Comment on FR Doc # E9-11322

Thank you for the opportunity to serve as a peer reviewer for the downlisting of Oregon chub (Oregonichthys crameri) from endangered to threatened. I am supportive of the downlisting and think it is appropriate given the current status of the species and the continuing but reduced threats to its recovery. Below I provide some comments on specifics of the analysis presented in the Federal Register notice, (50 CFR Part 17; Vol. 74, No 93, May 15, 2009); clarify implications of inclusion of species on Oregon Department of Game and Inland Fisheries’ (ODFW) sensitive species list; and recommend future work and assessment. While the current status of Oregon chub populations does not completely meet all downlisting criteria, (i.e., only two of the recommended three populations meet criteria in the Santiam sub-basin), overall population numbers and trends across the range of the species are such that the level of stability needed to qualify for threatened status have been met. Thresholds established by other criteria in the other two sub-basins have been surpassed. There are nineteen populations of 500 or more adults throughout the range. The downlisting “threshold” was ten. Sixteen of these nineteen populations have stable or increasing trends. These are distributed as such: the mainstem Willamette sub-basin (including the McKenzie and Coast Fork) has six, the Middle Fork Willamette sub-basin has eight, and, as mentioned above, the Santiam sub-basin has two. Continued recovery of Oregon chub is jeopardized by a variety of factors. The most significant threats currently are predation by non-native fish species and habitat degradation. These threats are in part related in that habitat alterations such as damming to create reservoirs and channelization have created situations that benefit non-native predators. In addition, there are sites connected to flowing water such as backwater sloughs and side channels that contain excellent habitat for Oregon chub. However, chub are frequently absent from these habitats when non-natives are present. Predation by non-natives is one of the biggest concerns for long-term recovery and maintenance of Oregon chub populations. Reconnection and restoration of historical back channels and sloughs to provide for movement between populations is essential to full recovery. However, introducing and maintaining Oregon chub populations in these habitats will be difficult with predatory non- natives present. Currently, Oregon chub populations are most successful in isolated ponds. Downlisting is warranted but before delisting can be considered, rigorous studies and experimentation should be completed that evaluate the possibility of establishing stable chub populations in reconnected habitats. Most of the extant populations of Oregon chub are isolated with no natural genetic exchange. These isolated populations should be monitored for evidence of genetic drift or inbreeding, and a plan developed to address these issues should they arise. Providing natural genetic exchange through habitat connection is the most desirable outcome but may not be possible pending the outcome of studies mentioned above and in the Willamette Biological Opinion. These issues should continue to be a focus of the Service and the Oregon Chub Working Group In addition to predation, non-native species potentially pose threats to Oregon chub through competition and the introduction of diseases and parasites. It is uncertain whether these threats are realized and if so, the extent of their impact. This area is worthy of study. Several state and federal agencies have implemented strategies to improve habitat quality for Oregon chub. These strategies should be commended and encouraged to continue and expand. Currently under consideration is a programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement which would streamline the process to enroll willing landowners into an agreement to introduce chub on their property. To date, introductions of Oregon chub into off-channel and isolated ponds have been very successful. This programmatic SHA would allow the ODFW to continue and perhaps increase the number of successful introductions. Despite all of these efforts, threats to habitat quality continue and should be monitored. Habitat threats include spills and run-off from nearby roads and railroads, siltation from land use practices including agriculture, development and logging; and nutrient enrichment resulting in eutrophication and anoxic conditions. The Federal Register notice indicated that the Service and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are coordinating through the Section 7 consultation process to evaluate effects of various pollutants on Oregon chub and assess the adequacy of current water quality standards. This coordination is important to the success of Oregon chub as many of the extant populations and potential future introductions are or will be in altered landscapes, largely agricultural. A thorough understanding of the effects of widely used fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides is essential. Another relatively recent development was the issuance of the Biological Opinion for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Willamette Project. Successful implementation of the measures outlined in the Opinion should maintain and improve habitat for chub and provide answers to some important research questions. Adequate funding must be provided for this to come to fruition. In regards to the overall condition of habitat for Oregon chub, I agree with the conclusion that the species is not in imminent danger of extinction. However, without continued protections of threatened status under the Endangered Species Act, it could slip back to endangered status. Current regulations would not likely provide the Oregon chub with the protections necessary to avoid serious decline should the species be removed from the Service’s threatened and endangered species list. However, moving the species to threatened status would result in continued protection and not affect continued efforts at recovery. I would like to clarify the implications of a species inclusion on the ODFW Sensitive Species List. While within the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife the list has limited regulatory consequences, several other state agencies refer to the Sensitive Species List when making regulatory decisions. These include the Oregon Department of State Lands, the Water Resources Department, and the Oregon State Marine Board. The Oregon chub continues to be included on the Sensitive Species List as a sensitive-critical species and is thus afforded protection under these rules and regulations. The Service assessed the issue of whether the downlisting should apply across the range of Oregon chub or if portions of the range should be listed separately. I agree with the assessment that each of the sub-basins represents a significant portion of the range of the species in that each significantly contributes to representation, resiliency, or redundancy of the species. It is also reasonable to consider the threats to be evenly distributed across the range of Oregon chub. Therefore, based on these analyses, downlisting the Oregon chub throughout its range is appropriate. However, efforts to target recovery actions in the Santiam sub-basin where downlisting criteria have not been met should be encouraged and supported. In summary, recovery activities to date have substantially improved the status of Oregon chub to a level which merits downlisting to threatened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Success in reaching future recovery goals to de-list Oregon chub will require continued support and cooperation among natural resource partners. This can be facilitated through continued activity of the Oregon Chub Working Group. Research is needed into questions of restoring chub in connected habitats, establishing genetic exchange between populations, and responses of chub to changes in hydrology. In addition, more targeted conservation actions in the Santiam sub-basin are needed to bring the populations in that recovery area up to the level of recovery seen in the other sub-basins and provide redundancy and resiliency to the species. Thank you for the opportunity to review this proposal.