[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 205 (Friday, October 23, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56911-56912]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-28508]
[[Page 56911]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
I.D. 071798D
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife; Recovery Plans for Listed
Marine Mammals
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS announces the availability of the final recovery plan for
the U.S. Atlantic and Pacific stocks of blue whales (Balaenoptera
musculus), as required by the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
ADDRESSES: Requests for a copy of the recovery plan may be submitted to
Chief, Marine Mammal Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS,
1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Also, the final plan
is provided on NMFS Protected Resources internet website at
www.nmfs.gov/prot_res/cetacean/blue.html.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory K. Silber, Ph.D., Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD
20910, Phone: 301-713-2322; Fax: 301-713-0376.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Congress passed the Endangered Species Act in 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq) (ESA) to protect species of plants and animals endangered or
threatened with extinction. NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
share responsibility for the administration of the Act. NMFS is
responsible for most marine mammal species, including the blue whale.
Listed endangered and threatened species under NMFS jurisdiction are
identified in 50 CFR 222.23(a) and 50 CFR 227.4, respectively. The List
of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife, which contains species under the
jurisdiction of both agencies, is provided in 50 CFR 17.11(h). The blue
whale is listed as endangered.
Section 4(f)(1) of the ESA requires that NMFS and FWS develop and
implement recovery plans for the conservation and survival of
endangered and threatened species, unless such plans would not promote
the conservation of the species. A plan was prepared at the request of
the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries to promote the recovery of
blue whales.
NMFS published a notice of availability of the draft recovery plan
for blue whales in the Federal Register on August 1, 1997 (62 FR
41367). Comments were received from four people during the 60-day
comment period. Reviewers' comments and NMFS' responses to the comments
are identified here.
Comment 1. The plan should place more emphasis than it currently
does on blue whale stocks in the North Atlantic Ocean.
Response. Changes have been made in various parts of the plan to
reflect this comment. However, as noted in the plan, in the North
Pacific Ocean, blue whale distribution in the North Atlantic Ocean is
largely outside U.S. waters. Therefore, much of the emphasis on the
North Pacific Ocean stocks remains.
Comment 2. With regard to human interactions with blue whales,
vessel strikes in particular, one commenter reported that 25 percent of
the 355 blue whales photo-identified in the St. Lawrence River had
scars attributable to vessel contact.
Response. This observation has been added to the discussion of
vessel disturbance in the Human Impact section.
Comment 3. One comment indicated that toxic contaminants,
particularly for ``blue whales found in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, carry
significant levels of PCBs and pesticides such as DDT.''
Response. The discussion of contaminants in the Human Impact
section was modified accordingly.
Comment 4. One reviewer provided specific information on blue whale
seasonal occurrence and distribution in the Gulf of St. Lawrence.
Response. The discussion in the section on distribution and habitat
use was expanded to include this information.
Comment 5. A reviewer noted that, while likely true that Northern
Hemisphere blue whales are generally smaller than their Southern
Hemisphere counterparts, a 92-ft (28-m) female was reported in Davis
Strait catch records, larger than the 27-m (89 ft) whale reported in
the draft plan.
Response. This change has been made and appears in the section on
Species Description and Taxonomy.
Comment 6. One commenter pointed out that, inasmuch as fin whales
are sympatric with blue whales in a number of locations in the North
Atlantic, they should be considered significant competitors for prey
consumed by blue whales.
Response. This comment is addressed in the section on Competition
with the statement that ``[a]ll baleen whale species that are sympatric
with the blue whale eat euphausiids to some extent and are, therefore,
potential competitors.''
Comment 7. One commenter noted that the number of calves seen in
the Gulf of St. Lawrence is low; only nine calves have been reported
there in 19 years of research. Off Iceland, however, three calves were
observed in only 10 days of surveys in July 1996 and July 1997. Also,
several observations were provided on the sex ratio of calves and the
timing of weaning.
Response. These observations were incorporated into the discussion
of reproduction.
Comment 8. One commenter noted that 352 blue whales have been
photo-identified in eastern Canadian and New England waters, and 32
have been identified from waters off Iceland.
Response. These data have been added to the Abundance and Trends
section.
Comment 9. Two reviewers indicated that the research recommended in
the plan was focused on surveys which tended to document ``effects''
rather than ``causes.'' They suggested that the plan identify studies
designed to examine testable hypotheses, e.g., why are only the
Icelandic and California populations apparently recovering? They
suggested that one could, for example, test the hypothesis that
populations with slow (or no) recovery rates feed on pelagic
aggregations which tend to be less dense and more patchy than the
euphausiid aggregations on which the coastally feeding blue whale
populations (Iceland and California) feed.
Response. This suggestion has been included in section 3.3 of the
step-down outline narrative.
Comment 10. More studies need to be done on the effects of
anthropogenic underwater sound, including those originating from
military operations.
Response. NMFS believes that this is a valid comment and shares the
view that anthropogenic underwater sound may adversely affect whales
and their habitat. While NMFS believes that studies are needed to
better understand these affects, it believes that this is a ``second
tier'' threat relative to more direct threats. Also, it believes that
possible adverse affects from underwater noise is systemic to nearly
all oceanic waters and not a problem specific to blue whales and the
recovery of blue whales. Therefore, studies specific to the affects of
noise on blue whales were not identified in the plan. Nonetheless, the
discussion of the status of research on the effects of sound emission
from the Acoustic
[[Page 56912]]
Thermometry of Ocean Climate experiment and from the U.S. Navy's Low-
Frequency Active sonar system testing is provided in the Habitat
Degradation and Military Operations sections, respectively.
Comment 11. With regard to the discussion on stocks in the North
Pacific population, one commenter suggested adding the phrase ``
...based on the presence of rare epizoites on blue whales which were
not found on other species known to migrate north ...'' to the
sentence, ``[h]owever, he recently concluded that the California
population is separate from that in the Gulf of and eastern Aleutians
(Rice 1992).''
Response. This suggested change has been made.
Comment 12. One reviewer challenged the assertion that blue whales
regularly feed on the pelagic red crab, Pleuroncodes planipes, as
reported by Rice (1974) and Rice (1986).
Response. In response to this comment, the sentence that read
``[o]ne exception to their near-total dependence on euphausiid prey is
that blue whales regularly feed on pelagic red crabs, Pleuroncodes
planipes, off Baja California (Rice 1974, 1986)'' in the draft has been
changed in the final plan to read, ``[o]ne exception to their near-
total dependence on euphausiid prey is that blue whales have been
observed feeding on pelagic red crabs, Pleuroncodes planipes, off Baja
California (Rice 1974, 1986), although these observations have not been
confirmed by subsequent observations or other analyses (e.g., fecal
analysis).''
Comment 13. A reviewer suggested a change in the discussion about
blue whale prey in the Gulf of California, Mexico.
Response. Two sentences on this subject have been changed to read,
``[b]etween February and April, blue whales in the Gulf of California,
Mexico, have been observed feeding on euphausiid surface swarms (Sears
1990), consisting mainly of Nyctiphanes simplex engaged in reproductive
activities (Gendron 1990, 1992). Sears (1990) regarded Nyctiphanes
simplex as the principal prey of blue whales in the region, and results
from recent fecal analyses confirmed this assertion (Del Angel-
Rodriguez and Gendron 1997).''
Comment 14. One reviewer indicated that the section on Reproduction
did not, but should, indicate that the Gulf of California is the only
known nursing and probable calving ground in the North Pacific.
Response. The following sentence has been added ``[t]herefore, this
area is likely an important nursing and calving area for the species.''
Comment 15. A reviewer pointed out that there are no regulations or
guidelines for whale watching in Mexican waters and suggested that this
be noted in the plan.
Response. The boat disturbance discussion in the North Pacific
section has been modified to reflect this comment.
Comment 16. One reviewer noted that there are three (not two) blue
whale photo-identification catalogs, including one for the waters off
Baja California and portions of the Mexico mainland Pacific coast.
Response. Under Narrative, section 2.3 of the Plan has been
modified accordingly.
Comment 17. A reviewer suggested that the importance of blue whale
habitat in the Gulf of California be clarified in section 3.2 of the
Narrative.
Response. In response to this comment, the sentence on Mexico has
been modified to read, ``[i]n Mexico, the waters of Baja California,
particularly the southwestern portion of the Gulf of California where
nursing, feeding, and probably calving occurs, are clearly of great
importance to many eastern North Pacific blue whales, including whales
that spend part of the year in U.S. waters.''
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531-1543 et seq.
Dated: October 19, 1998.
Hilda Diaz-Soltero,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 98-28508 Filed 10-22-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
