[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 108 (Wednesday, June 6, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31256-31264]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-10823]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on
a Petition To List the Yellow-Billed Loon as Threatened or Endangered
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition finding and initiation of status
review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list the yellow-billed loon (Gavia
adamsii) as threatened or endangered, under the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended. We find that the petition presents substantial
scientific information indicating that the petitioned action may be
warranted. As a result of this action, the Service also announces the
commencement of a thorough status review to determine if listing the
yellow-billed loon may be warranted. We ask the public to submit to us
any pertinent information concerning the status of or threats to this
species. We will also be working with other agencies to gain additional
data where gaps in our current information on this species exist. In
addition, together with the Bureau of Land Management, the Alaska
Departments of Fish and Game and Natural Resources, the U.S. Geological
Survey, and the National Park Service, we have developed a Conservation
Agreement for the yellow-billed loon, which addresses a subset of
threats to the loon in a subset of the species' range. We invite
comments on management strategies and research needs that should be
considered in annual reviews of the Conservation Agreement.
DATES: The finding announced in this document was made on June 6, 2007.
To be considered in the 12-month finding for this petition comments and
information must be submitted to us by August 6, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Data, information, and comments concerning this finding may
be submitted by any one of the following methods:
1. You may mail or hand-deliver written comments and information
to: Yellow-billed Loon Comments, Endangered Species Branch, Fairbanks
Fish and Wildlife Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 101-
12th Ave., Room 110, Fairbanks, AK 99701.
2. You may fax your comments to (907) 456-0208. Please clearly
indicate that you are submitting comments for the Yellow-billed Loon
finding on the cover sheet.
3. You may send your comments by electronic mail (e-mail) to
[email protected]. Please see the Public Information Solicited section of
this document for information on submitting e-mail comments.
4. You may submit comments via the Internet at the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions
for submitting comments.
The petition, findings, and supporting information are available
for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours, at
the Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field Office at the address listed
above. The Yellow-billed Loon Conservation Agreement, which addresses a
subset of threats to the loon in a subset of the species' range, is
available at or can be requested from the address listed above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ted Swem, Fairbanks Fish and
Wildlife Field Office (see ADDRESSES) (telephone 907-456-0441;
facsimile 907-456-0208).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Information Solicited
When we make a finding that substantial information is presented to
indicate that listing a species may be warranted, we are required to
promptly commence a review of the status of the species. To ensure that
the status review is complete and based on the best available
scientific and commercial information, we are particularly seeking the
following information on the yellow-billed loon:
(1) Additional information on the life history, ecology, and
distribution of the species;
(2) The status of the species and any trend information from the
United States, Canada, Europe, and Asia;
(3) Potential threats to the species on its nesting grounds,
wintering areas, or migration corridors;
(4) Ongoing management measures that may be important with regard
to the conservation of the yellow-billed loon throughout its range;
(5) The extent and nature of the use of the species for subsistence
purposes;
(6) The species' tolerance for human interaction and studies
documenting flushing distances;
(7) The incidence of mortality as a result of bycatch from fishing
on lakes and at sea;
(8) Conservation and management strategies that should be
considered for inclusion in annual reviews of the Yellow-billed Loon
Conservation Agreement; and
(9) Whether the U.S. breeding population constitutes a distinct
population segment.
If you wish to comment, you may submit your comments and materials
concerning this finding to the Endangered Species Branch Chief (see
ADDRESSES). If you wish to comment by e-mail, please include ``Attn:
Yellow-billed Loon'' in the beginning of your message. Please include
your name and return address in your e-mail message (anonymous comments
will not be considered). If you do not receive a confirmation from the
system that we have received your e-mail message, or in the event that
our Internet connection is not functional, please submit your comments
in writing using one of the alternate methods described above.
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be
able to do so.
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that we make a finding
on whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents
substantial scientific or commercial information to indicate that the
petitioned action may be warranted. We are to base this finding on
information provided in the petition, supporting information submitted
with the petition, and information otherwise available in our files at
the time we make the determination. To the maximum extent practicable,
we are to make this finding within 90 days of our receipt of the
petition and publish our notice of this finding promptly in the Federal
Register.
[[Page 31257]]
Our standard for substantial information within the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90-day petition finding is ``that
amount of information that would lead a reasonable person to believe
that the measure proposed in the petition may be warranted'' (50 CFR
424.14(b)). If we find that substantial information was presented, we
are required to promptly commence a review of the status of the
species.
In making this finding, we relied on information provided by the
petitioners and evaluated that information in accordance with 50 CFR
424.14(b). Our process of coming to a 90-day finding under section
4(b)(3)(A) of the Act and section 424.14(b) of our regulations is
limited to a determination of whether the information in the petition
meets the ``substantial information'' threshold. A substantial finding
should be made when the Service deems that adequate and reliable
information has been presented that would lead a reasonable person to
believe that the petitioned action may be warranted.
On April 5, 2004, we received a petition from the Center for
Biological Diversity (CBD) (Sitka, AK), Natural Resources Defense
Council (Washington, DC), Pacific Environment (San Francisco, CA),
Trustees for Alaska (Anchorage, AK), Kaira Club (Chukotka, Anadyr,
Russia), Kronotsky Nature Preserve (Kamchatka Region, Russia), Taiga
Rangers (Khabarovsk Region, Russia), Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk Local Public
Fund (Sakhalin Region, Russia), Interregional Public Charitable
Organization of Far Eastern Resource Centers (Vladivostok, Russia),
Kamchatka Branch of Pacific Institute of Geography (Petropavlovsk-
Kamchatsky, Russia), and Kamchatka League of Independent Experts
(Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, Russia) to list the yellow-billed loon
(Gavia adamsii) as endangered or threatened throughout its range, or as
a Distinct Population Segment, and to designate critical habitat once
listed. The petition summarizes threats to the species based on CBD's
review of Fair's (2002) report, prepared for the Natural Resources
Defense Council and Trustees for Alaska, on the status and significance
of the species in Alaska as well as CBD's review of the scientific
literature. The 63-plus page petition describes multiple threats to the
yellow-billed loon, including destruction or modification of habitats
due to development and pollution, lack of regulatory protection, and
other factors such as mortality from hunting and drowning in gill nets.
