Marine Mammal Protection Act; Stock Assessment Reports for the Pacific Walrus Stock and Three Northern Sea Otter Stocks in Alaska, 53510-53514 [2023-16935]
Download as PDF
53510
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2023 / Notices
(3) Ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(4) Ways to minimize the burdens of
the information collection on aggrieved
persons, including the use of
appropriate automated collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses.
HUD encourages interested parties to
submit comments in response to these
questions.
C. Authority
Section 3507 of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C.
chapter 35, as amended.
Erik Heins,
Director, Enforcement Support Division,
FHEO.
[FR Doc. 2023–16916 Filed 8–7–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Background
Fish and Wildlife Service
[Docket No. FWS–R7–ES–2022–0155;
FF07CAMM00–FXES111607MWA07]
Marine Mammal Protection Act; Stock
Assessment Reports for the Pacific
Walrus Stock and Three Northern Sea
Otter Stocks in Alaska
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Marine Mammal Protection Act and its
implementing regulations, we, the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, after
consideration of comments received
from the public have revised the marine
mammal stock assessment reports
(SARs) for the Pacific walrus (Odobenus
rosmarus divergens) and for each of the
three northern sea otter (Enhydra lutris
kenyoni) stocks in Alaska. We now
make these four final revised SARs
available to the public.
ADDRESSES: Obtaining Documents: You
may view the final revised stock
assessment reports at https://
www.regulations.gov in Docket No.
FWS–R7–ES–2022–0155, or you may
request copies from the contact in FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Charles Hamilton, Marine Mammals
Management, by telephone at 907–786–
3804; by email at charles_hamilton@
fws.gov; or by mail at U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, MS–341, 1011 East
Tudor Road, Anchorage, AK, 99503.
Individuals in the United States who are
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:00 Aug 07, 2023
deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have
a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY,
TDD, or TeleBraille) to access
telecommunications relay services.
Individuals outside the United States
should use the relay services offered
within their country to make
international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In
accordance with the Marine Mammal
Protection Act of 1972, as amended
(MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), and its
implementing regulations in the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR
part 18, we, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service), have developed four
final revised marine mammal stock
assessment reports (SARs) for species in
Alaska. These revised SARs are for the
Pacific walrus (Odobenus rosmarus
divergens) and for each of the three
stocks of the northern sea otter (Enhydra
lutris kenyoni) in Alaska—the
Southwest, Southcentral, and Southeast
stocks.
Jkt 259001
Under the MMPA and its
implementing regulations, we regulate
the taking, possession, transportation,
purchasing, selling, offering for sale,
exporting, and importing of marine
mammals. One of the goals of the
MMPA is to ensure that each stock of
marine mammals occurring in waters
under U.S. jurisdiction does not
experience a level of human-caused
mortality and serious injury (M/SI) that
is likely to cause the stock to be reduced
below its optimum sustainable
population level (OSP). The MMPA
defines the OSP as ‘‘the number of
animals which will result in the
maximum productivity of the
population or the species, keeping in
mind the carrying capacity of the habitat
and the health of the ecosystem of
which they form a constituent element’’
(16 U.S.C. 1362(9)).
To help accomplish the goal of
maintaining marine mammal stocks at
their OSPs, Section 117 of the MMPA
requires the Service and the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to
prepare a SAR for each marine mammal
stock that occurs in waters under U.S.
jurisdiction. A SAR must be based on
the best scientific information available;
therefore, we prepare it in consultation
with the regional scientific review
groups established under section 117(d)
of the MMPA. Each SAR must include:
(1) a description of the stock and its
geographic range; (2) a minimum
population estimate, maximum net
productivity rate, and current
population trend; (3) an estimate of the
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
annual human-caused M/SI by source
and, for a strategic stock, other factors
that may be causing a decline or
impeding recovery of the stock; (4) a
description of commercial fishery
interactions; (5) a categorization of the
status of the stock; and (6) an estimate
of the potential biological removal (PBR)
level.
The MMPA defines the PBR level as
‘‘the maximum number of animals, not
including natural mortalities, that may
be removed from a marine mammal
stock while allowing that stock to reach
or maintain its optimum sustainable
population.’’ (16 U.S.C. 1362(20)). The
PBR is the product of the minimum
population estimate of the stock (Nmin);
one-half the maximum theoretical or
estimated net productivity rate of the
stock at a small population size (Rmax);
and a recovery factor (Fr) of between 0.1
and 1.0, which is intended to
compensate for uncertainty and
unknown estimation errors. This can be
written as: PBR = (Nmin)(1⁄2 of the
Rmax)(FR).
Section 117 of the MMPA also
requires the Service and NMFS to
review the SARs (a) at least annually for
stocks that are specified as strategic
stocks; (b) at least annually for stocks for
which significant new information is
available; and (c) at least once every 3
years for all other stocks. If our review
of the status of a stock indicates that it
has changed or may be more accurately
determined, then the SAR must be
revised accordingly.
A strategic stock is defined in the
MMPA as a marine mammal stock ‘‘(A)
for which the level of direct humancaused mortality exceeds the PBR level;
(B) which, based on the best available
scientific information, is declining and
is likely to be listed as a threatened
species under the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, [as amended] (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.) [ESA], within the
foreseeable future; or (C) which is listed
as a threatened or endangered species
under the ESA, or is designated as
depleted under the MMPA’’ (16 U.S.C.
1362(19)).
Summary of Revised Stock Assessment
Reports
In accordance with Section 117(c) of
the MMPA, the Service reviews the
stock assessments for the Pacific walrus
and Southwest stock of the northern sea
otter annually (strategic stocks) and at
least once every 3 years for the
Southcentral and Southeast stocks of the
northern sea otter (non-strategic stocks).
If we determine that new information
(such as new abundance estimates)
indicates that a revision is warranted,
we will propose a revision. In 2021,
E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM
08AUN1
53511
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2023 / Notices
based on new information that had
become available, the Service initiated
revisions of these SARs, and once
completed, presented them to the
Alaska Regional Scientific Review
Group (SRG) for their comment and
review.
The Service also published a notice in
the Federal Register informing the
public of the availability of these draft
revised SARs and seeking public
comment (88 FR 7992, February 7,
2023). These final revised SARs
incorporate the comments and
suggestions provided to the Service by
the SRG and the public, as appropriate.
The following table summarizes the
final revised SARs for the Pacific walrus
and the Southwest, Southcentral, and
Southeast stocks of the northern sea
otter, listing each stock’s Nmin, Rmax, Fr,
PBR, annual estimated human-caused
mortality and serious injury, and status.
SUMMARY OF FINAL REVISED STOCK ASSESSMENT REPORTS FOR THE PACIFIC WALRUS AND FOR THE SOUTHWEST,
SOUTHCENTRAL, AND SOUTHEAST STOCKS OF THE NORTHERN SEA OTTER
M/SI
Stock
Nmin
Pacific Walrus ............................................................
