Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: 12-Month Finding for a Petition To List Southern Resident Killer Whales as Threatened or Endangered Under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: July 1, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 126)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 44133-44138]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01jy02-35]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Parts 223 and 224
[Docket No. 020603138-2138-01; I.D. 042502B]
RIN 0648-ZB22
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: 12-Month Finding
for a Petition To List Southern Resident Killer Whales as Threatened or
Endangered Under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Status review; notice of determination.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 44134]]
SUMMARY: NMFS announces a 12-month finding for a petition to list
Southern Resident killer whales (Orcinus orca) as threatened or
endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). After a review of
the best available scientific and commercial information, the agency
finds that listing the Southern Resident killer whales is not warranted
at this time because these killer whales do not constitute a species,
subspecies, or distinct population segment (DPS) under the ESA. NMFS
will continue to seek new information on the taxonomy, biology, and
ecology of these whales, as well as potential threats to their
continued existence, and within 4 years will reassess the status of
these whales under the ESA. NMFS is issuing an advance notice of
proposed rulemaking to designate this stock of killer whales as
depleted under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA).
DATES: The finding announced in this document was made on May 31, 2002.
ADDRESSES: The complete file for this finding, including comments and
information submitted, is available for public inspection by
appointment during normal business hours at the NMFS Protected
Resources Division, 525 NE Oregon Street, Suite 500, Portland, OR,
97232-2737.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Thomas Eagle, Office of Protected
Resources, Silver Spring, MD (301) 713-2322, ext. 105, or Mr. Garth
Griffin, Northwest Regional Office, Portland, OR (503) 231-2005.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
A list of references cited in this notice is available via the
Internet at http://www.nwr.noaa.gov.
Additional information, including
the report of the NMFS Biological Review Team (BRT) and written
comments from the Marine Mammal Commission and other co-managers, is
also available at this Internet address.
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the ESA requires that, for any petition to
revise the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants that
presents substantial scientific and commercial information, NMFS must
make a finding within 12 months of the date of receipt of the petition
about whether the petitioned action is (a) not warranted, (b)
warranted, or (c) warranted but precluded from immediate proposal by
other pending proposals of higher priority. Upon making a 12-month
finding, the agency must promptly publish notice of such finding in the
Federal Register.
On May 2, 2001, NMFS received a petition from the Center for
Biological Diversity (CBD) and 11 co-petitioners (CBD, 2001a) to list
Southern Resident killer whales as threatened or endangered and to
designate critical habitat for them under the ESA. The petitioned
whales consist of three pods (J, K, and L) whose range during the
spring, summer, and fall includes the inland waterways of Puget Sound,
Strait of Juan de Fuca, and Georgia Strait. The primary impetus behind
the petition is a recent decline in these pods from 97 animals in 1996
to 78 animals in 2001. The petition highlighted key issues for NMFS'
consideration, including: (1) Genetic, behavioral, and ecological
evidence indicating that Southern Resident killer whales may be a DPS
under the ESA; (2) population data documenting a recent decline in
Southern Resident killer whales and analyses indicating that these
whales may be at risk of extinction; and (3) an array of threats that
may account for the decline in Southern Resident killer whales. On July
26, 2001, NMFS received additional information from the lead
petitioner, including an updated population viability analysis and a
report on the July 2001 census of Southern Resident killer whales
returning to the inland waters of Washington and southern British
Columbia (CBD, 2001b).
On August 13, 2001 (66 FR 42499), NMFS provided notice of its
determination that the petition presents substantial information
indicating that a listing may be warranted and that it would initiate a
status review to determine if Southern Resident killer whales warrant
listing under the ESA. To conduct the status review, NMFS formed a BRT
comprising scientists from the agency's Alaska, Northwest, and
Southwest Fisheries Science Centers. Because the ESA requires that NMFS
make a listing determination based upon the best available scientific
and commercial information, the agency solicited pertinent information
on killer whales (66 FR 42499, August 13, 2001) and convened a meeting
on September 26, 2001, to gather technical information from co-
managers, scientists, and individuals having research or management
expertise pertaining to killer whale stocks in the north Pacific Ocean.
In addition, in March 2002, the BRT received comments from the Marine
Mammal Commission and Washington, Tribal, and Canadian co-managers on a
preliminary draft of the BRT's status review findings. These comments
were evaluated by the BRT, who then prepared a final status review
document for Southern Resident killer whales (NMFS, 2002). The status
review and other documents forming the administrative record for this
finding are available on the Internet (see Electronic Access) or from
NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
Biological Background
Killer whales are one of the most strikingly pigmented of all
cetaceans, making field identification easy. Killer whales are black
dorsally and white ventrally, with a conspicuous white oval patch
located slightly above and behind the eye. A highly variable gray or
white saddle is usually present behind the dorsal fin. Saddle shape
varies among individuals, pods, and from one side to the other on a
single animal. Sexual dimorphism occurs in body size, flipper size, and
height of the dorsal fin. More detailed information regarding this
species' distribution, behavior, genetics, morphology, and physiology
is contained in the BRT's status review (NMFS, 2002).
Killer whales are classified as top predators in the food chain and
the world's most widely distributed marine mammal (Leatherwood and
Dahlheim, 1978; Heyning and Dahlheim, 1988). Although observed in
tropical waters and the open sea, they are most abundant in coastal
habitats and high latitudes. In the northeastern Pacific Ocean, killer
whales occur in the eastern Bering Sea (Braham and Dahlheim, 1982) and
are frequently observed near the Aleutian Islands (Scammon, 1874;
Murie, 1959; Waite et al., 2001). They reportedly occur year-round in
the waters of southeastern Alaska (Scheffer, 1967) and in the
intracoastal waterways of British Columbia and Washington State
(Balcomb and Goebel, 1976; Bigg et al., 1987; Osborne et al., 1988).
There are occasional reports of killer whales along the coasts of
Washington, Oregon, and California (Norris and Prescott, 1961; Fiscus
and Niggol, 1965; Rice, 1968; Gilmore, 1976; Black et al., 1997), both
coasts of Baja California (Dahlheim et al., 1982), the offshore
tropical Pacific (Dahlheim et al., 1982), the Gulf of Panama, and the
Galapagos Islands. In the western North Pacific, killer whales occur
frequently along the Soviet coast in the Bering Sea, the Sea of
Okhotsk, the Sea of Japan, and along the eastern side of Sakhalin and
the Kuril Islands (Tomilin, 1957). There are numerous accounts of their
occurrence off China (Wang, 1985) and Japan (Nishiwaki and Handa, 1958;
Kasuya, 1971; Ohsumi, 1975). Data from the central Pacific are scarce.
They have been reported off
[[Page 44135]]
Hawaii, but do not appear to be abundant in these waters (Tomich, 1986;
Caretta et al., 2001).
The killer whale is the largest species within the family
Delphinidae. Various scientific names have been assigned to the killer
whale (Hershkovitz, 1966; Heyning and Dahlheim, 1988). These various
names can be explained by sexual and age differences in the size of the
dorsal fin, individual variations in color patterns, and the
cosmopolitan distribution of the animals. The genus Orcinus is
currently considered monotypic with geographical variation noted in
size and pigmentation patterns. Two proposed Antarctic species, O.
nanus (Mikhalev et al., 1981) and O. glacialis (Berzin and Vladimirov,
1982; Berzin and Vladimirov, 1983), both appear to refer to the same
type of smaller individuals. However, due to significant uncertainties
regarding the limited specimen data, these new taxa have not yet been
widely accepted by the scientific community. Recent genetic
investigations note marked differences between some forms of killer
whale (Hoelzel and Dover, 1991; Hoelzel et al., 1998; Barrett-Lennard,
2000; Barrett-Lennard and Ellis, 2001). A worldwide review of specimens
is needed to document geographical variation in morphology.
Killer whales in the Eastern North Pacific region (which includes
the petitioned whale pods) have been classified into three forms termed
Residents, Transients, and Offshore whales. The three forms vary in
morphology, ecology, behavior, and genetic characteristics, all of
which play an important role in determining whether the monotypic
species O. orca can be subdivided under the ESA.
Resident Killer Whales
Resident killer whales in the Eastern North Pacific are noticeably
different from both the Transient and Offshore forms. The dorsal fin of
Resident whales is rounded at the tip and falcate (curved and
tapering). Resident whales have a variety of saddle patch
pigmentations, with five different patterns recognized (Baird and
Stacey, 1988a). Resident whales occur in large, stable pods with
membership ranging from 10 to approximately 60 whales. Their presence
has been noted in the waters from California to Alaska. The primary
prey of Resident whales is fish. A recent summary of the differences
between Resident and Transient forms is found in Baird (2000).
Resident killer whales in the North Pacific consist of the
following groups: Southern, Northern, Southern Alaska, western Alaska
and western North Pacific Residents. Under the Marine Mammal Protection
Act (MMPA), Residents are separated into two stocks: (1) The eastern
North Pacific southern resident stock, which is the petitioned unit and
(2) the eastern North Pacific northern resident stock, which includes
the Northern (British Columbia) Residents, the Southern Alaska
Residents, and the western Alaska Residents. The descriptions of the
various units follows.
Southern Residents: The Southern Resident killer whale assemblage
contains three pods, J pod, K pod, and L pod, and is considered a stock
under the MMPA. Their range during the spring, summer, and fall
includes the inland waterways of Puget Sound, Strait of Juan de Fuca,
and Georgia Strait. Their occurrence in the coastal waters off
Washington, Vancouver Island, and more recently off the coast of
central California has been documented. Little is known about the
winter movements and range of the Southern Resident stock. Southern
Residents have not been seen to associate with other Resident whales.
Genetic data indicate that females from the Southern and Northern
Resident populations have not been migrating between populations within
at least the recent evolutionary history of these populations,
suggesting reproductive isolation between Southern and Northern
Resident killer whale stocks (Hoelzel et al., 1998; Barrett-Lennard,
2000; Barrett-Lennard and Ellis, 2001).
Northern Residents: The Northern Resident killer whale assemblage
contains approximately 16 pods. They range from Georgia Strait (British
Columbia) to Southeast Alaska (Ford et al., 1994; Dahlheim, 1997). On
occasion they have been known to occur in Haro Strait (west of San Juan
Island, Washington). Although some overlap in range occurs between the
Northern and Southern Residents, no intermixing of pods has been noted.
However, in Southeast Alaska, Northern Resident whales are known to
associate with Southern Alaska Residents (Dahlheim et al., 1997), and
there may be some gene flow between the two populations (Hoelzel et
al., 1998; Barrett-Lennard, 2000; Barrett-Lennard and Ellis, 2001).
Alaska Residents: There are two groups of Alaska Resident animals,
Southern Alaska Residents and western Alaska Residents. The Resident
whales of Southeast Alaska and Prince William Sound comprise the
Southern Alaska Resident killer whale assemblage. At least 15 pods have
been identified in these two regions. Resident killer whales
photographed in Southeast Alaska travel frequently to Prince William
Sound and intermix with all Resident groups from this area (Dahlheim et
al., 1997; Matkin and Saulitis, 1997). Prince William Sound Resident
whales have not been seen in Southeast Alaska, but have been noted off
Kodiak Island intermixing with other, yet unnamed, Resident pods
(Dahlheim, 1997; National Marine Mammal Laboratory, 2001). There are
241 animals photographed in western Alaska that have been provisionally
identified as ``Western Alaska Residents,'' but the number of pods
represented is unknown (National Marine Mammal Laboratory, 2001).
Recent vessel surveys in the southeastern Bering Sea have provided
preliminary estimates of approximately 400 killer whales (Waite et al.,
2001). Although it is not yet known how many of these animals were
Residents, killer whales occur both nearshore and offshore in the
Bering Sea.
Western North Pacific Residents: Resident killer whales co-occur
with salmon along the coasts of Washington, British Columbia, and
Alaska. If this pattern continues (or historically continued) further
to the west, then Resident killer whales may be expected to occur along
the coastline of Russia and Japan. Although there is documentation of
killer whales in these areas, little is known about whether they are
more similar to Resident, Transient, or Offshore types.
Transient Killer Whales
There are several differences between Transient and Resident killer
whales; these have most recently been summarized in Baird (2000). The
dorsal fin of Transient whales tends to be more erect (i.e., straighter
at the tip) than those of Resident and Offshore whales. Saddle patch
pigmentation of Transient killer whales is restricted to three patterns
(Baird and Stacey, 1988a). Pod structure is small (e.g., fewer than 10
whales) and dynamic in nature. Transient whales occur throughout the
Eastern North Pacific with a preference toward coastal waters. Their
geographical range overlaps that of the Resident and Offshore whales.
Individual Transient killer whales have been documented to move great
distances reflecting a large home range (Goley and Straley, 1994;
National Marine Mammal Laboratory, 2001). The primary prey of Transient
killer whales is other marine mammals. Transient whales are not known
to intermingle with Resident or Offshore whales. Significant genetic
differences occur among Resident, Transient, and Offshore killer whales
(Stevens et al., 1989; Hoelzel and Dover, 1991; Hoelzel
[[Page 44136]]
et al., 1998; Barrett-Lennard, 2000; Barrett-Lennard and Ellis, 2001).
At this time, only one stock of Transient killer whales is recognized
in eastern North Pacific waters, although recent genetic investigations
indicate that up to three genetically different groups of Transient
killer whales exist in the eastern North Pacific (the ``west coast''
Transients, the ``Gulf of Alaska Transients'' and AT1 pod) (Barrett-
Lennard, 2000; Barrett-Lennard and Ellis, 2001).
Offshore Killer Whales
Offshore killer whales are similar to Resident whales (i.e., their
fins appear to be more rounded at the tip). Most saddle patches appear
to be closed (National Marine Mammal Laboratory, 2001). Offshore whales
have been seen in groups ranging from 10 to 70 whales. They are known
to range from central coastal Mexico to Alaska and occur in both
coastal and offshore waters (300 miles off Washington State). While
foraging, it is assumed that the main target is fish, but observational
data on feeding events are extremely limited. Offshore whales are not
known to intermingle with Resident or Transient whales. Genetic
analysis suggests that Offshores may be reproductively isolated, but
they appear to be more closely related to Southern Residents than to
Northern Residents (Hoelzel et al., 1998).
Consideration as a ``Species'' Under the ESA
The ESA defines a species to include ``any subspecies of fish or
wildlife or plants, and any distinct population segment of any species
of vertebrate fish or wildlife which interbreeds when mature.''
Guidance on what constitutes a DPS is provided by the joint NMFS-U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service interagency policy on vertebrate populations
(61 FR 4722, February 7, 1996). To be considered a DPS, a population,
or group of populations, must be ``discrete'' from other populations
and ``significant'' to the taxon (species or subspecies) to which it
belongs. A population segment of a vertebrate species may be considered
discrete if:
(1) It is markedly separated from other populations of the same
taxon as a consequence of physical, physiological, ecological or
behavioral factors. Quantitative measures of genetic or morphological
discontinuity may also provide evidence of this separation; or
(2) It is delimited by international governmental boundaries within
which differences in control of exploitation, management of habitat,
conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms exist that are
significant under section 4(a)(1)(D) of the ESA.
If a population segment is considered discrete, NMFS must then
consider whether the discrete segment is ``significant'' to the taxon
to which it belongs. Criteria that can be used to determine whether the
discrete segment is significant include:
(1) Persistence of the discrete population segment in an ecological
setting unusual or unique for the taxon;
(2) Evidence that loss of the discrete population segment would
result in a significant gap in the range of the taxon;
(3) Evidence that the discrete population segment represents the
only surviving natural occurrence of a taxon that may be more abundant
elsewhere as an introduced population outside its historical range; and
(4) Evidence that the discrete population segment differs markedly
from other populations of the species in its genetic characteristics.
A population segment needs to satisfy only one of these criteria to
be considered significant. Furthermore, the list of criteria is not
exhaustive; other criteria may be used, as appropriate. As noted in the
DPS policy, Congress has instructed NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service to use the authority to list a DPS ``sparingly and only when
the biological evidence indicates such action is warranted'' (Senate
Report 151, 96th Congress, 1st Session (1979)).
Defining a DPS Under Existing Killer Whale Taxonomy
Two types of genetic data that have been collected for killer
whales have proven useful for identifying DPS boundaries in other
species: microsatellite (nuclear) DNA and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA).
Each type of genetic data offers a unique and valuable perspective on
the ecology and evolutionary history of killer whales. Microsatellite
data are available for killer whales from seven populations: Southern
Residents, Northern Residents, Southern Alaskan Residents, Gulf of
Alaska Transients, west coast Transients, and AT1 Transients from
Prince William Sound in Alaska. The magnitude of the genetic
differences between Southern and Northern Residents was about half that
found between Residents and Transients and about twice that found
between Northern Residents and Southern Alaska Residents. These
differences indicate that the Southern Resident, Northern Resident, and
Alaska Resident populations are reproductively isolated populations and
that the isolation of Southern and Northern Residents from each other
is greater than the isolation between Northern and Southern Alaska
Residents. There may be some gene flow between the Northern Residents
and Southern Alaska Residents (Hoelzel et al., 1998; Barrett-Lennard,
2000; Barrett-Lennard and Ellis, 2001).
Two mtDNA sequences have been found in North Pacific Resident
killer whales. The Southern Residents have one sequence and the
Northern Residents have another that differs by one DNA nucleotide.
Southern Alaska Residents have both sequences. Both males and females
inherit the mtDNA of their mother, so these data indicate that females
from the Southern and Northern Resident populations have not been
migrating between populations within at least the recent evolutionary
history of these populations.
The BRT recommended that Southern Residents meet the criterion for
``discreteness'' under the DPS policy based on genetics and other
information. However, the consideration of ``significance'' was far
more difficult, largely due to uncertainties surrounding killer whale
taxonomy. Correctly identifying the killer whale taxon is critical
because the criteria used to evaluate ``significance'' of a DPS are
defined relative to other populations within that taxon. The BRT
concluded that the current designation of one global species for killer
whales is likely inaccurate because available data suggest that
additional species/subspecies of killer whales probably exist.
In its consideration of ``significance,'' the BRT evaluated the
importance of Southern Residents to the taxon represented by the
currently recognized global species, O. orca. Based upon the following
arguments, the BRT concluded that Southern Resident killer whales are
not a DPS of the global species.
Persistence in an ecological setting that is unusual or unique for
the taxon. The habitat used by Southern Resident killer whales is very
similar to that of the neighboring Northern Resident population segment
(coastal fjord system, significant freshwater input, seasonal
availability of concentrations of salmon) though different from
habitats that other populations of killer whales occupy globally. In
addition, although Southern and Northern/Alaska Residents consume
salmon from different oceanographic systems, this difference is quite
minor when comparing Southern Resident killer whales foraging
strategies with other killer whale foraging strategies on a global
scale.
The petitioners suggested that Southern Resident killer whales
occupy
[[Page 44137]]
a unique setting because the Puget Sound region is highly urbanized.
Based upon the recommendation of the BRT, NMFS finds that this habitat
difference is irrelevant to the ESA discussion because there is no
evidence that Southern Residents have adapted in an evolutionary sense
to urbanization in Puget Sound.
Loss would represent a significant gap in the range of the taxon.
Because Transient killer whales are known to occupy the same range as
Southern Resident killer whales and because Offshore killer whales may
occupy a portion of the same range as Southern Resident killer whales,
extinction of Southern Resident killer whales might not result in a gap
in the range of the taxon. In addition, other Resident or Offshore
animals could re-colonize the current range of Southern Residents
should that population be extirpated.
Although it is plausible that the loss of Southern Resident killer
whales could result in few, if any, killer whales in parts of Puget
Sound for an extended period, killer whales would occupy their existing
range from the Bering Sea through British Columbia. Furthermore,
Transient and Offshore pods would continue to occupy other areas within
the Pacific Ocean. NMFS, therefore, concluded that the potential gap
that could result in the loss of Southern Residents would not be
considered ``significant'' to the species.
The only surviving natural occurrence of a taxon. Because Southern
Resident killer whales are clearly not a ``discrete population segment
representing the only surviving natural occurrence of a taxon that may
be more abundant elsewhere as an introduced population outside its
historic range,'' the BRT did not consider this criterion from the DPS
policy.
Evidence that the Southern Residents differ markedly from other
populations in genetic characteristics. The BRT evaluated the genetic
discreteness of Southern Resident killer whales in the context of
genetic differences among all aggregations of killer whales globally.
It found that the differences between Southern Residents and Resident
pods in Canada and Alaska were small compared to genetic differences
between Resident and Transient killer whale stocks. Consequently, the
Southern Resident killer whale stock does not have markedly different
genetic characteristics.
Southern Residents as a DPS Under Alternative Killer Whale Taxa
Although the BRT concluded that current killer whale taxonomy was
outdated, the scientists acknowledged that alternative taxa were not
easily identified and noted that formal taxonomic changes would be slow
to occur. In light of this, the BRT assessed which of several
population units of killer whales might be designated as a putative
taxon that would include Southern Resident killer whales if the global
species were to be subdivided into two or more taxa.
The BRT supported about equally four different scenarios for
alternative taxa: (1) North Pacific Resident killer whales; (2) North
Pacific Resident and Offshore killer whales; (3) fish-eating killer
whales worldwide; and (4) the entire mtDNA lineage that includes
Resident and Offshore type killer whales. Despite the broad range of
possible alternative taxa, the BRT did attempt to discern whether the
Southern Resident population would qualify as a DPS with respect to
each of these alternative taxonomic scenarios. Such information would
be deemed useful if future changes in this species' taxonomy warranted
reconsidering the ESA/DPS status of Southern Resident killer whales.
Within these four scenarios, the BRT expressed the strongest
support for the proposition that Southern Residents would be a DPS of
the Northern Pacific Residents (which included Southern, Northern,
Alaska, and western North Pacific Resident killer whales). Support for
Southern Residents as their own DPS diminished as the hypothesized
taxon grew larger.
Risk Assessment Under Alternative Taxa
Upon concluding that the petitioned entity-Southern Resident killer
whale-is not a DPS of the smallest taxon identified by the scientific
community (i.e., the global species), the BRT could have ended its
investigation. However, because the team members believed that current
killer whale taxonomy is outdated, they continued their assessment
beyond the narrow focus of the petition. Therefore, the BRT also
investigated Southern Residents as a component of several potential
DPS, and they examined various putative taxa of which Southern
Residents would be a DPS. Then, the BRT conducted Population Viability
Analyses (PVA) to estimate the probability of extinction for two of the
smallest possible population units.
The first scenario analyzed was one for Southern Resident killer
whales alone. As a continuation of the BRT's alternative taxa
deliberations, this information would be considered useful if future
changes in this species' taxonomy warranted reconsidering the ESA/DPS
status of Southern Resident killer whales. According to the PVA model
results, Southern Residents would have a £10 percent
probability of extinction in 100 years under the assumption that
population declines seen from 1992 to 2001 continue into the future.
Under the assumption that growth rates in the future would more
accurately be predicted by the full (27-year) time series of data
available, the model predicts that extinction probability is 1 to 5
percent in 100 years, with the higher values associated with higher
probability and magnitude of catastrophic mortality events (e.g., oil
spill). Again, these results pertain only to the smallest population
assemblage containing Southern Residents, not to a recognized DPS. As
such, they represent ``worst case'' estimates that are intended for
comparison with other, larger aggregations.
The second scenario evaluated the extinction risk of a combination
of Southern Residents and the closest population stock (identified
under the MMPA), which is the eastern North Pacific Northern Resident
stock (resident killer whales in British Columbia and Alaska).
According to the model, the extinction risk over 100 years for this
larger assemblage is negligible, and even larger aggregations are
expected to yield similarly negligible extinction risks. Therefore,
additional simulations were not conducted.
Conclusions of the BRT
Correctly identifying the killer whale taxon is critical because at
least two of the criteria used to evaluate ``significance'' of a DPS
are defined relative to other populations within that taxon. A
population segment will qualify as a DPS if it occupies an ``ecological
setting unusual or unique for the taxon'' or if ``loss of the discrete
population segment would result in a significant gap in the range of
the taxon.'' The BRT concluded that the current designation of one
global species for killer whales is likely inaccurate because available
data suggest that present taxonomy does not reflect current knowledge
and additional species/subspecies of killer whales should be
``officially'' recognized.
The BRT attempted to identify alternative taxa, but gave roughly
equal support to four different scenarios. The taxon to which Southern
Residents might belong if the global species were to be subdivided
could be as small as North Pacific Resident killer whales or as large
as the mtDNA lineage consistent with fish eating whales. The BRT
[[Page 44138]]
conducted PVA modeling on two population units of killer whales,
Southern Residents along and in combination with Northern and Alaska
Residents for comparative purposes. Although Southern Residents are not
considered a DPS of the global species, they face a relatively high
risk of extinction. The combination of Southern, Northern, and Alaska
Residents, however, was at a very low risk of extinction. Thus, the
manner by which killer whale taxonomy is resolved in the future will
play a key role in determining whether there is a DPS to which Southern
Resident killer whales belong and in evaluating the status of that DPS
under the ESA.
As described previously in this notice, NMFS received comments on a
preliminary draft of the BRT's status review findings from the Marine
Mammal Commission and from Washington, Tribal, and Canadian co-
managers. These comments included technical questions and data (e.g.,
recent census data for Northern Resident whales), discussions of DPS
and listing policy issues, and information describing the cultural and
spiritual importance of killer whales to Native American Tribes.
Some co-managers requested that NMFS use other DPS criteria for
significance, such as the ecological role of Southern Resident killer
whales in Puget Sound and Georgia Straits. The BRT discussed an array
of criteria that may be useful for determining significance, including
some not contained in the DPS policy but raised by the petitioners or
co-managers. However, only the criteria described in the DPS policy
were deemed applicable to assessing the significance of Southern
Residents. Based on these criteria, the BRT concluded that Southern
Resident killer whales are not a DPS of the global species. The
criteria before the BRT for considering ``significance'' were
sufficient to evaluate whether or not Southern Residents represented a
DPS of killer whales. In the notice of joint policy regarding DPS
determinations (61 FR 4722, February 7, 1996), NMFS and the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service discussed the criteria for evaluating a portion of
a species as a DPS. The Services noted that the ESA is not intended to
establish a comprehensive biodiversity conservation program; rather,
the ESA is focused on the protection and recovery of threatened and
endangered species or population segments that are discrete and
significant to the species and on the ecosystems upon which these
particular species depend. In the 1996 policy notice, the Services
responded to a comment suggesting that the ``significance'' criteria
include a consideration of the affected population's importance to the
ecosystem it occupies. The Services noted that most, if not all,
populations play a significant role in their ecosystems. The Services
also stated, ``On the other hand, populations commonly differ in their
importance to the overall welfare of the species they represent, and it
is this importance that the (DPS) policy attempts to reflect in the
consideration of significance.'' NMFS concurs with other co-manager
comments that the issue of classifying Southern Resident killer whales
into a particular DPS cannot be resolved until the taxonomic structure
of O. orca is clarified.
Finding
NMFS has reviewed the petition, the report of the BRT (NMFS, 2002),
co-manager comments, and other available information, and has consulted
with species experts and other individuals familiar with killer whales.
On the basis of the best available scientific and commercial
information, the agency finds that the petitioned action is not
warranted at this time because the petitioned group of killer whales
does not constitute a DPS of the currently recognized species O. orca.
The status review revealed uncertainties regarding the taxonomic
status of killer whales worldwide. The taxonomy of killer whales that
is currently published in the scientific literature includes a single
species that includes all killer whales globally. The BRT discussed
more recent, but inconclusive, evidence that O. orca could be separated
from a single, global species into additional species or subspecies. In
this case, NMFS recognized that taxonomists may be conservative or
liberal in assigning new species and that the relevance of new
information may be debated widely before it is generally accepted by
the scientific community. Because the recent information related to the
taxonomy of killer whales has not been subjected to that scientific
debate, NMFS considers the published standard of a single, global
species as the best available scientific information. In accordance
with the report of the BRT, NMFS finds that Southern Resident killer
whales are not a ``species'' under the ESA. Consequently, NMFS finds
that listing Southern Resident killer whales as threatened or
endangered is not warranted at this time.
As noted in the report of the BRT, NMFS also investigated
alternatives to identify whether there is a DPS to which Southern
Residents may belong. Although a DPS could not be identified clearly,
the BRT evaluated the risk of extinction of other larger potential DPSs
by aggregating logical units. For a first logical step in aggregating
units of killer whales, the BRT combined the Southern, Northern, and
Alaska Residents and simulated the risk of extinction for this
aggregation. Simulation results predicted that the extinction risk of
that initial aggregation was negligible. Therefore, NMFS cannot
identify a DPS to which Southern Residents may belong that is in danger
of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range or
likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future.
NMFS is, however, concerned about the recent decline in the
Southern Resident assemblage, and will continue to seek new information
on the taxonomy, biology, and ecology of these whales, as well as
potential threats to their continued existence. Within 4 years, NMFS
will reconsider the taxonomy of killer whales. If the species O. orca
has been subdivided in a manner that may allow Southern Resident killer
whales to be identified as a DPS, NMFS will reconvene a BRT to reassess
the status of these whales under the ESA. Also, in light of new
information presented in the recently completed status review and in
response to some co-manager recommendations, the agency will review the
status of Southern Resident killer whales to determine whether they
warrant reclassification as a depleted stock under the MMPA. A request
for information relevant to making this latter determination is being
made via a concurrent notice in the Federal Register.
References
A complete list of all cited references is available on the
Internet (see Electronic Access) or from NMFS upon request (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Dated: June 7, 2002.
William T. Hogarth,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 02-16526 Filed 6-28-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif)