsored recovery efforts, subbasin
planning, and watershed planning.
The Upper Columbia planning effort was supported by a NMFS-
appointed science panel, the Interior Columbia Technical Recovery Team
(ICTRT). This panel of 11 scientific experts from Federal, state,
local, and private organizations identified historical populations and
recommended ESU viability criteria (ICTRT 2005 and 2007). The ICTRT
reviewed early drafts of the plan and provided scientific peer review
of the Proposed Recovery Plan. In addition, staff biologists of the
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, U.S. Forest Service, Yakama Nation, Confederated Tribes of the
Colville Reservation, Okanogan County, Douglas County, and Chelan
County reviewed the UCSRB Plan at each stage. NMFS Northwest Region
staff biologists also reviewed draft versions of the Plan and provided
substantial guidance for revisions.
The Plan incorporates the NMFS viable salmonid population (VSP)
framework (McElhany et al., 2000) as a basis for biological status
assessments and recovery goals for Upper Columbia River spring Chinook
salmon and Upper Columbia River steelhead.
ESU Addressed and Planning Area
The Plan will be implemented within the range of the Upper Columbia
River Spring-Run Chinook Salmon ESU and the Upper Columbia River
Steelhead DPS. The planning area includes parts of Okanogan, Douglas,
Chelan, and Grant counties.
The ICTRT identified three independent populations in the spring
Chinook salmon ESU (Wenatchee, Entiat, and Methow), and five
independent populations in the steelhead DPS (Wenatchee, Entiat,
Methow, Okanogan, and Crab Creek). These independent populations were
identified based on the genetic, geographic, and habitat
characteristics they share within the ESU or the DPS. Each population's
size category (very large, large, medium, or basic) was based on its
historical population size. The Upper Columbia tributaries were further
divided into Major Spawning Areas and Minor Spawning Areas based on the
within-population complexity of tributary spawning habitats.
The Plan's Recovery Goals, Objectives and Criteria
The Plan's goal is to achieve recovery and delisting of spring
Chinook salmon and steelhead by ensuring the long-term persistence of
viable populations of naturally produced fish distributed across their
native range. The Plan bases biological status assessments and recovery
goals on the four VSP parameters: abundance, productivity, spatial
structure, and diversity (McElhany et al. 2000).
Evaluating a species for potential delisting requires an explicit
analysis of population or demographic parameters (biological recovery
criteria) and also of threats under the five ESA listing factors in ESA
section 4(a)(1) (threats criteria). Together these make up the
``objective, measurable criteria'' required under section 4(f)(1)(B).
While the ESU or DPS is the listed entity under the ESA, the viability
criteria are based on the collective viability, characteristics, and
distribution of the individual populations that make up the ESU or DPS.
The Plan identifies two levels of recovery objectives. The first
level relates to reclassifying the endangered species as threatened and
the second relates to recovery (delisting). The reclassification
objectives include increasing the abundance, productivity, and
distribution of naturally produced steelhead and spring Chinook salmon
sufficient to lead to reclassification as threatened, and conserving
their genetic and phenotypic diversity.
The Plan's recovery (delisting) objectives include increasing the
abundance of naturally produced spring Chinook salmon and steelhead
[[Page 57305]]
spawners within each population in the Upper Columbia River ESU/DPS to
levels considered viable; increasing the productivity (spawner:spawner
ratios and smolts/ redds) of naturally produced spring Chinook salmon
and steelhead within each population to levels that result in low risk
of extinction; restoring the distribution of naturally produced spring
Chinook salmon and steelhead to previously occupied areas where
practical; and conserving their genetic and phenotypic diversity.
The Plan sets forth specific criteria to meet the recovery
objectives, based on the ICTRT's recommended criteria, which, if met,
would indicate a high probability of persistence into the future for
Upper Columbia River spring Chinook salmon and steelhead. The Plan
establishes criteria for 95 percent probability of persistence (5
percent extinction risk) for all Upper Columbia River spring Chinook
salmon populations, and all but one population of the steelhead DPS.
The Plan concludes that the Upper Columbia River steelhead DPS may be
recovered without attaining the 95 percent probability of persistence
for the Crab Creek population, based on the possibility that this
population was not viable historically because of environmental
conditions (e.g., intermittent stream flows and high water
temperatures).
The ICTRT recently recommended that, in an ESU/DPS containing only
one major population group (MPG), as is the case for both Upper
Columbia River spring-run Chinook salmon and Upper Columbia River
steelhead, at least two populations should meet abundance/productivity
criteria representing a 1-percent extinction risk (99-percent
probability of persistence) over a 100-year period (ICTRT 2005b, p.
46). The ICTRT considers the 5 percent risk level ''viable'' and the 1
percent risk level ''highly viable.'' The Plan does not adopt this more
recent recommendation, but instead adopts the 5 percent extinction risk
for abundance/productivity for all populations in the Chinook salmon
ESU and all but one in the steelhead DPS, as stated above.
NMFS accepts the UCSRB's recommended recovery (delisting) criteria
because they call for all known extant populations within the Chinook
ESU and steelhead DPS to be viable. Furthermore, NMFS believes that it
is not possible at this time to distinguish between the levels of
effort needed to attain 95 vs. 99 percent probability of persistence;
therefore, the Plan's actions would not change at this time in response
to the ICTRT's more recently recommended criterion. Finally, NMFS will
re-evaluate ESU and DPS status and the appropriateness of the recovery
criteria in 5 years or less based on additional data from monitoring
and research on critical uncertainties, and could modify the recovery
plan accordingly.
Causes for Decline and Current Threats
The ESA includes five factors, in section 4(a)(1), to be evaluated
when the initial determination to list a species for protection is
made. These factors are: (a) the present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of a species' habitat or range; (b)
overutilization for commercial, recreational, or educational purposes;
(c) disease or predation; (d) the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; and (e) other natural or manmade factors affecting the
species' continued existence (16 U.S.C. 1533[a][1]). These five factors
may or may not still be limiting recovery when, in the future, NMFS
reevaluates the status of the species to determine whether the
protections of the ESA are sill warranted, and whether the species can
be delisted. In the Plan, NMFS provides criteria for each of the
relevant listing/delisting factors to help ensure that underlying
causes of decline have been addressed and mitigated before considering
the species for delisting.
The Plan identifies the main causes for the decline of the Upper
Columbia River steelhead and spring Chinook salmon as: (1) human
adaptation and destruction of habitat; (2) the effects of hydroelectric
operations; (3) the effects of commercial, sport, and tribal fisheries;
and (4) the impacts of hatchery programs and practices.
Habitat: Human activities have altered and/or curtailed habitat-
forming processes and limited the habitat suitable for spring Chinook
salmon and steelhead in the Upper Columbia River tributaries. Although
recent land and water management practices have improved, some storage
dams, diversions, roads and railways, agriculture, residential
development, and forest management continue to cause changes in water
flow, water temperature, sedimentation, floodplain dynamics, riparian
function, and other aspects of the ecosystem, that are deleterious to
spring Chinook salmon and steelhead and their habitat.
Hydroelectric Operations: Conditions for Upper Columbia River
spring Chinook salmon and steelhead have been fundamentally altered
throughout the Columbia River basin by the construction and operation
of mainstem dams and reservoirs for power generation, navigation, and
flood control. Upper Columbia River salmon and steelhead are adversely
affected by hydrosystem-related flow and water quality effects,
obstructed and/or delayed passage, and ecological changes in
impoundments.
Harvest: Harvest of Upper Columbia River spring Chinook salmon and
steelhead occurs in commercial, recreational, and tribal fisheries in
the mainstem Columbia and in some tributaries. Upper Columbia River
spring Chinook salmon and steelhead are rarely taken in ocean
fisheries; most harvest of these listed species occurs in the Columbia
mainstem and some tributaries. Aggregate harvest rates (from fishing in
all areas) have generally been reduced from their peak periods as a
result of international treaties, fisheries conservation acts, the
advent of weak-stock management in the 1970s and 1980s, regional
conservation goals, and the listing of many salmon ESUs and steelhead
DPSs under the ESA. While fisheries do not target weak stocks of listed
salmon or steelhead, listed fish are incidentally caught in fisheries
directed at hatchery and unlisted wild stocks.
Hatcheries: In the Upper Columbia region, the 12 hatcheries
currently producing spring Chinook salmon and steelhead are operated to
mitigate for loss of habitat and for passage mortalities resulting from
the Columbia River hydrosystem. These hatcheries provide valuable
mitigation and/or conservation benefits but can cause substantial
adverse impacts if not properly managed. The Plan describes the risks
to listed fish from these hatcheries, including genetic effects that
reduce fitness and survival, ecological effects such as competition and
predation, facility effects on passage and water quality, mixed stock
fishery effects, and masking of the true status of wild populations.
Additional Factors: The Plan considers that there could be
additional factors that affect Upper Columbia River spring Chinook
salmon and steelhead, including changes in estuarine habitat, global
climate change, inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms,
fluctuating ocean cycles, and predation.
Recovery Strategies and Actions
The Plan's initial approach is to target reductions in all
manageable threats and limiting factors and to improve the status of
all extant Upper Columbia River spring Chinook salmon and steelhead
populations. As monitoring and evaluation programs improve
understanding of the effectiveness of various actions and their
benefits
[[Page 57306]]
throughout the life cycle of salmon and steelhead, adjustments may be
made through the adaptive management framework described in the Plan.
