64094 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules

information could also permit the intended to impede the investigative DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE record subject to obtain valuable insight activity or avoid apprehension. National Oceanic and Atmospheric concerning the information obtained (6) From subsection (e)(4)(I), to the Administration during any investigation and to take extent that this subsection is interpreted measures to impede the investigation, to require more detail regarding the e.g., destroy evidence or flee the area to 50 CFR Part 223 record sources in this system than has avoid the investigation. [Docket No. 150211138–6789–01] (2) From subsection (c)(4) notification been published in the Federal Register. requirements because this system is Should the subsection be so interpreted, RIN 0648–XD771 exempt from the access and amendment exemption from this provision is provisions of subsection (d) as well as necessary to protect the sources of law Endangered and Threatened Wildlife the accounting of disclosures provision enforcement and intelligence and Plants; Proposed Rule To List Two of subsection (c)(3). The FBI takes information and to protect the privacy Guitarfishes as Threatened seriously its obligation to maintain and safety of witnesses and informants AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries accurate records despite its assertion of and others who provide information to Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and this exemption, and to the extent it, in the FBI. Further, greater specificity of Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), its sole discretion, agrees to permit properly classified records could Commerce. amendment or correction of FBI records, compromise national security. ACTION: it will share that information in Proposed rule; 12-month (7) From subsection (e)(5) because in appropriate cases. petition finding; request for comments. the collection of information for (3) From subsection (d)(1), (2), (3) and SUMMARY: We, NMFS, have completed a (4), (e)(4)(G) and (H), (e)(8), (f) and (g) authorized law enforcement and intelligence purposes, including efforts comprehensive status review under the because these provisions concern Endangered Species Act (ESA) for the individual access to and amendment of to detect, deter, and/or mitigate insider threats to national security or to the FBI common guitarfish (Rhinobatos law enforcement, intelligence and rhinobatos) and the blackchin guitarfish and its personnel, facilities, resources, counterintelligence, and (Rhinobatos cemiculus). We have and activities, due to the nature of counterterrorism records and determined that, based on the best compliance could alert the subject of an investigations and intelligence scientific and commercial data authorized law enforcement or collection, the FBI often collects available, and after taking into account intelligence activity about that information that may not be efforts being made to protect these particular activity and the interest of the immediately shown to be accurate, species, both species meet the definition FBI and/or other law enforcement or relevant, timely, and complete, although of a threatened species under the ESA. intelligence agencies. Providing access the FBI takes reasonable steps to collect Therefore, we propose to list both could compromise information only the information necessary to species as threatened species under the classified to protect national security; support its mission and investigations. ESA. We are not proposing to designate disclose information which would Additionally, the information may aid critical habitat for either of the species constitute an unwarranted invasion of in establishing patterns of activity and proposed for listing because the another’s personal privacy; reveal a providing criminal or intelligence leads. geographical areas occupied by these sensitive investigative or intelligence It could impede investigative progress if species are entirely outside U.S. technique; provide information that jurisdiction. We are soliciting comments would allow a subject to avoid detection it were necessary to assure relevance, on our proposal to list these two foreign or apprehension; or constitute a accuracy, timeliness and completeness marine guitarfish species. potential danger to the health or safety of all information obtained during the of law enforcement personnel, scope of an investigation. Further, some DATES: Comments on this proposed rule confidential sources, or witnesses. of the records in this system may come must be received by November 18, 2016. (4) From subsection (e)(1) because it from other domestic or foreign Public hearing requests must be made is not always possible to know in government entities, or private entities, by November 3, 2016. advance what information is relevant and it would not be administratively ADDRESSES: You may submit comments and necessary for law enforcement and feasible for the FBI to vouch for the on this document, identified by NOAA– intelligence purposes. The relevance compliance of these agencies with this NMFS–2016–0082, by either of the and utility of certain information that provision. following methods: may have a nexus to insider threats to • Electronic Submissions: Submit all national security or to the FBI may not Dated: September 2, 2016. electronic public comments via the always be fully evident until and unless Erika Brown Lee, Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to it is vetted and matched with other Chief Privacy and Civil Liberties Officer, http://www.regulations.gov/ sources of information that are Department of Justice. #!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2016- necessarily and lawfully maintained by [FR Doc. 2016–22412 Filed 9–16–16; 8:45 am] 0082. Click the ‘‘Comment Now’’ icon, the FBI. BILLING CODE 4410–02–P complete the required fields, and enter (5) From subsections (e)(2) and (3) or attach your comments. because application of these provisions • Mail: Submit written comments to could present a serious impediment to Brendan Newell, NMFS Office of efforts to detect, deter and/or mitigate Protected Resources (F/PR3), 1315 East- insider threats to national security or to West Highway, Silver Spring, MD the FBI and its personnel, facilities, 20910, USA. resources, and activities. Application of Instructions: You must submit these provisions would put the subject comments by one of the above methods of an investigation on notice of the to ensure that we receive, document, investigation and allow the subject an and consider them. Comments sent by opportunity to engage in conduct any other method, to any other address

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Sep 16, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM 19SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules 64095

or individual, or received after the end or wildlife which interbreeds when consideration. Because a species may be of the comment period, may not be mature.’’ susceptible to a variety of threats for considered. All comments received are On February 7, 1996, NMFS and the which different data are available, or a part of the public record and will U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS; which operate across different time generally be posted for public viewing together, the Services) adopted a policy scales, the foreseeable future is not on http://www.regulations.gov without describing what constitutes a distinct necessarily reducible to a particular change. All personal identifying population segment (DPS) of a number of years. information (e.g., name, address, etc.), taxonomic species (the DPS Policy; 61 Section 4(a)(1) of the ESA requires us confidential business information, or FR 4722). The DPS Policy identified two to determine whether any species is otherwise sensitive information elements that must be considered when endangered or threatened due to any of submitted voluntarily by the sender will identifying a DPS: (1) The discreteness the following factors: the present or be publicly accessible. We will accept of the population segment in relation to threatened destruction, modification, or anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/A’’ in the remainder of the species (or curtailment of its habitat or range; the required fields if you wish to remain subspecies) to which it belongs; and (2) overutilization for commercial, anonymous). You can find the petition, the significance of the population recreational, scientific, or educational status review report, Federal Register segment to the remainder of the species purposes; disease or predation; the notices, and the list of references (or subspecies) to which it belongs. As inadequacy of existing regulatory electronically on our Web site at http:// stated in the DPS Policy, Congress mechanisms; or other natural or www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/ expressed its expectation that the manmade factors affecting its continued petition81.htm. Services would exercise authority with existence. Under section (4)(b)(1)(A), we regard to DPSs sparingly and only when are also required to make listing FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brendan Newell, NMFS, Office of the biological evidence indicates such determinations based solely on the best action is warranted. Based on the scientific and commercial data Protected Resources (OPR), Telephone: scientific information available, we available, after conducting a review of (301) 427–7710 or Marta Nammack, determined that the common guitarfish the species’ status and after taking into NMFS, (OPR), Telephone: (301) 427– (Rhinobatos rhinobatos) and blackchin account efforts being made by any state 8469. guitarfish (Rhinobatos cemiculus) are or foreign nation to protect the species. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ‘‘species’’ under the ESA. There is Status Review Background nothing in the scientific literature indicating that either of these species The status review for the two On July 15, 2013, we received a should be further divided into guitarfishes addressed in this finding petition from WildEarth Guardians to subspecies or DPSs. was conducted by a NMFS biologist in list 81 marine species as threatened or Section 3 of the ESA defines an the Office of Protected Resources. endangered under the ESA. This endangered species as ‘‘any species Henceforth, the status review report for petition included species from many which is in danger of extinction these guitarfishes will be referenced in different taxonomic groups, and we throughout all or a significant portion of this preamble as ‘‘Newell (2016)’’, and prepared our 90-day findings in batches its range’’ and a threatened species as is available at http:// by taxonomic group. We found that the one ‘‘which is likely to become an www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/ petitioned actions may be warranted for endangered species within the petition81.htm and on the respective 27 of the 81 species and announced the foreseeable future throughout all or a species pages found on the Office of initiation of status reviews for each of significant portion of its range.’’ We Protected Resources Web site (http:// the 27 species (78 FR 63941, October 25, interpret an ‘‘endangered species’’ to be www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/ 2013; 78 FR 66675, November 6, 2013; one that is presently in danger of index.htm). In order to complete the 78 FR 69376, November 19, 2013; 79 FR extinction. A ‘‘threatened species,’’ on status review, information was 9880, February 21, 2014; and 79 FR the other hand, is not presently in compiled on each species’ biology, 10104, February 24, 2014). This danger of extinction, but is likely to ecology, life history, threats, and document addresses the findings for 2 of become so in the foreseeable future (that conservation status from information those 27 species: Common guitarfish is, at a later time). In other words, the contained in the petition, our files, a (Rhinobatos rhinobatos) and blackchin primary statutory difference between a comprehensive literature search, and guitarfish (Rhinobatos cemiculus). The threatened and endangered species is consultation with experts. We also status of, and relevant Federal Register the timing of when a species may be in considered information submitted by notices for, the other 25 species can be danger of extinction, either presently the public in response to our petition found on our Web site at http:// (endangered) or in the foreseeable future finding. www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/ (threatened). Newell (2016) provided an evaluation petition81.htm. When we consider whether a species of the factors specified by section We are responsible for determining might qualify as threatened under the 4(a)(1)(A)–(E) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. whether species are threatened or ESA, we must consider the meaning of 1533(a)(1)(A)–(E)) (Summary of Factors endangered under the ESA (16 U.S.C. the term ‘‘foreseeable future.’’ It is Affecting the Two Guitarfish Species), as 1531 et seq.). To make this appropriate to interpret ‘‘foreseeable well as the species’ demographic risks, determination, we consider first future’’ as the horizon over which such as low productivity, and then whether a group of organisms predictions about the conservation synthesized this information to estimate constitutes a ‘‘species’’ under the ESA, status of the species can be reasonably the extinction risk of the species then whether the status of the species relied upon. The foreseeable future (Extinction Risk). For the complete qualifies it for listing as either considers the life history of the species, threats assessment, demographic risks threatened or endangered. Section 3 of habitat characteristics, availability of analysis, and risk of extinction analysis, the ESA defines a ‘‘species’’ to include data, particular threats, ability to predict see Newell (2016). ‘‘any subspecies of fish or wildlife or threats, and the reliability to forecast the The demographic risk analysis, plants, and any distinct population effects of these threats and future events mentioned above, is an assessment of segment of any species of vertebrate fish on the status of the species under the manifestation of past threats that

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Sep 16, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM 19SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 64096 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules

have contributed to the species’ current ‘‘High Risk’’ below). A species may be wedge-shaped snout. Guitarfishes have status and informs the consideration of at moderate risk of extinction due to a stouter tail than all other batoids the biological response of the species to projected threats or declining trends in except sawfishes and torpedo rays present and future threats. For this abundance, productivity, spatial (Bigelow & Schroeder 1953; Serena analysis, Newell (2016) considered the structure, or diversity. ‘‘High Risk’’—a 2005). demographic viability factors developed species with a high risk of extinction is Rhinobatos rhinobatos and by McElhany et al., (2000). The at or near a level of abundance, Rhinobatos cemiculus are sympatric approach of considering demographic productivity, spatial structure, and/or species with relatively wide, risk factors to help frame the diversity that places its continued overlapping ranges in the subtropical consideration of extinction risk has been persistence in question. The waters of the eastern Atlantic and used in many of our status reviews, demographics of a species at such a high Mediterranean. In the Atlantic both including for Pacific salmonids, Pacific level of risk may be highly uncertain species range from Northern Portugal hake, walleye pollock, Pacific cod, and strongly influenced by stochastic or south to Angola, with R. rhinobatos Puget Sound rockfishes, Pacific herring, depensatory processes. (Stochastic extending slightly farther north into the scalloped and great hammerhead sharks, processes are random processes Bay of Biscay in south Atlantic France. and black abalone (see http:// evolving with time; depensatory Both species’ historical ranges include www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/ for processes are density-dependent all Mediterranean countries with the links to these reviews). In this approach, processes where a decrease in a species’ exception of Malta and France, which the collective condition of individual population leads to reduced are only in the range of R. rhinobatos. populations is considered at the species reproductive success, such as by an Both species are primarily found in level according to four demographic increase in the rate of predation on eggs coastal and estuarine, sandy or muddy viability factors: abundance; growth or young, or through the reduced bottomed habitat from very shallow rate/productivity; spatial structure/ likelihood of finding a mate.) Similarly, water to depths of approximately 100 m connectivity; and diversity. These a species may be at high risk of (Corsini-Foka 2009; Melendez & Macias viability factors reflect concepts that are extinction if it faces clear and present 2007; Serena 2005). Both species feed well-founded in conservation biology, threats (e.g., confinement to a small on a variety of macrobenthic organisms, and that individually and collectively geographic area; imminent destruction, including crustaceans, fishes, and provide strong indicators of extinction modification, or curtailment of its mollusks (Basusta et al.,, 2007; Enajjar risk. habitat; or disease epidemic) that are et al.,, 2007; Lteif 2015; Patokina & likely to create present and substantial Litvinov 2005). In conducting the threats assessment, demographic risks. In terms of reproduction, Rhinobatos Newell (2016) identified and The draft status review report (Newell rhinobatos and Rhinobatos cemiculus summarized the section 4(a)(1) factors (2016)) was submitted to independent are aplacental viviparous species (giving that are currently operating on the peer reviewers; comments and birth to live, free swimming young with species and their likely impact on the information received from peer embryo nutrition coming from a yolk biological status of the species. Newell reviewers were addressed and sac rather than a placental connection). (2016) also looked for future threats incorporated as appropriate before Both species aggregate seasonally to (where the impact on the species has yet finalizing the draft report. The status reproduce, with females visiting to be manifested), and considered the review report is available on our Web protected shallow waters to give birth reliability of forecasting the effects of site (see ADDRESSES section) and the (Capape & Zaouali 1994; Demirhan et these threats and future events on the peer review report is available at http:// al., 2010; Echwikhi et al., 2013; Ismen status of these species. Using the www.cio.noaa.gov/services_programs/ et al., 2007). As with many other findings from the demographic risk prplans/PRsummaries.html. Below we elasmobranchs, females mature later analysis and threats assessment, Newell summarize information from the report and at greater sizes than males, females (2016) evaluated the overall extinction and our analysis of the status of the two reach greater total length, and female risk of the species. Because species- guitarfish species. Further details can be fecundity increases with total length specific information (such as current found in Newell (2016). (TL) (Capape & Zaouali 1994; Corte´s abundance) is sparse, qualitative 2000; Demirhan et al., 2010; Enajjar et ‘‘reference levels’’ of risk were used to Species Descriptions al., 2008; Ismen et al., 2007). Based on describe extinction risk. The definitions Guitarfishes are cartilaginous fishes the limited available information, both of the qualitative ‘‘reference levels’’ of (class Chondrichthyes), in the subclass species seem to be relatively fast extinction risk were as follows: ‘‘Low Elasmobranchii (which includes all growing compared to most Risk’’—a species is at low risk of cartilaginous fishes except chimaeras). elasmobranch species (Bas¸usta et al., extinction if it is not at a moderate or They are part of the super order 2008; Enajjar et al., 2012)_ENREF_53. high level of extinction risk (see Batoidea, and members of the order Additional species-specific descriptions ‘‘Moderate risk’’ and ‘‘High risk’’ Rajiformes, which also includes skates, are provided below. below). A species may be at low risk of sawfishes, electric rays, and rays. Common guitarfish (Rhinobatos extinction if it is not facing threats that Rajiformes are characterized by a rhinobatos) are khaki-brown colored on result in declining trends in abundance, dorsoventrally depressed body with the their dorsal surface with a white productivity, spatial structure, or anterior edge of the pectoral fin attached underside (Melendez & Macias 2007). R. diversity. A species at low risk of to the side of the head (Serena 2005). rhinobatos have rostral ridges that are extinction is likely to show stable or Guitarfishes are members of the family widely separated over their entire length increasing trends in abundance and Rhinobatidae, which have a moderately with the anterior of their nasal lobe productivity with connected, diverse depressed, elongated, shark-like body level with the inner corner of their populations. ‘‘Moderate Risk’’—a form, with pectoral fins barely enlarged nostril. They have a wide posterior species is at moderate risk of extinction (compared to other batoids except for nasal flap and spiracles with two if it is on a trajectory that puts it at a sawfish), a subtriangular disk, two sub- moderately developed folds, with the high level of extinction risk in the equal, well-developed, and well- outer fold more prominent. They have foreseeable future (see description of separated dorsal fins, and an elongated, no dorsal or anal spines and relatively

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Sep 16, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM 19SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules 64097

small thorns present around the inner that males and females in the Gulf of authors, some species, including margin of their orbits, between their Gabe´s, Tunisia, matured around 3 and 5 guitarfishes, which are now rare or spiracles, on their shoulders and along years of age, respectively, and that extirpated in other parts of the the midline of their discs and tails individuals of the species can live for at Mediterranean, are still common in (Melendez & Macias 2007). There are least 14 years. No other age data were Libyan waters. In neighboring Egypt, R. regional variations in the maximum size found for this species. For a more rhinobatos was common in commercial and size at maturity of R. rhinobatos. TL detailed discussion of size, age, and fishery catches in 1990 (Abdel-Aziz et ranges from 22–185 cm with the reproduction, see Newell (2016). al., 1993). Over the last 10 years, heaviest specimen recorded reaching guitarfishes and other elasmobranchs Historical and Current Distribution and 26.6 kg (Edelist 2014; Ismen et al., have been increasingly exploited by Population Abundance 2007). The best available information Egyptian fishers as desirable bycatch estimated that 50 percent of females and Rhinobatos rhinobatos species, and recent declines in landings males reached maturity between 79–87 Historically the common guitarfish indicate that these populations are cm TL and 68–78 cm TL, respectively was known on all shores of the currently being overexploited (A. (Abdel-Aziz et al., 1993; Demirhan et Mediterranean as well as the coastal Marbourk, NOS, pers. comm. to B. al., 2010; Enajjar et al., 2008), and that eastern Atlantic from the Bay of Biscay Newell, NMFS, 21 July, 2016). gestation lasts 9–12 months with (France) to Angola (Melendez & Macias North of Egypt, R. rhinobatos was females giving birth to 1–14 pups in the 2007). Throughout its historical considered common in Israeli waters as late summer or early fall (see Newell Mediterranean range this species has of 2006, with the largest TL for the (2016)). The maximum age recorded was likely always been rare in most of the species recorded from a female 24 years old (Bas¸usta et al., 2008) and northwestern Mediterranean, and more specimen in the area (Edelist 2014; R. rhinobatos likely matures between 2 common in the Levantine Sea and along Golani 2006). Lernau and Golani (2004) and 4 years old (Bas¸usta et al., 2008; the southern shore of the Mediterranean state, ‘‘swarms of Rhinobatos rhinobatos Demirhan et al., 2010). For a more from southern Tunisia to Egypt (Abdel- are captured with purse seines.’’ detailed discussion of size, age, and Aziz et al., 1993; Capape´ et al., 2004; Although this statement is not reproduction see Newell (2016). C¸ek et al., 2009; Edelist 2014; Lteif 2015; connected to a specific fishing area it Blackchin guitarfish (Rhinobatos Saad et al., 2006). Presently R. appears the authors are either cemiculus) have a brown dorsal surface rhinobatos has been extirpated from the discussing fishing along the Israeli coast with a white underside and usually a northwestern Mediterranean, including or in the nearby Bardawil Lagoon on the blackish blotch on the snout, especially the coasts of Spain and France, as well Egyptian Sinai Peninsula. R. rhinobatos in juveniles. Their rostral ridges are as the Tyrrhenian, Ligurian, and is the most commonly observed narrowly separated and nearly join in Adriatic Seas (Bertrand et al., 2000; elasmobranch in Lebanese fisheries the front. Their anterior nasal lobes Capape´ et al., 2006; Medits 2016a; (Lteif 2015). In a study of elasmobranch extend little if any and their posterior Notarbartolo di Sciara et al., 2007b). In exploitation in Syria in the early 2000s, nasal flaps are narrow. Their spiracle this now curtailed portion of its range, R. rhinobatos was characterized as a has two well-developed folds of about up until the early 20th century, R. ‘‘moderate economically important the same size. They have no anal or rhinobatos was likely only common in species either for being caught in little dorsal spine and have thorns present the waters around Sicily (Doderlein quantities with high efforts in fishing, or around the inner margin of their orbits, 1884; Psomadakis et al., 2009) and the for their little demand for human between their spiracles, on their Balearic Islands of Spain (Notarbartolo consumption. Or maybe for both shoulders, and along the midline of di Sciara et al., 2007b). reasons’’ (Saad et al., 2006). By their disc and tail (Melendez & Macias R. rhinobatos is present in all comparison, R. cemiculus was 2007). There are regional variations in Tunisian waters, although less common characterized as a ‘‘very economically the maximum TL and size at maturity. than R. cemiculus. It is more abundant important species being caught in TL ranges from 32–245 cm with the in the southeastern area around the Gulf plentiful quantities and highly heaviest specimen recorded reaching 26 of Gabe`s and the Bahiret el Biban, consumable’’ (Saad et al., 2006). No kg, although the maximum weight is which are areas used by this species for clarification was given as to whether likely much higher because the 26 kg reproduction (Capape´ et al., 2004; there is low catch with high effort, or specimen was only 202 cm TL (Capape Echwikhi et al., 2013; Echwikhi et al., low demand. Regardless, the fact that R. & Zaouali 1994; Seck et al., 2004). Based 2012; Enajjar et al., 2008). In the rhinobatos was characterized as being of on the best available information, 50 Northern and Southern Lagoons near ‘‘moderate’’ economic importance percent of females and males reached the City of Tunis in the Gulf of Tunis indicates this fish is more than an maturity between 138–153 cm TL and on the northwest coast of Tunisia, R. occasional visitor to Syrian waters. In 112–138 cm TL, respectively (Enajjar et rhinobatos has become common since the Turkish portion of the Levantine Sea al., 2012; Valadou et al., 2006). The 2004, in response to environmental (off southeastern Turkey), R. rhinobatos reported litter size varies greatly, but the restoration of the lagoons (Mejri et al., is common in fisheries bycatch, reported range is 2–24 pups per litter 2004). Little information was available including in ˙Iskenderun Bay, where, as with small litters typical (Capape & for the status of R. rhinobatos in Libyan of 2012, it was less common than R. Zaouali 1994; Seck et al., 2004; Valadou waters beyond that they are targeted by cemiculus (Bas¸usta et al., 2012; C¸ek et et al., 2006). R. cemiculus is more fishers (Se´ret & Serena 2002). In a 2005 al., 2009). West of I˙skenderun Bay, prolific than R. rhinobatos, likely report, the Regional Activity Centre for based on samples collected in the early because it reaches a greater size than R. Specially Protected Areas (RAC/SPA) 1980s, R. rhinobatos is also common in rhinobatos (Capape & Zaouali 1994). proposed a research program that would Mersin Bay (Gu¨ cu¨ & Bingel 1994), and Gestation lasts between 5–12 months focus on eight cartilaginous fishes of it was collected in a 2002–2003 survey with parturition occurring in the later Libya, including R. rhinobatos, because of the Karatas¸ Coasts (located between summer and early fall (Capape & of their commercial importance and I˙skenderun Bay and Mersin Bay). R. Zaouali 1994; Seck et al., 2004; Valadou interest in their conservation (RAC/SPA rhinobatos has also been recorded in the et al., 2006). Enajjar et al., (2012) found 2005). According to the proposal Gulf of Antalya, west of Mersin Bay (C.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Sep 16, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM 19SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 64098 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules

Mancusi, ARPAT, pers. comm. to B. al., 2007a; Notarbartolo di Sciara et al., Rhinobatos cemiculus Newell, NMFS, 23 March, 2016). 2007b). Historically, the blackchin guitarfish Individuals of all life history stages, Rhinobatos rhinobatos occurs in the had a distribution similar to, but slightly including large quantities of pregnant waters of Guinea-Bissau off the more restricted than, R. rhinobatos, with ´ females, have been captured in the Gulf mainland and around the Bijagos its range listed through most of the Archipelago where it is targeted by of Gabe`s and the Bahiret el Biban coastal Mediterranean, and in the fishers (Cross 2015; Fowler & Cavanagh (Capape´ et al., 2004), Alexandria, Egypt eastern Atlantic from Portugal to Angola 2005; Kasisi 2004; Tous et al., 1998). In (Abdel-Aziz et al., 1993), and in (Melendez & Macias 2007). In the ˙ the late 1990s, rapid and substantial Iskenderun Bay (C¸ek et al., 2009). In the Mediterranean, there are no records of declines of R. rhinobatos were reported Aegean Sea, which is bound by the east this species off the coast of France in the Bijago´s Archipelago, as coast of Turkey and the west coast of (Capape´ et al., 2006), and there are specialized and sophisticated fishing Greece, R. rhinobatos is rare (Corsini- doubts about whether R. cemiculus teams targeting elasmobranchs for their Foka 2009). It was present on a checklist occurred in the Adriatic Sea (Akyol & fins migrated into the area, although from 1969 (Bilecenog˘lu et al., 2014), Capape´ 2014). Throughout its historical previously the area had seen almost no with one individual reported in 2008 Mediterranean range, this species has and another in the 1970s (Corsini-Foka elasmobranch fishing (Tous et al., 1998). In Guinea it is likely that this species is likely always been rare in most of the 2009), while no occurrences were northwestern Mediterranean, and more detected during a 2006–2007 survey of experiencing similar declines to those in Guinea-Bissau, Senegal, and Gambia (M. common in the Levantine Sea and along Saroz Bay in the northeastern Aegean the southern shore of the Mediterranean (Keskin et al., 2011). Ducrocq, Parcs Gabon, pers. comm. to J. Shultz, NMFS, 21 June, 2016). In Sierra from southern Tunisia to Egypt (Rafrafi- In the Atlantic, north of the strait of Nouira et al., 2015). Presently all Gibraltar, the only records we found of Leone, this species is one of the most heavily exploited elasmobranchs (Diop guitarfishes have been extirpated from this species were from checklists and the northwestern Mediterranean museum records from Spain and & Dossa 2011). It was recorded from 2008–2010 in a survey by the Sierra including the coast of Spain, as well as Portugal (Ban˜ o´n et al., 2010; Carneiro et from the Tyrrhenian, Ligurian, and al., 2014) and it not is reported in the Leone Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources as well as in industrial and Adriatic Seas (Bertrand et al., 2000; International Council for the Capape´ et al., 2006; Medits 2016a; Exploration of the Sea (ICES) DATRAS artisanal fishery data (Sierra Leone Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Notarbartolo di Sciara et al., 2007b). In data base, which is a collection of 45 Resources, pers. comm. to M. Miller, this now curtailed portion of its range, years’ worth of survey data including NMFS, 11 April, 2016). Rhinobatos up until the early 20th century, R. data collected off the Atlantic coasts of rhinobatos is listed in an updated cemiculus may have been common in France, Spain, and Portugal (ICES 2016), checklist of the marine fishes of Cape the waters around Sicily (Doderlein indicating that they are likely Verde, an island nation located about 1884; Psomadakis et al., 2009), and historically rare North of the Strait of 600 km west of Dakar, Senegal. frequently occurred around the Balearic Gibraltar. However, the authors of the checklist Islands of Spain (Notarbartolo di Sciara Along the Atlantic coast of Africa, this considered the record of R. rhinobatos et al., 2007b). species is found from Morocco to invalid, stating that they did not know Rhinobatos cemiculus commonly Angola. It is likely that this species is of any records of this species in the occur in fishery landings, both as a rare in Moroccan waters (Gulyugin et Cape Verde Islands (Wirtz et al., 2013). target species and as bycatch from the al., 2006; Serghini et al., 2008). In West Little information about the status of waters of the east coast of Tunisia, the Africa, R. rhinobatos has been one of the R. rhinobatos was available throughout north coast of Africa, and the eastern most common and widely distributed the rest of this species’ Atlantic range. Mediterranean from Israel to elasmobranchs in Mauritania, Gambia, From January 2009 to December 2010, southeastern Turkey (Capape & Zaouali Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Senegal, and R. rhinobatos was recorded during a 1994; Lteif 2015; Saad et al., 2006). It is Sierra Leone, but has become scarce study of landings by artisanal fishers fished throughout all of Tunisian throughout most of this portion of its based in the Ghanaian villages of waters. It is considered rare along the range in recent decades (Diop & Dossa Ahwaim and Elmina (Nunoo & Asiedu north coast of Tunisa, although it may 2011; M. Ducrocq, Parcs Gabon, pers. 2013). Rhinobatos rhinobatos is present become more common in this area due comm. to J. Shultz, NMFS, 21 June, in Gabon, but is likely less abundant to warming seas (Rafrafi-Nouira et al., 2016). In Mauritania, fishing pressure than R. cemiculus (G. De Bruyne, 2015) and environmental restoration has driven declines in the average size Wildlife Conservation Society, (Mejri et al., 2004). It has always been of guitarfishes landed in the Banc Mayumba, pers. comm. to B. Newell, abundant in southeastern Tunisia d’Arguin National Park from 1998 to NMFS, 26 June, 2016). Rhinobatos around the Gulf of Gabe`s and the 2007 (Diop & Dossa 2011). Restrictions rhinobatos was not caught from March Bahiret el Biban, where it is more on elasmobranch fishing in the park 2013 to May 2015 during a study of abundant than R. rhinobatos, and is have allowed guitarfishes to recover artisanal fisheries around Mayumba, known to use these areas during locally but they are still exploited Gabon (De Bruyne 2015). No reproduction, including for parturition throughout the rest of Mauritanian information on this species was (Capape´ et al., 2004; Echwikhi et al., waters (M. Ducrocq, Parcs Gabon, pers. available from Ghana and Gabon prior 2013; Echwikhi et al., 2012; Enajjar et comm. to J. Shultz, NMFS, 21 June, to these periods of study. We found no al., 2008). 2016). In Senegal, guitarfishes are data for R. rhinobatos in the following As with R. rhinobatos, little heavily targeted and this fishing countries, which have coastline in this information is available on the status of pressure has caused local declines in species’ range: Liberia, Cote d’Ivoire, R. cemiculus in Libyan waters beyond both species, with substantial declines Togo, Benin, Nigeria, Cameroon, that they are targeted by fishers (Se´ret & reported over the period of 1990 to 2005 Equatorial Guinea, Sa˜o Tome´ and Serena 2002), and that they are still (Diop & Dossa 2011; M. Ducrocq, Parcs Prı´ncipe, Republic of the Congo, common, relative to their occurrence in Gabon, pers. comm. to J. Shultz, NMFS, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and other parts of the Mediterranean (RAC/ 21 June, 2016; Notarbartolo di Sciara et Angola. SPA 2005). Guitarfishes are consumed

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Sep 16, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM 19SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules 64099

in Libya, and in a 2005 proposal for a off Portugal. This species was not Shultz, NMFS, 21 June, 2016). In Sierra research program focused on the reported in the DATRAS data base (ICES Leone, this species is one of the most cartilaginous fishes of Libya, R. 2016), indicating that they have heavily exploited elasmobranchs (Diop cemiculus was selected as one of the historically been rare north of the Strait & Dossa 2011). It was recorded from eight priority species for research of Gibraltar. 2008 to 2010 in a survey by the Sierra because of its commercial importance Along the Atlantic coast of Africa, this Leone Ministry of Fisheries and Marine and interest in its conservation (RAC/ species is found from Morocco to Resources as well as in industrial and SPA 2005). Capape´ et al., (1981) Angola. It is likely rare in Moroccan artisanal fishery data (Sierra Leone reported that an Egyptian museum waters (Gulyugin et al., 2006; Serghini Ministry of Fisheries and Marine specimen of R. cemiculus originated et al., 2008). In West Africa, R. Resources, pers. comm. to M. Miller, from the Red Sea, but no other reference cemiculus has been one of most NMFS, 11 April, 2016). Rhinobatos to this species occurring in the Red Sea common and widely distributed cemiculus is likely not common or was reported. We found no information elasmobranchs in Mauritania, Gambia, exploited in the waters of Cape Verde on the distribution or abundance of R. Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Senegal, and (Diop & Dossa 2011). Little information cemiculus in Mediterranean Egyptian Sierra Leone, but it has become scarce about the status of R. cemiculus was waters, but this fish likely occurs in this throughout most of this portion of its available throughout the rest of this area (Capape & Zaouali 1994). range in recent decades (Diop & Dossa species’ Atlantic range. From January North of Egypt, R. cemiculus is 2011; M. Ducrocq, Parcs Gabon, pers. 2009 to December 2010, R. cemiculus considered prevalent in Israeli waters comm. to J. Shultz, NMFS, 21 June, was not recorded in a study of landings (less common than R. rhinobatos), 2016). In Mauritania, fishing pressure by artisanal fishers based in the where it is caught as bycatch by has driven declines in the average size Ghanaian villages of Ahwaim and commercial fishers (Golani 2006). From of guitarfishes landed in the Banc Elmina (Nunoo & Asiedu 2013). December 2012 to October 2014, R. d’Arguin National Park from 1998 to Rhinobatos cemiculus is present cemiculus was the second most 2007, resulting in 95 percent of the throughout Gabonese coastal waters (G. common elasmobranch in Lebanese landed R. cemiculus being smaller than De Bruyne, Wildlife Conservation fisheries catches after R. rhinobatos the size at 50 percent maturity (Diop & Society, Mayumba, pers. comm. to B. (Lteif 2015). In a study of elasmobranch Dossa 2011). Restrictions on Newell, NMFS, 26 June, 2016), and it exploitation in Syria in the early 2000s, elasmobranch fishing in the park have was reported as bycatch from March R. cemiculus was characterized as a allowed guitarfishes to recover locally, 2013 to May 2015 during a study of ‘‘very economically important species but they are still exploited throughout artisanal fisheries around Mayumba, being caught in plentiful quantities and the rest of Mauritanian waters (M. Gabon (De Bruyne 2015). No highly consumable’’ (Saad et al., 2006). Ducrocq, Parcs Gabon, pers. comm. to J. information on this species was North of Syria, R. cemiculus is one of Shultz, NMFS, 21 June, 2016). In available from Ghana and Gabon prior the most common elasmobranchs in Senegal, guitarfishes are heavily to these periods of study. We found no fisheries landings in I˙skenderun Bay, targeted, and this has caused local data for R. cemiculus in the following Turkey (and more abundant than R. declines in both species, with countries with coastline in this species’ rhinobatos) (Bas¸usta et al., 2012; Keskin substantial declines reported over the range: Liberia, Cote d’Ivoire, Togo, et al., 2011). West of ˙Iskenderun Bay, R. period of 1990 to 2005 (Diop & Dossa Benin, Nigeria, Cameroon, Equatorial cemiculus was caught during a 2006 2011; M. Ducrocq, Parcs Gabon, pers. Guinea, Sa˜o Tome´ and Prı´ncipe, study of shrimp trawl bycatch in Mersin comm. to J. Shultz, NMFS, 21 June, Republic of the Congo, Democratic Bay sampling (Duruer et al., 2008). 2016; Notarbartolo di Sciara et al., Republic of the Congo, and Angola. Rhinobatos rhinobatos, but not R. 2007a; Notarbartolo di Sciara et al., cemiculus, was collected in a 2002– 2007b). Summary of Factors Affecting the Two 2003 survey of the Karatas¸ Coasts (C¸ic¸ek Rhinobatos cemiculus occurs in the Guitarfish Species et al., 2014). In the Aegean Sea, R. waters of Guinea-Bissau off the Available information regarding cemiculus is rare (Corsini-Foka 2009; mainland and around the Bijago´s historical, current, and potential threats Filiz et al., 2016). In 2013, two large R. Archipelago, where they are targeted by to these two guitarfishes was thoroughly cemiculus were caught in trawls in fishers (Cross 2015; Fowler & Cavanagh reviewed (see Newell (2016)). We find I˙zmir Bay, Turkey (eastern-central 2005; Kasisi 2004; Tous et al., 1998). that the main threat to these species is Aegean), which the authors considered Rhinobatos cemiculus was one of the overutilization for commercial a range expansion for this species elasmobranch species taken in the purposes. This threat is exacerbated by (Akyol & Capape´ 2014). Further highest numbers in 1989 during both species’ reproductive behavior. expanding the range of this species, in experimental fishing trips (Diop & Dossa Mature adults, including near-term October 2012 one R. cemiculus was 2011). In the late 1990s, rapid and pregnant females, congregate in shallow caught near Bursa, Turkey, in the Sea of substantial declines of R. cemiculus waters to breed and give birth. This Marmara, which connects the Aegean were reported in the Bijago´s behavior is well understood and Sea and the greater Mediterranean to the Archipelago, as specialized and exploited by fishers throughout these Black Sea (C. Mancusi, ARPAT, pers. sophisticated fishing teams targeting species’ ranges and exposes both species comm. to B. Newell, NMFS, 23 March, elasmobranchs for their fins migrated to capture by most demersal fishing gear 2016), although this record has not been into the area, although previously the types (Diop & Dossa 2011; Echwikhi et reported in peer-reviewed literature. area had seen almost no elasmobranch al., 2013; Echwikhi et al., 2012). In the Atlantic, north of the Strait of fishing (Tous et al., 1998). In Guinea, Although information on these species’ Gibraltar, the only records we found of just south of Guinea-Bissau, R. age structure and reproductive capacity this species were from checklists and cemiculus is one of the most important is incomplete, it is likely that their museum records from Spain and fishery species (Diop & Dossa 2011), and reproductive capacity, which may be Portugal (Ban˜ o´n et al., 2010; Carneiro et it is likely that this species is high compared to some other al., 2014), although Rafrafi-Nouira et al., experiencing declines similar to those in elasmobranchs, but low compared to (2015) noted that north of the Strait of Guinea, Senegal, and Gambia (M. most fished species, increases the threat Gibraltar, R. cemiculus was only known Ducrocq, Parcs Gabon, pers. comm. to J. of commercial overutilization to both

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Sep 16, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM 19SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 64100 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules

species. We find that current regulatory Tyrrhenian as late as the 1960s (Cavanagh & Gibson 2007). The semi- mechanisms contribute to the extinction (Doderlein 1884; Fowler & Cavanagh enclosed nature of the Mediterranean risk of both species because they are 2005; Psomadakis et al., 2009). Both increases the effects of pollution and inadequate to protect these species from species were present daily at the habitat degradation on elasmobranch further overutilization. In addition, Palermo (northwest Sicily) fish market species and, as a result, the status of pollution and development that in the late 19th century, where R. elasmobranchs may be worse in the modifies coastal habitat may be a threat rhinobatos was likely more common Mediterranean than in other regions of to these species’ survival, although the than R. cemiculus (Doderlein 1884). The the world (Melendez & Macias 2007; specific effects of these threats are not seasonal influx of R. rhinobatos in Se´ret & Serena 2002). well studied, so there is significant Sicilian waters (which may also apply The Mediterranean Sea receives heavy uncertainty regarding the contribution to R. cemiculus) described by Doderlein metals, pesticides, excess nutrients, and of pollution and coastal development to (1884) is similar to the seasonal other pollutants in the form of run-off the extinction risk of these guitarfishes. congregation of breeding adults reported (Melendez & Macias 2007; Psomadakis We summarize information regarding in other portions of both species’ ranges. et al., 2009). As long-lived predators, these threats and their interactions Additionally, Doderlein (1884) large elasmobranchs are significant below, with species-specific information reported specimens of R. cemiculus that bioaccumulators of pollutants where available, and according to the were 170, 180, and 230 cm TL (the (Melendez & Macias 2007). No factors specified in section 4(a)(1) of the largest being male), indicating that these information is available on the ESA. Available information does not individuals were likely mature. bioaccumulation of pollutants in the indicate that recreational fishing, However, there was no discussion of tissues of Rhinobatos spp. in the disease, predation, or other natural or pregnant females, reproduction, or how Mediterranean Sea, but other manmade factors are operative threats R. rhinobatos and R. cemiculus used elasmobranchs, such as the spiny on these species; therefore, we do not these areas, so there is significant dogfish and the gulper shark, have discuss these factors further in this uncertainty regarding how the loss of shown high concentrations of toxins finding. See Newell (2016) for a full the populations in Sicilian and Balearic (Melendez & Macias 2007). A study of discussion of all ESA section 4(a)(1) waters, as well as the loss of the accumulation of trace metals threat categories. populations in the rest of the cadmium, copper, and zinc in fish along northwestern Mediterranean, could the Mauritanian coast showed low Present or Threatened Destruction, contribute to the extinction risk of either levels of bioaccumulation of these Modification, or Curtailment of Habitat species. metals in the tissues of R. cemiculus or Range Although we found no other evidence compared to bony fishes. It should be Both R. rhinobatos and R. cemiculus of extirpations, the best available noted that three specimens of R. have likely been extirpated from the information indicates significant cemiculus were the only elasmobranchs northwestern Mediterranean. declines of elasmobranchs in West collected in this study, and that, in Rhinobatos rhinobatos has likely been Africa, with R. rhinobatos and R. contrast with the Mediterranean, the extirpated from the Mediterranean cemiculus, which were once common, trace metals in the area of the study are coasts of Spain and France, as well as becoming scarce. This region has thought to be primarily natural in origin the Tyrrhenian, Ligurian, and Adriatic already seen the total or near extirpation (Sidoumou et al., 2005). Seas (Bertrand et al., 2000; Capape´ et of sawfishes and the African wedgefish Pollution, habitat degradation, and al., 2006; Medits 2016a). Rhinobatos (Diop & Dossa 2011; Fowler & Cavanagh development in the coastal zone are also cemiculus may never have occurred in 2005). Given the similarity of these of concern in some African countries the Mediterranean waters of France, but species (relatively large, dorsoventrally within these species’ ranges (Diop & it has been extirpated from the Ligurian flattened, coastal elasmobranchs) to Dossa 2011; Kasisi 2004). While and Tyrrhenian Seas, the Balearic Rhinobatos spp., and the significant pollution is a concern in portions of Islands, and possibly the Adriatic (it is fishing pressure in the area, it is both species’ ranges, the effects of uncertain if it ever occurred there) reasonable to conclude that R. pollution on elasmobranchs and marine (Akyol & Capape´ 2014; Medits 2016a; rhinobatos and R. cemiculus could face food webs are not well understood Notarbartolo di Sciara et al., 2007a). the threat of range curtailment in West (Melendez & Macias 2007). We found no Throughout the area where both species Africa in the foreseeable future. information describing how marine have been extirpated, we found almost Throughout these species’ ranges pollution affects Rhinobatos spp., so the no information on the life-history of there is not much information available contribution of marine pollution to either species, including no mention of on the species-specific threats to R. these species’ extinction risk is the presence of different maturity stages rhinobatos and R. cemiculus habitat. unknown. or pregnant females. Based on the lack However, in the Mediterranean, the The significant demersal trawling that of available information, it appears that decline of elasmobranch diversity and occurred and continues to occur both species were rare throughout much abundance is well documented, and is throughout the Mediterranean range of of the area where they have been attributed in part to habitat destruction the two Rhinobatos species (Edelist extirpated, with the exception of the and pollution (Carlini et al., 2002; 2014; FAO 2016b; Sacchi 2008), and to Balearic Islands and the waters off Cavanagh & Gibson 2007; Melendez & a lesser extent throughout their Atlantic Sicily. Macias 2007; Psomadakis et al., 2009). range (Diop & Dossa 2011), has likely Around the Balearic Islands, both R. Mediterranean ecosystems have been altered seafloor morphology (Puig et al., rhinobatos and R. cemiculus were shaped by human actions for millennia, 2012). In some important reproductive frequently observed until at least the perhaps more so than anywhere else on areas for Rhinobatos spp., such as the early 20th century (Notarbartolo di earth (Bradai et al., 2012). Large species southeast coast of Turkey, intense Sciara et al., 2007a; Notarbartolo di that use coastal habitat, especially those trawling pressure has occurred over Sciara et al., 2007b). In the Tyrrhenian species that use these areas as nursery recent decades in depths less than 70 m Sea, especially around Sicily, areas (e.g., R. rhinobatos and R. (C¸ic¸ek et al., 2014). However, we found Rhinobatos spp. was common in cemiculus), are particularly vulnerable no information that this habitat commercial trawls in the northern in areas of intensive human activity modification has had a direct effect on

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Sep 16, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM 19SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules 64101

the abundance or distribution of these The overutilization of these species is processed for sale to meet local demand. two species. Additionally, trawl fishing not concentrated in one area or fishery. There was a small market for salted and within three nautical miles of the Throughout portions of their ranges, dried elasmobranch meat, based in Mediterranean coast has been they are, or were until recently, targeted Ghana that fueled trade for prohibited since 2012 in order to protect for their fins, meat, or both (G. De elasmobranch bycatch through the SRFC coastal elasmobranch species (FAO Bruyne, Wildlife Conservation Society, region, including for guitarfishes caught 2016e). Mayumba, pers. Comm. to B. Newell, in Senegal and Gambia. However, Some information shows that these NMFS, 26 June, 2016; Diop & Dossa compared to other fishery products, species are sensitive to habitat 2011; Echwikhi et al., 2012). shark meat had very low value, so there modification. Psomadakis et al., (2009) Throughout their ranges, there is great was little economic incentive to develop attributed the extirpation of Rhinobatos diversity in fisheries and in the types of a targeted fishery. Elasmobranch fishing spp. from the northwestern gear used (Diop & Dossa 2011; FAO in the SRFC region began to grow in Mediterranean to the combination of 2016b). As bycatch, R. cemiculus and R. Senegal and Gambia in the 1970s, and centuries of human development and rhinobatos are particularly exposed to then, fueled by the growing demand for fishing pressure. Additionally, both fishing pressure from demersal trawl, shark fins, developed into a robust and species returned to the Northern and gillnet, and longline fisheries (Cavanagh unsustainable shark fishery by the early Southern Tunis Lagoons in Tunisia after & Gibson 2007; Echwikhi et al., 2013; 1980s. To supply the shark fin export large scale restoration of the area (Mejri Echwikhi et al., 2012; FAO 2016d). industry, specialized shark fishing et al., 2004). Prior to restoration, the In West Africa, both species have teams became increasingly common in lagoons had undergone significant been targeted by the shark fin fishery, the SRFC region. These teams of anthropogenic hydrological which has led to both species becoming artisanal fishers migrate into new areas modification and been extremely scarce in this region after a few decades along the west coast of Africa as local polluted from sewage input and of targeted fishing (Diop & Dossa 2011; elasmobranch resources become locally Fowler & Cavanagh 2005). The industrial waste (Noppen 2003). After overexploited (Diop & Dossa 2011; explosion of the Chinese middle class at restoration was completed in 2001, R. Ducrocq & Diop 2006). As the fishery the end of the last century led to a rapid cemiculus was recorded for the first became more migratory, the increase in increase in demand for shark fin soup, time, and R. rhinobatos, which had fishing effort drove the need to a traditional Chinese dish desired for its previously been rare, became common maximize profits, further encouraging alleged tonic properties and, most (Mejri et al., 2004). Based on the the unsustainable, wasteful practice of importantly, because it has served as an available information, it is likely that finning (Diop & Dossa 2011; Tous et al., indicator of high societal status for 1998). In recent decades the demand for pollution and modification of habitat centuries. Shark fins are one of the elasmobranch meat, which was once contribute to the risk of extirpation of highest value seafood products in the considered a low value product, has both species from portions of their world, especially compared to shark grown, which provided additional range. However, because of the lack of meat, which is widely regarded as low economic incentive for growth in the information on the pollution and habitat value (Dulvy et al., 2014; Hareide et al., shark fishery in the SRFC region (Clarke modification throughout their entire 2007b). The value and quality of shark et al., 2007; Dent & Clarke 2015). ranges, and because there is no fins are judged by the thickness and The SRFC subregion’s international information on the direct effects of these length of the ceratotrichia, or fin elasmobranch fishing industry is threats to either species, the degree of needles, and based on this valuation composed of industrial and artisanal the contribution of these factors to the system, guitarfishes have some of the fishing vessels, coastal processing extinction risk of both species is most valuable elasmobranch fins facilities, and a robust trade network. unknown at this time. (Hareide et al., 2007b). Vessels are owned both by local Overutilization for Commercial The majority of the commercial fishermen and foreign investors Purposes harvest information available for these (primarily Spanish). Owners have species in the Atlantic pertains to the financed improvements in fishing The primary threat to both of these FAO Subregional Fisheries Commission technology (e.g. more advanced boats species is commercial overutilization. (SRFC) member countries: Mauritania, and nets) as yields have declined. This threat is difficult to quantify, as Senegal, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea- Guitarfishes are also targeted from fisheries data on elasmobranch landings Bissau, Sierra Leone, and Cape Verde. shore, such as by fishers using beach- throughout both species’ ranges has Outside of the SRFC countries, we also based ‘‘‘guitar lines’’ in Mauritania. In been drastically underreported (Clarke found information on fisheries in the SRFC region, elasmobranch fishing et al., 2006; Diop & Dossa 2011; FAO Morocco, Ghana, and Gabon. We found effort steadily increased since the 1970s, 2016a). When elasmobranch catches no data for either species in the with landings peaking in the early have been reported, it was generally not following countries, which have 2000s, and then showing a significant reported at the species level (Bradai et Atlantic coastline that is considered in and ongoing drop. Throughout the al., 2012; Echwikhi et al., 2012). one or both species’ ranges: France, region (with the exception of Cape However, based on surveys of fishers’ Spain, Portugal, Liberia, Cote d’Ivoire, Verde, an offshore island nation where knowledge, museum records, and Togo, Benin, Nigeria, Cameroon, neither species are abundant), analysis of scientific surveys of the Equatorial Guinea, Sa˜o Tome´ and ‘‘resources seem to be fully exploited, if northern Mediterranean, it appears that Prı´ncipe, Republic of the Congo, not overexploited, for almost all commercial overutilization has been the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and selachian1 species’’ (Diop & Dossa 2011; main driver of both species’ extirpation Angola. Ducrocq & Diop 2006). Because from the northwestern Mediterranean, In the SRFC region, elasmobranchs, Rhinobatos spp. have also been heavily and their decline in abundance in other including R. rhinobatos and R. targeted for their highly valuable fins in regions (Baino et al., 2001; Bertrand et cemiculus, have historically been the SRFC region for decades, this status al., 2000; Capape´ et al., 2006; Carlini et extremely abundant (Diop & Dossa of full or overexploitation likely also al., 2002; Diop & Dossa 2011; Echwikhi 2011). Prior to the 1970s, elasmobranchs et al., 2012; Psomadakis et al., 2009). were primarily taken as bycatch and 1 i.e. sharks.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Sep 16, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM 19SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 64102 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules

applies to guitarfishes in the SRFC guitarfishes, becoming scarce (Diop & declines have occurred or will occur in region (Diop & Dossa 2011; M. Ducrocq, Dossa 2011; M. Ducrocq, Parcs Gabon, Sierra Leone. Parcs Gabon, pers. comm. to J. Shultz, pers. comm. to J. Shultz, NMFS, 21 In Morocco, both species are likely NMFS, 21 June, 2016). June, 2016; Ducrocq & Diop 2006). rare; they are not targeted, but at least In the SRFC region, Diop and Dossa Based on survey and fisher interview R. rhinobatos occurs as demersal trawl (2011) report the importance of one or data collected by the IUCN Guinea- bycatch (Notarbartolo di Sciara et al., both R. rhinobatos and R. cemiculus to Bissau Programme and the National 2007b). We found no information on the local elasmobranch fisheries in all Centro de Investigacao Pesqueira commercial exploitation of Rhinobatos member countries except Gambia and Applicada, both guitarfishes were the spp. in Morocco but, in general, Cape Verde. Fishers throughout this main targets of specialized fishing teams Moroccan fisheries are likely in a state region time their fishing activities with in Guinea-Bissau, and landings had of overexploitation after years of intense the migration patterns and reproductive declined substantially as of the late and extremely underreported fishing behavior of both species, targeting 1990s (Fowler & Cavanagh 2005; Tous et activity by foreign vessels (Belhabib et guitarfishes when they return to the al., 2012b; Jouffre & Inejih 2005). In al., 1998). This fishing pressure also shallows to give birth (Ducrocq & Diop Ghana, where the artisanal fishing drove down the average size of R. 2006). In Mauritania, R. cemiculus is industry is an important and entrenched rhinobatos landed (Notarbartolo di one of the three elasmobranch species part of the economy, the demand for taken in highest numbers (Diop & Dossa Sciara et al., 2007b). According to dried and salted elasmobranch meat was 2011; M. Ducrocq, Parcs Gabon, pers. unpublished data from the Senegalese an early driver of the regional comm. to J. Shultz, NMFS, 21 June, Ministry of Maritime Economy and elasmobranch industry (Diop & Dossa 2016). In Guinea-Bissau and Guinea, R. International Maritime Transportation, 2011; Ducrocq & Diop 2006; Nunoo & cemiculus is listed as one of the few guitarfish landings in Senegal have Asiedu 2013), and R. rhinobatos, but not species listed as ‘‘most important decreased from 4,050 t in 1998 to 821 R. cemiculus, was recently reported in landings’’ and ‘‘taken in the highest t in 2005, with a reduction in the overall artisanal fisheries landings (Nunoo & numbers,’’ respectively. In Sierra Leone, size of specimens landed (Notarbartolo Asiedu 2013). The demersal fisheries ‘‘Rhinobatos spp. and Dasyatis spp. di Sciara et al., 2007a). Diop and Dossa resources of Ghana have been (stingrays) are found in the highest (2011) reported that, because of ‘‘operating under stress during the last numbers, both in terms of weight and overexploitation in the Banc d’Arguin decades’’ (Nunoo & Asiedu 2013). number.’’ In Senegal, both species, National Park in Mauritania, 95 percent Artisanal fishers from Ghana, as well as along with coastal sharks, are the main of landed R. cemiculus were smaller from neighboring Togo and Benin, have fisheries targets (Diop & Dossa 2011). than their size-at-maturity, which was migrated to other countries’ fishing Diatta et al., (2009) also found that likely impacting their reproductive grounds along the west coast of Africa, guitarfishes were some of the primary capacity. A ban on shark fishing in Banc likely because fishing grounds in these elasmobranchs targeted by the robust d’Arguin National Park has allowed fishers’ countries have been artisanal fishery in Senegal, where guitarfishes to recover within the park’s overexploited, overcrowded, or both (De finning is prevalent, and these fishes boundaries, but both species are still Bruyne 2015; Diop & Dossa 2011). were caught when they returned to heavily targeted outside of the park (M. In Gabon, both species are present in shallow waters to breed. Ducrocq, Parcs Gabon, pers. comm. to J. coastal waters, and are targeted by While the shark fin industry has been Shultz, NMFS, 21 June, 2016). artisanal fishers using specialized gear for their meat and to supply the black the major driver for elasmobranch While Diop and Dossa (2011) declines in the SRFC countries, it is not market fin trade, which is connected to characterized one or both species as the sole driver of overutilization of R. the West African fin trade. Both species being important, or landed in high rhinobatos and R. cemiculus. The region are also targeted by recreational fishers numbers, in fisheries in Senegal, has also experienced heavy population (G. De Bruyne, Wildlife Conservation Mauritania, and Guinea-Bissau, the shifts in recent decades, primarily from Society, Mayumba, pers. comm. to B. authors did not state a time period for people migrating to the coast, and this Newell, NMFS, 26 June, 2016). In the has put increased demand on all marine these characterizations. As just area of the village of Mayumba in resources. Additionally, fisheries discussed, significant declines in the southwest Gabon, R. cemiculus was the reporting in the area is inadequate, and overall abundance of guitarfishes have most frequent batoid species captured there is significant bycatch in the been reported in all of these countries by artisanal fishers from 2014 to 2015 industrial fishing industry (Diop & (Diop & Dossa 2011; M. Ducrocq, Parcs (R. rhinobatos is not mentioned). This Dossa 2011). In addition to reported Gabon, pers. comm. to J. Shultz, NMFS, catch included no mature females, harvest, since 1980, the African Atlantic 21 June, 2016; Fowler & Cavanagh 2005; which was noted by the author as an coast has experienced extremely high Notarbartolo di Sciara et al., 2007a; indicator that fishing has had a negative rates of illegal, unreported, and Notarbartolo di Sciara et al., 2007b) as impact on the reproductive capacity of unregulated (IUU) fishing, including in well as substantial reported declines in this species in the area. Although the shallow areas where both guitarfish landings of larger, more fecund, author noted the absence of pregnant species are vulnerable to capture individuals of both species in Guinea- females, he did not discuss whether (Agnew et al., 2009; Greenpeace 2015). Bissau, Senegal (Notarbartolo di Sciara pregnant females had previously been As a result of the decades of sustained et al., 2007a; Notarbartolo di Sciara et recorded in the area. ‘‘Sea fishing’’ and widespread targeting of guitarfishes al., 2007b) and Mauritania (Diop & began around Mayumba in the 1950s and other elasmobranchs in the SRFC Dossa 2011). Similar trends are likely in with the arrival of fishers from Ghana, region, combined with the increasing Guinea and Gambia (M. Ducrocq, Parcs Benin, and Togo, many of whom had overall fishing effort, there has been an Gabon, pers. comm. to J. Shultz, NMFS, been crowded out of fishing grounds in overall decrease in catch, with some 21 June, 2016). Because of the migratory the Republic of the Congo. Until species, such as sawfishes, lemon sharks fisheries in the SRFC countries, and the recently, this area experienced and the African wedgefish, almost reported scarcity of guitarfishes unsustainable industrial and IUU completely disappearing (Diop & Dossa throughout the area (Diop & Dossa fishing. In this area, there has also long 2011), and some species, including 2011), it is reasonable to assume similar been subsistence fishing by locals in the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Sep 16, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM 19SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules 64103

Banio Lagoon, where sharks and rays fishing pressure on R. rhinobatos and R. to 121,641 tons in 2004 (Clarke et al., were prevalent 30 years ago, but today cemiculus has driven declines in 2007; Dent & Clarke 2015), potentially are almost impossible to catch (De abundance throughout much of the providing economic incentive to retain Bruyne 2015). Based on this Mediterranean (Baino et al., 2001; these species as targeted or incidental information, it appears that Bertrand et al., 2000; Capape´ et al., catch. overutilization has caused a decline in 2006; Diop & Dossa 2011; Notarbartolo The primary Mediterranean area abundance and reproductive capacity of di Sciara et al., 2007a; Notarbartolo di where R. rhinobatos and R. cemiculus R. cemiculus in at least part of Gabonese Sciara et al., 2007b; Psomadakis et al., have been fished is the waters of waters. 2009). The area has a long history of Tunisia, where seasonal artisanal fishers In contrast with the relatively recent fishing pressure, which has not abated target elasmobranchs with gillnets and and rapid exploitation of guitarfishes in in recent decades (Ferretti et al., 2008). longlines when they move into shallow the African Atlantic, primarily driven Better technology and increased fishing waters in the spring and summer by the demand for shark fins, finning is effort, including increased benthic (Echwikhi et al., 2013; Echwikhi et al., not widely practiced in the continental shelf and slope trawling 2012). Rhinobatos spp. meat is sold in Mediterranean (Hareide et al., 2007a; over the last 50 years, has resulted in local markets and the skin is used for Serena 2005). Instead, in the the decline of many elasmobranch drumheads by local players (Capape & Mediterranean these species have been species (Bradai et al., 2012). In the Zaouali 1994). In Tunisian waters R. impacted by the centuries of sustained northwestern Mediterranean, sustained cemiculus is landed in greater numbers fishing pressure coupled with recent and intensive fishing pressure has been than R. rhinobatos (Capape & Zaouali increases in fishing effort and fishing a main driver of the extirpation of 1994; Echwikhi et al., 2013; Echwikhi et technology advances (Ferretti et al., Rhinobatos spp. (Bradai et al., 2012; al., 2012), although species-specific data 2008; Psomadakis et al., 2009). As Capape´ et al., 2006; Psomadakis et al., and reliable discard data are largely evidence of both species’ decline, R. 2009; Sacchi 2008). The highest unavailable (Echwikhi et al., 2012). Data rhinobatos and R. cemiculus have been concentration of fishing vessels in the on fishing vessels are underreported, listed on Annex II: List of Endangered Mediterranean occurs in the Eastern especially in Tunisia and Morocco. or Threatened Species of the Protocol Mediterranean Sea and the Ionian Sea However, based on the available data, Concerning Specially Protected Areas GFCM subregions, which make up the the Tunisian fleet is composed of 12,826 and Biological Diversity in the majority of the current Mediterranean reported vessels, or 14.91 percent of the Mediterranean (SPA/BD Protocol) of the ranges of Rhinobatos spp. Turkey, 92,734 vessels reported in the Barcelona Convention since 2012. The which appears to have some of the Mediterranean and Black Sea, making it SPA/BD Protocol prohibits the landing largest concentrations of R. cemiculus the third largest Mediterranean and of these species in the Mediterranean along its southern coast, also has the Black Sea fishing fleet. Since 1970, and requires that they ‘‘must be released most fishing vessels with 16,447 vessels when total fisheries landings in Tunisia unharmed and alive to the highest (17.74 percent of vessels in the were about 25,000 tons, there has been extent possible.’’ We found no studies Mediterranean). However, some of these a steady increase in landings, reaching on the survival rates of guitarfishes after vessels fish in the Black Sea, where an average of 101,400 t from 2000to being released from fishing gear neither species is found, or in the 2013. Additionally, Tunisia has one of interactions, so the potential of this Aegean Sea, where these species are rare the youngest fishing fleets in terms of vessel age, indicating a relatively recent requirement to reduce fishing mortality (FAO 2016b). is unknown. increase in fishing capacity. As is the General Fisheries Commission for the Between 1970 and 1985, reported case throughout the Mediterranean, the Mediterranean (GFCM) recommendation Mediterranean and Black Sea vast majority of the Tunisian fishery is GFCM/36/2012/3, which is associated chondrichthyan landings (which composed of artisanal vessels (FAO with the SPA/BD Protocol (see includes both guitarfishes) grew from 2016b). While elasmobranch landings Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory 10,000 t to 25,000 t, and then declined have dropped overall in southern Mechanisms), also prohibits trawling to about 7,000 t annually in 2008 Tunisia (Echwikhi et al., 2013; within three nautical miles of the despite growing fishing effort (Bradai et Echwikhi et al., 2012), an assessment shoreline, greatly reducing the al., 2012; Cavanagh & Gibson 2007; from the Workshop on Stock likelihood that these coastal fish will be Hareide et al., 2007). During this time, Assessment of Selected Species of caught as bycatch. Recommendation Tunisia and Turkey were two of the Elasmobranchs in the GFCM area found GFCM/36/2012/3 also prohibits finning most prolific Mediterranean that the southern Tunisian R. cemiculus and the landing of elasmobranchs elasmobranch fishing countries. As of stock was actually underfished from without their heads and skins, thus 2007, there were six Mediterranean 2001–2007 (GFMC:SAC 2012). protecting these fish from illegal sale elasmobranchs affected by targeted Targeted fishing for guitarfishes in (FAO 2016e)(Hareide et al., 2007a; fisheries. Historically, many more Tunisia likely began in the 1970s to Serena 2005). We found no information species had been targeted or landed in mid-1980s (Capape´ et al., 2004; on the current level of IUU fishing on large quantities, but this number has Echwikhi et al., 2013). The majority of these species in the Mediterranean, so it been reduced because these fisheries are Tunisian elasmobranch catches have is difficult to assess the impact of these no longer commercially viable been from the Gulf of Gabe`s (Bradaı¨ et prohibitions. Recent information from (Cavanagh & Gibson 2007; FAO 2016d; al., 2006; Echwikhi et al., 2013; Tunisia, Lebanon, and Egypt indicates Ferretti et al., 2008). In a few areas in Echwikhi et al., 2012), where general that the fisheries in these countries are the Mediterranean, R. rhinobatos and R. elasmobranch landings and batoid inadequately regulated (Echwikhi et al., cemiculus are or were targeted or landings steadily increased during the 2013; Echwikhi et al., 2012; Lteif 2015; considered a valuable secondary catch. 1990s, peaked in 2002, and decreased A. Marbourk, NOS, pers. comm. to B. Additionally, the global demand for from 2003 to 2008 (trend data are not Newell, NMFS, 21 July, 2016; Samy- elasmobranch meat has grown rapidly available after 2008) (Echwikhi et al., Kamal 2015). in recent decades, with the reported 2012). Guitarfishes were targeted with Regardless of the efficacy of the SPA/ production of meat and fillets growing special gillnets called ‘‘garracia,’’ with BD Protocol prohibitions, the historical from approximately 40,000 tons in 1985 catches peaking in the spring and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Sep 16, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM 19SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 64104 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules

summer when females move into VI of Lamboeuf et al., (2000), which consumed locally. The same is likely shallow waters to gestate and give birth. provided an example of the project’s true for R. cemiculus. After Egypt, Adults, juveniles, and neonates have database printout, rather than a Turkey has the highest number of also been caught as bycatch in demersal complete picture of guitarfish retention registered trawlers in the Eastern fish and shrimp trawls (Bradaı¨ et al., in Libya, and we found no additional Mediterranean, with 599 vessels (FAO 2006). In a study of elasmobranch information on guitarfish catch in this 2016b). While some of these trawlers are gillnet fishing in the Gulf of Gabe`s from country. According to the RAC/SPA concentrated in the Black Sea (FAO 2007 to 2008, R. cemiculus was the most (2005) research proposal, guitarfishes 2016b), the southeastern waters of abundant elasmobranch caught. R. have been traditionally consumed in Turkey, including ˙Iskenderun Bay, have cemiculus and R. rhinobatos were 52 Libya, and some species that have been intensely fished for decades and percent and 6.81 percent of the total declined in the greater Mediterranean, have shown obvious signs of decline in elasmobranch catch, respectively. including guitarfishes, are still relatively biodiversity and fish abundance (C¸ic¸ek Female R. cemiculus (40 percent common in Libyan waters. The effects of et al., 2014). mature) and R. rhinobatos (48 percent targeted fishing in Libya on the In Egypt, Mediterranean fisheries mature) were more common than males. extinction risk of these species are landings have generally been growing The authors of this study noted that R. unknown at this time. since the 1970s, as fishing technology cemiculus is particularly susceptible to Along the eastern Mediterranean, has advanced and fishing effort has capture in bottom gillnets because of its guitarfishes are illegally targeted in increased. There have been periods shape and schooling behavior (Echwikhi Lebanon by artisanal fishers. From where landings dropped despite December 2012 to October 2014, R. et al., 2012). continued increases in fishing efforts In recent years, Gulf of Gabe`s rhinobatos was the most common (FAO 2016c; Samy-Kamal 2015). As a fishermen who had targeted grouper elasmobranch in Lebanese fisheries result there has been an increase in the using demersal longlines have shifted to catches, followed by R. cemiculus, and landings of and demand for targeting elasmobranchs as grouper both have had significant economic cartilaginous fishes bycatch, with abundance has declined, although in value. Fishing pressure in Lebanon is guitarfishes (not reported at the species this fishery elasmobranchs were still greatest in the north, where it has level) composing the majority of these reported as bycatch (Echwikhi et al., already impacted elasmobranch landings, primarily as bycatch from 2013). The first study of elasmobranch diversity (Lteif 2015). In a study of shrimp trawls. Prior to 2005, shark and catches in this longline fishery, elasmobranch exploitation in Syria in conducted from 2007 to 2008, found the early 2000s, R. cemiculus was ray bycatch were usually discarded. that R. cemiculus was the most characterized as a ‘‘very economically From 2005 to 2006, landings of abundant elasmobranch, with R. important species being caught in cartilaginous fishes jumped from around cemiculus and R. rhinobatos composing plentiful quantities and highly 500 tons to over 3,000 tons. Over the 31.7 percent and 11.2 percent of the consumable,’’ whereas R. rhinobatos last 10 years, this production has elasmobranch catch, respectively. was characterized as a ‘‘moderate remained high, although recently it Mature, pregnant females dominated the economically important species either decreased from over 3,000 tons annually R. cemiculus catch, while males and for being caught in little quantities with in 2010 and 2011, to 1,843 tons in 2014 females were about equal for R. high efforts in fishing, or for their little in spite of sustained fishing effort (A. rhinobatos, with slightly more mature demand for human consumption. Or Marbourk, NOS, pers. comm. to B. individuals than juvenile individuals maybe for both reasons’’ (Saad et al., Newell, NMFS, 21 July, 2016). Most of caught. This study found that longline 2006). It is unclear if R. cemiculus is the landings in Egypt occur in the Nile fishing effort during this time period more common or if there is a higher Delta region, which is highly suitable was ‘‘considerable’’ (Echwikhi et al., demand for its meat over that of R. for trawling and includes Alexandria, 2013). Enajjar et al., (2008) found a rhinobatos, but these data indicate that where R. rhinobatos is known to decrease in the overall TL and TL at 50 both species were either targeted or aggregate in shallow waters to give birth percent maturity for male and female R. welcomed as secondary catch in Syria. (Abdel-Aziz et al., 1993; Samy-Kamal rhinobatos in southern Tunisia, Overall fisheries landings in Lebanon 2015). Within this region, almost 80 compared to the results reported by and Syria increased since the 1970s, but percent of the cartilaginous fish Capape et al., (1975, 1997). The reported their reported landings only make a production is landed at two ports, decrease in R. rhinobatos, compared to small fraction of the overall Alexandria and Borg El Burullus (A. the relatively recent GFCM:SAC (2012) Mediterranean catch (FAO 2016c). Marbourk, NOS, pers. comm. to B. stock assessment that found R. Throughout their entire Newell, NMFS, 21 July, 2016). Wild- cemiculus was underfished in this area, Mediterranean ranges, R. cemiculus and caught fisheries in Egypt have been may indicate that only the Tunisian R. rhinobatos have long been exposed to regulated for decades, but these population of R. rhinobatos is pressure as bycatch (Bradai et al., 2012). regulations have been under-enforced, experiencing levels of fishing pressure Rhinobatos cemiculus is one of the most as the government has focused on that contribute to its risk of extinction. commonly landed elasmobranchs in developing the booming aquaculture There is significant uncertainty with I˙skenderun Bay, Turkey (and more industry. Additionally, regulations have this conclusion because of the limited abundant than R. rhinobatos) (Bas¸usta et not been updated to reflect the GFCM information available. al., 2012; Keskin et al., 2011), where the recommendations, which are apparently Just east of the Tunisian border, there coastal area is heavily fished, exposing also not being enforced. This lack of are artisanal gillnet and longline mature, breeding individuals to capture enforcement has resulted in rampant elasmobranch fisheries based in when they migrate to shallow waters IUU fishing in Egyptian waters, Tarwah, Libya, that, as of 2000, (Bas¸usta et al., 2008). Rhinobatos spp. including unsustainable trawling and primarily targeted sharks of the family are not commercially important species the use of illegal fishing gear (Samy- Carcharhinidae, with guitarfishes and in Turkey (Keskin et al., 2011), but C¸ek Kamal 2015). The lack of fishing angelsharks retained as associate target et al., (2009) reported that R. rhinobatos regulations and enforcement has species (Lamboeuf et al., 2000). This has been exploited by bottom trawlers resulted in widespread declines in information was reported in Appendix in I˙skenderun Bay since 1990, and it is Egyptian fisheries, including in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Sep 16, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM 19SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules 64105

elasmobranch populations, and is likely fishery driven size reduction (Diop & BD Protocol to protect species listed in also affecting neighboring countries, as Dossa 2011; Enajjar et al., 2012). Based Annex II (Bradai et al., 2012; Lteif 2015), Egyptian fishers are known to illegally on this information, we conclude that Tunisia has restricted the retention of fish in Libyan waters (A. Marbourk, overharvest from industrial and rays and skates less than 40cm, and all NOS, pers. comm. to B. Newell, NMFS, artisanal commercial fisheries is cartilaginous fishes are protected in 21 July, 2016). contributing significantly to the Israel (Bradai et al., 2012). In Lebanon, In the waters of Cyprus, there was a extinction risk of both R. rhinobatos and these regulations are neither being large increase in coastal trawl fishing R. cemiculus throughout their ranges. followed nor enforced (Lteif 2015). effort in the late 1980s. From 1985 to Historically, monitoring of the Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory 1990, there was a spike in elasmobranch Mediterranean fleet has been negligible Mechanisms capture, primarily of dogfish, skates, (Se´ret & Serena 2002), and the data on and rays, followed by a sharp decline in There are some regional and national cartilaginous fishes have not been capture after 1990. In response to a regulatory mechanisms that impact the reported at the species level (Echwikhi government fishing permit buy-back conservation status of these species. In et al., 2012; Serena 2005). Vessel, program, trawling effort has reduced 2009, both species were listed on SPA/ bycatch, and discard data from artisanal substantially since the early 2000s BD Protocol Annex III: List of Species fisheries, which primarily operate along (Hadjichristophorou 2006). In Israel, Whose Exploitation is Regulated, which the coast and make up 80 percent of the reported landings are low, was adopted under the Barcelona vessels in the Mediterranean, are approximately at the levels reported for Convention in 1995 (Bradai et al., 2012). difficult to obtain and likely Syria and Lebanon, and have been In 2012, both species were uplisted to underreported (FAO 2016c, 2016d). decreasing for decades (FAO 2016c), Annex II: List of Endangered or Echwikhi et al., (2012) and Echwikhi et although Edelist (2014) considered the Threatened Species (S. de Benedictis, al., (2013) describe the nature of soft-bottomed habitat off Israel to be GFCM Secretariat, pers. comm. to B. artisanal gillnet and longline fisheries in under intensive fishing pressure. Newell, 12, May, 2016). The protocol Tunisia and the Mediterranean as Guitarfish are caught as bycatch by local charges all parties with identifying and ‘‘unregulated.’’ In Lebanon, Turkey, and fishermen, but there is little market for compiling lists of all endangered or Tunisia the artisanal sector makes up elasmobranch products because they are threatened species in their jurisdiction, well over 80 percent of the total vessels, not kosher, thus their consumption is controlling or prohibiting (where and no data were available for Syria forbidden by Jewish law. Elasmobranch appropriate) the taking or disturbance of (FAO 2016c), increasing the likelihood species are primarily caught as bycatch wild protected species, and that fisheries in these important by local fishermen using trawls and coordinating their protection and portions of Rhinobatos spp. range are bottom long-lines, and also purse seines recovery efforts for migratory species, underregulated and catches are and trammel nets (Golani 2006). among other measures that are likely underreported. Rhinobatos rhinobatos are considered less relevant to these species (RAC/SPA In Egypt, which is also an important common in the area, while R. cemiculus 1996). Currently, all coastal part of the range of at least R. is prevalent but less abundant than R. Mediterranean countries where these rhinobatos, the wild catch fisheries are rhinobatos (Edelist 2014; Golani 2006). species occur are contracting parties to underregulated as the government has The magnitude of the threat to R. the SPA/BD Protocol (European focused most of its resources on rhinobatos and R. cemiculus from Commission 2016). Further, since 2012, supporting the booming aquaculture commercial overharvest is impossible to both species have been protected by industry (Samy-Kamal 2015). This lack fully assess because of the lack of GFCM recommendation GFCM/36/ of regulation and enforcement has led to fisheries data, especially at the species 2012/3. This recommendation prohibits widespread overfishing in Egyptian level, from all countries in which these the finning of elasmobranchs or the waters, where both guitarfish species species occur. However, the best beheading or skinning of elasmobranchs have been retained as profitable bycatch available information shows (1) fishery before landing, and it prohibits trawling species since 2005, and Egyptian fishers driven extirpation of Rhinobatos spp. in the first three nautical miles off the are known to illegally fish in Libyan from the northwestern Mediterranean coast or up to the 50 m isobaths waters because of the overexploited (Capape´ et al., 2006; Psomadakis et al., (whichever comes first). Additionally, state of local Egyptian fisheries. 2009); (2) decreasing elasmobranch Annex II elasmobranch species cannot Additionally, the focus on aquaculture landings due to decades of technological be retained on board, transshipped, production has resulted in the pollution advances and increased fishing effort landed, transferred, stored, sold or of coastal brackish lakes, which (Cavanagh & Gibson 2007; Diop & Dossa displayed or offered for sale, and must degrades coastal ecosystems (A. 2011; Melendez & Macias 2007; Se´ret & be released unharmed and alive to the Marbourk, NOS, pers. comm. to B. Serena 2002); (3) substantial decreases extent possible (GFCM/36/2012/3). Any Newell, NMFS, 21 July, 2016). in the abundance of both species in capture of these species in the GFCM In the Atlantic African countries, as in West Africa (Diop & Dossa 2011); (4) area of competence, which includes all the Mediterranean, artisanal fishing considerable fishing effort in demersal national and high seas waters of the makes up a huge, growing proportion of fisheries concentrated in coastal areas Mediterranean and Black Seas (FAO the fishing activity. Until recently, this where both species, especially 2016f), is considered IUU fishing (S. de fishing sector has lacked species- reproductive individuals, are Benedictis, GFCM Secretariat, pers. specific data and strong management or particularly vulnerable to capture (C¸ic¸ek comm. to B. Newell, 12, May, 2016). regulations (De Bruyne 2015; Diop & et al., 2014; Diop & Dossa 2011; In the Mediterranean, the efficacy of Dossa 2011; Nunoo & Asiedu 2013). Echwikhi et al., 2013; Echwikhi et al., these and other protections is unclear, Along the Atlantic coast of Africa, all of 2012; Samy-Kamal 2015); (5) sustained but it appears that countries have the SRFC countries have passed targeting of these species as historically been slow to adopt and regulations that offer some protection to commercially important species (Diop & enforce the SPA/BD Protocol either or both species. Cape Verde, Dossa 2011; Echwikhi et al., 2013; protections (Serena 2005). Italy, Greece, Guinea, Gambia, and Sierra Leone have Echwikhi et al., 2012; Lteif et al., 2016; and Lebanon have promulgated all banned finning. Mauritania has Saad et al., 2006); and (6) evidence of regulations in accordance with the SPA/ banned all elasmobranch fishing (except

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Sep 16, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM 19SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 64106 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules

for houndshark) in Banc d’Arguin management in Africa. The west coast of Extinction Risk National Park since 2003. Guinea and Africa has experienced some of the Although there is no quantitative Sierra Leone have introduced highest amounts of IUU fishing in the analysis of either species’ abundance elasmobranch fishing licenses. Guinea- world for decades (Agnew et al., 2009). over time, and data for many Bissau dismantled elasmobranch fishing Historically, EU vessels had fished demographic characteristics of R. camps in the Bijagos Archipelago and unsustainably off African countries rhinobatos and R. cemiculus are lacking, banned elasmobranch fishing in all (Agnew et al., 2009; Belhabib et al., the best available data indicate that marine protected areas (MPAs). Senegal 2012a), but recent regulatory updates, these species currently face a moderate established size limits for R. cemiculus such as the reform for the European risk of extinction due to their inherent (106 cm for males and 100 cm for Union Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), demographic vulnerabilities, coupled females). However, all of the SRFC have curbed these practices (Greenpeace with commercial overutilization and the countries lack adequate technical and 2015). Currently, the biggest source of inadequacy of regulations of commercial financial resources for monitoring and IUU fishing in Atlantic African waters, fisheries in their ranges. As defined in management, and regulations at the in particular the SRFC region, is China, the status review (see Newell (2016)), a country level are not very strict and lack whose African distant water fishing fleet species is considered to be at a moderate regional coordination (Diop & Dossa has swelled from 13 vessels in 1985, to risk of extinction when it is on a 2011). Whether these regulatory 462 vessels in 2013 (Greenpeace 2015). trajectory that puts it at a high level of protections put in place in the SRFC Chinese vessels, which negotiate fishing extinction risk in the foreseeable future. countries are reducing the extinction agreements with African countries, have In this case, we define the foreseeable risk of these species is unknown at this future as 15–20 years, which is a time. been documented trawling in shallow In Gabon, a national marine planning prohibited areas, underreporting catch, reasonable amount of time to project the effort called ‘‘Gabon Bleu,’’ which was using illegal fishing gear, misreporting continued threat of overutilization as established in 2012, seeks to improve vessel specifications (including gross countries throughout both species’ management of marine resources across tonnage), and tampering with vessel ranges develop and begin to enforce different stakeholder groups, including monitoring systems (Greenpeace 2015). relevant regulations. Additionally, given artisanal and industrial fishing. The Currently, it appears that many West the relatively low productivity of these country’s 2005 Fisheries Code had African coastal states lack the regulatory species, it will likely take more than one established regulations that were not and enforcement capacity to adequately generation for these species to recover. being followed, with reported non- deal with this issue (Greenpeace 2015). This foreseeable future corresponds roughly to three generation times of R. compliance including the disconnection We found no regulatory information cemiculus (Enajjar et al., 2012). In this of vessel monitoring systems and the for Morocco, Liberia, Cote d’Ivoire, case, because of the lack of life-history use of illegal monofilament nets by Togo, Benin, Nigeria, Cameroon, data, we simply define the generation artisanal fishers. In 2012, under Gabon Democratic Republic of the Congo, and time of R. cemiculus as the age when the Bleu, all fishing activity was suspended, Angola. Overall, we found little average female reaches sexual maturity and all fishers who wished to resume information on the effectiveness of the (5.09 years). work were required to sign an current regulations in countries along agreement that clearly defined the the west coast of Africa and the Rhinobatos rhinobatos regulations and required their Mediterranean, so it is difficult to assess The common guitarfish faces participation in fisheries research. how these regulations are impacting the Several arrests were made as a result of demographic risks that significantly extinction risk of both species. increase its risk of extinction in the a crackdown on IUU fishing that However, we do know that in the included increased surveillance (De foreseeable future. Although there is no African Atlantic there has been rapid species-specific quantitative analysis of Bruyne 2015). Additionally, both growth of unregulated or underregulated species are considered ‘‘sensitive R. rhinobatos abundance over time, the exploitation of both species. In addition, species’’ and cannot be targeted by best available information (including throughout both species’ ranges IUU fishers. Unfortunately, these regulations survey data, interviews with fishers, and fishing is still prevalent, and there is an have not eliminated the black market for anecdotal accounts) indicates that this abundance of coastal, artisanal fishers, fins, so guitarfishes are still being species has likely undergone significant targeted by artisanal fishers and illegally who can be difficult to regulate because declines throughout most of its range, finned by demersal trawl fishers (G. De of the novelty of efforts to regulate and with no evidence to suggest a reversal Bruyne, Wildlife Conservation Society, manage fishers that have long been of these trends, with the exception of a Mayumba, pers. comm. to B. Newell, undermanaged or not regulated at all. few, extremely localized examples. NMFS, 28 June, 2016). In Mayumba Because of these factors, as well as the Based on survey data and historical National Park, only artisanal fishers high catchability and low reproductive records, this species once occurred have been allowed to operate, and potential of these species, we conclude throughout the entire coastal sharks are no longer targeted (De Bruyne that the inadequacy of existing northwestern Mediterranean, including 2015). Recent efforts to improve regulatory mechanisms is likely as a common species off the Balearic monitoring of artisanal catches have contributing significantly to the Islands and Sicily, but it has been also been made in Ghana (Nunoo & extinction risk of both R. rhinobatos and extirpated for decades throughout this Asiedu 2013). Republic of the Congo, R. cemiculus. Although the 2012 SPA/ entire area. In the Mediterranean, strong which shares Gabon’s southern border, BD Protocol Annex II listing and other fishing pressure on this species, both as banned all shark fishing along its entire current regulations may, in time, a targeted species and as bycatch, likely coastline in 2001 (Marine Conservation provide sufficient protection to reduce still occurs in Tunisia, Lebanon, Institute 2016), although we found no these species’ risk of extinction, the southeast Turkey, Egypt, and Libya. In information on the enforcement of this current uncertainty associated with the Africa, substantial and relatively recent ban. enforcement of these restrictions is too declines have occurred in Mauritania, IUU fishing by foreign fleets is also a great to conclude these protections are Senegal, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, and major challenge for sustainable fisheries adequate to prevent overutilization. Sierra Leone, all countries where this

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Sep 16, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM 19SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules 64107

species was one of the most common Rhinobatos cemiculus there may be isolated populations that elasmobranch species only a few The blackchin guitarfish faces contribute to the genetic diversity of this decades ago. This species is also demographic risks that significantly species. targeted illegally for its fins in Gabon, increase its risk of extinction in the In conclusion, although there is and IUU fishing is likely rampant foreseeable future. Although there is no significant uncertainty regarding the throughout most of its African Atlantic species-specific quantitative analysis of current abundance of this species, the range. R. cemiculus abundance over time, the best available information indicates that The limited productivity data on R. best available information (including the species has suffered substantial rhinobatos suggests this species may be survey data, interviews with fishers, and declines in many portions of its range relatively fast-growing and productive anecdotal accounts) indicates that this where it was once common. Throughout almost all of this species’ range, the compared to other elasmobranchs. species has likely undergone significant threat of overutilization from industrial However, compared to most fished declines throughout most of its range, and artisanal fishing continues. Given species, such as bony fishes, this species with no evidence to suggest a reversal the past evidence of fishery driven is slow-growing and has low of these trends, with the exception of a extirpation in areas where this species productivity. Additionally, aspects of few, extremely localized examples. was once common, and the still- this species’ reproductive strategy make Based on survey data and historical practiced targeting of mature, breeding it inherently vulnerable to records, this species once occurred individuals, which has likely reduced overexploitation. This species is long- throughout much of the coastal the reproductive potential of this lived, and larger, older individuals are northwestern Mediterranean, likely as a species, we find that continued fishing the most productive. Because this common species off the Balearic Islands species migrates into shallow waters to pressure poses a significant risk of and Sicily, but it has been extirpated for endangering this species with extinction give birth and breed, the breeding decades throughout this entire area. In population of this species is very in the foreseeable future. Additionally, the Mediterranean, strong fishing the regulations and conservation vulnerable to fishing capture and, as a pressure on this species, both as a result, a decline of the average size at measures in place are likely inadequate targeted species and as bycatch, likely to reverse the decline of this species. In maturity and rate of maturity in catches still occurs in Tunisia, Lebanon, has been reported in many of the summary, based on the best available southeast Turkey, Egypt, and Libya. In information and the above analysis, we portions of this species’ range where Africa, substantial and relatively recent conclude that R. cemiculus is presently data are available. Information on declines have occurred in Mauritania, at a moderate risk of extinction spatial structure, connectivity, and Senegal, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, and throughout its range. diversity is unavailable for this species. Sierra Leone, all countries where this However, differences in maximum TL, species was one of the most common Conservation Efforts size at maturity, and reproductive elasmobranch species only a few Throughout the ranges of R. timing throughout this species’ range, decades ago. This species is also rhinobatos and R. cemiculus, we found combined with evidence of extirpated targeted illegally for its fins in Gabon, no efforts that are dedicated specifically populations from areas that have not and IUU fishing is likely rampant to the conservation of these species. been recolonized after decades, suggest throughout most of its African Atlantic However, there are some efforts in there may be isolated populations that range. portions of their ranges that may have contribute to the genetic diversity of this The limited productivity data on R. a positive effect on the status of these species. cemiculus suggests this species may be species. These include recently In conclusion, although there is relatively fast-growing and productive developed management plans and significant uncertainty regarding the compared to other elasmobranchs. protections from harvest and habitat current abundance of this species, the However, compared to most fished modification in national parks and best available information indicates that species, such as bony fishes, this species MPAs. the species has suffered substantial is slow-growing and has low All SRFC countries except Gambia declines in many portions of its range productivity. Additionally, aspects of have adopted, or integrated into their where it was once common. Throughout this species’ reproductive strategy make fisheries management plans, a National almost all of this species’ range, the it inherently vulnerable to Plan of Action for the Conservation and threat of overutilization from industrial overexploitation. This species is long- Management of Sharks (NPOA-Sharks) and artisanal fishing continues. Given lived and larger, older individuals are as part of the Sub-Regional Plan of the past evidence of fishery-driven the most productive. Because this Action for the Conservation of Sharks extirpation in areas where this species species migrates into shallow waters to (SRPOA-Sharks) (Diop & Dossa 2011). was once common, and the still- give birth and breed, the breeding With assistance from the International practiced targeting of mature, breeding population of this species is very Union for the Conservation of Nature’s individuals, which has likely reduced vulnerable to fishing capture and, as a Shark Specialist Group (IUCNSSG), the reproductive potential of these result, a decline of the average size at these plans were developed under the species, we find that continued fishing maturity and rate of maturity in catches recommendations of the FAO pressure poses a significant risk of has been reported in many of the International Plan of Action for the endangering this species with extinction portions of this species’ range where Conservation and Management of in the foreseeable future. Additionally, data are available. Information on Sharks (IPOA–SHARKS). IPOA– the regulations and conservation spatial structure, connectivity, and SHARKS seeks to ensure conservation measures in place are likely inadequate diversity is unavailable for this species. and sustainable management of sharks to reverse the decline of this species. In However, differences in maximum TL, with emphasis on quality data summary, based on the best available size at maturity, and reproductive collection for management purposes information and the above analysis, we timing throughout this species’ range, (IUCNSSG 2016). In the SRFC, these conclude that R. rhinobatos is presently combined with evidence of extirpated plans are still in the early stage of at a moderate risk of extinction populations from areas that have not implementation, and it remains to be throughout its range. been recolonized after decades, suggest seen how effective they will be in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Sep 16, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM 19SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 64108 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules

minimizing the extinction risk of R. For example, most are not ‘‘no-take’’ their ranges in the foreseeable future. rhinobatos and R. cemiculus. zones, so artisanal and recreational We therefore propose to list both species Additionally, all of the SRFC countries fishers still have access to many as threatened under the ESA. lack adequate technical and financial protected areas. Effects of Listing resources for monitoring and There are also MPAs on the West management, and regulations at the Coast of Africa that might impact or Conservation measures provided for country level are not very strict and lack have already impacted the status of species listed as endangered or regional coordination (Diop & Dossa these two guitarfish species. In the Banc threatened under the ESA include 2011). There are no NPOA-Sharks d’Arguin National Park in Mauritania, recovery plans (16 U.S.C. 1533(f)); developed for the other African nations the use of specialized gear such as concurrent designation of critical in these species’ Atlantic ranges guitarfish nets as well as the targeting of habitat, if prudent and determinable (16 (IUCNSSG 2016). All European shark and ray species has been U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(A)) and consistent countries have adopted the EU Plan of prohibited since 2003 (Diop & Dossa with implementing regulations; Federal Action (EUPOA Sharks) but we could 2011). This allowed the local guitarfish agency requirements to consult with find little information on conservation populations to recover, but both species NMFS under section 7 of the ESA to actions associated with this plan. are still targeted outside of the park (M. ensure their actions do not jeopardize The GFMC is one of the only FAO Ducrocq, Parcs Gabon, pers. comm. to J. the species or result in adverse Regional Fisheries Management Shultz, NMFS, 21 June, 2016). Guinea- modification or destruction of critical Organizations (RMFOs) with the Bissau has banned shark fishing in all habitat should it be designated (16 competence to adopt spatial of its MPAs, including the Bijagos U.S.C. 1536); and, for endangered management measures in the high seas. Archipelago, which includes important species, prohibitions on taking (16 However, many of these protections areas for both species (Cross 2015; Diop U.S.C. 1538). Recognition of the species’ have focused on the deep sea (FAO & Dossa 2011). Mayumba National Park plight through listing promotes 2016e), offering little conservation value in Gabon, where at least R. cemiculus is conservation actions by Federal and to either species. In the early 2000s, found, has recently implemented gear state agencies, foreign entities, private Cyprus initiated a fishing license buy- restrictions and no longer allows groups, and individuals. back program, which likely reduced industrial fishing (De Bruyne 2015). Identifying Section 7 Conference and trawl impact on these species There are also other MPAs that dot the Consultation Requirements (Hadjichristophorou 2006), although we west coast of Africa, but they found little information on either collectively cover only a small fraction Section 7(a)(2) (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2)) species’ status in Cyprian waters, so we of both species’ ranges (MPAtlas 2016). of the ESA and NMFS/USFWS cannot evaluate the conservation benefit regulations require Federal agencies to Proposed Determination of this action. consult with us to ensure that activities The Regional Activity Centre for There is significant uncertainty they authorize, fund, or carry out are not Specially Protected Areas (RAC/SPA) regarding the status of the current likely to jeopardize the continued and the Network of Marine Protection populations of both R. rhinobatos and R. existence of listed species or destroy or Area Managers in the Mediterranean cemiculus, but both species may still be adversely modify critical habitat. (MedPAN) have been working with a relatively common, although very likely Section 7(a)(4) (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(4)) of diverse network of partners to establish below their historical population levels, the ESA and NMFS/USFWS regulations a network of well-connected, well- in Tunisia, Israel, Lebanon, Syria, and also require Federal agencies to confer managed MPAs that protect at least 10 southeastern Turkey. Based on this with us on actions likely to jeopardize percent of the Mediterranean Sea while information, and the best available the continued existence of species representing the sea’s biodiversity scientific and commercial information, proposed for listing, or that result in the (Gabrie´ et al., 2012). The Gabrie´ et al., as summarized here and in Newell destruction or adverse modification of (2012) report, entitled ‘‘The Status of (2015), we find that neither Rhinobatos proposed critical habitat of those Marine Protected Areas in the species is currently at high risk of species. It is unlikely that the listing of Mediterranean Sea,’’ found that, as of extinction throughout their entire these species under the ESA will 2012, only 4.6 percent of the ranges. However, both species are at increase the number of section 7 Mediterranean surface (114,600 km2) moderate risk of extinction. We assessed consultations, because these species was protected by MPAs, with these the ESA section 4(a)(1) factors and occur outside of the United States and areas mostly concentrated in the coastal conclude that R. rhinobatos and R. are unlikely to be affected by Federal zone, predominantly in the northern cemiculus face ongoing threats of actions. basin where these species are rare or overutilization by fisheries and Critical Habitat have been extirpated. Two inadequate existing regulatory Mediterranean ecoregions that are mechanisms throughout their ranges. Critical habitat is defined in section 3 important to both species, the Tunisian Both species have also suffered a of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1532(5)) as: (1) plateau and the Levantine Sea, were curtailment of a large portion of their The specific areas within the found to be ‘‘markedly under- historical ranges. These species’ natural geographical area occupied by a species, represented.’’ Management of MPAs biological vulnerability to at the time it is listed in accordance throughout the Mediterranean was overexploitation and present with the ESA, on which are found those found to be weak, with many MPAs demographic risks (declining physical or biological features (a) lacking dedicated managers and abundance, decreasing size of essential to the conservation of the management plans and financial reproductive individuals, and low species and (b) that may require special resources, and having a low surveillance productivity) are currently exacerbating management considerations or levels, with only northwestern MPAs the negative effects of these threats. protection; and (2) specific areas outside reporting a sufficient budget to Further, ongoing conservation efforts are the geographical area occupied by a effectively manage. Additionally, the not adequate to improve the status of species at the time it is listed upon a level of ecosystem protection varies these species. Thus, both species are determination that such areas are throughout the Mediterranean MPAs. likely to become endangered throughout essential for the conservation of the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Sep 16, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM 19SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules 64109

species. ‘‘Conservation’’ means the use Public Comments Solicited from three scientists familiar with both of all methods and procedures needed To ensure that any final action guitarfish species. We received and to bring the species to the point at resulting from this proposed rule to list reviewed these peer review comments, which listing under the ESA is no the R. rhinobatos and R. cemiculus as and incorporated them into both the longer necessary (16 U.S.C. 1532(3)). threatened will be as accurate and draft status review report for the Section 4(a)(3)(A) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. effective as possible, we are soliciting common guitarfish and blackchin 1533(a)(3)(A)) requires that, to the comments and information from the guitarfish and this proposed rule. Peer reviewer comments on the draft status extent prudent and determinable, public, other concerned governmental review are summarized in the peer critical habitat be designated agencies, the scientific community, review report, which is available at: concurrently with the listing of a industry, and any other interested http://www.cio.noaa.gov/services_ species. However, critical habitat shall parties on information in the status programs/prplans/PRsummaries.html. not be designated in foreign countries or review and proposed rule. Comments other areas outside U.S. jurisdiction (50 are encouraged on these proposals (See References CFR 424.12(h)). DATES and ADDRESSES). We must base A complete list of references used in The best available scientific and our final determination on the best this proposed rule is available upon commercial data as discussed above available scientific and commercial request (see ADDRESSES). identify the geographical areas occupied information. We cannot, for example, by R. rhinobatos and R. cemiculus as consider the economic effects of a Classification being entirely outside U.S. jurisdiction, listing determination. Before finalizing National Environmental Policy Act so we cannot designate critical habitat this proposed rule, we will consider the for these species. comments and any additional The 1982 amendments to the ESA, in information we receive, and such section 4(b)(1)(A), restrict the Identification of Those Activities That information that may be considered information may lead to a final Would Constitute a Violation of Section when assessing species for listing. Based regulation that differs from this proposal 9 of the ESA on this limitation of criteria for a listing or result in a withdrawal of this listing decision and the opinion in Pacific On July 1, 1994, NMFS and FWS proposal. We particularly seek: Legal Foundation v. Andrus, 675 F. 2d published a policy (59 FR 34272) that (1) Information concerning the threats 825 (6th Cir. 1981), NMFS has requires NMFS to identify, to the to the Rhinobatos species proposed for concluded that ESA listing actions are maximum extent practicable at the time listing; not subject to the environmental a species is listed, those activities that (2) Taxonomic information on the assessment requirements of the National would or would not constitute a species; Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). violation of section 9 of the ESA. (3) Biological information (life Because we are proposing to list the R. history, genetics, population Executive Order 12866, Regulatory rhinobatos and R. cemiculus as connectivity, etc.) on the species; Flexibility Act, and Paperwork threatened, no prohibitions of section (4) Efforts being made to protect the Reduction Act 9(a)(1) of the ESA will apply to these species throughout their current ranges; As noted in the Conference Report on species. (5) Information on the commercial the 1982 amendments to the ESA, Protective Regulations Under Section trade of the species; economic impacts cannot be considered 4(d) of the ESA (6) Historical and current distribution when assessing the status of a species. and abundance and trends for the Therefore, the economic analysis We are proposing to list R. rhinobatos species; and requirements of the Regulatory and R. cemiculus as threatened under (7) Any of the above information on Flexibility Act are not applicable to the the ESA. In the case of threatened either or both species from the following listing process. In addition, this species, ESA section 4(d) leaves it to the countries, from which we have very proposed rule is exempt from review Secretary’s discretion whether, and to little information: Morocco, Liberia, under Executive Order 12866. This what extent, to extend the section 9(a) Cote d’Ivoire, Ghana, Togo, Benin, proposed rule does not contain a ‘‘take’’ prohibitions to the species, and Nigeria, Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea, collection-of-information requirement authorizes us to issue regulations Sa˜o Tome´ and Prı´ncipe, Republic of the for the purposes of the Paperwork necessary and advisable for the Congo, Democratic Republic of the Reduction Act. conservation of the species. Thus, we Congo, Angola, Algeria, and Syria. have flexibility under section 4(d) to We request that all information be Executive Order 13132, Federalism tailor protective regulations, taking into accompanied by: (1) Supporting In accordance with E.O. 13132, we account the effectiveness of available documentation, such as maps, determined that this proposed rule does conservation measures. The section 4(d) bibliographic references, or reprints of not have significant federalism effects protective regulations may prohibit, pertinent publications; and (2) the and that a federalism assessment is not with respect to threatened species, some submitter’s name, address, and any required. In keeping with the intent of or all of the acts which section 9(a) of association, institution, or business that the Administration and Congress to the ESA prohibits with respect to the person represents. provide continuing and meaningful endangered species. These section 9(a) dialogue on issues of mutual state and prohibitions apply to all individuals, Role of Peer Review Federal interest, this proposed rule will organizations, and agencies subject to In December 2004, the Office of be given to the relevant governmental U.S. jurisdiction. Because neither Management and Budget (OMB) issued agencies in the countries in which the species has ever occupied U.S. waters, a Final Information Quality Bulletin for species occurs, and they will be invited and the United States has no known Peer Review establishing a minimum to comment. We will confer with the commercial or management interest in peer review standard. We solicited peer U.S. Department of State to ensure either species, we propose to not apply review comments on the draft common appropriate notice is given to all foreign any section 9(a) prohibitions to either guitarfish and blackchin guitarfish nations within the ranges of both species. status review report (Newell (2016)) species. As the process continues, we

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Sep 16, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM 19SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 64110 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Proposed Rules

intend to continue engaging in informal Dated: September 12, 2016. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531–1543; subpart and formal contacts with the U.S. State Samuel D. Rauch, III, B, § 223.201–202 also issued under 16 U.S.C. Department, giving careful Deputy Assistant Administrator for 1361 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 5503(d) for § 223.206(d)(9). consideration to all written and oral Regulatory Programs, National Marine comments received. Fisheries Service. ■ 2. In § 223.102, paragraph (e), add For the reasons set out in the entries for two species in alphabetical List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 223 preamble, we propose to amend 50 CFR order by common name under the Endangered and threatened species, part 223 as follows: ‘‘Fishes’’ table subheading to read as follows: Exports, Imports, Transportation. PART 223—THREATENED MARINE AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES § 223.102 Enumeration of threatened marine and anadromous species. ■ 1. The authority citation for part 223 * * * * * continues to read as follows: (e) * * *

Species 1 Citation(s) for listing Critical Common Scientific Description of determination(s) habitat ESA Rules name name listed entity

*******

FISHES

******* Guitarfish, blackchin Rhinobatos Entire species ...... [Federal Register citation and date when NA NA cemiculus. published as a final rule]. Guitarfish, common .. Rhinobatos Entire species ...... [Federal Register citation and date when NA NA rhinobatos. published as a final rule].

******* 1 Species includes taxonomic species, subspecies, distinct population segments (DPSs) (for a policy statement, see 61 FR 4722, February 7, 1996), and evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) (for a policy statement, see 56 FR 58612, November 20, 1991).

* * * * * and commercial data and completed a Therefore, we are not proposing to [FR Doc. 2016–22450 Filed 9–16–16; 8:45 am] comprehensive status review for these designate critical habitat. We are BILLING CODE 3510–22–P two subspecies of Hector’s dolphin (C. soliciting public comments on our hectori). The Maui’s dolphin faces status review report and proposal to list serious demographic risks due to these two subspecies. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE critically low abundance, a low DATES: Comments on this proposed rule National Oceanic and Atmospheric population growth rate, a restricted must be received by November 18, 2016. Administration range, low genetic diversity, and Public hearing requests must be made ongoing threats such as bycatch in by November 3, 2016. 50 CFR Parts 223 and 224 commercial and recreational gillnets. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments We have determined Maui’s dolphin is on this document, identified by NOAA– [Docket No. 160614520–6520–01] currently in danger of extinction NMFS–2016–0118, by either of the RIN 0648–XE686 throughout its range and, therefore, following methods: meets the definition of an endangered • Electronic Submissions: Submit all Endangered and Threatened Wildlife species. The relatively more abundant electronic comments via the Federal and Plants: Proposed Rule To List the and more widely distributed South eRulemaking Portal. Go to Maui’s Dolphin as Endangered and the Island Hector’s dolphin has experienced www.regulations.gov/ South Island Hector’s Dolphin as large historical declines and is expected #!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2016- Threatened Under the Endangered to continue to slowly decline due to 0118, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, Species Act bycatch and other lesser threats, such as complete the required fields, and enter AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries disease and impacts associated with or attach your comments. • Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and tourism. We have determined that this Mail: Submit written comments to Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), subspecies is not currently in danger of Lisa Manning, NMFS Office of Protected Commerce. extinction throughout all or a significant Resources (F/PR3), 1315 East West portion of its range, but is likely to ACTION: Proposed rule; request for Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910, comments. become so within the foreseeable future; USA. and therefore, it meets the definition of Instructions: Comments sent by any SUMMARY: We, NMFS, propose to list the a threatened species. Both subspecies other method, to any other address or Maui’s dolphin (Cephalorhynchus occur only in New Zealand. We are individual, or received after the end of hectori maui) as endangered and the authorized to designate critical habitat the comment period, may not be South Island Hector’s dolphin (C. within U.S. jurisdiction only, and we considered by NMFS. All comments hectori hectori) as threatened under the are not aware of any areas within U.S received are a part of the public record Endangered Species Act (ESA). We have jurisdiction that may meet the definition and will generally be posted for public reviewed the best available scientific of critical habitat under the ESA. viewing on www.regulations.gov

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Sep 16, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\19SEP1.SGM 19SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS