Listing Endangered or Threatened Species: 90-Day Finding on a Petition To Revise the Critical Habitat Designation for the Southern Resident Killer Whale, 22933-22935 [2014-09483]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 80 / Friday, April 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules
p.m. to 10:00 p.m. If the event is
postponed due to inclement weather,
then this rule will be enforced on July
12, 2014 from 8:45 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.
(c) Regulations. The general
regulations contained in 33 CFR 165.23
apply. During the enforcement period,
entering into, transiting through,
remaining, mooring or anchoring within
this safety zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port
(COTP) or the designated
representatives.
(1) Definitions. The following
definitions apply to this section:
(i) Designated Representative. A
‘‘designated representative’’ is any Coast
Guard commissioned, warrant or petty
officer of the U.S. Coast Guard who has
been designated by the COTP, Sector
Long Island Sound, to act on his or her
behalf. The designated representative
may be on an official patrol vessel or
may be on shore and will communicate
with vessels via VHF–FM radio or
loudhailer. In addition, members of the
Coast Guard Auxiliary may be present to
inform vessel operators of this
regulation.
(ii) Official Patrol Vessels. Official
patrol vessels may consist of any Coast
Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, state, or
local law enforcement vessels assigned
or approved by the COTP Sector Long
Island Sound.
(iii) Spectators. All persons and
vessels not registered with the event
sponsor as participants or official patrol
vessels.
(2) Spectators desiring to enter or
operate within the regulated area should
contact the COTP Sector Long Island
Sound at 203–468–4401 (Sector Long
Island Sound command center) or the
designated representative via VHF
channel 16 to obtain permission to do
so. Spectators given permission to enter
or operate in the regulated area must
comply with all directions given to
them by the COTP Sector Long Island
Sound or the designated on-scene
representative.
(3) Upon being hailed by an official
patrol vessel or the designated
representative, by siren, radio, flashing
light or other means, the operator of the
vessel shall proceed as directed. Failure
to comply with a lawful direction may
result in expulsion from the area,
citation for failure to comply, or both.
Dated: April 8, 2014.
E. J. Cubanski III,
Captain, U. S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Sector Long Island Sound.
[FR Doc. 2014–09364 Filed 4–24–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Apr 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 226
[Docket No. 140407321–4321–01]
RIN 0648–XD233
Listing Endangered or Threatened
Species: 90-Day Finding on a Petition
To Revise the Critical Habitat
Designation for the Southern Resident
Killer Whale
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: 90-day petition finding; request
for information.
AGENCY:
We, the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS), announce a
90-day finding on a petition from the
Center for Biological Diversity to revise
the critical habitat designation for the
Southern Resident killer whale (Orcinus
orca) Distinct Population Segment (DPS)
under the Endangered Species Act
(ESA). In November 2006 we issued a
final rule designating approximately
2,560 square miles (6,630 square km) of
inland waters of Washington State as
critical habitat for the Southern
Resident killer whale DPS. The petition
requests we revise this critical habitat to
include inhabited Pacific Ocean marine
waters along the West Coast of the
United States that constitute essential
foraging and wintering areas.
Additionally, the petition requests that
we adopt protective in-water sound
levels as a primary constituent element
for both currently designated critical
habitat and the proposed revised critical
habitat. We find that the petition to
revise critical habitat, viewed in the
context of information readily available
in our files, presents substantial
scientific information indicating the
petitioned action may be warranted. We
are hereby initiating a review of the
currently designated critical habitat to
determine whether revision is
warranted. To ensure a comprehensive
review, we are soliciting scientific and
commercial information pertaining to
this action.
DATES: Scientific and commercial
information pertinent to the petitioned
action must be received by June 24,
2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
information, or data on this document,
identified by the code NOAA–NMFS–
2014–0041, by any of the following
methods: Electronic Submissions:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
22933
Submit all electronic comments via the
Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to
www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-20140041, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon,
complete the required fields, and enter
or attach your comments.
Mail or hand-delivery: NMFS, West
Coast Region, Protected Resources
Division, 7600 Sand Point Way NE.,
Seattle, WA 98115. Attention—Lynne
Barre, Seattle Branch Chief.
Instructions: Comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or
individual, or received after the end of
the comment period, may not be
considered by NMFS. All comments
received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted for public
viewing on www.regulations.gov
without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address, etc.),
confidential business information, or
otherwise sensitive information
submitted voluntarily by the sender will
be publicly accessible. We will accept
anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/A’’ in
the required fields if you wish to remain
anonymous), although submitting
comments anonymously will prevent us
from contacting you if we have
difficulty retrieving your submission.
Attachments to electronic comments
will be accepted in Microsoft Word,
Excel, or Adobe PDF file formats only.
Copies of the petition and the list of
references are available online at: https://
www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/
protected_species/marine_mammals/
killer_whale/esa_status.html.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lynne Barre, NMFS West Coast Region,
(206) 526–4745; or Dwayne Meadows,
NMFS Office of Protected Resources,
(301) 427–8403.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On January 21, 2014, we received a
petition from the Center for Biological
Diversity requesting revision to the
critical habitat designation for the
Southern Resident killer whale DPS.
The ESA defines critical habitat under
section 3(5)(A) as: ‘‘(i) The specific areas
within the geographical area currently
occupied by the species, at the time it
is listed . . . 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 by the Secretary
that such areas are essential for the
conservation of the species.’’
E:\FR\FM\25APP1.SGM
25APP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
22934
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 80 / Friday, April 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Joint NMFS-Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS) regulations for designating
critical habitat at 50 CFR 424.12(b) state
that the agencies ‘‘shall consider those
physical and biological features that are
essential to the conservation of a given
species and that may require special
management considerations or
protection’’ (hereafter also referred to as
‘‘Essential Features’’ or ‘‘Primary
Constituent Elements’’ (PCEs). Pursuant
to these regulations, such features
include: Space for individual and
population growth, and normal
behavior; food, water, air, light,
minerals, or other nutritional or
physiological requirements; cover or
shelter; sites for breeding, reproduction,
rearing of offspring; and habitats that are
protected from disturbance or are
representative of the historic
geographical and ecological distribution
of a species. We are required to focus on
the PCEs that best represent the
principal biological or physical features
of the habitat. PCEs may include:
Nesting grounds, feeding sites, water
quality, tide, and geological formation.
Our implementing regulations (50 CFR
424.02) define ‘‘special management
considerations or protection’’ as any
method or procedure useful in
protecting physical and biological
features of the environment for the
conservation of the species.
Section 4(b)(2) of the ESA requires us
to designate and make revisions to
critical habitat for listed species based
on 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 of
Commerce may exclude any particular
area from critical habitat if she
determines that the benefits of such
exclusion outweigh the benefits of
specifying such area as part of the
critical habitat, unless she determines
that the failure to designate such area as
critical habitat will result in the
extinction of the species concerned.
The ESA provides that NMFS may,
from time-to-time, revise critical habitat
as appropriate (section 4(a)(3)(A)(ii)). In
accordance with section 4(b)(3)(D)(i) of
the ESA, to the maximum extent
practicable, within 90 days of receipt of
a petition to revise critical habitat, the
Secretary of Commerce is required to
make a finding as to whether that
petition presents substantial scientific
or commercial information indicating
that the petitioned action may be
warranted, and to promptly publish
such finding in the Federal Register.
ESA implementing regulations issued
jointly by NMFS and FWS (50 CFR
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Apr 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
424.14(b)) define ‘‘substantial
information’’ as the amount of
information that would lead a
reasonable person to believe that the
measure proposed in the petition may
be warranted. In evaluating whether
substantial information is contained in
a petition to revise critical habitat, the
Secretary must consider whether the
petition contains: (1) ‘‘Information
indicating that areas petitioned to be
added to critical habitat contain
physical or biological features essential
to, and that may require special
management to provide for, the
conservation of the species involved’’;
or (2) ‘‘information indicating that areas
designated as critical habitat do not
contain resources essential to, or do not
require special management to provide
for, the conservation of the species
involved.’’
Judicial decisions have clarified the
appropriate scope and limitations of the
Services’ review of petitions at the 90day finding stage, in making a
determination that a petitioned action
may be warranted. As a general matter,
these decisions hold that a petition need
not establish a ‘‘strong likelihood’’ or a
‘‘high probability’’ that the petitioned
action is warranted (See Center for
Biological Diversity v. Kempthorne,
2007 WL 163244, at *4, *7 (N.D. Cal.
Jan. 19, 2007)). At the 90-day stage, we
evaluate the petitioner’s request based
upon the information in the petition,
including its references and the
information readily available in our
files. We do not conduct additional
research, and we do not solicit
information from parties outside the
agency to help us evaluate the petition.
We will accept the petitioner’s sources
and characterizations of the information
presented, if they appear to be based on
accepted scientific principles, unless we
have specific information in our files
that indicates the petition’s information
is incorrect, unreliable, obsolete, or
otherwise irrelevant to the requested
action. Information that is susceptible to
more than one interpretation or that is
contradicted by other available
information will not be dismissed at the
90-day finding stage, so long as it is
reliable and a reasonable person would
conclude that it supports the
petitioner’s assertions. If we find that a
petition presents substantial
information indicating that the revision
may be warranted, within 12 months
after receiving the petition, we are
required to determine how we intend to
proceed with the requested revision and
promptly publish notice of such
intention in the Federal Register
(Section 4(b)(3)(D)(ii) of the ESA).
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Because the finding at the 12-month
stage is based on a more thorough
review of the available information, a
‘‘may be warranted’’ finding at the 90day stage does not prejudge the outcome
of our review.
Current Critical Habitat Designation
Following the ESA listing of the
Southern Resident killer whale DPS (70
FR 69903; November 18, 2005), we
initiated our effort to designate critical
habitat for the Southern Resident killer
whale DPS and finalized the designation
in 2006 (71 FR 69054, November 29,
2006). Based on the natural history of
the Southern Resident killer whales and
their habitat needs, the physical or
biological features necessary for
conservation were identified as: (1)
Water quality to support growth and
development; (2) prey species of
sufficient quantity, quality and
availability to support individual
growth, reproduction and development,
as well as overall population growth;
and (3) passage conditions to allow for
migration, resting, and foraging. At that
time, we noted that there were few data
on Southern Resident killer whale
distribution and habitat use of the
coastal and offshore areas in the Pacific
Ocean. Although we recognized that the
whales occupy these waters for a
portion of the year and considered them
part of the geographical area occupied
by the species, we declined to designate
these areas as critical habitat because we
found that the data informing whale
distribution, behavior and habitat use
was insufficient to define ‘‘specific
areas’’ based upon defined physical and
biological features (See Coastal and
Offshore Areas section; 71 FR 69054;
November 29, 2006). The final critical
habitat designation identified three
specific areas, within the area occupied,
that contained the essential features
listed above. The three specific areas
designated as critical habitat were (1)
the Summer Core Area in Haro Strait
and waters around the San Juan Islands;
(2) Puget Sound; and (3) the Strait of
Juan de Fuca, which in total comprise
approximately 2,560 square miles (6,630
sq km) of marine habitat. We
determined that the economic benefits
of exclusion of any of the areas did not
outweigh the benefits of designation,
and we therefore did not exclude any
areas based on economic impacts. We
considered the impacts to national
security, and concluded the benefits of
exclusion of 18 military sites,
comprising approximately 112 square
miles (291 sq km), outweighed the
benefits of inclusion, because of
national security impacts, and therefore,
the sites were not included in the
E:\FR\FM\25APP1.SGM
25APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 80 / Friday, April 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
designation. The critical habitat
designation included waters deeper
than 20 feet (6.1 m) relative to the
extreme high water tidal datum.
Although we did not include coastal
and offshore areas based on the limited
information on coastal habitat use and
essential features in the offshore areas of
the whales’ range, we acknowledged
that there was an active research
program in place to gather information
about movements and activities and
noted that as we collected new
information we hoped to fill data gaps
about habitat features in the Pacific
Ocean coastal and offshore areas to
inform future considerations of critical
habitat.
Analysis of Petition
As described above, the standard for
determining whether a petition includes
substantial information is whether the
amount of information would lead a
reasonable person to believe that the
measure proposed in the petition may
be warranted. Based on the information
presented and referenced in the
petition, as well as all other information
readily available in our files, we find the
recent information on the whales’
movements through their offshore
habitat and discussion of sound as a
feature of habitat meet this standard.
The petition lists recent sources of
information on the whales’ habitat use
along the West Coast of the United
States, particularly from NMFS’
Northwest Fisheries Science Center
(NWFSC) programs. The petition also
reviews natural history and threats to
the whales. The Center for Biological
Diversity proposes that the critical
habitat designation be revised to include
the Pacific Ocean region between Cape
Flattery, WA and Point Reyes, CA,
extending approximately 47 miles (76
km) offshore. The petition identifies that
each of the three PCEs identified in the
2006 critical habitat designation (see
Current Critical Habitat Section above)
are also essential features in the whales’
Pacific Ocean habitat. In addition, the
petition asks us to adopt a fourth PCE
for both existing and proposed critical
habitat providing for in-water sound
levels that: ‘‘(1) Do not exceed
thresholds that inhibit communication
or foraging activities, (2) do not result in
temporary or permanent hearing loss to
whales, and (3) do not result in
abandonment of critical habitat areas.’’
As described in the critical habitat
designation in November 2006, we have
been directly engaged in research
activities to fill data gaps about coastal
habitat use. Collecting information to
better understand coastal distribution
was also identified as a top priority in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Apr 24, 2014
Jkt 232001
developing a Research Plan and
Recovery Plan for Southern Resident
killer whales (NMFS, 2008). In 2011,
NMFS completed a 5-year review of the
status Southern Resident DPS under the
ESA (NMFS, 2011). In the 5-year review,
one of the recommendations for future
actions was to increase knowledge of
coastal distribution, habitat use and
prey consumption to inform critical
habitat designation. As identified in the
petition, the NWFSC and our partners
have used several techniques to collect
information on coastal distribution and
behavior, including land-based
sightings, passive acoustic monitoring,
coastal research cruises, and satellite tag
studies. While data from these studies
are available in our files and have begun
to address data deficiencies identified in
the 2006 critical habitat designation,
there is considerable data analysis still
needed to refine our understanding of
the whales’ habitat use and needs.
While we have been actively working to
gather and analyze data on coastal
habitat use, we have not yet had
sufficient information to propose
revisions to critical habitat as requested
in the petition. Additional data and
analyses will contribute to identification
of habitat features and areas in the
Pacific Ocean that contain these
features. In the petition, the Center for
Biological Diversity recognized that
NMFS is continuing to analyze data
describing the Southern Residents’ use
of coastal and offshore waters and
requested we refine the proposed
revisions, as necessary, to include
additional inhabited zones or to focus
specifically on areas of concentrated
use.
Additional information since the 2006
critical habitat designation is also
provided in the petition regarding
effects of anthropogenic sound on
marine mammals. The petition
references new information on killer
whale responses to vessel noise (Erbe et
al., 2012; Holt, 2008; Holt et al., 2009,
Williams et al., 2009; Williams et al.,
2014), as well as a review of the acoustic
quality of habitats for whale
populations, including killer whales
(Williams et al., 2013). This information
may be relevant to consideration of
sound as a new essential feature.
Petition Finding
Based on the information presented
and referenced in the petition, as well
as all other information readily available
in our files, and pursuant to the criteria
specified in 50 CFR 424.14(c), we find
the recent information on the whales’
movements through their offshore
habitat and discussion of sound as a
feature of habitat present substantial
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
22935
information indicating that revision of
critical habitat may be warranted.
Information Solicited
To ensure that our review of Southern
Resident killer whale critical habitat is
complete and based on the best
available scientific and commercial
information, we are soliciting new
information from the public,
governmental agencies, tribes, the
scientific community, industry,
environmental entities, and any other
interested parties concerning: (1) The
essential habitat needs and use of the
whales, (2) the West Coast area
proposed in the petition for inclusion,
(3) the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of
Southern Residents and that may
require special management
considerations or protection, (4)
information regarding potential benefits
or impacts of designating any particular
area, including information on the types
of Federal actions that may affect the
area’s physical and biological features,
and (5) current or planned activities in
the areas the petition requests to be
added as critical habitat and costs of
potential modifications to those
activities due to critical habitat
designation.
We request that all data and
information be accompanied by
supporting documentation such as
maps, bibliographic references, or
reprints of pertinent publications.
Comments and materials received will
be available for public inspection, by
appointment, during normal business
hours at the above address (see
ADDRESSES).
References Cited
The complete citations for the
references used in this document can be
obtained by contacting NMFS (See
ADDRESSES and FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT) or on our Web
page at: https://
www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/
protected_species/marine_mammals/
killer_whale/esa_status.html.
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: April 21, 2014.
Samuel D. Rauch, III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2014–09483 Filed 4–24–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\25APP1.SGM
25APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 80 (Friday, April 25, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 22933-22935]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-09483]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 226
[Docket No. 140407321-4321-01]
RIN 0648-XD233
Listing Endangered or Threatened Species: 90-Day Finding on a
Petition To Revise the Critical Habitat Designation for the Southern
Resident Killer Whale
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: 90-day petition finding; request for information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), announce a
90-day finding on a petition from the Center for Biological Diversity
to revise the critical habitat designation for the Southern Resident
killer whale (Orcinus orca) Distinct Population Segment (DPS) under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA). In November 2006 we issued a final rule
designating approximately 2,560 square miles (6,630 square km) of
inland waters of Washington State as critical habitat for the Southern
Resident killer whale DPS. The petition requests we revise this
critical habitat to include inhabited Pacific Ocean marine waters along
the West Coast of the United States that constitute essential foraging
and wintering areas. Additionally, the petition requests that we adopt
protective in-water sound levels as a primary constituent element for
both currently designated critical habitat and the proposed revised
critical habitat. We find that the petition to revise critical habitat,
viewed in the context of information readily available in our files,
presents substantial scientific information indicating the petitioned
action may be warranted. We are hereby initiating a review of the
currently designated critical habitat to determine whether revision is
warranted. To ensure a comprehensive review, we are soliciting
scientific and commercial information pertaining to this action.
DATES: Scientific and commercial information pertinent to the
petitioned action must be received by June 24, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, information, or data on this
document, identified by the code NOAA-NMFS-2014-0041, by any of the
following methods: Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic
comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2014-0041, click the ``Comment Now!'' icon,
complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
Mail or hand-delivery: NMFS, West Coast Region, Protected Resources
Division, 7600 Sand Point Way NE., Seattle, WA 98115. Attention--Lynne
Barre, Seattle Branch Chief.
Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other
address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period,
may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the
public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on
www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business
information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily
by the sender will be publicly accessible. We will accept anonymous
comments (enter ``N/A'' in the required fields if you wish to remain
anonymous), although submitting comments anonymously will prevent us
from contacting you if we have difficulty retrieving your submission.
Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word,
Excel, or Adobe PDF file formats only.
Copies of the petition and the list of references are available
online at: https://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/protected_species/marine_mammals/killer_whale/esa_status.html.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynne Barre, NMFS West Coast Region,
(206) 526-4745; or Dwayne Meadows, NMFS Office of Protected Resources,
(301) 427-8403.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On January 21, 2014, we received a petition from the Center for
Biological Diversity requesting revision to the critical habitat
designation for the Southern Resident killer whale DPS.
The ESA defines critical habitat under section 3(5)(A) as: ``(i)
The specific areas within the geographical area currently occupied by
the species, at the time it is listed . . . 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 by the Secretary that such areas are essential for the
conservation of the species.''
[[Page 22934]]
Joint NMFS-Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) regulations for
designating critical habitat at 50 CFR 424.12(b) state that the
agencies ``shall consider those physical and biological features that
are essential to the conservation of a given species and that may
require special management considerations or protection'' (hereafter
also referred to as ``Essential Features'' or ``Primary Constituent
Elements'' (PCEs). Pursuant to these regulations, such features
include: Space for individual and population growth, and normal
behavior; food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or
physiological requirements; cover or shelter; sites for breeding,
reproduction, rearing of offspring; and habitats that are protected
from disturbance or are representative of the historic geographical and
ecological distribution of a species. We are required to focus on the
PCEs that best represent the principal biological or physical features
of the habitat. PCEs may include: Nesting grounds, feeding sites, water
quality, tide, and geological formation. Our implementing regulations
(50 CFR 424.02) define ``special management considerations or
protection'' as any method or procedure useful in protecting physical
and biological features of the environment for the conservation of the
species.
Section 4(b)(2) of the ESA requires us to designate and make
revisions to critical habitat for listed species based on 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 of Commerce may exclude any particular area from critical
habitat if she determines that the benefits of such exclusion outweigh
the benefits of specifying such area as part of the critical habitat,
unless she determines that the failure to designate such area as
critical habitat will result in the extinction of the species
concerned.
The ESA provides that NMFS may, from time-to-time, revise critical
habitat as appropriate (section 4(a)(3)(A)(ii)). In accordance with
section 4(b)(3)(D)(i) of the ESA, to the maximum extent practicable,
within 90 days of receipt of a petition to revise critical habitat, the
Secretary of Commerce is required to make a finding as to whether that
petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information
indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted, and to promptly
publish such finding in the Federal Register.
ESA implementing regulations issued jointly by NMFS and FWS (50 CFR
424.14(b)) define ``substantial information'' as the amount of
information that would lead a reasonable person to believe that the
measure proposed in the petition may be warranted. In evaluating
whether substantial information is contained in a petition to revise
critical habitat, the Secretary must consider whether the petition
contains: (1) ``Information indicating that areas petitioned to be
added to critical habitat contain physical or biological features
essential to, and that may require special management to provide for,
the conservation of the species involved''; or (2) ``information
indicating that areas designated as critical habitat do not contain
resources essential to, or do not require special management to provide
for, the conservation of the species involved.''
Judicial decisions have clarified the appropriate scope and
limitations of the Services' review of petitions at the 90-day finding
stage, in making a determination that a petitioned action may be
warranted. As a general matter, these decisions hold that a petition
need not establish a ``strong likelihood'' or a ``high probability''
that the petitioned action is warranted (See Center for Biological
Diversity v. Kempthorne, 2007 WL 163244, at *4, *7 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 19,
2007)). At the 90-day stage, we evaluate the petitioner's request based
upon the information in the petition, including its references and the
information readily available in our files. We do not conduct
additional research, and we do not solicit information from parties
outside the agency to help us evaluate the petition. We will accept the
petitioner's sources and characterizations of the information
presented, if they appear to be based on accepted scientific
principles, unless we have specific information in our files that
indicates the petition's information is incorrect, unreliable,
obsolete, or otherwise irrelevant to the requested action. Information
that is susceptible to more than one interpretation or that is
contradicted by other available information will not be dismissed at
the 90-day finding stage, so long as it is reliable and a reasonable
person would conclude that it supports the petitioner's assertions. If
we find that a petition presents substantial information indicating
that the revision may be warranted, within 12 months after receiving
the petition, we are required to determine how we intend to proceed
with the requested revision and promptly publish notice of such
intention in the Federal Register (Section 4(b)(3)(D)(ii) of the ESA).
Because the finding at the 12-month stage is based on a more thorough
review of the available information, a ``may be warranted'' finding at
the 90-day stage does not prejudge the outcome of our review.
Current Critical Habitat Designation
Following the ESA listing of the Southern Resident killer whale DPS
(70 FR 69903; November 18, 2005), we initiated our effort to designate
critical habitat for the Southern Resident killer whale DPS and
finalized the designation in 2006 (71 FR 69054, November 29, 2006).
Based on the natural history of the Southern Resident killer whales and
their habitat needs, the physical or biological features necessary for
conservation were identified as: (1) Water quality to support growth
and development; (2) prey species of sufficient quantity, quality and
availability to support individual growth, reproduction and
development, as well as overall population growth; and (3) passage
conditions to allow for migration, resting, and foraging. At that time,
we noted that there were few data on Southern Resident killer whale
distribution and habitat use of the coastal and offshore areas in the
Pacific Ocean. Although we recognized that the whales occupy these
waters for a portion of the year and considered them part of the
geographical area occupied by the species, we declined to designate
these areas as critical habitat because we found that the data
informing whale distribution, behavior and habitat use was insufficient
to define ``specific areas'' based upon defined physical and biological
features (See Coastal and Offshore Areas section; 71 FR 69054; November
29, 2006). The final critical habitat designation identified three
specific areas, within the area occupied, that contained the essential
features listed above. The three specific areas designated as critical
habitat were (1) the Summer Core Area in Haro Strait and waters around
the San Juan Islands; (2) Puget Sound; and (3) the Strait of Juan de
Fuca, which in total comprise approximately 2,560 square miles (6,630
sq km) of marine habitat. We determined that the economic benefits of
exclusion of any of the areas did not outweigh the benefits of
designation, and we therefore did not exclude any areas based on
economic impacts. We considered the impacts to national security, and
concluded the benefits of exclusion of 18 military sites, comprising
approximately 112 square miles (291 sq km), outweighed the benefits of
inclusion, because of national security impacts, and therefore, the
sites were not included in the
[[Page 22935]]
designation. The critical habitat designation included waters deeper
than 20 feet (6.1 m) relative to the extreme high water tidal datum.
Although we did not include coastal and offshore areas based on the
limited information on coastal habitat use and essential features in
the offshore areas of the whales' range, we acknowledged that there was
an active research program in place to gather information about
movements and activities and noted that as we collected new information
we hoped to fill data gaps about habitat features in the Pacific Ocean
coastal and offshore areas to inform future considerations of critical
habitat.
Analysis of Petition
As described above, the standard for determining whether a petition
includes substantial information is whether the amount of information
would lead a reasonable person to believe that the measure proposed in
the petition may be warranted. Based on the information presented and
referenced in the petition, as well as all other information readily
available in our files, we find the recent information on the whales'
movements through their offshore habitat and discussion of sound as a
feature of habitat meet this standard. The petition lists recent
sources of information on the whales' habitat use along the West Coast
of the United States, particularly from NMFS' Northwest Fisheries
Science Center (NWFSC) programs. The petition also reviews natural
history and threats to the whales. The Center for Biological Diversity
proposes that the critical habitat designation be revised to include
the Pacific Ocean region between Cape Flattery, WA and Point Reyes, CA,
extending approximately 47 miles (76 km) offshore. The petition
identifies that each of the three PCEs identified in the 2006 critical
habitat designation (see Current Critical Habitat Section above) are
also essential features in the whales' Pacific Ocean habitat. In
addition, the petition asks us to adopt a fourth PCE for both existing
and proposed critical habitat providing for in-water sound levels that:
``(1) Do not exceed thresholds that inhibit communication or foraging
activities, (2) do not result in temporary or permanent hearing loss to
whales, and (3) do not result in abandonment of critical habitat
areas.''
As described in the critical habitat designation in November 2006,
we have been directly engaged in research activities to fill data gaps
about coastal habitat use. Collecting information to better understand
coastal distribution was also identified as a top priority in
developing a Research Plan and Recovery Plan for Southern Resident
killer whales (NMFS, 2008). In 2011, NMFS completed a 5-year review of
the status Southern Resident DPS under the ESA (NMFS, 2011). In the 5-
year review, one of the recommendations for future actions was to
increase knowledge of coastal distribution, habitat use and prey
consumption to inform critical habitat designation. As identified in
the petition, the NWFSC and our partners have used several techniques
to collect information on coastal distribution and behavior, including
land-based sightings, passive acoustic monitoring, coastal research
cruises, and satellite tag studies. While data from these studies are
available in our files and have begun to address data deficiencies
identified in the 2006 critical habitat designation, there is
considerable data analysis still needed to refine our understanding of
the whales' habitat use and needs. While we have been actively working
to gather and analyze data on coastal habitat use, we have not yet had
sufficient information to propose revisions to critical habitat as
requested in the petition. Additional data and analyses will contribute
to identification of habitat features and areas in the Pacific Ocean
that contain these features. In the petition, the Center for Biological
Diversity recognized that NMFS is continuing to analyze data describing
the Southern Residents' use of coastal and offshore waters and
requested we refine the proposed revisions, as necessary, to include
additional inhabited zones or to focus specifically on areas of
concentrated use.
Additional information since the 2006 critical habitat designation
is also provided in the petition regarding effects of anthropogenic
sound on marine mammals. The petition references new information on
killer whale responses to vessel noise (Erbe et al., 2012; Holt, 2008;
Holt et al., 2009, Williams et al., 2009; Williams et al., 2014), as
well as a review of the acoustic quality of habitats for whale
populations, including killer whales (Williams et al., 2013). This
information may be relevant to consideration of sound as a new
essential feature.
Petition Finding
Based on the information presented and referenced in the petition,
as well as all other information readily available in our files, and
pursuant to the criteria specified in 50 CFR 424.14(c), we find the
recent information on the whales' movements through their offshore
habitat and discussion of sound as a feature of habitat present
substantial information indicating that revision of critical habitat
may be warranted.
Information Solicited
To ensure that our review of Southern Resident killer whale
critical habitat is complete and based on the best available scientific
and commercial information, we are soliciting new information from the
public, governmental agencies, tribes, the scientific community,
industry, environmental entities, and any other interested parties
concerning: (1) The essential habitat needs and use of the whales, (2)
the West Coast area proposed in the petition for inclusion, (3) the
physical and biological features essential to the conservation of
Southern Residents and that may require special management
considerations or protection, (4) information regarding potential
benefits or impacts of designating any particular area, including
information on the types of Federal actions that may affect the area's
physical and biological features, and (5) current or planned activities
in the areas the petition requests to be added as critical habitat and
costs of potential modifications to those activities due to critical
habitat designation.
We request that all data and information be accompanied by
supporting documentation such as maps, bibliographic references, or
reprints of pertinent publications. Comments and materials received
will be available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal
business hours at the above address (see ADDRESSES).
References Cited
The complete citations for the references used in this document can
be obtained by contacting NMFS (See ADDRESSES and FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT) or on our Web page at: https://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/protected_species/marine_mammals/killer_whale/esa_status.html.
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: April 21, 2014.
Samuel D. Rauch, III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-09483 Filed 4-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P