58868 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR • Mail: NMFS National Sea Turtle Conservation Commission, and the Coordinator, Attn: Loggerhead Critical North Carolina Wildlife Resources Fish and Wildlife Service Habitat Information, Office of Protected Commission. The BRT was charged with Resources, National Marine Fisheries reviewing and evaluating all relevant 50 CFR Part 17 Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Room scientific information relating to 13657, Silver Spring, MD 20910 or loggerhead population structure globally DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE USFWS National Sea Turtle to determine if any population met the Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife criteria to qualify as a DPS and, if so, to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Service, 7915 Baymeadows Way, Suite assess the extinction risk of each DPS. Administration 200, Jacksonville, FL 32256. The findings of the BRT, which are • Fax: To the attention of NMFS detailed in the ‘‘Loggerhead Sea Turtle 50 CFR Parts 223 and 224 National Sea Turtle Coordinator at 301– (Caretta caretta) 2009 Status Review under the U.S. Endangered Species Act’’ [Docket No. 100104003–1068–02] 427–2522 or USFWS National Sea Turtle Coordinator at 904–731–3045. (Conant et al., 2009; hereinafter referred RIN 0648–AY49 Instructions: All information received to as the Status Review), addressed DPS will be a part of the public record. All delineations, extinction risks to the Endangered and Threatened Species; personal identifying information (for species, and threats to the species. The Determination of Nine Distinct example, name, address, etc.) Status Review underwent independent Population Segments of Loggerhead voluntarily submitted by the public may peer review by nine scientists with Sea Turtles as Endangered or be publicly accessible. expertise in loggerhead sea turtle Threatened FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: biology, genetics, and modeling. The AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Barbara Schroeder, NMFS, at 301–427– Status Review is available electronically Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 8402; Sandy MacPherson, USFWS, at at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/ Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 904–731–3336; Marta Nammack, NMFS, species/statusreviews.htm. On March 12, 2009, the petitioners Commerce; United States Fish and at 301–427–8403 or Lorna Patrick, (Center for Biological Diversity, Turtle Wildlife Service (USFWS), Interior. USFWS, at 850–769–0552 ext. 229. Island Restoration Network, and Persons who use a Telecommunications ACTION: Final rule. Oceana) sent a 60-day notice of intent to device for the deaf (TDD) may call the sue to the Services for failure to make SUMMARY: We (NMFS and USFWS; also Federal Information Relay Service 12-month findings on the petitions by collectively referred to as the Services) (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339, 24 hours a the statutory deadlines (July 16, 2008, have determined that the loggerhead sea day, 7 days a week. for the North Pacific petition and turtle (Caretta caretta) is composed of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: nine distinct population segments November 16, 2008, for the Northwest (DPSs) that constitute ‘‘species’’ that Background Atlantic petition). On May 28, 2009, the petitioners filed a Complaint for may be listed as threatened or We issued a final rule listing the endangered under the Endangered Declaratory and Injunctive Relief to loggerhead sea turtle as threatened compel the Services to complete the Species Act (ESA). In this final rule, we throughout its worldwide range on July are listing four DPSs as threatened and 12-month findings. On October 8, 2009, 28, 1978 (43 FR 32800). On July 12, the petitioners and the Services reached five as endangered under the ESA. We 2007, we received a petition to list the will propose to designate critical habitat a settlement in which the Services ‘‘North Pacific populations of agreed to submit to the Federal Register for the two loggerhead sea turtle DPSs loggerhead sea turtle’’ as an endangered occurring within the United States in a a 12-month finding on the two petitions species under the ESA. NMFS on or before February 19, 2010. On future rulemaking. We encourage published a notice in the Federal interested parties to provide any February 16, 2010, the United States Register on November 16, 2007 (72 FR District Court for the Northern District information related to the identification 64585), concluding that the petitioners of critical habitat and essential physical of California modified the February 19, (Center for Biological Diversity and 2010, deadline to March 8, 2010. or biological features for this species, as Turtle Island Restoration Network) On March 16, 2010 (75 FR 12598), the well as economic or other relevant presented substantial scientific Services published in the Federal impacts of designation of critical information indicating that the Register combined 12-month findings habitat, to assist us with this effort. petitioned action may be warranted. on the petitions to list the North Pacific DATES: This rule is effective on October Also, on November 15, 2007, we populations and the Northwest Atlantic 24, 2011. received a petition to list the ‘‘Western populations of the loggerhead sea turtle ADDRESSES: This final rule and North Atlantic populations of as DPSs with endangered status, along comments and materials received, as loggerhead sea turtle’’ as an endangered with a proposed rule to designate nine well as supporting documentation used species under the ESA. NMFS loggerhead sea turtle DPSs worldwide in the preparation of this rule, are published a notice in the Federal and to list two of the DPSs as threatened available on the Internet at http:// Register on March 5, 2008 (73 FR and seven as endangered. The Federal www.regulations.gov and will be 11849), concluding that the petitioners Register notice also announced the available for public inspection, by (Center for Biological Diversity and opening of a 90-day public comment appointment, during normal business Oceana) presented substantial scientific period on the proposed listing hours at: National Marine Fisheries information indicating that the determination. Service, Office of Protected Resources, petitioned action may be warranted. The Services subsequently received a 1315 East West Highway, Room 13657, In early 2008, NMFS assembled a request from the Maryland Department Silver Spring, MD 20910. You may Loggerhead Biological Review Team of Natural Resources for a public submit information related to the (BRT) to complete a status review of the hearing to be held in Maryland. On June identification of critical habitat for the loggerhead sea turtle. The BRT was 2, 2010 (75 FR 30769), the Services loggerhead sea turtle by either of the composed of biologists from NMFS, published a notice in the Federal following methods: USFWS, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Register announcing our plans to hold

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58869

a public hearing on the proposed differences in control of exploitation, (Dodd, 1988). However, the majority of actions on June 16, 2010. The Federal management of habitat, conservation loggerhead nesting is at the western Register notice also announced a re- status, or regulatory mechanisms exist rims of the Atlantic and Indian Oceans. opening of the public comment period that are significant in light of section The most recent reviews show that only for an additional 90 days. The June 16, 4(a)(1)(D) of the ESA (i.e., inadequate two loggerhead nesting aggregations 2010, public hearing was held at the regulatory mechanisms). have greater than 10,000 females nesting Ocean Pines Public Library in Berlin, If a population segment is found to be per year: Peninsular Florida, United Maryland. discrete under one or both of the above States, and Masirah Island, Oman On March 22, 2011 (76 FR 15932), the conditions, its biological and ecological (Baldwin et al., 2003; Ehrhart et al., Services published in the Federal significance to the taxon to which it 2003; Kamezaki et al., 2003; Limpus and Register a notice announcing a 6-month belongs is evaluated. This consideration Limpus, 2003a; Margaritoulis et al., extension of the deadline for a final may include, but is not limited to: (1) 2003). Nesting aggregations with 1,000 listing decision to address substantial Persistence of the discrete population to 9,999 females nesting annually are disagreement on the interpretation of segment in an ecological setting unusual Georgia through North Carolina (United data related to the status and trends for or unique for the taxon; (2) evidence States), Quintana Roo and Yucatan the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS of that loss of the discrete population (Mexico), Brazil, Cape Verde Islands the loggerhead sea turtle and its segment would result in a significant (Cape Verde), Western Australia relevance to the assessment of risk of gap in the range of a taxon; (3) evidence (Australia), and Japan. Smaller nesting extinction. At this time, we solicited that the discrete population segment aggregations with 100 to 999 nesting new information or analyses from the represents the only surviving natural females annually occur in the Northern public that would help clarify this issue. occurrence of a taxon that may be more Gulf of Mexico (United States), Dry The public comment period was open abundant elsewhere as an introduced Tortugas (United States), Cay Sal Bank for 20 days, and closed on April 11, population outside its historical range; (The Bahamas), Tongaland (South 2011. or (4) evidence that the discrete Africa), Mozambique, Arabian Sea Coast population segment differs markedly Policies for Delineating Species Under (Oman), Halaniyat Islands (Oman), from other population segments of the the ESA Cyprus, Peloponnesus (Greece), species in its genetic characteristics. Zakynthos (Greece), Crete (Greece), Section 3 of the ESA defines Listing Determinations Under the ESA Turkey, and Queensland (Australia). In ‘‘species’’ as including ‘‘any subspecies contrast to determining population size of fish or wildlife or plants, and any The ESA defines an endangered on nesting beaches, determining distinct population segment of any species as one that is in danger of population size in the marine species of vertebrate fish or wildlife extinction throughout all or a significant environment has been very localized. A which interbreeds when mature.’’ The portion of its range, and a threatened summary of information on distribution term ‘‘distinct population segment’’ is species as one that is likely to become and habitat by ocean basin follows. not recognized in the scientific endangered in the foreseeable future literature, nor clarified in the ESA or its throughout all or a significant portion of Pacific Ocean implementing regulations. Therefore, its range (sections 3(6) and 3(20), Loggerheads can be found throughout the Services adopted a joint policy for respectively). The statute requires us to tropical to temperate waters in the recognizing DPSs under the ESA (DPS determine whether any species is Pacific; however, their breeding grounds Policy; 61 FR 4722) on February 7, 1996. endangered or threatened because of include a restricted number of sites in Congress has instructed the Secretary of any of the following five factors: (1) The the North Pacific and South Pacific. the Interior or of Commerce to exercise present or threatened destruction, Within the North Pacific, loggerhead this authority with regard to DPSs modification, or curtailment of its nesting has been documented only in ‘‘* * * sparingly and only when the habitat or range; (2) overutilization for Japan (Kamezaki et al., 2003), although biological evidence indicates such commercial, recreational, scientific, or low level nesting may occur outside of action is warranted.’’ The DPS Policy educational purposes; (3) disease or Japan in areas surrounding the South requires the consideration of two predation; (4) the inadequacy of existing China Sea (Chan et al., 2007). In the elements when evaluating whether a regulatory mechanisms; or (5) other South Pacific, nesting beaches are vertebrate population segment qualifies natural or manmade factors affecting its restricted to eastern Australia and New as a DPS under the ESA: (1) The continued existence (section 4(a)(1)(A– Caledonia and, to a much lesser extent, discreteness of the population segment E)). We are to make this determination Vanuatu and Tokelau (Limpus and in relation to the remainder of the based solely on the best available Limpus, 2003a). species or subspecies to which it scientific and commercial data after Based on tag-recapture studies from belongs; and (2) the significance of the conducting a review of the status of the Japan, the East China Sea has been population segment to the species or species and taking into account any identified as the major habitat for post- subspecies to which it belongs. efforts being made by States or foreign nesting adult females (Iwamoto et al., A population segment of a vertebrate governments to protect the species. 1985; Kamezaki et al., 1997; Balazs, species may be considered discrete if it 2006), while satellite tracking indicates satisfies either one of the following Biology and Life History of Loggerhead the Kuroshio Extension Bifurcation conditions: (1) It is markedly separated Sea Turtles Region to be an important pelagic from other populations of the same A thorough account of loggerhead sea foraging area for juvenile loggerheads taxon (an organism or group of turtle biology and life history may be (Polovina et al., 2006). Other important organisms) as a consequence of found in the Status Review, which is juvenile turtle foraging areas have been physical, ecological, or behavioral incorporated here by reference. The identified off the coast of Baja California factors. Quantitative measures of genetic following is a summary of that Sur, Mexico (Pitman, 1990; Peckham or morphological discontinuity may information. and Nichols, 2006; Peckham et al., provide evidence of this separation; or The loggerhead occurs throughout the 2007). (2) it is delimited by international temperate and tropical regions of the Nesting females tagged on the coast of governmental boundaries within which Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Oceans eastern Australia have been recorded

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58870 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

foraging in New Caledonia; Queensland, from the Shark Bay World Heritage 2008). The oceanic juvenile stage in the northern New South Wales, and Area, including Dirk Hartog Island, and North Atlantic has been primarily Northern Territory, Australia; Solomon northward through the Ningaloo Marine studied in the waters around the Azores Islands; Papua New Guinea; and Park coast to the North West Cape, and Madeira (Bolten, 2003). In Azorean Indonesia (Limpus and Limpus, 2003a; including the Muiron Islands (Baldwin waters, satellite telemetry data and Limpus, 2009). Foraging Pacific et al., 2003). Nesting individuals from flipper tag returns suggest a long period loggerheads originating from nesting Dirk Hartog Island have been recorded of residency (Bolten, 2003), whereas beaches in Australia are known to foraging within Shark Bay and Exmouth turtles appear to be moving through migrate to Chile and Peru (Alfaro- Gulf (Baldwin et al., 2003), and satellite Madeiran waters (Dellinger and Freitas, Shigueto et al., 2004, 2008a; Donoso and tracking of individuals from Ningaloo 2000). Preliminary genetic analyses Dutton, 2006; Boyle et al., 2009). has demonstrated that female turtles can indicate that juvenile loggerheads found disperse as far east as Torres Strait in in Moroccan waters are of western Indian Ocean Queensland. Atlantic origin (M. Tiwari, NMFS, and In the North Indian Ocean, Oman In the Southwest Indian Ocean, A. Bolten, University of Florida, hosts the vast majority of loggerhead loggerhead nesting occurs on the unpublished data). Other concentrations nesting. The majority of the nesting in southeastern coast of Africa, from the of oceanic juvenile turtles exist in the Oman occurs on Masirah Island, on the Paradise Islands in Mozambique Atlantic (e.g., in the region of the Grand Al Halaniyat Islands, and on mainland southward to St. Lucia in South Africa, Banks off Newfoundland; Witzell, beaches south of Masirah Island all the and on the south and southwestern 2002). Genetic information indicates the way to the Oman-Yemen border coasts of Madagascar (Baldwin et al., Grand Banks are foraging grounds for a (IUCN—The World Conservation Union, 2003). Foraging habitats are only known mixture of loggerheads from all the 1989a, 1989b; Salm, 1991; Salm and for post-nesting females from North Atlantic rookeries (Bowen et al., Salm, 1991). In addition, nesting Tongaland, South Africa; tagging data 2005; LaCasella et al., 2005), and a large probably occurs on the mainland of show these loggerheads migrating size range is represented (Watson et al., Yemen on the Arabian Sea coast, and eastward to Madagascar, northward to 2004, 2005). nesting has been confirmed on Socotra, Mozambique, Tanzania, and Kenya, and After departing the oceanic zone, an island off the coast of Yemen (Pilcher southward to Cape Agulhas at the neritic juvenile loggerheads in the and Saad, 2000). Limited information southernmost point of Africa (Baldwin Northwest Atlantic inhabit continental exists on the foraging habitats of North et al., 2003; Luschi et al., 2006). shelf waters from Cape Cod Bay, Indian Ocean loggerheads; however, Massachusetts, south through Florida, Atlantic Ocean foraging individuals have been reported The Bahamas, Cuba, and the Gulf of off the southern coastline of Oman In the Northwest Atlantic, the Mexico (Musick and Limpus, 1997; (Salm et al., 1993). Satellite telemetry majority of loggerhead nesting is Spotila et al., 1997; Hopkins-Murphy et studies of post-nesting migrations of concentrated along the coasts of the al., 2003) (neritic refers to the inshore loggerheads nesting on Masirah Island, United States from southern Virginia marine environment from the surface to Oman, have revealed extensive use of through Alabama. Additional nesting the sea floor where water depths do not the waters off the Arabian Peninsula, beaches are found along the northern exceed 200 meters). with the majority of telemetered turtles and western Gulf of Mexico, eastern Habitat preferences of Northwest traveling southwest, following the Yucatan Peninsula, at Cay Sal Bank in Atlantic non-nesting adult loggerheads shoreline of southern Oman and Yemen, the eastern Bahamas (Addison and in the neritic zone differ from the and circling well offshore in nearby Morford, 1996; Addison, 1997), on the juvenile stage in that relatively oceanic waters (Environment Society of southwestern coast of Cuba (F. enclosed, shallow water estuarine Oman and Ministry of Environment and Moncada-Gavilan, personal habitats with limited ocean access are Climate Change, Oman, unpublished communication, cited in Ehrhart et al., less frequently used. Areas such as data). A minority traveled north as far 2003), and along the coasts of Central Pamlico Sound, North Carolina, and the as the western Persian Gulf or followed America, Colombia, Venezuela, and the Indian River Lagoon, Florida, in the the shoreline of southern Oman and eastern Caribbean Islands. In the United States, regularly used by juvenile Yemen as far west as the Gulf of Aden Southwest Atlantic, loggerheads nest in loggerheads, are only rarely frequented and the Bab-el-Mandab. significant numbers only in Brazil. In by adults (Ehrhart and Redfoot, 1995; The only verified nesting beaches for the eastern Atlantic, the largest nesting Epperly et al., 2007). In comparison, loggerheads on the Indian subcontinent population of loggerheads is in the Cape estuarine areas with more open ocean are found in Sri Lanka. A small number Verde Islands (L.F. Lo´pez-Jurado, access, such as the Chesapeake Bay in of nesting females use the beaches of Sri personal communication, cited in the U.S. mid-Atlantic, are also regularly Lanka every year (Deraniyagala, 1939; Ehrhart et al., 2003), and some nesting used by juvenile loggerheads, as well as Kar and Bhaskar, 1982; Dodd, 1988); occurs along the West African coast by adults primarily during warmer however, there are no records indicating (Fretey, 2001). seasons (J. Musick, The Virginia that Sri Lanka has ever been a major As post-hatchlings, Northwest Institute of Marine Science, personal nesting area for loggerheads Atlantic loggerheads use the North communication, 2008). Shallow water (Kapurusinghe, 2006). No confirmed Atlantic Gyre and enter Northeast habitats with large expanses of open nesting occurs on the mainland of India Atlantic waters (Carr, 1987). They are ocean access, such as Florida Bay, (Tripathy, 2005; Kapurusinghe, 2006). also found in the Mediterranean Sea provide year-round resident foraging The Gulf of Mannar provides foraging (Carreras et al., 2006; Eckert et al., areas for significant numbers of male habitat for juvenile and post-nesting 2008). In these areas, they overlap with and female adult loggerheads adult turtles (Tripathy, 2005; animals originating from the Northeast (Schroeder et al., 1998; Witherington et Kapurusinghe, 2006). Atlantic and the Mediterranean Sea al., 2006a). Offshore, adults inhabit In the East Indian Ocean, Western (Laurent et al., 1993, 1998; Bolten et al., continental shelf waters, from New York Australia hosts all known loggerhead 1998; LaCasella et al., 2005; Carreras et south through Florida, The Bahamas, nesting (Dodd, 1988). Nesting al., 2006; Monzo´n-Argu¨ ello et al., 2006, Cuba, and the Gulf of Mexico distributions in Western Australia span 2010; Revelles et al., 2007; Eckert et al., (Schroeder et al., 2003; Hawkes et al.,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58871

2007; Foley et al., 2008). The southern Preliminary surveys in Libya suggested assess whether there were any edge of the Grand Bahama Bank is nesting activity comparable to Greece loggerhead population segments that important habitat for loggerheads and Turkey, although a better satisfy the DPS criteria of both nesting on the Cay Sal Bank in The quantification is needed (Laurent et al., discreteness and significance. First, the Bahamas, but nesting females are also 1999). Minimal to moderate nesting also BRT examined whether there were any resident in the bights of Eleuthera, Long occurs in other countries throughout the loggerhead population segments that Island, and Ragged Islands as well as Mediterranean including Egypt, Israel, were discrete. Data relevant to the Florida Bay in the United States, and Italy (southern coasts and islands), discreteness question included physical, the north coast of Cuba (A. Bolten and Lebanon, Syria, and Tunisia ecological, behavioral, and genetic data. K. Bjorndal, University of Florida, (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). Recently, Given the physical separation of ocean unpublished data). Moncada et al. isolated nesting events have been basins by continents, the BRT evaluated (2010) reported the recapture in Cuban recorded in the western Mediterranean these data by ocean basin (Pacific waters of five adult female loggerheads basin, namely in Spain, Corsica Ocean, Indian Ocean, and Atlantic originally flipper tagged in Quintana (France), and in the Tyrrhenian Sea Ocean). This was not to preclude any Roo, Mexico, indicating that Cuban (Italy) (Toma´s et al., 2002; Delaugerre larger or smaller DPS delineation, but to shelf waters likely also provide foraging and Cesarini, 2004; Bentivegna et al., aid in data organization and assessment. habitat for adult females that nest in 2005). The BRT then evaluated genetic Mexico. Important neritic habitats have been information by ocean basin. The genetic In the Northeast Atlantic, satellite suggested for the large continental data consisted of results from studies telemetry studies of post-nesting shelves of: (1) Tunisia-Libya, using maternally inherited females from Cape Verde identified two (2) northern Adriatic Sea, (3) Egypt, and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and distinct dispersal patterns; larger (4) Spain (Margaritoulis, 1988; Argano biparentally inherited nuclear DNA individuals migrated to benthic foraging et al., 1992; Laurent and Lescure, 1994; microsatellite markers. Next, tagging areas off the northwest Africa coast and Lazar et al., 2000; Gomez de Segura et data (both flipper and Passive Integrated smaller individuals foraged primarily al., 2006; Broderick et al., 2007; Casale Transponder (PIT) tags) and telemetry oceanically off the northwest Africa et al., 2007a; Nada and Casale, 2008). At data were reviewed. Additional coast (Hawkes et al., 2006). Monzo´n- least the first three constitute shallow information, such as potential Argu¨ ello et al. (2009) conducted a benthic habitats for adults (including differences in morphology, was also mixed stock analysis of juvenile post-nesting females). Some other evaluated. Finally, the BRT considered loggerheads sampled from foraging areas neritic foraging areas include whether the available information on in the Canary Islands, Madeira, Azores, Amvrakikos Bay in western Greece, loggerhead population segments was and Andalusia and concluded that Lakonikos Bay in southern Greece, and bounded by any oceanographic features while juvenile loggerheads from the southern Turkey. Oceanic foraging areas (e.g., current systems) or geographic Cape Verde population were distributed for small juvenile loggerheads have been features (e.g., land masses). among these four sites, a large identified in the south Adriatic Sea proportion of Cape Verde juvenile (Casale et al., 2005a), Ionian Sea In accordance with the DPS policy, turtles appear to inhabit as yet (Deflorio et al., 2005), Sicily Strait the BRT also reviewed whether the unidentified foraging areas. (Casale et al., 2007a), and western population segments identified in the In the South Atlantic, recaptures of Mediterranean (Spain) (e.g., Camin˜ as et discreteness analysis were significant. If tagged juvenile turtles and nesting al., 2006). In addition, tagged juvenile a population segment is considered females have shown movement of loggerheads have been recorded discrete, its biological and ecological animals up and down the coast of South crossing the Mediterranean from the significance relative to the species or America (Almeida et al., 2000, 2007; eastern to the western basin and vice subspecies must then be considered. Marcovaldi et al., 2000; Laporta and versa, as well as in the Eastern Atlantic NMFS and USFWS must consider Lopez, 2003). Juvenile loggerheads, (Argano et al., 1992; Casale et al., available scientific evidence of the presumably of Brazilian origin, have 2007a). discrete segment’s importance to the also been captured on the high seas of Reproductive migrations have been taxon to which it belongs. Data relevant the South Atlantic (Kotas et al., 2004; confirmed by flipper tagging and to the significance question include Pinedo and Polacheck, 2004) and off the satellite telemetry. Female loggerheads, morphological, ecological, behavioral, coast of Atlantic Africa (Petersen, 2005; after nesting in Greece, migrate and genetic data, as described above. Bal et al., 2007; Petersen et al., 2007) primarily to the Gulf of Gabe`s and the The BRT considered the following suggesting that loggerheads of the South northern Adriatic (Margaritoulis, 1988; factors, listed in the DPS policy, in Atlantic may undertake transoceanic Margaritoulis et al., 2003; Lazar et al., determining whether the discrete developmental migrations (Bolten et al., 2004; Zbinden et al., 2008). Loggerheads population segments were significant: 1998; Peckham et al., 2007). Marcovaldi nesting in Cyprus migrate to Egypt and (a) Persistence of the discrete segment in et al. (2010) identified the northeastern Libya, exhibiting fidelity in following an ecological setting unusual or unique coast of Brazil as important foraging the same migration route during for the taxon; (b) evidence that loss of habitat for post-nesting females from subsequent nesting seasons (Broderick the discrete segment would result in a Bahia, Brazil. et al., 2007). In addition, directed significant gap in the range of the taxon; movements of juvenile loggerheads have (c) evidence that the discrete segment Mediterranean Sea been confirmed through flipper tagging represents the only surviving natural Loggerhead sea turtles are widely (Argano et al., 1992; Casale et al., 2007a) occurrence of a taxon that may be more distributed in the Mediterranean Sea. and satellite tracking (Rees and abundant elsewhere as an introduced However, nesting is almost entirely Margaritoulis, 2009). population outside its historical range; confined to the eastern Mediterranean and (d) evidence that the discrete basin, with the main nesting Overview of Information Used To segment differs markedly from other concentrations in Cyprus, Greece, and Identify DPSs populations of the species in its genetic Turkey (Margaritoulis et al., 2003; In the Status Review, the BRT characteristics. A discrete population Casale and Margaritoulis, 2010). considered a vast array of information to segment needs to satisfy only one of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58872 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

these criteria to be considered are effectively isolated from populations level nesting may occur outside Japan in significant. As described below, the BRT in the other basin, but some dispersal areas surrounding the South China Sea evaluated the available information and from the Tongaland rookery in the (Chan et al., 2007). Loggerhead sea considered items (a), (b), and (d), as Indian Ocean into feeding and turtles hatching on Japanese beaches noted above, to be most applicable to developmental habitat in the South undertake extensive developmental loggerheads. Atlantic is possible via the Agulhas migrations using the Kuroshio and Current (G.R. Hughes, unpublished data, North Pacific Currents (Balazs, 2006; Discreteness Determination cited in Bowen et al., 1994). In the Kobayashi et al., 2008), and some turtles As described in the Status Review, the Pacific, extensive mtDNA studies show reach the vicinity of Baja California in loggerhead sea turtle is present in all that the northern loggerhead the eastern Pacific (Uchida and Teruya, tropical and temperate ocean basins, populations are isolated from the 1988; Bowen et al., 1995; Peckham et and has a life history that involves southern Pacific populations, and that al., 2007). After spending years foraging nesting on coastal beaches and foraging juvenile loggerheads from these distinct in the central and eastern Pacific, in neritic and oceanic habitats, as well genetic populations do not disperse loggerheads return to their natal beaches as long-distance migrations between and across the equator (Bowen et al., 1994, for reproduction (Resendiz et al., 1998; within these areas. As with other 1995; Hatase et al., 2002a; Dutton, 2007, Nichols et al., 2000) and remain in the globally distributed marine species, unpublished data; Boyle et al., 2009). western Pacific for the remainder of today’s global loggerhead distribution Mitochondrial DNA data indicate that their life cycle (Iwamoto et al., 1985; has been shaped by a sequence of regional turtle rookeries within an ocean Kamezaki et al., 1997; Sakamoto et al., isolation events created by tectonic and basin have been strongly isolated from 1997; Hatase et al., 2002c). oceanographic shifts over geologic time one another over ecological timescales Despite these long-distance scales, the result of which is population (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen and Karl, developmental movements of juvenile substructuring in many areas (Bowen et 2007). These same data indicate strong loggerheads in the North Pacific, current al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). Globally, female natal homing and suggest that scientific evidence, based on genetic loggerhead sea turtles comprise a each regional nesting population is an analysis, flipper tag recoveries, and mosaic of populations, each with independent demographic unit (Bowen satellite telemetry, indicates that unique nesting sites and in many cases et al., 2004, 2005; Bowen and Karl, individuals originating from Japan possessing disparate demographic 2007). It is difficult to determine the remain in the North Pacific for their features (e.g., mean body size, age at precise boundaries of these entire life cycle, never crossing the first reproduction) (Dodd, 1988). demographically independent equator or mixing with individuals from However, despite these differences, populations in regions, such as the the South Pacific (Bowen et al., 1995; loggerheads from different nesting eastern U.S. coast, where rookeries are Hatase et al., 2002a; LeRoux and Dutton, populations often mix in common close to each other and range along large 2006; Dutton, 2007, unpublished data; foraging areas during certain life stages areas of a continental coastline. There Boyle et al., 2009). This apparent, (Bolten and Witherington, 2003; Bowen appear to be varying levels of almost complete separation of two and Karl, 2007), thus creating unique connectivity between proximate adjacent populations most likely results challenges when attempting to delineate rookeries facilitated by imprecise natal from: (1) The presence of two distinct distinct population segments for homing and male mediated gene flow Northern and Southern Gyre (current management or listing purposes. (Pearce, 2001; Bowen, 2003; Bowen et flow) systems in the Pacific (Briggs, Bowen et al. (1994) examined the al., 2005). Regional genetic populations 1974), (2) near-passive movements of mtDNA sequence diversity of often are characterized by allelic post-hatchlings in these gyres that loggerheads across their global frequency differences rather than fixed initially move them farther away from distribution and found a separation of genetic differences (Bowen and Karl, areas of potential mixing among the two loggerheads in the Atlantic- 2007). populations along the equator, and (3) Mediterranean basins from those in the Through the evaluation of genetic the nest-site fidelity of adult turtles that Indo-Pacific basins since the Pleistocene data, tagging data, telemetry, and prevents turtles from returning to non- period. The divergence between these demography, the BRT determined that natal nesting areas. two primary lineages corresponds to there are at least nine discrete Pacific loggerheads are further approximately three million years (2 population segments of loggerhead sea partitioned evolutionarily from other percent divergence per million years; turtles globally. These discrete loggerheads throughout the world based Dutton et al., 1996; Encalada et al., population segments are markedly on additional analyses of mtDNA. The 1996). Geography and climate appear to separated from each other as a haplotypes (a haplotype refers to the have shaped the evolution of these two consequence of physical, ecological, genetic signature, coded in mtDNA, of matriarchal lineages with the onset of behavioral, and oceanographic factors an individual) from both North and glacial cycles, the appearance of the and, given the genetic evidence, the South Pacific loggerheads are Panama Isthmus creating a land barrier BRT concluded that each regional distinguished by a minimum genetic between the Atlantic and eastern population identified is discrete from distance (d) equal to 0.017 from other Pacific, and upwelling of cold water off other populations of loggerheads. conspecifics, which indicates isolation southern Africa creating an Information considered by the BRT in of approximately one million years oceanographic barrier between the its delineation of discrete population (Bowen, 2003). Atlantic and Indian Oceans (Bowen, segments is presented below by ocean Within the Pacific, Bowen et al. 2003). Recent warm temperatures basin. (1995) used mtDNA to identify two during interglacial periods allowed bi- genetically distinct nesting populations directional invasion by the temperate- Pacific Ocean in the Pacific—a northern hemisphere adapted loggerheads into the respective In the North Pacific Ocean, the population nesting in Japan and a basins (Bowen et al., 1994; J.S. Reece, primary loggerhead nesting areas are southern hemisphere population nesting Washington University, personal found along the southern Japanese primarily in Australia. This study also communication, 2008). Today, it coastline and Ryukyu Archipelago suggested that some loggerheads appears that loggerheads within a basin (Kamezaki et al., 2003), although low sampled as bycatch in the North Pacific

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58873

might be from the Australian nesting and west-east movements (Uchida and webs. Juvenile loggerheads originating population (Bowen et al., 1995). Teruya, 1988; Resendiz et al., 1998; W.J. from nesting beaches in Japan exhibit However, more extensive mtDNA data Nichols, California Academy of high site fidelity to this area referred to from rookeries in Japan (Hatase et al., Sciences, and H. Peckham, Pro as the Kuroshio Extension Bifurcation 2002a) taken together with preliminary Peninsula, unpublished data) and Region (Polovina et al., 2006). Juvenile results from microsatellite (nuclear) several recoveries of adults in the turtles also were found to correlate analysis confirms that loggerheads western Pacific (Iwamoto et al., 1985; strongly with the Transition Zone inhabiting the North Pacific actually Kamezaki et al., 1997). Tag returns show Chlorophyll Front, an area of surface originate from nesting beaches in Japan post-nesting females migrating into the chlorophyll a levels that also (Watanabe et al., 2011; P. Dutton, East China Sea off South Korea, China, concentrates surface prey for NMFS, unpublished data). and the Philippines, and the nearby loggerheads (Polovina et al., 2001; Although these studies indicate coastal waters of Japan (Iwamoto et al., Parker et al., 2005; Kobayashi et al., genetic distinctness between 1985; Kamezaki et al., 1997, 2003). 2008). Kobayashi et al. (2008) loggerheads nesting in Japan versus However, despite the more than 30,000 demonstrated that loggerheads strongly those nesting in Australia, Bowen et al. marked individuals, not a single tag track these zones even as they shift in (1995) did identify individuals with the recovery has been reported outside the location, suggesting that strong habitat common Australian haplotype at North Pacific. specificity during the oceanic stage also foraging areas in the North Pacific, A lack of movements by loggerheads contributes to the lack of mixing. In based on a few individuals sampled as south across the equator has also been summary, loggerheads inhabiting the bycatch in the North Pacific. Bowen et supported by extensive satellite North Pacific Ocean are derived al. (1995) indicated that this finding telemetry. As with flipper tagging, primarily, if not entirely, from Japanese could be an artifact of sampling variance satellite telemetry has been conducted beaches, with the possible exception of or that the Australian haplotype exists widely in the North Pacific, with rare waifs over evolutionary time scales. at low frequency in Japanese nesting satellite transmitters being placed on Further, nesting colonies of Japanese aggregates but escaped detection in their adult turtles departing nesting beaches loggerheads are found to be genetically study. More recently, Hatase et al. (Sakamoto et al., 1997; Japan Fisheries distinct based on mtDNA analyses, and (2002a) and Watanabe et al. (2011) Resource Conservation Association, when compared to much larger and detected this common Australian 1999; Hatase et al., 2002b, 2002c), on more genetically diverse loggerhead haplotype at very low frequency at adult and juvenile turtles bycaught in populations in the Atlantic and Japanese nesting beaches. However, the pound nets off the coast of Japan (Sea Mediterranean, Pacific loggerheads have presence of the common Australian Turtle Association of Japan, likely experienced critical bottlenecks haplotype does not preclude the genetic unpublished data), on captive-reared (in Hatase et al., 2002a). This is the only distinctiveness of Japanese and juvenile turtles released in Japan known population of loggerheads to be Australian nesting populations, and is (Balazs, 2006), on juvenile and adult found north of the equator in the Pacific likely the result of rare gene flow events turtles bycaught in the eastern and Ocean, foraging in the eastern Pacific as occurring over geologic time scales. central North Pacific (e.g., Kobayashi et far south as Baja California Sur, Mexico Watanabe et al. (2011) found sub- al., 2008; Peckham, 2008), and on (Seminoff et al., 2004; Peckham et al., structuring among the Japanese nesting juvenile turtles foraging in the eastern 2007) and in the western Pacific as far sites based on mtDNA results, but Pacific (Nichols et al., 2000; Nichols, south as the Philippines (Limpus, 2009) homogeneity of nuclear DNA variation 2003; Peckham et al., 2007; Peckham, and the mouth of Mekong River, among the same Japanese nesting sites, 2008; J. Seminoff, NMFS, unpublished Vietnam (Sadoyama et al., 1996; indicating connectivity through male- data). Aerial surveys and satellite Hamann et al., 2006). mediated gene flow. These results taken telemetry studies, which have together are consistent with the documented juvenile foraging areas in In the South Pacific Ocean, previous evidence supporting the the eastern Pacific, near Baja California, loggerhead sea turtles nest primarily in genetic distinctiveness of the northern Mexico (Nichols, 2003; Seminoff et al., Queensland, Australia, and, to a lesser (Japanese) stocks from the southern 2006; Peckham et al., 2007; H. Peckham, extent, New Caledonia and Vanuatu Pacific nesting stocks. Pro Peninsula, unpublished data) and (Limpus and Limpus, 2003a; Limpus et The discrete status of loggerheads in Peru (Mangel et al., in press), similarly al., 2006; Limpus, 2009). Loggerheads the North Pacific is further supported by showed a complete lack of long distance from these rookeries undertake an results from flipper tagging in the North north or south movements. Of the nearly oceanic developmental migration, Pacific. Flipper tagging of loggerheads 200 loggerheads tracked using satellite traveling to habitats in the central and has been widespread throughout this telemetry in the North Pacific, none southeastern Pacific Ocean where they region, occurring on adults nesting in have moved south of the equator. may reside for several years prior to Japan and bycaught in the coastal pound Studies have demonstrated the strong returning to the western Pacific for net fishery (Y. Matsuzawa, Sea Turtle association loggerheads show with reproduction. Loggerheads in this early Association of Japan, personal oceanographic mesoscale features such life history stage differ markedly from communication, 2006), juvenile turtles as the Kuroshio Current Bifurcation those originating from Western reared and released in Japan (Uchida Region and the Transition Zone Australia beaches in that they undertake and Teruya, 1988; Hatase et al., 2002a), Chlorophyll Front (Polovina et al., 2000, long west-to-east migrations, likely juvenile turtles foraging near Baja 2001, 2004, 2006; Etnoyer et al., 2006; using specific areas of the pelagic California, Mexico (Nichols, 2003; Kobayashi et al., 2008). The Kuroshio environment of the South Pacific Ocean. Seminoff et al., 2004), and juvenile and Extension Current, lying west of the An unknown portion of these adult loggerheads captured in and international date line, serves as the loggerheads forage off Chile and Peru, tagged from commercial fisheries dominant physical and biological and genetic information from foraging platforms in the North Pacific high seas habitat in the North Pacific and is areas in the southeastern Pacific (NMFS, unpublished data). To date, highly productive, likely due to unique confirms that the haplotype frequencies there have been at least three trans- features such as eddies and meanders among juvenile turtles in these areas Pacific tag recoveries showing east-west that concentrate prey and support food closely match those found at nesting

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58874 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

beaches in eastern Australia (Alfaro- less clear, although these too are This 3- to 6-year cycle within the Shigueto et al., 2004; Donoso and considered to be genetically distinct coupled ocean-atmosphere system of the Dutton, 2006, 2007; Boyle et al., 2009). from one another (Limpus, 2009). For tropical Pacific brings increased surface Large juvenile and adult loggerheads example, mtDNA haplotype CCP1, water temperatures and lower primary generally remain in the western South which is the overwhelmingly dominant productivity, both of which have Pacific, inhabiting neritic and oceanic haplotype among eastern Australia profound biological consequences foraging sites during non-nesting nesting females (98 percent), is also (Chavez et al., 1999; Saba et al., 2008). periods (Limpus et al., 1994; Limpus, found in western Australia, although at Loggerheads are presumably adversely 2009). much lower frequency (33 percent) impacted by the reduced food Loggerheads from Australia and New (FitzSimmons et al., 1996, 2003). The availability that often results from ENSO Caledonia apparently do not travel remaining haplotype for both regions events, although data on this subject are north of the equator. Flipper tag was the CCP5 haplotype. Further, lacking. Although ENSO may last for recoveries from nesting females have FitzSimmons (University of Canberra, only short periods and thus not have a been found throughout the western unpublished data) found significant long-term effect on loggerheads in the Pacific, including the southern Great differences in nuclear DNA region, recent studies by Chaloupka et Barrier Reef and Moreton Bay off the microsatellite loci from females nesting al. (2008) suggested that long-term coast of Queensland, Australia, in these two regions. Estimates of gene increases in sea surface temperature Indonesia (Irian Jaya), Papua New flow between eastern and western within the South Pacific may influence Guinea, Solomon Islands, the Torres Australian populations were an order of the ability of the Australian nesting Strait, and the Gulf of Carpentaria magnitude less than gene flow within population to recover from historical (Limpus, 2009). Of approximately 1,000 regions. These preliminary results based population declines. (adult and juvenile; male and female) on nuclear DNA indicate that male- Loggerheads originating from nesting loggerheads that have been tagged in mediated gene flow between eastern and beaches in the western South Pacific are eastern Australian feeding areas over western Australia may be insignificant, the only population of loggerheads to be approximately 25 years, only two have which, when considered in light of the found south of the equator in the Pacific been recorded nesting outside of substantial disparity in mtDNA Ocean. As post-hatchlings, they are Australia; both traveled to New haplotype frequencies between these generally swept south by the East Caledonia (Limpus and Limpus, 2003b; two regions, provides further evidence Australian Current (Limpus et al., 1994), Limpus, 2009). Flipper tagging programs of population separation. It is also spend a large portion of time foraging in in Peru and Chile tagged approximately important to note that there is no the oceanic South Pacific Ocean, and 500 loggerheads from 1999 to 2006, nesting by loggerheads recorded by some migrate to the southeastern Pacific none of which have been reported from either scientists or indigenous peoples Ocean off the coasts of Peru and Chile outside of the southeastern Pacific for the thousands of kilometers of sandy as juvenile turtles (Donoso et al., 2000; (Alfaro-Shigueto et al., 2008a; S. Kelez, beaches between the rookeries of Alfaro-Shigueto et al., 2004, 2008a; Duke University Marine Laboratory, Queensland and Western Australia Boyle et al., 2009). As large juveniles unpublished data; M. Donoso, ONG (Chatto and Baker, 2008). and adults, the foraging range of these Pacifico Laud—Chile, unpublished At present, there is no indication from loggerheads encompasses the eastern data). Limited satellite telemetry data genetic studies that the loggerhead sea Arafura Sea, Gulf of Carpentaria, Torres from 12 turtles in the southeastern turtles nesting in eastern Australia are Strait, Gulf of Papua, Coral Sea, and Pacific area show a similar trend distinct from those nesting in New throughout the eastern coastline of (Mangel et al., in press). Caledonia. Of 27 turtles sequenced from Australia from north Queensland south The spatial separation between the New Caledonia, 93 percent carried the to southern New South Wales, including North Pacific and South Pacific CCP1 haplotype and the remaining had the Great Barrier Reef, Hervey Bay, and loggerhead populations has contributed the CCP5 haplotype; similar to eastern Moreton Bay. The outer extent of this to substantial differences in the genetic Australia (Boyle et al., 2009). range includes the coastal waters off profiles of the nesting populations in The South Pacific population of eastern Indonesia, northeastern Papua these two regions. Whereas the loggerheads occupies an ecological New Guinea, northeastern Solomon dominant mtDNA haplotypes among setting distinct from other loggerheads, Islands, and New Caledonia (Limpus, loggerheads nesting in Japan are CCP2 including the North Pacific population; 2009). and CCP3 (equivalent to B and C however, less is known about the In summary, all loggerheads respectively in Bowen et al., 1995 and ecosystem on which South Pacific inhabiting the South Pacific Ocean are Hatase et al., 2002a; LeRoux et al., 2008; oceanic juvenile and adult loggerheads derived from beaches in eastern P. Dutton, NMFS, unpublished data), depend. Sea surface temperature and Australia and a lesser known number of loggerheads nesting in eastern Australia chlorophyll frontal zones in the South beaches in southern New Caledonia, have a third haplotype (CCP1, Pacific have been shown to dramatically Vanuatu, and Tokelau (Limpus and previously A) which is dominant (98 affect the movements of green turtles, Limpus, 2003a; Limpus, 2009). percent of nesting females) (Bowen et Chelonia mydas (Seminoff et al., 2008) Furthermore, nesting colonies of the al., 1994; FitzSimmons et al., 1996; and leatherback turtles, Dermochelys South Pacific population of loggerheads Boyle et al., 2009). Further, preliminary coriacea (Shillinger et al., 2008), and it are found to be genetically distinct from genetic analysis using microsatellite is likely that loggerhead distributions loggerheads in the North Pacific and markers (nuclear DNA) indicates genetic are also affected by these mesoscale Indian Ocean. distinctiveness between nesting oceanographic features. However, Given the information presented populations in the North versus South unlike the North Pacific, there are no above, the BRT concluded, and we Pacific (P. Dutton, NMFS, personal records of oceanic aggregations of concur, that two discrete population communication, 2008). loggerhead sea turtles. segments exist in the Pacific Ocean: The separateness between nesting Loggerheads in the South Pacific are (1) North Pacific Ocean and (2) South populations in eastern Australia (in the substantially impacted by periodic Pacific Ocean. These two population South Pacific Ocean) and western environmental perturbations such as the segments are markedly separated from Australia (in the East Indian Ocean) is El Nin˜ o Southern Oscillation (ENSO). each other and from population

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58875

segments within the Indian Ocean and Islands, Oman (17° S. lat.) and on to the nearby Muiron Islands (Baldwin Atlantic Ocean basins as a consequence Oman’s Persian Gulf mainland beaches et al., 2003). Nesting individuals from of physical, ecological, behavioral, and south of Masirah Island to the Oman- Dirk Hartog Island have been recorded oceanographic factors. Information Yemen border (17–20° S. lat.) (IUCN— foraging within Shark Bay and Exmouth supporting this conclusion includes The World Conservation Union, 1989a, Gulf, while other adults range into the genetic analysis, flipper tag recoveries, 1989b; Salm, 1991; Salm and Salm, Gulf of Carpentaria (Baldwin et al., and satellite telemetry, which indicate 1991; Baldwin et al., 2003). In addition, 2003) as far east as Torres Strait. At the that individuals originating from Japan nesting probably occurs on the eastern extent of this apparent range, remain in the North Pacific for their mainland of Yemen on the Arabian Sea there is likely overlap with loggerheads entire life cycle, likely never crossing coast, and nesting has been confirmed that nest on Australia’s Pacific coast the equator or mixing with individuals on Socotra, an island off the coast of (Limpus, 2009). However, despite from the South Pacific (Bowen et al., Yemen (Pilcher and Saad, 2000). extensive tagging and beach monitoring 1995; Hatase et al., 2002a; LeRoux and Outside of Oman, loggerhead nesting at principal nesting beaches on Dutton, 2006; Dutton, 2007, is rare in the North Indian Ocean. The Australia’s Indian Ocean and Pacific unpublished data; Boyle et al., 2009). only verified nesting beaches for coasts, no exchange of females between This apparent, almost complete loggerheads on the Indian subcontinent nesting beaches has been observed separation most likely results from: (1) are found in Sri Lanka (Deraniyagala, (Limpus, 2009). The presence of two distinct Northern 1939; Kar and Bhaskar, 1982; Dodd, Loggerhead nesting in the Southwest and Southern Gyre (current flow) 1988; Kapurusinghe, 2006). Reports of Indian Ocean includes the southeastern systems in the Pacific (Briggs, 1974), regular loggerhead nesting on the Indian coast of Africa from the Paradise Islands (2) near-passive movements of post- mainland are likely misidentifications in Mozambique southward to St. Lucia hatchlings in these gyres that initially of olive ridleys (Lepidochelys olivacea) in South Africa, and on the south and move them farther away from areas of (Tripathy, 2005; Kapurusinghe, 2006). southwestern coasts of Madagascar potential mixing along the equator, and Although loggerheads have been (Baldwin et al., 2003). Foraging habitats (3) the nest-site fidelity of adult turtles reported nesting in low numbers in are only known for the Tongaland, that prevents turtles from returning to Myanmar, these data may not be reliable South Africa, adult female loggerheads. non-natal nesting areas. The separation because of misidentification of species Returns of flipper tags describe a range of the Pacific Ocean population (Thorbjarnarson et al., 2000). that extends eastward to Madagascar, segments from population segments Limited information exists on foraging northward to Mozambique, Tanzania, within the Indian Ocean and Atlantic locations of North Indian Ocean and Kenya, and southward to Cape Ocean basins is believed to be the result loggerheads. Foraging individuals have Agulhas at the southernmost point of of land barriers and oceanographic been reported off the southern coastline Africa (Baldwin et al., 2003). Four post- barriers. Based on mtDNA analysis, of Oman (Salm et al., 1993) and in the nesting loggerheads satellite tracked by Bowen et al. (1994) found a separation Gulf of Mannar, between Sri Lanka and Luschi et al. (2006) migrated northward, of loggerheads in the Atlantic- India (Tripathy, 2005; Kapurusinghe, hugging the Mozambique coast and Mediterranean basins from those in the 2006). Satellite telemetry studies of remained in shallow shelf waters off Indo-Pacific basins since the Pleistocene post-nesting migrations of loggerheads Mozambique for more than 2 months. period. Geography and climate appear nesting on Masirah Island, Oman, have Only one post-nesting female from the to have shaped the evolution of these revealed extensive use of the waters off Southwest Indian Ocean population two matriarchal lineages with the onset the Arabian Peninsula, with the (South Africa) has been documented of glacial cycles, the appearance of the majority of telemetered turtles (15 of 20) migrating north of the equator (to Panama Isthmus creating a land barrier traveling southwest, following the southern Somalia) (Hughes and between the Atlantic and eastern shoreline of southern Oman and Yemen, Bartholomew, 1996). Pacific, and upwelling of cold water off and circling well offshore in nearby The available genetic information southern Africa creating an oceanic waters (Environment Society of relates to connectivity and broad oceanographic barrier between the Oman and Ministry of Environment and evolutionary relationships between Atlantic and Indian Oceans (Bowen, Climate Change, Oman, unpublished ocean basins. There is a lack of genetic 2003). data). A minority traveled north as far information on population structure as the western Persian Gulf (3 of 20) or among rookeries within the Indian Indian Ocean followed the shoreline of southern Ocean. Bowen et al. (1994) described Similar to loggerheads in the Pacific Oman and Yemen as far west as the Gulf mtDNA sequence diversity among eight and Atlantic, loggerheads in the Indian of Aden and the Bab-el-Mandab (2 of loggerhead nesting assemblages and Ocean nest on coastal beaches, forage in 20). These preliminary data from Oman found one of two principal branches in neritic and oceanic habitats, and suggest that post-nesting migrations and the Indo-Pacific basins. Using additional undertake long-distance migrations adult female foraging areas are restricted published and unpublished data, Bowen between and within these areas. The to the Northwest Indian Ocean (2003) estimated divergence between distribution of loggerheads in the Indian (Environment Society of Oman and these two lineages to be approximately Ocean is limited by the Asian landmass Ministry of Environment and Climate three million years. Bowen pointed out to the north (approximately 30° N. lat.); Change, Oman, unpublished data). No evidence for more recent colonizations distributions east and west are not tag returns or satellite tracks indicated (12,000–250,000 years ago) between the restricted by landmasses south of that loggerheads nesting in Oman Indian Ocean and the Atlantic- approximately 38° S. latitude. traveled south of the equator. Mediterranean. For example, the sole In the North Indian Ocean, Oman In the East Indian Ocean, Western mtDNA haplotype (among eight hosts the vast majority of loggerhead Australia hosts all known loggerhead samples) identified by Bowen et al. nesting. The largest nesting assemblage nesting (Dodd, 1988). Nesting (1994) at Masirah Island, Oman, is is at Masirah Island, Oman, in the distributions in Western Australia span known from the Atlantic and suggests northern tropics at 21° N. lat. (Baldwin from the Shark Bay World Heritage Area some exchange between oceans some et al., 2003). Other key nesting northward through the Ningaloo Marine 250,000 years ago. The other principal assemblages occur on the Al Halaniyat Park coast to the North West Cape and Indian Ocean haplotype reported by

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58876 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

Bowen et al. (1994) was seen in all for the North Indian Ocean, Southeast (1994) found a separation of loggerheads loggerheads sampled (n = 15) from Indo-Pacific Ocean, and Southwest in the Atlantic-Mediterranean basins Natal, South Africa. Encalada et al. Indian Ocean loggerhead populations. from those in the Indo-Pacific basins (1998) reported that this haplotype was Although there is not a sufficiently clear since the Pleistocene period. Geography common throughout the North Atlantic picture of gene flow between these and climate appear to have shaped the and Mediterranean, thus suggesting a regions, significant vicariant barriers evolution of these two matriarchal similar exchange between the Atlantic likely exist between these three Indian lineages with the onset of glacial cycles, and Indian Oceans as recently as 12,000 Ocean populations that would prevent the appearance of the Panama Isthmus years ago (Bowen et al., 1994). Bowen migration of individuals on a time scale creating a land barrier between the (2003) speculated that Indian-Atlantic relative to management and Atlantic and eastern Pacific, and Ocean exchanges took place via the conservation efforts. These upwelling of cold water off southern temperate waters south of South Africa biogeographical barriers are the Africa creating an oceanographic barrier and became rare as the ocean shifted to oceanographic phenomena associated between the Atlantic and Indian Oceans cold temperate conditions in this region. with Indian Ocean equatorial waters, (Bowen, 2003). In the East Indian To estimate loggerhead gene flow in and the large expanse between Ocean, although there is possible and out of the Indian Ocean, J.S. Reece continents in the South Indian Ocean overlap with loggerheads that nest on (Washington University, personal without suitable benthic foraging Australia’s Indian Ocean and Pacific communication, 2008) examined 100 habitat. Ocean coasts, extensive tagging at the samples from Masirah Island, 249 from Given the information presented principal nesting beaches on both coasts Atlantic rookeries (from Encalada et al., above, the BRT concluded, and we has revealed no exchange of females 1998), and 311 from Pacific rookeries concur, that three discrete population between these nesting beaches (Limpus, (from Bowen et al., 1995 and Hatase et segments exist in the Indian Ocean: (1) 2009). al., 2002a). Reece estimated that gene North Indian Ocean, (2) Southeast Indo- flow, expressed as number of effective Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea Pacific Ocean, and (3) Southwest Indian migrants, or exchanges of breeding Within the Atlantic Ocean, loss and Ocean. These three population segments females between Indian Ocean rookeries re-colonization of nesting beaches over are markedly separated from each other and those from the Atlantic or Pacific evolutionary time scales has been and from population segments within occurred at the rate of less than 0.1 influenced by climate, natal homing, the Pacific Ocean and Atlantic Ocean migrant per generation. Reece estimated and rare dispersal events (Encalada et gene flow based on coalescence of basins as a consequence of physical, al., 1998; Bowen and Karl, 2007). At combined mtDNA and nuclear DNA ecological, behavioral, and times, temperate beaches were too cool data to be approximately 0.5 migrants oceanographic factors. Information to incubate eggs and embryonic per generation. These unpublished supporting this conclusion is primarily development could have succeeded results, while somewhat theoretical, based on observations of tag returns and only on tropical beaches. Thus, the may indicate that there is restricted gene satellite telemetry. The genetic contemporary distribution of nesting is flow into and out of the Indian Ocean. information currently available based on the product of colonization events from The low level of gene flow most likely mtDNA sequences does not allow for a the tropical refugia during the last reflects the historical connectivity over comprehensive analysis of genetic 12,000 years. Apparently, turtles from geological timescales rather than any population structure for Indian Ocean the Northwest Atlantic colonized the contemporary migration, and is rookeries; however, the Oman and Mediterranean and at least two consistent with Bowen et al.’s (1994) South African rookeries are genetically matrilines were involved (Schroth et al., hypothesis that exchange occurred most distinct (Bowen et al., 1994), and, based 1996); however, Mediterranean recently over 12,000–3,000,000 years on preliminary results, once sequencing rookeries became isolated from the ago during the Pleistocene, and has been studies are completed for these Atlantic populations in the last 10,000 restricted over recent ecological rookeries, it is likely that they will also years following the end of the timescales. be determined genetically distinct from Wisconsin glacial period (Encalada et The discrete status of three loggerhead the rookeries in Western Australia (P. al., 1998). A similar colonization event populations in the Indian Ocean is Dutton, NMFS, unpublished data; N. appears to have populated the Northeast primarily supported by observations of FitzSimmons, University of Canberra, Atlantic (Monzo´n-Argu¨ ello et al., 2010). tag returns and satellite telemetry. The unpublished data; J. Reece, University Nesting in the western South Atlantic genetic information currently available of California at Santa Cruz, unpublished occurs primarily along the mainland based on mtDNA sequences does not data). Furthermore, significant coast of Brazil from Sergipe south to Rio allow for a comprehensive analysis of biogeographical barriers (i.e., de Janeiro, with peak concentrations in genetic population structure analysis for oceanographic phenomena associated northern Bahia, Espı´rito Santo, and Indian Ocean rookeries, although with Indian Ocean equatorial waters, northern Rio de Janeiro (Marcovaldi and Bowen et al. (1994) indicated the Oman and the large expanse between Chaloupka, 2007). In the eastern South and South African rookeries are continents in the South Indian Ocean Atlantic, diffuse nesting may occur genetically distinct, and, based on without suitable benthic foraging along the mainland coast of Africa preliminary results, once sequencing habitat) likely exist between these three (Fretey, 2001), with more than 200 studies are completed for these Indian Ocean populations that would loggerhead nests reported for Rio Longa rookeries, it is likely that they will also prevent migration of individuals on a beach in central Angola in 2005 (Brian, be genetically distinct from the time scale relative to management and 2007). However, other researchers have rookeries in Western Australia (P. conservation efforts. The separation of been unable to confirm nesting by Dutton, NMFS, unpublished data; N. the Indian Ocean population segments loggerheads in the last decade anywhere FitzSimmons, University of Canberra, from population segments within the along the south Atlantic coast of Africa, unpublished data; J. Reece, University Pacific Ocean and Atlantic Ocean basins including Angola (Fretey, 2001; Weir et of California at Santa Cruz, unpublished is believed to be the result of land al., 2007). There is the possibility that data). Based on multiple lines of barriers and oceanographic barriers. reports of nesting loggerheads from evidence, discrete status is supported Based on mtDNA analysis, Bowen et al. Angola and Namibia (Ma´rquez M., 1990;

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58877

Brian, 2007) may have arisen from Brazil with satellite transmitters to progeny depends on female nesting misidentified olive ridley turtles study their internesting and postnesting success. All Northwest Atlantic (Brongersma, 1982; Fretey, 2001). At the movements. At the conclusion of their recovery units are reproductively current time, it is not possible to nesting season, all 10 turtles migrated to isolated from populations within the confirm that regular, if any, nesting of the northern coast of Brazil to Northeast Atlantic, South Atlantic, and loggerheads occurs along the Atlantic individual foraging areas on the Mediterranean Sea. coast of Africa, south of the equator. continental shelf. Females were also As oceanic juveniles, loggerheads Genetic surveys of loggerheads have tracked during a second postnesting from the Northwest Atlantic use the revealed that the Brazilian rookeries migration back to their foraging areas, North Atlantic Gyre and often are have a unique mtDNA haplotype showing a strong fidelity to foraging associated with Sargassum communities (Encalada et al., 1998; Pearce, 2001). grounds. (Carr, 1987). They also are found in the The Brazilian mtDNA haplotype, Within the Northwest Atlantic, the Mediterranean Sea. In these areas, they relative to North Atlantic haplotypes, majority of nesting activity occurs from overlap with animals originating from indicates isolation of South Atlantic April through September, with a peak in the Northeast Atlantic and the loggerheads from North Atlantic June and July (Williams-Walls et al., Mediterranean Sea (Laurent et al., 1993, loggerheads on a scale of 250,000– 1983; Dodd, 1988; Weishampel et al., 1998; Bolten et al., 1998; Bowen et al., 500,000 years ago, and microsatellite 2006). Nesting occurs within the 2005; LaCasella et al., 2005; Carreras et DNA results show divergence on the Northwest Atlantic along the coasts of al., 2006; Monzo´n-Argu¨ ello et al., 2006; same time scale (Bowen, 2003). Brazil’s North America, Central America, Revelles et al., 2007). In the western unique haplotype has been found only northern South America, the Antilles, Mediterranean, they tend to be in low numbers in foraging populations and The Bahamas, but is concentrated associated with the waters off the of juvenile loggerheads of the North in the southeastern United States and on northern African coast and the Atlantic (Bass et al., 2004). Other lines the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico northeastern Balearic Archipelago, areas of evidence support a deep division (Sternberg, 1981; Ehrhart, 1989; Ehrhart generally not inhabited by turtles of between loggerheads from the South et al., 2003; NMFS and USFWS, 2008). Mediterranean origin (Carreras et al., Atlantic and from the North Atlantic, Five recovery units (management 2006; Revelles et al., 2007; Eckert et al., including: (1) A nesting season in Brazil subunits of a listed species that are 2008). As larger neritic juveniles, they that peaks in the austral summer around geographically or otherwise identifiable show more structure and tend to inhabit December–January (Marcovaldi and and essential to the recovery of the areas closer to their natal origins Laurent, 1996), as opposed to the April– species) have been identified based on (Bowen et al., 2004), but some do move September nesting season in the genetic differences and a combination of to and from oceanic foraging grounds southeastern United States in the geographic distribution of nesting throughout this life stage (McClellan northern hemisphere (Witherington et densities and geographic separation and Read, 2007; Mansfield et al., 2009; al., 2009); and (2) no observations of (NMFS and USFWS, 2008). These McClellan et al., 2010), and some tagged loggerheads moving across the recovery units are: Northern Recovery continue to use the Mediterranean Sea equator in the Atlantic, except a single Unit (Florida/Georgia border through (Casale et al., 2008a; Eckert et al., 2008). case of a captive-reared animal that was southern Virginia), Peninsular Florida Adult populations are highly released as a juvenile from Espı´rito Recovery Unit (Florida/Georgia border structured with no overlap in Santo and was recaptured 3 years later through Pinellas County, Florida), Dry distribution among adult loggerheads in the Azores (Bolten et al., 1990). Post- Tortugas Recovery Unit (islands located from the Northwest Atlantic, Northeast nesting females from Espı´rito Santo, west of Key West, Florida), Northern Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Brazil, moved either north or south Gulf of Mexico Recovery Unit (Franklin Mediterranean. Carapace epibionts along the coast, but remained between County, Florida, through Texas), and suggest the adult females of different 10° S. lat. and 30° S. lat. (Marcovaldi et Greater Caribbean Recovery Unit subpopulations use different foraging al., 2000; Lemke et al., 2006), while (Mexico through French Guiana, The habitats (Caine, 1986). In the Northwest post-nesting females from Bahia, Brazil, Bahamas, Lesser Antilles, and Greater Atlantic, based on satellite telemetry all moved north (Marcovaldi et al., Antilles) (NMFS and USFWS, 2008). studies and flipper tag returns, non- 2010). Loggerheads in the Northwest nesting adult females from the Northern Recaptures of tagged juvenile turtles Atlantic have a complex population Recovery Unit reside primarily off the and nesting females have shown genetic structure. Based on mtDNA east coast of the United States; movement of animals up and down the evidence, oceanic juveniles show no movement into the Bahamas or the Gulf coast of South America (Almeida et al., structure, neritic juveniles show of Mexico is rare (Bell and Richardson, 2000, 2007; Marcovaldi et al., 2000; moderate structure, and nesting colonies 1978; Williams and Frick, 2001; Laporta and Lopez, 2003). Juvenile show strong structure (Bowen et al., Mansfield, 2006; Turtle Expert Working loggerheads, presumably of Brazilian 2005). In contrast, a study using Group (TEWG), 2009). Adult females of origin, have also been captured on the microsatellite (nuclear DNA) markers the Peninsular Florida Recovery Unit high seas of the South Atlantic (Kotas et showed no significant population are distributed throughout eastern al., 2004; Pinedo and Polacheck, 2004) structure among nesting populations Florida, The Bahamas, Greater Antilles, and off the coast of Atlantic Africa (Bowen et al., 2005), indicating that the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico, and (Petersen, 2005; Petersen et al., 2007; while females exhibit strong philopatry, the Gulf of Mexico, as well as along the Weir et al., 2007) suggesting that, like males may provide an avenue of gene Atlantic seaboard of the United States their North Pacific, South Pacific, and flow between nesting colonies in this (Meylan, 1982; Meylan et al., 1983; Northwest Atlantic counterparts, region. Nevertheless, Bowen et al. Foley et al., 2008; TEWG, 2009). Adult loggerheads of the South Atlantic may (2005) argued that male-mediated gene females from the Northern Gulf of undertake transoceanic developmental flow within the Northwest Atlantic does Mexico Recovery Unit remained in the migrations (Bowen et al., 1995; Bolten et not detract from the classification of Gulf of Mexico, including off the al., 1998; Peckham et al., 2007; Boyle et breeding areas as independent Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico, based on al., 2009). Marcovaldi et al. (2010) populations (e.g., management/recovery satellite telemetry and flipper tag equipped 10 loggerheads nesting in units) because the production of returns (Foley et al., 2008; TEWG, 2009;

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58878 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

M. Lamont, Florida Cooperative Fish Satellite-tagged, post-nesting females Sea) along the European coast (Laurent and Wildlife Research Unit, personal from Cape Verde foraged in coastal et al., 1998; Margaritoulis et al., 2003; communication, 2009; M. Nicholas, waters along northwest Africa or foraged Carreras et al., 2006; Revelles et al., National Park Service, personal oceanically, mostly between Cape Verde 2007). Carreras et al. (2006) believe this communication, 2009). and the African shelf from Mauritania to genetic structuring is explained by the Nesting in the Northeast Atlantic is Guinea Bissau (Hawkes et al., 2006). pattern of sea surface currents and water concentrated in the Cape Verde In the Mediterranean, nesting occurs masses, with a limited exchange of Archipelago, with some nesting throughout the central and eastern juvenile loggerheads between water occurring on most of the islands, and basins on the shores of Italy, Greece, masses. Larger juveniles also use the the highest concentration on the Cyprus, Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, eastern Atlantic and the eastern beaches of Boa Vista Island (Lo´pez- the Sinai, Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia Mediterranean, especially the Tunisia- Jurado et al., 2000; Varo Cruz et al., (Sternberg, 1981; Margaritoulis et al., Libya shelf and the Adriatic Sea 2007; Loureiro, 2008; Monzo´n-Argu¨ ello 2003; SWOT, 2007; Casale and (Laurent et al., 1993; Margaritoulis et et al., 2010). On mainland Africa, there Margaritoulis, 2010). Sporadic nesting al., 2003; Monzo´n-Argu¨ ello et al., 2006; is minor nesting on the coasts of also has been reported in the western Revelles et al., 2007; Eckert et al., 2008). Mauritania to Senegal (Brongersma, Mediterranean on Corsica (Delaugerre Adults appear to forage closer to the 1982; Arvy et al., 2000; Fretey, 2001). and Cesarini, 2004), southwestern Italy nesting beaches in the eastern basin; Earlier reports of loggerhead nesting in (Bentivegna et al., 2005), and on the most tag recoveries from females nesting Morocco (Pasteur and Bons, 1960) have Spanish Mediterranean coast (Toma´s et in Greece have occurred in the Adriatic not been confirmed in recent years al., 2003, 2008). Nesting in the Sea and off Tunisia (Margaritoulis et al., (Tiwari et al., 2001). Nesting has not Mediterranean is concentrated between 2003; Lazar et al., 2004). been reported from Macaronesia June and early August (Margaritoulis et Loggerheads nesting in the (Azores, Madeira Archipelago, The al., 2003; Casale and Margaritoulis, Mediterranean were significantly Selvagens Islands, and the Canary 2010). smaller than loggerheads nesting in the Islands), other than in the Cape Verde Within the Mediterranean, a recent Northwest Atlantic and the South Archipelago (Brongersma, 1982). In study of mtDNA and nuclear DNA in Atlantic. Within the Mediterranean, Cape Verde, nesting begins in mid-June nesting assemblages from Greece to carapace lengths ranged from 58 to 95 and extends into October (Cejudo et al., Israel indicated genetic structuring, cm SCL (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). 2000), which is somewhat later than philopatry by both females and males, Greece’s loggerheads averaged 77–80 cm when nesting occurs in the Northwest and limited gene flow between SCL (Tiwari and Bjorndal, 2000; Atlantic. assemblages (Carreras et al., 2007). Margaritoulis et al., 2003), whereas Based on an analysis of mtDNA of Genetic differentiation based on mtDNA Turkey’s loggerheads averaged 72–73 nesting females from Boa Vista Island, indicated that there are at least four cm SCL (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). The the Cape Verde nesting assemblage is independent nesting assemblages within Greece turtles also produced larger genetically distinct from other studied the Mediterranean and usually they are clutches (relative to body size) than rookeries (Monzo´n-Argu¨ ello et al., 2009, characterized by a single haplotype: (1) those produced by Florida or Brazil 2010). The results also indicate that Mainland Greece and the adjoining nesters (Tiwari and Bjorndal, 2000). despite the close proximity of the Ionian Islands, (2) eastern Turkey, (3) Given the information presented Mediterranean, the Boa Vista rookery is Israel, and (4) Cyprus. There is no above, the BRT concluded, and we most closely related to the rookeries of evidence of adult female exchange concur, that four discrete population the Northwest Atlantic. among these four assemblages (Carreras segments exist in the Atlantic Ocean/ The distribution of juvenile et al., 2006). In studies of the foraging Mediterranean: (1) Northwest Atlantic loggerheads from the Northeast Atlantic grounds in the western and central Ocean, (2) Northeast Atlantic Ocean, (3) is largely unknown but they have been Mediterranean, seven of the 17 distinct South Atlantic Ocean, and (4) found on the oceanic foraging grounds haplotypes detected had not yet been Mediterranean Sea. These four of the North Atlantic (A. Bolten, described, indicating that nesting beach population segments are markedly University of Florida, personal data to describe the natal origins of separated from each other and from communication, 2008, based on Bolten juveniles exploiting the western population segments within the Pacific et al., 1998 and LaCasella et al., 2005; Mediterranean Sea are incomplete Ocean and Indian Ocean basins as a Monzo´n-Argu¨ ello et al., 2009; M. (Carreras et al., 2006; Casale et al., consequence of physical, ecological, Tiwari, NMFS, and A. Bolten, 2008a). Gene flow among the behavioral, and oceanographic factors. University of Florida, unpublished data) Mediterranean rookeries estimated from Information supporting this conclusion and in the western and central nuclear DNA was significantly higher includes genetic analysis, flipper tag Mediterranean (A. Bolten, University of than that calculated from mtDNA, recoveries, and satellite telemetry. Florida, personal communication, 2008, consistent with the scenario of female Genetic studies have shown that adult based on Carreras et al., 2006), along philopatry maintaining isolation populations are highly structured with with small juvenile loggerheads from between rookeries, offset by male- no overlap in distribution among adult the Northwest Atlantic. The size of mediated gene flow. Nevertheless, the loggerheads in these four population nesting females in the Northeast nuclear data show there was a higher segments (Bowen et al., 1994; Encalada Atlantic is comparable to those in the degree of substructuring among et al., 1998; Pearce, 2001; Carerras et al., Mediterranean (average 72–80 cm Mediterranean rookeries compared to 2007; Monzo´n-Argu¨ ello et al., 2009, straight carapace length (SCL); those in the Northwest Atlantic (Bowen 2010). Although loggerheads from the Margaritoulis et al., 2003) and smaller et al., 2005; Carreras et al., 2007). Northwest Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, than those in the Northwest Atlantic or Small oceanic juveniles from the and Mediterranean Sea population the South Atlantic; 91 percent of the Mediterranean Sea use the eastern basin segments may comingle on oceanic nesting turtles are less than 86.5 cm (defined as inclusive of the central foraging grounds as juveniles, adults are curved carapace length (CCL) (Hawkes Mediterranean, Ionian, Adriatic, and apparently isolated from each other; et al., 2006) and nesting females average Aegean Seas) and the western basin they also differ demographically. Data 77.1 cm SCL (Cejudo et al., 2000). (defined as inclusive of the Tyrrhenian from satellite telemetry studies and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58879

flipper tag returns have shown that evolution of these two matriarchal segment would represent a significant nesting females from the Northwest lineages with the onset of glacial cycles, loss of genetic diversity. Therefore, the Atlantic return to the same nesting the appearance of the Panama Isthmus BRT concluded, and we concur, that areas; they reveal no evidence of creating a land barrier between the these nine population segments are both movement of adults south of the equator Atlantic and eastern Pacific, and discrete from other conspecific or east of 40° W. longitude. Similarly, upwelling of cold water off southern population segments and significant to there is no evidence of movement of Africa creating an oceanographic barrier the species to which they belong, Northeast Atlantic adults south of the between the Atlantic and Indian Oceans Caretta caretta. equator, west of 40° W. long., or east of (Bowen, 2003). The geographic delineations given the Strait of Gibraltar, a narrow strait Significance Determination below for each discrete population that connects the Atlantic Ocean to the segment were determined primarily Mediterranean Sea. Also, there is no As stated in the preceding section, the evidence of movement of adult BRT identified nine discrete population based on nesting beach locations, Mediterranean Sea loggerheads west of segments. As described below by ocean genetic evidence, oceanographic the Strait of Gibraltar. With regard to basin, the BRT found that each of the features, thermal tolerance, fishery South Atlantic loggerheads, there have nine discrete population segments is bycatch data, and information on been no observations of tagged biologically and ecologically significant. loggerhead distribution and migrations loggerheads moving across the equator They each represent a large portion of from satellite telemetry and flipper in the Atlantic, except a single case of the species’ range, sometimes tagging studies (see Map of Loggerhead a captive-reared animal that was encompassing an entire hemispheric Sea Turtle DPS Boundaries). With rare released as a juvenile from Espı´rito ocean basin. The range of each discrete exception, adults from discrete Santo and was recaptured 3 years later population segment occurs within a population segments remain within the in the Azores (Bolten et al., 1990). The unique ecosystem that has significantly delineated boundaries. In some cases, separation of the Atlantic Ocean/ influenced each population in juvenile turtles from two or more Mediterranean Sea population segments physiology, morphology, and genetics. discrete population segments may mix from population segments within the The loss of any individual discrete on foraging areas and, therefore, their Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean basins population segment would result in a distribution and migrations may extend is believed to be the result of land significant gap in the loggerhead’s beyond the geographic boundaries barriers and oceanographic barriers. range. Each discrete population segment delineated below for each discrete Based on mtDNA analysis, Bowen et al. is genetically distinct, often identified population segment (e.g., juvenile (1994) found a separation of loggerheads by unique mtDNA haplotypes, and the turtles from the Northwest Atlantic in the Atlantic-Mediterranean basins BRT suggested that this geographic Ocean, Northeast Atlantic Ocean, and from those in the Indo-Pacific basins partitioning of genetic variation could Mediterranean Sea discrete population since the Pleistocene period. Geography also indicate adaptive differences; the segments share foraging habitat in the and climate appear to have shaped the loss of any one discrete population western Mediterranean Sea).

Pacific Ocean on oceanographic features, loggerhead Pacific Ocean discrete population sightings, thermal tolerance, fishery segment is biologically and ecologically ° The BRT considered 60 N. lat. and bycatch data, and information on significant because the loss of this the equator as the north and south loggerhead distribution from satellite population segment would result in a boundaries, respectively, of the North telemetry and flipper tagging studies. significant gap in the range of the taxon, Pacific Ocean population segment based The BRT determined that the North and the population segment differs

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 ER22SE11.007 58880 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

markedly from other population of loggerheads found south of the bycatch data, and information on segments of the species in its genetic equator in the Pacific Ocean and there loggerhead distribution from satellite characteristics. The North Pacific Ocean is no evidence or reason to believe that telemetry and flipper tagging studies. population segment encompasses an female loggerheads from North Pacific The BRT determined that the North entire hemispheric ocean basin and its nesting beaches would repopulate the Indian Ocean discrete population loss would result in a significant gap in South Pacific nesting beaches should segment is biologically and ecologically the range of the taxon. There is no those nesting assemblages be lost significant because the loss of this evidence or reason to believe that (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). In population segment would result in a female loggerheads from South Pacific addition, flipper tag and satellite significant gap in the range of the taxon, nesting beaches would repopulate the telemetry research, as described in and the population segment differs North Pacific nesting beaches should detail in the Discreteness Determination markedly from other population those nesting assemblages be lost section above, has shown no evidence of segments of the species in its genetic (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). north-south movement of loggerheads characteristics. The North Indian Ocean Tagging studies show that the vast across the equator. The BRT also stated population segment encompasses an majority of nesting females return to the that it does not expect that entire hemispheric ocean basin, and its same nesting area. As summarized by recolonization from Indian Ocean loss would result in a significant gap in Hatase et al. (2002a), of 2,219 tagged loggerheads would occur in eastern the range of the taxon. Genetic nesting females from Japan, only five Australia within ecological time frames. information currently available for females were subsequently documented Despite evidence of foraging in the Gulf Indian Ocean populations indicates that nesting away (between 74 and 630 km) of Carpentaria by adult loggerheads the Oman rookery in the North Indian from where they were originally from the nesting populations in eastern Ocean and the South African rookery in encountered. In addition, flipper tag and Australia (South Pacific Ocean the Southwest Indian Ocean are satellite telemetry research, as described population segment) and western genetically distinct (Bowen et al., 1994), in detail in the Discreteness Australia (Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean and, based on preliminary results, once Determination section above, has shown population segment), the nesting sequencing studies are completed for no evidence of north-south movement of females from these two regions are these rookeries, it is likely that they will loggerheads across the equator. This considered to be genetically distinct also be determined to be genetically discrete population segment is from one another (Limpus, 2009). In distinct from the Western Australia genetically unique (see Discreteness addition to a substantial disparity in rookeries in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Determination section above) and the mtDNA haplotype frequencies between Ocean (P. Dutton, NMFS, unpublished BRT indicated that these unique these two populations, FitzSimmons data; N. FitzSimmons, University of haplotypes could represent adaptive (University of Canberra, unpublished Canberra, unpublished data; J. Reece, differences; thus, the loss of this data) found significant differences in University of California at Santa Cruz, discrete population segment would nuclear DNA microsatellite loci between unpublished data). In addition, represent a significant loss of genetic females nesting in these two regions, oceanographic phenomena associated diversity. Based on this information, the indicating separation between the South with Indian Ocean equatorial waters BRT concluded, and we concur, that the Pacific Ocean and the Southeast Indo- exist between the North Indian Ocean North Pacific Ocean population segment Pacific Ocean population segments. population segment and the two is significant to the taxon to which it Long-term studies show a high degree of population segments in the South belongs, and, therefore, that it satisfies site fidelity by adult females in the Indian Ocean, which likely prevent the significance element of the DPS South Pacific, with most females migration of individuals across the policy. returning to the same beach within a equator on a time scale relative to nesting season and in successive nesting The BRT considered the equator and management and conservation efforts ° seasons (Limpus, 1985, 2009; Limpus et (Conant et al., 2009). Therefore, there is 60 S. lat. as the north and south al., 1994). This has been documented as boundaries, respectively, and 67° W. no evidence or reason to believe that ° characteristic of loggerheads from female loggerheads from the Southwest long. and 141 E. long. as the east and various rookeries throughout the world Indian Ocean or Southeast Indo-Pacific west boundaries, respectively, of the (Schroeder et al., 2003). This discrete Ocean would repopulate the North South Pacific Ocean population segment population segment is genetically Indian Ocean nesting beaches should based on oceanographic features, unique and the BRT indicated that these those populations be lost (Bowen et al., loggerhead sightings, thermal tolerance, unique haplotypes could represent 1994; Bowen, 2003). Based on this fishery bycatch data, and information on adaptive differences. Thus, the loss of information, the BRT concluded, and loggerhead distribution from satellite this discrete population segment would we concur, that the North Indian Ocean telemetry and flipper tagging studies. represent a significant loss of genetic population segment is significant to the The BRT determined that the South diversity. Based on this information, the taxon to which it belongs, and, Pacific Ocean discrete population BRT concluded, and we concur, that the segment is biologically and ecologically South Pacific Ocean population segment therefore, that it satisfies the significant because the loss of this is significant to the taxon to which it significance element of the DPS policy. population segment would result in a belongs, and, therefore, that it satisfies The BRT considered the equator and significant gap in the range of the taxon, the significance element of the DPS 60° S. lat. as the north and south and the population segment differs policy. boundaries, respectively, and 20° E. markedly from other population long. at Cape Agulhas on the southern segments of the species in its genetic Indian Ocean tip of Africa and 80° E. long. as the east characteristics. The South Pacific Ocean The BRT considered 30° N. lat. and and west boundaries, respectively, of population segment encompasses an the equator as the north and south the Southwest Indian Ocean population entire hemispheric ocean basin, and its boundaries, respectively, of the North segment based on oceanographic loss would result in a significant gap in Indian Ocean population segment based features, thermal tolerance, fishery the range of the taxon. The South Pacific on oceanographic features, loggerhead bycatch data, and information on Ocean population is the only population sightings, thermal tolerance, fishery loggerhead distribution from satellite

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58881

telemetry and flipper tagging studies. west boundaries, respectively, of the nesting females from these two regions The BRT determined that the Southwest Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean are considered to be genetically distinct Indian Ocean discrete population population segment based on from one another (Limpus, 2009). In segment is biologically and ecologically oceanographic features, thermal addition to a substantial disparity in significant because the loss of this tolerance, fishery bycatch data, and mtDNA haplotype frequencies between population segment would result in a information on loggerhead distribution these two regions, FitzSimmons significant gap in the range of the taxon, from satellite telemetry and flipper (University of Canberra, unpublished and the population segment differs tagging studies. The BRT determined data) found significant differences in markedly from other population that the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean nuclear DNA microsatellite loci from segments of the species in its genetic discrete population segment is females nesting in these two regions, characteristics. The Southwest Indian biologically and ecologically significant indicating separation between the South Ocean population segment encompasses because the loss of this population Pacific Ocean population segment and half of a hemispheric ocean basin, and segment would result in a significant the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean its loss would result in a significant gap gap in the range of the taxon, and the population segment. Based on this in the range of the taxon. Genetic population segment differs markedly information, the BRT concluded, and information currently available for from other population segments of the we concur, that the Southeast Indo- Indian Ocean populations indicates that species in its genetic characteristics. Pacific Ocean population segment is the Oman rookery in the North Indian The Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean significant to the taxon to which it Ocean and the South African rookery in population segment encompasses half of belongs, and, therefore, it satisfies the the Southwest Indian Ocean are a hemispheric ocean basin, and its loss significance element of the DPS policy. genetically distinct (Bowen et al., 1994), would result in a significant gap in the Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea and, based on preliminary results, once range of the taxon. Genetic information ° sequencing studies are completed for The BRT considered 60 N. lat. and currently available for Indian Ocean the equator as the north and south these rookeries, it is likely that they will populations indicates that the Oman ° also be determined to be genetically boundaries, respectively, and 40 W. rookery in the North Indian Ocean and long. as the eastern boundary of the distinct from the Western Australia the South African rookery in the rookeries in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Northwest Atlantic Ocean population Southwest Indian Ocean are genetically segment based on oceanographic Ocean (P. Dutton, NMFS, unpublished distinct (Bowen et al., 1994), and, based features, loggerhead sightings, thermal data; N. FitzSimmons, University of on preliminary results, once sequencing tolerance, fishery bycatch data, and Canberra, unpublished data; J. Reece, studies are completed for these information on loggerhead distribution University of California at Santa Cruz, rookeries, it is likely that they will also from satellite telemetry and flipper unpublished data). In addition, be determined to be genetically distinct tagging studies. The BRT determined biogeographical barriers (i.e., from the Western Australia rookeries in that the Northwest Atlantic Ocean oceanographic phenomena associated the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean (P. discrete population segment is with Indian Ocean equatorial waters, Dutton, NMFS, unpublished data; N. biologically and ecologically significant and the large expanse between FitzSimmons, University of Canberra, because the loss of this population continents in the South Indian Ocean unpublished data; J. Reece, University segment would result in a significant without suitable benthic foraging of California at Santa Cruz, unpublished gap in the range of the taxon, and the habitat) likely exist between the three data). In addition, biogeographical population segment differs markedly Indian Ocean populations that would barriers (i.e., oceanographic phenomena from other population segments of the prevent migration of individuals associated with Indian Ocean equatorial species in its genetic characteristics. between populations on a time scale waters, and the large expanse between The Northwest Atlantic Ocean relative to management and continents in the South Indian Ocean population segment encompasses half of conservation efforts (Conant et al., without suitable benthic foraging a hemispheric ocean basin, and its loss 2009). Therefore, there is no evidence or habitat) likely exist between the three would result in a significant gap in the reason to believe that female Indian Ocean populations that would range of the taxon. Genetic studies have loggerheads from the North Indian likely prevent migration of individuals shown that adult populations are highly Ocean or Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean between populations on a time scale structured with no overlap in would repopulate the Southwest Indian relative to management and distribution among adult loggerheads Ocean nesting beaches should those conservation efforts (Conant et al., from the Northwest Atlantic, Northeast populations be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; 2009). Therefore, there is no evidence or Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Bowen, 2003). There is also no evidence reason to believe that female Mediterranean Sea (Bowen et al., 1994; of movement of adult Southwest Indian loggerheads from the North Indian Encalada et al., 1998; Pearce, 2001; ° Ocean loggerheads west of 20 E. long. Ocean or Southwest Indian Ocean Carerras et al., 2007; Monzo´n-Argu¨ ello at Cape Agulhas, the southernmost would repopulate the Southeast Indo- et al., 2009, 2010). There is no evidence point on the African continent, or east Pacific Ocean nesting beaches should or reason to believe that female ° of 80 E. long. within the Indian Ocean. those populations be lost (Bowen et al., loggerheads from the Northeast Atlantic, Based on this information, the BRT 1994; Bowen, 2003). There is also no Mediterranean Sea, or South Atlantic concluded, and we concur, that the evidence of movement of adult nesting beaches would repopulate the Southwest Indian Ocean population Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean Northwest Atlantic nesting beaches segment is significant to the taxon to loggerheads west of 80° E. long. within should these populations be lost (Bowen which it belongs, and, therefore, that it the Indian Ocean. Despite evidence of et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). Data from satisfies the significance element of the foraging in the Gulf of Carpentaria by satellite telemetry studies and flipper DPS policy. adult loggerheads from the nesting tag returns, as described in detail in the The BRT considered the equator and populations in eastern Australia (South Discreteness Determination section 60° S. lat. as the north and south Pacific Ocean population segment) and above, have shown that the vast boundaries, respectively, and 141° E. western Australia (Southeast Indo- majority of nesting females from the long. and 80° E. long. as the east and Pacific Ocean population segment), the Northwest Atlantic return to the same

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:36 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58882 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

nesting area; they reveal no evidence of population segments), no evidence of the Strait of Gibraltar (5°36′ W. long.). movement of adults south of the equator movement east of 5° 36′ W. longitude. This discrete population segment is or east of 40° W. longitude. This discrete This discrete population segment is genetically unique (see Discreteness population segment is genetically genetically unique (see Discreteness Determination section above) and the distinct (see Discreteness Determination Determination section above) and the BRT indicated that these unique section above) possibly indicating BRT indicated that these unique haplotypes could represent adaptive adaptive differences as suggested by the haplotypes could represent adaptive differences; thus, the loss of this BRT; thus, the loss of this discrete differences; thus, the loss of this discrete population segment would population segment would represent a discrete population segment would represent a significant loss of genetic significant loss of genetic diversity. represent a significant loss of genetic diversity. Based on this information, the Based on this information, the BRT diversity. Based on this information, the BRT concluded, and we concur, that the concluded, and we concur, that the BRT concluded, and we concur, that the Mediterranean Sea population segment Northwest Atlantic Ocean population Northeast Atlantic Ocean population is significant to the taxon to which it segment is significant to the taxon to segment is significant to the taxon to belongs, and, therefore, that it satisfies which it belongs, and, therefore, that it which it belongs, and, therefore, that it the significance element of the DPS satisfies the significance element of the satisfies the significance element of the policy. DPS policy. DPS policy. The BRT considered the equator and The BRT considered 60° N. lat. and The BRT considered the 60° S. lat. as the north and south the equator as the north and south Mediterranean Sea west to 5°36′ W. boundaries, respectively, and 20° E. boundaries, respectively, and 40° W. long. (Strait of Gibraltar) as the long. at Cape Agulhas on the southern long. as the west boundary of the boundary of the Mediterranean Sea tip of Africa and 67° W. long. as the east Northeast Atlantic Ocean population population segment based on and west boundaries, respectively, of segment. The BRT considered the oceanographic features, loggerhead the South Atlantic Ocean population boundary between the Northeast sightings, thermal tolerance, fishery segment based on oceanographic Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea bycatch data, and information on features, loggerhead sightings, thermal population segments as 5° 36′ W. long. loggerhead distribution from satellite tolerance, fishery bycatch data, and (Strait of Gibraltar). These boundaries telemetry and flipper tagging studies. information on loggerhead distribution are based on oceanographic features, The BRT determined that the from satellite telemetry and flipper loggerhead sightings, thermal tolerance, Mediterranean Sea discrete population tagging studies. The BRT determined fishery bycatch data, and information on segment is biologically and ecologically that the South Atlantic Ocean discrete loggerhead distribution from satellite significant because the loss of this population segment is biologically and telemetry and flipper tagging studies. population segment would result in a ecologically significant because the loss The BRT determined that the Northeast significant gap in the range of the taxon, of this population segment would result Atlantic Ocean discrete population and the population segment differs in a significant gap in the range of the segment is biologically and ecologically markedly from other population taxon, and the population segment significant because the loss of this segments of the species in its genetic differs markedly from other population population segment would result in a characteristics. The Mediterranean Sea segments of the species in its genetic significant gap in the range of the taxon, population segment encompasses the characteristics. The South Atlantic and the population segment differs entire Mediterranean Sea basin, and its Ocean population segment encompasses markedly from other population loss would result in a significant gap in an entire hemispheric ocean basin, and segments of the species in its genetic the range of the taxon. Genetic studies its loss would result in a significant gap characteristics. The Northeast Atlantic have shown that adult populations are in the range of the taxon. Genetic Ocean population segment encompasses highly structured with no overlap in studies have shown that adult half of a hemispheric ocean basin, and distribution among adult loggerheads populations are highly structured with its loss would result in a significant gap from the Northwest Atlantic, Northeast no overlap in distribution among adult in the range of the taxon. Genetic Atlantic, South Atlantic, and loggerheads from the Northwest studies have shown that adult Mediterranean Sea (Bowen et al., 1994; Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, South populations are highly structured with Encalada et al., 1998; Pearce, 2001; Atlantic, and Mediterranean Sea (Bowen no overlap in distribution among adult Carerras et al., 2007; Monzo´n-Argu¨ ello et al., 1994; Encalada et al., 1998; loggerheads from the Northwest et al., 2009, 2010). There is no evidence Pearce, 2001; Carerras et al., 2007; Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, South or reason to believe that female Monzo´n-Argu¨ ello et al., 2009, 2010). Atlantic, and Mediterranean Sea (Bowen loggerheads from the Northwest There is no evidence or reason to et al., 1994; Encalada et al., 1998; Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, or South believe that female loggerheads from the Pearce, 2001; Carerras et al., 2007; Atlantic nesting beaches would Northwest Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, Monzo´n-Argu¨ ello et al., 2009, 2010). repopulate the Mediterranean Sea or Mediterranean Sea nesting beaches There is no evidence or reason to nesting beaches should these would repopulate the South Atlantic believe that female loggerheads from the populations be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; nesting beaches should these Northwest Atlantic, Mediterranean Sea, Bowen, 2003). As previously described, populations be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; or South Atlantic nesting beaches would adults from the Mediterranean Sea Bowen, 2003). This discrete population repopulate the Northeast Atlantic population segment appear to forage segment is genetically unique (see nesting beaches should these closer to the nesting beaches in the Discreteness Determination section populations be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; eastern basin, and most flipper tag above) and the BRT indicated that these Bowen, 2003). There is also no evidence recoveries from females nesting in unique haplotypes could represent of movement of Northeast Atlantic Greece have occurred in the Adriatic adaptive differences; thus, the loss of adults west of 40° W. long. or, in the Sea and off Tunisia (Margaritoulis et al., this discrete population segment would vicinity of the Strait of Gibraltar (the 2003; Lazar et al., 2004). There is no represent a significant loss of genetic boundary between the Northeast evidence of movement of adult diversity. Based on this information, the Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea Mediterranean Sea loggerheads west of BRT concluded, and we concur, that the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58883

South Atlantic Ocean population the DPSs that was more significant to then rose again to a high of just under segment is significant to the taxon to the DPS than another portion of the 11,000 nests in 2008. Estimated nest which it belongs, and, therefore, that it same range because of the species’ numbers for 2009 were on the order of satisfies the significance element of the migratory nature, the varying threats 7,000–8,000 nests. While nesting DPS policy. that affect different life stages, and the numbers have gradually increased in In summary, based on the information varying benefits accruing from recent years and the number for 2009 provided in the Discreteness conservation efforts throughout the was similar to the start of the time series Determination and Significance geographic range of each DPS. The next in 1990, historical evidence from Determination sections above, the BRT section describes our evaluation of the Kamouda Beach (census data dates back identified nine loggerhead DPSs status of each DPS throughout its range. to the 1950s) indicates that there has distributed globally: (1) North Pacific been a substantial decline over the last Ocean DPS, (2) South Pacific Ocean Status and Trends of the Nine Loggerhead DPSs half of the 20th century (Kamezaki et al., DPS, (3) North Indian Ocean DPS, (4) 2003) and that current nesting Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS, (5) Complete population abundance represents a fraction of historical Southwest Indian Ocean DPS, (6) estimates do not exist for the nine DPSs. nesting levels. Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS, (7) Within the global range of the species, Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS, (8) and within each DPS, the primary data South Pacific Ocean DPS available are collected on nesting Mediterranean Sea DPS, and (9) South In the South Pacific, loggerhead beaches, either as counts of nests or Atlantic Ocean DPS. We concur with nesting is almost entirely restricted to the findings and application of the DPS counts of nesting females, or a eastern Australia (primarily policy described by the BRT and herein combination of both (either direct or Queensland) and New Caledonia, and delineate the nine DPSs identified by extrapolated). Information on the population has been well studied. the BRT as DPSs (i.e., they are discrete abundance and trends away from the The size of the annual breeding and significant). nesting beaches is limited or non- existent, primarily because these data population (females only) has been Significant Portion of the Range are, relative to nesting beach studies, monitored at numerous rookeries in We have determined that the range of logistically difficult and expensive to Australia since 1968 (Limpus and each DPS contributes meaningfully to obtain. Therefore, the primary Limpus, 2003a), and these data the conservation of the DPS and that information source for directly constitute the primary measure of the populations that may contribute more or evaluating status and trends of the nine current status of the DPS. The total less to the conservation of each DPS DPSs is nesting beach data. nesting population for Queensland was throughout a portion of its range cannot approximately 3,500 females in the be identified due to the highly migratory North Pacific Ocean DPS 1976–1977 nesting season (Limpus, nature of the listed entity. In the North Pacific, loggerhead 1985; Limpus and Reimer, 1994). Little The loggerhead sea turtle is highly nesting is essentially restricted to Japan more than two decades later, Limpus migratory and crosses multiple domestic where monitoring of loggerhead nesting and Limpus (2003a) estimated this and international geopolitical began in the 1950s on some beaches, nesting population at less than 500 boundaries. Depending on the life stage, and expanded to include most known females in the 1999–2000 nesting they may occur in oceanic waters or nesting beaches since approximately season. There has been a marked along the continental shelf of 1990. Kamezaki et al. (2003) reviewed decline in the number of females landmasses, or transit back and forth census data collected from most of the breeding annually since the mid-1970s, between oceanic and neritic habitats. Japanese nesting beaches. Although with an estimated 50 to 80 percent Protection and management of both the most surveys were initiated in the 1980s decline in the number of breeding terrestrial and marine environments is and 1990s, some data collection efforts females at various Australian rookeries essential to recovering the listed entity. were initiated in the 1950s. Along the up to 1990 (Limpus and Reimer, 1994) Management measures implemented by Japanese coast, nine major nesting and a decline of approximately 86 any State, foreign nation, or political beaches (greater than 100 nests per percent from 1976–1999 (Limpus and subdivision likely would only affect season) and six ‘‘submajor’’ beaches Limpus, 2003a). However, since 2000, individual sea turtles during certain (10–100 nests per season) were this long-term decline in the number of stages and seasons of the life cycle. identified. Census data from 12 of these nesting females has reversed with Management measures implemented by 15 beaches provide composite increasing numbers of nesting females any State, foreign nation, or political information on longer-term trends in the observed from 2000–2009 (Limpus, in subdivision may also affect individuals Japanese nesting assemblage. Using press). More recent data for Mon Repos from multiple DPSs because juvenile information collected on these beaches, have shown increased nesting; 2009 turtles from disparate DPSs can overlap Kamezaki et al. (2003) concluded a nesting numbers were similar to nesting on foraging grounds or migratory substantial decline (50–90 percent) in numbers recorded in the 1990s (M. corridors (e.g., Northwest Atlantic, the size of the annual loggerhead Hamann, James Cook University, Northeast Atlantic, and Mediterranean nesting population in Japan since the personal communication, 2010). Sea DPSs). The term ‘‘significant portion 1950s. Snover (2008) combined nesting However, comparable nesting surveys of its range’’ is not defined by the data from the Sea Turtle Association of have not been conducted in New statute. For the purposes of this rule, a Japan and data from Kamezaki et al. Caledonia. Information from a pilot portion of the species’ (species or (2002) to analyze an 18-year time series study conducted in 2005 combined with distinct population segment) range is of nesting data from 1990–2007. Nesting oral history information collected ‘‘significant’’ if its contribution to the declined from an initial peak of suggest that there has been a decline in viability of the species is so important approximately 6,638 nests in 1990– loggerhead nesting over recent decades that without that portion the species 1991, followed by a steep decline to a (Limpus et al., 2006). Based on data would be in danger of extinction. The low of 2,064 nests in 1997. During the from the pilot study, only 60 to 70 BRT was unable to identify any past decade, nesting increased gradually loggerheads nested on the four surveyed particular portion of the range of any of to 5,167 nests in 2005, declined and New Caledonia beaches during the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58884 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

2004–2005 nesting season (Limpus et Even using the low end of the 1977– likely reduced from historical numbers, al., 2006). 1978 estimates of 20,000 nesting females before recent beach monitoring Studies of eastern Australia at Masirah, this suggests a significant programs began, as a result of bycatch loggerheads at their foraging areas decline in the size of the nesting in commercial fisheries (Nishemura and provide some information on the status population and is consistent with Nakahigashi, 1990; Poiner et al., 1990; of non-breeding loggerheads of the observations by long-term resident Poiner and Harris, 1996). South Pacific Ocean DPS. Chaloupka rangers that the population has declined Southwest Indian Ocean DPS and Limpus (2001) determined that the substantially in the last three decades resident loggerhead population on coral (E. Possardt, USFWS, personal In the Southwest Indian Ocean, the reefs of the southern Great Barrier Reef communication, 2008). highest concentration of nesting occurs declined at 3 percent per year from 1985 In addition to the nesting beaches on on the coast of Tongaland, South Africa, to the late 1990s. The observed decline Masirah Island, over 3,000 nests per where surveys and management occurred in spite of constant high year have been recorded in Oman on the practices were instituted in 1963 annual survivorship measured at this Al-Halaniyat Islands and, along the (Baldwin et al., 2003). A trend analysis foraging habitat and was hypothesized Oman mainland of the Arabian Sea, of index nesting beach data from this to result from recruitment failure from approximately 2,000 nests are deposited region from 1965 to 2008 indicates an fox predation of eggs at mainland annually (Salm, 1991; Salm et al., 1993). increasing nesting population between rookeries during the 1960s and pelagic In Yemen, on Socotra Island, 50–100 the first decade of surveys, which juvenile mortality from incidental loggerheads were estimated to have documented 500–800 nests annually, capture in longline fisheries since the nested in 1999 (Pilcher and Saad, 2000). and the last 8 years, which documented 1970s (Chaloupka and Limpus, 2001). A time series of nesting data based on 1,100–1,500 nests annually (Nel, 2008). Concurrently, a decline in new recruits standardized surveys is not available to These data represent approximately 50 was measured in these foraging areas determine trends for these nesting sites. percent of all nesting within South (Limpus and Limpus, 2003a). Loggerhead nesting is rare elsewhere Africa and are believed to be in the northern Indian Ocean and in representative of trends in the region. North Indian Ocean DPS some cases is complicated by inaccurate Loggerhead nesting occurs elsewhere in The North Indian Ocean hosts the species identification (Shanker, 2004; South Africa, but sampling is not largest nesting assemblage of Tripathy, 2005). A small number of consistent and no trend data are loggerheads in the eastern hemisphere; nesting females use the beaches of Sri available. The total number of females the vast majority of these loggerheads Lanka every year; however, there are no nesting annually in South Africa is nest in Oman (Baldwin et al., 2003). records to suggest that Sri Lanka has estimated between 500–2,000 turtles Nesting occurs in greatest density on ever been a major nesting area for (Baldwin et al., 2003). In Mozambique, Masirah Island; the number of loggerheads (Kapurusinghe, 2006). surveys have been instituted much more emergences ranges from 27–102 per km Loggerheads have been reported nesting recently; likely less than 200 females nightly (Ross, 1998). Nesting densities in low numbers in Myanmar; however, nest annually and no trend data are have complicated the implementation of these data may not be reliable because available (Baldwin et al., 2003; Louro et standardized nesting beach surveys, and of misidentification of species al., 2006; Videira et al., 2008, 2010; more precise nesting data have only (Thorbjarnarson et al., 2000). Pereira et al., 2009). Similarly, in been collected since 2008. Madagascar, loggerheads have been Extrapolations resulting from partial Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS documented nesting in low numbers, surveys and tagging in 1977–1978 In the eastern Indian Ocean, but no trend data are available provided broad estimates of 19,000 to loggerhead nesting is restricted to (Rakotonirina, 2001). 60,000 females nesting annually at Western Australia (Dodd, 1988), and Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS Masirah Island in 1977 and 28,000 to this nesting population is the largest in 35,000 in 1978. A more recent partial Australia (Wirsing et al., unpublished Nesting occurs within the Northwest survey in 1991 provided an estimate of data, cited in Natural Heritage Trust, Atlantic along the coasts of North 23,000 nesting females at Masirah Island 2005; Limpus, 2009). America, Central America, northern (Ross, 1979, 1998; Ross and Barwani, Dirk Hartog Island hosts about 70–75 South America, the Antilles, and The 1982; Baldwin, 1992). A reinterpretation percent of nesting individuals in the Bahamas, but is concentrated in the of the 1977–1978 estimates, assuming eastern Indian Ocean (Baldwin et al., southeastern U.S. and on the Yucatan 50 percent nesting success (as compared 2003). Surveys were conducted on the Peninsula in Mexico (Sternberg, 1981; to 100 percent in the original estimates), island for the duration of six nesting Ehrhart, 1989; Ehrhart et al., 2003; resulted in an estimate of 20,000 to seasons between 1993/1994 and 1999/ NMFS and USFWS, 2008). Collectively, 40,000 females nesting annually 2000 (Baldwin et al., 2003) and the Northwest Atlantic Ocean hosts the (Baldwin et al., 2003). Reliable trends in continued until 2009 during which time most significant nesting assemblage of nesting cannot be determined due to the 800–1,500 loggerheads were estimated loggerheads in the western hemisphere lack of standardized surveys at Masirah to nest annually on Dirk Hartog Island and is one of the two largest loggerhead Island prior to 2008. From 2008 through beaches (Baldwin et al., 2003). nesting assemblages in the world. NMFS 2010, approximately 50,000, 67,600, and Fewer loggerheads (approximately and USFWS (2008), Witherington et al. 62,400 nests, respectively, were 150–350 per season) are reported (2009), and TEWG (2009) provide estimated annually based on nesting on the Muiron Islands; however, comprehensive analyses of the status of standardized daily surveys of the more nesting loggerheads are reported the nesting assemblages within the highest density nesting beaches and here than on North West Cape Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS using weekly surveys on all remaining island (approximately 50–150 per season) standardized data collected over survey nesting beaches. Using an estimated (Baldwin et al., 2003). Although data are periods ranging from 10 to 23 years. The clutch frequency of five nests per insufficient to determine trends, results of these analyses, using different nesting female this would convert to historical information suggests the analytical approaches, were consistent 10,000, 13,520, and 12,480 nesting nesting population in the Muiron in their findings—there had been a females annually (Conant et al., 2009). Islands and North West Cape region was significant, overall nesting decline

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58885

within this DPS. However, with the years of nesting in the 2000s in 2009 Crouse et al. (1987) and Crowder et al. addition of nesting data from 2008 (2,183 nests) and 2010 (3,141 nests). The (1994) presented models, using data through 2010, which was not available previous high for that 11-year span was available from what is now the at the time those analyses were 1,433 nests in 2003. North Carolina had Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS, conducted, the final result for the trend 847 nests in 2010, which is above the suggesting that adults (males and line changes. Nesting in 2008 showed a average of 715. The Georgia, South females) are approximately 0.3 percent substantial increase compared to the Carolina, and North Carolina nesting of the total population. These models low of 2007, and nesting in 2010 data come from the seaturtle.org Sea assume that the population is density reached the highest level seen since Turtle Nest Monitoring System which is independent and growing 2000 (Florida Fish and Wildlife populated with data input by the State exponentially; however, in the case of Conservation Commission Core Index agencies. The Greater Caribbean sea turtles, it is unlikely that either of Nesting Beach Database). The most Recovery Unit is the third largest these assumptions is met. The most current nesting trend for the Northwest recovery unit within the Northwest recent point estimate of the number of Atlantic Ocean DPS, from 1989–2010, is Atlantic Ocean DPS, with the majority adult females in the Northwest Atlantic very slightly negative, but the rate of of nesting at Quintana Roo, Mexico. Ocean DPS is 30,000 (Southeast decline is not statistically different from TEWG (2009) reported a greater than 5 Fisheries Science Center, 2009); zero. Additionally, the range from the percent annual decline in loggerhead assuming a 1:1 adult sex ratio results in statistical analysis of the nesting trend nesting from 1995–2006 at Quintana 60,000 adults. If those individuals includes both negative and positive Roo. When nest counts up through 2010 represent 0.3 percent of the total growth (NMFS, unpublished data). are analyzed, however, the nesting population size, then the total NMFS and USFWS (2008) identified trends from 1989 through 2010 are not population size would be on the order five recovery units (nesting significantly different from zero for all of 20 million individuals. The vast subpopulations) in the Northwest of the recovery units within the majority of these individuals would be Atlantic Ocean: The Northern (Florida/ Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS for in the youngest life stages, where Georgia border to southern Virginia); which there are enough data to analyze natural mortality is very high. This is Peninsular Florida (Florida/Georgia (NMFS, unpublished data). the life history strategy of sea turtles; border south through Pinellas County, many individuals must be produced to In an effort to evaluate loggerhead excluding the islands west of Key West, contribute to the breeding population population status and trends beyond the Florida); Dry Tortugas (islands west of and to keep the population from nesting beach, NMFS and USFWS Key West, Florida); Northern Gulf of declining. The most important point to (2008) and TEWG (2009) reviewed data Mexico (Franklin County, Florida, west understand regarding these models and from in-water studies within the range through Texas); and Greater Caribbean subsequent calculations is that their of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS. (Mexico through French Guiana, The main assumptions—the population has NMFS and USFWS (2008), in the Bahamas, Lesser and Greater Antilles). a stable age distribution, anthropogenic Recovery Plan for the Northwest At that time, declining trends in the mortality is constant, sex ratios are annual number of nests were Atlantic Population of the Loggerhead equal, and the environment is documented for all recovery units for Sea Turtle, summarized population constant—are likely not met. which there were an adequate time trend data reported from nine in-water A recent aerial survey from Cape series of nesting data. study sites where loggerheads were Canaveral, Florida, to the mouth of the The Peninsular Florida Recovery Unit regularly captured and where efforts Gulf of St. Lawrence provided insight represents approximately 87 percent of were made to provide local indices of into loggerhead abundance in all nesting effort in the Northwest abundance. These sites were located continental shelf waters of the U.S. Atlantic Ocean DPS (Ehrhart et al., from Long Island Sound, New York, to Atlantic coast. In a preliminary report 2003). A significant declining trend had Florida Bay, Florida. The study periods (Northeast Fisheries Science Center, been documented for the Peninsular for these nine sites varied. The earliest 2011), the most conservative estimate, Florida Recovery Unit, where nesting began in 1987, and the most recent were in which only sightings that were declined 26 percent over the 20-year initiated in 2000. Results reported from positively identified as loggerhead sea period from 1989–2008, and declined 41 four of the studies indicated no turtles were used, was that about percent over the period 1998–2008 discernible trend, two studies reported 588,000 juvenile and adult loggerheads (NMFS and USFWS, 2008; Witherington declining trends, and two studies were present in the survey area et al., 2009). As explained previously, reported increasing trends. Trends at (approximate inter-quartile range of with the addition of nesting data one study site, Mosquito Lagoon, 382,000–817,000 individuals). When a through 2010, the nesting trend for the Florida, indicated either a declining portion of the unidentified turtles were Peninsular Florida Recovery Unit, and trend (all data, 1977–2005) or no trend assigned as loggerheads, the estimate the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS, does (more recent data, 1995–2005), increased to 801,000 individuals (inter- not show a nesting decline statistically depending on whether all sample years quartile range of 521,000–1,111,000). different from zero. The Northern were used or only the more recent, and The survey effort did not encompass Recovery Unit is the second largest likely more comparable sample years, waters south of Cape Canaveral on the recovery unit within the DPS and was were used. TEWG (2009) used raw data Atlantic Coast or in the Gulf of Mexico declining significantly at 1.3 percent from six of the aforementioned nine in- (Northeast Fisheries Science Center, annually from 1983 to 2007 (NMFS and water study sites to conduct trend 2011). USFWS, 2008). Currently, nesting for analyses. Results from three of the four that recovery unit is showing possible sites located in the southeastern United Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS signs of stabilizing. In 2008, nesting in States showed an increasing trend in the In the northeastern Atlantic, the Cape Georgia reached what was a new record abundance of loggerheads, one showed Verde Islands support the only large at that time (1,646 nests), with a no discernible trend, and the two sites nesting population of loggerheads in the downturn in 2009, followed by yet located in the northeastern United region (Fretey, 2001). Nesting occurs at another record in 2010 (1,760 nests). States showed a decreasing trend in some level on most of the islands in the South Carolina had the two highest abundance of loggerheads. archipelago with the largest nesting

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58886 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

numbers reported from the island of Boa Margaritoulis, 2010). In addition, days through September 13, 2010, and Vista where studies have been ongoing sporadic nesting has been reported from announced our intention to hold a since 1998 (Lazar and Holcer, 1998; the western Mediterranean (Spain and public hearing to provide an additional Lo´pez-Jurado et al., 2000; Fretey, 2001; France), but the vast majority of nesting opportunity and format to receive Varo Cruz et al., 2007; Loureiro, 2008; occurs in Greece and Turkey public input. The public hearing was M. Tiwari, NMFS, personal (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). The held in Berlin, Maryland, on June 16, communication, 2008). On Boa Vista documented annual nesting of 2010. On March 22, 2011 (76 FR 15932), Island, 833 and 1,917 nests were loggerheads in the Mediterranean we published in the Federal Register a reported in 2001 and 2002 respectively averages over 7,200 nests (Casale and notice announcing a 6-month extension from 3.1 km of beach (Varo Cruz et al., Margaritoulis, 2010). There has been no of the deadline for a final listing 2007) and between 1998 and 2002 the discernible trend in nesting reported for decision to address substantial local project had tagged 2,856 females the two longest monitoring projects in disagreement that existed on the (Varo Cruz et al., 2007). In 2005, 5,396 Greece, Laganas Bay (Margaritoulis, interpretation of data related to the nests and 3,121 females were reported 2005) and southern Kyparissia Bay status and trends for the Northwest from 9 km of beach on Boa Vista Island (Margaritoulis and Rees, 2001). Atlantic Ocean DPS of the loggerhead (Lo´pez-Jurado et al., 2007). More However, the nesting trend at Rethymno sea turtle and its relevance to the recently, 12,028 nests in 2008, 20,102 Beach, which hosts approximately 7 assessment of risk of extinction. At this nests in 2009, and 9,174 nests in 2010 percent of all documented loggerhead time, we announced an additional 20- were reported from approximately 68 nesting in the Mediterranean, showed a day comment period for new km of beach on Boa Vista Island (Cabo highly significant declining trend from information or analyses from the public Verde Natura 2000, 2010). On Sal 1990 through 2004 (Margaritoulis et al., that would help clarify this issue. Island, 344 nests were reported in 2008, 2009). In Turkey, intermittent nesting A joint NMFS/USFWS policy requires 1,037 nests in 2009, and 566 nests in surveys have been conducted since the us to solicit independent expert review 2010 (SOS Tartarugas, 2009; J. Cozens, 1970s with more consistent surveys from at least three qualified specialists, SOS Tartarugas, personal conducted on some beaches only since concurrent with the public comment communication, 2011). From Santiago the 1990s, making it difficult to assess period (59 FR 34270; July 1, 1994). In Island, 66 nests were reported from four trends in nesting. Ilgaz et al. (2007) December 2004, the Office of beaches in 2007 and 53 nests from five reported a declining trend at Fethiye Management and Budget (OMB) issued beaches in 2008 (http:// Beach from 1993–2004, this beach a Final Information Quality Bulletin for tartarugascaboverde.wordpress.com/ represents approximately 10 percent of Peer Review establishing minimum peer santiago). Due to limited data available, loggerhead nesting in Turkey review standards, a transparent process a population trend cannot currently be (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). for public disclosure, and opportunities determined for the Cape Verde South Atlantic Ocean DPS for public input. The OMB Peer Review population; however, available Bulletin, implemented under the information on the directed killing of In the South Atlantic, nesting occurs primarily along the mainland coast of Information Quality Act (Public Law nesting females suggests that this 106–554), is intended to provide public nesting population is under severe Brazil from Sergipe south to Rio de oversight on the quality of agency pressure and likely significantly Janeiro, with peak concentrations in information, analyses, and regulatory reduced from historical levels (Marco et northern Bahia, Espı´rito Santo, and activities, and applies to information al., 2010). Loureiro (2008) reported a northern Rio de Janeiro with peak disseminated on or after June 16, 2005. reduction in nesting from historical nesting along the coast of Bahia We solicited technical review of the levels at Santiago Island, based on (Marcovaldi and Chaloupka, 2007). proposed listing determination from six interviews with elders. Elsewhere in the Prior to 1980, loggerhead nesting independent experts, and received northeastern Atlantic, loggerhead populations in Brazil were considered reviews from all six of these experts. nesting is non-existent or occurs at very severely depleted. Recently, Marcovaldi The independent expert review under low levels. In Morocco, anecdotal and Chaloupka (2007) reported a long- reports indicated high numbers of term, sustained increasing trend in the joint NMFS/USFWS peer review nesting turtles in southern Morocco nesting abundance over a 16-year period policy collectively satisfies the (Pasteur and Bons, 1960), but a few from 1988 through 2003 on 22 surveyed requirements of the OMB Peer Review recent surveys of the Atlantic coastline beaches containing more than 75 Bulletin and the joint NMFS/USFWS have suggested a dramatic decline percent of all loggerhead nesting in peer review policy. The peer reviewers (Tiwari et al., 2001, 2006). A few nests Brazil. A total of 4,837 nests were provided additional information, have been reported from Mauritania reported from these survey beaches for clarifications, suggestions, and editorial (Arvy et al., 2000) and Sierra Leone (E. the 2003–2004 nesting season comments to improve this final rule. Aruna, Conservation Society of Sierra (Marcovaldi and Chaloupka, 2007). Peer reviewer comments are addressed Leone, personal communication, 2008). Loggerhead nesting has continued to in the following summary and Some loggerhead nesting in Senegal and increase with approximately 6,800 nests incorporated into this final rule as elsewhere along the coast of West Africa recorded during the 2008–2009 nesting appropriate. has been reported; however, a more season (dos Santos et al., 2011). The Services received over 109,000 recent and reliable confirmation is public comments on the proposed rule, Summary of Comments needed (Fretey, 2001). of which over 104,000 were form letters With the publication of the proposed sent as part of comment campaigns from Mediterranean Sea DPS listing determination for the nine environmental organizations. Nesting occurs throughout the central loggerhead sea turtle DPSs on March 16, Approximately 5,000 unique individual and eastern Mediterranean in Italy, 2010 (75 FR 12598), we announced a 90- comments received were generally Greece, Cyprus, Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, day comment period extending through supportive of the proposed rule. Israel, Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia June 14, 2010. On June 2, 2010 (75 FR Comments were received from (Sternberg, 1981; Margaritoulis et al., 30769), we extended the public interested individuals, State and Federal 2003; SWOT, 2007; Casale and comment period for an additional 90 agencies, fishing groups, environmental

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58887

organizations, industry groups, and peer discretion of the Services the task of sufficiently explained. Another reviewer reviewers with scientific expertise. giving meaning to the terms through the found the evidence compelling to The Services received many process of case-specific analyses that conclude that the North Pacific Ocean, comments outside the scope of this necessarily depend on the Services’ South Pacific Ocean, and South Atlantic rulemaking. These included comments expertise to make the highly fact- Ocean DPSs were discrete. However, he on agency guidance on listing species, specific decisions to list species as had questions about the discreteness of prohibitions on take, exceptions to the endangered or threatened. Although the Indian Ocean DPSs, and the ESA prohibition on take (e.g., incidental Congress did not seek to make any northern Atlantic Ocean and take permits under section 10, single factor controlling when drawing Mediterranean Sea DPSs. While he did incidental take statements under section the distinction, Congress acknowledged not question the discreteness findings of 7), the difference between ‘‘take’’ as that ‘‘there is a temporal element to the these DPSs, the full argument was not defined by the ESA and mortality, distinction between the categories.’’ In clear to him. actions that may be taken as a result of Re Polar Bear Endangered Species Act Response: Insufficient information changes to the ESA listing for Listing and § 4(d) Rule Litigation, Slip was available to further separate the loggerheads, management measures Opinion at 40 n. 24, 51, 51 n. 27. (D.D.C. North Indian Ocean DPS into east and implemented via subsequent June 30, 2011). Thus, in the context of west segments. As for the comments rulemakings, the findings of a National the ESA, the Services interpret an indicating that sufficient information Research Council report on the ‘‘endangered species’’ to be one that is was not provided to justify the assessment of sea turtle status and presently at risk of extinction. A separation of some of the DPSs, the trends, and implementation of recovery ‘‘threatened species,’’ on the other hand, Services believe the information plans. We do not respond to these is not currently at risk of extinction, but provided in the Discreteness comments in this final rule. is likely to become so. In other words, Determination section of this final rule The summary of comments and our a key statutory difference between a and the Discreteness Determination responses below are organized into six threatened and endangered species is section of the Status Review (Conant et general categories: (1) Peer review the timing of when a species may be in al., 2009), which is incorporated into comments; (2) comments on the danger of extinction, either now this final rule by reference, meets identification of DPSs; (3) comments on (endangered) or in the foreseeable future agency policy for identifying DPSs. the identification and consideration of (threatened). Comment 3: In most cases, the peer specific threats; (4) comments on the The term ‘‘significant portion of its reviewers either agreed with or did not status and trends and extinction risk range’’ is not defined by the statute. For oppose the proposed listing status for assessments of the DPSs; (5) comments the purposes of this rule, a portion of the nine DPSs. However, one reviewer on the status determinations for the the species’ (species, subspecies, or stated that while he does not oppose the DPSs; and (6) other comments. distinct population segment) range is proposed status for any of the DPSs, he does not believe the proposed status for Peer Review Comments ‘‘significant’’ if its contribution to the viability of the species is so important each DPS was adequately explained or Comment 1: Two of the six peer that, without that portion, the species justified. Another reviewer expressed reviewers requested clearer definitions would be in danger of extinction. The similar concerns for the North Pacific for Endangered Species Act terminology definition of a ‘‘threatened species’’ is a Ocean DPS, South Pacific Ocean DPS, used in the proposed rule. For instance, species that is ‘‘likely to become an North Indian Ocean DPS, Southeast the proposed rule stated ‘‘The ESA endangered species within the Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS, and the defines an endangered species as one foreseeable future.’’ USFWS uses the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS and that is in danger of extinction term foreseeable future as interpreted by stated that the status determinations throughout all or a significant portion of the U.S. Department of the Interior needed to be more explicitly justified. its range, and a threatened species as Office of the Solicitor (Bernhardt, 2009): One reviewer expressed concern about one that is likely to become endangered ‘‘In summary, the foreseeable future the restricted use of nesting data for the in the foreseeable future throughout all describes the extent to which the South Pacific Ocean DPS up until 1999 or a significant portion of its range Secretary (of Interior) can, in making only and indicated that more recent data * * *’’ These two reviewers asked determinations about the future should be used. This reviewer indicated about the time frame for ‘‘in danger of conservation status of the species, that the more recent data for Mon extinction’’ and whether the term reasonably rely on predictions about the Repos, for example, have shown extinction is referring to quasi- future. Those predictions can be in the increased nesting with 2009 nesting extinction or absolute extinction. One of form of extrapolation of population or levels back up to similar numbers as these reviewers also asked what is threat trends, analysis of how threats seen in the 1990s. Two reviewers did meant by a ‘‘significant portion of its will affect the status of the species, or not believe sufficient data were range’’ and ‘‘foreseeable future.’’ events that will have a significant new presented to justify listing of the North Response: The ESA defines an impact on the species. The Secretary’s Indian Ocean DPS as endangered, endangered species as a species that is ability to rely on predictions may particularly in light of the large size of ‘‘in danger of extinction throughout all significantly vary with the amount and the nesting population, although one of or a significant portion of its range,’’ and substance of available data.’’ them indicated he did not feel strongly a threatened species as a species that is Comment 2: Three of the six peer about this. These same two reviewers ‘‘likely to become an endangered reviewers agreed with the designation of also questioned the proposed species within the foreseeable future the nine proposed DPSs. Two reviewers endangered status for the Southeast throughout all or a significant portion of agreed with eight of the proposed DPSs, Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS because the its range.’’ The legislative history of the but disagreed with the proposed North nesting population is protected, trends ESA indicates Congress did not provide Indian Ocean DPS and questioned the have been stable, and there do not any quantitative measures for the rationale for not breaking out this DPS appear to be major sources of mortality; Services to apply when determining into East and West components. One however, one of the two reviewers whether a species is ‘‘in danger of reviewer felt that the separation of the indicated he did not feel strongly about extinction.’’ Rather, it left to the Indian Ocean into three DPSs was not this.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58888 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

Response: With regard to the North approach looked at the risk of declining species is dependent on available data Indian Ocean DPS, threats are to 30 percent of the current population and the life history and ecology of the substantial as identified in the five- size, but it was not clear over what time species, the nature of the threats, and factor review, and conservation efforts frame this decline was examined or the species’ response to those threats. are embryonic relative to the known and what risk of decline warranted listing. While the SQE analysis relied on suspected threats impacting the He also noted that the SQE method was nesting beach surveys and is population. Given the information largely retrospective, as it used past retrospective, the threat matrix analyses suggesting declines in the nesting empirical trends to forecast future look at the potential future directions population, the emergence of gillnet trends. He thought the matrix method given the known threats and loggerhead fisheries in close proximity to the was better at exploring the potential risk sea turtle biology. Although the SQE nesting beaches, and the embryonic posed by future trends, so it was more and threat matrix analyses provided stage of conservation efforts in the forward-looking than the SQE method, some additional insights into the status region, the Services believe an but it only looked at deterministic risk, of the nine DPSs, ultimately the endangered status is justified. In the not stochastic risk. A third reviewer conclusions and determinations made case of the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean agreed with the threat based were primarily based on an assessment DPS, the nesting survey effort and assessments, but he thought details were of population sizes and trends, current methods have varied over the last 2 lacking in the SQE analysis. and anticipated threats, and decades and currently there are no Specifically, he thought there should be conservation efforts for each DPS. nesting population estimates available more emphasis on the relationship Comment 6: One peer reviewer said to suggest any positive trend in nesting between reduced population sizes and that for some populations (e.g., populations. However, some of the decreased resilience to cope with Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS) there fisheries bycatch impacts have been current and future impacts and felt this has been a great deal of study over the resolved through requirement of turtle to be particularly relevant given the past few decades and there is a lot of excluder devices (TEDs) in shrimp large time frames for maturity and the information about many aspects of the trawlers, and longline fishery effort has large spatial scales involved. life history of the population and its declined due to fish stock decreases and Response: The Services have clarified anthropogenic threats. For other economic reasons. Although a new the text in the Extinction Risk populations, there are little data. As a fisheries effort has emerged for portunid Assessments section to more clearly result he was unclear how the quality of crabs and is posing new threats to state that the SQE and threat matrix the empirical evidence affected the risk loggerheads, and longline fishing effort analyses were only used to provide assessment and the status classification for tuna and billfish is also subject to some additional insights into the status under the ESA. He questioned whether increase if and when economics and of the nine DPSs, but that ultimately the a more precautionary interpretation of fish populations improve, we are unable conclusions and determinations made the risk was taken when there was to quantify these threats. As a result, were based on an assessment of greater uncertainty or whether the based primarily on peer reviewer population sizes and trends, current and greater amount of evidence in some comments regarding current threats and anticipated threats (i.e., five-factor places actually made it easier. Response: We are to make status conservation efforts, the Services now analysis), and conservation efforts for determinations based solely on the best believe a threatened status for the each DPS. Comment 5: One peer reviewer stated available scientific and commercial data Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS is that the threats assessments were not as after conducting a review of the status appropriate. With regard to the future-focused as he would have liked. of the species and taking into account comment that the status determinations He thought they tended to rely on any efforts being made by States or for several of the DPSs lacked sufficient current or past status and trends, but he foreign governments to protect the justification, we have clarified the believes the ESA is forward-looking and species. In assessing the status of each rationale for the status determinations is concerned about the future status of identified DPS, we considered available in the Finding section in this final rule. the species. He recognized that some information on status and trends, the Comment 4: One peer reviewer evidence was presented about future five-factor analysis (see Summary of commented that the information trends, such as development pressures Factors Affecting the Nine Loggerhead presented in the proposed rule appeared on beaches in various areas of the DPSs section), and conservation efforts thorough, up-to-date, and convincing for world, progress toward enforcing that have been implemented (see the conclusions made, both with respect existing legislation, reduction of Conservation Efforts section). We to DPS designation and listing status. bycatch, and potential climate change considered this information in light of However, he noted the Services could impacts, but he still thought the final the ESA definitions of endangered and have readily arrived at these assessments could be more future- threatened (see Listing Determinations conclusions without the use of either focused. Under the ESA section). the susceptibility to quasi-extinction Response: Section 4 of the ESA and Comment 7: One peer reviewer (SQE) or the threat matrix analysis. He its implementing regulations (50 CFR commented that the boundary of 139° E. also noted that the relative novelty and part 424) set forth the procedures for long. in the Gulf of Carpentaria thin track records of both methods may adding species to the Federal Lists of separating the South Pacific Ocean DPS draw criticism that distracts from the Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean real substance of the analysis of the and Plants. A species may be DPS was too far west. He stated that available data. Another reviewer noted determined to be endangered or satellite tracking showed a female from weaknesses with the extinction risk threatened due to one or more of the Western Australia moving into 141° E. assessments, but was pleased to see five factors described in section 4(a)(1) long. and indicated there are reasonable these quantitative risk assessments of the Act. The Services are required to numbers of loggerheads foraging in the included in the proposed rule and use the best scientific and commercial Torres Strait for which genetic analyses appreciated that they were considered information available at the time we are have not yet been conducted. hand-in-hand with the threats analysis. making our listing assessments. Thus, Response: Based on the information Specifically, he stated that the SQE predicting potential future threats to a provided by this peer reviewer, the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58889

Services have revised the boundary The States of Georgia and South differences or endemic mtDNA separating the South Pacific Ocean DPS Carolina support the designation of the haplotypes; however, fixation is not a and the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean Northwest Atlantic DPS. The State of requirement for marked genetic DPS from 139° E. long. to 141° E. Connecticut believes the listing of nine separation. longitude. loggerhead DPSs is reasonable and will Comment 13: One commenter result in better targeted conservation for disagreed with the Services’ Comments on the Identification of DPSs this species. The State of Maryland determination that physical factors Comment 8: Two commenters believes it is premature to consider separate DPSs in different ocean basins, questioned the Services’ application of listing DPSs without full disclosure of and further disagreed that water the DPS policy. They noted that DPS loggerhead population status. Numerous temperatures are a sufficient barrier to designations should be used sparingly conservation organizations and prevent turtles from moving between and only when biological evidence individuals, including all the ocean basins. The commenter noted that indicates that such action is warranted individuals that sent form letters, dispersal from the Indian Ocean to the to meet Congressional intent. They support designation of the nine South Atlantic is possible via the stated that the separation must be proposed DPSs. Three fishing groups do Agulhas current and cited Bowen and marked, and DPS designations are only not support the identification of Karl (2007), which documented at least appropriate where scientific evidence is loggerhead DPSs. two such transfers. The commenter conclusive to justify such listing. Response: The Services have disagreed with the rationale for dividing Response: The Services acknowledge considered the best available the Atlantic basin into North and South in the Policies for Delineating Species information on loggerhead population because a DNA haplotype unique to the Under the ESA section of this final rule status and have summarized this Brazilian nesting assemblage has been that Congress has instructed the information in the Status and Trends of found in foraging juveniles in the North Secretaries of the Interior and the Nine Loggerhead DPSs section of Atlantic, therefore contradicting that Commerce to exercise the authority to this final rule. loggerheads in the North and South designate DPSs ‘‘* * * sparingly and Comment 11: The State of Alaska Atlantic are isolated from each other. only when the biological evidence provided information that only two The commenter also believes that indicates such action is warranted.’’ As loggerheads have been observed in loggerheads from the North Pacific and a result, the Services adopted a joint Alaska in the past 50 years and South Pacific mix during their trans- policy for recognizing DPSs under the requested that Alaska waters be Pacific migrations, which results in gene ESA (DPS Policy; 61 FR 4722) on excluded from the North Pacific Ocean flow across the equator. The commenter February 7, 1996. This policy, described DPS. cited information presented in Hatase et in the Policies for Delineating Species Response: While the ESA authorizes al. (2002a) that the Australian haplotype Under the ESA section, has been closely the listing, delisting, or reclassification (South Pacific Ocean DPS) was present followed in determining loggerhead of a species, subspecies, or DPS of a in loggerheads nesting in Japan (North DPSs, and the Services believe it meets vertebrate species, it does not authorize Pacific Ocean DPS) and in Bowen and the Congressional intent. the exclusion of a subset or portion of Karl (2007) that turtles caught off Baja Comment 9: One commenter did not a listed species, subspecies, or DPS from California have 5 percent of the believe additional benefits to the a listing decision. Although only two Australian haplotype. populations would occur if DPSs were observations of loggerheads in Alaska Response: There is substantial genetic designated (e.g., threatened turtles are waters have been reported, this evidence that is consistent with satellite already treated the same as endangered indicates the species does at least telemetry and other lines of evidence to turtles under a 4(d) rule, critical habitat occasionally occur there. support the division between Ocean can be designated, and section 7 of the Comment 12: One commenter basins and between the North and South ESA applies). Another commenter contended that the Services failed to Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. The believes the United States will diminish conduct analyses (e.g., statistical Services present a review of the its role in international sea turtle analysis, gene flow, extent of DNA allele available science and discuss the conservation by only having an interest and haplotype differences, degree of rationale in detail for each DPS, which in the two DPSs (Northwest Atlantic DNA sequence divergence for mtDNA or are based on distribution of breeding Ocean and North Pacific Ocean) that nuclear DNA) necessary to determine if populations (rookeries). The Services occur in the United States. the data support a conclusion of marked note that the distribution of and Response: The Services were separation with respect to genetics. The migration of juveniles may extend petitioned to list the Northwest Atlantic commenter noted that the proposed rule beyond the geographic boundaries of and North Pacific loggerhead sea turtle stated that it relied on genetic each DPS and that juveniles from populations as DPSs and to change the differences characterized by allele different DPSs may share oceanic listing status of turtles in those frequency differences rather than fixed foraging habitat. The dispersal (in terms populations from threatened to genetic differences. of expansion/exchange and endangered. The Services do not believe Response: The Services conducted a establishment of breeding populations) that identifying DPSs for the loggerhead thorough review of the best available between the Atlantic and Indian Oceans will diminish the United States’ role in science and presented and discussed the referred to by the commenter occurred international sea turtle conservation. body of published genetic studies in the on geological timescales, most recently Both Services have strong international scientific literature, including statistical during the Pleistocene 12,000–250,000 programs for sea turtles, including analysis, gene flow, extent of DNA allele years ago. The separation between the implementation of the U.S. Marine and haplotype differences, and degree of North and South Atlantic is believed to Turtle Conservation Act of 2004, which DNA sequence divergence for mtDNA be even deeper according to the was created to assist in the conservation and nuclear DNA. All of these studies published scientific literature detailed of sea turtles and their nesting habitats consistently show evidence of deep by the Services. The earlier speculation in foreign countries. evolutionary divergence between the by Bowen et al. (2005) of an Australian Comment 10: The State of Florida proposed DPSs. Several of the DPSs are haplotype present in the North Pacific supports the identification of nine DPSs. characterized by fixed genetic (including Baja California foraging

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58890 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

grounds) has been shown by more measure that has been used extensively research. Published studies consistently recent studies to be a sampling artifact to delineate populations of sea turtles indicate that gene flow between the (Bowen et al., 1994, 1995; Hatase et al., whose life history is characterized by DPSs identified by the Services occur 2002a; Dutton, 2007, unpublished data; natal homing (both of adult males and over geological time scales and shared Boyle et al., 2009; Watanabe et al., females). haplotypes are the result of shared 2011). Comment 16: One commenter common ancestry 12,000–3 million Comment 14: One commenter referred disagreed that genetic separation exists years ago and not ongoing radiation and to the Status Review statement that for loggerheads in the Atlantic. The colonization between DPSs. unique DNA haplotypes could represent commenter believes that the data Comment 17: One commenter adaptive differences. The commenter suggest the proposed DPSs in the questioned and disagreed with the contended that this is speculation with Atlantic (Northwest Atlantic, Northeast Services’ finding that the Northwest no supporting evidence and, therefore, Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Atlantic Ocean DPS is genetically that adaptation and selection should not Mediterranean) are not genetically separated from other DPSs, particularly be considered in the discreteness distinct because they share mtDNA the Northeast Atlantic Ocean and South finding. haplotypes and microsatellite DNA Atlantic Ocean DPSs. As evidence of Response: Adaptation and selection alleles. The commenter provided their substantial mixing in the oceanic zone, were not explicitly used as criteria to own analysis of the Northwest Atlantic the commenter cited data from bycaught evaluate discreteness, but are processes and South Atlantic that showed at least loggerheads in the pelagic longline that are implicitly involved in the four migrants per generation between fishery operating off Atlantic Canada as evolution of populations (e.g., the the Northwest Atlantic and South well as fisheries off the Azores and accumulation of geographically Atlantic; the commenter contended that Madeira. Relative to foraging grounds, divergent genetic variation). The text migration of 1 to 10 animals between another commenter believes that the has been revised to clarify this point. population groups per generation is documented mixing of males and Comment 15: One commenter sufficient to prevent genetic females facilitates male mediated gene believes the Services cannot limit differentiation. Another commenter flow between different nesting genetic analysis to a subset of the DPS noted scientific agreement that male assemblages and different ocean basins (adult females) because doing so would mediated gene flow is common among and results in mixing by male mediated be listing below the DPS level and loggerheads, which leads the gene flow. This commenter also believes contrary to court findings and legislative commenter to conclude that loggerheads that Northwest Atlantic loggerheads are history. The commenter cited various are not ‘‘reproductively-isolated’’ on a not a legitimate DPS because they do court cases including Modesto Irrigation global scale. This commenter believes not have private microsatellite alleles, District v. Gutierrez, Alsea Valley that exchanges between ocean basins share microsatellite alleles with other Alliance v. Evans, and Rock Creek have occurred, are occurring now, and loggerheads, and do not have Alliance v. United States Fish and will likely occur in the future, while monophyletic DNA haplotypes within Wildlife Service. The commenter even subpopulations have been shown regions. believes that limiting genetic analyses to as genetically distinct within regions. Response: There is no evidence that only mtDNA can yield misleading One commenter questioned the mating occurs on the distant foraging results because it only reflects female Services’ finding that the Northwest grounds. Indeed the body of genetic, gene flow. Alternately, nuclear DNA Atlantic Ocean DPS is reproductively behavioral, and telemetry research over reflects total gene flow. isolated and therefore markedly the last 25 years is consistent with a Response: The Services followed the separated based on male-mediated gene paradigm of migration by adults, both DPS Policy to determine the flow as well as nest site fidelity. The male and female, to coastal areas near applicability of the policy for the commenter cited studies that have natal beaches where mating takes place loggerhead sea turtle. The DPS policy documented individual adult females at the beginning of the nesting season. requires the consideration of two returning to nest at sites that were equal There is no evidence that mixing of elements when evaluating whether a to or greater than distances between immature turtles at high seas foraging vertebrate population segment qualifies nesting colonies. This commenter areas where pelagic fisheries also as a DPS under the ESA: (1) The further believes that by declaring female interact facilitates male mediated gene discreteness of the population segment loggerheads are reproductively isolated flow. Bowen et al. (2005) also showed in relation to the remainder of the because of ‘‘unique’’ nesting areas is to tendency toward natal homing by species or subspecies to which it classify an entire species based on the immature loggerheads in the Northwest belongs; and (2) the significance of the characteristics of part of the proposed Atlantic as they move into the nearshore population segment to the species or DPS (nesting adult females), which neritic habitat. subspecies to which it belongs. The violates the ESA. Comment 18: One commenter loggerhead sea turtle’s global Response: Male mediated gene flow is provided an analysis comparing mtDNA distribution and natal site fidelity and one hypothesis explaining lack of haplotypes directly (i.e., not migratory nature are integral to this differentiation with nuclear markers transforming them to Fst) for the determination. While the Services relied that have been found between proposed DPSs in the Northwest on the genetic analysis results of proximate rookeries that have otherwise Atlantic and Mediterranean. The mitochondrial DNA (matriarchal), shown structure based on mtDNA. commenter concluded that actual nuclear DNA analysis results, where Follow up studies are necessary to genetic data show that the Northwest available, were used to determine further test the alternative hypothesis Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, and discreteness and significance of the that the lack of differentiation was due Mediterranean populations are DPSs. The Services presented a detailed to the lack of statistical power of the genetically similar, with shared mtDNA rationale for identifying breeding microsatellite markers used in early haplotypes with similar frequencies in populations as the population units studies to resolve fine scale structure. some nesting populations. The given the complex life history of sea These studies are ongoing and there is commenter believes these observations turtles. The geographic structure of a suite of new microsatellite markers of genetic patterns within and between maternal lineages is an appropriate that has been developed to further this regions indicate the proposed DPSs

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:36 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58891

(Northwest Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, comprehensively reanalyze Atlantic and occurs in the summer months in both and Mediterranean) are not genetically Mediterranean rookery structure that is the South Atlantic and the Northwest distinct or markedly separated. The expected to provide greater power to Atlantic; the months that nesting occurs commenter noted that after the Services detect differentiation. Also, see the are not the same because of the earth’s concluded genetic separation between response to Comment 17. rotation and have nothing to do with the proposed Northwest and Northeast Comment 19: One commenter turtle behavior. The commenter Atlantic Ocean DPSs, the Services believes there is an error in the contended that the behavior patterns of admitted that nesting females of the Boa proposed rule, which notes that turtles are the same in both regions, thus Vista rookery in the Northeast Atlantic, loggerheads at Brazilian rookeries have if nesting season is used as the despite their proximity to other a ‘‘unique mtDNA haplotype * * *.’’ justification, it argues against separating Northeast Atlantic rookeries and to the but then notes the haplotype is not the Northwest Atlantic from the Mediterranean, are ‘‘most closely related ‘‘unique’’ because it has been found ‘‘in Northeast Atlantic and the to the rookeries of the Northwest foraging populations of juvenile Mediterranean. Atlantic.’’ Thus, the commenter believes loggerheads of the North Atlantic Response: Marked differences in the Services’ admit no marked genetic * * *.’’ The commenter believes that if nesting season between northern and separation between these two proposed the haplotype is found throughout the southern hemispheres is one of several DPSs. The commenter further recalled Atlantic it is not ‘‘unique’’ and instead characteristics that help support that the proposed rule admitted indicates common recent ancestry and distinction. The Services do not use loggerheads from the Northwest Atlantic male mediated gene flow throughout the nesting season per se as a diagnostic colonized the Northeast Atlantic and Atlantic basin. Additionally, the criterion to justify DPS designation, but Mediterranean. Additionally, the commenter believes that mtDNA rather consider it as one of several commenter believes this same rationale obtained from 11 animals from one site supporting factors. applies to other DPSs. An Australian in Brazil is too small a sample and Comment 22: One commenter haplotype (South Pacific Ocean) is limited geographically to properly believes the Services reached found in Japanese nesting populations assess the presence of haplotypes in conclusions on the discreteness factors (North Pacific Ocean) indicating North and South Atlantic populations. without analysis or explanation. Response: The Services disagree. The comingling of these groups. Similarly, Response: The commenter has Discreteness Determination section of the proposed South Pacific Ocean DPS confused the presence of haplotype in the proposed rule clearly presented the (eastern Australia) does not appear to be juvenile foraging populations with information we considered in markedly different from nesting absence of this haplotype in North determining the discreteness of assemblages in Western Australia in the Atlantic rookeries. Furthermore the commenter overstates the frequency of populations. proposed Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean occurrence of the Brazilian haplotype in Comment 23: One commenter noted DPS because the two groups share two the North Atlantic juvenile foraging that the proposed rule addressed size mtDNA haplotypes. Turtles caught off aggregations, and since mtDNA is issues only in the Atlantic and Baja California included 95 percent of maternally inherited, the claim that this neglected the other ocean basins. Also the haplotypes that are common to is evidence of male mediated gene flow with respect to size, the commenter did Japanese nesting areas and 5 percent of is erroneous. not agree that mean size of reproductive Australian haplotypes; the Status Comment 20: One commenter female loggerheads should be used to Review admitted gene flow between disagreed that there are ecological support splitting the Northwest Atlantic these populations. As noted by Bowen differences for adult females in the Ocean and South Atlantic Ocean DPSs and Karl (2007) ‘‘there appears to be Atlantic basin because multiple because the proposed rule noted that sufficient leakage [of genes] between populations mix on foraging grounds. SCL in Brazil is comparable to that in ocean basins to prevent long-term The commenter also feels that ecological the Northwest Atlantic. Further, the isolation and allopatric specification.’’ differences cannot be used as commenter does not believe that size Response: Standard population justification for delineating a Northwest differences are justification for separate genetic analysis published in the peer- Atlantic Ocean DPS because foraging DPSs as these differences could be reviewed scientific literature indicates behavior of adult males and other life attributed to various ages, sexes, significant population structure. Recent stages are not included. Therefore, DPS nutrition, and water temperature, which studies (Monzo´n-Argu¨ ello et al., 2010) designation is based only on a subset of would greatly affect growth rates and reinforce this and identify haplotypes the population and not the entire DPS. corresponding size. that are common in the Northeast To further illustrate this point, the Response: The Services did not use Atlantic but absent in the Northwest commenter cited a 2001 Atlantic Highly nesting female size per se as a Atlantic rookeries. Furthermore, Migratory Species Fishery Management diagnostic criterion to justify DPS Monzo´n-Argu¨ ello et al. (2010) show that Plan that noted adult females comprise designation, but rather considered it as haplotypes that were the same based on only 1 percent of the total turtle one of several supporting factors. relatively short (∼380bp) sequences population and a National Research Comment 24: One commenter does were actually different when longer Council report that concluded adults not believe the ‘‘significance’’ standard sequence fragments (∼760bp) were comprise less than 5 percent of the non- is met in the proposed rule. The analyzed. They identified four new hatchling population. commenter believes that being located variants of the base haplotype and Response: See response to comment in different geographic areas does not showed fixed differences between a 15. Also, in general, adult females make each area unique for loggerheads Northwest Atlantic rookery and occupy neritic foraging habitat, and such that each area is significant. Northeast Atlantic rookery, suggesting mixing of adults from different DPSs on Response: The Services disagree with that previous studies have foraging grounds is unlikely. the comment. Each of the nine underestimated the level of Comment 21: One commenter populations represents a large portion of differentiation between these DPSs. disagreed that behavioral differences the species’ range and each represents a Research is currently underway using (i.e., nesting season) justify discreteness. unique ecosystem that is significant to longer sequence data to The commenter noted that nesting the taxon as a whole, influenced by

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58892 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

local ecological and physical factors. cause severe effects on nesting females population to extinction; this is contrary The loss of any individual population and their eggs (Hawkes et al., 2009; to the language in the proposed rule on would result in a significant gap in the Poloczanska et al., 2009). foreign high seas fisheries’ effects on the loggerhead’s range. Each population Comment 26: One commenter population. segment is genetically unique, often believes that terrestrial threats Response: The Services agree that identified by unique mtDNA documented in the proposed rule efforts by Hawaii-based longline haplotypes, and the loss of any one should be irrelevant because the North fisheries to minimize loggerhead takes population segment would represent a Pacific Ocean DPS nesting beach counts have been substantial and effective. significant loss of genetic diversity. have increased despite these threats However, to focus on loggerhead during the same time period. While population trends since 1990 only tells Comments on the Identification and these threats may have some as yet part of the story. Empirical data clearly Consideration of Specific Threats unquantified impact on the population, show that by 1990 the annual nesting Comment 25: Three commenters they are most certainly not driving the population was substantially reduced believe climate change should be population to extinction. relative to historical levels. Thus, determined as a significant threat to the Response: The Services believe that loggerheads in the North Pacific remain persistence of all of the DPSs. The increased impacts in the terrestrial zone, a depleted population that continues to commenters provided detailed such as beach armoring and human be vulnerable to fisheries bycatch. information on sea level rise impacts on traffic, serve to decrease nesting success, Comment 29: One commenter did not nesting beaches and nesting success, hatching success, and hatchling agree that bycatch in Japanese coastal increasing sand temperatures resulting survivorship. Thus, although terrestrial pound net and other fisheries is causing in skewed sex ratios and higher egg threats may not impact loggerheads population declines of the North Pacific mortality, impacts of storm activity on through direct mortality, the indirect Ocean DPS and requested detailed nesting beaches and nesting success, effects hamper the reproductive output bycatch data/information that supports warmer ocean temperatures and changes of the population, on which the effects the Services’ conclusion. in circulation effects on all age classes, will be manifested for decades to come. Response: The loggerhead Status and ocean acidification impacts on Comment 27: One commenter Review concludes that impacts from nesting beaches and food resources. believes the listing factor analysis for fisheries bycatch represent a substantial Another commenter believes that global the North Pacific Ocean DPS does not threat to loggerhead sea turtles. Coastal climate change should not be appropriately weigh the adequacy of pound-net fisheries in Japan have been considered in the listing decision for the existing regulatory mechanisms (e.g., shown to present a problem to North Pacific Ocean DPS because its regulatory measures that address egg loggerhead sea turtles in Japan and, effects on loggerheads and the harvest and drift netting). when taken in context of all the other ecosystem are too complex and Response: The Services believe that fisheries impacts ongoing at present, it speculative, and they could adapt to the illegal, unidentified, and is clear that no single fishery (coastal changing conditions. unregulated industrial longline and pound nets included) constitutes the Response: The Services have driftnet fleets operating in the North only threat to loggerheads. identified climate change impacts as Pacific have a major adverse effect on Comment 30: One commenter noted potentially having profound long-term loggerhead sea turtles. Thus, the that for listing Factor A (The Present or impacts on nesting populations, but also existing regulatory mechanisms are Threatened Destruction, Modification, continue to believe it is not possible to currently insufficient to address these or Curtailment of its Habitat or Range), quantify the potential impacts at this fishing impacts. It is likely that the the Status Review listed threats as low time. Impacts from climate change, existing regulatory mechanisms and very low for Northwest Atlantic especially due to global warming, are mandating fishing strategies in U.S.- loggerheads. The commenter believes likely to become more apparent in based fleets are approaching adequate, that low or very low threats do not future years (Intergovernmental Panel yet loggerheads remain vulnerable to provide a legally sound basis to on Climate Change, 2007). The global impacts from foreign fleets. designate the Northwest Atlantic Ocean mean temperature has risen 0.76 degrees Comment 28: One commenter DPS as endangered. The commenter Celsius over the last 150 years, and the believes the impacts of U.S. commercial believes the proposed rule is inadequate linear trend over the last 50 years is fisheries on North Pacific loggerheads in its assessment of listing Factor A and nearly twice that for the last 100 years are extremely small and not currently does not believe this factor justifies an (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate (or foreseeably) a significant source of endangered finding. The commenter Change, 2007). One of the most certain injury or mortality. The commenter listed several threats for which effects consequences of climate change is sea noted that peer-reviewed scientific were not quantified (e.g., number of level rise (Titus and Narayanan, 1995), literature demonstrated that severe individuals or amount of habitat which will result in increased erosion restrictions placed on the shallow-set affected) or evaluated for impacts to rates along nesting beaches. On fishery ostensibly to protect turtles, Northwest Atlantic loggerheads: Nesting undeveloped and unarmored beaches actually resulted in substantially more beach erosion, erosion control devices with no landward infrastructure, takes on the high seas by foreign fleets (beach armoring), beach washout, jetty shoreline migration may have limited filling market demand not being met by construction, light pollution, vehicular effects on the suitability of nesting Hawaii-based longline fisheries. While traffic, fishing effects on loggerhead habitat. Bruun (1962) hypothesized that foreign high seas fisheries interact with diet, sediment dredging for port during sea level rise a typical beach North Pacific loggerheads, the navigation, and climate change effects profile will maintain its configuration commenter noted the impact of this take on trophic changes. Further, the but will be translated landward and is uncertain and unquantified. The commenter noted that the proposed rule upward. However, along developed commenter believes that known data does not explain how impacts from coastlines, and especially in areas where demonstrate that the North Pacific armoring or dredging are offset by beach erosion control structures have been population has increased and remained nourishment programs that increase constructed to limit shoreline stable since the 1990s, which suggests loggerhead nesting. Another commenter movement, rising sea levels are likely to that high seas bycatch is not driving the also provided comments for listing

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58893

Factor A and believes the discussion of loggerheads with extinction in the very compelling analysis of loggerhead trends in addressing these threats is Northwest Atlantic, citing the TEWG nesting trends and demonstrated that missing in the proposed rule (e.g., assessment of harvest in the Caribbean fisheries impacts appear to account for artificial lighting in Florida, beach and the proposed rule. a significant proportion of the trend. driving in North Carolina, Magnuson- Response: For a number of reasons, Comment 34: One commenter Stevens Fishery Conservation and discussed in the Finding section, the believes listing Factor D (Inadequacy of Management Act and Atlantic States Services are listing the Northwest Existing Regulatory Mechanisms) is not Marine Fisheries Commission Atlantic Ocean DPS as threatened. at issue and cannot be used to justify an management measures, etc.). While a listing could proceed based on endangered designation for the Response: For a number of reasons, one of the five factors, determinations of Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS because discussed in the Finding section, the any listing decision are generally based the Status Review noted that it is ‘‘not Services are listing the Northwest on an examination of all five factors and considered to be reducing survival rates Atlantic Ocean DPS as threatened. how they impact the listed entity in directly.’’ Additionally, the commenter While a listing could proceed based on total and not by examining or relying on believes the Services never discussed one of the five factors, determinations of only one factor in isolation. what mechanisms are believed to be any listing decision are generally based Comment 32: One commenter noted inadequate nor identified any indirect on an examination of all five factors and that for listing Factor C (Disease or impacts. Predation), the Status Review lists how they impact the entity in total and Response: For a number of reasons, threats as low or very low for Northwest not by examining or relying on only one discussed in the Finding section, the factor in isolation. Habitat modification Atlantic loggerheads. The commenter Services are listing the Northwest or destruction impacts are considered to believes that low or very low threats do Atlantic Ocean DPS as threatened. the extent they are known based on the not provide a legally sound basis to While a listing could proceed based on best available information. designate the Northwest Atlantic Ocean one of the five factors, determinations of Quantification of such impacts is DPS as endangered. The commenter also any listing decision are generally based typically very difficult as a result of lack asserted the proposed rule does not on an examination of all five factors and of available information. Regarding claim that threat from disease and how they impact the entity in total and armoring or dredging impacts being predation actually exists, only that it not by examining or relying on only one offset by beach nourishment programs, may be an issue for Northwest Atlantic factor in isolation. Our review of we cannot quantify what the trade-off in loggerheads. Further, the commenter effects would be. However, while believes the Services failed to indicate regulatory mechanisms for this DPS nourishment can provide nesting habitat the nature or extent of the threat or how described below in the Summary of where either it had been destroyed many loggerheads may be affected. Factors Affecting the Nine Loggerhead previously or to augment impacts from Response: For a number of reasons, DPSs demonstrates that regulatory other coastal measures, it at best helps discussed in the Finding section, the mechanisms are in place that should reduce the impacts, but does not Services are listing the Northwest address direct and incidental take for provide new benefits to the turtles. The Atlantic Ocean DPS as threatened. this DPS. While the regulatory Services agree that many efforts have While a listing could proceed based on mechanisms contained within been made to reduce threats on the one of the five factors, determinations of international instruments are nesting beaches. However, in many any listing decision are generally based inconsistent and likely insufficient, the cases past policies have resulted in on an examination of all five factors and mechanisms of existing national permanent detrimental impacts to how they impact the entity in total and legislation and protection enacted under nesting beaches. As coastal not by examining or relying on only one existing regulatory mechanisms, development increases, additional factor in isolation. There are little data primarily the ESA, Magnuson-Stevens pressure on beach systems will occur, to assess the extent of disease and Fishery Conservation and Management and are occurring now. In many areas predation threats, thus a more Act, and State regulations, are much breakwaters, jetties, seawalls, and other qualitative discussion on the factor is more adequate. However, it remains to erosion control structures designed to presented. That some degree of disease be determined if national measures are protect public and private property and predation occurs is known, though being implemented effectively to fully continue to be permitted and built. it is not expected to be significant by address the needs of loggerheads as Additional residential and commercial itself. That is the reason it was many of the most significant measures properties near beaches also continue to considered to be a low to very low have come within the last generation of be permitted and built. While measures threat. loggerheads, and thus the benefits may (e.g., lighting ordinances, construction Comment 33: One commenter not yet be seen in the nesting trends. In setbacks) to mitigate these pressures to presented an argument that the declines addition, even with the existing some degree provide important in Northwest Atlantic loggerhead regulatory mechanisms there is still a protections, threats remain a serious nesting can best be explained by an potential threat from both national and concern. epizootic event that specifically international fishery bycatch and coastal Comment 31: One commenter noted impacted loggerheads, and not fishery development, beachfront lighting, and that for listing Factor B (Overutilization interactions. The commenter also coastal armoring and other erosion for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, claimed that the epizootic ended some control structures on nesting beaches in or Educational Purposes), the Status years ago and populations are in the United States. More work needs to Review lists threats as low or very low recovery. be done under the existing national for Northwest Atlantic loggerheads. The Response: The Services do not find regulatory mechanisms, as well as commenter believes that low or very there is enough evidence to support the continuing to advance the development low threats do not provide a legally epizootic hypothesis at this time. While and effectiveness of international sound basis to designate the Northwest epizootic events may play a factor in the instruments, to ensure the persistence of Atlantic Ocean DPS as endangered. The population trajectory, a much stronger this DPS. Therefore, we have commenter also questioned how a case would need to be made. determined that the threat from the harvest of close to zero threatens Witherington et al. (2009) published a inadequacy of existing regulatory

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58894 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

mechanisms is significant relative to the also been a concern for the Services. ‘‘lack of availability of comprehensive persistence of this DPS. There is a need to continue researching bycatch reduction technologies’’ under Comment 35: One commenter agrees the issue to better understand what the Factor D (Inadequacy of Existing with the Services that although actual survival rates are for adult Regulatory Mechanisms) for the regulatory mechanisms are in place that females and all age classes. The Services Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS. should address direct and incidental agree that continued, and more Response: While TEDs stand as the take in Northwest Atlantic loggerheads, effective, implementation of measures model for sea turtle bycatch reduction these regulatory mechanisms are under the existing regulatory technology, many gear types do not lend insufficient or are not being mechanisms is needed. themselves to technological fixes that implemented effectively to address the Comment 38: One commenter can reach a similarly high level of needs of loggerheads. disagreed that existing regulatory effectiveness when properly used. Even Response: More work needs to be mechanisms have failed to adequately for some trawl fisheries, further done under the existing national address threats to Northwest Atlantic development is needed to devise TED regulatory mechanisms, as well as loggerheads from incidental take and designs that effectively exclude sea continuing to advance the development that no mechanism has effectively turtles while maintaining sufficient and effectiveness of international eliminated or sufficiently reduced target catch. Longline measures such as instruments, to ensure the persistence of mortality from fishing. Similarly, circle hooks and release gear this DPS. See the response to Comment another commenter stated that the requirements are valuable, but partial, 34 for additional information. claims that NMFS faces ‘‘limitations on solutions. Take levels in longline Comment 36: One commenter implementing demonstrated effective fisheries, both pelagic and bottom, can believes that the Services’ assessment of conservation measures’’ and that still result in significant impacts. For existing regulatory measures for domestic ‘‘regulatory mechanisms are many other gear types, effective loggerheads in the Northwest Atlantic insufficient or are not being technological solutions are not so Ocean DPS was confounded by the implemented effectively to address the readily available, and much work Services’ failure to implement existing needs of loggerheads’’ of the Northwest remains to determine what gear mechanisms. The commenter believes it Atlantic is contrary to the commenters’ changes, if any, will result in significant is difficult to argue that the existing beliefs. This commenter noted that reductions in interactions and regulatory mechanisms are inadequate while no regulatory measure is perfect, mortalities. for the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS. the mechanisms in the United States Comment 40: One commenter The commenter noted that many (and increasingly internationally) are believes that ‘‘limitations on conservation measures have been strong and subject to constant implementing demonstrated enacted, but given the species’ improvement and enforcement. The law conservation measures’’ is a fallacious prolonged age to maturity, coupled with virtually assures that identified gaps in rationale to justify a change in status. transitory dynamics, it is likely too early protection are filled. Further, this The commenters again cited longline to begin measuring effects of past commenter states that the current and shrimp trawl as well as scallop actions on nesting activity; this is system for enforcing sea turtle dredge gear modifications as leading to further complicated by multiple protective measures is comprehensive increasing protection for sea turtles at measures, implemented at different and effective and took issue with the all life stages. times, affecting different life stages. Services’ characterization of Response: While important measures Response: The Services agree that ‘‘limitations on enforcement capacity.’’ have been enacted to address sea turtle nationally, significant measures have However, several commenters disagreed interactions in some fisheries, there are been enacted under existing regulatory that NMFS has an adequate number of still substantial levels of interactions in mechanisms and that is not yet possible officers to enforce existing regulations. those and other fisheries. Limitations in to determine whether the measures are Response: The Services agree that applicability, resources, and industry sufficiently effective as many of the substantial measures have been taken to acceptance and compliance in many most significant measures have come reduce sea turtle mortality from fishery cases present very real limitations on within the last generation of bycatch, and NMFS is committed to implementing demonstrated loggerheads, and thus the benefits may reducing bycatch and bycatch mortality conservation measures in an effective not yet be seen in the nesting trends. further. However, in many fisheries high manner. However, we have determined that interaction levels and mortalities still Comment 41: One commenter noted additional work needs to be done under occur, both nationally and that Federal negligence to design and the existing national regulatory internationally. While the Federal law execute appropriate loggerhead recovery mechanisms, as well as continuing to does require that gaps in protection efforts is a routinely overlooked threat advance the development and under U.S. jurisdiction are addressed, to loggerhead survival. However, the effectiveness of international many gaps remain, and many of the commenter believes these failures can instruments, to ensure the persistence of measures enacted provide benefits to simply be corrected by harmonizing the this DPS. the species, but impacts still remain conservation recommendations of ESA Comment 37: One commenter is significant. NMFS disagrees with the mandates with permitted incidental concerned about apparent low survival assertion that there are not substantial take. The commenter suggested better rates of adult females from the limitations on enforcement capacity, as integration of three integral agency Peninsular Florida Recovery Unit the geographic scope and variety of actions—mandatory species recovery within the Northwest Atlantic Ocean fisheries, inshore, coastal, and on the plans, ESA section 7 Biological DPS, but suggested this is better high seas that are known to, or Consultations, and incidental take (both addressed through more effective potentially, impact sea turtles make Incidental Take Permits for State and implementation of existing regulatory effective enforcement difficult with private actions and Incidental Take measures. limited resources at both the State and Statements for Federal agency actions)— Response: The apparent low survival Federal levels. to facilitate the recovery of the rate of adult females from the Comment 39: One commenter loggerhead sea turtle. Specifically, the Peninsular Florida Recovery Unit has questioned what the Services meant by commenter stated the belief that crucial

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58895

recommendations in recovery plans are history parameters; however, the ESA Atlantic Ocean DPS may be a significant routinely ignored during section 7 requires us to use the best scientific data concern. That study estimated annual consultations and incidental take available when making a listing survivorship of adult females to be as authorizations and urged NMFS to determination. Although significant low as 0.41 (0.20–0.65, 95 percent reassess its internal recovery measures have been enacted nationally confidence intervals), and at best 0.60 management strategy (e.g., reinitiating under existing regulatory mechanisms, (0.40–0.78, 95 percent confidence section 7 consultation when necessary it is not yet possible to determine intervals) (NMFS, unpublished data). not just when authorized take limits are whether the measures are sufficiently Additional research to better understand exceeded) to meet the recovery needs of effective as many of the most significant survival rates for the various life stages loggerheads. measures have come within the last is a high priority for the Services. Response: Although the commenter is generation of loggerheads, and thus the Comment 44: One commenter referring to actions taken subsequent to benefits may not yet be seen in the believes the justification for listing the the listing, the Services point out that nesting trends. We have determined that Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS as the ‘‘three integral agency actions’’ cited additional work needs to be done under endangered by evaluating other natural by the commenter are and will continue the existing national regulatory or manmade factors is missing. The to be integrated. The ‘‘ESA section 7 mechanisms, as well as continuing to commenter noted several threats for biological consultations’’ and incidental advance the development and which effects were not quantified take are both part of the same action for effectiveness of international adequately or inappropriately assessed, a Federal agency action. Incidental take instruments, to ensure the persistence of such as vessel strikes, changing weather is authorized by section 7 Biological this DPS. (e.g., hurricanes and cold stun events), Opinions, which are formal ESA Comment 43: One commenter habitat change, saltwater cooling, and consultations that occur when take is questioned the analysis of loggerhead bycatch. Specific to bycatch in the anticipated from a Federal action. survival rates in the Status Review. The shrimp fishery, the commenter provided Section 10(a)(1)(B) provides a commenter noted that the natural a population calculation for Northwest mechanism when an action is being survival rate for neritic adults (i.e., large Atlantic loggerheads based on annual undertaken by a non-Federal entity that prebreeding and breeding males and bycatch in all fisheries and questioned results in incidental take of a species; females) is stated to be 95 percent in all how take of 0.17 percent of the section 10(a)(1)(A) provides a DPSs. The Status Review also stated that population is likely to result in an mechanism for exempting directed take anthropogenic mortalities for neritic endangered listing. for scientific purposes. Recovery plans juveniles and adults in the proposed Response: The Services disagree that are important tools in the species Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS are an evaluation of other natural or conservation and recovery and provide between 13 percent and 50 percent of manmade factors was missing. In many recommendations at a broader scale and the 95 percent of loggerheads left after cases, there are substantial data are used as guidelines but are not natural mortality is subtracted. In other limitations that prevent in-depth, regulatory. Reasonable and Prudent words, using the high end of the quantitative analysis of threats, Measures and Terms and Conditions, in anthropogenic mortality estimate in the including those listed by the Biological Opinions are project specific Status Review, approximately 52.5 commenter. The five-factor analysis for and are intended to minimize the effects percent of the proposed Northwest listing determinations is based on of the incidental take on a species. Atlantic Ocean DPS neritic juvenile and consideration of all of the factors, using Reinitiation of section 7 consultations adult population dies annually. The the best data available. takes place when: The amount or extent TEWG estimated the neritic juvenile Comment 45: The State of Florida of take specified in the incidental take and adult population of the proposed referenced the Witherington et al. (2009) statement is exceeded; new information Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS to be analysis of the Index Nesting Beach reveals effects of the action that may 230,000. Given that, the Status Review Survey data set that concluded the affect listed species or critical habitat in asserted that 120,750 neritic juveniles causal factor that best fit the nesting a manner or to an extent not previously and adults from this population die decline was fisheries bycatch. The State considered; the identified action is annually, almost entirely because of judged the magnitude, timing, and subsequently modified in a manner that anthropogenic mortality. Yet the Status ongoing nature of fisheries threats to be causes an effect to the listed species or Review admitted that the largest source consistent with the steep decline in critical habitat that was not considered of mortality in the proposed Northwest nesting following 1998. The State in the biological opinion; and a new Atlantic Ocean DPS, fishery bycatch, believes the full scope of threats and species is listed or critical habitat totals only 3,743 turtles annually. impacts remain poorly understood as designated that may be affected by the Response: The Status Review evidenced by the recent discovery of identified action. document prepared by the BRT was unexpectedly high mortality rates of sea Comment 42: One commenter only one of many sources of information turtles in the Gulf of Mexico reef fish believes that permitting incidental take considered by the Services to make the bottom longline fishery. The State does in the face of uncertainties in baseline listing status determination. The not believe the threat posed by fisheries loggerhead life history parameters and mortality estimate used for that bycatch is likely to abate significantly in population estimates suggests existing particular threat analysis was based the foreseeable future. regulatory mechanisms are inadequate. upon a majority opinion of experts Response: Inclusion of nesting data Specifically, the commenter stated the comprising the BRT, but it was not a up through 2010 results in the nesting belief that data for both sexes of consensus opinion. Another study trend line being slightly negative, but loggerheads at all life stages (growth estimated that total annual mortality not significantly different from zero. rate, size, dispersal, etc.) are either (natural and anthropogenic) for the The Services agree that fisheries bycatch nonexistent or inadequate, significantly neritic juveniles was 17 percent, with a is one factor that best fits the nesting curtailing their value for modeling. range of 11–26 percent (Braun-McNeill decline seen in the past. However, Response: The Services agree that et al., 2007). However, another various fishery bycatch reduction there remain substantial gaps in preliminary study determined that adult measures have occurred within the last knowledge regarding loggerhead life female survivorship from the Northwest generation time for loggerhead sea

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58896 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

turtles, and the benefits of those actions Response: The Services agree that of Northwest Atlantic loggerhead deaths may only now be starting to become fishery bycatch is a significant threat to annually throughout their range’’ evident on the nesting beaches. The sea turtles, including Northwest especially with regard to the pelagic agencies are committed to reducing Atlantic loggerheads, and that longline fleet. Additionally, yet another fisheries bycatch further. substantial gaps remain in our commenter stated that measures, Comment 46: The North Carolina understanding of take and mortality particularly shrimp TEDs, modifications Division of Marine Fisheries and the levels for many fisheries. Various to longline gear and practices, and State of South Carolina suggested that fishery bycatch reduction measures gillnet reductions, have progressively instead of reclassifying Northwest have occurred within the most recent reduced the threat facing juvenile and Atlantic loggerheads as endangered, generation of loggerhead sea turtles, adult loggerheads by orders of existing measures (e.g., TEDs, circle including technological measures, time/ magnitudes and weigh strongly against hooks, time/area closures) should be area closures, and effort reductions. a change in listing status. broadened or modified to apply to Additionally, some U.S. fisheries that Response: NMFS has enacted various problem gears or areas. Additionally, incidentally capture loggerhead turtles efforts over the years to reduce bycatch the North Carolina Division of Marine have experienced effort declines within and mortality rates in domestic Fisheries believes that annual catch that time. The benefits of those actions fisheries, and has engaged other nations limits and accountability measures may only now be starting to become bilaterally and through larger under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery evident on the nesting beaches. NMFS international organizations in efforts to Conservation and Management Act will is committed to reducing fisheries reduce sea turtle bycatch overseas. Such result in lower harvest levels, reduced bycatch further to conserve loggerhead efforts continue to be a top priority for fishing effort, closed areas, and shorter sea turtles, regardless of the listing the agency. This includes reductions in seasons, all of which will decrease status of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean take, and mortality rates, for the Gulf of potential for sea turtle bycatch. DPS. Mexico reef fish bottom longline fishery Response: A variety of conservation Comment 48: Three commenters enacted in 2009. However, the effect of measures for fisheries and non-fishery referenced recent data showing 1,451 those measures are yet to be determined activities have been enacted in many loggerhead mortalities in the Southeast as many of the most significant areas, including in the Northwest U.S. and Gulf of Mexico shrimp trawl measures have come within the last Atlantic, and many within the past fleets, indicating this fishery is the generation of loggerheads, and thus the generation of loggerhead sea turtles. leading cause of mortality for Northwest benefits may not yet be seen in the Additionally, many fisheries, especially Atlantic loggerheads. nesting trends. The Services are the shrimp trawl fisheries in the Response: The Services agree that committed to enacting additional Northwest Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of taking measures to limit sea turtle measures to reduce anthropogenic Mexico, have experienced substantial interactions with fisheries, including impacts. NMFS also continues to declines, thus potentially reducing the U.S. shrimp trawl fishery, is a top undertake efforts to increase the impacts to sea turtles. The benefits of priority for sea turtle conservation. those fishery reductions, if permanent, NMFS is currently working on a new understanding of interaction levels and combined with conservation actions, if consultation for the shrimp trawl impacts of the many Federal and State sufficiently effective, may only now, or fishery, a rule to require TEDs in certain fisheries through means such as the may soon, begin to become evident on mid-Atlantic trawl fisheries, and a rule 2007 ESA Sea Turtle Observer Rule the nesting beaches. The agencies are to require TEDs in skimmer trawl (72 FR 43176; August 3, 2007). committed to reducing fisheries bycatch fisheries. NMFS continues to work with The level of take authorized under the further regardless of the listing status. the coastal States to improve TED ESA is based upon an analysis of the Comment 47: Two commenters noted enforcement. anticipated take from the proposed that loggerheads are at risk from Comment 49: Two commenters action. Upward revisions of take occur fisheries using longlines, trawls, highlighted the bycatch of hundreds of when new data indicate that take levels gillnets, hooks and lines, dredges, and loggerheads in the Gulf of Mexico reef are higher than previously anticipated. assorted other types of gear, citing fish bottom longline fishery, citing That new expected take level is then mortality estimates in the 2008 NMFS 2005 and 2009 biological analyzed to determine if it would Recovery Plan for Northwest Atlantic opinions. The commenters noted the jeopardize the continued existence of loggerheads. Additionally, the particularly lethal nature of takes in this the species, and often additional terms commenters noted that an unknown fishery because turtles become hooked and conditions are required as part of number of animals also sustain serious while too deep and cannot reach the the new biological opinion that could and moderate injuries in other fisheries. surface to breathe. Additionally, the result in additional or different The commenters referenced Wallace et commenters stated that gillnet limitations or gear restrictions for the al. (2008), which concluded that turtles interactions represent the greatest fishing industry. killed in U.S. waters are larger and more unknown for turtles because there is no Comment 50: The State of Maryland valuable to the population; therefore, estimate of the total numbers of provided information on loggerhead the failure of NMFS to reduce fishery interactions occurring or the mortality strandings documented from May to interactions is significantly sustained by loggerheads in gillnets as November from 1991–2009 along the undermining the survival of Northwest observer coverage in many fisheries is Chesapeake Bay and Atlantic Coast. Of Atlantic loggerheads. Further, the so low and State fisheries are often not the 378 dead loggerhead strandings, less commenters noted the 2008 Biological observed or regulated. The commenters than 3 percent of strandings with Opinion on the Gulf of Mexico reef fish further noted that as observer coverage evidence of human interaction exhibited fishery, which states that the population increases, actual take levels and signs of fishery interaction. The ‘‘is likely to continue to decline until authorizations are regularly revised Maryland Department of Natural large mortality reductions in all upward. However, another commenter Resources conducts fishery-dependent fisheries and other sources of mortality disagreed with the Services’ statement and independent surveys each year and (including impacts outside U.S. that ‘‘gillnets, longlines, and trawl gear rarely finds turtles associated with jurisdiction) are achieved.’’ collectively result in tens of thousands either of these surveys.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58897

Response: The Services are aware that Commission for the Conservation of population as a result of conservation there is variability, both geographically Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), etc. efforts over the last 15 years would not and temporally, in the instances of Response: Although the majority of be apparent until 2020 and beyond. The fishery interactions with loggerheads in Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS nesting North Carolina Division of Marine coastal waters. Evidence of human is within the United States, and a Fisheries also stated that conservation interaction in stranded turtles is significant portion of adult and sub- measures (e.g., TEDs) from the 1980s difficult to ascertain, especially if the adult stages are spent in U.S. waters, the should have positive effects on the examination is limited to externally wide-ranging habits of the species still segment of the population that is just observable anomalies. Bycatch mortality results in significant exposure to now becoming sexually mature; due to drowning is not apparent through pressures outside of U.S. jurisdiction. therefore, it would be prudent to allow external examination, and turtles The existence of various international enough time to evaluate whether those captured in gear, such as trawls or conventions (e.g., CITES) and conservation measures have worked gillnets, are most often removed from organizations (e.g., ICCAT) are valuable before taking further action. Similarly, a the gear and, as such, do not strand with tools, as pointed out by the commenter. third commenter stated that the most gear attached. This makes it difficult to However, advances made in reducing recent and effective management use the referenced stranding data to bycatch in foreign nations via these measures have and will continue to ascertain rates of fisheries interactions. instruments are still limited, in need of have beneficial impacts that will not be The Services believe that fisheries strengthening and expansion, and in seen on beaches for decades. bycatch is the leading source of many cases tenuous as a result of Response: The Services agree that the anthropogenic mortality in U.S. waters. political uncertainties. effects of most conservation measures Comment 51: Five commenters cited Comments on the Status and Trends will not be apparent for many years information on the threat of direct and and Extinction Risk Assessments of the given the loggerhead’s prolonged age to indirect effects of oil, as well as the DPSs maturity. Although individual actions to contain, remove, and disperse Comment 54: One commenter conservation measures should have a oil, on sea turtles. Two of these positive effect on a population, in many commenters noted that while the believes that neither of the methodologies used in the 2009 Status cases it would be difficult to clearly preamble of the proposed rule discusses determine the effect of any individual the threat posed by oil spills, it was Review provided the necessary ‘‘convincing evidence’’ of near-term conservation activity due to the many published prior to the Deepwater different conservation efforts being Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. extinction of loggerheads, either undertaken simultaneously. Additionally, three of the commenters globally or in the Northwest Atlantic Collectively, however, conservation noted that the total number of Ocean DPS. The commenter believes efforts should result in a positive effect loggerhead sea turtles harmed by the that neither of the two models employed on a population as long as the key spill is likely higher than observed were geared toward the legally relevant threats have been sufficiently targeted. numbers. Another commenter provided factors, and thus do nothing to further For a number of reasons, discussed in information on the impacts of the 2010 the inquiry as to the imminence of the Finding section, the Services are Deepwater Horizon oil spills on loggerhead extinction. The commenter listing the Northwest Atlantic Ocean loggerheads. believes that the models used do not Response: The full scope and effects meet the ESA standard that the Services DPS as threatened. However, the of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon use the best available scientific and Services do not believe it would be (Mississippi Canyon 252) oil well commercial data. Thus, as a legal prudent to wait to see the results of blowout and uncontrolled oil release on matter, the commenter believes that a conservation efforts that have been sea turtles in the Gulf of Mexico, change in listing status is not warranted implemented before taking any including Northwest Atlantic Ocean by the best scientific and commercial additional actions to protect the species DPS loggerheads, is not yet determined. data available. Another commenter given the species life history. Further, Comment 52: Three commenters believes that models are an under the ESA, the Services are required believe that plastic ingestion poses inappropriate tool to measure to make determinations based on the immediate threats and risks to fluctuating population trends and best available scientific and commercial Northwest Atlantic loggerheads. The predict extinction. data, and not wait to determine whether commenters provided detailed Response: The Services have clarified measures already implemented are information to support this. the text in the Extinction Risk effective at ameliorating threats. Response: The Services agree that Assessments section to more clearly Comment 56: The Services received plastic ingestion is a threat to Northwest state that the SQE and threat matrix several comments relative to in-water Atlantic Ocean DPS loggerheads as well analyses were only used to provide abundance and population size. One as other DPSs and species. Discussion of some additional insights into the status commenter questioned why the Status this threat was added to the ‘‘Other of the nine DPSs, but that ultimately the Review did not consider existing in- Manmade and Natural Impacts’’ section conclusions and determinations made water survey data, which show an under the analysis for Factor E (Other were primarily based on an assessment increase in loggerhead populations, as Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting of population sizes and trends, current reported in the 2009 TEWG Report. its Continued Existence) in the five- and anticipated threats, and Another commenter noted that both factor analysis. conservation efforts for each DPS. Epperly et al. (2007) and the SEAMAP Comment 53: One commenter However, for a number of reasons, survey show an increase in juvenile questioned why ‘‘geopolitical discussed in the Finding section, the loggerheads. Both of these commenters complexities’’ contribute to a listing Services are listing the Northwest stated that the Services should not determination given that all populations Atlantic Ocean DPS as threatened. proceed until a major survey of in-water are within the U.S. and subject to the Comment 55: Given the species’ life abundance is undertaken, and that the Convention on International Trade in history, one commenter expressed Services should wait to make a final Endangered Species of Wildlife Fauna concern that any positive trends in the decision until additional data were and Flora (CITES), the International adult segment of the Northwest Atlantic available.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58898 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

Response: It would not be appropriate 2010 Regional Abundance Estimate of uncertainty in the threat matrix for the Services to wait for additional in- Loggerhead Turtles (Caretta caretta) in analyses. Because of the late maturity of water data to become available before Northwestern Atlantic Ocean the species, only small additional proceeding with this final rule. Under Continental Shelf Waters) and suggested mortality can be tolerated for a the ESA, the Services must base each that the Services incorporate this new population of loggerhead sea turtles. listing determination solely on the best information into the final rule. Because of the large uncertainties in available scientific and commercial data Response: The Services agree and additional mortalities from a wide after conducting a review of the status have incorporated this information into variety of threats, a population of of the species and taking into account the Status and Trends of the Nine loggerheads can be increasing or any efforts being made by States or Loggerhead DPSs section of this final decreasing rapidly. The observed trend foreign governments to protect the rule. at nesting beaches may not reflect what species. The Services were petitioned to Comment 58: One commenter stated happens at sea. list the North Pacific and Northwest that the Status Review never assessed Comment 60: One commenter Atlantic populations as DPSs under the the status of the proposed Northwest questioned whether a decline to 30 ESA. The Services must respond to Atlantic Ocean DPS as a whole; rather percent by itself warrants listing any petitions within statutory deadlines. We the analysis focused solely on specific species under the ESA regardless of the do not have the latitude to defer listing indices. Thus, the commenter stated the population size when at 30 percent. In decisions until additional information opinion that no finding was ever made the case of the Northwest Atlantic becomes available. as to whether the proposed DPS is in Ocean DPS, in 2007 (the lowest nesting Although the Services did consider danger of extinction. The commenter activity in the series) the adult available data from in-water studies also stated there was no analysis of the population size of all recovery units within the range of the Northwest timeframe in which extinction is likely combined was approximately 30,000 Atlantic Ocean DPS in its assessment of to occur, which is the primary factor adult females (TEWG, 2009). Thus, a population status, extrapolation of these distinguishing a threatened from an quasi-extinction threshold (QET) of 0.3 localized in-water trends to the broader endangered species under the ESA. of that number translates to a decline to, population, and relating localized Therefore, the commenter recommends or below, 10,000 nesting females (or trends at neritic sites to population that the appropriate response would be 20,000 adult females and males trends at nesting beaches, is a problem to find that there is not sufficient combined) within 100 years, if the of scale and requires the integration of evidence to justify reclassifying model was initialized with the 2007 many representative foraging grounds Northwest Atlantic loggerheads as numbers, not the 1998 numbers, which throughout the population range endangered. were greater. The commenter asked (Bjorndal et al., 2005). NMFS and Response: Both modeling approaches whether a population of 10,000 adult USFWS (2008) summarized trend data assessed the Northwest Atlantic Ocean females 100 years later warrants available from nine in-water sampling DPS as a whole; the indices used were endangered or threatened status. programs along the U.S. Atlantic coast. based on the population. The Response: The Services believe that Four studies indicated no discernible commenter is correct in saying that the population size is just one piece of trend, two studies reported declining models did not find that the proposed information to be taken into trends, and two studies reported DPS was in danger of extinction. The consideration when considering the increasing trends. Trends at one study models also did not find that the DPS status of a species. Although the SQE site indicated either a declining trend or was increasing. The Status Review and threat matrix analyses provided no trend depending on whether all simply stated that the model outputs some additional insights into the status sample years were used or only the indicated that the DPS may be declining of the nine DPSs, ultimately the more recent, and likely more without us detecting the decline. conclusions and determinations made comparable, sample years were used. However, for a number of reasons, were primarily based on an assessment TEWG (2009) used raw data from six of discussed in the Finding section, the of population sizes and trends, current the aforementioned nine in-water study Services are listing the Northwest and anticipated threats, and sites to conduct trend analyses and Atlantic Ocean DPS as threatened. conservation efforts for each DPS. found three with positive trends, two Comment 59: One commenter stated Comment 61: One commenter with a negative trend, and one with no that she does not believe that a believes the SQE analysis used trend. The TEWG did not provide a proportional decline in the population outdated, qualitative estimates of risk shared agreement about the weighting of is the appropriate definition of factors that fail to incorporate these data, nor did they establish how extinction when other information significant changes in fishing effort and representative these programs were of exists. Specifically, the commenter did management measures that have the larger population. As a result, not agree that listing decisions should drastically reduced take and mortality. caution must be exercised in evaluating depend solely on whether the Response: The SQE analysis did not results from all of the above referenced population will decline to 50 percent, use risk factors. Fishing effort or studies, given the relative short-term 30 percent, or 10 percent of its current management measures were not relevant duration of most of the studies, noted or historical population size, but should to the SQE analysis. difficulties in comparisons of trend data instead be based on more quantitative Comment 62: One commenter across disparate sampling periods, listing criteria whenever possible. The believes that because the SQE analysis changes in sampling methodologies and commenter further noted that stochastic relies exclusively on nesting beach equipment, small study areas, and population models have indicated that surveys, it is retrospective and considers uncontrolled variables such as weather, population size and trend are the best only mature females thereby failing to sea-state, migration patterns, and focus in determining listing status and capture important indicators of current possible shifts in loggerhead provided several references. abundance. distributions. Response: Stochastic population Response: The Services agree that Comment 57: One commenter models are useful when we have because the SQE analysis relied on referenced Northeast Fisheries Science information on the magnitude of nesting beach surveys, it is retrospective Center (2011) (Preliminary Summer stochasticity. We incorporated the and considers only mature females. That

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58899

is why the BRT also conducted the season than new nesters. Therefore, the maturing, this analysis completely threat matrix analyses to provide insight commenter stated the belief that the ignored the myriad efforts implemented into the future outlook for each DPS, model fails to account for the large over the past 20 to 30 years to reduce given the known threats and loggerhead number of females that are about to be anthropogenic mortality and increase sea turtle biology. added to the breeding population and survival, of which the benefits to Comment 63: One commenter the possibility of a naturally fluctuating conservation of juvenile loggerheads recommended that the Services update decrease that may follow. have yet to influence adult numbers. the model to include nesting data Response: Because the models were This math-rich, but data-poor approach through 2008 for the Northwest Atlantic not age-specific, the BRT did not does not address relevant legal criteria. Ocean DPS, Peninsula Florida Recovery incorporate age-specific demographic Response: The BRT included all Unit, and the North Pacific Ocean DPS parameters. Such an exercise is available information in the threat and through 2008–2009 for the Indian important for demographic studies but matrix analysis approach and used Ocean DPS as data were provided by an not for determining effects of possible mathematics as a tool to explain how independent reviewer of the Status threats to a population, as those these data are related to the results Review. The commenter stated the uncertainties would be overwhelmed provided in the Status Review rather belief that including these data will with much greater uncertainty in threat than treating them as separate entities. change the model’s results. Another measures. The parameters of the base The BRT also considered the time-lag commenter also requested that the model in the threat matrix analyses effects of the long-lived and late Services update the model to include were derived from the basic biology of maturing nature of the species through 2008 nesting data. A third commenter loggerhead sea turtles, rather than what the matrix modeling approach. noted that nesting beach abundance may happen in the future. Comment 67: One commenter data for the North Pacific Ocean DPS Comment 65: One commenter stated disagreed with using 100 years in the exhibit a long-term increasing trend. that the application of the diffusion diffusion approximation model given Additionally, this commenter noted that approximation model was so flawed as that scientists who support this concept in the Snover model, the North Pacific to make the results unusable and recommend limiting the number of population ranked 0.3 on the SQE provided a detailed analysis of these years to 2.5 times the number of years index, thus indicating that it is at risk flaws. The commenter questioned why for which nesting survey data are (i.e., ‘‘threatened’’). The model used a the Services did not specify a available (i.e., 50 years based on the 20 single composite time series of nesting population threshold or range that years or less of nesting data in the Status counts for 1990–2007, which likely below which the population could not Review). The commenter stated that, underestimates a strong recovery trend survive. The commenter also contended using the current model, the population because it does not include 2008 and that the Services did not provide direct size of the Peninsula Florida Recovery 2009 nesting data. A fourth commenter probability estimates of extinction; Unit within the Northwest Atlantic also noted that most major nesting instead the Services provided Ocean DPS in 100 years would still beaches for which pre-1990 nest count susceptibility to quasi-extinction. approach 1 million loggerheads, which data are available show a consistent Response: The Services agree that the does not suggest an immediate risk of lower trend in the latter half of the diffusion approximation approach has extinction. 1980s compared to the early 1990s, limitations as do any other approaches Response: Because loggerhead sea raising the question of whether 1990 used to estimate possible extinctions of turtles are likely to mature at greater may have been an anomalous year with a population. That is why we also than 30 years of age, the BRT used the high nesting activity. conducted the threat matrix analyses to time period of 100 years to compute Response: The Services have included provide insight into the future outlook QETs, which is consistent with the the most recent nesting data available for each DPS, given the known threats IUCN Red List Criteria for estimating for each DPS in the Status and Trends and loggerhead sea turtle biology. The extinction risk (3 generations or 100 of the Nine Loggerhead DPSs section. Services have clarified the text in the years, whichever is shorter). To For the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS, Extinction Risk Assessments section to incorporate the uncertainty of parameter the nesting data for 2008–2010 were more clearly state that the SQE and estimates in determining SQE, the BRT incorporated into the nesting trend threat matrix analyses were only used to used 95 percent confidence limits of the analyses, and the result indicated that provide some additional insights into arithmetic mean of the log population the nesting trend for this DPS from the status of the nine DPSs, but that growth rate and the variance of the log 1989–2010 is slightly negative but not ultimately the conclusions and population growth rate, which accounts statistically different from zero. determinations made were based on an for sources of variability, including Available data for the North Pacific assessment of population sizes and environmental and demographic Ocean DPS suggest this DPS has trends, current and anticipated threats stochasticity, and observation error. declined up to 90 percent from its (i.e., five-factor analysis), and Comment 68: One commenter stated recorded historical population size of conservation efforts for each DPS. that the diffusion approximation model about 50 years ago. The 2010 estimate Comment 66: One commenter stated produced results outside appropriate of the number of nests suggests the that neither the Status Review nor the and acceptable boundaries and abundance of nesting females has Services dealt with the actual contended that the Services did not returned to earlier levels (ca. 1990); abundance of loggerhead sea turtles or evaluate the model assumptions to however, this level is still low relative bothered to develop a numeric value to determine whether the results were to the historical population. define ‘‘quasi-extinction’’ based on within appropriate boundaries. Comment 64: One commenter noted known biological characteristics of Response: The Services believe the that the Status Review model used a loggerheads. Rather, the Status Review assumptions made for the diffusion constant parameter for the number of included relative estimates of potential approximation model were appropriate nests laid per female per season for the decline in its SQE analysis. Further, the for the modeling exercise conducted by next 100 years. The commenter stated analysis relied solely on nesting data as the BRT. For further information on the that this was inappropriate because the only empirical input. Because sea assumptions for the diffusion older females produce more nests per turtles are both long-lived and late approximation model, see Conant et al.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:40 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58900 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

2009, section 4. The Services have clearly state that the SQE and threat which likely skew results when clarified the text in the Extinction Risk matrix analyses were only used to combining Japanese nesting beach data Assessments section to more clearly provide some additional insights into into a single time series. This state that the SQE and threat matrix the status of the nine DPSs, but that commenter suggested the Services analyses were only used to provide ultimately the conclusions and revise the Status Review and extinction some additional insights into the status determinations made were primarily analysis using individual nesting beach of the nine DPSs, but that ultimately the based on an assessment of population data for longer time periods, which conclusions and determinations made sizes and trends, current and would likely produce different, more were primarily based on an assessment anticipated threats, and conservation positive results. The proposed rule of population sizes and trends, current efforts for each DPS. recognizes the positive nesting trend, and anticipated threats, and Comment 70: One commenter noted but states ‘‘nesting beach count data for conservation efforts for each DPS. that when the impact of the scallop the North Pacific Ocean DPS indicated Comment 69: One commenter noted fishery on loggerhead sea turtles was a decline of loggerhead nesting in the that there is no universal definition or last assessed, NMFS undertook an last 20 years.’’ numerical value of the QET, but it is analysis that looked at the probability of Response: The Services used the best generally defined as a small population extinction in terms of the time to quasi- available information in assessing that is doomed to eventual extinction. extinction. This report was conducted population trends for the North Pacific The commenter provided specific in the context of an ESA section 7 Ocean DPS. Population size trends for information from Morris and Doak consultation to determine whether the this DPS rely on nesting beach counts at (2002) on the range of QET values, fishery could lead to ‘‘jeopardy.’’ The a number of nesting beaches in Japan. starting at 1 (extremely low), including basic findings, utilizing the same Overall counts in the early 1990s 20 and 50, and continuing to a much nesting trends and similar modeling approached 7,000 nests, declined to a larger value of 100 breeders and noted techniques as relied upon by the 2009 low point in the mid-1990s (just over that typically QET values are less than Status Review and very conservative 2,000 nests), and between 2008 and 500 individuals, breeders, or females. (i.e., precautionary high) estimates of 2010 have ranged from approximately The commenter suggested that the takes by the scallop fishery, were that 7,000 to 11,000 nests. A long-term Services make informed decisions about the likelihood of quasi-extinction over a dataset available from a single beach the QET for sea turtles and use 75-year period was zero, and the (Kamouda, Japan) documents turtle population size. The commenter likelihood at 100 years was only 0.01. emergences from 1954 to at least 2004. provided an example of susceptibility of The commenter noted that neither the While these emergence counts include quasi-extinction for Kemp’s ridley sea BRT nor the Services made a both nesting emergences and non- turtles to support this point. The comparable quantitative finding of the nesting emergences (false crawls), they commenter recommended using a QET likelihood of near-term extinction with have a relationship to the number of of 1,000 (or lesser value) adult female respect to loggerheads as a global nests, and thereby to nesting females. As loggerhead population size. The species or as a species within any of the such, it is the longest continual index of commenter provided a new analysis of newly proposed DPSs. adult females in the North Pacific various SQE values using QET levels Response: The Services believe the population, and these data suggest a ranging from 10,000 to 50 adult females. analyses conducted were appropriate decline of approximately 90 percent in The Peninsular Florida Recovery Unit is and tailored to the best available turtle emergences at the site over the 50- the largest in the Northwest Atlantic information (see section 4 of the 2009 year period. Given historical records Ocean DPS (80 percent of nesting occurs Status Review (Conant et al. 2009)). The overall, during the last half of the 20th in this recovery unit) and it drives the Services have clarified the text in the century, over fewer than three dynamics of the DPS. Based on the Extinction Risk Assessments section to generations, the size of the nesting revised SQE analysis, the commenter more clearly state that the SQE and population in Japan has declined expressed the opinion that there is little threat matrix analyses were only used to between 50–90 percent. risk (SQE<0.3) that the Peninsular provide some additional insights into Comment 72: Four commenters stated Florida Recovery Unit, and therefore the the status of the nine DPSs, but that that they did not agree with the expert Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS, will fall ultimately the conclusions and opinions used in the Status Review to or below the threshold of 1,000 adult determinations made were primarily threat matrix model. One of the females in 100 years. Similarly, the based on an assessment of population commenters questioned the validity of commenter stated the South Atlantic sizes and trends, current and this approach and cited one of the Ocean DPS is not at risk of dropping anticipated threats, and conservation Status Review peer reviewer’s below 1,000 adult females, whereas the efforts for each DPS. comments to support their opinion as North Pacific Ocean DPS and the South Comment 71: Comments were well as a National Research Council Pacific Ocean DPS are at risk. The provided with respect to survey report noting that models are a commenter stated that the conclusions methods and how the resulting data are ‘‘heuristic exercise with little or no real are the same when QET is set at 500 and used in the listing process for the North power for prediction.’’ Further, this 250 adult females, but begin to differ Pacific Ocean DPS. One commenter commenter contended that the experts when QET is 100 or less (fewer DPSs are stated that the proposed rule is arbitrarily assigned threat rankings that at risk). internally inconsistent and unjustifiably were inconsistent with actual data. Response: The SQE analyses only relies on questionable long-term data. Another of these commenters noted that provided information on what has For example, the Kamouda Beach 1955– despite disagreeing on values for happened and what may happen if the 1992 data only covers 500 m of beach, anthropogenic mortality in the same trend continues in the future. is unreliable, and does not outweigh Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS, the Consequently, the Services do not rely standardized data collection from 1990 analysis on extinction risk using solely on the SQE analysis in the to present. Another commenter stated population growth rate showed that this decision-making process. The Services that individual beach level data should DPS cannot withstand much have clarified the text in the Extinction be used to ameliorate the distorting anthropogenic mortality. Yet another of Risk Assessments section to more effects of inconsistent survey methods, these commenters also stated that the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58901

model skewed estimates of Comment 73: One commenter stated not at risk when in fact it is). SQE values anthropogenic mortalities high (e.g., for the belief that the BRT incorporated the greater than 0.30, therefore, indicate the the scallop fishery, trawl fisheries), most pessimistic and conservative DPS is at risk.’’ The Services agree with leading to a false sense of urgency, assumptions in its analyses. For this approach taken by the BRT. primarily because it over-relied on the example, with respect to the Comments on the Status Determinations subjective opinions of experts. In assumptions made in the threat matrix for the DPSs addition, one of the four commenters analysis, the BRT stated that ‘‘we used asserted that threat rankings were the precautionary principle for Comment 74: All individuals that sent arbitrarily assigned mortality values that characterizing the threat level.’’ For the form letters, as well as 18 organizations do not correlate with actual data. Three SQE analysis, the commenter stated that or individuals that sent non-form letters, different commenters indicated that a the BRT ignored the model developers’ supported the proposed endangered paper by Dulvy et al. (2004) noted that use of 0.4 as the critical value, which listing status for seven of the DPSs. the available approaches have been was found to balance the risk of making Response: While general support or subject to considerable debate, but this both Type I and Type II errors, opting non-support of a listing is not, in itself, suggests that deference to the scientific to reduce that value to 0.3. This had the a substantive comment that we take into expertise of those knowledgeable about effect of increasing the chances of consideration as part of our five-factor loggerhead sea turtles, such as the BRT, finding risk where none exists. The analysis, we appreciate the support of is required. These three commenters commenter stated that all assumptions these commenters. Support is important noted that general criticisms, such as incorporated in the models were skewed to the conservation of species. Comment 75: Several commenters the fact that loggerhead sea turtles may toward findings of endangerment. The noted that in the NMFS and USFWS 5- be numerous, are not sufficient to commenter noted this approach could year review for the loggerhead sea turtle undermine the BRT’s report and are not be suitable, and perhaps even required, (NMFS and USFWS, 2007), the agencies in the context of a section 7 based on the best available science. For concluded that they do not believe the example, Dulvy et al. (2004) stated that consultation, where the question is loggerhead sea turtle should be the decline of an abundant species may whether a Federal action is or is not reclassified; therefore, the 2009 Status represent a massive biomass loss that likely to result in jeopardy to a listed Review presents no new information to may be of greater concern than the loss species. However, the commenter justify a new ‘‘endangered’’ finding. of a small number of individuals of a argued that it is legally inappropriate in Response: In the 5-year review for the rare species because it may compromise the context of a listing decision. The loggerhead sea turtle, NMFS and the ecosystem’s functionality, stability, commenter noted that the Services are USFWS concluded that, based on the or resilience. These three commenters required to use the best scientific and best available information, we did not stressed that scientists with intimate commercial data available, not data believe the entire species, as listed knowledge both of loggerhead sea skewed toward a particular result. In the worldwide, should be delisted or turtles and their ecosystem must be able present case, the commenter stated that reclassified. However, we stated that we to use their scientific opinions to the BRT failed to utilize both basic had information indicating that an analyze the status of the species. biological and population dynamics analysis and review of the species Response: As stated in the Status expertise. Further, the commenter noted should be conducted to determine the Review, known anthropogenic threats to that contrary information, such as the application of the DPS policy to the each life stage of a DPS, measured as TEWG’s findings with respect to the loggerhead sea turtle. Subsequently, the additional annual mortality, were increase in juvenile abundance and the BRT reviewed and evaluated all relevant quantified using both available data and newer nest numbers, was ignored. scientific information relating to experts’ opinions, where the stage- Response: The BRT clearly explained loggerhead population structure globally specific additional annual mortality was its rationale for using the SQE value of to determine whether DPSs exist and, if summarized in a matrix format (threat 0.3 as follows: ‘‘Using simulations, so, to assess the status of each DPS. The matrix). The BRT loggerhead sea turtle Snover and Heppell (2009) findings of the BRT informed this experts estimated threat levels based on demonstrated that SQE values greater rulemaking. the best information available. than 0.4 indicated a population has > Comment 76: One commenter Justifications and references for each 0.9 probability of quasi-extinction. At provided an analysis of the distinction threat were provided in the Status this critical value (SQE = 0.40), Type I between ‘‘threatened’’ and Review and in the online threat matrix and Type II errors are minimized ‘‘endangered’’ under the ESA, spreadsheets [http://www.nmfs.noaa. simultaneously at approximately 10%. referencing a memorandum written by gov/pr/species/statusreviews.htm]. Reducing the critical value to 0.3 Dan Ashe, USFWS (Ashe Memo). The The threat matrix analysis was not lessens the ‘Type I’ error rate but commenter stated that the key used to predict the population trends. increases the ‘Type II’ error rate (Snover difference is the timing for when the The National Research Council (2010) and Heppell, 2009). The choice of 0.9 as species is in danger of extinction— review is correct in that the threats the cut-off probability was arbitrary, and threatened means may be in danger of matrix analysis was used as a heuristic values other than 0.9 could be used. extinction in the foreseeable future and exercise to show that the current However, new critical values other than endangered means in danger now and knowledge about loggerhead sea turtle 0.4 needed to be established for on the brink of extinction. The biology and anthropogenic mortalities is different values of the cut-off commenter referenced four basic not sufficient to make precise probability. Qualitatively, the results categories included in the Ashe Memo conclusions about the future. In the would not differ if a value other than 0.9 and provided information relative to Status Review, the BRT stated ‘‘* * * was used (Snover and Heppell, 2009). In loggerhead sea turtles as follows: ‘‘(1) these indices were used to measure the this assessment, we used the cut-off Species facing a catastrophic threat from negative effects of known anthropogenic probability of 0.9 as in Snover and which the risk of extinction is imminent mortalities on the overall health of each Heppell (2009) and a critical value for and certain. Unlike snail darters, DPS and not to estimate the actual the SQE of 0.30, which reduced the loggerhead sea turtles are found population growth rates of these DPSs.’’ ‘Type I’ error (a DPS is considered to be throughout the world making it neither

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58902 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

uniquely dependent on a single, mortalities in many domestic and on the specific life history and ecology vulnerable area nor subject to any international fisheries, continued loss of of the species, the nature of the threats, impending, catastrophic threat. (2) nesting beach habitat, and inadequate the species’ response to those threats, Narrowly restricted endemics that, as a development and enforcement of and population numbers and trends. result of their limited range or lighting ordinances, to name a few, Comment 78: Two commenters stated population size, are vulnerable to suggest that many threats are still that they did not support the proposed extinction from elevated threats. impacting Northwest Atlantic endangered listing for North Pacific Conservation efforts for loggerheads in loggerhead sea turtles and need to be loggerheads. One of these commenters the U.S. and internationally have greatly further addressed. With regard to the stated the proposed endangered listing minimized anthropogenic threats and commenter’s assertion that the current is contrary to established listing these threats have been significantly trend in loggerhead abundance in the practices for other species in similar reduced over recent decades. (3) Species Northwest Atlantic is increasing, situations with North Pacific formerly more widespread that have inclusion of nesting data up through loggerheads (e.g., crested caracara, been reduced to such critically low 2010 results in the nesting trend line ribbon seal, northern spotted owl, numbers or restricted ranges that they being slightly negative, but not slickspot peppergrass, chirichua leopard are at a high risk of extinction due to significantly different from zero. frog, delta green ground beetle, threats that would not otherwise imperil Regardless, for a number of reasons, California red-legged frog, southeastern the species. Loggerheads do not meet discussed in the Finding section, the beach mouse, Anastasia Island beach these particular criteria, for many of the Services are listing the Northwest mouse, and Waccamaw silverside same reasons already discussed. Atlantic Ocean DPS as threatened. minnow). This commenter argued that Additionally, in the Northwest Atlantic Comment 77: Three commenters even though a species may be at risk alone, this species numbers in the noted that best available science from significant past and projected millions at all life stages. Furthermore, suggests that focusing solely on habitat destruction, population declines, such as in the Tongaland example, local biological extinction, or imminent or elimination from a portion of its loggerhead subpopulations have shown extinction, is not useful from an range, the Services regularly list a the ability to recover from levels of only ecological, management, or ecosystem species as threatened when the a couple hundred mature females. (4) perspective because even after population declines are not steep and Species with still relatively widespread population declines of more than 95 when the threat to the species’ ongoing distribution that have nevertheless percent, many marine fishes would still survival is not imminent. suffered ongoing major reductions in its number in the hundreds of thousands or Response: An endangered species is numbers, range, or both, as a result of millions of individuals and, therefore, any species which is in danger of factors that have not abated.’’ The not be considered to be at an increased extinction throughout all or a significant commenter noted that protective risk of extinction. The commenters portion of its range. A threatened measures in the form of ever improving argued that scientists do not understand species is any species which is likely to TEDs, protective longline gear and ‘‘how the multitude of factors that become an endangered species within practices, time/area closures, and influence the extinction probability for the foreseeable future throughout all or nesting beach improvements and a given population or species interact a significant portion of its range. Thus, ordinances have gone a long way toward with one another under specific a species may be listed as threatened if abating threats to loggerhead sea turtles physical and biological environments.’’ it is likely to become in danger of and that the current trend in loggerhead They contended that the ESA, by extinction within the foreseeable future. abundance in the Northwest Atlantic is requiring NMFS and USFWS to Threatened species typically have some increasing. consider five statutory listing criteria, of the same characteristics as The commenter further referenced the anticipates the interactions of many endangered species with relatively Ashe Memo, which says ‘‘threatened factors and provides inherent flexibility widespread distribution that have species typically have some of the in determining whether a species suffered ongoing major reductions in characteristics of the fourth category warrants protection as endangered. The numbers, range, or both, as a result of above, in that they too have generally commenters stated that requiring that factors that have not been abated, in that suffered some recent declines in the species face imminent extinction or they too have generally suffered some numbers, range or both, but to a less that the species be on the brink of recent decline in numbers, range, or severe extent than endangered species.’’ extinction is neither legally justifiable both, but to a less severe extent than The Ashe Memo goes on to distinguish nor scientifically possible given the endangered species. Whether a species between a species that is endangered current published literature on is ultimately protected as an endangered and one that is threatened and ‘‘depends extinction risk in marine species. The species or a threatened species depends on the life history and ecology of the commenters urged the Services to be on the specific life history and ecology species, the nature of the threats, and open to scientists’ assessments of of the species, the nature of the threats, population numbers and trends.’’ The extinction risk because these are the species’ response to those threats, trends for loggerheads, both in terms of important to convey that a species’ and population numbers and trends. increased nesting and reduced threats, extinction probability has increased and Comment 79: One commenter stated not to mention the geographic diversity that its probability of recovery is low. that there is a lack of evidence to of nesting habitat, the species’ extensive Response: The Services agree that support the endangered designation for distribution, and the sheer numbers of even species that have suffered fairly the North Pacific Ocean DPS. The individuals in the population, all point substantial declines in numbers or range commenter stated that recent nesting toward, at most, a ‘‘threatened’’ status. are sometimes listed as threatened increases are clear evidence that the Response: The Services agree that rather than endangered, based on the North Pacific Ocean DPS is increasing, numerous protective measures have species’ resilience and resistance to which is inconsistent with the proposed been implemented to protect loggerhead threats making the species currently less endangered status. sea turtles in the Northwest Atlantic vulnerable to threats. Whether a species Response: The Services agree there Ocean. However, compliance levels is ultimately protected as an endangered has been an encouraging trend in the with TEDs, high interaction levels and species or a threatened species depends annual nesting abundance of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58903

loggerheads in Japan. However, relative rule should be rejected, particularly for currently ‘‘in danger of extinction to historical levels, the annual nesting the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS. throughout all or a portion of its range,’’ abundance is very low. The agencies Response: The Services agree on the and determined that a ‘‘threatened’’ believe the substantial depletion of this importance of the Northwest Atlantic listing under the ESA is more population, despite the aforementioned Ocean DPS. The predominance of appropriate. Quasi-extinction analyses increases, coupled with ongoing threats nesting in the United States and the support the fact that the Northwest to loggerheads in the North Pacific, extensive use of U.S. coastal and Atlantic Ocean DPS is not currently in warrants endangered status for the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) waters danger of extinction throughout all or a North Pacific Ocean DPS. by adults and large neritic juveniles portion of its range. In one such Comment 80: Two commenters stated from this DPS provides us the ability to analysis, a Dennis-Holmes demographic that they do not support listing the better control anthropogenic threats to population viability analysis (PVA) was Southwest Indian Ocean DPS as individuals of those highly valuable life conducted using nesting data through threatened and suggested it should be stages compared to other DPSs which 2009. Quasi-extinction was defined as listed as endangered. The commenters originate in, and inhabit waters of, other 1,000 remaining adults (which is higher noted that although this population is nations over which we have no control. than is typically used in most PVAs) increasing, it remains small and Based on additional review and within 100 years. For a population of vulnerable. The commenters noted that discussions within the Services on 35,000 turtles (approximately the while the majority of nesting habitat is status and trends, threats, and current estimated number of adult protected in South Africa and conservation efforts, we do not believe females), the risk of reaching that QET Mozambique, loggerheads are at risk the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS is was 0.0017, less than two-tenths of a from direct exploitation, especially in currently ‘‘in danger of extinction percent (NMFS, unpublished data). A Madagascar, and incidental capture has throughout all or a portion of its range,’’ revision of the SQE analysis done in the not yet been quantified. Additionally, and determined that a ‘‘threatened’’ Status Report written by the BRT had dramatic increases in regional longline listing under the ESA is more similar results. Including nesting data fishing for tuna are expected to increase appropriate. through 2009 instead of just 2007, and Comment 82: The North Carolina loggerhead bycatch. redoing the analysis to use a range of Division of Marine Fisheries stated that Response: A trend analysis of index adult female abundance estimates as there is no accurate way to determine QETs, it was determined that there was nesting beach data from this region from the status of the Northwest Atlantic 1965 to 2008 indicates an increasing little risk (SQE < 0.3) of the Peninsular Ocean DPS because there is no Florida Recovery Unit (comprising nesting population. Although the benchmark assessment of the DPS and Services agree that fisheries bycatch is approximately 80 percent of the periodic updates. It suggested Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS) a concern, the extent of this threat is not conducting an assessment similar to the reaching 1,000 or fewer females in 100 well understood. In light of the 2009 bottlenose dolphin stock years. protected status of the majority of assessment. Comment 84: Three commenters nesting beaches and the increasing Response: The Services agree that referenced Center for Biological nesting trend, the Services believe a gaps remain in what is known about the Diversity v. Lohn, where the court found threatened status is appropriate for the population dynamics of the Northwest that uncertainty regarding data used in Southwest Indian Ocean DPS. Atlantic Ocean DPS. The Services an ESA section 4 listing determination Comment 81: Thousands of continue to evaluate ways to improve did not justify failing to list the species, commenters stated that they strongly population assessments for sea turtles. citing Conner v. Burford. The supported listing the Northwest Atlantic The Services used the best available commenters noted that, while data gaps Ocean DPS as endangered, particularly data and the most appropriate analyses exist for loggerhead sea turtles, this is noting that Northwest Atlantic in assessing the status of the Northwest true for many if not all marine species loggerheads are more in need of Atlantic Ocean DPS and making our and cannot excuse the lack of agency endangered status to ensure their final determination. action under the ESA to protect survival after the recent oil spill in the Comment 83: Three commenters loggerhead sea turtles. The commenters Gulf of Mexico. Many commenters stated the belief that the Northwest noted that with a threatened listing for noted that the majority of Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS is ‘‘in danger of over 30 years, Northwest Atlantic Atlantic loggerheads nest in the United extinction throughout all or a portion of loggerheads continue to decline; States and represent the second largest its range’’ and therefore must be listed therefore, the Services must grant nesting assemblage in the world, which as endangered. The commenters noted additional protections to recover the makes their survival critical to the that the definition of an endangered species. future of the species. The States of species is necessarily forward-looking, Response: The Services agree and Florida, Georgia, and Virginia support as a species ‘‘in danger’’ of extinction is understand that data gaps do not justify an endangered status for the Northwest not currently extinct. Rather it is a failing to list a species under the ESA. Atlantic Ocean DPS. The North Carolina species facing a risk of extinction in the Despite the gaps in knowledge, Department of Marine Fisheries stated future. The Northwest Atlantic Ocean loggerhead sea turtles in the Northwest that it opposes an endangered listing DPS, facing a high probability of quasi- Atlantic have been, and will continue to because appropriate information is extinction, cannot be merely threatened, be, listed as a threatened species under lacking. Specifically, the agency stated because the threatened category is only the ESA. We disagree that there has that it opposes the listing because for species that are not currently in been a ‘‘lack of agency action under the counts of nests or females are not an danger of extinction but instead likely to ESA to protect loggerhead sea turtles.’’ assessment of the population. Three become so in the future. Numerous protective regulations and other commenters also stated that they Response: Based on additional review measures have been adopted since the oppose listing the Northwest Atlantic and discussions within the Services on original listing of the loggerhead sea Ocean DPS as endangered, arguing that status and trends, threats, and turtle, both on the nesting beaches and the case for a change in listing status has conservation efforts, we do not believe in the marine environment. The not been established and the proposed the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS is effectiveness of many of those measures

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58904 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

may not yet be observed on the nesting combined with the Florida estimate, Comment 88: The State of Florida beaches because of the recent enactment yields an adult population size of provided data on loggerhead nesting relative to the life history and age to 44,830 turtles for the region. The activity on Florida beaches collected by maturity of loggerhead sea turtles. regional population was thought to be the Florida Fish and Wildlife However, additional measures continue declining. The most recent adult Conservation Commission through June to be undertaken to reduce population point estimate for the 2010. The analysis of these data shows anthropogenic impacts, as required by Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS is 30,050 a marked decline in nest counts since the ESA. Analysis of nesting trends from adult females or approximately 60,100 1989 when extensive index beach 1989–2010 results in a trend line that is adult males and females, and that monitoring began. The recent analysis slightly negative, but not significantly number is believed to be declining. reveals that the decline in nest counts different from zero. Thus, while the number of nests in the from 1989 to 2009 was 23.9 percent and Comment 85: Three commenters DPS [at the largest rookery] in the from 1998 to 2009 was 38.4 percent, reiterated that the Services’ Northwest Atlantic increased for 2 which corresponds to a decline of 1.42 determinations concerning listing decades after being listed, it since has percent and 4.84 percent per year, species or DPSs and changing the status declined, and now the population size respectively. The State of Florida noted of a listed species or DPS must be made of adults (extrapolated from the number that nesting declines correspond with ‘‘solely on the basis of the best scientific of nests) is comparable to or slightly declines of adult female loggerheads. and commercial data available.’’ The greater than the number that existed The State acknowledged that nest commenters noted that the Services may when the species was listed as counts vary with reproductive output as not cater to political influences in threatened. Another commenter also well as adult female abundance and that conducting a purely scientific questioned the size of the loggerhead this source of variation could contribute evaluation. The commenters noted that population against which impacts are to either an under- or over-estimate of their petitions, prior comments, the measured and provided an estimate of females from nests in a given year. As 2009 Status Review, and the best between 1,230,000 and at least such, declines in adult females may be available science support the Services’ 3,300,000 animals in the Northwest lower or greater than nest counts proposed DPS designations and Atlantic Ocean DPS. indicate, but the declining trend is not changing the status of the Northwest Response: Based on additional review in dispute. The State of Florida Atlantic Ocean DPS from threatened to and discussions within the Services on recognized data from other data sets endangered. The commenters argued status and trends, threats, and representing younger life stages within that the Services’ alleged substantial conservation efforts, we do not believe the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS that disagreement on the interpretation of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS is come from in-water captures where the existing data, which prompted a currently ‘‘in danger of extinction capture effort was recorded. The trends 6-month extension on the final throughout all or a portion of its range,’’ in catch per unit effort vary by location determination, suggests political and and have determined that a with some showing a statistically not scientific differences of opinion. ‘‘threatened’’ listing under the ESA is significant increasing trend in immature Response: The Services agree that more appropriate. loggerheads. The State of Florida such determinations must be made Comment 87: One commenter explained that there are important solely on the basis of the best scientific questioned whether nesting declines are differences between nest count data and and commercial data available. The truly valid evidence that the Northwest catch per unit effort data that apply to final determination was based upon all Atlantic Ocean DPS is headed for how accurately each data set represents available information, as well as extinction. The commenter expressed actual population changes. Florida nest information and comments provided in the belief that the Services should have response to the proposed rule, including delved more rigorously into all existing count data have a time series of 21 years information provided during the public abundance data to determine whether collected via a standardized protocol, comment extension periods. The trends in nesting actually reflect trends are spatially detailed, and are collected Services then determined that the in the population. The commenter cited over the majority of the principal Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS should the following text from the TEWG nesting range of the Northwest Atlantic be listed as threatened. A discussion of (2000) report: ‘‘nesting trends alone may Ocean DPS. In contrast, catch per unit that information and basis for the listing give an incomplete picture of effort data, even when a composite data status is contained in the final population status.’’ set, do not come close to the spatial determination for the DPS, below. Response: The Services agree with the detail and population range as the nest Comment 86: One commenter TEWG (2000) report’s statement that count data. The State of Florida questioned why the Services reasoned nesting trends alone may give an acknowledged the importance of catch that current circumstances warrant an incomplete picture of population status. per unit effort trends assessment, but endangered listing for the Northwest However, at this time it is the strongest cautioned that the inherent sampling Atlantic Ocean DPS instead of a indicator, and most thorough and bias of catch per unit effort techniques threatened listing. The commenter consistent data set available for such introduces uncertainty into any noted that at the time of the original determinations. The limited in-water conclusions drawn from those data. listing in 1978, adult loggerhead data are also given consideration when Response: The Services acknowledge population sizes were not well known. making determinations of population the nesting decline reported by the State For example, the Final EIS associated status. Note that subsequent to the of Florida for the period 1989–2009; with the original listing of the species in publication of the proposed rule, however, analysis of the data through 1978 identified the Florida population nesting data for 2008–2010 was 2010 (2010 data were not available at with a total of 41,524 adults of both incorporated into the nesting trend the time of the proposed rule) results in sexes and Georgia with 551 females analyses, and the result indicated that a trend line that is slightly negative, but nesting annually. Assuming a 3-year the nesting trend for the Northwest not statistically different from zero. remigration interval and a 1:1 sex ratio, Atlantic Ocean DPS from 1989–2010 is Nesting in 2009 on the Core Index the Georgia estimate equates to slightly negative but not statistically Nesting Beaches was relatively low at approximately 3,306 adults, and different from zero. 32,717. However, in 2008, nesting

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58905

numbers exceeded 38,000, the second gene flow within the Northwest Atlantic Response: The Services appreciate the highest total since 2002. In 2010, the Ocean DPS. significance and importance of non- nest count was 47,880, the highest since Comment 91: One commenter fisheries threats on sea turtle 2000, and the ninth highest in the 22 provided a critique of the methods used populations, including the Northwest years in the data set. The Services agree in the loggerhead Status Review written Atlantic Ocean DPS. Discussion of these that available in-water abundance by the BRT. In more than one instance, threats does occur within the preamble information must be used with caution the commenter made reference to the language of the listing rule. However, as due to inherent sampling biases; Status Review making an ‘‘endangered’’ a result of the greater specific however, we believe these data are an determination or recommendation. information available for known fishery important piece of information that can Response: The Services would like to impacts and the general understanding be used to help assess the status of this clarify that the role of the BRT and the that fishery impacts constitute what is DPS. Status Review was not to make a likely the largest category of impact on Comment 89: Five commenters determination or recommendation of sea turtle populations, a greater volume referenced Witherington et al. (2009) listing status under the ESA. The BRT of text is dedicated to that discussion. and the decline of nesting in Florida. was to provide an analysis of loggerhead Comment 94: Three commenters The commenters noted that if the trend status, which was then used in argued the 6-month extension was continues the nesting population will conjunction with numerous other unjustified and unlawful and requested decline by 80 percent by 2017 (using sources of information by the Services the Services withdraw the extension 1989–2007 data); such a drastic decline to make a final listing determination. and complete the final rule over just 19 years, less than half a Confusion occurred for many readers of immediately. loggerhead’s generation time, would the Status Review because of the Response: The Services disagree that warrant IUCN Critically Endangered convergence of language used in the the 6-month extension was unjustified status. Witherington et al. 2009 noted BRT report and the legal language used and unlawful. Section 4(b)(6) of the ESA that fisheries bycatch is the factor that in the ESA. The BRT did not make allows for 6-month extensions of final best fits the nesting decline. conclusions as to ESA listing status. determinations when ‘‘there is Comment 92: Two commenters stated substantial disagreement regarding the Response: Inclusion of nesting data that they did not support listing the sufficiency or accuracy of the available up through 2010 results in the nesting South Atlantic Ocean DPS as threatened data relevant to the determination * * * trend line being slightly negative, but and suggested it should be listed as for purposes of soliciting additional not significantly different from zero. endangered. The commenters noted that data.’’ The Services proposed to list the The Services agree that fisheries bycatch although this population is increasing, it Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS of the is one factor that best fits the nesting remains small and vulnerable. The loggerhead sea turtle as endangered. decline seen in the past. However, commenters further noted that the However, in preparing the final rule, various fishery bycatch reduction South Atlantic Ocean DPS in Brazil is there was substantial disagreement measures have occurred within the last subject to various threats on both regarding the interpretation of the generation time for loggerhead sea important nesting beaches and in-water existing data on status and trends and turtles, and the benefits of those actions habitat, particularly climate change and its relevance to the assessment of may only now be starting to become ocean acidification. extinction risk to the Northwest Atlantic evident on the nesting beaches. The Response: The Services determined Ocean DPS. There was also considerable agencies are committed to reducing that a threatened status is appropriate disagreement regarding the magnitude fisheries bycatch further. for the South Atlantic Ocean DPS. A and immediacy of the fisheries bycatch Comment 90: The State of Georgia long-term, sustained increasing trend in threat and measures to reduce this provided data on loggerhead nesting in nesting abundance was observed from threat to the Northwest Atlantic Ocean Georgia. The State noted that loggerhead 1988 through 2003, and loggerhead DPS. As part of the 6-month extension nest counts in Georgia show a stable nesting has continued to increase notice, the Services solicited new nesting population for the through the 2008–2009 nesting season. information or analyses to help clarify corresponding time period used in Conservation efforts on nesting beaches these issues and used this time to fully Witherington et al. (2009). However, the have been largely successful although evaluate and assess the best scientific State acknowledged that nesting in coastal development in the main nesting and commercial data available and Georgia represents a small fraction (less areas continues to be a concern. The ensure consistent interpretation of data than 2 percent) of the nesting by Services agree that fisheries bycatch and application of statutory standards loggerheads in the Northwest Atlantic remains a concern; however, there are for all of the nine proposed DPSs. Ocean DPS and, therefore, has little efforts underway within Brazilian Comment 95: Several individuals effect on the overall nesting trend for waters and elsewhere in their range to provided comments on critical habitat the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS. address these threats. designations for the Northwest Atlantic Response: The Services agree that Other Comments Ocean and North Pacific Ocean DPSs. Georgia loggerhead nesting indicates a Response: The Services have not stable nesting population. Additionally, Comment 93: The North Carolina designated critical habitat for the nesting in South Carolina and North Division of Marine Fisheries and one loggerhead sea turtle. Critical habitat is Carolina has also been relatively stable other commenter noted that the not determinable at this time, but will over the past decade, with record or proposed rule contained limited be proposed in a separate rulemaking. near record nesting since 2008 in some discussion of mitigating non-fisheries cases. Nesting in these three States threats (e.g., oil spills, vessel strikes, Summary of Factors Affecting the Nine constitute most of the Northern entanglement in marine debris, and Loggerhead DPSs Recovery Unit of the Northwest Atlantic indirect anthropogenic factors that affect Section 4 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1533) Ocean DPS. While small in comparison reproductive success such as alteration/ and implementing regulations at 50 CFR to the Peninsular Florida Recovery Unit, loss of nesting habitat, light pollution, part 424 set forth procedures for adding it is the second largest recovery unit in etc.) for the Northwest Atlantic Ocean species to the Federal List of the DPS and an important source of DPS. Endangered and Threatened Species.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58906 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

Under section 4(a) of the ESA, we must pre-emergent hatchlings at many invertebrate and fish populations and determine if a species is threatened or Japanese rookeries (Matsuzawa, 2006). thus alter ecosystem dynamics. In many endangered because of any of the While the Services cannot predict the cases loggerhead foraging areas coincide following five factors: (A) The present or exact impacts of climate change, sea with fishing zones. For example, using threatened destruction, modification, or level rise may present a more immediate aerial surveys and satellite telemetry, curtailment of its habitat or range; (B) challenge for this DPS because of the juvenile foraging hotspots have recently overutilization for commercial, proportion of beaches with shoreline been identified off the coast of Baja recreational, scientific, or educational armoring that prevents or interferes with California, Mexico; these hotspots purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the ability of nesting females to access overlap with intensive small-scale the inadequacy of existing regulatory to suitable nesting habitat. fisheries (Peckham and Nichols, 2006; mechanisms; or (E) other natural or Maehama Beach and Inakahama Peckham et al., 2007, 2008). manmade factors affecting its continued Beach on Yakushima in Kagoshima Comprehensive data currently are existence. Prefecture account for approximately 30 unavailable to fully understand how We have described the effects of percent of loggerhead nesting in Japan intense harvesting of fish resources various factors leading to the decline of (Kamezaki et al., 2003), making changes neritic and oceanic ecosystems. the loggerhead sea turtle in the original Yakushima an important area for Climate change also may result in future listing determination (43 FR 32800; July nesting beach protection. However, the trophic changes, thus impacting 28, 1978) and other documents (NMFS beaches suffer from beach erosion and loggerhead prey abundance and and USFWS, 1998, 2007, 2008). In light pollution, especially from passing distribution. making this finding, information cars, as well as from tourists In summary, we find that the North regarding the status of each of the nine encroaching on the nesting beaches Pacific Ocean DPS of the loggerhead sea loggerhead DPSs is considered in (Matsuzawa, 2006). Burgeoning turtle is negatively affected by ongoing relation to the five factors provided in numbers of visitors to beaches may changes in both its terrestrial and section 4(a)(1) of the ESA. The reader is cause sand compaction and nest marine habitats as a result of land and directed to section 5 of the Status trampling. Egg and pre-emergent water use practices as considered above Review for a more detailed discussion of hatchling mortality in Yakushima has in Factor A. Within Factor A, we find the factors affecting the nine identified been shown to be higher in areas where that coastal development and coastal loggerhead DPSs. In section 5.1, a public access is not restricted and is armoring on nesting beaches in Japan general description of the threats that mostly attributed to human foot traffic are significant threats to the persistence occur for all DPSs is presented under on nests (Kudo et al., 2003). Fences have of this DPS. the relevant section 4(a)(1) factor. In been constructed around areas where B. Overutilization for Commercial, section 5.2, threats that are specific to a the highest densities of nests are laid; Recreational, Scientific, or Educational particular DPS are presented by DPS however, there are still lower survival Purposes under each section 4(a)(1) factor. That rates of eggs and pre-emergent information is incorporated here by hatchlings due to excessive foot traffic In Japan, the use of loggerhead meat reference; the following is a summary of (Ohmuta, 2006). for food was historically popular in that information by DPS. Loggerhead nesting habitat also has local communities such as Kochi and been lost at important rookeries in Wakayama prefectures. In addition, egg North Pacific Ocean DPS Miyazaki due in part to port collection was common in the coastal A. The Present or Threatened construction that involved development areas during times of hunger and later Destruction, Modification, or of a groin of 1 kilometer from the coast by those who valued loggerhead eggs as Curtailment of its Habitat or Range into the sea, a yacht harbor with revitalizers or aphrodisiacs and breakwaters and artificial beach, and an acquired them on the black market (in Terrestrial Zone airport, causing erosion of beaches on Kamezaki et al., 2003; Takeshita, 2006). Destruction and modification of both sides of the construction zone. This Currently, due in large part to research loggerhead nesting habitat in the North once excellent nesting habitat for and conservation efforts throughout the Pacific result from coastal development loggerheads is now seriously threatened country, egg harvesting no longer and construction, placement of erosion by erosion (Takeshita, 2006). represents a problem in Japan control structures and other barriers to Minabe-Senri beach, Wakayama (Kamezaki et al., 2003; Ohmuta, 2006; nesting, beachfront lighting, vehicular Prefecture is a ‘‘submajor’’ nesting beach Takeshita, 2006). Laws were enacted in and pedestrian traffic, sand extraction, (in Kamezaki et al., 2003), but is one of 1973 to prohibit egg collection on beach erosion, beach sand placement, the most important rookeries on the Yakushima, and in 1988, the laws were beach pollution, removal of native main island of Japan (Honshu). Based extended to the entire Kagoshima vegetation, planting of non-native on unpublished data, Matsuzawa (2006) Prefecture, where two of the most vegetation (NMFS and USFWS, 1998), reported hatching success of unwashed- important loggerhead nesting beaches and climate change. Beaches in Japan out clutches at Minabe-Senri beach to be are protected (Matsuzawa, 2006). where loggerheads nest are extensively 24 percent in 1996, 50 percent in 1997, Despite national laws, in many other eroded due to dredging and dams 53 percent in 1998, 48 percent in 1999, countries where loggerheads are found constructed upstream, and are 62 percent in 2000, 41 percent in 2001, migrating through or foraging, the obstructed by seawalls as well. and 34 percent in 2002. hunting of adult and juvenile turtles is Unfortunately, no quantitative studies still a problem, as seen in Baja have been conducted to determine the Neritic/Oceanic Zones California Sur, Mexico (Koch et al., impact to the loggerhead nesting Threats to habitat in the loggerhead 2006; Mancini and Koch, 2009). Sea populations (Kamezaki et al., 2003). neritic and oceanic zones in the North turtles have been protected in Mexico However, it is clear that loggerhead Pacific Ocean include fishing practices, since 1990, when a Federal law decreed nesting habitat has been impacted by channel dredging, sand extraction, the prohibition of the ‘‘extraction, erosion and extensive beach use by marine pollution, and climate change. capture and pursuit of all species of sea tourists, both of which have contributed Fishing methods not only incidentally turtle in federal waters or from beaches to unusually high mortality of eggs and capture loggerheads, but also deplete within national territory * * * [and a

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58907

requirement that] * * * any species of Mexico likely was a factor that bycatch, and some positive actions have sea turtle incidentally captured during contributed to the historical declines of been implemented, it is unlikely that the operations of any commercial this DPS. Current illegal harvest of this source of mortality can be fishery shall be returned to the sea, loggerheads in Baja, California for sufficiently reduced in the near future independently of its physical state, dead human consumption continues as a due to the challenges of mitigating or alive’’ (in Garcia-Martinez and significant threat to the persistence of illegal, unregulated, and unreported Nichols, 2000). Despite the ban, studies this DPS. fisheries, the lack of comprehensive have shown that sea turtles continue to information on fishing distribution and C. Disease or Predation be caught, both indirectly in fisheries effort, limitations on implementing and by a directed harvest of juvenile The potential exists for diseases and demonstrated effective conservation turtles. Turtles are principally hunted endoparasites to impact loggerheads measures, geopolitical complexities, using nets, longlines, and harpoons. found in the North Pacific Ocean. As in limitations on enforcement capacity, While some are killed immediately, other nesting locations, egg predation and lack of availability of others are kept alive in pens and also exists in Japan, particularly by comprehensive bycatch reduction transported to market. The market for raccoon dogs (Nyctereutes technologies. sea turtles consists of two types: the procyonoides) and weasels (Mustela In addition to fishery bycatch, coastal local market (consumed locally) and the itatsi); however, quantitative data do not development and coastal armoring on export market (sold to restaurants in exist to evaluate the impact on nesting beaches in Japan continues as a Mexico cities such as Tijuana, loggerhead populations (Kamezaki et substantial threat (see Factor A). Coastal Ensenada, and Mexicali, and U.S. cities al., 2003). Loggerheads in the North armoring, if left unaddressed, will such as San Diego and Tucson). Pacific Ocean also may be impacted by become an even more substantial threat Consumption is highest during holidays harmful algal blooms. as sea level rises. Recently, the Japan such as Easter and Christmas In summary, although nest predation Ministry of Environment has supported (Wildcoast/Grupo Tortuguero de las in Japan is known to occur, quantitative the local non-governmental organization Californias, 2003). data are not sufficient to assess the conducting turtle surveys and Based on a combination of analyses of degree of impact of nest predation on conservation on Yakushima in stranding data, beach and sea surveys, the persistence of this DPS. establishing guidelines for surveys and tag-recapture studies, and extensive minimizing impacts by humans D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory interviews, all carried out between June encroaching on the nesting beaches. As Mechanisms 1994 and January 1999, Nichols (2003) of the 2009 nesting season, humans conservatively estimated the annual International Instruments accessing Inakahama, Maehama, and take of sea turtles by various fisheries The BRT identified several regulatory Yotsuse beaches at night must comply and through direct harvest in the Baja with the established rules (Y. California, Mexico, region. Sea turtle mechanisms that apply to loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the North Matsuzawa, Sea Turtle Association of mortality data collected between 1994 Japan, personal communication, 2009). and 1999 indicated that over 90 percent Pacific Ocean. The reader is directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.1.4. of the Status In summary, our review of regulatory of sea turtles recorded dead were either mechanisms under Factor D green turtles (30 percent of total) or Review for a discussion of these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle (2002) demonstrates that although regulatory loggerheads (61 percent of total), and mechanisms are in place that should signs of human consumption were and Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the effectiveness of some of these address direct and incidental take of evident in over half of the specimens. North Pacific Ocean loggerheads, these These studies resulted in an estimated international instruments. The problems with existing international treaties are regulatory mechanisms are insufficient 1,950 loggerheads killed annually, or are not being implemented effectively affecting primarily juvenile size classes. often that they have not realized their full potential, do not include some key to address the needs of loggerheads. We The primary causes for mortality were find that the threats from the the incidental take in a variety of fishing countries, do not specifically address sea turtle conservation, and are inadequacy of existing regulatory gears and direct harvest for mechanisms for fishery bycatch (Factor consumption and [illegal] trade handicapped by the lack of a sovereign authority to enforce environmental E) and coastal development and coastal (Gardner and Nichols, 2001; Nichols, armoring (Factor A) are significant 2003). regulations. The ineffectiveness of relative to the persistence of this DPS. From April 2000 to July 2003 international treaties and national throughout the Bahia Magdalena region legislation is oftentimes due to the lack E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors (including local beaches and towns), of motivation or obligation by countries Affecting Its Continued Existence researchers found 1,945 sea turtle to implement and enforce them. A carcasses, 44.1 percent of which were thorough discussion of this topic is Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear loggerheads. Of the sea turtle carcasses available in a special 2002 issue of the Incidental capture in artisanal and found, slaughter for human Journal of International Wildlife Law commercial fisheries is a significant consumption was the primary cause of and Policy: International Instruments threat to the survival of loggerheads in death for all species (63 percent for and Marine Turtle Conservation (Hykle, the North Pacific. (Artisanal fisheries loggerheads). Over 90 percent of all 2002). are typically small scale-commercial or turtles found were juvenile turtles (Koch subsistence fisheries.) Sea turtles may National Legislation and Protection et al., 2006). As the population of green be caught in pelagic and demersal turtles has declined in Baja California Fishery bycatch that occurs longlines, drift and set gillnets, bottom Sur waters, poachers have switched to throughout the North Pacific Ocean is and mid-water trawling, fishing dredges, loggerheads (H. Peckham, Pro substantial (see Factor E). Although pound nets and weirs, haul and purse Peninsula, personal communication, national and international governmental seines, pots and traps, and hook and 2006). and non-governmental entities on both line gear. In summary, overutilization for sides of the North Pacific are currently Based on turtle sightings and capture commercial purposes in both Japan and working toward reducing loggerhead rates reported in an April 1988 through

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58908 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

March 1989 survey of fisheries research loggerhead sea turtles were entangled by fisheries. In order to corroborate this, in and training vessels and extrapolated to the combined fleets of Japan, Korea, and 2005, researchers observed two small- total longline fleet effort by the Japanese Taiwan from June 1990 through May scale fleets operating closest to an area fleet in 1978, Nishemura and 1991, when all fleets were monitored. identified as a high-use area for Nakahigashi (1990) estimated that Of these incidental entanglements, an loggerheads. One fleet, based out of 21,200 turtles, including greens, estimated 805 loggerheads were killed Puerto Lo´pez-Mateos, fished primarily leatherbacks, loggerheads, olive ridleys, (27 percent mortality rate) (Wetherall, for halibut using bottom set gillnets, and hawksbills, were captured annually 1997). Data on size composition of the soaking from 20 to 48 hours. This fleet by Japanese tuna longliners in the turtles caught in the high-seas driftnet consisted of up to 75 boats in 2005, and, western Pacific and South China Sea, fisheries also were collected by on a given day, 9 to 40 vessels fished the with a reported mortality of observers. The majority of loggerheads deep area (32–45 meter depths). During approximately 12,300 turtles per year. measured by observers were juvenile a 2-month period, 11 loggerheads were Using commercial tuna longline (Wetherall, 1997). The cessation of high- observed taken in 73 gillnet day-trips, logbooks, research vessel data, and seas driftnet fishing in 1992 should have with eight of those loggerheads landed questionnaires, Nishemura and reduced the incidental take of marine dead (observed mortality rate of 73 Nakahigashi (1990) estimated that for turtles. However, nations involved in percent). The other fleet, based in Santa every 10,000 hooks in the western driftnet fishing may have shifted to Rosa, fished primarily for demersal Pacific and South China Sea, one turtle other gear types (e.g., pelagic or sharks using bottom-set longlines baited is captured, with a mortality rate of 42 demersal longlines, coastal gillnets); this with tuna or mackerel and left to soak percent. Although species-specific shift in gear types could have resulted for 20 to 48 hours. In 2005, the fleet information on the bycatch is not in either similar or increased turtle numbered only five to six vessels. available, vessels reported that 36 bycatch and associated mortality. During the seven day-long bottom-set percent of the sightings of turtles in These rough mortality estimates for a longline trips observed, 26 loggerheads locations that overlap with these single fishing season provide only a were caught; 24 of them were dead commercial fishing grounds were narrow glimpse of the impacts of the when the longlines were retrieved loggerheads. driftnet fishery on sea turtles, and a full (observed mortality rate of 92 percent). Caution should be used in assessment of impacts would consider Based on these observations, researchers interpreting the results of Nishemura the turtle mortality generated by the estimated that in 2005 at least 299 and Nakahigashi (1990), including driftnet fleets over their entire range. loggerheads died in the bottom-set estimates of sea turtle take rate (per Unfortunately, comprehensive data are gillnet fishery and at least 680 number of hooks) and resultant lacking, but the observer data do loggerheads died in the bottom-set mortality rate, and estimates of annual indicate the possible magnitude of turtle longline fishery. This annual bycatch take by the fishery, for the following mortality given the best information estimate of approximately 1,000 reasons: (1) The data collected were available. Wetherall et al. (1993) loggerheads is considered a minimum based on observations by training and speculate that the actual mortality of sea and is also supported by shoreline research vessels, logbooks, and a turtles may have been between 2,500 mortality surveys and informal questionnaire (i.e., hypothetical), and do and 9,000 per year, with most of the interviews (Peckham et al., 2007). These not represent actual, substantiated mortalities being loggerheads taken in results suggest that incidental capture at logged or observed catch of sea turtles the Japanese and Taiwanese large-mesh Baja California Sur is one of the most by the fishery; (2) the authors assumed fisheries. significant sources of mortality that turtles were distributed While a comprehensive, quantitative identified for the North Pacific homogeneously; and (3) the authors assessment of the impacts of the North loggerhead population and underscores used only one year (1978) to estimate Pacific driftnet fishery on turtles is the importance of reducing bycatch in total effort and distribution of the impossible without a better small-scale fisheries. Japanese tuna longline fleet. Although understanding of turtle population the data and analyses provided by abundance, genetic identities, Peckham et al. (2008) assessed Nishemura and Nakahigashi (1990) are exploitation history, and population anthropogenic mortality of loggerhead conjectural, longliners fishing in the dynamics, it is likely that the mortality sea turtles in the coastal waters of Baja Pacific have significantly impacted and, inflicted by the driftnet fisheries in 1990 California Sur through the synthesis of with the current level of effort, probably and in prior years was significant three sources: (1) Intensive surveys of an will continue to have significant (Wetherall et al., 1993), and the effects index shoreline from 2003–2007, (2) impacts on sea turtle populations. may still be evident in sea turtle bimonthly surveys of additional Foreign high-seas driftnet fishing in populations today. The high mortality of shorelines and towns for stranded and the North Pacific Ocean for squid, tuna, juvenile turtles and reproductive adults consumed carcasses from 2006–2007, and billfish ended with a United in the high-seas driftnet fishery has and (3) bycatch observations of two Nations moratorium in December 1992. probably altered the current age small-scale fishing fleets. They Except for observer data collected in structure (especially if certain age estimated that 1,500–2,950 loggerhead 1990–1991, there is virtually no groups were more vulnerable to driftnet sea turtles died per year from 2005– information on the incidental take of sea fisheries) and therefore diminished or 2006 due to bycatch in the two observed turtle species by the driftnet fisheries limited the future reproductive potential fleets. Actual mortality may have been prior to the moratorium. The high-seas of affected sea turtle populations. considerably higher due to bycatch in squid driftnet fishery in the North Extensive ongoing studies regarding other fisheries, directed hunting for Pacific was observed in Japan, Korea, loggerhead mortality and bycatch have black market trade, and natural factors and Taiwan, while the large-mesh been administered off the coast of Baja including predation and disease. From fisheries targeting tuna and billfish were California Sur, Mexico. The location 2003–2007, 2,719 loggerhead carcasses observed in the Japanese fleet (1990– and timing of loggerhead strandings were encountered on shorelines and in 1991) and the Taiwanese fleet (1990). A documented in 2003–2005 along a 43- and around towns of Baja California combination of observer data and fleet kilometer beach (Playa San Lazaro) Sur. Along the 43-km Playa San La´zaro, effort statistics indicate that 2,986 indicated bycatch in local small-scale thousands of loggerheads stranded

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58909

during the summer fishing months over California during forecasted or individuals. While the fishing industry 5 years, which is among the highest occurring El Nin˜ o events from June 1 has an interest in changing its gear to reported stranding rates worldwide. through August 31, when loggerheads open-type, it is very expensive, and the This stranding rate corroborates are likely to move into the area from the support from the Japanese government similarly high observed bycatch rates for Pacific coast of Baja California following is limited (T. Ishihara, Sea Turtle local small-scale longline (29 a preferred prey species, pelagic red Association of Japan, personal loggerheads per 1,000 hooks) and gillnet crabs. communication, 2007). Nonetheless, the (1.0 loggerhead per km of net) fisheries. Prior to 2000, the Hawaii-based BRT recognized that coastal pound net A significant increase in mean length of longline fishery targeted highly fisheries off Japan may pose a 2,636 carcasses measured at Baja migratory species north of Hawaii using significant threat to the North Pacific California Sur occurred from 1995– gear largely used by fleets around the population of loggerheads. 2007. Due to the decades-long world. From 1994–1999, the fishery was Quantifying the magnitude of the maturation time of loggerheads, this estimated to take between 369 and 501 threat of fisheries in the North Pacific increasing trend in turtle size may loggerheads per year, with between 64 Ocean on loggerhead sea turtles is very reflect both long term declines in and 88 mortalities per year (NMFS, difficult given the low level of observer nesting described from Japan (Kamezaki 2000). Currently, the Hawaii-based coverage or investigations into bycatch et al., 2003) and also historically high shallow longline fishery targeting conducted by countries that have large bycatch of juvenile loggerheads in both swordfish is strictly regulated such that fishing fleets. Efforts have been made to high seas driftnet (Wetherall et al., 1993) an annual take of 17 loggerheads is quantify the effect of pelagic longline and longline fisheries (Lewison et al., authorized for the fishery, beginning in fishing on loggerheads, and annual 2004). The decreasing proportion of 2004, when the fishery was re-opened estimates of bycatch were on the order smaller juveniles at Baja California Sur after being closed for several years. In of over 10,000 sea turtles, with as many especially from 2000–2007 could be 2004 and 2005, the fishing year was as 2,600 individual loggerheads killed related to sharp declines in nesting completed without reaching the turtle annually through immediate or delayed observed across all Japanese rookeries in take levels (1 and 10 loggerheads were mortality as a result of interacting with the 1990s (Peckham et al., 2008). captured, respectively, with fleets the gear (Lewison et al., 2004). In the U.S. Pacific, longline fisheries operating with 100 percent observer Other Manmade and Natural Impacts targeting swordfish and tuna and drift coverage). However, in 2006, 17 gillnet fisheries targeting swordfish have loggerheads were taken, resulting in Similar to other areas of the world, been identified as the primary fisheries early closure of the fishery. From 2007 climate change and sea level rise have of concern for loggerheads. Bycatch of through 2010, 15, 0, 3, and 5 the potential to impact loggerheads in loggerhead sea turtles in these fisheries loggerheads were taken, respectively, by the North Pacific Ocean. This includes has been significantly reduced as a the fishery. Most loggerheads were beach erosion and loss from rising sea result of time-area closures, required released alive (NMFS—Pacific Islands levels, skewed hatchling sex ratios from gear modifications, and hard caps Regional Office, Observer Database rising beach incubation temperatures, imposed on turtle bycatch, with 100 Public Web site, 2011, http:// and abrupt disruption of ocean currents percent observer coverage in certain www.fpir.noaa.gov/OBS/ used for natural dispersal during the areas. obs_qrtrly_annual_rprts.html). complex life cycle (Hawkes et al., 2009; The California/Oregon (CA/OR) drift Recent investigations off the coast of Poloczanska et al., 2009). Because the gillnet fishery targets swordfish and Japan, particularly focused off the main majority of Japanese beaches are thresher shark off the west coast of the islands of Honshu, Shikoku, and armored, loggerheads nesting on Japan United States. The fishery has been Kyushu, have revealed a major threat to beaches are likely to be left with observed by NMFS since July 1990 and the more mature stage classes of increasingly limited nesting habitat currently averages 20 percent observer loggerheads (approximately 70–80 cm when they undergo the vertical and coverage. From July 1990 to January SCL) due to pound net fisheries set poleward shifts in nesting habitat 2000, the CA/OR drift gillnet fishery offshore of the nesting beaches and in selection necessitated by sea level rise was observed to incidentally capture 17 the coastal foraging areas (T. Ishihara, (S.H. Peckham, Grupo Tortuguero de las loggerheads (12 released alive, 1 Sea Turtle Association of Japan, Californias, personal communication, injured, and 4 killed). Based on a worst- personal communication, 2007). While 2010). Matsuzawa et al. (2002) found case scenario, NMFS estimated that a pound nets constitute the third largest heat-related mortality of pre-emergent maximum of 33 loggerheads in a given fishery in terms of metric tons of fish hatchlings in Minabe Senri Beach and year could be incidentally taken by the caught in Japan, they account for the concluded that this population is CA/OR drift gillnet fleet. Sea turtle majority of loggerhead bycatch by vulnerable to even small temperature mortality rates for hard-shelled species Japanese fisheries (Ishihara, 2007, 2009). increases resulting from global warming were estimated to be 32 percent (NMFS, Open-type pound nets studied in an because sand temperatures already 2000). In 2000, analyses conducted area off Shikoku were shown to take exceed the optimal thermal range for under the mandates of the ESA showed loggerheads as the most prevalent sea incubation. Recently, Chaloupka et al. that the CA/OR drift gillnet fishery was turtle species caught but had lower (2008) used generalized additive taking excessive numbers of sea turtles, mortality rates (less than 15 percent), regression modeling and autoregressive- such that the fishery ‘‘jeopardized the primarily because turtles could reach prewhitened cross-correlation analysis continued existence of’’ loggerheads and the surface to breathe. Middle layer and to consider whether changes in regional leatherbacks. In this case, the consulting bottom-type pound nets in particular ocean temperatures affect long-term agency (NMFS) was required to provide have high rates of mortality (nearly 100 nesting population dynamics for Pacific a reasonable and prudent alternative to percent), because the nets are loggerheads from primary nesting the action (i.e., the fishery). In order to submerged and sea turtles are unable to assemblages in Japan and Australia. reduce the likelihood of interactions reach the surface. Estimates of Researchers chose four nesting sites with loggerhead sea turtles, NMFS has loggerhead mortality in one area studied with a generally long time series to regulations in place to close areas to between April 2006 and September model, two in Japan (Kamouda rookery, drift gillnet fishing off southern 2007 were on the order of 100 declining population, and Yakushima

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58910 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

rookery, generally increasing in the last loggerheads in the South China Sea and the Woongarra Coast to a few clutches 20 years), and two in Australia the North Pacific Ocean, is a significant annually as a result of altered light (Woongarra rookery, generally declining threat to the persistence of this DPS. horizons (Limpus, 2009). through early 1990s and beginning to South Pacific Ocean DPS Neritic/Oceanic Zones recover, and Wreck Island rookery, which is generally declining). Analysis A. The Present or Threatened Threats to habitat in the loggerhead of 51 years of mean annual sea surface Destruction, Modification, or neritic and oceanic zones in the South temperatures around two core foraging Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range Pacific Ocean include fishing practices, areas off Japan and eastern Australia, channel dredging, sand extraction, Terrestrial Zone showed a general warming of the oceans marine pollution, and climate change, in these regions. In general, nesting In the South Pacific Ocean, though they appear to be minor. abundance for all four rookeries was loggerhead sea turtles nest primarily in However, climate change may result in inversely related to sea surface Queensland, Australia, and, to a lesser future trophic changes, thus impacting temperatures; that is, higher sea surface extent, New Caledonia and Vanuatu loggerhead prey abundance and temperatures during the previous year (Limpus and Limpus, 2003a; Limpus et distribution. in the core foraging area resulted in al., 2006; Limpus, 2009). Over 80 In summary, we find that the South lower summer season nesting at all percent of all loggerhead nesting in Pacific Ocean DPS of the loggerhead sea rookeries. Given that cooler ocean Queensland occurs within the protected turtle is negatively affected by ongoing temperatures are generally associated habitat of Conservation Parks and changes in both its terrestrial and with increased productivity and that National Parks (Limpus, 2009). marine habitats as a result of land and female sea turtles generally require at However, destruction and modification water use practices as considered above least 1 year to acquire sufficient fat of loggerhead nesting habitat outside the in Factor A. However, the majority of stores for vitellogenesis to be completed, protected areas in Queensland result nesting is located within protected as well as the necessary somatic energy from coastal development and parks in Queensland, and current reserves required for the breeding construction, beach erosion, placement threats in both the terrestrial and marine season, any lag in productivity due to of erosion control structures, and environments appear to be low and are warmer temperatures has physiological beachfront lighting (Limpus et al., 2006; not believed to be significant threats to basis. Over the long term, warming Limpus, 2009). the persistence of this DPS. Removal or destruction of native dune ocean temperatures could therefore lead B. Overutilization for Commercial, vegetation, which enhances beach to lower productivity and prey Recreational, Scientific, or Educational stability and acts as an integral buffer abundance, and thus reduced nesting Purposes and recruitment by Pacific loggerheads zone between land and sea, results in (Chaloupka et al., 2008). erosion of nesting habitat. Preliminary The Australian Native Title Other anthropogenic impacts include studies on nesting beaches in New Legislation (Native Title Act 1993) boat strikes, ingestion of and Caledonia include local oral histories allows the harvesting of loggerheads and entanglement in marine debris, and that attribute the decrease in loggerhead their eggs by indigenous peoples entrainment in coastal power plants. nesting to the removal of vegetation for (Environment Australia, 2003). Natural environmental events, such as construction purposes and subsequent However, egg consumption in Australia cyclones, hurricanes, and tsunamis, may beach erosion (Limpus et al., 2006). is virtually nil and very few loggerheads affect loggerheads in the North Pacific Beach armoring presents a barrier to are taken for food by indigenous Ocean. Typhoons also have been shown nesting in New Caledonia. On the Australians (M. Hamann, James Cook to cause severe beach erosion and primary nesting beach in New University, personal communication, negatively affect hatching success at Caledonia, a rock wall was constructed 2010). Outside of Australia, despite many loggerhead nesting beaches in to prevent coastal erosion, and sea turtle national laws, in many areas the Japan, especially in areas already prone nesting attempts have been poaching of eggs and hunting of adult to erosion. For example, during the 2004 unsuccessful. Local residents are and juvenile turtles is still a problem, season, the Japanese archipelago seeking authorization to extend the wall and Limpus (2009) suggests that the suffered a record number of typhoons further down the beach (Limpus et al., harvest rate of loggerheads by and many nests were drowned or 2006). indigenous hunters (including the legal washed out. Extreme sand temperatures Beachfront lighting has been take in Australia and the illegal take in at nesting beaches also create highly identified as a problem in some areas of neighboring countries) is on the order of skewed female sex ratios of hatchlings Queensland. Hatchling disorientations 40 turtles per year. Preliminary studies or threaten the health of hatchlings. have been regularly documented on the suggest that local harvesting in New Without human intervention to protect small nesting beaches adjacent to Mon Caledonia constitutes about 5 percent of clutches against some of these natural Repos (Burnett Heads, Neilson Park, the nesting population (Limpus et al., threats, many of these nests would be Bargara) and at Heron Island (Limpus, 2006). Loggerheads also are consumed lost (Matsuzawa, 2006). 1985; EPA Queensland Turtle after being captured incidentally in In summary, we find that the North Conservation Project unpublished data high-seas fisheries of the southeastern Pacific Ocean DPS of the loggerhead sea cited in Limpus, 2009). However, efforts Pacific (Alfaro-Shigueto et al., 2006), turtle is negatively affected by both have been made to reduce hatchling and occasionally may be the product of natural and manmade impacts as disorientations on Burnett Heads beach illegal trade throughout the region. described above in Factor E. Within with the installation of low pressure In summary, current legal and illegal Factor E, we find that fishery bycatch sodium vapor lighting. Lighting has not harvest of loggerheads in Australia and that occurs throughout the North Pacific been controlled at other beaches New Caledonia for human consumption, Ocean, including the coastal pound net (Neilson Park, Bargara, Kellys Beach), as well as the consumption of fisheries off Japan, coastal fisheries and eggs are relocated to nearby dark loggerheads incidentally taken in high- impacting juvenile foraging populations beaches to protect emerging hatchlings seas fisheries, continues to affect the off Baja California, Mexico, and (Limpus, 2009). Hatchling South Pacific Ocean DPS. However, undescribed fisheries likely affecting disorientations have been reduced along current threats in both the terrestrial

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58911

and marine environments appears to be Review for a discussion of these bycatch, and some positive actions have minor to moderate and are not believed regulatory mechanisms. Hykle (2002) been implemented (e.g., TED to be a significant threat to the and Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the requirements in certain trawl fisheries persistence of this DPS. effectiveness of some of these in Australia), it is unlikely that this international instruments. The problems cumulative bycatch mortality can be C. Disease or Predation with existing international treaties are sufficiently reduced in the near future There are no reports of diseases often that they have not realized their due to the challenges of mitigating causing significant loggerhead mortality full potential, do not include some key illegal, unregulated, and unreported in the South Pacific (Limpus, 2009). The countries, do not specifically address fisheries, the continued expansion of prevalence of fibropapillomatosis is sea turtle conservation, and are artisanal fleets in the southeastern thought to be small and occurs at low handicapped by the lack of a sovereign Pacific, the lack of comprehensive frequency among loggerheads in authority to enforce environmental information on fishing distribution and Moreton Bay and the southern Great regulations. The ineffectiveness of effort, limitations on implementing Barrier Reef (Limpus and Miller, 1994; international treaties and national demonstrated effective conservation Limpus, 2009). Limpus et al. (1994) legislation is oftentimes due to the lack measures, geopolitical complexities, reported 14 of 320 loggerheads (4.4 of motivation or obligation by countries limitations on enforcement capacity, percent) captured in Moreton Bay, to implement and enforce them. A and lack of availability of Australia, during 1990–1992 as thorough discussion of this topic is comprehensive bycatch reduction exhibiting the disease. According to available in a special 2002 issue of the technologies. Limpus (2009), there is no evidence this Journal of International Wildlife Law In summary, our review of regulatory disease is having a significant impact on and Policy: International Instruments mechanisms under Factor D the population. Predation on nests and and Marine Turtle Conservation (Hykle, demonstrates that although regulatory hatchlings by terrestrial vertebrates is a 2002). mechanisms are in place that should major problem at loggerhead rookeries National Legislation and Protection address direct and incidental take of in the South Pacific. At mainland South Pacific Ocean loggerheads, these rookeries in eastern Australia, for A large part of the Great Barrier Reef regulatory mechanisms are insufficient example, the introduced fox (Vulpes off the coast of Queensland, Australia, is or are not being implemented effectively vulpes) has been the most significant protected as part of the Great Barrier to address the needs of loggerheads. We predator on loggerhead eggs (Limpus, Reef Marine Park, which helps limit find that the threat from the inadequacy 1985, 2009). Although this has been human use impacts such as fishing and of existing regulatory mechanisms for minimized in recent years (to less than tourism. Over 80 percent of all fishery bycatch across the range of the 5 percent; Limpus, 2009), researchers loggerhead nesting in Queensland DPS (Factor E) is significant relative to believe the earlier egg loss will greatly occurs within the protected ownership the persistence of this DPS. impact recruitment to this nesting (Limpus, 2009). In 1981, in recognition population in the early 21st century of its rich faunal diversity, the Great E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors (Limpus and Reimer, 1994). Predation Barrier Reef was inscribed on the United Affecting Its Continued Existence Nations Educational, Scientific and on hatchlings by crabs and diurnal birds Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear Cultural Organization’s World Heritage is also a threat (Limpus, 2009). In New Incidental capture in artisanal and Caledonia, feral dogs pose a predation List. One of the key reasons for its listing as the Great Barrier Reef World commercial fisheries and shark control threat to nesting loggerheads, and thus programs are a significant threat to the far no management has been Heritage Area (GBRWHA) was the presence of internationally significant survival of loggerheads throughout the implemented (Limpus et al., 2006). South Pacific. The primary gear types In summary, nest and hatchling foraging and nesting populations of sea turtles, including loggerheads. Since its involved in these interactions include predation likely was a factor that longlines, driftnets, set nets, and trawl contributed to the historical decline of listing, protection of habitats within the GBRWHA has increased, with the fisheries. These are employed by both this DPS. Current fox predation levels in current zone-based management plan artisanal and industrial fleets, and target eastern Australia are greatly reduced enacted in 2004 (Dryden et al., 2008). a wide variety of species including from historical levels, although Nesting habitat protection has also tunas, sharks, sardines, swordfish, and predation by other species still occurs, increased with the addition of mahi mahi. and predation by feral dogs in New indigenous co-management plans and In the southwestern Pacific, bottom Caledonia has not been addressed and ecotourism regulations at Mon Repos trawling gear has been a contributing continues to affect the South Pacific (M. Hamann, James Cook University, factor to the decline in the eastern Ocean DPS. In addition, a low incidence personal communication, 2010). Australian loggerhead population of the fibropapillomatosis disease exists However, destruction and modification (Limpus and Reimer, 1994). The in Moreton Bay and the southern Great of loggerhead nesting habitat outside the northern Australian prawn fishery Barrier Reef. However, these threats protected areas in Queensland result (NPF) is made up of both a banana appear to be minor and are not believed from coastal development and prawn fishery and a tiger prawn fishery, to be a significant threat to the construction, beach erosion, placement and extends from Cape York, persistence of this DPS. of erosion control structures, and Queensland (142° E) to Cape D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory beachfront lighting, (Limpus et al., Londonberry, Western Australia (127° Mechanisms 2006; Limpus, 2009). E). The fishery is one of the most Fishery bycatch that occurs valuable in all of Australia and in 2000 International Instruments throughout the South Pacific Ocean is comprised 121 vessels fishing The BRT identified several regulatory substantial (see Factor E). Although approximately 16,000 fishing days mechanisms that apply to loggerhead national and international governmental (Robins et al., 2002a). In 2000, the use sea turtles globally and within the South and non-governmental entities on both of TEDs in the NPF was made Pacific Ocean. The reader is directed to sides of the South Pacific are currently mandatory, due in part to several sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.2.4. of the Status working toward reducing loggerhead factors: (1) Objectives of the Draft

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58912 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

Australian Recovery Plan for Marine In the southeastern Pacific, significant Similar to other areas of the world, Turtles, (2) requirement of the bycatch has been reported in artisanal climate change and sea level rise have Australian Environment Protection and gillnet and longline shark and mahi the potential to impact loggerheads in Biodiversity Conservation Act for mahi fisheries operating out of Peru the South Pacific Ocean. This includes Commonwealth fisheries to become (Kelez et al., 2003; Alfaro-Shigueto et beach erosion and loss from rising sea ecologically sustainable, and (3) the al., 2006, 2010) and, to a lesser extent, levels, skewed hatchling sex ratios from 1996 U.S. import embargo on wild- Chile (Donoso and Dutton, 2010). The rising beach incubation temperatures, caught prawns taken in a fishery fishing industry in Peru is the second and abrupt disruption of ocean currents without adequate turtle bycatch largest economic activity in the country, used for natural dispersal during the management practices (Robins et al., and, over the past few years, the complex life cycle (Hawkes et al., 2009; 2002a). Data primarily were collected by longline fishery has rapidly increased. Poloczanska et al., 2009). Climate volunteer fishers who were trained Currently, nearly 600 longline vessels change studies for the northern Great extensively in the collection of scientific fish in the winter and over 1,300 vessels Barrier Reef green turtle population data on sea turtles caught as bycatch in fish in the summer. During an observer indicate that increased sand their fishery. Prior to the use of TEDs in program in 2003/2004, 588 sets were temperatures will result in the sex ratio this fishery, the NPF annually took observed during 60 trips, and 154 sea of hatchlings produced by this between 5,000 and 6,000 sea turtles as turtles were taken as bycatch. population skewing toward females, as bycatch, with a mortality rate of an Loggerheads were the species most often well as lethal incubation temperatures; estimated 40 percent due to drowning, caught (73.4 percent). Of the up to 34 percent of available nesting injuries, or being returned to the water loggerheads taken, 68 percent were habitat used by this population may be comatose (Poiner and Harris, 1996). entangled and 32 percent were hooked. inundated as a result of sea level rise; Since the mandatory use of TEDs has Of the two fisheries, sea turtle bycatch and changes in nesting beach been in effect, the annual bycatch of sea was highest during the mahi mahi sedimentology may result in changes in turtles in the NPF has dropped to less season, with 0.597 turtles/1,000 hooks, nesting success, hatchling emerging than 200 sea turtles per year, with a while the shark fishery caught 0.356 success, and reduced optimal nesting mortality rate of approximately 22 turtles/1,000 hooks (Alfaro-Shigueto et habitat (Fuentes et al., 2009, 2010a, percent (based on recent years). This al., 2008b). A separate study by Kelez et 2010b, 2010c, 2011). Thus, climate lower mortality rate also may be based al. (2003) reported that approximately change and sea level rise have the on better sea turtle handling techniques 30 percent of all turtles bycaught in potential to also impact loggerheads in adopted by the fleet. In general, Peru were loggerheads. In many cases, the South Pacific Ocean; however, the loggerheads were the third most loggerheads are kept on board for impact of these threats for loggerheads common sea turtle taken in this fishery. human consumption; therefore, the has not been quantified (Hamann et al., In the East Coast otter trawl fishery, mortality rate in this artisanal longline 2007). Robins (1995) suggests that upwards of fishery is likely high because sea turtles Natural environmental events, such as 340 turtle mortalities may potentially are retained for future consumption or cyclones or hurricanes, may affect occur each year, with loggerheads sale. loggerheads in the South Pacific Ocean. comprising the bulk of the interactions. These types of events may disrupt Data on loggerhead bycatch in Chile loggerhead nesting activity, albeit on a Despite encouraging signs of reduced are limited to the industrial swordfish temporary scale. Chaloupka et al. (2008) impacts to turtles from these and other fleet (Donoso and Dutton, 2010). Since demonstrated that nesting abundance of fisheries operating on the East Coast due 1990, fleet size has ranged from 7 to 23 loggerheads in Australia was inversely to rezoning of the Great Barrier Reef vessels with a mean of approximately 14 related to sea surface temperatures, and World Heritage site, there remain vessels per year. These vessels fish up suggested that a long-term warming fisheries threats in nearshore areas that to and over 1,000 nautical miles along trend in the South Pacific may be have yet to be abated and that may the Chilean coast with mechanized sets adversely impacting the recovery continue to impact loggerhead sea numbering approximately 1,300 to 2,000 potential of this population. turtles (Dryden et al., 2008). hooks (M. Donoso, ONG Pacifico Laud— In summary, we find that the South Loggerheads also are taken by Chile, personal communication, 2007; Pacific Ocean DPS of the loggerhead sea longline fisheries operating out of Donoso and Dutton, 2010). Loggerhead turtle is negatively affected by both Australia (Limpus, 2009). For example, bycatch is present in Chilean fleets; natural and manmade impacts as Robins et al. (2002b) estimate that however, the catch rate is substantially described above in Factor E. Within approximately 400 turtles are killed lower than that reported for Peru Factor E, we find that the cumulative annually in Australian pelagic longline (Alfaro-Shigueto et al., 2008b, 2010; fishery bycatch of loggerheads that fishery operations. Of this annual Donoso and Dutton, 2010). occurs throughout the South Pacific estimate, leatherbacks accounted for Other Manmade and Natural Impacts Ocean is a significant threat to the over 60 percent of this total, while persistence of this DPS. unidentified hardshelled turtles Other threats such as marine debris accounted for the remaining species. ingestion, boat strikes, port dredging, North Indian Ocean DPS Therefore, the effect of this longline and oil and gas development also A. The Present or Threatened fishery on loggerheads is unknown. impact loggerheads in the South Pacific Destruction, Modification, or Loggerheads also have been the most (Limpus, 2009; M. Hamann, James Cook Curtailment of its Habitat or Range common turtle species captured in University, personal communication, shark control programs in Australia 2010). Loggerhead mortality resulting Terrestrial Zone (Kidston et al., 1992; Limpus, 2009). from dredging of channels in Destruction and modification of From 1998–2002, a total of 232 Queensland is a persistent, albeit minor loggerhead nesting habitat in the North loggerheads was captured with 195 problem. From 1999–2002, the average Indian Ocean result from coastal taken on drum lines and 37 taken in annual reported mortality was 1.7 development and construction, nets, both with a low level of direct turtles per year (range = 1–3) from port beachfront lighting, vehicular and mortality (Limpus, 2009). dredging operations (Limpus, 2009). pedestrian traffic, beach pollution,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58913

removal of native vegetation, and changes in both its terrestrial and full potential, do not include some key planting of non-native vegetation (E. marine habitats as a result of land and countries, do not specifically address Possardt, USFWS, personal observation, water use practices as considered above sea turtle conservation, and are 2008). in Factor A. Within Factor A, we find handicapped by the lack of a sovereign The primary loggerhead nesting that coastal development, beachfront authority to enforce environmental beaches of this DPS are at Masirah lighting, and vehicular beach driving on regulations. The ineffectiveness of Island, Oman, and are still relatively nesting beaches in Oman are significant international treaties and national undeveloped but now facing increasing threats to the persistence of this DPS. legislation is oftentimes due to the lack development pressures. Newly paved of motivation or obligation by countries roads closely paralleling most of the B. Overutilization for Commercial, to implement and enforce them. A Masirah Island coast are bringing newly Recreational, Scientific, or Educational thorough discussion of this topic is constructed highway lights (E. Possardt, Purposes available in a special 2002 issue of the USFWS, personal observation, 2008) The use of loggerhead meat for food Journal of International Wildlife Law and greater access to nesting beaches by in Oman is not legal or popular. and Policy: International Instruments the public. Light pollution from the However, routine egg collection on and Marine Turtle Conservation (Hykle, military installation at Masirah Island Masirah Island does occur (Baldwin, 2002). also is evident at the most densely 1992). The extent of egg collection as National Legislation and Protection nested northern end of the island and is estimated by Masirah rangers and local a likely cause of hatchling residents is approximately 2,000 Oman Royal Decree No. 6/2003 (The disorientation and nesting female clutches per year (less than 10 percent). Law of Nature Conservation and disturbance (E. Possardt, USFWS, In summary, although the collection Wildlife) prohibits harm to all species of personal observation, 2008). Beach of eggs for human consumption is sea turtles or the collecting of their eggs. driving occurs on most of the major known to occur, it does not appear to be Royal Decrees also exist to protect beaches outside the military a significant threat to the persistence of habitat for important green turtle installation. This vehicular traffic this DPS. nesting beaches (Ras al Hadd Turtle creates ruts that obstruct hatchling Reserve) and hawksbills (Damaniyat movements (Mann, 1977; Hosier et al., C. Disease or Predation Nature Reserve). No such protection 1981; Baldwin, 1992; Cox et al., 1994), The potential exists for diseases and exists in Oman for the important nesting tramples nests, and destroys vegetation endoparasites to impact loggerheads beaches at Masirah Island and Halaniyat and dune formation processes, which found in the North Indian Ocean. Islands, although a proposed protected exacerbates light pollution effects. Free Natural egg predation on Oman area is being developed and considered ranging camels, sheep, and goats loggerhead nesting beaches undoubtedly for Masirah Island for the loggerhead overgraze beach vegetation, which occurs, but is not well documented or nesting beaches and other endangered impedes natural dune formation (E. believed to be significant. Predation on wildlife. Possardt, USFWS, personal observation, hatchlings by Arabian red fox (Vulpes Impacts to loggerheads and 2008). A new hotel on a major vulpes arabica), ghost crabs (Ocypode loggerhead nesting habitat from coastal loggerhead nesting beach at Masirah saratan), night herons (Nycticorax development, beachfront lighting, and Island was recently completed and, nycticorax), and gulls (Larus spp.) likely vehicular beach driving on nesting although not yet approved, there are occurs. While quantitative data do not beaches in Oman is substantial (see plans for a major resort at an important exist to evaluate these impacts on the Factor A). In addition, fishery bycatch loggerhead nesting beach on one of the North Indian Ocean loggerhead that occurs throughout the North Indian Ocean, although not quantified, is likely Halaniyat Islands. Armoring structures population, they are not likely to be substantial (see Factor E). Threats to common to many developed beaches significant. nesting beaches are likely to increase, throughout the world are not yet evident In summary, nest predation is known which would require additional and on the major loggerhead nesting beaches to occur and hatchling predation is widespread nesting beach protection of this DPS. likely. The best available data suggest efforts (Factor A). Little is currently predation is potentially affecting the Neritic/Oceanic Zones being done to monitor and reduce persistence of this DPS; however, Threats to habitat in the loggerhead mortality from neritic and oceanic quantitative data are not sufficient to neritic and oceanic zones in the North fisheries in the range of the North assess the degree of impact of nest Indian Ocean include fishing practices, Indian Ocean DPS; this mortality is predation on the persistence of this channel dredging, sand extraction, likely to continue and increase with DPS. marine pollution, and climate change. expected additional fishing effort from Fishing methods not only incidentally D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory commercial and artisanal fisheries capture loggerheads, but also deplete Mechanisms (Factor E). Reduction of mortality would invertebrate and fish populations and be difficult due to a lack of International Instruments thus alter ecosystem dynamics. In many comprehensive information on fishing cases loggerhead foraging areas coincide The BRT identified several regulatory distribution and effort, limitations on with fishing zones. There has been an mechanisms that apply to loggerhead implementing demonstrated effective apparent growth in artisanal and sea turtles globally and within the North conservation measures, geopolitical commercial fisheries in waters Indian Ocean. The reader is directed to complexities, limitations on surrounding Masirah Island (Baldwin, sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.3.4. of the Status enforcement capacity, and lack of 1992). Climate change also may result in Review for a discussion of these availability of comprehensive bycatch future trophic changes, thus impacting regulatory mechanisms. Hykle (2002) reduction technologies. loggerhead prey abundance and and Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the In summary, our review of regulatory distribution. effectiveness of some of these mechanisms under Factor D indicates In summary, we find that the North international instruments. The problems that existing regulatory mechanisms Indian Ocean DPS of the loggerhead sea with existing international treaties are may be insufficient or may not be turtle is negatively affected by ongoing often that they have not realized their sufficiently implemented to address the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58914 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

needs of loggerheads. The best available entanglement in marine debris, as well section of the coast is a private data suggest that insufficient or as entrainment in coastal power plants, leasehold, but there are concerns about insufficiently implemented regulatory likely apply to loggerheads in the North future coastal development (M. mechanisms in both the terrestrial and Indian Ocean. Similar to other areas of Hamann, James Cook University, marine environments are potentially the world, climate change and sea level personal communication, 2010). The affecting the persistence of this DPS; rise have the potential to impact Ningaloo Coast (including Gnaraloo) is however, sufficient data are not loggerheads in the North Indian Ocean. currently being considered for World available to assess the adequacy of This includes beach erosion and loss Heritage listing (Commonwealth of existing regulatory mechanisms on the from rising sea levels, skewed hatchling Australia, 2010). sex ratios from rising beach incubation persistence of this DPS. Neritic/Oceanic Zones temperatures, and abrupt disruption of E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors ocean currents used for natural Threats to habitat in the loggerhead Affecting Its Continued Existence dispersal during the complex life cycle neritic and oceanic zones in the Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear (Hawkes et al., 2009; Poloczanska et al., Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean include 2009). Climate change impacts could fishing practices, channel dredging, oil The magnitude of the threat of have profound long-term impacts on and gas development, sand extraction, incidental capture of sea turtles in nesting populations in the North Indian marine pollution, and climate change. artisanal and commercial fisheries in Ocean, but it is not possible to quantify Fishing methods not only incidentally the North Indian Ocean is difficult to the potential impacts at this point in capture loggerheads, but also deplete assess. A bycatch survey administered time. invertebrate and fish populations and off the coast of Sri Lanka between Natural environmental events, such as thus alter ecosystem dynamics. In many September 1999 and November 2000 cyclones, tsunamis, and hurricanes, cases, loggerhead foraging areas reported 5,241 total turtle affect loggerheads in the North Indian coincide with fishing zones. Climate entanglements, of which 1,310 were Ocean. For example, during the 2007 change also may result in future trophic loggerheads, between Kalpitiya and season, Oman suffered a rare typhoon. changes, thus impacting loggerhead Kirinda (Kapurusinghe and Saman, In general, however, severe storm events prey abundance and distribution. 2001; Kapurusinghe and Cooray, 2002). are episodic and, although they may In summary, we find that the Sea turtle bycatch has been reported in affect loggerhead hatchling production, Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS of the driftnet and set gillnets, longlines, the results are generally localized and loggerhead sea turtle is negatively trawls, and hook and line gear they rarely result in whole-scale losses affected by ongoing changes in its (Kapurusinghe and Saman, 2001; over multiple nesting seasons. marine habitats. The best available data Kapurusinghe and Cooray, 2002; In summary, we find that the North suggest that threats to neritic and Lewison et al., 2004). Indian Ocean DPS of the loggerhead sea oceanic habitats are potentially affecting Quantifying the magnitude of the turtle is negatively affected by both the persistence of this DPS; however, threat of fisheries on loggerheads in the natural and manmade impacts as sufficient data are not available to assess North Indian Ocean is difficult given the described above in Factor E. Within the degree of impact of these threats on low level of observer coverage or Factor E, we find that fishery bycatch the persistence of this DPS. investigations into bycatch conducted that occurs throughout the North Indian by countries that have large fishing Ocean, although not quantified, is likely B. Overutilization for Commercial, fleets. Efforts have been made to a significant threat to the persistence of Recreational, Scientific, or Educational quantify the effects of pelagic longline this DPS. Purposes fishing on loggerheads globally The Australian Native Title Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS (Lewison et al., 2004; Wallace et al., Legislation (Native Title Act 1993) 2010). While there were no turtle A. The Present or Threatened allows the harvesting of loggerheads and bycatch data available from the North Destruction, Modification, or their eggs by indigenous peoples Indian Ocean to use in their assessment, Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range (Environment Australia, 2003). extrapolations that considered bycatch However, egg consumption in Australia Terrestrial Zone data for the Pacific and Atlantic basins is virtually nil, and very few gave a conservative estimate of 6,000 The primary loggerhead nesting loggerheads are taken for food by loggerheads captured in the Indian beaches for this DPS occur in Australia indigenous Australians (M. Hamann, Ocean in the year 2000 (Lewison et al., on Dirk Hartog Island and Murion James Cook University, personal 2004). Interviews with rangers at Islands (Baldwin et al., 2003), which are communication, 2010). Dirk Hartog Masirah Island reveal that shark gillnets undeveloped. Dirk Hartog Island and Island and Murion Islands are largely capture many loggerheads off nesting the Murion Islands recently became part uninhabited, and poaching of eggs and beaches during the nesting season. As of the Western Australian Protected turtles is likely negligible. many as 60 boats are involved in this Area System. In summary, harvest of eggs and fishery with up to 6 km of gillnets being On the mainland, loggerhead nesting turtles is believed to be negligible and fished daily from June through October habitat is not well protected within the does not appear to be a threat to the along the Masirah Island coast. Australian conservation reserve system persistence of this DPS. Quantitative estimates of bycatch are (Limpus, 2009). Nesting habitat on the C. Disease or Predation not available due to lack of observer Ningaloo Coast is almost entirely coverage; however, rangers reported that contained within the Ningaloo Marine The potential exists for diseases and loggerhead bycatch is a common Park; however, management of nesting endoparasites to impact loggerheads occurrence (E. Possardt, USFWS, habitat on this coast is primarily driven found in the Southeast Indo-Pacific personal communication, 2008). by management related to the adjacent Ocean. On the North West Cape and the pastoral leases. South of the Ningaloo beaches of the Ningaloo coast of Other Manmade and Natural Impacts Marine Park, other mainland nesting mainland Australia, a long established Other anthropogenic impacts, such as habitat mostly occurs within pastoral feral European red fox (Vulpes vulpes) boat strikes and ingestion or leases (Limpus, 2009). The Gnaraloo population preyed heavily on eggs and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58915

is thought to be responsible for the done to monitor and reduce mortality E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors lower numbers of nesting turtles on the from neritic and oceanic fisheries in the Affecting Its Continued Existence mainland beaches (Baldwin et al., range of the Southeast Indo-Pacific Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear 2003). Ocean DPS. This mortality is likely to The fox populations have been continue and increase with expected The extent of the threat of incidental eradicated on Dirk Hartog Island and additional fishing effort from capture of sea turtles in artisanal and Murion Islands (Baldwin et al., 2003), commercial and artisanal fisheries commercial fisheries in the Southeast and fox eradication projects currently (Factor E). Although national and Indo-Pacific Ocean is unknown. Sea occur at Gnaraloo and Ningaloo in international governmental and non- turtles are caught in pelagic and Western Australia. However, fox governmental entities are currently demersal longlines, gillnets, trawls, predation is still a significant issue on working toward reducing loggerhead seines, and pots and traps (Environment these mainland beaches (Limpus, 2009; bycatch, and some positive actions have Australia, 2003). There is evidence of Butcher, 2010; Hattingh et al., 2010), but been implemented, it is unlikely that significant historical bycatch from these are minor nesting sites (M. this source of mortality can be prawn fisheries, which may have Hamann, James Cook University, sufficiently reduced in the near future depleted nesting populations long personal communication, 2010). due to the challenges of mitigating before nesting surveys were initiated in In summary, nest predation likely was illegal, unregulated, and unreported the 1990s (Baldwin et al., 2003). a factor that contributed to the historical fisheries, the continued expansion of Quantifying the magnitude of the decline of this DPS. However, foxes artisanal fleets, the lack of threat of fisheries on loggerheads in the have been eradicated on Dirk Hartog comprehensive information on fishing Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean is very Island and Murion Islands, and current distribution and effort, limitations on difficult given the low level of observer coverage or investigations into bycatch fox predation levels on mainland implementing demonstrated effective conducted by countries that have large beaches in Western Australia are greatly conservation measures, geopolitical fishing fleets. Efforts have been made to reduced from historical levels. complexities, limitations on quantify the effects of pelagic longline Therefore, predation no longer appears enforcement capacity, and lack of fishing on loggerheads globally to be a significant threat to the availability of comprehensive bycatch (Lewison et al., 2004). While there were persistence of this DPS. reduction technologies. no turtle bycatch data available from the D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Loggerheads are listed as Endangered Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean to use in Mechanisms under Australia’s Environment their assessment, extrapolations that Protection and Biodiversity considered bycatch data for the Pacific International Instruments Conservation Act of 1999. As described and Atlantic basins gave a conservative The BRT identified several regulatory under Factor A, the primary nesting estimate of 6,000 loggerheads captured mechanisms that apply to loggerhead beaches for this DPS occur in Australia in the Indian Ocean in the year 2000. sea turtles globally and within the on Dirk Hartog Island and Murion Loggerheads are known to be taken by Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean. The Islands (Baldwin et al., 2003). These Japanese longline fisheries operating off reader is directed to sections 5.1.4. and islands are undeveloped and recently of Western Australia (Limpus, 2009). 5.2.4.4. of the Status Review for a became part of the Western Australian The northern Australian prawn discussion of these regulatory Protected Area System. On the fishery (NPF) is made up of both a mechanisms. Hykle (2002) and Tiwari mainland, loggerhead nesting habitat is banana prawn fishery and a tiger prawn (2002) have reviewed the effectiveness not well protected within the Australian fishery, and extends from Cape York, of some of these international conservation reserve system (Limpus, Queensland (142° E) to Cape instruments. The problems with existing 2009), although the Ningaloo Coast Londonberry, Western Australia (127° international treaties are often that they (including Gnaraloo) is currently being E). The fishery is one of the most have not realized their full potential, do considered for World Heritage listing valuable in all of Australia and in 2000 not include some key countries, do not (Commonwealth of Australia, 2010). At comprised 121 vessels fishing specifically address sea turtle this time, loggerhead nesting habitat on approximately 16,000 fishing days conservation, and are handicapped by the Ningaloo Coast is almost entirely (Robins et al., 2002a). In 2000, the use the lack of a sovereign authority to contained within the Ningaloo Marine of TEDs in the NPF was made enforce environmental regulations. The Park, but the Gnaraloo section of the mandatory, due in part to several ineffectiveness of international treaties coast is a private leasehold and there are factors: (1) Objectives of the Draft and national legislation is oftentimes concerns about future coastal Australian Recovery Plan for Marine due to the lack of motivation or development (M. Hamann, James Cook Turtles, (2) requirement of the obligation by countries to implement University, personal communication, Australian Environment Protection and and enforce them. A thorough 2010). Biodiversity Conservation Act for discussion of this topic is available in a In summary, our review of regulatory Commonwealth fisheries to become special 2002 issue of the Journal of mechanisms under Factor D ecologically sustainable, and (3) the International Wildlife Law and Policy: demonstrates that although regulatory 1996 U.S. import embargo on wild- International Instruments and Marine mechanisms are in place that should caught prawns taken in a fishery Turtle Conservation (Hykle, 2002). address direct and incidental take of without adequate turtle bycatch Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean management practices (Robins et al., National Legislation and Protection loggerheads, these regulatory 2002a). Data primarily were collected by Fishery bycatch that occurs mechanisms are insufficient or are not volunteer fishers who were trained throughout the Southeast Indo-Pacific being implemented effectively to extensively in the collection of scientific Ocean, although not quantified, is likely address the needs of loggerheads. We data on sea turtles caught as bycatch in substantial (see Factor E). With the find that the threat from the inadequacy their fishery. Prior to the use of TEDs in exception of efforts to reduce loggerhead of existing regulatory mechanisms for this fishery, the NPF annually took bycatch in the northern Australian fishery bycatch (Factor E) is significant between 5,000 and 6,000 sea turtles as prawn fishery, little is currently being relative to the persistence of this DPS. bycatch, with a mortality rate of an

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58916 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

estimated 40 percent, due to drowning, find that fishery bycatch, particularly oceanic habitats are potentially affecting injuries, or being returned to the water from the northern Australian prawn the persistence of this DPS; however, comatose (Poiner and Harris, 1996). fishery, was a factor that contributed to sufficient data are not available to assess Since the mandatory use of TEDs has the historical decline of this DPS. the significance of these threats to the been in effect, the annual bycatch of sea Although loggerhead bycatch has been persistence of this DPS. turtles in the NPF has dropped to less greatly reduced in the northern than 200 sea turtles per year, with a Australian prawn fishery, bycatch that B. Overutilization for Commercial, mortality rate of approximately 22 occurs elsewhere in the Southeast Indo- Recreational, Scientific, or Educational percent (based on recent years). This Pacific Ocean has not been fully Purposes lower mortality rate also may be based quantified, and there is a new fishery for In the Southwest Indian Ocean, on the on better sea turtle handling techniques portunid crabs with known but east coast of Africa, subsistence hunting adopted by the fleet. In general, unquantified bycatch. The best available by local people is a continued threat to loggerheads were the third most data suggest the effects of pelagic loggerheads (Baldwin et al., 2003). common sea turtle taken in this fishery. longline fishing on loggerheads in the Illegal hunting of marine turtles and egg Loggerheads also have been the most Southeast Indo-Pacific are likely harvesting remains a threat in common turtle species captured in substantial when considering the Mozambique as well (Louro et al., shark control programs in Pacific number of industrial and artisanal 2006). Australia (Kidston et al., 1992; Limpus, vessels operating out of nations lining In summary, harvest of loggerheads 2009); however, the Western Australian the Indo-Pacific region (FAO Fisheries and eggs for human consumption on the demersal longline fishery for sharks has Statistics [http://www.fao.org/fishery/ east coast of Africa, although not no recorded interaction with statistics/en], accessed online June quantified, is likely a significant threat loggerheads. An emerging and 2011). Within Factor E, we find that to the persistence of this DPS. expanding fishery for portunid crabs has fishery bycatch that occurs throughout started up in Western Australia and is the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean, C. Disease or Predation known to kill loggerheads as bycatch (R. although not quantified, is likely a The potential exists for diseases and Prince, Department of Environment and significant threat to the persistence of endoparasites to impact loggerheads Conservation, Western Australia, this DPS. found in the Southwest Indian Ocean. personal communication, 2011). Southwest Indian Ocean DPS Side striped jackals (Canis adustus) and Other Manmade and Natural Impacts honey badgers (Melivora capensis) are A. The Present or Threatened known to depredate nests (Baldwin et Other anthropogenic impacts, such as Destruction, Modification, or al., 2003). boat strikes, oil and gas development, Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range In summary, nest predation is known and ingestion or entanglement in marine Terrestrial Zone to occur. The best available data suggest debris, likely apply to loggerheads in predation is potentially affecting the the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean. Limited information is available on persistence of this DPS; however, Similar to other areas of the world, threats in the terrestrial zone. All quantitative data are not sufficient to climate change and sea level rise have nesting beaches within South Africa are assess the degree of impact of nest the potential to impact loggerheads in within protected areas (Baldwin et al., predation on the persistence of this the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean. This 2003). In Mozambique, nesting beaches DPS. includes beach erosion and loss from in the Maputo Special Reserve rising sea levels, skewed hatchling sex (approximately 60 km of nesting beach) D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory ratios from rising beach incubation and in the Paradise Islands are within Mechanisms temperatures, and abrupt disruption of protected areas (Baldwin et al., 2003; International Instruments ocean currents used for natural Costa et al., 2007). dispersal during the complex life cycle The BRT identified several regulatory (Hawkes et al., 2009; Poloczanska et al., Neritic/Oceanic Zones mechanisms that apply to loggerhead 2009). Climate change impacts could Threats to habitat from fishing sea turtles globally and within the have profound long-term impacts on practices, channel dredging, sand Southwest Indian Ocean. The reader is nesting populations in the Southeast extraction, and marine pollution likely directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.5.4. of Indo-Pacific Ocean, but it is not possible apply to loggerhead neritic and oceanic the Status Review for a discussion of to quantify the potential impacts at this zones in the Southwest Indian Ocean these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle point in time. DPS. Fishing methods not only (2002) and Tiwari (2002) have reviewed Natural environmental events, such as incidentally capture loggerheads, but the effectiveness of some of these cyclones and hurricanes, may affect also deplete invertebrate and fish international instruments. The problems loggerheads in the Southeast Indo- populations and thus alter ecosystem with existing international treaties are Pacific Ocean. In general, however, dynamics. In many cases, loggerhead often that they have not realized their severe storm events are episodic and, foraging areas coincide with fishing full potential, do not include some key although they may affect loggerhead zones. Climate change also may result in countries, do not specifically address hatchling production, the results are future trophic changes, thus impacting sea turtle conservation, and are generally localized and they rarely loggerhead prey abundance and handicapped by the lack of a sovereign result in whole-scale losses over distribution. authority to enforce environmental multiple nesting seasons. In summary, we find that the regulations. The ineffectiveness of In summary, we find that the Southwest Indian Ocean DPS of the international treaties and national Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS of the loggerhead sea turtle is likely negatively legislation is oftentimes due to the lack loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in its of motivation or obligation by countries affected by both natural and manmade marine habitats as a result of land and to implement and enforce them. A impacts as described above in Factor E; water use practices as considered above thorough discussion of this topic is however, many of these threats have not in Factor A. The best available data available in a special 2002 issue of the been quantified. Within Factor E, we suggest that threats to neritic and Journal of International Wildlife Law

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58917

and Policy: International Instruments given the low level of observer coverage Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS and Marine Turtle Conservation (Hykle, or investigations into bycatch conducted A. The Present or Threatened 2002). by countries that have large fishing Destruction, Modification, or National Legislation and Protection fleets. Efforts have been made to Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range quantify the effects of pelagic longline Fishery bycatch that occurs fishing on loggerheads globally Terrestrial Zone throughout the Southwest Indian Ocean, (Lewison et al., 2004). While there were although not broadly quantified, is Destruction and modification of no turtle bycatch data available from the loggerhead nesting habitat in the likely substantial (see Factor E). This Southwest Indian Ocean to use in their mortality is likely to continue and may Northwest Atlantic results from coastal assessment, extrapolations that increase with expected additional development and construction, considered bycatch data for the Pacific fishing effort from commercial and placement of erosion control structures artisanal fisheries. Reduction of and Atlantic basins gave a conservative and other barriers to nesting, placement mortality would be difficult due to a estimate of 6,000 loggerheads captured of nearshore shoreline stabilization lack of comprehensive information on in the Indian Ocean in the year 2000. structures, beachfront lighting, fishing distribution and effort, The effect of the longline fishery on vehicular and pedestrian traffic, beach limitations on implementing loggerheads in the Indian Ocean is erosion, beach sand placement, removal demonstrated effective conservation largely unknown (Lewison et al., 2004). of native vegetation, and planting of non-native vegetation (NMFS and measures, geopolitical complexities, Other Manmade and Natural Impacts limitations on enforcement capacity, USFWS, 2008). and lack of availability of Other anthropogenic impacts, such as Numerous beaches in the comprehensive bycatch reduction boat strikes and ingestion or southeastern United States are eroding technologies. entanglement in marine debris, likely due to both natural (e.g., storms, sea As described under Factor A, all apply to loggerheads in the Southwest level changes, waves, shoreline geology) loggerhead nesting beaches within Indian Ocean. Similar to other areas of and anthropogenic (e.g., construction of South Africa are within protected areas the world, climate change and sea level armoring structures, groins, and jetties; (Baldwin et al., 2003). In Mozambique, rise have the potential to impact coastal development; inlet dredging) nesting beaches in the Maputo Special loggerheads in the Southwest Indian factors. Such shoreline erosion leads to Reserve (approximately 60 km of Ocean. This includes beach erosion and a loss of nesting habitat for sea turtles. nesting beach) and in the Paradise loss from rising sea levels, skewed In the southeastern United States, Islands are within protected areas hatchling sex ratios from rising beach numerous erosion control structures (Baldwin et al., 2003; Costa et al., 2007). incubation temperatures, and abrupt (e.g., bulkheads, seawalls, soil retaining In summary, our review of regulatory walls, rock revetments, sandbags, mechanisms under Factor D indicates disruption of ocean currents used for natural dispersal during the complex geotextile tubes) that create barriers to that existing regulatory mechanisms nesting have been constructed. The may be insufficient or may not be life cycle (Hawkes et al., 2009; Poloczanska et al., 2009). Climate proportion of coastline that is armored sufficiently implemented to address the is approximately 18 percent (239 km) in needs of loggerheads. The best available change impacts could have profound long-term impacts on nesting Florida (Clark, 1992; Schroeder and data suggest that insufficient or Mosier, 2000; Witherington et al., populations in the Southwest Indian insufficiently implemented regulatory 2006b), 9 percent (14 km) in Georgia (M. Ocean, but it is not possible at this time mechanisms in the marine environment Dodd, Georgia Department of Natural to predict how and the extent to which are potentially affecting the persistence Resources, personal communication, of this DPS; however, sufficient data are climate change will impact this DPS. 2009), 12 percent (29 km) in South not available to assess the adequacy of Natural environmental events, such as Carolina (D. Griffin, South Carolina existing regulatory mechanisms on the cyclones, tsunamis and hurricanes, may Department of Natural Resources, persistence of this DPS. affect loggerheads in the Southwest personal communication, 2009), and E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Indian Ocean. In general, however, 3 percent (9 km) in North Carolina (M. Affecting Its Continued Existence severe storm events are episodic and, Godfrey, North Carolina Wildlife although they may affect loggerhead Resources Commission, 2009). These Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear hatchling production, the results are estimates of armoring extent do not The full extent of the threat of generally localized and they rarely include structures that are also barriers incidental capture of sea turtles in result in whole-scale losses over to sea turtle nesting but do not fit the artisanal and commercial fisheries in multiple nesting seasons. definition of armoring, such as dune the Southwest Indian Ocean is crossovers, cabanas, sand fences, and unknown. Sea turtles are caught in In summary, we find that the recreational equipment. Jetties have demersal and pelagic longlines, trawls, Southwest Indian Ocean DPS of the been placed at many ocean inlets along gillnets, and seines (Petersen, 2005; loggerhead sea turtle is negatively the U.S. Atlantic coast to keep Louro et al., 2006; Costa et al., 2007; affected by both natural and manmade transported sand from closing the inlet Fennessy and Isaksen, 2007; Petersen et impacts as described above in Factor E. channel. Witherington et al. (2005) al., 2007, 2009). There is evidence of Within Factor E, we find that fishery found a significant negative relationship significant historical bycatch from bycatch that occurs throughout the between loggerhead nesting density and prawn fisheries, which may have Southwest Indian Ocean, although not distance from the nearest of 17 ocean depleted nesting populations long quantified, is likely a significant threat inlets on the Atlantic coast of Florida. before nesting surveys were initiated in to the persistence of this DPS. The effect of inlets in lowering nesting the 1990s (Baldwin et al., 2003). density was observed both updrift and Quantifying the magnitude of the downdrift of the inlets, leading threat of fisheries on loggerheads in the researchers to propose that beach Southwest Indian Ocean is very difficult instability from both erosion and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58918 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

accretion may discourage loggerhead hundred nests each year and are likely narrow beaches where driving is nesting. to involve tens of thousands of concentrated on the high beach and Stormwater and other water source hatchlings (Nelson et al., 2002); foredune. runoff from coastal development, however, this number calculated is Neritic/Oceanic Zones including beachfront parking lots, likely a vast underestimate. building rooftops, roads, decks, and Independent of these reports, Threats to habitat in the loggerhead draining swimming pools adjacent to Witherington et al. (1996) surveyed neritic and oceanic zones in the the beach, is frequently discharged hatchling orientation at nests located at Northwest Atlantic Ocean include directly onto Northwest Atlantic 23 representative beaches in six fishing practices, channel dredging, beaches and dunes either by sheet flow, counties around Florida in 1993 and sand extraction, oil exploration and through stormwater collection system 1994 and found that, by county, development, marine pollution, and outfalls, or through small diameter approximately 10 to 30 percent of nests climate change. Fishing methods not pipes. These outfalls create localized showed evidence of hatchlings only incidentally capture loggerheads, erosion channels, prevent natural dune disoriented by lighting. From this but also deplete invertebrate and fish establishment, and wash out sea turtle survey and from measures of hatchling populations and thus alter ecosystem nests (Florida Fish and Wildlife production (Florida Fish and Wildlife dynamics. Although anthropogenic Conservation Commission, unpublished Conservation Commission, unpublished disruptions of natural ecological data). Contaminants contained in data), the number of hatchlings interactions have been difficult to stormwater, such as oils, grease, disoriented by lighting in Florida is discern, a few studies have been focused antifreeze, gasoline, metals, pesticides, calculated in the range of hundreds of on the effects of these disruptions on chlorine, and nutrients, are also thousands per year. Mortality of loggerheads. For instance, Youngkin discharged onto the beach and have the disoriented clutches is likely very high (2001) analyzed gut contents from potential to affect sea turtle nests and (NMFS and USFWS, 2008—see hundreds of loggerheads stranded in emergent hatchlings. The effects of these Appendix 2). Georgia over a 20-year period. His contaminants on loggerheads are not yet findings point to the probability of In the United States, vehicular driving understood. As a result of natural and major effects on loggerhead diet from is allowed on certain beaches in anthropogenic factors, beach activities such as shrimp trawling and northeast Florida (Nassau, Duval, St. nourishment is a frequent activity, and dredging. Lutcavage and Musick (1985) Johns, and Volusia Counties), northwest many beaches are on a periodic found that horseshoe crabs strongly nourishment schedule. On severely Florida (Walton and Gulf Counties), dominated the diet of loggerheads in eroded sections of beach, where little or Georgia (Cumberland, Little Chesapeake Bay in 1980–1981. no suitable nesting habitat previously Cumberland, and Sapelo Islands), North Subsequently, fishermen began to existed, beach nourishment has been Carolina (Fort Fisher State Recreation harvest horseshoe crabs, primarily for found to result in increased nesting Area, Carolina Beach, Freeman Park, use as bait in the eel and whelk pot (Ernest and Martin, 1999). However, on Onslow Beach, Emerald Isle, Indian fisheries, using several gear types. most beaches in the southeastern United Beach/Salter Path, Pine Knoll Shores, Atlantic coast horseshoe crab landings States, nesting success typically Atlantic Beach, Cape Lookout National increased by an order of magnitude (0.5 declines for the first year or two Seashore, Cape Hatteras National to 6.0 million pounds) between 1980 following construction, even though Seashore, Nag’s Head, Kill Devil Hills, and 1997, and in 1998 the Atlantic more nesting habitat is available for Town of Duck, and Currituck Banks), States Marine Fisheries Commission turtles (Trindell et al., 1998; Ernest and Virginia (Chincoteague NWR and implemented a horseshoe crab fishery Martin, 1999; Herren, 1999). Wallops Island), and Texas (the majority management plan to curtail catches Coastal development also contributes of beaches except for a highly developed (Atlantic States Marine Fisheries to habitat degradation by increasing section of South Padre Island and Padre Commission, 1998). The decline in light pollution. Both nesting and Island National Seashore, San Jose horseshoe crab availability has hatchling sea turtles are adversely Island, Matagorda Island, and apparently caused a diet shift in affected by the presence of artificial Matagorda Peninsula where driving is juvenile loggerheads, from lighting on or near the beach not allowed or is limited to agency predominantly horseshoe crabs in the (Witherington and Martin, 1996). personnel, land owners, and early to mid-1980s to blue crabs in the Experimental studies have shown that researchers). Beach driving has been late 1980s and early 1990s, to mostly artificial lighting deters adult female found to reduce the quality of finfish in the late 1990s and early 2000s turtles from emerging from the ocean to loggerhead nesting habitat in several (Seney, 2003; Seney and Musick, 2007). nest (Witherington, 1992). Witherington ways. In the southeastern U.S., vehicle These data suggest that turtles are (1986) also noted that loggerheads ruts on the beach have been found to foraging in greater numbers in or around aborted nesting attempts at a greater prevent or impede hatchlings from fishing gears and on discarded bycatch frequency in lighted areas. Because reaching the ocean following emergence (Seney, 2003). However, Wallace et al. adult females rely on visual brightness from the nest (Mann, 1977; Hosier et al., (2009) and McClellan et al. (2010) cues to find their way back to the ocean 1981; Cox et al., 1994; Hughes and reported that neritic crabs (blue crabs, in after nesting, those turtles that nest on Caine, 1994). Sand compaction by particular) and whelk comprised the lighted beaches may become disoriented vehicles has been found to hinder nest most important dietary items for by artificial lighting and have difficulty construction and hatchling emergence juvenile loggerheads in neritic areas in finding their way back to the ocean. In from nests (Mann, 1977). Vehicle lights North Carolina, indicating that the trend some cases, misdirected nesting females and vehicle movement on the beach reported by Seney and Musick (2007) have crawled onto coastal highways and after dark results in reduced habitat might be regional. have been struck and killed by vehicles suitability, which can deter females Periodic dredging of sediments from (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation from nesting and disorient hatchlings. navigational channels is carried out at Commission, unpublished data). Additionally, vehicle traffic on nesting large ports to provide for the passage of Reports of hatchling disorientation beaches contributes to erosion, large commercial and military vessels. events in Florida alone describe several especially during high tides or on In addition, sand mining (dredging) for

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58919

beach renourishment and construction B. Overutilization for Commercial, diseases have not been documented in projects occurs in the Northwest Recreational, Scientific, or Educational free-ranging loggerheads, with the Atlantic along the U.S., Mexico, Central Purposes possible exception of sea turtle American, Colombia, and Venezuela Deliberate hunting of loggerheads for fibropapillomatosis, which may have a coasts. Although directed studies have their meat, shells, and eggs is reduced viral etiology (Herbst and Jacobson, not been conducted, dredging activities, from previous exploitation levels, but 1995; George, 1997). Although which occur regularly in the Northwest still exists. In the Caribbean, 12 of 29 fibropapillomatosis reaches epidemic Atlantic, have the potential to destroy or (41 percent) countries/territories allow proportions in some wild green turtle degrade benthic habitats used by the harvest of loggerheads (NMFS and populations, the prevalence of this disease in most loggerhead populations loggerheads. Channelization of inshore USFWS, 2008—see Appendix 3; A. is thought to be small. An exception is and nearshore habitat and the Bolten, University of Florida, personal Florida Bay where approximately 9.5 subsequent disposal of dredged material communication, 2009); this takes into percent of the loggerheads captured account the September 2009 ban on the in the marine environment can destroy exhibit fibropapilloma-like external harvest of sea turtles in The Bahamas. or disrupt resting or foraging grounds lesions (B. Schroeder, NMFS, personal Loggerhead harvest in the Caribbean is (including grass beds and coral reefs) communication, 2006). Mortality levels generally restricted to the non-nesting and may affect nesting distribution by and population-level effects associated season with the exception of St. Kitts altering physical features in the marine with the disease are still unknown. and Nevis, where turtle harvest is environment (Hopkins and Murphy, Heavy infestations of endoparasites may 1980). Oil exploration and development allowed annually from March 1 through cause or contribute to debilitation or on live bottom areas may disrupt September 30, and the Turks and Caicos mortality in loggerhead sea turtles. foraging grounds by smothering benthic Islands, where turtle harvest is allowed Trematode eggs and adult trematodes year-round. Most countries/territories organisms with sediments and drilling were recorded in a variety of tissues that allow harvest have regulations that muds (Coston-Clements and Hoss, including the spinal cord and brain of favor the harvest of large juvenile and 1983). The effects of benthic habitat debilitated loggerheads during an adult turtles, the most reproductively alteration on loggerhead prey epizootic in South Florida, USA, during valuable members of the population. late 2000 and early 2001. These abundance and distribution, and the Exceptions include the Cayman Islands, effects of these potential changes on endoparasites were implicated as a which mandates maximum size limits, possible cause of the epizootic (Jacobson loggerhead populations, have not been and Haiti and Trinidad and Tobago, determined but are of concern. Climate et al., 2006). Although many health which have no size restrictions. All problems have been described in wild change also may result in trophic North, Central, and South American populations through the necropsy of changes, thus impacting loggerhead countries in the Northwest Atlantic stranded turtles, the significance of prey abundance and distribution. have enacted laws that mandate diseases on the ecology of wild In summary, we find that the complete protection of loggerheads from loggerhead populations is not known Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS of the harvest in their territorial waters with (Herbst and Jacobson, 1995). loggerhead sea turtle is negatively the exception of Guyana. Despite Predation of eggs and hatchlings by affected by ongoing changes in both its national laws, in many countries the native and introduced species occurs on terrestrial and marine habitats as a poaching of eggs and hunting of adult almost all nesting beaches throughout result of land and water use practices as and juvenile turtles still occurs at the Northwest Atlantic. The most considered above in Factor A. Within varying levels (NMFS and USFWS, common predators at the primary 2008—see Appendix 3). Although Factor A, we find that coastal nesting beaches in the southeastern unquantified, the extent of legal and development, beachfront lighting, and United States are ghost crabs (Ocypode illegal take in most locations is believed coastal armoring and other erosion quadrata), raccoons (Procyon lotor), to be low and occur in locations where feral hogs (Sus scrofa), foxes (Urocyon control structures on nesting beaches in loggerhead density is low (NMFS and cinereoargenteus and Vulpes vulpes), the United States are significant threats USFWS, 2008—see Appendix 2; TEWG, coyotes (Canis latrans), armadillos to the persistence of this DPS. We also 2009). However, take in Cuba, despite (Dasypus novemcinctus), and red fire find that anthropogenic disruptions of the national ban, is thought to be rather ants (Solenopsis invicta) (Stancyk, 1982; natural ecological interactions as a extensive (F. Moncada-Gavilan, Cuba Dodd, 1988). In the absence of well result of fishing practices, channel Fisheries Research Centre, personal managed nest protection programs, dredging, and oil exploration and communication, 2009). predators may take significant numbers development are likely a significant In summary, overutilization for of eggs; however, nest protection threat to the persistence of this DPS. commercial purposes likely was a factor programs are in place at most of the However, compared to many of the that contributed to the historical decline major nesting beaches in the Northwest other loggerhead DPSs and sea turtle of this DPS. Legal and illegal harvest of Atlantic. species, the United States has the ability loggerheads in the Caribbean for human Non-native vegetation has invaded to control a very large proportion of the consumption continues, and the best many coastal areas and often anthropogenic threats to nesting and available data suggest this harvest is outcompetes native plant species. Exotic foraging habitats used by neritic potentially affecting the persistence of vegetation may form impenetrable root juveniles and adults. While not this DPS; however, quantitative data are mats that can invade and desiccate eggs, minimizing the role of the Caribbean not sufficient to assess the degree of as well as trap hatchlings. The rookeries, the vast majority of nesting is impact of overutilization on the Australian pine (Casuarina equisetifolia) is particularly harmful to on U.S. beaches, and a great number of persistence of this DPS. sea turtles. Dense stands have taken large neritic juveniles and adults, the C. Disease or Predation over many coastal areas throughout most reproductively valuable age The potential exists for diseases and central and south Florida. Australian classes, from all rookeries spend a large endoparasites to impact loggerheads pines cause excessive shading of the portion of their time in U.S. waters. found in the Northwest Atlantic. Viral beach that would not otherwise occur.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58920 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

Studies in Florida suggest that nests laid levels in the United States are greatly mortality can be reduced across the in shaded areas are subjected to lower reduced from historical levels, range of the DPS in the near future incubation temperatures, which may predation still occurs in the United because of the diversity and magnitude alter the natural hatchling sex ratio States, as well as in Mexico, and could of the fisheries operating in the North (Marcus and Maley, 1987; Schmelz and be significant in the absence of the Atlantic, the lack of comprehensive Mezich, 1988; Hanson et al., 1998). current well managed protection efforts. information on fishing distribution and Fallen Australian pines limit access to Although diseases and parasites are effort, limitations on implementing suitable nest sites and can entrap known to impact loggerheads in this demonstrated effective conservation nesting females (Austin, 1978; Reardon DPS, the significance of these threats is measures, geopolitical complexities, and Mansfield, 1997). The shallow root not known. Overall, however, current limitations on enforcement capacity, network of these pines can interfere threats in both the terrestrial and marine and lack of availability of with nest construction (Schmelz and environments are not believed to be a comprehensive bycatch reduction Mezich, 1988). Davis and Whiting significant threat to the persistence of technologies. National legislation and (1977) reported that nesting activity this DPS. protective measures have been declined in Everglades National Park implemented in the past, and in many where dense stands of Australian pine D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory cases it is yet too early to determine the took over native dune vegetation on a Mechanisms effectiveness of those actions stemming remote nesting beach. Beach vitex (Vitex International Instruments from the available regulatory rotundifolia) is native to countries in the mechanisms. With a long age to The BRT identified several regulatory western Pacific and was introduced to maturity and transitory dynamics in the mechanisms that apply to loggerhead the horticulture trade in the populations, the effects of actions taken southeastern United States in the mid- sea turtles globally and within the over 20 years ago may just now be 1980s and is often sold as a ‘‘dune Northwest Atlantic Ocean (Conant et al., expected to be observed on the nesting stabilizer.’’ Its presence on North 2009). Hykle (2002) and Tiwari (2002) beaches. The existing regulatory Carolina and South Carolina beaches have reviewed the effectiveness of some framework uses the authority of the has a negative effect on sea turtle of these international instruments. The ESA, as well as that of the Magnuson- nesting as its dense mats interfere with problems with existing international Stevens Fishery Conservation and sea turtle nesting and hatchling treaties are often that they have not Management Act, as the primary means emergence from nests (Brabson, 2006). realized their full potential, do not of providing protection from fishery This exotic plant is crowding out the include some key countries, do not interactions. Further explanation of native species, such as sea oats and specifically address sea turtle specific protective actions taken under bitter panicum, and can colonize large conservation, and are handicapped by these Acts to reduce fishery bycatch are areas in just a few years. Sisal, or the lack of a sovereign authority to detailed in the discussion of incidental century plant, (Agave americana) is enforce environmental regulations. The bycatch in fishing gear under Factor E native to arid regions of Mexico. The ineffectiveness of international treaties as well as under the Conservation plant was widely grown in sandy soils and national legislation is oftentimes Efforts section. A comprehensive review around Florida in order to provide fiber due to the lack of motivation or of the framework for all U.S. fisheries in for cordage. It has escaped cultivation in obligation by countries to implement which turtle (as well as mammal and Florida and has been purposely planted and enforce them. A thorough seabird) bycatch occurs is provided by on dunes. Although the effects of sisal discussion of this topic is available in a Moore et al. (2009). on sea turtle nesting are uncertain, special 2002 issue of the Journal of Coastal development, coupled with thickets with impenetrable sharp spines International Wildlife Law and Policy: critical beach erosion, has led to the are occasionally found on developed International Instruments and Marine placement of structures (e.g., armoring, beaches. Turtle Conservation (Hykle, 2002). sand fences, and other erosion control Harmful algal blooms, such as a red However, efforts continue to establish structures to protect upland property), tide, also affect loggerheads in the international instruments for sea turtle which have destroyed or degraded Northwest Atlantic. In Florida, the protection and to incorporate sea turtle nesting habitat. While some States have species that causes most red tides is protection into existing instruments. In regulations prohibiting coastal Karenia brevis, a dinoflagellate that November 2010, ICCAT approved a armoring, other State regulations are produces a toxin (Florida Marine proposal to require data reporting on the insufficient to protect nesting habitat. Research Institute, 2003) and can cause capture of sea turtles in the Atlantic State regulations related to the mortality in birds, marine mammals, Ocean and mandated the use of hook- placement and design of new coastal and sea turtles. During four red tide removal and fishing line structures need to be reviewed and events along the west coast of Florida, disentanglement gear. revised as appropriate to reduce the sea turtle stranding trends indicated that need for coastal armoring. Where National Legislation and Protection these events were acting as a mortality lighting ordinances have been adopted factor (Redlow et al., 2003). Fishery bycatch that occurs and adequately enforced, hatchling Furthermore, brevetoxin concentrations throughout the North Atlantic Ocean is disorientation has been managed at supportive of intoxication were detected substantial (see Factor E). National and acceptable levels; however, not all in biological samples from dead and international governmental and non- coastal counties or municipalities have moribund sea turtles during a mortality governmental entities on both sides of adopted or fully enforced effective event in 2005 and in subsequent events the North Atlantic are currently working lighting ordinances and thus additional (Fauquier et al., 2007). The population toward reducing loggerhead bycatch. work is needed to ensure more level effects of these events are not yet Some positive actions have been consistent protective measures. known. implemented in addition to effort In summary, our review of regulatory In summary, nest and hatchling reductions occurring in some fisheries mechanisms under Factor D predation likely was a factor that as a result of economics and reductions demonstrates that regulatory contributed to the historical decline of in target species. However, it is still mechanisms are in place that should this DPS. Although current predation unclear to what degree this source of address direct and incidental take of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58921

Northwest Atlantic Ocean loggerheads. mortality of loggerheads in certain South Atlantic (2009 effort was 62 While the regulatory mechanisms fishing operations have been undertaken percent of 2001 effort) (NMFS, contained within international and implemented or partially unpublished data). In 2011 a revised instruments are inconsistent and likely implemented. These efforts include estimate of annual loggerhead mortality insufficient, the mechanisms of existing developing gear solutions to prevent or for the Southeast food shrimp trawl national legislation and protection are reduce captures or to allow turtles to fishery was calculated using 2009 data much more adequate. However, it escape without harm (e.g., TEDs, circle (the latest available at the time). It remains to be determined if national hooks and bait combinations), estimated annual mortality to be 778 measures are being implemented implementing time and area closures to individuals in the Gulf of Mexico and effectively to fully address the needs of prevent interactions from occurring 673 in the South Atlantic (NMFS, loggerheads. The potential strength of (e.g., prohibitions on gillnet fishing unpublished data). the existing national regulatory along the mid-Atlantic coast during the Other trawl fisheries operating in mechanisms provides a likely advantage critical time of northward migration of Northwest Atlantic waters that are to the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS loggerheads), implementation of careful known or expected to capture sea turtles compared to other loggerhead DPSs and release protocols (e.g., requirements for include, but are not limited to, summer other sea turtle species, as a very large careful release of turtles captured in flounder, calico scallop, sea scallop, proportion of the adult and large longline fisheries), prohibitions of blue crab, whelk, cannonball jellyfish, juvenile stages occur in waters under gillnetting in some U.S. State waters, horseshoe crab, and mid-Atlantic our national jurisdiction. However, we and modifying gear (e.g., requirements directed finfish trawl fisheries and the find that even with the existing to reduce mesh size in the leaders of Sargassum fishery. In the United States, regulatory mechanisms there is still a pound nets in certain U.S. coastal the summer flounder fishery is the only potential threat from both national and waters to prevent entanglement). trawl fishery (other than the shrimp fishery) with federally mandated TED international fishery bycatch (Factor E) The primary bycatch reduction focus use (in certain areas). Loggerhead and coastal development, beachfront in the Northwest Atlantic, since the annual bycatch estimates in 2004 and lighting, and coastal armoring and other 1978 ESA listing of the loggerhead, has 2005 in U.S. mid-Atlantic scallop trawl erosion control structures on nesting been on bycatch reduction in shrimp gear ranged from 81 to 191 turtles, beaches in the United States (Factor A). trawls. The United States has required depending on the estimation More work needs to be done under the the use of TEDs throughout the year existing national regulatory methodology used (Murray, 2007). since the mid-1990s, with modifications Estimated average annual bycatch of mechanisms, as well as continuing to required and implemented as necessary advance the development and loggerheads in other mid-Atlantic (52 FR 24244; June 29, 1987; 57 FR federally managed bottom otter trawl effectiveness of international 57348; December 4, 1992; Epperly, instruments, to ensure the persistence of fisheries during 1996–2004 was 616 2003). Most notably, in 2003, NMFS turtles (Murray, 2006). A more recent this DPS. Therefore, we find that the implemented new requirements for threat from the inadequacy of existing study estimated that between the years TEDs in the shrimp trawl fishery to 2005–2008, an average of 352 regulatory mechanisms is significant ensure that large loggerheads could relative to the persistence of this DPS. loggerheads were caught annually by escape through TED openings (68 FR the U.S. Mid-Atlantic fish and scallop E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors 8456; February 21, 2003). Significant bottom otter trawl fisheries (Warden, Affecting Its Continued Existence effort has been expended to transfer this 2011). The harvest of Sargassum by technology to other shrimping fleets in Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear trawlers can result in incidental capture the Northwest Atlantic; however, not all of post-hatchlings and habitat Bycatch of loggerheads in commercial nations where loggerheads occur require destruction (Schwartz, 1988; and recreational fisheries in the the device be used. Enforcement of TED Witherington, 2002); however, this Northwest Atlantic is a significant threat regulations is difficult and compliance fishery is not currently active. Likewise, facing the species in this region. A is not believed to be complete in any of the calico scallop fishery was a periodic variety of fishing gears that incidentally the nations requiring TED use, fishery that did not occur on a regular capture loggerhead sea turtles are including the United States. Even if basis and has not been prosecuted for employed including gillnets, trawls, compliance was complete, TEDs are not years: no commercial landings of calico hook and line, longlines, seines, 100 percent effective, as it is estimated scallop have been reported from the East dredges, pound nets, and various types that as much as 3 percent of turtles may Coast of Florida since 2003 (NMFS of pots/traps. Among these, gillnets, still be retained and possibly drown in commercial fisheries landings database), longlines, and trawl gear contribute to a trawl with a properly installed TED. and the processing facilities that the vast majority of bycatch mortality of Therefore, a significant number of previously supported these fisheries loggerheads annually throughout their loggerheads are estimated to still be have been closed, hampering the rapid range in the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of killed annually in shrimp trawls resumption of a large-scale fishery. Mexico with shrimp trawls likely throughout the Northwest Atlantic. For Dredge fishing gear is the accounting for the majority of bycatch the U.S. Southeast food shrimp trawl predominant gear used to harvest sea mortality (Epperly et al., 1995; NMFS, fishery, NMFS previously estimated the scallops off the mid- and northeastern 2002, 2004, 2007, 2008; Lewison et al., annual mortality of loggerheads in the United States Atlantic coast. Turtles can 2003, 2004; Richards, 2007; Moore et Gulf of Mexico and southeastern U.S. be struck and injured or killed by the al., 2009; NMFS, unpublished data). Atlantic Ocean as 3,948 individuals (95 dredge frame or captured in the bag Considerable effort has been expended percent confidence intervals, 1,221– where they may drown or be further since the 1980s to document and 8,498) based upon 2001 effort data injured or killed when the catch and address fishery bycatch, especially in (NMFS, 2002). However, shrimping heavy gear are dumped on the vessel the United States and Mexico. Observer effort by otter trawls in the southeastern deck. Total estimated bycatch of programs have been implemented in United States has significantly declined loggerhead sea turtles in the U.S. sea some fisheries to collect turtle bycatch in both the Gulf of Mexico (2009 effort scallop dredge fishery operating in the data, and efforts to reduce bycatch and was 39 percent of 2001 effort) and the mid-Atlantic region (New York to North

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58922 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

Carolina) from June through November a mortality of 378 over that time span. Chesapeake Bay and at certain times, is on the order of several hundred This represents a reduction compared to pound net leaders having mesh greater turtles per year (Murray, 2004, 2005, the recent historical take cited above. than or equal to 12 inches and leaders 2007). The impact of the sea scallop These estimates are not comprehensive with stringers (67 FR 41196; June 17, dredge fishery on loggerheads in U.S. across this gear type (i.e., pelagic and 2002). Subsequent regulations have waters of the Northwest Atlantic demersal longline) throughout the further restricted the use of certain remains a serious concern. Northwest Atlantic Ocean. pound net leaders in certain geographic Incidental take of oceanic-stage Cumulatively, the bycatch and mortality areas and established pound net leader loggerheads in pelagic longline fisheries of Northwest Atlantic loggerheads in gear modifications (69 FR 24997; May 5, has recently received significant longline fisheries is significant. 2004; 71 FR 36024; June 23, 2006). attention (Balazs and Pooley, 1994; Gillnet fisheries may be the most Pots/traps are commonly used to Bolten et al., 1994, 2000; Aguilar et al., ubiquitous of fisheries operating in the target crabs, lobsters, whelk, and reef 1995; Laurent et al., 1998; Long and neritic range of the Northwest Atlantic fishes. These traps vary in size and Schroeder, 2004; Watson et al., 2005). loggerhead. Comprehensive estimates of configuration, but all are attached to a Large-scale commercial longline bycatch in gillnet fisheries do not yet surface float by means of a vertical line fisheries operate throughout the pelagic exist and, while this precludes a leading to the trap. Entanglement and range of the Northwest Atlantic quantitative analysis of their impacts on mortality of loggerheads has been loggerhead, including the western loggerhead populations, the cumulative documented in various pot/trap Mediterranean. The largest size classes mortality of loggerheads in gillnet fisheries in the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of in the oceanic stage are the size classes fisheries is likely high. In the U.S. mid- Mexico. Data from the U.S. Sea Turtle impacted by the swordfish longline Atlantic, the average annual estimated Stranding and Salvage Network indicate fishery in the Azores (Bolten, 2003) and bycatch of loggerheads from 1995–2006 that 82 loggerheads (dead and rescued on the Scotian Shelf, Georges Bank, and was 350 turtles (CV = 0.20., 95 percent alive) were documented by the Grand Banks in Canadian waters confidence intervals over the 12-year stranding network in various pot/trap (Watson et al., 2005; Brazner and period: 234 to 504) (Murray, 2009). gear from 1996–2005, of these McMillan, 2008), and this is likely the From 2007–2009, the U.S. pelagic shark approximately 30–40 percent were case for other nation’s fleets operating in gillnet fishery had a total of three adults and the remainder juvenile the region, including but not limited to, observed loggerhead takes (all in 2007), turtles (NMFS, unpublished data). the European Union, United States, but insufficient data exist to extrapolate Without intervention it is likely that the Japan, and Taiwan. The demographic a total estimated take for the fishery majority of the live, entangled turtles consequences relative to population (NMFS, unpublished report). In the would die. Additionally, documented recovery of the increased mortality of United States, some States (e.g., South strandings represent only a portion of these size classes have been discussed Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, total interactions and mortality. (Crouse et al., 1987; Heppell et al., 2003; and Texas) have prohibited gillnets in Recently, a small number of loggerhead Chaloupka, 2003; Wallace et al., 2008). their waters, but there remain active entanglements also have been recorded Estimates derived from data recorded by gillnet fisheries in other U.S. States, in in whelk pot bridles in the U.S. Mid- the international observer program U.S. Federal waters, Mexico waters, Atlantic (M. Fagan, Virginia Institute of suggest that thousands of mostly Central and South America waters, and Marine Science, personal juvenile loggerheads have been captured the Northeast Atlantic. communication, 2008). However, no in the Canadian pelagic longline fishery Pound nets are fixed gear with a long dedicated observer programs exist to in the western North Atlantic since 1999 mesh leader that can be suspended from provide estimates of take and mortality (Brazner and McMillan, 2008). NMFS the surface by a series of stringers or from pot/trap fisheries; therefore, (2004) estimates that 635 loggerheads vertical lines or a mesh supported along comprehensive estimates of loggerhead (143 lethal) will be taken annually in its length supported by stakes; both end interactions with pot/trap gear are not the U.S. pelagic longline fishery. in a ‘‘heart’’ that funnels animals into an available, but the gear is widely used Incidental capture of neritic-stage impoundment for trapping fish at the throughout the range of the DPS, and loggerheads in demersal longline fishing terminal point of the gear. Sea turtles poses a continuing threat. gear has also been documented. incidentally captured in the open top Richards (2007) estimated total annual pound are usually safe from injury and Other Manmade and Natural Impacts bycatch of loggerheads in the Southeast can be released when the fishermen pull Propeller and collision injuries from U.S. Atlantic and U.S. Gulf of Mexico the nets (Mansfield et al., 2002; Epperly boats and ships are becoming more commercial directed shark bottom et al., 2007). However, sea turtle common in sea turtles. In the U.S. longline fishery from 2003–2005 as mortalities have been documented in Atlantic, from 1997 to 2005, 14.9 follows: 2003: 302–1,620 (CV 0.45); the leader of certain pound nets. Large percent of all stranded loggerheads were 2004: 95–591 (CV 0.49); and 2005: 139– mesh leaders (greater than 12-inch documented as having sustained some 778 (CV 0.46). NMFS (2009) estimated stretched mesh) may act as a gillnet, type of propeller or collision injuries the total number of captures of entangling sea turtles by the head or (NMFS, unpublished data). The hardshell turtles in the U.S. Gulf of foreflippers (Bellmund et al., 1987) or incidence of propeller wounds observed Mexico reef fish fishery (demersal may act as a barrier against which in sea turtles stranded in the United longline fishery) from July 2006– turtles may be impinged (NMFS, States has risen from approximately 10 December 2008 as 861 turtles (95 unpublished data). Nets with small percent in the late 1980s to a record percent confidence intervals, 383–1934). mesh leaders (less than 8 inches high of 20.5 percent in 2004, followed Based on the 2009 biological opinion for stretched mesh) usually do not present by annual rates of 15.2, 15.6, and 16.5 the Gulf of Mexico reef fish fishery, a mortality threat to loggerheads, but percent from 2005 to 2007, respectively estimated takes by the demersal longline some mortality has been reported (NMFS, unpublished data). In the portion of the fishery following new (Morreale and Standora, 1998; Epperly United States, propeller wounds are regulations on gear restrictions and et al., 2000, 2007; Mansfield et al., greatest in Southeast Florida; during post-hooking gear removal was 2002). In 2002, the United States some years, as many as 60 percent of the determined to be 623 every 3 years, with prohibited, in certain areas within the loggerhead strandings found in these

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58923

areas had propeller wounds (Florida Annually about 1 percent of all sea has been reported at several locations in Fish and Wildlife Conservation turtle strandings along the U.S. east the United States, including Cape Cod Commission, unpublished data). coast have been associated with oil, but Bay, Massachusetts (Still et al., 2002); However, it is still unclear what higher rates of 3 to 6 percent have been Long Island Sound, New York (Meylan proportion of those received the wounds observed in South Florida and Texas and Sadove, 1986; Morreale et al., postmortem. As the number of vessels (Rabalais and Rabalais, 1980; Plotkin 1992); the Indian River system, Florida increases, in concert with increased and Amos, 1990; Teas, 1994). It is not (Mendonc¸a and Ehrhart, 1982; coastal development, and possibly yet clear what the immediate and long- Witherington and Ehrhart, 1989); and increasing numbers of juvenile sea term impacts of the 2010 Deepwater Texas inshore waters (Hildebrand, 1982; turtles, especially in nearshore waters, Horizon (Mississippi Canyon 252) oil Shaver, 1990). Cold stunning is a propeller and vessel collision injuries well blowout and uncontrolled release phenomenon during which turtles are also expected to rise. has had, and will have, on sea turtles in become incapacitated as a result of Marine pollution impacts, especially the Gulf of Mexico, including Northwest rapidly dropping water temperatures the ingestion of or entanglement in Atlantic Ocean DPS loggerheads. (Witherington and Ehrhart, 1989; plastic, is another significant In addition to the destruction or Morreale et al., 1992). As temperatures anthropogenic impact to loggerhead sea degradation of habitat, periodic fall below 8–10° C, turtles may lose their turtles. Studies have shown that dredging of sediments from navigational ability to swim and dive, often floating approximately 15 percent of post- channels can also result in incidental to the surface. The rate of cooling that hatchling loggerheads that emerge from mortality of sea turtles. Direct injury or precipitates cold stunning appears to be Florida beaches ingest plastics as they mortality of loggerheads by dredges has the primary threat, rather than the water forage during their first few weeks in the been well documented in the temperature itself (Milton and Lutz, pelagic environment. Even in small southeastern and mid-Atlantic United 2003). Sea turtles that overwinter in quantities, plastics can kill sea turtles States (National Research Council, inshore waters are most susceptible to due to obstruction of the esophagus or 1990). Solutions, including modification cold stunning, because temperature perforation of the bowel, as well as of dredges and time/area closures, have changes are most rapid in shallow water potentially reducing normal food intake. been successfully implemented to (Witherington and Ehrhart, 1989). More Several activities associated with reduce mortalities and injuries in the recent large-scale cold-stunning events offshore oil and gas production, United States (NMFS, 1991, 1995, 1997; have occurred in January 2010, and including oil spills, water quality Nelson and Shafer, 1996). December 2010/January 2011. Although (operational discharge), seismic surveys, The entrainment and entrapment of the vast majority of the sea turtles were explosive platform removal, platform loggerheads in saltwater cooling intake green turtles, some loggerheads were lighting, and noise from drillships and systems of coastal power plants has also impacted (Florida Fish and Wildlife production activities, are known to been documented in New Jersey, North Conservation Commission data). impact loggerheads (National Research Carolina, Florida, and Texas (Eggers, Another natural factor that has the Council, 1996; Minerals Management 1989; National Research Council, 1990; potential to affect recovery of Service, 2000; Gregg Gitschlag, NMFS, Carolina Power and Light Company, loggerhead sea turtles is aperiodic personal communication, 2007; Viada et 2003; Progress Energy Florida, Inc., hurricanes. In general, these events are al., 2008). Currently, there are 3,443 2003; Florida Power and Light Company episodic and, although they may affect federally regulated offshore platforms in and Quantum Resources, Inc., 2005). loggerhead hatchling production, the the Gulf of Mexico dedicated to natural Average annual incidental capture rates results are generally localized and they gas and oil production. Additional for most coastal plants from which rarely result in whole-scale losses over State-regulated platforms are located in captures have been reported amount to multiple nesting seasons. The negative State waters (Texas and Louisiana). several turtles per plant per year. One effects of hurricanes on low-lying and There are currently no active leases off notable exception is the St. Lucie developed shorelines may be longer- the Atlantic coast. Nuclear Power Plant located on lasting and a greater threat overall. Oil spills also threaten loggerheads in Hutchinson Island, Florida. During the Similar to other areas of the world, the Northwest Atlantic. Two oil spills first 15 years of operation (1977–1991), climate change and sea level rise have that occurred near loggerhead nesting an average of 128 loggerheads per year the potential to impact loggerheads in beaches in Florida were observed to was captured in the intake canal with a the Northwest Atlantic. These potential affect eggs, hatchlings, and nesting mortality rate of 6.4 percent. During impacts include beach erosion from females. Approximately 350,000 gallons 1991–2005, loggerhead captures more rising sea levels, repeated inundation of of fuel oil spilled in Tampa Bay in than doubled (average of 308 per year), nests, skewed hatchling sex ratios from August 1993 and was carried onto while mortality rates decreased to 0.3 rising incubation temperatures, and nesting beaches in Pinellas County. percent per year (Florida Power and abrupt disruption of ocean currents Observed mortalities included 31 Light Company and Quantum used for natural dispersal during the hatchlings and 176 oil-covered nests; an Resources, Inc., 2005). From 2005–2009, complex life cycle (Fish et al., 2005, additional 2,177 eggs and hatchlings numbers fluctuated in the 200+ to 400+ 2008; Hawkes et al., 2009; Poloczanska were either exposed to oil or disturbed range (Florida Power and Light et al., 2009). Climate change impacts by response activities (Florida Company and Quantum Resources, Inc. could have profound long-term impacts Department of Environmental Protection take database). Epperly et al. (2007) and on nesting populations in the Northwest et al., 1997). Another spill near the TEWG (2009) used this dataset, among Atlantic Ocean, but it is not possible to beaches of Broward County in August others, to demonstrate that an predict the impacts at this point in time. 2000 involved approximately 15,000 examination of all in-water research In summary, we find that the gallons of oil and tar (National Oceanic sites in the United States with data Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS of the and Atmospheric Administration and suitable for trend analysis was showing loggerhead sea turtle is negatively Florida Department of Environmental a similar increase. This suggests a affected by both natural and manmade Protection, 2002). Models estimated that possible juvenile population increase. impacts as described above in Factor E. approximately 1,500 to 2,000 hatchlings Although not a major source of Within Factor E, we find that fishery and 0 to 1 adult were injured or killed. mortality, cold stunning of loggerheads bycatch that occurs throughout the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58924 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

North Atlantic Ocean, particularly buildings claimed by the sea may throughout the region to reduce fishing bycatch mortality of loggerheads from present obstructions to nesting females. pressure (http://www.lme.noaa.gov). gillnet, longline, and trawl fisheries The threats to bottom habitat for Neritic/Oceanic Zones throughout their range in the Atlantic loggerheads include modification of the Ocean and Gulf of Mexico, is a Threats to habitat in the loggerhead habitat through bottom trawling. significant threat to the persistence of neritic and oceanic zones in the Trawling occurs off the European coast this DPS. In addition, boat strikes are Northeast Atlantic Ocean include and the area off Northwest Africa is one becoming more common, possibly as a fishing practices, marine pollution and of the most intensively trawled areas in result of increased boat traffic, increased climate change. Ecosystem alterations the world (Zeeberg et al., 2006). juvenile populations, or some have occurred due to the tremendous Trawling has been banned in the combination of both, and are possibly a human pressure on the environment in Azores, Madeira, and Canary Islands to significant threat to the persistence of the region. Turtles, including protect cold-water corals (Lutter, 2005). this DPS. loggerheads, usually are included in Although illegal, trawling also occurs in the Cape Verde Islands (Lo´pez-Jurado et Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS ecosystem models of the region (see Palomares and Pauly, 2004). In the al., 2003). The use of destructive fishing A. The Present or Threatened Canary Current Large Marine Ecosystem practices, such as explosives and toxic Destruction, Modification, or (LME), the area is characterized by the chemicals, has been reported in the Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range Global International Waters Assessment Canary Current area, causing serious damage to both the resources and the Terrestrial Zone as severely impacted in the area of modification or loss of ecosystems or habitat (Tayaa et al., 2005). Destruction and modification of ecotones and health impacts, but these In summary, we find that the loggerhead nesting habitat in the impacts are decreasing (http:// Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS of the Northeast Atlantic result from coastal www.lme.noaa.gov). The Celtic-Biscay loggerhead sea turtle is negatively development and construction, Shelf LME is affected by alterations to affected by ongoing changes in both its placement of erosion control structures the seabed, agriculture, and sewage terrestrial and marine habitats as a and other barriers to nesting, beachfront (Valde´s and Lavin, 2002). The Gulf of result of land and water use practices as lighting, vehicular and pedestrian considered above in Factor A. Within Guinea has been characterized as traffic, sand extraction, beach erosion, Factor A, we find that sand extraction severely impacted in the area of solid and beach pollution (Formia et al., and beachfront lighting on nesting wastes by the Global International 2003; Loureiro, 2008). beaches are significant threats to the Waters Assessment; this and other In the Northeast Atlantic, the only persistence of this DPS. We also find pollution indicators are increasing loggerhead nesting of note occurs in the that anthropogenic disruptions of (http://www.lme.noaa.gov). Marine Cape Verde Islands. The Cape Verde natural ecological interactions as a pollution, such as oil and debris, has government’s plans to develop Boa Vista result of fishing practices and marine been shown to negatively impact Island, the location of the main nesting pollution are likely a significant threat loggerheads and represent a degradation beaches, could increase the terrestrial to the persistence of this DPS. threats to loggerheads (van Bogaert, of the habitat (Oro´s et al., 2005, 2009; 2006). Sand extraction on Santiago Calabuig Miranda and Liria Loza, 2007). B. Overutilization for Commercial, Island, Cape Verde, may be responsible Climate change also may result in future Recreational, Scientific, or Educational for the apparent decrease in nesting trophic changes, thus impacting Purposes there (Loureiro, 2008). Both sand loggerhead prey abundance and Deliberate hunting of loggerheads for extraction and beachfront lighting have distribution. their meat, shells, and eggs still exists been identified as serious threats to the Additionally, fishing is a major source and remains the most serious threat continued existence of a nesting of ecosystem alteration of the neritic facing nesting turtles in the Northeast population on Santiago Island (Loureiro, and oceanic habitats of loggerhead sea Atlantic. Historical records indicate 2008). Scattered and infrequent nesting turtles in the region. Fishing effort off turtles were harvested throughout occurs in western Africa, where much the western African coast is increasing Macaronesia (see Lo´pez-Jurado, 2007). industrialization is located on the coast and record low biomass has been Intensive exploitation has been cited for and population growth rates fluctuate recorded for exploited resources, the extirpation of the loggerhead nesting between 0.8 percent (Cape Verde) and representing a decline in fish biomass colony in the Canary Islands (Lo´pez- 3.8 percent (Coˆte D’Ivoire) (Abe et al., by a factor of 13 since 1960 (see Jurado, 2007), and heavy human 2004; Tayaa et al., 2005). Land mines on Palomares and Pauly, 2004). predation on nesting and foraging some of the beaches of mainland Africa, Throughout the North Atlantic, fishery animals occurred on Santiago Island, within the reported historical range of landings fell by 90 percent during the Cape Verde, the first in the Archipelago nesting by loggerheads (e.g., the Western 20th century, foreboding a trophic to be settled (Loureiro, 2008), as well as Sahara region), would be detrimental to cascade and a change in food-web on Sal and Sao Vicente islands (Lo´pez- nesters and are an impediment to competition (Pauly et al., 1998; Jurado, 2007). Nesting loggerheads and scientific surveys of the region (Tiwari Christensen et al., 2003). For a eggs are still harvested at Boa Vista, et al., 2001). Tiwari et al. (2001) noted description of the exploited marine Cape Verde (Cabrera et al., 2000; Lo´pez- a high level of human use of many of resources in the region, see Lamboeuf Jurado et al., 2003). In 2007, over 1,100 the beaches in Morocco—enough that (1997). The Celtic-Biscay Shelf LME, the (36 percent) of the nesting turtles were any evidence of nesting activity would Iberian Coastal Ecosystem LME, the hunted, which is about 15 percent of the be quickly erased. Garbage litters many Canary Current LME, and the Guinea estimated adult female population developed beaches (Formia et al., 2003). Current LME all are severely overfished, (Marco et al., 2010). In 2008, the Erosion is a problem along the long and effort now is turning to a focus on military protected one of the major stretches of high energy ocean shoreline pelagic fisheries, whereas historically nesting beaches on Boa Vista where in of Africa and is further exacerbated by there were demersal fisheries. The 2007 55 percent of the mortality had sand mining and harbor building impacts continue to increase in the occurred; with the additional (Formia et al., 2003); crumbling Guinea Current LME despite efforts protection, only 17 percent of the turtles

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58925

on that beach were slaughtered (Roder loggerhead eggs in two nests in national and international governmental et al., in press). On Sal Island, 11.5 Mauritania by golden jackals (Canis and non-governmental entities in the percent of the emergences on aureus); a loggerhead sea turtle creating Northeast Atlantic are currently working unprotected beaches ended with a third nest also had been killed, with toward reducing loggerhead bycatch, mortality, whereas mortality was 3 meat and eggs eaten, but the predator and some positive actions have been percent of the emergences on protected was not identified. implemented, it is unlikely that this beaches (Cozens et al., in press). The Loggerheads in the Northeast Atlantic source of mortality can be sufficiently slaughter of nesting turtles is a problem also may be impacted by harmful algal reduced across the range of the DPS in wherever turtles nest in the Cape Verde blooms, which have been reported the near future because of the lack of Islands and may approach 100 percent infrequently in the Canary Islands and bycatch reduction in high seas fisheries in some places (C. Roder, Turtle the Iberian Coastal LME (Ramos et al., operating within the range of this DPS, Foundation, Mu¨ nsing, Germany, 2005; Akin-Oriola et al., 2006; Amorim lack of bycatch reduction in coastal personal communication, 2009; Cozens, and Dale, 2006; Moita et al., 2006; fisheries in Africa, the lack of in press). The meat and eggs are http://www.lme.noaa.gov). comprehensive information on fishing consumed locally as well as traded In summary, disease and predation distribution and effort, limitations on among the archipelago (C. Roder, Turtle are known to occur. The best available implementing demonstrated effective Foundation, Mu¨ nsing, Germany, data suggest these threats are potentially conservation measures, geopolitical personal communication, 2009). affecting the persistence of this DPS; complexities, limitations on Hatchlings are collected on Sal Island, however, quantitative data are not enforcement capacity, and lack of but this activity appears to be rare on sufficient to assess the degree of impact availability of comprehensive bycatch other islands of the archipelago (J. of these threats on the persistence of reduction technologies. Cozens, SOS Tartarugas, Santa Maria, this DPS. In summary, our review of regulatory Sal Island, Cape Verde, personal mechanisms under Factor D communication, 2009). Additionally, D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory demonstrates that although regulatory free divers target turtles for Mechanisms mechanisms are in place that should consumption of meat, often selectively International Instruments taking large males (Lo´pez-Jurado et al., address direct and incidental take of 2003). Turtles are harvested along the The BRT identified several regulatory Northeast Atlantic Ocean loggerheads, African coast and, in some areas, are mechanisms that apply to loggerhead these regulatory mechanisms are considered a significant source of food sea turtles globally and within the insufficient or are not being and income due to the poverty of many Northeast Atlantic Ocean. The reader is implemented effectively to address the residents along the African coast directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.7.4. of needs of loggerheads. We find that the (Formia et al., 2003). Loggerhead the Status Review for a discussion of threat from the inadequacy of existing carapaces are sold in markets in these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle regulatory mechanisms for harvest of Morocco and Western Sahara (Fretey, (2002) and Tiwari (2002) have reviewed turtles and eggs for human consumption 2001; Tiwari et al., 2001; Benhardouze the effectiveness of some of these (Factor B), fishery bycatch (Factor E), et al., 2004). international instruments. The problems and sand extraction and beachfront In summary, overutilization for with existing international treaties are lighting on nesting beaches (Factor A) is human consumption likely was a factor often that they have not realized their significant relative to the persistence of that contributed to the historical decline full potential, do not include some key this DPS. of this DPS. Current harvest of countries, do not specifically address sea turtle conservation, and are E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors loggerhead sea turtles and eggs for Affecting Its Continued Existence human consumption in both Cape Verde handicapped by the lack of a sovereign and along the African coast, as well as authority to enforce environmental Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear the sale of loggerhead carapaces in regulations. The ineffectiveness of markets in Africa, are a significant international treaties and national Loggerhead sea turtles strand threat to the persistence of this DPS. legislation is oftentimes due to the lack throughout the Northeast Atlantic of motivation or obligation by countries (Fretey, 2001; Tiwari et al., 2001; Duguy C. Disease or Predation to implement and enforce them. A et al., 2004, 2005; Witt et al., 2007), and The potential exists for diseases and thorough discussion of this topic is there are indications that the turtles endoparasites to impact loggerheads available in a special 2002 issue of the become entangled in nets and found in the Northeast Atlantic Ocean. Journal of International Wildlife Law monofilament and swallow hooks in the Spontaneous diseases documented in and Policy: International Instruments region (Oro´s et al., 2005; Calabuig the Northeast Atlantic include and Marine Turtle Conservation (Hykle, Miranda and Liria Loza, 2007). On the pneumonia, hepatitis, meningitis, 2002). European coasts, most stranded septicemic processes, and neoplasia loggerheads are small (mean of less than National Legislation and Protection (Oro´s et al., 2005). Pneumonia could 30 cm SCL), but a few are greater than result from the aspiration of water from Ongoing directed lethal take of 60 cm SCL (Witt et al., 2007). Similarly, forced submergence in fishing gear. The nesting females and eggs (Factor B), low Tiwari et al. (2001) and Benhardouze et authors also reported nephritis, hatching and emergence success al. (2004) indicated that the animals esophagitis, nematode infestation, and (Factors A, B, and C), and mortality of they viewed in Morocco and Western eye lesions. Fibropapillomatosis does juvenile and adult turtles from fishery Sahara were small juveniles and not appear to be an issue in the bycatch (Factor E) that occurs preliminary genetic analyses of stranded Northeast Atlantic. throughout the Northeast Atlantic turtles indicate that they are of western Nest depredation by ghost crabs Ocean is substantial. Currently, Atlantic origin (M. Tiwari, NMFS, and (Ocypode cursor) occurs in Cape Verde conservation efforts to protect nesting A. Bolten, University of Florida, (Lo´pez-Jurado et al., 2000). The ghost females are growing, and a reduction in unpublished data), whereas Fretey crabs feed on both eggs and hatchlings. this source of mortality is likely to (2001) reported that loggerheads Arvy et al. (2000) reported predation of continue in the near future. Although captured and stranded in Mauritania

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58926 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

were both juvenile and adult-sized Other Manmade and Natural Impacts longline and trawl fisheries, is a animals. Other anthropogenic impacts, such as significant threat to the persistence of Incidental capture of sea turtles in boat strikes and ingestion or this DPS. artisanal and commercial fisheries is a entanglement in marine debris, also Mediterranean Sea DPS threat to the survival of loggerheads in apply to loggerheads in the Northeast A. The Present or Threatened the Northeast Atlantic. Sea turtles may Atlantic. Propeller and boat strike Destruction, Modification, or be caught in a multitude of gears injuries have been documented in the Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range deployed in the region: pelagic and Northeast Atlantic (Oro´s et al., 2005; demersal longlines, drift and set Calabuig Miranda and Liria Loza, 2007). Terrestrial Zone gillnets, bottom and mid-water trawling, Exposure to crude oil is also of concern. In the Mediterranean, some areas weirs, haul and purse seines, pots and Loggerhead strandings in the Canary known to host nesting activity in the traps, cast nets, and hook and line gear Islands have shown evidence of past have been lost to turtles (e.g., (see Pascoe and Gre´boval, 2003; Bayliff hydrocarbon exposure as well as Malta) or severely degraded (e.g., Israel) et al., 2005; Tayaa et al., 2005; Dossa et ingestion of marine debris, such as (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). Destruction al., 2007). Fishing effort off the western plastic and monofilament (Oro´s et al., and modification of loggerhead nesting African coast has been increasing (see 2005; Calabuig Miranda and Liria Loza, habitat in the Mediterranean result from Palomares and Pauly, 2004). Impacts 2007), and in the Azores and elsewhere coastal development and construction, continue to increase in the Guinea plastic debris is found both on the placement of erosion control structures Current LME, but, in contrast, the beaches and floating in the waters and other barriers to nesting, beachfront impacts are reported to be decreasing in (Barrerios and Barcelos, 2001; Tiwari et lighting, vehicular and pedestrian the Canary Current LME (http:// al., 2001). Pollution from heavy metals traffic, sand extraction, beach erosion, www.lme.noaa.gov). Throughout the is a concern for the seas around the beach sand placement, beach pollution, region, fish stocks are depleted and Iberian Peninsula (European removal of native vegetation, and management authorities are striving to Environmental Agency, 1998) and in the planting of non-native vegetation Guinea Current LME (Abe et al., 2004). reduce the fishing pressure. (Baldwin, 1992; Margaritoulis et al., Bioaccumulation of metals in 2003). These activities may directly In the Northeast Atlantic, loggerheads, loggerheads has been measured in the impact the nesting success of particularly the largest size classes in Canary Islands and along the French loggerheads and survivability of eggs the oceanic environment (most of which Atlantic Coast (Caurant et al., 1999; and hatchlings. Nesting in the are small juveniles), are captured in Torrent et al., 2004). However, the Mediterranean almost exclusively surface longline fisheries targeting consequences of long-term exposure to occurs in the Eastern basin, with the swordfish (Ziphias gladius) and tuna heavy metals are unknown (Torrent et main concentrations found in Cyprus, (Thunnus spp.) (Ferreira et al., 2001; al., 2004). Greece, Turkey, and Libya Bolten, 2003). Bottom longlines in Natural environmental events, such as (Margaritoulis et al., 2003; Laurent et Madeira Island targeting black-scabbard climate change, could affect loggerheads al., 1999); therefore, the following (Aphanopus carbo) capture and kill in the Northeast Atlantic. Similar to threats to the nesting habitat are small juvenile loggerhead sea turtles as other areas of the world, climate change concentrated in these areas. the fishing depth does not allow hooked and sea level rise have the potential to The Mediterranean experiences a turtles to surface (Dellinger and impact loggerheads in the Northeast large influx of tourists during the Encarnac¸aˆo, 2000; Delgado et al., in Atlantic, and the changes may be further summer months, coinciding with the press). exacerbated by the burning of fossil nesting season. Margaritoulis et al. In United Kingdom and Irish waters, fuels and deforestation. This includes (2003) stated that extensive urbanization loggerhead bycatch is uncommon but beach erosion and loss from rising sea of the coastline, largely a result of has been noted in pelagic driftnet levels, skewed hatchling sex ratios from tourism and recreation, is likely the fisheries (Pierpoint, 2000; Rogan and rising beach incubation temperatures, most serious threat to loggerhead Mackey, 2007). Loggerheads have not and abrupt disruption of ocean currents nesting areas. The large numbers of been captured in pelagic trawls, used for natural dispersal during the tourists that use Mediterranean beaches demersal trawls, or gillnets in United complex life cycle (Hawkes et al., 2009; result in an increase in umbrellas, Poloczanska et al., 2009). Climate Kingdom and Irish waters (Pierpoint, chairs, garbage, and towels, as well as change impacts could have profound related hotels, restaurants, and 2000), but have been captured in nets long-term impacts on nesting stationary (e.g., street lights, hotels) and off France (Duguy et al., 2004, 2005). populations in the Northeast Atlantic moving (e.g., cars) lighting, all which International fleets of trawl fisheries Ocean, but it is not possible to quantify can impact sea turtle nesting success operate in Mauritania and have been the potential impacts at this point in (Demetropoulos, 2000). Further, the documented to capture sea turtles, time. Tropical and sub-tropical storms eastern Mediterranean is exposed to including loggerheads (Zeeberg et al., occasionally strike the area and could high levels of pollution and marine 2006). Despite being illegal, trawling have a negative impact on nesting, debris, in particular the nesting beaches occurs in the Cape Verde Islands and although such an impact would be of of Cyprus, Turkey, and Egypt (Camin˜ as, has the potential to capture and kill limited duration. 2004). loggerhead sea turtles; one piece of In summary, we find that the Construction and infrastructure abandoned trawl net washed ashore Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS of the development also have the potential to with eight live and two dead loggerhead sea turtle is negatively alter nesting beaches and subsequently loggerheads (Lo´pez-Jurado et al., 2003). affected by both natural and manmade impact nesting success. The Longlines, seines, and hook and line impacts as described above in Factor E. construction of new buildings on or have been documented to capture Within Factor E, we find that fishery near nesting beaches has been a problem loggerheads 35–73 cm SCL off the bycatch that occurs throughout the in Greece and Turkey (Camin˜ as, 2004). northwestern Moroccan coast Northeast Atlantic Ocean, particularly The construction of a jetty and (Benhardouze, 2004). bycatch mortality of loggerheads from waterworks around Mersin, Turkey, has

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58927

contributed significantly to the beaches, leaving deep ruts in the sand, habitat in internesting areas in the continuous loss of adjacent beach disturbing sea turtles trying to nest, and Mediterranean (Margaritoulis et al., (Camin˜ as, 2004). impacting hatchlings trying to reach the 2003). Further, the Mediterranean is a Beach erosion and sand extraction sea. site of intense tourist activity, and also pose a problem for sea turtle corresponding boat anchoring also may Neritic/Oceanic Zones nesting sites. The noted decline of the impact loggerhead habitat in the neritic nesting population at Rethymno, Island Threats to habitat in the loggerhead environment. of Crete, Greece, is partly attributed to neritic and oceanic zones in the In summary, we find that the beach erosion caused by construction on Mediterranean Sea include fishing Mediterranean Sea DPS of the the high beach and at sea (e.g., groins) practices, channel dredging, sand loggerhead sea turtle is negatively (Margaritoulis et al., 2009). A 2001 extraction, marine pollution, and affected by ongoing changes in both its survey of Lebanese nesting beaches climate change. Trawling occurs terrestrial and marine habitats as a found severe erosion on beaches where throughout the Mediterranean, most result of land and water use practices as previous nesting had been reported, and notably in areas off Albania, Algeria, considered above in Factor A. Within in some cases the beaches had Croatia, Egypt, France, Greece, Italy, Factor A, we find that coastal disappeared completely (Venizelos et Libya, Morocco, Slovenia, Spain, development, placement of barriers to al., 2005). Definitive causes of this Tunisia, and Turkey (Gerosa and Casale, nesting, beachfront lighting, and erosion erosion were found to be sand 1999; Camin˜ as, 2004; Casale, 2008). resulting from sand extraction, offshore extraction, offshore sand dredging, and This fishing practice has the potential to sand dredging, and sediment removal sediment removal from river beds for destroy bottom habitat in these areas. from river beds are significant threats to construction and military purposes. Fishing methods affect neritic zones by the persistence of this DPS. Beach erosion also may occur from not only impacting bottom habitat and B. Overutilization for Commercial, natural changes, with the same incidentally capturing loggerheads but Recreational, Scientific, or Educational deleterious effects to loggerhead nesting. also depleting fish populations, and Purposes On Patara, Turkey, beach erosion and thus altering ecosystem dynamics. For subsequent inundation by waves and example, depleted fish stocks in Mediterranean turtle populations shifting sand dunes are responsible for Zakynthos, Greece, likely contributed to were subject to severe exploitation until about half of all loggerhead nest losses predation of adult loggerheads by monk the mid-1960s (Margaritoulis et al., (Camin˜ as, 2004). Erosion can further be seals (Monachus monachus) 2003). Deliberate hunting of loggerheads exacerbated when native dune (Margaritoulis et al., 1996). Further, by for their meat, shells, and eggs is vegetation, which enhances beach depleting fish populations, the trophic reduced from previous exploitation stability and acts as an integral buffer dynamics will be altered, which may levels, but still exists. For example, zone between land and sea, is degraded then in turn affect the ability of Nada and Casale (2008) found that egg or destroyed. This in turn often leaves loggerheads to find prey resources. If collection (for individual consumption) insufficient nesting opportunities above loggerheads are not able to forage on the still occurs in Egypt. In some areas of the high tide line, and nests may be necessary prey resources, their long- the Mediterranean, like on the Greek washed out. In contrast, the planting or term survivability may be impacted. Island of Zakynthos, nesting beaches are invasion of less stabilizing, non-native Climate change also may result in future protected (Panagopoulou et al., 2008), plants can lead to increased erosion and trophic changes, thus impacting so egg harvest by humans in those areas degradation of suitable nesting habitat. loggerhead prey abundance and is likely negligible. Finally, sand extraction has been a distribution. Exploitation of juveniles and adults serious problem on Mediterranean Marine pollution, including direct still occurs in some Mediterranean nesting beaches, especially in Turkey contamination and structural habitat areas. In Tunisia, clandestine trade for (Tu¨ rkozan and Baran, 1996), Cyprus degradation, can affect loggerhead local consumption is still recorded, (Demetropoulos and neritic and oceanic habitat. As the despite prohibition of the sale of turtles Hadjichristophorou, 1989; Godley et al., Mediterranean is an enclosed sea, in fish markets in 1989 (Laurent et al., 1996), and Israel (Levy, 2003). organic and inorganic wastes, toxic 1996). In Egypt, turtles are sold in fish While the most obvious effect of effluents, and other pollutants rapidly markets despite prohibitive laws; of 71 nesting beach destruction and affect the ecosystem (Camin˜ as, 2004). turtles observed at fish markets in 1995 modification may be to the existence of The Mediterranean has been declared a and 1996, 68 percent were loggerheads the actual nests, hatchlings are also ‘‘special area’’ by the MARPOL (Laurent et al., 1996). Nada (2001) threatened by habitat alteration. In the Convention, in which deliberate reported 135 turtles (of which 85 Mediterranean, disorientation of petroleum discharges from vessels are percent were loggerheads) slaughtered hatchlings due to artificial lighting has banned, but numerous repeated offenses at the fish market of Alexandria in 6 been recorded mainly in Greece (Rees, are still thought to occur (Pavlakis et al., months (December 1998–May 1999). 2005; Margaritoulis et al., 2007, 2009), 1996). Some estimates of the amount of Based on observed sea turtle slaughters Turkey (Tu¨ rkozan and Baran, 1996), and oil released into the region are as high in 1995 and 1996, Laurent et al. (1996) Lebanon (Newbury et al., 2002). as 1,200,000 metric tons (Alpers, 1993). estimated that several thousand sea Additionally, vehicle traffic on nesting Direct oil spill events also occur as turtles were probably killed each year in beaches may disrupt the natural beach happened in Lebanon in 2006 when Egypt. More recently, a study found that environment and contribute to erosion, 10,000 to 15,000 tons of heavy fuel oil the open selling of sea turtles in Egypt especially during high tides or on spilled into the eastern Mediterranean generally has been curtailed due to narrow beaches where driving is (United Nations Environment enforcement efforts, but a high level of concentrated on the high beach and Programme, 2007). intentional killing for the black market foredune. On Zakynthos Island in Destruction and modification of or for direct personal consumption still Greece, Venizelos et al. (2006) reported loggerhead habitat also may occur as a exists (Nada and Casale, 2008). Given that vehicles drove along the beach and result of other activities. For example, the high numbers of turtles caught in sand dunes throughout the tourist underwater explosives have been this area, several hundred turtles are season on East Laganas and Kalamaki identified as a key threat to loggerhead currently estimated to be slaughtered

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58928 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

each year in Egypt (Nada and Casale, artificially high level of seagulls (Larus D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory 2008). This estimate likely includes spp.), which results in increased Mechanisms both juvenile and adult loggerheads, as predation pressure on hatchlings International Instruments Egyptian fish markets have been (Panagopoulou et al., 2008). Planting of documented selling different sized sea non-native plants also can have a The BRT identified several regulatory turtles. While the mean sea turtle size detrimental effect on nests in the form mechanisms that apply to loggerhead was 65.7 cm CCL (range 38–86.3 cm of roots invading eggs (e.g., tamarisk tree sea turtles globally and within the CCL; n = 48), 37.5 percent of observed (Tamarix spp.) roots invading eggs in Mediterranean Sea. The reader is loggerhead samples were greater than 70 Zakynthos, Greece) (Margaritoulis et al., directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.8.4. of cm CCL (Laurent et al., 1996). 2007). the Status Review for a discussion of In summary, overutilization for Predation on adult and juvenile these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle commercial purposes likely was a factor loggerheads has also been documented (2002) and Tiwari (2002) have reviewed that contributed to the historical in the Mediterranean. Predation of the effectiveness of some of these declines of this DPS. Current illegal nesting loggerheads by golden jackals international instruments. The problems harvest of loggerheads in Egypt for has been recorded in Turkey (Peters et with existing international treaties are human consumption continues as a al., 1994). During a 1995 survey of often that they have not realized their significant threat to the persistence of loggerhead nesting in Libya, two nesting full potential, do not include some key this DPS. females were found killed by carnivores, countries, do not specifically address probably jackals (Laurent et al., 1997). sea turtle conservation, and are C. Disease or Predation Off the sea turtle nesting beach of handicapped by the lack of a sovereign The potential exists for diseases and Zakynthos, Greece, adult loggerheads authority to enforce environmental endoparasites to impact loggerheads were found being predated upon by regulations. The ineffectiveness of found in the Mediterranean. Mediterranean monk seals (Monachus international treaties and national Endoparasites in loggerheads have been monachus). Of the eight predated turtles legislation is oftentimes due to the lack studied in the western Mediterranean. observed or reported, 62.5 percent were of motivation or obligation by countries While the composition of the adult males (Margaritoulis et al., 1996). to implement and enforce them. A gastrointestinal community of sea Further, stomach contents were thorough discussion of this topic is turtles is expected to include digeneans, examined from 24 Mediterranean white available in a special 2002 issue of the nematodes, and aspidogastreans, sharks (Carcharodon carcharias), and 17 Journal of International Wildlife Law loggerheads in the Mediterranean were percent contained remains of marine and Policy: International Instruments found to harbor only four digenean turtles, including two loggerheads, one and Marine Turtle Conservation (Hykle, species typical of marine turtles (Aznar green, and one unidentifiable turtle 2002). et al., 1998). There have been no records (Fergusson et al., 2000). One of the National Legislation and Protection of fibropapillomatosis in the loggerhead sea turtles ingested was a Mediterranean. While there is the juvenile with a carapace length of Fishery bycatch that occurs potential for disease in this area, approximately 60 cm (length not throughout the Mediterranean Sea (see information on the prevalence of such reported as either SCL or CCL). Factor E), as well as anthropogenic disease is lacking. Fergusson et al. (2000) report that white threats to nesting beaches (Factor A) and In the Mediterranean Sea, loggerhead shark interactions with sea turtles are eggs/hatchlings (Factors A, B, C, and E), hatchlings and eggs are subject to likely rare east of the Ionian Sea, and is substantial. Although conservation depredation by wild canids (i.e., foxes while the impact of shark predation on efforts to protect some nesting beaches (Vulpes vulpes), golden jackals (Canis turtle populations is unknown, it is are underway, more widespread and aureus)), feral/domestic dogs, and ghost probably small compared to other consistent protection is needed. crabs (Ocypode cursor) (Margaritoulis et sources of mortality. Although national and international al., 2003). Predators have caused the The Mediterranean is a low- governmental and non-governmental loss of 48.4 percent of loggerhead productivity body of water, with high entities in the Mediterranean Sea are clutches at Kyparissia Bay, Greece water clarity as a result. However, currently working toward reducing (Margaritoulis, 1988), 70–80 percent at harmful algal blooms do occur in this loggerhead bycatch, it is unlikely that Dalyan Beach, Turkey (Erk’akan, 1993), area (e.g., off Algeria in 2002), and the this source of mortality can be 36 percent (includes green turtle problem is particularly acute in sufficiently reduced across the range of clutches) in Cyprus (Broderick and enclosed ocean basins such as the the DPS in the near future because of Godley, 1996), and 44.8 percent in Libya Mediterranean. In the northern Adriatic the lack of bycatch reduction in (Laurent et al., 1995). A survey of the Sea, fish kills have occurred as a result commercial and artisanal fisheries Syrian coast in 1999 found 100 percent of noxious phytoplankton blooms and operating within the range of this DPS, nest predation, mostly due to stray dogs anoxic conditions (Mediterranean Sea the lack of comprehensive information and humans (Venizelos et al., 2005). LME). While fish may be more on fishing distribution and effort, Loggerhead eggs are also depredated by susceptible to these harmful algal limitations on implementing insect larvae in Cyprus (McGowan et al., blooms, loggerheads in the demonstrated effective conservation 2001), Turkey (O¨ zdemir et al., 2004), Mediterranean also may be impacted by measures, geopolitical complexities, and Greece (Lazou and Rees, 2006). such noxious or toxic phytoplankton to limitations on enforcement capacity, Ghost crabs have been reported preying some extent. and lack of availability of on loggerhead hatchlings in northern In summary, nest and hatchling comprehensive bycatch reduction Cyprus and Egypt, suggesting 66 percent predation likely was a factor that technologies. of emerging hatchlings succumb to this contributed to the historical decline of In summary, our review of regulatory mortality source (Simms et al., 2002). this DPS. The best available data suggest mechanisms under Factor D Predation also has been influenced by that current nest and hatchling demonstrates that although regulatory anthropogenic sources. On Zakynthos, predation on several Mediterranean mechanisms are in place that should Greece, a landfill site next to loggerhead nesting beaches is a significant threat to address direct and incidental take of nesting beaches has resulted in an the persistence of this DPS. Mediterranean Sea loggerheads, these

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58929

regulatory mechanisms are insufficient gear type is discussed below. There is level of sea turtle bycatch, with over or are not being implemented effectively growing evidence that artisanal/small 10,000 turtle captures per year for each to address the needs of loggerheads. We vessel fisheries (set gillnet, bottom country, and Greece, Malta, Libya, and find that the threat from the inadequacy longline, and part of the pelagic longline Tunisia each catch 1,000 to 3,000 turtles of existing regulatory mechanisms for fishery) may be responsible for a per year (Casale, 2008). Available data fishery bycatch (Factor E) and impacts comparable or higher number of suggest the annual number of to nesting beach habitat (Factor A) is captures with higher mortality rates loggerhead sea turtle captures by all significant relative to the persistence of than the commercial/large vessel Mediterranean pelagic longline fisheries this DPS. fisheries (Casale, 2008) as previously may be greater than 50,000 (Casale, suggested by indirect clues (Casale et 2008). Note that these are not E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors al., 2005b). necessarily individual turtles, as the Affecting Its Continued Existence Mediterranean fish landings have same sea turtle can be captured more Other anthropogenic and natural increased steadily since the 1950s, but than once. factors affecting loggerhead survival the FAO 10-year capture trend from Mortality estimates in the pelagic include incidental bycatch in fisheries, 1990–1999 shows stable landings longline fishery at gear retrieval appear vessel collisions, marine pollution, (Mediterranean LME, http:// to be lower than in some other types of climate change, and cyclonic storm www.lme.noaa.gov). However, stable gear (e.g., set gillnet). Although limited events. Fishing practices alone have fish landings may result from stable to observations of direct mortality at been estimated to result in over 150,000 fishing effort at the same catch rates, or gear retrieval, Carreras et al. (2004) sea turtle captures per year, with higher fishing effort at lower catch rates. found mortality to be low (0–7.7 approximately 50,000 mortalities As fish stocks in the Mediterranean are percent) in the longline fishery off the (Casale, 2008; Lucchetti and Sala, 2009), being depleted (P. Casale, MTSG–IUCN Balearic Islands, and Jribi et al. (2008) and sea turtle bycatch in multiple gears Italy, personal communication, 2009), reported 0 percent direct mortality in in the Mediterranean is considered fishing effort in some areas may be the southern Tunisia surface longline among the most urgent conservation increasing to catch the available fish. fishery. These estimates are consistent priorities globally (Wallace et al., 2010). This trend has not yet been verified with those found in other areas; direct The only estimation of loggerhead throughout the Mediterranean, but mortality was estimated at 4.3 percent survival probabilities in the fishing pressures may be increasing in Greece (n = 23), 0 percent in Italy (n Mediterranean was calculated by using even though landings appear stable. = 214), and 2.6 percent in Spain (n = capture-mark-recapture techniques from Longline Fisheries. In the 676) (Laurent et al., 2001). However, 1981–2003 (Casale et al., 2007b). Of the Mediterranean, pelagic longline considering injured turtles and those 3,254 loggerheads tagged, 134 were fisheries targeting swordfish (Ziphias released with hooks, the potential for recaptured at different sites throughout gladius) and albacore (Thunnus mortality is likely much higher. Based the Mediterranean. Most recaptured alalunga) may be the primary source of upon observations of hooked loggerhead animals were juveniles (mean 54.4 cm loggerhead bycatch. It appears that most sea turtles in captivity, Aguilar et al. CCL; range 25–88 cm CCL), but the of the incidental captures occur in the (1995) estimated 20–30 percent of study did not delineate between western and central portions of the area animals caught in longline gear may juvenile life stages. This research (Demetropoulos and eventually die. More recently, Casale et estimated a loggerhead annual survival Hadjichristophorou, 1995). The most al. (2008b) reported, given variations in probability of 0.73 (95 percent severe bycatch in the Mediterranean hook position affecting survivability, the confidence intervals; 0.67–0.78), occurs around the Balearic Islands mortality rate of turtles caught by recognizing that there are where 1,950–35,000 juveniles are caught pelagic longlines could be higher than methodological limitations of the annually in the surface longline fishery previously thought (17–42 percent; technique used. Nonetheless, Casale et (Mayol and Castello´ Mas, 1983; Lewison et al., 2004). Considering direct al. (2007c) stated that assuming a Camin˜ as, 1988, 1997; Aguilar et al., and post-release mortality, Casale (2008) natural survivorship no higher than 0.95 1995). Specifically, the following used a conservative approach to arrive and a tag loss rate of 0.1, a range of 0.1– regions have reported annual estimates at 40 percent for the average mortality 0.2 appears reasonable for the additional of total turtle bycatch from pelagic from Mediterranean pelagic longlines. human induced mortality (from all longlines: Spain—17,000 to 35,000 The result is an estimated 20,000 turtles sources). turtles (Aguilar et al., 1995; Camin˜ as et killed per year by pelagic longlines al., 2003); Italy (Ionian Sea)—1,084 to (Casale, 2008). Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear 4,447 turtles (Deflorio et al., 2005); In general, most of the turtles Incidental capture of sea turtles in Morocco—3,000 turtles (Laurent, 1990); captured in the Mediterranean surface artisanal and commercial fisheries is a Greece—280 to 3,310 turtles (Panou et longline fisheries are juvenile animals significant threat to the survivability of al., 1999; Kapantagakis and Lioudakis, (Aguilar et al., 1995; Panou et al., 1999; loggerheads in the Mediterranean. Sea 2006); Italy (Lampedusa)—2,100 turtles Camin˜ as et al., 2003; Casale et al., turtles may be caught in pelagic and (Casale et al., 2007c); Malta—1,500 to 2007c; Jribi et al., 2008), but some adult demersal longlines, drift gillnets, set 2,500 turtles (Gramentz, 1989); South loggerhead bycatch is also reported. gillnets and trammel nets, bottom and Tunisia (Gulf of Gabe`s)—486 turtles Considering data from many mid-water trawls, seines, dredges, traps/ (Jribi et al., 2008); and Algeria—300 Mediterranean areas and research pots, and hook and line gear. In a 2004 turtles (Laurent, 1990). studies, the average size of turtles FAO Fisheries Report, Camin˜ as (2004) For the entire Mediterranean pelagic caught by pelagic longlines was 48.9 cm stated that the main fisheries affecting longline fishery, an extrapolation CCL (range 20.5–79.2 cm CCL; n = 1868) sea turtles in the Mediterranean Sea (at resulted in a bycatch estimate of 60,000 (Casale, 2008). Specifically, in the that time) were Spanish and Italian to 80,000 loggerheads in 2000 (Lewison Spanish surface longline fishery, 13 longline, North Adriatic Italian, et al., 2004). Further, a more recent percent of estimated carapace sizes (n = Tunisian, and Turkish trawl, and paper used the best available 455) ranged from 75.36 to 107 cm CCL, Moroccan and Italian driftnet. Available information to estimate that Spain, considered to be adult animals (Camin˜ as information on sea turtle bycatch by Morocco, and Italy have the highest et al., 2003), and in the Ionian Sea, 15

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58930 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

percent of a total 157 loggerhead sea evaluation of turtles tagged then Fisheries Commission for the turtles captured in swordfish longlines recaptured in gillnets along the Italian Mediterranean prohibited driftnet were adult animals (estimated size at coast found 14 of 19 loggerheads (73.7 fishing in 1997; a total ban on driftnet greater than or equal to 75 cm) (Panou percent) to be dead (Argano et al., 1992). fishing by the European Union fleet in et al., 1999). Gillnets off France were observed to the Mediterranean went into effect in Bottom longlines are also fished in the capture six loggerheads with a 50 2002; and ICCAT banned driftnets in Mediterranean, but specific capture percent mortality rate (Laurent, 1991). 2003. Nevertheless, there are an rates for loggerheads are largely Six loggerheads were recovered in estimated 600 illegal driftnet vessels unknown for many areas. The countries gillnets off Croatia between 1993 and operating in the Mediterranean, with the highest number of documented 1996; 83 percent were found dead including fleets based in Algeria, captures (in the thousands per year) are (Lazar et al., 2000). Off the Balearic France, Italy, Morocco, and Turkey Tunisia, Libya, Greece, Turkey, Egypt, Islands, 196 sea turtles were estimated (Environmental Justice Foundation, Morocco, and Italy (Casale, 2008). to be captured in lobster trammel nets 2007). In particular, the Moroccan fleet, Available data suggest the annual in 2001, with a CPUE of 0.17 turtles per operating in the Alboran Sea and Straits number of loggerhead sea turtle captures vessel (Carreras et al., 2004). Mortality of Gibraltar, comprises the bulk of (not necessarily individual turtles) by estimates for this artisanal lobster Mediterranean driftnetting, and has all Mediterranean demersal longliners trammel net fishery ranged from 78 to been found responsible for high may be greater than 35,000 (Casale, 100 percent. Given this mortality rate bycatch, including loggerhead sea 2008). Given available information and and the number of turtles reported in turtles (Environmental Justice using a conservative approach, mortality lobster trammel nets, Carreras et al. Foundation, 2007; Aksissou et al., from bottom longlines may be at least (2004) estimate that a few thousand 2010). Driftnet fishing in the equal to pelagic longline mortality (40 loggerhead sea turtles are killed Mediterranean, and accompanying percent; Casale, 2008). The result is an annually by lobster trammel nets in the threats to loggerhead sea turtles, estimated 14,000 turtles killed per year whole western Mediterranean. continues to occur. in Mediterranean bottom longlines Considering data throughout the entire Trawl Fisheries. Sea turtles are known (Casale, 2008). It is likely that these Mediterranean, as well as a conservative to be incidentally captured in trawls in animals represent mostly juvenile approach, Casale (2008) considered Albania, Algeria, Croatia, Egypt, France, loggerheads, Casale (2008) reported an mortality by set nets to be 60 percent, Greece, Italy, Libya, Morocco, Slovenia, average turtle size of 51.8 cm CCL (n = with a resulting estimate of 16,000 Spain, Tunisia, and Turkey (Gerosa and 35) in bottom longlines based on turtles killed per year. Most of these Casale, 1999; Camin˜ as, 2004; Casale, available data throughout the animals are likely juveniles; Casale 2008). Laurent et al. (1996) estimated Mediterranean. (2008) evaluated available set net catch that approximately 10,000 to 15,000 sea Artisanal longline fisheries also have data throughout the Mediterranean and turtles (most of which are loggerheads) the potential to take sea turtles. A found an average size of 45.4 cm CCL are captured by bottom trawling in the survey of 54 small boat (4–10 meter (n = 74). length) artisanal fishermen in Cyprus As noted above, artisanal set net entire Mediterranean. More recently, and Turkey resulted in an estimated fisheries also may capture numerous sea Casale (2008) compiled available trawl minimum bycatch of over 2,000 turtles turtles, as observed off Cyprus and bycatch data throughout the per year, with an estimated 10 percent Turkey (Godley et al., 1998a). Mediterranean and reported that Italy mortality rate (Godley et al., 1998a). Driftnet Fisheries. Historically, and Tunisia have the highest level of sea These small boats fished with a driftnet fishing in the Mediterranean turtle bycatch, potentially over 20,000 combination of longlines and trammel/ caught large numbers of sea turtles. An captures per year combined, and gillnets. However, note that it is likely estimated 16,000 turtles were captured Croatia, Greece, Turkey, Egypt, and that a proportion (perhaps a large annually in the Ionian Sea driftnet Libya each catch more than 2,000 turtles proportion) of the turtle bycatch fishery in the 1980s (De Metrio and per year. Further, Spain and Albania estimated in this study are green turtles. Megalofonou, 1988). The United may each capture a few hundred sea Set Net (Gillnet) Fisheries. As in other Nations established a worldwide turtles per year (Casale, 2008). Available areas, sea turtles have the potential to moratorium on driftnet fishing effective data suggest the annual number of sea interact with set nets (gillnets or in 1992, but unregulated driftnetting turtle captures by all Mediterranean trammel nets) in the Mediterranean. continued to occur in the trawlers may be greater than 40,000 Mediterranean set nets refer to gillnets Mediterranean. For instance, a bycatch (Casale, 2008). Although juveniles are (a single layer of net) and trammel nets, estimate of 236 loggerhead sea turtles incidentally captured in trawl gear in which consist of three layers of net with was developed for the Spanish many areas of the Mediterranean (Casale different mesh size. Casale (2008) swordfish driftnet fishery in 1994 et al., 2004, 2007c; Jribi et al., 2007), estimated that the countries with the (Silvani et al., 1999). While the Spanish adult turtles are also found. In Egypt, 25 highest number of loggerhead captures fleet curtailed activity in 1994, the percent of loggerheads captured in (in the thousands per year) are Tunisia, Moroccan, Turkish, French, and Italian bottom trawl gear (n = 16) were greater Libya, Greece, Turkey, Cyprus, and driftnet fleets continued to operate. than or equal to 70 cm CCL, and in Croatia. Italy, Morocco, Egypt, and Tudela et al. (2005) presented bycatch Tunisia, 26.2 percent (n = 62) were of France likely have high capture rates as rates for driftnet fisheries in the Alboran this larger size class (Laurent et al., well. Available information suggests the Sea and off Italy. The Moroccan Alboran 1996). Off Lampedusa Island, Italy, the annual number of loggerhead captures Sea driftnet fleet bycatch rate ranged average size of turtles caught by bottom by Mediterranean set nets may be from 0.21 to 0.78 loggerheads per haul, trawlers was 51.8 cm CCL (range 22–87 greater than 30,000 (Casale, 2008). whereas the Italian driftnet fleet had a cm CCL; n = 368), and approximately 10 Due to the nature of the gear and lower bycatch rate of 0.046 to 0.057 percent of the animals measured greater fishing practices (e.g., relatively long loggerheads per haul (Di Natale, 1995; than 75 cm CCL (Casale et al., 2007c). soak times), incidental capture in Camin˜ as, 1997; Silvani et al., 1999). The For all areas of the Mediterranean, gillnets is among the highest source of use of driftnets in the Mediterranean Casale (2008) reported that medium to direct sea turtle mortality. An continues to be illegal: the General large turtles are generally caught by

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:56 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58931

bottom trawl gear (mean 53.9 cm CCL; artisanal gear types on sea turtles have concentrations (mercury, cadmium, and range 22–87 cm CCL; n = 648). not been estimated. lead) to be higher in loggerheads than green turtles. Even so, concentrations of While there is a notable interaction Other Manmade and Natural Impacts rate in the Mediterranean, it appears contaminants from sea turtles in that the mortality associated with Other anthropogenic threats, such as Mediterranean waters were found to be trawling is relatively low. Incidents of interactions with recreational and comparable to other areas, generally mortality have ranged from 3.3 percent commercial vessels, marine pollution, with levels lower than concentrations (n = 60) in Tunisia (Jribi et al., 2007) and intentional killing, also impact shown to cause deleterious effects in and 3.3 percent (n = 92) in France loggerheads found in the Mediterranean. other species (Godley et al., 1999; (Laurent, 1991) to 9.4 percent (n = 32) Propeller and collision injuries from Mckenzie et al., 1999). However, lead in Italy (Casale et al., 2004). Casale et al. boats and ships are becoming more concentrations in some Mediterranean (2004) found that mortality would be common in sea turtles, although it is loggerhead hatchlings were at levels higher if all comatose turtles were unclear as to whether the events are known to cause toxic effects in other assumed to die. It also should be noted increasing or just the reporting of the vertebrate groups (Godley et al., 1999). that the mortality rate in trawls depends injuries. Speedboat impacts are of As in other areas of the world, on the duration of the haul, with longer particular concern in areas of intense intentional killing or injuring of sea haul durations resulting in higher tourist activity, such as Greece and turtles has been reported to occur in the mortality rates (Henwood and Stuntz, Turkey. Losses of nesting females from Mediterranean. Of 524 strandings in 1987; Sasso and Epperly, 2006). Jribi et vessel collisions have been documented Greece, it appeared that 23 percent had al. (2007) stated that the low recorded in Zakynthos and Crete in Greece been intentionally killed or injured ˜ mortality in the Gulf of Gabe`s is likely (Caminas, 2004). In the Gulf of Naples, (Kopsida et al., 2002). While some 28.1 percent of loggerheads recovered due to the short haul durations in this turtles incidentally captured are used from 1993–1996 had injuries attributed area. Based on available information for consumption, it has been reported to boat strikes (Bentivegna and from multiple areas of the that some fishermen kill the sea turtles Paglialonga, 1998). Along the Greece Mediterranean, and assuming that they catch for a variety of other reasons, coastline from 1997–1999, boat strikes comatose animals die if released in that including non-commercial use, were reported as a seasonal condition, the overall average mortality hostility, prejudice, recovery of hooks, phenomenon in stranded turtles rate for bottom trawlers was estimated and ignorance (Laurent et al., 1996; (Kopsida et al., 2002), but numbers were to be 20 percent (Casale, 2008). This Godley et al., 1998a; Gerosa and Casale, not presented. results in at least 7,400 turtles killed per 1999; Casale, 2008). Direct or indirect disposal of Natural environmental events also year by bottom trawlers in all of the anthropogenic debris introduces may affect loggerheads in the Mediterranean, but the number is likely potentially lethal materials into Mediterranean. Cyclonic storms that more than 10,000 (Casale, 2008). loggerhead foraging habitats. closely resemble tropical cyclones in Mid-water trawling may have less Unattended or discarded nets, floating satellite images occasionally form over total impact on sea turtles found in the plastics and bags, and tar balls are of the Mediterranean Sea (Emanuel, 2005). Mediterranean than some other gear particular concern (Camin˜ as, 2004; While hurricanes typically do not occur types, but interactions still occur. Casale Margaritoulis, 2007). Monofilament in the Mediterranean, researchers have et al. (2004) found that while no turtles netting appears to be the most suggested that climate change could were caught on observed mid-water dangerous waste produced by the trigger hurricane development in this trawl trips in the North Adriatic Sea, fishing industry (Camin˜ as, 2004). In the area in the future (Gaertner et al., 2007). vessel captains reported 13 sea turtles Mediterranean, 20 of 99 loggerhead sea Any significant storm event that may captured from April to September. turtles examined from Maltese fisheries develop could disrupt loggerhead Considering total fishing effort, these were found contaminated with plastic nesting activity and hatchling reports resulted in a minimum total or metal litter and hydrocarbons, with production, but the results are generally catch estimate of 161 turtles a year in crude oil being the most common localized and rarely result in whole- the Italian mid-water trawl fishery. Off pollutant (Gramentz, 1988). Of 54 scale losses over multiple nesting Turkey, 71 loggerheads were captured juvenile loggerhead sea turtles seasons. in mid-water trawls from 1995–1996, incidentally caught by fisheries in Similar to other areas of the world, while 43 loggerheads were incidentally Spanish Mediterranean waters, 79.6 climate change and sea level rise have taken in bottom trawls (Oruc¸, 2001). In percent had debris in their digestive the potential to impact loggerheads in this same study, of a total 320 turtles tracts (Toma´s et al., 2002). In this study, the Mediterranean. Over the long term, captured in mid-water trawls plastics were the most frequent type of Mediterranean turtle populations could (loggerheads and greens combined), 95 marine debris observed (75.9 percent), be threatened by the alteration of percent were captured alive and followed by tar (25.9 percent). However, thermal sand characteristics (from apparently healthy. While the total an examination of stranded sea turtles global warming), resulting in the catch numbers throughout the in Northern Cyprus and Turkey found reduction or cessation of female Mediterranean have not been estimated, that only 3 of 98 animals were affected hatchling production (Camin˜ as, 2004; mid-water trawl fisheries do present a by marine debris (Godley et al., 1998b). Hawkes et al., 2009; Poloczanska et al., threat to loggerhead sea turtles. Pollutant waste in the marine 2009). Further, a significant rise in sea Other Gear Types. Seine, dredge, trap/ environment may impact loggerheads, level would restrict loggerhead nesting pot, and hook and line fisheries operate likely more than other sea turtle species. habitat in the eastern Mediterranean. in Mediterranean waters and may affect Omnivorous loggerheads stranded in In summary, we find that the loggerhead sea turtles, although Cyprus, Greece, and Scotland had the Mediterranean Sea DPS of the incidental captures in these gear types highest organochlorine contaminant loggerhead sea turtle is negatively are largely unknown (Camin˜ as, 2004). concentrations, as compared to green affected by both natural and manmade Artisanal fisheries using a variety of and leatherback turtles (Mckenzie et al., impacts as described above in Factor E. gear types also have the potential for sea 1999). In northern Cyprus, Godley et al. Within Factor E, we find that fishery turtle takes, but the effects of most (1999) found heavy metal bycatch that occurs throughout the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:56 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58932 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

Mediterranean Sea, particularly bycatch al., 1999). It is impossible to assess 2006). Use of bycaught loggerheads for mortality of loggerheads from pelagic whether this structured habitat has subsistence and medicinal purposes is and bottom longline, set net, driftnet, resulted in long-term changes to the likely to occur in southern Atlantic and trawl fisheries, is a significant loggerhead nesting rookery in northern Africa, based on information from threat to the persistence of this DPS. In Bahia. central West Africa (Fretey, 2001; Fretey addition, boat strikes are becoming more Neritic/Oceanic Zones et al., 2007). common and are likely also a significant In summary, the harvest of threat to the persistence of this DPS. Human activities that impact bottom loggerheads in Brazil for their meat, habitat in the loggerhead neritic and South Atlantic Ocean DPS shells, and eggs likely was a factor that oceanic zones in the South Atlantic contributed to the historical decline of A. The Present or Threatened Ocean include fishing practices, this DPS. However, current harvest Destruction, Modification, or channel dredging, sand extraction, levels are greatly reduced from Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range marine pollution, and climate change historical levels. Although harvest is (e.g., Ibe, 1996; Silva et al., 1997). Terrestrial Zone known to still occur in Brazil and General human activities have altered southern Atlantic Africa, it no longer Destruction and modification of ocean ecosystems, as identified by appears to be a significant threat to the loggerhead nesting habitat in the South ecosystem models (http:// persistence of this DPS. Atlantic result from coastal www.lme.noaa.gov). On the western development and construction, side of the South Atlantic, the Brazil C. Disease or Predation placement of erosion control structures Current LME region is characterized by The potential exists for diseases and and other barriers to nesting, beachfront the Global International Waters endoparasites to impact loggerheads lighting, vehicular and pedestrian Assessment as suffering severe impacts found in the South Atlantic Ocean. traffic, sand extraction, beach erosion, in the areas of pollution, coastal habitat There have been five confirmed cases of beach sand placement, beach pollution, modification, and overexploitation of fibropapillomatosis in loggerheads in removal of native vegetation, and fish stocks (Marques et al., 2004). The Brazil (Baptistotte, 2007). There is no planting of non-native vegetation Patagonian Shelf LME is moderately indication that this disease poses a (D’Amato and Marczwski, 1993; affected by pollution, habitat major threat for this species in the Marcovaldi and Marcovaldi, 1999; Naro- modification, and overfishing (Mugetti eastern South Atlantic (Formia et al., Maciel et al., 1999; Marcovaldi et al., et al., 2004). On the eastern side of the 2007). 2002b, 2005; Marcovaldi, 2007). South Atlantic, the Benguela Current Eggs and nests in Brazil experience The primary nesting areas for LME has been characterized as depredation, primarily by foxes loggerheads in the South Atlantic are in moderately impacted in the area of (Marcovaldi and Laurent, 1996). Nests the States of Sergipe, Bahia, Espı´rito overfishing, with future conditions laid by loggerheads in the southern Santo, and Rio de Janeiro in Brazil expected to worsen by the Global Atlantic African coastline, if any, likely (Marcovaldi and Marcovaldi, 1999). International Waters Assessment experience similar predation pressures These primary nesting areas are (Prochazka et al., 2005). Climate change to those on nests of other species laid monitored by Projeto TAMAR, the also may result in future trophic in the same area (e.g., jackals depredate national sea turtle conservation program changes, thus impacting loggerhead green turtle nests in Angola; Weir et al., in Brazil. Since 1980, Projeto TAMAR prey abundance and distribution. 2007). has worked to establish legal protection In summary, we find that the South Loggerheads in the South Atlantic for nesting beaches (Marcovaldi and Atlantic Ocean DPS of the loggerhead also may be impacted by harmful algal Marcovaldi, 1999). As such, human sea turtle is negatively affected by blooms (Gilbert et al., 2005). activities, including sand extraction, ongoing changes in its marine habitats In summary, disease and predation beach nourishment, seawall as a result of land and water use are known to occur. The best available construction, beach driving, and practices as considered above in Factor data suggest these threats are potentially artificial lighting, that can negatively A. The best available data suggest that affecting the persistence of this DPS; impact sea turtle nesting habitat, as well threats to neritic and oceanic habitats however, quantitative data are not as directly impact nesting turtles and are potentially affecting the persistence sufficient to assess the degree of impact their eggs and hatchlings during the of this DPS; however, sufficient data are of these threats on the persistence of reproductive season, are restricted by not available to assess the significance this DPS. various State and Federal laws of these threats to the persistence of this (Marcovaldi and Marcovaldi, 1999; DPS. D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Marcovaldi et al., 2002b, 2005). Mechanisms Nevertheless, tourism development in B. Overutilization for Commercial, International Instruments coastal areas in Brazil is high, and Recreational, Scientific, or Educational Projeto TAMAR works toward raising Purposes The BRT identified several regulatory awareness of turtles and their Deliberate hunting of loggerheads for mechanisms that apply to loggerhead conservation needs through educational their meat, shells, and eggs is reduced sea turtles globally and within the South and informational activities at their from previous exploitation levels, but Atlantic Ocean. The reader is directed to Visitor Centers that are dispersed still exists. Limited numbers of eggs are sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.9.4. of the Status throughout the nesting areas taken for human consumption in Brazil, Review for a discussion of these (Marcovaldi et al., 2005). but the relative amount is considered regulatory mechanisms. Hykle (2002) In terms of non-native vegetation, the minor when compared to historical rates and Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the majority of nesting beaches in northern of egg collection (Marcovaldi and effectiveness of some of these Bahia, where loggerhead nesting density Marcovaldi, 1999; Marcovaldi et al., international instruments. The problems is highest in Brazil (Marcovaldi and 2005; Almeida and Mendes, 2007). Use with existing international treaties are Chaloupka, 2007), have coconut of sea turtles including loggerheads for often that they have not realized their plantations dating back to the 17th medicinal purposes occasionally occurs full potential, do not include some key century backing them (Naro-Maciel et in northeastern Brazil (Alves and Rosa, countries, do not specifically address

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58933

sea turtle conservation, and are significant threat to the survivability of available on bycatch of loggerheads in handicapped by the lack of a sovereign loggerheads in the South Atlantic. Sea coastal fisheries, although loggerheads authority to enforce environmental turtles may be caught in pelagic and are known (or strongly suspected) to regulations. The ineffectiveness of demersal longlines, drift and set occur in coastal waters from Gabon to international treaties and national gillnets, bottom and mid-water trawling, South Africa (Fretey, 2001; Bal et al., legislation is oftentimes due to the lack fishing dredges, pound nets and weirs, 2007; Weir et al., 2007). Coastal of motivation or obligation by countries haul and purse seines, pots and traps, fisheries implicated in bycatch of to implement and enforce them. A and hook and line gear. In the western loggerheads and other turtles include thorough discussion of this topic is South Atlantic, there are various efforts gillnets, beach seines, and trawlers (Bal available in a special 2002 issue of the aimed at mitigating bycatch of sea et al., 2007). Journal of International Wildlife Law turtles in various fisheries. In Brazil, In the high seas, longlines are used by and Policy: International Instruments there is the National Action Plan to fishing boats targeting tuna and and Marine Turtle Conservation (Hykle, Reduce Incidental Capture of Sea swordfish in the eastern South Atlantic. 2002). Turtles in Fisheries, coordinated by A recent study by Honig et al. (2008) Projeto TAMAR (Marcovaldi et al., estimates 7,600–120,000 sea turtles are National Legislation and Protection 2006). This action plan focuses on both incidentally captured by commercial Fishery bycatch that occurs artisanal and commercial fisheries, and longlines fishing in the Benguela throughout the South Atlantic Ocean is collects data directly from fishers as Current LME; 60 percent of these are substantial (see Factor E). Although well as on-board observers. Although loggerheads. Petersen et al. (2007, 2009) national and international governmental loggerheads have been observed as reported that the rate of loggerhead and non-governmental entities on both bycatch in all fishing gear and methods bycatch in South African longliners was sides of the South Atlantic are currently identified above, Marcovaldi et al. around 0.02 turtles/1,000 hooks, largely working toward reducing loggerhead (2006) have identified longlining as the in the Benguela Current LME. In the bycatch in the South Atlantic, it is major source of incidental capture of middle of the South Atlantic, unlikely that this source of mortality loggerhead sea turtles. Reports of loggerhead bycatch by longlines was can be sufficiently reduced across the loggerhead bycatch by pelagic longlines reported to be low, relative to other range of the DPS in the near future come mostly from the southern portion regions in the Atlantic (Mejuto et al., because of the diversity and magnitude of the Brazilian Exclusive Economic 2008). of the commercial and artisanal fisheries Zone, between 20° S. and 35° S. Other Manmade and Natural Impacts operating in the South Atlantic, the lack latitude. Bugoni et al. (2008) reported a of comprehensive information on Other anthropogenic impacts, such as loggerhead bycatch rate of 0.52 juvenile boat strikes and ingestion or fishing distribution and effort, turtles/1,000 hooks by surface longlines limitations on implementing entanglement in marine debris, also targeting dolphinfish. Pinedo and apply to loggerheads in the South demonstrated effective conservation Polacheck (2004) reported seasonal Atlantic. Bugoni et al. (2001) have measures, geopolitical complexities, variation in bycatch of juvenile suggested the ingestion of plastic and oil limitations on enforcement capacity, loggerheads (and other sea turtle may contribute to loggerhead mortality and lack of availability of species) by pelagic longlines in the same on the southern coast of Brazil. Plastic comprehensive bycatch reduction region of Brazil, with the highest rates marine debris in the eastern South technologies. (1.85 turtles/1,000 hooks) in the austral Atlantic also may pose a problem for In the primary nesting areas in the spring. Kotas et al. (2004) reported the loggerheads and other sea turtles (Ryan, States of Sergipe, Bahia, Espı´rito Santo, highest rates of loggerhead bycatch 1996). Similar to other areas of the and Rio de Janeiro in Brazil, human (greater than 10 turtles/1,000 hooks) by world, climate change and sea level rise activities, including sand extraction, pelagic longlines in the austral summer/ have the potential to impact loggerheads beach nourishment, seawall fall months. A study based on several in the South Atlantic. This includes construction, beach driving, and years found that the highest rate of beach erosion and loss from rising sea artificial lighting, are restricted by loggerhead bycatch in pelagic longlines levels, repeated inundation of nests, various State and Federal laws off Uruguay and Brazil was in the late skewed hatchling sex ratios from rising (Marcovaldi and Marcovaldi, 1999; austral summer month of February: 2.72 beach incubation temperatures, and Marcovaldi et al., 2002b, 2005). turtles/1,000 hooks (Lo´pez-Medilaharsu abrupt disruption of ocean currents In summary, our review of regulatory et al., 2007). Sales et al. (2008) reported used for natural dispersal during the mechanisms under Factor D a loggerhead bycatch rate of 0.87/1,000 complex life cycle (Hawkes et al., 2009; demonstrates that although regulatory hooks near the Rio Grande Elevacao do Poloczanska et al., 2009). Climate mechanisms are in place that should Rio Grande, about 600 nautical miles off change impacts could have profound address direct and incidental take of the coast of southern Brazil. In long-term impacts on nesting South Atlantic Ocean loggerheads, these Uruguayan waters, the primary fisheries populations in the South Atlantic regulatory mechanisms are insufficient with loggerhead bycatch are bottom Ocean, as is the case for all DPSs, but or are not being implemented effectively trawlers and longlines (Domingo et al., at this time we cannot predict what to address the needs of loggerheads. We 2006). Domingo et al. (2008) reported those impacts may be. find that the threat from the inadequacy bycatch rates of loggerheads of 0.9–1.3/ Oil reserve exploration and extraction of existing regulatory mechanisms for 1,000 hooks by longline deployed south activities also may pose a threat for sea fishery bycatch (Factor E) is significant of 30° S. latitude. In waters off turtles in the South Atlantic. Seismic relative to the persistence of this DPS. Argentina, bottom trawlers also catch surveys in Brazil and Angola have E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors some loggerheads (Domingo et al., recorded sea turtle occurrences near the Affecting Its Continued Existence 2006). seismic work (Gurja˜o et al., 2005; Weir In the eastern South Atlantic, sea et al., 2007). While no sea turtle takes Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear turtle bycatch in fisheries has been were directly observed on these surveys, Incidental capture of sea turtles in documented from Gabon to South Africa increased equipment and presence in artisanal and commercial fisheries is a (Fretey, 2001). Limited data are the water that is associated with these

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58934 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

activities also increases the likelihood of approach is based on matrix models, the hindered precise assessment of the sea turtle interactions (Weir et al., 2007). BRT referred to it as a threat matrix status of any DPS. Within the range of Natural environmental events may analysis. This approach focused on how possible ages at first reproduction of the affect loggerheads in the South Atlantic. additional mortalities may affect the species, however, some DPSs could However, while a rare hurricane hit future growth and recovery rate of a decline rapidly regardless of the exact Brazil in March 2004, typically loggerhead sea turtle DPS. The first age at first reproduction because of high hurricanes do not occur in the South approach (SQE) was solely based on the anthropogenic mortality. Atlantic (McTaggart-Cowan et al., 2006). available time-series data on the Second, the lack of precise estimates This is generally due to higher numbers of nests at nesting beaches, of anthropogenic mortalities resulted in windspeeds aloft, preventing the storms whereas the second approach (threat a wide range of possible status using the from gaining height and therefore matrix analysis) was based on the threat matrix analysis. For the best case strength. known biology of the species, natural scenario, a DPS may be considered In summary, we find that the South mortality rates, and anthropogenic healthy, whereas for the worst case Atlantic Ocean DPS of the loggerhead mortalities, independent of observed scenario the same DPS may be sea turtle is negatively affected by both nesting beach data. considered as declining rapidly. The natural and manmade impacts as The BRT found that for three of five precise prognosis of each DPS relies on described above in Factor E. Within DPSs with sufficient data to conduct the obtaining precise estimates of Factor E, we find that fishery bycatch, SQE analysis (North Pacific Ocean, anthropogenic mortality and vital rates. particularly bycatch mortality of South Pacific Ocean, and Northwest Third, the assessment of a population loggerheads from pelagic longline Atlantic Ocean), these DPSs were at risk without the information on natural and fisheries, is a significant threat to the of declining to levels that are less than anthropogenic mortalities is difficult. persistence of this DPS. 30 percent of the current numbers of Because of the longevity of the species, loggerhead sea turtles require high Supplemental Extinction Risk nesting females (QETs <0.30). The BRT survival rates throughout their life to Assessments found that for the other two DPSs with sufficient data to conduct the SQE maintain a population. Anthropogenic In addition to the status evaluation analysis (Southwest Indian Ocean and mortality on the species occurs at every and Section 4(a)(1) 5-factor analysis South Atlantic Ocean), the risk of stage of their life, where the exact provided above, the BRT conducted two declining to any level of quasi- magnitude of the mortality is often independent analyses to further assess extinction is negligible using the SQE unknown. As described in the Status extinction risks of the nine identified analysis because of the observed Review, the upper end of natural DPSs. Although these analyses provided increases in the nesting females in both mortality can be computed from some additional insights into the status DPSs. There were not enough data to available information. of the nine DPSs, ultimately the conduct the SQE analysis for the North Nesting beach count data for the conclusions and determinations made Indian Ocean, Southeast Indo-Pacific North Pacific Ocean DPS indicated a were primarily based on an assessment Ocean, Northeast Atlantic Ocean, and decline of loggerhead sea turtle nesting of population sizes and trends, current Mediterranean Sea DPSs. It is important in the last 20 years. The SQE approach and anticipated threats, and to note that the BRT’s analysis was not reflected the observed decline. conservation efforts for each DPS. based on the actual population size at However, in the threat matrix analysis, The first analysis used the diffusion the end of the 100-year projection the asymptotic population growth rates approximation approach based on time period, but was based on reaching a (λ) with anthropogenic mortalities series of counts of nesting females certain proportion (2.5 and 97.5 percent) ranged from less than one to greater (Lande and Orzack, 1988; Dennis et al., of the current population size. Thus, it than one, indicating a large uncertainty 1991; Holmes, 2001; Snover and is possible to greatly diminish a about the future of the DPS. Fishery Heppell, 2009). This analysis provided population but still have a large bycatch along the coast of the Baja a metric (SQE) to determine if the population size after 100 years. Peninsula and the nearshore waters of probability of a population’s risk of According to the threat matrix Japan are the main known sources of quasi-extinction is high enough to analysis using a majority of experts’ mortalities. Mortalities in the high-seas, warrant a particular listing status opinions in the matrix model where a large number of juvenile (Snover and Heppell, 2009). The term framework, the BRT determined that all loggerhead sea turtles reside (Kobayashi ‘‘quasi-extinction’’ is defined by loggerhead sea turtle DPSs have the et al., 2008), from fishery bycatch are Ginzburg et al. (1982) as the minimum potential to decline in the future. still unknown. number of individuals (often females) Although some DPSs are indicating The SQE approach indicated that, below which the population is likely to increasing trends at nesting beaches based on nest count data from the mid- be critically and immediately imperiled. (Southwest Indian Ocean and South 1970s through the early to mid-2000s, The diffusion approximation approach Atlantic Ocean), available information the South Pacific Ocean DPS is at risk is based on stochastic projections of about anthropogenic threats to juvenile and thus likely to decline in the future. observed trends and variability in the and adult loggerheads in neritic and These results were based on recently numbers of mature females at various oceanic environments indicate possible published nesting census data for nesting beaches. The second analysis unsustainable additional mortalities. loggerhead sea turtles at index beaches used a deterministic stage-based According to the threat matrix analysis, in eastern Australia (Limpus, 2009). The population model that focused on the potential for future decline is threat matrix analysis provided determining the effects of known greatest for the North Indian Ocean, uncertain results: in the case of the anthropogenic mortalities on each DPS Northwest Atlantic Ocean, Northeast lowest anthropogenic threats, the South with respect to the vital rates of the Atlantic Ocean, Mediterranean Sea, and Pacific Ocean DPS may recover, but in species. Anthropogenic mortalities were South Atlantic Ocean DPSs. the worst-case scenario, the DPS may added to natural mortalities and The BRT’s approach to the risk substantially decline in the future. possible ranges of population growth analysis presented several important These results are largely driven by the rates were computed as another metric points. First, the lack of precise ongoing threats to juvenile and adult of population health. Because this estimates of age at first reproduction loggerheads from fishery bycatch that

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58935

occur throughout the South Pacific Recovery Unit (comprising large-scale management actions Ocean and the uncertainty in estimated approximately 80 percent of the (Domingo et al., 2006). mortalities. Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS) Conservation Efforts For the North Indian Ocean DPS, reaching 1,000 or fewer females in 100 there were no nesting beach data years. This revised analysis was done by When considering the listing of a available to conduct the SQE analysis. the same member of the BRT that species, section 4(b)(1)(A) of the ESA The threat matrix analysis indicated a performed the original SQE analysis. requires us to consider efforts by any decline of the DPS in the future, The threat matrix analysis indicated a State, foreign nation, or political primarily as a result of fishery bycatch likely decline of the DPS in the future. subdivision of a State or foreign nation in neritic habitats. Cumulatively, The greatest threats to the DPS result to protect the species. Such efforts substantial threats may exist for eggs/ from cumulative fishery bycatch in would include measures by Native hatchlings. Because of the lack of neritic and oceanic habitats. American tribes and organizations. precise estimates of bycatch, however, Sufficient nesting beach data for the Also, Federal, tribal, State, and foreign λ the range of possible values was large. Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS were not recovery actions (16 U.S.C. 1533(f)), and Similar to the North Indian Ocean available to conduct the SQE analysis. Federal consultation requirements (16 DPS, no nesting beach data were The high likelihood of the predicted U.S.C. 1536) constitute conservation available for the Southeast Indo-Pacific decline of the Northeast Atlantic Ocean measures. In addition to identifying Ocean DPS. The level of anthropogenic DPS from the threat matrix analysis is these efforts, under the ESA and our mortalities is low for the Southeast largely driven by the ongoing harvest of policy implementing this provision (68 Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS, based on the nesting females, low hatchling and FR 15100; March 28, 2003) we must best available information, resulting in emergence success, and mortality of evaluate the certainty of an effort’s λ effectiveness on the basis of whether the relatively large Pl (the proportion of juvenile and adult turtles from fishery effort or plan establishes specific values greater than 1) and a narrow bycatch throughout the Northeast conservation objectives; identifies the range. The greatest threats for the Atlantic Ocean. The threat matrix necessary steps to reduce threats or Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS exist analysis indicated a consistently for the first year of the life stages (eggs factors for decline; includes quantifiable pessimistic future for the DPS. and hatchlings). performance measures for the For the Southwest Indian Ocean DPS, Representative nesting beach data for monitoring of compliance and the SQE approach, based on a 37-year the Mediterranean Sea DPS were not effectiveness; incorporates the time series of nesting female counts at available to conduct the SQE analysis. principles of adaptive management; is Tongaland, South Africa (1963–1999), The threat matrix analysis indicated the likely to be implemented; and is likely indicated this segment of the DPS is likely to decline in the future. to improve the species’ viability at the population, while small, has increased, The primary threats are fishery bycatch time of the listing determination. and the likelihood of quasi-extinction is in neritic and oceanic habitats. North Pacific Ocean DPS negligible. The threat matrix analysis, The two approaches for determining on the other hand, provided a wide risks to the South Atlantic Ocean DPS NMFS has formalized two range of results: In the best case provided different, although not conservation actions to protect foraging scenario, the DPS would grow slowly, incompatible, results. The SQE loggerheads in the North Pacific Ocean, whereas in the worst case scenario, the approach indicated that, based on nest both of which were implemented to DPS would decline in the future. The count data for the past 2 decades, the reduce loggerhead bycatch in U.S. results of the threat matrix analysis were population was unlikely to decline in fisheries. Prior to 2001, the Hawaii- driven by uncertainty in anthropogenic the future. These results were based on based longline fishery had annual mortalities in the neritic environment recently published nesting beach trend interaction levels of 300 to 500 and the eggs/hatchlings stage. analyses by Marcovaldi and Chaloupka loggerhead sea turtles. The temporary Within the Northwest Atlantic Ocean (2007) and this QET analysis was closure of the shallow-set swordfish DPS, four of the five identified recovery consistent with their conclusions. fishery in 2001 in large part over units have adequate time series data for However, the SQE approach was based concerns of turtle interactions brought applying the original SQE analysis; on past performance of the DPS, about the immediate need to develop these are the Northern, Peninsular specifically only nesting beach data, and effective solutions to reduce turtle Florida, Northern Gulf of Mexico, and did not address ongoing or future interactions while maintaining the Greater Caribbean Recovery Units. The threats to segments of the DPS that viability of the industry. Since the original SQE analysis indicated might not have been or might not yet be reopening of the swordfish sector in differences in SQEs among these four reflected by nest count data. The threat 2004, the fishery has operated under recovery units. Although the Northern matrix approach indicated that the strict management measures, including Gulf of Mexico Recovery Unit indicated South Atlantic Ocean DPS is likely to the use of large circle hooks and fish the worst result among the four recovery decline in the future. These results were bait, restricted annual effort, annual units assessed the length of the time largely driven by the ongoing mortality caps on loggerhead interactions (17 series was shortest (12 data points). The threats to juvenile turtles from fishery annually), and 100 percent onboard other three recovery units, however, bycatch that occurs throughout the observer coverage (50 CFR 665.3). As a appeared to show similar declining South Atlantic Ocean. Although result of these measures, loggerhead trends, which were indicated through conservation efforts by national and interactions in the swordfish fishery the SQE approach. A revision of the international groups in the South have been reduced by over 90 percent SQE analysis, however, had different Atlantic are currently working toward (Gilman et al., 2007). Furthermore, in results. Including nesting data through mitigating bycatch in the South 2003, NMFS implemented a time/area 2009 instead of just 2007, and redoing Atlantic, it is unlikely that this source closure in southern California during the analysis to use a range of adult of mortality can be greatly reduced in forecasted or existing El Nin˜ o-like female abundance estimates as QETs, it the near future, largely due to conditions to reduce the take of was determined that there was little risk inadequate funding and knowledge gaps loggerheads in the California/Oregon (SQE <0.3) of the Peninsular Florida that together inhibit implementation of drift gillnet fishery (68 FR 69962;

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58936 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

December 16, 2003). While this closure receive the protection they are afforded migration routes, inter-nesting and has not been implemented since the by Mexican law. The task force is foraging habitats, and other relevant passage of these regulations due to the comprised of Federal and State biological information of sea turtles in lack of conditions occurring in the area, agencies, in addition to non- the region; investigation of the such a closure is expected to reduce governmental organizations, to address interaction between fisheries activities interactions between the large-mesh the bycatch problem, meeting and sea turtle mortality; and an gillnet fishery and loggerheads by over ProCaguama’s bottom-up initiatives assessment of the effectiveness of the 70 percent. NMFS has also developed a with complementary top-down use of TEDs and circle hooks in mapping product known as TurtleWatch management and enforcement reducing sea turtle mortality (SEAFDEC that provides a near real time product resources. In 2009, while testing a 2009, 2010). Since 2003, with the that recommends areas where the variety of potential solutions, assistance of the United States, the Sea deployment of pelagic longline shallow ProCaguama’s fisher-scientist team Turtle Association of Japan and, in sets should be avoided to help reduce demonstrated the commercial viability recent years with the Grupo Tortuguero, interactions between Hawaii-based of substituting bycatch-free hook fishing has conducted nesting beach monitoring pelagic longline fishing vessels and for gillnet fishing. Local fishers are and management at several major loggerhead sea turtles (Howell et al., interested in adoption of this gear loggerhead nesting beaches, with the 2008). because the technique results in higher intent of increasing the number of Loggerhead interactions and quality catch offering access to higher- beaches surveyed and protected. Due to mortalities with coastal fisheries in value markets and potentially higher logistical problems and costs, the Sea Mexico and Japan are of concern and are sustainability with zero bycatch. Turtle Association of Japan’s program considered a major threat to North ProCaguama, in coordination with the had been limited to five primary Pacific loggerhead recovery. NMFS and task force, is working to develop a rookeries. At these areas, hatchling U.S. non-governmental organizations market-based bycatch solution production has been augmented have worked with international entities consisting of hook substitution, training through: (1) Relocation of doomed nests; to: (1) Assess bycatch mortality through to augment ex-vessel fish value, and (2) protection of nests in situ from systematic stranding surveys in Baja development of fisheries infrastructure, trampling, desiccation, and predation. California Sur, Mexico; (2) reduce linkage of local fleets with regional and Between 2004 and 2008, management interactions and mortalities in two international markets, and concurrent activities have been successful with bottom-set fisheries in Mexico; (3) strengthening of local fisheries over 160,000 hatchlings released from conduct gear mitigation trials to reduce management. relocated nests that would have bycatch in Japanese pound nets; and (4) The United States has also funded otherwise been lost to inundation or convey information to fishers and other non-governmental organizations to erosion, with many more hatchlings stakeholders through participatory convey bycatch solutions to local fishers produced from in situ nests. activities, events and outreach. as well as to educate communities on The United States plans to continue In 2003, the Grupo Tortuguero’s the protection of all sea turtles (i.e., supporting this project in the ProCaguama (Operation Loggerhead) reduce directed harvest). The foreseeable future, increasing relocation was initiated to partner directly with effectiveness of these efforts are difficult activities at other high-density nesting fishermen to assess and mitigate their to quantify without several post- beaches, implementing predator control bycatch while maintaining fisheries outreach years of documenting activities to reduce predation by sustainability in Baja California, reductions in sea turtle strandings, raccoon dogs and raccoons, and Mexico. ProCaguama’s fisher-scientist directed takes, or bycatch in local assessing the effects of light pollution at team discovered the highest turtle fisheries. a major nesting beach (Maehama Beach). bycatch rates documented worldwide Due to concerns of high adult Determination of hatching success will and has made considerable progress in loggerhead mortality in mid-water also be initiated at several key nesting mitigating anthropogenic mortality in pound nets, as documented in 2006, Sea beaches (Inakahama, Maehama, Yotsuse, Mexican waters (Peckham et al., 2007, Turtle Association of Japan researchers and Kurio, all in Yakushima) to provide 2008). As a result of the 2006 and 2007 began to engage the pound net operators information to support the removal of tri-national fishermen’s exchanges run in an effort to study the impact and armoring structures and to evaluate the by ProCaguama, Sea Turtle Association reduce sea turtle bycatch. This work success of relocation and other nest of Japan, and the Western Pacific was expanded in 2008 with U.S. protection activities. Outreach and Fisheries Management Council, in 2007 support and, similar to outreach efforts education activities in coastal cities will a prominent Baja California Sur fleet in Mexico, is intended to engage local increase public awareness of problems retired its bottom-set longlines fishermen in conservation throughout with foot traffic, light pollution, and (Peckham et al., 2008; Peckham and several Japanese prefectures. Research armoring. Maldonado-Diaz, in press). Prior to this opportunities will be developed with Egg harvest was common in Japan closure, the longline fleet interacted and for local fishermen in order to until the 1970s, when several of the with an estimated 1,160–2,174 assess and mitigate bycatch. major nesting areas (notably Yakushima loggerheads annually, with nearly all The Southeast Asian Fisheries and Miyazaki) led locally based efforts (89 percent) of the takes resulting in Development Center (SEAFDEC), an to ban or eliminate egg harvest. As a mortalities (Peckham et al., 2008). intergovernmental organization result, egg harvest at Japanese nesting Because this fleet no longer interacts established in 1967 to promote beaches was eliminated by the early with loggerheads, conservation efforts sustainable fisheries development, also 1980s. have resulted in the continued has made progress in managing sea The establishment of the Sea Turtle protection of approximately 1,160–2,174 turtle bycatch in the North Pacific Association of Japan in 1990 created a juvenile loggerheads annually. region. SEAFDEC activities include network of individuals and Led by the Mexican wildlife service research for the enhancement of sea organizations conducting sea turtle (Vida Silvestre), a Federal loggerhead turtle populations that is comprised of monitoring and conservation activities bycatch reduction task force was a sea turtle tagging and satellite in Japan for the first time. The Sea organized in 2008 to ensure loggerheads telemetry study aimed at determining Turtle Association of Japan also served

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58937

to standardize data collection methods implementation of the use of circle Coastal trawl fisheries also threaten (for tagging and measuring). The hooks in longline fisheries operating in juvenile and adult loggerheads foraging Association greatly depends on its the North Pacific Ocean is necessary, as off eastern Australia, particularly the members around Japan to gather nesting well as understanding fishery related northern Australian prawn fishery data as well as to conduct various impacts in the South China Sea. (estimated to take between 5,000 and conservation measures. Further, it is suspected that there are 6,000 turtles annually in the late 1980s/ Shoreline erosion and bycatch are substantial impacts from illegal, early 1990s). However, since the some of the major concerns the Sea unreported, and unregulated fishing, introduction and requirement for these Turtle Association of Japan is dealing which we are unable to mitigate without fisheries to use TEDs in 2000, that threat with today. Much of Japan’s coastline is additional fisheries management efforts has been drastically reduced, to an ‘‘armored’’ using concrete structures to and international collaborations. While estimated 200 turtles/year (Robins et al., prevent and minimize impacts to coastal conservation projects for this population 2002a). TEDs were also made mandatory communities from natural disasters. have been in place since 2004 for some in the Queensland East Coast trawl These structures have resulted in a important areas, efforts in other areas fisheries (2000), the Torres Strait prawn number of nesting beaches losing sand are still being developed to address fishery (2002), and the Western suitable for sea turtle nesting, and nests major threats, including fisheries Australian prawn and scallop fisheries are often relocated to safe areas or bycatch and long-term nesting habitat (2002) (Limpus, 2009). hatcheries to protect them from further protection. Predation of loggerhead eggs by foxes erosion and inundation. In recent years, was a major threat to nests laid in a portion of the concrete structures at a South Pacific Ocean DPS eastern Australia through the late 1970s, beach in Toyohashi City, Aichi The New Caledonia Aquarium and particularly on Mon Repos and Wreck Prefecture, was experimentally removed NMFS have collaborated since 2007 to Rock. Harassment by local residents and to create better nesting habitat. The Sea address and influence management researchers, as well as baiting and Turtle Association of Japan, along with measures of the regional fishery shooting, discouraged foxes from various other organizations in Japan, are management organization. Their intent encroaching on the nesting beach at carrying out discussions with local and is to reduce pelagic fishery interactions Mon Repos so that by the mid-1970s Federal Government agencies to develop with sea turtles through increased predation levels had declined to trivial further solutions to the beach erosion understanding of pelagic habitat use by levels. At Wreck Rock, fox predation issue and to maintain viable nesting South Pacific loggerheads using satellite was intense through the mid-1980s, sites. Beach erosion and armament still telemetry, oceanographic analysis, and with a 90–95 percent predation rate remain one of the most significant juvenile loggerheads reared at the documented. Fox baiting was threats to nesting beaches in Japan. Aquarium. NMFS augments this effort introduced at Wreck Rock and some While conservation efforts for the by supporting animal husbandry, adjacent beaches in 1987, and has been North Pacific Ocean DPS are substantive successful at reducing the predation rate education and outreach activities and improving and may be reflected in to low levels by the late 1990s (Limpus, coordinated through the New Caledonia the recent increases in the number of 2009). To reduce the risk of hatchling Aquarium to build capacity, and public nesting females, they still remain disorientation due to artificial lighting awareness regarding turtle conservation inadequate to ensure the long-term inland of the nesting beaches adjacent to in general. viability of the population. For example, Mon Repos and Heron Island, low while most of the major nesting beaches The United States has collaborated on pressure sodium vapor lights have been are monitored, some of the management at-sea conservation of sea turtles with installed or, where lighting has not been measures in place are inadequate and Chile under the US–Chile Fisheries controlled, eggs are relocated to may be inappropriate. On some beaches, Cooperation Agreement, and with Peru artificial nests on nearby dark beaches. hatchling releases are coordinated with in collaboration with El Instituto del Limpus (2009) reported that hatchling the tourist industry or nests are being Mar del Peru and local non- mortality due to altered light horizons trampled on or are unprotected. The governmental organizations. Research on the Woongara coast has been reduced largest threat on the nesting beach, from this collaboration showed that to a handful of clutches annually. reduced availability of habitat due to loggerheads of southwestern Pacific Since the Great Barrier Reef’s listing heavy armament and subsequent stock origin interact with commercial on the United Nations Educational, erosion, is just beginning to be and artisanal longline fisheries off the Scientific and Cultural Organization’s addressed but without immediate South American coast. NMFS has World Heritage List in 1981, protection attention may ultimately result in the supported efforts by Chile to reduce of habitats within the GBRWHA has demise of the highest density beaches. bycatch and mortality by placing increased, with the current zone-based Efforts to reduce loggerhead bycatch in observers that have been trained and management plan enacted in 2004 known coastal fisheries off Baja equipped to dehook, resuscitate, and (Dryden et al., 2008). Nesting habitat California, Mexico, and Japan is release loggerheads on vessels. Since protection has also increased with the encouraging, but concerns remain 2002, Chile also has closed the addition of indigenous co-management regarding the mortalities of adult and northernmost sector where the plans and ecotourism regulations at juvenile turtles in mid-water pound nets loggerheads interactions occur to Mon Repos (M. Hamann, James Cook and the high costs that may be involved longline fishing (Miguel Donoso, University, personal communication, in replacing or mitigating this gear. With Pacifico Laud, personal communication, 2010). these coastal fishery threats still 2009). Local non-governmental While most of the conservation efforts emerging, there has not yet been organizations, such as Pacifico Laud for the South Pacific Ocean DPS are sufficient time—or a nationwide (Chile), Associacion Pro Delphinus long-term, substantive, and improving, understanding of the threat—to develop (Peru), and Areas Costeras y Recursos given the low number of nesting appropriate conservation strategies or Marinos (Peru), have been engaged in females, the declining trends, and major work to fully engage with the outreach and conservation activities threats that are just beginning to be government of Japan. Greater promoting loggerhead bycatch addressed, they still remain inadequate international cooperation and reduction, with support from NMFS. to ensure the long-term viability of the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58938 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

population. The use of TEDs in most of The remaining 50 kilometers of fisheries. There is no information on the major trawl fisheries in Australia loggerhead nesting beaches are not bycatch from fisheries off the main has certainly reduced the bycatch of protected from egg harvest, lighting, or nesting beaches other than reports that juvenile and adult turtles, as has the beach driving. Currently, MECA is in this bycatch occurs. A comprehensive reduction in fox predation on important the process of developing a protected conservation program for this nesting beaches. However, the intense area proposal for Masirah Island that population is under development, but is effort by longline fisheries in the South will address needed protection of incomplete relative to fisheries bycatch Pacific, particularly from artisanal fleets nesting beaches, including protection and long-term nesting habitat operating out of Peru, and its estimated from egg collection and beach driving. protection. impact on this loggerhead population, In the meantime, development is Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS particularly oceanic juveniles, remains a continuing and it is uncertain how significant threat that is just beginning much, when, and if nesting habitat will The level of anthropogenic mortalities to be addressed by most participating receive adequate protection. MECA is is low for the Southeast Indo-Pacific countries, including the regional fishery beginning to regulate artificial lighting Ocean DPS, based on the best available management council(s) that manages in new development. In 2010, a major information. However, there are many many of these fleets. Modeling by outreach effort in the form of a Turtle known opportunities for conservation Chaloupka (2003) showed the impact of Celebration Day is planned at Masirah efforts that would aid recovery. Some this fleet poses a greater risk than either Island to raise greater awareness of the significant conservation efforts are fox predation at major nesting beaches local communities about the global underway. (90 percent egg loss per year during importance of the Masirah Island One of the principal nesting beaches unmanaged periods) or past high loggerhead nesting population and to for this DPS, Australia’s Dirk Hartog mortalities in coastal trawl fisheries. increase community involvement in Island, is part of the Shark Bay World The recent sea turtle conservation conservation efforts. Nesting surveys are Heritage Area and recently became part resolution by the Western and Central also being conducted on the Halaniyat of Australia’s National Park System. Pacific Fisheries Commission, requiring Islands. There are no specific efforts This designation may facilitate longline fleets to use specific gear and underway to designate Halaniyat monitoring of nesting beaches and collect information on bycatch, is nesting beaches as Protected Areas in enforcement of prohibitions on direct encouraging but took effect in January the face of proposed development plans. take of loggerheads and their eggs. 2010, so improvement in the status of Although important management Loggerheads are listed as Endangered this population may not be realized for actions are underway on the nesting under Australia’s Environment many years. Potentially important beaches, their effectiveness has yet to be Protection and Biodiversity pelagic foraging habitat in areas of high determined and the potential for strong Conservation Act of 1999. fishing intensity remains poorly studied habitat protection and restoration of Conservation efforts on nesting but is improving through U.S. and degraded nesting habitat remains beaches have included invasive international collaborations. While a uncertain. At present, hatchling predator control. On the North West comprehensive conservation program production is not measured. Cape and the beaches of the Ningaloo for this population has been in place for The only research that has been coast of mainland Australia, a long important nesting beaches, efforts in conducted on the nesting population to established feral European red fox other areas are still being developed to date was a study of internesting and (Vulpes vulpes) population preyed address major threats, including post-nesting movements conducted in heavily on eggs and is thought to be fisheries bycatch. 2006 when 20 nesting females were responsible for the lower numbers of fitted with satellite transmitters. This nesting turtles on the mainland beaches North Indian Ocean DPS research identified important inter- (Baldwin et al., 2003). Fox populations The main threats to North Indian seasonal foraging grounds but is have been eradicated on Dirk Hartog Ocean loggerheads are fishery bycatch considered incomplete, and additional Island and Murion Islands (Baldwin et and nesting beach habitat loss and nesting females were satellite tagged in al., 2003), and threat abatement plans degradation. Royal Decree 53/81 2011 to assess clutch frequency, have been implemented for the control prohibits the hunting of turtles and eggs determine inter-nesting and post-nesting of foxes (1999) and feral pigs (2005). in Oman. The Ministry of Environment movements, and identify potential In 2000, the use of TEDs in the and Climate Affairs (MECA) and overlap of loggerhead habitat use with Northern Australian Prawn Fishery Environmental Society of Oman (ESO) coastal fisheries. In 2009, efforts to (NPF) was made mandatory. Prior to the are collaborating to carry out a number investigate loggerhead bycatch in gillnet use of TEDs in this fishery, the NPF of conservation measures at Masirah fisheries at Masirah were initiated, and annually took between 5,000 and 6,000 Island for the nesting loggerhead some fisherman are cooperating and sea turtles as bycatch, with a mortality population. First and foremost are documenting bycatch. rate estimated to be 40 percent (Poiner standardized annual nesting surveys to While conservation efforts for the and Harris, 1996). Since the mandatory monitor population trends. North Indian Ocean loggerhead DPS are use of TEDs has been in effect, the Standardized surveys were first substantive and improving, they still annual bycatch of sea turtles in the NPF implemented in 2008. Less complete remain inadequate to ensure the long- has dropped to less than 200 sea turtles nesting surveys have been conducted in term viability of the population. For per year, with a mortality rate of some previous years beginning in 1977, example, there is currently no approximately 22 percent (based on but the data have yet to be adequately assessment of hatchling production on recent years). Initial progress has been analyzed to determine their usefulness the main nesting beaches, no efforts made to measure the threat of incidental in determining population size and underway to restore the largely capture of sea turtles in other artisanal trends. Nine kilometers of nesting degraded nesting habitat on the major and commercial fisheries in the habitat within the Masirah Air Force nesting beaches, and little Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean (Lewison Base is largely protected from tourist understanding or knowledge of foraging et al., 2004; Limpus, 2009); however, development but remains subject to grounds for juveniles or adults and the the data remain inadequate for light pollution from military operations. extent of their interactions with population assessment.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58939

As in other DPSs, persistent marine Atlantic loggerheads. Fishing gear types the shrimp fishery is very limited, at debris poses entanglement and ingestion include gillnets, trawls, hook and line around 2 percent of total directed effort, hazards to loggerheads. In 2009, (e.g., longlines), seines, dredges, and as a result of the size of the fishery and Australia’s Department of the various types of pots/traps. Among the expense of observer programs. Environment, Water, Heritage and the these, gillnets, longlines, and trawl gear Gillnets of various mesh sizes are Arts published a threat abatement plan collectively result in tens of thousands used extensively to harvest fish in the for the impacts of marine debris on of Northwest Atlantic loggerhead deaths Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. All vertebrate marine life. annually throughout their range (see for size classes of loggerheads in coastal In spite of these conservation efforts, example, NMFS, 2002, 2004; Lewison et waters are prone to entanglement in considerable uncertainty in the status of al., 2004; Wallace et al., 2008, 2010). gillnets, and, generally, the larger the this DPS lies with inadequate efforts to Considerable effort has been mesh size the more likely that turtles measure bycatch in the region, a short expended since the 1980s to document will become entangled. State resource time-series of monitoring on nesting and reduce commercial fishing bycatch agencies and NMFS have been beaches, and missing vital rates data mortality. NMFS has implemented addressing this issue on several fronts. necessary for population assessments. observer programs in many federally In the southeastern United States, managed and some State-managed gillnets are prohibited in the State Southwest Indian Ocean DPS fisheries to collect turtle bycatch data waters of South Carolina, Georgia, The Southwest Indian Ocean DPS is and estimate mortality. NMFS, working Florida, and Texas and are restricted to small but has experienced an increase in with industry and other partners, has fishing for pompano and mullet in numbers of nesting females. Although reduced bycatch in some fisheries by saltwater areas of Louisiana. Reducing there is considerable uncertainty in developing technological solutions to bycatch of loggerheads in the remaining anthropogenic mortalities, especially in prevent capture or to allow most turtles State and federally regulated gillnet the water, the DPS may have benefitted to escape without harm (e.g., TEDs), by fisheries of the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of from important conservation efforts at implementing time and area closures to Mexico has not been fully the nesting beaches. prevent interactions from occurring accomplished. NMFS has addressed the All principal nesting beaches, (e.g., prohibitions on gillnet fishing issue for several federally managed centered in South Africa, are within along the mid-Atlantic coast during the fisheries, such as the large-mesh gillnet protected areas (Baldwin et al., 2003). In periods of high loggerhead abundance), fishery (primarily for monkfish) along Mozambique, nesting beaches in the and by modifying gear (e.g., the Atlantic coast, where gillnets larger Maputo Special Reserve (approximately requirements to reduce mesh size in the than 8-inch stretched mesh are now 60 kilometers of nesting beach) and in leaders of pound nets to prevent regulated in North Carolina and Virginia the Paradise Islands are also within entanglement, requirements to use large through rolling closures timed to match protected areas (Baldwin et al., 2003; circle hooks with certain bait types in the northward migration of loggerheads Costa et al., 2007). segments of the pelagic longline along the mid-Atlantic coast in late The international regulatory fishery). Many of these measures have spring and early summer. The State of mechanisms described in Section 5.1.4. been implemented within the lifetime of North Carolina, working with NMFS of the Status Review apply to one generation of loggerhead sea turtles, through the ESA section 10 process, has loggerheads found in the Southwest and thus the conservation benefits may been making some progress in reducing Indian Ocean. In addition, loggerheads not yet be observed on the nesting bycatch of loggerheads in gillnet of this DPS benefit from the Indian beaches. NMFS is currently working to fisheries operating in Pamlico Sound Ocean–South-East Asian Marine Turtle implement a coastwide, comprehensive though that fishery predominantly Memorandum of Understanding strategy to reduce bycatch of sea turtles catches green and Kemp’s ridley turtles, (IOSEA) and the Nairobi Convention for in State and Federal fisheries in the U.S. with loggerheads accounting for a the Protection, Management and Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. This smaller percentage. The large mesh Development of the Marine and Coastal approach was developed to address sea driftnet fishery for sharks off the Environment of the Eastern African turtle bycatch issues on a per-gear basis, Atlantic coast of Florida and Georgia Region. rather than a fishery by fishery basis, remains a concern as do gillnet fisheries In spite of these conservation efforts, with a goal of developing and operating elsewhere in the range of the caution in the status of this DPS lies implementing coastwide solutions for DPS, including Mexico and Cuba. with its small population size, reducing turtle bycatch inshore, Observer programs have documented inadequate efforts to measure bycatch in nearshore, and offshore. significant bycatch of loggerheads in the the region, and missing vital rates data The development and implementation U.S. longline fishery operating in the necessary for population assessments. of TEDs in the shrimp trawl fishery is Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. In arguably the most significant recent years, NMFS has dedicated Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS conservation accomplishment for significant funding and effort to address The main threats to Northwest Northwest Atlantic loggerheads in the this bycatch issue. In partnership with Atlantic Ocean loggerheads include marine environment since their listing. academia and industry, NMFS has fishery bycatch mortality, particularly in In the southeastern United States and funded and conducted field gillnet, longline, and trawl fisheries; Gulf of Mexico, TEDs have been experiments in the Northwest Atlantic nesting beach habitat loss and mandatory in shrimp and flounder Ocean to develop gear modifications degradation (e.g., beachfront lighting, trawls for over a decade. However, TEDs that eliminate or significantly reduce coastal armoring); and ingestion of are not required in all trawl fisheries, loggerhead bycatch and mortality. As a marine debris during the epipelagic and significant loggerhead mortality result of these experiments, NMFS now lifestage. In addition, mortality from continues in some trawl fisheries. In requires the use of circle hooks fleet- vessel strikes is increasing and likely addition, enforcement of TED wide and larger circle hooks in also a significant threat to this DPS. regulations depends on available combination with whole finfish bait in Mortality resulting from domestic and resources, and illegal or improperly the Northeast Distant area (69 FR 40734; international commercial fishing is the installed TEDs continue to contribute to July 6, 2004). Gear limitations, seasonal most significant threat to Northwest mortality. Current observer coverage in restrictions, and sea turtle release gear

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58940 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

and handling requirements in the Gulf effort has been the acquisition of Archie problems with existing international of Mexico and South Atlantic bottom Carr National Wildlife Refuge in treaties are often that they have not longline fisheries are also expected to Florida, where nesting densities often realized their full potential, do not reduce loggerhead bycatch and exceed 600 nests per km (1,000 nests include some key countries, do not mortality. per mile). Over 60 percent of the specifically address sea turtle The incidental capture and mortality available beachfront acquisitions for the conservation, and are handicapped by of loggerheads by international longline Refuge have been completed as the the lack of a sovereign authority to fleets operating in the North Atlantic result of a multi-agency land acquisition enforce environmental regulations. Ocean and Mediterranean Sea is of great effort. In addition, 14 additional refuges, Continued efforts are needed to develop concern. The United States has been as well as numerous coastal national and strengthen these international attempting to work through Regional seashores, military installations, and initiatives. Fisheries Management Organizations, State parks in the Southeast where In summary, while conservation such as the International Commission loggerheads regularly nest are also efforts for the Northwest Atlantic Ocean for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, provided protection. However, despite loggerhead DPS are substantive and to encourage member nations to adopt these efforts, alteration of the coastline improving, it is still too soon to tell if gear modifications (e.g., large circle continues, and outside of publicly they are adequate to ensure the long- hooks) that have been shown to owned lands, coastal development and term viability of the population. significantly reduce loggerhead bycatch. associated coastal armoring remains a Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS As stated previously, in late 2010, serious threat. ICCAT approved a proposal to require Efforts are also ongoing to reduce light Since 2002, all sea turtles and their data reporting on the capture of sea pollution on nesting beaches. A habitats in Cape Verde have been turtles in the Atlantic Ocean and significant number of local governments protected by law (Decreto-Regulamentar mandated the use of hook-removal and in the southeastern U.S. have enacted n° 7/2002). The reality, however, is that fishing line disentanglement gear. To lighting ordinances designed to reduce the laws are not respected or enforced date, limited success in reducing the effects of artificial lighting on sea and that in recent years until 2008 up loggerhead bycatch has been achieved turtles. However, enforcement of the to 25–30 percent of nesting females in these international forums, but efforts lighting ordinances varies considerably were illegally killed for meat each year are ongoing. and efforts to strengthen these measures on the nesting beaches. Egg collection is Although numerous efforts are are ongoing. also a serious threat on some of the underway to reduce loggerhead bycatch With regard to marine debris, the islands. Other major threats include in fisheries, and many positive actions MARPOL Convention (International developments and commensurate light have been implemented, it is unknown Convention for the Prevention of pollution behind one important nesting whether this source of mortality can be Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified beach on Boa Vista and the most sufficiently reduced across the range of by the Protocol of 1978) is the main important nesting beach on Sal, as well the DPS in the near future because of international convention that addresses as sand mining on many of the islands. the diversity and magnitude of the prevention of pollution (including oil, Other planned and potential fisheries operating in the North Atlantic, chemicals, harmful substances in developments on these and other the lack of comprehensive information packaged form, sewage, and garbage) of islands present future threats. Bycatch on fishing distribution and effort the marine environment by ships from and directed take in coastal waters is (primarily international, but even some operational or accidental causes. likely a significant mortality factor to State fisheries), limitations on However, challenges remain to the population given the importance of implementing demonstrated effective implementation and enforcement of the the coastal waters as loggerhead foraging conservation measures, geopolitical MARPOL Convention and marine grounds and the extensive fisheries complexities, limitations on pollution remains an issue of concern. occurring there. Adult females nesting enforcement capacity, and lack of The seriousness of the threat caused in Cape Verde have been found foraging availability of comprehensive bycatch by vessel strikes to loggerheads in the along the mainland coast of West Africa reduction technologies. The advent of Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico is not fully as well as in the oceanic environment, TED requirements, longline understood at this time, but is expected thereby making them vulnerable to requirements, and other conservation to be significant. This growing problem impacts from a wide range of fisheries measures, along with the decline of is particularly difficult to address. In (Hawkes et al., 2006). Unfortunately, some fisheries, especially trawling and some cases, NMFS, through section 7 of law enforcement on the nesting beaches surface longlining, have primarily the ESA, has worked with the U.S. Coast and in the marine environment is occurred within one generation of Guard in an attempt to reduce the lacking in Cape Verde. loggerhead sea turtles. A number of probability of vessel strikes during Conservation efforts in Cape Verde measures (larger TED openings and permitted offshore race events. began in the mid-1990s and focused on longline requirements among the most However, most vessel strikes occur efforts to raise local, national, and important) occurred only in the past 8 outside of these venues and the growing international awareness of the years or less. Therefore, the number of licensed vessels over the importance of the Cape Verdian conservation benefit to loggerhead years, especially inshore and nearshore, loggerhead population and the ongoing populations is difficult to gauge at this exacerbates the conflict. slaughter of nesting females. A field time as the effect on the nesting A number of regulatory instruments at camp set up by the non-governmental population may only be starting to be international, regional, national, and organization Cabo Verde Natura 2000 in realized. local levels have been developed that 1999 on the 10-kilometer Ervatao Beach, In the southeastern U.S., nest provide legal protection for loggerhead the single most important nesting beach protection efforts have been sea turtles globally and within the at Boa Vista, grew out of this initial implemented on the majority of nesting Northwest Atlantic Ocean. The Status effort. This camp established a presence beaches, and progress has been made in Review identifies and includes a to deter poaching and gather data on reducing mortality from human-related discussion of these regulatory nesting and poaching activity. In 2008, impacts on the nesting beach. A key instruments (Conant et al., 2009). The The Turtle Foundation, another non-

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58941

governmental organization, began to turtles and with sustained and planned of the average annual number of nests work at Porto Ferreira Beach, the second efforts may be able to reduce it to less in Cyprus. Note, however, that the most important nesting area on Boa than 1 percent in the next few years. annual nesting effort in Cyprus Vista. The non-governmental The issues of light pollution, sand presented in Margaritoulis et al. (2003) organization SOS Tartarugas began mining on nesting beaches, long-term includes additional sites, so the total conservation work on the important protection of even the most important proportion of protected nesting sites in nesting beaches of Sal in 2008. In May nesting beaches, law enforcement, and Cyprus is much lower, potentially 2009, USFWS funded a workshop in bycatch have not even begun to be around 22 percent. In Italy, a reserve to Cape Verde to bring together addressed. While there is definite protect nesting on Lampedusa was representatives from the three non- improvement in a once gloomy situation established in 1984 (Margaritoulis et al., governmental organizations and the as recent as 2 years ago, the future of the 2003). In summary, Mediterranean universities involved with loggerhead population is tenuous. loggerhead nesting primarily occurs in conservation in Cape Verde and Greece, Libya, Turkey, and Cyprus, and Mediterranean Sea DPS government representatives from the a notable proportion of nesting in those Ministry of Environment, Military and The main threats to Mediterranean areas is protected through various Municipalities to discuss the threats, Sea loggerheads include fishery bycatch, mechanisms. It is important to recognize current conservation efforts, and as well as pollution/debris, vessel the success of these protected areas, but priority actions needed. A Sea Turtle collisions, and habitat destruction as the protection has been in place for Network was established to better impacting eggs and hatchlings at nesting some time and the threats to the species coordinate and expand conservation beaches. Most Mediterranean countries remain (particularly from increasing efforts throughout the Cape Verdean have developed national legislation to tourism activities), it is unlikely that the islands. protect sea turtles and nesting habitats conservation measures discussed here Cabo Verde Natura 2000 has (Margaritoulis, 2007). National will change the status of the species as continued its efforts on Ervatao Beach protective legislation generally prohibits outlined in Conant et al. (2009). and in 2009 assumed responsibility for intentional killing, harassment, Protection of marine habitats is at the work on Porto Ferreira Beach. Cabo possession, trade, or attempts at these early stages in the Mediterranean, as in Verde Natura 2000 has reduced (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). Some other areas of the world. Off Zakynthos, poaching to about 5 percent on these countries have site specific legislation the National Marine Park established in two important beaches, which represent for turtle habitat protection. In 1999, a 1999 also included maritime zones. The 75 percent of the nesting on Boa Vista. National Marine Park was established marine area of Laganas Bay is divided The Turtle Foundation also conducts on Zakynthos in western Greece, with into three zones controlling maritime extensive public outreach on sea turtle the primary aim to provide protection to traffic from May 1 to October 31: Zone conservation issues. The Turtle loggerhead nesting areas (Dimopoulos, A—no boating activity; Zone B—speed Foundation covered four other 2001). Zakynthos represents limit of 6 knots, no anchoring; Zone C— important beaches in 2009 with the approximately 43 percent of the average speed limit of 6 knots. The restraints on assistance of the Cape Verdian military annual nesting effort of the major and boating activity are particularly aimed at and likewise believes poaching was moderate nesting areas in Greece protecting the internesting area reduced to about 5 percent of nesting (Margaritoulis et al., 2003) and about 26 surrounding the Zakynthos Laganas Bay females on the beaches covered. The percent of the documented nesting effort nesting area. However, despite the University of Algarve established a in the Mediterranean (Touliatou et al., regulations, there has been insufficient research project on Santiago Island in 2009). It is noteworthy for conservation enforcement (especially of the 6 knot 2007; activities included nest purposes that this site is legally speed limit), and a high density of monitoring and protection, collecting protected. While park management has speedboats and recorded violations biological data and information on improved over the last several years, within the marine area of the Park have poaching, and outreach through the there are still some needed measures to been reported. In 2009, 13 of 28 media and to the government improve and ensure sufficient recorded strandings in the area of the representatives (Loureiro, 2008). This protection at this Park (Panagopoulou et National Marine Park bore evidence of project minimized its efforts in 2009. al., 2008; Touliatou et al., 2009). watercraft injuries and fishing gear The Turtle Foundation continued to In Turkey, five nesting beaches interactions, and four live turtles were focus its primary efforts on patrolling (Belek, Dalyan, Fethiye, Goksu Delta, found with fishing gear lines/hooks. beaches to protect nesting females on and Patara) were designated Specially Another marine zone occurs in Cyprus; Boa Vista with the assistance of the Protected Area status in the context of off the nesting beaches of Lara and military. SOS Tartarugas has also been the Barcelona Convention (Margaritoulis Toxeftra, a maritime zone extends to the doing regular monitoring of beaches et al., 2003). Based on the average 20 meter isobath as delineated by the with support from the military, annual number of nests from the major Fisheries Regulation (Margaritoulis, extensive public outreach on light nesting sites, these five beaches 2007). pollution behind nesting beaches, and represent approximately 56 percent of The main concern to loggerheads in relocating nests to a hatchery to nesting in Turkey (World Wildlife Fund, the Mediterranean includes incidental alleviate hatchling disorientation, as 2005). In Cyprus, the two nesting capture in fisheries. While there are well as assisting with training of turtle beaches of Lara and Toxeftra have been country specific fishery regulations that projects on the islands of Maio and Sao afforded protection through the may limit fishing effort to some degree Nicolau. Fisheries Regulation since 1989 (to conserve the fishery resource), little, In the last 2 years, new efforts to (Margaritoulis, 2007), and Alagadi is a if anything, has been undertaken to better coordinate and expand projects Specially Protected Area (World reduce sea turtle bycatch and associated being conducted by the three non- Wildlife Fund, 2005). Of the major mortality in Mediterranean fisheries. governmental organizations, as well as Cyprus nesting sites included in the Given the lack of conservation efforts to engage the national and municipal 2005 World Wildlife Fund Species address fisheries and the limited in- governments, are dramatically Action Plan, the nesting beaches water protection provided to turtles to decreasing the poaching of nesting afforded protection represent 51 percent reduce the additional impacts of vessel

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58942 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

collisions and pollution/debris for many loggerhead nesting beaches in loggerheads in coastal waters of interactions, it is unlikely that the status Bahia and Espirito Santo (Marcovaldi et southwestern Africa (Petersen et al., of the species will change given the al., 2005). In addition, Projeto TAMAR 2007, 2009; Weir et al., 2007). Bycatch measures discussed here. has initiated several high-profile public of loggerheads has been documented in It appears that international and awareness campaigns, which have longline fisheries off the Atlantic coasts national laws are not always enforced or focused national attention on the of Angola, Namibia, and South Africa followed. This minimizes the potential conservation of loggerheads and other (Petersen et al., 2007), and several success of these conservation efforts. marine turtles in Brazil. authors have highlighted the need to For example, in Egypt, international and Loggerhead sea turtles of various sizes develop regional mitigation plans to national measures to protect turtles and life stages occur throughout the reduce bycatch of loggerheads and other were not immediately adhered to, but in South Atlantic, although density/ sea turtle species in coastal waters recent years, there has been a notable observations are more limited in (Formia et al., 2003; Weir et al., 2007; effort to enforce laws and regulations equatorial waters (Ehrhart et al., 2003). Petersen et al., 2009). On the high seas that prohibit the trade of sea turtles at Within national waters of specific of the South Atlantic, little is known fish markets. However, the illegal trade countries, various laws and actions have about exact bycatch levels, but there are of turtles in the Alexandria fish market been instituted to mitigate threats to some areas of higher concentration of has persisted and a black market has loggerheads and other species of sea longline effort that are likely to result in been created (Nada and Casale, 2008). turtles; less protection is afforded in the loggerhead bycatch (Lewison et al., This is an example of ineffective sea high seas of the South Atlantic. Overall, 2004). turtle protection and continuing threat Overall, conservation efforts for the principal in-water threat to to the species, even with conservation loggerhead sea turtles in the South loggerheads in the South Atlantic is efforts in place. Atlantic are dichotomous. On the incidental capture in fisheries. In the nesting beaches (almost exclusively in South Atlantic Ocean DPS southwest Atlantic, the South Atlantic Brazil), conservation actions are Association is a multinational group The only documented and confirmed successful at protecting nesting females that includes representatives from nesting locations for loggerhead sea and their clutches, resulting in large Brazil, Uruguay, and Argentina, and turtles in the South Atlantic occur in numbers of hatchlings being released meets bi-annually to share information Brazil, and major nesting beaches are each year. In contrast, fisheries bycatch found in the States of Rio de Janeiro, and develop regional action plans to in coastal and oceanic waters remains a Espirito Santo, Bahia, and Sergipe address threats including bycatch serious threat, despite regional (Marcovaldi and Marcovaldi, 1999). (http://www.tortugasaso.org/). At the emphasis on assessing bycatch rates in Protection of nesting loggerheads and national level, Brazil has developed a various fisheries on both sides of the their eggs in Brazil is afforded by national plan for the reduction of South Atlantic. Comprehensive national law that was established in incidental capture of sea turtles that was management actions to reduce or 1989 and most recently reaffirmed in initiated in 2001 (Marcovaldi et al., eliminate bycatch mortality are lacking 2008. Illegal practices, such as 2002a). This national plan includes in most areas, which is likely to result collecting eggs or nesting females for various activities to mitigate bycatch, in a decline of this DPS in the future. consumption or sale, are considered including time-area restrictions of environmental crimes and are fisheries, use of bycatch reduction Finding punishable by law. Other State or devices, and working with fishermen to We find that nine loggerhead sea Federal laws have been established in successfully release live-captured turtle DPSs exist. We have carefully Brazil to protect reproductive females, turtles. In Uruguay, all sea turtles are considered the best scientific and incubating eggs, emergent hatchlings, protected from human impacts, commercial data available regarding the and nesting habitat, including including fisheries bycatch, by past, present and future threats faced by restricting nighttime lighting adjacent to presidential decree (Decreto the nine loggerhead sea turtle DPSs. We nesting beaches during the nesting/ presidencial 144/98). The Karumbe are listing the North Pacific Ocean, hatching seasons and prohibiting conservation project in Uruguay has South Pacific Ocean, North Indian vehicular traffic on beaches. Projeto been working on assessing in-water Ocean, Northeast Atlantic Ocean, and TAMAR, a semi-governmental threats to loggerheads and marine Mediterranean Sea DPSs of the organization, is responsible for sea turtle turtles for several years (see http:// loggerhead sea turtle as endangered and conservation in Brazil. In general, www.seaturtle.org/promacoda), with the the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean, nesting beach protection in Brazil is objective of developing mitigation plans Southwest Indian Ocean, Northwest considered to be effective and in the future. In Argentina, various Atlantic Ocean, and South Atlantic successful for loggerheads and other conservation organizations are working Ocean DPSs as threatened for the species of nesting turtles (e.g. toward assessing bycatch of loggerheads reasons described below for each DPS. Marcovaldi and Chaloupka, 2007; and other sea turtle species in fisheries, Thome´ et al., 2007; da Silva et al., with the objective of developing North Pacific Ocean DPS 2007). Efforts at protecting reproductive mitigation plans for this threat (see In the North Pacific, loggerhead turtles, their nests, hatchlings and their http://www.prictma.com.ar). Overall, nesting is essentially restricted to Japan nesting beaches have been more effort to date has been expended where monitoring of loggerhead nesting supplemented by the establishment of on evaluating and assessing levels of began in the 1950s on some beaches, federally mandated protected areas that fisheries bycatch of loggerhead sea and expanded to include most known include major loggerhead nesting turtles, than concretely reducing nesting beaches since approximately populations: Reserva Biologica de Santa bycatch in the Southwest Atlantic, but 1990. While nesting numbers have Isabel (established in 1988 in Sergipe) this information is necessary for gradually increased in recent years and and Reserva Biologica de Comboios developing adequate mitigation plans. the number for 2009 is similar to the (established in 1984 in Espirito Santo); In the southeastern Atlantic, efforts have start of the time series in 1990, at the State level, Environmental been directed toward assessing the historical evidence indicates that there Protection Areas have been established distribution and levels of bycatch of has been a substantial decline over the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58943

last half of the 20th century and that We have considered the five factors anthropogenic mortality rates (or the current nesting represents a fraction of described above in the Summary of best case scenario), the deterministic historical nesting levels. In addition, Factors Affecting the Nine Loggerhead model suggests that the South Pacific based on nest count data for nearly the DPSs, efforts to protect the DPS, and the Ocean DPS will grow slightly, but in the past 2 decades, the North Pacific population size and trends of the DPS. worst-case scenario, the model indicates population of loggerheads is small. The In light of the small nesting range and that the population is likely to SQE approach described in the Status small size of the nesting population, an substantially decline in the future. and Trends of the Nine Loggerhead estimated decline between 50–90 These results are largely driven by DPSs section suggested that the North percent in the size of the nesting mortality of juvenile and adult Pacific Ocean DPS appears to be population since the 1950s, significant loggerheads from fishery bycatch that declining, is at risk, and is thus likely and ongoing threats to the nesting occurs throughout the South Pacific to decline in the future. The stage-based beaches, significant and continuing Ocean (Factor E). Although national and fishery bycatch with limited bycatch deterministic modeling approach international governmental and non- reduction success except in the Hawaii suggested that the North Pacific Ocean governmental entities on both sides of DPS could grow slightly, but in the longline fishery, and only limited efforts at conservation thus far, we have the South Pacific are currently working worst-case scenario, the model indicates determined that the North Pacific Ocean toward reducing loggerhead bycatch, that the population is likely to DPS is in danger of extinction and some positive actions have been substantially decline in the future. throughout all of its range. Therefore, implemented, it is unlikely that this These results are largely driven by the we are listing it as endangered. In other source of mortality can be sufficiently mortality of juvenile and adult words, we believe that a threatened reduced in the near future due to the loggerheads from fishery bycatch that status is not appropriate for this DPS challenges of mitigating illegal, occurs throughout the North Pacific because of the significance of the unregulated, and unreported fisheries, Ocean, including the coastal pound net threats, the small size of the nesting the continued expansion of artisanal fisheries off Japan, coastal fisheries population, and the estimated historical fleets in the southeastern Pacific, the impacting juvenile foraging populations decline in the nesting population. lack of comprehensive information on off Baja California, Mexico, and fishing distribution and effort, South Pacific Ocean DPS undescribed fisheries likely affecting limitations on implementing loggerheads in the South China Sea and In the South Pacific, loggerhead demonstrated effective conservation the North Pacific Ocean (Factor E). nesting is almost entirely restricted to measures, geopolitical complexities, Although national and international eastern Australia (primarily limitations on enforcement capacity, governmental and non-governmental Queensland) and New Caledonia. In and lack of availability of entities on both sides of the North eastern Australia, there has been a comprehensive bycatch reduction Pacific are currently working toward marked decline in the number of technologies. It is highly uncertain females breeding annually since the reducing loggerhead bycatch, and some whether the actions identified in the mid-1970s, with an estimated 50 to 80 positive actions have been Conservation Efforts section above will percent decline in the number of implemented, it is unlikely that this be fully implemented in the near future source of mortality can be sufficiently breeding females at various Australian rookeries up to 1990 and a decline of or that they will be sufficiently effective. reduced in the near future due to the While climate change may have adverse challenges of mitigating illegal, approximately 86 percent by 1999. Comparable nesting surveys have not effects on all of the loggerhead sea turtle unregulated, and unreported fisheries, DPSs, it is not possible to predict the lack of comprehensive information been conducted in New Caledonia however. Information from pilot surveys exactly what those would be and the on fishing distribution and effort, extent to which they would affect this limitations on implementing conducted in 2005, combined with oral history information collected, suggest DPS. demonstrated effective conservation that there has been a decline in measures, geopolitical complexities, We have considered the five factors loggerhead nesting (see the Status and limitations on enforcement capacity, described above in the Summary of Trends of the Nine Loggerhead DPSs Factors Affecting the Nine Loggerhead and lack of availability of section above for additional comprehensive bycatch reduction DPSs, efforts to protect the DPS, and the information). Similarly, studies of population size and trends of the DPS. technologies. In addition to fishery eastern Australia loggerheads at their bycatch, coastal development and In light of the small nesting range and foraging areas revealed a decline of 3 small size of the nesting population, a coastal armoring on nesting beaches in percent per year from 1985 to the late marked decline in the number of Japan continues as a substantial threat 1990s on the coral reefs of the southern females nesting annually since the mid- (Factor A). Coastal armoring, if left Great Barrier Reef. A decline in new 1970s, and significant and continuing unaddressed, will become an even more recruits was also measured in these substantial threat as sea level rises as a foraging areas. The SQE approach fishery bycatch with limited bycatch result of climate change. It is highly described in the Status and Trends of reduction success except in the northern uncertain whether the actions identified the Nine Loggerhead DPSs section Australian prawn fishery, we have in the Conservation Efforts section suggested that, based on nest count data determined that the South Pacific Ocean above will be fully implemented in the from the mid-1970s through the early to DPS is in danger of extinction near future or that they will be mid-2000s, the population is at risk and throughout all of its range. Therefore, sufficiently effective. While climate thus likely to decline in the future. we are listing it as endangered. In other change may have adverse effects on all These results were based on published words, we believe that a threatened of the loggerhead sea turtle DPSs, it is nesting census data for loggerhead sea status is not appropriate for this DPS not possible to predict exactly what turtles at index beaches in eastern because of the significance of the those would be and the extent to which Australia. The stage-based deterministic threats, the small size of the nesting they would affect this DPS beyond the modeling approach provided a wide population, and the observed marked concern noted above. range of results: in the case of the lowest decline in the nesting population.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58944 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

North Indian Ocean DPS DPSs, efforts to protect the DPS, and the North West Cape region was depleted In the North Indian Ocean, nesting population size and trends of the DPS. before recent beach monitoring occurs in greatest density on Masirah In light of the estimated significant programs began. The SQE approach Island. Reliable trends in nesting cannot decline in the number of females described in the Status and Trends of be determined due to the lack of nesting annually since the late 1970s, the Nine Loggerhead DPSs section is standardized surveys at Masirah Island significant and increasing threats on based on nesting data; however, an prior to 2008. However, a nesting beaches, insufficient monitoring adequate time series of nesting data for reinterpretation of the 1977–1978 and and reduction of bycatch in neritic and this DPS was not available; therefore, 1991 estimates of nesting females was oceanic fisheries, and only limited we could not use this approach to compared to survey information efforts at conservation thus far, we have evaluate extinction risk. The stage-based collected since 2008 and results suggest determined that the North Indian Ocean deterministic modeling approach a significant decline in the size of the DPS is in danger of extinction provided a wide range of results: in the nesting population, which is consistent throughout all of its range. Therefore, case of the lowest anthropogenic with observations by local rangers that we are listing it as endangered. In other mortality rates, the deterministic model the population has declined words, we believe that a threatened suggests that the Southeast Indo-Pacific dramatically in the last three decades. status is not appropriate for this DPS Ocean DPS will grow slightly, but in the Nesting trends cannot be determined because of the significance of the threats worst-case scenario, the model indicates and the estimated significant decline in elsewhere in the North Indian Ocean that the population is likely to the nesting population. where loggerhead nesting occurs substantially decline in the future. because the time series of nesting data Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS These results are largely driven by based on standardized surveys is not The Services originally published a mortality of juvenile and adult available. The SQE approach described proposed rule (75 FR 12598; March 16, loggerheads from fishery bycatch that in the Status and Trends of the Nine 2010) in which a Southeast Indo-Pacific occurs throughout the region, as can be Loggerhead DPSs section is based on Ocean DPS would be established and inferred from data from Australia’s nesting data; however, an adequate time listed as endangered under the ESA. Pacific waters (Factor E). However, the series of nesting data for this DPS was Subsequently, based on information current level of anthropogenic not available. Therefore, we could not provided by one of the peer reviewers mortalities is low for the Southeast use this approach to evaluate extinction and information gathered in response, Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS, based on the risk. The stage-based deterministic the Services determined that the best available information. In addition, modeling approach indicated the North Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean some significant conservation efforts are Indian Ocean DPS is likely to decline in population warranted DPS designation, underway. One of the principal nesting the future. These results are driven by but that the proposed listing status of beaches for this DPS, Australia’s Dirk cumulative mortality from a variety of the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS Hartog Island, is part of the Shark Bay sources across all life stages. Threats to needed to be revisited prior to making World Heritage Area and recently nesting beaches are likely to increase, a final determination. The Services became part of Australia’s National Park which would require additional and ultimately determined that the System. Control of red foxes, formerly a widespread nesting beach protection Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS significant threat to nests laid on the efforts (Factor A). Little is currently should be listed as threatened because principal nesting beaches for this DPS, being done to monitor and reduce the majority of nesting occurs on has been extremely successful with fox mortality from neritic and oceanic protected lands and nesting trends have populations now eradicated on Dirk fisheries in the range of the North been stable. However, the nesting Hartog Island and Murion Islands. A Indian Ocean DPS; this mortality is survey effort and methods have varied requirement for the mandatory use of likely to continue and increase with over the last 2 decades and currently TEDs in the Northern Australian Prawn expected additional fishing effort from there are no nesting population Fishery in 2000 has substantially commercial and artisanal fisheries estimates available to suggest any reduced the annual bycatch of sea (Factor E). Reduction of mortality would positive trend in nesting populations. In turtles in this fishery. Regardless, be difficult due to a lack of addition, some of the fisheries bycatch although national and international comprehensive information on fishing impacts appear to have been resolved governmental and non-governmental distribution and effort, limitations on through requirement of TEDs in shrimp entities are currently working toward implementing demonstrated effective trawlers, and longline fishery effort has reducing loggerhead bycatch, and some conservation measures, geopolitical declined due to fish stock decreases and positive actions have been complexities, limitations on economic reasons. However, a new implemented, it is unlikely that enforcement capacity, and lack of fisheries effort has emerged for portunid mortality from fishery bycatch that availability of comprehensive bycatch crabs and is posing new threats to occurs throughout the entire region can reduction technologies. It is highly loggerheads, and longline fishing effort be sufficiently reduced in the near uncertain whether the actions identified for tuna and billfish is also subject to future due to the challenges of in the Conservation Efforts section increase if and when economics and mitigating illegal, unregulated, and above will be fully implemented in the fish populations improve. unreported fisheries, the continued near future or that they will be In the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean, expansion of artisanal fleets, the lack of sufficiently effective. While climate loggerhead nesting is restricted to comprehensive information on fishing change may have adverse effects on all Western Australia, with the greatest distribution and effort, limitations on of the loggerhead sea turtle DPSs, it is number of loggerheads nesting on Dirk implementing demonstrated effective not possible to predict exactly what Hartog Island. Loggerheads also nest on conservation measures, geopolitical those would be and the extent to which the Muiron Islands and North West complexities, limitations on they would affect this DPS. Cape, but in smaller numbers. Although enforcement capacity, and lack of We have considered the five factors data are insufficient to determine availability of comprehensive bycatch described above in the Summary of trends, evidence suggests the nesting reduction technologies. In spite of the Factors Affecting the Nine Loggerhead population in the Muiron Islands and actions identified in the Conservation

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58945

Efforts section above, considerable nesting in low numbers, but no trend DPSs, efforts to protect the DPS, and the uncertainty in the status of this DPS still data are available. The SQE approach population size and trends of the DPS. exists relative to inadequate efforts to described in the Status and Trends of Although the nesting population is measure bycatch throughout the entire the Nine Loggerhead DPSs section, small, increased nesting has been region, a short time-series of monitoring based on a 37-year time series of nesting observed since the 1960s in Tongaland on nesting beaches, and missing vital female counts at Tongaland, South where the highest concentration of rates data necessary for population Africa (1963–1999), indicated this nesting occurs for this DPS, and this assessments. While climate change may segment of the population, while small, trend is believed to be representative of have adverse effects on all the has increased, and the likelihood of nesting trends for the entire DPS. loggerhead sea turtle DPSs, it is not quasi-extinction is negligible. We note However, fishery bycatch in neritic and possible to predict exactly what those that the SQE approach we used is based oceanic fisheries remains of concern would be and the extent to which they on past performance of the DPS (nesting and is not yet fully addressed. As a would affect this DPS. data from 1963–1999) and does not fully result, we have determined that the We have considered the five factors reflect ongoing and future threats to all Southwest Indian Ocean DPS of the described above in the Summary of life stages within the DPS. The stage- loggerhead sea turtle is not currently in Factors Affecting the Nine Loggerhead based deterministic modeling approach danger of extinction, but is likely to DPSs, efforts to protect the DPS, and the provided a wide range of results: in the become so in the foreseeable future population size and trends of the DPS. case of the lowest anthropogenic throughout all of its range. Therefore, Although the nesting population is mortality rates, the deterministic model we are listing it as threatened. In other small, the primary nesting beaches on suggests that the Southwest Indian words, we believe that an endangered Dirk Hartog Island and the Murion Ocean DPS will grow slightly, but in the status is not appropriate for this DPS Islands are undeveloped and are now worst-case scenario, the model indicates because of the observed increase in the both protected under the Western that the population is likely to nesting population, the protected status Australian Protected Area System; Dirk substantially decline in the future. of the primary nesting beaches, and the Hartog also recently became a National These results are largely driven by success of conservation efforts on the Park. In addition, nest predation and mortality of juvenile loggerheads from nesting beaches. bycatch from the northern Australian fishery bycatch that occurs throughout Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS prawn fishery that contributed to the the Southwest Indian Ocean (Factor E). The Services originally published a historical decline of this DPS have been This mortality is likely to continue and proposed rule (75 FR 12598; March 16, greatly reduced and are no longer may increase with expected additional 2010) in which a Northwest Atlantic significant threats. However, bycatch in fishing effort from commercial and Ocean DPS would be established and other fisheries, including a new fishery artisanal fisheries. Reduction of listed as endangered under the ESA. for portunid crabs and pelagic longline mortality would be difficult due to a Subsequently, the Services determined fishing, are believed to be substantial. lack of comprehensive information on that the Northwest Atlantic Ocean As a result, we have determined that the fishing distribution and effort, population warranted DPS designation, Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS of the limitations on implementing but that the proposed listing status of loggerhead sea turtle is not currently in demonstrated effective conservation danger of extinction, but is likely to the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS measures, geopolitical complexities, needed to be revisited prior to making become so in the foreseeable future limitations on enforcement capacity, throughout all of its range. Therefore, a final determination. Nesting data and lack of availability of we are listing it as threatened. In other available after the proposed rule was comprehensive bycatch reduction words, we believe that an endangered published, information provided by technologies. Although there is status is not appropriate for this DPS commenters on the proposed rule, and uncertainty in anthropogenic because of the protected status of the further discussions within the Services mortalities, especially in the water, this primary nesting beaches and the were taken into account to determine DPS has likely benefitted from successful conservation efforts that have whether this DPS should be classified as important conservation efforts at the significantly reduced some of the key threatened or endangered. A working nesting beaches. All principal nesting threats that historically affected this group comprised of biologists and beaches, centered in South Africa, are DPS. managers from NMFS and USFWS met within protected areas. In Mozambique, in November 2010 to discuss these Southwest Indian Ocean DPS nesting beaches in the Maputo Special issues and begin working toward a final In the Southwest Indian Ocean, the Reserve and in the Paradise Islands are agreement on the listing status for both highest concentration of nesting occurs also within protected areas. However, in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS and on the coast of Tongaland, South Africa, spite of the actions identified in the the North Pacific Ocean DPS. where surveys and management Conservation Efforts section above, Subsequent discussions and review of practices were instituted in 1963. A caution in the status of this DPS lies the full range of information available trend analysis of index nesting beach with its small, although increasing, occurred over the months following the data from this region from 1965 to 2008 population size, inadequate efforts to working group meeting, with the indicates an increasing nesting measure bycatch in the region, and Services ultimately determining that it population between the first decade of missing vital rates data necessary for was more appropriate to list the surveys and the last 8 years. These data population assessments. While climate Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS as represent approximately 50 percent of change may have adverse effects on all threatened. The rationale for that all nesting within South Africa and are of the loggerhead sea turtle DPSs, it is decision is contained in the information believed to be representative of trends not possible to predict exactly what presented in the previous sections, and in the region. Loggerhead nesting occurs those would be and the extent to which is summarized below. elsewhere in South Africa, but sampling they would affect this DPS. The two primary lines of evidence is not consistent and no trend data are We have considered the five factors upon which the Services ultimately available. Similarly, in Madagascar, described above in the Summary of determined that the Northwest Atlantic loggerheads have been documented Factors Affecting the Nine Loggerhead Ocean DPS should be listed as

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58946 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

threatened were population abundance in danger of extinction or likely to foreseeable future throughout all of its and population trend. As detailed become so and therefore more range. Therefore, we are listing it as previously, the absolute magnitude of appropriate to classify the DPS as threatened. In other words, we believe the population is calculated to be in the threatened or as endangered. The that an endangered status is not millions, with just mature adult primary threat to the Northwest Atlantic appropriate for this DPS because of the individuals numbering over 60,000. The Ocean DPS was determined to be large size of the nesting population, the adult population exceeds that of any fisheries bycatch and mortality, overall nesting population remains other ESA-listed marine species in the although other anthropogenic impacts widespread, the trend for the nesting Atlantic. While population abundance also play an important role. Although population appears to be stabilizing, is important, population trend is also a bycatch and bycatch mortality levels of and substantial conservation efforts are vital component of the status of a Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS underway to address threats. species. For sea turtles in general, loggerheads in domestic and foreign Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS including the Northwest Atlantic Ocean fisheries remain high, and continued DPS, there is currently a large gap in our efforts are necessary to reduce those In the Northeast Atlantic Ocean, the knowledge of population trends. As a impacts, it is too early to determine if Cape Verde Islands support the only result, nesting trends are typically used the bycatch and mortality reduction large nesting population of loggerheads as a proxy. Although using the most measures to date are adequate. Many of in the region. Nesting occurs at some complete and consistent dataset (Florida the most significant bycatch and level on most of the islands in the Index Nesting Beach Survey data bycatch mortality reduction efforts have archipelago with the largest nesting starting with 1989), the nesting trend for occurred within the past generation of numbers reported from the island of Boa this DPS was determined to be declining loggerhead sea turtles, and many Vista where studies have been ongoing through the 2007 nesting season. With fisheries have experienced effort since 1998. Due to limited data the addition of nesting data available reductions in recent years, and thus the available, a population trend cannot after the proposed rule was published benefits may not yet be observed on the currently be determined for the Cape (data through 2010), the nesting trend is nesting beaches. This does not, Verde population; however, available slightly negative, but not statistically however, mean that the Services are to information on the directed killing of different from zero. Although not as take a ‘‘wait and see’’ approach; nesting females suggests that this nesting population is under severe complete and consistent as the nesting continued efforts to reduce bycatch and pressure and likely significantly dataset, Epperly et al. (2007) and TEWG bycatch mortality, as well as reduce reduced from historical levels. In (2009) examined data from in-water other sources of anthropogenic impacts, addition, based on interviews with research sites in the United States that are a priority of the Services. Because elders, a reduction in nesting from they determined were suitable for trend the majority of nesting of loggerhead sea historical levels at Santiago Island has analysis and concluded these data turtles within the Northwest Atlantic been reported. Elsewhere in the suggested a likely increasing juvenile Ocean DPS is on U.S. beaches, and a northeastern Atlantic, loggerhead population. Additionally, a revision of great number of large neritic juveniles nesting is non-existent or occurs at very the SQE analysis conducted in the and adults from this DPS spend a low levels. The SQE approach described substantial portion of their time in U.S. Status Review indicated that the in the Status and Trends of the Nine Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS had a waters, this provides us the opportunity Loggerhead DPSs section is based on lower risk of extinction with the to use U.S. regulatory mechanisms to nesting data. However, we had addition of nesting data available after afford a greater degree of protection to insufficient nest count data over an the proposed rule was published. the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS appropriate time series for this DPS and Including nesting data through 2009, compared to other loggerhead DPSs. could not use this approach to evaluate and redoing the analysis to use a range While climate change may have adverse extinction risk. The stage-based of adult female abundance estimates as effects on all of the loggerhead sea turtle deterministic modeling approach QETs, it was determined that there was DPSs, it is not possible to predict indicated the Northeast Atlantic Ocean little risk (SQE <0.3) of the Peninsular exactly what those would be and the DPS is likely to decline in the future, Florida Recovery Unit (comprising over extent to which they would affect this even under the scenario of the lowest 80 percent of the Northwest Atlantic DPS. anthropogenic mortality rates. These Ocean DPS) reaching 1,000 or fewer We have considered the five factors results are largely driven by the ongoing females in 100 years. This revised described above in the Summary of directed lethal take of nesting females analysis was done by the same member Factors Affecting the Nine Loggerhead and eggs (Factor B), low hatching and of the BRT that performed the original DPSs, efforts to protect the DPS, and the emergence success (Factors A, B, and C), SQE analysis. population size and trends of the DPS. and mortality of juveniles and adults In addition to population abundance Although this DPS faces significant from fishery bycatch (Factor E) that and trends, an understanding of the threats from fishery bycatch, occurs throughout the Northeast threats faced by the listed entity and particularly bycatch mortality from Atlantic Ocean. Currently, conservation effects of conservation efforts must be gillnet, longline, and trawl fisheries efforts to protect nesting females are taken into consideration when making a throughout their range in the Atlantic growing, and a reduction in this source determination on whether a species Ocean and Gulf of Mexico, as well as of mortality is likely to continue in the would be more appropriately classified negative impacts to both its terrestrial near future. Although national and as threatened or as endangered. As and marine habitats, the nesting international governmental and non- described previously, loggerhead sea population is large and widespread, and governmental entities in the Northeast turtles of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean the nesting population trend appears to Atlantic are currently working toward DPS face a multitude of threats. The be stabilizing. As a result, we have reducing loggerhead bycatch, and some scope of these threats are examined, in determined that the Northwest Atlantic positive actions have been the context of the DPS’ population Ocean DPS of the loggerhead sea turtle implemented, it is unlikely that this abundance and trends, and conservation is not currently in danger of extinction, source of mortality can be sufficiently efforts, to determine whether the DPS is but is likely to become so in the reduced across the range of the DPS in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58947

the near future because of the lack of significant declining trend (1990–2004). In light of the significant fishery bycatch bycatch reduction in high seas fisheries In Turkey, intermittent nesting surveys that occurs throughout the operating within the range of this DPS, have been conducted since the 1970s Mediterranean Sea, particularly ongoing lack of bycatch reduction in coastal with more consistent surveys conducted bycatch mortality from pelagic and fisheries in Africa, the lack of on some beaches only since the 1990s, bottom longline, set net, driftnet, and comprehensive information on fishing making it difficult to assess trends in trawl fisheries, as well as ongoing distribution and effort, limitations on nesting. A declining trend (1993–2004) threats to terrestrial and marine habitats, implementing demonstrated effective has been reported at Fethiye Beach, current illegal harvest of loggerheads in conservation measures, geopolitical which represents approximately 10 Egypt for human consumption, and only complexities, limitations on percent of loggerhead nesting in Turkey. limited efforts at bycatch reduction thus enforcement capacity, and lack of The SQE approach described in the far, we have determined that the availability of comprehensive bycatch Status and Trends of the Nine Mediterranean Sea DPS is in danger of reduction technologies. It is highly Loggerhead DPSs section is based on extinction throughout all of its range. uncertain whether the actions identified nesting data; however, region-wide Therefore, we are listing it as in the Conservation Efforts section nesting data for this DPS were not endangered. In other words, we believe above will be fully implemented in the available. Therefore, we could not use that a threatened status is not near future or that they will be this approach to evaluate extinction appropriate for this DPS because of the sufficiently effective. While climate risk. The stage-based deterministic significance of the threats, particularly change may have adverse effects on all modeling approach indicated the fishery bycatch, and ineffective of the loggerhead sea turtle DPSs, it is Mediterranean Sea DPS is likely to protection of loggerheads even with not possible to predict exactly what decline in the future, even under the some conservation efforts in place. those would be and the extent to which scenario of the lowest anthropogenic South Atlantic Ocean DPS they would affect this DPS. mortality rates. These results are largely We have considered the five factors driven by mortality of juvenile and In the South Atlantic nesting occurs described above in the Summary of adult loggerheads from fishery bycatch primarily along the mainland coast of Factors Affecting the Nine Loggerhead that occurs throughout the Brazil from Sergipe south to Rio de DPSs, efforts to protect the DPS, and the Mediterranean Sea (Factor E), as well as Janeiro. Prior to 1980, loggerhead population size and trends of the DPS. anthropogenic threats to nesting beaches nesting populations in Brazil were considered severely depleted. More In light of available information (Factor A) and eggs/hatchlings (Factors recently, a long-term, sustained indicating significant directed killing of A, B, C, and E). Although conservation increasing trend in nesting abundance nesting females and eggs for efforts to protect some nesting beaches has been observed over a 16-year period consumption at the main nesting are underway, more widespread and from 1988 through 2003 on 22 surveyed beaches, evidence indicating the nesting consistent protection is needed. beaches containing more than 75 population is significantly reduced from Although national and international percent of all loggerhead nesting in historical levels, significant and governmental and non-governmental Brazil. The SQE approach described in unaddressed fishery bycatch, entities in the Mediterranean Sea are the Status and Trends of the Nine particularly bycatch in longline and currently working toward reducing trawl fisheries, and only limited efforts Loggerhead DPSs section suggested that, loggerhead bycatch, it is unlikely that based on nest count data for the past 2 at conservation thus far, we have this source of mortality can be determined that the Northeast Atlantic decades, the population is unlikely to sufficiently reduced across the range of Ocean DPS is in danger of extinction decline in the future. These results are the DPS in the near future because of throughout all of its range. Therefore, consistent with Marcovaldi and the lack of bycatch reduction in we are listing it as endangered. In other Chaloupka’s (2007) nesting beach trend commercial and artisanal fisheries words, we believe that a threatened analyses. We note that the SQE operating within the range of this DPS, status is not appropriate for this DPS approach is based on past performance the lack of comprehensive information because of the significance of the of the DPS (nesting data) and does not on fishing distribution and effort, threats, particularly directed harvest fully reflect ongoing and future threats limitations on implementing and fishery bycatch, and evidence that to all life stages within the DPS. The demonstrated effective conservation the nesting population is significantly stage-based deterministic modeling reduced from historical levels. measures, geopolitical complexities, approach indicated the South Atlantic limitations on enforcement capacity, Ocean DPS is likely to decline in the Mediterranean Sea DPS and lack of availability of future, even under the scenario of the Nesting occurs throughout the central comprehensive bycatch reduction lowest anthropogenic mortality rates. and eastern Mediterranean in Italy, technologies. It is highly uncertain This result is largely driven by mortality Greece, Cyprus, Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, whether the actions identified in the of juvenile loggerheads from fishery Israel, the Sinai, Egypt, Libya, and Conservation Efforts section above will bycatch that occurs throughout the Tunisia. In addition, sporadic nesting be fully implemented in the near future South Atlantic Ocean (Factor E). has been reported from the western or that they will be sufficiently effective. Although national and international Mediterranean, but the vast majority of While climate change may have adverse governmental and non-governmental nesting (greater than 80 percent) occurs effects on all of the loggerhead sea turtle entities on both sides of the South in Greece and Turkey. There is no DPSs, it is not possible to predict Atlantic are currently working toward discernible trend in nesting at the two exactly what those would be and the reducing loggerhead bycatch in the longest monitoring projects in Greece, extent to which they would affect this South Atlantic, it is unlikely that this Laganas Bay and southern Kyparissia DPS. source of mortality can be sufficiently Bay. However, the nesting trend at We have considered the five factors reduced across the range of the DPS in Rethymno Beach, which hosts described above in the Summary of the near future because of the diversity approximately 7 percent of all Factors Affecting the Nine Loggerhead and magnitude of the commercial and documented loggerhead nesting in the DPSs, efforts to protect the DPS, and the artisanal fisheries operating in the South Mediterranean, shows a highly population size and trends of the DPS. Atlantic, the lack of comprehensive

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58948 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

information on fishing distribution and by the species, at the time it is listed formation, vegetation type, tide, and effort, limitations on implementing * * * on which are found those specific soil types.’’ demonstrated effective conservation physical or biological features (I) The ESA also directs the Secretaries measures, geopolitical complexities, Essential to the conservation of the of Commerce and Interior to consider limitations on enforcement capacity, species and (II) which may require the economic, national security, and and lack of availability of special management considerations or other relevant impacts of specifying any comprehensive bycatch reduction protection; and (ii) specific areas particular area as critical habitat, and technologies. It is highly uncertain outside the geographical area occupied under section 4(b)(2) the Secretaries whether the actions identified in the by the species at the time it is listed may exclude any area from such Conservation Efforts section above will * * * upon a determination by the designation if the benefits of exclusion be fully implemented in the near future Secretaries of Commerce and Interior outweigh those of inclusion, provided or that they will be sufficiently effective. that such areas are essential for the that the exclusion will not result in the While climate change may have adverse conservation of the species.’’ Section extinction of the species. In addition, effects on all of the loggerhead sea turtle 3(3) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1532(3)) also the Secretaries may not designate as DPSs, it is not possible to predict defines the terms ‘‘conserve,’’ critical habitat any lands or other exactly what those would be and the ‘‘conserving,’’ and ‘‘conservation’’ to geographical areas owned or controlled extent to which they would affect this mean ‘‘to use and the use of all methods by the Department of Defense, or DPS. and procedures which are necessary to designated for its use, that are subject to We have considered the five factors bring any endangered species or an integrated natural resources described above in the Summary of threatened species to the point at which management plan under section 101 of Factors Affecting the Nine Loggerhead the measures provided pursuant to this the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a), if the DPSs, efforts to protect the DPS, and the chapter are no longer necessary.’’ Secretaries determine in writing that population size and trends of the DPS. Section 4(a)(3) of the ESA requires such a plan provides a benefit to the Although the nesting population is that, to the extent prudent and species for which critical habitat is small and is believed to be severely determinable, critical habitat be proposed for designation (see section depleted from historical levels, trends designated concurrently with the listing 318(a)(3) of the National Defense observed since the 1980s have shown a of a species. Section 4(b)(2) provides Authorization Act, Public Law 108– more recent increase in nesting that designation of critical habitat must 136). We also cannot designate critical abundance, nesting beach protection in be based on the best scientific data habitat in foreign countries or other Brazil has been effective and successful, available. Once critical habitat is areas outside U.S. jurisdiction (50 CFR and many important nesting beaches designated, section 7 of the ESA 424.12(h)). have been placed in protected status. requires Federal agencies to ensure that At this time, we lack the However, fishery bycatch is believed to they do not fund, authorize, or carry out comprehensive data and information be a significant threat to this DPS. any actions that are likely to destroy or necessary to identify and describe Although efforts have been made to adversely modify that habitat. This physical and biological features of the evaluate and assess levels of fishery requirement is in addition to section 7’s marine and terrestrial habitats of the bycatch, actions to reduce or eliminate requirement that Federal agencies loggerhead sea turtle. Accordingly, we bycatch mortality are lacking in most ensure their actions do not jeopardize find designation of critical habitat to be areas. As a result, we have determined the continued existence of the species. ‘‘not determinable’’ at this time. that the South Atlantic Ocean DPS of In determining what areas qualify as Public Comments Solicitied the loggerhead sea turtle is not currently critical habitat, 50 CFR 424.12(b) in danger of extinction, but is likely to requires that the Services consider those We request interested persons to become so in the foreseeable future physical or biological features that are submit information related to the throughout all of its range. Therefore, essential to the conservation of a given identification of critical habitat and we are listing it as threatened. In other species including space for individual essential physical or biological features words, we believe that an endangered and population growth and for normal for this species, as well as economic or status is not appropriate for this DPS behavior; food, water, air, light, other relevant impacts of designation of because of the increased trend in minerals, or other nutritional or critical habitat, for the U.S. marine and nesting abundance observed since the physiological requirements; cover or terrestrial habitats of loggerhead sea 1980s, the protected status of many of shelter; sites for breeding, reproduction, turtles occurring within the U.S. range the important nesting beaches, and and rearing of offspring; and habitats of the North Pacific Ocean DPS and the successful efforts to address threats on that are protected from disturbance or Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS. We the nesting beaches. are representative of the historical solicit information from the public, geographical and ecological distribution other concerned governmental agencies, Take Prohibitions of a species. The regulations further the scientific community, industry, or The existing take prohibitions and direct the Services to ‘‘focus on the any other interested party. You may exceptions contained in 50 CFR 17.31, principal biological or physical submit this information by any one of 17.42(b), 223.205, 223.206, and 223.207 constituent elements * * * that are several methods (see ADDRESSES). remain in effect and continue to apply essential to the conservation of the Peer Review to those DPSs listed as threatened sea species,’’ and specify that the ‘‘Known turtle species, which are the Southeast primary constituent elements shall be In December 2004, the Office of Indo-Pacific Ocean, Southwest Indian listed with the critical habitat Management and Budget (OMB) issued Ocean, Northwest Atlantic Ocean, and description.’’ The regulations identify a Final Information Quality Bulletin for South Atlantic Ocean DPSs. primary constituent elements (PCEs) as Peer Review, establishing minimum including, but not limited to: ‘‘roost peer review standards, a transparent Critical Habitat sites, nesting grounds, spawning sites, process for public disclosure of peer Section 3(5)(A) of the ESA defines feeding sites, seasonal wetland or review planning, and opportunities for critical habitat as ‘‘(i) the specific areas dryland, water quality or quantity, host public participation. The OMB Bulletin, within the geographical area occupied species or plant pollinator, geological implemented under the Information

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58949

Quality Act (Pub. L. 106–554), is information) disseminated by federal documenting our determination, along intended to enhance the quality and agencies.’’ Compliance of this document with the proposed rule, were sent to the credibility of the Federal government’s with NOAA guidelines is evaluated coastal zone management program scientific information, and applies to below. offices of these States. A list of the influential or highly influential • Utility: The information specific State contacts and a copy of the scientific information disseminated on disseminated is intended to describe a letters are available upon request. A or after June 16, 2005. We obtained species’ life history, population status, copy of the final rule will be sent to the independent peer review of the threats, and risks; management actions; coastal zone management programs in scientific information compiled in the and the effects of management actions. these States. The information is intended to be useful 2009 Status Review (Conant et al., 2009) Executive Order 13132 Federalism that supported the proposed rule (75 FR to State and Federal agencies, non- 12598; March 16, 2010) to list nine DPSs governmental organizations, industry Executive Order 13132 requires of the loggerhead sea turtle as groups and other interested parties so agencies to take into account any endangered or threatened. The Status they can understand the listing status of federalism impacts of regulations under Review underwent independent peer the species. development. It includes specific • review by nine scientists with expertise Integrity: No confidential data were directives for consultation in situations in loggerhead sea turtle biology, used in the analysis of the impacts where a regulation will preempt State genetics, and modeling. We also associated with this document. All law or impose substantial direct solicited technical review of the information considered in this compliance costs on State and local proposed listing determination from six document and used to analyze the governments (unless required by independent experts, and received proposed action, is considered public statute). Neither of those circumstances information. is applicable to this final rule. In reviews from all six of these experts. • On July 1, 1994, the Services Objectivity: The NOAA Information keeping with the intent of the published a policy for peer review of Quality Guidelines require disseminated Administration and Congress to provide scientific data (59 FR 34270). The intent information to be presented in an continuing and meaningful dialogue on of the peer review policy is to ensure accurate, clear, complete, and unbiased issues of mutual State and Federal that listings are based on the best manner. This document was prepared interest, the proposed rule was provided scientific and commercial data with these objectives in mind. It was to each State in which the subject available. We solicited the expert also reviewed by a variety of biologists, species occurs, and the State was opinions of six qualified and policy analysts, and attorneys from invited to comment. We considered and independent specialists from the NMFS and USFWS. incorporated their comments and recommendations into this final academic and scientific community. We Administrative Procedure Act have addressed their comments in the determination where applicable. We The Federal Administrative Procedure also provided responses to their Summary of Comments section and Act (APA) establishes procedural incorporated them as appropriate in this comments in the Summary of requirements applicable to informal Comments section. final rule. rulemaking by Federal agencies. The References purpose of the APA is to ensure public Environmental Justice access to the Federal rulemaking Executive Order 12898 requires that A complete list of the references and process and to give the public notice Federal actions address environmental all non-copyrighted publications cited and an opportunity to comment before justice in decision-making process. In in this final rule are available on the the agency promulgates new particular, the environmental effects of Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. regulations. These public notice and the actions should not have a Classification comment procedures have been disproportionate effect on minority and completed in this rulemaking as further low-income communities. The final National Environmental Policy Act explained in the Background. listing determinations are not expected ESA listing decisions are exempt from to have a disproportionate effect on Coastal Zone Management Act the requirement to prepare an minority or low-income communities environmental assessment (EA) or Section 307(c)(1) of the Federal because the implications of these listing environmental impact statement (EIS) Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 actions do not adversely affect the under the National Environmental requires that all Federal activities that human health of low-income, minority, Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (NOAA affect any land or water use or natural or other populations or the environment Administrative Order 216–6.03(e)(1); resource of the coastal zone be in which these various populations live. Pacific Legal Foundation v. Andrus, 675 consistent with approved State coastal F. 2d 825 (6th Cir. 1981)). Thus, we zone management programs to the Executive Order 12866, Regulatory have determined that the final listing maximum extent practicable. NMFS and Flexibility Act, and Paperwork determinations for the nine loggerhead USFWS have determined that this Reduction Act (PRA) DPSs described in this notice are action is consistent to the maximum As noted in the Conference Report on exempt from the requirements of NEPA. extent practicable with the enforceable the 1982 amendments to the ESA, policies of approved Coastal Zone economic impacts shall not be Information Quality Act Management Programs of Maine, New considered when assessing the status of The Information Quality Act directed Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode a species. Therefore, the economic the Office of Management and Budget to Island, Connecticut, New York, New analysis requirements of the Regulatory issue government wide guidelines that Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, Flexibility Act are not applicable to the ‘‘provide policy and procedural North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, listing process. In addition, this rule is guidance to federal agencies for Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, exempt from review under Executive ensuring and maximizing the quality, Louisiana, Texas, California, Oregon, Order 12866. This rule does not contain objectivity, utility, and integrity of Washington, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and a collection-of-information requirement information (including statistical the U.S. Virgin Islands. Letters for the purposes of the PRA.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58950 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

List of Subjects species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and PART 17—ENDANGERED AND recordkeeping requirements, 50 CFR Part 17 THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS Transportation. Endangered and threatened species, ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 Dated: September 9, 2011. Exports, Imports, Reporting and continues to read as follows: Daniel M. Ashe, recordkeeping requirements, Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. Transportation. Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99– 50 CFR Part 223 Samuel D. Rauch III, 625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted. Deputy Assistant Administrator for ■ 2. In § 17.11(h) revise the entry for Endangered and threatened species, Regulatory Programs, National Marine ‘‘Sea turtle, loggerhead’’, which is in Exports, Imports, Reporting and Fisheries Service. alphabetical order under REPTILES, to recordkeeping requirements, For the reasons set out in the read as follows: Transportation. preamble, FWS and NOAA amend 50 § 17.11 Endangered and threatened 50 CFR Part 224 CFR parts 17, 223, and 224 as follows: wildlife. Administrative practice and * * * * * procedure, Endangered and threatened (h) * * *

Species Vertebrate population Historic range where endangered or Status When listed Critical Special Common name Scientific name threatened habitat rules

******* Sea turtle, logger- Caretta caretta ..... Mediterranean Mediterranean Sea east E 794 NA NA head, Mediterra- Sea Basin. of 5°36′ W. Long. nean Sea. Sea turtle, logger- Caretta caretta ..... North Indian North Indian Ocean north E 794 NA NA head, North In- Ocean Basin. of the equator and dian Ocean. south of 30° N. Lat. Sea turtle, logger- Caretta caretta ..... North Pacific North Pacific north of the E 794 NA NA head, North Pa- Ocean Basin. equator and south of cific Ocean. 60° N. Lat. Sea turtle, logger- Caretta caretta ..... Northeast Atlantic Northeast Atlantic Ocean E 794 NA NA head, Northeast Ocean Basin. north of the equator, Atlantic Ocean. south of 60° N. Lat., and east of 40° W. Long., except in the vi- cinity of the Strait of Gi- braltar where the east- ern boundary is 5°36′ W. Long. Sea turtle, logger- Caretta caretta ..... Northwest Atlantic Northwest Atlantic Ocean T 794 NA NA head, Northwest Ocean Basin. north of the equator, Atlantic Ocean. south of 60° N. Lat., and west of 40° W. Long. Sea turtle, logger- Caretta caretta ..... South Atlantic South Atlantic Ocean T 794 NA NA head, South At- Ocean Basin. south of the equator, lantic Ocean. north of 60° S. Lat., west of 20° E. Long., and east of 67° W. Long. Sea turtle, logger- Caretta caretta ..... South Pacific South Pacific south of the E 794 NA NA head, South Pa- Ocean Basin. equator, north of 60° S. cific Ocean. Lat., west of 67° W. Long., and east of 141° E. Long. Sea turtle, logger- Caretta caretta ..... Southeast Indian Southeast Indian Ocean T 794 NA NA head, Southeast Ocean Basin; south of the equator, Indo-Pacific South Pacific north of 60° S. Lat., Ocean. Ocean Basin as and east of 80° E. far east as 141° Long.; South Pacific E. Long. Ocean south of the equator, north of 60° S. Lat., and west of 141° E. Long. Sea turtle, logger- Caretta caretta ..... Southwest Indian Southwest Indian Ocean T 794 NA NA head, Southwest Ocean Basin. north of the equator, Indian Ocean. south of 30° N. Lat., west of 20° E. Long., and east of 80° E. Long.

*******

VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:44 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 58951

PART 223—THREATENED MARINE Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531–1543; subpart § 223.102 Enumeration of threatened AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES B, § 223.201–202 also issued under 16 U.S.C. marine and anadromous species. 1361 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 5503(d) for * * * * * § 223.206(d)(9). ■ 3. The authority citation for part 223 ■ 4. Amend the table in § 223.102 by continues to read as follows: revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:

Species 1 Where listed Citation(s) for listing Citation(s) for critical Common name Scientific name determination(s) habitat designation(s)

******* (b) SEA TURTLES (1) Green sea turtle 2 ...... Chelonia mydas ...... Wherever found, except where listed 43 FR 32800; Jul 28, 63 FR 46693; Sep 2, as endangered under 1978. 1998, 64 FR 14052; § 224.101(c); circumglobal in trop- Mar 23, 1999. ical and temperate seas and oceans. (2) Loggerhead sea tur- Caretta caretta ...... Northwest Atlantic Ocean north of [INSERT FR CITATION NA. tle—Northwest Atlantic the equator, south of 60° N. Lat., WHEN PUBLISHED Ocean DPS 2. and west of 40° W. Long. AS A FINAL RULE]. (3) Loggerhead sea tur- Caretta caretta ...... South Atlantic Ocean south of the [INSERT FR CITATION NA. tle—South Atlantic equator, north of 60° S. Lat., west WHEN PUBLISHED Ocean DPS 2. of 20° E. Long., and east of 67° AS A FINAL RULE]. W. Long. (4) Loggerhead sea tur- Caretta caretta ...... Southeast Indian Ocean south of the [INSERT FR CITATION NA. tle—Southeast Indo- equator, north of 60° S. Lat., and WHEN PUBLISHED Pacific Ocean DPS 2. east of 80° E. Long.; South Pacific AS A FINAL RULE]. Ocean south of the equator, north of 60° S. Lat., and west of 141° E. Long. (5) Loggerhead sea tur- Caretta caretta ...... Southwest Indian Ocean north of the [INSERT FR CITATION NA. tle—Southwest Indian equator, south of 30° N. Lat., west WHEN PUBLISHED Ocean DPS 2. of 20° E. Long., and east of 80° AS A FINAL RULE]. E. Long. (6) Olive ridley sea tur- Lepidochelys olivacea ... Wherever found, except where listed 43 FR 32800; Jul 28, NA. tle 2. as endangered under 1978. § 224.101(c); circumglobal in trop- ical and temperate seas.

******* 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). 2 Jurisdiction for sea turtles by the Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, is limited to turtles while in the water.

PART 224—ENDANGERED MARINE ■ 6. Amend § 224.101 by revising where they are listed, and the citations AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES paragraph (c) to read as follows: for the listings and critical habitat designations. Jurisdiction for sea turtles § 224.101 Enumeration of endangered ■ 5. The authority citation for part 224 marine and anadromous species. by the Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric continues to read as follows: * * * * * Administration, National Marine Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531–1543 and 16 (c) Sea turtles. The following table U.S.C. 1361 et seq. lists the common and scientific names Fisheries Service, is limited to turtles of endangered sea turtles, the locations while in the water.

Species1 Where listed Citation(s) for listing Citation(s) for critical Common name Scientific name determination(s) habitat designation(s)

******* (1) Green sea turtle ...... Chelonia mydas ...... Breeding colony populations in Flor- 43 FR 32800; Jul 28, NA. ida and on the Pacific coast of 1978. Mexico. (2) Hawksbill sea turtle ... Eretmochelys imbricata Wherever found; tropical seas ...... 35 FR 8491; Jun 2, 47 FR 27295; Jun 24, 1970. 1982, 63 FR 46693; Sep 2, 1998, 64 FR 14052; Mar 23, 1999. (3) Kemp’s ridley sea tur- Lepidochelys kempii ..... Wherever found; tropical and tem- 35 FR 18319; Dec 2, NA. tle. perate seas in Atlantic Basin, incl. 1970. Gulf of Mexico.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:36 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2 58952 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 184 / Thursday, September 22, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

Species1 Where listed Citation(s) for listing Citation(s) for critical Common name Scientific name determination(s) habitat designation(s)

(4) Leatherback sea tur- Dermochelys coriacea .. Wherever found; tropical, temperate, 35 FR 8491; Jun 2, 43 FR 43688; Sep 26, tle. and subpolar seas. 1970. 1978, 44 FR 17710; Mar 23, 1979, 64 FR 14052; Mar 23, 1999. (5) Loggerhead sea tur- Caretta caretta ...... Mediterranean Sea east of 5°36′ W [INSERT FR CITATION NA. tle—Mediterranean Long. WHEN PUBLISHED Sea DPS. AS A FINAL RULE]. (6) Loggerhead sea tur- Caretta caretta ...... North Indian Ocean north of the [INSERT FR CITATION NA. tle—North Indian equator and south of 30° N. Lat. WHEN PUBLISHED Ocean DPS. AS A FINAL RULE]. (7) Loggerhead sea tur- Caretta caretta ...... North Pacific north of the equator [INSERT FR CITATION NA. tle—North Pacific and south of 60° N. Lat. WHEN PUBLISHED Ocean DPS. AS A FINAL RULE]. (8) Loggerhead sea tur- Caretta caretta ...... Northeast Atlantic Ocean north of [INSERT FR CITATION NA. tle—Northeast Atlantic the equator, south of 60° N. Lat., WHEN PUBLISHED Ocean DPS. and east of 40° W. Long., except AS A FINAL RULE]. in the vicinity of the Strait of Gi- braltar where the eastern bound- ary is 5°36′ W. Long. (9) Loggerhead sea tur- Caretta caretta ...... South Pacific south of the equator, [INSERT FR CITATION NA. tle—South Pacific north of 60° S. Lat., west of 67° WHEN PUBLISHED Ocean DPS. W. Long., and east of 141° E. AS A FINAL RULE]. Long. (10) Sea turtle, olive rid- Lepidochelys olivacea ... Breeding colony populations on the 43 FR 32800; Jul 28, NA. ley. Pacific coast of Mexico. 1978. 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).

* * * * * [FR Doc. 2011–23960 Filed 9–16–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:36 Sep 21, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\22SER2.SGM 22SER2 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES2