Notice2026-09665
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Notice of 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List Gulf of Alaska Chinook Salmon as Threatened or Endangered Under the Endangered Species Act
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
May 14, 2026
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Abstract
We, NMFS, announce a 12-month finding on a petition to list one or more Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESUs) of Gulf of Alaska (GOA) Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). In response to the petition submitted by Wild Fish Conservancy, the Status Review Team (SRT) completed a review of the status of GOA Chinook salmon and defined three ESUs for GOA Chinook salmon (Southeast, Central, and Northwest GOA). Based on the best scientific and commercial data available, including the Status Review Report written by the SRT, we conclude that the three ESUs of GOA Chinook salmon are not currently in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of their ranges nor likely to become so within the foreseeable future. Therefore, we find that listing any of the ESUs of GOA Chinook salmon under the ESA is not warranted at this time.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 93 (Thursday, May 14, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 93 (Thursday, May 14, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27271-27283]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-09665]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[Docket No. 260512-0129; RTID 0648-XR135]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Notice of 12-Month
Finding on a Petition to List Gulf of Alaska Chinook Salmon as
Threatened or Endangered Under the Endangered Species Act
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of 12-month petition finding.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, NMFS, announce a 12-month finding on a petition to list
one or more Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESUs) of Gulf of Alaska
(GOA) Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) as threatened or
endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). In response to the
petition submitted by Wild Fish Conservancy, the Status Review Team
(SRT) completed a review of the status of GOA Chinook salmon and
defined three ESUs for GOA Chinook salmon (Southeast, Central, and
Northwest GOA). Based on the best scientific and commercial data
available, including the Status Review Report written by the SRT, we
conclude that the three ESUs of GOA Chinook salmon are not currently in
danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of their
ranges nor likely to become so within the foreseeable future.
Therefore, we find that listing any of the ESUs of GOA Chinook salmon
under the ESA is not warranted at this time.
DATES: This finding was made available on May 14, 2026.
ADDRESSES: The petition, Status Review Report, Federal Register
notices, and the list of references can be accessed electronically
online at: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/Chinook-salmon-protected#conservation-management">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/Chinook-salmon-protected#conservation-management</a>. The peer review report is available
online at: <a href="https://www.noaa.gov/information-technology/biological-status-of-gulf-of-alaska-chinook-salmon">https://www.noaa.gov/information-technology/biological-status-of-gulf-of-alaska-chinook-salmon</a>.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anne Marie Eich, NMFS Alaska Region,
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#dfbeb1b1bab2beadb6baf1bab6bcb79fb1b0bebef1b8b0a9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="72131c1c171f13001b175c171b111a321c1d13135c151d04">[email protected]</span></a>; or Heather Austin, NMFS Office of Protected
Resources, at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8be3eeeaffe3eef9a5eafef8ffe2e5cbe5e4eaeaa5ece4fd"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="68000d091c000d1a46091d1b1c01062806070909460f071e">[email protected]</span></a>, (301) 427-8422.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On January 11, 2024, we received a petition from the Wild Fish
Conservancy to delineate and list one or more ESUs of Chinook salmon in
southern Alaska, which the petition stated ``encompasses all Chinook
populations that enter the marine environment of the Gulf of Alaska,''
as threatened or endangered under the ESA, and to designate critical
habitat concurrently with the listing. The petition indicated that this
``includes all populations on the southern side of the Aleutian
Peninsula, Cook Inlet, and the coast of Alaska south of Cook Inlet to
the southern end of the Alaska/British Columbia border,'' hereafter
referred to as GOA Chinook salmon. The petition asserted that GOA
Chinook salmon are threatened by all of the ESA section 4(a)(1)
factors: (A) the present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of habitat or range; (B) overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (C) disease or
predation; (D) the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms to
address identified threats; and (E) other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(1), 50 CFR
424.11(c)). The petition is available online (see ADDRESSES).
On May 24, 2024, NMFS published a 90-day finding that the petition,
viewed in the context of information readily available in our files,
presented substantial scientific and commercial information indicating
the petitioned action may be warranted (89 FR 45815). NMFS also
announced the initiation of a status review of GOA Chinook salmon, as
required by section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA, and opened a 60-day comment
period to solicit pertinent information to inform the status review. In
response to public requests, NMFS extended the comment period an
additional 45 days (89 FR 53936, June 28, 2024). We received
information from the public in response to the 90-day finding.
Additionally, information gathered from Tribal participants during
Tribal Consultations and Subsistence Regional Advisory Council meetings
informed our analyses. All relevant information was incorporated into
the Status Review Report (GOA Chinook SRT 2026; available
electronically (see ADDRESSES)) and this 12-month finding.
Listing Determinations Under the ESA
NMFS is responsible for determining whether a species under our
jurisdiction meets the definition of threatened or endangered under the
ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). To make this determination, we first
consider whether a group of organisms constitutes a species under
section 3 of the ESA, then whether the status of the species qualifies
it for listing as either threatened or endangered. Section 3 of the ESA
defines species to include ``any subspecies of fish or wildlife or
plants, and any distinct population segment of any species of
vertebrate fish or wildlife which interbreeds when mature'' (16 U.S.C.
1532(16)). In 1991, we issued the Policy on Applying the Definition of
Species Under the ESA to Pacific Salmon (ESU Policy; 56 FR 58612,
November 20, 1991). Under the ESU Policy, a Pacific salmon population
is a distinct population segment (DPS), and hence a species under the
ESA, if it represents an evolutionarily significant unit (ESU) of the
biological species. Under this policy, a Pacific salmon population unit
must satisfy two criteria to be considered an ESU: (1) it must be
substantially reproductively isolated from other conspecific population
units, and (2) it must represent an important component in the
evolutionary legacy of the species. The first criterion, reproductive
isolation, need not be
[[Page 27272]]
absolute, but must be strong enough to permit evolutionarily important
differences to accrue in different population units. A population would
meet the second criterion if it contributes substantially to the
ecological and genetic diversity of the species as a whole. The ESU
Policy is used exclusively for evaluating whether a population unit of
Pacific salmon qualifies as a DPS under the ESA. A joint NMFS-U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS; jointly, the Services) policy clarifies
the Services' interpretation of the phrase ``distinct population
segment'' for the purposes of listing, delisting, and reclassifying a
species under the ESA (DPS Policy; 61 FR 4722, February 7, 1996). In
announcing this policy, the Services indicated that the ESU Policy was
consistent with the DPS Policy and that NMFS would continue to use the
ESU Policy for Pacific salmon.
Section 3 of the ESA defines an endangered species as ``any species
which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range'' and a threatened species as one ``which is
likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range'' (16 U.S.C.
1532(6), (20)). Thus, we interpret an endangered species to be one that
is presently in danger of extinction. A threatened species is not
presently in danger of extinction but is likely to become so within the
foreseeable future.
When we consider whether a species qualifies as threatened under
the ESA, we must consider the meaning of the term, foreseeable future.
Our implementing regulations describe the foreseeable future as
extending into the future as far as we can make reasonably reliable
predictions about the threats to the species and the species' responses
to those threats (50 CFR 424.11(d)). The regulations instruct us to
describe the foreseeable future on a case-by-case basis, using the best
available data and taking into account considerations such as the
species' life history characteristics, threat-projection timeframes,
and environmental variability. The regulations also state that we need
not identify the foreseeable future in terms of a specific period of
time.
Section 4(a)(1) of the ESA requires us to determine whether any
species is endangered or threatened as a result of any one or a
combination of the following factors: (A) the present or threatened
destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (B)
overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(1)). Section
4(b)(1)(A) of the ESA requires us to make listing determinations solely
on basis of the best scientific and commercial data available after
conducting a review of the status of the species and after taking into
account efforts, if any, being made by any state or foreign nation or
political subdivision thereof to protect the species (16 U.S.C.
1533(b)(1)(A)). In evaluating the efficacy of existing domestic
conservation efforts that have yet to be implemented or demonstrate
effectiveness, we rely on the Services' joint Policy for Evaluation of
Conservation Efforts When Making Listing Decisions (PECE; 68 FR 15100,
March 28, 2003).
NMFS formed an SRT comprised of biologists from the NMFS Alaska
Fisheries Science Center and the NMFS Alaska Region to conduct the
status review of GOA Chinook salmon. NMFS charged the SRT with
reviewing and evaluating the best scientific and commercial data
available relating to GOA Chinook salmon biology to determine if any
populations or groups of populations met the criteria to qualify as
ESUs, and if so, to assess the extinction risk to each potential ESU.
Two scientists from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) and
a Tribal liaison were included in the SRT review process as advisory,
non-voting SRT members (which means they participated in the process
except for the SRT's final assessment of extinction risk). The Status
Review Report, prepared by the SRT, summarizes the best scientific and
commercial information available on GOA Chinook salmon distribution,
abundance, life history, genetics, and biology. Based on this
information, the Status Review Report: identifies ESUs and outlines
reasoning for how they were chosen; evaluates the demographic factors
(abundance, productivity, spatial structure, and diversity); identifies
threats or stressors affecting the status of the species; and describes
management, mitigation, and conservation efforts. The Status Review
Report presents the SRT's risk matrix results, which assigns an
estimate of risk caused by each demographic factor and threat/stressor
to each stock and assigns overall risk for each ESU, incorporating the
extinction risk faced now and in the foreseeable future. The SRT then
evaluated each ESU's overall extinction risk (high, moderate, or low)
using a qualitative risk assessment framework that incorporates all
demographic factors and threats/stressors, acting together, throughout
the range of the ESU. The SRT then conducted a similar analysis for the
significant portion of its range for each ESU. The Status Review Report
presents the SRT's professional scientific judgement on the extinction
risk facing each of the potential ESUs but makes no recommendation as
to their listing status. The Status Review Report also incorporates
information received in response to our request for information (89 FR
45815, May 24, 2024), Tribal outreach and engagement, and comments from
four independent, external peer reviewers (see Peer Review below).
We subsequently reviewed the Status Review Report, its cited
references, and the peer reviewer comments, and concluded that the
Status Review Report, upon which this 12-month finding is based,
provides the best available scientific and commercial data on GOA
Chinook salmon. Much of the information discussed below on GOA Chinook
salmon biology, ESU structure, demographics, threats, and extinction
risks is attributable to the Status Review Report. However, in making
the 12-month finding determination, we independently applied the
statutory provisions of the ESA, including evaluation of the factors
set forth in section 4(a)(1)(A)-(E), regulations regarding listing
determinations (50 CFR part 424.11), and relevant policies identified
herein.
Life History of Chinook Salmon
Chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha) were historically distributed from
the Ventura River in California to Point Hope, Alaska in North America,
and in northeastern Asia from Hokkaido, Japan to the Anadyr River in
Russia (Healey 1991). Additionally, Chinook salmon have been reported
in the Mackenzie River area of northern Canada (McPhail and Lindsey
1970). Of the Pacific salmon, Chinook salmon exhibit arguably the most
diverse and complex life history strategies across their range. Healey
(1986) described 16 age categories (combinations of freshwater and
saltwater ages) for Chinook salmon: 7 total ages, with 3 possible
freshwater ages. As described by Gilbert (1912), stream-type or
yearling Chinook salmon reside in freshwater for a year or more
following emergence, whereas ocean-type or sub-yearling Chinook salmon
migrate to the ocean within their first year. According to the best
available data, nearly all populations of Chinook salmon in Alaska
comprise individuals from the stream-type life history (Taylor 1990;
Lewis et al., 2015). However, one
[[Page 27273]]
population (Situk River) contains primarily ocean-type individuals
(Johnson et al., 1992), and other populations (e.g., Keta River,
Blossom River) contain some proportion of ocean-type individuals
(Pahlke 2001; Fleischman et al., 2011). While there have also been some
historical observations of ocean-type individuals in the Deshka River
(Delaney 1982), more recent data (2005-2014) show no ocean-type
individuals observed based on scale data from returning adults
(Lescanec 2017).
The generalized life history of Pacific salmon involves incubation,
hatching, and emergence in freshwater; migration to the ocean; and
subsequent initiation of maturation and return to freshwater for
completion of maturation and spawning. Additionally, some young male
Chinook salmon mature in freshwater (minijacks), thereby forgoing
emigration to the ocean. Minijacks have been documented only through
hatchery work in Alaska, but have been anecdotally observed in some
wild populations in Southeast Alaska. Salmon exhibit a high degree of
variability in life history traits, which are determined by a
combination of genetic and environmental factors. Many of these traits
appear to have a substantial genetic component (Carlson and Seamons
2008), and some appear to be largely controlled by variation at a few
or single genomic regions (Barson et al., 2015; Pearse et al., 2019;
Thompson et al., 2020, Barry et al., 2024).
Several types of biological evidence were considered in evaluating
the contribution of GOA Chinook salmon to the ecological and genetic
diversity of the biological species under the ESA. Life history traits
examined for naturally spawning Chinook salmon populations included
freshwater life history, age and size at spawning, river-entry timing,
spawn timing, and ocean migration. These traits are thought to have
both a genetic and environmental basis, and similarities among
populations could indicate either a shared genetic heritage or similar
responses to shared environmental conditions.
ESU Delineations
ESUs have not been previously defined for Chinook salmon in the
GOA. Consistent with the criteria outlined in the ESU Policy, the SRT
considered neutral genetic data analyzed for spawning populations in
this region for the reproductive isolation criterion, supplemented by
inferences about barriers to migration created by environmental
differences and habitat breaks. The SRT also considered information on
ocean distribution and, to a lesser extent, information on life history
variation. Based on this information, the SRT defined the following
three ESUs (complete information regarding ESU delineation can be found
in the Status Review Report): (1) Southeast Gulf of Alaska (SEGOA:
populations from the southern border of Alaska to Cape Fairweather),
(2) Central Gulf of Alaska (CGOA: populations from Cape Fairweather
through Prince William Sound), and (3) Northwest Gulf of Alaska (NWGOA:
populations from the Kenai Peninsula through Chignik).
Southeast Gulf of Alaska ESU
The SEGOA ESU includes populations from the Chilkat River in
northern Southeast Alaska to the Keta and Blossom Rivers entering Behm
Canal in southern Southeast Alaska near the northern coastal border of
British Columbia. Chinook populations in the SEGOA ESU are part of the
eastern genetic lineage and are highly genetically diverged from the
closest populations to the north (Alsek River), which are part of the
western genetic lineage (Templin et al., 2011). Populations from the
SEGOA and the Alsek River are also separated by a large geographic
distance (350 km waterway distance). Populations at the southern end of
this ESU (Keta and Blossom Rivers) are separated from the nearest
populations to the south in Portland Inlet across the U.S. border in
British Columbia by approximately 150 km. Although some straying may
occur among Chinook salmon populations in southern Southeast Alaska and
British Columbia, these groups are largely genetically isolated.
Therefore, we find that the SEGOA ESU is substantially reproductively
isolated from other ESUs. Fish from the Taku and Stikine Rivers,
classified as outside rearing, primarily rear in the GOA and Bering
Sea, and are rarely captured in inside waters as immature fish.
Contrastingly, other stocks in SEGOA are classified as inside rearing,
and a portion of them rear in SEGOA inside waters and are caught as
immature fish in this region; some also use the GOA and Bering Sea as
rearing habitat. This ESU contains four primary genetic groups: Chilkat
River, King Salmon River, Taku and Stikine Rivers, and the short,
coastal streams in southern Southeast Alaska. We find that the SEGOA
ESU contributes substantially to the ecological and genetic diversity
of the species as a whole. Therefore, we find that the SEGOA ESU meets
the definition for an ESU as described in the ESU Policy.
Central Gulf of Alaska ESU
The CGOA ESU includes populations from the Copper, Situk, and Alsek
Rivers. Populations from the Copper River are highly genetically
differentiated from Cook Inlet populations to the north, and from
Southeast Alaska populations to the south. Copper River populations are
also isolated by major habitat breaks. To the north, populations from
the Copper River are separated from the closest populations on the
Kenai Peninsula (~500 km away) by Prince William Sound, a rugged,
mountainous region that does not contain any self-sustaining Chinook
salmon populations. To the south, Copper River populations are
separated from the Situk and Alsek Rivers by an area of rugged
coastline containing glacially influenced rivers that do not contain
any large, known populations of Chinook salmon, although there may be
some small populations in this region. The Situk and Alsek Rivers are
the only two rivers monitored for escapement by ADF&G with self-
sustaining Chinook salmon (i.e., no hatchery supplementation) in an 800
km region that spans from the Copper River to the Chilkat and Taku
Rivers in Southeast Alaska. Both of these populations appear to be
recently colonized based on genetic data, which is unsurprising given
the dynamic nature of this landscape characterized by shifting
glaciers. Therefore, we find that the CGOA ESU is substantially
reproductively isolated from other ESUs.
The Situk River is the only known population in the GOA that is
composed primarily of ocean-type individuals. The SRT determined that
grouping the Alsek River populations in the same ESU as the Copper
River populations was appropriate, given their genetic similarity and
the fact that no conspicuous life history differences exist between the
lower Copper River and Alsek River populations. Contrastingly, the
Situk River is unique both in terms of life history (ocean type) and
genetics (intermediate between many populations). However, the SRT did
not conclude that it constitutes an evolutionarily unique population
because it may have been recently recolonized from strays from many
populations, may undergo periodic extinction and recolonization events,
and/or may be a sink for strays that prevents it from evolving
independently. The SRT therefore chose to group it in the CGOA ESU,
which has the most geographically proximate populations. We find that
the CGOA ESU contributes substantially to the
[[Page 27274]]
ecological and genetic diversity of the species as a whole. Therefore,
we find that the CGOA ESU meets the definition for an ESU as described
in the ESU Policy.
Northwest Gulf of Alaska ESU
The NWGOA ESU includes populations from the Chignik River on the
South Alaska Peninsula, Kodiak Island (Ayakulik and Karluk Rivers), and
Cook Inlet (includes the Susitna drainage and populations on the Kenai
Peninsula). Populations from this ESU rear in the GOA and the eastern
Bering Sea, according to the best available information. The ESU
boundaries correspond to habitat breaks and genetic breaks. Populations
from the North Alaska Peninsula inhabit relatively low gradient coastal
tributaries that drain flat tundra areas, whereas the South Alaska
Peninsula is much more rugged and mountainous. Populations in Cook
Inlet at the other margin of the ESU are separated from populations in
the Copper River by Prince William Sound, which contains steep
mountains and glaciers that do not provide suitable habitat for self-
sustaining populations of Chinook salmon.
Although genetic differences exist among populations from the Kenai
Peninsula, Cook Inlet, and the South Alaska Peninsula, these
differences are generally smaller than those found between ESUs.
Additionally, distributional breaks in this region are generally
smaller than the break between other ESUs, with the exception of the
habitat break between Chignik and Kodiak. Furthermore, there is no
evidence that different genetic subgroupings within this ESU contain
unique life history diversity that is important to maintaining the
evolutionary legacy of the species. Therefore, splitting this ESU
further is not warranted. We find that the NWGOA ESU is substantially
reproductively isolated from other ESUs. We also find that the NWGOA
ESU contributes substantially to the ecological and genetic diversity
of the species as a whole. Together, these factors indicate that the
NWGOA is a single ESU that meets the definition for an ESU as described
in the ESU Policy.
Analysis of Demographic Factors
After identifying the three ESUs, the SRT evaluated the best
scientific and commercial data available regarding four demographic
viability factors: abundance, productivity, spatial structure, and
diversity. These factors, rooted in conservation biology, represent the
key attributes of a viable salmonid population and collectively serve
as strong indicators of extinction risk (McElhany et al., 2000). For
each ESU, the SRT evaluated the demographic factors and their trends.
The SRT summarized their conclusions for each ESU and each indicator
stock within each ESU (stocks are populations of salmon grouped
together for management purposes such as harvest accounting,
assessment, and reporting) in the risk matrix results. Indicator
stocks, for the purpose of the SRT's assessment, were those for which
escapement data were available. See Status Review Report. These results
informed our conclusions about the viability of each ESU.
For each ESU, the SRT first considered abundance. Producing an
overall estimate of total abundance for salmon ESUs is a complex
process due to their anadromous nature, multiple life stages, and
multiple stocks. Run size estimates represent the estimated number of
returning adults (specifically wild Chinook), which is an appropriate
measure of stock abundance. The SRT was provided minimum estimates for
each of the 22 stocks for which run size data exist from ADF&G. These
data are presented in the Status Review Report. For the SEGOA and NWGOA
ESUs, the SRT also estimated the minimum estimated annual return of
wild adult Chinook salmon between 2010 and 2023, based on ADF&G-
provided run reconstruction data for the major Chinook systems. Because
the SRT generated these estimates to compare to the estimated annual
returns of hatchery adults, results are not available for the CGOA,
which does not host any Chinook-producing hatcheries. The SRT also
considered a study that compared the relative abundance of different
stocks among areas by scaling the proportion of each stock from a mixed
stock sample to the overall abundance of that stock (Larson et al.,
2013). This method produces coarse estimates, reported below for each
ESU, and the SRT used this study to indicate that the SEGOA and NWGOA
ESUs have relatively similar abundances, while the CGOA ESU's abundance
is roughly one-third lower than the other two.
To investigate trends in the abundance of GOA Chinook salmon, the
SRT focused on two primary questions: Have there been any short-term
(15-year periods) declines in abundance across the available data? And
have there been any long-term (full time series, since 1980) declines
in abundance across the available data? To address these questions, the
SRT analyzed the 31 stocks monitored by ADF&G within the three ESU
designations. While similar reviews conducted by other SRTs across the
Pacific Northwest have identified escapement data as the most reliable
metric of the available data for such assessments (Ford 2022, OC and
SONCC SRT 2024), the SRT distinguished between escapement data (a
productivity measure of the number of salmon that survive to spawn) and
escapement goals, which are a management target. Escapement goals (the
number of fish allowed to escape the fishery and spawn) in Alaska are
designed for sustained yield, not as thresholds for population
viability. As described above, run size estimates provide a more
accurate estimate of minimum abundance and are a better metric to
assess population trends. However, run size estimates, which integrate
harvest and escapement data, were available for only 22 stocks.
As noted above, for each ESU, the SRT also considered productivity.
As described above, escapement is one measure of productivity. They
also considered size and age at maturity. These data do not exist at
the stock level for every indicator stock, which precluded a
comprehensive assessment of these metrics at the ESU level. Therefore,
the SRT considered available literature on changes in size and age at
maturity more broadly in the GOA as a whole. Reductions in size can
potentially reduce productivity through decreases in fecundity and/or
egg quality (Oke et al., 2020; Malick et al., 2023), and smaller
females may not be able to dig deep enough redds to reduce
susceptibility to scouring (Healey 1991). Reduction of age diversity
could increase variation in abundance and decrease portfolio effects
and population stability (Schindler et al., 2010). For stocks with run
size estimates, the SRT also performed a depensation analysis.
Depensation (also known as Allee effects) refers to a decline in
productivity at low abundance. Mechanisms for depensation include
impaired reproduction (difficulty finding mates) and predator
saturation. Results from the depensation analysis were highly variable,
and no significant trends were found. See the Status Review Report for
details.
Finally, the SRT considered the spatial distribution and diversity
of each ESU. Spatial distribution includes geographic range and
connectivity. Diversity includes genetic, habitat, and life history
diversity.
Southeast Gulf of Alaska ESU
The SEGOA ESU exhibits a large total abundance. Using mixed stock
analyses, Larson et al. (2013) estimated a total stock size of 181,000
salmon in
[[Page 27275]]
Southeast Alaska and Northern British Columbia, grouped in this study
due to poor genetic resolution. The SRT estimated a minimum annual
return of 53,000 wild adult Chinook salmon in the SEGOA ESU. The ESU
includes 25 indicator stocks, and run size data are available for 9
representative indicator stocks.
Overall trends in abundance do not indicate long-term decline for
the ESU. Short-term declines have been observed in certain stocks;
these patterns are highly variable, but are within the historical
variability and have either stabilized or begun to rebound in recent
years. Evaluating escapement and run size for each stock, the SRT found
little support for sustained, long-term declines (i.e., the 50 and 90
percent credible intervals overlapped with zero). Short-term analyses
indicate a high degree of variability over space and time. There have
been recent declines in estimated total run size and spawning
escapements for several stocks within the SEGOA ESU, particularly since
the early 2000s and 2010s. For example, run size and escapement have
decreased in systems such as the Chilkat, Unuk, King Salmon, Stikine,
and Taku Rivers. However, the stocks in King Salmon, Taku, and Chilkat
Rivers have shown early signs of recovery in the most recent 5-year
period. For most stocks, long-term trend estimates indicate that these
short-term declines largely fall within the range of historical
variability. See the Status Review Report for stock-specific results.
There is some synchrony (i.e., correlation among run size and/or
escapement trends) among stocks.
To evaluate productivity, the SRT first considered escapement. As
described above, the data do not support a long-term, sustained decline
in escapement for the ESU. Mean age and size-at-age have declined over
the past 20-25 years (Lewis et al., 2015; Ohlberger et al., 2018; Oke
et al., 2020). In particular, the abundance of the oldest age classes
has declined. Additionally, the size at age of older age classes (3 to
5 years in the ocean) has decreased, while the sizes of younger age
classes (1 to 2 years in the ocean) have increased (Ohlberger et al.,
2018). The SRT analyzed the missed escapement goals and evidence of
decreasing size and age at maturity, potential threats specifically
identified in the petition and 90-day finding, and found that these
measures of productivity remain within the range for viable
populations. We agree.
The SEGOA ESU demonstrates broad spatial distribution with spawning
populations in numerous rivers and creeks throughout Southeast Alaska.
Seasonally, immature fish from this ESU are distributed throughout the
GOA and Bering Sea. Genetic data generally support four primary
groupings within the ESU: Chilkat River, King Salmon River, Taku and
Stikine Rivers, and the short, coastal streams in southern Southeast
Alaska. In general, population structure follows an isolation by
distance pattern and is organized hierarchically by major river
systems. The SRT found, and we agree, that spatial distribution is
unlikely to contribute significantly to, and is likely a buffer
against, the ESU's risk of extinction.
The SEGOA ESU demonstrates high genetic diversity. Despite genetic
isolation among some rivers, there is limited evidence of reduced
genetic diversity in stocks. For example, while the King Salmon River
stock displays relatively lower genetic diversity, this is consistent
with a small, stable population size across many generations. Thus,
concerns regarding reductions in genetic diversity or inbreeding are
minimal. Habitat diversity is also high. Some populations occupy
shorter, coastal streams, while others occur in rivers that traverse
the coastal mountain range. Spawning populations in the Taku and
Stikine rivers are found in upland plateaus. This diversity makes it
highly unlikely that a single catastrophe could impact the entire ESU.
Therefore, the SRT found, and we agree, that diversity is unlikely to
contribute significantly to, and is likely a buffer against, the ESU's
risk of extinction.
Central Gulf of Alaska ESU
The CGOA ESU exhibits a large total abundance. Using mixed stock
analyses, Larson et al. (2013) estimated a total stock size of 89,000
salmon in Copper, Situk, and Alsek Rivers. The SRT estimated a minimum
annual return of 103,865 wild adult Chinook salmon. The ESU includes
three indicator stocks with run size data for each. Trends in abundance
indicate an overall stable population trajectory, with no strong
evidence of sustained declines across the ESU. Evaluating escapement
and run size for each stock, the SRT found little support for
sustained, long-term declines (i.e., the 50 and 90 percent credible
intervals overlapped with zero). The largest stock, Copper River, has
exhibited increasing escapement over multiple decades. Short-term
analyses of the Alsek and Situk stocks indicate reductions since the
early 2000s; however, recent abundance estimates are similar to long-
term median values. A notable characteristic of the CGOA ESU is the
lack of strong interannual synchrony among stocks for both escapement
and run size.
To evaluate productivity, the SRT first considered escapement. As
described above, the data do not support a long-term, sustained decline
in escapement for the ESU. Similar to the SEGOA ESU, mean age and size-
at-age have declined over the past 20-25 years (Lewis et al., 2015;
Ohlberger et al., 2018; Oke et al., 2020). After analyzing missed
escapement goals and evidence of decreasing size and age at maturity,
the SRT concluded that productivity remains within the range for a
viable population. We agree.
The CGOA ESU demonstrates broad, albeit patchy, spatial
distribution. This has led to significant population structure within
the ESU. Populations spawn in the upper, middle, and lower Copper
River, which are genetically differentiated. While the Alsek stock is
genetically similar to the lower Copper River populations, the Situk
stock is genetically unique. The Situk and Alsek stocks were likely
recently colonized, possibly as glaciers shifted. The SRT found, and we
agree, that spatial distribution is unlikely to contribute
significantly to, and is likely a buffer against, the ESU's risk of
extinction.
Although smaller and with fewer stocks than the other two ESUs, the
CGOA ESU exhibits high diversity. Spawning habitats range from recently
deglaciated rivers in rugged mountainous terrain to upland highlands
draining tundra. Its life history characteristics are also diverse. The
Situk River stock is the only population in Alaska composed primarily
of ocean-type Chinook salmon. Genetic diversity includes fine-scale
adaptive variation among Copper River populations. This diversity makes
it highly unlikely that a single catastrophe could impact the entire
ESU. Therefore, the SRT found, and we agree, that diversity is unlikely
to contribute significantly to, and is likely a buffer against, the
ESU's risk of extinction.
Northwest Gulf of Alaska ESU
The NWGOA ESU exhibits a large total abundance. Using mixed stock
analyses, Larson et al. (2013) estimated a total stock size of 131,000
salmon in the South Peninsula and Cook Inlet. The SRT estimated a
minimum annual return of 103,865 wild adult Chinook salmon. The ESU
includes 19 indicator stocks with run size data available for 10 of
them.
Run size and escapement data provide evidence for long-term
declines in several stocks of the NWGOA ESU. For these stocks, the 95
percent credible
[[Page 27276]]
intervals overlapped with zero, but the 50% credible intervals were
negative. Short-term analyses indicate that many stocks, including
Alexander Creek, Deshka River, Theodore River, Ninilchik River, and
Karluk River, have experienced significant reductions in escapement in
recent decades. Similarly, declines in run size have been observed in
several stocks, including the Anchor River, Kenai River (early and late
runs), East Susitna, Talkeetna, and Yentna Rivers. While these declines
have persisted over multiple 15-year periods, some stocks show signs of
stabilization, though at lower abundance levels than historical
averages. The degree of decline varies by system, with some stocks
exhibiting gradual reductions while others have shown more abrupt
decreases, particularly in the early 2000s. There is some synchrony
(i.e., correlation among run size and/or escapement trends) among
stocks. The SRT expressed concern over abundance trends in this ESU.
However, the declining trend is buffered by the number of stocks (19)
and the overall large abundance of the ESU. For these reasons, the SRT
concluded, and we agree, that abundance is unlikely to contribute
significantly to the ESU's risk of extinction now or in the foreseeable
future. The SRT found that the small abundance of Theodore River may
significantly influence the long-term persistence of this stock.
However, this stock is small and is geographically located near 12
other stocks in the Upper Cook Inlet. Therefore, this stock did not
substantially influence or determine the SRT's risk assessment for the
abundance of the NWGOA ESU as a whole.
To evaluate productivity, the SRT first considered escapement. As
described above, the data indicate a long-term, sustained decline in
escapement for multiple stocks within the ESU. Similar to the other
ESUs, mean age and size-at-age have declined over the past 20-25 years
(Lewis et al., 2015; Ohlberger et al., 2018; Oke et al., 2020).
Although missed escapement goals and shifts toward smaller, younger
fish indicate reduced productivity, the magnitude and nature of these
changes are not consistent with conditions that would place the ESU at
risk of extinction. Escapement goals are designed to optimize yield
rather than define viability thresholds, and thus viable populations
may miss escapement goals repeatedly without necessarily reaching the
point of elevated risk of extinction. Accordingly, the SRT concluded
based on both current numbers and observed trends in escapement that
population viability is not threatened within the foreseeable future.
We agree.
The NWGOA ESU demonstrates broad spatial distribution. It occurs in
numerous rivers and creeks, across multiple major watersheds (Susitna,
Kenai, Karluk, Chignik), and throughout Cook Inlet, the Kenai and South
Alaska Peninsulas, and Kodiak Island. Seasonally, immature fish from
this ESU are distributed throughout the GOA and eastern Bering Sea.
Genetic data generally indicate three primary groupings within the ESU:
South Alaska Peninsula and Kodiak Island, northern Cook Inlet, and
Kenai Peninsula. There may be additional population sub-structuring
within these groups. The SRT found, and we agree, that spatial
distribution is unlikely to contribute significantly to, and is likely
a buffer against, the ESU's risk of extinction.
The NWGOA ESU demonstrates high genetic diversity. There is also
temporal diversity in run timing. The Kenai Peninsula group contains
some late run populations in the Kenai and Kasilof Rivers that spawn 4
to 6 weeks later than other populations in these systems. Habitat
diversity is also high. Populations on the South Alaska Peninsula
inhabit rugged coastal rivers that drain from mountainous regions and
contain large lakes. Populations in northern Cook Inlet inhabit a
myriad of low-lying coastal streams or tributaries. This diversity
makes it highly unlikely that a single catastrophe could impact the
entire ESU. Therefore, the SRT found, and we agree, that diversity is
unlikely to contribute significantly to, and is likely a buffer
against, the ESU's risk of extinction.
Analysis of Section 4(a)(1) Factors
As described above, section 4(a)(1) of the ESA and NMFS'
implementing regulations (50 CFR 424.11(c)) state that we must
determine whether a species is endangered or threatened because of any
one or a combination of the following factors: the present or
threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or
range; overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; disease or predation; the inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms; or other natural or manmade factors affecting
its continued existence. The SRT evaluated whether and the extent to
which each of the foregoing factors contributes to the overall
extinction risk of the GOA chinook salmon ESUs. The SRT summarized
their conclusions for each ESU and each stock in the risk matrix
results. See Status Review Report. This informed our conclusions about
whether the ESUs are threatened or endangered because of any one or a
combination of these factors.
The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment of
Its Habitat or Range
In all three ESUs, a large portion of land is protected at the
state or Federal level, ranging from approximately 40 to 80 percent,
depending on the ESU. Due to these protections and the regulatory
measures described below, many habitats in the corresponding watersheds
are in good condition. Therefore, much of the ESUs' habitat remains
intact and, given existing regulatory mechanisms, is expected to remain
so in the foreseeable future.
To assess present and threatened modification of habitat, the SRT
focused on human activities that can have adverse impacts on the
different life history stages of Chinook salmon in watersheds within
the boundaries of the three ESUs. The intensity of the various
activities differs among ESUs, though the impacts are largely the same.
In particular, the SRT quantified land use (timber harvest,
agriculture, oil and gas extraction, and mining) and urbanization
(including proximity to cities, population size, roads and culverts,
and dams) that may negatively impact the ESUs and their habitat at
present and through the foreseeable future (GOA Chinook SRT 2026).
Although not at a large scale, timber harvest occurs in the ranges
of all three ESUs. Some of the primary concerns associated with timber
harvest are erosion, removal of streamside vegetation, water quality
degradation, and the construction of roads and culverts (Limpinsel et
al., 2023). Impacts may include smothering salmon eggs, impeding fish
passage, altering stream temperature, or reducing in-stream habitat
complexity (Limpinsel et al., 2023). However, the Alaska Forest
Resources and Practices Act and the U.S. Forest Service plans for the
Tongass and Chugach National Forests aim to minimize the impacts of
timber harvest on fish habitat. These laws and guidelines include
designing roads and culverts in ways that minimize impacts to streams,
preserving vegetated buffers along streams, and reforestation (USDA
2016; USDA 2020; ADNR 2017). The SRT found that land use for active
timber harvest is less than 0.01 percent in SEGOA habitat and less than
0.1 percent in NWGOA habitat. There is no active timber harvest in CGOA
habitat. Given the minimal exposure to timber harvest and guidelines in
place to reduce impacts to Chinook habitat, we
[[Page 27277]]
find timber harvest to be a low risk to habitat for all three ESUs.
Mining also occurs in the ranges of all three ESUs. Mines may
negatively impact water quality, including through the leaching of
heavy metals and other contaminants into river systems (Sergeant et
al., 2022). Active mines are limited in each ESU such that the ESU-wide
risk from any localized reduction in water quality is considered
minimal. Additionally, most mines are not located near Chinook-bearing
streams, and there are regulations in place to reduce the impact of
mining on fish habitat. Thus, we find mining to be a low risk to
habitat for all three ESUs.
Two more land uses with potential impacts are agriculture and oil
and gas extraction. These land uses are found only in the NWGOA
watersheds and are not present in the CGOA or SEGOA watersheds.
Agricultural areas can lead to both physical habitat loss and
reductions in water quality (Limpinsel et al., 2023) but are minimal
throughout the state and primarily concentrated in the Matanuska-
Susitna Valley and some parts of the Kenai Peninsula in the NWGOA. Oil
and gas extraction can lead to habitat alteration and pollution
(Limpinsel et al., 2023), but these activities are limited to Cook
Inlet in the NWGOA. Due to their absence in the CGOA and SEGOA ESUs,
the SRT found that agriculture and oil and gas extraction poses no risk
to habitat for these ESUs. While these land-uses do occur in the NWGOA,
they are limited in magnitude and spatially-restricted. Thus,
agriculture and oil and gas extraction pose a low risk to habitat for
the NWGOA ESU.
Multiple aspects of urbanization present threats to fish and fish
habitat, including physical loss of habitat and increased runoff from
impervious surfaces, often containing pollutants (McCarthy et al.,
2008; Limpinsel et al., 2023). Road development extends these impacts
from impervious surfaces and is also associated with the construction
of culverts that may block or impede fish passage (Limpinsel et al.,
2023). Dams, including hydropower facilities, may also block or impede
fish passage, in addition to altering flow and water temperature
(Limpinsel et al., 2023). While large areas of land in the ranges of
all three ESUs remain undeveloped or minimally developed, the NWGOA ESU
experiences significantly more impacts from urbanization in comparison
to the SEGOA and CGOA ESUs. However, even within NWGOA habitat,
increased urbanization impacts remain limited to a few systems in the
Cook Inlet area, and habitat within the ESU as a whole is largely
intact.
As described in detail in the Status Review Report, and summarized
here, the SRT reviewed all present or threatened impacts to the ESUs'
habitat and range. The SRT reviewed such impacts for each stock and
overall for each ESU. The data demonstrate that exposure to such
threats is limited due to the limited development across the broad
spatial distribution of each ESU. Each ESU retains predominantly intact
habitats such that potential impacts to the ESU have not materialized
and are not likely to materialize in the foreseeable future. Therefore,
the SRT found it unlikely that habitat threats contribute significantly
to each ESU's extinction risk, now or in the foreseeable future. We
agree that the present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of each ESU's habitat or range is a low-level threat.
Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
For this review, the SRT analyzed 133 years (1890-2022) of GOA
Chinook salmon harvest estimates (GOA Chinook SRT 2026). Since marine
harvests are often mixed stocks, stock-specific estimates were derived
by subtracting spawning escapement from total run size. Historical
harvest levels are strongly influenced by regulations and management
actions, meaning harvest levels do not necessarily indicate overall
stock abundance or health.
Harvests occur across various fisheries (commercial, recreational,
subsistence, etc.) and are conducted using multiple methods (e.g.,
purse seine, gillnet, troll). Contemporary data comes from ADF&G
reports and databases, reports on bycatch in federally managed
groundfish fisheries, and the Cook Inlet EEZ Area fishery (since 2024).
Data are largely collected by ADF&G and attributed to their management
areas, which do not align with the ESUs identified herein, so the SRT
focused on stock-specific data that could be attributed to stocks
within the ESUs. These data represent the best available scientific and
commercial information.
Overall, for the time series, the mean annual harvest of GOA
Chinook salmon was 423,484 fish, the median harvest was 410,237 fish,
and the average harvest over the last 10 years was 434,081 fish. The
maximum harvest was 992,000 fish in 1937, and the minimum was 0 fish
harvested in 1892. Overall, harvests appear to be variable but stable
(neither increasing nor decreasing) since the 1960s. Commercial catch
accounts for the majority of the harvest, followed by sport, groundfish
bycatch, and subsistence. The SRT estimated harvest for each stock for
which both run size and escapement data were available. See the Status
Review Report for stock-level results.
Southeast Gulf of Alaska ESU Harvest
Chinook salmon harvest estimates for stocks associated with the
SEGOA ESU are complex, involving a mixture of stocks from Alaska,
British Columbia, Washington, and Oregon, as well as various gear types
and fisheries within ADF&G's Southeast Alaska Region. Available data
varies, with some reports providing total estimated Chinook harvests by
fishery (e.g., Hagerman et al., 2022) and others offering stock-
specific breakouts for SEGOA and non-SEGOA stocks (Peterson et al.,
2024). The SRT focused on stock-specific harvest estimates for the nine
indicator stocks representative of the 25 known Chinook stocks in the
SEGOA ESU, noting that these estimates are confined to large fish or a
specific size/age class, consistent with escapement goals. For untagged
stocks, surrogate harvest rates from nearby hatcheries, such as the ACI
(Andrew Creek/King Salmon River) and AKB (Blossom/Chickamin/Keta
Rivers) indicators produced by the Pacific Salmon Commission Chinook
Technical Committee, are used for run reconstruction, where total run
is calculated as escapement divided by the mature run equivalent
exploitation rate, with adjustments for differences between hatchery
indicators and wild stocks.
Central Gulf of Alaska ESU Harvest
Historical harvest information for Chinook salmon associated with
the CGOA ESU, focused on the three indicator stocks: the Alsek, Situk,
and Copper Rivers. The Alsek and Situk rivers drain into the marine
waters of ADF&G's Yakutat Management Area, part of ADF&G's Southeast
Alaska Region. The Copper River drains into the marine waters of
ADF&G's Copper River District, which is part of ADF&G's Central Region
(encompassing Prince William Sound, Cook Inlet, and Bristol Bay
management areas).
Northwest Gulf of Alaska ESU Harvest
The SRT provides Chinook salmon harvest estimates for the NWGOA
ESU, which encompasses indicator stocks and associated harvests in
ADF&G's Central Region and Westward Region. The NWGOA ESU includes ten
Chinook salmon indicator stocks, but the disparate management
boundaries used by ADF&G's Divisions of Sport and Commercial Fisheries,
such as the
[[Page 27278]]
Commercial Fisheries Division's Central Region versus the Sport Fish
Division's larger Southcentral Region, complicate harvest reporting.
Nevertheless, this assessment attempts to compile complete harvests
across all management boundaries and fisheries.
Summary of Gulf of Alaska ESU Harvest Trends
Across ESUs, estimates of stock-specific Chinook salmon harvests
and harvest rates (harvest relative to total run size) have generally
declined in recent years, when compared to historical rates, likely as
management actions have restricted fisheries in response to lower
levels of Chinook salmon abundance. However, for some stocks in the
SEGOA ESU, harvest rates have been relatively high during the last
decade (see section 7.3 of the Status Review Report).
Bycatch
Chinook salmon originating from the GOA are caught incidentally in
the GOA and Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) Federal groundfish
fisheries, especially in the pollock pelagic trawl fishery. Salmon are
considered a prohibited species catch (PSC) in groundfish fisheries,
and cannot be retained for sale or personal use (50 CFR 679.7; 50 CFR
679.21). These fish are counted and sampled by fisheries observers
(none are released), and some are retained for seafood donation
programs. Nearly all salmon taken as bycatch in these fisheries are
Chinook salmon or chum salmon. To limit the amount of bycatch of
Chinook salmon, the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (NPFMC)
and NMFS have implemented mandatory Chinook salmon PSC limits,
apportioned by fishery sector; the attainment of a PSC limit results in
the closure of the responsible fishery. Other Chinook bycatch reduction
measures in place for the GOA groundfish fisheries include the use of
gear modifications (i.e., salmon excluder devices) and incentive plan
agreements designed to incentivize vessel operator avoidance of Chinook
bycatch.
The estimated average number of GOA-origin Chinook salmon
incidentally caught in the Federal Bering Sea (mainly in summer) and
GOA groundfish fisheries each year from 2010 to 2023 averaged 1,081
fish (range = 198-2,336) and 3,325 fish (range = 1,633-5,857)
respectively. The primary Chinook salmon stocks bycaught in these
fisheries between 2011 and 2023 were from the SEGOA and NWGOA ESUs,
with annual bycatch averaging 2,755 fish (range = 1,810-4,091) from the
SEGOA ESU and 1,416 fish (range = 500-4,333) from the NWGOA ESU. Stocks
from the CGOA ESU were rarely encountered in these fisheries (2011-2023
yearly average = 234, range = 35-646). A small number of Chinook salmon
originating from the GOA are also caught as bycatch in state-managed
non-salmon fisheries (e.g., state-managed trawl fisheries; <1,000 fish
annually between 2008 and 2023, with an annual average of 275 fish),
and many of those salmon are likely from stocks outside the GOA (ADF&G
2024). Because bycatch rates are low for GOA stocks, we consider
impacts of bycatch on abundance and productivity to be limited and thus
presents a low risk to each ESU.
Summary of Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
As described in detail in the Status Review Report, and summarized
here, the SRT reviewed all available catch and bycatch data for each
ESU. Overall, the SRT found that current state and Federal management
practices are effective for managing GOA Chinook stocks in a way that
mitigates the risk of overutilization (GOA Chinook SRT 2026).
Therefore, the SRT found it unlikely that overutilization contributes
significantly to each ESU's extinction risk, now or in the foreseeable
future. We agree that overutilization is a low-level threat.
Disease and Predation
Disease
Infectious disease is one of many factors that influence adult and
juvenile salmon survival. Chinook salmon are exposed to numerous
bacterial, fungal, protozoan, viral, and parasitic organisms in
spawning and rearing areas, hatcheries, migratory routes, and the
marine environment. However, no indigenous or emerging exotic diseases
have been identified as threats to Chinook salmon in the GOA (GOA
Chinook SRT 2026). Additionally, the State of Alaska has a robust fish
health monitoring program and strict protocols to minimize transmission
of diseases between hatchery and wild fish, including Chinook salmon
(ADF&G 2026).
Predation
Salmon are an integral part of the food web, and predation on
salmon naturally occurs at all salmon life stages in both freshwater
and marine environments. Predation occurs from a variety of native
piscine, avian, and mammalian species. In the marine environment, it
has been hypothesized that the broadly observed demographic changes
(e.g., decline in age at maturity) in Chinook salmon could be due to
size-selective predation by sharks or marine mammals. However, based on
the synthesis of a suite of studies detailed in the Status Review
Report, there is no direct evidence that predatory impacts are outside
normal ecosystem dynamics and imperiling the long-term existence of GOA
Chinook salmon populations.
The introduced northern pike (Esox lucius) is the only freshwater
predator identified as a potential threat to early life stages of GOA
Chinook salmon, but their impact is limited to only certain systems in
the NWGOA ESU. Although northern pike have driven declines in the
Alexander Creek stock, the state and its partners have multiple
management strategies for eradication and suppression, particularly in
high-impact areas such as the Kenai Peninsula, Anchorage, and Mat-Su
Valley (Dunker et al., 2022). The use of rotenone treatments has
increased, and in conjunction with fish salvage programs, native
salmonids are being reintroduced into lakes where pike populations have
been eradicated. Improved gillnetting strategies, with year-round
monitoring efforts, have led to significant reductions in pike
densities in targeted lakes. Experimental exclusion barriers are being
installed in critical migration corridors to prevent pike from entering
high-priority salmon habitats. Long-term monitoring and mitigation
efforts are planned to ensure that restored salmon populations remain
stable and viable in previously impacted watersheds (Dunker et al.,
2022).
The SRT concluded that current state management practices are
effective for mitigating the risk of northern pike predation (GOA
Chinook SRT 2026). Therefore, the SRT found it unlikely that predation
and disease contribute significantly to each ESU's extinction risk, now
or in the foreseeable future. We agree that disease and predation are
low-level threats.
Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
Numerous regulatory mechanisms exist to protect GOA Chinook salmon
from present and future impacts of threats. The SRT reviewed each of
these existing regulatory mechanisms in detail. See Status Review
Report. In the paragraphs below, we summarize their findings.
A wide array of Federal, state, Tribal, and local laws,
regulations, and treaties currently and effectively address the
survival and habitat quality of GOA Chinook salmon. Fisheries
management
[[Page 27279]]
is primarily conducted by the State of Alaska and is supplemented by
state and Federal policies governing subsistence and personal use.
Federally, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
governs marine fisheries, includes provisions to designate Essential
Fish Habitat, and requires Federal agencies to consult with NMFS on
actions that may impact that habitat. Additionally, Chinook hatchery
propagation is guided by state policies aimed at maintaining wild stock
genetic integrity, preventing disease spread, and prioritizing wild
stock conservation in mixed-stock fisheries.
Land and water management across the GOA region involves
significant Federal oversight. The U.S. Forest Service, USFWS, Bureau
of Land Management, and National Park Service manage millions of acres
that overlap with Chinook watersheds, with management plans that
include objectives for fish and fish habitat protection. Federal water
regulation is fairly comprehensive, with statutes such as the Clean
Water Act and Rivers and Harbors Act providing authority to the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers to regulate activities such as wetland filling,
the discharge of dredged material, and construction in navigable
waters. Furthermore, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission regulates
non-Federal hydropower under the Federal Power Act, which grants NMFS
the authority to issue mandatory prescriptions for fish passage and to
recommend other measures to protect anadromous salmon and to improve
their habitat.
State and local agencies also play a crucial role in regulating
salmon habitat. ADF&G enforces the Anadromous Fish Act, requiring
permits for activities in essential anadromous waters. The Alaska
Department of Natural Resources (ADNR) administers laws like the Alaska
Forest Resources and Protection Act, setting standards for protecting
fish habitat and water quality. Locally, many boroughs and the
Municipality of Anchorage enforce development setbacks from anadromous
streams. On Tribal lands, Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act
corporations manage substantial acreage with varied priorities, while
Tribal Conservation Districts and Tribes actively work to conserve and
restore salmon habitat for cultural and subsistence use.
Internationally, the Pacific Salmon Treaty and the Boundary Waters
Treaty foster cooperation between the U.S. and Canada on salmon
management and transboundary water protection, and the Canadian
Environmental Assessment Acts address large projects in transboundary
streams.
The SRT reviewed all existing regulatory mechanisms relevant to GOA
Chinook and concluded that none are inadequate to such an extent that
they are posing a threat to any of the ESUs. For example, land use
regulatory mechanisms reduce the impacts of timber harvest, mining,
agriculture, and oil and gas extraction. Fisheries management reduces
the impact of overutilization. Northern pike eradication and prevention
measures reduce the impact of predation. The extensive proactive
management strategies and measures in place to protect and monitor
Chinook salmon allow management to respond long before population
viability is threatened. Thus, the SRT found it unlikely that the
inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms contributes significantly
to each ESU's extinction risk, now or in the foreseeable future. We
agree that this is a low-level threat.
Other Natural or Human Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
Environmental Variability
Increasing environmental variability observed throughout the range
of GOA Chinook salmon is a challenge for maintaining stock productivity
and predictability. Trends of increased environmental variability
include observations of pronounced changes to hydrologic structures and
processes in GOA Chinook salmon freshwater systems, and increased
prevalence and severity of marine heatwaves. See the Status Review
Report for details. Such trends are likely to continue in the
foreseeable future.
Recent climate vulnerability assessments for salmon indicate that
some populations exhibit moderate-to-high vulnerability to increased
environmental variability, depending on their life history, geographic
location, and habitat use (Crozier et al., 2019). Changes in freshwater
temperature, flow variability, and marine prey availability all
contribute to their vulnerability. Chinook salmon, which exhibit
extended freshwater rearing and extensive marine migrations, are
considered to be among the more sensitive salmon species (Crozier et
al., 2019). The SRT found that environmental variability poses the
greatest threat to GOA Chinook of all threats considered, and continued
monitoring of environmental changes and responses to these changes in
Chinook salmon is warranted. However, the SRT did not find any stock
nor any ESU to be at high or moderate risk of extinction (i.e., now or
in the foreseeable future) due to changing environmental conditions.
Please see the Status Review Report for details. Below, we summarize
their reasoning.
Within the GOA river systems, there have been documented widespread
premature mortality of salmon in some years due to high water
temperatures and drought conditions (von Biela et al., 2022); however,
GOA Chinook salmon were not among these premature mortality
observations. It has also been posited that deglaciation may increase
available spawning habitat for Alaskan salmon (Pitman et al., 2020;
Pitman et al., 2021). Climatic variability is estimated to be more
impactful to Alaska stream fishes compared to other anthropogenic
stressors (e.g., land use or fire; Murdoch et al., 2020). However, it
should be noted that actual hydrologic changes in GOA freshwater
landscapes will be impacted by local factors, such as vegetation, fine-
scale topography, and wind (Littell et al., 2018); therefore, the
timing, magnitude, and ecological consequences of these transitions
will vary depending on microclimate, watershed physiography, and
elevation. The SRT considered all of these conditions in its risk
assessment of each stock and overall for each ESU. While environmental
variability has localized impacts in some cases depending on the
individual river system, the SRT found it unlikely that environmental
variability contributes significantly to each ESU's extinction risk,
now or in the foreseeable future. While it will likely increase over
time, we agree that this is a low-level threat now and in the
foreseeable future.
Hatcheries
Concerns regarding hatchery and wild salmon interactions generally
fall into three categories: (1) genetic and epigenetic interactions,
(2) spatial competition for freshwater habitat, and (3) competition for
food resources (Naish et al., 2008). Typically, the first category
references intraspecific interactions, while the latter two categories
may refer to either intraspecific or interspecific interactions,
particularly with large-scale hatchery releases of pink or chum salmon.
Hatchery-reared salmon populations are at risk of genetic and
phenotypic change (Grant 2012). Changes in hatchery-reared salmon can
occur through domestication selection, inbreeding, genetic drift,
epigenetic modifications, or a combination of these mechanisms. These
changes can affect genetic diversity, individual fitness, population
productivity, and probability
[[Page 27280]]
of extinction (Keller and Walker 2002; Frankham 2005; O'Grady et al.,
2006; Kardos et al., 2016). Of the five species of Pacific salmon
propagated in Alaska hatcheries, Chinook salmon may be the most
vulnerable to hatchery influences due to the extended rearing time
typically required before their release into the marine environment.
However, the extended rearing time and resources required (e.g., food,
water, personnel) also make Chinook the least propagated species of
anadromous salmonid in Alaska hatcheries (Wilson 2024). The
comparatively low release numbers, coupled with the ADF&G Genetic
Policy (Davis et al., 1985), likely reduce the potential for hatchery
Chinook to adversely impact wild stocks. However, the degree of risk
may vary between ESUs.
Spatial competition or habitat displacement of wild Chinook salmon
by hatchery-origin fish during their juvenile, freshwater life history
stages are unlikely in the GOA, as hatchery-origin Chinook are released
as smolts to begin their marine migration. However, spatial competition
or habitat displacement of adult wild Chinook by adult hatchery-origin
fish on the spawning grounds may be more likely. Such intraspecific
spatial competition has been documented outside of Alaska, particularly
in areas where hatchery release (i.e., imprinting) sites are near wild
stocks. Interspecific spatial interactions between wild Chinook and
more abundant hatchery species, like chum and pink salmon, which have
higher stray rates, are also possible. Generally, species-specific redd
site requirements, habitat partitioning, and temporal differences in
spawn timing reduce the likelihood of this type of interspecific
competition (Fukushima and Smoker 1998; Geist et al., 2002; Quinn 2005;
Beechie et al., 2008). However, data gaps exist regarding potential
intraspecific and interspecific spatial competition, so increased
monitoring of localized impacts of stray hatchery fish on wild
populations is warranted.
The spread of disease from hatchery fish to wild stocks is also a
concern. Within Alaska hatcheries, several management strategies and
health policies implemented by ADF&G's Fish/Shellfish Health Program
exist to prevent transmission of new pathogens to wild stocks as well
as to surveil existing, emerging, and exotic disease agents (ADF&G
2026). The State of Alaska's Fish Health and Disease Control Policy (5
AAC 41.080) is designed to prevent the spread of infectious diseases in
fish and shellfish (Evenson et al., 2018). It mandates rigorous health
protocols for hatcheries, including disinfection of salmon eggs
transported between watersheds, regular inspections of hatchery
facilities, and detailed disease reporting and isolation measures to
control disease spread.
The SRT concluded that current state management practices are
effective for mitigating risks caused by hatcheries. Therefore, the SRT
found it unlikely that hatcheries contribute significantly to each
ESU's extinction risk, now or in the foreseeable future. We agree that
hatcheries present a low-level threat.
Rangewide Risk of Extinction
Based on the best scientific and commercial data available on each
of the demographic and ESA section 4(a)(1) factors, the SRT completed a
risk matrix for each stock and ESU. Following the assessment of stock-
level demographic factors and threats using this risk matrix approach,
each team member independently evaluated the overall extinction risk
for each ESU as low, moderate, or high (defined below). To accommodate
individual uncertainty and support a representative expression of
expert opinion, the team applied the ``likelihood point'' method,
commonly referred to as the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team
(FEMAT) approach, based on its use in the FEMAT process (FEMAT 1993).
Under this method, each reviewer allocated 10 likelihood points across
the 3 risk categories to represent their confidence in the ESU's true
status. For example, a reviewer confident in a low-risk classification
might assign all 10 points to that category, while a reviewer with
greater uncertainty could distribute points across 2 or all 3
categories. This approach has been used in most anadromous Pacific
salmonid status reviews since 1999. The three risk levels have been
used in prior Pacific Northwest salmonid species reviews with minor
wording changes (Stout et al., 2012; Ford 2022; OC and SONCC SRT 2024).
<bullet> High Risk: A species or ESU with a high risk of extinction
is at or near a level of abundance, productivity, spatial structure,
and/or diversity that places its continued persistence in question. The
demographics of a species or ESU at such a high level of risk may be
highly uncertain and strongly influenced by stochastic or depensatory
processes. Similarly, a species or ESU may be at high risk of
extinction if it faces clear and present threats (e.g., confinement to
a small geographic area; imminent destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat; or disease epidemic) that are likely to
create imminent and substantial demographic risks.
<bullet> Moderate Risk: A species or ESU is at moderate risk of
extinction if it is on a trajectory that puts it at a high level of
extinction risk in the foreseeable future (see description of ``High
risk'' above). A species or ESU may be at moderate risk of extinction
due to current and/or projected threats or declining trends in
abundance, productivity, spatial structure, or diversity. The
appropriate time horizon for evaluating whether a species or ESU is
more likely than not to be at high risk in the foreseeable future
depends on various case- and species-specific factors. For example, the
time horizon may reflect certain life history characteristics (e.g.,
long generation time or late age-at-maturity) and should also reflect
the time frame or rate over which identified threats are likely to
impact the biological status of the species or ESU (e.g., the rate of
disease spread). The appropriate time horizon is not limited to the
period that status can be quantitatively modeled or predicted within
predetermined limits of statistical confidence. The biologist (or Team)
should, to the extent possible, clearly specify the time horizon over
which it has confidence in evaluating moderate risk.
<bullet> Low Risk: A species or ESU is at low risk of extinction if
it is not at moderate or high level of extinction risk (see ``Moderate
risk'' and ``High risk'' above). A species or ESU may be at low risk of
extinction if it is not facing threats that result in declining trends
in abundance, productivity, spatial structure, or diversity. A species
or ESU at low risk of extinction is likely to show stable or increasing
trends in abundance and productivity with connected, diverse
populations.
The extinction risk determination reflects the informed
professional judgment of each SRT voting member, based on a synthesis
of available information. This assessment was structured around a risk
matrix framework that integrated demographic risk indicators with
anticipated interactions among threats and other relevant factors, now
and in the foreseeable future. For a detailed explanation of the risk
matrix framework methods, see section 8 in the Status Review Report.
The foreseeable future was defined as a period of 25 to 40 years,
corresponding to approximately 5 to 8 generations of GOA Chinook
salmon. This timeframe extends as far into the future as the SRT could
make reasonably reliable predictions about threats to the species and
the species' responses to those
[[Page 27281]]
threats. The SRT based this timeframe on the availability of
comprehensive demographic data for each ESU and the projected impacts
of environmental variability, ocean conditions, and freshwater habitat
trends on GOA Chinook salmon viability. Further justification of this
timeframe can be found in Section 8.2 of the SRT report (GOA Chinook
SRT 2026).
Southeast Gulf of Alaska ESU
The SRT concluded, and we agree, that the SEGOA ESU is at low risk
of extinction now and for the foreseeable future, throughout its range.
Of 90 points total, the SRT assigned 87 points to low extinction risk
and three points to moderate extinction risk, reflecting their
confidence in this conclusion.
The SEGOA ESU exhibits a large total abundance based on mixed-stock
analyses and the minimum estimated annual return of wild adult Chinook
salmon. The ESU includes 25 stocks, nine of which have estimated run
sizes and escapements in the thousands. These data do not indicate
sustained, long-term declines in abundance for the ESU. Many SRT
members emphasized that although short-term declines have been observed
in certain stocks, these patterns are highly variable, fall within the
historical variability, and have either stabilized or begun to rebound
in recent years. Productivity has also declined but has remained within
limits for viable salmon populations. Further buffering the SEGOA ESU
from extinction risk are high spatial distribution and diversity, which
includes genetic, habitat, and life history diversity. In conclusion,
the risk matrix evaluations across the demographic factors (abundance,
productivity, spatial structure, and diversity) were uniformly low.
Next, the SRT considered the threats caused by the ESA section
4(a)(1) factors, individually and combined. They found it unlikely that
the ESA section 4(a)(1) factors, individually or combined, contribute
significantly to the extinction risk of the ESU. Instead, the SRT found
that estuarine and freshwater habitats remained in relatively pristine
condition. Hatchery influence, predation, and overutilization occur at
low levels. While productivity, habitat quality, and diversity and
connectivity among populations were key factors supporting a low-risk
determination, several SRT members acknowledged environmental
variability as the most pressing emerging threat to this ESU. Concerns
included shifts in streamflow patterns, reduced snowpack, increased
peak flows, and marine heatwaves, all of which could negatively impact
key life stages. However, these climate-related risks were generally
viewed as insufficient to conclude that the ESU is likely to become
endangered within the next 25-40 years, alone or in combination with
other threats. Some SRT members assigned a small portion of likelihood
points to the moderate risk category to reflect uncertainty about
future environmental impacts, particularly in glacially influenced
systems such as the Taku and Stikine. Nonetheless, SRT members agreed
that current management actions, low levels of other threats (e.g.,
hatchery influence, predation, overutilization), and demographic
resilience support the conclusion that this ESU is not in danger of
extinction or likely to become so in the foreseeable future, throughout
its range.
Central Gulf of Alaska ESU
The SRT concluded, and we agree, that the CGOA ESU is at low risk
of extinction now and for the foreseeable future, throughout its range.
Of 90 points total, the SRT assigned 87 points to low extinction risk
and three points to moderate extinction risk, reflecting their
confidence in this conclusion.
The CGOA ESU exhibits a moderately large total abundance based on
mixed-stock analyses. The ESU includes three stocks; in addition, the
largest stock (Copper River) is composed of numerous metapopulations
that provide demographic and spatial resilience. There is little
evidence for sustained, long-term declines for the ESU overall. The
Copper River stock abundance has been increasing over multiple decades.
Short-term analyses of the Alsek and Situk stocks indicated reductions
since the early 2000s; however, recent abundance estimates are similar
to long-term median values and fall within historical variability.
Productivity has also declined but remained within limits for viable
salmon populations. Further buffering the CGOA ESU from extinction risk
are high spatial distribution and diversity, which includes genetic,
habitat, and life history diversity. In conclusion, the risk matrix
evaluations across the four demographic factors (abundance,
productivity, spatial structure, and diversity) were uniformly low.
Next, the SRT considered the threats caused by the ESA section
4(a)(1) factors, individually and combined. They found it unlikely that
the ESA section 4(a)(1) factors, individually or combined, contribute
significantly to the extinction risk of the ESU. Instead, the SRT found
that habitat conditions remain largely intact. Predation and
overutilization occur at low levels. While the overall risk was low,
several SRT members acknowledged environmental variability as the most
pressing emerging threat to this ESU, particularly related to
environmental variability and potential ecological isolation among
populations. Environmental-related concerns included altered hydrology,
warming stream temperatures, and changing marine conditions, which may
impact key life stages and reduce productivity over time, but not to
the point of endangering the ESU within the foreseeable future. Some
SRT members assigned some points to the moderate-risk category, citing
environmental variability and past declines as justification for
acknowledging uncertainty about the ESU's long-term trajectory.
Additionally, concerns were noted about limited buffering capacity due
to the isolation of populations and potential ecological risks from
hatchery programs. However, these factors were generally not considered
sufficient to elevate the extinction risk above the low category due to
low levels of all factors, considered alone or in combination. Within
this ESU, high levels of diversity and habitat intactness, combined
with recently stable or increasing trends in abundance and
productivity, support the conclusion that this ESU is not in danger of
extinction or likely to become so in the foreseeable future, throughout
its range.
Northwest Gulf of Alaska ESU
The SRT concluded, and we agree, that the NWGOA ESU is at low risk
of extinction now and for the foreseeable future, throughout its range.
Of 90 points total, the SRT assigned 75 points to low extinction risk
and 15 points to moderate extinction risk, reflecting their confidence
in this conclusion, which is slightly lower than their confidence in
the conclusions for the other ESUs.
The NWGOA ESU exhibits the largest total abundance of all GOA ESUs
based on mixed-stock analyses and the minimum estimated annual return
of wild adult Chinook salmon. The ESU includes 19 stocks, most of which
have estimated run sizes and escapements in the thousands. There is
moderate evidence (negative 50 percent confidence intervals, but the 95
percent confidence intervals overlap with zero) for declines in
multiple stocks within the ESU. Some stocks also exhibit signs of
demographic stress. Despite these declines, abundance, productivity,
spatial structure, and diversity all remain high, providing resilience
and buffering against future threats. With one exception (abundance in
Theodore
[[Page 27282]]
River, a small stock in Upper Cook Inlet), the risk matrix evaluations
across the four demographic factors (abundance, productivity, spatial
structure, and diversity) were low.
Next, the SRT considered the threats caused by the ESA section
4(a)(1) factors, individually and combined. Environmental variability
was identified as the most prominent overarching threat to the ESU,
with additional cumulative stressors including predation by invasive
northern pike, habitat impacts associated with urban development, and
ecological risks from hatchery interactions, particularly in Cook Inlet
and other road-accessible watersheds.
While these risks warrant continued attention within the NWGOA ESU,
there are numerous measures in place that mitigate them. Within Cook
Inlet, the state has management strategies for controlling the
expansion of the northern pike, an escapement-based management approach
for addressing demographic stress, and habitat protections for
urbanization impacts. These risks, mitigated by current actions, do not
rise to a level that would place the ESU beyond the low-risk category.
The SRT's inclusion of a few moderate-risk points reflects some
uncertainty regarding the level of risk posed by demographic stress and
the potential for cumulative threats to influence long-term outcomes
within the foreseeable future of 25 to 40 years. Overall, the SRT's
assessment reflects a low extinction risk for the NWGOA Chinook salmon
ESU throughout its range. Within this ESU, high abundance,
productivity, spatial structure, and diversity in addition to ongoing
monitoring, threat mitigation, and proactive management support the
conclusion that this ESU is not in danger of extinction or likely to
become so in the foreseeable future, throughout its range.
Significant Portion of Its Range Analysis
As noted above, the definitions of threatened and endangered
species contain the phrase: throughout all or a significant portion of
its range (SPR). This phrase provides two independent bases for
listing: a species may be endangered or threatened throughout all of
its range or a species may be endangered or threatened throughout a
SPR. Thus, in construing the statutory definitions of threatened and
endangered species, NMFS is required to give independent meaning to the
SPR phrase to avoid rendering it superfluous to the ``throughout all''
language (see Defenders of Wildlife v. Norton, 258 F.3d 1136, 1141-45
(9th Cir. 2001)).
A joint USFWS-NMFS policy, finalized in 2014, provided the
Services' interpretation of the SPR phrase (SPR Policy; 79 FR 37578,
July 1, 2014). It explains that we will use the same standards and
methodology to determine whether a species is endangered or threatened
throughout a portion of its range that we use to determine if a species
is endangered or threatened throughout its range. Further, depending on
the case, it might be more efficient for us to address the significance
question or the status question first. Regardless of which question we
choose to address first, if we reach a negative answer with respect to
either question, we do not need to evaluate the other question for that
portion of the species' range. In other words, if we determine that a
portion of the range is not significant, we will not need to determine
whether the species is endangered or threatened there; if we determine
that the species is not endangered or threatened in a portion of its
range, we will not need to determine if that portion was significant.
Courts have held that the threshold definition of significant
contained in the SPR Policy was invalid, stating it set too high a
standard to allow for an independent basis for listing species--i.e.,
it did not give independent meaning to the phrase ``throughout . . . a
significant portion of its range'' (see, e.g., Center for Biological
Diversity, et al. v. Jewell, 248 F. Supp. 3d 946, 958 (D. Ariz. 2017);
Desert Survivors v. Dep't of the Interior, 321 F. Supp. 3d 1011, 1069-
74 (N.D. Cal. 2018)). However, those courts did not take issue with the
fundamental approach of evaluating significance in terms of the
biological significance of a particular portion of the range to the
overall species. NMFS did not rely on the definition of significant in
the SPR Policy when making this 12-month finding. While certain other
aspects of the SPR Policy have also been addressed by courts, the
policy framework and key elements remain in place, and until the policy
is withdrawn, we apply those aspects of it that remain valid.
For salmonids, status reviews generally include detailed
population- or subpopulation-level assessments to inform the rangewide
extinction risk determination. In these cases, the SPR analysis draws
directly from that foundational work, using population-level data to
assess whether any portion of the range may independently meet the
criteria for listing as threatened or endangered. In other words, the
individual stocks within the ESUs comprised the portions that were
assessed during the SPR analysis. The SRT took guidance for this
process from other recent NMFS salmon status reviews (e.g., OC and
SONCC SRT 2024).
Following the determination of the overall ESU level risk for all
three GOA Chinook salmon ESUs, the SRT analyzed individual stocks
comprising each ESU as portions to evaluate in the SPR analysis. The
SRT used the risk matrix approach, evaluating the demographic and
section 4(a)(1) factors for each stock. All factors were found to pose
low-level threats or risks, except for one small stock (Theodore River)
at one factor (abundance). The SRT found that the low abundance of this
stock contributes to its long-term risk of extinction (i.e., moderate
score); however, all other factors fell into the low-risk category, and
thus this stock was rated at low-risk for extinction overall.
Therefore, the SRT concluded that the Chinook in this portion of the
ESU's range are at low risk of extinction now and within the
foreseeable future. We agree with this conclusion and find that the
NWGOA ESU is not in danger of extinction, or likely to become so in the
foreseeable future, throughout any significant portions of its range.
Based on our review of the SRT's assessment, we also conclude that the
SEGOA and CGOA ESUs are not at risk of extinction, or likely to become
so in the foreseeable future, throughout any significant portions of
their ranges.
Peer Review
In December 2004, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued
a Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review (M-05-03; December
16, 2004) establishing minimum peer review standards, a transparent
process for public disclosure of peer review planning, and
opportunities for public participation. The OMB Bulletin, implemented
under the Information Quality Act (Pub. L. 106-554), is intended to
enhance the quality and credibility of the Federal government's
scientific information, and applies to influential or highly
influential scientific information disseminated on or after June 16,
2005. To satisfy our requirements under the OMB Bulletin, we solicited
independent peer review comments on the draft Status Review Report from
four scientists selected from the academic and scientific community
with expertise in conservation biology, salmonid genetics, stock
assessment, and Chinook salmon biology. All peer review comments on the
Status Review Report were addressed prior to dissemination of the final
version of the
[[Page 27283]]
report that was referenced for this 12-month finding. The peer review
report can be found online at: <a href="https://www.noaa.gov/information-technology/biological-status-of-gulf-of-alaska-chinook-salmon">https://www.noaa.gov/information-technology/biological-status-of-gulf-of-alaska-chinook-salmon</a>.
Final Determination
Section 4(b)(1) of the ESA requires that we make listing
determinations based solely on the best scientific and commercial data
available after conducting a review of the status of the species and
taking into account those efforts, if any, being made by any state or
foreign nation, or political subdivisions thereof, to protect and
conserve the species. We have independently reviewed the best
scientific and commercial information available, including the
petition, public comments submitted on the 90-day finding, the Status
Review Report (GOA Chinook SRT 2026), and other published and
unpublished information, and have consulted with species experts and
individuals familiar with GOA Chinook salmon.
After reviewing the SRT's analysis of reproductive isolation and
evolutionary legacy according to the ESU Policy, we identify three
ESUs: SEGOA, CGOA, and NWGOA. For each of the three ESUs, we assessed
the four demographic factors: abundance, productivity, spatial
distribution, and diversity. We then evaluated each ESU to determine
whether it is endangered or threatened because of any one or a
combination of the ESA section 4(a)(1) factors. Despite some declines
in abundance and productivity, the ESUs exhibit large overall
population sizes spread across multiple stocks, viable levels of
productivity, broad spatial distributions, and high diversity. As
described in the Status Review Report, the habitat of GOA Chinook
salmon in all three ESUs remains undeveloped or minimally developed.
While the NWGOA ESU experiences more impacts from urbanization than
other ESUs, increased urbanization impacts are limited to a few systems
in the Cook Inlet area, and habitat within the ESU as a whole is
largely intact. Across the three ESUs, current state and Federal
management practices specific to harvest and bycatch are effective for
managing GOA Chinook stocks in a way that mitigates the risk of
overutilization. No indigenous or emerging exotic diseases have been
identified as major threats to Chinook salmon in the GOA, and the State
of Alaska maintains a robust fish health surveillance program.
Predation on GOA Chinook salmon is considered to be within normal
ecosystem dynamics, with the exception of invasive northern pike, which
is limited to only a few systems in the NWGOA. Comprehensive regulatory
mechanisms enforced by Federal, state, and Tribal entities, as well as
laws and regulations at the local level, currently and effectively
address the harvest, northern pike predation pressure, and habitat
quality of GOA Chinook salmon. Other human factors, e.g., risks posed
by hatchery interactions, are controlled and well-mitigated through
established policies and protocols implemented by the State of Alaska.
Natural factors, specifically environmental variability, pose a threat
to GOA Chinook salmon, and there is uncertainty about future
environmental conditions. However, GOA Chinook salmon are ecologically
resilient, and fluctuations in abundance and productivity levels are
expected for salmon. Stocks in the SEGOA ESU have experienced short-
term and highly variable declines, which have stabilized or have begun
to rebound in recent years. High quality habitat as well as the high
abundance, productivity, spatial distribution, and diversity indicate
long-term population viability in this ESU. The CGOA ESU shows an
overall stable population trajectory, without evidence of sustained
declines. Additionally, high quality, intact habitat and high levels of
spatial distribution and diversity support long-term population
viability in this ESU. The NWGOA ESU has experienced multiple periods
of persistent declines and is currently at lower abundances than
historical averages. However, some stocks are showing signs of
stabilization. While additional stressors impact the NWGOA ESU, such as
predation by invasive northern pike and increased urban development,
these stressors are mitigated by dedicated management actions that are
likely to continue into the foreseeable future. Large abundance,
spatial connectivity, robust spatial structure and diversity, and broad
geographic distribution in conjunction with established proactive
management strategies, monitoring protocols, and habitat protections
support the long-term population viability of this ESU. Therefore, we
find that the ESA section 4(a)(1) factors, collectively and
individually, present a low extinction risk to the SEGOA, CGOA, and
NWGOA ESUs of Chinook salmon.
Within each of the three ESUs, we did not find any portion of the
range that was both significant and had a high or moderate risk of
extinction (i.e., at risk of extinction now or in the foreseeable
future). Based on the best available scientific and commercial
information, we conclude that the SEGOA, CGOA, and NWGOA ESUs of GOA
Chinook salmon are not in danger of extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of their ranges, nor likely to become so within the
foreseeable future. Therefore, the SEGOA, CGOA, and NWGOA ESUs do not
meet the definition of an endangered or threatened species and do not
warrant listing under the ESA.
This is a final action, and, therefore, we are not soliciting
public comments.
References
A complete list of all references cited herein is available online
(see ADDRESSES) and upon request (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authority: The authority for this action is the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: May 12, 2026.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2026-09665 Filed 5-13-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on May 14, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.