The Plan describes objectives and strategies and recommends
specific actions for Upper Columbia River spring Chinook salmon and
steelhead recovery. Among the most significant recommendations are the
following:
Habitat: The Plan includes habitat protection and restoration
actions in all streams that currently support or may support (in a
restored condition) listed spring Chinook salmon and steelhead in the
Upper Columbia Basin. The objectives and recommended actions are
derived from subbasin plans, watershed plans, the Upper Columbia
Biological Strategy, the Douglas County public utility district (PUD)
and Chelan County PUD Anadromous Fish Agreement and Habitat
Conservation Plans (AFAHCPs), and other relicensing agreements. The
Plan emphasizes actions that (1) protect existing areas where high
ecological integrity and natural ecosystem processes persist; (2)
restore connectivity (access) throughout the historical range, where
feasible and practical; (3) protect and restore riparian habitat along
spawning and rearing streams and identify long-term opportunities for
riparian habitat enhancement; (4) protect and restore floodplain
function and reconnection, off-channel habitat, and channel migration
processes where appropriate; and (5) increase habitat diversity by
rebuilding, maintaining, and adding instream structures (e.g., large
woody debris or rocks) where long-term channel form and function
efforts are not feasible.
Hydroelectric Operations: Upper Columbia River spring Chinook
salmon and steelhead migrate through four federally owned projects and
three to five projects owned by PUDs. These projects are licensed by
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The Plan acknowledges that
hydropower strategies and actions are being implemented, reviewed, and
considered in several ongoing processes, including Federal Columbia
River Power System (FCRPS) ESA section 7 consultations (for the lower
four Federal dams on the Columbia River), the AFAHCPs, and relicensing
agreements. The Plan's recommended actions are intended to be
consistent with these processes. The Plan emphasizes continued
implementation of the actions identified in the AFAHCPs, which adopted
a standard of no net impact (NNI) on the Upper Columbia River Spring-
Run Chinook Salmon ESU and Steelhead DPS.
Harvest: Harvest objectives for treaty and non-treaty salmon and
steelhead fisheries in the Columbia River Basin are set by the
applicable state, tribal, and Federal agencies. Fishery objectives from
McNary Dam to the mouth of the Columbia River (fishing zones 1-6) are
established by state, tribal, and Federal parties in U.S. v. Oregon,
302 F. Supp. 899 (D. Or. 1969). While recognizing the role of the
treaty and non-treaty co-managers, the Plan proposes that the U.S. v.
Oregon parties incorporate Upper Columbia recovery goals when
formulating fishery plans affecting Upper Columbia River spring Chinook
salmon and steelhead. The Plan also recommends that appropriate co-
managers and fishery management agencies work together with local
stakeholders to develop tributary fisheries management goals and plans.
Hatcheries: The hatchery strategies and actions in the Plan are
being reviewed and considered in several ongoing processes, including
the Chelan County and Douglas County PUD AFAHCPs, the Grant County
biological opinion, and U.S. v. Oregon. NMFS expects that the Plan's
recommended goals and actions will be implemented through these ongoing
processes. The Plan emphasizes that hatchery programs play an essential
role in spring Chinook salmon and steelhead recovery. Among other
measures, the Plan proposes that hatchery programs employ mechanisms to
manage hatchery returns on spawning grounds in balance with naturally
produced fish, while maintaining production levels identified in
various agreements. It also proposes that, as the populations recover,
hatchery programs should be modified to minimize adverse impacts of
hatchery fish on naturally produced fish.
Integration: The Plan states that recovery will depend on
integrating actions that address habitat, harvest, and hydroelectric
operations; moreover, it emphasizes that recovery actions must be
implemented at both the ESU/DPS and population scale.
Adaptive Management: Adaptive management is the process of
adjusting management actions and/or directions based on new
information. It requires building an evaluation method into an
implementation plan, so that selection and design of future recovery
actions can be adjusted depending on the results of previous actions.
Adaptive management is essential to salmon recovery planning. The UCSRB
is developing a monitoring and evaluation element (and associated
costs) to incorporate into its adaptive management framework, which
will become a part of the overall implementation plan. NMFS will
continue to work with the UCSRB on its adaptive management program as
appropriate during plan implementation.
Time and Cost Estimates
ESA section 4(f)(1) requires that a recovery plan include
''estimates of the time required and the cost to carry out those
measures needed to achieve the Plan's goal and to achieve intermediate
steps toward that goal'' (16 U.S.C. 1533[f][1]). The Plan contains an
extensive list of actions that need to be undertaken to recover spring
Chinook salmon and steelhead; however, there are many uncertainties
involved in predicting the course of recovery and in estimating total
costs. Such uncertainties include biological and ecosystem responses to
recovery actions as well as long-term and future funding. The Plan
states that if its recommended actions are implemented, recovery of the
Upper Columbia River Spring-Run Chinook Salmon ESU and the Upper
Columbia River Steelhead DPS is likely to occur within 10 to 30 years.