Northern Sea Otter (NSO) Southwest Stock .............
NSO Southcentral Stock ............................................
NSO Southeast Stock ................................................
Revisions to Northern Sea Otter,
Southeast Stock SAR
On March 31, 2023, the Service
released a technical report, ‘‘Northern
Sea Otter (Enhydra lutris kenyoni)
Population Abundance and Distribution
across the Southeast Alaska Stock
Summer 2022.’’ This report provides
details of a stock-wide sea otter
population survey that was conducted
May through June 2022. The collected
data was combined with all available
prior population survey data from the
Southeast stock in an integrated
population model, which provided
updated assessments of sea otter
population abundance, trends through
time, and carrying capacity. We have
incorporated the results from this
technical report into this final revised
SAR and included the updates to NMIN
and PBR in the chart above. Although
these values slightly decreased, the
status of the stock has not changed and
remains non-strategic.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Our Response to Comments
In addition to comments from the
SRG, the Service also received
comments on the draft SARs from the
Marine Mammal Commission, the
Eskimo Walrus Commission, and two
members of the public. We present
substantive issues raised in those
comments that are pertinent to all four
SARs first, and then comments
pertinent to the Pacific walrus, and then
the three stocks of northern sea otters in
Alaska, along with our responses below.
Comments Pertinent to All Four Stock
Assessment Reports
Comment 1: Final SARs for these four
stocks were last published on April 21,
2014 (79 FR 22154). The Service should
take all steps necessary to adhere to the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:00 Aug 07, 2023
Jkt 259001
214,008
41,666
19,854
21,187
Rmax
Fr
0.06
0.29
0.29
0.29
PBR
0.5
0.38
0.75
0.75
Comments Pertinent to the Pacific
Walrus
Comment 2: Given the future
uncertainty of the Pacific walrus’
viability due to the effects of climate
change, the Fish and Wildlife Service
should be required to enforce the PBR
number for the Pacific walrus and allow
no more than that number to be taken.
Service Response to Comment 2: The
most recent population information
suggests that subsistence walrus
harvests are occurring at sustainable
levels. We acknowledge that climate
change is impacting walrus sea ice
habitats, which could lead to a future
population decline. If the population
starts to decline due to environmental
conditions, managers and subsistence
users will need to work closely together
to ensure that harvest levels remain
sustainable. The Service is in the
process of developing a projection
model based on the best available
Frm 00061
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Subsistence
<1
<1
<1
<1
4,210
176
389
851
3,210
2,296
2,159
2,304
schedule set forth in Section 117(c) of
the MMPA for revising SARs.
Service Response to Comment 1: The
Service conducts timely reviews of the
stock assessment reports in accordance
with Section 117(c)(1) of the MMPA,
which directs the Service to review
SARs on an annual basis for ‘‘strategic’’
stocks, an annual basis for stocks ‘‘for
which significant new information is
available,’’ and every three years for all
other stocks. The Service is required to
revise SARs only if such review
indicates that ‘‘the status of the stock
has changed or can be more accurately
determined.’’ (16 U.S.C. 1386(c)(2). If, as
a result of its review, the Service
determines that the status of the stock
has changed or can be more accurately
determined, then the Service will
propose a revision.
PO 00000
Stock status
Fishery/other
Strategic.
Strategic.
Nonstrategic.
Nonstrategic.
estimates of population size, growth
rate, and carrying capacity to help
inform harvest management decisions
under an array of potential climate
change and anthropogenic disturbance
scenarios. Section 119(a) of the MMPA
provides for the development of comanagement agreements with Alaska
Natives for the subsistence use of
marine mammals, and tribally based
hunting ordinances provide a potential
mechanism for self-regulation of
harvest.
Comment 3: The draft SAR states: ‘‘By
the 1980s, walrus researchers were
concerned that the population had
exceeded its natural carrying capacity
. . .’’. The draft SAR also notes that ‘‘in
1980 the population was estimated to be
254,890 with a 95% confidence level for
184,000–344,000’’. The latest estimate
in 2017 has very similar numbers,
257,193 and 171,138–366,366. Is there a
similar concern that the natural carrying
capacity has been reached or exceeded?
Service Response to Comment 3:
Fluctuations in density-dependent vital
rates over the past several decades
suggest that the carrying capacity of the
ecosystem has likely shifted over time.
Declining reproductive and calf survival
rates in the 1980s suggest that the
population may have approached or
exceeded carrying capacity. Population
models suggest a decline in abundance
may have occurred through the 1980s
and 1990s, which lessened over time as
reproductive and calf survival rates rose
in a density-dependent manner. The
most recent information on walrus vital
rates does not indicate that the
population is in a food limited status at
the present time.
Comment 4: The harvest reporting
correction factor for Pacific walrus is
over 30 years old and the struck and lost
E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM
08AUN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
53512
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2023 / Notices
is based on data collected over 50 years
ago; these are not reliable for calculating
current harvest data. These should be
studied with the cooperation of the
Eskimo Walrus Commission and its
communities.
Service Response to Comment 4: We
agree that the harvest reporting
correction factor and the struck and lost
rates should be studied with the
cooperation of the Eskimo Walrus
Commissions and its communities.
Imperfect harvest reporting and
unknown struck and lost rates
associated with modern hunting
practices create uncertainty with respect
to true harvest removal levels. For the
purpose of the SAR, we use the best
available information to account for
these factors. We have also applied a
conservative (0.5) recovery factor in our
PBR calculation to account for these
uncertainties. Improving harvest
removal estimates is a top management
priority for this species that can only be
addressed through a collaborative effort
with subsistence hunters and leaders.
Comment 5: There is considerable
overlap between commercial fisheries
and walrus as their use of terrestrial
haulouts and foraging by swimming
longer distances increase. Commercial
fisheries and shipping disturbances in
both U.S. and Russian waters must be
considered more carefully.
Service Response to Comment 5:
While direct mortality or injury
associated with interactions with
commercial fishing gear is rare, marine
(and air) traffic occurring near coastal
walrus haulouts is an emerging
conservation and management concern.
Disturbances associated with marine
vessels and other human activities can
disrupt resting and foraging patterns
and lead to trampling related injuries
and mortalities. The Service and
partners conduct annual outreach and
education campaigns to raise awareness
about the sensitivity of walruses to
disturbances and distribute guidance to
commercial fishermen, mariners and
aircraft pilots about how to avoid
disturbances to walruses. The Service
has provided clarifying language in the
final revised SAR for the Pacific walrus
recognizing the potential future impacts
of commercial fisheries and shipping on
the stock.
Comment 6: The statement that
‘‘Although subsistence harvest rates are
declining and appear to be within a
sustainable range at present’’ should be
explained because it exceeds the PBR.
Service Response to Comment 6:
Indigenous harvest rates are declining
and harvest rates have not prohibited
the Pacific walrus population from
being ‘‘at or near its OSP range.’’ The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:00 Aug 07, 2023
Jkt 259001
language in the final revised SAR has
been edited to explain that harvest
sustainability was determined by other
analyses rather than the PBR formula,
based on a Bayesian Belief Network
model by MacCraken et al. (2017). We
also note that the PBR formula includes
a conservative correction factor (FR
value) due to uncertainty associated
with estimates of human caused
mortality.
Comment 7: Please provide a clearer
explanation of how the value of the
recovery factor (FR) was selected when
calculating Potential Biological Removal
(PBR).
Service Response to Comment 7: The
final revised SAR includes additional
language explaining that a conservative
FR value of 0.5 has been adopted in
consideration of uncertainty associated
with estimates of human caused
removals and a petition to consider
listing walruses under the ESA.
Comment 8: Incomplete harvest
reporting and potentially high rates of
strike-and-loss during subsistence
harvest of Pacific Walrus should be
addressed in more detail.
Service Response to Comment 8: The
final revised SAR includes additional
language acknowledging the issue of
under-reporting of harvest and tentative
plans to engage in a collaborative effort
in key walrus harvest communities to
refine harvest estimates.
Comments Pertinent to Northern Sea
Otter Stocks
Comment 9: The Service used a
recovery factor (FR) for the Southwest
stock that was reduced by 20% (reduced
from 0.5 to 0.4) to account for
uncertainty around human-caused
removals. However, the FR for the
Southeast and Southcentral stocks was
reduced by 25% (reduced from 1 to
0.75). Are there differences in
uncertainty surrounding human-caused
removals across the three stocks are or
are they similar? If similar, the Service
should use the same FR across the stocks
for standardization.
Service Response to Comment 9: The
uncertainty in human-caused mortality
is similar across all three stocks. In the
final revised SAR, we have updated the
Southwest SAR to reduce the FR value
in the Southwest stock to match the
reduction in the Southcentral and
Southeast stocks by 25%. The updated
Southwest stock FR is 0.38. We have
updated the Potential Biological
Removal (PBR) calculation based on this
change, which resulted in an updated
PBR of 2,296 sea otters for the
Southwest stock.
Comment 10: The Service makes
statements about sea otter population
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
trends in the five management units
(MU) of the Southwest stock, but this is
problematic given the relatively limited
historical data, overlapping confidence
intervals for population estimates, and
differences in the frequency, methods,
and timing of population surveys within
each MU. Additionally, in many of the
surveys listed, the Service does not
clearly indicate if the survey was aerial
or boat-based, the time of year the
survey was conducted. We recommend
the Service add more survey details in
each MU section, limit conclusions
about stock abundance and status, and
add statements of how the Service plans
to address these concerns to provide
more consistency across the five MUs in
the Southwest stock.
Service Response to Comment 10: We
have edited each of the sections
summarizing population surveys for the
five Management Units (MU) to provide
additional details on the season, month
the survey was conducted, survey
platform, and analytical approach. We
provide additional details about
differences in methodology and how
this affects our ability to accurately
describe the magnitude of increases or
decreases in each MU. The Service
plans to develop integrated population
models to incorporate the various
population surveys across the five MUs
in a single analytical framework,
following a similar approach developed
for the Southeast stock of northern sea
otters (Eisaguirre et al. 2021, 2023,
Schuette et al. 2023). This approach will
allow the Service to better account for
methodological differences across the
five MUs to provide a more
comprehensive view of sea otter
population abundance, distribution, and
trends through time.
Comment 11: The estimates of
human-caused mortality and serious
injury (M/SI) in the SARs for the
Southwest, Southcentral, and Southeast
Alaska stocks of northern sea otters are
based almost entirely on subsistence
harvest data collected by FWS’s
marking, tagging, reporting program
(MTRP). However, it is unclear whether
or not all subsistence harvests are
reported, and some M/SI of sea otters
from other sources (e.g., illegal and
unreported hunting) likely occurs. We
recommend the Service develop a
method for quantifying unreported
harvest and include that information in
the SARs.
Service Response to Comment 11: The
Service acknowledges there is an
information gap pertaining to
unreported harvest of sea otters. MTRP
harvest reporting data collection was
initiated in 1989 and is ongoing. MTRP
data is the most comprehensive data set
E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM
08AUN1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2023 / Notices
available for legal harvest. The Service
is considering options for accounting for
unreported harvest in future population
models. The Service has little empirical
data to quantify the amount of illegal
take associated with fisheries conflict.
The Service is considering options for
accounting for illegal takes in future
population models.
Comment 12: FWS discusses ‘‘illegal’’
takes of sea otters (including possession,
transport, and sale of sea otter hides) in
the SARs for the Southeast and
Southwest stocks in the subsections on
‘‘Alaska Native Subsistence Harvest
Information.’’ However, referencing
illegal takes of sea otters and illegal
handling of sea otter hides in that
subsection is inappropriate, given that
taking of sea otters and other marine
mammals by Alaska Natives for
subsistence purposes and to create and
sell authentic articles of handicrafts and
clothing is not illegal as long as the
taking is not conducted in a wasteful
manner. We suggest the Service move
the discussion of illegal takes of sea
otters to a separate subsection within
the ‘‘Annual Human-Caused Mortality
and Serious Injury’’ section of the SARs
(i.e., not the subsection on ‘‘Alaska
Native Subsistence Harvest
Information’’).
Service Response to Comment 12: We
agree that these statements do not
belong in this section. We have moved
the statements related to illegal take to
a new heading, ‘Illegal Take’ under
‘Annual Human-Caused Mortality and
Serious Injury’ in all of the northern sea
otters SARs to make it clearer that there
is a difference between legal take by
Alaska Native peoples and the various
forms of illegal take.
Comment 13: In the ‘‘Fisheries
Information’’ subsections, the draft
SARs note that the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) maintains an
observer program to detect and estimate
M/SI of marine mammals. The Alaska
Marine Mammal Observer Program was
designed specifically to collect data on
marine mammal M/SI in nearshore
salmon drift gillnet and set gillnet
fisheries, where sea otters are at
relatively high risk of entanglement.
However, that program has not operated
since 2013 and, when it was operating,
observer coverage was low. As such,
although the Service concludes that M/
SI from fisheries is likely low, there are
actually no reliable estimates of sea otter
M/SI in the commercial fisheries that
pose the highest entanglement risk to
sea otters. We recommend that the
Service coordinate with NMFS to ensure
sufficient levels of observer coverage in
all nearshore fisheries that may pose a
significant entanglement risk to any of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:00 Aug 07, 2023
Jkt 259001
the three stocks of sea otters in Alaska.
Observer coverage should be sufficient
to (1) generate reliable estimates of
serious injury and mortality, as required
under section 118 of the MMPA, and (2)
provide a basis for introducing measures
to reduce sea otter bycatch if and as
necessary.
Service Response to Comment 13: As
we state in the final revised SARs, the
reported level of incidental take of sea
otters from fisheries is very low, and it
is difficult to state the total combined
effect of fisheries, including whether the
total fishery mortality and serious injury
rate is insignificant and approaching a
zero mortality and serious injury rate.
The Service obtains fisheries related
information from NMFS. The Service is
supportive of initiatives to obtain more
reliable information on incidental take
from fisheries managed by NMFS, the
State of Alaska, and local stakeholders.
This will include strategies to gather
information associated with State
managed shellfisheries and mariculture
activities, which are increasing across
the State of Alaska.
Comment 14: In the draft SARs, the
discussion of Flannery et al. 2021
suggests genetic information could be
important for stock differentiation. Does
Flannery et al. 2021 suggest a stock
delineation different than that of the
three stocks currently used by FWS?
Service Response to Comment 14: No,
this study does not suggest a different
delineation, rather it recognizes that the
inclusion of genetic variation among sea
otter populations is important to define
stock delineations and indicates that
genetic differentiation among northern
sea otters is clinal across their range
(Larson et al. 2021, Flannery et al.
2021).
Comment 15: In the draft SARs, a few
different Rmax values from the scientific
literature are described; the reports
should clearly state which value for
Rmax was selected and why.
Service Response to Comment 15: We
agree, the Service added language to all
three final revised sea otter SARs to
clarify that we used 0.29 as the value for
Rmax, which is the maximum intrinsic
rate of growth achievable by northern
sea otters.
Comment 16: Why is unknown
subsistence harvest considered to be
negatively biased when there are similar
unknown mortalities associated with oil
spills, boating, and mariculture?
Service Response to Comment 16: The
Service agrees with this comment, and
we have removed this statement from all
three final revised sea otter SARs.
Comment 17: The draft SARs mention
that there is uncertainty in the rate of
human-caused mortality associated with
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
53513
increased development in the
mariculture industry. Is there conflict
between the northern sea otter stocks
and the mariculture industry?
Service Response to Comment 17: A
recent report (Rehberg and Goodglick
2023) to the Service provides
information on potential conflicts
between sea otters and certain types of
mariculture; however, negative
interactions have only been reported in
Kachemak Bay. The Service revised all
three final sea otter SARs to reflect this
information and promote awareness of
mariculture as another source of
uncertainty and potential conflict.
Comment 18: Figures 2 and 3 in the
Southcentral SAR should be revised to
add clarity in the following ways: (1)
remove the point-to-point trend lines
because abundance estimates with lines
implies that we know for a fact what the
population trajectory is between the
points, and if a trend line is drawn,
typically it should be a regression trend
line. Although the trend lines would not
be different from what is already there,
this is more problematic in Figure 3,
especially for Western Prince William
Sound, because it seems to suggest that
the ups and down of the abundance in
the time series are real when, given the
confidence intervals, they are most
likely sampling variance; (2) clearly
identify the name of the regions
illustrated so that it is easier to match
with previous tables and figures; and (3)
do not use the same blue and green
colors in Figures 2 and 3 because they
do not represent the same regions, and
it is confusing.
Service Response to Comment 18: We
agree with all of the comments made
about Figures 2 and 3 in the
Southcentral SAR. We have created a
single, revised figure that illustrates the
same data originally presented in
Figures 2 and 3, but in a simpler and
easier to follow format. This new figure
(Figure 2) now presents the three subregions as a series of independent
estimates (not a line plot) from each
survey area. This figure is in black and
white (rather than in color) and now
more closely matches the figure style
used in the Southwest and Southeast
Sea Otter SARs.
Comment 19: The description of the
contours of the critical habitat
designated for the Southwest stock
under the ESA is confusing because it
is not clear which marine waters are
included in the critical habitat
designation.
Service Response to Comment 19: The
Service has revised this SAR by adding
the following clarification: ‘‘As part of
the ESA listing decision, the Service
designated 15,164 km2 (5,855 mi2) of
E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM
08AUN1
53514
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2023 / Notices
nearshore waters as Southwest stock
critical habitat, which occurs in
nearshore marine waters ranging from
the mean high tide line seaward for a
distance of 100 meters or to a water
depth of 20 meters (65.6 ft) (74 FR
51988).’’
Comment 20: In the Southwest SAR,
consider whether there was an actual
decline and then increase in the Bristol
Bay MU because although the
coefficients of variation (CVs) overlap
across all three Southwest stock
surveys, there are also differences
among the survey methods.
Service Response to Comment 20: The
Service agrees that there may not have
been an initial decline, and we have
revised our discussion regarding this
MU in the final revised SAR.
Comment 21: The Southwest stock
SAR states that: ‘‘The best available
information indicates that the
Southwest stock in the Aleutian
archipelago declined by up to 90
percent in the 1990s.’’ What is the
citation for the scientific literature that
support this statement?
Service Response to Comment 21: The
Service has added the citation Doroff et
al. 2003 as reference to support this
statement in the final revised SAR.
Comment 22: In the Southwest stock
SAR, the Service should add a
description of how mortality is
distributed across the management units
(MUs) (e.g., ∼90% of the human-caused
M/SI occurred around Kodiak, the MU
with the largest abundance), or a
qualitative sentence saying that
distribution of mortality across MUs is
something that the Service considered
but that it does not seem to be a
concern.
Service Response to Comment 22: The
Service added language to this final
revised SAR to explain that 96% of the
harvest occurs in the Kodiak, Kamishak,
Alaska Peninsula MUs, where most
people and sea otters are located.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
References
The complete list of references used
for each of these revised SARs is
available at https://www.regulations.gov
under Docket No. FWS–R7–ES–2022–
0155 and upon request from the Alaska
Marine Mammals Management Office
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972,
as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.).
Martha Williams,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2023–16935 Filed 8–7–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:00 Aug 07, 2023
Jkt 259001
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2023–0150;
FXES11140400000–234–FF04EF4000]
Receipt of Incidental Take Permit
Application and Proposed Habitat
Conservation Plan for the Sand Skink;
Lake County, FL; Categorical
Exclusion
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability; request
for comments.
AGENCY:
We, the Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service), announce receipt of
an application from Helen Crittenden et
al. (Helen Crittenden, Alexander van
den Berg, and Nancy van den Berg;
applicants) for an incidental take permit
(ITP) under the Endangered Species Act.
The applicants request the ITP to take
the federally listed sand skink
incidental to the construction of a
residential development in Lake
County, Florida. We request public
comment on the application, which
includes the applicants’ proposed
habitat conservation plan (HCP), and on
the Service’s preliminary determination
that the proposed permitting action may
be eligible for a categorical exclusion
pursuant to the Council on
Environmental Quality’s National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
regulations, the Department of the
Interior’s (DOI) NEPA regulations, and
the DOI Departmental Manual. To make
this preliminary determination, we
prepared a draft environmental action
statement and low-effect screening form,
both of which are also available for
public review. We invite comment from
the public and local, State, Tribal, and
Federal agencies.
DATES: We must receive your written
comments on or before September 7,
2023.
SUMMARY:
Obtaining Documents: You
may obtain copies of the documents
online in Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–
2023–0150 at https://
www.regulations.gov.
Submitting Comments: If you wish to
submit comments on any of the
documents, you may do so in writing by
one of the following methods:
• Online: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments
on Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2023–0150;
or
• U.S. mail: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: Docket No. FWS–R4–
ES–2023–0150; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Service, MS: PRB/3W, 5275 Leesburg
Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041–3803.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin
Gawera, by telephone at 904–731–3121
or via email at erin_gawera@fws.gov.
Individuals in the United States who are
deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have
a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY,
TDD, or TeleBraille) to access
telecommunications relay services.
Individuals outside the United States
should use the relay services offered
within their country to make
international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We, the
Fish and Wildlife Service (Service),
announce receipt of an application from
Helen Crittenden et al. (Helen
Crittenden, Alexander van den Berg,
and Nancy van den Berg) (applicants)
for an incidental take permit (ITP) under
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
The applicants request the ITP to take
federally listed sand skinks (Neoseps
reynoldsi) (skink) incidental to the
construction and operation of a
commercial and residential
development in Lake County, Florida.
We request public comment on the
application, which includes the
applicants’ habitat conservation plan
(HCP), and on the Service’s preliminary
determination that this proposed ITP
qualifies as ‘‘low effect,’’ and may
qualify for a categorical exclusion
pursuant to the Council on
Environmental Quality’s National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
regulations (40 CFR 1501.4), the
Department of the Interior’s (DOI) NEPA
regulations (43 CFR 46), and the DOI’s
Departmental Manual (516 DM
8.5(C)(2)). To make this preliminary
determination, we prepared a draft
environmental action statement and
low-effect screening form, both of which
are also available for public review.
Proposed Project
The applicants request a 5-year ITP to
take skinks via the conversion of
approximately 0.63 acres (ac) of
occupied nesting, foraging, and
sheltering skink habitat incidental to the
construction and operation of a
commercial and residential
development on 111.53-ac on parcel
numbers 22–21–25–0003–0000–1800,
22–21–25–0003–0000–1000, 22–21–25–
0003–0000–1901, 22–21–25–0003–
0000–1902, and 22–21–25–0003–0000–
1700 in Sections 21, 22, 27 and 28,
Township 21 South, Range 25 East, Lake
County, Florida. The applicants propose
to mitigate for take of the skinks by
purchasing credits equivalent to 1.26 ac
E:\FR\FM\08AUN1.SGM
08AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 151 (Tuesday, August 8, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53510-53514]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-16935]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[Docket No. FWS-R7-ES-2022-0155; FF07CAMM00-FXES111607MWA07]
Marine Mammal Protection Act; Stock Assessment Reports for the
Pacific Walrus Stock and Three Northern Sea Otter Stocks in Alaska
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act and its
implementing regulations, we, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, after
consideration of comments received from the public have revised the
marine mammal stock assessment reports (SARs) for the Pacific walrus
(Odobenus rosmarus divergens) and for each of the three northern sea
otter (Enhydra lutris kenyoni) stocks in Alaska. We now make these four
final revised SARs available to the public.
ADDRESSES: Obtaining Documents: You may view the final revised stock
assessment reports at https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FWS-R7-
ES-2022-0155, or you may request copies from the contact in FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Hamilton, Marine Mammals
Management, by telephone at 907-786-3804; by email at
[email protected]; or by mail at U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
MS-341, 1011 East Tudor Road, Anchorage, AK, 99503. Individuals in the
United States who are deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a
speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access
telecommunications relay services. Individuals outside the United
States should use the relay services offered within their country to
make international calls to the point-of-contact in the United States.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the Marine Mammal
Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), and
its implementing regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
at 50 CFR part 18, we, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service),
have developed four final revised marine mammal stock assessment
reports (SARs) for species in Alaska. These revised SARs are for the
Pacific walrus (Odobenus rosmarus divergens) and for each of the three
stocks of the northern sea otter (Enhydra lutris kenyoni) in Alaska--
the Southwest, Southcentral, and Southeast stocks.
Background
Under the MMPA and its implementing regulations, we regulate the
taking, possession, transportation, purchasing, selling, offering for
sale, exporting, and importing of marine mammals. One of the goals of
the MMPA is to ensure that each stock of marine mammals occurring in
waters under U.S. jurisdiction does not experience a level of human-
caused mortality and serious injury (M/SI) that is likely to cause the
stock to be reduced below its optimum sustainable population level
(OSP). The MMPA defines the OSP as ``the number of animals which will
result in the maximum productivity of the population or the species,
keeping in mind the carrying capacity of the habitat and the health of
the ecosystem of which they form a constituent element'' (16 U.S.C.
1362(9)).
To help accomplish the goal of maintaining marine mammal stocks at
their OSPs, Section 117 of the MMPA requires the Service and the
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to prepare a SAR for each
marine mammal stock that occurs in waters under U.S. jurisdiction. A
SAR must be based on the best scientific information available;
therefore, we prepare it in consultation with the regional scientific
review groups established under section 117(d) of the MMPA. Each SAR
must include: (1) a description of the stock and its geographic range;
(2) a minimum population estimate, maximum net productivity rate, and
current population trend; (3) an estimate of the annual human-caused M/
SI by source and, for a strategic stock, other factors that may be
causing a decline or impeding recovery of the stock; (4) a description
of commercial fishery interactions; (5) a categorization of the status
of the stock; and (6) an estimate of the potential biological removal
(PBR) level.
The MMPA defines the PBR level as ``the maximum number of animals,
not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a marine
mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its optimum
sustainable population.'' (16 U.S.C. 1362(20)). The PBR is the product
of the minimum population estimate of the stock (Nmin); one-
half the maximum theoretical or estimated net productivity rate of the
stock at a small population size (Rmax); and a recovery
factor (Fr) of between 0.1 and 1.0, which is intended to
compensate for uncertainty and unknown estimation errors. This can be
written as: PBR = (Nmin)(\1/2\ of the
Rmax)(FR).
Section 117 of the MMPA also requires the Service and NMFS to
review the SARs (a) at least annually for stocks that are specified as
strategic stocks; (b) at least annually for stocks for which
significant new information is available; and (c) at least once every 3
years for all other stocks. If our review of the status of a stock
indicates that it has changed or may be more accurately determined,
then the SAR must be revised accordingly.
A strategic stock is defined in the MMPA as a marine mammal stock
``(A) for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds the
PBR level; (B) which, based on the best available scientific
information, is declining and is likely to be listed as a threatened
species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, [as amended] (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) [ESA], within the foreseeable future; or (C) which
is listed as a threatened or endangered species under the ESA, or is
designated as depleted under the MMPA'' (16 U.S.C. 1362(19)).
Summary of Revised Stock Assessment Reports
In accordance with Section 117(c) of the MMPA, the Service reviews
the stock assessments for the Pacific walrus and Southwest stock of the
northern sea otter annually (strategic stocks) and at least once every
3 years for the Southcentral and Southeast stocks of the northern sea
otter (non-strategic stocks). If we determine that new information
(such as new abundance estimates) indicates that a revision is
warranted, we will propose a revision. In 2021,
[[Page 53511]]
based on new information that had become available, the Service
initiated revisions of these SARs, and once completed, presented them
to the Alaska Regional Scientific Review Group (SRG) for their comment
and review.
The Service also published a notice in the Federal Register
informing the public of the availability of these draft revised SARs
and seeking public comment (88 FR 7992, February 7, 2023). These final
revised SARs incorporate the comments and suggestions provided to the
Service by the SRG and the public, as appropriate.
The following table summarizes the final revised SARs for the
Pacific walrus and the Southwest, Southcentral, and Southeast stocks of
the northern sea otter, listing each stock's Nmin,
Rmax, Fr, PBR, annual estimated human-caused
mortality and serious injury, and status.
Summary of Final Revised Stock Assessment Reports for the Pacific Walrus and for the Southwest, Southcentral, and Southeast Stocks of the Northern Sea
Otter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
M/SI
---------------------------
Stock Nmin Rmax Fr PBR Fishery/ Stock status
other Subsistence
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific Walrus................................. 214,008 0.06 0.5 3,210 <1 4,210 Strategic.
Northern Sea Otter (NSO) Southwest Stock....... 41,666 0.29 0.38 2,296 <1 176 Strategic.
NSO Southcentral Stock......................... 19,854 0.29 0.75 2,159 <1 389 Nonstrategic.
NSO Southeast Stock............................ 21,187 0.29 0.75 2,304 <1 851 Nonstrategic.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revisions to Northern Sea Otter, Southeast Stock SAR
On March 31, 2023, the Service released a technical report,
``Northern Sea Otter (Enhydra lutris kenyoni) Population Abundance and
Distribution across the Southeast Alaska Stock Summer 2022.'' This
report provides details of a stock-wide sea otter population survey
that was conducted May through June 2022. The collected data was
combined with all available prior population survey data from the
Southeast stock in an integrated population model, which provided
updated assessments of sea otter population abundance, trends through
time, and carrying capacity. We have incorporated the results from this
technical report into this final revised SAR and included the updates
to NMIN and PBR in the chart above. Although these values
slightly decreased, the status of the stock has not changed and remains
non-strategic.
Our Response to Comments
In addition to comments from the SRG, the Service also received
comments on the draft SARs from the Marine Mammal Commission, the
Eskimo Walrus Commission, and two members of the public. We present
substantive issues raised in those comments that are pertinent to all
four SARs first, and then comments pertinent to the Pacific walrus, and
then the three stocks of northern sea otters in Alaska, along with our
responses below.
Comments Pertinent to All Four Stock Assessment Reports
Comment 1: Final SARs for these four stocks were last published on
April 21, 2014 (79 FR 22154). The Service should take all steps
necessary to adhere to the schedule set forth in Section 117(c) of the
MMPA for revising SARs.
Service Response to Comment 1: The Service conducts timely reviews
of the stock assessment reports in accordance with Section 117(c)(1) of
the MMPA, which directs the Service to review SARs on an annual basis
for ``strategic'' stocks, an annual basis for stocks ``for which
significant new information is available,'' and every three years for
all other stocks. The Service is required to revise SARs only if such
review indicates that ``the status of the stock has changed or can be
more accurately determined.'' (16 U.S.C. 1386(c)(2). If, as a result of
its review, the Service determines that the status of the stock has
changed or can be more accurately determined, then the Service will
propose a revision.
Comments Pertinent to the Pacific Walrus
Comment 2: Given the future uncertainty of the Pacific walrus'
viability due to the effects of climate change, the Fish and Wildlife
Service should be required to enforce the PBR number for the Pacific
walrus and allow no more than that number to be taken.
Service Response to Comment 2: The most recent population
information suggests that subsistence walrus harvests are occurring at
sustainable levels. We acknowledge that climate change is impacting
walrus sea ice habitats, which could lead to a future population
decline. If the population starts to decline due to environmental
conditions, managers and subsistence users will need to work closely
together to ensure that harvest levels remain sustainable. The Service
is in the process of developing a projection model based on the best
available estimates of population size, growth rate, and carrying
capacity to help inform harvest management decisions under an array of
potential climate change and anthropogenic disturbance scenarios.
Section 119(a) of the MMPA provides for the development of co-
management agreements with Alaska Natives for the subsistence use of
marine mammals, and tribally based hunting ordinances provide a
potential mechanism for self-regulation of harvest.
Comment 3: The draft SAR states: ``By the 1980s, walrus researchers
were concerned that the population had exceeded its natural carrying
capacity . . .''. The draft SAR also notes that ``in 1980 the
population was estimated to be 254,890 with a 95% confidence level for
184,000-344,000''. The latest estimate in 2017 has very similar
numbers, 257,193 and 171,138-366,366. Is there a similar concern that
the natural carrying capacity has been reached or exceeded?
Service Response to Comment 3: Fluctuations in density-dependent
vital rates over the past several decades suggest that the carrying
capacity of the ecosystem has likely shifted over time. Declining
reproductive and calf survival rates in the 1980s suggest that the
population may have approached or exceeded carrying capacity.
Population models suggest a decline in abundance may have occurred
through the 1980s and 1990s, which lessened over time as reproductive
and calf survival rates rose in a density[hyphen]dependent manner. The
most recent information on walrus vital rates does not indicate that
the population is in a food limited status at the present time.
Comment 4: The harvest reporting correction factor for Pacific
walrus is over 30 years old and the struck and lost
[[Page 53512]]
is based on data collected over 50 years ago; these are not reliable
for calculating current harvest data. These should be studied with the
cooperation of the Eskimo Walrus Commission and its communities.
Service Response to Comment 4: We agree that the harvest reporting
correction factor and the struck and lost rates should be studied with
the cooperation of the Eskimo Walrus Commissions and its communities.
Imperfect harvest reporting and unknown struck and lost rates
associated with modern hunting practices create uncertainty with
respect to true harvest removal levels. For the purpose of the SAR, we
use the best available information to account for these factors. We
have also applied a conservative (0.5) recovery factor in our PBR
calculation to account for these uncertainties. Improving harvest
removal estimates is a top management priority for this species that
can only be addressed through a collaborative effort with subsistence
hunters and leaders.
Comment 5: There is considerable overlap between commercial
fisheries and walrus as their use of terrestrial haulouts and foraging
by swimming longer distances increase. Commercial fisheries and
shipping disturbances in both U.S. and Russian waters must be
considered more carefully.
Service Response to Comment 5: While direct mortality or injury
associated with interactions with commercial fishing gear is rare,
marine (and air) traffic occurring near coastal walrus haulouts is an
emerging conservation and management concern. Disturbances associated
with marine vessels and other human activities can disrupt resting and
foraging patterns and lead to trampling related injuries and
mortalities. The Service and partners conduct annual outreach and
education campaigns to raise awareness about the sensitivity of
walruses to disturbances and distribute guidance to commercial
fishermen, mariners and aircraft pilots about how to avoid disturbances
to walruses. The Service has provided clarifying language in the final
revised SAR for the Pacific walrus recognizing the potential future
impacts of commercial fisheries and shipping on the stock.
Comment 6: The statement that ``Although subsistence harvest rates
are declining and appear to be within a sustainable range at present''
should be explained because it exceeds the PBR.
Service Response to Comment 6: Indigenous harvest rates are
declining and harvest rates have not prohibited the Pacific walrus
population from being ``at or near its OSP range.'' The language in the
final revised SAR has been edited to explain that harvest
sustainability was determined by other analyses rather than the PBR
formula, based on a Bayesian Belief Network model by MacCraken et al.
(2017). We also note that the PBR formula includes a conservative
correction factor (FR value) due to uncertainty associated
with estimates of human caused mortality.
Comment 7: Please provide a clearer explanation of how the value of
the recovery factor (FR) was selected when calculating
Potential Biological Removal (PBR).
Service Response to Comment 7: The final revised SAR includes
additional language explaining that a conservative FR value
of 0.5 has been adopted in consideration of uncertainty associated with
estimates of human caused removals and a petition to consider listing
walruses under the ESA.
Comment 8: Incomplete harvest reporting and potentially high rates
of strike-and-loss during subsistence harvest of Pacific Walrus should
be addressed in more detail.
Service Response to Comment 8: The final revised SAR includes
additional language acknowledging the issue of under-reporting of
harvest and tentative plans to engage in a collaborative effort in key
walrus harvest communities to refine harvest estimates.
Comments Pertinent to Northern Sea Otter Stocks
Comment 9: The Service used a recovery factor (FR) for
the Southwest stock that was reduced by 20% (reduced from 0.5 to 0.4)
to account for uncertainty around human-caused removals. However, the
FR for the Southeast and Southcentral stocks was reduced by
25% (reduced from 1 to 0.75). Are there differences in uncertainty
surrounding human-caused removals across the three stocks are or are
they similar? If similar, the Service should use the same FR
across the stocks for standardization.
Service Response to Comment 9: The uncertainty in human-caused
mortality is similar across all three stocks. In the final revised SAR,
we have updated the Southwest SAR to reduce the FR value in
the Southwest stock to match the reduction in the Southcentral and
Southeast stocks by 25%. The updated Southwest stock FR is
0.38. We have updated the Potential Biological Removal (PBR)
calculation based on this change, which resulted in an updated PBR of
2,296 sea otters for the Southwest stock.
Comment 10: The Service makes statements about sea otter population
trends in the five management units (MU) of the Southwest stock, but
this is problematic given the relatively limited historical data,
overlapping confidence intervals for population estimates, and
differences in the frequency, methods, and timing of population surveys
within each MU. Additionally, in many of the surveys listed, the
Service does not clearly indicate if the survey was aerial or boat-
based, the time of year the survey was conducted. We recommend the
Service add more survey details in each MU section, limit conclusions
about stock abundance and status, and add statements of how the Service
plans to address these concerns to provide more consistency across the
five MUs in the Southwest stock.
Service Response to Comment 10: We have edited each of the sections
summarizing population surveys for the five Management Units (MU) to
provide additional details on the season, month the survey was
conducted, survey platform, and analytical approach. We provide
additional details about differences in methodology and how this
affects our ability to accurately describe the magnitude of increases
or decreases in each MU. The Service plans to develop integrated
population models to incorporate the various population surveys across
the five MUs in a single analytical framework, following a similar
approach developed for the Southeast stock of northern sea otters
(Eisaguirre et al. 2021, 2023, Schuette et al. 2023). This approach
will allow the Service to better account for methodological differences
across the five MUs to provide a more comprehensive view of sea otter
population abundance, distribution, and trends through time.
Comment 11: The estimates of human-caused mortality and serious
injury (M/SI) in the SARs for the Southwest, Southcentral, and
Southeast Alaska stocks of northern sea otters are based almost
entirely on subsistence harvest data collected by FWS's marking,
tagging, reporting program (MTRP). However, it is unclear whether or
not all subsistence harvests are reported, and some M/SI of sea otters
from other sources (e.g., illegal and unreported hunting) likely
occurs. We recommend the Service develop a method for quantifying
unreported harvest and include that information in the SARs.
Service Response to Comment 11: The Service acknowledges there is
an information gap pertaining to unreported harvest of sea otters. MTRP
harvest reporting data collection was initiated in 1989 and is ongoing.
MTRP data is the most comprehensive data set
[[Page 53513]]
available for legal harvest. The Service is considering options for
accounting for unreported harvest in future population models. The
Service has little empirical data to quantify the amount of illegal
take associated with fisheries conflict. The Service is considering
options for accounting for illegal takes in future population models.
Comment 12: FWS discusses ``illegal'' takes of sea otters
(including possession, transport, and sale of sea otter hides) in the
SARs for the Southeast and Southwest stocks in the subsections on
``Alaska Native Subsistence Harvest Information.'' However, referencing
illegal takes of sea otters and illegal handling of sea otter hides in
that subsection is inappropriate, given that taking of sea otters and
other marine mammals by Alaska Natives for subsistence purposes and to
create and sell authentic articles of handicrafts and clothing is not
illegal as long as the taking is not conducted in a wasteful manner. We
suggest the Service move the discussion of illegal takes of sea otters
to a separate subsection within the ``Annual Human-Caused Mortality and
Serious Injury'' section of the SARs (i.e., not the subsection on
``Alaska Native Subsistence Harvest Information'').
Service Response to Comment 12: We agree that these statements do
not belong in this section. We have moved the statements related to
illegal take to a new heading, `Illegal Take' under `Annual Human-
Caused Mortality and Serious Injury' in all of the northern sea otters
SARs to make it clearer that there is a difference between legal take
by Alaska Native peoples and the various forms of illegal take.
Comment 13: In the ``Fisheries Information'' subsections, the draft
SARs note that the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) maintains
an observer program to detect and estimate M/SI of marine mammals. The
Alaska Marine Mammal Observer Program was designed specifically to
collect data on marine mammal M/SI in nearshore salmon drift gillnet
and set gillnet fisheries, where sea otters are at relatively high risk
of entanglement. However, that program has not operated since 2013 and,
when it was operating, observer coverage was low. As such, although the
Service concludes that M/SI from fisheries is likely low, there are
actually no reliable estimates of sea otter M/SI in the commercial
fisheries that pose the highest entanglement risk to sea otters. We
recommend that the Service coordinate with NMFS to ensure sufficient
levels of observer coverage in all nearshore fisheries that may pose a
significant entanglement risk to any of the three stocks of sea otters
in Alaska. Observer coverage should be sufficient to (1) generate
reliable estimates of serious injury and mortality, as required under
section 118 of the MMPA, and (2) provide a basis for introducing
measures to reduce sea otter bycatch if and as necessary.
Service Response to Comment 13: As we state in the final revised
SARs, the reported level of incidental take of sea otters from
fisheries is very low, and it is difficult to state the total combined
effect of fisheries, including whether the total fishery mortality and
serious injury rate is insignificant and approaching a zero mortality
and serious injury rate. The Service obtains fisheries related
information from NMFS. The Service is supportive of initiatives to
obtain more reliable information on incidental take from fisheries
managed by NMFS, the State of Alaska, and local stakeholders. This will
include strategies to gather information associated with State managed
shellfisheries and mariculture activities, which are increasing across
the State of Alaska.
Comment 14: In the draft SARs, the discussion of Flannery et al.
2021 suggests genetic information could be important for stock
differentiation. Does Flannery et al. 2021 suggest a stock delineation
different than that of the three stocks currently used by FWS?
Service Response to Comment 14: No, this study does not suggest a
different delineation, rather it recognizes that the inclusion of
genetic variation among sea otter populations is important to define
stock delineations and indicates that genetic differentiation among
northern sea otters is clinal across their range (Larson et al. 2021,
Flannery et al. 2021).
Comment 15: In the draft SARs, a few different Rmax
values from the scientific literature are described; the reports should
clearly state which value for Rmax was selected and why.
Service Response to Comment 15: We agree, the Service added
language to all three final revised sea otter SARs to clarify that we
used 0.29 as the value for Rmax, which is the maximum
intrinsic rate of growth achievable by northern sea otters.
Comment 16: Why is unknown subsistence harvest considered to be
negatively biased when there are similar unknown mortalities associated
with oil spills, boating, and mariculture?
Service Response to Comment 16: The Service agrees with this
comment, and we have removed this statement from all three final
revised sea otter SARs.
Comment 17: The draft SARs mention that there is uncertainty in the
rate of human-caused mortality associated with increased development in
the mariculture industry. Is there conflict between the northern sea
otter stocks and the mariculture industry?
Service Response to Comment 17: A recent report (Rehberg and
Goodglick 2023) to the Service provides information on potential
conflicts between sea otters and certain types of mariculture; however,
negative interactions have only been reported in Kachemak Bay. The
Service revised all three final sea otter SARs to reflect this
information and promote awareness of mariculture as another source of
uncertainty and potential conflict.
Comment 18: Figures 2 and 3 in the Southcentral SAR should be
revised to add clarity in the following ways: (1) remove the point-to-
point trend lines because abundance estimates with lines implies that
we know for a fact what the population trajectory is between the
points, and if a trend line is drawn, typically it should be a
regression trend line. Although the trend lines would not be different
from what is already there, this is more problematic in Figure 3,
especially for Western Prince William Sound, because it seems to
suggest that the ups and down of the abundance in the time series are
real when, given the confidence intervals, they are most likely
sampling variance; (2) clearly identify the name of the regions
illustrated so that it is easier to match with previous tables and
figures; and (3) do not use the same blue and green colors in Figures 2
and 3 because they do not represent the same regions, and it is
confusing.
Service Response to Comment 18: We agree with all of the comments
made about Figures 2 and 3 in the Southcentral SAR. We have created a
single, revised figure that illustrates the same data originally
presented in Figures 2 and 3, but in a simpler and easier to follow
format. This new figure (Figure 2) now presents the three sub-regions
as a series of independent estimates (not a line plot) from each survey
area. This figure is in black and white (rather than in color) and now
more closely matches the figure style used in the Southwest and
Southeast Sea Otter SARs.
Comment 19: The description of the contours of the critical habitat
designated for the Southwest stock under the ESA is confusing because
it is not clear which marine waters are included in the critical
habitat designation.
Service Response to Comment 19: The Service has revised this SAR by
adding the following clarification: ``As part of the ESA listing
decision, the Service designated 15,164 km\2\ (5,855 mi\2\) of
[[Page 53514]]
nearshore waters as Southwest stock critical habitat, which occurs in
nearshore marine waters ranging from the mean high tide line seaward
for a distance of 100 meters or to a water depth of 20 meters (65.6 ft)
(74 FR 51988).''
Comment 20: In the Southwest SAR, consider whether there was an
actual decline and then increase in the Bristol Bay MU because although
the coefficients of variation (CVs) overlap across all three Southwest
stock surveys, there are also differences among the survey methods.
Service Response to Comment 20: The Service agrees that there may
not have been an initial decline, and we have revised our discussion
regarding this MU in the final revised SAR.
Comment 21: The Southwest stock SAR states that: ``The best
available information indicates that the Southwest stock in the
Aleutian archipelago declined by up to 90 percent in the 1990s.'' What
is the citation for the scientific literature that support this
statement?
Service Response to Comment 21: The Service has added the citation
Doroff et al. 2003 as reference to support this statement in the final
revised SAR.
Comment 22: In the Southwest stock SAR, the Service should add a
description of how mortality is distributed across the management units
(MUs) (e.g., ~90% of the human-caused M/SI occurred around Kodiak, the
MU with the largest abundance), or a qualitative sentence saying that
distribution of mortality across MUs is something that the Service
considered but that it does not seem to be a concern.
Service Response to Comment 22: The Service added language to this
final revised SAR to explain that 96% of the harvest occurs in the
Kodiak, Kamishak, Alaska Peninsula MUs, where most people and sea
otters are located.
References
The complete list of references used for each of these revised SARs
is available at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R7-ES-
2022-0155 and upon request from the Alaska Marine Mammals Management
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authority
The authority for this action is the Marine Mammal Protection Act
of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.).
Martha Williams,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-16935 Filed 8-7-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P