The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAlaska's Threatened & Endangered Species 2003URS Ratt Alaska’s Threatened and Endangered Species February 2003 Alaska’s Threatened and Endangered Species TABLE OF CONTENTS Subject Page Endangered Species Act Basics........sescceseeesssrreeeee tener nisseee sees ree ceseeeressgs 1 List of Informative Websites ............:ccseceecee ree eee nee ee eee ee eee ea eee ne nee ne eee e cess 3 List of Endangered, Threatened, and Candidate Species in Alaska ...........sseseeeesssessssseeeeseeeeeeeeeeseeceeseeeeesesseeseeeeees 4 Glossary of Endangered Species Act Term .........0000seeeeeee tt tree ett e nner eee eeenes 6 The Consultation Process ..........:ccsceeeeeeeee eee eee eee een ee esses eee eaee nee een ee ee eee esaes 12 Consultation Process Flow Chart............:ccsccsereeneenee eee eeeeeeen ee eneeeeeese een es 14 Steller’s Eider — Threatened ........cccceccec cece eee ree ne ene nee EEE a 15 Spectacled Eider — Threatened .....cscsscsseecsecsesesieenneenneeen tees eee eee eee een seen ated 23 Short-tailed Albatross — Endangered .........ccccceeeenee eee eee e ene e ene n sense eens 34 Aleutian Shield Fern — Endangered.....scccccsescssesseresesesessereseseseeseneneneneenensnsnsssssessnnss 37 Sea Otter — Candidate ......ccccccccccec cece eet eee EEE EEE EEE EEE EEE EEE 39 U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE. February 2003 Introduction When the Endangered Species Act (ESA) was passed in 1973, it represented America’s concern about the decline of many wildlife species around the world. It is regarded as one of the most comprehensive wildlife conservation laws in the world. The purpose of the ESA is to conserve “the ecosystems upon which endangered and threatened species depend” and to conserve and recover listed species. Under the law, species may be listed as either “endangered” or “threatened”. Endangered means a species is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Threatened means a species is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future. All species of plants and animals, except pest insects, are eligible for listing as endangered or threatened. As of August 31, 2002, 1,818 species are listed, of which 1,260 are U.S. species. The list covers mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fishes, snails, clams/mussels, crustaceans, insects, arachnids, and plants. Groups with the most listed species are (in order) plants, mammals, birds, fishes, reptiles, and clams/mussels. The law is administered by the Interior Department's U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the Commerce Department's National Marine Fisheries Service. The FWS has primary responsibility for terrestrial and freshwater organisms, while the National Marine Fisheries Service's responsibilities are mainly for marine species such as salmon and whales. Legislative History The 1973 Endangered Species Act replaced earlier laws enacted in 1966 and 1969, which provided for a list of endangered species but gave them little meaningful protection. The 1973 law has US. Fish & Wildlife Service ESA Basics Over 25 years of protecting endangered species been reauthorized seven times and amended on several occasions, most recently in 1988. The Endangered Species Act was due for reauthorization again in 1993, but legislation to reauthorize it has not yet been enacted. The Endangered Species program has continued to receive appropriations while Congress considers reauthorization, allowing conservation actions for threatened and endangered species to continue. The ESA The Endangered Species Act is a complex law with a great deal of built-in flexibility. Some basics of the law include: Purpose When Congress passed the Endangered Species Act in 1973, it recognized that many of our nation’s native plants and animals were in danger of becoming extinct. They further expressed that our rich natural heritage was of “esthetic, ecological, educational, recreational, and scientific value to our Nation and its people.” The purposes of the Act are to protect these endangered and threatened species and to provide a means to conserve their ecosystems. Federal Agencies All federal agencies are to protect species and preserve their habitats. Federal agencies must utilize their authorities to conserve listed species and make sure that their actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species. The FWS and the National Marine Fisheries Service work with other agencies to plan or modify federal projects so that they will have minimal impact on listed species and their habitat. Working with States —Section 6 The protection of species is also achieved through partnerships with the States. Section 6 of the law encourages each State to develop and maintain conservation programs for resident federally-listed threatened and endangered Bald eagle Corel Corp. photo species. Federal financial assistance and a system of incentives are available to attract State participation. Some State laws and regulations are even more restrictive in granting exceptions or permits than the current ESA. Working with non-Federal landowners, the Service provides financial and technical assistance to landowners to implement management actions on their lands to benefit listed and nonlisted species. Local Involvement The protection of federally listed species on Federal lands is the first priority of the FWS, yet, many species occur partially, extensively or, in some cases, exclusively on private lands. Policies and incentives have been developed to protect private landowners’ interests in their lands while encouraging them to manage their lands in ways that benefit endangered species. Much of the progress in recovery of endangered species can be attributed to public support and involvement. Listing —Section 4 Species are listed on the basis of “the best scientific and commercial data available.” Listings are made solely on the basis of the species’ biological status and threats to its existence. In some instances, a species which closely resembles an endangered or threatened species is listed due to similarity of appearance. The FWS decides all listings using sound science and peer review to ensure the accuracy of the best available data. Candidate Species —Section 4 The FWS also maintains a list of “candidate” species. These are species for which the Service has enough information to warrant proposing them for listing as endangered or threatened, but these species have not yet been proposed for listing. The FWS works with States and private partners to carry out conservation actions for candidate species to prevent their further decline and possibly eliminate the need to list them as endangered or threatened. Recovery —Section 4 The law's ultimate goal is to “recover” species so they no longer need protection under the Endangered Species Act. The law provides for recovery plans to be developed describing the steps needed to restore a species to health. Appropriate public and private agencies and institutions and other qualified persons assist in the development and implementation of recovery plans. Involvement of the public and interested “stakeholders” in development of recovery plans is encouraged. Recovery teams may be appointed to develop and implement recovery plans. Consultation —Section 7 The law requires federal agencies to consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service to ensure that the actions they authorize, fund, or carry out will not jeopardize listed species. In the relatively few cases where the FWS determines the proposed action will jeopardize the species, they must issue a “biological opinion” offering “reasonable and prudent alternatives” about how the proposed action could be modified to avoid jeopardy to listed species. It is a very rare exception where projects are withdrawn or terminated because of jeopardy toa listed species. Critical Habitat —Section 4 The law provides for designation of “critical habitat” for listed species when judged to be “prudent and determinable”. Critical habitat includes geographic areas “on which are found those physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species and which may require special management considerations or protection.” Critical habitat may include areas not occupied by the species at the time of listing but that are essential to the conservation of the species. Critical habitat designations affect only federal agency actions or federally funded or permitted activities. International Species —Section 8 The Endangered Species Act is the law that implements U.S. participation in the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), a 130-nation agreement designed to prevent species from becoming endangered or extinct because of international trade. The law prohibits trade in listed species except under CITES permits. Exemptions —Section 10 The law provides a process for exempting development projects from the restrictions of the Endangered Species Act. This process permits completion of projects that have been determined to jeopardize the survival of a listed species, if a Cabinet-level “Endangered Species Committee” decides the benefits of the project clearly outweigh the benefits of conserving a species. Since its creation in 1978, the Committee has only been convened three times to make this decision. Habitat Conservation Plans —Section 10 This provision of the ESA is designed to relieve restrictions on private landowners who want to develop land inhabited by endangered species. Private landowners who develop and implement an approved “habitat conservation plan” providing for conservation of the species can receive an “incidental take permit” that allows their development project to go forward. Definition of “Take” —Section 9 Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act makes it unlawful for a person to “take” a listed species. The Act says “The term take means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect or attempt to engage in any such conduct.” The Secretary of the Interior, through regulations, defined the term “harm” in this passage as “an act which actually kills or injures wildlife. Such act may include significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering.” Compliance with Other Laws The Endangered Species Act is not the only law to protect species of wild mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians and fishes, clams, snails, insects, spiders, crustaceans, and plants. There are many other laws with enforcement provisions to protect declining populations of rare species and their habitat, such as the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and the Anadromous Fish Conservation Act. The Lacey Act makes it a federal crime for any person to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, possess, or purchase any fish, wildlife, or plant taken, possessed transported or sold in violation of any Federal, State, foreign or Indian tribal law, treaty, or regulation. For More Information For additional information about threatened and endangered species and current recovery efforts, contact the USS. Fish and Wildlife Service at the address below. Additional materials and the current U.S. List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants is also available over the Internet at http.