Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Notice of 12-Month Finding on a Petition To List the Gulf of Mexico Bryde's Whale as Endangered Under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), 88639-88656 [2016-29412]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules
§ 5b.11
SORN for system of records 09–25–
0225.
Analysis of Impacts
The HHS/NIH has examined the
impacts of this rule under Executive
Order 12866 and the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), and
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). Executive Order
12866 directs agencies to assess all costs
and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, when regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety,
and other advantages; distributive
impacts; and equity). The agency
believes that this rule is not a significant
regulatory action under the Executive
Order.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
requires agencies to analyze regulatory
options that would minimize any
significant impact of a rule on small
entities. Because the rule imposes no
duties or obligations on small entities,
the agency certifies that the rule will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Section 202(a) of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires
that agencies prepare a written
statement, which includes an
assessment of anticipated costs and
benefits, before proposing ‘‘any rule that
includes any Federal mandate that may
result in the expenditure by State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100,000,000
or more (adjusted annually for inflation)
in any one year.’’ The current threshold
after adjustment for inflation is $144
million, using the most current (2015)
Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross
Domestic Product. The NIH does not
expect that a final rule consistent with
this NPRM would result in any 1-year
expenditure that would meet or exceed
this amount.
List of Subjects in 45 CFR Part 5b
Privacy.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, the Department proposes to
amend its part 5b of title 45 of the Code
of Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 5b—PRIVACY ACT
REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for Part 5b
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 5 U.S.C. 552a.
2. Amend § 5b.11 by adding paragraph
(b)(2)(vii)(E) as follows:
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Dec 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
Exempt systems.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(vii) * * *
(E) NIH Electronic Research
Administration (eRA) Records, HHS/
NIH/OD/OER, 09–25–0225 (e.g.,
reference or recommendation letters,
reviewer critiques, preliminary or final
individual overall impact/priority
scores, and/or assignment of peer
reviewers to an application and other
evaluative materials and data compiled
by the NIH Office of Extramural
Research).
Dated: October 14, 2016.
Francis S. Collins,
Director, National Institutes of Health.
Approved: October 18, 2016.
Sylvia Matthews Burwell,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human
Services.
[FR Doc. 2016–29058 Filed 12–7–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 224
[Docket No. 141216999–6999–02]
RIN 0648–XD669
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants: Notice of 12-Month Finding
on a Petition To List the Gulf of Mexico
Bryde’s Whale as Endangered Under
the Endangered Species Act (ESA)
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule, request for
comments.
AGENCY:
We, NMFS, announce a 12month finding and listing determination
on a petition to list the Gulf of Mexico
Bryde’s whale (Balaenoptera edeni) as
threatened or endangered under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA). We have
completed a Status Review report of the
Gulf of Mexico Bryde’s whale in
response to a petition submitted by the
Natural Resources Defense Council.
After reviewing the best scientific and
commercial data available, including
the Status Review report, and consulting
with the Society for Marine
Mammology’s Committee on Taxonomy,
we have determined that the Gulf of
Mexico Bryde’s whale is taxonomically
a subspecies of the Bryde’s whale thus
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
88639
meeting the ESA’s definition of a
species. Based on the Gulf of Mexico
Bryde’s whale’s small population (likely
fewer than 100 individuals), its life
history characteristics, its extremely
limited distribution, and its
vulnerability to existing threats, we
believe that the species faces a high risk
of extinction. Based on these
considerations, described in more detail
within this action, we conclude that the
Gulf of Mexico Bryde’s whale is in
danger of extinction throughout all of its
range and meets the definition of an
endangered species. We are soliciting
information that may be relevant to
inform both our final listing
determination and designation of
critical habitat.
DATES: Information and comments on
the subject action must be received by
January 30, 2017. For the specific date
of the public hearing, see Public Hearing
section.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
information, or data on this document,
identified by the code NOAA–NMFS–
2014–0101 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-20140101, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon,
complete the required fields, and enter
or attach your comments;
• Mail: NMFS, Southeast Regional
Office, 263 13th Avenue South, St.
Petersburg, FL 33701;
• Hand delivery: You may hand
deliver written information to our office
during normal business hours at the
street address given above.
The Status Review of Bryde’s Whales
in the Gulf of Mexico (Rosel et al., 2016)
and reference list are available by
submitting a request to the Species
Conservation Branch Chief, Protected
Resources Division, NMFS Southeast
Regional Office, 263 13th Avenue
South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701–5505,
Attn: Bryde’s Whale 12-month Finding.
The Status Review report and references
are also available electronically at:
https://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/protected_
resources/listing_petitions/.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Laura Engleby or Calusa Horn, NMFS,
Southeast Regional Office (727) 824–
5312 or Marta Nammack, NMFS, Office
of Protected Resources (301) 427–8469.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On September 18, 2014, we received
a petition from the Natural Resources
Defense Council to list the Gulf of
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
88640
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Mexico population of Bryde’s whale
(Balaenoptera edeni) as an endangered
species. The petition asserted that the
Bryde’s whale in the Gulf of Mexico is
endangered by at least three of the five
ESA section 4(a)(1) factors: present or
threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of habitat or range;
inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; and other natural or
manmade factors affecting its continued
existence. The petitioner also requested
that critical habitat be designated
concurrent with listing under the ESA.
On April 6, 2015, we published a 90day finding that the petition presented
substantial scientific and commercial
information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted (80
FR 18343). At that time, we announced
the initiation of a formal status review
and requested scientific and commercial
information from the public,
government agencies, scientific
community, industry, and any other
interested parties on the delineation of,
threats to, and the status of the Bryde’s
whale in the Gulf of Mexico including:
(1) Historical and current distribution,
abundance, and population trends; (2)
life history and biological information
including adaptations to ecological
settings, genetic analyses to assess
paternal contribution and population
connectivity, and movement patterns to
determine population mixing; (3)
management measures and regulatory
mechanisms designed to protect the
species; (4) any current or planned
activities that may adversely impact the
species; and (5) ongoing or planned
efforts to protect and restore the species
and habitat. We received eight public
comments in response to the 90-day
finding, with the majority of comments
in support of the petition. The public
provided relevant scientific literature to
be considered in the Status Review
report as well as a recently developed
density model and abundance estimate.
Relevant information was incorporated
in the Status Review report and in this
proposed rule.
Listing Determinations Under the ESA
We are responsible for determining
whether the Bryde’s whale in the Gulf
of Mexico is threatened or endangered
under the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the ESA requires us
to make listing determinations based
solely on the best scientific and
commercial data available after
conducting a review of the status of the
species and after taking into account
efforts being made by any state or
foreign nation to protect the species. To
be considered for listing under the ESA,
a group of organisms must constitute a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Dec 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
‘‘species,’’ which is defined in Section
3 of the ESA to include taxonomic
species and ‘‘any subspecies of fish, or
wildlife, or plants, and any distinct
population segment (DPS) of any
species of vertebrate fish or wildlife
which interbreeds when mature.’’ Under
NMFS regulations, we must rely not
only on standard taxonomic
distinctions, but also on the biological
expertise of the agency and the
scientific community, to determine if
the relevant taxonomic group is a
‘‘species’’ for purposes of the ESA (see
50 CFR 424.11). Under Section 4(a)(1) of
the ESA, we must next determine
whether any species is endangered or
threatened due to any of the following
five factors: (A) The present or
threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range; (B)
overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D)
the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; or (E) other natural or
manmade factors affecting its continued
existence (sections 4(a)(1)(A) through
(E)).
To determine whether the Bryde’s
whale population in the Gulf of Mexico
warrants listing under the ESA, we first
formed a Status Review Team (SRT) of
seven biologists, including six NOAA
Fisheries Science Center (Southeast,
Southwest, and Northeast) and
Southeast Regional Office personnel and
one member from the Bureau of Safety
and Environmental Enforcement—Gulf
of Mexico Region, to compile and
review the best available scientific
information on Bryde’s whales in the
Gulf of Mexico and assess their
extinction risk. The Status Review
report prepared by the SRT summarizes
the taxonomy, distribution, abundance,
life history, and biology of the species,
identifies threats or stressors affecting
the status of the species, and provides
a description of existing regulatory
mechanisms and conservation efforts
(Rosel et al., 2016). The Status Review
report incorporates information received
in response to our request for
information (80 FR 18343; April 6,
2015) and comments from three
independent peer reviewers.
Information from the Status Review
report about the biology of the Gulf of
Mexico Bryde’s whale is summarized
below under ‘‘Biological Review.’’ The
Status Review report also includes a
threats evaluation and an Extinction
Risk Analysis (ERA), conducted by the
SRT. The results of the threats
evaluation are discussed below under
‘‘Threats Evaluation’’ and the results of
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the ERA are discussed below under
‘‘Extinction Risk Analysis.’’
Section 3 of the ESA defines an
endangered species as ‘‘any species
which is in danger of extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range’’ and a threatened species as
one ‘‘which is likely to become an
endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range.’’ Thus,
we interpret an ‘‘endangered species’’ to
be one that is presently in danger of
extinction. A ‘‘threatened species,’’ on
the other hand, is not currently at risk
of extinction but is likely to become so
in the foreseeable future. In other words,
a key statutory difference between a
threatened and endangered species is
the timing of when a species may be in
danger of extinction, either presently
(endangered) or in the foreseeable future
(threatened).
In determining whether the Gulf of
Mexico population of Bryde’s whale
meets the standard of endangered or
threatened, we first determined that,
based on the best scientific and
commercial data available, the Gulf of
Mexico Bryde’s whale is a genetically
distinct subspecies of the globally
distributed Bryde’s whale. We next
considered the specific life history and
ecology of the species, the nature of
threats, the species’ response to those
threats, and population numbers and
trends. We considered both the data and
information summarized in the Status
Review report, as well as the results of
the ERA. We considered impacts of each
identified threat both individually and
cumulatively. For purposes of our
analysis, the mere identification of
factors that could impact a species
negatively is not sufficient to compel a
finding that ESA listing is appropriate.
In considering those factors that might
constitute threats, we look beyond mere
exposure of the species to the factor to
determine whether the species
responds, either to a single threat or
multiple threats, in a way that causes
actual impacts at the species level. In
making this finding, we have considered
and evaluated the best available
scientific and commercial information,
including information received in
response to our 90-day finding.
Biological Review
This section provides a summary of
key biological information presented in
the Status Review report (Rosel et al.,
2016), which provides the baseline
context and foundation for our listing
determination. The petition specifically
requested that we consider the Gulf of
Mexico population of Bryde’s whale as
a DPS and list that population as an
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules
endangered species. Therefore, the SRT
first considered whether the Bryde’s
whale in the Gulf of Mexico constituted
a DPS, a subspecies, a species, or part
of the globally distributed Bryde’s whale
population. This section also includes
our conclusions based on the biological
information presented in the Status
Review report.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Species Description
Bryde’s whale (B. edeni) is a large
baleen whale found in tropical and
subtropical waters worldwide. Currently
two subspecies of Bryde’s whale are
recognized: A smaller form, Eden’s
whale (B. e. edeni), found in the Indian
and western Pacific oceans primarily in
coastal waters, and a larger, more
pelagic form, Bryde’s whale (B. e.
brydei), found worldwide. Like Bryde’s
whales found worldwide, the Bryde’s
whale in the Gulf of Mexico has a
streamlined and sleek body shape, a
somewhat pointed, flat rostrum with
three prominent ridges (i.e., a large
center ridge, and smaller left and right
lateral ridges), a large falcate dorsal fin,
and a counter-shaded color that is fairly
uniformly-dark dorsally and light to
pinkish ventrally (Jefferson et al., 2015).
There is no apparent morphological
difference between the Bryde’s whale in
the Gulf of Mexico and those
worldwide. Baleen from these whales
has not been thoroughly characterized,
but the baleen plates from one
individual from the Gulf of Mexico were
dark gray to black with white bristles
(Rosel et al., 2016). This is consistent
with the description by Mead (1977),
who indicated that the bristles of both
Bryde’s whale subspecies are coarser
than those in the closely-related sei
whale. Limited data (n=14) indicate the
length of Bryde’s whales in the Gulf of
Mexico is intermediate with the
currently recognized subspecies. The
largest Bryde’s whale observed in the
Gulf of Mexico was a lactating female at
12.7 meters (m) in length and the next
four largest animals were 11.2–11.6 m in
length (Rosel and Wilcox 2014). Rice
(1998) reported adult Eden’s whales
rarely exceed 11.5 m total length and
adult Bryde’s whales from the Atlantic,
Pacific and the Indian Ocean reach
14.0–15.0 m in length.
Genetics
In a recent genetic analysis of
mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) samples
taken from Bryde’s whales in the Gulf
of Mexico, Rosel and Wilcox (2014)
found that the Gulf of Mexico
population was genetically distinct from
all other Bryde’s whales worldwide.
Maternally inherited mtDNA is an
indicator of population-level
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Dec 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
differentiation, as it evolves relatively
rapidly. Rosel and Wilcox (2014)
identified 25–26 fixed nucleotide
differences in the mtDNA control region
between the Bryde’s whale in the Gulf
of Mexico and the two currently
recognized subspecies (i.e., Eden’s
whale and Bryde’s whale) and the sei
whale (B. borealis). They found that the
level and pattern of mtDNA
differentiation discovered indicates that
Gulf of Mexico Bryde’s whales are as
genetically differentiated from other
Bryde’s whales worldwide, as those
Bryde’s whales are differentiated from
their most closely-related species, the
sei whale. In addition, genetic analysis
of the mtDNA data and data from 42
nuclear microsatellite loci (repeating
base pairs in the DNA) revealed that the
genetic diversity within the Gulf of
Mexico Bryde’s whale population is
exceedingly low. Rosel and Wilcox
(2014) concluded that this level of
genetic divergence suggests a unique
evolutionary trajectory for the Gulf of
Mexico population of Bryde’s whale,
worthy of its own taxonomic standing.
The SRT considered this level of
genetic divergence to be significant,
indicating that the Bryde’s whale in the
Gulf of Mexico is a separate subspecies.
To confirm its determination, the SRT
asked the Society for Marine
Mammalogy Committee on Taxonomy
(Committee) for its expert scientific
opinion on the level of taxonomic
distinctiveness of the Bryde’s whale in
the Gulf of Mexico. The Committee
maintains the official list of marine
mammal species and subspecies for the
Society for Marine Mammalogy. It
updates the list as new descriptions of
species, subspecies, or taxonomic
actions appear in the technical
literature, adhering to principle and
procedures, opinions, and directions set
forth by the International Commission
on Zoological Nomenclature. The
Committee also reviews, as requested,
formal descriptions of new taxa and
other taxonomic actions, and provides
expert advice on taxonomic descriptions
and other aspects of marine mammal
taxonomy. In response to the request
made by the SRT, all of the Committee
members who responded (nine out of
nine) voted it was ‘‘highly likely’’ that
Bryde’s whales in the Gulf of Mexico
comprise at least an undescribed
subspecies of what is currently
recognized as B. edeni. This result
constituted the opinion of the
Committee, which makes decisions by
majority vote (W. F. Perrin, Committee
Chairman 2015). Based on the expert
opinion from the Committee and the
best available scientific information, the
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
88641
SRT concluded Bryde’s whales in the
Gulf of Mexico are taxonomically
distinct from the other two Bryde’s
whale subspecies. The SRT identified
the Bryde’s whale occurring in the Gulf
of Mexico as a separate subspecies
called ‘‘GOMx Bryde’s whale,’’ and
conducted the Status Review
accordingly.
Our regulations state that, ‘‘In
determining whether a particular taxon
or population is a species for the
purpose of the Act, the Secretary shall
rely on standard taxonomic distinctions
and biological expertise of the
Department and scientific community
concerning the relevant taxonomic
group’’ (50 CFR 424.11(a)). Under this
provision, we must consider the
biological expertise of the SRT and the
scientific community, and apply the
best available science when it indicates
that a taxonomic classification is
outdated or incorrect. The GOMx
Bryde’s whale has a high level of genetic
divergence from the two recognized
Bryde’s whale subspecies (Eden’s whale
and Bryde’s whale) elsewhere in the
world. Given this information, we relied
on the biological expertise of the SRT
and the Committee concerning the
taxonomic status of the Bryde’s whale in
the Gulf of Mexico. We agree with the
SRT and the Committee’s determination
that the Bryde’s whale in the Gulf of
Mexico is taxonomically at least a
subspecies of B. edeni. Based on the best
available scientific and commercial
information described above and in the
Status Review report, we have
determined that the Bryde’s whale in
the Gulf of Mexico is a taxonomically
distinct subspecies and, therefore,
eligible for listing under the ESA.
Accordingly, we did not further
consider whether the Gulf of Mexico
Bryde’s whale population is a DPS
under the ESA.
Distribution
The Status Review report (Rosel et al.,
2016) found that the historical
distribution of Bryde’s whale in the Gulf
of Mexico included the northeastern,
north-central and southern Gulf of
Mexico. This was based on work by
Reeves et al. (2011), which reviewed
whaling logbooks of ‘‘Yankee whalers’’
and plotted daily locations of ships
during the period 1788–1877 as a proxy
for whaling effort, with locations of
species takes and sightings in the Gulf
of Mexico. These sightings by the
whalers were generally offshore in
deeper (e.g., >1000 m) waters, given
their primary target of sperm whales
(Physeter microcephalus). Reeves et al.
(2011) concluded whales reported as
‘‘finback’’ by ‘‘Yankee whalers’’ in the
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
88642
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Gulf of Mexico were most likely Bryde’s
whales, because Bryde’s whales are the
only baleen whales that occur in the
Gulf of Mexico year-round. The SRT
found that these data indicate that the
historical distribution of Bryde’s whales
in the Gulf of Mexico was much broader
and also included the north-central and
southern Gulf of Mexico.
Stranding records from the Southeast
U.S. stranding network, the
Smithsonian Institution, and the
literature (Mead 1977, Schmidly 1981,
Jefferson 1995) include 22 Bryde’s
whales strandings in the Gulf of Mexico
from 1954–2012, although three have
uncertain species identification. Most
strandings were recorded east of the
Mississippi River through west central
Florida, but two were recorded west of
Louisiana. There are no documented
Bryde’s whale strandings in Texas,
although strandings of fin (B. physalus),
sei (B. borealis), and minke (B.
acutorostrata) whales have been
documented.
We began conducting oceanic (ship)
and continental shelf (ship and aerial)
surveys for cetaceans in 1991 that
continue today. The location of
shipboard and aerial survey effort in the
Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean was
plotted by Roberts et al. (2016). Details
of Bryde’s whale sightings from these
surveys are summarized in Waring et al.
(2015). During surveys in 1991, Bryde’s
whales were sighted in the northeastern
Gulf of Mexico along the continental
shelf break, in an area known as the De
Soto Canyon. In subsequent surveys,
Bryde’s whales or whales identified as
Bryde’s/sei whales (i.e.., where it was
not possible to distinguish between a
Bryde’s whale or a sei whale), were
sighted in this same region of the
northeastern Gulf of Mexico. When
observers were able to clearly see the
dorsal surface of the rostrum of at least
one whale, three ridges were present, a
diagnostic characteristic of Bryde’s
whales (Maze-Foley & Mullin 2006). As
a result, our Gulf of Mexico surveys
from 1991–2015 use sightings of Bryde’s
whale, Bryde’s/sei whale, and baleen
whale species collectively as the basis
for estimates of Bryde’s whales
abundance and distribution. Sightings
of Bryde’s whales in the Gulf of Mexico
have been consistently located in the De
Soto Canyon area, along the continental
shelf break between 100 m and 300 m
depth. Bryde’s whales have been sighted
in all seasons within the De Soto
Canyon area (Mullin and Hoggard 2000,
Maze-Foley and Mullin 2006, Mullin
2007, DWH MMIQT 2015).
Consequently, LaBrecque et al. (2015)
designated this area, home to the small
resident population of Bryde’s whale in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Dec 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
the northeastern Gulf of Mexico, as a
Biologically Important Area (BIA). BIA’s
are reproductive areas, feeding areas,
migratory corridors, and areas in which
small and resident populations are
concentrated. They do not have direct or
immediate regulatory consequences.
Rather, they are intended to provide the
best available science to help inform
regulatory and management decisions,
in order to minimize impacts from
anthropogenic activities on marine
mammals (LaBrecque et al., 2015).
Despite the lack of sightings of
Bryde’s whales in the Gulf of Mexico
outside the BIA, questions remain about
their current distribution in U.S. waters.
NMFS surveys recorded three baleen
whales sighted outside the BIA (i.e., fin
whale identified in 1992 off Texas and
two sightings of Bryde’s/sei whale in
1992 and 1994 along the shelf break in
the western Gulf of Mexico). In
addition, five records of ‘baleen whales’
have been recorded from 2010 to 2014
west of the BIA, at the longitude of
western Louisiana in depths similar to
those in the BIA (Bureau of Safety and
Environmental Enforcement,
unpublished). The two sightings
southwest of Louisiana included
photographs showing they were clearly
baleen whales. However, the
information collected was not sufficient
to identify to the species level. In 2015
a citizen sighted and photographed
what most experts believe was a Bryde’s
whale in the western Gulf of Mexico
south of the Louisiana-Texas border
(Rosel et al., 2016). Given these
observations, the SRT determined that
while it is possible that a small number
of baleen whales occur in U.S. waters
outside the BIA, these observations in
the north-central and western Gulf of
Mexico were difficult to interpret (Rosel
et al., 2016).
Few systematic surveys have been
conducted in the southern Gulf of
Mexico (i.e., Mexico and Cuba). Six
marine mammal surveys were
conducted from 1997 to 1999 in the
´
southern Gulf of Mexico and Yucatan
Channel. These surveys focused
specifically in the extreme southern Bay
of Campeche, an area where Reeves et
al. (2011) reported numerous sightings
of baleen whales from the whaling
logbooks. A more recent survey reported
a single baleen whale in an area of
nearly 4,000 square kilometers (km2)
(Ortega-Ortiz 2002, LaBrecque et al.
2015). This whale was identified as a fin
whale; however, subsequent discussion
between the author and the SRT
suggested it should have been recorded
as an unidentified baleen whale (Rosel
et al., 2016). A compilation of all
available records of marine mammal
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
sightings, strandings, and captures in
the southern Gulf of Mexico identified
no Bryde’s whales (Ortega-Ortiz 2002)
as summarized in the Status Review
report (Rosel et al., 2016).
We agree with the SRT’s findings that
what is now recognized as the GOMx
Bryde’s whale has been consistently
located over the past 25 years along a
very narrow depth corridor in the
northeastern Gulf of Mexico, recognized
as the GOMx Bryde’s whale BIA.
Sightings outside this particular area are
few, despite a large amount of dedicated
marine mammal survey effort that
included both continental shelf and
oceanic waters of the Atlantic Ocean off
the southeastern United States and the
northern Gulf of Mexico. Historical
whaling records indicate that the
historical distribution of the GOMx
Bryde’s whale in the Gulf of Mexico was
much broader than it is currently and
included the north-central and southern
Gulf of Mexico. We agree with the SRT
that the BIA, located in the De Soto
Canyon area of the northeastern Gulf of
Mexico, encompasses the current areal
distribution of GOMx Bryde’s whale.
Abundance Estimates
All of the abundance estimates for
Bryde’s whale in the northern Gulf of
Mexico are based on aerial- or shipbased line-transect surveys (Buckland et
al., 2005). Various surveys conducted
from 1991 to 2012 are discussed in the
Status Review report (Rosel et al., 2016).
As previously stated, nearly all GOMx
Bryde’s whale sightings occurred in the
BIA during surveys that uniformly
sampled the entire northern Gulf of
Mexico. The Marine Mammal Protection
Act abundance estimate used for
management of the ‘‘Northern Gulf of
Mexico Bryde’s Whale Stock’’ is 33
whales (coefficient of variation = 1.07;
Waring et al., 2013). Recently, Duke
University researchers estimated
abundance to be 44 individuals
(coefficient of variation = .27) based on
the averages of 23 years of survey data
(Roberts et al., 2015a, Roberts et al.,
2016). No analysis has been conducted
to evaluate abundance trends for GOMx
Bryde’s whale. Given the paucity of data
that influences the range in the
abundance estimates, the SRT agreed by
consensus that, given the best available
science and allowing for the uncertainty
of Bryde’s whale occurrence in non-U.S.
waters of the Gulf of Mexico, most likely
less than 100 individuals exist. For the
reasons stated above, we concur that
likely less than 100 GOMx Bryde’s
whales exist.
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Behavior
Little information exists on the
behavior of GOMx Bryde’s whale. MazeFoley and Mullin (2006) found GOMx
Bryde’s whales to have a mean group
size of 2 (range 1 ¥5, n = 14), similar
to group sizes of the Eden’s and Bryde’s
whales (Wade and Gerrodette 1993).
The GOMx Bryde’s whale is known to
be periodically ‘‘curious’’ around ships
and has been documented approaching
them in the Gulf of Mexico (Rosel et al.,
2016), as observed in Bryde’s whales
worldwide (Leatherwood et al. 1976,
Cummings 1985). In September 2015, a
female GOMx Bryde’s whale was tagged
with an acoustic and kinematic datalogging tag in the De Soto Canyon (Rosel
et al., 2016). Over the nearly 3-day
tagging period, the whale spent 47
percent of its time within 15 m of the
surface during the day and 88 percent
of its time within 15 m of the surface
during the night (NMFS, unpublished
data).
Foraging Ecology
Little information is available on
foraging ecology available for GOMx
Bryde’s whales. Based on behavior
observed during assessment surveys,
these whales do not appear to forage at
or near the surface (NMFS,
unpublished). In general, Bryde’s
whales are thought to feed primarily in
the water column on schooling fish such
as anchovy, sardine, mackerel and
herring, and small crustaceans (Kato
2002). These prey occur throughout the
Gulf of Mexico and the BIA (Grace et al.
2010). Tracking data from the single
whale with an acoustic tag (described
above) indicated diurnal diving to
depths of up to 271 m, with foraging
lunges apparent at the deepest depths.
That whale was likely foraging at or just
above the sea floor (NMFS, unpublished
data) where diel-vertical-migrating
schooling fish form tight aggregations.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Reproduction and Growth
Little information exists on
reproduction and growth of GOMx
Bryde’s whale; however, similar to
Eden’s whales and Bryde’s whales
elsewhere in the world, the GOMx
Bryde’s whale is considered to have kselected life history parameters (large
body size, long life expectancy, slow
growth rate, late maturity, with few
offspring). Taylor et al. (2007) estimated
that Bryde’s whales worldwide may
reproduce every two to three years and
reach sexual maturity at age nine. Given
the basic biology of baleen whales, it is
likely that under normal conditions, the
female GOMx Bryde’s whales produce a
calf every 2 to 3 years. The largest
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:31 Dec 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
known GOMx Bryde’s whale was a
lactating female 12.6 m in length (Rosel
and Wilcox 2014). Currently, skewed
sex ratio does not appear to be an issue
for this population, as recent biopsies
have shown equal number of males and
females (Rosel and Wilcox, 2014; Rosel
et al., 2016). No GOMx Bryde’s whale
calves have been reported during
surveys. However, two stranded calves
have been recorded in the Gulf of
Mexico: A 4.7 m calf stranded in the
Florida Panhandle in 2006 (SEUS
Historical Stranding Database) and a 6.9
m juvenile stranded north of Tampa,
Florida, in 1988 (Edds et al. 1993).
Acoustics
Baleen whale species produce a
variety of highly stereotyped, lowfrequency tonal and broadband calls for
communication purposes (Richardson et
al. 1995). These calls are thought to
function in a reproductive or territorial
context, provide individual
identification, and communicate the
presence of danger or food (Richardson
et al., 1995). Bryde’s whales worldwide
produce a variety of calls that are
distinctive among geographic regions
that may be useful for delineating
subspecies or populations (Oleson et al.
ˇ
´
2003, Sirovic et al. 2014). In the Gulf of
ˇ
´
Mexico, Sirovic et al. (2014) reported
Bryde’s whale call types composed of
downsweeps and downsweep sequences
and localized these calls. Rice et al.
(2014) detected these sequences, as well
as two stereotyped tonal call types that
originated from Bryde’s whales in the
Gulf of Mexico. One call type has been
definitively identified to free-ranging
ˇ
´
GOMx Bryde’s whales (Sirovic et al.,
2014), four additional call types have
been proposed as likely candidates (Rice
ˇ
´
et al., 2014a, Sirovic et al., 2014), and
two call types have been described from
a captive juvenile during rehabilitation
(Edds et al., 1993). Based on these data,
the calls by the Gulf of Mexico Bryde’s
whale are consistent with, but different
from those previously reported for
Bryde’s whales worldwide (Rice et al.,
2014). These unique acoustic signatures
support the genetic analyses identifying
the GOMx Bryde’s whale as an
evolutionary distinct unit (Rosel and
Wilcox 2014).
Threats Evaluation
The threats evaluation is the second
step in making an ESA listing
determination for the GOMx Bryde’s
whale, as described above in ‘‘Listing
Determinations Under the ESA.’’ The
SRT identified a total of 27 specific
threats, organized and described them
according to the five ESA factors listed
in section 4(a)(1), and then evaluated
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
88643
the severity of each threat with a level
of certainty (see Appendix 3 in Rosel et
al., 2016). Because direct evidence from
studies on GOMx Bryde’s whales was
lacking, the SRT agreed that published
scientific evidence from other similar
marine mammals was relevant and
necessary to estimate impacts to GOMx
Bryde’s whale and extinction risk.
To promote consistency when ranking
each threat, the SRT used definitions for
‘severity of threat’ and ‘level of
certainty’ similar to other status
reviews, including the Hawaiian insular
false killer whales (Oleson et al. 2010)
and the northeastern Pacific population
of white shark (Dewar et al. 2013). The
SRT categorically defined specific
rankings for both severity and certainty
for each specific threat (identified
below) as ‘‘low,’’ ‘‘moderate,’’ or ‘‘high.’’
The categorical definitions for the
severity of each threat were identified
by the SRT as 1 = ‘‘low,’’ meaning that
the threat is likely to only slightly
impair the population; 2 = ‘‘moderate,’’
meaning that the threat is likely to
moderately degrade the population; or 3
= ‘‘high,’’ meaning that the threat is
likely to eliminate or seriously degrade
the population. The SRT also scored the
certainty of the threat severity based on
the following categorical definitions: 1 =
‘‘low,’’ meaning little published and/or
unpublished data exist to support the
conclusion that the threat did affect, is
affecting, or is likely to affect the GOMx
Bryde’s whale with the severity
ascribed; 2 = ‘‘moderate,’’ meaning some
published and/or unpublished data
exist to support the conclusion that the
threat did affect, is affecting, or is likely
to affect the population with the
severity ascribed; and 3 = ‘‘high,’’
meaning there are definitive published
and/or unpublished data to support the
conclusion that this threat did affect, is
affecting, or is likely to affect the GOMx
Bryde’s whale with the severity
ascribed. Then, to determine the overall
impact of an ESA factor, the SRT looked
at the collective impact of threats
considered for each ESA factor to
provide an ‘‘overall threat ranking’’ for
each ESA factor, defined as follows: 1=
‘‘low,’’ meaning the ESA factor included
‘‘a low number’’ of threats likely to
contribute to the decline of the GOMx
Bryde’s whale; 2 = ‘‘moderate,’’ meaning
the ESA Factor included an
intermediate number of threats likely to
contribute to the decline of the GOMx
Bryde’s whale, or contained some
individual threats identified as
moderately likely to contribute to the
decline; and 3 = ‘‘high,’’ meaning the
ESA factor included a high number of
threats that are moderately or very likely
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
88644
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules
to contribute to the decline of the GOMx
Bryde’s whale, or contains some
individual threats identified as very
likely to contribute to the decline of the
GOMx Bryde’s whale.
The SRT then calculated the
numerical mean of the team members’
scores for each threat or category of
threats. However, we do not believe that
relying on the numerical mean of the
SRT’s scores is appropriate, because the
specific rankings for the severity,
certainty, and overall threat were
categorically defined by the SRT and
not numerically defined. Therefore, we
assessed the majority vote of the team
members’ scores (i.e., 1, 2, or 3, as
described above) and assigned each
threat a specific ranking defined by the
SRT’s categorical definitions (i.e., low,
moderate or high) based on the majority
vote of the SRT. When there was no
clear majority (i.e., no rank received
four votes), the categorical ranking we
assigned was a combination of the two
ranks receiving three votes each (e.g.,
three votes for high and three votes for
moderate we characterized as
‘‘moderate-high’’).
Each of the 27 threats identified by
the SRT is summarized below, by ESA
factor, with severity and certainty
rankings based on the SRT’s categorical
scoring, as described above. We also
summarize the overall threat ranking for
each ESA factor, based on the SRT’s
scores, and provide NMFS’
determination with regard to each
factor. A detailed table of the SRT’s
threats and rankings can be found in
Appendix 3 of the Status Review report
(Rosel et al., 2016).
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Factor A. The Present or Threatened
Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of Habitat or Range
The SRT considered the following
threats to the GOMx Bryde’s whale
under ESA Factor A: Energy exploration
and development, oil spills and spill
response, harmful algal blooms,
persistent organic pollutants, and heavy
metals. Based on the SRT’s numerical
threat rankings, the overall threat
ranking assigned to Factor A was
‘‘high.’’
Energy Exploration and Development
The SRT assigned the threat of energy
exploration and development (drilling
rigs, platforms, cables, pipelines) a score
of ‘‘high’’ severity threat with
‘‘moderate’’ certainty, as it relates to
destruction, modification, or
curtailments of the range of the GOMx
Bryde’s whale. (Note: Other aspects or
elements of energy exploration and
development can act directly on the
whales (e.g., noise, vessel collision,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Dec 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
marine debris). The SRT evaluated those
threats under Factor E, other natural or
human factors affecting a species
continued existence. Accordingly, we
discuss and evaluate those threats under
Factor E below.)
The Gulf of Mexico is a major oil and
gas producing area and has proven a
steady and reliable source of crude oil
and natural gas for more than 50 years.
Approximately 2,300 platforms operate
in Federal outer continental shelf (OCS)
waters (Rosel et al., 2016) and in 2001
approximately 27,569 miles (44,368 km)
of pipeline lay on the Gulf of Mexico
seafloor (Cranswick 2001). For planning
and administrative purposes, the Bureau
of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM)
has divided the Gulf of Mexico into
three planning areas: Western, Central,
and Eastern. The majority of active lease
sales are located in the Western and
Central Planning Areas. Habitat in the
north-central and western Gulf of
Mexico, which includes the GOMx
Bryde’s whale’s historical range, has
been significantly modified with the
presence of thousands of oil and gas
platforms. The Eastern Planning Area
(EPA), which overlaps with the GOMx
Bryde’s whale BIA, currently has no
production activity, with most of the
area falling under a moratorium of lease
sales until 2022. However, this
moratorium expires in 2022, and GOMx
Bryde’s whale could then be exposed to
increased threats associated with energy
exploration and development activities
(e.g., marine debris, operational
discharge, vessel collision, noise,
seismic surveys, oil spills, etc.) as they
are almost exclusively located within
this geographic region. In addition to
expressing concern regarding the
current curtailment of the GOMx
Bryde’s whale range due to energy
exploration and development in the
north-central and western Gulf of
Mexico, the SRT raised significant
concern about the moratorium expiring
and the potential expansion of impacts
that opening these waters to
development would have on the Bryde’s
whale BIA in the future, especially in
light of the apparent limited use by
Bryde’s whales of the north-central and
western Gulf of Mexico.
Oil Spills and Spill Response
Oil spills are a common occurrence in
the Gulf of Mexico. In 2010, the
Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil spill was
the largest spill affecting U.S. waters in
U.S. history, spilling nearly 134 million
gallons (507 million liters) of oil into the
Gulf of Mexico. In addition, 46 smallerscale spills associated with oil and gas
related activities (e.g., platforms, rigs,
vessels, pipelines) occurred in the Gulf
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
of Mexico between 2011 and 2013 (OCS
EIS EA BOEM 2015–001).
Exposure to oil spills may cause
marine mammals acute or chronic
impacts with lethal or sub-lethal effects
depending on the size and duration of
the spill. For large baleen whales, like
the GOMx Bryde’s whale, oil can foul
the baleen they use to filter-feed,
decreasing their ability to eat, and
resulting in the ingestion of oil (Geraci
et al., 1989). Impacts from exposure may
also include: Reproductive failure, lung
and respiratory impairments, decreased
body condition and overall health, and
increased susceptibility to other
diseases (Harvey and Dahlheim 1994).
Oil and other chemicals on the body of
marine mammals may result in
irritation, burns to mucous membranes
of eyes and mouth, and increased
susceptibility to infection (DWH
Trustees 2016). Dispersants used during
oil spill response activities may also be
toxic to marine mammals (Wise et al.,
2014a). After oil spills cease, marine
mammals may experience continued
effects through persistent exposure to
oil and dispersants in the environment,
reduction or contamination of prey,
direct ingestion of contaminated prey,
or displacement from preferred habitat
(Schwacke et al., 2014, BOEM and Gulf
of Mexico OCS Region 2015, DWH
Trustees 2016). The DWH oil spill is an
example of the significant impacts a
spill can have on the status of the GOMx
Bryde’s whale. Although the DWH
platform was not located within the
BIA, the oil footprint included 48
percent of GOMx Bryde’s whale habitat
and an estimated 17 percent of the
species was killed, 22 percent of
reproductive females experienced
reproductive failure, and 18 percent of
the population likely suffered adverse
health effects due to the spill (DWH
Trustees 2016). Based on the SRT’s
scoring, the threat of exposure to oil
spills and spill response is a ‘‘high’’
severity threat with a ‘‘high’’ level of
certainty to the GOMx Bryde’s whale.
Harmful Algal Blooms
Harmful Algal Blooms (HAB) occur
throughout the Gulf of Mexico, with
most blooms occurring off the coast of
Florida. One of the most common HAB
species, Karenia brevis (also known as
the red tide organism), is common along
coastal zones, but can also develop
offshore. Karenia brevis produces
neurotoxins that affect the nervous
system by blocking the entry of sodium
ions to nerve and muscle cells (Geraci
et al., 1989). The neurotoxins can
accumulate in primary consumers
through direct exposure to toxins in the
water, ingestion, or inhalation. Once
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
neurotoxins have entered the food web,
bioaccumulation can occur in predators
higher up on the food web, like GOMx
Bryde’s whales.
HABs are also known to negatively
affect marine mammal populations
through acute and chronic detrimental
health effects, including reproductive
failure (reviewed in Fire et al., 2009).
Although no documented cases of
GOMx Bryde’s whale deaths resulting
from HABs exist, cases involving
humpback whales (Megaptera
novaeangliae; Geraci et al., 1989) and
potentially fin (B. physalus) and minke
whales (Gulland and Hall 2007) have
been reported. Impacts from HABs have
also been associated with large-scale
mortality events for common bottlenose
dolphins and manatees in the offshore
and coastal waters of the northeastern
Gulf of Mexico. Given the small
population size of the GOMx Bryde’s
whale, the SRT noted that a HABinduced mortality of a single breeding
female would significantly degrade the
status of the population. Largely due to
human activities, HABs are increasing
in frequency, duration, and intensity
throughout the world (Van Dolah 2000).
Based on the SRT’s scoring, the threat
of harmful algal blooms (HABs) is a
‘‘moderate’’ severity threat with a ‘‘low’’
level certainty.
Persistent Organic Pollutants and Heavy
Metals
Concentrations of persistent organic
pollutants (POP) are typically lower in
baleen whales compared to toothed
whales due to differences in feeding
levels in the trophic system (Waugh et
al., 2014, Wise et al., 2014b). In general,
thresholds for adverse impacts to baleen
whales resulting from POPs are
unknown (Steiger and Calambokidis
2000).
Little is known about the effects of
heavy metals on offshore marine
mammal populations. Heavy metals can
accumulate in whale tissue and cause
toxicity (Sanpera et al., 1996,
´
Hernandez et al., 2000, Wise et al.,
2009). Similarly heavy metals
accumulate in prey at the trophic levels
where marine mammals feed. However,
concentrations of heavy metals in tissue
vary based on physiological and
ecological factors such as geographic
location, diet, age, sex, tissue, and
metabolic rate (Das et al., 2003).
Although heavy metals are pervasive in
the marine environment and
documented in various marine mammal
species, their impact on Bryde’s whale
health and survivorship is unknown.
Based on the SRT’s scoring, the threat
of POPs and heavy metals are ‘‘low’’
severity threat, with a ‘‘moderate’’ level
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Dec 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
of certainty for POPs and a ‘‘low’’ level
of certainty for heavy metals.
Summary of Factor A
We interpret the overall risk assigned
by the SRT for ESA Factor A as ‘‘high,’’
indicating that there are a high number
of threats that are moderately or very
likely to contribute to the decline of the
GOMx Bryde’s whale, or some
individual threats identified as very
likely to contribute to the decline of the
population. Specifically, the SRT found
that energy exploration and
development, and oil spills and spill
response, were significant threats
currently seriously degrading the GOMx
Bryde’s whale population. In addition,
the SRT found that HABs, POPs, and
heavy metals are not currently
significantly contributing to the risk of
extinction for the Gulf of Mexico
Bryde’s whale.
Based on the comprehensive status
review and after considering the SRT’s
threats assessment, we conclude that
energy exploration and development,
and oil spills and spill response, are
currently increasing the GOMx Bryde’s
whales risk of extinction.
Factor B. Overutilization for
Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
The SRT considered two threats
under ESA Factor B; historical whaling
and scientific biopsy sampling. The
overall rank assigned for Factor B, based
on the SRT’s scoring, is ‘‘low.’’
Historical Whaling
The SRT scored the impacts from
historical whaling as a ‘‘low’’ severity
threat with a ‘‘moderate-high’’ degree of
certainty. Whaling that occurred in the
18th and 19th centuries in the Gulf of
Mexico may have removed Bryde’s
whales. The primary target species were
sperm whales, but other species were
taken. Reeves et al., (2011) indicated
that, during the 18th and 19th centuries,
whalers hunting ‘‘finback whales’’ in
the Gulf of Mexico were most likely
taking Bryde’s whales, based on the
known distribution and recent records
of baleen whale species in the Gulf of
Mexico. However, the total number of
whales killed during that time cannot be
quantified. The SRT determined that it
is unlikely the current low abundance of
GOMx Bryde’s whales is related to
historical whaling, as the population
would have recovered to some extent,
given the estimated population recovery
rate (Wade 1998) and considering that
whaling stopped over a century ago
(Rosel et al., 2016). Whaling is not a
current threat in the Gulf of Mexico and
is regulated by the International
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
88645
Whaling Commission (see Factor D).
The SRT ranked the impacts from
historical whaling as ‘‘low’’ severity
threat with a ‘‘moderate-high’’ degree of
certainty.
Scientific Biopsy Sampling
Scientific research that may have the
potential to disturb and/or injure marine
mammals such as the Bryde’s whale
requires a letter of authorization under
the Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA). As of March 7, 2016 (the
reference date used by the SRT), there
was one active scientific permit
authorizing non-lethal take of GOMx
Bryde’s whale and four scientific
research permits authorizing non-lethal
take of Bryde’s whales worldwide,
including the Gulf of Mexico. The
permits authorize activities such as
vessel or aerial surveys, photoidentification, behavioral observation,
collection of sloughed skin, and passive
acoustics. Four of the permits also
authorize activities such as dart biopsies
and/or tagging. Biopsy sampling, where
a small piece of tissue is removed for
analysis, is a common research activity
used to support stock differentiation,
evaluate genetic variation, and
investigate health, reproduction and
pollutant loads (Brown et al., 1994).
Research on wound healing from
biopsies has indicated little long-term
impact (Brown et al., 1994, Best et al.,
2005). In addition, research activities
are closely monitored and evaluated in
the United States in an attempt to
minimize impacts (see Factor D). The
SRT scored the threat of scientific
biopsy sampling as a ‘‘low’’ severity
threat with a ‘‘high’’ level of certainty.
Summary of Factor B
The overall threat rank assigned for
Factor B by the SRT was ‘‘low,’’
indicating there are a low number of
threats that are likely to contribute to
the decline of the GOMx Bryde’s whale.
We conclude, based on our review of
the information presented in the Status
Review report and SRTs threats
assessment, that the threats posed by
whaling and scientific biopsy sampling
are not increasing the risk of extinction
for the Gulf of Mexico Bryde’s whale.
Upon reviewing the information in the
Status Review report and the SRT’s
threats assessment, we concluded that
whaling and scientific biopsy sampling
are low potential threats to the GOMx
Bryde’s whale and are not currently
contributing to the risk of extinction.
Factor C. Disease, Parasites, and
Predation
The SRT considered the following
threats under ESA Factor C: Disease and
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
88646
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules
parasites, and predation. The overall
rank assigned for Factor C based on the
SRT’s scoring was ‘‘low.’’
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Disease and Parasites
There is little information on disease
or parasitism of any Bryde’s whale in
the literature. Reviews of conservation
issues for baleen whales have tended to
see disease as a relatively
inconsequential threat (Claphan et al.,
1999). The SRT noted that cetacean
morbillivirus, which causes epizootics
resulting in serious population declines
in dolphin species (Van Bressem et al.,
2014), has also been detected in fin
whales in the eastern Atlantic Ocean
(Jauniaux et al., 2000) and in fin whales
and minke whales in the Mediterranean
Sea (Mazzariol et al., 2012; Di Guardo et
al., 1995). In the Gulf of Mexico the
morbillivirus outbreaks that occurred in
1990, 1992, and 1994, caused marine
mammal mortalities, with most the
mortalities being common bottlenose
dolphins (Rosel et al., 2016). These
outbreaks were thought to have
originated in the Atlantic Ocean (Litz et
al. 2014). An unusual mortality event
involving hundreds of common
bottlenose dolphins in the Atlantic
Ocean from 2013–2015 was caused by
morbillivirus (Rosel et al., 2016). During
this outbreak, a few individuals of
multiple species of baleen whales in the
Atlantic tested positive for the disease,
indicating that it could potentially
spread to Bryde’s whales (Rosel et al.,
2016). However, there have been no
confirmed morbillivirus-related deaths
of Bryde’s whales in the Gulf of Mexico
(Rosel et al., 2016).
The SRT identified only two cases of
other diseases and parasites known to
occur in Bryde’s whale detected in
Australia (Patterson 1984) and Brazil
(Pinto et al., 2004). Based on the SRT’s
scoring, the threat of disease and
parasites is a ‘‘low’’ severity threat with
‘‘low’’ certainty.
Predation
Killer whales (Orcinus orca) are the
only known predator to Bryde’s whales
and they occur in areas further offshore
from the BIA (Silber & Newcomer 1990,
Alava et al. 2013). There are no
published records of killer whale
predation of GOMx Bryde’s whale
(Rosel et al., 2016). Killer whales have
been observed harassing sperm whales
and attacking pantropical spotted
dolphins (Stenella attenuate) and a
dwarf/pygmy sperm whale (Kogia sp.)
(Pitman et al. 2001, Whitt et al. 2015,
NMFS SEFSC, unpublished) in the Gulf
of Mexico. While large sharks (e.g.,
white sharks Carcharodon carcharias,
and tiger sharks Galaecerdo cuvier) are
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Dec 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
known to scavenge on carcasses of
Bryde’s whales elsewhere in the world
(Dudley et al. 2000), the SRT found no
published reports of large shark
predation on healthy, living individuals
(Rosel et al., 2016). Based on this
information, the SRT’s scoring of this
threat was ‘‘low’’ severity with ‘‘low’’
certainty.
Summary of Factor C
The overall threat rank assigned for
Factor C, based on the SRT’s scoring
was ‘‘low,’’ indicating that this category
includes a low number of threats that
are likely to contribute to the decline of
the GOMx Bryde’s whale. Based on the
limited observance of disease, parasites,
or predation, we concur that these are
low potential threats to the GOMx
Bryde’s whale and are not currently
contributing to their extinction risk.
Factor D. Inadequacy of Existing
Regulatory Mechanisms
The relevance of existing regulatory
mechanisms to extinction risk for an
individual species depends on the
vulnerability of that species to each of
the threats identified under the other
factors of ESA section 4, and the extent
to which regulatory mechanisms could
or do control the threats that are
contributing to the species’ extinction
risk. If a species is not vulnerable to a
particular threat, it is not necessary to
evaluate the adequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms for addressing
that threat. Conversely, if a species is
vulnerable to a particular threat, we do
evaluate the adequacy of existing
measures, if any, in controlling or
mitigating that threat. In the following
paragraphs, we summarize existing
regulatory mechanisms relevant to
threats to GOMx Bryde’s whale
generally, and assess their adequacy for
controlling those threats.
Marine Mammal Protection Act
In U.S. waters, Bryde’s whales are
protected by the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361
et seq.). The MMPA sets forth a national
policy to prevent marine mammal
species or population stocks from
diminishing to the point where they are
no longer a significant functioning
element of their ecosystem. The
Secretaries of Commerce and the
Interior have primary responsibility for
implementing the MMPA. The Secretary
of Commerce has jurisdiction over the
orders Cetacean and Pinnipedia with
the exception of walruses, and the
Secretary of Interior has jurisdiction
over all other marine mammals. Both
agencies are responsible for
promulgating regulations, issuing
permits, conducting scientific research,
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and enforcing regulations, as necessary,
to carry out the purposes of the MMPA.
The MMPA includes a general
moratorium on the ‘taking’ and
importing of marine mammals, which is
subject to a number of exceptions. Some
of these exceptions include ‘take’ for
scientific purposes, public display, and
unintentional incidental take coincident
with conducting lawful activities. Any
U.S. citizen, agency, or company who
engages in a specified activity other
than commercial fishing (which is
specifically and separately addressed
under the MMPA) within a specified
geographic region may submit an
application to the Secretary to authorize
the incidental, but not intentional,
taking of small numbers of marine
mammals within that region for a period
of not more than five consecutive years
(16 U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(A)). U.S. citizens
can also apply under the MMPA for
authorization to incidentally take
marine mammals by harassment for up
to 1 year (16 U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(D)). For
both types of authorizations, it must be
determined that the take is of small
numbers, has no more than a negligible
impact on those marine mammal
species or stocks, and does not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock for
subsistence use. The MMPA also
provides mechanisms for directed
‘‘take’’ of marine mammals for the
purposes of scientific research. Nonlethal research takes of Bryde’s whale
for scientific research (e.g., biopsy
sampling) are currently authorized on a
global scale and typically do not specify
a geographic area. Hence the potential
for multiple biopsies of an individual
Bryde’s whale does exist. However, any
risk to GOMx Bryde’s whale from
multiple sampling is low, and we do not
expect any mortalities to result. In these
situations, we take a proactive role and
coordinate with researchers to minimize
any potential negative effects to a small
population.
The MMPA currently identifies the
Northern Gulf of Mexico stock of
Bryde’s whales as a ‘‘strategic’’ stock,
because the level of direct humancaused mortality and serious injury
exceeds the potential biological removal
(PBR) level determined for the species,
which could have management
implications. The MMPA also provides
additional protections to stocks
designated as ‘‘depleted’’ and requires
that conservation plans be developed to
conserve and restore the stock to its
optimum sustainable population (OSP).
In order for a stock to be considered
‘‘depleted’’ the Secretary, after
consultation with the Marine Mammal
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Commission and the Committee of
Scientific Advisors on Marine
Mammals, must determine it is below
its OSP or if the species or stock is listed
under the ESA. In 2015, the Marine
Mammal Stock Assessment Report
determined that the status of the
Northern Gulf of Mexico Population of
Bryde’s whales, relative to OSP was
unknown, as there was insufficient
information to determine population
trends (SARS 2015). Due to this lack of
information on OSP, the GOMx Bryde’s
whale is not designated as a ‘‘depleted’’
stock and there is no conservation plan.
Based on the above, we conclude that,
outside of the general protections
provided to marine mammals by the
MMPA, there are no specific regulatory
mechanisms specific to the GOMx
Bryde’s whale under the MMPA.
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act and
the Oil Pollution Act
The SRT also identified existing
regulatory mechanisms relating to oil
and gas development and oil spills and
spill response (see Factors A and E for
a discussion of those threats). The Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA)
establishes Federal jurisdiction over
submerged lands on the OCS seaward of
coastal state boundaries in order to
explore and develop oil and gas
resources. Implementation, regulation,
and granting of leases for exploration
and development on the OCS are
delegated to the BOEM, and BOEM is
responsible for managing development
of the nation’s offshore resources. The
functions of BOEM include leasing,
exploration and development, plan
administration, environmental studies,
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) analysis, resource evaluation,
economic analysis, and the renewable
energy program BSEE is responsible for
enforcing safety and environmental
regulations. OCSLA mandates that
orderly development of OCS energy
resources be balanced with protection of
human, marine and coastal
environments. It is the stated objective
of the OCSLA ‘‘to prevent or minimize
the likelihood of blowouts, loss of well
control, fires, spillages . . . or other
occurrences which may cause damage to
the environment or to property, or
endanger life or health’’ (43 U.S.C.
1332(6)). OCSLA further requires the
study of the environmental impacts of
oil and gas leases on the continental
shelf, including an assessment of effects
on marine biota (43 U.S.C. 1346).
OCSLA, as amended, requires the
Secretary of the Interior, through BOEM
and BSEE, to manage the exploration
and development of OCS oil, gas, and
marine minerals (e.g., sand and gravel)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Dec 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
and the siting of renewable energy
facilities. The Energy Policy Act of
2005, Public Law (Pub. L.) 109–58,
added Section 8(p)(1)(C) to the OCSLA,
which grants the Secretary of Interior
the authority to issue leases, easements,
or rights-of-way on the OCS for the
purpose of renewable energy
development (43 U.S.C. 1337(p)(1)(C)).
This authority has been delegated to
BOEM (30 CFR 585), who now regulates
activities within Federal waters. Since
2006, there has been a moratorium on
leasing new areas for oil and gas
development and production in the Gulf
of Mexico EPA that includes the waters
offshore of Florida, including the BIA.
The moratorium is set to expire in 2022
and, if it is not renewed, the GOMx
Bryde’s whale within the BIA could be
exposed to increased energy
exploration.
The Oil Pollution Act (OPA) of 1990
(33 U.S.C. 2701–2761) is the principal
statute governing oil spills in the
nation’s waterways. OPA was passed
following the March 1989 Exxon Valdez
oil spill to address a lack of adequate
resources, particularly Federal funds, to
respond to oil spills (National Pollution
Funds Center 2016). The OPA created
requirements for preventing, responding
to, and funding restoration for oil
pollution incidents in navigable waters,
adjoining shorelines, and Federal
waters. The OPA authorizes Trustees
(representatives of Federal, state, and
local government entities, and Tribes
with jurisdiction over the natural
resources in question) to determine the
type and amount of restoration needed
to compensate the public for the
environmental impacts of the spill.
These assessments are typically
described in damage assessment and
restoration plans. The Final
Programmatic Damage Assessment and
Restoration Plan (PDARP) developed for
the 2010 DWH oil spill found the GOMx
Bryde’s whale to be the most impacted
oceanic and shelf marine mammal; 48
percent of the population was affected,
resulting in an estimated 22 percent
maximum decline in population size
(DWH Trustees 2016). The DWH PDARP
allocates fifty-five million dollars over
the next 15 years for restoration of
oceanic and shelf marine mammals,
including Bryde’s whales. The PDARP
does not identify specific projects, but
lays out a framework for planning future
restoration projects, that may contribute
to the restoration of GOMx Bryde’s
whale.
The ongoing impacts to the GOMx
Bryde’s whale from oil and gas
development and oil spills in the Gulf
of Mexico identified by the SRT indicate
that existing regulatory mechanisms are
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
88647
not adequate to control these threats.
While the current moratorium on
leasing for new oil and gas development
in the EPA appears to provide some
protection to the GOMx Bryde’s whale,
the SRT found that development in the
Gulf of Mexico continues to have broad
impacts, through curtailment of range
and anthropogenic noise from seismic
surveys and vessels associated with oil
and gas development. Additionally, the
existing moratorium on new leases in
the EPA expires in 2022 and, if not
renewed, energy exploration would be
allowed in the GOMx Bryde’s whale
BIA, resulting in potentially severe
impacts to this small population. We
acknowledge that activities under the
DWH PDARP may be beneficial to
GOMx Bryde’s whales, but we also
conclude that oil spills and spill
response remain a serious current threat
to the GOMx Bryde’s whale population,
as discussed above in Factor A.
International Convention for the
Regulation of Whaling
The International Whaling
Commission (IWC) was set up under the
International Convention for the
Regulation of Whaling (ICRW), signed in
1946. The IWC established an
international moratorium on
commercial whaling for all large whale
species in 1982, effective in 1986; this
affected all member (signatory) nations
(paragraph 10e, IWC 2009a). Since 1985,
IWC catch limits for commercial
whaling have been set at zero. However,
under the IWC’s regulations,
commercial whaling has been permitted
in both Norway and Iceland based on
their objection to specific provisions. In
addition, harvest of whales by Japan for
scientific purposes has been permitted
by the ICRW, including the Bryde’s
whale in the North Pacific. However,
distribution of the GOMx Bryde’s whale
does not overlap with any permitted
commercial whaling. The SRT
concluded the current commercial
whaling moratorium provides
significant protection for the GOMx
Bryde’s whale, and we concur.
The Convention on International Trade
in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna
and Flora
The Convention on International
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
Fauna and Flora (CITES) is aimed at
protecting species at risk from
unregulated international trade and
regulates international trade in animals
and plants by listing species in one of
its three appendices. The level of
monitoring and control to which an
animal or plant species is subject
depends on the appendix in which the
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
88648
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules
species is listed. All Bryde’s whales (B.
edeni) are currently listed in Appendix
I under CITES. Appendix I includes
species that are threatened with
extinction and may be affected by trade;
trade of Appendix I species is only
allowed in exceptional circumstances.
Due to the IWC commercial whaling
moratorium in place since 1985,
commercial trade of Bryde’s whale in
the Gulf of Mexico has not been
permitted. However, if the moratorium
should be lifted in the future, the
Bryde’s whale’s CITES Appendix I
listing would restrict trade, so that trade
would not contribute to the extinction
risk of the species.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
International Maritime Organization
The International Maritime
Organization (IMO), a branch of the
United Nations, is the international
authority on shipping, pollution, and
safety at sea and has adopted guidelines
to reduce shipping noise and pollution
from maritime vessels. Additionally, the
IMO’s Marine Environment Protection
Committee occasionally identifies
special areas and routing schemes for
various ecological, economic, or
scientific reasons. Some of these actions
help benefit endangered right whales
and humpback whales. However the
SRT found no protected areas or routing
schemes that would protect the GOMx
Bryde’s whale.
Mexico Energy Sector: Opening to
Private Investment
The SRT expressed concern regarding
potential oil and gas development in the
southern Gulf of Mexico. Mexico
recently instituted reforms related to its
oil and gas sector that officially opened
Mexico’s oil, natural gas, and energy
sectors to private investment. As a
result, Mexico’s state-owned petroleum
company, Petroleos Mexicanos (Pemex)
may now partner with international
companies for the purposes of exploring
the southern Gulf of Mexico’s deep
water and shale resources. The SRT
found that more than 9 companies have
shallow water lease permits either
pending or approved, and 2D and 3D
seismic data collection has begun. In
2013, the U.S. Congress approved the
U.S.-Mexico Transboundary
Hydrocarbons Agreement, which aims
to facilitate joint development of oil and
natural gas in part of the Gulf of Mexico.
This agreement, coupled with recent
reforms in Mexico, could lead to
development within the Gulf of Mexico
offshore Mexico oil and gas, including
infrastructure for cross-border pipelines.
The SRT found that recent
developments indicate a high potential
for oil and gas development in these
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Dec 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
waters. However, we believe that
anticipating any future threats to the
GOMx Bryde’s whale at this point in
time is overly speculative, because the
best available science indicates that the
GOMx Bryde’s whale distribution does
not currently include the southern Gulf
of Mexico.
Summary of Factor D
The SRT unanimously agreed that the
inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms factor is a ‘‘high’’ threat to
the GOMx Bryde’s whale (Rosel et al.,
2016). Specifically the SRT found that,
given the current status and limited
distribution of the Bryde’s whale
population in the Gulf of Mexico, it is
clear that existing regulations have been
inadequate to protect them. The SRT
expressed particular concern regarding
current oil and gas development and
impacts from oil spills in the Gulf of
Mexico, as well as vessel strikes due to
shipping traffic. We agree that currently
there are no regulatory mechanisms in
the Gulf of Mexico to address ship
strikes on GOMx Bryde’s whales, which
the SRT identified as one of the primary
threats faced by the species (see Factor
E below). Additionally, the Status
Review report suggests that oil and gas
development in the Gulf of Mexico have
been a contributing factor to limiting the
GOMx Bryde’s whale’s current range to
the De Soto Canyon. Thus, while we
acknowledge that existing protective
regulations are in place, we agree with
the SRT’s overall conclusion that the
existing regulatory mechanisms have
not prevented the current status of the
GOMx Bryde’s whale, for the reasons
stated above.
Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade
Factors Affecting Its Continued
Existence
The SRT categorized threats under
ESA Factor E by three groups: A general
category for ‘‘other natural or human
factors;’’ anthropogenic noise; and small
population concerns. Within the general
sub-category for other natural or human
factors, the SRT included: Vessel
collision; military activities; fishing gear
entanglements; trophic impacts due to
commercial harvest of prey; climate
change; plastics and marine debris; and
aquaculture. Within the anthropogenic
noise sub-category of Factor E, the SRT
included: Aircraft and vessel noise
associated with oil and gas activities;
drilling and production noise associated
with oil and gas activities; seismic
survey noise associated with oil and gas
activities; noise associated with military
training and exercises; noise associated
with commercial fisheries and scientific
acoustics; and noise associated with
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
vessels and shipping traffic. Within the
small population concerns sub-category
of Factor E, the SRT included: Allee
effects; demographic stochasticity;
genetics; k-selected life-history
parameters; and stochastic and
catastrophic events. An explanation of
these threats and the SRT’s ranking for
each of these sub-categories follows.
Other Natural or Human Factors
Vessel Collision—Vessel collisions are
a significant source of mortality for a
variety of coastal large whale species
(Laist et al., 2001). The northern Gulf of
Mexico is an area of considerably high
amount of ship traffic, which increases
the risk of vessel-whale collisions (Rosel
et al., 2016). Several important
commercial shipping lanes travel
through the primary GOMx Bryde’s
whale habitat in the northeastern Gulf of
Mexico, particularly vessel traffic from
ports in Mobile, Pensacola, Panama
City, and Tampa (see Figure 17; Rosel et
al., 2016). In 2009, a GOMx Bryde’s
whale was found floating dead in the
Port of Tampa, Tampa Bay, Florida. The
documented cause of death was blunt
impact trauma due to ship strike
(Waring et al., 2016). The necropsy
report found that the whale was a
lactating female indicating that the
whale was nursing a calf. It is likely that
the calf died, as it was still dependent
on the mother.
Bryde’s whales are the third most
commonly reported species struck by
ships in the southern hemisphere (Van
Waerebeek et al., 2007). As previously
described, tracking information from a
single GOMx Bryde’s whale indicated a
consistent diel dive pattern over 3 days,
with 88 percent of nighttime hours
spent within 15 m of the surface. This
suggested to the SRT that, if other
individuals exhibit a similar diving
pattern, they would be at greater risk of
ship strike, because they spend most of
the time at the surface at night when
there is minimal visibility. Marine
mammals that spend the majority of
their nighttime hours near the surface
and animals that spend more time at or
near the surface are at greater risk than
species that spend less time at the
surface (Rosel et al., 2016).
Additionally, the threat of vessel
collision may increase in the future
given the expansion of the Panama
Canal, which is anticipated to increase
vessel traffic in the Gulf of Mexico
(Institute for Water Resources 2012).
Given the location of commercial
shipping lanes, the difficulty of sighting
a whale at the surface at night, and the
low ability of large ships to change
course quickly enough to avoid a whale,
the SRT’s scoring indicates that ship
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules
strikes pose a ‘‘high’’ severity threat to
the GOMx Bryde’s whale with ‘‘high’’
certainty.
Military Activities—Significant
portions of the Gulf of Mexico are used
for military activities. NMFS conducted
a 2013 Biological Opinion to assess the
impact of the Navy training exercises
and coordinated via a Letter of
Authorization under the MMPA to
govern unintentional takes incidental to
training and testing activities (Rosel et
al., 2016). Although Level B harassment
(i.e., activities that have the potential to
disturb or harass) is authorized, the
Navy determined that very few training
or testing activities are likely to occur
within the BIA (see Figures 18 and 19
in Rosel et al., 2016). Moreover, the
Navy agreed to expand their Planning
Awareness Area to encompass the
Bryde’s whale BIA and as a result they
will avoid planning major training
activities there, when feasible. In
addition, Eglin Air Force Base (AFB)
also conducts training exercises in the
Gulf of Mexico. Eglin AFB also has an
incidental harassment authorization for
common bottlenose dolphin and
Atlantic spotted dolphin, for their
Maritime Weapon Systems Evaluation
Program. However, their training
activities take place in relatively
shallow water (i.e., 35 to 50 m depth).
Eglin AFB does not anticipate that its
activities would take GOMx Bryde’s
whales, because the GOMx Bryde’s
whales are rare in the areas involved
(e.g., shallow waters); therefore, Eglin
AFB did not request a take authorization
(Rosel et al., 2016; 81 FR 7307, February
11, 2016). The SRT concluded that,
although there are military activities in
the Gulf of Mexico, including the
northern Gulf of Mexico, most activities
appeared to occur outside the BIA. In
addition, they found that military
activities are not constant, and due to
the current scope of existing activities,
the threat was considered less likely to
have negative impacts on the population
(Rosel et al., 2016). However, the SRT
believed that this threat would need to
be re-evaluated if the intensity, timing,
or location of military training exercises
encroached closer to the BIA. Based on
the SRT rankings, the threat of military
activities (i.e., explosive pressure waves,
target training, and vessel activities) is
a ‘‘moderate’’ threat with ‘‘low’’
certainty. The threat of noise from
military activities is considered under
the Anthropogenic Noise section, below.
Fishing Gear Entanglement—Marine
mammals are known to become hooked,
trapped, or entangled in fishing gear,
leading to injury or mortality (Read
2008, Reeves et al., 2013). While gear
interactions are documented more
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Dec 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
frequently for toothed whales, they
remain a threat to small populations of
baleen whales like the GOMx Bryde’s
whale (Reeves et al., 2013). The SRT
evaluated the special distribution and
fishing effort for 12 fisheries that occur
in the Gulf of Mexico. Based on their
evaluation, the SRT concluded that five
commercial fisheries (Table 7; Rosel et
al., 2016) overlap or possibly overlap
with the Bryde’s whale BIA and use gear
types (i.e., pelagic longlines, bottom
longlines, and trawls) that pose
entanglement threats to whales.
Pelagic longlines are a known
entanglement threat to baleen whales, as
the majority of mainline gear is in the
water column and animals swimming in
the area may interact with the gear
(Andersen et al., 2008). The Atlantic
Ocean, Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico
commercial pelagic longline fishery for
large pelagic species is active within the
GOMx Bryde’s whale BIA.
Approximately two thirds of the BIA
has been closed to commercial pelagic
longline fishing year-round since 2000,
when the Highly Migratory Species
Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish, and Sharks
Fishery Management Plan was amended
to close the De Soto Canyon Marine
Protected Area (65 FR 47214, August 1,
2000). While longline fishing still
occurs in the remaining one third of the
BIA (Figure 20B; Rosel et al., 2016), the
fishery typically operates in waters
greater than 300m, where sightings of
Bryde’s whales are infrequent. To date,
no interactions between GOMx Bryde’s
whale and pelagic longline gear have
been recorded.
Gulf reef fish and shark bottom
longline gear consists of a monofilament
mainline up to a mile in length
anchored on the seafloor, with up to
1,000 baited hooks along the mainline
and marked with buoys. Generally
bottom longline gear poses less of a
threat of entanglement threat to
cetaceans compared to pelagic longline
gear, except when cetaceans forage
along the seafloor. Such foraging
appears to be the case with the GOMx
Bryde’s whale, exposing them to risk of
entanglement in mainlines. These
fisheries overlap spatially with the
GOMx Bryde’s whale BIA. While bottom
longlining typically occurs in waters
less than 100m, fishing for yellowedge
grouper, golden tilefish, blueline
tilefish, and sharks occurs in deeper
waters between 100 and 300m within
the BIA. The available information
indicates the GOMx Bryde’s whale
forages on or near the seafloor bottom,
such that, potential for interactions
exists, although no interactions have
been recorded (Rosel et al., 2016).
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
88649
Both the Gulf of Mexico shrimp trawl
fishery and the butterfish trawl fishery
occur within the GOMx Bryde’s whale
BIA (Rosel et al., 2016). However, the
shrimp trawl fishery has limited spatial
overlap with the BIA and the areas that
do overlap represent only a small
portion of total fishing effort. The
butterfish trawl fishery is small, with
only two participants currently
permitted, and limited available
information. Based on the SRT’s
scoring, the threat of entanglement in
commercial fishing gear is ‘‘moderate’’
in severity with ‘‘moderate’’ certainty.
Trophic Impacts Due to Commercial
Harvest of Prey Items—While GOMx
Bryde’s whales’ prey in the Gulf of
Mexico are currently unknown (Rosel et
al., 2016), they likely feed on anchovy,
sardine, mackerel and herring, and
small crustaceans, similar to Bryde’s
whales worldwide (Kato 2000). The two
main Gulf of Mexico commercial
fisheries for small schooling fish are the
Gulf of Mexico menhaden purse-seine
fishery and the Florida west coast
sardine purse-seine fishery; the main
invertebrate fishery is the Gulf of
Mexico shrimp trawl fishery. The SRT
concluded that direct competition
between GOMx Bryde’s whale and
commercial fisheries did not appear to
be likely, based on the current
distribution of the GOMx Bryde’s whale,
the distribution of fishery effort, and
presumed fish and invertebrate habitat
(Rosel et al., 2016). The SRT also
evaluated the threat of total biomass
removal by the menhaden purse-seine
fishery and the shrimp trawl fishery in
the Gulf of Mexico and the resulting
impact on ecosystem functioning,
species composition, and potential
trophic pathway alterations, and
concluded that the ecosystem and
trophic effects of these removals are
unknown. Based on the SRT’s scoring,
the threat from trophic impacts due to
commercial harvest of prey is a ‘‘low’’
severity threat with ‘‘low’’ certainty.
Climate Change—The impacts of
climate change on cetaceans are not
easily quantified; however direct and
indirect impacts are expected (Evans
and Bj2014
16:27 Dec 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
safety (Gulf of Mexico Fishery
Management Council and National
Marine Fisheries Service 2009). Marine
mammals are known to interact with
aquaculture facilities through physical
interaction with nets, ropes, twine and
anchor lines (Price and Marris 2013).
Because each application, including the
proposed location, will be considered
on a case-by-case basis, taking into
account potential impacts to marine
mammals, and no aquaculture facilities
are currently sited in the Gulf of
Mexico, the SRT scoring indicates that
the SRT found aquaculture to be a
‘‘low’’ severity threat with ‘‘low’’
certainty.
Anthropogenic Noise—A variety of
anthropogenic noise sources, such as
energy exploration and development
and shipping have considerable energy
at low frequencies (<100 Hz) (Sodal
1999; Nieukirk et al., 2004; Hildebrand
2009; Nieukirk et al., 2012) and are
pervasive in the Gulf of Mexico (Rosel
et al., 2016). Baleen whales produce
calls that span a similar low frequency
range (20 Hz–30 kHz), and therefore,
presumably these species’ best hearing
abilities fall within this range, and are
most impacted by low-frequency sounds
(Richardson et al., 1995, Ketten 1997,
Ketten et al., 2013, Cranford and Krysl
2015). Marine mammals rely heavily on
their hearing to detect and interpret
communication and environmental cues
to select mates, find food, maintain
group structure and relationships, avoid
predators, navigate, and perform other
critical life functions (Rosel et al., 2016).
As noise levels rise in the marine
environment, there are a variety of
direct and indirect adverse physical and
behavioral effects to marine mammals
such as death, hearing loss or
impairment, stress, behavioral changes,
physiological effects, reduced foraging
success, reduced reproductive success,
masking of communication and
environmental cues, and habitat
displacement (Richardson et al., 1995,
Southall et al., 2007, Francis and Barber
2013). The SRT evaluated
anthropogenic noise and separately
assessed, as detailed below, noise from
aircraft and vessels associated with oil
and gas activities, seismic surveys
associated with oil and gas activities,
noise associated with military training
and exercises, noise associated with
commercial fisheries and scientific
acoustics, and noise associated with
vessels and shipping traffic.
Noise Generated from Aircraft and
Vessels and Oil Drilling and Production
Associated with Oil and Gas Activities—
Aircraft and vessel operations (service
vessels, etc.) support outer continental
shelf oil and gas activities in the Gulf of
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Mexico. Routine aircraft overflights may
interrupt and elicit a startle response
from marine mammals nearby
(Richardson et al., 1995). However, if
marine mammals are nearby, the
disturbance caused by helicopters
approaching or departing OCS oil and
gas facilities will be short in duration
and transient in nature. The SRT
reasoned that aircraft and vessel
operations may ensonify large areas, but
due to the lack of oil and gas activities
currently in the eastern Gulf of Mexico,
the threat from service aircraft and
vessel noise to GOMx Bryde’s whale
should be minimal.
Oil drilling and production activities
produce low-frequency underwater
sounds that are in the frequency range
detectable by the GOMx Bryde’s whale
and, given the amount of drilling
activity and platforms in the central and
western Gulf of Mexico, noise levels are
already high. While there are currently
no wells being drilled in the eastern
Gulf of Mexico, and no production
platforms in place, the potential
opening of the EPA that overlaps the
GOMx Bryde’s whale BIA for oil and gas
exploration is of considerable concern
(Rosel et al., 2016). Based on the SRT’s
scoring, the threat of noise generated
from aircraft and vessels associated with
oil and gas activities and noise from
drilling and oil production is a
‘‘moderate’’ threat, with a ‘‘moderate’’
level of certainty for noise associated
with aircraft and vessels, and the SRT
assigned a ‘‘low’’ level of certainty for
noise generated from drilling and oil
production.
Seismic Survey Noise Associated with
Oil and Gas Activities—The northern
Gulf of Mexico is an area of high seismic
survey activity; seismic surveys are
typically conducted 24 hours a day,
365-days a year, using airguns that are
a source of primarily low-frequency
sound (Sodal 1999), and that overlap
with ranges baleen whales use for
communication and hearing (Rosel et
al., 2016). These low-frequency sounds
can travel substantial distances and
airgun sounds have been recorded many
hundreds of miles away from the survey
locations (Nieukirk et al., 2004). Seismic
surveys have the potential to cause
serious injury to animals within 100m–
1km of airguns with source levels of 230
dB re 1 mPa (peak) or higher (Southall
et al., 2007). Behavioral changes
following seismic surveys, specifically
changes in vocal behavior and habitat
avoidance, have been documented for
baleen whales (Malme et al., 1984,
McCauley et al., 1998, Gordon et al.,
2001, Blackwell et al., 2015). While
reactions of Bryde’s whales to seismic
surveys have not been studied, the
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules
auditory abilities of all baleen whale
species are considered to be broadly
similar based upon vocalization
frequencies and ear anatomy (Ketten
1998). There are currently few seismic
surveys occurring in the eastern Gulf of
Mexico, due in part to the moratorium
on energy exploration in the EPA;
however, the SRT noted that, given the
ability of low-frequency sounds to travel
substantial distances, sounds from
nearby surveys may be impacting the
GOMx Bryde’s whales in the BIA. The
SRT scorned anthropogenic noise
associated with seismic surveys as a
‘‘high’’ severity threat with ‘‘moderate’’
certainty.
Noise Associated with Military
Training and Exercises—Military
training and exercises use active sonar
sources and explosives as part of their
operations and each of these sources
have the potential to impact marine
mammals (Rosel et al., 2016). However,
as discussed above, most military
activities that occur in the Gulf of
Mexico take place outside of the GOMx
Bryde’s whale BIA and the Navy
expanded their Planning Awareness
Area to encompass the BIA (see Military
Activities above). The SRT found this
threat to be less likely to have a negative
impact on the GOMx Bryde’s whale
compared to other threats associated
with the anthropogenic noise
considered in this sub-category.
Therefore, the SRT assigned the threat
of noise associated with military
training and exercises as ‘‘low’’ in
severity with a ‘‘moderate’’ level of
certainty.
Noise Associated with Commercial
Fisheries and Scientific Acoustics—
Commercial and scientific vessels
employ active sonar for the detection,
localization, and classification of
underwater targets, including the
seafloor, plankton, fish, and human
divers (Hildebrand 2009). Source
frequencies of many of these sonars are
likely above the frequency range for
Bryde’s whale hearing (Watkins 1986,
Au et al. 2006, Tubelli et al. 2012).
Recent technological advancements,
such as Ocean Acoustic Waveguide
Remote Sensing (OAWRS) system, use
low-frequency acoustics that have the
potential to impact baleen whale
behavior (Risch et al., 2012). However,
the SRT concluded these low-frequency
systems are not likely to be used in U.S.
waters in the future (Rosel et al., 2016).
Because the acoustic frequencies
associated with the sonar systems
employed by commercial fisheries and
scientific vessels are not within the
range of GOMx Bryde’s whale hearing
and are not likely to be used in the Gulf
of Mexico, the SRT assigned the threat
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Dec 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
of noise associated with commercial
fisheries and scientific acoustics a
ranking of ‘‘low’’ in severity with ‘‘low’’
certainty.
Noise Associated with Shipping
Traffic and Vessels—Noise from
shipping traffic is an unintended
byproduct of shipping and depends on
factors such as ship type, load, speed,
ship hull and propeller design; noise
levels increase with increasing speed
and vessel size (Allen et al., 2012,
McKella et al 2012b, Rudd et al., 2015).
Shipping noise is characterized by
mainly low frequencies (Hermannsen et
al., 2014) and contributes significantly
to low-frequency noise in the marine
environment (National Research
Council 2003, Hildebrand 2009).
Approximately 50 percent of U.S.
merchant vessel traffic (as measured by
port calls or tonnage for merchant
vessels over 1000 gross tons) occurs at
U.S. Gulf of Mexico ports, indicating
shipping activity is a significant source
of noise in this region. Noise is likely to
increase as shipping trends indicate that
faster, larger ships will traverse the Gulf
of Mexico following expansion of the
Panama Canal (Rosel et al., 2016).
Shipping noise in the northeast
United States was predicted to reduce
the communication space of humpback
whales, right whales, and fin whales by
8 percent, 77 percent, and 20 percent,
respectively, by masking their calls
(Clark et al. 2009). Because Bryde’s
whale call source levels are most similar
to those of right whales, the SRT found
they may be similarly impacted (Rosel
et al., 2016). Documented impacts of
vessel and shipping noise on marine
mammals, like the GOMx Bryde’s
whale, include: habitat displacement;
changes in diving and foraging behavior;
changes in vocalization behavior; and
altered stress hormone levels (Rosel et
al., 2016).
The SRT found that there is a high
level of low frequency noise caused by
shipping activity in the Gulf of Mexico,
and that it is likely the GOMx Bryde’s
whale is experiencing significant
biological impacts as a result. The
impacts to the GOMx Bryde’s whale are
assumed to be similar to those observed
in other low frequency hearing baleen
whale species, and include increased
stress hormone levels, changes in dive
and foraging behavior and
communication, and habitat
displacement. The SRT assigned the
threat of noise associated with shipping
traffic and vessels a score of ‘‘moderate’’
severity threat with ‘‘moderate’’
certainty.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
88651
Small Population Concerns
The final sub-category considered by
the SRT under ESA Factor E was small
population concerns. The SRT
considered Allee effects, demographic
stochasticity, genetics, k-selected lifehistory parameters, and stochastic and
catastrophic events under this subcategory.
Allee Effects—If a population is
critically small in size, individuals may
have difficulty finding a mate. The
probability of finding a mate depends
largely on density (i.e., abundance per
area) rather than absolute abundance
alone (Rosel et al., 2016). As previously
discussed, noise from ships and
industrial oil activities, including
seismic exploration, could mask mating
calls and contribute to reduced
fecundity of the GOMx Bryde’s whale
(Rosel et al., 2016). The small
population size (i.e., likely less than 100
individuals) may mean that Allee effects
are occurring, making it difficult for
individual whales to find one another
for breeding, thereby reducing the
population growth rate. The SRT’s
scored the impacts from Allee effects as
a ‘‘moderate’’ threat in both severity and
certainty.
Demographic Stochasticity—
Demographic stochasticity refers to the
variability of annual population change
arising from random birth and death
events at the individual level.
Populations that are small in number
are more vulnerable to adverse effects
from demographic stochasticity.
Demographic stochasticity is also more
problematic for slowly reproducing
species, such as GOMx Bryde’s whales,
which under normal conditions are
likely to produce a calf every two to
three years, similar to Bryde’s whales
worldwide and Eden’s whale. Mean
population growth rates can be reduced
by variances in inter-annual growth
rates, and this variance steadily
increases as the population size
decreases (Goodman 1987). The SRT
also noted that, while skewed sex ratios
do not currently appear to be a problem
for GOMx Bryde’s whales, their low
calving rate and small population size
create a higher probability of developing
skewed sex ratios through chance alone.
The SRT’s scored the threat from
impacts from demographic stochasticity
as ‘‘high’’ in both severity and certainty.
Genetics—Genetic stochasticity
results from three separate factors:
Inbreeding depression, loss of
potentially adaptive genetic diversity
and mutation accumulation (Frankham
2005, Reed 2005). The SRT concluded
that the very small population size and
documented low level of genetic
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
88652
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules
diversity (Rosel and Wilcox 2014)
indicates that the GOMx Bryde’s whale
is likely already experiencing
inbreeding (mating with related
individuals) that could lead to a loss of
potentially adaptive genetic diversity
and accumulation of deleterious
mutations (Frankham 2005, Reed 2005).
Applying the estimate from Taylor et
al., (2007) of 0.51 for the proportion of
a Bryde’s whale population that is
mature, and assuming a stable age
distribution, the SRT concluded there
would be at most 50 mature individuals
for the GOMx Bryde’s whale population,
putting the whales at immediate
recognized risk for genetic factors. Even
with a 50–50 sex ratio, the SRT
concluded that current abundance
estimates are so low that current Bryde’s
whale population levels would meet
any genetic risk threshold for decreased
population growth due to inbreeding
depression and potential loss of
adaptive genetic diversity (Rosel et al.,
2016). The SRT scored the threat of
genetic stochasticity as ‘‘high’’ in both
severity and certainty.
K-Selected Life History Parameters—
In general all whales are considered as
k-selected species due to their life
history characteristics of large-size, latematurity, and iteroparous reproduction
that is energetically expensive, resulting
in few offspring. K-selected life history
characteristics in and of themselves are
not a problem for baleen whales, but a
small population size coupled with a
low productivity rate further hinders
population growth and increases the
time frame for recovery when, as with
the GOMx Bryde’s whale, the
population size is small and overly
vulnerable to threats (Rosel et al., 2016).
The SRT assigned the threat from kselective life history parameters a score
of ‘‘high’’ in severity and certainty.
Stochastic and Catastrophic Events—
The small number of GOMx Bryde’s
whales and their restricted range (i.e.,
De Soto Canyon area of the northeastern
Gulf of Mexico) exacerbates the species’
vulnerability to stochastic and
catastrophic events. Further, the GOMx
Bryde’s whales are in close proximity to
oil extraction developments, extreme
weather events, and HABs. For example,
an analysis of the impacts of Deepwater
Horizon oil spill on cetacean stocks in
the Gulf of Mexico estimated that 17
percent of the GOMx Bryde’s whale
population was killed (DWH Trustees
2016). The SRT scored the threat from
stochastic and catastrophic events on
the GOMx Bryde’s whale as ‘‘high’’ in
severity with ‘‘high’’ certainty.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Dec 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
Summary of Factor E
The overall threat rank for ESA Factor
E by the SRT was influenced by the
suite of threats assessed by the SRT.
Based on the SRT’s scoring, vessel
collision, followed by fishing gear
entanglements, presents the most
serious individual threats of those
considered in the generic ‘‘other natural
and human factors,’’ category. The
threat of vessel collision is a significant
source of mortality for a variety of
coastal whale species and several
important commercial shipping lanes
travel through the GOMx Bryde’s whale
BIA (Rosel et al., 2016). Fishing gear
entanglement from the pelagic longline
and bottom longline fisheries is a threat
due to the spatial overlap between these
fisheries and the Bryde’s whale BIA,
and the potential for interactions given
the whale’s foraging behavior (Rosel et
al., 2016). The SRT’s overall threat
ranking for the generic ‘‘other natural or
human factors category’’ was moderatehigh. The SRT’s overall threat ranking
for the sub-category of ‘‘anthropogenic
noise’’ was ‘‘high’’, which was driven
strongly by the impacts of seismic noise,
shipping noise, and oil and gas
activities. The greatest threat identified
by the SRT under ESA Factor E was
‘‘small population concerns, which the
SRT’s scoring unanimously assigned a
‘‘high’’ overall threat rank.
In summary, the SRT found the level
of anthropogenic noise in the Gulf of
Mexico, the cumulative threat posed by
energy exploration, development and
production, and the risk of vessel
collisions, in combination with the
small population size, are threats that
are likely to eliminate or seriously
degrade the population. The overall
rank the SRT assigned for Factor E was
‘‘high’’ (i.e., two high overall ranks and
one moderate-high overall rank),
indicating that there are a high number
of threats that are moderately or very
likely to contribute to the decline of the
GOMx Bryde’s whale. Considering the
assessment completed by the SRT, we
determine that the threats considered
under Factor E are currently increasing
the risk of extinction for the GOMx
Bryde’s whale.
NMFS’ Conclusions From Threats
Evaluation
The most serious threats to the GOMx
Bryde’s whale are: Energy exploration
and development, oil spills and oil spill
response, vessel collision,
anthropogenic noise, and the effects of
small population size. We consider
these threats, under ESA section 4(a)(1)
factors A and E, as overall ‘‘high’’
threats. We agree with the SRT’s
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
assessment that these threats are
currently affecting the status of the
GOMx Bryde’s whale, and find that they
are putting it at a heightened risk of
extinction. We also agree with the SRT’s
characterization of factors B and C,
overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes and disease, parasites, or
predation, and their low overall ranking.
We find that these are not factors that
are likely contributing to the extinction
risk for the GOMx Bryde’s whale.
Finally, we agree with the SRT’s overall
conclusion for Factor D, that existing
regulatory measures have not
adequately prevented the GOMx Bryde’s
whale from reaching its current status,
given the presence of current threats to
the GOMx Bryde’s whale identified
under Factors A and E.
Demographic Risk Analysis
The SRT also evaluated four
demographic factors to assess the degree
of extinction risk: Abundance, spatial
distribution, growth/productivity, and
genetic diversity. These demographic
criteria have been used in previous
NMFS status reviews to summarize and
assess a population’s extinction risk due
to demographic processes. The SRT
used the following definitions to rank
these factors: 1 = ‘‘No or low risk: it is
unlikely that this factor contributes
significantly to risk of extinction, either
by itself or in combination with other
factors;’’ 2 = ‘‘Low risk: it is unlikely
that this factor contributes significantly
to risk of extinction by itself, but some
concern that it may contribute, in
combination with other factors;’’ 3 =
‘‘Moderate risk: it is likely that this
factor in combination with others
contributes significantly to risk of
extinction;’’ 4 = ‘‘High risk: it is likely
that this factor, by itself, contributes
significantly to risk of extinction’’; and
5 = ‘‘Very high risk: it is highly likely
that this factor, by itself, contributes
significantly to risk of extinction.’’ As
described in detail below, the SRT
concluded that each of these four
demographic factors are likely to
contribute significantly to the risk of
extinction for the GOMx Bryde’s whale.
The SRT determined that both
abundance and spatial distribution were
‘‘very high risk’’ factors, meaning that it
is highly likely that each factor, by
itself, contributes significantly to the
risk of extinction. The SRT concluded
the best available science indicated: (1)
The number of GOMx Bryde’s whales is
likely less than 100 mature individuals,
and (2) their current distribution
restricted to a small region along the
continental shelf break (100–300 m) in
the De Soto Canyon makes them
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules
vulnerable to catastrophe. The SRT
concluded that the GOMx Bryde’s whale
constitutes a dangerously small
population, at or below the nearextinction population level, and the
species’ restricted range makes it
vulnerable to a single catastrophic event
(Rosel et al., 2016).
The SRT ranked both growth/
productivity and genetic diversity as
‘‘high’’ risk factors, meaning that it is
likely that each factor, by itself,
contributes significantly to the risk of
extinction. The SRT noted that the lifehistory characteristics of the GOMx
Bryde’s whale (i.e., late-maturing, long
gestation, single offspring) result in a
slower recovery ability from their small
population size and leads to a longer
time during which a risk factor like a
catastrophe could occur (Rosel et al.,
2016). Allee effects were also identified
by the SRT as increasing extinction risk
because the small number of individuals
reduces population growth rate through
mate limitation (Rosel et al., 2016).
Similarly, the low level of genetic
diversity, documented in both mtDNA
and nuclear DNA by Rosel and Wilcox
(2014), combined with the small
population size, means that individuals
are likely breeding with related
individuals and inbreeding depression
may be occurring, resulting in a loss of
genetic diversity (Rosel et al., 2016).
Extinction Risk Analysis
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
The SRT considered the information
provided in the Status Review report
and demographic risk factors to conduct
an Extinction Risk Analysis (ERA). The
SRT summarized its ERA for the GOMx
Bryde’s whale, placing it in the context
of our agency guidelines on how to
synthesize extinction risk (NMFS 2015).
Those agency guidelines define the high
extinction risk category as:
A species or DPS with a high risk of
extinction is at or near a level of abundance,
productivity, spatial structure, and/or
diversity that places its continued
persistence in question. The demographics of
a species or DPS at such a high level of risk
may be highly uncertain and strongly
influenced by stochastic or depensatory
processes. Similarly, a species or DPS may be
at high risk of extinction if it faces clear and
present threats (e.g., confinement to a small
geographic area; imminent destruction,
modification, or curtailment of its habitat; or
disease epidemic) that are likely to create
present and substantial demographic risks.
Applying this standard, the SRT
unanimously agreed that the GOMx
Bryde’s whale has a high risk of
extinction.
The SRT provided the following
summary of the concerns leading to its
overall extinction risk assessment:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Dec 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
The GOMx Bryde’s whale population is
very small and is restricted to a small habitat
area in the De Soto Canyon region of the
northeastern [Gulf of Mexico]. Their level of
genetic divergence from other Bryde’s whales
worldwide indicates they are reproductively
isolated and on a unique evolutionary
trajectory. The Society for Marine
Mammalogy’s Committee on Taxonomy
concluded they represent at least an
unnamed subspecies of Bryde’s whales.
Although the historic population size is
unknown, whaling data indicate their
distribution in the [Gulf of Mexico] was once
much broader. The Team concluded,
therefore, based on the best available
scientific data, that there has been a range
contraction such that their primary range is
restricted to the northeastern [Gulf of
Mexico] although there are limited data from
outside U.S. waters. The north-central and
western [Gulf of Mexico] contains some of
the most industrialized marine waters in the
U.S. due to expansive energy exploration and
production, and also experiences significant
commercial shipping traffic and commercial
fishing activity. The area in the northeastern
[Gulf of Mexico], where all verified sightings
of Bryde’s whales have been recorded during
cetacean surveys, has experienced the least
amount of energy exploration, due in part to
a moratorium put in place in 2006. However,
this moratorium expires in 2022 and the
eastern [Gulf of Mexico] could be exposed to
increased energy activities. Commercial
fishing and vessel traffic also could affect the
whales in the eastern [Gulf of Mexico].
The Team concluded that the small
population size alone put the GOMx Bryde’s
whale at high risk of extinction. The small
size of this population makes it vulnerable to
inbreeding depression, demographic
stochasticity, and stochastic and catastrophic
events. The combination of small size plus
risk factors that may have affected the
population in the past and may affect it in
the future, further increase the extinction
risk. These factors include, in particular,
impacts due to energy exploration (e.g.,
habitat modification, noise from seismic
surveys, and shipping) and energy
production (e.g., oil spills), and vessel
collisions. The Team’s concern for this group
of whales is further increased by uncertainty
regarding the cause(s) of its small population
size, its limited distribution, current and
future threats, and the long-term viability of
the population (Rosel et al., 2016).
We consider the SRT’s approach to
assessing the extinction risk for GOMx
Bryde’s whale appropriate, consistent
with our agency guidance, and based on
the best scientific and commercial
information available. Based on the key
conclusions from the Status Review
report, including the ERA (Rosel et al.,
2016), we find that the GOMx Bryde’s
whale is a species, as defined by the
ESA, which is in danger of extinction
throughout all of its range, as a result of
ESA Factors A (the present or
threatened destruction, modification or
curtailment of a species’ habitat or
range), D (inadequacy of existing
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
88653
regulatory mechanisms), and E (other
natural or manmade factors affecting its
continued existence). Accordingly, we
find that the species meets the
definition of an endangered species.
Protective Efforts
Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the ESA requires
the Secretary, when making a listing
determination for a species, to take into
consideration those efforts, if any, being
made by any State or foreign nation to
protect the species. To evaluate the
efficacy of domestic efforts that have not
yet been implemented or that have been
implemented, but have not yet
demonstrated to be effective, the
Services developed a joint ‘‘Policy for
Evaluation of Conservation Efforts
When Making Listing Decisions’’ (PECE)
(68 FR 15100; March 28, 2003). The
PECE is designed to ensure consistent
and adequate evaluation on whether
domestic conservation efforts that have
been recently adopted or implemented,
but not yet proven to be successful, will
result in recovering the species to the
point at which listing is not warranted
or contribute to forming the basis for
listing a species as threatened rather
than endangered. The PECE is expected
to facilitate the development of
conservation efforts by states and other
entities that sufficiently improve a
species’ status so as to make listing the
species as threatened or endangered
unnecessary.
The PECE establishes two overarching
criteria to use in evaluating efforts
identified in conservations plans,
conservation agreements, management
plans or similar documents: (1) The
certainty that the conservation efforts
will be implemented; and (2) the
certainty that the efforts will be
effective. We have considered the
actions identified by the SRT (i.e.,
potential future DWH PDARP
restoration activities and Gulf of Mexico
Marine Assessment Program for
Protected Species (GoMMAPPS) as
conservation efforts and we have
concluded that they do not meet the
PECE policy criteria (see analysis
below).
The Status Review report (Rosel et al.,
2016) summarized two known
conservation efforts, both of which are
planned and have yet to be
implemented, which we further assess
here: The DWH PDARP and the
GoMMAPPS. The restoration plan in the
PDARP is a framework for planning
future restoration projects. For marine
mammals, the PDARP focuses on
restoration activities that support
population resilience, reduce further
harm or impacts, and complement
existing management priorities, with the
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
88654
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules
goal of compensating for the population
injuries suffered by each marine
mammal stock. GOMx Bryde’s whales
were the most impacted offshore
cetacean by the DWH oil spill, suffering
an estimated 22 percent maximum
decline in population size (DWH
Trustees 2016). Although specific
projects are not yet identified to
implement Bryde’s whale restoration,
we anticipate that they should benefit
the population, but, considering the
species’ life history, population
recovery to pre-spill levels will take
decades. More importantly, the
population estimates considered by the
SRT were pre-spill and were still found
to represent a high extinction risk.
Therefore, the conservation benefits that
may be expected through
implementation of the PDARP would
not be expected to reduce the extinction
risk for Bryde’s whale to a degree where
this population qualifies only as
threatened or where that listing is not
warranted.
We also considered the proposed
results from GoMMAPPS and its
potential to protect and restore the
population of GOMx Bryde’s whale. The
purpose of this program is to improve
information about abundance,
distribution, habitat use, and behavior
of living marine resources (e.g., marine
mammals, sea turtles, sea birds) in the
Gulf of Mexico, as well as to mitigate
and monitor potential impacts of human
activities. GoMMAPPS promotes
collaborations via data sharing with
other research efforts in the Gulf of
Mexico, including potentially with
Mexico. Given the scope of the program,
studies are likely to increase scientific
understanding of the GOMx Bryde’s
whale and its habitat, support
management decisions, and monitor
potential impacts of human activities.
GoMMAPPS is likely to provide
significantly improved information on
the status of protected species in the
Gulf of Mexico, possibly including
GOMx Bryde’s whales, and we
anticipate that this information can be
used to protect Bryde’s whales more
effectively in the future. However, these
conservation benefits will require
secondary actions that are not currently
known. Therefore, we conclude that the
conservation benefits from GOMAPPS
to Bryde’s whales are too diffuse and
uncertain to be considered effective
measures under our PECE policy. After
taking into account these conservation
efforts and the current status of GOMx
Bryde’s whale, our evaluation of the
section 4(a)(1) factors is that the
conservation efforts identified cannot be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Dec 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
considered effective measures in
reducing the current extinction risk.
Proposed Listing Determination
Section 4(b)(1) of the ESA requires
that we make listing determinations
based solely on the best scientific and
commercial data available after
conducting a review of the status of the
species and taking into account those
efforts, if any, being made by any state
or foreign nation, or political
subdivisions thereof, to protect and
conserve the species. We have reviewed
the best available scientific and
commercial information contained in
the Status Review report, the Threats
Evaluation, Demographic Evaluation,
and the ERA (Rosel et al., 2016). We
found that the GOMx Bryde’s whale is
a species, as defined by the ESA, which
is in danger of extinction throughout all
of its range as a result of ESA section
4(a)(1) Factors A, D, and E. After
considering efforts being made to
protect the species, we could not
conclude that existing or proposed
conservation efforts would alter its
extinction risk. Accordingly, we
propose to list the GOMx Bryde’s whale
as an endangered species.
Effects of Listing
Conservation measures provided for
species listed as endangered or
threatened under the ESA include
recovery plans (16 U.S.C. 1533(f)),
critical habitat designations (16 U.S.C.
1533(a)(3)(A)), Federal agency
consultation requirements (16 U.S.C.
1536), and protective regulations (16
U.S.C. 1533(d)). Recognition of the
species’ status through listing promotes
conservation actions by Federal and
state agencies, private groups, and
individuals, as well as the international
community. Both a recovery program
and designation of critical habitat could
result from this final listing. Given its
narrow range in the De Soto Canyon
region of the northeastern Gulf of
Mexico, and existing threats, a regional
cooperative effort to protect and restore
the population is necessary. Federal,
state, and the private sectors will need
to cooperate to conserve listed GOMx
Bryde’s whales and the ecosystem upon
which they depend.
Marine Mammal Protection Act
The MMPA provides protections to all
marine mammals, such as Bryde’s
whales, whether they are listed under
the ESA or not. In addition, the MMPA
provides heightened protections to
marine mammals designated as
‘‘depleted.’’ Section 3(1) of the MMPA
defines ‘‘depleted’’ as ‘‘any case in
which’’: (1) The Secretary ‘‘determines
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
that a species or population stock is
below its optimum sustainable
population’’; (2) a state to which
authority has been delegated makes the
same determination; or (3) a species or
stock ‘‘is listed as an endangered species
or a threatened species under the
[ESA]’’ (16 U.S.C. 1362(1)). Section
115(a)(1) of the MMPA establishes that
‘‘[i]n any action by the Secretary to
determine if a species or stock should be
designated as depleted, or should no
longer be designated as depleted,’’ such
determination must be made by rule,
after public notice and an opportunity
for comment (16 U.S.C. 1383b(a)(1)). It
is our position that a marine mammal
species or stock automatically gains
‘‘depleted’’ status under the MMPA
when it is listed under the ESA.
Identifying ESA Section 7 Consultation
Requirements
Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA and joint
NMFS/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
regulations require Federal agencies to
consult with us on any actions they
authorize, fund, or carry out if those
actions may affect the listed species or
designated critical habitat. Based on
currently available information, we can
conclude that examples of Federal
actions that may affect GOMx Bryde’s
whale include, but are not limited to:
Authorizations for energy exploration
(e.g., habitat modification, noise from
seismic surveys, and shipping), energy
production (e.g., oil drilling and
production), actions that directly or
indirectly introduce vessel traffic that
could result in collisions, and military
activities and fisheries regulations that
may impact the species.
Take Prohibitions
Because we are proposing to list this
species as endangered, all of the take
prohibitions of section 9(a)(1) of the
ESA would apply. These include
prohibitions against the import, export,
use in foreign commerce, or ‘‘take’’ of
the species. ‘‘Take’’ is defined under the
ESA as ‘‘to harass, harm, pursue, hunt,
shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or
collect, or attempt to engage in any such
conduct.’’ These prohibitions apply to
all persons subject to the jurisdiction of
the United States, including in the
United States or on the high seas.
Critical Habitat
Critical habitat is defined in section 3
of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1532(5)) as: (1)
The specific areas within the
geographical area occupied by a species,
at the time it is listed in accordance
with the ESA, on which are found those
physical or biological features (a)
essential to the conservation of the
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules
species and (b) that may require special
management considerations or
protection; and (2) specific areas outside
the geographical area occupied by a
species at the time it is listed upon a
determination that such areas are
essential for the conservation of the
species. ‘‘Conservation’’ means the use
of all methods and procedures needed
to bring the species to the point at
which listing under the ESA is no
longer necessary. Critical habitat may
also include areas unoccupied by GOMx
Bryde’s whale if those areas are
essential to the conservation of the
species.
Section 4(a)(3)(A) of the ESA (16
U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(A)) requires that, to
the maximum extent prudent and
determinable, critical habitat be
designated concurrently with the listing
of a species. Pursuant to 50 CFR
424.12(a), designation of critical habitat
is not determinable when one or both of
the following situations exist: (i) Data
sufficient to perform required analyses
are lacking; or (ii) The biological needs
of the species are not sufficiently well
known to identify any area that meets
the definition of ‘‘critical habitat.’’
Although we have gathered information
through the Status Review report and
public comment periods on the habitat
occupied by this species, we currently
do not have enough information to
determine what physical and biological
feature(s) within that habitat facilitate
the species’ life history strategy and are
thus essential to the conservation of
GOMx Bryde’s whale, and may require
special management considerations or
protection. To the maximum extent
prudent and determinable, we will
publish a proposed designation of
critical habitat for GOMx Bryde’s whale
in a separate rule. Designations of
critical habitat must be based on the
best scientific data available and must
take into consideration the economic,
national security, and other relevant
impacts of specifying any particular area
as critical habitat. Once critical habitat
is designated, section 7 of the ESA
requires Federal agencies to ensure that
they do not fund, authorize, or carry out
any actions that are likely to destroy or
adversely modify that habitat. This
requirement is in addition to the section
7 requirement that Federal agencies
ensure that their actions do not
jeopardize the continued existence of
listed species.
Policies on Peer Review
In December 2004, the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) issued
a Final Information Quality Bulletin for
Peer Review establishing minimum peer
review standards, a transparent process
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Dec 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
for public disclosure of peer review
planning, and opportunities for public
participation. The OMB Bulletin,
implemented under the Information
Quality Act (Pub. L. 106–554) is
intended to enhance the quality and
credibility of the Federal government’s
scientific information, and applies to
influential or highly influential
scientific information disseminated on
or after June 16, 2005. To satisfy our
requirements under the OMB Bulletin,
we received peer reviews from three
independent peer reviewers on the
Status Review report (Rosel et al., 2016).
All peer reviewer comments were
addressed prior to dissemination of the
final Status Review report and
publication of this final rule. We
conclude that these experts’ reviews
satisfy the requirements for ‘‘adequate
[prior] peer review’’ contained in the
Bulletin (sec. II.2.).
Public Comments Solicited
We intend that any final action
resulting from this proposal will be as
accurate as possible and informed by
the best available scientific and
commercial information. Therefore, we
request comments or information from
the public, other concerned
governmental agencies, the scientific
community, industry, or any other
interested party concerning this
proposed rule. In particular we seeks
comments containing: (1) Information,
including genetic analyses, regarding
the classification of the GOMx Bryde’s
whale as a subspecies; (2) life history
information including abundance,
distribution, diving, and foraging
patterns; (3) information concerning
threats to the species; (4) efforts being
made to protect the species throughout
its current range; and (5) other pertinent
information regarding the species.
We are also soliciting information on
physical or biological features and areas
that may support designation of critical
habitat for the GOMx Bryde’s whale.
Information provided should identify
the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the
species and areas that contain these
features. Areas outside the occupied
geographical area should also be
identified if such areas themselves are
essential to the conservation of the
species. Essential features may include,
but are not limited to, features specific
to the species’ range, habitat, and life
history characteristics within the
following general categories of habitat
features: (1) Space for individual growth
and normal behaviour; (2) food, or other
nutritional or physiological
requirements; (3) protection from
predation; (4) sites for reproduction and
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
88655
development of offspring; and (5)
habitats that are protected from natural
or human disturbance or are
representative of the historical,
geographical, and ecological
distributions of the species (50 CFR
424.12(b)). ESA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(h) specify
that critical habitat shall not be
designated within foreign countries or
in other areas outside of U.S.
jurisdiction. Therefore, we request
information only on potential areas of
critical habitat within U.S. jurisdiction.
For features and areas potentially
qualifying as critical habitat, we also
request information describing: (1)
Activities or other threats to the
essential features or activities that could
be affected by designating them as
critical habitat, and (2) the positive and
negative economic, national security
and other relevant impacts, including
benefits to the recovery of the species,
likely to result if these areas are
designated as critical habitat.
Public Hearing
During the public hearing, a brief
opening presentation on the proposed
rule will be provided before accepting
public testimony. Written comments
may be submitted at the hearing or via
the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal (see
ADDRESSES) until the scheduled close of
the comment period on (January 30,
2017). In the event that attendance at
the public hearing is large, the time
allotted for oral statements may be
limited. There are no limits on the
length of written comments submitted
to us. Oral and written statements
receive equal consideration.
Public Hearing Schedule
The date and location for the public
hearing is as follows: St. Petersburg,
Florida: January 19, 2017, from 6:00
p.m. to 8:00 p.m. at NOAA Fisheries,
Southeast Regional Office, Dolphin
Conference Room, 236 13th Avenue,
South, St. Petersburg, Florida 33701.
Special Accommodations
This hearing is physically accessible
to people with disabilities. Requests for
sign language interpretation or other
accommodations should be directed to
Calusa Horn (see ADDRESSES) as soon as
possible, but no later than 7 business
days prior to the hearing date.
References
A complete list of the references used
in this proposed rule is available upon
request, and also available at: https://
sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/protected_
resources/listing_petitions/species_esa_
consideration/.
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
88656
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 236 / Thursday, December 8, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Classifications
National Environmental Policy Act
The 1982 amendments to the ESA, in
section 4(b)(1)(A), restrict the
information that may be considered
when assessing species for listing. Based
on this limitation of criteria for a listing
decision and the opinion in Pacific
Legal Foundation v. Andrus, 675 F. 2d
825 (6th Cir. 1981), NMFS has
concluded that ESA listing actions are
not subject to the environmental
assessment requirements of the NEPA
(See NOAA Administrative Order 216–
6A).
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Flexibility Act and Paperwork
Reduction Act
As noted in the Conference Report on
the 1982 amendments to the ESA,
economic impacts cannot be considered
when assessing the status of a species.
Therefore, the economic analysis
requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act are not applicable to the
listing process. In addition, this final
rule is exempt from review under
Executive Order 12866. This final rule
does not contain a collection-ofinformation requirement for the
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction
Act.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
In keeping with the intent of the
Administration and Congress to provide
continuing and meaningful dialogue on
issues of mutual state and Federal
interest, the proposed rule will be
provided to the relevant agencies in
each state in which the subject species
occurs, and these agencies are invited to
comment.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 224
Administrative practice and
procedure, Endangered and threatened
species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
record keeping requirements,
Transportation.
Dated: December 2, 2016.
Samuel D. Rauch, III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, we propose to amend 50 CFR
part 224 as follows:
PART 224—ENDANGERED MARINE
AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES
1. The authority citation for part 224
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531–1543 and 16
U.S.C. 1361 et seq.
2. In § 224.101, in the table in
paragraph (h), add an entry for ‘‘Whale,
Bryde’s (Gulf of Mexico subspecies)’’
under MARINE MAMMALS in
alphabetical order by common name to
read as follows:
■
§ 224.101 Enumeration of endangered
marine and anadromous species.
*
*
*
(h) * * *
*
*
Species 1
Common name
*
Description of listed
entity
Scientific name
*
*
*
Citation(s) for listing
determination(s)
Critical habitat
*
ESA rules
*
*
Marine mammals
*
Whale, Bryde’s (Gulf of
Mexico subspecies).
*
*
*
Balaenoptera edeni
(unnamed subspecies).
*
*
Bryde’s whales that
breed and feed in the
Gulf of Mexico.
*
*
*
[Federal Register citation and date when
published as a final
rule].
*
NA ..................
*
*
1 Species
*
NA
*
includes taxonomic species, subspecies, distinct population segments (DPSs) (for a policy statement, see 61 FR 4722, February 7,
1996), and evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) (for a policy statement, see 56 FR 58612, November 20, 1991).
[FR Doc. 2016–29412 Filed 12–7–16; 8:45 am]
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Dec 07, 2016
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\08DEP1.SGM
08DEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 236 (Thursday, December 8, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 88639-88656]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-29412]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 224
[Docket No. 141216999-6999-02]
RIN 0648-XD669
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Notice of 12-Month
Finding on a Petition To List the Gulf of Mexico Bryde's Whale as
Endangered Under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule, request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, NMFS, announce a 12-month finding and listing
determination on a petition to list the Gulf of Mexico Bryde's whale
(Balaenoptera edeni) as threatened or endangered under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA). We have completed a Status Review report of the Gulf
of Mexico Bryde's whale in response to a petition submitted by the
Natural Resources Defense Council. After reviewing the best scientific
and commercial data available, including the Status Review report, and
consulting with the Society for Marine Mammology's Committee on
Taxonomy, we have determined that the Gulf of Mexico Bryde's whale is
taxonomically a subspecies of the Bryde's whale thus meeting the ESA's
definition of a species. Based on the Gulf of Mexico Bryde's whale's
small population (likely fewer than 100 individuals), its life history
characteristics, its extremely limited distribution, and its
vulnerability to existing threats, we believe that the species faces a
high risk of extinction. Based on these considerations, described in
more detail within this action, we conclude that the Gulf of Mexico
Bryde's whale is in danger of extinction throughout all of its range
and meets the definition of an endangered species. We are soliciting
information that may be relevant to inform both our final listing
determination and designation of critical habitat.
DATES: Information and comments on the subject action must be received
by January 30, 2017. For the specific date of the public hearing, see
Public Hearing section.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, information, or data on this
document, identified by the code NOAA-NMFS-2014-0101 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-2014-0101, click the ``Comment Now!'' icon,
complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments;
Mail: NMFS, Southeast Regional Office, 263 13th Avenue
South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701;
Hand delivery: You may hand deliver written information to
our office during normal business hours at the street address given
above.
The Status Review of Bryde's Whales in the Gulf of Mexico (Rosel et
al., 2016) and reference list are available by submitting a request to
the Species Conservation Branch Chief, Protected Resources Division,
NMFS Southeast Regional Office, 263 13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg,
FL 33701-5505, Attn: Bryde's Whale 12-month Finding. The Status Review
report and references are also available electronically at: https://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/protected_resources/listing_petitions/.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura Engleby or Calusa Horn, NMFS,
Southeast Regional Office (727) 824-5312 or Marta Nammack, NMFS, Office
of Protected Resources (301) 427-8469.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On September 18, 2014, we received a petition from the Natural
Resources Defense Council to list the Gulf of
[[Page 88640]]
Mexico population of Bryde's whale (Balaenoptera edeni) as an
endangered species. The petition asserted that the Bryde's whale in the
Gulf of Mexico is endangered by at least three of the five ESA section
4(a)(1) factors: present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of habitat or range; inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms; and other natural or manmade factors affecting its
continued existence. The petitioner also requested that critical
habitat be designated concurrent with listing under the ESA.
On April 6, 2015, we published a 90-day finding that the petition
presented substantial scientific and commercial information indicating
that the petitioned action may be warranted (80 FR 18343). At that
time, we announced the initiation of a formal status review and
requested scientific and commercial information from the public,
government agencies, scientific community, industry, and any other
interested parties on the delineation of, threats to, and the status of
the Bryde's whale in the Gulf of Mexico including: (1) Historical and
current distribution, abundance, and population trends; (2) life
history and biological information including adaptations to ecological
settings, genetic analyses to assess paternal contribution and
population connectivity, and movement patterns to determine population
mixing; (3) management measures and regulatory mechanisms designed to
protect the species; (4) any current or planned activities that may
adversely impact the species; and (5) ongoing or planned efforts to
protect and restore the species and habitat. We received eight public
comments in response to the 90-day finding, with the majority of
comments in support of the petition. The public provided relevant
scientific literature to be considered in the Status Review report as
well as a recently developed density model and abundance estimate.
Relevant information was incorporated in the Status Review report and
in this proposed rule.
Listing Determinations Under the ESA
We are responsible for determining whether the Bryde's whale in the
Gulf of Mexico is threatened or endangered under the ESA (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.). Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the ESA requires us to make
listing determinations based solely on the best scientific and
commercial data available after conducting a review of the status of
the species and after taking into account efforts being made by any
state or foreign nation to protect the species. To be considered for
listing under the ESA, a group of organisms must constitute a
``species,'' which is defined in Section 3 of the ESA to include
taxonomic species and ``any subspecies of fish, or wildlife, or plants,
and any distinct population segment (DPS) of any species of vertebrate
fish or wildlife which interbreeds when mature.'' Under NMFS
regulations, we must rely not only on standard taxonomic distinctions,
but also on the biological expertise of the agency and the scientific
community, to determine if the relevant taxonomic group is a
``species'' for purposes of the ESA (see 50 CFR 424.11). Under Section
4(a)(1) of the ESA, we must next determine whether any species is
endangered or threatened due to any of the following five factors: (A)
The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of
its habitat or range; (B) overutilization for commercial, recreational,
scientific, or educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the
inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) other natural or
manmade factors affecting its continued existence (sections 4(a)(1)(A)
through (E)).
To determine whether the Bryde's whale population in the Gulf of
Mexico warrants listing under the ESA, we first formed a Status Review
Team (SRT) of seven biologists, including six NOAA Fisheries Science
Center (Southeast, Southwest, and Northeast) and Southeast Regional
Office personnel and one member from the Bureau of Safety and
Environmental Enforcement--Gulf of Mexico Region, to compile and review
the best available scientific information on Bryde's whales in the Gulf
of Mexico and assess their extinction risk. The Status Review report
prepared by the SRT summarizes the taxonomy, distribution, abundance,
life history, and biology of the species, identifies threats or
stressors affecting the status of the species, and provides a
description of existing regulatory mechanisms and conservation efforts
(Rosel et al., 2016). The Status Review report incorporates information
received in response to our request for information (80 FR 18343; April
6, 2015) and comments from three independent peer reviewers.
Information from the Status Review report about the biology of the Gulf
of Mexico Bryde's whale is summarized below under ``Biological
Review.'' The Status Review report also includes a threats evaluation
and an Extinction Risk Analysis (ERA), conducted by the SRT. The
results of the threats evaluation are discussed below under ``Threats
Evaluation'' and the results of the ERA are discussed below under
``Extinction Risk Analysis.''
Section 3 of the ESA defines an endangered species as ``any species
which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range'' and a threatened species as one ``which is
likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range.'' Thus, we
interpret an ``endangered species'' to be one that is presently in
danger of extinction. A ``threatened species,'' on the other hand, is
not currently at risk of extinction but is likely to become so in the
foreseeable future. In other words, a key statutory difference between
a threatened and endangered species is the timing of when a species may
be in danger of extinction, either presently (endangered) or in the
foreseeable future (threatened).
In determining whether the Gulf of Mexico population of Bryde's
whale meets the standard of endangered or threatened, we first
determined that, based on the best scientific and commercial data
available, the Gulf of Mexico Bryde's whale is a genetically distinct
subspecies of the globally distributed Bryde's whale. We next
considered the specific life history and ecology of the species, the
nature of threats, the species' response to those threats, and
population numbers and trends. We considered both the data and
information summarized in the Status Review report, as well as the
results of the ERA. We considered impacts of each identified threat
both individually and cumulatively. For purposes of our analysis, the
mere identification of factors that could impact a species negatively
is not sufficient to compel a finding that ESA listing is appropriate.
In considering those factors that might constitute threats, we look
beyond mere exposure of the species to the factor to determine whether
the species responds, either to a single threat or multiple threats, in
a way that causes actual impacts at the species level. In making this
finding, we have considered and evaluated the best available scientific
and commercial information, including information received in response
to our 90-day finding.
Biological Review
This section provides a summary of key biological information
presented in the Status Review report (Rosel et al., 2016), which
provides the baseline context and foundation for our listing
determination. The petition specifically requested that we consider the
Gulf of Mexico population of Bryde's whale as a DPS and list that
population as an
[[Page 88641]]
endangered species. Therefore, the SRT first considered whether the
Bryde's whale in the Gulf of Mexico constituted a DPS, a subspecies, a
species, or part of the globally distributed Bryde's whale population.
This section also includes our conclusions based on the biological
information presented in the Status Review report.
Species Description
Bryde's whale (B. edeni) is a large baleen whale found in tropical
and subtropical waters worldwide. Currently two subspecies of Bryde's
whale are recognized: A smaller form, Eden's whale (B. e. edeni), found
in the Indian and western Pacific oceans primarily in coastal waters,
and a larger, more pelagic form, Bryde's whale (B. e. brydei), found
worldwide. Like Bryde's whales found worldwide, the Bryde's whale in
the Gulf of Mexico has a streamlined and sleek body shape, a somewhat
pointed, flat rostrum with three prominent ridges (i.e., a large center
ridge, and smaller left and right lateral ridges), a large falcate
dorsal fin, and a counter-shaded color that is fairly uniformly-dark
dorsally and light to pinkish ventrally (Jefferson et al., 2015). There
is no apparent morphological difference between the Bryde's whale in
the Gulf of Mexico and those worldwide. Baleen from these whales has
not been thoroughly characterized, but the baleen plates from one
individual from the Gulf of Mexico were dark gray to black with white
bristles (Rosel et al., 2016). This is consistent with the description
by Mead (1977), who indicated that the bristles of both Bryde's whale
subspecies are coarser than those in the closely-related sei whale.
Limited data (n=14) indicate the length of Bryde's whales in the Gulf
of Mexico is intermediate with the currently recognized subspecies. The
largest Bryde's whale observed in the Gulf of Mexico was a lactating
female at 12.7 meters (m) in length and the next four largest animals
were 11.2-11.6 m in length (Rosel and Wilcox 2014). Rice (1998)
reported adult Eden's whales rarely exceed 11.5 m total length and
adult Bryde's whales from the Atlantic, Pacific and the Indian Ocean
reach 14.0-15.0 m in length.
Genetics
In a recent genetic analysis of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) samples
taken from Bryde's whales in the Gulf of Mexico, Rosel and Wilcox
(2014) found that the Gulf of Mexico population was genetically
distinct from all other Bryde's whales worldwide. Maternally inherited
mtDNA is an indicator of population-level differentiation, as it
evolves relatively rapidly. Rosel and Wilcox (2014) identified 25-26
fixed nucleotide differences in the mtDNA control region between the
Bryde's whale in the Gulf of Mexico and the two currently recognized
subspecies (i.e., Eden's whale and Bryde's whale) and the sei whale (B.
borealis). They found that the level and pattern of mtDNA
differentiation discovered indicates that Gulf of Mexico Bryde's whales
are as genetically differentiated from other Bryde's whales worldwide,
as those Bryde's whales are differentiated from their most closely-
related species, the sei whale. In addition, genetic analysis of the
mtDNA data and data from 42 nuclear microsatellite loci (repeating base
pairs in the DNA) revealed that the genetic diversity within the Gulf
of Mexico Bryde's whale population is exceedingly low. Rosel and Wilcox
(2014) concluded that this level of genetic divergence suggests a
unique evolutionary trajectory for the Gulf of Mexico population of
Bryde's whale, worthy of its own taxonomic standing.
The SRT considered this level of genetic divergence to be
significant, indicating that the Bryde's whale in the Gulf of Mexico is
a separate subspecies. To confirm its determination, the SRT asked the
Society for Marine Mammalogy Committee on Taxonomy (Committee) for its
expert scientific opinion on the level of taxonomic distinctiveness of
the Bryde's whale in the Gulf of Mexico. The Committee maintains the
official list of marine mammal species and subspecies for the Society
for Marine Mammalogy. It updates the list as new descriptions of
species, subspecies, or taxonomic actions appear in the technical
literature, adhering to principle and procedures, opinions, and
directions set forth by the International Commission on Zoological
Nomenclature. The Committee also reviews, as requested, formal
descriptions of new taxa and other taxonomic actions, and provides
expert advice on taxonomic descriptions and other aspects of marine
mammal taxonomy. In response to the request made by the SRT, all of the
Committee members who responded (nine out of nine) voted it was
``highly likely'' that Bryde's whales in the Gulf of Mexico comprise at
least an undescribed subspecies of what is currently recognized as B.
edeni. This result constituted the opinion of the Committee, which
makes decisions by majority vote (W. F. Perrin, Committee Chairman
2015). Based on the expert opinion from the Committee and the best
available scientific information, the SRT concluded Bryde's whales in
the Gulf of Mexico are taxonomically distinct from the other two
Bryde's whale subspecies. The SRT identified the Bryde's whale
occurring in the Gulf of Mexico as a separate subspecies called ``GOMx
Bryde's whale,'' and conducted the Status Review accordingly.
Our regulations state that, ``In determining whether a particular
taxon or population is a species for the purpose of the Act, the
Secretary shall rely on standard taxonomic distinctions and biological
expertise of the Department and scientific community concerning the
relevant taxonomic group'' (50 CFR 424.11(a)). Under this provision, we
must consider the biological expertise of the SRT and the scientific
community, and apply the best available science when it indicates that
a taxonomic classification is outdated or incorrect. The GOMx Bryde's
whale has a high level of genetic divergence from the two recognized
Bryde's whale subspecies (Eden's whale and Bryde's whale) elsewhere in
the world. Given this information, we relied on the biological
expertise of the SRT and the Committee concerning the taxonomic status
of the Bryde's whale in the Gulf of Mexico. We agree with the SRT and
the Committee's determination that the Bryde's whale in the Gulf of
Mexico is taxonomically at least a subspecies of B. edeni. Based on the
best available scientific and commercial information described above
and in the Status Review report, we have determined that the Bryde's
whale in the Gulf of Mexico is a taxonomically distinct subspecies and,
therefore, eligible for listing under the ESA. Accordingly, we did not
further consider whether the Gulf of Mexico Bryde's whale population is
a DPS under the ESA.
Distribution
The Status Review report (Rosel et al., 2016) found that the
historical distribution of Bryde's whale in the Gulf of Mexico included
the northeastern, north-central and southern Gulf of Mexico. This was
based on work by Reeves et al. (2011), which reviewed whaling logbooks
of ``Yankee whalers'' and plotted daily locations of ships during the
period 1788-1877 as a proxy for whaling effort, with locations of
species takes and sightings in the Gulf of Mexico. These sightings by
the whalers were generally offshore in deeper (e.g., >1000 m) waters,
given their primary target of sperm whales (Physeter microcephalus).
Reeves et al. (2011) concluded whales reported as ``finback'' by
``Yankee whalers'' in the
[[Page 88642]]
Gulf of Mexico were most likely Bryde's whales, because Bryde's whales
are the only baleen whales that occur in the Gulf of Mexico year-round.
The SRT found that these data indicate that the historical distribution
of Bryde's whales in the Gulf of Mexico was much broader and also
included the north-central and southern Gulf of Mexico.
Stranding records from the Southeast U.S. stranding network, the
Smithsonian Institution, and the literature (Mead 1977, Schmidly 1981,
Jefferson 1995) include 22 Bryde's whales strandings in the Gulf of
Mexico from 1954-2012, although three have uncertain species
identification. Most strandings were recorded east of the Mississippi
River through west central Florida, but two were recorded west of
Louisiana. There are no documented Bryde's whale strandings in Texas,
although strandings of fin (B. physalus), sei (B. borealis), and minke
(B. acutorostrata) whales have been documented.
We began conducting oceanic (ship) and continental shelf (ship and
aerial) surveys for cetaceans in 1991 that continue today. The location
of shipboard and aerial survey effort in the Gulf of Mexico and
Atlantic Ocean was plotted by Roberts et al. (2016). Details of Bryde's
whale sightings from these surveys are summarized in Waring et al.
(2015). During surveys in 1991, Bryde's whales were sighted in the
northeastern Gulf of Mexico along the continental shelf break, in an
area known as the De Soto Canyon. In subsequent surveys, Bryde's whales
or whales identified as Bryde's/sei whales (i.e.., where it was not
possible to distinguish between a Bryde's whale or a sei whale), were
sighted in this same region of the northeastern Gulf of Mexico. When
observers were able to clearly see the dorsal surface of the rostrum of
at least one whale, three ridges were present, a diagnostic
characteristic of Bryde's whales (Maze-Foley & Mullin 2006). As a
result, our Gulf of Mexico surveys from 1991-2015 use sightings of
Bryde's whale, Bryde's/sei whale, and baleen whale species collectively
as the basis for estimates of Bryde's whales abundance and
distribution. Sightings of Bryde's whales in the Gulf of Mexico have
been consistently located in the De Soto Canyon area, along the
continental shelf break between 100 m and 300 m depth. Bryde's whales
have been sighted in all seasons within the De Soto Canyon area (Mullin
and Hoggard 2000, Maze-Foley and Mullin 2006, Mullin 2007, DWH MMIQT
2015). Consequently, LaBrecque et al. (2015) designated this area, home
to the small resident population of Bryde's whale in the northeastern
Gulf of Mexico, as a Biologically Important Area (BIA). BIA's are
reproductive areas, feeding areas, migratory corridors, and areas in
which small and resident populations are concentrated. They do not have
direct or immediate regulatory consequences. Rather, they are intended
to provide the best available science to help inform regulatory and
management decisions, in order to minimize impacts from anthropogenic
activities on marine mammals (LaBrecque et al., 2015).
Despite the lack of sightings of Bryde's whales in the Gulf of
Mexico outside the BIA, questions remain about their current
distribution in U.S. waters. NMFS surveys recorded three baleen whales
sighted outside the BIA (i.e., fin whale identified in 1992 off Texas
and two sightings of Bryde's/sei whale in 1992 and 1994 along the shelf
break in the western Gulf of Mexico). In addition, five records of
`baleen whales' have been recorded from 2010 to 2014 west of the BIA,
at the longitude of western Louisiana in depths similar to those in the
BIA (Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, unpublished). The
two sightings southwest of Louisiana included photographs showing they
were clearly baleen whales. However, the information collected was not
sufficient to identify to the species level. In 2015 a citizen sighted
and photographed what most experts believe was a Bryde's whale in the
western Gulf of Mexico south of the Louisiana-Texas border (Rosel et
al., 2016). Given these observations, the SRT determined that while it
is possible that a small number of baleen whales occur in U.S. waters
outside the BIA, these observations in the north-central and western
Gulf of Mexico were difficult to interpret (Rosel et al., 2016).
Few systematic surveys have been conducted in the southern Gulf of
Mexico (i.e., Mexico and Cuba). Six marine mammal surveys were
conducted from 1997 to 1999 in the southern Gulf of Mexico and
Yucat[aacute]n Channel. These surveys focused specifically in the
extreme southern Bay of Campeche, an area where Reeves et al. (2011)
reported numerous sightings of baleen whales from the whaling logbooks.
A more recent survey reported a single baleen whale in an area of
nearly 4,000 square kilometers (km\2\) (Ortega-Ortiz 2002, LaBrecque et
al. 2015). This whale was identified as a fin whale; however,
subsequent discussion between the author and the SRT suggested it
should have been recorded as an unidentified baleen whale (Rosel et
al., 2016). A compilation of all available records of marine mammal
sightings, strandings, and captures in the southern Gulf of Mexico
identified no Bryde's whales (Ortega-Ortiz 2002) as summarized in the
Status Review report (Rosel et al., 2016).
We agree with the SRT's findings that what is now recognized as the
GOMx Bryde's whale has been consistently located over the past 25 years
along a very narrow depth corridor in the northeastern Gulf of Mexico,
recognized as the GOMx Bryde's whale BIA. Sightings outside this
particular area are few, despite a large amount of dedicated marine
mammal survey effort that included both continental shelf and oceanic
waters of the Atlantic Ocean off the southeastern United States and the
northern Gulf of Mexico. Historical whaling records indicate that the
historical distribution of the GOMx Bryde's whale in the Gulf of Mexico
was much broader than it is currently and included the north-central
and southern Gulf of Mexico. We agree with the SRT that the BIA,
located in the De Soto Canyon area of the northeastern Gulf of Mexico,
encompasses the current areal distribution of GOMx Bryde's whale.
Abundance Estimates
All of the abundance estimates for Bryde's whale in the northern
Gulf of Mexico are based on aerial- or ship-based line-transect surveys
(Buckland et al., 2005). Various surveys conducted from 1991 to 2012
are discussed in the Status Review report (Rosel et al., 2016). As
previously stated, nearly all GOMx Bryde's whale sightings occurred in
the BIA during surveys that uniformly sampled the entire northern Gulf
of Mexico. The Marine Mammal Protection Act abundance estimate used for
management of the ``Northern Gulf of Mexico Bryde's Whale Stock'' is 33
whales (coefficient of variation = 1.07; Waring et al., 2013).
Recently, Duke University researchers estimated abundance to be 44
individuals (coefficient of variation = .27) based on the averages of
23 years of survey data (Roberts et al., 2015a, Roberts et al., 2016).
No analysis has been conducted to evaluate abundance trends for GOMx
Bryde's whale. Given the paucity of data that influences the range in
the abundance estimates, the SRT agreed by consensus that, given the
best available science and allowing for the uncertainty of Bryde's
whale occurrence in non-U.S. waters of the Gulf of Mexico, most likely
less than 100 individuals exist. For the reasons stated above, we
concur that likely less than 100 GOMx Bryde's whales exist.
[[Page 88643]]
Behavior
Little information exists on the behavior of GOMx Bryde's whale.
Maze-Foley and Mullin (2006) found GOMx Bryde's whales to have a mean
group size of 2 (range 1 -5, n = 14), similar to group sizes of the
Eden's and Bryde's whales (Wade and Gerrodette 1993). The GOMx Bryde's
whale is known to be periodically ``curious'' around ships and has been
documented approaching them in the Gulf of Mexico (Rosel et al., 2016),
as observed in Bryde's whales worldwide (Leatherwood et al. 1976,
Cummings 1985). In September 2015, a female GOMx Bryde's whale was
tagged with an acoustic and kinematic data-logging tag in the De Soto
Canyon (Rosel et al., 2016). Over the nearly 3-day tagging period, the
whale spent 47 percent of its time within 15 m of the surface during
the day and 88 percent of its time within 15 m of the surface during
the night (NMFS, unpublished data).
Foraging Ecology
Little information is available on foraging ecology available for
GOMx Bryde's whales. Based on behavior observed during assessment
surveys, these whales do not appear to forage at or near the surface
(NMFS, unpublished). In general, Bryde's whales are thought to feed
primarily in the water column on schooling fish such as anchovy,
sardine, mackerel and herring, and small crustaceans (Kato 2002). These
prey occur throughout the Gulf of Mexico and the BIA (Grace et al.
2010). Tracking data from the single whale with an acoustic tag
(described above) indicated diurnal diving to depths of up to 271 m,
with foraging lunges apparent at the deepest depths. That whale was
likely foraging at or just above the sea floor (NMFS, unpublished data)
where diel-vertical-migrating schooling fish form tight aggregations.
Reproduction and Growth
Little information exists on reproduction and growth of GOMx
Bryde's whale; however, similar to Eden's whales and Bryde's whales
elsewhere in the world, the GOMx Bryde's whale is considered to have k-
selected life history parameters (large body size, long life
expectancy, slow growth rate, late maturity, with few offspring).
Taylor et al. (2007) estimated that Bryde's whales worldwide may
reproduce every two to three years and reach sexual maturity at age
nine. Given the basic biology of baleen whales, it is likely that under
normal conditions, the female GOMx Bryde's whales produce a calf every
2 to 3 years. The largest known GOMx Bryde's whale was a lactating
female 12.6 m in length (Rosel and Wilcox 2014). Currently, skewed sex
ratio does not appear to be an issue for this population, as recent
biopsies have shown equal number of males and females (Rosel and
Wilcox, 2014; Rosel et al., 2016). No GOMx Bryde's whale calves have
been reported during surveys. However, two stranded calves have been
recorded in the Gulf of Mexico: A 4.7 m calf stranded in the Florida
Panhandle in 2006 (SEUS Historical Stranding Database) and a 6.9 m
juvenile stranded north of Tampa, Florida, in 1988 (Edds et al. 1993).
Acoustics
Baleen whale species produce a variety of highly stereotyped, low-
frequency tonal and broadband calls for communication purposes
(Richardson et al. 1995). These calls are thought to function in a
reproductive or territorial context, provide individual identification,
and communicate the presence of danger or food (Richardson et al.,
1995). Bryde's whales worldwide produce a variety of calls that are
distinctive among geographic regions that may be useful for delineating
subspecies or populations (Oleson et al. 2003, [Scaron]irovi[cacute] et
al. 2014). In the Gulf of Mexico, [Scaron]irovi[cacute] et al. (2014)
reported Bryde's whale call types composed of downsweeps and downsweep
sequences and localized these calls. Rice et al. (2014) detected these
sequences, as well as two stereotyped tonal call types that originated
from Bryde's whales in the Gulf of Mexico. One call type has been
definitively identified to free-ranging GOMx Bryde's whales
([Scaron]irovi[cacute] et al., 2014), four additional call types have
been proposed as likely candidates (Rice et al., 2014a,
[Scaron]irovi[cacute] et al., 2014), and two call types have been
described from a captive juvenile during rehabilitation (Edds et al.,
1993). Based on these data, the calls by the Gulf of Mexico Bryde's
whale are consistent with, but different from those previously reported
for Bryde's whales worldwide (Rice et al., 2014). These unique acoustic
signatures support the genetic analyses identifying the GOMx Bryde's
whale as an evolutionary distinct unit (Rosel and Wilcox 2014).
Threats Evaluation
The threats evaluation is the second step in making an ESA listing
determination for the GOMx Bryde's whale, as described above in
``Listing Determinations Under the ESA.'' The SRT identified a total of
27 specific threats, organized and described them according to the five
ESA factors listed in section 4(a)(1), and then evaluated the severity
of each threat with a level of certainty (see Appendix 3 in Rosel et
al., 2016). Because direct evidence from studies on GOMx Bryde's whales
was lacking, the SRT agreed that published scientific evidence from
other similar marine mammals was relevant and necessary to estimate
impacts to GOMx Bryde's whale and extinction risk.
To promote consistency when ranking each threat, the SRT used
definitions for `severity of threat' and `level of certainty' similar
to other status reviews, including the Hawaiian insular false killer
whales (Oleson et al. 2010) and the northeastern Pacific population of
white shark (Dewar et al. 2013). The SRT categorically defined specific
rankings for both severity and certainty for each specific threat
(identified below) as ``low,'' ``moderate,'' or ``high.'' The
categorical definitions for the severity of each threat were identified
by the SRT as 1 = ``low,'' meaning that the threat is likely to only
slightly impair the population; 2 = ``moderate,'' meaning that the
threat is likely to moderately degrade the population; or 3 = ``high,''
meaning that the threat is likely to eliminate or seriously degrade the
population. The SRT also scored the certainty of the threat severity
based on the following categorical definitions: 1 = ``low,'' meaning
little published and/or unpublished data exist to support the
conclusion that the threat did affect, is affecting, or is likely to
affect the GOMx Bryde's whale with the severity ascribed; 2 =
``moderate,'' meaning some published and/or unpublished data exist to
support the conclusion that the threat did affect, is affecting, or is
likely to affect the population with the severity ascribed; and 3 =
``high,'' meaning there are definitive published and/or unpublished
data to support the conclusion that this threat did affect, is
affecting, or is likely to affect the GOMx Bryde's whale with the
severity ascribed. Then, to determine the overall impact of an ESA
factor, the SRT looked at the collective impact of threats considered
for each ESA factor to provide an ``overall threat ranking'' for each
ESA factor, defined as follows: 1= ``low,'' meaning the ESA factor
included ``a low number'' of threats likely to contribute to the
decline of the GOMx Bryde's whale; 2 = ``moderate,'' meaning the ESA
Factor included an intermediate number of threats likely to contribute
to the decline of the GOMx Bryde's whale, or contained some individual
threats identified as moderately likely to contribute to the decline;
and 3 = ``high,'' meaning the ESA factor included a high number of
threats that are moderately or very likely
[[Page 88644]]
to contribute to the decline of the GOMx Bryde's whale, or contains
some individual threats identified as very likely to contribute to the
decline of the GOMx Bryde's whale.
The SRT then calculated the numerical mean of the team members'
scores for each threat or category of threats. However, we do not
believe that relying on the numerical mean of the SRT's scores is
appropriate, because the specific rankings for the severity, certainty,
and overall threat were categorically defined by the SRT and not
numerically defined. Therefore, we assessed the majority vote of the
team members' scores (i.e., 1, 2, or 3, as described above) and
assigned each threat a specific ranking defined by the SRT's
categorical definitions (i.e., low, moderate or high) based on the
majority vote of the SRT. When there was no clear majority (i.e., no
rank received four votes), the categorical ranking we assigned was a
combination of the two ranks receiving three votes each (e.g., three
votes for high and three votes for moderate we characterized as
``moderate-high'').
Each of the 27 threats identified by the SRT is summarized below,
by ESA factor, with severity and certainty rankings based on the SRT's
categorical scoring, as described above. We also summarize the overall
threat ranking for each ESA factor, based on the SRT's scores, and
provide NMFS' determination with regard to each factor. A detailed
table of the SRT's threats and rankings can be found in Appendix 3 of
the Status Review report (Rosel et al., 2016).
Factor A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or
Curtailment of Habitat or Range
The SRT considered the following threats to the GOMx Bryde's whale
under ESA Factor A: Energy exploration and development, oil spills and
spill response, harmful algal blooms, persistent organic pollutants,
and heavy metals. Based on the SRT's numerical threat rankings, the
overall threat ranking assigned to Factor A was ``high.''
Energy Exploration and Development
The SRT assigned the threat of energy exploration and development
(drilling rigs, platforms, cables, pipelines) a score of ``high''
severity threat with ``moderate'' certainty, as it relates to
destruction, modification, or curtailments of the range of the GOMx
Bryde's whale. (Note: Other aspects or elements of energy exploration
and development can act directly on the whales (e.g., noise, vessel
collision, marine debris). The SRT evaluated those threats under Factor
E, other natural or human factors affecting a species continued
existence. Accordingly, we discuss and evaluate those threats under
Factor E below.)
The Gulf of Mexico is a major oil and gas producing area and has
proven a steady and reliable source of crude oil and natural gas for
more than 50 years. Approximately 2,300 platforms operate in Federal
outer continental shelf (OCS) waters (Rosel et al., 2016) and in 2001
approximately 27,569 miles (44,368 km) of pipeline lay on the Gulf of
Mexico seafloor (Cranswick 2001). For planning and administrative
purposes, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) has divided the
Gulf of Mexico into three planning areas: Western, Central, and
Eastern. The majority of active lease sales are located in the Western
and Central Planning Areas. Habitat in the north-central and western
Gulf of Mexico, which includes the GOMx Bryde's whale's historical
range, has been significantly modified with the presence of thousands
of oil and gas platforms. The Eastern Planning Area (EPA), which
overlaps with the GOMx Bryde's whale BIA, currently has no production
activity, with most of the area falling under a moratorium of lease
sales until 2022. However, this moratorium expires in 2022, and GOMx
Bryde's whale could then be exposed to increased threats associated
with energy exploration and development activities (e.g., marine
debris, operational discharge, vessel collision, noise, seismic
surveys, oil spills, etc.) as they are almost exclusively located
within this geographic region. In addition to expressing concern
regarding the current curtailment of the GOMx Bryde's whale range due
to energy exploration and development in the north-central and western
Gulf of Mexico, the SRT raised significant concern about the moratorium
expiring and the potential expansion of impacts that opening these
waters to development would have on the Bryde's whale BIA in the
future, especially in light of the apparent limited use by Bryde's
whales of the north-central and western Gulf of Mexico.
Oil Spills and Spill Response
Oil spills are a common occurrence in the Gulf of Mexico. In 2010,
the Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil spill was the largest spill affecting
U.S. waters in U.S. history, spilling nearly 134 million gallons (507
million liters) of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. In addition, 46
smaller-scale spills associated with oil and gas related activities
(e.g., platforms, rigs, vessels, pipelines) occurred in the Gulf of
Mexico between 2011 and 2013 (OCS EIS EA BOEM 2015-001).
Exposure to oil spills may cause marine mammals acute or chronic
impacts with lethal or sub-lethal effects depending on the size and
duration of the spill. For large baleen whales, like the GOMx Bryde's
whale, oil can foul the baleen they use to filter-feed, decreasing
their ability to eat, and resulting in the ingestion of oil (Geraci et
al., 1989). Impacts from exposure may also include: Reproductive
failure, lung and respiratory impairments, decreased body condition and
overall health, and increased susceptibility to other diseases (Harvey
and Dahlheim 1994). Oil and other chemicals on the body of marine
mammals may result in irritation, burns to mucous membranes of eyes and
mouth, and increased susceptibility to infection (DWH Trustees 2016).
Dispersants used during oil spill response activities may also be toxic
to marine mammals (Wise et al., 2014a). After oil spills cease, marine
mammals may experience continued effects through persistent exposure to
oil and dispersants in the environment, reduction or contamination of
prey, direct ingestion of contaminated prey, or displacement from
preferred habitat (Schwacke et al., 2014, BOEM and Gulf of Mexico OCS
Region 2015, DWH Trustees 2016). The DWH oil spill is an example of the
significant impacts a spill can have on the status of the GOMx Bryde's
whale. Although the DWH platform was not located within the BIA, the
oil footprint included 48 percent of GOMx Bryde's whale habitat and an
estimated 17 percent of the species was killed, 22 percent of
reproductive females experienced reproductive failure, and 18 percent
of the population likely suffered adverse health effects due to the
spill (DWH Trustees 2016). Based on the SRT's scoring, the threat of
exposure to oil spills and spill response is a ``high'' severity threat
with a ``high'' level of certainty to the GOMx Bryde's whale.
Harmful Algal Blooms
Harmful Algal Blooms (HAB) occur throughout the Gulf of Mexico,
with most blooms occurring off the coast of Florida. One of the most
common HAB species, Karenia brevis (also known as the red tide
organism), is common along coastal zones, but can also develop
offshore. Karenia brevis produces neurotoxins that affect the nervous
system by blocking the entry of sodium ions to nerve and muscle cells
(Geraci et al., 1989). The neurotoxins can accumulate in primary
consumers through direct exposure to toxins in the water, ingestion, or
inhalation. Once
[[Page 88645]]
neurotoxins have entered the food web, bioaccumulation can occur in
predators higher up on the food web, like GOMx Bryde's whales.
HABs are also known to negatively affect marine mammal populations
through acute and chronic detrimental health effects, including
reproductive failure (reviewed in Fire et al., 2009). Although no
documented cases of GOMx Bryde's whale deaths resulting from HABs
exist, cases involving humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae; Geraci
et al., 1989) and potentially fin (B. physalus) and minke whales
(Gulland and Hall 2007) have been reported. Impacts from HABs have also
been associated with large-scale mortality events for common bottlenose
dolphins and manatees in the offshore and coastal waters of the
northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Given the small population size of the
GOMx Bryde's whale, the SRT noted that a HAB-induced mortality of a
single breeding female would significantly degrade the status of the
population. Largely due to human activities, HABs are increasing in
frequency, duration, and intensity throughout the world (Van Dolah
2000). Based on the SRT's scoring, the threat of harmful algal blooms
(HABs) is a ``moderate'' severity threat with a ``low'' level
certainty.
Persistent Organic Pollutants and Heavy Metals
Concentrations of persistent organic pollutants (POP) are typically
lower in baleen whales compared to toothed whales due to differences in
feeding levels in the trophic system (Waugh et al., 2014, Wise et al.,
2014b). In general, thresholds for adverse impacts to baleen whales
resulting from POPs are unknown (Steiger and Calambokidis 2000).
Little is known about the effects of heavy metals on offshore
marine mammal populations. Heavy metals can accumulate in whale tissue
and cause toxicity (Sanpera et al., 1996, Hern[aacute]ndez et al.,
2000, Wise et al., 2009). Similarly heavy metals accumulate in prey at
the trophic levels where marine mammals feed. However, concentrations
of heavy metals in tissue vary based on physiological and ecological
factors such as geographic location, diet, age, sex, tissue, and
metabolic rate (Das et al., 2003). Although heavy metals are pervasive
in the marine environment and documented in various marine mammal
species, their impact on Bryde's whale health and survivorship is
unknown. Based on the SRT's scoring, the threat of POPs and heavy
metals are ``low'' severity threat, with a ``moderate'' level of
certainty for POPs and a ``low'' level of certainty for heavy metals.
Summary of Factor A
We interpret the overall risk assigned by the SRT for ESA Factor A
as ``high,'' indicating that there are a high number of threats that
are moderately or very likely to contribute to the decline of the GOMx
Bryde's whale, or some individual threats identified as very likely to
contribute to the decline of the population. Specifically, the SRT
found that energy exploration and development, and oil spills and spill
response, were significant threats currently seriously degrading the
GOMx Bryde's whale population. In addition, the SRT found that HABs,
POPs, and heavy metals are not currently significantly contributing to
the risk of extinction for the Gulf of Mexico Bryde's whale.
Based on the comprehensive status review and after considering the
SRT's threats assessment, we conclude that energy exploration and
development, and oil spills and spill response, are currently
increasing the GOMx Bryde's whales risk of extinction.
Factor B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
The SRT considered two threats under ESA Factor B; historical
whaling and scientific biopsy sampling. The overall rank assigned for
Factor B, based on the SRT's scoring, is ``low.''
Historical Whaling
The SRT scored the impacts from historical whaling as a ``low''
severity threat with a ``moderate-high'' degree of certainty. Whaling
that occurred in the 18th and 19th centuries in the Gulf of Mexico may
have removed Bryde's whales. The primary target species were sperm
whales, but other species were taken. Reeves et al., (2011) indicated
that, during the 18th and 19th centuries, whalers hunting ``finback
whales'' in the Gulf of Mexico were most likely taking Bryde's whales,
based on the known distribution and recent records of baleen whale
species in the Gulf of Mexico. However, the total number of whales
killed during that time cannot be quantified. The SRT determined that
it is unlikely the current low abundance of GOMx Bryde's whales is
related to historical whaling, as the population would have recovered
to some extent, given the estimated population recovery rate (Wade
1998) and considering that whaling stopped over a century ago (Rosel et
al., 2016). Whaling is not a current threat in the Gulf of Mexico and
is regulated by the International Whaling Commission (see Factor D).
The SRT ranked the impacts from historical whaling as ``low'' severity
threat with a ``moderate-high'' degree of certainty.
Scientific Biopsy Sampling
Scientific research that may have the potential to disturb and/or
injure marine mammals such as the Bryde's whale requires a letter of
authorization under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). As of
March 7, 2016 (the reference date used by the SRT), there was one
active scientific permit authorizing non-lethal take of GOMx Bryde's
whale and four scientific research permits authorizing non-lethal take
of Bryde's whales worldwide, including the Gulf of Mexico. The permits
authorize activities such as vessel or aerial surveys, photo-
identification, behavioral observation, collection of sloughed skin,
and passive acoustics. Four of the permits also authorize activities
such as dart biopsies and/or tagging. Biopsy sampling, where a small
piece of tissue is removed for analysis, is a common research activity
used to support stock differentiation, evaluate genetic variation, and
investigate health, reproduction and pollutant loads (Brown et al.,
1994). Research on wound healing from biopsies has indicated little
long-term impact (Brown et al., 1994, Best et al., 2005). In addition,
research activities are closely monitored and evaluated in the United
States in an attempt to minimize impacts (see Factor D). The SRT scored
the threat of scientific biopsy sampling as a ``low'' severity threat
with a ``high'' level of certainty.
Summary of Factor B
The overall threat rank assigned for Factor B by the SRT was
``low,'' indicating there are a low number of threats that are likely
to contribute to the decline of the GOMx Bryde's whale. We conclude,
based on our review of the information presented in the Status Review
report and SRTs threats assessment, that the threats posed by whaling
and scientific biopsy sampling are not increasing the risk of
extinction for the Gulf of Mexico Bryde's whale. Upon reviewing the
information in the Status Review report and the SRT's threats
assessment, we concluded that whaling and scientific biopsy sampling
are low potential threats to the GOMx Bryde's whale and are not
currently contributing to the risk of extinction.
Factor C. Disease, Parasites, and Predation
The SRT considered the following threats under ESA Factor C:
Disease and
[[Page 88646]]
parasites, and predation. The overall rank assigned for Factor C based
on the SRT's scoring was ``low.''
Disease and Parasites
There is little information on disease or parasitism of any Bryde's
whale in the literature. Reviews of conservation issues for baleen
whales have tended to see disease as a relatively inconsequential
threat (Claphan et al., 1999). The SRT noted that cetacean
morbillivirus, which causes epizootics resulting in serious population
declines in dolphin species (Van Bressem et al., 2014), has also been
detected in fin whales in the eastern Atlantic Ocean (Jauniaux et al.,
2000) and in fin whales and minke whales in the Mediterranean Sea
(Mazzariol et al., 2012; Di Guardo et al., 1995). In the Gulf of Mexico
the morbillivirus outbreaks that occurred in 1990, 1992, and 1994,
caused marine mammal mortalities, with most the mortalities being
common bottlenose dolphins (Rosel et al., 2016). These outbreaks were
thought to have originated in the Atlantic Ocean (Litz et al. 2014). An
unusual mortality event involving hundreds of common bottlenose
dolphins in the Atlantic Ocean from 2013-2015 was caused by
morbillivirus (Rosel et al., 2016). During this outbreak, a few
individuals of multiple species of baleen whales in the Atlantic tested
positive for the disease, indicating that it could potentially spread
to Bryde's whales (Rosel et al., 2016). However, there have been no
confirmed morbillivirus-related deaths of Bryde's whales in the Gulf of
Mexico (Rosel et al., 2016).
The SRT identified only two cases of other diseases and parasites
known to occur in Bryde's whale detected in Australia (Patterson 1984)
and Brazil (Pinto et al., 2004). Based on the SRT's scoring, the threat
of disease and parasites is a ``low'' severity threat with ``low''
certainty.
Predation
Killer whales (Orcinus orca) are the only known predator to Bryde's
whales and they occur in areas further offshore from the BIA (Silber &
Newcomer 1990, Alava et al. 2013). There are no published records of
killer whale predation of GOMx Bryde's whale (Rosel et al., 2016).
Killer whales have been observed harassing sperm whales and attacking
pantropical spotted dolphins (Stenella attenuate) and a dwarf/pygmy
sperm whale (Kogia sp.) (Pitman et al. 2001, Whitt et al. 2015, NMFS
SEFSC, unpublished) in the Gulf of Mexico. While large sharks (e.g.,
white sharks Carcharodon carcharias, and tiger sharks Galaecerdo
cuvier) are known to scavenge on carcasses of Bryde's whales elsewhere
in the world (Dudley et al. 2000), the SRT found no published reports
of large shark predation on healthy, living individuals (Rosel et al.,
2016). Based on this information, the SRT's scoring of this threat was
``low'' severity with ``low'' certainty.
Summary of Factor C
The overall threat rank assigned for Factor C, based on the SRT's
scoring was ``low,'' indicating that this category includes a low
number of threats that are likely to contribute to the decline of the
GOMx Bryde's whale. Based on the limited observance of disease,
parasites, or predation, we concur that these are low potential threats
to the GOMx Bryde's whale and are not currently contributing to their
extinction risk.
Factor D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
The relevance of existing regulatory mechanisms to extinction risk
for an individual species depends on the vulnerability of that species
to each of the threats identified under the other factors of ESA
section 4, and the extent to which regulatory mechanisms could or do
control the threats that are contributing to the species' extinction
risk. If a species is not vulnerable to a particular threat, it is not
necessary to evaluate the adequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms
for addressing that threat. Conversely, if a species is vulnerable to a
particular threat, we do evaluate the adequacy of existing measures, if
any, in controlling or mitigating that threat. In the following
paragraphs, we summarize existing regulatory mechanisms relevant to
threats to GOMx Bryde's whale generally, and assess their adequacy for
controlling those threats.
Marine Mammal Protection Act
In U.S. waters, Bryde's whales are protected by the MMPA (16 U.S.C.
1361 et seq.). The MMPA sets forth a national policy to prevent marine
mammal species or population stocks from diminishing to the point where
they are no longer a significant functioning element of their
ecosystem. The Secretaries of Commerce and the Interior have primary
responsibility for implementing the MMPA. The Secretary of Commerce has
jurisdiction over the orders Cetacean and Pinnipedia with the exception
of walruses, and the Secretary of Interior has jurisdiction over all
other marine mammals. Both agencies are responsible for promulgating
regulations, issuing permits, conducting scientific research, and
enforcing regulations, as necessary, to carry out the purposes of the
MMPA. The MMPA includes a general moratorium on the `taking' and
importing of marine mammals, which is subject to a number of
exceptions. Some of these exceptions include `take' for scientific
purposes, public display, and unintentional incidental take coincident
with conducting lawful activities. Any U.S. citizen, agency, or company
who engages in a specified activity other than commercial fishing
(which is specifically and separately addressed under the MMPA) within
a specified geographic region may submit an application to the
Secretary to authorize the incidental, but not intentional, taking of
small numbers of marine mammals within that region for a period of not
more than five consecutive years (16 U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(A)). U.S.
citizens can also apply under the MMPA for authorization to
incidentally take marine mammals by harassment for up to 1 year (16
U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(D)). For both types of authorizations, it must be
determined that the take is of small numbers, has no more than a
negligible impact on those marine mammal species or stocks, and does
not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the
species or stock for subsistence use. The MMPA also provides mechanisms
for directed ``take'' of marine mammals for the purposes of scientific
research. Non-lethal research takes of Bryde's whale for scientific
research (e.g., biopsy sampling) are currently authorized on a global
scale and typically do not specify a geographic area. Hence the
potential for multiple biopsies of an individual Bryde's whale does
exist. However, any risk to GOMx Bryde's whale from multiple sampling
is low, and we do not expect any mortalities to result. In these
situations, we take a proactive role and coordinate with researchers to
minimize any potential negative effects to a small population.
The MMPA currently identifies the Northern Gulf of Mexico stock of
Bryde's whales as a ``strategic'' stock, because the level of direct
human-caused mortality and serious injury exceeds the potential
biological removal (PBR) level determined for the species, which could
have management implications. The MMPA also provides additional
protections to stocks designated as ``depleted'' and requires that
conservation plans be developed to conserve and restore the stock to
its optimum sustainable population (OSP). In order for a stock to be
considered ``depleted'' the Secretary, after consultation with the
Marine Mammal
[[Page 88647]]
Commission and the Committee of Scientific Advisors on Marine Mammals,
must determine it is below its OSP or if the species or stock is listed
under the ESA. In 2015, the Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Report
determined that the status of the Northern Gulf of Mexico Population of
Bryde's whales, relative to OSP was unknown, as there was insufficient
information to determine population trends (SARS 2015). Due to this
lack of information on OSP, the GOMx Bryde's whale is not designated as
a ``depleted'' stock and there is no conservation plan. Based on the
above, we conclude that, outside of the general protections provided to
marine mammals by the MMPA, there are no specific regulatory mechanisms
specific to the GOMx Bryde's whale under the MMPA.
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act and the Oil Pollution Act
The SRT also identified existing regulatory mechanisms relating to
oil and gas development and oil spills and spill response (see Factors
A and E for a discussion of those threats). The Outer Continental Shelf
Lands Act (OCSLA) establishes Federal jurisdiction over submerged lands
on the OCS seaward of coastal state boundaries in order to explore and
develop oil and gas resources. Implementation, regulation, and granting
of leases for exploration and development on the OCS are delegated to
the BOEM, and BOEM is responsible for managing development of the
nation's offshore resources. The functions of BOEM include leasing,
exploration and development, plan administration, environmental
studies, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis, resource
evaluation, economic analysis, and the renewable energy program BSEE is
responsible for enforcing safety and environmental regulations. OCSLA
mandates that orderly development of OCS energy resources be balanced
with protection of human, marine and coastal environments. It is the
stated objective of the OCSLA ``to prevent or minimize the likelihood
of blowouts, loss of well control, fires, spillages . . . or other
occurrences which may cause damage to the environment or to property,
or endanger life or health'' (43 U.S.C. 1332(6)). OCSLA further
requires the study of the environmental impacts of oil and gas leases
on the continental shelf, including an assessment of effects on marine
biota (43 U.S.C. 1346). OCSLA, as amended, requires the Secretary of
the Interior, through BOEM and BSEE, to manage the exploration and
development of OCS oil, gas, and marine minerals (e.g., sand and
gravel) and the siting of renewable energy facilities. The Energy
Policy Act of 2005, Public Law (Pub. L.) 109-58, added Section
8(p)(1)(C) to the OCSLA, which grants the Secretary of Interior the
authority to issue leases, easements, or rights-of-way on the OCS for
the purpose of renewable energy development (43 U.S.C. 1337(p)(1)(C)).
This authority has been delegated to BOEM (30 CFR 585), who now
regulates activities within Federal waters. Since 2006, there has been
a moratorium on leasing new areas for oil and gas development and
production in the Gulf of Mexico EPA that includes the waters offshore
of Florida, including the BIA. The moratorium is set to expire in 2022
and, if it is not renewed, the GOMx Bryde's whale within the BIA could
be exposed to increased energy exploration.
The Oil Pollution Act (OPA) of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2701-2761) is the
principal statute governing oil spills in the nation's waterways. OPA
was passed following the March 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill to address a
lack of adequate resources, particularly Federal funds, to respond to
oil spills (National Pollution Funds Center 2016). The OPA created
requirements for preventing, responding to, and funding restoration for
oil pollution incidents in navigable waters, adjoining shorelines, and
Federal waters. The OPA authorizes Trustees (representatives of
Federal, state, and local government entities, and Tribes with
jurisdiction over the natural resources in question) to determine the
type and amount of restoration needed to compensate the public for the
environmental impacts of the spill. These assessments are typically
described in damage assessment and restoration plans. The Final
Programmatic Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan (PDARP) developed
for the 2010 DWH oil spill found the GOMx Bryde's whale to be the most
impacted oceanic and shelf marine mammal; 48 percent of the population
was affected, resulting in an estimated 22 percent maximum decline in
population size (DWH Trustees 2016). The DWH PDARP allocates fifty-five
million dollars over the next 15 years for restoration of oceanic and
shelf marine mammals, including Bryde's whales. The PDARP does not
identify specific projects, but lays out a framework for planning
future restoration projects, that may contribute to the restoration of
GOMx Bryde's whale.
The ongoing impacts to the GOMx Bryde's whale from oil and gas
development and oil spills in the Gulf of Mexico identified by the SRT
indicate that existing regulatory mechanisms are not adequate to
control these threats. While the current moratorium on leasing for new
oil and gas development in the EPA appears to provide some protection
to the GOMx Bryde's whale, the SRT found that development in the Gulf
of Mexico continues to have broad impacts, through curtailment of range
and anthropogenic noise from seismic surveys and vessels associated
with oil and gas development. Additionally, the existing moratorium on
new leases in the EPA expires in 2022 and, if not renewed, energy
exploration would be allowed in the GOMx Bryde's whale BIA, resulting
in potentially severe impacts to this small population. We acknowledge
that activities under the DWH PDARP may be beneficial to GOMx Bryde's
whales, but we also conclude that oil spills and spill response remain
a serious current threat to the GOMx Bryde's whale population, as
discussed above in Factor A.
International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling
The International Whaling Commission (IWC) was set up under the
International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW), signed
in 1946. The IWC established an international moratorium on commercial
whaling for all large whale species in 1982, effective in 1986; this
affected all member (signatory) nations (paragraph 10e, IWC 2009a).
Since 1985, IWC catch limits for commercial whaling have been set at
zero. However, under the IWC's regulations, commercial whaling has been
permitted in both Norway and Iceland based on their objection to
specific provisions. In addition, harvest of whales by Japan for
scientific purposes has been permitted by the ICRW, including the
Bryde's whale in the North Pacific. However, distribution of the GOMx
Bryde's whale does not overlap with any permitted commercial whaling.
The SRT concluded the current commercial whaling moratorium provides
significant protection for the GOMx Bryde's whale, and we concur.
The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
Fauna and Flora
The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
Fauna and Flora (CITES) is aimed at protecting species at risk from
unregulated international trade and regulates international trade in
animals and plants by listing species in one of its three appendices.
The level of monitoring and control to which an animal or plant species
is subject depends on the appendix in which the
[[Page 88648]]
species is listed. All Bryde's whales (B. edeni) are currently listed
in Appendix I under CITES. Appendix I includes species that are
threatened with extinction and may be affected by trade; trade of
Appendix I species is only allowed in exceptional circumstances. Due to
the IWC commercial whaling moratorium in place since 1985, commercial
trade of Bryde's whale in the Gulf of Mexico has not been permitted.
However, if the moratorium should be lifted in the future, the Bryde's
whale's CITES Appendix I listing would restrict trade, so that trade
would not contribute to the extinction risk of the species.
International Maritime Organization
The International Maritime Organization (IMO), a branch of the
United Nations, is the international authority on shipping, pollution,
and safety at sea and has adopted guidelines to reduce shipping noise
and pollution from maritime vessels. Additionally, the IMO's Marine
Environment Protection Committee occasionally identifies special areas
and routing schemes for various ecological, economic, or scientific
reasons. Some of these actions help benefit endangered right whales and
humpback whales. However the SRT found no protected areas or routing
schemes that would protect the GOMx Bryde's whale.
Mexico Energy Sector: Opening to Private Investment
The SRT expressed concern regarding potential oil and gas
development in the southern Gulf of Mexico. Mexico recently instituted
reforms related to its oil and gas sector that officially opened
Mexico's oil, natural gas, and energy sectors to private investment. As
a result, Mexico's state-owned petroleum company, Petroleos Mexicanos
(Pemex) may now partner with international companies for the purposes
of exploring the southern Gulf of Mexico's deep water and shale
resources. The SRT found that more than 9 companies have shallow water
lease permits either pending or approved, and 2D and 3D seismic data
collection has begun. In 2013, the U.S. Congress approved the U.S.-
Mexico Transboundary Hydrocarbons Agreement, which aims to facilitate
joint development of oil and natural gas in part of the Gulf of Mexico.
This agreement, coupled with recent reforms in Mexico, could lead to
development within the Gulf of Mexico offshore Mexico oil and gas,
including infrastructure for cross-border pipelines. The SRT found that
recent developments indicate a high potential for oil and gas
development in these waters. However, we believe that anticipating any
future threats to the GOMx Bryde's whale at this point in time is
overly speculative, because the best available science indicates that
the GOMx Bryde's whale distribution does not currently include the
southern Gulf of Mexico.
Summary of Factor D
The SRT unanimously agreed that the inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms factor is a ``high'' threat to the GOMx Bryde's
whale (Rosel et al., 2016). Specifically the SRT found that, given the
current status and limited distribution of the Bryde's whale population
in the Gulf of Mexico, it is clear that existing regulations have been
inadequate to protect them. The SRT expressed particular concern
regarding current oil and gas development and impacts from oil spills
in the Gulf of Mexico, as well as vessel strikes due to shipping
traffic. We agree that currently there are no regulatory mechanisms in
the Gulf of Mexico to address ship strikes on GOMx Bryde's whales,
which the SRT identified as one of the primary threats faced by the
species (see Factor E below). Additionally, the Status Review report
suggests that oil and gas development in the Gulf of Mexico have been a
contributing factor to limiting the GOMx Bryde's whale's current range
to the De Soto Canyon. Thus, while we acknowledge that existing
protective regulations are in place, we agree with the SRT's overall
conclusion that the existing regulatory mechanisms have not prevented
the current status of the GOMx Bryde's whale, for the reasons stated
above.
Factor E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued
Existence
The SRT categorized threats under ESA Factor E by three groups: A
general category for ``other natural or human factors;'' anthropogenic
noise; and small population concerns. Within the general sub-category
for other natural or human factors, the SRT included: Vessel collision;
military activities; fishing gear entanglements; trophic impacts due to
commercial harvest of prey; climate change; plastics and marine debris;
and aquaculture. Within the anthropogenic noise sub-category of Factor
E, the SRT included: Aircraft and vessel noise associated with oil and
gas activities; drilling and production noise associated with oil and
gas activities; seismic survey noise associated with oil and gas
activities; noise associated with military training and exercises;
noise associated with commercial fisheries and scientific acoustics;
and noise associated with vessels and shipping traffic. Within the
small population concerns sub-category of Factor E, the SRT included:
Allee effects; demographic stochasticity; genetics; k-selected life-
history parameters; and stochastic and catastrophic events. An
explanation of these threats and the SRT's ranking for each of these
sub-categories follows.
Other Natural or Human Factors
Vessel Collision--Vessel collisions are a significant source of
mortality for a variety of coastal large whale species (Laist et al.,
2001). The northern Gulf of Mexico is an area of considerably high
amount of ship traffic, which increases the risk of vessel-whale
collisions (Rosel et al., 2016). Several important commercial shipping
lanes travel through the primary GOMx Bryde's whale habitat in the
northeastern Gulf of Mexico, particularly vessel traffic from ports in
Mobile, Pensacola, Panama City, and Tampa (see Figure 17; Rosel et al.,
2016). In 2009, a GOMx Bryde's whale was found floating dead in the
Port of Tampa, Tampa Bay, Florida. The documented cause of death was
blunt impact trauma due to ship strike (Waring et al., 2016). The
necropsy report found that the whale was a lactating female indicating
that the whale was nursing a calf. It is likely that the calf died, as
it was still dependent on the mother.
Bryde's whales are the third most commonly reported species struck
by ships in the southern hemisphere (Van Waerebeek et al., 2007). As
previously described, tracking information from a single GOMx Bryde's
whale indicated a consistent diel dive pattern over 3 days, with 88
percent of nighttime hours spent within 15 m of the surface. This
suggested to the SRT that, if other individuals exhibit a similar
diving pattern, they would be at greater risk of ship strike, because
they spend most of the time at the surface at night when there is
minimal visibility. Marine mammals that spend the majority of their
nighttime hours near the surface and animals that spend more time at or
near the surface are at greater risk than species that spend less time
at the surface (Rosel et al., 2016). Additionally, the threat of vessel
collision may increase in the future given the expansion of the Panama
Canal, which is anticipated to increase vessel traffic in the Gulf of
Mexico (Institute for Water Resources 2012). Given the location of
commercial shipping lanes, the difficulty of sighting a whale at the
surface at night, and the low ability of large ships to change course
quickly enough to avoid a whale, the SRT's scoring indicates that ship
[[Page 88649]]
strikes pose a ``high'' severity threat to the GOMx Bryde's whale with
``high'' certainty.
Military Activities--Significant portions of the Gulf of Mexico are
used for military activities. NMFS conducted a 2013 Biological Opinion
to assess the impact of the Navy training exercises and coordinated via
a Letter of Authorization under the MMPA to govern unintentional takes
incidental to training and testing activities (Rosel et al., 2016).
Although Level B harassment (i.e., activities that have the potential
to disturb or harass) is authorized, the Navy determined that very few
training or testing activities are likely to occur within the BIA (see
Figures 18 and 19 in Rosel et al., 2016). Moreover, the Navy agreed to
expand their Planning Awareness Area to encompass the Bryde's whale BIA
and as a result they will avoid planning major training activities
there, when feasible. In addition, Eglin Air Force Base (AFB) also
conducts training exercises in the Gulf of Mexico. Eglin AFB also has
an incidental harassment authorization for common bottlenose dolphin
and Atlantic spotted dolphin, for their Maritime Weapon Systems
Evaluation Program. However, their training activities take place in
relatively shallow water (i.e., 35 to 50 m depth). Eglin AFB does not
anticipate that its activities would take GOMx Bryde's whales, because
the GOMx Bryde's whales are rare in the areas involved (e.g., shallow
waters); therefore, Eglin AFB did not request a take authorization
(Rosel et al., 2016; 81 FR 7307, February 11, 2016). The SRT concluded
that, although there are military activities in the Gulf of Mexico,
including the northern Gulf of Mexico, most activities appeared to
occur outside the BIA. In addition, they found that military activities
are not constant, and due to the current scope of existing activities,
the threat was considered less likely to have negative impacts on the
population (Rosel et al., 2016). However, the SRT believed that this
threat would need to be re-evaluated if the intensity, timing, or
location of military training exercises encroached closer to the BIA.
Based on the SRT rankings, the threat of military activities (i.e.,
explosive pressure waves, target training, and vessel activities) is a
``moderate'' threat with ``low'' certainty. The threat of noise from
military activities is considered under the Anthropogenic Noise
section, below.
Fishing Gear Entanglement--Marine mammals are known to become
hooked, trapped, or entangled in fishing gear, leading to injury or
mortality (Read 2008, Reeves et al., 2013). While gear interactions are
documented more frequently for toothed whales, they remain a threat to
small populations of baleen whales like the GOMx Bryde's whale (Reeves
et al., 2013). The SRT evaluated the special distribution and fishing
effort for 12 fisheries that occur in the Gulf of Mexico. Based on
their evaluation, the SRT concluded that five commercial fisheries
(Table 7; Rosel et al., 2016) overlap or possibly overlap with the
Bryde's whale BIA and use gear types (i.e., pelagic longlines, bottom
longlines, and trawls) that pose entanglement threats to whales.
Pelagic longlines are a known entanglement threat to baleen whales,
as the majority of mainline gear is in the water column and animals
swimming in the area may interact with the gear (Andersen et al.,
2008). The Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico commercial pelagic
longline fishery for large pelagic species is active within the GOMx
Bryde's whale BIA. Approximately two thirds of the BIA has been closed
to commercial pelagic longline fishing year-round since 2000, when the
Highly Migratory Species Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish, and Sharks Fishery
Management Plan was amended to close the De Soto Canyon Marine
Protected Area (65 FR 47214, August 1, 2000). While longline fishing
still occurs in the remaining one third of the BIA (Figure 20B; Rosel
et al., 2016), the fishery typically operates in waters greater than
300m, where sightings of Bryde's whales are infrequent. To date, no
interactions between GOMx Bryde's whale and pelagic longline gear have
been recorded.
Gulf reef fish and shark bottom longline gear consists of a
monofilament mainline up to a mile in length anchored on the seafloor,
with up to 1,000 baited hooks along the mainline and marked with buoys.
Generally bottom longline gear poses less of a threat of entanglement
threat to cetaceans compared to pelagic longline gear, except when
cetaceans forage along the seafloor. Such foraging appears to be the
case with the GOMx Bryde's whale, exposing them to risk of entanglement
in mainlines. These fisheries overlap spatially with the GOMx Bryde's
whale BIA. While bottom longlining typically occurs in waters less than
100m, fishing for yellowedge grouper, golden tilefish, blueline
tilefish, and sharks occurs in deeper waters between 100 and 300m
within the BIA. The available information indicates the GOMx Bryde's
whale forages on or near the seafloor bottom, such that, potential for
interactions exists, although no interactions have been recorded (Rosel
et al., 2016).
Both the Gulf of Mexico shrimp trawl fishery and the butterfish
trawl fishery occur within the GOMx Bryde's whale BIA (Rosel et al.,
2016). However, the shrimp trawl fishery has limited spatial overlap
with the BIA and the areas that do overlap represent only a small
portion of total fishing effort. The butterfish trawl fishery is small,
with only two participants currently permitted, and limited available
information. Based on the SRT's scoring, the threat of entanglement in
commercial fishing gear is ``moderate'' in severity with ``moderate''
certainty.
Trophic Impacts Due to Commercial Harvest of Prey Items--While GOMx
Bryde's whales' prey in the Gulf of Mexico are currently unknown (Rosel
et al., 2016), they likely feed on anchovy, sardine, mackerel and
herring, and small crustaceans, similar to Bryde's whales worldwide
(Kato 2000). The two main Gulf of Mexico commercial fisheries for small
schooling fish are the Gulf of Mexico menhaden purse-seine fishery and
the Florida west coast sardine purse-seine fishery; the main
invertebrate fishery is the Gulf of Mexico shrimp trawl fishery. The
SRT concluded that direct competition between GOMx Bryde's whale and
commercial fisheries did not appear to be likely, based on the current
distribution of the GOMx Bryde's whale, the distribution of fishery
effort, and presumed fish and invertebrate habitat (Rosel et al.,
2016). The SRT also evaluated the threat of total biomass removal by
the menhaden purse-seine fishery and the shrimp trawl fishery in the
Gulf of Mexico and the resulting impact on ecosystem functioning,
species composition, and potential trophic pathway alterations, and
concluded that the ecosystem and trophic effects of these removals are
unknown. Based on the SRT's scoring, the threat from trophic impacts
due to commercial harvest of prey is a ``low'' severity threat with
``low'' certainty.
Climate Change--The impacts of climate change on cetaceans are not
easily quantified; however direct and indirect impacts are expected
(Evans and Bj[oslash]rge 2013). Potential impacts of climate change on
marine mammals include range shifts, habitat degradation or loss,
changes to the food web, susceptibility to disease and contaminants,
and thermal intolerance (MacLeod 2009, Evans and Bj[oslash]rge 2013).
The restricted distribution of the GOMx Bryde's whale is a concern, as
climate change may disproportionately affect species with specialized
or restricted habitat requirements. As water temperatures rise, many
marine species will have to shift their distributions
[[Page 88650]]
northward or in a direction that maintains a near-constant environment
(e.g., temperature and prey availability) (Evans et al., 2010). Within
the Gulf of Mexico, GOMx Bryde's whales have little room to shift their
distribution northward into cooler waters. Furthermore, the predicted
changes in freshwater inflow and the associated effects on productivity
may affect the health of the Gulf of Mexico. While recognizing the
potential threat that climate change poses to the GOMx Bryde's whale,
the SRT considered that there are more significant and immediate
pressures on the GOMx Bryde's whale (Rosel et al., 2016). The SRT
assigned the threat of climate change as a ``low'' severity threat to
GOMx Bryde's whale with ``low'' certainty.
Plastics and Marine Debris--Plastics comprise 60-80 percent of all
marine debris (Baulch and Perry 2014), and derelict fishing gear is the
second most common form of marine debris (National Oceanic Service
2015). The interactions of marine mammals with marine debris in the
Gulf of Mexico are not frequently documented and the SRT did not find
any documented cases specific to Bryde's whale (NOAA Fisheries Marine
Mammal Health and Stranding Response Database). Less than one percent
of marine mammal strandings in the Gulf of Mexico from 2000-2014 showed
evidence of entanglement or ingestion of marine debris (NOAA Fisheries
Marine Mammal Health and Stranding Response Database, March 21, 2016).
While noting that the records of reported marine mammal strandings may
not be comprehensive, the SRT's scoring ranked this threat as ``low''
severity with ``low'' certainty (Rosel et al., 2016).
Aquaculture--There are currently no aquaculture facilities in the
U.S. waters of the Gulf of Mexico. However, a final rule was published
on January 13, 2016 (81 FR 1761) regulating offshore marine aquaculture
in the Gulf of Mexico and establishing a regional permitting process.
We note that this final rule is currently under challenge in a pending
court proceeding, Gulf Fishermen's Association, et al. v. NMFS, 16-cv-
01271 (E.D. La.). The associated Fishery Management Plan for Regulating
Offshore Aquaculture in the Gulf of Mexico (FMP) specifies that each
facility must satisfy a list of siting requirements and conditions and
specifies that an application may be denied for potential risks to
essential fish habitat, endangered and threatened species, marine
mammals, wild fish and invertebrate stocks, public health, or safety
(Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council and National Marine
Fisheries Service 2009). Marine mammals are known to interact with
aquaculture facilities through physical interaction with nets, ropes,
twine and anchor lines (Price and Marris 2013). Because each
application, including the proposed location, will be considered on a
case-by-case basis, taking into account potential impacts to marine
mammals, and no aquaculture facilities are currently sited in the Gulf
of Mexico, the SRT scoring indicates that the SRT found aquaculture to
be a ``low'' severity threat with ``low'' certainty.
Anthropogenic Noise--A variety of anthropogenic noise sources, such
as energy exploration and development and shipping have considerable
energy at low frequencies (<100 Hz) (Sodal 1999; Nieukirk et al., 2004;
Hildebrand 2009; Nieukirk et al., 2012) and are pervasive in the Gulf
of Mexico (Rosel et al., 2016). Baleen whales produce calls that span a
similar low frequency range (20 Hz-30 kHz), and therefore, presumably
these species' best hearing abilities fall within this range, and are
most impacted by low-frequency sounds (Richardson et al., 1995, Ketten
1997, Ketten et al., 2013, Cranford and Krysl 2015). Marine mammals
rely heavily on their hearing to detect and interpret communication and
environmental cues to select mates, find food, maintain group structure
and relationships, avoid predators, navigate, and perform other
critical life functions (Rosel et al., 2016). As noise levels rise in
the marine environment, there are a variety of direct and indirect
adverse physical and behavioral effects to marine mammals such as
death, hearing loss or impairment, stress, behavioral changes,
physiological effects, reduced foraging success, reduced reproductive
success, masking of communication and environmental cues, and habitat
displacement (Richardson et al., 1995, Southall et al., 2007, Francis
and Barber 2013). The SRT evaluated anthropogenic noise and separately
assessed, as detailed below, noise from aircraft and vessels associated
with oil and gas activities, seismic surveys associated with oil and
gas activities, noise associated with military training and exercises,
noise associated with commercial fisheries and scientific acoustics,
and noise associated with vessels and shipping traffic.
Noise Generated from Aircraft and Vessels and Oil Drilling and
Production Associated with Oil and Gas Activities--Aircraft and vessel
operations (service vessels, etc.) support outer continental shelf oil
and gas activities in the Gulf of Mexico. Routine aircraft overflights
may interrupt and elicit a startle response from marine mammals nearby
(Richardson et al., 1995). However, if marine mammals are nearby, the
disturbance caused by helicopters approaching or departing OCS oil and
gas facilities will be short in duration and transient in nature. The
SRT reasoned that aircraft and vessel operations may ensonify large
areas, but due to the lack of oil and gas activities currently in the
eastern Gulf of Mexico, the threat from service aircraft and vessel
noise to GOMx Bryde's whale should be minimal.
Oil drilling and production activities produce low-frequency
underwater sounds that are in the frequency range detectable by the
GOMx Bryde's whale and, given the amount of drilling activity and
platforms in the central and western Gulf of Mexico, noise levels are
already high. While there are currently no wells being drilled in the
eastern Gulf of Mexico, and no production platforms in place, the
potential opening of the EPA that overlaps the GOMx Bryde's whale BIA
for oil and gas exploration is of considerable concern (Rosel et al.,
2016). Based on the SRT's scoring, the threat of noise generated from
aircraft and vessels associated with oil and gas activities and noise
from drilling and oil production is a ``moderate'' threat, with a
``moderate'' level of certainty for noise associated with aircraft and
vessels, and the SRT assigned a ``low'' level of certainty for noise
generated from drilling and oil production.
Seismic Survey Noise Associated with Oil and Gas Activities--The
northern Gulf of Mexico is an area of high seismic survey activity;
seismic surveys are typically conducted 24 hours a day, 365-days a
year, using airguns that are a source of primarily low-frequency sound
(Sodal 1999), and that overlap with ranges baleen whales use for
communication and hearing (Rosel et al., 2016). These low-frequency
sounds can travel substantial distances and airgun sounds have been
recorded many hundreds of miles away from the survey locations
(Nieukirk et al., 2004). Seismic surveys have the potential to cause
serious injury to animals within 100m-1km of airguns with source levels
of 230 dB re 1 [micro]Pa (peak) or higher (Southall et al., 2007).
Behavioral changes following seismic surveys, specifically changes in
vocal behavior and habitat avoidance, have been documented for baleen
whales (Malme et al., 1984, McCauley et al., 1998, Gordon et al., 2001,
Blackwell et al., 2015). While reactions of Bryde's whales to seismic
surveys have not been studied, the
[[Page 88651]]
auditory abilities of all baleen whale species are considered to be
broadly similar based upon vocalization frequencies and ear anatomy
(Ketten 1998). There are currently few seismic surveys occurring in the
eastern Gulf of Mexico, due in part to the moratorium on energy
exploration in the EPA; however, the SRT noted that, given the ability
of low-frequency sounds to travel substantial distances, sounds from
nearby surveys may be impacting the GOMx Bryde's whales in the BIA. The
SRT scorned anthropogenic noise associated with seismic surveys as a
``high'' severity threat with ``moderate'' certainty.
Noise Associated with Military Training and Exercises--Military
training and exercises use active sonar sources and explosives as part
of their operations and each of these sources have the potential to
impact marine mammals (Rosel et al., 2016). However, as discussed
above, most military activities that occur in the Gulf of Mexico take
place outside of the GOMx Bryde's whale BIA and the Navy expanded their
Planning Awareness Area to encompass the BIA (see Military Activities
above). The SRT found this threat to be less likely to have a negative
impact on the GOMx Bryde's whale compared to other threats associated
with the anthropogenic noise considered in this sub-category.
Therefore, the SRT assigned the threat of noise associated with
military training and exercises as ``low'' in severity with a
``moderate'' level of certainty.
Noise Associated with Commercial Fisheries and Scientific
Acoustics--Commercial and scientific vessels employ active sonar for
the detection, localization, and classification of underwater targets,
including the seafloor, plankton, fish, and human divers (Hildebrand
2009). Source frequencies of many of these sonars are likely above the
frequency range for Bryde's whale hearing (Watkins 1986, Au et al.
2006, Tubelli et al. 2012). Recent technological advancements, such as
Ocean Acoustic Waveguide Remote Sensing (OAWRS) system, use low-
frequency acoustics that have the potential to impact baleen whale
behavior (Risch et al., 2012). However, the SRT concluded these low-
frequency systems are not likely to be used in U.S. waters in the
future (Rosel et al., 2016). Because the acoustic frequencies
associated with the sonar systems employed by commercial fisheries and
scientific vessels are not within the range of GOMx Bryde's whale
hearing and are not likely to be used in the Gulf of Mexico, the SRT
assigned the threat of noise associated with commercial fisheries and
scientific acoustics a ranking of ``low'' in severity with ``low''
certainty.
Noise Associated with Shipping Traffic and Vessels--Noise from
shipping traffic is an unintended byproduct of shipping and depends on
factors such as ship type, load, speed, ship hull and propeller design;
noise levels increase with increasing speed and vessel size (Allen et
al., 2012, McKella et al 2012b, Rudd et al., 2015). Shipping noise is
characterized by mainly low frequencies (Hermannsen et al., 2014) and
contributes significantly to low-frequency noise in the marine
environment (National Research Council 2003, Hildebrand 2009).
Approximately 50 percent of U.S. merchant vessel traffic (as measured
by port calls or tonnage for merchant vessels over 1000 gross tons)
occurs at U.S. Gulf of Mexico ports, indicating shipping activity is a
significant source of noise in this region. Noise is likely to increase
as shipping trends indicate that faster, larger ships will traverse the
Gulf of Mexico following expansion of the Panama Canal (Rosel et al.,
2016).
Shipping noise in the northeast United States was predicted to
reduce the communication space of humpback whales, right whales, and
fin whales by 8 percent, 77 percent, and 20 percent, respectively, by
masking their calls (Clark et al. 2009). Because Bryde's whale call
source levels are most similar to those of right whales, the SRT found
they may be similarly impacted (Rosel et al., 2016). Documented impacts
of vessel and shipping noise on marine mammals, like the GOMx Bryde's
whale, include: habitat displacement; changes in diving and foraging
behavior; changes in vocalization behavior; and altered stress hormone
levels (Rosel et al., 2016).
The SRT found that there is a high level of low frequency noise
caused by shipping activity in the Gulf of Mexico, and that it is
likely the GOMx Bryde's whale is experiencing significant biological
impacts as a result. The impacts to the GOMx Bryde's whale are assumed
to be similar to those observed in other low frequency hearing baleen
whale species, and include increased stress hormone levels, changes in
dive and foraging behavior and communication, and habitat displacement.
The SRT assigned the threat of noise associated with shipping traffic
and vessels a score of ``moderate'' severity threat with ``moderate''
certainty.
Small Population Concerns
The final sub-category considered by the SRT under ESA Factor E was
small population concerns. The SRT considered Allee effects,
demographic stochasticity, genetics, k-selected life-history
parameters, and stochastic and catastrophic events under this sub-
category.
Allee Effects--If a population is critically small in size,
individuals may have difficulty finding a mate. The probability of
finding a mate depends largely on density (i.e., abundance per area)
rather than absolute abundance alone (Rosel et al., 2016). As
previously discussed, noise from ships and industrial oil activities,
including seismic exploration, could mask mating calls and contribute
to reduced fecundity of the GOMx Bryde's whale (Rosel et al., 2016).
The small population size (i.e., likely less than 100 individuals) may
mean that Allee effects are occurring, making it difficult for
individual whales to find one another for breeding, thereby reducing
the population growth rate. The SRT's scored the impacts from Allee
effects as a ``moderate'' threat in both severity and certainty.
Demographic Stochasticity--Demographic stochasticity refers to the
variability of annual population change arising from random birth and
death events at the individual level. Populations that are small in
number are more vulnerable to adverse effects from demographic
stochasticity. Demographic stochasticity is also more problematic for
slowly reproducing species, such as GOMx Bryde's whales, which under
normal conditions are likely to produce a calf every two to three
years, similar to Bryde's whales worldwide and Eden's whale. Mean
population growth rates can be reduced by variances in inter-annual
growth rates, and this variance steadily increases as the population
size decreases (Goodman 1987). The SRT also noted that, while skewed
sex ratios do not currently appear to be a problem for GOMx Bryde's
whales, their low calving rate and small population size create a
higher probability of developing skewed sex ratios through chance
alone. The SRT's scored the threat from impacts from demographic
stochasticity as ``high'' in both severity and certainty.
Genetics--Genetic stochasticity results from three separate
factors: Inbreeding depression, loss of potentially adaptive genetic
diversity and mutation accumulation (Frankham 2005, Reed 2005). The SRT
concluded that the very small population size and documented low level
of genetic
[[Page 88652]]
diversity (Rosel and Wilcox 2014) indicates that the GOMx Bryde's whale
is likely already experiencing inbreeding (mating with related
individuals) that could lead to a loss of potentially adaptive genetic
diversity and accumulation of deleterious mutations (Frankham 2005,
Reed 2005). Applying the estimate from Taylor et al., (2007) of 0.51
for the proportion of a Bryde's whale population that is mature, and
assuming a stable age distribution, the SRT concluded there would be at
most 50 mature individuals for the GOMx Bryde's whale population,
putting the whales at immediate recognized risk for genetic factors.
Even with a 50-50 sex ratio, the SRT concluded that current abundance
estimates are so low that current Bryde's whale population levels would
meet any genetic risk threshold for decreased population growth due to
inbreeding depression and potential loss of adaptive genetic diversity
(Rosel et al., 2016). The SRT scored the threat of genetic
stochasticity as ``high'' in both severity and certainty.
K-Selected Life History Parameters--In general all whales are
considered as k-selected species due to their life history
characteristics of large-size, late-maturity, and iteroparous
reproduction that is energetically expensive, resulting in few
offspring. K-selected life history characteristics in and of themselves
are not a problem for baleen whales, but a small population size
coupled with a low productivity rate further hinders population growth
and increases the time frame for recovery when, as with the GOMx
Bryde's whale, the population size is small and overly vulnerable to
threats (Rosel et al., 2016). The SRT assigned the threat from k-
selective life history parameters a score of ``high'' in severity and
certainty.
Stochastic and Catastrophic Events--The small number of GOMx
Bryde's whales and their restricted range (i.e., De Soto Canyon area of
the northeastern Gulf of Mexico) exacerbates the species' vulnerability
to stochastic and catastrophic events. Further, the GOMx Bryde's whales
are in close proximity to oil extraction developments, extreme weather
events, and HABs. For example, an analysis of the impacts of Deepwater
Horizon oil spill on cetacean stocks in the Gulf of Mexico estimated
that 17 percent of the GOMx Bryde's whale population was killed (DWH
Trustees 2016). The SRT scored the threat from stochastic and
catastrophic events on the GOMx Bryde's whale as ``high'' in severity
with ``high'' certainty.
Summary of Factor E
The overall threat rank for ESA Factor E by the SRT was influenced
by the suite of threats assessed by the SRT. Based on the SRT's
scoring, vessel collision, followed by fishing gear entanglements,
presents the most serious individual threats of those considered in the
generic ``other natural and human factors,'' category. The threat of
vessel collision is a significant source of mortality for a variety of
coastal whale species and several important commercial shipping lanes
travel through the GOMx Bryde's whale BIA (Rosel et al., 2016). Fishing
gear entanglement from the pelagic longline and bottom longline
fisheries is a threat due to the spatial overlap between these
fisheries and the Bryde's whale BIA, and the potential for interactions
given the whale's foraging behavior (Rosel et al., 2016). The SRT's
overall threat ranking for the generic ``other natural or human factors
category'' was moderate-high. The SRT's overall threat ranking for the
sub-category of ``anthropogenic noise'' was ``high'', which was driven
strongly by the impacts of seismic noise, shipping noise, and oil and
gas activities. The greatest threat identified by the SRT under ESA
Factor E was ``small population concerns, which the SRT's scoring
unanimously assigned a ``high'' overall threat rank.
In summary, the SRT found the level of anthropogenic noise in the
Gulf of Mexico, the cumulative threat posed by energy exploration,
development and production, and the risk of vessel collisions, in
combination with the small population size, are threats that are likely
to eliminate or seriously degrade the population. The overall rank the
SRT assigned for Factor E was ``high'' (i.e., two high overall ranks
and one moderate-high overall rank), indicating that there are a high
number of threats that are moderately or very likely to contribute to
the decline of the GOMx Bryde's whale. Considering the assessment
completed by the SRT, we determine that the threats considered under
Factor E are currently increasing the risk of extinction for the GOMx
Bryde's whale.
NMFS' Conclusions From Threats Evaluation
The most serious threats to the GOMx Bryde's whale are: Energy
exploration and development, oil spills and oil spill response, vessel
collision, anthropogenic noise, and the effects of small population
size. We consider these threats, under ESA section 4(a)(1) factors A
and E, as overall ``high'' threats. We agree with the SRT's assessment
that these threats are currently affecting the status of the GOMx
Bryde's whale, and find that they are putting it at a heightened risk
of extinction. We also agree with the SRT's characterization of factors
B and C, overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes and disease, parasites, or predation, and their
low overall ranking. We find that these are not factors that are likely
contributing to the extinction risk for the GOMx Bryde's whale.
Finally, we agree with the SRT's overall conclusion for Factor D, that
existing regulatory measures have not adequately prevented the GOMx
Bryde's whale from reaching its current status, given the presence of
current threats to the GOMx Bryde's whale identified under Factors A
and E.
Demographic Risk Analysis
The SRT also evaluated four demographic factors to assess the
degree of extinction risk: Abundance, spatial distribution, growth/
productivity, and genetic diversity. These demographic criteria have
been used in previous NMFS status reviews to summarize and assess a
population's extinction risk due to demographic processes. The SRT used
the following definitions to rank these factors: 1 = ``No or low risk:
it is unlikely that this factor contributes significantly to risk of
extinction, either by itself or in combination with other factors;'' 2
= ``Low risk: it is unlikely that this factor contributes significantly
to risk of extinction by itself, but some concern that it may
contribute, in combination with other factors;'' 3 = ``Moderate risk:
it is likely that this factor in combination with others contributes
significantly to risk of extinction;'' 4 = ``High risk: it is likely
that this factor, by itself, contributes significantly to risk of
extinction''; and 5 = ``Very high risk: it is highly likely that this
factor, by itself, contributes significantly to risk of extinction.''
As described in detail below, the SRT concluded that each of these four
demographic factors are likely to contribute significantly to the risk
of extinction for the GOMx Bryde's whale.
The SRT determined that both abundance and spatial distribution
were ``very high risk'' factors, meaning that it is highly likely that
each factor, by itself, contributes significantly to the risk of
extinction. The SRT concluded the best available science indicated: (1)
The number of GOMx Bryde's whales is likely less than 100 mature
individuals, and (2) their current distribution restricted to a small
region along the continental shelf break (100-300 m) in the De Soto
Canyon makes them
[[Page 88653]]
vulnerable to catastrophe. The SRT concluded that the GOMx Bryde's
whale constitutes a dangerously small population, at or below the near-
extinction population level, and the species' restricted range makes it
vulnerable to a single catastrophic event (Rosel et al., 2016).
The SRT ranked both growth/productivity and genetic diversity as
``high'' risk factors, meaning that it is likely that each factor, by
itself, contributes significantly to the risk of extinction. The SRT
noted that the life-history characteristics of the GOMx Bryde's whale
(i.e., late-maturing, long gestation, single offspring) result in a
slower recovery ability from their small population size and leads to a
longer time during which a risk factor like a catastrophe could occur
(Rosel et al., 2016). Allee effects were also identified by the SRT as
increasing extinction risk because the small number of individuals
reduces population growth rate through mate limitation (Rosel et al.,
2016). Similarly, the low level of genetic diversity, documented in
both mtDNA and nuclear DNA by Rosel and Wilcox (2014), combined with
the small population size, means that individuals are likely breeding
with related individuals and inbreeding depression may be occurring,
resulting in a loss of genetic diversity (Rosel et al., 2016).
Extinction Risk Analysis
The SRT considered the information provided in the Status Review
report and demographic risk factors to conduct an Extinction Risk
Analysis (ERA). The SRT summarized its ERA for the GOMx Bryde's whale,
placing it in the context of our agency guidelines on how to synthesize
extinction risk (NMFS 2015). Those agency guidelines define the high
extinction risk category as:
A species or DPS with a high risk of extinction is at or near a
level of abundance, productivity, spatial structure, and/or
diversity that places its continued persistence in question. The
demographics of a species or DPS at such a high level of risk may be
highly uncertain and strongly influenced by stochastic or
depensatory processes. Similarly, a species or DPS may be at high
risk of extinction if it faces clear and present threats (e.g.,
confinement to a small geographic area; imminent destruction,
modification, or curtailment of its habitat; or disease epidemic)
that are likely to create present and substantial demographic risks.
Applying this standard, the SRT unanimously agreed that the GOMx
Bryde's whale has a high risk of extinction.
The SRT provided the following summary of the concerns leading to
its overall extinction risk assessment:
The GOMx Bryde's whale population is very small and is
restricted to a small habitat area in the De Soto Canyon region of
the northeastern [Gulf of Mexico]. Their level of genetic divergence
from other Bryde's whales worldwide indicates they are
reproductively isolated and on a unique evolutionary trajectory. The
Society for Marine Mammalogy's Committee on Taxonomy concluded they
represent at least an unnamed subspecies of Bryde's whales. Although
the historic population size is unknown, whaling data indicate their
distribution in the [Gulf of Mexico] was once much broader. The Team
concluded, therefore, based on the best available scientific data,
that there has been a range contraction such that their primary
range is restricted to the northeastern [Gulf of Mexico] although
there are limited data from outside U.S. waters. The north-central
and western [Gulf of Mexico] contains some of the most
industrialized marine waters in the U.S. due to expansive energy
exploration and production, and also experiences significant
commercial shipping traffic and commercial fishing activity. The
area in the northeastern [Gulf of Mexico], where all verified
sightings of Bryde's whales have been recorded during cetacean
surveys, has experienced the least amount of energy exploration, due
in part to a moratorium put in place in 2006. However, this
moratorium expires in 2022 and the eastern [Gulf of Mexico] could be
exposed to increased energy activities. Commercial fishing and
vessel traffic also could affect the whales in the eastern [Gulf of
Mexico].
The Team concluded that the small population size alone put the
GOMx Bryde's whale at high risk of extinction. The small size of
this population makes it vulnerable to inbreeding depression,
demographic stochasticity, and stochastic and catastrophic events.
The combination of small size plus risk factors that may have
affected the population in the past and may affect it in the future,
further increase the extinction risk. These factors include, in
particular, impacts due to energy exploration (e.g., habitat
modification, noise from seismic surveys, and shipping) and energy
production (e.g., oil spills), and vessel collisions. The Team's
concern for this group of whales is further increased by uncertainty
regarding the cause(s) of its small population size, its limited
distribution, current and future threats, and the long-term
viability of the population (Rosel et al., 2016).
We consider the SRT's approach to assessing the extinction risk for
GOMx Bryde's whale appropriate, consistent with our agency guidance,
and based on the best scientific and commercial information available.
Based on the key conclusions from the Status Review report, including
the ERA (Rosel et al., 2016), we find that the GOMx Bryde's whale is a
species, as defined by the ESA, which is in danger of extinction
throughout all of its range, as a result of ESA Factors A (the present
or threatened destruction, modification or curtailment of a species'
habitat or range), D (inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms),
and E (other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence). Accordingly, we find that the species meets the definition
of an endangered species.
Protective Efforts
Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the ESA requires the Secretary, when making a
listing determination for a species, to take into consideration those
efforts, if any, being made by any State or foreign nation to protect
the species. To evaluate the efficacy of domestic efforts that have not
yet been implemented or that have been implemented, but have not yet
demonstrated to be effective, the Services developed a joint ``Policy
for Evaluation of Conservation Efforts When Making Listing Decisions''
(PECE) (68 FR 15100; March 28, 2003). The PECE is designed to ensure
consistent and adequate evaluation on whether domestic conservation
efforts that have been recently adopted or implemented, but not yet
proven to be successful, will result in recovering the species to the
point at which listing is not warranted or contribute to forming the
basis for listing a species as threatened rather than endangered. The
PECE is expected to facilitate the development of conservation efforts
by states and other entities that sufficiently improve a species'
status so as to make listing the species as threatened or endangered
unnecessary.
The PECE establishes two overarching criteria to use in evaluating
efforts identified in conservations plans, conservation agreements,
management plans or similar documents: (1) The certainty that the
conservation efforts will be implemented; and (2) the certainty that
the efforts will be effective. We have considered the actions
identified by the SRT (i.e., potential future DWH PDARP restoration
activities and Gulf of Mexico Marine Assessment Program for Protected
Species (GoMMAPPS) as conservation efforts and we have concluded that
they do not meet the PECE policy criteria (see analysis below).
The Status Review report (Rosel et al., 2016) summarized two known
conservation efforts, both of which are planned and have yet to be
implemented, which we further assess here: The DWH PDARP and the
GoMMAPPS. The restoration plan in the PDARP is a framework for planning
future restoration projects. For marine mammals, the PDARP focuses on
restoration activities that support population resilience, reduce
further harm or impacts, and complement existing management priorities,
with the
[[Page 88654]]
goal of compensating for the population injuries suffered by each
marine mammal stock. GOMx Bryde's whales were the most impacted
offshore cetacean by the DWH oil spill, suffering an estimated 22
percent maximum decline in population size (DWH Trustees 2016).
Although specific projects are not yet identified to implement Bryde's
whale restoration, we anticipate that they should benefit the
population, but, considering the species' life history, population
recovery to pre-spill levels will take decades. More importantly, the
population estimates considered by the SRT were pre-spill and were
still found to represent a high extinction risk. Therefore, the
conservation benefits that may be expected through implementation of
the PDARP would not be expected to reduce the extinction risk for
Bryde's whale to a degree where this population qualifies only as
threatened or where that listing is not warranted.
We also considered the proposed results from GoMMAPPS and its
potential to protect and restore the population of GOMx Bryde's whale.
The purpose of this program is to improve information about abundance,
distribution, habitat use, and behavior of living marine resources
(e.g., marine mammals, sea turtles, sea birds) in the Gulf of Mexico,
as well as to mitigate and monitor potential impacts of human
activities. GoMMAPPS promotes collaborations via data sharing with
other research efforts in the Gulf of Mexico, including potentially
with Mexico. Given the scope of the program, studies are likely to
increase scientific understanding of the GOMx Bryde's whale and its
habitat, support management decisions, and monitor potential impacts of
human activities. GoMMAPPS is likely to provide significantly improved
information on the status of protected species in the Gulf of Mexico,
possibly including GOMx Bryde's whales, and we anticipate that this
information can be used to protect Bryde's whales more effectively in
the future. However, these conservation benefits will require secondary
actions that are not currently known. Therefore, we conclude that the
conservation benefits from GOMAPPS to Bryde's whales are too diffuse
and uncertain to be considered effective measures under our PECE
policy. After taking into account these conservation efforts and the
current status of GOMx Bryde's whale, our evaluation of the section
4(a)(1) factors is that the conservation efforts identified cannot be
considered effective measures in reducing the current extinction risk.
Proposed Listing Determination
Section 4(b)(1) of the ESA requires that we make listing
determinations based solely on the best scientific and commercial data
available after conducting a review of the status of the species and
taking into account those efforts, if any, being made by any state or
foreign nation, or political subdivisions thereof, to protect and
conserve the species. We have reviewed the best available scientific
and commercial information contained in the Status Review report, the
Threats Evaluation, Demographic Evaluation, and the ERA (Rosel et al.,
2016). We found that the GOMx Bryde's whale is a species, as defined by
the ESA, which is in danger of extinction throughout all of its range
as a result of ESA section 4(a)(1) Factors A, D, and E. After
considering efforts being made to protect the species, we could not
conclude that existing or proposed conservation efforts would alter its
extinction risk. Accordingly, we propose to list the GOMx Bryde's whale
as an endangered species.
Effects of Listing
Conservation measures provided for species listed as endangered or
threatened under the ESA include recovery plans (16 U.S.C. 1533(f)),
critical habitat designations (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(A)), Federal agency
consultation requirements (16 U.S.C. 1536), and protective regulations
(16 U.S.C. 1533(d)). Recognition of the species' status through listing
promotes conservation actions by Federal and state agencies, private
groups, and individuals, as well as the international community. Both a
recovery program and designation of critical habitat could result from
this final listing. Given its narrow range in the De Soto Canyon region
of the northeastern Gulf of Mexico, and existing threats, a regional
cooperative effort to protect and restore the population is necessary.
Federal, state, and the private sectors will need to cooperate to
conserve listed GOMx Bryde's whales and the ecosystem upon which they
depend.
Marine Mammal Protection Act
The MMPA provides protections to all marine mammals, such as
Bryde's whales, whether they are listed under the ESA or not. In
addition, the MMPA provides heightened protections to marine mammals
designated as ``depleted.'' Section 3(1) of the MMPA defines
``depleted'' as ``any case in which'': (1) The Secretary ``determines
that a species or population stock is below its optimum sustainable
population''; (2) a state to which authority has been delegated makes
the same determination; or (3) a species or stock ``is listed as an
endangered species or a threatened species under the [ESA]'' (16 U.S.C.
1362(1)). Section 115(a)(1) of the MMPA establishes that ``[i]n any
action by the Secretary to determine if a species or stock should be
designated as depleted, or should no longer be designated as
depleted,'' such determination must be made by rule, after public
notice and an opportunity for comment (16 U.S.C. 1383b(a)(1)). It is
our position that a marine mammal species or stock automatically gains
``depleted'' status under the MMPA when it is listed under the ESA.
Identifying ESA Section 7 Consultation Requirements
Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA and joint NMFS/U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service regulations require Federal agencies to consult with us on any
actions they authorize, fund, or carry out if those actions may affect
the listed species or designated critical habitat. Based on currently
available information, we can conclude that examples of Federal actions
that may affect GOMx Bryde's whale include, but are not limited to:
Authorizations for energy exploration (e.g., habitat modification,
noise from seismic surveys, and shipping), energy production (e.g., oil
drilling and production), actions that directly or indirectly introduce
vessel traffic that could result in collisions, and military activities
and fisheries regulations that may impact the species.
Take Prohibitions
Because we are proposing to list this species as endangered, all of
the take prohibitions of section 9(a)(1) of the ESA would apply. These
include prohibitions against the import, export, use in foreign
commerce, or ``take'' of the species. ``Take'' is defined under the ESA
as ``to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture,
or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct.'' These
prohibitions apply to all persons subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States, including in the United States or on the high seas.
Critical Habitat
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the ESA (16 U.S.C.
1532(5)) as: (1) The specific areas within the geographical area
occupied by a species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the
ESA, on which are found those physical or biological features (a)
essential to the conservation of the
[[Page 88655]]
species and (b) that may require special management considerations or
protection; and (2) specific areas outside the geographical area
occupied by a species at the time it is listed upon a determination
that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.
``Conservation'' means the use of all methods and procedures needed to
bring the species to the point at which listing under the ESA is no
longer necessary. Critical habitat may also include areas unoccupied by
GOMx Bryde's whale if those areas are essential to the conservation of
the species.
Section 4(a)(3)(A) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(A)) requires
that, to the maximum extent prudent and determinable, critical habitat
be designated concurrently with the listing of a species. Pursuant to
50 CFR 424.12(a), designation of critical habitat is not determinable
when one or both of the following situations exist: (i) Data sufficient
to perform required analyses are lacking; or (ii) The biological needs
of the species are not sufficiently well known to identify any area
that meets the definition of ``critical habitat.'' Although we have
gathered information through the Status Review report and public
comment periods on the habitat occupied by this species, we currently
do not have enough information to determine what physical and
biological feature(s) within that habitat facilitate the species' life
history strategy and are thus essential to the conservation of GOMx
Bryde's whale, and may require special management considerations or
protection. To the maximum extent prudent and determinable, we will
publish a proposed designation of critical habitat for GOMx Bryde's
whale in a separate rule. Designations of critical habitat must be
based on the best scientific data available and must take into
consideration the economic, national security, and other relevant
impacts of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. Once
critical habitat is designated, section 7 of the ESA requires Federal
agencies to ensure that they do not fund, authorize, or carry out any
actions that are likely to destroy or adversely modify that habitat.
This requirement is in addition to the section 7 requirement that
Federal agencies ensure that their actions do not jeopardize the
continued existence of listed species.
Policies on Peer Review
In December 2004, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued
a Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review establishing
minimum peer review standards, a transparent process for public
disclosure of peer review planning, and opportunities for public
participation. The OMB Bulletin, implemented under the Information
Quality Act (Pub. L. 106-554) is intended to enhance the quality and
credibility of the Federal government's scientific information, and
applies to influential or highly influential scientific information
disseminated on or after June 16, 2005. To satisfy our requirements
under the OMB Bulletin, we received peer reviews from three independent
peer reviewers on the Status Review report (Rosel et al., 2016). All
peer reviewer comments were addressed prior to dissemination of the
final Status Review report and publication of this final rule. We
conclude that these experts' reviews satisfy the requirements for
``adequate [prior] peer review'' contained in the Bulletin (sec.
II.2.).
Public Comments Solicited
We intend that any final action resulting from this proposal will
be as accurate as possible and informed by the best available
scientific and commercial information. Therefore, we request comments
or information from the public, other concerned governmental agencies,
the scientific community, industry, or any other interested party
concerning this proposed rule. In particular we seeks comments
containing: (1) Information, including genetic analyses, regarding the
classification of the GOMx Bryde's whale as a subspecies; (2) life
history information including abundance, distribution, diving, and
foraging patterns; (3) information concerning threats to the species;
(4) efforts being made to protect the species throughout its current
range; and (5) other pertinent information regarding the species.
We are also soliciting information on physical or biological
features and areas that may support designation of critical habitat for
the GOMx Bryde's whale. Information provided should identify the
physical and biological features essential to the conservation of the
species and areas that contain these features. Areas outside the
occupied geographical area should also be identified if such areas
themselves are essential to the conservation of the species. Essential
features may include, but are not limited to, features specific to the
species' range, habitat, and life history characteristics within the
following general categories of habitat features: (1) Space for
individual growth and normal behaviour; (2) food, or other nutritional
or physiological requirements; (3) protection from predation; (4) sites
for reproduction and development of offspring; and (5) habitats that
are protected from natural or human disturbance or are representative
of the historical, geographical, and ecological distributions of the
species (50 CFR 424.12(b)). ESA implementing regulations at 50 CFR
424.12(h) specify that critical habitat shall not be designated within
foreign countries or in other areas outside of U.S. jurisdiction.
Therefore, we request information only on potential areas of critical
habitat within U.S. jurisdiction. For features and areas potentially
qualifying as critical habitat, we also request information describing:
(1) Activities or other threats to the essential features or activities
that could be affected by designating them as critical habitat, and (2)
the positive and negative economic, national security and other
relevant impacts, including benefits to the recovery of the species,
likely to result if these areas are designated as critical habitat.
Public Hearing
During the public hearing, a brief opening presentation on the
proposed rule will be provided before accepting public testimony.
Written comments may be submitted at the hearing or via the Federal e-
Rulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES) until the scheduled close of the
comment period on (January 30, 2017). In the event that attendance at
the public hearing is large, the time allotted for oral statements may
be limited. There are no limits on the length of written comments
submitted to us. Oral and written statements receive equal
consideration.
Public Hearing Schedule
The date and location for the public hearing is as follows: St.
Petersburg, Florida: January 19, 2017, from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. at
NOAA Fisheries, Southeast Regional Office, Dolphin Conference Room, 236
13th Avenue, South, St. Petersburg, Florida 33701.
Special Accommodations
This hearing is physically accessible to people with disabilities.
Requests for sign language interpretation or other accommodations
should be directed to Calusa Horn (see ADDRESSES) as soon as possible,
but no later than 7 business days prior to the hearing date.
References
A complete list of the references used in this proposed rule is
available upon request, and also available at: https://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/protected_resources/listing_petitions/species_esa_consideration/.
[[Page 88656]]
Classifications
National Environmental Policy Act
The 1982 amendments to the ESA, in section 4(b)(1)(A), restrict the
information that may be considered when assessing species for listing.
Based on this limitation of criteria for a listing decision and the
opinion in Pacific Legal Foundation v. Andrus, 675 F. 2d 825 (6th Cir.
1981), NMFS has concluded that ESA listing actions are not subject to
the environmental assessment requirements of the NEPA (See NOAA
Administrative Order 216-6A).
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Flexibility Act and Paperwork
Reduction Act
As noted in the Conference Report on the 1982 amendments to the
ESA, economic impacts cannot be considered when assessing the status of
a species. Therefore, the economic analysis requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act are not applicable to the listing process.
In addition, this final rule is exempt from review under Executive
Order 12866. This final rule does not contain a collection-of-
information requirement for the purposes of the Paperwork Reduction
Act.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
In keeping with the intent of the Administration and Congress to
provide continuing and meaningful dialogue on issues of mutual state
and Federal interest, the proposed rule will be provided to the
relevant agencies in each state in which the subject species occurs,
and these agencies are invited to comment.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 224
Administrative practice and procedure, Endangered and threatened
species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and record keeping requirements,
Transportation.
Dated: December 2, 2016.
Samuel D. Rauch, III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, we propose to amend 50 CFR
part 224 as follows:
PART 224--ENDANGERED MARINE AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES
0
1. The authority citation for part 224 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531-1543 and 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 224.101, in the table in paragraph (h), add an entry for
``Whale, Bryde's (Gulf of Mexico subspecies)'' under MARINE MAMMALS in
alphabetical order by common name to read as follows:
Sec. 224.101 Enumeration of endangered marine and anadromous
species.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Citation(s) for
Description of listed listing Critical habitat ESA rules
Common name Scientific name entity determination(s)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marine mammals
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Whale, Bryde's (Gulf of Mexico Balaenoptera edeni Bryde's whales that [Federal Register NA................... NA
subspecies). (unnamed subspecies). breed and feed in citation and date
the Gulf of Mexico. when published as a
final rule].
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Species includes taxonomic species, subspecies, distinct population segments (DPSs) (for a policy statement, see 61 FR 4722, February 7, 1996), and
evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) (for a policy statement, see 56 FR 58612, November 20, 1991).
[FR Doc. 2016-29412 Filed 12-7-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P