[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 192 (Tuesday, October 4, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 61298-61307]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-25595]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[FWS-R1-ES-2008-0048; MO 92210-0-0008 B2]


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding 
on a Petition To List the Lake Sammamish Kokanee Population of 
Oncorhynchus nerka as an Endangered or Threatened Distinct Population 
Segment

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of a 12-month petition finding.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a 
12-month finding on a petition to list the Lake Sammamish kokanee, 
Oncorhynchus nerka, as an endangered or threatened species under the 
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). After review of all 
available scientific and commercial information, we find that the Lake 
Sammamish kokanee population is not a listable entity under the Act 
and, therefore, listing is not warranted. We ask the public to continue 
to submit to us any new information that becomes available concerning 
the taxonomy, biology, ecology, and status of Lake Sammamish kokanee, 
and to support cooperative conservation efforts for this population.

DATES: The finding announced in this document was made on October 4, 
2011.

ADDRESSES: This finding is available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov at docket number [FWS-R1-ES-2008-0048]. Supporting 
documentation we used to prepare this finding is available for public 
inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington Fish and Wildlife Office, 510 
Desmond Drive, SE., Suite 102, Lacey, WA 98503. Please submit any new 
information, materials, comments, or questions concerning this finding 
to the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken Berg, Manager, Project Leader, 
Washington Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
(see

[[Page 61299]]

ADDRESSES) by telephone at 360-753-6039; or by facsimile at 360-753-
9405. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), 
may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 
amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that, for any petition 
to revise the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants 
that contains substantial scientific or commercial information that 
listing the species may be warranted, we make a finding within 12 
months of the date of receipt of the petition on whether the petitioned 
action is: (a) Not warranted; (b) warranted; or (c) warranted, but 
immediate proposal of a regulation implementing the petitioned action 
is precluded by other pending proposals to determine whether species 
are threatened or endangered, and expeditious progress is being made to 
add or remove qualified species from the Lists of Endangered and 
Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Section 4(b)(3)(C) of the Act requires 
that we treat a petition for which the requested action is found to be 
warranted but precluded as though resubmitted on the date of such 
finding; that is, requiring a subsequent finding to be made within 12 
months. Such 12-month findings must be published in the Federal 
Register. This notice constitutes our 12-month finding for the petition 
to list the Lake Sammamish population of kokanee.

Previous Federal Actions

    On July 9, 2007, we received a petition from Trout Unlimited; the 
City of Issaquah, Washington; King County, Washington; People for Puget 
Sound; Save Lake Sammamish; the Snoqualmie Tribe; and the Wild Fish 
Conservancy requesting that all wild, indigenous, naturally spawned 
kokanee (Oncorhynchus nerka) in Lake Sammamish, Washington, be listed 
as a threatened or endangered species under the Endangered Species Act. 
The petition clearly identified itself as such and included the 
requisite identification information for the petitioners, as required 
in 50 CFR 424.14(a). Included in the petition was supporting 
information regarding the species' declining numbers, reduced 
productivity, a decline in the quantity and quality of their habitat, 
and narrowing temporal, spatial, and genetic diversity. We acknowledged 
the receipt of the petition in a letter to the petitioners dated 
September 24, 2007, and stated that we anticipated making an initial 
finding within 90 days as to whether the petition contained substantial 
information indicating that the action may be warranted. We also 
advised that our initial review of the petition did not indicate that 
an emergency listing situation existed, but that if conditions changed 
and we determined that emergency listing was warranted, an emergency 
rule may be developed. Funding became available to work on the 90-day 
finding on October 1, 2007. We published a notice of 90-day finding in 
the Federal Register on May 6, 2008 (73 FR 24915), determining that the 
petition presented substantial scientific information indicating that 
listing the Lake Sammamish kokanee may be warranted, and that we were 
initiating a status review of the species and opening a 60-day public 
comment period. On December 14, 2009, we received a 60-day notice of 
intent to sue from the Center for Biological Diversity over the 
Service's failure to make a 12-month finding as required by the Act 
(CBD v. Ken Salazar, U.S. District Court, District of Oregon, CV 10-
0176-JO). A complaint was filed with the court on February 17, 2010.
    We received comments and information from the following individuals 
and organizations in response to the 90-day finding: King County 
Department of Natural Resources and Parks, James Mattila, Trout 
Unlimited, Snoqualmie Indian Tribe, Save Lake Sammamish, Friends of 
Pine Lake Creek, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Sno-
King Watershed Council. We have fully considered the comments and 
information presented by these commentors in this finding. In addition, 
during our status assessment, we generally found that much more 
information was available on the status of sockeye populations, 
compared to kokanee populations at the rangewide scale, which may be 
related to the commercial importance of sockeye salmon. To evaluate 
whether the population of kokanee in Lake Sammamish qualifies as a 
listable entity under the Act, we must first determine if it satisfies 
the criteria for being a distinct population segment. Under the Policy 
Regarding the Recognition of Distinct Vertebrate Population Segments 
(DPS Policy), which was published in the Federal Register on February 
7, 1996 (61 FR 4722), we are required to evaluate the discreteness and 
significance of the petitioned entity against the rest of the taxon, at 
the rangewide scale.

Species Information

Taxonomy and Range

    Oncorhynchus nerka (Order Salmoniformes, Family Salmonidae), is 
native to watersheds in the north Pacific from southern Kamchatka to 
Japan in the western Pacific, and from Alaska to the Columbia River in 
North America (Page and Burr 1991, p. 52; Taylor et al. 1996, pp. 402-
403). There are three life forms of this species, which are discussed 
in greater detail below: (1) Anadromous (ocean-going) sockeye; (2) 
residual sockeye, and (3) kokanee. The kokanee life form was at one 
time thought to be a separate subspecies (Oncorhynchus nerka kennerlyi, 
Suckley 1861), and that taxonomy continues to be reflected in some 
scientific papers and other studies (Robertson 1961; McLellan et al. 
2001; Carruth et al. 2000; Maiolie et al. 1996). However, kokanee and 
sockeye are formally recognized as the same species (O. nerka) by the 
scientific community, and in the integrated taxonomic data system 
(ITIS) (http://www.itis.gov/servlet/SingleRpt/SingleRpt?search_topic=TSN&search_value=161979). Despite their recognized conspecific 
status, sympatric populations of sockeye and kokanee (those that occur 
in the same or overlapping geographic areas) are biologically and 
genetically distinct (Foote et al. 1989, in Young et al. 2004, p. 63). 
Based on the best available information, we consider the Lake Sammamish 
kokanee population to belong to the species Oncorhynchus nerka.

Kokanee Evolution

    All kokanee populations are evolutionarily derived from sockeye 
salmon. Sockeye salmon (anadromous Oncorhynchus nerka) give rise to 
kokanee over evolutionary timeframes (hundreds to thousands of years) 
as a result of isolation or selective pressures related to difficulty 
of migration and lake productivity (Wood et al. 2008, pp. 208-210). All 
kokanee are at the end of a long chain of events where individuals of 
the anadromous sockeye entered a lake and selective pressures founded a 
residual sockeye population, then selective pressures or perhaps a 
geologic event selected for a kokanee population. The evolution of the 
O. nerka forms is unidirectional, and established resident, migratory, 
or kokanee forms generally do not create successful progeny of the 
other forms (Wood et al. 2008, pp. 209-210).
    Taylor et al. (1996, pp. 411-414), found multiple episodes of 
independent divergence between sockeye and kokanee throughout their 
current range.

[[Page 61300]]

As ancestral anadromous sockeye populations expanded to new river 
systems, those that could not access the marine environment on a 
regular basis evolved into the non anadromous kokanee form or developed 
a sympatric population of the non anadromous kokanee form. This has 
resulted in native kokanee populations typically being genetically more 
similar to their sympatric (occupying the same geographic area without 
interbreeding) sockeye populations than to kokanee in other river 
systems (Taylor et al. 1996, pp. 401, 413-414). However, there are 
exceptions (e.g., Lake Ozette, Washington) where native sympatric 
kokanee and sockeye populations were determined to be genetically 
dissimilar, which suggests in these cases that they were established 
through a different founding event (Winans et al. 1996, pp. 655-656).

Differences Between Sockeye and Kokanee

    Sockeye salmon are primarily anadromous, migrating to the Pacific 
Ocean following hatching and rearing in freshwater. Most populations 
are associated with a natal lake. They spend 2 to 3 years in marine 
waters before returning to freshwater environments to spawn and die. 
Some progeny within each sockeye population may remain in freshwater 
throughout their lifecycle and are called ``residual sockeye'' or 
``residuals'' (Gustafson et al. 1997, p. 20). Unlike sockeye, kokanee 
are non anadromous and spend their entire lives in freshwater habitats 
(Meehan and Bjorn 1991, pp. 56-57). Ricker (1938) first used the terms 
``residual sockeye'' and ``residuals'' to refer to these resident, non 
migratory progeny of anadromous salmon (Quinn 2005, p. 210). These 
``residuals'' were much smaller at maturity than the anadromous fish 
because growing conditions in the lakes are generally poorer than those 
at sea (Quinn 2005, p. 210). Wood (1995) hypothesizes that the 
evolution of sockeye populations may proceed from postglacial 
colonization by ocean-type fish, to lake-type populations if a suitable 
lake is present, and then to kokanee if there is some combination of 
good growing conditions and an arduous migration (Quinn 2005, pp. 301-
302). Kokanee young are spawned in freshwater streams and subsequently 
migrate to a nursery lake (Burgner 1991, pp. 35-37), where they remain 
until maturity. In some cases kokanee are spawned along the shoreline 
of the nursery lake itself (Scott and Crossman 1973, p.168). When 
mature, they return to natal freshwater streams to spawn and die, 
typically around age four. Sympatric kokanee and sockeye populations 
are typically temporally or spatially separated. In cases where they 
are not, assortative mating by body size usually leads to assortative 
mating by type (Gustafson et al. 1997, p. 30). Said another way, 
sockeye are typically larger and spawn with other sockeye, while 
kokanee are smaller and spawn with other kokanee.
    Both kokanee and anadromous sockeye turn from silver to bright red 
during maturation, while the head is olive green and the fins are 
blackish red (Craig and Foote 2001, p. 381). Typically, resident or 
``residual sockeye'' (progeny of anadromous sockeye that do not migrate 
to sea but are not kokanee) turn from silver to green (Foote et al. 
2004, p. 70). Although adult kokanee resemble sockeye salmon, they have 
significant morphological and physiological differences. Kokanee are 
more efficient at extracting carotinoids from food resources; have 
higher gill raker counts, which is known to be an inherited trait; and 
are normally smaller in size at maturity than sockeye because they are 
confined to freshwater environments, which are less productive than the 
ocean (Burgner 1991, p. 59; Gustafson et al. 1997, p. 29; Craig and 
Foote 2001, p. 387; Leary et al. 1985 in Wood 1995, p. 203). Kokanee 
maintain a constant egg size, while increasing egg number with 
increasing body size; sockeye increase both egg number and egg size 
with increasing body size. It is thought that this characteristic may 
be related to the less energetically costly kokanee spawning migrations 
and the smaller particle size of spawning gravel that can be exploited 
(McGurk 2000, p. 1802). Other studies have demonstrated that under-
yearling sockeye salmon exhibit superior swimming ability compared to 
kokanee (Taylor and Foote 1991). Further, although kokanee appear to 
have maintained some degree of seasonal adaptation to saltwater, which 
is part of the smoltification process of anadromous salmonids (complex 
physiological changes that enable juvenile salmon to make the 
transition from freshwater to saltwater), genetically there are 
significant differences in the timing (delayed) and duration (short-
lived) compared to sockeye (Foote et al. 1992, pp. 106-108).

Sockeye and Kokanee Distribution

    Sockeye occur in watersheds in the north Pacific from southern 
Kamchatka to Japan in the western Pacific, and from Alaska to the 
Columbia River in North America (Page and Burr 1991, p. 52; Taylor et 
al. 1996, pp. 402-403). Sockeye salmon of Canadian origin generally 
remain east of the International Dateline and south of the Aleutian 
Islands, while those from Asia originate in freshwater habitats from 
Cape Navarin Peninsula in the Bering Sea to north of Sakhalin Island in 
the Sea of Okhotsk. Most sockeye from Canadian rivers spend 2 years in 
the ocean, while those from other rivers spend 1, 3 or 4 years (Hart 
1973, p. 121).
    Native populations of kokanee, each associated with a specific 
nursery lake, likely occurred historically over most of the range of 
sockeye salmon within the Columbia River to the Yukon River systems. 
Native kokanee populations are not widespread in Alaska (McGurk 2000, 
p. 1801) or Asia (McPhail 2007, p. 288). There are said to be well over 
500 kokanee populations in British Columbia (B.C.) (McPhail 2007, p. 
295). No native kokanee are known from the B.C. portion of the Yukon 
River (B.C. Ministry of Fisheries 1998, p. 17), and although 
introduction activities have spread kokanee throughout the province, 
only two natural populations are known from the Mackenzie River system 
(McPhail 2007, p. 289). Kokanee have been widely introduced across 
North America, including areas outside their larger geographic 
distribution and farther inland in States and provinces where they 
occur naturally (Scott and Crossman 1973, p. 167).

Sammamish River/Lake Sammamish Watershed Kokanee Population Groupings

    Lake Sammamish kokanee distribution (the petitioned entity): Lake 
Washington is the dominant feature of the greater Lake Washington/Lake 
Sammamish Basin and is fed by two major drainage systems. The Cedar 
River watershed at the south end of the lake, and the Sammamish River/
Lake Sammamish watershed at the north end of the lake. Surface water 
discharge from Lake Sammamish is by way of the Sammamish River at the 
north end of the lake, which ultimately flows into Lake Washington. The 
four major tributaries that discharge into the Sammamish River are 
Swamp Creek, North Creek, Little Bear Creek, and Bear Creek. The major 
tributary to Lake Sammamish is Issaquah Creek, which enters at the 
south end of the lake and contributes approximately 70 percent of the 
inflow to the lake (Kerwin 2001, p. 425). Native kokanee historically 
spawned in tributaries located throughout Lake Washington and Lake 
Sammamish. Although the Sammamish River and Cedar River (Walsh Lake) 
drainages have been included within the current distribution of native 
kokanee in prior assessments (Gustafson