// endangered. fws.gov. US. Fish & Wildlife Service Endangered Species Program 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Room 420 Arlington, VA 22203 703/358 2390 http://endangered.fws.gov October 2002 INFORMATIVE WEB SITES ON ENDANGERED SPECIES http://endangered. fws.gov The USFWS web site on the Endangered Species Program, full of information, lists of endangered and threatened species, links to laws and pertinent Federal Register publications. http://endangered.fws.gov/esa. html The Endangered Species Act http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/prot_res/laws/ESA/ESA. Home.html NOAA/NMES web site on the Endangered Species Act http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/prot_res/overview/es.html Information on NMFS protected resources http://www.17.fws.gov/es/te.cfm Updates on Alaska’s endangered, threatened, and candidate species http:/Awww.state.ak.us/local/akpages/F ISH.GAME/wildlife/geninfo/game/albatros.htm Information on the endangered short-tailed albatross http://www.state.ak.us/adfg/wildlife/geninfo/game/st eider.htm Information on the threatened Steller’s eider http://www-state.ak.us/adfg/wildlife/geninfo/game/sp eider.htm Information on the threatened spectacled eider http://ecos.fws.gov/servlet/SpeciesProfile? ’spcode=SO00V Information on the endangered Aleutian shield fern http:/Awww.r7.fws.gov/ea/sotter/qa.html Q&A on the southeastern Alaskan candidate population of sea otters http://www.absc.usgs.gov/research/seabird foragefish/seabirds/flash_cards/kittlitz's_murr elet.html Information on Kittlitz’s murrelet, currently being assessed as a Candidate species ENDANGERED, THREATENED AND CANDIDATE SPECIES IN ALASKA February 2003 LISTED AND CANDIDATE SPECIES MANAGED BY U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE LEAD LISTED SPECIES STATUS OFFICE RANGE IN AK Birds Eskimo curlew (Numenius borealis) E FAI No longer occurs in AK Short-tailed albatross (Phoebastria albatrus) E ANC U.S. Territorial waters, Gulf of AK, (Formerly: Diomedea albatrus ) Aleutian Islands, Bering Sea Coast, Japan, Russia, high seas Spectacled eider (Somateria fischeri) ie FAI Western and Northern AK (coastal) Steller's eider (Polysticta stelleri) T FAI Southwestern, Western and Northern AK Plants Aleutian shield fern (Polystichum aleuticum) E ANC Adak Island DELISTED SPECIES Arctic peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus tundrius) FAI Northern, Western AK Delisted October 5, 1994 American peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum) FAI Interior AK Delisted August 25, 1999 Aleutian Canada goose (Branta canadensis leucopareia) ANC Aleutian Is., Semidi Is. Delisted March 20, 2001 CANDIDATE SPECIES Northern sea otter (Enhydra lutris kenyoni) Cc ANC Aleutian Islands, AK (Aleutian Islands population) LISTED SPECIES MANAGED BY NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE Under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, the National Marine Fisheries Service is responsible for listed anadromous and marine fishes and marine mammals other than sea otters, manatees, and dugongs. TAXON STATUS Mammals Resident/Frequent: Bowhead whale (Balaena mysticetus) E Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) E Humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) E Sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus) E Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus) T east of 144° Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus) E west of 144° Rare/Occasional: Sei whale (Balaenoptera borealis) E North Pacific right whale (Eubalaena japonica) E Blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus) E Fishes A number of listed trout and salmon that spawn in the lower 48 Pacific Northwest may occur in Alaskan waters during the marine phase of their life cycle. For information on these, you may visit the NMFS Northwest Region website: http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/ or call (206) 526-6150. Reptiles More Frequent: Leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) E Occasional (mostly temperate/ tropical): Loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) T Green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas) (incl. agassizi) T DELISTED SPECIES Mammals Gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus) Effective June 16, 1994 CANDIDATE SPECIES Cook Inlet beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas) KEY AND DEFINITIONS STATUS E - Endangered: A species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion its range. T - Threatened: A species which is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. D - Delisted: A species that has been removed from the list of threatened and endangered species. The Fish and Wildlife Service will monitor these species for a period of at least five years following delisting. C - Candidate: A species for which the Service has on file sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threat(s) to support proposals as threatened or endangered (formerly Category 1 Candidate species). LEAD OFFICE ANC: Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage Fish and Wildlife Field Office (refer to address below) FAI: Fish and Wildlife Service, Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field Office (refer to address below) ADDRESSES National Marine Fisheries Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 43 Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7577 TEL: 907-271-5006 Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska Regional Office Division of Endangered Species 1011 E. Tudor Road Anchorage, Alaska 99503-6199 TEL: 907-786-3520 FAX: 907-786-3350 Fish and Wildlife Service Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field Office 101 12th Ave. Box 19, Room 110 Fairbanks, Alaska 99701 TEL: 907-456-0203 FAX: 907-456-0208 National Marine Fisheries Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Protected Resources Division P.O. Box 21668 Juneau, AK 99802-1668 TEL: 907-586-7235 Fish and Wildlife Service Juneau Fish and Wildlife Field Office 3000 Vintage Blvd., Suite 201 Juneau, Alaska 99801-7100 TEL: 907-586-7240 FAX: 907-586-7099 Fish and Wildlife Service Anchorage Fish and Wildlife Field Office 605 West 4th Avenue, Room G-61 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 TEL: 907-271-2888 FAX: 907-271-2786 Glossary Here are some terms that you might encounter when hearing or reading about the endangered species program. This glossary may also be accessed orline at: http://midwest.fws.gov/endangered/glossary/index.htm! where many terms are linked to more information. Biodiversity - The variety of life and its processes, including the variety of living organisms, the genetic differences among them, and the communities and ecosystems in which they occur. Biological assessment - A document prepared for the Section 7 process to determine whether a proposed major construction activity under the authority of a Federal action agency is likely to adversely affect listed species, proposed species, or designated critical habitat. Biological opinion - A document that is the product of formal consultation, stating the opinion of the Service on whether or not a Federal action is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. Candidate species - Plants and animals that have been studied and the Service has concluded that they should be proposed for addition to the Federal endangered and threatened species list. These species have formerly been referred to as category 1 candidate species. From the February 28, 1996 Federal Register, page 7597: "those species for which the Service has on file sufficient information on biological vulnerability and threat(s) to support issuance of a proposed rule to list but issuance of the proposed rule is precluded." Category 1 candidate species - A term no longer in use, having been replaced by the term "candidate species" which uses the same definition. Category 2 candidate species - A term no longer in use. Previously referred to species for which the Service had some indication that listing as threatened or endangered might be warranted, but there were insufficient data available to justify a proposal to list them. Category 3 candidate species - A term no longer in use. Previously referred to species which once were category 1 or 2 candidate species, but for which subsequent data indicated that listing as threatened or endangered was not appropriate. CITES - The 1973 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, restricting international commerce between participating nations for plant and animal species believed to be harmed by trade. Common name - The nonscientific name of an animal or plant most widely used and accepted by the scientific community. Conference - The consultation process required for Federal actions that are likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a species proposed for listing or result in the destruction of adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. Conserve - Carrying out actions to improve the health of a species so it no longer needs to be listed as threatened or endangered. Conservation - From section 3(3) of the Federal Endangered Species Act: "The terms "conserve," "conserving," and "conservation" mean to use and the use of all methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered species or threatened species to the point at which the measures provided under this Act are no longer necessary. Such methods and procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities associated with scientific resources management such as research, census, law enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, propagation, live trapping, and transportation, and, in the extraordinary case where population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise relieved, may include regulated taking." Consultation - All Federal agencies must consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (or National Marine Fisheries Service) when any activity permitted, funded, or conducted by that agency may affect a listed species or designated critical habitat, or is likely to jeopardize proposed species or adversely modify proposed critical habitat. There are two stages of consultation: informal and formal. Critical habitat - Specific geographic areas, whether occupied by listed species or not, that are determined to be essential for the conservation and management of listed species, and that have been formally described in the Federal Register. Delist - The process of removing an animal or plant from the list of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Distinct population segment - If it satisfies the criteria specified in the February 7, 1996, Federal Register, pages 4722-4725, a portion of a vertebrate (i.e., animals with a backbone) species or subspecies can be listed. The criteria require it to be readily separable from the rest of its species and to be biologically and ecologically significant. Such a portion of a species or subspecies is called a distinct population segment. Ecosystem - Dynamic and interrelating complex of plant and animal communities and their associated nonliving (e.g. physical and chemical) environment. Ecosystem Approach - Protecting or restoring the function, structure, and species composition of an ecosystem, recognizing that all components are interrelated. Endangered - The classification provided to an animal or plant in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended - Federal legislation intended to provide a means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered and threatened species depend may be conserved, and provide programs for the conservation of those species, thus preventing extinction of native plants and animals. Endangered species permit - A document issued by the Service under authority of Section 10 allowing an action otherwise prohibited under Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act. Endemic species - A species native and confined to a certain region; having comparatively restricted distribution. Extinct species - A species no longer in existence. Extirpated species - A species no longer surviving in regions that were once part of their range. Federal action agency - Any department or agency of the United States proposing to authorize, fund, or carry out an action under existing authorities. Formal consultation - The consultation process conducted when a Federal agency determines its action may affect a listed species or its critical habitat, and is used to determine whether the proposed action may jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or adversely modify critical habitat. This determination is stated in the Service's biological opinion. Habitat - The location where a particular taxon of plant or animal lives and its surroundings (both living and nonliving) and includes the presence of a group of particular environmental conditions surrounding an organism including air, water, soil, mineral elements, moisture, temperature, and topography. Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) - A plan which outlines ways of maintaining, mhancing, and protecting a given habitat type needed to protect species. The plan usually includes measures to minimize impacts, and might include provisions for permanently protecting land, restoring habitat, and relocating plants or animals to another area. An HCP is required before an incidental take permit may be issued. Harm - An act which actually kills or injures wildlife. Such acts may include significant habitat modification or degradation when it actually kills or injures wildlife by significanty impairing essential behavioral patterns including breeding, feeding, or sheltering. Historic range - Those geographic areas the species was known or believed to occupy in the past. Implementation schedule - An outline of actions, with responsible parties, estimated costs and timeframes, for meeting the recovery objectives described in the species recovery plan. Incidental take - Take that results from, but is not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity. Incidental take permit - A permit issued under Section 10 of the Federal Endangered Species Act to private parties undertaking otherwise lawful projects that might result in the take of an endangered or threatened species. Application for an incidental take permit is subject to certain requirements, including preparation by the permit applicant of a conservation plan, generally known as a "Habitat Conservation Plan" or "HCP." Incidental take statement - A term referring to that part of a biological opinion that exempts incidental take of a listed species from the Section 9 prohibitions. Informal consultation - Informal consultation precedes formal consultation and includes any form of communication between the Federal action agency, applicant, or designated non Federal representative and the Service to determine if listed species may occur in the action area and what the effects of the action may be to such species. This phase is often used to develop project modifications or alternatives to avoid adverse effects to listed species, which would then preclude the need for formal consultation. Jeopardy biological opinion - A Service Section 7 biological opinion that determines that a Federal action is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. Lead region - The Fish and Wildlife Service Region that is responsible for coordinating all actions taken to study, propose, list, conserve, and delist a species. Lead office - The field office that has been given the responsibility for coordinating all or most actions taken to study, propose, list, conserve, and delist a species within the boundaries of Region 3. If Region 3 is the lead region for a particular species, the lead office has these responsibilities over the entire range of that species. Listed species - A species, subspecies, or distinct vertebrate population segment that has been added to the Federal lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants as they appear in sections 17.11 and 17.12 of Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR 17.11 and 17.12). Listing - The formal process through which the Service adds species to the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. Listing moratorium - Public Law 104-6 "Emergency Supplemental Appropriations and Rescissions for the Department of Defense to Preserve and Enhance Military Readiness Act of 1995" specifically prohibited ". . . making a final determination that a species is threatened or endangered or that habitat constitutes critical habitat .. . " This measure was signed into law on April 10, 1995, and prohibits the listing of species as threatened or endangered or the designation of critical habitat. Listing priority - A number from | to 12 indicating the relative urgency for listing plants or animals as threatened or endangered. The criteria used to assign this number reflect the magnitude and immediacy of threat to the species, as well as the relative distinctiveness or isolation of the genetic material they possess. This latter criterion is applied by giving a higher priority number to species which are the only remaining species in their genus, and a lower priority number to subspecies and varieties. These listing priorities are described in detail in the Federal Register on September 21, 1983, as pages 43098-43105. No jeopardy biological opinion - A Service Section 7 biological opinion that determines that a Federal action is not likely to jeopardize the existence of a listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. Participation plan - A plan describing the means to carry out one or more tasks outlined in the Implementation Schedule of a species recovery plan, minimizing the socioeconomic impacts of that action. Petition (Listing) - A formal request, with the support of adequate biological data, suggesting that a species, with the support of adequate biological data, be listed, reclassified, or delisted, or that critical habitat be revised for a listed species. See also Region 3 Guidance for Potential Petitioners Propose - The formal process of publishing a proposed Federal regulation in the Federal Register and establishing a comment period for public input into the decisionmaking process. Plants and animals must be proposed for listing as threatened or endangered species, and the resulting public comments must be analyzed, before the Service can make a final decision. Proposed species - Any species of fish, wildlife, or plant that is proposed in the Federal Register to be listed under Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act. Range - The geographic area a species is known or believed to occupy. Reauthorization - A term referring to periodic action taken by Congress to reauthorize the Endangered Species Act. By reauthorizing an act, Congress extends it and may also amend it. Reclassify - The process of changing a species! official threatened or endangered classification. Recovery - The process by which the decline of an endangered or threatened species is arrested or reversed, or threats to its survival neutralized so that its long-term survival in nature can be ensured. Recovery outline - The first Service recovery document provided for a listed species. While very brief, the document serves to direct recovery efforts pending the completion of the species’ recovery plan. Recovery permit - Permits issued under Section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Federal Endangered Species Act for scientific research and other activities benefitting the recovery of Federally listed species. Recovery plan - A document drafted by the Service or other knowledgeable individual or group, that serves as a guide for activities to be undertaken by Federal, State, or private entities in helping to recover and conserve endangered or threatened species. Recovery priority - A number, ranging from a high of 1C to a low of 18, whereby priorities to listed species and recovery tasks are assigned. The criteria on which the recovery priority number is based are degree of threat, recovery potential, taxonomic distinctiveness, and presence of an actual or imminent conflict between the species and development activities. Region 3 - The geographic unit of the Service that is composed of Illinois, Indiana, lowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Scientific name - A formal, Latinized name applied to a taxonomic group of animals or plants. A species’ scientific name is a two-part combination consisting of the name of the genus, followed by a species name. For example, the scientific name of gray bat is Myotis grisescens. If a species has been further divided into subspecies, a third part is added to the scientific name. The Ozark big-eared bat is Plecotus townsendii ingens. "Ingens" distinguishes the Ozark subspecies from other subspecies of the bigeared bat. Scientific take permit - A type of recovery permit authorized under Section 10 allowing for research pertaining to species recovery such as taking blood samples from a peregrine falcon for genetic analysis, or conducting surveys of freshwater mussel beds to determine species status and distribution. Section 4 - The section of the Endangered Species Act that deals with listing and recovery of species, and designation of critical habitat. Section 4(d) rule - A special regulation developed by the Service under authority of Section 4(d) modifying the normal protective regulations for a particular threatened species when it is determined that such a rule is necessary and advisable to provide for the conservation of that species. Section 6 - The section of the Endangered Species Act that authorizes the Service to provide financial assistance to States through cooperative agreements supporting the conservation of endangered and threatened species. Section 7 - The section of the Endangered Species Act that requires all Federal agencies, in "consultation" with the Service, to insure that their actions are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or result in destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. Section 9 - The section of the Endangered Species Act that deals with prohibited actions, including the import and export, take, possession of illegally taken species, transport, or sale of endangered or threatened species. Section 10 - The section of the Endangered Species Act that lays out the guidelines under which a permit may be issued to authorize activities prohibited by Section 9, such as take of endangered or threatened species. Species - From Section 3(15) of the Federal Endangered Species Act: "The term 'species' includes 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." A population of individuals that are more or less alike, and that are able to breed and produce fertile offspring under natural conditions. 10 Species of Concern - "Species of concern" is an informal term that refers to those species which Region 3 believes might be in need of concentrated conservation actions. Such conservation actions vary depending on the health of the populations and degree and types of threats. At one extreme, there may only need to be periodic monitoring of populations and threats to the species and its habitat. At the other extreme, a species may need to be listed as a Federal threatened or endangered species. Species of concern receive no legal protection and the use of the term does not necessarily mean that the species will eventually be proposed for listing as a threatened or endangered species. Take - From Section 3(18) of the Federal Endangered Species Act: "The term ‘take' means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct." Threatened - The classification provided to an animal or plant likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. ll THE CONSULTATION PROCESS IN BRIEF Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires federal agencies to ensure that their actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species. “Actions” include federal permitting or licensing of private, state, or other activities, as well as those activities that are wholly or partially funded with federal dollars. To comply with section 7, the consulting Federal action agency or its designated non-federal representative must review the proposed project for potential impacts to federally protected species. Informal consultation provides an opportunity for the action agency and the Service to explore ways to modify the action to reduce or remove adverse effects to the species or critical habitat. This process typically starts with a request for listed species that may be in the action area. Based on its analysis, the Federal agency makes one of three determinations of effect for listed species: “No effect” is the appropriate conclusion if the proposed action will not affect listed species. If a “no effect” determination is made, the Federal agency is not obligated to contact the Service for concurrence, and informal consultation ends. “Is not likely to adversely affect” is the appropriate conclusion when effects to listed species are expected to be discountable, insignificant, or completely beneficial. If a “not likely to adversely affect” determination is made, the Federal agency must contact the Service for written concurrence. “Is likely to adversely affect” is the appropriate conclusion if any adverse effect to an individual of a listed species may occur as a direct or indirect result of the proposed action or its interrelated or interdependent actions. Adverse effects may result in take, which means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect an individual of a listed entity. If a determination of “is likely to adversely affect” is made, the Federal agency must initiate formal consultation with the Service. Formal consultation is a process in which the Service assesses the action’s potential to jeopardize the listed species, to result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat, or to result in incidental take ofa listed species. Formal consultation concludes when the Service issues a biological opinion. For the purposes of section 7, “action area” means all areas to be affected directly or indirectly by the proposed action, not merely the immediate area involved in the action (i.e. project footprint). Informal consultation concludes when a determination of “no effect” is made, when the Service concurs with a “not likely to adversely affect” determination, or when the action agency initiates formal consultation. 12 THE STEPWISE CONSULTATION PROCESS Federal agency (action agency) or its designated non-Federal representative proposes action (2) Federal agency requests species list from Service (3) Service responds within 30 days of receipt of request with list of proposed and listed threatened and endangered species (including proposed and designated critical habitat) that may occur in the action area (4) Action agency determines if there are potential impacts to species provided by Service (4a, 4b) a. Action agency determines “no affect”; informal consultation stops b. Action agency determines “may affect”; informal consultation continues (5) Action agency determines if the proposed action is “major construction” (5a, Sb) a. Proposed action is not major construction; informal consultation continues (6) b. Proposed action is “major construction”; action agency prepares a biological assessment, informal consultation continues (6) Action agency makes preliminary determination regarding whether proposed action is or is not likely to adversely affect a listed species or critical habitat and requests Service concurrence in their determination (6a, 6b, 6c) a. Action agency determines “is not likely to adversely affect listed species” and Service concurs (within 30 days); informal consultation stops b. Action agency determines “is not likely to adversely affect listed species” and Service does not concur (6bi, 6bii) i. Action agency modifies project design to minimize affects; informal consultation continues (4) ii. Action agency submits biological assessment and requests formal consultation; Service responds (within 30 days) to either initiate formal consultation or request additional information (7) c. Action agency determines “is likely to adversely affect listed species” and Service concurs i. Action agency modifies project design to minimize affects; informal consultation continues (4) ii. Action agency submits biological assessment and requests formal consultation; Service responds (within 30 days) to either initiate formal consultation or request additional information (7) If either the action agency or the Service determines that the action is likely to adversely affect then formal consultation is required and the Service writes a biological opinion. The BO has two purposes (7a, 7b) a. To determine the proposed action’s potential to “jeopardize” the listed species or result in “destruction or adverse modification” of critical habitat (7ai, 7aii) i. “Jeopardy” or “destruction or adverse modification” would not result (7b) ii. “Jeopardy” or “destruction or adverse modification” would likely result (7aiil) 1. The Service develops Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (7b) b. To determine if the proposed action will result in incidental take (harm, harassment) either directly or indirectly (7bi, 7bii) i. The proposed action will not result in incidental take (8) ii. The proposed action will result in incidental take (7biil) 1. An incidental Take Statement is included in the BO, including mandatory Reasonable and Prudent Measures and their associated Terms and Conditions, which are designed to reduce the amount and/or extent of incidental take of the proposed action. (8) Formal consultation concludes with issuance of the BO (135 day process; 90 days to evaluate and negotiate; 45 days to write). In the case of “jeopardy” and “destruction or adverse modification” BOs, the action agency may apply for an exemption. See $0 CFR Part 451 for procedures. 13 The Threatened and Endangered Species Consultation Process for Federal Agencies Service Responds With List Or Concurs With List ‘Submitted By - Action Agency (Within 30 days). List is valid for 90 days | Service Concurs (Within 30 Federal Agency * @ supplies add’l. information & YE Service Initiates Formal Consultation or Requests Service Establishes _ Additional Information Reasonable and. (within 30 days) Prudent Measures and Terms and Conditions Service Establishes Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives Service Issues Biological Opinion Within 135 days Of Receipt Of ALL Requested Information a a1 Status The Alaska breeding population is listed as threatened (Federal Register, June 11, 1997). Description Steller’s eiders are the smallest of the four eider species, averaging 43-47 centimeters long (17-18.5 inches). In the winter, spring, and early summer adult males are in breeding plumage with a black back, white shoulders, chestnut breast and belly, a white head with a greenish tuft, and small black eye patches. During the late summer and fall, males are entirely mottled dark brown. Females and juveniles are mottled dark brown year-round. Adults of both sexes have a blue patch with a white border on the upper wing, similar to a mallard. Range and Population Size Three breeding populations of Steller’s eiders are recognized, two in Arctic Russia and one in Alaska. The Russian Atlantic population breeds in western Russia and winters in the north Atlantic Ocean while the Russian Pacific population nests in eastern Russia and winters in the southern Bering Sea, including southwest Alaska. Neither Russia-breeding population is classified as endangered or threatened; only Steller’s eiders that nest in Alaska are considered threatened under the Endangered Species Act. The Alaska-breeding population historically nested in western and northern Alaska. In western Alaska, they were formerly considered locally common in portions of the Yukon- Kuskokwim Delta and were recorded nesting on Saint Lawrence Island, the Seward Peninsula, the Alaska Peninsula, and Aleutian Islands. Today, however, they are extremely scarce on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta and have not been found breeding elsewhere in western Alaska for several decades. The species’ current breeding range in Alaska is primarily confined to the Arctic Coastal Plain between Wainwright and Prudhoe Bay, with a notable concentration near Barrow. After nesting, Alaska’s Steller’s eiders move into the nearshore marine waters of southwest Alaska U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Threatened and Endangered Species Steller’s Eider (Polysticta stelleri) Other names: Iginikkauktuk (Inupiaq) Anarnissaguq (Yup’ik) where they mix with the much more numerous Russian Pacific population. Adults undergo a flightless molt in autumn; most molt in the protected bays and lagoons on the north side of the Alaska Peninsula, most notably Izembek and Nelson lagoons. Although some remain in molting areas throughout winter, others disperse into the coastal waters of the eastern Aleutian Islands, south side of the Alaska Peninsula, Kodiak Archipelago, and southern Cook Inlet. During spring migration, Steller’s eiders concentrate in Kuskokwim and Bristol bays to await the retreat of sea ice and opening of overwater migratory routes. Population sizes are only imprecisely known. The Russian Atlantic population is believed to contain 30 to 50,000 individuals, and the Russian Pacific population likely numbers 100 to 50,000. The threatened Alaska-breeding population is thought to include hundreds or low thousands on the Arctic Coastal Plain, and possibly tens or hundreds on the Yukon- Kuskokwim Delta. Habitat and Habits Steller’s eiders are diving ducks that spend most of the year in shallow, near-shore marine waters. Molting and wintering flocks Named after Georg Steller, who first described the species to western science, Steller s eiders are the smallest of the four eider species. An adult female is on the left, and an adult male is on the right. Photo by Michele M. Johnson. congregate in protected lagoons and bays, as well as along rocky headlands and islets. They feed by diving and dabbling for molluscs and crustaceans in shallow water. In summer, they nest in tundra adjacent to small ponds or within drained lake basins. During the breeding season they feed on aquatic insects and plants in freshwater ponds and streams. Reasons for Current Status Causes of the decline are unknown but several potential threats have been identified. Lead poisoning, caused by eiders ingesting spent lead shot as they feed, may have affected Steller’s eiders on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. Predation by ravens, large gulls, and foxes on the breeding grounds may be increasing in areas where populations of these predators are enhanced by food and shelter provided by human activities and garbage dumps. Shipping and fishing poses the risk of oil spills and disturbance of feeding flocks in marine waters. Other possible threats include marine contaminants and changes in the . Bering Sea ecosystem affecting food availability. 15 Management and Protection To protect Steller’s eiders and their breeding, molting, and wintering habitat, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service recommends the guidelines below for projects and activities within the range of Steller’s eiders. Adherence to these guidelines will help avoid the illegal take of Steller’s eiders, and reduce the potential for adverse effects to the species. If these guidelines cannot be followed, consultation with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service is required for federal actions. Under federal law, all federal agencies must consult with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service on any project they authorize, fund, or carry out that may affect Steller’s eiders or other listed species. For projects within the breeding range of Steller’s eiders: = Assess whether Steller’s eiders are likely to use the project area for nesting or brood- rearing. Contact the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Ecological Services Fairbanks Field Office for assistance. For projects conducted during the breeding season, a Service- approved survey for Steller’s eiders should be conducted in the year of construction, prior to initiation of activities. = If Steller’s eider nests are in the project area, the following activities require special permits within 200 meters (656 feet) of nest sites: Vehicle and foot traffic from May 20 through August 1, except on existing roads. Construction of permanent facilities, placement of fill, or alteration of habitat. Introduction of high noise levels from May 20 through August 1, including but not limited to noise from airports, blasting, and compressor stations. m Eiders are present on breeding grounds from mid-May through mid-September, but activities any time of year may affect them through habitat modification. For guidelines and recommendations for projects in coastal marine waters around the Alaska Peninsula, the Aleutian Islands, Kodiak Island, the western Alaska coastline, lower Cook Inlet, and Nunivak Island, contact the US. Fish & Wildlife Service’s Anchorage Field Office. For North Slope projects ans northwestern coastal Alaska, contact the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service’s Fairbanks Field Office (see map below). Hunting of eiders is regulated under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. In Russia, hunting of Steller’s eiders has been closed since 1981, but subsistence harvest occurs in Siberia at an unknown level. In Alaska, reported subsistence harvest on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta has averaged 34 Steller’s eiders over the past six years. Sport hunting of Steller’s eiders in Alaska has been closed since 1991. Non- toxic shot must be used for all waterfowl hunting. Use of lead shot for waterfowl hunting has been prohibited throughout the United States since 1991. For more information on this and other threatened and endangered species, contact the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Ecological Services Field Office near you (see map below). Distribution of Steller ’s eiders in Alaska and Russia. References Jones, R.D., Jr. 1965. Returns from Steller’s eiders banded in Izembek Bay, Alaska. Wildfowl Trust Ann. Rep. 16:83-85. Kertell, K. 1991. Disappearance of the Steller’s eider from the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, Alaska. Arctic 44(3):177-87. Larned, W.W., G.R. Balogh, R.A. Stehn, and W.I. Butler, 1993. The Status of Eider Breeding Populations in Alaska, 1992. Unpublished Report, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska. 55 pp. Laubhan, M.K. and K.A. Metzner. 1999. Distribution and diurnal behavior of Steller’s eiders wintering on the Alaska Peninsula. Condor 101:694-698. Nygard, T., B. Frantzen, and S. Svazas. 1995. Steller’s eider Polysticta stelleri wintering in Europe: numbers, distribution and origin. Wildfowl 46:140-155. Petersen, M. 1981. Populations, feeding ecology and molt of Steller’s eiders. Condor 83:256-262. ———— Anchorage Fish and Wildlife Field Office Phone (907)271-2888 Lead office for Aleutian Canada goose, short-tailed albatross, Aleutian shield-fern, and sea otter. Project review for western and south-central Alaska, and the Bering Sea and western Gulf of Alaska. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 1 800/344 WILD Http://www.fws.gov January 2003 — Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field Office Phone (907)456-0203 Lead office for spectacled and Steller s eiders, American peregrine falcon, and Eskimo curlew. Project review for northern Alaska and the Beaufort and Chukchi Sea. Juneau Fish and Wildlife Field Office Phone (907)586-7240 Status review for old-growth forest species in | southeast Alaska. Project review. for southeast Alaska and eastern Gulf of Alaska. 16 a1 Yukon-Kuskokwim_ Delta Nesting Unit — Kuskokwim Shoals Unit DD exind Sea w _ . RN > Brist\ Seal Islands Unit \ Nelson Lagoon Unit \y Izembek Lagoon % 7 XN oa Unit : , — 30 0 30 60 90 Miles ati 2S PA, 40 0 40 80 Kilometers —— Steller's Eider Critical Habitat Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta St Michael Critical Habitat Native Selected (ANCSA) Native Interim Conveyed (ANCSA) Native Patented (ANCSA) Native Allotment, Selected MaKe Native Allotment, Patented Sheldon Bolts Yukon Delta NWR Alaska Maritime NWR Bureau of Land Management Military Private/Non-Native Saleh Bay ti does (es 4 r Hooper Bay® 20 0 20 40 Miles —S 0 20 40 Kilometers Steller's Eider Critical Habitat - Izembeck Lagoon tol Bay ets Nelson Lagoon Kudobin Islands UNE. iin Steller's Eider Critical Habitat - Seal Islands Steller's Eider Critical Habitat - Kuskokwim mi z — —— @* 10%» 20 Miles . ble! af a 6, \20™Kilometers ee Seg e@ Kwigillingo we — GE Critical Habitat te Status Threatened throughout its range (Federal Register, May 10, 1993). Description Spectacled eiders are large sea ducks, 52-56 centimeters long (20-22 inches). In the winter and spring, adult males are in breeding plumage with a black chest, white back, and ' pale green head with a long, sloping forehead and white spectacle-like patches around the eyes. During the late summer and fall, males are entirely mottled brown. Females and juveniles are mottled brown year-round with pale brown eye patches. Range and Population Level Historically, spectacled eiders nested along much of the coast of Alaska, from the Nushagak Peninsula in the southwest, north to Barrow, and east nearly to the Canadian border. They also nested along much of the arctic coast of Russia. Today, three primary nesting grounds remain; the central coast of the Yukon- Kuskokwim Delta, the arctic coastal plain of Alaska, and the arctic coastal plain of Russia. A few pairs nest on St. Lawrence Island as well. Their fall and winter distribution was virtually unknown until satellite telemetry led to the discovery of spectacled eiders at sea in 1995. Important late summer and fall molting areas have been identified in eastern Norton Sound and Ledyard Bay in Alaska, and in Mechigmenskiy Bay and an area offshore between the Kolyma and Indigirka River Deltas in Russia. Wintering flocks of spectacled eiders have been observed in the Bering Sea between St. Lawrence and St. Matthew islands. Between the 1970s and the 1990s, the breeding population on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta declined by over 96%, and only about 4,000 pairs nest there today. At least 40,000 pairs nest in arctic Russia. Historical data for other nesting areas are scarce. Scientists don’t know if populations ever declined in northern Alaska or Russia, although the population may be in slow decline on Alaska’s Arctic Coastal Plain, where about 3,000-4,000 pairs currently nest. Winter surveys in the Bering Sea, which include non-breeding birds, indicate a worldwide population of about 360,000 spectacled eiders. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Threatened and Endangered Species Spectacled Eider (Somateria fischeri) Habitat and Habits Spectacled eiders are diving ducks that spend most of the year in marine waters, where they probably feed on bottom-dwelling molluscs and crustaceans. Around the time of spring break-up, breeding pairs move to nesting areas on wet coastal tundra. They establish nests near shallow ponds or lakes, usually within 3 meters (10 ft) of water. During this season they feed by diving and dabbling in ponds and wetlands, eating aquatic insects, crustaceans, and vegetation. Soon after eggs are laid, males leave the nesting grounds for offshore molting areas, usually by the end of June. Females whose nests fail leave the nesting area to molt at sea by mid-August. Breeding females and their young remain on the nesting grounds until early September. Molting flocks gather in relatively shallow coastal water, usually less than 36 m (120 ft) deep. While moving between nesting and molting areas, spectacled eiders travel along the coast up to 50 km (31 mi) offshore. During the winter months of October through March, they move far offshore to waters up to 65 m (213 ft) deep, where they sometimes gather in dense flocks in openings of nearly continuous sea ice. Reasons for Current Status Causes of the decline of spectacled eiders are not well understood. Lead poisoning, caused by consumption of spent lead shot, has been documented in this species on the Yukon- Kuskokwim Delta. Subsistence hunting is As their name suggests, male spectacled eiders in breeding plumage have distinctive patches around the eye which resemble eyeglasses, or spectacles. Female spectacled eiders, like the bird on the left, are mottled brown with faint eye patches. Reprinted with permission from an original painting by Joseph Hautman. also a threat to spectacled eiders. Predation by foxes, large gulls, and ravens on the breeding grounds may be increasing in areas where populations of these predators are enhanced by the year-round food and shelter provided by human activities and garbage dumps. Complex changes in fish and invertebrate populations in the Bering Sea may be affecting food availability for spectacled eiders during the 8 to 10 month non-breeding season. Spectacled eiders may also be affected by other shifts in the Bering Sea ecosystem, by commercial fisheries, and by environmental contaminants at sea. Management and Protection To protect spectacled eiders and their breeding, molting, and wintering habitat, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service recommends the guidelines below for projects and activities within the range of spectacled eiders. Adherence to these guidelines will help avoid the illegal take of spectacled eiders, and reduce the potential for adverse effects to the species. If these guidelines cannot be followed, consultation with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service is required. Under federal law, all Federal agencies must consult with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service on any project they authorize, fund, or carry out that may affect this or other listed species. 23 For projects within the breeding range of spectacled eiders: a Assess whether spectacled eiders are likely to use the project area for nesting or brood-rearing. Contact the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service for assistance. For projects conducted during the breeding season, a Service-approved survey for spectacled eiders should be conducted in the year of construction, prior to initiation of activities. u If spectacled eider nests are in the project area, the following activities require special permits within 200 meters (656 feet) of nest sites: Vehicle and foot traffic from May 20 through August 1, except on existing roads. Construction of permanent facilities, placement of fill, or alteration of habitat. Introduction of high noise levels from May 20 through August 1, including but not limited to noise from airports, blasting, and compressor stations. m Eiders are present on breeding grounds from mid-May through mid-September, but activities any time of year may affect them through habitat modification. For guidelines and recommendations for projects in coastal marine waters around the Alaska Peninsula, the Aleutian Islands, Kodiak Island, the western Alaska coastline, lower Cook Inlet, and Nunivak Island, contact the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service’s Anchorage Field Office. For North Slope projects and northwestern coastal Alaska, contact the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service’s Fairbanks Field Office (see map below). Hunting of eiders is regulated under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Sport and subsistence hunting of spectacled eiders has been closed in Alaska since 1991. However, reported subsistence harvest on the Yukon- Kuskokwim Delta has averaged 272 spectacled eiders per year over ten years. Non-toxic shot must be used for all waterfowl hunting. Use of lead shot for waterfowl hunting has been prohibited throughout the United States since 1991. For more information on this and other threatened and endangered species, contact the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Ecological Services Field Office near you (see map below). Distribution of spectacled eiders. References Dau, C.P. 1974. Nesting Biology of the Spectacled Eider Somateria fischeri (Brandt) on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, Alaska. M.S. Thesis, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska. Flint, P.L., and J.B. Grand. 1997. Survival of spectacled eider adult females and ducklings during brood rearing. Journal of Wildlife Management 61(1):217-221. Franson, J.C., M.R. Petersen, C.U. Meteyer, and MLR. Smith. 1995. Lead poisoning of spectacled eiders (Somateria fischeri) and of a common eider (Somateria mollissima) in Alaska. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 3 1:268-271. Grand, J.B., and PLL. Flint. 1997. Productivity of nesting spectacled eiders on the lower Kashunuk River, Alaska. Condor 99:926-932. Petersen, M.R., D. Douglas, and B. Larned. In prep. At sea distribution and abundance of spectacled eiders. Petersen, M.R., D. Douglas, and D.M. Mulcahy. 1995. Use of implanted satellite transmitters to locate spectacled eiders at-sea. Condor 97:276- 278. Stehn, R.A., C.P. Dau, B. Conant, and WI. Butler, Jr. 1993. Decline of spectacled eiders nesting in western Alaska. Arctic 46:264-277. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. Spectacled Eider Recovery Plan. Anchorage, Alaska. 157 pp. —— Anchorage Fish and Wildlife Field Office Phone (907)271-2888 Lead office for Aleutian Canada goose, short-tailed albatross, Aleutian shield-fern, and sea otter. Project review for western and south-central Alaska, and the Bering Sea and western Gulf of Alaska. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 1 800/344 WILD Http://www. fws.gov January 2003 Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field Office Phone (907)456-0203 Lead office for spectacled and Steller s eiders, ‘American peregrine falcon, and Eskimo curlew. Project review for northern Alaska and the Beaufort and Chukchi Sea. Juneau Fish and Wildlife Field Office Phone (907)586-7240 Status review for old-growth forest species in southeast Alaska. Project review for southeast Alaska and eastern Gulf of Alaska. 24° Status Spectacled eiders (Somateria fischeri) were isted as threatened in 1993 under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (Federal Register, May 10, 1993). The eider was listed because the breeding population on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, Alaska, declined 96% between the 1970's and the early 1990's, Since spectacled eiders spend most of their lives at sea, minimizing harm in marine habitats is crucial to the species survival and recovery. At-Sea Distribution and Ecology Until recently, little was known about the habits of spectacled eiders outside their summer breeding areas. Researchers are using satellite telemetry and aerial surveys to find the birds at sea, from coastal fall molting areas to offshore wintering areas in the central Bering Sea. In the late summer and fall after breeding in northern and western Alaska and arctic Russia, spectacled eiders gather in flocks in coastal waters to molt. During molt, the birds become flightless as their old, worn feathers are replaced with new ones. Four principle molting areas have been identified. Two molting areas on the coast of Alaska are eastern Norton Sound and Ledyard Bay, between Cape Lisburne and Point Lay. On the coast of Russia, eiders molt in Mechigmenskiy Bay on the Chukotka Peninsula and an area between the Indigirka and Kolyma river deltas. Molting areas are typically less than 36 meters deep. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Threatened and Endangered Species Protecting Spectacled Eiders At Sea Eastern Norton Sound appears to be the primary molting area for females nesting on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta in Alaska, while females nesting in northern Alaska migrate to either Ledyard Bay or Mechigmenskiy Bay to molt. Males from all three breeding areas have been found molting in Ledyard Bay, Mechigmenskiy Bay, and in the area between the Indigirka and Kolyma river deltas. Males reach molting areas first, beginning in late June, and may remain through mid- October. Females that did not breed or whose breeding efforts failed begin arriving in late July. Successfully breeding females reach molting areas in late August or September, and may remain through October. Consequently, flightless eiders are present in molting areas from July to October. Wintering flocks of spectacled eiders, such as this flock of over 80,000 birds, gather in the pack ice southwest of St. Lawrence Island. USFWS photo by Bill Larned. By late October, spectacled eiders follow coastal and offshore migration corridors through the Bering and Chukchi seas to offshore wintering areas. The primary wintering area is in the central Bering Sea south and southwest of St. Lawrence Island. Additional wintering areas have not yet been identified. In early winter, spectacled eiders have been seen within 50 kilometers of St. Lawrence Island, moving farther offshore as winter progresses. Their late winter location appears to move with annual ice coverage as the birds search for open water. When ice cover is extensive, dense flocks of many thousands of eiders gather in small ice-free openings. While at sea, spectacled eiders appear to be primarily bottom feeders, eating molluscs While in breeding plumage (October to June), adult male spectacled eiders have a black chest, white back, pale green head with a long sloping forehead, and white spectacle-like patches around the eyes. From July to September, males are entirely mottled brown, Females and juveniles are mottled brown year-round with pale brown eye patches. One of the largest sea ducks, spectacled eiders average 52-56 centimeters (20- 22 inches) in length. Illustration by Joseph Hautman. 25 and crustaceans at depths of up to 70 meters in the wintering area. As spring approaches, food abundance is especially important as females accumulate nutrient reserves needed for egg-laying and incubation. In March and April, spectacled eiders depart wintering areas. Breeding adults migrate to coastal nesting areas, arriving by mid-May or early June. Males remain on shore for just a few weeks, returning to sea by the end of June after eggs have been laid. Breeding females and their young remain on the nesting grounds until late August or early September. Most females whose nests have failed return to sea by late July. The location of non-breeding spectacled eiders from May to October is not well known. They probably occur in shallow coastal areas throughout their range in the Bering and Chukchi Seas in scattered small flocks of less than a few hundred birds Protecting Spectacled Eiders At Sea The following measures are suggested to avoid harm to eiders in their molting and wintering areas: = Comply with the Endangered Species Act, section 7 regulations; consult with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service prior to permitting, funding, participating in, or conducting any activities at sea that may affect spectacled eiders. m Prevent oil spills. Even a small amount of oil destroys the insulating properties of feathers and can weaken or kill an eider. = When possible, use absorbent booms when transferring fuel to shore-based facilities. @ Store adequate oil and fuel clean-up equipment on-site at fuel transfer locations. = Do not discharge oily bilge water near molting areas during summer or fall. = Avoid disturbing or harvesting benthic communities in eider molting and wintering areas during any time of year. > Distribution of spectacled eiders. Molting areas (green) are used July through October. Wintering areas (yellow) are used October through April. The full extent of molting and wintering areas is not yet known, and may extend beyond the boundaries shown. References Federal Register. 1993. Final rule to list the spectacled eider as threatened. Federal Register 58(88):27474-27480. Petersen, M.R., W.W. Larned, and D.C. Douglas. 1999. At-sea distribution of spectacled eiders (Somateria fischeri): 120 year-old mystery resolved. Auk 116:1009- 1020. Petersen, M.R., J.F. Piatt, and K.A. Trust. 1998. Foods of spectacled eiders Somateria fischeri in the Bering Sea, Alaska. Wildfowl 49:124-128. For more information on this and other threatened and endangered species, contact the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Ecological Services Field Office near you (see map below). US. Fish & Wildlife Service. 1996. Spectacled eider recovery plan. Anchorage, Alaska, 157 pp. Phone (907)271-2888 Lead office for Aleutian Canada goose, short-tailed albatross, Aleutian shield-fern, and sea otter. Project review for western and south-central Alaska, and the Bering Sea and western Gulf of Alaska. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 4 800/344 WILD Http:/\www.fws.gov January 2003 Anchorage Fish and Wildlife Field Office — Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field Office Phone (907)456-0203 | Lead office for spectacled and Steller's eiders, | ‘American peregrine falcon, and Eskimo curlew. | Project review for northern Alaska and the Beaufort and Chukchi Sea. uneau — Juneau Fish and Wildlife Field Office | Phone (907)586-7240 | Status review for old-growth forest species in | southeast Alaska. Project review for southeast Alaska and eastern Gulf of Alaska. 26 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Division of Environmental Contaminants Environmental Contaminants Survey of Spectacled Eiders from St Lawrence Island, Alaska Spectacled eiders were listed as threatened in 1993 under the Endangered Species Act (Federal Register, May 10, 1993). Purpose of Study Exposure of spectacled eiders to environmental contaminants may be contributing to the decline of this species. Therefore, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in coordination with the people of Gambell, Alaska conducted a contaminants survey of male spectacled eiders. Birds migrating from their wintering grounds in the Bering Sea to their nesting areas in Alaska and arctic Russia were the subject of the survey. Why Are We Concerned About Contaminants in Spectacled Eiders? 1. Past studies have found higher than expected levels of trace elements and metals in several spectacled eiders found dead on their nesting grounds in the Yukon- Kuskokwim Delta. Many of these birds died of lead poisoning from eating spent shot left in wetland soils. 4. Finally, atmospheric and marine transport may be exposing spectacled eiders to industrial and agricultural chemicals while they are at sea. 2. Higher than expected levels of some of these elements have also been found in other Alaskan waterfowl, such as white-winged scoters and emperor geese. 3. Water birds in arctic latitudes may be exposed to global contamination from the releases of radioactive compounds (for example, from the explosion of the nuclear power plant at Chernobyl, Russia). Study site: spectacled eiders winter in the Bering Sea near St Lawrence Island. This study would not have been possible without the assistance of Gambell residents. Male spectacled eiders wintering in the Bering Sea were examined for the presence and effects of contaminants. Photo by Greg Balogh, USFWS Partnership With a Remote Alaskan Community The Service appreciates the assistance of the IRA Traditional Council, the Sivuqaq Corporation, and local guides and boat captains from the village of Gambell, Alaska. The guides and boat captains worked with Service biologists to collect tissues from 20 migrating male spectacled eiders. What Did We Measure? Tissues were analyzed for presence and amount of: = 19 trace elements and metals (such as lead and cadmium); = 22 chlorinated organic and pesticide compounds (such as PCBs and DDT); and = Radioactive cesium. Additionally, tissues were examined for effects of contaminants. 27 Results: Chemical Analysis Only a few samples had measurable amounts of chlorinated organic compounds. Two birds had low concentrations of a DDT metabolite. We were unable to detect PCBs in any of the eiders. Copper, cadmium and selenium concentrations were higher than normal in spectacled eider tissues when compared to other marine birds. Radioactive cesium in breast muscle was not detected in any of the eiders. Results: Contaminant Effects Microscopic examination of livers, kidneys and testes did not reveal any tissue damaged by contaminant exposure. A minor parasitic infection caused inflammation in the livers and kidneys of a few birds. Metallothionein (MT) is a protein that helps protect animals from toxic effects of exposure to heavy metals, such as cadmium. MT concentrations in spectacled eiders were lower than we expected. People of the St Lawrence Island village of Gambell provided snowmobile, boat, and guiding assistance. Photo by Kim Trust, USFWS Discussion Although high concentrations of organic chemicals, such as PCBs, have been reported in other high- latitude animals, chlorinated organic compounds were barely measurable in spectacled eiders. However, high concentrations of some metals, including copper, cadmium and selenium, were found. Chronic exposure of wild birds to copper has not been well-studied. However, spectacled eiders in this study had higher concentrations than Barrow’s goldeneyes from southeast Alaska or snow geese that winter in Pacific waters. Spectacled eiders had high concentrations of cadmium, so we expected their concentrations of MT to be high as well. However, their MT concentrations were lower than we expected, and were much lower than in other marine birds that have been exposed to high levels of cadmium. The complete investigation is published under the following citation: Trust K.A., Rummel K.T., Schuehammer A.M., Brisbin Jr. LL., Hooper MJ. 2000. Contaminant Exposure and Biomarker Responses in Spectacled Eiders (Somateria Contamination and Toxicology 38:107-113. This could be affecting their ability to fight the toxic effects of certain metals that MT helps to eliminate. Selenium concentrations in spectacled eiders were some of the highest yet found in marine birds. Although selenium poisoning can cause reproductive failure and death in other water birds, this has not been investigated in spectacled eiders. Other metals of concern, such as lead and mercury, were not found to be unusually high in spectacled eiders in this study. Conclusion Male spectacled eiders migrating through the St. Lawrence Island area were apparently in good condition. However, high concentrations of metals and subtle biochemical changes may have long-term consequences not measured in this study. fischeri) from St. Lawrence Island, Alaska. Archives of Environmental U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 800/344 WILD Http:/www.fws.gov For more information about the Division of Environmental Contaminants Program in Southcentral Alaska, please contact Ecological Services, Anchorage Field Office at 907/271 2888 Visit the Division of Environmental Contaminants Home Page at Http:/|www.contaminants.fws.gov April 2001 28 Spectacled Eider Critical Habitat — | Yukon Kuskokwim | Delta Nesting Unit oe a | 100__0_100 _200 Miles 400 0 100200 Kilometers 2 29 Spectacled Eider Critical Habitat... = | ~ -Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta_ “ |: Satellite-taged SPEI i Spectacled Eider aerial observations 1993-1999 ! [-] Critical Habitat 30 0 30 60 90 Kilometers ee || ~e Villages : WAZ /\/ Coastline o 6 “MI Yukon Delta NWR _ Sessa ceteeee ee ee - \ | Unalakleet _ - 20 0 20 Kilometers 0 10 — 10 20 Miles Critical Habitat » Satellite-tagged SPEI » SPEI aerial observations Ocean depth in meters am -45 al -35 am -30 mmm -25 ea imam -15 /-10 a Sie 5 Spectacled Eider Critical Habitat Wintering Area 60 Miles 80 Kilometers [[) Wintering Area Depth in meters i -75 - -85 lm -65 --75 Wm -55 - -65 Wm -45 - -55 Wm -35 - -45 fi -25 --35 -15 - -25 G\GIS\Projects\Terry\At Sea\SPEl\Winter_color Spectacled Eider Critical Habitat Ledyard Bay, Alaska Critical Habitat Depth in Meters [lm -45 - -55 Wm -35 --45 Wd -25 - -35 (lim -15 - -25 -5--15 ) 0--5 60 Miles ce Status . The short-tailed albatross is listed under the Endangered Species Act as Endangered throughout its range (65 FR 46643). Description With a wingspan of over 2 meters (over 7 feet), the short-tailed albatross is the largest seabird in the North Pacific. Its long, narrow wings are adapted to soaring low over the ocean. It is best distinguished from other albatrosses by its large, bubblegum-pink bill. Young birds also have the large pink bill, but their feathers are dark chocolate brown, gradually turning white as the bird ages. Adults have an entirely white back, white or light gold head and back of neck, and black and white wings. Range and Population Level Historically, millions of short-tailed albatrosses bred in the western North Pacific on several islands south of the main islands of Japan. Only two breeding colonies remain active today: Torishima Island and Minami-kojima Island, Japan. In addition, a single nest was recently found on Yomejima Island of the Ogasawara Island group in Japan. Single nests also occasionally occur on Midway Island, HI. Short-tailed albatrosses forage widely across the temperate and subarctic North Pacific, and can be seen in the Gulf of Alaska, along the Aleutian Islands, and in the Bering Sea. The world population is currently estimated to be about 1200 birds and is increasing. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Threatened and Endangered Species Short-tailed Albatross (Phoebastria albatrus} Habitat and Habits Like many seabirds, short-tailed albatrosses are slow to reproduce and are long-lived, with some known to be over 40 years old. They begin breeding at about 7 or 8 years, and mate for life. Short-tailed albatrosses nest on sloping grassy terraces on two rugged, isolated, windswept islands in Japan. Pairs lay a single egg each year in October or November. Eggs hatch in late December through early January. Chicks remain near the nest for about 5 months, fledging in June. After breeding, short- tailed albatrosses move to feeding areas in the North Pacific. When feeding, albatrosses alight on the ocean surface and seize their prey, including squid, fish, and shrimp. The largest of three albatross species found in the North Pacific Ocean, short- tailed albatrosses are best distinguished by their large, bubblegum-pink bill with bluish tip. Adults, like the one shown here, are black and white with a light gold head. Although younger birds can be much darker, they still have the large pink bill. Photo by Hiroshi Hasegawa. Reasons for Current Status Short-tailed albatrosses have survived multiple threats to their existence. During the late 1800s and early 1900s, feather hunters clubbed to death an estimated five million of them, stopping only when the species was nearly extinct. In the 1930s, nesting habitat on the only active nesting island in Japan was damaged by volcanic eruptions, leaving fewer than 50 birds by the 1940s. Loss of nesting habitat to volcanic eruptions, severe storms, and competition with black-footed albatrosses for nesting habitat continue to be natural threats to short-tailed albatrosses today. Human-induced threats include hooking and drowning on commercial longline gear, collision with vessel rigging, entanglement in derelict fishing gear, and ingestion of plastic debris, 34 contamination from oil spills. Management and Protection The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service is working with the commercial fishing industry to minimize take of this endangered seabird. To that end, we are supplying free paired tori line (streamer line) kits to any commercial longline vessel owner/operator who requests one. In addition, we are working cooperatively with the National Marine Fisheries Service and the University of Washington Sea Grant program on ways to minimize the impacts to seabirds by commercial fisheries. Other Federal agencies permitting, authorizing, funding or conducting actions that may affect the albatross must also consult with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service prior to implementing their actions. The government of Japan provides legal protection to the short-tailed albatross as a Special National Monument and a Special Bird of Protection. The main nesting island, Torishima, is protected as a National Monument. Japan has improved the nesting habitat on Torishima by planting grass at the colony site to stabilize soils and provide cover. Efforts to establishing a second nesting area on Torishima Island continue. The second nesting island, Minami-Kojima, is currently claimed by both Japan and China. This dispute in ownership prevents scientists from studying and helping the birds that nest there. The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) prohibits commercial import or export of the short-tailed albatross or the trade of its parts across international borders. To reduce the incidental take of seabirds “~torishima Is. Short-tailed albatross distribution and sightings from 1905-1996. The birds can be Z Midway Is. in any part of their range during any months in which open water is present. by the fishing industry, including the short-tailed albatross, the National Marine Fisheries Service requires the Alaska longline fisheries to employ bird avoidance techniques such as using weighted groundlines, hanging streamer or tori lines above baited hooks, deploying baited hooks underwater, and setting gear at night. Fisherman are strongly encouraged to develop new, effective techniques to avoid catching birds. You can help in documenting the habits of this species. Please report any sightings of short-tailed albatrosses to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Anchorage Field Office at: (907)271-2888 For more information on this and other threatened and endangered species, contact the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Ecological Services Field Office near you (see map below). References Harrison, C. 1979. The largest seabird in the North Pacific breeds on one small island south of Japan. Oceans 12:24-26. Hasegawa, H. Pers. comm. Hasegawa, H., and A.R. DeGange. 1982. The short-tailed albatross, Diomedea albatrus: Its status, distribution and natural history. American Birds 6(5):806-814. Sherburne, J. 1993. Status Report on the Short-tailed Albatross, Diomedea albatrus. Alaska Natural Heritage Program, University of Alaska Anchorage, for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska. 33 pp. USS. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1989. Biological Opinion on the Interim Incidental Take Exemption Program. Unpublished report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to National Marine Fisheries Service. 13 pp. ————_— Anchorage Fish and Wildlife Field Office Phone (907)271-2888 Lead office for Aleutian Canada goose, short-tailed albatross, Aleutian shield-fern, and sea otter. Project review for western and south-central Alaska, and the Bering Sea and western Gulf of Alaska. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 1 800/344 WILD Http://www.fws.gov January 2003 = Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field Office Phone (907)456-0203 Lead office for spectacled and Steller’s eiders, ‘American peregrine falcon, and Eskimo curlew. Project review for northern Alaska and the Beaufort and Chukchi Sea. po Juneau Fish and Wildlife Field Office | Phone (907)586-7240 Status review for old-growth forest species in | southeast Alaska. Project review Sor southeast Alaska and eastern Gulf of Alaska. 35 TSM ETM NCard Ca Threatened and Endangered Species Cooperative Efforts to Conserve Albatrosses and Other Seabirds in Alaska Two endangered short- tailed albatross perform a mating dance on Torishima Island in Commercial longliners in Alaska accidentally hook thousands of seabirds per year. A collaborative effort to solve this problem has hooked together some unlikely partners. In the past few years, commercial fishing organizations have joined forces with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), independent fishermen, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), commercial fishing gear manufacturers, and the University of Washington Sea Grant Program (UW Sea Grant). Together, we are forging ahead on several fronts to minimize seabird bycatch, not only in Alaska, but around the world. Shortly after the first Alaskan longline vessel turned up a dead endangered short-tailed albatross on one of its i az Sins ams A prototype tori line lies on deck, ready for deployment. Deterrent devices like this may help troubled seabird populations if they are embraced by the industry. hooks, the entire Alaska commercial longline fishing industry spearheaded efforts to minimize take of this, and other seabird species. At their urging, NMEFS passed laws requiring the use of seabird avoidance measures while fishing Alaskan waters. With the passage of these laws, the need to know the relative effectiveness of the different deterrent devices became instantly acute. In response, NMFS and the Service ffunded a 2-year study conducted by the University of Washington Sea Grant program to evaluatethe effectiveness of different seabird avoidance measures. The UW Sea Grant study is the most extensive and statistically rigorous seabird avoidance measure study of its kind. All commercial fisheries worldwide will be able to draw on the results of this research. The Food and Agriculture Organization has identified seabird bycatch as a global problem, has issued a report on the subject, and is pressuring governments around the world to solve it. If foreign governments endorse or enforce seabird avoidance measures based on this work, we are likely to see decreases in the loss of seabirds due to commercial fisheries world-wide. Japan. About 900 of the remaining 1300 of these birds nest on this eroding slope of an active volcano. Government and Industry are working together to bring this bird back from the brink of extinction. UW Sea Grant's initial results suggest that paired tori lines are an effective and inexpensive way to minimize seabird bycatch. Consequently, the Service, through its Endangered Species Landowner Incentive Program, granted over $850,000 to the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission; the goal being paired tori lines effectively deployed on every boat in the Alaskan longline fleet. In addition, we are cost- sharing the installation of davits (heavy- duty tori line-deployment devices) on the larger freezer longline vessels. The Service believes the partnership that has been formed with the commercial fishing industry, agencies, and scientists to conserve the endangered short-tailed albatross on the remote and treacherous high seas of Alaska makes good conservation sense. To learn more about this effort or to find out how you can obtain tori lines under this program, please contact Ann Rappoport or Greg Balogh of the Ecological Services Anchorage Field Office, 605 West 4th Avenue, Room G-61, Anchorage, Alaska 99501 or call (907) 271-2888. j 36 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Threatened and Endangered Species Aleutian shield-fern (Polystichum aleuticum) Status Endangered (Federal Register, February 17, 1988). Description The Aleutian shield-fern is a small, tufted fern which grows to about 15 centimeters (6 inches) tall. Its stems are chestnut brown at the base, and arise from a stout underground rhizome. Its fronds (leaves) are dark green and have small pinnae (leaflets) with toothed edges. Small, straw-colored scales are found on the stem and underside of the leaflets, but may be less evident late in the season. The Aleutian shield-fern may be confused with more common ferns occurring within its range: Polystichum lonchitis is much taller, up to 60 centimeters (24 inches), more robust, has thicker, leathery, evergreen leaves, and very spiny leaflets. Cystopteris fragilis has more strongly dissected leaflets and lacks scales. The closest living relatives of the Aleutian shield-fern outside of Alaska occur in Asia. Range, Habitat and Population Level The Aleutian shield-fern is now known to exist only on Adak Island in the central Aleutian Islands. Four populations totaling approximately 143 “clumps” are located on a single mountain on east-facing slopes having steep cliffs, rock outcrops, and vegetated gullies and ledges. The fern grows in moderately protected, moist spots in crevices, beneath overhangs, and at the edges of vegetation mats along rock walls. Historically, the Aleutian shield- fern also occurred on Atka Island but has not been seen there since it was reported in 1932. Rarely reaching more than 5 inches in height, the Aleutian shield-fern grows only on Adak Island. USFWS photo. Other more common ferns are ofien mistaken for Aleutian shield-ferns. Polystichum lonchitis (far left) is taller and more robust, with thicker, leathery, evergreen leaves, and very spiny leaflets. Cystopteris fragilis (lower right) has more strongly dissected leaflets. Drawings not to scale. From original artwork by Ann- Lillian Schell and Dominique Collet. 