[Federal Register: January 5, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 2)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 310-316]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05ja10-23]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS-R9-ES-2009-0089]
[90100-1660-1FLA]
[RIN 1018-AW70]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Withdrawal of
Proposed Rule to List Cook's Petrel
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, withdraw our December
17, 2007, proposal (72 FR 71298) to list the Cook's petrel (Pterodroma
cookii) as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended. Based on a thorough review of the best available
scientific data, we do not believe this species is likely to become an
endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range.
DATES: The December 17, 2007 (72 FR 71298), proposal to list the
Cook's petrel as a threatened species is withdrawn as of January 5,
2010.
ADDRESSES: Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
information used in the preparation of this document, are available for
public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours, Monday
through Friday, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax
Drive, Suite 110, Arlington, VA 22203.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Douglas Krofta, Chief, Branch of
Listing, Endangered Species, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 North
Fairfax Drive, Room 420, Arlington, VA 22203; telephone 703-358-2105.
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the
Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Cook's petrel (Pterodroma cookii) is a small, grey and white
gadfly petrel that is endemic to the New Zealand archipelago (del Hoyo
et al. 1992, p. 11; Rayner et al. 2007b, p. 59; Birdlife International
(BLI) 2009, unpaginated). Its darker grey wings show an ``M'' in
flight. It is distinguished from other petrels by a whiter underwing
(BLI 2009, unpaginated). The species was first taxonomically described
by Gray in 1843 (Sibley and Monroe 1990, p. 322).
The New Zealand archipelago comprises two main islands, the North
and South islands, and numerous smaller islands. The total land area of
the archipelago covers 103,363 square miles (mi\2\) (267,710 square
kilometers (km\2\)) (CIA 2009, unpaginated). Birds migrate to the east
Pacific Ocean, mainly between 34 degrees south ([deg]S) and 30 degrees
north ([deg]N) (Heather and Robertson 1997, as cited in BLI 2009,
unpaginated).
The species' diet consists primarily of cephalopods, fish,
crustaceans, and bioluminescent tunicates that can be hunted at night
(Imber 1996, p. 189). It breeds in burrows on forested ridges and steep
slopes. Ideal breeding habitat is unmodified forests close to ridge
tops with a low and open canopy and many large stems (Marchant and
Higgins 1990, as cited in BLI 2009, unpaginated; Rayner et al. 2007b,
p. 59; Rayner et al. 2007c, p. 243; Rayner et al. 2007, as cited in BLI
2009). Historically, Cook's petrels were harvested in large numbers as
a food source by native Moriori (Oliver 1955, p. 10).
Although the Cook's petrel was once considered a dominant species
on these New Zealand islands, the species' breeding and nesting
activities are now restricted to islands at the northern and southern
limits of its former breeding range, including Great Barrier (Aotea),
Little Barrier (Hauturu), and Codfish (Whenua Hou) islands (del Hoyo et
al. 1992, p. 15).
BLI (2009, unpaginated) estimates the range of the Cook's petrel to
be 124 mi\2\ (320 km\2\). However, BLI (2000, pp. 22, 27) defines
``range'' as the ``Extent of Occurrence, the area contained within the
shortest continuous imaginary boundary which can be drawn to encompass
all the known, inferred, or projected sites of present occurrence of a
species, excluding cases of vagrancy.'' Therefore, this reported range
includes a large area of nonbreeding habitat (i.e., the sea).
The population of the Cook's petrel on Little Barrier Island was
thought to be about 50,000 pairs (BLI 2007, unpaginated). Using GIS
(Geographic Information System) technology, Rayner et al. (2007c, pp.
241-242) and Rayner (2008, in litt.) determined that the population is
approximately 286,000 pairs. The population on Codfish Island is
approximately 5,000 breeding pairs (Rayner 2008, in litt.). In 2006,
the Great Barrier Island population was considered to be in danger of
extirpation because only four nest burrows had been located in recent
years, and it was estimated that fewer than 20 pairs continued to breed
on the island. However, the populations on Little Barrier and Codfish
islands are increasing following predator eradications (Rayner 2008, in
litt.; BLI 2009, unpaginated). The minimum world population for Cook's
petrel is estimated to be approximately 1,300,000 individuals, with an
increasing population trend (Rayner et al. 2007c, p. 245; Rayner 2008,
in litt.; BLI 2009, unpaginated).
Previous Federal Actions
On November 28, 1980, we received a petition (1980 petition) from
Dr. Warren B. King, Chairman of the International Council for Bird
Preservation (ICBP), to add 60 foreign bird species to the List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife (50 CFR 17.11(h)), including Cook's
petrel. Two of the foreign species identified in the
[[Page 311]]
petition were already listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); therefore, in response to the 1980
petition, we published a substantial 90-day finding on May 12, 1981 (46
FR 26464), for 58 foreign species and initiated a status review. On
January 20, 1984 (49 FR 2485), we published a 12-month finding within
an annual review on pending petitions and description of progress on
all pending petition findings. In that notice, we found that all 58
foreign bird species from the 1980 petition were warranted but
precluded by higher priority listing actions. On May 10, 1985, we
published the first annual notice (50 FR 19761) in which we continued
to find that listing all 58 foreign bird species from the 1980 petition
was warranted but precluded. We published additional annual notices on
the 58 species included in the 1980 petition on January 9, 1986 (51 FR
996), July 7, 1988 (53 FR 25511), December 29, 1988 (53 FR 52746),
April 25, 1990 (55 FR 17475), November 21, 1991 (56 FR 58664), and May
21, 2004 (69 FR 29354).
On May 6, 1991, we received a petition (1991 petition) from ICBP to
add an additional 53 species of foreign birds to the List of Endangered
and Threatened Wildlife. The 1991 petition also confirmed the 1980
petition's request to add Cook's petrel to the List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife.
Per the Service's listing priority guidelines (September 21, 1983;
48 FR 43098), in our April 23, 2007, Annual Notice on Resubmitted
Petition Findings for Foreign Species (72 FR 20184), we determined that
listing six seabird species of the family Procellariidae, including
Cook's petrel, was warranted. In selecting these six species from the
list of warranted-but-precluded species, we took into consideration the
magnitude and immediacy of the threats to the species, consistent with
the Service's listing priority guidelines.
On December 17, 2007 (72 FR 71298), we published in the Federal
Register a proposal to list the Chatham petrel, Fiji petrel, and the
magenta petrel as endangered under the Act, and the Cook's petrel,
Galapagos petrel, and the Heinroth's shearwater as threatened under the
Act. We implemented the Service's peer review process and opened a 60-
day comment period to solicit scientific and commercial information on
the species from all interested parties following publication of the
proposed rule.
On December 30, 2008, the Service received a 60-day notice of
intent to sue from the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) over
violations of section 4 of the Act and the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA) for the Service's failure to issue a final determination
regarding the listing of these six foreign birds. Under a settlement
agreement approved by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of California on June 15, 2009 (CBD v. Salazar, 09-cv-02578-CRB), the
Service must submit to the Federal Register final determinations on the
proposed listings of the Chatham petrel, Fiji petrel, and magenta
petrel by September 30, 2009, and final determinations on the proposed
listings of the Cook's petrel, Galapagos petrel, and Heinroth's
shearwater by December 29, 2009.
We listed the Chatham petrel, Fiji petrel, and magenta petrel as
endangered in a final rule published on September 14, 2009 (74 FR
46914). We are listing the Galapagos petrel and Heinroth's shearwater
in a final rule published in the Rules and Regulations section of
today's Federal Register. This document addresses only the Cook's
petrel.
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
In the proposed rule published on December 17, 2007 (72 FR 71298),
we requested that all interested parties submit information that might
contribute to development of a final rule. We received nine comments
addressing the proposed listing of the six Procellariid species: six
from members of the public, one from an international conservation
organization, one from the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS), and one from the New Zealand Department of Conservation
(NZDOC). In all, four commenters supported the proposed listings. Five
commenters provided information but did not express support or
opposition to the proposed listings. We address the comments we
received below.
Peer Review
In accordance with our policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34270), we solicited expert opinions from 14 knowledgeable individuals
with scientific expertise that included familiarity with the six
Procellariid species, the geographic region in which the six species
occur, and conservation biology principles. We received a response from
six of the peer reviewers from whom we requested comments. The peer
reviewers generally agreed that the description of the biology and
habitat for each species was accurate and based on the best available
information. New or additional information on the current population
numbers for the Cook's petrel and threats to the species was provided
and incorporated into this determination as appropriate (as indicated
in the citations by ``in litt.'').
Peer Review Comments
Comment 1: Provide the taxonomic list(s) of birds used to identify
the six species.
Our Response: We have added information on taxonomy of the Cook's
petrel to this determination.
Comment 2: One peer reviewer disagreed with our conclusion in the
proposed rule that there was a likelihood of extinction for Cook's
petrel within the foreseeable future. The peer reviewer provided us
with new information on the population levels and threats to this
species.
Our Response: Based on this new information (which is discussed
above in the Background section of this document), we have reexamined
our proposal to list the Cook's petrel (Pterodroma cookii) as a
threatened species, and we are withdrawing our proposal to list this
species under the Act. We concur with the peer reviewer and do not
believe this species is likely to become an endangered species within
the foreseeable future throughout all, or a significant portion, of its
range.
Other Comments
Comment 3: Listing under the Act provides substantial benefits to
foreign species, such as drawing attention to their needs and providing
much-needed funding and expertise to address the significant threats
they face.
Our Response: We agree that listing a foreign species under the Act
provides benefits to the species in the form of conservation measures,
such as recognition, requirements for Federal protection, and
prohibitions against certain practices. However, we did not find any
threats of such magnitude to warrant listing of this species. In
addition, we found evidence of active support for the conservation of
this species, which has contributed to the increasing population.
Comment 4: We would encourage the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to
carefully consider how listing these species under the Act will benefit
their conservation. Would listing under the Act prompt U.S.-based
actions that the species would otherwise not receive?
Our Response: As part of the conservation measures provided to
foreign species listed under the Act, recognition through listing
results in public awareness and encourages and results in conservation
actions by
[[Page 312]]
Federal and State governments, private agencies and groups, and
individuals. In addition, section 8(a) of the Act authorizes the
provision of limited financial assistance for the development and
management of programs that the Secretary of the Interior determines to
be necessary or useful for the conservation of endangered and
threatened species in foreign countries. Sections 8(b) and 8(c) of the
Act authorize the Secretary to encourage conservation programs for
foreign endangered and threatened species and to provide assistance for
such programs in the form of personnel and the training of personnel.
Comment 5: The general statement that the ``long-line fishery...is
the single greatest threat to all seabirds'' erroneously indicates
long-line fishing as a threat to all seabirds. The main species of
seabirds killed in long-line fisheries are albatrosses and other
species of petrels (not Pterodroma species). The characteristics of a
petrel species vulnerable to long-line fishing (seabird that is
aggressive and good at seizing prey, or baited hooks, at the water's
surface, or is a proficient diver) do not describe the five Pterodroma
species or the Heinroth's shearwater that are proposed for listing
under the Act. Fisheries by catch has not been identified as a key
threat for any of these species; thus it is inaccurate to characterize
long-line fishing as a threat to these species or to all seabird
species.
Our Response: We received several comments disputing our statement
that long-line fisheries threaten all seabirds and Cook's petrel,
Galapagos petrel, and the Heinroth's shearwater in particular, and we
have amended this determination for the Cook's petrel accordingly (see
the Summary of Factors Affecting the Cook's Petrel section of this
document).
Comment 6: The serious threats to the species are impacts from
extremely small populations, limited breeding locations or foraging
ranges, loss and degradation of nesting habitat, invasive alien
species, introduced predators, and hunting.
Our Response: Although this may be true of the other Procellariid
species included in the 2007 proposed rule, we are not aware of any
information that indicates that the Cook's petrel is currently
threatened by hunting or over collection in New Zealand.
Comment 7: The primary threats to these species are predation by
introduced predators and risk at breeding colonies.
Our Response: Although this may be true of the other Procellariid
species included in the 2007 proposed rule, we are not aware of any
information that indicates that the Cook's petrel is currently
threatened by nonnative predators.
Species Information and Factors Affecting the Species
Section 4 of the Act, and its implementing regulations at 50 CFR
part 424, set forth the procedures for adding species to the Federal
Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. A species may
be determined to be an endangered or threatened species due to one or
more of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act. The
five factors are: (A) The present or threatened destruction,
modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (B)
overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; and (E) other natural or manmade
factors affecting its continued existence. Listing actions may be
warranted based on any of the above threat factors, singly or in
combination.
Conservation Status
Rayner (2008, in litt.) suggested a revision of the conservation
status of this species, under IUCN criteria, from endangered to
vulnerable based on the refined population numbers mentioned above and
discussed below. The IUCN has recently reclassified Cook's petrel from
``Endangered'' to ``Vulnerable'' based on an increasing population
trend and habitat (BLI 2009, unpaginated).
Summary of Factors Affecting the Cook's Petrel
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of the Species' Habitat or Range
The range of this species changes intra-annually based on an
established breeding cycle. During the breeding season, which appears
to vary by population (Taylor 2000, p. 135), birds return to colonies
to breed and nest. During the nonbreeding season, birds migrate far
from their breeding range where they remain at sea until returning to
breed. Therefore, our analysis of Factor A is separated into analyses
of: (1) The species' breeding habitat and range, and (2) the species'
nonbreeding habitat and range.
The Cook's petrel breeds on Little Barrier and Great Barrier
islands in the Hauraki Gulf, northeast of New Zealand's North Island,
and Codfish Island, west of Stewart Island in southern New Zealand. The
species breeds on steep slopes near ridge tops at 984 feet (300 meters)
above sea level or higher and prefers unmodified forest habitat with
low, open canopies (Rayner et al. 2007b, pp. 65-66). Fire is unlikely
to be a threat to this species' breeding habitat because Cook's petrels
primarily breed in damp forests (Imber 1985a, as cited in Taylor 2000,
p. 135). Breeding burrows are usually long and deep among tree roots
and are not easily collapsed, so trampling by introduced species is not
likely to be a threat to Cook's petrel nest sites (Taylor 2000, p.
135).
According to the best available information, a large amount of
suitable habitat is available to the Cook's petrel on the three islands
where it breeds (Rayner et al. 2007b, p. 59; Rayner 2008, in litt.). Of
these islands, the largest, the Great Barrier Island covering 110 mi\2\
(285 km\2\), is the only island that has a permanent human population.
This small population of 1,100 people is located primarily within
coastal settlements, away from the species' breeding habitat.
Inhabitants mostly make a living from farming and the tourist industry,
but the island is not considered a major tourist destination due to its
relative remoteness (Wikipedia 2007a, unpaginated). There is no
indication that the Cook's petrel's breeding habitat on Great Barrier
Island is threatened with human-induced habitat destruction or
modification.
The other two islands, Little Barrier and Codfish islands, covering
11 and 9 mi\2\ (28 km\2\ and 23 km\2\), respectively, are wildlife
sanctuaries with restricted access. These islands are not inhabited by
humans aside from rotational conservation staff (Wikipedia 2007a and b,
unpaginated). Therefore, the Cook's petrel's breeding habitat on these
islands is not threatened with human-induced habitat destruction or
modification.
In 2004, the Maungatautari Ecological Island Trust prepared ``An
Ecological Restoration Plan for Maungatautari,'' which included
restoration of habitat and the removal of threats to attract or
reintroduce Cook's petrel, as well as a number of other native species,
to New Zealand's North Island (McQueen 2004, pp. 13-22). In 2007, the
Trust finished construction of a 29-mi (47-km) pest-proof fence around
the forest edge of Maungatautari [Mountain] to allow restoration of
degraded habitat and reintroduction of native plants and animals that
were historically known from this area but no longer occur there
(Maungatautari Ecological Island Trust N.D., unpaginated).
Reintroduction of Cook's petrel is suggested by McQueen (2004, p. 50)
following eradication of all
[[Page 313]]
pest species within the fenced area. There is no information to
indicate that reintroduction efforts have begun for this species at
Maungatautari. However, if successful, this effort would expand the
current breeding range of the species.
During the nonbreeding season, the Cook's petrel migrates to the
east Pacific Ocean, primarily between 34 [deg]S and 30 [deg]N (Heather
and Robertson 1997, as cited in BLI 2009, unpaginated). We are unaware
of any present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment
of this species' current sea habitat or range.
Summary of Factor A
We are not aware of any scientific or commercial information that
indicates that the present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of the Cook's petrel's habitat or range poses a threat to
this species. As a result, we do not consider the destruction,
modification, or curtailment of the species' habitat or range to be a
contributing factor to the continued existence of the Cook's petrel.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purpose
We are unaware of any scientific or commercial information that
indicates that overutilization of the Cook's petrel for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or education purposes poses a threat to this
species. As a result, we do not consider the destruction, modification,
or curtailment of the species' habitat or range to be a contributing
factor to the continued existence of the Cook's petrel.
C. Disease or Predation
Although several diseases have been documented in other species of
petrels, disease has not been documented in the Cook's petrel.
Therefore, we have no other information to indicate that disease is a
threat to Cook's petrel.
The introduction of predatory species by European settlers is
believed to have contributed to the historical population decline in
this species. The best available information indicates that the Codfish
Island population declined due to predation by rats and the weka, a
bird native to the North and South islands and introduced to Codfish
Island (Marchant and Higgins 1990, as cited in BLI 2009, unpaginated).
In 1934, there were an estimated 20,000 breeding pairs on Codfish
Island, but weka predation reduced the population to 100 pairs by 1984
(Bartle et al. 1993, as cited in Taylor 2000, p. 135). On Little
Barrier and Great Barrier islands, introduced feral cats and the
Pacific rat reduced Cook's petrel population numbers. However, a
Pacific rat eradication on Little Barrier Island in 2004 led to a
tenfold increase in breeding success of Cook's petrel (Rayner et al.
2007a, p. 20862; Rayner 2008, in litt.). The black rat (Rattus rattus)
also contributed to the decline on Great Barrier Island (Heather and
Robertson 1997, Marchant and Higgins 1990, as cited in BLI 2009,
unpaginated; Taylor 2000, p. 135).
Due to extensive predator eradication programs implemented by
NZDOC, by 1980, feral cats had been eradicated from Little Barrier
Island. By 1985, weka had been eradicated from Codfish Island (Taylor
2000, p. 135). Rats had been successfully eradicated from Codfish
Island by 1998, and from Little Barrier Island by 2006 (NZDOC 2006a,
unpaginated).
The NZDOC manages Little Barrier Island under the New Zealand
Conservation Act of 1987 as a nature reserve for many of New Zealand's
most threatened species as well as other native animals and plants
(Little Barrier Island Supporters Trust 2007, unpaginated). Access to
the island is restricted by permit for scientific or conservation
purposes only, and visitor numbers and movements are strictly
regulated. Resident NZDOC rangers are responsible for day-to-day
management and for coordinating research activities and volunteer
working groups (Little Barrier Island Supporters Trust 2007,
unpaginated). While there is an ongoing risk that predators, such as
rats or cats, may be inadvertently reintroduced to the island by boats
transporting conservation and research groups to the island, we believe
the risk of these predators becoming reestablished on the island is
quite low because the NZDOC monitors and manages the island intensively
to maintain the island as a predator-free habitat. In 2006, Cook's
petrels were reported to be breeding in record numbers since rats were
eradicated on Little Barrier Island, and 86 percent of eggs in a
monitored area hatched with all chicks fledged or about to fledge
(NZDOC News 2006, unpaginated).
The NZDOC also manages the 3,459-acre (1,400-hectare) Codfish
Island Nature Reserve for several threatened species, as well as the
Cook's petrel (NZDOC 2006b, unpaginated). Access is restricted and by
permit for scientific or conservation purposes only. In order to
prevent the inadvertent introduction of pest plants and animals,
incoming bags and equipment are searched at an on-island quarantine
facility (Encyclopedia of New Zealand 2007, unpaginated). As stated
above, while there is an ongoing risk that predators, such as rats or
cats, may be inadvertently reintroduced to the island by boats
transporting conservation and research groups to the island, we believe
the risk of these predators becoming reestablished on the island is
quite low because the NZDOC monitors and manages the island intensively
to maintain it as a predator-free habitat.
Although the introduced predators that threaten Cook's petrels have
been eradicated from Little Barrier and Codfish Islands, introduced
predators have not been removed from Great Barrier Island. As a result,
the Cook's petrel population on Great Barrier Island, which has been
reduced to 20 breeding pairs, continues to be severely threatened by
introduced feral cats, the black rat, and the Pacific rat (Marchant and
Higgins 1990, as cited in BLI 2009, unpaginated; Rayner 2008, in
litt.), and the risk of extirpation of this species from Great Barrier
Island is high. In fact, Rayner (2008, in litt.) believes this
population has long since ceased to be viable and that the small number
of burrows on Great Barrier Island are due to ongoing recruitment from
the large population on Little Barrier Island, 1.9 mi (3 km) away.
Summary of Factor C
We are unaware of any threats to this species from disease
affecting the continued existence of this species.
Predators have been successfully eradicated from both Little
Barrier Island and Codfish Island. There is a current ongoing effort by
NZDOC to monitor for reintroductions of nonnative plants and animals on
these islands and immediately eradicate any detected. Therefore, we
find that introduced predators are not an immediate threat to Cook's
petrel populations on Little Barrier and Codfish islands. We find that
introduced predators are a threat to Cook's petrels on Great Barrier
Island. According to Rayner (2008, in litt.), burrows that have been
found on Great Barrier Island over the last 25 years are likely due to
recruitment of birds from nearby Little Barrier Island, and not due to
the presence of a viable population on Great Barrier Island.
We are unaware of any threats due to predation on Cook's petrels
during the nonbreeding season (while the species is at sea) affecting
the continued existence of this species.
Therefore, we find that neither disease nor predation is a threat
to the Cook's petrel on Codfish and Little Barrier islands now or in
the foreseeable future. Predation is a threat to this species on Great
Barrier Island, but it is questionable whether these birds comprise a
viable population.
[[Page 314]]
D. The Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
The Cook's petrel is protected from disturbance and harvest under
New Zealand's Wildlife Act of 1953 and its Reserves Act of 1977. The
petrel is designated as a declining species by the NZDOC, which
signifies the species is not seriously threatened, ``but may become so
over time if population trends continue on their current trajectory''
(Hitchmough et al. 2005, p. 49; Townsend et al. 2008, pp. 10-11). As
discussed in Factor C above, this species is not threatened by
predators such as nonnative rats, feral cats, and weka on Codfish and
Little Barrier islands due to the successful efforts of the NZDOC to
eradicate and maintain these islands as predator-free. We are not aware
of any predator eradication efforts in the burrow areas on Great
Barrier Island, and therefore these birds are threatened by nonnative
predators. Though currently not classified as a seriously threatened
species, the NZDOC and other agencies and organizations have
implemented many actions that directly or indirectly benefit the
conservation of Cook's petrel. These actions include the removal of all
predators on two of the three known islands with petrel breeding sites;
the support of research and other studies on the Cook's petrel to
better understand its biological and ecological requirements, and the
reintroduction of Cook's petrel to predator-free sites in its
historical range (e.g., Maungatautari on the North Island) (McQueen
2004, pp. 47, 50, 65; NZDOC News 2007, unpaginated; Taylor 2000, p.
136).
Summary of Factor of D
The available regulatory protections conferred by the New Zealand
Wildlife and Reserves acts, in combination with the actions implemented
for the protection of the Cook's petrel by the NZDOC and other
organizations and agencies, provide significant protection to this
species on Codfish and Little Barrier islands. Therefore, we find that
the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms is not a threat to
Cook's petrel on Codfish and Little Barrier islands now and in the
foreseeable future. However, while existing regulatory mechanisms have
not eliminated the threat from predators on Great Barrier Island, this
population is not believed to be viable and the presence of birds on
this island is most likely due to ongoing recruitment from the large
population on nearby Little Barrier Island.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting the Continued Existence
of the Species
As previously mentioned, several commenters disputed our statement,
in our 2007 proposed rule to list six Procellariid species (72 FR
71298), that long-line fisheries threaten all seabirds and in
particular, Cook's petrel, Galapagos petrel, and Heinroth's shearwater.
According to the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service (Mecum, in
litt. 2008) and BLI (Small, in litt. 2008), the main seabirds killed in
long-line fisheries are albatrosses and other species of petrels (not
Pterodroma species). The characteristics of a petrel species vulnerable
to long-line fishing (seabird that is aggressive and good at seizing
prey, or baited hooks, at the water's surface, or is a proficient
diver) do not describe the five Pterodroma species, including Cook's
petrel. According to the commenters, fisheries by catch has not been
identified as a key threat for any of these species (Small, in litt.
2008; Mecum, in litt. 2008; NZDOC, in litt. 2008, pp. 2-3). Therefore,
we do not believe that long-line fishing is a significant threat to the
Cook's petrel.
In our 2007 proposal (72 FR 71298), we stated that the loss of the
Cook's petrel population on Great Barrier Island would decrease the
species' genetic diversity and increase the risk of extinction of this
species. However, based on information we received during the public
comment period, we now believe that the population on Great Barrier
Island is no longer viable and that the small number of burrows on this
island are due to ongoing recruitment from the large population on
Little Barrier Island, 1.9 mi (3 km) away (Rayner 2008, in litt.).
Therefore, the genetic diversity contributed by the Great Barrier
Island population is likely already extirpated, and there is a low risk
of extinction of this species due to the loss of the Great Barrier
Island population because the presence of birds on Great Barrier Island
is due to recruitment of birds from Little Barrier Island (i.e.,
currently there is not a Great Barrier population), the overall
population number of the species is quite high (estimated to be
approximately 1,300,000 individuals), and the populations on Codfish
and Little Barrier islands are increasing.
We are unaware of any threats to this species from other natural or
manmade factors affecting the continued existence of this species.
Summary of Factor E
The characteristics of a petrel species vulnerable to long-line
fishing do not describe the Cook's petrel; therefore, we do not believe
that long-line fishing is a significant threat to the Cook's petrel.
Since the birds present on Great Barrier Island are believed to be
mostly from recruitment of birds from Little Barrier Island, we find
that the Cook's petrel is not threatened by other natural or manmade
factors affecting the continued existence of the species throughout all
of its range now or in the foreseeable future.
Significant Portion of the Range
We now consider whether more immediate threats place this species
in imminent danger of extinction in any significant portion of the
species' range. Having determined that this species does not meet the
definition of threatened or endangered throughout its range, we must
next consider whether there are any significant portions of its range
that are in danger of extinction or are likely to become endangered in
the foreseeable future. On March 16, 2007, a formal opinion was issued
by the Solicitor of the Department of the Interior, ``The Meaning of In
Danger of Extinction Throughout All or a Significant Portion of Its
Range'' (U.S. Department of the Interior 2007). We have summarized our
interpretation of that opinion and the underlying statutory language
below.
A portion of a species' range is significant if it is part of the
current range of the species and it contributes substantially to the
representation, resiliency, or redundancy of the species. The
contribution must be at a level such that its loss would result in a
decrease in the ability to conserve the species. In other words, in
considering significance, the Service should ask whether the loss of
this portion likely would eventually move the species toward
extinction, but not necessarily to the point where the species should
be listed as threatened throughout its range.
The first step in determining whether a species is threatened or
endangered in a significant portion of its range is to identify any
portions of the range of the species that warrant further
consideration. The range of a species can theoretically be divided into
portions in an infinite number of ways. However, there is no purpose to
analyzing portions of the range that are not reasonably likely to be
significant and threatened or endangered. To identify only those
portions that warrant further consideration, we determine whether there
is substantial information indicating that (i) the portions may be
significant and (ii) the species may be in danger of extinction there
or likely to
[[Page 315]]
become so within the foreseeable future. In practice, a key part of
this analysis is whether the threats are geographically concentrated in
some way. If the threats to the species are essentially uniform
throughout its range, no portion is likely to warrant further
consideration. Moreover, if any concentration of threats applies only
to portions of the range that are not significant to the conservation
of the species, such portions will not warrant further consideration.
If we identify any portions that warrant further consideration, we then
determine whether in fact the species is threatened or endangered in
any significant portion of its range.
The terms ``resiliency,'' ``redundancy,'' and ``representation''
are intended to be indicators of the conservation value of portions of
the range. Resiliency of a species allows the species to recover from
periodic disturbance. A species will likely be more resilient if large
populations exist in high-quality habitat that is distributed
throughout the range of the species in such a way as to capture the
environmental variability found within the range of the species. It is
likely that the larger size of a population will help contribute to the
viability of the species overall. Thus, a portion of the range of a
species may make a meaningful contribution to the resiliency of the
species if the area is relatively large and contains particularly high-
quality habitat or if its location or characteristics make it less
susceptible to certain threats than other portions of the range. When
evaluating whether or how a portion of the range contributes to
resiliency of the species, it may help to evaluate the historical value
of the portion and how frequently the portion is used by the species.
In addition, the portion may contribute to resiliency for other reasons
-- for instance, it may contain an important concentration of certain
types of habitat that are necessary for the species to carry out its
life-history functions, such as breeding, feeding, migration,
dispersal, or wintering.
Redundancy of populations may be needed to provide a margin of
safety for the species to withstand catastrophic events. This does not
mean that any portion that provides redundancy is a significant portion
of the range of a species. The idea is to conserve enough areas of the
range such that random perturbations in the system act on only a few
populations. Therefore, each area must be examined based on whether
that area provides an increment of redundancy is important to the
conservation of the species.
Adequate representation insures that the species' adaptive
capabilities are conserved. Specifically, the portion should be
evaluated to see how it contributes to the genetic diversity of the
species. The loss of genetically based diversity may substantially
reduce the ability of the species to respond and adapt to future
environmental changes. A peripheral population may contribute
meaningfully to representation if there is evidence that it provides
genetic diversity due to its location on the margin of the species'
habitat requirements.
The population on Great Barrier Island is approximately 20 breeding
pairs. Cook's petrels on Great Barrier Island are threatened by
predation from rats and feral cats; however the available information
suggests that the population on this island is essentially extirpated.
Further, based on the best information available, petrels that use
Great Barrier Island are believed to be birds that are dispersing from
the other islands; they are not believed to be distinct genetically,
nor are they believed to be a wholly separate population. On the basis
that the habitat on Great Barrier Island appears to be of low quality
and supports feral cats and rats, and because the birds are believed to
be dispersing from other nearby islands, we believe that the birds and
the habitat on Great Barrier Island are not significant to the species
as a whole because they do not contribute significantly to the
representation, resiliency, or redundancy of the species. Loss of these
birds and the habitat on Great Barrier Island would not result in a
meaningful effect on the representation, resiliency, and redundancy of
the species. There are large, healthy, populations on two other islands
that are protected, and the NZDOC is translocating birds to other
protected areas.
Following an evaluation of the best available information, we
conclude that the population and the portion of the Cook's petrel range
on Great Barrier Island is not significant to the taxon and does not
warrant further consideration as a significant portion of the species'
range. The population is believed to be locally extirpated, thus
limiting its overall contribution to the species. The loss of the birds
on Great Barrier Island would not result in a decrease in the ability
to conserve the species. Therefore, it is our judgment that the Great
Barrier Island is not a significant portion of the range for the Cook's
petrel.
Conclusion and Finding for the Cook's Petrel
We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial data
available regarding the status of the Cook's petrel and have analyzed
the five threat factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act. We
find, based on the best available scientific data, that there is not
sufficient information to justify the earlier proposed rule to list the
Cook's petrel as threatened. In our December 2007 proposal (72 FR
71298), we determined that the Cook's petrel was threatened by
predation from nonnative feral cats and rats within its breeding range
on Little Barrier, Great Barrier, and Codfish islands. However, based
on information we received during the proposal's public comment period,
including information from the NZDOC, one peer reviewer, and one member
of the public, we believe that introduced predators are not an
immediate threat to Cook's petrel on Codfish and Little Barrier islands
for the reasons discussed above (see Factor C). The overall population
number of the Cook's petrel is not as low as previously thought, and
the two viable populations of this species, Little Barrier Island and
Codfish Island, with 286,000 and 5,000 pairs, respectively, are
reported to be increasing (Rayner et al. 2007c, pp. 235, 245; Rayner
2008, in litt.; BLI 2009, unpaginated).
In conclusion, while the NZDOC classified this species as
``declining,'' and thus of lower priority for conservation, the NZDOC
intensively manages both Little Barrier Island and Codfish Island for
the conservation of native species, including the Cook's petrel.
Nonnative predators have been removed from these islands, access is
restricted, and monitoring for new introductions of predators is
ongoing. Habitat restoration efforts are also ongoing. In addition,
there are plans to translocate Cook's petrels to additional,
appropriate, predator-free sites (NZDOC News 2007, unpaginated; Rayner
2008, in litt.). All of these actions are evidence of active support
for the conservation of this species, even though the overall
population number is not low.
We believe the population of Cook's petrel is likely to be
increasing now and is likely to do so into the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range due to the
eradication of predators from Little Barrier Island and Codfish Island
which contain viable populations of this species, and the translocation
of birds to additional predator-free sites. Therefore, we do not
believe Cook's petrel is likely to become an endangered species within
[[Page 316]]
the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range.
Withdrawal of Proposal to List Cook's Petrel
Based on the information discussed above, we withdraw our December
17, 2007 (72 FR 71298), proposal to list the Cook's petrel as a
threatened species under the Act.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited in this rule is available
on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or upon request from the
Branch of Listing, Endangered Species, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Author
The primary authors of this final rule are staff members of the
Branch of Listing, Endangered Species, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Dated: December 28, 2009
Robyn Thorson,
Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service
[FR Doc. E9-31215 Filed 1-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S