[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 144 (Wednesday, July 29, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37671-37674]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18079]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Parts 223 and 224
[Docket No. 0906221082-91083-01]
RIN 0648-XQ03
Listing Endangered and Threatened Species and Designating
Critical Habitat: Notice of Finding on a Petition To List the
Largetooth Sawfish (Pristis perotteti) as an Endangered or Threatened
Species Under the Endangered Species Act
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce
ACTION: Notice of finding, request for information, and initiation of
status review
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, NMFS, announce a 90 day finding on a petition to list
largetooth sawfish (Pristis perotteti) as endangered or threatened
under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). We find that the petition
presents substantial scientific and commercial information indicating
the petitioned action may be warranted. We will conduct a status review
of largetooth sawfish to determine if the petitioned action is
warranted. To ensure that the status review is comprehensive, we are
soliciting scientific and commercial data regarding this species (see
below).
DATES: Information and comments on the subject action must be received
by September 28, 2009.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by the code 0648-XQ03,
addressed to: Shelley Norton, Natural Resource Specialist, by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic comments via
the Federal eRulemaking Portal http://www.regulations.gov
Facsimile (fax): 727-824-5309
Mail: NMFS, Southeast Regional Office, 263 13th Avenue
South, St Petersburg, FL 33701
Hand delivery: You may hand deliver written comments to
our office during normal business hours at the street address given
above.
Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record
and may be posted to http://www.regulations.gov without change. All
personally identifiable information (for example, name, address, etc.)
voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do
not submit confidential business information or otherwise sensitive or
protected information. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter N/A
in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous). Attachments to
electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, Corel
WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shelley Norton, NMFS, Southeast
Region, (727) 824-5312; or Sean Ledwin, NMFS, Office of Protected
Resources, (301) 713-1401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On April 24th, 2009, we received a petition from WildEarth
Guardians requesting that the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) list
largetooth sawfish (P. perotteti) as endangered or threatened
throughout its range and designate critical habitat concurrent with
listing. We identified largetooth sawfish as a candidate species under
the ESA on June 23, 1999 (64 FR 33466). On November 30, 1999, we
received a petition from the Center for Marine Conservation (now the
Ocean Conservancy) requesting that we list the North American
populations of largetooth and smalltooth sawfish (P. pectinata) as
endangered. On March 10, 2000 (65 FR 12959), we found that there was
not substantial evidence to warrant initiation of a status review of
North American populations of largetooth sawfish, on the basis that the
petition did not contain substantial scientific or commercial
information to indicate the present existence of such a population
eligible for listing. WildEarth Guardians' current petition also
requests that the Secretary re-examine and reverse the March 10, 2000,
negative 90-day finding to list the North American population of
largetooth sawfish as endangered. We will consider the petitioner's
request as a request to consider a North American Distinct Population
Segment (DPS), should we determine that a 90-day ``may be warranted''
finding regarding the species throughout its range is not warranted.
ESA Statutory Provisions and Policy Considerations
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)) requires
that we make a finding as to whether a petition to list, delist, or
reclassify a species ``presents substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating the petitioned action may be warranted.'' ESA
implementing regulations define substantial information as the ``amount
[[Page 37672]]
of information that would lead a reasonable person to believe the
measure proposed in the petition may be warranted'' (50 CFR
424.14(b)(1)). In determining whether substantial information exists to
support a petition to list a species, we take into account several
factors, including information submitted with, and referenced in, the
petition and all other information readily available in our files. To
the maximum extent practicable, this finding is to be made within 90
days of the receipt of the petition (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)), and the
finding is to be published promptly in the Federal Register. If we find
that a petition presents substantial information indicating that the
requested action may be warranted, section 4 (b)(3)(A) of the ESA
requires that the Secretary conduct a status review of the species.
Section 4 (b)(3)(B) requires the Secretary to make a finding as to
whether or not the petitioned action is warranted within 12 months of
the receipt of the petition. The Secretary has delegated the authority
for these actions to the NOAA Assistant Administrator for Fisheries.
Under the ESA, a listing determination can address a species,
subspecies, or a DPS of a vertebrate species (16 U.S.C. 1532 (16)). In
1996, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and NMFS published the Policy
on the Recognition of a Distinct Vertebrate Population Segments under
the Endangered Species Act (61 FR 4722; February 7, 1996).
The ESA defines an endangered species as ''any species which is in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range'' (ESA Section 3(6)). A threatened species is defined as a
species that is ''likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range'' (ESA Section 3(19)). Under section 4(a)(1) of the ESA, a
species may be determined to be threatened or endangered as a result of
any one of the following factors: (1) present or threatened
destruction, modification, or curtailment of habitat or range; (2)
over-utilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (3) disease or predation; (4) inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (5) other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence. Listing determinations are made
solely on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data
available, after conducting a review of the status of the species and
taking into account efforts made by any state or foreign nation to
protect such species.
Distribution and Life History of Largetooth Sawfish
Largetooth sawfish historically inhabited warm temperate to
tropical marine waters in the Atlantic, Caribbean, and eastern Pacific.
In the western Atlantic the species occurred from the Caribbean and
Gulf of Mexico south through Brazil. In the United States, largetooth
sawfish were reported in the Gulf of Mexico mainly along the Texas
coast and east into Florida waters (Burgess and Curtis, 2003). In the
eastern Atlantic largetooth sawfish historically occurred from Spain
through Angola. The eastern Pacific historic range of the species was
from Mazatlan, Mexico to Guayaquil, Ecuador (Cook et al., 2005) or
possibly Tumbes, Peru (Chirichigo and Cornejo, 2001).
Largetooth and smalltooth sawfish occur in many of the same areas
in the Atlantic and may be morphologically distinguished from each
other by the number of pairs of rostral teeth, the placement of the
pectoral fins relative to the pelvic fins, and the shape of their
caudal fin (Bigelow and Schroeder, 1953). Despite these differences
there were problems differentiating the species in a few early
accounts, so some records of distribution and abundance are uncertain.
To confuse matters further, the current species P. perotteti has been
variously referred to in the literature over part or all of its range
as P. antiquorum (Visschen, 1919; as cited in Bigelow and Schroeder,
1953), P. zephyreus (Beebe and Tee-Van, 1941; Compango and Last, 1999),
P. pristis (McEachran and Fechhelm, 1998), or P. microdon (Garman,
1913; Fowler, 1941; Compango and Last, 1999; Chirichigo and Cornejo,
2001; Vakily et al., 2002). Pristis microdon is still considered valid
taxa; some authors consider the eastern Pacific populations to be part
of the species P. microdon (Garman, 1913; Fowler, 1941; Chirichigo and
Cornejo, 2001) while others consider the eastern Pacific populations to
be P. perotteti (Jordan and Evermann, 1896; refs. in Beebe and Tee-Van,
1941; Compagno and Cook, 1995; Camhi et al., 1998; Cook et al., 2005).
The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) ``Red
List'' notes the controversy, but bases its assessment only on the
Atlantic populations (Charvet-Almeida et al., 2007). We tentatively
regard the eastern Pacific populations as being included in P.
perotteti for the purposes of this analysis. The taxonomic
relationships of largetooth sawfish and related sawfishes clearly need
further examination (Compagno and Cook, 1995; Cook et al., 2005;
Wueringer et al., 2009).
Largetooth sawfish are thought to presently occur in freshwater
habitats in Central and South America and Africa. In Atlantic
drainages, largetooth sawtooth have been found in freshwater at least
833 miles (1,340 km) from the ocean in the Amazon River system
(Manacapuru, Brazil), as well as in Lake Nicaragua and the San Juan
River and other east coast Nicaraguan rivers; the Rio Coco, on the
border of Nicaragua and Honduras; Rio Patuca, Honduras; Lago de Izabal,
Rio Motagua, and Rio Dulce, Guatemala; the Belize River, Belize;
Mexican streams that flow into the Gulf of Mexico; Las Lagunas Del
Tortuguero, Rio Parismina, Rio Pacuare, and Rio Matina, Costa Rica; Rio
San Juan and the Magdalena River, Columbia; the Falm River in Mali and
Senegal; the Saloum River, Senegal; coastal rivers in Gambia; and the
Geba River, Guinea-Bissau (Thorson, 1974; 1982b; Castro-Augiree, 1978
as cited in Thorson, 1982b; Compagno and Cook, 1995; C. Scharpf and M.
McDavitt, pers. comm., as cited in Cook et al., 2005). In the eastern
Pacific the species has been reported in freshwater in the Tuyra,
Culebra, Tilapa, Chucunaque, Bayeno, and Rio Sambu Rivers, and at the
Balboa and Miraflores locks in the Panama Canal, Panama; Rio San Juan,
Columbia; and in the Rio Goascoran, along the border of El Salvador and
Honduras (Boulenger, 1909; Fowler, 1936; 1941; Beebe and Tee-Van, 1941;
Bigelow and Schroeder, 1953; Gunter, 1957; Thorson et al., 1966; Dahl,
1971; Thorson, 1974; 1976; 1980; 1982a; 1982b, 1987; Vasquez-Montoya
and Thorson 1982a, 1982b; Daget, 1984; Compagno and Cook, 1995; all as
cited in Cook et al., 2005).
Largetooth sawfish, like other members of their family, are
characterized by a toothy snout projecting well forward of the head and
mouth. Approximately 2.5 ft (0.76m) long at birth, largetooth sawfish
can reach lengths of up to 21.3 feet (6.5m) and weights of up to 1300
pounds (600 kg) (Thorson, 1976). Studies of largetooth sawfish in Lake
Nicaragua report litter sizes of 1 to 13 individuals, with an average
of 7.3 individuals (Thorson, 1976). The gestation period for largetooth
sawfish is approximately 5 months, and females likely produce litters
every second year. Given that largetooth sawfish are long lived, slow
growing, late maturing, ovoviviparous, and produce few young, the
species has a very low intrinsic rate of increase. Simpfendorfer (2000)
estimated the intrinsic rate of increase for largetooth sawfish was
from 0.05 to 0.07 per year, and population doubling time was
[[Page 37673]]
between 10.3 and 13.6 years. Musick et al. (2000) noted that intrinsic
rates of increase less than ten percent (0.1) were low and make a
species particularly vulnerable to excessive mortalities and rapid
population declines, after which recovery may take decades.
Largetooth sawfish are generally restricted to shallow (<33 feet or
10 m) coastal, estuarine, and fresh waters, although they have been
found at depths of up to 400 ft (122 m) in Lake Nicaragua. Largetooth
sawfish are often found in brackish water near river mouths and large
embayments, preferring partially enclosed waters, lying in deeper holes
and on bottoms of mud or muddy sand (Bigelow and Schroeder, 1953).
While it is thought that they spend most of their time on the bottom,
they are commonly observed swimming near the surface in the wild and in
aquaria (Cook et al., 2005). Largetooth sawfish move among salinity
gradients freely and appear to have more physiological tolerance of
freshwater than smalltooth sawfish (Bigelow and Schroeder, 1953; Dahl,
1971; Thorson, 1974; 1976; all as cited in Thorson, 1982b). The rostral
``saw'' is used in feeding to stir up prey items in the benthos and may
be used to stun schooling fish.
Analysis of Petition
We evaluated the information referenced in the petition and all
other information readily available in our files to determine if the
petition presents substantial scientific and/or commercial information
indicating that the species may be ``threatened'' or ``endangered''
throughout all or a significant portion of their range. The current
petition differs from the 1999 petition by seeking the listing of the
entire species wherever it is found. The petition resubmits biological,
distributional, and historical information from the 1999 petition and
2000 finding and provides additional information including the
International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) ``Red List''
assessment (Charvet-Almeida et al., 2007), reports on the Brazilian
population (Menni and Stehmann, 2000; Charvet-Almeida, 2002), a report
on the international sawfish trade (McDavitt and Charvet-Almeida,
2004), and a summary paper on the global population of largetooth
sawfish (Cook et al., 2005). The petition also addresses the five
factors in section 4(a)(1) of the ESA as they pertain to listing of the
species. The petitioner stresses information related to range
contraction and local extirpations, declines in abundance, and specific
details about threats to the species. We summarize our analysis
regarding specific factors affecting the species' risk of extinction
below.
Range Contraction
There is evidence from throughout the species range that largetooth
sawfish have been extirpated and/or no longer occur in some locations.
These locations include the U. S. portion of the Gulf of Mexico and the
southeastern coast of Brazil (Menni and Stehmann, 2000). The last known
U.S. sightings were in 1941 in Florida and 1943 in Texas (Burgess and
Curtis, 2003). In addition, the IUCN considers populations in Benin,
Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Ghana, Gibraltar, Guinea, Mali,
Mauritania, Morocco, Nigeria, Spain, Togo, Western Sahara, and the U.
S. as ``possibly extinct'' (i.e., locally extirpated) (Charvet-Almeida
et al., 2007). The IUCN provides contradictory information on whether
largetooth sawfish currently occur in Angola, The Democratic Republic
of Congo, Cote d'Ivoire, Gambia, Liberia, Senegal, and Sierra Leone
(Charvet-Almeida et al., 2007).
Declines in Abundance
Quantitative data on largetooth sawfish population trends are
lacking in the petition and our files. The best available information
from scientific reports and anecdotal information from fisherpeople and
others suggests large declines in abundance have occurred on the north
coast of Brazil (Charvet-Almeida, 2002) and in other areas where the
species still occurs (Charvet-Almeida et al., 2007). Thorson's detailed
studies (Thorson, 1976; 1982a; 1982b; 1987) document significant
declines of largetooth sawfish in Lake Nicaragua, and others report
that these low abundance levels continue (Tanaka, 1994; McDavitt,
2002). The IUCN reports ongoing declines in artisanal and commercial
landings (Charvet-Almeida et al., 2007), but they provide no direct
citations or data. Based on the local extirpations and declines in
abundance the IUCN has placed largetooth sawfish on the IUCN ``Red
List'' as ``critically endangered'' in the Atlantic (Charvet-Almeida et
al., 2007).
Population Structure
There is little information in the petition or our files related to
genetic, morphological, or other population structure differences
within the species beyond the unique freshwater population of Lake
Nicaragua discussed above.
Threats
The petitioner believes the most immediate threat to the species is
the reduction in abundance and density caused by overharvest and
bycatch. Direct and incidental commercial catch and artisanal and
recreational fisheries occur throughout the species' range (Thorson,
1987; Taniuchi, 1992; Tanaka, 1994; Camhi et al., 1998; Charvet-
Almeida, 2002). The species is valued for its flesh, fins that are used
in the ``shark'' fin trade, skins that are used for leather, the live
aquarium trade, the curio value of the rostral saw, and the rostral
teeth, which are used for a variety of purposes including as spurs for
roosters used in cockfighting (Charvet-Almeida, 2002; McDavitt and
Charvet-Almeida, 2004; Cook et al., 2005). These values have created an
international market for sawfish products (McDavitt and Charvet-
Almeida, 2004); however largetooth sawfish were added to Appendix I of
the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species in 2007. On
his initial visits to Lake Nicaragua, Thorson (pers. comm.; as cited in
Cook et al., 2005) noted large catches of largetooth sawfish. Direct
fisheries in Lake Nicaragua removed an estimated 60,000 to 100,000
sawfishes between 1970 and 1975 (Thorson, 1976); sawfish are now
extremely rare in the lake (Thorson, 1987; Tanaka, 1994; McDavitt,
2002). In Brazil, largetooth sawfish extirpation from the southeastern
coast and decline on the north coast is attributed to direct fisheries
that continue today (Charvet-Almeida, 2002).
Habitat degradation and loss are also likely contributors to the
species' decline. Specific threats to largetooth sawfish habitat
include destruction of mangrove forests and coastal development
throughout its range (Charvet-Almeida et al., 2007). The petitioner
also identified weak or non-existent regulatory or management
mechanisms throughout the species range.
Petition Finding
After reviewing the information submitted with, and referenced in,
the petition and all other information readily available in our files,
the evidence suggests that largetooth sawfish have undergone severe
range contractions and local extirpations in their distribution at both
the northern and southern extremes of their range; have experienced
severe population declines in areas where they still exist; and are
subject to ongoing threats of overharvest, habitat loss and
degradation, and inadequate management and/or regulation in many parts
of their range. Therefore, we determine that the petition presents
substantial scientific or commercial
[[Page 37674]]
information indicating the petitioned action may be warranted with
respect to the species throughout its entire range. In accordance with
section 4(b)(3)(B) of the ESA and NMFS' implementing regulations (50
CFR 424.14(b)(2)), we will commence a review of the status of the
species and make a determination within 12 months of receiving the
petition (i.e., April 24, 2010) as to whether the petitioned action is
warranted. If warranted, we will publish a proposed rule and solicit
public comments before developing and publishing a final rule.
Information Solicited
To ensure the status review is based on the best available
scientific and commercial data, we are soliciting information on
whether largetooth sawfish are endangered or threatened. Specifically,
we are soliciting information in the following areas: (1) historical
and current distribution and abundance of this species throughout its
range; (2) historical and current population trends; (3) information on
life history in marine environments, (4) curio, meat, ``shark'' fin or
other trade data; (5) information related to taxonomy of the species
and closely related forms (e.g., P. microdon); (6) information on any
current or planned activities that may adversely impact the species;
(7) ongoing efforts to protect and restore the species and its habitat;
and (8) information identifying a North American Distinct Population
Segment. We request that all information be accompanied by: (1)
supporting documentation such as maps, bibliographic references, or
reprints of pertinent publications; and (2) the submitter's name,
address, and any association, institution, or business that the person
represents.
Critical Habitat
The petitioner also requested that we designate critical habitat
concurrently with listing the species as threatened or endangered.
Under our regulations for designating critical habitat, we are only
able to designate critical habitat within areas of U.S. jurisdiction
(50 CFR 424.12). Critical habitat is defined in the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.) as:
``(i) the specific areas within the geographical area currently
occupied by the species, at the time it is listed... on which are found
those physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation
of the species and (II) which may require special management
considerations or protection; and (ii) specific areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed upon
a determination by the Secretary that such areas are essential for the
conservation of the species.''
Our implementing regulations (50 CFR 424.12) describe those
essential physical and biological features to include: (1) space for
individual and population growth, and normal behavior; (2) food, water,
air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological
requirements; (3) cover or shelter; (4) sites for breeding,
reproduction, rearing of offspring; and (5) habitats that are protected
from disturbance or are representative of the historic geographical and
ecological distribution of a species. We are required to focus on the
primary constituent elements (PCEs) which best represent the principal
biological or physical features. PCEs may include: spawning sites,
feeding sites, water quality and quantity. Our implementing regulations
(50 CFR 424.02) define ``special management considerations or
protection'' as ``any methods or procedures useful in protecting
physical and biological features of the environment for the
conservation of listed species.''
Section 4(b)(2) of the ESA requires us to designate critical
habitat for listed species based on the best scientific data available
and after taking into consideration the economic impact, the impact on
national security, and any other relevant impact, of specifying any
particular area as critical habitat. The Secretary may exclude any
particular area from critical habitat if he determines that the
benefits of such exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying such
area as part of the critical habitat, unless he determines that the
failure to designate such area as critical habitat will result in the
extinction of the species concerned.
To ensure that our review of critical habitat is complete and based
on the best available data, we solicit information and comments on
whether the petitioned area in U.S. waters including the Exclusive
Economic Zone, or some subset thereof, qualifies as critical habitat.
Areas that include the physical and biological features essential to
the conservation of the species and that may require special management
considerations or protection should be identified. Essential features
include, but are not limited to, space for individual growth and for
normal behavior, food, water, air, light, minerals, or other
nutritional or physiological requirements, cover or shelter, sites for
reproduction and development of offspring, and habitats that are
protected from disturbance or are representative of the historical,
geographical, and ecological distributions of the species (50 CFR
424.12).
Peer Review
On July 1, 1994, NMFS, jointly with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, published a series of policies regarding listings under the
ESA, including a policy for peer review of scientific data (59 FR
34270). The intent of the peer review policy is to ensure listings are
based on the best scientific and commercial data available. We are
soliciting the names of recognized experts in the field who could take
part in the peer review process for this status review.
Independent peer reviewers will be selected from the academic and
scientific community, tribal and other Native American groups, Federal
and state agencies, the private sector, and public interest groups.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.
Dated: July 24, 2009.
James W. Balsiger,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-18079 Filed 7-28-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S