37 Reasons for Current Status The Aleutian shield-fern may never have been very abundant. Some scientists consider it a “living fossil” leftover from the Pleistocene Epoch. It may once have been more widespread in the Aleutian Islands, but periods of glaciation probably reduced its abundance to the remnant populations existing today. Currently, the Adak populations appear to be stable, but because of their restricted range, they are subject to the threat of earth slides and other unpredictable events that could obliterate the entire species. Human disturbance at this remote location is rare, but hikers and climbers may cause accidental disturbance. Caribou were introduced to Adak Island in 1958, and may also pose a threat to the shield-fern populations. Management and Protection All known Aleutian shield-fern populations are located within a military reservation managed by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service as part of the Aleutian Islands Unit of the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge. They are protected from unauthorized plant collecting. The military base on Adak Island was recently closed, and future use of the installation is unknown. Surveys for additional shield-fern populations have been conducted on Adak, Atka, and other islands in the Aleutian chain. Research continues on the reproductive biology and genetics of the shield-fern to learn about causes of its rarity and its potential for recovery. Aleutian shield-ferns are being cultivated at nationally recognized botanical institutions to ensure that reserve populations exist should the natural populations be destroyed. References Hulten E. 1968. Flora of Alaska and Neighboring Territories. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. 1008 pp. Lipkin, R. and D.F. Murray. 1997. Alaska Rare Plant Field Guide. Alaska Natural Heritage Program, University of Alaska Anchorage, for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, and U.S. Forest Service. Talbot, S.S. and S.L. Talbot. 1995. Field Surveys for the Aleutian Shield-Fern (Polystichum aleuticum C. Chr.) on Though it may have been more widespread in prehistoric times, the Aleutian shield-fern is now found only on Adak Island. Adak Island, Aleutian Islands, Alaska - 1993. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska. 27 pp. Talbot, S.S., S.L. Talbot, and W.B. Schofield. 1995. Contribution toward an understanding of Polystichum aleuticum C. Chr. on Adak Island, Alaska. American Fern Journal 85(3):83-88. USS. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1992. Aleutian Shield Fern Recovery Plan. Anchorage, Alaska. 20 pp. For more information on this and other threatened and endangered species, contact the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Field Office near you (see map below). Anchorage Fish and Wildlife Field Office Phone (907)271-2888 Lead office for Aleutian Canada goose, short-tailed albatross, Aleutian shield-fern, and sea otter. Project review for western and south-central Alaska, and the Bering Sea and western Gulf of Alaska. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 4 800/344 WILD Http://www.fws.gov January 2003 Fairbanks Fish and Wildlife Field Office Phone (907)456-0203 Lead office for spectacled and Steller s eiders, American peregrine falcon, and Eskimo curlew. Project review for northern Alaska and the Beaufort and Chukchi Sea. Juneau Fish and Wildlife Field Office Phone (907)586-7240 Status review for old-growth forest species in southeast Alaska. Project review for southeast Alaska and eastern Gulf of Alaska. 38 QeNT OF Seana, lS De yo g “rons © Background Though sea otters (Enhydra lutris) were once hunted to the brink of extinction for their dense, luxurious fur, their populations rebounded spectacularly following protection in 1911. Of the thirteen isolated populations that remained, eleven grew and re-colonized much of their former range. Perhaps the most dramatic recovery occurred in the Aleutian archipelago; a 1,000 mile-long chain of islands located between the Bering Sea and the North Pacific Ocean. By the mid-1980s, biologists believed that perhaps half of the world’s population of sea otters existed in the Aleutians. A 1992 aerial survey indicated that while sea otters had re-colonized the six major island groups in the Aleutians, they had unexpectedly declined by almost 50% in the Rat, Delarof, and Andreanof Islands. Skiff surveys at selected islands in the mid-1990s also documented the ongoing sea otter decline. In 2000, the Service conducted another aerial survey of sea otters throughout the Aleutians. The results indicated that the population had declined by 70% in only 8 years, which prompted the Service to designate sea otters in the Aleutians as a Candidate Species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Additional aerial surveys in southwest Alaska conducted in the past year reveal that the geographic extent of the sea otter decline is even broader than previously believed. Baseline Data In order to examine sea otter population trends in southwest Alaska, we used survey results from the 1980s and 90s as a baseline for comparison with new data. In 1986, Brueggeman et al. (1988) conducted fixed-wing aerial surveys of sea otters on the north side of the Alaska Peninsula from Unimak Island to Port Heiden, and from Unimak Island to Pavlof Bay on the south side. The survey consisted of north-south strip transects extending from the shoreline to the 70 meter depth contour. In addition, they surveyed the shoreline of the Pavlof and Shumagin Islands. The shoreline of the Alaska Peninsula was also surveyed by helicopter in 1989 Sea Otter Declines in Southwest Alaska A Growing Concern from Unimak Island to Cape Douglas (DeGange et al. 1995). This survey was conducted in April and May of 1989 in advance of oil from the Exxon Valdez. As part of the same oil spill study, the Kodiak archipelago was also surveyed by helicopter. In 1994, the Service used a new aerial survey method to estimate the sea otter population around Kodiak Island. This technique, developed by the USGS/BRD Alaska Science Center, uses strip transects to sample areas of high and low density sea otter habitat (Bodkin and Udevitz 1995). Table 1. Southwest Alaska Sea Otter Survey Results, 1986 - 2001. Location Year Aleutian Islands 1992 2000 North Alaska Peninsula 1986 2000 South Alaska Peninsula 1986 2001 Kodiak Archipelago 1989 1994 2001 Count or Estimate Decline 8,044 2,442 10% 9,061 - 13,091 5,756 36 - 56% 15,346 - 17,835 1,344 91 - 92% 18, 526 9,817 5,893 56% 39 Regional Surveys In May 2000 and April 2001 the Service repeated the aerial surveys of Brueggeman et al. (1988) using the same study design, similar aircraft, and experienced observers. The results of these surveys indicate sea otters have declined along both the north and south sides of the Alaska Peninsula. In April and May 2001 the Service also flew the entire shoreline of the Alaska Peninsula from Unimak Island to Cape Douglas for comparison with the 1989 helicopter survey. The results corroborate the decline along the western end of the Peninsula, but also indicate that populations have not declined along the eastern end from Castle Cape to Cape Douglas. In June 2001 we repeated the 1994 aerial survey of the Kodiak archipelago using the same study design, aircraft, pilot, and observer as before, and found that sea otters had declined by 40% over the past 7 years and by 56% since 1989. Population Status —— Decreasing a — Stable or Increasing — Increasing Southcentral ¥ Stock 2 : Alseka Kodiak Southeast * Southwest Peninsula = = Archipelago Stock . Stock ae | Tt. Aleutian Islands on © South 0 had mR ee Alaska Peninsula Stock Structure Under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Service is required to prepare stock assessments to report on population status and trend, estimate annual human-caused mortality, and describe commercial fishery interactions with marine mammals. Gorbics and Bodkin (2001) identified three stocks of sea otters in Alaska: southwest, southeast, and southcentral. The results of recent aerial surveys clearly indicate that the southwest stock has declined dramatically in the past 10-15 years. The best available scientific information suggests that the southeast stock, which was translocated to that region in the mid-1960s, continues to grow in numbers and expand in range. The southcentral stock, which includes Prince William Sound, has been extensively surveyed over the past decade and is believed to be either stable or increasing in numbers. Using the most recent survey results and correcting for otters not aetected Dy ODServers, Lule Currey best estimate of the Alaska sea otter population size is 74,143 with a 957% confidence interval of + 15,789. Management Actions The dramatic sea otter population decline in southwest Alaska is cause for concern. The Alaska Region has requested funding in Fiscal Year 2002 to prepare a proposed rule to list sea otters in southwest Alaska as threatened or endangered under the ESA. The Service is working with partners to evaluate the impacts of human activity and development on the sea otter, and hopefully prevent further stress on the population. Additional resources will be needed to identify what actions can be taken to address the decline, and to better investigate the cause, which is not definitively known. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 1 800/344 WILD http://www.fws.gov November 2001 For list of references and more information please contact: Douglas Burn 907/786 3807 Douglas_Burn@fws.gov US. Fish & Wildlife Service Marine Mammals Management Office 1011 East Tudor Road Anchorage, AK $9503 Visit the Marine Mammals home page: http://)www.17.fws.gov/mmm/index.html 40 The Story So Far Sea otters are disappearing from southwest Alaska. These populations were among the first to recover from the disastrous effects of 170 years of fur hunting. Less than 20 years ago, biologists believed that more than 80 percent of the world’s sea otters could be found in this area, which ranges from Attu in the western Aleutian Islands to the southwest corner of Cook Inlet. Results of an April 2000 aerial survey of the Aleutians revealed that the population had declined by 70% since 1992; the Service responded by designating sea otters in the Aleutian Islands as a candidate species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) later that year. This recognition focused attention on the declining sea otter population and prompted the Service to conduct additional surveys in southwest Alaska. The results of those later surveys indicate that sea otter populations have plummeted throughout most of southwest Alaska during the past 10-15 years (see: Sea Otter Declines in Southwest Alaska; A Growing Concern, November 2001). Sea Otter Workshop The Service hosted a sea otter workshop on April 3-4, 2002. Experts from diverse fields participated and shared information, ideas and opinions about the possible cause of the decline and potential threats to recovery of the population. Topics included: sea otter reproduction, survivorship, disease, contaminants, starvation, predation, human harvest, and interactions with commercial fisheries. They also discussed strategies for future surveys to continue monitoring population RS TS ce lhe Conserving Sea Otters in Southwest Alaska Accepting the Challenge trends. A summary report from the workshop is currently in preparation, and will be available soon. The Endangered Species Act By designating sea otters in the Aleutian Islands as a candidate species under the ESA, the Service affirmed that the species is in trouble and should be considered for listing as a threatened or endangered species. The Service is currently evaluating all available information on the sea otter decline to determine if listing under the ESA is warranted, and anticipates making a proposal in late 2002. This decision will be published in the Federal Register, and there will be a 60-day public comment period for interested parties to provide us with their input. If the Service decides that sea otters in southwest Alaska should be listed under the ESA, several things would happen. A Recovery Team would be formed to develop a plan that would identify steps to bring the sea otter population back to a healthy level. Additional resources would become available to investigate the decline and monitor the population. Activities that are permitted, funded, or carried out by Federal agencies would be reviewed to insure that they would not jeopardize recovery of the sea otter population. The Service anticipates that the overall impact of these measures on human activities throughout southwest Alaska would be minimal. The ultimate goal of these actions would be to insure the recovery of sea otters in southwest Alaska. Sea otters are considered a keystone species in the nearshore marine environment, a healthy sea otter population is vital to the health of the ecosystem as a whole. US. Fish & Wildlife Service 1 800/344 WILD http://www.fws.gov June 2002 For more information please contact: Douglas Burn 907/786 3807 Douglas_Burn@fws.gov USS. Fish & Wildlife Service Marine Mammals Management Office 1011 East Tudor Road Anchorage, AK 99503 Visit the Marine Mammals home page: http://www.r7.fws.gov/mmm/index.html 41