The petition also emphasizes that additional factors, including limited
and specific breeding habitats, a small global population, and low
reproductive rate, make yellow-billed loon populations more susceptible
to the above-mentioned threats and less likely to recover after
population declines.
Development of a Conservation Agreement
Yellow-billed loons may benefit greatly from a Conservation
Agreement among agencies (the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the
National Park Service, and the Service) with management and
conservation responsibilities on public lands that include much of the
loon's breeding range in the United States. At present, the Service and
the Alaska Department of Fish and Game cooperatively promulgate
migratory bird hunting and subsistence regulations, and the U.S.
Geological Survey has ongoing yellow-billed loon studies. The BLM and
the Service, with other agencies, have developed a Conservation
Agreement (Agreement) dated September 30, 2006, for the yellow-billed
loon that addresses a subset of threats (including fisheries bycatch,
habitat loss from industrial development, and disturbance) for yellow-
billed loons breeding in northern and western Alaska. We will be
conducting annual review of the Agreement and as such, we welcome
suggestions for conservation and management strategies that should be
considered. The strategies for conservation in the Agreement include:
(1) Implement specific actions to protect yellow-billed loons and their
breeding habitats in Alaska from potential impacts of land uses and
management activities, including oil and gas exploration and
development; (2) inventory and monitor yellow-billed loon breeding
populations in Alaska; (3) determine and reduce, if significant, the
impact of subsistence activities on yellow-billed loons (including
subsistence fisheries and hunting) in Alaska; and (4) conduct
biological research on yellow-billed loons, including response to
management actions.
Biology and Distribution
The following information regarding the description and natural
history of the yellow-billed loon (American Ornithologist's Union (AOU)
2003) has been condensed from these sources: Earnst et al. (2006,
2005), Evers (2004), Mallek et al. (2004), Johnson et al. (1999, 1998,
1997, 1996), Larned et al. (2003), Fair (2002), North (1994), Smith et
al. (1994, 1993), Field et al. (1993), and North and Ryan (1989). These
and other references are cited for data of particular relevance to this
finding.
The yellow-billed loon (Order Gaviiformes, Family Gaviidae) is one
of the largest of the five loon species and similar in appearance to
the common loon (Gavia immer). Yellow-billed loons are distinguished
from common loons by their larger yellow or ivory bill. Adults weigh
4,000 to 6,000 grams (8.8 to 13.2 pounds) and are 774 to 920
millimeters (30 to 37 inches) in length. Presumably, as with common
loons, average male body mass and size is greater than female mass and
size. Breeding (alternate) plumage of adults of both sexes is black
above with white spots on the wings and underside, and white stripes on
the neck. Non-breeding (basic) plumage is gray-brown with fewer and
less distinct white spots than breeding plumage, with paler undersides
and head, and a blue-gray bill. Hatchlings have dark brown and gray
down, and juveniles are gray with a paler head. There are no recognized
subspecies or geographic variations. Yellow-billed loons are
specialized for aquatic foraging and are unable to fly from land, with
a streamlined shape and legs near the rear of the body.
Yellow-billed loons nest exclusively in coastal and inland low-
lying tundra from 62 to 74[deg] N latitude, in association with
permanent, fish-bearing lakes. Populations are thought to be limited
primarily by breeding habitat, specifically nesting and brood-rearing
lakes (North 1994, p. 16). Lakes that support breeding loons have
abundant fish populations; depths greater than 2 meters (m) or 6.5 feet
(ft) and water under the ice during winter; large areas (at least 13.4
hectares [ha] or 33 acres [ac]) (North & Ryan 1989, p. 302); often
connections to streams that may supply fish; highly convoluted,
vegetated, and low-lying shorelines; clear water; and dependable water
levels (Earnst et al. 2006, p. 227; North 1994, p. 6). Breeding lakes
may be near major rivers, but are usually not connected to them,
possibly because fluctuating water levels can flood nests or cause
turbidity that compromises foraging success.
Breeding territories (areas defended against conspecifics and other
loon species, particularly Pacific loons [Gavia pacifica]), may include
one or more lakes or parts of lakes. Territory size, dependent upon
lake size and quality, ranged from 13.8 to greater than 100 ha (34 to
greater than 247 ac) on the Colville River Delta, AK (North 1986, as
cited in North 1994, p. 10). It is thought that loons occupy the same
breeding territory throughout their reproductive life; certainly,
breeding lakes are ``known to be reoccupied over long time
[[Page 31258]]
spans'' (North 1994, p. 10), most likely by the same monogamous pair
(North 1994, p. 10), similar to common loons (Evers 2004, p. 13).
Yellow-billed loons feed on fish and aquatic invertebrates. Marine
prey species include sculpins (Leptocottus armatus, Myoxocephalus sp.);
tomcod (Microgadus proximus) and rock cod (Sebastodes sp.);
invertebrates such as amphipods, isopods, shrimps, hermit crabs
(Pagarus sp.), and marine worms (Nereus sp.); and Pacific sand dabs
(Citharichthys sordidus). During the breeding season, freshwater prey
may include ninespine sticklebacks (Pungitius pungitius), Alaska
blackfish (Dallia pectoralis), fourhorn sculpins (M. quadricornus),
least cisco (Coregonus sardinella), and freshwater amphipods, isopods,
insects, and spiders. Freshwater foraging habitats include lakes,
rivers, and the nearshore marine environment for non-breeders; young
are fed almost entirely from the brood-rearing lake (North 1994, p.
14).
Nest sites are usually located on islands, hummocks, or peninsulas,
along low shorelines, within 1 m (3 ft) of water. The nest location,
which may be used in multiple years, usually provides a better view of
the surrounding land and water than other available lakeshore
locations. Nests are constructed of mud or peat, and are often lined
with vegetation. One or two large, smooth, mottled brown eggs are laid
in mid-to late June; hatching occurs after 27 to 28 days of incubation
by both sexes. Although the actual age at which young are capable of
flight is unknown, it is probably similar to common loons (8 to 9,
possibly 11, weeks). The young leave the nest soon after hatching, and
the family may move between natal and brood-rearing lakes. Both males
and females participate in feeding and caring for young. In spite of
the occasional replacement of eggs after nest predation, the short
Arctic summer makes it impossible to raise more than one brood.
There is no reliable scientific information on lifespan and
survivorship, but as large-bodied birds with low clutch size, yellow-
billed loons are probably K-selected (long-lived and dependent upon
high annual adult survival to maintain populations). Assuming
demography similar to common loons (Evers 2004, p. 17-18), individuals
on average reach sexual maturity at three years of age, but competition
for breeding territories may delay successful reproduction until six or
seven years of age.
Reproductive success, although studied rarely and with differing
methodologies, is low and highly variable. For example, on the Colville
River Delta, the percent of territorial pairs that nested were 76, 79,
42, and 71 in 1983, 1984, 1989, and 1993 respectively (Smith et al.
1994, p. 18; Field et al. 1993, p. 329). Aerial surveys on the Colville
River Delta from 1993 to 2003 documented annual variation in number of
nests (16 to 26), number of broods (3 to 14), and total number of
chicks (3 to 17) from 1993 to 2003 (Johnson 2004; Wildman 2004a;
Johnson et al. 1999, p. 48). Specifically, in 2000 and 2001, there were
only 3 young among 16 observed nests and 4 young among 20 observed
nests, respectively, which is relatively low compared to other years,
possibly due to late summer storms, severe spring flooding, or both
(Wildman 2004b). In 1995 to 2000 on the Colville River Delta, Earnst
(2004a, p. 1) also documented high annual variability in several
reproductive parameters, including number of territorial pairs nesting,
clutch size, hatch date, proportion of eggs hatching, and proportion of
chicks surviving to six weeks of age.
Yellow-billed loons breed in the freshwater treeless tundra of
Alaska (sparsely in western Alaska and the foothills of the Brooks
Range, more abundantly on the North Slope), in Canada east of the
Mackenzie Delta and west of Hudson's Bay, in arctic Russia in the
relatively narrow strip of coastal tundra from the Chukchi Peninsula in
the east to the Taymyr Peninsula and the areas of the Novaya Zemlya and
Pechora Rivers in the west, and rarely in far northern Norway and
Finland. Because preferred breeding habitats are patchy and sparsely
distributed across the yellow-billed loon's range, breeding birds are
found in clumped and concentrated distributions. Based on aerial survey
data (1998 to 2001 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska Coastal Plain
(ACP) and North Slope Eider (NSE) surveys), most of the population in
Alaska occurred within 6 concentrations, which together covered only 15
percent of the surveyed area yet contained 84 percent of yellow-billed
loon sightings. The largest concentration area was between the Meade
and Ikpikpuk Rivers. It covered only 5 percent of the survey area, but
had 30 percent of yellow-billed loon sightings. Other notable
concentration areas were on the Colville River Delta and west,
southwest, and east of Teshukpuk Lake. In Canada, concentration areas
include Banks Island; western Victoria Island; the mainland south of
the Kent Peninsula, east of Bathhurst Inlet and west of Ellice River;
the west side of Boothia Peninsula, and the lake district between Great
Slave Lake and Baker Lake, including the Thelon Game Sanctuary (North
1994, p. 3). In Russia, breeding concentrations have been identified
east of Chaun Bay on the Chukchi Peninsula (Fair 2002, pp. 17 and 19),
and along the Kolyma River Delta (Earnst 2004a, p. 1).
The wintering range of the yellow-billed loon includes nearshore
coastal waters from southcentral Alaska south to Puget Sound; from the
Pacific coast of Siberia south to the Yellow Sea; and occasionally in
northern Europe from Great Britain to Norway. Wintering habitats have
less specific characteristics than breeding habitats but are primarily
in protected nearshore marine waters. A small proportion of yellow-
billed loons breeding in interior North America may winter on large
inland freshwater lakes (North 1994, p. 3).
Yellow-billed loon migration routes are thought to be primarily
marine, sometimes far offshore. Migration route and timing is possibly
influenced by ocean ice conditions, although inland breeders may
migrate along chains of inland lakes. In 2002 and 2003, 11 yellow-
billed loons along the North Slope of Alaska were outfitted with
satellite transmitters. All 11 of these loons migrated to Asia,
predominantly along the Russian coastline, and wintered in the Yellow
Sea off China, North Korea, Russia, and Japan (near Hokkaido) (Schmutz
2004, p. 1). Most of these yellow-billed loons departed breeding areas
in late September, arrived in wintering locations in mid-November,
started spring migration in April, and arrived on breeding grounds in
the first half of June; these are similar to breeding ground arrival
dates reported by North (1994, p. 5). Non-breeders or failed nesters
may start fall migration in July; non-breeders and juveniles may forego
spring migration altogether and spend the summer in wintering areas.
Yellow-billed loons are thought to migrate singly or in pairs, although
large groups are occasionally seen at staging (temporary resting or
loafing) areas.
The only known comprehensive population estimates of yellow-billed
loons are derived from the two Arctic coastal plain waterfowl surveys
conducted in Alaska annually in early June (NSE survey) and late June
(ACP survey) by the Service's Migratory Bird Management program. The
long-term (1986 to 2003) mean estimate of yellow-billed loons on the
Arctic coastal plain is 2,919 (95 percent confidence interval = 2,450
to 3,387) (ACP estimate; Mallek et al. 2004, p. 10); a 12-year mean
(1992 to 2003) based on both surveys and a
[[Page 31259]]
visibility correction factor results in a similar estimate (Earnst et
al. 2005, p. 289). A 1-year (1993) estimate of breeding yellow-billed
loons on the Seward Peninsula was 680. There is anecdotal information
of 50 yellow-billed loons on St. Lawrence Island and approximately the
same number in the Selawik wetlands. When these are added to the
coastal plain estimates, the estimated total number of yellow-billed
loons on Alaska breeding grounds is approximately 3,500 to 4,000. (Not
all are breeders; the ACP and NSE surveys include, but do not
distinguish between, breeding and non-breeding yellow-billed loons. The
3- to 5-year-old reproductively mature individuals are capable of
breeding, yet due to limited availability of suitable breeding
territories, only a portion of these individuals may be present and,
therefore, visible on the breeding grounds. The 1- to 2-year-old
juveniles likely stay at sea and are not counted.) The total Alaska
yellow-billed loon population, including those birds not occupying
breeding areas during summer, may be between 3,700 to 4,900, assuming
yellow-billed loon demography (age-specific survival, productivity, and
average age of first breeding) is similar to that of common loons
(Evers 2004, p. 16-20).
