[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 23 (Thursday, February 3, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5298-5300]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-2311]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding for
a Petition To Delist the Northern Spotted Owl From the List of
Threatened and Endangered Species
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition finding.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding for a petition to delist the northern spotted owl (Strix
occidentalis caurina) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). We find that the petitioner did not present substantial
scientific or commercial information indicating that the delisting of
the northern spotted owl may be warranted.
DATES: The finding announced in this document was made on January 18,
2000.
ADDRESSES: Data, information, comments or questions concerning this
petition should be sent to the Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Western Washington Office, 510 Desmond Drive SE, Suite 102,
Lacey, Washington 98503. The petition finding, and comments and
material received, will be available for public inspection, by
appointment, during normal business hours at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. L. Karolee Owens at the above
address (telephone 360/753-4369; facsimile 360/753-4369).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, requires that we make a finding on
whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents
substantial scientific or commercial information to demonstrate that
the petitioned action may be warranted. This finding is based upon all
information submitted with and referenced in the petition and all other
information available to us at the time the finding is made. To the
maximum extent practicable, this finding is to be made within 90 days
following receipt of the petition, and promptly published in the
Federal Register. If the finding is positive, section 4(b)(3)(B) of the
Act requires us to promptly commence a review of the status of the
species and to disclose our findings within 12 months.
The processing of this petition finding conforms with our Listing
Priority Guidance published in the Federal Register on October 22, 1999
(64 FR 57114). The guidance clarifies the order in which we will
process rulemakings. Highest priority is processing emergency listing
rules for any species determined to face a significant and imminent
risk to its well-being (Priority 1). Second priority (Priority 2) is
processing final determinations on proposed additions to the lists of
endangered and threatened wildlife and
[[Page 5299]]
plants. Third priority is processing new proposals to add species to
the lists. The processing of administrative petition findings
(petitions filed under section 4 of the Act) is the fourth priority.
The processing of critical habitat determinations (prudency and
determinability decisions) and proposed or final designations of
critical habitat will no longer be subject to prioritization under the
Listing Priority Guidance. The processing of this petition finding is a
Priority 4 action and is being completed in accordance with the current
Listing Priority Guidance.
We have made a 90-day finding on a petition to delist the northern
spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina). The petition, dated January
18, 1999, was submitted by Dr. Richard A. Gierak of Yreka, California,
and we received it on February 2, 1999.
The petition identified three subspecies of spotted owl, including
the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina), the California
spotted owl (Strix occidentalis occidentalis), and the Mexican spotted
owl (Strix occidentalis lucida). The petitioner asked that the
``spotted owl'' be removed from the ``endangered list.'' The California
spotted owl, however, is not a listed subspecies. The Mexican and
northern spotted owls, subjects of separate listing actions, are both
listed as threatened. The Mexican spotted owl was listed on March 16,
1993 (58 FR 14271), and critical habitat was designated for this
subspecies on June 6, 1995 (60 FR 29914). The northern spotted owl was
listed as threatened on June 26, 1990 (55 FR 26194), and critical
habitat for the subspecies was designated on January 15, 1992 (57 FR
1796). Since the information presented in the petition refers only to
northern spotted owls, this 90-day petition finding addresses only this
subspecies. The petition is based on statements referring to the status
and listing of the northern spotted owl from the National Center for
Policy Analysis web site. There is no documentation of the source(s) of
the information on the web site, and no scientific supporting
documentation was included with the petition.
The petitioner asserts that the northern spotted owl should be
delisted because the original data were in error. This assertion is
based on an increased number of known northern spotted owl pairs, their
use of forest areas that have been harvested and regrown, and the
economic effects of the listing.
Documentation of greater numbers of northern spotted owls since the
first population estimates results from expanded knowledge and
increased survey efforts, and not from an increasing northern spotted
owl population. Additionally, listing and any consideration of
delisting of the northern spotted owl must be based on its status as
reflected by the required analysis of the five factors specified under
section 4 of the Act, and not solely on the basis of the number of
pairs. To delist a species, the analysis must indicate that none of
these five factors are affecting the species such that it is in danger
of extinction, or likely to become endangered, within the foreseeable
future. For the northern spotted owl, this will require stable or
increasing and self-sustaining populations and conservation of adequate
suitable habitat to allow the species to survive without protection of
the Act.
Current data do not suggest that the decision to list the northern
spotted owl was based on erroneous data, or that the species has
recovered. Observations of banded northern spotted owls in 15 study
areas in Washington, Oregon, and California were used for the recently
released 1998 demographic analysis of northern spotted owls (Franklin
et al. 1999). In this analysis, these observations were used to
estimate survival and reproductive rates, and to determine if the
population is increasing, decreasing, or stable. The results indicate
there has been a range-wide northern spotted owl population decline of
about 3.9 percent per year during the years 1985 to 1998. The analysis
does not indicate, however, a range-wide decline in reproductive rates
and female survival rates, which varied among years and among study
areas. Reproductive rates and female survival rates can be relatively
stable, but still be lower than necessary to support a stable
population. The result is a declining population. Although these
results indicate that the rate of the northern spotted owl population
decline is slower than was evident in the 1993 analysis for the
development of the Northwest Forest Plan (U.S. Department of
Agriculture and U.S. Department of Interior 1994), uncertainty still
exists regarding the range-wide health of the northern spotted owl
population.
Northern spotted owls are known to use a wide variety of habitat
types and forest stand conditions throughout their distribution (57 FR
1796). Northern spotted owls use a wide array of forest types for
foraging, including open and fragmented habitat. Habitat that meets the
species' needs for nesting and roosting also provides foraging habitat.
Some habitat that supports foraging, however, may be inadequate for
nesting and roosting. The presence of northern spotted owls, or even
breeding pairs, in forest stands that have been harvested and regrown
do not present sufficient evidence that these habitats are occupied by
self-sustaining populations.
Economic analysis is not a factor in listing a species, but is used
to evaluate the economic consequences of designating critical habitat
in selected areas. We considered the economic and other relevant
impacts prior to making a final decision on the size and scope of
critical habitat for the northern spotted owl. Some areas were excluded
due to economic and other relevant information, including information
and comments received during the public comment period and public
hearings following the publication of the proposed rule to designate
critical habitat (56 FR 40001). Final critical habitat units for the
northern spotted owl were designated only on Federal lands (57 FR
1796).
When evaluating petitions for delisting of species under the Act,
our guidelines state that a ``not-substantial information'' finding be
made when a petition to delist a species presents no new information
indicating the original data for listing the species may be in error
(U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1996). We have reviewed the petition
and other available literature and information. This review of
additional information includes the recently released 1998 demographic
analysis, which indicates a continued range-wide decline of the
northern spotted owl population. We find the petition does not present
substantial information to indicate delisting the northern spotted owl
may be warranted.
References Cited
Franklin, A.B., K.P. Burnham, G.C. White, R.J. Anthony, E.D.
Forsman, C. Schwarz, J.D. Nichols, and J. Hines. 1999. Range-wide
status and trends in northern spotted owl populations. Unpublished
report. 71 pp.
U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of the Interior.
1994. Final supplemental environmental impact statement on management
of habitat for late-successional and old-growth forest related species
within the range of the northern spotted owl. Portland, Oregon.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries
Service. 1996. Endangered species petition management guidance. 20 pp.
and appendices.
Author: The primary author of this finding is Dr. L. Karolee Owens,
Fish and Wildlife Service, Western Washington Office (see ADDRESSES
section).
[[Page 5300]]
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: January 18, 2000.
Jamie Rappaport Clark,
Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 00-2311 Filed 2-2-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P