[[Page 61301]]

et al. 1997, p. 123; Berge and Higgins 2003, p. 3), their current 
spawning distribution in the Lake Washington/Lake Sammamish Basin 
appears to be limited to portions of the Lake Sammamish drainage. For 
the purposes of this finding, we are analyzing a petitioned entity that 
includes the native kokanee population found in the Lake Sammamish 
drainage.
    Although the major tributary to Lake Sammamish is Issaquah Creek, 
there are also several smaller tributaries to Lake Sammamish used for 
spawning by kokanee, including Ebright Creek, Pine Lake Creek, Laughing 
Jacobs Creek, and Lewis Creek (Berge and Higgins 2003, p. 5). Kokanee 
in the Sammamish River/Lake Sammamish watershed (referred to by the 
petitioners as the Lake Sammamish population) are separated into three 
groups: (1) Summer/early-run; (2) fall/middle-run; and, (3) winter/
late-run, based on spawn timing and location (Berge and Higgins 2003, 
p. 3; Young et al. 2004, p. 66). Summer/early-run kokanee spawn during 
late summer (August through September) in Issaquah Creek, and are the 
only run of kokanee known to spawn in that creek, although introduced 
sockeye salmon spawn there in October. Fall/middle-run kokanee spawn in 
late September through November, primarily in larger Sammamish River 
tributaries including Swamp Creek, North Creek, Bear Creek, Little Bear 
Creek, and Cottage Lake Creek (Berge and Higgins 2003, pp. 21-25). 
Winter/late-run kokanee spawn from late fall into winter (October 
through January) in Lake Sammamish tributaries including Lewis Creek, 
Ebright Creek, and Laughing Jacobs Creek (Berge and Higgins 2003, pp. 
26-29). Some winter/late-run spawning kokanee have also been recorded 
in Vasa Creek, Pine Lake (Trout Unlimited et al. 2007, p. 9), and 
Tibbetts Creek (Berge and Higgins 2003, pp. 5, 30) in the recent past. 
Berge and Higgins (2003, p. 5) identified George Davis, Zaccuse, and 
Alexander's Creeks as part of the historical spawning distribution for 
winter/late-run kokanee. On at least one occasion, kokanee, presumed to 
be winter/late-run based on spawn timing, were observed spawning in 
Lake Sammamish near the mouth of Ebright Creek (Berge and Higgins 2003, 
p. 33), suggesting that some degree of beach spawning may also occur 
within the lake. More recently, what appears to be winter/late-run 
kokanee have been observed entering the lower reach of George Davis 
Creek at dusk (Nickel 2009) but then retreating back to Lake Sammamish 
during the day apparently without spawning. This may further indicate 
possible beach spawning within the lake.

Sammamish River/Lake Sammamish Watershed Kokanee Escapement Surveys

    Summer/early-run: Berggren (1974, p. 9) and Pfeifer (1995, pp. 8-9, 
21-22) report escapements (the number of fish arriving at a natal 
stream or river to spawn) of summer/early-run Issaquah Creek kokanee 
numbering in the thousands during the 1970s. Since 1980, the escapement 
of early-run kokanee in Issaquah Creek has ``plummeted dramatically'' 
(Berge and Higgins 2003, p. 18). Between 1998 and 2001, only three 
summer/early-run kokanee redds (gravel nests of fish eggs) were 
observed in Issaquah Creek (Berge and Higgins 2003, p. 18). The last 
time summer/early-run kokanee were observed was during the summer of 
2000, when only two individuals were recorded (Washington Trout 2004, 
p. 3). In July 2001 and 2002, the Washington Department of Fish and 
Wildlife installed a fish weir across Issaquah Creek in an attempt to 
capture all migrating summer/early-run kokanee and spawn them in a 
hatchery for a supplementation program. No kokanee were observed or 
captured (WDFW 2002, pp. 5-7). Further, there were no summer/early-run 
kokanee observed during spawner surveys conducted in 2003 (Washington 
Trout 2004, p. 2), leading King County and Washington Department of 
Fish and Wildlife biologists to conclude that the summer/early-run is 
functionally extinct (Berge and Higgins 2003, p. 33; Jackson 2006, p. 
1).
    Fall/middle-run: In the 1940s, the fall/middle-run kokanee was 
estimated to number from 6,000 to as many as 30,000 spawners in Bear 
Creek, a tributary to the Sammamish River (Connor et al. 2000, pp. 13-
14), although these estimates are confounded by the high numbers of 
out-of-basin and in-basin kokanee introductions during this time 
period. Between 1917 and 1969, more than 44 million kokanee were 
introduced into Bear Creek and its tributaries, 35 million of which 
originated from Lake Whatcom in northwestern Washington (Gustafson et 
al. 1997, pp. 3-113). However, the introduced kokanee were unable to 
persist, and by the 1970s the native kokanee fall/middle-run was also 
considered extinct by biologists from Washington Department of Game 
(now part of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife) (Fletcher 
1973, p. 1).
    Winter/late-run: From 1996 to 2006, the winter/late-run kokanee 
have had highly variable spawner returns with returns as low as 64 in 
1997, and as high as 4,702 in 2003 (Trout Unlimited et al. 2007, p. 
18). Annual spawner returns averaged 946 fish, with a median return of 
594 fish during this period (Trout Unlimited et al. 2007, p. 16). From 
2004 to 2007, the average spawner return was 463 fish, although in two 
of the four spawning streams currently used by the winter/late-run 
(Laughing Jacobs Creek and Pine Lake Creek), there were fewer than 70 
fish counted annually in each stream (Jackson 2009). In 2008, the 
estimated spawner return was 42 individuals with none observed in Pine 
Lake Creek and only one kokanee observed in Laughing Jacobs Creek 
(Jackson 2009, pp. 1-6). This represented the lowest escapement for 
this population on record, although in 2009 the estimated spawner 
return was 1,655 individuals, which was the largest escapement recorded 
since 2003 (Jackson 2010, p. 11). The longest accessible spawning 
stream currently used by the winter/late-run, Lewis Creek, is 0.75 mile 
(mi) (1.2 kilometers (km)), and the combined spawning reaches of the 
core spawning streams (Lewis Creek, Laughing Jacobs Creek, and Ebright 
Creek) total less than 1.0 mile (1.6 km) (Jackson 2006, p. 5). Winter/
late run propagation efforts have recently been implemented, and are 
described below.

Winter/Late Run Propagation Efforts

    In the fall of 2009, approximately 35,000 eggs were harvested from 
mature kokanee collected from Lewis, Ebright, and Laughing Jacobs 
Creeks by teams from the Issaquah Creek salmon hatchery. The eggs were 
shipped to the Cedar River and Chambers Creek hatcheries in Washington 
State for development into fry, for use in supplementing the native 
kokanee population in Lake Sammamish. In March 2010, approximately 
14,000 kokanee fry were released into Lewis, Ebright, and Laughing 
Jacobs Creeks; another release of 20,000 fry into the same creeks was 
done on April 14, 2010. The eventual success of these efforts remains 
to be determined (http://www.issaquahpress.com/2010/04/20/the-fish-journal-bar-codes-help-kokanee-salmon-in-their-survival/#more-21481).