The Service is unaware of scientifically valid population estimates
for other areas. Yellow-billed loons are not summarized in the North
American Spring Waterfowl Surveys (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2003,
p. 1-53), and Canadian population estimates do not exist (http://www.bsc-eoc.org/clls-bw1.html, accessed January 17, 2006). However,
Fair (2002, p. 29) speculated, based on anecdotal local density and
habitat information, that 8,000 yellow-billed loons breed in Canada and
5,000 breed in Russia. Combining these estimates, the worldwide
breeding-ground yellow-billed loon population is estimated at 16,500.
Given the lack of comprehensive scientific information relative to
population estimates, there are few ways to assess population trends.
In Alaska, the total number of yellow-billed loons counted in surveys
is small (resulting in wide confidence intervals around annual
estimates), but estimates over the last two decades do not suggest a
change in the number of adults on Alaskan breeding grounds. Additional
analysis of ACP and NSE survey data, using a multivariate model to
account for the confounding factors of spring timing and observer
experience, also indicates no discernible trend in population numbers.
However, the statistical power (or ability to detect a significant
change) is relatively low; a minimum of 10.4 years is required to
detect a 50 percent decline in the surveyed population (based on NSE
data; Larned et al. 2003, Fig. 8). Thus, in Alaska, the breeding ground
population could decline to less than 2,000 individuals before current
survey methods would detect a significant declining trend. The total
Alaska population could decline by a larger percentage because breeding
ground surveys do not include population components that remain at sea
during the breeding season (pre-breeding and reproductively mature but
non-breeding individuals). Thus, a significant decline in these
population components in Alaska could not be readily detected with
current surveys. Further, any decline in yellow-billed loons in Russia
and Canada could not be detected because these are not currently
surveyed. Finally, a decline in the breeding component may be masked by
movement of previously uncounted individuals to vacated territories
(resulting in sinks rather than productive breeding habitats); this
decline would not be detected with current surveys.
Conservation Status
Pursuant to section 4(a) of the Act, we may list a species or
subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, or distinct population
segment (DPS) of a vertebrate taxa, on the basis of any of the
following five factors: (A) present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of a species' habitat or range; (B)
overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; and (E) other natural or manmade
factors affecting its continued existence. The petition asserts that
yellow-billed loons are subject to threats primarily under Factors A,
C, D, and E, above. We used information provided by the petitioners and
available in our files to address the relationship of these factors to
the yellow-billed loon and its habitats.
Certain intrinsic aspects of yellow-billed loon ecology and
demography, including low and variable productivity, adult survival,
and low population numbers, are important to consider when evaluating
the species' status and its threats. Healthy populations of K-selected
species, such as the yellow-billed loon, are characterized by low
annual productivity rates balanced with high annual survival rates,
meaning that individuals must live many years to replace themselves
with offspring that survive to recruit into the breeding population.
Low productivity means that depleted K-selected species have lower
recovery potential and slower recovery rates following population
declines than r-selected species, which are characterized by high
annual productivity. Factors that reduce productivity, including loss
of productive breeding habitats, reduction in prey populations, or
increases in nest predators, may further constrain a K-selected
species' recovery. Further, most arctic species are characterized by
variable annual productivity, given the vagaries and severity of arctic
weather, fluctuations in predator-prey relationships (e.g.,
reproductive success of many predators fluctuates with large annual
variation in lemming abundance), and other aspects of arctic ecology.
The population impact of threats that reduce productivity could be
magnified if coincident with a rare year of otherwise high
productivity.
Although factors that compromise productivity can cause populations
to decline, adult survival may be the most important determinant of a
K-selected species' population size and persistence (Smith and Smith
2001, p. 235). If adults are removed from the population prior to
replacing themselves (i.e., adult survival is decreased), the
population will decline. Perhaps most pertinent to a discussion of
extinction, rare species--those with low numbers--are intrinsically
closer to a threshold below which recovery is not possible (i.e.,
minimum viable population) (Hunter 1996, p. 137). Species can be rare
because of restriction to a rare type of habitat, limitation to a small
geographic range, or occurrence at low densities (Hunter 1996, p. 129),
all of which are true for yellow-billed loons. Because rare species are
closer to extinction to begin with, potential threats become more
urgent and imminent, even if we have not studied and therefore not
documented their occurrence or effects.
A. Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of a
Species' Habitat or Range
The petitioners assert that yellow-billed loon freshwater breeding
habitats are threatened by oil, gas, and mineral development, and that
marine wintering and migrating habitats are threatened by degradation
of the marine environment. Disturbance from human presence and noise
from construction and aerial traffic, changes in freshwater chemistry
or pollutant loads, and changes in freshwater hydrology associated with
oil and gas development are addressed by the petitioners under Factor
E, but warrant discussion under Factor A because they are potential
mechanisms
[[Page 31260]]
for rendering breeding habitats unsuitable. (Additional impacts
associated with development on the breeding grounds, such as increased
predation, are discussed under Factors C and E.)
