Endangered and Threatened Species; Take of Anadromous Fish, 82212-82213 [2010-32845]
Download as PDF
82212
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Notices
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES3
the species (50 CFR 402.02). We have an
analytical framework for determining
whether actions will result in the
destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat (NMFS, 2005).
When we analyze a proposed action
(e.g., timber or fisheries harvest, dock
construction, roadway development)
under one of our ESA authorities, we
consider which populations and habitat
areas are affected by the action. Not all
populations and habitats have equal
value for the survival and recovery of an
ESU. In evaluating a proposed action,
we therefore consider the impacts on
each affected population and habitat
area, and how those impacts affect the
overall viability of the population or
conservation value of the habitat.
The population rankings in Table 1
reflect the team’s determination of each
population’s relative role in recovery of
the listed ESU. The recovery rankings
proposed in the framework will inform
our assessment of the effects of
proposed actions on overall viability
and conservation value under the ESA.
In general, we expect actions that harm
high-value populations would be more
likely to reduce the chances of species
survival and recovery than actions that
harm low-value populations. A similar
logic would apply to actions that harm
high-value habitat areas and those that
do not. We emphasize that these
concepts only apply when we exercise
our authority under the ESA. In other
contexts we will emphasize the
importance of achieving broad sense
recovery of all populations in Puget
Sound and Washington’s coast, to
satisfy tribal treaty rights and
recreational and commercial fishing
goals. NMFS acknowledges that
consultations among fisheries managers
and persons interested in the PRA will
be ongoing, particularly about its
applicability to ESA determinations
regarding habitat actions that affect long
term productivity of populations. It is
not the intent of the PRA to allow
actions that preclude the future
productivity of a population or the
ability to change its future status.
Public Comment and Availability of
Final Framework
We seek comments from the public on
the draft framework through the end of
the comment period. We will consider
all comments received by the end of the
comment period in formulating a final
framework. The full document
describing the framework and the
technical team’s work is available on
our Web site and by mail upon request.
We will make the final framework
available on our Northwest Regional
Office Web site and by mail upon
VerDate Mar<15>2010
23:27 Dec 28, 2010
Jkt 223001
request following consideration of
comments received. We are specifically
interested in comments and information
regarding (1) technical documentation
upon which the framework is based and
(2) the population ranking methods the
technical team applied in the
framework.
Persons wishing to read the full
technical document can obtain an
electronic copy (i.e., CD–ROM) by
calling (503) 231–5400, or by e-mailing
a request to Joanna.Donnor@noaa.gov,
with the subject line ‘‘CD–ROM Request
for Puget Sound Chinook Salmon
Population Framework’’, Electronic
copies of this document are also
available online via the NMFS’ Web
site, https://www.nwr.noaa.gov/SalmonRecovery-Planning/Recovery-Domains/
Puget-Sound/PS-Chinook-Plan.cfm.
References
Federal Register Notices:
70 FR 37160. June 28, 2005. Final ESA listing
determinations for 16 ESUs of West
Coast salmon, and final 4(d) protective
regulations for threatened salmonid
ESUs.
70 FR 52630. September 2, 2005. Critical
habitat for 12 Evolutionarily Significant
Units (ESUs) of salmon and Steelhead
(Onchorhynchus spp.) in Washington,
Oregon and Idaho.
Literature Cited
16 U.S.C. 1532 Federal Endangered Species
Act of 1973 as amended.
50 CFR 402.02. Code of Federal Regulations.
Title 50—Wildlife and Fisheries. Part
402—Interagency Cooperation—
Endangered Species Act of 1973, As
Amended.
Appleby, A., 2005, Washington Department
of Wildlife, Unpublished data.
Beechie, T., E. Buhle, M. Ruckelshaus, A.
Fullerton, and L. Holsinger. 2006.
Hydrologic regime and the conservation
of salmon life history diversity.
Conservation:Volume 130, Issue 4, pages
560–572.
Beecher and 14 others. 1999. A system for
prioritizing water resource inventory
areas in western Washington for
protection and restoration of wild
salmonids. Interagency Science Advisory
Team (ISAT) Report to the Washington
State Joint Natural Resources Cabinet.
Office of the Governor, State of
Washington. Olympia, Washington.
103 p.
Good, T.P., R.S. Waples, and P. Adams
(editors). 2005. Updated status of
federally listed ESUs of West Coast
salmon and steelhead. U.S. Dept.
Commerce, NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS–
NWFSC–66, 598 p.
McElhany, P., M. H. Ruckelshaus, M. J. Ford,
T. C. Wainwright. 2000. Viable salmonid
populations and the recovery of
evolutionarily significant units. U.S.