Sockeye and Kokanee Abundance Trends

    Quinn 2005 (p. 319) indicated the estimated average annual 
abundance of sockeye salmon per region (catch and escapement of wild 
and hatchery fish) from 1981 to 2000 to be 83 million fish (Japan 0.0 
million, Russia 10.0 million, Western Alaska 50.4 million, Central

[[Page 61302]]

Alaska 20.3 million, and Southeast Alaska to California 19.3 million). 
The estimated catch and escapement of North American sockeye salmon 
from 1951 through 2001 was 51.4 million fish from 1,400 populations, 
averaging approximately 37,000 fish per population (Quinn 2005, p. 
321).
    Sockeye populations inhabiting the southern portions of their range 
are in decline, whereas those in the northerly regions are generally 
stable. In southwestern British Columbia, one-third of the sockeye 
spawning runs known since the early 1950s have been lost or have 
decreased to such low numbers that spawners are not consistently 
monitored (Ridell 1993, in Wood 1995, p. 195). These trends in number 
and magnitude of spawning runs imply a loss of genetic diversity, 
through the loss of both locally adapted subpopulations and genetic 
variation due to low effective population sizes (Wood 1995, p. 195). 
Subpopulations in the Hecata Strait-Queen Charlotte Sound, Georgia 
Basin/Vancouver Island Area, Skeena River and Fraser River, decreased 
in abundance considerably over the last three generations. Towards the 
northern end of their distribution, sockeye were generally 
characterized by stable-to-increasing trends in adult abundance. There 
were several notable exceptions, however, to the north-to-south risk 
gradient, including subpopulations in the Columbia and in eastern 
Washington State. Many of these are supported through some level of 
artificial enhancement, however, which may mask declines in wild 
populations (Rand 2008 (IUCN Red List Supporting Documentation, O. 
nerka, (http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/135301/0)).
    Although Fraser River stocks as well as other West Coast sockeye 
salmon stocks had record returns in 2010 (Northwest Indian Fisheries 
Commission (NWIFC 2010, p. 1) (http://nwifc.org/2010/09/large-fraser-sockeye-run-doesnt-make-up-for-decades-of-poor-fishing/), prior to this 
year most Fraser River stocks have exhibited declining trends in 
productivity beginning as early as 1960 (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 
(DFO) 2010, p. 1). Following returns are expected to again be poor for 
the next 3 years (NWIFC 2010, p. 1). The three factors that likely 
contributed to this record return are:
    (1) Large number of offspring resulting from the 6th largest 
spawning escapement since 1952 as a result of reduced fisheries in 
2006;
    (2) Favorable changes in coastal ocean conditions toward cool 
temperatures in early 2008 when sockeye that returned in 2010 were 
entering the ocean as juveniles; and
    (3) the occurrence of a major volcanic eruption in Alaska's 
Aleutian Islands in 2008, which resulted in ash fertilizing the ocean 
and triggering an algal bloom that possibly enhanced forage value and 
availability (Simon Fraser University et al. 2010, p. 2).
    The Snake River sockeye Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) has 
remained at very low levels of only a few hundred fish, though there 
have been recent increases in the number of hatchery-reared fish 
returning to spawn. Data quality for the Ozette Lake sockeye ESU make 
differentiating between the number of hatchery and natural spawners 
difficult, but in either case the size of the population is small, 
though possibly growing. Both the Snake River and Ozette Lake ESUs were 
listed as endangered and threatened, respectively, under the Act by the 
National Marine Fisheries Service (now NOAA Fisheries (NOAAF) under 
their ESU policy (56 FR 58612; November 20, 1991), (http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/fish/sockeyesalmon.htm).
    We are unaware of average annual abundance records for kokanee; 
however, there are said to be well over 500 kokanee populations in 
British Columbia (McPhail 2007, p. 295). No native kokanee are known 
from the B.C. portion of the Yukon River (B.C. Ministry of Fisheries 
1998, p. 17), and although introduction activities have spread kokanee 
throughout the province, only two natural populations are known from 
the Mackenzie River system (McPhail 2007, p. 289). There are numerous 
introduced kokanee populations maintained through hatchery 
introductions to support recreational fisheries; kokanee have been 
widely introduced across North America, including areas outside their 
larger geographic distribution and farther inland in States and 
provinces where they occur naturally (Scott and Crossman 1973, p. 167).

Regulatory Context and Agency Responsibilities

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service Regulatory Jurisdiction under the Endangered Species 
Act

    Under a 1974 Memorandum of Understanding between the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (now 
NOAAF), NOAAF has Act authority over species that either reside the 
major portion of their lifetimes in marine waters or spend part of 
their lifetime in estuarine waters if the major portion of the 
remaining time is spent in marine waters. The FWS has Act authority 
over species that spend the major portion of their lifetimes on land or 
in fresh water, or that spent part of their lifetimes in estuarine 
waters if a major portion of the remaining time is spent on land or in 
fresh water (USFWS and NOAA, 1974).

Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) and Distinct Population Segment 
(DPS) Policies

    In addition to the DPS policy, NOAAF applies the ESU policy (56 FR 
58612; November 20, 1991), which was adopted prior to adoption of the 
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service 
DPS Policy. The ESU policy considers a stock of Pacific salmon to be a 
distinct population and hence a ``species'' under the Act, if it 
represents an ESU of the biological species. A stock must satisfy two 
criteria to be considered an ESU: (1) It must be substantially 
reproductively isolated from other conspecific population units; and 
(2) It must represent an important component in the evolutionary legacy 
of the species. Under the ESU policy, the evolutionary legacy of a 
species is the genetic variability that is a product of past 
evolutionary events and which represents the reservoir upon which 
future evolutionary potential depends. This criteria would be met for 
purposes of the ESU policy if the population contributed substantially 
to the ecological/genetic diversity of the species as a whole (i.e., 
extinction of the population would represent a significant loss to the 
ecological/genetic diversity of the species). In making this 
determination, NOAAF considers whether: (1) The population is 
genetically distinct from other conspecific populations; (2) the 
population occupies unusual or distinctive habitat; and (3) the 
population shows evidence of unusual or distinctive adaptation to its 
environment.
    NOAAF states that while conclusive evidence does not yet exist 
regarding the relationship of resident and anadromous forms of 
Oncorhynchus nerka, the available evidence suggests that resident 
sockeye and kokanee should not be included in listed anadromous sockeye 
ESUs in cases where the strength and duration of reproductive isolation 
would provide the opportunity for adaptive divergence in sympatry (64 
FR 14530; March 25, 1999). However, NOAAF does include those resident/
residual sockeye within ESUs that spawn with, or adjacent to, sockeye 
salmon in the same ESU. NOAAF interprets an ESU as a

[[Page 61303]]

population that is substantially reproductively isolated from 
conspecific populations (populations of the same species), which 
represents an important component of the evolutionary legacy of the 
species. Although Lake Sammamish kokanee are also Pacific salmon, we 
have no authority under NOAAF's ESU policy, and have evaluated the 
status of the Lake Sammamish kokanee population under the DPS policy.
    NOAAF acknowledges the DPS policy takes a somewhat different 
approach from the ESU policy to identifying conservation units, which 
may result, in some cases, in the identification of different 
conservation units. Although the DPS and ESU policies are consistent, 
they will not necessarily result in the same delineation of DPSs under 
the Act. The statutory term ``distinct population segment'' is not used 
in the scientific literature and does not have a commonly understood 
meaning therein. NOAAF's ESU policy and the joint DPS policy apply 
somewhat different criteria, with the result that their application may 
lead to different outcomes in some cases. The ESU policy relies on 
``substantial reproductive isolation'' to delineate a group of 
organisms, and emphasizes the consideration of genetic and other 
relevant information in evaluating the level of reproductive exchange 
among potential ESU components. The DPS policy does not rely on 
reproductive isolation to determine ``discreteness,'' but rather on the 
marked separation of the population segment from other populations of 
the same taxon as a consequence of biological factors (61 FR 4725; 
February 7, 1996). In addition, the DPS policy also considers the 
significance of the discrete population segment to the taxon to which 
it belongs, which may produce a different result than the important 
evolutionary legacy component considered by NOAAF under the ESU policy.

Distinct Population Segment Policy

Defining a Species Under the Act

    Section 3(16) of the Act defines ``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.'' Under the DPS policy, three elements are considered in 
the decision regarding the establishment and classification of a 
population of a vertebrate species as a possible DPS. These are applied 
similarly for additions to and removal from the Lists of Endangered and 
Threatened Wildlife and Plants. These elements are: (1) The 
discreteness of a population segment in relation to the remainder of 
the species to which it belongs; (2) the significance of the population 
segment to the species to which it belongs; and (3) the population 
segment's conservation status in relation to the Act's standards for 
listing, delisting, or reclassification. Our regulations provide 
further guidance for determining whether a particular taxon or 
population is a species for the purposes of the Act: ``The Secretary 
shall rely on standard taxonomic distinctions and the biological 
expertise of the Department and the scientific community concerning the 
relevant taxonomic group'' (50 CFR 424.11).
    Kokanee are classified as Oncorhynchus nerka, which is the same 
taxonomic species as sockeye salmon. Because the kokanee life history 
form itself is not recognized taxonomically as a distinct species or 
subspecies, to determine whether the kokanee population in Lake 
Sammamish constitutes a DPS, and thus a listable entity under the Act, 
we evaluate this population's discreteness and significance with 
respect to the taxon to which it belongs (in other words, all 
Oncorhynchus nerka (sockeye and kokanee) populations rangewide). 
Accordingly, each of the factors evaluated in this finding have been 
considered within that context.
    Under the DPS policy, a population segment of a vertebrate taxon 
may be considered discrete if it satisfies either of the following 
factors:
    Discreteness Factor 1: The population 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 provide evidence of this 
separation).
    Discreteness Factor 2: The population 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 in light of Section 4(a)(1)(D) of 
the Act.

Lake Sammamish Kokanee Discreteness Analysis

Discreteness Factor 1 Examination

    Patterns of genetic variation demonstrate that the sockeye and 
kokanee within lakes are usually more closely related to each other 
than they are to members of their form in other lakes (Foote et al. 
1989; Taylor et al. 1996 in Quinn 2005 p. 212). Sympatric kokanee and 
sockeye populations are typically temporally or spatially separated; 
where that is not the case, assortative mating by body size usually 
leads to assortative mating by type (Gustafson et al. 1997, p. 30) 
(e.g., sockeye are typically larger and spawn with other sockeye, while 
kokanee are smaller and spawn with other kokanee). Historically, a 
heritable tendency to remain in a lake system rather than migrate to 
sea may have promoted genetic divergence between kokanee and sockeye 
forms as they specialized for their freshwater and marine habitat. 
These genetic differences would be reinforced by size-specific 
preferences for breeding sites, accompanied by the evolution of 
isolating mechanisms to reduce interbreeding between the forms (Quinn 
p. 210). Kokanee in Lake Sammamish are geographically isolated from 
other kokanee, and within Lake Sammamish, kokanee and sockeye are 
further isolated by genetic and reproductive behavior (Young et al. 
2004, pp. 72-73).
    Conclusion: Available data indicate that the Lake Sammamish 
population is geographically and reproductively isolated from other 
native kokanee and sockeye populations, and genetically and 
ecologically discrete from other Oncorhynchus nerka populations, 
although a transplanted sockeye population was introduced during the 
1930s to the 1950s (NOAA 1997, p. ix).

Discreteness Factor 2 Examination

    This factor is not applicable to the discreteness analysis for the 
Lake Sammamish kokanee population, as the petitioned Oncorhynchus nerka 
population is not delimited by international governmental boundaries 
within which differences in control of exploitation, management of 
habitat, conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms exist that are 
significant in light of Section 4(a)(1)(D) of the Act.
Discreteness Analysis Summary
    The kokanee population in Lake Sammamish has been determined to be 
discrete as a result of its marked separation from other populations of 
the same taxon as a consequence of physical, physiological, ecological, 
or behavioral factors. There are no international governmental 
boundaries within which differences in control of exploitation, 
management of habitat, conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms 
exist that are significant in light of Section 4(a)(1)(D) of the Act. 
Accordingly, this discreteness criterion is not applicable to our 
evaluation.

[[Page 61304]]

Lake Sammamish Kokanee Significance Analysis

    Under the DPS policy, a determination as to whether the Lake 
Sammamish kokanee population is a listable entity under the Act must 
first consider its discreteness and significance with regard to the 
remainder of the taxon, which includes all other sockeye salmon and 
kokanee populations throughout the range of the biological species. If 
a population segment is considered discrete under one or more of the 
conditions listed in the Service's DPS policy, its biological and 
ecological significance is considered in light of Congressional 
guidance that the authority to list a DPS be used sparingly, while 
encouraging the conservation of genetic diversity. In carrying out this 
examination, we consider available scientific evidence of the 
population segment's importance to the taxon to which it belongs. This 
consideration may include, but is not limited to: (1) Its persistence 
in an ecological setting unusual or unique for the taxon; (2) evidence 
that its loss would result in a significant gap in the range of the 
taxon; (3) evidence that it is the only surviving natural occurrence of 
the taxon that may be more abundant elsewhere as an introduced 
population outside of its historical range; or (4) evidence that the 
discrete segment differs markedly from other populations of the species 
in its genetic characteristics (FR 61 4721; February 7, 1996). A 
population segment needs to satisfy only one of these criteria to be 
considered significant. Furthermore, since the list of criteria is not 
exhaustive, other criteria may be used if appropriate.
    Significance Factor 1: Persistence of the discrete population 
segment in an ecological setting unusual or unique for the taxon.

Significance Factor 1 Examination

    (A) The Lake Washington/Lake Sammamish Basin is a large, 
interconnected lake system containing two low-elevation mesotrophic 
lakes (Edmondson 1979, pp. 234-235; Welch et al. 1977, p. 301). 
Mesotrophic lakes are characterized by an intermediate concentration of 
nutrients, moderate plant production, some organic sediment 
accumulation, some loss of dissolved oxygen in the lower waters, and 
moderate water clarity. Other lake systems that support or have 
supported native sockeye populations (and by association their native 
kokanee populations) are typically oligotrophic in nature (Mullan 1986, 
pp. 71-73; Quinn 2005, p. 171). Oligotrophic lakes are characterized by 
low concentrations of nutrients, limited plant production, little 
accumulation of organic sediment on the bottom, an abundance of 
dissolved oxygen, and good water clarity. Oligotrophic lakes are also 
typically located at high elevations in interior areas where energetic 
costs of anadromous migration are high (Wood 1995, pp. 202-203). In 
addition to Lake Sammamish, the two other known exceptions are Lake 
Ozette in Washington, which has been characterized as oligotrophic to 
mesotrophic (or meso-oligotrophic) (Ritchie and Bourgeois 2010, p. 5), 
and Lake Osoyoos, which straddles the Washington and B.C border in the 
interior Columbia Basin, which has been characterized as a mesotrophic 
system (Gustafson et al. 1997, p. 57).
    Although we were unable to find comprehensive information on 
limnology as it relates to lake systems occupied by O. nerka, within 
the known and studied kokanee lakes, Lake Sammamish is the only 
mesotrophic, easily accessible coastal lake, where energetic costs of 
migration are minimal, that is known to support a native kokanee 
population in the coterminous United States. Mesotrophic lakes 
containing Oncorhynchus nerka populations appear to be rare in coastal 
British Columbia (Shortreed 2007, p. vi; Woodruff 2010, pp. 47, 56). We 
would also expect mesotrophic lakes that support kokanee to be rare or 
absent within the northern portion of the species' range and at higher 
elevations, since lakes with the lowest productivity are either at high 
altitudes or high latitudes (Brylinsky and Mann 1973, p. 2). One 
research biologist with the NOAAF Northwest Fishery Science Center, 
commented that most sockeye salmon nursery lakes are typically strongly 
nutrient limited (i.e., oligotrophic), and kokanee are not common in 
easily accessible coastal lakes where the energetic costs of migration 
are minimal (Gustafson 2009. pers comm.).
    Although the presence of the petitioned entity in a mesotrophic 
lake appears to be atypical, we do not have information on the 
percentage or extent of mesotrophic lakes occupied by O. nerka 
throughout the range of the taxon, and therefore cannot determine 
whether this is actually an unusual or unique setting for O. nerka. 
However, it is well-documented that the species occupies lakes with a 
wide range of thermal regimes and other physical attributes (McPhail 
2007, pp. 288, 295; Scott and Crossman 1973, p. 167; Mullen 1986 pp. 
71-73; Quinn 2005, p. 171). These include coastal lakes in Washington 
that stratify in summer with surface temperatures near 20 degrees 
Celsius (C) (60 degrees Fahrenheit (F)), and remain mixed without 
freezing in winter, to lakes in the interior and northern latitudes 
that are ice-covered for at least half the year and have summer 
temperatures barely above 10 degrees C (50 degrees F). Oncorhynchus 
nerka occupies lakes that range in elevation from essentially sea level 
to 2,000 m (6,550 ft), and in area from 1 to 2,600 square kilometers 
(0.6 to 1,615 square miles), which includes coastal lakes from 
Washington to Alaska and lakes in the interior of the Columbia, Fraser, 
and Skeena river systems (Quinn 2005, p. 173). Anadromous O. nerka do 
not occur naturally in Japan, although other populations are 
distributed among several lakes. Native populations occur in Akan and 
Chimikeppu Lakes (Kogura et al. 2011, pp. 2-3), and O. nerka also 
occurs in Lake Toya, a large oligotrophic lake located in a caldera in 
the central area of Hokkaido, in Northern Japan (Sakano et al., 1998, 
p. 173). Based on our analysis, we are not aware of any scientific 
evidence suggesting or demonstrating that the presence of an O. nerka 
population in a mesotrophic lake is beyond the normal range of 
variability that would be expected from a species that occupies the 
diversity of habitat types where it has been documented, or that this 
may represent an important trait from an adaptation/evolutionary 
perspective.
    In addition, NOAAF (1997, p. 20) states that Oncorhynchus nerka 
exhibits the greatest diversity in selection of spawning habitat among 
the Pacific salmon, and great variation in river entry timing and the 
duration of holding in lakes prior to spawning. The species' adaptation 
to a greater diversity of lake environments for adult spawning and 
juvenile rearing has resulted in the evolution of complex timing for 
incubation, fry emergence, spawning, and adult lake entry that often 
involves intricate patterns of adult and juvenile migration and 
orientation not seen in other Oncorhynchus species.
    Conclusion: Oncorhynchus nerka exhibiting differing life-history 
forms occupy a variety of ecosystems and watersheds in the north 
Pacific from southern Kamchatka to Japan in the western Pacific, and 
from Alaska to the Columbia River in North America (Page and Burr 1991, 
p. 52; Taylor et al. 1996, pp. 402-403). We acknowledge Lake Sammamish 
represents a complex ecological setting. However, the available 
information indicates O. nerka occurs in a wide geographical range, and 
habitat varies with respect to continental setting, latitude, 
elevation,

[[Page 61305]]

and type(s) of waters used to support the species' physical and 
biological needs. Given the available information on the diversity and 
extent of ecological settings O. nerka occupies within the rest of its 
range, the best scientific information available does not suggest that 
Lake Sammamish represents a unique or unusual setting that may have 
special significance relative to the taxon as a whole.
    (B) The kokanee life form has historically been more abundant than 
the sockeye life form in Lake Sammamish, although a larger number of 
the sockeye life form would be expected because of the relatively easy 
access to marine waters. Reports in the literature are equivocal as to 
whether sockeye salmon were historically present in the Lake Sammamish 
basin prior to the construction of the Lake Washington Ship Canal, 
although kokanee were described as numerous (NOAA 1997, pp. 73-75). 
Hendry (1995) in NOAA 1997 (p. 75), stated that limited runs of sockeye 
salmon were probably present at the turn of the century in the Lake 
Washington/Lake Sammamish drainage, and that it is ``certainly unlikely 
that large populations were present.'' Young (2004, p. 1) stated the 
Lake Sammamish/Lake Washington watershed supported only small 
populations of sockeye, but large populations of kokanee in the period 
from 1890 to 1920. In addition, the oral history of the Snoqualmie 
Indian Tribe once characterized kokanee as being so abundant that 
Tribal members could stand in the tributaries of Lake Sammamish and 
scoop up the ``little red fish'' in their hands (Snoqualmie Indian 
Tribe and Trout Unlimited 2008, p. 10).
    As ancestral sockeye populations expanded to new river systems, 
those that could not access the marine environment on a regular basis 
evolved into the non anadromous kokanee form (Taylor et al. 1996, pp. 
411-414). Kokanee populations are typically located at high elevations 
in interior areas where energetic costs of anadromous migration are 
high or where productive lakes can support both types (Wood 1995, pp. 
202-203). In areas closer to and with easy access to marine waters, 
sockeye populations typically dominate and kokanee are not common, 
since the energetic costs of migration are minimal (Gustafson 2009, 
pers comm.), and marine waters are much more productive. At higher 
latitudes, productivity (and growing opportunities) is greater at sea 
than in freshwater, as is evidenced by the more rapid growth of salmon 
at sea than in streams and lakes (Quinn 2005, p. 6). Since Lake 
Sammamish is located close to marine waters and is historically and 
presently capable of accommodating anadromous migration, the 
expectation would be that this should be a sockeye-dominated system. 
The fact that kokanee appears to have been the more common Oncorhynchus 
nerka life form in the Lake Washington/Lake Sammamish system 
historically suggests there may have been at least some partial or 
periodic barrier to anadromous sockeye in the past (Young et al. 2004, 
p. 1).
    Comparing Lake Sammamish to other nearby water bodies, Lake Whatcom 
and Lake Ozette are geographically near marine waters and support 
native kokanee populations; however, there are differences. Lake 
Whatcom is oligotrophic (Matthews et al. 2002, p. 107), and has an 
outlet that presents a long-standing natural barrier to anadromous 
migration. Lake Ozette, although also near marine waters, is meso-
oligotrophic and dominated by sockeye.
    Although the dominant presence of kokanee in a system where a 
greater abundance of the sockeye life form would be expected is 
notable, this does not necessarily lead to a conclusion that Lake 
Sammamish represents a unique or unusual ecological setting. Quinn 
(2005, pp. 10-11), states that all salmon are habitat generalists, and 
populations tend to be very productive (i.e., when the population is 
below its carrying capacity, each salmon produces many surviving 
offspring). They spawn and rear in bodies of water ranging from tiny 
creeks above waterfalls in the mountains, or streams discharging 
directly into saltwater, to large rivers, and from small beaver ponds 
and ephemeral wetlands to the largest lakes of the region. They are 
found in a number of large rivers as well as in thousands of smaller 
streams. Oncorhynchus nerka is the second most abundant Pacific salmon 
species, having a primary spawning range from the Columbia River to the 
Kuskokwim River in Alaska. In Asia they range from the Kuril Islands to 
the area of the Anadyr River, but the heart of their distribution is 
the Kamchatka Peninsula and tributaries of the Bering Sea. They spawn 
in coastal systems and also ascent as far as 1,600 km (994 mi) to 
Redfish Lake, Idaho (Quinn 2005, p. 14). We have no information on 
whether there are any other lake systems that are predominately 
occupied by the kokanee life form that would be expected to be 
dominated by sockeye.
    Conclusion: We have insufficient information to determine the 
extent of waterbodies with relatively easy access to marine waters 
where the kokanee form may be dominant over the anadromous form of O. 
nerka across the range of the taxon. However, given the available 
information on the diversity and extent of ecological settings of O. 
nerka throughout the rest of its range, there is no information that 
would suggest the apparent dominance of the kokanee life form over the 
anadromous form in Lake Sammamish (at least since at least the late 
19th century) supports a conclusion that Lake Sammamish constitutes a 
unique or unusual setting that is significant to the taxon.
    Significance Factor 2: Evidence that the loss of the population 
would result in a significant gap in the range of the taxon.

Significance Factor 2 Examination

    Lake Sammamish kokanee represent 1 of 11 known native kokanee 
populations within the southern extent of their North American range, 
and currently, we believe the best available information identifies 9 
extant native kokanee populations that occur in the coterminous United 
States (Lake Ozette, WA; Lake Sammamish, WA; Lake Whatcom, WA; 
Chilliwack Lake, WA; Chain Lake, WA; Osoyoos Lake, WA; Stanley Lake, 
ID; Redfish Lake, ID; and Alturas Lake, ID). The number of kokanee 
populations in other areas within the range of the taxon is less well 
known, but there are said to be well over 500 kokanee populations in 
British Columbia (McPhail 2007, p. 295) alone. At one time there were 
kokanee in Lake Washington as well as three different runs of kokanee 
in Lake Sammamish. All other native kokanee that inhabited the Lake 
Washington Basin are thought to be extinct, and the prevailing evidence 
indicates that only the winter/late-run kokanee in the Lake Sammamish 
Basin remain (Berge and Higgins 2003, p. 33; Jackson 2006, p. 1; 
Warheit and Bowman 2008, p. 3).
    Conclusion: The Lake Sammamish kokanee population is one of three 
native kokanee populations (Lake Sammamish, Lake Whatcom, and 
Chilliwack Lake) that evolved from sockeye populations within the Puget 
Sound and the Strait of Georgia Basin regions. If Lake Sammamish 
kokanee were to become extirpated, two other native kokanee populations 
would persist from this evolutionary arm of the taxon, and there are 
other native kokanee populations in the southern extent of their North 
American range, although each of these populations expresses 
differences in their geographic and biological characteristics. The 
loss of Lake Sammamish kokanee, when considered in relation to 
Oncorhynchus

[[Page 61306]]

nerka throughout the remainder of the species' range would mean the 
loss of a very small geographic portion of the entire range of the 
taxon, since this species occurs in watersheds in the north Pacific 
from southern Kamchatka to Japan in the western Pacific, and from 
Alaska to the Columbia River in North America (Page and Burr 1991, p. 
52; Taylor et al. 1996, pp. 402-403). Due to the broad geographic range 
of O. nerka, the wide diversity of habitats available to the species, 
and the fact that this population is one of several O. nerka 
populations within this portion of the range, we find the gap in the 
range resulting from the loss of the Lake Sammamish population would 
not be significant.
    Significance Factor 3: Evidence that the population represents the 
only surviving natural occurrence of a taxon that may be more abundant 
elsewhere as an introduced population outside of its historical range.

Significance Factor 3 Examination

    Since the taxon is widespread, there are 11 known populations of 
native kokanee in the coterminous United States within the historic 
range, and at least 500 kokanee populations in B.C., Lake Sammamish 
kokanee do not represent the only surviving natural occurrence of the 
taxon.
    Significance Factor 4: Evidence that the population differs 
markedly from other populations of the species in its genetic 
characteristics.

Significance Factor 4 Examination

    Relatively large genetic differences occur among the largest 
sockeye salmon stocks in northwestern, coastal Canadian, and 
southeastern parts of the species' range (Wood 1995, p. 197). Surveys 
of genetic variation throughout the range of Oncorhynchus nerka provide 
new insights about colonization patterns following the last glaciation 
and the extent of reproductive isolation among spawning locations (Wood 
1995, p. 196). Evidence from geological studies and the distribution of 
freshwater fish assemblages strongly suggests that modern sockeye 
salmon populations are derived primarily from a northern race that 
survived glaciation in the Bering Sea area and a southern race that 
survived south of the Cordilleran Ice Sheet in the Columbia River (Wood 
et al. 2008, p. 208). This 4,000-feet thick (1,219-meters) ice sheet 
expanded southward into Northern Washington, Idaho and Montana and had 
three main lobes. The Puget lobe that scoured out the Puget Sound, the 
Okanogan lobe that blocked the Columbia River at the site of the 
present day Grand Coulee dam, and the Purcell lobe that blocked the 
North Fork, Clark River near Cabinet Gorge on the Idaho-Montana border. 
Postglacial (the time following a glacial period) adaptive evolution 
occurred multiple times, resulting in native kokanee populations being 
genetically more similar to their sympatric (i.e., occupying the same 
geographic area without interbreeding) sockeye populations than kokanee 
in other river systems (Taylor et al. 1996, pp. 401, 413-414).
    Conclusion: Lake Sammamish kokanee may be 1 of only 11 remaining 
native kokanee populations that evolved from the southern race of 
sockeye and 1 of 3 that evolved in the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin 
region. Given the presumed large number of kokanee populations across 
the range of Oncorhynchus nerka (e.g., 500 kokanee populations in 
British Columbia alone (McPhail 2007, p. 295)), based on the genetic 
information currently available, the Lake Sammamish kokanee population 
does not differ markedly from other O. nerka populations with respect 
to the variability beyond the species' norm of distribution, such that 
they should be considered biologically or ecologically significant 
based on genetic characteristics. Although each O. nerka population 
likely expresses some degree of genetic distinctiveness because of 
differing responses to evolutionary pressures, Lake Sammamish kokanee 
do not demonstrate any unique or unusual genetic distinctiveness beyond 
that which would be expected between other populations throughout the 
range of the taxon. When measuring this evidence against the DPS 
standard, we are required to look for evidence of marked 
differentiation of this Lake Sammamish kokanee population segment 
compared to other populations of Oncorhynchus nerka throughout the 
range of the taxon. More importantly, scientific information to 
indicate that the genetic divergence observed in the Lake Sammamish 
kokanee population segment confers a fitness advantage or otherwise 
contributes to the biological or ecological importance of this 
population, in relation to the taxon as a whole, is lacking. With the 
additional consideration that the authority to list DPSs be used 
``sparingly,'' we conclude this population segment of O. nerka does not 
meet the significance element of this factor.

Other Potential Significance Factors Examined

    (A) Disease resistance: Infectious hematopoietic necrosis (IHN) is 
a serious viral disease of salmonid fish, which was first reported at 
fish hatcheries in Oregon and Washington in the 1950s. The causative 
virus now exists in many wild and farmed salmonid stocks in the Pacific 
Northwest region of North America, and has spread to Europe and some 
Asian countries. IHN virus (IHN) affects rainbow/steelhead trout (O. 
mykiss), cutthroat trout (Salmo clarki), brown trout (Salmo trutta), 
Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar), and Pacific salmon including chinook (O. 
tshawytscha), sockeye/kokanee (O. nerka), chum (O. keta), masou/yamame 
(O. masou), amago (O. rhodurus), and coho (O. kisutch) (Iowa State 
University, 2007, p. 1). Over 40 million kokanee were introduced into 
the Sammamish basin from the Lake Whatcom Hatchery between 1940 and 
1978 (Young et al. 2004, p. 65); however, these introduced stocks have 
not been successful. The Lake Sammamish kokanee population remains 
extant, whereas transplanted stocks were unable to persist (Young et 
al. 2004, p. 1). The reasons are unknown, and there has been some 
speculation that this could be related to a disease resistance function 
to IHN; however, this theory has not been confirmed. This speculation 
is based on Young et al. 2004 (p. 3), who stated, ``We note that the 
Lake Washington/Lake Sammamish Basin is an IHN positive environment and 
that Lake Whatcom is IHN free. We speculate that IHN vulnerability 
might explain the apparent lack of success of the Lake Whatcom kokanee 
introductions, however, confirmation or refutation would require 
further study.'' However, while these authors speculated as to the 
vulnerability of Lake Whatcom kokanee to IHN, it does not follow that 
Lake Sammamish kokanee are, therefore, resistant to, or tolerant of, 
the disease. We were also unable to find any additional studies 
regarding disease resistance or disease tolerance of the Lake Sammamish 
kokanee, so this idea remains merely speculative at this time.
    Even assuming that Lake Sammamish kokanee may be resistant to IHN, 
this does not mean disease resistance is unique to kokanee in the Lake 
Washington/Lake Sammamish system. We were unable to find any 
information on IHN presence in other lakes within the range of 
Oncorhynchus nerka, so were unable to determine whether a presumed 
resistance or tolerance to IHN (as evidenced by presence of a 
population of O. nerka in IHN-positive lakes) is unusual such that a 
population evidencing this disease resistance or tolerance would be 
significant to the taxon as a whole.

[[Page 61307]]

    Conclusion: Although disease resistance or tolerance may be 
important to the long-term viability of Oncorhynchus nerka at some 
scale, the relevant question for this finding is whether the Lake 
Sammamish kokanee population is significant to the taxon as a whole 
(i.e., all O. nerka populations and life history forms throughout the 
range of the species). Given that there is no evidence indicating that 
the Lake Sammamish kokanee are disease resistant or disease tolerant, 
and that we were unable to find any information on IHN presence in 
other lakes containing O. nerka populations in order to determine 
whether Lake Sammamish is atypical, we conclude that the hypothesized 
disease resistance or tolerance of the Lake Sammamish kokanee 
population does not meet the significance element of the DPS policy.
    (B) Multiple run spawning timings: Multiple run timings allow 
kokanee and other salmonid populations the ability to exploit a range 
of available habitats and reduce risks to extirpation (e.g., stochastic 
events, predation, variable climate) by diversifying spawning 
distribution over space and time. The Lake Sammamish/Lake Washington 
kokanee population historically had at least three distinct run timings 
expressed in different locations within the basin. The expression of 
multiple-run timings within populations appears to be rare across the 
range of kokanee, especially among tributaries (Wood 2009, pers comm.), 
although there are at least a few other kokanee populations that are 
known to exhibit this trait (Shepard 1999). In addition, the literature 
indicates that other kokanee populations have run timings that occur 
during similar times of the year as do the run timings of the Lake 
Sammamish kokanee (Scott and Crossman 1973, p. 167). With regard to the 
taxon-wide examination, NOAAF (1997, p. 20) states that Oncorhynchus 
nerka exhibits the greatest diversity in selection of spawning habitat 
among the Pacific salmon, and great variation in river entry timing and 
the duration of holding in lakes prior to spawning. Bimodal run timing 
(two spawning runs in a single season) for O. nerka populations have 
been demonstrated in the Russian River in Alaska (Nelson 1979, p. 3), 
the Klukshu River, Yukon Territory (Fillatre et al. 2003, p. 1), and 
Karluk Lake on Kodiak Island, Alaska (Schmidt et al. 1998, p. 744).
    Conclusion: Under the DPS policy, we are required to evaluate the 
Lake Sammamish kokanee population segment's significance relative to 
the taxon as a whole. Therefore, given the available information on the 
number of O. nerka populations across the range of the species (see 
sockeye and kokanee abundance trends above), and the presence of 
bimodal run timing in other populations, we conclude the presence of 
multiple run timings in Lake Sammamish is not significant to the taxon.

DPS Conclusion

    On the basis of the best available information, we conclude that 
the Lake Sammamish kokanee population segment is discrete due to marked 
separation as a consequence of physical, ecological, physiological, or 
behavioral factors according to the 1996 DPS policy. However, on the 
basis of the four significance elements in the 1996 DPS policy, we 
conclude this discrete population segment is not significant to the 
remainder of the taxon and therefore, does not qualify as a DPS under 
our 1996 DPS policy. As such, we find the Lake Sammamish kokanee 
population is not a listable entity under the Act.

Finding

    In making this finding, we considered information provided by the 
petitioners, as well as other information available to us concerning 
the Lake Sammamish kokanee population. We have carefully assessed the 
best scientific and commercial information available regarding the 
status and threats to the Lake Sammamish kokanee population. We 
reviewed the petition and unpublished scientific and commercial 
information. We also consulted with Federal and State land managers, 
and scientists having expertise with Oncorhynchus nerka. This 12-month 
finding reflects and incorporates information received from the public 
following our 90-day finding or obtained through consultation or 
literature research.
    On the basis of that review, we have determined that the Lake 
Sammamish kokanee does not meet the elements of our 1996 DPS policy as 
being a valid DPS. Consequently, we find the Lake Sammamish kokanee 
population is not a listable entity under the Act, and that listing is 
not warranted.

References

    A complete list of all references cited is available at http://www.regulations.gov, or upon request from the Washington Fish and 
Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES).

Author

    The primary authors of this document are staff of Region 1, Pacific 
Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Authority

    The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of 
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

    Dated: September 23, 2011.
Rowan W. Gould,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-25595 Filed 10-3-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P