The cost estimates cover work projected to occur within the first 10-
year period. NMFS supports the Plan's determination to focus on the
first 10 years of implementation, provided that, before the end of this
first implementation period, specific actions and costs will be
estimated for subsequent years, to achieve long-term goals and to
proceed until a determination is made that listing is no longer
necessary.
The estimated cost of restoring habitat for spring Chinook salmon
and steelhead in the Upper Columbia Basin is approximately $296 million
over the initial 10-year period. This estimate includes expenditures by
local, tribal, state, and Federal governments, private business, and
individuals in implementing both capital projects and non-capital work.
The estimate of $296 million does not include costs associated with
hatchery programs, because the implementation of hatchery actions is
approved and budgeted in processes established by the Upper Columbia
HCPs. These processes are consistent with this recovery plan. The cost
estimate also does not include expenses associated with implementing
actions within the lower Columbia River, estuary, or FCRPS, or the cost
of implementing measures in the PUDs' HCPs and Settlement Agreements.
Cost estimates for the estuary and FCRPS are included in two modules
that NMFS developed because of the basin-wide scope and applicability
of the actions to all 13 ESUs and DPSs listed as threatened or
endangered in the
[[Page 57307]]
Columbia Basin. These modules, as well as the HCPs and Settlement
Agreements, are incorporated into the Plan by reference. The modules
are available on the NMFS Web site: www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-Recovery-
Planning/ESA-Recovery-Plans/Other-Documents.cfm.
The hydropower cost estimates will be updated over time, as the
section 7 consultation on the remanded 2004 FCRPS BiOp is completed.
The estuary recovery costs could be further refined following public
comment on the module and on the ESA recovery plan for the three listed
lower Columbia River ESUs and one listed lower Columbia River steelhead
DPS in 2007 or early 2008. There are virtually no estimated costs for
recovery actions associated with harvest to report at this time. This
is because no actions are currently proposed that go beyond those
already being implemented through U.S. v. Oregon and other harvest
management forums. In the event that additional harvest actions are
implemented through these forums, those costs will be added during the
implementation phase of this recovery plan. All cost estimates will be
refined and updated over time.
The Plan estimates it may cost a total of $10 million ($1 million
per year) to cover state, tribal, and local agency and organization
staffing costs during the first 10 years of plan implementation, and it
is conceivable that this level of effort will need to continue for the
Plan's duration. Also, continued actions in the management of habitat,
hatcheries, and harvest, including both capital and non-capital costs,
will likely warrant additional expenditures beyond the first 10 years.
Although it is not practicable to accurately estimate the total cost of
recovery, it appears that most of the costs will occur in the first 10
years. Annual costs are expected to be lower for the remaining years,
so that the total for the entire period (years 11-30) may possibly
range from $150 million to $200 million.
Periodic Reviews
In accordance with its responsibilities under ESA section 4(c)(2),
NMFS will conduct status reviews of the listed Upper Columbia River
Spring-Run Chinook Salmon ESU and Upper Columbia River Steelhead DPS at
least once every 5 years to evaluate their status and determine whether
the ESU or DPS should be removed from the list or changed in status.
Such evaluations will take into account the following:
The biological recovery criteria (ICTRT 2007) and listing
factor (threats) criteria described in the Plan.
The management programs in place to address the threats.
Principles presented in the Viable Salmonid Populations
paper (McElhany et al., 2000).
Best available information on population and ESU/DPS
status and new advances in risk evaluation methodologies.
Other considerations, including: the number and status of
extant spawning groups; linkages and connectivity among populations;
the diversity of life history and phenotypes expressed; and
considerations regarding catastrophic risk.
Principles laid out in NMFS' Hatchery Listing Policy (70
FR 37204, June 28, 2005).
Conclusion
NMFS has reviewed the Plan, the public comments, and the
conclusions of the ICTRT from its reviews of the Plan. Based on that
review, NMFS concludes that the Plan meets the requirements in section
4(f) of the ESA for developing a recovery plan.
Literature Cited
Interior Columbia Technical Recovery Team. 2005. Updated population
delineation in the Interior Columbia Basin. National Marine Fisheries
Service, Northwest Fisheries Science Center. Memorandum. May 11, 2005.
Interior Columbia Technical Recovery Team. 2007. Viability criteria for
application to Interior Columbia Basin salmonid ESUs. National Marine
Fisheries Service, Northwest Fisheries Science Center. March 2007.
McElhany, P., M. H. Ruckelshaus, M. J. Ford, T. C. Wainwright, and E.
P. Bjorkstedt. 2000. Viable salmon populations and the recovery of
evolutionarily significant units. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA Tech.
Memo., NMFS NWFSC 42, 156 p.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.
Dated: October 2, 2007.
Angela Somma,
Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E7-19812 Filed 10-5-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S