[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 42 (Friday, March 1, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8016-8018]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-4803]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding for
a Petition To List the Fisher in the Western United States as
Threatened
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition finding.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) announces a 90-day
finding for a petition to list the fisher (Martes pennanti) in the
western United States as threatened under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended. The Service finds that the petition did not present
substantial information indicating that the two fisher populations in
the western United States requested to be listed constitute distinct
vertebrate population segments. Therefore, the Service makes a negative
finding on this petition.
DATES: The finding announced in this document was made on November 22,
1995.
ADDRESSES: Data, information, comments or questions concerning this
petition should be submitted to the Western Washington Office, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 3704 Griffin Lane S.E., Suite 102, Olympia,
Washington 98501. The petition, finding, supporting data, and comments
are available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal
business hours at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David C. Frederick, Supervisor (see
ADDRESSES above), at (360) 753-9440.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that the Service make
a finding on whether a petition to list, delist or reclassify a species
presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating
that the petitioned action may be warranted. To the maximum extent
practicable, this finding is to be made within 90 days of the date the
petition was received, and the finding is to be published promptly in
the Federal Register. If the finding is that substantial information
was presented, the Service also is required to commence a review of the
status of the species involved if one has not already been initiated
under the Service's internal candidate assessment process.
On December 29, 1994, a petition to list the fisher (Martes
pennanti) in the western United States was received by the Service. The
petition, dated December 22, 1994, was submitted by D.C. ``Jasper''
Carlton, Director for the Biodiversity Legal Foundation, Boulder,
Colorado. The petition requested listing of two fisher populations in
the western United States (Washington, Oregon, California, Idaho,
Montana and Wyoming) as threatened species. The petition stated that
two fisher populations from the Pacific Coast and northern Rocky
Mountain areas of the western United States are vulnerable to
extirpation due to habitat loss and fragmentation of late-successional
and old-growth forests from road construction and logging, threats from
direct and incidental trapping, and the effects of small population
size.
After a review of the above information, and based on the best
scientific and commercial information available, the Service finds the
petition does not present substantial information indicating that
listing two western United States fisher populations may be warranted.
Historically, fishers ranged from northern British Columbia,
Canada, into central California in the Pacific region, and into Idaho,
Montana and Wyoming in the Rocky Mountains. In the central United
States, fishers may have been distributed as far south as southern
Illinois, and in the eastern states, fishers occurred as far south as
North Carolina and Tennessee in the Appalachian Mountains (Powell and
Zielinski 1994). During the late 1800s and early 1900s, fishers were
extirpated over much of their range in both the United States and
Canada. Overtrapping and logging are believed to have been the primary
cause of that decline (Powell and Zielinski 1994).
Fishers today occur across the Canadian provinces (Banci 1989). In
the Pacific States, fishers still occur in the Cascade Range and
Okanogan Highlands of Washington State, and are probably still present
in the Olympic Mountains (Aubry and Houston 1992). The status of the
fisher in Washington is believed to be ``very rare'' although
distribution patterns between 1955-1979 and 1980-1991 were similar
(Aubry and Houston 1992). Little is known of the status in Oregon,
although sightings are extremely rare. Powell and Zielinski (1994)
report that fishers have recently been detected by remote camera just
west of the Cascade Crest in southern Oregon. In California, the
fishers in the Sierra Nevada appear to be isolated from the animals in
the northwestern part of the state (Powell and Zielinski 1994). Though
the Sierran fishers may be doing well (Powell and Zielinski 1994),
California Fish and Game biologists have expressed concern over their
long term viability (pers. comm. in Gibilisco 1994). Fishers in
northwestern California have apparently remained stable since early in
this century, and several researchers suggest this population may have
the highest abundance of all the populations in the western United
States (Powell and Zielinski 1994) and it may increase in the near
future (Gibilisco 1994).
In the Rocky Mountains, fishers occur in central Idaho and
northwestern Montana; successful reintroductions have occurred in both
states (Gibilisco 1994). Although some reintroductions have been
unsuccessful (Powell and Zielinski 1994, Roy 1991), fisher populations
in the Rocky Mountains may be more stable than those in the Pacific
States (Powell and Zielinski 1994). Fishers are occasionally sighted in
Wyoming, but have always been rare (Biodiversity Legal Foundation
1994). Fisher populations have increased in
[[Page 8017]]
many areas in the eastern United States since trapping seasons were
closed in the 1930s and 1940s over much of the species range, in
combination with several successful reintroduction efforts in the
eastern and central states. In Canada, fisher are relatively abundant
in the eastern provinces; however, in British Columbia (i.e., western
Canada), populations are low, and the trapping season has recently been
closed (Province of British Columbia, undated).
Under the Act, the Service may list a species that is in danger of
extinction (endangered), or likely to become an endangered species
within the foreseeable future (threatened) throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. The term ``species'' is defined under
the Act to include ``subspecies * * * and any distinct population
segment of any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife which interbreeds
when mature'' (16 U.S.C. 1532 (16)). The Act's legislative history
indicates a Congressional intent that populations be listed only
``sparingly'' (Senate Report 151, 96th Congress, 1st Session). On
December 21, 1994, the Service and the National Marine Fisheries
Service jointly published a draft policy regarding distinct vertebrate
population segments (59 FR 65884). In determining whether groups of
vertebrate fish or wildlife are distinct population segments, the
Service has, consistent with the draft policy, considered whether (1)
the population is discrete, and (2) the population is significant to
the species as a whole.
The petition requested listing the fisher in the western United
States and its two populations: The Pacific Coast and Rocky Mountain
populations. The petition claimed that ``fisher in the Pacific Coast
and Rocky Mountain states are geographically separate and distinct from
each other * * * and from remaining fisher populations to the east in
the remainder of the contiguous United States.'' In 1991, the Service
viewed the Pacific fisher as ``probably genetically, though not
morphometrically distinct from the Rocky Mountain form'' (56 FR 1159).
The best scientific evidence available today indicates that the
range of the fisher is contiguous across Canada, with peninsular
extensions projecting southward into the United States in the Pacific
States, Rocky Mountains, and the central and eastern United States. No
evidence was provided by the petitioner to demonstrate that any
physical, physiological, ecological, or behavioral factors separate
fishers in the western United States from the fishers in the remainder
of the species' distribution. Powell and Zielinski (1994) state that
the contiguous range of fishers across North America allows free
interchange of genes. The petition states that the unsuitable habitat
of the Great Plains separates fishers in the western United States from
mid-west and northeastern United States populations. However, the
continuity of the fisher's range through Canada, and between Canada and
the United States, provides for genetic exchange throughout North
America.
In the past, the Service questioned whether the Pacific subspecies
of the fisher (Martes pennanti pacifica) was a distinct subspecies and
designated it as a category 2 candidate species for which there was not
sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threats to
justify a proposed listing. The designation of Category 2 species as
candidates has resulted in confusion about the listing status of these
taxa. To reduce that confusion, the designation of Category 2 species
has been discontinued by the Service. The Service now regards these
species as species of concern but not as candidates for listing.
Furthermore, the taxonomic distinctness of fisher subspecies
including the Pacific fisher is questionable. Recent literature cited
in the petition (Heinemeyer and Jones 1994, Powell and Zielinski 1994)
refutes the distinctness of the putative subspecies. Powell and
Zielinski (1994) state that ``[t]he continuous range of the fisher
across North America, allowing free interchange of genes, is consistent
with a lack of valid subspecies.'' The petition does not address the
Pacific Coast fishers as a separate subspecies and does not provide new
information to support listing those animals either as a subspecies as
a distinct population under the Act.
The petition further argues that the Pacific Coast and Rocky
Mountain groups of fishers warrant listing based on the Service's
precedent with other populations, comparing these groups of fishers
with other listed populations such as the woodland caribou (Rangifer
tarandus caribou), grizzly bear (Ursus arctos), bald eagle (Haliaeetus
leucocephalus) and gray wolf (Canis lupus). The petition correctly
states that these populations were listed in the lower 48 states
despite the fact that the species occur more commonly in Canada and/or
Alaska. The Service has listed populations that are delimited by
international boundaries within which significant differences in
control of exploitation, management of habitat, conservation status or
regulatory mechanisms exist. However, in most instances, including
those referenced, the population warranted listing throughout the
entire range of the species within the conterminous United States. The
``United States population'' was not broken down into subpopulations.
As was stated in the petition finding for the North Cascades lynx
(Felis lynx canadensis) (58 FR 36924), `` `[d]istinct population
segments' listed as endangered or threatened species typically consist
of: (1) Populations that are reproductively isolated from other members
of the species, or (2) the entire United States population of the
species.'' The Service is not required to make a decision based solely
on the existence of an international boundary through the range of a
species. Service policy has allowed for the flexibility to delimit
international boundary populations if that listing is in the best
interest of the species. In the case of the fisher, the petition did
not provide sufficient information concerning the control of
exploitation, management of habitat, conservation status or regulatory
mechanisms in Canada to allow the Service to make a determination of
the appropriateness of delimiting the western United States population
of the fisher based on the international boundary between Canada and
the United States.
In summary, the Service finds that the petition does not present
substantial information indicating that the fishers in the Pacific
Coast and Rocky Mountain areas of the western United States are
distinct vertebrate population segments listable under the Act.
However, because available information indicates fishers have
experienced declines in the past, and may be vulnerable to the removal
and fragmentation of mature/old-growth habitat and incidental trapping
pressure, the Service will continue to treat the entire fisher species
(Martes pennanti) as a species of concern. Moreover, the Service will
continue to accept information on the status and threats to the fisher.
References Cited
Aubry, K. B., and D. B. Houston. 1992. Distribution and status of
the fisher (Martes pennanti) in Washington. Northwestern Naturalist
73: 69-79.
Banci, V. 1989. A fisher management strategy for British Columbia.
Wildlife Bulletin No. B-63.
[[Page 8018]]
Powell, R. A. and W. J. Zielinski. 1994. Fisher. In: Ruggiero, L.
F., K. B. Aubry, S. W. Buskirk, L. J. Lyon, and W. J. Zielinski,
eds.; The Scientific Basis for Conserving Forest Carnivores in the
Western United States: American Marten, Fisher, Lynx, and Wolverine.
USDA Forest Service, General Technical Report RM-254; pp 38-73.
Author: The primary author of this document is Leslie Propp,
Western Washington Office (see ADDRESSES section).
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: November 22, 1995.
John G. Rogers,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 96-4803 Filed 2-29-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
