8874 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules

general applicability date under review of these species to determine if ESA throughout their respective ranges, paragraph (d)(1) of this section. the petitioned action is warranted. To or, as an alternative, to list any (5) Elective application of definition ensure that the status review is identified DPSs as threatened or of political subdivision. An issuer may comprehensive, we are soliciting endangered. The petition also states that choose to apply the definition of scientific and commercial information if the Caribbean manta ray is political subdivision in paragraph (c) of pertaining to these two species from any determined to be a subspecies of the this section to an issue of bonds in interested party. We also find that the giant manta ray and not a distinct circumstances in which that section petition and information in our files species, then we should consider listing otherwise would not apply to that issue does not present substantial scientific or the subspecies under the ESA. However, under paragraph (d)(2) or (3) of this commercial information indicating that if we determine that the Caribbean section, provided that choice is applied the Caribbean manta ray is a manta ray is neither a species nor a consistently to the issue. An entity may taxonomically valid species or subspecies, then the petition requests choose to apply the definition of subspecies for listing, and, therefore, it that we list the giant manta ray, political subdivision in paragraph (c) of does not warrant listing at this time. including all specimens in the this section to an entity in DATES: Information and comments on Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico and circumstances in which that section the subject action must be received by southeastern United States, under the otherwise would not apply to that entity April 25, 2016. ESA. The petition requests that critical habitat be designated concurrently with under paragraph (d)(4) of this section, ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, listing under the ESA. Copies of the provided that choice is applied information, or data on this document, petition are available upon request (see consistently to the entity. identified by the code NOAA–NMFS– ADDRESSES). John Dalrymple, 2016–0014, by either any of the following methods: ESA Statutory, Regulatory, and Policy Deputy Commissioner for Services and • Enforcement. Electronic Submissions: Submit all Provisions and Evaluation Framework electronic public comments via the [FR Doc. 2016–03790 Filed 2–22–16; 8:45 am] Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA of 1973, Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to BILLING CODE 4830–01–P as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), www.regulations.gov/ requires, to the maximum extent #!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2016- practicable, that within 90 days of 0014. Click the ‘‘Comment Now’’ icon, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE receipt of a petition to list a species as complete the required fields, and enter threatened or endangered, the Secretary or attach your comments. National Oceanic and Atmospheric of Commerce make a finding on whether • Mail: Submit written comments to Administration that petition presents substantial Maggie Miller, NMFS Office of scientific or commercial information Protected Resources (F/PR3), 1315 East- 50 CFR Parts 223 and 224 indicating that the petitioned action West Highway, Silver Spring, MD may be warranted, and to promptly [Docket No. 160105011–6011–01] 20910, USA. publish such finding in the Federal Instructions: Comments sent by any RIN 0648–XE390 Register (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)). When other method, to any other address or it is found that substantial scientific or individual, or received after the end of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife; commercial information in a petition the comment period, may not be 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List indicates the petitioned action may be considered by NMFS. All comments Three Manta Rays as Threatened or warranted (a ‘‘positive 90-day finding’’), received are a part of the public record Endangered Under the Endangered we are required to promptly commence and will generally be posted for public Species Act a review of the status of the species viewing on www.regulations.gov concerned during which we will AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries without change. All personal identifying conduct a comprehensive review of the Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and information (e.g., name, address, etc.), best available scientific and commercial Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), confidential business information, or information. In such cases, we conclude Department of Commerce. otherwise sensitive information the review with a finding as to whether, ACTION: 90-day petition finding; request submitted voluntarily by the sender will in fact, the petitioned action is for information. be publicly accessible. NMFS will warranted within 12 months of receipt accept anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/ of the petition. Because the finding at SUMMARY: We, NMFS, announce a 90- A’’ in the required fields if you wish to the 12-month stage is based on a more day finding on a petition to list three remain anonymous). thorough review of the available manta rays, identified as the giant manta Copies of the petition and related information, as compared to the narrow ray (Manta birostris), reef manta ray (M. materials are available on our Web site scope of review at the 90-day stage, a alfredi), and Caribbean manta ray (M. at http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/pr/ ‘‘may be warranted’’ finding does not c.f. birostris), range-wide or, in the species/fish/manta-ray.html. prejudge the outcome of the status alternative, any identified distinct FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: review. population segments (DPSs), as Maggie Miller, Office of Protected Under the ESA, a listing threatened or endangered under the Resources, 301–427–8403. determination may address a species, Endangered Species Act (ESA), and to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: which is defined to also include designate critical habitat concurrently subspecies and, for any vertebrate with the listing. We find that the Background species, any DPS that interbreeds when petition and information in our files On November 10, 2015, we received mature (16 U.S.C. 1532(16)). A joint present substantial scientific or a petition from Defenders of Wildlife to NMFS-U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service commercial information indicating that list the giant manta ray (M. birostris), (USFWS) (jointly, ‘‘the Services’’) policy the petitioned action may be warranted reef manta ray (M. alfredi) and clarifies the agencies’ interpretation of for the giant manta ray and the reef Caribbean manta ray (M. c.f. birostris) as the phrase ‘‘distinct population manta ray. We will conduct a status threatened or endangered under the segment’’ for the purposes of listing,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Feb 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM 23FEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 8875

delisting, and reclassifying a species be based on accepted scientific information indicating that listing may under the ESA (61 FR 4722; February 7, principles, unless we have specific be warranted. We look for information 1996). A species, subspecies, or DPS is information in our files that indicates indicating that not only is the particular ‘‘endangered’’ if it is in danger of the petition’s information is incorrect, species exposed to a factor, but that the extinction throughout all or a significant unreliable, obsolete, or otherwise species may be responding in a negative portion of its range, and ‘‘threatened’’ if irrelevant to the requested action. fashion; then we assess the potential it is likely to become endangered within Information that is susceptible to more significance of that negative response. the foreseeable future throughout all or than one interpretation or that is Many petitions identify risk a significant portion of its range (ESA contradicted by other available classifications made by sections 3(6) and 3(20), respectively, 16 information will not be dismissed at the nongovernmental organizations, such as U.S.C. 1532(6) and (20)). Pursuant to the 90-day finding stage, so long as it is the International Union on the ESA and our implementing regulations, reliable and a reasonable person would Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the we determine whether species are conclude it supports the petitioners’ American Fisheries Society, or threatened or endangered based on any assertions. In other words, conclusive NatureServe, as evidence of extinction one or a combination of the following information indicating the species may risk for a species. Risk classifications by five section 4(a)(1) factors: The present meet the ESA’s requirements for listing other organizations or made under other or threatened destruction, modification, is not required to make a positive 90- Federal or state statutes may be or curtailment of habitat or range; day finding. We will not conclude that informative, but such classification overutilization for commercial, a lack of specific information alone alone may not provide the rationale for recreational, scientific, or educational negates a positive 90-day finding if a a positive 90-day finding under the purposes; disease or predation; reasonable person would conclude that ESA. For example, as explained by inadequacy of existing regulatory the unknown information itself suggests NatureServe, their assessments of a mechanisms; and any other natural or an extinction risk of concern for the species’ conservation status do ‘‘not manmade factors affecting the species’ species at issue. constitute a recommendation by existence (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(1), 50 CFR To make a 90-day finding on a NatureServe for listing under the U.S. 424.11(c)). petition to list a species, we evaluate Endangered Species Act’’ because ESA-implementing regulations issued whether the petition presents NatureServe assessments ‘‘have jointly by NMFS and USFWS (50 CFR substantial scientific or commercial different criteria, evidence 424.14(b)) define ‘‘substantial information indicating the subject requirements, purposes and taxonomic information’’ in the context of reviewing species may be either threatened or coverage than government lists of a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a endangered, as defined by the ESA. endangered and threatened species, and species as the amount of information First, we evaluate whether the therefore these two types of lists should that would lead a reasonable person to information presented in the petition, not be expected to coincide’’ (http:// believe that the measure proposed in the along with the information readily www.natureserve.org/prodServices/pdf/ petition may be warranted. In evaluating available in our files, indicates that the NatureServeStatusAssessmentsListing- whether substantial information is petitioned entity constitutes a ‘‘species’’ Dec%202008.pdf). Additionally, species contained in a petition, the Secretary eligible for listing under the ESA. Next, classifications under IUCN and the ESA must consider whether the petition: (1) we evaluate whether the information are not equivalent; data standards, Clearly indicates the administrative indicates that the species faces an criteria used to evaluate species, and measure recommended and gives the extinction risk that is cause for concern; treatment of uncertainty are also not scientific and any common name of the this may be indicated in information necessarily the same. Thus, when a species involved; (2) contains detailed expressly discussing the species’ status petition cites such classifications, we narrative justification for the and trends, or in information describing will evaluate the source of information recommended measure, describing, impacts and threats to the species. We that the classification is based upon in based on available information, past and evaluate any information on specific light of the standards on extinction risk present numbers and distribution of the demographic factors pertinent to and impacts or threats discussed above. species involved and any threats faced evaluating extinction risk for the species Taxonomy of the Petitioned Manta Rays by the species; (3) provides information (e.g., population abundance and trends, regarding the status of the species over productivity, spatial structure, age The petition identifies three manta all or a significant portion of its range; structure, sex ratio, diversity, current ray ‘‘species’’ as eligible for listing and (4) is accompanied by the and historical range, habitat integrity or under the ESA: The giant manta ray (M. appropriate supporting documentation fragmentation), and the potential birostris), reef manta ray (M. alfredi), in the form of bibliographic references, contribution of identified demographic and Caribbean manta ray (M. c.f. reprints of pertinent publications, risks to extinction risk for the species. birostris). Manta is one of two genera copies of reports or letters from We then evaluate the potential links under the family Mobulidae, the second authorities, and maps (50 CFR between these demographic risks and being Mobula (commonly referred to as 424.14(b)(2)). the causative impacts and threats ‘‘devil rays’’). Collectively, manta and At the 90-day finding stage, we identified in section 4(a)(1). devil rays are referred to as mobulid evaluate the petitioners’ request based Information presented on impacts or rays and are often confused with one upon the information in the petition threats should be specific to the species another. Until recently, all manta rays including its references and the and should reasonably suggest that one were considered to be a single species information readily available in our or more of these factors may be known as Manta birostris (Walbaum files. We do not conduct additional operative threats that act or have acted 1792). However, in 2009, Marshall et al. research, and we do not solicit on the species to the point that it may (2009) provided substantial evidence to information from parties outside the warrant protection under the ESA. support splitting the monospecific agency to help us in evaluating the Broad statements about generalized Manta genus into two distinct species. petition. We will accept the petitioners’ threats to the species, or identification Based on new morphological and sources and characterizations of the of factors that could negatively impact meristic data, the authors confirmed the information presented if they appear to a species, do not constitute substantial presence of two visually distinct

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Feb 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM 23FEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 8876 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules

species: Manta birostris and Manta Master’s thesis that examined the substitutions: A clade consisting of alfredi (Krefft 1868). Manta birostris is population structure of M. birostris from clustered western Pacific samples, the the more widely distributed and oceanic the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. This three Gulf of Mexico samples as another of the two species, found in tropical to study was conducted prior to the clade, and the third clade represented temperate waters worldwide and splitting of the monospecific Manta by the samples from Baja and the two common along productive coastlines, genus, and, as such, all of the manta genetically similar Gulf of Mexico particularly off seamounts and rays identified in the study are referred samples. pinnacles (Marshall et al. 2009; CITES to as M. birostris. However, the The petitioners argue that the Gulf of 2013). Manta alfredi is more commonly petitioners argue that the genetic Mexico clade, noted above, represents a observed inshore in tropical waters, differences between populations third, distinct species of manta ray, found near coral and rocky reefs and discussed in Clark (2001) provide which they identify as Manta c.f. also along productive coastlines. It support for the differentiation of the birostris. While the genetic divergence primarily occurs throughout the Indian Caribbean manta ray from M. birostris. between the Gulf of Mexico population Ocean and in the eastern and south Clark (2001) examined sequences of and the Baja population (assumed to be Pacific, with only a few reports of the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) from 18 M. birostris) was high relative to the species in Atlantic waters (off the manta ray individuals and calculated intrapopulation values, this analysis Canary Islands, Cape Verde Islands and the genetic divergence among was based on an extremely low sample Senegal).While both species are wide- haplotypes. Based on these estimates, size, with only three samples from the ranging, and are even sympatric in some Clark (2001) divided the 18 individuals Gulf of Mexico, and thus cannot be locations, Marshall et al. (2009) into three operational taxonomic units: reasonably relied upon to support the provides a visual key to differentiate A Western Pacific unit (which included identification of a new species of manta these two species based on coloration, samples from Hawaii, French Frigate ray. It is also important to note that this dentition, denticle and spine Shoals, Yap, and Fiji; n=5), a Baja unit study analyzed only mtDNA. At best, morphology, size at maturity, and (which included samples from two this mtDNA evidence suggests that M. maximum disc width. For example, in individuals from the Gulf of Mexico; birostris females in the Gulf of Mexico terms of coloration, M. birostris can be n=10), and a Gulf of Mexico unit (n=3). may be philopatric (i.e., returning or distinguished by its large, white, The results showed low genetic remaining near its home area); however, triangular shoulder patches that run divergence among samples from the mtDNA does not alone describe down the middle of its dorsal surface, Western Pacific (0.038–0.076 percent population structure. Because mtDNA is in a straight line parallel to the edge of sequence divergence), hence their maternally inherited, differences in the upper jaw. The species also has dark taxonomic grouping. Based on findings mtDNA haplotypes between (black to charcoal grey) mouth and distribution maps from Marshall et populations do not necessarily mean coloration, medium to large black spots al. (2009), these samples were all likely that the populations are substantially that occur below its fifth gill slits, and taken from M. alfredi individuals. reproductively isolated from each other a grey V-shaped colored margin along Similarly, the Baja samples were likely because they do not provide any the posterior edges of its pectoral fins all from M. birostris individuals. Clark information on males. As demonstrated (Marshall et al. 2009). In contrast, M. (2001) notes that the mtDNA haplotypes in previous findings, in species where alfredi has pale to white shoulder from the five individuals collected in female and male movement patterns patches where the anterior margin the Gulf of Mexico formed two groups differ (such as philopatric females but spreads posteriorly from the spiracle with percent sequence divergence wide-ranging males), analysis of mtDNA before curving medially, a white to light values that were similar in magnitude to may indicate discrete populations, but grey mouth, small dark spots that are estimates obtained from geographically analysis of nuclear (or bi-parentally typically located in the middle of the distinct samples. In other words, the inherited) DNA could show abdomen, in between the five gill slits, mtDNA haplotypes from three of the homogenous populations as a result of and dark colored bands on the posterior Gulf of Mexico individuals were as male-mediated gene flow (see e.g., edges of the pectoral fins that only distant genetically from the other two loggerhead sea turtle, 68 FR 53947, stretch mid-way down to the fin tip Gulf of Mexico individuals (0.724–0.80 September 15, 2003, and sperm whale, (Marshall et al. 2009). The separation of percent sequence divergence) as 78 FR 68032, November 13, 2013). these two manta species appears to be samples from the Western Pacific unit Although very little is known about the widely accepted by both taxonomists were compared to the Baja unit (0.609– reproductive behavior of the species, the (with Marshall et al. (2009) published in 0.762 percent). Furthermore, the two available information suggests that M. the international animal taxonomist Gulf of Mexico samples, which had birostris is highly migratory, with males journal, Zootaxa) and international identical sequences, were similar potentially capable of reproducing with scientific bodies (Convention on genetically to haplotype samples from females in different populations. Manta International Trade in Endangered Baja (0.076–0.228 percent sequence birostris is a cosmopolitan species, and Species of Wild Fauna and Flora divergence), with phylogenetic analysis in the western Atlantic has been (CITES) and Food and Agriculture strongly supporting the pooling of these documented as far north as Rhode Organization of the United Nations samples with the Baja taxonomic unit. Island and as far south as Uruguay. (FAO); see CITES (2013) and FAO The other Gulf of Mexico group (n=3) Marshall et al. (2009) note that the (2013)), and, as such, we consider both showed percent sequence divergence available information indicates that M. M. birostris and M. alfredi to be values ranging from 0.647–0.838 percent birostris is more oceanic than M. alfredi, taxonomically distinct species eligible when compared to the Baja taxonomic and undergoes significant seasonal for listing under the ESA. unit and to the Western Pacific unit. migrations. In a tracking study of six M. The petitioners identify a third manta The most parsimonious tree birostris individuals from off Mexico’s ray species, which they refer to as M. cf. representing the phylogenic relationship Yucatan peninsula, Graham et al. (2012) birostris, or the ‘‘Caribbean manta ray,’’ among the mtDNA haplotypes had three calculated a maximum distance based on their interpretation of data well-supported clades that differed from travelled of 1,151 km (based on from Clark (2001). Clark (2001) is a one another by at least 14 nucleotide cumulative straight line distance

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Feb 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM 23FEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 8877

between locations), further confirming information indicating that M. c.f. lived and slow-growing species, with that the species is capable of fairly long- birostris, referred to as the ‘‘Caribbean extremely low reproductive output distance migrations. As such, it does not manta ray’’ in the petition, is a valid (Marshall et al. 2011a; CITES 2013). The seem unreasonable to suggest that males manta ray species for listing under the giant manta ray can grow to over 7 from one M. birostris population may ESA. As such, we will consider the meters (measured by wingspan, or disc breed with females from other information presented in the petition for width (DW)) with anecdotal reports of populations. We highlight the fact that the Caribbean manta ray as pertaining to the species reaching sizes of up to 9 m all of the Gulf of Mexico samples from the species M. birostris, as requested by DW, and longevity estimated to be at the Clark (2001) study were taken from the petitioner. We, therefore, proceed least 40 years old (Marshall et al. 2009; the same area, the Flower Garden Banks with our evaluation of the information Marshall et al. 2011a). Size at maturity National Marine Sanctuary, indicating in the petition to determine if this for M. birostris varies slightly significant overlap and potential for information indicates that M. birostris throughout its range, with males interchange of individuals between M. (referred henceforth as the giant manta estimated to mature around 3.8–4 m DW birostris populations, at least in the ray) and M. alfredi (referred henceforth and females at around 4.1–4.7 m DW western Atlantic. In other words, as the reef manta ray) may be warranted (White et al. 2006; Marshall et al. 2009). without nuclear DNA analyses, or for listing throughout all or a significant Generally, maturity appears to occur at additional information on the mating portion of their respective ranges under around 8–10 years (Marshall et al. and reproductive behavior of the the ESA. 2011a; CITES 2013). The giant manta species, we cannot confidently make ray is viviparous (i.e., gives birth to live conclusions regarding the genetic Range, Distribution and Life History young), with a gestation period of 10– discreteness or reproductive isolation of Manta birostris 14 months. Manta rays have among the the M. birostris populations in the lowest fecundity of all elasmobranchs, The giant manta ray is a circumglobal western Atlantic. Therefore, at this time, typically giving birth to only one pup on species found in temperate to tropical we do not find that the petition’s average every 2–3 years, which waters (Marshall et al. 2009). In the interpretation of the Clark (2001) results translates to around 5–15 pups total Atlantic, it ranges from Rhode Island to is substantial scientific or commercial over the course of a female manta ray’s Uruguay in the west and from the information to indicate that M. c.f. lifetime (Couturier et al. 2012; CITES Azores Islands to Angola in the east. birostris is a distinct species under the 2013). The species is also found throughout the ESA. Furthermore, based on the Manta rays are filter-feeders that feed Indian Ocean, including off South conclusions from the widely accepted almost entirely on plankton. In a Africa, within the Red Sea, around India recent manta ray taxonomy publication tracking study of M. birostris, Graham et and Indonesia, and off western (Marshall et al. 2009), to which we defer al. (2012) noted that the species Australia. In the Pacific, the species is as the authority and best available exhibited plasticity in its diet, with the found as far north as Mutsu Bay, scientific information on this topic, ability to switch between habitat and Aomori, Japan, south to the eastern there is not enough information at this prey types, and fed on three major prey coast of Australia and the North Island time to conclude that M. c.f. birostris is types: Copepods (occurring in eutrophic of New Zealand (Marshall et al. 2011a; a distinct manta ray species. While waters), chaetognaths (predatory marine Couturier et al. 2015). It has also been Marshall et al. (2009) noted the worms that feed on copepods), and fish documented off French Polynesia and possibility of this third, putative eggs (occurring in oligotrophic waters). Hawaii, and in the eastern Pacific, its species, the authors were similarly Because manta rays are large filter- range extends from southern California limited by sample size. The authors feeders that feed low in the food chain, south to Peru (Marshall et al. 2009; examined only one physical specimen they can potentially be used as indicator Mourier 2012; CITES 2013). (an immature male killed in 1949) and species that reflect the overall health of The species is thought to spend the concluded that ‘‘further examination of the ecosystem (CITES 2013). majority of its time in deep water, but specimens is necessary to clarify the migrates seasonally to productive Manta alfredi taxonomic status of this variant manta coastal areas, oceanic island groups, The reef manta ray is primarily ray.’’ The authors proceed to state: pinnacles and seamounts (Marshall et observed in tropical and subtropical At present there is not enough empirical al. 2009; CITES 2013). Giant manta rays waters. It is widespread throughout the evidence to warrant the separation of a third have been observed visiting cleaning Indian Ocean, from South Africa to the species of Manta. At minimum, additional stations on shallow reefs (i.e., locations Red Sea, and off Thailand and Indonesia examination of dead specimens of Manta sp. cf. birostris are necessary to clarify the where manta rays will solicit cleaner to Western Australia. In the western taxonomic status of this variant manta ray. fish, such as wrasses, shrimp, and Pacific, its range extends from the Further examinations of the distribution of gobies, to remove parasitic copepods Yaeyama Islands, Japan in the north to Manta sp. cf. birostris, as well as, studies of and other unwanted materials from their the Solitary Islands, Australia in the its ecology and behaviour within the Atlantic body) and are occasionally observed in south, and as far east as French and Caribbean are also recommended sandy bottom areas and seagrass beds Polynesia and the Hawaiian Islands (Marshall et al. 2009). (Marshall et al. 2011a). While generally (Marshall et al. 2009; Mourier 2012). We would also like to note that Clark known as a solitary species, the giant Reef manta rays have not been found in (2001) was cited by Marshall et al. manta ray has been sighted in large the eastern Pacific, and are rarely (2009), and, as such, we assume the aggregations for feeding, mating, or observed in the Atlantic, with only a authors reviewed this paper prior to cleaning purposes (Marshall et al. few historical reports or photographs of their conclusions regarding the 2011a). In parts of the Atlantic and M. alfredi from off the Canary Islands, taxonomy of the manta ray species. Caribbean, there is evidence that some Cape Verde Islands, and Senegal Given the above information and M. birostris populations may exhibit (Marshall et al. 2009). analysis, we do not find that differences in fine-scale and seasonal In contrast to the giant manta ray, M. information contained in our files or habitat use (Marshall et al. 2009). alfredi is thought to be more of a provided by the petitioner presents The general life history characteristics resident species, commonly observed substantial scientific or commercial of the giant manta ray are that of a long- inshore, around coral and rocky reefs,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Feb 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM 23FEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 8878 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules

productive coastlines, tropical island more similar to those estimates sparsely distributed. In the 10 studied groups, atolls, and bays (Marshall et al. calculated for marine mammal species subpopulations mentioned above, the 2009). According to Marshall et al. (Croll et al. 2015). Productivity (r) was number of recorded individuals ranges (2009), the species tends to exhibit calculated to be 0.029 (Dulvy et al. from 60 to around 650 (Annex V; CITES smaller home ranges, philopatry, and 2014). When compared to the 2013). The only subpopulation estimate shorter seasonal migrations compared to productivity parameters and criteria in available is from the aggregation site off M. birostris. However, recent tracking Musick (1999), manta rays can be southern Mozambique, where 5 years of studies, while showing evidence of site characterized as having ‘‘very low’’ mark and recapture data (2003–2008) fidelity (Couturier et al. 2011; Deakos et productivity (<0.05). Overall, given their were used to estimate a local al. 2011), also indicate that M. alfredi life history traits and productivity subpopulation of 600 individuals travels greater distances than previously estimates, manta ray populations (CITES 2013 citing Marshall 2009). thought (e.g., >700 km), with distances (discussed in more detail below) are Reef manta ray subpopulations are similar to those exhibited by M. birostris extremely susceptible to depletion and also thought to be small and (Convention on Migratory Species vulnerable to extirpations (CITES 2013). geographically fragmented. The number (CMS) 2014). Braun et al. (2014) also of individuals recorded from the Analysis of Petition and Information observed diel behavior in M. alfredi monitored aggregation sites mentioned Readily Available in NMFS Files whereby the manta rays occupy above range from 35 to 2,410 (Annex V; shallower waters (such as reef cleaning The petition contains information on CITES 2013). Estimates of stations and feeding grounds; <10 m the two manta ray species, including subpopulations are available from five depths) during daylight hours and move their taxonomy, description, geographic aggregation sites, ranging from around toward deeper, offshore pelagic habitats distribution, habitat, population status 100 individuals in Yap, Micronesia to throughout the night. It is thought that and trends, and factors contributing to 5,000 in the Republic of Maldives, this behavior, which has also been the species’ declines. According to the which, presently, is the largest known reported for M. birostris (CMS 2014), is petition, all five causal factors in section aggregation of manta rays (CITES 2013). associated with feeding, with mantas 4(a)(1) of the ESA are adversely affecting Based on mark-recapture data, exploiting emergent reef and pelagic the continued existence of both the subpopulations in southern plankton that move into the photic zone giant and reef manta ray: (A) The Mozambique and western Australia are at night (Braun et al. 2014). The authors present or threatened destruction, estimated to be on the order of around also confirmed the capability of M. modification, or curtailment of its 890 and 1,200–1,500 individuals, alfredi to conduct deep-water dives (up habitat or range; (B) overutilization for respectively, and the subpopulation to 432 m), the purpose of which has not commercial, recreational, scientific, or found off Maui, Hawaii is estimated to yet been understood. educational purposes; (C) disease or comprise around 350 individuals The reef manta ray has a similar life predation; (D) inadequacy of existing (Annex V; CITES 2013). history to that of the giant manta ray; regulatory mechanisms; and (E) other Given the small, sparsely distributed, however, M. alfredi grows to a smaller natural or manmade factors. and highly fragmented nature of these size than M. birostris. Based on In the following sections, we subpopulations, even a small number of observations from southern summarize and evaluate the information mortalities could potentially have Mozambique, reef manta rays can grow presented in the petition and in our files significant negative population-level to slightly over 5 m DW (Marshall et al. on the status of M. birostris and M. effects that may lead to regional 2009). Maturity estimates range from alfredi and the ESA section 4(a)(1) extirpations (CITES 2013; CMS 2014), around 2.5–3.0 m DW for males, and factors that may be affecting these increasing these species’ risks of global 3.0–3.9 m DW for females, which species’ risks of global extinction. Based extinction. In fact, information from corresponds to around 8–10 years of age on this evaluation, we determine known aggregation sites suggests global (Marshall et al. 2009; Deakos 2010; whether a reasonable person would abundance may already be declining, Marshall and Bennett 2010; Marshall et conclude that an endangered or with significant subpopulation al. 2011b). Longevity is unknown but is threatened listing may be warranted for reductions (as high as 56–86 percent) for thought to be at least 40 years (Marshall these two manta ray species. both Manta species observed in a et al. 2011b). The reef manta ray is also number of regions (see Annex VI; CITES Status and Population Trends viviparous, with a gestation period of 2013). [Note: As the Manta genus was around 12 months, and typically gives The global abundance of either manta split in 2009, information prior to this birth to only one pup on average every species is unknown, with no available year is lumped for both species. Where 2 years; however, there are reports of historical baseline population data. possible (i.e., in locations where the two individuals reproducing annually in Worldwide, only 10 subpopulations of species are allopatric or where species both the wild and captivity (Marshall M. birostris and 14 subpopulations of M. is described or assumed), we identify and Bennett 2010). alfredi have been identified and studied, the likely species to which the dataset Using estimates of known life history and in most cases are comprised of applies.] For example, based on annual parameters for both giant and reef manta fewer than 1,000 individuals (see Annex landings data from Lamakera, Indonesia, rays, and plausible range estimates for V; CITES 2013). An additional 25 more Manta spp. landings fell from 1,500 the unknown life history parameters, subpopulations are known to exist, and individuals in 2001 to only 648 in 2010, Dulvy et al. (2014) calculated a although species-level information is a decline of 57 percent in 9 years. maximum population growth rate of unavailable, these subpopulations are Fishing effort was also noted to have Manta spp. and found it to be one of the also assumed to consist of very small increased over those years, from 30 lowest values when compared to 106 aggregations. Given this information, it boats in 2001 to 40 boats in 2011, with other shark and ray species. can be inferred that global population no other change to gear or fishing Specifically, the median maximum numbers of both M. birostris and M. practices (CITES 2013), indicating that population growth rate (Rmax) was alfredi are likely to be small (CITES the observed decline in Manta spp. estimated to be 0.116, which is among 2013). could likely be attributed to a decrease the lowest calculated for For M. birostris, the small in abundance of the subpopulation. chondrichthyan species and is actually subpopulations are thought to be Similarly, a 57 percent decline in Manta

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Feb 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM 23FEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 8879

spp. landings in Lombok, Indonesia declining and unknown statuses of the significantly increased, incentivizing over the course of 6–7 years was also remaining 43 subpopulations to be a fishermen who once avoided capture of observed, based on market surveys and concern, especially as it relates to the manta rays to directly target these fishermen and dealer interviews global extinction risk of these two manta species (Heinrichs et al. 2011; CITES conducted between 2001–2005 and ray species, and thus, further 2013). According to Heinrichs et al. 2007–2011. In the Philippines, artisanal investigation is warranted. (2011), it is primarily the older fishermen indicate declines of up to 50 Analysis of ESA Section 4(a)(1) Factors population in Southern China as well as percent in Manta spp. landings over the Macau, Singapore, and Hong Kong, that course of 30 years. While the petition presents ascribe to the belief of the healing Anecdotal reports and professional information on each of the ESA Section properties of the gill rakers; however, diver observational data also suggest 4(a)(1) factors, we find that the the gill rakers are not considered substantial declines from historical information presented, including ‘‘traditional’’ or ‘‘prestigious’’ items (i.e., numbers, with significantly fewer diver information within our files, regarding shark fins) and many consumers and sightings and overall sporadic the overutilization of these two species sellers are not even aware that gill observations of manta rays in areas for commercial purposes is substantial rakers come from manta or mobula rays where they were once common (CITES enough to make a determination that a (devil rays). Meat, cartilage, and skin of 2013). For example, off southern reasonable person would conclude that manta rays are also utilized, but valued Mozambique, scuba divers reported an these species may warrant listing as at significantly less than the gill rakers, average of 6.8 mantas (likely M. alfredi) endangered or threatened based on this and usually enter local trade or are kept per dive, but by 2011, this figure had factor alone. As such, we focus our for domestic consumption (Heinrichs et dropped to less than 1, a decline of 86 below discussion on the evidence of al. 2011; CITES 2013). percent (CITES 2013 citing Rohner et al. overutilization for commercial purposes In terms of the market and trade of gill in press). Off the Similan-Surin Islands and present our evaluation of the rakers, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province in Thailand, sightings of manta rays information regarding this factor and its in Southern China is considered to be (likely M. birostris) fell from 59 in 2006– impact on the extinction risk of the two the ‘‘epicenter’’ for trade and 2007 to only 14 in 2011–2012, a decline manta ray species. consumption, comprising as much as 99 of 76 percent in only 5 years (CITES Overutilization for Commercial, percent of the global gill raker market 2013). Declines were also observed off Recreational, Scientific, or Educational (Heinrichs et al. 2011). Gill rakers Japan, with manta ray numbers (likely Purposes M. alfredi) sighted by divers dropping specifically from giant manta rays from 50 in 1980 to 30 in 1990 (CITES Information from the petition and in comprise a large proportion of this 2013 citing Homma et al. 1999). In our files suggests that the primary threat trade. Based on market investigations Cocos Island National Park, a Marine to both M. birostris and M. alfredi is (see Annex VIII; CITES 2013), around 30 Protected Area (MPA), White et al. overutilization by fisheries. Because percent of the gill raker stock in stores (2015) used diver sighting data to both species exhibit affinities for coastal consisted of ‘‘large’’ gill rakers estimate a decline of 89 percent in M. habitats and aggregate in predictable attributed to M. birostris, and had an birostris relative abundance, although locations, they are especially vulnerable average sale price in Guangzhou of the authors noted that giant manta rays to being caught in numerous types of $251/kg (with some selling for up to were observed ‘‘only occasionally’’ in fishing gear and are both targeted and $500/kg). Small gill rakers attributed to the area over the course of the study. taken as bycatch in various commercial Manta spp. (including juvenile M. Additionally, in the Sea of Cortez, the and artisanal fisheries (CITES 2013; birostris) comprised 4 percent of the subpopulation (of likely M. birostris) is Croll et al. 2015). They have historically stock but sold for the fairly high average thought to have completely collapsed, been a component of subsistence fishing price of $177/kg. In total, about 61,000 with manta rays rarely seen despite for decades, primarily fished with kg of gill rakers (from both mobula and being present on every major reef and simple fishing gear (CITES 2013); manta rays) are traded annually. While frequently observed during dives back however, international demand for Manta spp. made up about a third of in the early 1980s (CITES 2013). manta ray gill rakers (sometimes this total, in terms of total market value, Anecdotal reports from Madagascar, referred to as ‘‘gill plates’’—thin, they comprised almost half (45 percent; India, and the Philippines reflect similar cartilage filaments used to filter around $5 million) of the total value of situations, with scuba divers and plankton out of the water) has led to a the trade. This indicates the higher fishermen noting the large declines in significant increase in fishing pressure value placed on manta ray gill rakers the manta ray populations over the past on both species. The gill rakers are used compared to mobula ray gill rakers decade and present rarity of the species in Asian medicine and are thought to (Annex VIII; CITES 2013). While this (CITES 2013). have healing properties, from curing trade does not significantly contribute to Not all subpopulations are declining, chicken pox to cancer, with claims that the Chinese dried seafood or Traditional though, with information to suggest that they also boost the immune system, Chinese Medicine industries (and those manta ray aggregations not subject purify the body, enhance blood amounting to less than 3 percent of the to fishing or located within protected circulation, remedy throat and skin value of the shark fin trade), the areas are presently stable. These include ailments, cure male kidney issues, and numbers of manta rays traded annually, the manta ray aggregations found off help with fertility problems (Heinrichs estimated at 4,653 individuals (average), Micronesia, Palau, Hawaii, and et al. 2011). The use of gill rakers as a are around three times higher than the currently the largest known aggregation remedy, which was widespread in vast majority of known subpopulation off the Maldives (CITES 2013). Southern China many years ago, has and aggregation estimates for these two However, given these species’ sensitive recently gained renewed popularity over species (CITES 2013). In other words, life history traits and demographic risks, the past decade as traders have the amount of manta rays killed every including small, sparsely distributed, increased efforts to market its healing year for the gill raker trade is equivalent and highly fragmented subpopulations and immune boosting properties to removing multiple subpopulations of (which inhibit recruitment and recovery directly to consumers (Heinrichs et al. these species, and given their following declines), we find that the 2011). As a result, demand has demographic risks of extremely low

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Feb 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM 23FEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 8880 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules

productivity, evidence of declining based on limited data and interviews CITES 2013). In Lamakera, as population abundances, and low spatial and, as such, should be viewed as an technology improved and fishermen structure and connectivity, we conclude absolute minimum for the region. Of replaced their traditional dugout canoes that this level of utilization for the gill concern, in terms of risk of extirpations with motorized boats, catch rates of raker trade is a threat that may be and extinction of M. birostris, is the fact Manta spp. increased by an order of significantly contributing to the that this assumed minimum level of magnitude above historical levels extinction risk of M. birostris and M. take is equivalent to about one third of (CITES 2013 citing Dewar 2002). This alfredi and requires further the estimate of the closest known, intense fishing pressure on a species investigation. largest, but also protected aggregation of that is biologically sensitive to depletion The three countries presently giant manta rays off the Isla de la Plata, subsequently led to noticeable declines responsible for the largest documented Ecuador. While the manta rays targeted in populations. In Lombok, for example, fishing and exporting of Manta spp. are by the Peruvian fishermen may a survey of fishermen and local Indonesia, Sri Lanka, and India. These comprise a separate subpopulation, processing facilities indicated that countries account for an estimated 90 given the seasonal migratory behavior of manta ray catches have declined in percent of the world’s Manta spp. catch, M. birostris, it is also possible that the recent years (around 57 percent), with yet, prior to 2013, when the species take consists of animals from the the average size of a manta ray now less complex was added to Appendix II of protected aggregation as they migrate than half of what it was historically, a CITES, lacked any sort of landings south (Heinrichs et al. 2011). strong indication of overutilization of restrictions or regulations pertaining to Regardless, given the very small the species (Heinrichs et al. 2011). manta rays (CITES 2013). Furthermore, estimated sizes of M. birostris Based on data from 2001–2012, the fact that there is no documented aggregations (range 60–650 individuals) Indonesian landings were estimated to domestic use of gill rakers within these coupled with the species’ sensitive life be around 1,026 per year, the largest for countries, with reports that income from history traits, even low levels of fishing any country, and attributed to M. directed fisheries for Manta spp. is mortality can quickly lead to depletion birostris, although M. alfredi are also unlikely to even cover the cost of fuel of subpopulations and drive overall present in this region (Annex VII; CITES without the gill raker trade, further population levels down to functional 2013). Given the observed declines in points to the significant and lucrative extinction. In fact, evidence of the rapid both size and catch of manta rays incentives of the gill raker trade as the decline of M. birostris from directed throughout the region, in relatively primary driver of directed manta ray fishing efforts in the eastern Pacific is short periods of time (over 9 years in fisheries (CITES 2013). In fact, prior to most apparent in the Sea of Cortez, Lamakera; 6–7 years in Tanjung Luar, the rapid growth of the gill raker trade, Mexico. Prior to the start of targeted Lombok) that are notably less than one fishermen in Sri Lanka would avoid fishing (which began in the 1980s), the generation (∼25 years) for either species, setting nets in known Manta spp. giant manta ray was reportedly common we find that the available information aggregation areas, and release any on every major reef in the area. In 1981, indicates that overutilization of manta incidentally caught manta rays alive a filmmaker reported seeing three to rays in this region may be a significant (Heinrichs et al. 2011). However, with four manta rays during every dive while threat to both species and is cause for the increase in the international demand filming; however, in a follow-up project, concern. and high value for gill rakers, fishermen conducted only 10 years later, not a Similarly, in the Philippines, recent are now landing all Manta spp. and single giant manta ray was observed CITES (2013) warns that directed and exploitation of manta rays through (CITES 2013). Within a decade of the opportunistic fisheries may develop targeted fishing efforts has also start of directed manta ray fishing, the elsewhere. contributed to significant and In the Pacific, directed fisheries for M. birostris population in the Sea of concerning declines. Artisanal manta rays already exist (or existed) in Cortez had collapsed, and reportedly fishermen note that directed fishing on many areas, including China, Tonga, still has not recovered (CITES 2013), Manta species (likely M. birostris) in the Peru, and Mexico. In Zhejiang, China, despite a 2007 regulation prohibiting Bohol Sea started in the 1960s, but Heinrichs et al. (2011) (citing Hilton the capture and retention of the species really ramped up in the early 1990s and 2011) estimate that fisheries currently in Mexican waters (NOM–029–PESC– consequently led to population declines targeting manta rays land around 100 2006). of up to 50 percent by the mid-1990s individuals per year (species not Manta rays may also be at risk of (CITES 2013 citing Alava et al. 2002). identified). While subpopulation extinction in the Indo-Pacific region, Similar declines were observed for the estimates in this area are unknown, it is where the number of fisheries directly local population of manta rays (species likely that this level of fishing mortality targeting manta species has not identified; although petition refers is contributing to local population substantially increased over the past to them as M. alfredi) in the Sulu Sea declines as evidenced by the fact that decade, concurrent with the rise in the off Palawan Island, with estimates of sightings of manta rays (likely M. gill raker trade. This targeted fishing has between 50 and 67 percent over the alfredi) at nearby Okinawa Island, already led to substantial declines in the course of 7 years (from the 1980s to Japan, have fallen by over 70 percent numbers and size of Manta populations, 1996) (CITES 2013). Although there is since the 1980s (CITES 2013). Directed particularly off Indonesia. Many shark presently a ban on catching and selling fisheries in the eastern Pacific may also fishermen have also turned to manta ray manta rays in the Philippines, Heinrichs likely be contributing to the targeted fishing following the collapse et al. (2011) reports that enforcement overexploitation of manta ray of shark populations throughout the varies, with locals continuing to eat subpopulations. Heinrichs et al. (2011), region (CITES 2013 citing Donnelly et manta ray meat in line with their citing to a rapid assessment of the al. 2003). As recently as 2012, Manta cultural practices. Furthermore, in 2011, mobulid fisheries in the Tumbes and spp. fisheries were noted in Lamalera, Hong Kong traders identified the Piura regions of Peru, reported Tanjung Luar (Lombok), Cilacap Philippines as a supplier of dried gill estimated annual landings of M. (Central Java), Kedonganan (Bali), and rakers, indicating that fishermen may birostris on the order of 100–220 rays. the Wayag and Sayan Islands in Raja still be actively targeting the species for The petition asserts that this estimate is Ampat, Indonesia (Heinrichs et al. 2011; trade (Heinrichs et al. 2011). Manta rays

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Feb 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM 23FEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 8881

are now considered rare throughout the catches, we find that present utilization Mozambique, Marshall et al. (2011b) Philippines (CITES 2013), and, as such, levels and the impacts of this potential estimate that subsistence fishermen, any additional mortality on these nursery ground exploitation, alone, catch around 20–50 M. alfredi species, either through incidental particularly on the manta ray annually in a 100 km area/length of fishing or illegally directed fishing, may populations in this area (especially M. coast. This area corresponds to less than have significant negative effects on the birostris populations, although M. five percent of the coastline; however, viability of giant and reef manta ray alfredi is also noted in this region but fisheries in this region are widespread populations. not identified in the available and, therefore, the actual landings of In the Indian Ocean, directed fisheries information), are threats contributing to manta rays are likely significantly more for manta rays exist in Sri Lanka, India, a risk of extinction that is cause for (Marshall et al. 2011b). In fact, based on Thailand, and are known from several concern. a study on the abundance of manta rays areas in Africa, including Tanzania and In India, which has the second largest in southern Mozambique, Rohner et al. Mozambique. As mentioned previously, elasmobranch fishery in the world, (2013) (cited by Croll et al. (2015)) Sri Lanka is one of the top three nations Heinrichs et al. (2011) report manta ray provides evidence of the impact of the in terms of manta ray landings, with landings of around 690 individuals per current level of utilization on manta ray estimates totaling around 1,055 M. year (based on data from 2003–2004). species. From their findings, the authors birostris individuals per year (Heinrichs However, the authors also caution that report declines of up to 88 percent in et al. 2011; CITES 2013), the second these landings data from the Indian the abundance of the heavily fished M. trawl and gillnet fleets targeting sharks, highest amount behind Indonesia. alfredi over the past 8 years (Heinrichs skates, and rays, are likely largely Historically, fishermen in Sri Lanka et al. 2011; CITES 2013; Croll et al. underreported given the limited would catch manta rays primarily as 2015), but a relatively stable abundance oversight of these fisheries. Although bycatch or avoid them altogether; trend in the un-targeted M. birostris. the exact extent of utilization of manta however, as the gill raker market took These data further confirm the extreme ray species in Indian waters is shape and demand increased (with vulnerability of the manta ray species to unknown, decreases in overall mobulid reports of gill rakers selling for as much depletion from fisheries-related catches have been observed in several mortality in relatively short periods of as 250 times the price of meat), regions, including Kerala, along the time, and raise significant cause for fishermen gained incentive to actively Chennai and Tuticorin coasts, and concern for the species’ viability in target mobulids (both manta and devil Mumbai (CITES 2013). These declines areas where they are being directly rays) (Heinrichs et al. 2011). As direct are despite increases in fishing effort, targeted or landed as bycatch. targeting of manta rays increased, a suggesting that abundance of mobulids In the Atlantic, the only known corresponding decrease in catches was has likely decreased in these areas as a directed fishing of Manta spp. occurs reported by fishermen, particularly over result of heavy fishing pressure and seasonally off Dixcove, Ghana, where the past 3–5 years (Heinrichs et al. associated levels of fishery-related the meat is consumed locally, but manta 2011). Of concern, as it relates to the mortality (CITES 2013). rays have also been reported as targets extinction risk of particularly the giant Harpoon fisheries that target Manta of the mesh drift gillnet fishery that manta ray, is the fact that a large spp. also exist on both coasts of India, operates year-round in this area proportion of the identified M. birostris but landings data are largely (Heinrichs et al. 2011; CITES 2013). landings are reportedly immature. Based unavailable. Despite the lack of data, Manta spp. are also reportedly illegally on available data from Negombo and anecdotal reports suggest that the level caught off Mexico’s Yucatan peninsula Mirissa fish market surveys, at least 87 of utilization by these fisheries may also (Graham et al. 2012; CITES 2013), but percent (possibly up to 95 percent; be contributing to the decline of these without additional information, the CITES 2013) of the M. birostris sold in species within the region. For example, extent of utilization of the species in the markets are juveniles and sub-adults prior to 1998, landings of manta rays this region is unknown. (Heinrichs et al. 2011). Although the (thought to be M. alfredi) were In addition to the threat from directed proportion of these fish markets to total reportedly abundant in a directed fisheries, manta rays are susceptible to Sri Lankan manta ray landings is not harpoon fishery operating at Kalpeni, off being caught as bycatch in many of the provided, the direct targeting and Lakshadweep Islands; however, based international fisheries operating removal of immature manta rays can on personal communication from a local throughout the world, with present have negative impacts on the dive operator, this harpoon fishery no utilization levels contributing to their recruitment of individuals to the longer operates because manta ray extinction risk that may be cause for populations, and may likely explain the sightings around the Lakshadweep concern. According to Croll et al. (2015), decrease in catches observed by Sri Islands are now a rare occurrence. mobulids (manta and devil rays) have Lankan fishermen in recent years. Similarly, dive operators in Thailand been reported as bycatch in 21 small- Furthermore, these data also suggest have observed increased fishing for scale fisheries in 15 countries and 9 that fishermen in Sri Lanka are Manta spp. off the Similan Islands, large-scale fisheries in 11 countries. In potentially exploiting a ‘‘nursery’’ including within Thai National Marine terms of the estimated impact of bycatch ground for manta rays, which, if found Parks, with corresponding significant rates on extinction risk, the commercial to be true, would be the first identified declines in sightings (Heinrichs et al. tuna purse seine fisheries are thought to juvenile aggregation site in the world 2011). Specifically, during the 2006– pose one of the most significant threats (Heinrichs et al. 2011). In fact, 2007 season, professional dive operators to mobulids, given the high spatial aggregations consisting of primarily sighted 59 Manta individuals; however, distribution overlap of tunas and immature individuals are extremely 5 years later, sightings had fallen by 76 mobulids coupled with the global rare, with only one other subpopulation percent, with only 14 Manta individuals distribution and significant fishing identified (off Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula) spotted during the 2011–2012 season effort by the tuna purse seine fisheries where observations of immature manta (CITES 2013). (Williams and Terawasi 2011; Croll et rays outnumber adults (CITES 2013). Across the Indian Ocean, manta rays al. 2015). Based on extrapolations of Given the predominance of immature are also likely at risk of overutilization; observer data, Croll et al. (2015) manta rays and recent decreases in however, data are severely lacking. Off estimated an average annual capture of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Feb 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM 23FEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 8882 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules

2,774 mobulids in the Eastern Pacific, estimates of 1.14 mt in 1999) (Marshall landings restrictions or population 7,817 in the Western and Central et al. 2011a citing Coan et al. 2000) and monitoring programs for manta ray Pacific, 1,936 mobulids in the Indian the Hawaii-based deep-set and shallow- species (CITES 2013). In terms of Ocean, and 558 in the Atlantic Ocean. set longline fisheries for tuna (with 2010 national protections, the petition states While the above data are lumped for bycatch estimates of 8,510 lbs (3,860 kg) that due to the recent splitting of the all mobulids, specific observer data on of M. birostris and 2,601 lbs (1,180 kg) genus, many of the pre-2009 national manta rays suggest that present bycatch of unidentified Mobulidae) (NMFS laws define ‘‘manta ray’’ as a single levels may have potentially serious 2013). While manta rays may have a species, M. birostris, and, therefore, negative population-level impacts on fairly high survival rate after release those associated protections fail to both manta ray species. In the Atlantic (based on 1.4 percent hooking mortality protect the newly identified reef manta Ocean, for example, observer data from rate in longline gear (Coelho et al. 2012) ray. Furthermore, even where 2003–2007 showed manta rays and 33.7 percent mortality rate in protections exist, there are noted (presumably M. birostris) represented protective shark nets (Marshall et al. enforcement difficulties in many areas, 17.8 percent of the total ray bycatch in (2011a) citing Young 2001)), significant with the lucrative trade in manta gill the European purse seine tuna fishery debilitating injuries from entanglements rakers driving the illegal fishing of the operating between 10° S. and 15° N. in fishing gear (e.g., gillnets and species. For example, although latitude off the African coast (Amande` longlines) have been noted (Heinrichs et Indonesia prohibited fishing for manta et al. 2010). While only 11 total giant al. 2011). The likelihood of bycatch rays throughout its entire EEZ in 2014, manta rays were observed caught over mortality significantly increases when only 2 years prior, it was ranked as the study period, observer coverage fishing pressure is concentrated in likely the most aggressive fishing nation averaged a mere 2.9 percent (Amande` et known manta ray aggregation areas. For for manta rays (based on landing al. 2010), suggesting the true extent of example, in a major M. birostris estimates; see CITES 2013). Based on M. birostris catch may be significantly aggregation site off Ecuador, researchers evidence of enforcement difficulties of greater. In fact, within the Mauritanian have observed large numbers of manta prior regulations (particularly relating to exclusive economic zone (EEZ) alone, rays with life-threatening injuries as a manta rays), and citing to examples of Zeeberg et al. (2006) estimated an result of incidental capture in illegal illegal fishing in Indonesian waters, the annual removal rate of between 120 and wahoo (Acanthocybium solandri) trawl petitioners note that the financial 620 mature manta rays by large foreign fisheries operating within Machalillia incentive of targeting manta rays will trawlers operating off the western coast National Park (Heinrichs et al. 2011; continue to drive their exploitation. In of Africa, which the authors deemed Marshall et al. 2011a). Similarly, off a study on the movement of manta rays likely to be an unsustainable rate. This Thailand, a significantly higher between manta ray sanctuaries in removal rate is especially troubling in proportion of manta rays show net and Indonesia, Germanov and Marshall terms of its impact on the extinction risk line injuries compared to anywhere else (2014) also recognized the inadequacy of both species, given that the only in the world, with the aforementioned of existing regulatory measures, noting known populations of M. alfredi in the exception off Ecuador (Heinrichs et al. that although the prohibition was Atlantic Ocean occur within this region 2011). Off Papua New Guinea, manta implemented in 2014, ‘‘[I]n reality, (off Senegal, Cape Verde and Canary rays (presumably M. alfredi) are however, it may be a long time before Islands), and that this level of take is reported as bycatch in purse seines, and all manta ray fisheries in Indonesia are equivalent to the subpopulation sizes of from 1994 to 2006 comprised an completely shut down.’’ Illegal fishing, M. birostris (estimates of 100–1000) and estimated 1.8 percent of the annual landings and trade of manta rays have M. alfredi (100–1500, with the exception purse seine bycatch. While the also been reported from the Philippines, of 5,000 in Maldives) found throughout condition of the manta rays in these Ecuador, Mexico, and Thailand the world. As such, utilization of manta purse seines was not described, by (Heinrichs et al. 2011; Graham et al. ray species at this level may likely be 2005/2006, a sharp decline in the 2012; CITES 2013); however, the true contributing to population declines in catches of manta rays was observed in extent of the global illegal trade in this region for giant manta rays and these waters, suggesting the population manta species is not known (CITES could easily lead to the extirpation of may have been unable to withstand the 2013). reef manta rays from the Atlantic Ocean, prior bycatch mortality rates (Marshall if this has not already occurred. (Based In terms of regulations pertaining to on information in the petition and in et al. 2011b). For the most part, though, the legal international trade in the our files, we could not verify the year manta rays are almost never recorded species, all manta ray species (Manta of the most recent observations of M. down to species in bycatch reports, and spp.) were listed in Appendix II of alfredi off Cape Verde or the Canary more often than not tend to be lumped CITES (with listing effective on Islands. The evidence of M. alfredi off into broader categories such as ‘‘Other,’’ September 14, 2014). CITES is an Senegal is based on historical reports ‘‘Rays,’’ and ‘‘Batoids.’’ As such, the international agreement between and photos from 1958; (Marshall et al. true extent of global manta ray bycatch governments that regulates international (2009) citing Cadenat (1958))). and associated mortality remains largely trade in wild animals and plants. It In the Indian Ocean, manta rays are unknown. encourages governments to take a reportedly taken in large numbers as Although there are a number of both proactive approach and the species bycatch in the Pakistani, Indian, and Sri national and international regulations covered by CITES are listed in Lankan gillnet fisheries where their aimed at protecting manta rays from the appendices according to the degree of meat is used for shark bait or human above threat of overutilization by endangerment and the level of consumption and their gill rakers are fisheries, the petition asserts that these protection provided. For example, sold in the Asian market. Manta rays existing regulatory measures, both Appendix I includes species threatened have also been identified in U.S. species-specific and otherwise, do not with extinction; trade in specimens of bycatch data from fisheries operating adequately protect the manta rays. In these species is permitted only in primarily in the Central and Western fact, as of 2013, neither India nor Sri exceptional circumstances. Appendix II Pacific Ocean, including the U.S. tuna Lanka, two of the top manta ray fishing includes species not necessarily purse seine fisheries (likely M. birostris; countries, had implemented any threatened with extinction, but for

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Feb 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM 23FEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 8883

which trade must be controlled to avoid the manta ray tourism industry, and the available information in the petition exploitation rates incompatible with predation from shark and orca attacks, and in our files, their statuses are either species survival. Appendix III contains we find that the petition and unknown or in rapid decline, and yet species that are protected in at least one information in our files suggests that both species appear to continue to face country that has asked other CITES overutilization for commercial heavy fishing pressure (due to the high Parties (i.e., those countries that have purposes, in and of itself, may be a value of gill rakers in trade) and have ‘‘joined’’ CITES) for assistance in threat impacting the giant and reef significant biological vulnerabilities and controlling the trade. manta ray to such a degree that raises demographic risks (i.e., extremely low The listing of manta rays on concern that these two species may be productivity; declining abundance; Appendix II of CITES provides at risk of extinction throughout all or a small, fragmented, and isolated increased protection for both species, significant portion of their respective subpopulations), we find that the but still allows legal and sustainable ranges. We note that the information in information in the petition and in our trade. Export of any part of a manta ray our files and provided by the petitioner files would lead a reasonable person to requires permits that ensure the does indicate that a few identified conclude that both M. birostris and M. products were legally acquired and that subpopulations of reef manta rays the CITES Scientific Authority of the alfredi may warrant listing as threatened appear to be stable, particularly those or endangered species throughout all or State of export has advised that such which receive at least some protection a significant portion of their ranges. export will not be detrimental to the from fisheries, including: survival of that species. This is achieved Subpopulations in Hawaii (Maui Petition Finding through the issuing of a ‘‘Non-Detriment subpopulation estimate = 350; CITES Finding’’ or ‘‘NDF.’’ The petition argues, 2013 citing personal communication), After reviewing the information however, that there are no clear where harvest and trade of manta rays contained in the petition, as well as standards for making this CITES NDF. are prohibited (H.B. 366); the Maldives information readily available in our Furthermore, the petition states that (subpopulation estimate = 5,000; CITES files, and based on the above analysis, given the limited population 2013 citing personal communication), we conclude the petition presents information for the manta ray species, it where export of all ray species has been substantial scientific information will be difficult to even determine banned since 1995, where most types of indicating the petitioned action of sustainable harvest, and coupled with net fishing are prohibited, and where listing the giant manta ray and the reef the lack of adequate scientific capacity two MPAs have been created to protect manta ray as threatened or endangered in many CITES member countries, the critical habitat for the Maldives species may be warranted. Therefore, in determinations with respect to manta populations (Anderson et al. 2011; CMS accordance with section 4(b)(3)(B) of the ray exports will be inconsistent and 2014); Yap (subpopulation estimate = ESA and NMFS’ implementing unreliable. Ward-Paige et al. (2013) ∼100), with a designated Manta Ray regulations (50 CFR 424.14(b)(3)), we remark that despite these efforts by Sanctuary that covers 8,234 square will commence a status review of these CITES, no international management miles (21,326 square km) (CMS 2014); plans have been put in place to ‘‘ensure two species. We also find that the and Palau (estimate = 170 recorded petition did not present substantial the future of mobulid populations,’’ and individuals). With the passage of with manta ray species only recently scientific information to indicate that Micronesia’s Public Law 18–108 in early the Caribbean manta ray (identified as subject to the management of only one 2015 (which created a shark sanctuary Regional Fishery Management Manta c.f. birostris) is a taxonomically in the Federated States of Micronesia Organization (RFMO) (the Inter- valid species eligible for listing under EEZ, encompassing nearly 3 million American Tropical Tuna Commission; the ESA. However, if during the course square kilometers in the western Pacific Resolution C–15–04), as Mundy-Taylor of the status review of the giant and reef Ocean), a Micronesia Regional Shark and Crook (2013) state, ‘‘it is expected manta ray we find new information to Sanctuary now exists that prohibits the that it will be particularly challenging suggest otherwise, we will self-initiate a commercial fishing and trade of sharks for countries and/or territories that status review of the Caribbean manta and rays and their parts within the harvest M. birostris [and potentially also ray, announcing our intention in the waters of the Republic of Marshall M. alfredi] on the high seas to carry out Federal Register. Islands, Republic of Palau, Guam, NDFs for such specimens.’’ Based on the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana During the status review, we will information provided in the petition determine whether the particular manta and in our files, we are presently unable Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia and its four member states, ray species is in danger of extinction to speak to the current effectiveness of (endangered) or likely to become so the CITES Appendix II listing in Yap, Chuuk, Pohnpei, and Kosrae. (threatened) throughout all or a protecting manta ray species from levels However, these protections cover only a significant portion of its range. We now of trade that may contribute to the small portion of the migratory giant and initiate this review, and thus, both M. overutilization of both species. Overall, reef manta ray ranges. Additionally, we find that further evaluation of manta rays are not confined by national birostris and M. alfredi are considered to existing regulatory measures is needed boundaries and, for example, may lose be candidate species (69 FR 19975; to determine if these regulations are certain protections as they conduct April 15, 2004). Within 12 months of inadequate to protect the giant and reef seasonal migrations (or even as they the receipt of the petition (November 10, manta ray from threats that are move around to feed; Graham et al. 2016), we will make a finding as to significantly contributing to their (2012)) if they cross particular national whether listing the giant manta ray and extinction risks. jurisdictional boundaries (e.g., between the reef manta ray as endangered or While the petition identifies the Maldives and Sri Lanka or India), threatened species is warranted as numerous other threats to the two move outside of established MPAs, or required by section 4(b)(3)(B) of the species, including habitat destruction enter into high seas. ESA. If listing is found to be warranted, and modification from coral reef loss, Overall, when we consider the we will publish a proposed rule and climate change, and plastic marine number of manta ray subpopulations solicit public comments before debris, recreational overutilization by throughout the world where, based on developing and publishing a final rule.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Feb 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM 23FEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 8884 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules

Information Solicited DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/A’’ in the required fields if you wish to remain To ensure that the status review is National Oceanic and Atmospheric anonymous). based on the best available scientific Administration FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt and commercial data, we are soliciting Dunlap, NMFS PIR Sustainable information on whether the giant manta 50 CFR Part 665 Fisheries, 808–725–5177. ray and reef manta ray are endangered [Docket No. 150715616–6097–01] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The or threatened. Specifically, we are bottomfish fishery in Federal waters RIN 0648–XE062 soliciting information in the following around Hawaii is managed under the areas: (1) Historical and current Pacific Island Fisheries; 2015–16 Fishery Ecosystem Plan for the distribution and abundance of these Annual Catch Limit and Accountability Hawaiian Archipelago (Hawaii FEP), species throughout their respective Measures; Main Hawaiian Islands Deep developed by the Western Pacific ranges; (2) historical and current 7 Bottomfish Fishery Management Council (Council) population trends; (3) life history in and implemented by NMFS under the marine environments, including AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries authority of the Magnuson-Stevens identified nursery grounds; (4) historical Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Fishery Conservation and Management and current data on manta ray catch, Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). The bycatch and retention in industrial, Commerce. regulations at Title 50, Code of Federal commercial, artisanal, and recreational ACTION: Proposed specifications; request Regulations, Part 665 (50 CFR 665.4) fisheries worldwide; (5) historical and for comments. require NMFS to specify an ACL for current data on manta ray discards in MHI Deep 7 bottomfish each fishing SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to specify an global fisheries; (6) data on the trade of year, based on a recommendation from annual catch limit (ACL) of 326,000 lb manta ray products, including gill the Council. The Deep 7 bottomfish are for Deep 7 bottomfish in the main rakers, meat, and skin; (7) any current onaga (Etelis coruscans), ehu (E. Hawaiian Islands (MHI) for the 2015–16 carbunculus), gindai (Pristipomoides or planned activities that may adversely fishing year, which began on September impact either of these species; (8) any zonatus), kalekale (P. sieboldii), 1, 2015, and ends on August 31, 2016. opakapaka (P. filamentosus), lehi impacts of the manta ray tourism If the ACL is projected to be reached, as industry on manta ray behavior; (9) (Aphareus rutilans), and hapuupuu an accountability measure (AM), NMFS (Hyporthodus quernus). ongoing or planned efforts to protect would close the commercial and non- NMFS proposes to specify an ACL of and restore these species and their commercial fisheries for MHI Deep 7 326,000 lb of Deep 7 bottomfish in the habitats; (10) population structure bottomfish for the remainder of the MHI for the 2015–16 fishing year. The information, such as genetics data; and fishing year. The proposed ACL and AM Council recommended the ACL at its (11) management, regulatory, and support the long-term sustainability of 163rd meeting held in June 2015. The enforcement information. We request Hawaii bottomfish. proposed specification is 20,000 lb less that all information be accompanied by: DATES: NMFS must receive comments than the ACL that NMFS specified for (1) Supporting documentation such as by March 9, 2016. the past four consecutive fishing years maps, bibliographic references, or ADDRESSES: You may submit comments (i.e., 2011–12, 2012–13, 2013–14, and reprints of pertinent publications; and on this document, identified by NOAA– 2014–15). NMFS monitors Deep 7 (2) the submitter’s name, address, and NMFS–2015–0090, by either of the bottomfish catches based on data any association, institution, or business following methods: provided by commercial fishermen to that the person represents. • Electronic Submission: Submit all the State of Hawaii. If NMFS projects electronic public comments via the the fishery will reach this limit, NMFS References Cited Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to would close the commercial and non- A complete list of references is http://www.regulations.gov/ commercial fisheries for MHI Deep 7 available upon request to the Office of #!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2015- bottomfish for the remainder of the Protected Resources (see ADDRESSES). 0090, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, fishing year, as an accountability complete the required fields, and enter measure (AM). In addition, if NMFS and Authority or attach your comments. the Council determine that the final • Mail: Send written comments to 2015–16 Deep 7 bottomfish catch The authority for this action is the Michael D. Tosatto, Regional exceeds the ACL, NMFS would reduce Endangered Species Act of 1973, as Administrator, NMFS Pacific Islands the Deep 7 bottomfish ACL for the amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Region (PIR), 1845 Wasp Blvd. Bldg. 2015–16 fishing year by the amount of Dated: February 16, 2016. 176, Honolulu, HI 96818. the overage. The fishery did not attain Samuel D. Rauch, III, Instructions: NMFS may not consider the specified ACL in fishing years from comments sent by any other method, to September 2011 to August 2015, and Deputy Assistant Administrator for any other address or individual, or NMFS does not anticipate the fishery Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service. received after the end of the comment will attain the limit in the current period. All comments received are a fishing year, which began on September [FR Doc. 2016–03638 Filed 2–22–16; 8:45 am] part of the public record and will 1, 2015, and ends on August 31, 2016. BILLING CODE 3510–22–P generally be posted for public viewing The Council recommended the ACL on www.regulations.gov without change. and AMs based on a 2011 NMFS All personal identifying information bottomfish stock assessment updated (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential with three additional years of data, and business information, or otherwise in consideration of the risk of sensitive information submitted overfishing, past fishery performance, voluntarily by the sender will be the acceptable biological catch (ABC) publicly accessible. NMFS will accept recommendation from its Scientific and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Feb 22, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM 23FEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS