Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the Yangtze Sturgeon as an Endangered Species, 61230-61241 [2017-27954]
Download as PDF
61230
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
and willfully offer, pay, solicit, or
receive remuneration to induce or
reward business reimbursable under
Federal health care programs. The
offense is classified as a felony and is
punishable by fines of up to $25,000
and imprisonment for up to 5 years. OIG
may also impose civil money penalties,
in accordance with section 1128A(a)(7)
of the Act (42 U.S.C. 1320a–7a(a)(7)), or
exclusion from Federal health care
programs, in accordance with section
1128(b)(7) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 1320a–
7(b)(7)).
Because the statute, on its face, is so
broad, concern has been expressed for
many years that some relatively
innocuous commercial arrangements
may be subject to criminal prosecution
or administrative sanction. In response
to the above concern, section 14 of the
Medicare and Medicaid Patient and
Program Protection Act of 1987, Public
Law 100–93 § 14, specifically required
the development and promulgation of
regulations, the so-called ‘‘safe harbor’’
provisions, specifying various payment
and business practices that, although
potentially capable of inducing referrals
of business reimbursable under Federal
health care programs, would not be
treated as criminal offenses under the
anti-kickback statute and would not
serve as a basis for administrative
sanctions. OIG safe harbor provisions
have been developed ‘‘to limit the reach
of the statute somewhat by permitting
certain non-abusive arrangements, while
encouraging beneficial and innocuous
arrangements’’ (56 FR 35952, July 29,
1991). Health care providers and others
may voluntarily seek to comply with
these provisions so that they have the
assurance that their business practices
will not be subject to liability under the
anti-kickback statute or related
administrative authorities. OIG safe
harbor regulations are found at 42 CFR
part 1001.
B. OIG Special Fraud Alerts
OIG periodically issues Special Fraud
Alerts to give continuing guidance to
health care providers with respect to
practices OIG considers to be suspect or
of particular concern. The Special Fraud
Alerts encourage industry compliance
by giving providers guidance that can be
applied to their own practices. OIG
Special Fraud Alerts are published in
the Federal Register and on our website
and are intended for extensive
distribution.
In developing Special Fraud Alerts,
OIG relies on a number of sources and
consults directly with experts in the
subject field, including those within
OIG, other agencies of the U.S.
Department of Health and Human
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:10 Dec 26, 2017
Jkt 244001
Services (the Department), other Federal
and State agencies, and those in the
health care industry.
C. Section 205 of the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act of
1996
Section 205 of the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act of
1996 (HIPAA), Public Law 104–191
§ 205 (the Act), § 1128D, 42 U.S.C.
1320a–7d, requires the Department to
develop and publish an annual
notification in the Federal Register
formally soliciting proposals for
modifying existing safe harbors to the
anti-kickback statute and for developing
new safe harbors and Special Fraud
Alerts.
In developing safe harbors for a
criminal statute, OIG thoroughly
reviews the range of factual
circumstances that may fall within the
proposed safe harbor subject area so as
to uncover potential opportunities for
fraud and abuse. Only then can OIG
determine, in consultation with the U.S.
Department of Justice, whether it can
effectively develop regulatory
limitations and controls that will permit
beneficial and innocuous arrangements
within a subject area while, at the same
time, protecting Federal health care
programs and their beneficiaries from
abusive practices.
II. Solicitation of Additional New
Recommendations and Proposals
In accordance with the requirements
of section 205 of HIPAA, OIG last
published a Federal Register
solicitation notification for developing
new safe harbors and Special Fraud
Alerts on December 28, 2016 (81 FR
95551). As required under section 205
of the Act, a status report of the
proposals OIG received for new and
modified safe harbors in response to
that solicitation notification is set forth
in Appendix F of OIG’s Fall 2017
Semiannual Report to Congress.1 OIG is
not seeking additional public comment
on the proposals listed in Appendix F
at this time. Rather, this notification
seeks additional recommendations
regarding the development of new or
modified safe harbor regulations and
new Special Fraud Alerts beyond those
summarized in Appendix F.
A detailed explanation of
justifications for, or empirical data
supporting, a suggestion for a safe
harbor or Special Fraud Alert would be
helpful and should, if possible, be
1 The OIG Semiannual Report to Congress can be
accessed through the OIG website at https://
oig.hhs.gov/publications/semiannual.asp.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
included in any response to this
solicitation.
A. Criteria for Modifying and
Establishing Safe Harbor Provisions
In accordance with section 205 of
HIPAA, we will consider a number of
factors in reviewing proposals for new
or modified safe harbor provisions, such
as the extent to which the proposals
would affect an increase or decrease in:
• Access to health care services,
• the quality of health care services,
• patient freedom of choice among
health care providers,
• competition among health care
providers,
• the cost to Federal health care
programs,
• the potential overutilization of
health care services, and
• the ability of health care facilities to
provide services in medically
underserved areas or to medically
underserved populations.
In addition, we will consider other
factors, including, for example, the
existence (or nonexistence) of any
potential financial benefit to health care
professionals or providers that may take
into account their decisions whether to
(1) order a health care item or service or
(2) arrange for a referral of health care
items or services to a particular
practitioner or provider.
B. Criteria for Developing Special Fraud
Alerts
In determining whether to issue
additional Special Fraud Alerts, we will
consider whether, and to what extent,
the practices that would be identified in
a new Special Fraud Alert may result in
any of the consequences set forth above,
as well as the volume and frequency of
the conduct that would be identified in
the Special Fraud Alert.
Dated: December 12, 2017.
Daniel R. Levinson,
Inspector General.
[FR Doc. 2017–27117 Filed 12–26–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4152–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–HQ–ES–2017–0047;
4500090024]
RIN 1018–BC83
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Listing the Yangtze
Sturgeon as an Endangered Species
AGENCY:
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
ACTION:
Proposed rule.
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
proposed rule and a 12-month finding
on a petition to list the Yangtze sturgeon
(Acipenser dabryanus) as an endangered
species under the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Loss of
individuals due to overharvesting on the
Yangtze River is the main factor that
contributed to the historical decline of
the species. Despite conservation efforts,
this species is still currently in decline
due primarily to the effects of dams and
bycatch. If we finalize this rule as
proposed, it would extend the Act’s
protections to this species. We seek
information from the public on this
proposed rule and the status review for
this species.
DATES: We will consider comments and
information received or postmarked on
or before February 26, 2018. Comments
submitted electronically using the
Federal eRulemaking Portal (see
ADDRESSES, below) must be received by
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing
date. We must receive requests for
public hearings, in writing, at the
address shown in FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT by February 12,
2018.
ADDRESSES: Document availability: This
finding is available on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov at Docket
No. FWS–HQ–ES–2017–0047.
Written comments: You may submit
comments by one of the following
methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
enter FWS–HQ–ES–2017–0047, which
is the docket number for this
rulemaking. Then, in the Search panel
on the left side of the screen, under the
Document Type heading, click on the
Proposed Rules link to locate this
document. You may submit a comment
by clicking on ‘‘Comment Now!’’
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail
or hand-delivery to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS–HQ–ES–2017–
0047; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls
Church, VA 22041–3803.
We request that you send comments
only by the methods described above.
We will post all comments on https://
www.regulations.gov. This generally
means that we will post any personal
information you provide us (see Public
Comments, below, for more
information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Janine Van Norman, Branch of Foreign
Species, Ecological Services, U.S. Fish
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:10 Dec 26, 2017
Jkt 244001
and Wildlife Service, MS: ES, 5275
Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041–
3803; telephone, 703–358–2171;
facsimile, 703–358–2499. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), call the Federal Relay Service at
800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Information Requested
Public Comments
Our intent, as required by the Act (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), is to use the best
available scientific and commercial data
as the foundation for all endangered and
threatened species classification
decisions. Further, we want any final
rule resulting from this proposal to be
as accurate and effective as possible.
Therefore, we invite the range country,
governmental agencies, the scientific
community, industry, and other
interested parties to submit comments
regarding this proposed rule. Comments
should be as specific as possible.
Before issuing a final rule to
implement this proposed action, we will
take into account all comments and any
additional relevant information we
receive. Such communications may lead
to a final rule that differs from our
proposal. For example, new information
or analysis may lead to a threatened
status instead of an endangered status
for this species, or we may determine
that this species does not warrant listing
based on the best available information
when we make our determination. All
comments, including commenters’
names and addresses, if provided to us,
will become part of the administrative
record. For this species, we particularly
seek comments concerning:
(1) The species’ biology, ranges, and
population trends, including:
(a) Biological or ecological
requirements of the species, including
habitat requirements for feeding,
breeding, and sheltering;
(b) Genetics and taxonomy;
(c) Historical and current range,
including distribution patterns;
(d) Historical and current population
levels, and current and projected trends;
and
(e) Past and ongoing conservation
measures for the species, its habitat, or
both.
(2) Factors that may affect the
continued existence of the species,
which may include habitat modification
or destruction, overutilization, disease,
predation, the inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms, or other natural
or manmade factors.
(3) Biological, commercial trade, or
other relevant data concerning any
threats (or lack thereof) to the species
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
61231
and existing regulations that may be
addressing those threats.
(4) Additional information concerning
the historical and current status, range,
distribution, and population size of the
species, including the locations of any
additional populations of the species.
Please include sufficient information
with your submission (such as scientific
journal articles or other publications) to
allow us to verify any scientific or
commercial information you include.
Please note that submissions merely
stating support for or opposition to the
action under consideration without
providing supporting information,
although noted, will not be considered
in making a determination, as section
4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that
determinations as to whether any
species is an endangered or threatened
species must be made ‘‘solely on the
basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.’’
You may submit your comments and
materials concerning this proposed rule
by one of the methods listed in
ADDRESSES. We request that you send
comments only by the methods
described in ADDRESSES.
If you submit information via https://
www.regulations.gov, your entire
submission—including any personal
identifying information—will be posted
on the website. If your submission is
made via a hardcopy that includes
personal identifying information, you
may request at the top of your document
that we withhold this information from
public review. However, we cannot
guarantee that we will be able to do so.
We will post all hardcopy submissions
on https://www.regulations.gov.
Comments and materials we receive,
as well as supporting documentation we
used in preparing this proposed rule,
will be available for public inspection
on https://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Headquarters Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Public Hearing
Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for
one or more public hearings on this
proposal, if requested. Requests must be
received by the date listed above in
DATES. Such requests must be sent to the
address shown in FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT. We will schedule
public hearings on this proposal, if any
are requested, and announce the dates,
times, and places of those hearings, as
well as how to obtain reasonable
accommodations, in the Federal
Register and local newspapers at least
15 days before the hearing.
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
61232
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint policy on
peer review published in the Federal
Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270),
we solicited the expert opinion of six
appropriate and independent specialists
for peer review of the Species Status
Assessment (SSA) that provides the
biological basis for this proposed listing
determination. The purpose of peer
review is to ensure that our listing
determinations are based on
scientifically sound data, assumptions,
and analyses. Their comments and
suggestions can be found at (https://
www.fws.gov/endangered/improving_
ESA/peer_review_process.html).
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Previous Federal Actions
On March 12, 2012, the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
received a petition dated March 8, 2012,
from WildEarth Guardians and Friends
of Animals to list as endangered or
threatened under the Act the following
15 sturgeon species: Adriatic sturgeon
(Acipenser naccarii); Baltic sturgeon (A.
sturio); Russian sturgeon (A.
gueldenstaedtii); ship sturgeon (A.
nudiventris); Persian sturgeon (A.
persicus); stellate sturgeon (A. stellatus);
Siberian sturgeon (A. baerii); Yangtze
sturgeon (A. dabryanus); Chinese
sturgeon (A. sinensis); Sakhalin
sturgeon (A. mikadoi); Amur sturgeon
(A. schrenckii); Kaluga sturgeon (Huso
dauricus); Syr Darya sturgeon
(Pseudoscaphirhynchus fedtschenkoi);
dwarf sturgeon (P. hermanni); and Amu
Darya sturgeon (P. kaufmanni). The
petition states that all 15 petitioned
sturgeon species are affected by similar
threats, which are primarily: Legal and
illegal harvest for meat and/or roe;
habitat loss and degradation, including
dams or dam construction; and water
pollution. The petition is available at
https://www.regulations.gov/
document?D=FWS-HQ-ES-2013-00510003.
NMFS acknowledged receipt of this
petition in a letter dated April 14, 2012,
and informed the petitioners that NMFS
would determine, under section 4 of the
Act, whether the petition presents
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted.
Although the petition was initially sent
to NMFS, as a result of subsequent
discussions between NMFS and the
Service regarding the August 28, 1974,
Memorandum of Understanding
pertaining to ‘‘Jurisdictional
Responsibilities and Listing Procedures
Under the Endangered Species Act of
1973,’’ we have determined that 10 of
the 15 petitioned sturgeon species are
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:10 Dec 26, 2017
Jkt 244001
within the jurisdiction of the Service.
Therefore, in April 2012, the Service
notified WildEarth Guardians that we
have jurisdiction over the 10 sturgeon
species, listed below.
On September 24, 2013, we published
in the Federal Register (78 FR 58507) a
90-day finding that found that the
petition presented substantial scientific
and commercial information indicating
that the petitioned action may be
warranted for the following 10 sturgeon
species included in the petition:
Siberian sturgeon (Acipenser baerii),
Yangtze sturgeon (A. dabryanus),
Russian sturgeon (A. gueldenstaedtii),
ship sturgeon (A. nudiventris), Persian
sturgeon (A. persicus), Amur sturgeon
(A. schrenckii), stellate sturgeon (A.
stellatus), Syr-Darya sturgeon
(Pseudoscaphirhynchus fedtschenkoi),
dwarf sturgeon (P. hermanni), and Amu
Darya sturgeon (P. kaufmanni). This
document constitutes our review and
determination of the status of the
Yangtze sturgeon, our publication of our
12-month finding on this species, and
our proposed rule to list this species.
Background
A thorough review of the taxonomy,
life history, ecology, and overall
viability of the Yangtze sturgeon is
presented in the Species Status
Assessment (SSA) for the Yangtze
sturgeon (Service 2017; available at
https://www.regulations.gov at Docket
No. FWS–HQ–ES–2017–0047). The SSA
documents the results of the
comprehensive biological status review
for the Yangtze sturgeon and provides
an account of the species’ overall
viability through forecasting of the
species’ condition in the future (Service
2017, entire). In the SSA, we summarize
the relevant biological data and a
description of past, present, and likely
future stressors and conduct an analysis
of the viability of the species. The SSA
provides the scientific basis that informs
our regulatory decision regarding
whether this species should be listed as
an endangered or threatened species
under the Act. This decision involves
the application of standards within the
Act, its implementing regulations, and
Service policies (see Determination,
below). The SSA contains the risk
analysis on which this determination is
based, and the following discussion is a
summary of the results and conclusions
from the SSA. We solicited peer review
of the draft SSA from six qualified
experts. We received responses from
one of the reviewers, and we modified
the SSA as appropriate.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Species Description
The Yangtze sturgeon is a freshwater
fish species that attains a maximum size
of around 130 centimeters (4.3 feet (ft))
and a maximum weight of about 16
kilograms (35 pounds) (Billiard and
Lecointre 2000, p. 368; Zhuang et al.
1997, pp. 257, 259). The species has a
triangular head, an elongated snout, and
large blowholes (Gao et al. 2009b, p.
117). Yangtze sturgeons have tactile
barbels at the front of their mouths that
they use to dig for food. On the dorsal
side, the Yangtze sturgeons are dark
gray, brownish-gray, or yellow-gray in
color. The rest of the body is milky
white in color (Zhuang et al. 1997, p.
259).
Taxonomy
Historically, the Yangtze sturgeon
coexisted alongside the Chinese
sturgeon in the Yangtze River. Initial
attempts to differentiate the two species
included using morphological measures.
However, morphological characteristics
can be influenced by differences in
environmental conditions. For example,
wild Yangtze sturgeon display grey
color on the sides of their bodies while
those bred in captivity sometimes
display a darker color (Li et al. 2015, p.
186).
Due to similarities in their
morphology, the two sturgeons were not
identified as separate species until 1869,
based on collection of specimens
obtained from the Yangtze River
(Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 257). Multiple
studies since have shown the Yangtze
and Chinese sturgeons are very closely
related and can be considered to be
sister species (Krieger et al. 2008, p. 41;
Zhu et al. 2008, p. 32; Zhang et al. 2000,
p. 136). A study of mitochondrial DNA
found that Yangtze and Chinese
sturgeon have a divergence value of 0.3
percent. This is in contrast to Chinese
sturgeon and starry sturgeon (Acipenser
stellatus), which have a divergence
value of 7.7 percent (Zhang et al. 2000,
pp. 133–134). While these results
suggest that Yangtze and Chinese
sturgeon are closely related species,
taxonomic confusion regarding the two
species continued well into the 1960s
(Li J. et al. 2015, p. 186). In addition to
genetic similarities, Yangtze and
Chinese sturgeon share the same habitat
and multiple studies suggest that
Yangtze sturgeon may be a landlocked
ecotype of the Chinese sturgeon (Kynard
2016, pers. comm.; Li J. et al. 2015, p.
186; Krieger et al. 2008, p. 42; Zhang et
al. 2000, p. 136).
Despite similarities between Yangtze
and Chinese sturgeon, there are
differences between the two species.
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Yangtze and Chinese sturgeon can be
differentiated by the different ecoregion
they inhabit. The Chinese sturgeon is an
anadromous species (species that spawn
in freshwater and spend most of its life
at sea) that migrates between coastal
feeding grounds and spawning grounds
in both the Yangtze River and the Pearl
River. On the other hand, the Yangtze
sturgeon is a potamodromous species (a
species that conducts its entire life cycle
in freshwater) that migrates between
feeding grounds and spawning grounds
entirely within the Yangtze River basin
(Kynard et al. 2003, p. 28; Zhuang et al.
1997, pp. 257–295).
In addition to differences in their life
history, these two species can also be
differentiated based on their
mitochondrial and nuclear DNA (Li J. et
al. 2015, pp. 185, 194). Therefore,
despite possessing morphological and
genetic similarities, there are differences
in the habitat, life history
characteristics, and genetic makeup
between the two species. We thus
accept the Yangtze sturgeon as a
separate species as classified below:
Class: Actinopterygii
Order: Acipenseriformes
Family: Acipenseridae
´
Species: Acipenser dabryanus Dumeril,
1869
Biology and Life History
Although the Yangtze sturgeon’s life
history is similar to other sturgeon
species, there are key differences. Based
on the best available information, much
of what is known about the Yangtze
sturgeon’s life history comes from
research on the more numerous and
studied Chinese sturgeon due to
similarities in morphology, taxonomy,
and life history between the two
species. Yangtze sturgeons spawn in the
spring from March to April, with a
smaller late fall/early winter spawning
period occurring from October to
December (Qiwei 2010, p. 3; Gao et al.
2009b, p. 117; Kynard et al. 2003, p. 28).
Spawning migration begins when water
level, flow velocity, and silt content
enters a downward trend (Zhang H. et
al. 2012, p. 4).
At the spawning site, female Yangtze
sturgeons can lay between 57,000 to
102,000 eggs. These eggs, when mature,
are gray to black and range from 2.7 to
3.4 millimeters (0.11 to 0.13 inches) in
diameter. The eggs are sticky and firmly
adhere to the space between pebbles
and boulders, known as the
‘‘interstitial’’ space, on the riverbed (Gao
et al. 2009b, p. 117; Zhuang et al. 1997,
p. 261). Larvae emerge from the eggs
about 115 to 117 hours after
fertilization, and they remain at the
spawning ground for around 12 to 30
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:10 Dec 26, 2017
Jkt 244001
days before dispersing downstream
(Kynard et al. 2003, pp. 33–34; Zhuang
et al. 1997, p. 262). Yangtze sturgeons
do not start their migration downriver
until they become juveniles.
Juvenile sturgeons disperse around
100 to 200 kilometers (km) (62 to 124
miles (mi)) downstream from their
spawning ground and arrive in
backwater pools and sandy shallows
with low velocity flow and rich mud
and sand substrate where they feed on
insects, aquatic plants, and small fish
(Zhang et al. 2011, p. 184; Zhuang et al.
1997, p. 259). During the spring flood on
the main stem of the Yangtze River,
juveniles will move to the tributaries to
feed. Young sturgeons will remain in
these feeding reaches until they reach
maturity (4 to 6 years for males and 6
to 8 years for females) after which they
begin migrating upstream towards the
spawning ground during the spring
flood (Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 261).
Habitat
The Yangtze sturgeon is found in
sandy shoal with silt ground and gentle
to moderate water flow (Bemis and
Kynard 1997, p. 169; Zhuang et al. 1997,
p. 259). The spawning habitat for the
Yangtze sturgeon is a riverbed that
contains larger boulders, pebbles, clear
water with a velocity of 1.2 to 1.5 meters
(m) per second (3.9 to 4.9 ft per second),
and a depth of 5 to 15 m (16 to 49 ft)
(Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 261). The
presence of large boulders ensures there
is sufficient interstitial space between
the rocks for eggs to adhere to. At the
same time, smaller pebbles and gravel
fill in the interstitial space so that water
flowing through the space is not too
high to prevent adherence (Du et al.
2011, p. 257). Sufficient velocity is also
needed to prevent excess buildup of
gravel in the interstitial space (Du et al.
2011, p. 262). If there is insufficient
interstitial space, eggs will not adhere to
the boulders on the riverbed. If there is
too much space, the water current will
be too strong and the eggs will be
washed away. Therefore, suitable
sturgeon habitat has specific
requirements for velocity and riverbed
composition to ensure successful
spawning.
Distribution
Historical Range
As its name implies, the Yangtze
sturgeon is found in the Yangtze River
(Wu et al. 2014, p. 5). The river is more
than 6,397 km (3,975 mi) in length and
is divided into three segments. The
upper reach, which span a total of about
4,300 km (2,671 mi), is further subdivided into two segments: the Jinsha
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
61233
River segment, which stretches from the
headwater in Yushu in the Tibetan
Plateau to Yibin, a distance of about
2,300 km (1,429 mi), and the upper
Yangtze River, which stretches from
Yibin to the Three Gorges region at
Yichang, a distance of about 1,000 km
(621 mi) (Cheng et al. 2015, p. 571; Jiang
et al. 2008, p. 1471; Fu et al. 2003, p.
1651). Four major tributaries feed into
the upper Yangtze. They are: the Min,
Tuo, Jialing, and the Wu River (Chen Z.
et al. 2001, p. 78). The middle reach is
from Yichang to Hukou, a distance of
about 950 km (590 mi). The Yangtze
River widens in this segment and is
identified by multiple large lakes,
including Lake Dongting and Lake
Poyang. The lower reach stretches from
Hukou to the mouth of the river at
Shanghai, a distance of about 930 km
(577 mi) (Fu et al. 2003, p. 1651).
Historically, the Yangtze sturgeon was
found in the lower portion of the Jinsha
River and the upper, middle, and lower
reaches of the Yangtze River, a distance
of about 1,300 km (807 mi) (Wu et al.
2014, p. 5). The majority of historical
sightings occurred in the lower Jinsha
and upper Yangtze River with
occasional sightings in the middle and
lower Yangtze (Zhuang et al. 1997, p.
259). The species has also been found in
major tributaries that feed into the
upper Yangtze including the Min, Tuo,
and Jialing (Artyukhin et al. 2007, p.
370). There have also been sightings of
the species in Dongting Lake and
Poyang Lake in the middle and lower
reaches, respectively (Zhuang et al.
1997, p. 259). One sighting took place as
far downstream as Anhui province, a
distance of more than 2,000 km (1,242
mi) downstream from Yibin (Zhuang et
al. 1997, p. 261). The species’ spawning
reach is understood by Yangtze sturgeon
researchers to have occurred from
Maoshui in the lower Jinsha River to
Hejiang in the upper Yangtze River
(Zhang et al. 2011, p. 184).
Current Range
The Yangtze sturgeon’s current range
is limited to the upper Yangtze River
and its tributaries in the reaches
between Yibin and Yichang, a distance
of about 1,000 km (Wu et al. 2014, p. 5;
Dudgeon 2010, p. 128; Huang et al.
2011, p. 575; Zhang et al. 2011, p. 181;
Artyukhin et al. 2007, p. 370). The
completion of the Gezhouba Dam in
1981 at Yichang prevented the upstream
migration of adults to the species’
spawning ground (Zhuang et al. 1997, p.
261). As a result of the construction of
Gezhouba Dam, the species may have
been extirpated in reaches below the
dam (Li et al. 2015, p. 186; Zhu et al.
2008, p. 30). That said, from 2014–2017,
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
61234
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
fishermen below Gezhouba Dam
accidently captured four adult Yangtze
sturgeons, suggesting the presence of a
very small remnant population (Du
2017, pers. comm.). Due to Gezhouba
Dam’s smaller size, the reservoir for the
Gezhouba Dam is relatively small
(Kynard 2017, pers. comm.) However,
the Three Gorges Dam, located slightly
upstream from Gezhouba Dam, and its
reservoir changed the hydrology of the
Yangtze. Construction on the Three
Gorges Dam began in 2003 and was
completed in 2009. The reservoir, which
extends 600 km (372 mi) upstream,
further reduced the species’ range by
modifying reaches above Three Gorges
Dam to a lentic (still water) system
(Chen D. et al. 2009, p. 341; Fu et al.
2003, p. 1650). Loss of lotic (rapidly
moving water) ecosystem reduces the
quality of remaining habitat for the
species (Kynard 2016, pers. comm.;
Cheng et al. 2015, pp. 570, 576). On the
lower Jinsha River, in the upstream
portion of the species’ historical range,
the construction of the Xiangjiaba Dam,
which was completed in 2008, limited
the species’ spawning ground to areas
below the dam (Zhang et al. 2011, pp.
183–184). The species continues to
ascend the major tributaries in the
upper Yangtze, including the Min, Tuo,
and Jialing River (Huang et al. 2011, p.
575; Artyukhin et al. 2007, p. 370).
Historical and Current Population
The Yangtze sturgeon was historically
abundant and was commercially
harvested up to the 1970s (Lu et al.
2015, p. 89; Zhang et al. 2013, p. 409;
Kynard et al. 2003, p. 27). The majority
(80 percent) of harvest of Yangtze
sturgeon took place during the 1950s to
the 1970s. However, overharvesting
during this time period led to a sharp
decline in the population size (Kynard
et al. 2003, p. 27).
While there may have been natural
recruitment of the species in the 1990s,
no natural recruitment has been
observed in the wild since the 2000s
(Du et al. 2014, p. 1; Wu et al. 2014, p.
1). The population is currently being
sustained by artificial restocking.
Between the years of 2010–2013, 7,030
Yangtze sturgeon juveniles were
released into the middle and upper
Yangtze River in two to three batches
each year (Wu et al. 2014, p. 3).
Restocking efforts have been ongoing in
the reaches below Gezhouba Dam since
2014 (Hu 2017, pers. comm.). However,
restocked sturgeons suffer from low
fitness; most notably, they lack the
ability to survive to reproductive age.
Capture data obtained from the releases
in 2010–2013 found that 95 days after
restocking, no restocked sturgeons were
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:10 Dec 26, 2017
Jkt 244001
caught either by researchers or by
fishermen in the upper Yangtze River
(Wu et al. 2014, pp. 3–5). These results
indicate that restocked sturgeon have a
very low survival rate. Although we do
not have population estimates for the
species, based on the fact that there has
been no observable natural reproduction
since the 2000s and the low survival
rate of restocked sturgeon, the species
population in the Yangtze River is likely
to be very low when compared to
historical numbers (Du et al. 2014, p. 1;
Wu et al. 2014, p. 4).
Summary of Threats and Conservation
Measures That Affect the Species
The Act directs us to determine
whether any species is an endangered
species or a threatened species because
of any factors affecting its continued
existence. We completed a
comprehensive assessment of the
biological status of the Yangtze
sturgeon, and prepared a report of the
assessment, which provides a thorough
account of the species’ overall viability.
In this section, we summarize the
conclusions of that species status
assessment, which can be accessed at
Docket No. FWS–HQ–ES–2017–0047 on
https://www.regulations.gov.
Dams on the Yangtze River and Its
Effects
The topography of the upper Yangtze
River basin is characterized by
mountains of varying heights. The
change in elevation between the upper
Yangtze to the lower Yangtze amounts
to 3,280 m (10,761 ft), which makes the
upper Yangtze River an ideal place for
hydroelectric projects (Fan et al. 2006,
p. 33). The growth of dam construction
in China has accelerated during the past
decades. From the 1970s to the 1990s,
an average of 4.4 large reservoirs
(capacity greater than 0.1 km3) were
constructed per year. By the 2000s, this
number had increased to an average
construction rate of 11.8 large reservoirs
per year. By 2011, China possessed 552
large reservoirs, 3,269 medium
reservoirs (capacity of 0.01–0.1 km 3),
and 84,052 small reservoirs (capacity of
0.0001–0.01 km 3); of this number, the
Yangtze River basin contained 45,000
dams and reservoirs, including 143
dams having large reservoirs, or a
quarter of all large reservoirs in China
(Miao et al. 2015, p. 2350; Mueller et al.
2008, p. 233). The construction of dams
and reservoirs have multiple and broad
effects on the Yangtze sturgeon and its
habitat, including limiting connectivity
between spawning and feeding reaches;
altering water temperature, water
discharge, and velocity rates; and
changing sediment concentration.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Connectivity
Dam construction on Yangtze River
limits the ability of the Yangtze sturgeon
to migrate between spawning and
feeding reaches. Dam construction on
the Yangtze occurs on both the upper
and lower end of the species’ current
range. In the middle Yangtze River, the
construction of Gezhouba Dam in 1981
prevented migration of adults
downstream of the dam from being able
to migrate to the species’ spawning
ground in the upper Yangtze near Yibin
(Miao et al. 2015, p. 2351; Dudgeon
2010, p. 128; Fang et al. 2006, p. 375;
Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 261). Although
the reaches below Gezhouba Dam might
be suitable for the species, at present
there has been no observed natural
reproduction below Gezhouba Dam (Du
2017, pers. comm.). The construction of
Three Gorges Dam created a reservoir,
which affected individuals of the
species upstream. The Three Gorges
Dam reservoir, which extended 600 km
upstream from the dam, transformed the
area into unsuitable habitat (Kynard
2016, pers. comm.; Cheng et al. 2015, p.
570; Miao et al. 2015, p. 2351). After the
construction of the reservoir, the species
rarely moves to reaches below
Chongqing, a distance of approximately
500 km (Wu et al. 2015, p. 5).
Meanwhile, the construction of
Xiangjiaba Dam on the lower Jinsha
River segment occurred on part of the
historical spawning reach of the species.
Xiangjiaba Dam is a barrier to all fish
species and prevents the migration to
areas above or the below the dam (Wu
et al. 2014, p. 2). However, the species
may be able to use spawning reaches
below the dam (Fan et al. 2006, p. 36).
That said, a dam located upstream from
the species’ habitat affects the species
downstream by altering water
temperature and sedimentation rate,
which we discuss below (Fan et al.
2006, p. 36).
In addition to dams currently present
on the lower Jinsha and upper Yangtze
River, in the early 2000s, a proposal was
presented for the construction of the
Xiaonanhai Dam, which is to be located
upstream from Chongqing. If built, this
dam will create a barrier between the
species’ last known spawning ground
and feeding reach, which, depending on
design, could have a negative impact on
the species (Cheng et al. 2015, p. 579).
However, at present, China’s Ministry of
Environmental Protection has rejected
the proposal and any future dam
projects on the last stretch of freeflowing Yangtze River due to
environmental impacts (Chang 2016,
pers. comm.; Kynard 2016, pers. comm.;
Mang 2015, unpaginated).
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
While the rejection of the proposal to
construct the Xiaonanhai Dam is good
for Yangtze sturgeon, the country’s
twelfth 5-year plan stated that
renewable resources should make up 15
percent of all energy generated in China
with 9 percent coming from
hydroelectric source. This plan
translates to an additional 230 gigawatt
(GW) of power generated via
hydroelectric dam. This target is a very
ambitious one, given that Three Gorges
Dam generates 18 GW of power per year
(Dudgeon 2011, p. 1496). Furthermore,
although the plan to construct the
Xiaonanhai Dam has been rejected,
plans to construct dams on the Jinsha
River as part of a 12-dam cascade are
still proceeding (Dudgeon 2010, p. 129).
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Water Temperature
Historically, dams negatively affect
the reproductive success of Yangtze
sturgeon by altering water temperature
flowing through the species’ habitat.
Water temperature influences the
reproductive success of the Yangtze
sturgeon at two stages in its life cycle:
Commencement of spawning migration
and egg survival. Spawning migration of
the Yangtze sturgeon will not start until
the water temperatures reach 18 degrees
Celsius (°C) (64.4 degrees Fahrenheit
(°F)) (Cheng et al. 2015, p. 578).
Historically, before the construction of
the Xiangjiaba and other dams on the
lower Jinsha, water temperature reached
18 °C (64.4 °F) around April. However,
the construction of the dams stratified
the water table. As most dams on the
Yangtze are designed to release cold
water located at the bottom of the dams,
the spawning season for the Yangtze
sturgeon could be delayed by more than
a month (Deng et al. 2006 and Wang et
al. 2009, as cited in Cheng et al. 2015,
p. 578). This delay shortens the
maturing season for juveniles and is
likely to reduce the species’ survival
rate. Additionally, if the water remains
too cold for too long, sturgeon eggs will
not mature, resulting in total loss of
reproduction for that season (Kynard
2016, pers. comm.).
After the construction of the Three
Gorges Dam, mean flow rate varies
between 12,780 m3/s in high flow years
and 6,414 m3/s in low flow years (Chen
and Wu 2011, p. 384). For Chinese
sturgeon, successful spawning occurs
when water discharge is between 7,000
and 26,000 m3/s. This means that
although flow rate during high flow
years remains in the optimal discharge
rate for Chinese sturgeon spawning,
discharge rates during low flow years
could have a negative impact on
spawning success rates of both sturgeon
species (Chen and Wu 2011, p. 385).
While we do not have long-term
historical data for water discharge rate
for the Yangtze sturgeon at Yibin, the
flow rate at Chongqing during the years
1950–2000 was between 4,540 m3/s and
11,000 m3/s (Zhang et al. 2011, p. 183).
Since Chongqing is farther upstream
from Yichang, this flow rate may be the
river’s natural rate at this section of the
Yangtze. However, following the
impoundment by the Xiangjiaba Dam in
October 2012 and the Xiluodo Dam in
May 2013, discharge in the lower Jinsha
has declined more than 50 percent,
suggesting that current flow rate is
likely to be lower than the flow rate
between 1950 and 2000 (Cheng et al
2015, p. 577). The Jinsha River feeds
into the upper Yangtze River. This
means that reduction in flow rate on the
Jinsha will also reduce the flow rate on
the upper Yangtze River. Given that the
Yangtze sturgeon is closely related to
the Chinese sturgeon, a reduction of
flow rate by over 50 percent could have
a significant negative impact on the
reproductive success rate of the Yangtze
sturgeon given its already tenuous
biological status.
Sedimentation Concentration
In addition to affecting spawning of
Yangtze sturgeon, dams affect the
condition of the species’ spawning
ground through changes in the water
velocity and sedimentation load.
Because reproductive success of
sturgeon is tied to the amount of
suitable habitat, a reduction in habitat
Water Discharge and Velocity
area can reduce the reproductive
success of the species (Ban et al. 2011,
By altering discharge rates, dams
p. 96; Bemis and Kynard 1997, p. 169).
affect the Yangtze sturgeon’s
Specifically, flow rates affect the
reproductive success by affecting the
Yangtze sturgeon by affecting the
timing of spawning migration. The
sedimentation concentration in the
species’ spawning migration begins
water and on the riverbed. As noted
when flow rate increases during the
spring flood (Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 261). before, Yangtze sturgeon lay their eggs
on the interstitial spaces between rocks
At Yichang, the most downstream
and boulders. The makeup of the
portion of the Yangtze sturgeon’s
riverbed needs to contain the right
current range, the mean discharge rate
concentration of small pebbles and
from 1983 to 2004 (before the
larger boulders to provide sufficient
construction of Three Gorges Dam) was
space for adherence and aeration of the
between 10,000 m3/s and 17,000 m3/s.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:10 Dec 26, 2017
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
61235
eggs (Du et al. 2011, pp. 261–262; Bemis
and Kynard 1997, p. 169).
Historically, discharge rates and
sedimentation load were in alignment
with precipitation rates. A low
discharge rate results in low
sedimentation load. High discharge
rates lead to higher sediment load, as
high flows are able to transport more
sediments downstream (Chen Z. et al.
2001, pp. 88–89). However, dams cause
discharge and sedimentation rates to go
out of alignment. While discharge rates
remain aligned with precipitation rate,
the sedimentation load pattern displays
a 2-month delay due to sediment being
trapped behind the dams. When the
spring flood occurs, numerous dams
release highly concentrated sediment
downstream all at once, resulting in an
asymmetrical sediment load pattern
(Chen Z. et al. 2001, p. 90). The effects
of sediment load patterns on the
species’ habitat occur at two stages:
Release of sediments during high river
stages and reduced sediment size and
load over time (Dudgeon 2011, pp. 1488,
1495).
The Jinsha River dams trap up to 82
percent of the sediment during the
winter months, resulting in ‘‘clean’’ (i.e.,
sediment-free) water flowing
downstream. This ‘‘clean’’ water lacks
nutrients and may decrease the food
supply of the Yangtze sturgeon over the
winter months (Cheng et al. 2015, p.
578). During the subsequent spring
flood, the release of concentrated
sediment by dams likely results in
sediments filling in all the interstitial
spaces in spawning habitat, thereby
reducing available spawning habitat for
that season.
Despite the spring release of
concentrated sediments, sediment load
is expected to decline over time. At
Yichang, sediment load per year has
decreased from 530 mega tons (Mt) per
year in the 1950s–1960s, to 60 Mt per
year after 2003. Additionally,
suspended sediment at Yichang below
Three Gorges Dam has decreased in size
from 8–10 micrometers in 1987–2002 to
3 micrometers after 2003 (Yang et al.
2011, pp. 16–17). Reduction in sediment
size can lead to increased
embeddedness of available interstitial
space. At the reaches below Gezhouba
Dam, sedimentation has reduced
available interstitial space by up to 50
to 70 percent (Du et al. 2011, p. 262).
This prevents the adherence of eggs to
the river bottom and reduces the quality
of remaining spawning habitats.
Summary of Effects of Dams on the
Yangtze Sturgeon
Dam construction in the middle
Yangtze and lower Jinsha has restricted
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
61236
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
the species’ range to the reaches of the
Yangtze between Yibin and Yichang
(Wu et al. 2014, p. 5). These projects
prevented the migration of the species
upstream and downstream of the dams.
Although there is currently access
between the species’ remaining
spawning and feeding grounds, the
condition of remaining habitat is likely
to be negatively affected by changes to
the river flow and sedimentation rate.
The formation of the Three Gorges
reservoir has transformed the 600-km
reach above the dam into a lentic
system, resulting in unsuitable habitat
for the species (Kynard 2016, pers.
comm.; Cheng et al. 2015, pp. 570, 576).
As a result, Yangtze sturgeon rarely use
habitat downstream from Chongqing
(Wu et al. 2014, p. 5).
Upstream from the species’ current
range, the construction of the Xiluodu
and Xiangjiaba Dam is likely to
negatively affect the reproductive
success of the Yangtze sturgeon.
Through the release of cold water
during the spring flood, the dam can
delay the spawning migration of the
sturgeon, which will either shorten the
maturation time for juveniles or prevent
the successful maturation of eggs
altogether (Kynard 2016, pers. comm.;
Cheng et al. 2015, p. 578). Alteration to
sediment concentration in both the
short term and long term reduces the
quality of remaining habitat (Du et al.
2011, p. 262). Given the lack of observed
natural reproduction of the species in
the upper Yangtze, dams significantly
affect the viability of the species.
Overfishing (historical) and Bycatch
(current)
Historically, the Yangtze sturgeon was
commercially harvested on the Yangtze
River. In the 1960s, harvest of Yangtze
sturgeon accounted for 10 percent of
total harvest. In the 1970s, 5,000
kilograms (5.5 tons) of Yangtze
sturgeons were caught in the spring
season at Yibin (Zhuang et al. 1997, p.
262). Since then however, the
population of Yangtze sturgeon has
declined significantly (Zhang et al.
2013, p. 409). This decline is due to
multiple reasons. Fishermen use fine
mesh nets that prevent smaller fish,
weighing as little as 50 grams (1.7
ounces), from being able to escape. The
number of fishing boats increased from
500 in 1950s to 2,000 by 1985. More
than 140,000 fishermen currently
depend on the river for a living.
Furthermore, the fishing season
overlapped with the main spawning
season of the Yangtze sturgeon (Yi 2016,
p. 1; Fan et al. 2006, p. 37; Zhuang et
al. 1997, p. 262). The replacement of
bamboo and reed gear with gear made
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:10 Dec 26, 2017
Jkt 244001
from synthetic fibers further contributed
to a higher catch rate of sturgeons (Chen
D. et al. 2009, p. 346).
Despite attempts to help conserve the
species by restocking, restocked
juveniles experience very low survival
rates (Wu et al. 2014, p. 4). From 2010
to 2013, restocking operations released
7,030 juveniles into the upper Yangtze
River main stem. Subsequent bycatch
between 2010 and 2013 recorded a total
of 112 sturgeons caught, indicating a
very low survival rate of stocked
juveniles (Wu et al. 2014, p. 3). These
results suggest very low survivability of
restocked sturgeon, and the subsequent
impacts from bycatch are too high for
the species to persist (Wu 2016, pers.
comm.; Wu et al. 2014, p. 4).
Riverbed Modification
The Yangtze sturgeon requires river
substrate to contain suitable
concentration to reproduce successfully
(Du et al. 2011, p. 257). Alteration to the
riverbed has reduced the reproductive
success of this species. To improve
navigation on the lower Jinsha and
upper Yangtze River, multiple projects,
including sand and gravel extraction
operations, were implemented on the
reaches between Shuifu and Yibin and
Yibin and Chongqing (Zhang et al. 2011,
p. 184). Between 2005 and 2009, $44
million (converted to U.S. dollars) were
invested to improve the navigation
between Yibin and Chongqing. These
investments have led to the
modification of 22 riffles (a shallow
section of a stream or river with rapid
current and a surface broken by gravel,
rubble or boulders) on the upper
Yangtze and the deepening of the
channel from 1.8 m (5.9 ft) to 2.7 m (8.8
ft) (Zhang et al. 2011, p. 184).
Additionally, up to 10, 6, and 3 river
dredge ships operate in the Yangtze
River, the Jinsha River, and the Min
River, respectively. The operations of
these ships alters the bottom topography
of the riverbeds, which results in the
loss of benthic habitat and spawning
ground for many fish species, including
the Yangtze sturgeon (Fan et al. 2006, p.
37). These projects are occurring on or
near current Yangtze sturgeon spawning
and feeding grounds from Yibin to
Hejiang. Thus these operations will
continue to reduce the quality and
quantity of remaining habitat (Zhang et
al. 2011, p. 184).
Industrial Pollution
As a benthic predator, the Yangtze
sturgeon is exposed to higher
concentrations of industrial pollution
than many other fish species (Yujun et
al. 2008, pp. 341–342). While we are not
aware of any studies that analyze the
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
impacts of industrial pollution on
Yangtze sturgeon specifically, there
have been studies on Chinese sturgeon
and other sturgeon species. Industrial
pollutants such as triphenyltin (TPT)
affect reproductive success of the
Chinese sturgeon. TPT, used in paint on
ship hulls and in fishnets in China, can
be absorbed into the eggs of Chinese
sturgeon, resulting in increased
deformities including abnormal
development and skeletal and
morphological deformities in embryos
(Hu et al. 2009, pp. 9339–9340).
A study on TPT exposure to 2- to 3day-old Chinese sturgeon larvae found
that 6.3 percent showed skeletal/
morphological deformities and 1.2
percent had no eyes or only one eye. At
the same time, larvae from spawning
hatches of captured adults showed
skeletal/morphological deformities of
3.9 percent and 1.7 percent that had
only one eye or no eyes. Given the rate
of deformities found in this study, the
capability for the studied Chinese
sturgeon to reproduce was reduced by
58.4 to 75.9 percent (Hu et al. 2009, p.
9342). Because the Yangtze and Chinese
sturgeon are closely related species, the
presence of TPT in the upper Yangtze
River is likely reducing the reproductive
success of the Yangtze sturgeon by a
similar rate.
In addition to TPT, the presence of
endocrine disruptors compound (EDC)
affects Chinese sturgeon by inducing
declining sperm activity, intersex testisova, and a decline in male to female
ratio in the population (An and Hu
2006, p. 381). A study on EDC found
that the concentration of EDC in the
Yangtze River (1.55 to 6.85 micrograms
per liter) is very high and could have a
detrimental impact on sturgeon in the
river. This result suggests that industrial
discharge of EDC is occurring in the
Yangtze.
As a result of rapid industrialization
on the Yangtze River, higher
concentration of heavy metals are found
in the Yangtze River (Yujun et al. 2008,
p. 338). High concentration of heavy
metals leads to greater accumulation in
all aquatic organisms (Yujun et al. 2008,
p. 339). The toxicity effect of heavy
metal accumulation is especially
pronounced in zoobenthic predators,
like the Yangtze sturgeon, because they
occupy a higher position in the food
chain. The result is that by consuming
smaller prey species that have absorbed
heavy metal, zoobenthic predator build
up heavy metal accumulation inside
their bodies (Yujun et al. 2008, p. 346).
Given that heavy metal concentration is
highest in benthic animals, especially
zoobenthic predators like the sturgeon,
the effect of heavy metals on the
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
Siberian sturgeon with Russian sturgeon
(A. gueldenstaedtii), Sterlet sturgeon (A.
ruthenus), and Amur sturgeon (A.
schrenckii) (Li R. et al. 2009, p. 636).
Crossbreeding of sturgeon species in
China alters the wild population
makeup. A study on the lower Yangtze
River in 2006 found that of the 221
young sturgeons captured, 153 were
hybrids, which accounted for 69.9
percent of total sturgeons caught (Li R.
et al. 2009, p. 636). This information
indicates that farmed hybrids are
escaping into the river system. Although
Hybridization With Displaced Native
this study was conducted in the lower
and Nonnative Sturgeon
Yangtze River, because sturgeon
Despite decline in wild fishery yields, aquaculture occurs across the Yangtze
the Yangtze basin remains one of the
River system, it is likely that
major centers of China’s aquaculture
hybridization is occurring in the upper
industry. Fishery yields from the basin
Yangtze River as well.
accounts for 65 percent of total
The uncontrolled hybridization of
freshwater fisheries production in China native and nonnative species on the
(Shen et al. 2014, p. 1547; Chen D. et
Yangtze alters the population dynamics
al. 2009, p. 338). In the past 30 years,
between hybrids and native stocks.
sturgeon aquaculture in China has risen Hybridization may reduce the fitness of
significantly. Although commercial
the overall population or replace a
aquaculturing of sturgeon only started
population of native fish with hybrids
in the 1990s, by 2006, production had
(Shen et al. 2014, p. 1549; Li R. et al.
reached 17,424 tons, which accounts for 2009, p. 636). Hybridization may also
80 percent of the world total production result in hybrids with better fitness than
(Shen et al. 2014, p. 1548). The growth
wild stock that outcompete wild native
of the aquaculture industry in China
stock of Yangtze sturgeon for habitat
saw aquaculture farms constructed
and resources. When native fish are
across all branches of the Yangtze River unavailable, farmers tend to import
(Li R. et al. 2009, p. 636). Sturgeon
nonnative fish that have better
species that are commonly used in the
characteristics, such as higher growth
aquacultural industry include A.
rate and better adaptability. These nonschrenckii, Huso dauricus, and other
native sturgeons are bred with available
Amur River sturgeon hybrids (Li R. et al. native sturgeon to produce hybrids.
2009, p. 636). However, none of these
These hybrids oftentimes escape or are
commonly cultured species are native to accidentally introduced into the wild
the Yangtze River. Additionally, there is and then compete with the Yangtze
a lack of regulation and enforcement of
sturgeon for resources (Xiong et al.
regulation to properly manage
2015, pp. 657–658). Although
hybridization of sturgeon species. There hybridization is likely to be occurring
is also the problem of aquaculture
all along the Yangtze River, we
sturgeon escaping from sturgeon farms
currently do not have information on
into the wider river system (Li R. et al.
the rates of hybridization of sturgeon in
2009, p. 636). The result is a comingling the upper Yangtze or how significant
of native, exotic, and hybrid sturgeon
the effects are on the Yangtze sturgeon.
species which could have a negative
That said, given that hybridized
impact on the Yangtze sturgeon (Shen et sturgeons make up 69.9 percent of
al. 2014, p. 1549; Li R. et al. 2009, p.
sturgeons found in the studied area, it
636).
is likely that sturgeon hybrids are
There is currently no native-strain
competing, and will likely continue to
farm (farm that raises native species) for compete, with native stocks for habitat
sturgeons in China. Because no farms in and resources throughout the Yangtze
China focus on raising native stock in
River system.
large enough number, this system
Management Efforts
creates shortages of parental stock of
As a result of overfishing and the
native sturgeons. In response to this
construction of Gezhouba Dam in 1981,
shortage, farmers crossbreed wildthe population of Yangtze sturgeon has
caught sturgeon with any sturgeon
declined (Du et al. 2014, p. 1; Wu et al.
species available including nonnative
2014, p. 1; Zhang H. et al. 2011, p. 181).
species (Xiong et al. 2015, p. 658; Li R.
In response to the decline of the species,
et al. 2009, p. 636). For example, in
national and local officials have
2006, there was a shortage of Siberian
embarked on a number of initiatives to
sturgeon in China (Acipenser baerii).
help conserve the species. These
Farmers then started crossbreeding
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
sturgeon could be more pronounced
than other aquatic species (Yujun et al.
2008, p. 341; An and Hu 2006, p. 381).
Despite the known impacts on captured
Chinese sturgeon, we currently do not
have evidence of population-level
impacts of EDC or heavy metal on the
wild Yangtze sturgeon population. That
said, even though we have no evidence
of morphological deformities in wild
sturgeon, it is likely that industrial
pollution does have an effect on the
reproductive success of wild sturgeon.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:10 Dec 26, 2017
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
61237
initiatives include increasing legal
protection for the Yangtze sturgeon,
creating and designating part of the
species’ range as a protected area, and
repopulating the species in the wild
through restocking (Zhang H. et al.
2011, p. 181; Fan et al. 2006, p. 35; Wei
et al. 2004, p. 322).
Legal Protections
In response to the decline of the
Yangtze sturgeon, in 1989, China’s State
Council added the Yangtze sturgeon to
the National Red Data Book for
Threatened Chinese Fish as a Class I
Protected Animal (Wu et al. 2014, p. 1;
Zhang H. et al. 2011, p. 181; Dudgeon
2010, p. 128; Wei et al. 2004, p. 322;
Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 258). Animals
listed as a Class I species are protected
from certain activities, including
hunting, capturing, or killing, for both
commercial and personal uses.
Scientific research, domestication,
breeding, and exhibition are exempted
(Wei et al. 2004, p. 322). Transportation
of Class I-listed species requires
approval from the Department of
Wildlife Administration. Import or
export of Class I aquatic species is
regulated by the Fisheries Bureau of the
Minister of Agriculture (Wei et al. 2004,
p. 323).
In addition to its listing under
national law, the species has also been
included in Appendix II of the
Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and
Flora (CITES) since 1998 (Ludwig 2008,
p. 5; CITES 1997, pp. 152–153). The
CITES trade database has recorded no
international trade of this species going
as far back as 1975 (the oldest date on
CITES database) (CITES 2017).
International trade in CITES species is
regulated via a permit system. Under
Article IV of CITES, export of an
Appendix-II specimen requires the prior
grant and presentation of an export
permit. Export permits for Appendix-II
specimens are only granted if the
Management Authority of the State of
export is satisfied that the specimens
were lawfully obtained and if the
Scientific Authority of the State of
export has advised that the trade is not
detrimental to the survival of the
species in the wild. For any living
specimen, the Management Authority of
the State of export must also be satisfied
that the specimen will be so prepared
and shipped as to minimize the risk of
injury, damage to health or cruel
treatment. Re-export of an Appendix-II
specimen requires the prior grant and
presentation of a re-export certificate,
which is only granted if the
Management Authority of the State of
re-export is satisfied that the specimen
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
61238
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
was imported into that State in
accordance with CITES and, for any
living specimen, that the specimen will
be so prepared and shipped as to
minimize the risk of injury, damage to
health or cruel treatment. Certain
exemptions and other special provisions
relating to trade in CITES specimens are
also provided in Article VII of CITES. In
the United States, CITES is
implemented through the Act and
regulations at 50 CFR part 23.
Additionally, since 2003, a fishing
ban on all fish species has been
implemented in the upper Yangtze
River from February 1 to April 30.
Starting in 2017, the fishing ban was
extended from March to June (Du 2017,
pers. comm.). One of the side effects of
this ban is a reduction in the bycatch of
Yangtze sturgeon since the time period
of the ban coincides with the spawning
season of the Yangtze sturgeon (Chen D.
et al. 2012, p. 532; Chen D. et al. 2009,
p. 348).
Despite the implementation of legal
protection for the species, there are
several shortcomings with the current
regulatory mechanisms for the species.
China currently does not have a
specialized, dedicated agency to manage
fisheries resources across the country.
Riverine resource management is
maintained at local levels which are
often located in major population
center, far away from the fishery
resource (Chen D. et al. 2012, p. 541).
In the case of Yangtze sturgeon, these
different jurisdictions have variations in
regulation and conservation goals for
the Yangtze River ecosystem, which
limits coordination of speciesconservation efforts and the overall
effectiveness in managing species
conservation across the Yangtze River
basin (Chen D. et al. 2012, p. 541).
In addition to a lack of a specialized
body or other effective basin-wide
conservation efforts, lack of funding is
major problem for local jurisdictions.
Enforcement officers often lack basic
equipment, such as boats, to carry out
fishing regulations within the fishery
(Chen D. et al. 2012, p. 541).
Additionally, while commercial
harvesting of the species is prohibited,
bycatch is still occurring and may still
be too high to sustain a wild breeding
population (Zhang H. et al. 2011, p.
184). The new fishing ban implemented
in 2017 has the potential to reduce
bycatch (Du 2017, pers. comm.).
However, the positive effects from a
fishing ban on the Yangtze may be
limited, given the importance of the
Yangtze to the economic well-being of
riverside communities as entire
stretches of the river cannot be closed
off to fishing (Fan et al. 2006, p. 38).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:10 Dec 26, 2017
Jkt 244001
Protected Areas
To offset the effects of habitat loss due
to dams, China’s State Department
established in 2000 the National Reserve
of Hejiang-Leibo Reaches of the Yangtze
River for Rare and Endangered Fishes
(Zhang H. et al. 2011, p. 181; Fan et al.
2006, p. 35). The reserve is located on
the upper Yangtze River on the reaches
between Xiangjiaba Dam and the city of
Chongqing. This reserve is intended to
protect three imperiled fish species, the
Yangtze sturgeon, the Chinese
paddlefish (Psephurus gladius), and the
Chinese high-fin banded shark
(Myxocyprinus asiaticus), as well as 37
other endemic fish species (Fan et al.
2006, p. 35). In 2005, the reserve was
expanded to mitigate the impact from
current and future hydroelectric projects
(Zhang H. et al. 2011, pp. 181–182).
While the reserve plays an important
role in protecting wildlife within its
borders, expansion of the hydroelectric
project in the lower Jinsha River and
upper Yangtze outside the protected
area is likely to undermine the
effectiveness of the reserve. In order to
facilitate economic growth, China has
decentralized authority for
infrastructure development from the
state to local municipalities. This
decentralized model has resulted in
provincial governments prioritizing
economic growth over environmental
impacts (Dudgeon 2011, p. 1496).
Since 2003, hydroelectric projects in
China are subjected to environmental
assessments and approval from the
Ministry of Environmental Protection
(Ministry) (Dudgeon 2011, p. 1496).
However, this approval is routinely
ignored even by nationally owned
corporations. For example, in 2004,
China Three Gorges Corporation (CTGC)
began construction of the Xiluodu Dam
in the Lower Jinsha without obtaining
permission from the Ministry (Dudgeon
2011, pp. 1496–1497). In response, the
Ministry suspended work on the dam in
2005. However, despite initial
reservation about the lack of an
environmental impact assessment, the
Ministry quickly compiled reports and
allowed the dam construction to
proceed (Dudgeon 2011, p. 1499).
Additionally, in 2009 the Ministry gave
the authority to build two additional
dams on the Jinsha segment to other
dam construction companies after a
brief suspension (Dudgeon 2010, p.
129). Overall, these temporary
suspensions of construction have done
little to slow down the pace of dam
development. In 2011, CTGC began
constructing the Xiangjiaba Dam on the
Lower Jinsha. The location of this dam
would have occurred within the 500-km
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
boundary of the National Reserve of
Hejiang-Leibo Reaches. The CTGC
successfully petitioned the State
Council to redraw the boundaries of the
reserve to exclude the section of the
river where the Xiangjiaba Dam is
located (Dudgeon 2011, p. 1500;
Dudgeon 2010, p. 129). The reserve,
now renamed the National Natural
Reserve Area of Rare and Special Fishes
of the Upper Yangtze River,
encompasses the reaches below the
Xiangjiaba Dam from Yibin to
Chongqing as well the tributaries that
feed into the Yangtze (Zhang H. et al.
2011, p. 182; Fan et al. 2006, p. 35). The
redrawing of the area of the reserve to
accommodate the construction of
Xiangjiaba Dam lends further evidence
that local governments are prioritizing
growth over environmental impacts.
The construction of the Xiangjiaba Dam
led to the impoundment of the reach
upriver, which will affect the flow and
sedimentation rate downstream (Cheng
et al. 2015, p. 577; Dudgeon 2011, p.
1500). Given the lack of natural
reproduction of the Yangtze sturgeon
and future impacts from the dam, it is
unlikely that the current boundary of
the reserve will be sufficient to maintain
a wild breeding population of this
species (Kynard 2016, pers. comm.;
Dudgeon 2011, p. 1500).
Restocking
As a result of the decline of the
species, controlled reproduction and
release of juvenile Yangtze sturgeon has
occurred every year since 2007 (Zhang
H. et al. 2011, p. 181). Between 2007
and 2012, more than 10,000 Yangtze
sturgeon juveniles were released into
the upper Yangtze on reaches
downstream from Xiangjiaba Dam (Wu
et al. 2014, p. 1). In 2014, restocking was
started on the reaches below Gezhouba
Dam (Du 2017, pers. comm.). While this
number pales in comparison to the six
million Chinese sturgeon that have been
released since 1983, the restocking of
the Yangtze sturgeon represent an
attempt by local and state officials to try
to maintain the species in the wild
(Chen D. et al. 2009, p. 349).
Despite the efforts to restock the
Yangtze sturgeon in the wild, current
restocking efforts are unsuccessful (Wu
et al. 2014, p. 4). No juveniles were
caught 95 days after release, indicating
that released sturgeon experienced a
very high mortality rate (Wu et al. 2014,
p. 4). There are multiple possible
reasons for the limited success of
current restocking efforts, including
poor breeding and rearing techniques
that result in progeny with low survival
rates in the wild, high bycatch rate, and
loss or deterioration of remaining
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
habitats (Cheng et al. 2015, pp. 579–580;
Du et al. 2014, p. 2; Shen et al. 2014,
p. 1549; Zhang H. et al. 2011, p. 184).
Thus, despite attempts to conserve the
species in the wild through restocking,
with all the other forces acting on the
Yangtze sturgeon it is unlikely that
current restocking efforts are adequate
to improve the species’ condition in the
wild.
Stochastic (Random) Events and
Processes
Species endemic to small regions, or
known from few, widely dispersed
locations, are inherently more
vulnerable to extinction than
widespread species because of the
higher risks from localized stochastic
(random) events and processes, such as
industrial spills and drought. These
problems can be further magnified when
populations are very small, due to
genetic bottlenecks (reduced genetic
diversity resulting from fewer
individuals contributing to the species’
overall gene pool) and random
demographic fluctuations (Lande 1988,
p. 1455–1458; Pimm et al. 1988, p. 757).
Species with few populations, limited
geographic area, and a small number of
individuals face an increased likelihood
of stochastic extinction due to changes
in demography, the environment,
genetics, or other factors, in a process
described as an extinction vortex (a
mutual reinforcement that occurs among
biotic and abiotic processes that drives
population size downward to
extinction) (Gilpin and Soule´ 1986, pp.
24–25). The negative impacts associated
with small population size and
vulnerability to random demographic
fluctuations or natural catastrophes can
be further magnified by synergistic
interactions with other threats.
The Yangtze sturgeon is known from
a single geographic population in the
upper Yangtze River and its tributaries
(Zhang et al. 2011, pp 181–182; Zhuang
et al. 1997, p. 259). As a result, the
species is highly vulnerable to
stochastic processes and is highly likely
negatively affected by these processes.
In March 2000, for example, the
Jinguang Chemical Plant, located on the
Dadu River (a tributary of the Yangtze
River), was found to be releasing yellow
phosphorous into the Yangtze. This
substance is highly toxic to aquatic
organisms including the Yangtze
sturgeon (Chen D. et al. 2009, p. 343).
Another spill in 2006 on the Yuexi
River, which also feeds into the
Yangtze, saw mercury being released
into the river (Worldwatch Insitute
2006, npn). These and other incidents
combined with the fact that the Yangtze
River system is home to a large number
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:10 Dec 26, 2017
Jkt 244001
of chemical plants suggest that risk of
industrial spills is quite high. Therefore,
it is likely that stochastic processes have
negative impacts on the species in
combination with other factors such as
habitat modification and loss and
bycatch.
Determination
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533),
and its implementing regulations at 50
CFR part 424, set forth the procedures
for adding species to the Federal Lists
of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the
Act, we may list a species based on: (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. Listing
actions may be warranted based on any
of the above threat factors, singly or in
combination.
We have carefully assessed the best
scientific and commercial information
available on the Yangtze sturgeon.
While we do not know the exact
population size of the Yangtze sturgeon,
the species was historically abundant
enough to be commercially viable up to
the 1970s, after which it experienced a
significant decline (Kynard et al. 2003,
p. 27). Loss of individuals due to
overharvesting by fishermen on the
Yangtze (Factor B) is the main factor
that contributed to the historical decline
of the species. Subsequent construction
of dams on the Yangtze prevented the
migration in the middle Yangtze and
lower Jinsha, which prevented recovery
of the species in these areas (Miao et al.
2015, p. 2351; Wu et al. 2014, p. 2;
Dudgeon 2010, p. 128; Fang et al. 2006,
p. 375; Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 261).
Additionally, dams affect the quality of
the species’ habitat through changes in
discharge, temperature, and
sedimentation rate (Zhang G. et al. 2012,
p. 445; Du et al. 2011, p. 262; Chen Z.
et al. 2001, p. 90). In addition to dams,
the species’ habitat is also adversely
affected by riverbed modification to
accommodate increasing boat traffic.
The combined effects of dams and
riverbed modification on the Yangtze
include the loss and reduction in
quality of remaining habitat (Factor A).
Despite conservation efforts
undertaken by local and national
authorities such as fishing bans and
restocking, current efforts do not appear
to be successful in conserving the
species. No natural reproduction has
been documented in the wild since the
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
61239
2000s (Wu et al. 2014, p. 1).
Additionally, restocked juvenile
sturgeon experience very high mortality
rates due to a high bycatch rate and an
inability to survive in wild conditions
(Du et al. 2014, p. 1; Wu et al. 2014, p.
4).
Industrial pollution and hybridization
with displaced native and nonnative
sturgeon species are also acting on the
species (Factor E). Although we do not
have information on the impact of
industrial pollution on the species in
the wild, studies in a laboratory
environment found that pollutants such
as TPT and EDC can reduce the
reproductive success rate of adult
sturgeons (Hu et al. 2009, p. 9342; An
and Hu 2006, pp. 379–380).
Additionally, there are high
concentrations of TPT and EDC in the
Yangtze River. While we do not have
data on the hybridization of Yangtze
sturgeon with other species, surveys
conducted in the lower Yangtze River
found that 69.9 percent of sturgeon
species caught were hybrids (Li R. et al.
2009, p. 636). These results suggest that
industrial pollution and hybridization,
in tandem with other factors, are
affecting the species.
Therefore, for the following reasons
we conclude that this species has been
and continues to be significantly
reduced to the extent that the viability
of the Yangtze sturgeon is significantly
compromised:
(1) The species is limited to a single
geographic population in the upper
Yangtze main stem and its tributaries.
There is also some evidence of a small
remnant population in the middle
Yangtze.
(2) Loss of habitat and connectivity
between the spawning and feeding
reaches is having a significant adverse
effect on the species, which appears to
have low to no reproduction.
(3) The cumulative effects of habitat
modification and loss due to dams and
riverbed projects, bycatch, industrial
pollution, and hybridization are
adversely affecting the species.
(4) Current restocking and
management efforts are inadequate to
maintain the species’ presence in the
wild.
(5) Stochastic events, such as
industrial spills or drought, can reduce
the survival rate of the species
In section 3(6), the Act defines an
‘‘endangered species’’ as any species
that is ‘‘in danger of extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range’’ and in section 3(20), a
‘‘threatened species’’ as any species that
is ‘‘likely to become an endangered
species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
61240
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
its range.’’ We find that the Yangtze
sturgeon is presently in danger of
extinction throughout its range based on
the severity and immediacy of threats
currently adversely affecting the
species. The populations and
distributions of the species have been
significantly reduced to the point where
there is no current reproduction in the
wild which is indicative of a very high
risk of extinction, and the remaining
habitat and populations are threatened
by a variety of factors acting alone and
in combination to reduce the overall
viability of the species.
Based on the factors described above
and their impacts on the Yangtze
sturgeon, we find the following factors
to be threats to this species (i.e., factors
contributing to the risk of extinction of
this species): Loss and modification of
habitat due to dams and riverbed
expansion (Factor A), bycatch (Factor
C), and cumulative effects (Factor E) of
these and other threats including
industrial pollution and hybridization.
Furthermore, current legal and
management efforts over these practices
are inadequate to conserve the species
(Factor D).
Therefore, on the basis of the best
available scientific and commercial
information, we propose listing Yangtze
sturgeon as endangered in accordance
with sections 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of the Act.
We find that a threatened species status
is not appropriate for this species
because of its restricted range, limited
distribution, and vulnerability to
extinction; and because the threats are
ongoing throughout its range at a level
that places this species in danger of
extinction now.
Under the Act and our implementing
regulations, a species may warrant
listing if it is endangered or threatened
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range. Because we have determined
that the Yangtze sturgeon is endangered
throughout all of its range, we do not
need to conduct an analysis of whether
there is any significant portion of its
range where the species is in danger of
extinction or likely to become so in the
foreseeable future. This is consistent
with the Act because when we find that
a species is currently in danger of
extinction throughout all of its range
(i.e., meets the definition of an
‘‘endangered species’’), the species is
experiencing high-magnitude threats
across its range or threats are so high in
particular areas that they severely affect
the species across its range. Therefore,
the species is in danger of extinction
throughout every portion of its range
and an analysis of whether there is any
significant portion of the range that may
be in danger of extinction or likely to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:10 Dec 26, 2017
Jkt 244001
become so would not result in a
different outcome.
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to
species listed as endangered or
threatened under the Act include
recognition of conservation status,
requirements for Federal protection, and
prohibitions against certain practices.
Recognition through listing encourages
and results in public awareness and
conservation actions by Federal and
State governments in the United States,
foreign governments, private agencies
and groups, and individuals.
Our regulations at 50 CFR part 402
implement the interagency cooperation
provisions found under ESA Section 7.
Under section 7(a)(1) of the ESA, federal
agencies are to utilize, in consultation
with and with the assistance of the
Service, their authorities in furtherance
of the purposes of the Act. Section
7(a)(2) of the Act, as amended, requires
Federal agencies to ensure, in
consultation with the Service, that ‘‘any
action authorized, funded, or carried
out’’ by such agency is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of a
listed species or result in destruction or
adverse modification of its critical
habitat. An ‘‘action’’ that is subject to
the consultation provisions of section
7(a)(2) has been defined in our
implementing regulations as ‘‘all
activities or programs of any kind
authorized, funded, or carried out, in
whole or in part, by Federal agencies in
the United States or upon the high
seas.’’ 50 CFR 402.02. With respect to
this species, there are no ‘‘actions’’
known to require consultation under
ESA Section 7(a)(2). Given the
regulatory definition of ‘‘action,’’ which
clarifies that it applies to ‘‘activities or
programs . . . in the United States or
upon the high seas,’’ the species is
unlikely to be the subject of section 7
consultations, because the species
conducts its entire life cycle in
freshwater outside of the United States
and is unlikely to be affected by U.S.
Federal actions. Additionally, because
the Yangtze sturgeon is not native to the
United States, no critical habitat is being
proposed for designation with this rule.
50 CFR 424.12(g).
Section 8(a) of the Act authorizes the
provision of limited financial assistance
for the development and management of
programs that the Secretary of the
Interior determines to be necessary or
useful for the conservation of
endangered or threatened species in
foreign countries. Sections 8(b) and 8(c)
of the Act authorize the Secretary to
encourage conservation programs for
foreign listed species, and to provide
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
assistance for such programs, in the
form of personnel and the training of
personnel.
Section 9 of the Act and our
implementing regulations at 50 CFR
17.21 set forth a series of general
prohibitions that apply to all
endangered wildlife. These
prohibitions, in part, make it illegal for
any person subject to the jurisdiction of
the United States to ‘‘take’’ (which
includes harass, harm, pursue, hunt,
shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or
collect; or to attempt any of these)
endangered wildlife within the United
States or upon the high seas. It is also
illegal to possess, sell, deliver, carry,
transport, or ship any such wildlife that
has been taken illegally. In addition, it
is illegal for any person subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States to
import; export; deliver, receive, carry,
transport, or ship in interstate or foreign
commerce, by any means whatsoever
and in the course of commercial
activity; or sell or offer for sale in
interstate or foreign commerce any
listed species. Certain exceptions apply
to employees of the Service, the
National Marine Fisheries Service, other
Federal land management agencies, and
State conservation agencies.
We may issue permits under section
10 of the Act to carry out otherwise
prohibited activities involving
endangered wildlife under certain
circumstances. Regulations governing
permits for endangered species are
codified at 50 CFR 17.22. With regard to
endangered wildlife, a permit may be
issued for the following purposes: For
scientific purposes, to enhance the
propagation or survival of the species,
and for incidental take in connection
with otherwise lawful activities. There
are also certain statutory exemptions
from the prohibitions, which are found
in sections 9 and 10 of the Act.
Required Determination
Clarity of the Rule
We are required by Executive Orders
12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we
publish must:
(1) Be logically organized;
(2) Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
(3) Use clear language rather than
jargon;
(4) Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
(5) Use lists and tables wherever
possible.
If you feel that we have not met these
requirements, send us comments by one
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
61241
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 27, 2017 / Proposed Rules
of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To
better help us revise the rule, your
comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell
us the numbers of the sections or
paragraphs that are unclearly written,
which sections or sentences are too
long, the sections where you feel lists or
tables would be useful, etc.
National Environmental Policy Act (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
We have determined that
environmental assessments and
environmental impact statements, as
defined under the authority of the
National Environmental Policy Act (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not be
prepared in connection with listing a
species as an endangered or threatened
species under the Endangered Species
Act. We published a notice outlining
our reasons for this determination in the
Common name
References Cited
A complete list of references cited in
this rulemaking is available on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov
and upon request from the Branch of
Foreign Species, Ecological Services
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this proposed
rule are the staff members of the Branch
of Foreign Species, Ecological Services,
Falls Church, VA.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation.
Scientific name
*
*
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Federal Register on October 25, 1983
(48 FR 49244).
Accordingly, we propose to amend
part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title
50 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
as set forth below:
PART 17—ENDANGERED AND
THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531–
1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise
noted.
2. In § 17.11(h), add an entry for
‘‘Sturgeon, Yangtze’’ to the List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in
alphabetical order under FISHES to read
as set forth below:
■
§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened
wildlife.
*
*
*
(h) * * *
Where listed
*
*
Status
*
*
*
Listing citations and applicable
rules
*
*
FISHES
*
*
Sturgeon, Yangtze ......................
*
*
*
*
Acipenser dabryanus ................
*
*
*
*
*
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 622
[Docket No. 170720688–7688–01]
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
RIN 0648–BH07
Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of
Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish
Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico;
Vermilion Snapper Management
Measures; Amendment 47
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
AGENCY:
Jkt 244001
NMFS proposes to implement
management measures described in
Amendment 47 to the Fishery
Management Plan for the Reef Fish
Resources of the Gulf of Mexico (FMP),
as prepared by the Gulf of Mexico
Fishery Management Council (Council)
(Amendment 47). For vermilion
snapper, this proposed rule would
revise the stock annual catch limit
(ACL). Additionally, Amendment 47
would establish a proxy for the estimate
of the stock maximum sustainable yield
(MSY). The purpose of this proposed
rule is to revise the stock ACL for
vermilion snapper in the Gulf of Mexico
(Gulf) consistent with the most recent
stock assessment.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before January 26, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on the amendment identified by
‘‘NOAA–NMFS–2017–0106’’ by either
of the following methods:
• Electronic Submission: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
SUMMARY:
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
E
*
Proposed rule; request for
comments.
[FR Doc. 2017–27954 Filed 12–26–17; 8:45 am]
20:10 Dec 26, 2017
*
ACTION:
Dated: November 15, 2017.
James W. Kurth,
Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Exercising the Authority of the
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
*
*
Wherever found ........................
Sfmt 4702
*
*
[Insert Federal Register citation when published as a final
rule].
*
*
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to
www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=
NOAA-NMFS-2017-0106, click the
‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, complete the
required fields, and enter or attach your
comments.
• Mail: Submit written comments to
Lauren Waters, Southeast Regional
Office, NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South,
St. Petersburg, FL 33701.
Instructions: Comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or
individual, or received after the end of
the comment period, may not be
considered by NMFS. All comments
received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted for public
viewing on www.regulations.gov
without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address, etc.),
confidential business information, or
otherwise sensitive information
submitted voluntarily by the sender will
be publicly accessible. NMFS will
accept anonymous comments (enter
‘‘N/A’’ in the required fields if you wish
to remain anonymous). Electronic
copies of Amendment 47, which
includes an environmental assessment,
E:\FR\FM\27DEP1.SGM
27DEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 27, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 61230-61241]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-27954]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2017-0047; 4500090024]
RIN 1018-BC83
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the
Yangtze Sturgeon as an Endangered Species
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
[[Page 61231]]
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
proposed rule and a 12-month finding on a petition to list the Yangtze
sturgeon (Acipenser dabryanus) as an endangered species under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Loss of individuals
due to overharvesting on the Yangtze River is the main factor that
contributed to the historical decline of the species. Despite
conservation efforts, this species is still currently in decline due
primarily to the effects of dams and bycatch. If we finalize this rule
as proposed, it would extend the Act's protections to this species. We
seek information from the public on this proposed rule and the status
review for this species.
DATES: We will consider comments and information received or postmarked
on or before February 26, 2018. Comments submitted electronically using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, below) must be received
by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date. We must receive
requests for public hearings, in writing, at the address shown in FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by February 12, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Document availability: This finding is available on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2017-
0047.
Written comments: You may submit comments by one of the following
methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS-HQ-ES-2017-0047,
which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, in the Search
panel on the left side of the screen, under the Document Type heading,
click on the Proposed Rules link to locate this document. You may
submit a comment by clicking on ``Comment Now!''
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-HQ-ES-2017-0047; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
We request that you send comments only by the methods described
above. We will post all comments on https://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any personal information you provide
us (see Public Comments, below, for more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Janine Van Norman, Branch of Foreign
Species, Ecological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS: ES,
5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803; telephone, 703-358-
2171; facsimile, 703-358-2499. If you use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Information Requested
Public Comments
Our intent, as required by the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), is to
use the best available scientific and commercial data as the foundation
for all endangered and threatened species classification decisions.
Further, we want any final rule resulting from this proposal to be as
accurate and effective as possible. Therefore, we invite the range
country, governmental agencies, the scientific community, industry, and
other interested parties to submit comments regarding this proposed
rule. Comments should be as specific as possible.
Before issuing a final rule to implement this proposed action, we
will take into account all comments and any additional relevant
information we receive. Such communications may lead to a final rule
that differs from our proposal. For example, new information or
analysis may lead to a threatened status instead of an endangered
status for this species, or we may determine that this species does not
warrant listing based on the best available information when we make
our determination. All comments, including commenters' names and
addresses, if provided to us, will become part of the administrative
record. For this species, we particularly seek comments concerning:
(1) The species' biology, ranges, and population trends, including:
(a) Biological or ecological requirements of the species, including
habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering;
(b) Genetics and taxonomy;
(c) Historical and current range, including distribution patterns;
(d) Historical and current population levels, and current and
projected trends; and
(e) Past and ongoing conservation measures for the species, its
habitat, or both.
(2) Factors that may affect the continued existence of the species,
which may include habitat modification or destruction, overutilization,
disease, predation, the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms,
or other natural or manmade factors.
(3) Biological, commercial trade, or other relevant data concerning
any threats (or lack thereof) to the species and existing regulations
that may be addressing those threats.
(4) Additional information concerning the historical and current
status, range, distribution, and population size of the species,
including the locations of any additional populations of the species.
Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as
scientific journal articles or other publications) to allow us to
verify any scientific or commercial information you include.
Please note that submissions merely stating support for or
opposition to the action under consideration without providing
supporting information, although noted, will not be considered in
making a determination, as section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that
determinations as to whether any species is an endangered or threatened
species must be made ``solely on the basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.''
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We request that you
send comments only by the methods described in ADDRESSES.
If you submit information via https://www.regulations.gov, your
entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will
be posted on the website. If your submission is made via a hardcopy
that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the
top of your document that we withhold this information from public
review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We
will post all hardcopy submissions on https://www.regulations.gov.
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection on https://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Headquarters Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Public Hearing
Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for one or more public hearings
on this proposal, if requested. Requests must be received by the date
listed above in DATES. Such requests must be sent to the address shown
in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. We will schedule public hearings on
this proposal, if any are requested, and announce the dates, times, and
places of those hearings, as well as how to obtain reasonable
accommodations, in the Federal Register and local newspapers at least
15 days before the hearing.
[[Page 61232]]
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint policy on peer review published in the
Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we solicited the expert
opinion of six appropriate and independent specialists for peer review
of the Species Status Assessment (SSA) that provides the biological
basis for this proposed listing determination. The purpose of peer
review is to ensure that our listing determinations are based on
scientifically sound data, assumptions, and analyses. Their comments
and suggestions can be found at (https://www.fws.gov/endangered/improving_ESA/peer_review_process.html).
Previous Federal Actions
On March 12, 2012, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
received a petition dated March 8, 2012, from WildEarth Guardians and
Friends of Animals to list as endangered or threatened under the Act
the following 15 sturgeon species: Adriatic sturgeon (Acipenser
naccarii); Baltic sturgeon (A. sturio); Russian sturgeon (A.
gueldenstaedtii); ship sturgeon (A. nudiventris); Persian sturgeon (A.
persicus); stellate sturgeon (A. stellatus); Siberian sturgeon (A.
baerii); Yangtze sturgeon (A. dabryanus); Chinese sturgeon (A.
sinensis); Sakhalin sturgeon (A. mikadoi); Amur sturgeon (A.
schrenckii); Kaluga sturgeon (Huso dauricus); Syr Darya sturgeon
(Pseudoscaphirhynchus fedtschenkoi); dwarf sturgeon (P. hermanni); and
Amu Darya sturgeon (P. kaufmanni). The petition states that all 15
petitioned sturgeon species are affected by similar threats, which are
primarily: Legal and illegal harvest for meat and/or roe; habitat loss
and degradation, including dams or dam construction; and water
pollution. The petition is available at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=FWS-HQ-ES-2013-0051-0003.
NMFS acknowledged receipt of this petition in a letter dated April
14, 2012, and informed the petitioners that NMFS would determine, under
section 4 of the Act, whether the petition presents substantial
scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned
action may be warranted. Although the petition was initially sent to
NMFS, as a result of subsequent discussions between NMFS and the
Service regarding the August 28, 1974, Memorandum of Understanding
pertaining to ``Jurisdictional Responsibilities and Listing Procedures
Under the Endangered Species Act of 1973,'' we have determined that 10
of the 15 petitioned sturgeon species are within the jurisdiction of
the Service. Therefore, in April 2012, the Service notified WildEarth
Guardians that we have jurisdiction over the 10 sturgeon species,
listed below.
On September 24, 2013, we published in the Federal Register (78 FR
58507) a 90-day finding that found that the petition presented
substantial scientific and commercial information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted for the following 10 sturgeon
species included in the petition: Siberian sturgeon (Acipenser baerii),
Yangtze sturgeon (A. dabryanus), Russian sturgeon (A. gueldenstaedtii),
ship sturgeon (A. nudiventris), Persian sturgeon (A. persicus), Amur
sturgeon (A. schrenckii), stellate sturgeon (A. stellatus), Syr-Darya
sturgeon (Pseudoscaphirhynchus fedtschenkoi), dwarf sturgeon (P.
hermanni), and Amu Darya sturgeon (P. kaufmanni). This document
constitutes our review and determination of the status of the Yangtze
sturgeon, our publication of our 12-month finding on this species, and
our proposed rule to list this species.
Background
A thorough review of the taxonomy, life history, ecology, and
overall viability of the Yangtze sturgeon is presented in the Species
Status Assessment (SSA) for the Yangtze sturgeon (Service 2017;
available at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2017-
0047). The SSA documents the results of the comprehensive biological
status review for the Yangtze sturgeon and provides an account of the
species' overall viability through forecasting of the species'
condition in the future (Service 2017, entire). In the SSA, we
summarize the relevant biological data and a description of past,
present, and likely future stressors and conduct an analysis of the
viability of the species. The SSA provides the scientific basis that
informs our regulatory decision regarding whether this species should
be listed as an endangered or threatened species under the Act. This
decision involves the application of standards within the Act, its
implementing regulations, and Service policies (see Determination,
below). The SSA contains the risk analysis on which this determination
is based, and the following discussion is a summary of the results and
conclusions from the SSA. We solicited peer review of the draft SSA
from six qualified experts. We received responses from one of the
reviewers, and we modified the SSA as appropriate.
Species Description
The Yangtze sturgeon is a freshwater fish species that attains a
maximum size of around 130 centimeters (4.3 feet (ft)) and a maximum
weight of about 16 kilograms (35 pounds) (Billiard and Lecointre 2000,
p. 368; Zhuang et al. 1997, pp. 257, 259). The species has a triangular
head, an elongated snout, and large blowholes (Gao et al. 2009b, p.
117). Yangtze sturgeons have tactile barbels at the front of their
mouths that they use to dig for food. On the dorsal side, the Yangtze
sturgeons are dark gray, brownish-gray, or yellow-gray in color. The
rest of the body is milky white in color (Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 259).
Taxonomy
Historically, the Yangtze sturgeon coexisted alongside the Chinese
sturgeon in the Yangtze River. Initial attempts to differentiate the
two species included using morphological measures. However,
morphological characteristics can be influenced by differences in
environmental conditions. For example, wild Yangtze sturgeon display
grey color on the sides of their bodies while those bred in captivity
sometimes display a darker color (Li et al. 2015, p. 186).
Due to similarities in their morphology, the two sturgeons were not
identified as separate species until 1869, based on collection of
specimens obtained from the Yangtze River (Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 257).
Multiple studies since have shown the Yangtze and Chinese sturgeons are
very closely related and can be considered to be sister species
(Krieger et al. 2008, p. 41; Zhu et al. 2008, p. 32; Zhang et al. 2000,
p. 136). A study of mitochondrial DNA found that Yangtze and Chinese
sturgeon have a divergence value of 0.3 percent. This is in contrast to
Chinese sturgeon and starry sturgeon (Acipenser stellatus), which have
a divergence value of 7.7 percent (Zhang et al. 2000, pp. 133-134).
While these results suggest that Yangtze and Chinese sturgeon are
closely related species, taxonomic confusion regarding the two species
continued well into the 1960s (Li J. et al. 2015, p. 186). In addition
to genetic similarities, Yangtze and Chinese sturgeon share the same
habitat and multiple studies suggest that Yangtze sturgeon may be a
landlocked ecotype of the Chinese sturgeon (Kynard 2016, pers. comm.;
Li J. et al. 2015, p. 186; Krieger et al. 2008, p. 42; Zhang et al.
2000, p. 136).
Despite similarities between Yangtze and Chinese sturgeon, there
are differences between the two species.
[[Page 61233]]
Yangtze and Chinese sturgeon can be differentiated by the different
ecoregion they inhabit. The Chinese sturgeon is an anadromous species
(species that spawn in freshwater and spend most of its life at sea)
that migrates between coastal feeding grounds and spawning grounds in
both the Yangtze River and the Pearl River. On the other hand, the
Yangtze sturgeon is a potamodromous species (a species that conducts
its entire life cycle in freshwater) that migrates between feeding
grounds and spawning grounds entirely within the Yangtze River basin
(Kynard et al. 2003, p. 28; Zhuang et al. 1997, pp. 257-295).
In addition to differences in their life history, these two species
can also be differentiated based on their mitochondrial and nuclear DNA
(Li J. et al. 2015, pp. 185, 194). Therefore, despite possessing
morphological and genetic similarities, there are differences in the
habitat, life history characteristics, and genetic makeup between the
two species. We thus accept the Yangtze sturgeon as a separate species
as classified below:
Class: Actinopterygii
Order: Acipenseriformes
Family: Acipenseridae
Species: Acipenser dabryanus Dum[eacute]ril, 1869
Biology and Life History
Although the Yangtze sturgeon's life history is similar to other
sturgeon species, there are key differences. Based on the best
available information, much of what is known about the Yangtze
sturgeon's life history comes from research on the more numerous and
studied Chinese sturgeon due to similarities in morphology, taxonomy,
and life history between the two species. Yangtze sturgeons spawn in
the spring from March to April, with a smaller late fall/early winter
spawning period occurring from October to December (Qiwei 2010, p. 3;
Gao et al. 2009b, p. 117; Kynard et al. 2003, p. 28). Spawning
migration begins when water level, flow velocity, and silt content
enters a downward trend (Zhang H. et al. 2012, p. 4).
At the spawning site, female Yangtze sturgeons can lay between
57,000 to 102,000 eggs. These eggs, when mature, are gray to black and
range from 2.7 to 3.4 millimeters (0.11 to 0.13 inches) in diameter.
The eggs are sticky and firmly adhere to the space between pebbles and
boulders, known as the ``interstitial'' space, on the riverbed (Gao et
al. 2009b, p. 117; Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 261). Larvae emerge from the
eggs about 115 to 117 hours after fertilization, and they remain at the
spawning ground for around 12 to 30 days before dispersing downstream
(Kynard et al. 2003, pp. 33-34; Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 262). Yangtze
sturgeons do not start their migration downriver until they become
juveniles.
Juvenile sturgeons disperse around 100 to 200 kilometers (km) (62
to 124 miles (mi)) downstream from their spawning ground and arrive in
backwater pools and sandy shallows with low velocity flow and rich mud
and sand substrate where they feed on insects, aquatic plants, and
small fish (Zhang et al. 2011, p. 184; Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 259).
During the spring flood on the main stem of the Yangtze River,
juveniles will move to the tributaries to feed. Young sturgeons will
remain in these feeding reaches until they reach maturity (4 to 6 years
for males and 6 to 8 years for females) after which they begin
migrating upstream towards the spawning ground during the spring flood
(Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 261).
Habitat
The Yangtze sturgeon is found in sandy shoal with silt ground and
gentle to moderate water flow (Bemis and Kynard 1997, p. 169; Zhuang et
al. 1997, p. 259). The spawning habitat for the Yangtze sturgeon is a
riverbed that contains larger boulders, pebbles, clear water with a
velocity of 1.2 to 1.5 meters (m) per second (3.9 to 4.9 ft per
second), and a depth of 5 to 15 m (16 to 49 ft) (Zhuang et al. 1997, p.
261). The presence of large boulders ensures there is sufficient
interstitial space between the rocks for eggs to adhere to. At the same
time, smaller pebbles and gravel fill in the interstitial space so that
water flowing through the space is not too high to prevent adherence
(Du et al. 2011, p. 257). Sufficient velocity is also needed to prevent
excess buildup of gravel in the interstitial space (Du et al. 2011, p.
262). If there is insufficient interstitial space, eggs will not adhere
to the boulders on the riverbed. If there is too much space, the water
current will be too strong and the eggs will be washed away. Therefore,
suitable sturgeon habitat has specific requirements for velocity and
riverbed composition to ensure successful spawning.
Distribution
Historical Range
As its name implies, the Yangtze sturgeon is found in the Yangtze
River (Wu et al. 2014, p. 5). The river is more than 6,397 km (3,975
mi) in length and is divided into three segments. The upper reach,
which span a total of about 4,300 km (2,671 mi), is further sub-divided
into two segments: the Jinsha River segment, which stretches from the
headwater in Yushu in the Tibetan Plateau to Yibin, a distance of about
2,300 km (1,429 mi), and the upper Yangtze River, which stretches from
Yibin to the Three Gorges region at Yichang, a distance of about 1,000
km (621 mi) (Cheng et al. 2015, p. 571; Jiang et al. 2008, p. 1471; Fu
et al. 2003, p. 1651). Four major tributaries feed into the upper
Yangtze. They are: the Min, Tuo, Jialing, and the Wu River (Chen Z. et
al. 2001, p. 78). The middle reach is from Yichang to Hukou, a distance
of about 950 km (590 mi). The Yangtze River widens in this segment and
is identified by multiple large lakes, including Lake Dongting and Lake
Poyang. The lower reach stretches from Hukou to the mouth of the river
at Shanghai, a distance of about 930 km (577 mi) (Fu et al. 2003, p.
1651).
Historically, the Yangtze sturgeon was found in the lower portion
of the Jinsha River and the upper, middle, and lower reaches of the
Yangtze River, a distance of about 1,300 km (807 mi) (Wu et al. 2014,
p. 5). The majority of historical sightings occurred in the lower
Jinsha and upper Yangtze River with occasional sightings in the middle
and lower Yangtze (Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 259). The species has also
been found in major tributaries that feed into the upper Yangtze
including the Min, Tuo, and Jialing (Artyukhin et al. 2007, p. 370).
There have also been sightings of the species in Dongting Lake and
Poyang Lake in the middle and lower reaches, respectively (Zhuang et
al. 1997, p. 259). One sighting took place as far downstream as Anhui
province, a distance of more than 2,000 km (1,242 mi) downstream from
Yibin (Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 261). The species' spawning reach is
understood by Yangtze sturgeon researchers to have occurred from
Maoshui in the lower Jinsha River to Hejiang in the upper Yangtze River
(Zhang et al. 2011, p. 184).
Current Range
The Yangtze sturgeon's current range is limited to the upper
Yangtze River and its tributaries in the reaches between Yibin and
Yichang, a distance of about 1,000 km (Wu et al. 2014, p. 5; Dudgeon
2010, p. 128; Huang et al. 2011, p. 575; Zhang et al. 2011, p. 181;
Artyukhin et al. 2007, p. 370). The completion of the Gezhouba Dam in
1981 at Yichang prevented the upstream migration of adults to the
species' spawning ground (Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 261). As a result of
the construction of Gezhouba Dam, the species may have been extirpated
in reaches below the dam (Li et al. 2015, p. 186; Zhu et al. 2008, p.
30). That said, from 2014-2017,
[[Page 61234]]
fishermen below Gezhouba Dam accidently captured four adult Yangtze
sturgeons, suggesting the presence of a very small remnant population
(Du 2017, pers. comm.). Due to Gezhouba Dam's smaller size, the
reservoir for the Gezhouba Dam is relatively small (Kynard 2017, pers.
comm.) However, the Three Gorges Dam, located slightly upstream from
Gezhouba Dam, and its reservoir changed the hydrology of the Yangtze.
Construction on the Three Gorges Dam began in 2003 and was completed in
2009. The reservoir, which extends 600 km (372 mi) upstream, further
reduced the species' range by modifying reaches above Three Gorges Dam
to a lentic (still water) system (Chen D. et al. 2009, p. 341; Fu et
al. 2003, p. 1650). Loss of lotic (rapidly moving water) ecosystem
reduces the quality of remaining habitat for the species (Kynard 2016,
pers. comm.; Cheng et al. 2015, pp. 570, 576). On the lower Jinsha
River, in the upstream portion of the species' historical range, the
construction of the Xiangjiaba Dam, which was completed in 2008,
limited the species' spawning ground to areas below the dam (Zhang et
al. 2011, pp. 183-184). The species continues to ascend the major
tributaries in the upper Yangtze, including the Min, Tuo, and Jialing
River (Huang et al. 2011, p. 575; Artyukhin et al. 2007, p. 370).
Historical and Current Population
The Yangtze sturgeon was historically abundant and was commercially
harvested up to the 1970s (Lu et al. 2015, p. 89; Zhang et al. 2013, p.
409; Kynard et al. 2003, p. 27). The majority (80 percent) of harvest
of Yangtze sturgeon took place during the 1950s to the 1970s. However,
overharvesting during this time period led to a sharp decline in the
population size (Kynard et al. 2003, p. 27).
While there may have been natural recruitment of the species in the
1990s, no natural recruitment has been observed in the wild since the
2000s (Du et al. 2014, p. 1; Wu et al. 2014, p. 1). The population is
currently being sustained by artificial restocking. Between the years
of 2010-2013, 7,030 Yangtze sturgeon juveniles were released into the
middle and upper Yangtze River in two to three batches each year (Wu et
al. 2014, p. 3). Restocking efforts have been ongoing in the reaches
below Gezhouba Dam since 2014 (Hu 2017, pers. comm.). However,
restocked sturgeons suffer from low fitness; most notably, they lack
the ability to survive to reproductive age. Capture data obtained from
the releases in 2010-2013 found that 95 days after restocking, no
restocked sturgeons were caught either by researchers or by fishermen
in the upper Yangtze River (Wu et al. 2014, pp. 3-5). These results
indicate that restocked sturgeon have a very low survival rate.
Although we do not have population estimates for the species, based on
the fact that there has been no observable natural reproduction since
the 2000s and the low survival rate of restocked sturgeon, the species
population in the Yangtze River is likely to be very low when compared
to historical numbers (Du et al. 2014, p. 1; Wu et al. 2014, p. 4).
Summary of Threats and Conservation Measures That Affect the Species
The Act directs us to determine whether any species is an
endangered species or a threatened species because of any factors
affecting its continued existence. We completed a comprehensive
assessment of the biological status of the Yangtze sturgeon, and
prepared a report of the assessment, which provides a thorough account
of the species' overall viability. In this section, we summarize the
conclusions of that species status assessment, which can be accessed at
Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2017-0047 on https://www.regulations.gov.
Dams on the Yangtze River and Its Effects
The topography of the upper Yangtze River basin is characterized by
mountains of varying heights. The change in elevation between the upper
Yangtze to the lower Yangtze amounts to 3,280 m (10,761 ft), which
makes the upper Yangtze River an ideal place for hydroelectric projects
(Fan et al. 2006, p. 33). The growth of dam construction in China has
accelerated during the past decades. From the 1970s to the 1990s, an
average of 4.4 large reservoirs (capacity greater than 0.1 km\3\) were
constructed per year. By the 2000s, this number had increased to an
average construction rate of 11.8 large reservoirs per year. By 2011,
China possessed 552 large reservoirs, 3,269 medium reservoirs (capacity
of 0.01-0.1 km \3\), and 84,052 small reservoirs (capacity of 0.0001-
0.01 km \3\); of this number, the Yangtze River basin contained 45,000
dams and reservoirs, including 143 dams having large reservoirs, or a
quarter of all large reservoirs in China (Miao et al. 2015, p. 2350;
Mueller et al. 2008, p. 233). The construction of dams and reservoirs
have multiple and broad effects on the Yangtze sturgeon and its
habitat, including limiting connectivity between spawning and feeding
reaches; altering water temperature, water discharge, and velocity
rates; and changing sediment concentration.
Connectivity
Dam construction on Yangtze River limits the ability of the Yangtze
sturgeon to migrate between spawning and feeding reaches. Dam
construction on the Yangtze occurs on both the upper and lower end of
the species' current range. In the middle Yangtze River, the
construction of Gezhouba Dam in 1981 prevented migration of adults
downstream of the dam from being able to migrate to the species'
spawning ground in the upper Yangtze near Yibin (Miao et al. 2015, p.
2351; Dudgeon 2010, p. 128; Fang et al. 2006, p. 375; Zhuang et al.
1997, p. 261). Although the reaches below Gezhouba Dam might be
suitable for the species, at present there has been no observed natural
reproduction below Gezhouba Dam (Du 2017, pers. comm.). The
construction of Three Gorges Dam created a reservoir, which affected
individuals of the species upstream. The Three Gorges Dam reservoir,
which extended 600 km upstream from the dam, transformed the area into
unsuitable habitat (Kynard 2016, pers. comm.; Cheng et al. 2015, p.
570; Miao et al. 2015, p. 2351). After the construction of the
reservoir, the species rarely moves to reaches below Chongqing, a
distance of approximately 500 km (Wu et al. 2015, p. 5).
Meanwhile, the construction of Xiangjiaba Dam on the lower Jinsha
River segment occurred on part of the historical spawning reach of the
species. Xiangjiaba Dam is a barrier to all fish species and prevents
the migration to areas above or the below the dam (Wu et al. 2014, p.
2). However, the species may be able to use spawning reaches below the
dam (Fan et al. 2006, p. 36). That said, a dam located upstream from
the species' habitat affects the species downstream by altering water
temperature and sedimentation rate, which we discuss below (Fan et al.
2006, p. 36).
In addition to dams currently present on the lower Jinsha and upper
Yangtze River, in the early 2000s, a proposal was presented for the
construction of the Xiaonanhai Dam, which is to be located upstream
from Chongqing. If built, this dam will create a barrier between the
species' last known spawning ground and feeding reach, which, depending
on design, could have a negative impact on the species (Cheng et al.
2015, p. 579). However, at present, China's Ministry of Environmental
Protection has rejected the proposal and any future dam projects on the
last stretch of free-flowing Yangtze River due to environmental impacts
(Chang 2016, pers. comm.; Kynard 2016, pers. comm.; Mang 2015,
unpaginated).
[[Page 61235]]
While the rejection of the proposal to construct the Xiaonanhai Dam
is good for Yangtze sturgeon, the country's twelfth 5-year plan stated
that renewable resources should make up 15 percent of all energy
generated in China with 9 percent coming from hydroelectric source.
This plan translates to an additional 230 gigawatt (GW) of power
generated via hydroelectric dam. This target is a very ambitious one,
given that Three Gorges Dam generates 18 GW of power per year (Dudgeon
2011, p. 1496). Furthermore, although the plan to construct the
Xiaonanhai Dam has been rejected, plans to construct dams on the Jinsha
River as part of a 12-dam cascade are still proceeding (Dudgeon 2010,
p. 129).
Water Temperature
Historically, dams negatively affect the reproductive success of
Yangtze sturgeon by altering water temperature flowing through the
species' habitat. Water temperature influences the reproductive success
of the Yangtze sturgeon at two stages in its life cycle: Commencement
of spawning migration and egg survival. Spawning migration of the
Yangtze sturgeon will not start until the water temperatures reach 18
degrees Celsius ([deg]C) (64.4 degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F)) (Cheng et
al. 2015, p. 578). Historically, before the construction of the
Xiangjiaba and other dams on the lower Jinsha, water temperature
reached 18 [deg]C (64.4[emsp14][deg]F) around April. However, the
construction of the dams stratified the water table. As most dams on
the Yangtze are designed to release cold water located at the bottom of
the dams, the spawning season for the Yangtze sturgeon could be delayed
by more than a month (Deng et al. 2006 and Wang et al. 2009, as cited
in Cheng et al. 2015, p. 578). This delay shortens the maturing season
for juveniles and is likely to reduce the species' survival rate.
Additionally, if the water remains too cold for too long, sturgeon eggs
will not mature, resulting in total loss of reproduction for that
season (Kynard 2016, pers. comm.).
Water Discharge and Velocity
By altering discharge rates, dams affect the Yangtze sturgeon's
reproductive success by affecting the timing of spawning migration. The
species' spawning migration begins when flow rate increases during the
spring flood (Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 261). At Yichang, the most
downstream portion of the Yangtze sturgeon's current range, the mean
discharge rate from 1983 to 2004 (before the construction of Three
Gorges Dam) was between 10,000 m\3\/s and 17,000 m\3\/s. After the
construction of the Three Gorges Dam, mean flow rate varies between
12,780 m\3\/s in high flow years and 6,414 m\3\/s in low flow years
(Chen and Wu 2011, p. 384). For Chinese sturgeon, successful spawning
occurs when water discharge is between 7,000 and 26,000 m\3\/s. This
means that although flow rate during high flow years remains in the
optimal discharge rate for Chinese sturgeon spawning, discharge rates
during low flow years could have a negative impact on spawning success
rates of both sturgeon species (Chen and Wu 2011, p. 385).
While we do not have long-term historical data for water discharge
rate for the Yangtze sturgeon at Yibin, the flow rate at Chongqing
during the years 1950-2000 was between 4,540 m\3\/s and 11,000 m\3\/s
(Zhang et al. 2011, p. 183). Since Chongqing is farther upstream from
Yichang, this flow rate may be the river's natural rate at this section
of the Yangtze. However, following the impoundment by the Xiangjiaba
Dam in October 2012 and the Xiluodo Dam in May 2013, discharge in the
lower Jinsha has declined more than 50 percent, suggesting that current
flow rate is likely to be lower than the flow rate between 1950 and
2000 (Cheng et al 2015, p. 577). The Jinsha River feeds into the upper
Yangtze River. This means that reduction in flow rate on the Jinsha
will also reduce the flow rate on the upper Yangtze River. Given that
the Yangtze sturgeon is closely related to the Chinese sturgeon, a
reduction of flow rate by over 50 percent could have a significant
negative impact on the reproductive success rate of the Yangtze
sturgeon given its already tenuous biological status.
Sedimentation Concentration
In addition to affecting spawning of Yangtze sturgeon, dams affect
the condition of the species' spawning ground through changes in the
water velocity and sedimentation load. Because reproductive success of
sturgeon is tied to the amount of suitable habitat, a reduction in
habitat area can reduce the reproductive success of the species (Ban et
al. 2011, p. 96; Bemis and Kynard 1997, p. 169). Specifically, flow
rates affect the Yangtze sturgeon by affecting the sedimentation
concentration in the water and on the riverbed. As noted before,
Yangtze sturgeon lay their eggs on the interstitial spaces between
rocks and boulders. The makeup of the riverbed needs to contain the
right concentration of small pebbles and larger boulders to provide
sufficient space for adherence and aeration of the eggs (Du et al.
2011, pp. 261-262; Bemis and Kynard 1997, p. 169).
Historically, discharge rates and sedimentation load were in
alignment with precipitation rates. A low discharge rate results in low
sedimentation load. High discharge rates lead to higher sediment load,
as high flows are able to transport more sediments downstream (Chen Z.
et al. 2001, pp. 88-89). However, dams cause discharge and
sedimentation rates to go out of alignment. While discharge rates
remain aligned with precipitation rate, the sedimentation load pattern
displays a 2-month delay due to sediment being trapped behind the dams.
When the spring flood occurs, numerous dams release highly concentrated
sediment downstream all at once, resulting in an asymmetrical sediment
load pattern (Chen Z. et al. 2001, p. 90). The effects of sediment load
patterns on the species' habitat occur at two stages: Release of
sediments during high river stages and reduced sediment size and load
over time (Dudgeon 2011, pp. 1488, 1495).
The Jinsha River dams trap up to 82 percent of the sediment during
the winter months, resulting in ``clean'' (i.e., sediment-free) water
flowing downstream. This ``clean'' water lacks nutrients and may
decrease the food supply of the Yangtze sturgeon over the winter months
(Cheng et al. 2015, p. 578). During the subsequent spring flood, the
release of concentrated sediment by dams likely results in sediments
filling in all the interstitial spaces in spawning habitat, thereby
reducing available spawning habitat for that season.
Despite the spring release of concentrated sediments, sediment load
is expected to decline over time. At Yichang, sediment load per year
has decreased from 530 mega tons (Mt) per year in the 1950s-1960s, to
60 Mt per year after 2003. Additionally, suspended sediment at Yichang
below Three Gorges Dam has decreased in size from 8-10 micrometers in
1987-2002 to 3 micrometers after 2003 (Yang et al. 2011, pp. 16-17).
Reduction in sediment size can lead to increased embeddedness of
available interstitial space. At the reaches below Gezhouba Dam,
sedimentation has reduced available interstitial space by up to 50 to
70 percent (Du et al. 2011, p. 262). This prevents the adherence of
eggs to the river bottom and reduces the quality of remaining spawning
habitats.
Summary of Effects of Dams on the Yangtze Sturgeon
Dam construction in the middle Yangtze and lower Jinsha has
restricted
[[Page 61236]]
the species' range to the reaches of the Yangtze between Yibin and
Yichang (Wu et al. 2014, p. 5). These projects prevented the migration
of the species upstream and downstream of the dams. Although there is
currently access between the species' remaining spawning and feeding
grounds, the condition of remaining habitat is likely to be negatively
affected by changes to the river flow and sedimentation rate. The
formation of the Three Gorges reservoir has transformed the 600-km
reach above the dam into a lentic system, resulting in unsuitable
habitat for the species (Kynard 2016, pers. comm.; Cheng et al. 2015,
pp. 570, 576). As a result, Yangtze sturgeon rarely use habitat
downstream from Chongqing (Wu et al. 2014, p. 5).
Upstream from the species' current range, the construction of the
Xiluodu and Xiangjiaba Dam is likely to negatively affect the
reproductive success of the Yangtze sturgeon. Through the release of
cold water during the spring flood, the dam can delay the spawning
migration of the sturgeon, which will either shorten the maturation
time for juveniles or prevent the successful maturation of eggs
altogether (Kynard 2016, pers. comm.; Cheng et al. 2015, p. 578).
Alteration to sediment concentration in both the short term and long
term reduces the quality of remaining habitat (Du et al. 2011, p. 262).
Given the lack of observed natural reproduction of the species in the
upper Yangtze, dams significantly affect the viability of the species.
Overfishing (historical) and Bycatch (current)
Historically, the Yangtze sturgeon was commercially harvested on
the Yangtze River. In the 1960s, harvest of Yangtze sturgeon accounted
for 10 percent of total harvest. In the 1970s, 5,000 kilograms (5.5
tons) of Yangtze sturgeons were caught in the spring season at Yibin
(Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 262). Since then however, the population of
Yangtze sturgeon has declined significantly (Zhang et al. 2013, p.
409). This decline is due to multiple reasons. Fishermen use fine mesh
nets that prevent smaller fish, weighing as little as 50 grams (1.7
ounces), from being able to escape. The number of fishing boats
increased from 500 in 1950s to 2,000 by 1985. More than 140,000
fishermen currently depend on the river for a living. Furthermore, the
fishing season overlapped with the main spawning season of the Yangtze
sturgeon (Yi 2016, p. 1; Fan et al. 2006, p. 37; Zhuang et al. 1997, p.
262). The replacement of bamboo and reed gear with gear made from
synthetic fibers further contributed to a higher catch rate of
sturgeons (Chen D. et al. 2009, p. 346).
Despite attempts to help conserve the species by restocking,
restocked juveniles experience very low survival rates (Wu et al. 2014,
p. 4). From 2010 to 2013, restocking operations released 7,030
juveniles into the upper Yangtze River main stem. Subsequent bycatch
between 2010 and 2013 recorded a total of 112 sturgeons caught,
indicating a very low survival rate of stocked juveniles (Wu et al.
2014, p. 3). These results suggest very low survivability of restocked
sturgeon, and the subsequent impacts from bycatch are too high for the
species to persist (Wu 2016, pers. comm.; Wu et al. 2014, p. 4).
Riverbed Modification
The Yangtze sturgeon requires river substrate to contain suitable
concentration to reproduce successfully (Du et al. 2011, p. 257).
Alteration to the riverbed has reduced the reproductive success of this
species. To improve navigation on the lower Jinsha and upper Yangtze
River, multiple projects, including sand and gravel extraction
operations, were implemented on the reaches between Shuifu and Yibin
and Yibin and Chongqing (Zhang et al. 2011, p. 184). Between 2005 and
2009, $44 million (converted to U.S. dollars) were invested to improve
the navigation between Yibin and Chongqing. These investments have led
to the modification of 22 riffles (a shallow section of a stream or
river with rapid current and a surface broken by gravel, rubble or
boulders) on the upper Yangtze and the deepening of the channel from
1.8 m (5.9 ft) to 2.7 m (8.8 ft) (Zhang et al. 2011, p. 184).
Additionally, up to 10, 6, and 3 river dredge ships operate in the
Yangtze River, the Jinsha River, and the Min River, respectively. The
operations of these ships alters the bottom topography of the
riverbeds, which results in the loss of benthic habitat and spawning
ground for many fish species, including the Yangtze sturgeon (Fan et
al. 2006, p. 37). These projects are occurring on or near current
Yangtze sturgeon spawning and feeding grounds from Yibin to Hejiang.
Thus these operations will continue to reduce the quality and quantity
of remaining habitat (Zhang et al. 2011, p. 184).
Industrial Pollution
As a benthic predator, the Yangtze sturgeon is exposed to higher
concentrations of industrial pollution than many other fish species
(Yujun et al. 2008, pp. 341-342). While we are not aware of any studies
that analyze the impacts of industrial pollution on Yangtze sturgeon
specifically, there have been studies on Chinese sturgeon and other
sturgeon species. Industrial pollutants such as triphenyltin (TPT)
affect reproductive success of the Chinese sturgeon. TPT, used in paint
on ship hulls and in fishnets in China, can be absorbed into the eggs
of Chinese sturgeon, resulting in increased deformities including
abnormal development and skeletal and morphological deformities in
embryos (Hu et al. 2009, pp. 9339-9340).
A study on TPT exposure to 2- to 3-day-old Chinese sturgeon larvae
found that 6.3 percent showed skeletal/morphological deformities and
1.2 percent had no eyes or only one eye. At the same time, larvae from
spawning hatches of captured adults showed skeletal/morphological
deformities of 3.9 percent and 1.7 percent that had only one eye or no
eyes. Given the rate of deformities found in this study, the capability
for the studied Chinese sturgeon to reproduce was reduced by 58.4 to
75.9 percent (Hu et al. 2009, p. 9342). Because the Yangtze and Chinese
sturgeon are closely related species, the presence of TPT in the upper
Yangtze River is likely reducing the reproductive success of the
Yangtze sturgeon by a similar rate.
In addition to TPT, the presence of endocrine disruptors compound
(EDC) affects Chinese sturgeon by inducing declining sperm activity,
intersex testis-ova, and a decline in male to female ratio in the
population (An and Hu 2006, p. 381). A study on EDC found that the
concentration of EDC in the Yangtze River (1.55 to 6.85 micrograms per
liter) is very high and could have a detrimental impact on sturgeon in
the river. This result suggests that industrial discharge of EDC is
occurring in the Yangtze.
As a result of rapid industrialization on the Yangtze River, higher
concentration of heavy metals are found in the Yangtze River (Yujun et
al. 2008, p. 338). High concentration of heavy metals leads to greater
accumulation in all aquatic organisms (Yujun et al. 2008, p. 339). The
toxicity effect of heavy metal accumulation is especially pronounced in
zoobenthic predators, like the Yangtze sturgeon, because they occupy a
higher position in the food chain. The result is that by consuming
smaller prey species that have absorbed heavy metal, zoobenthic
predator build up heavy metal accumulation inside their bodies (Yujun
et al. 2008, p. 346). Given that heavy metal concentration is highest
in benthic animals, especially zoobenthic predators like the sturgeon,
the effect of heavy metals on the
[[Page 61237]]
sturgeon could be more pronounced than other aquatic species (Yujun et
al. 2008, p. 341; An and Hu 2006, p. 381). Despite the known impacts on
captured Chinese sturgeon, we currently do not have evidence of
population-level impacts of EDC or heavy metal on the wild Yangtze
sturgeon population. That said, even though we have no evidence of
morphological deformities in wild sturgeon, it is likely that
industrial pollution does have an effect on the reproductive success of
wild sturgeon.
Hybridization With Displaced Native and Nonnative Sturgeon
Despite decline in wild fishery yields, the Yangtze basin remains
one of the major centers of China's aquaculture industry. Fishery
yields from the basin accounts for 65 percent of total freshwater
fisheries production in China (Shen et al. 2014, p. 1547; Chen D. et
al. 2009, p. 338). In the past 30 years, sturgeon aquaculture in China
has risen significantly. Although commercial aquaculturing of sturgeon
only started in the 1990s, by 2006, production had reached 17,424 tons,
which accounts for 80 percent of the world total production (Shen et
al. 2014, p. 1548). The growth of the aquaculture industry in China saw
aquaculture farms constructed across all branches of the Yangtze River
(Li R. et al. 2009, p. 636). Sturgeon species that are commonly used in
the aquacultural industry include A. schrenckii, Huso dauricus, and
other Amur River sturgeon hybrids (Li R. et al. 2009, p. 636). However,
none of these commonly cultured species are native to the Yangtze
River. Additionally, there is a lack of regulation and enforcement of
regulation to properly manage hybridization of sturgeon species. There
is also the problem of aquaculture sturgeon escaping from sturgeon
farms into the wider river system (Li R. et al. 2009, p. 636). The
result is a comingling of native, exotic, and hybrid sturgeon species
which could have a negative impact on the Yangtze sturgeon (Shen et al.
2014, p. 1549; Li R. et al. 2009, p. 636).
There is currently no native-strain farm (farm that raises native
species) for sturgeons in China. Because no farms in China focus on
raising native stock in large enough number, this system creates
shortages of parental stock of native sturgeons. In response to this
shortage, farmers crossbreed wild-caught sturgeon with any sturgeon
species available including nonnative species (Xiong et al. 2015, p.
658; Li R. et al. 2009, p. 636). For example, in 2006, there was a
shortage of Siberian sturgeon in China (Acipenser baerii). Farmers then
started crossbreeding Siberian sturgeon with Russian sturgeon (A.
gueldenstaedtii), Sterlet sturgeon (A. ruthenus), and Amur sturgeon (A.
schrenckii) (Li R. et al. 2009, p. 636). Crossbreeding of sturgeon
species in China alters the wild population makeup. A study on the
lower Yangtze River in 2006 found that of the 221 young sturgeons
captured, 153 were hybrids, which accounted for 69.9 percent of total
sturgeons caught (Li R. et al. 2009, p. 636). This information
indicates that farmed hybrids are escaping into the river system.
Although this study was conducted in the lower Yangtze River, because
sturgeon aquaculture occurs across the Yangtze River system, it is
likely that hybridization is occurring in the upper Yangtze River as
well.
The uncontrolled hybridization of native and nonnative species on
the Yangtze alters the population dynamics between hybrids and native
stocks. Hybridization may reduce the fitness of the overall population
or replace a population of native fish with hybrids (Shen et al. 2014,
p. 1549; Li R. et al. 2009, p. 636). Hybridization may also result in
hybrids with better fitness than wild stock that outcompete wild native
stock of Yangtze sturgeon for habitat and resources. When native fish
are unavailable, farmers tend to import nonnative fish that have better
characteristics, such as higher growth rate and better adaptability.
These non-native sturgeons are bred with available native sturgeon to
produce hybrids. These hybrids oftentimes escape or are accidentally
introduced into the wild and then compete with the Yangtze sturgeon for
resources (Xiong et al. 2015, pp. 657-658). Although hybridization is
likely to be occurring all along the Yangtze River, we currently do not
have information on the rates of hybridization of sturgeon in the upper
Yangtze or how significant the effects are on the Yangtze sturgeon.
That said, given that hybridized sturgeons make up 69.9 percent of
sturgeons found in the studied area, it is likely that sturgeon hybrids
are competing, and will likely continue to compete, with native stocks
for habitat and resources throughout the Yangtze River system.
Management Efforts
As a result of overfishing and the construction of Gezhouba Dam in
1981, the population of Yangtze sturgeon has declined (Du et al. 2014,
p. 1; Wu et al. 2014, p. 1; Zhang H. et al. 2011, p. 181). In response
to the decline of the species, national and local officials have
embarked on a number of initiatives to help conserve the species. These
initiatives include increasing legal protection for the Yangtze
sturgeon, creating and designating part of the species' range as a
protected area, and repopulating the species in the wild through
restocking (Zhang H. et al. 2011, p. 181; Fan et al. 2006, p. 35; Wei
et al. 2004, p. 322).
Legal Protections
In response to the decline of the Yangtze sturgeon, in 1989,
China's State Council added the Yangtze sturgeon to the National Red
Data Book for Threatened Chinese Fish as a Class I Protected Animal (Wu
et al. 2014, p. 1; Zhang H. et al. 2011, p. 181; Dudgeon 2010, p. 128;
Wei et al. 2004, p. 322; Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 258). Animals listed as
a Class I species are protected from certain activities, including
hunting, capturing, or killing, for both commercial and personal uses.
Scientific research, domestication, breeding, and exhibition are
exempted (Wei et al. 2004, p. 322). Transportation of Class I-listed
species requires approval from the Department of Wildlife
Administration. Import or export of Class I aquatic species is
regulated by the Fisheries Bureau of the Minister of Agriculture (Wei
et al. 2004, p. 323).
In addition to its listing under national law, the species has also
been included in Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade
in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) since 1998
(Ludwig 2008, p. 5; CITES 1997, pp. 152-153). The CITES trade database
has recorded no international trade of this species going as far back
as 1975 (the oldest date on CITES database) (CITES 2017). International
trade in CITES species is regulated via a permit system. Under Article
IV of CITES, export of an Appendix-II specimen requires the prior grant
and presentation of an export permit. Export permits for Appendix-II
specimens are only granted if the Management Authority of the State of
export is satisfied that the specimens were lawfully obtained and if
the Scientific Authority of the State of export has advised that the
trade is not detrimental to the survival of the species in the wild.
For any living specimen, the Management Authority of the State of
export must also be satisfied that the specimen will be so prepared and
shipped as to minimize the risk of injury, damage to health or cruel
treatment. Re-export of an Appendix-II specimen requires the prior
grant and presentation of a re-export certificate, which is only
granted if the Management Authority of the State of re-export is
satisfied that the specimen
[[Page 61238]]
was imported into that State in accordance with CITES and, for any
living specimen, that the specimen will be so prepared and shipped as
to minimize the risk of injury, damage to health or cruel treatment.
Certain exemptions and other special provisions relating to trade in
CITES specimens are also provided in Article VII of CITES. In the
United States, CITES is implemented through the Act and regulations at
50 CFR part 23.
Additionally, since 2003, a fishing ban on all fish species has
been implemented in the upper Yangtze River from February 1 to April
30. Starting in 2017, the fishing ban was extended from March to June
(Du 2017, pers. comm.). One of the side effects of this ban is a
reduction in the bycatch of Yangtze sturgeon since the time period of
the ban coincides with the spawning season of the Yangtze sturgeon
(Chen D. et al. 2012, p. 532; Chen D. et al. 2009, p. 348).
Despite the implementation of legal protection for the species,
there are several shortcomings with the current regulatory mechanisms
for the species. China currently does not have a specialized, dedicated
agency to manage fisheries resources across the country. Riverine
resource management is maintained at local levels which are often
located in major population center, far away from the fishery resource
(Chen D. et al. 2012, p. 541). In the case of Yangtze sturgeon, these
different jurisdictions have variations in regulation and conservation
goals for the Yangtze River ecosystem, which limits coordination of
species-conservation efforts and the overall effectiveness in managing
species conservation across the Yangtze River basin (Chen D. et al.
2012, p. 541).
In addition to a lack of a specialized body or other effective
basin-wide conservation efforts, lack of funding is major problem for
local jurisdictions. Enforcement officers often lack basic equipment,
such as boats, to carry out fishing regulations within the fishery
(Chen D. et al. 2012, p. 541). Additionally, while commercial
harvesting of the species is prohibited, bycatch is still occurring and
may still be too high to sustain a wild breeding population (Zhang H.
et al. 2011, p. 184). The new fishing ban implemented in 2017 has the
potential to reduce bycatch (Du 2017, pers. comm.). However, the
positive effects from a fishing ban on the Yangtze may be limited,
given the importance of the Yangtze to the economic well-being of
riverside communities as entire stretches of the river cannot be closed
off to fishing (Fan et al. 2006, p. 38).
Protected Areas
To offset the effects of habitat loss due to dams, China's State
Department established in 2000 the National Reserve of Hejiang-Leibo
Reaches of the Yangtze River for Rare and Endangered Fishes (Zhang H.
et al. 2011, p. 181; Fan et al. 2006, p. 35). The reserve is located on
the upper Yangtze River on the reaches between Xiangjiaba Dam and the
city of Chongqing. This reserve is intended to protect three imperiled
fish species, the Yangtze sturgeon, the Chinese paddlefish (Psephurus
gladius), and the Chinese high-fin banded shark (Myxocyprinus
asiaticus), as well as 37 other endemic fish species (Fan et al. 2006,
p. 35). In 2005, the reserve was expanded to mitigate the impact from
current and future hydroelectric projects (Zhang H. et al. 2011, pp.
181-182). While the reserve plays an important role in protecting
wildlife within its borders, expansion of the hydroelectric project in
the lower Jinsha River and upper Yangtze outside the protected area is
likely to undermine the effectiveness of the reserve. In order to
facilitate economic growth, China has decentralized authority for
infrastructure development from the state to local municipalities. This
decentralized model has resulted in provincial governments prioritizing
economic growth over environmental impacts (Dudgeon 2011, p. 1496).
Since 2003, hydroelectric projects in China are subjected to
environmental assessments and approval from the Ministry of
Environmental Protection (Ministry) (Dudgeon 2011, p. 1496). However,
this approval is routinely ignored even by nationally owned
corporations. For example, in 2004, China Three Gorges Corporation
(CTGC) began construction of the Xiluodu Dam in the Lower Jinsha
without obtaining permission from the Ministry (Dudgeon 2011, pp. 1496-
1497). In response, the Ministry suspended work on the dam in 2005.
However, despite initial reservation about the lack of an environmental
impact assessment, the Ministry quickly compiled reports and allowed
the dam construction to proceed (Dudgeon 2011, p. 1499). Additionally,
in 2009 the Ministry gave the authority to build two additional dams on
the Jinsha segment to other dam construction companies after a brief
suspension (Dudgeon 2010, p. 129). Overall, these temporary suspensions
of construction have done little to slow down the pace of dam
development. In 2011, CTGC began constructing the Xiangjiaba Dam on the
Lower Jinsha. The location of this dam would have occurred within the
500-km boundary of the National Reserve of Hejiang-Leibo Reaches. The
CTGC successfully petitioned the State Council to redraw the boundaries
of the reserve to exclude the section of the river where the Xiangjiaba
Dam is located (Dudgeon 2011, p. 1500; Dudgeon 2010, p. 129). The
reserve, now renamed the National Natural Reserve Area of Rare and
Special Fishes of the Upper Yangtze River, encompasses the reaches
below the Xiangjiaba Dam from Yibin to Chongqing as well the
tributaries that feed into the Yangtze (Zhang H. et al. 2011, p. 182;
Fan et al. 2006, p. 35). The redrawing of the area of the reserve to
accommodate the construction of Xiangjiaba Dam lends further evidence
that local governments are prioritizing growth over environmental
impacts. The construction of the Xiangjiaba Dam led to the impoundment
of the reach upriver, which will affect the flow and sedimentation rate
downstream (Cheng et al. 2015, p. 577; Dudgeon 2011, p. 1500). Given
the lack of natural reproduction of the Yangtze sturgeon and future
impacts from the dam, it is unlikely that the current boundary of the
reserve will be sufficient to maintain a wild breeding population of
this species (Kynard 2016, pers. comm.; Dudgeon 2011, p. 1500).
Restocking
As a result of the decline of the species, controlled reproduction
and release of juvenile Yangtze sturgeon has occurred every year since
2007 (Zhang H. et al. 2011, p. 181). Between 2007 and 2012, more than
10,000 Yangtze sturgeon juveniles were released into the upper Yangtze
on reaches downstream from Xiangjiaba Dam (Wu et al. 2014, p. 1). In
2014, restocking was started on the reaches below Gezhouba Dam (Du
2017, pers. comm.). While this number pales in comparison to the six
million Chinese sturgeon that have been released since 1983, the
restocking of the Yangtze sturgeon represent an attempt by local and
state officials to try to maintain the species in the wild (Chen D. et
al. 2009, p. 349).
Despite the efforts to restock the Yangtze sturgeon in the wild,
current restocking efforts are unsuccessful (Wu et al. 2014, p. 4). No
juveniles were caught 95 days after release, indicating that released
sturgeon experienced a very high mortality rate (Wu et al. 2014, p. 4).
There are multiple possible reasons for the limited success of current
restocking efforts, including poor breeding and rearing techniques that
result in progeny with low survival rates in the wild, high bycatch
rate, and loss or deterioration of remaining
[[Page 61239]]
habitats (Cheng et al. 2015, pp. 579-580; Du et al. 2014, p. 2; Shen et
al. 2014, p. 1549; Zhang H. et al. 2011, p. 184). Thus, despite
attempts to conserve the species in the wild through restocking, with
all the other forces acting on the Yangtze sturgeon it is unlikely that
current restocking efforts are adequate to improve the species'
condition in the wild.
Stochastic (Random) Events and Processes
Species endemic to small regions, or known from few, widely
dispersed locations, are inherently more vulnerable to extinction than
widespread species because of the higher risks from localized
stochastic (random) events and processes, such as industrial spills and
drought. These problems can be further magnified when populations are
very small, due to genetic bottlenecks (reduced genetic diversity
resulting from fewer individuals contributing to the species' overall
gene pool) and random demographic fluctuations (Lande 1988, p. 1455-
1458; Pimm et al. 1988, p. 757). Species with few populations, limited
geographic area, and a small number of individuals face an increased
likelihood of stochastic extinction due to changes in demography, the
environment, genetics, or other factors, in a process described as an
extinction vortex (a mutual reinforcement that occurs among biotic and
abiotic processes that drives population size downward to extinction)
(Gilpin and Soule[acute] 1986, pp. 24-25). The negative impacts
associated with small population size and vulnerability to random
demographic fluctuations or natural catastrophes can be further
magnified by synergistic interactions with other threats.
The Yangtze sturgeon is known from a single geographic population
in the upper Yangtze River and its tributaries (Zhang et al. 2011, pp
181-182; Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 259). As a result, the species is
highly vulnerable to stochastic processes and is highly likely
negatively affected by these processes. In March 2000, for example, the
Jinguang Chemical Plant, located on the Dadu River (a tributary of the
Yangtze River), was found to be releasing yellow phosphorous into the
Yangtze. This substance is highly toxic to aquatic organisms including
the Yangtze sturgeon (Chen D. et al. 2009, p. 343). Another spill in
2006 on the Yuexi River, which also feeds into the Yangtze, saw mercury
being released into the river (Worldwatch Insitute 2006, npn). These
and other incidents combined with the fact that the Yangtze River
system is home to a large number of chemical plants suggest that risk
of industrial spills is quite high. Therefore, it is likely that
stochastic processes have negative impacts on the species in
combination with other factors such as habitat modification and loss
and bycatch.
Determination
Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533), and its implementing
regulations at 50 CFR part 424, set forth the procedures for adding
species to the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and
Plants. Under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, we may list a species based
on: (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. Listing actions may be warranted based on any of
the above threat factors, singly or in combination.
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial
information available on the Yangtze sturgeon. While we do not know the
exact population size of the Yangtze sturgeon, the species was
historically abundant enough to be commercially viable up to the 1970s,
after which it experienced a significant decline (Kynard et al. 2003,
p. 27). Loss of individuals due to overharvesting by fishermen on the
Yangtze (Factor B) is the main factor that contributed to the
historical decline of the species. Subsequent construction of dams on
the Yangtze prevented the migration in the middle Yangtze and lower
Jinsha, which prevented recovery of the species in these areas (Miao et
al. 2015, p. 2351; Wu et al. 2014, p. 2; Dudgeon 2010, p. 128; Fang et
al. 2006, p. 375; Zhuang et al. 1997, p. 261). Additionally, dams
affect the quality of the species' habitat through changes in
discharge, temperature, and sedimentation rate (Zhang G. et al. 2012,
p. 445; Du et al. 2011, p. 262; Chen Z. et al. 2001, p. 90). In
addition to dams, the species' habitat is also adversely affected by
riverbed modification to accommodate increasing boat traffic. The
combined effects of dams and riverbed modification on the Yangtze
include the loss and reduction in quality of remaining habitat (Factor
A).
Despite conservation efforts undertaken by local and national
authorities such as fishing bans and restocking, current efforts do not
appear to be successful in conserving the species. No natural
reproduction has been documented in the wild since the 2000s (Wu et al.
2014, p. 1). Additionally, restocked juvenile sturgeon experience very
high mortality rates due to a high bycatch rate and an inability to
survive in wild conditions (Du et al. 2014, p. 1; Wu et al. 2014, p.
4).
Industrial pollution and hybridization with displaced native and
nonnative sturgeon species are also acting on the species (Factor E).
Although we do not have information on the impact of industrial
pollution on the species in the wild, studies in a laboratory
environment found that pollutants such as TPT and EDC can reduce the
reproductive success rate of adult sturgeons (Hu et al. 2009, p. 9342;
An and Hu 2006, pp. 379-380). Additionally, there are high
concentrations of TPT and EDC in the Yangtze River. While we do not
have data on the hybridization of Yangtze sturgeon with other species,
surveys conducted in the lower Yangtze River found that 69.9 percent of
sturgeon species caught were hybrids (Li R. et al. 2009, p. 636). These
results suggest that industrial pollution and hybridization, in tandem
with other factors, are affecting the species.
Therefore, for the following reasons we conclude that this species
has been and continues to be significantly reduced to the extent that
the viability of the Yangtze sturgeon is significantly compromised:
(1) The species is limited to a single geographic population in the
upper Yangtze main stem and its tributaries. There is also some
evidence of a small remnant population in the middle Yangtze.
(2) Loss of habitat and connectivity between the spawning and
feeding reaches is having a significant adverse effect on the species,
which appears to have low to no reproduction.
(3) The cumulative effects of habitat modification and loss due to
dams and riverbed projects, bycatch, industrial pollution, and
hybridization are adversely affecting the species.
(4) Current restocking and management efforts are inadequate to
maintain the species' presence in the wild.
(5) Stochastic events, such as industrial spills or drought, can
reduce the survival rate of the species
In section 3(6), the Act defines an ``endangered species'' as any
species that is ``in danger of extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range'' and in section 3(20), a ``threatened
species'' as any species that is ``likely to become an endangered
species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant
portion of
[[Page 61240]]
its range.'' We find that the Yangtze sturgeon is presently in danger
of extinction throughout its range based on the severity and immediacy
of threats currently adversely affecting the species. The populations
and distributions of the species have been significantly reduced to the
point where there is no current reproduction in the wild which is
indicative of a very high risk of extinction, and the remaining habitat
and populations are threatened by a variety of factors acting alone and
in combination to reduce the overall viability of the species.
Based on the factors described above and their impacts on the
Yangtze sturgeon, we find the following factors to be threats to this
species (i.e., factors contributing to the risk of extinction of this
species): Loss and modification of habitat due to dams and riverbed
expansion (Factor A), bycatch (Factor C), and cumulative effects
(Factor E) of these and other threats including industrial pollution
and hybridization. Furthermore, current legal and management efforts
over these practices are inadequate to conserve the species (Factor D).
Therefore, on the basis of the best available scientific and
commercial information, we propose listing Yangtze sturgeon as
endangered in accordance with sections 3(6) and 4(a)(1) of the Act. We
find that a threatened species status is not appropriate for this
species because of its restricted range, limited distribution, and
vulnerability to extinction; and because the threats are ongoing
throughout its range at a level that places this species in danger of
extinction now.
Under the Act and our implementing regulations, a species may
warrant listing if it is endangered or threatened throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. Because we have determined that the
Yangtze sturgeon is endangered throughout all of its range, we do not
need to conduct an analysis of whether there is any significant portion
of its range where the species is in danger of extinction or likely to
become so in the foreseeable future. This is consistent with the Act
because when we find that a species is currently in danger of
extinction throughout all of its range (i.e., meets the definition of
an ``endangered species''), the species is experiencing high-magnitude
threats across its range or threats are so high in particular areas
that they severely affect the species across its range. Therefore, the
species is in danger of extinction throughout every portion of its
range and an analysis of whether there is any significant portion of
the range that may be in danger of extinction or likely to become so
would not result in a different outcome.
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or
threatened under the Act include recognition of conservation status,
requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions against certain
practices. Recognition through listing encourages and results in public
awareness and conservation actions by Federal and State governments in
the United States, foreign governments, private agencies and groups,
and individuals.
Our regulations at 50 CFR part 402 implement the interagency
cooperation provisions found under ESA Section 7. Under section 7(a)(1)
of the ESA, federal agencies are to utilize, in consultation with and
with the assistance of the Service, their authorities in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act, as amended,
requires Federal agencies to ensure, in consultation with the Service,
that ``any action authorized, funded, or carried out'' by such agency
is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species
or result in destruction or adverse modification of its critical
habitat. An ``action'' that is subject to the consultation provisions
of section 7(a)(2) has been defined in our implementing regulations as
``all activities or programs of any kind authorized, funded, or carried
out, in whole or in part, by Federal agencies in the United States or
upon the high seas.'' 50 CFR 402.02. With respect to this species,
there are no ``actions'' known to require consultation under ESA
Section 7(a)(2). Given the regulatory definition of ``action,'' which
clarifies that it applies to ``activities or programs . . . in the
United States or upon the high seas,'' the species is unlikely to be
the subject of section 7 consultations, because the species conducts
its entire life cycle in freshwater outside of the United States and is
unlikely to be affected by U.S. Federal actions. Additionally, because
the Yangtze sturgeon is not native to the United States, no critical
habitat is being proposed for designation with this rule. 50 CFR
424.12(g).
Section 8(a) of the Act authorizes the provision of limited
financial assistance for the development and management of programs
that the Secretary of the Interior determines to be necessary or useful
for the conservation of endangered or threatened species in foreign
countries. Sections 8(b) and 8(c) of the Act authorize the Secretary to
encourage conservation programs for foreign listed species, and to
provide assistance for such programs, in the form of personnel and the
training of personnel.
Section 9 of the Act and our implementing regulations at 50 CFR
17.21 set forth a series of general prohibitions that apply to all
endangered wildlife. These prohibitions, in part, make it illegal for
any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to ``take''
(which includes harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap,
capture, or collect; or to attempt any of these) endangered wildlife
within the United States or upon the high seas. It is also illegal to
possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or ship any such wildlife
that has been taken illegally. In addition, it is illegal for any
person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to import;
export; deliver, receive, carry, transport, or ship in interstate or
foreign commerce, by any means whatsoever and in the course of
commercial activity; or sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign
commerce any listed species. Certain exceptions apply to employees of
the Service, the National Marine Fisheries Service, other Federal land
management agencies, and State conservation agencies.
We may issue permits under section 10 of the Act to carry out
otherwise prohibited activities involving endangered wildlife under
certain circumstances. Regulations governing permits for endangered
species are codified at 50 CFR 17.22. With regard to endangered
wildlife, a permit may be issued for the following purposes: For
scientific purposes, to enhance the propagation or survival of the
species, and for incidental take in connection with otherwise lawful
activities. There are also certain statutory exemptions from the
prohibitions, which are found in sections 9 and 10 of the Act.
Required Determination
Clarity of the Rule
We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
(1) Be logically organized;
(2) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(3) Use clear language rather than jargon;
(4) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(5) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one
[[Page 61241]]
of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To better help us revise the rule,
your comments should be as specific as possible. For example, you
should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs that are
unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long, the
sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc.
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
We have determined that environmental assessments and environmental
impact statements, as defined under the authority of the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), need not be prepared
in connection with listing a species as an endangered or threatened
species under the Endangered Species Act. We published a notice
outlining our reasons for this determination in the Federal Register on
October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).
References Cited
A complete list of references cited in this rulemaking is available
on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the
Branch of Foreign Species, Ecological Services (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this proposed rule are the staff members of
the Branch of Foreign Species, Ecological Services, Falls Church, VA.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; and 4201-4245, unless
otherwise noted.
0
2. In Sec. 17.11(h), add an entry for ``Sturgeon, Yangtze'' to the
List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in alphabetical order under
FISHES to read as set forth below:
Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Listing citations
Common name Scientific name Where listed Status and applicable
rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Fishes
* * * * * * *
Sturgeon, Yangtze................ Acipenser dabryanus. Wherever found...... E [Insert Federal
Register citation
when published as
a final rule].
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Dated: November 15, 2017.
James W. Kurth,
Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Exercising the
Authority of the Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-27954 Filed 12-26-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P