Dept. of Commerce, NOAA Tech. Memo.,
NMFS–NWFSC–42, 156 p.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).
2004. Salmon Hatchery Inventory and
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
Evaluation Report (SHIER) for Chinook
salmon hatchery programs within the
geographic boundaries of the Puget
Sound Chinook salmon ESU. Hatcheries
and Inland Fisheries Branch. Salmon
Recovery Division. NOAA Fisheries
Service. Lacey, Washington. 102 p.
NMFS. 2005. Memorandum from William T.
Hogarth, Ph.D. (NMFS) to NMFS
Regional Administrators regarding
Application of the ‘‘Destruction or
Adverse Modification’’ Standard under
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered
Species Act. November 7, 2005.
Available from NMFS Protected
Resources Division, 1201 NE. Lloyd
Blvd., Suite 1100, Portland, OR, 97232.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
2006. Final Supplement to the Shared
Strategy’s Puget Sound Salmon Recovery
Plan. NMFS Northwest Region.
November 17, 2006. 47 p.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
2010. Puget Sound Chinook Salmon
Population Recovery Approach (PRA),
NMFS Northwest Region Approach for
Distinguishing Among Individual Puget
Sound Chinook Salmon ESU Populations
and Watersheds for ESA Consultation
and Recovery Planning Purposes.
November XX, 2010. XX p. Available on
the NMFS Web site at:
www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-RecoveryPlanning/Recovery-Domains/PugetSound/PS-Chinook-Plan.cfm.
Ruckelshaus, M.H., K. Currens, R.
Fuerstenberg, W. Graeber, K. Rawson, N.
Sands, and J. Scott. 2002. Planning
ranges and preliminary guidelines for the
delisting and recovery of the Puget
Sound Chinook salmon Evolutionarily
Significant Unit. Puget Sound Technical
Recovery Team. April 30, 2002. 19 p.
Available on the Internet at: https://
research.nwfsc.noaa.gov/trt/
trtpopESU.pdf.
Ruckelshaus, M.H., K.P. Currens, W.H.
Graeber, R.R. Fuerstenberg, K. Rawson,
N.J. Sands, and J.B. Scott. 2006.
Independent populations of Chinook
salmon in Puget Sound. U.S. Dept.
Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS–
NWFSC–78, 125 p.
Dated: December 22, 2010.
Susan Pultz,
Acting Chief, Endangered Species Division,
Office of Protected Resources, National
Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–32844 Filed 12–28–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XA110
Endangered and Threatened Species;
Take of Anadromous Fish
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\29DEN3.SGM
29DEN3
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2010 / Notices
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of availability and
request for comment.
The Puget Sound Treaty
Tribes and the Washington Department
of Fish and Wildlife submitted to
NMFS, pursuant to the protective
regulations promulgated for Puget
Sound Chinook salmon under Limit 6 of
the Endangered Species Act (ESA) 4(d)
Rule for salmon and steelhead, a jointly
developed Resource Management Plan
(RMP). The RMP specifies the future
management of commercial,
recreational, subsistence and tribal
salmon fisheries potentially affecting
listed Puget Sound Chinook salmon
from May 1, 2010, through April 30,
2015. This document serves to notify
the public of the availability for
comment of the proposed evaluation of
the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary)
as to how the RMP addresses the criteria
in Limit 6 of the ESA 4(d) Rule.
DATES: Written comments on the
Secretary’s proposed evaluation must be
received at the appropriate address or
fax number (see ADDRESSES) no later
than 5 p.m. Pacific Standard Daylight
Time on January 28, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Comments and requests for
copies of the proposed evaluation
should be addressed to Susan Bishop,
Salmon Management Division, National
Marine Fisheries Service, 7600 Sand
Point Way, NE., Seattle, Washington
98115–0070, or faxed to (206) 526–6736.
Comments on this proposed evaluation
may be submitted by e-mail. The
mailbox address for providing e-mail
comments is
2010PSCHNKHARVEST.nwr@noaa.gov.
Include in the subject line the following
document identifier: ‘‘2010 CHNK
PSHARVEST proposed evaluation.’’ The
document is also available on the
Internet at https://www.nwr.noaa.gov/
Salmon-Harvest-Hatcheries/StateTribal-Management/PS–ChinookRMPs.cfm.
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES3
Susan Bishop at phone number: (206)
526–4587, Puget Sound Harvest Team
Leader or e-mail:
susan.bishop@noaa.gov regarding the
RMP.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
23:27 Dec 28, 2010
Jkt 223001
This
notice is relevant to the Puget Sound
Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus
tshawytscha) Evolutionarily Significant
Unit (ESU).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
The full texts of NMFS’ proposed
evaluation and proposed determination
are available on the Internet at the
NMFS, Salmon Management Division
Web site at: https://www.nwr.noaa.gov/
Salmon-Harvest-Hatcheries/StateTribal-Management/PS-ChinookRMPs.cfm.
Background
In April, 2010, the Puget Sound
Treaty Tribes and the WDFW (comanagers) provided a jointly developed
RMP that encompasses Strait of Juan de
Fuca and Puget Sound salmon fisheries
affecting the Puget Sound Chinook
salmon ESU. The RMP encompasses
salmon and steelhead fisheries within
the area defined by the Puget Sound
Chinook salmon ESU, as well as the
western Strait of Juan de Fuca, which is
not within the ESU. The RMP is
effective from May 1, 2010, through
April 30, 2015. Harvest objectives
specified in the RMP account for
fisheries-related mortality of Puget
Sound Chinook throughout its migratory
range, from Oregon and Washington to
southeast Alaska. The RMP also
includes implementation, monitoring
and evaluation procedures designed to
ensure fisheries are consistent with
these objectives.
On July 10, 2000, NMFS issued a rule
under section 4(d) of the ESA (referred
hereafter as the 4(d) Rule), establishing
take prohibitions for 14 salmon and
steelhead ESUs, including the Puget
Sound Chinook salmon ESU (50 CFR
223.203(b)(6); July 10, 2000, 65 FR
42422). In 2005, as part of the final
listing determinations for sixteen ESUs
of West Coast salmon, NMFS amended
and streamlined the previously
promulgated 4(d) protective regulations
for threatened salmon and steelhead (70
FR 37160, June 28, 2005). Under these
regulations, the same set of fourteen
limits was applied to all threatened
Pacific salmon and steelhead ESUs or
Distinct Population Segments (DPS). As
required by § 223.203(b)(6) of the ESA
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
82213
4(d) rule (50 CFR 223.203), the Secretary
must determine pursuant to 50 CFR
223.209 (renumbered 50 CFR 223.204)
and pursuant to the government to
government processes therein whether
the RMP for Puget Sound Chinook
would appreciably reduce the
likelihood of survival and recovery of
the Puget Sound Chinook and other
affected threatened ESUs.
Authority
Under section 4(d) of the ESA, 16
U.S.C. 1533(d), NMFS, by delegated
authority from the Secretary of
Commerce, is required to adopt such
regulations as it deems necessary and
advisable for the conservation of the
species listed as threatened. The ESA
salmon and steelhead 4(d) rule (65 FR
42422, July 10, 2000) specifies
categories of activities that contribute to
the conservation of listed salmonids or
are governed by a program that
adequately limits impacts on listed
salmonids, and sets out the criteria for
such activities. The rule further
provides that the prohibitions of
paragraph (a) of the rule do not apply to
actions undertaken in compliance with
a RMP developed jointly within the
continuing jurisdiction of United States
v. Washington by the State of
Washington and the Tribes and
determined by NMFS to be in
accordance with the provisions of 50
CFR 223.203(b)(6), (i.e., Limit 6 of the
salmon and steelhead 4(d) rule (65 FR
42422, July 10, 2000)). In 2005, as part
of the final listing determinations for
sixteen Evolutionarily Significant Units
of West Coast salmon, NMFS amended
and streamlined the previously
promulgated 4(d) protective regulations
for threatened salmon and steelhead (70
FR 37160, June 28, 2005). Under these
regulations, the same set of fourteen
limits was applied to all threatened
Pacific salmon and steelhead ESUs or
DPSs.
Dated: December 22, 2010.
Susan Pultz,
Acting Chief, Endangered Species Division,
Office of Protected Resources, National
Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–32845 Filed 12–28–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\29DEN3.SGM
29DEN3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 249 (Wednesday, December 29, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 82212-82213]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32845]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XA110
Endangered and Threatened Species; Take of Anadromous Fish
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
[[Page 82213]]
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of availability and request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Puget Sound Treaty Tribes and the Washington Department of
Fish and Wildlife submitted to NMFS, pursuant to the protective
regulations promulgated for Puget Sound Chinook salmon under Limit 6 of
the Endangered Species Act (ESA) 4(d) Rule for salmon and steelhead, a
jointly developed Resource Management Plan (RMP). The RMP specifies the
future management of commercial, recreational, subsistence and tribal
salmon fisheries potentially affecting listed Puget Sound Chinook
salmon from May 1, 2010, through April 30, 2015. This document serves
to notify the public of the availability for comment of the proposed
evaluation of the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) as to how the RMP
addresses the criteria in Limit 6 of the ESA 4(d) Rule.
DATES: Written comments on the Secretary's proposed evaluation must be
received at the appropriate address or fax number (see ADDRESSES) no
later than 5 p.m. Pacific Standard Daylight Time on January 28, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Comments and requests for copies of the proposed evaluation
should be addressed to Susan Bishop, Salmon Management Division,
National Marine Fisheries Service, 7600 Sand Point Way, NE., Seattle,
Washington 98115-0070, or faxed to (206) 526-6736. Comments on this
proposed evaluation may be submitted by e-mail. The mailbox address for
providing e-mail comments is 2010PSCHNKHARVEST.nwr@noaa.gov. Include in
the subject line the following document identifier: ``2010 CHNK
PSHARVEST proposed evaluation.'' The document is also available on the
Internet at https://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-Harvest-Hatcheries/State-Tribal-Management/PS-Chinook-RMPs.cfm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Bishop at phone number: (206)
526-4587, Puget Sound Harvest Team Leader or e-mail:
susan.bishop@noaa.gov regarding the RMP.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice is relevant to the Puget Sound
Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Evolutionarily Significant
Unit (ESU).
Electronic Access
The full texts of NMFS' proposed evaluation and proposed
determination are available on the Internet at the NMFS, Salmon
Management Division Web site at: https://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Salmon-Harvest-Hatcheries/State-Tribal-Management/PS-Chinook-RMPs.cfm.
Background
In April, 2010, the Puget Sound Treaty Tribes and the WDFW (co-
managers) provided a jointly developed RMP that encompasses Strait of
Juan de Fuca and Puget Sound salmon fisheries affecting the Puget Sound
Chinook salmon ESU. The RMP encompasses salmon and steelhead fisheries
within the area defined by the Puget Sound Chinook salmon ESU, as well
as the western Strait of Juan de Fuca, which is not within the ESU. The
RMP is effective from May 1, 2010, through April 30, 2015. Harvest
objectives specified in the RMP account for fisheries-related mortality
of Puget Sound Chinook throughout its migratory range, from Oregon and
Washington to southeast Alaska. The RMP also includes implementation,
monitoring and evaluation procedures designed to ensure fisheries are
consistent with these objectives.
On July 10, 2000, NMFS issued a rule under section 4(d) of the ESA
(referred hereafter as the 4(d) Rule), establishing take prohibitions
for 14 salmon and steelhead ESUs, including the Puget Sound Chinook
salmon ESU (50 CFR 223.203(b)(6); July 10, 2000, 65 FR 42422). In 2005,
as part of the final listing determinations for sixteen ESUs of West
Coast salmon, NMFS amended and streamlined the previously promulgated
4(d) protective regulations for threatened salmon and steelhead (70 FR
37160, June 28, 2005). Under these regulations, the same set of
fourteen limits was applied to all threatened Pacific salmon and
steelhead ESUs or Distinct Population Segments (DPS). As required by
Sec. 223.203(b)(6) of the ESA 4(d) rule (50 CFR 223.203), the
Secretary must determine pursuant to 50 CFR 223.209 (renumbered 50 CFR
223.204) and pursuant to the government to government processes therein
whether the RMP for Puget Sound Chinook would appreciably reduce the
likelihood of survival and recovery of the Puget Sound Chinook and
other affected threatened ESUs.
Authority
Under section 4(d) of the ESA, 16 U.S.C. 1533(d), NMFS, by
delegated authority from the Secretary of Commerce, is required to
adopt such regulations as it deems necessary and advisable for the
conservation of the species listed as threatened. The ESA salmon and
steelhead 4(d) rule (65 FR 42422, July 10, 2000) specifies categories
of activities that contribute to the conservation of listed salmonids
or are governed by a program that adequately limits impacts on listed
salmonids, and sets out the criteria for such activities. The rule
further provides that the prohibitions of paragraph (a) of the rule do
not apply to actions undertaken in compliance with a RMP developed
jointly within the continuing jurisdiction of United States v.
Washington by the State of Washington and the Tribes and determined by
NMFS to be in accordance with the provisions of 50 CFR 223.203(b)(6),
(i.e., Limit 6 of the salmon and steelhead 4(d) rule (65 FR 42422, July
10, 2000)). In 2005, as part of the final listing determinations for
sixteen Evolutionarily Significant Units of West Coast salmon, NMFS
amended and streamlined the previously promulgated 4(d) protective
regulations for threatened salmon and steelhead (70 FR 37160, June 28,
2005). Under these regulations, the same set of fourteen limits was
applied to all threatened Pacific salmon and steelhead ESUs or DPSs.
Dated: December 22, 2010.
Susan Pultz,
Acting Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office of Protected
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-32845 Filed 12-28-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P