Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a Petition to Revise Critical Habitat for the Florida Manatee (Trichechus manatus latirostris, 49842-49845 [E9-23245]
Download as PDF
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
49842
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 29, 2009 / Proposed Rules
Federally funded or permitted
projects affecting listed species outside
their designated critical habitat areas
may still result in jeopardy findings in
some cases. Similarly, critical habitat
designations made on the basis of the
best available information at the time of
designation will not control the
direction and substance of future
recovery plans, habitat conservation
plans, or other species conservation
planning efforts if new information
available to these planning efforts calls
for a different outcome. Section 7(a)(2)
of the Act requires Federal agencies,
including the Service, to ensure that
actions they fund, authorize, or carry
out are not likely to destroy or adversely
modify critical habitat. If a Federal
action may affect a listed species or its
critical habitat, the responsible Federal
agency (action agency) must enter into
consultation with us. As a result of this
consultation, we document compliance
with the requirements of section 7(a)(2)
through our issuance of:
(1) A concurrence letter for Federal
actions that may affect, but are not
likely to adversely affect, listed species
or critical habitat; or
(2) A biological opinion for Federal
actions that may affect, and are likely to
adversely affect, listed species or critical
habitat.
When we issue a biological opinion
concluding that a project is likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of a
listed species or destroy or adversely
modify critical habitat, we also provide
reasonable and prudent alternatives to
the project, if any are identifiable. We
define ‘‘Reasonable and prudent
alternatives’’ at 50 CFR 402.02 as
alternative actions identified during
consultation that:
• Can be implemented in a manner
consistent with the intended purpose of
the action,
• Can be implemented consistent with
the scope of the Federal agency’s legal
authority and jurisdiction,
• Are economically and
technologically feasible, and
• Would, in the Director’s opinion,
avoid jeopardizing the continued
existence of the listed species or
destroying or adversely modifying
critical habitat.
Reasonable and prudent alternatives
can vary from slight project
modifications to extensive redesign or
relocation of the project. Costs
associated with implementing a
reasonable and prudent alternative are
similarly variable.
Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require
Federal agencies to reinitiate
consultation on previously reviewed
actions in instances where we have
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:35 Sep 28, 2009
Jkt 217001
listed a new species or subsequently
designated critical habitat that may be
affected and the Federal agency has
retained discretionary involvement or
control over the action (or the agency’s
discretionary involvement or control is
authorized by law). Consequently,
Federal agencies may sometimes need to
request reinitiation of consultation with
us on actions for which formal
consultation has been completed, if
those actions with discretionary
involvement or control may affect
subsequently listed species or
designated critical habitat.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
in this document is available, upon
request, from the Western Colorado
Ecological Services Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Author
The primary authors of this notice are
the staff members of the Western
Colorado Ecological Services Office (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: September 16, 2009.
Thomas L. Strickland
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and
Parks
[FR Doc. E9–23155 Filed 9–28– 09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–S
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2009-0066]
[92210-1117-0000-B4]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a
Petition to Revise Critical Habitat for
the Florida Manatee (Trichechus
manatus latirostris)
AGENCY:
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90–day petition
finding and initiation of critical habitat
review.
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, announce a 90–day
finding on a petition to revise the
critical habitat designation for the
Florida subspecies (Trichechus manatus
latirostris) of the endangered West
Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus)
under the Endangered Species Act of
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1973, as amended. Based on our review,
we find that the petition, in conjunction
with information readily available in
our files, presents substantial scientific
or commercial information indicating
that a revision of the critical habitat
designation for the Florida manatee may
be warranted. Therefore, with the
publication of this notice, we are
initiating a review of the current critical
habitat designation for the subspecies to
determine how we intend to proceed
with the revision. To ensure a
comprehensive review, we seek
information pertaining to the Florida
manatee’s essential habitat needs from
any interested party.
DATES: To allow us adequate time to
conduct this review, we request that you
send us information on or before
October 29, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit
information by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Search for docket
FWS-R4-ES-2009-0066 and then follow
the instructions for submitting
comments.
• U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R4ES-2009-0066; Division of Policy and
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive,
Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203.
We will post all information received
on https://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us
(see the Information Solicited section
below for more details).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dave Hankla, Field Supervisor,
Jacksonville, Florida Ecological Services
Office, 7915 Baymeadows Way, Suite
200, Jacksonville, FL 32256, by
telephone (904-731-3336), or by
facsimile (904-731-3045). If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), please call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Information Solicited
When we make a finding that a
petition presents substantial
information indicating that a revision of
a critical habitat designation may be
warranted, we initiate a review of that
critical habitat to determine how we
intend to proceed with the requested
revision of the designation. To ensure
that the review is complete and
incorporates the best available scientific
and commercial information, we seek
information regarding the revision of
critical habitat for the Florida manatee.
E:\FR\FM\29SEP1.SGM
29SEP1
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 29, 2009 / Proposed Rules
We request information from
governmental agencies, Native
American Tribes, the scientific
community, industry, and any other
interested parties. We are seeking
information regarding:
(1) The historical and current status
and distribution of Florida manatee, its
biology and ecology, and ongoing
conservation measures for the species
and its habitat;
(2) Physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species;
(3) Information on threats to the
species and its habitat; and
(4) Data on the increase in growth of
Florida’s human population since we
designated manatee critical habitat in
1976, and examples of related increased
threats to the species and subsequent
changes to manatee habitat.
In 2007, the Service conducted an
extensive review of all available
information on the Florida manatee
while preparing a 5–year status review
of the species (Service 2007). We are
particularly seeking information about
manatee habitat or manatee use of
habitat that has been made available
since publication of the review.
Please note that submissions merely
stating support for or opposition to the
action under consideration without
providing supporting information,
although noted, will not be considered
in making a determination. Section
4(b)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.) directs that ‘‘the Secretary shall
designate critical habitat, and make
revisions thereto, ...on the basis of the
best scientific data available.’’ Based on
our critical habitat review, we will
publish a 12–month notice of our
intentions concerning the petition, as
provided in section 4(b)(3)(D)(ii) of the
Act.
You may submit your information
concerning this review by one of the
methods listed in the ADDRESSES
section. If you submit information via
https://www.regulations.gov, your entire
submission—including any personal
identifying information—will be posted
on the website. If your submission is
made via a hardcopy that includes
personal identifying information, you
may request at the top of your document
that we withhold this personal
identifying information from public
review. However, we cannot guarantee
that we will be able to do so. We will
post all hardcopy submissions on https://
www.regulations.gov. Please include
sufficient information with your
submission (such as full references) to
allow us to verify any scientific or
commercial information you include.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:35 Sep 28, 2009
Jkt 217001
Information and materials we receive,
as well as supporting documentation we
used in preparing this finding, will be
available for public inspection on https://
www.regulations.gov, or by appointment
during normal business hours, at the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Jacksonville, Florida Ecological Services
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(D) of the Act requires
that we make a finding as to whether a
petition to revise critical habitat
presents substantial scientific
information indicating that the revision
may be warranted. The standard for
substantial scientific or commercial
information set forth in our
implementing regulations with regard to
a 90–day petition finding is ‘‘that
amount of information that would lead
a reasonable person to believe that the
measure proposed in the petition may
be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)). In
determining whether substantial
information exists, we take into account
several factors, including information
submitted with, and referenced in, the
petition and all other information
readily available in our files. To the
maximum extent practicable, we are to
make this finding within 90 days of the
receipt of the petition, and we are to
publish the finding promptly in the
Federal Register.
Our standard for substantial scientific
or commercial information within the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with
regard to a 90–day petition finding is
‘‘that amount of information that would
lead a reasonable person to believe that
the measure proposed in the petition
may be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)).
If we find that a petition presents
substantial information indicating that
the revision may be warranted, we are
required to determine how we intend to
proceed with the requested revision
within 12 months after receiving the
petition and promptly publish notice of
such intention in the Federal Register.
Critical habitat is defined under
section 3(5)(A) of the Act as:
(i) The specific areas within the
geographical area occupied by the
species, at the time it is listed in
accordance with the Act, on which are
found those physical or biological
features
(I) essential to the conservation of the
species and
(II) which may require special
management considerations or
protection; and
(ii) Specific areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it is listed, upon a
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
49843
determination that such areas are
essential for the conservation of the
species.
Our implementing regulations at 50
CFR 424.12 describe our criteria for
designating critical habitat. We are to
consider essential physical and
biological features essential to the
conservation of the species. Those
features include, but are not limited to:
(1) space for individual and population
growth, and normal behavior; (2) food,
water, air, light, minerals, or other
nutritional or physiological
requirements; (3) cover or shelter; (4)
sites for breeding, reproduction, or
rearing of offspring; and (5) habitats that
are protected from disturbance or are
representative of the historic
geographical and ecological distribution
of a species. Essential physical and
biological features may include, but are
not limited to: ‘‘nesting grounds, feeding
sites, water quality, tide, and geological
formations.’’ Our implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 define
‘‘special management considerations or
protection’’ as any methods or
procedures useful in protecting physical
and biological features of the
environment for the conservation of the
species.
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires us
to designate and make revisions to
critical habitat for listed species on the
basis of the best scientific data available
and after taking into consideration the
economic impact, the impact on
national security, and any other relevant
impact, of specifying any particular area
as critical habitat. The Secretary may
exclude any particular area from critical
habitat if he determines that the benefits
of such exclusion outweigh the benefits
of specifying such area as part of the
critical habitat, unless he determines
that the failure to designate such area as
critical habitat will result in the
extinction of the species concerned.
Petition History
On December 19, 2008, we received a
petition from Wildlife Advocacy Project,
Save the Manatee Club, Center for
Biological Diversity, and Defenders of
Wildlife, requesting that we revise
critical habitat for the Florida manatee
(Trichechus manatus latirostris)
pursuant to the Act and the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C.
Subchapter II). The petition clearly
identified itself and included the
requisite identification information for
the petitioners, as required in 50 CFR
424.14(a). In a January 17, 2009, letter
to the petitioners, we responded that we
received the petition and would make a
finding, to the maximum extent
practicable within 90 days, as to
E:\FR\FM\29SEP1.SGM
29SEP1
49844
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 29, 2009 / Proposed Rules
whether or not the petition presents
substantial information. We also stated
that if the initial finding concludes that
the petition presents substantial
information indicating that a revision
may be warranted, then we have one
year from the date we received the
petition to determine how we intend to
proceed with the requested revision and
we will promptly publish in the Federal
Register a notice of our intentions at the
end of this period.
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Previous Federal Actions
We originally listed the Florida
manatee (Trichechus manatus
latirostris), a subspecies of the West
Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus),
as endangered in 1967 (32 FR 4001,
March 11, 1967) under the Endangered
Species Preservation Act of 1966 (Pub.
L. 89-669; 80 Stat. 926). In 1970, we
amended Appendix A to 50 CFR part 17
to include additional names to the list
of foreign endangered species (35 FR
18319, December 2, 1970). This listing
incorporated West Indian manatees into
the list under the Endangered Species
Conservation Act of 1969 (Pub. L. 91135; 83 Stat. 275) and encompassed the
species’ range in the Caribbean and
northern South America, thus including
both Antillean (T. m. manatus) and
Florida manatees in the listing. The
West Indian manatee is currently listed
as an endangered species under the Act,
and the population is further protected
as a depleted stock under the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 1361
et seq.). We designated critical habitat
for the Florida manatee (listed in that
regulation as Trichechus manatus) on
September 24, 1976 (41 FR 41914) in
Citrus, Hillsborough, Manatee, Sarasota,
Charlotte, De Soto, Lee, Collier, Monroe,
Dade, Palm Beach, Martin, West Palm
Beach, Volusia, Brevard, Nassau and
Duval Counties, Florida. That critical
habitat designation appears in our
regulations at 50 CFR 17.95(a).
Species Information
For current information on the
biology, status, and habitat needs of the
Florida manatee, refer to the Service’s 5Year Review of the West Indian Manatee
(Service 2007) and the Service’s Florida
Manatee Recovery Plan (Service 2001),
available on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov and at https://
www.fws.gov/northflorida/Manatee/
manatees.htm.
Evaluation of the Petition
In making this 90–day finding, we
evaluated whether information
regarding the revision of the critical
habitat for Florida manatee, as
presented in the petition and other
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:35 Sep 28, 2009
Jkt 217001
information available in our files is
substantial, thereby indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. Our
evaluation of this information is
presented below.
The petitioners seek to revise the
critical habitat designation through
proposed revisions of each geographic
area or management unit and the
inclusion of ‘‘notable constituent
elements.’’ The petitioners claim that
although the currently designated
critical habitat is large, because of flaws
in the listing, it provides inadequate
protection of manatees. The petitioners
include the four topics listed below as
‘‘major deficiencies’’ in the currently
designated critical habitat for the
Florida manatee.
(1) Petitioners Claim that Constituent
Elements Required by Law are Absent.
The petitioners state that we
designated manatee critical habitat in
1976, 2 years before the requirement for
constituent elements was included in
the 1978 amendments to the ESA in
which the term ‘‘critical habitat’’ was
clearly defined, and included the
physical and biological factors (p. 15).
The petitioners also state that, because
extensive information concerning the
manatee’s current and projected habitat
needs and utilization is now available,
it is possible to describe the constituent
elements, and we should remedy the
lack of such elements in the critical
habitat designation (p. 15).
We agree that we did not address
constituent elements, or more
appropriately, the physical and
biological features essential to the
conservation of the manatee, in the
original 1976 designation of critical
habitat, and more information is now
available on the habitat needs of the
manatee. Therefore, we find that the
petitioners have presented substantial
information that a revision to the critical
habitat for the manatee may be
warranted to more adequately address
the features essential to the species’
conservation.
(2) Petitioners Claim that Changes in
Use by the Species Necessitate Revision.
The petitioners include statistics on
the increase in growth of Florida’s
human population since we designated
manatee critical habitat and include
examples of related increased threats to
the species and subsequent changes to
habitats now available to manatees (pp.
15-16). They state that a 171 percent
increase in the human population of
Florida since critical habitat was
designated in 1976, through 2005, has
increased recreational use of coastal
areas and has diminished water quality
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and the availability of natural warm
water for manatees.
We agree that the increase in urban
development, particularly on Florida’s
coasts, has changed the landscape since
we designated critical habitat for the
manatee. In response to the increase in
human growth, and consequent increase
in the number of recreational vessels on
Florida’s waterways, we have published
a number of rules to establish manatee
protection areas in the State (50 CFR
17.100 through 17.108). This
information can be found on the
Internet at https://www.fws.gov/
northflorida/Manatee/manatees.htm.
We find that the information provided
by the petitioners, along with
information in our files, is substantial,
indicating that a revision to critical
habitat may be warranted to address
changes in habitat use by manatees in
Florida since the original designation of
critical habitat.
(3) Petitioners Claim that Advancements
in Science Provide New Information
About the Needs of the Species.
The petitioners claim that aerial
surveys, radio and satellite telemetry
studies, a carcass retrieval database, and
the U.S. Geological Survey-Sirenia
Project photo-identification database,
which were developed after the initial
designation of manatee critical habitat,
have revolutionized our knowledge of
manatee distribution and use of habitat.
The petitioners also cite the Florida
Manatee Recovery Plan’s actions
regarding manatee habitat, stating that
we are compiling information and
sponsoring research to identify and
protect important manatee habitats with
a longer term goal to conserve a network
of manatee migratory corridors, and
feeding, calving, and nursing areas (p.
16).
We agree that scientific information
regarding manatee conservation has
dramatically increased since the original
critical habitat designation. On the basis
of this information, it is apparent that
there has been a change in habitat use
by the manatee due to an increasing
manatee population and changing
habitats. However, the most substantial
information otherwise readily available
to the Service is not that of the
petitioners, but the analysis of threats
for the Florida manatee in the Service’s
5–year review (Service 2007), which
incorporates updates in manatee science
and includes both biological
information and habitat use. The
Service must designate and make
revisions to critical habitat on the basis
of the best scientific information
available. The Service’s 5–year review is
the most recent analysis of threats to the
E:\FR\FM\29SEP1.SGM
29SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 29, 2009 / Proposed Rules
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
species based on those updates in
scientific information. Therefore, based
on information submitted by the
petitioners and information in Service
files, we find the information
concerning advancements in science
and new information concerning the
needs of the species to be substantial
information. We now know more
specifically where habitat exists for
manatees that is critical to their survival
and recovery. As a consequence, we
have determined that a revision to
critical habitat for the manatee may be
warranted to address new information
concerning habitat usage and needs.
(4) Petitioners Claim that The U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service Recognizes the
Need for Revision.
The petitioners cite passages from
Service consultation documents and the
current Florida Manatee Recovery Plan
(Recovery Plan) as evidence that we
have stated the need to assess and revise
critical habitat for the Florida manatee
(p. 17). Specifically, the petitioners cite
a biological opinion regarding U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers Application
(No. 4-1-97-F-602): ‘‘The action area is
within designated critical habitat for the
manatee; however, no specific primary
or secondary constituent elements were
included in the critical habitat
designation, making it difficult to
determine when an action adversely
modifies critical habitat.’’ The
petitioners state that the Service’s
Recovery Plan acknowledges the need to
revise critical habitat and cite Recovery
Action 3.5 from the Recovery Plan:
‘‘Much has been learned about manatee
distribution in the decades since
manatee critical habitat was originally
defined. The FWS should assess the
need to revise critical habitat for the
Florida manatee.’’
The Service disagrees with the
petitioner’s statement that the Recovery
Plan acknowledges the need to revise
critical habitat; however, we do
acknowledge that the 2001 Florida
Manatee Recovery Plan contains a
recovery action, including the
recommendation as stated above, to
assess the need to revise critical habitat.
Although the Service believes
‘‘assessing the need’’ is not the same as
‘‘recognizing the need’’ for revision, we
find that the information submitted by
the petitioner in this category to be
substantial information indicating that a
revision to critical habitat for the
manatee may be warranted.
Petitioners’ Proposed Revisions to
Critical Habitat
In addition to identifying the
deficiencies noted above with the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:35 Sep 28, 2009
Jkt 217001
current Florida manatee critical habitat
designation, the petitioners dedicate an
entire section of the petition to specific
proposed revisions to manatee critical
habitat in Florida. These proposed
revisions include a description of
geographic boundaries within each
regional management unit that would
alter the currently designated critical
habitat, as well as recommended
physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
manatee that would require protection
and special attention either throughout
all or portions of the petition’s proposed
geographical boundary revisions.
Within each geographic management
unit (Northwest Region, Southwest
Region, Atlantic Region, and Upper St.
Johns River Region), the petitioners
provide a list of the currently designated
critical habitat areas followed by their
proposed revisions to those areas. In
most cases, the petitioners list
additional areas that they believe should
be included in a revision to the
currently designated critical habitat
boundaries. They cite available
scientific data to support their proposal.
The list of essential features
recommended by the petitioners for
each of these geographic areas includes
warm water (natural springs, passive
thermal basins, and power plant thermal
discharges); various food sources
(seagrasses and freshwater vegetation);
travel corridors; shelter (for calving and
from disturbances); fresh water; and
other habitat features (water depth,
water quality and salinity).
The Service recognizes the
importance of warm water habitat to
manatees; however, we have not
evaluated potential physical and
biological features essential to the
conservation of the manatee. The
Service makes no statement at this time
on the specific proposals by the
petitioners for the constituent elements
or for the areas presented as revised
critical habitat geographic boundaries.
We do believe that any revision to
critical habitat should reflect the current
understanding of the conservation needs
of the species.
Finding
Our process for making this 90–day
finding under section 4(b)(3)(D) of the
Act is limited to a determination of
whether the information in the petition
presents ‘‘substantial scientific
information,’’ which is interpreted in
our regulations as ‘‘that amount of
information that would lead a
reasonable person to believe that the
measure proposed in the petition may
be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)).
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
49845
Based on this review and evaluation,
in addition to the information readily
available in our files, we find that the
petition has presented substantial
scientific information indicating that
revision of the critical habitat
designation for the Florida manatee may
be warranted. Therefore, we are
initiating a review to determine how we
intend to proceed with the request to
revise the critical habitat designation
under the Act for the Florida manatee.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
in this rule is available on the Internet
at https://www.regulations.govor upon
request from the Field Supervisor,
Jacksonville, Florida Ecological Services
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Author(s)
The primary authors of this notice are
the staff members of the Jacksonville,
Florida Ecological Services Office (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: September 16, 2009.
Thomas L. Strickland
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and
Parks
[FR Doc. E9–23245 Filed 9–28– 09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 660
[Docket No. 0909111273–91274–01]
RIN 0648–XR09
Fisheries Off West Coast States;
Coastal Pelagic Species Fisheries;
Annual Specifications
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes a regulation
to implement the annual harvest
guideline (HG) for Pacific mackerel in
the U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ)
off the Pacific coast. This HG is
proposed according to the regulations
implementing the Coastal Pelagic
Species (CPS) Fishery Management Plan
(FMP) and establishes allowable harvest
E:\FR\FM\29SEP1.SGM
29SEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 187 (Tuesday, September 29, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 49842-49845]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-23245]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R4-ES-2009-0066]
[92210-1117-0000-B4]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on
a Petition to Revise Critical Habitat for the Florida Manatee
(Trichechus manatus latirostris)
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition finding and initiation of critical
habitat review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce a 90-day
finding on a petition to revise the critical habitat designation for
the Florida subspecies (Trichechus manatus latirostris) of the
endangered West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus) under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. Based on our review, we
find that the petition, in conjunction with information readily
available in our files, presents substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that a revision of the critical habitat
designation for the Florida manatee may be warranted. Therefore, with
the publication of this notice, we are initiating a review of the
current critical habitat designation for the subspecies to determine
how we intend to proceed with the revision. To ensure a comprehensive
review, we seek information pertaining to the Florida manatee's
essential habitat needs from any interested party.
DATES: To allow us adequate time to conduct this review, we request
that you send us information on or before October 29, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit information by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Search for docket FWS-R4-ES-2009-0066 and then
follow the instructions for submitting comments.
U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS-R4-ES-2009-0066; Division of Policy and
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax
Drive, Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203.
We will post all information received on https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us (see the Information Solicited
section below for more details).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dave Hankla, Field Supervisor,
Jacksonville, Florida Ecological Services Office, 7915 Baymeadows Way,
Suite 200, Jacksonville, FL 32256, by telephone (904-731-3336), or by
facsimile (904-731-3045). If you use a telecommunications device for
the deaf (TDD), please call the Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Information Solicited
When we make a finding that a petition presents substantial
information indicating that a revision of a critical habitat
designation may be warranted, we initiate a review of that critical
habitat to determine how we intend to proceed with the requested
revision of the designation. To ensure that the review is complete and
incorporates the best available scientific and commercial information,
we seek information regarding the revision of critical habitat for the
Florida manatee.
[[Page 49843]]
We request information from governmental agencies, Native American
Tribes, the scientific community, industry, and any other interested
parties. We are seeking information regarding:
(1) The historical and current status and distribution of Florida
manatee, its biology and ecology, and ongoing conservation measures for
the species and its habitat;
(2) Physical and biological features essential to the conservation
of the species;
(3) Information on threats to the species and its habitat; and
(4) Data on the increase in growth of Florida's human population
since we designated manatee critical habitat in 1976, and examples of
related increased threats to the species and subsequent changes to
manatee habitat.
In 2007, the Service conducted an extensive review of all available
information on the Florida manatee while preparing a 5-year status
review of the species (Service 2007). We are particularly seeking
information about manatee habitat or manatee use of habitat that has
been made available since publication of the review.
Please note that submissions merely stating support for or
opposition to the action under consideration without providing
supporting information, although noted, will not be considered in
making a determination. Section 4(b)(2) of the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) directs that ``the
Secretary shall designate critical habitat, and make revisions thereto,
...on the basis of the best scientific data available.'' Based on our
critical habitat review, we will publish a 12-month notice of our
intentions concerning the petition, as provided in section
4(b)(3)(D)(ii) of the Act.
You may submit your information concerning this review by one of
the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. If you submit information
via https://www.regulations.gov, your entire submission--including any
personal identifying information--will be posted on the website. If
your submission is made via a hardcopy that includes personal
identifying information, you may request at the top of your document
that we withhold this personal identifying information from public
review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We
will post all hardcopy submissions on https://www.regulations.gov.
Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as
full references) to allow us to verify any scientific or commercial
information you include.
Information and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this finding, will be available for
public inspection on https://www.regulations.gov, or by appointment
during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Jacksonville, Florida Ecological Services Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(D) of the Act requires that we make a finding as to
whether a petition to revise critical habitat presents substantial
scientific information indicating that the revision may be warranted.
The standard for substantial scientific or commercial information set
forth in our implementing regulations with regard to a 90-day petition
finding is ``that amount of information that would lead a reasonable
person to believe that the measure proposed in the petition may be
warranted'' (50 CFR 424.14(b)). In determining whether substantial
information exists, we take into account several factors, including
information submitted with, and referenced in, the petition and all
other information readily available in our files. To the maximum extent
practicable, we are to make this finding within 90 days of the receipt
of the petition, and we are to publish the finding promptly in the
Federal Register.
Our standard for substantial scientific or commercial information
within the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90-day
petition finding is ``that amount of information that would lead a
reasonable person to believe that the measure proposed in the petition
may be warranted'' (50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we find that a petition
presents substantial information indicating that the revision may be
warranted, we are required to determine how we intend to proceed with
the requested revision within 12 months after receiving the petition
and promptly publish notice of such intention in the Federal Register.
Critical habitat is defined under section 3(5)(A) of the Act as:
(i) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the
species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which
are found those physical or biological features
(I) essential to the conservation of the species and
(II) which may require special management considerations or
protection; and
(ii) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas
are essential for the conservation of the species.
Our implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.12 describe our criteria
for designating critical habitat. We are to consider essential physical
and biological features essential to the conservation of the species.
Those features include, but are not limited to: (1) space for
individual and population growth, and normal behavior; (2) food, water,
air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological
requirements; (3) cover or shelter; (4) sites for breeding,
reproduction, or rearing of offspring; and (5) habitats that are
protected from disturbance or are representative of the historic
geographical and ecological distribution of a species. Essential
physical and biological features may include, but are not limited to:
``nesting grounds, feeding sites, water quality, tide, and geological
formations.'' Our implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424.02 define
``special management considerations or protection'' as any methods or
procedures useful in protecting physical and biological features of the
environment for the conservation of the species.
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires us to designate and make
revisions to critical habitat for listed species on the basis of the
best scientific data available and after taking into consideration the
economic impact, the impact on national security, and any other
relevant impact, of specifying any particular area as critical habitat.
The Secretary may exclude any particular area from critical habitat if
he determines that the benefits of such exclusion outweigh the benefits
of specifying such area as part of the critical habitat, unless he
determines that the failure to designate such area as critical habitat
will result in the extinction of the species concerned.
Petition History
On December 19, 2008, we received a petition from Wildlife Advocacy
Project, Save the Manatee Club, Center for Biological Diversity, and
Defenders of Wildlife, requesting that we revise critical habitat for
the Florida manatee (Trichechus manatus latirostris) pursuant to the
Act and the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. Subchapter II). The
petition clearly identified itself and included the requisite
identification information for the petitioners, as required in 50 CFR
424.14(a). In a January 17, 2009, letter to the petitioners, we
responded that we received the petition and would make a finding, to
the maximum extent practicable within 90 days, as to
[[Page 49844]]
whether or not the petition presents substantial information. We also
stated that if the initial finding concludes that the petition presents
substantial information indicating that a revision may be warranted,
then we have one year from the date we received the petition to
determine how we intend to proceed with the requested revision and we
will promptly publish in the Federal Register a notice of our
intentions at the end of this period.
Previous Federal Actions
We originally listed the Florida manatee (Trichechus manatus
latirostris), a subspecies of the West Indian manatee (Trichechus
manatus), as endangered in 1967 (32 FR 4001, March 11, 1967) under the
Endangered Species Preservation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89-669; 80 Stat.
926). In 1970, we amended Appendix A to 50 CFR part 17 to include
additional names to the list of foreign endangered species (35 FR
18319, December 2, 1970). This listing incorporated West Indian
manatees into the list under the Endangered Species Conservation Act of
1969 (Pub. L. 91-135; 83 Stat. 275) and encompassed the species' range
in the Caribbean and northern South America, thus including both
Antillean (T. m. manatus) and Florida manatees in the listing. The West
Indian manatee is currently listed as an endangered species under the
Act, and the population is further protected as a depleted stock under
the Marine Mammal Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.). We
designated critical habitat for the Florida manatee (listed in that
regulation as Trichechus manatus) on September 24, 1976 (41 FR 41914)
in Citrus, Hillsborough, Manatee, Sarasota, Charlotte, De Soto, Lee,
Collier, Monroe, Dade, Palm Beach, Martin, West Palm Beach, Volusia,
Brevard, Nassau and Duval Counties, Florida. That critical habitat
designation appears in our regulations at 50 CFR 17.95(a).
Species Information
For current information on the biology, status, and habitat needs
of the Florida manatee, refer to the Service's 5-Year Review of the
West Indian Manatee (Service 2007) and the Service's Florida Manatee
Recovery Plan (Service 2001), available on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov and at https://www.fws.gov/northflorida/Manatee/manatees.htm.
Evaluation of the Petition
In making this 90-day finding, we evaluated whether information
regarding the revision of the critical habitat for Florida manatee, as
presented in the petition and other information available in our files
is substantial, thereby indicating that the petitioned action may be
warranted. Our evaluation of this information is presented below.
The petitioners seek to revise the critical habitat designation
through proposed revisions of each geographic area or management unit
and the inclusion of ``notable constituent elements.'' The petitioners
claim that although the currently designated critical habitat is large,
because of flaws in the listing, it provides inadequate protection of
manatees. The petitioners include the four topics listed below as
``major deficiencies'' in the currently designated critical habitat for
the Florida manatee.
(1) Petitioners Claim that Constituent Elements Required by Law are
Absent.
The petitioners state that we designated manatee critical habitat
in 1976, 2 years before the requirement for constituent elements was
included in the 1978 amendments to the ESA in which the term ``critical
habitat'' was clearly defined, and included the physical and biological
factors (p. 15). The petitioners also state that, because extensive
information concerning the manatee's current and projected habitat
needs and utilization is now available, it is possible to describe the
constituent elements, and we should remedy the lack of such elements in
the critical habitat designation (p. 15).
We agree that we did not address constituent elements, or more
appropriately, the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the manatee, in the original 1976 designation of
critical habitat, and more information is now available on the habitat
needs of the manatee. Therefore, we find that the petitioners have
presented substantial information that a revision to the critical
habitat for the manatee may be warranted to more adequately address the
features essential to the species' conservation.
(2) Petitioners Claim that Changes in Use by the Species Necessitate
Revision.
The petitioners include statistics on the increase in growth of
Florida's human population since we designated manatee critical habitat
and include examples of related increased threats to the species and
subsequent changes to habitats now available to manatees (pp. 15-16).
They state that a 171 percent increase in the human population of
Florida since critical habitat was designated in 1976, through 2005,
has increased recreational use of coastal areas and has diminished
water quality and the availability of natural warm water for manatees.
We agree that the increase in urban development, particularly on
Florida's coasts, has changed the landscape since we designated
critical habitat for the manatee. In response to the increase in human
growth, and consequent increase in the number of recreational vessels
on Florida's waterways, we have published a number of rules to
establish manatee protection areas in the State (50 CFR 17.100 through
17.108). This information can be found on the Internet at https://www.fws.gov/northflorida/Manatee/manatees.htm. We find that the
information provided by the petitioners, along with information in our
files, is substantial, indicating that a revision to critical habitat
may be warranted to address changes in habitat use by manatees in
Florida since the original designation of critical habitat.
(3) Petitioners Claim that Advancements in Science Provide New
Information About the Needs of the Species.
The petitioners claim that aerial surveys, radio and satellite
telemetry studies, a carcass retrieval database, and the U.S.
Geological Survey-Sirenia Project photo-identification database, which
were developed after the initial designation of manatee critical
habitat, have revolutionized our knowledge of manatee distribution and
use of habitat. The petitioners also cite the Florida Manatee Recovery
Plan's actions regarding manatee habitat, stating that we are compiling
information and sponsoring research to identify and protect important
manatee habitats with a longer term goal to conserve a network of
manatee migratory corridors, and feeding, calving, and nursing areas
(p. 16).
We agree that scientific information regarding manatee conservation
has dramatically increased since the original critical habitat
designation. On the basis of this information, it is apparent that
there has been a change in habitat use by the manatee due to an
increasing manatee population and changing habitats. However, the most
substantial information otherwise readily available to the Service is
not that of the petitioners, but the analysis of threats for the
Florida manatee in the Service's 5-year review (Service 2007), which
incorporates updates in manatee science and includes both biological
information and habitat use. The Service must designate and make
revisions to critical habitat on the basis of the best scientific
information available. The Service's 5-year review is the most recent
analysis of threats to the
[[Page 49845]]
species based on those updates in scientific information. Therefore,
based on information submitted by the petitioners and information in
Service files, we find the information concerning advancements in
science and new information concerning the needs of the species to be
substantial information. We now know more specifically where habitat
exists for manatees that is critical to their survival and recovery. As
a consequence, we have determined that a revision to critical habitat
for the manatee may be warranted to address new information concerning
habitat usage and needs.
(4) Petitioners Claim that The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Recognizes the Need for Revision.
The petitioners cite passages from Service consultation documents
and the current Florida Manatee Recovery Plan (Recovery Plan) as
evidence that we have stated the need to assess and revise critical
habitat for the Florida manatee (p. 17). Specifically, the petitioners
cite a biological opinion regarding U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Application (No. 4-1-97-F-602): ``The action area is within designated
critical habitat for the manatee; however, no specific primary or
secondary constituent elements were included in the critical habitat
designation, making it difficult to determine when an action adversely
modifies critical habitat.'' The petitioners state that the Service's
Recovery Plan acknowledges the need to revise critical habitat and cite
Recovery Action 3.5 from the Recovery Plan: ``Much has been learned
about manatee distribution in the decades since manatee critical
habitat was originally defined. The FWS should assess the need to
revise critical habitat for the Florida manatee.''
The Service disagrees with the petitioner's statement that the
Recovery Plan acknowledges the need to revise critical habitat;
however, we do acknowledge that the 2001 Florida Manatee Recovery Plan
contains a recovery action, including the recommendation as stated
above, to assess the need to revise critical habitat. Although the
Service believes ``assessing the need'' is not the same as
``recognizing the need'' for revision, we find that the information
submitted by the petitioner in this category to be substantial
information indicating that a revision to critical habitat for the
manatee may be warranted.
Petitioners' Proposed Revisions to Critical Habitat
In addition to identifying the deficiencies noted above with the
current Florida manatee critical habitat designation, the petitioners
dedicate an entire section of the petition to specific proposed
revisions to manatee critical habitat in Florida. These proposed
revisions include a description of geographic boundaries within each
regional management unit that would alter the currently designated
critical habitat, as well as recommended physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of the manatee that would
require protection and special attention either throughout all or
portions of the petition's proposed geographical boundary revisions.
Within each geographic management unit (Northwest Region, Southwest
Region, Atlantic Region, and Upper St. Johns River Region), the
petitioners provide a list of the currently designated critical habitat
areas followed by their proposed revisions to those areas. In most
cases, the petitioners list additional areas that they believe should
be included in a revision to the currently designated critical habitat
boundaries. They cite available scientific data to support their
proposal.
The list of essential features recommended by the petitioners for
each of these geographic areas includes warm water (natural springs,
passive thermal basins, and power plant thermal discharges); various
food sources (seagrasses and freshwater vegetation); travel corridors;
shelter (for calving and from disturbances); fresh water; and other
habitat features (water depth, water quality and salinity).
The Service recognizes the importance of warm water habitat to
manatees; however, we have not evaluated potential physical and
biological features essential to the conservation of the manatee. The
Service makes no statement at this time on the specific proposals by
the petitioners for the constituent elements or for the areas presented
as revised critical habitat geographic boundaries. We do believe that
any revision to critical habitat should reflect the current
understanding of the conservation needs of the species.
Finding
Our process for making this 90-day finding under section 4(b)(3)(D)
of the Act is limited to a determination of whether the information in
the petition presents ``substantial scientific information,'' which is
interpreted in our regulations as ``that amount of information that
would lead a reasonable person to believe that the measure proposed in
the petition may be warranted'' (50 CFR 424.14(b)).
Based on this review and evaluation, in addition to the information
readily available in our files, we find that the petition has presented
substantial scientific information indicating that revision of the
critical habitat designation for the Florida manatee may be warranted.
Therefore, we are initiating a review to determine how we intend to
proceed with the request to revise the critical habitat designation
under the Act for the Florida manatee.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited in this rule is available
on the Internet at https://www.regulations.govor upon request from the
Field Supervisor, Jacksonville, Florida Ecological Services Office (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Author(s)
The primary authors of this notice are the staff members of the
Jacksonville, Florida Ecological Services Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: September 16, 2009.
Thomas L. Strickland
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks
[FR Doc. E9-23245 Filed 9-28- 09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S