DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 24/Wednesday, February 5, 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 24/Wednesday, February 5, 2020 6518 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 24 / Wednesday, February 5, 2020 / Notices Shannon Gleason at (907) 271–2809 at (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et NMFS previously issued an IHA to least 7 working days prior to the seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce the Navy for similar activities meeting date. (as delegated to NMFS) to allow, upon conducted in 2018 (83 FR 6522; Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. request, the incidental, but not February 14, 2018). The Navy complied intentional, taking of small numbers of with all the requirements (e.g., Dated: January 30, 2020. marine mammals by U.S. citizens who mitigation, monitoring, and reporting) of Diane M. DeJames-Daly, engage in a specified activity (other than the previous IHA and information Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable commercial fishing) within a specified regarding their monitoring results may Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. geographical region if certain findings be found in the Estimated Take section. [FR Doc. 2020–02165 Filed 2–4–20; 8:45 am] are made and either regulations are Description of Proposed Activity BILLING CODE 3510–22–P issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed The Navy proposes to conduct incidental take authorization may be submarine training and testing activities DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE provided to the public for review. from an ice camp established on an ice Authorization for incidental takings floe in the Beaufort Sea and Arctic National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ocean for approximately six weeks Administration shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on beginning in February 2020. The ice [RTID 0648–XR067] the species or stock(s) and will not have camp would be established approximately 100–200 nautical miles an unmitigable adverse impact on the (nmi) north of Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. The Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to availability of the species or stock(s) for submarine training and testing activities Specified Activities; Taking Marine taking for subsistence uses (where would occur over approximately four Mammals Incidental to U.S. Navy 2020 relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe weeks during the six-week period. Ice Exercise Activities in the Beaufort the permissible methods of taking and Submarine active acoustic transmissions Sea and Arctic Ocean other ‘‘means of effecting the least may result in occurrence of temporary practicable adverse impact’’ on the AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries hearing impairment (temporary affected species or stocks and their Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and threshold shift (TTS)) and behavioral habitat, paying particular attention to Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), harassment (Level B harassment) of rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of Commerce. ringed and bearded seals. ACTION: Notice; issuance of an Incidental similar significance, and on the A detailed description of ICEX20 Harassment Authorization (IHA). availability of the species or stocks for activities is provided in the Federal taking for certain subsistence uses Register notice for the proposed IHA (84 SUMMARY: In accordance with the (referred to in shorthand as FR 68886; December 17, 2019). Since regulations implementing the Marine ‘‘mitigation’’); and requirements that time, no changes have been made Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as pertaining to the monitoring and to the planned activities. Therefore, a amended, notification is hereby given reporting of the takings must be set detailed description is not provided that NMFS has issued an IHA to the forth. here. Please refer to that Federal United States Department of the Navy The NDAA (Pub. L. 108–136) Register notice for the description of the (Navy) to incidentally harass, by Level removed the ‘‘small numbers’’ and specific activity. B harassment only, marine mammals ‘‘specified geographical region’’ during submarine training and testing limitations indicated above and Comments and Responses activities associated with Ice Exercise amended the definition of ‘‘harassment’’ A notice of NMFS’s proposal to issue 2020 (ICEX20) north of Prudhoe Bay, as it applies to a ‘‘military readiness an IHA to the Navy was published in Alaska. The Navy’s activities are activity.’’ The activity for which the Federal Register on December 17, considered military readiness activities incidental take of marine mammals is 2019 (84 FR 68886). That notice pursuant to the MMPA, as amended by being requested addressed here qualifies described, in detail, the Navy’s activity, the National Defense Authorization Act as a military readiness activity. The the marine mammal species that may be for Fiscal Year 2004 (NDAA). definitions of all applicable MMPA affected by the activity, and the DATES: This authorization is effective statutory terms cited above are included anticipated effects on marine mammals. from February 1, 2020, through January in the relevant sections below. During the 30-day public comment 31, 2021. Summary of Request period, NMFS received a comment letter FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: from the Marine Mammal Commission Amy Fowler, Office of Protected On July 3, 2019, NMFS received a (Commission). Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. request from the Navy for an IHA to take Comment 1: The Commission noted Electronic copies of the application and marine mammals incidental to that the Navy used cutoff distances supporting documents, as well as a list submarine training and testing instead of relying on Bayesian biphasic of the references cited in this document, activities, including establishment of a dose response functions (BRFs) to may be obtained online at: https:// tracking range on an ice floe in the inform take estimates. The Commission www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/ Beaufort Sea and Arctic Ocean north of asserted that the cutoff distances used incidental-take-authorizations-under- Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. The application by the Navy are unsubstantiated and marine-mammal-protection-act. In case was deemed adequate and complete on that the Navy arbitrarily set a cutoff of problems accessing these documents, November 22, 2019. The Navy’s request distance of 10 kilometers (km) for please call the contact listed above. was for take of ringed seals (Pusa pinnipeds, which could effectively SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: hispida hispida) and bearded seals eliminate a large portion of the (Erignathus barbatus) by Level B estimated number of takes. The Background harassment. Neither the Navy nor NMFS Commission, therefore, recommended The MMPA prohibits the ‘‘take’’ of expect serious injury or mortality to that the Navy refrain from using cut-off marine mammals, with certain result from this activity. Therefore, an distances in conjunction with the exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and IHA is appropriate. Bayesian BRFs. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:54 Feb 04, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM 05FEN1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 24 / Wednesday, February 5, 2020 / Notices 6519 Response: We disagree with the Renewals are available for more than area and summarizes information Commission’s recommendation. The one year. Any given Federal Register related to the population or stock, derivation of the behavioral response notice considering a Renewal clearly including regulatory status under the functions and associated cutoff indicates that it is only being considered MMPA and ESA and potential distances is provided in the Navy’s for one year. Accordingly, changes to biological removal (PBR), where known. Criteria and Thresholds for U.S. Navy the Renewal language on the website, For taxonomy, we follow Committee on Acoustic and Explosive Effects Analysis Federal Register notices, or Taxonomy (2018). PBR is defined by the (Phase III) technical report (Navy authorizations is not necessary. MMPA as the maximum number of 2017a). The consideration of proximity animals, not including natural (distance cutoff) was part of criteria Changes From the Proposed IHA to Final IHA mortalities, that may be removed from a developed in consultation with NMFS marine mammal stock while allowing and was applied within the Navy’s BRF. NMFS has added specific elements that stock to reach or maintain its Distance cutoffs beyond which the that must be reported in the Navy’s optimum sustainable population (as potential of significant behavioral post-activity monitoring report. These described in NMFS’s SARs). While no responses were considered to be requirements are detailed in the mortality or serious injury is anticipated unlikely were used in conducting Monitoring and Reporting section of this or authorized here, PBR and annual analysis for ICEX20. The Navy’s BRF notice. serious injury and mortality from applied within these distances is an Description of Marine Mammals in the anthropogenic sources are included here appropriate method for providing a Area of Specified Activities as gross indicators of the status of the realistic (but still conservative where species and other threats. some uncertainties exist) estimate of Sections 3 and 4 of the application impact and potential take for these summarize available information Marine mammal abundance estimates activities. regarding status and trends, distribution presented in this notice represent the Comment: The Commission and habitat preferences, and behavior total number of individuals that make recommended that NMFS stipulate that and life history, of ringed and bearded up a given stock or the total number an IHA Renewal
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Alaska Sea Lions and Seals
    Alaska Sea Lions and Seals Blaire, Kate, Donovan, & Alex Biodiversity of Alaska 18 June 2017 https://www.stlzoo.org/files/3913/6260/5731/Sea-lion_RogerBrandt.jpg Similarities & Differences of Sea Lions and Seals Phocidae Family Otariidae Family cannot rotate back can rotate back flippers flippers; move like a marine under themselves to walk caterpillar on land mammals and run on land no external earflaps pinniped, “fin external earflaps footed” in use back flippers for Latin use front flippers for power when swimming power when swimming preyed upon by polar use front flippers for use back flippers for bears, orcas, steering when swimming steering when swimming and sharks food: krill, fish, lobster, food: squid, octopus, birds birds, and fish claws and fur on front no claws or hair on front flippers flippers Seals ("What’s the Difference “ 2017) Sea Lions Evolution • Both seals and sea lions are Pinnipeds • Descended from one ancestral line • Belong to order carnivora • Closest living relatives are bears and musteloids (diverged 50 million years ago) http://what-when-how.com/marine-mammals/pinniped-evolution- (Churchill 2015) marine-mammals/ http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2009-04/24/content_7710231.htm Phylogenetics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinniped Steller: Eumetopias jubatus http://www.arkive.org/stellers-sea-lion/eumetopias-jubatus/image-G62602.html Steller: Eumetopias jubatus • Classification (”Steller Sea Lion” 2017) Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Mamalia Order: Carnivora Family: Otarridae Genus: Eumetopias Species:
    [Show full text]
  • 8 April 2021 Mr. Jon Kurland Assistant
    8 April 2021 Mr. Jon Kurland Assistant Regional Administrator Protected Resources Division, Alaska Region National Marine Fisheries Service P.O. Box 21668 Juneau, Alaska 99082-1668 Dear Mr. Kurland: The Marine Mammal Commission (the Commission), in consultation with its Committee of Scientific Advisors on Marine Mammals, has reviewed the National Marine Fisheries Service’s (NMFS) 8 January 2021 Federal Register notice (86 Fed. Reg. 1452) revising its proposed designation of critical habitat for Arctic ringed seals (Phoca hispida hispida)1 and reopening the comment period on that proposal. The Commission offers the following comments and recommendations. Background On 28 December 2012, NMFS published a final rule listing the Arctic ringed seal as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) (77 Fed. Reg. 76706) and requesting information on physical and biological features essential to the conservation of Arctic ringed seals and on economic consequences of designating critical habitat for this species. Section 3(5)(A) of the ESA defines “critical habitat” as: (i) the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species, at the time it is listed in accordance with section 4 of this Act, on which are found those physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation of the species and (II) which may require special management considerations or protection; and (ii) specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed in accordance with the provisions of section 4 of this Act, upon a determination by the Secretary that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.
    [Show full text]
  • Mammal Species Native to the USA and Canada for Which the MIL Has an Image (296) 31 July 2021
    Mammal species native to the USA and Canada for which the MIL has an image (296) 31 July 2021 ARTIODACTYLA (includes CETACEA) (38) ANTILOCAPRIDAE - pronghorns Antilocapra americana - Pronghorn BALAENIDAE - bowheads and right whales 1. Balaena mysticetus – Bowhead Whale BALAENOPTERIDAE -rorqual whales 1. Balaenoptera acutorostrata – Common Minke Whale 2. Balaenoptera borealis - Sei Whale 3. Balaenoptera brydei - Bryde’s Whale 4. Balaenoptera musculus - Blue Whale 5. Balaenoptera physalus - Fin Whale 6. Eschrichtius robustus - Gray Whale 7. Megaptera novaeangliae - Humpback Whale BOVIDAE - cattle, sheep, goats, and antelopes 1. Bos bison - American Bison 2. Oreamnos americanus - Mountain Goat 3. Ovibos moschatus - Muskox 4. Ovis canadensis - Bighorn Sheep 5. Ovis dalli - Thinhorn Sheep CERVIDAE - deer 1. Alces alces - Moose 2. Cervus canadensis - Wapiti (Elk) 3. Odocoileus hemionus - Mule Deer 4. Odocoileus virginianus - White-tailed Deer 5. Rangifer tarandus -Caribou DELPHINIDAE - ocean dolphins 1. Delphinus delphis - Common Dolphin 2. Globicephala macrorhynchus - Short-finned Pilot Whale 3. Grampus griseus - Risso's Dolphin 4. Lagenorhynchus albirostris - White-beaked Dolphin 5. Lissodelphis borealis - Northern Right-whale Dolphin 6. Orcinus orca - Killer Whale 7. Peponocephala electra - Melon-headed Whale 8. Pseudorca crassidens - False Killer Whale 9. Sagmatias obliquidens - Pacific White-sided Dolphin 10. Stenella coeruleoalba - Striped Dolphin 11. Stenella frontalis – Atlantic Spotted Dolphin 12. Steno bredanensis - Rough-toothed Dolphin 13. Tursiops truncatus - Common Bottlenose Dolphin MONODONTIDAE - narwhals, belugas 1. Delphinapterus leucas - Beluga 2. Monodon monoceros - Narwhal PHOCOENIDAE - porpoises 1. Phocoena phocoena - Harbor Porpoise 2. Phocoenoides dalli - Dall’s Porpoise PHYSETERIDAE - sperm whales Physeter macrocephalus – Sperm Whale TAYASSUIDAE - peccaries Dicotyles tajacu - Collared Peccary CARNIVORA (48) CANIDAE - dogs 1. Canis latrans - Coyote 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Patterns in Marine Mammal Distributions
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION I. TAXONOMIC DECISIONS In this work we followed Wilson and Reeder (2005) and Reeves, Stewart, and Clapham’s (2002) taxonomy. In the last 20 years several new species have been described such as Mesoplodon perrini (Dalebout 2002), Orcaella heinsohni (Beasley 2005), and the recognition of several species have been proposed for orcas (Perrin 1982, Pitman et al. 2007), Bryde's whales (Kanda et al. 2007), Blue whales (Garrigue et al. 2003, Ichihara 1996), Tucuxi dolphin (Cunha et al. 2005, Caballero et al. 2008), and other marine mammals. Since we used the conservation status of all species following IUCN (2011), this work is based on species recognized by this IUCN to keep a standardized baseline. II. SPECIES LIST List of the species included in this paper, indicating their conservation status according to IUCN (2010.4) and its range area. Order Family Species IUCN 2010 Freshwater Range area km2 Enhydra lutris EN A2abe 1,084,750,000,000 Mustelidae Lontra felina EN A3cd 996,197,000,000 Odobenidae Odobenus rosmarus DD 5,367,060,000,000 Arctocephalus australis LC 1,674,290,000,000 Arctocephalus forsteri LC 1,823,240,000,000 Arctocephalus galapagoensis EN A2a 167,512,000,000 Arctocephalus gazella LC 39,155,300,000,000 Arctocephalus philippii NT 163,932,000,000 Arctocephalus pusillus LC 1,705,430,000,000 Arctocephalus townsendi NT 1,045,950,000,000 Carnivora Otariidae Arctocephalus tropicalis LC 39,249,100,000,000 Callorhinus ursinus VU A2b 12,935,900,000,000 Eumetopias jubatus EN A2a 3,051,310,000,000 Neophoca cinerea
    [Show full text]
  • Ecology of Ringed Seals (Phoca Hispida) in Western Hudson Bay, Canada
    Ecology of ringed seals (Phoca hispida) in western Hudson Bay, Canada by Magaly Vincent-Chambellant A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies of The University of Manitoba in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Biological Sciences University of Manitoba Winnipeg Copyright © 2010 by Magaly Vincent-Chambellant Abstract Recently, Hudson Bay experienced unidirectional trends in temperature, sea-ice extent, time of break-up, and length of the open-water season. Predicted impacts on population dynamics of ice-associated species include habitat loss and shift in prey availability. The ringed seal (Phoca hispida) depends on a stable ice platform with sufficient snow depth and a productive open-water season for reproduction and survival. Evidence of ringed seal sensitivity to environmental variations has been reported, but mechanisms involved were poorly understood. In western Hudson Bay, density, life-history traits, and diet of ringed seals were monitored over two decades, providing an opportunity to understand the effects of climatic variations on the population dynamics of this long-lived carnivore. Ringed seal density was estimated through strip-transect analyses after aerial surveys were flown in western Hudson Bay in late spring during the annual moult in the 1990s and 2000s. During these periods, ringed seals were also sampled from Inuit subsistence fall harvests In Arviat, NU, and ages, reproductive status, percentage of pups in the harvest, body condition, and diet were assessed. Strong inter-annual variations in these parameters were observed, and a decadal cycle was suggested and related to variations in the sea-ice regime.
    [Show full text]
  • Periodic Status Review for the Steller Sea Lion
    STATE OF WASHINGTON January 2015 Periodic Status Review for the Steller Sea Lion Gary J. Wiles The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife maintains a list of endangered, threatened, and sensitive species (Washington Administrative Codes 232-12-014 and 232-12-011, Appendix E). In 1990, the Washington Wildlife Commission adopted listing procedures developed by a group of citizens, interest groups, and state and federal agencies (Washington Administrative Code 232-12-297, Appendix A). The procedures include how species listings will be initiated, criteria for listing and delisting, a requirement for public review, the development of recovery or management plans, and the periodic review of listed species. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife is directed to conduct reviews of each endangered, threatened, or sensitive wildlife species at least every five years after the date of its listing. The reviews are designed to include an update of the species status report to determine whether the status of the species warrants its current listing status or deserves reclassification. The agency notifies the general public and specific parties who have expressed their interest to the Department of the periodic status review at least one year prior to the five-year period so that they may submit new scientific data to be included in the review. The agency notifies the public of its recommendation at least 30 days prior to presenting the findings to the Fish and Wildlife Commission. In addition, if the agency determines that new information suggests that the classification of a species should be changed from its present state, the agency prepares documents to determine the environmental consequences of adopting the recommendations pursuant to requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Novel Terrestrial Haul-Out Behaviour by Ringed Seals
    POLAR RESEARCH, 2017 VOL. 36, 1374124 https://doi.org/10.1080/17518369.2017.1374124 RESEARCH ARTCLE Novel terrestrial haul-out behaviour by ringed seals (Pusa hispida)in Svalbard, in association with harbour seals (Phoca vitulina) Christian Lydersena, Jade Vaquie-Garciaa, Espen Lydersenb, Guttorm N. Christensenc & Kit M. Kovacsa aNorwegian Polar Institute, Tromsø, Norway; bUniversity College of Southeast Norway, Campus Bø, Norway; cAkvaplan-Niva, Tromsø, Norway ABSTRACT KEYWORDS Ringed seals (Pusa hispida) are the most ice-associated of all Arctic pinnipeds. In the Svalbard Arctic; behavioural plasticity; area, this species has always given birth, moulted and rested on sea ice. In addition, much of climate change; glacier their food has been comprised of ice-associated prey. Recently, ringed seals have been fronts; lagoons; sea ice reported to be using terrestrial substrates as a haul-out platform in some fjords on the west coast of Spitsbergen. In many cases the seals involved are harbour seals (Phoca vitulina), which are extending their distribution into new areas within the Svalbard Archipelago and which are being misclassified as ringed seals. However, this study reports that terrestrial haul- out by ringed seals is also now taking place on rocks exposed at low tide as well as on the coastline. Recent intrusions of warm Atlantic Water (with associated prey) have extended deep into the fjords of western Spitsbergen, resulting in deteriorated ice conditions for ringed seals and expanded habitat for harbour seals. Over the last decade, ringed seals have become more and more confined in coastal areas to narrow bands in front of tidal glacier fronts where Arctic conditions still prevail.
    [Show full text]
  • Electrophoretic Variation in Large Mammals. III. the Ringed Seal, Pusa-Hispida, the Harp Seal, Pagophilus-Groenlandicus, and the Hooded Seal, Cystophora-Cristata
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Biological Sciences Faculty Publications Biological Sciences 1982 Electrophoretic Variation in Large Mammals. III. The Ringed Seal, Pusa-Hispida, the Harp Seal, Pagophilus-Groenlandicus, and the Hooded Seal, Cystophora-Cristata V. Simonsen Fred W. Allendorf University of Montana - Missoula, [email protected] W. F. Eanes F. O. Kapel Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/biosci_pubs Part of the Biology Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Simonsen, V.; Allendorf, Fred W.; Eanes, W. F.; and Kapel, F. O., "Electrophoretic Variation in Large Mammals. III. The Ringed Seal, Pusa-Hispida, the Harp Seal, Pagophilus-Groenlandicus, and the Hooded Seal, Cystophora-Cristata" (1982). Biological Sciences Faculty Publications. 63. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/biosci_pubs/63 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Biological Sciences at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Biological Sciences Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Hereditas 97: 87-90 (1982) Electrophoretic variation in large mammals 111. The ringed seal, Pusa hispida, the harp seal, Pagophilus groenlandicus, and the hooded seal, Cystophora cristata. V. SIMONSEN', F. W. ALLENDORF, W. F. EANES3 and F. 0. KAPEL4 ' Institute of Ecology and Genetics, University of Aarhus, Denmark Department of Zoology, University of Montana, USA ' Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York, Stony Brook, USA Greenland Fisheries Investigations, Charlottenlund, Denmark SIMONSEN, V., ALLENDORF, F. W.,EANES, W.
    [Show full text]
  • SEALS and SEA LIONS in BRITISH COLUMBIA Sea Lion Comparison Five Species of Seals and Sea Lions (Pinnipeds) Are Found in British Columbia (B.C.) Waters
    SEALS AND SEA LIONS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA Sea Lion Comparison Five species of seals and sea lions (pinnipeds) are found in British Columbia (B.C.) waters. Although commercial hunting of all marine mammals is prohibited in the Pacific Region, accidental Steller Sea Lions are commonly entanglement in fishing gear or debris, oil spills, conflicts with fisherman, and environmental mistaken for California Sea Lions contaminants all pose a threat to pinnipeds. which pass through B.C. in early winter and late spring. Look for Steller Sea Lions were listed as a species of Special Concern in Canada under the Species at Risk these key differences. Act (SARA) in 2005. People and boats can interfere with an animals’ ability to feed, communicate, rest, breed, and care for its young. Be cautious and quiet around pinnipeds, especially when passing haulouts, and avoid approaching closer than 100 meters. CALIFORNIA SEA LION STELLER SEA LION Only males in B.C. Males and females in B.C. Reporting Marine Mammal Incidents Broad snout Adults larger, Rescuing an injured or entangled seal or seal lion can be dangerous - do not attempt to touch or Prominent tan colour sagittal crest move an animal yourself. Observe from a distance and report any incidents of injured, entangled, Growling distressed, or dead marine mammals and sea turtles. If accidental contact occurs between a marine Long, narrow vocalizations snout mammal and your vessel or gear, regulations require you to immediately report it. Proper species identification (see back) is critical for documenting
    [Show full text]
  • Pacific Walrus (Odobenus Rosmaurs Divergens) As a Threatened Or Endangered Species Under the Endangered Species Act
    BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR PETITION TO LIST THE PACIFIC WALRUS (ODOBENUS ROSMAURS DIVERGENS) AS A THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT © BILL HICKEY, USFWS CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY FEBRUARY 7, 2008 Notice of Petition____________________________________________________ Dirk Kempthorne, Secretary Department of the Interior 1849 C Street, N.W. Washington. D.C. 20240 Tom Melius, Regional Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska Regional Office 1011 East Tudor Road Anchorage, Alaska 99503 PETITIONER The Center for Biological Diversity 1095 Market Street, Suite 511 San Francisco, CA 94103 ph: (415) 436-9682 ext 301 fax: (415) 436-9683 __________________________ Date: this 7th day of February, 2008 Shaye Wolf, Ph.D. Kassie Siegel Brendan Cummings Center for Biological Diversity Pursuant to Section 4(b) of the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. §1533(b), Section 553(3) of the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. § 553(e), and 50 C.F.R. § 424.14(a), the Center for Biological Diversity hereby petitions the Secretary of the Interior, through the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (“USFWS”), to list the Pacific walrus (Odobenus rosmarus divergens) as a threatened or endangered species and to designate critical habitat to ensure its survival and recovery. The Center for Biological Diversity works through science, law, and policy to secure a future for all species, great or small, hovering on the brink of extinction. The Center has over 40,000 members throughout Alaska and the United States. The Center and its members are concerned with the conservation of endangered species, including the Pacific walrus, and the effective implementation of the ESA.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Status of Pinniped Conservation Research in KOREA
    Current status of Pinniped conservation research in KOREA Seong Oh Im1), Hye-min Park1), InSeo Hwang1), Sang Heon Lee2), Younggeun Oh2) , Hyun-Woo Kim3), Eun-Bi Kim3) 1)Korea Marine Environment Management Corporation, 2)Pusan National University, 3)Pukyong National University * Correspondence: Korea Marine Environment Management Corporation / * E-mail: [email protected] 1. Introduction Six pinniped species are currently designated as Marine protected species (MPS) in KOREA. Their main breeding grounds are known to be China and Russia, and the waters along the Korean peninsula are considered as the marginal region for those species with extremely low individuals. Among them, Researches have been limited to the spotted seals (Phoca largha), the most abundant pinniped species in the Yellow Sea, Korea. Most of their studies have been mainly dependent on the traditional monitoring methods from visual surveys to count individuals of air-breathing vertebrates, which required a high-degree of labors and costs. As one of promising novel alternative tools for the traditional surveys, molecular biological analyses using environmental DNA (eDNA) has been paid attention for marine ecological studies due to its low cost and labors and high sensitivity in taxon recovery. We here introduce current status of research for pinniped conservation in Republic of Korea using both traditional and novel molecular tools. In addition, satellite monitoring results and environmental conditions around breeding grounds are compared and analyzed. Current status of Pinniped conservation research in KOREA (A) Donghae (A) Donghae 2. Materials & Methods (B) Ulleung ① Visual surveys 3 times of field survey (May, (C) Dokdo August, October, 2020) in the East Sea of Korea (B) Ulleung (Donghae, Ulleung Island, and Dokdo).
    [Show full text]
  • Walrus Odobenus Rosmarus
    Research Note Ringed seal Phoca hispida fright behaviour caused by walrus Odobenus rosmarus IAN GJERTZ Gjertz, I. 1990: Ringed seal Phoca hisppida fright behaviour caused by walrus Odobenus rosmarus. Polar Research 8, 317-319. Other marine mammals tend to avoid walruses. The prcsent papcr describes two incidents of avoidance behaviour displagcd by ringed seals in the presence of a walrus. Ian Gjertz. Norsk Pularinstitutt, P.0. Box 158. N-1330 Oslo Lufthaun, Norway; February 1990 (revised April 1990). Walruses (Odobenus rosmarus) are at the top of are shallow with many large rocks which are sub- the interspecific social hierarchy among northern merged during high tide. pinnipeds (Hediger 1955, in Fay 1960, 1981). At Andreetangen in 1987 I witnessed two inci- They are omnivorous and forage mainly on ben- dents of different ringed seals (Phoca hispida) thic prey, but it is well documented that some apparently frightened by the presence of a walrus. walruses eat other marine mammals (Fay 1960, On 31 July, while observing the haul-out beach 1981; Lowry & Fay 1984). It is a matter of dispute at 2255 hr and mid tide, I noticed a young walrus, whether walruses actively prey upon these, or which according to its small teeth, was an esti- merely are carrion feeders (Fay 1960, 1981). It mated 4 years old, swimming northwards along has only recently been verified in the scientific the shore of Andreetangen towards the haul-out literature that walruses actively catch and kill beach. At the same time a ringed seal (estimated mammalian prey (Timoshenko & Popov 1990). weight 40 kg) was approaching along the coast in Marine mammals are known to desert or avoid the opposite direction.
    [Show full text]