81822 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 3—COMPLETED DOMESTIC RECOVERY ACTIONS (PROPOSED AND FINAL DOWNLISTINGS AND DELISTINGS) IN FY 2019 AND FY 2020—Continued [As of September 30, 2020]

Federal Register Publication date Title Action(s) Citation

4/27/2020 ...... Removing Arenaria ...... Proposed Rule—Delisting ...... 85 FR 23302–23315. cumberlandensis (Cumberland Sandwort) From the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Plants. 06/01/2020 ...... Removing San Benito Evening-Primrose Proposed Rule—Delisting ...... 85 FR 33060–33078. (Camissonia benitensis) From the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Plants. 06/11/2020 ...... Removing the Borax Lake Chub From the Final Rule—Delisting ...... 85 FR 35574–35594. List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. 07/24/2020 ...... Reclassification of Morro Shoulderband Snail Proposed Rule—Downlisting ...... 85 FR 44821–44835. (Helminthoglypta walkeriana) From Endan- gered to Threatened With a 4(d) Rule. 08/19/2020 ...... Reclassification of Stephens’ Kangaroo Rat Proposed Rule—Downlisting ...... 85 FR 50991–51006. From Endangered to Threatened With a Section 4(d) Rule. 9/30/2020 ...... Reclassification of Layia carnosa (Beach Proposed Rule—Downlisting ...... 85 FR 61684–61700. Layia) From Endangered To Threatened Species Status With Section 4(d) Rule. 9/30/2020 ...... Reclassifying the Virgin Islands Tree Boa Proposed Rule—Downlisting ...... 85 FR 61700–61717. From Endangered To Threatened With a Section 4(d) Rule.

When a petitioned action is found to change in status is warranted, including Authors be warranted but precluded, the Service the need to make prompt use of The primary authors of this document is required by the Act to treat the emergency listing procedures. are the staff members of the Fish and petition as resubmitted on an annual A detailed discussion of the basis for Wildlife Service’s Species Assessment basis until a proposal or withdrawal is this finding can be found in the Team. published. If the petitioned species is monarch butterfly species assessment not already listed under the Act, the form and other supporting documents Authority species becomes a ‘‘candidate’’ and is (see ADDRESSES, above). The authority for this action is section reviewed annually in the Candidate New Information 4 of the Endangered Species Act of Notice of Review. The number of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et candidate species remaining in FY 2020 We intend that any proposed listing seq.). is the lowest it has been since 1975. For rule for the monarch butterfly will be as these species, we are working on accurate as possible. Therefore, we will Aurelia Skipwith, developing a species status assessment, continue to accept additional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. preparing proposed listing information and comments from all [FR Doc. 2020–27523 Filed 12–16–20; 8:45 am] determinations, or preparing not- concerned governmental agencies, the BILLING CODE 4333–15–P warranted 12-month findings. scientific community, industry, or any Another way that we have been other interested party concerning this expeditious in making progress in finding. We request that you submit any DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE adding and removing qualified species new information concerning the National Oceanic and Atmospheric to and from the Lists is that we have taxonomy of, biology of, ecology of, Administration made our actions as efficient and timely status of, threats to, or conservation as possible, given the requirements of actions for the monarch butterfly to the 50 CFR Parts 223 and 224 the Act and regulations and constraints person specified under FOR FURTHER relating to workload and personnel. We INFORMATION CONTACT, whenever it [Docket No. 201123–0313; RTID 0648– are continually seeking ways to becomes available. New information XE804] streamline processes or achieve will help us monitor this species and economies of scale, such as batching make appropriate decisions about its Revisions to Hatchery Programs related actions together for publication. conservation and status. We encourage Included as Part of Pacific Salmon and Given our limited budget for all stakeholders to continue cooperative Steelhead Species Listed Under the implementing section 4 of the Act, these monitoring and conservation efforts. Endangered Species Act efforts also contribute toward our References Cited AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries expeditious progress in adding and Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and removing qualified species to and from The list of the references cited in the Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Lists. petition finding is available on the Commerce. The monarch butterfly will be added internet at http://www.regulations.gov ACTION: Final rule. to the candidate list, and we will under docket number FWS–R3–ES– continue to evaluate this species as new 2020–0103 and upon request from the SUMMARY: We, NMFS, announce updates information becomes available. person specified under FOR FURTHER to the descriptions of Pacific salmon Continuing review will determine if a INFORMATION CONTACT. and steelhead (Oncorhynchus spp.)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Dec 16, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM 17DER1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81823

species that are currently listed as ESA includes the following entities: (1) Adding new hatchery programs threatened or endangered under the Species, subspecies, and, for vertebrates that meet the Hatchery Listing Policy Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA). only, ‘‘distinct population segments criteria for inclusion, or adding Updates include the addition or removal (DPSs).’’ Steelhead are listed as DPSs programs that resulted from dividing of specific hatchery programs, as well as and Pacific salmon are listed as existing listed hatchery programs into clarifying changes to the names of ‘‘evolutionarily significant units separate programs with new names; specific hatchery programs included as (ESUs),’’ which are essentially (2) Removing hatchery programs that part of the listings of certain Pacific equivalent to DPSs for the purpose of have been terminated and do not have salmon and steelhead species. These the ESA. any fish remaining from the program, or changes are informed by our most recent For West Coast salmon and steelhead, removing previously listed hatchery ESA 5-year reviews, which were many of the ESU and DPS descriptions programs that were subsumed by completed in 2016. We are not changing include fish originating from specific another listed program; the ESA-listing status of any species artificial propagation programs (e.g., (3) Revising some hatchery program under NMFS’s jurisdiction, or hatcheries) that, along with their names for clarity or to standardize modifying any critical habitat naturally-produced counterparts, are conventions for naming programs; and designation. The updates also include included as part of the listed species. (4) Making minor changes in minor changes in terminology to NMFS’ Policy on the Consideration of terminology to standardize species descriptions. standardize species descriptions. Hatchery-Origin Fish in Endangered The approach we used in the DATES: This final rule is effective Species Act Listing Determinations for proposed rule and this final rule to December 17, 2020. Pacific Salmon and Steelhead (Hatchery determine which hatchery programs are ADDRESSES: NMFS, Protected Resources Listing Policy) (70 FR 37204, June 28, included within an ESU or DPS is Division, 1201 NE Lloyd Boulevard, 2005) guides our analysis of whether consistent with the approach taken in Suite 1100, Portland, OR 97232. individual hatchery programs should be the 2016 status review. That is, as part FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: included as part of the listed species. of our status reviews, we reviewed Robert Markle, NMFS, West Coast The Hatchery Listing Policy states that hatchery programs under our Hatchery Region, Protected Resources Division, hatchery programs will be considered Listing Policy and concluded that some 1201 NE Lloyd Blvd., Suite 1100, part of an ESU/DPS if they exhibit a changes to the list of hatchery programs Portland, OR 97232, by phone at (503) level of genetic divergence relative to included in certain ESUs and DPSs were 230–5433, or by email at robert.markle@ the local natural population(s) that is warranted. Those changes included noaa.gov. You may also contact Maggie not more than what occurs within the updates to hatchery program names as Miller, NMFS, Office of Protected ESU/DPS. In applying the Hatchery well as the inclusion of new programs Resources, (301) 427–8403. Copies of Listing Policy, we use a variety of and the removal of programs that had the 5-year status reviews can be found sources to reach conclusions about been discontinued. However, as on our website at https:// divergence. indicated in the 2016 status review, www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/2016-5- Section 4(c)(2)(A) of the ESA requires none of these changes resulted in a year-reviews-28-listed-species-pacific- regular review of listed species to change to the listing status of an ESU or salmon-steelhead-and-eulachon. determine whether a species should be DPS because none of the changes SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: delisted, reclassified, or retain its affected the extinction risk of the ESU current classification (16 U.S.C. or DPS. Background 1533(c)(2)). We completed our most Section 4 of the ESA provides for recent 5-year review of the status of Comments Received in Response to the NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife ESA-listed salmon ESUs and steelhead Proposed Rule and Responses Service (FWS) to make determinations DPSs in California, Oregon, Idaho, and We received 23 comments on the as to the endangered or threatened Washington in 2016 (81 FR 33468, May proposed rule via www.regulations.gov, status of ‘‘species’’ in response to 26, 2016). As part of the 5-year review, letter, or email. These comments were petitions or on their own initiative. In we reviewed the classification of all submitted by individuals, state agencies, accordance with the ESA, we (NMFS) West Coast salmon and steelhead non-governmental organizations, and make determinations as to the hatchery programs, guided by our tribes or tribal representatives. Many of threatened or endangered status of Hatchery Listing Policy. We considered the submissions included similar species by regulation. These regulations the origin for each hatchery stock, the comments, and several were form provide the text for each species’ listing location of release of hatchery fish, and letters. We reviewed all comments for and include the content required by the the degree of known or inferred genetic substantive issues or new information ESA section 4(c)(1). We enumerate and divergence between the hatchery stock and identified several broad issues of maintain a list of species under our and the local natural population(s). A concern. In the text below we have jurisdiction which we have determined NMFS internal memorandum (Jones organized comments by major issue to be threatened or endangered at 50 2015) explains the results of our categories, summarized the comments CFR 223.102 (threatened species) and 50 hatchery program review. Jones (2015) for brevity and clarity, and addressed CFR 224.101 (endangered species) found that, based on the best scientific similar comments with common (hereafter referred to as the ‘‘NMFS evidence available, some hatchery responses where possible. After Lists’’). The FWS maintains two master programs should be reclassified, that is, considering all comments, we made lists of all threatened and endangered added to or removed from the changes or clarifications in the final rule species, i.e., both species under NMFS’s description of the relevant ESUs/DPSs. as explained below. jurisdiction and species under FWS’s On October 21, 2016, we proposed to Comment 1—Genetic and Ecological jurisdiction (the ‘‘FWS Lists’’) at 50 CFR revise the NMFS Lists based on the Risk of Hatchery Programs: Numerous 17.11 (threatened and endangered aforementioned review and we solicited commenters stated their opposition to animals) and 50 CFR 17.12 (threatened public comments (81 FR 72759). The the release of hatchery fish into areas and endangered plants). The term proposed revisions to listed species with natural populations. They also ‘‘species’’ for listing purposes under the descriptions included: opposed adding new hatchery programs

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Dec 16, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM 17DER1 81824 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations

to ESA-listed ESUs or DPSs. of this moderate divergence criterion consultations, is the most Commenters stated that NMFS is failing relative to how we have applied it in the comprehensive and current information to adequately address the deleterious past. available. In the few cases where genetic and ecological effects of We do not believe there is a need to commenters provided new information, hatchery fish, and requested that we revise our Hatchery Listing Policy, and we considered the information (see convene a panel of experts to revise and reiterate that the policy does recognize Revisions to Threatened Species update our Hatchery Listing Policy. the risks from hatchery programs and Descriptions and Revisions to Response: This final rule arises from allows us to evaluate them in a manner Endangered Species Descriptions, our obligation under ESA section 4(c)(2) commensurate with the potential below). In most cases, commenters to regularly assess the status of listed benefits of the programs. provided no new information for us to species and determine whether they Of note, many hatchery programs consider. Under the Hatchery Listing should be de-listed or changed in have undergone or are undergoing Policy, we base our determinations of classification from threatened to review under our ESA section 4(d) species status under the ESA on the endangered or vice-versa. 16 U.S.C. regulations at 50 CFR 223.203(d)(5) (4(d) status of the entire ESU/DPS, including 1531(c)(2). In 2016, we assessed the Rule). When NMFS determines that a hatchery fish. We recognize that composition of salmonid ESUs and Hatchery and Genetic Management Plan important genetic resources DPSs pursuant to the requirements of (HGMP) meets the 4(d) Rule representing the ecological and genetic the ESA and our Hatchery Listing Policy requirements and approves the HGMP, diversity of species can reside in to determine whether any changes were then the ESA’s prohibitions against take hatchery fish as well as natural fish. We warranted. of threatened species do not apply to apply the Hatchery Listing Policy in The Hatchery Listing Policy was program activities. When we list a support of the conservation of naturally- developed, in part, in response to the hatchery program under the ESA, it spawning salmon and the ecosystems lawsuit Alsea Valley Alliance v. Evans does not automatically receive an upon which they depend, consistent (2001) (Alsea decision), where a U.S. exemption from the ESA’s prohibitions with section 2(b) of the ESA. District Court ruled that NMFS cannot against take. In evaluating whether to Comment 3—Justification for the Rule exclude hatchery fish from an ESA approve an HGMP under the 4(d) Rule, and Data Sources: Numerous comments listing if NMFS determines that such NMFS carries out consultation under asserted that the proposed rule did not fish comprise part of the listed ESU/DPS ESA section 7 to ensure that HGMP provide adequate justification to under the applicable ESA standards. implementation is not likely to support our proposed revisions. The Hatchery Listing Policy was jeopardize any listed species or destroy Comments requested more detail about subsequently upheld in the lawsuit or adversely modify its critical habitat. the criteria, data, and analytical Trout Unlimited v. Lohn (2009). In that This provides another means for NMFS methods that we used to evaluate each case, the court upheld NMFS’ to evaluate the effects of hatchery fish hatchery program. Several comments determination to include both hatchery on the ESU/DPS to which they belong asked how the level of divergence and natural fish in a listed steelhead and recommend management measures between hatchery and natural DPS, despite the potential threats posed to improve hatchery operations. populations is measured. Other by hatchery fish. The court noted that Comment 2—Use of Best Available comments stated that pHOS (proportion the listing process comprises two Science: Numerous commenters stated of spawners of hatchery origin) and PNI distinct phases: The initial decision that the Hatchery Listing Policy and the (the proportionate natural influence in a regarding the composition of the DPS, moderate divergence criterion are not natural salmon or steelhead population) and the subsequent decision whether to consistent with the best available metrics should have been explained and list the DPS. science. Three commenters stated that evaluated in the proposed rule. In sum, Our recommendation to include a use of a criterion that focuses solely on the commenters requested that we more hatchery program in an ESA-listed ESU genetics—without attention to life clearly link our proposed revisions to or DPS does not reflect a de-emphasis of history, ecology, and population supporting documentation, including the risks from hatchery programs. The demographics—is inadequate. Related the 5-year status reviews and relevant Hatchery Listing Policy guiding our comments questioned the current HGMPs. recommendation acknowledges such relevance of supporting documents Response: We apply the best available risks and their impacts on the adaptive including the Jones (2011, 2015) memos information when determining whether genetic diversity, reproductive fitness, and two reports, the Salmon and a hatchery program should be included and productivity of the ESU. If we Steelhead Assessment Group’s in an ESU or DPS. The primary sources determine that a hatchery program (SSHAG), ‘‘Hatchery Broodstock of information that NMFS considers in warrants inclusion in an ESU or DPS, Summaries and Assessments for Chum, defining each ESU/DPS, including we consider effects of the hatchery fish Coho, and Chinook,’’ and the Salmonid recently approved HGMPs, are on the natural fish comprising the ESU/ Hatchery Inventory and Effects referenced in Jones (2015), which was DPS in determining how the ESU/DPS Evaluation Report (SHIEER) titled ‘‘An cited in the proposed rule. NMFS’ most should be classified under ESA section Evaluation of the Effects of Artificial recent 5-year reviews (81 FR 33468, May 4(c). For the hatchery programs that are Propagation on the Status and 26, 2016), which were also cited in the being added, a summary of findings Likelihood of Extinction of West Coast proposed rule, describe relationships, from this analysis can be found in Jones Salmon and Steelhead under the risks, benefits, and uncertainties of (2015). Federal Endangered Species Act’’ specific hatchery stocks relative to The Hatchery Listing Policy states (SSHAG 2003, SHIEER 2004). natural populations of ESUs/DPSs. that hatchery programs will be Response: The best available Links to these 5-year reviews can be considered part of an ESU/DPS if they information upon which to determine found on our website (https:// exhibit a level of genetic divergence whether hatchery programs should be www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/2016-5- relative to the local natural included in a salmon ESU or steelhead year-reviews-28-listed-species-pacific- population(s) that is not more than what DPS is referenced in Jones (2015). This salmon-steelhead-and-eulachon). For occurs within the ESU/DPS. We are not report, in conjunction with individual many species, data are not available to changing or weakening our application HGMPs and associated section 7 quantitatively assess the level of genetic

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Dec 16, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM 17DER1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81825

divergence between a hatchery stock evaluation of available reproductive criteria for determining divergence, and natural populations, and so success information would occur during decisions to either include or exclude surrogate information must be used. our consideration of an HGMP. hatchery populations from listing will We agree that the pHOS and PNI Comment 6—Conservation Value of be arbitrary and inconsistent. metrics are helpful in assessing the Hatchery Programs Using Local Response: As stated above, NMFS is effects of hatchery programs and we did Broodstock: Several commenters stated required to use the best available evaluate the most recently available that NMFS has acknowledged the information when making ESA listing pHOS and PNI information. The widely- limited conservation value of segregated decisions. The ESA requires that we used demographic metrics pHOS, pNOB hatchery programs using broodstocks conduct status reviews for listed species (proportion of broodstock of natural derived from local populations, yet has every 5 years. Prior to our review, we origin) and PNI are typically used as adopted a standard that encompasses publish a Federal Register notice measures of genetic risk associated with virtually all hatchery programs using requesting information pertinent to our program operations. In the absence of local broodstock. Several commenters reviews. We then review this historical genetic databases, we use also recommended that we exclude information to inform our assessment of these metrics extensively in making ‘‘segregated’’ hatchery programs because the species’ ESA status. As part of that decisions regarding levels of divergence. they serve no conservation purpose assessment, we consider species A summary of the analysis of these (e.g., the Deep River Net Pen- composition, including whether any metrics for each hatchery program can Washougal, Klaskanine Hatchery, hatchery programs should be included be found in Jones (2015). Bonneville Hatchery, and Cathlamet in the listed entity. Comment 4—Need for Approved Channel Net Pen Programs within the For many listed ESUs/DPSs, metrics HGMPs: A commenter stated that the Lower Columbia River ESU). The such as Fst, or even pHOS and PNI (as listed ESU/DPS should only include commenter stated that high stray rates mentioned in an earlier comment) are hatchery programs that have been from these segregated hatchery not available. As a result, mandating a evaluated under the ESA. The programs result in the fish from these quantitative genetics approach to our commenter asserted that the proposed programs appearing to be ‘‘no more than listing decisions is impossible due to rule ‘‘notably leaves out the critical moderately diverged’’ from natural such data limitations. As mentioned details within approved HGMPs that populations, while the listed natural above, we are required to decide link to broodstock source, breeding and populations decrease in fitness and whether or not to include a hatchery rearing protocols, monitoring and recovery potential as a result of genetic program as part of a listed ESU/DPS genetics,’’ and ‘‘without that introgression from the hatchery strays. using the best available information. information any inclusion of additional Response: The fundamental issue in The analysis of Puget Sound steelhead hatcheries, or even previously included determining the listing status of a provided by the commenter noted above hatcheries, lacks the scientific rigor that hatchery program is its divergence from provides a good example of the is required to include a hatchery natural populations, not the purpose of limitations of genetic data. Based on population within the DPS/ESU.’’ the hatchery (i.e., conservation or molecular genetic markers, winter Response: Under our Hatchery Listing harvest). Including a hatchery program steelhead derived from Chambers Creek Policy, we assess whether hatchery in an ESU or DPS listing does not hatchery broodstock do not appear to be programs should be included in an ESU endorse its use for any purpose, but substantively diverged from other or DPS based on the best available rather acknowledges that fish from the naturally-spawning populations, scientific information and the standards program are within the range of genetic suggesting that such hatchery fish may identified in the policy. By contrast, diversity exhibited by naturally warrant listing as part of the Puget evaluation of an HGMP under the ESA produced fish in the ESU/DPS. Many Sound steelhead DPS. However, fish is a separate process from our listing hatchery programs designed without from this hatchery program are not determinations under ESA section 4(c). conservation intent use local listed due to domestication, which has HGMP reviews involve a separate, legal broodstock. We evaluate any potential occurred over several generations and determination as to whether a hatchery impact associated with the release of resulted in a noticeably earlier run program qualifies for an exemption from hatchery program fish in the wild timing and poorer productivity than the ESA’s take prohibition. The during our consideration of an HGMP. natural typical Puget Sound steelhead inclusion of a hatchery program in a Comment 7—Genetic Introgression: populations. listing does not authorize the Several commenters stated that genetic In our analysis we use a qualitative propagation of that hatchery stock, and introgression (the transfer of genetic categorization scheme based on SSHAG each hatchery program must still information) between hatchery and (2003), which we believe is the best way undergo ESA review before it can be natural fish increases the likelihood that to consistently evaluate hatchery exempted from the ESA’s take hatchery stocks will qualify for programs at this time. We categorize prohibition. inclusion in an ESU/DPS listing when each hatchery program as category 1 Comment 5—Reproductive Fitness of using the moderate divergence criterion. through category 4, based on the Hatchery Fish: A commenter asked, One commenter provided an analysis program’s degree of divergence from the ‘‘Where are the documents that set forth for Puget Sound steelhead, calculating natural population. Programs designated the reproduction success rates of the Fst/Gst for five listed natural category 1 and 2 are included as part of genetically similar hatchery fish to populations and two unlisted, the listed ESU/DPS because they have a establish whether they can promote segregated hatchery programs derived minimal to moderate level of genetic wild fish recovery?’’ from Chambers Creek hatchery divergence based on the best available Response: The relevant information broodstock. The commenter noted that information. Furthermore, our associated with the decision herein is in their example, NMFS correctly determination whether to include a whether the level of genetic divergence declined to list the segregated steelhead hatchery program in a listing, as we of the hatchery stock is not more than programs under the ESA, due to their mentioned above, is not to be conflated what occurs within the natural high degree of domestication. The with program purpose or program type. population. Consequently, reproductive commenter stated that absent Comment 8—Release Location: A success was not evaluated. An biologically credible, measurable commenter inquired about how release

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Dec 16, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM 17DER1 81826 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations

location affects our evaluation of the ESU/DPS and could potentially be used Hatchery being reared in the Chief listing status of a hatchery program. The later for recovery. Joseph hatchery should still be included commenter stated that ‘‘if fish used in Response: The ESA includes as part of the Upper Columbia River a hatchery program are of ESU origin provisions in section 10 for designating spring-run Chinook salmon listing. and within the accepted divergence experimental populations (50 CFR 17.80 However, upon release into the limits of the ESU, then it would seem through 17.86). All such populations Okanogan River basin these fish would that these fish, biologically, are part of have potential value for the recovery of no longer be considered part of the the ESU, no matter the location of salmon and steelhead, but ESA section endangered Upper Columbia spring-run release from a hatchery program.’’ 10(j) requires that they be designated Chinook salmon ESU. Consistent with Response: We agree in circumstances either as essential or nonessential for our regulations at 50 CFR 223.102(e), where those release locations are within recovery. Nonessential experimental such fish would instead be considered the ESU/DPS range, and this idea is the populations (NEP) are treated as members of the threatened NEP of impetus for many of our decisions to proposed for listing under the ESA for Upper Columbia spring-run Chinook add certain hatchery programs to the purposes of section 7 of the ESA, while salmon when, and at such times as, they listing. However, there are a few essential populations are treated as a are found in the mainstem or tributaries exceptions, largely for reintroduction threatened species. To date, all salmon/ of the Okanogan River from the Canada- programs where listed fish are moved to steelhead hatchery programs associated United States border to the confluence a separate geographic location and used with experimental populations are of the Okanogan River with the to create a stock that adapts, over time, designated as nonessential. Under the Columbia River, Washington. to the new geographic location (i.e., ESA, NEPs do not receive the same level Comment 12—STEP Programs: A coho salmon in the Upper Columbia and of protection as populations listed as commenter stated that Salmon and Snake River Basins). threatened or endangered. Thus, we Trout Enhancement Programs (STEP) Comment 9—Puget Sound Steelhead believe it was more consistent with the should be excluded from listing, stating Hatchery Program Divergence: One ESA’s treatment of NEPs to consider that these programs lack monitoring of commenter stated that the Jones (2015) their associated hatchery programs as broodstock, release sites and strategies, memo cited in the proposed rule seems not listed. In the future, new salmon and return rates. to carry forward estimates of divergence hatchery programs could be considered Response: We base our listing between hatchery and natural essential for recovery and thus determinations on the best scientific production from the 2003 SSHAG experimental populations could include information available. While monitoring document, which were overestimated such hatchery fish in the listing. data may be limited for STEP programs, out of caution, due to a lack of data. The Comment 11—Winthrop National we have evaluated the origin and commenter stated that more recent Fish Hatchery Program and Okanogan history of their broodstocks and information is available in revised NEP: Two commenters requested conclude that several programs warrant HGMPs for Puget Sound steelhead, for clarification regarding the Winthrop inclusion in the ESU/DPS listing. example the proportion of natural-origin National Fish Hatchery Program in the Comment 13—Lower Columbia River broodstock used in each hatchery Upper Columbia spring-run Chinook Chinook Salmon Programs: One program and the proportion of hatchery salmon ESU. One comment stated that commenter stated that the Lower fish found in carcass surveys of the ‘‘it is unclear if the designated [section] Columbia River Chinook salmon rivers. The degree of gene flow inferred 10(j) NEP program is included as part of Cathlamet Channel Net Pens program from these revised HGMPs indicates this Winthrop National Fish Hatchery and the Lower Columbia River coho that the ‘moderate’ divergence Program’’ and requested that NMFS salmon Clatsop County Fisheries Net classification (category 2 in the Jones include language in the species listing Pen program should not be included in 2015 memo) should be replaced with to eliminate any ambiguity. The other the Lower Columbia River Chinook ‘minimal’ divergence (category 1 in the comment recommended that we include salmon ESU. The basis for this comment Jones 2015 memo). in the listing the Chief Joseph Hatchery is that these net pen programs produce Response: There are only a few Program that uses ESA-listed broodstock Chinook salmon for selective harvest steelhead programs in Puget Sound from the Winthrop National Fish purposes and not for conservation. where hatchery and natural fish are Hatchery Program for rearing and Response: Non-biological integrated. In Table 4 of Jones (2015), release in the Okanogan NEP. This considerations, including whether a we identified three programs that are second commenter asserted that the fish hatchery program is planned to ongoing; the Green River Natural, the at the Chief Joseph Hatchery are still of contribute to ESU recovery or to harvest, White River Supplementation, the ESU origin and within the acceptable are not a factor in listing decisions. In Elwha River. We are adding the new divergence level, and therefore should this case, based on available biological Fish Restoration Facility program to the carry the protections of the ESA prior to information, spring-run Chinook salmon Puget Sound steelhead DPS. All of these their release into the NEP. from net pens in the lower Columbia are classified as category 1’s with the Response: The Okanogan NEP and the River are not more than moderately exception of the Green River Natural Winthrop National Fish Hatchery share diverged from the Lower Columbia program, which is classified as a a common broodstock, however the River Chinook Salmon ESU. category 1 or 2. Thus, we think our Okanogan NEP fish are reared in a Comment 14—Cowlitz River Spring listing decisions are in line with the separate hatchery (Chief Joseph Chinook Salmon Hatchery: A comment commenter’s statement. Hatchery), and are released in a stated that the Cowlitz River spring-run Comment 10—Experimental different river basin located outside the Chinook salmon hatchery program is Populations: Two commenters stated geographic range of the ESU. The Jones not listed and thus two programs that that hatchery fish used for experimental memo (2015) documents that the use this stock, Cathlamet net pens populations should ‘‘not necessarily’’ be Winthrop National Fish Hatchery program and the Friends of the Cowlitz excluded from listing. The commenters Program provides fish for the Okanogan program, should be removed from pointed out that hatchery fish used to spring Chinook salmon reintroduction. listing. establish an experimental population We agree that spring Chinook salmon Response: The commenter is in error. may meet the criteria for inclusion in an from the Winthrop National Fish The Cowlitz River spring-run Chinook

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Dec 16, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM 17DER1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81827

salmon hatchery program is included in National Fish Hatchery for broodstock. hatchery stock, which was created using the Lower Columbia River Chinook Thus, these fish should be listed fish from all steelhead populations Salmon ESU and is listed under the ESA because the ‘‘parent’’ program is listed. returning to the Upper Columbia. Given (50 CFR 223.102). NMFS may reconsider this listing the Wells stock is not representative of Comment 15—Lower Columbia River decision once the programs in the any one single population, we have Coho Salmon Description: The Lower Upper Salmon River no longer use decided not to list components of the Columbia River coho salmon ESU Dworshak National Fish Hatchery Wells Program that propagate this stock. description contains Eagle Creek steelhead. Comment 21—Upper Willamette River National Fish Hatchery Program, Comment 18—Dollar Creek Programs: Chinook Salmon: A commenter stated Bonneville/Cascade/Oxbow Hatchery A commenter suggested removing the that the Jones (2015) memo did not Program, and Kalama River Type N Dollar Creek Program because it is adequately address the relationships Program, which provide broodstock subset of the McCall Hatchery. between hatchery and natural sources to reintroduce coho in the Response: Dollar Creek is an egg box populations of Chinook salmon and Clearwater and Grande Ronde basins. A program that has its own HGMP. We steelhead in the Willamette River. The comment suggested adding to the ESU will identify this program individually commenter stated that recent genetic description that the listing ‘‘excludes in the listing description because it is analysis by Oregon State University and Clearwater and Grande Ronde managed by a separate entity, it has a the FWS suggests that the ‘‘Willamette production groups.’’ separate HGMP, and it is a separate line River population is more appropriate Response: Snake River coho salmon item in the 2018–2027 U.S. v. Oregon (sic) considered one stock and not were extirpated in the Snake River basin Management Agreement (U.S. v. OR). divided between Upper Willamette and by 1986. Coho salmon were Identifying this program separately Lower Columbia River.’’ The commenter reintroduced to the Clearwater subbasin allows us to better track program suggests a more accurate delineation in 1994 and the Grande Ronde/Lostine implementation. In the proposed rule would be ‘‘Willamette River stock’’ and subbasin in 2017 using broodstock from we identified this as the Dollar Creek ‘‘Columbia River stock.’’ Furthermore, the Lower Columbia River ESU. Lower Program, but have renamed it the South the commenter stated that Jones (2015) Columbia River coho salmon are Fork Salmon River Eggbox Program as it did not analyze this new genetic data, described in the CFR as ‘‘naturally is more consistent with the description nor did it analyze proposed HGMPs for spawned coho salmon originating from in U.S. v. OR. hatchery populations under the the Columbia River and its tributaries Comment 19—Listing Status of Willamette Biological Opinion or the downstream from the Big White Salmon Panther Creek: A commenter stated that Portland General Electric Hydropower and Hood Rivers (inclusive) and any we are treating populations in Panther Settlement Agreement, which requires such fish originating from the Creek and Lookingglass Creek long term changes to the hatchery Willamette River and its tributaries inconsistently. The commenter asked if populations and releases. below Willamette Falls.’’ By this functionally-extirpated populations that Response: This comment addresses definition, Lower Columbia River coho have been reestablished with ‘‘within how the Upper Willamette River salmon occurring in the Snake River ESU’’ stock (but not ‘within- Chinook salmon and Lower Columbia basin are excluded from the listing and population’) would be considered to be River Chinook salmon ESUs are defined, we see no need to add the commenter’s recovered? which is not the subject of this proposed new language. Response: We are listing Panther rulemaking. Comment 16—Snake River Sockeye Creek because the fish released there are Comment 22—ESU Description: Salmon Hatchery Programs: One from an already listed hatchery program Several comments requested that we comment stated that only the Redfish within the same ESU, and this is revise ESU/DPS descriptions for various Lake Captive Broodstock Program is consistent with how we have handled reasons. listed, and the recently-added ‘‘smolt other reintroduction programs within Response: This final rule addresses production program’’ is not listed but the same ESU/DPS for the purpose of hatchery programs associated with should be. reintroducing fish into functionally listed ESU/DPSs. Our recently- Response: The commenter is correct. extirpated populations (e.g., completed 5-year reviews did not The Redfish Lake Captive Broodstock Lookingglass in the Grande Ronde River recommend modifications to the Program currently produces the eggs Basin). composition of any ESU/DPS apart from used in the new smolt production Comment 20—Wells Fish Hatchery the modifications related to hatchery program. Therefore, the smolts Program Description: One commenter programs addressed in this final rule. produced for this new hatchery program stated that the Wells Fish Hatchery Comment 23—Naming of Hatchery are a category 1a (Jones 2015) and program releases Columbia River Programs: A commenter stated that it is should be included in the Snake River steelhead smolts directly into the unclear what strategy NMFS used to sockeye salmon ESU. We will list this Columbia River and other locations, so name the different hatchery programs program under Idaho Department of it is not clear why in the listing included in the proposed changes. Fish and Game’s program name, the language the Methow and Okanogan are Response: We acknowledge that ‘‘Snake River Sockeye Salmon Hatchery listed in parentheses and the Columbia naming conventions are not always Program.’’ River is excluded. The commenter consistent. Hatchery program names Comment 17—Upper Salmon River recommends deleting ‘in the Methow sometimes include reference to stocking Steelhead Programs: A commenter and Okanogan’ in the listing language. location and sometimes they do not. For stated that the Upper Salmon River Response: The Wells Program has programs with submitted HGMPs, we programs are similar to the Little three separate components: Releases use program names provided in the Salmon River in that the programs are into the Methow River, the Twisp River, HGMP. In general, our intention is to in the process of changing stocks that do and the Columbia River. The Methow use program names that are commonly not utilize B-run steelhead from River and Twisp River releases use accepted and which provide sufficient Dworshak Hatchery. Methow River steelhead. Previously, the description to identify the program. Response: Currently these programs rationale for excluding the Columbia Comment 24—Consistency with Alsea still use some fish from the Dworshak River release was because it uses Wells Decision: A commenter stated that the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Dec 16, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM 17DER1 81828 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations

proposed rule is inconsistent with the most recent 5-year status reviews and or EIS under NEPA. See NOAA Alsea decision. Jones (2015) memos as well as NMFS Administrative Order 216 6.03(e)(1) and Response: NMFS issued the ‘‘Interim staff contact information to obtain any Pacific Legal Foundation v. Andrus, 675 Policy on Artificial (Hatchery) additional supporting information. F. 2d 825 (6th Cir. 1981). Propagation of Pacific Salmon under the Comment 26—ESA Compliance: Endangered Species Act’’ (Interim Several commenters stated that the Summary of Changes Made Between Policy) in 1993. The Interim Policy proposed rule does not comply with the the Proposed and Final Rules provided that hatchery salmon and requirements of section 4 of the ESA Please refer to the proposed rule (81 steelhead would not be listed under the and requested that we re-issue the FR 72759) for details on the rationale for ESA unless they were found to be proposed rule and re-open for public our decision for each affected hatchery essential for recovery of a listed species comment. Commenters also stated that program. We carefully considered all (i.e., if the hatchery population to update the list of hatchery programs comments received in response to the contained a substantial portion of the included with listed ESU/DPSs, NMFS proposed rule and, as a result, have remaining genetic diversity of the must engage in consultation under made the appropriate changes in this species). The result of this policy was section 7(a)(2) of the ESA. final rule. Below we summarize the that a listing determination for a species Response: As noted in the changes made between the proposed depended solely upon the relative Background section above, in and final rules. health of the naturally spawning accordance with section 4(c)(2)(A) of the Threatened Species at 50 CFR 223.102 component of the species. In most cases, ESA, we completed our most recent 5- hatchery fish were not relied upon to year reviews of the status of ESA-listed Revisions to Threatened Species contribute to recovery, and therefore salmon ESUs and steelhead DPSs in Descriptions were not listed. California, Oregon, Idaho, and As explained above, a federal court Washington in 2016 (81 FR 33468, May Salmon, Chinook (Puget Sound ESU) ruled in the Alsea decision that NMFS 26, 2016). At that time, we evaluated In response to the proposed rule we made an improper distinction under the hatchery stocks associated with the received numerous comments ESA by excluding certain hatchery relevant ESUs/DPS as part of a hatchery requesting name changes to listed programs from the listing of Oregon program review (Jones 2015), which in hatchery programs to ensure Coast coho salmon, even though NMFS turn informed the overall ESA status consistency with HGMPs. A few had determined that these hatchery reviews. Our evaluation addressed a comments corrected errors we had made programs were otherwise a part of the number of factors regarding hatchery in the proposed rule. In response to same ESU as the listed natural fish, including the degree of known or these comments, we made the following populations. The Court set aside NMFS’ inferred genetic divergence between the changes between the proposed and final 1998 listing of Oregon Coast coho hatchery stock and the local natural rules: salmon because it impermissibly population(s) as well as the role and (1) We had proposed updating the excluded hatchery fish within the ESU impacts of hatchery programs on key name of the Keta Creek Hatchery from listing and therefore listed an viability parameters such as abundance, Program to the Fish Restoration Facility entity that was not a species, subspecies productivity, spatial structure, and Program. Instead, we are removing the or DPS. While the Alsea decision only diversity. As a result of those 2016 Keta Creek Hatchery Program from addressed Oregon Coast coho salmon, it status reviews, we concluded that the listing, as it never existed and was prompted NMFS to reconsider the species membership of several salmonid previously listed in error. However, we inclusion of hatchery fish in ESA hatchery programs warranted revision are adding the Fish Restoration Facility listings for other West Coast salmon and and advised the public that we would Program, which is a new program. steelhead species. make those revisions through a (2) We had proposed to add the In 2005, NMFS issued the Hatchery subsequent rulemaking (i.e., this Bernie Kai-Kai Gobin (Tulalip) Listing Policy, which superseded the Federal Register document). Hatchery-Skykomish Program. We want Interim Policy. Under the Hatchery ESA sections 4 and 7 serve different to correct the description of this action. Listing Policy, hatchery stocks with a purposes. Under section 4, NMFS This update is not the addition of a new level of genetic divergence relative to determines whether a species should be program but rather a program name the local natural populations that is no listed as endangered or threatened based change from the existing Tulalip Bay more than what occurs within the DPS on section 4’s standards. Under ESA Program to the Bernie Kai-Kai Gobin are: (a) Considered part of the DPS; (b) section 7, Federal agencies must engage (Tulalip) Hatchery-Skykomish Program. considered in determining whether the in consultation with NMFS or the FWS (3) We had proposed updating the DPS should be listed under the ESA; prior to authorizing, funding, or name of the Harvey Creek Hatchery and (c) to be included in any listing of carrying out actions that may affect Program to the Brenner Creek Hatchery the DPS. Thus, the proposed rule and listed species. It would not make sense Program. In fact, the Harvey Creek and this final rule are consistent with the for NMFS to carry out section 7 Brenner Creek hatchery programs are Alsea decision. consultation over whether to list a two distinct programs based on Comment 25—Administrative species, as section 7 only applies to geography and run-timing. The Harvey Procedure Act (APA) Compliance: A species that are already listed. Creek Hatchery Program (summer-run commenter suggested that updates to Comment 27—National and fall-run) was already listed as part the list of hatchery programs included Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of the ESU. The updated listing with listed ESU/DPSs is in violation of Compliance: Multiple commenters language will better describe these the APA because relevant data were not stated that the proposed rule violates programs as the Harvey Creek Hatchery made available to the public. NEPA and NMFS must prepare an Program (summer-run), and the now Response: This rule was published as Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). distinct Brenner Creek Hatchery a proposed rule (81 FR 72759, October Response: ESA listing decisions are Program (fall-run). 21, 2016) and the public was entitled to non-discretionary actions by the agency (4) We are changing the name of the contact NMFS and request additional which are exempt from the requirement Marblemount Hatchery Program (spring- information. We provided links to our to prepare an environmental assessment run subyearlings and summer-run). This

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Dec 16, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM 17DER1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81829

program is now considered to be two considered to be part of the listed because they are now considered to be distinct programs: The Marblemount Imnaha River Program. part of the listed Dworshak National Hatchery Program (spring-run) and (2) We proposed to add the Dollar Fish Hatchery Program. Marblemount Hatchery Program Creek Program. We will be adding this (3) We had proposed to add the (summer-run). This name change was new program, but it will be named the Squaw Creek, Yankee Fork, and not described in the proposed rule. South Fork Salmon River Eggbox Pahsimeroi River Programs as discrete (5) We are changing the names of Program. programs. In fact, these releases of listed several other programs and these Salmon, Coho (Lower Columbia River hatchery fish are considered to be part changes were not described in the ESU) of the Salmon River B-run Program and proposed rule. We are changing the so we are not listing these tributary We are making two changes that differ release sites as individual programs. names of: The Whitehorse Springs Pond from those described in the proposed Program to the Whitehorse Springs rule. Endangered Species at 50 CFR 224.101 Hatchery Program (summer-run); the (1) We removed the Kalama River Revisions to Endangered Species Diru Creek Program to the Clarks Creek Type-S Coho Program because it was Descriptions Hatchery Program; the Issaquah terminated. Hatchery Program to the Issaquah Creek (2) The North Fork Toutle River Salmon, Chinook (Upper Columbia Hatchery Program; the White Hatchery Program will now be named River Spring-Run ESU) Acclimation Pond Program to the White the North Fork Toutle River Type-S We are adding the new Chief Joseph River Acclimation Pond Program; the Hatchery Program. Clear Creek Program to the Clear Creek spring Chinook Hatchery Program Hatchery Program; and the Kalama Steelhead (Puget Sound DPS) (Okanogan release). For further Creek Program to the Kalama Creek We are changing the name of the explanation, see Issue—Winthrop Hatchery Program. Hood Canal Steelhead Supplementation National Fish Hatchery Program and Okanogan NEP in the response to (6) There was a typographical error in Off-station Projects in the Dewatto, comments, above. the proposed rule referring to the Skokomish, and Duckabush Rivers ‘‘Hamma Hatchery Program.’’ The Program to the Hood Canal Salmon, Sockeye (Snake River ESU) Supplementation Program. correct name for this program is the In the proposed rule we Hamma Hamma Hatchery Program. Steelhead (Snake River Basin DPS) recommended minor changes in Salmon, Chinook (Snake River Spring/ We are making three changes that terminology to standardize species Summer-Run ESU) differ from those described in the descriptions in regulations, but we did proposed rule. not propose any changes in hatchery We are making two changes that differ (1) We are adding the South Fork programs included in this ESU. In from those described in the proposed Clearwater Hatchery Program, as response to comments, we are adding rule. proposed, but we correct the name for the Snake River Sockeye Salmon (1) We proposed updating the name of this program to be the South Fork Hatchery Program. the Big Sheep Creek Program to the Big Clearwater (Clearwater Hatchery) B-run In Table 1 we summarize this final Sheep Creek-Adult outplanting from Program. rule’s revisions to hatchery programs Imnaha Program. Instead, we are (2) We are removing the individual associated with listed species removing this program from listing as a listings of the Lolo Creek Program and descriptions for Pacific salmon and separate program, because it is now the North Fork Clearwater Program, steelhead species listed under the ESA. TABLE 1—WEST COAST SALMON AND STEELHEAD HATCHERY PROGRAMS ADDRESSED IN THIS FINAL RULE

ESU/DPS (listing status), and name of Run Location of release hatchery program timing (watershed, state) Type of update Reason for update

Lower Columbia River Chinook salmon (Threatened): Klaskanine Hatchery Program ...... Fall (Tule) ...... Klaskanine River (OR) ...... Add ...... Existing release now classified as a sepa- rate and distinct program. Deep River Net Pens-Washougal Pro- Fall (Tule) ...... Deep River (WA) ...... Add ...... Existing release now classified as a sepa- gram. rate and distinct program. Bonneville Hatchery Program ...... Fall (Tule) ...... Lower Columbia River Gorge Add ...... Existing release now classified as a sepa- (OR). rate and distinct program. Cathlamet Channel Net Pens Program Spring ...... Lower Columbia River (WA/ Add ...... Existing release now classified as a sepa- OR). rate and distinct program. Puget Sound Chinook salmon (Threatened): Marblemount Hatchery Program (spring- Spring ...... Cascade River (WA) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Marblemount Hatchery run). Program (spring subyearlings and sum- mer-run). Marblemount Hatchery Program (sum- Summer ...... Skagit River (WA) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Marblemount Hatchery mer-run). Program (spring subyearlings and sum- mer-run). Harvey Creek Hatchery Program (sum- Summer ...... Stillaguamish River (WA) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Harvey Creek Hatchery mer-run). (summer-run and fall-run). Brenner Creek Hatchery Program (fall- Fall ...... Stillaguamish River (WA) ...... Add ...... Existing release now classified as a sepa- run). rate and distinct program. Whitehorse Springs Hatchery Program Summer ...... Stillaguamish River (WA) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Whitehorse Springs (summer-run). Pond Program. Issaquah Creek Hatchery Program ...... Fall ...... Sammamish River (WA) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Issaquah Hatchery Pro- gram. White River Acclimation Pond Program Spring ...... White River (WA) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as White Acclimation Pond Program.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Dec 16, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM 17DER1 81830 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 1—WEST COAST SALMON AND STEELHEAD HATCHERY PROGRAMS ADDRESSED IN THIS FINAL RULE—Continued

ESU/DPS (listing status), and name of Run Location of release hatchery program timing (watershed, state) Type of update Reason for update

Clarks Creek Hatchery Program ...... Fall ...... Puyallup River (WA) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Diru Creek Hatchery Program. Clear Creek Hatchery Program ...... Fall ...... Nisqually River (WA) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Clear Creek Program. Kalama Creek Hatchery Program ...... Fall ...... Nisqually River (WA) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Kalama Creek Program. Bernie Kai-Kai Gobin (Tulalip) Hatchery- Summer ...... Skykomish River/Tulalip Bay Name Change .... Previously listed as Tulalip Bay Program. Skykomish Program. (WA). Bernie Kai-Kai Gobin (Tulalip) Hatchery- Spring ...... Snohomish River/Tulalip Bay Add ...... New program. Cascade Program. (WA). Soos Creek Hatchery Program (Sub- Fall ...... Green River (WA) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as two programs: the Soos yearlings and Yearlings). Creek Hatchery Subyearlings Program and the Soos Creek Hatchery Yearlings Program. Icy Creek Hatchery ...... Fall ...... Green River (WA) ...... Remove ...... Program now considered part of the listed Soos Creek Hatchery Program. Keta Creek Hatchery Program ...... N/A ...... Green River (WA) ...... Remove ...... Program never existed and was previously listed in error. Fish Restoration Facility Program ...... Fall ...... Green River (WA) ...... Add ...... New program. Hupp Springs Hatchery-Adult Returns to Spring ...... Minter Creek, Carr Inlet (WA) .. Name Change .... Previously listed as Hupp Springs Hatchery Minter Creek Program. Program. Rick’s Pond Hatchery ...... Fall ...... Skokomish River (WA) ...... Remove ...... Program terminated. Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salm- on (Endangered): Livingston Stone National Fish Hatchery Winter ...... Sacramento River (CA) ...... Add ...... New program. (Supplementation and Captive Broodstock). Snake River fall-run Chinook salmon (Threatened): Idaho Power Program ...... Fall ...... Salmon River (ID) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Oxbow Hatchery Pro- gram. Snake River spring/summer-run Chinook salmon (Threatened): South Fork Salmon River Eggbox Pro- Summer ...... South Fork Salmon River (ID) Add ...... Existing release now classified as a sepa- gram. rate and distinct program. Panther Creek Program ...... Spring/Summer .. Salmon River (ID) ...... Add ...... New program. Yankee Fork Program ...... Spring/Summer .. Yankee Fork (ID) ...... Add ...... New program. Big Sheep Creek Program ...... Spring/Summer .. Imnaha River (OR) ...... Remove ...... Program now considered part of the listed Imnaha River Program. Upper Columbia River spring-run Chinook salmon (Endangered): Nason Creek Program ...... Spring ...... Wenatchee River (WA) ...... Add ...... New program. Chewuch River Program ...... Spring ...... Chewuch River (WA) ...... Remove ...... Program now considered part of the listed Methow Composite Program. Chief Joseph spring Chinook Hatchery Spring ...... Okanogan (WA) ...... Add ...... New program. Program (Okanogan release). Upper Willamette River Chinook salmon (Threatened): McKenzie River Hatchery Program ...... Spring ...... McKenzie River (OR) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as McKenzie River Hatch- ery Program (ODFW Stock #23). North Santiam River Program ...... Spring ...... North Fork Santiam River (OR) Name Change .... Previously listed as Marion Forks Hatchery/ North Fork Santiam Hatchery Program (ODFW Stock #21). Molalla River Program ...... Spring ...... Molalla River (OR) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as South Santiam Hatchery Program (ODFW Stock #24) in the South Fork Santiam River and Mollala River. South Santiam River Program ...... Spring ...... South Fork Santiam River Name Change .... Previously listed as South Santiam Hatchery (OR). Program (ODFW Stock #24) in the South Fork Santiam River and Mollala River. Willamette Hatchery Program ...... Spring ...... Middle Fork Willamette River Name Change .... Previously listed as Willamette Hatchery (OR). Program (ODFW Stock #22). Clackamas Hatchery Program ...... Spring ...... Clackamas River (OR) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Clackamas Hatchery Program (ODFW Stock #19). Columbia River chum salmon (Threatened): Big Creek Hatchery Program ...... Fall ...... Big Creek (OR) ...... Add ...... New program. Hood Canal summer-run chum salmon (Threatened): Hamma Hamma Fish Hatchery Program Summer ...... Hamma Hamma River (WA) .... Remove ...... Program terminated. Jimmycomelately Creek Fish Hatchery Summer ...... Sequim Bay (WA) ...... Remove ...... Program terminated. Program. Lower Columbia River coho salmon (Threat- ened): Clatsop County Fisheries/Klaskanine N/A ...... SF Klaskanine River (OR) ...... Add ...... Existing release now classified as a sepa- Hatchery. rate and distinct program. Clatsop County Fisheries Net Pen Pro- N/A ...... Youngs Bay (OR) ...... Add ...... Existing release now classified as a sepa- gram. rate and distinct program. Kalama River Type-S Coho Program .... N/A ...... Kalama River (WA) ...... Remove ...... Program terminated. Big Creek Hatchery Program ...... N/A ...... Big Creek (OR) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Big Creek Hatchery Pro- gram (ODFW Stock #13). Sandy Hatchery Program ...... Late ...... Sandy River (OR) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Sandy Hatchery Pro- gram (ODFW Stock #11).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Dec 16, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM 17DER1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81831

TABLE 1—WEST COAST SALMON AND STEELHEAD HATCHERY PROGRAMS ADDRESSED IN THIS FINAL RULE—Continued

ESU/DPS (listing status), and name of Run Location of release hatchery program timing (watershed, state) Type of update Reason for update

Bonneville/Cascade/Oxbow Complex N/A ...... Lower Columbia River Gorge Name Change .... Previously listed as Bonneville/Cascade/ Hatchery Program. (OR). Oxbow Complex (ODFW Stock #14) Hatchery. North Fork Toutle River Type-S Hatch- N/A ...... North Fork Toutle River ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as North Fork Toutle River ery Program. Hatchery Program. Oregon Coast coho salmon (Threatened): Cow Creek Hatchery Program ...... N/A ...... South Fork Umpqua River Name Change .... Previously listed as Cow Creek Hatchery (OR). Program (ODFW Stock #18). Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast coho salmon ESU (Threatened): Cole Rivers Hatchery Program ...... N/A ...... Rogue River (OR) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Cole Rivers Hatchery Program (ODFW Stock #52). Ozette Lake sockeye (Threatened): Umbrella Creek/Big River Hatcheries N/A ...... Lake Ozette (WA) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as two programs: The Um- Program. brella Creek Hatchery Program and the Big River Hatchery Program. Snake River sockeye (Endangered): Snake River Sockeye Salmon Hatchery N/A ...... Upper Salmon River (ID) ...... Add ...... New program. Program. California Central Valley steelhead (Threat- ened): Mokelumne River Hatchery ...... Winter ...... Mokelumne River (CA) ...... Add ...... New program. Lower Columbia River steelhead (Threat- ened): Clackamas Hatchery Late Winter-run Late Winter ...... Clackamas River (OR) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Clackamas Hatchery Program. Late Winter-run Program (ODFW Stock #122). Sandy Hatchery Late Winter-run Pro- Late Winter ...... Sandy River (OR) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Sandy Hatchery Late gram. Winter-run Program (ODFW Stock #11). Hood River Winter-run Program ...... Winter ...... Hood River (OR) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Hood River Winter-run Program (ODFW Stock #50). Upper Cowlitz River Wild Program ...... Late Winter ...... Upper Cowlitz River (WA) ...... Add ...... New program. Tilton River Wild Program ...... Late Winter ...... Upper Cowlitz River (WA) ...... Add ...... New program. Middle Columbia River steelhead (Threat- ened): Deschutes River Program ...... Summer ...... Deschutes River (OR) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Deschutes River Pro- gram (ODFW Stock #66). Umatilla River Program ...... Summer ...... Umatilla River (OR) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Umatilla River Program (ODFW Stock #91). Puget Sound steelhead (Threatened): Fish Restoration Facility Program ...... Winter ...... Green River (WA) ...... Add ...... New program. Hood Canal Supplementation Program Winter ...... Hood Canal (WA) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Hood Canal Steelhead Supplementation Off-station Projects in the Dewatto, Skokomish, and Duckabush Rivers. Snake River Basin steelhead (Threatened): Salmon River B-run Program ...... Summer (B) ...... Salmon River (ID) ...... Add ...... Existing release now classified as a sepa- rate and distinct program. South Fork Clearwater (Clearwater Summer (B) ...... SF Clearwater River (ID) ...... Add ...... Existing release now classified as a sepa- Hatchery) B-run program. rate and distinct program. East Fork Salmon River Natural Pro- Summer (A) ...... Salmon River (ID) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as East Fork Salmon River gram. Program. Lolo Creek Program ...... Summer (B) ...... Clearwater River (ID) ...... Remove ...... Now considered part of the listed Dworshak National Fish Hatchery Program. North Fork Clearwater Program ...... Summer (B) ...... Clearwater River (ID) ...... Remove ...... Now considered part of the listed Dworshak National Fish Hatchery Program. Little Sheep Creek/Imnaha River Pro- Summer (A) ...... Imnaha River (OR) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Little Sheep Creek/ gram. Imnaha River Hatchery Program (ODFW Stock #29). Upper Columbia River steelhead (Threat- ened): Okanogan River Program ...... Summer ...... Okanogan River (WA) ...... Name Change .... Previously listed as Omak Creek Program. Note: Updates to listing descriptions consist of three types: ‘‘Add’’ (a new program that meets Hatchery Listing Policy criteria, or an existing program that was di- vided into separate programs); ‘‘Remove’’ (a program terminated or now considered to be part of another listed program); or ‘‘Name Change’’ (a change to the name of a hatchery program that already was listed). N/A indicates that run-timing is not specified for the program.

References Classification requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act are not applicable to the Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Copies of previous Federal Register listing process. In addition, this final notices and related reference materials Flexibility Act, and Paperwork Reduction Act rule is exempt from review under are available on the internet at https:// Executive Order 12866. This rule does www.fisheries.noaa.gov/rules-and- As noted in the Conference Report on not contain a collection of information regulations, http:// the 1982 amendments to the ESA, requirement for the purposes of the www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/, or economic impacts cannot be considered Paperwork Reduction Act. upon request (see FOR FURTHER when assessing the status of a species. INFORMATION CONTACT section above). Therefore, the economic analysis

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Dec 16, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM 17DER1 81832 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations

Federalism communities of Indian tribal PART 223—THREATENED MARINE In accordance with Executive Order governments and imposes substantial AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES 13132, we determined that this rule direct compliance costs on those does not have significant federalism communities, NMFS must consult with ■ 1. The authority citation for part 223 effects and that a federalism assessment those governments or the Federal continues to read as follows: Government must provide the funds is not required. In keeping with the Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 1543; subpart B, intent of the Administration and necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by the tribal § 223.201–202 also issued under 16 U.S.C. Congress to provide continuing and governments. This final rule does not 1361 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 5503(d) for meaningful dialogue on issues of mutual impose substantial direct compliance § 223.206(d)(9). state and Federal interest, this final rule costs on Indian tribal governments or will be shared with the relevant state ■ 2. In § 223.102, amend the table in communities. Accordingly, the agencies. The revisions may have some paragraph (e) by revising the entries for requirements of section 3(b) of benefit to state and local resource ‘‘Salmon, Chinook (Lower Columbia Executive Order 13084 do not apply to agencies in that the ESA-listed species River ESU);’’ ‘‘Salmon, Chinook (Puget this final rule. Nonetheless, during our addressed in this rulemaking are more Sound ESU);’’ ‘‘Salmon, Chinook (Snake preparation of the proposed and final clearly and consistently described. River fall-run ESU);’’ ‘‘Salmon, Chinook rules, we solicited information from (Snake River spring/summer-run ESU);’’ Civil Justice Reform tribal governments and tribal fish ‘‘Salmon, Chinook (Upper Willamette The Department of Commerce has commissions. We informed potentially affected tribal governments of the River ESU);’’ ‘‘Salmon, chum (Columbia determined that this final rule does not proposed rule and considered their River ESU);’’ ‘‘Salmon, chum (Hood unduly burden the judicial system and comments in formulation of the final Canal summer-run ESU);’’ ‘‘Salmon, meets the requirements of sections 3(a) rule. We will continue to coordinate on coho (Lower Columbia River ESU);’’ and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988. In future management actions pertaining to ‘‘Salmon, coho (Oregon Coast ESU);’’ keeping with that order, we are revising the listed species addressed in this final ‘‘Salmon, coho (Southern Oregon/ our descriptions of ESA-listed species to rule. Northern California Coast ESU);’’ improve the clarity of our regulations. ‘‘Salmon, sockeye (Ozette Lake ESU);’’ List of Subjects National Environmental Policy Act of ‘‘Steelhead (California Central Valley 1969 50 CFR Part 223 DPS);’’ ‘‘Steelhead (Central California The 1982 amendments to the ESA, in Endangered and threatened species, Coast DPS);’’ ‘‘Steelhead (Lower section 4(b)(1)(A), restrict the Exports, Imports, Transportation. Columbia River DPS);’’ ‘‘Steelhead (Middle Columbia River DPS);’’ information that may be considered 50 CFR Part 224 when assessing species for listing. Based ‘‘Steelhead (Puget Sound DPS);’’ on this limitation of criteria for a listing Administrative practice and ‘‘Steelhead (Snake River Basin DPS);’’ decision and the opinion in Pacific procedure, Endangered and threatened and ‘‘Steelhead (Upper Columbia River Legal Foundation v. Andrus, 657 F. 2d species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and DPS)’’ to read as follows: 829 (6th Cir. 1981), we have concluded recordkeeping requirements, that NEPA does not apply to ESA listing Transportation. § 223.102 Enumeration of threatened actions. (See NOAA Administrative Dated: November 23, 2020. marine and anadromous species. Order 216–6.) Samuel D. Rauch III, * * * * * Government-to-Government Deputy Assistant Administrator for (e) * * * Regulatory Programs, National Marine Relationship With Tribes Fisheries Service. Executive Order 13084 requires that if For the reasons set out in the NMFS issues a regulation that preamble, we amend 50 CFR parts 223 significantly or uniquely affects the and 224 as follows:

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

******* Fishes

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Dec 16, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM 17DER1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81833

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

******* Salmon, Chinook (Lower Oncorhynchus Naturally spawned Chinook salmon originating from 70 FR 37160, June 28, 226.212 223.203 Columbia River ESU). tshawytscha. the Columbia River and its tributaries downstream 2005. of a transitional point east of the Hood and White Salmon Rivers, and any such fish originating from the Willamette River and its tributaries below Wil- lamette Falls. Not included in this DPS are: (1) Spring-run Chinook salmon originating from the Clackamas River; (2) fall-run Chinook salmon originating from Upper Columbia River bright hatchery stocks, that spawn in the mainstem Co- lumbia River below Bonneville Dam, and in other tributaries upstream from the Sandy River to the Hood and White Salmon Rivers; (3) spring-run Chinook salmon originating from the Round Butte Hatchery (Deschutes River, Oregon) and spawn- ing in the Hood River; (4) spring-run Chinook salmon originating from the Carson National Fish Hatchery and spawning in the Wind River; and (5) naturally spawned Chinook salmon originating from the Rogue River Fall Chinook Program. This DPS does include Chinook salmon from the fol- lowing artificial propagation programs: The Big Creek Tule Chinook Program; Astoria High School Salmon-Trout Enhancement Program (STEP) Tule Chinook Program; Warrenton High School STEP Tule Chinook Program; Cowlitz Tule Chinook Program; North Fork Toutle Tule Chinook Program; Kalama Tule Chinook Pro- gram; Washougal River Tule Chinook Program; Spring Creek National Fish Hatchery (NFH) Tule Chinook Program; Cowlitz Spring Chinook Pro- gram in the Upper Cowlitz River and the Cispus River; Friends of the Cowlitz Spring Chinook Pro- gram; Kalama River Spring Chinook Program; Lewis River Spring Chinook Program; Fish First Spring Chinook Program; Sandy River Hatchery Program; Deep River Net Pens-Washougal Pro- gram; Klaskanine Hatchery Program; Bonneville Hatchery Program; and the Cathlamet Channel Net Pens Program. Salmon, Chinook (Puget Oncorhynchus Naturally spawned Chinook salmon originating from 70 FR 37160, June 28, 226.212 223.203 Sound ESU). tshawytscha. rivers flowing into Puget Sound from the Elwha 2005. River (inclusive) eastward, including rivers in Hood Canal, South Sound, North Sound and the Strait of Georgia. Also, Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Kendall Creek Hatchery Program; Marblemount Hatchery Program (spring-run); Marblemount Hatchery Program (summer-run); Brenner Creek Hatchery Program (fall-run); Harvey Creek Hatch- ery Program (summer-run); Whitehorse Springs Hatchery Program (summer-run); Wallace River Hatchery Program (yearlings and subyearlings); Issaquah Creek Hatchery Program; White River Hatchery Program; White River Acclimation Pond Program; Voights Creek Hatchery Program; Clarks Creek Hatchery Program; Clear Creek Hatchery Program; Kalama Creek Hatchery Pro- gram; George Adams Hatchery Program; Hamma Hamma Hatchery Program; Dungeness/Hurd Creek Hatchery Program; Elwha Channel Hatch- ery Program; Skookum Creek Hatchery Spring- run Program; Bernie Kai-Kai Gobin (Tulalip) Hatchery-Cascade Program; North Fork Skokomish River Spring-run Program; Soos Creek Hatchery Program (subyearlings and year- lings); Fish Restoration Facility Program; Bernie Kai-Kai Gobin (Tulalip) Hatchery-Skykomish Pro- gram; and Hupp Springs Hatchery-Adult Returns to Minter Creek Program. Salmon, Chinook (Snake Oncorhynchus Naturally spawned fall-run Chinook salmon origi- 70 FR 37160, June 28, 226.205 223.203 River fall-run ESU). tshawytscha. nating from the mainstem Snake River below 2005. Hells Canyon Dam and from the Tucannon River, Grande Ronde River, Imnaha River, Salmon River, and Clearwater River subbasins. Also, fall- run Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Lyons Ferry Hatchery Program; Fall Chinook Acclimation Ponds Pro- gram; Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery Program; and the Idaho Power Program.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Dec 16, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM 17DER1 81834 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations

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

Salmon, Chinook (Snake Oncorhynchus Naturally spawned spring/summer-run Chinook 70 FR 37160, June 28, 226.205 223.203 River spring/summer-run tshawytscha. salmon originating from the mainstem Snake 2005. ESU). River and the Tucannon River, Grande Ronde River, Imnaha River, and Salmon River sub- basins. Also, spring/summer-run Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Tucannon River Program; Lostine River Pro- gram; Catherine Creek Program; Lookingglass Hatchery Program; Upper Grande Ronde Pro- gram; Imnaha River Program; McCall Hatchery Program; Johnson Creek Artificial Propagation Enhancement Program; Pahsimeroi Hatchery Program; Sawtooth Hatchery Program; Yankee Fork Program; South For Salmon River Eggbox Program; and the Panther Creek Program. Salmon, Chinook (Upper Oncorhynchus Naturally spawned spring-run Chinook salmon origi- 70 FR 37160, June 28, 226.212 223.203 Willamette River ESU). tshawytscha. nating from the Clackamas River and from the 2005. Willamette River and its tributaries above Willam- ette Falls. Also, spring-run Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The McKenzie River Hatchery Program; Willamette Hatchery Program; Clackamas Hatchery Pro- gram; North Santiam River Program; South Santiam River Program; and the Mollala River Program.

******* Salmon, chum (Columbia Oncorhynchus keta ...... Naturally spawned chum salmon originating from 70 FR 37160, June 28, 226.212 223.203 River ESU). the Columbia River and its tributaries in Wash- 2005. ington and Oregon. Also, chum salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Grays River Program; Washougal River Hatchery/ Duncan Creek Program; and the Big Creek Hatchery Program. Salmon, chum (Hood Oncorhynchus keta ...... Naturally spawned summer-run chum salmon origi- 70 FR 37160, June 28, 226.212 223.203 Canal summer-run ESU). nating from Hood Canal and its tributaries as well 2005. as from Olympic Peninsula rivers between Hood Canal and Dungeness Bay (inclusive). Also, sum- mer-run chum salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Lilliwaup Creek Fish Hatchery Program; and the Tahuya River Pro- gram. Salmon, coho (Lower Co- Oncorhynchus kisutch ..... Naturally spawned coho salmon originating from the 70 FR 37160, June 28, 226.212 223.203 lumbia River ESU). Columbia River and its tributaries downstream 2005. from the Big White Salmon and Hood Rivers (in- clusive) and any such fish originating from the Willamette River and its tributaries below Willam- ette Falls. Also, coho salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Grays River Program; Peterson Coho Project; Big Creek Hatchery Program; Astoria High School Salmon- Trout Enhancement Program (STEP) Coho Pro- gram; Warrenton High School STEP Coho Pro- gram; Cowlitz Type-N Coho Program in the Upper and Lower Cowlitz Rivers; Cowlitz Game and Anglers Coho Program; Friends of the Cow- litz Coho Program; North Fork Toutle River Type- S Hatchery Program; Kalama River Type-N Coho Program; Lewis River Type-N Coho Program; Lewis River Type-S Coho Program; Fish First Wild Coho Program; Fish First Type-N Coho Pro- gram; Syverson Project Type-N Coho Program; Washougal River Type-N Coho Program; Eagle Creek National Fish Hatchery Program; Sandy Hatchery Program; Bonneville/Cascade/Oxbow Complex Hatchery Program; Clatsop County Fisheries Net Pen Program; and the Clatsop County Fisheries/Klaskanine Hatchery Program. Salmon, coho (Oregon Oncorhynchus kisutch ..... Naturally spawned coho salmon originating from 76 FR 35755, June 20, 226.212 223.203 Coast ESU). coastal rivers south of the Columbia River and 2011. north of Cape Blanco. Also, coho salmon from the Cow Creek Hatchery Program. Salmon, coho (Southern Oncorhynchus kisutch ..... Naturally spawned coho salmon originating from 70 FR 37160, June 28, 226.210 223.203 Oregon/Northern Cali- coastal streams and rivers between Cape Blanco, 2005. fornia Coast ESU). Oregon, and Punta Gorda, California. Also, coho salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Cole Rivers Hatchery Program; Trinity River Hatchery Program; and the Iron Gate Hatchery Program.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Dec 16, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM 17DER1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81835

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

Salmon, sockeye (Ozette Oncorhynchus nerka ...... Naturally spawned sockeye salmon originating from 70 FR 37160, June 28, 226.212 223.203 Lake ESU). the Ozette River and Ozette Lake and its tribu- 2005. taries. Also, sockeye salmon from the Umbrella Creek/Big River Hatchery Program.

******* Steelhead (California Cen- Oncorhynchus mykiss ..... Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss 71 FR 834, Jan. 5, 2006 226.211 223.203 tral Valley DPS). (steelhead) originating below natural and man- made impassable barriers from the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers and their tributaries; ex- cludes such fish originating from San Francisco and San Pablo Bays and their tributaries. This DPS includes steelhead from the following artifi- cial propagation programs: The Coleman National Fish Hatchery Program; Feather River Fish Hatchery Program; and the Mokelumne River Hatchery Program. Steelhead (Central Cali- Oncorhynchus mykiss ..... Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss 71 FR 834, Jan. 5, 2006 226.211 223.203 fornia Coast DPS). (steelhead) originating below natural and man- made impassable barriers from the Russian River to and including Aptos Creek, and all drainages of San Francisco and San Pablo Bays eastward to Chipps Island at the confluence of the Sac- ramento and San Joaquin Rivers. Also, steelhead from the following artificial propagation programs: The Don Clausen Fish Hatchery Program, and the Kingfisher Flat Hatchery Program (Monterey Bay Salmon and Trout Project). Steelhead (Lower Colum- Oncorhynchus mykiss ..... Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss 71 FR 834, Jan. 5, 2006 226.212 223.203 bia River DPS). (steelhead) originating below natural and man- made impassable barriers from rivers between the Cowlitz and Wind Rivers (inclusive) and the Willamette and Hood Rivers (inclusive); excludes such fish originating from the upper Willamette River basin above Willamette Falls. This DPS in- cludes steelhead from the following artificial prop- agation programs: The Cowlitz Trout Hatchery Late Winter-run Program (Lower Cowlitz); Kalama River Wild Winter-run and Summer-run Programs; Clackamas Hatchery Late Winter-run Program; Sandy Hatchery Late Winter-run Program; Hood River Winter-run Program; Lewis River Wild Late- run Winter Steelhead Program; Upper Cowlitz Wild Program; and the Tilton River Wild Program. Steelhead (Middle Colum- Oncorhynchus mykiss ..... Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss 71 FR 834, Jan. 5, 2006 226.212 223.203 bia River DPS). (steelhead) originating below natural and man- made impassable barriers from the Columbia River and its tributaries upstream of the Wind and Hood Rivers (exclusive) to and including the Yak- ima River; excludes such fish originating from the Snake River basin. This DPS includes steelhead from the following artificial propagation programs: The Touchet River Endemic Program; Yakima River Kelt Reconditioning Program (in Satus Creek, Toppenish Creek, Naches River, and Upper Yakima River); Umatilla River Program; and the Deschutes River Program. This DPS does not include steelhead that are designated as part of an experimental population.

******* Steelhead (Puget Sound Oncorhynchus mykiss ..... Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss 72 FR 26722, May 11, 226.212 223.203 DPS). (steelhead) originating below natural and man- 2007. made impassable barriers from rivers flowing into Puget Sound from the Elwha River (inclusive) eastward, including rivers in Hood Canal, South Sound, North Sound and the Strait of Georgia. Also, steelhead from the following artificial propa- gation programs: The Green River Natural Pro- gram; White River Winter Steelhead Supplemen- tation Program; Hood Canal Supplementation Program; Lower Elwha Fish Hatchery Wild Steelhead Recovery Program; and the Fish Res- toration Facility Program.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Dec 16, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM 17DER1 81836 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations

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

Steelhead (Snake River Oncorhynchus mykiss ..... Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss 71 FR 834, Jan. 5, 2006 226.212 223.203 Basin DPS). (steelhead) originating below natural and man- made impassable barriers from the Snake River basin. Also, steelhead from the following artificial propagation programs: The Tucannon River Pro- gram; Dworshak National Fish Hatchery Program; East Fork Salmon River Natural Program; Little Sheep Creek/Imnaha River Hatchery Program; Salmon River B-run Program; and the South Fork Clearwater (Clearwater Hatchery) B-run Program.

******* Steelhead (Upper Colum- Oncorhynchus mykiss ..... Naturally spawned anadromous O. mykiss 71 FR 834, Jan. 5, 2006 226.212 223.203 bia River DPS). (steelhead) originating below natural and man- made impassable barriers from the Columbia River and its tributaries upstream of the Yakima River to the U.S.-Canada border. Also, steelhead from the following artificial propagation programs: The Wenatchee River Program; Wells Complex Hatchery Program (in the Methow River); Win- throp National Fish Hatchery Program; Ringold Hatchery Program; and the Okanogan River Pro- gram.

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

* * * * * Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531–1543 and 16 California Coast ESU);’’ and ‘‘Salmon, U.S.C. 1361 et seq. sockeye (Snake River ESU)’’ to read as PART 224—ENDANGERED MARINE ■ 4. In § 224.101, amend the table in follows: AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES paragraph (h) by revising the entries for § 224.101 Enumeration of endangered ‘‘Salmon, Chinook (Sacramento River marine and anadromous species. ■ 3. The authority citation for part 224 winter-run ESU)’’; ‘‘Salmon, Chinook continues to read as follows: (Upper Columbia River spring-run * * * * * ESU)’’; ‘‘Salmon, coho (Central (h) * * *

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

******* Fishes

******* Salmon, Chinook (Sac- Oncorhynchus Naturally spawned winter-run Chinook salmon origi- 70 FR 37160, June 28, 226.204 NA ramento River winter-run tshawytscha. nating from the Sacramento River and its tribu- 2005. ESU). taries. Also, winter-run Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Liv- ingston Stone National Fish Hatchery (Sup- plementation and Captive Broodstock). Salmon, Chinook (Upper Oncorhynchus Naturally spawned spring-run Chinook salmon origi- 70 FR 37160, June 28, 226.212 NA Columbia River spring- tshawytscha. nating from Columbia River tributaries upstream 2005. run ESU). of the Rock Island Dam and downstream of Chief Joseph Dam (excluding the Okanogan River subbasin). Also, spring-run Chinook salmon from the following artificial propagation programs: The Twisp River Program; Chief Joseph spring Chi- nook Hatchery Program (Okanogan release); Methow Program; Winthrop National Fish Hatch- ery Program; Chiwawa River Program; White River Program; and the Nason Creek Program. Salmon, coho (Central Oncorhynchus kisutch ..... Naturally spawned coho salmon originating from riv- 70 FR 37160, June 28, 226.210 NA California Coast ESU). ers south of Punta Gorda, California to and in- 2005; 77 FR 19552, cluding Aptos Creek, as well as such coho salm- Apr. 2, 2012. on originating from tributaries to San Francisco Bay. Also, coho salmon from the following artifi- cial propagation programs: The Don Clausen Fish Hatchery Captive Broodstock Program; the Scott Creek/King Fisher Flats Conservation Program; and the Scott Creek Captive Broodstock Program. Salmon, sockeye (Snake Oncorhynchus nerka ...... Naturally spawned anadromous and residual sock- 70 FR 37160, June 28, 226.205 NA River ESU). eye salmon originating from the Snake River 2005. basin. Also, sockeye salmon from the Redfish Lake Captive Broodstock Program and the Snake River Sockeye Salmon Hatchery Program.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Dec 16, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM 17DER1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 243 / Thursday, December 17, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81837

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

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

* * * * * accordance with implementing adjusted December subquota, and the [FR Doc. 2020–26287 Filed 12–16–20; 8:45 am] regulations. adjusted 2020 General category quota. BILLING CODE 3510–22–P Under § 635.28(a)(1), NMFS files a Fishermen may catch and release (or closure notice with the Office of the tag and release) BFT of all sizes, subject Federal Register for publication when a to the requirements of the catch-and- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE BFT quota (or subquota) is reached or is release and tag-and-release programs at projected to be reached. Retaining, § 635.26. All BFT that are released must National Oceanic and Atmospheric possessing, or landing BFT under that Administration be handled in a manner that will quota category is prohibited on and after maximize their survival, and without the effective date and time of a closure 50 CFR Part 635 removing the fish from the water, notice for that category, for the consistent with requirements at remainder of the fishing year, until the § 635.21(a)(1). For additional [Docket No. 180117042–8884–02; RTID opening of the subsequent quota period information on safe handling, see the 0648–XA672] or until such date as specified. ‘‘Careful Catch and Release’’ brochure The baseline General category quota is available at https:// Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; 555.7 mt. See § 635.27(a). Each of the Atlantic Bluefin Tuna Fisheries www.fisheries.noaa.gov/resource/ General category time periods (January, outreach-and-education/careful-catch- AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries June through August, September, and-release-brochure/. Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and October through November, and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), December) is allocated a ‘‘subquota’’ or Monitoring and Reporting portion of the annual General category Commerce. Dealers are required to submit quota. The baseline subquotas for each ACTION: Temporary rule; closure. landings reports within 24 hours of a time period are as follows: 29.5 mt for dealer receiving BFT. Late reporting by January; 277.9 mt for June through SUMMARY: NMFS closes the Atlantic dealers compromises NMFS’ ability to August; 147.3 mt for September; 72.2 mt bluefin tuna (BFT) General category timely implement actions such as quota for October through November; and 28.9 fishery for the December subquota and retention limit adjustment, as well mt for December. period, and thus for the remainder of as closures, and may result in 2020. The intent of this closure is to Closure of the December 2020 General enforcement actions. Additionally, and prevent further overharvest of the Category Fishery separate from the dealer reporting adjusted December subquota, and the requirement, General and HMS Charter/ overall adjusted General category quota. NMFS has determined that the General category December subquota of Headboat category vessel owners are DATES: Effective 11:30 p.m., local time, 28.9 mt has been reached and exceeded required to report the catch of all BFT December 14, 2020, through December (i.e., 32.7 mt have been landed as of retained or discarded dead within 24 31, 2020. December 14, 2020), as has the overall hours of the landing(s) or end of each FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: adjusted General category quota of 846.5 trip, by accessing hmspermits.noaa.gov, Sarah McLaughlin, 978–281–9260, mt, and that the fishery should be using the HMS Catch Reporting app, or Nicholas Velseboer 978–675–2168, or closed. Through this action, we are calling (888) 872–8862 (Monday Larry Redd, 301–427–8503. closing the General category BFT fishery through Friday from 8 a.m. until 4:30 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: effective 11:30 p.m., December 14, 2020, p.m.). Regulations implemented under the through December 31, 2020. Therefore, NMFS will need to account for 2020 authority of the Atlantic Tunas retaining, possessing, or landing large landings and dead discards within the Convention Act (ATCA; 16 U.S.C. 971 et medium or giant BFT by persons aboard adjusted U.S. quota, consistent with seq.) and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery vessels permitted in the Atlantic tunas ICCAT recommendations, and Conservation and Management Act General category and HMS Charter/ anticipates having sufficient quota to do (Magnuson-Stevens Act; 16 U.S.C. 1801 Headboat category (while fishing that based on anticipated underharvest et seq.) governing the harvest of BFT by commercially) must cease at 11:30 p.m. due to landings of some quota categories persons and vessels subject to U.S. local time on December 14, 2020. The being substantially less than the jurisdiction are found at 50 CFR part General category will reopen available quotas for those categories.’’ 635. Section 635.27 subdivides the U.S. automatically on January 1, 2021, for the Could add ‘‘(e.g., the Purse Seine, Trap, BFT quota recommended by the January 2021 subquota period. This and Longline categories). International Commission for the action applies to those vessels permitted Classification Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) in the General category, as well as to among the various domestic fishing those HMS Charter/Headboat permitted NMFS issues this action pursuant to categories, per the allocations vessels with a commercial sale section 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens established in the 2006 Consolidated endorsement when fishing Act. This action is taken pursuant to Highly Migratory Species Fishery commercially for BFT, and is taken regulations at 50 CFR part 635, which Management Plan (2006 Consolidated consistent with the regulations at were issued pursuant to section 304(c) HMS FMP) (71 FR 58058, October 2, § 635.28(a)(1). The intent of this closure of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the 2006) and amendments, and in is to prevent further overharvest of the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act, and is

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:27 Dec 16, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\17DER1.SGM 17DER1