Marine Mammal Protection Act; Stock Assessment Report, 79895-79898 [E8-31022]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
79895
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 250 / Tuesday, December 30, 2008 / Notices
Committee Act, it has been determined
that this HSAC meeting concerns
matters that ‘‘disclose investigative
techniques and procedures’’ under 25
U.S.C. 552b(c)(7)(E) and are ‘‘likely to
significantly frustrate implementation of
a proposed agency action’’ within the
meaning of 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B) and
that, accordingly, the meeting will be
closed to the public.
Discussion of ongoing investigations
with Department of Homeland Security
enforcement Components and outside
law enforcement partners fall within the
meaning of 5 U.S.C 552b(7)(E) insofar as
they will ‘‘disclose investigative
techniques and procedures.’’
Additionally, release of information
presented during the briefings and the
nature of the discussion could lead to
premature disclosure of information on
Department of Homeland Security
actions that would be ‘‘likely to
significantly frustrate implementation of
a proposed agency action.’’
Dated: December 19, 2008.
Stewart Baker,
Assistant Secretary, Office of Policy.
[FR Doc. E8–30983 Filed 12–29–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–10–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R9–IA–2008–N0334; 96300–1671–
0000–P5]
Issuance of Permits
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of issuance of permits for
endangered species.
SUMMARY:
The following permits were
issued.
Documents and other
information submitted with these
applications are available for review,
subject to the requirements of the
Privacy Act and Freedom of Information
ADDRESSES:
Act, by any party who submits a written
request for a copy of such documents to:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division
of Management Authority, 4401 North
Fairfax Drive, Room 212, Arlington,
Virginia 22203; fax 703/358–2281.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Division of Management Authority,
telephone 703/358–2104.
Notice is
hereby given that on the dates below, as
authorized by the provisions of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) the
Fish and Wildlife Service issued the
requested permits subject to certain
conditions set forth therein. For each
permit for an endangered species, the
Service found that (1) The application
was filed in good faith, (2) the granted
permit would not operate to the
disadvantage of the endangered species,
and (3) the granted permit would be
consistent with the purposes and policy
set forth in Section 2 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Receipt of application Federal Register notice
Permit issuance date
Hawthorn Corporation .........................
73 FR 49698; August 22, 2008 ...........
November 13, 2008.
Los Angeles Zoo .................................
Houston Zoo, Inc .................................
73 FR 61162; October 15, 2008 .........
73 FR 56863; September 30, 2008 ....
December 1, 2008.
November 20, 2008.
Permit No.
Applicant
Endangered Species
PRT’s–182592,
182594
182595,
182596, 058658, 058659, 058660,
058662, 058663, 058664, 058665,
058666, 058667, 058668, 058669,
058681, 058683, 058685, and
058780.
189849 ..................................................
192243 ..................................................
Dated: December 5, 2008.
Lisa J. Lierheimer,
Senior Permit Biologist, Branch of Permits,
Division of Management Authority.
[FR Doc. E8–31011 Filed 12–29–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R9–FHC–2008–N0287; 80221–1113–
0000–L5]
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Marine Mammal Protection Act; Stock
Assessment Report
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability of final
2008 revised marine mammal stock
assessment report for the southern sea
otter in California; response to
comments.
22:55 Dec 29, 2008
Jkt 217001
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
information on the methods, data, and
results of the stock assessment, contact
Lilian Carswell by phone at (805) 612–
2793 or by e-mail at
Lilian_Carswell@fws.gov.
Send requests for printed
copies of the SAR to: Field Supervisor,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura
Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493 Portola
Road, Suite B, Ventura, CA 93003. You
may also view or download it at https://
www.fws.gov/ventura/speciesinfo/
so_sea_otter/.
ADDRESSES:
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
as amended (MMPA), and its
implementing regulations, we, the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (Service),
announce that we have revised our
stock assessment report (SAR) for the
southern sea otter (Enhydra lutris
nereis) stock in California State,
including incorporation of public
comments. We now make our complete
final 2008 revised SAR available to the
public.
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Under the
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) and its
implementing regulations in the Code of
Federal Regulations at 50 CFR part 18,
we regulate the taking, possession,
transportation, purchasing, selling,
offering for sale, exporting, and
importing of marine mammals. One of
the goals of the MMPA is to ensure that
stocks of marine mammals occurring in
waters under the jurisdiction of the
United States do not experience a level
of human-caused mortality and serious
injury that is likely to cause the stock to
be reduced below its optimum
sustainable population level (OSP). OSP
is defined as ‘‘the number of animals
which will result in the maximum
productivity of the population or the
species, keeping in mind the carrying
capacity of the habitat and the health of
the ecosystem of which they form a
constituent element.’’
To help accomplish the goal of
maintaining marine mammal stocks at
their OSPs, section 117 of the MMPA
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\30DEN1.SGM
30DEN1
79896
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 250 / Tuesday, December 30, 2008 / Notices
requires us and the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) to prepare a
SAR for each marine mammal stock that
occurs in waters under the jurisdiction
of the United States. A SAR must be
based on the best scientific information
available; therefore, we prepare it in
consultation with established regional
scientific review groups. Each SAR must
include: (1) A description of the stock
and its geographic range; (2) minimum
population estimate, maximum net
productivity rate, and current
population trend; (3) estimate of humancaused mortality and serious injury; (4)
commercial fishery interactions; (5)
status of the stock; and (6) potential
biological removal (PBR) level. The PBR
is defined as ‘‘the maximum number of
animals, not including natural
mortalities, that may be removed from a
marine mammal stock while allowing
that stock to reach or maintain its OSP.’’
The PBR is the product of the minimum
population estimate of the stock (Nmin);
one-half the maximum theoretical or
estimated net productivity rate of the
stock at a small population size (Rmax);
and a recovery factor (Fr) of between 0.1
and 1.0, which is intended to
compensate for uncertainty and
unknown estimation errors.
Section 117 of the MMPA also
requires us and NMFS to review the
SARs (a) At least annually for stocks
that are specified as strategic stocks; (b)
at least annually for stocks for which
significant new information is available;
and (c) at least once every 3 years for all
other stocks.
A strategic stock is defined in the
MMPA as a marine mammal stock (A)
For which the level of direct humancaused mortality exceeds the PBR; (B)
which, based on the best available
scientific information, is declining and
is likely to be listed as a threatened
species under the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.; ESA), within the foreseeable
future; or (C) which is listed as a
threatened or endangered species under
the ESA, or is designated as depleted
under the MMPA.
Before releasing our draft SAR for
public review and comment, we
submitted it for technical review
internally and also for scientific review
by the Pacific Regional Scientific
Review Group, which was established
under the MMPA. In a June 10, 2008 (73
FR 32732), Federal Register notice, we
made available our draft SAR for the
MMPA-required 90-day public review
and comment period. Following the
close of the comment period, we revised
the SAR based on public comments we
received (see below) and prepared the
final 2008 revised SAR. Between
publication of the draft and final revised
SARs, we have not revised the status of
the stock itself (i.e., strategic). However,
in response to a public comment, we
revised Nmin to base it on the 20th
percentile of the log-normal distribution
of the average count for the 3-year
running average for 2006–2008. In
addition, rather than listing the Nmin, of
the mainland and the San Nicolas Island
populations separately, we combined
them into a single Nmin, for the stock as
a whole. We used an Rmax of 6 percent,
that of the mainland population,
because this rate reflects the threats and
limitations to which approximately 98
percent of the stock is exposed. We
revised the PBR level from 9 to 8 based
on an Rmax of 6 percent and the revised
Nmin. We addressed most of the public
comments we received by adding text
for clarity.
The following table summarizes the
final 2008 revised SAR for southern sea
otters in California, listing the stock’s
Nmin, Rmax, Fr, PBR, annual estimated
human-caused mortality and serious
injury, and status:
SUMMARY OF FINAL REVISED STOCK ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE SOUTHERN SEA OTTER IN CALIFORNIA
Nmin
Rmax
Fr
PBR
Annual estimated average humancaused mortality
Southern sea otters ..........
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Stock
2,723
0.06
0.1
8
Unknown ............................................
Responding to Public Comments
We received comments on the draft
SAR (73 FR 32732) from the Marine
Mammal Commission, the Center for
Biological Diversity, Friends of the Sea
Otter, Defenders of Wildlife, and one
private citizen. We present issues raised
in those comments, along with our
responses, below.
Comment 1: Because of the
uncertainty in population counts, the
decline in the 2008 sea otter count, and
the absence of routine updates to the
SAR, the Service should take a
precautionary approach and base the
minimum population size estimate on
the 20th percentile of the log-normal
distribution of the average count for the
3-year running average for 2006–2008
rather than the latest single-year count.
Response: Our use of the latest singleyear count in the draft SAR was based
on the Guidelines for Preparing Stock
Assessment Reports Pursuant to Section
117 of the Marine Mammal Protection
Act (GAMMS II), published in 2005,
which state that a direct count may be
VerDate Aug<31>2005
22:55 Dec 29, 2008
Jkt 217001
used as an estimate for Nmin. We
acknowledge that there are considerable
fluctuations in the population count
from year to year, resulting in part from
unquantifiable observation error.
Because of this year-to-year variability,
the 3-year running average is the metric
recommended in the final revised
recovery plan for the southern sea otter
(68 FR 16305; April 3, 2003), and it is
the metric we typically use to
characterize population size and to track
trends. However, use of the 3-year
running average as a minimum
population size estimate for the
purposes of the SAR is not appropriate,
because the MMPA defines Nmin as the
number that provides reasonable
assurance that the stock size is equal to
or greater than the estimate. If a high
count is followed by 2 years of declining
counts, it is possible that the 3-year
running average will not provide
reasonable assurance that the stock size
is equal to or greater than the estimate.
Therefore, we adopt the precautionary
approach recommended by the
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Stock status
Strategic.
commenter, which applies the alternate
guidelines for determining Nmin that are
included in the GAMMS II guidance. To
calculate Nmin for the stock, we
combined counts for the mainland and
San Nicolas Island. Given the lognormal distribution of the average
combined counts for 2006–2008, the
estimate corresponding to the 20th
percentile of this distribution is 2,723.
We have revised the minimum
population estimate accordingly.
Comment 2: The Service should
include an estimate of the average
population size as well as a minimum
population estimate.
Response: The data resulting from the
annual spring surveys represent
minimum population counts, with no
associated correction factor or variance
estimate. As a result, they include
significant (but unquantifiable)
observation error, probably caused
mostly by year-to-year variance in
survey conditions. In order to reduce
potential influences from the vagaries of
any single census, data are presented as
E:\FR\FM\30DEN1.SGM
30DEN1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 250 / Tuesday, December 30, 2008 / Notices
3-year running averages. In response to
comments we received on our draft SAR
(73 FR 32732), we now base the
minimum population estimate on the
20th percentile of the log-normal
distribution of the average count for
2006–2008 rather than on the most
recent census. However, because
correction factors or variance estimates
are not available, we are unable to
include an estimate of the average
population size.
Comment 3: The SAR should clarify
that the San Nicolas Island colony is
considered to be a ‘‘non-essential
experimental population’’ under the
ESA because it was established during
a translocation experiment (52 FR
29754; August 11, 1987). It should also
clarify whether this population was
included in the estimation of population
parameters used to characterize the
stock’s status and to determine its PBR
level.
Response: We have revised the SAR
accordingly.
Comment 4: The Service should
arrange for observer coverage of trap
fisheries for lobster, crab, and fish,
particularly in waters occupied by sea
otters south of Point Conception, and of
set and drift gillnet fisheries in the sea
otter’s range. Observer coverage should
be augmented in the purse-seine
fisheries.
Response: NMFS conducts observer
programs. Since resources for these
programs are fully utilized, no new
programs may be initiated until other
monitoring or conservation efforts are
terminated so that resources can be
redirected. A recent analysis has shown
that a very high level of observer
coverage would be required to see any
indication of trap mortality, even if
mortality levels were high enough to
substantially reduce the rate of
population recovery (Hatfield et al., in
prep.). We are evaluating options for
obtaining additional information on
interactions between sea otters and
fisheries that have limited or no
observer coverage.
Comment 5: The Service assumes that
mortalities from gill nets are ‘‘at or near
zero’’ based on the closure of some areas
to gill net use but lacks the observer and
other independent data to back up this
assumption. The Service cannot
legitimately claim that entanglements
are at or near zero based on the limited
observer data available.
Response: We believe that southern
sea otter mortalities resulting from
interactions with gill nets are currently
at or near zero because of the
relationship between three factors: The
depths that are closed to gill net fishing;
the depths utilized by sea otters for
VerDate Aug<31>2005
22:55 Dec 29, 2008
Jkt 217001
foraging; and the current extent of the
southern sea otter’s range. Gill net
fishing is prohibited in waters shallower
than 70 fathoms (128 meters) from Point
Reyes to Point Arguello, in waters
generally within 3 nautical miles
offshore of the mainland coast from
Point Arguello to the Mexican border,
and in waters shallower than 70 fathoms
or within 1 mile, whichever is less,
around the Channel Islands. Although
sea otters occasionally dive to depths of
100 meters, the vast majority (more than
99 percent) of dives are to depths of 40
meters or less (M. Tim Tinker, pers.
comm., 2008). The southern sea otter
range currently extends from the mouth
of the Tunitas Creek, in San Mateo
County, to Coal Oil Point, in Santa
Barbara County (https://
www.werc.usgs.gov/otters/casurveyspr2008.htm). The closure from
Point Reyes to Point Arguello, which
includes most of the sea otter range,
encompasses the depths to which
southern sea otters are known to dive.
The remainder of the range is located
along the coast from Point Arguello to
Coal Oil Point. The bathymetry of the
area from Point Arguello to Coal Oil
Point is such that the 3-mile closure
translates into depths of approximately
100 meters. A preliminary analysis of
sea otter dives in the southern portion
of the range determined that a closure
to 94 meters would include all dives of
95 percent of all sea otters, and a closure
to 104 meters would include all dives of
99 percent of all sea otters (M. Tim
Tinker, pers. comm., 2008). Because the
likelihood of a sea otter diving to depths
exceeding 128 or 100 meters is
exceedingly small, we do not believe
that, given the current extent of the
range, sea otters are interacting with gill
nets. However, we will continue to
evaluate the risks to which sea otters are
exposed by this type of gear.
Comment 6: The Service reports three
non-lethal interactions in purse-seine
fisheries over the past 5 years but
assumes that no serious injuries or
mortalities have occurred. This
assumption seems overly optimistic.
Response: We have revised the SAR to
reflect that no data are available to
enable us to assess whether sea otter
interactions with purse-seine gear are
resulting in mortality or serious injury.
Comment 7: Because sea otters are not
covered under section 118 of the
MMPA, PBR does not apply to the
governance of incidental take of
southern sea otters in commercial
fisheries. However, section 117 of the
MMPA requires the calculation of PBR,
and that calculation should be based on
the best available scientific data.
Therefore, the Service should use a
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
79897
value for Rmax of 5 percent rather than
6 percent to calculate PBR, because the
average annual growth rate from 2001 to
2007 was approximately 5 percent.
Response: We have revised the SAR to
clarify the status of southern sea otters
with respect to section 118 of the
MMPA. However, we have not used an
Rmax of 5 percent as suggested by the
commenter. The MMPA defines onehalf Rmax as ‘‘one-half of the maximum
theoretical or estimated ‘net
productivity rate’ of the stock at a small
population size,’’ where the term ‘‘net
productivity rate’’ means ‘‘the annual
per-capita rate of increase in a stock
resulting from additions due to
reproduction, less losses due to natural
mortality.’’ The maximum observed
growth rate along the mainland is 6
percent annually. Although the
maximum observed growth rate in any
southern sea otter population is 9
percent annually, this rate has been seen
only at San Nicolas Island, which is
geographically removed from the
mainland range and is subject to
different threats and limitations than the
mainland range. For the stock as a
whole, we use an Rmax of 6 percent
rather than 9 percent because that rate
reflects the threats and limitations to
which approximately 98 percent of the
population is exposed.
Comment 8: It is misleading to say
that the colony at San Nicolas Island
‘‘has grown by approximately 9 percent
annually’’ since the early 1990s. It
would be accurate to say that the colony
has grown by ‘‘an approximate average
of 9 percent annually’’ since the early
1990s.
Response: We have revised the SAR
accordingly.
Comment 9: The Service does not
provide an estimated number of nonlethal interactions or a precise estimate
of observer coverage in the purse-seine
fishery for 2006.
Response: The SAR has been revised
to incorporate an estimated number of
non-lethal interactions in 2006. A
precise estimate of observer coverage in
the purse-seine fishery for 2006 requires
data on fishing effort derived from
logbook and landing data. At the time
the final SAR was prepared, logbook
and landing data for purse seine
fisheries targeting sardine, anchovy,
mackerel, and tuna in 2006 were not
available.
Comment 10: The SAR should
reference the unpublished study that
analyzed sea otter carcasses and their
ability to fit through a variety of trap
openings.
Response: We have included results
from the referenced study (Hatfield et
al., in prep.) in the final SAR.
E:\FR\FM\30DEN1.SGM
30DEN1
79898
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 250 / Tuesday, December 30, 2008 / Notices
Comment 11: The Service should take
every action available to investigate and,
where possible, mitigate the impact of
infectious disease and should improve
enforcement of the provisions of the
MMPA that prevent the intentional
shooting of marine mammals.
Response: We support and have
provided funding for studies aimed at
determining and mitigating the impact
of infectious disease. We continue to
investigate, and pursue actions in
response to, intentional shooting of sea
otters.
Comment 12: While section 118 of the
MMPA does not govern the incidental
taking of southern sea otters, the zero
mortality rate goal (ZMRG) provisions in
section 101 do apply to southern sea
otters. The fact that the Service cannot
make a status determination with
respect to ZMRG confirms that ZMRG
has not been achieved for sea otters and
that the Service has not satisfied its
requirements under the law. This failure
strongly supports the need for [the
Service] to aggressively place observers
on fisheries that have the potential to
take southern sea otters so that it can
determine the status of the stock with
respect to ZMRG.
Response: Please see our response to
comment 4.
Comment 13: The SAR should
provide additional discussion and
references on the topic of food
limitation and nutritional deficiency.
Response: We have included
additional references in the final SAR
and will expand our discussion as data
become available.
Additional References Cited:
Bentall, G.B., 2005. Morphological and
Behavioral Correlates of Population
Status in the Southern Sea Otter: A
Comparative Study Between Central
California and San Nicolas Island.
Masters Thesis, University of
California, Santa Cruz, CA,
unpublished.
Hatfield, B.B., J.A. Ames, J.A. Estes,
M.T. Tinker, A.B. Johnson, M.M.
Staedler, and M.D. Harris. Manuscript
in preparation. The potential for sea
otter mortality in fish and shellfish
traps. 22 pp. + appendices.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Authority: The authority for this action is
the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972,
as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et al.).
Dated: December 17, 2008.
Kenneth Stansell,
Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E8–31022 Filed 12–29–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
22:55 Dec 29, 2008
Jkt 217001
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R5–FHC–2008–N0336; 53330–1335–
0000–J3]
Lake Champlain Sea Lamprey Control
Alternatives Workgroup
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of meeting.
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
meeting of the Lake Champlain Sea
Lamprey Control Alternatives
Workgroup (Workgroup). The
Workgroup’s purpose is to provide, in
an advisory capacity, recommendations
and advice on research and
implementation of sea lamprey control
techniques alternative to lampricide that
are technically feasible, cost effective,
and environmentally safe. The primary
objective of the meeting will be to
discuss potential research initiatives
that may enhance alternative sea
lamprey control techniques. The
meeting is open to the public.
DATES: The Workgroup will meet on
Thursday February 5, 2009, from 5 to
8 p.m., with an alternate date of
Thursday February 12, 2009, from 5 to
8 p.m., should the meeting need to be
cancelled due to inclement weather.
Any member of the public who wants to
find out whether the meeting has been
postponed may contact Stefi Flanders of
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service at
802–872–0629 ext. 10 (telephone); or
Stefi_Flanders@fws.gov (electronic mail)
during regular business hours on the
primary meeting date.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the Ilsley Public Library, Jessica Swift
Community Meeting Room, 75 Main
Street, Middlebury, VT 05753;
telephone 802–388–4095.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dave Tilton, Designated Federal Officer,
Lake Champlain Sea Lamprey Control
Alternatives Workgroup, Lake
Champlain Fish and Wildlife Resources
Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
11 Lincoln Street, Essex Junction, VT
05452 (U.S. mail); 802–872–0629
(telephone); or Dave_Tilton@fws.gov
(electronic mail).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We
publish this notice under section
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.). The
Workgroup’s specific responsibilities
are to provide advice regarding the
implementation of sea lamprey control
methods alternative to lampricides, to
recommend priorities for research to be
PO 00000
Frm 00110
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
conducted by cooperating organizations
and demonstration projects to be
developed and funded by State and
Federal agencies, and to assist Federal
and State agencies with the
coordination of alternative sea lamprey
control research to advance the state of
the science in Lake Champlain and the
Great Lakes.
Dated: December 5, 2008.
Wendi Weber,
Acting Regional Director, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E8–31029 Filed 12–29–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R9–IA–2008–N0335; 96300–1671–
0000–P5]
Receipt of Applications for Permit
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of receipt of applications
for permit.
SUMMARY: The public is invited to
comment on the following applications
to conduct certain activities with
endangered species.
DATES: Written data, comments or
requests must be received by January 29,
2009.
ADDRESSES: Documents and other
information submitted with these
applications are available for review,
subject to the requirements of the
Privacy Act and Freedom of Information
Act, by any party who submits a written
request for a copy of such documents
within 30 days of the date of publication
of this notice to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Division of Management
Authority, 4401 North Fairfax Drive,
Room 212, Arlington, Virginia 22203;
fax 703/358–2281.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Division of Management Authority,
telephone 703/358–2104.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Endangered Species
The public is invited to comment on
the following applications for a permit
to conduct certain activities with
endangered species. This notice is
provided pursuant to Section 10(c) of
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Written data, comments, or requests for
copies of these complete applications
should be submitted to the Director
(address above).
E:\FR\FM\30DEN1.SGM
30DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 250 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 79895-79898]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-31022]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R9-FHC-2008-N0287; 80221-1113-0000-L5]
Marine Mammal Protection Act; Stock Assessment Report
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability of final 2008 revised marine mammal
stock assessment report for the southern sea otter in California;
response to comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972,
as amended (MMPA), and its implementing regulations, we, the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (Service), announce that we have revised our stock
assessment report (SAR) for the southern sea otter (Enhydra lutris
nereis) stock in California State, including incorporation of public
comments. We now make our complete final 2008 revised SAR available to
the public.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on the methods, data,
and results of the stock assessment, contact Lilian Carswell by phone
at (805) 612-2793 or by e-mail at Lilian_Carswell@fws.gov.
ADDRESSES: Send requests for printed copies of the SAR to: Field
Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura Fish and Wildlife
Office, 2493 Portola Road, Suite B, Ventura, CA 93003. You may also
view or download it at https://www.fws.gov/ventura/speciesinfo/so_sea_
otter/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) and
its implementing regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations at 50
CFR part 18, we regulate the taking, possession, transportation,
purchasing, selling, offering for sale, exporting, and importing of
marine mammals. One of the goals of the MMPA is to ensure that stocks
of marine mammals occurring in waters under the jurisdiction of the
United States do not experience a level of human-caused mortality and
serious injury that is likely to cause the stock to be reduced below
its optimum sustainable population level (OSP). OSP is defined as ``the
number of animals which will result in the maximum productivity of the
population or the species, keeping in mind the carrying capacity of the
habitat and the health of the ecosystem of which they form a
constituent element.''
To help accomplish the goal of maintaining marine mammal stocks at
their OSPs, section 117 of the MMPA
[[Page 79896]]
requires us and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to prepare
a SAR for each marine mammal stock that occurs in waters under the
jurisdiction of the United States. A SAR must be based on the best
scientific information available; therefore, we prepare it in
consultation with established regional scientific review groups. Each
SAR must include: (1) A description of the stock and its geographic
range; (2) minimum population estimate, maximum net productivity rate,
and current population trend; (3) estimate of human-caused mortality
and serious injury; (4) commercial fishery interactions; (5) status of
the stock; and (6) potential biological removal (PBR) level. The PBR is
defined as ``the maximum number of animals, not including natural
mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal stock while
allowing that stock to reach or maintain its OSP.'' The PBR is the
product of the minimum population estimate of the stock
(Nmin); one-half the maximum theoretical or estimated net
productivity rate of the stock at a small population size
(Rmax); and a recovery factor (Fr) of between 0.1
and 1.0, which is intended to compensate for uncertainty and unknown
estimation errors.
Section 117 of the MMPA also requires us and NMFS to review the
SARs (a) At least annually for stocks that are specified as strategic
stocks; (b) at least annually for stocks for which significant new
information is available; and (c) at least once every 3 years for all
other stocks.
A strategic stock is defined in the MMPA as a marine mammal stock
(A) For which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds the
PBR; (B) which, based on the best available scientific information, is
declining and is likely to be listed as a threatened species under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.;
ESA), within the foreseeable future; or (C) which is listed as a
threatened or endangered species under the ESA, or is designated as
depleted under the MMPA.
Before releasing our draft SAR for public review and comment, we
submitted it for technical review internally and also for scientific
review by the Pacific Regional Scientific Review Group, which was
established under the MMPA. In a June 10, 2008 (73 FR 32732), Federal
Register notice, we made available our draft SAR for the MMPA-required
90-day public review and comment period. Following the close of the
comment period, we revised the SAR based on public comments we received
(see below) and prepared the final 2008 revised SAR. Between
publication of the draft and final revised SARs, we have not revised
the status of the stock itself (i.e., strategic). However, in response
to a public comment, we revised Nmin to base it on the 20th
percentile of the log-normal distribution of the average count for the
3-year running average for 2006-2008. In addition, rather than listing
the Nmin, of the mainland and the San Nicolas Island
populations separately, we combined them into a single Nmin,
for the stock as a whole. We used an Rmax of 6 percent, that
of the mainland population, because this rate reflects the threats and
limitations to which approximately 98 percent of the stock is exposed.
We revised the PBR level from 9 to 8 based on an Rmax of 6
percent and the revised Nmin. We addressed most of the
public comments we received by adding text for clarity.
The following table summarizes the final 2008 revised SAR for
southern sea otters in California, listing the stock's Nmin,
Rmax, Fr, PBR, annual estimated human-caused
mortality and serious injury, and status:
Summary of Final Revised Stock Assessment Report for the Southern Sea Otter in California
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual estimated average
Stock Nmin Rmax Fr PBR human-caused mortality Stock status
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Southern sea otters................... 2,723 0.06 0.1 8 Unknown.................. Strategic.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Responding to Public Comments
We received comments on the draft SAR (73 FR 32732) from the Marine
Mammal Commission, the Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the
Sea Otter, Defenders of Wildlife, and one private citizen. We present
issues raised in those comments, along with our responses, below.
Comment 1: Because of the uncertainty in population counts, the
decline in the 2008 sea otter count, and the absence of routine updates
to the SAR, the Service should take a precautionary approach and base
the minimum population size estimate on the 20th percentile of the log-
normal distribution of the average count for the 3-year running average
for 2006-2008 rather than the latest single-year count.
Response: Our use of the latest single-year count in the draft SAR
was based on the Guidelines for Preparing Stock Assessment Reports
Pursuant to Section 117 of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (GAMMS II),
published in 2005, which state that a direct count may be used as an
estimate for Nmin. We acknowledge that there are
considerable fluctuations in the population count from year to year,
resulting in part from unquantifiable observation error. Because of
this year-to-year variability, the 3-year running average is the metric
recommended in the final revised recovery plan for the southern sea
otter (68 FR 16305; April 3, 2003), and it is the metric we typically
use to characterize population size and to track trends. However, use
of the 3-year running average as a minimum population size estimate for
the purposes of the SAR is not appropriate, because the MMPA defines
Nmin as the number that provides reasonable assurance that
the stock size is equal to or greater than the estimate. If a high
count is followed by 2 years of declining counts, it is possible that
the 3-year running average will not provide reasonable assurance that
the stock size is equal to or greater than the estimate. Therefore, we
adopt the precautionary approach recommended by the commenter, which
applies the alternate guidelines for determining Nmin that
are included in the GAMMS II guidance. To calculate Nmin for
the stock, we combined counts for the mainland and San Nicolas Island.
Given the log-normal distribution of the average combined counts for
2006-2008, the estimate corresponding to the 20th percentile of this
distribution is 2,723. We have revised the minimum population estimate
accordingly.
Comment 2: The Service should include an estimate of the average
population size as well as a minimum population estimate.
Response: The data resulting from the annual spring surveys
represent minimum population counts, with no associated correction
factor or variance estimate. As a result, they include significant (but
unquantifiable) observation error, probably caused mostly by year-to-
year variance in survey conditions. In order to reduce potential
influences from the vagaries of any single census, data are presented
as
[[Page 79897]]
3-year running averages. In response to comments we received on our
draft SAR (73 FR 32732), we now base the minimum population estimate on
the 20th percentile of the log-normal distribution of the average count
for 2006-2008 rather than on the most recent census. However, because
correction factors or variance estimates are not available, we are
unable to include an estimate of the average population size.
Comment 3: The SAR should clarify that the San Nicolas Island
colony is considered to be a ``non-essential experimental population''
under the ESA because it was established during a translocation
experiment (52 FR 29754; August 11, 1987). It should also clarify
whether this population was included in the estimation of population
parameters used to characterize the stock's status and to determine its
PBR level.
Response: We have revised the SAR accordingly.
Comment 4: The Service should arrange for observer coverage of trap
fisheries for lobster, crab, and fish, particularly in waters occupied
by sea otters south of Point Conception, and of set and drift gillnet
fisheries in the sea otter's range. Observer coverage should be
augmented in the purse-seine fisheries.
Response: NMFS conducts observer programs. Since resources for
these programs are fully utilized, no new programs may be initiated
until other monitoring or conservation efforts are terminated so that
resources can be redirected. A recent analysis has shown that a very
high level of observer coverage would be required to see any indication
of trap mortality, even if mortality levels were high enough to
substantially reduce the rate of population recovery (Hatfield et al.,
in prep.). We are evaluating options for obtaining additional
information on interactions between sea otters and fisheries that have
limited or no observer coverage.
Comment 5: The Service assumes that mortalities from gill nets are
``at or near zero'' based on the closure of some areas to gill net use
but lacks the observer and other independent data to back up this
assumption. The Service cannot legitimately claim that entanglements
are at or near zero based on the limited observer data available.
Response: We believe that southern sea otter mortalities resulting
from interactions with gill nets are currently at or near zero because
of the relationship between three factors: The depths that are closed
to gill net fishing; the depths utilized by sea otters for foraging;
and the current extent of the southern sea otter's range. Gill net
fishing is prohibited in waters shallower than 70 fathoms (128 meters)
from Point Reyes to Point Arguello, in waters generally within 3
nautical miles offshore of the mainland coast from Point Arguello to
the Mexican border, and in waters shallower than 70 fathoms or within 1
mile, whichever is less, around the Channel Islands. Although sea
otters occasionally dive to depths of 100 meters, the vast majority
(more than 99 percent) of dives are to depths of 40 meters or less (M.
Tim Tinker, pers. comm., 2008). The southern sea otter range currently
extends from the mouth of the Tunitas Creek, in San Mateo County, to
Coal Oil Point, in Santa Barbara County (https://www.werc.usgs.gov/
otters/ca-surveyspr2008.htm). The closure from Point Reyes to Point
Arguello, which includes most of the sea otter range, encompasses the
depths to which southern sea otters are known to dive. The remainder of
the range is located along the coast from Point Arguello to Coal Oil
Point. The bathymetry of the area from Point Arguello to Coal Oil Point
is such that the 3-mile closure translates into depths of approximately
100 meters. A preliminary analysis of sea otter dives in the southern
portion of the range determined that a closure to 94 meters would
include all dives of 95 percent of all sea otters, and a closure to 104
meters would include all dives of 99 percent of all sea otters (M. Tim
Tinker, pers. comm., 2008). Because the likelihood of a sea otter
diving to depths exceeding 128 or 100 meters is exceedingly small, we
do not believe that, given the current extent of the range, sea otters
are interacting with gill nets. However, we will continue to evaluate
the risks to which sea otters are exposed by this type of gear.
Comment 6: The Service reports three non-lethal interactions in
purse-seine fisheries over the past 5 years but assumes that no serious
injuries or mortalities have occurred. This assumption seems overly
optimistic.
Response: We have revised the SAR to reflect that no data are
available to enable us to assess whether sea otter interactions with
purse-seine gear are resulting in mortality or serious injury.
Comment 7: Because sea otters are not covered under section 118 of
the MMPA, PBR does not apply to the governance of incidental take of
southern sea otters in commercial fisheries. However, section 117 of
the MMPA requires the calculation of PBR, and that calculation should
be based on the best available scientific data. Therefore, the Service
should use a value for Rmax of 5 percent rather than 6
percent to calculate PBR, because the average annual growth rate from
2001 to 2007 was approximately 5 percent.
Response: We have revised the SAR to clarify the status of southern
sea otters with respect to section 118 of the MMPA. However, we have
not used an Rmax of 5 percent as suggested by the commenter.
The MMPA defines one-half Rmax as ``one-half of the maximum
theoretical or estimated `net productivity rate' of the stock at a
small population size,'' where the term ``net productivity rate'' means
``the annual per-capita rate of increase in a stock resulting from
additions due to reproduction, less losses due to natural mortality.''
The maximum observed growth rate along the mainland is 6 percent
annually. Although the maximum observed growth rate in any southern sea
otter population is 9 percent annually, this rate has been seen only at
San Nicolas Island, which is geographically removed from the mainland
range and is subject to different threats and limitations than the
mainland range. For the stock as a whole, we use an Rmax of
6 percent rather than 9 percent because that rate reflects the threats
and limitations to which approximately 98 percent of the population is
exposed.
Comment 8: It is misleading to say that the colony at San Nicolas
Island ``has grown by approximately 9 percent annually'' since the
early 1990s. It would be accurate to say that the colony has grown by
``an approximate average of 9 percent annually'' since the early 1990s.
Response: We have revised the SAR accordingly.
Comment 9: The Service does not provide an estimated number of non-
lethal interactions or a precise estimate of observer coverage in the
purse-seine fishery for 2006.
Response: The SAR has been revised to incorporate an estimated
number of non-lethal interactions in 2006. A precise estimate of
observer coverage in the purse-seine fishery for 2006 requires data on
fishing effort derived from logbook and landing data. At the time the
final SAR was prepared, logbook and landing data for purse seine
fisheries targeting sardine, anchovy, mackerel, and tuna in 2006 were
not available.
Comment 10: The SAR should reference the unpublished study that
analyzed sea otter carcasses and their ability to fit through a variety
of trap openings.
Response: We have included results from the referenced study
(Hatfield et al., in prep.) in the final SAR.
[[Page 79898]]
Comment 11: The Service should take every action available to
investigate and, where possible, mitigate the impact of infectious
disease and should improve enforcement of the provisions of the MMPA
that prevent the intentional shooting of marine mammals.
Response: We support and have provided funding for studies aimed at
determining and mitigating the impact of infectious disease. We
continue to investigate, and pursue actions in response to, intentional
shooting of sea otters.
Comment 12: While section 118 of the MMPA does not govern the
incidental taking of southern sea otters, the zero mortality rate goal
(ZMRG) provisions in section 101 do apply to southern sea otters. The
fact that the Service cannot make a status determination with respect
to ZMRG confirms that ZMRG has not been achieved for sea otters and
that the Service has not satisfied its requirements under the law. This
failure strongly supports the need for [the Service] to aggressively
place observers on fisheries that have the potential to take southern
sea otters so that it can determine the status of the stock with
respect to ZMRG.
Response: Please see our response to comment 4.
Comment 13: The SAR should provide additional discussion and
references on the topic of food limitation and nutritional deficiency.
Response: We have included additional references in the final SAR
and will expand our discussion as data become available.
Additional References Cited:
Bentall, G.B., 2005. Morphological and Behavioral Correlates of
Population Status in the Southern Sea Otter: A Comparative Study
Between Central California and San Nicolas Island. Masters Thesis,
University of California, Santa Cruz, CA, unpublished.
Hatfield, B.B., J.A. Ames, J.A. Estes, M.T. Tinker, A.B. Johnson, M.M.
Staedler, and M.D. Harris. Manuscript in preparation. The potential for
sea otter mortality in fish and shellfish traps. 22 pp. + appendices.
Authority: The authority for this action is the Marine Mammal
Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et al.).
Dated: December 17, 2008.
Kenneth Stansell,
Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E8-31022 Filed 12-29-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