Discussion of disturbance, pollution, hydrologic alterations, and
other impacts from development that may reduce the suitability of
breeding habitats is relevant because much of the yellow-billed loon's
limited, specific, and concentrated breeding habitat in Alaska is
available for oil and gas leasing and development. Approximately three-
quarters of the yellow-billed loons that nest in Alaska, and over 90
percent of those that nest on Alaska's North Slope, occur within the
9.5-million-ha (23.5-million-ac) National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska Plan
(NPR-A), and information available in our files indicates that some of
the highest-density yellow-billed loon breeding areas overlap with
areas of high economic oil potential. The petitioners cite National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) planning documents for oil and gas
leasing and exploration in NPR-A to support their assertion that oil
and gas exploration and development will occur. The BLM has conducted
four lease sales in the NPR-A since 1999. In the Northeast Planning
Area, sales held in May 1999 and June 2002 resulted in leases covering
404,685 ha (1.45 million ac) (http://www.blm.gov/ak/ak940/fluids/boe_npra_index.html, accessed March 30, 2007), on which 21 exploration
wells were drilled from 2000 to 2007 (http://www.blm.gov/ak/ak940/fluids/boe_explrtn_actvty.html, accessed March 30, 2007). In the
Northwest Planning Area, sales held in June 2004 and September 2006
resulted in leases covering 809,371 ha (2.34 million ac), on which 3
exploration wells were drilled in 2006 and 2007 (http://www.blm.gov/ak/ak940/fluids/boe_explrtn_actvty.html, accessed March 30, 2007). If
exploration drilling results in discovery of a commercially viable
field, ``* * * it typically takes an additional 4 to 10 years for
further study, design, and installation of facilities before production
can begin.'' (USDOI-BLM 2006, p. 2-6). Because most of yellow-billed
loon breeding habitats are in NPR-A, and because approximately half of
the high-density breeding areas overlap with leased areas that have
high potential for economically recoverable oil, the likelihood of
threats from oil and gas development to the species occurring within
the next ten years is high.
The petitioners assert that loons as a genus are extremely
susceptible to disturbance, and information in our files suggests that
yellow-billed loons may be very sensitive to human presence (North
1994, p. 16). Disturbance can cause yellow-billed loons to abandon
reproductive efforts or leave eggs or chicks unattended and exposed to
predators or bad weather. A yellow-billed loon's normal behavior can be
interrupted at a distance of up to 1.6 kilometers (1 mile) from humans,
although these behavioral changes can vary by individual and
circumstance (Earnst 2004b, p. 1). When undisturbed, yellow-billed
loons rarely leave eggs or chicks, and they effectively defend both
from aerial predators (Earnst 2004b, p. 1). Further, although
information available in our files suggests displaced common loons may
successfully breed in alternative sites (e.g., common loons not
accustomed to human activity have relocated breeding activities in
response to human presence) (numerous studies cited in Evers 2004, p.
35), alternative suitable breeding sites are likely not available for
yellow-billed loons, as evidenced by inter- and intra-specific
competition for nesting and brood-rearing lakes of suitable size and
depth, and the species' philopatric behavior (North 1994, p. 16).
The petitioners assert that oil spills and other chemical
contamination that would occur with oil and gas development will also
impact loons, citing information on oil toxicity and prevalence of oil
spills on Alaska's North Slope. Information in our files suggests that
changes in freshwater chemistry or pollutant loads, including oil
spills, associated with oil and gas development may render breeding
habitats unsuitable, and both have been documented on Alaska's North
Slope (NRC 2003, p. 6-7, 73-74). Yellow-billed loons, like other
aquatic-dependent birds, are susceptible to oiling in the event of a
spill. Severe effects are expected to result for birds contacted by oil
spills in NPR-A (USDOI-BLM 2005, p. 4-105). Further, oil spills may
have long-term effects on tundra waters by killing prey and vegetation
(USDOI-BLM 2005, p. 4-78, 4-88), thereby reducing food availability and
cover. Oil spills in arctic marine habitats may also affect juvenile
and non-breeding yellow-billed loons (USDOI-BLM 2005, p. 4-105). The
majority of spills that have occurred in association with oil and gas
development on Alaska's North Slope are relatively small and cause
minimal impacts to surrounding habitats or wildlife. The risks from
larger and potentially more frequent spills need to be examined
however.
The petitioners assert that water depletion or drawdown may affect
connectedness, depth, or melt date of yellow-billed loon nesting or
brood-rearing lakes and may render such areas unsuitable as breeding
habitats. Information in our files indicates that industrial
development on the North Slope has affected freshwater flow and
drainage as a result of water withdrawals to build ice roads or
drilling pads, and through permafrost decay consequent to
infrastructure placement, vegetation damage, or fluid extraction and
injection (NRC 2003, p. 1-11). North (1994, p. 16) and North and Ryan
(1989, p. 303) suggested that permafrost decay consequent to
infrastructure placement and disturbance of vegetation may cause
breaching of rivers into yellow-billed loon breeding lakes, rendering
them unsuitable due to fluctuating water levels (causing drowned nests)
or increased turbidity (negatively affecting foraging success).
Additionally, the petitioners assert and we concur that ice roads on
breeding lakes may compact lake ice and delay melting (USDOI-BLM 1998,
p. IV-3-b-1-b), thus delaying or discouraging yellow-billed loon
breeding.
Water withdrawals used for ice roads and pads could have additional
effects on habitat suitability by affecting fish populations that
breeding yellow-billed loons depend upon to feed themselves and young.
Although water withdrawal stipulations in oil and gas planning
documents are designed to protect and monitor fish-bearing lakes, their
adequacy for protecting fish that serve as yellow-billed loon prey is
not currently known. The Service is working with the BLM and others to
evaluate these and other accommodations that are either in place or are
proposed for the protection of this species.
Areas within the yellow-billed loon's arctic breeding range in
Russia and Canada may face similar developmental pressures. The
petitioners assert that mineral and oil development in Russia is either
unregulated or regulations are not enforced, resulting in long-term
environmental impacts. In Canada, oil and gas developments within the
yellow-billed loon's breeding and staging areas have been proposed. If
it occurs, overlap of development (particularly unregulated
development) with the specific and limited breeding areas required by
yellow-billed loons will result in destruction, modification, or
curtailment of habitats or range in Russia and Canada. Further, the
Service and the petitioners are unaware of assessment or monitoring
data to
[[Page 31261]]
evaluate these effects on yellow-billed loons in Eurasia (including
Russia).
There is little documentation of the degradation of marine habitats
resulting in destruction or modification of yellow-billed loon habitat.
However, the marine environment is clearly important for yellow-billed
loons, as that is where they spend their first three years, and
subsequently at least eight months per year. Particular examples of
marine degradation listed by the petitioners include pollution
(although oil and chemical spills are discussed under Factor E), and
the effects of fishing practices such as drowning in fishing nets and
depletion of the prey base through overfishing or other destructive
fishing practices. The negative effects of these examples are likely to
be on individual condition or survival; high survival rates, especially
of breeding adults, are required for yellow-billed loon population
maintenance.
Information available in our files indicates that the Yellow Sea,
where all 11 Alaska-breeding yellow-billed loons with satellite
transmitters wintered (Schmutz 2004, p. 1), is being degraded. There
are approximately six million humans in surrounding watersheds, and the
Yellow Sea is impacted by loss of wetland habitat, depleted fisheries,
and industrial, agricultural, and domestic pollution (http://www.gefonline.org/projectDetails.cfm?projID=790), accessed January 17,
2006). The Australian Government, in a summary of the Yellow Sea's
importance to shorebirds, noted that declining river flows, pollution,
and unsustainable harvesting of benthic fauna are leading to reduced
benthic productivity and food declines for shorebirds (http://www.deh.gov.au/biodiversity/migratory/waterbirds/yellow-sea/, accessed
January 17, 2006). These impacts on the aquatic system would also
affect wintering loon food availability, potentially reducing
individual fitness prior to spring migration and breeding.
We find the petition provided substantial information to support
its assertions that the threat of past, current and probable future
destruction, modification, or curtailment of yellow-billed loon habitat
is sufficient to warrant additional review of the species' status. In
freshwater breeding areas, factors associated with oil and gas
exploration and development (i.e., disturbance, pollution, and
hydrologic changes) can make breeding habitats unsuitable. Marine
habitats, where yellow-billed loons spend much of the year, are being
degraded through overfishing and pollution.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
The petitioners assert that overutilization for commercial,
recreational, or educational purposes is unlikely. Although the
petitioners list research-related nest disturbance under this Factor,
they also state that it is likely to be a minor Factor affecting the
species and that the benefits of such research outweigh any adverse
effects.
C. Disease or Predation
The petitioners assert that yellow-billed loons may be subjected to
increased nest predation if infrastructure associated with resource
development occurs in their breeding areas. Increasing numbers of
ravens, gulls, and arctic foxes, some of which are documented predators
of yellow-billed loon nests or young (North 1994, p. 11), have been
associated with oil field infrastructure development and human-
generated food sources on the North Slope of Alaska (NRC 2003, p. 6).
When combined with increased predation opportunities resulting from
disturbance (discussed under Factor A), the effect of increased
predator numbers could be amplified. The petitioners assert that
disease does not appear to be a risk to yellow-billed loons. However,
since receiving the petition the highly pathogenic avian influenza has
been documented in Asia where yellow-billed loons winter.
We find the petition provided substantial information to support
its assertions that the threat of increased predation associated with
resource development infrastructure is sufficient to warrant additional
review of the species' status. Additionally, the potential impacts of
avian influenza on the loon are not know at this time and may warrant
further investigation.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
The petitioners assert that the yellow-billed loon is not protected
or is inadequately protected by existing regulations, including
international conventions or agreements against threats such as
development and hunting. The yellow-billed loon is not currently listed
under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of
Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). The species is listed under the United
Nations Environment Program Convention on the Conservation of Migratory
Species of Wild Animals (UNEP-CMS), yet the United States, Russia,
Canada, and most Asian nations are not signatories (http://www.cms.int/
, accessed January 17, 2006). Although it is listed in the Russian Red
Data book, and the species and its habitat are nominally protected
under the U.S. Migratory Bird Treaty with the former Soviet Union (P.L.
95-616), the petitioners assert that current economic and social
conditions in Russia limit the implementation and enforcement of these
regulations. In Canada, the yellow-billed loon is protected under the
Migratory Birds Convention Act, but subsistence hunting is allowed and
is not regulated or tracked. In Canada, the yellow-billed loon is not
listed on Schedule 1 (i.e., specified as ``at risk'') of the Species at
Risk Act of 2002, legislation similar to the Act. Currently, the
species is not covered under Canadian Provincial laws or regulations
and, thus, receives no protections or conservation considerations in
Canada.
Within the United States, the yellow-billed loon has protection
under several laws and regulations, but the petitioners assert that
these are inadequate given the vulnerabilities of, and the specific
threats facing, the species and its habitat. The Migratory Bird Treaty
Act (MBTA) makes it unlawful to kill or take eggs or nests of yellow-
billed loons, but does not provide protection for habitats, a primary
concern in relation to development in breeding areas. Yellow-billed
loons are not open for subsistence hunting in Alaska under migratory
bird spring subsistence harvest regulations (69 FR 17318-17329). The
Service and State of Alaska have recognized the yellow-billed loon as a
potentially vulnerable species under the Birds of Conservation Concern
(68 FR 6179) and State Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy
(http://www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/statewide/ngplan/, accessed January 17,
2006), respectively. These designations provide management and research
funding prioritization.
The BLM has adopted stipulations and required operating procedures
for the NW and NE NPR-A (USDOI-BLM 2004, p. 2-22-23; USDOI-BLM 2005, p.
2-2-45) in order to minimize potential impacts to yellow-billed loons,
such as disturbance of nesting birds and broods. These include water
withdrawal standards for deep fish-bearing lakes (discussed under
Factor A) and setbacks for exploratory drilling and permanent
facilities near fish-bearing and deep lakes (greater than 3.9 m (13 ft)
deep). While exceptions may be authorized for all stipulations and
required operating procedures, the stipulations and required operating
procedures were proposed to minimize impacts, including disturbance, to
yellow-billed loons within BLM-managed areas. At
[[Page 31262]]
this time, however, data are not available to determine how effective
the stipulations and required operating procedures will be in
minimizing or eliminating adverse impacts to the species. Further, the
petitioners assert that some information is not provided or is
erroneous and leads to unsupported conclusions about probability or
magnitude of potential impacts. They note, for example, in the 1998 NE
NPR-A Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), that vehicle travel was
encouraged to occur more than 30 m (100 ft) from streams or lakes
bearing overwintering fish, a stipulation not included in the 2005 NE
NPR-A Final Amended EIS (USDOI-BLM 2005) or in the NW NPR-A Record of
Decision (ROD)(USDOI-BLM 2004). While the rationale for removal of the
stipulation was that travel on lakes is limited to specified areas
(water pumping stations and ice roads), thus reducing ice and snow
compaction, there are other reasons for restricting travel near fish-
bearing water bodies, including reducing contamination from spills or
ice-road maintenance activities. The petitioners also claim that the
Final EIS for the Minerals Management Service's (MMS) 1996 Beaufort Sea
Planning Area Oil and Gas Lease Sale 144 fails to acknowledge
documented use of marine foraging areas on the North Slope (USDOI-MMS
1996, p. IV-B-21). The Service is working with BLM and others to
thoroughly review the biological needs of the yellow-billed loon,
evaluate the conservation measures proposed by BLM to conserve this
species, and identify any other measures that would help to avoid and
minimize impacts to the species in its range within NPR-A.
We find the petition provided substantial information to support
its assertions that the yellow-billed loon's habitat is not currently
protected by existing regulatory mechanisms in the U.S. and Canada.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting the Species' Continued
Existence
The petitioners assert that other natural or manmade factors may
threaten yellow-billed loons. These factors include small population
size and low productivity; vulnerability to oil spills and other
contaminants; water depletion associated with oil and gas development;
incidental bycatch in commercial or subsistence fishing nets; and
hunting. Increased predation, disturbance, and water withdrawals
associated with oil and gas development, and marine pollution, were
discussed under Factors A and C.
As previously discussed, small population size, low and variable
productivity, and dependence upon high adult survival are all
ecological characteristics of yellow-billed loons, a K-selected
species. These characteristics mean that the yellow-billed loon is
inherently more vulnerable to perturbations that impact their survival
and reproductive success because their population would take longer to
recover from declines than a more common or fecund species.
Additionally, many of the factors discussed under Factor E may affect
adult survival, which may be more important to population maintenance
in these long-lived birds than annual productivity (Smith and Smith
2001, p. 235). K-selected species like the yellow-billed loon also tend
to be specialists, efficiently using particular environments, but they
are often at or near carrying capacity, resource-limited, poor
colonizers, and generally do not do well in disturbed environments
(Smith and Smith 2001, p. 235). They are also highly vulnerable to
random environmental or anthropogenic events, such as the threats
described below.
Yellow-billed loons, like other loons, are potentially vulnerable
to oil and chemical spills throughout their range. Of the 30,000 bird
carcasses recovered after the Exxon Valdez oil spill, approximately 1.5
percent (450) were loons (with an unknown percentage of yellow-billed
loons; Piatt et al. 1990, p. 391). As recovered carcasses represent
only a fraction of actual oil spill mortality (Wiens 1996, p. 596),
yellow-billed loon loss may have been high relative to population size
(Piatt et al. 1990, p. 395). Habitat alterations associated with oil,
gas, and mineral development were addressed in Factor A, and although
an oil spill may make habitats unsuitable, perhaps the effect of most
concern is mortality. Because loons in general are so dependent upon
the aquatic environment and spend so little time on land, they are
particularly at risk for exposure during an oil spill. Oiled birds die
primarily from hypothermia because oil coats their normally insulating
and buoyant feathers, preventing efficient thermoregulation. They can
also die from oil ingested during preening. Egg viability can be
diminished through contact with even small amounts of oil on feathers
of incubating adults (e.g., Harfenist et al. 1990, p. 902). Oil spills
may also alter foraging habitats, acutely by killing large numbers of
prey, or chronically by altering community structure via long-term
exposure to oil or its components (e.g., Peterson et al. 1996, p.
2637). In migrating and wintering areas of the Pacific, current and
future oil and gas development will only increase, such as in the
Yellow Sea (http://www.china.org.cn/english/7352.htm), accessed January
17, 2006), or on Sakhalin Island, Russia.
Anecdotal data indicate that loons, including yellow-billed loons,
may die as incidental bycatch in commercial and subsistence gill nets,
although more data are needed to accurately quantify this threat.
Service law enforcement agents have been told that yellow-billed loons
are routinely and unavoidably caught in subsistence fishing nets on the
Ikpikpuk River (Roberts 2004), and this presumably occurs on other
North Slope rivers with gillnetting. Additionally, intensive commercial
fishing, a likely source of bycatch mortality, occurs in yellow-billed
loon wintering areas in Asia, particularly the Yellow Sea (Elvidge et
al. 2001, Fig. 2).
Yellow-billed loons have also been hunted for subsistence purposes,
especially for their feathers for use in traditional dance regalia.
Hunting is not allowed under current spring subsistence hunting
regulations in Alaska (i.e., they are not on the list of ``open''
species). Annual subsistence harvest surveys conducted in Alaska from
1990 to 1999 indicate a total estimated harvest of 98 yellow-billed
loons (Wentworth and Wong 2001, p. 107). In Russia and Canada,
traditional or subsistence use of yellow-billed loons is not regulated.
Specifically, many subsistence species may be taken at higher rates in
Russia than in Alaska, because of the relative lack of paying jobs, and
yellow-billed loons are included as customary and traditional
subsistence-use species on the 1996 protocol amending the 1916
Convention for the Protection of Migratory Birds between the United
States and Canada (Letter of Submittal dated May 20, 1996, as cited in
70 FR 55691-55699).
We find the petition provided substantial information to support
its assertions that the threats of other natural and manmade factors,
including small population size, low productivity, vulnerability to
spilled oil and other contaminants, water depletion associated with
resource development, incidental bycatch, and hunting , are sufficient
to warrant additional review of the species' status.
Finding
We have reviewed the petition and supporting information. We have
found:
(1) On April 5, 2004, we received a petition from the Center for
Biological Diversity and others to list the yellow-billed loon as
endangered or threatened
[[Page 31263]]
throughout its range or as a Distinct Population Segment and to
designate critical habitat. The petition describes multiple threats to
the yellow-billed loon, including destruction or modification of
habitats due to development and pollution, lack of regulatory
protection, and other factors such as mortality from drowning in
fishing nets and hunting. The petition emphasized that certain other
factors, including limited and specific breeding habitats, a small
global population, and low reproductive rate, make yellow-billed loons
more susceptible to the threats identified in the petition and less
likely to recover after declines. The petitioners assert that yellow-
billed loon freshwater breeding habitats are threatened by oil, gas,
and mineral development, and that marine wintering and migrating
habitats are threatened by degradation of the marine environment.
(2) Yellow-billed loons breed in remote circumpolar areas,
generally above the Arctic Circle, with harsh climates and low human
population densities. Yellow-billed loons nest exclusively in coastal
and inland low-lying tundra from 62 to 74[deg] N latitude, in
association with permanent, fish-bearing lakes in Alaska, Canada,
Russia, and rarely in far northern Norway and Finland. Populations are
thought to be limited primarily by availability of breeding habitat,
specifically nesting and brood-rearing lakes.
(3) Our knowledge of the status of the yellow-billed loon is far
from complete, but the worldwide population is believed to be
relatively small. The only known comprehensive yellow-billed loon
population estimates are from Alaska. The total Alaska yellow-billed
loon population may be 3,700 to 4,900. The Service is unaware of
scientifically valid population estimates for other areas. However,
anecdotal density and habitat information have caused at least one
scientist to speculate that 8,000 yellow-billed loons breed in Canada
and 5,000 breed in Russia. Combining these estimates, the worldwide
breeding-ground yellow-billed loon population may be roughly 16,500.
(4) Given the lack of comprehensive scientific information relative
to yellow-billed loon population estimates, there are few means with
which to assess population trends. In Alaska, the number of yellow-
billed loons counted in surveys is small (resulting in wide confidence
intervals around annual estimates). Although estimates over the last
two decades do not show a change in the number of adults on the
breeding grounds, the ability to statistically detect a significant
change is relatively low. Thus, the Alaska breeding ground population
could decline significantly before current survey methods would detect
a declining trend. Other breeding areas are not surveyed at all.
(5) Yellow-billed loons have relatively low annual recruitment but
relatively high annual adult survival, meaning that individuals must
live many years to replace themselves with offspring that survive to
recruit into the breeding population. Biologists identify species such
as the yellow-billed loon as K-selected species, which are especially
vulnerable to threats and are less likely to recover after declines.
(6) While comprehensive information on the biology of the yellow-
billed loon is not complete, available scientific information and the
professional judgment of knowledgeable biologists suggests that loons
in general are relatively sensitive to human activity, and development
and infrastructure located close to breeding lakes will affect the
species and may cause reduced breeding success and declining
populations. Flushing or other changes in normal nesting behavior can
cause eggs or young to be vulnerable to cold and predation. Increased
predation of eggs and chicks due to human disturbance has been
documented in loons.
(7) Approximately 75 percent of the yellow-billed loons that nest
in Alaska are found within the NPR-A (25 percent in NE NPR-A and 50
percent in NW NPR-A), which is managed by BLM. Of the 1.9 million ha
(4.6 million ac) in NE NPR-A, a 1998 Record of Decision (ROD) made 87
percent available for oil and gas leasing. In June 2004, the BLM
released a draft amended EIS that may allow an increase in the area
available for leasing to 95 percent of the unit. In the 3.6 million ha
(8.8 million ac) of NW NPR-A, a January 2004 ROD made all BLM-
administered lands available for leasing. The EIS process for the 4.1
million-ha (10.1 million-ac) S NPR-A has begun. In summary, much of the
higher density loon breeding area lies within the area identified as
having high potential for oil development and exploration and
development has begun in certain areas and will likely begin in others
soon (i.e., within the next ten years).
(8) As exploration and development occurs in the NPR-A, the
potential for disturbance, pollution, hydrologic alterations, and other
impacts on the yellow-billed loon and its limited, specific, and
concentrated breeding habitat will need to be addressed. Additionally,
increased predator numbers are often associated with industrial
development in Arctic areas and could adversely impact nesting success
without careful planning and management.
(9) Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that we make a finding
on whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents
substantial scientific or commercial information to indicate that the
petitioned action may be warranted. Our standard for substantial
scientific information with regard to a 90-day petition finding is
``that amount of information that would lead a reasonable person to
believe that the measure proposed in the petition may be warranted''
(50 CFR 424.14(b)). When a substantial finding is made, we are required
to promptly begin a thorough review of the status of the species, if
one has not already been initiated.
We have determined that the information in the petition would lead
a reasonable person to believe that the measure proposed by the
petition may be warranted. Therefore, we find that the petition
presents substantial information indicating that listing the yellow-
billed loon may be warranted. While we note the lack of documented
scientific information on the effects of threats to yellow-billed
loons, the yellow-billed loon is restricted in its breeding habitat
and, in Alaska, it breeds primarily within a geographic area that has
significant development potential. Therefore, the responsible course of
action is to review in detail the threats and vulnerabilities listed in
the petition and to thoroughly review the scientific literature and
other information to determine if listing the species is warranted. To
do otherwise could subject the species to significant risks from which
it may have difficulty recovering. We have also developed, together
with the BLM and other agencies, a Conservation Agreement that
addresses a subset of threats to the loon in a portion of the species'
range. The strategies for conservation in the Agreement include:
Implement specific actions to protect yellow-billed loons and their
breeding habitats in Alaska from potential impacts of land uses and
management activities, including oil and gas exploration and
development; inventory and monitor yellow-billed loons breeding
populations in Alaska; determine and reduce, if significant, the impact
of subsistence activities on yellow-billed loons (including subsistence
fisheries and hunting) in Alaska; and conduct biological research on
yellow-billed loons, including response to management actions. We
invite comments on management strategies and research needs that
[[Page 31264]]
should be considered during scheduled annual reviews of the
Conservation Agreement.
Following completion of the status review, we will evaluate whether
the species or a Distinct Population Segment warrant listing as
endangered or threatened. The petitioners also requested that critical
habitat be designated for this species. We always consider the need for
critical habitat designation when listing species. If we determine in
our 12-month finding that listing the yellow-billed loon is warranted,
we will address the designation of critical habitat at the time of the
proposed rulemaking.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited herein is available upon
request from the Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field Office, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (see ADDRESSES).
Author
The primary author of this document is Dr. Angela Matz, Fairbanks
Fish and Wildlife Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Fairbanks, Alaska.
Authority: The authority for this action is the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)
Dated: May 11, 2007.
Kenneth Stansell,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E7-10823 Filed 6-5-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P