Petition to list the pinto abalone
(Haliotis kamtschatkana) as
threatened or endangered under
the Endangered Species Act
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Center for Biological Diversity with Rachel Aronson, Adi Hanein, Amy Klein, and Zachary
Meyer formally request that the Secretary of Commerce, through the National Marine Fisheries
Service (“NMFS” or “NOAA Fisheries”), list the pinto or northern abalone (Haliotis
kamtschatkana) as Threatened or Endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act
(“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. § 1531 – 1544. The petitioners also requests that pinto abalone critical
habitat be designated concurrently with its listing.
The pinto abalone, an intertidal invertebrate ranging from southeast Alaska to Point Conception,
CA has severely declined in large portions of its range. The pinto abalone has now virtually
disappeared from its historical range in Northern California and is declining in its Southern
California range. The species appears to be experiencing zero recruitment in Washington State
despite the closure of all fisheries there in 1994. In Alaska, total commercial harvest peaked in
1981-1982 season, and then crashed precipitously despite an increase in fishing effort. That
fishery was closed in the 1996-1997 season.
The primary drivers of the decline of pinto abalone are commercial and recreational fishing,
which severely depleted most populations, some of them past the point at which densities
became too low for successful larval dispersal. While all fishing of pinto abalone is now banned,
global climate change poses an increasingly severe threat to pinto abalone, particularly through
ocean acidification and sea surface temperature rise. Poaching and the return of sea otter
populations concurrent with abalone habitat may also play a factor in the decline.
Pinto abalone have declined precipitously from their historic numbers such that the species is
now in serious danger of extinction. Scientists have predicted that the species will have no hope
of recovering without immediate and active intervention.
This Petition summarizes the natural history of the pinto abalone, the population information
available on the species, and the threats to the species and its habitat. The Petition then shows
that, in the context of the ESA’s five statutory listing factors, the severely depleted population
status of the species and the ongoing threats to its continued existence leave NMFS with no
choice but to list the species as Threatened or Endangered under the ESA.
Once listed, the Pinto Abalone would join the Black Abalone, the White Abalone and the
Elkhorn and Staghorn Corals as the only marine invertebrates protected under the ESA. Each of
these species are protected under the ESA only following a similar Center petition.
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
INTRODUCTION
NATURAL HISTORY AND STATUS OF THE PINTO ABALONE
A.
NATURAL HISTORY
1.
Description
2.
Distribution
3.
Habitat
4.
Feeding
5.
Movement
6.
Reproduction and Growth
7.
Natural Mortality
B.
POPULATION DECLINE OF THE PINTO ABALONE
1.
Alaska
2.
British Columbia
3.
Washington
4.
Oregon
5.
California
6.
Implications of low population size for pinto abalone
CRITERIA FOR ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT LISTING
A.
THE PINTO ABALONE IS A “SPECIES” UNDER THE ESA
B.
THE PINTO ABALONE IS ENDANGERED UNDER THE ESA
1.
PRESENT OR THREATENED DESTRUCTION, MODIFICATION OR
CURTAILMENT OF ITS HABITAT OR RANGE
2.
OVERUTILIZATION FOR COMMERCIAL, RECREATIONAL,
SCIENTIFIC OR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES
3.
DISEASE AND PREDATION
4.
INADEQUACY OF EXISTING REGULATORY MECHANISM
5.
OTHER NATURAL OR ANTHROPOGENIC FACTORS
a)
Poaching
b)
Low recruitment
CRITICAL HABITAT
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
I. Introduction
The pinto abalone (Haliotis kamtschatkana) is a marine mollusk with a wide distribution ranging
from Alaska to California. In Canada, pinto abalone are listed as ‘endangered’ under the Species
at Risk Act while the IUCN has listed the global status of pinto abalone as ‘endangered’ as well.
Pinto abalone are considered ecosystem engineers because they modify their surrounding habitat
through their grazing to promote colonization by other species. Largely due to overharvesting,
the pinto abalone populations have drastically declined in their range. This has created
segregated populations and distant individuals which negatively impacts reproduction through
spawning and larval recruitment. Harvesting of pinto abalone is now illegal, but the species have
not rebounded to reach historic population sizes. In addition to new emerging threats, such as
ocean acidification and global climate change, and continuing declining populations, pinto
abalone qualifies for listing under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). This petition summarizes
pinto abalones’ natural history, the current status of populations in different locations, and threats
to the species and its habitat.
II. Natural History and Status of the Pinto Abalone
A. Natural History
1.
Description
Pinto abalone, also known as Northern abalone, are a species of marine gastropod found in the
rocky intertidal environments on the Pacific coast of North America. The pinto abalone is
sometimes called the Northern abalone because it is the northernmost occurring abalone species
in the world (COSEWIC 2009). The shell of pinto abalones are flat and ear shaped with three to
six respiratory holes (Fallu 1991). Their shells grow to a maximum length of about 14 cm, and
they can live up to 15 years. The exterior side of the shells is typically green-brown, but can also
display shades of white and blue. The edges of the shell are relatively scalloped. The lacy
epipodium, like the exterior of the shell, is also green-brown in color (NOAA 2007). The interior
of the shell is a pearly-white with a hint of iridescence (COSEWIC 2009). Encompassing the
foot, tentacles protrude into the water, aiding the abalone in its search for food and detection of
predators (NOAA 2007). The gut is located in the cavity between the stalk of the foot and the
rim of the shell. The gonads surround the tubes of the gut, forming a protuberance in the shape of
a cone that extends between the shell and the foot. The gonads are located on the same side of
the shell as the respiratory holes. The sex of an abalone can be determined by the color of the
gonads. Females that are ready to reproduce have eggs that are blue, green, or brown, while the
gonads of males are usually cream, ivory, or bone colored. In immature abalone, the gonads are
typically grey, regardless of gender (Fallu 1991).
Figure 1. Northern Abalone, H. kamtschatkana (COSEWIC 2009;
Photo by D. Bureau, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Nanaimo)
2.
Distribution
The historic range of pinto abalone is from Sitka, Alaska to Turtle Bay, Baja California
(COSEWIC 2009). The core of the populations are situated around Alaska and British Columbia
and are the only species of abalone found in Washington state.
Figure 2. Global distribution of H. kamtschatkana along west coast of North America.
(COSEWIC 2009)
3.
Habitat
After planktonic larval stage, juvenile abalone prefer to settle in shallow macroalgal forests and
deep boulder environments (Bouma 2007). Another place where juvenile abalone might settle is
in sea urchin barrens where crustose coralline algae levels are high (Bouma 2007). Juvenile pinto
abalone reared in an experimental hatchery showed preference for coralline covered rocks over
kelp holdfasts and sea urchin spine microhabitats (Rogers-Bennett et al. 2011). Adult pinto
abalone reside in a variety of habitats ranging from high tidal currents, rocky intertidal, coralline
algae, and kelp canopies. Pinto abalone have been found to be most abundant in locations where
kelp canopies and coralline algae is present. Pinto abalone also require typical sea water of >30
psu to survive (COSEWIC 2009). During a 2005 survey by the Washington Department of Fish
and Wildlife, pinto abalone were found within a depth range of up to 6-7 meters (Rogers-Bennett
et al. 2011). During the day, abalone are usually only found hidden in crevices or under
overhangs (Fallu 1991).
4.
Feeding
Adult pinto abalone are herbivorous. While abalone are in the larval stage, they do not need to
eat and have been successfully raised in sterile water. However, it has been observed that larvae
reared in water with algae do significantly better in terms of growth and survival (Fallu 1991).
Juveniles begin by consuming benthic diatoms and microalgae (COSEWIC 2009). They cannot
yet feed on larger algae because their mouths are too small and weak. They use their radulae to
scrape off coralline algae from the rocks (Fallu 1991). As they grow and their size increases, they
begin to feed on seasonally available benthic macroalgae (Rothaus et al. 2008; COSEWIC 2009).
This usually occurs in the form of drift algae (COSEWIC 2009). They also feed graze on kelp.
Turbulent water acts as a trigger for grazing. This is because in order to feed, abalone cannot be
as vigilante about predators. Feeding when the water is more turbulent increases the chances of
seaweed drifting by and decreases the chances of predation (Fallu 1991).
5.
Movement
Like most gastropods, pinto abalone use their muscular foot as means of locomotion. The foot of
pinto abalone does not cling well to sand. Therefore, they are usually only found on rocks or
coral. When an abalone feels threatened, it uses its foot to cling tightly to the substrate, and it is
nearly impossible to remove the abalone without a tool (Fallu 1991).
Pinto abalone generally do not travel very far from where they first settled as larvae. They can
travel several meters in a single day, but usually return to the same general vicinity. Pinto
abalone may exhibit home scars, which are a bare spots on a rock that conforms to the shape of
the abalone’s shell. This indicates that abalone return to the same spot on the same rock. Pinto
abalone also have very little vertical movement in the water column, with the total movement
being less than 50 meters in a year (COSEWIC 2009).
6.
Reproduction and Growth
Pinto abalone are broadcast spawners; they release their gametes into the water column at a
synchronized time. Spawning events typically take place between April and June. Pinto abalone
have been observed to ascend in high places such as on top of boulder, or even stack on top of
each other in order to increase fertilization success. The population of pinto abalone in British
Columbia reach sexual maturity at a shell length of about 50mm. At 70 mm, all pinto abalone are
considered sexually mature. A female with a shell length of 57 mm has a fecundity of 156,985
eggs. For a female with a shell length of 139 mm has a fecundity of a whopping 11.56 million
eggs (COSEWIC 2009). The same rule likely applies to the pinto abalone that reside in
Washington’s waters. Abalone eggs are slightly more dense than water, and will sink to the
bottom if there is no turbulence (Fallu 1991).
Because pinto abalone are broadcast spawners, successful fertilization is largely affected by
abalone density. A survey conducted in 2006 of the pinto abalone in the San Juan Archipelago
calculated a mean abalone density of 0.04 individuals/m2. This number falls far below the
minimum density required for successful reproduction of 0.15 individuals/m2 (PSP 2011).
Once sperm and egg meet and form a zygote, the fertilized egg will float to the surface before
eventually sinking back down into the water column (Fallu 1991). Within one to two days after
successful fertilization, eggs hatch and the planktonic larvae are left to survive suspended in the
water column. This planktonic phase of the pinto abalone life cycle is typically short, 10-14 days
depending on temperature of the water (14-10 C). The short duration of this phase is
advantageous because this limits the dispersal of the larvae (COSEWIC 2009).
Larvae tend to settle at in under rocks or in crevices at greater depths than where adults are found
(COSEWIC 2009). Once settled, these abalone are referred to as spat. Certain species of algae
produce chemicals that trigger settlement (Fallu 1991). Juvenile pinto abalone are generally
cryptic. They are considered juvenile until they reach a shell length of 70mm (COSEWIC 2009).
Figure 3: The various life stages of a pinto abalone represented with each stages’ respective
substrate (Welch 2012).
7.
Natural Mortality
A major cause of natural mortality in pinto abalone lies in its natural predators. Sea otters
(Enhydra lutris), river otters (Lontra canadensis), minks (Mustela vison), crabs (cancer spp), sea
stars (Pycnopodia helianthoides), octopuses (Enteroctopus dofleini), and several fish species are
all animals that prey on pinto abalone (COSEWIC 2009). Sea otter predation appears to be the
main limiting factor pinto abalone. According to Johnson et al. 2009, abalone is the preferred
prey for sea otters in a resource abundant marine habitat.
Interspecific competition is another source of natural mortality. Pinto abalone and sea urchins
have overlapping niches in terms of food. Both organisms consume drift macroalgae and occupy
kelp forests (COSEWIC 2009).
Annual natural mortality rates of pinto abalone are estimated to range between 0.15 and 0.27
(Sloan & Breen 1988).
B.
Population Decline of the Pinto Abalone
Pinto abalone have seen sharp population declines throughout its range entire range from
California to Alaska. The decline of pinto abalone is quantified through both fishery-related data
and research surveys, however the quantity and type of data varies throughout the pinto
abalone’s range. Each area will be looked at separately in regards to its overall population
decline.
1.
Alaska
Commercial pinto abalone fisheries have only existed in Alaska and British Columbia
(McDougall et al, 2006). The Alaskan abalone fishery began to heat up in the late 1970’s. Total
harvest continued to climb even after a quota was placed on the abalone fisheries. Despite limits
on catch, the Alaskan abalone fisheries harvested 378,685 pounds of pinto abalone in the 198081 season, well above the 250,000 pound quota set for that season resulting in emergency
closures of the abalone fishery (Walker et al. 2006). The next year (1981-82) the quota was again
significantly surpassed when 371,000 pounds of abalone were harvested in a season that saw a
reduced quota of 125,000 pounds. The grave state of the pinto abalone in Alaskan waters was not
realized until the 1984-85 season, when the fishery failed to reach the allotted quota of 86,000
pounds. The downward spiral of the poorly managed pinto abalone fisheries in Alaska continued
(see Table 1). As concerns about the population size of the abalone grew, the Alaska Department
of Fish and Game closed pinto abalone fisheries after the 1995-96 season, and have remained so
to through the present (Walker et al. 2006). Today, recreational harvest of abalone is still
permitted, however underwater breathing assistance is outlawed, making abalone in Alaska only
accessible for harvest in tidal zones and shallow water by snorkelers.
With the closure of Alaskan abalone fisheries and the lack of index sites, there is a lack of data to
determine the current populations of pinto abalone in Alaska (McDougall et al, 2006). However,
the combination of historical fishery data and current index sites in British Columbia can give us
insight that reflects current conditions in Alaska.
Table 1: Southeast Alaska commercial abalone harvests, effort, value, and season length from
1970 until the closure of abalone fisheries in Alaska in 1996. (Walker et al, 2006) Alaska
Department of Fish and Game
2.
British Columbia
Commercial pinto abalone fishery in British Columbia followed a similar pattern to Alaska’s
commercial fishery. Historical small scale harvesting switched to higher production as the
1970’s began (Jamieson 1999). Initially to curb the rapid increase in harvest of pinto abalone,
managers put in place restrictions on licensing as well as shortening the season, closure of
specific areas, and size limits for harvest (Muse 1998). These efforts however did nothing to
decrease abalone harvest as catch continued, and a sustainable yield quota was set in place (Muse
1998). The quota continued to see reductions reflecting the declining population of abalone in
the region, but efforts to manage the declining population were failing. In 1990, abalone fisheries
in British Columbia were closed to harvest, and the 1991 season saw an allowable catch of zero
and an inability to renew abalone fishing licenses (Muse 1998). This decision came after
agreement that abalone populations continued to decline despite quota restrictions set in place.
Figure 4: The reported pinto abalone landings and quotas from 1972-98 in British
Columbia, Canada. (Jamieson 1999)
The closure of pinto abalone commercial fisheries in British Columbia however, has not resulted
in stock regeneration. Surveys from index sites in the Queen Charlotte Islands and the Central
Coast relfect the fact that densities of the pinto abalone continue to decline (Jamieson 1999) (see
Figure 2). Anthropogenic factors such as poaching and ocean acidification could be responsible
for continued declines as well as natural factors such as rising sea otter Enhydra lutris
abundance, a major predator of the pinto abalone. Current population size of pinto abalone are
well below historic levels due to the overfishing that occurred.
Figure 5: Average density of pinto abalone in Queen Charlotte Islands and Central Coast, British
Columbia from m2 surveys (Jamieson, 1999)
3.
Washington
While no commercial fishery ever existed in Washington, recreational harvest was allowed up
until 1994 (Rothaus et al. 2008). Despite the closure of the recreational fishery in 1994,
Washington continues to see an overall decline in the densities of the abalone population. In the
San Juan Archipelago in Washington, 10 index stations exist where the Washington Department
of Fish and Wildlife monitors pinto abalone populations (see Figure 3). Densities are below what
is necessary for proper reproduction as a broadcast spawner, and natural reproduction is largly
unsuccessful. Overall shell length of the pinto abalone is also increasing suggesting a failure in
juvenile recruitment (Rothaus et al. 2008). The aging population is without young recruits and a
tipping point has been reached where densities are well below what is conducive for
reproduction. Without assistance, the aging pinto abalone population will die off entirely.
Figure 6: Declining of overall pinto abalone densities at index stations in the San Juan
Archipelago of Washington state. (Rothaus et al, 2008)
4.
Oregon
No pinto abalone surveys have been conducted to collect data of populations in Oregon
(COSEWIC 2009). The status of the pinto abalone in its predominate territory of Alaska, British
Columbia, and Washington clearly establish “a significant portion of its range” even though
there are no records of the population dynamics of this species in Oregon.
5.
California
Pinto abalone populations are poorly represented in fishery data of California. Currently, the
species comprise a small portion (<1% of total abalone population) of overall abalone population
in Northern California (Rogers-Bennett et al. 2002). Pinto abalone populations have declined
drastically from an estimated baseline abundance of 153,000 to 18,000 (Rogers-Bennett et al.
2002). Once again, the statistics from Alaska, British Columbia, and Washington clearly
represent the population decline of the pinto abalone in a significant portion of their range.
6.
Implications of low population size for pinto abalone
Declining population size and density of the pinto abalone is devastating for the future of the
species. As a broadcast spawner, the pinto abalone relies on high population density to ensure
juvenile recruitment (Rothaus et al. 2008). Evidence of increasing average shell length in the
pinto abalone confirms that juvenile recruitment is almost non-existent.
A population that is failing to regenerate through natural reproduction is extremely vulnerable.
Outside pressure affecting the population increase in magnitude as the population continues to
decrease. Predation (sea otters), poaching, habitat loss, and ocean acidification are major threats
facing the pinto abalone and its future. NOAA Fisheries listing of the pinto abalone as a ‘species
of concern’ in 2004 has done little to reverse the negative trends facing the pinto abalone
population. As the population continues to suffer, NOAA Fisheries must consider listing pinto
abalone as threatened or endangered under the ESA.
III. Criteria for Endangered Species Act Listing
A. The pinto abalone is a “species” under the ESA
The Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531 – 1544, allows any species of fish or wildlife or
plants to be listed under the provisions of the act. Section 3(8) of the ESA defines “fish or
wildlife” to mean “any member of the animal kingdom, including without limitation any
mammal, fish, or bird…, mollusk, crustacean, arthropod, or other invertebrate…” 16 U.S.C. §
1532 (8) (emphasis added). The pinto abalone is a mollusk. The pinto abalone (Haliotis
kamtschatkana) was formally described as a species in 1845 by Jonas (Cox 1962). Its taxonomy
and validity as a species is uncontested. It qualifies as a “species” under the Act. Petitioners seek
protection for the species throughout its range in Alaska, Washington, and California.
B. The pinto abalone is endangered under the ESA
NMFS is required to determine, substantiated solely on the basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available, whether a species is endangered or threatened in all or a significant
portion of its range because of any of the following factors: (1) the present or threatened
destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (2) overutilization for
commercial, recreational, scientific or educational purposes; (3) disease or predation; (4) the
inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or (5) other natural or manmade factors affecting
its continued existence. 16 U.S.C. §§ 1533(a)(1) and 1533(b).
Petitioners believe that all five of these factors have played a role in bringing the pinto abalone to
its current precarious condition. The most immediate threat to its extinction is the extreme
reduction in abundance and density of the species caused by overharvesting. While harvest has
been curtailed, declines of the species continue. Consequently, all existing regulatory
mechanisms have proven ineffective in protecting or recovering the species from its severely
depleted numbers. As described below, there are other actual and potential impacts to the species
that are also contributing to its decline and may impede its future recovery, including ocean
acidification and warming (Rogers-Bennett et al. 2007; Crim et al. 2011). The remaining viable
populations, if any, are small, vulnerable, and isolated. The species is in need of the additional
protections that only listing under the ESA can provide.
1.
Present or threatened destruction, modification or curtailment of its habitat
or range
Pinto abalone are most abundant in Nereocystis kelp forests with coralline algae, and shallow
nearshore kelp beds should be considered critical habitat (Rogers-Bennett et al. 2011). As sea
surface temperatures rise due to global climate change, Nereocystis kelp forests and coralline
algae will be adversely affected, as detailed below in section III(B)(5)(b). Direct habitat loss is
most likely not responsible for the severe reduction in population size of this abalone.
Nevertheless, the reduction in numbers of the species has resulted in a “curtailment of its habitat
or range.” As described in section II(B) above, the species simply cannot be found in many areas
of its historic range.
Perhaps the most significant threat to abalone habitat comes from greenhouse gas emissions
which are resulting in global warming, sea level rise, and ocean acidification. A major effect of
atmospheric CO2 emissions is the reduction of ocean pH or more commonly known as ocean
acidification. Atmospheric CO2 levels have risen from ca. 280 to 390 ppm since the industrial
revolution and are predicted to continue to increase to 800-1000 ppm (IPCC 2007). These further
increases in emissions will have a predicted decrease of ocean pH by 0.3 to 0.5 units (RogersBennett et al. 2007). Ocean acidification decreases the availability of carbonate ions in the water
which is of high importance for calcifying organisms, such as the pinto abalone. Larval survival
has been shown to decrease by 40% in elevated CO2 treatments relative to the control level of
400 ppm (Crim et al. 2011). Larvae who did survive had impaired shell development (Crim et al.
2011). These deformed shells adults survived in the laboratory, however, these adults will be
more vulnerable to predation and other external factors out in the wild. Without these essential
carbonate ions, impaired larval development and increased larval mortality will impose an
additional threat to the already endangered pinto abalone. Negative impacts have been shown to
not only impacted pinto abalone, but also a wide range of calcifying organisms (Feely et al.
2008).
Ocean Acidification is not only impacting pinto abalone populations, but is also causing oyster
failures in Washington and Oregon.
In the North Pacific Ocean, it is also predicted that the ocean will soon become under-saturated
with aragonite, which is key in shell formation from larvae to juveniles (Crim 2011). While in
the southern part of the range, warming temperatures (discussed below) will have a noticeable
impact on fertilization. These impacts on both ends of the pinto abalone’s range will drastically
decline the pinto abalone population, making a listing more urgent.
Upwelling is the process by which corrosive deep acidic water is brought up to shallow
nearshore habitats. Pinto abalone spawn during the late spring/early summer which is
synchronous with the upwelling season. These upwelling events, coupled with already
decreasing pH levels may cause higher mortality than laboratory experiments can predict. Shell
calcification will also be negatively impacted by increasing acidic water (Crim et al. 2011).
These upwelling events are predicated to change with ocean circulation patterns and the effects
on larval abalone transportation is still unknown (Rogers-Bennett et al. 2007).
Another effect of increasing atmospheric CO2 emission is increasing sea surface temperatures.
Sea surface temperatures are currently rising. At the most extreme CO2 emissions model, sea
surface temperatures are projected to increase up to 5-7C (Rogers-Bennett et al. 2010). Global
climate change has increased the frequency and intensity of El Nino events which is associated
with periodic warming of the surface in the Pacific Ocean (NCDC 2011). These warming
temperatures will have direct and indirect impacts on pinto abalone. Pinto abalone is found in
kelp canopies which comprise of two main geniuses, Nereocystis and Macrocystis. Kelp
canopies provide food and protection from larger predators. Nereocystis is more sensitive to
increase sea surface temperatures than Macrocystis which was seen in a 75% decrease due to an
El Nino event (Rogers-Bennett et al. 2011). Corallines, which are also used by pinto abalone as
cover, show a decrease in growth when temperatures rise (Rogers-Bennett et al. 2011). This
reduction in kelp canopies will make pinto abalone more vulnerable to predation and starvation.
Warmer temperatures will have direct impacts on pinto abalone will affect reproduction, growth
and mortality rates (Rogers-Bennett et al. 2011). Male pinto abalone will have less viable sperm
as sea temperature increases. Increasing temperatures may also create a positive feedback with
other emerging threats such as ocean acidification.
2.
Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific or educational
purposes
Over harvesting by both recreational and commercial fishing is addressed in section II(B) above.
The practice of serial depletion observed in the Alaska commercial abalone fishery (McDougall
et al. 2006; Walker et al. 2006) has lowered the density of pinto abalone adults to levels at which
recruitment failure is highly likely (Rothaus et al. 2008). The limited data available and reduced
population size I both Oregon and California represent the dire need for protection. All fishing
activity has ceased but pinto abalone population continue to decline.Overutilization is clearly a
significant factor that helped to create the current endangered status of the pinto abalone.
3.
Disease and predation
With sea surface temperature increasing, it is also predicted that all abalone species may become
more vulnerable to disease, such as Withering Syndrome. The rate at which the disease will
spread northward will also dramatically increase due to warmer temperatures (50 CFR Part 224).
Increased temperatures may provide optimal conditions for bacterial replication and transmission
which may spread north to the range of pinto abalone (Friedman and Finley 2003). The currently
listed Endangered black abalone had drastic impacts on its population size and range due to this
disease (50 CFR Part 224). Withering syndrome causes individuals to lose their secure grip on
the rocky substrate and more vulnerable to predation before dying from the disease (50 CFR Part
224). Withering syndrome is not only associated with black abalone, but is also known to cause
symptoms in another federally listed endangered abalone, the red abalone (50 CFR Part 224).
This potential threat was a substantial factor in listing the black abalone, and if Withering
Syndrome does infect healthy pinto abalone populations, the already fragile pinto abalone may
be pushed closer to extinction if not listed.
Sea otters are the primary nonhuman predator of adult abalone, and their increasing population
growth in abalone habitat may mean that predation becomes a greater threat in the future
(COSEWIC 2009). The primary predators of juvenile abalone are small decapod crustaceans,
such as Lophopanopeus bellus and Scyra acutifrons (Griffiths and Gosselin 2008). Any areas
chosen for artificial aggregations of wild pinto abalone or for reintroduction of captive-bred
stock must take the presence and density of abalone predators into consideration.
4.
Inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms
The pinto abalone has reached its current status due, in part, to the failure of fisheries regulations
to protect the species (Rogers-Bennett 2007). Management strategies have failed to take into
account the population density required for successful fertilization and the low survival rate
among abalone larvae. Pinto abalones are now too limited in numbers and density to have any
realistic chance of breeding successfully in the wild and require active management and human
intervention, both through captive breeding programs and management of ecological conditions.
No regulatory mechanisms are in place that adequately addresses greenhouse gas emissions and
their effect on the pinto abalone, as discussed below.
5.
Other threats
a)
Poaching
Even though fisheries have closed throughout its range, pinto abalone populations are still not
recovering. Illegal harvesting may play a large role in the continuing decline (Crim 2010).
Abalone possesses a high market value, estimated at $50 lb-1CAN and illegal collections occur
undetected by enforcement (Crim 2010). The removal of mature adults increases the threats to
the reproductive potential of the declining populations.
b)
Low recruitment
Pinto abalone are synchronous spawners which require mates to be near in order for fertilization
to occur (Seamone and Boulding 2011). Due to overharvesting, current pinto abalone densities
are low. If these low densities are below a critical density, pinto abalone may experience low
fertilization success due to large distances between mates, or more commonly known as the Alee
effect. Even after the end of harvesting of pinto abalone, densities continue to be low and the
Allee effect plays a major role (Rothaus et al. 2008). Ocean warming has shown to negatively
impact egg and sperm production through decreased food resources and disintegration of sperm
at warmer temperatures (Rogers-Bennett et al. 2010). The decreased availability of viable sperm
and egg will have dire effects on the recovery of pinto abalone populations. The natural recovery
of severely reduced abalone populations is already a slow process (50 CFR Part 224) and
combined with the other discussed impacts work synergistically to prevent restoration of pinto
abalone unless listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA.
IV. Critical Habitat
Petitioners request the designation of critical habitat for pinto abalone concurrent with its listing
as defined by the Endangered Species Act section 3: “the specific areas within the geographical
area occupied by the species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the provisions of section
1533 of this title, on which are found those physical or biological features (I) essential to the
conservation of the species and (II) which may require special management considerations or
protection; and (ii) specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the
time it is listed in accordance with the provisions of section 1533 of this title, upon a
determination by the Secretary that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.
16 U.S.C.§1532(5).” Pinto abalones have drastically decreased in abundance throughout its
historic range and have not recovered to near historical levels with the illegalization of
harvesting. Critical habitat should encompass the area from Sitka, Alaska to Point Conception,
California and encompass rocky subtidal habitats with low to medium exposures, boulders,
coralline cover and kelp canopies (Rogers-Bennett et al. 2011). The combination of kelp
canopies with associated corallines have shown to be the most suitable habitat for both adult and
juvenile pinto abalone (Rogers-Bennett et al. 2011). Kelp canopies can provide indicators to
measure recovery efforts of pinto abalone due to its high species diversity. The critical habitat
designation should include all substrate in the intertidal zones down to 10 meters deep in the
subtidal as well as exposed lands during low tides (Lessard and Campbell 2007).
V. Conclusion
Several anthropogenic factors appear to have combined in complex ways to weaken pinto
abalone populations, accelerate their mortality and cause subsequent declines. Based on the
information presented above, it is clear that pinto abalone are in danger of extinction throughout
their range, and therefore, are Endangered within the meaning of the ESA, 16 U.S.C. § 1532(6).
Failure to act is likely to result in the extinction of this highly endangered species.
VI. References
Bouma, J. 2007. Early life history dynamics of pinto abalone (Haliotis kamtschatkana) and
implications for recovery in the San Juan archipelago. MSc thesis. University of Washington:
Seattle, Washington.
Byrne, M., Ho, M., Wong, E., Soars, N.A., Selvakumaraswamy, P., Shepard-Brennand, H.
Dworjanyn, S.A. and A.R. Davis. 2010. Unshelled abalone and corrupted urchins: development
of marine calcifiers in a changing ocean. Proceedings of the Royal Society. 215 (6): 873-883.
COSEWIC. 2009. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the Northern Abalone
Haliotis kamtschatkana in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada.
Ottawa. vii + 48 pp. (http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2009/ec/CW69-14-2402009E.pdf).
Cox, K.W. 1962. California Abalones, family Haliotidae. California Fish and Game Bulletin
118:1-133.
(http://content.cdlib.org/view?docId=kt738nb1zx&brand=calisphere&doc.view=entire_text)
Crim, R.N. 2010. Effects of ocean acidification on different life history stages of northern
abalone (Haliotis kamtschatkana). MSc thesis. University of British Columbia: Vancouver,
Canada.
Crim, R.N., Sunday, J.M. and C.D.G. Harley. 2011. Elevated seawater CO2 concentrations
impair larval development and reduce larval survival in endangered northern abalone (Haliotis
kamtschatkana). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. 400(1-2): 272-277.
(http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022098111000499)
“Endangered status for black abalone” 2009. Title 50 Code of Federal Regulations Pt 224.
Feely, R.A., Sabine, C.L., Hernandez-Ayon, M., Ianson, D. and B. Hales. 2008. Evidence for
upwelling of corrosive "acidified" water onto the continental shelf. Science. 320: 1490- 1492.
Fallu, Rick. 1991. Abalone Farming. Oxford, England: Fishing News Books.
Friedman C., and C.A. Finley. 2003. Anthropogenic introduction of the etiological agent of
withering syndrome into northern California abalone populations via conservation efforts. Can J
Fish Aquat Sci. 60:1424-1431.
Griffiths, A.M. and L.A. Gosselin. 2008. Ontogenetic shift in susceptibility to predators in
juvenile northern abalone, Haliotis kamtschatkana. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and
Ecology. 360(2): 85-93. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022098108001767)
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Climate change 2007: the physical
science basis. Fourth assessment report. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Jamieson, G.S. 1999. Review of the status of Northern, or Pinto, abalone (Haliotis
kamtschatkana) Canada DFO. (http://www.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/whc/seadoc/pdfs/jamieson.pdf)
Johnson C.K., Tinker M.T., Estes J.A., Conrad P.A., Staedler M., Miller M.A., Jessup D.A.,
Mazet J.A.K. 2009. Prey choice and habitat use drive sea otter pathogen exposure in a resourcelimited coastal system. PNAS. 106(7): 2242-2247.
Lessard, J. and A. Campbell. 2007. Describing northern abalone, Haliotis kamtschatkana,
habitat: Focusing rebuilding efforts in British Columbia, Canada. Journal of Shellfish Research.
26(3): 677-686.
Muse, B. 1998. Management of the British Columbia abalone fishery. Tech., Alaska Commercial
Fisheries Entry Commission CFEC 98-1N.
NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA). 2007. Species of Concern Pinto Abalone.
National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). 2011. State of the climate: global analysis annual 2011.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 15 Feb 2012.
(http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2011/13).
Puget Sound Partnership (PSP). 2011. Puget Sound Science Update. pg: 215-218.
Rogers-Bennet, L., Haaker, P.L., Huff, T.O, and P.K. Dayton. 2002. Estimating baseline
abundances of abalone in California for restoration. CalCOFI Rep. 43.
(http://calcofi.ucsd.edu/newhome/publications/CalCOFI_Reports/v43/pdfs/Vol_43_RogersBennett_etal.pdf)
Rogers-Bennett, L., Dondanville, R.F., Moore, J.D. and L.I. Vilchis. 2010. Response of red
abalone reproduction to warm water, starvation, and disease stressors: implications of ocean
warming. Journal of Shellfish Research. 29(3): 599-611.
Rogers-Bennett, L., Allen, B.L., and D.P. Rothaus. 2011. Status and habitat associations of the
threatened northern abalone: importance of kelp and coralline algae. Augatic Conserv: Mar.
Fresw. Ecosyst. 21:573-581.
Rothaus, D.P., Vadopalas, B. and C.S. Friedman. 2008. Precipitous declines in pinto abalone
(Haliotis kamtschatkana kamtschatkana) abundance in the San Juan Archipelago, Washington,
USA, despite statewide fishery closure. Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 65:2603-2711.
Sloan, N. A. & P. A. Breen. 1988. Northern abalone, Haliotis kamtschatkana, in British
Columbia: fisheries and synopsis of life history information. Can. Spec. Publ. Fish. Aquat. Sci.
103. 46 pp
Talmage, S.C. and C.J. Gobler. 2009. The effects of elevated carbon dioxide concentrations on
the metamorphosis, size, and survival of larval hard clams (Mercenaria mercenaria), bay
scallops (Argopecten irradians), and Eastern oysters (Crassostrea virginica). Limnol Oceaongr.
54(6):2072-2080.
Walker, S., Hoyt Z. and M. Pritchett. 2006. Report to The Board of Fisheries, Miscellaneous
Dive Fisheries. Alaska Department of Fish and Game: Divisions of Sport Fish and Commercial
Fisheries. Report No. 06-01 (http://www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/FedAidPDFs/fmr06-01.pdf)
Welch, Craig. 2012. "Abalone Are Treasured — Nearly to Extinction Locally." The Seattle
Times. The Seattle Times.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009202083_abalone10m.html.